CAROL MOORE REPORT

Dog Killers w/o Warrants - Waco deja vu

2008-08-08T08:16:00.006-04:00

It took a Prince Georges Country police attack on a local mayor's home, killing his two gorgeous black Labrador dogs, to bring attention to the fact that police continue to bust into people's homes, kill their animals (even kill them, as they did a 92 year old woman last year) and not even bother to show a warrant!

That's right. Even though the mayor Cheye Calvo repeatedly asked for a warrant, the police didn't bother to show it to him until three days later. (Read: do we believe they even had one to start out!?!)

This story has generated a number of frequently repeated stories on CNN and other channels. In one video Calvo's wife Trinity Tomsi cries as she tells the story. She especially breaks up when she recalls how a neighborhood girl tells her - and I anticipated her words - "I'll never trust the police again."

Of course, who can, after the 1993 incident near Waco, Texas where almost 100 federal agents went in shooting (including blindly from helicopters) at a home filled with 130 people, mostly women, elderly and children. They killed four church members - after shooting their five dogs, who were fenced in in the yard. Group leader David Koresh claimed ATF shot him at the front door while as he stood unarmed trying to talk to them. (He'd peacefully accepted search warrants in the past.) At the 1995 congressional hearings an ATF agent claimed that ATF DID have a search warrant but it was "all shot up" in the truck! Fifty-one days later, after constantly sabotaging negotiations, the FBI smashed into the home with tanks, causing a fire that killed another 78 Davidians - and destroyed evidence of illegal ATF gunfire contained in the walls of the building.

So the mayor got off lucky. The police didn't kill him and his mother-in-law, who also was at home, and burn down their house to destroy the evidence. They only bound them, threw them to the floor and refused to show him a search warrant.

The charges? Does it matter? Some drug smugglers randomly sent Ms. Tomsi a package and failed to intercept it before it got to her home. ATF thought Koresh might have turned a few of his semi-automatic guns into automatic guns without following federal regulations or paying the federal tax. For a state bent on total control of the populace, that's more than enough excuse to smash into a home, kill dogs and rough up or even kill the inhabitants.

ATROCITY! Hiroshima, Winter Soldier

2008-08-06T10:46:00.002-04:00

It's been 63 years since the atrocity of the bombing of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, followed by the bombing of Nagasaki on August 9th. The continuing propaganda atrocity is the lie that it was necessary to save hundreds of thousands of American lives which would be lost if the U.S. invaded. The truth, of course, is the Japanese had had enough with the merciless fire bombings of its cities and were eager to surrender. But the U.S. had to show those Soviet Communists what it had in store for them if they didn't stop their advances in Europe and Asia.

Communists ended up taking Eastern Europe and China anyway, of course, leading to tens of millions of atrocities, but we're focusing on our own leaders' atrocities today.

Like the atrocities confessed to in March during the Iraq Veterans Against the War "Winter Soldiers" event where more than 200 U.S. veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan confessed to torturing and murdering innocents at will.

Not that you got to read about in the New York Times or see it on mainstream national television. It's just not news when Americans confess to the atrocities of mass murder! Like the heart felt confession of one young former soldier below. (See IVAW youtube videos of this and other protests here.)

Ready for any McCain win

2008-08-03T10:03:00.005-04:00

Paint the hair white, and we're ready for January 20, 2009... Obama also voted for or publicly supports too many of Bush's unconstitutional initiatives. But at least we can maintain the delusion he's just playing typical lying politics - until Obama gets elected and proves that he thinks that he deserves the Monarchical powers bestowed upon or allowed to accrue to the Fuhr...I mean president...by a special interest-controlled U.S. congress. My usual reminder:

Check out Secession.Net and my "Secede & Survive" blog at VermontCommons.

Secession Graphics

2008-07-26T21:27:00.000-04:00

I collected a few like the below here, including a fun animated graphic.

Zogby Poll: One in Five Americans Believe States Have the Right to Secede

2008-07-24T19:05:00.002-04:00

Middlebury Institute/Zogby Poll: One in Five Americans Believe States Have the Right to Secede Survey finds 18% would support a secessionist effort in their state

July 23, 2008

UTICA, New York – One in five American adults – 22% – believe that any state or region has the right to “peaceably secede from the United States and become an independent republic,” a new Middlebury Institute/Zogby International telephone poll shows.

"I believe any state or region has the right to peaceably secede and become an independent republic:" Agree 22% Disagree 73% Not sure 5%

The level of support for the right of secession was consistent in every region in the country, though the percentage was slightly higher in the South (26%) and the East (24%). The figures were also consistent for every age group, but backing was strongest among younger adults, as 40% among those age 18 to 24 and 24% among those age 25 to 34 agreed states and regions have secession rights.

Broken down by race, the highest percentage agreeing with the right to secede was among Hispanics (43%) and African-Americans (40%). Among white respondents, 17% said states or regions should have the right to peaceably secede.

"I believe the United States' system is broken and cannot be fixed by traditional two-party politics and elections": Agree 44% Disagree 53% Not sure 3%

Politically, liberal thinkers were much more likely to favor the right to secession for states and regions, as 32% of mainline liberals agreed with the concept. Among the very liberal the support was only slightly less enthusiastic – 28% said they favored such a right. Meanwhile, just 17% of mainline conservatives thought it should exist as an option for states or regions of the nation.

Asked whether they would support a secessionist movement in their own state, 18% said they would, with those in the South most likely to say they would back such an effort. In the South, 24% said they would support such an effort, while 15% in the West and Midwest said the same. Here, too, younger adults were more likely than older adults to be supportive – 35% of those under age 30 would support secession in their state, compared to just 17% of those over age 65. Among African Americans, 33% said they would support secession, compared to just 15% of white adults. The more education a respondent had, the less likely they were to support secession – as 38% of those with less than a high school diploma would support it, compared to just 10% of those with a college degree.

"I would support a secessionist effort in my state:" Agree 18% Disagree 72% Not sure 10%

To gauge the extent to which support for secession comes from a sense that the nation’s current system is not working, a separate question was asked about agreement that “the United States’ system is broken and cannot be fixed by traditional two-party politics and elections.” Nearly half of respondents agreed with this statement, with 27% who somewhat agree and 18% who strongly agree.

The telephone poll, conducted by Zogby International, included 1,209 American adult respondents. It was conducted July 9-13, 2008, and carries a margin of error of ± 2.9 per cent.

The sponsor of the poll was the Middlebury Institute, a think tank for “the study of separatism, secession, and self-determination,” based in Cold Spring, NY. Their website address is: MiddleburyInstitute.org. Also at Zogby Poll page.

For content, contact: Kirkpatrick Sale, Director, Middlebury Institute, at 845-265-3158 or Director@MiddleburyInstitute.org

For methodology, contact: Fritz Wenzel, 315-624-0200 ext. 229 or 419-205-0287 or fritz@zogby.com

The evil that males do.... a photographic essay...

2008-07-20T18:53:00.000-04:00

...with far too much female emotional support for, or fear of resisting, their brutal acts...just some un-filed images from My Pictures folder.

Prompted by a reading of Israeli historian Benny Morris NY Times reality-based opinion piece pretty much recommending nuking Iran. My letter to the editor in response?

Since we're all being so "realistic" about what to do about nuclear weapons in the middle east, how about this as a solution? The United States does a first strike on Israel's nuclear delivery systems- air, missile and submarine. And invades and captures its nuclear depots. Then the Iranians won't have a reason to build a nuclear bomb because the US will then be able to persuade Israel to give up all the land it has stolen from the Palestinians, permit the right of return and become a democratic state of all its members. Then Americans could stop worrying about $12 a gallon oil and world nuclear war.

If you can't beat 'em, join em??

Ron Paul Revolution Rally Great Turnout

2008-07-13T17:14:00.001-04:00

The Ron Paul Revolution March and Rally got a great turnout - at very least 3,000 - on the west side of the capitol building on Saturday, July 12. It was too darn hot to drag my old bod down but lots of energetic liberty-loving young people were there and put up videos so we can all see how it went. So I'll make up for my absence by posting the best ones I saw so far. The big news from dozens of mainstream media outlets was that Ron Paul had - sort of - dropped out of the race. Good blog entry about event here. See Ron Paul speech and Naomi Klein speech and Michael Scheuer speech defending our civil liberties.

Here crowd is chanting "Ron Paul Revolution"! Just as loud as lefties chant - "Who's streets? Our streets!"

LeakTheTruth has a bunch of good ones, including marchers booing the I.R.S. building:

OneVisionProductions has a few videos of the march itself. Some other good photos here and photos and video here.

Someone interviewed Iraq Veteran against the War Adam Kokesh talking about impeachment and includes Ron Paul's speech.

See "Fascist Cops" versus Free Speech Profanity in this video. See short one on cops versus Guy Fawkes masks here.

Search July 12 Revolution March on Youtube.com for more!

Pick up your phone and yell F*** Bush Three Times

2008-07-09T21:46:00.002-04:00

See relevant article about this Washington Post ad - before the Senate passed the FISA "compromise" telecom SPYING bill. Oh, well. The good news is that if Obama really is a Muslim plant, he'll have full power to spy on, prosecute, imprison and execute all the neoconservatives and other war mongering racist imperialists who deserve it. Including Bush himself.
Update: if you want to support the people who brought the original suits and intend to bring more to stop all this unconstitutional wiretapping, go to the relevant Electronic Frontiers Foundation page.

July 4th Protest of Bush at Monticello -While Iraqis kick us out?

2008-07-07T19:20:00.000-04:00

I don't know what makes me happier, the beginning of this video where Bush gets protested for being a war criminal on July 4, 2008 at Thomas Jefferson's home - or Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki talking about requiring (or is it demanding) United States troops to leave on the Iraqi's time table, not on the U.S.'s time table.

Is Senator Joe Lieberman an Israeli Spy??

2008-07-06T10:18:00.002-04:00

I was half listening to Senator Joe Lieberman on an ABC Sunday Morning talk show yap about bombing Iran for the good of Israel, oh, yeah, and America, too. (Lieberman, of course, is the defeated 2000 Democratic V.P. candidate who turned Independent when Connecticut Dems rejected him for his pro-Israel pro-war mongering in 2006. The one some think would be John McCain's ideal V.P.)

Suddenly it occurred to me, could Lieberman be an Israeli Spy? Could that be an undercover Mossad Agent contact to Lieberman's left in the photo?

After all, two "vetted" Bush administration officials, Douglas Feith and Richard Perle, got fired in their younger days for passing along information to Israelis, and they still got high level access to government secrets under Bush. So why not a NON-vetted elected official?

And there have been enough Israeli spies infiltrating the American establishment in the news the last few years. (See here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here, just for starters.) And Lieberman has complete access to all sorts of classified information in his positions on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the Armed Services committees.

If I was a reporter I'd go and find out. Living in DC, I guess I could always go make and appointment as a "prominent blogger" (heh heh) with a Lieberman aide and start spending a couple hours a day making contacts, searching down leads, etc. etc. til I found out or gave up.

But I think I'd rather spend the time working on my Secession Blog and my Secession.Net web page. After all, swat down one congressional spy, and two or three will just take his place.

UPDATE: Sign the Lieberman Must Go petition - and watch excellent video. 43,000 signatures already and a very energetic crew promoting it.

July 4, 2008 Fire Works Shortage Dramatized

2008-07-05T23:46:00.000-04:00

So maybe I sound like I'm doing a Rush Limbaugh b.s artist imitation, there's a grain of truth here! Governments steal our liberty and export our jobs - not to mention engage in blood sucking and blood letting wars - so we can't even find or afford fire works to celebrate the Declaration of Independence and our Right to Alter or Abolish Government.

July 4th Commentaries on our “Right to Alter or Abolish Government”

2008-07-03T22:45:00.001-04:00

A few commentaries about the Declaration of Independence - celebrated today, July 4th - excerpted from my much longer list just posted at my Vermont Commons "Secede & Survive" blog.

My News.Google search for “the right to alter or abolish” resulted in a couple of editorials of interest.

The Baltimore Chronicle, the Hawaii Reporter and doubtless other publications, printed an editorial by radical libertarian columnist Jacob Hornberger "The Real Meaning of the Fourth of July" which includes question:

What happens if a government that people have established becomes a destroyer, rather than a protector, of their rights? The Declaration provides the answer: It is the right of the people to alter or even abolish their government and establish a new government whose purpose is the protection, not the destruction, of people's rights and freedoms.

In the American Spectator Lawrence Henry celebrates the recent “DC vs. Heller” Supreme Court decision. (Dick Heller was a past officer of the Libertarian Party of DC.) Henry emphasizes that issue, writing: Fourth of July weekend, here's as good a time as any to review what the American idea really means. And how far we have fallen away from that idea.

Conveniently, we find a news hook: The Supreme Court's recent 5-4 ruling affirming that the Second Amendment to the Constitution really does assure citizens the right to keep and bear firearms. Along with many another commentator, I find that close decision frightening. How can there be any doubt? How can there be any argument?

Let's review:

Our Founders said, explicitly, that when a people found their rulers had usurped the rightful reach of their powers, it was the people's right to "alter or abolish" that government. And no mistake, our Founders, being realists, knew that "alter or abolish" might mean "change the government by violent means, if necessary."

And not to beat around the bush, conservative writer J.J. Jackson gets to the heart of it in his article “Alaska should just secede.” Quoting the Declaration, he writes: I think that it is high time some states start taking the issue seriously once again and using it as leverage against an out of control federal government that has expanded beyond the limited powers we agreed to give to it in our Constitution. While I would like to see all the states start pushing back against the gluttonous federal government and begin warning, that if it does not start acting as prescribed, they will leave the Union, one state in particular that should be seriously considering it, perhaps more than most others, is Alaska.

Al-Jazeera makes a telling comment in an article "Before July 4th, the U.S. must confront July 3rd." It reminds readers about the July 3, 1988 attack on an Iranian commercial airliner that killed 290 men, women and children. And writes about talk of a U.S. attack on Iranian nuclear facilities: As the U.S. readies itself to celebrate another Independence Day on July 4th, I cannot help but think how the U.S. Government has become enslaved to hatred, revenge, retaliation, belligerent policies, nuclear weapons, and of course, Middle Eastern oil.

If the U.S. confronts the July 3rd massacre before celebrating July 4th, it may then be a true celebration! U.S. citizens may also want to recall the patriots’ purpose in signing the Declaration of Independence was not a call to alter and abolish a foreign country, but to change and abolish their own Government, which had become destructive and repressive.

Of course, potential tyrants also can quote the Declaration, as does Iranian Maryam Rajavi, head of the Islamic Marxist cult best known as “MEK” which seeks to overthrow the current Iranian government. At a gathering of 70,000 Iranians in Paris she said: And I quote the Declaration of Independence, "Whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government." (MEK is considered a terrorist group by the State Department, but it is likely that it has received money for covert purposes, as approved by Congress last years and revealed recently in the New Yorker by Seymour Hersh.)

I can't help but comment on politicians who can’t talk about the Declaration of Independence without bringing in that great enemy of altering and abolishing government, Abraham Lincoln. More specifically Barack Obama in his recent speech on “Patriotism.” He starts with an interesting statement about American revolutionaries fighting the British on April 19, 1775. “They did so not on behalf of a particular tribe or lineage, but on behalf of a larger idea. The idea of liberty. The idea of God-given, inalienable rights.” (Something those itching to engage in violent revolutionary secession for the sake of THEIR tribe or lineage might keep in mind.)...(And I go on for a couple more paragraphs, recommending people debunk his assertions about Lincoln's beneficience by seeing a bunch of anti-Lincoln articles here.)

Ed Quillen updates the Declaration in the Denver Post. Noting that it “has this seditious-sounding stuff about how it ‘is the Right of the People to alter or abolish’ their government, he offers this version:

"When in the Course of human Events it becomes necessary for the Unitary Executive to dissolve the Political Restraints which have constrained him from assuming, among the Powers of Earth, his proper role as the Decider, a total Disrespect for the Opinions of Mankind means that no Explanation is required.

"Nonetheless, the Unitary Executive holds this Truth to be of divine Origin, that the Executive Branch of Government enjoys certain unalienable Rights, that among these Rights are Spying upon Citizens without a Warrant, the Rendition of Captives unto foreign Despotisms, the Invasion and Occupation of other Nations upon false Pretenses, and the Employment of Torture to gather Evidence to be used in secret Courts.

"And that to secure these Rights, the Unitary Executive has been instituted among Humankind, and if the Citizenry becomes destructive of these Ends, then it is the Right of the Unitary Executive to alter the Citizenry, and to institute an improved Citizenry, in such Form as shall seem most likely to effect the Safety and Happiness of the Unitary Executive.

Finally, Kirkpatrick Sale of the Middlebury Institute sends out an email wishing us all “Happy Secession Day.”

July 4 marks the day when the American colonies declared their secession from the British empire and their right to “institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles…as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

And thus began the War of Secession—not a revolutionary war, for there was no intent to overthrow the British government—that led to the free Confederation of American colonies and ultimately the United States.

It is in that great tradition that the modern secessionist movement in America takes its inspiration, hoping to dissolve the imperial government of the present United States and institute new governments, at state or regional levels, that will positively effect their safety and happiness.

Serious and Funny Feminism Videos

2008-06-27T23:23:00.000-04:00

What an easy way to blog! The first video is a very serious, stylized rant.

The second is a puppet-filled hoot.

Here comes the sun - the solstice sun: new music video

2008-06-21T08:43:00.001-04:00

I've been waiting for this day for six months to catch the sun coming up on summer solstice. Oops! It was yesterday. Oh well, who can tell? Enjoy the video!

Hillary Clinton's Run No Real Gain for Women or Feminists

2008-06-19T20:04:00.002-04:00

The three women at left graced the December 22, 2002 cover of Time Magazine as "Persons of the Year." The article describes how Sherron Watkins, an Enron vice president; Coleen Rowley, an FBI staff attorney; and Cynthia Cooper, a WorldCom staffer, all risked their jobs and careers by exposing mistakes or crimes by their male bosses. Even if they weren't feminists, they were women other women could look up to.

And then there is Hillary Clinton, who has covered up for every patriarchal crime imagineable, including sexual assaults and even rape by her own husband, in her quest to become the most powerful person on earth. Of course, that's only because our patriarchal nation state has created more conventional and nuclear weapons than all other nations put together. (Which is why we also are the most in debt nation on the planet.)

I've found two female pundits who agree with me.

Sherrilyn A. Ifill, a civil rights lawyer and University of Maryland School of Law professor, in a June 8 article called “No loss for feminism” in the Baltimore Sun writes: “...very little about the candidacy of Hillary Clinton reflected feminism. First of all, to be a modern feminist necessarily means to reject racism. No 21st-century feminist could fail to understand the complicated but very real connection between patriarchy and white supremacy. Thus, it is impossible to run a campaign as a feminist while making racist appeals to white, male voters....When she knocked back a shot and a beer in that bar in Pennsylvania, Mrs. Clinton ended any pretense of running as a feminist. The whole point of feminism is to reject the idea of masculinized power. Feminism seeks to counter the mythology that stereotypically masculine behavior is the only legitimate way in which leadership can be exercised....Finally and most important, Mrs. Clinton's campaign at the outset was premised on the idea that she was the inevitable nominee. This air of inevitability was based largely on her connections to one of most powerful men in the Democratic Party, her husband, the former president. She campaigned hard, but it was her relationship to Bill Clinton that enabled Mrs. Clinton, who had never held elective office, to walk into New York - a state with which she had no historical ties - and become a U.S. senator on her first try. Given Mr. Clinton's political gifts and legacy and the power-packed Rolodex of both Clintons, it never occurred to Mrs. Clinton until after Iowa that she wouldn't be able to attain the presidency on her first try as well....Achieving power largely on the name of your husband is not feminist. In fact, it's very traditional.”

Susan Campbell, in a June 15 Hartfort Courant Column “I Am Feminist; Hear Me Roar Against A Clinton Mandate,” writes: “My take on feminism is this: If you believe in the radical notion that women are people, too, then you know that means we think outside the box. You know that no job is the special provenance of any gender. Our genitalia does not limit our choices, whether it's how we earn our living, the compensation we receive for said work, or how we choose our political candidates...And it means we fearlessly examine and then choose our political candidates, regardless of their — or our — gender....She was not my candidate, but not because of gender. Suggesting we all move lock-step to support only the people who look like us robs grown-ups of their ability to make their decisions based on a candidates' promise and past practice.... Because I am a woman, I must think for myself because I don't trust the yahoos to do it for me.”

And then there is the 1999 allegation of former Clinton campaign worker Juanita Broaddrick, who told a national television audience that Bill Clinton raped her in a hotel room in April 1978. In a "Letter to Hillary Clinton" published by the DrudgeReport on October 15, 2000. In it she wrote:

I have no doubt that you (Hillary) are the same conniving, self-serving person you were twenty-two years ago when I had the misfortune to meet you. When I see you on television, campaigning for the New York senate race, I can see the same hypocrisy in your face that you displayed to me one evening in 1978. You have not changed.

I remember it as though it was yesterday. I only wish that it were yesterday and maybe there would still be time to do something about what your husband, Bill Clinton, did to me. There was a political rally for Mr. Clinton's bid for governor of Arkansas. I had obligated myself to be at this rally prior to my being assaulted by your husband in April, 1978. I had made up my mind to make an appearance and then leave as soon as the two of you arrived. This was a big mistake, but I was still in a state of shock and denial. You had questioned the gentleman who drove you and Mr. Clinton from the airport. You asked him about me and if I would be at the gathering. Do you remember? You told the driver, "Bill has talked so much about Juanita", and that you were so anxious to meet me. Well, you wasted no time. As soon as you entered the room, you came directly to me and grabbed my hand. Do you remember how you thanked me, saying "we want to thank you for everything that you do for Bill". At that point, I was pretty shaken and started to walk off. Remember how you kept a tight grip on my hand and drew closer to me? You repeated your statement, but this time with a coldness and look that I have seen many times on television in the last eight years. You said, "Everything you do for Bill". You then released your grip and I said nothing and left the gathering.

What did you mean, Hillary? Were you referring to my keeping quiet about the assault I had suffered at the hands of your husband only two weeks before? Were you warning me to continue to keep quiet? We both know the answer to that question.

Bob Barr Embarassingly Funny on Colbert

2008-06-08T07:23:00.002-04:00

See video below... and my neat graphic celebrating the Libertarian Party putting The Right to Alter or Abolish Government (from the Declaration of Independence) in its platform. Barr's obviously being affected by hanging with pot smoking libertarians. He admitted to Colbert the possibly he'd ingested drug-laced brownies and later joking about waking up with heavens knows who in bed, due to his sexy mustache. "Loose" women, men, 16 year old hermaphrodites? Oh, Bob, the wit!! Of course, it was a bit much for him to declare that he is the first good candidate of the Libertarian Party, as if the many others weren't quite good (and more hard core) in their own rights, especially Ed Clark, Ron Paul and Harry Browne.

Obama Slips at AIPAC: Supports America (first)

2008-06-04T11:08:00.004-04:00

Barack Obama was doing great at kissing the Israel Lobby's butt speaking at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference, so the pro-Israel media doesn't smash him down any more than it already has (repeat Rev. Wright 100,000 times).

But then he slipped and he said he's going to do what's best for America's interest. He controlled self and didn't mention registering AIPAC and its friends as foreign agents or creating a totally nuclear free middle east, including Israel.

The AIPAC candidate - Hillary Clinton, coincidentally technically defeated in her quest to extend the Clinton dynasty - picked up on that and made it the second paragraph of her speech that followed right after Obama's. (Or maybe she knows he's been rolling around in the political bed with "realists" who just love Mearsheimer and Walt?)

Just further justifying the fun graphic I put together after Obama made his "America first" statement. See my rocking video of last year's protest at the AIPAC conference that I helped organized. Photos of past years AIPAC protests here or interspersed here.

Update: William Hughes video from this year's smaller protest here(DC activists) and here (Rabbi Weiss of Jews Against Zionism).

Update: Looking at the actual transcript, Obama blabs about US-Israel "shared interests" a number of times before issuing this line which doesn't make it clear they are the same, as a good puppet would have done: "But as President of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leader at a time and place of my choosing - if, and only if - it can advance the interests of the United States." If Obama wins it will be interesting to see how hard he fights the lobby.

Update: Here's a good Chris Hedges' article critical of Obama's speech, ending with "Barack Obama, when we need sane leadership the most, has proved feckless and weak. He, and the Democratic leadership, is as morally bankrupt as those preparing to ignite our funeral pyre in the Middle East.

Excellent "Don't Bomb Iran" video

2008-06-03T18:32:00.000-04:00

American and Jewish Consciousness Shifting on Israel/Palestine

2008-06-02T14:03:00.000-04:00

Blogger Philip Weiss makes a hopefully accurate assessment on his blog Mondoweiss. Go to link for whole May 21st entry.

[T]here has been a tremendous change in American consciousness, and the Jewish consciousness of Israel/Palestine in the last year. Jimmy Carter deserves great credit, so does Jonathan Demme, so do Walt and Mearsheimer, so do all the capillaries of the progressive movement, from the late great Hilda Silverman to the great Hannah Mermelstein to Adam Horowitz, who will be speaking tonight on the Nakba in Brooklyn, along with Zachary Lockman of NYU. There, I have just run off a few Jewish names without scratching my head. We are legion, and we are having a real effect. So is Obama. So is the Nakba recognition movement, which has shifted the focus from '67 landgrab to '48 landgrab. Israelis are panicked.Anti-Zionist Jews at a 2005 (top) and 2007 (bottom) protests of AIPAC conference. June 3rd DC peace activists will be doing another one.

Palestinian "Al Nakba" Commemorated on National Mall

2008-06-01T20:15:00.001-04:00

I couldn't make this commemoration of the massive ethnic cleansing of 700,000 Arabs from Palestine by Israelis in 1948. But at least I can blog it!

Two Hilarious Bob Barr Videos

2008-05-30T07:35:00.001-04:00

While I'm waiting for Bob Barr to say anything that would assure me he isn't trying to sell out the Libertarian Party to quasi-conservatives or quasi-neocons, I at least can release the tensions with these two videos, both hilarious. The music video "Bob Barr: Smells like a Republican" is tricky - proves liberals understand libertarianism, anyway. And especially rewarding are the last 5 seconds of the short one from the Borat smash hit Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan.

LP: Making Lemonade with Two Lemons

2008-05-28T17:51:00.001-04:00

On May 25, on the sixth ballot, the more conservative elements of the The Libertarian Party nominated two quasi-libertarian candidates who they hope will get them all the publicity, votes and power that haunt their wet dreams. Former Representative Bob Barr has been good on some civil liberties issues (first, second and fourth amendments, Waco massacre) and terrible on others (pro-war on drugs; pro-defense of marriage act), though he alleges he now would legalize medical marijuana and down play the war on drugs and just wants the states to enforce drug laws, and maybe a bit less vigorously, and decide on the definition of marriage. He says he'll get us out of Iraq and everywhere else.

For Vice President these same starry eyed libertarians chose hyperactive, egomaniacal and proudly Jewish Wayne Root, a rich Las Vegas odds maker seems to have become more libertarian since entering the race last year - but we'll see if the stays that way, especially when it comes to supporting his favorite colonialist apartheid state, Israel.

Some joke that the wacky Root is sufficient revenge for the more reserved Barr taking the nomination from more radical candidates. See radical photos. Others make plays on their names that are plainly penile allusions. "Barr-Root: Thrusting to the future."

The good news is enough radicals were elected to the Libertarian National Committee and Judicial Committee that both candidates will know their every utterance will be scrutinized. (I already have a dozen google alerts out for certain phrases and their names.) Article 12. Sec 5. of the Libertarian Party bylaws reads: "A candidate's nomination may be suspended by a 3/4 vote of the entire membership of the National Committee at a meeting."

Anyway, here's the Lemonade:

* Libertarians did not restore the 2004 platform but wrote a short one which isn't too objectionable, except on National Defense, Internal Security and Individual Rights and International Affairs! Just too many little loopholes that allow "libertarians" to claim the platform supports neoconservative wars of aggression and impositions on civil liberties. However, the platform almost makes up for it - and for deleting the "Secession" plank with a new plank:

3.7. Self-Determination: Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of individual liberty, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to agree to such new governance as to them shall seem most likely to protect their liberty.

That's what I call getting with the program! Let's make it HARD for Barr-Root to forget it.

* Maybe a lot of those annoyed radicals will join "Secessionists for Barr-Root" - if anyone gets around to starting it.

Hillary Leaks Mossad Plan to Assassinate Obama?

2008-05-23T22:40:00.000-04:00

I knew through my astute woman's intuition that Hillary and her aides were yapping about the inevitable assassination of Barack Obama (as I wrote before by Israel's Mossad for his poorly hidden pro-Palestinian sympathies). Little did I know she'd yap out loud about it and let the cat out of the bag, per the video below, saying: "My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it."

Meanwhile, what fun that McCain had to renounce the endorsement of "Christian Zionist" John Hagee (much mocked on this blog) for yapping about Hitler being "God's hunter" who drove the Jews to Palestine. I'm sure McCain can find similar comments as or more ridiculous than anything Rev. Wright ever said, if he investigated some of his other endorsers. Like Mike Huckabee who actually joked about an assassination attempt on Obama.

Deep in their hearts these white racists are hoping the "uppity black boy" gets it. (And they are just encouraging non-Mossad angry white men to do it!) So disgusting! Some disgusting right wing males also are insulting the hard core libertarian presidential nominee, uppity female Mary Ruwart.

Below is a video report on Hillary's comments and my video of the history of the John F. Kennedy grave and memorial with appropriate Irish folk music accompaniment. Even Irish radical decentralists can think fondly of an Irish president who stood up to certain foreign lobbies and probably were assassinated for it. (I mean isn't a bit of a coincidence that both Jack Ruby and Sirhan Sirhan worked for the Meyer Lansky gang, which ran weapons to Jewish terrorists in Palestine in the 1930s and 40s and did money laundering for the Mossad after the creation of Israel?)

Will Third Party Raiders Take Over Libertarian Party?

2008-05-22T12:45:00.004-04:00

The Libertarian Party has had a hardcore libertarian platform - including the “right of secession of political entities, private groups or individuals” - since its inception in the early 1970s. I personally had never met a libertarian who would use military force against secessionists. See my Libertarian Party page.

However, for years “moderate” and pro-military “libertarians” have been trying to water down the platform’s most pro-peace and freedom planks - including in just the last couple years that supporting secession.

Since the September 11, 2001 attacks, pro-interventionist factions - especially Israel supporters, people working for military contractors, frightened libertarians and, more and more, conservatives and neoconservatives posing as libertarians - have worked to make the radical LIBERTARIAN Party a CONSERVATIVE Libertarian Party. Most of these people are not as hardcore libertarian as Republican Ron Paul!

In 2004 this faction engineered getting its partisans to an off year LP convention held in far off Portland, Oregon. They gutted the platform of its most radical planks - including secession. Since the beginning of this year hard core libertarians (LP Radicals and Restore04, among others) have been working to restore the original 2004 platform, and to nominate a hardcore libertarian candidate for President this Memorial Day weekend. (A convention I just couldn’t get it together to make this year. That's me at 2004 convention, speaking and flashing a peace sign.)

However, some members of the Libertarian National Committee and its office staff (led by a truly sleazy operative named Shane Cory) have been manipulating to give former Congressman Bob Barr the nomination, hoping he could jump on the Ron Paul bandwagon – without being as libertarian as Ron Paul. The takeover is being organized by Richard Viguerie and Russ Verney (Barr’s campaign manager) who in the past raided and decimated the American Independent Party and the Reform Party. (Cory quit his job and now works for them. He loves to threaten to sue people for libel and slander. Would that include this paragraph?)

Read about their crass attempts to take over the Libertarian Party through infiltration and bribery - including by buying ThirdPartyWatch.com. See Is Richard Viguerie Trying to Buy the Libertarian Party? by David F. Nolan (who called the meeting that launched the LP) and Resist Much! by Tom Knapp (long time radical activist). I’ll report briefly on the outcome next time.

As I've said for decades, the problem with political parties is that they tend to attract people who want power, and they can only get that by watering down principles and driving out radicals so they can attract mainstream and even special interest money. So I'm not particularly surprised or discouraged by this. Especially because libertarians are starting to gravitate into the evolving secession movement and I'm working on helping them get there.

I do encourage people to run for office as secessionists - but on whatever party makes it easiest to gain ballot access and all the free publicity running for office can generate. A losing challenger in a major party primary can be just as effective as a losing libertarian or green challenger in the final election.

However, in the end it is the strategy of non-cooperation and withdrawal - the secession strategy – that will free us. See the outline of “198 Methods of Nonviolent Action” from Gene Sharp’s book The Methods of Nonviolent Action.

I’ve just gotten Thomas H. Naylor’s new paperback “Secession: How Vermont and All the Other States Can Save Themselves from the Empire” (intro by Kirkpatrick Sale) and once I finish reading it will report on which of those strategies he prefers.

Mourning 60 Years of Colonization with Black Balloons

2008-05-17T11:52:00.002-04:00

May 15 Bush was speaking to the Israeli Knesset -- about the only people besides nutty American Christian Zionists who support him any more -- on the 60th anniversary of the creation of Israel on mostly Arab land. Meanwhile millions of displaced or occupied Palestinians were engaging in various forms of protest and mourning, including sending up thousands of black balloons to fly up out of their defacto concentration camps in the West Bank and Gaza and over Israel, to tweak Israeli's poorly developed consciences. (More Facebook photos here, story here. See Associated Press, UK Reuters story.)

Bush, of course, was ranting his malarkey about "appeasement" - insinuating that talking with governments you have problems with is defacto appeasement. That gave Barack Obama lots of air time to explain why Bush (pressed on by his only buddies mentioned above) is the war-aggressing Hitler of our time. He didn't do much to stand up for the Palestinians, however.

And of course it lead to this great television theater on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews badgering the young and ignorant talk show host Kevin James to explain just what it was that British Prime Minister Nevil Chamberlain did in the late 193os that was appeasement. James clearly did not know it had something to do with Chamberlain's concession's to Hitler's Germany - or was too stupid to explain it. (Of course, many of the concessions would have been just or practical ones given the punishment of Germany after World War I, but ones empire builders like Hitler take advantage of.) Anyway it's pretty amusing viewing and shows just how little substance there is to Bush and company's war mongering.