"Land of the Free" my ass

After five years, two pregnancies, and thousands of dollars in expenses, the government still insists their marriage is a sham.

Homeland Security wrecks a home - Chicago Reader

Land of the fucking free - Part 9284

It starts all out as clean and irresponsible fun, but watch out for parts 5 and 6.


Part 1


Part 2


Part 3


Part 4


Part 5


Part 6


Part 7

Don't go to America.

Right Web?

I stumbled across an interesting website:

Right Web, founded in 2003, is a program of the International Relations Center (IRC) that tracks the work of those, in and outside of government, who have been instrumental in shaping or supporting U.S. policies in the global war on terror. Right Web explores the many ties that link the main players, organizations, corporate supporters, foundations, educational institutions, and government representatives in what could be described as a new architecture of power. Right Web aims to shine a spotlight on how these links influence the direction of foreign, military, and homeland security policies, and to illuminate this web for the public.

Many of the organizations and individuals profiled by Right Web are affiliated with the Republican Party, but not all. Efforts to push militaristic policies cross party lines, and so the Right Web project examines rightist organizations and figures, as well as leading liberal hawks. ...

The IRC has worked for nearly three decades to illuminate the causes and consequences of U.S. policy and “to make the United States a more responsible global leader and global partner.” Right Web represents a revival of a former IRC program called GroupWatch (1985-1991), which profiled more than 125 private, quasi-governmental, and religious organizations that were closely associated with the implementation of U.S. foreign policy, especially in Central America.

By establishing Right Web, the IRC hopes to add to the growing national movement of concerned citizens who are working to check the militaristic drift of the country.

Right Web

I don't know much more about them, but what they write on their about page seems promising.

Kafka is now an US resident

And he is working at the immigration counter, where else?

him#3: I am sorry sir, but we can not allow you to enter the US.

me: ?!?! Why is that?

him#3: You tried to enter on your Belgian passport, but this one is not valid to enter the US.

me: Why not? I was in New York two weeks ago. I fly to the US three-four times a year. I always use my Belgian passport.

him#3: Sorry, but the rules changed. As of last week, Belgian passports have to be machine readable.

The Day I Got Deported From the US - The Road to the Horizon

Project for a new conspiracy theory PNCT

Rough sketch:
Saudi Arabia has a major influence on US politics. Saudi Arabia feels threatend by Saddam Hussein. Saudi Arabia influences the US to attack Iraq.

Based on this and this.

See: The tale of the 15 Saudis with boxcutters and the bearded Saudi in a cave.

Where is Waldo?

I know, this is old news, I just needed to post it here for completeness. The only thing I changed from the nytimes report are the malreported begining of the following paragraphs, each one was one sentence too early. And I added the highlighting.

Who could believe that one day we could witness the collapse of the Eastern Empire? But we have seen its fall during our lives and it collapsed in such a way that we have to refer to libraries because no trace of it is left. Imam [Khomeini] said Saddam must go and he said he would grow weaker than anyone could imagine. Now you see the man who spoke with such arrogance ten years ago that one would have thought he was immortal, is being tried in his own country in handcuffs and shackles by those who he believed supported him and with whose backing he committed his crimes. Our dear Imam said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement.

We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime [Israel] has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world.

But we must be aware of tricks. For over 50 years the world oppressor tried to give legitimacy to the occupying regime and it has taken measures in this direction to stabilize it. ...

Text of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Speech - New York Times
(If you are asked for login information, get them here)

Somehow, the last highlighted senctence just doesn't fit, the map part just seems wrong.

For me, the original seems like something like this:
1. Who thought that the Soviet Union would vanish?
2. Who would have thought that Saddam would be removed from power one day? Khomeini did.
3. Khomein said as well that one day the government in Israel will be gone.

He then continues about the fight against the Israeli *government*(which he calls regime) what could endager this fight and what could be gained from it.

Obviously, this is far from being peaceful. But except the one sentence, which I can neither confirm or deny (Do you speak Farsi?), he basicly says that change will come, sometimes not peaceful (as in Iraq). As I said before, I hate violence, I'm against war, but if you say that Ahmadienjad wants to wipe Israel off the map, then Bush and his cronies want to wipe Iraq off the map. For me, there is little difference, excpet one side has the better PR, better weapons and more money. Ask yourself where this money is from.

The tale of the 15 Saudis

15 Saudis, lead by a Saudi and sponsored by Saudi money, attack the US and the US retaliate against - Afghanistan and Iraq. Of course it is much more comforting to think that the US government is full of liars and criminals than the alternative that the people in power in the US are plain stupid and couldn't tell their ass from their head.

A load of old bollocks courtesy of the BBC - Stef

I really hate violence...

... and I don't want to promote any kind of violent ideology, whether it is American, Iranian, Christian or Islamic. But I stumbled upon this video while searching for the meaning of the word Moronican and wanted to share it with the world, just to give you an idea why the US have already lost the war in Iraq and how they are creating that kind of "evil" they claim to be fighting. And not even pork bullets are going to make the US win. Just listen to the song they are using as background music. If I would live in Iraq, with such beautiful music, I would pick up a RPG and fight infidels.

LiveLeak.com - Video of Islamic State of Iraq Shooting Down an American Chinook Helicopter in Al-Karma

(The images you see if you click there show an US helicopter being shot down. If this disturbs you, don't click. Other than that, this video shows no graphic violence, which is far less than any Hollywood movie depicting the war in Vietnam. I guess in twenty years, we will see the movies showing how the Iraq war really was and everybody is going to say "Never again" and forget it when the government warns of a new danger, a new Emmanuel Goldstein)

As to the quote:

Military officials are growing increasingly concerned that Iraqi insurgents are successfully adapting their tactics to be more effective against American aircraft.

A CH-47 Chinook is a 40 year old unarmored helicopter. I guess you could shoot it down with anything that is bigger than a small caliber weapon, a starting or landing Chinook could be downed with a AK-47, some skill and some luck.

Cognitive Dissonance

• For years the US have being "fighting" against a relentless terrorist threat on US mainland and no attack has happened since 2001
  
• For years the US have being "fighting" against a relentless inflow of drugs into the US mainland and every year hundreds of tons of drugs have slipped through
  

So what is the story here?

Either

• There is no terrorist threat

or

• There is no "war on drugs"
  

or

• Both

Sans the Lizards

David Huddleston playing Jeffrey Lebowski

Webster G. Tarpley playing himself (rather badly)

Finally I found that video from the Webster Tarpley presentation again (90 minutes).



It is nice to listen to Tarpley, he makes a wonderful presentation. No I did not check his facts, but he gives a really good lecture of patsies and 9/11. And he talks a bit about the "controlled demolition and cruise missile" blah blah bullshit as if he does not believe it, just to mention it. The main point he makes is that 9/11 was a coup, which is a interesting theory. The good thing about him, he does not feel mentally unstable like Alex Jones and does not talk about lizards like David Icke. Alas, I can't shake the feeling that he wants to sell me something, maybe it is just the suit and the tie.

Which brings me to this video of a presentation by Mike Rupert, who just feels like he's from the cast of some TV cop show from the eighties.

And by the way, I can see a game of Top Trumps with conspiracy theorists cards:

- Sentences said before being cut off by TV crew?
- 1
- 5! Alex Jones wins!
- Times being shot at?
- Zero
- Twice! Mike Rupert wins!

(Stole some ideas for this posting from Stef)

Why Iran will not be next

I could be wrong. I was wrong before, boy was I wrong before. Last summer, I thought Iran would be next, I thought the bombs would be falling within weeks. I thought the US would invade Iran. Or Syria. Or both. In 2003 I thought if the US would invade Iraq, it would be a good thing for the Iraqis. Boy was I unillumined and naive back then. And wrong, wrong, wrong.

Right now, we see the same bullshit fabricated intelligence as we have seen in 2003. But do the same means lead to the same ends?

To understand what will happened next, we have to know what happened before. I hope I have learned since then and can make an educated guess now. If I get this wrong, what I say will not have any relation to reality.

So why was Iraq attacked? Some people claim that it was some fuzzy "Old-School US Imperialism ™". Modern US imperialism has different means. Some claim that it was "For Oil". I don't think so, there are other countries with oil, more valuable countries. Why not go for Venezuela or Nigeria?

As I have said before, I think Iraq was attacked because some people wanted to transfer shitloads of tax-money into the accounts of the arms industry and into their own pockets. What better way than to start a war. Not something too big, but something that smolders for a very long time. Just like something we are seeing right now in Iraq. Perfect.

So what's the worst that could happen? Just imagine you have to show some PowerPoint slides to the executive board of some bigshot arms manufacturer in the US the day after an Democratic President has declared to pull out of Iraq and has been greeted by congressmen of both parties as an "American Gandhi". Oops, wrong meeting.

So what would happen if the US invaded Iran. Two things would be possible.

1. The violence would tail off. In which case the president could declare "Job well done" and pull out. It was only Iran behind all that violence (which I don't think)
2. The violence would not tail off. The US military would find itself awfully stretched. It would show that Iran wasn't behind all this insurgency business. The calls to pull out, which are getting louder already without a mess in Iran, would get even louder. It would be suicide for a president not to give up Iraq or Iran or both. "Leave the suckers to themselves" would be the American motto du jour.
   

So, to keep the US military in the mess it is right now, we need a reason, a plausible reason why the US military has to stay in that mess. To achieve this, the people in charge would need a "device" with which they could put pressure on who ever becomes president NOT to pull out. What better device than an Iran that has to be curbed? So, if the US president should think about pulling out, he could be pressured to stay the course or be called a traitor who endangers the US security.

When they have learned one thing from the end of the cold war, it is that not having an enemy, not having something you need protection from, can be a very dangerous thing if you are in the business of selling arms. I guess the war on terror is loosing steam, there is only so far you can go with a phantom terror organization and a phantom terror-leader. So what better than to have Mini-Soviet threat? It worked for over forty years with the Russkies, why not give it a try with the Mullahs now? And if it doesn't work out, there is allways Russia or China to fall back as the enemy du jour. Better prepare them as enemy now.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said last Wednesday the United States had to prepare for the possibility of combating major armies and that it also needed significant Special Forces because he did not know what might happen in Russia, North Korea, Iran and China in the future.
...
"In principle, as defense minister, I can understand this statement. All sorts of tricks are used to approve the budget," RIA Novosti quoted [Russian defense minister] Ivanov.

As I said before, I could be wrong, but I think what the people currently in charge want is not another war, they want to make sure this war keeps going the way it has been going since the beginning. In my opinion, Iraq has not become another Vietnam for the US because their leaders have made mistakes. Their intention from the first moment was to turn Iraq into another Vietnam.

Just as a reminder

Current dispersal of U.S. troops around the world. Darker colours signify U.S. usage of military facilities, or nations with fewer than 10,000 troops present. The lightest nations represent U.S. presence of 10,000 or more.

Military history of the United States - Wikipedia

Field Guide to Iraq

Daryl Cagle's Weblog

(via fefe, in German)

And while searching for it: The Slate Field Guide to Iraq Pundits

"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."

The real secrets of the 9/11 attack have nothing at all to do with planes with no Arab hijackers aboard being flown by remote control, or missiles, rather than a Boeing airliner, hitting the Pentagon, or pods under the wings of the planes, or explosives in the World Trade Center, or the attack of the Crab People.

Clever disinformation is designed to throw out a lot of white noise... and throw up a smokescreen.

Author Thomas Pynchon said it best: "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."

NEW TOP 10 THINGS YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO KNOW ABOUT 9/11

By the way, the last post was my 1.111th post on this blog!

The game stays the same

I once read the book "A Short History of Nearly Everything" by Bill Bryson. What surprised me was the fact that a great deal of "scientists" in the past were self-serving, arrogant, cocky, self-important, conceited, overweening, priggish pricks. A property by the way they share with today's politicians, religious believers and the rest of the human race.

Sometime ago I thought that life today is different, that people today are somehow "better". Today I am more disillusioned and it does not surprise me anymore that politics interfered with science and that there were, are (and always will be) "scientists" who are willing supporters of this kind of endeavour.

I would like to call myself an misanthrope, as I hate those kinds of people, but there are people in world who are not pricks. So does hating just stupid pricks make me a misanthrope?

(via fefe, in German)

[Update] I found this nice nugget via wikipedia:

Bryson also exaggerates the portrayals of some scientists: Ernest Rutherford is said to be an overpowering force, Fred Hoyle a complete weirdo, Fritz Zwicky an utterly abrasive astronomer, and Newton a total paranoiac. Surely the descriptions of these and other scientists are distorted.

A Short History of Nearly Everything - Prepared by the staff of Jupiter Scientific

Which sounds to me like: "I'm just too lazy to look up any facts, but surely these descriptions are distorted. Impossible that scientists are anything other than scientists, same as it is impossible that a politician is anything other than a politician or an astronaut is anything other than an astronaut."

Sure, Bryson could be wrong. But his works looks pretty solid to me.

Unlike any other ever seen

This speech by Bush is very revealing.

"On September the 11th, enemies of freedom committed an act of war against our country. [...]

This group and its leader -- a person named Osama bin Laden -- are linked to many other organizations in different countries, including the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. There are thousands of these terrorists in more than 60 countries. [...]

Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated. [...]

Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms -- our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other. [...]

With every atrocity, they hope that America grows fearful [...]

We will direct every resource at our command [...]

[This] war will not be like the war against Iraq a decade ago, with the decisive liberation of territory and a swift conclusion. [...]

Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes.

Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign unlike any other we have ever seen. [...]

Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."

Iran's Goldstein and the Proliferation of Lies - YouTube

“As usual, the face of Emmanuel Goldstein, the Enemy of the People, had flashed on to the screen. There were hisses here and there among the audience. [...]

The social atmosphere is that of a besieged city [...]

[The] consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival. [...]

It does not matter whether the war is actually happening, and, since no decisive victory is possible, it does not matter whether the war is going well or badly. All that is needed is that a state of war should exist.”

Eric Arthur Blair at his best. If anybody thinks that this war will end, once the Demorats are in power, they are wrong. This war will continue, like a smoldering fire, incinerate everybodies freedoms, everybodies economy and with it countless lives. It will leave behind a fascist US nation with a military economy.

BTW: I like how Rumsfled defends himself by calling out on the actions of Hussein against Iran.

The American Twilight

SE: It's like the Twilight Zone in there – you have to keep the Pakistani translators on one side of the room and the Indians on the other, or they will come to blows. You have to keep the Hebrew translators separated from the Arabic ones, and so on. It's so unprofessional it's ridiculous. Most of the time people spend trying to dig up dirt on one another. Really.
...

CD: Sibel, I know you made a lot of complaints about several other examples of corruption and incompetence beyond the ones we have time to discuss. Can you just explain a little about how your superiors received your complaints?

SE: Sure. They used what we call the "hooking" procedure. When I first reported some of these translations failures and stalling tactics in December 2001 to my superiors, my mid-level manager said to me, "Now, Sibel, I understand you've been taking on a lot of coursework at your university. Why not take advantage of our workplace opportunities?"

When I asked him what he meant, this boss suggested that I could "bring my school bag" to work on Saturdays and Sundays, and just study. No work. I wouldn't even have to turn on my computer. He told me that I should then put myself down as having worked all those hours on the time sheet, so that, you know, I would be making something like $700 in a weekend – specifically for not working!

CD: Incredible.

SE: And this is what they say when you file a complaint.

CD: So is that the extent of how they tried to appease you and forestall complaints, or do you have other examples?

SE: That's funny, there is another really amazing example. They would come to me and say, "Sibel, we understand you've been going back to Turkey a couple of times a year to visit family. Before you go the next time, just let us know. We'll make it a TDY" [paid travel]. And all I'd have to do is stop off in some liaison office in Ankara a couple times, make my little appearance, and suddenly all my flights, hotels and expenses would be paid for by the FBI. I couldn't believe what I was hearing.

CD: An offer you couldn't refuse, huh? I imagine most people in your position would take it.

SE: Oh, so many people will go for it … but if you do, then they [the FBI] can use it against you. Maybe discover irregularities in your expenses at some later date, "forged" documents, or else just hold it over your head. They love to do things like that to hold you in their power.

An Interview with Sibel Edmonds - by Christopher Deliso

Read the interview, it gets much more political.

I had to think of the quote: Crooked cops. Do they come in any other way?

“The French lost in Viet Nam? What else would you expect from the French? Never happen to us.”

Some military philosophers favor actually removing from military libraries books on what happened to the French in Viet Nam, the Americans in Viet Nam, the Russians in Afghanistan, the Americans in Afghanistan (a work in progress), the French in Algeria, the Americans in Iraq (also in progress), the Israelis in Lebanon the first time, the Israelis in Lebanon the last time, the Americans in Lebanon 1983, the Americans in Somalia the first time, and so on. However, the best thinkers hold that it doesn’t matter what books are in military libraries, as only those on stirring victories will be checked out.
...
Insist that the US military never loses wars. Instead, it is betrayed, stabbed in the back, and brought low by treason. For example, argue furiously that the US didn’t lose in Viet Nam, but won gloriously; the withdrawal was due to the treachery of Democrats, Jews, hippies, the press, most of the military, and a majority of the general population, all of whom were traitors. This avoids the unpleasantness of learning anything from defeat. Further, it facilitates a focus on controlling the press, who are the real enemy, along with the Democrats and the general population.

Fred On Everything - A True Son of Tzu

(via fefe - in German)

Fake crimes and real victims

As of 2003, over 6.9 million people were under some form of correctional supervision in the United States . Said another way, as of today, we have about seven million people in this “free” country either in jail, prison, probation or parole; that’s one in 32 adults. As of December 2003, we have 2.1 million people in cages, most of them for non-violent “crimes,” and the majority of those are drug-related.

For every 100,000 of population, there are 686 people in cages. The United States has more people in cages than any other country on earth. Worldwide, there are about nine million people in prison. Most of the other countries have incarceration rates of 150 per 100,000. By comparison, the United Kingdom has a rate of 139 per 100,000. In the United States , one of every 75 men are in jail. If you go further and break this down by race, about eight of every 75 black men are in prison.

I am not saying that there are not people who should be in prison, but certainly not at the rate the United States has, and certainly not for a “free” country. Most of these people are in cages for doing nothing more than smoking something that is as natural as tobacco. Most of them have never harmed another person, and are certainly not a threat to anyone. These victimless “crimes” I like to call “fake crimes.”
...
If recent incarceration rates remain unchanged, an estimated one of every 20 Americans can be expected to serve time in prison during their lifetime. For African-American men, the number is greater than one in four.
...
Here are some more interesting statistics. Every year in this country, 8,000 to 14,000 people die from illegal drugs. Now compare that to over 500,000 that die from “legal” drugs (tobacco, liquor and prescriptions). This is roughly a 50 to 1 ratio. Alcohol alone is involved in seven times more violent crimes than all illegal substances combined, yet our government continues to hugely subsidize alcohol and tobacco, while demonizing those who would exercise a different choice.

The War on Humanity

Pop Quiz

Who invented the phrase "To slap the members of a certain nation off the map"?

Sorry, wrong answer.