This is the story that led me to the previous NY Times piece. It is much more relavent and touches on a growing movement to bring under-reported journalism to the front lines. May just pipe dreams, but why not?

U.S. Firms Aiding Iraqi Oil Industry

The comments by the German investigator in this piece are rather interesting, particularly towards the end of the story. The fact that everything is piecing together so well may not be coincidental. Why is that? Could it be what US authorities are keeping from the public, while other countries are revealing more information? Or is this information purposely placed?

Washington Post writer Howard Kurtz's deflective comment on the NY Times story make me think that he is missing the point: "More evidence on the planning of Sept. 11, and how dumb American flight schools were when foreign students showed up who weren't interested in learning to land:" What is going on here?

Sept. 11 Attack Planned in '99, Germans Learn

While the International Environmental Summit is convening in South Africa, Double Dip Dubya is not attending because he is a busy man. Mark Fiore will explain.

The nonsense continues, and M. Ivins keeps the barrel rolling- making perfect sense of what was anything but an 'economic forum' in Waco, TX last week. This showboating has got to stop folks, or the American way mantra will fully evolve to "act now, and forget later..."

Star Telegram | 08/18/2002 | Mayor Bush of the Potemkin Village of Economyville

Populism seems to be the idea we are all striving for nowadays, at least in politics. Krugman here brings up a valid point of the administration's blatant missuse of it. And the Dems inaction. as a result of not knowing what they have...

The Real Thing

This is another one. Great use of music...

Question Mark Campaign #9: Money Part 2

This is great. The Dems seem to be getting started with a little creative advertising. Works well...

Question Mark #8: Money

Somehow, my outrage toward this pResident and his administration is beginning to become numb, which is what I was afraid of... This story from Reuters upsets me a bit. These firefighters risked their lives and died, yet are stomped by the political farce we call patriotism...

Yahoo! News - Firefighters Vote to Boycott Bush Sept. 11 Tribute

yes yes yes yes yes! I have not owned a tv for three years now and really enjoy the amount of "news" I miss out on. As a matter of fact, I was eating in a resteraunt the other day that had the tv on to one of the all news all day kind of stations and it is amazing in how that now that we have 24 hour news coverage, they have to make up newsworthy things to report. Dragging on a a fire investigation and cutting back and forth from footage to press conference until something moteworthy happens. ANd I think I might add that the amount of pressure the two parties have on the news is big too. I'm for the radio and though it has the same problems it is much easier to turn off. Ever notice how sportscenter has such flashy graphics and entrancing music. That's how my friends can watch it four times in a row. OPium for the masses. Even during the september attacks I found out before a lot of people because I had my radio on as I usually do on my way to work. Actually I might be the only american who still hasn't seen the plane footage. Weird, but by the time I got to a tv later that week they deemed it insensitive to show. YES YES YES YES YES

Morford from SFGate brings us a fresh and vital rant in these times of constant 24-Hour brash news. His "notes & errata" segments whip up a sense of passion and irony here. The possibility still exists, the duality of one's self in a fucked up world. That fact that we can just tune out at a moments notice is refreshing, and well, necessary. Besides, who would want to think of the 'war on terror' sitting by a mountain lake surrounded by redwoods...

Turn Off TV, Swim In Lake / Maybe the new American dream is simply to avoid the brutish news and seek some perspective

Well, Derek, your point is well taken and indeed more fact than fiction. It is true that the political extremes are identical. Sure, we can compare Ann Coulter with a radical tree-spiker in the Pacific Northwest, but who are we kidding here? They back themselves with facts and agendas and move their machine forward and we sit here and protest and weed through the garbage, and shape it into our perspective. But we live in a world that dictates policy through Media, or as Chomsky referred to as "manufacturing consent," Whether to bomb a town in some desert monarchy on the other side of the globe, or to put Martha on the block for being a bad businesswoman.

But, what I am actually gathering here through our series of abstract, concrete and passionate discussions is that the "reality" of all this constant information lies in what YOU make of it. You can struggle to sift through and pose and ponder, while others pander and pilfer, because they beat you to the punch in getting "their" side out there first. OR, we can do something about it, as RandomMan pushes ever so slightly. Grassroots movements have and will continue to work to change the status quo. The question is "When will we decide to relinquish all control?" You don't want these people in your life, true, but your anarchist musings elude you. One day you may have to fight for your rights at great risk to you and your well-being, and your immediate "world." This is not a question of economics, or Capitalism, or Democracy, but instinct or power. Humans don't want to fade away quickly; one group just wants all the control.

I am not here to persuade you to choose between two leaders, or two parties, or two ideas, for they both may be wrong. More ideas are better, and breaking down the wall to get to compete and have a presence is necessary. So that is our calling, our action -to push forward with our lives as individuals for a greater cause, and peace, and art, and balance. So do what you do, Derek. Show your life through your art and action. Nobody is requiring the specifics, really. That is all noise on our screens. We won't remember Coulter's words, or Halliburton's actions years from know. That is not important. What is important is how, why and when we learn from them. And I am not talking about more laws and regulations, but real fundamental change. Not "moral responsibility" and "compassion conservatism" or "bridges to the 21 Century" and "thousand points of lights," but real change...

Thanks for being here...

Molly Ivins pins the dittohead and their self-procliamed leader down pat... Thanks for the laughs, Molly!

Lyin' Bully

“Who knows if, thus, we are not preparing ourselves to escape someday the principle of identity.”
Breton

RandomMan, I apologize for being too abstract. And JC, abstraction is perhaps the most organic. I do try to name the unnamable. That’s my nature. I seek the point to view without reiterating what these politicians are saying. It’s redundant redundant. I’m just here to occasionally stoke the fire, add some insight to the bleakness of the way the world wants me to believe it is. I’m an optimist. And at the risk of absurdity, I’d say look at the news today. All of the narrowing viewpoints, all with a cause underneath, skim the surface and still find no substance. For the ship is all but sunk. As for the foreign properties the ol’ US had a hand in obtaining. That’s just bad business. I like our foreign policy just as much as I like the foreign policy of any nation that contributes to genocide or terrorism. The far right is just as scary as the far left. (the same point on a circle) They both make their points well and back them up with documented (fact). The problem lies in that, which one is the more correct. I mean take a look at how two sides of the Halliburton thing are being dictated. Ann Coulter points out that Cheney’s sale of stocks was before his vice presidency of the company so as to not have a conflict of interest and then look at the left’s view about the situation, where Cheney is dumping stock just before the asbestos claims. I mean come on lets just step back and look at the ethics of that industry all together. Halliburton makes money even if oil is not found. And should anyone trust them? But then again that’s just business. I could quote a billion things here to back up either side. I choose not to turn into a media outlet for you, and instead just try and figure out what’s going on in the world and contribute to the dialogue. Now that Cheney is in a new company I start to fear a bit. I mean all this power keeps swaying and narrowing toward him and I could conspiracize his immanent control of the world or I could think hey at least we won’t get blown up under his watch.

What it comes down to is what do we actually believe in, not what we can find out. I will probably not be as detailed as the rest of you, yet I will try to take what I get from my mass consumption of news and kind of spit out how I process it. I tend to go with the anarchist notion to not vote for anybody I don’t personally know. Yet look how far that’s gotten me. Actually it has worked well on a grass-roots level. And that is the world I live in. I’m not relinquishing my rights to those nuts in charge, I’m just saying they better stay the fuck out of my life. My life consists of the world around me and it would be naïve of me to say my national vote doesn’t count, but has it ever. I vote where I can make a difference. And I don’t want to hear things like voting for Nader is like stealing votes from Gore. That’s what you’re supposed to do. I see that the last election showed us two points of view aren’t enough and maybe it’s time we heard from some more. Again I am an optimist and I feel like the election in 2004 will have a high turnout. But what are my choices? Two I don’t believe in. And I have to vote tonight to decide if we should charge the people in my building if they do not recycle.

But let’s cut to the chase here. I’m an artist and I’m concerned with making my art and writing my books. What is art to me? Real art is play, & play is one of the most immediate of all experiences. Those who have cultivated the pleasure of play cannot be expected to give it up simply to make a political point (as in an ``Art Strike, '' or ``the suppression without the realization'' of art, etc.). Art will go on, in somewhat the same sense that breathing, eating, or fucking will go on.

That said I like this place JC and I like being here.
Thanks,
Derek

Wow! Ted Rall asks the questions that nobody is willing to admit about 9-11. And this is not conspiracy theory stuff. These questions are realistic and go on unanswered by the government. Deflection, distraction, obfuscation...

Yahoo! News - THE TRUTH ABOUT SEPTEMBER 11

Arianna Huffington tells is how it is sometimes. And well, this is one of those sometimes. Our friend slick Dick- quite the bastion of the Capital idea- finally showed up in "public" today in of all places- San Francisco! He was addressing the Commonwealth Club. Whose wealth I don't know, but he was greeted by protests, led by the SF Mime Troupe, who had a few words to say...

August 5, 2002 - Holding Dick Cheney "Accountable"

Rule number one: Never give a loaded weapon to a politician- they may actually use it! At least if you are in the GOP...

Pistol fires accidentally at reception for Georgia's Rep. Bob Barr; no one injured

I realize this is from a the venerable mainstream Media source, TIME, but I still found this chain of events story by M. Elliot fascinating. It is critical of the government and US intelligence agencies' lack of competence when it came to anti-terrorism pre-9/11. Some detailed information comes out and plays like a international spy thriller...

TIME.com: Could 9/11 Have Been Prevented?

JC's point that "our direct relationship, as the People, with "the State" is not concrete" is well taken. Likewise, our economic system, in reality, does not conform perfectly to the textbook definition of capitalism. There are forces of BASTARDization everywhere. The same case can be made that our supposedly democratic system of politics falls short of our ideals.


Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis said:
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both."


So we don't have to look too far for proof of concept here. Now consider these reasons, given by the Founders in the Declaration of Independence, as the basis for their decision to break completely from the Crown.


He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

Surely any reasonable person could see recent Bush/Administration actions in at least some, if not all of these charges. The Declaration of Independence also said:


whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

So I'd like to see the conversation steer away from impossibly perfect definitions like capitalism and democracy. Instead, let's prove we've learned from mistakes. Let's approach it from the angle, "what would be better?" The answer exists, but cannot have a name.

To add Derek to your July 24 comments "But wait! First: -- who is "The Enemy"?..." :

True, our direct relationship, as the People, with "the State" is not concrete and we do work on a "local" level, but the intrinsic value of it is not lost. So we all wander a bit and Capitalism harps on like a juggernaut in disguise. These specific groups are employees of the state and are directly responsible in aiding to separate.

But what you are saying- that Capitalism is too organic, as opposed to Communism, is misleading somewhat. As I do agree with you on the whole, however your comments concerning seem opposite of your original point. If Capitalism is to "retreat in cyberspace... once economics becomes a matter of digitalized data,” does this not represent a fading to abstraction? Are we not seeing a state of denial in terms of the very organization of the Capital Idea?

You are right- Capitalism will disintegrate. But Communism, Marxism and a number of offshoots imploded only by the use of Capitalism 'rapid response." Call it pre-emptive, if you will. We do already see the obvious bias of Capital systems through out. And, I believe that the political issues of the very State where Capitalism is a leading hand is only a side note. Consider that most Latin American "capital systems" and "democracies” only exist with the guiding hand of US prowess only to benefit the benefactors, while the rest of the population is mired in conflict and hopelessness. Examples of certain rapid response economics and implosive endings include Argentina and Venezuela. Their societies only benefited initially with "economic progress,” as they sold off all their public lands, power pipelines and utilities to US companies. These companies, namely Enron and Occidental, were push by politics.

And there is the rub, my friend. These societies collapsed as fast as they were economically initialized. The political means always taints the economic ends. (Or is it vice-versa?)

I will consider your WORK next? Till then...

Scott Ritter, former Marine Corps and UN weapons inspector in IRAQ, under the title UNSCOM, has been making some waves lately. A recent "FrontLine" special about the Iraqi potential for biological weapons development spent some time on Ritter’s political action.

Eli Pariser (9-11Peace Campaign) of MoveOn.org recently pointed out "The following article describes a speech by Scott Ritter, the weapons inspector mentioned above. Ritter's paid his dues, and he's not a typical peacenik. His arguments about Iraq deserve some serious attention."

Please read!

t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | The Coming October War in Iraq

When one person, company or entity has control it is called a monopoly.

When two entities conspire to assure their longevity by eliminating additional competition, we call it anti-trust.

What phrase could possibly describe better the way Democrats and Republicans operate?

Here's some ammo for third parties to kick down the door.

Steve Elmendorf, Minority Leader Richard Gephardt's (D-Mo.) chief of staff is quoted in the above article as saying:

"We don't think the ethics process should be politicized" (in reference to a truce D's and R's have to prevent ethics violations charges against members).

Instead of politicizing ethics, how about ethicizing politics?

Regarding Random Man's post "W's Absurd Support of Jeb":

You would think that all this political support between brothers would drum up some sort of uproar. Of course not, it is Florida. The media is bought and paid for. The article is indeed well written with very specific sources. Lizza at the New Republic exposes the Banana Republic state for what it is- deflection. However, it seems to pail in comparison to the Election 2000, Choicepoint, DBT, Katherine Harris scandal, even though many taxpayers and states like California are paying the price for these off-shore drilling environmental deals. The prices for buybacks are absurd, so energy and oils firms still win, just increasing their surplus at other states' expenses.