Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Left Masthead
September 4, 2015
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!

Global Tree Census Highlights Need to Restore Forests

Latest Readings

Truthdig Bazaar more items

Print this item

The Dubious Mr. Dobbs

Posted on Dec 4, 2007

By Amy Goodman

Truth matters. History and context count. “You’re entitled to your own opinions. You’re not entitled to your own facts,” the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously observed. CNN’s Lou Dobbs has migrated to a pre-eminent position in the debate on immigration in the U.S. Since he identifies himself as a journalist, he has a special responsibility to rely on facts and to correct misstatements of fact. CNN, which purports to be a news organization, touting itself as the “Most Trusted Name in News,” has an equally strong obligation to its audience to tell the truth.

  Dobbs was best known for anchoring CNN’s “Moneyline,” an early and influential program that helped create the televised financial-news genre. On “Moneyline,” Dobbs featured corporate CEOs and generally lauded them. About five years ago, Dobbs began changing his line, invoking populist rhetoric and championing the cause of the middle class. He thematically titled his coverage “War on the Middle Class” and “Broken Borders.” Dobbs’ signature issue of undocumented immigrants, or, as he calls them, illegal aliens, has tremendous influence on the debate nationally. So it matters if he is wrong.

  On March 28, 2006, Dobbs said on his show, “And it’s costing us, no one knows precisely how much, to incarcerate what is about a third of our prison population who are illegal aliens.” As it turns out, the number of noncitizens incarcerated in the U.S. federal and state prisons is closer to 6 percent, not 33 percent. Note that the 6 percent includes legal immigrants as well.

  On April 14, 2005, Lou Dobbs opened his show by saying: “The invasion of illegal aliens is threatening the health of many Americans. Highly contagious diseases are now crossing our borders decades after those diseases had been eradicated in this country.” CNN correspondent Christine Romans filed a report, then told Dobbs, “There have been 7,000 [cases of leprosy] in the past three years.” CBS’ “60 Minutes” later challenged the fact, pointing out that there had actually been 7,029 cases reported over 30 years. When Lesley Stahl confronted Dobbs on the statistic, he defended it, saying: “Well, I can tell you this. If we reported it, it’s a fact.”

  Dobbs’ reporter, Romans, said her source was “Dr. Madeleine Cosman, a respected medical lawyer and medical historian.” Cosman, who died in March 2006, was a medical lawyer and staunch anti-immigrant activist. She was recorded saying publicly of Mexican men: “Recognize that most of these bastards molest girls under age 12, some as young as age 5, others aged 3, although, of course, some specialize in boys, some specialize in nuns, some are exceedingly versatile and rape little girls aged 11 and women up to age 79.”


Square, Site wide

  After I played the tape of Cosman for Dobbs, he conceded to me that his reporter’s source, Cosman, was a “whack job.”

  On May 23, 2006, Dobbs aired a report on a state visit by Mexican President Vicente Fox. His correspondent, Casey Wian, called it a “Mexican military incursion” and displayed a map of the U.S. with the seven Southwest states highlighted as “Aztlan,” which, Wian reported, “some militant Latino activists ... claim rightfully belongs to Mexico.” The graphic came from the Council of Conservative Citizens, which the Southern Poverty Law Center, a group that tracks hate groups, points out is the current incarnation of the old White Citizen Councils of the 1950s and 1960s, which Thurgood Marshall referred to as “the uptown Klan.” The SPLC has reported that several of Dobbs’ guests and sources have had links to the CCC, such as Joe McCutchen of Protect Arkansas Now, part of the Minuteman vigilante movement, and Barbara Coe of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform. Another guest, Glenn Spencer, head of the anti-immigrant group American Patrol, speaks on the white-supremacist circuit. When CNN’s Wolf Blitzer had Spencer on, he told his audience that the SPLC had designated American Patrol as a hate group. When Dobbs had him on, he never identified the connection.

  In our conversation with Dobbs, “Democracy Now!” co-host Juan Gonzalez raised the issue of history, of how immigrants have been scapegoated: the Irish in the 1860s, the Chinese in the 1880s and, later, Southern Europeans. Dobbs rolled his eyes, saying, “Are you holding me responsible?” No, and Dobbs knows better. But he must be held responsible for not bringing a historical context to this crucial discussion of immigration reform. The immigration issue will not be solved by vilifying a population. The SPLC has just released a report on the upsurge in anti-immigrant, anti-Latino violence in the U.S.

  United Stations Radio Networks has just announced that Dobbs will soon be hosting a three-hour daily talk radio show. The Web site claims, “It’s not about what’s right and left ... it’s about what’s right and wrong.” Let’s hope that Lou Dobbs follows his own advice.

  Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on 500 stations in North America.

  © 2007 Amy Goodman

  Distributed by King Features Syndicate

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Michael Shaw, December 19, 2007 at 10:52 am Link to this comment

121093 Well of course Ernest you are right! But when we see the push in nuclear energy by this administration, based upon the influence of the nuclear, coal and oil lobbies, we might as well hang ourselves out to dry. Nuclear power does not only cost more to operate than the energy it sells, it is the biggest polluter of them all and more importantly, it depends upon the oil and coal industries.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 19, 2007 at 10:46 am Link to this comment

121081 I can relate to that CY and in fact it falls in line with the Peter Barnes plan from his, “Who Owns the Sky” book I posted with you earlier. He suggests a board of salaried civil appointees to oversee it rather than corruptible politicians. The idea is that the bigger the polluters, the more money they would have to pay into this fund, which would be largely based on the Alaska Trust Fund, only on a national scale. In other words, every time an oil company drills a new hole or a coal mining operation levels another mountain, they would have to subsidize this fund. Meanwhile, the folks who use less dirty energy(including the poor and those who live in small houses, drive little cars etc) get more money from this fund, offsetting the ultimate(whether we adopt this plan or not) higher cost in fossil fuels. The only losers in this would be the nuclear, coal and oil corporations.

Essentially it would be stock, clean environment stock that could reduce emissions up to 80 percent in the next twenty years and every man, woman and child in this nation would own a share in this stock. It is very capitalistic and socialistic as well. More importantly, it will help save the planet.

Report this

By cann4ing, December 18, 2007 at 4:49 pm Link to this comment

Problem is, Michael, that this unfettered greed may well lead to the destruction of a sustainable and livable environment.  We can’t wait for American fascism to collapse on its own accord.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 18, 2007 at 3:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Believe it or not, conservatives can favor some form of capital-supported socialism. (As formerly in Switzerland) This involves taking some areas of the economy OUT of the marketplace. 

the big struggle is to get consensus on what items should be OUT of the futures game.  I like health care and residential housing as well as some of the food market.  BUT I’ve heard other (SELF IDENTIFIED) conservatives mention the communications and information industries.

The huge difference of opinion is where “control” of these “socialist segments” should lie? Most liberals believe in the government as the “regulator” conservatives, on the other hand favor a sort of elected “civilian review” board, for example one containing 33.3% “paid regulators” (with certified experience in the field) 33.3% consumers, and 16.66% consumer advocates, and 16.66% employees of the regulated business.

It would be a step toward social progress if some things (a very few things) were not for sale to the highest bidder!

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 18, 2007 at 2:10 pm Link to this comment

121047 Well Ernest, I remember her in a speech saying in that case we found a third way in the New Deal. The bottom line is we found a third way and diverted crises. I agree with everything you’re saying too! I would also like to add that in the unfettered rush to gain more and more money as quickly as possible and without regard to the consequences, capitalism will ultimately fail. They realize this and thus the need for a police state, a new world order and a move to corporate feudalism. In essence they want the good old days, with a compliant, impoverished, basically helpless dullard society forever obedient or else. They won’t get it!

Report this

By cann4ing, December 18, 2007 at 1:10 pm Link to this comment

Actually, Michael, it isn’t true that the only third choice between fascism and communism was regulated capitalism or what Klein refers to as a mixed economy.  Indeed, Klein notes:  “Washington has always regarded democratic socialism as a greater threat than totalitarian Communism, which was easy to vilify and made a handy enemy.  In the sixties and seventies, the favored tactic for dealing with the inconvenient popularity of developmentalism and democratic socialism was to try to equate them with Stalinism, deliberately blurring the clear differences between the worldviews.  (Conflating all opposition with terrorism plays a similar role today).  A stark example of this strategy comes from the early days of the Chicago crusade, deep inside the declassified Chile documents.  Despite the CIA-funded propaganda campaign painting Allende as a Soviet-style dictator, Washington’s real concerns about the Allende election victory were relayed by Henry Kissinger in a 1970 memo to Nixon:  ‘The example of a successful elected Marxist government in Chile would surely have an impact on—and even precedent value for—other parts of the world…; the imitative spread of similar phenomena elsewhere would in turn significantly affect the world balance and our position in it.’  In other words, Allende needed to be taken out before his democratic third way spread.”

I think you can see the same factors at work today in the anti-Chavez propaganda; perhaps also in the apoplexy caused by Michael Moore filming 9/11 workers getting medical care in Cuba which care was denied by reason of their own country’s corrupt health care system.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 18, 2007 at 9:02 am Link to this comment

120907 You’re right Mack it shouldn’t be racist and when we look at the real underlying problems, it has little to do with race as much as it does with elitist capitalism and the bottom line for the world’s wealthiest. Our economic policies are the real culprits. But is has become a matter of race. It’s become a matter of “us” or “them” now. The degradations of our lifestyles have little to do with them. In a game of quick profit, they are merely pawns, just like the rest of us. While we address the affect we fail to address the cause and we will continue to fail addressing it because it isn’t good for big business.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 18, 2007 at 8:41 am Link to this comment

120864 I agree Ernest and as you point out it was not unfettered capitalism, but rather regulated capitalism. To save capitalism he had to regulate it. It was the third way Naomi Klein talks about, a compromise, the other two alternatives being either communism or fascism, the latter of which it seems is what we have right now. I see it as more than saving capitalism. I see it as saving the nation, which could very easily have taken a chaotic turn for the worse IE rebellion/revolution, military coup etc. Of course today there already has been a military coup of sorts since defense contractors rule the country and own our politicians, support the notion of a police state and executive dictatorship. This is not saving the country and it seeks no third way or any compromise. I believe in fact this road we’re on will lead us exactly to where Roosevelt knew it would.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 18, 2007 at 7:13 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

120864 by Ernest Canning on 12/17 at 6:15 pm

“CY the fact that Michael and I have pointed out an inaccuracy in the perception you advanced about Roosevelt’s effort to pack the court”

With all due respect, WHAT inaccuracy?

It is a well known fact that when the Court thwarted Roosevelt’s New Deal Government expansion” He proposed to expand the court by up to 6 additional Justices, one for every current judge over seventy. Those new judges would be appointed by “the President” To me that is “court packing” at a level unheard of before or since.

Let me ask you, if the current WH occupant attempted such a scheme, wouldn’t you and Michael be raising the rooftops?

Me too! 

Oh, and Michael about “Lynchings”

From wikipedia:

“President Franklin Roosevelt did not support the federal anti-lynching bill. He was concerned that support would cost him Southern votes in the 1936 1936 election.”


so much for “the little people” who BTW were so much “littler” in those days.

Elenor was another story… I agree a GREAT woman!

Report this
mackTN's avatar

By mackTN, December 17, 2007 at 11:01 pm Link to this comment

This argument has gotten way too personal.

Can I suggest that it doesn’t make any difference who these undocumented workers are ethnically—it’s about how many and it’s about who is recruiting them and exploiting them. 

If racism were really at work here, these Mexicans would have been banished a long time ago (if, for instance, instead of 20 million Mexicans we had 20 million black Africans!)  If we are so concerned about being humanitarian, why not bring over all the endangered Africans of the Sudan?  I’m sure they wouldn’t protest being used as cheap labor either.

How many people can we add to this country, flooding the job market, overwhelming the interstates and schools, without lowering everyone’s quality of life? 

What are the limits?  How many people can cities support overnight—schooling, medical care, postal delivery, water, electricity…? 

Every year, the time I spend commuting to work goes up, the money I spend on gas, the time I spend in a grocery store, the cars overtake everything. 

Why does Mexico get a pass?  Why aren’t we helping Mexico take care of its own citizens? 

Try sneaking into Mexico illegally—you’ll be put into the dungeons in a flash.  But we attempt to enforce laws that we’ve modified for Mexican immigrants repeatedly and we’re the bad guys?

The businesses who’ve recruited these workers should be forced to provide health, welfare, and education benefits instead of expecting taxpayers to foot this bill.  Why let them get away with $6/hour labor and ceo bonuses of billions in windfall profits?

This racism thing is merely a shield to deflect inquiry from the heart of the matter.

Report this

By cann4ing, December 17, 2007 at 7:15 pm Link to this comment

CY and Michael:  I think it would be fair to say that, by softening its impact through Keynesian economics, Roosevelt actually saved capitalism.  I would prefer democratic socialism, such as that embodied in the UK health care system, to the mixed system produced by Keynesian economics.  But that mixed system has been under assault by the most avaricious form of capitalism embodied in the doctrinaire ideology of Milton Friedman—a point so aptly demonstrated by Naomi Klein in “The Shock Doctrine.”

CY the fact that Michael and I have pointed out an inaccuracy in the perception you advanced about Roosevelt’s effort to pack the court does not equate rejecting all criticism of the man.  On the other hand, as 20th Century presidents go, I doubt that there is another who comes close to his level of positive accomplishments.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 17, 2007 at 5:06 pm Link to this comment

120719, CY, I never said you were trying to demonize Roosevelt, I said many who are rewriting history have already done the job. As for Zinn, a man who I basically respect, I see his putting the entire blame of Pearl Harbor on Roosevelt because of the statements made by a few people and the copies of a couple of ancient transcripts as preposterous! There is simply no proof, only speculation! And if there ever was real proof, the republicans would have been on him like flies on s**t! Also I’d like to see evidence of this anti-lynching legislation you talk about and the full legislative package assigned to it before “we” heap that on him as well! Yes he was a rich man, but unlike his current replacement, he had compassion for the little guy and was looking out for the interests of the entire nation, rather then only the elitists of this nation. Eleanor Roosevelt had a lot to do with it, but for all intents and purposes and from a purely historical standpoint, Roosevelt was for the little guy and he proved it. He was also probably the most beloved president in US history. In other words, the exact opposite of George W. Bush.

We need strong and compassionate leadership like his or we’re sunk though yes I believe the population is long overdue in growing a pair. You are right about the lead candidates as well.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 17, 2007 at 1:56 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

What is amazing to me is the duplicitous actions of those who describe themselves as “liberals” while they point to conservative folks as heirs to Ebenezer Scrooge. 

Disagree with Howard Zinn?  Over the side. Think Keynesian economics isn’t the end-all be-all, obviously a fool.

AND the smear tactics, worthy of Karl Rove; When did I say Roosevelt was a “bad guy” He was a capitalist attempting to save the economic system which made his family rich.  Nothing wrong with that, but as a savior of the poor?  I reject that theory.  Hell he wouldn’t even sign “anti-lynching” legislation.

My belief (mileage may vary) is that we do NOT need another “strong leader” we need a population with balls and heart.

The current crop of candidates (and voters) appears to have neither…..I sincerely hope they prove me wrong!

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 17, 2007 at 11:57 am Link to this comment

120742. Also Ernest, thanks for pointing out this executive unitarian theory which is by far a greater threat to us then any terrorist organization or anything else for that matter, on the planet. These people who have either endorsed this or enabled this, have betrayed their sworn oaths to protect and defend the constitution of the United States. In my view(and Jefferson’s) that makes all of them traitors. Also long after Bush is gone, his stacked courts will continue to haunt us for decades to come, unless of course an act of God takes mercy upon us. Meanwhile with friends like Feinstein, who needs enemies?

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 17, 2007 at 11:16 am Link to this comment

120742 Thanks for adding on to that Ernest. As history is being rewritten, lots of people are going out of their way to paint FDR as a bad guy, including sadly, the great historian Howard Zinn. The irony of course is that people like Bush and Cheney love to quote him. I believe Cheney did as much as 7 times during the pre-2004 election at the RNC. Meanwhile they have done everything to undermine every good thing this president did! The Social Security issue is all that’s left and we all know what Bush wants to do with that. Privatization will take a huge chunk of that money, which is earmarked for recipients and give it to Wall Street. The most successful government program in US history we are told is draining government resources, thus the need to privatize it, or in other words to essentially destroy it. It is the only piece of government capital left the corporations can get their hands on. Meanwhile tax breaks, the largest bulk of which go to Wall Street and this so called war on terror that Wall Street profits so immensely from and this system of corporate lawlessness(corporatism) Bush as allowed, are the biggest culprits to draining government coffers. It was corporate lawlessness which brought us into the Great Depression in the first place and make no mistake, it is doing the same thing right now and indeed it will take another FDR, a man of courage and vision, to get us out of his mess.

Report this

By cann4ing, December 17, 2007 at 10:04 am Link to this comment

Michael you are absolutely correct about the reasons behind the Roosevelt court packing scheme in which he sought to obtain a majority on the Supreme Court by increasing the number of Justices.  At the time, the Supreme Court was striking down just about every state law that sought to protect the public health and safety or to protect workers’ rights under the long since discredited doctrine of “substantive due process.” 

Roosevelt’s move arose out of frustration because this was occurring at the height of the Great Depression when the nation was in dire need of Keynesian economics to overcome the disaster created by unregulated capitalism. 

Over the past forty years, the American hard-right has engaged in a very different court packing scheme, one which has produced no less than four federalist society radicals in robes on the Supreme Court—only one away from a majority.  All four subscribe to the subversive “Unitary Executive” theory—the theory that provides the basis for the more than 1000 presidential signing statements.  It is a theory that the president, in times of war, is not merely above the law but “is” the law.  Under Unitary Executive theory, it is the president (not Congress or the Courts) who has the exclusive authority to define the limits of presidential power in times of war.

Since the so-called “global war on terror” is intended to be endless, under “Unitary Executive” theory the hard right envisions a “permanent” change in our system from that of checks and balances to unchecked executive power.  We are now but one federalist society jurist away from ending the rule of law as we know it.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 17, 2007 at 6:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“FDR only threatened to stack the supreme court because the right wingers controlling it were preventing every program we needed to get this nation back on its feet.”

So let me get this straight; It is OK to alter the constitution when it is done by a Democrat, but not as OK when done by a conservative?

“...Also appointing its members is not exactly what one would call dictatorial.”

If that is what he had done, I would agree, but obviously you are not familiar with Roosevelt’s proposal to add additional justices to the high court (above the current nine) to alter the balance of power.

“Here lies the real dictatorship, not in a great president long gone who was trying to do what was right for this nation and all of its people.”

However many people didn’t believe he was doing “right” We were an isolationist nation, and he won his second term promising NOT to get us involved in “another foreign war” His economic programs, while continually praised by the Democrats may 9according to many economists) not have worked without the onset of WW II. and when one take a non-partisan look over their shoulder to the times in question what Roosevelt did best was to save the capitalist system which was in majority disfavor after the stock market crash.

I’m not arguing the Bush vs Roosevelt question, that would be stupid beyond even me….HOWEVER Bush has admitted to using Roosevelt Nixon, and Reagan building blocks to construct the mess (which he calls his policy) we are in now… Wouldn’t it be advisable to study some of those blocks to find out what he means….. BUT the Americans never bothered to read Mein Kamph until it was too late… so what else is new?

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 16, 2007 at 8:23 pm Link to this comment

120359 CY I’d like to point out that FDR only threatened to stack the supreme court because the right wingers controlling it were preventing every program we needed to get this nation back on its feet. Also appointing its members is not exactly what one would call dictatorial. FDR never had anywhere near the powers this current president has and in fact has given himself. Take the letter from Feinstein I shared with Ernest. According to the security council, upon which Feinstein sits, the telecoms secretly spying upon us was legal. Her contentions to this end come from the pretense that secret letters sent by the president behind the backs of congress to these telecoms, requesting them to spy upon us makes them legal. The executive branch is not suppose to have the powers to legislate and in fact never did until Bush. When secretive letters that circumvent laws and treaties become law simply because the president sends them, and leaders in the house and senate see no wrong in this, we are all in big trouble. Roosevelt never had these self given powers and if he had for one moment tried to establish them, the whole nation, including the house and senate, would be up in arms. Here lies the real dictatorship, not in a great president long gone who was trying to do what was right for this nation and all of its people.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 15, 2007 at 8:29 pm Link to this comment

120309 Points taken Ernest and thank you! There is no doubt we are in a world of you know what. But as Kennedy once said “great crises produce great men, and great deeds of courage.” Let’s hope he was right!

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 15, 2007 at 6:50 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

120309 by Ernest Canning on 12/15 at 12:32 am

While I fully agree with the non-partisan thrust of your post. there is evidence to suggest that the Democratic savior FDR also (in his attempt to pack the SC) believed in an “imperial presidency”

While folks on the left look for another “savior” I feel the only way to “keep the Republic” is to elect a slight majority (never veto proof) to congress while gifting the Presidency to the opposing party.

As you have pointed out in other posts, they are all bought and paid for by competing interests, so why not use that “divide and conquer” tactic they wield so well?

Report this

By cann4ing, December 15, 2007 at 1:32 am Link to this comment

Yes Michael I am an attorney.  I attended law school back in the mid 70s.  Back then no one had ever heard of “Unitary Executive” theory.  It was the 1982 brainchild of Sam Alito and the radically subversive, Robert Bork founded, Richard Mellon Scaife funded Federalist Society to which four of the nine Justices on the Supreme Court belong.

The concept that if the President says its okay its lawful was one advanced by President Nixon.  That attitude as much as his participation in a criminal coverup of Watergate is what led to his impeachment.  It is in essense a restatement that the King is the sovereign and therefore can do no wrong.

Of course, the Founders of this nation were definitely not looking for a new monarchy.  But I doubt they could so much as recognize the tattered remains of the constitution they so carefully drafted.  Bit by bit, in piecemeal fashion, the members of Congress have betrayed the solumn oath they took to defend that constitution, surrendering power to the executive as rights have steadily eroded. 

There was never a valid reason to tinker with FISA.  These efforts have nothing to do with protecting the American people and everything to do with the acquisition of unchecked executive power under the cover of an Orwellian “war on terror.” 

With the ruthless Dick Cheney hell-bent on attacking Iran, a likely blowback and executive orders now in place that would permit the president to declare a national emergency in the event of a new terrorist incident on US soil, leading to martial law, a suspension of the Constitution, shutting down Congress and cancelling the November 2008 election, impeachment may well be the only legal device remaining which could save the Republic.  Unfortunately, with the Speaker of the House knee deep in the waterboarding scandal and with other so-called “leading Democrats” more concerned with trolling for the corporate money needed for the next election than they are with protecting the Republic, the rule of law may be in very serious jeopardy—and of course, if we are to take a lesson from Pakistan, once the putsch comes, lawyers don’t seem to fare very well.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 14, 2007 at 3:21 pm Link to this comment

120135 LOL! Well CY I’ll have to chew on this for awhile. At any rate Merry Christmas, especially since it might be our last… perhaps next year we’ll be herded onto that train to the New Dachau! I’d like to add as I have before, I do not support illegal immigration. I just see the problem from a different perspective than you do. God help us all though!

On another note, especially since you brought up rising waters and such, have you ever heard of a book called, “Who Owns the Sky?” It’s written by Peter Barnes, the former CEO who created the long distance company Working Assets. He has some good stuff in there based on the Alaska Trust Fund, that might help us solve the greenhouse affect. It’s the most practical solution I’ve heard anyone come up with. Here’s an article about it. I thought you might be interested.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 14, 2007 at 12:49 pm Link to this comment

102184 Ernest you’re an attorney aren’t you? This is off topic, but I was wondering what you can make of this. It’s an intelligence committee report that basically says the telecommunications corporations didn’t break the law because the president authorized them to spy on us. It’s Feinstein’s excuse for supporting the idea no telecommunications corporations should be prosecuted.

Report this

By cann4ing, December 14, 2007 at 10:22 am Link to this comment

As to those who claim they are only concerned with “illegal” immigration, consider the following from the Ventura County Star:

“Nearly two-thirds of the nation’s Latinos say the battle over illegal immigration has made life more difficult for all Latinos, including those here legally…

“About 64 percent of those surveyed by the Pew Hispanic Center said failed immigration-reform efforts in Congress have affected far more people than the estimated 12 million who have crossed the border illegally.

“About 53 percent said they had experienced at least one negative impact from a list that included not finding work, not finding housing, more demands to prove immigration status, reluctance to use government services and deciding not to travel out of the country.

“‘The biggest threat is that by the color of our skin and our last name, we’re all put in the same boat,’ said David Rodriquez of Camarillo, state deputy director of the League of United Latino American Citizens.  ‘We’re tainted by the ‘illegal’ brush.  That’s not fair.’”

Yes, like Jim Crow, not fair, but apparently as American as apple pie.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 14, 2007 at 6:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

120080 by Michael Shaw on 12/13 at 8:15 pm

“Once they succeed we won’t be in here arguing over illegal immigrants, we’ll be out in the streets burning down the capital and stringing up CEO’s.”

You have far more faith in humanity than do I.

I believe they will peacefully get on trains to the gas chambers while soldiers empty their suitcases on the ground taking anything of value… History repeats when not remembered.

60% of US population growth over the last 15 years is due to immigration. while this helps corporate entities (that need at least 3% growth a year) it isn’t helping the average citizen or the world.

As scroogey as it sounds around xmas, when you quench the thirst and relieve the hunger of starving people, the first thing they do when feeling better is fuck.  AND since our government is invested in the corporate need for unlimited growth, no birth control, or abortion allowed.

At some point one of two things will happen.

Pestilence, war and starvation will eliminate the excess population of humans

we will see the truth that this planet can sustain only so many folks, and act on a gentler reduction of people.

These are the only choices, and only folks who have been in the over-full Titanic lifeboats watching other passengers drown can understand fully the enormity of what must eventually come to pass.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 13, 2007 at 9:15 pm Link to this comment

119945 CY to further clarify, I was not trying to call you a racist, if that’s what you thought I was doing. But I was promoting the idea that much of this illegal immigration bashing is a racist matter. I think Ernest worded it better when he mentioned the lying undercurrent in the movement. I do however believe America is a racist country, though certainly not all of its members. Not even most of them.

As for living in cities, I grew up in Philadelphia, the City of Brotherly Love, which ironically is probably one of the most racist cities in the nation. It is also one of the most liberal cities. But it is a town of racially defined neighborhoods. On this pretext and in my opinion, the anti immigration movement is doing the same thing but on a much grander scale. You obviously don’t agree with that and that’s OK.

The points you make about the environment, our water supply, our natural resources and the rising ocean waters are relevant, in fact even more relevant than this illegal immigration issue. This is a world problem, not just a national one. The world is becoming overpopulated and our impact on the planet, especially our industrial impact is frighteningly apparent. But these problems do not come strictly because of illegal immigration and stopping illegal immigration won’t solve these problems either. If we were the last country on earth that had drinkable water, would we let the rest of the world thirst? Or would we help them to produce their own through desalinization or whatnot? Corporations are privatizing water around the world. Once they succeed we won’t be in here arguing over illegal immigrants, we’ll be out in the streets burning down the capital and stringing up CEO’s.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 13, 2007 at 8:35 pm Link to this comment

120007 Thank you Ernest for a refreshing breath of truth! America is probably the most racist country on earth, though some might argue Japan is. These anti immigrant folk, along with Lou Dobbs, spend more time attacking the Southern Poverty Law Office then they do the poor illegals. As for SPLO, all they do is track the ever growing and dangerous fascist elements and hate groups in this country who have grown considerably since 9/11. Anyone who believes for one moment this movement isn’t racist are kidding themselves. These “people” will latch onto any hot key issue to better their own position. They also do a great job in detracting us from the real problem, corporate elitism.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 13, 2007 at 8:12 pm Link to this comment

119945 Conservative Yankee what in the hell are you talking about? I merely made an observation and threw out a few ideas. Now I’m a smear campaign? You must be joking! The smear isn’t being conducted by me but by NAFTA which has allowed corporate elitists to redefine the borders of Canada and Mexico. This redefining is not an attempt by the Mexicans to steal the entire southwest as these illegal immigrant bashers say, but it is a NAU of sorts, a corporate elitist NAU that allows corporate America to rape and pillage our neighbors and their resources. If you want to know why there are so many illegals running around the US, you should go to NAFTA then realize that because of it, Mexican factory workers have taken more than a 30% pay cut and hundreds of thousands of Mexican Farmers have been kicked off their lands thanks to the flooding of cheap corn subsidies from the United States.

Also I noticed you produced no proposals yourself.

Report this

By cann4ing, December 13, 2007 at 1:37 pm Link to this comment

The undercurrent of racism beneath the anti-immigrant bashing serves the interests of the ruling elite, who are able to deflect the American working class away from the economics driving the erosion of their middle class aspirations (e.g. NAFTA & neoliberal “free trade”) to the fellow economic victims who are depicted as foreign, illegal and as competition.

This issue was touched upon by Naomi Klein in “Disaster Capitalism” wherein she discussed the “clashes between free markets and free people [which] took place in Europe in 2005, when the European Constitution was rejected in two national referendums.”

“The powerful rejection of what the French call ‘savage capitalism’ takes many different forms, including reactionary and racist ones.  In the US, rage at the shrinking of the middle class has been easily redirected to calls for border fences, with CNN’s Lou Dobbs leading a nightly campaign against the ‘invasioin of illegal aliens’ waging ‘war on the American middle class’—stealing jobs, spreading crime, as well as bringing in ‘highly contagious diseases.’...”

“In the Netherlands, the 2005 referendum on the European Constitution was similary hijacked by anti-immigration parties, turning it into a vote less against a corporate order than against the specter of Polish tradespeople flooding into Western Europ[e to push down wages…”

Scapegoating permits the ruling class to enjoy the feast as the peasants, both native and immigrant, are left to fight over the crumbs.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 13, 2007 at 7:11 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

119886 by Michael Shaw on 12/12 at 10:55 pm

“ point was that under the pretexted illusion that we can and must preserve white rule and culture in the United States, that there is no reasonable resolution. With the illegals gone and the borders slammed shut we will in spite of this, eventually have an Hispanic majority. Perhaps we should have thought about this before we told the world to give us their huddled masses. We are a melting pot after all, not an Aryan nation. But an Aryan Nation is what well get if we keep charging down the current path.”

“With this situation, it seems we have but two choices, either accept the natural inevitability that one day Hispanics will outnumber whites, or impose unjust rules on non whites. It seems that right now the unjust rules are pressing at the forefront.”

With this statement you prove for all time that a liberal can: be as decietful, be as off topic, and run a smear as well as the furtherest right Pat Robertson fanatic.

I am not concerned about the racial make-up of these United States.  I grew up in New York City where 403 different languages and dialects from 523 separate nationalities defined the culture.  Dad used to take us to a different type of restaurant every friday night. I speak enough Spanish to find my way around, can order a meal in a French restaurant (and find the toilet) and tell the guy at the Indian discount store that he gave me the wrong change.

I like diversity of cultures


We have no more room to double our population.  We’re running out of water, arable land, and resources needed to support 300 million people. the problem is not “Hispanics” it’s PEOPLE!!! 

The fires this summer in California are in large part a disaster due to folks building homes where homes shouldn’t be! ditto New Orleans, along the Mississippi, Platte, and Ohio rivers. In New York they are pushing the sod further and further into the Hudson, East and Harlem rivers.  if the water rises 1 foot, 30% of the property created in the last 50 years will be under water! The situation around ground zero (where it used to be zoned for warehouse storage only) is particularly dangerous.

So run your “racist rant’ if you wish, BUT first you might want to listen to Roy Rogers version of “Cool Water”

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 13, 2007 at 12:18 am Link to this comment

119874 Well look what Tennant got for falling on the sword! The Medal of Freedom Award! Then look at how after stopping all air traffic, they let the family members of the primary suspect take a flight out of the country without even questioning them!

We need a new investigation, there is no doubt about it, but still I believe we need to revamp the 9/11 commission or all we’ll get is more of the same. Investigations that restrict the right to persecute are a waste of time.

We need to hold these bastards accountable and we need committee members who are dedicated to that end. Unfortunately, presidential authority won’t allow it and neither will the republican and republicrat members of the senate. Perhaps that will change with the changing of the guard. We’ll have to wait and see. But regardless, by all means investigate!

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 12, 2007 at 11:55 pm Link to this comment

119802 Well Cy my point was that under the pretexted illusion that we can and must preserve white rule and culture in the United States, that there is no reasonable resolution. With the illegals gone and the borders slammed shut we will in spite of this, eventually have an Hispanic majority. Perhaps we should have thought about this before we told the world to give us their huddled masses. We are a melting pot after all, not an Aryan nation. But an Aryan Nation is what well get if we keep charging down the current path.

With this situation, it seems we have but two choices, either accept the natural inevitability that one day Hispanics will outnumber whites, or impose unjust rules on non whites. It seems that right now the unjust rules are pressing at the forefront.

The only real solution as I see it is acclimation! For example, there are generations of Hispanics in California who are more American than most Americans and their history here spans long before California became a part of the United States. Many of them don’t even speak Spanish. On the other hand, many Anglos have embraced certain aspects in Hispanic culture and speak the language fluently. We eat their food, we share in their religious practices, we inter-marry, we embrace the same basic value systems. We’re acclimating! Acclimation is the only viable cure and that will mean as it always does, that cultures will ultimately mold and change. This is the most inevitable reality of them all. It won’t mean an end to Anglo-European culture, just a natural process in change that all cultures and even languages go through. Everything changes. A thousand years from now our culture will have evolved into something completely different and most people won’t even think twice about it. Perhaps George Bernard Shaw had the answer/foresight when he suggested interracial marriage, until one day there would only be but one race on this planet, the human race. That way we would embrace all the things we have in common and literally remove the prejudicial differences.

This rant by O’Reilly saying we’re going to lose the entire southwest is ridicules. It will lead us to drastic measures and roads that we should not go down.

I suppose we could limit immigration to whites, but they aren’t exactly pounding down our doors and they wouldn’t accept cheap labor status either. Most of them are better educated than we are and doing better economically and socially. Also to impose such injustice in a nation that boasts about justice for all, would simply be one more example to the rest of the world that we preach one thing and do another.

We could do what the Chinese have done, if you have one kid you get a tax break, more than one you pay more taxes.

We could try fining the Mexican government, charging them for all the process fees concerning illegals. When they laugh in our faces, we could invade Mexico and make it another state, but then we’d end up with another Iraq situation or worse. Perhaps we should ask Mexico to simply join us peacefully. Who knows, maybe they would! Regardless of any of it, Hispanics will still be the majority here 50 years down the road.

How do you propose we solve this issue?

Report this
FilthyCherry's avatar

By FilthyCherry, December 12, 2007 at 11:04 pm Link to this comment


Well I think the people from the steering committee want a new investigation and I think they should get it.  Not a single reprimand or firing, in fact didn’t the general in charge of US defenses get a promotion to the joint chiefs of staff?  What the hell did he do?  lol

I’d also heard that not a single fighter jet had been scrambled to intercept a passenger plane from the month that Bush/Cheney took office.  For 10 years prior to that an average of 12 interceptions occured every month.

Now you just don’t let murder go uninvestigated, doesn’t matter what other pressing issues there are.

Oh well, it’s your country and your credibility.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 12, 2007 at 9:30 pm Link to this comment

119818 Ernest, Adio is an inflected form of adiar which means to fix, appoint(day). Basically it means “until then” or until that specific time or day rather than goodbye. In other words its a bent word.

Report this

By cann4ing, December 12, 2007 at 5:50 pm Link to this comment

CY, it’s adios, not adio, mi hermano.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 12, 2007 at 4:35 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)


... for my part, I’m brushing up on my Spanish. Adio mi Hermano!”

Your argument, your “talking points” and your solution are not anywhere near where I can live…

Watch the D’s blow another election by forgetting the workers..

What a party!

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 12, 2007 at 4:11 pm Link to this comment

119776 I hear ya filthycherry, but I think part of the problem behind progressive journalists not taking a stand concerning the 9/11 truth movement is because of the many kooks out there who have embraced it and who in many ways have made it their own. There are several noteworthy and respectable people involved in the movement like David Ray Griffin for example, but there are also people like Tarpley and LaRouche. Alex Jones has ties to extreme right wing elements. He was one of the guests at that American Free Press/Barnes Review conference I mentioned previously with fempatriot. Michael Collins Piper, Christopher Bollyn, etc, and these folks, just by their mere presence make the search for truth a mission in absurdity. Their main agenda, beyond stressing their own importance and intellect, is to detract. They also weaken credibility and make them all look like kooks, which of course isn’t true.

But as much as I wish to learn the entire truth about 9/11, JFK, MLK and a myriad of other issues, I tend to agree with Klein. There are far more important things at play here and take note that all the corporate lawlessness that’s been going on has only gotten worse during this entire 9/11 truth process. Besides, what we already know about this administration and 9/11 is damning enough. We know they were warned several times and we also know at the very least, they chose to ignore those warnings. Whether the Bush regime actually planned and carried out this act or simply allowed it to happen (as I suspect) is mute. Either action would be construed as an act in treason, but since most of the tangible evidence has already been destroyed, and what wasn’t has been sealed for god knows how long, we’ll be debating this seemingly unresolvable issue for the next 50 years or longer, when any illicit parties involved will be dead and gone. Meanwhile we’re on the brink of national bankruptcy, environmental crisis, corporatized media and government, another possible war on the horizon and our civil liberties continue to die on the vine.

Thanks for the link though. I will respond a bit later.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 12, 2007 at 3:07 pm Link to this comment

119761 Well Cy I don’t for one moment believe the issue hasn’t any merit. I’m glad you acknowledge the racist right however.

Recently I was watching FOX News and they were running a survey showing the republicans are losing Hispanic support in key red states where there are large Latino populations. They stressed the fact that because of this, they could lose those key red states in the coming elections. But the reality is the same as it was concerning the war in Iraq. They are targeting the angry white male just as they did then, essentially abandoning their Hispanic supporters who are on the losing end of this hotkey issue. That display on FOX was in there for one reason, to fire up white middle America to vote republican. They did remark about Bush once enjoying large Hispanic support, almost as if to suggest the reason they lost it was not because of Bush but because of the current candidates, but I see that as window dressing. They knew it would fire up the white middle class, who thanks to these same right wingers are now in a state of hysteria over this illegal immigration issue.

As for the fear of losing our national identity goes, if the plan was to remain white forever, it’s too late for that now, unless we decide to foolishly embrace some version of South Africa’s Apartheid government! Even if we deported every illegal, abandoned the immigration process entirely and allowed not one single foreigner into this country ever again, in the next 50 years our population will be a Latino majority. More importantly, what they see happening to them now they will remember in that 50 year timetable. Better to make friends than enemies I say. It’s either that or allow a complete white racist takeover. As for my part, I’m brushing up on my Spanish. Adio mi Hermano!

Report this
FilthyCherry's avatar

By FilthyCherry, December 12, 2007 at 2:37 pm Link to this comment

Ernest and Michael, thanks for the links.  Good stuff there.

Norman Dodd was interviewed by G. Edward Griffin in 1982 and he alleged that tax-exempt foundations were created to control education and media.  Here’s the transcript:

Michael, I was just very disappointed with the Greenspan interview.  Amy kept thanking Greenspan for coming on the show and it was making me sick.  I must have skipped the Krugman show but I’ve got it as I use the torrent feature to get each show so I’m going to watch it today.

As for Amy, Klein, and Chomsky, their work is insightful and invaluable but on the 9/11 issue they just won’t touch it, and it surprises me (and disappoints).  I went to Naomi’s book launch and when asked about 9/11 being a false flag operation she stated (and she’s thought this out because she’s been asked a few times now):

“First of all, I’m not so sure I would put anything past these people. It’s just that with these conspiracy theories I feel that we’re taking away all this energy that could be going toward other issues that are so important right now”.

And with the words “conspiracy theory” everyone mumbles and nods like the left wing parrots they are.

This is really odd because her mother-in-law is Michele Landsberg who has written, favourably, two articles about the 9/11 Truth movement in her column for the Toronto Star. Given that and her general support for grassroots labour, feminist, and anti-global groups and issues she can hardly be ignorant of the number of the anomalies, contradictions and absurdities of the official story or the need for a new and proper investigation.

Is that taking away energy that could be going towards other issues that are so important right now?

I think the statement is belittling and disempowering. “It’s like she’s a life guard who is helping you stay afloat even as she points out that the rough seas you are in have been deliberately stired up by forces that want to drown you. Lifeguard Naomi tells you, as you’re bobbing around and gasping for breath, how bad these forces are and explains how they make the waves…
Then she lets go of you, and you drown.” - Barry Zwicker

That, in my books, is a Gatekeeper.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 12, 2007 at 2:01 pm Link to this comment

119673 Great analogy again Conservative Yankee, but I would add the right wing smear campaign, aka Willie Horton and that Snoopy tank ride that was as ridicules as Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” jet landing on that carrier.

We’re talking about short attention span theater here where presentation (in 10 second sound bytes) is everything and genuine issues become less viable. In a sense, this really is psychology 101 as a nervous Bush recently rendered, but not for him, the American people. I hope they are smart enough to realize it. Polls seem to indicate most Americans want change. That doesn’t help the “stay the course” crowd. I truly hope however that the dems don’t blow it again. They can only win unless they embrace stupidity.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 12, 2007 at 1:48 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

119757 by Michael Shaw on 12/12 at 12:29 pm

An Idiot, or fool sometimes will surprise you with the truth.

Just because the racist right-wing pushes an issue to the fore, this is not evidence that the issue has no merit.

and what is racist about a desire to keep a nation’s sovereignty?

The dangerous far left world trader, open border faction is equal in reprehensible behavior to the far right white supremest hate mongers in that neither gives a rats ass about hard working middle class, middle of the road US workers.  Oh, BTW those workers are black, white, brown and yellow!

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 12, 2007 at 1:29 pm Link to this comment

Heres more:

You can hear the push to defend “white culture” from nearly every sector of the right, from Bill O’Reilly:

  But do you understand what the New York Times wants, and the far-left want? They want to break down the white, Christian, male power structure, which you’re a part, and so am I, and they want to bring in millions of foreign nationals to basically break down the structure that we have. In that regard, Pat Buchanan is right.

To Patrick Buchanan:

  I think America may exist, but I’ll tell you this: I do believe we’re going to lose the American Southwest. I think it is almost inevitable. If we do not put a fence on that border ... you’re going to have 100 million Hispanics in the country, most of them new immigrants from Mexico, which believes that belongs to them. What’s going to happen to us, Sean, in my judgment, is what is happening right now: We are Balkanizing. We are dividing and separating from one another politically, morally—on issues like abortion or Terri Schiavo—racially and ethnically, when you get Jena and then you get Don Imus, and all of these things ripping us apart. All the things that used to pull us together and hold us together no longer do.

To Michael Savage:

  But basically, if you’re talking about a day like today, Martin Luther King Junior Day, and you’re gonna understand what civil rights has become, the con it’s become in this country. It’s a whole industry; it’s a racket. It’s a racket that is used to exploit primarily heterosexual, Christian, white males’ birthright and steal from them what is their birthright and give it to people who didn’t qualify for it.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 12, 2007 at 1:24 pm Link to this comment

“.......if it weren’t already crystal clear that the right-wing approach to the immigration debate has had the effect of infusing movement conservatism with the toxic sewage of the racist right—all the way to the highest levels—last night’s GOP presidential debate drove the point home rather vividly.”

Rick Perlstein surveyed the damage and acidly observed:

  The Republican YouTube debate was an astonishment. Not a single second on the economy, which may well be on the verge of collapse, with the middle class potentially more vulnerable than its been at any point since the 1920s. And yet, as my colleague Bill Scher points out, twenty-three minutes of ranting about the dusky hordes invading our shores. Is a great American political party really going to base its entire presidential appeal on scapegoating the Other?

  Question answers itself, I guess.

I thought this would add some fuel to the debate.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 12, 2007 at 12:03 pm Link to this comment

119737 Opps! He was talking about Edward Griffin. Don’t know much about him beyond cancer research. I’m getting old I guess!

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 12, 2007 at 12:01 pm Link to this comment

119661 You’re right Ernest and I’m a Philly boy too, an avid Chomsky fan. Sorry Noam! I only wish I had added how the 9/11 Commission snubbed the widows of 9/11, the very people who demanded an investigation in the first place. I do respect David Ray Griffin though.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 12, 2007 at 6:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

After the Republican Convention in 1988 (you remember the one where Darth Vader ran the show from back stage) the Democrats should have taken the White House in a landslide, but as usual, they developed deep thoughtful positions which many folks, out working for a living, either did not understand, OR were too busy to parse.

Dukakis was a liberal to the right wing, but a conservative to the left. The thoughts this (very educated intelligent) man had would not fit on a bumper sticker, and as usual the Democrats fought over where the center of their party should be.

Dukakis (who went from a 17 point lead over the first G Bush to a lopsided defeat) was blamed for the loss, and after the election he disappeared, but whatever, the Democrats learned nothing!  They are headed in the same direction again.. 

This time they will nominate a right of center corporatist and lose the party base. The Republicans will nominate Huckabee, a nice personable fellow, and we’ll get another term of Supreme Court appointments made by the xtian right.

Give the folks a choice between a Republican and a republican, and they will pick the Republican every time!  (harry Truman)

Oh well…

Report this

By cann4ing, December 12, 2007 at 6:27 am Link to this comment

Michael Shaw & filthycherry, it’s Chomsky, not Chomski.

I agree with your post totally, Michael, but would add that filthycherry left out that Amy & Juan followed up their interview of Greenspan by having Paul Krugman on their show.  Krugman tore Greenspan a new rear end.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 12, 2007 at 5:13 am Link to this comment

119561 Filthycherry, the steering committee for the 9/11 Commission was handpicked by George W. Bush. His allowance in creating the committee in the first place was based on the premise that he handpick its members and that their investigative conclusions would lead to no prosecutions. Thus their end result, everyone was at fault and no one was at fault. In other words it was a complete waste of time. An independent investigation was what was called for, not a staged circus packed with Bush’s cronies.

To denigrate Noam Chomski and Naomi Klein, and then chastise Goodman and Gonzales on this premise is preposterous. Also if Amy and Juan didn’t care about the FED and what Greenspan was doing, they wouldn’t have exposed him in the first place, unlike any major media who basically consider him a god. Also to suggest coercion on the show is absurd and there is virtually no evidence whatsoever to back that insinuation up.

If you truly wish to attack media, you should be going after the major broadcasters who for the most part are owned by defense contractors. Here lie the true media whores. Visit the Center for Public Integrity and see for yourself. I’d also like to add Democracy Now has no lobby expenditures and do not support political candidates, unlike their corporate opposites.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 12, 2007 at 4:08 am Link to this comment

119546 Right! What’s good is bad and what’s bad is good! Flawlessly logical T Rex. I hope you realize exactly what you’re saying here, that neo-Nazi’s, white supremacists and racists are the truth sayers and those who oppose them are the liars. No wonder you applaud Dobbs over Goodman and Gonzales. He after all has these bigots on his show and all Juan and Amy do is expose them.

Report this
FilthyCherry's avatar

By FilthyCherry, December 11, 2007 at 7:34 pm Link to this comment

I’m quite a fan of the show and it’s my main source of news but I don’t see how this interview could good.  Especially when she had Allan Greenspan on just a while ago and was hardly calling him out on the horrors that he’s had a hand in. Let’s face it, Amy is a disciple of St. Chomski, as is Naomi Klein, and as such they are gatekeepers unwilling to even support the people involved in the steering committee of the 9/11 commission report who are demanding a real investigation.  Chomski doesn’t think it’s important so neither do they. It’s sad really.

As for foundations donating to DN, I think it’s important to note.  Money talks as they say.  Now if anyone doubts the altruistic nature of these fundings then they should look up the interview that was done with Senator Dodd by G. Edward Griffin.  I’m sure it’s on googlevid or youtube or somesuch.

Report this

By cann4ing, December 11, 2007 at 6:21 pm Link to this comment

No T. Rex, I do not think you cynical.  I think you are an under-educated, ignorant, opinionated fool who lacks the ability to organize a coherent thought.

As to your suggestion that I am a Zionist, I have to burst out laughing.  I’d suggest you read some of my past posts on that topic here at Truthdig. 

Frankly T. Rex there is a fundamental difference between the academic work of Prof. Finkelstein demonstrating “misuse” of the Holocaust for political gain and your off-the-wall effort to deny established facts, coupled with your paranoia about any who do not buy into your delusion.

I suspect that you are someone who could benefit from years of psychotherapy.  Regardless, I do know you are someone badly in need of an education.

Report this

By T.Rex, December 11, 2007 at 6:00 pm Link to this comment

Mr. Shaw, you can mention name after name and that doesn’t change the fact that Mr. Dobbs comes much closer to targeting the real guilty parties promoting and encouraging the invasion of our country by illegal immigrants, than Amy and Juan do.

And a person can appear to be “good” and lie like a cheap rug. A person can also appear “bad”, and be engaged in nothing more than ramming home the truth. The revelations regarding Iran during the last week provide a tailor made, recent example of this phenomenon.

It’s the message, not the messenger. And the word “hate” in these cases, is much too simplistic and overused for my personal comfort. Being “hate mongers” as defined by you, means that I should not believe anything they say? Use of the word “hate” is much too often used to protect and further agendas in my opinion. It’s breathtakingly rare that the word is used to protect individuals.

Report this

By T.Rex, December 11, 2007 at 5:23 pm Link to this comment

Mr. Canning, you are obviously deeply invested in the zionist version of reality. The fact that you get your fur up so far at the mere thought of anyone questioning the facts behind the holocaust indicates the behavior of someone who’s thinking has been completely halted. A more sinister explanation could also explain it, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt on an agenda based motivation. 52 million people rarely spoken about, nor made the subject of endless movies, books, documentaries, news reports, powerful and wealthy lobbying firms, foreign policy manipulation, etc., etc.? And that’s irrelevant? Was their suffering less important? Better check your ability to think objectively here. Logic indeed. I never claimed to be the sole repository for truth either. But I will not let inertia stop my quest for the truth. It’s a rule I established for myself after 9/11. I think that’s happened to a lot of people since that day. It seems, the collective veil of “established” B.S. surrounding much of history is being slowly pulled away and only those who’ve been honest can afford to sit back and relax.

Professor Finkelstein is very good at stating the obvious, but like so many others regarding this uncomfortable subject, they aren’t nearly so good at taking the next obvious step. Why does an industry exist? Is it to defend the questionable? Is it to further an agenda? If so, when did that agenda start and what are it’s goals? Ask yourself, if the subject weren’t the holocaust, wouldn’t I be asking these questions? Call me cynical, but it seems obvious that “truth”  shouldn’t really need it’s own infrastructure. Even the most simple minded among us can rattle off a list of atrocities from history that did not need this kind of massive effort given to their continued remembrance. And surely, no decent jew would tolerate this effort being made for profit or territory if it were truly the horror that it’s been portrayed as?

As fempatriot alluded to, history is written by the victors. Fempatriot is quite correct in that observation, but winning should not be confused with honesty. I’m completely lucid regarding this subject. That’s due to having no predefined truth to protect. It really is quite liberating and it doesn’t make you into a hater, a denier or anything other than open minded. I’d be even happier if it turned out that I was wrong about the reality of holocaust history, because it’s very offensive being manipulated and lied to for decades.

Report this

By prellmechanik, December 11, 2007 at 2:31 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Amy’s so right: “The immigration issue will not be solved by vilifying a population.” Deporting them will suffice.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 11, 2007 at 11:10 am Link to this comment


Fempatriot, you know full well who the Barnes Review is. You also know that Piper introduced Theo Junker, the former SS twit who immortalized Hitler on his farm at that Barnes Review/American Free Press conference yet you still go out of your way to defend these thugs. Amazingly, in your attempt to glorify them, you suggest in your opening lines you’ve been attacked…...

“I’ve been posting for several years, and I’ve been attacked by people before.”...

...Now where in the world did I attack you? I merely pointed to one of your sources, exposing it for what it was. I even admitted some of your reading suggestions were good ones! Is presenting facts about Michael Collins Piper and the Barnes Review an attack, or simply exposing the realities? 

You go on…“The Barnes Review magazine is devoted to history that is _not_ written by the VICTORS as so much of our history is.” ...not written by the victors…who are the victors?...the Colonial Army, the Union, perhaps the Allies after WW2? If so, who then are the none victors? To quote Mel Gibson, “history is written by those who hang heroes,” but are Piper, Carto, Tanton, the National Alliance and the KKK heroes? I think not! Is Theo Junker a hero? Adolf Hitler? David Duke? Your presenting the Barnes Review as a dependable news source that prints the “truth” no one else dares to might suggest to some you believe they are.

“American Free Press speaks out about subjects that other news media is afraid/forbidden to tackle.” What a hoot!

While you so adamantly support the militias who are currently guarding our southwestern borders, have you ever once considered the implications? The federal government is allowing armed militias, vigilantes in fact to do its job. We haven’t seen the likes of that since the brown shirts in 1930’s Germany. Also try to remember that in Germany back then, Jews, minorities, foreigners, liberals and others were singled out as the source in all of Germany’s woes. Attack the minorities, the weak and the most vulnerable, the easiest patsies and who knows, someday those losers you talk about will one day be the winners.

As for the USS Liberty, that was a tragic event and although it deserves scrutiny and I personally see no wrong in honoring those who have fallen, the bottom line is we were in the middle of a red zone, in a war in fact we were not directly a part of. Had we not been there in the first place we may never have been targeted. The fact the Barnes Review, along with their neo-Nazi counterparts decided to memorialize it is not a revelation, merely one more of the many propaganda tools you’ve been spouting off about.

You are right, all governments use rhetoric. But why this fact should lead you to embrace the worse group of rhetorical liars in the history of the planet is beyond the realm of logical comprehension.

Also you make it sound as though only you and these groups you believe in support free speech. No one in here, not me, not Mr. Canning nor anyone else has ever tried to suggest people shouldn’t read, write or say what they want to. In the case of the Barnes Review, I merely stated I don’t abide in them and I gave my reasons and supported them. If people wish to abide in them, I won’t stop them. But I shouldn’t be stopped either in adding another side to this conversation. I have free speech rights too!

In closing I’d like to first add I do not support illegal immigration. But the way we are going about solving this problem is what draws my attention. Also ignoring the real culprits behind it, who are profiting from it and who wish to continue profiting from it while they make scapegoats and criminals out of people who are only trying their best to survive.

Lastly, thank God FDR wanted a war against fascism. It is a shame other, more recent presidents have failed so poorly where he so admirably succeeded.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 11, 2007 at 10:39 am Link to this comment

119290 T Rex…Clever analogy in non-layman’s terms but it simply doesn’t wash. If you’re trying to tell me, or anyone else for that matter that the National Alliance, The Barnes Review, The American Free Press, Michael Collins Piper, Willis Carto, David Duke etc etc etc are not hate mongers, you can save your breath! You may not hate Jews and Mexicans,....(I never said you or fempatriot or anyone else in here did)...but you certainly seem ready to stand up and defend those who do.

Report this

By wvf3, December 11, 2007 at 9:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

911Truth wrote:

“If you want to know how racist Lou is, just look at his wife.  She is Latino.  Come on, how could he be racist?” 

First of all, to be “latino” is to be someone who is from Latin America (and speaks Spanish or Portuguese). It has nothing to do with race. If you want to see racism go to Brazil where there are white “latinos” of European decent and black “latinos” of African decent. Your point is about as valid is if you said “just look at his wife, she’s English.”

Report this

By cann4ing, December 11, 2007 at 9:33 am Link to this comment

T.Rex—the fact that there is a “Holocaust industry” which, as Prof. Finkelstein so aptly demonstrates in “Beyond Chutzpa” misuses the Holocaust to advance Zionist goals does not mean that the Holocaust did not occur.  The fact that there were millions of people killed during WW II, combatants and non-combatants alike, that were not included amongst those made to enter the gas chambers in Nazi concentration camps does not mean that the Holocaust did not occur.  The fact that you chose to deny uncontrovertable and well documented facts does not elevate your belief into “truth.”  The fact that you would cite so many irrelevancies to demonstrate your point reflects that you, unfortunately, lack the fundamental ability to reason by logic.  The fact that you would use the ubiquitous “they” to describe any and all who disagree with either Mr. Dobbs or with you suggests also that you suffer from some level of psychopathology.

News flash!  T.Rex, you are not the sole repository of “truth.”

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 11, 2007 at 2:37 am Link to this comment

Conservative Yankee I agree with much of what you’re saying. We are responsible for a lot of it, at least in the way we have allowed it to happen. Also in the way we fail to truly see it for what it is, how and why it came about and more importantly, where it is really taking us. Even organized labor IE Sweeney and the AFL-CIO should take some responsibility in supporting NAFTA, which in fact is an anti labor initiative. Did they get lost in this fact or was it merely a short term politically motivated perk? The long term realities have become drastically apparent!

I can’t argue that the elitists in Mexico aren’t having a grand old time. In fact an article I posted gives credence to what you’re saying. But still, we must not for a moment believe our own elitists aren’t enjoying the show too! It is a mutual agreement and elitists on both sides of the border and for that matter, the entire world all share the balcony seats in this spectacle.

As always thank you for your thoughtful commentary.

Report this

By T.Rex, December 10, 2007 at 8:54 pm Link to this comment

The holocaust “industry” pays little attention to the 52 million other (apparently less important) deaths recorded during World War II. That sounds like the type of widespread racism and injustice that Juan and Amy would/should be concerned about doesn’t it?

But, they attacked Mr. Dobbs for reporting on the illegal alien invasion and used the racist angle because it suited them. And it was designed from the outset to obfuscates the real problem and it was an attempt to put the brakes on a real investigative interview of the subject Dobbs is obviously concerned with.

These tactics are called “agenda”. And to prove you have one Mr. Canning, I never said I “denied” the holocaust did I? I said, I believe we’ve been lied to about it. And I do. “Holocaust denier” being a subset of the word “hate” is also a “thought stopper”. Real truth has no sacred or untouchable areas.

Seek the truth. Never stop.

Report this

By fempatriot, December 10, 2007 at 8:32 pm Link to this comment

I’ve been posting for several years, and I’ve been attacked by people before.  The pattern is to discredit my posts so that people won’t be influenced by them.  Before American Free Press existed, it was The Spotlight, and certain people in the US hated it for printing _the truth_ and sued it; a judge found against it, and Spotlight went down the tubes.  They came back again as American Free Press. The only similarity between this newspaper and Fox News is their stand against illegal immigration. American Free Press speaks out about subjects that other news media is afraid/forbidden to tackle.  The newspaper tells people when the Bilderbergs are meeting (to decide the fate of us peons). They are the only news media this year to mourn the June 4, 1967 tragedy of the USS Liberty, an American ship that the Israelis bombed and strafed trying to sink it and kill all American sailors aboard. (Some survived.) AFP is very informative about illegal immigration and the powers behind it; the plight of the Palestinians (walled in, occupied, denied food, water, electricity by Israel) and the current push to bomb Iran, and more. The Barnes Review magazine is devoted to history that is _not_ written by the VICTORS as so much of our history is.  People lie. People omit any history that doesn’t put them in a good light.  I put these names forth, and readers can go to their sites, read excerpts from the two and make up their own minds. Or not. I can’t vouch for the accuracy of each article, or the impartiality of them, but I will defend the right of any person to read something that might run counter to what we’ve been propagandized about and then to make up their own minds.  I used to think that during WWII the Germans had a monopoly on propaganda, but now I know differently. The Spaniards didn’t sink “The Main,” but the US used it to start the Spanish American War.  The Lusitania was not just a passenger ship; it was carrying munitions for Britain which they lied about (WWI). Roosevelt wanted to get into WWII, and he had sanctions against Japan that pushed them into attacking the US… Heads of state lie.  They manipulate. Americans have been getting daily doses of propaganda for years. I hope some people will check out Federation for American Immigration Reform and NumbersUSA.  Especially the NumbersUSA stance of Democrats and Republicans on this issue.  And that this will influence voters next November. The posts here have been interesting and informative.  Goodbye all. :o)

Report this

By cann4ing, December 10, 2007 at 6:15 pm Link to this comment

So T.Rex, are you telling me that there is any “truth” in denying the existence of the Holocaust?  If so, then you have proven only that you fall within one or more of the categories I listed.

Report this

By T.Rex, December 10, 2007 at 4:44 pm Link to this comment

Well Ernest, you may have set a new record for proving my point. What on earth made you stop at a forum with “Truth” in it’s name? Perhaps that’s only for the “Truth” you find comfortable? And when truth or even the discussion of it, don’t fit your “parameters”, it’s on to option “C”?

Report this

By cann4ing, December 10, 2007 at 4:26 pm Link to this comment

T.Rex, if you really doubt that the Holocaust happened you are either (a) incredibly stupid, (b) badly misinformed, or (c) thoroughly disingenous.  Hate could explain category (c).

Report this

By JOHN, December 10, 2007 at 4:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Amy and Juan - A little less “STATIC” in your interviews might be helpful.  We know we are in trouble when we can’t distinguish between Democracy Now and Fox.

Report this

By T.Rex, December 10, 2007 at 3:17 pm Link to this comment

Michael Shaw, why is it that when anyone doubts that the holocaust happened the way it’s been not only presented, but actively promoted, it is automatically because of “hate”. I think “hate” is one of the favorite buzzwords for those frightened of the truth, and/or those who have an investment in the status quo. I’ve never hated a jew in my life, nor would I hurt one hair on one’s head, but I do believe we’ve been lied to about the holocaust. I also don’t believe 9/11 happened the way we were sold/told. I guess I automatically “hate” the victims and their families?

And more on topic, I guess I also “hate” Mexicans because I think we have way too many illegal aliens taking jobs, depressing wages and using taxpayer provided social services? I wasn’t present in Eastern Europe in the early 1940s, so my quest for holocaust truth “must be” motivated by “hate”, but this illegal alien situation is very close to home and I am very much a witness. Is it still “hate” to discuss the presently obvious?

Folks, mention any of these three examples (holocaust, 9/11 and illegal alien invasion) in any forum and you will get some person(s) accusing you of hatred. It’s an automatic “thought stopper” when used on a population who “cut their teeth” on corporate media mind control.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 10, 2007 at 11:18 am Link to this comment

119235 Fempatriot here is more on American Free Press. They put the manufactured news of FOX to shame. They are also subsidized by the Barnes Review a known mouthpiece for the extreme right. In fact they share the same office building. In my view anyone who runs adds for the National Alliance doesn’t deserve the time of day.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 10, 2007 at 11:07 am Link to this comment

I’m sorry Fempatriot but I do not condone fascism wherever it comes from. As a believer in the first amendment, they can say whatever they want like anyone else, but I admonish what they perpetuate, which is basically a few strewn facts, lots of speculation and all of it wrapped in hate.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 10, 2007 at 11:00 am Link to this comment

119113 I jumped the gun First things First. You are absolutely right.We are on the same side.

Report this

By fempatriot, December 10, 2007 at 10:37 am Link to this comment

Back to the subject of Lou Dobbs and Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez:  When I watched the show, I was disappointed to see both Amy and Juan “gang up on” Lou Dobbs for his firm rejection of illegal immigration from anywhere. (They come from 40 different countries, people!) And I understand his rancor when he came under attack.  They pointed out a few mistakes in order to discredit him.  In my opinion, that’s not a debate. And that is what I wanted to hear: a debate.
Now for some good (I think) news:  NumbersUSA has compiled a grid on the Democrat and Republican actions on illegal immigration.  You can go to the NumbersUSA site and find it somewhere—I received it in an email.  They rate each candidate on his/her stance on what to do about illegal aliens.  I was disappointed to find that _every_ Democrat has an abysmal record.  Yes, people, the Democrats want to just open the doors and sing “Come on down!”  Barak Obama scored highest with 2 “good’s.”  Most had only one.  I didn’t check the Republican one, because they appear to have a better record, but I don’t think President Bush does.  Anyway, I invite those interested to go see it.

Report this

By fempatriot, December 10, 2007 at 10:19 am Link to this comment

To Michael Shaw:  I remember now why I mentioned Michael Collins Piper’s book FINAL JUDGMENT and what I said…that JFK was murdered (didn’t say by whom) because he went against the “statue quo.”  Behind the scenes he was fighting a desperate fight to keep Israel from obtaining nuclear weapons because he didn’t want the balance of power in the Middle East to be so one-sided.  Communist China was helping them, btw, and they not only were making nuclear weapons at that time, but they were 7 stories below ground, and they sealed it up when US inspectors came there to inspect their reactor at Dimona and LIED to JFK and the inspectors.  Some years later, that brave Israeli, Mordechai Vanunu blew the whistle on them that yes, indeedy, they had been making nukes for years. For that he was drugged by a female Mossad, kidnapped in Italy (by Mossad agents) and secretly brought back to Israel where he was incarcerated for over 18 years and still is not allowed to leave the country.  I would invite you to post under a different subject, and we could have a conversation, but I sense that your opinion is as set as mine, so nothing would be accomplished.  Also…the American Free Press conference was about “free speech.”  So why not give everyone, including those with opposing views to yours the opportunity to be there and to speak?  Isn’t that what our right to free speech is all about? The fact that the Crescent & Cross people liked it doesn’t mean that American Free Press has anything to do with that organization, whatever it is. I had never heard of it till you mentioned it. I also think that when you put a damning label on someone—such as saying that Piper belongs to the KKK you should have a source to back that allegation up and not just throw out labels like that and “holocaust denier,” etc.  Freedom of speech also means the freedom of thought and the freedom to DOUBT.  This will be my last post on Piper.  He has a new book out: THE GOLEM—which is about—Israel’s nuclear weapons stockpile.

Report this

By Jon, December 9, 2007 at 7:31 pm Link to this comment

Lou Dobbs’ attitude in that interview was a great illustration of the arrogance and hubris that prevails today in corprate american and our goverment. 

Neither Amy nor Juan challenged Lou’s assertion that he was talking about illegal vs. legal immigration in his comments. 

I watch Democracy Now! regularly and whether you agree or diagree with the point of view of a guest on Amy’s show, you always know something of their background and/or who they represent. 

Lou Dobbs was so disrepectful that I give Amy and Juan credit for not asking him to leave.  Lou Dobbs did not seem to have any patience for the developement of an argument or point of view, be it historical context or otherwise.

I have watched Lou Dobbs and thought on the surface that it was good that he seemed to be siding with workers and others affected by wrong headed goverment policies.  As a result I expected a lively and well rounded debate on issues that are important in our country.  Instead, what I witnessed was defensive egomanical responses to fair qustions about his record. 

I was surprised and diappointed by his seeming inability to respond in a civil noncombative way to legitimate questions about factual desrepancies found in some of his reports.

finally, it seemed especially presumtive and arrogant for Lou Dobbs to say the lead ins to his reports were merely “jocular” and his audience should just know that he is just making light of the issues of immigration and the loss of jobs in America, and to suggest otherwise is insulting to their intelligence.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 9, 2007 at 6:47 pm Link to this comment

119036 Oppps!

Sorry First things first. I see you were using The American Monetary Institute as a weapon to fight what is going on, rather than blaming them for the current problem. I apologize for this oversight and on this note you are right! I still think Dobbs is a part of the problem though. But the AMI is a good program and a move in the right direction.

Report this

By reason, December 9, 2007 at 6:07 pm Link to this comment

I have been a viewer of the Lou Dobbs program on CNN for the last 3 years. I have found Lou Dobbs to be most honest in his presentation of the news and issues than most other news presentations. I have watched Democracy Now; finding it to be a good source of altenative views and I generally respect Amy Goodman’s efforts (not always her views).
Lou Dobbs has proved his passion/compassion, character and dignity in his nightly presentations on CNN. He has been at odds with CNN in the past to maintain the content of his show. He is not a corporate stooge; afraid to speak the truth as he knows it. Lou Dobbs is not God and like any other human; I am sure he is capable of making mistakes. But, I can say that; if I had to pick a friend from any news anchor, Lou would be the man.

Report this

By FirstThingsFirst, December 9, 2007 at 5:26 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Michael Shaw:

I need to clarify—I’m critical of progressives not for what they get right (racism, NAFTA, DLC etc.) but for what they too often overlook-the pivotal role of banking and financial institutions in the shaping of the “real economy.” The American Monetary Institute, far from being a source of the problem, is a beacon of light for those who want to understand the global consequences of our privatized monetary policy.

After looking at the AMI, check out the DVD “Money as Debt” for a primer on how private centralized banking supplies the impetus for pretty much everything we see happening in the real economy.

The point is, if you want to do something about the race to the bottom, go to the primary cause of the phenomenon—not just to the endless number of consequences. In my opinion, progressives spend too much time discussing consequences, and too little time working hard to illuminate the financial causes of our situation.

We need candidates (like Kucinich)who will take a stand on monetary policy (as he has) and make structural monetary reform (see American Monetary Act) an absolute priority.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 9, 2007 at 4:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

119127 by Ernest Canning on 12/09 at 3:25 pm

“... China is Communist in name only.”

As was/is every country which ever attempted this economic system.

The word “communist” has been so bastardized that it really means only what the person using it at the time says it means, sort of like “democracy” only worse!

BUT you (EC) know this….

Report this

By cann4ing, December 9, 2007 at 4:25 pm Link to this comment

fempatriot, China is Communist in name only.  Actually, it is perhaps the most brutal capitalist regime in the world, providing what amounts to a slave labor pool so that companies like Wal Mart can bring us poisoned toys on the cheap, while the five members of the Walton family, worth more than a combined $100 billion, rake in another $7 billion annually. 

Consider the following from Naomi Klein, “The Shock Doctrine,” previously cited by you. 

In the early 80s Deng Xiaoping “was enthusiastically committed to converting to a corporate-based economy—so committed that, in 1980, his government invited Milton Friedman to come to China and tutor hundreds of top-level civil servants, professors and party economists in the fundamentals of free-market theory….

“Friedman’s definition of freedom, in which political freedoms were incidental, even unnecessary , compared with the freedom of unrestricted commerce, conformed nicely with the vision taking shape in the Chinese Politburo.  The party wanted to open the economy to private ownership and consumerism while maintaining its grip on power….The mode the Chinese government intended to emulate was not the United States but something much closer to Chile under Pinochet:  free markets combined with authoritarian political control, enforced by iron-fisted repression.

“...Under Mao, the Chinese state had exerted brutal control over the people, dispensing with opponents and sending dissidents for reeducation.  But Mao’s repression took place in the name of the workers and against the bourgeoisie; now the party was going to launch its own counterrevolution and ask workers to give up many of their benefits and security so that a minority could collect huge profits.”

Report this

By fempatriot, December 9, 2007 at 3:30 pm Link to this comment

Michael Shaw: I shouldn’t have posted Piper’s book, since it has nothing to do with illegal immigration (unless one counts the fact that Mafia boss Lansky had dual citizenship back and forth between the US and Israel.)
I have read most of Piper’s books, and I don’t find him to be a hatemonger, a holocaust denier, or pro-Nazi.  His books are backed up by a huge reference section.  I subscribe to American Free Press and to The Barnes Review magazine.  You’d be surprised what you can learn if you have an open mind. My goal in life is to read as many politically incorrect books as possible and then weigh the evidence.  Luckily there is a growing body of it out there. I did not attend the conference; I don’t know about some of the speakers, but some of them are very well respected.  And I applaud the fact that a person who may have political ideals different from mine was given the chance to speak—whether or not I would have agreed with what he said (the man who built a monument to Hitler??) There are speakers who have tried to speak in this country and who have been denied that privilege by an audience of the opposing view who shouted them down. Free speech is giving everyone a chance to speak—not keeping them from doing so. The Establishment has been very quiet about Piper’s books and his accusations, which is a good sign that The Establishment doesn’t want them brought to the attention of the average American.

Report this

By fempatriot, December 9, 2007 at 3:02 pm Link to this comment

The movie, Gangs of New York was about immigration and how it impacted the poor (both black and white) who were already here.  At that time, the government was letting in starving Irishmen.  Britain was deliberately not doing anything about the poverty in Ireland, and the USA was getting Irish bodies to put into the factories where they could pay them even less than they did blacks.  Many Irish volunteered to fight in the Civil War to make that $13 a month wage.  The Scots immigrated to America when the landowners began to burn down their cottages to drive them off Scottish land and run sheep on the land back in the days when Britain had its industrial revolution and needed large amounts of wool (from Scotland) and cotton (from the southern US) for the mills. Children as young as 4 worked at the looms, often dying before they reached their teens. World War I brought an end to a lot of this class system and cheap labor, but the Establishments of the US and Europe keep trying to resurrect it.  Communist China, of course, is providing most of American/multicultural corporations with slave labor now.  (My hat’s off to Lou Dobbs for using the word COMMUNIST China.  Never forget that they are still communists.)

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 9, 2007 at 2:45 pm Link to this comment

119114 FemPatriot although some of your reading suggestions are good ones, I’d like to point out that Michael Collins Piper of the American Free Press and his show, The Piper Report, author of the book you mentioned, has ties in fact to the KKK.

He has claimed the MOSSAD murdered everyone from JFK to MLK.  He’s a holocaust denying, hate mongering right wing extremist who in 2006 attended an American Free Press and Barnes Review/rally who highlighted among others, Theo Junker, a former member of the SS and a guy who built a memorial on his American farm to Adolf Hitler. In fact Piper introduced him at the rally. This comes from the Crescent and Cross, an American born neo-Nazi organization. It has a list of guest speakers I think you’ll find most interesting.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 9, 2007 at 1:58 pm Link to this comment


First things first, you’ve got to be joking! I fail to see how a charitable non-profit institution who wants a more fair and balanced monetary system as the number one problem. Obviously you oppose monetary transparency and no doubt Dennis Kucinich.

If anything, Greenspan and the FED, along with the Friedmanite American Enterprise Institute are the real culprits, enabling corporate lawlessness on a scale that dwarfs any other previous scheme we seen in the last 50 years! Disasters are market opportunities and what better way to create more opportunity than to create more disasters? It’s like the old cliche, “We make the mess, we clean it up, business couldn’t be better!”

The now deceased Milton Friedman, who once helped former Dictator General Augusto Pinochet after his bloody coup, to manage his economic “shock treatment,” went on to turn Louisiana, after Katrina, into “his boys” own personal piggy bank. As he said, “only a crisis - actual or perceived - produces real change.” Yea! Change in their pockets! Concerning school privatization in Louisiana, his Chicago Schoolboys ranted, “Katrina accomplished in a day ... what Louisiana school reformers couldn’t do after years of trying”. Now we have the illegal immigration issue in the forefront, a perfect opportunity. Make it a national crisis, then market the hell out of it. 

Lou Dobbs may not the problem, but he helps it along by distorting the facts to the general population.

On these grounds, this doesn’t take Dobbs off the hook. He is a complicit and willing drum beater. Hence, the wall in stupidity, the armed militias and more importantly, the security contractors like Blackwater who (on our dime) are gearing up to “solve” the problem.

Dobbs is conveying exactly what they want him to convey and the charade continues and more importantly, the ripoff.

The American Monetary Institute has nothing to do with it…... corporate despotism does.

Report this

By fempatriot, December 9, 2007 at 1:52 pm Link to this comment

Decades ago the USA became the party to a movement to rape and pillage weaker nations of the world.  CONFESSIONS OF AN ECONOMIC HIT MAN by John Perkins is about that.  What happens is that the World Bank loans money to small countries that they know will never be able to pay off the debt. The US then sent in men like Mr. Perkins to make sure that this happened.  When the debt came due and the country couldn’t pay, they then demanded some resource of the country—like oil.  And came in and took it, without a care for the pollution, or the increase in poverty and misery when they were finished. After years of his conscience bothering him, Mr. Perkins finally got out.  I remember reading in a book—I believe it was The Ugly American—where the USA would build a highway for Asians who mostly rode bicycles and didn’t need much more than a bicycle path.  What they wanted—a bicycle, or a small flock of chickens, or an animal to pull a plow, they were denied. It was never about giving someone a real helping hand.  It’s frustrating to me to know that our government does not truly represent the will of us American people.  Time after time I have heard someone say that the people in most foreign countries like Americans when they get to know them, but they despise our government.  And the way our government has entrenched itself, there is no way to get rid of the wrongdoers for they are on both sides, and voting Democrat or Republican doesn’t do a thing to be rid of the evildoers.  Neither would term limits help.  The only way is to find those who will not knuckle under to the Powers That Be and easy money. But they get frozen out of the elections.  Even a president (JFK) can be killed if he doesn’t go along with the status quo. (FINAL JUDGMENT by Michael Collins Piper)
Recommended reading: 
I’ve read a few and they’re all on my list.

Report this

By Fempatriot, December 9, 2007 at 12:38 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Two things pained me about the Lou Dobbs appearance. (1) Amy and Juan are both dedicated devotees of ILLEGAL immigration.  They are especially determined that any Hispanic should be able to come here illegally, obtain all sorts of aid by fraud, and then be rewarded with citizenship.  (2) Both Amy and Juan were hostile to Lou Dobbs, determined to put across their POV.  Unfortunately, Lou is almost as strident as Bill O’Reilly. Plus—how can you argue for something illegal?
I recently read Lou’s book about the war on the middle class.  It is frightening how our own government in Washington, D. C. has done everything in its power to strip the average US citizen of work and American rights.  They are supposed to be our public servants, but they have become our RULERS.  And I do believe they are working toward forming the NORTH AMERICAN UNION, erasing the borders between the US, Canada, and Mexico.  It is not going to work.  There will be a race war in the US brought about by—not our racial hatred, but by our desperation to feed and clothe ourselves. That’s what happens when you get too many people + too few jobs.

Report this
mackTN's avatar

By mackTN, December 9, 2007 at 12:15 pm Link to this comment

Heavens, I’ve never been called conservative in my life!  I’m about as left as you can get, which is why I oppose recruiting undocumented workers in this country for the purpose of achieving profts through cheap labor.  This is the slave system all over again—instead of Africans, now Mexicans. 

Remember the big myth you discussed in history class—the one that dealt with the reasons for the civil war?  What?  You mean it wasn’t about the moral wrongs of slavery, that it was actually about a restructuring of the economy, and “freeing” up labor for the factories in the North, the only way to do so being to wrest them from the plantations in the South?  Thereafter, the big Migration—from the frying pan into the fire.

Those who want you to believe this is some kind of huge humanitarian project where we are rescuing the poor Mexicans from poverty (“they’re just trying to survive”) are using these workers as human shields to deflect attention from the real issues.

911 is absolutely right.  Forget about partisanship on this one.  Most people are, in fact.  They are interpeting the reality of what’s around them instead of taking Bush at his word—or the authority in our government. 

The North American Union—US, Canada, Mexico.  Guess what Mexico’s contribution is in this deal.  Businesses want cheap labor, they don’t want to be forced to pay a living wage, benefits, etc.  But if they can “rescue” the poor Mexicans who are trying to survive (while their own country does nothing except give them a map to the border) and get us to pay their health and welfare benefits—all is good.

This isn’t about Lou Dobbs, the Minutemen, etc.  If you attach yorself to a spokesman, that person will be brought down—and there is has been an accelerated attempt to weaken these people and paint them as racists.

It’s not about the workers, it has nothing to do with immigration—it’s about the people who bring these workers here and their reasons for doing so.

Report this

By cann4ing, December 9, 2007 at 11:36 am Link to this comment

Michael, the rapid growth of these private equity vultures is nothing less than astounding.  In an article accompanying the video it was noted that Kohberg, Kravis, Robers & Co. (KKR), founded in 1976, now commands a $107 billion empire.  “KKR raises money from investors, typically public and private pension funds, and then leverages that cash with borrowed money to make acquisitions and magnify returns.  For example, KKR may invest $1 for every $9 it borrows….Hardly a day goes by without another marque brand getting gobbled up by private equities.”  During the six month period Jan. to June 2006, “private equity buy-outs accounted for $1.2 trillion, or 20.3% of the record $5.8 trillion in mergers & acquisitions announced world wide during that period.”

Social Darwinists have it all wrong.  Capitalism doesn’t reward hard work.  It rewards scam artists, who use other people’s money to leverage their way to success, then profit by axing hard-working people who have devoted their lives to the acquired corporations.  These vultures then convert what only money can buy into political clout that affords billionaires a lower tax rate than is applied to their maids, whom they pay the bare minimum.

Meanwhile, as noted by Naomi Klein in “Disaster Capitalism,” in the wake of Katrina, “the Gulf Coast became a domestic laboratory for the same kind of government-run-by-contractors that had been pioneered in Iraq” with the same companies with the no-bid contracts in Iraq being given the no bids in New Orleans.

As in Iraq, “residents of the Gulf Coast…were expected to watch as contractors created an economic boom based on easy taxpayer money and relaxed regulations.”  Like the suspension of Davis-Beacon minimum wage.

“The result, predictably, was that after all the layers of subcontractors had taken their cut, there was next to nothing left for the people at the bottom.  For instance…FEMA paid Shaw $175 a square foot to install blue tarps on damaged roofs, even though the tarps themselves were provided by the government.  Once all the subcontractors took their share, the workers who actually hammered in the tarps were paid as little as $2 a square foot….”

“According to one study, ‘a quarter of the workers rebuilding the city were immigrants lacking papers…making far less money than legal workers….Some were not paid at all.  On one Halliburton/KBR job site, undocumented immigrant workers reported being wakened in the middle of the night by their employer…, who allegedly told them that immigration agents were on their way.  Most workers fled to avoid arrest; after all, they could end up in one of the new immigration prisons that Halliburton/KBR had been contracted to build for the federal government.”

Report this

By DennisD, December 9, 2007 at 11:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The corporate infestation of the building we call our nations democracy has been steady and nearly complete. The termites we call our politicians have all but destroyed us from within.

We the people, as voters and concerned citizens have allowed this to happen and continue to happen without so much as the slightest protest or demonstration. We have only ourselves to blame. It seems that the people of Europe aren’t going as quietly into that good night as we are. We’d better pay attention. Lou Dobbs is not the problem. He’s been used by the left and right as a convenient straw man to attack while the problem itself isn’t being addressed and isn’t about to go away on its own.

If anyone thinks that the influx of illegal aliens into the workforce in this country has been a good thing, ask yourself - has your standard of living increased or decreased in the last twenty plus years since NAFTA. You have to look no further than the net worth of the major corporations to see how they’ve profited, how about your own.

“In our conversation with Dobbs, “Democracy Now!” co-host Juan Gonzalez raised the issue of history, of how immigrants have been scapegoated: the Irish in the 1860s, the Chinese in the 1880s and, later, Southern Europeans”

Classic substitution, illegal for legal. Juan - I missed your point just what do the 1880’s that offered no welfare, hospital or other endless taxpayer provided services have in common with today.
And since yours and Amy’s checks come from George Soros who funds DN and whose corporate holdings benefit from this type of “unbiased” reporting just who the hell is kidding who.

You can attack the messenger but the message remains.

Report this

By Frances Cappelletti, December 9, 2007 at 9:33 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I am writing as a Liberal Democrat who volunteers for Democratic candidates.  My community is rife with illegal aliens and it shows.  The majority of Democrats, Independents and Republicans that I have spoken with, as well as the polls show that most Americans are fed up with the illegal alien invasion.  Lou Dobbs is speaking truth about the harm to American workers and school children that illegals and outsourcing cause.  We are no longer upholding the rule of law under Bush…..illegal war, habeas corpus, outing a CIA agent, destruction of evidence, stonewalling, secrecy, torture, and not securing our borders then not catching and deporting illegal alien lawbreakers.  It is illegal to harbor illegals whether it is a church or sanctuary city.  So churches should loose their tax exempt status and cities should be forced to uphold the laws of the USA.  Why would anyone think it is OK for illegal alien lawbreakers to step over the backs of the good law abiding immigrants who do their paperwork, get their medical checks and wait in line for the privilege of coming to America?  Fran

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 9, 2007 at 6:57 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

118942 by Michael Shaw on 12/08 at 12:33 pm

“... no one here has denied the influx of illegals have caused us problems. My contention is however that these problems are not a creation of Mexicans who can’t get their act together.”

Well, maybe, BUT I smell the stink of US huberous in this comment.

I suggest that maybe it is US (WE you and I and our fellow citizens)who do not have our act together.

Down in the South Bronx in the late 70’s they called the rich do-gooders from Scarsdale “The lady-bountiful contingent”

Some of the more scurrilous folks took down license numbers, found addresses, and traveled to Scarsdale to rob the folks who had recently brought food, clothing, and cash to “fix” the problems in the barrio.

IMHO The government of Mexico (home to the man who is now the wealthiest person on the planet)HAS their act together. They are “fixing” their problem with poverty by exporting it.  (similar to the way we export “freedom” to Iraq.

Report this

By FirstThingsFirst, December 9, 2007 at 3:01 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

In my opinion, what we’re seeing here is yet another example of dysfunctional progressivism. Lou Dobbs is not the problem. The problem is that progressives don’t understand how financial capitalism works, and therefore continue to fall short in critiquing our present system.

It’s like the incompetent handyman who has only a hammer in his tool box and turns every job into an opportunity to pull out the hammer. Progressives are good at spotting racism, and so Dobbs becomes a big target. What progressives are not so good at understanding is the financial machinery that drives our world economy, particularly how capital markets and international banking pull the strings for the media, trade and immigration policy.

Capital thrives in a world without borders, and if that makes us all reluctant nationalists, so be it. But for an even better form of resistance, go to the American Monetary Institute…

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 8, 2007 at 9:03 pm Link to this comment

118982 Ah! Equity Firms! Borrow the money to buy out public businesses, sell off their assets, lay off thousands of workers and live happily ever after. And then only pay a 15% income tax rate on your profits while the rest of us pay 35%. And we’re worried about immigrants! Thanks Ernest!

Report this

By dystopian, December 8, 2007 at 6:16 pm Link to this comment


My “corporate pawn” comment was over the top.  Amy has done great work.  “Profoundly ignorant”?  Every other network is a corporate pawn.  It only follows that DN could be a corporate pawn.  It is not beyond reason to question DN’s motives.  “Profoundly ignorant” - DN is no different than any other information organ. 

So, let’s not look at the impetus behind the interview (corporate), but instead look at the results.  Why would DN mock the North American Union with Lou Dobbs, but devote an interview to its existence a few months earlier?

As far as your contention that I would not be able to put on a news program as good as Amy and Jaun - WTF?  Why does my lack of ability to successfully host a news program preclude me from commenting on theirs?  That is a ridiculous notion that reminds me of the behavior of those on the right.  DN is not above reproach.

This is about truth.  I don’t care what program it is.  I watch DN - I’ve watched for 2 years or so.  I’ll continue to watch and I will continue to call them on any other misleading (or in this case plain bad) or dishonest interviews.

Report this

By Thomas Billis, December 8, 2007 at 5:26 pm Link to this comment

Lou please have your next group of people we can all hate ready.If the Mexican immigration problem is solved I may have to start blaming myself again for all my problems.Thanks to you and others I have been able to unburden myself and blame someone else for all the problems of the Universe.Lou please have another group of people ready to go I do not want to go back to the good old blame myself days.

Report this

By cann4ing, December 8, 2007 at 5:12 pm Link to this comment

dystopian, I would be one of the first to say that the Dobbs interview was not one of Amy and Juan’s better efforts, but to suggest that this translates into making DN a “corporate pawn” is so profoundly ignorant that I can only conclude that you are not someone who links into DN on a daily basis, as I have done for years.

As I noted in a previous post, outside of an occasional piece by Bill Moyers, Democracy Now represents the finest in American journalists.  They may have stumbled a bit on this one interview, but they have always striven to speak truth to power.

I have yet to read anything you have posted at Truthdig that suggests that if you were given the responsibility to prepare and present such a program on a daily basis you could even begin to approach the degree of professional presentation that Amy and Juan provide for this nation five days a week, every week.

Report this

By dystopian, December 8, 2007 at 4:42 pm Link to this comment

Shame on democracy now.  Juan Gonzalez asks Lou Dobbs about the North American Union and then can’t help laughing while he asks it as if the whole topic is just too silly -  “this concept of a giant nation, can you expound on that?”.  Yet, earlier this year DN featured Canadian broadcaster Avi Lewis who spoke on the North American Union very seriously.  There was no laughing at this time yet when the question is posed to Dobbs…...
I guess I’ll have to write off another “independent” news program as a corporate pawn.

Watch these two 10 minute videos of both interviews

dobbs on DN

DN with Avi Lewis talking about the NAU

Report this

By cann4ing, December 8, 2007 at 4:38 pm Link to this comment

Michael Shaw:  While we are on the topic of “privatization” you just “have” to see the latest Robert Greenwald short clip at

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 8, 2007 at 1:33 pm Link to this comment

118911 Union guy, no one here has denied the influx of illegals have caused us problems. My contention is however that these problems are not a creation of Mexicans who can’t get their act together. Quite the contrary. It’s corporatism plain and simple. Look up the definition and then reflect on how Bush has privatized our own government, essentially giving corporations free reign while at the same time he has weakened the Bill of Rights, removed Habeas Corpus and can lock up anyone he wants indefinitely by simply calling them an enemy of the state. Also reflect on his huge government spending programs, the greatest in world history, that may very well bankrupt our nation in the years to come. When that happens we’ll be eating illegal aliens just to survive.

We need to focus on the real problems and who are causing them if we are ever to solve these things and make them right. The symptoms you see and that Dobbs extrapolates are not the symptoms of illegal immigration, they are the symptoms of globalization, NAFTA and the free trade market scenario.

Report this

By Union Guy, December 8, 2007 at 10:51 am Link to this comment

I know people from Marshalltown, Iowa who have told me about the social service programs that have been destroyed from the influx of illegal immigrants working in the meat processing facilities in that community. The schools and hospitals have had budgets decimated from the illegals use of the emergency room services and from the schools having to start classes training their children to speak English.

I spent a few years in Springdale, AR - another community overrun by illegals. I can hardly recognize the place from when I lived there in the mid to late eighties. The chicken plants advertised in southern California about job opennings there and openned the floodgates for them to flow there unabated. Results:  the same as the paragraph described above.

I’m part of a peer support team here in Kansas City. I help people dealing with post traumatic stress from critical incidents that they have had. One man told me about his son who befriended the son of one of these illegals. At a party this “friend” used a .38 caliber pistol to point at the back of his head and pulled the trigger. At the trial the judge asked him why he shot this young guy in the head. The defendant chuckled and said, “He thought he was big - I guess he wasn’t so big.” This man will be released in January in the state of Kansas after 3 years of incarceration.

I’ve always been a Democrat but with all of this silly crap that we’ve aligned ourselves with you’ve lost me. It’s no longer about the
“working guy”. It’s about radical voting blocks tearing us apart. We’ve become bi-polar in our demeanor and easy to tear apart by our opposition because of it. We definitely need adult supervision.
The illegals need to go home and fight for fairness in their countries. Unionizing wasn’t easy in this country but people believed in it enough to fight and die for some amount of fairness and representation. Real working Americans are again being divided by the wealthy and Corporate Elite, the outcome of which will be another republican in the White House and their eventual regain of control of Congress. Lou Dobbs isn’t the problem - he’s just noticing the symptoms.

Report this

By Fempatriot, December 8, 2007 at 10:21 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I watch Lou Dobbs every night.  He is NOT a hate monger; he’s merely against ILLEGAL immigration.  He is 100% for immigrants who come into this country LEGALLY. He’s also for the common, ordinary citizen who is being crowded out of many jobs by employers who prefer to hire illegals for a pittance rather than even pay minimum wages to American citizens.  (Tyson in Ark. got rid of its American citizen employees so they could hire illegals—all the meat packers seem to be doing this.) Construction—lawn maintenance, food service, etc. is cashing on illegals from 40 different countries who are willing to work at slave wages—-for now.  In the meantime, middle class America is sinking down to lower class America while the corporations get richer every day.  If you prefer to not listen to Mr. Dobbs—fine.  Check with Federation for American Immigration Reform and NumbersUSA to get the truth about how illegal immigration is IMPORTING POVERTY and turning the USA into just another 3rd world country without borders.

Report this

By T.Rex, December 8, 2007 at 12:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Well, I always watch your show AND Lou Dobbs every day. Unfortunately, I think you’ve just exposed yourselves as the New York-centric, left-wing elite gatekeepers I suspected you were. I think you need to get out more and see the effects of illegal immigration and corporate outsourcing on middle class/working class and unemployed/underemployed citizens of all these United States. Sharpening your pencils over the minutia of a few inaccuracies on Mr. Dobbs’ show pointed out your glaring inability to deal with the reality of the issues of effecting massive numbers of regular folks in this country. This was really a low point in your show’s credibility.

I also want to leave you with a few thoughts. Intellectuals, authors and journalists don’t make the world go around. Although these too are under siege by the avarice stricken, the roads you drive on, the food you eat, the heat you enjoy in the Winter, the water you drink and wash with, the home you live in and the buildings you work in, electricity/telephone/broadband, all brought to you by the working slobs of the United States. Also, 97% of this country does not live in the media fog of New York City. Broaden your horizons. If a fraction of your show focused on the rather large group of people for whom I speak (and am very proud to be a member of) versus the plight of the oppressed in semi-obscure foreign countries around the globe, you’d have more credibility with a guy like Lou Dobbs. As it was, you came off like a bitter Pee Wee Herman at a Mr. Universe contest.

I think you’d be best served taking a pass on these types of “home grown” issues in the future. Hopefully, you’ll do better reporting on these issues in the future and then I can continue to watch your show.

Independent media is too important to leave in the hands of the semi-intellectual left-gatekeepers, any more than minds should be shaped by corporate right-wing news. Please do better in the future.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 7, 2007 at 10:34 pm Link to this comment

118760 April good question. Another point: While our politicians allow armed militias and mercenaries, along with private security corporations like Blackwater, to essentially have free reign of our entire southwest(and elsewhere), we should stop and think for a moment that these same politicians, who have squashed our civil liberties (to keep us safe) have also handed these bozos federal authority. Thanks for your comments!

Report this

Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 >

Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Like Truthdig on Facebook