Friday, December 22, 2006

Worth Fighting For

There is word from the Institute for Development of Economics Research of the United Nations University claiming that the richest 2 percent of the world's adults own more than half of the world's wealth.

The richest 1%, they say own 40% of the planet's assets in the year 2000, and the richest 10% own 85% of the total goods. A different 50% of the world's adult population own just under 1% of the world's wealth.

So, this is definitely worth fighting for. If you are the numerous Not-haves, you clearly NEED to attack. But who? Where are they? How do you find them and get to them, and attack with what?

But if you are the Haves, then you have the means to defend your way of life. You just have to be clever about it, and give the Not-haves reasons to attack each other.

If you one of the Haves, the greatest of your assest is religion. Not for you, you have other assets; religion is for the Not-haves. It will keep them busy and maleable for generations, and give them reasons to worry about what they do, how they can do it, and it also promise them riches after they suffer away.

Another great asset the Haves have is the military. The Not-haves can serve in the Have's military forces. Why would any Not-have possibly risk his or her life and well-being again and again for the Haves? Easy - of course the answer is security. Simple. If you don't get killed, you get a pension and some benefits.

Then there is the question of education. If you are a Have, you don't really need it; if you are a Not-have, you are led to believe it can help you help the Haves and therefore get paid well by the Haves. But the "education" is not really Education - it is a form of training. The "educated" Not-haves become like eunuchs, trained to care for the Haves but limited to one area of expertise. That limits the usefulness of their "education" to the Not-haves themselves, and keeps them in the employ of the Haves. This "education" is sometimes so specialized that the graduates become a bit like idiot savants, able to stun the world in one or two things but otherwise unable to function without care from their keepers - in this case the keepers are the Haves.

Patriotism is another asset that the Haves have. There is honor and glory all over the place that Not-haves can aspire to. What use is honor and glory? Well, if you can't get assets, then honor and glory can make you shine before other Not-haves. The Not-haves parents can be proud of their patriotic child.

Another great asset the Haves have, is the Not-haves themselves. Ultimately the Not-haves belong to the Haves. They work for them (at the Haves' pleasure, of course). The Not-haves can "have" too, they just have to borrow it from the Haves - and then pay it back again and again and again.


© John Womack, 2006. All rights reserved.

Worse than a civil war? Yes - much, much worse.

Webster defines a Civil War as a war between different citizens of the same country. Perhaps that seems to imply to President Bush and those who advise him that a civil war should be two different sides like in the American entry in civil wars in which two different armies squared off against each other.

What is going on in Iraq though, is much worse that that simple, model civil war. It is more like a free-for-all brawl. Like Vietnam. Does anyone remember Vietnam? (No, I really mean does anyone in D.C remember Vietnam?)

In Vietnam there was North Vietnam vrs South Vietnam, but in the southern part there was also the Viet Cong against the Army of the Republic of Vietnam. Then there was a parade of American-selected South Vietnam leaders such as Ky, Thieu, Huong, Diem, Van Mihn, and so on.

So Iraq is not only a civil war, it is also a series of civil wars like Vietnam was, but worse even than that: Iraq is an ancient battlefield for war lords. Ancient hatreds that have simmered for more than a thousand years in places, shoved to the back burner because of Saddam can surface at any time, raising questions of pay-back, questions of family honor, questions of subjugation and endless variations on all of those themes. But Iraq is STILL much, much worse than even that!

Because in addition to being a civil war, and being a series of civil wars, and being a land of century-old blood feuds among warlords, it is also a religious war. Not just a simple religious war even, but a collection of religious wars. Sunni against Shiite against Kurds against Jews against Christians, and add in the Wassabis, Sufis, evangelical Christians, Orthodox Jews, Hamas, Fatah, Hezzbollah and whatnots. And even the Shiites, to choose only one faction, have several on-going factional disputes among themselves.

Forget any good the American forces and mercenaries may have done over there. All we represent to many Iraqis are the shock and awe of Abu-Ghraib, deportations to Guantanamo, renditions, Hadithas, Falujas, torture, and things the American press has never cared to hear about plus a recurring, years-long inability of the mighty American powers to restore water, electricity and even gasoline supplies. To the Iraqis, that simply means we don't really care.

© John Womack, 2006.

Thursday, December 07, 2006

How to Begin in Iraq

Much of the rumble about the Baker-Hamilton report concerns how to "fix" not only the American War in Iraq but all of the middle-east and southwest Asia.

The U.S. invaded Iraq and upset a brutal dictator who was holding a boiling cauldron of competing war lords and rival sects down by the use of savage killings and torture. Now we have removed the cover from the cauldron and it has exploded.

We cannot cure their problems because they want their problems and they don't want us. Unfortunate as it seems, we are limited in what we can do with only the use of guns and a small army. We don't speak the language, don't understand the religions or their many crucial and deadly nuances, we don't share the background of the people or understand their methods of solving problems. We bring logical management techinques, democratic principles and corporate hierarachies to the table and find they don't like tables.

What Bush has done is done, we cannot undo it. Most importantly we cannot bring Sunni, Kurd, Shiite, Christian and Jewish groups together in peace by waging war against them in their own homeland. They have not solved their own problems for some 1500 and more years. All we can do is to get our military men out of Iraq, try to get us back into the human race, and begin the cruicial and definitive work of international communication, dialog and negotiation.

A great place to begin is in the UN (especially since the Bolton thing has gone), and to work with Europe, the other countries in the middle-east (including Iran and Syria), and other nations in the world. There is help that can come to the middle-east, but it cannot be delivered by American bullets, bombs and CBUs - those just add to everybody's problems and misery - including our own. And don't forget our "troops" - they signed up to defend our country - not to be returning targets in a war that can't be won.

Don't even try to say the UN in inept and incapable. If America had put a tiny portion of the money, skill, knowledge, dedication and meticulous work into the UN that we have spent on war over the past 50 years, the UN would be a vastly different organization today, and we would all be much safer, richer and happier. Where do we begin? The Baker-Hamilton Report is a great place to begin. Today is a great place to begin. We have to start somewhere.

© John Womack, 2006. All rights reserved.

Wednesday, December 06, 2006

Baker-Hamilton.

The Baker-Hamilton Report officially came out today. Scary stuff. But it's probably just the tip of the tip of the explosions that lie beneath all that.

Baker seemed to indicate on the Jim Lehrer Report December 6, 2006, that the U.S. would probably be in Iraq into the far distant future. Possibly he was referring to (or being able to say in the future that he had referenced) those little-talked-about 14 air bases in Iraq.

Much about the American War against Iraq seems to me to mimic the American War against Vietnam. We were dragged into the event by a president who lied to start the war. The enemy is personified by its leader, who is then cast as being The Devil, himself. Early opportunities to consolidate victories were wasted. "New Strategies for Victory" begin marching out of the Oval Office. The leaders of our host country are denigrated. We plan to win in a series of bold strokes, and they are successful, but ultimately meaningless. Training begins for the host country's "military" forces. New programs to Win the Hearts And Minds of the host country people are initiated. (In Vietnam, LBJ's forray into this program was called the WHAM program). The American public is told that we can't back out now - we have lost 1,000 (then 2,000, 3,000, 4,000, 5,000, 6,000 and so on) lives and we have to "honor them".

THEN - came the really big event. The Vietnam war had been the Democrat's baby - their problem - and THEN Nixon was put into power (with his very own "secret" plan) and the Republicans bought the war - they bought it slowly and reluctantly - but completely.

Then Vietnam became the all of America's problem.

We now have the Democrats moving into control of the House and Senate - not much control, but they will control the committies and be able to ask the questions and fund the issues. If they begin to "buy" the War in Iraq, then it will be a very long trip down into a hole from which we may not fully emerge.

©John Womack, 2006. All rights reserved.

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

Make Your "Local" a Little Bit Bigger - MoveOn!



Call For Change
Just back from voting. Pretty simple here in the village of Franklin, North Carolina. Rainy day, temperatures in the mid 50s. Got to the polling place about 1105, into the voting booth at 1125, left at 1135. Very friendly group, collegial, not any discussion that I heard about how people planned to vote or about any issue. Somebody was handing out sample ballots so the voters could see what their ballots would look like when they got in the booth - the sample ballots had even been marked to help the voter figure out who to vote for if they weren't sure. All the "suggested" markings were for Republicans. That's odd - or would be - but not here. When I checked in, no identification was required, I just told them my name and where I lived. Then signed the appropriate line with my signature. Sure glad nobody else had claimed to be me and already voted.

We had to fill in the circles with a special? ball-point pen. Then we fed the sheet into a reader and that was it. I asked the guy who sat beside the reader and who handed me my "I Voted" sticker if there was any kind of a paper trail. He looked deeply into my eyes and tapped on the case below the reader, and gave me a half-nod. I looked closely and didn't see any kind of a wink from him. I guess he was on the level and knew what he was talking about. Everybody seemed very happy and were smiling and laughing, and chatting very friendly-like with each other. Village voting.

All voting is local? Yeah. That's true. What has changed is the extent of "local". Here is a picture I made last week in Athens, Greece. This is one guy's way of spreading the word about how he feels. I'm using one of my blogs. You can do the same. Make your "local" a little bit bigger - Go to MoveOn and add their message to your blog.

John Womack.

MoveOn



Call For Change
Just back from voting. Pretty simple here in the village of Franklin, North Carolina. Got there about 1105, into the voting booth at 1125, left at 1135. Very friendly group, collegial, not any discussion that I heard about how people planned to vote or about any issue. No identification required, I just told them my name and where I lived. Then signed the appropriate line with my signature. Sure glad nobody else had claimed to be me and already voted. Rainy day, temperatures in the mid 50s.

© John Womack, 2006. All rights reserved.

Sunday, November 05, 2006

Media Shame

George Bush is so unpopular that he can only go to a few places in a few states and even then has to speak to selected and pre-screened crowds. Yet he went, probably at Karl Rove's direction. That seemed simple enough, what difference could it possibly make, who would really hear him, anyway, and so on. BUT the media picked up all his punch lines, played them again and again, led off most news segments with Bush draped over a lecturn, telling the nation that the Republicans would win, that everything was OK, there was no problem, and hurling insults at the Democrats and anyone else.

This smacks of more than just the Bully Pulpit, this seems to point to some type of payoff. Maybe not. Maybe it is just the media at its worst, but it has already swung the polls toward the Republicans. Enough? We'll find out Tuesday. Maybe it is just more of Rove's magic.

Saddam

Saddam is to hang. That's just been spoken by the judge but it certainly is not news. We all knew he was going to be hanged a year ago when we found out that was how they were going to kill him. Few tears will be shed at his death. My own feeling about the death penalty is that it is never justified, but of course that doesn't matter here. Neither does the fact that history will hold the entire mess to be a kangaroo-court performance. To have held the trial in the middle of a civil war, to have had numerous defense lawyers quit - 2 of them were shot dead, to have had judges removed and replaced, witnesses interviewed in secrecy and . . . well, there's just too many irregularities to try to mention even most of them.

The ICC was available for the job and would have done humanity proud if it that had this chance. But Bush hates the ICC even more than he hates Saddam. Besides, if the ICC had conducted the trial its verdict would not have been announced to coincide with an election in the United States that is of great importance to George Bush.

© John Womack, 2006. All rights reserved.

Sunday, October 08, 2006

Management, By George:

Or,
CEO George’s Little Red Book on Management,
Or Let George Do It, by George

The basic teaching about the theory of management usually begins by explaining the Principles which govern and control it. There has always been problem determining how many of these principles there are. Some authorities (textbook writers) claim as few as five, some soar upwards of twenty. What can any rational being do?

Fortunately there is a new book on the market. It explains how too many principles can create problems for a manager. A manager is busy, has a lot of work to do, and it can be confusing at times. Part of the charm of this book is that it shows how to seize control of the problems, cut through the fog of work and boil down the theories into a few hard-headed ways to get things done.

So the author of this book will go with the basic five Principles of Management: Planning, Organizing, Staffing, Directing and Controling. Let’s look at them in detail now.

Most important of all is Planning - it is always the first step in management, and far and away the hardest. Everything else depends on it. And the hardest part of Planning is the first part of it: Choosing the Objective. Here you have to look at needs of the organization and its mission, learn to know your clients and competition, determine possible alternatives, select desired criteria and establish measurement standards to weigh each of them. It’s a really hard way to earn a living.

Here is where “Management, by George”, really steals the show. You don’t have to figure out what the Objective should be - you are GIVEN the Objective. Kind of like in the old TV show, Mission Impossible. Here is an example of what I mean: Remember the lead in that show? “Your misssion, by George should you choose to accept it, is to . . . Invade Iraq!” If it is a valid mission, you may even hear background music. How do you find these missions? First you have to get right with God, then you have to listen to the right people. The rest is easy. All you have left to plan, in this case, is figure out how to invade Iraq. Pretty simple, right? Want more? OK, lets go on to the second principle: Organizing.

Let’s deal with the main problem of Organizing right up front. And that is, according to George, it shouldn’t be the second principle. Second should be Staffing. Organizing deals with establishing and delegating authority, responsibility and validity, determining unity of command, building balance into your organization, division of work, departmentalization, and other minor things like those otther trivial pursuits. Besides, how can you do that if you don’t know who will be working for you? So you need to move right on into Staffing.

Staffing concerns the building of jobs, determining actions that must be taken, specifying knowledge, skills and abilities that will be needed in your organization. You will have to build position descriptions and establish performance standards, then advertise, schedule, interview and hire applicants. Obviously, these actions will waste a lot of your valuable time and keep you from applying your own knowledge, skills and abilities to the really important things. If you’re planning a war in Iraq, for example. you wouldn’t have time to do all this grunge work. Staffing can be taken care of easily, by George, if you just hire one or two Top Guys and tell them to get the people they need. Then - the people your Top Guys bring on line can Organize their own organization. Amazing, isn’t it; you have to wonder why nobody else ever thought of this!

Now comes the principle of Directing. This is the fun part. All this requires is just simple Leadership. Someone has to decide, and after your Top Guys have briefed you, you will make their decision, by George. That’s right, you will be the Decider. You tell everybody where to go and what they can do. Then they will go do it, and since they are all good people you can be sure they will do it and do it right. You give orders. Speeches. Radio talks. TV programs. Press conferences. That way you can get the word out to the right people - the nation’s press - you know, the papers, radio stations, TV networks and so on - these have all been pre-selected as part of the Staffing principle. Your Top Dogs sift through the details and brief you, you decide what to do and you tell the media. They will get the word out to the masses.

Last principle is Control. This means inspecting to see what actually gets done is what you orderded to be done, and what you planned to do in the beginning. Clearly, this is only for beginning managers. When you move up the line you don’t need any Control. Your only Control will be to make sure everybody else is staying the course. You will never cut and run, so you never have to review what is going on.

What is really going on is what you had planned would go on at the beginning. This way you save a lot of time and you don’t worry about what you are doing, like everybody else does.

© John Womack, 2006. All Rights Reserved

Wednesday, October 04, 2006

Foley

My own concern with Foley’s alleged crimes were less what he personally did to the young pages (which had to have had a life-changing effect upon them) but with the hierarchy of the American congress. And since this congress is totally controlled by the Republican Party - then the Republican Party must shoulder much of the blame for the attempted cover-up of the problem for perhaps three years, and keeping Foley as Chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children.

This, to my thinking, is almost an exact copy of the pedophilia which was discovered in the Roman Catholic church. Again, in that case, my concern was with the church hierarchy which protected itself while maintaining and spreading traumatic experiences among the young people entrusted to them.

In both cases, massive and intensely powerful hierarchies acted initially to protect themselves rather than their victims. Their easiest escape path was to blame it all on a convenient scapegoat: homosexuals.

Gay and lesbian people are wonderful scapegoats simply because much of what we know about them is wrong, and much of it can be emotionally charged. Many religions discriminate against gay people, and we all have known (or heard about) some homosexuals who were violent and who preyed upon young people. An inconvenient truth is that many, probably most, pedophiles are heterosexual. Another inconvenient truth is that we all have known many gay people in our lifetime, but didn’t even know most of them were gay.

Another inconvenient truth (for some of us) is that about 10% of all human beings on the planet today are homosexual. That includes white people, blacks, Asians and Indians, and Russians, Americans, Iranians, and so on. Other species of animals have a much higher rate.

Much of the discrimination against homosexuals has a religious overtone and direction. Such discrimination often claims that homosexuality is abominable in the sight of God. But Genesis states that man (meaning mankind) was created in the image of God. Could God possibly make so many mistakes? And about His OWN image? No one could possibly keep their job if 10% of their output was dangerously defective.

Pedophiles threaten all of us. They need containment and treatment. Homosexual people do not threaten anyone. THEY are people who are often threatened themselves. To blame pedophilia on gay people is just another form of gay-bashing.

The greatest threat to all of us however is a government that uses its great resources to protect itself at the expense of its own people - and then is willing to let blame for its own crimes settle on a small part of its constituency.

Let’s not lose sight of the real villain who permitted and encouraged Foley’s alleged crimes to take place. Let’s not let a convenient scapegoat shoulder the blame. Let’s make sure the Republican Party and all of congress faces one more inconvenient truth squarely.

© John Womack, 2006. All Rights Reserved.

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

Guns

The carnage of children shot down in American schools has been particularily striking this year. The latest masacre at the Amish school is simply another set of happenings in this long and dreary tale, but in no way have Americans indicated that they are ready to do anything meaningful to help their children or themselves in this regard.

Here in our little village we have no worries - not about kids and guns anyway. Everybody's a good Christian around here and that's all hit takes. Christians can have their guns and kids too and never have to worry about it. We even have a new gun shop here, and it is the closest building to the new elementary school. A sign inside the gun shop indicates there are guns for turkey, bear and deer. Big guns just across the road from the little kids in the school. Well, the kids are clearly not going to storm the gun store and make off with an arsenal - but it's a sign of what is considered by the community to be important. And - let's face it - the community is simply not worried.

So guns are a way of life, just like kids. In fact we even have a place down close to town, a little strip mall that has a church and gun shop next door to it. The Solid Rock Baptist Church and the Spirit Gun Shop. I've never been in either one but I can't help but wonder if there is a wall separating church and shop. Obviously guns belong here. Kids are OK too, as long as they behave.

You ask the folks here what should be done to help make the kids safe and there is not much comment. You talk about gun control and you could be in trouble.


©John Womack, 2006. All rights reserved
Photos made with Canon Elura 70 on SD card.

Thursday, September 28, 2006

Way Up There, High Above the Law

Once upon a time, a long, long time ago, there were laws only in Heaven. These laws were all good laws and they provided guidance for the good people who resided therein, and also protected them from the occasional transients and bible salesmen who sometimes tried to crash the pearly gates. People who did not abide by those good laws were punished by God. No need for courts, God knew Good and God knew Evil; and God knew there was not a single thing in between. There were gooddoers and evildoers and God could tell them apart.

Then man multiplied and filled the earth. People had to work together and make their living by the sweat of their brows. Some of the people found they could live better with less browsweat if they stole the work of another person and the laws of God were found deficient in this land on Earth which was not as good as Heaven nor quite as bad as Hell. So lawettes were instituted among the people by themselves to guide and protect and punish. And there were many lawettes in every land. These were not the perfect laws of God, but man-made-things, often not clearly written, sometimes not even comprehendable. So these laws were made subject to man-made courts where the laws could be “tested” to find out if they made sense and to also test to see if those laws had actually been “broken”. So the laws and the people who made them and those who were charged with breaking them were “tried” or measured to see what really did happen.

Now how could you possibly examine any complex event to see what had actually happened? It was usually decided by whimsy or by sheer might, or the very act of being “tried” or “tested” depended upon the King or Sheriff, or Grand Exalted Cyclops, or whatever Testor or source of power had detained the prisoner. Usually the Testor already knew even before the "trial" began if the Testee was really guilty and the more guilty the Testee was “known” to be by the Testor, or the more serious the “crime” the less seriously any trial needed to be prosecuted.

So, to try to get fair trials,“facts” were required to be introduced to help in the test or trial. How to determine if those “facts” were truly true came to depend on only one criterion: That was that both sides had to have equal access to all the charges and were able to examine and test or refute the charges by the other side.

If the people being tried could not find out what the evidence against them was, they were almost always found guilty. If they could introduce evidence themselves and also challenge the evidence introduced against them, then they were often found not to be guilty.

If any of the people charged with breaking the laws had a friend who knew the laws well to help them, it was even more often found that the Testees were not guilty! Of course, that meant someone else had to be guilty - Amazingly, that sometimes turned out to be the Testors who had had them arrested!

It is said that God felt the people’s pain in their travail, and He sent His own son to earth to clear up that mess. His son was called by some, Jesus. When questioned about some of the man-made laws, God’s son reportedly said that men should render into Caesar that which was Caesar's, and unto God that which was God’s.

Then God’s son was seized and brought to be “tried” himself. He could not introduce evidence and had no friend who knew the man-made law, and the decision was made by a Roman satrap. God’s son was killed.

Some 2,000 years later - apparently God sent a second son to earth. His name was Georgus. Georgus has His Father’s comprehension of Good and Evil. More than that, he understands a better way to introduce and test evidence.
Georgus understands that torture, humiliation, physical and emotional maltreatment, kidnapping, and permanent incarceration without resort to habeus corpus, access to legal aid, or even any need to ever have evidence presented to them or against them is sometimes necessary if the suspected crime was great enough, and the prisoner dangerous enough - especially if the prisoner is a “bad guy”, an “evildoer” or obviously guilty. That way the Testee can be tested without compromising sensitive information. And that makes sense anyway because evidence should be surpressed if the Testee should not have had access to information that sensitive because if he were found “not guilty” he would theoretically have to be released - but then - he would have been told what he should not have known and would therefore THEN be Guilty! Anyway, as far as needing a friend who knows the law to help him, these Testees have the best possible - Georgus, himself, and Georgus will see they are taken care of.

It may be even be there are those who are SO guilty that it would be better for them and all mankind if they were just “collected” and never acknowledged - if they would just simply “disappear”. Georgus can help these people too!

Of course, Georgus assures us that these modifications to the US laws are temporary and due to the Twin Tower attack, kind of like what happened in Germany after the Reichstag Fire.

The US Supreme Court stepped in and raised a warning about infractions to the great American Constitution to Georgus, so He has gone to His congress, just like Hitler did, and made it enact an “Enabling Act”, llike Germany did on March 23, 1933. And just like in Germany 63 years ago, more will soon be needed.

©John Womack, 2006. All Rights Reserved

Sunday, September 24, 2006

Don't Tread on Me!

Apparently America agrees to abide by law, treaties and international conventions when they have encountered uniformed people serving in a military force they are fighting on a battlefield. Those they collect who were not serving in an enemy army or without uniforms are simply called “terrorists” and they become eligible to be secretly locked away forever or to simply “disappear”.

There are terrorists like Osama Bin Laden, al-Zarrquawi and al-Zawahiri and they have their following. Many others however appear to belong to other groups. Some appear to have just been “found” and captured, others are people who clearly feel they are simply fighting for their own homeland. More than a few appear to be totally confounded as to why they were ever "arrested" in the first place, claiming they had nothing to do with any fighting.

Thus invading foreign troops who preemptively invading another nation are deemed to be lawful, legal and protected, but the people whose country has been invaded - if they fight back - are deemed to be "terrorists". If captured they can be imprisoned for endless years, kept without charge or legal representation, tortured or disappeared.

I feel certain that if an invading army were to occupy the villages of western North Carolina (where I now live) they would be met with a ferocious blast of “instant terrorists” - or "freedom fighters". I feel the same way about the other 15 states in which I have lived. There would be snipers, bomb builders, and bridge destroyers. Those who had sided with that occupying force would be killed without compunction and none of the “patriots/terrorists” would ever think of wearing a uniform.

Some of these “patriots/terrorists” would be noble people, some would be wild and unruly people who had been permitted - and instructed how - to do horrible things. So they would not necesarilly be "nice" people, nor would they happen to be "bad" people. They would be whomever you might expect to encounter right now, here in America, if you were to just break into people's homes at random.


© John Womack, 2006. All Rights Reserved.

Where the law is What it needs to be.

The very idea that a law may or may not apply in certain cases because of the nature of the crime the perpertrator is alleged to have committed implies that that law in question is not a law but a “punishment favor” which must be earned, or an “award” which must be granted by someone whose power is greater than the law.
Thus we now see the treatment by the United States of people they have collected in various places. This treatment apparently includes torture, humiliation, physical and emotional maltreatment, kidnapping, and permanent incarcaration without resort to habeus corpus, access to legal aid, or even any need to ever have evidence presented to them or against them. It may well be that there are many who have been collected and never acknowledged - they were simply “disappeared”.
Apparently America agrees to abide by law, treaties and international conventions when they have encountered uniformed people serving in a military force they are fighting on a battlefield. Those they collect who were not serving in an enemy army or without uniforms are simply called “terrorists” and they become eligible to “disappear”.
There are terrorists like OBL and (recently killed) and they have their following. Many others however appear to belong to other groups. Some appear to have just been “found” and captured, others are people who clearly feel they are simply fighting for their own homeland.
Thus invading foreign troops preemptively invading a nation are lawful and legal and protected, but the people whose country has been invaded - if they fight back - are terrorists. If captured they can be imprisoned for endless years, kept without charge or legal representation, tortured or disappeared.
I feel certain that the place where I live would become filled with “terrorists” if some invading army were to occupy the villages of western North Carolina. I feel the same way about everywhere I have ever lived. In such a case there would be snipers, bomb builders, and disrupters. Those who had sided with that occupying force would be killed without concern and none of these “patriots/terrorists” would ever think of wearing a uniform. Some of these would be noble people, many would be just wild and unruly people turned free to do as they wish

© Juhn Womack, 2007. All rights reserved.

Saturday, September 16, 2006

Papal Incredibility


Regensburg's Old Chapel

Pope Benedict XVI spoke of how Islam had used the symbolic sword of violence in the past, and his words incensed many Muslims. Some immediately began fire-bombing Christian churches to prove he was wrong.

The Pope is still a person, even though obviously smart and intelligent, but capable of quoting the wrong part of the great historical record of mankind. Now he will be pummeled and pounded and pilloried until he squirms in sorrow and repentance and finally announces for all the world that history is sometimes wrong and then he can prove how sorry he is as a representative of God.

But wait, does the Doctrine of Papal infallibility apply here? I understand there are three tests to that doctrine. 1) Scripture? Jesus said to Peter, the first Pope, "What you loose on earth is loosed in heaven". Catholics believe that the current Pope has the same powers as Peter was given by Jesus. So what's loose in heaven now? Surely nothing new. 2) History? The Pope was quoting a historical statement. How much more historical can you get? 3) Logic? Well, here lies the Pope's escape path. He can claim that he was not logical. But such a statement would not seem logical in itself because Ratzinger was well known to be the most logical member of the College of Cardinals and was extremely knowledgable in both theology and philosophy. He had been a professor of theology here at the University of Regansburg, and the leader of the Catholic Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith before becoming elevated to the papacy.

The truth is that no single aspect of humanity has been more violent than religious organizations. Too often, mankind's inability to communicate with each other has “justified" violence, and when wrapped in holy cloth and screaming for revenge, punishment and consequenches, then violence is seen to justify any actions that would please a wrathful, loving god.

The great lie is that we all worship the same god. That is clearly not true. Talk for a moment with a Southern Baptist, then with a Roman Catholic, then with a Presbyterian; same god? Of course not. They will all say that they do worship the same God, because they know their faith worships the Only True God, and any problems would have to lie with people who just don't understand God. And that’s just Christians. Talk with Jewish and Muslim adherents and God becomes much more complicated. Hindus make God truly amazing and Buddhists - well - good luck! Add in a few scientists who can tell what they know about the universe and God becomes astonishing.

So the definition of God is tricky. Personally I think it is not true that Jews, Christians and Muslims worship the same god. Historically they have all worshipped violence, and maybe that's what they really mean.


The Pope spoke in Regensburg, Germany, on September 12, and that day would have been much kinder to him if he had wandered down to the Danube to the Historische Wurstkuche and had eaten their saurkraut and fantastic dark mustard with the best sausage in the entire universe. That would have proven he was infallible.

Photos: Top> Regensburg's Old Chapel, a gleaming white-and-gold rococo church, 200 meters from Ratzinger's family home.
Lower> The Historische Wurstkuche on the Danube in Regensburg.
All Photos by John Womack

John Womack, 2006. All Rights Reserved.

Monday, September 11, 2006

What Really Kept Us Safe - Reflections on 9/11

It was not our military, good as it is, that kept us safe for so many long years. Nor was it our oceans, wide as they are, that kept any enemies away. Our refuge was the only safe harbor that can ever be. It was the respect and honor of the rest of the world.

Even though we had become money-grubbing tricksters when it came to commerce, other people felt that was just our way. Deep down they knew they could trust us to do what was right when it would make a difference, and we were really their friend.

We could send our emissaries where no one else could even send troops. We could always find a way to help anybody. We cared about people, ordinary individuals, and we really did want to help them. We were the world's friend.

We were religion-neutral. We were welcomed in Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, Christian, and Moslem cultures, and trusted by them to help in ways that were peculiar to America.

They didn't fear us. That was the big thing. They knew we COULD step on them and that would be it, but they also knew we wouldn’t ever do it.
Now our leaders want the world to fear us. And the world does fear us for we are mad. And I don't mean angry, I mean insane. Our great light has been extinguished, and our leaders want to replace it with a great fire that if lighted will consume the world.

©John Womack, 2006. All Rights Reserved

Sunday, August 20, 2006

Macaca?

So Senator Allen of Virginia called a photographer, who appeared to be of Indian descent, by the name “macaca”, and then welcomed him to America.

So far, so good. But wait. Why use the word “macaca”? I first thought that must have been the photographer’s name, I had never heard it before. I wasn’t the only one. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary had not a clue. Even the august Oxford English Dictionary offered only vague definitions like “monkey”, “baboon”, “lemur”. But it turns out that “Macaca” is also considered to be a derogatory name which refers to people of color generally being similar to monkeys or baboons. Apparently it is a French derogatory comment about Arabs in general. Allen’s mother was raised in France and in French-speaking Tunisia, and Allen apparently studied French in college and speaks it quite well.

So Allen had insulted this guy. OK. So what? No big deal. Of course, I’m white and was not impressed, and assumed that people of color would be impressed enough to remember the comment later when in the voting both. Then Senator Allen wrung the big bell. He told reporters that he had never heard of the word before and that he had just made it up on the spur of the moment.

Now, Allen has insulted ME! He has also insulted all of mankind! He apparently thinks we are dumb enough to believe such a stupid tale. That tells us what he really thinks about us. And this is a US senator? Running for reelection? And wants to be our president?

OK. Here’s a new definition for the magic word macaca: a) A universal insult. b) Describes any individual so referred to as a gullible person devoid of understanding, comprehension, rational abilities, and perception. c) Precisely categorizes any person using this word as crude, intolerant, insulting, precocious, unmanly, prejudicial and destructive.

Now some are saying that Allen made this apology to comfort his “base”. Ooohhhh, now he’s insulting them! (Wonder if any of them will notice that?)

© John Womack, 2006. All Rights Reserved.

Friday, August 18, 2006

A Pyrrhic Loss?

We all know that a Phrrhic Victory is a great “win” on a battlefield that so devastates the apparent victor that it cannot recover.
We may have just seen Hizbollah suffer a great “Pyrrhic Loss” to Israel in Lebanon.
Israel won the battlefield, it killed more people than Hizbollah did, it destroyed (or aborted) vast numbers of Kitusha rockets and Lebanon is in shambles.
Yet Hizbollah held off Israel for 25 days, killed many of their soldiers in fighting, and apparently left Israel with no choice but to withdraw.
Hizbollah began as a problem to Lebanon and the entire Arab world. It now stands as a great hero and new leader of that same world.
Hizbollah has been a provider to the people of food, medicine and other needs and is now shifting into high speed operation to clean up Lebanon, repair the houses, provide money to the people (up to $12,000 per person), and is taking over as a leading functionary in the affairs of Lebanon.

© John Womack, 2006. All Rights Reserved.

Sunday, August 13, 2006

Collateral Action

It seems clear that the Israeli attacks against Lebanon go far beyond any type of generally known or acknowledged provocation by either Lebanon or Hezbollah.
This also seems true of the Israeli attacks against Hamas in Gaza.
These are modern, technologically sophisticated military action against unarmed and completely defenseless civilians.
They appear to be aided and helped by the United States government, considering that American military equipment is used by Israel and there has been a hurried resupply of Israeli troops of munitions from America.
These attacks also proceed in defiance of a request by the United Nations to cease and to work for a peaceful settlement.
The attacks also appear to employ cluster bomb units which are designed to deny access to a battlefield by enemy troops, yet they are being dropped in civilian quarters and residential areas.
Meanwhile, Hizbollah fighters and Israeli soldiers are dying here and there, but the real carnage is being wreaked in Israel and especially in Lebanon. The battlefield has become a place for “Collateral Action” while the real action takes place against children, women, infrastructure, electricity production, water and sewage plants.
Condolezza Rice is hiding. She speaks of seeking a "significant" settlement of problems - clearly letting the war drag on to punish Hizbollah - and to hell with Lebanon.
It seems apparent that the president’s administration is incapable of initiating action to help solve the problems. They seem to appreciate Hate and appear to watch this war with envy and anticipation of the next war.

© John Womack, 2006. All Rights Reserved.

Thursday, July 06, 2006

Memorial Day

May, 2002
This generally hallowed day generates within me feelings of sarcasm more than anything else. Perhaps that is due to memories of my own welcome back from two of my three tours in Vietnam. I know that a lot of these men who are honored today, the majority of which were probably not yet into the estate of manhood, had no choice in where they were and what they were doing when their life suddnly ended violently. It is often stated, on Memorial Day, that we Americans, and many others in the world, owe a great debt to these men, and that is not to be denied. The fact that his holiday keeps their memory alive is only to be contrasted with the reality of the observances which is cocerned only with the spending of money. Those who were killed ultimately had no choice, but we know now that their leaders had many choices that they did not use or were not aware of. We know that Pearl Harbor was tipped off in more than one way, only no one could “connect-those-dots” either. Korea was one of those “slippery slopes” we hear about from timt to time. We slid all the way back down the North Korean part of the place. Why did we go in? Why did we go north of the 32nd parallel? What else could have been done. Why Vietnam? Well, that answer is easy. It concerns the Falling Domino Theory. If Vietnam should fall to Ho-Chi-Mihn, then within a year all of Burma, Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, Taiway and possibly Japan and Hawaii would fall to communism. Secretary of Defence McNamara has written in 1995, that he and President Johnson knew the war was lost in 1966, and that we fought all the rest of it, the big part of it, those last six years, killing those 50,000 Americans and 2 million Vietnamese to try to “save the presidency,” to save Johnson and Nixon from disgrace. The Gulf War brought home men with “strange illnesses.” They are still dying, and they are told by the United States government that it has nothing to do with their fighting for the United States in the Persian Gulf. They gave for Halliburton, Exxon, and other great giants of American commerce. What other choices were available -before- the Kuwait invasion, or after, for that matter? We know that when the attack on the Twin Towers was being finalized, the American president was spending a month in Texas, to escape the “humdrum” of life in the Capitol. His administration was doubtless at work, but there was no center to events. What else could have been done?
Israel and the Arabs are at low-grade war, Pakistan and India are ready for Glory. And it goes on and on. Maybe we can make some small changes; here’s one: Let’s not ever honor another fallen soldier or lost sailor without convening a war crimes convention to address the fault of those who led their young men into war. Let us make Memorial Day really memorial by declairing that war is a crime against mankind, the universe and God.
It is a travesty that we “honor” young men who were killed by their own countries for the personal enrichment of their leaders. These leaders grow old and get rich; the young men get glory.

Friday, June 30, 2006

Destruction of Democracy

Not to comment on the destruction of democracy is in itself an act equal to or greater than that destruction itself. Democracy is not a right granted by any ruler or god but it is a right that was ripped from the hearts and souls of many rulers and many gods.

Today, we find at least two democratic elections under attack - Israel is attacking the Palestinians because they elected the “wrong” leaders - i.e. those not acceptable to Israel. And the European nations are threatening Iran for the same reason - the Iranian people elected the “wrong” leaders.

It is noteworthy that America is foremost in the countries that have castigated both Palestine and Iran. Are we seeing an establishment by implication of an "approval power" that must be met by all newly elected governments, that power being the American ruling establishment?

Monday, June 05, 2006

Desecration of America

Dear Senator Burr, Dole, Congressman Taylor:

Why is the Congress debating issues like same sex marriage and flag desecration at this time? If you want to debate desecration of the American flag, let's talk about Haditha. We have heard the story of the killings, now let's investigate the real story - the planning of intimidation attacks like this, the countenancing of them and then - when they are inevitably discovered - the real story - the coverup by administration officials.
If the thought of naked people of the same sex getting together on a recurring and intimate basis turns you on, let's talk about Abu Ghraib. Let's hear the American congress talk about Guantanamo or renditions whether extraordinary or not. We want to hear Rumsfeld explain why there are suddenly so many Bad Apples all over the place.
The American public knows that these actions could not come not from a few wayward young boys and girls but have to be specifically planned operations directed from the highest offices in America. I served proudly in the United States armed forces - this is not the same military force that I knew. Instinctively we know that these actions are directed and approved by the Secretary of Defense and the President, and probably now, by the office of the Vice-President.
How much more useless can the Republican Party appear to be than to try to distract the American public with insignificant issues like these two at this time? This appears to be a reflexive response to orders issued by the White House to "keep the natives diverted". Since it has become clear that the Bush Administration will not take ANY steps to alleviate the problems in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the entire Middle-east, it must fall to Congress to take charge of our foreign policy.
I am requesting a personal response from Senator Burr, Dole, Congressman Taylor explaining to me how he/she plans to help move the United States out of the Iraq quagmire and help reinstate our country's honor among the nations of the world. I want him/her to personally explain to me and to the rest of his constituents why he/she thinks these two diversionary debates are more important than Haditha, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, renditions, American torture, global warming, control of nuclear weapons, the American economy, Iran, North Korea, illegal immigration, the collapse of FEMA and the CIA, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the entire middle-east.
Tell me why the congress needs to debate same sex marriage and flag desecration at this time. Tell me - and the rest of us - why the Republican Party is so out of touch with America. One suspects it can no longer be the same old "playing dumb on purpose", one must suspect this borders on treason.

This message is in the public domain. Feel free to copy, distribute, etc.

Friday, June 02, 2006

His One Shot At Glory.


The real victims of discrimination are those who hear and heed the slurs. Discrimination is really aimed at people who live in fear of those whom they believe are different from themselves. Many of these targeted people tend to be poorer, under educated and generally don’t vote, because the issues which are at stake concern problems about which they know little and in which they are not interested. Too many of them feel themselves to be victims of people in power, and they feel isolated and lost.

Slurs and distortions, whether directed at gays, blacks, immigrants, abortions, gun control, or other issues seem to narrow their choices to black or white, good or evil, intelligence or stupidity. Worse yet, if the slurs and distortions come from someone in power or authority, then those lost and isolated people feel they can become part of a team, and that they have been called to rally around a great cause. Now they not only "understand" these complex issues, they are led to believe they are the last hope of mankind. The fate of the world seems to await their response. Their president and their God now "need" them, and they will obey.

Unfortunately for them, once they have voted, they are no longer needed and slide away back into the great gray void of reality and never know for whom or for what they really voted. The flag and the bible are there to die for and a real patriot would never ask what comes after glory.

© John Womack, 2006. All Rights Reserved.

Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Unity08 - Party and Blog

This was my first post to this new site - found at http://www.unity08.com/
START
Submitted by John Womack on May 31, 2006 - 10:29pm.
Sounds good so far. Most of us are wary - know there will be terrible attacks to come. But - we now teeter on the brink of disaster. Our country is heading for a massive change very soon. Even if the Unity 08 can't get ready in time to make a difference, we need to have something ready to replace what we have lost. This movement might save what we had that was really good. John.

Come join me here!

Thursday, May 11, 2006

Stephen Colbert's Presentation

This at the White House Correspondent's Association annual dinner April 29, 2006. He was sitting next to President Bush.
Unfortunately, Colbert's remarks were not publicized by the media - no real surprise because he took them to task as much as he did Bush. A number of bloggers are trying to make up a little bit for this by passing the comments along. Not the same, sure, but it is the least we can do.

STEPHEN COLBERT: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Before I begin, I've been asked to make an announcement. Whoever parked 14 black bulletproof SUVs out front, could you please move them? They are blocking in 14 other black bulletproof SUVs, and they need to get out.

Wow! Wow, what an honor! The White House Correspondents' dinner. To actually -- to sit here at the same table with my hero, George W. Bush, to be this close to the man. I feel like I'm dreaming. Somebody pinch me. You know what? I'm a pretty sound sleeper; that may not be enough. Somebody shoot me in the face. Is he really not here tonight? Damn it! The one guy who could have helped.

By the way, before I get started, if anybody needs anything else at their tables, just speak slowly and clearly into your table numbers. Someone from the NSA will be right over with a cocktail.

Mark Smith, ladies and gentlemen of the press corps, Madame First Lady, Mr. President, my name is Stephen Colbert, and tonight it is my privilege to celebrate this president, ‘cause we're not so different, he and I. We both get it. Guys like us, we're not some brainiacs on the nerd patrol. We're not members of the factinista. We go straight from the gut. Right, sir?

That's where the truth lies, right down here in the gut. Do you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than you have in your head? You can look it up. Now, I know some of you are going to say, "I did look it up, and that's not true." That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut. I did. My gut tells me that's how our nervous system works.

Every night on my show, The Colbert Report, I speak straight from the gut, okay? I give people the truth, unfiltered by rational argument. I call it the "No Fact Zone." FOX News, I hold a copyright on that term.

I'm a simple man with a simple mind. I hold a simple set of beliefs that I live by. Number one, I believe in America. I believe it exists. My gut tells me I live there. I feel that it extends from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and I strongly believe it has 50 states, and I cannot wait to see how the Washington Post spins that one tomorrow.

I believe in democracy. I believe democracy is our greatest export. At least until China figures out a way to stamp it out of plastic for three cents a unit. As a matter of fact, Ambassador Zhou Wenzhong, welcome. Your great country makes our Happy Meals possible. I said it's a celebration.

I believe the government that governs best is the government that governs least. And by these standards, we have set up a fabulous government in Iraq.

I believe in pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. I believe it is possible. I saw this guy do it once in Cirque du Soleil. It was magical!

And though I am a committed Christian, I believe that everyone has the right to their own religion, be you Hindu, Jewish or Muslim. I believe there are infinite paths to accepting Jesus Christ as your personal savior.

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe it's yogurt. But I refuse to believe it's not butter.

Most of all, I believe in this president. Now, I know there are some polls out there saying that this man has a 32% approval rating. But guys like us, we don't pay attention to the polls. We know that polls are just a collection of statistics that reflect what people are thinking in "reality." And reality has a well-known liberal bias. So, Mr. President, please, please, pay no attention to the people that say the glass is half full. 32% means the glass -- important to set up your jokes properly, sir. Sir, pay no attention to the people who say the glass is half empty, because 32% means it's 2/3 empty. There's still some liquid in that glass is my point, but I wouldn't drink it. The last third is usually backwash. Okay.

Look, folks, my point is that I don't believe this is a low point in this presidency. I believe it is just a lull before a comeback. I mean, it's like the movie Rocky. Alright? The President, in this case, is Rocky Balboa, and Apollo Creed is everything else in the world. It's the tenth round. He's bloodied. His corner man, Mick, who in this case, I guess, would be the Vice President, he's yelling, "Cut me, Dick, cut me!" And every time he falls, everyone says, "Stay down, Rocky! Stay down!" But does he stay down? No. Like Rocky, he gets back up, and in the end he -- actually loses in the first movie. Okay, doesn't matter. Doesn’t matter.

The point is it is the heart-warming story of a man who was repeatedly punched in the face, so don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say that 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't.

I stand by this man. I stand by this man, because he stands for things. Not only for things, he stands on things, things like aircraft carriers and rubble and recently flooded city squares. And that sends a strong message, that no matter what happens to America, she will always rebound with the most powerfully staged photo-ops in the world.

Now, there may be an energy crisis. Well, this president has a very forward-thinking energy policy. Why do you think he's down on the ranch cutting that brush all the time? He's trying to create an alternative energy source. By 2008, we will have a mesquite-powered car.

And I just like the guy. He's a good Joe, obviously loves his wife, calls her his better half. And polls show America agrees. She's a true lady and a wonderful woman. But I just have one beef, ma'am. I'm sorry, but this reading initiative. I'm sorry, I've never been a fan of books. I don't trust them. They're all fact, no heart. I mean, they're elitist, telling us what is or isn't true or what did or didn't happen. Who's Britannica to tell me the Panama Canal was built in 1914? If I want to say it was built in 1941, that's my right as an American! I'm with the President. Let history decide what did or did not happen.

The greatest thing about this man is he's steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday. Events can change; this man's beliefs never will.

And as excited as I am to be here with the President, I am appalled to be surrounded by the liberal media that is destroying America, with the exception of FOX News. FOX News gives you both sides of every story: the President's side, and the Vice President's side.

But the rest of you, what are you thinking? Reporting on NSA wiretapping or secret prisons in Eastern Europe? Those things are secret for a very important reason: they're super-depressing. And if that's your goal, well, misery accomplished.

Over the last five years you people were so good, over tax cuts, WMD intelligence, the effect of global warming. We Americans didn't want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out. Those were good times, as far as we knew.

But, listen, let's review the rules. Here's how it works. The President makes decisions. He's the decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Just put 'em through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration? You know, fiction!

Because, really, what incentive do these people have to answer your questions, after all? I mean, nothing satisfies you. Everybody asks for personnel changes. So, the White House has personnel changes. And then you write, "Oh, they're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." First of all, that is a terrible metaphor. This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring! If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg!

Now, it's not all bad guys out there. There are some of the heroes out there tonight: Christopher Buckley, Jeff Sacks, Ken Burns, Bob Schieffer. I’ve interviewed all of them. By the way, Mr. President, thank you for agreeing to be on my show. I appreciate it. I was just as shocked as everyone here is, I promise you. How's Tuesday for you? I've got Frank Rich, but we can just bump him. And I mean bump him. I know a guy. Say the word.

See who we've got here tonight. We’ve got General Moseley, Air Force Chief of Staff. We’ve got General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They still support Rumsfeld. Right, you guys aren't retired yet, right? Right, they still support Rumsfeld. Look, by the way, I've got a theory about how to handle these retired generals causing all this trouble: Don't let them retire! Come on, we've got a stop-loss program; let's use it on these guys. I've seen Zinni in that crowd on Wolf Blitzer. If you're strong enough to go on one of those pundit shows, you’re strong enough to stand on a bank of computers and order men into battle. Come on!

Jesse Jackson is here, the Reverend. Haven't heard from the Reverend in just a little while. I had him on the show. It was a very interesting interview, very challenging interview. You can ask him anything, but he's going to say what he wants at the pace that he wants. It's like boxing a glacier. Enjoy that metaphor, by the way, because your grandchildren will have no idea what a glacier is.

Justice Scalia is here. Justice Scalia, may I be the first to say, “Welcome, sir!” You look fantastic! How are you? Just talking some Sicilian with my paisan.

John McCain is here. John McCain, what a maverick! Somebody find out what fork he used on his salad, because I guarantee you it wasn't a salad fork. This guy could have used a spoon! There's no predicting him. By the way, Senator McCain, it's so wonderful to see you coming back into the Republican fold. I’ve actually got a summer house in South Carolina. Look me up when you go to speak at Bob Jones University. So glad you've seen the light, sir.

Mayor Nagin! Mayor Nagin is here from New Orleans, the chocolate city! Yeah, give it up. Mayor Nagin, I'd like to welcome you to Washington, D.C., the chocolate city with a marshmallow center and a graham cracker crust of corruption. It's a Mallomar, I guess, is what I'm describing, is a Mallomar. It’s a seasonal cookie.

Joe Wilson is here. Joe Wilson, right down here in front, the most famous husband since Desi Arnaz. And, of course, he brought along his lovely wife Valerie Plame. Oh, my god! Oh, what have I said? Ay, gee monetti! I am sorry, Mr. President, I meant to say he brought along his lovely wife “Joe Wilson's wife.” Patrick Fitzgerald is not here tonight, right? Okay, dodged a bullet.

And, of course, we can't forget the man of the hour, new press secretary, Tony Snow. Secret Service name: "Snow Job." Toughest job. What a hero! Took the second toughest job in government, next to, of course, the ambassador to Iraq. Got some big shoes to fill, Tony. Big shoes to fill. Scott McClellan could say nothing like nobody else. McClellan, of course, eager to retire, really felt like he needed to spend more time with Andrew Card's children.

Now, Mr. President, I wish you hadn't made the decision so quickly, sir. I was vying for the job myself. I think I would have made a fabulous press secretary. I have nothing but contempt for these people.

AMY GOODMAN: Stephen Colbert addressing the White House Correspondents' Association annual dinner. He was speaking right next to President Bush, who was sitting at his side

Thursday, April 27, 2006

Pop Quiz

1. The US Senate recently spent 8 months studying one of the major parts of the American government. They said the study revealed that "The __________________ Agency is demoralized and dysfunctional, It is beyond repair, Just tweaking the organizational chart will not solve the problem. It should be abolished and a new agency created. We found clear evidence of failures in planning, failures in decision-making, failures to create an effective, coordinated national response system and most of all a failure of leadership at all levels of government,''

Name the agency that best fits their description::

a) FEMA
b) The Central Intelligence Agency
c) The National Security Agency
d) The Department of Homeland Security
e) The Department of Defense
f) The Department of State
g) The Office of the President
h) The Office of the Vice-president
i) The US Senate
j) The US House of Representatives
k) All of the above

Saturday, April 22, 2006

Sneak-and-Peek

What’s wrong with the “sneak and peek” operations that President Bush is claiming is his right to do?
The person or people doing the sneak and peek will be some permanently unidentifiable person, perhaps a CIA employee, perhaps a lower level FBI person. . . more and more, perhaps a private company employee.
They will be searching for “evidence”.
Their search will not be a legal search for only certain specified items, authorized by a judge after seeing a “justification” for such a search.
The Sneak and Peek will be a clandestine probe for any possible evidence that could be used for any purpose.
You will have no right to know what “evidence” was found, or to challenge it or confront it or to even see if it really was yours.
Such “evidence” could lead not to your legal arrest, but to your abduction.
More and more, public officials as well as private company employees, are working under terms of program measures and performance standards. Such employees, whose job is to produce “evidence”, will find that the more “evidence” they produce, the more secure their employment, the better their chances for retention and promotion.
These people will have no need to restrict their search to a certain category of “evidence”, either because there is no search warrant. They can sneak in and peek at whatever they wish, copying, photographing, even taking whatever seems likely to be “evidence” of one possible crime or another. “Evidence” could actually be found in your place, or brought into your place by the Sneak and Peekers - they could “certify” later that they were looking for some relatively minor item and “find” this damning stuff instead - stuff they actually brought into your place - or - simply “swore” that they found it there. You would never know what that “evidence” was, and neither would your lawer be able to find out.
Why would anyone want to find “evidence” against you or me? If we are not doing anything wrong, why should be even be concerned about it? Mistaken identity, stolen identity, bureaucratic bungling, a careless mistake either on our part or on theirs, their fear of admiting they made a mistake, a settling of old scores, racial, sexual or religious predjuices, someone needing to make a name for themselves. How’s that for a start?

Thursday, April 20, 2006

Zacarias Moussaou: Scape Goat

Zacarias Moussaou
(zack ah REE us Miss SOW wee)
Scape-goat
One who bears the sins of others for them

Diversion of attention from the real causes of a problem.


The blindfold that the goddes Justice normally wears over her eyes has become a full face mask to hide her shame.
The age-old search for legal impartiality has been turned into an emotional caldron over the air crashes of September 11, 2001. More help for a beleagured presidential administration as they try to rally citizens for the administration’s War on Terror. This “war” can only be continued by maintaining a pit of terror in the consciounsess of the American people.
Such events sometimes lead people to ask others, DuKakis-like, how they would feel if such a thing had happened to their loved ones. I can answer such a hypothetical question only for myself - and I am totally against the dealth penalty - see my blog “What Does the Death Penalty Really Kill”
My answer to the question of how would I feel if that had happened to a loved one of mine is that I would probably be furious. I would probably want to kill - maybe even want to torture the guilty one - I would gladly pull the trigger, drop the gate, throw the switch or whatever.
But I also know that would not satisfy me, and I would later regret those actions. It would be revenge - it would not only not be justice, it would be a defeat for justice.
Zacarias Moussaou is not a good person, he is not nice, he is bad and probably can never be turned loose again. He appears to be a very sick person. But the legal question is this: Did he cause the attacks on the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and Flight 93?
It is alleged that if he had told the truth after he had been captured that the FBI could then have averted those attacks.
But in light of all the information the FBI, CIA, NSA, DOD, and the State Department had already been fed - by their own operatives - in whom they completely trusted - and how they purposefully interpreted the other information about WMD in Iraq, etc. It seems doubtful that anybody in authority would have paid any attention to anything. They already knew all they needed to know, therefore they knew all they would ever know. It seems obvious, to this writer at least, that Zacarias' words would have fallen upon ears that “knew better than that.”
Long after Moussaou has been put to death - executed for lying - the American public will still not have even asked the most important qestion of all: “Why? Why did they do it?”

Friday, March 31, 2006

Thousands of Mistakes.

Condolezzza Rice said in Blackburn, England on Friday March 31, 2006, that the US had made mistakes in Iraq, “perhaps thousands of them”.

Thousands, eh? Was she talking about 100,000? 200,000, 500,000? Perhaps only 10,000? Let’s go with the conservative figure - just10,000 mistakes. That works out to 2,000 mistakes a year in the first 5 years of the Bush Administration. That’s 5.48 mistakes a day or one every 4.38 hours. And that’s only in Iraq. And only the ones she recongnizes.

She didn’t venture a guess about how many things they had done right. But it would be interesting to see what she thinks their batting average is. It would be even more interesting to see her before the House of Commons responding to questions like the Prime Minister has to do.

Even more interesting would be to see the members of the Bush Administration answer to the world's public and explain what their management objectives and performance standards had been. Thousands of mistakes might be the kindest appraisal of all. Has anyone seen Carl Sagan lately?

Monday, February 13, 2006

Cheney Hits Home.

The gang that couldn't shoot straight has struck again. Trigger happy Dick bagged a Texas lawyer, an overseer of the undertakers in the Lone Star State, appointed to the Texas taxpayers dole by Gov Bush, long long ago. Main question I have at this time is who is paying for the lawyer's medical care? It is the Cheney family or my family? Biggest casualty of the shoot out? Once again it is the American media - our sacred press. It now has a new fascination with something that is really not important while it ignores the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the screams of cartoon-led mullas in the Middle East, the crimes of Guantanamo and the sins of Katrina.

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Muslims Humiliated?

That’s what some of their spokespeople are saying. They say they have been humiliated and embarrassed by cartoons published in Denmark last September, and further insulted by other newspapers in other countries publishing the same cartoons after Denmark was threatened because of the cartoons.
The subsequent publishing was intended as support by the other papers, not for that Denmark paper, but for the concept of Freedom of the Press. This freedom has a long and bloody history in the west where the press has often been engaged in battle with various kings, governments and powerful rulers, including great hierarchies from various churches. This freedom was not given but taken, it is not a gift of any government or religion but it is a right ripped out of the heart of several governments and religions. It is enforced only by other members of the press.
The original Danish publishing was the outgrowth of an attempt by a Danish writer to complete a children’s book on the Life of Muhammod. He was unable to get an ilustrator to draw the stories for his children’s book because they were afraid of being attacked. This created its own story which found its way into the newspapers, and eventually the question arose about publishing freedom. Then came the cartoons - 12 of them.
Some Muslim rulers said this publishing and republishing was an insult to the religion and to its prophet, Muhammod. Now great mobs of vandals have been ordered to form and take part in orchestrated rallies which are now resulting in out-of-control roits, beatings, burnings and even a killing or two.
Muslims say they were humiliated and embarrased by the cartoons, but the real cartoon of embarassment has been drawn by their own depiction of their religion and prophet.
Perhaps the greatest lesson those of us who share values of the Western Heritage can draw from this reaction is to realize there is a total lack of understanding on the part of many of the middle easterners of the concept of the individual as a soverign entity. Individual Rights are not comprehended outside of their family, tribe or religion. The story of the woman kidnapped in Iraq by one tribe for punishment to another tribe for some insult, then she was raped and returned home where her father and husband had to kill her to avenge the embarassment she had caused to their tribe is perhaps an indication of this lack of understanding. Her only status as an individual was within the framework of her family.
Unfortunately for Islam, and increasingly for Christianity too now, is that since they both have slammed themselves upon the world as new political forces, they must be prepared for the world to regard them in a new light. If a religion wants to be respected as a religion it must act like a religion. If it wishes to descend into the hurly-burly mess of politics, it must expect to be treated as a politician.

who Really was Martin Luther King Jr?

Martin Luther King Jr. has come to prominence again a couple of times lately. With the passing of some of his associates, his name and presence comes before us again. What was he really? He was really a miracle. It is easy to forget that Rosa Parks was arrested in a powerder-keg society smarmy with racial gasoline fumes seeping throughout the American country. Parts of the south, the midwest and certain large cities in California were assembled ready for explosion.
Would Rosa be the spark that would tear our country apart? Yes. But the fuse that she lit was Martin Luther King, Jr. He led that burning power to a different place and instead of hatred and self justification exploding upon America, peace and love exploded upon it instead.
So we often wonder what will Peace really look like when it finally arrives. Will it be hugs and kisses, warm and fuzzy feelings? I think Martin Luther King, Jr., introduced America to what Peace will really look like. Peace is work. It is hard work, suffering, patience, doing the right thing over and over again and again. Being pleased with small steps as long as they are in the right direction.

Monday, January 16, 2006

Validity #

For press pass until Jan 15, 2007, number is 73073272956