This just may be our BEST chance to turn this country around!

Bravo! (4.00 / 28)

Tips for Prof. Francis A. Boyle!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 03:27:24 AM UTC

Don't Get Your Hopes Up.... (4.00 / 3)

The United States Government is so arrogant that, as a matter of policy, it refuses to abide by or recognize the jurisdiction of the I.C.C. (as it might apply to U.S. officials).

The clear hypocrisy here is that if the same I.C.C. brought similar charges against any other Country's leaders (except Israel, of course), then our government would insist upon their immediate execution (or even start a War as well perhaps - which we do anyway now under the grounds of mere suspicion).

Secondly, Obama himself would never let anyone even think about touching Dick Cheney or George Bush. They would be granted special protections (at taxpayers expense) directly, whenever they travel abroad. As it is right now, Dick Cheney is a former VP (not a current one), and yet he receives (under the approval of Obama), extended-continued Secret Service protection round-the-clock (at taxpayers expense) one whole year after he left office.

This is unprecedented. No former VP in history has ever received extended post-office SS protections before (beyond 3 months - and most refuse it), but the rules are always bent for Mr. Dick Cheney (or the evil Bushes). "Rules" never apply to them (at least in the United States), or we would have counted the damn votes back in 2000.

The only good news with this, is that it may generate some unfavorable publicity, and tarnish their reputations in the court of International public opinion, in a way that is unrepairable (not that they care though).  

However, understand that here in the United States, President Obama himself is happily continuing all of the Bush-Cheney Wars, the Secret Renditions (torture "privatized"), Indefinite Detentions, Foreign Occupations, and uneccessary new Warmongering and CIA-provocations against Iran, Yemen, and Venezuela (via Columbia).  So, back in the U.S., Bush and Cheney remain the "legitmate" and "legally accepted" blueprint for the handling of Foreign Policy.  Washington DC approves.

Obama loves it so much..he just can do enough to perpetuate it.  I hope that the I.C.C does not stop with just Bush and Cheney, but also includes Obama and Robert Gates as well. It is just as bad to continue and promote Worldwide violence and tyranny, as it is to start it.

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold, is for
people of good conscience to remain silent."
    --Thomas Jefferson

---

by: FreeSociety @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 23:03:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thank you, FreeSociety! (4.00 / 2)

Cheney probably enjoys those protections because he has a huge, big hand in the CIA and its operations.  In fact, he built a home (just before leaving office) within a 10-minute walking distance of the CIA.  Just for the hell of it?  His home is in Wyoming.  Why did he stay?  Why didn't he go back?  Why does he get so much air time?  He seems to feel he's STILL V-P -- someone really ought to clue him in.  

Yes, I'm aware of all that you've said, FreeSociety, and many of us are.  For that reason, we must always attempt to do that which is RIGHT!

Personally, I doubt Obama is running the country and I don't think he has been since early on after being sworn in as President.*  

At any rate, if you will note the asterisked material above, you will see that Prof. Boyle covers Obama, as well.

Truth be known, probably it's the Pentagon (Gates) and the CIA that are calling most, if not all, the shots!

It's easy to be a "naysayer" and many are, but it's that attitude that usually curbs individuals from taking action.  

If we don't continue to TRY, then what?

Thanks again, Free Society!

*Ray McGovern, wrote this interesting article "Are Presidents Afraid of the CIA?"

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 23:27:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I Agree With You! (3.00 / 3)

And I hope my comments weren't interpreted as a call for no action.  I think that everybody should speak out and demand that the I.C.C. follow through 100%.

But I did want to set the overall context, that none of these guys will ever really go to jail (no matter they do). Just recently, Obama and his DOJ threw out the charges that were brought against John Yoo (Human Torture Attorney). Despite the Elections, nothing has changed. Obama is just "Dick Cheney" with a better personality. He has even called for further historic increases in War & Military way beyond their already ludicrous and insane levels (and at a time when our Nation is financially bankrupt).

Which brings me to the question of is Obama the one running things?
Answer: Yes and No

Obviously, the International Bankers, and their U.S. arm: the Federal Reserve Monopoly, Wall-Street, the War Establishment (CIA-Pentagon), the Oil Monopolies, and their sponsered "think-tanks" (which brainwash Congress), have been in control now for decades.

But a President has enormous power to put a stop to things that are going on.  When John Kennedy became President, General Lymam Lemnitzer, and the Joint Chiefs (all WarHawks) presented Kennedy with a plan called "Operation Northwoods".  It was a crooked plan to stage terrorist attacks on U.S. civilians, including blowing an airplane, and have it blamed upon Cuba (sound familiar???). The intent was to (murder people) to manipulate public opinion and the Congress into supporting a (unprovoked) Military Invasion on Cuba.

Kennedy was horrified at the idea, and stopped it in its tracks.  

The CIA also lied to him and totally misrepresented the details of the Bay-of-Pigs.  It was really a ploy to force Kennedy into sending in the Pentagon to bail out the CIA-trained "freedom fighters" and get the United States embroiled in an illegal Military Invasion of Cuba.  Once again, Kennedy saw that he had been tricked, and did the courageous thing of stopping it from going any further. Kennedy then fired CIA architects Allen Dulles, Charles Cabell and Richard Bissell, and vowed to "splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces".  Kennedy didn't play ball with these people.

During the Cuban Missile Crisis, when virtually his entire Cabinet, the Joint Chiefs, the Pentagon, and the CIA were all demanding that he attack Cuba immediately, Kennedy refused and worked out a diplomatic resolution of mutual withdrawal (we removed our Missiles from Turkey).

So, yes, a President can be the firewall, and take considerable control of things.  But in order to do that, they first must have the inner wisdom, enough honest historical perspective about our Country and respect for the ideals it was founded on, an understanding of the War-Profiteering racket and the knowledge of who to trust and who not to trust, a deep sense of committment to peace and human rights, and the strength of character to not be corruptible.



What a real President sounds like...

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold, is for
people of good conscience to remain silent."
    --Thomas Jefferson

---

by: FreeSociety @ Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 02:40:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Absolutely, FreeSociety! (0.00 / 0)

On this, I agree with you 100% -- Obama went down the path of thinking, or "imagining" that HE could somehow bring about partisanship.  Should I say, "silly boy"?  This was and is the worst mistake he has made from the get-go (Lincoln, he ain't' and times they are not.)  The Repugs from the get-go were out to see to his "demise" -- they NEVER ever intended to honor bipartisanship, and will and have done everything to try and destroy Obama!  (I'm sure you know this, as well.)  (I kid you not (having campaigned for him, rallied, donated, etc.), I have always had great difficulty "believing" he would literally turn his back on those who reached into their pockets -- over and over, etc.).

I wrote him, a few months ago, to the same effect, stating those very views!  Urging him to forget the bipartisanship, who wish only to destroy him.  

But, in that same "letter," I also told him he could not remain "on the fence forever" -- that, at a point, he must examine himself and his initial stances and decide WHERE HE IS AT!    

So, for whatever worth, I agree -- Obama needs to examine himself and take a stance -- once and for all -- I suggested in that letter that he cannot appease ALL, that he must decide as to his original premises.

Then, too, it wouldn't be Obama that they would "get."  But, probably, one of his most adored daughters -- an unforeseen "car accident?"  A "train derailing?" Etc.  So, yes, I agree (except for those factors), Obama should decide he is going to stand by LAWS, or continue to be intimidated!  I don't profess to have all the answers -- but this, just may be, the scenario.  Me, in the same set of circumstances -- I would put my family in a "safe" place and honor my vows!  At least that is what, in my heart, I believe I would do!

SOMEHOW, SOMEWHERE, THE "CYCLE" MUST BE BROKEN!

Thanks, FreeSociety!


"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 04:04:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The problem with Obama... (4.00 / 1)

The problem with Obama goes beyond a naive delusion to govern like a Republican in order to provide a "bipartisanship" that will never happen.

The problem with Obama is that he himself (by his own omission has no real political Ideology. Without fundamental principles, and core beliefs driving him, he then has no investment at all himself in what the outcome is -- other than to make as few enemies as he possibly can, and create the theatre of passing a bill (...any bill...doesn't matter what the heck it does).

And, of course, when you operate that way, five things then happen that are inevitable:

1. You get easily pushed around by the really strong willed people (the corrupt WarHawks and Corporatists) - and even begin to believe in their most transparent lies.
2. Nobody in Washington fears you, and therefore they don't really respect you.
3. You're seen by the public as wishy-washy, weak, and not standing for anything.
4. You resort to cheap gimmicks and embarassing stunts ("spending freezes -- excluding the Military", laws that take effect in year 2014, etc.) instead of advancing serious reforms.
5. You get nothing done of any consequence.

This is exactly what we see happening with Obama.

He will never be an effective leader, no matter how much soul-searching he does, because there was never any genuine Ideological framework driving him to begin with.





"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold, is for
people of good conscience to remain silent."
    --Thomas Jefferson

---

by: FreeSociety @ Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 05:01:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Couldn't agree more, FreeSociety! (0.00 / 0)

This is how I have viewed him for a long time now!  

No, during his campaign (and having seen and heard him, etc.), I cannot say that he appeared to have NO representations as to what he believed in!  No, I cannot say that!  Oh, well, forget that!

Whatever "self" he had, he left!  

I feel he has been and is, as you do, a person who has chosen NOT to take leadership!  Thus, he comes off as "wishy-washy" and has, consequently, aided and abetted all that we had hoped to overcome.

In that same letter I wrote, I told him "you cannot please all of the people all of the time -- somewhere, somehow, each of us must take a stand in this life!"  

Anyway, that's how I feel -- if we take no stand, then we are nowhere and we stand for nothing!

Sad, sad, sad!

Thanks, FreeSociety!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 05:15:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Whoops! (0.00 / 0)

--should read "bipartisanship" in second sentence of my comment--

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 17:54:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I can tell you what the response would be if (4.00 / 10)

Cheney, Condi, Bush and Co were "extraordinarily renditioned" to the Hague.

"This is an outrage!" ::splutter, splutter:: "U.S. Sovereignty!" ::harumphing::

::pearl clutching:: "We demand their immediate return!"

Tommyknockers, Tommyknockers, knocking at the door

---

by: AndyS In Colorado @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 03:52:38 AM UTC

Understatement, ASIC! (4.00 / 6)

And I, "splutter, splutter," don't give a flying f..k what "their" response would be.  They (the "Accused") have been responsible for the deaths of millions of people -- genocide in Iraq (on-going), people tortured to death in accountings known of and those unknown of.  A literal "mayhem" by "war criminals" -- our own!  There is nothing, but nothing, no matter the attempt to avert facing our government's war crimes, that we could (despite, propaganda) find any means on earth to JUSTIFY -- NONE!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 04:31:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wouldn't you know it (4.00 / 2)

My IP service provider just started migrating their email accounts to a new mail server.

Reply

No problem I understand. Especially having to relive that nightmare over again; this time unpleasantly.

Mine lasted for... six hours, but there was only one and he waited until the end to get 'tough'.

Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to provisions against danger, real or pretended from abroad. ~J. Madison

---

by: wolverine06 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 06:26:04 AM UTC

Acknowledged! (4.00 / 1)

Thanks, wolverine06!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 20:17:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Weighing the good vs evil here (4.00 / 4)

I have to hold onto my core belief system that the current incarnation of globalization is the higher evil meme here.
To prosecute only a single administration while turning a blind eye to the current one which continued the very same war of error and has expanded upon the themes of a future dystopian Clockwork Orange PC surveillance world, well then.
Ok the real question here is setting the precedent to give up US sovereignty to a global organization.
Why Bush, Cheney et al but NOT giving up the truth of 911 as the inside job the truth movement knows it to be.

It is the same now as it was last year when the subject was brought up before Obama was installed as America's puppet globalist spokesman.

Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what your country can do to you.

---

by: Lasthorseman @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 15:03:27 PM UTC

Lasthorseman, (4.00 / 4)

I don't completely disagree with "the higher evil meme here."  I have pondered that myself.  

I have always contended and do content that accountability for the war criminality of the Bush Administration officials is an absolute imperative.  It is imperative not only for this country, which now operates on pretty much of a "lawless" basis, but without accountability, it sets a precedent for the world literally.  So long as these war criminals have gotten away with and continue to get away with all their heinous crimes, pray tell, what is to prevent other countries from following suit?  Then, you have a global breakdown in structure and morality.

As to Obama, please see the asterisked material above.

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 19:18:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes you are right (4.00 / 1)

Then again the globalist organizations like the UN are dominated by "our" influence.  They much like "our" government addresses 1/1000th of the real and pressing problems with a response time measured in decades, unless of course the situation involves resources like oil.

Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what your country can do to you.

---

by: Lasthorseman @ Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 11:01:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The U.S. does not recognize international law (4.00 / 5)

anymore -- at least de facto if not de jure. It's over. There is neither support within the power structure nor support within the electorate, schooled by the media's worship of violence and torture, for anything we might agree resembles international law.

That period of post-WWII interest in rule of law is long gone and not likely to return. In it's place are imperial decrees.

---

by: banger @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 17:27:16 PM UTC

Banger, (4.00 / 4)

the picture you paint is the one that has been and is being painted in the ways that you speak of.  Nonetheless, that does not change reality!  We are bound by International laws, as well as our own national laws.

See here:  

On May 6, 2008, three very distinguished law professors gave testimony before the House Judiciary Committee-- the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties.  They are:

Marjorie Cohn, President, National Lawyers Guild
  Professor, Thomas Jefferson School of Law

Philippe Sands, Professor Laws, University College, London
   Barrister, Matrix Chambers

David Luban, Professor of Law, Legal Ethics
Georgetown University Law Center

Ms. Cohn's opening statement stands out sharply:

What does torture have in common with genocide, slavery, and wars of aggression?  They are all jus cogens.  Jus cogens is Latin for "higher law" or "compelling law." This means that no country can ever pass a law that allows torture. There can be no immunity from criminal liability for violation of a jus cogens prohibition.

If you're interested, you might also see, Jordan J. Paust's "THE ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION OF TORTURE AND NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE SANCTIONS" (April 15, 2009) and portions of this document.  We are already . . .  

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 19:39:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Law is not relevant in our current Rogue World (4.00 / 4)

We are passing from a period of civilization to a period of civilizational collapse. Yes, some law is enforced from time to time at the convenience of the powerful. The fact is if you have the muscle you use it. If the government (or anyone else with power) wants to kill me they can and they will get away with it. That's the bottom line.

You can have all the law you want but when it is systematically ignored then it has no value other than what can be enforced. Law depends on moral authority. Who has it? The government? The international organizations? I don't think so.

U.S. law was systematically broken by the Bush administration in any number of areas and they were not called to account and will never be called to account unless there is a dramatic change in political culture.

---

by: banger @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 21:29:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes, I agree that is what has happened! (4.00 / 2)

But an effort to hold them accountable, in any form, fashion, or shape, could do a LOT to wake our governmental criminals up.  Criminals don't change, they go on being criminals until such time as they are caught, etc.

See above, my comment:

It is imperative not only for this country, which now operates on pretty much of a "lawless" basis, but without accountability, .  . . .

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 21:38:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I should add, and probably doesn't need to be added really! (4.00 / 3)

There are two sets of standards in this country.  One, where laws still apply -- that would be to ordinary citizens of the U.S.  The other being, of course, those in our government and the rich, where laws just don't seem to apply!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 21:40:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

good point and (4.00 / 1)

the lawlessness will spread to increasing segments of the population gradually. Really, we need to find a way to rebuild community -- that's at the heart of the problem both moral and political.

---

by: banger @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 22:55:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't think the (4.00 / 4)

rule of law is ever over. It really doesn't belong to one country or society. The media's pumping the torture and violence has nothing to do with the law. Law is not public opinion or polling. We may have a constant percentage that thinks it's okay and are sociopaths and vicious, but most people when presented with the facts and truth about what their government is doing does not want this lawlessness to continue.

I do not believe that the reality espoused by the pols and the media are how the people, the majority, really think about these crimes. Your underestimating the people who know basic right from wrong. Just like the % of the people who watch Fox is low so are the vocal violent types. They are however used by the pols to bamboozle us into thinking that rule of law is dead. It's not it's just been declared a distraction that keeps the pols in power and declares that the pig ignorant vicious minorty are the real America.

If the information was released or we had any real news   or media coverage of what were doing/have done they would have a hard time justifying what we continue to do to those we call a danger or terrorists. the is why they won't release the photos or show footage of what we do in Pakistan or Bagram. It is important for the rest of the world to do what they can to reign in the lawlessness that is both domestic and international. The law is not gone, it's just been taken hostage and the more people inside and out who work to free it from these criminals the better. It's necessary regardless of the outcome to open this up.                    

---

by: Shaharazade @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 20:40:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thank you, Shaharazade! (4.00 / 3)

Britain is certainly exposing Tony Blair, if nothing else.  But, I think he has, at this point, lost all credibility with the people and is a thoroughly disgraced man.  Perhaps, it will go even further than that, but, at least, the Brits have done SOMETHING!

If we'd had had the "REAL NEWS or media coverage" of what was really going on, they wouldn't have been able to pull it off.  So, to do all that they did, they had to "dupe" the public.  And, further, had not Ms. Sickoid Pelosi hadn't taken impeachment off the table, we could have stopped some of the war and other criminality!

I'm so hoping that everyone will send this to each of their own e-mail lists and plead for action.  In other words, VIRAL THIS!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 21:08:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Increasingly there is no basis for judging what is "right" from (4.00 / 4)

"wrong". On what do we base it? I think most Americans are dazed and confused and have no idea what is right and wrong anymore. There are moral notions floating around but they are easily dissipated by fear and the massive propaganda/mind-control regime of the MSM (I particularly include the action-adventure movie here that glorifies violence, extra-judicial killing and torture as legit).

Morality has come down to a "good guys" vs. "bad guys" concept. The ideas of evidence and a trial by jury seem to many if not most Americans to be quaint old-fashioned notions that don't hold water anymore. I've found it kind of shocking to listen to young people talk about these kinds of issues. I would say about half the people in this country are ready for fascism today.

We on the left ought to be pointing out the lack of morality in our cultural life and start finding a way to find some new basis for morality and create an intellectual framework that is defensible. Lakoff has some interesting ideas of a kind of natural morality that ought to be looked into.

---

by: banger @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 21:42:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think people are capable of (4.00 / 2)

separating fiction from reality. I being more optimistic then you say about a third are ready for fascism but they already had their run in the Bush regime which was resoundingly defeated by the majority. The young I talk to give me a different perspective then your take they seem to be less hateful and greedy, less afraid of 'other'. Lackoff seems to miss the point that intellectual/morality frameworks don't work if the foundation itself is rotten and corrupt. how can you talk morality other then stupid faith based strictures if you are killing, robbing and dehumanizing the world for profit and power.        

---

by: Shaharazade @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 22:00:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

the entities that run the place now turn their (4.00 / 3)

hungry eyes on the people who are citizens and give their consent to be governed by the pols they hire.. The Democrats are not capable of using morality as a talking point as they are as transparently immoral and corrupt as the Republicans. You can't blame this on the people's immorality when there is no accountability or laws that are upheld no matter who they elect. The people voted to stop the real life nastiness committed by our government and they just got more of the same called 'moving forward'.          

---

by: Shaharazade @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 22:13:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, I'm talking here of mainly working-class youth (4.00 / 2)

My own children and most of their friends are very sweet. But the upper-middle class (where I am socially but not financially) is it's own island.

---

by: banger @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 22:57:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Banger, (4.00 / 2)

I agree with Shaharazade's comments.

Also, if you will recall, there was a huge, non-stop calling for Impeachment by THE PEOPLE, despite the fact that Ms. Nutsoid Pelosi, had taken Impeachment off the table.

I think there are those with jobs, who, for fear of losing their jobs, may not be as willing to speak up, but many have not stopped speaking up all these years.  

We have little or no morality left in this country, in terms of our government, its policies, and its treatment toward its own citizens.  You have only to watch C-Span, from time to time, as, for example, they have proceeded to discuss the health care issue.  It is ad nauseum, mostly, as they discuss what we should or shouldn't have -- you know, the "better than thou" demeanor, while they enjoy excellent health care and pensions, at the expense of the American people.  

Similar to Shaharazade's comment, our government is a "cancer" that simply continues to metastasize, because there has been nothing done to arrest it.  If those in the government haven't a harness on their own individual immoral  behavior, then they must be harnessed in -- laws enforced!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 23:02:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I've evolved to be open to the devolution of government (4.00 / 1)

I've always been open to libertarian ideas because it is close to the classical anarchism that informed me early on. But, as a practical matter, I saw government as a buffer between the voracious greed of the corporate elites and the average person.

But in the past decade or so I've seen government at the federal level at least (I actually worked as a consultant in the gov't for over 10 years) become increasingly an alien presence unconnected with the needs of the people it is supposed to serve. I mean this was always a problem with huge bureaucracies but now with laws being literally written by lobbyists the situation is just nothing short of a disaster. Someone I know and trust (a typical right-winger) asked me about health-care: "would you trust the government to run a health-care system?" I couldn't really answer him other than say "no". End of argument really. Theoretically the government could run the system but, at this point, I don't trust it to do anything but enrich political friends of Congress -- and we seen that's what has happened and people know.

The government has become so dominated by the military and security services that we are basically under military rule and the door is shut for change. There is no valid reason for a GWOT other than enrich and empower the militarists. No valid reason at all -- it's utterly Orwellian in every way.  

---

by: banger @ Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 14:11:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Can't disagree with (4.00 / 1)

anything you've said, Banger!  I think that is the realistic picture of our government.

Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, I believe, have worked quite well, administered by the government.  On the other side of the coin, the government has literally been "thieving" from the funds supplied by Americans and their employer(s) over many years.  It's my understanding that not one dime has been repaid to Social Security funds from that which was to have been "borrowed."

Now, we're reading that there is an effort to dismantle even those benefits, via "entitlement reform" and other cutesy gimmicky wording, such as "fiscal responsibility."  It seems there is pressure to get those $3 trillion in funds awaiting baby-boomers, an attempt to cut back Social Security benefits, etc.  These funds DO NOT BELONG TO THE GOVERNMENT -- they are the funds of yours and my hard work over many years.  (Always think of George Carlin and his words, "They want it all, and you know what?  They'll get it, they'll get if ALL!)

Fiscal responsibility, my A..!  You never hear a word in all of these efforts to cut back here, cut back there, etc. about ENDING two illegal, disgusting wars -- wars that we are using China's money to pay for!  No, you never hear about that for a measure, not forgetting the monies we gave the Wall-Street criminals, etc.  Well, you know the story.

Yes, I agree with this:

The government has become so dominated by the military and security services that we are basically under military rule and the door is shut for change. There is no valid reason for a GWOT other than enrich and empower the militarists. No valid reason at all -- it's utterly Orwellian in every way.

But, again, we must try to find ways, means, of somehow getting this all turned around.  Hopefully, we can find a way before China might decide to pull the "rug from under our feet."  I think that would be the coup de grace!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 18:21:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm actually pretty hopeful (4.00 / 1)

And you are so gloriously passionate! Which shows that there is a lot of energy out there and a hunger for the truth. Our views are so at odds with conventional wisdom that as conventional wisdom crashes out of its own weight (as the HCR process has crashed) those who think like us will reap some rewards.

I see a major change in people on all sides of the political fences, particularly the left. People have increasingly come to understand that Obama is a fraud. If you are at all progressive you can't possibly be pro-Obama or pro-Democratic Party (national version that is). This all creates some room to breathe.

The trick is that the oligarchs will try their usual tricks of making the right-wing even more cartoonishly crazy in order to scare everyone into the Democratic Party. That has to be resisted at all costs. I keep telling people I know that even if Sarah Palin was President there would be no dramatic change in policy just drastic changes in symbolism. The policy is to enrich and empower the current oligarchy -- they will allow no agenda to derail that.

---

by: banger @ Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 21:12:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sarah Palin, is the "dream" (0.00 / 0)

of the neocons and the GOP.  She's exactly what they look for in a "mouthpiece."  And, unless the Supreme Court* ruling re corporations is amended, overturned or whatever, it's likely to happen -- you know, who's got the most dollars.  "drastic changes in symbolism" you say?  Hah, you mean "embecil-ism "?

BTW, there is concern expressed with regard to Supreme Court Justices, i.e., there will some that will be retiring in the next couple of years, thus, we will undoubtedly need to get Democrats in again, unless we want a completely stacked Supreme Court (GOP).  (I do think that's a legitimate concern!)

Yes, I agree, those with power and money will DO anything to deter a "loss of their grip."  

Back during the campaign period between Bush and Kerry, I listened to political scientist, author, speaker, Arunhati Roy, giving a speech, which aired on NPR Radio.  She said, "Makes no difference whether you [Americans] elect an "Oxy-Tide" or a "Gentle Ivory" -- it's all the same.  You [Americans] need to change your policies!"  (Paraphrasing)  This is where it's at!

*Just read:

WASHINGTON, DC - Congresswoman Donna Edwards of Maryland introduced today a constitutional amendment bill to overturn the US Supreme Court's recent ruling allowing unlimited corporate money in elections. Congressman John Conyers, Jr. of Michigan, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, is a co-sponsor of the amendment bill. . . .

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 22:02:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If we prosecuted and locked up (4.00 / 6)

our terrorists, there wouldn't be so many terrorists in other countries retaliating against U.S. terrorism with their own terrorism.

Thanks for posting this, Tahoe.  

---

by: Rusty1776 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 19:48:26 PM UTC

Forgetting, for a moment, (4.00 / 5)

your recent relegation of me -- my sentiments exactly.  It is WE who are the terrorists and we've done a "helluva' job" creating hatred around the world.  There's just something about going about the world and killing and/or torturing citizens of other countries that riles them up, not to mention all the other horrific things we do!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 20:16:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

P.S. I'm working on my draft e-mail (4.00 / 4)

to the ICC!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 20:18:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ek hornbeck -- (4.00 / 1)

thank you for FP'g this.  :)

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 18:22:12 PM UTC

I'll see if I can get Mike Gravel to sign on n/t (4.00 / 1)

Vote for yourself at www.ni4d.org!

---

by: rossl @ Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 13:57:35 PM UTC

Very cool, rossi! (4.00 / 1)

Thank you!  Sorry I just now saw this!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 01:01:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I feel so strongly about this -- (4.00 / 1)

WE must have accountability -- however (crumbs?) we can get it!  If not, I feel, that not only from a "national" sense, but an "international" sense, there is NOTHING of any merit that will/can effectuate a REAL CHANGE in this country -- and, "what goes around comes around."  

Thank you!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 03:34:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I called Gravel and he said he supports it (4.00 / 1)

and so I emailed the people and told them to add his name.

Vote for yourself at www.ni4d.org!

---

by: rossl @ Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 23:47:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Very cool -- thank you! (4.00 / 1)

One brave soul has taken this step solely and on his own -- the very least that can be done is to step up and show our support of his effort.

Thank you for "pushing" it along further, rossi!  :)

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 00:43:52 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't know if you were or are aware of this lawsuit that (4.00 / 1)

had been filed in the Spanish Courts  -- Iraqis v. 4 U.S. Presidents and 4 British P.M.'s.  Anyway, it was filed one day prior to a new ruling, restricting "jurisdiction" by the International community (etc.).  At any rate, the case has been "dismissed"  -- this is so sad, the lawsuit, IMHO, is a most worthy one and deserving of Int'l. intervention.  You can see it here.  If you have not already read about this and the suit, it is all here in this site -- I think you, or just about anyone, could only agree that the Iraqis have an absolute justifiable suit -- which now will be ignored.  Very, very sad!

You see, somehow, I feel that all the lack of accountability by those criminal officials of ours has laid way for "turning the cheek" -- even legally!  What is to become of this world?

Thank you, rossi, for your responses and "aid."  

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 03:36:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

rossi! (4.00 / 2)

In addition to having sent out a broadcast to my personal e-mail list, I also sent one to Bloggers Against Torture, and, today, a response was had:

I am working directly with Professor Boyle.  Please visit our website: www.bushtothehague.org  Also on facebook.

We are actively gathering names of endorsing groups.  All that is necessary to be listed as a group endorsing Boyle's complaint in the ICC is to reply to susan@bushtothehague.org

with a link to the endorsing group's website.  We are also including any high-profile individuals who endorse (most recently Mike Gravel).

Also, if you have any maintream media connections, please contact me.  There has been a virtual US media blackout of this historic event.

I thought this would be of interest to you.  I hope that you will see this, late in this diary as it may be.  I would have sent you an e-mail, but didn't see it anywhere!

"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."--Aristotle

---

by: tahoebasha3 @ Fri Feb 12, 2010 at 22:52:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]