War on Drugs
Crime Family News
Rights Under Attack
. . . about Chaos,
Reason, and Hope
Free California: is independence the answer?
(Robert Nanninga, Earth Times, April 2003)
That's it! I've had it. I am officially over the American Dream. No longer will I pretend the intent of the founding fathers is still alive in the government, known officially around the world as the United States of America. . . . The Bush Regime, having begun an imperialist war of preemption and the long occupation of a sovereign nation, has forever weakened the fabric that holds together the federation. . . . Hawaii, New England, Alaska, Vermont, and Texas all have active secessionist movements . . . I would like to officially add California to that list. . . . Considering an overwhelming majority of Californians did not vote for George W. Bush in 2000, as the fifth largest economy in the world it is time we considered secession. . . . California could easily sustain itself. A large area, encompassing diverse cultures � some dating before the western � there is enough biodiversity remaining to ensure continued well-being, albeit at a much slower pace. Here in Southern California we have enough sunshine to power this new nation, with an ample surplus to trade with our northern neighbors in Cascadia. Tourism, biotech, and entertainment are industries that would flourish away from federal restraint and manipulation. . . . The strongest argument for California secession is environmental protections. California is grossly over populated due to failed federal policy designed to promote cheap labor and maximum profit. Population is California's Achilles heel, and water is the poisoned arrow that will bring us down if we do not take control of our destiny. . . . Best of all, there will be no need for violence. As proven by the Bush Doctrine, nations can be bought. And once a precedent has been established, nothing should prevent California from buying our independence. After the war Uncle Bushie will be strapped for cash, so we should be prepared with a generous divorce settlement.
. . . Read more!
posted by Lorenzo 8:31 AM
Documents from the Phoenix Program
(The Memory Hole)
Created by the CIA in Saigon in 1967, Phoenix was a program aimed at "neutralizing"�through assassination, kidnapping, and systematic torture�the civilian infrastructure that supported the Viet Cong insurgency in South Vietnam. It was a terrifying "final solution" that violated the Geneva Conventions and traditional American ideas of human morality. (For a full introduction to Phoenix, see link above.)
While researching the Phoenix Program for my book on the subject, I conducted over a hundred interviews and collected boxes full of documents from individuals, as well as from the State Department and Department of Defense. The most important documents provided by any one individual came from retired CIA officer Nelson Brickham, the man most responsibile for the creation of the Phoenix Program.
Luckily for history, Brickham kept copies of the documents he wrote while with the CIA; otherwise, there would be no documentary evidence of how Phoenix was actually created. During the evacuation of Saigon in April 1975, the CIA destroyed most of the documents it had about its assassination program, and none of what it kept at Langley headquarters can be obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests. This is no accident, for Phoenix is the model for the equally terrifying US homeland security aparatus.
Attack Against VC Infrastructure
A Concept for Organization for Attack on VC Infrastructure
A Proposal for the Coordination and Management of Intelligence Programs and Attack on VC Infrastructure and Local Irregular Forces
MACV Directive 381-41
Action Program for Attack on VC Infrastructure, 1967-1968
Carver memo, 7 August 1967 (re: Attack on the Viet Cong Infrastructure)
Program Guidance--Mount Attack on VC Infrastructure [Project TAKEOFF]
ICEX Briefing, August 1967
MACV Joint Messageform DTG 06 0910Z
MACV Directive 381-43
Evaluation Report: Processing of Viet Cong Suspects
Directive of the Prime Minister on the Neutralization of the VCI
Phung Hoang Advisor Handbook
. . . Read more!
posted by Lorenzo 8:05 AM
George W. Bush Resume
(Author Unknown) ... [excerpts below ... click on the link above for more sad details of Little Bush's life]
Attacked and took over two countries. . . . Spent the surplus and bankrupted the treasury. . . . Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history. . . . Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market. . . . First president in decades to execute a federal prisoner. . . . First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record. . . . In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their jobs. . . . Cut unemployment benefits for more out of work Americans than any president in US history. . . . Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history. . . . Set the record for the least amount of press conferences than any president since the advent of television. . . . Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to
intervene when corruption was revealed. . . . Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans.
. . . Read more!
posted by Lorenzo 5:32 PM
US plans death camp
NEWS.com.au - May 26, 2003
THE US has floated plans to turn Guantanamo Bay into a death camp, with its own death row and execution chamber. Prisoners would be tried, convicted and executed without leaving its boundaries, without a jury and without right of appeal, The Mail on Sunday newspaper reported yesterday. The plans were revealed by Major-General Geoffrey Miller, who is in charge of 680 suspects from 43 countries, including two Australians. The suspects have been held at Camp Delta on Cuba without charge for 18 months. General Miller said building a death row was one plan. Another was to have a permanent jail, with possibly an execution chamber. The Mail on Sunday reported the move is seen as logical by the US, which has been attacked worldwide for breaching the Geneva Convention on prisoners of war since it established the camp at a naval base to hold alleged terrorists from Afghanistan.
But it has horrified human rights groups and lawyers representing detainees. They see it as the clearest indication America has no intention of falling in line with internationally recognised justice. The US has already said detainees would be tried by tribunals, without juries or appeals to a higher court. Detainees will be allowed only US lawyers. British activist Stephen Jakobi, of Fair Trials Abroad, said: "The US is kicking and screaming against any pressure to conform with British or any other kind of international justice." American law professor Jonathan Turley, who has led US civil rights group protests against the military tribunals planned to hear cases at Guantanamo Bay, said: "It is not surprising the authorities are building a death row because they have said they plan to try capital cases before these tribunals. "This camp was created to execute people. The administration has no interest in long-term prison sentences for people it regards as hard-core terrorists." Britain admitted it had been kept in the dark about the plans. A Downing St spokesman said: "The US Government is well aware of the British Government's position on the death penalty."
*****Yeah, they're aware. They just don't give a shit what the Brits (or any one else for that matter) think.********
. . . Read more!
posted by An Old Curmudgeon 2:23 PM
Achtung!� Are We the New Nazis?
The Nazis demonized and then destroyed their enemies, after first intimidating and then liquidating their domestic opponents. The German propaganda machine cranked out misinformation and outright lies in the state-supported media, suppressing the truth and threatening anyone who dared to speak or print opposition to the war regime. . . . Presently, American military veterans�rank and file former soldiers mostly--are speaking out against American Imperialism, as well as ministers, artists, reporters, scientists and educators. But the powerful alliance of media monopolies and corporate-financed political leaders sway public opinion to war. In America, as was the case in Nazi Germany, the imperceptible slide to tyranny increases in direct proportion to the number of voices of conscience that are ignored. . . . Are we the New Nazis? Could it happen here? Has it already begun? Absurd, you say. God is on our side. The God of Christians and Jews. . . . The last time I checked, the Pope was vehemently against the unprovoked war with Iraq, as were most ministers and priests. The National Council of Churches, with 50 million members in 36 denominations, opposed the war. The Catholic Church, with nearly 64 million Americans, did not support the war. Many American Jews did not support the war. Yet according to all reports, we�ve �won� a war and the rumors are we may have another couple of other wars very soon. . . . God is on our side, but which one? The vengeful God, the one guiding our radioactive armor-sheathed battle tanks as they slice through families of frightened civilians? . . . Assuming the support for this war was a mile wide and an inch deep-- generally the case in polls and wars--how many Christian soldiers will continue to take up arms against the �infidel� simply on the summons of Militant Christian Bush and Uber-Zionist Paul Wolfowitz? . . . In a prolonged, stepping-stone war of conquest and vendetta, thinly disguised as �liberation,� how many American soldiers will suffice? If the Russians in Afghanistan could not pacify a region at their doorstep with over 150,000 troops, using Gestapo tactics, what makes American leaders think they can do better, using twice the troops over twice the area? . . . "Do we have ten million men willing to fight and save petroleum resources?" asks Anthony Gancarski in a recent Counterpunch column. "How many millions would it take to provide an occupation force sufficient to pacify the region? Is there any hope of attaining such a fighting force without conscription?" . . . The draft is a done deal if the war spreads. The New York Times recently reported that America�s military power, measured in military spending, exceeded that of all NATO countries combined--plus China, Russia, Japan, Iraq and North Korea--but the need for military men will surpass the capacity of the all-volunteer army if �liberation� spreads to Syria and Iran, as our chief Chickenhawks intend. . . . This recent preemptive strike precedent for America is a page taken from the Third Reich playbook. In 1939, the Germans attacked Poland, a fourth-rate military power, having used a phony excursion by Polish soldiers as a ploy for invasion. Our excuse for attacking another fourth-rate power--the search for weapons of mass destruction--worked wonderfully well in Iraq, yet not even Hitler was so draconian as to expose his own troops to the risk of chemical attack or the exposure of depleted uranium. Thus far more than 10,000 American troops who fought in the first Gulf War have died from Gulf War Syndrome, while the House of Representatives voted recently to cut $25 billion from assistance to disabled veterans. . . . The barbarism of conquered Baghdad mirrors the Nazi blueprint for dealing with foreign art and culture: Loot the art and burn the culture. Yet even The German High command never allowed or conspired in the wholesale eradication of French culture to the degree the American Army appeared to do in Baghdad. . . . The Nazis, great plunderers of European art, would have been envious of the speed and cohesion of the entire operation. Understandably, they would have been aghast at the waste, however. . . . Will our soldiers soon be sporting �God With Us� belt buckles over protective, Darth Vader body armor, wielding depleted uranium weapons in the Cradle of Civilization? How many My Lai-style atrocities�already occurring as I write this--or Beirut-type barracks bombings will we accept before we realize our occupation in Iraq is West Bank supersized? . . . Truthfully, to the rest of the world, we already are the New Nazis.
. . . Read more!
posted by Lorenzo 6:27 PM
Bush's political use of war images is shameless
(Paul Krugman, International Herald Tribune, May 7, 2003)
George Bush's "Top Gun" act aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln - c'mon, guys, it wasn't about honoring the troops, it was about showing the president in a flight suit - was as scary as it was funny. . . . Mind you, it was funny. At first the White House claimed that the dramatic tail-hook landing was necessary because the carrier was too far out at sea to use a helicopter. In fact the ship was so close to shore that, according to The Associated Press, administration officials "acknowledged positioning the massive ship to provide the best TV angle for Bush's speech, with the sea as his background instead of the San Diego coastline." . . . If Tony Blair had tried such a stunt, he said, the press would have demanded to know how many hospital beds could have been provided for the cost of the jet fuel. . . . But U.S. television coverage ranged from respectful to gushing. Nobody pointed out that Bush was breaking an important tradition. And nobody seemed bothered that Bush, who appears to have skipped more than a year of the National Guard service that kept him out of Vietnam, is now emphasizing his flying experience. . . . Luckily for Bush, the frustrating search for Osama bin Laden somehow morphed into a good old-fashioned war, the kind where you seize the enemy's capital and get to declare victory after a cheering crowd pulls down the tyrant's statue. (It wasn't much of a crowd, and American soldiers actually brought down the statue, but it looked great on TV.) . . . Well, Bush got to pose in his flight suit. And given the absence of awkward questions, his handlers surely feel empowered to make even more brazen use of the national security issue in future. . . . And who will ask why, if the administration is so proud of its response to Sept. 11, it has gone to such lengths to prevent a thorough, independent inquiry into what actually happened? . . . There was a time when patriotic Americans from both parties would have denounced any president who tried to take political advantage of his role as commander in chief. But that, it seems, was another country.
. . . Read more!
posted by Lorenzo 10:29 AM