Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Preventing terrorism

Expand Messages
  • Mike helsher
    http://proposal.permanentpeace.org/index.html
    Message 1 of 16 , Mar 1, 2007
    • Tarjei Straume
      Interesting subject, this preventing of terrorism thing. Seymour Hersh is out with a fresh bomb in The New Yorker Magazine:
      Message 2 of 16 , Mar 1, 2007
        Interesting subject, this preventing of terrorism thing. Seymour
        Hersh is out with a fresh bomb in The New Yorker Magazine:

        http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/070305fa_fact_hersh

        He is talking about the strategic shift in the Bush-administration's
        policy. The US is now indirectly funding Al-Qaeda linked Sunni groups
        in in order to counter Iran. How are they funding it? In manners very
        simillar to those of the Iran-Contra affair of the 1980's, and by
        many of the same people who were also in power under Reagan. There's
        a lot of "black money" out there; the Iraqis are now starving and
        without electricity and water; the invaders plundered the cash that
        Saddam Hussein had stashed away, and there was a hearing recently
        about $9 billion in Iraqi oil money that simply disappeared and is
        unaccounted for. So some of this black money is re-emerging to fund
        black ops not approved by Congress, and sometimes not even approved
        by CIA - it seems to be Cheney's game a lot of it.

        Anyway, Amy Goodman spent about thirty minutes with Hersh February 28
        on Democracy Now! talking about his New Yorker article - here is the
        transcript:

        http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/28/150251

        And here is the download for that day:

        http://www.archive.org/details/dn2007-0228_vid

        Facts are spicier than fiction.

        Tarjei

        Mike H wrote:

        >http://proposal.permanentpeace.org/index.html
      • Mike helsher
        ... administration s ... groups ... very ... There s ... 28 ... the ... I Love Amy and Democracy Now. I used to watch her on FSTV along with a ton of other
        Message 3 of 16 , Mar 2, 2007
          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Tarjei Straume
          <straume@...> wrote:
          >
          > Interesting subject, this preventing of terrorism thing. Seymour
          > Hersh is out with a fresh bomb in The New Yorker Magazine:
          >
          > http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/070305fa_fact_hersh
          >
          > He is talking about the strategic shift in the Bush-
          administration's
          > policy. The US is now indirectly funding Al-Qaeda linked Sunni
          groups
          > in in order to counter Iran. How are they funding it? In manners
          very
          > simillar to those of the Iran-Contra affair of the 1980's, and by
          > many of the same people who were also in power under Reagan.
          There's
          > a lot of "black money" out there; the Iraqis are now starving and
          > without electricity and water; the invaders plundered the cash that
          > Saddam Hussein had stashed away, and there was a hearing recently
          > about $9 billion in Iraqi oil money that simply disappeared and is
          > unaccounted for. So some of this black money is re-emerging to fund
          > black ops not approved by Congress, and sometimes not even approved
          > by CIA - it seems to be Cheney's game a lot of it.
          >
          > Anyway, Amy Goodman spent about thirty minutes with Hersh February
          28
          > on Democracy Now! talking about his New Yorker article - here is
          the
          > transcript:
          >
          > http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/28/150251
          >
          > And here is the download for that day:
          >
          > http://www.archive.org/details/dn2007-0228_vid
          >
          > Facts are spicier than fiction.
          >
          > Tarjei
          >
          > Mike H wrote:
          >
          > >http://proposal.permanentpeace.org/index.html
          >
          I Love Amy and Democracy Now. I used to watch her on FSTV along with
          a ton of other programs that require a bit of thinking from the
          watcher.
          http://www.freespeech.org/fscm2/genx.php?name=home

          Thinking about the repeat of the contra affair is a little creepy to
          me, cause it might include another step up on a new "war on drugs"
          also. War, oil, drugs, and crime punishment are highly profitable for
          the business party, that rides high on a mountain of disposable
          people.

          I certainly want to stay aware of current affairs like this, but I
          think I'm changing direction a bit, and instead of just complaining
          with lively spicy words, Im going to put some energy and thought into
          some ideas that premote posivite change in the opposite direction of
          the Bush cabal. Mainly by going deeper into the well spring of my own
          spicy mind and creating an aura of reverence around my body so bright
          that evil dooers like Chaney will melt like the wicked witch of the
          west in my exalted and Holy presence.

          [Mike prays in preperation for yet another long interesting trip down
          into the rabbit hole]

          All prayers and blessings are greatfully accepted.

          Mike
        • Jo Ann Schwartz
          ... Hi Mike! Good on yer! Too often folks get caught up in their opposition to what is going on around them and forget to create the world they want to see.
          Message 4 of 16 , Mar 2, 2007
            --- Mike helsher wrote:

            > I certainly want to stay aware of current affairs like this, but I
            > think I'm changing direction a bit, and instead of just complaining
            > with lively spicy words, Im going to put some energy and thought into
            > some ideas that premote posivite change in the opposite direction of
            > the Bush cabal. Mainly by going deeper into the well spring of my own
            > spicy mind and creating an aura of reverence around my body so bright
            > that evil dooers like Chaney will melt like the wicked witch of the
            > west in my exalted and Holy presence.
            >
            > [Mike prays in preperation for yet another long interesting trip down
            > into the rabbit hole]
            >
            > All prayers and blessings are greatfully accepted.

            Hi Mike!

            Good on yer! Too often folks get caught up in their opposition to what is going on
            around them and forget to create the world they want to see. Maybe we can't create
            it fully, but we can start, neh?

            "We are children of great promise
            We dance the light out from the dark..."

            Glitter blessings on you and your trip down the rabbit hole...
            JoAnn




            ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
            "Life's short and we never have enough time for the hearts of those who travel the way with us. O, be swift to love! Make haste to be kind." --Henri-Frederic Amiel
          • write3chairs
            ... Hey there, Mike! I have been spending time lately at William C. Moyers website. Since the publication last year of his book, Broken, he s been getting
            Message 5 of 16 , Mar 2, 2007
              --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Mike helsher" wrote:

              > Thinking about the repeat of the contra affair is a little
              > creepy to me, cause it might include another step up on a new
              > "war on drugs" also. War, oil, drugs, and crime punishment
              > are highly profitable for the business party, that rides high
              > on a mountain of disposable people.

              Hey there, Mike! I have been spending time lately at William C.
              Moyers' website. Since the publication last year of his
              book, "Broken," he's been getting more and more attention. This
              sentence jumped out at me yesterday, and I thought to share it here
              since it directly relates to what you say about drugs. Moyers
              writes: "The war on drugs is a war against people who do illegal and
              insane things when they drink or drug." Isn't that what it comes down
              to? It's a war against people, not against the substance called
              drugs.

              > I certainly want to stay aware of current affairs like this,
              > but I think I'm changing direction a bit, and instead of just
              > complaining with lively spicy words, Im going to put some
              > energy and thought into some ideas that premote posivite
              > change in the opposite direction of the Bush cabal. Mainly
              > by going deeper into the well spring of my own spicy mind
              > and creating an aura of reverence around my body so bright
              > that evil dooers like Chaney will melt like the wicked witch
              > of the west in my exalted and Holy presence.

              Wow....

              > [Mike prays in preperation for yet another long interesting
              > trip down into the rabbit hole]
              >
              > All prayers and blessings are greatfully accepted.

              Do let us know how it all comes out, okay?

              Jennifer

              > Mike
            • Tarjei Straume
              ... Oh please please don t get me started on this again. This is my only comment on this subject: The above definition of War On Drugs is wrong. The war on
              Message 6 of 16 , Mar 2, 2007
                Jennifer wrote:

                Hey there, Mike! I have been spending time lately at William C. Moyers' website. Since the publication last year of his book, "Broken," he's been getting more and more attention. This sentence jumped out at me yesterday, and I thought to share it here since it directly relates to what you say about drugs. Moyers writes: "The war on drugs is a war against people who do illegal and insane things when they drink or drug." Isn't that what it comes down to? It's a war against people, not against the substance called drugs.

                Oh please please don't get me started on this again. This is my only comment on this subject:

                The above definition of War On Drugs is wrong. "The war on drugs is a war against people...." So far so good. The problem is the "who" - "war against people who. Who what? Doing insane and illegal things when high? Like serial killing maybe? Engaging in holocaust denial perhaps? The war on drugs is not limited to substance users who do insane things, or illegal things (other than taking a puff from a pipe or dropping a pill).

                The war on drugs is a war against anyone who not only happens to to prefer a stimulant that J. Edgar Hoover and evildoers of his ilk have officially declared to be non-standard, it's even against those who refuse to share the governmen'ts opinions and exercise free speech. Kids get dismissed from school for saying that drogs don't kill you. If someone asks you how to grow marijuana, you can be prosecuted for answering the question.

                The War on Drugs is an excuse for the police and customs officials to stop anyone at random, strip them naked, dig in their rectums and vaginas with plastic gloves and stick tubes down their throats into their stomochs, force-feed them laxatives and things that make them puke for hours until they pass out. Drugs are so convenient, because stolen property is rarely that small except diamonds, and they don't have probable cause to beat up bums and transients in their paddy wagons in search of diamonds if the person hasn't done anything "insane or illegal."

                Doing insane and illegal things my ass. That''s certainly not a requirement. The problem is people getting arrested, not for what they do when high, but just for being high.

                "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Philipino's and Entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others."
                -- Harry Anslinger, Commissioner of Narcotics to Congress, why marijuana should be made illegal, 1937.
                (Marijuana Tax Act, signed August 2 1937; effective Oct.1, 1937)

                But we ain't seen nothin' yet. Terror is the big thing now, because drugs don't scare the way it used to. They just have to make them bombs much smaller, very much smaller, so they can search your panties and inside your ears and up your nose to find a smart nuke or other terror weapon.

                I've got to get back to my nice and serene and lofty, positive thoughts and energies to get in tune with Jo Ann and Mike H. I've got all of "Weeds" season 1 and 2 downloaded; perhaps I should re-watch some episodes. A few years ago, when newsgroups (usenets) were still in vogue, I got a big kick out of the conversations, jargons, vernacular, tone, rhythm, at the marijuana-related discussion groups btw. Just reading people's posts gave you a high.

                Before I go:

                http://www.archive.org/details/reefer_madness_ipod

                Tarjei
              • write3chairs
                ... The old cause and effect, sounds like. My drug days are long gone; haven t puffed a pipe in many a year. Yet merely being high is hardly cause for
                Message 7 of 16 , Mar 3, 2007
                  --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Tarjei Straume wrote:

                  > Oh please please don't get me started on this again.
                  > This is my only comment on this subject:
                  >
                  > The above definition of War On Drugs is wrong.
                  > "The war on drugs is a war against people...."
                  > So far so good. The problem is the "who" -
                  > "war against people who. Who what? Doing insane
                  > and illegal things when high? Like serial killing
                  > maybe? Engaging in holocaust denial perhaps?
                  > The war on drugs is not limited to substance users
                  > who do insane things, or illegal things (other
                  > than taking a puff from a pipe or dropping a pill).
                  >
                  > The war on drugs is a war against anyone who not
                  > only happens to to prefer a stimulant that J. Edgar
                  > Hoover and evildoers of his ilk have officially
                  > declared to be non-standard, it's even against those
                  > who refuse to share the governmen'ts opinions and
                  > exercise free speech.
                  > Kids get dismissed from school for saying that drogs
                  > don't kill you.
                  > If someone asks you how to grow marijuana, you can
                  > be prosecuted for answering the question.
                  >
                  > The War on Drugs is an excuse for the police and
                  > customs officials to stop anyone at random, strip
                  > them naked, dig in their rectums and vaginas with
                  > plastic gloves and stick tubes down their throats
                  > into their stomochs, force-feed them laxatives and
                  > things that make them puke for hours until they
                  > pass out. Drugs are so convenient, because stolen
                  > property is rarely that small except diamonds, and
                  > they don't have probable cause to beat up bums and
                  > transients in their paddy wagons in search of diamonds
                  > if the person hasn't done anything "insane or illegal."
                  >
                  > Doing insane and illegal things my ass. That''s
                  > certainly not a requirement. The problem is people
                  > getting arrested, not for what they do when high,
                  > but just for being high.

                  The old cause and effect, sounds like. My "drug days"
                  are long gone; haven't puffed a pipe in many a year.
                  Yet merely being high is hardly cause for arrest,
                  although that's the reality. People *are* arrested
                  for it, while driving that way, for example. But
                  what about just being out in public that way, even
                  if no substance is found on your person? Is that
                  a crime? Can "highness" be proven? With drug testing,
                  yes. Then what? I *choose* not to imbibe anymore,
                  not for any fear of being caught but just because
                  there's no place for it in my life. It doesn't add
                  any value and, thus, I don't think about it much.

                  This is not really a related issue, but it sort of
                  is, in the way that it affects people. There is an
                  issue at large here in my community; I haven't been
                  paying much attention to it other than noticing
                  it's created a lot of controversy and strife. This
                  is the issue of illegal immigration and its effects
                  in neighborhoods. One one level, I say I don't care
                  because it doesn't directly affect me. If someone
                  is here illegally, managed to sneak into the country,
                  how does that affect *me* unless the person somehow
                  infringes upon my life. It's kind of a ripple effect,
                  though, like tossing a stone in water and watching
                  what happens. The illegal person must live, find
                  means of support somehow; and the choices s/he makes
                  can indeed affect me in some way, small or great.
                  What I'm getting at here is that with regard to
                  illegal immigrants *or* stoned people, I could say:
                  "Who cares," and continue minding my own business.
                  But if everyone thouht that way, then what?

                  > "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the
                  > US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Philipino's
                  > and Entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and
                  > swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana
                  > causes white women to seek sexual relations with
                  > Negroes, entertainers and any others."
                  > -- Harry Anslinger, Commissioner of Narcotics
                  > to Congress, why marijuana should be made illegal, 1937.
                  > (Marijuana Tax Act, signed August 2 1937; effective Oct.1, 1937)

                  Why does Little Richard all of a sudden come to mind?

                  > But we ain't seen nothin' yet. Terror is the big thing
                  > now, because drugs don't scare the way it used to. They
                  > just have to make them bombs much smaller, very much
                  > smaller, so they can search your panties and inside
                  > your ears and up your nose to find a smart nuke or
                  > other terror weapon.
                  >
                  > I've got to get back to my nice and serene and lofty,
                  > positive thoughts and energies to get in tune with
                  > Jo Ann and Mike H. I've got all of "Weeds" season
                  > 1 and 2 downloaded; perhaps I should re-watch
                  > some episodes. A few years ago, when newsgroups
                  > (usenets) were still in vogue, I got a big kick out
                  > of the conversations, jargons, vernacular, tone,
                  > rhythm, at the marijuana-related discussion groups
                  > btw. Just reading people's posts gave you a high.
                  >
                  > Before I go:
                  >
                  > http://www.archive.org/details/reefer_madness_ipod

                  Boy, I remember that one, Tarjei. We had so much fun
                  as teenagers watching Reefer Madness. Great propaganda!

                  Back down the hole again,
                  Jennifer

                  > Tarjei
                • write3chairs
                  ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o4ohFfBOpQ&NR
                  Message 8 of 16 , Mar 3, 2007
                  • Tarjei Straume
                    ... She s impressive, Amy Goodman. A real work horse with a keen sense of humor, which is a must. At first I thought she was an ideologue of sorts, an ideology
                    Message 9 of 16 , Mar 3, 2007
                      Mike H wrote:

                      I Love Amy and Democracy Now. I used to watch her on FSTV along with a ton of other programs that require a bit of thinking from the watcher.

                      She's impressive, Amy Goodman. A real work horse with a keen sense of humor, which is a must. At first I thought she was an ideologue of sorts, an ideology with which I had a lot in common, but nevertheless some political agenda. That initial perception was changed very quickly; it's simply critical journalism on a quest for human decency. I'm most of all impressed by AG's professionalism and versatility and scope, and her fascinating guests. People with credibility and long track records, people in Congress, former CIA people and retired generals, top investigative reporters around the world, and her special flashback, often connected to various anniversaries, feature old timers from the Black Panther Party and the Weather Underground, - and during the break introducing Weather Underground people who were on the run from the FBI and so on, we get to listen to Bob Dylan's "Subterranean Homesick Blues" with the fitting phrase, "You don't need a Weatherman to know which way the wind blows....." . Yep, Democracy Now! is top of the line, and I'm a huge fan.

                      One of AG's most recent interviews was a full hour with retired four-star general Wesley Clark, the guy who bombed Kosovo as NATO supreme commander. Here is one helluva spicy excerpt:

                      http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/02/1440234

                      GEN. WESLEY CLARK: (.............) About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”

                      So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” -- meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office -- “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”

                      AMY GOODMAN: I’m sorry. What did you say his name was?

                      GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I’m not going to give you his name.

                      AMY GOODMAN: So, go through the countries again.

                      GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, starting with Iraq, then Syria and Lebanon, then Libya, then Somalia and Sudan, and back to Iran.

                      Cheers,

                      Tarjei
                    • elfuncle
                      ... That s fair enough, because people are also arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol (which is far worse btw) and there are prescription meds
                      Message 10 of 16 , Mar 3, 2007
                        Jennifer wrote:

                        > The old cause and effect, sounds like. My "drug days"
                        > are long gone; haven't puffed a pipe in many a year.
                        > Yet merely being high is hardly cause for arrest,
                        > although that's the reality. People *are* arrested
                        > for it, while driving that way, for example.

                        That's fair enough, because people are also arrested for driving
                        under the influence of alcohol (which is far worse btw) and there
                        are prescription meds that should not be taken if you're going to
                        drive. So that's a public safety issue. Being high should be legal,
                        but sobriety should be an absolute condition for driving on public
                        highways; too many lives at stake.

                        > But what about just being out in public that way, even
                        > if no substance is found on your person? Is that
                        > a crime? Can "highness" be proven? With drug testing,
                        > yes.

                        The problem with urinalyses, for instance, is that it shows if
                        you've smoked marijuana during the past 30 days. There are several
                        problems with this. You may not have smoked, because having been
                        exposed to second-hand smoke may get you in trouble too. Another
                        problem with this has been evidenced in Norwegian prisons where
                        urinalyses are done regularly. So if an inmate wants to get high,
                        but he also knows that marijuana will be in his blood for 30 days
                        and show up on the next test, he'll opt for heroin instead, which is
                        out of the body within 24 hours. So the epidemic of heroin addiction
                        among prison inmates is directly attributable to this type of drug
                        testing.

                        > This is not really a related issue, but it sort of
                        > is, in the way that it affects people. There is an
                        > issue at large here in my community; I haven't been
                        > paying much attention to it other than noticing
                        > it's created a lot of controversy and strife. This
                        > is the issue of illegal immigration and its effects
                        > in neighborhoods. One one level, I say I don't care
                        > because it doesn't directly affect me. If someone
                        > is here illegally, managed to sneak into the country,
                        > how does that affect *me* unless the person somehow
                        > infringes upon my life. It's kind of a ripple effect,
                        > though, like tossing a stone in water and watching
                        > what happens. The illegal person must live, find
                        > means of support somehow; and the choices s/he makes
                        > can indeed affect me in some way, small or great.
                        > What I'm getting at here is that with regard to
                        > illegal immigrants *or* stoned people, I could say:
                        > "Who cares," and continue minding my own business.
                        > But if everyone thouht that way, then what?

                        Let everyone think that way. There is no such thing as an illegal
                        person. It's something invented by the government. I was an illegal
                        in the US for over 10 years myself, actively promoting what I
                        called "the virtues of anarchism and illegal alienism."

                        Look, in Houston (where my 17 year old son lives these days) there
                        is at least one huge facility, a maximum prison in fact, where
                        illegal aliens have been incarcerated, and they're kept for years
                        and years before they're deported. Children too, and they're locked
                        up with serious criminals and have to sleep separate from their
                        parents, can't play with the other kids, don't get any schooling,
                        and many of these families are completely innocent even of so-called
                        immigration violations. There was this Canadian family that returned
                        from Iran, and because one passenger had a heart attack, they made
                        an emergency landing in Puerto Rico, and for some strange freak
                        reason the family ended up being arrested by US Homeland Security
                        and are now locked up in Texas. The boy is 9 years old, and all he
                        wants is to go home to Canada, but they're locked up indefinitely
                        because "aliens" have no rights.

                        26 years ago, in 1981, during my own illegal alien days, I wrote the
                        following poem and delivered it personally to the INS office in
                        Phoenix - I'm especially proud of my subtle reference to "wetbacks":

                        Undocumented Aliens

                        Undocumented aliens arrive from outer space.
                        I saw one in the bushes with a funny-looking face.
                        The papers say they're coming from some place in Mexico,
                        but I have seen them jump out from a giant UFO!

                        The Pentagon is worried about alien attacks.
                        Some people tell me aliens have liquid on their backs!
                        They went to Mars in search of them but could not find a trace.
                        One immigration lawyer flew to Venus on a case.

                        The INS is frantic, and they don't know what to do.
                        They're handing out those green cards, but some aliens are blue!
                        Red alert is on, and there's an awful lot of fuss -
                        Rumors say that aliens look just like some of us!

                        Undocumented aliens are roaming around wild.
                        One could be your governor - another one your child!
                        With eighteen federal files on every native motorist,
                        they'd better find those aliens and add them to the list!

                        Cheers,

                        Tarjei
                      • elfuncle
                        Look, I ve posted this and the next from my email client,but it s not showing up, so it seems to me that Yahoo is busy copying whatever is of interest to the
                        Message 11 of 16 , Mar 3, 2007
                          Look, I've posted this and the next from my email client,but it's
                          not showing up, so it seems to me that Yahoo is busy copying
                          whatever is of interest to the NSA and the DEA and the INS and
                          Homeland Security and Bush's enemy list and what have you,
                          especially with the hot spicy Pentagon memo leak from September 20,
                          2001, so I'll do it from the web and apologize if these posts appear
                          in duplicates.

                          Mike H wrote:

                          > I Love Amy and Democracy Now. I used to watch her on FSTV along
                          with
                          > a ton of other programs that require a bit of thinking from the
                          > watcher.

                          She's impressive, Amy Goodman. A real work horse with a keen sense
                          of humor, which is a must. At first I thought she was an ideologue
                          of sorts, an ideology with which I had a lot in common, but
                          nevertheless some political agenda. That initial perception was
                          changed very quickly; it's simply critical journalism on a quest for
                          human decency. I'm most of all impressed by AG's professionalism and
                          versatility and scope, and her fascinating guests. People with
                          credibility and long track records, people in Congress, former CIA
                          people and retired generals, top investigative reporters around the
                          world, and her special flashback, often connected to various
                          anniversaries, feature old timers from the Black Panther Party and
                          the Weather Underground, - and during the break introducing Weather
                          Underground people who were on the run from the FBI and so on, we
                          get to listen to Bob Dylan's "Subterranean Homesick Blues" with the
                          fitting phrase, "You don't need a Weatherman to know which way the
                          wind blows....." . Yep, Democracy Now! is top of the line, and I'm a
                          huge fan.

                          One of AG's most recent interviews was a full hour with retired four-
                          star general Wesley Clark, the guy who bombed Kosovo as NATO supreme
                          commander. Here is one helluva spicy excerpt:

                          http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/02/1440234

                          GEN. WESLEY CLARK: (.............) About ten days after 9/11, I went
                          through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy
                          Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of
                          the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of
                          the generals called me in. He said, "Sir, you've got to come in and
                          talk to me a second." I said, "Well, you're too busy." He said, "No,
                          no." He says, "We've made the decision we're going to war with
                          Iraq." This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, "We're
                          going to war with Iraq? Why?" He said, "I don't know." He said, "I
                          guess they don't know what else to do." So I said, "Well, did they
                          find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?" He said, "No,
                          no." He says, "There's nothing new that way. They just made the
                          decision to go to war with Iraq." He said, "I guess it's like we
                          don't know what to do about terrorists, but we've got a good
                          military and we can take down governments." And he said, "I guess if
                          the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a
                          nail."

                          So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we
                          were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, "Are we still going to war with
                          Iraq?" And he said, "Oh, it's worse than that." He reached over on
                          his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, "I just got
                          this down from upstairs" -- meaning the Secretary of Defense's
                          office -- "today." And he said, "This is a memo that describes how
                          we're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with
                          Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing
                          off, Iran." I said, "Is it classified?" He said, "Yes, sir." I
                          said, "Well, don't show it to me." And I saw him a year or so ago,
                          and I said, "You remember that?" He said, "Sir, I didn't show you
                          that memo! I didn't show it to you!"

                          AMY GOODMAN: I'm sorry. What did you say his name was?

                          GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I'm not going to give you his name.

                          AMY GOODMAN: So, go through the countries again.

                          GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, starting with Iraq, then Syria and Lebanon,
                          then Libya, then Somalia and Sudan, and back to Iran.

                          Cheers,

                          Tarjei
                        • kmlightseeker
                          Hi Mike, ... Interesting idea and one that should be given serious thought to. However, I wonder whose interests this will be serving. Sure, assuming this
                          Message 12 of 16 , Mar 4, 2007
                            Hi Mike,


                            Mike H wrote:
                            >
                            > http://proposal.permanentpeace.org/index.html
                            >

                            Interesting idea and one that should be given serious thought to.

                            However, I wonder whose interests this will be serving. Sure, assuming
                            this works, there will be greater peace but will there be a greater
                            sense of wellbeing among *all* levels in the world's population?

                            Will there be both prosperity and sustenance for all? Will there be
                            equity and fairness for all in the peaceable society, or will this
                            continuous peace serve to create a more passive, compliant society?


                            Regards,

                            Keith
                          • write3chairs
                            ... Please forgive me for snipping all that came before this. I just wanted to say thank you for such an enlightening post. When saying illegal, one must
                            Message 13 of 16 , Mar 4, 2007
                              --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "elfuncle" wrote:

                              > Undocumented Aliens
                              >
                              > Undocumented aliens arrive from outer space.
                              > I saw one in the bushes with a funny-looking face.
                              > The papers say they're coming from some place in Mexico,
                              > but I have seen them jump out from a giant UFO!
                              >
                              > The Pentagon is worried about alien attacks.
                              > Some people tell me aliens have liquid on their backs!
                              > They went to Mars in search of them but could not find a trace.
                              > One immigration lawyer flew to Venus on a case.
                              >
                              > The INS is frantic, and they don't know what to do.
                              > They're handing out those green cards, but some aliens are blue!
                              > Red alert is on, and there's an awful lot of fuss -
                              > Rumors say that aliens look just like some of us!
                              >
                              > Undocumented aliens are roaming around wild.
                              > One could be your governor - another one your child!
                              > With eighteen federal files on every native motorist,
                              > they'd better find those aliens and add them to the list!

                              Please forgive me for "snipping" all that came before this. I just
                              wanted to say thank you for such an enlightening post. When
                              saying "illegal," one must ask: According to *whose* laws? What is
                              happening with regard to immigration here now is that people of
                              Hispanic heritage are being targeted for discrimination, and that is
                              wrong. This is why all the controversy and hurt feelings
                              (justifiably) are happening. It's kind of like the Black person who
                              gets pulled over by the racist cop, simply for being Black. Same deal
                              with Hispanic people, who are under scrutiny because the "illegals"
                              here happen to be of that same heritage. Injustice is sometimes hard
                              to fight for, especially when a person is in the midst of it.

                              I think of Eli Wiesel, Holocaust survivor who said some very
                              significant things with regard to his situation. He mistrusts words
                              to convey accurately the horror of what he experienced in the death
                              camps. He asks, "How does one describe the indescribable? How does
                              one use restraint in recreating the fall of mankind and the eclipse
                              of the gods? And then, how can one be sure that the words, once
                              uttered, will not betray, distort the message they bear?"

                              Some things in life are that serious. He goes on: "So heavy was my
                              anguish that I made a vow not to speak, not to touch upon the
                              essential for at least ten years...."

                              Think of what he is saying here. This is a man who suffered
                              unspeakable injustice, evil so great that it silenced him.

                              Wiesel comes to this: "Maybe in a mystical way I thought I could
                              purify language before using it for the sacred purpose of
                              communicating the uncommunicable." He wanted to do it right, for
                              justice to be served, finally.

                              Thanks again, Tarjei.

                              Jennifer
                            • elfuncle
                              ... is ... Oh yes, hispanics have always been racially profiled, targeted, for suspicion of illegal alienism. And the irony is that most of them are Indians,
                              Message 14 of 16 , Mar 4, 2007
                                Jennifer wrote:

                                > Please forgive me for "snipping" all that came before this. I just
                                > wanted to say thank you for such an enlightening post. When
                                > saying "illegal," one must ask: According to *whose* laws? What is
                                > happening with regard to immigration here now is that people of
                                > Hispanic heritage are being targeted for discrimination, and that
                                is
                                > wrong. This is why all the controversy and hurt feelings
                                > (justifiably) are happening.

                                Oh yes, hispanics have always been racially profiled, targeted, for
                                suspicion of illegal alienism. And the irony is that most of them
                                are Indians, Spanish speaking Indians, whose ancestors were in North
                                America long before there were any white people there or any US-
                                Mexican border. As I said, I was an illegal alien for over ten years
                                by overstaying my six months' visa. But it wasn't a problem, not
                                even with my special type of name, because I was white, I was blue-
                                eyed, I spoke fluent American English and so on. The illegal alien
                                thing is basically racist; white Europeans, Canadians, and
                                Australians have no problems - well, not before the Patriot Act
                                anyway; now it's different, very different.

                                You know that poem, "Undocumented Aliens," which I wrote in Phoenix
                                in 1981, do you know what brought it on? I was a cab driver in
                                Phoenix in those days, and sometimes I had some interesting
                                assignments, I got the cab full of Mexicans who didn't speak a word
                                of English, but they managed to direct me, through Tempe and Mesa
                                and way, way out in the desert, where they paid their fare from the
                                meter, and then I saw they headed for some bushes where all their
                                buddies and maybe families were. In the bushes! They were illegal
                                Mexicans!

                                I remember bringing up the subject with my fellow cabbies on the
                                stands downtown Phoenix and at the Sky Harbor Airport, and they just
                                said "they're not supposed to be here." I almost said, "Well,
                                neither am I, I'm just as illegal as they are." But I didn't. I kept
                                shooting the breeze with the local police at coffee shops and bars,
                                nobody knew I was an illegal unless I told them. But those Mexicans
                                were petrified. At one time I didn't quite understand the directions
                                they were giving me, so I was about to ask a traffic cop for help,
                                innocent and naive as I was I guess, but they panicked at that,
                                which made me realize they were illegals, so I let it go.

                                Quite ironic that I, who had only been on the Western hemisphere for
                                a few years, and was indeed an illegal, could live openly like that
                                as a normal person, but those poor Mexicans who had been around for
                                millennia had to hide in the bushes!

                                So now you understand the phrase: "I saw one in the bushes with a
                                funny-looking face." That's them. And you also
                                understand: "Undocumented aliens are roaming around wild. One could
                                be your governor - another one your child!" And: "Rumors say that
                                aliens look just like some of us!" That's me.

                                Tarjei
                              • Mike helsher
                                ... assuming ... Hey Keith. Good questions. I would personally speculate that yes, there would be greater sense of well being for all, to a degree. Mainly
                                Message 15 of 16 , Mar 4, 2007
                                  --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "kmlightseeker"
                                  <kmlightseeker@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Hi Mike,
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Mike H wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > http://proposal.permanentpeace.org/index.html
                                  > >
                                  >
                                  > Interesting idea and one that should be given serious thought to.
                                  >
                                  > However, I wonder whose interests this will be serving. Sure,
                                  assuming
                                  > this works, there will be greater peace but will there be a greater
                                  > sense of wellbeing among *all* levels in the world's population?
                                  >
                                  > Will there be both prosperity and sustenance for all? Will there be
                                  > equity and fairness for all in the peaceable society, or will this
                                  > continuous peace serve to create a more passive, compliant society?
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Regards,
                                  >
                                  > Keith

                                  Hey Keith.

                                  Good questions. I would personally speculate that yes, there would be
                                  greater sense of well being for all, to a degree. Mainly because
                                  there would have to be a greater population of people that actually
                                  THINK for themselves, and have command of their feelings, for ideas
                                  like this to perpetuate.

                                  Depends too on what definition of Peace that we use. I think that
                                  most people would agree that individual Inner peace, creates outer
                                  peace. But, in our age, true personal inner peace is attained
                                  individually, which is a product of whole human education (like what
                                  Waldorf tries to create). "Our highest endaevor must be to develope
                                  humans who are able themselves to impart perpose and direction in
                                  their lives".

                                  Individual perpose and direction, in accord with the kind of morality
                                  that RS points to in the POF, where if we're truly thinking
                                  intutively, we cannot but meet at the same intention (roughly
                                  paraphrased) would not make more passive or compliant people. To the
                                  contrary: I think it would create more lively and assertive
                                  individuals that think with the unending possibilities that are
                                  possible when we truly think "with the power of Love in spiritual
                                  form".

                                  A tall order for sure. But I think that initiatives like the link
                                  above are pointing in a better direction, if not a perfect one.

                                  Mike
                                  >
                                • write3chairs
                                  ... Oh, yeah. Don t get me started on that. You do know, don t you, that the Father of Education in Texas was a leading oppressor of Native Americans (he
                                  Message 16 of 16 , Mar 5, 2007
                                    Tarjei wrote:

                                    > Oh yes, hispanics have always been racially profiled,
                                    > targeted, for suspicion of illegal alienism. And the
                                    > irony is that most of them are Indians, Spanish speaking
                                    > Indians, whose ancestors were in North America long before
                                    > there were any white people there or any US-Mexican border.

                                    Oh, yeah. Don't get me started on that. You do know,
                                    don't you, that the "Father of Education" in Texas
                                    was a leading oppressor of Native Americans (he chased
                                    them out of the state), a protector of slavery, and
                                    much more. His name was Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar.

                                    > As I said, I was an illegal alien for over ten years

                                    Sorry, but this thought sends me into fits of laughter,
                                    although I'm sure you had your moments of despair in
                                    that situation. But Tarjei as an "alien" is amusing.
                                    (Imagining your spacecraft.) Not to make light of your
                                    circumstances at all, but just for the record, my
                                    husband was an "illegal alien" in a sense, too, when
                                    he first came to the U.S. He was a political refugee,
                                    and went through all the legal hoops to become "legal,"
                                    yet he wouldn't be allowed back into his home country.
                                    So, again, legal according to *whom* becomes an issue.

                                    > by overstaying my six months' visa. But it wasn't a
                                    > problem, not even with my special type of name, because
                                    > I was white, I was blue-eyed, I spoke fluent American
                                    > English and so on. The illegal alien thing is basically
                                    > racist; white Europeans, Canadians, and Australians
                                    > have no problems - well, not before the Patriot Act
                                    > anyway; now it's different, very different.

                                    That's right, and one can never fully understand "white
                                    privilege" from the perspective of the other unless one
                                    has walked in the other's shoes.

                                    > You know that poem, "Undocumented Aliens," which I
                                    > wrote in Phoenix in 1981, do you know what brought it on?
                                    > I was a cab driver in Phoenix in those days, and sometimes
                                    > I had some interesting assignments, I got the cab full
                                    > of Mexicans who didn't speak a word of English, but
                                    > they managed to direct me, through Tempe and Mesa
                                    > and way, way out in the desert, where they paid their
                                    > fare from the meter, and then I saw they headed for
                                    > some bushes where all their buddies and maybe families
                                    > were. In the bushes! They were illegal Mexicans!

                                    At the end of this posting, I'm going to copy and paste
                                    an article I just found that details what is happening
                                    here, the legal actions taken to fight illegal immigration.
                                    My understanding is that this is making international
                                    news, and conversations about it are ongoing. The
                                    Dallas Peace Center has gotten involved, to try and
                                    help smooth over some of the very bruised feelings.

                                    > I remember bringing up the subject with my fellow
                                    > cabbies on the stands downtown Phoenix and at the
                                    > Sky Harbor Airport, and they just said "they're not
                                    > supposed to be here." I almost said, "Well, neither
                                    > am I, I'm just as illegal as they are." But I didn't.
                                    > I kept shooting the breeze with the local police at
                                    > coffee shops and bars, nobody knew I was an illegal
                                    > unless I told them. But those Mexicans were petrified.
                                    > At one time I didn't quite understand the directions
                                    > they were giving me, so I was about to ask a traffic
                                    > cop for help, innocent and naive as I was I guess,
                                    > but they panicked at that, which made me realize they
                                    > were illegals, so I let it go.
                                    >
                                    > Quite ironic that I, who had only been on the Western
                                    > hemisphere for a few years, and was indeed an illegal,
                                    > could live openly like that as a normal person, but
                                    > those poor Mexicans who had been around for millennia
                                    > had to hide in the bushes!
                                    >
                                    > So now you understand the phrase: "I saw one in the
                                    > bushes with a funny-looking face." That's them. And
                                    > you also understand: "Undocumented aliens are roaming
                                    > around wild. One could be your governor - another one
                                    > your child!" And: "Rumors say that aliens look just
                                    > like some of us!" That's me.

                                    Thanks for sharing your story, Tarjei!

                                    Cheers,
                                    Jennifer

                                    ---
                                    Farmers Branch OKs Illegal Immigration Measures

                                    (AP) FARMERS BRANCH Council members in Farmers Branch unanimously
                                    approved tough new anti-illegal immigration measures Monday evening,
                                    including one that makes English the official language.

                                    In a series of 6-0 votes, the council members also approved fines for
                                    landlords and businesses that deal with illegal immigrants, and
                                    allowed local authorities to screen suspects in police custody to see
                                    if they are in the country illegally.

                                    The votes were made in a room in City Hall packed with people who
                                    clapped as the votes were tallied in favor of the measures. In a
                                    parking lot outside, hundreds of protesters against the rules hoisted
                                    American flags and sang the Pledge of Allegiance in English before
                                    the votes were taken.

                                    The vote came up in a public meeting Monday evening after an all-day
                                    closed meeting with the city attorney where council members discussed
                                    the legal ramifications of the proposals, intended to keep illegal
                                    immigrants away from the city.

                                    Opponents of the measures, meanwhile, collected signatures on a
                                    petition urging the city not to become the first in Texas to pass
                                    such strong anti-immigrant laws. They submitted more than 80
                                    signatures to the mayor's office Monday.

                                    Supporters say the ordinances are necessary because the federal
                                    government has failed to address the issue.

                                    But critics argued the proposals could lead to sanctioned
                                    discrimination and racism.

                                    "It's very much against the very fiber of this nation," said Mike
                                    Ghouse, a homebuilder with a local group called Foundation for
                                    Pluralism who has an office in Farmers Branch.

                                    Attorneys with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational
                                    Fund, a civil rights advocacy group, told city council members during
                                    the closed meeting that the proposals could violate federal law.

                                    The group said it would evaluate any measures approved by the council
                                    to determine their legality.

                                    The rules could force untrained business owners and landlords to
                                    evaluate a wide array of immigration documents to determine if the
                                    person carrying them is legally in the country, MALDEF staff attorney
                                    Marisol Perez said.

                                    "You're putting them in the shoes of an immigration officer," she
                                    said she told council members.

                                    More than 50 municipalities nationwide have considered, passed or
                                    rejected similar laws, but until now that trend hasn't been matched
                                    in the Lone Star State.

                                    Such sentiments and the proposed ordinances trouble many people in
                                    Texas, where many Latino families can trace their roots here to the
                                    era before statehood.

                                    Since 1970, Farmers Branch has changed from a small, predominantly
                                    white bedroom community with a declining population to a city of
                                    almost 28,000 people, about 37 percent of them Hispanic, according to
                                    the census. It also is home to more than 80 corporate headquarters
                                    and more than 2,600 small and mid-size firms, many of them minority-
                                    owned.

                                    "They're afraid that Farmers Branch is becoming Hispanic," said
                                    Christopher McGuire, a resident of the city and spokesman for a group
                                    called United Farmers Branch. "It's going to happen, and that's not a
                                    bad thing."

                                    The local debate over illegal immigration began in August and spawned
                                    demonstrations by both sides.

                                    The proposals follow a vote this year in Hazleton, Pa., to fine
                                    landlords who rent to illegal immigrants, deny business permits to
                                    companies that employ them and require tenants to register and pay
                                    for a rental permit.

                                    However, a federal judge temporarily blocked enforcement of the
                                    Hazleton ordinance while he considers a lawsuit against the town by
                                    the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, the American Civil
                                    Liberties Union and other groups.


                                    (© 2006 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may
                                    not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)

                                    http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_317205232.html
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.