U.S. cursed by US Right Wing

[waioli kai]

United States' US

a peace in progress:

The United States has been cursed by the predominance of a so-called US Right Wing in social, economic, political, military*, and foreign affairs for more than a century now. Given such a record, such momentum, such deceit and such tolerance by an ever constant if not increasingly ignorant and self-indulgent populace, the most the non - US Right Wing can do is to hope for change while never being able to effect change away from such US Right Wing dominance.

The present US war in Iraq is a perfect example of how the US Right Wing sets the agenda for the future, creates facts on the ground which can only precipitate yet another US Right Wing conclusion. A conclusion, an outcome wherein the most is to be gained by the US Right Wing, simultaneously the least being sacrificed by the U.S. Right Wing.

Another perfect example is US Right Wing control of the United States' Treasury, driven to the brink, if not indeed into an abyss, of bankruptcy.

Much to the contrary of all US Right Wing protestations and claims, there is no "Left Wing" in the United States, its territories, claims and possessions* * . There is United States' US Right Wing, allies, and apologist, Republicans, "conservatives", ultra-"conservatives", neo-"conservatives', then there are the enablers of United States' US Right Wing, the United States' US Democrats and a vast majority of media in the United States.

* And more often than not, judicial affairs as well.

* * including Iraq, one would think



There is United State$' US Right Wing, allie$, and apologUSt$, RepublUScan$, conservUStive$, ultra-conservUStive$, neo-conservUStive$, then there are the enablUSer$' UniteUS $tates' US Right Wing, the Democrat$ and a vast majority media in the United States, its' allie$, etc., etc, ,,,

[j3rr3y]

Hey, thanks for sharing your opinion, but seriously, I think I am a lot dumber for having read that post. That is the stupidest thing I have heard for quite a while.

[pzarquon]

You understood that? Ten words in, I wasn't even sure what wing was flapping which way anymore. :p

[craigwatanabe]

What's with the dollar signs? I take it left wing extremists are against making money?

I think if you put it to some good bass beats that would make a decent hip hop rap.

So anyway would someone please translate that into something understandable? All I get from it is HATE HATE HATE!! So much anger.

[Glen Miyashiro]

You know, waioli kai -- and I'm only saying this because I care -- there are a lot of decaffeinated brands on the market that are just as tasty as the real thing.

[craigwatanabe]

Bite your tongue!!! Coffee without caffeine is like well...Hawaii Threads.Com without a good debate! Gotta have the gogetum juice. :D

[waioli kai]

You understood that? Ten words in, I wasn't even sure what wing was flapping which way anymore.
That's the point most can never get. Their's, i.e. US of the U.S. United States*, is only one wing. The flapping in your ears, between ears, is the US USraeli single winged creature whose only wing is a right one powered on self-justified rhetoric, unfathomable** deficits both financial and moral.

Perhaps you are of US media, among US Right Wing's enablers of US, US Democrats? Perhaps not. Perhaps an US enabler of a different vein of the same creature?

* US is of the U.S. United States, US rules the demockery of bankrupt treasuries, wealth squandered on the excesses of US, the furtherance of US, the preservation of US ---at any and all costs, whatever the abyss of bankruptcy can accept, whatever US can prevail on the world that is not US of the U.S.

**no small thanks to US Right Wing's enablers and allies in furtherance of hopes and dreams of the faithful fans of Militant Zionism and Corporatism.
What's with the dollar signs?

Are they, the $ signs, not all written in the context of US's promisorry notes: $US or US$? You can call it money, most people do. Some call it not worth the fiber it's made of.

[waioli kai]

"We have been too nice. We have been too polite." -- DNC strategist Ann Lewis.

Isn't that what enabling is all about? ...

Getting dividends for being polite to a fault?

Wearing the suit with appropriate pin on the lapel for cosmetic effect, for conscience soothing incorporation of one's morally unsustainable condition* on Earth with the prevailing, or publicly tolerated by the prevailing, powers of political and social governance, and, with too rare exception, religious governance as well?


* Condition in comparison with living-it-up floating in a presumed-to-be sink-proof cabin cruiser while the overwhelming majority of the surviving remainder of Life on Earth not already on cruisers, or at least clinging to life rafts**, is already or in the process of drowning in the ever growing BankruptUS $ea.

**Life rafts, always of non-U.S. origin and now more likely made in China, courtesy trillion$ of virtual US promisorry notes, treasury certificates***, rafts of floating societies with tenuous threads connecting to the 'unsinkable' mother ship of Freedumb and Demockery, the USS US Dollar its war "to spread Freedumb and Demockery over Earth and beyond, to infinity if need be, Gawd bless U$ "

*** even as the expected (presumed and alleged by US to be) redeemers of US certificates of debt are yet to be born to willingly, faithfully bear such a horrendous encumbrance, then pass the indebtedness on to be borne by their own children.

[j3rr3y]

HAHAHA
well hating America as much as you do, you could probably make a lot of money teaming up with Michael Moore.. oh but you dont like money do you? move to russia or north korea for a while... you will be begging for American capitalism within days. It is people like you that give the Democratic Party a bad rep... If you hate the USA so much, seriously, no one is forcing you to stay!

[waioli kai]

move to russia or north korea for a while... you will be begging for American capitalism within days. It is people like you that give the Democratic Party a bad rep..., no one is forcing you to stay!

Move away and let terrorUSt$, and their fans like you, screw the world up even more? Don't you need a reason to be such a fanatic of terrorUSism?

[craigwatanabe]

I think this guy was standing too close to the Microwave oven and fried his WalMart brain implant cuz something's hijacked that noggin of his.

His artistry of words is impeccable yet too incoherent for me to understand. Maybe I'm too ignorant or maybe he's just on drugs (or both).

What I gather is that we in America live in this facade of moral conduct yet our international actions prove otherwise. Oh well.

Show me one country that is happy with their governance, or their economy and I'll show you a country that still lacks moral conduct with their labor force or their socio-economic status against gender.

We in the United States of America take pride in our ability to speak freely of civil rights, the ability to become successful in our own right not by goverment induction. We have the strictest environmental laws in the world regarding clear cutting of our rain forests, automobile emissions, manufacturing plant emissions as well. Whether it's for corporate greed or not it does support the need to clean our environment.

Middle East countries we fight for and against have one major export...oil. So does that make the muslim world any less corrupt than the west? I think not.

Countries in Africa aren't immune to humanity either with their human rights violations and genocide.

It seems the world hates us not for our economic status, but our ties with Isreal. In what should be the greatest feud regarding family assets, Isreal and Jordan are locked in generations of in-fighting as to who was supposed to inherit what from whom.

As for our redeemers of US certificates...it's not only our children, we are the beneficeries of our promissory backing of the almighty U.S. Dollar already! We got off the Gold standard decades ago my friend. But the strength of our economy proves we will not go bancrupt that easily and that our economic engine will fuel our military might where ever democracy deems fit.

Regarding being too nice...yes to some point diplomacy works but when your kid still doesn't get the message and empty lectures still doesn't get thru your head, some strict discipline is in order, or you can play the good parent/bad parent and let the bad parent do the spanking while the good parent stands by and does nothing (UN has not introduced any actions against the US for it's war on Iraq).

Your impressions of the U.S. lifestyle is one of decadence yet that's what you choose to see. The majority of the U.S. population don't live in unsinkable ships with life boats made in China. Most of us don't live behind a facade of fearlessness that our economy won't fail us. This is a country of survivors and those who told the rest of the world that no government will decide my fate. We are not sheep led by a shepard but are individuals willing to speak up against fanaticals like yourself (waioli kai)

As your name implies, it sounds like you are one of the 130+ Hawaiian groups seeking power over the Hawaiian Kingdom illegally overthrown by our own U.S. government. If that's your facade then you have a legitimate gripe over the values of the U.S. Government, but before you continue to denounce this government, denounce your subsidy checks from the hand that feed you and your family first.

One thing I cannot stand is a bitter indigenent who just complains about their "Poor me" situation and does nothing about it yet has the time to denegrade the government that has paid for their health and car insurance as well as the milk, eggs, cheese, and other food subsidy that the U.S. supplies free for the taking for those who strive to undermine it. You hate the successful Hawaiian because they succumbed to the western evils.

You hate everything and denounce everything associated with the U.S. government and for that it breeds internal hatred and contempt for your fellow Kanaka Maoli (Plantation Mentality) to the point where you get NOTHING!! Oh excuse me, you get berated by people like myself who uncovers the hypocracy of your attitudes. Reality sucks when you get past the denial stage doesn't it.

If you really have this hatred for something, don't hide behind a facade, reveal yourself and be true to yourself and those you try to educate. Hiding behind an alias doesn't give you any credibility. It just says you have a lot of words to say without backing it up with who you are. In other words you're simply blowing empty words and your time is worthless on this board.

Pissed off, laughing with contempt? Either way I got under your skin. So what are you gonna do now poser? Get real and expose yourself to give yourself some credibility or hide like Osama Bin Laden throwing rocks and then running away like a coward.

Or continue running your mouth off, blah blah blah. Until you reveal yourself, you can say anything you want and the rest of us will simply say: La la la la I can't hear you....

Believe in yourself? Then speak the truth and it starts with who you are! Or just let the adults talk, go play outside with the keiki.

[waioli kai]

While Iraqis risk their lives to vote in Sunday's elections, far left windbag Ted Kennedy continues to give aid and comfort to America's enemies and to Islamic fascists over the world.

But why shouldn't we expect besotted clown Kennedy to encourage hatred of our country while he cozies up to terrorists and dictators? He's a Democratic Party politician and therefore defacto an unhinged, raving lunatic.

It's no wonder Democrats keep losing elections, what's astonishing is that they are able to win any at all.

Only an anti-Communism ideologue, Cheney/Reagan/Bush/Rice groupie can accuse Ted Kennedy of being " far left ". The only way Kennedy, or virtually anyone in US government or US commercial, religious media could be politically left, much less " far left " is when one's intellect is thoroughly void of the relevancy, indeed the existence, of Communist ideology to the practical solution to the political ills of this planet, the economy of the future, the essence of Democracy, the possession of Freedom, the Peace not otherwise attainable.

How does one's intellect become so corrupted, so co-opted, that it is so void of something so obvious? Believing "Communism is dead" propaganda, and all the corporatUS anti-Communism propaganda leading into, through and beyond last century Cold War is a prerequisite to suffering the delusion that humankind's choice of systems for the production, distribution, management of Earth's terrestrial and Space resources not only must not incorporate a US-declared "dead ideology" , but, humankind's choice must be corporatUS-approved, corporatUS-included, indeed, especially in the course of U.S. funded nation building investments like Colombia, Afghanistan, Iraq, corporatUSt$'-divined.

[kimo55]

aaaagggh!
pzarq! make it stop.
I'm melting! Melting! Oh, what a world! What a world!

[waioli kai]

Will the January 2005 elections in Iraq accomplish anything?
The elections in Iraq will accomplish nothing that will make the Bush Administration appear as if they have a handle on a cure to the disastrous situation they created in Iraq. The passing of next week's Iraqi expatriate "Iraqi" elections will eliminate the over-used Bush2 Administration crutch for the Bush2 propaganda campaign about, crusade for, the great benefits they expect will accrue to their conservative, neoconservative, fundamentalist, corporatUSt$ America powerbrokers and beneficiaries consequent real democracy
--i.e., democracy uncontaminated by corporatUSt$, bankruptUS interests*, agents, clients:: *counterbalanced in the world by their of past, present and future victims--
developing in the Middle East, or anywhere in the world for that matter, including most especially in the pseudo-democracy that is corporatUSt$ America, in the Americas.

[waioli kai]

...terrorUSt$ are, are financed by, Republican corporatUSts, Democratic corporatUSts, British corporatUSts, West's corpoatUSts, Australian corporatUSts, Indian corporatUSts, Colombian corporatUSts, Pakistani corporatUSts, Greek corporatUSts, ... corporatUSi$m and terrorUSi$m are, since before the times of George Washington's militarys' exterminations of the Iroquois and their neighbors, one and the same.
Who are anti-terrorUSt$? "Leftists"?

Who are militant anti-terrorUSt$? "Jihadists"?

Just what is the future of war by terrorUSt$? More sanctions on Iran? Israeli attacks on Iran, with the typical accompanying US apologetics?

Then what, after the wBush Cheney regime? Less militant anti-terrorUSraelism? Greater security for corporatUSt America? Greater sense of security for one's being "American"? Greater sense of one's feeling respect and admiration for being "American" ?

[waioli kai]

Wolfowitz on 1/20/05 PBS News Hour talks of Saddam "misleading the world".

Misleading the world ? Vested interests of the bankruptUS$ A's "Defense" leadership talking about misleading the world ! No shame!! Condi Rice getting a prelude of a war crimes trial during her sos confirmation hearing, and Wolfowitz now knowing that his arse is in the swing of his, his fellow neocon political artists', own making. Their most immediate raison d'etre being the provision of both immediate relief to Israel and more predictable crude oil supplies. Nothing, absolutely nothing, considered by them to be of any worthy of living consequence without such provision. No costs too great to bear. No propagandUS that is too shameful to deploy to perpetuatUS corporatUSraelian delusions of "leading" verses "misleading".

[waioli kai]

On Comedy Central Jon Stewart 1/25/05,
Seymour Hersh confirms (confirms again) to millions in the United States the nightmare millions already know thanks not to The New Yorker magazine, or Mr. Hersh to any extent whatsoever compared to contributions toward growing popular knowledge derived from displays of co-opted intellect, arrogance, and incompetence of a majority, if not a supermajority, of the civilian leadership of the United States Executive Branch.

If there is God, and, Such could ever be thanked, Such would be thanked by not mere 10's of millions (as in number beneficiaries of the U.S. Executive Branch civilian corps of corporatUSt interests realm), rather, Such would be thanked by billions of Earth's inhabitants for the fact that there exists in the U.S. Executive Branch pyramid a significant number of individuals to whom moral values is not of a militarist, nationalistic, vainglorious vein.

When it comes to the U.S. Executive Branch pyramid, it is rotting from the top down. Congress joining in the regression, hopelessly under the control of the militarist of Corporate America and the West's capitalessUSnest$.

They think more US-divined war in foreign lands and more U.S. expenditures (crimson, blood red, fiscally, literally) for more US-grown weaponry, war supplies and cooked books can save the credibility, the wealth of US; what has US Presidency got to lose? Just about everything they have ever thought was immutable, right and divinely ordained, that's all. Which means, naturally: "What is it to US to have in the world more 'we created them' suicidal, homicidal, maniacal anti-US 'insurgents', 'guerrilla', 'militants' (with US decreasingly being confused with U.S. -- U period S period abbreviation for United States), what is it to US to make ever more eternal enemies of US? When such US-created enemies are of generational, uncountable numbers, what are more such enemies? "US is secure in US righteoUSnest$", as, inversely so, the U.S., the United States is correspondingly less secure in every way conceivable.

[waioli kai]

Saddam Hussein was another gangster for capitalism in his US-approved years of rule over Iraq.

"The Iraqi Shiites have shown forbearance and have not retaliated from Sunni attacks on them."

Iraqi Shia are not now in a condition of military hardware armament comparable to Iraqi Sunni. After US restoring the US-approved capitalist monarchy and US crude oil connection to Kuwait, Iraqi Shia were given (by US powers)grounds to expect US support (of more than a rhetorical nature)for a Shia rebellion against the ruling Sunni of Saddam (up til and including at that moment Saddam, a honed and tempered client of, by and for US corporate interests in the same addicted vein as US's Shah Pahlavi of Iran): the Iraqi civilian mass graves after Bush1 Gulf War were a consequence of Iraqi Shia having considered rising against Saddam in an armed, US bles$ed uprising.
What happens after such mass killings is that a society is not in condition to take revenge, much less able to afford to avenge one injustice without guarantee against ever greater injustice being perpetrated on them?
****The Conservative form of Capitalism has shown itself to be a massive failure.
The USA "democracy" is capitalist democracy. USA has a capitalist economy and a capitalist democracy. Whether that democracy is of a liberal form (Liberman, Kerry, Gore, Biden,) or a conservative form (ala Lott, Delay, Bush, Card,) of capitalism, corporatist capitalism is a malign tumor on humanity. There is no morally substantive difference between the economic fundamentals of Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Bushs' USA.

[waioli kai]

'Well-regulated Capitalism' sounds oxymoronic, though granting that such is not the case for the sake of argument: Isn't it the case in the U.S. that capitalism is well regulated?

Capitalism is quite well regulated, to the exclusive advantage of corporations. The rights of corporations prevail over citizens' rights and welfare as much because of regulation as because of a lack of regulation. Would well-regulated genocide/ecocide be preferable to not-so-well-regulated genocide/ecocide?

Maybe there is a form of capitalist economy which does not allow for the sociopathic wastes and immoral material consumption characteristic of the U.S. economy/government; however, to get there from where we have been and are now is not even remotely likely.

The US health care 'system' exemplifies the malady. Insurance companies have leeched onto health care such that the economic security of the U.S. requires the leeching to exist.

"Economic security"...what a joke! If only today's U.S. children could see through the fog in which their parents find such comfort while on this side of the Baby Boomers' retirement delusions of security. A former Federal Reserve Board member has recently stated on cnn's Dobb's Report that the U.S. government debt combined with unfunded U.S. government liabilities in a dozen years or less will amount to around $US44trillion....three years worth of today's U.S. GNP. Obviously the U.S., indeed the world, is on course with an iceberg of titanic proportions while many, if not most, U.S. politicians parade on deck passing out saccharin-sweetened shave-ice refreshments.

Assuming our US gets the spoils of war from Operation Iraqi Liberation which it anticipated...on second thought, why assume such unlikely consequences. The commanders of US economy really have only one course set for US and it is a corporatist one doomed by their greed, deceit and inhumanity.

[waioli kai]

"...people who do evil with capitalism rather than capitalism being inherently evil in itself."
Yes, similar reasoning is presented by the National Rifle Association to jusitfy ownership of hand guns in the U.S.

'People who do evil with capitalism'... not sure what that means. US Capitalism sucks up about 40% of the world's resources for 5% of the world's population, or broken down again, about 30% for 2%. In my book there is inherent evil reflected in such a fact, but for the most part I would say that the 30% are not evil so much as is their capitalist economic system itself evil.

The vast wealth of Saddam's Iraq was distributed in a way most like the vast wealth of the world is distributed among the West. Under US corporatist control Iraq's wealth does not stand a chance of being distributed much differently than it was distributed under Saddam--- the face of corporatist capitalism varies but the outcome does not.
***

"These are people who hate guns because guns provide a defense against the totalitarian state they want to impose. They are big fans of guns in the hands of socialist enforcers."

The Right Wing's "leftist", "socialist" in the U.S. are not an armed camp. The armed camp of the U.S. is his right-wing. Throughout the world, it is the right-wing that is armed to the teeth through their right-wing, "conservative" governments to their right-wing oligarchs' paramilitaries to assassins for right-wing causes. Has there ever been left-wing fascism; are not "right-wing", fascism, totalitarianism synonymous?

Anyone today who falls into the sights of the U.S. IRS, or any U.S. or state investigative and/or enforcement agency experiences a degree of totalitarianism that fills a general prescription of totalitarianism [(1 :centralized control by an autocratic authority 2 : the political concept that the citizen should be totally subject to an absolute state authority)].

What good is one's being armed to protect oneself against such a power in these heavily-armed government times? A good joke perhaps; or, for the Right Wingers of the world, a comforting delusion til their lights go out...what little light there is for them.

"It sounds like you recognize that the IRS and other such armed agencies are a threat to honest people. They would be more of a threat if all honest people were disarmed."

The threat of the IRS keeps them honest, for the most part. I don't for a second think that the IRS, FBI, ATF et.al let the thought of an armed citizery hinder their prosecution of justice. But, you do think such agencies reconsider their prosecution of their idea of justice based on the fact (ie, your assumption) that they are more afraid of armed citizens than unarmed citizens?

"Just ask anyone who survived socialism under Stalin, Tito, Mao, Ho, Pol Pot, etc."

Are you suggesting that such survivors would claim: "If only we citizens had had more guns, things would have been different. We would have been safe, happy, democratic, free, peace-loving corporate capitalists. But, (sigh), we just didn't have the arms to prevent being dominated by the government, to become more like the US."

[waioli kai]

"In the long run capitalism is always bad. There are some short run benefits."
In the short run the U.S. govt borrows money to shower upon capitalists, who in the short run use the money as they are accustomed (pursuit of profits for happiness-success first and always while pursuit of goodness trails behind the pursuit of corporatist benefits resulting from philanthropy) . In the longer run the borrowed moneys are exhausted necessarily undemocratically, often frivolously, usually wastefully (scaled in drums by billions per generation of capitalist reign), most irresponsibly and most unaccountably to sustain the corruption of humanity many US"Americans" fondly call "An Adventure in Capitalism", then, that which is not exhausted completely trickles down to those whose investment in self is more truly an investment in humanity.

* capital Date: circa 1639 1 a (1) : a stock of accumulated goods especially at a specified time and in contrast to income received during a specified period; also : the value of these accumulated goods (2) : accumulated goods devoted to the production of other goods (3) : accumulated possessions calculated to bring in income b (1) : net worth

** working capital Date: circa 1901 : capital actively turned over in or available for use in the course of business activity: a : the excess of current assets over current liabilities

When capital is "the excess of current assets over current liabilities" it must be that the US is capital-less. Since Reagan and Bushes (Clinton was riding a 'short-term benefit' wrinkle of the tumor) have absolutely guaranteed that for the duration the Republic --which capitalists [US, Brit, Zionazi (i.e., not to include all Zionists, just those of the militant variety), others] hijacked more than a century ago-- the people's government of the U.S. will never have 'working capital'. U.S. peoples will be capital-less, while an ever greater percentage of US capitalists will themselves be deemed capital-less. National debt, corporate debt and consumer debt mushrooming in the long run to a dissolution of the United States, as speculated by some futurists in the Aleutians.
***

In Iraq US has U.S. civilian and military personel in the midst of a Mideast civil war which US could not --even with a small fortune spent for US-sponsored mercenary paramilitary/subversion forces-- foment to erupt into violence without (but for Blair and Sharon and some newfound US buddies of "Adventure in Capitalism" in) unilaterally destroying and invading the nation.

In Sudan and Cong, as the rest of Africa, U.S. accepts/when not encourages Africa's civil wars. Except where civil war was a war that was headed towards the doorsteps of hundreds of thousands of white South Africans (Afrikaner or not), US has pretty much just let Africa's civil wars burn as they please, adding fuel$ at various times.

I don't know how some European/American imperialists could ever recompense most all peoples of Africa for the disenfranchisement, deculturalization, grief and irredeemable loss forced upon them over the centuries by EuroAmerican coporatist governments. The imperialists' heirs' manifest denial of any responsibilty for the tragedies of Sudan, Liberia, Congo, Sierre Leone, Angola, Mozambique, ..., is understandable: "Look at this mess our fathers handed US. It is overwhelming!! Where do we start? Where can we start? It's just too much...But! We didn't do it, did we, not US? Of course not. So, since there's nothing we can do about something we didn't cause, let 'em kill each other 'til they wear themselves out."

How many reasons can there be that the terror in Sudan, Congo, and subSahara Africa is not deemed worthy of waging war against? Is it that US seeks world support in waging war against only that which terrorizes Americans; that which terrorizes populations/investments of mostly white people?

[waioli kai]

"Missiles being installed in Alaska will become part of a new defense system. The idea is to knock incoming missiles out of the sky. But will the system work as advertised?"
To find out how well such proposed 'missile defense' works as advertised, who will have to be provoked to give such systems a real test? China? Russia? Pakistan? India? France? Britain? Israel?

A very, very long range ballistic missile strike on U.S. mainland from North Korea, or a long range strike on U.S.'s Honolulu?

This on-going militarist "missile defense" idea, plan, project is just as bogus, wasteful and deceitfully perpetuated as was the Reagan administration's multi-billion dollar "defense" plan for building intercontinental ballistic missile silos in the Three Corners region of the U.S. Southwest.

Dr. Condoleeza Rice, soon-to-be, yet to be tried, convicted war criminal at head of US State Department can never be content that she has promoted enough such militarist schemes of state as is "missile defense".

[admin]

Waioli Kai, you are pretty much talking to yourself and are even quoting material that is not from this forum (making for a pretty surreal "discussion"). I think ten posts in one afternoon is more than enough. Take a break, please.

[waioli kai]

'Dr. Condoleeza Rice, soon-to-be, yet to be tried, convicted war criminal at head of US State Department can never be content that she has promoted enough such militarist schemes of state as is 'missile defense'. As is much of United States' dedicated revenue stream originating in the sale of "homesteads" of stolen lands of Native Americans and Pacific Islanders, perpetuated in national and international currency scams of the sort that in earlier times were facilitated (for a cut, to be sure) by traders of U.S. Treasury securities located in top floors of a World Trade Center building. U.S. Treasury securities fancied to be honorable promissory notes for domestic and international consumption .... borrowed wealth to dump into a lot of worthless nothings wrapped up in United States' war machinery, war preparations, war readiness, militarist expenditures.'

"When you messed with Condi it may have been a mistake."

Something to think about for sure. Before crediting Dr.Rice, no other woman would be given by Reagan, Bush1, Cheney (Rumsfeld, Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith, Sharon, Docters Thatcher, Kissinger, Negroponte) credit for the dissolution of the CCCP.'The Soviet specialist at the end of the Cold War' (http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/41424.asx>), Dr.Rice says of herself at meeting with State Department employees who clapped their hands off before refreshments while Dr. Rice is "going to find my room".

'This extraordinary ...' what? What did Dr.Rice say? "Adventure"? No, it wasn't "adventure"...but something along that line. She didn't say "crusade"*, but that would have been taken for granted anyway by those attending her first employee meeting (http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/41261.htm#newsofday) at Bush2's, Cheney's and Rice's State Department.

Please, understand that this is a time when the history is calling us. (http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/41423.asx) And I just look forward to working with each and every one of you toward that end."

"The President has laid out a bold agenda and he expects a lot of us. I want you to know that I'm going to be committed to you; and you, in turn, will be committed, and we, in turn, will be committed, to carrying out that bold agenda." --- What is turning, what is spinning, is the communication that emanates from the U.S. Executive Branch.

* What Docter Rice did say: This is a great time for America. (http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0412/purplehearts_01.html ) It's a great time for the international system."

[waioli kai]

Waioli Kai, you are pretty much talking to yourself and are even quoting material that is not from this forum (making for a pretty surreal "discussion"). I think ten posts in one afternoon is more than enough. Take a break, please.

You are quite correct. I must be missing something here: like a self-deletion option. Before the storm approaching the islands possibly turns off the lights I did want to replace an inadvertent double post. It's cooling off fast.

[waioli kai]

Social Security: The Right-Wing's Stalingrad?
By Max J. Castro
Progreso Weekly

10-16 February 2005 Edition

"We had to destroy it in order to save it," an American soldier said famously about a village in Vietnam. President George W. Bush's proposal to save social security by privatizing it represents the same concept of safety.

The arguments the President is using in his covert war against social security, an attack disguised as a reform, are so bogus they make the case for war in Iraq seem an open and shut affair.

cont'd at
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021005M.shtml

http://www.progresoweekly.com/index.php?progreso=Max_Castro&otherweek=1108015200

The US Right wing has always spoke of the U.S. central government as if it were a curse on Americans because of the government's support for social welfare programs. The US Right Wing very deliberately and methodically has poisoned and continues to emasculate the U.S. government's social welfare responsibilities, concerns, contributions and entitlements. Corporate welfare and military hardware have consumed all and more than the Right Wing "savings" resulting from their eliminations and whittling down to token effectiveness every U.S. government enabled social welfare endeavor. The U.S. central government is now more than ever the enabler for corporations, insurance companies and financial gaming adventures of Wall Street. Wall Street...how appropriate it is that the walls after which it is named were owned by slavers' to contain and concentrate their wealth in Native American and African slaves.

[waioli kai]

''
R.I.P. PBS

The last remaining televised source of information is foundering after years of assault by the right wing. The most obvious solution is for subscribers to greatly increase their donations, freeing PBS from CPB control.

The president and CEO of the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), Pat Mitchell, announced she will not be seeking a third term earlier this week, raising new questions about the future of a network beset by partisan interference and faced with major budget cuts. The move comes less than a month after Education Secretary Margaret Spellings condemned the once-celebrated PBS show, "Postcards with Buster," because a not-yet-aired episode involved an 11-year-old girl with two mommies.

That was merely the latest in the Bush administration's attempts to control content and enforce conservative themes at the station. Fearful the right wing will continue to impinge on the channel's independence, children's television advocates are calling for a new funding model based on a "national trust fund or endowment [that] would allow PBS to be free of the whims of the White House." (Share your thoughts on the conservative takeover at PBS on ThinkProgress.org).

Mitchell maintains the "Postcards" controversy has nothing to do with her decision to leave, but the episode was indicative of the political wrangling that has complicated her job at PBS. Mitchell originally signaled she was "comfortable" with the episode in question, but according to PBS spokesman Lea Sloan, she changed her mind "after conversations with a number of PBS stations and 'national leadership.'"

Asked who among the "national leadership" had contacted Mitchell, "Sloan named John Lawson, who lobbies for public TV stations on the Hill." Lawson, besides being CEO of the Association of Public Television Stations, is Spellings's brother-in-law. His role in the controversy suggests a direct conflict of interest: Lawson is supposed to advocate for public television stations, but has a family connection with media censors in the Bush administration.

CONSERVATIVES STACK CBP: In the current model, the bulk of PBS's funding comes from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), whose board President Bush has attempted to stack with partisan political operatives. Two of the board's newest members, Gay Hart Gaines and Cheryl Halpern, have given more than $816,000 to conservative causes over the past 14 years. In addition, both have shown contempt for the board's function. According to Common Cause, Gaines was a key fundraiser for Newt Gingrich a decade ago when the House speaker campaigned to "zero out" CPB funding and privatize PBS.

NEW MEMBERS SEEK CENSORSHIP: Halpern signaled her intentions during her confirmation hearing, when she suggested the CPB should be given authority to penalize and "remove physically" someone whose broadcasts it decided were unbalanced. Halpern took repeated shots at esteemed "Now" host Bill Moyers and advocated a policy of "aggressive" censorship. This was apparently part of a "litmus test" the Bush administration used to select board members – media watchdog groups say the White House sunk the candidacy of UCLA media professor Chon Noriega after he said the CPB should intervene in programming only in "extraordinary circumstances." The Public Broadcasting Act prohibits CPB from interfering with public TV's programming.

NEW PROGRAMMER: In addition to stacking the board of CBP, the administration hired Michael Pack, a producer with close ties to the Bush administration. In 2002, Pack greeted Mitchell at Vice President Cheney's house and proceeded to push a children's series featuring the vice president's wife, Lynn Cheney. Just weeks after pitching the show to PBS programmers – who found the whole idea "inappropriate" – Pack was appointed senior vice-president for television programming for the CPB, "which dispenses federal funding to PBS and local stations."

COMING UP NEXT: The partisan CPB has already begun to have an effect: the hosts of PBS's two new public affairs programs are right-wing CNN commentator Tucker Carlson and Paul Gigot, of the Wall Street Journal's editorial board (which once called for the "complete withdrawal" of federal funding for PBS). Moyers's former newsmagazine, which also came under attack during a CBP Board meeting last winter (one member reportedly screamed, "You've got to get rid of Moyers!"), has been zero funded and cut from an hour to thirty minutes. And President Bush has "ordered an internal review" of "Postcards with Buster," a show the Education Department once praised as helping kids learn to read and giving them a "greater understanding and appreciation of the varied cultures in North America."

ON THE FRONT LINES: On Thursday, PBS found itself in the middle of another controversy when the producers of a "Frontline" documentary about U.S. combat troops in Iraq criticized the channel's decision "to send member stations an edited satellite feed of the program that cut out profanity used by soldiers." The channel "opted to change from practice" by sending only the edited version of the show and forcing stations to "sign a legal waiver indemnifying PBS" if they want to get the unedited version. The producers charge PBS is bowing to concern about Federal Communications Commission indecency rules and that the network should "stand firm" for the "principle of editorial independence." The latest dust-up highlights the "inside-the-Beltway environment in which PBS is forced to operate, where funding concerns often trump programming decisions, and the fear of upsetting conservatives has become a driving force."

"What good fortune for those in power that the people do not think." --Adolf Hitler


"Through clever and constant application of propaganda people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise." --Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, 1923


"It also gives us a very special, secret pleasure to see how unaware the people around us are of what is really happening to them. " --Adolf Hitler


"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State." -- Joseph Goebbels, German Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945
"

[waioli kai]

"It's the principle that I object to, that someone 4 to 7 generations removed from slavery deserves reparations as though something were done to them."
Fair enough. In the same vein it should also be objectionable that people generations removed from the initial source of their inherited wealth deserve such wealth as though they earned it.

*

U.S. GNP, gross national product, is a convenient indicator (in $US) of the level of U.S. economic activity. The key phrase is "...a convenient indicator..." , describing total market value of the final goods and services produced by the nation's economy during a year.

The inherent nature of such goods and services is irrelevant. Whether goods like farm equipment, farm produce, washing machines; services like auto repair, healthcare, education; or 'goods' like diamond necklaces, race horses, designer suits; or services like hedge funds, cosmetic surgery, advertising ... present and future value to family, community, society, value to humanity is not what determines GNP value. Market value is the GNP scale of measurement. Market value has no direct correlation to intrinsic value or real value.

Market value is fantasy, imagined value expressed in US$ transactions, US$ themselves being of popularly accepted, albeit, fantasized worth.

A $US10 trillion GNP is a total of real and fantasy value, fantasy value be the greater and faster growing for the U.S. economy.

Even Alan Greenspan, longtime chairman of the U.S. central bank, is succumbing to the alchemic allure of the financial fantasy houses of the U.S. economy. Of course Corporate America has a lot to fear as baby-boomers start retiring from the workforce cashing out of their pensions and stockholdings. Corporate America will be in a hell of a lot worse shape down the road in the not-to-distant future than will be the government's social security system (given that the U.S. Treasury will not default on the bonds representing the monies it borrowed from, and interests due U.S. citizens' Social Security Trust Fund) unless they can mortally wound the Trust by diverting payroll SSI taxes directly to Corporate America.

Even if U.S. corporatist elite --including of course their political toadies and patsies-- succeed in crippling if not killing the SSI trust fund, diverting workers' SSI taxes and supposed matching contributions from employers...even if they succeed at pulling off that scam, they cannot alter a basic law of the universe: "Thou Cannot Create Something From Nothing" .

Decades of financial fraud, deceit and fiscal subterfuge have given the appearance that such a law does not apply to U.S. corporatist capitalism, that real value can be created from nothing. A seemingly eternal fountain of corporate mergers and divestitures, strategic sales and bankruptcies, has produced for some, for the time being, a general image of enhanced value, worth and substance of Corporate America. It is an image that the nation's corporate elites' Cheerleader in Chief is expected --indeed paid, by such elites of the corporatist democracy-- to capitalize on while the image, the illusion persists.

Something from nothing? That is exactly what the prophets of "private accounts" are preaching. They project there will only be two workers for every one retiree in a few decades and that neither workers' nor retirees' (security of society in general is conveniently dismissed: an inherently Republican perspective) financial security will be able to be honored by the government because the government will not be collecting enough revenue for that purpose due to the relatively (to now) small number of workers compared to retirees.

"However," , say the 'private account' prophets, "there is wondrous magic in Wall Street ! ! Wall Street is sure and everlasting in its ability to transform money into more and more money ! Wall Street has well served our domestic and foreign leisure class for years. Where money 'earns' money. Where money does all 'work' and all there is to share is money. Where two workers supporting one non-worker is a luxury of workforce. We are experts at creating something from nothing. Trust us with your future. We are your best, indeed your only, option if we bought the government we think we have. "

[waioli kai]

'We (Wall Street) are experts at creating something from nothing.'

"So when are the working men going to rise up against Wall Street?"

When/if U.S. citizen's get the representative government they deserve instead of the corporatist government corporate america feeds them, (and/or) when direct, participatory democracy supercedes democracy by corporatist capitalism...when the moral and fiscal bankruptcy of an economy founded on imperialism, deceit, genocide, human bondage, usury, fraud, hypocrisy, unmitigated arrogance and injustice ceases to be consciously sustainable by educated truthfully informed peoples, no government can forever shield from radical change such an economy.

[waioli kai]

The US right-wing never fails to claim it is looking for new ideas from the Left.

The U.S. right-wing is hungry for fresh ideas because they have knawed themselves to death on "old Left ideas".

Of course, the U.S. right-wing -- right-wing by definition meaning anti-progressive, socially and politically conservative, and, absolutely, unequivocably reactionary-- would like "the Left" to toss them something they could chew on, something they could react to. They are starving in the idelogical sewer of their own creation.

[waioli kai]

Reactionary

A reactionary (sometimes: reactionist) is someone who seeks to restore conditions to those of a previous era. The political attitude of a reactionary is reaction, reactionism. Reaction is always presented against something that it opposes. Reactionary comes from the French word réactionnaire , coined in the early 19th century.

It was the first of the two words coined (the other being conservative, from the French word conservateur) for the opposition to the French revolution. "In parliamentary usage, the monarchists were commonly referred to as the Right, although they were often called Reactionaries." (1) A reactionary is sometimes described as an extreme conservative, but whereas a conservative seeks, in the simplest terms, to preserve the status quo , a reactionary seeks to return to the situation of a prior time. In particular the term is used to describe those who are seen to oppose "progress" and particularly revolutionary change , and is used in revolutionary contexts interchangeably with the word counterrevolutionary.

Classical 19th century reactionaries and their heirs idealized either feudalism or the pre-modern era that preceded the Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution when economies were largely agrarian, the landed aristocracy (the financially "well-connected") dominated society, an hereditary king was on the throne and the church was the moral centre of society. Thus, reactionaries once favored the aristocracy over the middle class and the working class, even though they later favored the conservative bourgeoisie. In that context, reactionaries are against democracy and parliamentarism.

Reactionary is nowadays mostly used pejoratively by political groups, especially those of the "left-wing", to qualify politicians that they accuse of wanting to reverse (when not outright destroy) some progress (in the U.S., such progress as international cooperation, Social Security, civil justice, war crimes conventions, scientific facts) and that they claim has been beneficial to society.

In Marxist terminology, "reactionary" is generally used with a pejorative meaning, to refer to supporters of feudalism, capitalism or fascism (feudalists and fascists are considered the most reactionary, while left-wing capitalists are considered the least reactionary).

The term may be also be used in self-description by people who believe in strict obedience to a god or to various social structures that they consider immutable (the social hierarchy, the "natural law", the "original laws of the state", the "loyalty to one's tribe").

The term "reaction" appeared in Europe during the French Revolution, when conservative, and especially Catholic, forces organized to oppose the changes brought by the revolution and to fight to preserve the authority of the Church and Crown.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactionary

..

[waioli kai]

"And the left has won how many elections lately?"
Elections whose results and mandates were not subverted either covertly or overtly by employees/agents of the government by, for and of Corporate America?

"It would seem that U.S.elections under our form of government has been be a good test of ideas." "Our" form of government? Corporate America's government, the U.S.?The U.S. Government is a corporatist economy's/world's dream come true of nations worshiping at the altar of corporatist/state capitalism: any contrasting ideology is crucified in fields jingoistic righteousness...to the cheers of a great majority of deluded U.S. citizens.


"...the left, including the Democratic Party..." The Democratic Party is only "left" when contrasted to the fascistically "right"ward location of what has become "the center" in U.S. politics. The Democratic Party is not Left, it is just not yet Republican.

[waioli kai]

Wall Street abyss, not mere sinkhole:

"Who is going to pay the exorbitant fees charged by brokers?
Most brokers charge in excess of $35.00 per transaction for even a minimal purchase of stock. Those people who earn so little that they will have to rely on Social Security, won't be able to afford to pay those kinds of ridiculous fees. Not to mention the costs of gathering enough accurate information to make informed decisions about what stocks (bonds, mutual funds, etc.) to invest in.
Are not the "Personal Accounts" advocates assuring the U.S. populace that as Wall Street (financial services corporations included) grows so grows the worth of "personal accounts" (ie, the "social security" taxes taken directly from workers paychecks added to trillion$ borrowed by the U.S. Treasury, all to be deposited in care of Wall Street) ? The fees paid by taxpayers to Wall Street to manage 'social security' Personal/Private Accounts will actually be corporate profits that in turn are supposedly to be shared with public investors (assuming such profits are of a publicly held corporation), Personal Account receipts being among such investment!! A giant Ponzi scheme?

All the U.S. corporatist class fear-mongering directed at the peoples' Social Security system on the premise that the "baby boomers" are going to exhaust the funding of the Social Security Trust Fund as they retire from the work force begs the question: Since a significant portion of Wall Street's supposed worth reflects baby boomers' Wall Street adventures in corporatism while the boomers are in the work force , why would not the viability of Wall Street be even more threatened as boomers begin cashing out of Wall Street in the course of their retirement. And , as the boomers do divest of such holdings, Who is going to be purchasing negotiable paper/bytes which the boomers wish to sell, if not the U.S. Government via revenues collected from taxpayers on behalf of Corporate America?

- - -

"...as boomers begin cashing out of Wall Street in the course of their retirement...Who is going to be purchasing negotiable paper/bytes which the boomers wish to sell.."
Apart from Corporate Americas' tax on U.S. workers (aka, "Private/Personal Accounts"), far from enough domestic numbers of purchasers will exist to make baby boomers' Wall Street wealth be what those boomers expect it to be worth in years to come. There should be some "great deals" on Wall Street as baby boomers, seeking to maintain their lifestyles, cash out of Corporate America on their work-free journeys to old age.

- - - -

'There should be some "great deals" on Wall Street as baby boomers, seeking to maintain their lifestyles, cash out of Corporate America on their work-free journeys to old age.'
Won't they be cashing out of their and their investment corporations' holdings of Treasury Bonds during their expected 25-40 yr. retirements? ?Will their Wall Street sustain all of them and their heirs plus all those "newcomers" being welcomed -- --indeed guided, driven-- into the greatest scam ever perpetrated on humanity: Wall Street

Even though the scammers themselves seem to be a little more nervous than usual about the possible consequences of failing to be able to pull off this Corporatist Account/Personal Account tax (from a corporatist point of view, it is "savings" ) on employees --their latest sleight of hand finance-- not that they really had/have a choice. It's not a gamble for them, it is more of "status quo", or ...nothing ..else... but a fight to the mortal end.

[waioli kai]

FASCISM ANYONE? Laurence W. Britt

The following article is from Free Inquiry magazine, Volume 23, Number 2.

Free Inquiry readers may pause to read the Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles on the inside cover of the magazine. To a secular humanist, these principles seem so logical, so right, so crucial. Yet, there is one archetypal political philosophy that is anathema to almost all of these principles. It is fascism. And fascism’s principles are wafting in the air today, surreptitiously masquerading as something else, challenging everything we stand for. The cliché that people and nations learn from history is not only overused, but also overestimated; often we fail to learn from history, or draw the wrong conclusions. Sadly, historical amnesia is the norm.

We are two-and-a-half generations removed from the horrors of Nazi Germany, although constant reminders jog the consciousness. German and Italian fascism form the historical models that define this twisted political worldview. Although they no longer exist, this worldview and the characteristics of these models have been imitated by protofascist1 regimes at various times in the twentieth century. Both the original German and Italian models and the later protofascist regimes show remarkably similar characteristics. Although many scholars question any direct connection among these regimes, few can dispute their visual similarities.

Beyond the visual, even a cursory study of these fascist and protofascist regimes reveals the absolutely striking convergence of their modus operandi. This, of course, is not a revelation to the informed political observer, but it is sometimes useful in the interests of perspective to restate obvious facts and in so doing shed needed light on current circumstances.

For the purpose of this perspective, I will consider the following regimes: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia. To be sure, they constitute a mixed bag of national identities, cultures, developmental levels, and history. But they all followed the fascist or protofascist model in obtaining, expanding, and maintaining power. Further, all these regimes have been overthrown, so a more or less complete picture of their basic characteristics and abuses is possible.

Analysis of these seven regimes reveals fourteen common threads that link them in recognizable patterns of national behavior and abuse of power. These basic characteristics are more prevalent and intense in some regimes than in others, but they all share at least some level of similarity.

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.

5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.

6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.

(more)

[waioli kai]

(cont'd)
7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.

9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.

14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.

Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not.



Note
1. Defined as a “political movement or regime tending toward or imitating Fascism”—Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary.

References
Andrews, Kevin. Greece in the Dark. Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1980. Chabod, Frederico. A History of Italian Fascism. London: Weidenfeld, 1963. Cooper, Marc. Pinochet and Me. New York: Verso, 2001. Cornwell, John. Hitler as Pope. New York: Viking, 1999. de Figuerio, Antonio. Portugal—Fifty Years of Dictatorship. New York: Holmes & Meier, 1976. Eatwell, Roger. Fascism, A History. New York: Penguin, 1995. Fest, Joachim C. The Face of the Third Reich. New York: Pantheon, 1970. Gallo, Max. Mussolini’s Italy. New York: MacMillan, 1973. Kershaw, Ian. Hitler (two volumes). New York: Norton, 1999. Laqueur, Walter. Fascism, Past, Present, and Future. New York: Oxford, 1996. Papandreau, Andreas. Democracy at Gunpoint. New York: Penguin Books, 1971. Phillips, Peter. Censored 2001: 25 Years of Censored News. New York: Seven Stories. 2001. Sharp, M.E. Indonesia Beyond Suharto. Armonk, 1999. Verdugo, Patricia. Chile, Pinochet, and the Caravan of Death. Coral Gables, Florida: North-South Center Press, 2001. Yglesias, Jose. The Franco Years. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1977.

Laurence Britt’s novel, June, 2004, depicts a future America dominated by right-wing extremists.

<<<<>>>>>

"What good fortune for those in power that the people do not think." --Adolf Hitler

[waioli kai]

"When trying to make sense of the seemingly inextricable political morass into which we've descended, one of the real keys to understanding our situation is realizing that conservatism and the "conservative movement" are in fact two entirely different things. . . . The "conservative movement" . . . has become something entirely new, a fresh political entity quite unlike we've ever seen before in our history, but one that at the same time seems somehow familiar, as though we have seen something like it. . . . Call it Pseudo Fascism. Or, if you like, Fascism Lite. Happy-Face Fascism. Postmodern Fascism. But there is little doubt anymore why the shape of the "conservative movement" in the 21st century is so familiar and disturbing: Its architecture, its entire structure, has morphed into a not-so-faint hologram of 20th-century fascism."

David Neiwert: The Rise of Pseudo Fascism, dneiwert.blogspot, September 19, 2004

[waioli kai]

U.S. GNP, gross national product, is a convenient indicator (in $US) of the level of U.S. economic activity. The key phrase is "...a convenient indicator..." , describing total market value of the final goods and services produced by the nation's economy during a year.

The inherent nature of such goods and services is irrelevant. Whether goods like farm equipment, farm produce, washing machines; services like auto repair, healthcare, education; or 'goods' like diamond necklaces, race horses, designer suits; or services like hedge funds, cosmetic surgery, advertising ... present and future value to family, community, society, value to humanity is not what determines GNP value. Market value is the GNP scale of measurement. Market value has no direct correlation to intrinsic value or real value.

Market value is fantasy, imagined value expressed in US$ transactions, US$ themselves being of popularly accepted, albeit, fantasized worth.

A $US10 trillion GNP is a total of real and fantasy value, fantasy value be the greater and faster growing for the U.S. economy.

Even Alan Greenspan, longtime chairman of the U.S. central bank, is succumbing to the alchemic allure of the financial fantasy houses of the U.S. economy. Of course Corporate America has a lot to fear as baby-boomers start retiring from the workforce cashing out of their pensions and stockholdings. Corporate America will be in a hell of a lot worse shape down the road in the not-to-distant future than will be the government's social security system (given that the U.S. Treasury will not default on the bonds representing the monies it borrowed from, and interests due U.S. citizens' Social Security Trust Fund) unless they can mortally wound the Trust by diverting payroll SSI taxes directly to Corporate America.

Even if U.S. corporatist elite --including of course their political toadies and patsies-- succeed in crippling if not killing the SSI trust fund, diverting workers' SSI taxes and supposed matching contributions from employers...even if they succeed at pulling off that scam, they cannot alter a basic law of the universe:
"Thou Cannot Create Something From Nothing"
.

Decades of financial fraud, deceit and fiscal subterfuge have given the appearance that such a law does not apply to U.S. corporatist capitalism, that real value can be created from nothing. A seemingly eternal fountain of corporate mergers and divestitures, strategic sales and bankruptcies, has produced for some, for the time being, a general image of enhanced value, worth and substance of Corporate America. It is an image that the nation's corporate elites' Cheerleader in Chief is expected --indeed paid, by such elites of the corporatist democracy-- to capitalize on while the image, the illusion persists.

Something from nothing? That is exactly what the prophets of "private accounts" are preaching. They project there will only be two workers for every one retiree in a few decades and that neither workers' nor retirees'
(security of society in general is conveniently dismissed: an inherently Republican perspective)
financial security will be able to be honored by the government because the government will not be collecting enough revenue for that purpose due to the relatively (to now) small number of workers compared to retirees.

"However," say the 'private account' prophets, "there is wondrous magic in Wall Street !!
Wall Street is sure and everlasting in its ability to transform money into more and more money ! Wall Street has well served our domestic and foreign leisure class for years. Where money 'earns' money. Where money does all 'work' and all there is to share is money. Where two workers supporting one non-worker is a luxury of workforce. We are experts at creating something from nothing. Trust us with your future. We are your best, indeed your only, option if we bought the government we think we have. ''

[waioli kai]

"The elite demand more and more while the people get less and less, until finally the core group realizes the truth of it all and rejects the system outright."
I see neither the historical evidence to suggest nor the likelihood that a "core group (of elites) realizes (could intellectually realize) the truth of it all and rejects (is able to reject) the system outright." I cannot envision today's core group of corporatist elites to be all that concerned with truth except in that they can manage and control truth to yield a public consciousness which is not only tolerant of corporatist elitism, but worships corporatist elitism.
---
"When a civilization allows its servants to become its sovereigns, the course is pretty much set.
"For no matter how wealthy or crafty the elite, no matter how oppressed and defenseless the population, the elite will invariably push things past the breaking point. Once no one is left willing to carry out the order of the masters, their hold is broken utterly and they are swept away, victims of their own delusion."

Corporatist United States, judging from the quadrennial day of elections recently past and rhetorical headwinds before and afterward, instead of there becoming less domestic willingness to serve masters of the corporate state of the U.S., there is, at least rhetorically, an apparent willingness to serve.

A U.S. militarist hegemony without the necessity of U.S. foot soldiers in fields of combat and control is the U.S. militarists' goal. It is at least some years distant before the level of Space weaponization is achieved by the U.S. that allows for such zero U.S. causality warfare.

Meanwhile, there is an overextended U.S. military groundforce with constantly resupplying, repositioning U.S. Air Force and Navy virtually causality-free, extremely mobile war forces on alert for action; but, just focusing on U.S. ground forces, whose masters' need for their deployment is still acute for another decade or so, their masters are burning them with fraudulent contracts and missions. Who is going to volunteer for that without selling his or her soul for many thousand$ ? For sure most won't be for sale at any price, in which case only an unemployment-driven enlistment or conscription remedy will serve the masters' need for ground forces.

[waioli kai]

The quote "Everything Lenin taught us about Communism was false; everything he taught us about Capitalism was true" --Russian proverb is begging for some comments. One is that it perhaps would be more proper, to call it a Soviet proverb.

Another is to consider:

War Communism (http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?tocId=38559) Lenin did not favour moving toward a socialist economy after October, because the Bolsheviks lacked the necessary economic skills. He preferred state capitalism, with capitalist managers staying in place but supervised by the work force. Others, like Bukharin, wanted a rapid transition to a socialist economy. The Civil War caused the Bolsheviks to adopt a more severe economic policy known as War Communism, characterized chiefly by the expropriation of private business and industry and the forced requisition of grain and other food products from the peasants. The Bolsheviks subsequently clashed with the labour force, which understood socialism as industrial self-management. (www.britannica.com/eb/article?tocId=38559)

U.S. Cold War propaganda on Communism was intent on passing off the Soviet wartime economy as "Communism", with a capital "c". However, The economy of the Soviet state was from birth a wartime economy. It was not communist, and (or, therefore...) it was not popularly democratic. It was totalitarian and in an industrialized-militarist century of Europe and the Pacific, it was militarist.

Without at least qualifying the word "Communism", it is absurd to say that either the economy or the political system of the Soviet state were Communist.

Communism was never intended to incorporate, nurture and perpetuate militarism, militarist ideals requiring secrecy, deception, land, resource procurements, industries and war-making products,, all nothing to do with Living which is what Communism is all about.

That is one thing the U.S. right-wing, conservatives, neo-cons or whatever they and their followers call themselves, do have correct: Socialism leads to Communism, like condoms lead to sex. What they refuse to allow, on pain of death (near invariably, deaths of someone other than themselves) , is for for corporatist capitalism to peacefully, and naturally, evolve to Socialism then Communism. Nothing needs to die into nothingness, as the Chinese are manifesting on their own course, and, for the most part, on their own timeframe, without militarist forces beating on their front or flanks.

[waioli kai]

Militarist U.S. Israel hegemony obsessively fantasizes.


"U.S. Israel will benefit proportionate to the degree to which the Middle East does embrace popular democracy."
The benefit, however, is not an alleged benefit on which the U.S Israel nationalist, corporatist, militarist hegemon obsessively fantasizes. Minus the U.S. state of Israel, no popular democratic majority in the Middle East is either suddenly or inevitably going to vote in favor of U.S. Israel forces, adventures, intrigues in Southwest Asia. Leaders of the U.S. Israel hegemon know that to be a fact, notwithstanding all of their flatulent rhetoric about freedom, morality, international law, human rights, democracy, and so forth.

So why do they, the leadership of the hegemon, persist with such nonsense? Because they want to pre-empt the inevitable rise of viable popular democracies with their own versions of democracies, U.S. corporatist ones.

Well then, what is to be the benefit for U.S. Israel from fledgling democracies in the Middle East continuing toward popular democracy? The benefit will be that U.S. Israel will have to cease fantasizing about a world of their own making, and they would have to accept the world as the peoples of the world choose it to be. Once U.S. Israel comes to grips with the real nature of, hopes and dreams of, the vast majority of humanity, which ever more true democracies will reveal, U.S. Israel will be able to allow the majority of its own citizens to pursue non-militarist, morally and socially progressive political agendas.

It impossible to prove that the United States is worse off today than it would have been without the 1860's Civil War; it is impossible to prove that the Lincoln-led North's destruction of civilization in the South was not necessary in order to end slavery in the Confederacy; and now, it is impossible to prove whether or not the peoples of Iraq would of themselves have prevailed on a course of popular democracy without first being destroyed by warmongers of the U.S. Israel Alliance.

[waioli kai]

Lebanon's Prime Minister Resigns:


' Demonstrators in Beirut's Martyrs Square chanted, "Syria out! Syria out!" after Prime Minister Omar Karami announced his resignation in a speech aired by the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation.

In his speech, Karami said he would have won a no-confidence vote scheduled for later in the day, but was resigning to avoid making his government a stumbling block to peace.

The country's pro-Syrian president, Emile Lahoud, now must pick a prime minister to form a new government until scheduled elections in May.
"We are still following the rules of the constitution," said Farid Abboud, the Lebanese ambassador to the United States.

"We will manage to weather the storm peacefully and change course, maybe, or resume our political life normally without violence." ' (www.cnn.com)
Hopefully Lebanon must only manage to weather the storm in its present dimensions, and, will be able to do so as Syria is allowed to diminish its heretofore stabilizing influence in Lebanon following the wars and chaos of the 1970's and 80's. It is hard to believe, however, that foreign governments and interests will try to tweak their way the outcome of unrest in Lebanon, if indeed the assassination of Hariri was not a covert action designed for that very purpose.

- - -
"And how should Syria be handled?"
Well, the U.S. Ambassador to Syria is on an indefinite vacation and Israel only has spies, sabateurs and drones in Syria, so whatever is to be "handled" in Syria by U.S. Israel at this point would be outside the conventions and covenants of international law. But then, that is the norm.

[waioli kai]

"... if Syria has troops in Lebanon, it's no different than Bush keeping troops in Iraq."
There is a huge difference between the manner in which Syria came to occupy Lebanon and the manner in which United States came to occupy Iraq. There is also a huge difference between the numbers of Lebanese casualties consequent Syria's occupation of Lebanon and the numbers of Iraqi casualties consequent United States's occupation of Iraq. Sixteen years' worth of such casualties in Lebanon due to Syria's occupational forces equals some day's smallest totals of Iraqi casualties due to United States's occupation of Iraq.

[waioli kai]

Permitting the populace of occupied lands to vote up or down on the issue of their being occupied is a great idea. The peoples of the Philippines vetoed their state of occupation by U.S. Forces (via Status of Forces Agreement, SOFA, etc.)

When a sound, secure popular election results in a majority supporting the presence of the occupier, the occupier stays for a single generational advance in time until another such referendum for end of occupation is held. No hegemonical occupation shall be without its legitimacy of occupation being suPermitting the populace of occupied lands to vote up or down on the issue of their being occupied is a great idea. The peoples of the Philippines did that without a revolutionary war against the U.S.

When a sound, secure popular election results in a majority supporting the presence of the occupier, the occupier stays for a single generational advance in time until another such referendum for end of occupation is held. No hegemonical occupation shall be without its legitimacy of occupation being subjected to a popular vote of confidence in a rarely* less than and never more than single generation** time span.
Next peoples' end of occupation by popular referenda candidates for review:


Lebanon verses Syria security forces
Okinawa vs. U.S. Defense Department
Guam vs. U.S. Defense Department
Tahiti vs. France
Hawaiian Islands vs. U.S. Government
Marquesas vs. France
Alaska vs. U.S. Government
Puerto Rico vs. U.S. Government
Cuba vs. U.S. Government
Greenland vs. U.S. Government
Palestine vs. Israel
Syria vs. Israel
,,,,,,, ,,, ,,,,,,,,


... ....

[waioli kai]

"what are you like defending the Assads? They have had the kinder, gentler occupation for TWENTY-EIGHT YEARS!"
What? You have a mentally paralyzing math handicap? Prove something, if it is not that--->> Sixteen years' worth of such casualties in Lebanon due to Syria's occupational forces equals some day's smallest totals of Iraqi casualties due to United States' occupation of Iraq.
- - -

"... US has been in Iraq less than 24 months and we have handed back sovereignty and defended elections that were resoundingly supported by the Iraqi people."
Your " ... US has been in Iraq....and...we have handed back sovereignty" is not even trying to be sold by your US President. He is in a thirty percentile range of approval on his Social Security heist attempt...and that is barely half of a 66% popular vote it should require (and the President, via advises and US hegemonic strategies ... to institutionalize the Corporatist Tax*8 on employees of "executives" of that corporatist, militarist state you claim "handed back sovereignity, resoundingly supported by the Iraqi people."
- - -
"... US military is the greatest force for freedom in history."
Who is one to dispute your " the greatest force in history" claim ? "For freedom" needs to qualified. Freedom for US is the greatest freedom, right ? Freedom for US is preeminent to all others' freedoms. Freedom for US is not a stardard, it is a state of being personified in US Americans, and, as such, it is something which can only be divined by US onto those peoples of less fortunate insightful, humane, engaged, progressive, freedom-loving, prosperous leadership than US, right?
- - -


** Corporatist Tax, proposed as "Savings", "Personal Account", "Private Account"...a tax on employee wages to go directly to corporatist accounts, being a much more efficient system of corporate welfare, bypassing both the Social Security Administration and the U.S. Congress.

.

[waioli kai]

" ... US has been in Iraq....and...we have handed back sovereignty" is not even trying to be sold by your US President. On his Social Security heist attempt, he is in a thirty percentile range of approval ...and that is barely half of a 66% popular vote it should require (while initially the President, via advisers, US hegemonic strategists' projections, assumed they were beginning with at least a 51% level of approval number like the number% of popular votes that kept the Executive Branch in corporatist Republican hands) to institutionalize the Corporatist Tax** on employees of "executives" of that corporatist, militarist state you claim "handed back sovereignty, resoundingly supported by the Iraqi people."

[waioli kai]

'What's your take on the Japanese, circa 1941?'

In East Asia and the Pacific many generations of European imperialism were being added to by the world's newest imperialist designers (Hearst, Pulitzer and other corporatist designers, technicians of the evolving, militarist, corporate state barely a century old; barely emerging from a criminally bloody and destructive civil war; finishing up it continental cleansing, relocation of surviving Native Americans, far still from being the inclusively democratic republic its leaders allege) beginning with the United States' so-called "Spanish-American War", "liberation" of Philippines and its subsequent genocidally persued occupation of the Philippines and surrounding waters.

Meanwhile the British Empire is a mighty tumor in China and it owns India. No wonder Japanese were led to believe: "We're next!! "

......

Japan 1880's to 1941, "We're next!!" : to be slaughtered, intimidated, occupied, humiliated in our own land, rendered a commodity for use by a greater power, or, "We're next!!" to seize, possess, rule and plunder the less deserving, inferior others, accountable to no international convenants or conventions of humanity, just like Euro-american imperialists.

[waioli kai]

Philippine-American War 1899–1913 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine-American_War): "This conflict is also known as the Philippine Insurrection. This name was historically the most commonly used in the U.S., but Filipinos and an increasing number of American historians refer to these hostilities as the Philippine-American War, and in 1999** the U.S. Library of Congress reclassified its references to use this term.

Hostilities started on February 4, 1899 when a (drunk?) American soldier*** shot a Filipino soldier who was crossing a bridge into American-occupied territory in San Juan del Monte, an incident historians now consider to be the start of the war. U.S. President William McKinley later told reporters "that the insurgents had attacked Manila" in justifying war on the Philippines.

***Note: Recent evidence from the National Historical institute of the Philippines say that the Filipino soldier shot by the (said drunk) American soldiers is not in San Juan del Monte, but in present-day Sociego Street in Manila. The National Historical Institute put a marker there.

The administration of US President McKinley declared Aguinaldo (On January 1, 1899, Emilio Aguinaldo was declared the first President. He later organized a Congress at Malolos, Bulacan to draft a constitution to be an "outlaw bandit", and no formal declaration of war was ever issued. Two reasons have been given for this. One is that calling the war the Philippine Insurrection made it appear to be a rebellion against a lawful government, although the only part of the Philippines under American control was Manila. The other was to enable the American government to avoid liability to claims by veterans of the action. ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine-American_War

** 1999, to coincide with the first centennial commemoration of U.S. "Operation Filipino Freedom"

US combatant strength, 126,000 Philippine combatant strength, unknown

US soldiers killed: 4,324 -- US soldiers wounded, 2,818 Philippine soldiers killed: 16,000 actually counted, estimates soldiers killed: around 20,000 Philippine soldiers wounded: unknown
US civilians killed: (?) ;; Philippine civilians killed: 250,000 to 1,000,000
[most stats from wikipedia.org]
Estimate US cost$ (?); estimate damage Philippine quality of life, infrastructure, culture (unknown) [/CENTER]

.

[waioli kai]

This month some statistics of US Coalition's War in Iraq have striking similarities to The Mexican-American War of the 1840's.

As of 1March 2005 (icasualties.org/oif/) 1672 deaths US Coalition in Iraq vs. 1733 US Killed-in Action in Mex-Am War ( www.wordiq.com/definition/Mexican-American_War )

Mex-Am War combatant strength: US 78,718 ; Mexico 40,000 [Mexico combatant casualties ~6000 (word.iq.com); ~25,000 (wikipedia.org)]

10,740 US Coalition in Iraq wounded-in-action vs. 11,550 Mex-Am War US forces dead (not KIA), and 4,152 wounded US forces

Iraq civilians reported dead: min. 16,123 ; 18,395 max (1Mar2005) www.iraqbodycount.net/

**** **** ****
"Mexico severed relations with the United States in March 1845, shortly after the U.S. annexation of Texas. In September President James K. Polk sent John Slidell on a secret mission to Mexico City to negotiate the disputed Texas border, settle U.S. claims against Mexico, and purchase New Mexico and California for up to $30,000,000. Mexican officials, aware in advance of Slidell's intention of dismembering their country (http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?tocId=9052384), refused to receive him. When Polk learned of the snub, he ordered troops under General Zachary Taylor to occupy the disputed area between the Nueces and the Rio Grande (January 1846).
On May 9, 1846, Polk began to prepare a war message to Congress, justifying hostilities on the grounds of Mexican refusal to pay American claims and its refusal to negotiate with Slidell. That evening he received word that Mexican troops had crossed the Rio Grande on April 25 and attacked Taylor's troops, killing or injuring 16 of them. In his quickly revised war message—delivered to Congress on May 11—Polk claimed that Mexico had “invaded our territory and shed American blood on American soil.”

Congress overwhelmingly approved a declaration of war on May 13... " ttp://www.britannica.com/eb/article?tocId=9052384

**** *** ****
The Mexican-American War was a war fought between the United States and Mexico between 1846 and 1848. It is also called the US-Mexico War . In the US it is also known as the Mexican War ; in Mexico it is also known as the North American Invasion of Mexico , the United States War Against Mexico , and the War of Northern Aggression (this last name is more commonly used in the Southern United States to refer to the American Civil War).
The war is often considered an example of the US government's then-ongoing expansionist policies in North America, as defined by the doctrine of Manifest Destiny.

Henry David Thoreau wrote his essay Civil Disobedience and refused to pay taxes because of this war.
Ulysses S. Grant declared the Mexican-American war to be "one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation" and one of the causes of the American Civil War.
General Porfirio Diaz, president of Mexico from 1877–1911) would later lament: " ?Pobre Mexico! Tan lejos de Dios, y tan cerca de los Estados Unidos. " ( "Poor Mexico! So far from God, and so close to the United States.") www.wordiq.com/definition/Mexican-American_War www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/\
.

[waioli kai]

Fascism Anyone? (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm)

ttp://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm

[waioli kai]

Open Letter to U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/westview/story/2610442p-3026695c.html>) Axworthy fires back at U.S. -- and Canadian -- critics of our (ie, Canada's) BMD (Ballistic Missile Defense) decision in

Your boss did not avail himself of a similar opportunity to visit our House of Commons during his visit, fearing, it seems, that there might be some signs of dissent. He preferred to issue his diktat on missile defence in front of a highly controlled, pre-selected audience.

Such control-freak antics may work in the virtual one-party state that now prevails in Washington. But in Canada we have a residual belief that politicians should be subject to a few checks and balances, an idea that your country once espoused before the days of empire.

;;;;

Now, I understand that there may have been some miscalculations in Washington based on faulty advice from your resident governor of the "northern territories," Ambassador Cellucci. But you should know by now that he hasn't really won the hearts and minds of most Canadians through his attempts to browbeat and command our allegiance to U.S. policies.

Sadly, Mr. Cellucci has been far too closeted with exclusive groups of 'experts' from Calgary think-tanks and neo-con lobbyists at cross-border conferences to remotely grasp a cross-section of Canadian attitudes (nor American ones, for that matter).
;;;
You would find that what is rising in Canada is not so much anti-Americanism, as claimed by your and our right-wing commentators, but fundamental disagreements with certain policies of your government. You would see that rather than just reacting to events by drawing on old conventional wisdoms, many Canadians are trying to think our way through to some ideas that can be helpful in building a more secure world.

These Canadians believe that security can be achieved through well-modulated efforts to protect the rights of people, not just nation-states.

To encourage and advance international co-operation on managing the risk of climate change, they believe that we need agreements like Kyoto.

To protect people against international crimes like genocide and ethnic cleansing, they support new institutions like the International Criminal Court -- which, by the way, you might strongly consider using to hold accountable those committing atrocities today in Darfur, Sudan.

And these Canadians believe that the United Nations should indeed be reformed -- beginning with an agreement to get rid of the veto held by the major powers over humanitarian interventions to stop violence and predatory practices.

On this score, you might want to explore the concept of the 'Responsibility to Protect' while you're in Ottawa. It's a Canadian idea born out of the recent experience of Kosovo and informed by the many horrific examples of inhumanity over the last half-century. Many Canadians feel it has a lot more relevance to providing real human security in the world than missile defence ever will.
....
As I discovered recently while giving a series of lectures in southern California, there is keen interest in how the U.S. can offer real leadership in managing global challenges of disease, natural calamities and conflict, other than by military means. There is also a very strong awareness on both sides of the border of how vital Canada is to the U.S. as a partner in North America. We supply copious amounts of oil and natural gas to your country, our respective trade is the world's largest in volume, and we are increasingly bound together by common concerns over depletion of resources, especially very scarce fresh water.
...
In friendship,
Lloyd Axworthy
Lloyd Axworthy is president of the University of Winnipeg and a former Canadian foreign minister.
www.winnipegfreepress.com/westview/story/2610442p-3026695c.html

[waioli kai]

? corporatUSt, militarUSt Fascism

US SOS Condoleeza Rice says to the world, via pbs News Hour, " The Lebanese people are saying... "

Really Condi ? Are they really ? Can't you wait for some kind of democratic process of an electoral nature let the Lebanese electorate speak for itself, without your bless ed insight full of corporatUSt, militarUSt Fascism ?

[waioli kai]

More Condidoms from the News Hour interview:
... ... ... ... ..

"The idea behind This Future... help from US for democracy training..."
Democracy Training. Now we know what to call that which is happening in Iraq, threatened upon the Middle East, indeed upon the world, if the President and Vice-President are to be believed: starting with peoples whose misfortune it is to be between corporatUSt lust$ and that for which corporatUSts lu$t.
... ... ... ... ..

"...triumph of human will to live in freedom..."
'Triumph of human will to live in freedom, once the lessons of shock and awe training are deemed by US to be sufficiently appreciated to warrant coalition with US ' militarUSt.
... ... ... ...

"... . How to support the European 3, ..."
Okay, US has Six in Asia who talk to North Korea for US, Three in Euroasia who talk to Iran for US. Is there at least one who can talk to US for Americans? <a href=http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?postid=21227#post21227>Canada could, but would Condi listen ? </b>

Interview With Jim Lehrer of The NewsHour (http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/42999.html)
Secretary Condoleezza Rice
Washington, DC
March 4, 2005
... ... ... ... ..

[waioli kai]

Valentines 2005

U.S.- Korea Relations (Feb 14): (http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/42235.htm)

SoS Rice (11:00am EST): Well, we've had a very good relationship in the past... but a very strong alliance and friendship...

FM Ban: ...I'm really looking forward to your great leadership...

SoS Rice: And I very much welcome you here... ...But as we were just saying, it's a very, very strong friendship...And again, welcome.

- - - ^ - - -

SoS Rice (11:00am EST) : Well, ... a lot of issues ...

FM Ban: "...I'm really looking forward to your great leadership..."

SoS Rice: "...of the many issues before us...have many mutual interests... on the many challenges... And again, welcome.

QUESTION: Do you have any reaction to Hariri's death ?

QUESTION: Can we have a handshake ?

SoS RICE: That we can do.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, do you have any reaction to Prime Minister -- former Prime Minister Hariri's death ?

SoS RICE: We'll get you a reaction on that in a little bit. I'll
get back to you shortly.
www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/42235.htm

,, ? ,, "US - Korea Relations" is what kind of relations with a DMZ cutting Korea in half? What did Madame Secretary say: "Well, we've had a very good relationship in the past..."

'''from
Remarks With South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-Moon Before Their Meeting
Secretary Condoleezza Rice
The Secretary of State's Outer Office
Washington, DC
February 14, 2005

[waioli kai]

Mexican-American War combatant strength:
.. . . US 78,718 [17,035 casualties, combat and non-combat included]
Mexico 40,000 [Mexico combatant casualties ~6000 (word.iq.com); ~25,000 (wikipedia.org)]

US combatant strength in Iraq today is about twice what it was in the Mexican-American War, while "insurgent" combatant strength in Iraq is estimated by some (rarely publicly by the US Defense Dept)
in 20.000 to 40,000 range, about the same as anti-US combatants in the Mexican-American War.

[waioli kai]

On the State Department's "Speeches and Remarks" web page "What the Secretary (http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/) Has Been Saying" there is a photo link captioned boldly
" U.S-Korea Relations (Feb.14) "
. The Secretary could elaborate on the nuance in her posted remarks (http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/42235.htm)... " ... a very, very strong friendship and alliance with the Republic of Korea..."

" US-Korea Relations " is what kind of relations with a DMZ cutting Korea in half? What did Madame Secretary say?"

What she says is not literally what she believes. She may say "Republic of Korea", South Korea --what she believes (like the Department's caption to the photo link above mentioned "U.S.-Korea Relations)
is that the US Korean Civil War's "victor" has yet to divide the spoils of its northern Korean province. What she believes is that there is Korea, and the real Koreans are of vested South Korean corporatUSt persuasion. Just as she believes that there is Cuba and the real Cubans thrive in eastern United States. Just as she believed real Iraqis would be cheering for militarUSt intervention against the Saddam Hussein regime. Just as she believes that mass demonstrations in defiance of Arab regimes are legitimate, demonstrably indicative expressions of the will of the majority
(such beliefs she let fly through the past week's "anti-Syrian demonstrations" ** in Beirut); she believes, however, that mass demonstrations in defiance of corporatUSt American regimes could never,
without further qualification, be indicative of the will of the majority.
In the latter case, at the least, she would require safe, secure elections to demonstrate the will of the people; in the former case, Madame Secretary has not the patience to want for elections in Lebanon.

The (ostrich head-in-a -hole) notion that the security of the United States resides greatly (reflected in $$ outlays for such) in corporatUSt$' national ballistic missile shoot down capabilities, systems and support structures, is a favorite notion in ex-National Security Advisor, now Secretary of State Rice's ideological agenda of the coporatUSt, militarUSt republic of US, the fascist faction of the United States, the U.S. .

[waioli kai]

I think this guy was standing too close to the Microwave oven and fried his WalMart brain implant cuz something's hijacked that noggin of his.
Maybe it's the side effects of Verizon, Nextel, ATT microwave towers in the FCC allowed moved into our neighborhood.
... .... ... ...

What I gather is that we in America live in this facade of moral conduct yet our international actions prove otherwise.
No argument there.
... .... ... ...

We have the strictest environmental laws in the world regarding clear cutting of our rain forests, automobile emissions, manufacturing plant emissions as well. Can you cite a source, afford a link to back up that claim?
... .... ... ...

Countries in Africa aren't immune to humanity either with their human rights violations and genocide.
"Countries in Africa aren't immune to humanity..." ?? Lost me.
... .... ... ...
Middle East countries we fight for and against have one major export...oil. So does that make the muslim world any less corrupt than the west?
I fail to make the connections you're making.
... .... ... ...

It seems the world hates us not for our economic status, but our ties with Isreal.
Could it be that the world is fed up with the ignorance, self-deception and belligerence of the U.S. ?
... .... ... ...
As for our redeemers of US certificates...it's not only our children, we are the beneficeries of our promissory backing of the almighty U.S. Dollar already!
Not sure what you mean exactly, but here's a thought along that line: With all the concern being expressed about baby-boomers drawing down on the Social Security Trust Fund, possibly driving the Fund to insolvency in the next half of the 21st Century . why is there not a similar cry of alarm for what is going to happen to Wall Street as baby-boomers start to cash out of their IRA's, 401K's, pensions funds and so worth?
... .... ... ...
But the strength of our economy proves we will not go bancrupt that easily and that our economic engine will fuel our military might where ever democracy deems fit.
?? "...wherever democracy deems fit." ?? What democracy? Whose idea of democracy? Economic engine? Are you are that many are saying that the U.S. is now in the Information Era, having been deemed to have grown out of, or pushed out of, or seduced out of the Industrial Age. So if industry is not the engine of the U.S. economy, what is? Information?
... .... ... ...
As your name implies, it sounds like you are one of the 130+ Hawaiian groups seeking power over the Hawaiian Kingdom illegally overthrown by our own U.S. government. If that's your facade then you have a legitimate gripe over the values of the U.S. Government, but before you continue to denounce this government, denounce your subsidy checks from the hand that feed you and your family first.
Who is subsidizing whom? Just get your governments to pay one, just one, long overdue bill, payable to Hawaiians: the revenue agreements made by U.S. and Sate governments with Hawaiian affairs concerning Honolulu International Airport.
... .... ... ...
One thing I cannot stand is a bitter indigenent ([?]) who just complains about their "Poor me" situation and does nothing about it yet has the time to denigrate the government that has paid for their health and car insurance as well as the milk, eggs, cheese, and other food subsidy that the U.S. supplies free for the taking for those who strive to undermine it. You hate the successful Hawaiian because they succumbed to the western evils.
You're point of view is drowning in your assumptions, and you're revealing your racist underpinnings as you go belly up.
... .... ... ...

One thing I cannot stand is a bitter indigenent who just complains about their "Poor me" situation and does nothing about it yet has the time to denegrade the government that has paid for their health and car insurance as well as the milk, eggs, cheese, and other food subsidy that the U.S. supplies free for the taking for those who strive to undermine it. You hate the successful Hawaiian because they succumbed to the western evils.
You're point of view is drowning in your assumptions, and you're revealing your racist underpinnings as you go belly up.
... .... ... ...

Hiding behind an alias doesn't give you any credibility. It just says you have a lot of words to say without backing it up with who you are. In other words you're simply blowing empty words and your time is worthless on this board.
What does using an alias have to do with anything when it comes to seeking truth, honest discourse and reasoned criticism?

[pzarquon]

I would respectfully submit that you're probably posting a bit too much too fast, if you're finally responding to Craig's post now. He posted that message on November 10, 2004! :p

[waioli kai]

I would respectfully submit that you're probably posting a bit too much too fast, if you're finally responding to Craig's post now. He posted that message on November 10, 2004!

Navigating this forum had for awhile not been one of my better abilities. cw's posts rarely are political directed...i think he happened into topic he had /has passions about but not in terms of attentive interests and fascination with, not a primary interest or talent for.

Am not sure that the speed of getting posts up has much to do with it. And. as for amount of posts per day, others are far more prolific than me. Oh well most of just do the best we can, and sometimes, as often as not, spend more, otherwise family, time and concentrated effort on products which did not warrant such attention.

[waioli kai]

SoS Dr. Rice, on 1st day at State Dept: "This is a great time for America. (http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0412/purplehearts_01.html ) It's a great time for the international system."

.... .....

John Paul II and hypocrUSy (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/06/opinion/06kristof.html?hp)

President Bush and other world leaders are honoring John Paul II in a way that completely misunderstands his message. We pay him no tribute if we lower our flags to half-staff and send a grand presidential delegation to his funeral, when at the same time we avert our eyes as villagers are slaughtered and mutilated in the genocide unfolding in Darfur.

The message of the pope's ministry was about standing up to evil, not about holding grand funerals.

" Throughout the West, John Paul's witness reminded us of our obligation to build a culture of life in which the strong protect the weak," Mr. Bush said. Well, what about that reminder ? What kind of a "culture of life" is it that allows us to shrug as Sudanese soldiers heave children onto bonfires? ....

If there is a lesson from the papacy of John Paul II, it is the power of moral force. The pope didn't command troops, but he deployed principles. And it's hypocritical of us to pretend to honor him by lowering our flags while simultaneously displaying an amoral indifference to genocide. (by Nicholas D. Kristof Published: April 6, 2005 www.nytimes.com/2005/04/06/opinion/06kristof.html?hp )

If nothing else, the Bush Administration can duly claim to be the leaders of the amoral majority of US, the amoral majority of the West.

Bush1 was content to let the Balkans go to hell. His son, Bush2 is obviously just as pleased to have his legacy be comprised of a boundless tolerance for atrocity in Sudan. He and shameless crew of sycophants and Cheney prototypes may enjoy their heaven on Earth, but should they ever meet their Judeo-Christian god in afterlife it could only be in the course of their being ushered to an infinite hell designed just for them.

[waioli kai]

Death Monopoly Capitalism & Other Kids' Stuff (http://www.socialist-tv.com/)


(a 49 minute video for those whose attention span is not permanently corrupted/stunted by corporatUSt$ "infomercials")

www.socialist-tv.com/

[waioli kai]

Freedom is on the March (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/freedom_march1.jpg) But, of what are those clouds? U.S. cities?? Foreign cities?? Babylonian blood fields?? Future outposts for the maintenance and furtherance or corporUSism built on recently past (barely, when even, little more than six generations removed from 1776 BCE)
when not otherwise ongoing, savage justUS Freedom, founded on wealth born of annihilations of, militarist expropriations of native peoples communities, where and when not mere removals of and sanctions on such peoples will sufficeUS.
---------------------

It's (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/FASCISM_NOT_US.jpg) not Fascism (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm) when we (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/crusade_1.jpg) do it (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/freedom_3.jpg).

Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski rails against Iraq war plans
6/17/2005 12:31:59 PM
by (http://www.katu.com/stories/77843.html) J. Roxbury (http://www.rightonnews.com/news/?id=12626)

SALEM, Ore. - Gov. Ted Kulongoski is calling the use of Oregon National Guard troops in Iraq unreasonable, unfair and unconscionable.

They are the strongest statements so far by the governor concerning the U.S.-led occupation in Iraq, the use of volunteer soldiers and the fact that the President has yet to talk about an exit strategy.

He also expressed concerns about the effect the war is having on the Iraqi people.

"These are very proud and independent people and they will not tolerate very long an occupying army in their country," he said.

.... "I think it is unreasonable. It is unfair and it is actually unconscionable to me that the Defense Department thinks that they can rotate these National Guard troops two, three and four times into these areas of conflict."

Right Wing Lies cost Lives (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/RIGHT_WING_LIES.jpg)
while
CheneyBushCarlyle, Inc. (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/oil_tort1.jpg)
leads terrorUSt$ corporatUSt$ efforts to exploit oil reserves everywhere.

[Miulang]

Hui Waioli: Was wondering where you went...long time no see, yeah? :)

All it takes is one small little pebble to start a landslide. All it takes is one little vibration to start an avalanche...all it takes is one little unofficial hearing on something as "inconsequential" as the Downing Street Memo and the other leaked British top secret documents to have some fence-straddling Republicans and moderate Democrats fear for their own political lives and want to turn their backs to the Administration by finally saying, "NO"...that's all it takes...we'll now just have to keep up the pressure to find out the truth.

If it turns out that the truth is more like what the White House wants the American public to believe, then so be it. But the fact that the White House keeps stonewalling and denying everything, rather than saying, "OK, here are facts to refute what the other side is saying", strikes me as being a little suspicious.

I'm willing to give the White House its day in court, but it doesn't seem to want to put itself in the position of having to defend itself, other than by discounting all the allegations without having a shred of proof that the allegations are false. In a court of law, that wouldn't hold much water.

Miulang

[waioli kai]

Hui Waioli: Was wondering where you went...long time no see, yeah? :)
Oui, a long time, in some respects. In the interim cheneybUSh War Iraq has eaten to death another hundred U.S. military members and more than a thousand Muslim peoples, and the Cheney regime has not even taken a burp yet. When the cheneybUSh regime ingests its 2000th Operation Iraqi Liberation dead U.S. soldier, opening another new year beginning the 21st Christian century, is the U.S. prepared to follow their corporatUSt regime tread over a path (a dead-end?) paved with another 1000 U.S. soldi