Saturday, December 30, 2006

 

A Sigh of Relief...

...arises from Western elites who are glad that Saddam Hussein will never talk. You know what I’m talking about — the people who lent a hand to this brutal tinhorn dictator, giving him means and encouragement, and in fact making him what he was. Saddam Hussein also dies for the sins of the US and its “coalition” partners in trashing Iraq and murdering hundreds of thousands of innocents. But don’t expect to hear about this from the US mainstream media, which subject us to a relentless stream of propaganda about how great it is that Saddam is gone, thanks to the US.

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

 

More Tax $$ Wasted

Gitmo will now have a $125 million court complex that will include guest rooms and restaurants, according to reports. This to try 80 of 400 prisoners in a kangaroo court. When will they release the other 320? And I wonder if any of the prisoners will get to eat in the restaurants.

Sunday, December 24, 2006

 

Missing Badges and Uniforms

According to this AP story, “More than 3,700 identification badges and uniform items have been reported lost or stolen from Transportation Security Administration employees since 2003.” Just imagine what could be done with those items, because it’s likely that at least some of their new owners are imagining, too.

But that’s not the real problem. Considering that the TSA is responsible for airport security, that’s a pretty egregious record. How could they be so sloppy? A Congress member says he will “propose legislation to fine TSA employees who lose their badges or uniforms,” but if airport security is really such a matter of life and death — as we have been led to believe — why weren’t strict rules and draconian punishments in place to begin with? Combine this with travelers’ accounts of incredibly slipshod security procedures and nitpicking, nonsensical challenges, and you have to wonder in what sense “security” is being used.

Saturday, December 23, 2006

 

European Energy

Or lack thereof. EU countries, especially Britain, had a bad year. In fact, Britain has seen the future and has already given up its energy sovereignty. And recall that the EU has taken a beating in energy negotiations with Russia. Can you spell “hypothermia”?

Meanwhile, Norway’s Statoil is cutting 95,000 bd production for “sound reservoir management.” You bet. Statoil said it would “seek to” make up for most of that by pumping more from other fields. But remember that seven major Norwegian oil fields peaked by 1995, and that as a whole Norwegian crude production has likely already peaked.

Friday, December 15, 2006

 

Should Bush Twins Volunteer for Combat Duty in Iraq?

Actor Matt Damon said in an interview that maybe Bush’s twin daughters should join the military and go to Iraq to fight. His point about many soldiers fighting because of their financial situations is well taken. Still, I for one don’t know how Jenna and Barbara Bush feel about their father’s illegal war and brutal policies. I’ll say this: If they are in agreement, then they should give serious consideration to enlisting in the military and volunteering for front-line combat duty. Some young chicken hawks agree with Bush’s policies, but have excuses for not signing up (“I can do more good here,” etc.). Don’t they think that people in favor of wars should help fight them?

Friday, December 08, 2006

 

9/11 Debunking: Intellectual Dishonesty, Faith, and Illogic

The classy left gatekeeper publication The Nation has just published another 9/11 debunking article, by Christopher Hayes. Despite the publication’s claim to be disseminating “unconventional wisdom,” this article is quite conventional in terms of debunking technique and the overarching belief that the system just needs some tweaking.

Hayes’ thesis is that although the 9/11 truth movement is wrong, the US media and the Bush administration itself are much to blame for the emergence of this grassy-knoll conspiracy theory.

The media are to blame for not being skeptical, and for reporting everything that Bush says verbatim, he says. So many of Bush’s claims and announcements turn out to be a crock of baloney that it’s no wonder the public doesn’t believe either the media or Bush. And the 9/11 Commission’s report has problems, he admits. Well, Hayes is definitely on to something here, and while I don’t know about Hayes himself, most of us with functioning brains saw through Bush’s lies from approximately the day after he was inaugurated. What surprises me most in this respect is that people like Hayes express disbelief about most or all of what Bush says except for 9/11. On the one issue of 9/11, they just believe Bush. This is what I call the “faith-based” or “Fox Mulder” mentality. “I want to believe.” For some reason these people want to believe Bush’s flimsy, contradiction-ridden, logic-challenged story. I say this because without that strong will to believe, Bush’s story simply cannot stand up to close scrutiny.

One wonders if Hayes has ever seen a White House press conference. Has any one of Bush’s press secretaries ever given a straight answer? Every answer is evasion, spin, distortion, or an outright lie. Or these Answer Men simply do not answer the question! Everything posted on the White House website is smarmy, insincere propaganda. And yet, on this one issue of 9/11, Hayes and the rest of the “I want to believe” crowd believe Bush. Truly, it is faith-based thinking that beggars belief. And this from people who claim to be journalists!

In all-too-predictable fashion, Hayes latches onto the physical evidence argument and attacks the video “Loose Change.” This is classic debunker technique: attack your opponent’s weakest point, but make no mention of facts and arguments that you cannot counter. To be honest, the 9/11 truth movement itself is much to blame here. Starting on the very day of the tragedy, Bush quickly set to work concealing and destroying the physical evidence. Crime scene cleanup began immediately, videos were quickly confiscated (how did law enforcement agents know immediately where all those videos would be?), and precautions were taken to keep evidence out of public view. As a consequence, there is virtually no physical evidence, and people who decide to take this route are reduced to arguing about simulations and melting points, and about photographs and poor-quality videos, whose provenance and chain of custody are in many cases unknown. A weakness of the 9/11 movement, therefore, is overemphasis on the physical evidence argument, which is a very easy target, instead of emphasizing the huge volume of known and verifiable facts which all point in the direction of US complicity in 9/11 (an excellent work in this respect is Michael C. Ruppert’s Crossing the Rubicon).

And although Hayes does not explicitly say so in this article, implicit here is the same logically flawed conclusion that other debunkers make. Namely, if they demonstrate that aircraft brought down the WTC towers, they demonstrate by extension that Bush’s 9/11 story is true. This is an absurd claim because even if they prove that planes brought down the towers, this proves only that planes brought down the towers. The other evidence — which is much better — still stands.

The breathtaking dishonesty of Hayes and his ilk lies in their constant barrage against this easy physical-evidence target, while ignoring the colossal volume of excellent circumstantial evidence against the Bush regime. In fact, in my own debates with debunkers, I have found that they actually refuse to address this evidence, claiming that it is not evidence! That is how desperate they are to ignore it.

Let’s consider just a few items. Take the timeline, for instance (David Ray Griffin’s analyses of timeline discrepancies are highly recommended). It never worked from the start, despite the 9/11 Commission’s efforts to tweak it into some sort of workable configuration. For about five years, honest people were pointing at this leaky story and asking questions. Then suddenly this year, the government gives it a major overhaul. Well, excuse me, but if the first, official, Commission-approved timeline was the truth, what is the need for a complete overhaul and major change in the story? Doesn’t Hayes think this is just slightly strange? Why, instead of writing a debunking article, didn’t he expend a little ink and brainwork on this problem? We know the answer: Close scrutiny of the timeline (any version) shows that Bush’s story can’t possibly be true. Their reaction is the same as that of religious authorities in the Middle Ages to the heliocentric theory. They just reject it out of hand because it conflicts with their faith.

The same goes for so much more evidence. Debunkers do not want to talk about the war games that diverted and paralyzed air defenses, and confused air traffic controllers. They don’t want to discuss insider trading, or the connections with oil, drugs, intelligence services, “homeland security” scams, the Israel lobby, the money trail, the network of elites who stood to profit, or a whole slew of other damning evidence. They just dismiss all of this out of hand, claiming it is not evidence.

To sum up, 9/11 debunking thrives on intellectual dishonesty, illogic, and a faith-based mindset. If the 9/11 truth movement wants to address this properly, it must get over its over-dependence on the highly speculative and theoretical physical evidence argument, and instead challenge debunkers with the vast body of known and verifiable facts that point to US complicity.

Thursday, December 07, 2006

 

It's about the Oil

It’s not about the oil, we were assured when the US illegally invaded Iraq, but now the Iraq Study Group has recommended privatizing Iraq’s national oil industry. What a surprise! Who would have expected them to do such a thing?

Tuesday, December 05, 2006

 

Down-Home Caring

Now, remember what I said a while ago about the Bush family being warm, caring, down-home people? Here is further testament to what I am saying. Truly, it warms the heart and calms the soul and brightens the day to know that the Bushes — one of the most caring families in the world — are out there putting their lives and fortunes on the line for us little people. Who says elites don’t care? And furthermore...

Sorry, I just can’t continue. I’m all choked up...

Monday, December 04, 2006

 

Preparing for Peak Oil

One of these days the excrement is going to hit the rotating airfoil, and will you be ready? A good place to start is to get a handle on the situation. Having a good idea of how society and the economy will change can help you plan for the future, and in that sense I highly recommend this comparative study of the US and USSR by Dmitry Orlov.

Friday, December 01, 2006

 

The China Model, Again

In a number of posts I have pointed out how the US government is trying to implement the China Model of a controlled society in the US. I’m not the only person to think so, as seen in this article on an apparent attempt to put the internet under tight control. Writes the author:
Deep sixing the entire Internet seems a highly unlikely move in that it would probably derail the world economy and put thousands of huge transnational corporations out of business. An outcome more likely to happen if this ruling is accepted is that it would further pave the way for government regulation and tracking of the Internet, namely "Internet 2," a completely controlled, surveilled and autocratic cyber police state similar to the Chinese model, whereby website owners have to obtain government permission to run a blog, be approved by a biometric thumb scan just to turn their computer on, and immediately get their Internet access shut off if they misbehave.
Watch for more attempts of various kinds to restrict freedom of speech and the free exchange of information.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?