Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

Monday, November 29, 2010

The Casualties -- "War is Business"



War Is Business

No time to run, permission to go, times running in,
with troops, and bombs, and guns.
From the left and right, people are fighting,
screaming, shooting, fighting, hanging from the ground.

One, two, call the death squad.
War is business, war is business.

Arrogate, fall out, stand in line.

Why do our lives have to go with indecisions,
we have permission to take, to decide, to fight!
More and more fighting its making me sick.
We fought with them, the rich don't have to fight.

One two call the death squad,
War is business, war is business.

Death squad, collision, finish this.

As long as we are here you wont need to worry,
just close your eyes, decide, think on your own.
Can you hear bodies their fucking dead in the streets,
just close your eyes, and you will think and see.

One two call the death squad,
War is business, war is business.

Arrogate, fall out, stand in line

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Bankrun 2010

Read more about the Bankrun -- aka "Break the Bank Day" (FB-group page) aka "Anti-banking Solidarity Movement" -- planned for December 7th, 2010.

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Michelle Obama says Barak's Home Country is Kenya

Did I hear correctly? Barak Obamma's home country is Kenya?!




Did she mean his "ancestral home country," or did she actually mean his home country?

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Some Thoughts on the State of the US

If you are an American and do not wish to get depressed, I suggest you skip this part. However, if you are an American, this might be just the part for you to read.

Like in my previous letter I’m not going to talk in detail about what’s happening in the United States. What I’ve learned from previously letters is that, as many people before me have found out for themselves, the bearer of bad news is seldom liked. People, especially Americans, feel offended by the things I mention, thinking that my critique is somehow aimed at them; I guess by proxy of being American. Let me reiterate that my “critique,” if one is really to call it that, is intended as observations, and where applicable as warnings. I’m merely noticing things that I find significant and mention them.

If there is one recent incident that should send shivers down the spine of every American citizen then it is the G20 meeting that was held in Pittsburg in September. Unfortunately few Americans actually know what happened there, since the media did a very good job of under reporting the peripheral events occurring outside the meeting. The mainstream media did not reveal the truth of how ordinary citizens (i.e. non-protesters) were attacked, both physically and with military weapons, including rubber bullets, teargas and experimental sonic weapons. It is clear from this event that the mainstream media in America is actually suppressing news and that free press is a rarity these days. I serious advice people to stop following the pre-packaged news agencies like CNN and start listening to independent news agencies, such as Democracy Now: The War and News Report, or other similar news agencies. Or if you can speak another language, listen to American news as covered by non-American broadcasters. Germany, for one, seems to present clearer description of big newsworthy events (i.e., not Michael Jackson or Britney Spears) in the USA. I’ve also seen some good stuff on Russia Today.

Most Americans do not know this but much the anti-protest police used in Pittsburg during the G20 meeting was made up of foreign military forces, and police forces from outside of Pittsburg. This is terrifying in itself, but also makes good sense – you don’t want the militia you’re using to feel sentimental about the people they are oppressing, do you?

People were arrested for using Twitter, warning fellow citizens in Pittsburg to stay clear of certain areas. Twitter, if you don’t know, is an Internet based text-messaging system that allows one to send simultaneous messages to everyone that is registered to your account. Well, people used their Twitter-accounts to warn other people to avoid certain areas where this anti-riot police, or rather militia, was at. (And for good reason, the militia were harassing innocent civilians, beating them, shooting them with rubber bullets, or sonic devices, or teargas – I’d be quite thankful if someone forewarned me to avoid such danger zones.) For this, some of these Twitter-users were thrown in jail, and / or raided by the FBI, for, (get this!) interfering with police activities. What does this say about the future of freedom of speech in America?

The ironic thing is that the USA condemned Iran’s oppression of Twitter-users just a couple of months earlier when Iranian freedom of speech activists used Twitter as a networking tool. Now, in America users of Twitter are raided, treated as terrorists and thrown in jail.

During the Pittsburg event members of the press was detained, and the main news media broadcasters were quiet. Or if they covered the event it showed a skewed reality. Thank goodness that, for now, the Internet is still an open resource. Many students from the University of Pittsburg recorded some of the events on their cell phones and uploaded it onto YouTube. You can easily search for it. But how long will the Internet stay open? There are already movements towards muzzling it – think of the Cyber Bullying Act which is one step in the wrong direction, no matter how well intended.

Should I mention how children in some American schools are taught songs of praise to glorify the President? Really, this is seriously disconcerting. I don’t have anything personally against Mr. Obama, how could I? I’m not American. But this reconfirms a grave trend I’ve noticed even before his election – a type of worship similar to little North Korean children singing praises to the Great Leader. And while such Obama-worship is happening on the one side of the spectrum, a colleague told me that she heard how people are having bets on the date the First Lady of America will become a widow; and I also heard of a poll that was on Facebook asking whether or not the president should be assassinated. So while the Obama-mania is still sweeping one segment of America, there seems to be a counter-wave as well. And in between are the normal folk, who will become caught in the crossfire.

Did you know that a private company, with the convenient title of “American Police Force” is buying up prisons to be privately owned. With private companies having names such as “American Police Force,” and foreign militia running the streets pretending to be local police or military, how is one to know who is friend and who is foe, who is protector and who is predator? And I just recently heard that some of these privately owned jails bribed judges to get more prisoners. So much for a fare trial!

And let met not even begin talking about the Swine Flu and the recent declaration of a “national emergency.” Sweden was the first country to start swine flu vaccinations and it is also the first to report deaths related to the injection. The fact that a “national emergency” was declared, which basically give authorities the power to forcefully quarantine and vaccinate people against their will, seems not to make the headlines at all. The fact that there are carcinogens and mercury in some of the vaccinations doesn’t seem much of a media headline either – in fact, some of the media reports actually lie about the vaccine ingredients. I wonder how much the pharmaceutical companies have invested in these media broadcasters. The swine flu is not fake (although some do think it artificial), and I would not be surprised if it was engineered by these pharmaceutical companies who made millions selling vaccines to governments.

Want to hear more? How about the FBI’s application to renew three Patriot Act spying provisions, without them having to reveal their conduct (aka “gag power”). Melissa Goodman, the ACLU Staff Attorney explains that the “gag power has allowed the FBI to manipulate the debate, to suppress evidence of its misuse of the NSL power, and to deprive Congress and the public of important information it needs to inform whether these intrusive surveillance and gag powers should be reformed.” It was announced that the Supreme Court will review, at least parts of, the controversial Patriot Act, to ascertain it constitutionality – but one has to wonder about their “creative interpretations” sometimes.

The Dollar keeps dropping in value (which is no surprise as more money is continually printed—“stimulus”—without any physical backing like gold). Latin American countries have announced a new Latin American Currency to replace dependency on the Dollar. The BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) are in negotiations to find an alternative currency than the US Dollar to trade in.

And the United States is increasing its three foreign wars (Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan), with the current Administration considered sending more and more young soldiers; many of them to die in wars based on lies: “Weapons of Mass Destruction.” Does the US Administration really think that it is making America a safer place by increasing its oppression of these countries? Rather, it is fuelling emotions of revenge which is bound to increase terrorists’ attacks and one would not be surprised to see more of that in the future.

Surely seeing such trends one must be concerned for the future of the country? And I am especially concerned for the future of all my American friends and acquaintances. I’m not sharing these things because I take pleasure out of pointing the issues in America; rather, I’m sharing it because I am seriously troubled by it.

Imagine if America took all those billions of dollars it is pumping into these wars, and instead of using it to destroy “and keep order,” the money is used to build up, provide food, schools, hospitals, homes…

There is a story in the Bible where Syria came to destroy Israel, but through miraculous events Israel got the upper hand. The king of Israel asked council from the prophet Elisha: “My father, shall I smite them?” Elisha gave a surprising answer: “Thou shalt not smite them: wouldest thou smite those whom thou hast taken captive with thy sword and with thy bow? Set bread and water before them, that they may eat and drink, and [let them] go to their master.” The king listened and “he prepared great provision for them: and when they had eaten and drunk, he sent them away, and they went to their master. So the bands of Syria came no more into the land of Israel.” (You can read the story in II Kings 6.) This is how you make peace with your enemy.

The principle in this story was mentioned before by the Sage-King Solomon: “If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink…” (Proverbs 25:21). Centuries later the Messiah came to make this principle clearest, by saying “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you…” (Matthew 5:43).

If it was possible for the US government to take such an approach to their enemies they would make friends of them, and will then need little fear of terrorist attacks. Of course, this will not happen. The way of the Kingdom of God, i.e. the Way of Unconditional Love and Peace and “good will toward men,” is not the way of earthly governments—American or any other government; after all, Jesus did say that his “kingdom is not of this world.”

Making friends of its enemies is not the agenda of the USA. America’s culture of violence has it conditioned into believing that conquering is the way. It may be a way, but it is definitely not the way to long lasting peace. Instead it creates enemies intend on revenge. Do not be fooled; America’s wars are far from over and President Obama’s campaign promises were at best wishful thinking. While American tactics involve drone planes blasting away civilians, who can expect peace?

I said that I’d not go into detail concerning America. I didn’t. The few points I’ve mentioned I hardly discussed, and these were merely a blip of the things that happened over the last two months.

Friday, September 18, 2009

The Political Power of Iconography

In the video below the powerful influence of icons and branding is discussed within the context of politics, specifically American politics. As someone who was once a graphic designer (and who have designed my share of logos) and also an avid believer in the need visual literacy in the times we live, I found this an excellent analysis well worth watching.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Jailed for What You're Gonna Do

A couple of months old, but still relevant.



The fact that Rachel Maddow should take such a strong position against President Obama should in itself be something of note. She is considered one of the most liberal radio personalities in America.

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Some ponderings...

I have been quite negative the last couple of weeks and months. Most of it relates to the state of the world and how I see people’s liberties taken away without them even flinching, with how I see economies being manipulated and money “legally” stolen by governments and corporate powers working together, with manipulating people’s fears to get them submissive and obeying, with governments “fixing” the economic problems by printing more money and so devaluing the system even further, with political two-faced tactics where the front man says one thing, but the administration another.

But I’m gaining hope. In a letter to my friends I wrote sometime back that one of the only ways to get out of this depression is if something wonderful is discovered, like a cheap alternative energy source. A friend recently sent me a link to current experiments happening in this area. This is wonderful, and if it is not squashed by the oil syndicates, then the world can change dramatically for the better.

The other thing that is giving me hope is the amount of protests worldwide. More and more people are standing up to their governments and making themselves heard. The powers-that-be will try and fear monger the masses into submission with anything from military involvement to swine flu epidemics. If the people can rise above such fear-terrorism employed by their governments, then I have a little more hope for the world.

Good luck everyone. It’s gonna be a bumpy ride ahead.

Monday, August 10, 2009

Why so serious?


The Obama-Joker poster has gone viral and is popping up all over the U.S.A, partially due to a $1000 competition run by InfoWars.Com, and partly because of anti-socialists. And probably because the image is a meme, and it carries strong memetic (propagating) qualities, much like a catchy tune that you can't get out of your head, even though you don't necessarily like it.

The point made on the CNN-clip below is a valid one: the Joker-character from Batman: The Dark Knight on which this poster is based is an anarchist, which probably contradicts Obama’s supposed socialist goals. Personally I don’t think America is really heading for Socialism (just yet). Instead, I’m convinced it is heading for Fascism (the merging of state and corporate powers), if it isn’t a fledgling little Fascist state already.

Sunday, July 12, 2009

Critiquing America

Every month I write a lengthy letter that I send to family and friends. After my previous letter a very good (American) friend of mine emailed me, admitting that she took offence to my negative opinions of America and how the current government is addressing the economic problems.

Lest I offend any more people, I would like to say here publically, as I replied to my friend in private, that my comments on America are not critique, as much as it is vocalized observation. In other words, my purpose is not to criticize America in these letters. (For that I have this blog ;-) .) It is primarily to note the symptoms, ponder on the causes, and extrapolate possible future results.

Let me give you an example. When Zimbabwe started to feel an economic hardship they started to print extra money. This money was not based on anything real, like gold. Such printing of unsubstantiated money created inflation (i.e. you needed more money to pay for things), and the government tried to “solve” this problem by printing even more money. Again, since the money was not substantiated by something real its value decreased. A cursory look at Zimbabwe’s complete depreciation in currency is a glimpse into what will happen to the American Dollar if America continues to print more money. I’d like to mention two other observations that are underscoring the issue with this continued printing of unsubstantiated money in America. The first is the Chancellor of Germany’s critique of America’s economic plan. From experience, Germany knows all too well the type of reality where you need a wheelbarrow load of money to buy bread. The second is China, Russia, Brazil and India’s discussion of abandoning the US Dollar as the trade currency of choice. If these countries have lost faith in the American Dollar, it should say something – keeping in mind that these countries are some of the biggest exporters in the world.

My friend asked me a very serious and probably fair question: “What would YOU do instead of what is being done with the banks?” Firstly, let me not pretend to have the solutions to this problem. As I said in a previous letter, this problem is too big for any one person (i.e. Obama or any president and his cabinet) to fix. One thing I would not do is to continue to print valueless money. Printing unsubstantiated money is not solving the problem. It is merely prolonging the inevitable, and by doing so it is increasing the seriousness of the collapse when it occurs. Obama’s recent proposal to give the Federal Reserve Bank more power is another thing I would not do. The US’s Federal Reserve Bank is not “federal”, it is a private company. As I heard one guy say, the Federal Reserve Bank is as “federal” as Federal Express. Part of the mess the US is in, is because companies have gotten too much power over government. Increasing their power will increase the problem.

Also, I don’t think bailing out the these “too big to fail” companies will solve the problem, and here is why: The premise is that by helping these companies the money pumped into them will tinkle down from top-to-bottom until the common man at grassroots level benefits. This is mostly not the case. The money dumped into these companies will mostly be used to pay off the debt (often abroad). In other words, the money will not somehow soak down to the average citizen that needs it the most; instead, the money will go out of America, or save the butts of the rich elite whom have their own savings, yachts, holiday houses in tropical countries and European sports cars.

What would I do instead? Personally I would distrust these major companies, and if need be let them fail.
What I would do with all these billions of dollars in bailout money is invest from the bottom up. I’d invest in emergency projects, encourage entrepreneurial businesses, improved education, build up the infrastructure and not cut infrastructural budgets (like that of the education system, police, etc.). The basic difference between what is being done, and what I think ought to be done can best be described by an analogy of a very sick person. Currently the sick person’s symptoms are being treated. I propose that the person’s immune system be boosted. If one continue to treat the symptoms the person might superficially seem to improve (and that is what the continual printing of money will achieve in the short run), but suddenly the sickness will flare up and the inevitable will happen. (The printing of money will only go so far, until Zimbabwean results occur.) On the other hand, if you focus not on the symptoms, but on boosting the immune system, the patient will be in serious pain and suffering at first, but there is a very good chance that the person will start to heal naturally if you make sure that the causes are not still in place. This healing will not be a superficial covering of the symptoms, but actual recovery. The focus should not be on improved comfort and relief, but on actual healing.

Of course, I do not pretend to know it all – I’m not a politician or economist. I’m merely an observer.

To come back to my criticism of Obama, let me be clear that I’m not criticizing him in particular. (Again, I’m not so much a critic as an observer.) I’ve been equally critical of Bush, even more so, but for different reasons. Bush moved America towards an Orwellian Big Brother state. Obama has done very little to counter that momentum. However, I must admit that I’ve lost my faith in Obama long ago. Any true perusing of the media will reveal that what Obama says often contradicts what his administration says. It would seem that his job is mostly PR.

I do not trust politicians. I didn’t trust Bush. I do not trust Obama.

Friday, June 26, 2009

Israel or Palestine?

So, are you for Israel or for Palestine?

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Ozymandias

A lyrical interpretation by The Black League of Percy Bysshe Shelley's
"Ozymandias":

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Rumsfeld = God (?)

Image from The Guardian

In 2003, then US President, George Bush, declared that God told him: “George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan” and “George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq.”

It turns out that the “Voice of God” was Donald Rumsfeld. An article by GQ-magazine reveals that Rumsfeld often prepared top secret reports on the Afghan and Iraqi wars, with quotes from the Bible, often juxtaposed with images from the battlefront. While the verses are frequently comforting and motivational, their effect when placed in association with the images creates a tone reminiscent of the Crusades. “This mixing of Crusades-like messaging with war imagery, which until now has not been revealed, had become routine,” writes Robert Draper.

It would seem that George Bush was hearing a voice; he just mistook whose voice it was.

Monday, April 20, 2009

Reasons for the Death of a President (JFK)

I think this is why JFK was assassinated, and yes, I believe it was an inside-job.

Speech to the American Newspaper Publishing Association. You can listen to it here.

Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen:

I appreciate very much your generous invitation to be here tonight.

You bear heavy responsibilities these days and an article I read some time ago reminded me of how particularly heavily the burdens of present day events bear upon your profession.

You may remember that in 1851 the New York Herald Tribune under the sponsorship and publishing of Horace Greeley, employed as its London correspondent an obscure journalist by the name of Karl Marx.

We are told that foreign correspondent Marx, stone broke, and with a family ill and undernourished, constantly appealed to Greeley and managing editor Charles Dana for an increase in his munificent salary of $5 per installment, a salary which he and Engels ungratefully labeled as the "lousiest petty bourgeois cheating."

But when all his financial appeals were refused, Marx looked around for other means of livelihood and fame, eventually terminating his relationship with the Tribune and devoting his talents full time to the cause that would bequeath the world the seeds of Leninism, Stalinism, revolution and the cold war.

If only this capitalistic New York newspaper had treated him more kindly; if only Marx had remained a foreign correspondent, history might have been different. And I hope all publishers will bear this lesson in mind the next time they receive a poverty-stricken appeal for a small increase in the expense account from an obscure newspaper man.

I have selected as the title of my remarks tonight "The President and the Press." Some may suggest that this would be more naturally worded "The President Versus the Press." But those are not my sentiments tonight.

It is true, however, that when a well-known diplomat from another country demanded recently that our State Department repudiate certain newspaper attacks on his colleague it was unnecessary for us to reply that this Administration was not responsible for the press, for the press had already made it clear that it was not responsible for this Administration.

Nevertheless, my purpose here tonight is not to deliver the usual assault on the so-called one party press. On the contrary, in recent months I have rarely heard any complaints about political bias in the press except from a few Republicans. Nor is it my purpose tonight to discuss or defend the televising of Presidential press conferences. I think it is highly beneficial to have some 20,000,000 Americans regularly sit in on these conferences to observe, if I may say so, the incisive, the intelligent and the courteous qualities displayed by your Washington correspondents.

Nor, finally, are these remarks intended to examine the proper degree of privacy which the press should allow to any President and his family.

If in the last few months your White House reporters and photographers have been attending church services with regularity, that has surely done them no harm.

On the other hand, I realize that your staff and wire service photographers may be complaining that they do not enjoy the same green privileges at the local golf courses that they once did.

It is true that my predecessor did not object as I do to pictures of one's golfing skill in action. But neither on the other hand did he ever bean a Secret Service man.

My topic tonight is a more sober one of concern to publishers as well as editors.

I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger. The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some; but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years. Whatever our hopes may be for the future--for reducing this threat or living with it--there is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security--a challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity.

This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President--two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for a far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.

I

The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.

But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country's peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of "clear and present danger," the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public's need for national security.

Today no war has been declared--and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.

If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.

It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.

Nevertheless, every democracy recognizes the necessary restraints of national security--and the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion.

For the facts of the matter are that this nation's foes have openly boasted of acquiring through our newspapers information they would otherwise hire agents to acquire through theft, bribery or espionage; that details of this nation's covert preparations to counter the enemy's covert operations have been available to every newspaper reader, friend and foe alike; that the size, the strength, the location and the nature of our forces and weapons, and our plans and strategy for their use, have all been pinpointed in the press and other news media to a degree sufficient to satisfy any foreign power; and that, in at least in one case, the publication of details concerning a secret mechanism whereby satellites were followed required its alteration at the expense of considerable time and money.

The newspapers which printed these stories were loyal, patriotic, responsible and well-meaning. Had we been engaged in open warfare, they undoubtedly would not have published such items. But in the absence of open warfare, they recognized only the tests of journalism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is whether additional tests should not now be adopted.

The question is for you alone to answer. No public official should answer it for you. No governmental plan should impose its restraints against your will. But I would be failing in my duty to the nation, in considering all of the responsibilities that we now bear and all of the means at hand to meet those responsibilities, if I did not commend this problem to your attention, and urge its thoughtful consideration.

On many earlier occasions, I have said--and your newspapers have constantly said--that these are times that appeal to every citizen's sense of sacrifice and self-discipline. They call out to every citizen to weigh his rights and comforts against his obligations to the common good. I cannot now believe that those citizens who serve in the newspaper business consider themselves exempt from that appeal.

I have no intention of establishing a new Office of War Information to govern the flow of news. I am not suggesting any new forms of censorship or any new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemma that I have posed, and would not seek to impose it if I had one. But I am asking the members of the newspaper profession and the industry in this country to reexamine their own responsibilities, to consider the degree and the nature of the present danger, and to heed the duty of self-restraint which that danger imposes upon us all.

Every newspaper now asks itself, with respect to every story: "Is it news?" All I suggest is that you add the question: "Is it in the interest of the national security?" And I hope that every group in America--unions and businessmen and public officials at every level-- will ask the same question of their endeavors, and subject their actions to the same exacting tests.

And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations.

Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma faced by a free and open society in a cold and secret war. In times of peace, any discussion of this subject, and any action that results, are both painful and without precedent. But this is a time of peace and peril which knows no precedent in history.

II

It is the unprecedented nature of this challenge that also gives rise to your second obligation--an obligation which I share. And that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people--to make certain that they possess all the facts that they need, and understand them as well--the perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program and the choices that we face.

No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers--I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.

Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed--and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.

This means greater coverage and analysis of international news--for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security--and we intend to do it.

III

It was early in the Seventeenth Century that Francis Bacon remarked on three recent inventions already transforming the world: the compass, gunpowder and the printing press. Now the links between the nations first forged by the compass have made us all citizens of the world, the hopes and threats of one becoming the hopes and threats of us all. In that one world's efforts to live together, the evolution of gunpowder to its ultimate limit has warned mankind of the terrible consequences of failure.

And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news--that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.

Sunday, April 19, 2009

Time Bombs

"The world is now pocked with cities that feel as if they are perched on top of bombs. The bombs have yet to explode, but the fuses have been lit, and there’s nothing anyone can do to extinguish them." Michael Lewis (2008)

Sunday, April 5, 2009

MTV Martial Law Warnings

Hopefully some of the people watching these warnings that aired on MTV took notice.



Saturday, March 28, 2009

New World Order

It would seem that my suspicions were not unfounded. How many paranoid prophets will it take to agree and propagate that the New World Order is on the way before the masses take head?

The Infamous "We the People"/"Second American Revolution" Videos