Check out the new TD post about new evidence being released on the anthrax case. I’m reposting my post from that thread:
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— -
This is evidence??????????????????????? Some introspective poetry, and what sounds to me like normal indignation at the 9-11 disaster? They must be kidding! The only actual evidence they have is the DNA traced to his flask of anthrax, but Gerald Posner says he has talked to many microbiologists and they are unanimous that to go from such an anthrax culture to the kind of highly sophisticated, weapons grade powder that was in those envelopes is technically difficult and beyond the capabilities of one scientist working alone. Ivins sounds like a total patsy to me, conveniently suicided just before the “solution” was announced.
————————& #8212;———————R 12;————————
So, what do you think? i think we got psychopaths in the woodwork.

ITW,

I appreciate your skepticism when it comes to conspiracy theories. So let me ask you about the Anthrax business. According to the FBI we have now determined the person who did it. He is, as usual, a lone nut, and, also as usual, by the time it is announced, he is conveniently dead and in no position to contradict the official story. Now I just heard author Gerald Posner make several strong points on the Olbermann show. There was a flask of liquid anthrax that was traced to Ivins, and that is being offered as the most convincing evidence that he is the culprit. Posner’s point is that it is a long way from a liquid flask of Anthrax to the weapons-grade powder that was sent in the mail. He says he has talked to many experts in microbiology and they are unanimous that making this sort of anthrax powder is technically difficult and beyond the capacity of one scientist working alone.

I think there were probably others involved. Who knows, maybe even the same rogue elements involved in 9-11 itself. Maybe not, but I would like to put an attack dog prosecutor on this to look at every last detail. Instead, the FBI is acting like they solved the case, the guy is dead, case closed. Smells like a coverup to me!

Just wondering when Obama starts talking about:
http://www.youtube.com/user/votenader08

Re Inherit The Wind, August 6 at 8:52 am #

But I’ve always said we get the leaders we deserve.
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— -
So have I. It was one of Jimmy Carter’s best lines. We deserved Carter, and we deserved what we got for not giving him a second term. We deserve Bush II, and if we manage to avoid electing the best candidate for President I have seen in my lifetime, Barack Obama, we will deserve McCain, too.

Of course, if it looks like a landslide victory for Obama from the exit polls, and the Republicans egregiously steal it by hacking the voting machines, that’s another matter. I would consider that a coup. In that case, it is time for massive street demonstrations, etc. If it is that egregious, the real American people would be behind such actions.

Re Inherit The Wind, August 6 at 8:52 am #

“But Tony, the people don’t know what they want or need! We have to teach them!”—Sorry, Mr. Headroom, but did I steal your next line?
————————& #8212;———————R 12;————————
Such “educational” efforts are going to convince millions of people that the Democratic Party is bad news and they better vote for McCain.

Tony Wicher, August 6 at 7:52 am #

You recreate 68 types are monumentally self-centered and self-righteous to think you represent “the people”. Who elected you? Nobody, that’s who. You “elected” yourselves. Obama certainly represents the power structure, or some elements of it, but he also represents “the people” a whole hell of a lot more than you. Even McCain does. You guys aren’t really democratic at all. You really are elitists. The people are not behind you, not at all. You’re the kiss of death. Anything you’re for, the people are going to vote against.
***********************************************

“But Tony, the people don’t know what they want or need! We have to teach them!”—Sorry, Mr. Headroom, but did I steal your next line?

It’s not that I don’t think there are a lot of ignorant and even stupid voters.  There obviously are (63 million voted for Bush in 2004).  I don’t think I have the right to “vote” for them, because they have to vote for themselves.

Right now, we have a system where the politicians play to the fears of the un-informed, who refuse to see they are un-informed.  How do I know?  They buy into obvious BS from McCain, Obama, Paul, Kucinich, Barr, and even (gasp!) Ralph Nader.

If you want to know what “The People” want, study Nikita Kruschev on “Goulash Communism”.

If you want better voters, bring back Civics classes and teach people what our Democracy is all about and how it works.  Ask 99 out of 100 people on the street what the requirements for being President are and and they’ll name something wrong “He has to be a family man.” “He has to go to church”—stuff like that. 

Ask them where Habeas Corpus is in the Bill of Rights—you’ll get answers like the 1st Amendment, the 5th Amendment (Trick Question: HC is in the main body of the Constitution, not the BOR—it was the ONE right the Founding Fathers all agreed needed to be enumerated right from the start).

But I’ve always said we get the leaders we deserve.  If we didn’t get Al Gore or John Kerry in, it’s the fault of everyone of us, including all you Ralph Nader voters.

If we are stupid voters, we get crooked leaders who take advantage of us. If we are scared voters, we get dictators.  If we judge Presidential candidates by who we’d like to drink a beer with, we get George W. Bush.

Max,

You recreate 68 types are monumentally self-centered and self-righteous to think you represent “the people”. Who elected you? Nobody, that’s who. You “elected” yourselves. Obama certainly represents the power structure, or some elements of it, but he also represents “the people” a whole hell of a lot more than you. Even McCain does. You guys aren’t really democratic at all. You really are elitists. The people are not behind you, not at all. You’re the kiss of death. Anything you’re for, the people are going to vote against.

cyrena,

When I first checked the site there was something suggesting a link to the DNC. I don’t see it now. There is no way the DNC is going to approve this thing. They’re not suicidal.

Check out this shit USA today. And I do mean shit.

The Denver City Council has passed an ordinance barring protesters from carrying buckets of feces during the Democratic National Convention.

Three protest groups say they’ve already promised not to toss, smear or spray feces, and they call the new ordinance insulting and excessive.

The council approved the ordinance 12-0 on Monday. It also bars protesters from possessing chains, locks or other materials they could use to create human barricades or cause other disruptions.

Members of Re-create 68, Unconventional Action and Tent State University say the ordinance is overkill because they have signed an agreement not to use excrement.

The convention will take place Aug. 25-28.
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— -
Wow, recreate 68 promises not to use excrement! Can you picture it on national TV?

By Tony Wicher, August 5 at 7:51 pm #

Re Max Shields, August 5 at 3:07 pm

Go ahead and predict gloom and doom; I can’t stop you. What’s your alternative? recreate 68?

================================================
Given what’s happening around us - that is if you stop thinking we can afford business as usual - it’s not a prediction of gloom and doom. I like to think of it as an opportunity for a new beginning…if we’re smart enough to view it that way.

The old system - the one McCain and Obama are running in - is dying. Death to such as system will not come easy. It will fight and claw to keep as many American’s attention as possible, but like all things, a re-birth is on the horizon.

But for the short term it’s pretty messy and it’s fair to say that the real power behind these personalities will fight mightily to retain their kingdom. Obama is not a leader in the sense of being at one with himself. His speeches are sounding tired and begging for purpose. Eloquence has a shelf-life and his is ending. That doesn’t mean he won’t in the White House in ‘09…it’s certainly possible though given everything McCain is neck in neck in the polls.

The point is it’s hard to simply talk your way into the hearts and minds of people. There’s got to be a sense of knowing who you are and what you stand for deep in your soul. Dems continue to play with Repug-lite fire and they get burned because they shed authenticity for pragmaticism - and as I said a Faustian wager that doesn’t pan out.

As far as violent disruptions as the Dem convention, I’m with you. The kind of change we need won’t be gotten through violence; but I certainly applaud any and all expressions by the people to demonstrate against deceipt and war. For that I say, RIGHT ON!!

Tony, this was part of your comment to ITW

Did you check it out? http://www.recreate68.com/. Tell me what you think. This supposedly has the blessing of the DNC??? I don’t like the looks of it at all. I’m sure that most of the people involved are sincere, but I fear they are politically naive and being used, same as 40 years ago.

~~~

For whatever the reason, (because I can’t site anything specifically right now) I don’t think this group is approved by the DNC. If so, then there is more than one agenda going on here.

Sounds overwhelmingly sinister to me…like a Max Shields type gang mentality. How do we figure that the DNC would be OK with a group who portends to break down the entire system?

I’m glad you sent the letter. I chewing my fingernails too. I don’t trust it at all.

Yeah, recreate 68,www.recreate68.com, “About Us”

Welcome to the Recreate 68 website, your virtual activists’ convergence center for the Democratic National Convention of 2008. This website was created for all the grassroots people who are tired of being sold out by the Democratic Party.

R68 agrees with the proposition, POTESTAS IN POPULO, “all power comes from the people.” What stands between the people and power are the party machines. The parties were devised as a means to represent the people. Today they represent nobody, not even party members, but only party bureaucracy. The people have been left without appropriate institutions for their representation. We intend to create those institutions!

Join us in the streets of Denver as we resist a two-party system that allows imperialism and racism to continue unrestrained.
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— —-
Great, just great! Well, maybe by the grace of Allah, things won’t be so bad, the Denver pigs won’t be as piggish as the Chicago 68 pigs, there won’t be any major incidents and a fun celebration of democracy will be had by all. I’m chewing my fingernails as we speak.

By yours trulyj, August 5 at 3:42 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

A Just Peace Is Possible

“How?”

“First the Jewish settlers own up to their having barged in uninvited and taken over the Palestinian homeland.”

———————— ———————— 212;———————— ;—
OK, I’ll bite. When is this going to happen? When Hell freezes over?

Re Max Shields, August 5 at 3:07 pm

Go ahead and predict gloom and doom; I can’t stop you. What’s your alternative? recreate 68?

By Lefty, August 5 at 3:20 pm #
“Max, I think you are a neo-con, bigot!”

=================================================

Consider refraining from using the word “think” when making such accusations.

Tony
“I do understand what you are saying, and it is certainly true that Obama cannot go outside the “mainstream” if he expects to be elected. The range of the debate is very narrow, as Chomsky says.”

It seems you aren’t reading my posts in their entirety. It is not simply that Obama has “moved” to the right and so the differences are slight between his rhetoric and McCain’s. It is the totality of his relationships which are deeply troubling if you believe in real change in foreign and hence domestic American policy.

The MSM is certainly extremely problematic as they shape the dialog and to whatever extent the election outcome. All of a sudden oil drilling is a must thing to do because - the American people want it, be damned all that talk about alternative green sustainable energy!!!

I expect, regardless of who wins this election, the US will refocus on Latin America. Military options will be part and parcel of so-called “American diplomacy”. The latter is not diplomacy because it is about asymmetrical force to bring about one sides results over the other, it is the ultimate threat.

In 2006, the Latin American historian, Greg Grandin wrote in his Empire’s Workshop, that regardless of which party/candidate won, the US would be going back into Latin America to lick its wounds as it has done twice before. When that happens death and despire occurs. While soft-power (FDR’s Good Neighbor policy) is possible, Grandin, wisely predicts that it will not be the case. The corporate hold on both parties has increased many times since Reagan when last the US (G Bush I went to Panama)blow tourched South and Central America with death squads. American Corporate dependencies are deep.

Bottom line, either of these guys will be forced to protect those interests at any cost to the people of Latin America. US will continue to be a preditory nation under an Obama administration. His advisors are shaping up to be militarists who’ve shown their proclevity for military intervention for decades.

No, Obama is a newby who will follow their lead. One can be very sure of that. So, it is not his rhetoric. It is the company he keeps and the truth that the US government is owned not by You and Me, but by a corporate class and its mineons (neocons/neoliberals, hawks, blue dog Dems, conservatives, etc.).

Peace, Tony

ITW,

Did you check it out? http://www.recreate68.com/. Tell me what you think. This supposedly has the blessing of the DNC??? I don’t like the looks of it at all. I’m sure that most of the people involved are sincere, but I fear they are politically naive and being used, same as 40 years ago. The language is inflamatory, with images of clenched fists, etc. In their statement of principles they don’t even promise to be non-violent, but invoke a principle of community self-defense. Can you picture it? It’s like deja vu all over again. Recreate 68. What the hell? How easy will it be for a provocateur to throw a stone and start a riot? Why are these people going to Denver, anyway? Vietnam was the Democrat’s war. At least it made sense in 68 for anti-war protesters to go to the Chicago Democratic convention. Iraq is the Republican’s war. They own it lock, stock and barrel. All anti-war protesters should go to the Republican convention, not the Democratic one. It makes no sense to go to Denver. What good do these people think they are doing? There is everything to lose and nothing to gain from this action.

Tony Wicher, August 5 at 8:45 am #

Tony Wicher
Ontario, California
****************************************

So that’s their latest dirty trick?  THAT I can believe they are capable of, far more than conceiving, planning, and carrying out the WTC attack.  THIS is more in line with how they think and act.  Then they’ll have someone toss in a bomb and blame the Left.  It’s been done before—The Haymarket Square Bombing—in Chicago, no less. May 4, 1886.  3 men were executed for a “crime” it was never proved that they committed.  It was used to crack down and generate hysteria against “Foreign Anarchists!”

Max,

I thought you might be interested in this email I just sent to the PDA:

Folks,

I want to be damn sure that any actions taken during the Denver convention do NOT turn out like Chicago 68, which was a huge political disaster that brought us 40 years of Republicanism, reaction and ruin. What is this “recreate68’ group? Is it full of Republican provocateurs like Chicago? I’m sure of it! Who the hell wants to recreate 68 but Republicans? THERE MUST BE NO VIOLENCE NO MATTER WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BETTER NOT TO GO AT ALL!!!! I SAY GO ONLY TO THE REPUBLICAN CONVENTION. They are the criminals, they are the ones we should be angry with. Please, please, don’t do anything to hurt the Democrats and let McCain get in the way Nixon got in. Not again.  I’M BEGGING YOU! 

Tony Wicher
Ontario, California

By Max Shields, August 5 at 5:22 am #

By Tony Wicher, August 4 at 8:53 pm #

Your arguments for Obama are frivelous. “what he says doesn’t matter because he’s not the president”!!!!

So, why not vote for McCain?

The truth is that Obama continues to frame the world in Bush-talk. He does not confront it and provide an alternative. This has been the fundamental problem with the Dems - accentuated post-Reagan. For Obama it’s still about a war on terror. But of course those are just his words and he’s not president and so we should ignore them…because when he’s in….

It is true that both these candidates are in a dialog that has nothing to do with change. There differences - as the differences between Hillary and Obama - are slight, a question of degree and image and personality. That’s fundamentally it.
————————& #8212;———————R 12;————————
I do understand what you are saying, and it is certainly true that Obama cannot go outside the “mainstream” if he expects to be elected. The range of the debate is very narrow, as Chomsky says. (By the way, I have been corresponding with Chomsky off and on since the early 90’s. I often agree with him, but we also disagree on important matters, and I find him rather - no, quite - dogmatic and intolerant.) But in this particular case, McCain v Obama, the political range, if still restricted, is the widest it has ever been in my lifetime. This is the election when our votes mean the most.  This election of all elections is the time for a Democratic landslide. People, don’t throw your vote away!

Re Inherit The Wind, August 5 at 3:40 am

ITW,

Whew! I’m pleasantly relieved. I was worried about you for a minute. I am on board with your strategy. No point starting serious investigations until after Bush is out of office and can’t pardon anybody. But once he is out, then, yes, investigate the hell out of everything and everybody. It would be so sweet to see Bush in jail! I could die happy. 

Part of the investigation should surely be a thorough investigation of everything that went on before, during and after 9-11. If it turns out on closer examination that it really was nothing but monumental incompetence, I can accept that.

I think your reluctance to consider that bin Laden had inside help may be that you are concerned that so many anti-Semites are blaming it on Israel and the Mossad. To me, the prime suspect is the Bush Administration, or rogue elements within it. I think it likely that CIA connections with bin Laden have been maintained since the 80’s through the ISI, Pakistani intelligence.

By Tony Wicher, August 4 at 8:53 pm #

Your arguments for Obama are frivelous. “what he says doesn’t matter because he’s not the president”!!!!

So, why not vote for McCain?

The truth is that Obama continues to frame the world in Bush-talk. He does not confront it and provide an alternative. This has been the fundamental problem with the Dems - accentuated post-Reagan. For Obama it’s still about a war on terror. But of course those are just his words and he’s not president and so we should ignore them…because when he’s in….

It is true that both these candidates are in a dialog that has nothing to do with change. There differences - as the differences between Hillary and Obama - are slight, a question of degree and image and personality. That’s fundamentally it.

When McCain makes his accusations about Obama the narrative is simply a script - The Dems get one speaking part and the Repugs the other. Only those who don’t follow any of this may think their actually defining real differences.

It’s about calling someone a “liberal” and the other calling his opponent a “Bush 3rd term”. No substance just old time political religion come out to strut its tired old self.

Frankly the problems with this country are so deep that this half-wits will never be able to do more than go to war, and meddle in the world’s business. Only a minor mirical, it would be timid at best, would change that course. The depth of the corporate strangle hold on these parties and candidates is such that there will be no change. Our domestic quagmire will go the way of our perpetural warring. It’s fatal.

Good news, Nadar’s clocking 6% and growing. Not bad.

Let me ask you this: do you support continuing to investigate the crimes of the Bush administration after November? Don’t you want to see some accountability? Don’t you think we really need a major airing out to restore our Constitution? That’s all I’m asking, just investigate everything from 9-11 to the lies that got us into Iraq to bin Laden being allowed to get away to secret wiretapping - everything.
********************************************

Of course I do. But let me be VERY specific here:  I don’t want any REALLY serious investigations of the Bush admin to take place, just enough to keep embarrassing them.

Why do I take this odd, seemingly irrational position? Simple: The Power of The Presidential Pardon.  ANYBODY seriously in trouble can expect a Bush pardon on Jan 19, 2009 as a bribe to keep his/her mouth shut, knowing that if he doublecrosses them, on Jan 20, 2009 they’ll be squealing like stuck pigs.  He can even pardon them for UNinvestigated crimes (like Ford pardoned Nixon).

So I want the investigations and prosecutions to kick in full-force on the morning of Jan 21, 2009, with Barack Obama as President to make sure Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfawitz, etc, don’t get a Presidential pardon, but instead see jail time.  I’d like to see George W. Bush as the first president to serve time for his crimes in office—it makes our nation stronger to re-inforce that even the President is bound by law.

Step 1) Investigate just enough to embarrass the WH and help Obama win a landslide that gives filibuster-proof power to Dems in the Senate, or, better still, veto-proof power to both houses.

Step 2) Bring criminal investigations of Bush&Co;upt to full speed on Jan 21, 2009

Step 3) Pray to Yahweh, God, Allah, Vishnu, Siva, Buddha, Odin, Zeus, etc, that Bush doesn’t stage a coup d’etat and seize power making himself “President For Life”.  Or, if he does, that the Military is loyal enough to kick him out and return power to the LEGAL possessors of it.

By Inherit The Wind, August 4 at 10:41 am #
Neither Israel nor even the Bushies stand to gain 1000th of what they stand to lose if revealed.
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————-
ITW

Don’t you think Bush/Cheney are war criminals? Don’t you think they belong at the end of a rope for all they have done, whether you think they are responsible for 9-11 or not? But the Bushes have been in the shadiest, most evil weapons business for generations, including almost being indicted for selling arms to Hitler as late as 1939. They don’t expect their crimes to be revealed. They think they are above that sort of thing, beyond the reach of human decency. And they are insane with hubris.

Max Shields, August 4 at 12:48 pm #

As far as AIPAC, he made a damning speech if you care about Palestinians and human rights. If his speeches are so damn important, than he needs to be held accountable for his words…not rationalized away. He’s done damage, Tony, how far before you hold him accountable?

The ends justifying the means has always been a no win game for the people. Winning at any prices you give your soul away - if there’s one to begin with; and then…you’re absolutely WORTHLESS. The Faustian wager has always back fired.
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— —-
Max,

I don’t consider that Obama has done any damage to speak of when he hasn’t been elected yet. I’m waiting to see what he does as President. I mostly find things to cheer about in his speeches, though he has shocked and disappointed me on occasion, specifically his dissociation from Jeremiah Wright (with whom I sympathized) the AIPAC speech and the FISA vote. Those disappointments are nowhere near enough to prevent me from supporting him. Why don’t you ever look on the bright side? This very day he is running an ad that says we can’t afford to have big oil running the country any more, and proposing a windfall profits tax to give everybody $1000 to help pay for gas (instead of the idiotic gas tax holiday). Hurray, is what I say.

By Max Shields, August 4 at 12:48 pm #

Why is your guy Obama afraid to debate Nader?
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— —
Max,
I would like to see that debate, but it isn’t going to happen, not because Obama is “afraid” but because there is no political advantage in it. You know, I always liked Nader. He was a great consumer advocate back in the 60’s, and I’m sure he would be welcome as such in an Obama administration. But no, instead he is spending his golden years splitting the progressive vote by running for President. They say the only cure for that bug is formaldehyde.

Re Inherit The Wind, August 4 at 10:41 am #

ITW,

Let me ask you this: do you support continuing to investigate the crimes of the Bush administration after November? Don’t you want to see some accountability? Don’t you think we really need a major airing out to restore our Constitution? That’s all I’m asking, just investigate everything from 9-11 to the lies that got us into Iraq to bin Laden being allowed to get away to secret wiretapping - everything.

I don’t have as much confidence in cowardly Congressional Democrats as you seem to. Of course none of them even suspected the possiblility of an inside job, and none of them looked for such a thing. Hell, neither did I for several years. But now, in retrospect, I do. Like I said, I could be wrong, but all I’m asking for is a real investigation.

Why is your guy Obama afraid to debate Nader? or Barr? or McKinney or even McCain in an unrigged debate when HE said he’d debate any of his opponents?

Progressive? My eye. This guy makes Bill Clinton look like a card carrying Marxist.

Tony, as far as Obama’s “sterling record” as a community organizer; from my research on this fellow it was short-lived and quickly moved to the shaky politics of Chicago. I understand that the only way Obama could get elected is when they redistricted the voting districts that put wealthy Repubs and Dems in the mix.

I think you should dig a tad more with just a little more skepticism about this “community organizer”. His aim was to get in politics and organizing was a means to an end. There may have been a time…but this guy doesn’t have deep roots with the black community. I’m not holding it against him, he grew up in white communities and adapted well…very well indeed (wasn’t his choice exactly).

But his resume as a community organizer would barely get him elected dog catcher by itself, let alone Prez. That’s why all the puff and sizzle. When the resume is thin you got to create a “rock superstar” vibe to get the show on the road.

But hey, I’m all for community organizers who have really accomplished things - so what did he really accomplish, Tony?

As far as AIPAC, he made a damning speech if you care about Palestinians and human rights. If his speeches are so damn important, than he needs to be held accountable for his words…not rationalized away. He’s done damage, Tony, how far before you hold him accountable?

The ends justifying the means has always been a no win game for the people. Winning at any prices you give your soul away - if there’s one to begin with; and then…you’re absolutely WORTHLESS. The Faustian wager has always back fired.

By Inherit The Wind, August 4 at 9:51 am #
Sumpin’ bad’s gonna happen….I just know it.
Why? Cyrena, TW, Lefty and me are all on the same wavelength with little, if any disagreement.
Sumthin’s really, really wrong here!!!!!!
~~~~~

ITW, you made my day! Think of it this way, (which will allow you to keep the general ‘importance’ of this celestial event)..maybe it means sumthin’ good’s gonna happen! Or, at the very worst, it means that things are soooo critical, that the sobriety of sanity has set in. I can speak to this from some personal experience. When tragedy/crises strikes, even the most diverse among the team of responders kicks in with perfect rhythm. Once the crises passes, (or at least the situation is stabilized) they’re at each other’s throats again. This actually provides me with a great deal more comfort than I might have otherwise experienced. I’m very attached to sanity…my own and others. Gives me a feeling of security to know that you all are out there.

Speaking of which, Max says this…

•  “cyrena and her buddy “lefty” on the other hand live in a fantasy world.

Oh Max, if only, if only, if only…this were true. (well, I can’t speak for Lefty, but I sure as hell wish I could conjure up some fantasy for myself). But, I don’t do those kinda drugs. But just out of curiosity, how do YOU do it?

Never mind…I’ll just stick with what I know. My gut tells me these times require complete sobriety.

~~~

As for the 9/11 catastrophe that changed life as we know it; I actually tried to believe it at first, even though it just never ‘settled right’. But, I was willing to wait for the complete details, like we’ve always received after any air disaster. Besides, even the merest hint of a question at the time was enough to get one exiled for treason and sedition. But, the expected answers never came. And when they supposedly finally did, in the form of that alleged Commission, it only made things worse. Seems like the least they could have done was admit that the WTC had been blown up by explosives, since that was a no-brainer. All they had to do was blames that on the ‘terrorists’ as well. Instead, they expected us to believe what they were telling us, instead of what our eyes were telling us.

Anyway, for me, I always knew something was terribly wrong. I knew several of the crew members on those flights, and I knew they wouldn’t give up their cockpits to anybody, if in fact they’d been in control of them. It really does boil down to that for me. That not a single one of them squawked a code is beyond belief for any professional. That there has yet to be a single solitary piece of physical evidence in the form of ANY kind of debris, defies all the laws of everything. 4 commercial jetliners don’t just evaporate without a trace, in less than 2 hours, with NO response from the nation’s defense system. It’s like the former San Francisco Mayor, Willie Brown said, “If they can’t protect the PENTAGON, then they can’t protect ANYTHING.” Nope, nope, nope. It defies all belief. WHOMEVER was responsible, it didn’t happen the way they say it did.

THIS…I know.

As I see it, I don’t doubt that that bin Laden and Islamic militants did carry out the attack. The question in my mind is whether they had inside help. I think they did, but I could be wrong. I still think all three builidings were demolished by explosive charges, which the perptrators counted on being able to cover up in all the chaos and confusion. All I want is a real investigation into all the criminal activities of the Bush administration, and I sure don’t trust the 9-11 Commission or anything else that happened under the auspices of the utterly corrupt Bush administration and Republican-controlled Congress.

Would you support me in this? I would happily accept the results either way if I thought the investigation was really thorough and open.
****************************************

Nope. I’ve never seen any reason to the commission’s findings.  It was bi-partisan and if there was ANY hint of our own government being behind it, the political capital for Democrats would be like hitting the MegaMillions jackpot when it hit its max…so NO Democrat would cover it up.

I think the idea is insane, even for Bush.  “Little Green Men did it.” is more believable.  However, IF there was a connection due to the bumbling incompetence and arrogance of this regime (which, I doubt, but certainly is possible) I, again, cannot imagine the Dems on the Commission not posting that right up there.

The problem with conspiracy theories is that most don’t stand up to, what Max Headroom likes to call “Critical Thinking”.  There is NO party outside of Al Qaeda, and possibly the nuts of Timothy McVeigh’s ilk that has isn’t risking far, far more than they hope to gain from such an attack.  Neither Israel nor even the Bushies stand to gain 1000th of what they stand to lose if revealed.

It’s a simple cost/benefit analysis.

By Inherit The Wind, August 4 at 9:51 am #

Sumpin’ bad’s gonna happen….I just know it.

Why? Cyrena, TW, Lefty and me are all on the same wavelength with little, if any disagreement.

Sumthin’s really, really wrong here!!!!!!
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— —-
ITW,

I guess it’s just that old Obama black magic! He really does bring us together. 
————————& #8212;———————R 12;————————
(BTW, Lefty, Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden were well known long before 9/11.  When it hit, on that day, the gang in my office were speculating if Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were behind it, because of the Kenya and Cole bombings. One guy even said “It’s his (OBL’s) style of attack.” And we are just an ordinary business with no government connections or interest or sources.  Just ordinary people who follow the news.)
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— —
ITW,

As I see it, I don’t doubt that that bin Laden and Islamic militants did carry out the attack. The question in my mind is whether they had inside help. I think they did, but I could be wrong. I still think all three builidings were demolished by explosive charges, which the perptrators counted on being able to cover up in all the chaos and confusion. All I want is a real investigation into all the criminal activities of the Bush administration, and I sure don’t trust the 9-11 Commission or anything else that happened under the auspices of the utterly corrupt Bush administration and Republican-controlled Congress.

Would you support me in this? I would happily accept the results either way if I thought the investigation was really thorough and open.

Sumpin’ bad’s gonna happen….I just know it.

Why? Cyrena, TW, Lefty and me are all on the same wavelength with little, if any disagreement.

Sumthin’s really, really wrong here!!!!!!

(BTW, Lefty, Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden were well known long before 9/11.  When it hit, on that day, the gang in my office were speculating if Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were behind it, because of the Kenya and Cole bombings. One guy even said “It’s his (OBL’s) style of attack.”  And we are just an ordinary business with no government connections or interest or sources.  Just ordinary people who follow the news.)

By Max Shields, August 4 at 6:42 am #

Tony,

Not to belabor (and I’m sure the Obama fanatics will distort what I’m about to “say”), but as a thought experiment, on the matter of “pandering”, this is a very important bit of information to track when thinking about these “candidates in waiting”. When is a “pander” just a meaningless token, and when is it a real gesture of where the candidate is coming from?
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— -
It’s a good question, Max. Take the Obama speech to AIPAC. You keep saying Obama has no record, but actually he has a sterling record as a community organizer in Chicago, and as Lefty says, if you want to know what Obama really thinks, your best bet is to look at his record there, and not what he says now in the heat of a presidential election. And what do we see when we look at his record? For one thing, we see strong ties with both the the Jewish and Afro-American communities in Chicago, and what looks to me like a very strong commitment to repair the old Jewish-Afro-American civil rights coalition. That is the kind of record I want to see in a president who is going to tackle the Israel/Palestine conflict. It is that real record that will enable Obama to retain a substantial majority of Jewish voters in the coming election. 

The political purpose of the AIPAC speech was obviously to garner maximum Jewish support by reassuring Jews of his commitment to Israeli security. The “undivided Jerusalem” was, I believe, and ill-considered applause line which he took back the next day. But the way he did it was so sneaky I can’t prove it was a takeback at all. The next day he has said that he never meant by “undivided” 100% Israeli control, but rather a Jerusalem not divided into zones with barbed wire fences and checkpoints preventing people of any nationality from traveling freely. Maybe the Zionist crowd just heard what it wanted to hear. A lot of them said “I knew it was too good to be true” after his statement the next day. But there is in any case no doubt that Obama IS committed to Israeli security, so the speech was not just a pander. Yet there is also no doubt in my mind that Obama symapthizes with Palestinians too. They are the “blacks” in this situation. From his record, I don’t think he will forget them. One thing is for sure for sure: Palestinians will get a much better deal from Obama than they would get from McCain.

By Lefty, August 3 at 8:25 pm
WHEN DO WE GET A CANDIDATE WHO IS PROUD TO BE A LIBERAL, AND KNOWS . . . KNOWS THAT THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WILL VOTE FOR HIM FOR BEING A PROUD, BRAVE, HONEST, LIBERAL?
Is that too much to ask?
~~~~

No Lefty, I don’t think it’s too much to ask. Not at all. And, when I get a chance, I’ll post a piece that I came across just recently, that might shed a little more light on his liberal roots. But in reality, the cautiousness that Obama exudes is *not* new, or really at all unusual for an academic who thinks hard.  But, breaking down your concerns (since many share them) or at least a few of them, I’ll just provide my own ‘take’ for whatever it’s worth, KNOWING that it is only one of many reactions, and respecting the others.

On the “Faith Based-Initiatives” : I think he should have just chosen another term for it, or…NOT ADDRESSED IT AT ALL! Seriously. He’s not talking about changing anything from the way things were PRIOR to the Coup. He made an error in trying to address what has become an insidious take-over of state institutions, (like the flippin’ MILITARY) by the right-wing fundies since the Coup. Using THEIR TERMINOLOGY to show how he was going to ‘fix it’,  just really blew up. In all honesty, (as an agnostic) I don’t have a problem with these organizations providing social services, AT LEAST not in the conditions that I’m familiar with. In other words, as long as they aren’t preaching their ideology in the process of providing the services, I don’t care. And in my experiences with many of them, they don’t. That’s not to say that I don’t understand how this rubs a lot of people the wrong way. I do. But my own experience tells me that the fears are overblown. (Of course since the Coup, these fears are obviously legitimate).  Prior to that though, these agencies, hospitals, and other social service type organizations that happen to maintain affiliations with one religion or another have not, (in my own experience) been committed to ‘converting’ anybody. They just provide services.

On Afghanistan: His recent plans DO concern me, for all of the normal reasons. Initially, I believed it to be a legitimate enough action, if only because it wasn’t ‘unilateral’. In other words, it was initiated under the umbrella of NATO. Knowing more now than I did then, I’m inclined to believe that it too, was a mistake. NOT because there isn’t an ‘al-Qaeda’ or a bin Laden. Both did exist, (and maybe they still do) but never as the all powerful boogey man that Dick Bush created for their ‘war OF terra’. An excellent book on this that you’d probably enjoy is: “The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11” by Lawrence Wright.

I’m also inclined to believe that bin Laden and Zawahiri most likely DID at least ‘pipe dream’ such an operation at one point, (bin laden even talked about waging war on Saddam, back when Saddam had the 4th largest military in the world, until his more sane compatriots advised him that he was out of his mind). That said, I’m sure they ‘talked about’ it. I’m equally certain that Dick Bush pre-empted any plans they may have had, plugging in their own operatives.

HOWEVER, like most academics and ‘professional’ scholars, Obama does apparently believe that they were behind that action, and most of my own colleagues believe it as well, based on the “Blowback” theory. Indeed, the Taliban does exist, and the connections between them and al-Qaeda are well documented. Still, since Pakistan has a new regime now, (as opposed to the Musharraff regime that was protecting them) they need time to work that out. Obama was pissed because we were giving Musharraff billions, and that pisses me off as well.

So, there should be some serious thought before any escalated military action happens. IMHO.

Re Lefty, August 3 at 7:29 pm #

Re Tony Wicher, August 3 at 6:00 pm #

With Obama, at least I have the comfort of doubt.
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— —-
Lefty, we are on the same wavelength for a change. I too cannot pretend to know how progressive Obama will be and how much he will compromise to the right when he is President. But with Obama at least there is doubt; McCain is a guaranteed imperialist lackey warmonger. The reason I have been sounding so optimistic about Obama in this forum is that I have been trying to make that very point - even if there are very legitimate doubts about Obama, there is no doubt whatsoever about whom to vote for in November for anybody with even slightly progessive instincts. Believe it or not, I have actually been kicked off the Obama for America site for being too critical!

Tony,

Not to belabor (and I’m sure the Obama fanatics will distort what I’m about to “say”), but as a thought experiment, on the matter of “pandering”, this is a very important bit of information to track when thinking about these “candidates in waiting”. When is a “pander” just a meaningless token, and when is it a real gesture of where the candidate is coming from?

In the case of McCain (the evil one) his pandering is done in the context of a long Senate history. He has positions and votes which say more about who he is, particularly where these are against the tide of his Party (and conservatives in general). When I look at that record, I sense more of the instincts of McCain. It doesn’t mean that he’ll not waiver, but that he’s not as dogmatic as his recent incarnation appears.

Obama has nearly none of that history and little to indicate that he has strong convictions that he stands by. He is a man who has learned to identify where the centers of power are and gravitate that way. His pandering has little context. Is he really for fair trade agreements or free trade? Does he really mean he’ll do whatever to protect Israel, or is that just a pragmatic thing to say during an election season?

(To be clear, I would never vote for either of these candidates.)

I was watching a rerun of the Robert F. Kennedy documentaryrun in 1968. I have no delusions about Bobby Kennedy, but he was in a particular time and place. He was totally of that time. He was one with himself and the people he spoke to. I do not question the authenticity of his words. I ask myself, what did he have to gain, politically, by making the powerless and poor his intense focus (and I do mean INTENSE)?

There is none of that with Obama. He assumes African Americans will be there as much of the Dem white power elite have done. We have a gap between the rich and poor that is FAR and away greater than what Bobby Kennedy saw. In fact it has reached (and perhaps surpassed) that of pre-Great Depression. Raw poverty has never been worse than since the Depression and yet, we have a tepid (at best) Dem candidate who offers to Israel the world and holds out nothing for the people of America - particularly the poor and disenfranchised - with some bleak and old platitudes about “hope”.

By Tony Wicher, August 3 at 6:00 pm #

Again, although I think your politics are off, I appreciate that you’re for Obama for the very reasons I find extremely dangerous.

cyrena and her buddy “lefty” on the other hand live in a fantasy world.

You, Tony, are a true believer in neoliberalism, mixed with realpolitic (ala Brezinski). You like limited strategic military intervention - the killing must be from 10,000 feet and collateral damage is a small price (ala Hillary Clinton and Albright in separate occasions). There’s the “good” and “just” war; and than there’s the f(ckup war like the one Bush II did. I’m not sure what you thought about Bush I invasion - but I suspect it was brief enough with “allied” support that the killing was basically “ok”.

If we can get on the same page here, Tony, we might be able to have a real debate. My position is that we’ve had endless war. By endless, I don’t mean that the USA has boots on the ground fighting. I mean the US is regularly intervening in the governments of sovereign states. This interventionism is done with much the same intent from the neoliberals and neocons. There is no doubt that there is a certain insanity in the neocon/militarists/Religious-right which is not apparent with the centrist corporatist and neoliberals. But the goal is the same and war is always ON THE TABLE.

Many say the reason Obama is even a candidate for the Dems is because he was percieved an “anti-war” candidate. That was always a deceipt on the part of the Obama campaign and a delusion on the part of the so-called anti-war pro-Obama crowd. Some are waking up; but we have many like the cyrena groupies who are still rowing with the big mO.

Those who think that my argument is because I “don’t understand how American politics work” clearly don’t understand what I’ve been posting or chose to frame it to distortion.

What Barack Obama said before AIPAC was not simply pandering. He went where no other American Prez candidate (though his former mentor Joseph I. Lieberman would be an exception had he stayed in the race long enough in 2004) had gone before - undivided Jerusalem! That is not your every day pandering.

Where I think you make a grave mistake is when you think that this kind of “pandering” will be forgotten when he “becomes POTUS”. He has joined hands, in no uncertain terms, with the centers of power, and that will not go away if he becomes Prez.

For “Lefty” since there is no progressive candidate running in either major party, you can be sure I will not vote for either of what the establishment Parties have given us.

GO LEFTY!!!

Some of this bears re-posting..

By Lefty, August 3 at 7:18 pm

•  “…But, that is why I will vote for Obama.  I have absolutely no doubt what Flipper McCain will do. - he will continue the republican policies begun by Ronald Reagan which have transformed America from the greatest, most admired nation in history, to a rogue, corrupt, corporatist, fascist, military junta, well on the path to a bankrupt, third world economy.  With Obama, at least I have the comfort of doubt…”

By Lefty, August 3 at 7:29 pm

•  “They” don’t call me Lefty, Max.  I do!  But, I’m not some sissified pacifist, or an Electronic Jihadist, islamist, fundamentalist, propagandist, arab, imposter, Israel bashing, troll, posing as a liberal, as so many here on Truthdig plainly are.”…… I am a real, socialist, leftist, liberal.  Perhaps you’ve never met one before.

You said it all here Lefty. Max hasn’t ‘met’ a real live socialist, leftist, liberal but it wouldn’t matter if he did, because he wouldn’t recognize it as such. That should be apparent in his failed attempts to pass himself off as the same, when in fact he belongs in the category of the far right-wing, fascist conservatives of the world.

Meantime, I’ve ‘registered’ your concerns about Obama, and I would only point to the appropriateness of your use of the term ‘premature’. There is much about his perceived changes for which we may not have the full view. All things are not always what they appear to be, which is why I too feel some comfort, even in the doubt. Or, maybe I should say BECAUSE of it

By Max Shields, August 3 at 4:04 pm #

Tony,

Apologizing for Obama can not dismiss our singular set of crises. People like Brezinski and Rubin hark to the very minds that are squarely in the trajectory (and that’s just two of many Obama is calling on).
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— -
Max,

Funny you should mention Rubin. I saw him on Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer this morning. It was such a relief to get away from the Britney Spears-Paris Hilton ad which is all anyone could hear about in the MSM for the last few days. It was a very solid, substantial discussion of economic issues. Rubin was talking about restoring the tax structure and the economy of the Clinton years (22 million new jobs, budget surpluses, remember?) and the absolute necessity of a diversified energy independence policy, given that there is currently transferring wealth to oil producing countries such as Saudi Arabia at a rate of 700 billion a year, which the U.S. economy cannot sustain. They discussed Obama’s so-called “flip-flop” on offshore oil drilling, and Ruben pointed out that Obama’s acceptance of limited oil drilling, which he is still against, as a part of an overall energy package, does not change his fundamental policy of development of alternate clean energy. It was great to hear that our economy might soon be back in competent hands.

Incidentally, if anyone is interested in some good news, MIT has announced a breakthrough in solar energy. If Obama puts 15 billion a year into development, it will be like Apollo. No one knows how far we might get in 10 years.

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/oxygen-0731.html

Tune in for my next rant: why I like Zbigniew Brzezinski.

By Inherit The Wind, August 3 at 4:40 pm

Thank God my father, who was a Communist labor organizer in the 30’s, but left the party in 1940 at the time of the Hitler-Stalin pact and volunteered to fight the Nazis, and who called himself a democratic socialist to the end of his life, gave me a better education than that. I learned Marxist theory from him when I was about 5, and I have forgotten more than any of these neo-leftists will ever know.

Hello?  Max? Max Headroom? 20 minutes into the past?

More like 40 years into the past. Those 60’s SDS’ers who thought a revolution “by the People” was just around the corner…and they would join with the Panthers “The Revolution WILL put you in the driver’s seat!”

It was exciting, it was thrilling, but it was also wrong, ultimately. Yet, like my father’s old Leftist friends from the 30’s, you, and they knew all the answers, always in neo-Marxist terms, and dismissed anyone who dared raise an objection with “That’s a shitty argument!”

You, like those old guys, some of whom were Lincoln and Washington Brigadiers, lived in a fanatasy world, where Marxists were pure and Stalin was an inexplicable abominiation, but not as bad as people thought.

What can I say?  Enjoy your fantasy, but stop trying to convince the rest of us it’s reality.

Maybe you should follow advice I was recently given—to enroll in a class in critical thinking.

Tony,

This “everybody knows except leftists” stuff is the basis of the on-going apology the Obamaists purport.

Forgiving Obama for all that he says and then demonizing all of what McCain says as if he too should not be given your “forgiveness” being as he is a politician pandering about to his base is at best hypocritical.

Here’s my point this little dialog between McCain and Obama is the dialog is one baked into nearly 100 years of US policy. It creates the glue between the candidates and those who are his advisors and the expectations of those he panders to.

For you, Tony, that little back and forth between Obama and McCain demonstrates critical differences. For me, and others, it demonstrates a complete disconnect with the world.

It is not that policies cannot change and be shaped around unforseen circumstances, but only the blind and uninitiated cannot see the trajectory of US policies over the last 60 years (and more). Obama is speaking the words of that trajectory. These are not words of change, but of the status quo.

What we know is not just what Obama says but who he brings into his inner circle as well as a careful look at his very short history. We can ignore those things as some here do and pretend he’s “really a progressive” who will reveal himself once in office, or we can begin to pay attention and acknowledge the trajectory he is on and how terribly dangerous it is (whether it is he or McCain in the Oval Office).

Some of us realize what the American political system is and has been. I find your lectures on political “pragmaticism” insulting. We all know what pandering is and when its being used. But an astute look at what is being said and how it measures up to our history is where critical thinking begins.

We face a massive set of crises and business as usual will not do. Obama has demonstrated that he is not up to the job (and that’s to be expected since it is systemic and he is a product of the system that’s created the situation).

Apologizing for Obama can not dismiss our singular set of crises. People like Brezinski and Rubin hark to the very minds that are squarely in the trajectory (and that’s just two of many Obama is calling on).

The posting here is less about arguing a case, as it is about mowing over one another with rants and tirades as if that’s going to make one bit of difference.

webbie,

Sorry, maybe that wasn’t well said. I’m only trying to invoke the principle to watch what politicians do, not what they say, and to read between the lines. This principle applies to Obama as much as to any other politician that has ever lived. He’s no different in that respect. It’s the nature of the beast. You may say that nobody can be sure about what one reads between the lines, and that is true. We live in an uncertain world, and all one can do is try to excercise one’s best judgment.

In the case of Obama’s speech to AIPAC, it is obvious that any speech given to that crowd was meant to please them. The “undivided Jerusalem” bit was an ill-considered applause line that Obama took back the next day, and all the Zionists said “I knew it”. Hard-core Zionists are going to vote for McCain no matter what Obama says. I believe Obama is really focusing on the progressive Jewish community, which is after all the majority of Jewish-Americans. If he can convince them of his commitment to Israeli security, a commitment which is indeed absolutely genuine as his whole record proves, he can win them over. With solid backing among the majority of Jewish Americans, he will be able to do the tough negotiating to get Israel to make the concessions necessary for a just peace.

webbedouin, August 3 at 12:42 pm #

What is equally dangerous in Obama’s uttering is that he might be, and is already, feeling pressured to balance his seemingly soft attitude towards Iraq and Iran by exaggerating his country’s pro-Israel stance in a way that will derail any possibility for a peaceful solution to the Palestinian- Israeli conflict, at least during his term. In fact, ominous signs of that pressure, and his succumbing to it are ample, the last of which was his statement, prior to his visit, that Jerusalem must remain undivided, a position that negates international law and the consistent tradition of various US administrations, including Bush’s.
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— —
webbedouin,

There is always the danger of Obama compromising too much to the right, I agree. We will see what happens after he is in office. At this time, however it is to be expected that Obama would move to the center in a general election. I think everybody in the world except some anti-Obama leftists like you understands those speeches to AIPAC were pandering of the highest order, and I mean everybody else including every Zion