Archive for December 2008
Cheney Admits to War Crime, Now What?
Dick Cheney
During his interview with ABC last week, Dick Cheney made some interesting comments and confessions. When asked about the interrogation methods used against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, which involved waterboarding, Cheney admitted to knowing about them, supporting them, and, “helping to get the process cleared.” The United States is very familiar with waterboarding, and has treated it as a war crime historically. So what now is going to happen to Cheney? Under the Anti-Torture Statute of the United States , Cheney has admitted to a felony and should very well be indicted.
Michael Ratner, the president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, believes Cheney is actually snooping for a presidential pardon. Go here to listen to his interview with the Real News. He believes Cheney could be afraid of getting prosecuted for his atrocious acts, and feels he would get along better with a pardon under his hat. Therefore, his admission was an act to put the pressure on Bush to pardon his vice president during his last days in office.
Will there be enough outrage to provoke somebody to prosecute our leaders when they break the law? I don’t believe Obama will have the guts to do it. He has been more than sketchy in matters dealing with political retribution. Perhaps he would be happy to have a spineless judicial system when he takes office and decides to break the law himself.
Aid for General Motors and Chrysler
You have likely heard that the auto-industry is sharing the struggle that has become the American economy. If you were crossing your fingers hoping that “big-brother” would step in and save the day, your wish has been granted. The United States Government has promised 17.4 Billion dollars to General Motors and Chrysler to help them get through these troubling times. George W. Bush stated,
“My economic advisers believe that such a collapse [speaking of a case in which GM or Chrysler were to go Bankrupt] would deal an unacceptably painful blow to the hard-working Americans far beyond the auto-industry.”
Thank goodness for the razor-sharp intuition of President Bush’s economic advisers. Bush added,
“…And it would leave the next president to confront the demise of a major American industry in his first days in office.”
Did Chrysler not receive help to “avoid-bankruptcy” in 1979? Clearly this “avoiding-bankruptcy” help is not doing its job. One might even venture to say that it is counter-productive. By ensuring the financial security of these businesses, the government:
A) allows the businesses to continue operating, despite the clear signs that they should not, in an inefficient manner, which is wasteful of resources and labor and yields inferior products.
B) indicates to these and any other business that are regarded as cornerstones of the American economy that the government will not allow them to face the consequences of their actions.
In 1979, Chrysler “needed” their loans guaranteed to avoid bankruptcy, and here, not 30 years later, they need help again. How did guaranteeing Chrysler’s loans improve their condition at all? Furthermore how do the American people benefit from keeping a suffering business running? Since they would likely continue running as a suffering business, why not allow the economy to purge itself of this clearly inadequate business and allow for the growth of a wiser, more forward-thinking one to take place? Peter Schiff suggested Sunday, on “Your $$$$$” (a program on CNN), that bancruptcy was precisely what needed to occur in the cases of both Chrysler and General Motors. Clearly Mr. Schiff understands that these financial short-comings within businesses occur for a very good reason. General Motors and Chrysler have clearly not conducted their businesses in such a way that they might maintain a more competitive position in the vehicle market. Of course General Motors and Chrysler are suffering while Toyota enjoys the spoils of being a superior business (note: Toyota’s recent declaration of its first loss in over 70 years has more to do with Japanese economics than the American car market, in which Toyota is flourishing). In the capitalistic spirit, consumers should reward businesses that have the interests of the CONSUMERS in mind. Most of the time because of price and practicality this trend occurs naturally; it certainly is occurring in the case of these auto-manufacturers, and their sudden financial misfortune makes a good deal of sense with this idea in mind. Of course, in the past, some Americans have suffered a fixation on buying “American” cars, but the more American car-makers do poor business, the more this trend will disappear, as it clearly has over the past few years.
Concerned about jobs? Well thanks to their recent increase in success in the United States, Toyota has begun building more factories in the United States. Those factories will need man-power. The American working class stands to benefit greatly by the growth of companies like Toyota. The continuing of businesses like General Motors and Chrysler promotes future instability and uncertainty and serves as an obstacle to more efficient companies who seek to deal in an American market. Bankruptcy IS exactly what these car manufacturers need. People seem to believe that were America to be without any of the “Big 3″ Auto-manufacturers it would be in some sort of worse shape than it is already in. Fortunately, that is far from the case. The downfall of General Motors, Chrysler, and/or Ford would be a disappointing event to be sure, but (to quote President Bush) “Americans have got to understand” that this country is not dependent upon those auto-manufacturers for jobs or economic stability.
By the way, one of the conditions of the money being provided to Chrysler and GM is that they will be required, by March 1, 2009, to submit a report proving that they will survive, and if they cannot they must re-pay the money they are being given. I will not insult the intelligence of the reader by explaining how absolutely ridiculous a statement like that is, but I would like to point out that the intelligence of Americans is being insulted by the mere suggestion that a condition like this justifies a 17.4 billion dollar hand-out to ensure the safety of businesses that we are expected to believe that we cannot prosper without.
A brief suggestion: this government, supposedly founded for YOU and by YOU has no business spending money that it has supposedly for YOUR benefit on expensive foolishness like this. Do not be fooled into believing that this country needs GM or Chrysler; it does not. Do not believe that Americans will suddenly be without jobs if either go out of business; Americans will have far more jobs available if all of the companies that function in America are flourishing and growing instead of struggling. The answer is not more intervention; the answer is less.
Begin the Militarization of America
It was only a matter of time before our government started sending out the marines in order to keep us under control. This holiday season, in direct violation of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, the military will be manning sobriety stations in San Bernardino County in California.
Militarization Engage
Is this just a first phase of a total militarization of the United States? Is our government perhaps getting nervous that its people will very soon stop being so friendly and actually get fed up with the horrible performance of its leaders?
DUI Blog reported:
A follow-up call to a Marine Corps public affairs sergeant resulted inassurances that the Marines would be there “as observers”.
I wonder what they will be observing for? If they wanted to just observe drunk drivers, must they do it in uniform? Oh wait, doesn’t action usually come after observation? This seems like a good way for them to get some experience on keeping us citizens in line so as to not upset the higher ups.
Orwellian Doublethink from the White House
In his classic science fiction novel 1984, George Orwell warns his readers of the psychological propaganda schemes exploited by totalitarian governments. Essentially, these tactics are efforts to control public opinion with deceitful language. The George W. Bush Administration is notorious for its use of such propaganda, some instances being more obvious than others. Consider Bush’s rhetoric in the early days of the “War on Terror” (and the idea of a war against terrorism in the first place), and you may recall such statements as: “Either you’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists,” or, shortly before the invasion of Iraq, “Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof—the smoking gun—that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.”
The propaganda continues into the final weeks of the Bush Administration. Bush seems to have learned his tactics of deception from Orwell himself, who explained the concept of doublethink:
“Doublethink is an unending series of victories over your own memory, reality control; to know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constricted lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancel out, knowing them to be completely contradictory, and believing in both of them; to use logic against logic to repudiate morality while laying claim to it.”
This week’s example of doublethink concerns the executive bailout of the auto industry, for which Bush explains: “I’ve abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system.” Two completely contradictory statements wrapped into one. Logic does not permit the coexistence of these facts any more than, say, crashing one’s car into a wall to maintain its prime condition. These rhetorical contradictions stink of propaganda at the highest level of American politics. The noxious odor dissipating from Pennsylvania Avenue is nothing new; media soundwaves have carried it eastward for eight years. But it’s become evident that the source of this stench is a rotting rule of law, infested with maggots whose survival depends upon perpetual death and rancid bullshit.
Don’t let yourself be deceived. Propaganda falters upon its recognition. Deceitful intentions must be recognized before they can be rejected.
-Dan Blazo
Source: thinkprogress.org
Elliot Wave Theory of Economics
In an interview with Scott Horton on Anti-War Radio, Robert Prechter described a very interesting economic and financial theory known as Elliot Wave Theory. This theory is a complicated one, but at its root it states that market swings result from the expansion and contraction of human emotional states. When social moods are up, bull markets tend to result. When social moods are down, bear markets tend to result. This is sort of, as Scott Horton describes in the podcast, a, “Which came first, the chicken or the egg,” type situation. This theory argues that people are not in worse emotional states due to recessions, but recessions are caused due to the worsening emotional states.
If you are in conflict with this because you believe it negates the fact that the Fed has been the major cause of the problems, don’t be. This theory, as described by Prechter, actually fits very well with the freedom movement’s distrust of the Federal Reserve. I recommend listening to the podcast as Prechter does a great job of blending Elliot Wave Theory with Austrian Economics.
In the podcast, Prechter expands on the Elliot Wave Theory to help predict other events. He states that our own revolution can be explained by this theory. It took years of worsening conditions before the colonists were able to start a revolution and grow a radical idea of liberty to popularity. Yet, when the low was reached, the mindsets of the colonists were ripe to accept a change from the old ways. From there the ideas of libety were spread, and our Constitution was eventually created.
He describes Ron Paul’s run for president as well. He says that the mood was not yet right for Dr. Paul’s ideas to win him the presidency. Yet, he believes that we have entered into a mood swing of negative emotion, which is only going to worsen. Once we hit the bottom of this contraction, the country will be ripe for a change in direction. This is good news for those wanting a shift away from the ways of central banking, creeping socialism, and war. Perhaps the libertarian’s (mindset) day will come in the future. We should make sure we are there to save our country from the hands of tyranny.
Ole Miss YAL Meet Congressman Ron Paul at Houston “End the Fed” Rally
Nine members of Ole Miss YAL attended the “End the Fed” Rally in Houston, Texas last Saturday to voice their opposition of the unconstitutional Federal Reserve. Dr. Ron Paul was the featured speaker of the event. Each group member who attended the rally was able to hug or shake hands with their favorite Congressman.
Without Ron Paul there would be no UM Constitutionalists; our close group of friends would remain isolated from one another, a distant group of strangers. Ron Paul’s tireless devotion to peace and freedom has inspired us to unite our efforts in the struggle against unjust government. We will continue to fight for the principles that unified our group and motivated our efforts of political activism. We will continue to inspire others the way Dr. Paul inspired each of us. We are eternally grateful for Dr. Paul’s guidance and inspiration.
Pictures from the rally are below:
Dr. Paul speaking at the Rally
