Evidence suggests

He completed the 20-month program at the Foreign Service Institutes Arabic School in Tunis in June 1978. Crocker was then assigned as chief of the economic-commercial section at the U.S. Interests Section in Baghdad, Iraq. Crocker served in Beirut, Lebanon as chief of the political section from 1981 to 1984; while there, he survived the 1983 United States Embassy bombing.

that Ambassador Crocker likely knew of or may have possibly been involved in starting the Iraq/Iran war.

Some in Iran made mistakes too

The Iranian hostage crisis was a diplomatic crisis between Iran and the United States where 53 Americans were held hostage for 444 days from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981, after a group of Islamist students and militants took over the American embassy in support of the Iranian Revolution.
by failing to consider possible consequences.

Bombing Iran’s nuclear-powered electric generation facilities is something we should all work to try to avoid because more possible unfortunate consequences.

So, George, I look forward to hearing from you and Ambassador Crocker.

Objective criterion of whether this aspect of our project is a success or a failure is simple.

If you click on http://news.google.com/ to read that Iran’s nuclear-powered electric generation facilities have been bombed, then, we believe, we have all lost.

best regards
bill

Let’s see what happens.

http://home.comcast.net/~bpayne37/whitman59/whitman59after.htm#deargeorge

Old Ed of the Delta’s is probably the most concise and accurate comment regarding the reaalities and the ethics of the U.S. dropping bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Worth remembering, however, is that those bombs were many many times less powerful that the nuclear weaponry now available. We’d best focus on figuring out how to not let ANY nuclear strike occur anywhere: the consequences are horrifying to contemplate, worse than horrifying to bear.

Howard writes, “To not understand the times as they were in 1945 and to spin a different interpretaion is called revisionism of history.”

To not admit what the United States would have done had Japan similarly bombed New York and had the U.S. still won the war is called revisionism of ethics.

“The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing ... I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon.”
-Dwight D. Eisenhower

Cognitas1, why are we talking about this? I never subscribed to your use of the term “innocents” in the first place and have been giving my views on it as I see it. The whole idea of the “innocent” in war was discarded by the planners of the war and has been used since then up to today as we see in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan. A terror weapon that fails more than succeeds and turns the populace against us and any one else using such tactics.

the A-bomb was a stunner and the war was essentially over anyway when it was used. So it was a death blow. Nagasaki was a double blow and a threat of more to come. [They didn’t know we had no more ready but that fact was irrelevant anyway.]

These days we are all combatants now as long as mass kill weapons exist and can be deployed all over the earth. I think fools is more approriate than innocents to use to describe us.

Japan IGNORED, YES, ignored all American peace overtures. It was to be a fight to the end. Their militaristic leadership was exhorting the Japenese populaton to get ready for just that ! Tens of thousands of American soldiers would have been killed or wounded in the upcoming invasion of Japan.
  My father and 4 of my uncles would have been in that invading force.
  To not understand the times as they were in 1945 and to spin a different interpretaion is called revisionism of history.

To all those who feel the dropping of the nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was justified: Is there any doubt that if Japan, convinced the United States would never surrender, had dropped an A-bomb on New York City, the U.S. would have included that as a War Crime or a Crime Against Humanity in the Tokyo War Crimes Trials?

Our current project[s] include trying to prevent bombing of Iran’s nuclear electric generation facilies.

Bombing could mess-up out retirement, to say the least.

Below interesting turn of events will cause slight changes in Bridges email for reason that Crocker and, as a result, Whitman College may have been, let’s say, involved in possibly inciting Saddam Hussein to attack Iraq.

The Iranian hostage crisis was a diplomatic crisis between Iran and the United States where 53 Americans were held hostage for 444 days from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981, after a group of Islamist students and militants took over the American embassy in support of the Iranian Revolution.

Where was Ambassador Ryan Crocker in 1980?

He completed the 20-month program at the Foreign Service Institutes Arabic School in Tunis in June 1978. Crocker was then assigned as chief of the economic-commercial section at the U.S. Interests Section in Baghdad, Iraq. Crocker served in Beirut, Lebanon as chief of the political section from 1981 to 1984; while there, he survived the 1983 United States Embassy bombing.

http://home.comcast.net/~bpayne37/whitman59/whitman59after.htm#deargeorge

Night-Gaunt:

Evidently you not only didn’t peruse my arguments but also didn’t peruse Scheer’s. Scheer discerns between “civilian” deaths and others from bombing. Why? Scheer provides the reason in his essay: “...neither the children nor the adults had any role in Japan’s decision to go to war…” You provide your reason for discerning here : “By-the-way most of the people killed in World War II weren’t soldiers or manufacturers of the war weapons and were unconnected to it. Those might be considered “innocents” as you see them.” Your reason demonstrates you to have not perused my definition of “innocent”, which definition I’ve demonstrated to pertain to Scheer’s discerning between “civilians” and others: “Citizens who contribute to war preparations such as arms makers or conscripts or farmers are by definition not “innocent”, since their contributions are noxious to the enemy…” You indicated your conceding to me by not even responding to my definition of US nuclear scientists; the inadequacy of your “civilian” and “innocent” definition is illustrated by these scientists, since some scientists were members of the US Army and some were not; were only those Army scientists “combatants” and those not Army “non-combatants”? Of course not. In addition, you observed no soldiers to have defined civilians as primary targets before WWII here: “Before WWII civilians weren’t automatically targeted.” You are clearly wrong. Both Swedes and Habsburgs deliberately slaughtered Germans in 30 Years’ War, both Royalists and parliamentarians deliberately slaughtered Irish in English Civil War, caesar deliberately slaughtered Celt and German women during his invasions of Gaul and Germany. Your boat has many leaks, because it is too large; and you drill more holes to drain but only take on more water.

Simply put the use of the term “innocent” in this context is irrelevant to the reasons given for bombing by others. I say the term to use is “civilians” and showed you where that went. I did not define “innocent” at all and find its usage is inconsistent with the military justifications given and therefor chose another term more relevant to it. To the military planners and the politicians that directed them, innocence is not a quality they see in the ‘enemy’ so everything is then justified. Is that not clear?

The whole attack on Iraq was bogus to begin with so all subsequent actions taken were criminal and therefor any effects should be noted as such whether to civilian or military targets in this context.

By-the-way most of the people killed in World War II weren’t soldiers or manufacturers of the war weapons and were unconnected to it. Those might be considered “innocents” as you see them. Are they? Or is that impossible? See above.

Also in this analysis I have not given my take on it. To me war is rarely justified and should be the very last reason to do anything. So we are mostly innocent in its original sense but become guilty if we knowingly carry it out. The fault lies at the top as always. Many can be duped by the few. That is one of the dangers. It is in action now and escalating.

Night-Gaunt:

Whether I consent with your arguments doesn’t matter, since they still don’t pertain at all to my arguments. I demonstrated your definition of “innocent” to be inaccurate, unless you estimate the US scientists as “non-combatants” to not have injured Japan. I have studied neither the effects of civilian bombing nor the justifications thereof, so I have no opinion; but in general you depend too much on others’ professed reasons: you credit the civilian bombing advocates to have intended to “impact manufacturing”, but do you now credit Bush’s justification for the invasion of Iraq? Whether or not civilian bombing “impacted manufacturing” doesn’t pertain to my argument of whether or not civilians were “innocent”.

I believe there is a slight misunderstanding here by me with in regards to your, Cognitis1, point of view on the topic. That is why I substituted “civilian” for “innocent” and how I looked upon the use of “innocent” and your analysis of as one of the many justifications for taking war to areas outside of the formally conventional battlefield. And I will point out that none of the justifications had the impacts that were promised by the war planners on all sides. It just didn’t work well. In some areas it did impact the manufacturing but still not with the effects they had hoped. My analysis is still correct, I just think my point of view was closer to the realities versus the planners mistaken outlooks. [One exception was the Doolittle Raid on Tokyo soon after Hawai’i had been hit. It was purely as a psychological action and did have a minor impact but not much.]

Reducing moral was one of the reasons given for civilian bombing. Even if it wasn’t factories but just the cities themselves like Dresden, London and Hiroshima for the impact of terror on moral. Not military reason for it. A tactical means of psychological warfare that failed in most ways way. Only with the end of the war and the coup de gra to a defenseless Hiroshima and Nagasaki by one bomb each did it work in this case. But the war was already over anyway. Do you agree?

Nite-Gaunt:

Thanks for your response. You did not peruse my arguments accurately and have thus responded also inaccurately. You ignored my definition of “innocent” and in place used your own definition, so while you could define “innocent” as various from me you would not respond to my argument: I defined “innocent” as those not contributing to war preparations, while you defined it as “non-combatant”; to reject your definition, I’ll describe US atom bomb scientists as “non-combatants” but noxious to Japan and thus not “innocent”. You also inject the matter of “morale” into your response for ambiguous reasons; I’ve cited elsewhere the killing of factory workers not for reasons of diminishing morale but for deterring them from contributing to war preparations, for a dead worker no longer makes bullets.

Note here a citation from the Bible that provides an example of Chris Hedges’ disgust with the Christian Right. Jim Yell demonstrates a Fundamentalist’s ignorance of the Bible in citing “Japan sowed the wind and reaped the whirlwind quite literally.” With the above citation, this “christian” presumes to speak for God, defines a human act as God’s act, defines America as a divine instrument of God’s design; of course no literate Christian would do any of the above.

Actually they were looked on an non-combatants. Before WWII civilians weren’t automatically targeted. The doctrine of terror bombing proved to do the opposite. However that and your reasoning Cognitis1 the the two chief reasons given to use it today. Even though it has shown to bring people together despite their differences in ways other means couldn’t. And it kills more of the civilians/non-combatants than the soldiers who actually fight that war.

So classify it as a Terror Weapon of choice.

Such blather here. Citizens who contribute to war preparations such as arms makers or conscripts or farmers are by definition not “innocent”, since their contributions are noxious to the enemy; so these citizens injured in war could define themselves as “innocent victims”, only if they themselves negate their own culpability for their contributions; should these Japanese and Germans be desirous of liberating themselves from chains of self-pity, they must then first concede their own culpability and then forgive Americans. American citizens for the same reason were not innocent, but as Americans were victors not victims Americans suffer the chains of pride not self-pity; should Americans be desirous of liberating themselves from these chains of pride, they must concede their culpability for the war and then forgive the Japanese and Germans; how long Americans exculpate themselves for the war and castigate the Japanese and Germans, so long they will be chained by pride and thus continue to send their sons and daughters to meaningless slaughter in foreign wars.

However Jim Yell there were war crimes on all sides but it was the victors who punished the losers. That is what the winners do. War itself is a crime composed of many smaller crimes against humanity and decency and morality. When it stops it will mean either humanity has evolved beyond it or has committed species suicide.

What Japan did was what the US now calls a “preemptive strike” at a possible future enemy. So the “sneak attack” by any other name still kills.

Ike not only was against the dropping of the bomb, he went on record against it when he was called to the White House to discuss the issue with George Marshall. Truman was not happy about Ike’s dissension. MacArthur was also not happy with the bomb decision and thought it not necessary. Truman basically overruled his top three military commanders. The Dresden bombings were also totally unnecessary, but the British and American air forces had their own chain of command separate from Eisenower and the British air commander “Bomber Harris” was heavily in favor of inflicting terror on German civilians. There was dissent in that decision but the dissenters were overruled.  In hindsight Truman was wrong about the bomb and his ranking as a U.S. president is too high for that decision alone. Japan was on the ropes and we knew that and still went ahead. As each decade passes, that fateful decision looks worse and worse.

Wold peace seems not to be an option. Never has and never will. Hopefully I am wrong.

Brother hippie4ever Beaver,

I suggest you investigate ethnohistorical texts and the Pre-Columbian archaeological record for North America.  It’s quite evident that land possession changed hands before whitey showed up and that it wasn’t the result of peaceful negotiations.  The Creeks’ own origin myth describes their migration into the Southeast from somewhere west of the Mississippi River.  Furthermore, once whitey arrived, Native Americans were virtually tripping over themselves to abandon their own culture to acquire technologically advanced European trade goods.  They adopted the economy of the deerskin trade wholesale not out of adaptive necessity but because they had a thirst for European goods and the power advantage that gave them among their own people.  In short, they sold out their own culture for guns and copper pots. 

Try not to be such a flake.

GW Hitler, I suggest you check this out:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/genocide5.htm

I find your mockery pathetic and more than a little sad. Seek help. Goddess bless.

We never learn. Most Americans approve of the bombings.  History has been whitewashed and distorted.
Hubris reigns supreme.

We’re concerned about possible consequences of bombing Iran nuclear electric generation facilities.

And getting our $22,036 back.

“[I]n 2007 we learned at Wikipedia

Nojeh Coup In July 1980, Zbigniew Brzezinski of the United States met Jordan’s King Hussein in Amman to discuss detailed plans for Saddam Hussein to sponsor a coup in Iran against Khomeini. King Hussein was Saddam’s closest confidant in the Arab world, and served as an intermediary during the planning. The Iraqi invasion of Iran would be launched under the pretext of a call for aid from Iranian loyalist officers plotting their own uprising on July 9, 1980 (codenamed Nojeh, after Shahrokhi/Nojeh air base in Hamedan). The Iranian officers were organized by Shapour Bakhtiar, who had fled to France when Khomeini seized power, but was operating from Baghdad and Sulimaniyah at the time of Brzezinski’s meeting with Hussein. However, Khomeini learned of the Nojeh Coup plan from Soviet agents in France and Latin America. Shortly after Brzezinski’s meeting with Hussein, the President of Iran, Abolhassan Bani-Sadr quietly rounded up 600 of the loyalist plotters within Iran, putting an effective end to the Nojeh Coup.[5] Saddam decided to invade without the Iranian officers’ assistance, beginning the Iran-Iraq war on 22 September 1980. 1 2

In 2009 we read

According to Iran’s president at the time, Abolhassan Banisadr, Brzezinski met directly with Saddam Hussein in Jordan two months before the Iraqi assault. Bani-Sadr wrote, “Brzezinski had assured Saddam Hussein that the United States would not oppose the separation of Khuzestan [in southwest Iran] from Iran.”

We don’t know if either the 2007 or 2009 information is correct or not. But if Brzezinski did either we know, from our 17 year legal project, that it is against the law to incite genocide.

May 11, 2007 we filed to void judgment in New Mexico federal court at Santa Fe, NM in CIV 97-266 MCA/LFG.

Formal criminal complaint affidavit against Brzezinski was filed on June 6, 2007 for his alleged role in inciting Saddam Hussein to attack Iran.

Instead of properly processing criminal complaint affidavit by initiating a proper investigation of 2007 and 2009 allegations against Brzezinski, the court sanctioned us with $22,036.00 using a bogus not file stamped court order.

Using the fraudulent court order Sandia Laboratories Federal Credit Union Credit Union CEO Christopher Jillson stole $11,018.00 from each of Morales’ and Payne’s retirement-protected savings accounts using a bogus court order to attempt to justify theft.
...”

http://home.comcast.net/~bpayne37/whitman59/whitman59after.htm#deargeorge

I can even see, maybe argue that dropping one A-bomb could have been justified but two? Just three days later! This is a ground shaking concept—-one bomb destroyed an entire city that it took thousands of bombs in numerous air raids to accomplish. Shouldn’t the Japanese leadership been given a week or more to digest the results? Only if the USA wanted to be sure that the USSR wasn’t going to waltz in and divide the Japanese islands between them. [How about that for a what if?] Truman did not want Stalin involved there. They did get the Sahkalin islands and the oil fields though from the Japanese. The Japanese want those islands back.

We still have the nuclear sword of Damocles hanging over all our heads to this day. We are in more danger now than ever. 9 nations have the nukes and there are no red phones between those nations. All it takes is a mere 500 100k warheads going off to cause a nuclear winter which has its own problems for us. There are an estimated 23,000-27,500 warheads out there right now from big bombs to missile warheads on fighters and cannon shells. This doesn’t even address the Depleted Uranium loads used by many countries in warfare today. Iraq is littered with them and causing a dramatic rise in birth defects, sterility and disease spread due to damaged marrow suppression the immune system of millions.

In the ancient Hindu epics the description of Indra‘s weapon sound eerily like nuclear bombs going off down to the effects of the radiation fallout. Interestingly at the end of the continental civil war the last of the bombs are ”...ground into dust and the dust poured into the ocean, never to be used again…” Maybe we should do the same before they render us extinct or neo-lithics again.

The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki sent a clear message to the Japanese leadership and the rest of the world that there was only room for one master race, and it sure as hell wasn’t asian!!!

“It used these ideologies to commit genocide against native American peoples…”

Which native American peoples are you talking about?  The ones that successfully pushed other native American peoples off their land and just happened to be in possession of it when the Europeans did the same to them?  Or the ones that were peace-loving, mystical nature priests that wept for all of Mother Earth’s hurts and used every part of the animals they very respectfully harvested—Brother Bear, Brother Beaver, Brother Deer?  Oh Brother!!

I believe that, no matter what they say, all Americans know in their hearts that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagaski were not justified and were in fact pure, sadistic, racist terrorism on a par with any of the worst crimes ever committed by any nation or government. The shared, suppressed guilt about this has a lot to do with the strident, delusional exceptionalism of US foreign policy. We simply cannot allow ourselves to accept the truth about what was done in our name at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

America thought it was a great and just nation, but in reality it emulated Europe and inherited many European problems, including capitalism, fascism, christianity. It used these ideologies to commit genocide against native American peoples; once they were eliminated or devastated the resulting land swindles made the elites wealthier than before.

America then joined the Euro free-for-all, a.k.a. World War I, just in time to cash in on the industrial opportunities. The elites liked it and we’ve been at war ever since, perpetually. Yet they were at first, clever in letting “the enemy” exhaust itself before joining in for the spoils; WWII was even more profitable for the American Empire. By the Korean War it didn’t matter if the nation didn’t benefit, as long as the Military-Industrial Complex received their tax-supported contracts.

We’re a nation of peace and justice, as were the Nazis and the Stalinists. “Great” and “just” certainly describes our rich history—just ignore the poverty and despair of nine-tenths of our citizens and all the blood everywhere. Pick and choose, and wear blinders, and shout out slogans without any understanding as we repeat the same mistakes over and over again.

When asked in a world wide survey the question : would you rather be killed by a “terrorist” or would you rather be killed by missiles from a helicopter or a drone?

  99.9% replied that they would rather not be killed period.

  When asked the question in a world wide survey the question: if you had the option to decide on the methods to kill would you choose “terrorism” or all out war as a more impersonal as well as more effective of killing?

  99.9% replied that “war” is not only more effective its also viewed as a more “gentlemanly” way of killing.

  When asked the question: if you could choose between getting killed by a bearded “terrorist” or a clean shaven machine gunner which one would you opt for?

  100% replied that they would rather not be killed period.

  Answer to the question as to which nation takes the trophy (based on the number of men, women and children killed) for killing more than any other nation is still the subject of much discourse amongst those in air conditioned, leather furnished suites.

Sepharad:
‘This is an article that states the obvious—killing civilians is bad—but has nothing new to teach us. On the other hand, perhaps simply restating its premise is useful.’

Breastbeating and atrocity poetry specifically about Hiroshima does suggest that there is a nice way to conduct war—poison gas, disease agents, fire-bombing, and starvation for example, to say nothing of having a few million excited people with guns running around shooting other people.

“America has never been anything but the playground bully”—RootJensen

Nope, you’re wrong there.  America was once a great and just nation.

America has never been anything but the playground bully

Once built, it had to be used.  I’ve seen interviews with former Japanese military officer who said it would’ve been foolish for the US to not use the bomb.  Not a single nation on earth would’ve taken the fabled high road of non-deployment that Scheer and others suggest we should’ve taken.  Nope, the actual use of the weapon is a very minor event historically speaking.  The real crime is in the enormous resources we’ve since wasted building a nuclear arsenal many many times larger than what is needed for mutually assured destruction. 

Oh well, if you don’t keep close eye on what the egg-sucking dogs in Washington are doing, of course they’re going to suck all your eggs.

If THAT DAY, we call 9/11 taught us anything, it should be that America’s nuclear arsenal cannot defeat ‘terrorism’ or provide security from the actions of a few violent mad men who target and murder innocent ones.

American money is imprinted with “IN GOD WE TRUST” but reality is we have become a nation of hypocrites, for by our foreign policy we expose that we live by the sword.

The U.S. is also a co-conspirator in international nuclear apartheid and major collaborator in Israel’s INEFFECTIVE policy of nuclear ambiguity.

In April 2004, and just three days after the Whistle Blower of Israel’s WMD Program, Mordechai Vanunu was released from 18 years in jail for providing the photographic proof and telling the truth about Israel’s clandestine seven story underground WMD Program in the Negev, Uri Avnery wrote:

“Everybody understands that he has no more secrets. What can a technician know after 18 years in jail, during which technology has advanced with giant steps?

“But gradually it becomes clear what the security establishment is really afraid of. Vanunu is in a position to expose the close partnership with the United States in the development of Israel’s nuclear armaments.

“This worries Washington so much, that the man responsible in the State Department for ‘arms control’, Under-Secretary John Bolton, has come to Israel in person for the occasion. Vanunu, it appears, can cause severe damage to the mighty super-power.

“The Americans, it seems, are very worried. The Israeli security services have to dance to their tune. The world must be prevented by all available means from hearing, from the lips of a credible witness, that the Americans are full partners in Israel’s nuclear arms program, while pretending to be the world’s sheriff for the prevention of nuclear proliferation.”

excerpted from “The 64th Anniversary Of USA Terrorism Enlightened By The Wisdom of Nonviolence”
by Eileen Fleming

ChaoticGood, re “I love America and I love the Earth; do I have to choose?”

Of course you don’t have to choose. Since you’re planted here, in the U.S., make yourself useful and plant trees, vegetables, don’t cover up anything with concrete and vote against stupid wars. You don’t HAVE to eat fatty foods and watch TV.

Or if you want to help the rest of the world you can do that too, through Habitat for Humanity, Peace Corps, any of many NGOs, Roth’s Human Rights Watch, many other good ones.

Oh no, don’t ever criticize the USA, the home of the good and true and brave and smart and healthy and god-fearing and all those other wonderful things that we are told that we are all the time by those that have a vested interest in us remaining passive, fat, happy, and stupid. I love America and I also love the planet Earth, do I have to choose which one I love more?

Re: liecatcher

You have lost all sense of reality, whether you enamor me or not, my suggestion would be to READ HISTORY, at least ten biographies of unfamous people, a philosopher or two….or three, and then come back, engage reality and consider at the very least, intuitive speculation regarding the conversation.

This is an article that states the obvious—killing civilians is bad—but has nothing new to teach us. On the other hand, perhaps simply restating its premise is useful.

“Just exactly what distinguishes the United States’ use of the ever-so-cutely-named ‘Fat Man’ and ‘Little Boy’ atomic bombs on cities in Japan from the car bombs of Baghdad or the planes that smashed into the World Trade Center?” And “just exactly what distinguishes the United States’ use of the ever-so-cutely-named ‘Fat Man’ and ‘Little Boy’ atomic bombs on cities in Japan from”... the U.S’s ‘shock and awe’ bombardment on cities in Iraq much more recently that caused far more death and destruction than the car bombs have and which created the enviornment that led to the car bombs in the first place. As well as a thirst for revenge like “the planes that smashed into the World Trade Center”.  And “just exactly what distinguishes” Israel’s use of the ever-so-cutely-designed cluster bombs on cities in Palestine and Lebanon from the martyr’s belt? You certainly don’t need to go all the way back to WW2, to Hiroshima and Nagasaki - and Dresden - to find copious examples of American and Israeli state terrorism that far exceed in scale and intensity more isolated instances of indiviual terrorism provoked by these governments’ actions. “This is a lesson to be pondered at a time when President Bush” errr, Pres. Obama, likewise “plays power games with a nuclear-equipped Russia while coddling Pakistan, the main proliferator of nuclear weapons to rogue regimes” - and while coddling and cohabitating with Israel, itself a rogue regime and main proliferator of nuclear weapons. “And Congress authorizes an expansion of the U.S. nuclear program” - as well as an expansion of military aid to Israel - to “better fight the war on terror by ‘improving’ the ultimate weapon of terror, which the U.S. alone stands guilty of using”. But not alone in seriously threatening to use, as Israel has done on more than one occasion.  This is a further “lesson to be pondered” at a time when President Obama and Israel are both threatening Iran with another Hiroshima.

Robert Scheer is a great writer. As a Southern California resident I was priveleged to read his pieces regularly in the LA Times before they lost their heart, their soul and their courage. He’s doing a great job with this site, which is becoming a center for real thought and good writing on the internet. Thanks Bob, and keep firing them up on LR and C.

The MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX which president

Eisenhower warned the Nation about benefited then &

continues to prosper now. The big difference is that

now America has been destroyed & enslaved by the

FASCIST enemy within. Obama has buried us deeper &

faster than the predators that preceded him. He gave the

FED total autonomy & passed the largest military

budget in history while millions of people are

without homes, jobs, or a future. Everything has been

either outsourced or privatized, including the

government.