Loony fringe movement backed by the largesse of shady rightwing billionaire industrialists.
Check.
Loony fringe movement fronted by even loonier orators with a gift for capturing a certain demented zeitgeist to incite the fearful, dullwitted masses during times of turbulent economic dislocation.
Check.
Appeals to national vanity mixed with a healthy dose of harkening back to a glorious, mythological past of racial purity that never was. [redundancy alert]
Check.
A confused, disorganized and politically impotent left that cannot even begin to muster the willpower or the courage to confront this loony fringe movement, even as said loonies blithely appropriate and pervert sacred leftist symbology for their own purposes.
Check.
"It can't happen here....no, it can't happen here...I'm telling you my dear, that it can't happen here."*
Physically, Arnold Schwarzenegger is just about the biggest, strongest Republican of them all, and even mentally, compared to the rest of those idiots, he's almost a genius. But in a battle of wits against anyone of approximately average intelligence, the Governator has about as much of a chance as Elmer Fudd against Godzilla.
For example, in Arnold's recent editorial for the Wall Street Journal, he makes several claims that even a fifth-grader could refute.
Few Californians in the private sector have $1 million in savings, but that's effectively the retirement account they guarantee to public employees who opt to retire at age 55 and are entitled to a monthly, inflation-protected check of $3,000 for the rest of their lives.
Hundreds of the Wall Street Journal's dim-witted readers accepted this silly claim with pitiful credulity, little suspecting that their all-time favorite action-hero was about to be beaten to a bloody pulp by a left-wing Terminator.
Swedish bloggers uncovered the full story in a few hours. The complaint was lodged by a radical feminist Anna Ardin, 30, a one-time intern in the Swedish Foreign Service. She's spokeswoman for Broderskapsrörelsen, the liberation theology-like Christian organization affiliated with Sweden's Social Democratic Party. She had invited Julian Assange to a crayfish party, and they had enjoyed some quality time together. When Ardin discovered that Julian shared a similar experience with a 20-year-old woman a day or two later, she obtained the younger woman's cooperation in declaring before the police that changing partners in so rapid a manner constituted a sort of deceit. And deceit is a sort of rape. The prosecutor immediately issued an arrest warrant, and the press was duly notified. Once the facts were examined in the cold light of day, the charge of rape seemed ludicrous and was immediately dropped. In the meantime the younger woman, perhaps realizing how she had been used, withdrew her report, leaving the vengeful Anna Ardin standing alone.
However, before we absolve the Swedish police as unwitting, if zealous, dupes, please note that Swedish law strictly forbids police and prosecutors to release to the media the details of any rape-connected complaint. The Expressen had all the details of the case, including the names of the accused and the complainant, within a matter of minutes. Please note further that the right-wing tabloid Expressen belongs to the Bonnier family, the biggest media owners in Sweden, who are not only pro-American but very much pro-Israel, too. As you know, the pro-Israeli lobby is warmly supportive of America's Middle Eastern wars, while Assange and his WikiLeaks have the potential to undermine America's weakening support for the war.
Sounds like the name of Assange's accuser has been out there for a little bit but it's the first time I've seen her name mentioned.
The article is admittedly a bit flippant and I'm not familiar with either of the authors at all. I generally find Counterpunch to be quite credible although I have noticed a clunker or two posted there. Generally those are pure op-ed pieces which I find misguided though - I haven't noticed them playing fast and loose with facts. That being said I really don't know what to make of this article or some stuff I found after searching around a bit.
Well, this looks pretty damn awful. Better call your Congresspeople.
Damian Lataan is convinced that Iran is actually not perceived as any threat at all by Israel, and an attack on Iran would be merely serve "to provide both the opportunity and the cover for Israel to realise its ultimate regional endgame of creating a Greater Israel." He states "Greater Israel includes occupying, and eventually annexing, south Lebanon up to at least the Litani River and possibly beyond, and also the full occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip with the eventual deportation of the Palestinians living in these places to the Sinai and Jordan." This seems eminently plausible to me.
("All material on this site is available for use without permission but it would be appreciated if the source is acknowledged.")
Three weeks ago the US Defence Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) published a notice, as it is legally required to do, announcing that Israel has ordered massive quantities of various fuels suitable for military use, and in the case of the order for JP-8 jet fuel, suitable only for military use.
The massive order is valued at some $2 billion and, as well as the 284 million gallons (1.075 billion litres) of JP-8 jet fuel, the order also includes 60 million gallons (227 million litres) of unleaded gasoline and 100 million gallons (378 million litres) of diesel fuel.
Last week I wrote of how it would not be possible for Israel to mount a 'unilateral' strike against Iran because Israel would require complete connivance and support for such a strike from the US. I explained, as I have in the past, how it would be necessary for the US to supply the massive amounts of fuel need for such a strike. If Israel were to strike Iran, Israel would only require the massive amounts of jet fuel and over a billion litres of jet fuel would be more that enough to do the job in practical terms.
If Israel were planning to strike Iran then that would explain the requirement for the large amounts of JP-8 fuel. However, it does not explain Israel's need for such large amounts of gasoline and diesel fuel since an Israeli strike against Iran is unlikely to include any type of ground incursion into Iran for which these fuels would be used. The only conclusion one can draw, if Israel is not planning to actually invade Iran, which, clearly, it could not, is that Israel is planning to use the gasoline and the diesel fuel for some other ground incursion - and that can only mean an invasion of Lebanon and possibly the Gaza and West Bank when an attack against Iran is launched.
This massive order begs the question; is the final confrontation imminent? And, if not, then what is all this fuel for?
Time will tell. Jet fuel, if it's going to be used in peak condition, doesn't have a very long shelf life.
It is absolutely amazing the way the pro-Zionist MSM (mainstream media) presents the 'dangers' from an attack on Iran. Generally, the 'dangers' are limited to the closing of the vital Straights of Hormuz with a resulting powerful economic impact from the temporary shutoff of much of the world's supply of oil. The reality is very different then the fairytale presented by the MSM. Iran has invested almost 20 years and a fortune in what is called 'Advanced Biological Warfare'. This is not the simple powered anthrax and existing viruses (such as smallpox) that most of the public understands as 'biowar', that view is of 'your grandfather's biowar' technology. Advanced biowar is based on genetic engineering using recombination DNA technology where all new viruses are created using parts of various DNA segments from existing viral material. Most nations, that invest in such technology, use it for biologically produced advanced biotoxins (a type of bio-chemical warfare) and no doubt the Iranians and their Syrian allies have also done so extensively. However, in the case of Iran, they have used this technology to produce a hellish nightmare of a global strategic weapon system of mass destruction for a MAD (mutually assured destruction) counter-force that is truly "the poor man's nukes". Their arsenal of man-created super-killer viruses is apt to be in the many hundreds. While such viruses can be delivered by missiles, and are apt to be so delivered in the Middle East, they are perfect for non-conventional delivery systems such as sleeper agents-in-place in North America, and Europe. One person can begin a virus contagion by spraying public areas disquietly (using what appears to be a cell phone in a shopping mall, in a movie theater lobby or church lobby, etc.). With such Advanced Biowar viruses, the first humans infected become the vectors. The kill levels from a large scale strategic Advanced Biowar attack are roughly in the same league as that from a large scale strategic thermonuclear attack.
There is no effective defense against a coordinated Advanced Biowar attack, except for self-quarantine and 'letting the viruses run their course' (that is killing everyone they come into contact with). There are plans in the US to attempt to use postal delivery people to distribute medicine to people in their homes but this is grossly underfunded and apt to be totally ineffective.
An Advanced Biowar attack on North America and Europe and Israel would result in several hundred million deaths, the greatest die off of the human race since the Black Death of the Middle Ages which killed from one-third to two-thirds of the population. Of course, Israel and/or the United States would respond with a full spectrum nuclear attack on Iran, Syria and most likely Lebanon with a resulting nightmare that there would be far too few survivors left to bury the dead.
The fallout from either an attack on a fully fueled nuclear power reactor at Bushehr and/or from a nuclear barrage upon Iran/Syria/Lebanon would kill millions from the radioactive fallout and the diseases caused by the killing off of the T-Cells of millions to hundred of millions of people in Pakistan/India/China/Asia as the clouds move eastward. Such an event, coupled with the global spread of large numbers of new highly contagious incredibly lethal viruses, would likely trigger a Third World War.
Or maybe not. Many people who care about environmentalism, get caught up a great deal in thinking about how they consume, and changing their consumer habits.
Nearly all scientists agree that sewage sludge can be beneficial if it is uncontaminated, as it is a rich source of phosphorus and nitrogen. It has two components -- bacteria naturally present in organic matter, which can be somewhat removed depending on how the sludge is processed; and heavy metals and chemicals such as any of the 11 flame retardants, 72 pharmaceuticals, 28 metals, 25 steroids and hormones, and others that EPA tested for in its 2009 national sludge survey. It can also contain chemicals that no one is looking for, any one of the 80,000 that are made in the United States.
So I went over to look at a diary at the Daily Kos. The reason was because it was a suggestion from someone that I would really enjoy the epic fail of a diary. At first, didn't look like fail, but then:
UPDATE:
Things I'm NOT saying (and don't believe)
1. Obama needs to be primaried.
2. Obama hasn't accomplished anything good as President.
3. There is no hope for the Democratic Party.
4. I am throwing in the towel on trying to accomplish anything in politics.
Please excuse my less-than-formal tone this afternoon (although I don't know how formal my usual tone can be, considering every fourth word I type is 'fart', 'fuck', or 'fuckity fart dingleberry'.
The last few days I've been suffering an odd tooth ailment, which my boner-worthy dentist has deemed fucked up, but not infected enough for her to extract without me being in a fuckity fart-load of pain, even if I'm pumped full of Novocaine. Therefore, I must wait until the tooth is extraordinarily infected so the nerve isn't as sensitive when she yanks it. Luckily, she provided me with enough Oxycodone to last a few days.
But unluckily, I'm also a recovering opiate addict, a subject I have gleefully joked about on Lib Porn time and again. At the moment I'm doped up to all hell, so excuse any errors in logic or extensive use of dingleberryish references of farts of the more fuckity persuasion.
Anyway, today I want to air my personal views on all forms of healthcare (and yes, given my plight, I'm including dentistry). This shit should be free. Whining bitch that I am -- and also from a family with historically poor teeth, despite my almost obsessive flossing and brushing -- I understand there are millions of Americans who face crippling pain every day. I am not suffering such pain, although I did have a strange encounter yesterday which made me think of those who are facing that type of unbearable anguish.
As my normal dentist was closed yesterday, I dragged myself to another, less welcoming dentist who usually caters to lower-income people in the neighborhood. Unlike my normal dentist, this cuntastic woman demands $100 dollars from patients before their seen. I witnessed an old woman, who had come into the office ahead of me, whimpering to see the dentist. Begging. She could scarcely talk. After the clerk at the front desk alerted the dentist to the woman's anguish, the dentist appeared...and promptly told the woman that, without the $100 fee, she had to leave.
Now dear readers, you may think that I, along with Mitch, have raked in billions of dollars with our internet ventures. We have not, and I am just as uninsured as any of you. I also had to dip into my own pockets to pay the dentist's fee...and she didn't do shit. I asked her, "Can you just pull the tooth?" She says, "Yes, if you want. But not tonight." I said, "Why not tonight? It's 5:30 pm. Your sign says you're open 'til 6." She ignored me. I asked for my $100 back and she basically told me to go fuck myself. Had I known this was going to happen, I would have given my money to the ailing old woman who had been ahead of me, but try as I might, I haven't yet mastered the art of looking into the future.
Now the Tea Baggishly arrogant argument (and, really, the argument of healthcare capitalists everywhere) demands the sick work to pay off their medical bills. I'm tapping into my Catholic upbringing by saying this, but such demands are a motherfucking mortal sin. Especially in country with as much wealth as America.
Imagine the folks out there who are suffering from certain forms of cancer but have no health insurance, the folks still required to punch a clock for their health. And their families; wives, husbands, and children goes bankrupt paying for their family members' medical bills. There are people facing the very painful choice of paying the rent or paying medical bills, who supposedly make too much money to qualify for welfare.
Meanwhile, our so-called political leadership spends a fuckity fartload of our tax dollars to pay for: The upkeep of nuclear weapons, even more stealth bombers, private mercenary armies (making much more than our own soldiers, by the way), and god knows how many other military pet projects.
As a country, we need to look at ourselves honestly and consider what cutting just a fraction of our defense budget can pay for. I'm pretty sure that old woman in the dentist's office could have paid that $100 fee a thousand times over for the price of arming and maintaining a tactical nuclear weapon which will most likely never be fired (not because the need may not arise, but because we have thousands of other nukes).
When I was a 20-year-old in community college and still covered by my father's insurance, I was something of a libertarian (which came after my high school love affair with communism and Marxism, but just mere months before my ideological foray into, ya know, sanity). As a libertarian in a mostly black and liberal community college, I jubilantly espoused the virtues of bootstrappiness and "individualism" even though pretty much everyone I grew up with was either poor, working-class, or from a union family. I was sort of like Rand Paul, only instead of being the son an upper-middle class doctor-slash-politician, I was the son of working-class truck driver who happened to have decent health coverage. And as you may predict, dear readers, my libertarian leanings on healthcare vanished as soon as I was no longer eligible for my father's health plan. Mind you, I worked my ass off my whole life. From the time I was 12, I've had a job. Except that none of those jobs provided health or dental insurance. (And no, the internet doesn't give insurance to its dick joke writers. We checked.) So for people like you and I, who've done what America has asked us to do and worked our asses off, to be told "Sorry, if you fall ill to a certain number of diseases, you're probably going to die or, at the very least, drown in debt" is a betrayal.
Just as I shifted ideologically from libertarianism (which pretends that being on your own in an increasingly corporatist state is a good thing) to a semi-socialist (we sane few who think the free market's great when appropriate, but sickening and immoral when applied to basic necessities), I firmly believe the vast majority of conservatives, Tea Baggers, and libertarians would immediately change their views upon losing their health coverage. I don't think any sane person without health insurance can actually hold such views. It's like a person who hates the police refusing to dial 9-1-1 when a few gang rapists show up.
And if my position wasn't clear (and it may not be, considering these painkillers have my head swimming), I'll say it now: Raise taxes on the rich by 10% after the Shrubby Tax Cuts expire and cut defense spending by 10%. We'd still have the most badass military in the world. Our super-rich would still only pay some of the lowest high-income taxes in the world. Then, if we as a people can be as compassionate as we pretend to be, we could finally make sure all of our citizens have healthcare as well as dental coverage (even if we have to scrap an extra stealth bomber or two to provide the huddled, communist masses with free root canals).
The Hot Rods Are In - (Photos) Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant was launched on Saturday as engineers loaded the first of 163 fuel rods into the reactor under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The startup of the plant marked a milestone in Iran's history as the country joined 29 nations that currently generate nuclear power.
Kuwait has expressed safety concerns over Iran's new nuclear reactor on the opposite side of the Gulf, fearing fallout from possible leaks, the official news agency KUNA reported.
"Kuwait's concern is based on fears of any leaks due to natural causes that may have future consequences," foreign ministry undersecretary Khaled al-Jarallah said, quoted by KUNA late on Monday.
Kuwait is the nearest country to the Russian-built nuclear plant in the Iranian city of Bushehr, located like Kuwait in the northern Gulf.
Iran loaded the Bushehr facility with nuclear fuel last Saturday and the United States said there was no "proliferation risk" from the civilian plant because of Russian involvement.
A number of Kuwaiti MPs, however, have called on the government to take precautionary measures against any incident from Iran's first nuclear plant.
The Power Plant Is Only 150 Miles From Kuwait IRAN'S nuclear future is under construction on a spit of land that juts into the Gulf 150 miles east of Kuwait. The Bushehr nuclear site is the home to a nearly completed Russian-built plant that will be capable of producing a quarter of a ton of weapons-grade plutonium a year -enough, say nuclear experts, to build 30 atomic bombs.
.
So...
If Iran's nuclear facilities are attacked, the Bushehr nuclear plant will go the way of Chernobyl, taking out our vital strategic ally Kuwait. If it is not attacked, Iran will stop sending the enriched uranium and plutonium "waste" off to Russia. It will withdraw from the UN altogether, and its nonproliferation treaty, and arrest the UN weapons inspectors. (Most other nations, from Vietnam to Argentina, will do likewise.)
So maybe there is a checkmate scenario. That's probably for the best.
FSZ - Free Speech Zone - www.freespeechzoneblog.com
All data and information provided on this site is for informational purposes only. Free Speech Zone makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis by individual diarists, independent journalists, and the views herein are those of the individual authors and do not reflect the views or opinions of the people who run this site. Free Speech Zone is a "common carrier" and the views presented herein
are in no way endorsed, condoned, or representative of
Free Speech Zone, its owners, or management.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
-First Amendment to the United States Constitution
