By The Last Boy In Line
Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Dear Russiagate:
Sincerely,
Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Dear Russiagate
Dear Russiagate
By The Last Boy In Line
Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Dear Russiagate:
Sincerely,
By The Last Boy In Line
Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Dear Russiagate:
Sincerely,
Monday, July 29, 2019
Who’s Afraid of William Barr?
Who’s Afraid of William Barr?
By Stephen F. Cohen
Information Clearing House
Monday, July 29, 2019
William Barr, a two-time attorney general who served at the CIA
in the 1970s, would seem to be an ultimate Washington insider.
According to his Wikipedia biography, he has—or he had—“a sterling
reputation” both among Republicans and Democrats.
That changed when Barr announced his ongoing investigation into
the origins of Russiagate, a vital subject I, too, have explored.
As Barr explained, “What we’re looking at is: What was the
predicate for conducting a counterintelligence investigation
on the Trump campaign.… How did the bogus narrative begin
that Trump was essentially in cahoots with Russia to interfere
with the U.S. election?”
Still more, Barr, who is empowered to declassify highly sensitive
documents, made clear that his primary focus was not the hapless
FBI under James Comey but the CIA under John Brennan.
Evidently this was too much for leading Democratic Senator Charles
Schumer, who assailed Barr for having “just destroyed…the scintilla
of credibility that he had left.”
Not known for a sense of irony, Schumer accused Barr of using “the
words of conspiracy theorists,” as though Russiagate itself is not
among the most malign and consequential conspiracy theories in
American political history.
More indicative is the reaction of the generally liberal
pro-Democratic New York Times and Washington Post,
the country’s two most important political newspapers,
to Barr’s investigation.
Leaning heavily on the “expert” opinion of former intelligence
officials and McCarthy-echoing members of Congress such as
Adam Schiff, both papers went into outrage mode.
The Times bemoaned Barr’s “drastic escalation of [Trump’s] years
long assault on the intelligence community” while rejecting “the
president’s unfounded claims that his campaign had been spied on”
even though some forms of FBI and CIA infiltration and surveillance
of the 2016 Trump campaign are now well documented.
Unconcerned by the activities of either agency, the papers warned
ominously that Barr’s probe “effectively strips [the CIA] of its most
critical power: choosing which secrets it shares and which remain
hidden.”
It “could be tremendously damaging to the C.I.A. and other
intelligence agencies.”
Not surprisingly, given the Times’ three-year role in promulgating
Russiagate allegations, it preempted Barr’s investigation by
declaring that US intelligence agencies’ covert actions were part
of “a lawful investigation aimed at understanding a foreign power’s
efforts to manipulate an American election.”
Considering what is now known, this generalization seems
a whitewash both of the Times’ coverage and the agencies’
conduct.
Hillary Clinton, also not surprisingly, agreed.
As paraphrased by Matt Stevens in the Times on May 3, she accused
Barr of diverting attention “from what the real story is. The real
story is the Russian interference in our election.”
According to the defeated Democratic candidate, “the Russians
were successful in sowing ‘discord and divisiveness’ in the country,
and helping Mr. Trump.” But who has actually sowed more “discord
and divisiveness” in America—the Russians or Mrs. Clinton and her
supporters, by still refusing to accept the legitimacy of her
electoral loss and Trump’s victory?
Unfortunately, but predictably, Barr’s investigation has become
polarizing, with Fox News, for example, bannering each new
unsavory Russiagate revelation and the Times and the Post mostly
ignoring them altogether.
In particular, the Democratic Party, once traditionally skeptical
of intelligence agencies, is becoming the party of an intel cult
and thus of the new US-Russian Cold War.
Only a few of the party’s leaders, notably presidential candidate
Tulsi Gabbard, demur from this dangerous folly.
Might Democratic reticence also be due to the circumstance that
the intelligence chiefs now under investigation were appointees
of former President Obama, who has been remarkably silent about
the entire Russiagate saga?
What, as I have asked previously, did Obama know, when did he
know it, and what did he do?
Everyone who cares about the quality of American political life,
no matter what they think about Trump, should encourage Barr’s
probe.
To resort to a familiar cliché, Russiagate allegations have become
a spreading cancer in American politics, with Democratic
congressional candidates raising funds by promising, despite the
exculpatory findings of Robert Mueller regarding “collusion,” to
fight evil “Trump-Putin” forces in Washington.
Meanwhile, some Republicans, despite ample contrary evidence,
preposterously blame Russia itself—for the infamous Steele Dossier,
for example.
By the way, for more irony, Trump is regularly accused in the
above-cited news accounts of “siding with” Russian President
Vladimir Putin in denying that any “collusion” determined the
outcome of the 2016 presidential election, a conclusion also
reached by Mueller, thereby putting Trump, Putin, and Mueller
on the same “side.”
Ideally, we would have an investigation of the intelligence agencies
entirely independent of the White House and headed by an eminent
political figure who is not a presidential appointee, as was the 1975
Senate Church Committee.
For now, we have only Trump’s attorney general, William Barr.
Nonetheless, we should support him, however conditionally.
Rogue intelligence agencies subvert democracy, and the next
candidate they target—as they did Trump—may be yours.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51941.htm
By Stephen F. Cohen
Information Clearing House
Monday, July 29, 2019
William Barr, a two-time attorney general who served at the CIA
in the 1970s, would seem to be an ultimate Washington insider.
According to his Wikipedia biography, he has—or he had—“a sterling
reputation” both among Republicans and Democrats.
That changed when Barr announced his ongoing investigation into
the origins of Russiagate, a vital subject I, too, have explored.
As Barr explained, “What we’re looking at is: What was the
predicate for conducting a counterintelligence investigation
on the Trump campaign.… How did the bogus narrative begin
that Trump was essentially in cahoots with Russia to interfere
with the U.S. election?”
Still more, Barr, who is empowered to declassify highly sensitive
documents, made clear that his primary focus was not the hapless
FBI under James Comey but the CIA under John Brennan.
Evidently this was too much for leading Democratic Senator Charles
Schumer, who assailed Barr for having “just destroyed…the scintilla
of credibility that he had left.”
Not known for a sense of irony, Schumer accused Barr of using “the
words of conspiracy theorists,” as though Russiagate itself is not
among the most malign and consequential conspiracy theories in
American political history.
More indicative is the reaction of the generally liberal
pro-Democratic New York Times and Washington Post,
the country’s two most important political newspapers,
to Barr’s investigation.
Leaning heavily on the “expert” opinion of former intelligence
officials and McCarthy-echoing members of Congress such as
Adam Schiff, both papers went into outrage mode.
The Times bemoaned Barr’s “drastic escalation of [Trump’s] years
long assault on the intelligence community” while rejecting “the
president’s unfounded claims that his campaign had been spied on”
even though some forms of FBI and CIA infiltration and surveillance
of the 2016 Trump campaign are now well documented.
Unconcerned by the activities of either agency, the papers warned
ominously that Barr’s probe “effectively strips [the CIA] of its most
critical power: choosing which secrets it shares and which remain
hidden.”
It “could be tremendously damaging to the C.I.A. and other
intelligence agencies.”
Not surprisingly, given the Times’ three-year role in promulgating
Russiagate allegations, it preempted Barr’s investigation by
declaring that US intelligence agencies’ covert actions were part
of “a lawful investigation aimed at understanding a foreign power’s
efforts to manipulate an American election.”
Considering what is now known, this generalization seems
a whitewash both of the Times’ coverage and the agencies’
conduct.
Hillary Clinton, also not surprisingly, agreed.
As paraphrased by Matt Stevens in the Times on May 3, she accused
Barr of diverting attention “from what the real story is. The real
story is the Russian interference in our election.”
According to the defeated Democratic candidate, “the Russians
were successful in sowing ‘discord and divisiveness’ in the country,
and helping Mr. Trump.” But who has actually sowed more “discord
and divisiveness” in America—the Russians or Mrs. Clinton and her
supporters, by still refusing to accept the legitimacy of her
electoral loss and Trump’s victory?
Unfortunately, but predictably, Barr’s investigation has become
polarizing, with Fox News, for example, bannering each new
unsavory Russiagate revelation and the Times and the Post mostly
ignoring them altogether.
In particular, the Democratic Party, once traditionally skeptical
of intelligence agencies, is becoming the party of an intel cult
and thus of the new US-Russian Cold War.
Only a few of the party’s leaders, notably presidential candidate
Tulsi Gabbard, demur from this dangerous folly.
Might Democratic reticence also be due to the circumstance that
the intelligence chiefs now under investigation were appointees
of former President Obama, who has been remarkably silent about
the entire Russiagate saga?
What, as I have asked previously, did Obama know, when did he
know it, and what did he do?
Everyone who cares about the quality of American political life,
no matter what they think about Trump, should encourage Barr’s
probe.
To resort to a familiar cliché, Russiagate allegations have become
a spreading cancer in American politics, with Democratic
congressional candidates raising funds by promising, despite the
exculpatory findings of Robert Mueller regarding “collusion,” to
fight evil “Trump-Putin” forces in Washington.
Meanwhile, some Republicans, despite ample contrary evidence,
preposterously blame Russia itself—for the infamous Steele Dossier,
for example.
By the way, for more irony, Trump is regularly accused in the
above-cited news accounts of “siding with” Russian President
Vladimir Putin in denying that any “collusion” determined the
outcome of the 2016 presidential election, a conclusion also
reached by Mueller, thereby putting Trump, Putin, and Mueller
on the same “side.”
Ideally, we would have an investigation of the intelligence agencies
entirely independent of the White House and headed by an eminent
political figure who is not a presidential appointee, as was the 1975
Senate Church Committee.
For now, we have only Trump’s attorney general, William Barr.
Nonetheless, we should support him, however conditionally.
Rogue intelligence agencies subvert democracy, and the next
candidate they target—as they did Trump—may be yours.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51941.htm
Saturday, July 27, 2019
Dear Attorney General William Barr
Dear Attorney General William Barr
By The Last Boy In Line
Saturday, July 27, 2019
Dear Attorney General William Barr:
Sincerely,
By The Last Boy In Line
Saturday, July 27, 2019
Dear Attorney General William Barr:
Sincerely,
Thursday, July 25, 2019
What Goes Around
What Goes Around
By James Howard Kunstler
Information Clearing House
Thursday, July 25, 2019
Just how dead is the RussiaGate story — and how brain-dead are
the House Democratic Committee chairmen, Nadler (Judiciary
Committee) and Schiff (Intelligence Committee) to haul
RussiaGate’s front-man, Robert Mueller back into the spotlight
where the next thing to roll over and die will be Mr. Mueller’s
evanescent reputation?
The entrapment operation that was the Special Counsel’s covert
mission has turned out to be Mr. Mueller own personal booby-trap,
prompting the question: is it possible that he’s just not very bright?
Though Mr. Mueller’s final report asserted that the Russian
government interfered in “a sweeping and systemic fashion” to
influence the 2016 election, the 450-page great tome contains
zero evidence to support that claim, and the discrepancy was
actually noticed by Federal Judge Dabney Friedrich who is
presiding over the case against the alleged Russian Facebook
trolls that was one of the two tent-poles in the RussiaGate
fantasy.
The case is now blowing up in Robert Mueller’s face.
In early 2018, Mr. Mueller sold a DC grand jury on producing
indictments against a Russian outfit called the Internet Research
Agency and its parent company Concord Management, owned by
Russian oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin for the so-called election
meddling.
The indictment was celebrated as a huge coup at the time by the
likes of CNN and The New York Times, styled as a silver bullet in
the heart of the Trump presidency.
But the indicted parties were all in Russia, and could not be
extradited, and there was zero expectation that any actual trial
would ever take place — leaving Mueller & Co. off-the-hook for
proving their allegations.
To the great surprise of Mr. Mueller and his “team,” Mr. Prigozhin
hired some American lawyers to defend his company in court.
Smooth move.
It automatically triggered the discovery process, by which the
accused is entitled to see the evidence that prosecutors hold.
It turned out that Mr. Mueller’s team had no evidence that the
Russian government was involved with the Facebook pranks.
This annoyed Judge Friedrich, who ordered Mr. Mueller and his
lawyers to desist making public statements about Concord and
IRA’s alleged “sweeping and systemic” collusion with Russia,
and threatened legal sanctions if they did.
Judge Friedrich’s rulings were unsealed in early July, after Messers
Nadler and Schiff had already scheduled Mr. Mueller’s testimony
before their committees.
And now they’re stuck with him.
The only purpose of his appearance was to repeat and reinforce the
narrative that the Russian government interfered in the election,
which he is now forbidden to do, at least in connection to the
Concord and IRA’s activities.
But the other tentpole of the two-year-plus inquisition has also
collapsed: the allegation that Russian intel hacked the DNC servers.
It’s now a matter of public record that the DNC servers were never
examined by federal officials.
They were purportedly scrutinized by a DNC contractor called
CrowdStrike, co-founded by Russian Dimitri Alperovitch, an
adversary of Vladimir Putin, active in US-based anti-Putin lobbying
and PR. CrowdStrike’s “draft” report on their review of the server
was laughably incomplete, and the Mueller team’s lawyers took no
steps to validate it.
It would be interesting to hear Robert Mueller’s explanation for
how come US computer forensic experts were never dispatched
to take possession of the DNC servers.
Surely a ranking member on either House committee would have
to ask him that, along with many other embarrassing questions
about the stupendously sloppy and disingenuous work of the
Special Counsel’s team.
It was only one glaring omission among many.
The whole affair now takes on tragic contours of Shakespearean
dimensions.
The Attorney General, Mr. Barr, is said to be an “old friend”
of Mr. Mueller.
They clashed pretty publicly after the release of Mr. Mueller’s
long-awaited final report.
Mr. Barr must at least be dismayed by the bad faith and deliberate
deceit in his old friend’s final report, and he really has to do
something about it.
The entire Mueller episode smacks of prosecutorial misconduct.
In retrospect, it can only be explained as a desperate act
undertaken by foolishly overconfident political activists.
If Mr. Mueller thought he was being enlisted to play an historically
heroic role to help get rid of an elected president detested by the
Establishment, then he made the blunder of a lifetime.
It was not the first blunder of his long career, but it was the final
and fatal one.
It is not out of the question that Mr. Mueller himself may eventually
be the one indicted and convicted of real crimes against the people
of the United States.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51969.htm
By James Howard Kunstler
Information Clearing House
Thursday, July 25, 2019
Just how dead is the RussiaGate story — and how brain-dead are
the House Democratic Committee chairmen, Nadler (Judiciary
Committee) and Schiff (Intelligence Committee) to haul
RussiaGate’s front-man, Robert Mueller back into the spotlight
where the next thing to roll over and die will be Mr. Mueller’s
evanescent reputation?
The entrapment operation that was the Special Counsel’s covert
mission has turned out to be Mr. Mueller own personal booby-trap,
prompting the question: is it possible that he’s just not very bright?
Though Mr. Mueller’s final report asserted that the Russian
government interfered in “a sweeping and systemic fashion” to
influence the 2016 election, the 450-page great tome contains
zero evidence to support that claim, and the discrepancy was
actually noticed by Federal Judge Dabney Friedrich who is
presiding over the case against the alleged Russian Facebook
trolls that was one of the two tent-poles in the RussiaGate
fantasy.
The case is now blowing up in Robert Mueller’s face.
In early 2018, Mr. Mueller sold a DC grand jury on producing
indictments against a Russian outfit called the Internet Research
Agency and its parent company Concord Management, owned by
Russian oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin for the so-called election
meddling.
The indictment was celebrated as a huge coup at the time by the
likes of CNN and The New York Times, styled as a silver bullet in
the heart of the Trump presidency.
But the indicted parties were all in Russia, and could not be
extradited, and there was zero expectation that any actual trial
would ever take place — leaving Mueller & Co. off-the-hook for
proving their allegations.
To the great surprise of Mr. Mueller and his “team,” Mr. Prigozhin
hired some American lawyers to defend his company in court.
Smooth move.
It automatically triggered the discovery process, by which the
accused is entitled to see the evidence that prosecutors hold.
It turned out that Mr. Mueller’s team had no evidence that the
Russian government was involved with the Facebook pranks.
This annoyed Judge Friedrich, who ordered Mr. Mueller and his
lawyers to desist making public statements about Concord and
IRA’s alleged “sweeping and systemic” collusion with Russia,
and threatened legal sanctions if they did.
Judge Friedrich’s rulings were unsealed in early July, after Messers
Nadler and Schiff had already scheduled Mr. Mueller’s testimony
before their committees.
And now they’re stuck with him.
The only purpose of his appearance was to repeat and reinforce the
narrative that the Russian government interfered in the election,
which he is now forbidden to do, at least in connection to the
Concord and IRA’s activities.
But the other tentpole of the two-year-plus inquisition has also
collapsed: the allegation that Russian intel hacked the DNC servers.
It’s now a matter of public record that the DNC servers were never
examined by federal officials.
They were purportedly scrutinized by a DNC contractor called
CrowdStrike, co-founded by Russian Dimitri Alperovitch, an
adversary of Vladimir Putin, active in US-based anti-Putin lobbying
and PR. CrowdStrike’s “draft” report on their review of the server
was laughably incomplete, and the Mueller team’s lawyers took no
steps to validate it.
It would be interesting to hear Robert Mueller’s explanation for
how come US computer forensic experts were never dispatched
to take possession of the DNC servers.
Surely a ranking member on either House committee would have
to ask him that, along with many other embarrassing questions
about the stupendously sloppy and disingenuous work of the
Special Counsel’s team.
It was only one glaring omission among many.
The whole affair now takes on tragic contours of Shakespearean
dimensions.
The Attorney General, Mr. Barr, is said to be an “old friend”
of Mr. Mueller.
They clashed pretty publicly after the release of Mr. Mueller’s
long-awaited final report.
Mr. Barr must at least be dismayed by the bad faith and deliberate
deceit in his old friend’s final report, and he really has to do
something about it.
The entire Mueller episode smacks of prosecutorial misconduct.
In retrospect, it can only be explained as a desperate act
undertaken by foolishly overconfident political activists.
If Mr. Mueller thought he was being enlisted to play an historically
heroic role to help get rid of an elected president detested by the
Establishment, then he made the blunder of a lifetime.
It was not the first blunder of his long career, but it was the final
and fatal one.
It is not out of the question that Mr. Mueller himself may eventually
be the one indicted and convicted of real crimes against the people
of the United States.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51969.htm
Tuesday, July 23, 2019
Dear National Debt
Dear National Debt
By The Last Boy In Line
Tuesday, July 23, 2019
Dear National Debt:
Sincerely,
By The Last Boy In Line
Tuesday, July 23, 2019
Dear National Debt:
Sincerely,
Sunday, July 21, 2019
Patriotism, Law, and Allegiance
Patriotism, Law, and Allegiance
By James Rothenberg
Information Clearing House
Sunday, July 21, 2019
Patriotism (noun): love for or devotion to one’s country
— Merriam-Webster —
Let’s go a little further with this and break it down.
ism (noun):
1: a distinctive doctrine, cause, or theory
2: an oppressive and especially discriminatory attitude or belief
— Merriam-Webster —
This opens things up — as a practice, who uses it, why and how
is it used, and what are the ramifications of its use?
Patriotic slogans, closer to shibboleths (…a word or saying used by
adherents of a party, sect, or belief and usually regarded by others
as empty of real meaning) such as, freedom isn’t free, support the
troops, honor our veterans, and God bless America rely on a certain
set of assumptions.
Namely, that the state is benevolent, that it is moral, and that it
acts as a whole to represent the goodwill and common interests of
ordinary people.
The purpose of a marketing slogan is to create, in the target host,
a suspension of the critical thought process.
Its success as a strategy is complete when the host is unable
or unwilling to seek an alternative.
The tethering of the host to the sloganeer presents an imbalance
of power, creating a vulnerability.
Patriotic sloganeering makes the citizen into a host,
tethered to the state.
When the citizen is sufficiently prepared through propaganda,
the state has enormous leverage.
The dissident view on patriotism is that the state exploits the
goodwill of its citizens into a double cross, rallying them into
battle and support for war and vilification of whistleblowers
and refuseniks while concealing its true purposes.
This is beyond politics and generalizes to all states.
States are, by degree, adversaries to the people in them.
Big Brother is not a relative.
The universe works well as a metaphor for the state, a cold amoral
entirety with a few warm spots here and there.
The warm spots are necessary to appeal to the benevolent and
altruistic side of humankind, without which the state as a ruling
body would lose legitimacy.
The job of the state is to keep the double cross operative by
throwing in those exploitable warm spots amidst the cold
amorality.
So goes the step of the capitalist imperialist state baiting its
young men and women to fight continuous war, prepared to
sacrifice them while hiding behind the figurative skirts
of, “support” and “honor” and for those not paying the
ultimate price in, “freedom isn’t free” thanking them for
their service with 10% off.
Another shibboleth: Nobody is above the law
(Aside) Some laws are beneath all of us
Used to keep ordinary people from breaking the law under
the pretense that all are subject to it.
We’re all in the same boat.
The “law” is presented as a rigid body when in practice it
is infinitely flexible.
Since this flexibility is everywhere evident, for instance,
some people clearly being over and beyond the law, there’s
nothing left for the state to do but lock up small people
as continuous examples.
We can derive a general principle here:
The higher your station, the more you get away with.
The lower your station, the less you get away with.
In this case, station is not only associated with wealth
and social standing.
The police and the military enjoy special status as agents of
the state, as are those that act in other capacities as agents.
The special principle is:
The higher your value to the state, the more you get away with.
The lower your value to the state, the less you get away with.
The expression, “we are a nation of laws” is low on content
because what arrangement of society has ever been without
them, even transmitted orally?
The continual harping about this is more an indication of
its disproof in much the same way as privacy promises were
unnecessary when it existed.
We pledge allegiance to the flag for two reasons.
So we remain that way, and so that we can be prosecuted when
we don’t.
What is supposed to happen when the republic is not allegiant to
its people?
The answer lies in our history.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51938.htm
By James Rothenberg
Information Clearing House
Sunday, July 21, 2019
Patriotism (noun): love for or devotion to one’s country
— Merriam-Webster —
Let’s go a little further with this and break it down.
ism (noun):
1: a distinctive doctrine, cause, or theory
2: an oppressive and especially discriminatory attitude or belief
— Merriam-Webster —
This opens things up — as a practice, who uses it, why and how
is it used, and what are the ramifications of its use?
Patriotic slogans, closer to shibboleths (…a word or saying used by
adherents of a party, sect, or belief and usually regarded by others
as empty of real meaning) such as, freedom isn’t free, support the
troops, honor our veterans, and God bless America rely on a certain
set of assumptions.
Namely, that the state is benevolent, that it is moral, and that it
acts as a whole to represent the goodwill and common interests of
ordinary people.
The purpose of a marketing slogan is to create, in the target host,
a suspension of the critical thought process.
Its success as a strategy is complete when the host is unable
or unwilling to seek an alternative.
The tethering of the host to the sloganeer presents an imbalance
of power, creating a vulnerability.
Patriotic sloganeering makes the citizen into a host,
tethered to the state.
When the citizen is sufficiently prepared through propaganda,
the state has enormous leverage.
The dissident view on patriotism is that the state exploits the
goodwill of its citizens into a double cross, rallying them into
battle and support for war and vilification of whistleblowers
and refuseniks while concealing its true purposes.
This is beyond politics and generalizes to all states.
States are, by degree, adversaries to the people in them.
Big Brother is not a relative.
The universe works well as a metaphor for the state, a cold amoral
entirety with a few warm spots here and there.
The warm spots are necessary to appeal to the benevolent and
altruistic side of humankind, without which the state as a ruling
body would lose legitimacy.
The job of the state is to keep the double cross operative by
throwing in those exploitable warm spots amidst the cold
amorality.
So goes the step of the capitalist imperialist state baiting its
young men and women to fight continuous war, prepared to
sacrifice them while hiding behind the figurative skirts
of, “support” and “honor” and for those not paying the
ultimate price in, “freedom isn’t free” thanking them for
their service with 10% off.
Another shibboleth: Nobody is above the law
(Aside) Some laws are beneath all of us
Used to keep ordinary people from breaking the law under
the pretense that all are subject to it.
We’re all in the same boat.
The “law” is presented as a rigid body when in practice it
is infinitely flexible.
Since this flexibility is everywhere evident, for instance,
some people clearly being over and beyond the law, there’s
nothing left for the state to do but lock up small people
as continuous examples.
We can derive a general principle here:
The higher your station, the more you get away with.
The lower your station, the less you get away with.
In this case, station is not only associated with wealth
and social standing.
The police and the military enjoy special status as agents of
the state, as are those that act in other capacities as agents.
The special principle is:
The higher your value to the state, the more you get away with.
The lower your value to the state, the less you get away with.
The expression, “we are a nation of laws” is low on content
because what arrangement of society has ever been without
them, even transmitted orally?
The continual harping about this is more an indication of
its disproof in much the same way as privacy promises were
unnecessary when it existed.
We pledge allegiance to the flag for two reasons.
So we remain that way, and so that we can be prosecuted when
we don’t.
What is supposed to happen when the republic is not allegiant to
its people?
The answer lies in our history.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51938.htm
Friday, July 19, 2019
Dear Minnesota
Dear Minnesota
By The Last Boy In Line
Friday, July 10, 2019
Dear Minnesota:
Sincerely,
By The Last Boy In Line
Friday, July 10, 2019
Dear Minnesota:
Sincerely,
Wednesday, July 17, 2019
America
America
By Claude McKay
July 17, 2019
Although she feeds me bread of bitterness,
And sinks into my throat her tiger’s tooth,
Stealing my breath of life I will confess,
I love this cultured hell that tests my youth.
Her vigor flows like tides into my blood,
Giving me strength erect against her hate,
Her bigness sweeps my being like a flood.
Yet, as a rebel fronts a king in state,
I stand within her walls with not a shred,
Of terror, malice, not a word of jeer.
Darkly I gaze into the days ahead,
And see her might and granite wonders there,
Beneath the touch of Time’s unerring hand,
Like priceless treasures sinking in the sand.
By Claude McKay
July 17, 2019
Although she feeds me bread of bitterness,
And sinks into my throat her tiger’s tooth,
Stealing my breath of life I will confess,
I love this cultured hell that tests my youth.
Her vigor flows like tides into my blood,
Giving me strength erect against her hate,
Her bigness sweeps my being like a flood.
Yet, as a rebel fronts a king in state,
I stand within her walls with not a shred,
Of terror, malice, not a word of jeer.
Darkly I gaze into the days ahead,
And see her might and granite wonders there,
Beneath the touch of Time’s unerring hand,
Like priceless treasures sinking in the sand.
Thursday, July 11, 2019
Dear Pledge of Allegiance
Dear Pledge of Allegiance
By The Last Boy In Line
Thursday, July 11, 2019
Dear Pledge of Allegiance:
Sincerely,
By The Last Boy In Line
Thursday, July 11, 2019
Dear Pledge of Allegiance:
Sincerely,
Monday, July 8, 2019
O, Say, Can You See
O, Say, Can You See
By Paul Edwards
Information Clearing House
July 8, 2019
All rise! It is the anniversary of this conflicted, sclerotic, blind,
self-destructive country.
There will be celebrations.
Glitzy extravaganzas of flash and fireworks providing the
shimmering eye candy to camouflage the corpse of the myth
that is centerpiece and theme our national shivaree.
A nation built on genocide and slavery, with a Constitution
launched with sanctimonious pieties never meant to be honored,
ranking property over people, with blood-and-guts Capitalism--
wealth and privilege--enthroned to rule an emasculated citizenry
concussed by propaganda: this is the, “exceptional” America we
swarm on this day to extol.
From infancy we are indoctrinated with the fairy tale of our own
magnificence; inoculated with the toxic serum of race arrogance;
infected with the poisonous virus of violence.
And what noble wonders has America wrought behind
its hero story?
We’re told we won two World Wars.
In fact, we barely showed in the First, after Europe cannibalized
itself; and we stalled until Russia, at staggering human cost,
pulverized the Wehrmacht to win the Second.
We made the world safe not for Democracy, but for Wall Street
Capitalism, which made a killing on both bloodbaths, and on
destroying and nukeing Bushido-addled fascist Japan.
Hey, but how about the job we did on Latin America?
We turned that entire continent into a ghastly vivisection lab for
psychotic military monsters, paid to run their countries as Dachaus,
gulags, for American Capital.
What we could not buy, or steal, we raped.
Where we couldn’t install our native murderers and US-trained
military brutes to crush their people we did our own crushing--in
Haiti, Nicaragua, Cuba--and where rebellion lived, we funded the
murder of generations of defiant young idealists in Chile, Argentina,
Brazil.
The dead hand of our “intelligence” vampires is at its grisly
trade now, bleeding Venezuela, Cuba, Honduras.
And what of our notorious “Nation Building”, seeding our lethal,
“freedom and liberty” wherever there is some wealth we have
not pirated, or some native eccentric that won’t sell his soul to
our IMF ganefs.
This is best exemplified by the sickening, barbaric massacre of the
simple, guiltless peasants of Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and
Libya.
According to one sick US Harpy, “we” feel that killing their children
is, “worth it”.
The depraved Hillary, queried on our Libyan gorefest, cackled:
“we came, we saw, he died”.
Ah, well, you will say, even if all that is true, you leave out the
many grand, humane things America has done for its own people.
Yes... And what are those things?
Social Security! Medicare!
True, in 1935 the U.S. passed the Social Security Act and in ‘66,
Medicare, programs that now rank below those of every developed
nation on earth.
It has rued them ever since, damning both as unjustified,
“entitlements” vowing that inadequate, inflation-devoured rates
and benefits will not increase, but rather must be abolished as
immoral.
Their doctrinal fantasy, “invisible hand of the market” exists only
as a fist to smash the people, never to care for them, though they
are the state.
Under both duller, dumber Republican, or slick, bullshitting
Democrat presidencies, there has been total stagnation in workers’
wages for fifty years, jobs eliminated or exported, obscene profits
only to the Super Rich.
The gap between the .001% and the rest of us was not so vast
even under J.P. Morgan and the Robber Barons.
Four men now have as much wealth as the lower 50% of the
country.
But if you are fairly well off, have a soul and all this appalls
you, you will retreat to the defensive posture you know:
No matter the evil and falsity of America, it has provided you
a decent life, a home, a job, some comfort and safety.
And there’s the cognitive rub.
Americans are comfortable enjoying every privilege available at
their level, from Bud Lite and food stamps, to Romanee-Conti
and Kobe Beef.
There is nothing inherently evil or even remarkable about this.
It’s what humans do.
What is disgraceful is to do it out of willful ignorance of how
such privilege is possible.
What is unforgivable is to know it is due to the rape and looting
of the world and celebrate it... because it’s for you.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51862.htm
By Paul Edwards
Information Clearing House
July 8, 2019
All rise! It is the anniversary of this conflicted, sclerotic, blind,
self-destructive country.
There will be celebrations.
Glitzy extravaganzas of flash and fireworks providing the
shimmering eye candy to camouflage the corpse of the myth
that is centerpiece and theme our national shivaree.
A nation built on genocide and slavery, with a Constitution
launched with sanctimonious pieties never meant to be honored,
ranking property over people, with blood-and-guts Capitalism--
wealth and privilege--enthroned to rule an emasculated citizenry
concussed by propaganda: this is the, “exceptional” America we
swarm on this day to extol.
From infancy we are indoctrinated with the fairy tale of our own
magnificence; inoculated with the toxic serum of race arrogance;
infected with the poisonous virus of violence.
And what noble wonders has America wrought behind
its hero story?
We’re told we won two World Wars.
In fact, we barely showed in the First, after Europe cannibalized
itself; and we stalled until Russia, at staggering human cost,
pulverized the Wehrmacht to win the Second.
We made the world safe not for Democracy, but for Wall Street
Capitalism, which made a killing on both bloodbaths, and on
destroying and nukeing Bushido-addled fascist Japan.
Hey, but how about the job we did on Latin America?
We turned that entire continent into a ghastly vivisection lab for
psychotic military monsters, paid to run their countries as Dachaus,
gulags, for American Capital.
What we could not buy, or steal, we raped.
Where we couldn’t install our native murderers and US-trained
military brutes to crush their people we did our own crushing--in
Haiti, Nicaragua, Cuba--and where rebellion lived, we funded the
murder of generations of defiant young idealists in Chile, Argentina,
Brazil.
The dead hand of our “intelligence” vampires is at its grisly
trade now, bleeding Venezuela, Cuba, Honduras.
And what of our notorious “Nation Building”, seeding our lethal,
“freedom and liberty” wherever there is some wealth we have
not pirated, or some native eccentric that won’t sell his soul to
our IMF ganefs.
This is best exemplified by the sickening, barbaric massacre of the
simple, guiltless peasants of Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and
Libya.
According to one sick US Harpy, “we” feel that killing their children
is, “worth it”.
The depraved Hillary, queried on our Libyan gorefest, cackled:
“we came, we saw, he died”.
Ah, well, you will say, even if all that is true, you leave out the
many grand, humane things America has done for its own people.
Yes... And what are those things?
Social Security! Medicare!
True, in 1935 the U.S. passed the Social Security Act and in ‘66,
Medicare, programs that now rank below those of every developed
nation on earth.
It has rued them ever since, damning both as unjustified,
“entitlements” vowing that inadequate, inflation-devoured rates
and benefits will not increase, but rather must be abolished as
immoral.
Their doctrinal fantasy, “invisible hand of the market” exists only
as a fist to smash the people, never to care for them, though they
are the state.
Under both duller, dumber Republican, or slick, bullshitting
Democrat presidencies, there has been total stagnation in workers’
wages for fifty years, jobs eliminated or exported, obscene profits
only to the Super Rich.
The gap between the .001% and the rest of us was not so vast
even under J.P. Morgan and the Robber Barons.
Four men now have as much wealth as the lower 50% of the
country.
But if you are fairly well off, have a soul and all this appalls
you, you will retreat to the defensive posture you know:
No matter the evil and falsity of America, it has provided you
a decent life, a home, a job, some comfort and safety.
And there’s the cognitive rub.
Americans are comfortable enjoying every privilege available at
their level, from Bud Lite and food stamps, to Romanee-Conti
and Kobe Beef.
There is nothing inherently evil or even remarkable about this.
It’s what humans do.
What is disgraceful is to do it out of willful ignorance of how
such privilege is possible.
What is unforgivable is to know it is due to the rape and looting
of the world and celebrate it... because it’s for you.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51862.htm
Thursday, July 4, 2019
Dear Fourth of July
Dear Fourth of July
By The Last Boy In Line
Thursday, July 4, 2019
Dear Fourth of July:
Sincerely,
By The Last Boy In Line
Thursday, July 4, 2019
Dear Fourth of July:
Sincerely,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
