impending war with iran and a history lesson
more information for you to digest. don't bother moaning, i've stuck my fingers in my ears and am chanting "I CAN'T HEAR YOU" very loudly.
yes, i've taken a page out of georgie porgie's book.
first of all, i'd like to direct you to the main page of the centre for research on globalization. take a quick scan of the titles of the articles, essays, and research papers listed on the front. count how many times the words "iran" or "nuclear strike" occur. ask yourself why you still care about things like american idol. shake your head repeatedly and read the titles again. you weren't imagining it before.
if any of you act surprised at all when "iran attacks america" then i will hunt you down and... read you a lot of books.
so while we're on that subject, i made a prediction ... er about a year ago? ... that george & co. would stage another terrorist attack, probably using a dirty bomb of some kind (this being before i heard information that stated that a thermonuclear device was likely used to weaken the supports of the twin towers - see the video posted in an earlier blog), and that would be mysteriously linked to iranian forces, or iranian backed terrorists. this attack would be used as a pretext to extend george's term in office and would lead to the bombing of iran.
even i thought i was being a little overly paranoid then.
of course, since that point, i've discovered that legislation is currently floating around the House and Senate that will take back the amendment that limits presidents to two terms. i figured when the democrats made it into the majority this would probably spell doom for such an amendment. as the democrats seem to be acting rather spinelessly - and complicitly, as we should have expected of them - i'm not so sure that this is bad news for this legislation anymore.
and now i've uncovered a few reports that, well, the titles speak for themselves:
published august 10, 2006: the pentagon's second 911 a few quotes ought to sum this article up nicely:
"In the month following last year's 7/7 London bombings, Vice President Dick Cheney is reported to have instructed USSTRATCOM to draw up a contingency plan 'to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States'."
...
"'The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing-that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack-but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections. (Philip Giraldi, Attack on Iran: Pre-emptive Nuclear War , The American Conservative, 2 August 2005)'"
there is more, of course, but i figure if you're not interested by now you probably never will be, and i invite you to go camp outside of your local recruitment office and tell them that you've decided you don't want to wait for the draft, you'd like to help out the america's gene pool now by lining up on the iranian border.
yes, i am feeling a bit touchy today. pms?
another article along this line of thought, published january 21, 2007: looking for a gulf of tonkin-like incident since i know so many of you attended public schools in the same district as me, i'm aware that you probably never made it as far as the vietnam war in your u.s. history classes. if you did, i'm sure you never really got the whole story behind the gulf of tonkin incident. well, i'm not going to give it to you. you're all smart people, go look it up for yourself. the gist of it all is that an american navy vessel was reported to have been sunk in the gulf of tonkin by communist/vietnamese forces, and this was used as a pretext to go to war. later it was shown that such a sinking never happened. the whole thing was fabricated so that the american public would blindly support their government as they participated in the murder of innocent civilians - and a few communists along the way.
the article opens with a quote from our favourite president: "I fully understand that they [the Congress] could try to stop me from doing it. But I’ve made my decision. And we’re going forward." President George W. Bush, (in an interview broadcast on CBS 60 Minutes, Jan. 14, 2007)"
you can read the rest yourself.
one more on iran, published january 16, 2007: iranian mp: us spy plane shot down by iran the title says it all, and the article is very brief and to the point. no speculation here. my question: how come this wasn't headlining on yahoo! news ... or any other major news organization?
the 'bush doctrine' and weapons in space here's an article that throws the united states' condemnation of china for launching it's anti-satellite missle right in their [us] faces. it discuesses briefly the signs that bush & co. are 100% for the weaponization of space - on american terms - despite their statements to the contrary. it also goes into some of the history throughout other administrations regarding the militarization of space - against treaties signed in the 1960s. the article opens with a quote i like, even if it's not directly related:
"'The dangerous patriot: The one who drifts into chauvinism and exhibits blind enthusiasm for military actions. He is a defender of militarism and its ideals of war and glory. Chauvinism is a proud and bellicose form of patriotism . . . which identifies numerous enemies who can only be dealt with through military power and which equates the national honor with military victory.' James A. Donovan, Colonel, US Marine Corps"
the world can't wait, won't wait, isn't waiting a speech that fans of cynthia mckinney will enjoy, documenting the sucesses of civilian movements worldwide against the flows of control and empire. check it out, will ya?
finally, the piece d'resistance: profits uber alles! a piece of history you probably never got, no matter what school you went to. some of you likely know that american corporations - like ford and gm - invested heavily in germany under the nazi party... well i hope some of you knew that. if not then this will probably come as a shock to you. this very informative, albeit long and full of large-ish words, article spells out these corporations involvement/love affair with hitler, the nazis, and facism in general. a few facts to draw you in:
"In the early 1920s, Henry Ford cranked out a vehemently anti-Semitic book, The International Jew, which was translated into many languages; Hitler read the German version and acknowledged later that it provided him with inspiration and encouragement."
"[Irenee] Du Pont provided generous financial support to America's own fascist organizations, such as the infamous "Black Legion," and was even involved in plans for a fascist coup d'état in Washington."
"Albert Speer, Hitler's architect and wartime armament minister, stated after the war that without certain kinds of synthetic fuel made available by American firms, Hitler 'would never have considered invading Poland.'"
"The German subsidiary of GM, however, did have an insatiable appetite for other types of forced labour, such as POWs. Typical of the use of slave labour in the Opel factories, particularly when it involved Russians, writes historian Anita Kugler, were 'maximum exploitation, the worst possible treatment, and...capital punishment even in the case of minor offences.'"
i strongly encourage you to read the remainder of the article, and you will if you're interested in just how capitalism and facism walk hand in hand. or if i were georgie i'd just threaten you with a nuke. but i'm not and i recognize that i can't force anyone to do anything. but trust me, if you will, and set aside some time for this piece. if you read fast like i do, you should be able to get through this in half an hour or so, assuming you're not interrupted constantly. otherwise break it into pieces and revist it every day or so, if you can't read that fast or get distracted easily. take notes. you probably won't need to, but my brain seems to hold onto information better than others.
all for now. i'm going to watch some more movies soon, i'll probably be recommending them to you along the way.
yes, i've taken a page out of georgie porgie's book.
first of all, i'd like to direct you to the main page of the centre for research on globalization. take a quick scan of the titles of the articles, essays, and research papers listed on the front. count how many times the words "iran" or "nuclear strike" occur. ask yourself why you still care about things like american idol. shake your head repeatedly and read the titles again. you weren't imagining it before.
if any of you act surprised at all when "iran attacks america" then i will hunt you down and... read you a lot of books.
so while we're on that subject, i made a prediction ... er about a year ago? ... that george & co. would stage another terrorist attack, probably using a dirty bomb of some kind (this being before i heard information that stated that a thermonuclear device was likely used to weaken the supports of the twin towers - see the video posted in an earlier blog), and that would be mysteriously linked to iranian forces, or iranian backed terrorists. this attack would be used as a pretext to extend george's term in office and would lead to the bombing of iran.
even i thought i was being a little overly paranoid then.
of course, since that point, i've discovered that legislation is currently floating around the House and Senate that will take back the amendment that limits presidents to two terms. i figured when the democrats made it into the majority this would probably spell doom for such an amendment. as the democrats seem to be acting rather spinelessly - and complicitly, as we should have expected of them - i'm not so sure that this is bad news for this legislation anymore.
and now i've uncovered a few reports that, well, the titles speak for themselves:
published august 10, 2006: the pentagon's second 911 a few quotes ought to sum this article up nicely:
"In the month following last year's 7/7 London bombings, Vice President Dick Cheney is reported to have instructed USSTRATCOM to draw up a contingency plan 'to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States'."
...
"'The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing-that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack-but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections. (Philip Giraldi, Attack on Iran: Pre-emptive Nuclear War , The American Conservative, 2 August 2005)'"
there is more, of course, but i figure if you're not interested by now you probably never will be, and i invite you to go camp outside of your local recruitment office and tell them that you've decided you don't want to wait for the draft, you'd like to help out the america's gene pool now by lining up on the iranian border.
yes, i am feeling a bit touchy today. pms?
another article along this line of thought, published january 21, 2007: looking for a gulf of tonkin-like incident since i know so many of you attended public schools in the same district as me, i'm aware that you probably never made it as far as the vietnam war in your u.s. history classes. if you did, i'm sure you never really got the whole story behind the gulf of tonkin incident. well, i'm not going to give it to you. you're all smart people, go look it up for yourself. the gist of it all is that an american navy vessel was reported to have been sunk in the gulf of tonkin by communist/vietnamese forces, and this was used as a pretext to go to war. later it was shown that such a sinking never happened. the whole thing was fabricated so that the american public would blindly support their government as they participated in the murder of innocent civilians - and a few communists along the way.
the article opens with a quote from our favourite president: "I fully understand that they [the Congress] could try to stop me from doing it. But I’ve made my decision. And we’re going forward." President George W. Bush, (in an interview broadcast on CBS 60 Minutes, Jan. 14, 2007)"
you can read the rest yourself.
one more on iran, published january 16, 2007: iranian mp: us spy plane shot down by iran the title says it all, and the article is very brief and to the point. no speculation here. my question: how come this wasn't headlining on yahoo! news ... or any other major news organization?
the 'bush doctrine' and weapons in space here's an article that throws the united states' condemnation of china for launching it's anti-satellite missle right in their [us] faces. it discuesses briefly the signs that bush & co. are 100% for the weaponization of space - on american terms - despite their statements to the contrary. it also goes into some of the history throughout other administrations regarding the militarization of space - against treaties signed in the 1960s. the article opens with a quote i like, even if it's not directly related:
"'The dangerous patriot: The one who drifts into chauvinism and exhibits blind enthusiasm for military actions. He is a defender of militarism and its ideals of war and glory. Chauvinism is a proud and bellicose form of patriotism . . . which identifies numerous enemies who can only be dealt with through military power and which equates the national honor with military victory.' James A. Donovan, Colonel, US Marine Corps"
the world can't wait, won't wait, isn't waiting a speech that fans of cynthia mckinney will enjoy, documenting the sucesses of civilian movements worldwide against the flows of control and empire. check it out, will ya?
finally, the piece d'resistance: profits uber alles! a piece of history you probably never got, no matter what school you went to. some of you likely know that american corporations - like ford and gm - invested heavily in germany under the nazi party... well i hope some of you knew that. if not then this will probably come as a shock to you. this very informative, albeit long and full of large-ish words, article spells out these corporations involvement/love affair with hitler, the nazis, and facism in general. a few facts to draw you in:
"In the early 1920s, Henry Ford cranked out a vehemently anti-Semitic book, The International Jew, which was translated into many languages; Hitler read the German version and acknowledged later that it provided him with inspiration and encouragement."
"[Irenee] Du Pont provided generous financial support to America's own fascist organizations, such as the infamous "Black Legion," and was even involved in plans for a fascist coup d'état in Washington."
"Albert Speer, Hitler's architect and wartime armament minister, stated after the war that without certain kinds of synthetic fuel made available by American firms, Hitler 'would never have considered invading Poland.'"
"The German subsidiary of GM, however, did have an insatiable appetite for other types of forced labour, such as POWs. Typical of the use of slave labour in the Opel factories, particularly when it involved Russians, writes historian Anita Kugler, were 'maximum exploitation, the worst possible treatment, and...capital punishment even in the case of minor offences.'"
i strongly encourage you to read the remainder of the article, and you will if you're interested in just how capitalism and facism walk hand in hand. or if i were georgie i'd just threaten you with a nuke. but i'm not and i recognize that i can't force anyone to do anything. but trust me, if you will, and set aside some time for this piece. if you read fast like i do, you should be able to get through this in half an hour or so, assuming you're not interrupted constantly. otherwise break it into pieces and revist it every day or so, if you can't read that fast or get distracted easily. take notes. you probably won't need to, but my brain seems to hold onto information better than others.
all for now. i'm going to watch some more movies soon, i'll probably be recommending them to you along the way.