The Power of Translation

How many times have you heard that famous quote attributed to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in which he is alleged to have threatened to “wipe Israel off the map”? Too many to count I bet. Well folks that’s how propaganda works. First you properly demonize the enemy in the minds of the cowering masses (he/they/it is a sponsor of terrorism, general hater of goodness, etc), then take his words and twist them into new meanings that further serve the objective of identifying him as an existential threat to survival and thus a legitimate target of attack in “self-defense”. There is a saying—coined by the Nazis over 70 years ago—that if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes “Truth”.

You are likely to be as fascinated as I was by the following revelations in an article from Anti-War.com about those famous words by Ahmadinejad and how they have managed, like Saddam’s WMD before them, to take on a life (and new meaning) of their own.

I Wonder Why They Hate Us So Much?

My apologies friends. This is really no way to conduct a dialog, I know. Two months without a word. Let me attempt an explanation. The demands of work and family have left me with very little in the tank for creative blogging of late and those few moments I have had in front the keyboard haven’t produced anything worthy of publishing. Frankly I was exhausted both physically and mentally, however, the time away has helped me to refocus and has rejuvenated my spirits.


Now that I‘ve gotten that out of the way, let’s turn to the purpose of this post courtesy of Dennis Perrin.



PS. I can't promise that there won't spells in the future where I don't post for a few day's or so but NEVER AGAIN will it be anywhere near 2 months!

Barockstar Dreams

Senator Barack Obama recently descended upon the University of Iowa campus in Iowa City on gilded wings before an audience of worshipful supporters, whereupon he thrilled the crowd with empty platitudes. One member of the crowd, however, was not so thrilled. Present among the multitude was one Paul Street, who long ago helped expose the Barockstar as a progressive poseur. Here now is his take on those proceedings.

When "Lib-Tards" Strike Back...

…The “He-Men” cry foul. It seems that the moderators over at the Second City Cop blog have their panties all tied up in knots over some responses I posted in the “Slapping A Lib-Tard” thread from 17 April 2007. They can dish it out but when it comes to taking it…well you know the rest. I’ve taken the liberty of reposting my censored responses as well as the SCC moderator’s final snit-fit wherein he justifies his decision to censor them.

Let’s first enjoy the SCC moderator’s penetrating “analysis” of my first response on the thread:


Ah, our favorite softball returns, spouting the tired liberal cliches:

coldtype said...SCC I haven't researched the matter thoroughly but I'm convinced that the above words are your most ridiculous to date.

and yet, you make the blanket accusation. how very typically liberal - no research, and yet an opinion. nice to see you haven't changed.

So your answer to the case of a single madman going on shooting spree on campus is to arm college freshmen. Listen, the days of the six-shooter on every hip are long over and shall never return--for good reason. Americans of the 19th century had the good sense to begin the process of disarmament after witnessing some of their communities dissolve into chaos and terror.

we didn't advocate arming freshmen - we advocated a sensible Concealed Carry policy as duly authorized by state law - if you qualify, you can carry. and actually, the days of the six shooter on the hip are retuning with a vengence. as of today, FORTY states have some form of concealed carry permitted within their boundaries. upwards of a dozen have reciprocal agreements that permit their qualified citizens to carry firearms across state lines. so not only are you way off base, you're completely wrong - again. and we'd really like to see which communities you describe as "dissolv[ing] into chaos." we can't find any. in fact, in most frontier towns, firearms were expected to be owned. all that Hollywood BS you see about the outlaws riding into town to shoot it up? never happened. most times homesteaders and townspeople were civil war vets who weren't about to take any shit from outlaws. so until you can come up with some actual historical evidence, we'll assume the rest of your argument is bullshit, too.

I didn't think it would be necessary to point this out here of all places but oh well: POLICING IS A STATE FUNCTION! We agree as members of a CIVILISATION to not presume to take the law into our own hands--which possession of a concealed weapon both implies and encourages.

and the state was where in this case? minutes away? hours? how long does it take to kill 30+ and wound another 20+? we enter into a social contract to abide by laws and rules. but what happens when the rules are disregarded? how long is the state allowed to respond? what is the acceptable threshhold of dead bodies for you liberals? the state failed, not only by not responding instantaneously, but by preventing citizens from defending themselves in an appropriate and legal manner.

Every citizen does not qualify as a police officer (for this is surely what you imply) and cannot be expected to possess the training and decision making skills that constitues a police officer.

BWAHAHAHAHA. find where we said everyone has to be a police officer. you are so full of shit you have to present an "argument" we never made. every citizen doesn't have to qualify as a police officer, just as a MARKSMAN - or at the bare minimum, a qualified user of a firearm. and what the hell decision has to be made in this case? to return fire or not? to protect the lives of fellow students, teachers and self or let everyone be slaughtered? you want to talk about ridiculous words? read your last paragraph - you are truly softer than baby shit.

The Virginia Tech tragidy was a random, isolated incident, something analogous to the crash of an airliner--not a pandemic. We don't seriously consider banning air travel when a plane goes down and, for the same reason, we shouldn't give way to the chimerial hysteria of the gun-nut lobby on those rare occasions when a madman with a gun makes himself known.

ah, but when an airliner goes down, there are hearings to determine where the error lies or cause of crash originated. in this case, VT officials declared the campus a gun free zone and in 2005, actually initiated disciplinary proceedings against a student who was authorized by the state to carry a weapon and did so on a state supported campus. so the obvious error in this case is that gun bans didn't work and the offender disregarded signs to that effect. as to your "isolated incident" argument, tornadoes are isolated incidents, yet we still have sirens, run drills and people build storm shelters. again we ask, what is the acceptable level of dead bodies for you when the state fails in its "duty" to the citizenry?

Stay safe.

we will - we're armed - all the time.


To which I responded…

Research complete. They WERE the most ridiculous words you’ve ever published, surpassing even your claim that the US never sought imperial possessions abroad (to which my response prompted the TLC Rule).

“you know what your problem is? You and your ilk are too willing to surrender your individual rights and liberties to the nanny state. you expect the state to solve all your problems. you fail to realize that the state is subservient to the citizen, not the other way around. we are the state. the state gains its power from the CONSENT of the governed. and we maintain that consent by remaining armed, plain and simple”-SCC (aka “The Wild Bunch”)

“Wow! Where do I begin with this classic? Really SCC, you’ve outdone yourselves. Let’s see…

You and your ilk are too willing to surrender your individual rights and liberties to the nanny state”-SCC

We are? I thought it was the Left leading the charge against Team Bush’s warrantless wiretaps of American citizens and the suspension of Habeas Corpus for “enemy combatants”? [You walked into that one and I just couldn’t resist]

“you fail to realize that the state is subservient to the citizen, not the other way around. we are the state. the state gains its power from the CONSENT of the governed.”-SCC

Could have fooled me. The last time I checked 70% of the citizens of this country wished to see US forces withdrawn from Iraq yet Congress just approved—with bipartisan support—a supplemental bill increasing funding for the Team Bush “surge” to the tune of 124 billion dollars. This amount by the way was MORE than Bush asked for. Furthermore, most Americans by an overwhelming margin would like to see our disastrously inefficient health care system overhauled and replaced by a socialized system more in line with that of Canada, Cuba, and many countries of Western Europe. Not likely to happen anytime soon, something about it being…”politically unfeasible”.

So it would appear that the so called “democracy deficit” (the disconnect between public policy and public opinion) in this country is as broad as ever. Our government most certainly operates with the consent of elites, but of THE PEOPLE I’m not so sure.

What was that? OOOOOH! You weren’t referring to issues of ACTUAL democracy, just the “crisis” facing gun nuts and their “right” to carry assault weapons! My bad.

“ah, but when an airliner goes down, there are hearings to determine where the error lies or cause of crash originated”-SCC

Thanks for stealing my line. Yes, airline disasters, tornadoes, and such are isolated incidents that require RATIONAL responses SCC, thus no one in a position of real influence will seriously consider the “insights” from the gun nut lobby when drafting a response to the Virginia Tech tragedy.

Stay safe.

I then followed up with a response to some of the other posters (we’ll call them minnows) on the thread who were mighty offended as well:

Now for the minnows…

“F*** Y*** Coldtype! I'm sure you would feel differently if it was one of your loved ones. Go change your name to Coldfuckface!” -4/17/2007 12:45:00 PM

No. My opinion wouldn’t change in the least. There is nothing that will convince me that we would be a safer society if MORE of us were armed. This is already the most violent society in the industrialized world. Sorry simple one, but more guns is not the answer. And I happen to like my name.

“This guy just shot up your school killing 32 innocent people and based on fuking ethics you won't realese his grades and journals, typical liberal bullshit” -4/17/2007 01:16:00 PM

Not “liberal bullshit”, just ethics and the right to privacy—the same ones that you and I enjoy (for now). So, for example, if you were to confide in a mental health professional you’d have every right to expect those conversations to be kept private. There are of course exceptions to these rules.

“Add a crazy Korean kook to this soup and you get spontaneous combustion” -4/17/2007 02:06:00 PM

Hmmm. I wonder what his race had to do with it. Perhaps Koreans have a proclivity for madness that I was unaware of.

“Instead of gun control issues, how about shutting down our borders completely. This goof moved to the U.S. in 1992 from South Korea. Now he is responsible for the biggest masacre in history!” -4/17/2007 02:10:00 PM

Ahhh! There’s the answer…xenophobia. Your last statement would no doubt come as a profound shock to Native Americans, European Jews, and the natives of East Timor.

“Another immigrant has fucked up this country” -4/17/2007 02:12:00 PM

No. That responsibility lies with a guy living at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave Washington, DC. I believe he’s from Texas.

“Because there are bad people in the world”-Murphy40pct

I know that Murph, and while the random nutjob with a gun is disturbing I’m far MORE concerned with the truly dangerous among us—in Washington—where the nuclear annihilation of millions of Iranian people who pose no threat to us is “on the table”.

“Hey Mr. Soft-As-Shit
Not every policeman qualifies as police material-just ask the family of Rondayle White” -4/17/2007 04:23:00 PM

Hi Dip-Shit. Demonstrate that you actually know something about the Rondayle White incident before you presume to comment upon it. That’s all folks.

Stay safe.

To these responses from me the SCC moderator huffed and puffed:


Sorry coldtype, but we aren't publishing your drivel today. You fail to address any of our arguments save the conclusion and take up too much space doing that. We addressed (and destroyed) your entire response piece by piece. We pointed out your specious claims and requested you back them with facts - you failed miserably and declined to cite even a single example to back your assertions. You insist on tying in your Bush Derangement Syndrome to every single post. You continue to attribute the argument that you want to defend to our posts rather than address the facts we actually present. Frankly, we're sick of it. And as you have no expectation of actually being published here, we're going to fulfill that expectation. You can go cry about censorship all you want and whine to the universe at large, but congratulations on being part of the 3% of comments that never make it to the site.
4/18/2007 01:33:00 AM

AWWWWWW!

Not Fit To Print

Recently, Edward S. Herman and David Peterson penned a brief essay outlining the latest UN resolution (essentially authored by the US) which denies Iran the means (thus the right) of defending itself from the depredations of aggressor nations, in this instance the US, UK, and Israel—not only the resolution’s chief sponsors but, paradoxically, the only nations that have launched attacks and maintain occupations in the Mid-East region. Not coincidentally, these three nations also threaten Iran with destruction.

What makes the Herman/Peterson essay remarkable, however, are not necessarily its contents which merely retraces some of the steps leading to the present “crisis”, but the peculiar reactions to it among newspaper editors across the nation. You see Herman and Peterson can’t seem to get it published anywhere in the mainstream.

Although they have submitted this piece to editors at all of the mainline newspapers for space on their op-ed pages, none to date have deemed it worthy of further dissemination. This circumstance is most curious given the fact that Herman and Peterson’s voices were among the most prescient detractors during the lead-up to the criminal assault on Iraq. This during a period, I remind you, when the corporate mainstream media served as a bullhorn for the Team Bush fabrications of the Iraqi “threat” to the US—indeed the world. One would think given the mainstream media’s appalling performance four years ago that it would leap at the opportunity to present the warnings of those who got it right back then, but such is not to be for it seems that some things are just not fit to print.

Hmmm. I'm thinking of a word...

Recently from ABC News International:

The U.S. Navy on Tuesday began its largest demonstration of force in the Persian Gulf since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, led by a pair of aircraft carriers and backed by warplanes flying simulated attack maneuvers off the coast of Iran.The maneuvers bring together two strike groups of U.S. warships and more than 100 U.S. warplanes to conduct simulated air warfare in the crowded Gulf shipping lanes.The U.S. exercises come just four days after Iran's capture of 15 British sailors and marines who Iran said had strayed into Iranian waters near the Gulf. Britain and the U.S. Navy have insisted the British sailors were operating in Iraqi waters.U.S. Navy Cmdr. Kevin Aandahl said the U.S. maneuvers were not organized in response to the capture of the British sailors nor were they meant to threaten the Islamic Republic, whose navy operates in the same waters.He declined to specify when the Navy planned the exercises.Aandahl said the U.S. warships would stay out of Iranian territorial waters, which extend 12 miles off the Iranian coast.Overall, the exercises involve more than 10,000 U.S. personnel on warships and aircraft making simulated attacks on enemy shipping with aircraft and ships, hunting enemy submarines and finding mines."What it should be seen as by Iran or anyone else is that it's for regional stability and security," Aandahl said. "These ships are just another demonstration of that. If there's a destabilizing effect, it's Iran's behavior."

* * * * *

Imagine if you will, the naval foces of a foreign power conducting exercises 13 miles off the eastern coast of the United States which incompassed 2 carrier battle groups. Imagine further that the foreign power in question has, for the past four years, invaded and occupied Canada. In response to American protests regarding the provocative nature of these latest actions a spokesman for the foreign power responds that:

“What it should be seen as by the US or anyone else is that it’s for regional stability and security. These ships are just another demonstration of that. If there’s a destablilizing effect, it’s America’s behaviour”. The spokesman concludes his comments with a warning that continued US support for the Canadian “insurgents” may invite harsh reprisals in the near future.

Oh yes!…Chutzpah.

Ying & Yang

Before and after. Truth and deceit. Actions and consequences. It’s funny how most things in the universe follow the expected flow of nature. For example, if I stub my toe on something immovable I can be reasonably assured that pain will shortly follow. Likewise, it would not be of particular note if, as a result of my consistently not going to work, I were fired from my job. Or, even better, were it demonstrated that I was chronically incompetent in my duties at work one would reasonably expect my employer to seek my separation. In other words, certain actions (or inactions) have expected consequences.

What if I were to tell you, however, that I have found an example of the opposite being true? Would you believe that there is a realm where incompetence and venality are rewarded with wealth and praise? The world of political punditry is just such a place gentle reader. Jebediah Reed of Radar Online.com has just chronicled the divergent fortunes of eight political commentators—four who accurately predicted the consequences of America’s illegal invasion of Iraq four years ago, and four who sang its praises to the tune of riotous applause. Behold “The Iraq Gamble” and learn, as I have, that pigs do fly.

To Surge Or Not To Surge

A few days ago an essay appeared on TomDispatch.com that was penned by Anthony Arnove, a terrific historian, in which he lays out a compelling case for immediate American withdrawal from Iraq. Arnove’s essay summarizes themes he explores in greater detail in his indispensable book, Iraq: The Logic of Withdrawal, which I highly recommend. A critical element of Arnove's analysis is his juxtaposition of the crisis in Darfur and our collective interpretation of the disaster there, and the continuing carnage in Iraq in which our government plays a direct hand. Read on.

Scott Ritter, Vindicated

I ran across this conversation between the vilified former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter and Robert Scheer of Truth Dig today and thought I’d share it with you. I think you’ll find it rather fascinating.

Corporate Media: the Playthings of Power

Rarely are we afforded the opportunity to see cataloged in all of its craven glory the appalling performance of the corporate media during the lead up to the US/UK (USuk) assault on Iraq. Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) has just completed a devastating revue of the mainstream media’s reporting in the months leading up to, during, and immediately following the USuk invasion. FAIR covers reporting during the critical period from 1 September 2002 thru 31 May 2003, a time when most Americans were skeptical of the Team Bush rationale for war without UN sanction, yet still vulnerable to the (false) implications of a Saddam/Al Qaeda link peddled to media lapdogs by senior Bush officials.

At just the time when the American public (to say nothing of soon-to-be-slaughtered Iraqis) needed the Fourth Estate to subject the Team Bush assertions (WMD, Iraqi connivance in the 9/11 attacks) to critical analysis, the highly credulous media uncritically reported the justifications for war from official sources—with the near total exclusion of articulate anti-war voices. In short, what the public needed were actual journalists, however, what it got instead were stenographers.

Blum Musings

It’s always with great anticipation that I open an e-mail from William Blum. Without fail his insights manage to lift my spirits and infuse me with renewed energy with which to forge ahead, serving not only to inform but inspire as well. So, without further ado, I present Blum’s latest Anti-Empire Report.

The Red Son Strikes Again

Its been far too long since I last posted work from Dennis Perrin of the The Red State Son blog. This latest bit of satire on leading Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton is priceless.

War Drums

Suddenly it seems like fall/spring 2002/03 all over again. The Bush administration and its stenographers in the MSM are at it again--this time of course with a new target, a new "threat" to our very exsistence. Media pundits are falling all over themselves to see who can top the other in reporting--with out challenge--the assertions of Bush officials regarding the fictional threats Iran poses to this country and the world.

I should be used to this routine by now but no matter how often I'm exposed to the spectacle of Team Bush lies and distortions dutifully reported in the MSM as "news" I am still shocked and amazed at the sheer chutzpah required of our leaders and media elites to think it possible to pull this one over on us yet again. Read the latest from Phyllis Bennis on Team Bush's manufactured "crisis" with Iran and see if you too don't feel a sense of dejavu.

Brother Can You Spare a Dime?

We've covered this ground before but it's always important to return to this theme from time to time. I recently came across an essay by one of my favorite social commentators, Michael Parenti. In this article Parenti explores some of the back ground factors driving the persistent misery throughout the global South and how the First World nations contribute to that condition. Read on.

I know its been quite a while since my last post but unfortunately circumstances beyond my control have conspired to rob me of what little time I have for some of the research that goes into this blog. Things are now settling down somewhat so you can expect more frequent posts in the future. Stay safe.

The Cowards Are Comming!

While I’m not at all optimistic, I’m still fascinated by the Democrats who now control both houses of Congress. Despite the fact that for the first time in over a decade they have within their power the ability to control the agenda, Democrats remain curiously sluggish about opening detailed investigations into the justifications for and conduct of the assault on Iraq. Oh certainly, some have drafted non-binding resolutions that do little more than tell Bush that he’s been a very bad boy, but nothing with actual teeth that would halt the slaughter and perhaps lead down the path to impeachment has appeared on the radar.

It makes me wonder how Democrats interpreted the results of the mid-term elections. Did they take from that experience somehow that the public was at ease with the FACT of the war in Iraq just not its execution? That’s the only explanation that I dare voice for their steadfast refusal to actively investigate the Bush administration. Try as I might, however, I cannot escape the knowledge that many of these same actors on the Democratic side of the isle were complicit in the Team Bush decisions during the run-up to war. Furthermore, it doesn’t stretch credibility to assume that the Democrats simply don’t care what the public desires given the long history of bipartisan support for policies that directly contradict the public will.

Recently at TomDispatch.com the work of two ACTUAL journalists (as opposed to the stenographers to which we are accustomed in the MSM) is presented, which lays out the clearest case I’ve yet seen for opening congressional investigations into the conduct of the Bush administration. Read this piece by David Swanson and Jonathan Schwarz and then ask yourselves if these Democrats serve the republic.

Nemesis Rising

Just a short post today. I feel this is a good time to introduce the work of one of America's most important scholars. Chalmers Johnson is a retired professor of Asian Studies at the University of California San Diego, and served from 1968 to 1972 as a consultant to the Office of National Estimates of the CIA.

Dr. Johnson has just completed the third work of his trilogy on American Empire which began in 2000 with Blowback, followed shortly by The Sorrows of Empire. His latest book, Nemesis: Last Days of the American Empire, gets a preview at TomDispatch.com. So without further ado...

Firm Opposition

Looks like things are pretty much working out the way I figured they would now that the Democrats are in charge. I can detect no perceptible reduction in speed as our country hurdles towards the cliff. I still find myself in conversation with people gushing over the new congress and how the Dems are going to put a stop to the maddness in Iraq--all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. Now I just smile and nod.

Dennis Perrin over at the Red State Son blog posts on this unwarranted enthusiasm among progressives in his critique of Virginia Democratic Senate nominee James Webb's speech last night and, depressingly, the fawning reaction to it.

To The Victor Go The Spoils

Recently over at the Second City Cop blog I found myself in the midst of a flame war over, you guessed it, the Team Bush war crimes in Iraq. In this instance the point of contention was whether or not the US occupation of Iraq is imperial in nature. Remarkably there are still at this late stage people who cling to belief that US designs on Iraq were not exploitative from the outset. No evidence appears strong enough to convince these die-hards otherwise.

I know it's useless presenting yet more evidence but I'll make the effort anyway. The following article was written by Antonia Juhasz, visiting scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies and chronicles the clear planning and foresight that went into the Team Bush decision to invade Iraq. Juhasz's investigation reveals that the popular perception of the Bush adminstration having occupied Iraq without a plausible plan for success is quite mistaken. Many of the neo-con wet-dreams are rapidly nearing fruition in the region. For example, the Middle East Free Trade Agreement is on fast track and, far more ominously, the Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) that allows for the virtual theft of Iraq's critical oil resources is firmly in place. I trust you will find The Spoils of War a fascinating read.

Barockstar

So it has officially begun. Soon everywhere you turn Barackomania will overwhelm your senses. Any day now "liberals" will swear that Senator and now presidential candidate Barack Obama has a secret cure for cancer.

Our disfunctional republic has long embraced the useful fiction of a two party political system. Completely ignored by those who adhere to this belief is the voluminous record of bipartisan support for the most reactionary, corporate-friendly policies of this and previous administrations from welfare "reform" to "free-trade" agreements to our current depredations in Iraq. As I've stated here and elsewhere, there is no difference between the Democratic and Republican parties on fundimental issues. Check the record.

Obama is but the latest in a long line of hustlers distracting the public from the fact that neither party remotely supports its positions on critical issues, as polls have long revealed. A quick perusal of the polling links on this site will make this plain.

Paul Street has a proud record of pointing this stuff out as he did late last year when the first rumblings of an Obama run for the White House began. In his latest post, Street revisits this theme with some added comments on mainstream liberals in general. Read on.

The Corporate Welfare Chronicles

Today's installment of the Corporate Welfare Chronicles features the latest outrage from "our" elected public servants in service to Big Oil. What's most frustrating about this Public Citizen report is that many of the members of Congress voting Big Oil its most recent sweetheart deal are lame-ducks--they have already been voted out of office and are serving out what remains of their terms (they end in January). Loyal to fault, however, to their true constituents these bought and paid for corporate shills ensure that the fat-cats of Big Oil will encounter no impediments to their record-breaking profit margins in the near future.