Showing posts with label big time fear. Show all posts
Showing posts with label big time fear. Show all posts

February 15, 2008

This blog has stopped being indexed and so ..

I am publishing the only relevant link on biochemical terror that I can find to draw people's attention to what I see happening.

I am paranoid as can be and am very very afraid.

I don't know if I will posting much longer. The article belong was published AFTER I trolled Debka and found the following information myself - because I located an article in FLORIDA where I read that US Personnel had been taken out of KURDISTAN.

In light of the items I have seen posted in the past four days I grew ever more wary and frightened out of my wits..

To review:

Monday, October 1, 2007

Report: Russia Evacuates Entire Bushehr Staff

Iranian news outlet claims nuclear experts packed their bags Friday, increasing speculation of imminent U.S., Israeli attack

Paul Joseph Watson

Prison Planet
Monday, October 1, 2007

Iranian and Israeli news outlets are reporting that Russia has evacuated its entire staff of nuclear engineers and experts who were working at the Bushehr nuclear reactor, increasing speculation that the United States is preparing an imminent military attack on Iran.

According to the Khorramshar News Agency, which represents ethnic Arabs in opposition to Ahmadinejad's regime who live near the reactor, the Russians packed their bags and left on Friday.

DEBKAfile offers three different scenarios to explain the sudden withdrawal of the experts. a) Russian-Iranian negotiations about how work will proceed on Bushehr have again hit a roadblock. This is highly unlikely because Vladimir Putin is set to visit Iran later in the month to sign a set of nuclear accords.

b) The Russians have learned that an Iranian attack against American interests in the Persian Gulf or Israel is imminent. This is extremely doubtful because any preemptive Iranian attack would give Israel and the U.S. the pretext they are desperately searching for to launch a devastating bombing campaign.

c) Moscow or Tehran have been tipped off that an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities is imminent and the Russians are getting their people out of harm's way. This seems to be the most plausible scenario, especially since reports emerged Friday from numerous "unnamed" worldwide intelligence sources that military action is just around the corner.

With every passing week, war rhetoric and maneuvering escalates as an assault on Iran seems all but inevitable.

This past weekend, Former US ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton said there was no alternative to a military option and that plans should be enacted for a "limited strike against their nuclear facilities."

Veteran newsman Seymour Hersh reports that the Bush administration has switched targets from Iran's nuclear facilities to instead target the Revolutionary Guard in a series of planned "surgical" air strikes.

"During a video conference over the summer, Bush allegedly told Ryan Crocker, the US ambassador to Iraq, that he was considering striking Iranian targets across the border and that the British "were on board," reports AFP.


Copyright © Prisonplanet.com. All rights reserved.

Noose found hanging in Long Islan

December 01, 2007

CROSSPOST update on FINLAND and the massacre

This is an excellent precis about what the Finnish massacre is really about and a good look at what is entailed in gun confiscations.

I am NOT a rightwinger if you do not know, but you'll find this of high interest. But I do contend we are ALL being had as the militarization of all criminal justice proceeds.

Incidentally, someone informed me recently that young kids are being permitted to buy TASERS. They think that they are fun to use at parties where people get high and then stun someone. Sigh. I knew that; but the age at which they have acess to them is getting younger and younger. Will someone please BAN these weapons of torture; they are NOT the same as gunz.

Veeger

Inter Arma

Friday 30 Novembere, 2007 by Baron Bodissey

I have long been aware of the Finnish writer and blogger Jussi Halla-aho because of his links to Gates of Vienna. However, since his work was mostly in Finnish, I didn’t know much about him.

He wrote me a couple of days ago to let me know that he had written an article on the recent Jokela school massacre which he subsequently translated into English.

Tundra Tabloids covered the Jokela shootings the day they happened, and here’s a news story about the incident from the November 7th edition of the English-language version of Helsingin Sanomat.

It’s no surprise that Finland, like most other modern Western democracies, responded to the school shootings with a move to crack down on guns. Jussi Halla-aho has his opinions on what is happening; his article is posted below (see the original on his website to find all the hyperlinks).

Inter Arma
by Jussi Halla-aho


In the wake of the Jokela School Shooting I have an urge to say a word or two in defence of guns and gun ownership. Someone may find this tasteless, but I consider it much more tasteless that our fanatically anti-gun press, led by Helsingin Sanomat, is making shameless use of the Jokela massacre to stir up hysteria and push their own goals.

Gun collectionWe have seen this happen before in Britain after Dunblane, in Germany after Erfurt, in Australia after Monash University, etc. Following an atrocity the pro-control lobby makes a swift attempt to utilize the understandable panic to achieve their predefined goal, a ban on private gun ownership. They strike immediately, so as not to give people time to cool down and put things in their proper context.

Helsingin Sanomat asks in its reader survey whether there should be a total ban on private gun ownership. (For the current legislative situation, see Wikipedia.) The paper has also, rather artificially one might say, linked the Jokela incident to the on-going dispute between Finland and the EU Comission on the right of minors between 15 and 17 years of age to possess firearms and use them independently for hunting and target shooting.

Let us ponder for a moment on these proposed prohibitions and restrictions. They imply an attack against existing rights (private gun ownership) and private property (privately owned firearms), that is, tough measures from both a juridical and an ethical point of view. Before such steps are taken, at least three questions must be thoroughly considered:

a) Is the proposal feasible? For instance, are the costs of implementation in any proportion to the potential profit?

b) Is the general good obtained in any proportion to the damage caused to the individual?

c) Does the measure address the problem? That is, is it realistic to expect that the measure affects the problem that we wish to solve?

Let us begin with a). What does it mean to ban private gun ownership? Does it mean that 1) the authorities stop issuing new licences now, but those that were issued prior to the ban remain valid; or that 2) the existing licences are revoked and the guns in question are confiscated?

If we choose the option 1), we won’t achieve anything. Somebody who does not know much about guns may not realize it, but firearms do not compare with digital cameras or television sets, which have a very limited service life and break down within ten years from the moment of purchase. Firearms are fairly simple mechanical devices, built from tough materials, whose functional life span, with low levels of use and proper maintenance, may reach hundreds of years. They can be repaired, serviced and even built from scratch with simple hand tools. If gun licences cease to be granted, firearms dealers will be out of business. When that happens, there will be no ammunition available. With no ammunition, the existing guns will be used less and less, which, in turn, decreases their natural wear and thus increases their life-expectancy.

If we opt for 2), we must figure out a procedure for taking away guns from their owners. Confiscating legally acquired and legally kept private property by retroactive legislation is extremely difficult, owing to the general laws protecting private property. What might come in question is the expropriation of the guns against their market value.

Another thing that may be unclear to someone not familiar with guns is that firearms are expensive devices. Huge amounts of money has been invested in them. Their prices vary between 100 Euros and thousands of Euros. At the moment there are some 1,600,000 licenced and privately owned firearms in Finland, of which about 80 per cent are hunting weapons, that is, shotguns and rifles. Let us present a very moderate estimate that the average price of a privately owned gun in Finland is 300 Euros. It is likely to be more.

The mere condemnation awards would cost our government a minimum of 480,000,000 Euros. (The annual state budget is around 30 billion Euros.) Following the expropriation, something would have to be done with one and a half million guns. They could be either stored, destroyed or sold. Selling the guns abroad would hardly be acceptable, given that this would mean just transferring the problem that was supposed to be solved by the expropriation. Storing a million and a half firearms would mean horrible construction and security costs, not to mention the permanent security risk involved. Destroying the guns would likely cost even more. Firearms are not just metal scrap that can be tossed into a melting pot. They consist of heavy metals, light alloys, wood, plastic and various composite materials. They would have to be disassembled manually, one by one.

Where, exactly, would this money come from?

Another possibility, and the one undoubtedly favored by the hoplophobic Left, would be to confiscate the guns without compensations. That would serve those trigger-happy Rambos right! However, the authorities must act within the limits set by the law. The confiscation of legally acquired and kept property without compensations would require wrecking the entire legislation protecting private property. Such a reform would not have a chance of passing the parliamentary process. Why? Because there are guns in more than a half of the Finnish households, and these households consist of people who vote.
- - - - - - - - -
Even if a law enabling the confiscation did pass the legislative apparatus, the guns could not be taken. By becoming a thief the state would lose its legitimacy in the eyes of gunowners. A significant portion of the to-be-confiscated guns would “disappear”. On the eve of the Confiscation the police would file hundreds of thousands of reports on “stolen” and “lost” firearms.

To make it simple and short: There are so many privately owned firearms in Finland that private gun ownership cannot be banned in any meaningful manner. Gunowners can, of course, be succesfully harassed with different measures, but from the point of view of the ultimate goal, a gun-free society, they are meaningless.

The private guns, thus, cannot be confiscated. Let us then move on to the point b): why they should not be confiscated.

If there are a million bathtubs in the country, it is a mathematical inevitability that someone will drown in one. If there are 1600,000 privately owned guns and 700,000 gunowners in the country, it is a mathematical inevitability that sooner or later at least one firearm will find itself in the hands of a criminal or a lunatic. It is clear that by tightening our gun laws we can avoid a certain number of accidents or crimes. It is, indeed, one of the eternal arguments of the pro-control folk that if restriction X prevents even one loss of life, it is worth it. It is difficult to counter this argument because any resistance will provoke hysterical shouting and questions like: “Are you ready to say that to the family members of those who died at Jokela?”

Perhaps I am not. I may also not be ready to advertize the statistical safety of air travel to someone who just lost their family in a plane crash. But punishing 700,000 decent citizens by confiscating their property and ending an activity that is important to them, because of a small handful of bad apples, is not proportionate. Any number of crimes is too many, but even so the damage done to decent citizens must be proportionate to the profit achievable. It may be prudent to approach this thing with parallels that excite people less than firearms which, to many, represent a mythical evil.

According to statistics, males between 18 and 25 years of age are overrepresented in traffic accidents. The number of traffic accidents could be significantly reduced by banning all unnecessary driving from this group of people. Why are we not ready to do this? Because only a small fraction of all males between 18 and 25 are responsible for the ugly statistical truth. The punishment would be collective and unfair, despite the fact that any number of children killed in traffic accidents is too many.

Most physical assaults take place at night in city centers, and most perpetrators are males between 20 and 35. The number of assaults would decrease significantly if a night curfew were imposed on the said group of males. Why are we not ready to do this? Because we would be mostly punishing innocent people. The profit would not be in a just proportion to the harm inflicted, despite the fact that any number of assaults is too many.

What about alcohol? Nothing kills more Finns than alcohol does. It destroys more families than anything else. It kills and cripples indirectly more than anything else, because it is involved in nearly all violent crime. It burdens the public health services more than anything else does. Why do we not prohibit alcohol? So much at least can be said in defence of guns and gun sports that shooting is an instructive hobby which also keeps most of its devotees out of mischief. Is drinking an instructive hobby? Are the damages caused by alcohol a tolerable price for its more wholesome effects? Is not every alcohol-related death, crime or accident one too many? Why not? Are you ready to say that to a person randomly stabbed by a drunk, or to a child of an alcoholic?

There is no coherent answer to the question concerning alcohol. Most people simply content themselves with the truth that alcohol is part of our Finnish culture. But so is private gun ownership. It has a longer continuous history in our country than alcohol has.

By forbidding hunting from minors between 15 and 17 we can possibly prevent one suicide in every two years. But at the same time, we shall deprive thousands of young people in remote districts of a healthy and perhaps the only leisure-time activity. Will they be better off drinking beer in their friends’ garages or playing war games on the Internet? Raising the minimum age for obtaining a gun licence to 20 years, as some have suggested, could have prevented the Jokela tragedy but it would not have prevented the recent shooting in Heikinlaakso (a district in Helsinki) or any other shooting of the past. A higher minimum age would be justified if teenagers between 15 and 19 years were a statistical hazard. But they are not. Pekka-Eric Auvinen was an isolated, unique case.

Banning all guns from everyone might prevent a unique crime. It probably would have prevented the Jokela massacre. But on the whole it would not lessen violent crime because nearly all violent crimes in Finland are committed with weapons other than firearms. It would not even decrease the number of gun crimes significantly because the majority of gun crimes are committed with illegal guns. By tightening gun laws we can only affect those who seek to abide the law.

In the wake of Jokela, we should not get stuck in a debate over guns. A SIG Sauer Mosquito or the Finnish gun law did not kill nine persons. Pekka-Eric Auvinen did. The gun did not make Auvinen kill. He acquired the gun in order to kill. There are, as I see, two reasons why we are talking about the instrument rather than the killer. The first one is that despite their apparent anti-American stance the Finnish (and European) Left adopt their doctrine, methods and agenda as such and predigested from the American Left. In the US, guns are a hot topic because lots of people over there are killed with guns, yet in America, too, the typical way to react is to harass the legal owners of legal guns, disregarding the fact that most gun crimes are committed with illegal and illegally owned ones. Cities and states that are characterized by gun laws significantly stricter than ours, such as Washington DC or Illinois, are black spots of gun crime, while many jurisdictions where gun ownership is not severely regulated, eg. Vermont and Alaska [and Virginia — BB], are among the safest. Gun crime in the US has to do with social and ethnic problems, not with gun laws or the availability of legal guns.

Since there is a gun problem in the US, the Finnish “progressives”, subservient to the American Left, have decided that we, too, must have a gun problem. In reality we have none. We have more guns per capita than any other European country but less gun crime than any other European country. The fact that there is a lot of violent crime in Finland is irrelevant because these crimes, as a rule, are not committed with guns.

The fact that we do not have a demonstrable gun problem disturbs our “progressives” in a terrible manner. For years they have been dying for something like Jokela to happen. So that they can yell triumphantly: “We told you, didn’t we!” This is their great moment. Like vultures they are feeding on the corpses of those who died at Jokela. As a gunowner I find that annoying. As a human being I find it repulsive.

Another reason for talking about guns, rather than the killer, is that guns and gunowners are an easy target to pour out your anger, hatred and frustration on. Similarly easy targets are computer games or heavy metal music. It is much more difficult and much less trendy to touch upon problems such as school bullying (according to the police investigations, Auvinen was bullied) because anti-gun people are also people who always view an evil-doer as a victim. It is much more difficult to talk about the catastrophic state of our public mental health care and school health services (according to the investigations Auvinen was suffering from mental problems). It is easy to take money from the mental patients because, on the one hand, they do not demand their rights and, on the other, the results of neglecting them show with a delay. A politician who only worries about the next elections is not interested in issues that have little immediate visible effects on anything, regardless of how severe the long-term impact on society will be.

In spite of what happened at Jokela, we do not have a gun problem. We do have other problems, but addressing them would require money and political will. Bringing knives or firearms into schools could be made more difficult by using guards or metal detectors, but such measures are a no-no to the self-proclaimed intellectuals because they would be “simplifying the problem” or something like that. The authorities that grant firearms licences should have an access to the mental record of the applicant, but this is a big no too because these intellectuals resent some, selected aspects of a police state. The licence authorities should be properly trained and instructed. Auvinen obtained his permit by virtue of having joined a Helsinki shooting club a few months before but without having visited the range even once. The law authorizes the police to consider whether the applicant has demonstrated his shooting hobby in a reliable manner. The Tuusula police made a clear mistake, the law itself is not to blame.

A lot of things could be done if there was political will. Even so, we cannot prevent all crimes. For decades the Finnish criminal politics have been based on the idea that the criminal is a victim and the crime is a reaction to influence from the social environment. We have lost our ability to understand that there are people who commit crimes, totally regardless of what the surrounding society does or does not do, because they are inherently stupid, crazy or evil. The world has seen all kinds of societies and legislations, but a crimeless society does not and will not exist. There will always be Auvinens who kill people out of their own will, their own motives, and using those instruments that are available. The society can only determine how, if at all, it wishes to punish them for their actions. It can also determine how, if at all, it allows the potential victims to defend themselves.


Read further... this is quite extensive the comments are well worth the read ..

November 27, 2007

This describes beautifully what this BLOG is all about..

Letter to all those who say "I can't change the way things are [the world is]- so I don't want to hear about it, learn about it, know about it, DO ANYTHING about it!" ? Isabel


Don’t be afraid to be afraid…

Yoko Ono, Beautiful Boys

I have heard many astounding things in the four years since I began to make What a Way to Go. The most astounding is this, which I have heard more than once, from real, living, seemingly intelligent and thoughtful people: “I refuse to be scared.”

Imagine… refusing to feel one’s feelings. As if such a thing is ever really possible. As if such a thing is even a good idea. As if such a disconnection from one’s own body and one’s essential humanity, as if this core-directed attempt at control and domination, isn’t just more of the same. It’s a bit like “I refuse to feel pain” or “I refuse to feel hunger.” I mean, right on… pain and hanger can be a real downer, dude, so like, yeah, cool, groovy, far out, but like…. um… shouldn’t you take your emaciated hand out of that fire? It’s starting to smoke.

Many great thinkers have wondered, Kurt Vonnegut amongst them, whether the hypertrophied human cerebral cortex will ultimately prove to have been a bad idea, and whether it will be soon selected against in the grand Walkabout that is evolution. My guess is that, if that should be the case, if we do go the way of the Yangtze River Dolphin or the Miss Waldron’s Red Colobus Monkey (two species which have recently gone belly-up in the shallow and quickly-warming end of the gene pool), it will be because this great, gray, wrinkled jelly-mold of an organ confers upon us the dubious ability to convince ourselves that we do not feel what we feel, and that we do not think what we think. To my mind, that’s about as good a working definition of insanity as we’re ever going to get.

“I refuse to feel scared.” Could we ask for a more marvelous statement of willful denial than that?

It’s understandable, of course. We live in a culture, and a system of governance and economy and production, that uses fear to control us. Just as it uses violence. Just as it uses power. And so, in the realms of power and violence and fear, we are left to stumble about at our most crazed and confused. Chafing under the dominating jackboot of the mortgage payment, the television commercial, the IRS form and our next employee review (what, did you think all dominating jackboots came hob-nailed?), we seek to distance ourselves from any and all participation in such basic human animal responses as fear in the face of danger, or protection and defense in the face of attack: “Those bastards use fear and power to control us, goddamnit! No way am I going to let them make me be afraid!” In an attempt to “not become the enemy”, we wrap ourselves in cloaks of noble courage and righteous pacifism and hope that these thin fabrics will protect us.

And why not? They HAVE protected us. If we’re rich, that is, or at least middle class. If we’re white. If we’re male. If we’re educated. If we’re first world. If we’re well-employed. Here in the Insulated States of America, much of our violence and power and fear, at least of the hob-nailed sort, has been outsourced, offshored and externalized so as not to upset us while we eat (bad for the digestion, you know). We on the top have been spared the most brutal and overt consequences of our actions for so long now that we have forgotten that there are any. We close our eyes and click our heals and zip up our No Fear hoodies and we’re good to go, confident that all that wishin’ and hopin’ will work today just like it worked yesterday.

Which is, of course, why Peak Oil whacks us so devastatingly upside the head. Because when we begin to look closely at the situation, it becomes very clear, very quickly, that wishin’ and hopin’ are about to go the way of the Yangtze River Dolphin and the Miss Waldron’s Red Colobus Monkey in terms of effective life strategies.

It burns, doesn’t it? It galls and vexes and maddens. I mean, isn’t this what we spent ten thousand years trying to control? Haven’t we worked long hours for low pay killing off everything we could that might chase us or bite us or poison us or eat us or claw us or irritate us or scare us or make us feel all creepy and oogly inside? Didn’t we arrange things so that we could know where our next meal is coming from, and where our warm bed will be at the end of the day? Aren’t we, by virtue of our millennia of effort, and by virtue of our exalted position at the very tip-top of the Great Chain of Being, actually and in no uncertain terms ENTITLED to not feel fear?

Well, sorry, no, we’re not. We can’t have that. First, because that Great Chain is a load of horseshit (my apologies to horseshit, which, composted, can be really great for your garden), and second because our delusional attempts to control something as huge and complex and chaotic and self-directing and autonomous and sacred as THE WHOLE WORLD have succeeded only in pissing her off, and, as that great mallrat-t-shirt says, “When Momma ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy”. Knock knock. Who’s there? Climate change. Oh fuck.

Some people, cognizant of how silly it sounds to actually deny their own feelings, will tweak things a bit, saying, instead of “I refuse to be scared”, something like “I refuse to live in fear,” meaning, I think, pretty much the same thing (though now avowed as an actual policy), but sounding much better. That this is said with high nobility of purpose and the best of intentions does not surprise me, for we are nothing if not well-intentioned. That it’s said with a straight face astounds me. Like… um… wouldn’t the only reason to actually “live in fear” be if there were something in our lives that was ongoingly frightening and threatening? And… I’m embarrassed to have to write this… if there’s something ongoingly frightening and threatening in our lives, don’t we actually want to know about it, and maybe, the gods forbid, respond? Isn’t that what fear is for?

Maybe that’s not totally fair. Maybe it is. At some point, we have to do the work of teasing apart a healthy and useful feeling of fear from an unhealthy and useless feeling of worry, of fear mired in molasses and J-B Weld, which can be both debilitating and paralyzing. Perhaps it’s the difference between a creative response and a reaction. Fear has an in-the-moment quality to it, as a response to an immediate stimulus, and the possibility of openness and creativity exists therein. Worry has a long-term gnawing quality to it, as if fear has taken up a dwelling-place in our hearts, with plans to stay and eat all our potato chips, and there’s nothing we can do to get rid of it.

We point to that ol’ deer-in-the-headlights as an example of the paralyzing effect of fear. Well, let’s think about deer for a second. I’ve met up with many of these “venisons of the deep” in my day, walking through the woods. When they hear me coming, they respond by running away. I’ve yet to have one stand there and let me walk up and pet it. Given the traditional choices afforded us animals, and knowing that fighting is probably riskier and may take more energy, and seeing an obvious escape route, the deer flees. Of course. Easy as pie. Deer ain’t dumb.

But when I approach a deer encased in two tons of metal and glass and fine Corinthian leather, sometimes the deer takes the third option, the option that remains when fighting won’t work and there isn’t time to flee, or a place to flee to: it freezes. Not a bad strategy as a last resort, given the physiology of vision and the instincts of predators, but fairly useless against a Ford F-350 Super Duty diesel, or even a Toyota Prius. What works in the evolved world of lions and tigers and deers fails in the invented world of traffic and tramways and trucks. An oncoming pickup falls so far outside the traditional purview of a white-tailed deer that her first and most effective fear responses break down. Fight and flight appear to be out of the question and, unfortunately in this case, freeze doesn’t stand much of a chance. Traffic and tramways and trucks. Oh my.

This, I think, is what some people are pointing to when they say they “refuse to live in fear.” They look at oil and climate and environmental meltdown and mass extinction and overshoot and economic and political insanity and they sense that, if things are really this dire, there’s no real way to effectively fight it (as in solving it… as in keeping this system going… as in SOL, dude… ), no clear place to which they might flee for safety (where could we go where they don’t hate us?…hmmm….), and they rightly surmise that freezing, in the face of something this huge, will probably not work either. What to do, what to do? There IS an ongoingly frightening and threatening presence in our lives. The coming storms lie so far outside of our purview that our traditional fear responses break down. We already know what usually happens to the deer. And being frozen in fear, apart from not working, really, really sucks. What to do?

I know! Let’s refuse the situation. Let’s just say no to our own reality! In fact, let’s re-write reality. Let’s do like Captain Kirk did with the Kobayashi Maru training exercise and reprogram the simulator. After all, he didn’t believe in the no-win situation, so why should we? I mean, c’mon, people! We’re Americans, aren’t we? Damn straight! Lock and load! Let’s roll!

Ahem… where were we?

When we douse out the fear, when we tamp down the embers of worry, we unwittingly, and unfortunately, choose ingrained reaction over creative response. We fail to let the fear and worry do their work, the work of alerting us, not only to the fact that we are in danger, but also that this danger is huge and new and so dire that our normal responses will not serve us.

Our culture in general (and those in power and control in particular) has used and abused fear and power and violence in order to manage our behavior and our beliefs, to sell us shit we don’t need, and to siphon off the material wealth of an entire planet. In reaction to that, rather than in creative response, we end up forced through tighter checkpoints and down narrower chutes, further and further into the pen. Reacting rather than responding IS a life lived in fear. Reaction is always constrained. It is always less free. The irony, for those who say, “I refuse to live in fear”, is that they already do, and that they probably always have. Refusing fear is a fear reaction to fear itself. (You came close, FDR, but no cigarette holder.)

There’s a way in which the fundamental heart and spirit of What a Way to Go can be encapsulated in one short piece of voice over: “If what we want is to stop the destruction of the life of this planet, then what we have been doing has not been working. We will have to do something else.” Something else, as in something really else, as in “now for something completely different” else. Not the same old tricks in a new shade of muddy green.

So what might that be, fellow deers? We’ve tried the Happy Chapter (TM), but that hasn’t seemed to “work” (I’m defining “work” as “somehow avoiding our headlong plunge into global mass extinction”). We’ve done the studies and written the books and convened the conferences and made the movies and, standing there in the glare of headlights, we’ve looked up at that big ol’ scary truck a’comin’, yes we have, yes we have. But then, because it’s so darned scary, and because everybody knows you can’t leave people afraid and upset, and because everybody knows that you’ve got to give people hope, man, you’ve just got to!, we’ve tacked on conclusions and chapters and benedictions and epilogues and dénouements that say, “Hey, things aren’t so bad. All we have to do is this-and-this-and-this and everything will be fine.” And the effect on us has been to put us back to sleep. I mean, if somebody has figured out the this-and-this-and-this, then surely they’re on it, right? So, I can get back to my shows, right? Cool. The truck? Oh, that. Yeah, don’t worry. There’s some guys in Colorado who have found the brake pedal.

(If only we had stopped to wonder why it is this culture never actually DOES this-and-this-and-this. Here lies Humanity: They could have saved themselves, but they really sucked at follow-up!)

We keep inching up to the edge of terror and hopelessness and despair, only to pull back and find solace in the arms of denial and false hope and slightly-less-unsustainable “green living.” Doing so hasn’t actually “worked.” So… now what? What comes next?

Remember, the truck is still coming…

I am reminded of an old children’s game we used to play in the one-room schoolhouse I attended in rural Michigan. One of us would lead and the rest would follow and we’d sit together and smack our hands on our knees and mimic the various motions and sounds as we went along. It was a hoot. Here, I’ll lead:

Coming to some fear. Coming to some fear.
Can’t go over it. Can’t go over it.
Can’t run away from it. Can’t run away from it.
Can’t go around it. Can’t go around it.
Gotta go through it. Gotta go through it.
Alright. Alright.
OK. OK.
Let’s go. Let’s go.

Smack your hands on your knees, folks. Shout out and shake these bones. We’ve got some feeling to go through! (WARNING: DO NOT TRY THIS ALONE!)

Here’s the thing: I think we all KNOW that we have to do this. We know it’s the fact that Brother Al’s movie was so damned scary that put Climate Change near the top of our national Honey-Do list (whether what the national Honeys are doing will actually “work” is another essay). We know that it’s the feeling that has made the difference. And we know that it’s the feeling that makes us come alive, which is why we spend $9 (plus $7.50 for popcorn and a drink) to go to a movie that will wrench our hearts and drain our tears and rouse our righteous indignation and scare the bejesus out of us.

What we don’t know is how to do this whole “feel the terror” thing without it totally undoing us, without it leaving us debilitated and paralyzed. I mean, shit, pretty much every last thing the analysts and scientists I’ve been reading for the past four years have been saying is now coming true, with this exception: IT’S UNFOLDING WAY FASTER THAN EXPECTED. Foreign investors are fleeing, petrodollars are petrified and petrodenial is running dry, bubbles are bursting and dollars are dropping and the price for a barrel of light sweet is getting downright crude. The delusional belief system (aka “the economy”, aka “the market”) is staring on in dis-belief. Oh, and climate change? Well, let’s just say that you might want to buy those new waders you’ve been looking at in the Cabelas catalog. Today.

You know things are moving quickly when you get to be a prophet and an historian all in one lifetime…

Atomized and ruggedly individualized, riven from our tribal roots, deprived of our healing arts, numbed, dumbed and bummed by an insane culture, alone and without community, how for fuck’s sake are we supposed to go through our terror? And why should we? If we can’t fight, and we can’t flee, what are we to do? If our terror is keeping us frozen, how do we know that feeling it and moving through it and unfreezing it (rather than denying it) will actually give us the power to jump before the truck turns us into road-pizza?

Well, here we are at the heart of it, folks, where the rubber meets the doe, so to speak. There IS no jumping out of the way. The truck is too big. And too close. And moving too quickly for us to even have time to get a good crouch in. So… perhaps it’s time to remember that sometimes… sometimes… when deer and truck meet… the truck gets totaled. And sometimes… sometimes… the deer survives.

We’re going to have to question some deeper assumptions here. Who says we can’t take the blow? And who says deer can’t protect themselves from attack? Who says we can’t find effective responses that will give us a better chance of surviving the impact? And who says we can’t align with the forces already in motion to help the death machine die with more dignity, and less destruction, than it otherwise will? Who says?

Ah, we poor Average Americans (TM). We’ve been bought off just like the Canarsies were before us (supposedly). But instead of the legendary “$24 worth of beads and trinkets”, we got iPhones and plasma TVs and hot and cold running water and The Sopranos and Denny’s Grand Slam Breakfast. We’re so much smarter than those silly Indians, aren’t we? Look what we got! And all it cost us was… well… our very souls, not to mention the health of an entire planet, which is, technically speaking, bigger than Manhattan.

We seem to have so much to lose (as long as we can continue to externalize those darn costs) that talk of taking the blow, of acting to protect ourselves and the life of this planet, scares the rest of the bejesus (that residual bejesus which has not been frightened away by horror movies) right out of us. Take the blow? I can’t take the blow; I just got these new blue jeans! Fight back? Why, they’ll put me in jail! I can’t get a signal in there! Preparing for collapse looks, to those at the top, like hard physical labor and learning to cook possum and really greasy hair and no more trips to Caribou’s. Fighting back looks like embarrassing headlines and a date with Bubba in the showers. With possum stew and jail food on the menu, the Extinction Basket with pommes frites and a Coke (TM) begins to look like an attractive option.

Pampered and purchased, it’s pretty much agreed all around that the last thing Americans are going to do is rise up and take their lives back into their own hands. On the whole, that’s probably true, at least until we’ve already lost our toys. But while masses do not seem to change minds on any sort of a time scale that will help us at this point, individual minds can and do change. People can step out of denial and get into real and effective response. You can. Yeah, I mean you. That’s why I’m sitting on my ass right now writing. Because there are people out there who are ready to look where I’m pointing. Maybe you’re one of those people.

We can take the blow. (We don’t really have much choice.) Perhaps we can even survive it. We can begin by finding our place and our people. We can start an edible forest garden and clean out some old barrels for water catchments and walk down the road and meet all of our neighbors and get together for a potluck and a meeting and talk about what’s coming. We can find a facilitator and do the feeling work we need to do, moving through the grief and the hopelessness, the fear, the anger, moving through them and beyond them, moving together, arm in arm, hand to hand, heart to heart, discovering that we are strong enough to bear such things, that we are still whole enough to not be undone by them, finding that together, we can stand and face the headlights, we can stand and hold each other as the truck hits, and finding, maybe, just maybe, that some of us are still alive after it has passed. Some of us need to do this work, because most will not. Refusing to feel their fear now, they will be forced to feel it upon impact, when the trauma is greatest, the losses so hard to bear. They will need our help.

And we can act to protect ourselves (the larger “ourselves”, which includes everybody else). We have no real idea what small groups of us can do to that truck if we stand up to it when it hits, but we can acknowledge the possibility that the truck will end up overturned in the ditch, damaged beyond repair, never to “let’s roll” again, while we manage to limp away and lick our wounds. It could happen. And since it’s possible that finding some way to deflect the truck into a ditch will “work” (and remember I’m defining “work” as “somehow avoiding our headlong plunge into global mass extinction”), then it’s worth the responding, the trying, the being, the doing. Things are going to get a bit crazy. The rules are all going to change. Stay awake. Stay aware. Stay poised. All will become clear.

The people I see engaged in effective response have all faced into, sat with, chewed on, and stared down their fear. This does not mean they are no longer afraid. It means that they have confronted their fears and found themselves more than a match for them. It means they have found their power to respond even when afraid, which is the definition of courage. They are still standing in the headlights, for there is no real place to hide, but they are not frozen. They are readying themselves for the blow, however and whenever it comes, responding, moment by moment, intuitively, rationally, non-rationally, and with heightened awareness. And they are getting prepared to play their parts in tossing that damned truck into the ditch.

It seems fair, in a way, that someone takes the blow. Not necessarily at the individual level, of course. There are many, many victims in this story. We were all born into this situation. I will not argue that any one of us in particular has a debt to pay. That’s for each of our own hearts to know.

But at the collective level, at the level of our nation, and our culture, there is a fairness here that feels deep and clear. This particular troop of clever monkeys has acted abominably. As dysfunctional (if not self-acknowledged) members of the Community of Life, as supposedly informed and qualified delegates to the great Council of All Beings, we have amends to make. Perhaps feeling the fear we’ve engendered, the pain we’ve caused, the grief we’ve created, the anger we’ve provoked, the guilt we’ve earned and the clear and soaring joy we can step into at any moment, perhaps feeling deeply is one way to begin making those amends. Feeling. Then moving into defensive and protective responses that might actually “work”. It’s sort of a cosmic you-break-it-you-buy-it situation we find ourselves in. We created this, we “civilized” ones. We broke the Laws of Life. The results belong to us. So how much do we have in our wallets? Who are we going to be?

I know my path: I’m going to finish growing up. I’m going to do whatever it takes to rejoin the community of living souls as a fully initiated adult human being. Refusing to feel one’s fear is just a dressed-up form of adolescent indestructibility, just another facet of Civilization’s millennia-long PCP frenzy. Fuck that. It’s time to grow up. I’m ready.

I’ll fear my fair share of fear and grief and anger and shame and joy, and savor the sweet delight of being alive in this amazing time. I’ll find those few people who see the truck coming, and sit with them in circle and share my heart, and my tears, and we’ll stand together and watch the truck as it nears. I’ll read the headlines, at the very least, in Carolyn Baker’s Daily News Stories, and let the fear and anger wash over me and through me, and I’ll use that fear to keep me aligned, and in response mode, with reality.

I’ll use the fear, rather than refuse it. I’ll use it to keep me awake and alive and in action. I’ll use it as an antidote to the culture that seeks always to lull me back to sleep. I’ll use it to help bring an end to that culture.

Damn, that feels good.

Bring on the truck.


November 13, 2007

Scared? Duh.


[In accord with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this article is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in receiving such material for educational purposes. Any other use requires contacting the author.]

Scared? Duh.

By Sharon Astyk

"I'm afraid there's no denyin'
I'm just a dandelion
A fate I don't deserve.
I'd be brave as a blizzard...
If I only had the nerve."

I don't think that conference speakers are supposed to say what I did at the Community Solutions Conference. We're supposed to be inspiring, energizing. Instead, towards the end of my presentation, I admitted that I was afraid. That's not very inspiring, right up there on the disheartening meter with the list of current democratic candidates. Unfortunately, it is also true.

Now I tend to be an optimist by both nature and inclination. I'm not generally fearful or easily made unhappy. I love my life. Despite the fact that my job is to read all the bad news about peak oil, climate change, soil and water depletion, resource wars, environmental toxicity, financial trouble and all the other crap you can imagine, and write about it, I tend not to take it all too seriously. That is, I do, but I also take very seriously the good stuff in my life. Generally speaking, they balance one another out. But not always. Not, perhaps, as much lately as I'd like.

The thing is, I think most people have a choice when they are confronted by a reality like peak oil and climate change - either they develop a thick skin for at least some things, or they deny. We're all aware that denial is the most popular choice, and why not - denial is a very happy place to live, as long as you don't mind the cost. Otherwise, you have to develop enough emotional scales to at least cover up the horror of the thing.
For example, confronted with the fact that 40% of the population of Swaziland is starving to death, you have to be able to find something darkly, horribly funny in the appalling realization that the government of Swaziland is still growing Cassava to make biofuels - that is, in the face of starvation, a government has decided to turn the staple food of that nation into gas, or in the larger truth that we're doing that all over the world now, as we drive food prices up and up and up...


I've got a lot of practice laughing rather than weeping, or winding up my computer and typing out my outrage hoping to break through someone else's scales and make them as angry as this stuff makes me, so that maybe, maybe we can do something to stop it. But I'm less practiced at dealing with my own fear. I've been dripping with outrage at the world's injustices pretty much since I was old enough to have a political conscience, sometime in the mid-Reagan years. But I haven't been particularly scared, because my own blood was never in the game. I was always outraged on someone else's behalf, and of course, that's an easy emotion.

I have, as we all know, four little hostages to fortune, and at least the average person's fear of suffering, death and inconvenience (Lest that list seem strange, I'll be blunt - I'm actually really good in a real crisis, but I can be a bitch when I've been put out in some way. Oddly, I've noticed that is is fairly common - we act like jerks when we can afford to, and something better often comes out when we can't - is that perhaps hopeful news?). I'm scared for my kids, and scared for myself. Some of the time I desperately wish this would all just go away and I wouldn't have to think about it anymore. Sometimes I wish denial was an option.

  • But mostly, I'm glad I know even the bad, hard stuff. Because I honestly have doubt whatsoever that being prepared is better than not being prepared. I'm not even always sure I want more time - part of me does, but part of me believes that we are better off going through our fossil fuel crisis sooner than later - soon enough that we still have money and resources to make some major infrastructure changes, soon enough that we may avoid the worst of catastrophic warming, and that there might be enough oil left for future generations some wind power and vaccinations. And I can't wish it would go away because it is my job to protect my kids, and my desire to protect the next generations in general -
    I don't want to dump this burden on my sons or on other people's children. I don't think that's the proper work of parents who love their kids.

John Adams once said that he was a soldier so that his son could be a farmer, and his grandson a poet. I'm no soldier, and if this is war (it isn't) it will be won by farmers and perhaps by poets too. But I share in the sentiment. I'm going to do this work, and face this as head on as I possibly can so that my children may someday choose other work. That's what Moms do. Now the thing they don't tell you about parenting when you become a Mom or Dad is this (for those of you without kids I'm going to reveal on of the dirty little secrets, something, if you are thinking about parenthood, you might rather not know) is this: being parent doesn't make you a better person.

That is, when you become a parent, if you are going to be any good at it, a certain amount of selflessness and self-sacrifice is mandatory, but you do not, as some people seem to think, immediately become the sort of person who enjoys self-sacrifice and wants to be selfless. The ugly truth is that you are still the same greedy, lazy, selfish person you were before (ok, maybe you aren't, but I am). If you were the sort of person who would rather read a novel on the couch than answer the question "what does this spell" 78 times in a row, nothing about parenthood, or even love for your kids will transform you magically into the kind of person who finds having your novel interrupted every 2 minutes delightful. I know the world is full of better people than me, but the truth is that a lot of us are still the same ordinarily rotten people we were before we had kids. We just don't have the option of indulging our rottenness. That is, parenthood, for parents who really want to do it right, requires not that you be a good person or that your better nature predominate, but that you suck it up and do the unselfish thing anyway, even when it sucks, even when you don't want to, even when it is damned hard. Some people really are good, unselfish people - and that's great - I envy them. But it actually doesn't matter very much whether you are one of them or not, if you care about your kids. You have to go around pretending to be unselfish most of the time in the parent business.

The same is true about our present situation. This is scary stuff. There's nothing crazy or unreasonable about being scared by what we're facing. We've got bad news, and it is *appropriate* to feel bad about it. There's no reason we have to be fearless here - frankly, the only way I can imagine being fearless is to be stupid. But we do have to be brave - that is, we don't have to feel brave, but like the Cowardly Lion, like the Mom who doesn't really want to get up for the two am feeding, we have act the right way, to pretend as hard as we can that we have, as the song says, the nerve.
And the amazing thing about pretending hard is that sometimes - not always, but just sometimes, you become, as Kurt Vonnegut put it, "what you pretend to be."

Which brings me back to fear, and the only antidote to fear I know - good work. I learned in pregnancy, facing labor (all of my labors were very, very, very long) to simply screw up my nerve, accept that the only way out is through, and to go forward. We're in the same situation now - the way out of this current crisis is through it, to go forward from where we are, with what we have and who we are. It isn't required of any of us that we not be afraid, or that we don't spend a lot of time grumpily wishing that someone else would do the work and leave us alone with our book. But it is required that while we curse fate, previous generations, the current administration, G-d and the Federal Reserve, we get to work. What work? Tikkun Olam, if you are a Jew, or even if you find the metaphor compelling - tikkun olam means "the repair of the world." In my faith, that is why we are here - to fix what is broken, repair what is damaged, to improve what can be improved. As the saying goes, it is not required of us that we complete the work, but it is not permitted for us not to try.

Now I do not come from one of those religous faiths where you put aside the lesser emotions like fear and selfishness - in fact, as far as I can tell, the right to whine is a sacrament in Judaism. So I'd hardly be the person to tell anyone "don't be afraid." Instead, I suggest we all be afraid - that isn't pathological, it is appopriate and reasonable. Nor do I suggest any of us fail to whine about it as much as possible - that, after all, is what the internet is for, collective whinging. We might as well take advantage of the technology while we've got it.

But let us whine while we hammer, moan while we cook, sigh in outrage while we write and march and yell and build and fight our fear with good work and the pretense that maybe we'll become better people while we're pretending that we already are. There's too damned much to do to do it any other way. I may be a coward at times (and trust me, I am), but like the Lion of song and story I'd like to think that , "I could show my prowess...be a lion, not a mou-us..."

We're going to need lions, or at least busy mice with really loud roars.
--
Edmund Fitzgerald
NADDUM Press
PO Box 8040
Bigfork, MT 59911
http://www.NADDUM.com

October 14, 2007

logo

Published on AfterDowningStreet.org (http://www.afterdowningstreet.org)

Kucinich: Get Ready to Read Bush His Miranda Rights

Created 2007-10-14 18:16

Kucinich speech at Latino Congresso, via MyDD [1]

I'm so grateful to be with you this morning. It's such an honor. When I am with this community, I realize the real connection I have, from the heart, (el corazón). It's a connection that transcends the issues, but it connects us to the issues at the same time.

When I started my career in politics forty years ago in Cleveland, the Puerto Rican population was growing, and there were a lot of problems between that community and the police. And so when I finally got elected to city council with the help of the Puerto Rican community, the first thing I did was to take a Spanish language course, so that I could better understand and communicate with members of the Latino community. One of the things we first discovered in the city council was the fact that the police were arresting Latinos without reading them their rights, in direct violation of the Miranda decision. So if someone didn't speak English, they didn't have any rights. The police didn't understand that even if people couldn't speak English, it didn't mean that those people shouldn't have rights. So I was responsible for causing the Cleveland Police to have to learn the Miranda rights in Spanish and carry a card with them.

Now the people in the Administration of George Bush better remember their Miranda rights, because when I'm elected President I'm going to see that they are arrested. I'm not kidding here! I want to let you to know something; how I feel about what's happened to our country. We have been led into a war based upon lies -- an unjust a war. We've seen our civil liberties taken away because of lies. The President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense are all part of this. They're going to be held accountable under the law. If someone runs a traffic light, they'll get a ticket here. There are a million dead Iraqis and almost 4,000 dead American soldiers as a result of this war. Where is the accountability? What's happened is that our constitution is being torn up. And in this toxic environment, the Administration, in its never-ending quest for more scapegoats, focuses on immigrants. You know it and I know it. And we see, unfortunately, the failure of the Democratic Party to stand up to this Administration.

I'm going to give you an example of something that occurred a couple of weeks ago. We had the bill on children's health care that we passed out of the House and it covered all children, including the children of legal immigrants: about 600,000 children. But because of some Republicans in the Senate, who said, "Look, we're not dealing with any immigrants," it doesn't even matter if they're legal at this point, the Democrats wouldn't fight to keep it in the Bill. They took it out. So they brought the bill back to the House, without 600,000 children of immigrants who are legal. Now, think about what that means. It means that we are in so much fear in this country that our children are now being affected by it. You see, I happen to believe that all children, whether they are the children of those that are documented or not, should be covered for their health care. When our politics has gotten to the point where we start to divide our children into various camps, where we start to separate our children from one another, we set the stage for the splitting of the Nation. I want to see our Nation united together. It is time that we had a President who understood that human unity is what makes for peace. And that when we impose the wrath of the law that is unjust, what we're doing is we're stopping peace from happening. So, I'm running for President to make sure that all the people in America know that they have someone who they can count on, and know that they will have a President who will stand up for them. And I will tell you today that the Latino community, in particular, has a right to expect that all the candidates will stand in front of you and say, "Yes. We must have a path to legalization. Yes. There must be a way for people to work in this country, if they want to live in Mexico. Yes. We must take down that wall!"

Isn't it interesting how famous Ronald Reagan became for saying, "Mr. Gorbachev, take down that wall." Oh, how far we've come from those days. When President Reagan said, "Take down that wall," and President Bush now says, "Build up a wall," where are we going as a nation?

I believe the way the immigrant community is treated, whether documented or not, reflects the direction and future of America. We must believe that our brothers and sisters, Latinos and all of the other ethnic groups, are essential to who we are as Americans. We are forgetting what it is that made this country great. We are forgetting that the Statue of Liberty was there for all nationalities. Maybe it would be helpful if we put Emma Lazarus's poem into Spanish, where she said, "Give me your tired, give me your poor."

This is at the base of the Statue of Liberty. "Give me your tired, your poor/your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free/The wretched refuse of your teeming shores/Send these, the homeless, the tempest tossed to me."

Those powerful, heartfelt sentiments welcomed generations of immigrants to our country; welcomed people in America to a beacon of freedom. We know that there have always been challenges, which have confronted each group that has come to this country. But never before in America have we had a discussion about having to send millions of people back across the border. Never before in America have we seen this attempt to divide us so deeply. And never before in America has there been a need to unite us so totally. And that's what my candidacy for President of the United States is all about. It is about the imperative of human unity. It is that -- we are all one.

So we have to make sure, as the unity blueprint for immigration reform is being talked about, that we protect the well-being and safety of immigrant and U.S. citizen children alike. We must make sure we achieve faithful enforcement of immigration laws by reinstating the jurisdiction of Federal Courts to review agency decisions. We have to stop these raids. We have to stop it. They are not worthy of the United States of America. We need to make sure that workers' rights are protected. This is why I say that as President, my first act in office will be to cancel NAFTA and the WTO. We all know what happened when NAFTA was being considered. The corporations went to the Mexico legislature and said, "Pass this. It will mean better living, better lives for the people of Mexico. Wages will go up. There will be prosperity." What happened? It passed, and wages went down. People lost jobs and fled north into the waiting arms of corporations. And the corporations said, "Yes. Come and work for us, but don't worry about what you're going to be paid, because it won't be much. You will have no rights; no rights to organize, or to collective bargaining." South of the border workers were faced with the same thing. Corporations achieved enormous control with the passage of NAFTA. People were not given a chance for their basic rights to be protected.

So when I say cancel NAFTA, what I mean is that we go to Mexico and renegotiate a trade agreement. And what are the principles of that trade agreement? That all workers will have the right to organize, the right to collective bargaining, the right to strike, the right to decent wages and benefits, the right to a secure retirement, the right to a safe workplace. It will mean prohibitions on child labor, slave labor, and prison labor. It will mean that the air and the water are protected. It is time to have a President of the United States who will stand up for workers, who will stand up for immigrants, who will stand up for working immigrants, who will stand up for those who have documents, who will stand up for those who don't have documents, who will stand up for human beings. We must realize that there is no such thing as an illegal human being. We need a President who will stand up for the people!

We understand that there needs to be a realistic framework for future migration. No one's saying that there shouldn't be an attempt to create some flow back and forth across the borders that makes sense. But, that's not what's happening. When you hear what is going on in Marico County --what is that hotline about but an encouragement of a kind of fascism? People reporting each other, what's that about? You get reported for speaking Spanish? When I was in the Ohio state legislature as a state senator there was an attempt to pass an English-only bill, and I rose and spoke about it. I gave a speech in Spanish objecting the English only. Let me tell you about how I defeated the bill: I pointed out that the founding documents of the state of Ohio were in German. So here we are in a county where people are saying "solamente." It would be good if every child had a working knowledge of the English language, and that our children receive the kind of education where they learn to read and write English perfectly. I have a proposal that's already been introduced in the Congress; one that I am getting ready to re-introduce in a couple of weeks for a universal pre-kindergarten. Children ages three, four, and five will have access to full-time daycare. How many of our parents, particularly working mothers, realize that if you don't have quality daycare, you are paying as much for daycare as you are paying for a college education? You work almost the whole week just to pay for daycare, so by the time you are through working you don't have much left at all, and you still have to worry about benefits like healthcare. What I am talking about is this: A universal pre-kindergarten daycare, where children ages three, four, and five will have access to full- time day care, fully paid, where they will learn things like music, art, reading skills, social skills and they would also learn languages. So we say all of the children in this country should learn languages like Spanish so they can reach out to the wider world. We can give our children the gift of knowing that there is a big world out there and not shut ourselves out from it, but say we are one with the world. So our children should be given this gift of learning languages at a young age, and this fear of the other will not exist anymore. This is such an important opportunity for our nation. However, in order to go from where we are to where we hope to be, there are a few things we have to do.

Number one, we have to break the fear that is holding so many of our fellow citizens captive. It's not only the fear of the other; it's the fear that people will not be safe. You know and I know that the war against the people of Iraq has made this country less safe. You know and I know that it is important to have a President who not only rejects the war against Iraq, who not only rejects a war against Iran, but who rejects war as an instrument of policy. It is time to have a President who truly stands for peace.

Dr. King understood this, forty years ago when he said the war in Vietnam was destroying the people of two nations. We don't have enough money to build bridges in this country, yet we blow them up in Iraq. We don't have money to build schools in this country, but we have seen schools and hospitals and other institutions destroyed in Iraq. We cannot take care of matters here at home, and yet we have leaders who want to go all around the world and tell people what to do. Let's come back home. Let's take care of things here. Let's have a country that we can be proud of, with housing for all and jobs for all and education for all and healthcare for all. That's the kind of America that people will love; the kind of America that will be an example to people all over the world as a country that you believe in, a country that you want to see succeed. Are we ready to take the path towards that kind of an America?

I want to conclude with an issue that I see as the number one domestic issue affecting America. And that's the issue of healthcare. This issue affects every family in this country. We all know that people cannot afford health care in this country. People can't afford to be sick, and they can't afford to get well. We have a situation where these insurance companies are making a lot of money. But we have to ask how they are making that money? For instance, car dealers make money. Shoe salesmen make money. How do these private insurance companies make money? They make money by not providing health care. What is going on in this country? The more they deny you health care, the more money they make. So doctors are on the phone with you saying, "No, you cannot have that test, no, you cannot have that procedure." The insurance companies are playing doctor now. People are not getting the care they are paying for. But then there are 47 million Americans who don't have any insurance at all. And you know what? The largest percentage happens to be Latino. You know this, and I know this. So isn't it time we recognize in America that we should have the same kind of care for its people that every other industrialized nation has?

That's why I am the co-author of a bill, HR 676, Medicare for all, a not-for- profit health care system -- one that covers everyone. It is time to break the hold that these private insurance companies have on our political system; a political system that is failing the American people. We need to reclaim it, so that we can restore the health of the American people. It is time to have a not-for-profit heath care system that covers everyone. Half the bankruptcies in America are due to people who cannot pay their medical bills, so they just go bankrupt. We all know that in households throughout the country, where families discuss this everyday, that someone says, "Honey I don't feel well, but I can't go to the doctor because we can't afford it." People forego the care that they need, until they end up in an emergency room very ill, and the costs go through the roof at that point.

Our system is not about caring for people, it is about caring for profits and insurance companies. The system that I am talking about is a not-for-profit system, and it will have enough money for vision care, dental care, mental health care, long-term care, and prescription drugs. Health care today is being used to accelerate the wealth of the rich. We need to reclaim the system so all people will have the money for their health care, and also for other things, like housing. You know, I started an investigation a couple of months ago about these mortgage companies that were going into communities of people of color and selling these sub-prime loans creating a wave of bankruptcies. The housing needs of America are greater than ever. Health care needs are greater than ever. The job needs of America are greater than ever. The need for higher wages is greater than ever. The need for a fair and just immigration policy is greater than ever. The need to stand for peace is greater than ever. Our system is failing the American people. My candidacy is about rallying the American people to defend their basic human and economic rights. This is our moment to reclaim our nation. This is our moment to restore our nation; our moment to say what America really stands for. This is our moment to say we are part of this country; we helped build this country; we helped make this country what it is. And we are not going to let anyone take this country away from us, whether it's for oil or for money or for blood. This is our nation, and we will reclaim it. We will restore it, and we will call it the United States of America for all the people. Thank you very much. Thank you.


Links:
[1] http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/10/12/225323/82

May 27, 2007

Incessant disease mongering turns Americans into profit-generating guinea pigs for Big Pharma (opinion)
by Mike Adams
www.newstarget.com

Disease mongering - the practice of pushing disease in order to sell more drugs - has become so routine and so successful in modern medicine that drug companies actually depend on inventing new diseases as a way to ensure future profits. It's not enough to sell drugs to people who are truly sick, you see. Big Pharma cleverly figured out that they could sell even MORE drugs if they simply invented new diseases and convinced people they needed pharmaceuticals to treat those diseases.

The FDA, always happy to serve the profit interests of Big Pharma, went right along with the ploy and legalized television and magazine drug ads in 1997. Since then, drug sales have skyrocketed, drug company profits have ballooned, and fictitious disease diagnoses have proliferated at an alarming rate.

Diseases such as Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Social Anxiety Disorder are completely fictitious, invented by a panel of psychiatrists with a simple vote. Conditions like "high cholesterol" aren't diseases at all (they're simply descriptions of blood chemistry), and artificially lowering high cholesterol with statin drugs has been scientifically found to offer absolutely no net health benefit whatsoever. Breast cancer is so frequently misdiagnosed that for every one woman helped by cancer screening and treatment, ten are harmed by it (click here for the story), and Restless Legs Syndrome is so routinely marketed and hyped that people who hadn't even heard of the disease two years ago now think they need patented chemicals to treat it.

By any honest assessment, pharmaceutical medicine today is all a grand hoax. (Click here to read my article exploring the massive "hoax" of drug advertising. )

In a recent CounterThink cartoon, I decided to show what goes on behind the scenes at Disease Mongers, Inc., a firm hired by drug companies to invent, package and market new diseases that can be used to sell more drugs.

The fascinating thing is that the cartoon is not a parody. Drug companies actually do hire firms to invent diseases (although they aren't called, "Disease Mongers, Inc."), and people really do sit around dreaming up disease names that they think might be swallowed by the public, the media and the FDA.

Inventing new diseases is child's play
How easy is it to come up with a fictitious disease or disorder that the public will think is real? It's incredibly easy! I even wrote a web tool that will generate new diseases for you at the click of a button. Simply visit my Disease Mongering Engine and you can get filthy rich inventing your own fictitious diseases starting right now!

I'm not the only one who has come up with hilarious ways to make fun of disease mongering by the drug industry. Justine Cooper created an entire website dedicated to a fictitious disease and a fake drug for treating it. The site, www.Havidol. com, claims to be a patient education site for Dysphoric Social Attention Consumption Deficit Anxiety Disorder, or DSCDAD for short.

Not surprisingly, the public bought it, and she has been contacted by hundreds of people wanting to know where they can buy the drug to treat their DSCDAD. (Didn't they get the drug name, "Havidol?" As in, "Have it all!") Even some members of the media fell for the hoax, reporting DSCDAD as a real disease requiring treatment with Havidol.

In another parody on YouTube, artists created a fake commercial for, "Motivational Deficiency Disorder" (formerly known as just being plain lazy) and recommended drugs for treatment. Click here to see the video yourself.

Back in 2005, I even made up my own list of fictitious diseases, including Obsessive Hosiery Dislocation Disorder (i.e. losing your socks in the laundry). Click here to read my full list of fictitious diseases.

A nation of hypochondriacs
The bottom line in all this? Drug advertising has turned America into a nation of hypochondriacs. By simply inventing some disease name, then getting easy FDA approval for a drug to "treat" it, drug companies can create a billion-dollar market where none existed previously. All they have to do is convince everyone they're sick or diseased, and given the complete lack of medical skepticism among consumers, doctors and regulators these days, that's frighteningly easy.

This fraudulent Big Pharma recipe for making money is so effective that the industry is now increasingly focusing on marketing diseases. If a so-called "disease" can be swallowed by the gullible mainstream media, and believed by brainwashed doctors and consumers, then drug sales will automatically follow.

Getting people to believe there's something wrong with them, of course, is amazingly easy. Why? Because everybody's life is in turmoil at one time or another. There's not a person alive who doesn't feel pressure, or anxiety, or challenges, or failures sooner or later. Drug companies want you to believe those feelings are diseases when, in reality, they're just part of life.

Drug companies essentially want to diseasify every emotion, habit and experience of human living. Falling asleep and waking up -- once regarded as natural human behaviors -- are now pharmacologically regulated with profitable drugs. Pregnancy is now considered a medical condition, and new HPV vaccination efforts go to such extremes that they "preemptively treat" a disease that a young girl might someday possibly get decades later.

What's next: Mandatory "treatment" for everyone

And until this drug cartel is stopped, the situation will only get worse. Soon, mandatory mental health screening programs will sweep across America, and anyone who displays independent thinking, creative ideas or even the slightest hint of stress might be carted off to a mental institution where they will be forced to undergo brain chemistry "rebalancing" at the whim of a psychiatrist who earns a commission on every pill he forces you to swallow.

Sound far-fetched? Don't jump to innocent conclusions. You probably have no idea how far Big Pharma will go to turn human beings into customers. Drugging the entire nation with patented chemicals is only part of the goal. The real goal is to drug everyone with multiple drugs that don't treat or cure anything, but only "manage" symptoms while keeping people alive long enough to keep them paying. Remember The Matrix? Today, the United States is inching ever closer to a Medical Matrix, where consumers are enslaved in a system of chemical control in order to turn a human being into profit machine.

If you think there's anything resembling "health" or "care" in our modern health care system, you're dangerously underinformed. The system is an out-of-control profit-accumulating machine that, right now, harms far more people than it helps. It has become a corporate empire where profits, not patients, come first. And drug companies now exercise astonishing degrees of control over the FDA, the USDA, the DEA, medical schools, doctors, media outlets and non-profit groups.

The way out
How do we end this medical madness? First, we've all got to come to our senses and stop believing every mood, habit or challenge in our lives is caused by some mysterious disorder. People need to start taking responsibility for their own behavior and stop blaming fictitious diseases (or bad genes) when things don't work out the way they want.

Secondly, we've got to end the ridiculous practice of direct-to-consumer drug advertising. There is absolutely no justifiable reason why prescription drugs should be marketed directly to patients on television. It is only allowed because it is profitable, not because it serves any scientifically justifiable function in society.

And third, it's time to conduct a serious investigation into the crimes against America that have been committed by top FDA officials. These bureaucrats have deliberately neglected their responsibility to the American people and have, instead, sought to protect and expand drug company profits, no matter who gets harmed or killed in the process. FDA officials have attacked natural health remedies, outlawed perfectly safe herbs and supplements, and have in fact conspired with drug companies to bury evidence demonstrating the dangers of their FDA-approved pharmaceuticals (among other crimes).

It's time we cleaned house at the FDA and prosecuted the criminals currently in charge there. We need a Nuremberg trial for the FDA where the crimes against humanity that have been committed by the agency are made public and accounted for.

If we don't put an end to this absurd disease mongering epidemic that is sweeping the world, it won't be long until we wake up and find ourselves chemical slaves of an all-powerful drug cartel that runs government, medicine, media and education. The time to stop drug companies is NOW, before they gain an even tighter grip over the laws, regulations and information outlets that dominate society today.

If we end this medical madness now, and outlaw drug advertising while prosecuting the criminals responsible for overmedicating America, we may have a chance at a better future with drastically reduced health care costs. It's going to take courage, honesty and ethics to get this done, but the alternative is to lose our nation to a dark future of medical tyranny, bankruptcy and despair.

Conventional medicine, as practiced today, has truly become the No. 1 obstacle to the health of the American people. Get medicine out of the way, and we would all be healthier, happier and better off.
___
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. Newstarget.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NewsTarget. com/terms. shtml

May 24, 2007

US Armada enters the Gulf today

[No battleship pic will be displayed]

In the past two weeks, I have attempted to show that the real EMPIRE problem is the fact that
the US is an unchallengeable naval power;
(and previously I showed how the

Canadians

are playing fast and loose

by employing one of their antiquated warships)


Things are gonna get downright scary once again.

As if the Lebanese invasion wasn't enough for one year.

WATCH CLOSELY

The ads for naval recruitment will escalate SOON.

And do not forget,

the designer of this disastrous military strategy,


DONALD RUMSFIELD

is still on contract to the Dept of Defense.

But you KNEW that, didn't cha ...?


Breaking News and Commentary from
Citizens for Legitimate Government
24 May 2007
All links to articles as summarized below are available here:

US warns Iran as armada enters Gulf 24 May 2007 The US today threatened new UN sanctions to punish Iran's nuclear drive as it ratcheted up tensions with the biggest display of naval power in the Gulf in years. A bristling US armada led by two aircraft carriers steamed into waters near Iran for exercises, hours before UN watchdogs said Iran was expanding its uranium enrichment program in defiance of international sanctions.

Nine U.S. warships in Gulf for show of force [for Exxon Mobil] 23 May 2007 The largest daytime assembly of U.S. warships in the Gulf since the 2003 Iraq war prepared on Wednesday to hold drills off Iran's coast in a major U.S. show of force that unnerved oil markets. U.S. Navy officials said Iran was not notified of plans to sail nine ships, including two aircraft carriers, through the Straits of Hormuz, a narrow channel in international waters off Iran's coast and a major artery for global oil shipments.

6 Navy Commanders Sacked in 6 Weeks By Noah Shachtman 22 May 2007 For the sixth time in as many weeks, the lead officer of a Navy ship has been suddenly relieved of command, DANGER ROOM pal Andy Scutro reports for Navy Times.

See also:
Jason Jeffrey
Debka file
Afshin Shahzamani blog

Then consider the following:

Rules Skirted, Millions Wasted On U.S. Navy Boat Barriers
2007-05-24 01:54:15

The men from al-Qaeda guided their bomb-laden skiff through the harbor and drew near the USS Cole, detonating a quarter-ton of C-4 plastic explosive that killed 17 sailors and tore a 40-foot hole in the side of the Navy destroyer.

Pentagon officials vowed that nothing like the Oct. 12, 2000, attack in the Yemeni port of Aden would happen again. The Naval Criminal Investigative Service embarked on a plan to shield U.S. ships around the world with rings of floating, rubberized barriers.

The investigative service is responsible for security and probing criminal wrongdoing, including fraud in Navy contracts, but auditors concluded that NCIS hired companies that did little or no significant work on the boat barriers yet collected millions of dollars in fees.

Invoices, e-mails and audit documents obtained by the Washington Post also show that the General Services Administration, the agency that awards and oversees federal contracts, allowed the Navy to sidestep federal procurement rules designed to ensure competition and protect taxpayers from abuse and fraud.


Read The Full Story

Where o where is my DIGG button ....?

I could keep digging stuff up about this .. but I am going to make sure there are PROVISIONS in my larder for the CNN onslaught today .. FEAR, FEAR, FEAR. Oh, yeah ....

ShareThis