SeptiC : .

Israeli Settlers Threaten Mutiny. Yes, They're Quite Nuts.

2010-03-27T04:03:00.000+02:00

PLEASE watch this. I'm kind of surprised it exists, and Bob Simon actually says a few meaningful things (eg. 'but the Israelis have the guns.') - and you'll see just how insane some of this is...a settler leader promises a MUTINY of the Israeli military, etc. They're really insane, completely and absolutely insane.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4752349n&tag=api

The Monkey On Your Back

2010-03-18T20:43:00.002+02:00

If you've been paying any attention, you already know that last week, while Joe Biden was in Israel to supposedly help move along the peace process - Israel declared, as though by accident, that it was 'allowing' the construction of 1,600 settler housing units in East Jerusalem.

Now the Israelis know damn well that the more they try to claim East Jerusalem, the less there's any chance of a peace. The international consensus is quite clear on this point - and all observers and negotiators agree that for any two-state solutions to take place, East Jerusalem would have to remain Palestinian. In essence the announcement was not just an 'insult' as Hillary Clinton announced - and not only a 'slap to the face' as most US-based media called it - but a clear indication that Israel has no peaceful intentions whatsoever, and that anybody who tries to push it towards establishing peace (even if it's the US government) will be absolutely, and quite rudely ignored and ridiculed.

It's not as if Israel needed to make the point, despite the fact that many people, through a contortion of logic, still think of Obama as being a liberal peace-seeker, the fact is that all along he has played the Zionist game, he knew damn well what he was doing when he promised Israel an 'all-jewish' Jerusalem months before he was ever elected to lead what is supposedly the sole remaining super-power. He was making it clear that Amerika, under his leadership would bend over backwards to accommodate Zionist aspirations - whether these involved occupation, murder, or genocide.

And now...

Apparently, after having called last week's announcement an 'insult' - Clinton is now choking on her own words. It's clear that Israel will not only not tolerate intervention in its war-mongering, but will react badly to even the implication that somehow their actions last week were, in fact, at the very least, an insult.

Clinton's been bitch-slapped.

How else would you explain her statement today dismissing any possibility that there is a 'crisis' in relations between the USA and Israel? How else would you possibly explain that two days after her country and her president had been insulted, slapped, kicked in the nuts by proxy, she is now doing her damnedest to make it clear that she's not 'really' pissed off at Israel?

I mean - just because somebody 'insults' you doesn't' mean you don't love them, right?

Just because somebody makes you look like a fool on a regular basis, makes you look like an idiot for even trying to present the 'appearance' of an honest broker, mocks your attempts at establishing even the most basic of negotiations...surely that's no reason to be pissed off at them, right?

Note that all this bending backwards, all this back paddling is happening because Israel itself called the situation a crisis!

Is the USA really that afraid of the Zionist thugs over there in Tel Aviv? Is the US government so indebted to Israel that even the appearance of dignity is no longer allowed it?

Are Israel's claws so deep into the back of Amerika that Amerika cannot even seem to complain when it's slapped in the face, kicked in the nuts, mocked in the eyes of the world?

Apparently that's the case.

Pathetic.

What About MY Nobel Peace Prize?

2009-10-10T07:09:00.004+03:00

I sneezed last week.

It was a good sneeze. It announced itself to my nose with a slight but telling twitch, and when I let it go – it shook through my whole body, and went through like a shock-wave, finding deliriously pleasant release both from my mouth and my nostrils. Truly, it shook me to my core, it scared nearby innocents.
It was a thing to behold.

And now, I want my Nobel Peace Prize.
Surely I deserve it.

When Thorbjorn Jagland, chairman of the Nobel committee, announced that Barack Obama, the 44th president of the United States had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 the reporters, or so it’s been reported – gasped.

That should’ve told him something.

In explaining the committees’ choice, it was explained that Obama was awarded the prize not for what he’s done, but for what he might yet do. In essence turning the entire Nobel Prize Committee into a cheerleader squad.

In claiming that the committee recognized Obama's efforts at dialogue to solve complex global problems, including working toward a world free of nuclear weapons, the committee demonstrates a massive amount of idiocy and a great deal of disrespect to the world at large.

Are we now rewarding ‘efforts’ at dialogue? If so, I’d like to nominate a few newborn infants I’ve come across who have put great efforts into dialogue, and I’d ask the committee to look past their current inability to say much more than ‘goo goo gaa gaa’. I know it’s not much, but really – they’re trying.

As for working towards a world free of nuclear weapons – is it really that easy to ignore the ridiculous stockpiles of American nuclear weapons that nobody ever talks about? Or do they actually mean ‘working towards a world free of other nuclear powers’? Maybe I’m just low on attention, or maybe American nuclear weapons are a GOOD thing whereas other nuclear weapons, say Iranian ones, are a bad, bad, bad thing. The American nukes give you Freedom, not death! Liberty, not radiation! Democracy, not fallout! That must be it! I shame myself and my readers by thinking otherwise.

Clearly.

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future," – the Nobel Committee.

To this I can only add that the same could pretty much be said of, say – Hitler. He definitely captured the world's attention too, and he most certainly gave people little else than hope for a better future.

The decision, apparently, was ‘unanimous and came with ease' – so feel free to feel ridiculed and disrespected by ALL members of the committee. They are all guilty of being too stupid to support their own raison d'être.
The nominees included 172 people -- among them three Chinese dissidents (invariably risking life and limb), an Afghan activist (life and limb anybody?) and a controversial Colombian lawmaker - and yet - they gave it to Obamamama.

Obama has basically screwed the Middle-East peace process by standing idle while the Israelis continue to build settlements on occupied land, he has done nothing to stop them or even threaten them with withholding American financial, military, or political support – all the time ignoring (as have all presidents and administrations before him) that it’s actually illegal for the US to support Israel according to it’s very own laws. Yup, you read that right. Look it up.

If that were not enough to destroy the possibilities of brokering a peace deal – Obamamama has also promised the Israelis an ‘undivided Israeli Jerusalem’ – almost literally slapping the Palestinians, History, and Justice in the face...

Obama has also dutifully continued not one but two wars of occupation which apparently nobody blames him for because they were started by Bush. Yet, rather than decrease troops, Obamamama has put more troops in Afghanistan.

“Yes, We Can!” takes on a whole new meaning - “Yes, we CAN continue to sucker you into bloodshed and aggression as long as we smile at you and coat our aggression with some eloquent BULLSHIT.”

When Obama first got elected, I wrote an open letter to the man explaining what I hoped he would do – so far he’s accomplished absolutely none of what anybody might’ve hoped for…and the world loves him yet.

Eat it up, Amerika.

Sultans and Scarves

2009-07-30T15:32:00.002+03:00

Three weeks ago, an Egyptian Muslim mother and wife, four months with child, was stabbed to death in Dresden, the civilian city bombed to the ground by the allies during World War II. She was stabbed in full view of her son and husband, and when her husband rushed to defend her, he himself was shot by the German police because they assumed him to be the attacker.

Go figure.

For the last three weeks, I’ve heard people say, and I’ve said it myself based on what I’ve seen – that the international media hasn’t found this story quite as interesting as that of The Death of Neda Sultan.

I’ve now done the numbers:

As of today, a search for Neda Sultan on Google, brings up about 1.14 Million results (I’m accounting for spelling variations by adding up the results for ‘Soltan’ and ‘Sultan’ – so this is the total of the two) for Neda. A similarly conducted search for Marwa Sherbini (with variations such as Sherbiny and Sherbeni, etc..) brings up about 220 thousand results. A bit less than a 5th of the results obtained by searching for Neda.

So perhaps the truth is quite simply that yes, the international media, goaded by political interests, wanted to sell an Iranian Revolution but are simply disinterested in a the story of a woman who in the 21st century Europe can be killed for her beliefs, race, or fashion sense.

It just sounds so…retro. I mean – this is what the Arabs are supposed to be so good at right? Being judgmental, being fundamentalist, being basically inhumane.

In contrast, it might be interesting to note just what Marwa and her husband did when they were harassed by their neighbor, the man who eventually stabbed her. The couple did the most that any civilized democratic civilization suggests that you do -

They went to the Law.

Unfortunately, there’s a loud vocal crowd of people who believe themselves to be doing ‘good’ – who tend to cloud the issues. When they turn Marwa into the ‘headscarf martyr’ – I’m not sure they understand quite how silly that sounds to an ear not familiar to the context. Did sympathizers come up with that nickname or did their enemies? Focusing on the headscarf is a mistake, and immediately begs the question – why would anybody die over a headscarf?

Yes, it’s that bad. If you think otherwise, wake up.

Calling her murder an example of ‘racism’ is also incorrect, and kicks a ball in a field for which the strategy has obviously not been thought out. It’s much more likely that this is the exclusive creation of the sympathizers – but it is still a huge mistake. By confusing religion with race, the issue becomes genetic. The implications here are complicated and messy, and completely unnecessary – the only religion that is ‘racial’ (or ‘racist’ if you choose to see it that way) – is Orthodox Judaism – since it is through maternal lines.

A Christian, on the other hand – is anybody who gives himself over to Jesus, and a Muslim is anybody who accepts Mohamed as the Prophet and submits to God’s will.

Zionism of course, has been lifting the Maternity Clause because they want more of ‘any-other-than-Arab’ races in Israel than they can get otherwise, and of course, there’s also the historical background of the Khazar Empire – now dispersed throughout Europe, a people who ‘decided’ (never mind the Orthodox) to 'be’ Jewish.

But Islam, as with Christianity, has none of that. You decide to be a Christian, presto – you are. You decide to be a Muslim, presto again – it’s about Idea & Choice.

NOT race, and we do our battle a disservice by claiming it to be so.

What do you call an ideology that destroys any other ideologies?

Well, the closest I can think of is Facism.

Pure and Simple.

We have to think through the logic.

Otherwise - we get emotional and distracted, and we're not thoughtful with our defenses or positions, barely fighting off the aggression and not mounting our own agenda. I've played a lot of Real Time Strategy games, and this is how you lose.

Black & White

2009-06-23T21:22:00.001+03:00

I keep getting told that life is not black and white, that I can be too judgmental – that things are not that cut and dried. That the Good is not discrete. That the Good and the Bad hold hands, that they blur into a vague grey.

Crap.

Actually, life looks grey because it's made up of many black and white dots. Like dots on a newspaper. Black and white events, black and white moments. Moments where you do what's right, and moments where you do something recklessly selfish, or moments where you stand by and let something happen.

Just because there are a lot of those moments, doesn't mean we're any less responsible for choosing the side we're with at that moment.

If we confuse issues, then we're out of focus, and rather than see all the black and white moments, we see a blurred continuum of maybe's and greys.

When we do that we are shirking our main duty.

It is on us to perceive with clarity and empathy, it is on us to ascertain which side bears the burden of the good, and it is on us to take that side, and share with it that burden.

Nothing grey about any of that.

So Much For The 'Digital Revolution' : They're Screwing With Your Heads.

2009-06-23T04:50:00.001+03:00

According to one investigator - each of the new highly active twitter accounts were created on Saturday, June 13th. “IranElection” is their most popular keyword. He narrowed the spammers to the most persistent: @StopAhmadi, @IranRiggedElect, and @Change_For_Iran. He researched further and found that On June 14 the Jerusalem Post already had an article on the new twitter.

http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/proof-israeli-effort-to-destabilize-iran-via-twitter/

Ahmedinejad, The U.S., and The Iranian Elections

2009-06-17T05:17:00.001+03:00

It's an easy enough lie to digest.

Ahmedinejad is a nutcase. Look at him, he's been wearing the same jacket for years, ever since we ever laid eyes on him. He's unshaven, looks kind of gruffy. He exhudes an informal, almost clumsy air and doesn't seem like much of an orator. He's soft spoken enough to make a cynic disbelieve anything he says, and the claims that he's still living in his old house and still driving his god-knows-how-old car all seem inherently ridiculous.

And then, of course, it was his idea to hold a conference on the Holocaust in an attempt to weed out the truth from the myths involved, and naturally, it was he who everybody credits with wanting to wipe out his Zionist neighbors.

It's easy to paint Ahmedinejad as a "petty, cruel, and ignorant dictator" as he was described by his host, the President of Columbia University in New York, after accepting an invitation to speak there.

Yeah, it's pretty easy.

I don't know about the old house, nor can I confirm that Ahmedinejad still drives an old car, but I have read the letter he sent to George Bush Jr., while Bush was still in office, and perhaps you should give it a read too, if you have the time or the inclination. It’s written simply, almost naively (considering who he was addressing), and is clearly unedited by anything resembling a professional political writer.

Once, during a television interview with some major U.S. network, I forget the name of the interviewer now, but it was a considered a major scoop at the time – the American Interviewer noticed Ahmedinejad’s assistant whisper something to him during the interview. Sensing the sinister intent behind the whisper, the American Interviewer asked Ahmedinejad what his assistant had told him. “Oh", said Ahmedinejad, adjusting his jacket, “he just told me to adjust my jacket because it looks a bit strange on the monitor.” Truly, investigative journalism at its best.

When Ahmedinejad – oh, wait – you’re still put off by the name, right?

Here, let’s play syllables: Ahmed (c’mon you know that one, right?) DEE (like John Dee, for example) NE (like your NEck) JAD (like, er…Chad)…see? Simple Ahmed-Dee-Ne-Jad. See?

To continue:

What Ahmedinejad (don’t you feel better about him already, now that you can pronounce his name?) said about the Chicken Little that you like to call ‘Israel’ (okay, so it’s not worried about the sky falling on its head – but it is particularly obsessed with being pushed into the sea..) – is that the ZIONIST regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish in the pages of time. It seems to redundant to say this, but apparently, there is a need – a regime is not a people, a regime is not a mother, a regime is not a boy, a regime is not a child. A regime is a mindset, and some regimes, such as the Apartheid Regime in South Africa, are certainly doomed to a morally-bankrupt downfall.

So now, we have Ahmedinejad – and an Iranian Election.

When Ahmedinejad was insulted by his host at Columbia University before he had even spoken, he replied, when he did take the podium, by saying that he was unfamiliar with America but that in his country, guest are not invited to an occasion simply to be insulted and ridiculed. The same Columbia students who clapped when he was insulted by their President applauded Ahmedinejad when he made that statement.

Their minds, apparently, are easy to sway.

So now, we are told that Ahmedinejad has stolen the Iranian Elections! That his people actually support an pro-reform opponent called Mousavi (it’s certainly easier to pronounce, isn’t it?) – and that the election has been rigged! The people of Iran have lost their voices! Their democracy has been hijacked by the Hitler-Esque Madman of Tehran, the would-be Holocaust-Denier, the would be Israeli-Decimator, the teacher who thinks he’s a preacher, if-he-gets-a-bomb-he’ll-beat-cha’ – Ahmedinejad!

Oh, gosh.

So here are the lies:

Ahmedinejad has less support than Mousavi. The U.S. and International Media know this. Ahmedinejad could not have gotten 62.6% of the votes since Mousavi is so well-supported. Mousavi is pro-reform, and the young population of Iran loves him because they yearn for a reformist who will bring Western Values to the country! The vote has been stolen, and Mousavi has been asking his supporters to stay calm while the issue is resolved. However, his supporters, those Valiant Iranians seeking the Western JuJu will not be calmed, they are on the streets asking for their rights! Ahmedinejad and the ruling council are meeting them with an Iron Fist. Killing them in a brute display of force! Proving once and for all that the rule of the madman in Iran is monstrous!

Oh, gosh indeed.

The Independent (of the UK) publishes a story in which an agonized Iranian student referred to as Maryam tells of her disappointment – that her hopes have been destroyed, her voice stolen, her dreams dashed. I run into the story since a friend of mine living in the UK sees it and sympathizes with the poor all-but-fictional ‘Maryam’.

Well-intentioned people fall for this story just as they fall for Obama and his recent speech to the Muslim World. Just as they fall for an invasion of Afghanistan that promises to liberate the women of Afghanistan from the dreaded tyranny of the Hijab – as only cluster bombs and an invasion force of rapists know how.

The truth is this:

Ahmedinejad has always had more support than Mousavi – even a recent American pre-election poll proves that much. Not only that, but it proves that even in Mousavi’s supposed main demographic – the Azeri’s polled 2 to 1 in favor of Ahmedinejad previous to the election. In fact, the polling overwhelmingly demonstrated that Ahmedinejad would get not only 62.6% of the vote but 66% of the vote and that his strongest voting bloc was among 18-24 year olds.

Mousavi is not as well-supported as his fans or the U.S. or England, or Israel would have you believe. That is, depending on how you see it – either a delusion of people who cannot believe that anybody could sincerely prefer a non pro-western candidate – or an illusion designed to fool over-educated, well-intentioned do-gooders who still can’t get over the fact that the Iranians might not see things the way they do and might not share their intentions, hopes or dreams.

Mousavi only made things worse (and this is apparently, all he’s really designed, and perhaps more dangerously paid to do) by declaring himself a winner before the official election results came in. Thus making his supporters (mainly, by the way, composed of university graduates, and the richer echelons of Iranian society) feel as though they had a victory and then had it stolen from them. In doing so, he has caused a great deal of fury, anger, and disappointment. Not only has he done this, but he has also specifically asked his supporters to continue to demonstrate, despite the fact that this is a legal issue – he is thus directly responsible for any bloodshed that occurs during those demonstrations, and is the primary inciting force behind the violence.

But you don’t want to hear all that.

Like Axl said in ‘Sorry’ - “It’s harder to live with the truth about you, than to live with the lies about me.”

And so it goes.

Obama In Cairo

2009-06-09T17:28:00.006+03:00

Well, here he was.

Massive hype, of course, an event touted as a game-changer for American/Arab relations and something that a lot of people were eagerly expecting.

Even before the event, certain facts were being highlighted within the region -

Unlike most, if not all, US Presidents of the last few decades, Obama would not be visiting Israel and would not be driven straight from the airport to the Holocaust Museum.

Obama would make his speech from Cairo, not from any of the other Middle-Eastern U.S. Buddy Nations of Arabia. This, in itself, is seen to augment Egypt’s arguably waning influence within the region.

And so he comes, with a security details of around, apparently, 3,000 Americans – most of whom entered the country with no visa or who were given rushed, no-questions-asked visa’s in the airport as they landed, putting in a more embarrassing light the humiliation and contempt with which the average Egyptian has to contend with if he desires to travel to the US, or for that matter, most other ‘Western’ countries in the 1st Century PWTC (Post World Trade Center).

Egypt, of course – painted any roads that Obama would drive or fly anywhere near. Traffic was restrained, and people pretty much stuck to their homes. Obama’s trip through Cairo would be pretty and unencumbered by the usually troublesome Cairo traffic.

A courtesy?

Perhaps.

So he’s at Cairo University, and he speaks. He tries the Arabic but keeps stumbling on the name ‘Azhar’. Still, he’s trying – so we listen.

The speech is very well written, rhetorically speaking – it’s quite well designed. A bit cliché-ridden here and there, the usual forms and patterns, but with a generous serving of credit to Moslems and to Islam. In any case -

These are my issues:

Obama not only regurgitates the standard Holocaust accounts of 6 million Jews killed (never mind that we’re ignoring the other non-Jewish 12 million people killed during the war) – but states that these are undeniable facts which nobody can dispute. With this he ignores the very real dispute put forward by historians like Roger Garaudy, and others. In short – that Jews were killed, but that many other races and/or groups were killed, and that it’s highly unlikely that the figure is anywhere near 6 million. Not only does the Obama regurgitate all of these (yes) disputed numbers, but you must remember that he does so while speaking to a people who were in no way at all responsible for a single one of those murders, and who despite this, have suffered from the event for the last 60 years at least, and are still suffering from it today.

In an attempt at ‘balance’ – the Obama uses the word ‘Occupation’ when referring to the Israeli aggression on Palestinians and yet by insisting that the Palestinians must renounce violence he is basically attempting to strip them of one of their basic human rights. In order to mask this, he mentions the agonizing example of school buses being targeted by Palestinian rockets – ignoring the fact that the Palestinian rockets are home-made pieces of flying debris and that thousands of them raining on Israel would amount, in effect to a nasty day-full of hail-stones. Ignoring the fact that a single Israeli helicopter or F16 can and does (routinely) inflict far more damage to the Palestinians.

The attempt at balance is shameful, and a simple scenario should clarify why it’s a false platform:

I steal $100 from you. A 3rd party walks in, hoping to arbitrate. You say it’s your $100, I say it’s my $100. In an effort at ‘fairness’ – the 3rd party offers to split and to give each of us $50.

Balanced? Only if you have the attention span of a goldfish.

Obama mentions that the settlements must ‘stop’. Stop? Stop to me, sounds like a gate through which what the Israelis call ‘natural growth’ will pass through unharmed. If, as Obama seems to admit, he knows they are illegal – then why is he not using the much more appropriate verb ‘dismantle’?

Feeble.

Obama throws around references to nuclear arms in the region – incredibly – and oh, the audacity – he is not talking about Israel. Israel has an estimated 200-300 nuclear bombs, and has never demonstrated anything resembling a desire for peace, and yet – the Obama is talking about IRAN.

He claims a desire for a nuclear free world, while he sits on around 20 or 30 thousand nuclear weapons and represents the only country in the world to have used them twice.

A word on that. First of all, the regular apologetics claim that the U.S. saved lives by nuking Hiroshima and Nagazaki is fallacious – it ignores the documented facts – that Japan was trying to surrender anyway. There is also the matter of why the U.S. felt the need to use TWO bombs – and for those still looking for an explanation – here’s a simple clue – they had two types of bombs.

Science, folks.

Obama tells us that he’s shutting down Guantanamo – and the people applaud. Unaware perhaps that as Obama was saying this, a 31-year-old Yemeni detainee at Guantanamo who had been imprisoned since 2001 was killing himself. He had been on a hunger-strike, and was thereafter held in a psychiatric ward where he was force-fed in a restraint chair and most likely held sedated.

These same people are also most likely unaware that in fact, most American ‘detainees’ are not held in Guantanamo at all, but around the world in what can only be described as torture-franchise stations in various third world countries around the world.

Naomi Klein, author of No Logo, The Shock Doctrine, and other works – said that “Obama is making us stupid.” – and in an single attention seeking moment, one of the actors present at the Cairo speech shouted ‘We Love You Obama!’ – during the speech. Obama, dutifully, thanked him, and continued.

Obama went on to claim that the ‘war’ (read ‘invasion’) with (read ‘of’) Afghanistan was forced on the U.S. by the attacks of 9/11 (which, it should be mentioned he mentioned at least 3 or 4 times during the speech) – ignoring completely the well-reported (do your homework if you don’t remember this) fact that the Taliban explicitly made an offer to surrender any of those proven to be responsible (including Osama Bin Laden) to a neutral country for trial if any evidence was presented. Ignoring the fact that 6 months before the invasion of Afghanistan the Afghanis were threatened with just that – an invasion – if they did not submit to the pipe-line demands of Haliburton, etc.

And so it goes.

America Marches On.

Ironically, it is the people on the street who see through the lies. The cab drivers of Egypt, the doormen, the plumbers and the carpenters – all of those seem to understand innately – that the Obama is all talk – all of those are skeptical of mere words, and are in wait of any real action, any substance to the smoke and mirrors.

It is the educated of the Middle-East, the ones with degrees, the ones who’ve invested in Americana – who are most eager to believe him, who are most eager to wash themselves aglow with his apparent sincerity – with his apparent good intentions – with his apparent respect for Islam.

We need much more.

Tele-Vision

2009-05-11T11:46:00.000+03:00

Sit down. Tune in, and grab a beer. See what you might otherwise miss. Give us 30 seconds - and with one blank frame every thirty - we’ll put you up into a deep hypno-idiotic state during which you’ll be up to 25 times more susceptible to The Creed. Photons building crude patterns, chiseling into your organism. Give us your minute cause we’ll take away your day. Believe what you will as long as it’s true. And that is what we offer. ‘Truth at 25 frames a second’ the man said, and he didn’t even know how much he’d meant it. Information and misinformation collude and leave you confused, or, a worst case scenario, leave you bright, blessed in lucidity, and full of insights. A new preacher in our midst. The Cretan Liar, twice bound and still unfulfilled. A dramatic re-inaction of a flop. Space: The Final Something and in Ethiopia the children are still dead and dying, but omnipotence has it’s rewards and telekinesis is as close as your remote control, and the kids aren’t there anymore because the drug lord is about to get shot by the good guy. All bad things come to a swift end. Tele-Vision: The Gaze from Afar, seeing at a distance, keeping a distance. In safety and in trust, forever pledged in holy media-money. A craft; artful even - sometimes - but always a taker. The mediator. That which comes between one thing and another, getting a cut on both sides.

Snow Blind Bliss.

ShortCuts

2009-04-15T07:24:00.000+03:00

Shortcuts are offered. In flavors tailored to appeal to both men and women.

For men, books like The Laws of Power basically provide a pseudo-mystical-alpha-male warrior disguise for what, basically, is a manual on how to be an asshole. Hardly the first of that kind that we've seen.

The excuse offered to women to allow them the luxury of being assholes is that of Disney-Destiny-Fate-Plan-Esteem-Bubbles - the kind of dross packaged in The Secret - ideas both useless and corruptive -

All there to give you permission to feel that you've earned the comfort your own life provides and to ease your guilt regarding the poor bastards to whom your 'miserable life' is a charmed one, and to provide a framework for the sacrifice or abandonment of others.

Go figure.

Lie To Me, She Says.

2009-04-06T14:52:00.000+03:00

Buffy: "Does it ever get easy?"

Giles: "You mean life?"

Buffy: "Yeah, does it get easy?"

Giles: "What do you want me to say?"

Buffy: "Lie to me."

Giles: "Yes, it's terribly simple. The good guys are always stalwart and true. The bad guys are easily distinguished by their pointy horns or black hats..and uh...we always defeat them and save the day. No one ever dies and...everybody lives happily ever after."

Buffy: "Liar."

From Season 2, Episode 7 "Lie To Me."

Batman Falls Victim! The Joker Didn't Do It - Morrison Did!

2009-03-08T13:02:00.003+02:00

I am sick of Grant Morrison.

My exposure to comics has lessened over the years. I've been living in Egypt, so unless I download the occasional scan or buy the trade paperbacks from Amazon, I don't get to read as much as I used to. Still, when I travel, I spend ridiculous sums of money on buying comics and catching up.

Lately, I 'caught' up again, after traveling and spending far too much at a particular comics shop in Austria.

First of all, I was SHOCKED by the ridiculous amount of titles written by Grant Morrison. I just didn't get it. It was as though DC had given Morrison a monopoly on it's titles. Half of the books in the shop were written by Morrison. I just don't get it. How many books does this guy write/month?

Also - he's just not very good. He's WAY too busy trying to be 'cool' and 'awesome' and 'controversial' to even know what a good story is. I was lucky enough to run into some stories by Geoff Johns and he is BY FAR a better writer. Johns writes the characters, he shows us dramatic scenes that lend gravity to any action scenes he writes. The gravity of the characters, the strength of the characters, his LOVE of the characters shows through almost every line of dialogue. He also respects the continuity and does his best to integrate and explain as many aspects of it as he can. He really does wonderful work, and his work on the Hal Jordan rebirth story was great, and the way he had Batman and Jordan interact in that, and in subsequent issues was wonderful. He LOVES the characters and it shows.

Morrison on the other hand - loves himself, and his own 'rebel without a clue' sensibilities. He's willing to destroy anything and anyone to appear cool and awesome and on top of things. I suspect he goes out of his way to make the stories 'cosmic' and 'complex' so that 1) people don't notice the complete lack of dramatic substance, and 2) the continuity gets so convoluted that only 'he' can continue to make sense of it thereby assuring his monopoly as DC writer supreme.

He's lame.

It didn't take me long to find that out.

Final Crisis is a piece of crap.

Yes. It really is. Including ridiculous panels where he 'tells' us how great and noble the characters are because he is CLEARLY unable to SHOW us just that in subtle dramatic scenes. Morrison is the Die Hard 4 of the comics industry. HUGE BANGS all in a row, leading, in my case, to a snooze-fest. He's so busy pulling focus on himself that his stories are just boring, boring, boring - and his treatment of the characters both shallow and shamefully disrespectful.

DC is really shooting itself in the foot, and the longer they allow Morrison free reign, the longer this will continue.

DC, if you listen to anything - listen to the fans - dump Morrison.

Listen to Geoff Johns.

Beg Brad Meltzer to write more.

Respect your characters.

Please.

The Clinton Provides A Pass

2009-01-27T20:10:00.055+02:00

Despite the supposedly promising move of making George Mitchell the Middle East Envoy - it appears that any work he attempts will be under the glowering shadow of none other than second of the two infamous Clintons, good old Hillary.

Consider if you will, the article at Reuters entitled "Clinton says Israel has the right to defend itself. " This is not a novel or unique statement, and it is a factually redundant one given that any 'nation' (and I use the word here against my better judgment) legally has that right. In fact, the statement is old code, and what it means is this "That the USA will continue to support Israel no matter what Israel chooses to do and no matter what it becomes in the process. Israel has the USA-Backed MIGHT to do to the Palestinians whatever they goddamn please." - so let's not kid ourselves, that's exactly what the Clinton has just stated.

The fact that she needs to make an apparently redundant statement implies one of two things, that "Israel" is not actually a 'nation' in which case it does not automatically have that 'right', and therefore 'we so state it' - or that, in fact, 'Israel' is doing something which we insist that you call self-defense.

In any case, she glosses over any right that the mothers and children of Gaza - living on the most densely populated space on earth, with an average age of 17 - any right whatsoever - that they might have of defending themselves.

She says that the Hamas rocket launches cannot be left "unanswered" - when she knows damn well that they are an answer to a decades old occupation and a several years old blockade - an answer from a population that has been robbed, raped, murdered, deprived of their tax money, had their homes destroyed, their husbands imprisoned, their children robbed of any childhood conceivable amidst poverty and rubble, and constant humiliation, intimidation and aggression.

Ironically, or ridiculously, given the title of the article, she is quoted as saying that "It is regrettable that the Hamas leadership apparently believes that it is in their interest to provoke the right of self-defence instead of building a better future for the people of Gaza." - so despite having specially, and just now invoked "Israels right to defend itself" - she then has the sheer gall to claim that it is the Palestinian democratically elected government that is so doing.

The sheer gall.

She then states that "The United States is currently the single largest contributor to Palestinian aid and we will be adding even more because we believe that it's important to help those who have been damaged and are suffering."

Let's correct this, if you will -

What she is in fact saying is this - "The United States is currently the single largest contributor to FATAH - the corrupt ex-leadership of the Palestinian people - a leadership that was sold peanuts in Oslo and eventually got so corrupted by US & Israeli and Arab Influence so as to effectively become a group of thugs operating under American and Israeli directives. A 'leadership' that is now the primary reason for the internal struggle within Palestine itself, since it is made up of a group of imposters trying to dethrone the legally elected government of Palestine." - and that is what the Clinton says.

"Yes," they say, "we can!"

Chinese Democracy Starts Now!

2008-11-22T12:18:00.001+02:00

You've had too many Yesterdays, and it's been 14 Years since you've heard anything good - meanwhile, Anything Goes. You've taken the Nighttrain straight from a Breakdown into a Coma, and you've been feeling Estranged from Paradise City, and all you feel like during this very un-Civil War is that you just want to scream 'Don't Damn Me' - but the time IS come, the moment is NOW, and Dr. Pepper owes all of America a free drink.

Chinese Democracy is here.

It's been a long time coming for Guns N' Roses fans - over 16 years ago - the band left us with the Use Your Illusion albums and since then it's been a rough ride. If you've been following the people involved, itching to hear something, anything - that FEELS like Guns N' Roses then you've probably been sorely disappointed. Slash's Snakepit, Duff McKagan's solo album, Izzy Stradlin's decent but unrevolutionary work and the Weiland-inspired disaster that I've personally found Velvet Revolver to be - have all failed to deliver the bite, the wall of heavy groove and the cry of unabashed unambigious almost painful honesty, the sheer depth of what the best Guns N' Roses tracks have ever offered.

Does this read like a long lead up? Then take the short end of it - Chinese Democracy is brilliant. It's not brilliant all the time, nor could it possibly be - even if it were not for the sheer weight of expectation that surrounds it. But - when it is what it aims to be it is nothing short of awe-inspiring greatness.

If you're still wondering where I'm going with this - get the damn thing. Pay the man, and get it. Or get it now, and then pay the man. Whichever, in both cases, do both.

Some of the tracks harken back to the Gn'R sound - and they are a tight manifestation that shows quite clearly that, despite all the fan nostalgia for the old band members, Axl can, quite simply, pull that off.

Just like that.

You'll find that on tracks like the title track 'Chinese Democracy' as well as tracks like 'I.R.S.', 'Street of Dreams', and 'Catcher In The Rye'.

The title track, 'Chinese Democracy', for example - has a long-ish intro with some music and layers of chinese murmers, and then it kicks into song proper. The main riff is a super-charged guitar line that really signals the side to side headbang that a proper Gn'R track is known to illicit. Axl is still Axl, and the unmistakable twist to the step of the groove is right here.

Where things get a lot more interesting - in terms of sheer sound and overall direction - is with tracks like 'Better', 'There Was A Time', 'Madagascar', & 'Prostitute'. These songs don't just kick a phenomenal load of butt - they do so in absolutely wonderful ways. You'll know that Axl's up to something as soon as you hear the starting part of 'Better', for example, but even when you're well into the bit that's as close to a chorus as the song might have you still won't quite see what's coming next. There are quite a few surprises here :)

'Better' is a bit of an iconic track, a signal in many ways. Of the first leaks it was easily the one I immediately got into. The second it starts you'll know you're listening to something fresh, and when both the guitar and Axl kick in, it's a solid, bendy, hard groove that chugs beautifully and powerfully along - with some brilliant vocals. The chorus is a bit difficult the first couple of times you hear the song, but when you get a grip on how it moves, it's just peachy keen. It's a kicker.

'Prostitute' is sheer genius. Let me say that again - absolute sheer genius. The music and lyrics just move along together with massive amounts of passion and power. It feels like every bit of a Gn'R song - even though it doesn't really sound like a Gn'R song. If that sounds confusing - you'll soon see what I mean. It doesn't sound half as good if you don't know the lyrics because then the musical changes don't carry the meaning they need. Just look up the lyrics somewhere and play this track and see what Axl says, and how he says it, and just scream along like a total maniac and fall in love with this song. Yeah, do it. You can read this crap here any time ;)

'Madagascar' is a slower track, starting off with horns and strings and sounding epic in a grave sort of way - and the instant Axl comes in singing 'I won't be told anymore / that I've been brought down in this storm / and left so far out from the shore / that I can't find my way back / my way anymore" you know you're 'in'.

If you've heard the 'Oh My God' single from the End of Days movie soundtrack, then you'll find that the industrial tones of 'Shackler's Revenge' and 'Scraped' refine that aesthetic into a tighter more perceivable groove, but even these take a few listens before you adapt to their feel.

There are softer tracks on the album - 'If The World', 'Sorry', & 'This I Love' are all much mellower than the rest of Chinese Democracy. And even though I tell you clearly that Axl will surprise you - you still won't see these coming. Nope.

I sure as hell didn't.

So first impressions (based though they be on over year of listening to the occasional demo-leaks) - are that the only thing 'wrong' with Chinese Democracy is that not every single track is a monster of a song.

That Axl does not yield miracles 14 times in 71 minutes ;)

The closest to a clear headed review that I've read online is by Chuck Klosterman who despite not 'getting' Estranged had this to say in conlusion:

"The final truth is this: He makes the best songs. They sound the way I want songs to sound. A few of them seem idiotic at the beginning, but I love the way they end. Axl Rose put so much time and effort into proving that he was super-talented that the rest of humanity forgot he always had been. And that will hurt him. This record may tank commercially. Some people will slaughter Chinese Democracy, and for all the reasons you expect. But he did a good thing here."

This won't stop the bashers of course. I've already seen reviews of the album that don't even talk about the songs - they basically bash Axl for existing. It's easy to do - The Botox rumors, the cornrows...being rich and reclusive is always a draw - and the flip side of an icon is always a cartoon. So they make jokes.

It's quite clear they haven't heard the music, though - and by the way - you can find the whole album right here on their myspace page.

The big hope, of course, is that the release of this album might finally signal the start of a trilogy of albums which would finally allow us to hear some of the +60 songs that Axl's rumored to have worked on during the last 16 years.

We wait.

He does make the best songs :)

PS: Riad & The Bedouins does not exist.

Open Letter To Barak Obama

2008-11-11T06:09:00.004+02:00

Mr. Obama, President Elect - you have won, and the people cheer - and in huge neon letters, or so the media would have us understand - the world itself now sees the words 'Hope', 'Change', 'Obama' all writ large pnto some bright fantastical chimera.

My skepticism is founded mainly on your foreign policies which, unfortunately, sound to me almost identical in attitude to the ones that have already cost America so much of its standing in the global community. The whole notion that unilateral actions are acceptable when America (and only America) chooses to act. The idea that America should play world leader, that somehow, America has been forced by virtue of some supposed superiority to police the rest of the world. That the injustices committed to some people are acceptable as long as they are perpetrated by 'friends' of America. That America would consider friends those who would perpetrate such injustices and in the process bloody the hands of all the otherwise good people that make up the nation. That America would threaten Iran as it did Iraq, with no legal basis and no proof. That it would blindly think that security is a function of power and not of the cultivation of good will and kindness. That the children, in short, will continue to pay in hunger and blood for the needs of wealthy old men.

However, despite my own opinions on the matter, the sheer scale of hope for something, anything better than what they've already seen is certainly palpable. That people would extend so much sheer hope that you, Mr. President Elect are their savior is on the one hand a poor exercise in naivette and on the other - well, frankly - it's almost touching.

This raises a possibility -

What if, just what if - I hope - You realize that this is how you won, that this is why you won - that people are so desperate for a real life super hero in office that they actually turned out, and put a cape on you - draping you in what each one believes to be the authentic American dream. Something, in any case, better than a Bush, better than a...well, Bush.

If such an effect were possible - if even its possibility is plausible - then perhaps it's a mistake to go around telling all the Obamaphiliacs that they're wrong. Maybe their optimism should be left to linger in the air - if there's any chance at all that you will pick up on it. That you would be so awe-struck by the power of that hope you've been promising - the intense desperation with which people want it - to actually consider wearing the mantle - to actually consider for a second - like MiracleMan did on Olympus - that you have some real influence on the state of the world. That some possibilities could actually, be more than mere campaign attitudes. That if by simply invoking the possibility of hope so much support could be gained - then how much more support would surely follow if one were to actually provide not only the promise of change, but real, actual change. A change of heart. A re-examination of values. A refusal to work the tired treads of things, that in the end, yield only cruel profit. An affirmation of the value of all human life, an actual attempt to understand issues such as occupation before labelling their reprecussions as terrorism. An opportunity to work with the world, and for the world, and to understand that words such as 'unilateral' - are not words of change, nor are they words of hope. That American politics should stop, financially, militarily, and politically, at American borders. That when you poke your nose in the affairs of other countries, you will take no credit for anything good, and all the blame for everything bad - because you are operating illegally, imposing your will by might rather than submitting to the grace of right. That America's opposition of the International Criminal Court is both disgraceful and shameful, that the very existence of a Security Council within the body of the United Nations is, in the final analysis, an absence of democracy, and that the absence of democracy, is in effect, a brutality.

These are all dangerous prospects for a man in your position, and I'm sure I do not understand half the complications involved. However, when reluctant, or hesitant, or not quite sure what to do or how to do it - I suggest you remember Nietzsche's doctrine of Eternal Recurrence - that these things you do will be here forever. That nothing ever ends, and that all moments must be moments that you would be proud to live again. That you do not visit upon yourself a moment that you would not choose to have again. That you do not yield to the demands of now.

I truly hope this message reaches you, and I truly hope you consider the sentiments behind it.

We need a better world. Badly.

Obama & Change - The Big Black Hype

2008-11-05T15:19:00.003+02:00

The election is done, the choice is made, and the world cares.

It's easy to see why:

The reason the US has so much influence over the rest of the world is the fact that it’s been intervening, both militarily and financially with most of the rest of the world. Mostly unwelcome interventions that you can find out about by reading some Gore Vidal or some William Blum, or just finding out for yourself.

Otherwise, they US is closely connnected to the IMF and the World Bank, as well as directly aligned to the Zionist regime of Israel - that has put the Middle East into a state of unease for more than 50 years - again - mostly with quite generous US backing - financial, political, and military.

Otherwise, the US is also one of the few members of the United Nation’s Security council and is infamous for using its veto power indiscriminately. It is also - ironically, one of the countries that gives itself, at a policy level - the ‘right’ (read might) to act in a unilateral fashion.

So the world has been paying a lot of attention - the idea being that there was a real choice to be made. That it made a difference whether McCain or Obama won. My views haven't been quite that excited...

The facts of the matter as I seem them are these -

This election results won't change anything at all. The majority of people around the world, the ones who don't have a roof over their heads, nor the luxery of even thinking about healthcare - will not be affected at all. Emperial Amerika will continue its unfortunate trajectory no matter which candidate wins.

Their policies are frighteningly similar. More so, it is clear, by looking at the media's treatment of candidates like Paul and Gravel, that Amerika is not particularly interested in anything remotely resembling 'difference'.

They will both continue the fictitious war on terror. They will both allow the Oil, Tobacco, Banking, and Weapons industries to continue to gain power at the expense of the American voter, and they will both continue to work to the profit of the rich and the misery of the poor.

Beyond the novelty of having an African American President, and the clear fact that he has more natural charisma than McCain - there is no functional difference between the candidates, especially when their foreign policies are examined.

That so many people are fooled into pinning so much hope on Obama - reminds me of the charm people attributed to Clinton. Whereas I saw a man who was an accomplice to the murder of more than 500,000 Iraqi children under sancations, a man whose Secretary of State justified the murder by saying 'it was worth it' - on the pretense that this way 'pressure' on Sadam Hussein - and yet - everybody is fooled by the boyish charm and the drawl, and hallelujah - Bless Clinton.

So I don't really care either way who won. On the other hand, if anything - I leaned towards thinking that it would be better for all of us if McCain won. Then, at least, there would be no delusion, no Clinton-esque veneer to cover up all the blood and gore. Then at least, we would know that we are being aggressed. We would realize it and act accordingly - Amerika would overextend itself to collapse, and the nightmare would be over.

Okay. So that's not how it came out, and the world has gone Disney and is breathing - what is to me a frightening - sigh of relief. Obama has won, they cheer - and in huge neon letters, or so the media would have us understand - the world now sees the words 'Hope', 'Change', 'Obama' all intwined into some bright fantastical chimera. A mirage.

However, despite my own opinions on the matter, the sheer scale of hope for something, anything better than what they've already seen is certainly palpable. That people would extend so much sheer hope that Obama is their savior is on the one hand a disgustingly poor exercise in naivette and on the other hand - it's almost touching.

This raises a possibility -

What if, just what if - Obama suddenly realizes that this is how he won, that this is why he won - that people are so desperate for a real life super hero in office that they actually turned out, and put a cape on him - draping him in what each one believes to be the authentic American dream. Something, in any case, better than a Bush, better than a...well, Bush.

If such an effect were possible - if even its possibility is plausible - then perhaps it's a mistake to go around telling all ye Obamaphiliacs that you're wrong. Maybe your optimism should be left to linger in the air - if there's any chance at all that Obama will pick up on it. That he would be so struck by the power of that hope he's been promising - the desperation with which people want it - to actually consider wearing the mantle - to actually consider for a second - like MiracleMan did on Olympus - that he has some real influence on the state of the world. That some possibilities could actually, be more than mere campaign attitudes. That if by simply invoking the possibility of hope so much support could be gained - then how much more support would surely follow if one were to actually provide not only the promise of change, but real, actual change. A change of heart. A re-examination of values. A refusal to work the tired treads of things, that in the end, yield only cruel profit. An affirmation of the value of all human life, an actual attempt to understand issues such as occupation before labelling their reprecussions as terrorism. An opportunity to work with the world, and for the world, and to understand that words such as 'unilateral' - are not words of change, nor are they words of hope. That American politics should stop, financially, militarily, and politically, at American borders. That when you poke your nose in other countries affairs, you will take no credit for anything good, and all the blame for everything bad - because you are operating illegally, imposing your will by might rather than submitting to the grace of right.

So - maybe.

Maybe all you freaks can build so much expectation around Obama that first he'd be struck by the power of your fantasies, delusional though they may be, and then he'd be too ashamed not to at least try to fulfill them - to try to actually do good.

So there, I won't piss on your parade right now.

Final words go to Axl ;)

"What should I tell you about all the ones / that you could not save / I told you when I found you / if there were doubts / you should be careful and not afraid / Now they surround you / all that amounts to - is love that you've crippled for fortune and fame." - Axl Rose

Hell

2008-09-20T11:55:00.000+03:00

Hell is a darkness aborting the light and declaring itself to be true. It is cold and it is numb to the touch, and unyielding with certitude. It is a devouring un-tempered by kindness or grace, and it is absolute.

Hell is the poverty of the slum in the City of Gold. It is the hunger and the plague in rapt unison with maligned might and counterfeit rights. It is born of puerile pride and nurtured on vanity and a choice not to understand. It is empathy murdered and sympathy derided, it is suffering unconsidered and a man unconcerned.

It is a mother no longer taking care of her child.

Hell is a loneliness born of betrayal and fathered by distrust. It is a withdrawal of the light affected through sorrow and pain. It is a grief overcome by sadness and unshed tears.

It is a wounded infant unfamiliar with because.

Foundations of A Broadcast-Based Financial Compensation Model for Digital Media

2008-06-09T07:34:00.001+03:00

As a listener - as audience - I am driven towards media that I like.

I am infotropic, so to speak. Some data, some information, some inherent artistic or intellectual order manifests to me through songs, books, movies, and various other forms of media. Wanting this information is as basic to my spiritual/intellectual/cultural self as water is to my biological. In that sense, it feels like more than a want, it feels like a morally justifiable right. I want to pay for the stuff I like, in fact - proud to pay for it when it's easy to, and when the compensation requested is within my budget. However, it seems that withholding the data, on condition of compensation is somehow contrary to the essence of information itself, to a moral imperative inherent in information - to the very fact that information seems to want to spread. It is self-reproducing.

As a musician - I am in a quandary.

I know that the best of the music that I make is not truly only mine. That is not ontologically exclusive to my self. That I am simply partner to a history of sounds, a history of lyrics, a history of patterns and shapes, and tempos. A whole data cluster to which I have been privy, and to which I am host. I try to take some credit, of course, but all in all - there is a partnership.

At the very best of times - and this can be confirmed, I think - by any musician or any anybody who has engaged in artistic process..at the best of times - it seems that a partnership is created between the whole data cluster itself, and the moment I find myself in. At those times, ever so briefly, the thing lives, and moves seemingly at its own accord - the guitar player, singer, or actor experiences an actual ongoing sense of surprise. It as though the information itself has become alive - taken over both artist and time.

It is very, very hard to take complete credit for experiences such as these. For many, the experience itself is so humbling - so necessary - that incurring the wrath of its muse doesn't quite seem wise.

As a musician, I want everybody to hear all of my tracks. I might not need, and excusing myself with vanity, might choose not to want everybody to like my tracks - but it somehow seems to matter that anybody that would like something, should get the chance to hear it.

Charging people for this seems, on the face of it - stupid.

But the less music pays me, the more I have to do something that isn't music. The more I do something that isn't music, the less music I make. The less music I make, the less music you hear.

So, this just doesn't work.

There is absolutely no excuse for different regional release dates in an online world - or data-blockages of any sort. Any data available anywhere should be available everywhere.
Data, in all forms - must be available to whoever can reach it. A ONE TO ONE profit situation (where a certain profit unit is made PER unit data-form sold) - should only be levied on products in which it the data-form is encoded into actual material. All pure data-forms (non-material) cost no material to duplicate and therefore a ONE TO ONE profit situation should neither be expected, nor condoned. Any attempt to do so is nothing less than a willful chocking of information.
Data that has no purpose other than the creation of material profit is almost by definition working against the very nature of informational growth - which seeks to free itself from material as much as possible so as to propagate as fast as possible, ultimately - as fast as light. This point must be understood.
Artist must be compensated in accordance with a) the will of the audience to listen to those artists, and b) the ability of the artist to sustain their art work through self-sustaining artwork or engaging some of their time towards more high-yield commercial investments.

Having established the above - a mechanism is necessary for satisfying points 1-4. Copyright protection schemes ALL violate 1,2, & 3 because they all attempt to establish a one-to-one relationship between data-form duplicated and material compensation.

The situation as such:

User pays his ISP for his web connectivity.
User downloads data. Some downloads are paid for, others are not. Protection systems increase the suggested price of the data to the paying user, and further convince the non-paying user that product is not worth the compensation requested.
As far as the user is concerned - he has (in his mind) somewhat already paid. He did that back in step 1 when he paid his ISP.
RIAA and other such entities sue the ISP for duplicating their data without license, and the user for downloading the data.

The failure to create un-crack-able data protection systems is due to the inherent desire of information to grow. All such attempts are attempts to dry wetness.

What needs to happen is:

The user, who previously paid X/bandwidth pays 2x or some such ratio for his web connectivity. The user might initially gripe about this, but once he absolves himself of the paranoia of the RIAA beating down his wife's door, and savors the contribution he knows he is actually materially making to the artists whose work he enjoys - will be more than happy. The industry needs to understand one thing - it's not that the user doesn't want to pay, it's that he either cannot afford it - or that the mechanism of payment is too awkward.
The ISP collects the money and keeps its share of it - let's say one of those 2 x's.
The other 'x' or portion goes to a Data Indexing and Re-Investment authority along with a file detailing the file-download stats for that month - anonymously reported in totals.
This authority then compensates the authors of the data in proportion to their downloads share. This raises one issue still in need of resolution - simple ideas - the paper-clips of 'data' - let's say - will be picked up so ubiquitously that by sheer number - even though the data-packet itself may be small - it'll still make something for its creator. Other data-packages such as movies or video games, might take up a greater bandwidth share per duplicate simply because they are bigger in size. So in that sense, the big productions will still make more money. Some problems might arise with people bloating their data consciously in order to get have more of a duplication index - but the counter to that, is that online reviews will work against it the more it chooses to do so.
Payments will not always be one-to-one, more importantly, they shouldn't be. People who have the luxury to pay will always be the first to get it cause that's where the streams originate. They are the people who are most data-hungry, and the ones that most can afford it. They want to pay if it means they get it, and they will pay a high bandwidth premium to download sooner as well as in quantity.
This may well mean that artists might take a hit, honestly, not many will mind. Most complaints come from the companies whose main gripe is simply because they are in the habit of thinking of their data as matter, and not information. In doing so, they still expect a one-to-one data-form to money relationship when it neither possible, nor good.
ALL attempts to block data duplication are inherently ill conceived. Release or don't release. The only protection necessary is a copyright registrar. The producer need not get paid per duplicate as much as he needs to be able to prove that it is his data-form.

Similar systems are already done for radio. Artists get compensated by authorities that monitor the airwaves and get reports from radio stations and broadcasters. That's how somebody somewhere gets paid whenever a radio stations somewhere plays 'Happy Birthday'. Systems for doing this are already somewhat in place for radio. By all means - a completely digital medium should be even easier to administer.

And that's how I think this particular dragon can be laid to rest.

Good Night & Good Luck This Ain't : ABC News...

2007-08-14T04:59:00.000+03:00

As usual, the local satellite channel MBC 4 continues to broadcast ABC News - featuring the effervescent Katie 'Da Man' Couric.

Joy.

Well, first of all - we'd all like to remind Katie that, generally speaking, 'magnate' is not best pronounced the same way you'd pronounce 'magnet'...

Moving on...

Good Ole Katie, rather than actually do some research and find out some real hard data regarding whether things in Iraq are 'getting better' by checking indicators - such as crime rates, mortality rates, the quality of water, the availability of clean water and medicine, etc...Katie quotes polls conducted in America. She quotes the polls as indicating that the US military 'surge' have 'improved conditions in Iraq' and that despite those polls, two thirds of Americans still think the situation in Iraq isn't very good.

No kidding.

And then, as though to deal with this aberrant strain of thought and help influence future polls - ABC follows this 'news' with a 'human interest' story titled 'Rescued In Iraq' - telling the story of a baby that was found by US Soldiers after her family was killed.

So, essentially, a baby girl had her whole family killed before her eyes, and this is somehow spun by ABC News, Katie Couric and the ever more hideous Lara 'I'm a babe' Logan into a positive story with which to make even more Americans think that the surge is 'making things better' in Iraq.

Is it any surprise ABC News isn't running a segment on the growing shadow army of mercenaries now operating in Iraq?

Half-Full.

2007-06-21T07:34:00.000+03:00

Having pointed out the true story behind the web of lies portrayed in Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan to somebody - I was taken aback by the response. The person I pointed things out to asked my why I would do such a thing to start with.

Why, he asked, would I do such a thing? And, he continued, "its like you want to crush everything i like. And find something wrong in everything...seems like you have a bit of a pessimistic outlook on the world. The glass is half empty. And you seem to miss the good."

My god...

It's got nothing to do with 'crushing' what you like. I was looking through your profile to get a better idea of who I'm talking to. When I saw that Saving Private Ryan was one of your favorite movies - I felt I needed to make you realize the truth about it.

If hoping to open your eyes to something you may not know is seen by you as me attempting to 'crush' things you like, then you are just completely misinterpreting my motivations.

My motivations, and I realize that for some strange reason you seem to find this incredibly hard to believe - is to shed some light where little seems to be found. I am trying to show you something important that you may not know, in the hope that your choices and opinions might be better informed.

When I asked you to look up the Sullivan Five it was because I wanted you to understand the difference between reality and the incredibly irresponsible cheerleader rewriting of it that Spielberg went ahead and shot - a rewrite that serves to make a cruel, abusive, manipulative war-machine appear to be kind, gentle, and humane. If trying to take the wool off your eyes regarding something (whether it's the situation in Iraq or the mess that is Saving Private Ryan) amounts to 'crushing' anything...

If there's anything I'm trying to crush it's the lies they surround us with, the lies they throw at you, and the lies which have led to you misunderstanding my every word and every attempt to communicate. The lies that twist whatever good intentions you might have into tools to be used and abused by unscrupulous politicians with nothing on their minds but power and genocide. I try to 'crush' the lies in the hope that you would do better if you knew better. I don't do this out of hate, I do this out of hope, and it saddens me that you can't see that. That whereas I have some faith in your good intent, you have very, very little in mine.

The glass isn't half empty, it's half full with poison. I'm hoping you'll throw away the poison and fill the glass with some clear water.

And no, I don't have a pessimistic outlook. If I had a pessimistic outlook, I would not be having this conversation - would not have made this deviation, would not have tried.

It's been a long day.

Mike Gravel : Why I Care.

2007-06-14T17:58:00.000+03:00

Somebody asked me why I want Mike Gravel to win - why I care either way, since I'm not even an American, and this is, after all, an American presidential candidate.

I've got more than a few reasons - and they all sort of come together.

I spent some time in the US as a child - and as a result spent a large part of my childhood with a bit of an American identity. It's also remained a large part of my cultural background. It's the music I hear, and the books, I read - the comics I grew up on, and various other things. Not quite Apple Pie and the Superbowl, but still ;)

The other thing is that, like it or not - America influences the whole world, and well, to be honest, considering how America has been lately, I have to say I don't like the effect it's having. I remember thinking years ago that because America chooses to stick its nose into the politics of just about every country in the world - then all citizens of the world should get to vote in American elections. That is, after all, the whole notion of democracy; that you get to vote on the people who affect your life.

I remember, for example, years ago - long before they 'killed' Captain America - there was a storyline in the comic when he was told that because the US Government developed the super soldier serum and the name and the costume of Captain America - that they 'owned' the brand - and he was told that he must either serve the government or give up the costume and the shield and the name. He went over to the committee that he had to answer to, and he told them clear and simple that he believed it was his duty to serve the American Ideal and that the government was just not doing that, and that he could therefore not subject himself to its will, and on that note, he left behind his costume, his shield, and the name of Captain America - and for a while, in the comics, operated only as The Captain. Incredibly enough, at the same time, Axl sung the lines 'Captain America's been torn apart / now he's a court jester with a broken heart / he said "turn me around and take me back to the start / I must be losing my mind / are you blind? I've seen it all a million times" - in the song Paradise City.

In short, yeah. I do care. And it matters. And I am incredibly saddened by the horror that is Bush, and I am terrified of the nightmare that will be Hillary if she wins. I don't trust her one tiny little bit. She strikes me as a cold, calculating, opportunistic schemer, and I know she'd be a terrible mistake. And I certainly don't feel any better about Obama - and these are the two being shoved down everybody's throat by the media. I don't get it.

Things just ... don't look the same from different places.

I've lived in America, and I've lived in Egypt, and I've lived in the Arabian Gulf, and I've lived in Italy, and I've been to a whole lot of other countries in between - so I understand - to some extent why certain things aren't clear to most Americans - and it saddens me that this unfortunate ignorance regarding the rest of the world is accompanied by such power over the rest of the world. The results have been catastrophic. For Afghanistan, for Iraq, for Palestine, and in fact, for the soul of America.

Some people can see this, some people can't.

Things like the Project for the New American Century, and the neo-cons that drive such projects - the people that hoped for a 'pearl harbor' type event that would allow them to stretch their military muscle across the globe to establish an American Empire - these things scare me. They scare the living hell out of me. Gravel knows these things, and I've heard him mention them when he speaks - he actually cares, actually knows, and actually speaks. It's not a common thing, and it's breathtaking to see, and touching to hear. My eyes are welling up right now just thinking of the man, knowing how difficult it is for a man like him to win, and yet - how vitally necessary it is that he does.

It's a hell of a world we're in. This isn't what it should be like. This was never how it should've been. I just keep hoping that it's not too late, that we haven't crossed some horrific point of no return. That we have not doomed both ourselves and generations to come.

We'll see.

Vote for Gravel.

So That's What It's All About...

2007-06-14T07:25:00.001+03:00

I just read a blog somewhere in which an apparently well intentioned but horrifically mal-informed American woman was (god bless her heart for stretching that far across the sea) lamenting the continued existence of Farfur - described as a Mickey Mouse-Alike that urges resistance to the United States and to Zionism. She claims that the Chairman of the TV station is depriving the children viewers of their childhoods for his own nefarious purposes. She uses words such as slandering and inciting...

Right.

So it's the chairman robbing the children of their childhood.

Not the IDF shooting them with so-called rubber bullets that are nothing but rubber-coated bullets. Not the Israeli roadblocks that prevent them from getting to school, or in fact, getting to hospital. Not the devastated economy they live under due to the Zionist state withholding their money from them. Not the murder of their siblings and the abduction of their fathers by the IDF. Not the water and electricity shortages they suffer daily due to Israeli pressure. Not the frequent massacres at places such as Jenin. Not the Zionist invaders who have stolen their land. Not the media that has portrayed them as terrorists. Not the American politicians who submit to AIPAC and supply Israel with the latest in military hardware with which to bombard them back to the stone age. Not the constant portrayal of them as ignorant terrorists by most of the American film industry.

Not the fact that she is so self-absorbed as to actually think they're better off watching the cartoon channel than learning about the enemy that lurks across their streets; Zionist settler teenagers with a machine gun in their hands, murder on their minds, and political immunity in the land they stole.

Right.

Look up Charles Black. Read.

Travel. See.

Joe Lieberman Is Nuts.

2007-06-11T02:00:00.000+03:00

Joe Lieberman was just on Face The Nation.

He's a complete nut.

No matter what question he was asked - Lieberman managed to inject the phrase 'Iranians are killing Americans' into each and every sentence he uttered. He said it once, then again, then again, then again and again and again.

It started with him saying that he's just been to 'the region' - the only country he mentioned by name was 'Israel' - not quite a country as much as a military camp full of genocidal Zionists, but that's another story for another post. In any case, his point was twofold - that he is an ally of 'Israel' and that he's got the god-given truth from the only 'trustworthy' American ally in the Middle East. The Zionists told him so, so it's just gotta be true.

And on he went, about how Iran is 'violating' international law with their nuclear program (they're not - no, really- they're not), about how Americans are dying in Iraq (they are), about how Iran is supporting the 'insurgency' (it's not an insurgency, it's a popular, national, resistance to an invading army, and it would shame Iran not to support it), and how Iranian trained warriors are (in case you missed it the first 15 times) killing Americans in Iraq.

His proposed solution (keep in mind - this is the Zionist Jew Who Would Be President) is to launch an attack on Iran!

So rather than have American soldiers dying only in Iraq, Lieberman apparently wants some of them to die in Iran as well.

Go, Lieberman! Go! Go! Go!

Like A Rolling Stone...

2007-05-20T11:59:00.000+03:00

I received an email yesterday informing me that the Rolling Stones are planning a concert in Israel, and asking me to include my name among people who are asking the Rolling Stones to boycott Israel; as various other artists and academics have. I replied to the email, included my information as requested, and then set up an online petition using the same text I was sent. Since, to my mind, that is probably a better way of collecting signatories. I then forwarded the web address of the petition to everybody on my contact list. In case you still don't know where the petition is - it's at http://www.petitiononline.com/suncity/petition.html

At least one person replied to the effect that we are impotent in this matter, that we cannot ask the Rolling Stones to boycott Israel, and that the Rolling Stones, along with the rest of the West, simply don't 'give a rat's ass'.

Here's my reply to that:

In the eyes of the uneducated and unwilling to learn, maybe. But that only applies if your expectations are very low. Mine aren't.

Some people know damn well what's going on. A good example that I came across a couple of weeks ago is Alan Rickman of Die Hard, Galaxy Quest, and the Potter movies. Rickman directed a play based on the diaries of Rachel Corrie - the 23 year old American woman who was killed on March 16, 2003 by an Israeli Army bulldozer while she was protesting against the demolition of Palestinian civilian homes.

I wouldn't for a second think that Alan Rickman, for instance, didn't give a 'rat's ass'.

Artists who choose to inform themselves of the realities of the situation should act responsibly. And in this day and age, not informing yourself is simply irresponsible.

If the Rolling Stones don't, as you say, 'give a rat's ass' - then we should make it clear to them that we, in turn, won't give a rat's ass about them. It's that simple.

Of course we can ask the Rolling Stones to boycott Israel. Whether or not they do so is another matter. One of the people who signed the petition laid it out very simple, and I quote him:

"Would you Exchange your fans in the Middle East (around 300 million people out of which more than 70\% are in the youth stage) with just 10 million people (out of which only 45\% are in the youth stage)??Let Your Manager do his job and calculate the correspondent risks and negatives of such a concert, before you take that risk."

Amen.

In any case, the whole 'it's hopeless and we can't do anything attitude' - just doesn't cut it for me, and it shouldn't for anybody who's still got a pulse.

You do what you can.

Bush's Veto or How To Dismantle A Cretin...

2007-05-09T08:15:00.000+03:00

Having just read the text of Bush's veto statement, I thought it might be worth a quick step-by-step deconstruction, for the benefit of any polar bears on a random island somewhere that may not have given it the once-through.

It reeks.

"Tonight", says The Bush, in reassuring tones, "I will explain the reasons for this veto" and effectively, his desire to override Congress. Then, of course, he goes on, heaping one inanity on another.

"It makes no sense to tell the enemy when you plan to start withdrawing" he says. Claiming that all the terrorists would then have to do is mark a day on their calendar when it would be safe to take over the major front (as he calls it and will continue to call it throughout his statement) on the 'war on terror'.

Idiotic nonsense.

Personally, and this is no great revelation, I think the US has absolutely no business being in Iraq in the first place. Having said that, what The Bush is trying to hide is that his statement implicitly acknowledges that the US cannot secure this invasion (I'd say 'win this war', but who are we kidding?). His fear of setting a deadline implicitly exposes his certainty that the US is simply in over its head, and that the chances of securing the invasion of a country thousands of miles away from mainland Amerika are simply not that good. The deadline, as argued by the so-called democrats - intends no such thing - it is simply seeking an overt commitment to the premise of the whole ill-founded enterprise and to the notion that it is possible to build a strong enough Iraq security apparatus to leave behind a secure Iraq. Of course, what most of Amerika still hasn't quite stomached is the notion that there will be a 'war' as long as there are Amerikan soldiers in a country which is not their own. This is not, and has never been a war against insurgents (whatever you may believe those to be...) it has been a war for Iraq, and therefore - against Iraqis.

Bush then goes on to say that the democrats in Congress know that they cannot summon enough votes to override his unfortunate veto, and he once again waves the patriotic flag about and equates cutting off funding to his invasion to a withdrawal of support for the soldiers of Amerika who have been sent to Iraq. Certainly, I feel sorry for some of them, who like Timothy McVeigh did during the invasion of Bush the First, find themselves riddled with conflicting moral demands, and on the decidedly immoral side of what the future will see as a sequence of orchestrated crimes against humanity, but for those soldiers who delight in the tortures of Abu Ghraib, who sing racist songs about the 'sand-niggers' they rejoice in 'taking down', that is another story altogether. I am, unfortunately reminded of Golda Meir saying that "We will never forgive them (she refers to the Palestinians) for turning our sons into killers."

Right.

Bush then claims that General Petraeus should be given time. Petraeus, The Bush reminds us, was confirmed in January, and has a plan. What The Bush fails to mention is that month after month, and I include the period since January, the death tolls in Iraq has risen. I am no longer surprised when month after month, I catch the now all-too-familiar headline "Deadliest Month In Iraq Yet!" I have seen it repeatedly since the start of the invasion, and have no reason whatsoever to believe that this will change anytime soon. Invasions look that way, smell that way, and act that way. Death tolls rise, and continue to rise, until the invading force finally calls it a day, cuts its losses, and heads back home to lick its wounds. That's how invasions work, had this truly been a liberation, as it was sold to you, the Amerikan Konsumer, things would have looked much, much, different.

Ducks.

He then goes on to deliberately misrepresent the aims of Al-Qaida and ignores completely the basis of their current presence in Iraq. Bush operates in a counterclockwise world, it seems. The fact is that one of Bush's pretexts was that Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaida were collaborators, we know that nothing could be further from the truth. We know that Saddam and Al-Qaida had been grave enemies. Any application of logic would reveal that, and yet - The Bush insisted - they are buddies and pals. It just wasn't so. The fact is that Al-Qaida was powerless in Iraq until The Bush & The Cheney turned that country into the hellhole that it now is. When Bush says that the aim of Al-Qaida is to subvert Amerikan efforts and reignite the sectarian violence in Baghdad, he is being disingenuous, he knows damn well that the aim of Al-Qaida in Iraq, as it is elsewhere is to make Amerikans go home. It's that simple, and is hardly a mystery. That particular goal has been stated countless times, and it has not changed throughout the history of Al-Qaida's existence. Chomsky has previously stated that, if anything, Bin laden has been consistent, and regardless of what you may otherwise think about him, that much has been true.

Time for a Bushism, perhaps...

Bush then more or less threatens that if his war-funding bill isn't passed, he will simply withdraw the funds from some other programs. If it does not seem like a threat to you - perhaps you should take another look at this:

"The need to act is urgent." He says, "Without a war-funding bill, the military has to take money from some other account or training program so the troops in combat have what they need."

What The Bush is saying is simply this, that he will take the money anyway.

Wake up.

Sen. Mike Gravel at SC Debates 04/26/07

2007-05-03T03:38:00.001+03:00

Well worth watching. Give it a good look, recommend.

Who's Afraid of Wolfowitz?

2007-04-16T04:58:00.000+03:00

Well, perhaps you should be.

With a dual American-Israeli citizenship, and strong political alliances, Paul Wolfowitz seems all but invincible.

The media, as a whole, seems blind to the perplexing paradox that the current president of the World Bank, ostensibly an organization out to alleviate poverty, and aid development - just happens to be one of the founders of the Project For The New American Century - an organization that propagates an agenda of Military Expansionism with the explicit aim of creating an American Empire. I've linked to documentation before, google the damn thing and read.

Does that at all seem like a conflict of interest to you?

And if not - are you even paying attention?

Oh, Kilgore - eat my Trout.

God Bless You, Mr. Vonnegut...

2007-04-13T19:52:00.000+03:00

He's dead.

Kurt Vonnegut, author of some truly wonderful books such as 'God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater', 'Slaughterhouse 5', 'Deadeye Dick', and various others is dead.

He spent years warning us about ourselves. He wrote and wrote and wrote, and, of course, we ignored his warnings and his alarms. He saw the last few years and realized what a terrible time we've been going through, and...well, another sane voice now silenced by time.

In 2002, during an interview, reflecting on Bush's America, he said “our country, for whose Constitution I fought in a just war, might as well have been invaded by Martians and body snatchers. Sometimes I wish it had been."

Thanks, Kurt.

And so it goes.

WorldMapper: Take A Look At The World...

2007-01-31T02:02:00.000+02:00

In case you haven't run into it, WorldMapper is an absolutely wonderful resource. It is, to quote the blurb, "a collection of world maps, where territories are re-sized on each map according to the subject of interest. 366 maps and PDF posters will be finished by February 2007." - It's a huge, and I mean huge eye opener.

Wander around. Look.

See.

A good introductory article to the whole thing can be found here.

Get Carter...

2007-01-21T23:53:00.000+02:00

I'm no big fan of Jimmy, and I've always had trouble with some of the formulations reached under his Camp David negotiations with the late Egyptian President Anwar El Sadat - who I'm also not a big fan of...

"Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" certainly didn't get a second glance from me when I first heard of its release - after all - he is a former president and an old man with questionable political influence and, it seemed to me, a title featuring a word that has been etched into my head over years of viewing the Zionist offensive on Palestine and the Palestinians and thus comes as no surprise.

For years, anybody who's paid the slightest bit of attention knows about the Palestinian crops destroyed, the Palestinian exports left to rot, the Palestinian homes pulverized by bulldozers provided by Caterpillar, the Palestinian roads blocked, the schools of Palestine shut down, the Palestinian money and land ransacked daily by foreign settlers arming their teenagers with machine guns and animosity, the Palestinian husbands kidnapped and detained without charge for years on end, the Palestinian children maimed and murdered by uniformed murderers.

We know about all that.

I didn't give Carter's book a second glance. Until, that is, the media machine decided to Get Him - and unlike the movie from which the title of this entry gets its name - this was no comedy.

You can read more about all this at CounterPunch - and you can follow up an interesting subplot regarding Amazon's presentation of the book. Unlike most other books for which the Editorial Reviews section usually quotes a publisher's blurb - Amazon (of which I am a regular client) ran a review by a Jeffrey Goldberg, who turns out to be, according to CounterPunch, a former member of the IDF - or as we like to call it - the Israeli Demolition Force.

In reaction to this a petition was put up demanding that Amazon clean up it's act...

So far as I can see the only reaction so far has been the addition of a short interview with Carter right before the Jeffrey Goldberg review.

Not quite satisfying, however, it doesn't seem to matter.

The more they complain, the more that word 'Apartheid' is going to be brought up in relation to the Zionist agenda.

The truth will out.

Someday.

Well, If The US Can Do It...

2007-01-08T07:28:00.000+02:00

The British Sunday Times has reported that Israel is already planning and training for a tactical nuclear attack on Iranian facilities.

This particular news item was also carried on ynetnews, a Zionist news site.

In any case, I find it particularly that neither headline displayed the simple truth behind the report - the final implicit headline composed of five simple words "Israel does have nuclear weapons."

In any case - Ynetnews then goes on to state that "After countless declarations of peaceful intentions of nuclear plan, Iran's chief nuclear envoy confirms fears by saying if county is threatened, situation may change."...

You can see the logic of paranoia putting that sentence together. The simple statement by Iran that it would react if threatened, is taken to mean that their nuclear plans are not otherwise intended peacefully.

The nuclear weapons that the Zionist Militia (hmm..now there's a simpler name...) - is planning to use are supposedly tactical - in plain English that means that they could potentially kill say 10,000 people - a paltry figure in a genocidal regime's eye - a mere 1/15th (more or less) the mass of life destroyed in Hiroshima.

Tact-ical indeed.

Interview with Gore Vidal

2006-12-28T03:05:00.001+02:00

Yup. Rosa Mariam Elizalde interviews Gore Vidal - as usual, Vidal is quite sharp, and to the point. At some point he quotes Mark Twain as having said "the American flag should be replaced not with the stars and stripes, forget them, it should be the Jolly Roger, the skull and crossbones, because we bring murder wherever we go."

Click here to read the whole thing, but for now, here are some nuggets...

"A child of five who knows nothing about the law can tell you that 9-11 requires a police response. We've been hit by the Mafia. You can't go to war without an enemy nation to attack. You can't have a war without a country, try and explain that to an American, I don't think they know what a country is. We certainly know 80% of them believe that Saddam Hussein that had a country called Iraq was working in tandem with Osama Bin Laden, who was living in a beautiful palace in Pakistan and Afghanistan. It's all nonsense. They had no connection the two. But Bush wanted to complete the work of his father, and to show that he was bolder than his father, he would be "Bush of Baghdad" not quite Lawrence of Arabia. Americans think they are the same person, and that both of them attacked us on 9/11."

and...

"We had a great Constitution, and a great legal system. Only by the restoration of that can we have a country with aspirations and with indeed successes like Cuba. Don't think I don't get extremely jealous for the United States, since I am a super patriot; I get very jealous."

Go on, read the damn thing.

Removal of American News Programming From MBC TV

2006-11-26T04:57:00.000+02:00

We the undersigned viewers of MBC in the Middle East abhor the constant broadcast of American produced news on an Arab TV Channel, and find that it as not much more than thinly veiled propaganda for what can only be considered a Western view point of current events.

We do not accept the flimsy disclaimer that MBC 4, for example, has chosen to hide behind stating that American news broadcasts on the channel do not reflect the channel's own opinions.

The size of the tiny disclaimer insults our intelligence, and it's very existence offends our sensibilities, and we hereby assert that aside from insulting mature viewers, these broadcasts are conditioning our children and youth towards a view of reality to which we do not subscribe.

We believe that by constantly and repeatedly broadcasting these views MBC 4 is, in action, if not by word, committing itself to an alliance with those views that it it uselessly tries to disassociate itself from, and demand that the directors at MBC either:

Completely cease to broadcast news items, or
Broadcast only news shows for which it can proudly claim both association and/or sponsorship.

We believe that refusal to do so constitutes a disloyalty to the main audience and demographic of MBC and that the continuation of their current news broadcasting is an insult to every Arab or Middle Eastern individual who does not agree with the Western view regarding both global and local events.

We expect change, and we expect it now.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

Please click here to sign the petition, if you think any of your friends or family would agree, please forward it to them as well.

Do It By The Numbers...

2006-11-23T23:09:00.000+02:00

You may or may not have come across a story about the six imams who were 'removed' from a Minneapolis to Phoenix flight earlier this week. If you haven't - you can read more about it here.

I can't say I'm too worried about that. According to the article, the 'reason' they were removed is because they were considered suspicious. To answer the obvious question that follows; three of them were seen praying before they got on the flight.

I'm not too worried about it because, thankfully, the imams have decided to sue, and I can't really see how the airline's actions could possibly stand up in court. It seems to be a simple case of religious discrimination at its worst.

The most interesting thing about the article is its mention of a survey that concludes that America is the rudest place to visitors. The survey ranked America last when it came to extending courtesy to travelers. The 2nd and 3rd places, incidentally, were awarded to the Middle East and East Asia. In case you're wondering, the survey was conducted by an American organization, not, as some readers might quickly assume, the Taliban.

This is even more interesting when juxtaposed with another survey I came across declaring Americans to be the most patriotic people. I cannot help but put the two together, and when I do, the inevitable conclusion is that America may well be the country with the greatest deal of misplaced pride.

This, unfortunately, comes as very little surprise for the rest of us.

So it goes.

In Appreciation of Simon Jenkins...

2006-11-18T20:13:00.000+02:00

I reread an article by Simon Jenkins today, and as before, I was pleased to some into contact, albeit one-way, with what appears to be a very rational man. Which is to say - I find myself nodding a lot while reading what Simon writes.

If you're waiting for a 'but', there isn't one.

I found another very interesting article by Simon called Paradox & Paranoia In The War On Terror - in which he reviews a book called 'The Politics of Good Intentions', by David Runciman (not, as PKD fans might note, Runciter...if you don't know what I mean, forget it - inside joke...) - in any case, I suggest you read the article because it's very, very sane.

Here's a tidbit -

"It is what Noam Chomsky calls “Blair’s new military humanism”, in which all means are excusable since intentions were noble. The bomb dropped on a marketplace or a wedding reception was moral because it was meant to fall somewhere else. It would indeed, since the war is just, have been immoral not to have dropped such a weapon. By definition our bombs are good bombs and theirs are not."

Amen.

The Strange Death of Malachi Ritscher...

2006-11-15T05:10:00.001+02:00

I came across the following news item on Harpers.org -

To protest the Iraq war, a man named Malachi Ritscher committed suicide in Chicago by setting himself on fire next to a 25-foot-tall sculpture called “Flame of the Millennium.” Along with a self-penned obituary, the 52-year-old Ritscher posted a farewell message on his website in which he described the “deep shame” of a day in 2002 when he stood, knife in hand, next to Donald Rumsfeld, but was unable to bring himself to slash the defense secretary's throat. “I too love God and country,” wrote Ritscher, “and feel called upon to serve.”

After googling around a bit - I found Malachi's farewell note. You can, if you're so inclined, read the whole thing right here. For the less adventurous, here are some excerpts:

"My actions should be self-explanatory, and since in our self-obsessed culture words seldom match the deed, writing a mission statement would seem questionable. So judge me by my actions...

Our so-called leaders are the real terrorists in the world today, responsible for more deaths than Osama bin Laden...

When I hear about our young men and women who are sent off to war in the name of God and Country, and who give up their lives for no rational cause at all, my heart is crushed. What has happened to my country? we have become worse than the imagined enemy - killing civilians and calling it 'collateral damage', torturing and trampling human rights inside and outside our own borders, violating our own Constitution whenever it seems convenient, lying and stealing right and left, more concerned with sports on television and ring-tones on cell-phones than the future of the world.... half the population is taking medication because they cannot face the daily stress of living in the richest nation in the world...

I too love God and Country, and feel called upon to serve. I can only hope my sacrifice is worth more than those brave lives thrown away when we attacked an Arab nation under the deception of 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'. Our interference completely destroyed that country, and destabilized the entire region. Everyone who pays taxes has blood on their hands.
I have had one previous opportunity to serve my country in a meaningful way - at 8:05 one morning in 2002 I passed Donald Rumsfeld on Delaware Avenue and I was acutely aware that slashing his throat would spare the lives of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people. I had a knife clenched in my hand, and there were no bodyguards visible; to my deep shame I hesitated, and the moment was past.
The violent turmoil initiated by the United States military invasion of Iraq will beget future centuries of slaughter, if the human race lasts that long. First we spit on the United Nations, then we expect them to clean up our mess. Our elected representatives are supposed to find diplomatic and benevolent solutions to these situations. Anyone can lash out and retaliate, that is not leadership or vision. Where is the wisdom and honor of the people we delegate our trust to?
To the rest of the world we are cowards - demanding Iraq to disarm, and after they comply, we attack with remote-control high-tech video-game weapons. And then lie about our reasons for invading. We the people bear complete responsibility for all that will follow, and it won't be pretty...

Our leaders are not wise persons with integrity and vision - they are actors reading from teleprompters, whose highest goal is to stir up the mob. Our country slaughters Arabs, abandons New Orleaneans, and ignores the dieing environment. Our economy is a house of cards, as hollow and fragile as our reputation around the world. We as a nation face the abyss of our own design."

Malachi was an activist, a jazz musician, a sound engineer, and a member of Mensa. His license plates were named after his favorite studio microphones. Once, he had been a minister.

Well.

So it goes.

You can also find more to read here.

From Ali G. To Borat - It's STILL Not Funny...

2006-11-14T08:44:00.000+02:00

I first saw an Ali G. show years ago.

I laughed.

I didn't laugh much, but I did laugh once, as I 'got' the joke, and then something spectacularly simple happened; I no longer found it funny. Sacha Baron Cohen was, and continues to be, a one trick pony; 1 ) lie to people, 2) subject them to a false premise conducted by somebody pretending to be even more stupid than he really is, and 3) watch them get initially frustrated by the sheer idiocy put on display, before 4) they finally grow annoyed as they realize that this is nothing but a cheap offensive waste of their time.

That was Ali G then, and that, today, is Borat.

Needless to say, since Sacha is such a one trick pony, he can never quite play the same place twice, such is notoriety. Thus, having pretty much beaten a dead horse to shreds across the ocean, he now comes to Amerika - where the audience has not yet been vaccinated to his particular brand of social offense.

It might be interesting to dwell on the possible motivations inducing a one trick Zionist comedian hack to choose a real nation, and in fact, a nation whose population is mostly Islamic to be the home of the idiot character he portrays - when a fictional nation would have served just as well. One wonders if the extra toxicity was necessary, but that is an issue deserving of a whole article in and of itself.

Of course this tendency on Sacha Baron Cohen's part is not new. It is certainly no coincidence that his previous idiot of a character was called Ali.

It might also be interesting to wonder how an American media might react to the inverse situation; that a Muslim actor make a movie in which he plays a stupid, rude, crass, offensive, creepy, clumsy, buffoon of a Jew with the likely name of, say, Cohen.

The charges of antisemitism, I suspect, would in sheer volume drown out the cacophony of the wars raging in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Those charges of antisemitism would be leveled not only at the actor, the producers, the studio responsible, the director, but also, I suspect, at those viewers who pay to watch this offense and who laugh, and laugh, and laugh...

As though this were funny.

And yet - no such charges are spoken against Sacha Baron Cohen, or at Everyman Studios, or Four By Two, or Gold/Miller Productions, or One America, or 20th Century Fox, or Larry Charles - or the 837 theaters that screened the movie, or the audiences that have paid upwards of $70 million to enjoy the vicious venom of a vicarious racism.

How did we get here?

'Israel' - The Might To Exist...

2006-11-13T07:22:00.000+02:00

Now, just to settle this once and for all.

Every once in a while, as has happened just recently (see comments on my previous post), I get told that it is the 'impractical' Arabs that are at the root of the problem. That, as a recent commentator has said, if the Arabs still resisting Zionism were but to "recognize Israel's right to exist" - then things could move on; progress could be achieved, the Middle East crisis would come to an end, and the Sun would rise in the East! The winds will once again smell of fresh blossoms, and the footprints of Jesus would shine bright throughout the Holy Land, cleansing it of millennia of bloodshed and imperial strife...

Right.

For the record, I do not acknowledge "Israel"'s right to exist. The claim is absurd, and even otherwise intelligent people have been taught to repeat it like a mantra. It just ain't so.

This does not put me as far out on a limb as some of the mantra-repeaters might think, I recall speaking to an American Professor at the American University in Cairo, and likewise, his view was that any 'right to exist' in the region was for the Arabs to grant, if they had so wished. The Zionist invaders had no claim to a fiat legitimus per se...

The Zionist delusion has no historical legitimacy, it has no ontological claim to existence, and it certainly has no moral right to exist. The fact that something is does not auto-magically grant it the sanction of an 'ought' or a 'should'. Children know better than to think that.

The simple fact is that the occupation known to Zionists throughout the world as 'Israel' - was built on nothing but an infrastructure of deception and outright lies - if you'd like some of the background on that feel free to peruse Roger Garaudy's 'The Founding Myths of Israeli Politics'.

This shameful construction, this so-called 'state', described to my ears by at least one of its own citizens as 'a cancer in the Middle East' is likewise sustained, not by any legal, moral, or historical right, but by the sheer brutal application of military might.

The 'state' you know as 'Israel' has nothing but the might to exist.

Open Letter To Nancy Pelosi...

2006-11-09T11:15:00.000+02:00

My name is Omar Kamel, and I am Egyptian.

I'm not a big fan of watching the news, but I couldn't help notice all the coverage regarding your victory in the recent elections. In any case, I wanted to know where you stood on things, and despite reasonable positions on some issues, and despite what appears to be a relatively compassionate social agenda, I was shocked to see that your heart stopped short of compassion for the plight of my Palestinian neighbors - when I finally read the text of your speech to AIPAC, I admit, I was horrified.

In any case, and assuming this email has not by now been deleted and ignored, I'm asking you a favor. Low as it may appear to be, I beseech you as a mother, and as a grandmother, to inform yourself more...fairly regarding the situation. I write this as the news also informs me about the recent attack by Israel which killed over 20 people in Gaza, most of them women and children....and I ask you, a stranger whom I have never met and most probably never will, a favor.

I ask that you please read the accompanying document I'm sending you, an article written by the late Professor Charles Black of Yale. A simple document, and a relatively old one, but the truths I believe it contains have remained, unfortunately, relevant to the current situation in the Middle East.

I know you probably don't have time for this, and especially considering the request comes from a man in Egypt who is most certainly not a constituent - but I spent the first few years of my life in the United States, and I still feel an affinity, and I am very sad for the horrors unleashed upon this world by people who should really know better.

The only guarantee of security, and I say this both to the US and to Israel - to whom you've promised support 'Now and forever' - is the cultivation of good will. If the incredible funds used to nurture might were used instead to nurture good will, there would be no such thing as what you consider terrorism.

In any case, I am going off my main topic, and my main request.

As a human being, and a fellow citizen of this planet, I really do hope you could at least read Professor Black's document.

Thank you,

A Tiny Bit of Boycott History...

2006-11-07T03:45:00.000+02:00

Most people seem to dismiss boycotts as ineffectual, a quick look at the history of Coca-Cola and Pepsi in the Middle East seems to indicate that we have been led to sorely underestimate the purchasing power we wield when we act en masse.

Take a look, you might want to reconsider your attitude.

If you keep wondering what you can do, well, stupid as it sounds:

Start with the basics.

What's Wrong With Alan Shore?

2006-11-02T14:25:00.000+02:00

Well, initially, nothing.

Season 3 of Boston Legal, however, has put the character in grave danger. There are two reasons, not one, for why Alan Shore had been such a fascinating character in The Practice, and in the first episodes of Boston Legal. He had been (as he yet continues to be) quirky - and more importantly he had been (and by Season 3 he has lost this) - scary.

This has been lost. We are no longer terrified at the extents to which Alan Shore might go in order to set things right. Alan Shore was the ultimate 'egg breaker' - when it came to omelette's.

In an episode of The Practice - he illegally obtains a document with which to effectively blackmail a pharmaceutical company into paying a settlement for a widow whose husband had apparently been driven suicidal by their drug. Her husband is dead, she has three children - Alan Shore knows what he must do - and yet - that a force for good should be quite so corrupt - is eerily disturbing. On the one hand, you are repulsed by his complete lack of faith in procedure, and yet - you have to admire, and this is a careful phrase, his willingness to sacrifice his own professional integrity for the sake of the particular good.

In the same episode, he refuses to walk into a conference room at the office, because he suspects that his client has left a murder weapon in there. He maintains that since he hasn't actually seen the murder weapon, then he has no real knowledge of evidence that he is suppressing. He chooses, in what can only be described as pragmatism, to remain sincerely ignorant of the contents of the conference room.

In all cases, he is certain that he can do a better job than the system, and in most cases, we see that to be true. I remember perhaps one exception in season 1 or 2 of Boston Legal where he had just won a case, and then had caught a glimpse between two involved parties, a glimpse that seemed to have meant he had been duped. That his sympathies had been played upon, and that he had used his skills to help the bad guys.

In any case...

Alan Shore represented nothing short of the triumph of morality over ethics, now he's been nipped, fixed, sterilized - and all we're left with is...quirkiness.

Not enough.

Make Space For The Flintstones...

2006-10-20T00:01:00.000+03:00

Once again demonstrating an incredible lack of perspective, the United States has claimed not an oil field, not a country, not even a continent, not even planet Earth, but outer space.

Why does that make me think of goldfish?

Ewoks should note this with interest, as should the citizens of Zenn-La, as should Klingons or any other space-faring civilization throughout the known universe. You're all property of the Unites States of Americom.

Once again, the revered Americom president 'W' has gone forth boldly where no man had ever wanted to go before, and has signed a policy document unilaterally declaring that Americom has the (and the quotes here are understated...) 'right' to deny access to space to anyone deemed 'hostile' to Americom interests.

In effect; claiming Americom ownership of outer space.

Move over Spock.

Wargames

2006-10-09T22:05:00.000+03:00

[after playing out all possible outcomes for Global Thermonuclear War]

Joshua: Greetings, Professor Falken.
Stephen Falken: Hello, Joshua.
Joshua: A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?

Strangely powerful movie, having just re-watched it. It's lost none of the power it had when I was a teenager and saw it for the first time. Granted, it was cheesier in retrospect, but the main idea is both powerful and on the dot, and the main sequence at the very end - when Joshua is going through all the possible scenarios is heart wrenching when considered in context.

I wonder if this is what Gardner might have meant by moral fiction?

Homework.

Meeting Nasrallah

2006-10-04T08:31:00.000+03:00

There's an interesting article by Assaf Kfoury on Counterpunch.com right here. Kfoury and Noam Chomsky went and met Nassrallah, and discussed a few issues at some length.

Well worth reading.

By The Sword: Fact & Fiction...

2006-09-28T07:45:00.001+03:00

Interesting article about the Pope Mess by Uri Avnery, an Israeli writer and peace activist with Gush Shalom.

Read it here.

Trying To Keep My Cool...

2006-09-28T01:17:00.000+03:00

What the hell is wrong with The Australian? Or more precisely, Roger Boyes in Berlin?

They publish an article with the hideous and false title of 'Mozart Sacrificed To The Muslims', about the German Opera performance that's been cancelled for worries about a specific scene.

The title is significant when you consider that the scene in question is not part of the original Opera, and is an 'addition' created by the Opera's director. The objectionable material has nothing whatsoever to do with Mozart.

And so, along come Roger and The Australian with a title claiming that Mozart has been sacrificed to 'The Muslims'. Notice that; not the objections of a specific Islamic body in Germany, no - the title simply says 'The Muslims'...

If you read the article, Roger does get around to mentioning that the scene occurs in the epilogue which Roger does tell us was conceived' by the director, but by the time he casually mentions that, the damage has been done. The readers have already been put in a mindset in which Mozart has fell victim to the suicidal maniacs.

Right.

The article title is obscene. It is false and inflammatory, and it is cheap.

Pope - A Bit More...

2006-09-25T05:08:00.000+03:00

You might find this to be of interest.

American Gulag

2006-09-24T09:00:00.000+03:00

Kate Brown is Associate Professor of History at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. Her book, A Biography of No Place: From Ethnic Borderland to Soviet Heartland won the American Historical Association’s George Louis Beer Prize. As a historian of Soviet history, she has sifted through an array of declassified NKVD and KGB documents about the abuse of prisoners in the Gulag. Her article, “Out of Solitary Confinement: The History of the Gulag,” will be published in Kritika vol. 8, no. 1 (Winter 2007). Brown recently answered a series of questions about the American penal and detention system, especially as it has developed post-9/11.

Read about it here at Harpers.

The Great Space Jack-Off...

2006-09-24T02:48:00.000+03:00

When I was twelve years old I wanted nothing more than to be an astronaut. To travel to space, and to see the planet of my birth from a distance. To go boldly where, well...a few had gone before.

When the space shuttle first launched into space, in 1981, I hassled my father until he agreed to let me call the international line NASA had set up, so I could hear the transmissions going back and forth between the astronauts and NASA HQ.

Despite hearing absolutely nothing of any consequence whatsoever, and despite a phone bill that my father certainly regretted, I was thrilled. It was, in a word, exciting.

Yes, when I was twelve.

Luckily, since then - I have grown up.

Dennis Tito, Mark Shuttleworth, Gregory Olsen, and now Anousheh Ansari.

What do they have in common?

Well, they are the space tourists, people so caught up in their own little multi-millionaire bubbles that they are willing to spend up to $20 million to piss in space while being fully aware of just how many terran-based human lifeforms that much money could save.

Shameful, and in it's own way no less shameful than buying a million dollar diamond-studded cell phone. As though the universe could care less where you've been or what you possess.

We're not twelve anymore, and whereas I have nothing against space tourism per se, I consider it in extremely poor taste when Earth is still home to poverty, famine, racism, and murder.

Grow up.

The Pope 'Thing' - Messier & Messier...

2006-09-23T17:17:00.000+03:00

So here I am, reading an article called 'The Pope on Islam' by a Dominic Lawson.

Lawson obviously has a vain view of himself, setting himself up as some intellectual man of courage, daring to speak out the things which others only dare think...etc..etc...

He claims that, despite claims to the contrary from moderates on both sides, the religions are natural enemies with mutually offensive beliefs.

He says "Christianity exists only on the basis that Jesus Christ is the son of God. Islam exists only on the basis that God dictated his laws to Mohamed and that the Koran contains the actual words of God" - ignoring completely the simple fact that both religions share one common notion, i.e. monotheism.

He also fails to see that some issues are due to chronological issues.

For example, Islam, coming after Christianity, clearly calls both Jews and Christians 'people of the book' - giving them a distinct position not shared with Buddhism, for example.

Dominic, published in the Hamilton Spectator, wants to start a fire.

He quotes an Islamic belief that Jesus could not have been the son of God, and although that may be true, he implies therefore that Moslems see Jesus as a liar, or a deluded fool.

In fact, and if he doesn't know better then he just hasn't done his homework, nothing could be further from the truth. The traditional Islamic view, which is (by the way) not contradicted by the Bible itself, is that Jesus was a prophet, and as such is held in very high regard within Islamic circles.

The divinity (or not) of Jesus has always been in dispute, even within earlier Christian circles. I need mention, for example, the adherents of docetism - as well as others - who saw a distinct difference between a moral Jesus and a Divine Christ...

In any case, as anybody who's done some research would know - the whole 'Son of God' thing came later, as did the Trinity concept, which to this day, nobody quite has a grip on.

I remember going through the Jesus quotations in the Bible before, and to my memory, although he does use the idea of God having children, not once did I see it used exclusively. For example, I would notice phrases like 'our heavenly father', etc...

In short, when Dominic says "If Jesus was not the Son of God then he, too, was deluded or a liar" - as though this were the Islamic view, he is lying. It's simply not true. Moslems might consider the vast majority of Christians to be confused or deluded on this point, but none of them believe that Jesus is guilty of this delusion. The guilt for this particular mess is thrown at the feet of the Christian Church, and at the Council of Nicaea, etc...

Also - and this is where Dominic is simply being disingenuous - he quotes a then Cardinal Ratzinger as saying that "Islam simply does not have the separation of the political and religious spheres which Christianity had from the very beginning". This is where I would laugh if this matter were not so serious for so many. The idea that anybody would today claim that the Church has not been a political entity with political aspirations is absolutely ridiculous. We need only recall that since Constantine the Church has been a political entity, in fact, molded, some have said, for political purposes. For centuries it was the Church and the Papacy that crowned kings in Europe. How is that not political? And yet, here comes Dominic The Inflamer, centuries later, after Napoleon grabbed the crown back from the church, quoting Ratzinger in claiming that the Church from the beginning had no political motive.

Right.

Maybe next week Dominic will claim that just because he uses a quote does not necessarily mean he feels the same way.

I leave you with these last words:

"There has only ever been one Christian, and he died on the cross." - Nietzsche

Dominic? I don't think so.

Fun & Fury @ The UN....

2006-09-22T07:39:00.000+03:00

It's good to experience some catharsis.

This week, as you all know, has been a bit of a rough ride for the United Nations.

Bush came out and gave us all a good few laughs, and then Ahmednejad and Chavez gave us all some much needed vocalization. What you may not have noticed is how the US media has been trying to skirt around the issues...

A simple example:

ABC News - unfortunately televised on MBC-4 (a Middle Eastern satelite channel which has recently taken to printing a disclaimer on all American News broadcasts in an attempt to purge themselves of responsibility for the crude lies they remain proxy to ) - has been juggling.

Before my very eyes, I saw the newscaster, whose name I didn't catch ( I just checked, and it appears to have been Taina Hernandez ) - sit around with a United Nations correspondant. She asked the correspondant about the ongoing events at the UN General Assembly. The correspondant clearly explained, with some amusement, how Hugo Chavez had laid the smack on the US, and more specifically, on Bush.

She told us that, although there were some initial laughs as Chavez spoke of the smell of sulfer left on the podium in the wake of Bush's speech, the audience applauded him quite dramatically. In fact, she stated that Chavez had so far been the single most applauded speaker.

Read that last line again.

Got it?

Alright. Good. Now...

FIVE minutes later, if not less, the same newscaster who had been speaking with the correspondant 'summarized the news' - and by a sheer act of media magicks the news had changed during those five minutes. Now, we were told that Chavez had delivered a speech at the UN for which he drew, and trust me, I quote, "scattered applause".

Yup.

Now read that again, and if you can, please excuse me for suspecting that some readers might have the memory span that ABC News thinks they have - but...

How the hell did 'strongest applause' during which "the diplomats and assembled presidents began to applaud him as if they were attending the theater" as described in the Russian Kommersant turn into 'scattered applause'?

Quite a trick, no?

They're working us and they're most certainly working you.

Figure it out.

Use some common sense, and let empathy be your guide.

Bush At The UN - On TV....Right Now...

2006-09-19T19:43:00.000+03:00

So he's on.

At the United Nations.

I missed most of what Kofi said...

Here's Bush making it sound like any democratic progress anywhere in the world must have been due to the influence of the United States. Painting pictures of misery worldwide, misery - we are to suppose - that will be alleviated by the actions of the United States.

And I think of Afghanistan, and Iraq - and I think of the blood of innocents, and of orphaned children.

"You have been fed conspiracy theories..." he tells us.

We must support, he said - people who offer better alternatives than blowing yourself up. I agree. Give them nukes and rpg's and they won't need to blow themselves up....but he goes on...

"My country desires peace", he says. "Extremists in your midst spread propaganda", he says...

He claims he will continue to 'train' those of us that 'step forward' to fight the 'enemies of freedom', and again, I think of the sheer banality of assuming that anybody could even imagine that anybody hates 'freedom'. What is at stake is freedom. Freedom from a United Nations non-democratically dominated by the private Security Council.

Now he has the balls to address the people of Lebanon, and alienates us all by immediately calling Hezbollah's actions 'unprovoked'.

He's insane.

He promises Lebanon will rise again, and makes it sound like it is the United States that will accomplish that. That it will rise due to nothing but the charity of John Smith, Idaho.

He goes on, and on. He just mentioned Nuclear Weapons.

And I think of the countless thousands the US has in stock, and I think of Hiroshima, and of Nagazaki, and I think of an angry Shiva, the light of a thousand suns, and I think of MiracleMan.

Now, he addresses Syria, claiming that it's rulers have turned it into a tool of Iran.

He wants Syria to live at peace with its' neighbors.

How the heart swells...

He says the UN has tried to help, and then - he says - and I tell you - check the video - he smiles as he continues "and yet you suffer". He smiled saying this.

Just now.

He claims the issues at Darfur put the credibility of the United Nations at stake, and I think - no, it's the damn Security Council that puts that at stake.

He re-iterates the so-called 'two state solution' for Palestine and the Zionists, and yet seems blissfully unaware of the racism of inherent in his next sentence which includes the phrase 'the jewish state of...'...

And I wonder why it's not called the Christian United States....or the United States of Chri...but let's not drag him into this...

Olmert, Bush continues - is committed to peace, and I simply remember Lebanon's children again, and think - yes, Olmert should indeed be committed.

You think me bitter, perhaps - but I tell you this - I am both angry and sad.

"Freedom" Bush says "by it's very nature cannot be imposed, it must be chosen." - and I wonder - does he understand the words he's ... using? Afghanistan? Iraq? His veiled promises to possible Syrian collaborators? To an Iranian people who find him both uneducated and ridiculous?

And now, they clap.

And clap.

Some, I see, as the camera pans out, have the decency not to.

Amen.

US Holds AP Photographer in Iraq...

2006-09-18T22:44:00.000+03:00

"The U.S. military in Iraq has imprisoned an Associated Press
photographer for five months, accusing him of being a security threat
but never filing charges or permitting a public hearing..."

Yup.

Read more about it right here.

By The Numbers...

2006-09-12T02:26:00.000+03:00

Just thought it might be worth noting that at this time the number of American soldiers killed in Afghanistan and Iraq is already greater than the number of Americans killed by the September 2001 attack on the World Trade Center.

So if the (clears throat) 'point' of the 'War on Terrorism' has been to ensure that such a loss is never again endured by America, well...

Guess what?

The 'War on Terrorism' has just accomplished precisely what it sought to prevent.

(imagines 7 billion humans clapplauding)

Amen.

Bush Assassination : Watch The Film!

2006-09-01T13:28:00.000+03:00

"Set in October 2007, the 90-minute drama uses a mix of archive footage, computer generated imagery and documentary techniques to portray Bush's assassination and America's reaction to it. Death of a President, which will also headline the Toronto film festival, will be seen first in this country on sister channel More 4 before being repeated on the main channel."

Yup.

Read the rest right here.

Media Warp 10

2006-08-26T18:09:00.000+03:00

I just had a flip through a few channels, and I committed upon myself the misfortune of choosing to watch some BBC. They had a short art documentary on, about Zionist artists, whom they spoke of as belonging to something called an 'Israel'.

In any case, and more to the point...

First, they showcased a photographer who got off on photographing 'homo-erotic' half nude IDF soldiers in explicitly playful and non-combative situations. Then they interviewed a painter who said something to the effect that the WALL was useless, and another, who while speculating on the meaning of a painting depicting two men in an airplane said (my italics) "maybe they are two Jews going back to Europe." They also talked to an artist who had moved to New York, and who, in a rather thick, quite un-newyorkian accent, claimed that she had been in NY so long it was now a part of her.

Quite.

Finally, towards the end, I hear them described as 'indigenous artists' - a violence to both logic and history, and an insult to the dead and living of any truly indigenous peoples.

And then - finally -

This thing the BBC keeps referring to as an 'Israel' - is described as "the"... and I do quote, "the cultural hub of the Middle East".

That will most certainly be news to hundreds of millions of Middle Easterners.

Think about that for a while.

Consider how the BBC could possibly say such a thing and claim any journalistic standards of objectivity whatsoever. Either they know the truth and they are consciously lying, hence aggressing...

or, and this is the much more sinister possibility - that in the dim-witted world of the BBC only culture exported from Europe is seen as culture. That in the world of BBC, culture must be presented in English for it to even exist.

And you wonder, as you offend, abuse and pile on both injury and insult, why the widows and the orphans do not yet worship the very ground beneath your feet...

Message To America From Your Special Friend In The Middle East!

2006-08-23T09:18:00.000+03:00

Watch the secret recording!

Watch the incredible special f/x!

Hear the message! Observe!

Observe!

See? It's all true.

Well, c'mon. I can't be serious all the time...

You can also watch it at YouTube.com right here.

In The First Person...

2006-08-16T08:39:00.000+03:00

Whao, Nelly...

Okay, we're on completely different planets, so let's get a few things straight:

1. Regarding recent events and Hezbollah, the Lebanese are not guilty of anything.

2. Hezboloh need not be 'expunged' because they are Lebanese. They are not a 'terrorist gang' as John 'Zionist' Bolton claimed at the United Nations. They are a popular resistence movement, and have been fending off Zionist aggression for more than a decade, and are the only reason the so-called 'State of Israel' has NOT invaded Lebanon so far, despite constant air patrols, and their attempts to terrorize Lebanon into surrending some of it's land and water.

3. Hezbollah are part of the Lebanese government, and represent anywhere between 20-40% of the ruling democracy.

In fact, if anything, gung-ho statments about 'following rats to their holes' imply that it is Hezbollah that should move straight into Tel Aviv, and yet - even the so-called 'triggering incident' of this recent Zionist aggression occured not on Occupied Palestine, but inside the Lebanese border.

In other words, Hezbollah have done nothing wrong, and the Zionists, as racists tend to, have been lying, and lying, and lying, and lying.

And anybody with half an eye wouldn't find that surprising.

And don't believe me...

Sure, I'm a brainwashed nutcase fundie that's out to cut off your limbs and confiscate your porn collection - Don't trust me.

Do some research, find out the real context of this conflict, and perhaps you won't be so quick with knee-jerk idiotic reactions next time.

Oh, also - you might want to consider this - as to working out who's lying - a bit of chronological awareness does help...

When this round of Zionist aggression started, Hezbollah stated that for them, the continuing existence of the resistance would be a victory. The IDF declared that it's goal was to 'wipe out' Hezbollah.

By their own definitions of success, declared immediately upon the commencement of aggresion, the Racist Zionist Occupying Military Terror That Calls Itself A Country have lost, whereas a 'terrorist gang' of no more than a 'few thousand' has won.

If this were a hollywood movie, nobody would for a moment suspect who the good guy in this scenario is, and who the bad guy is. Nobody would for a second doubt that heroic resistance can only be put up by characters fighting for a just cause.

A child could see all this.

Too bad us 'adults' are busy watching the news...

Wonderfully Abusive, Ridiculously Undiplomatic, Hail George!

2006-08-09T03:24:00.000+03:00

And I'm not being sarcastic. Admittedly, George doesn't go about it in what appears to be the most subtle way, and perhaps that might be less persuasive to those who might take offense, but if you can just get past that, and listen to what he's saying, and actually process it instead of just reel back in shock, then you might start to understand why any demeanor less insulted would be too shameful to bear...

And yes, that was a long sentence, I apologize for the lack of brevity.

Enjoy.

You can watch it at YouTube.com right here.

Gibson This...

2006-08-06T17:35:00.000+03:00

"Meanwhile, the fuss about Gibson's outburst has eclipsed less famous prophets, such as the Rev John Hagee. A Texan televangelist, Hagee recently told a meeting of Christian Zionists that the attacks on Lebanon are 'a miracle of God'. Several senators attended his symposium, at which he received a personal message of praise from President Bush." - Why are we crucifying Mel Gibson?

Yup. Who's paying attention?

A Zionist Is A Racist By Any Other Name...

2006-08-06T05:39:00.000+03:00

Please read this very important article by Virginia Tilley, she argues the case for an international boycott of Israel. More importantly, she discusses how the international community might go about implementing it.

She compares the Israeli position to that of the apartheid regime in South Africa and suggests that nothing short of the same international pressure could cause any real change to the policies of Zionism.

Here's an eye-opening excerpt:

"It is the "demographic threat," not security (Mr. Olmert has clarified), that requires the dreadful Wall to separate Arab and Jewish communities, now juxtaposed in a fragmented landscape, who might otherwise mingle.
"Demographic threat" is the most disgustingly racist phrase still openly deployed in international parlance. It has been mysteriously tolerated by a perplexed international community. But it can be tolerated no longer. Zionist fear of the demographic threat launched the expulsion of the indigenous Arab population in 1948 and 1967, created and perpetuates Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, inspires its terrible human rights abuses against Palestinians, spins into regional unrest like the 1982 attack on Lebanon..."

Read the whole article at Counterpunch.

America's "Special Relationship" With Israel...

2006-08-05T21:22:00.000+03:00

As sort-of-promised previously, here is a pdf version of the entire article by Professor Charles Black. Feel free to copy, link, distribute, etc. at will.

You might also be interested in this piece by Kurt Vonnegut:

06/17/06 -- "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you." A lot of people think Jesus said that, because it is so much the sort of thing Jesus liked to say. But it was actually said by Confucius, a Chinese philosopher, five hundred years before there was that greatest and most humane of human beings, named Jesus Christ.

The Chinese also gave us, via Marco Polo, pasta and the formula for gunpowder. The Chinese were so dumb they only used gunpowder for fireworks. And everybody was so dumb back then that nobody in either hemisphere even knew that there was another one.

We've sure come a long way since then. Sometimes I wish we hadn't. I hate H-bombs and the Jerry Springer Show

But back to people like Confucius and Jesus and my son the doctor, Mark, each of whom have said in their own way how we could behave more humanely and maybe make the world a less painful place. One of my favourite humans is Eugene Debs, from Terre Haute in my native state of Indiana.

Get a load of this. Eugene Debs, who died back in 1926, when I was not yet four, ran five times as the Socialist party candidate for president, winning 900,000 votes, almost 6 percent of the popular vote, in 1912, if you can imagine such a ballot. He had this to say while campaigning:

"As long as there is a lower class, I am in it.

"As long as there is a criminal element, I am of it.

"As long as there is a soul in prison, I am not free."

Doesn't anything socialistic make you want to throw up? Like great public schools, or health insurance for all?

When you get out of bed each morning, with the roosters crowing, wouldn't you like to say. "As long as there is a lower class, I am in it. As long as there is a criminal element, I am of it. As long as there is a soul in prison, I am not free."

How about Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes?

Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Earth.

Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.

And so on.

Not exactly planks in a Republican platform. Not exactly George W Bush, Dick Cheney, or Donald Rumsfeld stuff.

For some reason, the most vocal Christians among us never mention the Beatitudes. But, often with tears in their eyes, they demand that the Ten Commandments be posted in public buildings. And of course that's Moses, not Jesus. I haven't heard one of them demand that the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes, be posted anywhere.

"Blessed are the merciful" in a courtroom? "Blessed are the peacemakers" in the Pentagon? Give me a break!

It so happens that idealism enough for anyone is not made of perfumed pink clouds. It is the law! It is the US Constitution.

But I myself feel that our country, for whose Constitution I fought in a just war, might as well have been invaded by Martians and body snatchers. Sometimes I wish it had been. What has happened instead is that it was taken over by means of the sleaziest, low-comedy, Keystone Cops-style coup d'état imaginable.

I was once asked if I had any ideas for a really scary reality TV show. I have one reality show that would really make your hair stand on end: "C-Students from Yale".

George W Bush has gathered around him upper-crust C-students who know no history or geography, plus not-so-closeted white supremacists, aka Christians, and plus, most frighteningly, psychopathic personalities, or PPs, the medical term for smart, personable people who have no consciences.

To say somebody is a PP is to make a perfectly respectable diagnosis, like saying he or she has appendicitis or athlete's foot. The classic medical text on PPs is The Mask of Sanity by Dr Hervey Cleckley, a clinical professor of psychiatry at the Medical College of Georgia, published in 1941. Read it!

Some people are born deaf, some are born blind or whatever, and this book is about congenitally defective human beings of a sort that is making this whole country and many other parts of the planet go completely haywire nowadays. These were people born without consciences, and suddenly they are taking charge of everything.

PPs are presentable, they know full well the suffering their actions may cause others, but they do not care. They cannot care because they are nuts. They have a screw loose!

And what syndrome better describes so many executives at Enron and WorldCom and on and on, who have enriched themselves while ruining their employees and investors and country and who still feel as pure as the driven snow, no matter what anybody may say to or about them? And they are waging a war that is making billionaires out of millionaires, and trillionaires out of billionaires, and they own television, and they bankroll George Bush, and not because he's against gay marriage.

So many of these heartless PPs now hold big jobs in our federal government, as though they were leaders instead of sick. They have taken charge. They have taken charge of communications and the schools, so we might as well be Poland under occupation.

They might have felt that taking our country into an endless war was simply something decisive to do. What has allowed so many PPs to rise so high in corporations, and now in government, is that they are so decisive. They are going to do something every fuckin' day and they are not afraid. Unlike normal people, they are never filled with doubts, for the simple reason that they don't give a fuck what happens next. Simply can't. Do this! Do that! Mobilise the reserves! Privatise the public schools! Attack Iraq! Cut health care! Tap everybody's telephone! Cut taxes on the rich! Build a trillion-dollar missile shield! Fuck habeas corpus and the Sierra Club and In These Times, and kiss my ass!

There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I don't know what can be done to fix it. This is it: only nut cases want to be president. This was true even in high school. Only clearly disturbed people ran for class president.

The title of Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 is a parody of the title of Ray Bradbury's great science-fiction novel Fahrenheit 451. Four hundred and fifty-one degrees Fahrenheit is the combustion point, incidentally, of paper, of which books are composed. The hero of Bradbury's novel is a municipal worker whose job is burning books.

While on the subject of burning books, I want to congratulate librarians, not famous for their physical strength, who, all over this country, have staunchly resisted anti-democratic bullies who have tried to remove certain books from their shelves, and destroyed records rather than have to reveal to thought police the names of persons who have checked out those titles.

So the America I loved still exists, if not in the White House, the Supreme Court, the Senate, the House of Representatives, or the media. The America I loved still exists at the front desks of our public libraries.

And still on the subject of books: our daily news sources, newspapers and TV, are now so craven, so unvigilant on behalf of the American people, so uninformative, that only in books do we learn what's really going on.

I will cite an example: House of Bush, House of Saud by Craig Unger, published in early 2004, that humiliating, shameful, blood-soaked year.

In case you haven't noticed, as the result of a shamelessly rigged election in Florida, in which thousands of African-Americans were arbitrarily disenfranchised, we now present ourselves to the rest of the world as proud, grinning, jut-jawed, pitiless war-lovers with appallingly powerful weaponry - who stand unopposed.

In case you haven't noticed, we are now as feared and hated all over the world as Nazis once were.

And with good reason.

In case you haven't noticed, our unelected leaders have dehumanised millions and millions of human beings simply because of their religion and race. We wound 'em and kill 'em and torture 'em and imprison 'em all we want.

Piece of cake.

In case you haven't noticed, we also dehumanised our own soldiers, not because of their religion or race, but because of their low social class.

Send 'em anywhere. Make 'em do anything.

Piece of cake.

The O'Reilly Factor.

So I am a man without a country, except for the librarians and a Chicago paper called In These Times.

Before we attacked Iraq, the majestic New York Times guaranteed there were weapons of mass destruction there.

Albert Einstein and Mark Twain gave up on the human race at the end of their lives, even though Twain hadn't even seen the first world war. War is now a form of TV entertainment, and what made the first world war so particularly entertaining were two American inventions, barbed wire and the machine gun.

Shrapnel was invented by an Englishman of the same name. Don't you wish you could have something named after you?

Like my distinct betters Einstein and Twain, I now give up on people, too. I am a veteran of the second world war and I have to say this is not the first time I have surrendered to a pitiless war machine.

My last words? "Life is no way to treat an animal, not even a mouse."

Napalm came from Harvard. Veritas

Our president is a Christian? So was Adolf Hitler. What can be said to our young people, now that psychopathic personalities, which is to say persons without consciences, without senses of pity or shame, have taken all the money in the treasuries of our government and corporations, and made it all their own?

© 2005 Kurt Vonnegut Extracted from A Man Without a Country: : A Memoir of Life in George W Bush's America.

And so on...

You ARE Involved...

2006-08-05T17:08:00.000+03:00

Please watch this...

Otherwise, just don't act too surprised.

Yawm El Ghadab

2006-08-04T17:00:00.000+03:00

Made this years ago for the track 'Yawm El Ghadab' from the Shabaka album.

Enjoy.

You can watch it at YouTube.com right here.

Words To Consider...

2006-08-04T04:34:00.000+03:00

You might want to read the following quotation very carefully, and consider the words.

"Against huge odds...they decline to submit, and instead go out on the streets and pick up stones. They are beaten without let or mercy. They are imprisoned under obscene conditions, after kangaroo trials, or no trials at all. They are regularly shot at; enough of them are killed to make death as ever-present and as realistic a possibility as it was in our Korean and Vietnam Wars. Many are maimed; many are disfigured for life. Yet they come out in the streets again and again, these young people, some not much more than children, and they pick up stones.
"What name shall we give to the trait of character that produces conduct like this?
"Why do you hesitate? You know what the word is. Do you hesitate because that word just never happens to be spoken in America in application to these young Palestinian people? Or is it because you fear that a revolution in your thought and feeling will have to follow your pronouncing the word?
"Well, you're very likely right about that last. That makes you nervous? So let me help you. I'll start things off by saying the word for you the first time.
"The word is 'courage'."
Professor Charles L. Black, Jr.
Sterling Professor of Law Emeritus, Yale

Professor Black wrote only once about the Middle East, the terrible plight of the Palestinians, and the complicity of the United States in this situation because of the "Special Relationship" with Israel.

It was the only time in his career that no magazine or journal in the United States would publish his writings.

You can read the full text here - it's not in the most practical of formats, so I'll try to convert it to pdf at some point and mirror it somewhere. Don't hold your breath, since I'm not quite sure I've got the time to type it all up just yet.

But please read the damn thing...

Occupational Hazzards...

2006-08-04T04:03:00.000+03:00

Oh, so this is what an Israeli 'civilian' looks like...

Well, figures....

Gotta have something to fight off those nasty rock throwing Arab children whose land you're occupying, I guess...

Once again, American tax dollars at work!

Kidnapped in Israel or Captured in Lebanon? - by Joshua Frank

2006-08-03T15:00:00.000+03:00

Apparently, even 'Israel's excuse for starting the war is on shaky ground...

Yup.

Read up.

Kidnapped in Israel or Captured in Lebanon? - by Joshua Frank

Now, assuming a consistency of attitude...who do you think is lying?

The fall of a Hollywood hatemonger

2006-08-01T18:23:00.000+03:00

I was reading The fall of a Hollywood hatemonger by Christopher Hitchins, and well, he goes on and on, attacking Mel Gibson's DUI comments...

Hitchins goes out of his way to deride Gibson for apparently stating that Semites are behind most wars...

What is interesting is that at the end of the article, ironically enough, I noticed the National Post's 'Latest News' section...and despite the fact that I consider Zionists the problem and have nothing against Jews, I had to laugh...

These are the latest article links:

On the Move: In a major expansion of its ground offensive, Israel has decided to send troops...

Video: Israeli forces press on...

Israel thrusts across Border...

Israel pledges to broaden war...

C'mon. Isn't that just a bit creepy?

And Just In Case This Is All News To You...

2006-07-30T18:23:00.000+03:00

Here are some pics of Neturei Katra demonstrations...

At least those guys won't accuse me of being anti-Jewish.

God, this world needs an education.

Speaking of Neturei Katra ...

2006-07-30T16:59:00.000+03:00

This is their official response to the statments by the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad...

I quote in full.

The Orthodox Jewish response to the criticism of the Iranian President
28 October 2005
With the help of the Almighty.

Orthodox Jews the world over, are saddened by the hysteria which has greeted the recent stated desire of the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to see a world free of Zionism. This desire is nothing more than a yearning for a better, more peaceful world. It is a hope that with the elimination of Zionism, Jews and Muslims will live in harmony as they have throughout the ages, in Palestine and throughout the world.
It is a dangerous distortion, to see the President’s words, as indicative of anti-Jewish sentiments. The President was simply re-stating the beliefs and statements of Ayatollah Khomeini, who always emphasized and practiced the respect and protection of Jews and Judaism. The political ideology of Zionism alone was rejected. President Ahmadinejad stressed this distinction by referring only to Zionism, not Judaism or the Jewish people, regardless of whether they reside in Palestine or else were.
We concur!!… Orthodox Jews have always prayed and till today, continually pray for the speedy and peaceful dismantling of the Zionist state. As per the teachings of the Torah, the Jewish law, the Jewish people are required to be loyal, upstanding citizens, in all of the countries where-in they reside. They are expressly forbidden to have their own entity or state in any form or configuration, in this Heavenly decreed exile. Furthermore, the exemplification of one-self, with acts of compassion and goodness, is of the essence of Judaism. To subjugate and oppress a people, to steal their land, homes and orchards etc. is of the cardinal sins, of the basics crimes, forbidden by the Torah.
We have long stood together with the suffering Palestinian people in their struggle for self determination and respect. Based on our religious teachings, we believe it is impossible that any lasting peace can be achieved, for so long as the state of Israel exists. It is towards this goal of true reconciliation that religious Jews strive; via Palestinian statehood, so that we can once again reside in harmony and brotherhood.
May we merit to see the fruition of our prayers. Ultimately we pray for the day when all mankind will recognize the One G-g and serve Him in harmony. May this come upon us in the near future. Amen.
Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss
Neturei Karta International
Jews United Against Zionism
www.nkusa.org
914-262-8342

There.

The Seattle Incident - What You May Not Know...

2006-07-30T16:33:00.000+03:00

You may have all heard or read about what just happened in Seattle...

Unfortunately, almost all the news articles I've read - at the Washington Post linked above or elsewhere - fails to provide much needed context for what took place.

First of all, Naveed Afzal Haq might well have been desperate, but even my quick research shows he was not insane. The Jewish Federation of Greater Seatle is not a random collection of apolitical Jews. I went to their website, and learned a few things;

1. Right under their logo they make clear that they support Israel.

2. Just last week, while hundreds of innocent Lebanese were being bombarded by Israeli precision guided weapons, this 'Jewish' Federation held what they call the 'Largest Jewish Rally in the History of Seattle' in support of Israel, once again claiming Israel's 'right to defend itself' - i.e. their 'right' to ethnic cleansing, murder, and the usage of chemical weapons against innocents.

3. The woman that was killed was one of the rally volunteers, and at least one, if not more, of the wounded were on the organizing committee of the rally.

Had Naveed Afzal Haq attacked, say - the offices of Neturei Karta - I would gladly take the side of those calling him an armed madman...had he done that....

But he didn't.

Allow me a reconstruction...

He'd been watching the news, watching what he considers his fellow humans getting murdered in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and elsewhere, under the banner of the 'war on terrorism'...he's been watching Rice, Bush and Blair negotiating with the lives of women and children, and he's been seeing the toxic arm of Zionism murdering and lying, and claiming to be on the defensive...

...and then to his horror, he walked down the streets of his adopted hometown, and watched the 'Jewish' Federation of Greater Seattle (in my book - if you support 'Israel' - you're a Zionist, not simply a Jew...) - organize a rally in support of the horrors he had been witnessing...

Go ahead. Act surprised.

Who The Hell is John Bolton?

2006-07-28T14:03:00.000+03:00

Israel's Man at the UN

"In December 2005 the Zionist Organization of America honored Bolton with its annual Defender of Israel Award. Presenting the award, ZOA president Morton Klein said: 'The ZOA praises and strongly supports the heroic efforts of Ambassador Bolton to bring about fair treatment of Israel and decent conduct within the United Nations.' Referring to his recent work as UN ambassador on behalf of Israel, Klein noted that Bolton's 'efforts to have Hezbollah condemned at last for its vicious terrorist assaults on Israel, without the usual 'balancing' criticism of Israel for legitimately striking back at Hezbollah, is a major achievement and speaks volumes for his commitment to justice, the war on Islamic terrorism, and fair dealing for Israel and the world.'"

Read on.

Nasrallah's Interview on Jazeera...

2006-07-25T10:54:00.000+03:00

I was trying to locate this online, I've finally found a web link that has more of the interview than I've found anywhere else, and it's right here.

To get an idea of what's said, and why I feel it matters, here are some excerpts:

"We have been on the American terrorism list since... since they began the terrorism list. We were among the first to be included in the terrorism list. Some European countries also include us in their terrorism lists. The position of the international community is clear, and therefore, we are not surprised by the international community, and we have never pinned our hopes on it." - Hassan Nasrallah

"Today, we would accept it if the Arab regimes - I am being very objective and realistic... We would accept it if they were neutral. That's it. In the past, too, we accepted this from them. If you examine the rhetoric of Hizbullah... Maybe the rhetoric of our Palestinian brothers is different, and this is their right, because their circumstances are much harsher than ours. They always attack, accuse, and denounce the regimes and the rulers. This is not part of our rhetoric or writings. Why? Because we have forgotten about them." - Hassan Nasrallah

"Once we used to ask the international community to denounce the hangman and to have mercy on the victim. Then we got to the point where we said we would accept it if they denounce the hangman and the victim alike. This has become what we could expect from them. If a resolution denounces both the hangman and the victim - fine. As for the Arab regimes - all we expect from them is to be neutral. And if they do not want to be neutral - brother, let them treat Israel and us equally. We would even accept it if they treat the hangman and the victim equally. But for them to participate in spilling the blood of the victim, and to provide cover for the crimes of the hangman - I tell you that we did not expect this." - Hassan Nasrallah

"They want to annihilate any motivation to conduct resistance in Lebanon, whether by Hizbullah or anyone else. They want to bring the country to a situation in which the word "resistance" is considered derogatory. Martyr, Jihad, wounded, steadfastness, challenge, liberation, freedom, power, honor, nobility, dignity - all these words must be removed from the vocabulary of the Lebanese, from the press, the political writings, from the political thinking, from the popular conscience. This is what Israel is doing." - Hassan Nasrallah

"I am convinced that even the sons, daughters, and wives of some Arab rulers are with us. But I say to the Arab rulers: I don't want your swords or even your hearts. All I want is for you to leave us alone, as we say in colloquial Lebanese. In other words, remain neutral. We are fine with that. You've said what you said - you can relax now, thank you very much." - Hassan Nasrallah

You might notice that the man speaks well, remarkably so if you compare him to a bumbling idiot like George Bush, or even to an obvious liar like Tony Blair. You might also consider that this was not a speech - this was an interview on Jazeera. He may well have been prepared, but the eloquence and irony are his own.

Go ahead, read the whole thing...

The Power of The Lie...

2006-07-24T20:32:00.000+03:00

This is as good an explanation as you're likely to find....

"Israel claims that it is 'defending itself' that it is not attacking civilians, only 'terrorists', while we claim that Israeli is indeed involved in a very conscious campaign of ethnic cleansing of Arab lands. But because the average person does not believe that psychopathy among our leaders exists, that our leaders are just like you and me - fundamentally decent human beings - the public looks at these two opposing arguments and concludes that the truth must lie somewhere in the Middle. Yet such an analysis does not take into account that one side could be 100% lying and the other 100% telling the truth. As a result of this human tendency to conclude that the truth lies in the middle, the liar always comes out on top! His lies are given credence to some extent while the truth is watered down! In the case of Lebanon and Palestine, Israel is lying, Israel is consciously murdering civilians, that is the truth, yet because no one can believe that there are people who would actually do such things, they believe that the truth is exaggeration or ‘conspiracy theory’." - Alternative News

Yup.

2006-07-24T00:23:00.000+03:00

I am SICK of the amnesia being peddled by the media, and by Bush, and Blair as well as their Arab leader accomplices. Sick of all the cocksuckers pretending that the current massacre of men, women and children going on in Lebanon is due to the capture of two soldiers by Hezbollah on the 12th of July. Sick of the media ignoring the thousands of CIVILIAN prisoners held hostage by the Zionists, while they focus on 2 or 3 captured SOLDIERS.

Decades of ethnic cleansing, daily murders of Palestinians, daily captures of children and women, and the leaders and the media have the gall to say this started on the 12 of July, 2006!

What a sick, sick, sick joke.

And this, my American friends, is what your tax dollars are financing.

Here, have a wallpaper for your woes.

Enjoy.

UN Resolutions Condemning Israel...

2006-07-21T21:53:00.000+03:00

UN resolutions, from 1955 to 1992:

106, 111, 127, 162, 171, 228, 237, 248, 250, 251, 252, 256, 259, 262, 265, 267, 270, 271, 279, 280, 285, 298, 313, 316, 317, 332, 337, 347, 425, 427, 444, 446, 450, 452, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471, 476, 478, 484, 487, 497, 498, 501, 509, 515, 517, 518, 520, 573, 587, 592, 605, 607, 608, 636, 641, 672, 673, 681, 694, 726, 799....

Oh, and if that seems like a lot, you might want to consider the resolutions that were vetoed by the United States.

You can find more details here, here, and here.

Now, if only the UN had not been rendered absolutely impotent by the notion that some animals are more equal than others.

Fuck the Security Council.

A farewell to Beirut...

2006-07-21T21:13:00.000+03:00

"How does this happen to Beirut? For 30 years, I've watched this place die and then rise from the grave and then die again, its apartment blocks pitted with so many bullets they look like Irish lace, its people massacring each other.

I lived here through 15 years of civil war that took 150,000 lives, and two Israeli invasions and years of Israeli bombardments that cost the lives of a further 20,000 people. I have seen them armless, legless, headless, knifed, bombed and splashed across the walls of houses.

Yet they are a fine, educated, moral people whose generosity amazes every foreigner, whose gentleness puts any Westerner to shame, and whose suffering we almost always ignore.

They look like us, the people of Beirut. They have light-coloured skin and speak beautiful English and French. They travel the world. Their women are gorgeous and their food exquisite.

But what are we saying of their fate today as the Israelis — in some of their cruellest attacks on this city and the surrounding countryside — tear them from their homes, bomb them on river bridges, cut them off from food and water and electricity?

We say that they started this latest war, and we compare their appalling casualties — more than 300 in all of Lebanon by last night — with Israel's 34 dead, as if the figures are the same.

And then, most disgraceful of all, we leave the Lebanese to their fate like a diseased people and spend our time evacuating our precious foreigners while tut-tutting about Israel's 'disproportionate' response to the capture of its soldiers by Hezbollah."

Robert Fisk, A farewell to Beirut.

Worth Reading...

2006-07-21T16:51:00.000+03:00

The Founding Myths of Israeli Politics, Introduction

Just in case you haven't read it.

And please, don't comment on this particular post, unless you have.

The Truth From Above...

2006-07-19T06:59:00.000+03:00

I have generally maintained that the occupation commonly referred to as 'the State of Israel' - is just that; a military camp plonked down in the Middle East to wreak bloody havoc. My logic for this has been dead simple, call it simplistic if you will, but it is a very clear logic.

Consider this; when a 'country' that small (about 1/19 of the the size of California) has an army that is ranked as the most powerful in the Middle East - what can you conclude? The ratio of 'army' to 'country' in this little piece of Zionist heaven is ridiculous. The bare bones conclusion? The so-called 'State of Israel' is nothing but a military camp pretending to be a country.

Usually, when I reach this conclusion - I argue against myself, and think of the children born in that military camp. I know they will all undergo military training, no matter their gender or inclination, but still, I tell myself...before that, surely they cannot be seen as military personel, surely before that, they are nothing but innocent children.

But children are, at least until they mature, and if they mature, the creations of their families, their society, and their media, and as the previous post demonstrates; children are not always pretty nor cute.

And finally, remember this - that when the 'State of Israel' was created in the middle of a cruel war, a poster was plastered on the walls: "All the country - a front! All the people - an army!"

Point made.

Understanding 'Israel'...

2006-07-18T15:26:00.000+03:00

Already, more than a hundred Lebanese civilians have been killed - many of those children. More than 75,000 foreigners have tucked tail and evacuated the country, meanwhile...

Israeli girls write messages in Hebrew on shells ready
to be fired toward Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon.
Photo: AFP

Just an image you should see.

In case you can't quite make it out, the little Zionist girl is writing "To Hezbollah with love from Israel'.

Sick.

Sick.

Sick.

Anatomy of an Honest Broker...

2006-07-18T14:54:00.000+03:00

More from the article mentioned in the previous post...

"There was a glitch in 2002 when Bush declared 'enough is enough' and demanded that Sharon pull back Israeli forces from their siege of the West Bank, dispatching Colin Powell, then secretary of state, to negotiate a withdrawal. AIPAC helped organize congressional resolutions reaffirming solidarity with Israel that passed the Senate by 94 to 2 and the House by 352 to 21. Supporters organized a 'Stand Up for Israel' rally in Washington in April that drew tens of thousands. The crowd booed senior Pentagon official Paul Wolfowitz, Bush's representative to the rally, when he told them 'innocent Palestinians are suffering and dying in great numbers.' And they cheered Janet Parshall, host of an evangelical Christian talk show, who declared: 'We will never limp, we will never wimp, we will never vacillate in our support of Israel.'

Bush stopped making his plea for withdrawal, and four days after the rally hailed Sharon as a 'man of peace.' Powell came home empty-handed."

Like I said, read the damn thing.

A Beautiful Friendship?

2006-07-18T14:28:00.000+03:00

A Beautiful Friendship?

Not everyone believes this is a good thing. In March two distinguished political scientists -- Stephen Walt from Harvard and John Mearsheimer from the University of Chicago -- published a 42-page, heavily footnoted essay arguing that the Bush administration's support for Israel and its related effort to spread democracy throughout the Middle East have "inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized U.S. security."
The professors claim that our intimate partnership with Israel is both dangerous and unprecedented. "Other special interest groups have managed to skew foreign policy, but no lobby has managed to divert it as far from what the national interest would suggest," they argue. They go on to say that the war in Iraq "was due in large part to the Lobby's influence," and that the same combine is "using all of the strategies in its playbook" to pressure the administration into being aggressive and belligerent with Iran. The bottom line: "Israel's enemies get weakened or overthrown, Israel gets a free hand with the Palestinians, and the United States does most of the fighting, dying, rebuilding and paying."
A sweet deal for Israel, in other words, but a very bad one for America.

Read on.

Speak Your (My?) Mind...

2006-07-18T03:05:00.000+03:00

Need a wallpaper with....expression?

Here are some wallpapers I've made during the last year.

Sadly, time has not dated them.

First, here's a wallpaper made from images in Joe Sacco's Docu-Graphic Novel Palestine. It's big, it's red, and if you have any doubts about the role of violence in politics, will certainly put things into perspective for you. It'll fix your day, lube your engine, and put you on the fast road to True Global Calamity™!

IsraelStine

Next up we have the ridiculously title 'Freedom'! It's a hand. It's cut up into pieces. The word 'Freedom', as you can clearly see is mysteriously written inside the palm, as though the victim were clasping to it. There are drops of blood on and around the hand, indicating a potentially lethal injury. Behind you'll notice what appears to be a copy of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. A careful examination of the font...

Yeah, yeah. Click and use.

Freedom

The next wallpaper needs no introduction...well, let's just say this; A Fiskhood. A Fiskness. A Fisk given to a Robert. An Eye...and Serentiy. Media is Bliss. War is Peace. Amen.

Serene

The interesting part of writing all this, notwithstanding the fact that injustice has not yet buckled up, tucked its tail between its legs and run off, of course...is the interesting assortment of characters that react to you. A diverse array of incredible intelligence truly showcasing the magnificent spectrum of possibilities that is Man. This wallpaper, tastelessly called 'Insult To Injury' is a celebration of this infinite capacity for sheer humane-ness.

Insult To Injury

Finally, because...

Hey...

C'mon...

Hopefully, thing'll be better tomorrow.

Something To Consider...

2006-07-17T12:35:00.000+03:00

An article about the ridiculous divide in opinion between so-called 'Arab' so-called 'leaders' and 'their' peoples stated midway that "Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Sunday rallied behind Hezbollah, describing Israel as 'an evil, cancerous tumor' in the midst of the Islamic world."

I stopped at that, as I'm sure others might.

Some people might vilify Khamenei for saying such a thing. They've been watching the news, seeing the Zionist attacks on Lebanon and on the very existence of a Palestine, hearing it called a 'reaction', as though it had been the Arabs that had struck first, as though one hundred years ago there had been an 'Israel' to strike against in the first place.

The reason I stopped at it is because I had heard almost exactly the same description used to refer to the so-called 'State of Israel' before. I heard it years ago. I was in a little resort in Sinai, called Basata. I was at one of the large communal dinner tables. I was having my dinner and trying to ignore my 'hippier than thou' friend who still lived in Faerie-Land at the time and was accordingly trying to have a 'mutually enlightening' conversation with some of the Israeli tourists at the resort.

I remember only one part of that conversation; somebody had very distinctly compared the Zionist presence to a cancerous growth in the Middle East. It wasn't me, it wasn't my friend, and it wasn't a younger Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on a trip to Egypt.

It was one of the Israelis.

At some point, mustering all the honesty he could bring to bear on the situation, the Israeli tourist had finally confessed that "I feel sometimes that we are like a cancer here in the Middle East."

Had I been willing to take part in that particular conversation, the question would've been...

Then why not leave?

God damn it all.

Nails In The Political Coffin...

2006-07-17T05:54:00.000+03:00

Israel bombs Palestinian Foreign Ministry

Yup.

Given that this is the 2nd time 'Israel' bombs the Palestinian Foreign Ministry this week, does anybody out there actually believe in the existence of a 'political' solution to the problem?

In essence, the Zionists are now actually bombing the infamous 'negotiation table' itself.

Clever, eh?

And yet there are people who still think that the Palestinians should not resort to violence...

What're they supposed to do? Locate a negotiation...tray?

But so it goes...

Go ahead, wait for it. In a few weeks, the Zionists will probably release a statment saying they want peace but can't find a partner. The world, comfortably, will be busy watching re-runs of Friends, and won't remember that, in fact, the IDF bombed the negotiators.

Ungh.

Racist Wars : At Least Somebody's Talking About it...

2006-07-17T04:40:00.000+03:00

Give it a read.

"If you are an avid viewer of Fox News or a reader of the New York Times, then Israel is yet to exceed its legitimate legal boundaries: that of a democracy opting to defend its citizens. But only racism can lead to such rationale. Only a racist media portrays the capture of a soldier whose army units have besieged Gazans for years, denying them food and medicine, as a violation of all that is holy. Only a racist media presents the kidnapping of 9,000 Palestinians, now in Israeli jails, as a just outcome of Israel's routine arrests of Palestinian terrorists or potential terrorists. Only racism can play down the Israeli destruction of Gaza's infrastructure, which is justified without question, for such actions are necessary to impede the militants' efforts." - Ramzy Baroud: Racist Media Coverage of Gaza Assault

Amen.

Semantic Spaghetti : Don't Confuse Issues...

2006-07-16T14:25:00.000+03:00

This is the text of an email I just sent to Al-Jazeera while reading the article mentioned in the previous post. The message is important enough, and it's an issue I just haven't got around to discussing here. So here it goes...

Al-Jazeera Editors,

Hi, I ran into the poll on your website called 'Is Israeli action in Gaza an overreaction?' - and I am very saddened to see that your editors have allowed themselves to get distracted by such a question.

The issue at hand is not whether 'Israel' is overreacting. This question IMPLIES that 'Israel' is right in ESSENCE, but might simply be guilty of being HARSH. Using terminology like this, as Western Media has been using removes the focus from how WRONG the Zionists are, how INJUST the actions are, and wonders only if it is 'heavy-handed' - An idiotic attitude, shared by many, and that leads only to the victim asking for compassion from his rapist.

Please consider this point. I write to you in earnest.

Thank you for your time.

All things considered, the word 'idiotic' might not have been helpful.

So much for diplomacy.

Aljazeera.Net - Lebanon blames US for UN silence

2006-07-16T14:14:00.000+03:00

Okay, I just followed a Google News headline to Aljazeera.Net - Lebanon blames US for UN silence, incredibly, the text states that

"Cesar Mayoral, Argentina's UN ambassador, said the United States objected to any statement and Britain opposed calling for a ceasefire.

The US and Britain want to wait for the outcome of this weekend's Group of Eight meeting in Russia, an Arab League foreign ministers meeting, and a mission sent to the Middle East by Kofi Annan..."

Meaning, basically, that they insist on the 'right' of the Zionists to kill innocent children while they negotiate. Which - if you take one single step backwards, means they're negotiating over the killing of innocent children

So much for compassion, humanity, and the pursuit of happiness.

Rebel Without A Clue?

2006-07-10T01:26:00.000+03:00

Oh, c'mon. You just know you wanna read more about that daredevil, reckless, death defying, fearless monster of a warrior we all like to call...Bush.

Well, check this out, according to the Boston Globe:

President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.

Nifty, eh? The man fears nothing.

Can't imagine how incredible his leadership is? Check out this visual aid!

C'mon! Admit it! Now you're impressed!

Well, in any case - check out the article at the Boston Globe. It details the fearless commanders exploits in much more detail! Telling you about all kinds of laws that he's chosen to ignore and side-step. The man is a fearless juggler! A mine-field jogger! A drunk bull in a china shop!

Yeah. I'm sunny side up today.

More Love From Abu Ghraib...

2006-07-10T01:05:00.000+03:00

Maybe I should call this post 'More Pics From The Crypt'...

In any case, it turns out there are over 60 more pictures from Abu Ghraib that haven't been widely published. You can see some of them here.

Here are a couple of samples, just in case you can't hold your breath that long. Herefor example is a picture of a brave American soldier fighting for freedom...

Inspiring, no?

Here's another. You'll notice the recurring and apparent fondness for nude prisoners. Something the American G.I. seems to have in spades...

Tasteful, n'est pas?

It's 2006...do you know where your children are?

Defining Terrorism: The Road To Hell

2006-07-09T18:20:00.000+03:00

The road to hell, as they say, is paved with good intentions.

Apparently, that's true.

A friend of mine recently pointed me to a website carrying an English translation of the Quran, thinking it would do me good to read some of it. I checked the link, and then shortened the URL to see the home page. Lo and behold! The front page had a nice little condemnation - in a small black box on the right, reading 'We condemn all acts of violence, killing, and suicide bombings carried out in the name of Islam'.

Oh, gosh. Aren't these cute Moslems sane?

Let's consider this for a moment...

Notice it does not state that they condemn all acts of violence against, say, innocents. No! The site that claims to be spreading the religion of Islam and teaching about it condemns 'all acts of violence carried out in the name of Islam'. All! Which can only lead me to conclude that they also condemn, say - lashings and capital punishment, whether or not these are dictated by Islam!

Yes, it gets confusing. With friends like these...

Some would argue that I'm being facetious, but I'm not.

There's a whole camp of supposedly well-intentioned but apparently idiotic so-called 'Moslems' who are doing their very best to distance themselves as much as possible from any acceptance of violence - the implicit assumption being that violence is barbaric, unjust, and always a manifestation of terrorism. The last resort of the backward, the feeble minded, etc...

These are the same people who when confronted with the terrors of a Jenin, suggest Gandhi-esque non-violence to Palestinians. Briefly put, they are not Moslems, nor even quite human. They are fairies, living in Disneyland, wondering how much whitening cream their faces can take before their skin finally peels off and falls to the ground.

Another example of this is a recent television ad that I saw on MBC2. It shows a suicide bomber blowing himself up in a market, chaos ensues, people flying all over the place. A child looking on in fear. Etc. Etc...It ends with the message "Terrorism Has No Religion".

Right. Can't you just feel the epiphany?

Gosh, they're clever, those cute, sane...domesticated 'Moslems'.

But not all violence is terrorism, and whereas an attack on innocents is unjustifiable by any rational or religious means, violence in and of itself is often necessary, sometimes advisable, and occasionally mandatory. Peaceful persuasion and rational negotiations work when the conflict is a result of a misunderstanding, but NOT when you are simply being invaded, occupied, robbed, or raped. In cases such as those, arguing that 'losing your temper' or 'resorting to violence' is 'wrong' is simply criminal.

By placing messages such as these, the messengers are implicitly accepting the notion, peddled by Western imperialists to the Middle-East, that any violence or resistance is both backward and, on a more sinister note, punishable. It is an appeal to fairy and coward alike.

Hold a flower. Bow down. Bend over. Smile.

Who Loves Ya, Baby?

No Comment...

2006-07-08T09:24:00.000+03:00

Rafah - Palestine

What Americans Should Know...

2006-07-05T18:39:00.001+03:00

Incredibly, all the 'news' networks are flooded with items about the Isra...the Zionist soldier held by the Palestinians. Not surprisingly, most of these news items completely neglect to mention the fact that the Zionist occupation is holding and has been holding more than 9,000 Palestinian prisoners for years, most of whom are, by any definition of the word, civilians, and many of whom are children - legal minors. How many of those are actually undergoing some kind of legal process?

Well, the numbers are pathetic.

I'm not in the most lyrical of moods, so excuse the lackluster writing. I just can't believe the horrific lack of shame exhibited by the news media. The news media that remains silent about incredible injustices perpetrated daily at the expense of women and children, is yet somehow willing to blow the capture of one soldier beyond all reasonable proportion.

In any case, do your conscience and the world a favor, and check out If Americans Knew...

Consider your prejudices.

Stakka Bo? 1993? Well, yeah.

2006-06-24T14:01:00.001+03:00

I remember hearing this song ages ago - lately I downloaded it again, just for kicks - I'd missed the chorus. This time, I actually paid attention to the rest of the lyrics...well worth quoting in full:

Here we go again
Here we go go go
To the temple of consumption
Get your gear and start to spend
Here we go go go with total dedication

Here we go again
Here we go go go
To the temple of consumption
Get your gear and start to spend
Here we go
Here we go
Here we go

As some sort of prototype I serve to be - you see tomorrow's dream has never been part of me - consume today and leave the rest behind you - tomorrow's a surprise party buy a ticket too

faster livin' faster live as fast as you're able - eat the food while it's still hot on the table - spend if you can the greens are burning in your pocket - if you spend it right now you'll get as high as a rocket

Everything you don't use will loose it's value tomorrow - consume too much today and you can always borrow - this paradigm's the best one since the day of creation - get your gear and shape up this is the revelation - shop till you drop has built this civilization - don't believe what you hear 'bout the next generation - if you go wtih a lot of toys you'll slip away a happy man - the greens are burning in you pockets just spend it while you can

Here we go again
here we go go go
to the temple of consumption
get your gear and start to spend
here we go
here we go
here we go

The moon and the stars they all look down on me and say - there's a correlation between tomorrow and today - I say you won't gain a thing on that sick repudiation - we're right here right now that's the only situation - you can't fool me we live on borrowed time - so I spend the funds I have to the nickel and dime - check it in check it out it's not a matter of contention - get your gear and shape up and join the church of consumption

Use it in wear it out than throw it all away - go get yourself a new one all you gotta do is pay - because the more I will get the more I will own - with a lot of things around me I won't never fell alone - I work around the clock just to earn my livin' - and I wanna get I won't spend my funds on givin' - now I'm acting irresponsible is that what you say - hey somalia got my toaster just the other day

Not so bad, eh? It's weird, cause the track is totally dancy, fairly bouncy, and unless you're paying attention to the lyrics, just way upbeat.

Reminds me of the bit in Surplus - where you see a single billboard in the street in Cuba with two words on it; Consume Less.

Well, like they say...

Here We Go Again...

The Idiocy of So-Called Modern Science...

2006-06-24T01:46:00.001+03:00

One can only hope that the title of the 'news' article 'Creativity older than thought' was intended as a bad pun. Otherwise, well...

In any case, the article goes on to claim that due to the discovery of very early forms of jewelry, the 'modern' mind as we know it must've existed for a much longer time than scientists have previously assumed.

Now...

I have no doubt at all that the 'modern' mind a) is a mis-nomer, and b) has existed much longer than scientists would ever dare think...However, the logic of the argument elaborated in the article is just pathetic.

Examine, for instance, this quotation:

"If people were using beads, they were using them to convey a message about themselves," Professor Stringer said. "I believe that implies there was language, which does much the same thing." - The Australian

The assumption that you can date the existence of 'thought', 'creativity', or 'language' based on the existence of jewelry is just silly. The notion that man would collect artifacts for display goes back to the existence of the opposable thumb, and more so - to the existence of weaponry.

Look before you leap...

As If What We Do To Ourselves Wasn't Bad Enough...

2006-06-18T18:08:00.001+03:00

"Every year, millions of animals, including rabbits, raccoons, and foxes, are painfully caught in steel-jaw traps, where many will chew off their own feet in an attempt to escape. Some die of blood loss, while others succumb to infection or simply starve or freeze to death. Animals often languish for days before the trapper arrives to crush their chests or beat or stomp them to death. Farmed animals spend their short, miserable lives in filthy wire cages until they are killed by suffocation, neck-breaking, or genital or anal electrocution. Sometimes these methods only stun the animals, who end up being skinned alive." - From FurIsDead.com

Do what you can.

Useful Links:
PETA
Fur Is Dead

Mankind? What's so kind about man?

And fuck womankind too.

Know Thy Enemy...

2006-06-16T16:20:00.001+03:00

This is just a quick refresher, since memory seems to be in short supply.

When the World Trade Center in New York went down, killing around 3,000 people - the reactions in Tehran, Iran were as follows:

The Iranians, over 1 million of them, were on the streets of Tehran, holding a candle-light vigil for the people who had died. Yes, that's the 2nd time I say 'people', not 'Americans', because, really, that's what they were. To most people, I think - that's what they were...people; husbands, wives, sons and daughters.

Compare this with the footage of Mr. Bush, days afterwards, standing in the midst of the rubble.

Again, the smug look on the face, a man about to break into a smirk. A man who sees nothing but opportunity, a man high on the rising post-disaster approval ratings, a man who at the time this picture was taken, already had plans to attack both Afghanistan and Iraq. Meanwhile - how did the news media react? Consider this:

"And the towers keep falling. Every five minutes, there goes the tower again. I got on the phone, I called NBC. I'm listening to your newscast. How many times are you going to show those goddamn towers coming down? Don't you have any respect for the people who have family and friend in those towers? Do we have to keep watching them fall down? I watched them fall down 50 times already. When are you going to stop? Please stop. You're ripping my heart out." - Father of one of the victims, from 'Why We Fight'.

Put it all together.

Maybe You Should Believe The People Who Actually Do The Fighting

2006-06-13T21:31:00.001+03:00

You'd think their voices would be better heard.

In any case - here's an interesting read:

Military Men Who Oppose Neo-Con Warmongering Under Attack

Is anybody listening? Or is everybody too busy defending Rumsfeld? A man who claimed to accept 'full responsibility' for the tortures and abuses of Abu Ghraib and who yet, somehow, mysteriously, is still a free man?

Here we are.

No Comment...

2006-06-13T21:10:00.001+03:00

"Veteran journalist John Pilger recently wrote about one of PNAC’s founding members, Richard Perle: “I interviewed Perle when he was advising Reagan, and when he spoke about ‘total war,’ I mistakenly dismissed him as mad,” Pilger wrote. “He recently used the term again in describing America’s ‘war on terror.’ ‘No stages,’ he said. ‘This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don’t try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now.’ ”" - America Pearl Harbored

The Fantastic Disappearing Boeing!

2006-06-12T18:51:00.001+03:00

Anybody know why Rumsfeld won't sign this letter?

Seems simple enough, no?