|
Home To The World's Best Liberal Thought And Humor
|
In This Edition
Greg Palast and David Palliste show another example of the Crime Family Bush in, "FBI Claims Bin Laden Inquiry Was Frustrated."
Jim Hightower uncovers, "The Corporate Spirit!"
George Clooney's, "Letter To Bill O'Reilly."
Norman Solomon reports on, "Bloomberg's Victory And The Triumph Of Business News."
Joe Conason says, "Local Republicans Must Buck Party Line."
Gene Lyons has, "Fun And Games."
Jerold M. Starr gives us part two of our PBS series, "PBS Shuts Out Independant Producers."
Andy Rooney asks, "Follow What Leader?"
Ed Vulliamy reveals, "Anthrax Attacks Work Of Neo-Nazis."
Robert Lederman reports that, "Bush Plans Forced Immunizations, Quarantines."
Richard Berke wins the "Vidkun Quisling Award!"
Molly Ivins sees, "Berlin On The Pecos."
Tally Briggs reports on, "Domestic Sanctions And Government Terrorism."
And finally in "Parting Shots The Onion reports, "Gore Delivers Emergency Presidential Address Into Bathroom Mirror," but first Uncle Ernie says, "Nobody Expects The American Inquisition!"
This week we spotlight the cartoons of Steve Benson with additional cartoons from Ted Rall, MoPaul, TruCard, Shakti, Ariail, Carlson, Chris Whitehouse, GWBush Art, Chadsux and Political Strikes.
Plus we have all of your favorite departments! Welcome one and all to "Uncle Ernie's Issues & Alibis." We hope you enjoy your stay! |
Never before in our history has the ruling Junta been so blatant in destroying our republic. They know that not only did they get away with the Coup D' Etat but with the murder of thousands. And with those Democratic Pussies totally cowered by Karl Rove there is nothing standing in the way of their Imperial goals. The dream of the "Seven Corporations" running the world for their profit and power is all but assured now.
With the backing of the sheep who see only bright, shiny objects waved in front of them, they rush to join in goose stepping off to a brave new world. Blinded by the flag even once hard core liberals mumble something about we're at war and so they must lock step against the enemy.
First and foremost we are not at war. In fact the last time Congress declared war was on December 8th 1941 against Japan. Only after Derr Snifter declared war on us did we declare war on Germany and Italy on December 10th 1941. That was the last time the United States was at War. Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq and now Afghanistan were not and are not wars. Don't bother saying if it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck it's a duck. Nope, only Congress can make it a duck not Smirky the Wonder Chimp or Poppa Smirk or LBJ or HST.
Secondly blindly following this seditious traitor is not being patriotic it's being treasonistic. Waving a piece of cloth or plastic does not make one a patriot it makes one symbol minded. Joining the Army to go kill women and children in Afghanistan doesn't make one patriotic, it makes one a killer. Sacrificing your Constitutional Rights of freedom to make it easier for Big Brother to control your life isn't patriotic it's treason. Doing nothing about this treason except to sit on the side lines and watch it go by isn't only treason but it's also stupid too. Smirky was correct when he said you're either for this or against it. And you are America either for his treason or against it, there is no middle ground. It's time to get off the fence and take a stand or tomorrow it may be too late because, "Nobody Expects The American Inquisition!"
Remember the Catholic Inquisition? How the Pope and his followers killed millions in order to get rid of the Jews, steal billions in gold, take over millions of land parcels and estates. There were very few poor people who suffered under the priests as there was no money to be made from them. There was however a growing middle class to fleece and money to be made. Unlike today when the object is to destroy the middle class and return to those profitable days of yore, you know before the civil war? Imagine the cruelty of the middle ages with modern technology. Remember how the Nazis with the help of a very primitive IBM were able to rush Jews from their homes into waiting furnaces with efficiency unknown before. Consider your 'hand held' has more computing power than all the computers made in the first twenty years combined. Consider that the government has Crays, the worlds most powerful computers, how do you think they're going to be used? For the good of mankind? Yeah right!
Before you run off to join the goose-steppers thinking if you can't beat them, join them. Remember the Nazi's had Brown-shirts too. Of course they only lasted until Hitler had a lock on power and then they too were eliminated. Just because you're a follower don't expect to be given any breaks when the Inquisition starts unless of course you're a billionaire. Being a middle-class Nazi won't cut it.
Remember their weapons are, "Fear, Surprise, Ruthless Efficiency and an almost "Fanatical Devotion" to the Smirk." Be afraid America, be very afraid! Until next time, peace y'all!
We have a new feature starting in this edition, a weekly "Mini-Poll" for your amusement. It's down at the bottom of the page so don't forget to vote. You can click on it to see results and we will post the final tally every week.
Chapter 2 of my new book "The Red King's Horror." is now viewing. I post a new chapter on the 1st of each month. I've just finished the rebuild on most of my literary site, there is a new home page, etc. There is still some work to do but it's up and runnning again
Von Rumsfeld, Emperor Smirkus and Deputy-Fuhrer Ridge go on the attack.
Nobody Expects The American Inquisition
By Ernest Stewart
© 2001 Ernest Stewart
 FBI Claims Bin Laden Inquiry Was Frustrated Officials Told To 'Back Off' On Saudis Before September 11 Greg Palast and David Pallister Guardian FBI and military intelligence officials in Washington say they were prevented for political reasons from carrying out full investigations into members of the Bin Laden family in the US before the terrorist attacks of September 11. US intelligence agencies have come under criticism for their wholesale failure to predict the catastrophe at the World Trade Centre. But some are complaining that their hands were tied. FBI documents shown on BBC Newsnight last night and obtained by the Guardian show that they had earlier sought to investigate two of Osama bin Laden's relatives in Washington and a Muslim organisation, the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), with which they were linked. The FBI file, marked Secret and coded 199, which means a case involving national security, records that Abdullah bin Laden, who lived in Washington, had originally had a file opened on him "because of his relationship with the World Assembly of Muslim Youth - a suspected terrorist organisation". WAMY members deny they have been involved with terrorist activities, and WAMY has not been placed on the latest list of terrorist organisations whose assets are being frozen. Abdullah, who lived with his brother Omar at the time in Falls Church, a town just outside Washington, was the US director of WAMY, whose offices were in a basement nearby. But the FBI files were closed in 1996 apparently before any conclusions could be reached on either the Bin Laden brothers or the organisation itself. High-placed intelligence sources in Washington told the Guardian this week: "There were always constraints on investigating the Saudis". They said the restrictions became worse after the Bush administration took over this year. The intelligence agencies had been told to "back off" from investigations involving other members of the Bin Laden family, the Saudi royals, and possible Saudi links to the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Pakistan. "There were particular investigations that were effectively killed." Only after the September 11 attacks was the stance of political and commercial closeness reversed towards the other members of the large Bin Laden clan, who have classed Osama bin Laden as their "black sheep". Yesterday, the head of the Saudi-based WAMY's London office, Nouredine Miladi, said the charity was totally against Bin Laden's violent methods. "We seek social change through education and cooperation, not force." He said Abdullah bin Laden had ceased to run WAMY's US operation a year ago. Neither Abdullah nor Omar bin Laden could be contacted in Saudi Arabia for comment. WAMY was founded in 1972 in a Saudi effort to prevent the "corrupting" ideas of the west ern world influencing young Muslims. With official backing it grew to embrace 450 youth and student organisations with 34 offices worldwide. Its aim was to encourage "concerned Muslims to take up the challenge by arming the youth with sound understanding of Islam, guarding them against destructive ideologies, and instilling in them level-headed wisdom". In Britain it has 20 associated organisations, many highly respectable. But as long as 10 years ago it was named as a discreet channel for public and private Saudi donations to hardline Islamic organisations. One of the recipients of its largesse has been the militant Students Islamic Movement of India, which has lent support to Pakistani-backed terrorists in Kashmir and seeks to set up an Islamic state in India. Since September 11 WAMY has been investigated in the US along with a number of other Muslim charities. There have been several grand jury investigations but no findings have been made against any of them. Current FBI interest in WAMY is shown in their agents' interrogation of a radiologist from San Antonio, Texas, Dr Al Badr al-Hazmi, who was arrested on September 12 and released without charge two weeks later. He had the same surname as two of the plane hijackers. He was also questioned about his contacts with Abdullah bin Laden at the US WAMY office. Mr Al-Hazmi said that he had made phone calls to Abdullah bin Laden in 1999 trying to obtain books and videotapes about Islamic teachings for the Islamic Centre of San Antonio. To view the BBC television broadcast of the Palast investigation, go to http://www.GregPalast.com
|
|
We Americans are kind of a rah-rah people. We tend to enjoy getting fired up–at
sporting events, at political rallies, in church, wherever. Shout hallelujah! Won
one for the Gipper! Four more years! These have been some our exuberant
cries. And, now, we can add this classic: Burn your feet for Burger King!
Yes, in addition to god, country, party, and team, corporations increasingly are
holding employee pep rallies and otherwise trying to fire-up their worker bees
with the holy corporate spirit. But it appears that Burger King is the first that
literally has tried to fire-up its workers.
Associated Press reports that more than 100 marketing employees of this
British-owned fast food giant recently gathered at a resort in the Florida Keys for
a corporate retreat that was meant to promote bonding. To show their
enthusiasm for the corporate team, the employees were asked to engage in the
ritual of fire-walking–literally to walk barefooted across a bed of white-hot coals.
How hot? As hot as 1,200 degrees! Hot enough that a doctor had to be brought
in to treat about a dozen of the fired-up workers for first and second degree
burns. One woman was hospitalized, and some of the others had to have
wheelchairs to leave the resort.
Not that the corporation was surprised that its people got burned. Prior to the
fire-walk, Burger King required the participants to sign a waiver acknowledging
that they might get hurt and absolving the company of liability. Not to sign, and
not walk across the coals, would of course be a sign that maybe they lacked the
proper team spirit.
One who suffered injury was Burger King's vice president of product marketing.
But, hey, she had no regrets, for she was filled with the corporate rapture.
Walking across searing coals, she exclaimed, "Made you feel a sense of
empowerment and that you can accomplish anything."
This is Jim Hightower saying...Yeah, if you consider first-degree burns an
accomplishment. |
|
November 6, 2001
Mr. O’Reilly,
On the evening of October 31st you ran a story that has no basis in
truth. What is not important is your attack of the performers who gave
their time to raise money during the telethon for the September 11th fund.
What is important is your accusation that the fund is being mishandled and
misused.That sir, as you know, is nothing short of a lie.
The fund is intact and has already handed out some 36 million
dollars to victims’ families (fifteen thousand checks), with over $230
million more to be allocated as The United Way sorts through the
complicated process of who is in the most need. To have given out all of
the money only six weeks after it was raised, would truly be irresponsible.
If you were a journalist you would have known that.
If you were doing your job you would have also known that the
person put in place to run the September 11 Fund is a man named Frank
Thomas. Now that’s not the baseball player Bill, but rather the man who
headed the Ford Foundation for several years. The Ford Foundation, Mr.
O’Reilly, is one of the greatest charitable organizations in the world…..
(Not a car dealership…. but I’m sure you knew that). Mr. Thomas is a man
respected worldwide and I would enjoy watching you question his character
publicly.
…..No Mr. O’Reilly, even you wouldn’t do that.
So, let’s re-cap.
The fund is not only the most successful single fundraiser ever
(over 260 million dollars); it is also doing exactly what it is designed to
do. Responsibly. The money is going out to the right people and to make
certain of this, the United Way is taking some time.
It took one phone call to find this information. One phone call you
did not make. But hey, it’s the first week of sweeps and you need to run a
hard-hitting expose’ of irresponsible, pampered performers and try to bait
them on your show with inflammatory statements. I’m sure it must have been
frustrating for you that not one person took the bait. Hell Bill, even
McCarthy got a few people to show up.
Here’s the problem, and why I’m forced to respond: People are
coming up to me and asking if it’s true the telethon was a fraud. That
means the next time we try to raise money, like when the CD from the
telethon comes out this month, fewer people will participate. Because of
your unsubstantiated, untrue statements about the September 11 Fund, You,
Mr. O’Reilly will be taking money away that from people who need it….and
all because it’s the first week of sweeps.
I will say this; you were right about one thing. You accused all of
the performers of lying. You named them one by one and read each of their
excuses for not responding to you.
Tom Cruise, "Too busy".
Brad Pitt, "Too busy to respond".
Tom Hanks…..you get the idea.
You’re right, Mr. O’Reilly, we lied…all of us. Of course we
weren’t too busy. And if you were Peter Jennings, or Dan Rather, Tom
Brokaw, Charlie Rose, The Washington Post, New York Times, LA Times, or
pretty much anybody else, we would have dropped everything and explained
what we know. You see Bill, these are journalists. So, yes we lied when we
said we were too busy to do your "entertainment show". We were just trying
to not hurt your feelings.
I can’t wait to see what’s in store for the February sweeps.
Your biggest fan,
George |
 Bloomberg's Victory And The Triumph Of Business News By Norman Solomon After billionaire Michael Bloomberg won the race to become New York's next mayor, the French news agency AFP noted that he "was among the first to see how the information age could serve investors in unprecedented -- and lucrative -- ways." In recent months, Bloomberg's campaign spent at least $50 million from his vast personal fortune, made possible by a media environment teeming with reverence for accumulation of wealth. Bloomberg News became a far-reaching wire service during the 1990s as financial news gradually loomed larger in mass media. The operative definition of "general interest news" kept tilting. Mainstream outlets steadily shifted resources and priorities to the business of covering business. Back in 1970, when PBS launched "Wall Street Week" with Louis Rukeyser, the program was conspicuous. Now it's just one of many national TV shows -- most of them daily -- focusing on the quest for high returns. After "Moneyline" premiered on CNN in 1980, cable television news grew while embracing the world of investment. In 1989, General Electric opted to dedicate much of its startup news channel CNBC to the stock market. When host Lou Dobbs left "Moneyline" in spring 1999 at the start of his two-year absence from CNN, it was the cable network's most profitable show. By then, broadcast networks were fervently targeting the same demographics, and not only with explicitly financial offerings like "CBS Marketwatch." Regular news programs got accustomed to lavishing attention on minor business developments -- not because of significant economic implications for the general public, but because of executive decisions in news departments. When CNN revamped its daytime schedule in mid-1999 to make room for three and a half hours of programs about commerce and investment, the cable giant's president Richard Kaplan explained: "We look at business and finance as something we have to cover on a general interest news network. It's like the Cold War in the '50s. You just have to do it." Some viewers became far more equal than others. For broadcast and cable television, the goal has not simply been to attract a high number of eyeballs. As the Associated Press reported this year in an article about the intense competition between "Moneyline" and CNBC's "Business Center" program: "The audiences are small, but affluent, so advertisers pay a premium to run commercials." Countless news stories now amount to little more than human interest narratives about the glories and tribulations of entrepreneurs, financiers and CEOs. At networks owned by conglomerates like GE, Viacom and Disney, the news divisions solemnly report every uptick or downturn of the stock market. Between 1988 and 1999, the TV networks doubled the amount of air time they devoted to the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq. Viewers may assume that coverage reflects the considered judgment of journalistic pros. But those journalists are in a media industry dominated by corporate institutions with enough financial sway to redefine the functional meaning of professionalism. National Public Radio airs the "NPR business update" as part of its regular newscast, heard many times each day on stations nationwide. There's no "NPR labor update." Public radio listeners have easy access to the national daily "Marketplace" program and the weekly "Sound Money" show, but there's no "Workplace" or "Sound Labor" broadcast. In the quarter century since The New York Times founded its "Business Day" section, daily papers have turned more and more newsprint over to targeting the affluent readers most coveted by business advertisers. The Washington Post expanded its everyday business section from two to 12 pages. Around the country, the pattern has been similar, with a range of media outlets boosting their financial coverage -- at the expense of other news. Along the way, these trends have transformed basic concepts of what it really means to be a journalist. "As the 1980s rocketed along, our 'readers' became 'consumers,'" recalls New York Times reporter Diana B. Henriques. "As the 1990s unfolded, those 'consumers' morphed into 'investors.' And today, some of us are speaking only to investors who also own computer modems." The quality of mainstream journalism has always suffered due to the power of big money in the form of ownership and advertising, but flawed bygone eras are apt to evoke fond nostalgia in the present day. "As our intended audience has gotten narrower, so have we," Henriques lamented a year ago in the Columbia Journalism Review. "Business news today rarely sounds the sonorous chords or heart-lifting themes of great journalism. Most of it simply buzzes and squeaks, a reedy clarinet against a rhythm section of cash registers and ticker tape."
That sort of high-rolling muzak provided the backbeat for Michael
Bloomberg's march into the elite ranks of billionaires -- and into the New York mayor's office.
|
 Local Republicans Must Buck Party Line After preventing action on aviation-security legislation for weeks—a strategy that should trouble the conscience of any politician burdened by one—Congressional Republican leaders reportedly are planning to permit a vote before the weekend. Speaker Dennis Hastert and his string-pullers, Tom DeLay and Dick Armey, are no less determined to defeat the federalization proposal that has already passed the Senate unanimously, but they know they have already tested the nation’s patience. With nearly every Democrat lined up to support the Senate version, the objects of intimidation by the House leaders are their fellow Republicans, notably including several members of the New York delegation: Pete King, Vito Fossella, Ben Gilman, Sue Kelly, John Sweeney, Jack Quinn and John McHugh. The more moderate and sensible among them, such as Mr. King and Mr. Gilman, have voiced their support for a bipartisan House version of the Senate bill. The others have remained uncommitted so far, while two upstate Republicans, Jim Walsh and Sherwood Boehlert, have agreed to support the privatization bill. In other words, New Yorkers have an unusual opportunity to influence the outcome of this dispute, which in turn will have important consequences for national security, the economic recovery of the region and the country, and the political balance of power on Capitol Hill. It is a decision that ought to be made on merit, of course, but it is also a chance to rebuke the irresponsible, self-serving ways of Mr. DeLay and his cronies. It is a chance to inform them forcefully that their warped priorities, so weirdly unchanged by the events of Sept. 11, are no longer acceptable to the American people. Those priorities—aside from turning over as much of the national treasure as possible over to the very wealthiest Republican campaign contributors—are to cripple even the most necessary government initiatives and to keep workers docile, unorganized and underpaid. Such primitive impulses are now in direct conflict with the best defense of the nation’s health and safety. In arguing against the federalization bill, Mr. DeLay has exposed some amusing aspects of his own reasoning. Over and over again, he cites supposed European examples as the standard for aviation security. Ordinarily, the xenophobia of the Republican right makes any reference to the wisdom of Europe taboo, and certainly no exception is made for suspicious pinkos in places like France, Germany, Belgium or the Netherlands. Those people are all foreigners, aren’t they?< P> Neither Mr. DeLay nor his mentors at the Heritage Foundation are normally inclined to point to the European example on matters of national health care, child-rearing, pensions, unionization, or any other question of domestic or foreign policy. Yet suddenly, because the function of airport security is partially privatized in many European cities, Mr. DeLay has become an incongruous but ardent advocate of continental style. As is so often the case with the terrifying Texan, it is hard to tell whether his argument is disingenuous or simply ill-informed. Both are possible and in fact likely. He and his colleagues probably know, for instance, that most of the security employees at European airports are in fact unionized. If they bothered to read the report prepared by the General Accounting Office on this topic more than a year ago, they also know that those European screeners are paid three times as much as their counterparts here or more, in addition to health, pension and vacation benefits. More pertinently, they might be aware that at the best and probably most secure airport in Europe, the Netherlands’ Schiphol, government agents are omnipresent. Inspection of bags and passengers is carried out by 1,500 private workers, but under the intense scrutiny of the Ministry of Justice—specifically, no fewer than 1,300 agents of the Royal Police. They might even have learned, if they were paying attention in recent weeks, that some European airports are plagued by the same kinds of security breaches that have embarrassed private screening companies here. At Heathrow Airport, as The Times of London reported on Oct. 16, at least 38 private guards (and perhaps dozens more) were working without proper counterterrorist security clearances, including "one man from Afghanistan" serving in a "sensitive position." Those unvetted screeners had been hired by Securicor, the parent company of Argenbright, whose security failures have lately made headlines in this country. Maybe the time has come for Parliament to reconsider the security regime at British airports, where The Times quoted a Securicor employee saying, "There’s no way I’d risk getting on a plane from Heathrow right now and I wouldn’t let any of my family."
The New York Republicans in Congress should remember those words when they vote on
airport security. They must reject the backroom bullying and anti-union rhetoric of the DeLay
faction, and render a decision in the national interest.
|
 Fun And Games By Gene Lyons Everybody says that nothing will ever be the same again after September 11. Maybe so, even if some of the people who say it sound awfully smug, as if dread events have at last confirmed their own self-importance. Down at the University of Mississippi, however, they still pick their cheerleaders the old-fashioned way. No post-Title IX political correctness in Oxford, no suh. (Title IX is a federal law mandating gender equity. Jock school chauvinists blame it for everything but athletes foot.) Judging by the lineup of tearful blondes kneeling on the sidelines during the seventh overtime of Saturday's epic Arkansas-Ole Miss game, they must have chosen the squad by holding a Sharon Stone lookalike contest limited to sorority girls. They were an inspiring sight, all those perfectly coiffed Chi O's and Tri-Delts, oddly reassuring in their anachronistic way, and almost enough to make a man forget that Sen. Trent Lott was once an Ole Miss cheerleader. One of the great wrong-headed essays ever written by George Orwell was called "The Sporting Spirit." I re-read it sometimes to innoculate myself against literary hero worship, a detriment to clear thinking. Orwell wrote it after an acrimonious tour of Great Britain by a Russian soccer team in late 1945, when both countries had scarcely begun to recover from the suffering of World War II. "Even the newspapers," Orwell noted "have been unable to conceal the fact that at least two of the four matches played led to much bad feeling." There had been fistfights between players, bitterly argued referees' decisions, and allegations of what we'd call recruiting violations. With few exceptions, Orwell noted, sportswriters for right-wing papers accused the Russians of cheating; the left-wing papers defended them. A friendly match on the village green, Orwell argued, was one thing. But as soon as national chauvinism got involved, along "with the lunatic modern habit of identifying oneself with large power units and seeing everything in terms of competitive prestige," all hell was apt to break loose. He professed amazement at whole "nations who work themselves into furies over these absurd contests, and seriously believe-at least for short periods-that running, jumping, and kicking a ball are tests of national virtue." Sounding for all the world like the King of Brobdingnag lecturing Lemuel Gulliver on the absurd pretensions of puny little humans, Orwell contended that: "Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealousy, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence: in other words, it is war minus the shooting." Oh yeah, well how about them Hogs? The rowdy group of young men who watched the Arkansas-Ole Miss game game at our house didn't want to declare war on Mississippi. They did mention driving over to Oxford to comfort those cheerleaders. Now I have seen a drunken English soccer mob in action, and I don't believe I'd buy tickets to see Iran vs. Israel in World Cup soccer unless they played in Buenos Aires, but for the right-thinking Arkansas sports fan, last weekend was absolutely perfect. Not only did Houston Nutt's team prevail in the Mississippi melodrama (ESPN Classic televise it again Friday at 7 P.M.), but on Sunday, the Arizona Diamondbacks won an equally thrilling 9th inning, Game 7 victory over the New York Yankees in the most memorable World Series since 1975. Arizona not only did the National League proud, but demolished the derisive ex-Cub theory first promulgated by the late Mike Royko. It held that in any playoff series, the team with the most former Cubbies invariably lost. On Sunday night, an ex-Cub pitcher named Batista recorded a crucial 8th inning out, ex-Cub Mark Grace got the hit that started the Diamondbacks' 9th inning rally, and ex-Cub Luis Gonzalez drove in the winning run. Can a Cubs World Series triumph be far behind? The first thing Arkansas coaches and Diamondback players talked about afterward was what great teams they'd beaten and how it was too bad anybody had to lose. Having spent much of my life among athletes and literary/political intellectuals, if forced to choose one or the other, I'd pick the jocks every time. At the ballpark, see, everybody a.) competes openly; b.) agrees what the rules are and how to keep score; and c.) knows when the game is over and learns how to act. The games couldn't have come at a better time. People all over the country got into this World Series bigtime. Friends who hadn't watched ten games all year exchanged heated e-mails debating Arizona manager Bob Brenly's pitching decisions. Some still won't admit Brenly knew more about Curt Schilling's endurance than they did.
Orwell was simply wrong. At its best, competitive sport isn't war minus the
shooting; it's art minus the bull---t.
|
"One of the penalities for refusing to participate in politics is
that you end up being governed by your inferiors." ... Plato
|
PBS Shuts Out Independant Producers. What Happened to Greater Innovation and Diversity? Jerold M. Starr This is the second in a series of articles that explore the founding, current status and future of American public broadcasting, which will celebrate its 34th anniversary on November 7. Despite its auspicious and promising beginning, the Public Broadcasting Service largely has failed its congressional mandate. PBS was supposed to compensate for the inadequacies of advertiser-driven network programming by providing, in the words of its mandate, an "alternative" that expresses "diversity and excellence," involves "creative risks," and addresses "the needs of the unserved and underserved audiences." In 1987, Congress was confronted with testimony from members of the Association of Independent Video and Filmmakers (AIVF) that independent producers faced an increasingly "closed system" at PBS. In response, Congress authorized establishment of the Independent Television Service (ITVS) to promote "greater innovation and diversity" in programming, especially concerning "minorities" and "the lives and concerns of American workers." How's it doing today? While hundreds of ITVS-sponsored films have been made since, PBS has seen fit to air only a handful. When pressed, former PBS Program Director Kathy Quattrone quipped that ITVS was just one of many competing suppliers for PBS airtime. In 1997, then ITVS Director Jim Yee lamented, "The PBS schedule hasn't changed in the last several years. There is very little room for original programming." In the years since, Yee and his successor have pursued subscription cable channel outlets, like Showtime, with more success than they had at PBS. Three stations (WGBH in Boston, WNET in New York, and WETA in D.C.) provide more than 60 percent of the PBS schedule, while more than 300 do not contribute anything. While independents account for nearly 20 percent of all national programming, almost all their productions must be channeled through the same three "presenting" stations. PBS has has no qualms about airing several documentaries underwritten by foundations promoting a conservative political agenda. Worse, as author/filmmaker B.J. Bullert reports, even if they are accomplished filmmakers, PBS gatekeepers do not consider public interest advocates to be "journalists." In her words, they often "label" their work "propaganda," and assume that their interests bias their reporting. "Deadly Deception" is an expose of radiation poisoning of workers and residents by General Electric nuclear weapons production that won the 1991 Academy Award for Best Documentary Short. The film was produced by INFACT, a public-interest group leading a GE boycott. PBS turned it down. KQED San Francisco Program Director, Ron Santora defended the decision with the statement: PBS "stays away from documentaries commissioned by groups of that nature. We use more independent producers without an axe to grind." Yet PBS has had no qualms about airing several documentaries underwritten by foundations promoting a conservative political agenda. Frontline and POV are the only regularly scheduled PBS series that host serious documentaries. Only a handful of producers routinely are called upon to produce those shows. Former CBS producer Robert Richter won several Emmys, three duPonts and a Peabody, but he has never made it to "Frontline." "It's a very closed circle," he says, "I've tried to penetrate a few times, but it's not easy." His film, "The Money Leaders" is about the impact of the World Bank and the IMF on developing countries has been timely for years. However, PBS turned it down in 1993 with the comment: "Even though the documentary may seem objective to some, there is a perception of bias in favor of poor people who claim to be adversely affected." Last year, Citizens for Independent Public Broadcasting organized a nationwide competition to identify the best recent public affairs documentaries rejected by PBS. Participating AIVF Salons judges six films to be "Ready for PBS." In every case, the producers provided eloquent testimony on their persistence and resourcefulness in overcoming obstacles to get their films made. The films went on to win awards. When it came to PBS, however, the door was shut. PBS systematically bans documentaries that receive even partial funding from public interest groups or labor unions. Fred Glass' "Building the House They Lived In" depicts the California labor movement's successful fight for fair employment practices in the 1950s. Glass' "pay as you go project" took eight years to make and depended on help from labor unions. He was told this made his film ineligible for PBS airing. Glass reflects, "PBS has been forced to rely increasingly on corporate sponsorship and support in Congress ... The more PBS is perceived as promoting programming of the left, such as labor history, the less certain it is to receive the support of the right." In fact, PBS systematically bans documentaries that receive even partial funding from public interest groups or labor unions, a practice that amounts to de facto censorship of content. Barbara Zahm's "The Last Graduation" chronicles the dramatic success and ultimate killing of college programs in prisons by the 1994 "Contract with America" Congress. Zahm states, "We were told that it might be best to find a PBS affiliate station to support our project, but we found that unless we fit into one of the affiliate's predetermined formats, it was unlikely we could find support there." America's dangerous ignorance of the complexities of middle East politics has become painfully clear. A film by Kevin McKiernan examines the 25 million-member Kurdish struggle for national independence. The U.S. government encourages the Kurds in Iraq fighting against Sadam Hussein. Across the border, however, the U.S. government supplies weapons and training to the Turkish government's repression of the same movement. McKiernan recollects: "The most frustrating part was the inability to even ... engage PBS personnel in a discussion, regardless of outcome. Frequent letters were not replied to, phone calls were not returned. Oregon Public television liked the film but informed me that 'stories with a foreign element no longer fly' at PBS national." Independent filmmakers: "We are ready for PBS, but when will PBS be ready for us?" Danny Schechter's "Falun Gong's Challenge to China" looks behind the fascinating story of the Chinese government's repression of a spiritual practice that claims 100 million followers worldwide. The crackdown has resulted in more than 50,000 arrests, pervasive torture, 120 deaths, the burning of eight million books, and widespread world media coverage. However, it was no-go at PBS. Schechter states: "The documentary genres that PBS now considers priorities as listed on their web site, are not strong on investigative or topical current affairs programs like the ones we are keen to produce. We are ready for PBS, but when will PBS be ready for us?" PBS has turned away countless independent filmmakers with the explanation that their work is "too controversial," their support comes from the wrong sources, or their production quality does not meet standards. The result is that the only place in the broadcast spectrum where citizens can learn about important public affairs issues at home and around the world fails its mission and its public.
The next installment in Jerold Starr's PBS series will examine more closely the discrimination in PBS Underwriting Guidelines that
effectively censor journalists with important stories to tell. |
 Follow What Leader? By Andy Rooney There is a wish Americans are barely whispering because we don't want to be negative or un-American. We wish our elected and appointed leaders would stop trying to con us and tell us the truth. We have the uneasy feeling we're being told what they think will sound best instead of what's true. They don't seem to trust us to be able to handle bad news - and that's what the news is now - bad. We're being treated like children heading off to school and being told, "Be careful crossing the street." Has any child in all history been saved from being hit by a car because his or her mother said, "Be careful crossing the street?" Everyone is trying to comfort us with half-truths. The President, Attorney General John Ashcroft, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson and Tom Ridge, Director of Homeland Security, speak to us on television. If Thompson and Ridge were pitching against each other in a World Series game, they'd both be taken out and replaced by someone from the bullpen. They aren't good enough. "Americans are patient people," President Bush said, trying to flatter us into being patient with our campaign against the Taliban. Well, we're all on his side but I have to ask where he's been all his life if he thinks Americans are patient. Why did the guy behind me start blowing his horn the minute the light changed this morning if Americans are so patient? We are not patient people. We are impatient people. We're not happy the way things are being dragged out in Afghanistan. With all our military might bought with hundreds of billions of tax dollars, we can't seem to bring down the renegade government of one tiny, backward country with no real army or air force of its own. We want the Taliban out of there now. We want bin Laden dead or in our hands tomorrow. We want to know who planned the World Trade Center attack. We want to know who's spreading anthrax. What have all those generals, colonels and majors in the Pentagon been doing all these years? Playing golf with the FBI and CIA, maybe. Attorney General John Ashcroft, appeared on television with an emergency statement about the "probability" of another terrorist attack. What do you mean, sir? Do you have information we don't have? If you know and they know, why can't the rest of us know? How, where and when are we going to be attacked? In these terrible days - and they are terrible - it's difficult not to think about the worst that could happen when government officials talk about another attack.
There are three of us in my office - Susan Bieber, Keith Kulin and myself.
Susie and Keith live in New Jersey. The defining thing about living in New
Jersey, where housing is cheaper, and working in New York, where the pay is
better, is the North River, which divides the two states. It's an extension
of the Hudson River that runs from the George Washington Bridge to the
Statue of Liberty. If you live in New Jersey and work in New York, which
hundreds of thousands of people do, you have to go over or under the river
twice a day. |
|
Anthrax Attacks' 'Work Of Neo-Nazis' By Ed Vulliamy The Observer Neo-Nazi extremists within the US are behind the deadly wave of anthrax attacks against America, according to latest briefings from the security services and Justice Department. Experts on 'survivalist' groups and extreme-right 'Aryan' militants have been drafted into the investigation as the focus shifts away from possible links with the 11 September terrorists or even possible state backers such as Iraq. 'We've been zeroing in on a number of hate groups, especially one on the West Coast,' a source at the Justice Department told The Observer yesterday. 'We've certainly not discounted the possibility that they may be involved.' The anthrax crisis, which grew last week, had by Friday night spread to mailrooms at CIA headquarters, the Supreme Court and a hospital, and yesterday three traces were found in an office building serving the US Capitol. 'There are a number of strong leads, and some people we know well that we are looking at,' the Justice Department said. 'These are groups organised into militia and "survivalist" movements - which pull out of society and take to the hills to make war on the government, and who will support anyone else making war on the government.' Investigators are examining threatening letters sent to media organisations - some dated before the 11 September attacks - which did not contain anthrax but contained similar messages and handwriting style as those which later did. The theory is that the anthrax attacks were planned - and the killer germ was obtained and treated - long before the carnage of 11 September. Speaking to The Observer yesterday, the Justice Department official said: 'We have to see the right wing as much better coordinated than its apparent disorganisation suggests. And we have to presume that their opposition to government is just as virulent as that of the Islamic terrorists, if not as accomplished. 'But that is, in its way, one of the most compelling possible leads in the anthrax trail - that it is not really al-Qaeda's style, but rather that of others who sympathise with its war against the American government and media.' The official said the investigation had, in the past week, drafted in special teams from the Civil Rights division of the department to reinforce the international terrorism teams. The American neo-Nazi Right is motivated above all by its loathing of the federal government, which it believes is selling out the homeland to a 'New World Order' run by masons and Jews. Its insane politics have propelled numerous attacks and armed stand-offs over the past eight years, culminating in the carnage at Oklahoma. Now the anthrax investigation is zooming in on possible connections between these neo-Nazis and Arab extremists, united by their mutual anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel. Such alliances have been common among neo-Nazis in Europe, but have played a lesser role in the US. However, monitoring of the hate groups shows they are now embracing al-Qaeda's terrorism as commendable attacks on the federal government. Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal centre in Los Angeles said that at a meeting in Lebanon this year, US neo-Nazis were represented alongside Islamic militants. 'There's a great solidarity with the point of view of the bin Ladens of the world,' said Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Centre, which monitors the far right. 'These people wouldn't let their daughters near an Arab, but they are certainly making common cause on an ideological level. They see the same enemy: American culture and multiculturalism.' Neo-Nazi websites, including the largest umbrella organisation, the National Alliance, show support for al-Qaeda. Billy Roper, the alliance's membership coordinator posted a message within hours of the 11 September attacks, reading: 'Anyone who is willing to drive a plane into a building to kill Jews is all right by me. I wish our members had half as much testicular fortitude.' Another group, Aryan Action, praised the attacks of 11 September, saying: 'Either you're fighting with the Jews against al-Qaeda or you support al-Qaeda fighting against the Jews.' Others outwardly support the anthrax mailing. One message, entitled 'No Sympathy for the Devil', was posted in several chat rooms by right-winger Grant Bruer, whose racist writings are circulated among supremacist groups. It reads: 'Is there not a single person who has received these anthrax letters that isn't an avowed enemy of the white race? Tom Brokaw, Tom Daschle and the gossip rag offices have all been 100 per cent legitimate targets. Who among us has the slightest bit of sympathy for these pukes?' Right-wing groups have had an interest in anthrax and other biological agents. A member of the Aryan Nation group once bragged he had a stash of anthrax from digging up a field where cows had died of the disease in the 1950s. Larry Wayne Harris was arrested after trying to obtain three vials of bubonic plague from a mail-order science company. The trail leading investigators to groups from the domestic ultra-right - rather than the al-Qaeda terror network - comes as a dramatic twist in the confused crisis. Last week, parallel evidence appeared to be linking the now rampant anthrax attacks to another trail: leading from Iraq and through the Czech Republic, with al-Qaeda militants as the likely couriers.
The shift in the investigation echoes that which followed America's other
infamous terrorist attack: the destruction of the federal government
building in Oklahoma City in 1995. The bombing was initially thought to be
the work of Arab extremists, but turned out to be the work of the Aryan
supremacists. |
|
Vaccination is one of the most controversial aspects of medicine. While the official position of the medical
establishment is that vaccination is a foundation of public health policy, thousands of doctors and hundreds of
millions of people worldwide consider it to be a leading cause of disease, neurological damage, learning disabilities
and death and to be ineffective in conferring immunity.
The Bush administration has numerous direct ties to vaccine and drug manufacturers and many of Bush’s cabinet
members are former drug company executives. The Bush family also has more than a seventy year long documented
involvement with eugenics and population control.
To get a picture of where this is going read NY Times 11/4/2001 DRUG INDUSTRY A Muscular Lobby Tries to Shape
Nation's Bioterror Plan http://www.nytimes.com
An excerpt from this long article....."As that success shows, the pharmaceutical lobby, which represents the nation's
biggest drug makers, from Eli Lilly to Pfizer to Merck, is both large and politically adroit and, if anything, more
sophisticated than when it gained fame in the early 1990's for helping to defeat the Clinton administration health plan.
It has more lobbyists than there are members of Congress — 625 who are registered. It had a combined lobbying and
campaign contribution budget in 1999 and 2000 of $197 million, larger than any other industry. Now it is harnessing
those resources to influence major policy decisions being made by the Bush administration that may well influence
public health issues and industry profitability for years to come — much to the dismay of many consumer groups and
others...Because of the anthrax scare, and all the attention given to Cipro, the anti-anthrax drug of choice, that
access has been enormous. In recent weeks, the chief executives and other top executives of Merck, Bristol-Myers
Squibb, Bayer, Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Johnson & Johnson, along with trade association officials, have been meeting
regularly with Bush cabinet members. On one occasion, with executives from other industries, pharmaceutical
executives met with President Bush in New York to discuss the administration's response to terrorism. Drug company
executives have offered to send scores of industry scientists, now on their payrolls, to work in government agencies
in what the industry calls a gift to the nation, but critics say it is both a conflict of interest and a way for the industry
to get a toehold in government. In return, at these top-level meetings, industry executives and lobbyists are seeking
exemption from antitrust regulations, reduction of the timetable for getting new drugs to market for treating the ills of
biological warfare, and immunity from lawsuits for any vaccines they develop to combat bioterrorism. The
administration, those in the meeting say, has offered other help, asking the pharmaceutical executives to identify the
regulatory barriers they would like to see eliminated for this fight. Last Wednesday, for instance, a dozen industry
lobbyists and executives, among them Peter R. Dolan, chief executive of Bristol-Myers, and Raymond V. Gilmartin,
chief executive of Merck, met for an hour and a half in the Roosevelt Room of the White House with Tom Ridge, the
director of homeland security. According to one person at the meeting, Mr. Ridge was so impressed with what the
industry executives said that he responded: "I'm grateful for your offers of assistance. I accept." That , according to
the meeting's participant, reflected "a true partnership between the federal government and America's pharmaceutical
companies."
From CNN.com
CDC releases draft of public health law October 31, 2001
"ATLANTA, Georgia (AP) -- A model law drafted for states at the request of the federal government would give
authorities broad powers to close buildings, take over hospitals and order quarantines during a biological attack.
The draft, commissioned by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and made public Tuesday, provides a
template for states to respond to the release of a deadly agent like smallpox or Ebola. Whether to adopt such a law is
up to state legislatures. If any did, state officials could take drastic steps -- including controlling the sale of food and
gas and condemning contaminated buildings -- to prevent mass casualties from an outbreak.
"The current laws are hopelessly antiquated," said Lawrence Gostin, a professor of law and public health at
Georgetown University and the draft's principal author. "They predated all of the modern threats to the public health.
Many of them are probably unconstitutional."
Even before September 11, the federal government wanted states to update their public health laws, some of which
date to the 19th century.
The CDC asked public health and law specialists at Johns Hopkins and Georgetown universities, who were writing the
draft, to put it on a fast track because of the terrorist attacks and the anthrax outbreak. The 40-page draft would
allow state public health officials to purchase as many drugs as they see fit and ration them without getting approval
from other branches of government.
It also would give state authorities the right to mandate medical testing of its citizens, to isolate people deemed a
threat to the public health and to order private doctors to do the testing. In a bioterrorism emergency, states could
seize hospitals, other property and "communication devices" they believe are necessary to stop a biological attack
from killing huge numbers of people.
The draft tries to head off the concerns of civil liberties groups over governmental control. It says citizens have the
right to the review of a court if they object to being forced into quarantine or ordered to take a vaccine. The law would
be triggered by the governor in the event of bioterrorism or an epidemic that poses a substantial risk of significant
fatalities.
Because anthrax isn't contagious, the current response has been chiefly about tracking the germ, treating the
infected and distributing antibiotics. A more contagious and deadly agent, such as smallpox or Ebola virus, would
require a much broader -- and faster -- response, possibly including mass vaccinations and quarantining entire
communities.
The draft has been delivered to the CDC for tinkering. State government associations, including the National
Governors Association and the National Conference of State Legislatures, also collaborated."
The following story ran on page D4 of the Boston Globe on 10/31/2001.
By Bloomberg News,, 10/31/2001
"WASHINGTON - States would be able to force patients to take medication under model legislation outlining when and
how governors can use emergency powers to address public health crises such as recent anthrax attacks. The model
law, commissioned by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, also would give people the right to appeal
states' decisions to quarantine or isolate them. Individuals with contagious diseases, such as smallpox, wouldn't be
able to appeal orders for treatment or vaccination under the law.
State governments are concerned that laws are inadequate to address new kinds of public health threats such as the
Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on buildings in New York and Washington or the use of germ or chemical
weapons. Fifteen Americans have been infected with anthrax, a deadly bacterial disease, and thousands more are
taking antibiotics as a precaution. Lawrence Gostin, chief author of the model law and a professor at Georgetown
University Law Center, said the academic panel that drafted the proposal tried to balance the need to control disease
with individuals' civil rights - something he said isn't done under many
current state laws. ''We felt if we were too Draconian and didn't respect people's rights, that meant the terrorists
would win,'' Gostin said.
Emergency powers allow governors to suspend normal government temporarily, letting states swiftly address disease
epidemics or natural disasters such as earthquakes. Legal and public health experts at
Georgetown University and Johns Hopkins University examined all states' emergency-powers laws in crafting the
model.
Under the model law, states could quarantine or isolate individuals who are infected with a contagious disease, though
the patients would have the right to appeal that decision in court. The patient would remain
quarantined or isolated until the appeals process was exhausted, Gostin said.
Patients could be forced to take medicines or receive vaccines for contagious diseases that pose a public health
threat, such as smallpox, under the model law. Patients wouldn't be allowed to appeal a state's
decision, though the state would likely quarantine anyone who refused to comply, triggering an appeals process,
Gostin said. States would avoid civil liberties violations if they enact laws that spell out penalties such as the loss of
public benefits, instead of incarceration, for patients who refuse treatment, said R. Alta Charo, a professor at the
University of Wisconsin Law School."
For thousands of links on the dangers of vaccines see these sites among many others on the net:
http://vaccineinfo.net/ |
|
Dead Letter Office
Heil Bush,
Dear Propaganda Ansager Berke,
Congratulations you have just been awarded the Vidkun Quisling Award for 2001. Your name will now live throughout history with such past award winners as Marcus Junius Brutus, Judas Iscariot, Benedict Arnold, Vidkun Quisling and last year's winner Volksjudge Antoni (light-fingers) Scalia.
Without your help shilling for us, spinning the truth, telling out right lies and ignoring the real news, holding onto power after our Coup D' Etat would have been impossible. With the help of our mutual friends, the other "Media Whores," you have made it possible for all of us to goose-step off to a brave new bank account.
Along with this award there will be an Iron Cross 2nd class presented by our glorious Fuhrer Herr Bush at a gala celebration in der Fuhrer Bunker (formally the White House) on 12-15-2001. We salute you Herr Berke, Sieg Heil!
Signed,
Heil Bush
|
|
On his regular watch, all Dewhurst has done for Texans' security is permit the Longhorn Pipeline Co. to build through
populated areas without so much as an environmental impact statement, thus endangering the lives of thousands, if
you believe those alarmist environmentalist types. Just the man for the job.
We would feel even better about this if alert eyes had not noted a peculiar error in a recent Dewhurst political ad in
the Texas Monthly (he's running for lieutenant governor, which has nothing to do with the governor naming him
security czar). In this four-page, full-color ad about Dewhurst's many virtues was a photo of a soldier standing in front
of an American flag, all the better to emphasize Dewhurst's patriotism. Unfortunately, the soldier was in the German
Army, wearing German insignia on his uniform.
Great, our Homeland Security Czar can't even recognize a foreign soldier in uniform in his own ad -- hard to believe a
terrorist might slip past him.
Speaking of homeland security, heads up -- between panic attacks about anthrax, you should eyeball the "fast track"
negotiating authority on trade agreements. The effect of this legislation, which House Republicans are pushing for an
early vote, is to allow trade agreements to be enacted without congressional input. No amendments to the
agreements will be permitted, Congress can only vote up or down. This will make trade negotiations even more secret
and unaccountable. G.W. Bush, not exactly a strong proponent of labor rights, promised to "consider" labor issues,
but according to the Indian press, the World Trade Organization has "dropped" all labor-related issues from its
agenda.
Robert Zoellick, Bush's trade rep, has been running around Washington telling people we need the fast-track
authority to combat terrorism. He must have gotten that idea from David Dewhurst. This is one of the most unwelcome
"hitch-hikers" on the Sept. 11 attacks, and it's particularly shameless conduct on the part of the big corporations.
Meanwhile, Sept. 11 has had the odd effect of strengthening the hand of the developing countries on one big issue.
After four deaths from anthrax last month, Secretary Tommy Thompson threatened to override the Bayer company's
patent on Cipro, the anti-anthrax drug. Bayer then dropped the price from $1.77 a pill to 95 cents. The Canadian
government just ignored the patent and is getting Cipro for about 5 cents a pill.
But the United States has been stoutly defending the right of the big pharmaceutical companies to charge their rip-off
prices. You can imagine how countries suffering through the AIDS epidemic, losing tens of thousands of people,
reacted to the U.S. threat to override a patent after four deaths.
One of the ironies of trade negotiations is that the developing countries, like the big corporations, are firmly opposed
to labor and environmental standards since they see them as part of a plot by the developed countries to stack the
agreements in their own favor. The AFL-CIO is actually asking for basic human rights -- no child labor, no slave labor.
Pretty radical stuff.
According to the National Journal, the Republican House leadership, aka, the Texas 'wingers Armey and DeLay, is
urging Bush to use his high standing in the polls to turn reluctant Republicans on the fast-track legislation, as he did
on the repellent economic stimulus package. They want to him to call in the waverers, whip them into line -- without
this, they know they'll lose. Heaven forfend that any of them might actually use their own best judgment on an issue
when the president's popularity is at 85 percent.
Of course, we are supposed to be too polite to mention it in time of national emergency, but campaign contributions
have been known to affect congressional votes, as they so painfully obviously did with the House economic stimulus
package. Even the Wall Street Journal's opinion page, which is somewhere to the right of Ethelred the Unready,
carried a column that expressed appall at the corporate giveaways in that bill.
If you want to hold together support for a war against terrorism, this is not the right way to go about it. People are
somewhat less inclined to risk their lives for their country in far-away places when they notice they're getting ripped off
by greedheads at home.
To find out more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the
Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
|
|
What do these pathetic bleatings have in common? Money.
This week Subash Gurung, a 27 year-old man from Nepal, here in the US on an expired student Visa, (deja vu?) who shares the
same West Hollywood Chicago address as one of the 9/11 material witnesses that were arrested on 9/12 on that Amtrak train
heading to San Antonio, (you remember, the ones with the box cutters, multiple passport photos, $5500 cash, and hair dye that were
on a flight on 9/11, that was forced to land in St Louis when the FAA closed the skies to commercial aircraft), attempted to board a
United flight to Omaha. While passing through a metal detector on his way to the aircraft, it was discovered that he had two knives in
his pockets.
Ok, I don’t know about the security staff at O’Hare, but for most people on the planet, this would be a red flag big enough to cause a
huge uproar. Never mind that the x-ray screeners missed the fact that he had seven knives, a can of pepper spray, and a stun gun in
his carry on bag! (How do you miss seven knives and a stun gun? Even hair spray is getting confiscated!) Yet, the dimwitted security
personnel, who Bush thinks are perfectly capable of doing this job because the lobbyists from Argenbright Security have given him
large amounts of money to say so, didn’t even search his carry on bag at that point! It wasn’t until he got to the gate area, and was
randomly searched, that the rest of the arsenal was discovered. According to CNN, " [his] belongings were searched at the gate
because he was red-flagged by what is called the Computer Assisted Passenger Profiling [CAPP] system, which calls for further
scrutiny of some passengers for a variety of reasons….including those whose names are on a watch list and those who buy one-way
tickets, pay cash, or travel frequently to certain destinations." So this guy was suspected by software! A computer had more common
sense than anyone else he had come into contact by that point, even though he had two knives in his pockets!
To top this unfathomable breach, according to CNN, "A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office said later there was "no nefarious or
suspicious purpose" related to the man's intended flight from Chicago to Omaha, Nebraska." WHAAAAAT? Is he serious? How
many knives do warrant suspicion? Nine? Ten? What, seven doesn’t hit the "suspicion quota"? But wait! There’s more! (Now what
would you pay?!) "There is no allegation that this incident involves any suspected terrorist activity," the FBI said in a statement." Well
maybe the FBI needs to start suspecting. Just because this hasn’t hit their own "terror list" yet, doesn‘t mean this guy is innocent, nor
does it mean he’s guilty, and I am certainly against what some have called an "anti-immigrant witch hunt", but how many people do
you know normally carry around seven knives, a stun gun and pepper spray in a bag for "protection", much less try to board an
airplane with it??? Protection from what? Was he planning on fighting hijackers? I think anyone with that level of paranoia wouldn’t
be flying right about now, do you? Yet at first, this guy was released on bond, and told to appear in court on Dec 19th! Ok, but what
about his expired visa!? Does that mean he can still stay in the country for another month just to appear in court? (Why does all of this
have a hard time fitting into my head at this point?) When he went back to claim his checked baggage he was rearrested. Why did it
take that long for the ‘authorities’ to decide this wasn’t all copasetic? Are we really in the hands of such ineptness? What if he hadn’t
come back to claim his bag? Perhaps all the law enforcement personnel that came into contact with this incident, from the police, to
FBI and CIA, all need to be retrained!
To my way of thinking, giving this guy the benefit of the doubt is just downright irresponsible. Has this man been living under a rock?
Or is he just stupid? His "I was in a hurry" excuse to why he didn’t check his weapon collection just doesn’t wash with me since he
had packed another knife in his checked baggage. Either way, he deserves to be in jail, stupid or not, for his own, and the rest of the
public’s protection. How can anyone be that thought-free when the media has been reporting 24/7 the fact that the airlines have been
confiscating items as trivial as tweezers now for over a month? It’s almost the same as running through the airport terminal,
screaming, BOMB! BOMB! BOMB! Airport personnel do not take that lightly and someone who does such a thing can be prosecuted;
yet at first, this guy is given nowhere near that kind of scrutiny, and he had a cache of weapons in his carry on!
What is even more outrageous is this, is the audacity of Argenbright Security Inc., who said its airport employees "acted according to
FAA guidelines and internal company procedures." Well, myself, and it appears everyone else in this country except Bush and his
few House minions, think that these "guidelines" and "procedures" suck, and they certainly aren’t good enough for the national
security and safety of the citizens of any country, let alone The United States of America.
And why is our airline security, which anyone with an IQ of 19 can see is also national security, in the hands of a European-owned
company? Yes, Aregenbright is a European held firm. That’s right, national security at 17 of the nation’s 20 busiest airports, is in the
hands of a foreign entity. And that’s okay with the president!
In spite of all of this, Tom DeLay (R-I have a price) in all his pathetic transparent smugness said on Meet the Press, that he "saw no
reason to pay people who screen bags a federal wage." Well, maybe, just maybe Tom, if you are at all capable of seeing outside your
dark little slimy box, the federal security staff that the Congress unanimously wants to put into place, not to mention the majority of
people in this country, will be trained to do more than just screen bags more effectively! Maybe, since they’ll be trained law
enforcement personnel, they will be able to see that huge light bulb go off when someone gets busted for trying to smuggle not one
but two knives through a metal detector, and act appropriately. Maybe they’ll have the wherewithal and not wait for software to tell
them, to go beyond screening his carry on, by not only hand checking, but perhaps, just perhaps, they’ll be able to psychologically
profile these people as well. I think THAT warrants a living wage and federal employee status, much less having a smaller turnover
rate than 100 to 400 percent!
Why on Earth should I get on an airplane right now? To help out the airline industry? Screw them. After getting a no-strings attached
bailout from the government, they will also likely receive even more from Bush’s new economic stimulus corporate kiss ass payback
package, yet they continue to lay off thousands of employees. They also don’t think my safety is worth a security upgrade, but all the
while they are keeping their multi-million dollar retirement packages in place. No, they don’t deserve my business until they stop
being the greedy monsters they have become and manage to morph back into an industry remotely human, intelligent, responsible,
compassionate, and find something resembling integrity.
How about because it’s the "patriotic" thing to do? Screw that too. If my own president, illegally selected or not, and anyone else, puts
the needs of the country at the bottom of their priority list, and by doing so places the country in danger, then they should be tried for,
and found guilty of, sedition and treason. And if the Congress can’t see it’s way past this horrific lapse in policy and take action to
protect the country, then they are guilty as well.
Words are cheap "Mr. President". Baseball season is over. It’s time for action.
This edition we're proud to showcase the cartoons of Steve Benson |
|
The word Politics, comes from the Latin,
Poli meaning "Many" and
Tics meaning "Blood Sucking Creatures,"
Poli-Tics. Fortunate Son
Some folks are born made to wave the flag,
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no senator's son, son.
Yeah!
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no millionaire's son, no.
Some folks inherit star spangled eyes,
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no military son, son.
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, no no no, 
"War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as
something
that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small
inside
group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the
very
few at the expense of the masses.
I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a
nation
comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is
that
when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless
and
goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and
the
soldiers follow the flag.
I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy
investment
of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is
the
defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any
other
reason is simply a racket.
There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is
blind
to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to
destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big
Boss"
Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.
It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison.
Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months
in
active military service as a member of this country's most agile
military
force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second
Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my
time
being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and
for the
Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.
I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of
it.
Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought
of my
own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended
animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with
everyone in the military service.
I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil
interests in
1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City
Bank
boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen
Central
American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of
racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international
banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that
name
before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar
interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil
went its
way unmolested.
During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a
swell
racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a
few
hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three
districts. I
operated on three continents."...
|
|
Activist Alerts "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing." ... Edmund Burke
Yesterday, after I sent out the first batch of messages regarding the cover-up of the final results of the
Florida vote count, I received a telephone call from someone who, like David Podvin’s source, does not
want to be named. He worked on the NORC recount. Although he was not privy to any final numbers,
he confirmed David’s story, in the sense that the trend was obviously toward many, many more votes
for Gore than were included in the totals certified by Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris.
The Florida Ballot Project page of the University of Chicago National Opinion Research Center
(NORC)’s website contains the following text:
We have now completed all data-collection operations for the Florida Ballot Project. In
recent weeks, we have developed computer databases that contain the results of the
ballot examinations. At this moment, the databases are essentially complete.
The next step is to release the data to our clients, the media group, who will analyze the
data and report initial findings. After a brief embargo, we will make the databases
available to the public through our website.
No schedule has been set for that process. The media group has postponed release
because of the terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C.
I received a telephone call this morning from someone who also wants to remain anonymous, a member
of the political press who has contacts in the higher echelons of both the Democratic and the
Republican parties. He spoke to a University of Chicago official this past Monday (The New York
Times’ announcement of an indefinite postponement was made on the previous Thursday), who said
that the results "will be released soon."
Let’s make sure that happens. I invite you to write to members of the consortium and to NORC
demanding the release of the data.
The New York Times Co., letters@nytimes.com
I’ll keep you updated on any additional information I receive.
I have rewritten a suggested letter for requesting a Proclamation in recognition of the events of December 12th. I
suggest the you get these written and in the mail as soon as possible. I have always requested these from the Governor
of my state. I have tried to write this so as not to give the Republican Governors an excuse for not issuing you a
proclamation. In Florida, the governors office issues very a very fancy proclamation that would rival the Declaration of
Independence to organizations, groups requesting them. They are fantastic attention getters when trying to get
media coverage for your event. When I send out my announcements to the local TV stations, Radio, Newspapers, etc, I
always include a copy of the proclamation. Other suggestions would be to ask your Senators, your Mayor, to also
prepare a similar proclamation. I ask all of them. The worst that can happen is that they will say no. If they say no,
chalk it up on your little list of who NOT to vote for next time!
Submit the wording for the proclamation below to your elected officials and ask them to prepare a proclamation for
your event. The National Candlelight Vigil- 2001 December 12, 2001 I hereby officially recognize and honorThe National Candlelight Vigil-2001 and I urge all citizens of ( Your State name )to join me in this recognition. The National Candlelight Vigil to be held on December 12, 2001, to remind citizens of the United States of America of the need for Voter Reform to and protest the one year anniversary of the Supreme Court decision. This Vigil will also remember those killed in the senseless criminal terrorist acts committed upon New York City, Washington, DC & Pennsylvania. These acts of terrorism killed U. S. citizens as well as citizens of many other nationalities. As Governor of (State Name ) I commend The National Candlelight Vigil, 2001 for their dedication to people entitled to vote & in remembrance of those innocent people killed by acts of terrorism. © 2001 G.A.G.
SUPPORT THE OREGON DEMOCRATS' PROPOSAL TO IMPEACH THE FELONIOUS
FIVE!
Here's what you can do to help:
2. Contact your local and/or state Democratic Party office urging them to also
support the resolution.
3. Contribute to the Democratic Party of Oregon. We plan to continue to promote
this resolution and your contribution, no matter how small, will help us in this fight
for democracy. Click on Democratic Party of Oregon to send your support today!
Was it the worst Supreme Court decision in US history, as
American University Constitutional scholar Jamin Raskin has
suggested? Considering that Raskin is a staunch civil rights
advocate, the very thought that he would rank Bush v. Gore
lower than both the Dred Scott and Plessy rulings is instructive.
Nor does Raskin stand alone in his opinion of this judicial coup.
Justice John Paul Stevens: "One thing, however, is certain.
Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity
of the winner of this year's Presidential election, the identity of the
loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation's confidence in the judge as
an impartial guardian of the rule of law. I respectfully dissent."
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: "In sum, the Court's
conclusion that a constitutionally adequate recount is impractical is
a prophecy the Court's own judgment will not allow to be tested.
Such an untested prophecy should not decide the Presidency of the
United States. I dissent." And related is the unsigned per curiam
decision of the Scalia 5, a transparent attempt to try to avoid
history's scarlet letter.
Hendrik Hertzberg, former presidential speechwriter: "The
election of 2000 was not stolen. It was expropriated."
David Kairys, Temple University: "We had a constitutional
crisis, and it was Bush v. Gore. History will not be kind."
Suzanna Sherry, Vanderbilt University: "There is really very little way to reconcile this opinion other than that
they wanted Bush to win."
Jeffrey Rosen, legal scholar: "They have...made it impossible for citizens of the United States to sustain any
kind of faith in the rule of law as something larger than the self-interested political preferences of William
Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy, and Sandra Day O'Connor."
Randall Kennedy, Harvard University: "But we should also insist that there be no confirmation for Scalia-like
champions of the right-wing agenda. The Supreme Court has hurt its own reputation by wrongly intervening to
ensure the victory of George W. Bush. Those who abhor what the Court did should say so and say so loudly and
clearly."
Jesse Jackson and John Sweeney: "But if it comes down for justices to the 14th amendment and the promise
of equal protection, one can only hope for the sake of the country that they consider how not counting all the votes
mirrors too closely the habits of heart and mind that brought us slavery and segregation--the original sins of our
nation that the equal protection clause sought to repair."
And, of course, Vincent Bugliosi, prosecutor of Charles Manson and author of several bestselling true-crime
books, in The Betrayal of America: ". . . the Court committed the unpardonable sin of being a knowing surrogate
for the Republican Party instead of being an impartial arbiter of the law.... [The Court searched] mightily for a
way, any way at all, to aid their choice for president, Bush, in the suppression of the truth, finally settling, in their
judicial coup d'État, on the untenable argument that there was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's equal
protection clause..."
Recent polls indicate the public's growing dissatisfaction with the results of the Scalia Five's decision. A survey
conducted by the Pew Research Center and Princeton Survey Research Associates (June 13-17) showed George
W. Bush's job approval rating at just 50 percent, down six points from March; the New York Times survey with
CBS News (June 14-18) put the rating at 53 percent, down seven points from March. And Democracy Corps's
Greenberg Quinlan Rosner poll (June 11-13) found that 48 percent of likely voters think the nation is currently on
the "wrong track." Perhaps most tellingly, 25 percent of voters in the Democracy Corps poll said that the phrase
"not really elected President" describes Bush "very well," with another 15 percent saying that it describes him
"well"--in other words, six months after the Scalia Five coup, 40 percent of likely voters still believe Bush was not
really elected President.
What then, is to be done?
The least we can do is know our own history, and to understand that what the Injustices did was an insult to the
dreams and ideals of Lexington and Concord, Valley Forge and Jefferson and Paine, Gettsyburg and Lincoln and
Douglass, Selma and King, Seneca Falls and Anthony, Delano and Chavez, Flint and Debs and Lewis. We can
bear witness to injustice, in the nonviolent protest tradition of Thoreau, Gandhi, King, Havel, Robinson, Chavez.
The Scalia Five's judicial coup came down on the second Tuesday last December. So, on the second Tuesday of
July, July 10, 2001, the Tuesday after the Pro-Democracy Convention in Philadelphia, the Tuesday between
Independence Day and Bastille Day, the Institute for Policy Studies and friends are calling for a peaceful,
nonviolent vigil at the Supreme Court building, at noon.
On July 10--and each Tuesday at noon from then on--let's gather at the scene of the crime, and bear witness to the
truth. The Scalia Five won't be there; but we should be.
Bring a candle or a bell, like the Czechs a decade ago. Bring a copy of the Voters' Bill of Rights, or the US
Constitution. Send an e-mail to all your friends, with your favorite quote from this list. Bring Pablo Neruda's and
Marge Piercy's poems. Bring the next generation, so they will never forget. Bring your commitment to restore,
rebuild, and expand American democracy. The Supreme Court cheated. Democracy lost. For now.
This ultra-conservative group needs donations! Lend them a helping hand by sending them a few $100 or $1000 bills ... Confederate ones! Click
here to print or download the bills. Send them to other right-wing groups as well!
And if you still want to annoy the Heritage Foundation, you can always go to their
online donation form as soon as you try to leave the page, a pop-up window appears asking why you decided not to donate. Give them an explanation, but remember to be polite!
We, the undersigned voters, know that our cherished democracy is endangered from
within by the grave and potentially fatal flaws in our voting systems exposed by the
Presidential Election of 2000.
As our elected representatives, you have the duty, the opportunity, and the privilege to
correct these flaws and to restore fair and honest elections throughout our nation. To this
end, we charge you to construct and pass a VOTERS BILL OF RIGHTS, which shall
include:
Strict enforcement and extension of the Voting Rights Act to prevent the
disenfranchisement of voters and require full investigation and criminal prosecution of
any offenders;
Standardized, easily understandable federal election ballots
Funding to replace old and unreliable voting machines to ensure that every vote is
counted fairly and accurately
Genuine campaign finance reform that bans campaign contributions from special
interests
Replacement of the Electoral College with a majority-rule election, or substantial reform
of the Electoral College to allow for proportional representation
Measures to increase voter participation by eliminating bureaucratic hurdles to voter
registration and turnout, including language barriers, physical barriers, archaic
equipment, and lack of resources
Enactment and enforcement of a VOTERS BILL OF RIGHTS will restore trust in our
government and encourage participation in our democratic processes. The linchpin of a
democracy is the process by which we select our representatives and leaders. The right
to vote is our defining right as citizens of this nation. We call upon our elected
representatives to protect our Constitution from abusive exercise of government power
by enacting a VOTERS BILL OF RIGHTS.
We pledge our full and constant support for enactment of a VOTERS BILL OF
RIGHTS. Top twenty Republican donors with global consumer brands:
1 Philip Morris - $4,554,732
|
CONTRIBUTING LINKS
Parting Shots... 
CARTHAGE, TN—Urging the American people to have "courage, faith, and resolve in this time of trial," Al Gore delivered an
emergency presidential address into his bathroom mirror Tuesday.
"My fellow Americans, our enemies have struck at the heart of our great
democracy," Gore solemnly intoned into his electric razor during the not
nationally televised address. "They have attacked our citizens, our cities, and
the most prominent symbols of our pride and prosperity. In so doing, they
sought to tear us apart. But they have done just the opposite."
Punctuating his opening statements with a dramatic pause intended to
bolster the resolve of a wounded nation, Gore applied shaving cream to the
beard he had grown during his time out of the spotlight.
"We have, in recent days, seen tragedy and infamy on a scale equal to any
in American history," said a proud, defiant Gore as he shaved. "Yet we have
also seen heroism and selflessness on a scale equal to any in human
history."
Gore, who last week pretended to pledge an additional $1.5 billion in
federal aid to New York City, then switched off his razor and pulled out his
toothbrush.
"We must honor our fallen heroes by devoting ourselves fully to the
causes of liberty and freedom," said Gore, brushing his teeth with small
circular motions. "And we must resolve to ensure, as Lincoln said, that
government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish
from the Earth."
After a long silence, Gore said, "God bless America," and spat.
Gore, who narrowly lost the controversial 2000 presidential election to George W. Bush, then adjourned to the dining room, where he
held a closed-door meeting with his top advisors, Simba and Stripe.
Since not taking office in January, Gore's accomplishments on both the domestic and foreign fronts have earned him high praise
among fellow family members. His State Of The Union address of June 19 was hailed by wife Tipper as "very nice," despite being
delivered in his sleep. His late-August tax-reform proposal was generally well received by daughter Kristin, who came across it on the
back of a pizza-delivery menu. And his handling of the Sept. 11 tragedy and its aftermath has earned him a 100 percent approval rating
within the Gore household.
"He's really risen to the occasion, that's for sure," said Gore housekeeper
Virginia Evans, who spent nearly half an hour listening to Gore's anti-terrorism
plan after being named his "Secretary Of State" last Thursday. "'President Gore'
has taken some bold, decisive steps to help the American people in this time of
crisis."
"All you have to do is see the man rake leaves into piles representing the
various members of the international coalition, and you suddenly feel the nation is
in good hands," said Gore son-in-law Andrew Schiff. "Or, you know, would be, if
things had gone differently in Florida and with the Supreme Court and all."
Schiff also lauded the emergency federal-law-enforcement table of
organization Gore drew in his mashed potatoes during a recent family dinner as
"a masterpiece of delegation and efficiency."
"He's unbelievable, the way he's taken charge," Schiff said. "It's truly amazing
how much good he's imagined doing for this country."
Gore's bathroom-mirror speech, his 16th such address since Sept. 11, is widely considered to be the almost-president's most
emotional and stirring yet.
"I thought it was very moving," Tipper said. |
