Sunday, December 30, 2001
THE WORLD AFTER SEPT. 11
I am sure I am not the only one to have been reminded in the past months of some wise and prescient words of one of the most impressive figures of 20th century America, the radical pacifist A.J. Muste. As the US entered World War II 60 years ago, he predicted with considerable accuracy the contours of the world that would emerge after the US victory, and a little later, observed that "the problem after a war is with the victor. He thinks he has just proved that war and violence pay. Who will now teach him a lesson?"
Far too many people around the world were to learn the bitter meaning of these words. It is only in folk tales, children's stories, and the journals of intellectual opinion that power is used wisely and well to destroy evil. The real world teaches very different lessons, and it takes wilful and dedicated ignorance to fail to perceive them...
-- Noam Chomsky
I am sure I am not the only one to have been reminded in the past months of some wise and prescient words of one of the most impressive figures of 20th century America, the radical pacifist A.J. Muste. As the US entered World War II 60 years ago, he predicted with considerable accuracy the contours of the world that would emerge after the US victory, and a little later, observed that "the problem after a war is with the victor. He thinks he has just proved that war and violence pay. Who will now teach him a lesson?"
Far too many people around the world were to learn the bitter meaning of these words. It is only in folk tales, children's stories, and the journals of intellectual opinion that power is used wisely and well to destroy evil. The real world teaches very different lessons, and it takes wilful and dedicated ignorance to fail to perceive them...
-- Noam Chomsky
themassesareasses© on blogger Sunday, December 30, 2001
And I Quote,
[T]elevision has corrupted much of the American way of life...Building up all this mythology about the World War II generation...I think it's a complete fraud. I don't agree with Tom Brokaw and those people about the Great Generation. If anything, they hated more. Their generation led to the disasters of the early sixties, with Kennedy being killed, and divorce, the hypocrisy that led to the sexual revolution. They taught us the lying. They taught us the conspiracy theories about China and Russia as a Communist monolith. It's a lotta shit that they laid on us.
Eisenhower was a bad president, an awful president. And Truman was smoothed over by [biographer] David McCullough and turned into some hero. He wasn't a hero when he founded the national security state. They call us the Baby Boomers? I think we're the Baby Losers.
And more recently,
Six men [the heads of Viacom, Fox News Corp., Disney, Vivendi, Sony, and Time Warner-AOL] are deciding what you're seeing in film, and they own all the small companies.... Now, within reason, they let [filmmakers] do certain things, and that is far better obviously than, say, the Arabs where they don't let you do anything, and I agree it's relative. But we are in a dilemma. We have too much order.... And I think the revolt on September 11 was about order. It was about fuck you, fuck your order... And is it time perhaps to reconsider the world order? Is it time to wonder why the banks have joined the movie companies and all the corporations, and where this is all going?
-- Oliver Stone
[T]elevision has corrupted much of the American way of life...Building up all this mythology about the World War II generation...I think it's a complete fraud. I don't agree with Tom Brokaw and those people about the Great Generation. If anything, they hated more. Their generation led to the disasters of the early sixties, with Kennedy being killed, and divorce, the hypocrisy that led to the sexual revolution. They taught us the lying. They taught us the conspiracy theories about China and Russia as a Communist monolith. It's a lotta shit that they laid on us.
Eisenhower was a bad president, an awful president. And Truman was smoothed over by [biographer] David McCullough and turned into some hero. He wasn't a hero when he founded the national security state. They call us the Baby Boomers? I think we're the Baby Losers.
And more recently,
Six men [the heads of Viacom, Fox News Corp., Disney, Vivendi, Sony, and Time Warner-AOL] are deciding what you're seeing in film, and they own all the small companies.... Now, within reason, they let [filmmakers] do certain things, and that is far better obviously than, say, the Arabs where they don't let you do anything, and I agree it's relative. But we are in a dilemma. We have too much order.... And I think the revolt on September 11 was about order. It was about fuck you, fuck your order... And is it time perhaps to reconsider the world order? Is it time to wonder why the banks have joined the movie companies and all the corporations, and where this is all going?
-- Oliver Stone
themassesareasses© on blogger Sunday, December 30, 2001
2002 -- THE YEAR OF UNMET EXPECTATIONS
...What fuels these expectations [growth in 2002] is the manipulation of the money supply by the banking cartel, with the ready assistance of the U.S. Treasury. With the fiat pyramid in a state of emerging collapse long before 9/11/01, the central planners of planet earth developed a gameplan in an attempt to at least cushion the collapse, if not avert it altogether. In the event the deal just fell through completely, there was always 9/11/01 to blame, just in case.
The primary reason prices were collapsing in the months prior to 9/11/01 was the money supply was in contract mode. The banking cartel made several desperate attempts to inspire borrowing, but there rate cutting did not produce the desired effect. Despite the periodic 'spiking' of M1 in 2001, nothing was working. The only way money supply increases is if somebody takes the bank's bait and starts to borrow more money. People were not taking the bait prior to 9/11/01. If borrowing ceases, the money supply contracts, and the fiat ponzi pyramid house of cards collapses in upon itself.
The heaviest borrower, with the most voracious of all appetites for borrowing money, is the U.S. government. When the little people stop borrowing for the plain reason that the hyper-inflation caused by the chronic money supply inflation over the last 88 years makes prices go so high that the cost of credit becomes irrelevant, this is like taking a stick of dynamite and attaching it to the foundation of a hut in Bangladesh. Unless some other borrower steps up to the plate, like the mother of all borrowers, the U.S. government, then the people who rig the game on planet earth have a very real problem on their hands...
There was never any doubt in my mind where the prices were headed during 2001 prior to 9/11/01 (Link 1, Link 2 for those who have the mistaken notion I was 'wrong' about something). However, 'chance' intervened for the mother of all interveners (the cartel), who were busy intervening all year up until 9/11/01 anyway. The net result of 9/11/01 was a pre-determined and calculated scheme to close the markets for four sessions, force the prices in a foot race to just north of 1998 lows on all markets, and then -- using the new money freshly borrowed by the previously contracting and non-borrowing government, which now suddenly becomes a re-expanding and heavily borrowing government to fund and fight the 'war' on terrorism...attempt to contain the what was becoming a certain disaster from happening, by engineering the mother of all market maniplations known to mankind, which just happens to be the fourth quarter rally...
I want to reiterate the cause of the failure we will witness in 2002 of expectations being met will not be terrorist attacks at the olympics, or a war in India, or some other thing. It is the cause of the fraud of central banking, fiat money, central planning, and global hegemonizing, etc. The root of the disaster is the modern global aristocracy that make sport of our liberty to construct a world that suits the designs of their deluded minds (please, no cracks about mine:)). It won't be the fault of the Republicans, Democrats, Bush, Daschle, Cheney, or Hillary, unless they have an active role cooperating with the modern global aristocracy. And perhaps they do have a role. I do not know...
-- SM
...What fuels these expectations [growth in 2002] is the manipulation of the money supply by the banking cartel, with the ready assistance of the U.S. Treasury. With the fiat pyramid in a state of emerging collapse long before 9/11/01, the central planners of planet earth developed a gameplan in an attempt to at least cushion the collapse, if not avert it altogether. In the event the deal just fell through completely, there was always 9/11/01 to blame, just in case.
The primary reason prices were collapsing in the months prior to 9/11/01 was the money supply was in contract mode. The banking cartel made several desperate attempts to inspire borrowing, but there rate cutting did not produce the desired effect. Despite the periodic 'spiking' of M1 in 2001, nothing was working. The only way money supply increases is if somebody takes the bank's bait and starts to borrow more money. People were not taking the bait prior to 9/11/01. If borrowing ceases, the money supply contracts, and the fiat ponzi pyramid house of cards collapses in upon itself.
The heaviest borrower, with the most voracious of all appetites for borrowing money, is the U.S. government. When the little people stop borrowing for the plain reason that the hyper-inflation caused by the chronic money supply inflation over the last 88 years makes prices go so high that the cost of credit becomes irrelevant, this is like taking a stick of dynamite and attaching it to the foundation of a hut in Bangladesh. Unless some other borrower steps up to the plate, like the mother of all borrowers, the U.S. government, then the people who rig the game on planet earth have a very real problem on their hands...
There was never any doubt in my mind where the prices were headed during 2001 prior to 9/11/01 (Link 1, Link 2 for those who have the mistaken notion I was 'wrong' about something). However, 'chance' intervened for the mother of all interveners (the cartel), who were busy intervening all year up until 9/11/01 anyway. The net result of 9/11/01 was a pre-determined and calculated scheme to close the markets for four sessions, force the prices in a foot race to just north of 1998 lows on all markets, and then -- using the new money freshly borrowed by the previously contracting and non-borrowing government, which now suddenly becomes a re-expanding and heavily borrowing government to fund and fight the 'war' on terrorism...attempt to contain the what was becoming a certain disaster from happening, by engineering the mother of all market maniplations known to mankind, which just happens to be the fourth quarter rally...
I want to reiterate the cause of the failure we will witness in 2002 of expectations being met will not be terrorist attacks at the olympics, or a war in India, or some other thing. It is the cause of the fraud of central banking, fiat money, central planning, and global hegemonizing, etc. The root of the disaster is the modern global aristocracy that make sport of our liberty to construct a world that suits the designs of their deluded minds (please, no cracks about mine:)). It won't be the fault of the Republicans, Democrats, Bush, Daschle, Cheney, or Hillary, unless they have an active role cooperating with the modern global aristocracy. And perhaps they do have a role. I do not know...
-- SM
themassesareasses© on blogger Sunday, December 30, 2001
Saturday, December 29, 2001
NO ONE EVER CONFUSED BUENOS AIRES FOR ANKARA
A financial storm is brewing as Turkey's debts grow. At $115 billion in early 2001, Turkey's debt is even greater in proportion to the size of its economy than Argentina's. But Turkey is far too important for U.S. security concerns to suffer Argentina's fate. The International Monetary Fund will keep Turkey on the financial equivalent of life support until it can induce private investors to help shoulder the cost of bailing out Ankara...
A financial storm is brewing as Turkey's debts grow. At $115 billion in early 2001, Turkey's debt is even greater in proportion to the size of its economy than Argentina's. But Turkey is far too important for U.S. security concerns to suffer Argentina's fate. The International Monetary Fund will keep Turkey on the financial equivalent of life support until it can induce private investors to help shoulder the cost of bailing out Ankara...
themassesareasses© on blogger Saturday, December 29, 2001
WHY ARE THE AMERICANS SMILING?
In 1948, the total amount of dollars held by Central Banks around the world amounted to some $15 billion dollars – the dollar reserves of those banks. The total of gold, valued at $35 dollars an ounce, also in Central Bank reserves, amounted to some $34 billion dollars. In physical terms, the gold weighed 970 million ounces. The value of gold in the reserves of the Central Banks of the world, the U.S. included, amounted to over twice the value of the dollar reserves.
For twenty years, up to 1968, the increase in the amount of dollars in the hands of Central Banks of the world was quite restrained, although constant. The United States were careful to restrain their monetary and credit expansion, because the dollars held by foreign Central Banks were redeemable in gold. During those years, however, the U.S. was steadily losing gold reserves to those Banks, as they satisfied the demands for redemption of their dollar I.O.U.’s. (Dollar bills).
In the years leading up to 1968, General de Gaulle in France had been firm about the Bank of France’s policy of dollar redemption for gold. In the Spring of 1968, the good General found himself facing a near revolution, and was almost overthrown. World leaders noted the curious coincidence of events.
The flight of gold from the U.S. persisted, notwithstanding arrangements between the more developed countries, not to demand gold for dollar redemption among themselves.
Finally, on August 15th, 1971, President Nixon threw in the towel, and simply ceased redeeming dollars with gold, at any price. In 1944, the Bretton Woods monetary arrangement had stipulated that dollars would serve as Central Bank reserves as good as gold, because all dollars would be redeemed for gold on demand at the rate of $35 dollars per ounce. Nixon killed the Bretton Woods agreement.
There was no new international agreement. The Central Banks of the world simply went on receiving dollars for their reserves, without any possibility of redeeming them for gold. World Central Bank reserves, as far as dollars were concerned, became simply papers.
Once the U.S. was freed of the commitment to redeem dollars, they embarked on an unrestricted credit expansion. Dollars in the hands of foreign Central Banks were like checks that are never cashed. A lovely arrangement, for the United States.
From 1971 to 1997, the U.S. provided reserves to foreign Central Banks, in an amount in excess of $1.1 trillion dollars (that is, one million and one hundred thousand millions of dollars) of green paper dollars, created out of nothing by their monetary and financial system. (The amount is approximate, but the approximation is sufficient to show the colossal increase).
It is a curious fact that not one Nobel prize winner has pointed out these extraordinary circumstances. The reason must be, that dollar reserves are such a gigantic tribute operation, that it is not convenient to point out these things.
Privatization, opening to U.S. investment, globalization, transparency, and the struggle against corruption, are words which hide the purpose: to concentrate unlimited power, by using irredeemable dollars to buy up the world...
In 1948, the total amount of dollars held by Central Banks around the world amounted to some $15 billion dollars – the dollar reserves of those banks. The total of gold, valued at $35 dollars an ounce, also in Central Bank reserves, amounted to some $34 billion dollars. In physical terms, the gold weighed 970 million ounces. The value of gold in the reserves of the Central Banks of the world, the U.S. included, amounted to over twice the value of the dollar reserves.
For twenty years, up to 1968, the increase in the amount of dollars in the hands of Central Banks of the world was quite restrained, although constant. The United States were careful to restrain their monetary and credit expansion, because the dollars held by foreign Central Banks were redeemable in gold. During those years, however, the U.S. was steadily losing gold reserves to those Banks, as they satisfied the demands for redemption of their dollar I.O.U.’s. (Dollar bills).
In the years leading up to 1968, General de Gaulle in France had been firm about the Bank of France’s policy of dollar redemption for gold. In the Spring of 1968, the good General found himself facing a near revolution, and was almost overthrown. World leaders noted the curious coincidence of events.
The flight of gold from the U.S. persisted, notwithstanding arrangements between the more developed countries, not to demand gold for dollar redemption among themselves.
Finally, on August 15th, 1971, President Nixon threw in the towel, and simply ceased redeeming dollars with gold, at any price. In 1944, the Bretton Woods monetary arrangement had stipulated that dollars would serve as Central Bank reserves as good as gold, because all dollars would be redeemed for gold on demand at the rate of $35 dollars per ounce. Nixon killed the Bretton Woods agreement.
There was no new international agreement. The Central Banks of the world simply went on receiving dollars for their reserves, without any possibility of redeeming them for gold. World Central Bank reserves, as far as dollars were concerned, became simply papers.
Once the U.S. was freed of the commitment to redeem dollars, they embarked on an unrestricted credit expansion. Dollars in the hands of foreign Central Banks were like checks that are never cashed. A lovely arrangement, for the United States.
From 1971 to 1997, the U.S. provided reserves to foreign Central Banks, in an amount in excess of $1.1 trillion dollars (that is, one million and one hundred thousand millions of dollars) of green paper dollars, created out of nothing by their monetary and financial system. (The amount is approximate, but the approximation is sufficient to show the colossal increase).
It is a curious fact that not one Nobel prize winner has pointed out these extraordinary circumstances. The reason must be, that dollar reserves are such a gigantic tribute operation, that it is not convenient to point out these things.
Privatization, opening to U.S. investment, globalization, transparency, and the struggle against corruption, are words which hide the purpose: to concentrate unlimited power, by using irredeemable dollars to buy up the world...
themassesareasses© on blogger Saturday, December 29, 2001
Friday, December 28, 2001
BUSH: TRIBUNAL RULES STILL BEING DEVELOPED
CRAWFORD, Texas -- President Bush today said the United States had not yet decided how to structure military tribunals in its war on terrorism and angrily denounced leaks about its preliminary ideas...
...While many of the rules outlined in the newspaper reports on the military tribunals were similar to those in U.S. civilian criminal criminal trials, some of the standards of evidence would be different. For instance, "hearsay" would be allowed, the newspapers said.
hear·say, noun. unverified information acquired from another; rumour.
-- Webster's College Dictionary
CRAWFORD, Texas -- President Bush today said the United States had not yet decided how to structure military tribunals in its war on terrorism and angrily denounced leaks about its preliminary ideas...
...While many of the rules outlined in the newspaper reports on the military tribunals were similar to those in U.S. civilian criminal criminal trials, some of the standards of evidence would be different. For instance, "hearsay" would be allowed, the newspapers said.
hear·say, noun. unverified information acquired from another; rumour.
-- Webster's College Dictionary
themassesareasses© on blogger Friday, December 28, 2001
Wednesday, December 26, 2001
MERRY CHRISTMAS, ARGENTINA
NY Times - Argentina's declaration of a moratorium on repayment of its foreign debt marks the end of a failed economic experiment that has cost this country dearly. But it is also a blow to the United States and the International Monetary Fund, which had invested much of their credibility and prestige here, yet proved unwilling to help when things began falling apart.
"I think this is going to end up being a very costly experience for the United States," Walter Molano, chief of research for BCP Securities, a brokerage firm based in Connecticut that focuses on Latin America, said today. "It was very clearly the Department of the Treasury that pushed Argentina over the edge and allowed it to collapse, so I think the issue of accountability has to come up."
A decade ago, Argentina decided to tie its peso to the dollar at a value of one to one, a decision that at first dramatically reduced inflation and imposed fiscal discipline, but eventually led to the current crisis. The first Bush administration had strongly urged that step on Argentina, and the United States tried to sell the same system to other doubtful Latin American countries.
NY Times - Argentina's declaration of a moratorium on repayment of its foreign debt marks the end of a failed economic experiment that has cost this country dearly. But it is also a blow to the United States and the International Monetary Fund, which had invested much of their credibility and prestige here, yet proved unwilling to help when things began falling apart.
"I think this is going to end up being a very costly experience for the United States," Walter Molano, chief of research for BCP Securities, a brokerage firm based in Connecticut that focuses on Latin America, said today. "It was very clearly the Department of the Treasury that pushed Argentina over the edge and allowed it to collapse, so I think the issue of accountability has to come up."
A decade ago, Argentina decided to tie its peso to the dollar at a value of one to one, a decision that at first dramatically reduced inflation and imposed fiscal discipline, but eventually led to the current crisis. The first Bush administration had strongly urged that step on Argentina, and the United States tried to sell the same system to other doubtful Latin American countries.
themassesareasses© on blogger Wednesday, December 26, 2001
OPEN SECRETS
On Saturday, 15 December 2001, the United States vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution that would have cleared the way for international monitors in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Many believe that such monitors would help end the increasingly bloody low-intensity war Israel is waging against Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories, as well as the devastating suicide bombings against Israeli civilians.
Among the reasons the US gave for its veto was that the United Nations is not the proper forum for resolving Middle East violence. The US prefers to see itself as the sole arbiter in this conflict despite or perhaps because of its marked pro-Israel bias, all the more evident of late in its backing of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's public condemnation of PA President Yasser Arafat, and in its refusal to challenge Israel's appropriation of the Bush administration's language regarding America's "War on Terror."
We are expected to accept that Israel's policies and strategy towards the Palestinians are analogous to US policies and strategy towards al-Qa'eda in Afghanistan and elsewhere...
The litany of abuses conducted by the Israeli government, security forces, and civilians against Palestinians in the Occupied Territories...includes home demolitions; lengthy and damaging military "closures" on Palestinian cities, towns, and villages; the restriction of freedom of worship and of travel; the arbitrary closing of schools and universities; the state-sponsored destruction of olive and citrus orchards; censorship of Palestinian media; restrictions on freedom of assembly; extradition of Palestinian prisoners to prisons in Israel and the difficulty of obtaining proper legal counsel; it takes note of the IDF killings of hundreds of demonstrators and of the policy of assassinating terror suspects without ever attempting to bring them to trial. -- US STATE DEPARTMENT-CRHP 2000: Israel-Feb 2001
In this report on Israel we are reminded that "the international community does not recognize Israel's sovereignty over any part of the Occupied Territories," and any mildly critical glance at the body of international law dealing with this subject, including the 1949 Geneva Convention relating to the Protection of Civilians in Time of War (to which Israel is a signatory), will reveal the full extent of Israeli legal and human rights violations.
According to government documents on US Foreign Military Assistance, Israel will receive $720,000,000 in economic support (allowing it to free up money for military expenditures), and $2,040,000,000 in foreign military aid for fiscal year 2002. Congress approved this aid package on 24 October 2001, eight months after the US State Department published its latest human rights report on Israel and the Occupied Territories.
On Saturday, 15 December 2001, the United States vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution that would have cleared the way for international monitors in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Many believe that such monitors would help end the increasingly bloody low-intensity war Israel is waging against Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories, as well as the devastating suicide bombings against Israeli civilians.
Among the reasons the US gave for its veto was that the United Nations is not the proper forum for resolving Middle East violence. The US prefers to see itself as the sole arbiter in this conflict despite or perhaps because of its marked pro-Israel bias, all the more evident of late in its backing of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's public condemnation of PA President Yasser Arafat, and in its refusal to challenge Israel's appropriation of the Bush administration's language regarding America's "War on Terror."
We are expected to accept that Israel's policies and strategy towards the Palestinians are analogous to US policies and strategy towards al-Qa'eda in Afghanistan and elsewhere...
The litany of abuses conducted by the Israeli government, security forces, and civilians against Palestinians in the Occupied Territories...includes home demolitions; lengthy and damaging military "closures" on Palestinian cities, towns, and villages; the restriction of freedom of worship and of travel; the arbitrary closing of schools and universities; the state-sponsored destruction of olive and citrus orchards; censorship of Palestinian media; restrictions on freedom of assembly; extradition of Palestinian prisoners to prisons in Israel and the difficulty of obtaining proper legal counsel; it takes note of the IDF killings of hundreds of demonstrators and of the policy of assassinating terror suspects without ever attempting to bring them to trial. -- US STATE DEPARTMENT-CRHP 2000: Israel-Feb 2001
In this report on Israel we are reminded that "the international community does not recognize Israel's sovereignty over any part of the Occupied Territories," and any mildly critical glance at the body of international law dealing with this subject, including the 1949 Geneva Convention relating to the Protection of Civilians in Time of War (to which Israel is a signatory), will reveal the full extent of Israeli legal and human rights violations.
According to government documents on US Foreign Military Assistance, Israel will receive $720,000,000 in economic support (allowing it to free up money for military expenditures), and $2,040,000,000 in foreign military aid for fiscal year 2002. Congress approved this aid package on 24 October 2001, eight months after the US State Department published its latest human rights report on Israel and the Occupied Territories.
themassesareasses© on blogger Wednesday, December 26, 2001
Friday, December 14, 2001
JEWISH DEFENSE LEAGUE CHIEF ARRESTED IN LA
LOS ANGELES, Dec 13 (Reuters) - Relatives and lawyers for two Jewish Defense League members charged with plotting to bomb a mosque and a congressman's office said on Thursday the men were innocent and set up by a "crazy" man working as a confidential government informant.
Bryan Altman, the attorney for JDL chairman Irv Rubin, said the charges were false. "Mr Rubin has spent his entire career fighting terrorism. He does not perpetuate acts of terrorism...
Rubin, 56, who assumed leadership of the militant Jewish group in 1985 from its controversial founder, the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, is being held without bail along with one of his followers, Earl Krugel, 59...
Barry Krugel, the brother of Earl Krugel, said he was in "total shock" over first the arrest and then the "high-handed methods" employed by law enforcement officials during a search of the Krugel home.
"We've been around for over 30 years. We're not so stupid as to do that," he said, referring to the JDL. He added that the government's confidential informant entrapped his brother and described the man as a "fink bastard snitch," who drifted into
the group about a year-and-a-half ago, saying he was from the U.S. Navy, Krugel said.
"This guy was in deep with the government" and not a legitimate member of JDL. "No member would ever turn on a fellow Jew," Krugel said.
LOS ANGELES, Dec 13 (Reuters) - Relatives and lawyers for two Jewish Defense League members charged with plotting to bomb a mosque and a congressman's office said on Thursday the men were innocent and set up by a "crazy" man working as a confidential government informant.
Bryan Altman, the attorney for JDL chairman Irv Rubin, said the charges were false. "Mr Rubin has spent his entire career fighting terrorism. He does not perpetuate acts of terrorism...
Rubin, 56, who assumed leadership of the militant Jewish group in 1985 from its controversial founder, the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, is being held without bail along with one of his followers, Earl Krugel, 59...
Barry Krugel, the brother of Earl Krugel, said he was in "total shock" over first the arrest and then the "high-handed methods" employed by law enforcement officials during a search of the Krugel home.
"We've been around for over 30 years. We're not so stupid as to do that," he said, referring to the JDL. He added that the government's confidential informant entrapped his brother and described the man as a "fink bastard snitch," who drifted into
the group about a year-and-a-half ago, saying he was from the U.S. Navy, Krugel said.
"This guy was in deep with the government" and not a legitimate member of JDL. "No member would ever turn on a fellow Jew," Krugel said.
themassesareasses© on blogger Friday, December 14, 2001
From the Ari Fleischer files,
'reminding all Americans that they need to watch what they say and watch what they do.'
White House Press Briefing - Dec 13, 2001
Question: President Putin has just said that pulling out of the ABM (treaty) was a mistake. And once again reiterating that the treaty is a cornerstone of world security. What's your reaction to that?
Ari Fleischer: Ron, I think there is much more to his reaction than that. I do not believe that you have all of it. And we will take a look at his reaction in its entirety as the government receives it. And so I will withhold on any reaction until his statement is received in its entirety, because there is much more to it than what you've just indicated.
Question: Like what?
Question: That doesn't change the fact that he thinks it's a mistake...
Question: One more. The President said he had consulted, obviously, with President Putin extensively. Who else did he consult with? This is something that could damage the coalition, arguably, since there were a lot of nations who didn't want to see this. Did he talk in particular to China?
Ari Fleischer: He did. The President, this morning, called President Jiang of China. As well, he has spoken this week with Prime Minister Blair, with President Chirac, with Chancellor Schroeder, with Mr. Koizumi. The President has had a series of consultative discussions with the leaders around the world. In addition, the Vice President and the Secretary of State had a series of conversations. The Secretary of State, of course, met with many leaders in his recent travels.
And so, the United States has done exactly what the President committed to do, which was to consult, to talk to various nations --
Question: What was their reaction?
Ari Fleischer: And I'll let each nation characterize it for itself...
Question: You know we're not going to be able to call China and so forth.
Ari Fleischer: Well, your phones work. You have reporters there.
Question: When he talked to those leaders, did he tell them --
Ari Fleischer: ...The President, in his conversations, number one, everybody appreciated the fact that the President had consulted with them. Two, on the case of China, for example, President Jiang said to the President he looked forward to further, high-level dialogue about this topic. And other leaders just recognized that the President had always said he was going to do this, and they recognized that the President kept his word, did what he indicated what he was going to do.
So I think you will be able to get additional reaction from the governments; they will, most likely, have public statements.
Question:They didn't really like it, is what you're really saying, but they had no alternative.
Ari Fleischer: I think again, different leaders say different things. As you know, right from the beginning of the year, Europe has basically been of several minds about this topic. The President has all along had widespread support for these from Spain, from Italy, from Hungary, from Poland. There have been many nations that strongly do support this.
Question: To break the treaty -- they all had supported that?
Ari Fleischer: They've always understood the United States' statement about the need to develop missiles defenses and they supported that.
'reminding all Americans that they need to watch what they say and watch what they do.'
White House Press Briefing - Dec 13, 2001
Question: President Putin has just said that pulling out of the ABM (treaty) was a mistake. And once again reiterating that the treaty is a cornerstone of world security. What's your reaction to that?
Ari Fleischer: Ron, I think there is much more to his reaction than that. I do not believe that you have all of it. And we will take a look at his reaction in its entirety as the government receives it. And so I will withhold on any reaction until his statement is received in its entirety, because there is much more to it than what you've just indicated.
Question: Like what?
Question: That doesn't change the fact that he thinks it's a mistake...
Question: One more. The President said he had consulted, obviously, with President Putin extensively. Who else did he consult with? This is something that could damage the coalition, arguably, since there were a lot of nations who didn't want to see this. Did he talk in particular to China?
Ari Fleischer: He did. The President, this morning, called President Jiang of China. As well, he has spoken this week with Prime Minister Blair, with President Chirac, with Chancellor Schroeder, with Mr. Koizumi. The President has had a series of consultative discussions with the leaders around the world. In addition, the Vice President and the Secretary of State had a series of conversations. The Secretary of State, of course, met with many leaders in his recent travels.
And so, the United States has done exactly what the President committed to do, which was to consult, to talk to various nations --
Question: What was their reaction?
Ari Fleischer: And I'll let each nation characterize it for itself...
Question: You know we're not going to be able to call China and so forth.
Ari Fleischer: Well, your phones work. You have reporters there.
Question: When he talked to those leaders, did he tell them --
Ari Fleischer: ...The President, in his conversations, number one, everybody appreciated the fact that the President had consulted with them. Two, on the case of China, for example, President Jiang said to the President he looked forward to further, high-level dialogue about this topic. And other leaders just recognized that the President had always said he was going to do this, and they recognized that the President kept his word, did what he indicated what he was going to do.
So I think you will be able to get additional reaction from the governments; they will, most likely, have public statements.
Question:They didn't really like it, is what you're really saying, but they had no alternative.
Ari Fleischer: I think again, different leaders say different things. As you know, right from the beginning of the year, Europe has basically been of several minds about this topic. The President has all along had widespread support for these from Spain, from Italy, from Hungary, from Poland. There have been many nations that strongly do support this.
Question: To break the treaty -- they all had supported that?
Ari Fleischer: They've always understood the United States' statement about the need to develop missiles defenses and they supported that.
themassesareasses© on blogger Friday, December 14, 2001
Friday, December 07, 2001
A Century Old Coup D'Etat
The Federal Reserve Act was the biggest leap of faith in modern history. When President Woodrow Wilson signed this bill, the invisible government of the monetary power was legalized. The worst legislative crime of the ages was perpetrated by this banking and currency bill. The cost of this blind faith is immeasurable, as was later realized by the very President that signed it into law:
"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world, no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -- Woodrow Wilson
Institutionalized Economic Manipulation
Orchestrated Global Conflict
The Cold War & The Arms Race
Democracy: Tool of the Imperialists
Globalization
Taxation & Corporate Welfare
Critical Mass of Speculative Capitalism
911
Dictatorial Rule: Security and Trade Power For The Emperor
themassesareasses© on blogger Friday, December 07, 2001
From Bush's Town Hall Meeting in Orlando, Florida - Dec 4, 2001:
Question: One thing, Mr. President, is that you have no idea how much you've done for this country. And another thing is that, how did you feel when you heard about the terrorist attack?
The President: Thank you, Jordan. Well, Jordan, you're not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my Chief of Staff, Andy Card -- actually, I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident.
But I was whisked off there, I didn't have much time to think about it. And I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my Chief of Staff, who is sitting over here, walked in and said, "A second plane has hit the tower, America is under attack"...
"I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower..."
The President of The United States saw a commercial airliner crash into the World Trade Center and didn't feel that it warranted his attention enough to postpone the photo-op. Is there anything about the last few months that doesn't defy logic?
Question: One thing, Mr. President, is that you have no idea how much you've done for this country. And another thing is that, how did you feel when you heard about the terrorist attack?
The President: Thank you, Jordan. Well, Jordan, you're not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my Chief of Staff, Andy Card -- actually, I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident.
But I was whisked off there, I didn't have much time to think about it. And I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my Chief of Staff, who is sitting over here, walked in and said, "A second plane has hit the tower, America is under attack"...
The President of The United States saw a commercial airliner crash into the World Trade Center and didn't feel that it warranted his attention enough to postpone the photo-op. Is there anything about the last few months that doesn't defy logic?
themassesareasses© on blogger Friday, December 07, 2001
Thursday, December 06, 2001
ENRON, CORPORATE DEMOCRACY and THE LIE
Enron paid out $55 million in bonuses to executives and other employees two days prior to filing for bankruptcy, the company confirmed today. A total of 500 employees received bonuses.
Bush's $100 billion 'stimulus plan', An Alternate Reality, is a bold example of the corruption of this economy, and this system. The employed and unemployed citizens, who have been directly affected by the economic meltdown, will get a whopping $2.3 billion. That's less than 3% for 'the right' to have $100 billion added to 'their tab'. Even cash-rich General Motors (sitting on $8 billion) will be getting $800 million to help them through this difficult time.
Concepts like 'the good of the people' and 'the bottom line' are mutually exclusive. Regardless of what the managerial class may say, they cannot coexist. The corporate sector, the government, and the media have thrown caution to the wind. Being subtle is an afterthought. Difficulty noticing the 'slight of hand' in this crooked game is no longer an excuse.
For anyone that still doesn't get it, PULL YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS. Any politician or 'talking-head' that sings the praises of deregulation, commercialization, privatization, globalization, or patriotism, for that matter, is looking to harm YOU. Period.
Enron paid out $55 million in bonuses to executives and other employees two days prior to filing for bankruptcy, the company confirmed today. A total of 500 employees received bonuses.
Bush's $100 billion 'stimulus plan', An Alternate Reality, is a bold example of the corruption of this economy, and this system. The employed and unemployed citizens, who have been directly affected by the economic meltdown, will get a whopping $2.3 billion. That's less than 3% for 'the right' to have $100 billion added to 'their tab'. Even cash-rich General Motors (sitting on $8 billion) will be getting $800 million to help them through this difficult time.
Concepts like 'the good of the people' and 'the bottom line' are mutually exclusive. Regardless of what the managerial class may say, they cannot coexist. The corporate sector, the government, and the media have thrown caution to the wind. Being subtle is an afterthought. Difficulty noticing the 'slight of hand' in this crooked game is no longer an excuse.
For anyone that still doesn't get it, PULL YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS. Any politician or 'talking-head' that sings the praises of deregulation, commercialization, privatization, globalization, or patriotism, for that matter, is looking to harm YOU. Period.
themassesareasses© on blogger Thursday, December 06, 2001
HOUSE PASSES TRADE LEGISLATION
WASHINGTON –– In a one-vote victory for a wartime White House, the House approved legislation Thursday giving President Bush stronger authority to negotiate global trade deals.
The 215-214 vote was largely along party lines, and came after Speaker Dennis Hastert told lawmakers they could "support our president who is fighting a courageous war on terrorism and redefining American world leadership or ... undercut the president at the worst possible time"...
WASHINGTON –– In a one-vote victory for a wartime White House, the House approved legislation Thursday giving President Bush stronger authority to negotiate global trade deals.
The 215-214 vote was largely along party lines, and came after Speaker Dennis Hastert told lawmakers they could "support our president who is fighting a courageous war on terrorism and redefining American world leadership or ... undercut the president at the worst possible time"...
themassesareasses© on blogger Thursday, December 06, 2001
A letter to The Hill responding to a November 21, 2001 article:
Letter to the Editor:
Regarding your Nov. 21 article, Jewish Lawmakers Blast Bush On Palestinian Statehood Position, I find it disturbing that the members quoted seem to care more about Israel than human rights and American values.
They keep asserting that President Bush has rewarded Yasir Arafat with support of a state. But Arafat isn’t the only Palestinian in the world; there are 8 million others, half of whom are refugees Israel refuses to repatriate, despite United Nations resolutions. U.N. resolutions have been passed over three decades, in vain, calling on Israel to end its illegal occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip, and its building of illegal Jewish settlements on stolen Palestinian land.
President Bush did nothing more than finally take the courageous step to recognize that another people live on the holy land, that they are the indigenous inhabitants of the land, and that they deserve what every other colonized people have achieved - freedom.
Finally, these members continue to refer to the “great deal” that Arafat walked away from. What he walked away from was an offer for a Swiss cheese state with no sovereignty, no rights in Jerusalem, and no rights for refugees to return to their homes in Israel. You can see for yourself what he was offered by going to the website of an Israeli peace group called Gush Shalom.
What is more disturbing to me is that many of these pro-Israeli lawmakers sit on the House International Relations Committee despite the obvious conflict of interest that their emotional attachments to Israel cause.
The Israeli occupation of all territories must end, including Congress.
Raeed Tayeh
Office of Rep. Cynthia McKinney (Democrat-Georgia.)
Letter to the Editor:
Regarding your Nov. 21 article, Jewish Lawmakers Blast Bush On Palestinian Statehood Position, I find it disturbing that the members quoted seem to care more about Israel than human rights and American values.
They keep asserting that President Bush has rewarded Yasir Arafat with support of a state. But Arafat isn’t the only Palestinian in the world; there are 8 million others, half of whom are refugees Israel refuses to repatriate, despite United Nations resolutions. U.N. resolutions have been passed over three decades, in vain, calling on Israel to end its illegal occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip, and its building of illegal Jewish settlements on stolen Palestinian land.
President Bush did nothing more than finally take the courageous step to recognize that another people live on the holy land, that they are the indigenous inhabitants of the land, and that they deserve what every other colonized people have achieved - freedom.
Finally, these members continue to refer to the “great deal” that Arafat walked away from. What he walked away from was an offer for a Swiss cheese state with no sovereignty, no rights in Jerusalem, and no rights for refugees to return to their homes in Israel. You can see for yourself what he was offered by going to the website of an Israeli peace group called Gush Shalom.
What is more disturbing to me is that many of these pro-Israeli lawmakers sit on the House International Relations Committee despite the obvious conflict of interest that their emotional attachments to Israel cause.
The Israeli occupation of all territories must end, including Congress.
Raeed Tayeh
Office of Rep. Cynthia McKinney (Democrat-Georgia.)
themassesareasses© on blogger Thursday, December 06, 2001
Wednesday, December 05, 2001
ISRAELI (WAR ON) TERRORISTS
By raising the stakes in the fever-pitch climate in the region, Israel again adopts its classical approach of matching violence with violence. However, for a country to use its armed forces against civilian targets, as well as military ones, is an act of state terrorism, which would cause an international incident if it were practised by any other country.
If, for example, the British Armed Forces had launched missile attacks on the citizens of Belfast after one of the many atrocities carried out by the IRA (backed with money from NORAID, the North American Aid organisation which for years raised funds for the IRA to fight the British), the incident would have reached the UN Security Council. Similarly, whenever the Russian Army attacks Chechen terrorists hiding in civilian areas, there is a wave of concern that human rights are not being respected.
However, when it is Israel, there is a wall of silence. Israel has systematically violated UN Security Council Resolutions and declares openly that it is not interested in adhering to them. Israel occupied Palestinian territories and forced the residents to move out of the country. Israel has built colonies on these occupied lands. Israeli soldiers shoot stone-throwing Palestinian youths in the eyes with rubber bullets. Israeli security forces have on more than one occasion left pregnant women to die in the street, laughing, as the baby and mother die through not having been allowed to cross the border to get to a hospital.
If Yasser Arafat is the spokesperson of the moderate Palestinians, as claimed by the internationally respected Hanane Ashrawi, the hostile acts by the Israeli Armed Forces against his person – he was metres away from being killed on Tuesday in a missile attack – make sense only in the context that he is to be eliminated, only for there to be an implacable war against the extremists in the wake of his death.
It is more and more apparent that Ariel Sharon, himself indicted for acts of terrorism in the past in the massacre of Palestinian civilians in the Lebanon in the 1980s, can only remain in power in a climate of war. It is more and more evident that the policy undertaken by Israel is the elimination of the Palestinian Authority, and its people, from the Middle East.
How there can be talk of a serious commitment to peace when one side unilaterally steals territories, refuses to give them back to their rightful owners, kills civilians and refuses to adopt UN Resolutions defies logic. -- Timothy BANCROFT-HINCHEY
By raising the stakes in the fever-pitch climate in the region, Israel again adopts its classical approach of matching violence with violence. However, for a country to use its armed forces against civilian targets, as well as military ones, is an act of state terrorism, which would cause an international incident if it were practised by any other country.
If, for example, the British Armed Forces had launched missile attacks on the citizens of Belfast after one of the many atrocities carried out by the IRA (backed with money from NORAID, the North American Aid organisation which for years raised funds for the IRA to fight the British), the incident would have reached the UN Security Council. Similarly, whenever the Russian Army attacks Chechen terrorists hiding in civilian areas, there is a wave of concern that human rights are not being respected.
However, when it is Israel, there is a wall of silence. Israel has systematically violated UN Security Council Resolutions and declares openly that it is not interested in adhering to them. Israel occupied Palestinian territories and forced the residents to move out of the country. Israel has built colonies on these occupied lands. Israeli soldiers shoot stone-throwing Palestinian youths in the eyes with rubber bullets. Israeli security forces have on more than one occasion left pregnant women to die in the street, laughing, as the baby and mother die through not having been allowed to cross the border to get to a hospital.
If Yasser Arafat is the spokesperson of the moderate Palestinians, as claimed by the internationally respected Hanane Ashrawi, the hostile acts by the Israeli Armed Forces against his person – he was metres away from being killed on Tuesday in a missile attack – make sense only in the context that he is to be eliminated, only for there to be an implacable war against the extremists in the wake of his death.
It is more and more apparent that Ariel Sharon, himself indicted for acts of terrorism in the past in the massacre of Palestinian civilians in the Lebanon in the 1980s, can only remain in power in a climate of war. It is more and more evident that the policy undertaken by Israel is the elimination of the Palestinian Authority, and its people, from the Middle East.
How there can be talk of a serious commitment to peace when one side unilaterally steals territories, refuses to give them back to their rightful owners, kills civilians and refuses to adopt UN Resolutions defies logic. -- Timothy BANCROFT-HINCHEY
themassesareasses© on blogger Wednesday, December 05, 2001
From the Ari Fleischer files,
'reminding all Americans that they need to watch what they say and watch what they do.'
White House Press Briefing - Dec 5, 2001
Question: Ari, what makes the President -- I'm taking note of his wide-swinging threats in speeches recently. What makes him think that he has the right to go into a sovereign country and bomb the people?
Ari Fleischer: His threats?
Question: Any country. Yes, he's --
Ari Fleischer: Would you like to be more specific?
Question: Does he think he can go beyond Afghanistan or anywhere else?
Ari Fleischer: The President has made it clear to the American people that the United States, in the wake of an attack on our country, will defend itself. And as a result of defending ourselves, you can see what is happening in Afghanistan. The President has said that this is a war against terrorism because terrorists continue to pose a threat to the United States and to others around the world, and that he is involved in phase one of defending this country against terrorists, and he will continue to do so.
Question: What gives him the authority to go into other countries and bomb them, which is what he is threatening to do?
Ari Fleischer: The right as the Commander-in-Chief to protect and defend the American people.
'reminding all Americans that they need to watch what they say and watch what they do.'
White House Press Briefing - Dec 5, 2001
Question: Ari, what makes the President -- I'm taking note of his wide-swinging threats in speeches recently. What makes him think that he has the right to go into a sovereign country and bomb the people?
Ari Fleischer: His threats?
Question: Any country. Yes, he's --
Ari Fleischer: Would you like to be more specific?
Question: Does he think he can go beyond Afghanistan or anywhere else?
Ari Fleischer: The President has made it clear to the American people that the United States, in the wake of an attack on our country, will defend itself. And as a result of defending ourselves, you can see what is happening in Afghanistan. The President has said that this is a war against terrorism because terrorists continue to pose a threat to the United States and to others around the world, and that he is involved in phase one of defending this country against terrorists, and he will continue to do so.
Question: What gives him the authority to go into other countries and bomb them, which is what he is threatening to do?
Ari Fleischer: The right as the Commander-in-Chief to protect and defend the American people.
themassesareasses© on blogger Wednesday, December 05, 2001
Tuesday, December 04, 2001
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
-- Henry Louis Mencken
From the Propaganda Files:
U.S. FEARS BIN LADEN MADE NUCLEAR STRIDES
Washington Post - ...U.S. intelligence agencies have recently concluded that Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorist network may have made greater strides than previously thought toward obtaining plans or materials to make a crude radiological weapon that would use conventional explosives to spread radioactivity over a wide area, according to U.S. and foreign sources...
AL QAEDA INTERESTED IN 'DIRTY BOMB', U.S. SAYS
CNN - ...In recent weeks, intelligence officials -- as well as CNN and other news organizations -- have found piles of materials in former al Qaeda safe houses in the Afghan capital, Kabul, indicating the group was trying to learn how to make a nuclear weapon...
For those who are still confused, a dirty bomb is reported to be a conventional explosive laced with radioactive materials. Much like the mainstream media, it is designed more to terrify people than to kill large numbers.
-- Henry Louis Mencken
From the Propaganda Files:
U.S. FEARS BIN LADEN MADE NUCLEAR STRIDES
Washington Post - ...U.S. intelligence agencies have recently concluded that Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorist network may have made greater strides than previously thought toward obtaining plans or materials to make a crude radiological weapon that would use conventional explosives to spread radioactivity over a wide area, according to U.S. and foreign sources...
AL QAEDA INTERESTED IN 'DIRTY BOMB', U.S. SAYS
CNN - ...In recent weeks, intelligence officials -- as well as CNN and other news organizations -- have found piles of materials in former al Qaeda safe houses in the Afghan capital, Kabul, indicating the group was trying to learn how to make a nuclear weapon...
For those who are still confused, a dirty bomb is reported to be a conventional explosive laced with radioactive materials. Much like the mainstream media, it is designed more to terrify people than to kill large numbers.
themassesareasses© on blogger Tuesday, December 04, 2001
BUSH LAW CHIEF TRIED TO DROP HABEAS CORPUS
THE Bush Administration sought the power to suspend all suspects’ rights in the most extreme example of its squeeze on civil liberties since September 11.
According to a draft of the anti-terrorism Bill which was published yesterday, John Ashcroft, the Attorney-General, initially wanted to do away with the fundamental legal tenet of habeas corpus for terrorist suspects.
Such a move would have allowed the authorities to hold suspects in secret and indefinitely without charging them or producing them before a judge... -- Roland Watson
The preparations continue at home,...and abroad - Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq...?
The question is, how 'exciting' are things going to get?
THE Bush Administration sought the power to suspend all suspects’ rights in the most extreme example of its squeeze on civil liberties since September 11.
According to a draft of the anti-terrorism Bill which was published yesterday, John Ashcroft, the Attorney-General, initially wanted to do away with the fundamental legal tenet of habeas corpus for terrorist suspects.
Such a move would have allowed the authorities to hold suspects in secret and indefinitely without charging them or producing them before a judge... -- Roland Watson
The preparations continue at home,...and abroad - Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq...?
The question is, how 'exciting' are things going to get?
themassesareasses© on blogger Tuesday, December 04, 2001
