Northwest Bomb Plot 'Oddities' By Lori Price, www.legitgov.org Updated: 30 Dec 2009 (This page will be updated!)
Bogosity reaches critical mass!
In 2008, the ACLU estimated the US 'No Fly List' to have grown to over 1,000,000 names -- heck, even Cat Stevens and the late Senator Ted Kennedy were on it -- and it continues to expand. But, suspected terrorist Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was curiously able to obtain military-grade high explosives --80 grams of PETN (Gee, where'd he get that?) -- managed to escape airport security and detonate his underwear bomb!
In April 2009, American authorities reportedly refused an Air France flight from Paris to Mexico entry into US airspace because a left-wing journalist writing a book on the CIA was on board. Hernando Calvo Ospina, who works for Le Monde Diplomatique and has written on revolutionary movements in Cuba and Colombia, figured on the US authorities' 'no-fly list.' Air France said the April 18 flight was forced to divert to the French Caribbean island of Martinique before continuing its journey (telegraph.co.uk).
Got it? Write a book critical of the CIA -- you cannot fly. Carry explosives (allegedly from Yemen) on board when the US is trolling for an excuse to invade and occupy Yemen for its oil -- yes you can! The US needs false flags to provide cover for illegal invasions and occupations. The 9/11 terrorist attacks (aka inside job, six ways to Sunday) worked well for the US government; the security-industrial complex made billions and US corporaterrorists were able to negotiate the wholesale theft of Iraq's oil.
According to CNN, the terror suspect's father tried to warn authorities. CNN reported: The father of a man suspected in a botched terror attack aboard a Northwest Airlines flight contacted the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria recently with concerns his son was planning something, a senior U.S. administration official said Saturday. The father -- identified by a family source as Umaru Abdul Mutallab -- contacted the U.S. Embassy "a few weeks ago" saying his son, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, had "become radicalized," the senior administration official, who is familiar with the case, told CNN.
And yet, Abdulmutallab was not obliged to undergo any additional airport screening layers, prior to boarding for the last leg of his journey to Detroit.
Also, lest we forget: Three key provisions of the Patriot Act are scheduled to expire 31 December 2009. Hmm. I wonder if post-Abdulmutallab they will get renewed?
Abdulmutallab was thwarted by a quote, unquote vacationing movie producer, Jasper Schuringa, who, within seconds, asserted that he not only tackled the suspect and put him in a headlock but also tried 'to search his body for any explosives' (CNN). Unless one was a bona-fide law enforcement professional or a military agent, who on earth would think of searching a man who had just set himself on fire, in a matter of seconds, for more explosives?
The goal is Yemeni oil. Hence the reason for the destabilization and the purported need for the US to stop al-Qaeda (literally, 'the database'). The Yemeni national security chief has declared that the country is receiving assistance from the US in the crackdown on what he called 'al-Qaeda operatives' in southern Yemen (Press TV). Translation: US corporaterrorists want Yemen's oil and they want it NOW.
BTW, I hope the FAA enjoyed this page as much as the DHS and the Navy Network Information Center did, etc.
204.108.0.11 - - [28/Dec/2009:21:45:49 -0500] "GET /northwest_bomb_plot_oddities.html HTTP/1.1" 200 32177 "http://www.[redacted].com/" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; GTB5; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729)"
204.248.24.163 - - [28/Dec/2009:14:20:06 -0500] "GET /northwest_bomb_plot_oddities.html HTTP/1.1" 200 10170 "http://www.[redacted].com/" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; DHSI60SP1001; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30; DHSI70; DHSI70)"
138.162.8.57 - - [28/Dec/2009:07:24:51 -0500] "GET /northwest_bomb_plot_oddities.html HTTP/1.1" 200 31220 "http://www.[redacted].com/" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022)"
Man videotaped entire false flag, including detonation: Oconomowoc Family Survives Terrorist Attempt 28 Dec 2009 (WI) Patricia "Scotty" Keepman still has a sense of humor after the harrowing experience she, her husband, daughter and two new adopted children from Ethiopia had as a man tried to detonate an explosive device while their plane was getting ready to land in Detroit on Christmas Day. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab of Nigeria was charged Saturday in the Christmas Day attempt that only sparked a fire on the flight from Amsterdam. They were sitting about 20 rows behind Abdulmutallab, in a center aisle... Her daughter said that ahead of them was a man who videotaped the entire flight, including the attempted detonation. "He sat up and videotaped the entire thing, very calmly," said Patricia. "We do know that the FBI is looking for him intensely. Since then, we've heard nothing about it."
U.S. Had Information Before Christmas of a Terror Plot --The government also had more information about where Mr. Abdulmutallab had been and what some of his plans were. 30 Dec 2009 President Obama was told during a private briefing on Tuesday morning while vacationing here in Hawaii that the government had a variety of information in its possession before the thwarted bombing that would have been a clear warning sign had it been shared among agencies, a senior official said. Two officials said the government had intelligence from Yemen before Friday that leaders of a branch of Al Qaeda there were talking about "a Nigerian" being prepared [by his CIA handlers] for a terrorist attack.
'The information on AbdulMutallab had been sent to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.' Source: CIA failed to circulate report about bombing suspect 29 Dec 2009 The father of terrorism suspect Umar Farouk AbdulMutallab talked about his son's extremist views with someone from the CIA and a report was prepared, but the report was not circulated outside the agency, a reliable source told CNN on Tuesday. Had that information been shared, the 23-year-old Nigerian who is alleged to have bungled an attempt to blow up a jetliner as it was landing in Detroit, Michigan, on Christmas Day might have been denied passage on the Northwest Airlines flight, the source said. U.S. officials said the father, a former Nigerian banker, expressed his concerns about his son's radicalization during at least one meeting and several calls with officials at the embassy in Nigeria. The information on AbdulMutallab had been sent to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, but it sat there for five weeks and was not disseminated, the source said.
Two al Qaeda Leaders Behind Northwest Flight 253 Terror Plot Were Released by U.S. [by Bush] --Former Guantanamo Prisoners Believed Behind Northwest Airlines Bomb Plot; Sent to Saudi Arabia in 2007 28 Dec 2009 Two of the four leaders allegedly behind the al Qaeda [al-CIAduh] plot to blow up a Northwest Airlines passenger jet over Detroit were released by the U.S. from the Guantanamo prison in November, 2007, according to American officials and Department of Defense documents. American officials agreed to send the two terrorists from Guantanamo to Saudi Arabia where they entered into an "art therapy rehabilitation program" and were set free, according to U.S. and Saudi officials. Guantanamo prisoner #333, Muhamad Attik al-Harbi, and prisoner #372, Said Ali Shari, were sent to Saudi Arabia on Nov. 9, 2007, according to the Defense Department log of detainees who were released from American custody. Al-Harbi has since changed his name to Muhamad al-Awfi.
US jet plot suspect 'was in Yemen in December' 29 Dec 2009 The Nigerian man accused of trying to blow up a jet over the US on Christmas Day was living in Yemen until earlier this month, Yemeni officials have said. The foreign ministry said Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was in Yemen from August until the beginning of December, the official Saba news agency reported. He had a visa to study Arabic at an institute in the capital Sanaa.
Anti-terror officials let terror suspect keep visa 28 Dec 2009 The State Department says counterterrorism agencies were warned that the Nigerian man who allegedly tried to blow up an airliner Christmas Day may be under extremists' influence. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly says it was up to the National Counterterrorism Center to block Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab from entering the U.S. He says U.S. counterterror agencies received the information on Nov. 20, a day after it was provided by the father, but it was not enough to revoke the visa.
Father of terror suspect reported Mutallab to US Embassy 6 months ago 27 Dec 2009 The father of the al Qaeda terrorist behind Friday’s attempted explosion aboard a Northwest flight bound for Detroit reported his son’s fanatical religious views to the U.S. Embassy six months ago, according to a Nigerian news outlet. The young man, Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab, is the son of Alhaji Umaru Mutallab, a former Nigerian minister and bank chairman. He became wary of his son’s religious beliefs and reported his activities to the U.S. Embassy as well as Nigerian security services half a year ago, according to the Nigerian newspaper This Day.
Source: Terror suspect's father tried to warn authorities 27 Dec 2009 The father of a man suspected in a botched terror attack aboard a Northwest Airlines flight contacted the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria recently with concerns his son was planning something, a senior U.S. administration official said Saturday. The father -- identified by a family source as Umaru Abdul Mutallab -- contacted the U.S. Embassy "a few weeks ago" saying his son, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, had "become radicalized," the senior administration official, who is familiar with the case, told CNN. Abdulmutallab, 23, was charged in a federal criminal complaint Saturday with attempting to destroy the plane Friday on its final approach to Michigan's Detroit Metropolitan Airport, and placing a destructive device on the aircraft, the Department of Justice said.
Father alerted US about Nigerian plane bomb suspect 27 Dec 2009 The father of a Nigerian man charged with trying to blow up a transatlantic jet on Christmas Day had voiced concerns to US officials about his son. The father, a top Nigerian banker, warned US authorities last month about Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's extreme views, say officials. US sources confirm a file was opened, but say the information did not warrant placing the accused on a "no-fly" list.
Airline bomber was barred from Britain --Man who allegedly attempted to blow up US jet had UK visa request refused in May 27 Dec 2009 The son of a prominent Nigerian banker, who allegedly attempted to blow up a transatlantic flight over America, was barred from returning to Britain earlier this year. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, graduated from a university in London last year but his visa request was refused in May when he attempted to apply for a new course at a bogus college. Abdulmutallab, described as a devout Muslim, attempted to ignite an explosive device on a plane from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day after shouting about Afghanistan.
Flight 253 passenger: Sharp-dressed man aided terror suspect Abdul Mutallab onto plane without passport 27 Dec 2009 A Michigan man who was aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253 says he witnessed Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab trying to board the plane in Amsterdam without a passport. Kurt Haskell and his wife, Lori, of Newport, Mich., were returning from a safari in Uganda when they boarded the NWA flight on Friday. Haskell said he and his wife [attorneys with Haskell Law Firm in Taylor] were sitting on the ground near their boarding gate in Amsterdam, which is when they saw Mutallab approach the gate with an unidentified man. While Mutallab was poorly dressed, his friend was dressed in an expensive suit, Haskell said. He says the suited man asked ticket agents whether Mutallab could board without a passport. "The guy said, 'He's from Sudan and we do this all the time.'" Mutallab is Nigerian. Haskell believes the man may have been trying to garner sympathy for Mutallab's lack of documents by portraying him as a Sudanese refugee.
Unclear If Suspect's Name Was On Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment List --The list, maintained by United States National Counterterrorism Center, includes about 550,000 names 27 Dec 2009 The Nigerian man accused of trying to ignite an incendiary device aboard a trans-Atlantic jetliner on Friday came to the attention of American officials at least "several weeks ago," but the initial information was not specific enough to raise alarms that he could potentially carry out a terrorist attack, a senior Obama administration official said on Saturday... It was unclear whether Mr. Abdulmutallab’s name was entered into the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment list, which includes people with known or suspected contact or ties to a terrorist or terrorist organization. Those people, however, are not necessarily placed on the federal government’s so-called no-fly list, which prohibits persons entering the United States because of known or suspected [or imagined] terrorists links. Mr. Abdulmutallab was not on that list, federal officials say.
US authorites divert Air France flight carrying 'no-fly' journalist to Mexico --American authorities reportedly refused an Air France flight from Paris to Mexico entry into US airspace because a left-wing journalist writing a book on the CIA was on board. 29 Apr 2009 Hernando Calvo Ospina, who works for Le Monde Diplomatique and has written on revolutionary movements in Cuba and Colombia , figured on the US authorities' "no-fly list". Air France said the April 18 flight was forced to divert to the French Caribbean island of Martinique before continuing its journey and that it might ask the US Transportation Security Administration for compensation. A spokesman for Mr Ospina's French publisher, Le Temps des Cerises, said: "Hernando, who was heading to Nicaragua to research a report, thus found out that he is on a 'no-fly list' that bans a number of people from flying to or even over the United States." Some 50,000 people are said to be on the list set up under George W. Bush, the former US president [sic]. The publisher accused the Central Intelligence Agency of being behind Mr Ospina's blacklisting, pointing out that the journalist was currently researching a book about the spy agency. "It shows to what degree its paranoia (has reached)," it said.
'I was trying to search his body for any explosives.' Passenger says he helped thwart terror attack 27 Dec 2009 Passenger Jasper Schuringa told CNN that with the aid of the cabin crew, he helped subdue and isolate Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was charged Saturday with trying to destroy a plane. Schuringa of Amsterdam, Netherlands, said he was traveling to Florida to visit friends. The journey aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253 had been mundane, he said. But as the plane neared its destination of Detroit, Michigan, he heard a pop that sounded like a firecracker going off, and someone started yelling: "Fire! Fire!" Then, there was smoke. "Around 30 seconds later the smoke started to fill up on the left side beneath this person," he said. That's when Schuringa said he knew something was wrong. "I basically reacted directly. I didn't think. When you hear a pop on the plane you're awake, trust me," Schuringa said. When he noticed that Abdulmutallab was not moving, he grew suspicious. "I was on the right side of the plane and the suspect was on the left side, there were quite some seats in between." He jumped over the passenger next to him and lunged over Abdulmutallab's seat, "Because I was thinking he's trying to blow up the plane, and I was trying to search his body for any explosives."
Airports intensify security measures worldwide in wake of failed bomb attack aboard U.S.-bound jetliner --Terror suspect charged in jetliner bomb plot 26 Dec 2009 Federal authorities have charged Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab, of Nigeria, with attempting to destroy Northwest flight 253 with a "destructive device" as it descended into Detroit on Christmas Day. In a case of attempted terrorism that has sparked a worldwide intensification of security at airports, U.S. officials said Saturday afternoon that a preliminary FBI analysis found a bomb-making chemical called PETN in the device Abdulmutallab tried to detonate. The affidavit, filed in the Eastern District of Michigan, also said FBI agents discovered the remnant of a syringe near the suspect's seat, part of what the agents believe was part of the explosive device.
Investigators: Northwest Bomb Plot Planned by al-Qaeda in Yemen --Officials Say Bomb Materials Sewn Into Suspect's Underwear by Top Terror Bomb Maker 26 Dec 2009 The plot to blow up an American passenger jet over Detroit was organized and launched by al-Qaeda [al-CIAduh] leaders in Yemen who apparently sewed bomb materials into the suspect's underwear before sending him on his mission, federal authorities tell ABC News. Investigators say the suspect had more than 80 grams of PETN, a compound related to nitro-glycerin used by the military. The so-called shoe bomber, Richard Reid, had only about 50 grams kin his failed attempt in 2001 to blow up a U.S.-bound jet.
Yemen is focus of new US front against al Qaeda --The Pentagon is to spend more than $70 million over the next 18 months, and use teams of Special Forces to train and equip Yemeni military, Interior Ministry and coast guard forces. 28 Dec 2009 The United States has quietly opened a third, largely covert front against the Al-Qaeda terror network in Yemen, accoding to The New York Times newspaper. A year ago, the Central Intelligence Agency sent a number of its top field operatives with counter-terrorism experience to the country, the newspaper said. At the same time, some of the most secretive special operations commandos have begun training Yemeni security forces in counter-terrorism tactics, the report said.
Officials Point to Suspect’s Claim of Qaeda Ties in Yemen 27 Dec 2009 Federal authorities on Saturday charged a 23-year-old Nigerian man with trying to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas Day, and officials said the suspect told them he had obtained explosive chemicals and a syringe that were sewn into his underwear from a bomb expert in Yemen associated with Al Qaeda [al-CIAduh]. The authorities have not independently corroborated the Yemen connection claimed by the man, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was burned in his failed attempt to bring down the airliner and is in a hospital in Michigan. But a law enforcement official briefed on the investigation said on Saturday that the suspect’s account was “plausible,” and that he saw “no reason to discount it.”
US bombs Sa'ada governor's house, Houthis say 27 Dec 2009 A US fighter jet has carried out multiple airstrikes on the home of a senior official in Yemen's northern rugged province of Sa'ada, Houthi fighters say. The Yemen-based Houthi fighters say the warplane struck the home owned by the governor of Sa'ada province, Hassan Mohammad Manna in five blitzes. There were no reports on possible casualties in the attacks.
Yemen confirms receiving US military support 27 Dec 2009 The Yemeni national security chief has declared that the country is receiving assistance from the US in the crackdown on what he called 'al-Qaeda operatives' in southern Yemen. Mohamed al-Anisi has told the Saudi Arabian newspaper Okaz that Yemeni forces were cooperating with the US military on attacks against al-Qaeda camps, DPA reported on Saturday. Yemen's confirmation comes as an ABC report revealed that US President Barack Obama had signed the order for a recent military strike on Yemen in which scores of civilians, including children, were killed.
Yemen oil min- oil majors mull investments-paper 21 Feb 2009 Yemen has received investment offers from oil majors including Exxon Mobil Corp and Total, Oil Minister Amir al-Aidarous said in remarks published on Saturday. Yemen's Ministry for Oil and Mineral Resources has received eight oil investment bids from international companies, pan-Arab daily al-Hayat quoted Aidarous as saying, four of which were from oil majors seeking direct negotiations with Yemen. The companies include Exxon Mobil, Total, and BP, the minister said, but did not elaborate on the nature of the investments. Other companies that made bids included Austrian oil and gas group OMV, Nexen, and Occidental, he said.
House Delays Patriot Act Spy Vote By David Kravets 16 Dec 2009 The House of Representatives tabled on Wednesday legislation to reform U.S. surveillance law. The two-month delay puts off a collision with a competing Senate version. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declined to include a vote on the Patriot Act in a Pentagon funding bill. The move automatically extends provisions of the Patriot Act that would otherwise expire at year’s end. The Senate is likewise expected to delay the matter. The act, hastily adopted six weeks after the 2001 terror attacks, greatly expanded the government’s ability to spy on Americans in the name of national security. A key difference between the House and Senate packages concerns the standard by which the FBI may issue so-called National Security Letters -- although Wednesday’s vote prolongs the time for more backroom negotiations. Reforming NSL powers is a key bone of contention in the Patriot Act debate, even though it is not one of the three Patriot Act provisions that was scheduled to expire Dec. 31.
Police lose battle over evidence of 'British 9/11' plot --Scotland Yard must reveal whether it had CIA intelligence 26 Dec 2009 Scotland Yard has been ordered to reveal whether it has any evidence to support America’s claim that Britain was saved from a 9/11-style disaster by the CIA’s secret foreign interrogation centres. The Times has won a case under the Freedom of Information Act forcing British police to say whether the US stopped a plot to fly planes into Canary Wharf and Heathrow. The claim was made by President [sic] Bush when he first acknowledged the existence of a clandestine CIA prison network created to fight his War on of Terror. Scotland Yard has been given 35 days to comply or appeal. If it admits that there is no such intelligence, it would undermine any political defence for America’s strong-arm tactics in fighting terrorism
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Animal antibiotics kill more people than breast and prostate cancer
http://trueslant.com/rickungar/2009/12/29/animal-antibiotics-kill-more-people-than-breast-and-prostate-cancer/
Dec. 29 2009 - 12:31 pm | 292 views | 4 recommendations | 8 comments
Animal antibiotics kill more people than breast and prostate cancer
MIAMI - AUGUST 07: Bottles of antibiotics lin...
Image by Getty Images via Daylife
I spend a lot of time writing about the need to provide adequate health coverage to all Americans and the policies that could bring the hoped for result. To that end, I have frequently discussed the crime of allowing 45,000 people in America to die each year because they aren’t so fortunate as to have health insurance.
But making positive changes in our health care system it is not all about complicated economics and social policy. Sometimes people are dying from policies that should be easy to change – even if politically tricky.
Did you know that 65,000 Americans die every year from drug resistant strains of bacteria that result from the over usage of antibiotics in animals and humans? That’s more than the total number of deaths in this country each year from breast and prostate cancer combined. And, yes, it’s more than the number of deaths in the United States each year resulting from a lack of health insurance.
Antibiotics not only treat infections in livestock but allow the animals to grow faster. This gets pig, cow and chicken products to your table more quickly and at a lower cost, allowing farmers to improve their cash flows and profits. However, in the process, the animals develop drug resistant infections that are passed onto people and become part of the human disease trail.
Researchers are now finding that these drug resistant strains are having an impact throughout the world as diseases like malaria, tuberculosis and staphylococcus infections are resurging in new and untreatable forms.
This is a living breathing problem, it’s the big bad wolf and it’s knocking at our door,” said Dr. Vance Fowler, an infectious disease specialist at Duke University. “It’s here. It’s arrived.”
Via The Associated Press
For those inclined to believe that this is more a problem of humans overusing antibiotics (which we clearly do) every time we fear the arrival of a sore throat, consider this -
Last year, 35 million pounds of antibiotics were consumed in the United States. 70% of those drugs were given to pigs, chickens and cows. Around the world, 50% of the antibiotics go to livestock.
That’s not chickenfeed. Scratch that. Actually, it is chickenfeed.
America’s farmers give their pigs, cows and chickens about 8 percent more antibiotics each year, usually to heal lung, skin or blood infections. However, 13 percent of the antibiotics administered on farms last year were fed to healthy animals to make them grow faster. Antibiotics also save as much as 30 percent in feed costs among young swine, although the savings fade as pigs get older, according to a new USDA study.
Via The Associated Press
While proponents of organic and free range food products have known this for some time, others are beginning take notice. The World Health Organization recently issued a caution that surging antibiotic resistance is one of the leading threats to human health. The White House has deemed the problem urgent and there is legislation in the House to clamp down on the usage of antibiotics for reasons other than treating actual infection.
This one shouldn’t be too hard to fix, yes?
Not so much.
Enter the lobbyists. The drug and agribusiness companies have spent over $200 million this year battling legislation, including the newly proposed limits on antibiotic use.
And where there’s a lobbyist, you can bet there’s a Republican leading the charge:
Chaos will ensue,” said Kansas Republican Congressman Jerry Moran. “The cultivation of crops and the production of food animals is an immensely complex endeavor involving a vast range of processes. We raise a multitude of crops and livestock in numerous regions, using various production methods. Imagine if the government is allowed to dictate how all of that is done.”
The Associated Press
Really? I wonder if Rep. Moran has ever heard of a little government agency called the Food and Drug Administration who exists precisely to insure that this sort of thing does not happen.
The FDA appears to have a desire to do something about this problem but are pretty powerless. Having already approved the use of numerous antibiotics for animals back in the 50’s, it is difficult to turn back the clock, particularly in view of the special interests standing in the way.
This is something that will have to be handled by Congress- and the sooner the better.
By the way, I do not wish the farmers ill nor do I relish the idea of them suffering economic damage. American farmers have it pretty tough already.
It does, however, appear that the farmers may have some options. I recently discussed this with a dairyman in Central California, an area that produces much of the nation’s dairy products. It turns out that using garlic to treat infections in livestock is an effective way of fighting disease without having to use antibiotics. Not only does this approach lower their overhead by cutting down on expensive antibiotics and vet bills, but the alternate treatments can go a long way towards resolving a problem which presents a very clear an present danger to the world’s health.
Look for this to become one of the key world health issues in 2010.
==========================================
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9CSGMM80.htm
The Associated Press December 28, 2009, 2:47PM ET
Pressure rises to stop antibiotics in agriculture
By MARGIE MASON AND MARTHA MENDOZA
FRANKENSTEIN, Mo.
The mystery started the day farmer Russ Kremer got between a jealous boar and a sow in heat.
The boar gored Kremer in the knee with a razor-sharp tusk. The burly pig farmer shrugged it off, figuring: "You pour the blood out of your boot and go on."
But Kremer's red-hot leg ballooned to double its size. A strep infection spread, threatening his life and baffling doctors. Two months of multiple antibiotics did virtually nothing.
The answer was flowing in the veins of the boar. The animal had been fed low doses of penicillin, spawning a strain of strep that was resistant to other antibiotics. That drug-resistant germ passed to Kremer.
Like Kremer, more and more Americans -- many of them living far from barns and pastures -- are at risk from the widespread practice of feeding livestock antibiotics. These animals grow faster, but they can also develop drug-resistant infections that are passed on to people. The issue is now gaining attention because of interest from a new White House administration and a flurry of new research tying antibiotic use in animals to drug resistance in people.
Researchers say the overuse of antibiotics in humans and animals has led to a plague of drug-resistant infections that killed more than 65,000 people in the U.S. last year -- more than prostate and breast cancer combined. And in a nation that used about 35 million pounds of antibiotics last year, 70 percent of the drugs -- 28 million pounds -- went to pigs, chickens and cows. Worldwide, it's 50 percent.
"This is a living breathing problem, it's the big bad wolf and it's knocking at our door," said Dr. Vance Fowler, an infectious disease specialist at Duke University. "It's here. It's arrived."
The rise in the use of antibiotics is part of a growing problem of soaring drug resistance worldwide, The Associated Press found in a six-month look at the issue. As a result, killer diseases like malaria, tuberculosis and staph are resurging in new and more deadly forms.
In response, the pressure against the use of antibiotics in agriculture is rising. The World Health Organization concluded this year that surging antibiotic resistance is one of the leading threats to human health, and the White House last month said the problem is "urgent."
"If we're not careful with antibiotics and the programs to administer them, we're going to be in a post antibiotic era," said Dr. Thomas Frieden, who was tapped to lead the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention this year.
Also this year, the three federal agencies tasked with protecting public health -- the Food and Drug Administration, CDC and U.S. Department of Agriculture -- declared drug-resistant diseases stemming from antibiotic use in animals a "serious emerging concern." And FDA deputy commissioner Dr. Joshua Sharfstein told Congress this summer that farmers need to stop feeding antibiotics to healthy farm animals.
Farm groups and pharmaceutical companies argue that drugs keep animals healthy and meat costs low, and have defeated a series of proposed limits on their use.
--------------
America's farmers give their pigs, cows and chickens about 8 percent more antibiotics each year, usually to heal lung, skin or blood infections. However, 13 percent of the antibiotics administered on farms last year were fed to healthy animals to make them grow faster. Antibiotics also save as much as 30 percent in feed costs among young swine, although the savings fade as pigs get older, according to a new USDA study.
However, these animals can develop germs that are immune to the antibiotics. The germs then rub into scratches on farmworkers' arms, causing oozing infections. They blow into neighboring communities in dust clouds, run off into lakes and rivers during heavy rains, and are sliced into roasts, chops and hocks and sent to our dinner tables.
"Antibiotic-resistant microorganisms generated in the guts of pigs in the Iowa countryside don't stay on the farm," said Union of Concerned Scientists Food and Environment director Margaret Mellon.
More than 20 percent of all human cases of a deadly drug-resistant staph infection in the Netherlands could be traced to an animal strain, according to a study published online in a CDC journal. Federal food safety studies routinely find drug resistant bacteria in beef, chicken and pork sold in supermarkets, and 20 percent of people who get salmonella have a drug resistant strain, according to the CDC.
Here's how it happens: In the early '90s, farmers in several countries, including the U.S., started feeding animals fluoroquinolones, a family of antibiotics that includes drugs such as ciprofloxacin. In the following years, the once powerful antibiotic Cipro stopped working 80 percent of the time on some of the deadliest human infections it used to wipe out. Twelve years later, the New England Journal of Medicine published a study linking people infected with a Cipro-resistant bacteria to pork they had eaten.
Johns Hopkins University health sciences professor Ellen Silbergeld, who has reviewed every major study on this issue, said there's no doubt drug use in farm animals is a "major driver of antimicrobial resistance worldwide."
"We have data to show it's in wastewaters and it goes to aquaculture and it goes here and there," agreed Dr. Stuart Levy, an expert on antibiotic resistance at Tufts University in Boston. "Antibiotic use in animals impacts everything."
--------------
Farmer Craig Rowles remains unconvinced.
It's afternoon in one of his many rural Iowa pig barns, roaring with snorting and squealing pigs. Some snooze in corners, while others hustle toward their troughs, their slop laced with a steady supply of antibiotics.
"If there was some sort of crossover between the use of the antibiotics in animals and the antibiotics in humans, if there was in fact a real issue there, wouldn't you think we would have seen it?" said Rowles, also a veterinarian who sells 150,000 hogs a year. "That's what the science says to me."
The modular modern barn, home to 1,000 pigs, is a hygienic place. Manure plops through slatted floorboards; an invisible funk steams back up. Rowles dons a sanitary white paper jumpsuit and slips plastic booties over his shoes; he's anxious that his 100-pound pigs aren't exposed to outside germs. A few sick swine are isolated, corralled in a pen near the entrance.
Antibiotics are a crucial part of Rowles' business, speeding growth and warding off disease.
"Now the public doesn't see that," he said. "They're only concerned about resistance, and they don't care about economics because, 'As long as I can buy a pork chop for a buck 69 a pound, I really don't care.' But we live in a world where you have to consider economics in the decision-making process of what we do."
Rowles gives his pigs virginiamycin, which has been used in livestock for decades and is not absorbed by the gut. He withdraws the drug three weeks before his hogs are sent for slaughter. He also monitors his herd for signs of drug resistance to ensure they are getting the most effective doses.
"The one thing that the American public wants to know is: Is the product that I'm getting, is it safe to eat?" said Rowles, whose home freezer is full of his pork. "I'm telling you that the product that we produce today is the safest, most wholesome product that you could possibly get."
--------------
Some U.S. lawmakers are fighting for a new law that would ban farmers like Rowles from feeding antibiotics to their animals unless they are sick.
"If you mixed an antibiotic in your child's cereal, people would think you're crazy," said Rep. Louise M. Slaughter, D-N.Y.
Renewed pressure is on from Capitol Hill from Slaughter's bill and new rules discussed in regulatory agencies. There is also pressure from trade issues: The European Union and other developed countries have adopted strong limits against antibiotics. Russia recently banned pork imports from two U.S. plants after detecting levels of tetracycline that the USDA said met American standards.
Farmers and drugmakers are battling back. Pharmaceutical companies have spent $135 million lobbying so far this year, and agribusiness companies another $70 million, on a handful of issues including fighting the proposed new limits. Opponents, many from farm states, say Slaughter's law is misguided.
"Chaos will ensue," said Kansas Republican Congressman Jerry Moran. "The cultivation of crops and the production of food animals is an immensely complex endeavor involving a vast range of processes. We raise a multitude of crops and livestock in numerous regions, using various production methods. Imagine if the government is allowed to dictate how all of that is done."
He's backed by an array of powerful interests, including the American Farm Bureau, the National Pork Producers Council, Eli Lilly & Co., Bayer AG, Pfizer Inc., Schering-Plough Corp., Dow AgroSciences and Monsanto Company, who have repeatedly defeated similar legislation.
The FDA says without new laws its options are limited. The agency approved antibiotic use in animals in 1951, before concerns about drug resistance were recognized. The only way to withdraw that approval is through a drug-by-drug process that can take years of study, review and comment.
In 1977 the agency proposed a ban on penicillin and tetracycline in animal feed, but it was defeated after criticism from interest groups.
There has been one ban: In 2000, for the first time, the FDA ordered the poultry medication Baytril off the market. Five years later, after a series of failed appeals, poultry farmers stopped using the drug.
In 2008 the FDA issued its second limit on an antibiotic used in cows, pigs and chickens, citing "the importance of cephalosporin drugs for treating disease in humans." But the Bush Administration -- in an FDA note in the federal register -- reversed that decision five days before it was going to take effect after receiving several hundred letters from drug companies and farm animal trade groups.
Laura Rogers, who directs the Pew Charitable Trusts Campaign on Human Health and Industrial Farming in Washington D.C., says the federal government, from Congress to the administration, has failed to protect the public.
"Because of poor regulations and oversight of drug use in industrial farm animals, consumers in the U.S. do not know what their food is treated with, or how often," she said. "Nor is there a system in place to test meat for dangerous antibiotic resistant bacteria."
--------------
Back in Missouri, farmer Kremer finally found an antibiotic that worked on his leg. After being released from the hospital, Kremer tested his pigs. The results showed they were resistant to all the same drugs he was.
Kremer tossed his hypodermic needles, sacked his buckets of antibiotic-laced feed, slaughtered his herd and started anew.
"I was wearing a syringe, like a holster, like a gun, because my pigs were all sick," he recalled. "I was really getting so sick and aggravated at what I was doing. I said, 'This isn't working.'"
Today, when Kremer steps out of his dusty and dented pickup truck and walks toward the open-air barn in the foothills of the Ozark Mountains, the animals come running. They snort and root at his knee-high gum boots. There are no gates corralling the 180 pigs in this barn. He points to a mound of composting manure.
"There's no antibiotics in there," he says proudly.
Kremer sells about 1,200 pigs annually. And a year after "kicking the habit," he says he saved about $16,000 in vet bills, vaccinations and antibiotics.
"I don't know why it took me that long to wake up to the fact that what we were doing, it was not the right thing to do and that there were alternatives," says Kremer, stooping to scratch a pig behind the ear. "We were just basically killing ourselves and society by doing this."
--------
Martha Mendoza is an AP national writer based in Mexico City. Margie Mason is an AP medical writer who reported from Missouri and Iowa while on a fellowship from The Nieman Foundation at Harvard University.
Dec. 29 2009 - 12:31 pm | 292 views | 4 recommendations | 8 comments
Animal antibiotics kill more people than breast and prostate cancer
MIAMI - AUGUST 07: Bottles of antibiotics lin...
Image by Getty Images via Daylife
I spend a lot of time writing about the need to provide adequate health coverage to all Americans and the policies that could bring the hoped for result. To that end, I have frequently discussed the crime of allowing 45,000 people in America to die each year because they aren’t so fortunate as to have health insurance.
But making positive changes in our health care system it is not all about complicated economics and social policy. Sometimes people are dying from policies that should be easy to change – even if politically tricky.
Did you know that 65,000 Americans die every year from drug resistant strains of bacteria that result from the over usage of antibiotics in animals and humans? That’s more than the total number of deaths in this country each year from breast and prostate cancer combined. And, yes, it’s more than the number of deaths in the United States each year resulting from a lack of health insurance.
Antibiotics not only treat infections in livestock but allow the animals to grow faster. This gets pig, cow and chicken products to your table more quickly and at a lower cost, allowing farmers to improve their cash flows and profits. However, in the process, the animals develop drug resistant infections that are passed onto people and become part of the human disease trail.
Researchers are now finding that these drug resistant strains are having an impact throughout the world as diseases like malaria, tuberculosis and staphylococcus infections are resurging in new and untreatable forms.
This is a living breathing problem, it’s the big bad wolf and it’s knocking at our door,” said Dr. Vance Fowler, an infectious disease specialist at Duke University. “It’s here. It’s arrived.”
Via The Associated Press
For those inclined to believe that this is more a problem of humans overusing antibiotics (which we clearly do) every time we fear the arrival of a sore throat, consider this -
Last year, 35 million pounds of antibiotics were consumed in the United States. 70% of those drugs were given to pigs, chickens and cows. Around the world, 50% of the antibiotics go to livestock.
That’s not chickenfeed. Scratch that. Actually, it is chickenfeed.
America’s farmers give their pigs, cows and chickens about 8 percent more antibiotics each year, usually to heal lung, skin or blood infections. However, 13 percent of the antibiotics administered on farms last year were fed to healthy animals to make them grow faster. Antibiotics also save as much as 30 percent in feed costs among young swine, although the savings fade as pigs get older, according to a new USDA study.
Via The Associated Press
While proponents of organic and free range food products have known this for some time, others are beginning take notice. The World Health Organization recently issued a caution that surging antibiotic resistance is one of the leading threats to human health. The White House has deemed the problem urgent and there is legislation in the House to clamp down on the usage of antibiotics for reasons other than treating actual infection.
This one shouldn’t be too hard to fix, yes?
Not so much.
Enter the lobbyists. The drug and agribusiness companies have spent over $200 million this year battling legislation, including the newly proposed limits on antibiotic use.
And where there’s a lobbyist, you can bet there’s a Republican leading the charge:
Chaos will ensue,” said Kansas Republican Congressman Jerry Moran. “The cultivation of crops and the production of food animals is an immensely complex endeavor involving a vast range of processes. We raise a multitude of crops and livestock in numerous regions, using various production methods. Imagine if the government is allowed to dictate how all of that is done.”
The Associated Press
Really? I wonder if Rep. Moran has ever heard of a little government agency called the Food and Drug Administration who exists precisely to insure that this sort of thing does not happen.
The FDA appears to have a desire to do something about this problem but are pretty powerless. Having already approved the use of numerous antibiotics for animals back in the 50’s, it is difficult to turn back the clock, particularly in view of the special interests standing in the way.
This is something that will have to be handled by Congress- and the sooner the better.
By the way, I do not wish the farmers ill nor do I relish the idea of them suffering economic damage. American farmers have it pretty tough already.
It does, however, appear that the farmers may have some options. I recently discussed this with a dairyman in Central California, an area that produces much of the nation’s dairy products. It turns out that using garlic to treat infections in livestock is an effective way of fighting disease without having to use antibiotics. Not only does this approach lower their overhead by cutting down on expensive antibiotics and vet bills, but the alternate treatments can go a long way towards resolving a problem which presents a very clear an present danger to the world’s health.
Look for this to become one of the key world health issues in 2010.
==========================================
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9CSGMM80.htm
The Associated Press December 28, 2009, 2:47PM ET
Pressure rises to stop antibiotics in agriculture
By MARGIE MASON AND MARTHA MENDOZA
FRANKENSTEIN, Mo.
The mystery started the day farmer Russ Kremer got between a jealous boar and a sow in heat.
The boar gored Kremer in the knee with a razor-sharp tusk. The burly pig farmer shrugged it off, figuring: "You pour the blood out of your boot and go on."
But Kremer's red-hot leg ballooned to double its size. A strep infection spread, threatening his life and baffling doctors. Two months of multiple antibiotics did virtually nothing.
The answer was flowing in the veins of the boar. The animal had been fed low doses of penicillin, spawning a strain of strep that was resistant to other antibiotics. That drug-resistant germ passed to Kremer.
Like Kremer, more and more Americans -- many of them living far from barns and pastures -- are at risk from the widespread practice of feeding livestock antibiotics. These animals grow faster, but they can also develop drug-resistant infections that are passed on to people. The issue is now gaining attention because of interest from a new White House administration and a flurry of new research tying antibiotic use in animals to drug resistance in people.
Researchers say the overuse of antibiotics in humans and animals has led to a plague of drug-resistant infections that killed more than 65,000 people in the U.S. last year -- more than prostate and breast cancer combined. And in a nation that used about 35 million pounds of antibiotics last year, 70 percent of the drugs -- 28 million pounds -- went to pigs, chickens and cows. Worldwide, it's 50 percent.
"This is a living breathing problem, it's the big bad wolf and it's knocking at our door," said Dr. Vance Fowler, an infectious disease specialist at Duke University. "It's here. It's arrived."
The rise in the use of antibiotics is part of a growing problem of soaring drug resistance worldwide, The Associated Press found in a six-month look at the issue. As a result, killer diseases like malaria, tuberculosis and staph are resurging in new and more deadly forms.
In response, the pressure against the use of antibiotics in agriculture is rising. The World Health Organization concluded this year that surging antibiotic resistance is one of the leading threats to human health, and the White House last month said the problem is "urgent."
"If we're not careful with antibiotics and the programs to administer them, we're going to be in a post antibiotic era," said Dr. Thomas Frieden, who was tapped to lead the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention this year.
Also this year, the three federal agencies tasked with protecting public health -- the Food and Drug Administration, CDC and U.S. Department of Agriculture -- declared drug-resistant diseases stemming from antibiotic use in animals a "serious emerging concern." And FDA deputy commissioner Dr. Joshua Sharfstein told Congress this summer that farmers need to stop feeding antibiotics to healthy farm animals.
Farm groups and pharmaceutical companies argue that drugs keep animals healthy and meat costs low, and have defeated a series of proposed limits on their use.
--------------
America's farmers give their pigs, cows and chickens about 8 percent more antibiotics each year, usually to heal lung, skin or blood infections. However, 13 percent of the antibiotics administered on farms last year were fed to healthy animals to make them grow faster. Antibiotics also save as much as 30 percent in feed costs among young swine, although the savings fade as pigs get older, according to a new USDA study.
However, these animals can develop germs that are immune to the antibiotics. The germs then rub into scratches on farmworkers' arms, causing oozing infections. They blow into neighboring communities in dust clouds, run off into lakes and rivers during heavy rains, and are sliced into roasts, chops and hocks and sent to our dinner tables.
"Antibiotic-resistant microorganisms generated in the guts of pigs in the Iowa countryside don't stay on the farm," said Union of Concerned Scientists Food and Environment director Margaret Mellon.
More than 20 percent of all human cases of a deadly drug-resistant staph infection in the Netherlands could be traced to an animal strain, according to a study published online in a CDC journal. Federal food safety studies routinely find drug resistant bacteria in beef, chicken and pork sold in supermarkets, and 20 percent of people who get salmonella have a drug resistant strain, according to the CDC.
Here's how it happens: In the early '90s, farmers in several countries, including the U.S., started feeding animals fluoroquinolones, a family of antibiotics that includes drugs such as ciprofloxacin. In the following years, the once powerful antibiotic Cipro stopped working 80 percent of the time on some of the deadliest human infections it used to wipe out. Twelve years later, the New England Journal of Medicine published a study linking people infected with a Cipro-resistant bacteria to pork they had eaten.
Johns Hopkins University health sciences professor Ellen Silbergeld, who has reviewed every major study on this issue, said there's no doubt drug use in farm animals is a "major driver of antimicrobial resistance worldwide."
"We have data to show it's in wastewaters and it goes to aquaculture and it goes here and there," agreed Dr. Stuart Levy, an expert on antibiotic resistance at Tufts University in Boston. "Antibiotic use in animals impacts everything."
--------------
Farmer Craig Rowles remains unconvinced.
It's afternoon in one of his many rural Iowa pig barns, roaring with snorting and squealing pigs. Some snooze in corners, while others hustle toward their troughs, their slop laced with a steady supply of antibiotics.
"If there was some sort of crossover between the use of the antibiotics in animals and the antibiotics in humans, if there was in fact a real issue there, wouldn't you think we would have seen it?" said Rowles, also a veterinarian who sells 150,000 hogs a year. "That's what the science says to me."
The modular modern barn, home to 1,000 pigs, is a hygienic place. Manure plops through slatted floorboards; an invisible funk steams back up. Rowles dons a sanitary white paper jumpsuit and slips plastic booties over his shoes; he's anxious that his 100-pound pigs aren't exposed to outside germs. A few sick swine are isolated, corralled in a pen near the entrance.
Antibiotics are a crucial part of Rowles' business, speeding growth and warding off disease.
"Now the public doesn't see that," he said. "They're only concerned about resistance, and they don't care about economics because, 'As long as I can buy a pork chop for a buck 69 a pound, I really don't care.' But we live in a world where you have to consider economics in the decision-making process of what we do."
Rowles gives his pigs virginiamycin, which has been used in livestock for decades and is not absorbed by the gut. He withdraws the drug three weeks before his hogs are sent for slaughter. He also monitors his herd for signs of drug resistance to ensure they are getting the most effective doses.
"The one thing that the American public wants to know is: Is the product that I'm getting, is it safe to eat?" said Rowles, whose home freezer is full of his pork. "I'm telling you that the product that we produce today is the safest, most wholesome product that you could possibly get."
--------------
Some U.S. lawmakers are fighting for a new law that would ban farmers like Rowles from feeding antibiotics to their animals unless they are sick.
"If you mixed an antibiotic in your child's cereal, people would think you're crazy," said Rep. Louise M. Slaughter, D-N.Y.
Renewed pressure is on from Capitol Hill from Slaughter's bill and new rules discussed in regulatory agencies. There is also pressure from trade issues: The European Union and other developed countries have adopted strong limits against antibiotics. Russia recently banned pork imports from two U.S. plants after detecting levels of tetracycline that the USDA said met American standards.
Farmers and drugmakers are battling back. Pharmaceutical companies have spent $135 million lobbying so far this year, and agribusiness companies another $70 million, on a handful of issues including fighting the proposed new limits. Opponents, many from farm states, say Slaughter's law is misguided.
"Chaos will ensue," said Kansas Republican Congressman Jerry Moran. "The cultivation of crops and the production of food animals is an immensely complex endeavor involving a vast range of processes. We raise a multitude of crops and livestock in numerous regions, using various production methods. Imagine if the government is allowed to dictate how all of that is done."
He's backed by an array of powerful interests, including the American Farm Bureau, the National Pork Producers Council, Eli Lilly & Co., Bayer AG, Pfizer Inc., Schering-Plough Corp., Dow AgroSciences and Monsanto Company, who have repeatedly defeated similar legislation.
The FDA says without new laws its options are limited. The agency approved antibiotic use in animals in 1951, before concerns about drug resistance were recognized. The only way to withdraw that approval is through a drug-by-drug process that can take years of study, review and comment.
In 1977 the agency proposed a ban on penicillin and tetracycline in animal feed, but it was defeated after criticism from interest groups.
There has been one ban: In 2000, for the first time, the FDA ordered the poultry medication Baytril off the market. Five years later, after a series of failed appeals, poultry farmers stopped using the drug.
In 2008 the FDA issued its second limit on an antibiotic used in cows, pigs and chickens, citing "the importance of cephalosporin drugs for treating disease in humans." But the Bush Administration -- in an FDA note in the federal register -- reversed that decision five days before it was going to take effect after receiving several hundred letters from drug companies and farm animal trade groups.
Laura Rogers, who directs the Pew Charitable Trusts Campaign on Human Health and Industrial Farming in Washington D.C., says the federal government, from Congress to the administration, has failed to protect the public.
"Because of poor regulations and oversight of drug use in industrial farm animals, consumers in the U.S. do not know what their food is treated with, or how often," she said. "Nor is there a system in place to test meat for dangerous antibiotic resistant bacteria."
--------------
Back in Missouri, farmer Kremer finally found an antibiotic that worked on his leg. After being released from the hospital, Kremer tested his pigs. The results showed they were resistant to all the same drugs he was.
Kremer tossed his hypodermic needles, sacked his buckets of antibiotic-laced feed, slaughtered his herd and started anew.
"I was wearing a syringe, like a holster, like a gun, because my pigs were all sick," he recalled. "I was really getting so sick and aggravated at what I was doing. I said, 'This isn't working.'"
Today, when Kremer steps out of his dusty and dented pickup truck and walks toward the open-air barn in the foothills of the Ozark Mountains, the animals come running. They snort and root at his knee-high gum boots. There are no gates corralling the 180 pigs in this barn. He points to a mound of composting manure.
"There's no antibiotics in there," he says proudly.
Kremer sells about 1,200 pigs annually. And a year after "kicking the habit," he says he saved about $16,000 in vet bills, vaccinations and antibiotics.
"I don't know why it took me that long to wake up to the fact that what we were doing, it was not the right thing to do and that there were alternatives," says Kremer, stooping to scratch a pig behind the ear. "We were just basically killing ourselves and society by doing this."
--------
Martha Mendoza is an AP national writer based in Mexico City. Margie Mason is an AP medical writer who reported from Missouri and Iowa while on a fellowship from The Nieman Foundation at Harvard University.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Attack Yemen?
Attack Yemen?
By Congressman Ron Paul
Congressman Ron Paul gives his thoughts on Yemen, the attempted airline bombing, the motivations of Al Qaeda, the radicalization of the Middle East, and the negation of our liberties to government provided "security."
“The bigger the problem and the more the fear is built up, the more they take away our personal liberties and turn us all into zombies and the American people go along with it and say as long as it makes us safer I guess it’s OK to go along but it’s time the American people woke up and started realizing that there’s a bit of propaganda going on and quite possibly this incident will not only undermine our personal liberties but will also accelerate our intervention and the violence occurring in the Middle East,”
Posted December 29, 2009
By Congressman Ron Paul
Congressman Ron Paul gives his thoughts on Yemen, the attempted airline bombing, the motivations of Al Qaeda, the radicalization of the Middle East, and the negation of our liberties to government provided "security."
“The bigger the problem and the more the fear is built up, the more they take away our personal liberties and turn us all into zombies and the American people go along with it and say as long as it makes us safer I guess it’s OK to go along but it’s time the American people woke up and started realizing that there’s a bit of propaganda going on and quite possibly this incident will not only undermine our personal liberties but will also accelerate our intervention and the violence occurring in the Middle East,”
Posted December 29, 2009
The latest "false flag" operation on Christmas Day
Looks like a clear cut case of yet another Mossad/Israeli inspired "false flag" operation - and carefully timed on one of the Christian holy days.
Of course the Zionist puppet political leaders like Obama, Brown etc all quickly react on script and impose yet more absurd "airport security"
with predictable accusations against their invented bogeyman organization "Al Qaeda".
Reminder! - whenever a "terror" incident occurs always first check Mossad's motives and involvement to get the bigger picture!
Bomber Had No Passport, Helped To Board Plane By Sharp-Dressed Man! (see article below)
More Than A Coincidence? ICTS provides security at Amsterdam airport where a Nigerian with a bomb allegedly taped to his leg and links to al Qaeda boarded a plane to Detroit. The Israeli-owned IIICTSalso provided security at all the airports from whence the 911 hijackers depart
Security Services
ICTS provides "enhanced airline security services" for over 200 carriers at over 65 European locations including Amsterdam,
where on Christmas day a Nigerian (with apparent links to the mythical "Al Qaeda") had a bomb taped to his leg when boarding a flight to Detroit.
NB. The Israeli owned ICTS also provided security at ALL the airports from whence the 9/11 hijacked aircraft departed!
Obviously, through this arrangement, Mossad (the Israeli secret service) is perfectly positioned to maintain high profile terror in the air whenever required!
These services include:
* Enhanced passenger and baggage security
* Security interviewing
* Travel documentation verification
* Security at check-in, gate, and duty-free areas
* Baggage X-ray
* Aircraft inspection
* Control of boarding passengers
* Security checks at ramp areas immediately surrounding the aircraft and other related areas.
* Catering security
* Cargo security
ICTS provides specialised services to US carriers at 36 European locations, - servicing more than 150 flights each day in compliance with the procedures of the US Transport Security Administration (TSA), local regulators and of the airlines.
ICTS is the main security vendor for the European operations of Continental Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines. We are also the sole provider of security services at all of American Airlines’ and US Airways European stations.Hi All,
well its happened again. Another false flag operation. If we ever get the full story on
this guy I'll be surprised. Who set him up, who gave him explosives and how is it that a man
trying to blow up a plane has enough explosives to burn his pants and backside.
It doesn't add up!!!!! To penetrate the hull of an aircraft takes more than an undies bomb!
best , Richard ricgiles@powerup.com.au
Bomber Had No Passport, Helped To Board Plane By Sharp-Dressed Man
http://www.prisonplanet.com/
Travelers harassed by intense airport security after Nigerian on terror list was
allowed to attempt attack on Flight 253
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com , Sunday, December 27, 2009
A passenger who boarded Northwest Airlines Flight 253 in Amsterdam with attempted plane bomber Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab says the would-be terrorist had no passport and was aided by a sharp-dressed man who claimed Mutallab was a Sudanese refugee, just one of a plethora of startling inconsistencies surrounding an incident that has led to ramped up security and increased levels of harassment in airports.
Every single fact that has come to light since the attempted bombing on Christmas Day directly indicates that the bomber was deliberately allowed to board the plane and that his attack would have succeeded if not for the alert and brave reactions of the passengers and flight crew.
According to Kurt Haskell, an attorney with the Haskell Law Firm in Taylor, Michigan, "He and his wife were sitting on the ground near their boarding gate in Amsterdam, which is when they saw Mutallab approach the gate with an unidentified man."
Mutallab was a poorly dressed, young looking individual, but he was accompanied by a man in an expensive suit, Haskell told MLive.com.
"He says the suited man asked ticket agents whether Mutallab could board without a passport. "The guy said, 'He's from Sudan and we do this all the time.'"
Although Mutallab is Nigerian, Haskell said the well-dressed man portrayed him as a desperate Sudanese refugee in an attempt to elicit sympathy and as a way of bypassing his lack of documents.
"The ticket agent referred Mutallab and his companion to her manager down the hall, and Haskell didn't see Mutallab again until after he allegedly tried to detonate an explosive on the plane," states the report.
Crucially, Haskell said that after the plane landed he saw another man being taken into custody by the FBI along with Mutallab. However, the FBI later said that Mutallab was the only individual taken into custody.
Were the feds retrieving their own agent, the sharp dressed man who ensured that Mutallab boarded the plane despite his overwhelmingly suspicious circumstances?
Mutallab was a known security threat who was on the terror watch list. He is barred from entering Britain after being refused a new visa due to applying for a fake university course. Separate reports said that he did hold a valid visa, which begs the question, how can someone on a terror watch list be allowed to fly?
"On the one hand, it seems he's been on the terror watch list but not on the no-fly list," he said. "That doesn't square because the American Department for Homeland Security has pretty stringent data-mining capability. I don't understand how he had a valid visa if he was known on the terror watch list," Dr Magnus Ranstorp of the Center for Asymmetric Threat Studies told the London Independent.
It has also been revealed that Mutallab's father contacted U.S. intelligence officials a month ago and warned them that his son was a threat, but nothing was done.
The bomber's father, Alhaji Umaru Mutallab, was a a former minister and chairman of First Bank in Nigeria. The bomber does not fit the image of a disgruntled, rag-tag terrorist. His considerable wealth allowed him to live in luxury at an imposing London mansion.
As a result of the failed attack, new security directives have been introduced for anyone traveling into America. Intense body and hand-luggage searches and sniffer dogs have been beefed up at departure gates and passengers have been ordered not to stand during the final hour of the flight and are not allowed access to any of their hand luggage during the final hour.
There can be little doubt that whatever the nature of this incident, it will be exploited to the maximum in order to further tighten the stranglehold of police state security measures that are increasingly finding their way out of the airport and into our everyday lives. Homeland Security proposals to use a mandatory shock bracelet that will be fitted to all travelers will now move closer to implementation, as will the increased global rollout of x-ray scanning machines that produce naked images of passengers.
However, if you're a suspicious looking man on a terror watch list with no passport carrying explosives, you should breeze through security with no questions asked, just be sure to have a sharp-dressed man with you at all times.
Number 2
Foiled Terrorist Bombing in Detroit: An Excuse to Expand
the Bogus War On Terror
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com , December 27, 2009
The explosion of what witnesses describe as a firecracker on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas arrives at an opportune time for the Obama administration. The alleged perpetrator, Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab, like shoe bomber Richard Reid before him, appears to be an incompetent patsy. Mutallab told investigators he was on a mission from al-Qaeda and he got the explosive materials for the botched attack in Yemen.
Yemen is a new front in the war against the manufactured enemy al-Qaeda. Not only is the United States providing assisstance to the Yemeni government to bomb supposed al-Qaeda bases in the southern part of the country, but Saudi Arabia conducted airstrikes against targets in the north. Mohamed al-Anisi, the Yemeni national security chief, told told the Saudi Arabian newspaper Okaz that his forces were cooperating with Washington on attacks and accused Iran of aiding Houthi Shiite rebels. Earlier this week, a Saudi Ministry of Defense official said 73 Saudis were killed fighting the Houthi rebels, according to Deutsche Presse-Agentur.
Earlier this week al-Qaeda exploited an anti-government rally in Sanna. "Al Qaeda militants made a rare public appearance in restive south Yemen on Monday, telling an anti-government rally that the group's war was with the United States and not the Yemeni army, residents said," Reuters reported on December 23. "The West and Saudi Arabia fear al Qaeda will take advantage of the Yemeni government's focus on a Shi'ite rebellion in the north and rising secessionist sentiment in the south to spread its operations to the kingdom, the world's top oil exporter." An explosion during the demonstration killed three people.
The failed bombing of Flight 253 provides an excuse to expand the GWOT into Africa. "The alleged bomber's nationality and his apparent origination in Nigeria raised immediate questions about airport security in Africa's most populous country, where corruption, organized crime and crumbling infrastructure have long hobbled an otherwise oil-rich government," reports The Wall Street Journal. "The alleged attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound jet by a Nigerian national Friday raises new concern over possible extremist Islamic activity in Nigeria and West Africa, a corner of Africa where al Qaeda so far hasn't put down significant roots."
Ethiopian and U.S. intervention in Somalia was justified to the international public under the pretext of fighting terrorism and al-Qaeda. "Ethiopia has become a regional surrogate or proxy for the United States and Britain. This is evident from the coordination of the U.S. military and Ethiopian troops in Somalia," Global Research noted in January, 2007.
"America's renewed interest in the Horn of Africa dates to November 2002 when the US military established its joint taskforce in Djibouti, now the base for 1,800 troops, including special operations forces," The Guardian reported on January 13, 2007. "By then, the west had good reason to fear that Africa had become an arena for al-Qaida, and that the failed state of Somalia could become a haven for the organization's operatives."
Ethiopia invaded Somalia with US encouragement and military assistance after the Islamic Courts Union (ICU), an Islamist militant group that ruled much of the country, made military advances. On January 5, 2007, al-Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri - the notorious CIA operative in Afghanistan who was shepherded by the western intelligence asset the Muslim Brotherhood - issued a message urging Somalis to fight against the Ethiopian invaders.
The ICU is a classic intelligence fabrication. It was armed by none other than Victor Bout, described as the world's biggest illegal arms dealer. Bout worked with CIA front companies in Afghanistan. He also worked with the United Nations and African warlords, according to investigative journalist Wayne Madsen.
"Unified Quest 2008? underscores the importance of Africa in the bogus (and highly profitable) GWOT. The May 2008 United States Army War College war game included representatives from several NATO countries, Australia, and Israel, along with the private military contractors the Rand Corporation and Booz-Allen. Among scenarios examined during the game were the possibility of direct American military intervention involving some 20,000 U.S. troops in order to "secure the oil," and the question of how to handle possible splits between factions within the Nigerian government. The game ended without military intervention because one of the rival factions executed a successful coup and formed a new government that sought stability, reported the Stop NATO newsgroup.
Obama has defined the Africom mission to be within the parameters of U.S. national security and the larger globalist agenda. "America has a responsibility to advance this vision, not just with words, but with support that strengthens African capacity. When there is genocide in Darfur or terrorists in Somalia, these are not simply African problems - they are global security challenges, and they demand a global response," he said during a speech delivered on July 11, 2009. "Our Africa Command is focused not on establishing a foothold in the continent, but on confronting these common challenges to advance the security of America, Africa and the world."
Africa Command was established October 1, 2007 as a temporary sub-unified command under U.S. European Command, which for more than two decades was responsible for U.S. military relations with more than 40 African nations. Africa Command was formally activated October 1, 2008, during a public ceremony at the Pentagon attended by representatives of African nations posted in Washington, D.C.
In addition to paving the way for expanded incursion in Africa, the failed bombing provides an excuse to further harass and impose police state measures on airline passengers. "President Barack Obama, vacationing in Hawaii, ordered heightened security, calling for 'all appropriate measures to be taken' after receiving a briefing from national security officials, a White House statement said," reports Bloomberg. Obama considers yesterday's incident as an attempted terrorist attack.
Airport security was increased around the world today. "The Department of Homeland Security said passengers may notice additional screening. Security at airports in the U.K., continental Europe, Canada, parts of Asia and Australia was increased today, and a European Commission statement said the authorities are in contact with Dutch and U.S. officials," BusinessWeek reports this morning.
Prison Planet.tv Members Can Watch Fall Of The Republic Right Now Online -
Don't Miss Out! Get Your Subscription Today!
Of course the Zionist puppet political leaders like Obama, Brown etc all quickly react on script and impose yet more absurd "airport security"
with predictable accusations against their invented bogeyman organization "Al Qaeda".
Reminder! - whenever a "terror" incident occurs always first check Mossad's motives and involvement to get the bigger picture!
Bomber Had No Passport, Helped To Board Plane By Sharp-Dressed Man! (see article below)
More Than A Coincidence? ICTS provides security at Amsterdam airport where a Nigerian with a bomb allegedly taped to his leg and links to al Qaeda boarded a plane to Detroit. The Israeli-owned IIICTSalso provided security at all the airports from whence the 911 hijackers depart
Security Services
ICTS provides "enhanced airline security services" for over 200 carriers at over 65 European locations including Amsterdam,
where on Christmas day a Nigerian (with apparent links to the mythical "Al Qaeda") had a bomb taped to his leg when boarding a flight to Detroit.
NB. The Israeli owned ICTS also provided security at ALL the airports from whence the 9/11 hijacked aircraft departed!
Obviously, through this arrangement, Mossad (the Israeli secret service) is perfectly positioned to maintain high profile terror in the air whenever required!
These services include:
* Enhanced passenger and baggage security
* Security interviewing
* Travel documentation verification
* Security at check-in, gate, and duty-free areas
* Baggage X-ray
* Aircraft inspection
* Control of boarding passengers
* Security checks at ramp areas immediately surrounding the aircraft and other related areas.
* Catering security
* Cargo security
ICTS provides specialised services to US carriers at 36 European locations, - servicing more than 150 flights each day in compliance with the procedures of the US Transport Security Administration (TSA), local regulators and of the airlines.
ICTS is the main security vendor for the European operations of Continental Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines. We are also the sole provider of security services at all of American Airlines’ and US Airways European stations.Hi All,
well its happened again. Another false flag operation. If we ever get the full story on
this guy I'll be surprised. Who set him up, who gave him explosives and how is it that a man
trying to blow up a plane has enough explosives to burn his pants and backside.
It doesn't add up!!!!! To penetrate the hull of an aircraft takes more than an undies bomb!
best , Richard ricgiles@powerup.com.au
Bomber Had No Passport, Helped To Board Plane By Sharp-Dressed Man
http://www.prisonplanet.com/
Travelers harassed by intense airport security after Nigerian on terror list was
allowed to attempt attack on Flight 253
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com , Sunday, December 27, 2009
A passenger who boarded Northwest Airlines Flight 253 in Amsterdam with attempted plane bomber Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab says the would-be terrorist had no passport and was aided by a sharp-dressed man who claimed Mutallab was a Sudanese refugee, just one of a plethora of startling inconsistencies surrounding an incident that has led to ramped up security and increased levels of harassment in airports.
Every single fact that has come to light since the attempted bombing on Christmas Day directly indicates that the bomber was deliberately allowed to board the plane and that his attack would have succeeded if not for the alert and brave reactions of the passengers and flight crew.
According to Kurt Haskell, an attorney with the Haskell Law Firm in Taylor, Michigan, "He and his wife were sitting on the ground near their boarding gate in Amsterdam, which is when they saw Mutallab approach the gate with an unidentified man."
Mutallab was a poorly dressed, young looking individual, but he was accompanied by a man in an expensive suit, Haskell told MLive.com.
"He says the suited man asked ticket agents whether Mutallab could board without a passport. "The guy said, 'He's from Sudan and we do this all the time.'"
Although Mutallab is Nigerian, Haskell said the well-dressed man portrayed him as a desperate Sudanese refugee in an attempt to elicit sympathy and as a way of bypassing his lack of documents.
"The ticket agent referred Mutallab and his companion to her manager down the hall, and Haskell didn't see Mutallab again until after he allegedly tried to detonate an explosive on the plane," states the report.
Crucially, Haskell said that after the plane landed he saw another man being taken into custody by the FBI along with Mutallab. However, the FBI later said that Mutallab was the only individual taken into custody.
Were the feds retrieving their own agent, the sharp dressed man who ensured that Mutallab boarded the plane despite his overwhelmingly suspicious circumstances?
Mutallab was a known security threat who was on the terror watch list. He is barred from entering Britain after being refused a new visa due to applying for a fake university course. Separate reports said that he did hold a valid visa, which begs the question, how can someone on a terror watch list be allowed to fly?
"On the one hand, it seems he's been on the terror watch list but not on the no-fly list," he said. "That doesn't square because the American Department for Homeland Security has pretty stringent data-mining capability. I don't understand how he had a valid visa if he was known on the terror watch list," Dr Magnus Ranstorp of the Center for Asymmetric Threat Studies told the London Independent.
It has also been revealed that Mutallab's father contacted U.S. intelligence officials a month ago and warned them that his son was a threat, but nothing was done.
The bomber's father, Alhaji Umaru Mutallab, was a a former minister and chairman of First Bank in Nigeria. The bomber does not fit the image of a disgruntled, rag-tag terrorist. His considerable wealth allowed him to live in luxury at an imposing London mansion.
As a result of the failed attack, new security directives have been introduced for anyone traveling into America. Intense body and hand-luggage searches and sniffer dogs have been beefed up at departure gates and passengers have been ordered not to stand during the final hour of the flight and are not allowed access to any of their hand luggage during the final hour.
There can be little doubt that whatever the nature of this incident, it will be exploited to the maximum in order to further tighten the stranglehold of police state security measures that are increasingly finding their way out of the airport and into our everyday lives. Homeland Security proposals to use a mandatory shock bracelet that will be fitted to all travelers will now move closer to implementation, as will the increased global rollout of x-ray scanning machines that produce naked images of passengers.
However, if you're a suspicious looking man on a terror watch list with no passport carrying explosives, you should breeze through security with no questions asked, just be sure to have a sharp-dressed man with you at all times.
Number 2
Foiled Terrorist Bombing in Detroit: An Excuse to Expand
the Bogus War On Terror
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com , December 27, 2009
The explosion of what witnesses describe as a firecracker on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas arrives at an opportune time for the Obama administration. The alleged perpetrator, Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab, like shoe bomber Richard Reid before him, appears to be an incompetent patsy. Mutallab told investigators he was on a mission from al-Qaeda and he got the explosive materials for the botched attack in Yemen.
Yemen is a new front in the war against the manufactured enemy al-Qaeda. Not only is the United States providing assisstance to the Yemeni government to bomb supposed al-Qaeda bases in the southern part of the country, but Saudi Arabia conducted airstrikes against targets in the north. Mohamed al-Anisi, the Yemeni national security chief, told told the Saudi Arabian newspaper Okaz that his forces were cooperating with Washington on attacks and accused Iran of aiding Houthi Shiite rebels. Earlier this week, a Saudi Ministry of Defense official said 73 Saudis were killed fighting the Houthi rebels, according to Deutsche Presse-Agentur.
Earlier this week al-Qaeda exploited an anti-government rally in Sanna. "Al Qaeda militants made a rare public appearance in restive south Yemen on Monday, telling an anti-government rally that the group's war was with the United States and not the Yemeni army, residents said," Reuters reported on December 23. "The West and Saudi Arabia fear al Qaeda will take advantage of the Yemeni government's focus on a Shi'ite rebellion in the north and rising secessionist sentiment in the south to spread its operations to the kingdom, the world's top oil exporter." An explosion during the demonstration killed three people.
The failed bombing of Flight 253 provides an excuse to expand the GWOT into Africa. "The alleged bomber's nationality and his apparent origination in Nigeria raised immediate questions about airport security in Africa's most populous country, where corruption, organized crime and crumbling infrastructure have long hobbled an otherwise oil-rich government," reports The Wall Street Journal. "The alleged attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound jet by a Nigerian national Friday raises new concern over possible extremist Islamic activity in Nigeria and West Africa, a corner of Africa where al Qaeda so far hasn't put down significant roots."
Ethiopian and U.S. intervention in Somalia was justified to the international public under the pretext of fighting terrorism and al-Qaeda. "Ethiopia has become a regional surrogate or proxy for the United States and Britain. This is evident from the coordination of the U.S. military and Ethiopian troops in Somalia," Global Research noted in January, 2007.
"America's renewed interest in the Horn of Africa dates to November 2002 when the US military established its joint taskforce in Djibouti, now the base for 1,800 troops, including special operations forces," The Guardian reported on January 13, 2007. "By then, the west had good reason to fear that Africa had become an arena for al-Qaida, and that the failed state of Somalia could become a haven for the organization's operatives."
Ethiopia invaded Somalia with US encouragement and military assistance after the Islamic Courts Union (ICU), an Islamist militant group that ruled much of the country, made military advances. On January 5, 2007, al-Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri - the notorious CIA operative in Afghanistan who was shepherded by the western intelligence asset the Muslim Brotherhood - issued a message urging Somalis to fight against the Ethiopian invaders.
The ICU is a classic intelligence fabrication. It was armed by none other than Victor Bout, described as the world's biggest illegal arms dealer. Bout worked with CIA front companies in Afghanistan. He also worked with the United Nations and African warlords, according to investigative journalist Wayne Madsen.
"Unified Quest 2008? underscores the importance of Africa in the bogus (and highly profitable) GWOT. The May 2008 United States Army War College war game included representatives from several NATO countries, Australia, and Israel, along with the private military contractors the Rand Corporation and Booz-Allen. Among scenarios examined during the game were the possibility of direct American military intervention involving some 20,000 U.S. troops in order to "secure the oil," and the question of how to handle possible splits between factions within the Nigerian government. The game ended without military intervention because one of the rival factions executed a successful coup and formed a new government that sought stability, reported the Stop NATO newsgroup.
Obama has defined the Africom mission to be within the parameters of U.S. national security and the larger globalist agenda. "America has a responsibility to advance this vision, not just with words, but with support that strengthens African capacity. When there is genocide in Darfur or terrorists in Somalia, these are not simply African problems - they are global security challenges, and they demand a global response," he said during a speech delivered on July 11, 2009. "Our Africa Command is focused not on establishing a foothold in the continent, but on confronting these common challenges to advance the security of America, Africa and the world."
Africa Command was established October 1, 2007 as a temporary sub-unified command under U.S. European Command, which for more than two decades was responsible for U.S. military relations with more than 40 African nations. Africa Command was formally activated October 1, 2008, during a public ceremony at the Pentagon attended by representatives of African nations posted in Washington, D.C.
In addition to paving the way for expanded incursion in Africa, the failed bombing provides an excuse to further harass and impose police state measures on airline passengers. "President Barack Obama, vacationing in Hawaii, ordered heightened security, calling for 'all appropriate measures to be taken' after receiving a briefing from national security officials, a White House statement said," reports Bloomberg. Obama considers yesterday's incident as an attempted terrorist attack.
Airport security was increased around the world today. "The Department of Homeland Security said passengers may notice additional screening. Security at airports in the U.K., continental Europe, Canada, parts of Asia and Australia was increased today, and a European Commission statement said the authorities are in contact with Dutch and U.S. officials," BusinessWeek reports this morning.
Prison Planet.tv Members Can Watch Fall Of The Republic Right Now Online -
Don't Miss Out! Get Your Subscription Today!
New Bomb
That ought to do it…. doncha think !!!!
GBU-57A/B
The Pentagon is accelerating by three years its plans for a super bunker buster, the GBU-57A/B or Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), a powerful new bomb aimed squarely at the underground nuclear facilities of Iran and North Korea . The gargantuan bomb is longer than 11 persons standing shoulder-to-shoulder or more than 20 feet base to nose and weighs over 15 tons (31,862 pounds). Some 18 percent of its total weight is comprised of explosives.
The GBU-57A/B MOP is so immense it can only be carried by either a B-52 or a B-2A Stealth bomber. The weapons explosive power is 10 times greater than its predecessor, the BLU-109. Moreover, the GBU-57A/B MOP is one third heavier than the MOAB dubbed the Mother of All Bombs.
This super buster all started with a break-through by the Raytheon Company when it developed and tested a new conventional warhead technology to defeat hardened and deeply buried bunkers. The new technology, called Tandem Warhead System, consists of a shaped-charge precursor warhead combined with a follow- through penetrator explosive charge.
A small MOP prototype was exploded deep under the rugged mountains of the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico in the caverns of the little-known Weapons of Mass Destruction National Testbeds. The slender orange-colored MOP small prototype was vertically hung, nose down, just inches from the floor of a narrow cavern and then detonated. During the test, the newly developed 1,000-pound-class test warhead set a record when it punched through 19 feet, 3 inches of a 20-foot,330-ton, steel rod-reinforced concrete block rated at 12,600 pounds per square inch compressive strength. In fewer than 10 milliseconds, the explosion delivered into the target more than 110 million foot-pounds of energy via a high-velocity jet of molten metal.
cid:1.2524078483@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
Simultaneously, the Air Force contracted to have an extremely accurate GPS guidance system developed for the MOP; a system more accurate than those deployed in Iraq . It is believed that the CEP (Circle of Error Probably) for the new system is less than five meters.
cid:2.2524078484@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
Guided by the new precision GPS system, the MOP can penetrate an unprecedented 200 feet down before exploding with devastation into an underground bunker, such as those buried in Iran and North Korea currently used to shield rogue nuclear programs.
cid:3.2524078484@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
A test of the full sized prototype was conducted using a B-52 for the test drop. The prototype weapon met each and every flight, guidance, penetration and detonation requirements.
cid:4.2524078484@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
Its sheer explosive power was demonstrated in the test. By the end of 2007, a full-size dummy mock-up of the eventual GBU-57A/B MOP was loaded into the bay of a B2 at Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri . A member of the 509th Maintenance Group personally handling the bomb remarked, "I couldn't help but notice how enormous the bomb was hanging in the weapons bay".
cid:5.2524078484@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
A crash program was then approved to modify B-2A Stealth bombers to carry a payload of two GBU-57A/B MOP bombs. The speed and urgency comes at a time when Iran , NATO and Israel are approaching a denouement over Tehran 's nuclear ambitions, its development of long-range, multi-stage missiles and a new awareness that it is clearly developing a nuclear bomb. The Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) at Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio and the AFRLs Munitions Directorate and the Air Armament Center , both headquartered at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida , are now rushing to modify the bay of a radar-evading B-2A Stealth Bomber to deliver the bomb. A collage of private sector subcontractors is also working on effort, from Stealth bomber manufacturer Northrup-Grumman to Boeings Phantom Works, maker of the bomb itself and prime contractor for the entire project. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency in Virginia has been coordinating among the various air force groups from the beginning.
Thus, we will now have a non-nuclear weapon capable of deep penetration and massive explosive power. Welcome to the.....
GBU-57 A/B
cid:6.2524078484@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
GBU-57A/B
The Pentagon is accelerating by three years its plans for a super bunker buster, the GBU-57A/B or Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), a powerful new bomb aimed squarely at the underground nuclear facilities of Iran and North Korea . The gargantuan bomb is longer than 11 persons standing shoulder-to-shoulder or more than 20 feet base to nose and weighs over 15 tons (31,862 pounds). Some 18 percent of its total weight is comprised of explosives.
The GBU-57A/B MOP is so immense it can only be carried by either a B-52 or a B-2A Stealth bomber. The weapons explosive power is 10 times greater than its predecessor, the BLU-109. Moreover, the GBU-57A/B MOP is one third heavier than the MOAB dubbed the Mother of All Bombs.
This super buster all started with a break-through by the Raytheon Company when it developed and tested a new conventional warhead technology to defeat hardened and deeply buried bunkers. The new technology, called Tandem Warhead System, consists of a shaped-charge precursor warhead combined with a follow- through penetrator explosive charge.
A small MOP prototype was exploded deep under the rugged mountains of the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico in the caverns of the little-known Weapons of Mass Destruction National Testbeds. The slender orange-colored MOP small prototype was vertically hung, nose down, just inches from the floor of a narrow cavern and then detonated. During the test, the newly developed 1,000-pound-class test warhead set a record when it punched through 19 feet, 3 inches of a 20-foot,330-ton, steel rod-reinforced concrete block rated at 12,600 pounds per square inch compressive strength. In fewer than 10 milliseconds, the explosion delivered into the target more than 110 million foot-pounds of energy via a high-velocity jet of molten metal.
cid:1.2524078483@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
Simultaneously, the Air Force contracted to have an extremely accurate GPS guidance system developed for the MOP; a system more accurate than those deployed in Iraq . It is believed that the CEP (Circle of Error Probably) for the new system is less than five meters.
cid:2.2524078484@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
Guided by the new precision GPS system, the MOP can penetrate an unprecedented 200 feet down before exploding with devastation into an underground bunker, such as those buried in Iran and North Korea currently used to shield rogue nuclear programs.
cid:3.2524078484@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
A test of the full sized prototype was conducted using a B-52 for the test drop. The prototype weapon met each and every flight, guidance, penetration and detonation requirements.
cid:4.2524078484@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
Its sheer explosive power was demonstrated in the test. By the end of 2007, a full-size dummy mock-up of the eventual GBU-57A/B MOP was loaded into the bay of a B2 at Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri . A member of the 509th Maintenance Group personally handling the bomb remarked, "I couldn't help but notice how enormous the bomb was hanging in the weapons bay".
cid:5.2524078484@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
A crash program was then approved to modify B-2A Stealth bombers to carry a payload of two GBU-57A/B MOP bombs. The speed and urgency comes at a time when Iran , NATO and Israel are approaching a denouement over Tehran 's nuclear ambitions, its development of long-range, multi-stage missiles and a new awareness that it is clearly developing a nuclear bomb. The Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) at Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio and the AFRLs Munitions Directorate and the Air Armament Center , both headquartered at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida , are now rushing to modify the bay of a radar-evading B-2A Stealth Bomber to deliver the bomb. A collage of private sector subcontractors is also working on effort, from Stealth bomber manufacturer Northrup-Grumman to Boeings Phantom Works, maker of the bomb itself and prime contractor for the entire project. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency in Virginia has been coordinating among the various air force groups from the beginning.
Thus, we will now have a non-nuclear weapon capable of deep penetration and massive explosive power. Welcome to the.....
GBU-57 A/B
cid:6.2524078484@web81703.mail.mud.yahoo.com
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Zero Corner, Debt Costs & Isolation
http://www.kitco.com/ind/willie/dec242009.html
Zero Corner, Debt Costs & Isolation
By Jim Willie CB
Dec 24 2009 12:01PM
www.GoldenJackass.com
Think isolation. Think monetization. Think trapped. Think Catch-22, no remotely viable option. Think end of the road in a gigantic USTreasury bubble, in the process of discredit. Think last resort of monetization, due to the absence of bidders at USTreasury auctions. Think pressure like a vise. The USGovt is in a great big bind and chooses not to discuss it. As European nations ponder the plight of sovereign debt default, the United States compares an order of magnitude worse from deeper insolvency. A default closer to home is considered unthinkable. So was a broad mortgage market breakdown. So was an endless housing decline. So was an insolvent broken banking system. So were consecutive $1 trillion federal deficits. All were forecasted here.
BOND BOYCOTT LED BY CHINA
The Chinese, trade partner turned adversary, have been in boycott of USTreasury Bonds for a year, if truth be told. While still a significant creditor for USGovt debt, it also stands as the primary adversary in the movement to displace the USDollar from its global reserve currency. Arabs and Chinese are mentioned consistently as the most important creditors for official USGovt debt. Something of note happened in 2006 and 2007. The Japanese stopped adding to their USTreasury Bond holdings. The slack was taken by China. Now something has happened again. China has stopped purchasing the USTreasury debt securities. The United States has been set up for acute risk in funding its debt. The response is clearly to be a greater dependence upon the printing press, as the USGovt will be forced to finance its debt through monetization, perhaps almost exclusively. This is the closest one might ever see of a major industrialized nation engaging in behavior best described as Weimar-like. And US economists reward its chief monetary mechanic with a national award! We witness the ultimate in moral hazard, even its celebration.
The war of words continues with China. The leaders and officials in Beijing have delivered salvo after salvo against the weakened US fortress for months. They direct volleys the deficit flank, the currency flank, the tariff flank, the reform flank, and others. They have led the rebellion to remove the USDollar from exclusive usage in international trade settlements. They have endorsed the phase-out demise of the Petro-Dollar. The deputy governor of the Peoples Bank of China had some stern words recently. Zhu Min from the PBOC said, "The United States cannot force foreign governments to increase their holdings of Treasuries. Double the holdings? It is definitely impossible. The US current account deficit is falling as resident savings increase. So its trade turnover is falling, which means the US is supplying fewer dollars to the rest of the world. The world does not have so much money to buy more US Treasuries. [It is] getting harder for governments to buy United States Treasuries because the US's shrinking Current Account gap is reducing the supply of dollars overseas."
This is a double whammy. Foreigners have less US$ funds to buy when USTreasury supply is exploding, due to smaller US trade gaps and smaller foreign trade surpluses. The outlet is USFed monetization to purchase the official bond supply using printing press funds, a last resort source of money. Asian economies have their own challenges. Gone is the Japanese trade surplus. China, on the other hand, is openly sick & tired of financing a government debt when the direction has not been set toward progress or reform. Improvement of the USGovt finances seems NOT a priority in the eyes of foreign creditors. Zhu was as plain as possible, that the USGovt should no longer rely on China for funding its bottomless deficits. Conditions are extremely likely to grow worse, with more desperation to finance deficits that in no way are reduced. The Fed has no choice but to turn the monetization machine on hyper-drive. A chart accentuates the problem and exposes the risk, thanks to RBS bank.
China has made two important changes in their USTreasury management. They have converted much long-term debt securities into short-term debt securities. They have also stopped buying short-term USTreasury Bills almost completely. See how China has sharply reduced their short-term USTBill support (US S/T in brown), which fell off a cliff since summer 2009, when it was an annual outlay of almost $200 billion worth, but now is next to zero. Shown are rolling 12-month sums, meaning around May 2009 the previous 12 months totaled around $190 to $200 billion. As of October 2009, their assembly of USTBills has been nil for a year!! Their long-term USTreasury purchases remain steady (in light blue) in the $90 to $100 billion range, again summed over the last 12 months.
Look more closely at the complex chart above. Notice the very serious dumping of USAgency Mortgage Bond, from a level with running 12-month total near $75 billion in the early summer 2009 to minus $25-35 billion in the last 12 months. Clearly, Beijing leaders have ordered a halt of USTBond purchases. Major entities are selling huge amounts of USAgency Bonds. The Chinese Govt has been selling mortgage backed securities almost as fast as PIMCO. However, they have halted the purchase of USTreasurys. Since May 2009, Chinese USTBond holdings have been flat at $790 billion. The USGovt is more isolated nowadays, left to its printing press device to handle the avalanche of debt.
Imagine, the US recession does not produce enough trade deficits for foreign sources to recycle, perversely. It sounds crazy. A recession will do that, like one that stubbornly refused to end. Going hand in hand with stronger and more robust economic activity inside the US fenceposts is huge trade deficits, no longer seen. This is yet another ongoing recession signal, since the October trade gap was ONLY $32.94 billion, grossly inadequate for foreigners to purchase USTreasurys. Foreigners have less US$ funds from trade to devote to USTreasury conversion, thereby avoiding the currency lift at home. The experts call the process sterlization, since the new US$ money does not convert, does not push the local currency higher, does not interrupt via a feedback loop the export trade that produced the surplus in the first place. Export of USTreasurys is the nastiest, most sinister, most effective device in creating gigantic unresolvable global financial imbalances.
A TEST TO EXIT FROM 0% RATE POLICY
The USFed decided to keep the official interest rate at 0%. My forecast is either no rate hike for 12 to 18 months, or else a gambit of a 25 basis point hike, but with further hikes halted. A series of rate hikes would cause far more havoc and disruption than the so-called experts anticipate. The chronic 0% rate offered at the US bond ring assures a resumed Dollar Carry Trade, and USDollar decline. This is simple speculation mathematics. The result will continue to maintain the gold bull market. As universally expected, the USFed kept its overnight target at 0-0.25% and pledged to keep rates low for an extended period in its words, again. Their statement contained some rubbish about expressed growing optimism for the USEconomy. They cited an abatement in the labor market deterioration and hope of improvement in the housing market, pure fantasy. Neither has remotely occurred.
More important than such nonsense, the USFed underscored confidence in credit markets. It stands by USFed plans to end most of its emergency lending facilities on February 1st. Removal of the primary true source of liquidity will be a dangerous proposition, but they must fake the billboard messages and give it a trial. It is my belief that the USFed will remove the flow of easy money, aka Quantitative Easing, but only on the fringe. They will cut back on some highly visible monetization of USTreasury and USAgency Mortgage Bonds. But they will not reduce any hidden monetization of the same bonds, a powerful enterprise with magnificent unspoken volume that prevents auction failures.
The USFed is actively running a trial balloon. They are permitting the slow motion rise in the 10-year and 30-year USTBonds. If the 10-year TNX yield rises above 4.0%, which could happen easily, a test will be given. Borrowing costs on car loans and commercial loans would rise in step. But the main event would be the test to the housing market from the mortgage rates sure to rise in step. In parallel, the mortgage bond market would undergo a test. The USFed in my opinion wishes to test its urgently needed but impossible exit strategy. My bet is the test fails. My other bet is they lie about its failure. In time, they will halt the test and admit the USEconomy and US credit market remain too weak to begin a rate hike cycle. In order to prevent a future disaster, they must end the current easing cycle. THE USFED WANTS THE TEST FAILURE TO PROVIDE POLITICAL COVER FOR REMAINING IN A RIDICULOUSLY LOW INTEREST RATE ENVIRONMENT. They might wish to kick the Dollar Carry Trade off its path periodically. They know the extended risks. They know much higher price inflation awaits on the other side of Easy Street. The veto vote goes to the short-term USTreasury Bill market. If conditions were ready for a rate hike, the USTreasury Bills would confirm it across the lower maturities. Notice the 3-month USTBill yield. It cannot even rise to reach the 0.18% plateau seen for the entire spring and summer months. This means no return to normalcy anytime soon. A point of history is worth mentioning. The US Federal Reserve almost never breaks away from the path set by the short-term USTreasury Bill market.
To further point out the futility of policy and the lack of viable options, last week former USFed Greenspan actually claimed the United States was on the path toward a 'formidable fiscal crisis' unless its deficit situation is tackled shortly. He should know since it bears his signature. Next turn to comedy. A recent report prepared for the National Bureau of Economic Research suggested the monster USGovt debt be reduced by allowing inflation to rise. The real value of the debt would suffer erosion, the victims being the creditors. The NBER contains some of the best misguided economists on the planet. Let us not even delve into the risks of price hyper-inflation, which would serve as the greatest shock of reality to these charlatans in residence. Fast rising prices would be like a large bowl of cold liquidity splashed onto their faces. Laurence Meyer, the fixture in the banker elite circles, actually said last week during an interview that no connection exists between USGovt deficits, USTBond issuance, and price inflation. Why do people listen to these guys? They are inflation apologists and high priests.
USDOLLAR LEAST UGLY FOR NOW
The 0% rate continues to undermine the USDollar, an unchanging situation. The 0% rate continues to feed the gold bull, whose trough was pushed aside but will soon be placed to feed its appetite. The world requires an occasional US$ Index (DX) rally so as to avoid having it march directly into oblivion. The USGovt deficits are the ball & chain attached to the embattled USDollar. The onliest thing making the buck look good is the ugliness of the other major currencies. The fully engineered, entirely contrived USDollar rally began with the November Jobs Report, a work of fiction. It continued with the very real troubles facing European and London banks, from debt based both in Dubai and Southern Europe. The horrendous fundamentals for the beaten down buck had attention drawn away, by the wretched situation facing banks that underwrote massive debt to these two new centers of indebted attention. The Euro and British Pound gave way and buckled.
The last gold rally was led by the United States. The gold price in Euro terms has hardly corrected or budged. Attention is centered upon the European Union, certain to fracture from Parliamentary disappointment, as its monetary foundation suffers a grand erosion in its coastline to the South. Attention is centered upon the European Monetary Union, whose Euro currency will soon be denied usage across Southern Europe. The next round of the gold rally will be led by Europe. The broad advantages of a grand currency devaluation will soon come front and center. Greece, Spain, and other nations will realize the benefits of debt conversion and reduction on the back of returned currencies in the Drachma and Peseta. Then comes steady currency devaluation to enable a competitive position. The common Euro serves as a straitjacket for the distressed nations in the South of Europe. They are stuck, and will surely default one by one. The sequence of events is complicated. A heavy weight will sit atop the Euro currency from European credit failures until important significant events are unfolded and a new Core Euro is launched. At first the core version might simply be the old version with carved off burdensome Southern gristle and fat. These currency matters are analyzed in the December Hat Trick Letter.
MOTIVE TO MAINTAIN 0% RATES
An ultimate factor of practicality is often overlooked. Cheap interest rates to service USGovt debt is a huge reason why the official 0% interest rate policy continues. The USFed claims to want to end its ultra-easy monetary policy, but it must resort to words more than action. A higher USFed rate would not only deliver a heavy hindrance to the USEconomy, but a great aggravation to the federal deficit. The USGovt revenues are down sharply. Notice the Receipts have fallen from $2600 billion to almost $2000 billion in the last two plus years. They have fallen and cannot get up. In fact they contradict any lunatic notion of a jobs picture improvement. The November Jobs Report was a pure fiction. Thanks to the Casey Research folks for a great chart.
The White House staff estimates the current fiscal year debt service to be $202 billion. That amount is actually less than the 2008 debt service cost, even though the official 2009 federal deficit shot into low stratospheric orbit at $1420 billion. Despite much higher debt in 2009, the service cost to the USGovt debt went down, something of an advantage. In fiscal 2009, the average USGovt interest rate on new borrowings was under 1.0%, the lowest ever recorded. It is highly doubtful they wish for borrowing costs to shoot up. TRowe Price estimated that if USGovt debt service costs remained constant into year 2009, the cost would have been $423 billion, higher by $221 billion, or almost 110%. Bill Buckler of the Privateer calls 2009 the 'Interest Free Year' very appropriately. The USFed cannot cut rates any lower, unless they go negative. Furthermore, the USFed has used its mouths to make words to the effect that it will stop adding toxic bonds to its balance sheet by March 2010. The USGovt and USFed have enormous motive to keep their borrowing costs down, and to continue the discount to borrowing costs.
My doubts are very high for any end to monetization of USTreasury and USAgency Bonds or for any halt to USFed massive expansions to its balance sheet.If the USGovt and USFed stop buying US$-based official bonds, these debt securities must fight on their own in the bond market for proper valuation.That means higher yields and lower price, since supply is bloated and it shows no signs of stopping.
FINAL NOTE ON DEBT DOWNGRADES
The debt ratings agencies have been busy in the last few weeks. They do NOT wish for a repeated episode to demonstrate on a global scale another example of sleeping on the job. Their opponents, the many corporate bond losers in the wake of 2008, have begun lawsuits. The prospects of sovereign debt downgrades have led to wide debate about the likelihood of a string of sovereign debt defaults. Such defaults are written in stone, in my view. The main question is whether the Big Three ratings agencies will be ahead of the process and actually do responsible work.
Mere discussion by Moodys in recent weeks of a USTreasury debt default is indicative of the lack of creditworthiness. They said a USGovt debt downgrade and a UKGovt debt downgrade are unlikely. Between the lines they declare a debt downgrade is deserved. The USGovt debt burden will climb to 97.5% of GDP next year from 87.4% this year, according to the Organization of Economic Cooperation & Devmt forecast in June. The UKGovt public debt will swell to 89.3% of the economy in 2010 from 75.3% this year, a bigger percentage jump, according to the OECD. Moodys mentioned that all Aaa rated governments are affected by the global financial crisis, with differences in their impact and ability to respond. They must refer to the ability to print money and monetize debt, perhaps even pressure other nations to purchase the debt via their obedient central banks. David Keeble is head of fixed income strategy in London at Calyon, the investment banking unit of the French Credit Agricole. He said, "There has been a huge increase in debt-to-gross-domestic-product ratios as a result of the crisis. It is right that there should be a lot of attention and pressure on these numbers. It is difficult to drive a big wedge between the US and UK in terms of their fiscal outlook. The flexibility that Moodys spoke about is not obvious. It is all a matter of political willpower." My interpretation is to question their internal processes that failed to forewarn of Wall Street bank implosions in the autumn months of 2008. The debt rating agencies must operate with more independence and less pressure seen as collusion.
THE HAT TRICK LETTER PROFITS IN THE CURRENT CRISIS.
Jim Willie CB
Editor of the "HAT TRICK LETTER"
Hat Trick Letter
***
Jim Willie CB is a statistical analyst in marketing research and retail forecasting. He holds a PhD in Statistics. His career has stretched over 24 years. He aspires to thrive in the financial editor world, unencumbered by the limitations of economic credentials. Visit his free website to find articles from topflight authors at www.GoldenJackass.com . For personal questions about subscriptions, contact him at JimWillieCB@aol.com
Zero Corner, Debt Costs & Isolation
By Jim Willie CB
Dec 24 2009 12:01PM
www.GoldenJackass.com
Think isolation. Think monetization. Think trapped. Think Catch-22, no remotely viable option. Think end of the road in a gigantic USTreasury bubble, in the process of discredit. Think last resort of monetization, due to the absence of bidders at USTreasury auctions. Think pressure like a vise. The USGovt is in a great big bind and chooses not to discuss it. As European nations ponder the plight of sovereign debt default, the United States compares an order of magnitude worse from deeper insolvency. A default closer to home is considered unthinkable. So was a broad mortgage market breakdown. So was an endless housing decline. So was an insolvent broken banking system. So were consecutive $1 trillion federal deficits. All were forecasted here.
BOND BOYCOTT LED BY CHINA
The Chinese, trade partner turned adversary, have been in boycott of USTreasury Bonds for a year, if truth be told. While still a significant creditor for USGovt debt, it also stands as the primary adversary in the movement to displace the USDollar from its global reserve currency. Arabs and Chinese are mentioned consistently as the most important creditors for official USGovt debt. Something of note happened in 2006 and 2007. The Japanese stopped adding to their USTreasury Bond holdings. The slack was taken by China. Now something has happened again. China has stopped purchasing the USTreasury debt securities. The United States has been set up for acute risk in funding its debt. The response is clearly to be a greater dependence upon the printing press, as the USGovt will be forced to finance its debt through monetization, perhaps almost exclusively. This is the closest one might ever see of a major industrialized nation engaging in behavior best described as Weimar-like. And US economists reward its chief monetary mechanic with a national award! We witness the ultimate in moral hazard, even its celebration.
The war of words continues with China. The leaders and officials in Beijing have delivered salvo after salvo against the weakened US fortress for months. They direct volleys the deficit flank, the currency flank, the tariff flank, the reform flank, and others. They have led the rebellion to remove the USDollar from exclusive usage in international trade settlements. They have endorsed the phase-out demise of the Petro-Dollar. The deputy governor of the Peoples Bank of China had some stern words recently. Zhu Min from the PBOC said, "The United States cannot force foreign governments to increase their holdings of Treasuries. Double the holdings? It is definitely impossible. The US current account deficit is falling as resident savings increase. So its trade turnover is falling, which means the US is supplying fewer dollars to the rest of the world. The world does not have so much money to buy more US Treasuries. [It is] getting harder for governments to buy United States Treasuries because the US's shrinking Current Account gap is reducing the supply of dollars overseas."
This is a double whammy. Foreigners have less US$ funds to buy when USTreasury supply is exploding, due to smaller US trade gaps and smaller foreign trade surpluses. The outlet is USFed monetization to purchase the official bond supply using printing press funds, a last resort source of money. Asian economies have their own challenges. Gone is the Japanese trade surplus. China, on the other hand, is openly sick & tired of financing a government debt when the direction has not been set toward progress or reform. Improvement of the USGovt finances seems NOT a priority in the eyes of foreign creditors. Zhu was as plain as possible, that the USGovt should no longer rely on China for funding its bottomless deficits. Conditions are extremely likely to grow worse, with more desperation to finance deficits that in no way are reduced. The Fed has no choice but to turn the monetization machine on hyper-drive. A chart accentuates the problem and exposes the risk, thanks to RBS bank.
China has made two important changes in their USTreasury management. They have converted much long-term debt securities into short-term debt securities. They have also stopped buying short-term USTreasury Bills almost completely. See how China has sharply reduced their short-term USTBill support (US S/T in brown), which fell off a cliff since summer 2009, when it was an annual outlay of almost $200 billion worth, but now is next to zero. Shown are rolling 12-month sums, meaning around May 2009 the previous 12 months totaled around $190 to $200 billion. As of October 2009, their assembly of USTBills has been nil for a year!! Their long-term USTreasury purchases remain steady (in light blue) in the $90 to $100 billion range, again summed over the last 12 months.
Look more closely at the complex chart above. Notice the very serious dumping of USAgency Mortgage Bond, from a level with running 12-month total near $75 billion in the early summer 2009 to minus $25-35 billion in the last 12 months. Clearly, Beijing leaders have ordered a halt of USTBond purchases. Major entities are selling huge amounts of USAgency Bonds. The Chinese Govt has been selling mortgage backed securities almost as fast as PIMCO. However, they have halted the purchase of USTreasurys. Since May 2009, Chinese USTBond holdings have been flat at $790 billion. The USGovt is more isolated nowadays, left to its printing press device to handle the avalanche of debt.
Imagine, the US recession does not produce enough trade deficits for foreign sources to recycle, perversely. It sounds crazy. A recession will do that, like one that stubbornly refused to end. Going hand in hand with stronger and more robust economic activity inside the US fenceposts is huge trade deficits, no longer seen. This is yet another ongoing recession signal, since the October trade gap was ONLY $32.94 billion, grossly inadequate for foreigners to purchase USTreasurys. Foreigners have less US$ funds from trade to devote to USTreasury conversion, thereby avoiding the currency lift at home. The experts call the process sterlization, since the new US$ money does not convert, does not push the local currency higher, does not interrupt via a feedback loop the export trade that produced the surplus in the first place. Export of USTreasurys is the nastiest, most sinister, most effective device in creating gigantic unresolvable global financial imbalances.
A TEST TO EXIT FROM 0% RATE POLICY
The USFed decided to keep the official interest rate at 0%. My forecast is either no rate hike for 12 to 18 months, or else a gambit of a 25 basis point hike, but with further hikes halted. A series of rate hikes would cause far more havoc and disruption than the so-called experts anticipate. The chronic 0% rate offered at the US bond ring assures a resumed Dollar Carry Trade, and USDollar decline. This is simple speculation mathematics. The result will continue to maintain the gold bull market. As universally expected, the USFed kept its overnight target at 0-0.25% and pledged to keep rates low for an extended period in its words, again. Their statement contained some rubbish about expressed growing optimism for the USEconomy. They cited an abatement in the labor market deterioration and hope of improvement in the housing market, pure fantasy. Neither has remotely occurred.
More important than such nonsense, the USFed underscored confidence in credit markets. It stands by USFed plans to end most of its emergency lending facilities on February 1st. Removal of the primary true source of liquidity will be a dangerous proposition, but they must fake the billboard messages and give it a trial. It is my belief that the USFed will remove the flow of easy money, aka Quantitative Easing, but only on the fringe. They will cut back on some highly visible monetization of USTreasury and USAgency Mortgage Bonds. But they will not reduce any hidden monetization of the same bonds, a powerful enterprise with magnificent unspoken volume that prevents auction failures.
The USFed is actively running a trial balloon. They are permitting the slow motion rise in the 10-year and 30-year USTBonds. If the 10-year TNX yield rises above 4.0%, which could happen easily, a test will be given. Borrowing costs on car loans and commercial loans would rise in step. But the main event would be the test to the housing market from the mortgage rates sure to rise in step. In parallel, the mortgage bond market would undergo a test. The USFed in my opinion wishes to test its urgently needed but impossible exit strategy. My bet is the test fails. My other bet is they lie about its failure. In time, they will halt the test and admit the USEconomy and US credit market remain too weak to begin a rate hike cycle. In order to prevent a future disaster, they must end the current easing cycle. THE USFED WANTS THE TEST FAILURE TO PROVIDE POLITICAL COVER FOR REMAINING IN A RIDICULOUSLY LOW INTEREST RATE ENVIRONMENT. They might wish to kick the Dollar Carry Trade off its path periodically. They know the extended risks. They know much higher price inflation awaits on the other side of Easy Street. The veto vote goes to the short-term USTreasury Bill market. If conditions were ready for a rate hike, the USTreasury Bills would confirm it across the lower maturities. Notice the 3-month USTBill yield. It cannot even rise to reach the 0.18% plateau seen for the entire spring and summer months. This means no return to normalcy anytime soon. A point of history is worth mentioning. The US Federal Reserve almost never breaks away from the path set by the short-term USTreasury Bill market.
To further point out the futility of policy and the lack of viable options, last week former USFed Greenspan actually claimed the United States was on the path toward a 'formidable fiscal crisis' unless its deficit situation is tackled shortly. He should know since it bears his signature. Next turn to comedy. A recent report prepared for the National Bureau of Economic Research suggested the monster USGovt debt be reduced by allowing inflation to rise. The real value of the debt would suffer erosion, the victims being the creditors. The NBER contains some of the best misguided economists on the planet. Let us not even delve into the risks of price hyper-inflation, which would serve as the greatest shock of reality to these charlatans in residence. Fast rising prices would be like a large bowl of cold liquidity splashed onto their faces. Laurence Meyer, the fixture in the banker elite circles, actually said last week during an interview that no connection exists between USGovt deficits, USTBond issuance, and price inflation. Why do people listen to these guys? They are inflation apologists and high priests.
USDOLLAR LEAST UGLY FOR NOW
The 0% rate continues to undermine the USDollar, an unchanging situation. The 0% rate continues to feed the gold bull, whose trough was pushed aside but will soon be placed to feed its appetite. The world requires an occasional US$ Index (DX) rally so as to avoid having it march directly into oblivion. The USGovt deficits are the ball & chain attached to the embattled USDollar. The onliest thing making the buck look good is the ugliness of the other major currencies. The fully engineered, entirely contrived USDollar rally began with the November Jobs Report, a work of fiction. It continued with the very real troubles facing European and London banks, from debt based both in Dubai and Southern Europe. The horrendous fundamentals for the beaten down buck had attention drawn away, by the wretched situation facing banks that underwrote massive debt to these two new centers of indebted attention. The Euro and British Pound gave way and buckled.
The last gold rally was led by the United States. The gold price in Euro terms has hardly corrected or budged. Attention is centered upon the European Union, certain to fracture from Parliamentary disappointment, as its monetary foundation suffers a grand erosion in its coastline to the South. Attention is centered upon the European Monetary Union, whose Euro currency will soon be denied usage across Southern Europe. The next round of the gold rally will be led by Europe. The broad advantages of a grand currency devaluation will soon come front and center. Greece, Spain, and other nations will realize the benefits of debt conversion and reduction on the back of returned currencies in the Drachma and Peseta. Then comes steady currency devaluation to enable a competitive position. The common Euro serves as a straitjacket for the distressed nations in the South of Europe. They are stuck, and will surely default one by one. The sequence of events is complicated. A heavy weight will sit atop the Euro currency from European credit failures until important significant events are unfolded and a new Core Euro is launched. At first the core version might simply be the old version with carved off burdensome Southern gristle and fat. These currency matters are analyzed in the December Hat Trick Letter.
MOTIVE TO MAINTAIN 0% RATES
An ultimate factor of practicality is often overlooked. Cheap interest rates to service USGovt debt is a huge reason why the official 0% interest rate policy continues. The USFed claims to want to end its ultra-easy monetary policy, but it must resort to words more than action. A higher USFed rate would not only deliver a heavy hindrance to the USEconomy, but a great aggravation to the federal deficit. The USGovt revenues are down sharply. Notice the Receipts have fallen from $2600 billion to almost $2000 billion in the last two plus years. They have fallen and cannot get up. In fact they contradict any lunatic notion of a jobs picture improvement. The November Jobs Report was a pure fiction. Thanks to the Casey Research folks for a great chart.
The White House staff estimates the current fiscal year debt service to be $202 billion. That amount is actually less than the 2008 debt service cost, even though the official 2009 federal deficit shot into low stratospheric orbit at $1420 billion. Despite much higher debt in 2009, the service cost to the USGovt debt went down, something of an advantage. In fiscal 2009, the average USGovt interest rate on new borrowings was under 1.0%, the lowest ever recorded. It is highly doubtful they wish for borrowing costs to shoot up. TRowe Price estimated that if USGovt debt service costs remained constant into year 2009, the cost would have been $423 billion, higher by $221 billion, or almost 110%. Bill Buckler of the Privateer calls 2009 the 'Interest Free Year' very appropriately. The USFed cannot cut rates any lower, unless they go negative. Furthermore, the USFed has used its mouths to make words to the effect that it will stop adding toxic bonds to its balance sheet by March 2010. The USGovt and USFed have enormous motive to keep their borrowing costs down, and to continue the discount to borrowing costs.
My doubts are very high for any end to monetization of USTreasury and USAgency Bonds or for any halt to USFed massive expansions to its balance sheet.If the USGovt and USFed stop buying US$-based official bonds, these debt securities must fight on their own in the bond market for proper valuation.That means higher yields and lower price, since supply is bloated and it shows no signs of stopping.
FINAL NOTE ON DEBT DOWNGRADES
The debt ratings agencies have been busy in the last few weeks. They do NOT wish for a repeated episode to demonstrate on a global scale another example of sleeping on the job. Their opponents, the many corporate bond losers in the wake of 2008, have begun lawsuits. The prospects of sovereign debt downgrades have led to wide debate about the likelihood of a string of sovereign debt defaults. Such defaults are written in stone, in my view. The main question is whether the Big Three ratings agencies will be ahead of the process and actually do responsible work.
Mere discussion by Moodys in recent weeks of a USTreasury debt default is indicative of the lack of creditworthiness. They said a USGovt debt downgrade and a UKGovt debt downgrade are unlikely. Between the lines they declare a debt downgrade is deserved. The USGovt debt burden will climb to 97.5% of GDP next year from 87.4% this year, according to the Organization of Economic Cooperation & Devmt forecast in June. The UKGovt public debt will swell to 89.3% of the economy in 2010 from 75.3% this year, a bigger percentage jump, according to the OECD. Moodys mentioned that all Aaa rated governments are affected by the global financial crisis, with differences in their impact and ability to respond. They must refer to the ability to print money and monetize debt, perhaps even pressure other nations to purchase the debt via their obedient central banks. David Keeble is head of fixed income strategy in London at Calyon, the investment banking unit of the French Credit Agricole. He said, "There has been a huge increase in debt-to-gross-domestic-product ratios as a result of the crisis. It is right that there should be a lot of attention and pressure on these numbers. It is difficult to drive a big wedge between the US and UK in terms of their fiscal outlook. The flexibility that Moodys spoke about is not obvious. It is all a matter of political willpower." My interpretation is to question their internal processes that failed to forewarn of Wall Street bank implosions in the autumn months of 2008. The debt rating agencies must operate with more independence and less pressure seen as collusion.
THE HAT TRICK LETTER PROFITS IN THE CURRENT CRISIS.
Jim Willie CB
Editor of the "HAT TRICK LETTER"
Hat Trick Letter
***
Jim Willie CB is a statistical analyst in marketing research and retail forecasting. He holds a PhD in Statistics. His career has stretched over 24 years. He aspires to thrive in the financial editor world, unencumbered by the limitations of economic credentials. Visit his free website to find articles from topflight authors at www.GoldenJackass.com . For personal questions about subscriptions, contact him at JimWillieCB@aol.com
Ten Predictions for 2010
http://www.kitco.com/ind/Hamlin/dec282009.html
Ten Predictions for 2010
By Jason Hamlin
Dec 28 2009 3:35PM
www.goldstockbull.com
It has been said that “the only thing constant is change.” While this is true, the rate of that change is anything but constant. If you pause to reflect on how rapidly things are changing all around us, you will realize that momentum is building and the change is picking up pace.
While some may view this phenomenon with fear, I welcome it and believe that although difficult times are ahead, the accelerating change provides an opportunity to transition into a better societal structure. Not only will the economic and political breakdown clean the slate and allow for a better system to be built, but the rapidity of this change means that we may actually be able to see the changes manifest within our lifetimes. While this is exciting to think about, it makes predictions such as these a bit more difficult to pen.
I’ve managed to get about 8 of 10 right in the past few years, but admittedly did not anticipate how quickly or strongly the stock market would rebound in 2009. I was also early to predict that deflation would subside and inflation would materialize, although there are some signs of the coming storm.
Here are my 10 predictions or best guesses for what will transpire in 2010:
1. Deflationary Pressure Continues
I know this may come as a surprise to gold investors, but I believe the U.S. and world economy will likely experience a continued deflationary dip during 2010. Banks are still not lending and the expansion of the monetary base is not keeping pace with the massive contraction in the credit markets. With the commercial real estate shoe yet to drop and a glut of production capacity, deflation is the more likely and immediate threat to the economy. I believe the Fed and government pull out all of the stops to fight the deflationary threat. With new consumer stimulus programs, tax rebates, government lending, pressure on the banks to lend and the printing presses running overtime, all of the newly-created money will eventually work its way into the system and as the velocity increases, deflation will subside and inflationary pressures will materialize. This could easily spiral out of control and lead to hyperinflation during 2011-2012, as no matter how confidently Ben Bernanke speaks of his abilities, once the money is created and flows into the economy it multiplies via fractional reserve banking and becomes very difficult to soak back up. So while I view widespread inflation as inevitable, I don’t think it will happen in 2010.
2. Stock Market Rangebound
I believe the plunge protection team will continue to support the stock market during 2010, although the growth will slow considerably. As stocks are mainly a cash market, the deflationary impact felt in the credit markets will have little impact on stocks. The market is due for a correction and there may be short volatile swings as investors lose confidence, but I think the market will end the year little changed (+/- 5%). The market is on life support, with a fat IV injection of liquidity via the government and Fed. Absent this meddling, the market would currently be much lower and I would be predicting new lows for 2010.
3. Fed Funds Rate to Remain Near Zero
While many are anticipating a rise in rates during 2010, I believe the Fed will be forced to keep rates low due to deflationary pressures. Any rate increase would wreak havoc on the markets and this is the Fed’s biggest fear. At most, a small increase could occur towards the end of 2010. Higher rates are certainly on the horizon, but I think we need to see much higher inflation before the Fed changes course.
4. Real Estate Prices Flat to Lower
Real estate prices are likely to flat-line or decline during 2010. As real estate is heavily reliant on the rapidly-contracting credit market, deflation will trump any inflationary pressures created from the expansion in base money. There is an over-supply of housing and the high rate of foreclosures is likely to continue or increase during 2010. I believe real estate will be an excellent buy at some point in the next 5-10 years, but it is nowhere near a bottom yet.
5. Unemployment Remains High
Officially-reported unemployment (U-3) will hang around 10% for most of 2010, but could rise to as high as 12% nationwide. Of course, true unemployment that counts marginally employed and discouraged workers is closer to 20% currently. Government will be the major source of any new jobs, as private enterprise and small businesses continue to struggle. Of course, any wealth or jobs the government claims to create is really just a wealth transfer and not true or sustainable growth.
6. U.S. Dollar Rallies, but Drops to New Lows by Year End
With rates likely to remain near zero, I anticipate more dollar weakness during 2010. The Fed doubled the supply of base money during the past year, deficits are at record levels and Asian countries have already begun diversifying out of dollars. There have also been reports suggesting Arab countries, China, Russia, Japan and France want to end oil dealings in dollars. If the dollar begins to lose its status as world reserve currency, look out below! The current bounce could continue a bit longer before the plunge, but by the end of the year the dollar index will be at or below 70.
7. Gold and Silver to Make New Nominal Highs
While some are claiming gold has peaked, I believe gold is nowhere near a top and will reach a new nominal high between $1,300-$1,500 during 2010. Silver will outperform gold reaching $24 or higher as the gold/silver ratio dips towards 55. Remember, gold can perform well during periods of inflation or deflation. While I believe deflation is the greater threat during 2010, this will occur primarily in credit-based markets such as real estate. Cash-based markets such as precious metals are likely to experience inflation as record amounts of new money have been printed during the past year. Look for more central bank purchases during 2010, as well as significant purchases from China and other countries that are eager to diversify away from dollars. The gold/silver suppression story will continue to gain steam and with more and more investors demanding delivery, pressure will increase on shorts and COMEX regulators. There will be some type of rule change or restructuring at minimum and the potential for default is possible. Lastly, the Dow/Gold ratio will decline after bouncing in 2009.
8. Energy Prices to Push Higher
With the strengthening economy, increasing demand from China and India, plus declining supplies, I expect energy prices to move much higher during 2010. Oil will trade most of the year in the $75-$100 range, but will break above $100 for some time. I think natural gas will generate even greater returns than crude oil as it bounces off oversold lows. In addition, I expect clean energy companies to rebound during the 1st half of 2010 and think lithium and rare earth miners will benefit from this trend.
9. Agriculture Prices to Rise Sharply
One thing that is certainly not in over-supply is agriculture. With a very poor harvest season, lack of water in key agricultural areas and exploding demand from a growing middle class in China and India, I believe prices for many food items will shoot dramatically higher in 2010 and subsequent years. Investing in quality fertilizer companies should prove very profitable over the next few years.
10. More Bank Failures, Political Tension, Voter Discontent
I anticipate more banks will fail during 2010, allowing the largest banks to scoop up smaller competitors at bargain prices. Tensions will increase in the Middle East and between the U.S. and China/Russia. A major attack will be attempted on U.S. soil, the electorate will turn against corporatist politicians of both parties and a third political party will begin to emerge. Faith in the political system will continue to wane causing a growing movement towards restructuring society under a better system. People will become less apathetic as government meddling and banker exploitation will finally begin to hit everyone in the pocketbook. Look for more frugality, local buying, community organization and a move towards becoming self-sustaining.
While many are fearful of the political and economic climate at the moment, I remain optimistic that the current crisis is a necessary cleansing of the system and will allow for the rebuilding of a better society. The transition will undoubtedly be difficult as jobs become scarce, prices rise and crime and civil unrest flourish. However, there are common sense steps that you can take to protect yourself and your family. Besides diversifying out of dollars, moving your money out of banks and owning precious metals directly, you should also consider becoming more self-sufficient, learning to garden, stockpiling food and supplies which might become scarce, continually educating yourself and encouraging others to stop supporting a failed ponzi-based system. As it collapses under the weight of its own hubris and corruption, there will be enormous opportunities to profit individually and collectively as a society. The better prepared we all are to weather the storm and facilitate the transition, the better our future promises to be.
Ten Predictions for 2010
By Jason Hamlin
Dec 28 2009 3:35PM
www.goldstockbull.com
It has been said that “the only thing constant is change.” While this is true, the rate of that change is anything but constant. If you pause to reflect on how rapidly things are changing all around us, you will realize that momentum is building and the change is picking up pace.
While some may view this phenomenon with fear, I welcome it and believe that although difficult times are ahead, the accelerating change provides an opportunity to transition into a better societal structure. Not only will the economic and political breakdown clean the slate and allow for a better system to be built, but the rapidity of this change means that we may actually be able to see the changes manifest within our lifetimes. While this is exciting to think about, it makes predictions such as these a bit more difficult to pen.
I’ve managed to get about 8 of 10 right in the past few years, but admittedly did not anticipate how quickly or strongly the stock market would rebound in 2009. I was also early to predict that deflation would subside and inflation would materialize, although there are some signs of the coming storm.
Here are my 10 predictions or best guesses for what will transpire in 2010:
1. Deflationary Pressure Continues
I know this may come as a surprise to gold investors, but I believe the U.S. and world economy will likely experience a continued deflationary dip during 2010. Banks are still not lending and the expansion of the monetary base is not keeping pace with the massive contraction in the credit markets. With the commercial real estate shoe yet to drop and a glut of production capacity, deflation is the more likely and immediate threat to the economy. I believe the Fed and government pull out all of the stops to fight the deflationary threat. With new consumer stimulus programs, tax rebates, government lending, pressure on the banks to lend and the printing presses running overtime, all of the newly-created money will eventually work its way into the system and as the velocity increases, deflation will subside and inflationary pressures will materialize. This could easily spiral out of control and lead to hyperinflation during 2011-2012, as no matter how confidently Ben Bernanke speaks of his abilities, once the money is created and flows into the economy it multiplies via fractional reserve banking and becomes very difficult to soak back up. So while I view widespread inflation as inevitable, I don’t think it will happen in 2010.
2. Stock Market Rangebound
I believe the plunge protection team will continue to support the stock market during 2010, although the growth will slow considerably. As stocks are mainly a cash market, the deflationary impact felt in the credit markets will have little impact on stocks. The market is due for a correction and there may be short volatile swings as investors lose confidence, but I think the market will end the year little changed (+/- 5%). The market is on life support, with a fat IV injection of liquidity via the government and Fed. Absent this meddling, the market would currently be much lower and I would be predicting new lows for 2010.
3. Fed Funds Rate to Remain Near Zero
While many are anticipating a rise in rates during 2010, I believe the Fed will be forced to keep rates low due to deflationary pressures. Any rate increase would wreak havoc on the markets and this is the Fed’s biggest fear. At most, a small increase could occur towards the end of 2010. Higher rates are certainly on the horizon, but I think we need to see much higher inflation before the Fed changes course.
4. Real Estate Prices Flat to Lower
Real estate prices are likely to flat-line or decline during 2010. As real estate is heavily reliant on the rapidly-contracting credit market, deflation will trump any inflationary pressures created from the expansion in base money. There is an over-supply of housing and the high rate of foreclosures is likely to continue or increase during 2010. I believe real estate will be an excellent buy at some point in the next 5-10 years, but it is nowhere near a bottom yet.
5. Unemployment Remains High
Officially-reported unemployment (U-3) will hang around 10% for most of 2010, but could rise to as high as 12% nationwide. Of course, true unemployment that counts marginally employed and discouraged workers is closer to 20% currently. Government will be the major source of any new jobs, as private enterprise and small businesses continue to struggle. Of course, any wealth or jobs the government claims to create is really just a wealth transfer and not true or sustainable growth.
6. U.S. Dollar Rallies, but Drops to New Lows by Year End
With rates likely to remain near zero, I anticipate more dollar weakness during 2010. The Fed doubled the supply of base money during the past year, deficits are at record levels and Asian countries have already begun diversifying out of dollars. There have also been reports suggesting Arab countries, China, Russia, Japan and France want to end oil dealings in dollars. If the dollar begins to lose its status as world reserve currency, look out below! The current bounce could continue a bit longer before the plunge, but by the end of the year the dollar index will be at or below 70.
7. Gold and Silver to Make New Nominal Highs
While some are claiming gold has peaked, I believe gold is nowhere near a top and will reach a new nominal high between $1,300-$1,500 during 2010. Silver will outperform gold reaching $24 or higher as the gold/silver ratio dips towards 55. Remember, gold can perform well during periods of inflation or deflation. While I believe deflation is the greater threat during 2010, this will occur primarily in credit-based markets such as real estate. Cash-based markets such as precious metals are likely to experience inflation as record amounts of new money have been printed during the past year. Look for more central bank purchases during 2010, as well as significant purchases from China and other countries that are eager to diversify away from dollars. The gold/silver suppression story will continue to gain steam and with more and more investors demanding delivery, pressure will increase on shorts and COMEX regulators. There will be some type of rule change or restructuring at minimum and the potential for default is possible. Lastly, the Dow/Gold ratio will decline after bouncing in 2009.
8. Energy Prices to Push Higher
With the strengthening economy, increasing demand from China and India, plus declining supplies, I expect energy prices to move much higher during 2010. Oil will trade most of the year in the $75-$100 range, but will break above $100 for some time. I think natural gas will generate even greater returns than crude oil as it bounces off oversold lows. In addition, I expect clean energy companies to rebound during the 1st half of 2010 and think lithium and rare earth miners will benefit from this trend.
9. Agriculture Prices to Rise Sharply
One thing that is certainly not in over-supply is agriculture. With a very poor harvest season, lack of water in key agricultural areas and exploding demand from a growing middle class in China and India, I believe prices for many food items will shoot dramatically higher in 2010 and subsequent years. Investing in quality fertilizer companies should prove very profitable over the next few years.
10. More Bank Failures, Political Tension, Voter Discontent
I anticipate more banks will fail during 2010, allowing the largest banks to scoop up smaller competitors at bargain prices. Tensions will increase in the Middle East and between the U.S. and China/Russia. A major attack will be attempted on U.S. soil, the electorate will turn against corporatist politicians of both parties and a third political party will begin to emerge. Faith in the political system will continue to wane causing a growing movement towards restructuring society under a better system. People will become less apathetic as government meddling and banker exploitation will finally begin to hit everyone in the pocketbook. Look for more frugality, local buying, community organization and a move towards becoming self-sustaining.
While many are fearful of the political and economic climate at the moment, I remain optimistic that the current crisis is a necessary cleansing of the system and will allow for the rebuilding of a better society. The transition will undoubtedly be difficult as jobs become scarce, prices rise and crime and civil unrest flourish. However, there are common sense steps that you can take to protect yourself and your family. Besides diversifying out of dollars, moving your money out of banks and owning precious metals directly, you should also consider becoming more self-sufficient, learning to garden, stockpiling food and supplies which might become scarce, continually educating yourself and encouraging others to stop supporting a failed ponzi-based system. As it collapses under the weight of its own hubris and corruption, there will be enormous opportunities to profit individually and collectively as a society. The better prepared we all are to weather the storm and facilitate the transition, the better our future promises to be.
Inside the Military-Industrial-Media Complex: Impacts on Movement for Social Justice
Inside the Military-Industrial-Media Complex: Impacts on Movement for Social Justice
Sunday 27 December 2009
by: Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed
**************
This article has been previously published at Media Freedom Intl.
Among the most important corporate media censored news stories of the past decade, one must be that over one million people have died because of the United States military invasion and occupation of Iraq. This, of course, does not include the number of deaths from the first Gulf War nor the ensuing sanctions placed upon the country of Iraq that, combined, caused close to an additional one million Iraqi deaths. In the Iraq War, which began in March of 2003, over a million people have died violently primarily from US bombings and neighborhood patrols. These were deaths in excess of the normal civilian death rate under the prior government. Among US military leaders and policy elites, the issue of counting the dead was dismissed before the Iraqi invasion even began. In an interview with reporters in late March of 2002 US General Tommy Franks stated, “You know we don’t do body counts.”[i] Fortunately, for those concerned about humanitarian costs of war and empire, others do.
In a January 2008 report, the British polling group Opinion Research Business (ORB) reported that, “survey work confirms our earlier estimate that over 1,000,000 Iraqi citizens have died as a result of the conflict which started in 2003. We now estimate that the death toll between March 2003 and August 2007 is likely to have been of the order of 1,033,000. If one takes into account the margin of error associated with survey data of this nature then the estimated range is between 946,000 and 1,120,000.”[ii]
The ORB report came on the heels of two earlier studies conducted by Dr. Les Roberts and colleagues at Johns Hopkins University and published in the Lancet medical journal. The first study done from January 1, 2002 to March 18, 2003 confirmed civilian deaths at that time at over 100,000. The second study published in October 2006 documented over 650,000 civilian deaths in Iraq since the start of the US invasion and confirmed that US aerial bombing in civilian neighborhoods caused over a third of these deaths. Over half the deaths were directly attributable to US forces. The now estimated 1.2 million dead six years into the war/occupation, included children, parents, grandparents, cab drivers, clerics and schoolteachers. All manner of ordinary Iraqis have died because the United States decided to invade their country under false pretences of undiscovered weapons of mass destruction and in violation of international law. An additional four to five million Iraqi refugees have fled their homes. The magnitude of these million-plus deaths and creation of such a vast refugee crisis is undeniable. The continuing occupation by US forces has guaranteed a monthly mass death rate of thousands of people a carnage that ranks among the most heinous mass killings in world history. More tons of bombs have been dropped in Iraq than in all of World War II.[iii] Six years later the casualties continue but the story, barely reported from the start, has vanished.
The American people face a serious moral dilemma. Murder and war crimes have been conducted in their name. Yet most Americans have no idea of the magnitude of deaths and tend to believe that they number in the thousands and are primarily Iraqis killing Iraqis. Corporate mainstream media are in large part to blame. The question then becomes how can this mass ignorance and corporate media deception exist in the United States and what impact does this have on peace and social justice movements in the country?[iv]
Truth Emergency and Media Reform
In the United States today, the rift between reality and reporting has peaked. There is no longer a mere credibility gap, but rather a literal Truth Emergency in which the most important information affecting people is concealed from view. Many Americans, relying on the mainstream corporate media, have serious difficulty accessing the truth while still believing that the information they receive is the reality. A Truth Emergency reflects cumulative failures of the fourth estate to act as a truly free press. This truth emergency is seen in inadequate coverage of fraudulent elections, pseudo 9/11 investigations, illegal preemptive wars, torture camps, doctored intelligence, and domestic surveillance. Reliable information on these issues is systematically missing in corporate media outlets, where the vast majority of the American people continue to turn for news and information.
Consider these items of noteworthy conditions. US workers have been faced with a thirty-five year decline in real wages while the top few percent enjoy unparalleled wealth with strikingly low tax burdens. US schools, particularly in the west, are more segregated now than half a century ago. The US has the highest infant mortality rate among industrialized nations, is falling behind in scientific research and education, leads the world as a debtor nation, and is seriously lacking in healthcare quality and coverage, which results in the deaths of 18,000 people a year. America has entered another Gilded Age. Someone should the media.[v]
The Free Press or Media Reform Movement is a national effort to address mainstream media failures and the government policies that sanction them. During the 2008 National Conference for Media Reform (NCMR) in Minneapolis, Project Censored interns and faculty conducted a survey, completed by 376 randomly selected NCMR attendees out of the 3,500 people registered for the conference. This survey was designed to gauge participants’ views on the state of the corporate news media and the effectiveness of the media reform movement. The survey also sought to determine the level of belief in a truth emergency, a systematic hiding of critical information in the US. Not surprisingly, for a sample of independent media reform activists, majorities in the 90% plus range agreed on most criticisms of mainstream media, that corporate media failed to keep the American people informed on important issues facing the nation and that a truth emergency does indeed exist in the US. Regarding the reasons, 87% of the participants believed that a military-industrial-media complex exists in the US for the promotion of the US military domination of the world and most agreed with research conclusions by Project Censored, and others, that a continuing powerful global dominance group inside the US government, the US media, and the national policy structure is responsible. What was clear from our survey is that media democracy activists strongly support not only aggressive reform efforts and policy changes but also the continuing development of independent, grassroots media as part of an overall media democracy movement.
While most progressive media activists do not believe in some omnipotent conspiracy, an overwhelming portion of NCMR participants do believe the leadership class in the US is dominated by a neo-conservative group of some several hundred people who share a goal of asserting US military power worldwide. This Global Dominance Group (GDM) continues under both Republican and Democratic rule. In cooperation with major military contractors, the corporate media, and conservative foundations, the GDM has become a powerful long-term force in military unilateralism and US political processes.
The Global Dominance Group and Information Control
A long thread of sociological research documents the existence of a dominant ruling class in the US, which sets policy and determines national political priorities. C. Wright Mills, in his 1956 book The Power Elite, documented how World War II solidified a trinity of power in the US that comprised corporate, military and government elites in a centralized power structure working in unison through “higher circles” of contact and agreement.[vi] This power has grown through the Cold War and, after 9/11, the Global War on Terror.
At present, the global dominance agenda includes penetration into the boardrooms of the corporate media in the US. Only 118 people comprise the membership on the boards of director of the ten big media giants. These 118 individuals in turn sit on the corporate boards of 288 national and international corporations. Four of the top 10 media corporations share board director positions with the major defense contractors including:
William Kennard: New York Times, Carlyle Group
Douglas Warner III, GE (NBC), Bechtel
John Bryson: Disney (ABC), Boeing
Alwyn Lewis: Disney (ABC), Halliburton
Douglas McCorkindale: Gannett, Lockheed-Martin.
Given an interlocked media network of connections with defense and other economic sectors, big media in the United States effectively represent the interests of corporate America. Media critic and historian Norman Solomon described the close financial and social links between the boards of large media-related corporations and Washington’s foreign-policy establishment: “One way or another, a military-industrial complex now extends to much of corporate media.”[vii] The Homeland Security Act Title II Section 201(d)(5) provides an example of the interlocked military-industrial-media complex. This Act specifically asks the directorate to “develop a comprehensive plan for securing the key resources and critical infrastructure of the United States including information technology and telecommunications systems (including satellites) emergency preparedness communications systems.”
The media elite, a key component of the Higher Circle Policy Elite in the US, are the watchdogs of acceptable ideological messages, the controllers of news and information content, and the decision makers regarding media resources. Their goal is to create symbiotic global news distribution in a deliberate attempt to control the news and information available to society. The two most prominent methods used to accomplish this task are censorship and propaganda.
Sometimes the sensationalist and narrow media coverage of news is blamed upon the need to meet a low level of public taste and thereby capture the eyes of a sufficient market to lure advertisers and to make a profit. But another goal of cornering the marketplace on what news and views will be aired is also prominent. Billionaire Rupert Murdoch loses $50 million a year on the NY Post, billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife loses $2 to $3 million a year on the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, billionaire Philip Anschutz loses around $5 million a year on The Weekly Standard, and billionaire Sun Myung Moon has lost $2 to $3 billion on The Washington Times. The losses in supporting conservative media are part of a strategy of ideological control. They also buy bulk quantities of ultra-conservative books bringing them to the top of the NY Times bestseller list and then give away copies to “subscribers” to their websites and publications. They fund conservative “think tanks” like Heritage and Cato with hundreds of millions of dollars a year. All this buys them respectability and a megaphone. Even though William Kristol’s publication, the Standard, is a money-loser, his association with it has often gotten him on TV talk shows and a column with The New York Times. Sponsorships of groups like Grover Norquist’s anti-tax “Americans for Tax Reform” regularly get people like him front-and-center in any debate on taxation in the United States. This has contributed to extensive tax cuts for the wealthy and the most unfair tax laws of any industrialized country – all found acceptable by a public relying upon sound-bites about the dangers of ‘big government.’ Hence media corporation officials and others in the health care, energy and weapons industries remain wealthier than ordinary people can imagine. Their expenditures for molding opinion are better understood as investments in a conservative public ideology[viii]
Modern Media Censorship and Propaganda
A broader definition of contemporary censorship needs to include any interference, deliberate or not, with the free flow of vital news information to the public. Modern censorship can be seen as the subtle yet constant and sophisticated manipulation of reality in our mass media outlets. On a daily basis, censorship refers to the intentional non-inclusion of a news story – or piece of a news story – based on anything other than a desire to tell the truth. Such manipulation can take the form of political pressure (from government officials and powerful individuals), economic pressure (from advertisers and funders), and legal pressure (the threat of lawsuits from deep-pocket individuals, corporations, and institutions). or threats to reduce future access to governmental and corporate sources of news. Following are a few examples of censorship and propaganda.
1. Omitted or Undercovered Stories- The failure of the corporate media to cover human consequences, like one million , mostly civilian deaths of Iraqis, reduces public response to the wars being conducted by the US. Even when activists do mobilize, the media coverage of anti-war demonstrations has been negligible and denigrating from the start. When journalists of the so-called free press ignore the anti-war movement, they serve the interests of their masters in the military media industrial complex.[ix]
Further, the corporate mainstream press continues to ignore the human cost of the US war in Iraq with America’s own veterans. Veteran care, wounded rates, mental disabilities, VA claims, first hand accounts of soldier experiences, and pictures of dead or limbless soldiers are rare. One of the most important stories missed by the corporate press concerned the Winter Soldier Congressional hearings in Washington, D.C. The hearings, with eyewitness testimony of US soldiers relating their experiences on the battlefield and beyond, were only covered by a scant number of major media, and then only in passing. In contrast to the virtual corporate media blackout concerning American soldiers’ views of the war, the independent, listener sponsored, community Pacifica Radio network covered the hearings at length.[x]
A common theme among the most censored stories over the past few years has been the systemic erosion of human rights and civil liberties in both the US and the world at large. The corporate media has ignored the fact that habeas corpus can now be suspended for anyone by order of the President. With the approval of Congress, the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006, signed by Bush on October 17, 2006, allows for the suspension of habeas corpus for US citizens and non-citizens alike. While media, including a lead editorial in The New York Times October 19, 2006, have offered false comfort that American citizens will not be the victims, the Act is quite clear that ‘any person’ can be targeted.[xi]
Additionally, under the code-name Operation FALCON (Federal and Local Cops Organized Nationally), federally coordinated mass arrests have been occurring since April 2005 and netted over 54,000 arrests, a majority of whom were not violent criminals as was initially suggested. This unprecedented move of arresting tens of thousands of “fugitives” is the largest dragnet style operation in the nation’s history. The raids, coordinated by the Justice Department and Homeland Security, directly involved over 960 agencies (state, local and federal) and mark the first time in US history that all domestic police agencies have been put under the direct control of the federal government.[xii]
All these events are significant in a democratic society that claims to cherish individual rights and due process of law. To have them occur is a tragedy. To have a “free” press not report them or pretend these issues do not matter to the populace is the foundation of censorship today.
2. Repetition of Slogans and Sound Bites- The corporate media in the US present themselves as unbiased and accurate. The New York Times motto of “all the news that’s fit to print” is a clear example, as is CNN’s authoritative “most trusted name in news” and Fox’s mantra of “fair and balanced.” The slogans are examples of what linguist George Lakoff has referred to as framing. Through constant repetition, the metaphors and symbols that pervade our media turn into unquestioned beliefs. Terms like “liberal media,” “welfare cheaters,” “war on terror,” illegal aliens,” “tax burden,” “support our troops,” are all distorted images serving to conceal a transfer of wealth from people needing a safety net to corporations seeking profitable markets and military expansion.
3. Embedded Journalism- The media are increasingly dependent on governmental and corporate sources of news. Maintenance of continuous news shows requires a constant feed and an ever-entertaining supply of stimulating events and breaking news bites. The 24-hour news shows on MSNBC, Fox and CNN maintain constant contact with the White House, Pentagon, and public relations companies representing both government and private corporations.
By the time of the Gulf War in 1991, retired colonels, generals and admirals had become mainstays in network TV studios during wartime. Language such as “collateral damage” and “smart bombs” flowed effortlessly between journalists and military men, who shared perspectives on the occasionally mentioned but more rarely seen civilians killed by U.S. firepower. This clearly foreshadowed the structure of “embedded” reporting in the second Iraq War, where mainstream corporate journalists literally lived with the troops and had to submit all reports for military review.[xiii] A related militarization of news studies by Diane Farsetta at the Center for Media Democracy documented a related introduction of bias. These investigations showed Pentagon propaganda penetration on mainstream corporate news in the guise of retired Generals as “experts” or pundits who turned out to be nothing more than paid shills for government war policy.[xiv]
The problem then becomes more complex. What happens to a society that begins to believe such lies as truth? The run up to the 2003 war in Iraq concerning weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) is a case in point. It illustrates the power of propaganda in creating not only public support for an ill-begotten war, but also reduces the possibility of a peace movement, even when fueled by the truth, to stop a war based on falsehoods. The current war in Iraq was the most globally protested war in recorded history. This did nothing to stop it and has done little to end it even under a Democratic president who promised such on the campaign trail. The candidate of “hope and change,” with peace groups in tow, has proven to be dependent upon the same interests in foreign policy that got the US into war in the first place.[xv]
The Progressive Press
Where the left progressive press may have covered some of the Winter Soldier issues, most did not cover the major story of Iraqi deaths. InManufacturing Consent, Wharton School of Business Professor of Political Economy Edward Herman and MIT Institute Professor of Linguistics Noam Chomsky claim that because media are firmly embedded in the market system, they reflect the class values and concerns of their owners and advertisers. The corporate media maintain a class bias through five systemic filters: concentrated private ownership; a strict bottom-line profit orientation; over-reliance on governmental and corporate sources for news; a primary tendency to avoid offending the powerful; and an almost religious worship of the market economy. These filters limit what will become news in society and set parameters on acceptable coverage of daily events.[xvi]
The danger of these filters is that they make subtle and indirect censorship more difficult to combat. Owners and managers share class identity with the powerful and are motivated economically to please advertisers and viewers. Social backgrounds influence their conceptions of what is “newsworthy,” and their views and values seem only “common sense.” Journalists and editors are not immune to the influence of owners and managers. Reporters want to see their stories approved for print or broadcast, and editors come to know the limits of their freedom to diverge from the “common sense” worldview of owners and managers. The self-discipline that this structure induces in journalists and editors comes to seem only “common sense” to them as well. Self-discipline becomes self-censorship—independence is restricted, the filtering process hidden, denied, or rationalized away.
Project Censored’s analysis on the top ten progressive left publications and websites coverage of key post-9/11 issues found considerable limitations on reporting of specific stories. The evidence supports the Chomsky and Herman understanding that the media barrage may in fact contribute to the news story selection process inside the left liberal media as well.[xvii] Even the left progressive media showed limited coverage of the human costs of the 9/11 wars.
The figure reported in summer, 2007 documenting a million dead did appear in progressive websites and radio including After Downing Street, Huffington Post, CounterPunch, Alternet, Democracy Now! and the Nation, but several took months to get to it. This lack of timely reporting on such a critical story on the humanitarian crisis of the US occupation by the alternative press in America does not bode well for a strong, public, peace movement. The US is in dire need of a media democracy movement to address truth emergency concerns.
In response, the Truth Emergency Movement, held its first national strategy summit in Santa Cruz, California Jan. 25-27, 2008. Organizers gathered key media constituencies to devise coherent decentralized models for distribution of suppressed news, synergistic truth-telling, and collaborative strategies to disclose, legitimize and popularize deeper historical narratives on power and inequality in the US. In sum, this truth movement is seeking to discover in this moment of Constitutional crisis, ecological peril, and widening war, ways in which top investigative journalists, whistleblowers, and independent media activists can transform how Americans perceive and defend their world. We learn from grassroots actions in the US but also from experiences of other countries. This requires us to transcend the stereotypes of other countries hammered by the corporate media. It is not by chance that two Latin American nations, both targets of US efforts to remove their popular leaders by force, have been vilified by mainstream media. Both Cuba and Venezuela, however, have been experiments in local democratic participation in which voices of communities weigh heavily upon social policy.
International Models of Media Democracy in Action: Venezuela
Democracy from the bottom is evolving as a ten-year social revolution in Venezuela. Led by President Hugo Chavez, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) gained over 1½ million voters in the November, 2008 elections. “It was a wonderful victory,” said Professor Carmen Carrero with the communications studies department of the Bolivarian University in Caracas. “We won 81 percent of the city mayor positions and seventeen of twenty-three of the state governors,” Carrero reported.
The Bolivarian University is housed in the former oil ministry building and now serves 8,000 students throughout Venezuela. The University (Universidad Bolivariana de Venezuela) is symbolic of the democratic socialist changes occurring throughout the country. Before the election of Hugo Chavez as president in 1998, college attendance was primarily for the rich in Venezuela. Today over one million, eight hundred thousand students attend college, three times the rate ten years ago. “Our university was established to resist domination and imperialism,” reported Principal (president) Marlene Yadira Cordova in an interview November 10, 2008, “We are a university where we have a vision of life that the oppressed people have a place on this planet.” The enthusiasm for learning and serious-thoughtful questions asked by students was certainly representative of a belief in the potential of positive social change for human betterment. The University offers a fully staffed free healthcare clinic, zero tuition, and basic no-cost food for students in the cafeteria, all paid for by the oil revenues now being democratically shared by the people.
Bottom up democracy in Venezuela starts with the 25,000 community councils elected in every neighborhood in the country. “We establish the priority needs of our area,” reported community council spokesperson Carmon Aponte, with the neighborhood council in the barrio Bombilla area of western Caracas. Aponte works with Patare Community TV and radio station and is one of thirty-four locally controlled community television stations and four hundred radio stations now in the barrios throughout Venezuela. Community radio, TV and newspapers are the voice of the people, where they describe the viewers/listeners as the “users” of media instead of the passive audiences.[xviii]
Democratic socialism has meant healthcare, jobs, food, and security, in neighborhoods where in many cases nothing but poverty existed ten years ago. With unemployment down to a US level, sharing the wealth has taken real meaning in Venezuela. Despite a 50 percent increase in the price of food last year, local Mercals offer government subsidized cooking oil, corn meal, meat, and powdered milk at 30-50 percent off market price. Additionally, there are now 3,500 local communal banks with a $1.6 billion dollar budget offering neighborhood-based micro-financing loans for home improvements, small businesses, and personal emergencies.
“We have moved from a time of disdain [pre-revolution—when the upper classes saw working people as less than human] to a time of adjustment,” proclaimed Ecuador’s minister of Culture, Gallo Mora Witt at the opening ceremonies of the Fourth International Book Fair in Caracas, November, 2007. Venezuela’s Minister of Culture, Hector Soto added, “We try not to leave anyone out. . . before the revolution the elites published only 60-80 books a year, we will publish 1,200 Venezuelan authors this year…the book will never stop being the important tool for cultural feelings.” In fact, some twenty-five million books—classics by Victor Hugo and Miguel de Cervantes along with Cindy Sheehan’s Letter to George Bush—were published in 2008 and are being distributed to the community councils nationwide. The theme of the International Book Fair was books as cultural support to the construction of the Bolivarian revolution and building socialism for the 21st century.
In Venezuela the corporate media are still owned by the elites. The five major TV networks, and nine of ten of the major newspapers maintain a continuing media effort to undermine Chavez and the socialist revolution. But despite the corporate media and $20 million annual support to the anti-Chavez opposition institutions from USAID and National Endowment for Democracy, two-thirds of the people in Venezuela continue to support President Hugo Chavez and the United Socialist Party of Venezuela. The democracies of South America are realizing that the neo-liberal formulas for capitalism are not working and that new forms of resource allocation are necessary for human betterment. It is a learning process for all involved and certainly a democratic effort from the bottom up.
International Models of Media Democracy in Action: Cuba
“You cannot kill truth by murdering journalists,” said Tubal Páez, president of the Journalist Union of Cuba. In May of 2008, One hundred and fifty Cuban and South American journalists, ambassadors, politicians, and foreign guests gathered at the Jose Marti International Journalist Institute to honor the 50th anniversary of the death of Carlos Bastidas Arguello —the last journalist killed in Cuba. Carlos Bastidas was 23 years old when he was assassinated by Fulgencia Batista’s secret police after having visited Fidel Castro’s forces in the Sierra Maestra Mountains. Edmundo Bastidas, Carlos’ brother, told about how a river of change flowed from the Maestra (teacher) mountains, symbolized by his brother’s efforts to help secure a new future for Cuba.
The celebration in Havana was held in honor of World Press Freedom Day, which is observed every year in May. The UN first declared this day in 1993 to honor journalists who lost their lives reporting the news and to defend media freedom worldwide.
Cuban journalists share a common sense of a continuing counter-revolutionary threat by US financed Cuban-Americans living in Miami. This is not an entirely unwarranted feeling in that many hundreds of terrorist actions against Cuba have occurred with US backing over the past fifty years. In addition to the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, these attacks include the blowing up of a Cuban airlines plane in 1976 killing seventy-three people, the starting in 1981 of an epidemic of dengue fever that killed 158 people, and several hotel bombings in the 1990s, one of which resulted in the death of an Italian tourist.
In the context of this external threat, Cuban journalists quietly acknowledge that some self-censorship will undoubtedly occur regarding news stories that could be used by the “enemy” against the Cuban people. Nonetheless, Cuban journalists strongly value freedom of the press and there was no evidence of overt government control. Ricardo Alarcon, President of the National Assembly Cuba allows CNN, AP and Chicago Tribune to maintain offices in Cuba, noted that the US refuses to allow Cuban journalists to work in the United States.[xix]
Cuban journalists complain that the US corporate media is biased and refuses to cover the positive aspects of socialism in Cuba. Unknown to most Americans are the facts that Cuba is the number one country in percentage of organic foods produced in the world, has an impressive health care system with a lower infant mortality rate than the US, trains doctor from all over the world, and has enjoyed a 43% increase in GDP between 2005 and 2008.
Neither Cuba nor Venezuela are utopian societies. Developing countries subject to continuing pressure by the US may be cautious and suspicious of provocateurs that would incite violence or provoke US military intervention. But in these countries, the ability of local media expressing voices of local communities is something from which media reformers can learn.
Grassroots Antidotes to Corporate Media Propaganda
Tens of thousands of Americans engaged in various social justice issues constantly witness how corporate media marginalize, denigrate, or simply ignore their concerns. Activist groups working on issues like 9/11 Truth, election fraud, impeachment in the Bush era, war propaganda, civil liberties abridgements, torture, the Wall Street meltdown, and corporate-caused environmental crises have been systematically excluded from mainstream news and the national conversation leading to a genuine Truth Emergency in the country as a whole.
Now, however, a growing number of activists are finally saying “enough!” and joining forces to address this truth emergency by developing new journalistic systems and practices of their own. They are working to reveal the common corporate denominators behind the diverse crises we face and to develop networks of trustworthy news sources that tell people what is really going on. These activists know we need a journalism that moves beyond inquiries into particular crimes and atrocities, and exposes wider patterns of corruption, propaganda and illicit political control by a military and corporate elite. Recent efforts at national media reform through micro-power community radio– similar to the 400 people’s radio stations in Venezuela– and campaign finance changes, that would mandate access for all candidates on national media, have been strongly resisted by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB). NAB, considered one of the most powerful corporate lobby groups in Washington, works hard to protect over $200 billion dollars of annual advertising and the several hundred million dollars political candidates spend in each election cycle.
The Truth Emergency movement now recognizes that corporate media’s political power and failure to meet its First Amendment obligation to keep the public informed leaves a huge task. Citizens must mobilize resources to redevelop news and information systems from the bottom up. Citizen journalists can expand distribution of news via small independent newspapers, local magazines, independent radio, and cable access TV. Using the internet, the public can interconnect with like-minded grassroots news organizations to share important stories. These changes are already in progress.
Becoming the Media: Media Freedom International and Project Censored
In response to Truth Emergency conference, the Media Freedom Foundation and Project Censored launched an effort to both become a repository of independent news and information as well as a producer of content in what are called Validated Independent News stories vetted by college and university professors and students around the world. As corporate media continue their entertainment agenda and the PR industry—working for governments and corporations—increasingly dominates news content, there exists a socio-cultural opening to transform how the public receives and actually participates in the validation and creation of their own news.
Corporate media are increasingly irrelevant to working people and to democracy. People need to tell their own news stories from real experiences and perspectives, as an alternative to the hierarchically imposed and “official” top-down narrative. What better project in support of media democracy than for universities and colleges worldwide to support truth telling and validate news stories and independent news sources.
Only 5% of college students under 30 read a daily newspaper. Most get their news from corporate television and increasingly on the internet. One of the biggest problems with independent media sources on the internet is a perception of inconsistent reliability. The public is often suspicious of the truthfulness and accuracy of news postings from non-corporate media sources. Over the past ten years, in hundreds of presentations all over the US, Project Censored staff has frequently been asked, “what are the best sources for news and whom can we trust?”
The goal of this effort is to encourage young people to use independent media as their primary sources of news and information and to learn about trustworthy news sources through the Media Freedom International News Research Affiliate Program. By the end of 2008, there were over thirty affiliate colleges and universities with plans to expand that participation several fold this next year. Through these institutions, validated independent news stories can be researched by students and scholars, then written, produced and disseminated via the web. In addition, on any given day at the Media Freedom Foundation website, one can view enough independent news stories from RSS feeds to fill nearly fifty written pages, more than even the largest US newspapers. An informed electorate cannot remain passive consumers of corporate news. As aforementioned activist David Mathison suggested in his how-to manual, Be the Media, where he argues and instructs not only about how to build community media but how to build community through media.[xx]
Part of building community is in developing awareness about the type of world we want to participate in creating, and developing strategies for achieving change. New forms of media that promote widespread responsibility for both creating and disseminating information do not remove the need for people to protest, to demonstrate, to march, to boycott and to demand entry into corporate board rooms. Rather it assures that voices can be heard and, as shown in Howard Rheingold’s Smartmobbing Democracy,[xxi] the power of new Internet communication technologies can be harnessed to mobilize more effectively. Contrasted with previous more limited technologies, Rheingold points out that now, “[m]obile and deskbound media such as blogs, listserves and social networking sites allow for many-to-many communication.” Technology has helped level the playing field by creating a virtual sphere where people can exchange ideas and instigate activism. Grassroots, bottom-up, peer-to-peer efforts have increased in influence and effectiveness due to the speed and breadth of new communication technologies. We are currently experiencing a potential for collective activism on a scale never before seen.
The continued expansion of independent internet news sources allows for the mass political awareness of key issues and truth emergencies in the world. The involvement of university and college professors and their students in validating news stories will be an important component of reliability verification of these sources. As we learn who we can trust in the independent news world, we will be in a stronger position for the continued development and expansion of democratic social movement/anti-war efforts in the future.
It is up to the people to unite and oppose the common oppressors manifested in a militarist and unresponsive government along with their corporate media courtiers and PR propagandists. Only then, when the public forms and controls its own information resources, will it be armed with the power that knowledge gives to move beyond the media induced mindsets that limit change to modest reform. Grassroots media providing voice to those who would challenge elite domination are our best hope to create a truly vibrant democratic society that promises as well as delivers liberty, peace, and economic justice to all.
Media Freedom website include:
Daily News at: http://mediafreedom.pnn.com/5174-independent-news- sources
Validated News & Research at: http://www.mediafreedominternational.org/
Daily Censored Blog at: http://dailycensored.com/
Project Censored: http://www.projectcensored.org/
[i] US General Tommy Franks, quoted in The San Francisco Chronicle, March 23, 2002, onlinehttp://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2002/ 020323-attack01.htm.
[ii] Peter Phillips and Andrew Roth, Censored 2009, (New York: Seven Stories, Press, 2008), 19-25. This story is the number one censored story of the year at Project Censored for this year, archived online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/1-over-one-million-iraqi-deaths-caused-by-us-occ upation/ and for the earlier casualty numbers see http://www.countercurrents.org/iraq-polya070207.ht m.
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Various theories exist on the problem of the subject, from historian Rick Shenkman’s Just How Stupid Are We to historian and cultural critic Thomas Frank’s What’s the Matter with Kansas, but few examine its affects on the peace community. For more on the issue of American historical amnesia, see Gore Vidal on Democracy Now! at http://www.democracynow.org/2004/5/21/gore_vidal_o n_the_united_states , also, In These Times online at http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3099/the_unite d_states_of_amnesia/ and for a broader academic look at the issue of how Americans have become arguably the least informed, most entertained people in the modern world, see the now classic work from the late New York University media scholar Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, (New York: Viking Adult, 1985). This article hopes to shine more light on the impact of all of the aforementioned on the peace movement in general and what can be done about it. For another view of this written earlier, at the outset of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, see Felix Kolb and Alicia Swords, “Do Peace Movements Matter?” Commondreams.org, May 12, 2003, online at http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0512-08.htm.
[v] Diane Farsetta, Center for Media Democracy, studies on Pentagon propaganda online at http://www.prwatch.org/pentagonpundits and http://www.prwatch.org/node/8180.
[vi] C. Wright Mills. The Power Elite, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000, reissue). Also, continuing with this theme in terms of democratic communications theory/policy and the ideas of an open society, see the work of Jurgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a category of Bourgeois Society, published in1962, and The Theory of Communicative Action, from 1981, as well as Karl Popper’s The Open Society and Its Enemies, first published in 1945.
[vii] Norman Soloman, “The Military-Industrial-Media Complex
Why war is covered from the warriors’ perspective,” Extra! July/August 2005, published by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), on the FAIR website at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2627.
[viii] Cenk Uygur, “Conservative Media vs Progressive Media” Posted on The Daily Kos blog, July 1, 2009. )
[ix] Linda Milazzo, “Corporate Media Turned Out for Jena, but Not for Anti-War. Here’s Why.” Atlantic Free Press, September 23, 2007, online at http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/2473-corpo rate-media-turned-out-for-jena-but-not-for-anti-wa r-heres-why.html.
[x] For more on the Winter Soldiers, see Censored 2009, chapter 1, story 9, pp. 58-62 and online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/9-iraq-and-afghanistan-vets-testify/ and chapter 12, pp.297-319. See the KPFA radio and Corp Watch website for the coverage athttp://www.warcomeshome.org/wintersoldier2008.
[xi] Peter Phillips, Censored 2008, (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2007), 35-44. Online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/1-no-habeas-corpus-for-any-person/ and http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/2-bush-moves-toward-martial-law/.
[xii] See Censored 2008, chapter 1, story 6, 55-59. Also online at http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/6-operation-falcon-raids/.
[xiii] Ibid.
[xiv] Norman Soloman, “The Military-Industrial-Media Complex:
Why war is covered from the warriors’ perspective,” Extra! July/August 2005, published by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), on the FAIR website at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2627.
[xv] For several excellent studies of US Iraq War propaganda, see PR Watch’s John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton, Weapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush’s War on Iraq, (New York: Tarcher Penguin, 2003), and their follow up Best War Ever: Lies, Damned Lies, and the Mess in Iraq, (New York: Penguin, 2006), and the exhaustive work by Anthony R. DiMaggio, Mass Media, Mass Propaganda: Examining American News in the “War on Terror,” (UK: Lexington Books, 2008). Additionally, forthcoming in fall 2009, just reviewed by the authors, is Robert P. Abele, The Anatomy of a Deception: A Reconstruction and Analysis of the Decision to Invade Iraq, (Baltimore: University Press of America, 2009).
For reports on the continuation of war policy under President Barack Obama, see Center for Media Democracy’s John Stauber, “How Obama Took Over the Peace Movement” online http://www.prwatch.org/node/8297, and Peter Phillips, “Barack Obama Administration Continues US Military Dominance” online http://www.projectcensored.org/articles/story/http -wwwprojectcensoredorg-articles-story-barack-obama -administration-c/.
[xvi] Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, (New York: Pantheon Books, 1988, 2002). For an introduction of the Propaganda Model, see chapter 1, or see a retrospective by Edward Herman online http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/20031209.htm.
[xvii] Peter Phillips, Censored 2008, see chapter 7, “Left Progressive Media Inside the Propaganda Model,” 233-251. Online at http://www.projectcensored.org/articles/story/left -progressive-media-inside-the-propaganda-model/.
[xviii] Co-author Peter Phillips interviewed Carmon Aponte while visiting the Patare Community TV and radio station in a trip to Venezuela for a book fair in 2008. The station was one of thirty-four locally controlled community television stations and four hundred radio stations now in the barrios throughout Venezuela.
[xix] Co-author Peter Phillips attended the major journalism conference in Cuba in 2008. About his experiences there, Phillips remarked, “During my five days in Havana, I met with dozens of journalists, communication studies faculty and students, union representatives and politicians. The underlying theme of my visit was to determine the state of media freedom in Cuba and to build a better understanding between media democracy activists in the US and those in Cuba.”
Phillips continued, “I toured the two main radio stations in Havana, Radio Rebelde and Radio Havana. Both have Internet access to multiple global news sources including CNN, Reuters, Associated Press and BBC with several newscasters pulling stories for public broadcast. Over 90 municipalities in Cuba have their own locally run radio stations, and journalists report local news from every province.”
“During the course of several hours in each station I (Phillips) was interviewed on the air about media consolidation and censorship in the US and was able to ask journalists about censorship in Cuba as well. Of the dozens I interviewed all said that they have complete freedom to write or broadcast any stories they choose. This was a far cry from the Stalinist media system so often depicted by US interests.”
[xx] For more details see the Project Censored website at http://projectcensored.org/, for independent media feeds see Media Freedom Foundation at http://mediafreedom.pnn.com/5174-independent-news- sources, and for more on the Project Censored International Affiliates Program, see http://projectcensored.org/project-censored-intern ational-affilates-program and http://mediafreedominternational.org. For more on how to become the media, see David Mathison’s work online http://bethemedia.com. For more on Smart Mobs, see Howard Rheingold’s work onlinehttp://www.smartmobs.com/book/.
[xxi] Howard Rheingold, “Smartmobbing Democracy,” in Rebooting America: Ideas for Redesigning American Democracy for the Internet Age,” ed. Allison Fine, Micah L. Sifry, Andrew Rasiej and Josh Levy. Retrieved from The Personal Democracy Press Website:http://rebooting.personaldemocracy.com/nod e/5484.
*The co-authors would like to express sincere appreciation for editing assistance provided by Rebecca Norlander and Ellen Gaddy.
Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/21/2009 6:08 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
The survival of the U.S. Republic would be greatly enhanced if all or part of the following, not necessarily in this order, were effectuated:
o All members of the U.S. Congress, with the exception of Ron Paul, should be voted out of office and new members continuously voted out each election UNTIL the corporate/K-Street lobby influence and the revolving door stops and Congress is back under the guidance and control of the We THE PEOPLE.
o The 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, as well as the major banks that own the Federal Reserve Banks of New York and San Francisco, should be audited. Such audit should include all natural persons and corporate entities (commercial banks, investment banks, trusts, brokerage houses and insurance companies) holding more than 5% of any issue.
o Any person or corporate entity suspected of suppressing a vital energy technology (such as COLD FUSION) should be investigated in a court of law, such investigation broadcast on C-SPAN as it proceeds.
o Major portions of the Glass Owen Act should be cancelled and the Gold Standard reestablished. Fractional reserve banking should be declared the fraud it is and outlawed. All taxes should be removed from the sale and transfer of gold and silver. Hoarding gold or silver should be criminalized on the level of tampering with the mail or counterfeiting.
o Corporate entities should not be permitted to include the phrase "and any other lawful business" in their Articles of Incorporation as this business practice opens the door to conflicts of interest and excessive consolidation.
o The Sherman anti-Trust laws on the books should be enforced and government should be forbidden to grant ANY subsidy or special privilege to any natural person, partnership, (corporate) entity, trust or foundation.
o The production of all fossil fuels (especially oil and natural gas) for the purpose of BURNING should be phased out by 2015.
o Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution needs to be advertised in public service announcements until the public is aware of its significance. The significance of Article II, Section 2 is that Congress has the power to tell the Supreme Court that it does not have jurisdiction in certain circumstances. If WE THE PEOPLE more widely knew that our Congress had this power, perhaps we might be more concerned about who has influence OVER that Congress. It's time the People start demanding the Congress and the Supreme Court play their distinct parts and stop rubbing each others backs, and stop creating one-size-fits-all laws. The Constitution stipulates a FEDERALIST system, meaning different laws for different people in different states are sometimes preferable and more pragmatic.
o The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution must be reinstated to the intent of the Founders. It is high-time citizens refuse to permit the federal government to use the Commerce Clause, as re-written by a rogue Supreme Court, to stick its nose into every aspect of private business. When the government uses the Commerce Clause to remove citizens right to keep and bear arms -- as it is already doing -- this needs to be the last straw. The bastardized Commerce Clause must be killed and replaced with the Commerce Clause as written by the Founders. Anyone who opposes this can be identified as an apologist for totalitarian government.
o All drugs and prostitution need to be de-criminalized on the grounds that the Federal government has no business invading the personal affairs of its citizens. Drugs and prostitution should be left up to the citizens of each state.
o The National Security Agency (the NSA) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should be dissolved. The NSA and the DHS are unnecessary because they duplicate and confuse the functionality of the FBI and the CIA. The FBI was established to investigate and prevent crimes within the U.S. and the CIA was established to investigate and prevent possible conflicts that originate outside the US. To have additional agencies is confusing, wasteful and dangerous to US citizens. It is dangerous because such citizens, and even their elected representatives, are not able to maintain proper oversight. This opens the door to conflicts of interest from outside elites and agendas.
o If the reasons for so-called terrorism are removed, terrorism will cease. The Patriot Act was passed without the proper review of the U.S. Citizens and has thus opened the door to spying on U.S. citizens and all the civil rights abuses that go along with same. The Patriot Act should therefore be rescinded.
o The U.S. should bow out of NATO and cut the military budget by 50% over a 5-year period. The U.S. should cease and desist in all military adventures, including Afghanistan and Iraq, and withdraw all military forces from the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The U.S. has no reason and no business defending the world and stationing over 700 bases in over 140 countries around the world. This activity is antagonistic and expensive and is the CAUSE of 9/11. Potential future terrorism, if any, should be investigated by the FBI if internal and the CIA is external, and handled strictly as a criminal matter. The Patriot Act did more damage to the United States than the terrorists that damaged only a handful of buildings.
o All para-military outfits like BLACKWATER should be declared illegal under Constitution law and disbanded. The US government has no business hiring private military services that are not under the direct control of WE THE PEPLE. This goes for the US military as well. The Constitution authorizes and demands that each of the 50 states maintains a separate and distinct citizen militia whereby all able-bodied men and women between certain ages are trained and participate in defending their areas and country, if called upon by the President. The Militia of the Several States should be immediately revitalized per the Second Amendment and any and all standing armies defunded and disbanded.
o The Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid system should be abolished and phased out by 2020. The U.S. government has no business in the health care business or providing support to citizens that can't "make it." Citizens "can't make it" on their own because the government competes for the very money and resources they need TO "make it." In other words, social security and government-provided benefits are self-fulfilling prophesies. They ultimately reduce the GENERAL WELFARE of the nation and grow the government into a totalitarian state collective.
o Taxpayer investments in science, technology and space exploration should be increased such that such allocations are never less than 10% of the national budget. The national budget needs to be DEFINED, not ALLOCATED. There are two ways to budget money. Method I and Method II. Under Method I you start with a LUMP SUM of money and allocate it in accordance with certain re-established PERCENTAGES, percentages established upon MONETARY ALLOCATION PHILSOPHY. Under Method II you simply see what everyone wants and then ADD UP what everything comes to. Any shortfall is then borrowed. Financers and taxpayers like Method I. Government contractors, bankers and special interest groups like Method II. Method I should be used and Method II phased out. Method II is poor financial management and leads to debt and insolvency. See the BOOK OF BUDGETS at http://www.mecfilms.com/moviepubs/bk0001.htm
o Citizens, by direct referendum if necessary, should instruct the U.S. Treasury to default on all portions of the national debt that were funded by the Federal Reserve System monetizing Treasury bonds.
o The U.S. should immediately impose (VAT) taxes on any nation that imposes them on the U.S. This simple act would remedy the balance of trade deficit.
o The U.S. corporate income tax should be reduced to 10% - 20% and there should be no taxes on capital gains or inheritance. Why should the U.S. have some of the highest taxes in the world and an insane system of deductions that opens the door to endless tax-accounting expenses, legal expenses, fraud, special favors and threats from IRS agents?
o Commercial banks should not be allowed to sell or handle equities. Trust banks should not be allowed to practice commercial banking or insurance. Insurance companies should not be permitted to practice commercial banking or brokerage services. Brokerage houses should not be permitted to practice commercial banking. All of these mixed practices do nothing but serve greed and create massive conflicts of interest in the business world. So long as fiat money is in use, government should probably establish general ground rules, NOT regulate business.
o IF business insists on comprehensive lassez-faire (government keeps hands off business), THEN businesses that fail MUST be permitted to go bankrupt without any possibility of government bailout, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly. Accordingly, all of the money that was given to bail out the Wall Street banks and AIG should be immediately given back to the taxpayers with interest, and all of the banks and AIG should be permitted to fail, even if it crashes the entire world financial system. A crash of the entire world financial system would not be a "bad" thing. It would only be a "bad" thing for the plutocracy, rogue politicians and corporate fascists that have hijacked the productivity of the world's citizens in the trap known as "Globalism." With the advent of PEAK OIL, probably here now, it is inevitable that Globalization will end. This is good news for the middle class of the U.S. and the average world citizen.
o States have no business participating in, or regulating the gambling business, nor do they have any business participating in the revenue stream generated by cigarettes, alcohol or any mind-altering, recreational drug or substance.
o The Drug Enforcement Agency (the DEA) -- founded by the same criminal who encouraged trade with a Communist country, axed the Lunar Space Program, removed the US from the International Gold Standard System, defaulted on foreign debt obligations and broke into the Watergate Hotel in order to spy on his competitors -- Richard Nixon -- should be abolished. This agency has never won any war against drugs and has done nothing but help stock the world's largest penitentiary system with relatively innocent citizens, much of the system a for-profit partnership between corporate fascists and government.
o Anti-trust laws should be applied to the 6 major studios and the consolidated corporate media in order to break them up. It is unacceptable that almost all the news comes from 6 global corporations. This is no news at all. It is unacceptable that the cultural Marxist be permitted to indoctrinate entire populations with social, cultural and political spew. Violence that passes for "entertainment" in the movie and game industries is destroying an entire generation of children. The CEOS, boards and major stockholders that permit and profit of this war against traditional culture need to be run out of town and/or jailed.
o Insurance companies should not be permitted to reimburse for any sickness caused by over-eating obesity or drugs, whether legal or illegal, or reckless behavior, such as behavior in connection with committing crimes or extreme sports, such as sky-diving or bungee jumping.
o The LEGAL profession, CLERGY, BANKING profession and MEDICAL professions should all be non-profit industries. There is something wrong with people who enter these industries in order to profit from the confusion, fear, ambitions and sickness, RESPECTIVELY, of their fellow citizens.
o All Congresses, at the federal and state levels, should be required to have 50% male and female representation. Why should women, who comprise about 50% of the population, be excused from participating in a self-governing, representative democracy?
o Torture and the death penalty should be banned on the grounds that such is immoral, ineffective as a deterrent and cruel and unusual punishment. The entire "punishment" system should be phased out and replaced by a system that accentuates education, counseling, training, preventive health and medication in extreme cases. The current draconian system of fines, jail, torture and punishment is no longer acceptable in the 21st Century and does nothing but compound an environment of hate and destruction.
o The no-bid and cost-plus contracting system used by the U.S. government should be abolished. Any and all contracts offered by any government agency, whether federal, state or local, should be broadcast as a continuous public auction interactive with the Internet and the name, office, term and contact information of any and all public officials that have been involved in the proposals of such expenditures be made available in real-time. Citizens should be able to see WHERE their governments spends WHAT tax dollars and WHO budgeted their allocation in real-time, in writing, over the Internet.
o At least 50% of all the laws on the books (federal, state and local) MUST be consolidated OR struck. Any law physically WRITTEN by any person or entity who is NOT the specific elected Congressman or Congresswoman should be struck. Citizens cannot be expected to understand let alone obey overwhelming laws or laws that were not even written by their elected representatives. Put bluntly, any congressman that does not have the time or the ability to PHYSICALLY DRAFT his own legislation personally, is not qualified to be a legislator and has no business defrauding the public with credentials that s/he does not posses.
o The U.S. prison system needs to be downsized and readied for members of the Federal Reserve banking system, their cohorts/cronies in Congress (federal and state levels), top executives, board members and major stockholders of corporations (and other entities) who are convicted of participating in, or abetting, unjust enrichment at the expense of U.S. taxpayers and citizens.
BY THE ABOVE, I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT I HAVE PUT TOGETHER ALL THE BEST SOLUTIONS TO OUR PROBLEMS OR A LIST THAT EVERYONE, EVEN ANY MAJORITY, WILL AGREE WITH. NEVERTHELESS I DO FEEL THAT THESE SUGGESTIONS WOULD MOVE US ALL TO A COUNTRY AND WORLD THAT WOULD BE MORE PROSPEROUS, PROVIDE GREATER DIVERSITY OF LIFE STYLE, RESPECT THE RULE OF LAW, EMPHASIZE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, PROVIDE A MORE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF SECURITY, AND ALLOW PEOPLE TO MORE HAPPILY MAKE THEIR WAYS THROUGH LIFE.
James Jaeger
[Reply]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/21/2009 9:06 PM by selfreppingnano
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
ok a limited restructuring that tries to improve the contry with a return to the origonal enlightened philosophy of the past.
To what degree will this work in actuality?
There are lots of problems to overcome but some degree of these ideas might help to decentralize power enough to allow us the time create enough self sufficent societies to create real oppertunity.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 12:51 AM by gawell
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
"All members of the U.S. Congress, with the exception of Ron Paul, should be voted out of office." jj
How about eliminating the voting process all together? And instead introduce and sports style draft or recruitment program, and they all get to compete to 'advance' through the ranks from state to interstate offices (major leagues). The geeks and statisticians can work out an evaluation scheme. Colleges provide the fodder and open tryouts for independents and free-style self-educators. From mediocrities to meritocracies. Of course some sports never really become national or international, let alone solar systemically popular, hurling for example.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 11:10 AM by REDquist
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
That's what we have. It's the two party system. The voters choose the national champion.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 10:10 PM by gawell
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
surprise the party/league states went from 13 to 50.
and there are no voters
there are score keepers
and there winners and runners up.
steroids and rage is banned
adrenaline junkies hospitalized and given remedial
education in preventive health care, they can be assigned den mothers and senor mentors. they can practice standing in the corner and see how far that gets them in their attempts to move a real runner along or maybe lay down a sacrifice bunt.
they are told to seriously grow up and be a team player or sit on the sidelines to cheer and boo when team-spirit moves them or not.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 10:39 PM by REDquist
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
I rage against the night. Against the benighted.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 10:49 PM by gawell
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
rage against night is euphemistically ambiguous.
more specific is rage for those who are outraged upon.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 10:58 PM by REDquist
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Don't be a wimp.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 2:54 AM by gawell
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
To be both poor and sick -- is there anything worse?
Or put another way -- is there anything better than rich and healthy? Is happiness any less over-rated than rage?
Why do you have a brain?
Adaptive and complex movement.
2. WIMP is acronym for 'Weakly Interacting Massive Particle'. WIMPs are conjectured to make up most of the dark matter in the universe.
2. One leading candidate for the WIMPs are the sparticles predicted by string theory.
I am Sparticle.
also described as a mild insult.
mild rage is what again?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 12:18 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>To be both poor and sick -- is there anything worse?
Very little. There is no need for anyone to be poor or sick. These conditions occur because of inappropriate greed, waste and a confused and power-hungry planetary management system.
It's time scientists and technologists stop accomodating insane and ignorant politicians.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 3:28 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>To what degree will this work in actuality?
When a train goes off the tracks, the investigators start at the wreck and walk back down the tracks in the direction from whence the train came. As soon as they see the place where the tracks are bent, or too wide, or too narrow, one of the investigators, stops and says:
"By Job, I think this is the place were the train went off the tracks. Let's fix THIS place right here and the trains should be back on track."
Same with the U.S. The Constitution is the track and WE THE PEOPLE are the train. All we have to do is go back through the Constitution and FIX all the places where the stupid fucked up greedy, power-hungry morons changed the TEXT and interpretation of the original intent without due process of Ammendment.
Then we're back on track.
It's very simple. You're not going "back" in time (as some idiots counter). Ny doing this, you're getting back INTO time. We are now a country that is OUT OF TIME.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 10:03 AM by billmerit
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
"I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT I HAVE PUT TOGETHER ALL THE BEST SOLUTIONS TO OUR PROBLEMS"
REALLY????????
ROTFL
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 12:19 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>REALLY????????
>ROTFL
So maybe you should post your list then.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 11:40 AM by REDquist
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
. . . go back and look at your list and ask yourself “could this get Doojie arrested?”. I spotted two, the prohibition on ‘hoarding’ gold and the outlawing of ‘para-military outfits’. The problem with policy tools is that they can be used by both good people and bad people.
Also, your collection of items lacks a coherent strategy reflecting an overarching philosophy. You might give us your statement on that.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 1:26 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Most laws would get doojie arrested, because doojie has little use for law.
2nd amendment and paramilitary groups is of interest. The issue seems to be built around the "preamble clause" to the 2nd amendment:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state..."
Once the term "well regulated militia" is introduced, we have only to turn to Article 1, Section 8 regarding the enumerated powers of congress:
1.organizing arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be emoployed in the service of the United States..."
Notice that the federl government is responsible for "arming" the militia. Therefore the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" would be subject to use for militia purposes as established by the federal government.
But what about "shall not be infringed"? To the degree that a well regulated militia is necessary(which is no longer the case) there is no infringement whatever on the people's right to keep and bear arms for militia purposes.
For militia purposes, the federal government has every right to stop arming the people, or allowing them to keep and bear arms, since there are no more militias by the rule of congress.
HOWEVER, there is not the first jot or tittle that says I can;t own a firearm for personal reasons to go hunting or protect myself from intruders.
SO, scanning the 10th amendment, and seeing that those powers not delegated to the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are within the powers of the states respectively, or the people, there is NO POWER GIVEN TO REGULATE FIREARMS FOR PERSONAL REASONS.
But how would this 10th amendment prohibition now apply to the states?
14th amendment: "no state shall make or enforce any law which abridges the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States".
That is, once the states could regulate it, now they cannot. It is NOT left tio the states respectively OR to the "people" but is now included as a privilege or immunity of a citizen of the United States.
It CANNOT, by law, be made a crime simply to own a firearm for personal use. There is nothing whatever in the Constitution dealing with that issue.
If I can lawfully buy a suitcase nuclear weapon, there is nothing that can prohibit me constitutionally from doing so.
The main reason for the 2nd amendment was to discouirage independent ORGANIZATIONS from establishing themselves outside state or federal authgority. If anytone can do so, then you have a law by sheer force of arms.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms for the power of any independent organization is unconstitutional, but the power of any individual to keep and bear any kind of firearm for personal protection, including knowledge of law for personal protection, that would not include "bearing arms", but simply the use of varous personal defenses of life, liberty, or property.
The 2nd amendment, by its plain language, was made to protect the state itself and give the stae authority for a militia within the bounds of federal regulation.
The only reason i can see for this language is that the state professed a need for other states to come to its aid should there develop a private milita to challenge the power of the state.
This seems congruent with the rest of the Constitution in its attempts to create a federal government to suppress individuals.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 12:30 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>Notice that the federl government is responsible for "arming" the militia. Therefore the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" would be subject to use for militia purposes as established by the federal government.
I don't believe this is what is supposed to happen. The militia are formed in and by the CITIZENS in the various 50 STATES. The Federal gov, via the U.S. President, may call up (borrow) the militia from various states if he deems it necessary defend the nation from foreign invasion. An ARMY may be rasied by the Federal government, but it cannot STAND and may only be funded by Congress for two years at a time. The idea is: if you have standing militaries all over the place, someone is going to find "excuses" to USE them. Witness: VIETNAM, IRAQ.
The idea, for the not-quite-bright, is this: WE THE PEOPLE ARE SUPPOSED TO HOLD THE POWER OF THE GUN AND KEEP IT ON A SHORT LEASH: NOT THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, PROFESSIONAL MERCENARIES OR AN ELITE. See http://www.mecfilms.com/mid/movies/oi/clip5.wmv if you are still foggy on this.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 12:57 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
You know this and I know this and the "Federalist" tells us this, but yes, we have no militia, we have no militia today. (Yes, we have no bananas).
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 2:07 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>... we have no militia, we have no militia today.
Depends on your definition of "no."
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 3:54 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Congress has taken Article 1, Section 8 quite literally, arming, supplying, organizing, training, disciplining, and in effect rendering the 2nd amendment obsolete.
"A well regulated militia" is totally cared for by the feds, and the state is only the plavce where they happen to be until needed for further use.
That's why the freedom to simply own weapons for personal use is the only freedom not regulated by congress. Any weapon you can legally purchase and use for personal reasons is not limited by any Constitutional law.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 4:05 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
BTW, based on what I've learned in the study of law, since due process deals with personal freedoms, and "the people" refers to the people of each respective state, I'm thinking that individuals are largely ignored in personal affairs as long as they harm no other, which would THEN make them subject to judgement by the more ancient laws of due process that pre-dated the Constitution.
The fact that this is stated in the 5th and then repeated yet again in the 14th protectiing all persons regardless of citizenship, tends to support the idea that "due process" was never considered a process strictly limited to US Constitutional law, and in fact, the 9th amendment would suggest otherwise.
Statutory law would always be subject to common law. This would mean that all due process would allow the individual to question the lawfulness, not the legality, but the lawfulness of any statute applied to them personally.
It could be arguend that the assumption is consistent with ancient christianity: the individual is always above the power of the law as long as s/he harms no other, which then would require due process by laws not under the power of either state or Constitutional government:
1.Two witnesses
2.presumption of innocence
3.Right to face your accuser
4.protection of double jeopardy
5.habeas corpus
6.Right against self incrimination
Al the above can be traced to the bible, which would make it necessary for any tribunal to respect those rights.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 5:14 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Al the above can be traced to the bible
And where does that leave us?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 6:21 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
And where does that leave us?
Oh, I think I get it now. You're pointing out *why* our legal system is so screwed up. Because it's based in scripture!
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 4:21 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>That's why the freedom to simply own weapons for personal use is the only freedom not regulated by congress. Any weapon you can legally purchase and use for personal reasons is not limited by any Constitutional law.
True, but they use the Commerce Clause, as re-written by the Supreme Court, to "justify" banning guns in "gun-free zones," such zones illegal under Consitutional Law.
See what Edwin Vieira, J.D. and Pat Buchanan have to say about this in ORIGINAL INTENT at
http://www.OriginalIntent.us
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 4:29 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Yes, but even the commerce clause cannot override due process, which came long before any constitutional law. Even should an individual be accused of violation, the person is protected by due process, which can challenge any statutory principle.
The problem is, lawyers don't tell us that, priobably because they don't even know it.
A study of law from ancient process, however, shows it to be plainly true.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 4:33 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
To carry the above argument further, the 2nd amendment dealt with groups, as in legal militias, but not with individuals, because the founders recognized that by ancient law, individuals had the "inalienable right' to due process, which would invalidate control of any individual not part of some revolutionary group.
Due process always overrides statutory law. The reason is stated in the 14th amendment, which includes several sections of the original constitution, stating clearly in the "privilege and immunities" clause that no state, like the federal government, shall make or enforce any law abridging the rights of citizens, and allowing due process to all persons, showing clearly that due process is not part of statutory law.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 4:44 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>Yes, but even the commerce clause cannot override due process, which came long before any constitutional law. Even should an individual be accused of violation, the person is protected by due process, which can challenge any statutory principle.
I'm not following your thinking here.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 7:17 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
"A well regulated militia" is totally cared for by the feds, and the state is only the plavce where they happen to be until needed for further use. That's why the freedom to simply own weapons for personal use is the only freedom not regulated by congress. Any weapon you can legally purchase and use for personal reasons is not limited by any Constitutional law.
Here's what the Second Amendment actually says:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Let's explicate this:
>A well regulated Militia,
Means the militia should be well regulated by the elected officials in the STATE, not in the Federal government, because the next phrase names the state.
>being necessary
means a Militia is NECESSARY. This is the ONLY place the Constitution says something is NECESSARY. The Constitution doesn't say the Congress is necessary, or the President is necessary or a standing ARMY is necessary or the Supreme Court is necessary ... it says a MILITIA IS NECESSARY, to what?
>to the security of a free State,
So a MILITIA is NECESSARY in order for a STATE to be FREE. Note, it doesn't say a MILITIA is necessary in order for the FEDERAL government or the CENTRAL government to be free. It says in order for the STATE, i.e. Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, California, etc., to remain free. Free of what? Free of everything; especially the FEDERAL government, some CENTRAL government or some elite attempting to own and/or control an army and/or military. The STATES only LENT their authority to the Federal government.
>the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Thus, WE THE PEOPLE who comprise and authorize the FREE STATES to exist have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms as part of our duty to be well organized as a Militia BY those states. NOTE: nowhere does the Constitution say that People have the right to keep and bear arms for deer hunting or to protect themselves from intruders in their homes. The People have the right to keep and bear arms as PART of the STATE MILITIA on order to maintain a check and balance of power against the CENTRAL GOVERNMENT and in order to guarantee their FREEDOM as a FREE STATE or People. This is why it is NECESSARY, because POLITICAL POWER GROWS OUT OF THE BARREL OF A GUN.
o If the Central gov has the gun, then THEY have the political power.
o If some elite has the gun, then THEY have the political power.
o If the People, organized in state militia, have the gun, then THEY have the political power.
Can it be any simpler?
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 7:37 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Although I can't disagree with any particular point you bring up James, I have to ask if you don't see this as just 'centralizing' power within the State.
In other words, the State militia is it's own 'centralized' power within the borders of it's own State.
So, should we also have a county militia in every county to keep the 'central' State militia from getting out of control, and then a City militia in every city within the county to keep it's militia in check?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 9:32 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>Although I can't disagree with any particular point you bring up James, I have to ask if you don't see this as just 'centralizing' power within the State.
Yes, lesser of the evils.
>In other words, the State militia is it's own 'centralized' power within the borders of it's own State.
Yes.
>So, should we also have a county militia in every county to keep the 'central' State militia from getting out of control, and then a City militia in every city within the county to keep it's militia in check?
I will agree that the Second Amendment could have been a lot clearer. It would seem that no mater how you organize it, they didn't want a lot of citizens running around willy nilly with guns so they stipulated that they should be trained and organized. I don't know if this just makes it look better or what, but the idea is that citizens have the guns, not some over-arching group under some foreign or distant power.
Given the fact that we HAVE governments, what do you want to do, disarm everyone?
The problem with the anarchy movement is they don't give the (exact) program of relinquishing the power and duties of government into an orderly new arrangement. In other words it sounds good on paper, but that's as far as it goes ... so far.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 9:47 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
The problem with the anarchy movement is they don't give the (exact) program of relinquishing the power and duties of government into an orderly new arrangement. In other words it sounds good on paper, but that's as far as it goes ... so far.
Right, I gotcha. Just realizing it's a scalar problem.
Arm the State militias, and you have State centralized power, but at least it keeps the Feds in check, which would be a better State than the one we have. No argument there.
I like to hope that a real (working) egalitarianism would arise much in the same way cellular automata do...through simple recursive rules......such as the interwebz, and twitter, etc. It's a self-organizing system, built by the cellular interactions at the ground level.
I see it as an emergent system, not as one that even could in principle be organized externally or from 'on high', since that would be contrary to it's very nature.
I don't see people organizing any such movement per se, I just see it emerging through new modes of communication....and I think that's the key right there....widespread ubiquitous communication.
It probably helps some to disillusion people to any form of organized State along the way, if only to quicken the process.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 10:06 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
And what stops those Militias from becoming State sized armies?
Aside from whether they abuse the citizens in their own State, let's say California wanted to take over the entire West Coast, and Oregon and Washington couldn't really stand up to us.
What then?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 10:16 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
I guess what I'm actually asking is how do you envision preventing civil war between the States?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 10:21 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
I suppose another way of putting it, is that it doesn't appear you've actually changed the nature of the hierarchy, just shortened it down to the State level. But it has the same structure.
We could just as easily imagine the entire earth as a nation, with what we call "nations" currently as member States (the State of Canada, the State of Mexico, etc.) and then say that each of those States should have their own militia, but no army for the Federal United Earth.
Same system, different scale.
[Reply] [Parent]
Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/26/2009 6:56 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>Same system, different scale.
Okay agreed Pan. All this is a BIG fucking problem.
Let's hit it from another angle.
What are the THINGS or REASONS people fight, conflict and war? Let's itemize them and then prioritize the list. You start.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/26/2009 7:17 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
What are the THINGS or REASONS people fight, conflict and war? Let's itemize them and then prioritize the list. You start.
Damn, you gotta toss me a difficult question!?!? :)
Ok, well, it can be approached from many angles. We could break down competition/cooperation of life itself. We could talk about scarcity (or the perception of).
But, I'll start simply. In a nutshell, people have a hard time perceiving others as peers.
Also, I think there is a tendency towards "atomistic" thinking (a visual analogy: the thought of atoms as tiny solid 'billiard balls', is similarly erroneous to the rubber sheet visualization). It's what subTillion would call the 'transcendent bias', and probably stems from the fact that the 'objective' or 'physical' or 'emergent' or 'material' world emerges from an 'immanent' substrate. In other words, transcendence, or emergence (the active principle: yang) is how this world got here (physically), so obviously, all physical things are slanted in that direction.
But, he also points out that there are two ways to transcend: transcend and exclude, or transcend and include.
Transcension through exclusion seems to fail, as it literally excludes the ground under it's feet (this would be like the branches of a tree trying to dislodge itself from the trunk and roots to float towards the sun - an actual tree grows taller, and closer to the sun by simultaneously digging deeper into it's substrate via the root system).
Like the tree, transcension through inclusion means enfolding immanence into the next higher order.
"All things stand with their back to the female"
- Lao Tzu
In practical terms, this means that, as a society, we need to become more inclusive, and empowering women would probably help a lot. In fact, numerous studies have shown that the empowerment of poor women has vast benefits to any society she lives in.
We need to swing more towards the K-selection end of the spectrum, while not completely abandoning the R-selection paradigm (preserving those societal niches where it's actually effective), but rather limiting it's scope to non-destructive arenas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory
Overview
In r/K selection theory, selective pressures are hypothesised to drive evolution in one of two generalized directions: r- or K-selection.[1] These terms, r and K, are derived from standard ecological algebra, as illustrated in the simple Verhulst equation of population dynamics:[3]
where r is the growth rate of the population (N), and K is the carrying capacity of its local environmental setting. Typically, r-selected species exploit less-crowded ecological niches, and produce many offspring, each of which has a relatively low probability of surviving to adulthood. In contrast, K-selected species are strong competitors in crowded niches, and invest more heavily in fewer offspring, each of which has a relatively high probability of surviving to adulthood. In the scientific literature, r-selected species are occasionally referred to as "opportunistic", while K-selected species are described as "equilibrium".[4]
[edit]Unstable environments
In unstable or unpredictable environments, r-selection predominates as the ability to reproduce quickly is crucial. There is little advantage in adaptations that permit successful competition with other organisms, because the environment is likely to change again. Traits that are thought to be characteristic of r-selection include: high fecundity, small body size, early maturity onset, short generation time, and the ability to disperse offspring widely. Organisms whose life history is subject to r-selection are often referred to as r-strategists or r-selected. Organisms with r-selected traits range from bacteria and diatoms, through insects and weeds, to various semelparous cephalopods and mammals, especially small rodents.
[edit]Stable environments
In stable or predictable environments, K-selection predominates as the ability to compete successfully for limited resources is crucial and populations of K-selected organisms typically are very constant and close to the maximum that the environment can bear (unlike r-selected populations, where population sizes can change much more rapidly). Traits that are thought to be characteristic of K-selection include: large body size, long life expectancy, and the production of fewer offspring that require extensive parental care until they mature. Organisms whose life history is subject to K-selection are often referred to as K-strategists or K-selected. Organisms with K-selected traits include large organisms such as elephants, trees, humans and whales, but also smaller, long-lived organisms such as Arctic Terns. The climate that demonstrate predictably variable characteristics of a stable climate is the oceanic climate. The most stable climate in this sense would be found in Northwest Europe. The warm Gulf Stream and the cool temperature of the northern latitude form a natural front in which predictably variable characteristics are found to the greatest extent. The very location would be southern Lofoten which is also known for the greatest positive temperature anomaly in the world.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/26/2009 7:41 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
On a more concrete level, I think there are 3 mechanisms which will enrich society and aid the dissolution of government:
1) Empowerment, particularly of the middle class and poor. Getting people "off the grid" (I'm using the analogy to energy-independent people who no longer get power from the power companies, but this can be extended to ALL forms of power - get people off any form of power grid, i.e., help them become truly 'independent' or 'autonomous'. Of course, it's great to do this for oneself, but it also helps a lot to help as many others as possible achieve this: the more 'autonomous' people there are, the faster it propagates, and the more resilient it becomes, so by helping others to enhance their own autonomy, you are helping secure your own be creating the environment in which it thrives.
2) Non-participation. To the furthest extent you are reasonably able to (without endangering yourself), STOP participating in government (or any authoritarian structure). And encourage/support others doing this as well. This is similar to 'getting off the grid' but specifically applied to the mechanisms of government. Just stop playing with them. This could mean not voting (since voting implicitly validates the system of governance through one's participation in it), stop paying taxes (but see my disclaimer about putting yourself in danger), not calling/relying on police except in the utmost of emergencies (don't call them over trivial disputes), stop using the legal system as much as possible (this means don't sue people), etc. So, in every way you find it reasonable, simply disconnect from all forms of governance, and encourage/help others to do the same.
3) Technology. Especially technology that facilitates 1 & 2. We've already discussed what these technologies are (the usual supspects: social media, robotic farming, molecular nanotechnology, free energy, etc.) Use them, encourage others to use them, invest in them (if you can), invent them (if you can), and just keep supporting them in every imaginable way.
The technology will obsolete government, because it empowers people to do things and provide for themselves in ways that will make the government irrelevant.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 12:04 AM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Oh for christs sakes Pan ... I'll start.
What are the THINGS or REASONS people fight, conflict and war? Let's itemize them and then prioritize the list.
FOOD (non-durables)
SHELTER (caves and houses)
FIRE (energy)
THINGS (durable and non-durable)
WOMEN (sex)
LAND (space)
AUTHORITY (to offset insecurities)
RESPECT (to offset ignorance)
The above is what men and women basically fight for.
James Jaeger
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 12:38 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Right, but that can all be summed up in a single word:
Scarcity.
So the obvious solution would be abundance.
Open source.
Molecular manufacturing.
Fusion.
Robotic farming.
Ummm...sex...robots? Telepresence?
Edutainment.
Scarcity is a lie James, has been since the adoption of agriculture at least. Need to wean people off the lie.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 12:47 AM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>Right, but that can all be summed up in a single word: Scarcity.
>So the obvious solution would be abundance.
Scarcity is a lie James, has been since the adoption of agriculture at least. Need to wean people off the lie.
So why is scarcity a lie in 25 words or less?
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 1:13 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
What is scarce is time.
Let's look at farming.
It takes less than 1% of the worlds population to produce more food than the world consumes.
There is no shortage of actual food.
So, in principle, we could feed everyone.
There's enough gold in the world that every person on the planet could have at least one gold necklace, and there's still enough for all our electronics.
So, no shortage of gold either.
There's enough water (for now) in the world for everyone to drink, no shortage of water.
But, it takes time and effort to get all these things, and to get them to people.
Scarcity is a division of time, and thus a division of labor.
When the Amish build a new house, the entire community pitch in to do it, and it's built very quickly, and with very little effort on the part of each individual. Many hands makes for light work.
However, because of the division of labor, some people feel that they are 'above' any kind of work whatsoever, and they become bankers and politicians and lawyers.
Middle men and authoritarians. Kings. They relegate and delegate the work of others, and convince the majority, either through their intelligence (if they can produce ideas that increase efficiency/production) or through some long held belief (such as hereditary inheritance of position) that they deserve a larger portion of what is produced.
In other words, people who have good ideas that benefit society are often absolved of the "lesser" tasks that others have to do, or they con everyone into thinking they are absolved of these tasks due to their position of birth.
And then they organize.
This, to a degree, makes sense for the past few thousand years, when work was really hard, technology was primitive, and life was short.
Today though, the technology exists to make work (for pretty much everyone) really easy.
Like I mentioned, farming is pretty much completely automated already, and only requires a few 'hands'. Soon, construction will be completely automated, but it's already well on it's way.
Why do you think the majority of people in the US work in the service industry? Because what else is there to do other than serve each other the things our machines make? We just need to close the loop and make all menial jobs automated. But, we also need to make all this technology available to the rest of the world.
I think what's happened is that over thousands of years, we've just grown so used to Authority, that it's difficult to imagine life without it.
Here's a few more examples:
Food in America is not hard to come by. I spent 2 years travelling the country on foot. I never once had to worry about getting something to eat, as there are numerous missions and churches serving food everywhere you go. There's no scarcity of food itself, but there is to an extent a scarcity of people willing to serve it.
Establishments serving food or drink are required by law to make it available to anyone who asks.
I just don't think people get that we've completely exceeded all basic material needs already. There's MORE stuff than we know what to do with, so we endlessly go through this cycle of creating ever novel and useless 'consumer' goods. Nothing wrong with that, but you'd think that by now, we would have at least moved the basic necessities of life to a level where they're available to all.
I'm not against competition. But we've come far enough, that there is NO REASON why people would ever need to compete over the BASIC NECESSITIES that sustain the human body.
By this, I'm talking about food, shelter, water, clothing.
These things are DIRT CHEAP, and most of it can be produced by machines.
We have socialized police force. We have socialized fire departments. We have socialized highway systems. We have socialized parks. We have socialized libraries. Why not food/clothing/shelter to provide what every human needs just to go on day after day, so they can focus on the things that people really want: new ideas, new innovations, etc.
The only reason I can see that we haven't done this, is because those in power know that keeping people on the edge of survival creates a certain kind of fear/tension that makes them easier to control. As in Maslow's hierarchy of needs. People who can do nothing but wonder every day where their next meal is going to come from have a harder time rising up against them. They are reduced to the level of animals, and can be herded around as such.
In general, I'm opposed to authority in any form, because as far as I can see, authority has never accomplished anything good, but opposing it has.
The sad thing I've realized, is that their is no logical way to IMPOSEW non-authority, so my only means towards this end is to practice it, tell others, and wait patiently.
A star trek like egalitarianism is possible, it's not that we don't have the technology or physical resources to do it, it's that the masses are still under the illusion that it's not possible yet, and those in power want to maintain that illusion.
So, break the illusion, if you're able. There's nothing else you can do.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 1:15 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Establishments serving food or drink are required by law to make it available to anyone who asks.
Should read:
Establishments serving food or drink are required by law to make water available to anyone who asks.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 1:28 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
So this is why I bring up the differences between R-strategists and K-strategists.
In times of scarcity, R-strategists (virus', rats, pond scums, fleas) will go into an explosive growth phase (this is what happened during the major plagues). They breed profusely and spread as far as they can to increase the odds that some of them will survive. They have major boom and bust cycles.
K-strategists (great cats, wolves, elephants, whales) INVEST heavily in each of their young, to EMPOWER the individual animal. There are fewer of them, but they have greater equilibrium with their environment and rarely compete with their own kind.
If we viewed all people in this manner, then we would want to invest in the potential of EVERY human. We wouldn't think of other humans, no matter what their status or accomplishments, as 'disposable'. Every one would get the NURTURING they need until they succeed.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 1:55 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
I guess my point is that I see all these social ills as directly traceable to the fact that people continue to believe that they need authority over them.
I need the police because without them YOU might sneak into my house to steal something (wait, why would you steal something from me if you already had everything you need????)
I need courts, and judges, and lawyers and prisons to deter all future generations from doing the same thing (wait: it doesn't seem like the crime rates actually go down with all these institutions, so I'm not really any safer).
It's been noted by a few people that the level of crime (the reason why we need all these 'protections' and 'securities') is proportional to the size and extent of the government.
Or, in other words, deterrence in the form of law enforcement doesn't actually work.
If you walk into the wrong neighborhood, you're still in danger, no matter how many police there are (who are all hanging out in the rich neighborhoods and business district anyway).
If someone, at random, decides they want to walk up behind you and shoot you, the cop 4 blocks away won't be able to get to you in time to stop him.
The fact that enforcement exists doesn't seem to actually deter any of these criminals, and poverty seems to increase it.
So what's the solution? Duh! Eliminate poverty. The savings in taxes alone makes it cost-efficient! Less prisons, less courts, less judges, less lawyers, less property damage! That should equate into less taxes.
For example.
New York and Honolulu have both done studies that show it costs the State LESS to permanently house the homeless than it does to leave them where they are.
Why?
Because they use the ER less.
Because they use the psych wards less (btw, I've probably spent 1/4 million dollars in your tax dollars in psych wards - over $1000/day per person - and far less than that could have been spent putting me in an apartment and getting me a good therpist, which would have kept me out of the psych ward - just saying I know from first hand experience the excess and waste we tolerate just to hang on to our 'cold shoulder' mentality that could be better spent actually PREVENTING the problem from arising in the first place).
Because they end up in jails less.
Because they don't get sick as often.
Taking care of poverty is, it turns out, is actually more COST EFFECTIVE to the tax payer than not.
It's math. The studies have been done, and it should be common sense. So you can see why I get disgusted with authority.
If you get rid of government and taxes, communites naturally do this on their own. THey self-organize this kind of stuff.
Being taxed to death makes it HARDER for communities to do this, which perpetuates poverty, which increases crime, which JUSTIFIES the need for more POLICE!!!!!
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 2:46 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
25 words Pan?
Okay, I guess I'm going to have to boil what you say down ... most of which I agree with BTW.
>What is scarce is time.
Yes, time is truly a scarce factor I didn't really think of. BUT, in a world where people like Dr. Michael West advance REGENERATIVE MEDICINE and STEM CELL CLONING, people will live longer and longer, thus time will be knocked out as a scarcity factor.
>Let's look at farming.
It takes less than 1% of the worlds population to produce more food than the world consumes. There is no shortage of actual food.
The multiplier effect of technology.
>So, in principle, we could feed everyone.
The world's population stands at 6.83 billion today and will grow to 9.15 billion by 2050 and then level off. Global economic output is expected to be 2 - 3 percent per year, meaning, if you do the math, global income will increase more quickly than population over the next 40 years.
>There's enough ...
Forget the planet, there's enough UNIVERSE to go around.
If technology is used to conquer this UNIVERSE, then there's enough TIME to go around too.
>However, because of the division of labor, some people feel that they are 'above' any kind of work whatsoever, and they become bankers and politicians and lawyers. Middle men and authoritarians. Kings.
Okay, here's where the rub comes in, the stratification of society. This rub prompts this question:
IS IT DESIRABLE TO DE-STRATIFY SOCIETY?
Stratification is cause NOT by just one (1) activity or event. People can work hard and serve their fellows and thus become kings or CEOs. Is that wrong? A person sitting at the top of the crane can often better see what has to be picked up than those on the ground. Is that wrong?
>In other words, people who have good ideas that benefit society are often absolved of the "lesser" tasks that others have to do,
It's called "facility differential" in Scientology. An executive that provides supervision and GETS THINGS DONE (the definition of an EXECUTIVE), deserves more facilities than the person that DOESN'T GET THINGS DONE. Since I now edit faster than I did 5 years ago (get more done), I deserve three or four editing suits, each with at least one assistant editor, don't I? I also need to have the AUTHORITY to tell the assistants what to do because they do not have the experience YET, to know what to do. In consideration (EXCHANGE) for them taking my orders, I give them something: money, training, screen credits, prestige, satisfaction of producing a quality product. What's wrong with that? My authority is only abusive if there is NO exchange.
When a BANKER creates money out of thin air and then spends this money in society, he is ABUSING society because he is demanding AUTHORITY over others but not giving them a REAL EXCHANGE.
Thus, your beef with AUTHORITY should not be against authorities that keep their EXCHANGE in, but with AUTHORITIES that do not.
o We pay taxes to the AUTHORITIES, but we never see real results or we have no accountability = ABUSE.
o We use the Federal Reserve's "money" but all we see is increased debt where certain AUTHORITIES are getting paid first and paid ALWAYS = abuse.
o We see infinite space out there yet we are still stuck on a planet fighting each other because some gov AUTHORITY tells us to go to war = abuse.
Your beef is with MAL-authority, not GOOD-authority.
Your beef is with BAD-control, not GOOD-control Pan.
I guarantee if you ever worked for me, you would never even feel any authority over you, only good positive guidance that you COULD call control. In fact, many years ago, I was so concerned about this very issue of abusive control and authority and the attendant insanity that surrounds it, I wrote a bunch of manuals and books on the subject of management as such pertains to the film industry (as that's the only field I know anything about). Ck out one of my books called MOVIE JOB DESCRIPTIONS at http://www.moviepubs.net It's the 4th book down under BOOKS.
I acknowledge your other good points below, too numerous to comment upon, but allow me to say this: I recently did almost exactly what you suggested and put in 40 hours over at HABITAT FOR HUMANITY. There I got to work with fellow citizens that were not as fortunate as I have been due to the luck of birth. As I was loading and unloading trucks all day, I couldn't help admiring what a wonderful attitude most of these people had and it made me really want to get back to the editing room and cut the best film I possibly could to help improve conditions in this country and around the world. Was I wrong to want to be sitting in a posh editing studio controlling equipment and assistances, rather than being down there on the loading dock moving used couches and washing machines?
James
P.S. Pan, I know that with money and power and authority it's easy to become abusive, and many do. By comparison, it's almost easy to be ethical when one is poor. But I have known people with great financial resources that HAVE wielded reasonably great authority with a very gentle and understanding way, so I KNOW it CAN be done. But, like anything else, it takes training. Often people are given power and authority at birth and they were not properly trained by their parents on how top handle it. I thus respect Warren Buffet for giving much of his estate back to society rather than his kids. If he trains his kids well, there is no reason they won't be able to earn just as much as their old man.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 3:46 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
25 words Pan?
Sorry :)
Yes, time is truly a scarce factor I didn't really think of. BUT, in a world where people like Dr. Michael West advance REGENERATIVE MEDICINE and STEM CELL CLONING, people will live longer and longer, thus time will be knocked out as a scarcity factor.
Yeah, it's not just lifespan that makes time scarce. It's how much you get per unit of time invested.
I find the saying 'There is no such thing as a free lunch' humorous. In fact, all life attempts to get the freest lunch possible. Plants work their entire lives to store energy so that other animals can eat those plants. The animals that eat those plants, to some degree are getting a 'free' lunch (they're not the ones doing all the work storing solar energy/nutrients), and then other animals eat those animals that store the free energy provided by the plants...and so on and so on. Life is a process of finding the freest lunch you can find. The freer your lunch, the more time you have to do other things. Leisure time in society produces art and innovation. Innovation makes lunch more free, so we can continue to innovate more free lunches. And create more art.
The world's population stands at 6.83 billion today and will grow to 9.15 billion by 2050 and then level off. Global economic output is expected to be 2 - 3 percent per year, meaning, if you do the math, global income will increase more quickly than population over the next 40 years.
Right, guess that depends on your views of the Singularity, but it doesn't hurt to plan ahead :)
Forget the planet, there's enough UNIVERSE to go around.
Yup. No lack of material. The division of wealth is really a division of labor which is really a division of time.
If technology is used to conquer this UNIVERSE, then there's enough TIME to go around too.
Although I cringe at your use of the word 'conquer', and disagree with the outcome (I believe we will soon become hyperdimensional, and/or connect to the interstellar/intergalactic hypernet???), in all other respects I agree with you: as long as we live in a 3D 'verse we would need to continue to expand indefinitely.
Okay, here's where the rub comes in, the stratification of society. This rub prompts this question:
IS IT DESIRABLE TO DE-STRATIFY SOCIETY?
I view leadership as a 'Do as I do, not as I say' paradigm. Successful leaders...well...LEAD. Meaning, if you view them as successful, and you like where they're going, then you follow.
Those who attempt to lead by 'Do as I say, not as I do' are doing exactly the opposite.
So I think your concept of 'good authority' or 'good control' corresponds with my concept of 'Lead by example, not by Authority'. By Authority, I specifically mean threats of coercion and force and fraud. A true leader doesn't need these things, because the value of her 'direction' is apparent and self-evident. 'Bad' leaders must use glibness, lying, and violence to back up their claims.
Stratification is cause NOT by just one (1) activity or event. People can work hard and serve their fellows and thus become kings or CEOs. Is that wrong? A person sitting at the top of the crane can often better see what has to be picked up than those on the ground. Is that wrong?
See above. I follow those whom I respect, and I do not respect those who use externalized force or coercion to achieve their ends.
For historians, the matter of how we developed this system of Kings is interesting. For me, as a practical matter, I see all Law as 'suggestions'. In other words, all law should be reformulated as 'It's not the Law, it's just a Good Idea!' Leaders should be able to demonstrate their leadership through practice and logical reasoning, not by their charisma or 'glibness'.
It's called "facility differential" in Scientology. An executive that provides supervision and GETS THINGS DONE (the definition of an EXECUTIVE), deserves more facilities than the person that DOESN'T GET THINGS DONE. Since I now edit faster than I did 5 years ago (get more done), I deserve three or four editing suits, each with at least one assistant editor, don't I? I also need to have the AUTHORITY to tell the assistants what to do because they do not have the experience YET, to know what to do. In consideration (EXCHANGE) for them taking my orders, I give them something: money, training, screen credits, prestige, satisfaction of producing a quality product. What's wrong with that? My authority is only abusive if there is NO exchange.
Yes. I'm not suggesting a leveling or equalization that would destroy the idea of a meritocracy. I'm merely trying to point out that those who are at the top right now do very little of value, but have somehow convinced the majority that they do do something of value. They are parasites in the extreme.
Ideally, everyone should be free to value their work as they choose, and others likewise can agree or disagree with that valuation. Free exchange, unmediated by outside authority. Or in other words, truly free markets.
But again, see what I mean by real leadership above. If you're good at what you do, and I need to take instruction from you, that's the natural order of things.
The kind of authority I mean (and the operating definition I use whenever I use the word 'authority') is when you threaten or coerce me in any way to adopt or follow your practices. Authority is an action that robs someone of Autonomy.
When a BANKER creates money out of thin air and then spends this money in society, he is ABUSING society because he is demanding AUTHORITY over others but not giving them a REAL EXCHANGE.
never particularly liked banking, but especially fractional reserve and centralized banks.
Thus, your beef with AUTHORITY should not be against authorities that keep their EXCHANGE in, but with AUTHORITIES that do not.
See above :)
o We pay taxes to the AUTHORITIES, but we never see real results or we have no accountability = ABUSE.
Taxes are an entirely unholy affair. They should be suggested donations, kept accounted of in real time, and thoroughly audited every month. There are too many shell games going on. Most tax money doesn't actually get spent on public projects. I suggest 'voluntary taxation' (if we're to have any form whatsoever) that is 100% transparent, and every cent is tracked and made publicly available in real time via the web.
o We use the Federal Reserve's "money" but all we see is increased debt where certain AUTHORITIES are getting paid first and paid ALWAYS = abuse.
The Federal Reserve is the Fourth Reich.
o We see infinite space out there yet we are still stuck on a planet fighting each other because some gov AUTHORITY tells us to go to war = abuse.
They want to keep us stuck on the planet of the Apes.
And yes, in the eventuality that we don't actually go 'hyperspatial' at Singularity time, then I agree it would be cool to swing by Iapetus, and possibly further on my way out of this solar system.
Your beef is with MAL-authority, not GOOD-authority.
See above definition of Authority.
I guarantee if you ever worked for me, you would never even feel any authority over you, only good positive guidance that you COULD call control.
Are you offering me a job?
My current plans are to go to Honolulu in March, where I will not freeze to death, and begin to build things up until I get to the point where I can involved in virtualization (a booming industry - already up to a billion/year already). But I'm flexible and free form.
When it comes to work, I'm actually a workaholic, and tend to burn myself out quickly. I throw every cell of my being into what I do, but tend to overextend myself and 'crash'. Not good at self-regulation. My only stipulations are that I need residency, and if you don't fire me, I won't quit.
In fact, many years ago, I was so concerned about this very issue of abusive control and authority and the attendant insanity that surrounds it, I wrote a bunch of manuals and books on the subject of management as such pertains to the film industry (as that's the only field I know anything about). Ck out one of my books called MOVIE JOB DESCRIPTIONS at http://www.moviepubs.net It's the 4th book down under BOOKS.
I'll check that out today.
My suggestion about taking in a poor person and filming it, was the idea of tying together your love of documentaries (which are crucial for exposing the public) and actually causing real change at the same time.
Like the series '30 Days', but applied to providing homeless people with housing, skill training, etc.
I acknowledge your other good points below, too numerous to comment upon, but allow me to say this: I recently did almost exactly what you suggested and put in 40 hours over at HABITAT FOR HUMANITY.
That's awesome. They are great. Three huzzahs, and keep it up!
There I got to work with fellow citizens that were not as fortunate as I have been due to the luck of birth. As I was loading and unloading trucks all day, I couldn't help admiring what a wonderful attitude most of these people had and it made me really want to get back to the editing room and cut the best film I possibly could to help improve conditions in this country and around the world. Was I wrong to want to be sitting in a posh editing studio controlling equipment and assistances, rather than being down there on the loading dock moving used couches and washing machines?
Not at all, lol. That's why I suggested you do the thing with the homeless person and make a DOCUMENTRARY about it. That is your talent, so I thought of fusing the two together. You get the practice and experience of working directly with someone, you get to make your documentary, and if it does well (and I think it REALLY would do well) you would make money, and inspire change all over the country.
That's why I think of it as a 'positive sum' venture.
James
P.S. Pan, I know that with money and power and authority it's easy to become abusive, and many do. By comparison, it's almost easy to be ethical when one is poor. But I have known people with great financial resources that HAVE wielded reasonably great authority with a very gentle and understanding way, so I KNOW it CAN be done. But, like anything else, it takes training. Often people are given power and authority at birth and they were not properly trained by their parents on how top handle it. I thus respect Warren Buffet for giving much of his estate back to society rather than his kids. If he trains his kids well, there is no reason they won't be able to earn just as much as their old man.
Yup, again review my definition of authority and leadership above.
Good leaders are self-evident because they do NOT demand, they do NOT threaten, they do NOT coerce, lie, or cheat.
Ron Paul may be the only politician I know of that comes close to fitting that description, I respect the man a lot, although I wouldn't vote for him ONLY because I'm principally opposed to the process of voting itself. If I had the opportunity, I would probably support him in other ways, such as donating time. He's a very, very intelligent person, and crazy as hell to be setting himself against the Fed :)
kallisti
Pan
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 5:06 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>I'm merely trying to point out that those who are at the top right now do very little of value, but have somehow convinced the majority that they do do something of value. They are parasites in the extreme.
Well they're looking for THEIR free lunch.
That said, I no longer have any problem with your views on authority. Except in instances like bringing up children, amongst free adults, leadership authority IS best served by do as I do, not as I say. Leadership by example, I agree is the best, and it's unfortunate that so many in government and business are there because they're looking for a "free lunch" on the backs of everyone else. These are despicable and the system that breeds them must be altered.
As far as my next movie, I don't think I want to do any more with politics unless by some fluk ORIGINAL INTENT does well (and I seriously doubt it will do as well as FIAT EMPIRE). I may do a doc with Dr. West based on his book, THE IMMORTAL CELL.
Jame
P.S. I put the first half of ORIGINAL INTENT up on the net for free. If you have interest, you can see the various chapters by going to YOUTUBE and typing in ORIGINAL INTENT from "OriginalIntentDoc"
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 5:25 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
That said, I no longer have any problem with your views on authority. Except in instances like bringing up children
It's interesting that you should bring that up, because I think I have found an answer.
Parents (ideally - don't want to get into the good/bad parent thing) purposefully seek to create independence in their children. This is the entire process of 'raising' a child. They only exercise authority through the developmental stages of a child's life as it's necessary to instill that same sense of order in the child so that the child will ultimately become independent of the parent's authority. They never seek to prolong it past it's necessity.
Government is like the parent that never lets go. Which brings us full circle to what we were talking about concerning the duration of government.
If, like a parent, governments were designed with the principle in them that their function was to make society independent over some period of time (and this would need to be explicitly stated in the "Constitution" that this was the PRIMARY goal), then we could have a meaningful dialog about what level and type and so on of government was necessary to effectuate this goal.
Our current forms of government do not make it clear to people that they need to be WORKING towards this end. The common wisdom is that we'll always need government, because we'll always fear our neighbors, so we'll always be dependent on government for *something*.
Were it possible to instantiate such a government, I could probably get behind it. We would need a philosopher king (? somewhat jokingly ?)
So, a good government, like a good parent, seeks to NURTURE independence from itself.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 6:31 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Parents (ideally - don't want to get into the good/bad parent thing) purposefully seek to create independence in their children. This is the entire process of 'raising' a child. They only exercise authority through the developmental stages of a child's life as it's necessary to instill that same sense of order in the child so that the child will ultimately become independent of the parent's authority. They never seek to prolong it past it's necessity.
Government is like the parent that never lets go. Which brings us full circle to what we were talking about concerning the duration of government.
If, like a parent, governments were designed with the principle in them that their function was to make society independent over some period of time (and this would need to be explicitly stated in the "Constitution" that this was the PRIMARY goal), then we could have a meaningful dialog about what level and type and so on of government was necessary to effectuate this goal.
Our current forms of government do not make it clear to people that they need to be WORKING towards this end. The common wisdom is that we'll always need government, because we'll always fear our neighbors, so we'll always be dependent on government for *something*.
Were it possible to instantiate such a government, I could probably get behind it. We would need a philosopher king (? somewhat jokingly ?)
So, a good government, like a good parent, seeks to NURTURE independence from itself.
Pan I think you have nailed this perfectly. You ARE a genius (and would probably be an excellent Dad, if ever there could be a woman born that could "handle" you).
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 8:05 AM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
I miss the old corner barbershops, where men used to gather and talk politics and business.
The idea of scarcity came up, and one old farmer dispensed old wisdom. He said "If you want to make money on anything, convince people it's scarce".
I was about 13 at the time, but that stuck in my mind as my first economics lesson.
Our present fiat system of money creates scarcity by making money scarce. Because mony is "borrowed" into existence at a rate of interest, and the interest itself is never created to help repay the loan, no matter how much money floats around, no matter how prices are driven into inflationary frenzy by excessive money creation, there is never quite enough.
If you think about it, simply raising interest rates to drive prices down, slow inflation, and preserve a strong economy, in those times when businesses are operating on bare profits at the present rate of interest, a rise in interest rates will drive those businesses right out of operation, along with employees who need the jobs, in an economy marked by the scarcity of money even in an inflationary economy!
It is not scarcity of goods, or high taxes, or scarcity of productivity. It is a deliberate scarcity of money created to force people into dependency on the government, on its laws, on its redistribution.
When we see a president, such as GW Bush, spending easy printing press money for "guns and butter" at the same time, you know there will follow a period where the people will seek more government regulation, more controls, more tax funded care to "protect" the people from what big business/big government caused in the first place!
LBJ did it, and it took years to recover. Did we learn? Obviously not, since republicans stood behind "W" while he outspent even LBJ and became the new poster boy for government excess.
When the government spends a lot of money it doesn;t have and never had in order to be "compassionate", always remember, that compassion is merely lubricant for the grand sex they'll have with you later.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 11:53 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Exaptly.
@James:
If you really want to change the world for the better, start at the bottom. Go help someone find a better way to live. That's how it's always done.
You like making documentaries. I think doc's and films are really good, but I also know that their's an element of self-interest involved. You want to make a name for yourself, and possibly make some money too (I bring this up because I have an idea for you later). Michael Moore. Alex Jones. Merchandise. Films. Waitaminute.....why not actually go out and change someone's life?
Everyone's got their pet idea on how to "fix" the government (hell, the government is FULL of people who have an idea on how to "fix" government - and look where that's got us). Problem is, they always want to fix things at the top and not at the bottom. Start at the bottom.
Befriend a homeless person.
Visit a lonely senior.
Etc.....
Here's my idea: make a documentary based on how you invite one homeless person into your home, clean them up, take them under your wing, mentor them, get them help.....whatever.....be that old chinese master who whips someone into a killing machine, then sets them loose on the world. And film it.
It would be an instant hit (better than Supersize Me/30 Days), you'd probably become a sensation, make lots of money off it.....and best of all.... you'd have helped one person AND inspired people everywhere to do the same.....how much you wanna bet you'd see people imitating your actions all over the country......utilize media to convince people it's "hip" to do things like this......and BAM!!!
See, everyone wins.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 1:35 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Ah yes, "My Fair Lady"!
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 2:49 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Our present fiat system of money creates scarcity by making money scarce. Because mony is "borrowed" into existence at a rate of interest, and the interest itself is never created to help repay the loan, no matter how much money floats around, no matter how prices are driven into inflationary frenzy by excessive money creation, there is never quite enough.
This is exactly right. The current monetary system is such joke it's amazing people haven't revolted. But be patient ... they will. See http://www.mecfilms.com/mid/movies/oi/federal.wmv
Also, I put many clips of ORIGINAL INTENT up on the net for free last night. Just go to YOUTUBE and search for "ORIGINAL INTENT."
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/24/2009 10:27 AM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Pan, your questions and issues were all debated in "The Federalist". Actually not debated, but simply put out as an excuse for federal power.
The argument by Hamilton, I believe, was that there is no way a state militia can be overcome by any federal army, since there is no federal army allowed for more than two years, and all such armies are to be drawen from the milita under Article 1,Section 8.
Madison further argued that there was no way a civil war could occur in such an arrangement because the structure of the Constitution would prevent it... ROFLMAO!
The Supreme Court has no "incorporated" the 2nd amendment under the 14th, because of the wording of the 2nd amendment.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state...."
The 14th deals with individual privileges and immunities which has, from Magna Carta, been considered the province of "persons" apart from any type of collective government.
To incorporate the 2nd, it would necessarily mean:
"A well regulated individual being necessary for the security of a free individual, the right of every individual to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
IOW, the 2nd amendment would be "incorporated" against both state and federal government, meaning the elimination of police power by the force of arms.
But then, who would "well regulate" an individual, since he now has the right to keep and bear arms for defense against both state and federal governments?
You could legally shoot any law officer! (Which doesn't really bother me a lot).
A "well regulated militia' is as much an aspect of police power as of defense against encroachment. That is most likely why Art.1, Sect.8 of the Constitution left final discipline to the federal government, just in case militas formed in opposition to the state.
When you get right down to it, the Constitution has so many holes that have failed to prevent increasing power that we should simply ignore the whole damn thing.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/24/2009 12:24 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
When you get right down to it, the Constitution has so many holes that have failed to prevent increasing power that we should simply ignore the whole damn thing.
Cheers!
Of course, I'm once again trying to show how *any* hierarchical organization structure leads to corruption and potential for abuse.
But ya'll already know my stance on that, so I'm trying to point out flaws in people's solutions towards organized government.
In this case, it seems to be just a matter of shuffling from one scale of organization to another, but the inherent problem of authority over others remains.
You can secrete nacre around that irritant for all eternity, and end up with some pretty looking pearls....but in the end it's still built around an irritant.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/24/2009 12:28 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
The best reason for this is shown by Eric Hoffer in "The True Believer". he points out that it is the power to organize in itself that leads to corruption, because in order to organize for any reason, you must be "estranged from you self".
If my life means less to me in exchange for the "greater good", your life means squat. Resistance is futile. Mobocracy.
[Reply] [Parent]
Limit vs. Eliminate?
posted on 12/26/2009 7:09 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>When you get right down to it, the Constitution has so many holes that have failed to prevent increasing power that we should simply ignore the whole damn thing.
Well as I said to Edwin the other day, maybe the problem with the Constitution is that it seeks to LIMIT the government, when it should have sought to E-LIMIT (eliminate) the government over time.
As desirable as a planned-obsolescence re-write would/may have been, I don't think it would have flown in 1776 society. So here we are in 2009 society and somehow the old-boys' nation HAS somehow held together, against the odds of 10,000 years of impinging oligarchies. Maybe we should all recognize this unbelievable accomplishment and, before totalitarianism closes the doors forever, maybe we should DO SOMETHING to AMEND the Constitution so all these "imperfections" are handled.
YOU KNOW, THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION DOES ALLOW FOR AMENDMENTS WHEN THERE ARE FUCKING COMPLAINERS OUT THERE. WHY DON'T THE FUCKING COMPLAINERS AMEND IT INSTEAD OF TRYING TO THROW THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER???
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Gov vs. OT
posted on 12/24/2009 3:47 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>would arise much in the same way cellular automata ...
Yes, agreed on this. Problem may be what one could term, the "contagion of aberration" or the "contagion of insanity" that humans experience. Just like physical diseases, all humans are aberrated (crazy) to a greater or lesser degree and this aberration is contagious. I guess these are what we call memes. So if you try to evolve a civilization from the ground up -- one that will need no external government -- as a cellular automata, you will be starting with aberrated cells and these will generate just another insane civilization, like the one we live in. The only way I can see a non-insane civilization emerging would be if such automata were set up in quarantine from the rest of "civilization." But in order to avoid the "lord of the flies" syndrome you would somehow have to have "parent" the kids. Thus the problem would become how to "parent" the kids without introducing the normal aberrations all adults have (such as "government is good and needed," "people are born sinful", "only thing you can count on are death and taxes."
Such parents would have to be there and only GUIDE the children but not interact with them in such a way as to pass on their aberrations.
If a crop of in infestment-free kids could be raised, free of violence and insanity and perversion, etc. of "modern" society, then this first crop could be programmed with an INTERNAL system of ethics, OR it might automatically have such. If this new human culture was able to grow and establish itself, it might, just might be able to evolve WITHOUT external ethics, i.e. government. Such a society could be the human nexus and not AI.
Probably the reason Earth is in heavy quarantine (Fermi paradox) is because the beings that are farming us are running this same, or a similar, experiment. The Earth experiment is probably an experiment that has gone wrong, and they may have discarded us.
I have never come across an experiment such as the one I propose. Govs, religions and society would probably ban such an experiment, because it could succeed. Nothing worse than having something out there verify that you're insane. Same reason no one talks about (possible) IQ variances amongst races. Made very taboo by Hitler and all his eugenics boys.
Scientology has been running an interesting experiment of planetary de-aberration since about 1955. They call their state of de-aberration, "clear". Clears still operate in standard society, although at a minimum, as they are encouraged to operate with other Scientologists over "wogs." I have experienced this and it is true, you DO get a lot more work done, much faster, working with non-aberrated crews over wogs. But as to whether they will accomplish their mission of "clearing this planet" I have no idea. They may, even in spite of all the memes about them to the contrary. I even agree with many of these memes. But from their POV, wogs are just insane and tortured beings ranting out of ignorance and overts. I can't say they're totally wrong, but how wrong? Either way they have an uphill battle as its almost impossible to breed new beings-planet wide when the contagion of aberration-factor is so prevalent. They DO try to practice disconnection policies, but many times that meets with fury and law suits by the uninformed/informed public. When Paul left the COS and wrote his membership renouncement letter, he cited one of his reasons, disconnection. COS says they don't practice disconnection (any more) but Paul says his wife had to disconnect from her parents just last year. Who knows if they are running the correct experiment. Certainly the scientific community, the APA and the WFMH are clueless, as none of them have even BEGUN to think about any of this stuff. Should they?
Perhaps the easiest way to set up a new civilization, where government wasn't needed, would be to create AI parents, parents that could raise kids without instilling the typical human aberrations into them.
What all of this cones down to is the age-old question: what is the nature of Man? Is Man good or evil? Is he both? Are all people different? If so, why? These questions MUST be answered otherwise there will never be any hope of engineering a stateless civilization.
I have of course, like all Scientologists and ex-Scientologists, been consumed over the question of external ethics (Government) vs. internal ethics (Operating Thetan) since at least 1974.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Gov vs. OT
posted on 12/25/2009 9:20 AM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
External ethics or external religion or external government is merely the mechanical application to a moral idea, a necessary finite limitation by which individuals are judged, developng a homogenized concept of government. Like the idea "One nation under God', or "In God We Trust", or "God bless America", which actually tells us nothing at all, except the notion that we somehow are collectively represented by God in a process that none of us ever underastands, but are conditioned to die for.
It's the old "estrangement from self" that Hoffer writes about in "True Believer".
Upload into a machine? Mechanical estrangement from self. Cloning? Estrangement from self. Collective religion? Estrangement from self.
Government? Estrangement from self.
Remember the old Star trek movie where Spock;s brother was able to touch people and absolve them of all past guilts, making them serve him because he gave them happiness?
Kirk refused because he said that all his experiences and guilts, all the pain he experienced made him who he was, and he accepted that.
All of us are "sinners" to the extent that we screw up. Can't be avoided. Accept it, get on with it, deal with it.
I am not rules or laws or governments or religions. I cannot be defined because I will never be reduced to such ideas, and I'm damn happy with that.
[Reply] [Parent]
Even God Gets to Sin
posted on 12/26/2009 6:53 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>All of us are "sinners" to the extent that we screw up. Can't be avoided. Accept it, get on with it, deal with it.
The question:
1. Are we all sinners?
and the question:
2. Is Man basically good or bad?
... are two (2) entirely DIFFERENT questions, two questions endlessly confused.
Just because we have all "sinned" (screwed up) does not make us BASICALLY bad. And who is it that has the gall to determine that ANYTHING is a "screw up" in the first place? Even the (accidental) extermination of an entire planet is only a "screw up" in some being, or group of beings, minds as they "judge" the situation, FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE(S).
So the idea that we are sinners is completely relative to the judging party, authority, religion, government or asshole.
That said, even though Man "screws up" (sins) according to the JUDGMENT of others (such self-appointed to judge at the most), does NOT mean that Man is NOT basically good, as:
IT MAY BE GOOD THAT MAN SCREWS UP OR SINS.
Maybe the Universe and/or God WANTS planets DESTROYED from time to time. Maybe GOD or the UNIVERSE or WHAT THE FUCK EVER wants Man to screw up and totally sin the shit out of everyone and everything.
MAYBE GOD HAS BAD MOODS AND HE ENJOYS SINNING HIMSELF, VIA HIS HUMAN AGENTS -- MANKIND.
THUS, Man is basically GOOD, for whatever he does, there is absolutely NO proof that he's bad or sinning or screwing up because IF he exists, THEN he MUST be good, otherwise he would not exist.
Thus the question: IS EXISTENCE GOOD OR BAD is the exact same question as IS THE EXISTENCE OF MAN GOOD OR BAD.
If you think EXISTENCE is good, then you are REQUIRED to think that MAN IS GOOD, or you're just another brain-washed idiot who thinks God or ther Universe cannot be you.
James Jaeger
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Even God Gets to Sin
posted on 12/28/2009 5:53 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Man is neither good nor bad. Man is. To the extent that man has a mind, he also has limitations on that mind in the form of Godel's theorem, which makes him subject to undecidable propositions from now on, which seems to be good, since no one can claim authority.
If competition and struggle are the forces that bring ous "higher'(which they are not), then we have very little to look forward to.
The fact is, God does not compute. If God di compute, then we could reduce God to a framework of algorithms and eliminate human life altogether. It would not be necessary.
God lies outside the rules because man;s mind cannot be limited to the rules.
Simple stuff.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/28/2009 7:03 PM by gawell
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
no (militia) defined as a miss communication in a vacuum"
know, known, unknown, hidden, steaming, percolating, coming to a boil,unknownable until revealed.
in some cases some parents suspect (pay attention when concerned) and aren't listened to either.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 2:13 AM by knowledge
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
well spoken Mr. Jeager
As an American I am one of and part of the common people, with a basic relationship to a nation of diversity governed for and by the people ourselves, that allows, holds, and supports the premise that individualism and the individual expression of our very lives is of paramount importance to evolution.
In so saying this it can be argued that we the people calling ourselves a free people have created a nation of outrageous diversity where the extremes of right and left stretch into forever. This leads me to consider the possibility that the founding principles of our nation were created to form a stable structure in which we the people can experience our ultimate individual expression of life.
It is interesting to note that the ‘Bill of Rights’ was not originally in our Constitution as framed by the founding members of our society. But when the Constitution was given to the states and the people of those states to ratify- the people themselves argued for stronger protection of individualism within the framework of the constitution itself, thus producing within the structure of the constitution, the protection and diversity of individual expression.
Individualism is not nor should it ever be construed as an act of separation, but a rejoicing of the spirit that allows for each of us to make known unknown potentials in our life, to dream, to create, to experience life in all of its glory. It is this act of the individual that is the prize and the goal of our constitution. That maybe we as a people need to be reminded of this truth.
It seems today that extremism is frowned upon by many people as an act of unconscionable terrorism as they look to their government to provide security as a child would look to a parent. Yet it seems to me that strong willed children never look for security, but look for the adventure in life and push the mind to new limits of imagination by daring in innocence to dream and then experience those dreams as each day unfolds, thus a world of diversity is not a static world but alive and full.
When my youngest son was entering his early teen years I gave him a small book, and in the cover of this book I inscribed the words- “Read this it is your road map to freedom†. Than one day I took that small book and read it myself, that book was a copy of the Constitution of the United States of America!
Today I have watched our country rebuke diversity of thought and beg for security at the expense of individual freedoms.
I have watched as fear has frozen our minds and allowed the unthinkable to happen, a country divided on political party lines, where political parties take our people to court to suppress the rights of the individual to choose. (No parties mentioned in my son’s little book, wherever did they come from?)
I have watched in bewilderment a great nation turn inward and ignorant.
I have watched the suppression of the press to the point that today there really is no news only opinion.
This I believe, that we the common people must come together as a collective and remind ourselves of just what our country is about, without the constraints of secularism in a non-partisan environment.
This I believe, that our constitution is meant to recreate itself in the Image of stewardship, for and by the people it governs.
Lets take another look at George-
Could it be possible that George B was a part of a greater plan to wake up the American people and the world to what can happen when we as individuals do not stand up for basic human rights, when we do not educate ourselves and seek knowledge?
It saddens me to say that I am finding Obama and the Democrats spineless in making decisions that truly serve the people. Will another revolution be necessary?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 12:13 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Thanks Knowledge. Good points.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/26/2009 7:14 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
My overarching philosophy on the items of SOME POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS is basically:
HOW CAN WE BUILD A SOCIETY WITHOUT SCARCITY, INSANITY, WASTE OR THE CONFLICT OF WAR, WHERE ALL INDIVIDUALS ARE FREE TO CONTRIBUTE THEIR UNIQUE ABILITIES AND PROSPER, WHERE ALL BEINGS ARE FREE AND ABLE TO EXPLORE AND EXPERIENCE LIFE TO THE FULLEST, AND WHERE THE EMERGENT PROPERTY OF HUMAN ACTIVITY RESULTS IN A CLASS III CIVILIZATION THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE SURVIVAL AND GLORY OF THE UNIVERSE IN SOME LARGE OR SMALL WAY?
James Jaeger
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/28/2009 3:59 PM by mekanikalmekka
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Info for you James and Pan:
You should find this quite interesting.
Inside the Military-Industrial-Media Complex: Impacts on Movement for Social Justice
Sunday 27 December 2009
by: Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed
**************
This article has been previously published at Media Freedom Intl.
Among the most important corporate media censored news stories of the past decade, one must be that over one million people have died because of the United States military invasion and occupation of Iraq. This, of course, does not include the number of deaths from the first Gulf War nor the ensuing sanctions placed upon the country of Iraq that, combined, caused close to an additional one million Iraqi deaths. In the Iraq War, which began in March of 2003, over a million people have died violently primarily from US bombings and neighborhood patrols. These were deaths in excess of the normal civilian death rate under the prior government. Among US military leaders and policy elites, the issue of counting the dead was dismissed before the Iraqi invasion even began. In an interview with reporters in late March of 2002 US General Tommy Franks stated, “You know we don’t do body counts.”[i] Fortunately, for those concerned about humanitarian costs of war and empire, others do.
In a January 2008 report, the British polling group Opinion Research Business (ORB) reported that, “survey work confirms our earlier estimate that over 1,000,000 Iraqi citizens have died as a result of the conflict which started in 2003. We now estimate that the death toll between March 2003 and August 2007 is likely to have been of the order of 1,033,000. If one takes into account the margin of error associated with survey data of this nature then the estimated range is between 946,000 and 1,120,000.”[ii]
The ORB report came on the heels of two earlier studies conducted by Dr. Les Roberts and colleagues at Johns Hopkins University and published in the Lancet medical journal. The first study done from January 1, 2002 to March 18, 2003 confirmed civilian deaths at that time at over 100,000. The second study published in October 2006 documented over 650,000 civilian deaths in Iraq since the start of the US invasion and confirmed that US aerial bombing in civilian neighborhoods caused over a third of these deaths. Over half the deaths were directly attributable to US forces. The now estimated 1.2 million dead six years into the war/occupation, included children, parents, grandparents, cab drivers, clerics and schoolteachers. All manner of ordinary Iraqis have died because the United States decided to invade their country under false pretences of undiscovered weapons of mass destruction and in violation of international law. An additional four to five million Iraqi refugees have fled their homes. The magnitude of these million-plus deaths and creation of such a vast refugee crisis is undeniable. The continuing occupation by US forces has guaranteed a monthly mass death rate of thousands of people a carnage that ranks among the most heinous mass killings in world history. More tons of bombs have been dropped in Iraq than in all of World War II.[iii] Six years later the casualties continue but the story, barely reported from the start, has vanished.
The American people face a serious moral dilemma. Murder and war crimes have been conducted in their name. Yet most Americans have no idea of the magnitude of deaths and tend to believe that they number in the thousands and are primarily Iraqis killing Iraqis. Corporate mainstream media are in large part to blame. The question then becomes how can this mass ignorance and corporate media deception exist in the United States and what impact does this have on peace and social justice movements in the country?[iv]
Truth Emergency and Media Reform
In the United States today, the rift between reality and reporting has peaked. There is no longer a mere credibility gap, but rather a literal Truth Emergency in which the most important information affecting people is concealed from view. Many Americans, relying on the mainstream corporate media, have serious difficulty accessing the truth while still believing that the information they receive is the reality. A Truth Emergency reflects cumulative failures of the fourth estate to act as a truly free press. This truth emergency is seen in inadequate coverage of fraudulent elections, pseudo 9/11 investigations, illegal preemptive wars, torture camps, doctored intelligence, and domestic surveillance. Reliable information on these issues is systematically missing in corporate media outlets, where the vast majority of the American people continue to turn for news and information.
Consider these items of noteworthy conditions. US workers have been faced with a thirty-five year decline in real wages while the top few percent enjoy unparalleled wealth with strikingly low tax burdens. US schools, particularly in the west, are more segregated now than half a century ago. The US has the highest infant mortality rate among industrialized nations, is falling behind in scientific research and education, leads the world as a debtor nation, and is seriously lacking in healthcare quality and coverage, which results in the deaths of 18,000 people a year. America has entered another Gilded Age. Someone should the media.[v]
The Free Press or Media Reform Movement is a national effort to address mainstream media failures and the government policies that sanction them. During the 2008 National Conference for Media Reform (NCMR) in Minneapolis, Project Censored interns and faculty conducted a survey, completed by 376 randomly selected NCMR attendees out of the 3,500 people registered for the conference. This survey was designed to gauge participants’ views on the state of the corporate news media and the effectiveness of the media reform movement. The survey also sought to determine the level of belief in a truth emergency, a systematic hiding of critical information in the US. Not surprisingly, for a sample of independent media reform activists, majorities in the 90% plus range agreed on most criticisms of mainstream media, that corporate media failed to keep the American people informed on important issues facing the nation and that a truth emergency does indeed exist in the US. Regarding the reasons, 87% of the participants believed that a military-industrial-media complex exists in the US for the promotion of the US military domination of the world and most agreed with research conclusions by Project Censored, and others, that a continuing powerful global dominance group inside the US government, the US media, and the national policy structure is responsible. What was clear from our survey is that media democracy activists strongly support not only aggressive reform efforts and policy changes but also the continuing development of independent, grassroots media as part of an overall media democracy movement.
While most progressive media activists do not believe in some omnipotent conspiracy, an overwhelming portion of NCMR participants do believe the leadership class in the US is dominated by a neo-conservative group of some several hundred people who share a goal of asserting US military power worldwide. This Global Dominance Group (GDM) continues under both Republican and Democratic rule. In cooperation with major military contractors, the corporate media, and conservative foundations, the GDM has become a powerful long-term force in military unilateralism and US political processes.
The Global Dominance Group and Information Control
A long thread of sociological research documents the existence of a dominant ruling class in the US, which sets policy and determines national political priorities. C. Wright Mills, in his 1956 book The Power Elite, documented how World War II solidified a trinity of power in the US that comprised corporate, military and government elites in a centralized power structure working in unison through “higher circles” of contact and agreement.[vi] This power has grown through the Cold War and, after 9/11, the Global War on Terror.
At present, the global dominance agenda includes penetration into the boardrooms of the corporate media in the US. Only 118 people comprise the membership on the boards of director of the ten big media giants. These 118 individuals in turn sit on the corporate boards of 288 national and international corporations. Four of the top 10 media corporations share board director positions with the major defense contractors including:
William Kennard: New York Times, Carlyle Group
Douglas Warner III, GE (NBC), Bechtel
John Bryson: Disney (ABC), Boeing
Alwyn Lewis: Disney (ABC), Halliburton
Douglas McCorkindale: Gannett, Lockheed-Martin.
Given an interlocked media network of connections with defense and other economic sectors, big media in the United States effectively represent the interests of corporate America. Media critic and historian Norman Solomon described the close financial and social links between the boards of large media-related corporations and Washington’s foreign-policy establishment: “One way or another, a military-industrial complex now extends to much of corporate media.”[vii] The Homeland Security Act Title II Section 201(d)(5) provides an example of the interlocked military-industrial-media complex. This Act specifically asks the directorate to “develop a comprehensive plan for securing the key resources and critical infrastructure of the United States including information technology and telecommunications systems (including satellites) emergency preparedness communications systems.”
The media elite, a key component of the Higher Circle Policy Elite in the US, are the watchdogs of acceptable ideological messages, the controllers of news and information content, and the decision makers regarding media resources. Their goal is to create symbiotic global news distribution in a deliberate attempt to control the news and information available to society. The two most prominent methods used to accomplish this task are censorship and propaganda.
Sometimes the sensationalist and narrow media coverage of news is blamed upon the need to meet a low level of public taste and thereby capture the eyes of a sufficient market to lure advertisers and to make a profit. But another goal of cornering the marketplace on what news and views will be aired is also prominent. Billionaire Rupert Murdoch loses $50 million a year on the NY Post, billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife loses $2 to $3 million a year on the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, billionaire Philip Anschutz loses around $5 million a year on The Weekly Standard, and billionaire Sun Myung Moon has lost $2 to $3 billion on The Washington Times. The losses in supporting conservative media are part of a strategy of ideological control. They also buy bulk quantities of ultra-conservative books bringing them to the top of the NY Times bestseller list and then give away copies to “subscribers” to their websites and publications. They fund conservative “think tanks” like Heritage and Cato with hundreds of millions of dollars a year. All this buys them respectability and a megaphone. Even though William Kristol’s publication, the Standard, is a money-loser, his association with it has often gotten him on TV talk shows and a column with The New York Times. Sponsorships of groups like Grover Norquist’s anti-tax “Americans for Tax Reform” regularly get people like him front-and-center in any debate on taxation in the United States. This has contributed to extensive tax cuts for the wealthy and the most unfair tax laws of any industrialized country – all found acceptable by a public relying upon sound-bites about the dangers of ‘big government.’ Hence media corporation officials and others in the health care, energy and weapons industries remain wealthier than ordinary people can imagine. Their expenditures for molding opinion are better understood as investments in a conservative public ideology[viii]
Modern Media Censorship and Propaganda
A broader definition of contemporary censorship needs to include any interference, deliberate or not, with the free flow of vital news information to the public. Modern censorship can be seen as the subtle yet constant and sophisticated manipulation of reality in our mass media outlets. On a daily basis, censorship refers to the intentional non-inclusion of a news story – or piece of a news story – based on anything other than a desire to tell the truth. Such manipulation can take the form of political pressure (from government officials and powerful individuals), economic pressure (from advertisers and funders), and legal pressure (the threat of lawsuits from deep-pocket individuals, corporations, and institutions). or threats to reduce future access to governmental and corporate sources of news. Following are a few examples of censorship and propaganda.
1. Omitted or Undercovered Stories- The failure of the corporate media to cover human consequences, like one million , mostly civilian deaths of Iraqis, reduces public response to the wars being conducted by the US. Even when activists do mobilize, the media coverage of anti-war demonstrations has been negligible and denigrating from the start. When journalists of the so-called free press ignore the anti-war movement, they serve the interests of their masters in the military media industrial complex.[ix]
Further, the corporate mainstream press continues to ignore the human cost of the US war in Iraq with America’s own veterans. Veteran care, wounded rates, mental disabilities, VA claims, first hand accounts of soldier experiences, and pictures of dead or limbless soldiers are rare. One of the most important stories missed by the corporate press concerned the Winter Soldier Congressional hearings in Washington, D.C. The hearings, with eyewitness testimony of US soldiers relating their experiences on the battlefield and beyond, were only covered by a scant number of major media, and then only in passing. In contrast to the virtual corporate media blackout concerning American soldiers’ views of the war, the independent, listener sponsored, community Pacifica Radio network covered the hearings at length.[x]
A common theme among the most censored stories over the past few years has been the systemic erosion of human rights and civil liberties in both the US and the world at large. The corporate media has ignored the fact that habeas corpus can now be suspended for anyone by order of the President. With the approval of Congress, the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006, signed by Bush on October 17, 2006, allows for the suspension of habeas corpus for US citizens and non-citizens alike. While media, including a lead editorial in The New York Times October 19, 2006, have offered false comfort that American citizens will not be the victims, the Act is quite clear that ‘any person’ can be targeted.[xi]
Additionally, under the code-name Operation FALCON (Federal and Local Cops Organized Nationally), federally coordinated mass arrests have been occurring since April 2005 and netted over 54,000 arrests, a majority of whom were not violent criminals as was initially suggested. This unprecedented move of arresting tens of thousands of “fugitives” is the largest dragnet style operation in the nation’s history. The raids, coordinated by the Justice Department and Homeland Security, directly involved over 960 agencies (state, local and federal) and mark the first time in US history that all domestic police agencies have been put under the direct control of the federal government.[xii]
All these events are significant in a democratic society that claims to cherish individual rights and due process of law. To have them occur is a tragedy. To have a “free” press not report them or pretend these issues do not matter to the populace is the foundation of censorship today.
2. Repetition of Slogans and Sound Bites- The corporate media in the US present themselves as unbiased and accurate. The New York Times motto of “all the news that’s fit to print” is a clear example, as is CNN’s authoritative “most trusted name in news” and Fox’s mantra of “fair and balanced.” The slogans are examples of what linguist George Lakoff has referred to as framing. Through constant repetition, the metaphors and symbols that pervade our media turn into unquestioned beliefs. Terms like “liberal media,” “welfare cheaters,” “war on terror,” illegal aliens,” “tax burden,” “support our troops,” are all distorted images serving to conceal a transfer of wealth from people needing a safety net to corporations seeking profitable markets and military expansion.
3. Embedded Journalism- The media are increasingly dependent on governmental and corporate sources of news. Maintenance of continuous news shows requires a constant feed and an ever-entertaining supply of stimulating events and breaking news bites. The 24-hour news shows on MSNBC, Fox and CNN maintain constant contact with the White House, Pentagon, and public relations companies representing both government and private corporations.
By the time of the Gulf War in 1991, retired colonels, generals and admirals had become mainstays in network TV studios during wartime. Language such as “collateral damage” and “smart bombs” flowed effortlessly between journalists and military men, who shared perspectives on the occasionally mentioned but more rarely seen civilians killed by U.S. firepower. This clearly foreshadowed the structure of “embedded” reporting in the second Iraq War, where mainstream corporate journalists literally lived with the troops and had to submit all reports for military review.[xiii] A related militarization of news studies by Diane Farsetta at the Center for Media Democracy documented a related introduction of bias. These investigations showed Pentagon propaganda penetration on mainstream corporate news in the guise of retired Generals as “experts” or pundits who turned out to be nothing more than paid shills for government war policy.[xiv]
The problem then becomes more complex. What happens to a society that begins to believe such lies as truth? The run up to the 2003 war in Iraq concerning weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) is a case in point. It illustrates the power of propaganda in creating not only public support for an ill-begotten war, but also reduces the possibility of a peace movement, even when fueled by the truth, to stop a war based on falsehoods. The current war in Iraq was the most globally protested war in recorded history. This did nothing to stop it and has done little to end it even under a Democratic president who promised such on the campaign trail. The candidate of “hope and change,” with peace groups in tow, has proven to be dependent upon the same interests in foreign policy that got the US into war in the first place.[xv]
The Progressive Press
Where the left progressive press may have covered some of the Winter Soldier issues, most did not cover the major story of Iraqi deaths. InManufacturing Consent, Wharton School of Business Professor of Political Economy Edward Herman and MIT Institute Professor of Linguistics Noam Chomsky claim that because media are firmly embedded in the market system, they reflect the class values and concerns of their owners and advertisers. The corporate media maintain a class bias through five systemic filters: concentrated private ownership; a strict bottom-line profit orientation; over-reliance on governmental and corporate sources for news; a primary tendency to avoid offending the powerful; and an almost religious worship of the market economy. These filters limit what will become news in society and set parameters on acceptable coverage of daily events.[xvi]
The danger of these filters is that they make subtle and indirect censorship more difficult to combat. Owners and managers share class identity with the powerful and are motivated economically to please advertisers and viewers. Social backgrounds influence their conceptions of what is “newsworthy,” and their views and values seem only “common sense.” Journalists and editors are not immune to the influence of owners and managers. Reporters want to see their stories approved for print or broadcast, and editors come to know the limits of their freedom to diverge from the “common sense” worldview of owners and managers. The self-discipline that this structure induces in journalists and editors comes to seem only “common sense” to them as well. Self-discipline becomes self-censorship—independence is restricted, the filtering process hidden, denied, or rationalized away.
Project Censored’s analysis on the top ten progressive left publications and websites coverage of key post-9/11 issues found considerable limitations on reporting of specific stories. The evidence supports the Chomsky and Herman understanding that the media barrage may in fact contribute to the news story selection process inside the left liberal media as well.[xvii] Even the left progressive media showed limited coverage of the human costs of the 9/11 wars.
The figure reported in summer, 2007 documenting a million dead did appear in progressive websites and radio including After Downing Street, Huffington Post, CounterPunch, Alternet, Democracy Now! and the Nation, but several took months to get to it. This lack of timely reporting on such a critical story on the humanitarian crisis of the US occupation by the alternative press in America does not bode well for a strong, public, peace movement. The US is in dire need of a media democracy movement to address truth emergency concerns.
In response, the Truth Emergency Movement, held its first national strategy summit in Santa Cruz, California Jan. 25-27, 2008. Organizers gathered key media constituencies to devise coherent decentralized models for distribution of suppressed news, synergistic truth-telling, and collaborative strategies to disclose, legitimize and popularize deeper historical narratives on power and inequality in the US. In sum, this truth movement is seeking to discover in this moment of Constitutional crisis, ecological peril, and widening war, ways in which top investigative journalists, whistleblowers, and independent media activists can transform how Americans perceive and defend their world. We learn from grassroots actions in the US but also from experiences of other countries. This requires us to transcend the stereotypes of other countries hammered by the corporate media. It is not by chance that two Latin American nations, both targets of US efforts to remove their popular leaders by force, have been vilified by mainstream media. Both Cuba and Venezuela, however, have been experiments in local democratic participation in which voices of communities weigh heavily upon social policy.
International Models of Media Democracy in Action: Venezuela
Democracy from the bottom is evolving as a ten-year social revolution in Venezuela. Led by President Hugo Chavez, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) gained over 1½ million voters in the November, 2008 elections. “It was a wonderful victory,” said Professor Carmen Carrero with the communications studies department of the Bolivarian University in Caracas. “We won 81 percent of the city mayor positions and seventeen of twenty-three of the state governors,” Carrero reported.
The Bolivarian University is housed in the former oil ministry building and now serves 8,000 students throughout Venezuela. The University (Universidad Bolivariana de Venezuela) is symbolic of the democratic socialist changes occurring throughout the country. Before the election of Hugo Chavez as president in 1998, college attendance was primarily for the rich in Venezuela. Today over one million, eight hundred thousand students attend college, three times the rate ten years ago. “Our university was established to resist domination and imperialism,” reported Principal (president) Marlene Yadira Cordova in an interview November 10, 2008, “We are a university where we have a vision of life that the oppressed people have a place on this planet.” The enthusiasm for learning and serious-thoughtful questions asked by students was certainly representative of a belief in the potential of positive social change for human betterment. The University offers a fully staffed free healthcare clinic, zero tuition, and basic no-cost food for students in the cafeteria, all paid for by the oil revenues now being democratically shared by the people.
Bottom up democracy in Venezuela starts with the 25,000 community councils elected in every neighborhood in the country. “We establish the priority needs of our area,” reported community council spokesperson Carmon Aponte, with the neighborhood council in the barrio Bombilla area of western Caracas. Aponte works with Patare Community TV and radio station and is one of thirty-four locally controlled community television stations and four hundred radio stations now in the barrios throughout Venezuela. Community radio, TV and newspapers are the voice of the people, where they describe the viewers/listeners as the “users” of media instead of the passive audiences.[xviii]
Democratic socialism has meant healthcare, jobs, food, and security, in neighborhoods where in many cases nothing but poverty existed ten years ago. With unemployment down to a US level, sharing the wealth has taken real meaning in Venezuela. Despite a 50 percent increase in the price of food last year, local Mercals offer government subsidized cooking oil, corn meal, meat, and powdered milk at 30-50 percent off market price. Additionally, there are now 3,500 local communal banks with a $1.6 billion dollar budget offering neighborhood-based micro-financing loans for home improvements, small businesses, and personal emergencies.
“We have moved from a time of disdain [pre-revolution—when the upper classes saw working people as less than human] to a time of adjustment,” proclaimed Ecuador’s minister of Culture, Gallo Mora Witt at the opening ceremonies of the Fourth International Book Fair in Caracas, November, 2007. Venezuela’s Minister of Culture, Hector Soto added, “We try not to leave anyone out. . . before the revolution the elites published only 60-80 books a year, we will publish 1,200 Venezuelan authors this year…the book will never stop being the important tool for cultural feelings.” In fact, some twenty-five million books—classics by Victor Hugo and Miguel de Cervantes along with Cindy Sheehan’s Letter to George Bush—were published in 2008 and are being distributed to the community councils nationwide. The theme of the International Book Fair was books as cultural support to the construction of the Bolivarian revolution and building socialism for the 21st century.
In Venezuela the corporate media are still owned by the elites. The five major TV networks, and nine of ten of the major newspapers maintain a continuing media effort to undermine Chavez and the socialist revolution. But despite the corporate media and $20 million annual support to the anti-Chavez opposition institutions from USAID and National Endowment for Democracy, two-thirds of the people in Venezuela continue to support President Hugo Chavez and the United Socialist Party of Venezuela. The democracies of South America are realizing that the neo-liberal formulas for capitalism are not working and that new forms of resource allocation are necessary for human betterment. It is a learning process for all involved and certainly a democratic effort from the bottom up.
International Models of Media Democracy in Action: Cuba
“You cannot kill truth by murdering journalists,” said Tubal Páez, president of the Journalist Union of Cuba. In May of 2008, One hundred and fifty Cuban and South American journalists, ambassadors, politicians, and foreign guests gathered at the Jose Marti International Journalist Institute to honor the 50th anniversary of the death of Carlos Bastidas Arguello —the last journalist killed in Cuba. Carlos Bastidas was 23 years old when he was assassinated by Fulgencia Batista’s secret police after having visited Fidel Castro’s forces in the Sierra Maestra Mountains. Edmundo Bastidas, Carlos’ brother, told about how a river of change flowed from the Maestra (teacher) mountains, symbolized by his brother’s efforts to help secure a new future for Cuba.
The celebration in Havana was held in honor of World Press Freedom Day, which is observed every year in May. The UN first declared this day in 1993 to honor journalists who lost their lives reporting the news and to defend media freedom worldwide.
Cuban journalists share a common sense of a continuing counter-revolutionary threat by US financed Cuban-Americans living in Miami. This is not an entirely unwarranted feeling in that many hundreds of terrorist actions against Cuba have occurred with US backing over the past fifty years. In addition to the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, these attacks include the blowing up of a Cuban airlines plane in 1976 killing seventy-three people, the starting in 1981 of an epidemic of dengue fever that killed 158 people, and several hotel bombings in the 1990s, one of which resulted in the death of an Italian tourist.
In the context of this external threat, Cuban journalists quietly acknowledge that some self-censorship will undoubtedly occur regarding news stories that could be used by the “enemy” against the Cuban people. Nonetheless, Cuban journalists strongly value freedom of the press and there was no evidence of overt government control. Ricardo Alarcon, President of the National Assembly Cuba allows CNN, AP and Chicago Tribune to maintain offices in Cuba, noted that the US refuses to allow Cuban journalists to work in the United States.[xix]
Cuban journalists complain that the US corporate media is biased and refuses to cover the positive aspects of socialism in Cuba. Unknown to most Americans are the facts that Cuba is the number one country in percentage of organic foods produced in the world, has an impressive health care system with a lower infant mortality rate than the US, trains doctor from all over the world, and has enjoyed a 43% increase in GDP between 2005 and 2008.
Neither Cuba nor Venezuela are utopian societies. Developing countries subject to continuing pressure by the US may be cautious and suspicious of provocateurs that would incite violence or provoke US military intervention. But in these countries, the ability of local media expressing voices of local communities is something from which media reformers can learn.
Grassroots Antidotes to Corporate Media Propaganda
Tens of thousands of Americans engaged in various social justice issues constantly witness how corporate media marginalize, denigrate, or simply ignore their concerns. Activist groups working on issues like 9/11 Truth, election fraud, impeachment in the Bush era, war propaganda, civil liberties abridgements, torture, the Wall Street meltdown, and corporate-caused environmental crises have been systematically excluded from mainstream news and the national conversation leading to a genuine Truth Emergency in the country as a whole.
Now, however, a growing number of activists are finally saying “enough!” and joining forces to address this truth emergency by developing new journalistic systems and practices of their own. They are working to reveal the common corporate denominators behind the diverse crises we face and to develop networks of trustworthy news sources that tell people what is really going on. These activists know we need a journalism that moves beyond inquiries into particular crimes and atrocities, and exposes wider patterns of corruption, propaganda and illicit political control by a military and corporate elite. Recent efforts at national media reform through micro-power community radio– similar to the 400 people’s radio stations in Venezuela– and campaign finance changes, that would mandate access for all candidates on national media, have been strongly resisted by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB). NAB, considered one of the most powerful corporate lobby groups in Washington, works hard to protect over $200 billion dollars of annual advertising and the several hundred million dollars political candidates spend in each election cycle.
The Truth Emergency movement now recognizes that corporate media’s political power and failure to meet its First Amendment obligation to keep the public informed leaves a huge task. Citizens must mobilize resources to redevelop news and information systems from the bottom up. Citizen journalists can expand distribution of news via small independent newspapers, local magazines, independent radio, and cable access TV. Using the internet, the public can interconnect with like-minded grassroots news organizations to share important stories. These changes are already in progress.
Becoming the Media: Media Freedom International and Project Censored
In response to Truth Emergency conference, the Media Freedom Foundation and Project Censored launched an effort to both become a repository of independent news and information as well as a producer of content in what are called Validated Independent News stories vetted by college and university professors and students around the world. As corporate media continue their entertainment agenda and the PR industry—working for governments and corporations—increasingly dominates news content, there exists a socio-cultural opening to transform how the public receives and actually participates in the validation and creation of their own news.
Corporate media are increasingly irrelevant to working people and to democracy. People need to tell their own news stories from real experiences and perspectives, as an alternative to the hierarchically imposed and “official” top-down narrative. What better project in support of media democracy than for universities and colleges worldwide to support truth telling and validate news stories and independent news sources.
Only 5% of college students under 30 read a daily newspaper. Most get their news from corporate television and increasingly on the internet. One of the biggest problems with independent media sources on the internet is a perception of inconsistent reliability. The public is often suspicious of the truthfulness and accuracy of news postings from non-corporate media sources. Over the past ten years, in hundreds of presentations all over the US, Project Censored staff has frequently been asked, “what are the best sources for news and whom can we trust?”
The goal of this effort is to encourage young people to use independent media as their primary sources of news and information and to learn about trustworthy news sources through the Media Freedom International News Research Affiliate Program. By the end of 2008, there were over thirty affiliate colleges and universities with plans to expand that participation several fold this next year. Through these institutions, validated independent news stories can be researched by students and scholars, then written, produced and disseminated via the web. In addition, on any given day at the Media Freedom Foundation website, one can view enough independent news stories from RSS feeds to fill nearly fifty written pages, more than even the largest US newspapers. An informed electorate cannot remain passive consumers of corporate news. As aforementioned activist David Mathison suggested in his how-to manual, Be the Media, where he argues and instructs not only about how to build community media but how to build community through media.[xx]
Part of building community is in developing awareness about the type of world we want to participate in creating, and developing strategies for achieving change. New forms of media that promote widespread responsibility for both creating and disseminating information do not remove the need for people to protest, to demonstrate, to march, to boycott and to demand entry into corporate board rooms. Rather it assures that voices can be heard and, as shown in Howard Rheingold’s Smartmobbing Democracy,[xxi] the power of new Internet communication technologies can be harnessed to mobilize more effectively. Contrasted with previous more limited technologies, Rheingold points out that now, “[m]obile and deskbound media such as blogs, listserves and social networking sites allow for many-to-many communication.” Technology has helped level the playing field by creating a virtual sphere where people can exchange ideas and instigate activism. Grassroots, bottom-up, peer-to-peer efforts have increased in influence and effectiveness due to the speed and breadth of new communication technologies. We are currently experiencing a potential for collective activism on a scale never before seen.
The continued expansion of independent internet news sources allows for the mass political awareness of key issues and truth emergencies in the world. The involvement of university and college professors and their students in validating news stories will be an important component of reliability verification of these sources. As we learn who we can trust in the independent news world, we will be in a stronger position for the continued development and expansion of democratic social movement/anti-war efforts in the future.
It is up to the people to unite and oppose the common oppressors manifested in a militarist and unresponsive government along with their corporate media courtiers and PR propagandists. Only then, when the public forms and controls its own information resources, will it be armed with the power that knowledge gives to move beyond the media induced mindsets that limit change to modest reform. Grassroots media providing voice to those who would challenge elite domination are our best hope to create a truly vibrant democratic society that promises as well as delivers liberty, peace, and economic justice to all.
Media Freedom website include:
Daily News at: http://mediafreedom.pnn.com/5174-independent-news- sources
Validated News & Research at: http://www.mediafreedominternational.org/
Daily Censored Blog at: http://dailycensored.com/
Project Censored: http://www.projectcensored.org/
[i] US General Tommy Franks, quoted in The San Francisco Chronicle, March 23, 2002, onlinehttp://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2002/ 020323-attack01.htm.
[ii] Peter Phillips and Andrew Roth, Censored 2009, (New York: Seven Stories, Press, 2008), 19-25. This story is the number one censored story of the year at Project Censored for this year, archived online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/1-over-one-million-iraqi-deaths-caused-by-us-occ upation/ and for the earlier casualty numbers see http://www.countercurrents.org/iraq-polya070207.ht m.
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Various theories exist on the problem of the subject, from historian Rick Shenkman’s Just How Stupid Are We to historian and cultural critic Thomas Frank’s What’s the Matter with Kansas, but few examine its affects on the peace community. For more on the issue of American historical amnesia, see Gore Vidal on Democracy Now! at http://www.democracynow.org/2004/5/21/gore_vidal_o n_the_united_states , also, In These Times online at http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3099/the_unite d_states_of_amnesia/ and for a broader academic look at the issue of how Americans have become arguably the least informed, most entertained people in the modern world, see the now classic work from the late New York University media scholar Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, (New York: Viking Adult, 1985). This article hopes to shine more light on the impact of all of the aforementioned on the peace movement in general and what can be done about it. For another view of this written earlier, at the outset of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, see Felix Kolb and Alicia Swords, “Do Peace Movements Matter?” Commondreams.org, May 12, 2003, online at http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0512-08.htm.
[v] Diane Farsetta, Center for Media Democracy, studies on Pentagon propaganda online at http://www.prwatch.org/pentagonpundits and http://www.prwatch.org/node/8180.
[vi] C. Wright Mills. The Power Elite, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000, reissue). Also, continuing with this theme in terms of democratic communications theory/policy and the ideas of an open society, see the work of Jurgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a category of Bourgeois Society, published in1962, and The Theory of Communicative Action, from 1981, as well as Karl Popper’s The Open Society and Its Enemies, first published in 1945.
[vii] Norman Soloman, “The Military-Industrial-Media Complex
Why war is covered from the warriors’ perspective,” Extra! July/August 2005, published by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), on the FAIR website at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2627.
[viii] Cenk Uygur, “Conservative Media vs Progressive Media” Posted on The Daily Kos blog, July 1, 2009. )
[ix] Linda Milazzo, “Corporate Media Turned Out for Jena, but Not for Anti-War. Here’s Why.” Atlantic Free Press, September 23, 2007, online at http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/2473-corpo rate-media-turned-out-for-jena-but-not-for-anti-wa r-heres-why.html.
[x] For more on the Winter Soldiers, see Censored 2009, chapter 1, story 9, pp. 58-62 and online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/9-iraq-and-afghanistan-vets-testify/ and chapter 12, pp.297-319. See the KPFA radio and Corp Watch website for the coverage athttp://www.warcomeshome.org/wintersoldier2008.
[xi] Peter Phillips, Censored 2008, (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2007), 35-44. Online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/1-no-habeas-corpus-for-any-person/ and http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/2-bush-moves-toward-martial-law/.
[xii] See Censored 2008, chapter 1, story 6, 55-59. Also online at http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/6-operation-falcon-raids/.
[xiii] Ibid.
[xiv] Norman Soloman, “The Military-Industrial-Media Complex:
Why war is covered from the warriors’ perspective,” Extra! July/August 2005, published by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), on the FAIR website at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2627.
[xv] For several excellent studies of US Iraq War propaganda, see PR Watch’s John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton, Weapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush’s War on Iraq, (New York: Tarcher Penguin, 2003), and their follow up Best War Ever: Lies, Damned Lies, and the Mess in Iraq, (New York: Penguin, 2006), and the exhaustive work by Anthony R. DiMaggio, Mass Media, Mass Propaganda: Examining American News in the “War on Terror,” (UK: Lexington Books, 2008). Additionally, forthcoming in fall 2009, just reviewed by the authors, is Robert P. Abele, The Anatomy of a Deception: A Reconstruction and Analysis of the Decision to Invade Iraq, (Baltimore: University Press of America, 2009).
For reports on the continuation of war policy under President Barack Obama, see Center for Media Democracy’s John Stauber, “How Obama Took Over the Peace Movement” online http://www.prwatch.org/node/8297, and Peter Phillips, “Barack Obama Administration Continues US Military Dominance” online http://www.projectcensored.org/articles/story/http -wwwprojectcensoredorg-articles-story-barack-obama -administration-c/.
[xvi] Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, (New York: Pantheon Books, 1988, 2002). For an introduction of the Propaganda Model, see chapter 1, or see a retrospective by Edward Herman online http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/20031209.htm.
[xvii] Peter Phillips, Censored 2008, see chapter 7, “Left Progressive Media Inside the Propaganda Model,” 233-251. Online at http://www.projectcensored.org/articles/story/left -progressive-media-inside-the-propaganda-model/.
[xviii] Co-author Peter Phillips interviewed Carmon Aponte while visiting the Patare Community TV and radio station in a trip to Venezuela for a book fair in 2008. The station was one of thirty-four locally controlled community television stations and four hundred radio stations now in the barrios throughout Venezuela.
[xix] Co-author Peter Phillips attended the major journalism conference in Cuba in 2008. About his experiences there, Phillips remarked, “During my five days in Havana, I met with dozens of journalists, communication studies faculty and students, union representatives and politicians. The underlying theme of my visit was to determine the state of media freedom in Cuba and to build a better understanding between media democracy activists in the US and those in Cuba.”
Phillips continued, “I toured the two main radio stations in Havana, Radio Rebelde and Radio Havana. Both have Internet access to multiple global news sources including CNN, Reuters, Associated Press and BBC with several newscasters pulling stories for public broadcast. Over 90 municipalities in Cuba have their own locally run radio stations, and journalists report local news from every province.”
“During the course of several hours in each station I (Phillips) was interviewed on the air about media consolidation and censorship in the US and was able to ask journalists about censorship in Cuba as well. Of the dozens I interviewed all said that they have complete freedom to write or broadcast any stories they choose. This was a far cry from the Stalinist media system so often depicted by US interests.”
[xx] For more details see the Project Censored website at http://projectcensored.org/, for independent media feeds see Media Freedom Foundation at http://mediafreedom.pnn.com/5174-independent-news- sources, and for more on the Project Censored International Affiliates Program, see http://projectcensored.org/project-censored-intern ational-affilates-program and http://mediafreedominternational.org. For more on how to become the media, see David Mathison’s work online http://bethemedia.com. For more on Smart Mobs, see Howard Rheingold’s work onlinehttp://www.smartmobs.com/book/.
[xxi] Howard Rheingold, “Smartmobbing Democracy,” in Rebooting America: Ideas for Redesigning American Democracy for the Internet Age,” ed. Allison Fine, Micah L. Sifry, Andrew Rasiej and Josh Levy. Retrieved from The Personal Democracy Press Website:http://rebooting.personaldemocracy.com/nod e/5484.
*The co-authors would like to express sincere appreciation for editing assistance provided by Rebecca Norlander and Ellen Gaddy.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/28/2009 10:27 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Wow! I suspected the death toll was high, but I was figuring it was in the hundreds of thousands, maybe 250,000 at most.
Well this is what happens when WE THE PEOPLE lose control of our government: it uses fiat money and tax money to murder and mame.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Sunday 27 December 2009
by: Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed
**************
This article has been previously published at Media Freedom Intl.
Among the most important corporate media censored news stories of the past decade, one must be that over one million people have died because of the United States military invasion and occupation of Iraq. This, of course, does not include the number of deaths from the first Gulf War nor the ensuing sanctions placed upon the country of Iraq that, combined, caused close to an additional one million Iraqi deaths. In the Iraq War, which began in March of 2003, over a million people have died violently primarily from US bombings and neighborhood patrols. These were deaths in excess of the normal civilian death rate under the prior government. Among US military leaders and policy elites, the issue of counting the dead was dismissed before the Iraqi invasion even began. In an interview with reporters in late March of 2002 US General Tommy Franks stated, “You know we don’t do body counts.”[i] Fortunately, for those concerned about humanitarian costs of war and empire, others do.
In a January 2008 report, the British polling group Opinion Research Business (ORB) reported that, “survey work confirms our earlier estimate that over 1,000,000 Iraqi citizens have died as a result of the conflict which started in 2003. We now estimate that the death toll between March 2003 and August 2007 is likely to have been of the order of 1,033,000. If one takes into account the margin of error associated with survey data of this nature then the estimated range is between 946,000 and 1,120,000.”[ii]
The ORB report came on the heels of two earlier studies conducted by Dr. Les Roberts and colleagues at Johns Hopkins University and published in the Lancet medical journal. The first study done from January 1, 2002 to March 18, 2003 confirmed civilian deaths at that time at over 100,000. The second study published in October 2006 documented over 650,000 civilian deaths in Iraq since the start of the US invasion and confirmed that US aerial bombing in civilian neighborhoods caused over a third of these deaths. Over half the deaths were directly attributable to US forces. The now estimated 1.2 million dead six years into the war/occupation, included children, parents, grandparents, cab drivers, clerics and schoolteachers. All manner of ordinary Iraqis have died because the United States decided to invade their country under false pretences of undiscovered weapons of mass destruction and in violation of international law. An additional four to five million Iraqi refugees have fled their homes. The magnitude of these million-plus deaths and creation of such a vast refugee crisis is undeniable. The continuing occupation by US forces has guaranteed a monthly mass death rate of thousands of people a carnage that ranks among the most heinous mass killings in world history. More tons of bombs have been dropped in Iraq than in all of World War II.[iii] Six years later the casualties continue but the story, barely reported from the start, has vanished.
The American people face a serious moral dilemma. Murder and war crimes have been conducted in their name. Yet most Americans have no idea of the magnitude of deaths and tend to believe that they number in the thousands and are primarily Iraqis killing Iraqis. Corporate mainstream media are in large part to blame. The question then becomes how can this mass ignorance and corporate media deception exist in the United States and what impact does this have on peace and social justice movements in the country?[iv]
Truth Emergency and Media Reform
In the United States today, the rift between reality and reporting has peaked. There is no longer a mere credibility gap, but rather a literal Truth Emergency in which the most important information affecting people is concealed from view. Many Americans, relying on the mainstream corporate media, have serious difficulty accessing the truth while still believing that the information they receive is the reality. A Truth Emergency reflects cumulative failures of the fourth estate to act as a truly free press. This truth emergency is seen in inadequate coverage of fraudulent elections, pseudo 9/11 investigations, illegal preemptive wars, torture camps, doctored intelligence, and domestic surveillance. Reliable information on these issues is systematically missing in corporate media outlets, where the vast majority of the American people continue to turn for news and information.
Consider these items of noteworthy conditions. US workers have been faced with a thirty-five year decline in real wages while the top few percent enjoy unparalleled wealth with strikingly low tax burdens. US schools, particularly in the west, are more segregated now than half a century ago. The US has the highest infant mortality rate among industrialized nations, is falling behind in scientific research and education, leads the world as a debtor nation, and is seriously lacking in healthcare quality and coverage, which results in the deaths of 18,000 people a year. America has entered another Gilded Age. Someone should the media.[v]
The Free Press or Media Reform Movement is a national effort to address mainstream media failures and the government policies that sanction them. During the 2008 National Conference for Media Reform (NCMR) in Minneapolis, Project Censored interns and faculty conducted a survey, completed by 376 randomly selected NCMR attendees out of the 3,500 people registered for the conference. This survey was designed to gauge participants’ views on the state of the corporate news media and the effectiveness of the media reform movement. The survey also sought to determine the level of belief in a truth emergency, a systematic hiding of critical information in the US. Not surprisingly, for a sample of independent media reform activists, majorities in the 90% plus range agreed on most criticisms of mainstream media, that corporate media failed to keep the American people informed on important issues facing the nation and that a truth emergency does indeed exist in the US. Regarding the reasons, 87% of the participants believed that a military-industrial-media complex exists in the US for the promotion of the US military domination of the world and most agreed with research conclusions by Project Censored, and others, that a continuing powerful global dominance group inside the US government, the US media, and the national policy structure is responsible. What was clear from our survey is that media democracy activists strongly support not only aggressive reform efforts and policy changes but also the continuing development of independent, grassroots media as part of an overall media democracy movement.
While most progressive media activists do not believe in some omnipotent conspiracy, an overwhelming portion of NCMR participants do believe the leadership class in the US is dominated by a neo-conservative group of some several hundred people who share a goal of asserting US military power worldwide. This Global Dominance Group (GDM) continues under both Republican and Democratic rule. In cooperation with major military contractors, the corporate media, and conservative foundations, the GDM has become a powerful long-term force in military unilateralism and US political processes.
The Global Dominance Group and Information Control
A long thread of sociological research documents the existence of a dominant ruling class in the US, which sets policy and determines national political priorities. C. Wright Mills, in his 1956 book The Power Elite, documented how World War II solidified a trinity of power in the US that comprised corporate, military and government elites in a centralized power structure working in unison through “higher circles” of contact and agreement.[vi] This power has grown through the Cold War and, after 9/11, the Global War on Terror.
At present, the global dominance agenda includes penetration into the boardrooms of the corporate media in the US. Only 118 people comprise the membership on the boards of director of the ten big media giants. These 118 individuals in turn sit on the corporate boards of 288 national and international corporations. Four of the top 10 media corporations share board director positions with the major defense contractors including:
William Kennard: New York Times, Carlyle Group
Douglas Warner III, GE (NBC), Bechtel
John Bryson: Disney (ABC), Boeing
Alwyn Lewis: Disney (ABC), Halliburton
Douglas McCorkindale: Gannett, Lockheed-Martin.
Given an interlocked media network of connections with defense and other economic sectors, big media in the United States effectively represent the interests of corporate America. Media critic and historian Norman Solomon described the close financial and social links between the boards of large media-related corporations and Washington’s foreign-policy establishment: “One way or another, a military-industrial complex now extends to much of corporate media.”[vii] The Homeland Security Act Title II Section 201(d)(5) provides an example of the interlocked military-industrial-media complex. This Act specifically asks the directorate to “develop a comprehensive plan for securing the key resources and critical infrastructure of the United States including information technology and telecommunications systems (including satellites) emergency preparedness communications systems.”
The media elite, a key component of the Higher Circle Policy Elite in the US, are the watchdogs of acceptable ideological messages, the controllers of news and information content, and the decision makers regarding media resources. Their goal is to create symbiotic global news distribution in a deliberate attempt to control the news and information available to society. The two most prominent methods used to accomplish this task are censorship and propaganda.
Sometimes the sensationalist and narrow media coverage of news is blamed upon the need to meet a low level of public taste and thereby capture the eyes of a sufficient market to lure advertisers and to make a profit. But another goal of cornering the marketplace on what news and views will be aired is also prominent. Billionaire Rupert Murdoch loses $50 million a year on the NY Post, billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife loses $2 to $3 million a year on the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, billionaire Philip Anschutz loses around $5 million a year on The Weekly Standard, and billionaire Sun Myung Moon has lost $2 to $3 billion on The Washington Times. The losses in supporting conservative media are part of a strategy of ideological control. They also buy bulk quantities of ultra-conservative books bringing them to the top of the NY Times bestseller list and then give away copies to “subscribers” to their websites and publications. They fund conservative “think tanks” like Heritage and Cato with hundreds of millions of dollars a year. All this buys them respectability and a megaphone. Even though William Kristol’s publication, the Standard, is a money-loser, his association with it has often gotten him on TV talk shows and a column with The New York Times. Sponsorships of groups like Grover Norquist’s anti-tax “Americans for Tax Reform” regularly get people like him front-and-center in any debate on taxation in the United States. This has contributed to extensive tax cuts for the wealthy and the most unfair tax laws of any industrialized country – all found acceptable by a public relying upon sound-bites about the dangers of ‘big government.’ Hence media corporation officials and others in the health care, energy and weapons industries remain wealthier than ordinary people can imagine. Their expenditures for molding opinion are better understood as investments in a conservative public ideology[viii]
Modern Media Censorship and Propaganda
A broader definition of contemporary censorship needs to include any interference, deliberate or not, with the free flow of vital news information to the public. Modern censorship can be seen as the subtle yet constant and sophisticated manipulation of reality in our mass media outlets. On a daily basis, censorship refers to the intentional non-inclusion of a news story – or piece of a news story – based on anything other than a desire to tell the truth. Such manipulation can take the form of political pressure (from government officials and powerful individuals), economic pressure (from advertisers and funders), and legal pressure (the threat of lawsuits from deep-pocket individuals, corporations, and institutions). or threats to reduce future access to governmental and corporate sources of news. Following are a few examples of censorship and propaganda.
1. Omitted or Undercovered Stories- The failure of the corporate media to cover human consequences, like one million , mostly civilian deaths of Iraqis, reduces public response to the wars being conducted by the US. Even when activists do mobilize, the media coverage of anti-war demonstrations has been negligible and denigrating from the start. When journalists of the so-called free press ignore the anti-war movement, they serve the interests of their masters in the military media industrial complex.[ix]
Further, the corporate mainstream press continues to ignore the human cost of the US war in Iraq with America’s own veterans. Veteran care, wounded rates, mental disabilities, VA claims, first hand accounts of soldier experiences, and pictures of dead or limbless soldiers are rare. One of the most important stories missed by the corporate press concerned the Winter Soldier Congressional hearings in Washington, D.C. The hearings, with eyewitness testimony of US soldiers relating their experiences on the battlefield and beyond, were only covered by a scant number of major media, and then only in passing. In contrast to the virtual corporate media blackout concerning American soldiers’ views of the war, the independent, listener sponsored, community Pacifica Radio network covered the hearings at length.[x]
A common theme among the most censored stories over the past few years has been the systemic erosion of human rights and civil liberties in both the US and the world at large. The corporate media has ignored the fact that habeas corpus can now be suspended for anyone by order of the President. With the approval of Congress, the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006, signed by Bush on October 17, 2006, allows for the suspension of habeas corpus for US citizens and non-citizens alike. While media, including a lead editorial in The New York Times October 19, 2006, have offered false comfort that American citizens will not be the victims, the Act is quite clear that ‘any person’ can be targeted.[xi]
Additionally, under the code-name Operation FALCON (Federal and Local Cops Organized Nationally), federally coordinated mass arrests have been occurring since April 2005 and netted over 54,000 arrests, a majority of whom were not violent criminals as was initially suggested. This unprecedented move of arresting tens of thousands of “fugitives” is the largest dragnet style operation in the nation’s history. The raids, coordinated by the Justice Department and Homeland Security, directly involved over 960 agencies (state, local and federal) and mark the first time in US history that all domestic police agencies have been put under the direct control of the federal government.[xii]
All these events are significant in a democratic society that claims to cherish individual rights and due process of law. To have them occur is a tragedy. To have a “free” press not report them or pretend these issues do not matter to the populace is the foundation of censorship today.
2. Repetition of Slogans and Sound Bites- The corporate media in the US present themselves as unbiased and accurate. The New York Times motto of “all the news that’s fit to print” is a clear example, as is CNN’s authoritative “most trusted name in news” and Fox’s mantra of “fair and balanced.” The slogans are examples of what linguist George Lakoff has referred to as framing. Through constant repetition, the metaphors and symbols that pervade our media turn into unquestioned beliefs. Terms like “liberal media,” “welfare cheaters,” “war on terror,” illegal aliens,” “tax burden,” “support our troops,” are all distorted images serving to conceal a transfer of wealth from people needing a safety net to corporations seeking profitable markets and military expansion.
3. Embedded Journalism- The media are increasingly dependent on governmental and corporate sources of news. Maintenance of continuous news shows requires a constant feed and an ever-entertaining supply of stimulating events and breaking news bites. The 24-hour news shows on MSNBC, Fox and CNN maintain constant contact with the White House, Pentagon, and public relations companies representing both government and private corporations.
By the time of the Gulf War in 1991, retired colonels, generals and admirals had become mainstays in network TV studios during wartime. Language such as “collateral damage” and “smart bombs” flowed effortlessly between journalists and military men, who shared perspectives on the occasionally mentioned but more rarely seen civilians killed by U.S. firepower. This clearly foreshadowed the structure of “embedded” reporting in the second Iraq War, where mainstream corporate journalists literally lived with the troops and had to submit all reports for military review.[xiii] A related militarization of news studies by Diane Farsetta at the Center for Media Democracy documented a related introduction of bias. These investigations showed Pentagon propaganda penetration on mainstream corporate news in the guise of retired Generals as “experts” or pundits who turned out to be nothing more than paid shills for government war policy.[xiv]
The problem then becomes more complex. What happens to a society that begins to believe such lies as truth? The run up to the 2003 war in Iraq concerning weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) is a case in point. It illustrates the power of propaganda in creating not only public support for an ill-begotten war, but also reduces the possibility of a peace movement, even when fueled by the truth, to stop a war based on falsehoods. The current war in Iraq was the most globally protested war in recorded history. This did nothing to stop it and has done little to end it even under a Democratic president who promised such on the campaign trail. The candidate of “hope and change,” with peace groups in tow, has proven to be dependent upon the same interests in foreign policy that got the US into war in the first place.[xv]
The Progressive Press
Where the left progressive press may have covered some of the Winter Soldier issues, most did not cover the major story of Iraqi deaths. InManufacturing Consent, Wharton School of Business Professor of Political Economy Edward Herman and MIT Institute Professor of Linguistics Noam Chomsky claim that because media are firmly embedded in the market system, they reflect the class values and concerns of their owners and advertisers. The corporate media maintain a class bias through five systemic filters: concentrated private ownership; a strict bottom-line profit orientation; over-reliance on governmental and corporate sources for news; a primary tendency to avoid offending the powerful; and an almost religious worship of the market economy. These filters limit what will become news in society and set parameters on acceptable coverage of daily events.[xvi]
The danger of these filters is that they make subtle and indirect censorship more difficult to combat. Owners and managers share class identity with the powerful and are motivated economically to please advertisers and viewers. Social backgrounds influence their conceptions of what is “newsworthy,” and their views and values seem only “common sense.” Journalists and editors are not immune to the influence of owners and managers. Reporters want to see their stories approved for print or broadcast, and editors come to know the limits of their freedom to diverge from the “common sense” worldview of owners and managers. The self-discipline that this structure induces in journalists and editors comes to seem only “common sense” to them as well. Self-discipline becomes self-censorship—independence is restricted, the filtering process hidden, denied, or rationalized away.
Project Censored’s analysis on the top ten progressive left publications and websites coverage of key post-9/11 issues found considerable limitations on reporting of specific stories. The evidence supports the Chomsky and Herman understanding that the media barrage may in fact contribute to the news story selection process inside the left liberal media as well.[xvii] Even the left progressive media showed limited coverage of the human costs of the 9/11 wars.
The figure reported in summer, 2007 documenting a million dead did appear in progressive websites and radio including After Downing Street, Huffington Post, CounterPunch, Alternet, Democracy Now! and the Nation, but several took months to get to it. This lack of timely reporting on such a critical story on the humanitarian crisis of the US occupation by the alternative press in America does not bode well for a strong, public, peace movement. The US is in dire need of a media democracy movement to address truth emergency concerns.
In response, the Truth Emergency Movement, held its first national strategy summit in Santa Cruz, California Jan. 25-27, 2008. Organizers gathered key media constituencies to devise coherent decentralized models for distribution of suppressed news, synergistic truth-telling, and collaborative strategies to disclose, legitimize and popularize deeper historical narratives on power and inequality in the US. In sum, this truth movement is seeking to discover in this moment of Constitutional crisis, ecological peril, and widening war, ways in which top investigative journalists, whistleblowers, and independent media activists can transform how Americans perceive and defend their world. We learn from grassroots actions in the US but also from experiences of other countries. This requires us to transcend the stereotypes of other countries hammered by the corporate media. It is not by chance that two Latin American nations, both targets of US efforts to remove their popular leaders by force, have been vilified by mainstream media. Both Cuba and Venezuela, however, have been experiments in local democratic participation in which voices of communities weigh heavily upon social policy.
International Models of Media Democracy in Action: Venezuela
Democracy from the bottom is evolving as a ten-year social revolution in Venezuela. Led by President Hugo Chavez, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) gained over 1½ million voters in the November, 2008 elections. “It was a wonderful victory,” said Professor Carmen Carrero with the communications studies department of the Bolivarian University in Caracas. “We won 81 percent of the city mayor positions and seventeen of twenty-three of the state governors,” Carrero reported.
The Bolivarian University is housed in the former oil ministry building and now serves 8,000 students throughout Venezuela. The University (Universidad Bolivariana de Venezuela) is symbolic of the democratic socialist changes occurring throughout the country. Before the election of Hugo Chavez as president in 1998, college attendance was primarily for the rich in Venezuela. Today over one million, eight hundred thousand students attend college, three times the rate ten years ago. “Our university was established to resist domination and imperialism,” reported Principal (president) Marlene Yadira Cordova in an interview November 10, 2008, “We are a university where we have a vision of life that the oppressed people have a place on this planet.” The enthusiasm for learning and serious-thoughtful questions asked by students was certainly representative of a belief in the potential of positive social change for human betterment. The University offers a fully staffed free healthcare clinic, zero tuition, and basic no-cost food for students in the cafeteria, all paid for by the oil revenues now being democratically shared by the people.
Bottom up democracy in Venezuela starts with the 25,000 community councils elected in every neighborhood in the country. “We establish the priority needs of our area,” reported community council spokesperson Carmon Aponte, with the neighborhood council in the barrio Bombilla area of western Caracas. Aponte works with Patare Community TV and radio station and is one of thirty-four locally controlled community television stations and four hundred radio stations now in the barrios throughout Venezuela. Community radio, TV and newspapers are the voice of the people, where they describe the viewers/listeners as the “users” of media instead of the passive audiences.[xviii]
Democratic socialism has meant healthcare, jobs, food, and security, in neighborhoods where in many cases nothing but poverty existed ten years ago. With unemployment down to a US level, sharing the wealth has taken real meaning in Venezuela. Despite a 50 percent increase in the price of food last year, local Mercals offer government subsidized cooking oil, corn meal, meat, and powdered milk at 30-50 percent off market price. Additionally, there are now 3,500 local communal banks with a $1.6 billion dollar budget offering neighborhood-based micro-financing loans for home improvements, small businesses, and personal emergencies.
“We have moved from a time of disdain [pre-revolution—when the upper classes saw working people as less than human] to a time of adjustment,” proclaimed Ecuador’s minister of Culture, Gallo Mora Witt at the opening ceremonies of the Fourth International Book Fair in Caracas, November, 2007. Venezuela’s Minister of Culture, Hector Soto added, “We try not to leave anyone out. . . before the revolution the elites published only 60-80 books a year, we will publish 1,200 Venezuelan authors this year…the book will never stop being the important tool for cultural feelings.” In fact, some twenty-five million books—classics by Victor Hugo and Miguel de Cervantes along with Cindy Sheehan’s Letter to George Bush—were published in 2008 and are being distributed to the community councils nationwide. The theme of the International Book Fair was books as cultural support to the construction of the Bolivarian revolution and building socialism for the 21st century.
In Venezuela the corporate media are still owned by the elites. The five major TV networks, and nine of ten of the major newspapers maintain a continuing media effort to undermine Chavez and the socialist revolution. But despite the corporate media and $20 million annual support to the anti-Chavez opposition institutions from USAID and National Endowment for Democracy, two-thirds of the people in Venezuela continue to support President Hugo Chavez and the United Socialist Party of Venezuela. The democracies of South America are realizing that the neo-liberal formulas for capitalism are not working and that new forms of resource allocation are necessary for human betterment. It is a learning process for all involved and certainly a democratic effort from the bottom up.
International Models of Media Democracy in Action: Cuba
“You cannot kill truth by murdering journalists,” said Tubal Páez, president of the Journalist Union of Cuba. In May of 2008, One hundred and fifty Cuban and South American journalists, ambassadors, politicians, and foreign guests gathered at the Jose Marti International Journalist Institute to honor the 50th anniversary of the death of Carlos Bastidas Arguello —the last journalist killed in Cuba. Carlos Bastidas was 23 years old when he was assassinated by Fulgencia Batista’s secret police after having visited Fidel Castro’s forces in the Sierra Maestra Mountains. Edmundo Bastidas, Carlos’ brother, told about how a river of change flowed from the Maestra (teacher) mountains, symbolized by his brother’s efforts to help secure a new future for Cuba.
The celebration in Havana was held in honor of World Press Freedom Day, which is observed every year in May. The UN first declared this day in 1993 to honor journalists who lost their lives reporting the news and to defend media freedom worldwide.
Cuban journalists share a common sense of a continuing counter-revolutionary threat by US financed Cuban-Americans living in Miami. This is not an entirely unwarranted feeling in that many hundreds of terrorist actions against Cuba have occurred with US backing over the past fifty years. In addition to the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, these attacks include the blowing up of a Cuban airlines plane in 1976 killing seventy-three people, the starting in 1981 of an epidemic of dengue fever that killed 158 people, and several hotel bombings in the 1990s, one of which resulted in the death of an Italian tourist.
In the context of this external threat, Cuban journalists quietly acknowledge that some self-censorship will undoubtedly occur regarding news stories that could be used by the “enemy” against the Cuban people. Nonetheless, Cuban journalists strongly value freedom of the press and there was no evidence of overt government control. Ricardo Alarcon, President of the National Assembly Cuba allows CNN, AP and Chicago Tribune to maintain offices in Cuba, noted that the US refuses to allow Cuban journalists to work in the United States.[xix]
Cuban journalists complain that the US corporate media is biased and refuses to cover the positive aspects of socialism in Cuba. Unknown to most Americans are the facts that Cuba is the number one country in percentage of organic foods produced in the world, has an impressive health care system with a lower infant mortality rate than the US, trains doctor from all over the world, and has enjoyed a 43% increase in GDP between 2005 and 2008.
Neither Cuba nor Venezuela are utopian societies. Developing countries subject to continuing pressure by the US may be cautious and suspicious of provocateurs that would incite violence or provoke US military intervention. But in these countries, the ability of local media expressing voices of local communities is something from which media reformers can learn.
Grassroots Antidotes to Corporate Media Propaganda
Tens of thousands of Americans engaged in various social justice issues constantly witness how corporate media marginalize, denigrate, or simply ignore their concerns. Activist groups working on issues like 9/11 Truth, election fraud, impeachment in the Bush era, war propaganda, civil liberties abridgements, torture, the Wall Street meltdown, and corporate-caused environmental crises have been systematically excluded from mainstream news and the national conversation leading to a genuine Truth Emergency in the country as a whole.
Now, however, a growing number of activists are finally saying “enough!” and joining forces to address this truth emergency by developing new journalistic systems and practices of their own. They are working to reveal the common corporate denominators behind the diverse crises we face and to develop networks of trustworthy news sources that tell people what is really going on. These activists know we need a journalism that moves beyond inquiries into particular crimes and atrocities, and exposes wider patterns of corruption, propaganda and illicit political control by a military and corporate elite. Recent efforts at national media reform through micro-power community radio– similar to the 400 people’s radio stations in Venezuela– and campaign finance changes, that would mandate access for all candidates on national media, have been strongly resisted by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB). NAB, considered one of the most powerful corporate lobby groups in Washington, works hard to protect over $200 billion dollars of annual advertising and the several hundred million dollars political candidates spend in each election cycle.
The Truth Emergency movement now recognizes that corporate media’s political power and failure to meet its First Amendment obligation to keep the public informed leaves a huge task. Citizens must mobilize resources to redevelop news and information systems from the bottom up. Citizen journalists can expand distribution of news via small independent newspapers, local magazines, independent radio, and cable access TV. Using the internet, the public can interconnect with like-minded grassroots news organizations to share important stories. These changes are already in progress.
Becoming the Media: Media Freedom International and Project Censored
In response to Truth Emergency conference, the Media Freedom Foundation and Project Censored launched an effort to both become a repository of independent news and information as well as a producer of content in what are called Validated Independent News stories vetted by college and university professors and students around the world. As corporate media continue their entertainment agenda and the PR industry—working for governments and corporations—increasingly dominates news content, there exists a socio-cultural opening to transform how the public receives and actually participates in the validation and creation of their own news.
Corporate media are increasingly irrelevant to working people and to democracy. People need to tell their own news stories from real experiences and perspectives, as an alternative to the hierarchically imposed and “official” top-down narrative. What better project in support of media democracy than for universities and colleges worldwide to support truth telling and validate news stories and independent news sources.
Only 5% of college students under 30 read a daily newspaper. Most get their news from corporate television and increasingly on the internet. One of the biggest problems with independent media sources on the internet is a perception of inconsistent reliability. The public is often suspicious of the truthfulness and accuracy of news postings from non-corporate media sources. Over the past ten years, in hundreds of presentations all over the US, Project Censored staff has frequently been asked, “what are the best sources for news and whom can we trust?”
The goal of this effort is to encourage young people to use independent media as their primary sources of news and information and to learn about trustworthy news sources through the Media Freedom International News Research Affiliate Program. By the end of 2008, there were over thirty affiliate colleges and universities with plans to expand that participation several fold this next year. Through these institutions, validated independent news stories can be researched by students and scholars, then written, produced and disseminated via the web. In addition, on any given day at the Media Freedom Foundation website, one can view enough independent news stories from RSS feeds to fill nearly fifty written pages, more than even the largest US newspapers. An informed electorate cannot remain passive consumers of corporate news. As aforementioned activist David Mathison suggested in his how-to manual, Be the Media, where he argues and instructs not only about how to build community media but how to build community through media.[xx]
Part of building community is in developing awareness about the type of world we want to participate in creating, and developing strategies for achieving change. New forms of media that promote widespread responsibility for both creating and disseminating information do not remove the need for people to protest, to demonstrate, to march, to boycott and to demand entry into corporate board rooms. Rather it assures that voices can be heard and, as shown in Howard Rheingold’s Smartmobbing Democracy,[xxi] the power of new Internet communication technologies can be harnessed to mobilize more effectively. Contrasted with previous more limited technologies, Rheingold points out that now, “[m]obile and deskbound media such as blogs, listserves and social networking sites allow for many-to-many communication.” Technology has helped level the playing field by creating a virtual sphere where people can exchange ideas and instigate activism. Grassroots, bottom-up, peer-to-peer efforts have increased in influence and effectiveness due to the speed and breadth of new communication technologies. We are currently experiencing a potential for collective activism on a scale never before seen.
The continued expansion of independent internet news sources allows for the mass political awareness of key issues and truth emergencies in the world. The involvement of university and college professors and their students in validating news stories will be an important component of reliability verification of these sources. As we learn who we can trust in the independent news world, we will be in a stronger position for the continued development and expansion of democratic social movement/anti-war efforts in the future.
It is up to the people to unite and oppose the common oppressors manifested in a militarist and unresponsive government along with their corporate media courtiers and PR propagandists. Only then, when the public forms and controls its own information resources, will it be armed with the power that knowledge gives to move beyond the media induced mindsets that limit change to modest reform. Grassroots media providing voice to those who would challenge elite domination are our best hope to create a truly vibrant democratic society that promises as well as delivers liberty, peace, and economic justice to all.
Media Freedom website include:
Daily News at: http://mediafreedom.pnn.com/5174-independent-news- sources
Validated News & Research at: http://www.mediafreedominternational.org/
Daily Censored Blog at: http://dailycensored.com/
Project Censored: http://www.projectcensored.org/
[i] US General Tommy Franks, quoted in The San Francisco Chronicle, March 23, 2002, onlinehttp://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2002/ 020323-attack01.htm.
[ii] Peter Phillips and Andrew Roth, Censored 2009, (New York: Seven Stories, Press, 2008), 19-25. This story is the number one censored story of the year at Project Censored for this year, archived online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/1-over-one-million-iraqi-deaths-caused-by-us-occ upation/ and for the earlier casualty numbers see http://www.countercurrents.org/iraq-polya070207.ht m.
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Various theories exist on the problem of the subject, from historian Rick Shenkman’s Just How Stupid Are We to historian and cultural critic Thomas Frank’s What’s the Matter with Kansas, but few examine its affects on the peace community. For more on the issue of American historical amnesia, see Gore Vidal on Democracy Now! at http://www.democracynow.org/2004/5/21/gore_vidal_o n_the_united_states , also, In These Times online at http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3099/the_unite d_states_of_amnesia/ and for a broader academic look at the issue of how Americans have become arguably the least informed, most entertained people in the modern world, see the now classic work from the late New York University media scholar Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, (New York: Viking Adult, 1985). This article hopes to shine more light on the impact of all of the aforementioned on the peace movement in general and what can be done about it. For another view of this written earlier, at the outset of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, see Felix Kolb and Alicia Swords, “Do Peace Movements Matter?” Commondreams.org, May 12, 2003, online at http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0512-08.htm.
[v] Diane Farsetta, Center for Media Democracy, studies on Pentagon propaganda online at http://www.prwatch.org/pentagonpundits and http://www.prwatch.org/node/8180.
[vi] C. Wright Mills. The Power Elite, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000, reissue). Also, continuing with this theme in terms of democratic communications theory/policy and the ideas of an open society, see the work of Jurgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a category of Bourgeois Society, published in1962, and The Theory of Communicative Action, from 1981, as well as Karl Popper’s The Open Society and Its Enemies, first published in 1945.
[vii] Norman Soloman, “The Military-Industrial-Media Complex
Why war is covered from the warriors’ perspective,” Extra! July/August 2005, published by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), on the FAIR website at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2627.
[viii] Cenk Uygur, “Conservative Media vs Progressive Media” Posted on The Daily Kos blog, July 1, 2009.
[ix] Linda Milazzo, “Corporate Media Turned Out for Jena, but Not for Anti-War. Here’s Why.” Atlantic Free Press, September 23, 2007, online at http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/2473-corpo rate-media-turned-out-for-jena-but-not-for-anti-wa r-heres-why.html.
[x] For more on the Winter Soldiers, see Censored 2009, chapter 1, story 9, pp. 58-62 and online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/9-iraq-and-afghanistan-vets-testify/ and chapter 12, pp.297-319. See the KPFA radio and Corp Watch website for the coverage athttp://www.warcomeshome.org/wintersoldier2008.
[xi] Peter Phillips, Censored 2008, (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2007), 35-44. Online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/1-no-habeas-corpus-for-any-person/ and http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/2-bush-moves-toward-martial-law/.
[xii] See Censored 2008, chapter 1, story 6, 55-59. Also online at http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/6-operation-falcon-raids/.
[xiii] Ibid.
[xiv] Norman Soloman, “The Military-Industrial-Media Complex:
Why war is covered from the warriors’ perspective,” Extra! July/August 2005, published by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), on the FAIR website at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2627.
[xv] For several excellent studies of US Iraq War propaganda, see PR Watch’s John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton, Weapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush’s War on Iraq, (New York: Tarcher Penguin, 2003), and their follow up Best War Ever: Lies, Damned Lies, and the Mess in Iraq, (New York: Penguin, 2006), and the exhaustive work by Anthony R. DiMaggio, Mass Media, Mass Propaganda: Examining American News in the “War on Terror,” (UK: Lexington Books, 2008). Additionally, forthcoming in fall 2009, just reviewed by the authors, is Robert P. Abele, The Anatomy of a Deception: A Reconstruction and Analysis of the Decision to Invade Iraq, (Baltimore: University Press of America, 2009).
For reports on the continuation of war policy under President Barack Obama, see Center for Media Democracy’s John Stauber, “How Obama Took Over the Peace Movement” online http://www.prwatch.org/node/8297, and Peter Phillips, “Barack Obama Administration Continues US Military Dominance” online http://www.projectcensored.org/articles/story/http -wwwprojectcensoredorg-articles-story-barack-obama -administration-c/.
[xvi] Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, (New York: Pantheon Books, 1988, 2002). For an introduction of the Propaganda Model, see chapter 1, or see a retrospective by Edward Herman online http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/20031209.htm.
[xvii] Peter Phillips, Censored 2008, see chapter 7, “Left Progressive Media Inside the Propaganda Model,” 233-251. Online at http://www.projectcensored.org/articles/story/left -progressive-media-inside-the-propaganda-model/.
[xviii] Co-author Peter Phillips interviewed Carmon Aponte while visiting the Patare Community TV and radio station in a trip to Venezuela for a book fair in 2008. The station was one of thirty-four locally controlled community television stations and four hundred radio stations now in the barrios throughout Venezuela.
[xix] Co-author Peter Phillips attended the major journalism conference in Cuba in 2008. About his experiences there, Phillips remarked, “During my five days in Havana, I met with dozens of journalists, communication studies faculty and students, union representatives and politicians. The underlying theme of my visit was to determine the state of media freedom in Cuba and to build a better understanding between media democracy activists in the US and those in Cuba.”
Phillips continued, “I toured the two main radio stations in Havana, Radio Rebelde and Radio Havana. Both have Internet access to multiple global news sources including CNN, Reuters, Associated Press and BBC with several newscasters pulling stories for public broadcast. Over 90 municipalities in Cuba have their own locally run radio stations, and journalists report local news from every province.”
“During the course of several hours in each station I (Phillips) was interviewed on the air about media consolidation and censorship in the US and was able to ask journalists about censorship in Cuba as well. Of the dozens I interviewed all said that they have complete freedom to write or broadcast any stories they choose. This was a far cry from the Stalinist media system so often depicted by US interests.”
[xx] For more details see the Project Censored website at http://projectcensored.org/, for independent media feeds see Media Freedom Foundation at http://mediafreedom.pnn.com/5174-independent-news- sources, and for more on the Project Censored International Affiliates Program, see http://projectcensored.org/project-censored-intern ational-affilates-program and http://mediafreedominternational.org. For more on how to become the media, see David Mathison’s work online http://bethemedia.com. For more on Smart Mobs, see Howard Rheingold’s work onlinehttp://www.smartmobs.com/book/.
[xxi] Howard Rheingold, “Smartmobbing Democracy,” in Rebooting America: Ideas for Redesigning American Democracy for the Internet Age,” ed. Allison Fine, Micah L. Sifry, Andrew Rasiej and Josh Levy. Retrieved from The Personal Democracy Press Website:http://rebooting.personaldemocracy.com/nod e/5484.
*The co-authors would like to express sincere appreciation for editing assistance provided by Rebecca Norlander and Ellen Gaddy.
Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/21/2009 6:08 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
The survival of the U.S. Republic would be greatly enhanced if all or part of the following, not necessarily in this order, were effectuated:
o All members of the U.S. Congress, with the exception of Ron Paul, should be voted out of office and new members continuously voted out each election UNTIL the corporate/K-Street lobby influence and the revolving door stops and Congress is back under the guidance and control of the We THE PEOPLE.
o The 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, as well as the major banks that own the Federal Reserve Banks of New York and San Francisco, should be audited. Such audit should include all natural persons and corporate entities (commercial banks, investment banks, trusts, brokerage houses and insurance companies) holding more than 5% of any issue.
o Any person or corporate entity suspected of suppressing a vital energy technology (such as COLD FUSION) should be investigated in a court of law, such investigation broadcast on C-SPAN as it proceeds.
o Major portions of the Glass Owen Act should be cancelled and the Gold Standard reestablished. Fractional reserve banking should be declared the fraud it is and outlawed. All taxes should be removed from the sale and transfer of gold and silver. Hoarding gold or silver should be criminalized on the level of tampering with the mail or counterfeiting.
o Corporate entities should not be permitted to include the phrase "and any other lawful business" in their Articles of Incorporation as this business practice opens the door to conflicts of interest and excessive consolidation.
o The Sherman anti-Trust laws on the books should be enforced and government should be forbidden to grant ANY subsidy or special privilege to any natural person, partnership, (corporate) entity, trust or foundation.
o The production of all fossil fuels (especially oil and natural gas) for the purpose of BURNING should be phased out by 2015.
o Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution needs to be advertised in public service announcements until the public is aware of its significance. The significance of Article II, Section 2 is that Congress has the power to tell the Supreme Court that it does not have jurisdiction in certain circumstances. If WE THE PEOPLE more widely knew that our Congress had this power, perhaps we might be more concerned about who has influence OVER that Congress. It's time the People start demanding the Congress and the Supreme Court play their distinct parts and stop rubbing each others backs, and stop creating one-size-fits-all laws. The Constitution stipulates a FEDERALIST system, meaning different laws for different people in different states are sometimes preferable and more pragmatic.
o The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution must be reinstated to the intent of the Founders. It is high-time citizens refuse to permit the federal government to use the Commerce Clause, as re-written by a rogue Supreme Court, to stick its nose into every aspect of private business. When the government uses the Commerce Clause to remove citizens right to keep and bear arms -- as it is already doing -- this needs to be the last straw. The bastardized Commerce Clause must be killed and replaced with the Commerce Clause as written by the Founders. Anyone who opposes this can be identified as an apologist for totalitarian government.
o All drugs and prostitution need to be de-criminalized on the grounds that the Federal government has no business invading the personal affairs of its citizens. Drugs and prostitution should be left up to the citizens of each state.
o The National Security Agency (the NSA) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should be dissolved. The NSA and the DHS are unnecessary because they duplicate and confuse the functionality of the FBI and the CIA. The FBI was established to investigate and prevent crimes within the U.S. and the CIA was established to investigate and prevent possible conflicts that originate outside the US. To have additional agencies is confusing, wasteful and dangerous to US citizens. It is dangerous because such citizens, and even their elected representatives, are not able to maintain proper oversight. This opens the door to conflicts of interest from outside elites and agendas.
o If the reasons for so-called terrorism are removed, terrorism will cease. The Patriot Act was passed without the proper review of the U.S. Citizens and has thus opened the door to spying on U.S. citizens and all the civil rights abuses that go along with same. The Patriot Act should therefore be rescinded.
o The U.S. should bow out of NATO and cut the military budget by 50% over a 5-year period. The U.S. should cease and desist in all military adventures, including Afghanistan and Iraq, and withdraw all military forces from the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The U.S. has no reason and no business defending the world and stationing over 700 bases in over 140 countries around the world. This activity is antagonistic and expensive and is the CAUSE of 9/11. Potential future terrorism, if any, should be investigated by the FBI if internal and the CIA is external, and handled strictly as a criminal matter. The Patriot Act did more damage to the United States than the terrorists that damaged only a handful of buildings.
o All para-military outfits like BLACKWATER should be declared illegal under Constitution law and disbanded. The US government has no business hiring private military services that are not under the direct control of WE THE PEPLE. This goes for the US military as well. The Constitution authorizes and demands that each of the 50 states maintains a separate and distinct citizen militia whereby all able-bodied men and women between certain ages are trained and participate in defending their areas and country, if called upon by the President. The Militia of the Several States should be immediately revitalized per the Second Amendment and any and all standing armies defunded and disbanded.
o The Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid system should be abolished and phased out by 2020. The U.S. government has no business in the health care business or providing support to citizens that can't "make it." Citizens "can't make it" on their own because the government competes for the very money and resources they need TO "make it." In other words, social security and government-provided benefits are self-fulfilling prophesies. They ultimately reduce the GENERAL WELFARE of the nation and grow the government into a totalitarian state collective.
o Taxpayer investments in science, technology and space exploration should be increased such that such allocations are never less than 10% of the national budget. The national budget needs to be DEFINED, not ALLOCATED. There are two ways to budget money. Method I and Method II. Under Method I you start with a LUMP SUM of money and allocate it in accordance with certain re-established PERCENTAGES, percentages established upon MONETARY ALLOCATION PHILSOPHY. Under Method II you simply see what everyone wants and then ADD UP what everything comes to. Any shortfall is then borrowed. Financers and taxpayers like Method I. Government contractors, bankers and special interest groups like Method II. Method I should be used and Method II phased out. Method II is poor financial management and leads to debt and insolvency. See the BOOK OF BUDGETS at http://www.mecfilms.com/moviepubs/bk0001.htm
o Citizens, by direct referendum if necessary, should instruct the U.S. Treasury to default on all portions of the national debt that were funded by the Federal Reserve System monetizing Treasury bonds.
o The U.S. should immediately impose (VAT) taxes on any nation that imposes them on the U.S. This simple act would remedy the balance of trade deficit.
o The U.S. corporate income tax should be reduced to 10% - 20% and there should be no taxes on capital gains or inheritance. Why should the U.S. have some of the highest taxes in the world and an insane system of deductions that opens the door to endless tax-accounting expenses, legal expenses, fraud, special favors and threats from IRS agents?
o Commercial banks should not be allowed to sell or handle equities. Trust banks should not be allowed to practice commercial banking or insurance. Insurance companies should not be permitted to practice commercial banking or brokerage services. Brokerage houses should not be permitted to practice commercial banking. All of these mixed practices do nothing but serve greed and create massive conflicts of interest in the business world. So long as fiat money is in use, government should probably establish general ground rules, NOT regulate business.
o IF business insists on comprehensive lassez-faire (government keeps hands off business), THEN businesses that fail MUST be permitted to go bankrupt without any possibility of government bailout, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly. Accordingly, all of the money that was given to bail out the Wall Street banks and AIG should be immediately given back to the taxpayers with interest, and all of the banks and AIG should be permitted to fail, even if it crashes the entire world financial system. A crash of the entire world financial system would not be a "bad" thing. It would only be a "bad" thing for the plutocracy, rogue politicians and corporate fascists that have hijacked the productivity of the world's citizens in the trap known as "Globalism." With the advent of PEAK OIL, probably here now, it is inevitable that Globalization will end. This is good news for the middle class of the U.S. and the average world citizen.
o States have no business participating in, or regulating the gambling business, nor do they have any business participating in the revenue stream generated by cigarettes, alcohol or any mind-altering, recreational drug or substance.
o The Drug Enforcement Agency (the DEA) -- founded by the same criminal who encouraged trade with a Communist country, axed the Lunar Space Program, removed the US from the International Gold Standard System, defaulted on foreign debt obligations and broke into the Watergate Hotel in order to spy on his competitors -- Richard Nixon -- should be abolished. This agency has never won any war against drugs and has done nothing but help stock the world's largest penitentiary system with relatively innocent citizens, much of the system a for-profit partnership between corporate fascists and government.
o Anti-trust laws should be applied to the 6 major studios and the consolidated corporate media in order to break them up. It is unacceptable that almost all the news comes from 6 global corporations. This is no news at all. It is unacceptable that the cultural Marxist be permitted to indoctrinate entire populations with social, cultural and political spew. Violence that passes for "entertainment" in the movie and game industries is destroying an entire generation of children. The CEOS, boards and major stockholders that permit and profit of this war against traditional culture need to be run out of town and/or jailed.
o Insurance companies should not be permitted to reimburse for any sickness caused by over-eating obesity or drugs, whether legal or illegal, or reckless behavior, such as behavior in connection with committing crimes or extreme sports, such as sky-diving or bungee jumping.
o The LEGAL profession, CLERGY, BANKING profession and MEDICAL professions should all be non-profit industries. There is something wrong with people who enter these industries in order to profit from the confusion, fear, ambitions and sickness, RESPECTIVELY, of their fellow citizens.
o All Congresses, at the federal and state levels, should be required to have 50% male and female representation. Why should women, who comprise about 50% of the population, be excused from participating in a self-governing, representative democracy?
o Torture and the death penalty should be banned on the grounds that such is immoral, ineffective as a deterrent and cruel and unusual punishment. The entire "punishment" system should be phased out and replaced by a system that accentuates education, counseling, training, preventive health and medication in extreme cases. The current draconian system of fines, jail, torture and punishment is no longer acceptable in the 21st Century and does nothing but compound an environment of hate and destruction.
o The no-bid and cost-plus contracting system used by the U.S. government should be abolished. Any and all contracts offered by any government agency, whether federal, state or local, should be broadcast as a continuous public auction interactive with the Internet and the name, office, term and contact information of any and all public officials that have been involved in the proposals of such expenditures be made available in real-time. Citizens should be able to see WHERE their governments spends WHAT tax dollars and WHO budgeted their allocation in real-time, in writing, over the Internet.
o At least 50% of all the laws on the books (federal, state and local) MUST be consolidated OR struck. Any law physically WRITTEN by any person or entity who is NOT the specific elected Congressman or Congresswoman should be struck. Citizens cannot be expected to understand let alone obey overwhelming laws or laws that were not even written by their elected representatives. Put bluntly, any congressman that does not have the time or the ability to PHYSICALLY DRAFT his own legislation personally, is not qualified to be a legislator and has no business defrauding the public with credentials that s/he does not posses.
o The U.S. prison system needs to be downsized and readied for members of the Federal Reserve banking system, their cohorts/cronies in Congress (federal and state levels), top executives, board members and major stockholders of corporations (and other entities) who are convicted of participating in, or abetting, unjust enrichment at the expense of U.S. taxpayers and citizens.
BY THE ABOVE, I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT I HAVE PUT TOGETHER ALL THE BEST SOLUTIONS TO OUR PROBLEMS OR A LIST THAT EVERYONE, EVEN ANY MAJORITY, WILL AGREE WITH. NEVERTHELESS I DO FEEL THAT THESE SUGGESTIONS WOULD MOVE US ALL TO A COUNTRY AND WORLD THAT WOULD BE MORE PROSPEROUS, PROVIDE GREATER DIVERSITY OF LIFE STYLE, RESPECT THE RULE OF LAW, EMPHASIZE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, PROVIDE A MORE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF SECURITY, AND ALLOW PEOPLE TO MORE HAPPILY MAKE THEIR WAYS THROUGH LIFE.
James Jaeger
[Reply]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/21/2009 9:06 PM by selfreppingnano
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
ok a limited restructuring that tries to improve the contry with a return to the origonal enlightened philosophy of the past.
To what degree will this work in actuality?
There are lots of problems to overcome but some degree of these ideas might help to decentralize power enough to allow us the time create enough self sufficent societies to create real oppertunity.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 12:51 AM by gawell
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
"All members of the U.S. Congress, with the exception of Ron Paul, should be voted out of office." jj
How about eliminating the voting process all together? And instead introduce and sports style draft or recruitment program, and they all get to compete to 'advance' through the ranks from state to interstate offices (major leagues). The geeks and statisticians can work out an evaluation scheme. Colleges provide the fodder and open tryouts for independents and free-style self-educators. From mediocrities to meritocracies. Of course some sports never really become national or international, let alone solar systemically popular, hurling for example.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 11:10 AM by REDquist
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
That's what we have. It's the two party system. The voters choose the national champion.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 10:10 PM by gawell
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
surprise the party/league states went from 13 to 50.
and there are no voters
there are score keepers
and there winners and runners up.
steroids and rage is banned
adrenaline junkies hospitalized and given remedial
education in preventive health care, they can be assigned den mothers and senor mentors. they can practice standing in the corner and see how far that gets them in their attempts to move a real runner along or maybe lay down a sacrifice bunt.
they are told to seriously grow up and be a team player or sit on the sidelines to cheer and boo when team-spirit moves them or not.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 10:39 PM by REDquist
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
I rage against the night. Against the benighted.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 10:49 PM by gawell
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
rage against night is euphemistically ambiguous.
more specific is rage for those who are outraged upon.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 10:58 PM by REDquist
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Don't be a wimp.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 2:54 AM by gawell
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
To be both poor and sick -- is there anything worse?
Or put another way -- is there anything better than rich and healthy? Is happiness any less over-rated than rage?
Why do you have a brain?
Adaptive and complex movement.
2. WIMP is acronym for 'Weakly Interacting Massive Particle'. WIMPs are conjectured to make up most of the dark matter in the universe.
2. One leading candidate for the WIMPs are the sparticles predicted by string theory.
I am Sparticle.
also described as a mild insult.
mild rage is what again?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 12:18 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>To be both poor and sick -- is there anything worse?
Very little. There is no need for anyone to be poor or sick. These conditions occur because of inappropriate greed, waste and a confused and power-hungry planetary management system.
It's time scientists and technologists stop accomodating insane and ignorant politicians.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 3:28 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>To what degree will this work in actuality?
When a train goes off the tracks, the investigators start at the wreck and walk back down the tracks in the direction from whence the train came. As soon as they see the place where the tracks are bent, or too wide, or too narrow, one of the investigators, stops and says:
"By Job, I think this is the place were the train went off the tracks. Let's fix THIS place right here and the trains should be back on track."
Same with the U.S. The Constitution is the track and WE THE PEOPLE are the train. All we have to do is go back through the Constitution and FIX all the places where the stupid fucked up greedy, power-hungry morons changed the TEXT and interpretation of the original intent without due process of Ammendment.
Then we're back on track.
It's very simple. You're not going "back" in time (as some idiots counter). Ny doing this, you're getting back INTO time. We are now a country that is OUT OF TIME.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 10:03 AM by billmerit
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
"I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT I HAVE PUT TOGETHER ALL THE BEST SOLUTIONS TO OUR PROBLEMS"
REALLY????????
ROTFL
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 12:19 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>REALLY????????
>ROTFL
So maybe you should post your list then.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 11:40 AM by REDquist
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
. . . go back and look at your list and ask yourself “could this get Doojie arrested?”. I spotted two, the prohibition on ‘hoarding’ gold and the outlawing of ‘para-military outfits’. The problem with policy tools is that they can be used by both good people and bad people.
Also, your collection of items lacks a coherent strategy reflecting an overarching philosophy. You might give us your statement on that.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/22/2009 1:26 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Most laws would get doojie arrested, because doojie has little use for law.
2nd amendment and paramilitary groups is of interest. The issue seems to be built around the "preamble clause" to the 2nd amendment:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state..."
Once the term "well regulated militia" is introduced, we have only to turn to Article 1, Section 8 regarding the enumerated powers of congress:
1.organizing arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be emoployed in the service of the United States..."
Notice that the federl government is responsible for "arming" the militia. Therefore the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" would be subject to use for militia purposes as established by the federal government.
But what about "shall not be infringed"? To the degree that a well regulated militia is necessary(which is no longer the case) there is no infringement whatever on the people's right to keep and bear arms for militia purposes.
For militia purposes, the federal government has every right to stop arming the people, or allowing them to keep and bear arms, since there are no more militias by the rule of congress.
HOWEVER, there is not the first jot or tittle that says I can;t own a firearm for personal reasons to go hunting or protect myself from intruders.
SO, scanning the 10th amendment, and seeing that those powers not delegated to the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are within the powers of the states respectively, or the people, there is NO POWER GIVEN TO REGULATE FIREARMS FOR PERSONAL REASONS.
But how would this 10th amendment prohibition now apply to the states?
14th amendment: "no state shall make or enforce any law which abridges the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States".
That is, once the states could regulate it, now they cannot. It is NOT left tio the states respectively OR to the "people" but is now included as a privilege or immunity of a citizen of the United States.
It CANNOT, by law, be made a crime simply to own a firearm for personal use. There is nothing whatever in the Constitution dealing with that issue.
If I can lawfully buy a suitcase nuclear weapon, there is nothing that can prohibit me constitutionally from doing so.
The main reason for the 2nd amendment was to discouirage independent ORGANIZATIONS from establishing themselves outside state or federal authgority. If anytone can do so, then you have a law by sheer force of arms.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms for the power of any independent organization is unconstitutional, but the power of any individual to keep and bear any kind of firearm for personal protection, including knowledge of law for personal protection, that would not include "bearing arms", but simply the use of varous personal defenses of life, liberty, or property.
The 2nd amendment, by its plain language, was made to protect the state itself and give the stae authority for a militia within the bounds of federal regulation.
The only reason i can see for this language is that the state professed a need for other states to come to its aid should there develop a private milita to challenge the power of the state.
This seems congruent with the rest of the Constitution in its attempts to create a federal government to suppress individuals.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 12:30 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>Notice that the federl government is responsible for "arming" the militia. Therefore the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" would be subject to use for militia purposes as established by the federal government.
I don't believe this is what is supposed to happen. The militia are formed in and by the CITIZENS in the various 50 STATES. The Federal gov, via the U.S. President, may call up (borrow) the militia from various states if he deems it necessary defend the nation from foreign invasion. An ARMY may be rasied by the Federal government, but it cannot STAND and may only be funded by Congress for two years at a time. The idea is: if you have standing militaries all over the place, someone is going to find "excuses" to USE them. Witness: VIETNAM, IRAQ.
The idea, for the not-quite-bright, is this: WE THE PEOPLE ARE SUPPOSED TO HOLD THE POWER OF THE GUN AND KEEP IT ON A SHORT LEASH: NOT THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, PROFESSIONAL MERCENARIES OR AN ELITE. See http://www.mecfilms.com/mid/movies/oi/clip5.wmv if you are still foggy on this.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 12:57 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
You know this and I know this and the "Federalist" tells us this, but yes, we have no militia, we have no militia today. (Yes, we have no bananas).
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 2:07 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>... we have no militia, we have no militia today.
Depends on your definition of "no."
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 3:54 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Congress has taken Article 1, Section 8 quite literally, arming, supplying, organizing, training, disciplining, and in effect rendering the 2nd amendment obsolete.
"A well regulated militia" is totally cared for by the feds, and the state is only the plavce where they happen to be until needed for further use.
That's why the freedom to simply own weapons for personal use is the only freedom not regulated by congress. Any weapon you can legally purchase and use for personal reasons is not limited by any Constitutional law.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 4:05 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
BTW, based on what I've learned in the study of law, since due process deals with personal freedoms, and "the people" refers to the people of each respective state, I'm thinking that individuals are largely ignored in personal affairs as long as they harm no other, which would THEN make them subject to judgement by the more ancient laws of due process that pre-dated the Constitution.
The fact that this is stated in the 5th and then repeated yet again in the 14th protectiing all persons regardless of citizenship, tends to support the idea that "due process" was never considered a process strictly limited to US Constitutional law, and in fact, the 9th amendment would suggest otherwise.
Statutory law would always be subject to common law. This would mean that all due process would allow the individual to question the lawfulness, not the legality, but the lawfulness of any statute applied to them personally.
It could be arguend that the assumption is consistent with ancient christianity: the individual is always above the power of the law as long as s/he harms no other, which then would require due process by laws not under the power of either state or Constitutional government:
1.Two witnesses
2.presumption of innocence
3.Right to face your accuser
4.protection of double jeopardy
5.habeas corpus
6.Right against self incrimination
Al the above can be traced to the bible, which would make it necessary for any tribunal to respect those rights.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 5:14 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Al the above can be traced to the bible
And where does that leave us?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 6:21 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
And where does that leave us?
Oh, I think I get it now. You're pointing out *why* our legal system is so screwed up. Because it's based in scripture!
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 4:21 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>That's why the freedom to simply own weapons for personal use is the only freedom not regulated by congress. Any weapon you can legally purchase and use for personal reasons is not limited by any Constitutional law.
True, but they use the Commerce Clause, as re-written by the Supreme Court, to "justify" banning guns in "gun-free zones," such zones illegal under Consitutional Law.
See what Edwin Vieira, J.D. and Pat Buchanan have to say about this in ORIGINAL INTENT at
http://www.OriginalIntent.us
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 4:29 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Yes, but even the commerce clause cannot override due process, which came long before any constitutional law. Even should an individual be accused of violation, the person is protected by due process, which can challenge any statutory principle.
The problem is, lawyers don't tell us that, priobably because they don't even know it.
A study of law from ancient process, however, shows it to be plainly true.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 4:33 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
To carry the above argument further, the 2nd amendment dealt with groups, as in legal militias, but not with individuals, because the founders recognized that by ancient law, individuals had the "inalienable right' to due process, which would invalidate control of any individual not part of some revolutionary group.
Due process always overrides statutory law. The reason is stated in the 14th amendment, which includes several sections of the original constitution, stating clearly in the "privilege and immunities" clause that no state, like the federal government, shall make or enforce any law abridging the rights of citizens, and allowing due process to all persons, showing clearly that due process is not part of statutory law.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 4:44 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>Yes, but even the commerce clause cannot override due process, which came long before any constitutional law. Even should an individual be accused of violation, the person is protected by due process, which can challenge any statutory principle.
I'm not following your thinking here.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 7:17 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
"A well regulated militia" is totally cared for by the feds, and the state is only the plavce where they happen to be until needed for further use. That's why the freedom to simply own weapons for personal use is the only freedom not regulated by congress. Any weapon you can legally purchase and use for personal reasons is not limited by any Constitutional law.
Here's what the Second Amendment actually says:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Let's explicate this:
>A well regulated Militia,
Means the militia should be well regulated by the elected officials in the STATE, not in the Federal government, because the next phrase names the state.
>being necessary
means a Militia is NECESSARY. This is the ONLY place the Constitution says something is NECESSARY. The Constitution doesn't say the Congress is necessary, or the President is necessary or a standing ARMY is necessary or the Supreme Court is necessary ... it says a MILITIA IS NECESSARY, to what?
>to the security of a free State,
So a MILITIA is NECESSARY in order for a STATE to be FREE. Note, it doesn't say a MILITIA is necessary in order for the FEDERAL government or the CENTRAL government to be free. It says in order for the STATE, i.e. Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, California, etc., to remain free. Free of what? Free of everything; especially the FEDERAL government, some CENTRAL government or some elite attempting to own and/or control an army and/or military. The STATES only LENT their authority to the Federal government.
>the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Thus, WE THE PEOPLE who comprise and authorize the FREE STATES to exist have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms as part of our duty to be well organized as a Militia BY those states. NOTE: nowhere does the Constitution say that People have the right to keep and bear arms for deer hunting or to protect themselves from intruders in their homes. The People have the right to keep and bear arms as PART of the STATE MILITIA on order to maintain a check and balance of power against the CENTRAL GOVERNMENT and in order to guarantee their FREEDOM as a FREE STATE or People. This is why it is NECESSARY, because POLITICAL POWER GROWS OUT OF THE BARREL OF A GUN.
o If the Central gov has the gun, then THEY have the political power.
o If some elite has the gun, then THEY have the political power.
o If the People, organized in state militia, have the gun, then THEY have the political power.
Can it be any simpler?
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 7:37 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Although I can't disagree with any particular point you bring up James, I have to ask if you don't see this as just 'centralizing' power within the State.
In other words, the State militia is it's own 'centralized' power within the borders of it's own State.
So, should we also have a county militia in every county to keep the 'central' State militia from getting out of control, and then a City militia in every city within the county to keep it's militia in check?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 9:32 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>Although I can't disagree with any particular point you bring up James, I have to ask if you don't see this as just 'centralizing' power within the State.
Yes, lesser of the evils.
>In other words, the State militia is it's own 'centralized' power within the borders of it's own State.
Yes.
>So, should we also have a county militia in every county to keep the 'central' State militia from getting out of control, and then a City militia in every city within the county to keep it's militia in check?
I will agree that the Second Amendment could have been a lot clearer. It would seem that no mater how you organize it, they didn't want a lot of citizens running around willy nilly with guns so they stipulated that they should be trained and organized. I don't know if this just makes it look better or what, but the idea is that citizens have the guns, not some over-arching group under some foreign or distant power.
Given the fact that we HAVE governments, what do you want to do, disarm everyone?
The problem with the anarchy movement is they don't give the (exact) program of relinquishing the power and duties of government into an orderly new arrangement. In other words it sounds good on paper, but that's as far as it goes ... so far.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 9:47 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
The problem with the anarchy movement is they don't give the (exact) program of relinquishing the power and duties of government into an orderly new arrangement. In other words it sounds good on paper, but that's as far as it goes ... so far.
Right, I gotcha. Just realizing it's a scalar problem.
Arm the State militias, and you have State centralized power, but at least it keeps the Feds in check, which would be a better State than the one we have. No argument there.
I like to hope that a real (working) egalitarianism would arise much in the same way cellular automata do...through simple recursive rules......such as the interwebz, and twitter, etc. It's a self-organizing system, built by the cellular interactions at the ground level.
I see it as an emergent system, not as one that even could in principle be organized externally or from 'on high', since that would be contrary to it's very nature.
I don't see people organizing any such movement per se, I just see it emerging through new modes of communication....and I think that's the key right there....widespread ubiquitous communication.
It probably helps some to disillusion people to any form of organized State along the way, if only to quicken the process.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 10:06 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
And what stops those Militias from becoming State sized armies?
Aside from whether they abuse the citizens in their own State, let's say California wanted to take over the entire West Coast, and Oregon and Washington couldn't really stand up to us.
What then?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 10:16 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
I guess what I'm actually asking is how do you envision preventing civil war between the States?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/23/2009 10:21 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
I suppose another way of putting it, is that it doesn't appear you've actually changed the nature of the hierarchy, just shortened it down to the State level. But it has the same structure.
We could just as easily imagine the entire earth as a nation, with what we call "nations" currently as member States (the State of Canada, the State of Mexico, etc.) and then say that each of those States should have their own militia, but no army for the Federal United Earth.
Same system, different scale.
[Reply] [Parent]
Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/26/2009 6:56 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>Same system, different scale.
Okay agreed Pan. All this is a BIG fucking problem.
Let's hit it from another angle.
What are the THINGS or REASONS people fight, conflict and war? Let's itemize them and then prioritize the list. You start.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/26/2009 7:17 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
What are the THINGS or REASONS people fight, conflict and war? Let's itemize them and then prioritize the list. You start.
Damn, you gotta toss me a difficult question!?!? :)
Ok, well, it can be approached from many angles. We could break down competition/cooperation of life itself. We could talk about scarcity (or the perception of).
But, I'll start simply. In a nutshell, people have a hard time perceiving others as peers.
Also, I think there is a tendency towards "atomistic" thinking (a visual analogy: the thought of atoms as tiny solid 'billiard balls', is similarly erroneous to the rubber sheet visualization). It's what subTillion would call the 'transcendent bias', and probably stems from the fact that the 'objective' or 'physical' or 'emergent' or 'material' world emerges from an 'immanent' substrate. In other words, transcendence, or emergence (the active principle: yang) is how this world got here (physically), so obviously, all physical things are slanted in that direction.
But, he also points out that there are two ways to transcend: transcend and exclude, or transcend and include.
Transcension through exclusion seems to fail, as it literally excludes the ground under it's feet (this would be like the branches of a tree trying to dislodge itself from the trunk and roots to float towards the sun - an actual tree grows taller, and closer to the sun by simultaneously digging deeper into it's substrate via the root system).
Like the tree, transcension through inclusion means enfolding immanence into the next higher order.
"All things stand with their back to the female"
- Lao Tzu
In practical terms, this means that, as a society, we need to become more inclusive, and empowering women would probably help a lot. In fact, numerous studies have shown that the empowerment of poor women has vast benefits to any society she lives in.
We need to swing more towards the K-selection end of the spectrum, while not completely abandoning the R-selection paradigm (preserving those societal niches where it's actually effective), but rather limiting it's scope to non-destructive arenas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory
Overview
In r/K selection theory, selective pressures are hypothesised to drive evolution in one of two generalized directions: r- or K-selection.[1] These terms, r and K, are derived from standard ecological algebra, as illustrated in the simple Verhulst equation of population dynamics:[3]
where r is the growth rate of the population (N), and K is the carrying capacity of its local environmental setting. Typically, r-selected species exploit less-crowded ecological niches, and produce many offspring, each of which has a relatively low probability of surviving to adulthood. In contrast, K-selected species are strong competitors in crowded niches, and invest more heavily in fewer offspring, each of which has a relatively high probability of surviving to adulthood. In the scientific literature, r-selected species are occasionally referred to as "opportunistic", while K-selected species are described as "equilibrium".[4]
[edit]Unstable environments
In unstable or unpredictable environments, r-selection predominates as the ability to reproduce quickly is crucial. There is little advantage in adaptations that permit successful competition with other organisms, because the environment is likely to change again. Traits that are thought to be characteristic of r-selection include: high fecundity, small body size, early maturity onset, short generation time, and the ability to disperse offspring widely. Organisms whose life history is subject to r-selection are often referred to as r-strategists or r-selected. Organisms with r-selected traits range from bacteria and diatoms, through insects and weeds, to various semelparous cephalopods and mammals, especially small rodents.
[edit]Stable environments
In stable or predictable environments, K-selection predominates as the ability to compete successfully for limited resources is crucial and populations of K-selected organisms typically are very constant and close to the maximum that the environment can bear (unlike r-selected populations, where population sizes can change much more rapidly). Traits that are thought to be characteristic of K-selection include: large body size, long life expectancy, and the production of fewer offspring that require extensive parental care until they mature. Organisms whose life history is subject to K-selection are often referred to as K-strategists or K-selected. Organisms with K-selected traits include large organisms such as elephants, trees, humans and whales, but also smaller, long-lived organisms such as Arctic Terns. The climate that demonstrate predictably variable characteristics of a stable climate is the oceanic climate. The most stable climate in this sense would be found in Northwest Europe. The warm Gulf Stream and the cool temperature of the northern latitude form a natural front in which predictably variable characteristics are found to the greatest extent. The very location would be southern Lofoten which is also known for the greatest positive temperature anomaly in the world.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/26/2009 7:41 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
On a more concrete level, I think there are 3 mechanisms which will enrich society and aid the dissolution of government:
1) Empowerment, particularly of the middle class and poor. Getting people "off the grid" (I'm using the analogy to energy-independent people who no longer get power from the power companies, but this can be extended to ALL forms of power - get people off any form of power grid, i.e., help them become truly 'independent' or 'autonomous'. Of course, it's great to do this for oneself, but it also helps a lot to help as many others as possible achieve this: the more 'autonomous' people there are, the faster it propagates, and the more resilient it becomes, so by helping others to enhance their own autonomy, you are helping secure your own be creating the environment in which it thrives.
2) Non-participation. To the furthest extent you are reasonably able to (without endangering yourself), STOP participating in government (or any authoritarian structure). And encourage/support others doing this as well. This is similar to 'getting off the grid' but specifically applied to the mechanisms of government. Just stop playing with them. This could mean not voting (since voting implicitly validates the system of governance through one's participation in it), stop paying taxes (but see my disclaimer about putting yourself in danger), not calling/relying on police except in the utmost of emergencies (don't call them over trivial disputes), stop using the legal system as much as possible (this means don't sue people), etc. So, in every way you find it reasonable, simply disconnect from all forms of governance, and encourage/help others to do the same.
3) Technology. Especially technology that facilitates 1 & 2. We've already discussed what these technologies are (the usual supspects: social media, robotic farming, molecular nanotechnology, free energy, etc.) Use them, encourage others to use them, invest in them (if you can), invent them (if you can), and just keep supporting them in every imaginable way.
The technology will obsolete government, because it empowers people to do things and provide for themselves in ways that will make the government irrelevant.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 12:04 AM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Oh for christs sakes Pan ... I'll start.
What are the THINGS or REASONS people fight, conflict and war? Let's itemize them and then prioritize the list.
FOOD (non-durables)
SHELTER (caves and houses)
FIRE (energy)
THINGS (durable and non-durable)
WOMEN (sex)
LAND (space)
AUTHORITY (to offset insecurities)
RESPECT (to offset ignorance)
The above is what men and women basically fight for.
James Jaeger
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 12:38 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Right, but that can all be summed up in a single word:
Scarcity.
So the obvious solution would be abundance.
Open source.
Molecular manufacturing.
Fusion.
Robotic farming.
Ummm...sex...robots? Telepresence?
Edutainment.
Scarcity is a lie James, has been since the adoption of agriculture at least. Need to wean people off the lie.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 12:47 AM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>Right, but that can all be summed up in a single word: Scarcity.
>So the obvious solution would be abundance.
Scarcity is a lie James, has been since the adoption of agriculture at least. Need to wean people off the lie.
So why is scarcity a lie in 25 words or less?
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 1:13 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
What is scarce is time.
Let's look at farming.
It takes less than 1% of the worlds population to produce more food than the world consumes.
There is no shortage of actual food.
So, in principle, we could feed everyone.
There's enough gold in the world that every person on the planet could have at least one gold necklace, and there's still enough for all our electronics.
So, no shortage of gold either.
There's enough water (for now) in the world for everyone to drink, no shortage of water.
But, it takes time and effort to get all these things, and to get them to people.
Scarcity is a division of time, and thus a division of labor.
When the Amish build a new house, the entire community pitch in to do it, and it's built very quickly, and with very little effort on the part of each individual. Many hands makes for light work.
However, because of the division of labor, some people feel that they are 'above' any kind of work whatsoever, and they become bankers and politicians and lawyers.
Middle men and authoritarians. Kings. They relegate and delegate the work of others, and convince the majority, either through their intelligence (if they can produce ideas that increase efficiency/production) or through some long held belief (such as hereditary inheritance of position) that they deserve a larger portion of what is produced.
In other words, people who have good ideas that benefit society are often absolved of the "lesser" tasks that others have to do, or they con everyone into thinking they are absolved of these tasks due to their position of birth.
And then they organize.
This, to a degree, makes sense for the past few thousand years, when work was really hard, technology was primitive, and life was short.
Today though, the technology exists to make work (for pretty much everyone) really easy.
Like I mentioned, farming is pretty much completely automated already, and only requires a few 'hands'. Soon, construction will be completely automated, but it's already well on it's way.
Why do you think the majority of people in the US work in the service industry? Because what else is there to do other than serve each other the things our machines make? We just need to close the loop and make all menial jobs automated. But, we also need to make all this technology available to the rest of the world.
I think what's happened is that over thousands of years, we've just grown so used to Authority, that it's difficult to imagine life without it.
Here's a few more examples:
Food in America is not hard to come by. I spent 2 years travelling the country on foot. I never once had to worry about getting something to eat, as there are numerous missions and churches serving food everywhere you go. There's no scarcity of food itself, but there is to an extent a scarcity of people willing to serve it.
Establishments serving food or drink are required by law to make it available to anyone who asks.
I just don't think people get that we've completely exceeded all basic material needs already. There's MORE stuff than we know what to do with, so we endlessly go through this cycle of creating ever novel and useless 'consumer' goods. Nothing wrong with that, but you'd think that by now, we would have at least moved the basic necessities of life to a level where they're available to all.
I'm not against competition. But we've come far enough, that there is NO REASON why people would ever need to compete over the BASIC NECESSITIES that sustain the human body.
By this, I'm talking about food, shelter, water, clothing.
These things are DIRT CHEAP, and most of it can be produced by machines.
We have socialized police force. We have socialized fire departments. We have socialized highway systems. We have socialized parks. We have socialized libraries. Why not food/clothing/shelter to provide what every human needs just to go on day after day, so they can focus on the things that people really want: new ideas, new innovations, etc.
The only reason I can see that we haven't done this, is because those in power know that keeping people on the edge of survival creates a certain kind of fear/tension that makes them easier to control. As in Maslow's hierarchy of needs. People who can do nothing but wonder every day where their next meal is going to come from have a harder time rising up against them. They are reduced to the level of animals, and can be herded around as such.
In general, I'm opposed to authority in any form, because as far as I can see, authority has never accomplished anything good, but opposing it has.
The sad thing I've realized, is that their is no logical way to IMPOSEW non-authority, so my only means towards this end is to practice it, tell others, and wait patiently.
A star trek like egalitarianism is possible, it's not that we don't have the technology or physical resources to do it, it's that the masses are still under the illusion that it's not possible yet, and those in power want to maintain that illusion.
So, break the illusion, if you're able. There's nothing else you can do.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 1:15 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Establishments serving food or drink are required by law to make it available to anyone who asks.
Should read:
Establishments serving food or drink are required by law to make water available to anyone who asks.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 1:28 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
So this is why I bring up the differences between R-strategists and K-strategists.
In times of scarcity, R-strategists (virus', rats, pond scums, fleas) will go into an explosive growth phase (this is what happened during the major plagues). They breed profusely and spread as far as they can to increase the odds that some of them will survive. They have major boom and bust cycles.
K-strategists (great cats, wolves, elephants, whales) INVEST heavily in each of their young, to EMPOWER the individual animal. There are fewer of them, but they have greater equilibrium with their environment and rarely compete with their own kind.
If we viewed all people in this manner, then we would want to invest in the potential of EVERY human. We wouldn't think of other humans, no matter what their status or accomplishments, as 'disposable'. Every one would get the NURTURING they need until they succeed.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 1:55 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
I guess my point is that I see all these social ills as directly traceable to the fact that people continue to believe that they need authority over them.
I need the police because without them YOU might sneak into my house to steal something (wait, why would you steal something from me if you already had everything you need????)
I need courts, and judges, and lawyers and prisons to deter all future generations from doing the same thing (wait: it doesn't seem like the crime rates actually go down with all these institutions, so I'm not really any safer).
It's been noted by a few people that the level of crime (the reason why we need all these 'protections' and 'securities') is proportional to the size and extent of the government.
Or, in other words, deterrence in the form of law enforcement doesn't actually work.
If you walk into the wrong neighborhood, you're still in danger, no matter how many police there are (who are all hanging out in the rich neighborhoods and business district anyway).
If someone, at random, decides they want to walk up behind you and shoot you, the cop 4 blocks away won't be able to get to you in time to stop him.
The fact that enforcement exists doesn't seem to actually deter any of these criminals, and poverty seems to increase it.
So what's the solution? Duh! Eliminate poverty. The savings in taxes alone makes it cost-efficient! Less prisons, less courts, less judges, less lawyers, less property damage! That should equate into less taxes.
For example.
New York and Honolulu have both done studies that show it costs the State LESS to permanently house the homeless than it does to leave them where they are.
Why?
Because they use the ER less.
Because they use the psych wards less (btw, I've probably spent 1/4 million dollars in your tax dollars in psych wards - over $1000/day per person - and far less than that could have been spent putting me in an apartment and getting me a good therpist, which would have kept me out of the psych ward - just saying I know from first hand experience the excess and waste we tolerate just to hang on to our 'cold shoulder' mentality that could be better spent actually PREVENTING the problem from arising in the first place).
Because they end up in jails less.
Because they don't get sick as often.
Taking care of poverty is, it turns out, is actually more COST EFFECTIVE to the tax payer than not.
It's math. The studies have been done, and it should be common sense. So you can see why I get disgusted with authority.
If you get rid of government and taxes, communites naturally do this on their own. THey self-organize this kind of stuff.
Being taxed to death makes it HARDER for communities to do this, which perpetuates poverty, which increases crime, which JUSTIFIES the need for more POLICE!!!!!
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 2:46 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
25 words Pan?
Okay, I guess I'm going to have to boil what you say down ... most of which I agree with BTW.
>What is scarce is time.
Yes, time is truly a scarce factor I didn't really think of. BUT, in a world where people like Dr. Michael West advance REGENERATIVE MEDICINE and STEM CELL CLONING, people will live longer and longer, thus time will be knocked out as a scarcity factor.
>Let's look at farming.
It takes less than 1% of the worlds population to produce more food than the world consumes. There is no shortage of actual food.
The multiplier effect of technology.
>So, in principle, we could feed everyone.
The world's population stands at 6.83 billion today and will grow to 9.15 billion by 2050 and then level off. Global economic output is expected to be 2 - 3 percent per year, meaning, if you do the math, global income will increase more quickly than population over the next 40 years.
>There's enough ...
Forget the planet, there's enough UNIVERSE to go around.
If technology is used to conquer this UNIVERSE, then there's enough TIME to go around too.
>However, because of the division of labor, some people feel that they are 'above' any kind of work whatsoever, and they become bankers and politicians and lawyers. Middle men and authoritarians. Kings.
Okay, here's where the rub comes in, the stratification of society. This rub prompts this question:
IS IT DESIRABLE TO DE-STRATIFY SOCIETY?
Stratification is cause NOT by just one (1) activity or event. People can work hard and serve their fellows and thus become kings or CEOs. Is that wrong? A person sitting at the top of the crane can often better see what has to be picked up than those on the ground. Is that wrong?
>In other words, people who have good ideas that benefit society are often absolved of the "lesser" tasks that others have to do,
It's called "facility differential" in Scientology. An executive that provides supervision and GETS THINGS DONE (the definition of an EXECUTIVE), deserves more facilities than the person that DOESN'T GET THINGS DONE. Since I now edit faster than I did 5 years ago (get more done), I deserve three or four editing suits, each with at least one assistant editor, don't I? I also need to have the AUTHORITY to tell the assistants what to do because they do not have the experience YET, to know what to do. In consideration (EXCHANGE) for them taking my orders, I give them something: money, training, screen credits, prestige, satisfaction of producing a quality product. What's wrong with that? My authority is only abusive if there is NO exchange.
When a BANKER creates money out of thin air and then spends this money in society, he is ABUSING society because he is demanding AUTHORITY over others but not giving them a REAL EXCHANGE.
Thus, your beef with AUTHORITY should not be against authorities that keep their EXCHANGE in, but with AUTHORITIES that do not.
o We pay taxes to the AUTHORITIES, but we never see real results or we have no accountability = ABUSE.
o We use the Federal Reserve's "money" but all we see is increased debt where certain AUTHORITIES are getting paid first and paid ALWAYS = abuse.
o We see infinite space out there yet we are still stuck on a planet fighting each other because some gov AUTHORITY tells us to go to war = abuse.
Your beef is with MAL-authority, not GOOD-authority.
Your beef is with BAD-control, not GOOD-control Pan.
I guarantee if you ever worked for me, you would never even feel any authority over you, only good positive guidance that you COULD call control. In fact, many years ago, I was so concerned about this very issue of abusive control and authority and the attendant insanity that surrounds it, I wrote a bunch of manuals and books on the subject of management as such pertains to the film industry (as that's the only field I know anything about). Ck out one of my books called MOVIE JOB DESCRIPTIONS at http://www.moviepubs.net It's the 4th book down under BOOKS.
I acknowledge your other good points below, too numerous to comment upon, but allow me to say this: I recently did almost exactly what you suggested and put in 40 hours over at HABITAT FOR HUMANITY. There I got to work with fellow citizens that were not as fortunate as I have been due to the luck of birth. As I was loading and unloading trucks all day, I couldn't help admiring what a wonderful attitude most of these people had and it made me really want to get back to the editing room and cut the best film I possibly could to help improve conditions in this country and around the world. Was I wrong to want to be sitting in a posh editing studio controlling equipment and assistances, rather than being down there on the loading dock moving used couches and washing machines?
James
P.S. Pan, I know that with money and power and authority it's easy to become abusive, and many do. By comparison, it's almost easy to be ethical when one is poor. But I have known people with great financial resources that HAVE wielded reasonably great authority with a very gentle and understanding way, so I KNOW it CAN be done. But, like anything else, it takes training. Often people are given power and authority at birth and they were not properly trained by their parents on how top handle it. I thus respect Warren Buffet for giving much of his estate back to society rather than his kids. If he trains his kids well, there is no reason they won't be able to earn just as much as their old man.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 3:46 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
25 words Pan?
Sorry :)
Yes, time is truly a scarce factor I didn't really think of. BUT, in a world where people like Dr. Michael West advance REGENERATIVE MEDICINE and STEM CELL CLONING, people will live longer and longer, thus time will be knocked out as a scarcity factor.
Yeah, it's not just lifespan that makes time scarce. It's how much you get per unit of time invested.
I find the saying 'There is no such thing as a free lunch' humorous. In fact, all life attempts to get the freest lunch possible. Plants work their entire lives to store energy so that other animals can eat those plants. The animals that eat those plants, to some degree are getting a 'free' lunch (they're not the ones doing all the work storing solar energy/nutrients), and then other animals eat those animals that store the free energy provided by the plants...and so on and so on. Life is a process of finding the freest lunch you can find. The freer your lunch, the more time you have to do other things. Leisure time in society produces art and innovation. Innovation makes lunch more free, so we can continue to innovate more free lunches. And create more art.
The world's population stands at 6.83 billion today and will grow to 9.15 billion by 2050 and then level off. Global economic output is expected to be 2 - 3 percent per year, meaning, if you do the math, global income will increase more quickly than population over the next 40 years.
Right, guess that depends on your views of the Singularity, but it doesn't hurt to plan ahead :)
Forget the planet, there's enough UNIVERSE to go around.
Yup. No lack of material. The division of wealth is really a division of labor which is really a division of time.
If technology is used to conquer this UNIVERSE, then there's enough TIME to go around too.
Although I cringe at your use of the word 'conquer', and disagree with the outcome (I believe we will soon become hyperdimensional, and/or connect to the interstellar/intergalactic hypernet???), in all other respects I agree with you: as long as we live in a 3D 'verse we would need to continue to expand indefinitely.
Okay, here's where the rub comes in, the stratification of society. This rub prompts this question:
IS IT DESIRABLE TO DE-STRATIFY SOCIETY?
I view leadership as a 'Do as I do, not as I say' paradigm. Successful leaders...well...LEAD. Meaning, if you view them as successful, and you like where they're going, then you follow.
Those who attempt to lead by 'Do as I say, not as I do' are doing exactly the opposite.
So I think your concept of 'good authority' or 'good control' corresponds with my concept of 'Lead by example, not by Authority'. By Authority, I specifically mean threats of coercion and force and fraud. A true leader doesn't need these things, because the value of her 'direction' is apparent and self-evident. 'Bad' leaders must use glibness, lying, and violence to back up their claims.
Stratification is cause NOT by just one (1) activity or event. People can work hard and serve their fellows and thus become kings or CEOs. Is that wrong? A person sitting at the top of the crane can often better see what has to be picked up than those on the ground. Is that wrong?
See above. I follow those whom I respect, and I do not respect those who use externalized force or coercion to achieve their ends.
For historians, the matter of how we developed this system of Kings is interesting. For me, as a practical matter, I see all Law as 'suggestions'. In other words, all law should be reformulated as 'It's not the Law, it's just a Good Idea!' Leaders should be able to demonstrate their leadership through practice and logical reasoning, not by their charisma or 'glibness'.
It's called "facility differential" in Scientology. An executive that provides supervision and GETS THINGS DONE (the definition of an EXECUTIVE), deserves more facilities than the person that DOESN'T GET THINGS DONE. Since I now edit faster than I did 5 years ago (get more done), I deserve three or four editing suits, each with at least one assistant editor, don't I? I also need to have the AUTHORITY to tell the assistants what to do because they do not have the experience YET, to know what to do. In consideration (EXCHANGE) for them taking my orders, I give them something: money, training, screen credits, prestige, satisfaction of producing a quality product. What's wrong with that? My authority is only abusive if there is NO exchange.
Yes. I'm not suggesting a leveling or equalization that would destroy the idea of a meritocracy. I'm merely trying to point out that those who are at the top right now do very little of value, but have somehow convinced the majority that they do do something of value. They are parasites in the extreme.
Ideally, everyone should be free to value their work as they choose, and others likewise can agree or disagree with that valuation. Free exchange, unmediated by outside authority. Or in other words, truly free markets.
But again, see what I mean by real leadership above. If you're good at what you do, and I need to take instruction from you, that's the natural order of things.
The kind of authority I mean (and the operating definition I use whenever I use the word 'authority') is when you threaten or coerce me in any way to adopt or follow your practices. Authority is an action that robs someone of Autonomy.
When a BANKER creates money out of thin air and then spends this money in society, he is ABUSING society because he is demanding AUTHORITY over others but not giving them a REAL EXCHANGE.
never particularly liked banking, but especially fractional reserve and centralized banks.
Thus, your beef with AUTHORITY should not be against authorities that keep their EXCHANGE in, but with AUTHORITIES that do not.
See above :)
o We pay taxes to the AUTHORITIES, but we never see real results or we have no accountability = ABUSE.
Taxes are an entirely unholy affair. They should be suggested donations, kept accounted of in real time, and thoroughly audited every month. There are too many shell games going on. Most tax money doesn't actually get spent on public projects. I suggest 'voluntary taxation' (if we're to have any form whatsoever) that is 100% transparent, and every cent is tracked and made publicly available in real time via the web.
o We use the Federal Reserve's "money" but all we see is increased debt where certain AUTHORITIES are getting paid first and paid ALWAYS = abuse.
The Federal Reserve is the Fourth Reich.
o We see infinite space out there yet we are still stuck on a planet fighting each other because some gov AUTHORITY tells us to go to war = abuse.
They want to keep us stuck on the planet of the Apes.
And yes, in the eventuality that we don't actually go 'hyperspatial' at Singularity time, then I agree it would be cool to swing by Iapetus, and possibly further on my way out of this solar system.
Your beef is with MAL-authority, not GOOD-authority.
See above definition of Authority.
I guarantee if you ever worked for me, you would never even feel any authority over you, only good positive guidance that you COULD call control.
Are you offering me a job?
My current plans are to go to Honolulu in March, where I will not freeze to death, and begin to build things up until I get to the point where I can involved in virtualization (a booming industry - already up to a billion/year already). But I'm flexible and free form.
When it comes to work, I'm actually a workaholic, and tend to burn myself out quickly. I throw every cell of my being into what I do, but tend to overextend myself and 'crash'. Not good at self-regulation. My only stipulations are that I need residency, and if you don't fire me, I won't quit.
In fact, many years ago, I was so concerned about this very issue of abusive control and authority and the attendant insanity that surrounds it, I wrote a bunch of manuals and books on the subject of management as such pertains to the film industry (as that's the only field I know anything about). Ck out one of my books called MOVIE JOB DESCRIPTIONS at http://www.moviepubs.net It's the 4th book down under BOOKS.
I'll check that out today.
My suggestion about taking in a poor person and filming it, was the idea of tying together your love of documentaries (which are crucial for exposing the public) and actually causing real change at the same time.
Like the series '30 Days', but applied to providing homeless people with housing, skill training, etc.
I acknowledge your other good points below, too numerous to comment upon, but allow me to say this: I recently did almost exactly what you suggested and put in 40 hours over at HABITAT FOR HUMANITY.
That's awesome. They are great. Three huzzahs, and keep it up!
There I got to work with fellow citizens that were not as fortunate as I have been due to the luck of birth. As I was loading and unloading trucks all day, I couldn't help admiring what a wonderful attitude most of these people had and it made me really want to get back to the editing room and cut the best film I possibly could to help improve conditions in this country and around the world. Was I wrong to want to be sitting in a posh editing studio controlling equipment and assistances, rather than being down there on the loading dock moving used couches and washing machines?
Not at all, lol. That's why I suggested you do the thing with the homeless person and make a DOCUMENTRARY about it. That is your talent, so I thought of fusing the two together. You get the practice and experience of working directly with someone, you get to make your documentary, and if it does well (and I think it REALLY would do well) you would make money, and inspire change all over the country.
That's why I think of it as a 'positive sum' venture.
James
P.S. Pan, I know that with money and power and authority it's easy to become abusive, and many do. By comparison, it's almost easy to be ethical when one is poor. But I have known people with great financial resources that HAVE wielded reasonably great authority with a very gentle and understanding way, so I KNOW it CAN be done. But, like anything else, it takes training. Often people are given power and authority at birth and they were not properly trained by their parents on how top handle it. I thus respect Warren Buffet for giving much of his estate back to society rather than his kids. If he trains his kids well, there is no reason they won't be able to earn just as much as their old man.
Yup, again review my definition of authority and leadership above.
Good leaders are self-evident because they do NOT demand, they do NOT threaten, they do NOT coerce, lie, or cheat.
Ron Paul may be the only politician I know of that comes close to fitting that description, I respect the man a lot, although I wouldn't vote for him ONLY because I'm principally opposed to the process of voting itself. If I had the opportunity, I would probably support him in other ways, such as donating time. He's a very, very intelligent person, and crazy as hell to be setting himself against the Fed :)
kallisti
Pan
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 5:06 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>I'm merely trying to point out that those who are at the top right now do very little of value, but have somehow convinced the majority that they do do something of value. They are parasites in the extreme.
Well they're looking for THEIR free lunch.
That said, I no longer have any problem with your views on authority. Except in instances like bringing up children, amongst free adults, leadership authority IS best served by do as I do, not as I say. Leadership by example, I agree is the best, and it's unfortunate that so many in government and business are there because they're looking for a "free lunch" on the backs of everyone else. These are despicable and the system that breeds them must be altered.
As far as my next movie, I don't think I want to do any more with politics unless by some fluk ORIGINAL INTENT does well (and I seriously doubt it will do as well as FIAT EMPIRE). I may do a doc with Dr. West based on his book, THE IMMORTAL CELL.
Jame
P.S. I put the first half of ORIGINAL INTENT up on the net for free. If you have interest, you can see the various chapters by going to YOUTUBE and typing in ORIGINAL INTENT from "OriginalIntentDoc"
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 5:25 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
That said, I no longer have any problem with your views on authority. Except in instances like bringing up children
It's interesting that you should bring that up, because I think I have found an answer.
Parents (ideally - don't want to get into the good/bad parent thing) purposefully seek to create independence in their children. This is the entire process of 'raising' a child. They only exercise authority through the developmental stages of a child's life as it's necessary to instill that same sense of order in the child so that the child will ultimately become independent of the parent's authority. They never seek to prolong it past it's necessity.
Government is like the parent that never lets go. Which brings us full circle to what we were talking about concerning the duration of government.
If, like a parent, governments were designed with the principle in them that their function was to make society independent over some period of time (and this would need to be explicitly stated in the "Constitution" that this was the PRIMARY goal), then we could have a meaningful dialog about what level and type and so on of government was necessary to effectuate this goal.
Our current forms of government do not make it clear to people that they need to be WORKING towards this end. The common wisdom is that we'll always need government, because we'll always fear our neighbors, so we'll always be dependent on government for *something*.
Were it possible to instantiate such a government, I could probably get behind it. We would need a philosopher king (? somewhat jokingly ?)
So, a good government, like a good parent, seeks to NURTURE independence from itself.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 6:31 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Parents (ideally - don't want to get into the good/bad parent thing) purposefully seek to create independence in their children. This is the entire process of 'raising' a child. They only exercise authority through the developmental stages of a child's life as it's necessary to instill that same sense of order in the child so that the child will ultimately become independent of the parent's authority. They never seek to prolong it past it's necessity.
Government is like the parent that never lets go. Which brings us full circle to what we were talking about concerning the duration of government.
If, like a parent, governments were designed with the principle in them that their function was to make society independent over some period of time (and this would need to be explicitly stated in the "Constitution" that this was the PRIMARY goal), then we could have a meaningful dialog about what level and type and so on of government was necessary to effectuate this goal.
Our current forms of government do not make it clear to people that they need to be WORKING towards this end. The common wisdom is that we'll always need government, because we'll always fear our neighbors, so we'll always be dependent on government for *something*.
Were it possible to instantiate such a government, I could probably get behind it. We would need a philosopher king (? somewhat jokingly ?)
So, a good government, like a good parent, seeks to NURTURE independence from itself.
Pan I think you have nailed this perfectly. You ARE a genius (and would probably be an excellent Dad, if ever there could be a woman born that could "handle" you).
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 8:05 AM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
I miss the old corner barbershops, where men used to gather and talk politics and business.
The idea of scarcity came up, and one old farmer dispensed old wisdom. He said "If you want to make money on anything, convince people it's scarce".
I was about 13 at the time, but that stuck in my mind as my first economics lesson.
Our present fiat system of money creates scarcity by making money scarce. Because mony is "borrowed" into existence at a rate of interest, and the interest itself is never created to help repay the loan, no matter how much money floats around, no matter how prices are driven into inflationary frenzy by excessive money creation, there is never quite enough.
If you think about it, simply raising interest rates to drive prices down, slow inflation, and preserve a strong economy, in those times when businesses are operating on bare profits at the present rate of interest, a rise in interest rates will drive those businesses right out of operation, along with employees who need the jobs, in an economy marked by the scarcity of money even in an inflationary economy!
It is not scarcity of goods, or high taxes, or scarcity of productivity. It is a deliberate scarcity of money created to force people into dependency on the government, on its laws, on its redistribution.
When we see a president, such as GW Bush, spending easy printing press money for "guns and butter" at the same time, you know there will follow a period where the people will seek more government regulation, more controls, more tax funded care to "protect" the people from what big business/big government caused in the first place!
LBJ did it, and it took years to recover. Did we learn? Obviously not, since republicans stood behind "W" while he outspent even LBJ and became the new poster boy for government excess.
When the government spends a lot of money it doesn;t have and never had in order to be "compassionate", always remember, that compassion is merely lubricant for the grand sex they'll have with you later.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 11:53 AM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Exaptly.
@James:
If you really want to change the world for the better, start at the bottom. Go help someone find a better way to live. That's how it's always done.
You like making documentaries. I think doc's and films are really good, but I also know that their's an element of self-interest involved. You want to make a name for yourself, and possibly make some money too (I bring this up because I have an idea for you later). Michael Moore. Alex Jones. Merchandise. Films. Waitaminute.....why not actually go out and change someone's life?
Everyone's got their pet idea on how to "fix" the government (hell, the government is FULL of people who have an idea on how to "fix" government - and look where that's got us). Problem is, they always want to fix things at the top and not at the bottom. Start at the bottom.
Befriend a homeless person.
Visit a lonely senior.
Etc.....
Here's my idea: make a documentary based on how you invite one homeless person into your home, clean them up, take them under your wing, mentor them, get them help.....whatever.....be that old chinese master who whips someone into a killing machine, then sets them loose on the world. And film it.
It would be an instant hit (better than Supersize Me/30 Days), you'd probably become a sensation, make lots of money off it.....and best of all.... you'd have helped one person AND inspired people everywhere to do the same.....how much you wanna bet you'd see people imitating your actions all over the country......utilize media to convince people it's "hip" to do things like this......and BAM!!!
See, everyone wins.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 1:35 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Ah yes, "My Fair Lady"!
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Why Do People Fight?
posted on 12/27/2009 2:49 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Our present fiat system of money creates scarcity by making money scarce. Because mony is "borrowed" into existence at a rate of interest, and the interest itself is never created to help repay the loan, no matter how much money floats around, no matter how prices are driven into inflationary frenzy by excessive money creation, there is never quite enough.
This is exactly right. The current monetary system is such joke it's amazing people haven't revolted. But be patient ... they will. See http://www.mecfilms.com/mid/movies/oi/federal.wmv
Also, I put many clips of ORIGINAL INTENT up on the net for free last night. Just go to YOUTUBE and search for "ORIGINAL INTENT."
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/24/2009 10:27 AM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Pan, your questions and issues were all debated in "The Federalist". Actually not debated, but simply put out as an excuse for federal power.
The argument by Hamilton, I believe, was that there is no way a state militia can be overcome by any federal army, since there is no federal army allowed for more than two years, and all such armies are to be drawen from the milita under Article 1,Section 8.
Madison further argued that there was no way a civil war could occur in such an arrangement because the structure of the Constitution would prevent it... ROFLMAO!
The Supreme Court has no "incorporated" the 2nd amendment under the 14th, because of the wording of the 2nd amendment.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state...."
The 14th deals with individual privileges and immunities which has, from Magna Carta, been considered the province of "persons" apart from any type of collective government.
To incorporate the 2nd, it would necessarily mean:
"A well regulated individual being necessary for the security of a free individual, the right of every individual to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
IOW, the 2nd amendment would be "incorporated" against both state and federal government, meaning the elimination of police power by the force of arms.
But then, who would "well regulate" an individual, since he now has the right to keep and bear arms for defense against both state and federal governments?
You could legally shoot any law officer! (Which doesn't really bother me a lot).
A "well regulated militia' is as much an aspect of police power as of defense against encroachment. That is most likely why Art.1, Sect.8 of the Constitution left final discipline to the federal government, just in case militas formed in opposition to the state.
When you get right down to it, the Constitution has so many holes that have failed to prevent increasing power that we should simply ignore the whole damn thing.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/24/2009 12:24 PM by Pandemonium1323
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
When you get right down to it, the Constitution has so many holes that have failed to prevent increasing power that we should simply ignore the whole damn thing.
Cheers!
Of course, I'm once again trying to show how *any* hierarchical organization structure leads to corruption and potential for abuse.
But ya'll already know my stance on that, so I'm trying to point out flaws in people's solutions towards organized government.
In this case, it seems to be just a matter of shuffling from one scale of organization to another, but the inherent problem of authority over others remains.
You can secrete nacre around that irritant for all eternity, and end up with some pretty looking pearls....but in the end it's still built around an irritant.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: WHO Has Political Power
posted on 12/24/2009 12:28 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
The best reason for this is shown by Eric Hoffer in "The True Believer". he points out that it is the power to organize in itself that leads to corruption, because in order to organize for any reason, you must be "estranged from you self".
If my life means less to me in exchange for the "greater good", your life means squat. Resistance is futile. Mobocracy.
[Reply] [Parent]
Limit vs. Eliminate?
posted on 12/26/2009 7:09 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>When you get right down to it, the Constitution has so many holes that have failed to prevent increasing power that we should simply ignore the whole damn thing.
Well as I said to Edwin the other day, maybe the problem with the Constitution is that it seeks to LIMIT the government, when it should have sought to E-LIMIT (eliminate) the government over time.
As desirable as a planned-obsolescence re-write would/may have been, I don't think it would have flown in 1776 society. So here we are in 2009 society and somehow the old-boys' nation HAS somehow held together, against the odds of 10,000 years of impinging oligarchies. Maybe we should all recognize this unbelievable accomplishment and, before totalitarianism closes the doors forever, maybe we should DO SOMETHING to AMEND the Constitution so all these "imperfections" are handled.
YOU KNOW, THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION DOES ALLOW FOR AMENDMENTS WHEN THERE ARE FUCKING COMPLAINERS OUT THERE. WHY DON'T THE FUCKING COMPLAINERS AMEND IT INSTEAD OF TRYING TO THROW THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER???
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Gov vs. OT
posted on 12/24/2009 3:47 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>would arise much in the same way cellular automata ...
Yes, agreed on this. Problem may be what one could term, the "contagion of aberration" or the "contagion of insanity" that humans experience. Just like physical diseases, all humans are aberrated (crazy) to a greater or lesser degree and this aberration is contagious. I guess these are what we call memes. So if you try to evolve a civilization from the ground up -- one that will need no external government -- as a cellular automata, you will be starting with aberrated cells and these will generate just another insane civilization, like the one we live in. The only way I can see a non-insane civilization emerging would be if such automata were set up in quarantine from the rest of "civilization." But in order to avoid the "lord of the flies" syndrome you would somehow have to have "parent" the kids. Thus the problem would become how to "parent" the kids without introducing the normal aberrations all adults have (such as "government is good and needed," "people are born sinful", "only thing you can count on are death and taxes."
Such parents would have to be there and only GUIDE the children but not interact with them in such a way as to pass on their aberrations.
If a crop of in infestment-free kids could be raised, free of violence and insanity and perversion, etc. of "modern" society, then this first crop could be programmed with an INTERNAL system of ethics, OR it might automatically have such. If this new human culture was able to grow and establish itself, it might, just might be able to evolve WITHOUT external ethics, i.e. government. Such a society could be the human nexus and not AI.
Probably the reason Earth is in heavy quarantine (Fermi paradox) is because the beings that are farming us are running this same, or a similar, experiment. The Earth experiment is probably an experiment that has gone wrong, and they may have discarded us.
I have never come across an experiment such as the one I propose. Govs, religions and society would probably ban such an experiment, because it could succeed. Nothing worse than having something out there verify that you're insane. Same reason no one talks about (possible) IQ variances amongst races. Made very taboo by Hitler and all his eugenics boys.
Scientology has been running an interesting experiment of planetary de-aberration since about 1955. They call their state of de-aberration, "clear". Clears still operate in standard society, although at a minimum, as they are encouraged to operate with other Scientologists over "wogs." I have experienced this and it is true, you DO get a lot more work done, much faster, working with non-aberrated crews over wogs. But as to whether they will accomplish their mission of "clearing this planet" I have no idea. They may, even in spite of all the memes about them to the contrary. I even agree with many of these memes. But from their POV, wogs are just insane and tortured beings ranting out of ignorance and overts. I can't say they're totally wrong, but how wrong? Either way they have an uphill battle as its almost impossible to breed new beings-planet wide when the contagion of aberration-factor is so prevalent. They DO try to practice disconnection policies, but many times that meets with fury and law suits by the uninformed/informed public. When Paul left the COS and wrote his membership renouncement letter, he cited one of his reasons, disconnection. COS says they don't practice disconnection (any more) but Paul says his wife had to disconnect from her parents just last year. Who knows if they are running the correct experiment. Certainly the scientific community, the APA and the WFMH are clueless, as none of them have even BEGUN to think about any of this stuff. Should they?
Perhaps the easiest way to set up a new civilization, where government wasn't needed, would be to create AI parents, parents that could raise kids without instilling the typical human aberrations into them.
What all of this cones down to is the age-old question: what is the nature of Man? Is Man good or evil? Is he both? Are all people different? If so, why? These questions MUST be answered otherwise there will never be any hope of engineering a stateless civilization.
I have of course, like all Scientologists and ex-Scientologists, been consumed over the question of external ethics (Government) vs. internal ethics (Operating Thetan) since at least 1974.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Gov vs. OT
posted on 12/25/2009 9:20 AM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
External ethics or external religion or external government is merely the mechanical application to a moral idea, a necessary finite limitation by which individuals are judged, developng a homogenized concept of government. Like the idea "One nation under God', or "In God We Trust", or "God bless America", which actually tells us nothing at all, except the notion that we somehow are collectively represented by God in a process that none of us ever underastands, but are conditioned to die for.
It's the old "estrangement from self" that Hoffer writes about in "True Believer".
Upload into a machine? Mechanical estrangement from self. Cloning? Estrangement from self. Collective religion? Estrangement from self.
Government? Estrangement from self.
Remember the old Star trek movie where Spock;s brother was able to touch people and absolve them of all past guilts, making them serve him because he gave them happiness?
Kirk refused because he said that all his experiences and guilts, all the pain he experienced made him who he was, and he accepted that.
All of us are "sinners" to the extent that we screw up. Can't be avoided. Accept it, get on with it, deal with it.
I am not rules or laws or governments or religions. I cannot be defined because I will never be reduced to such ideas, and I'm damn happy with that.
[Reply] [Parent]
Even God Gets to Sin
posted on 12/26/2009 6:53 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
>All of us are "sinners" to the extent that we screw up. Can't be avoided. Accept it, get on with it, deal with it.
The question:
1. Are we all sinners?
and the question:
2. Is Man basically good or bad?
... are two (2) entirely DIFFERENT questions, two questions endlessly confused.
Just because we have all "sinned" (screwed up) does not make us BASICALLY bad. And who is it that has the gall to determine that ANYTHING is a "screw up" in the first place? Even the (accidental) extermination of an entire planet is only a "screw up" in some being, or group of beings, minds as they "judge" the situation, FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE(S).
So the idea that we are sinners is completely relative to the judging party, authority, religion, government or asshole.
That said, even though Man "screws up" (sins) according to the JUDGMENT of others (such self-appointed to judge at the most), does NOT mean that Man is NOT basically good, as:
IT MAY BE GOOD THAT MAN SCREWS UP OR SINS.
Maybe the Universe and/or God WANTS planets DESTROYED from time to time. Maybe GOD or the UNIVERSE or WHAT THE FUCK EVER wants Man to screw up and totally sin the shit out of everyone and everything.
MAYBE GOD HAS BAD MOODS AND HE ENJOYS SINNING HIMSELF, VIA HIS HUMAN AGENTS -- MANKIND.
THUS, Man is basically GOOD, for whatever he does, there is absolutely NO proof that he's bad or sinning or screwing up because IF he exists, THEN he MUST be good, otherwise he would not exist.
Thus the question: IS EXISTENCE GOOD OR BAD is the exact same question as IS THE EXISTENCE OF MAN GOOD OR BAD.
If you think EXISTENCE is good, then you are REQUIRED to think that MAN IS GOOD, or you're just another brain-washed idiot who thinks God or ther Universe cannot be you.
James Jaeger
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Even God Gets to Sin
posted on 12/28/2009 5:53 PM by doojie
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Man is neither good nor bad. Man is. To the extent that man has a mind, he also has limitations on that mind in the form of Godel's theorem, which makes him subject to undecidable propositions from now on, which seems to be good, since no one can claim authority.
If competition and struggle are the forces that bring ous "higher'(which they are not), then we have very little to look forward to.
The fact is, God does not compute. If God di compute, then we could reduce God to a framework of algorithms and eliminate human life altogether. It would not be necessary.
God lies outside the rules because man;s mind cannot be limited to the rules.
Simple stuff.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/28/2009 7:03 PM by gawell
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
no (militia) defined as a miss communication in a vacuum"
know, known, unknown, hidden, steaming, percolating, coming to a boil,unknownable until revealed.
in some cases some parents suspect (pay attention when concerned) and aren't listened to either.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 2:13 AM by knowledge
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
well spoken Mr. Jeager
As an American I am one of and part of the common people, with a basic relationship to a nation of diversity governed for and by the people ourselves, that allows, holds, and supports the premise that individualism and the individual expression of our very lives is of paramount importance to evolution.
In so saying this it can be argued that we the people calling ourselves a free people have created a nation of outrageous diversity where the extremes of right and left stretch into forever. This leads me to consider the possibility that the founding principles of our nation were created to form a stable structure in which we the people can experience our ultimate individual expression of life.
It is interesting to note that the ‘Bill of Rights’ was not originally in our Constitution as framed by the founding members of our society. But when the Constitution was given to the states and the people of those states to ratify- the people themselves argued for stronger protection of individualism within the framework of the constitution itself, thus producing within the structure of the constitution, the protection and diversity of individual expression.
Individualism is not nor should it ever be construed as an act of separation, but a rejoicing of the spirit that allows for each of us to make known unknown potentials in our life, to dream, to create, to experience life in all of its glory. It is this act of the individual that is the prize and the goal of our constitution. That maybe we as a people need to be reminded of this truth.
It seems today that extremism is frowned upon by many people as an act of unconscionable terrorism as they look to their government to provide security as a child would look to a parent. Yet it seems to me that strong willed children never look for security, but look for the adventure in life and push the mind to new limits of imagination by daring in innocence to dream and then experience those dreams as each day unfolds, thus a world of diversity is not a static world but alive and full.
When my youngest son was entering his early teen years I gave him a small book, and in the cover of this book I inscribed the words- “Read this it is your road map to freedom†. Than one day I took that small book and read it myself, that book was a copy of the Constitution of the United States of America!
Today I have watched our country rebuke diversity of thought and beg for security at the expense of individual freedoms.
I have watched as fear has frozen our minds and allowed the unthinkable to happen, a country divided on political party lines, where political parties take our people to court to suppress the rights of the individual to choose. (No parties mentioned in my son’s little book, wherever did they come from?)
I have watched in bewilderment a great nation turn inward and ignorant.
I have watched the suppression of the press to the point that today there really is no news only opinion.
This I believe, that we the common people must come together as a collective and remind ourselves of just what our country is about, without the constraints of secularism in a non-partisan environment.
This I believe, that our constitution is meant to recreate itself in the Image of stewardship, for and by the people it governs.
Lets take another look at George-
Could it be possible that George B was a part of a greater plan to wake up the American people and the world to what can happen when we as individuals do not stand up for basic human rights, when we do not educate ourselves and seek knowledge?
It saddens me to say that I am finding Obama and the Democrats spineless in making decisions that truly serve the people. Will another revolution be necessary?
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/23/2009 12:13 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Thanks Knowledge. Good points.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/26/2009 7:14 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
My overarching philosophy on the items of SOME POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS is basically:
HOW CAN WE BUILD A SOCIETY WITHOUT SCARCITY, INSANITY, WASTE OR THE CONFLICT OF WAR, WHERE ALL INDIVIDUALS ARE FREE TO CONTRIBUTE THEIR UNIQUE ABILITIES AND PROSPER, WHERE ALL BEINGS ARE FREE AND ABLE TO EXPLORE AND EXPERIENCE LIFE TO THE FULLEST, AND WHERE THE EMERGENT PROPERTY OF HUMAN ACTIVITY RESULTS IN A CLASS III CIVILIZATION THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE SURVIVAL AND GLORY OF THE UNIVERSE IN SOME LARGE OR SMALL WAY?
James Jaeger
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/28/2009 3:59 PM by mekanikalmekka
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Info for you James and Pan:
You should find this quite interesting.
Inside the Military-Industrial-Media Complex: Impacts on Movement for Social Justice
Sunday 27 December 2009
by: Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed
**************
This article has been previously published at Media Freedom Intl.
Among the most important corporate media censored news stories of the past decade, one must be that over one million people have died because of the United States military invasion and occupation of Iraq. This, of course, does not include the number of deaths from the first Gulf War nor the ensuing sanctions placed upon the country of Iraq that, combined, caused close to an additional one million Iraqi deaths. In the Iraq War, which began in March of 2003, over a million people have died violently primarily from US bombings and neighborhood patrols. These were deaths in excess of the normal civilian death rate under the prior government. Among US military leaders and policy elites, the issue of counting the dead was dismissed before the Iraqi invasion even began. In an interview with reporters in late March of 2002 US General Tommy Franks stated, “You know we don’t do body counts.”[i] Fortunately, for those concerned about humanitarian costs of war and empire, others do.
In a January 2008 report, the British polling group Opinion Research Business (ORB) reported that, “survey work confirms our earlier estimate that over 1,000,000 Iraqi citizens have died as a result of the conflict which started in 2003. We now estimate that the death toll between March 2003 and August 2007 is likely to have been of the order of 1,033,000. If one takes into account the margin of error associated with survey data of this nature then the estimated range is between 946,000 and 1,120,000.”[ii]
The ORB report came on the heels of two earlier studies conducted by Dr. Les Roberts and colleagues at Johns Hopkins University and published in the Lancet medical journal. The first study done from January 1, 2002 to March 18, 2003 confirmed civilian deaths at that time at over 100,000. The second study published in October 2006 documented over 650,000 civilian deaths in Iraq since the start of the US invasion and confirmed that US aerial bombing in civilian neighborhoods caused over a third of these deaths. Over half the deaths were directly attributable to US forces. The now estimated 1.2 million dead six years into the war/occupation, included children, parents, grandparents, cab drivers, clerics and schoolteachers. All manner of ordinary Iraqis have died because the United States decided to invade their country under false pretences of undiscovered weapons of mass destruction and in violation of international law. An additional four to five million Iraqi refugees have fled their homes. The magnitude of these million-plus deaths and creation of such a vast refugee crisis is undeniable. The continuing occupation by US forces has guaranteed a monthly mass death rate of thousands of people a carnage that ranks among the most heinous mass killings in world history. More tons of bombs have been dropped in Iraq than in all of World War II.[iii] Six years later the casualties continue but the story, barely reported from the start, has vanished.
The American people face a serious moral dilemma. Murder and war crimes have been conducted in their name. Yet most Americans have no idea of the magnitude of deaths and tend to believe that they number in the thousands and are primarily Iraqis killing Iraqis. Corporate mainstream media are in large part to blame. The question then becomes how can this mass ignorance and corporate media deception exist in the United States and what impact does this have on peace and social justice movements in the country?[iv]
Truth Emergency and Media Reform
In the United States today, the rift between reality and reporting has peaked. There is no longer a mere credibility gap, but rather a literal Truth Emergency in which the most important information affecting people is concealed from view. Many Americans, relying on the mainstream corporate media, have serious difficulty accessing the truth while still believing that the information they receive is the reality. A Truth Emergency reflects cumulative failures of the fourth estate to act as a truly free press. This truth emergency is seen in inadequate coverage of fraudulent elections, pseudo 9/11 investigations, illegal preemptive wars, torture camps, doctored intelligence, and domestic surveillance. Reliable information on these issues is systematically missing in corporate media outlets, where the vast majority of the American people continue to turn for news and information.
Consider these items of noteworthy conditions. US workers have been faced with a thirty-five year decline in real wages while the top few percent enjoy unparalleled wealth with strikingly low tax burdens. US schools, particularly in the west, are more segregated now than half a century ago. The US has the highest infant mortality rate among industrialized nations, is falling behind in scientific research and education, leads the world as a debtor nation, and is seriously lacking in healthcare quality and coverage, which results in the deaths of 18,000 people a year. America has entered another Gilded Age. Someone should the media.[v]
The Free Press or Media Reform Movement is a national effort to address mainstream media failures and the government policies that sanction them. During the 2008 National Conference for Media Reform (NCMR) in Minneapolis, Project Censored interns and faculty conducted a survey, completed by 376 randomly selected NCMR attendees out of the 3,500 people registered for the conference. This survey was designed to gauge participants’ views on the state of the corporate news media and the effectiveness of the media reform movement. The survey also sought to determine the level of belief in a truth emergency, a systematic hiding of critical information in the US. Not surprisingly, for a sample of independent media reform activists, majorities in the 90% plus range agreed on most criticisms of mainstream media, that corporate media failed to keep the American people informed on important issues facing the nation and that a truth emergency does indeed exist in the US. Regarding the reasons, 87% of the participants believed that a military-industrial-media complex exists in the US for the promotion of the US military domination of the world and most agreed with research conclusions by Project Censored, and others, that a continuing powerful global dominance group inside the US government, the US media, and the national policy structure is responsible. What was clear from our survey is that media democracy activists strongly support not only aggressive reform efforts and policy changes but also the continuing development of independent, grassroots media as part of an overall media democracy movement.
While most progressive media activists do not believe in some omnipotent conspiracy, an overwhelming portion of NCMR participants do believe the leadership class in the US is dominated by a neo-conservative group of some several hundred people who share a goal of asserting US military power worldwide. This Global Dominance Group (GDM) continues under both Republican and Democratic rule. In cooperation with major military contractors, the corporate media, and conservative foundations, the GDM has become a powerful long-term force in military unilateralism and US political processes.
The Global Dominance Group and Information Control
A long thread of sociological research documents the existence of a dominant ruling class in the US, which sets policy and determines national political priorities. C. Wright Mills, in his 1956 book The Power Elite, documented how World War II solidified a trinity of power in the US that comprised corporate, military and government elites in a centralized power structure working in unison through “higher circles” of contact and agreement.[vi] This power has grown through the Cold War and, after 9/11, the Global War on Terror.
At present, the global dominance agenda includes penetration into the boardrooms of the corporate media in the US. Only 118 people comprise the membership on the boards of director of the ten big media giants. These 118 individuals in turn sit on the corporate boards of 288 national and international corporations. Four of the top 10 media corporations share board director positions with the major defense contractors including:
William Kennard: New York Times, Carlyle Group
Douglas Warner III, GE (NBC), Bechtel
John Bryson: Disney (ABC), Boeing
Alwyn Lewis: Disney (ABC), Halliburton
Douglas McCorkindale: Gannett, Lockheed-Martin.
Given an interlocked media network of connections with defense and other economic sectors, big media in the United States effectively represent the interests of corporate America. Media critic and historian Norman Solomon described the close financial and social links between the boards of large media-related corporations and Washington’s foreign-policy establishment: “One way or another, a military-industrial complex now extends to much of corporate media.”[vii] The Homeland Security Act Title II Section 201(d)(5) provides an example of the interlocked military-industrial-media complex. This Act specifically asks the directorate to “develop a comprehensive plan for securing the key resources and critical infrastructure of the United States including information technology and telecommunications systems (including satellites) emergency preparedness communications systems.”
The media elite, a key component of the Higher Circle Policy Elite in the US, are the watchdogs of acceptable ideological messages, the controllers of news and information content, and the decision makers regarding media resources. Their goal is to create symbiotic global news distribution in a deliberate attempt to control the news and information available to society. The two most prominent methods used to accomplish this task are censorship and propaganda.
Sometimes the sensationalist and narrow media coverage of news is blamed upon the need to meet a low level of public taste and thereby capture the eyes of a sufficient market to lure advertisers and to make a profit. But another goal of cornering the marketplace on what news and views will be aired is also prominent. Billionaire Rupert Murdoch loses $50 million a year on the NY Post, billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife loses $2 to $3 million a year on the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, billionaire Philip Anschutz loses around $5 million a year on The Weekly Standard, and billionaire Sun Myung Moon has lost $2 to $3 billion on The Washington Times. The losses in supporting conservative media are part of a strategy of ideological control. They also buy bulk quantities of ultra-conservative books bringing them to the top of the NY Times bestseller list and then give away copies to “subscribers” to their websites and publications. They fund conservative “think tanks” like Heritage and Cato with hundreds of millions of dollars a year. All this buys them respectability and a megaphone. Even though William Kristol’s publication, the Standard, is a money-loser, his association with it has often gotten him on TV talk shows and a column with The New York Times. Sponsorships of groups like Grover Norquist’s anti-tax “Americans for Tax Reform” regularly get people like him front-and-center in any debate on taxation in the United States. This has contributed to extensive tax cuts for the wealthy and the most unfair tax laws of any industrialized country – all found acceptable by a public relying upon sound-bites about the dangers of ‘big government.’ Hence media corporation officials and others in the health care, energy and weapons industries remain wealthier than ordinary people can imagine. Their expenditures for molding opinion are better understood as investments in a conservative public ideology[viii]
Modern Media Censorship and Propaganda
A broader definition of contemporary censorship needs to include any interference, deliberate or not, with the free flow of vital news information to the public. Modern censorship can be seen as the subtle yet constant and sophisticated manipulation of reality in our mass media outlets. On a daily basis, censorship refers to the intentional non-inclusion of a news story – or piece of a news story – based on anything other than a desire to tell the truth. Such manipulation can take the form of political pressure (from government officials and powerful individuals), economic pressure (from advertisers and funders), and legal pressure (the threat of lawsuits from deep-pocket individuals, corporations, and institutions). or threats to reduce future access to governmental and corporate sources of news. Following are a few examples of censorship and propaganda.
1. Omitted or Undercovered Stories- The failure of the corporate media to cover human consequences, like one million , mostly civilian deaths of Iraqis, reduces public response to the wars being conducted by the US. Even when activists do mobilize, the media coverage of anti-war demonstrations has been negligible and denigrating from the start. When journalists of the so-called free press ignore the anti-war movement, they serve the interests of their masters in the military media industrial complex.[ix]
Further, the corporate mainstream press continues to ignore the human cost of the US war in Iraq with America’s own veterans. Veteran care, wounded rates, mental disabilities, VA claims, first hand accounts of soldier experiences, and pictures of dead or limbless soldiers are rare. One of the most important stories missed by the corporate press concerned the Winter Soldier Congressional hearings in Washington, D.C. The hearings, with eyewitness testimony of US soldiers relating their experiences on the battlefield and beyond, were only covered by a scant number of major media, and then only in passing. In contrast to the virtual corporate media blackout concerning American soldiers’ views of the war, the independent, listener sponsored, community Pacifica Radio network covered the hearings at length.[x]
A common theme among the most censored stories over the past few years has been the systemic erosion of human rights and civil liberties in both the US and the world at large. The corporate media has ignored the fact that habeas corpus can now be suspended for anyone by order of the President. With the approval of Congress, the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006, signed by Bush on October 17, 2006, allows for the suspension of habeas corpus for US citizens and non-citizens alike. While media, including a lead editorial in The New York Times October 19, 2006, have offered false comfort that American citizens will not be the victims, the Act is quite clear that ‘any person’ can be targeted.[xi]
Additionally, under the code-name Operation FALCON (Federal and Local Cops Organized Nationally), federally coordinated mass arrests have been occurring since April 2005 and netted over 54,000 arrests, a majority of whom were not violent criminals as was initially suggested. This unprecedented move of arresting tens of thousands of “fugitives” is the largest dragnet style operation in the nation’s history. The raids, coordinated by the Justice Department and Homeland Security, directly involved over 960 agencies (state, local and federal) and mark the first time in US history that all domestic police agencies have been put under the direct control of the federal government.[xii]
All these events are significant in a democratic society that claims to cherish individual rights and due process of law. To have them occur is a tragedy. To have a “free” press not report them or pretend these issues do not matter to the populace is the foundation of censorship today.
2. Repetition of Slogans and Sound Bites- The corporate media in the US present themselves as unbiased and accurate. The New York Times motto of “all the news that’s fit to print” is a clear example, as is CNN’s authoritative “most trusted name in news” and Fox’s mantra of “fair and balanced.” The slogans are examples of what linguist George Lakoff has referred to as framing. Through constant repetition, the metaphors and symbols that pervade our media turn into unquestioned beliefs. Terms like “liberal media,” “welfare cheaters,” “war on terror,” illegal aliens,” “tax burden,” “support our troops,” are all distorted images serving to conceal a transfer of wealth from people needing a safety net to corporations seeking profitable markets and military expansion.
3. Embedded Journalism- The media are increasingly dependent on governmental and corporate sources of news. Maintenance of continuous news shows requires a constant feed and an ever-entertaining supply of stimulating events and breaking news bites. The 24-hour news shows on MSNBC, Fox and CNN maintain constant contact with the White House, Pentagon, and public relations companies representing both government and private corporations.
By the time of the Gulf War in 1991, retired colonels, generals and admirals had become mainstays in network TV studios during wartime. Language such as “collateral damage” and “smart bombs” flowed effortlessly between journalists and military men, who shared perspectives on the occasionally mentioned but more rarely seen civilians killed by U.S. firepower. This clearly foreshadowed the structure of “embedded” reporting in the second Iraq War, where mainstream corporate journalists literally lived with the troops and had to submit all reports for military review.[xiii] A related militarization of news studies by Diane Farsetta at the Center for Media Democracy documented a related introduction of bias. These investigations showed Pentagon propaganda penetration on mainstream corporate news in the guise of retired Generals as “experts” or pundits who turned out to be nothing more than paid shills for government war policy.[xiv]
The problem then becomes more complex. What happens to a society that begins to believe such lies as truth? The run up to the 2003 war in Iraq concerning weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) is a case in point. It illustrates the power of propaganda in creating not only public support for an ill-begotten war, but also reduces the possibility of a peace movement, even when fueled by the truth, to stop a war based on falsehoods. The current war in Iraq was the most globally protested war in recorded history. This did nothing to stop it and has done little to end it even under a Democratic president who promised such on the campaign trail. The candidate of “hope and change,” with peace groups in tow, has proven to be dependent upon the same interests in foreign policy that got the US into war in the first place.[xv]
The Progressive Press
Where the left progressive press may have covered some of the Winter Soldier issues, most did not cover the major story of Iraqi deaths. InManufacturing Consent, Wharton School of Business Professor of Political Economy Edward Herman and MIT Institute Professor of Linguistics Noam Chomsky claim that because media are firmly embedded in the market system, they reflect the class values and concerns of their owners and advertisers. The corporate media maintain a class bias through five systemic filters: concentrated private ownership; a strict bottom-line profit orientation; over-reliance on governmental and corporate sources for news; a primary tendency to avoid offending the powerful; and an almost religious worship of the market economy. These filters limit what will become news in society and set parameters on acceptable coverage of daily events.[xvi]
The danger of these filters is that they make subtle and indirect censorship more difficult to combat. Owners and managers share class identity with the powerful and are motivated economically to please advertisers and viewers. Social backgrounds influence their conceptions of what is “newsworthy,” and their views and values seem only “common sense.” Journalists and editors are not immune to the influence of owners and managers. Reporters want to see their stories approved for print or broadcast, and editors come to know the limits of their freedom to diverge from the “common sense” worldview of owners and managers. The self-discipline that this structure induces in journalists and editors comes to seem only “common sense” to them as well. Self-discipline becomes self-censorship—independence is restricted, the filtering process hidden, denied, or rationalized away.
Project Censored’s analysis on the top ten progressive left publications and websites coverage of key post-9/11 issues found considerable limitations on reporting of specific stories. The evidence supports the Chomsky and Herman understanding that the media barrage may in fact contribute to the news story selection process inside the left liberal media as well.[xvii] Even the left progressive media showed limited coverage of the human costs of the 9/11 wars.
The figure reported in summer, 2007 documenting a million dead did appear in progressive websites and radio including After Downing Street, Huffington Post, CounterPunch, Alternet, Democracy Now! and the Nation, but several took months to get to it. This lack of timely reporting on such a critical story on the humanitarian crisis of the US occupation by the alternative press in America does not bode well for a strong, public, peace movement. The US is in dire need of a media democracy movement to address truth emergency concerns.
In response, the Truth Emergency Movement, held its first national strategy summit in Santa Cruz, California Jan. 25-27, 2008. Organizers gathered key media constituencies to devise coherent decentralized models for distribution of suppressed news, synergistic truth-telling, and collaborative strategies to disclose, legitimize and popularize deeper historical narratives on power and inequality in the US. In sum, this truth movement is seeking to discover in this moment of Constitutional crisis, ecological peril, and widening war, ways in which top investigative journalists, whistleblowers, and independent media activists can transform how Americans perceive and defend their world. We learn from grassroots actions in the US but also from experiences of other countries. This requires us to transcend the stereotypes of other countries hammered by the corporate media. It is not by chance that two Latin American nations, both targets of US efforts to remove their popular leaders by force, have been vilified by mainstream media. Both Cuba and Venezuela, however, have been experiments in local democratic participation in which voices of communities weigh heavily upon social policy.
International Models of Media Democracy in Action: Venezuela
Democracy from the bottom is evolving as a ten-year social revolution in Venezuela. Led by President Hugo Chavez, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) gained over 1½ million voters in the November, 2008 elections. “It was a wonderful victory,” said Professor Carmen Carrero with the communications studies department of the Bolivarian University in Caracas. “We won 81 percent of the city mayor positions and seventeen of twenty-three of the state governors,” Carrero reported.
The Bolivarian University is housed in the former oil ministry building and now serves 8,000 students throughout Venezuela. The University (Universidad Bolivariana de Venezuela) is symbolic of the democratic socialist changes occurring throughout the country. Before the election of Hugo Chavez as president in 1998, college attendance was primarily for the rich in Venezuela. Today over one million, eight hundred thousand students attend college, three times the rate ten years ago. “Our university was established to resist domination and imperialism,” reported Principal (president) Marlene Yadira Cordova in an interview November 10, 2008, “We are a university where we have a vision of life that the oppressed people have a place on this planet.” The enthusiasm for learning and serious-thoughtful questions asked by students was certainly representative of a belief in the potential of positive social change for human betterment. The University offers a fully staffed free healthcare clinic, zero tuition, and basic no-cost food for students in the cafeteria, all paid for by the oil revenues now being democratically shared by the people.
Bottom up democracy in Venezuela starts with the 25,000 community councils elected in every neighborhood in the country. “We establish the priority needs of our area,” reported community council spokesperson Carmon Aponte, with the neighborhood council in the barrio Bombilla area of western Caracas. Aponte works with Patare Community TV and radio station and is one of thirty-four locally controlled community television stations and four hundred radio stations now in the barrios throughout Venezuela. Community radio, TV and newspapers are the voice of the people, where they describe the viewers/listeners as the “users” of media instead of the passive audiences.[xviii]
Democratic socialism has meant healthcare, jobs, food, and security, in neighborhoods where in many cases nothing but poverty existed ten years ago. With unemployment down to a US level, sharing the wealth has taken real meaning in Venezuela. Despite a 50 percent increase in the price of food last year, local Mercals offer government subsidized cooking oil, corn meal, meat, and powdered milk at 30-50 percent off market price. Additionally, there are now 3,500 local communal banks with a $1.6 billion dollar budget offering neighborhood-based micro-financing loans for home improvements, small businesses, and personal emergencies.
“We have moved from a time of disdain [pre-revolution—when the upper classes saw working people as less than human] to a time of adjustment,” proclaimed Ecuador’s minister of Culture, Gallo Mora Witt at the opening ceremonies of the Fourth International Book Fair in Caracas, November, 2007. Venezuela’s Minister of Culture, Hector Soto added, “We try not to leave anyone out. . . before the revolution the elites published only 60-80 books a year, we will publish 1,200 Venezuelan authors this year…the book will never stop being the important tool for cultural feelings.” In fact, some twenty-five million books—classics by Victor Hugo and Miguel de Cervantes along with Cindy Sheehan’s Letter to George Bush—were published in 2008 and are being distributed to the community councils nationwide. The theme of the International Book Fair was books as cultural support to the construction of the Bolivarian revolution and building socialism for the 21st century.
In Venezuela the corporate media are still owned by the elites. The five major TV networks, and nine of ten of the major newspapers maintain a continuing media effort to undermine Chavez and the socialist revolution. But despite the corporate media and $20 million annual support to the anti-Chavez opposition institutions from USAID and National Endowment for Democracy, two-thirds of the people in Venezuela continue to support President Hugo Chavez and the United Socialist Party of Venezuela. The democracies of South America are realizing that the neo-liberal formulas for capitalism are not working and that new forms of resource allocation are necessary for human betterment. It is a learning process for all involved and certainly a democratic effort from the bottom up.
International Models of Media Democracy in Action: Cuba
“You cannot kill truth by murdering journalists,” said Tubal Páez, president of the Journalist Union of Cuba. In May of 2008, One hundred and fifty Cuban and South American journalists, ambassadors, politicians, and foreign guests gathered at the Jose Marti International Journalist Institute to honor the 50th anniversary of the death of Carlos Bastidas Arguello —the last journalist killed in Cuba. Carlos Bastidas was 23 years old when he was assassinated by Fulgencia Batista’s secret police after having visited Fidel Castro’s forces in the Sierra Maestra Mountains. Edmundo Bastidas, Carlos’ brother, told about how a river of change flowed from the Maestra (teacher) mountains, symbolized by his brother’s efforts to help secure a new future for Cuba.
The celebration in Havana was held in honor of World Press Freedom Day, which is observed every year in May. The UN first declared this day in 1993 to honor journalists who lost their lives reporting the news and to defend media freedom worldwide.
Cuban journalists share a common sense of a continuing counter-revolutionary threat by US financed Cuban-Americans living in Miami. This is not an entirely unwarranted feeling in that many hundreds of terrorist actions against Cuba have occurred with US backing over the past fifty years. In addition to the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, these attacks include the blowing up of a Cuban airlines plane in 1976 killing seventy-three people, the starting in 1981 of an epidemic of dengue fever that killed 158 people, and several hotel bombings in the 1990s, one of which resulted in the death of an Italian tourist.
In the context of this external threat, Cuban journalists quietly acknowledge that some self-censorship will undoubtedly occur regarding news stories that could be used by the “enemy” against the Cuban people. Nonetheless, Cuban journalists strongly value freedom of the press and there was no evidence of overt government control. Ricardo Alarcon, President of the National Assembly Cuba allows CNN, AP and Chicago Tribune to maintain offices in Cuba, noted that the US refuses to allow Cuban journalists to work in the United States.[xix]
Cuban journalists complain that the US corporate media is biased and refuses to cover the positive aspects of socialism in Cuba. Unknown to most Americans are the facts that Cuba is the number one country in percentage of organic foods produced in the world, has an impressive health care system with a lower infant mortality rate than the US, trains doctor from all over the world, and has enjoyed a 43% increase in GDP between 2005 and 2008.
Neither Cuba nor Venezuela are utopian societies. Developing countries subject to continuing pressure by the US may be cautious and suspicious of provocateurs that would incite violence or provoke US military intervention. But in these countries, the ability of local media expressing voices of local communities is something from which media reformers can learn.
Grassroots Antidotes to Corporate Media Propaganda
Tens of thousands of Americans engaged in various social justice issues constantly witness how corporate media marginalize, denigrate, or simply ignore their concerns. Activist groups working on issues like 9/11 Truth, election fraud, impeachment in the Bush era, war propaganda, civil liberties abridgements, torture, the Wall Street meltdown, and corporate-caused environmental crises have been systematically excluded from mainstream news and the national conversation leading to a genuine Truth Emergency in the country as a whole.
Now, however, a growing number of activists are finally saying “enough!” and joining forces to address this truth emergency by developing new journalistic systems and practices of their own. They are working to reveal the common corporate denominators behind the diverse crises we face and to develop networks of trustworthy news sources that tell people what is really going on. These activists know we need a journalism that moves beyond inquiries into particular crimes and atrocities, and exposes wider patterns of corruption, propaganda and illicit political control by a military and corporate elite. Recent efforts at national media reform through micro-power community radio– similar to the 400 people’s radio stations in Venezuela– and campaign finance changes, that would mandate access for all candidates on national media, have been strongly resisted by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB). NAB, considered one of the most powerful corporate lobby groups in Washington, works hard to protect over $200 billion dollars of annual advertising and the several hundred million dollars political candidates spend in each election cycle.
The Truth Emergency movement now recognizes that corporate media’s political power and failure to meet its First Amendment obligation to keep the public informed leaves a huge task. Citizens must mobilize resources to redevelop news and information systems from the bottom up. Citizen journalists can expand distribution of news via small independent newspapers, local magazines, independent radio, and cable access TV. Using the internet, the public can interconnect with like-minded grassroots news organizations to share important stories. These changes are already in progress.
Becoming the Media: Media Freedom International and Project Censored
In response to Truth Emergency conference, the Media Freedom Foundation and Project Censored launched an effort to both become a repository of independent news and information as well as a producer of content in what are called Validated Independent News stories vetted by college and university professors and students around the world. As corporate media continue their entertainment agenda and the PR industry—working for governments and corporations—increasingly dominates news content, there exists a socio-cultural opening to transform how the public receives and actually participates in the validation and creation of their own news.
Corporate media are increasingly irrelevant to working people and to democracy. People need to tell their own news stories from real experiences and perspectives, as an alternative to the hierarchically imposed and “official” top-down narrative. What better project in support of media democracy than for universities and colleges worldwide to support truth telling and validate news stories and independent news sources.
Only 5% of college students under 30 read a daily newspaper. Most get their news from corporate television and increasingly on the internet. One of the biggest problems with independent media sources on the internet is a perception of inconsistent reliability. The public is often suspicious of the truthfulness and accuracy of news postings from non-corporate media sources. Over the past ten years, in hundreds of presentations all over the US, Project Censored staff has frequently been asked, “what are the best sources for news and whom can we trust?”
The goal of this effort is to encourage young people to use independent media as their primary sources of news and information and to learn about trustworthy news sources through the Media Freedom International News Research Affiliate Program. By the end of 2008, there were over thirty affiliate colleges and universities with plans to expand that participation several fold this next year. Through these institutions, validated independent news stories can be researched by students and scholars, then written, produced and disseminated via the web. In addition, on any given day at the Media Freedom Foundation website, one can view enough independent news stories from RSS feeds to fill nearly fifty written pages, more than even the largest US newspapers. An informed electorate cannot remain passive consumers of corporate news. As aforementioned activist David Mathison suggested in his how-to manual, Be the Media, where he argues and instructs not only about how to build community media but how to build community through media.[xx]
Part of building community is in developing awareness about the type of world we want to participate in creating, and developing strategies for achieving change. New forms of media that promote widespread responsibility for both creating and disseminating information do not remove the need for people to protest, to demonstrate, to march, to boycott and to demand entry into corporate board rooms. Rather it assures that voices can be heard and, as shown in Howard Rheingold’s Smartmobbing Democracy,[xxi] the power of new Internet communication technologies can be harnessed to mobilize more effectively. Contrasted with previous more limited technologies, Rheingold points out that now, “[m]obile and deskbound media such as blogs, listserves and social networking sites allow for many-to-many communication.” Technology has helped level the playing field by creating a virtual sphere where people can exchange ideas and instigate activism. Grassroots, bottom-up, peer-to-peer efforts have increased in influence and effectiveness due to the speed and breadth of new communication technologies. We are currently experiencing a potential for collective activism on a scale never before seen.
The continued expansion of independent internet news sources allows for the mass political awareness of key issues and truth emergencies in the world. The involvement of university and college professors and their students in validating news stories will be an important component of reliability verification of these sources. As we learn who we can trust in the independent news world, we will be in a stronger position for the continued development and expansion of democratic social movement/anti-war efforts in the future.
It is up to the people to unite and oppose the common oppressors manifested in a militarist and unresponsive government along with their corporate media courtiers and PR propagandists. Only then, when the public forms and controls its own information resources, will it be armed with the power that knowledge gives to move beyond the media induced mindsets that limit change to modest reform. Grassroots media providing voice to those who would challenge elite domination are our best hope to create a truly vibrant democratic society that promises as well as delivers liberty, peace, and economic justice to all.
Media Freedom website include:
Daily News at: http://mediafreedom.pnn.com/5174-independent-news- sources
Validated News & Research at: http://www.mediafreedominternational.org/
Daily Censored Blog at: http://dailycensored.com/
Project Censored: http://www.projectcensored.org/
[i] US General Tommy Franks, quoted in The San Francisco Chronicle, March 23, 2002, onlinehttp://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2002/ 020323-attack01.htm.
[ii] Peter Phillips and Andrew Roth, Censored 2009, (New York: Seven Stories, Press, 2008), 19-25. This story is the number one censored story of the year at Project Censored for this year, archived online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/1-over-one-million-iraqi-deaths-caused-by-us-occ upation/ and for the earlier casualty numbers see http://www.countercurrents.org/iraq-polya070207.ht m.
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Various theories exist on the problem of the subject, from historian Rick Shenkman’s Just How Stupid Are We to historian and cultural critic Thomas Frank’s What’s the Matter with Kansas, but few examine its affects on the peace community. For more on the issue of American historical amnesia, see Gore Vidal on Democracy Now! at http://www.democracynow.org/2004/5/21/gore_vidal_o n_the_united_states , also, In These Times online at http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3099/the_unite d_states_of_amnesia/ and for a broader academic look at the issue of how Americans have become arguably the least informed, most entertained people in the modern world, see the now classic work from the late New York University media scholar Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, (New York: Viking Adult, 1985). This article hopes to shine more light on the impact of all of the aforementioned on the peace movement in general and what can be done about it. For another view of this written earlier, at the outset of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, see Felix Kolb and Alicia Swords, “Do Peace Movements Matter?” Commondreams.org, May 12, 2003, online at http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0512-08.htm.
[v] Diane Farsetta, Center for Media Democracy, studies on Pentagon propaganda online at http://www.prwatch.org/pentagonpundits and http://www.prwatch.org/node/8180.
[vi] C. Wright Mills. The Power Elite, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000, reissue). Also, continuing with this theme in terms of democratic communications theory/policy and the ideas of an open society, see the work of Jurgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a category of Bourgeois Society, published in1962, and The Theory of Communicative Action, from 1981, as well as Karl Popper’s The Open Society and Its Enemies, first published in 1945.
[vii] Norman Soloman, “The Military-Industrial-Media Complex
Why war is covered from the warriors’ perspective,” Extra! July/August 2005, published by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), on the FAIR website at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2627.
[viii] Cenk Uygur, “Conservative Media vs Progressive Media” Posted on The Daily Kos blog, July 1, 2009.
[ix] Linda Milazzo, “Corporate Media Turned Out for Jena, but Not for Anti-War. Here’s Why.” Atlantic Free Press, September 23, 2007, online at http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/2473-corpo rate-media-turned-out-for-jena-but-not-for-anti-wa r-heres-why.html.
[x] For more on the Winter Soldiers, see Censored 2009, chapter 1, story 9, pp. 58-62 and online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/9-iraq-and-afghanistan-vets-testify/ and chapter 12, pp.297-319. See the KPFA radio and Corp Watch website for the coverage athttp://www.warcomeshome.org/wintersoldier2008.
[xi] Peter Phillips, Censored 2008, (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2007), 35-44. Online http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/1-no-habeas-corpus-for-any-person/ and http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/2-bush-moves-toward-martial-law/.
[xii] See Censored 2008, chapter 1, story 6, 55-59. Also online at http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/article s/6-operation-falcon-raids/.
[xiii] Ibid.
[xiv] Norman Soloman, “The Military-Industrial-Media Complex:
Why war is covered from the warriors’ perspective,” Extra! July/August 2005, published by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), on the FAIR website at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2627.
[xv] For several excellent studies of US Iraq War propaganda, see PR Watch’s John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton, Weapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush’s War on Iraq, (New York: Tarcher Penguin, 2003), and their follow up Best War Ever: Lies, Damned Lies, and the Mess in Iraq, (New York: Penguin, 2006), and the exhaustive work by Anthony R. DiMaggio, Mass Media, Mass Propaganda: Examining American News in the “War on Terror,” (UK: Lexington Books, 2008). Additionally, forthcoming in fall 2009, just reviewed by the authors, is Robert P. Abele, The Anatomy of a Deception: A Reconstruction and Analysis of the Decision to Invade Iraq, (Baltimore: University Press of America, 2009).
For reports on the continuation of war policy under President Barack Obama, see Center for Media Democracy’s John Stauber, “How Obama Took Over the Peace Movement” online http://www.prwatch.org/node/8297, and Peter Phillips, “Barack Obama Administration Continues US Military Dominance” online http://www.projectcensored.org/articles/story/http -wwwprojectcensoredorg-articles-story-barack-obama -administration-c/.
[xvi] Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, (New York: Pantheon Books, 1988, 2002). For an introduction of the Propaganda Model, see chapter 1, or see a retrospective by Edward Herman online http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/20031209.htm.
[xvii] Peter Phillips, Censored 2008, see chapter 7, “Left Progressive Media Inside the Propaganda Model,” 233-251. Online at http://www.projectcensored.org/articles/story/left -progressive-media-inside-the-propaganda-model/.
[xviii] Co-author Peter Phillips interviewed Carmon Aponte while visiting the Patare Community TV and radio station in a trip to Venezuela for a book fair in 2008. The station was one of thirty-four locally controlled community television stations and four hundred radio stations now in the barrios throughout Venezuela.
[xix] Co-author Peter Phillips attended the major journalism conference in Cuba in 2008. About his experiences there, Phillips remarked, “During my five days in Havana, I met with dozens of journalists, communication studies faculty and students, union representatives and politicians. The underlying theme of my visit was to determine the state of media freedom in Cuba and to build a better understanding between media democracy activists in the US and those in Cuba.”
Phillips continued, “I toured the two main radio stations in Havana, Radio Rebelde and Radio Havana. Both have Internet access to multiple global news sources including CNN, Reuters, Associated Press and BBC with several newscasters pulling stories for public broadcast. Over 90 municipalities in Cuba have their own locally run radio stations, and journalists report local news from every province.”
“During the course of several hours in each station I (Phillips) was interviewed on the air about media consolidation and censorship in the US and was able to ask journalists about censorship in Cuba as well. Of the dozens I interviewed all said that they have complete freedom to write or broadcast any stories they choose. This was a far cry from the Stalinist media system so often depicted by US interests.”
[xx] For more details see the Project Censored website at http://projectcensored.org/, for independent media feeds see Media Freedom Foundation at http://mediafreedom.pnn.com/5174-independent-news- sources, and for more on the Project Censored International Affiliates Program, see http://projectcensored.org/project-censored-intern ational-affilates-program and http://mediafreedominternational.org. For more on how to become the media, see David Mathison’s work online http://bethemedia.com. For more on Smart Mobs, see Howard Rheingold’s work onlinehttp://www.smartmobs.com/book/.
[xxi] Howard Rheingold, “Smartmobbing Democracy,” in Rebooting America: Ideas for Redesigning American Democracy for the Internet Age,” ed. Allison Fine, Micah L. Sifry, Andrew Rasiej and Josh Levy. Retrieved from The Personal Democracy Press Website:http://rebooting.personaldemocracy.com/nod e/5484.
*The co-authors would like to express sincere appreciation for editing assistance provided by Rebecca Norlander and Ellen Gaddy.
[Reply] [Parent]
Re: Some Possible Solutions
posted on 12/28/2009 10:27 PM by James_Jaeger
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Wow! I suspected the death toll was high, but I was figuring it was in the hundreds of thousands, maybe 250,000 at most.
Well this is what happens when WE THE PEOPLE lose control of our government: it uses fiat money and tax money to murder and mame.
James
[Reply] [Parent]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)