Corruption And The Unspeakable by Bruce Gagnon


by Bruce Gagnon
featured writer
Dandelion Salad

Bruce’s blog post

July 6, 2008

Condi Rice lands in the Czech Republic early this coming week to sign the agreement between the U.S. and the Czech government to allow the Star Wars radar deployment there. In recent days, throughout Europe, activists have been holding vigils at U.S. and Czech embassies to protest the deployment. The Polish side of the “missile defense” deployments, once a slam dunk for Bush, has now fallen on hard times. The growing anti-Star Wars fever in Europe is having an impact.

I finished the book JFK and the Unspeakable while on the train ride home from Florida. This is a must read book….you must get it, read it, and tell others about it. It’s like reading history, a mystery story, and a moral lesson all in one. I will have to write more about it soon.

Mary Beth and I get back on the train this coming Wednesday for a trip to Chicago where we will each be doing workshops at the national Green Party Convention. It will also be exciting to witness the presidential nomination of Cynthia McKinney, former Democratic party congresswoman from Atlanta, Georgia. On my free time I will be volunteering for her campaign. If you have not yet watched her award winning documentary video called American Blackout about the stolen elections of 2000 and 2004 then you should see it and share it with others.

Speaking of Democrats and elections, the controversy here in Maine is heating up as Rep Tom Allen (D-ME) continues to get the Maine Democratic party to try to keep Independent candidate Herb Hoffman off the ballot. Allen is running for the U.S. Senate seat now held by Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Hoffman has successfully collected over 4,000 signatures to get himself on the ballot in that race. The Dems though contested Hoffman’s signatures claiming they were invalid but state authorities ruled they were acceptable. Fearing electoral competition the Dems have now challenged the state ruling and are taking the matter to court in their attempt to block the electoral process. The Dems are showing Maine voters how they can play the same corrupt games to subvert free and fair elections that the Republicans are famous for.

While on the way home from Florida, changing trains in New York City, I picked up the Washington Post newspaper and had to laugh (and cry) when I read the front page headline Obama May Consider Slowing Iraq Withdrawal. It’s starting to be like a joke – each day lately Obama has been backing away from an earlier campaign position as he swings hard to the right. But his backing away from Iraq, supposedly his signature issue, underlies the reality that Obama is proving to be like any other political hack. Maybe when he says he is for change he means that he promises to change his positions to match those of John McCain.

Try to stay sane as you watch all this nonsense develop.


The JFK Assassination and 9/11: the Designated Suspects in Both Cases

JFK and the Unspeakable

Poland rejects U.S. missile shield offer

American Blackout (2006)

Clone politics or Cynthia McKinney?

American Blackout (2006) + Cynthia McKinney at Media Summer

Dandelion Salad

replaced video Nov. 3, 2015

89 min – Aug 10, 2007
Guerilla News Network –

RunCynthiaRun on Nov 3, 2015

American Blackout, by Ian Inaba, is the story of how my political career was influenced by Deep State interests that are willing to push the limits to get what it wants at the expense of the ideals and values of the people of the United States. However, when the operatives fired at me, they also revealed themselves for those who were watching. What was daring then for me to say is now cliché.

Continue reading

Dysfunctional America Fails to See Elephant in the Living Room



by R J Shulman
Dandelion Salad
featured writer
Robert’s blog post
July 6, 2008

NEW YORK – In a her new book Denial is a River in America, author Ruth Treal compares the American public with a dysfunctional family deep in denial. “There is this big elephant in the living room,” Treal says, “and no one wants to admit it’s there. What is so shocking,” Treal contends, “is that this is not just an elephant, but a big bad one who lies the American family into war, promotes greed and favoritism, supports torture and tramples all over Constitutional rights, yet everyone pretends everything is OK.”

As an example, the book points out that more Americans were upset when their favorite contestant on American Idol was eliminated than when this big elephant eliminated their right to privacy. “Those that point out the elephant’s existance are ridiculed,” Treal says, “and are made to feel like real donkeys.”

Not everyone is ignoring the elephant. Senator Obama said its time to change the elephant. Senator McCain spoke at a political rally in Jackson, Mississippi where he said he couldn’t remember what was in the living room, but was in favor of the elephant, even if it was in the living room for a hundred years.

President Bush said that, “since I’ve stopped drinking, I’ve haven’t seen an elephant, just the Lord who tells me which countries to invaded next.”

“It’s a testament to the success of our war on global terror,” said Vice President Dick Cheney,” that Americans are not upset by the crushing of their rights and economic opportunities by a so called elephant, which of course is just propaganda from the terrorists who want to hit us and hit us hard. I would like to have a discussion with Ms. Treal about her theories, oh, let say if you will, on a private hunting trip.”

The book released this weekend is Ms. Treal follow up to Who Cares? America’s Lack of Concerned about Apathy.


Bush: USA Needs More States by R J Shulman

Israel locks down West Bank village over protests

Dandelion Salad



This video may contain images depicting the reality and horror of war/violence and should only be viewed by a mature audience.


Israeli troops are sealing off the Palestinian village of Ni’lin in the occupied West Bank.

Villagers in Ni’lin are trying to stop the latest stretch of Israel’s separation wall from cutting them off from their farmland.

Israel says the barrier is being built to keep out Palestinian suicide bombers.

Construction sites are flashpoints for confrontations between Israeli security forces and Palestinians, who are often supported by left-wing protesters from Israel and abroad.

David Chater, Al Jazeera’s correspondent in the West Bank, filed this exclusive report.

The Ashes Have Been Passed To A New Generation

Dandelion Salad

By David Michael Green
07/04/08 “ICH

We live in the most astonishing of times, politically speaking.

And I don’t mean that as a compliment.

There is so much I would hate to try to have explain to an alien about our politics. Same with a human five centuries from now – it’s just that I’m not so sure there’ll be any.

In America, a regressive majority of one on the Supreme Court disappears a whole clause from the Second Amendment in order to interpret it favorably for an industry merchandizing mass quantities of small death machines. Thirty or forty thousand of us are swept away every year by these killers, but few find the coincidence of that fact with their ubiquitous presence – by some estimates, there is nearly one gun for every American nowadays – somehow noteworthy.

One president has oral sex in a private consensual relationship and lies about it, so right-wing freaks spend $40 million to investigate this most heinous of crimes and bring impeachment charges against a president for only the second time in American history. Meanwhile, one of their own admits to trashing the Constitution at every turn and isn’t even investigated, let alone impeached, let alone removed from office.

This same president plunges the world into war on the basis of non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but couldn’t be less concerned when North Korea actually goes nuclear on his watch. This president goes to war to bring democracy to the Arab world, but can’t even be bothered to pressure Egypt or Saudi Arabia to move a tad in that direction. This president uses an attack on the US to justify international belligerence and mass human rights violations, but doesn’t seem very interested in even attacking, let alone vanquishing, the supposed perpetrator.

The list of these political out-of-body experiences is as endless as it is absurd. I may not speak Martian very well, but even I can tell you what the look on the face of that little green feller with the antennae means. He’s thinking, “Wow, you humans are the strangest freaks in the galaxy, man!”

Well, actually, it’s not so much the entire species, but mostly just us especially twisted sisters manning the bridge over here in the, uh, world’s only superpower. Bad coincidence, eh? Even we wacky Gringos know that weapons and criminals make a bad combination, as do weapons and lunatics. So, what fool handed us the keys to this planetary oil tanker? Shouldn’t, like, um, the Swedes or the Norwegians be the world’s superpower? They seem harmless enough.

Yep, we could go on and on detailing the ludicrous inanities of American politics in the age of Bush (himself Exhibit A), but really my favorite has to be the case of global warming. In a society devoted like no other to the politics of fear, we have somehow managed to forget the one thing we should probably fear most.

Imagine if there was a meteor headed toward our one and only planet, with the potential to do devastating and possibly lethal damage to the planet. Imagine that we had the technological capability to divert the course of this weapon of the massiest mass destruction, and all we needed was the will to do so. And imagine that we chose to focus our society’s energies instead on … gay marriage. Or illegal immigration. Or premarital sex.

Not only would we screw up all of those policy areas, but we be toast anyhow, along with all our unmarried gays, undocumented workers and ‘virgin’ teenagers (who, have you seen, just become experts at anal and oral sex in order to avoid the forbidden standard kind?). Good lord, this is a society which desperately needs medication! Or maybe that’s the problem, and we desperately need to ditch all the brain-benders of every sort that we imbibe like candy.

Remember Dick Cheney’s ‘one percent doctrine’? He argued that if there’s even a one percent chance of a terrorist attack, you have to go on the offensive. Of course, reality external to the Vice President’s secret location tends to be a bit more nuanced than that, but that’s why everyone calls him Dick, I guess. Anyhow, there’s this little thing called cost-benefit analysis that seems to have gone sorely missing over the last, er, eight years or so. It was last seen flowing down the sewers of Baghdad. It would argue, for example, that yes, you should take threats seriously, but that if the solution to a one percent probability of danger that could threaten the lives of a thousand people is to adopt a policy which definitely kills 100 million of your own citizens, that’s probably a bad plan. Costs and benefits, you see. I mean, people can differ on this, of course, but I’d vote to take the one percent risk in such a case. At a minimum I’d certainly argue that we ought to weight the costs along with the benefits every once in a while. Admittedly, though, that’s not so helpful when you’re in the middle of trying to scare the hell out of people so they’ll vote for you, or acquiesce to your destructive policies.

But I digress. There is a monstrous catastrophe not only headed our way, but actually already here. I’m not a climatologist, but my sense from paying attention to media reporting on this issue over the last two decades is that there is not only a one percent chance that global warming is both real and anthropogenic, but rather a ninety-five percent chance. Perhaps ninety-nine. Yep, sure, there are a few scientists out there still making the opposite argument. Probably some of them even aren’t on oil company payrolls! But the vast majority of reputable climate scientists now agree that this is happening, that we are making it happen, and that the results will be catastrophic. This, after ten and twenty years of a (somewhat) healthy scientific skepticism about those claims, which only further underscores the validity of the findings.

So what will they say about us five centuries from now – those very few, very toasty, remaining humans, living on mountain tops, the only dry land to be found? What they’ll say is probably unprintable in any family newspaper, that’s for sure. But in-between the expletives I think you’d be likely to find words like … “unconscionable” … “breathtakingly stupid” … “astonishingly selfish” … and, “If you weren’t already dead I’d kill you!”

Last week we had James Hansen reminding Congress, twenty years after originally doing so, of the gravity of this situation. One of the top scientists from one of America’s premier science agencies – who was told, by the way, to shut the hell up by the Bush administration – was reminding us yet again that we are facing mass species extinctions and ecosystem collapse among the lovely perils awaiting us if we continue in the current direction. Assuming, that is, that it isn’t already far too late to turn it around now.

Think about that for a second: Mass extinction. Ecosystem collapse. Meteor. Ninety-five or better percent chance.

Gay marriage.

Takes your breath right away, doesn’t it? There are certainly few better ways to underscore the full scope of the regressive nightmare haunting a country that likes to think of itself as the last, best hope of humanity. Fat chance of that. Indeed, we – or at least some of us – half-deserve this fate for choosing the likes of Nixon, Reagan, Bush, DeLay, Scalia and the rest these last decades. It’s the rest of the world I feel especially sorry for. Last, best hope? Jeez, the mercury had already burst out squirting from the top of my irony thermometer seven years ago. Somehow I don’t think so. Well, maybe the ‘last’ part…

And what’s especially killer about this particular issue is the degree to which the multiple maladies and solutions all line up so neatly. Sometimes the cosmos sends you a message in very subtle ways. Other times it beats you over the head with a two-by-four. Occasionally, it detonates a small nuclear device in your backyard swimming pool to get your attention.

We’re very much in the latter category right now. You don’t exactly have to do a full and complete inventory to figure this one out. Here, just take this pop quiz. Quick, now: What factor do all of the following items have in common: massive environmental devastation, skyrocketing transportation and food prices, a declining middle-class with disappearing jobs, and a war-prone and constant calamity-threatening Middle East continually sucking in American military involvement and nightmarishly distorting our foreign policy? (If you’re somehow still struggling with this, you may want to consider spending a little more time catching up with current events. Meanwhile, though, here’s a bonus hint for you: Alan Greenspan described this as the real reason America went to war in Iraq.)

Did you get it?!?! Okay! A+ for you! Now flip it on it’s head. What would be a way in which our society could address the massive threats of global warming, a sinking middle class with lousy jobs, poverty-inducing energy costs and military nightmares in the Middle East, all at once? How about if we made it a giant national priority to wean ourselves off carbon-based energy sources through a variety of policies mixing incentives and regulations, and a huge national effort to develop alternative fuel sources, with all the industrial development and good-paying jobs associated with launching such industries? You know. What did Jimmy Carter call it, thirty freakin’ years ago? “The moral equivalent of war”, wasn’t it? Too bad he was a failed president, though. Hardly invaded any other countries. What could he possibly have known?

Seriously, though, here’s a chance to go from the all-wrong scenario of environmental destruction / energy dependence / Middle East war / horrific gas prices / recession / middle class decline, over to the all-right scenario of sustainability / energy independence / peace / reasonable energy costs / economic development / prosperity – all in one fell swoop. I mean, I know that regressives have a problem with any policies that actually make sense, and I know that Americans are just about the dumbest branch of the homo politicus family tree, but isn’t this a no-brainer so obvious that even people who actually have no brains could figure it out?

So, last week James Hansen reminded us that we are headed for such joyous ‘lifestyle changes’ as mass extinction and ecosystem collapse. Of course, most regressives continued to pooh-pooh such warnings as some sort of liberal conspiracy to undermine capitalism. I must say, these people blow me away with their unflinching and robotic dogmatism. I mean, I get why they insist on the Earth being only 6,000 years old and anything having to do with sex being a major sin. They’re incredibly frightened, and these beliefs bring the existential comfort of order to an otherwise messy and capricious universe. But what’s up with middle class fools ardently supporting tax cuts for the wealthy? Or any human being in the whole world denying the near unanimous testimony of scientific experts regarding a planetary threat, because oil companies told them to do so? Do climatologists seriously strike anybody as crypto-anarchists masquerading as scientists in order to destroy capitalism? (Listen to some regressive kooks talk about global warming and you could easily think so.) And, if that was really their goal, wouldn’t there be a lot easier ways to crash the system than to go spend years getting a PhD, do a bunch of boring research for low pay, and grade a million mind-numbing term papers written by a million grammatically-challenged college sophomores?

Then there’s that pesky little problem of evidence. Every week there’s more, though hardly any quite as egregious as what you could have seen on just a few days ago: “North Pole Could Be Ice-Free This Summer, Scientists Say”. Woo-hoo. No worries there, eh? Now if Adam and Steve get married in California or Massachusetts, that’s something to get worked up about. But the destruction of the Arctic ice cap? We’ve already got polar bears in zoos, so what’s the big damn deal? Prolly it’ll be easier to get to the oil up there without all that ice in the way, anyhow.

What will they say – assuming there are any they left to be saying – in five centuries about us nice folks who managed to bequeath the solar system a second Mercury where a green and fertile planet once stood, just so we could party a little longer? I’m not sure, but I don’t think it will be pretty. And I don’t think it will be, “Well, sure, they weren’t perfect. And, true, they wrecked the whole planet. But at least they kept boys from marrying other boys.”

These regressive fools and their pre-/anti-scientific religious superstitions just kill me.

And that’s just the problem. They’re killing all of us.

Praise the lord.

David Michael Green is a professor of political science at Hofstra University in New York. He is delighted to receive readers’ reactions to his articles (, but regrets that time constraints do not always allow him to respond. More of his work can be found at his website,

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


Climate Chaos Is Inevitable. We Can Only Avert Oblivion

The Most IMPORTANT Video You’ll Ever See (videos; Parts 1-4)

The Most IMPORTANT Video You’ll Ever See (videos; Parts 5-8)

How It All Ends: Your Mission (global warming; must-see videos)

How It All Ends (Global Warming; must-see video; links)

Social change to stop climate change

Global Warming/Climate changes/Environment

Global Warming

How You Ended The War (video)

Dandelion Salad



This video may contain images depicting the reality and horror of war/violence and should only be viewed by a mature audience.

Updated: 3.01.09 replaced video

Free Speech Provided by: U.S. Military

You Have The Right To Remain Silent.
But We Hope You Won’t.

Mother: Roger Waters/Sinead O’Connor
Serve C: thievery corporation
For What Its Worth: Buffalo Springfield
Lonely Soldier: Tim Buckley

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about “How You Ended The War (video) Video“, posted with vodpod


Scott Ritter in my home town (must-see video)

Conditioning for the Police State – the American War At Home

Dandelion Salad

by Cathy Garger
July 6, 2008

Oh my word. The US Military has been working like busy worker bees this summer, conducting war training exercises in Indianapolis. Recently, military helicopters practiced playing war with military Special Operations commandos training with Denver police and fire teams for a potential terrorism threat in a ‘realistic urban environment’” over the skies of Denver, Colorado in counterterrorism helicopter exercises, which have rattled windows and residents’ nerves.”

It appears Uncle Sam has reason to believe the DNC convention is going to need some military “intervention” in Denver come August. In addition, in “War On America’s Playgrounds,” this writer reported on the Marine war drills waged in the city of Indianapolis that took place in a city park. Yes, you heard that right. Marines played war games in an Indiana city park. I swear to you, I’m not making this up!


FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

What gives Bush the right to destabilize Iran by covert military operations?

Dandelion Salad

by Brian Appleton
(CASMII Columns)
Sunday, July 6, 2008

What a miserable little excuse for a human being Mr. Bush is. What gives him the right to attempt to destabilize the government of another country covertly with our tax payers money because they refuse to be his vassal state. He does not have the imagination or honesty or desire to make earnest attempts at peace in a win win style negotiation which would be beneficial to both sides…covert operations, sanctions and bombing are the only tools in his bag and he has badgered our Congress and the EU into going along with this by abusing the power of the office of President of the USA…backed by the corporate owned media who have become a de facto propaganda ministry.

When I wrote my Senator Feinstein to vote in favor of Kucinich’s 35 articles of impeachment, she responded with a mealy mouthed statement about how impeachment would only further divide our nation. How is it in our great democracy that a President can routinely break the laws with impunity while an average citizen faces justice and jail time for the same? To me it is more embarassing that the Congress does not have the courage to curb the abuse of the Executive Office than to admit to the world that we have a President who should be impeached.

Just as the sanctions only make the average citizens suffer and not the elite it is targeted at, so covert operations are just going to get a lot of people killed and solidify the position of those in power who can use unity against foreign interference and threat of imminent attack to overcome dissidence thus producing the exact opposite effect of what the US administration desires.

This is not the 1950’s when Kermit Roosevelt bragged that it only cost him $60,000 to overthrow Mossadeg and reinstall the Shah. It will not happen that way again. Too many people fought and died in the revolution of 1979 and in the Iraq Iran War to allow the re-establishment of a US puppet… Mr. Bush naively thought the Iraqis would welcome US intervention with open arms and now five years later it is a quagmire with no exit.

The idea of sanctions is that somehow if the people suffer enough they will overthrow their government. Would you the average middle class citizen try to overthrow your government if tomorrow Mr. Bush declared himself president for life for example? What would you do against the military and the police who have the keys to all the gun racks? Would you risk your life, limb and property to attempt the overthrow of your government? Don’t ask other people to do what you haven’t the courage to do yourself.

Why doesn’t the President use the vast resources and energy of this nation to do good in the world instead of rain destruction on others to give us more of an upperhand over the third world than we already have?

As long as Americans and their leaders of this “Christian” nation think that an American life has more value than the life of a human being of any other nationality then there will be no peace.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


Iran: War or Privatization: All Out War or “Economic Conquest”?

Attack on Iran would turn region into a fireball + The most radical President in history

Rep. Ron Paul Assails Congress’ “Virtual Iran War Resolution” + vid

Kucinich: Independence Day: Let Us Remember Who We Are + Impeach Bush

Vidal: Bush ended US as a republic

Impeachment “ON or Off the table”? You decide.

Congressional Resolution to Provoke Iran (Action Alert)

Will the US Congress ratify the Bush Administration’s Decision to launch a War on Iran (H. CON. RES. 362)



The Communist Bugaboo By Gaither Stewart

Dandelion Salad

By Gaither Stewart

Dedicated to those who continually raise the bugaboo of the Communist menace to the make-believe, hypocritical, lying and socially perfidious “American way of life”.

(Rome) I visited the tomb of Antonio Gramsci in the Poets’ Cemetery in Rome. An inconspicuous urn resting in the center of the mound contains the ashes of the Marxist philosopher and founder of the Italian Communist Party. The tombstone bears only his name and his dates—1891-1937. The fresh red flowers indicate that the site is tended.

Continue reading

Poland rejects U.S. missile shield offer

Dandelion Salad

By Patryk Wasilewski and Gareth Jones
After Downing Street

Poland spurned as insufficient on Friday a U.S. offer to boost its air defenses in return for basing anti-missile interceptors on its soil but said it remained open to talks with Washington.


FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Bush: USA Needs More States by R J Shulman



by R J Shulman
Dandelion Salad
featured writer
Robert’s blog post
July 6, 2008

WASHIGNTON – President Bush announced today that in his final days as President, he will urge Congress to add at least five new states to the union. “Them old Europeans have banded together,” Bush said, “so in order to keep the USA number one, we need to out-state them. Under my administration, there have been some states that have been growing and it is time to make these states official.”

“First,” Bush said. “we should addicate the State of War. This has become a powerful territory that has helped me and my buddies and deserves to be crowned the mantle of Statehood. Next is the great State of Fear, very important to the governing of this great nation, without it where would I be?” Other states the President will propose to be added are the State of Confusion, State of Depression and his personal favorite, State of Paranoia.

“If Congress fails to add these deserving all-American states to the union,” said Vice President Dick Cheney, “I may have to travel over to the dark side to make it happen.” Congress has not commented on the President’s proposal as they are all vacationing in another proposed addition to America, the State of Denial.

Candidate Obama: A Less Risky Alternative by Rodrigue Tremblay

Dandelion Salad

More links on the original post.

by Rodrigue Tremblay
Monday, July 7, 2008

“All you have to do is to tell them [the people] they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

Hermann Goering, Germany’s Nazi leader

“Essential to this strategy is the UN Security Council, which should impose progressively tougher political and economic sanctions [on Iran]. Should the Security Council continue to delay in this responsibility, the United States must lead like-minded countries in imposing multilateral sanctions outside the UN framework.”

Sen. John McCain, June 2, 2008, before the annual AIPAC Conference, Washington D.C.

“The Iranian threat must be stopped by all possible means, and [it was a global duty to take] drastic measures’ to prevent it.”

Ehud Olmert, Israeli Prime Minister, June 4, 2008, before the annual AIPAC Conference, Washington D.C.

“I have proposed a responsible, phased redeployment of our troops from Iraq. We will get out as carefully as we were careless getting in.”

…[The] “danger from Iran is grave, [and I would] do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon – everything.”

Sen. Barack Obama, June 4, 2008, before the annual AIPAC Conference, Washington D.C.

“…I know that when I visit with AIPAC, I am among friends. Good friends. Friends who share my strong commitment to make sure that the bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable today, tomorrow, and forever.”

Sen. Barack Obama, June 4, 2008, before the annual AIPAC Conference, Washington D.C.

A few weeks ago, I analyzed the relative worthiness of the candidacy of presumptive Republican Candidate McCain. In all fairness, a similar assessment of Senator Barack Obama’s candidacy would appear necessary.

Indeed, the Bush-Cheney administration will be history at 11:59 pm on January 20, 2009. On November 4, 2008, their successors, a new president and a new vice president, will have been chosen. Will it be an Obama team or a McCain team?

Sen. Barack Obama (D. IL) is the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate and the U.S.’s first African-American presidential nominee from a major party. Considering the racial past of the United States, if he were to be elected President, this will have to be considered close to being a political revolution. The political climate for such an important shift in American politics is, as of now, most favorable to electing a Democrat as President.

For one, the current Republican administration, after eight years of blunder upon blunder, is the most unpopular of any administration in a long time, with a massive 65 percent disapproval rating, according to a recent Associated Press-Ipsos poll, while President George W. Bush is in the political cellar with a 28 percent approval rating. Even more revealing perhaps, very few Americans say their country is heading in the right direction.

Secondly, the American electorate is moving toward the Democrats with registration in both parties running 41 percent to 32 percent in favor of the Democrats. Thirdly, candidate Obama is much more intelligent, much younger, much more appealing and much more charismatic than candidate McCain. And, on issues, the Democrats should have a huge edge because people are tired of an expensive and unpopular war, because the economy is in bad shape and getting worse with the deepening financial crisis, and because a lot of people are suffering economically and financially, while oil prices are going through the roof. Many middle class Americans also have concluded that the time has come to improve the American health care system and the American pension system.

Therefore, since a Democratic presidential candidate should logically be the overwhelming favorite to defeat the Republican nominee in November, is this an election for Sen. Obama to lose? Will there be a “Bradley effect” with white voters telling pollsters they intend to vote for a black candidate, such as Senator Obama, but could instead vote their prejudice? Will there be a backlash from progressive Democrats as their candidate moves more and more to the right?

In theory, candidate Obama and his advisers would have to make a bundle of mistakes and come out with very bad decisions to lose this election, when everybody is expecting the Democrats to gain several seats in both the Senate and House of Representatives on November

As of now, it is widely recognized that candidate Obama has begun his official presidential campaign on the wrong foot by disillusioning his own progressive political base by wavering on issues.

Indeed, on June 4, candidate Obama went before the 2008 annual AIPAC conference and mimicked nearly word for word his hawkish Republican opponent, candidate McCain.

In fact, you would not believe from the quotes placed above this article that the two main American presidential candidates are from two different parties, at least, as they position themselves toward AIPAC’s political agenda regarding U.S. foreign policy. When it comes to AIPAC, both presidential candidates seem to have the same speechwriters and they behave as if they were members of a common plutocratic one party political system.

They both would not hesitate to bomb Iran and they both are pledging to make the world safe for Israel. One can also expect that neither would refrain from fomenting armed conflicts around the world. Even on some crucial domestic issues, such as government warrantless electronic surveillance, both candidates seem to be in agreement. Indeed, Sen. Obama has sided with the AIPAC-inspired so-called Bush Democrats in approving warrantless surveillance of citizens by the government. On that issue, he has flip-flopped in approving immunity for George W. Bush and the telecom companies who wiretapped American citizens without a warrant before 9/11. Both candidates also rely on rich lobbyists for political advice. Last June 11, for example, candidate Obama had to remove longtime Washington lobbyist Jim Johnson from his vice president running-mate search team after it became known that Mr. Johnson had received preferential loan terms from the large mortgage lender Countrywide Financial, a firm that Sen. Obama had sharply criticized before.

On constitutional matters, Sen. Obama would not be that reluctant in emulating George W. Bush by using public funds to finance church-run activities. Indeed, he even wants to expand tax-financed faith based programs. The American military-industrial complex has also little to fear from an Obama presidency, since Sen. Obama intends to maintain the high level of U.S. military spending.

All this smacks of some improvisation, despondency and an absence of firm ideological commitments on Sen. Obama’s part, and this plays into his opponent’s charges. But more risky for him, this may persuade some voters that the two main presidential candidates are only marginally different and are controlled by the same plutocratic interests.

What the two presumptive U.S. presidential candidates also have in common is that both have been raised partly outside their own country, Obama in Indonesia and McCain in Panama. On this score, they are most unusual candidates and can be expected to be sensitive to international issues. In fact, both would be expected to be interventionist, McCain being only slightly more a military interventionist than Obama. This is because both adhere to the hubristic and imperialistic ideology that the United States government, without any democratic or legal mandate to that effect whatsoever, should rule the world. On the whole, however, it is to be expected that a President Obama would adopt a somewhat more “pragmatic” and a somewhat more “realist” foreign policy, in the Bill Clinton administration’s style, while a President McCain would be inclined to duplicate more closely George W. Bush in following a more “rigidly ideological” and a more unilateral foreign policy.

It is probably on the question of the Iraq war that Sen. Obama  and Sen. McCain would seem to differ the most. Foremost among Sen. Obama’s objectives is his desire to extirpate his country from the presently occupied Iraq and stop spending more than one hundred billion dollars a year in that never-ending war and to devote that money to domestic social programs. On that score, a strong majority of Americans would side with him. Sen. Obama’s official timetable is to remove all U.S. combat brigades from Iraq within sixteen months after becoming president. However, Sen. Obama now says that he can be flexible on this pledge and that he is keeping some room to manoeuvre based on future advice that he could receive from military commanders in the field!

This is still at variance with Sen. McCain’s position on Iraq, which is closer to the current incumbent, George W. Bush.  Indeed, McCain voted for the Iraq war in October 2002, and he would be very happy to continue Bush’s policy in Iraq, even to the point of extending the military occupation of that country “one hundred years” into the future. On Iraq, therefore, the choice would seem to be clear: those who oppose the Iraq war should vote for Sen. Obama, and those who favor the Iraq war and other non U.N. approved wars would find in Sen. McCain a candidate more to their liking.

President George W. Bush sees that very clearly. Last May 15, (2008) President George W. Bush went to Israel and, speaking to the Israeli parliament (the Knesset), he did a most unusual thing: he attacked an American presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama, while in a foreign country. It was certainly most inappropriate for a sitting president to campaign against a fellow American in a foreign land.

On some narrowly defined social issues, Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain are further apart and it can be said that they offer a real choice. Indeed, on social issues, on the economy, and on budget priorities, Sen. Obama can be considered a progressive while Sen. McCain is a conservative. In fact, on the whole, Sen. McCain can be seen as the status quo candidate, while Sen. Obama is the candidate for change and reform.

Let us see the differences on key social and economic issues between Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain.

1. On Social Security, for instance, an issue closely followed by senior citizens and future retirees, Sen. McCain is on record as favoring a privatization of Social Security, while Sen. Obama strongly opposes such a privatization, as it could place retirees’ incomes at the whim of the stock market. Here the choice is clear.

2. On Health care, Sen. Obama favors public health care and cheaper drugs; Sen. McCain opposes this approach. Sen. Obama would like to see a comprehensive health care system that would be compulsory for children but voluntary for adults. Sen. McCain wants to keep the current health system pretty much intact, while providing individuals with a $2500 refundable tax credit for health expenditures. Here again the choice is pretty clear.

3. On the social issue of women’s rights, Sen. Obama clearly sides on the side of women and their right to control their own body. Therefore, he considers that decisions about abortion must remain a matter between a woman and her doctor, and not be dictated by religious or political authorities. By contrast, Sen. McCain has moved closer to religious activists and now favors overriding the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, while keeping incest and rape as the only exceptions for abortion. It would seem that those who believe in women’s rights should vote for Sen. Obama and those who believe that the state should impose its decisions on women should vote for Sen. McCain.

4. On the crucial related issue of who should sit on the U.S. Supreme Court, the choice between the two presidential candidates would also seem to be clear-cut. Sen. Obama could be expected to nominate progressive judges on the Supreme Court, while Sen. McCain would like to push the Supreme Court even further to the right than it is now. For instance, Sen. Obama opposed Judge Samuel Alito’s confirmation (Jan. 2006) and Judge John Roberts’ nomination for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (Sept. 2005). That could be the most long-term contentious difference between the two candidates.

5. On taxes and budget choices, the two candidates are way apart. For one, Sen. McCain was initially against the Bush administration tax cuts in 2003. Since then, he has embraced those cuts and the resulting deficits, while proposing a sizeable increase in defense spending. Sen. McCain would even go as far as requiring a two-thirds majority of Congress before raising taxes. Since expenditures would not be so constrained, this would insure permanent budgetary deficits for years to come. On the other side, Sen. Obama proposes that very wealthy individuals contribute more to financing Social Security. He would repeal Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy. He would also like to make the U.S. tax system more progressive by requiring wealthy individuals to contribute proportionally more than those with lower incomes, while providing tax relief to the majority of American taxpayers. On that score, Sen. McCain is more a follower of George W. Bush, while Sen. Obama adopts the standard Democratic position of favoring the middle class and the poor at the expense of the very rich. The choice on this issue is fairly clear.

Overall, Sen. Obama seems to be surrounding himself with intelligent, competent and experienced advisers such as former Security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski and former general William Odom. On the other hand, Sen. McCain seems to be emulating President George W. Bush by surrounding himself with lobbyists, and with neocon and far right advisers.

To conclude, Sen. Obama may be a better alternative than Sen. McCain, but his propensity to double-talk can be disconcerting. Let’s say that he is possibly the least worst of the two main presidential candidates. It is my contention that former Vice President Al Gore, the candidate for whom a majority of Americans voted in 2000, would have been a better and more logical, and most likely, a more successful Democratic choice as a presidential candidate.

Rodrigue Tremblay is professor emeritus of economics at the University of Montreal and can be reached at

He is the author of the book ‘The New American Empire’

Visit his blog site at:

Author’s Website:

Check Dr. Tremblay’s coming book “The Code for Global Ethics” at:

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


Candidate McCain: A Risky Choice by Prof. Rodrigue Tremblay

Bush Iraq Oil Policy: “Crony Capitalism” at its Worst

Dandelion Salad

by Sherwood Ross
Global Research
July 5, 2008

Eight universities were in the running to get the Bush Presidential Library but Hunt Oil Co. head Ray Hunt, of Dallas, an economics major from Southern Methodist University, co-chaired the SMU search effort and came out on top. His long time pals-ship with “The Decider” may have had more than a bit to do with it.

Hunt has done a lot for Bush and vice-versa. Bush named Hunt in 2001 to his President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, and reappointed him five years later. Hunt also sits on the National Petroleum Council that gives industry advice to Bush’s Energy Secretary.

An oilman’s oilman, Hunt is a member of the board of the American Petroleum Institute and has been showered with awards from the petroleum sector, including “All-American Wildcatter.” Success in Oilsville doesn’t get any headier than that.

Now it turns out Hunt Oil clinched a separate deal last September with Iraq province Kurdistan he might not have won if he were not Bush’s Good Buddy. Some folks think, according to a front page New York Times report July 3, the deal “runs counter to American policy and undercut Iraq’s central government.” Baghdad reportedly is furious over it.

Hunt got this free pass to explore Kurdistan’s oil riches last September 8 when he inked an exploration pact, one likely to give him a share of the boodle of any future gushers. “Hunt would be the first U.S. company to sign such a deal,” a State Department official told the Times. And according to reporter Jay Price of McClatchy News Service, the Iraqi oil minister, speaking for Baghdad, “called the Hunt deal illegal.”

The Hunt deal, though, may resemble the national oil law Bush seeks to push through Parliament. This law, writes Antonia Juhasz, an analyst for watchdog Oil Change International, would “allow much (if not most) of Iraq’s oil revenues to flow out of the country and into the pockets of international companies.”

In an Op-Ed of March 13 last year in The New York Times, Juhasz wrote if the Bush-backed bill became law the Iraq National Oil Company would have exclusive control of just 17 of Iraq’s 80 known oil fields, “leaving two-thirds of known—and all of its as yet undiscovered-fields open to foreign control.”

By contrast, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, “maintain nationalized oil systems and have outlawed foreign control over oil development,” Juhasz said.

Allowing the separate Hunt Oil deal—whose details Hunt and the Kurds will not divulge—will surely benefit the Kurds but fleece most Iraqis, hence the anger in Baghdad. This gives the lie to Bush’s statement of March 16, 2003, that “We will make sure that Iraq’s natural resources are used for the benefit of their owners, the Iraqi people.” If you count hundreds of thousands of labor union members as people, which Bush may not, there is a loud outcry in the streets against Bush’s oil policy.

Meanwhile, the Times reports, the Administration is defending help the U.S. provided in drawing up no-bid contracts between Iraq’s Oil Ministry and five western oil firms to operate in other Iraqi oil patches. The U.S. said it provided purely technical help writing the contracts and played no role in choosing the winners. Believe that one, if you can. But why no bids again? Whatever happened to free enterprise?

This is the same crony capitalism that gave Halliburton, formerly headed by Good Buddy Vice President Cheney, a controversial, multi-billion no-bid contract to truck oil into Iraq. Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root(KBR) also got named sole source contractor to douse any oil well fires that might break out in Iraq.

KBR landed that no-bid plum even though Army Corps of Engineers contract chief Bunnatine Greenhouse found there were other qualified bidders. She was demoted for not signing off on it.

The Hunt and Halliburton deals offer vivid proof that “crony capitalism,” not the free market brand, is being practiced divvying up Iraq’s oil resources and the other spoils of war. This has long been Bush’s modus vivendi. The Wall Street Journal once noted his Harken Energy Co. acquired exclusive offshore drilling rights from Bahrain in 1990 even though it had never drilled a single well. How did Harken get it? Well, Bush’s father at the time occupied the White House.

Maybe when SMU puts all the Bush papers on display about why he attacked Iraq—a war that so far has killed a million souls—it will include the fine print of the contract Hunt signed with the Kurds. It will show how high Hunt could rise with a degree in economics from SMU, and how far Bush would go to sell out the Iraqi people in order to favor a Good Buddy. Is there anyone who still does not believe the Iraq war is about oil? #

Sherwood Ross is an American writer that covers political and military issues. Reach him at

© Copyright Sherwood Ross, Global Research, 2008

The url address of this article is:

9/11 Chronicles Part One: Truth Rising

Dandelion Salad

replaced video Oct. 5, 2012

115 min – Jul 4, 2008
AEJ Productions – –

The 9/11 Chronicles: Part One, Truth Rising full length

“The 9/11 Chronicles Part One: Truth Rising” In Jones’ latest documentary, filmed in cinéma-vérité style — an appropriate technique, as the phrase translates from the French as “cinema of truth” — we witness repeated instances of police insisting the First Amendment is a dead letter and citizens no longer have the right to speak their minds in public, especially citizens going up against the imposed political orthodoxy and Fleischer’s counsel. – Alex Jones’ 9/11 Chronicles Part One: Truth Rising is more than a rollercoaster adventure through the various expressions of the 9/11 truth movement, it pays homage to a form of direct activism that has corrupt politicians scuttling for cover across the country as their crimes are exposed in public. – Seven years after the attacks of September the Eleventh, a global awakening has taken place, the likes of which the world has never seen. As the corporate-controlled media dwindles into extinction, a new breed of journalists and activists has emerged. – Shot unlike anything you have ever experienced from Alex Jones, cinema verite’ style, this masterpiece not only exposes the mistreatment of our 9/11 heroes, but also shows how a growing number of people around the world are questioning the official version of events that day. – Featuring interviews with Willie Nelson, Rosie O’Donnell, Jesse Ventura, George Carlin, Martin Sheen, as well as confrontations with many political figures including Bill Clinton, David Rockefeller and Arnold Schwarzenegger. – 9/11 Chronicles: Part One, Truth Rising is a testament to free speech, an endangered commodity in post September 11, 2001 America. Alex Jones’ latest documentary is a vivid testament standing in complete and defiant opposition to former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer’s admonishment that “nowadays you have to be careful what you say and do,” as if the orchestrated events of that horrible day have nullified the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. – 9/11 Chronicles Part One: Truth Rising is available in multiple different streaming and download options, including Div-X, for ease of making CD and DVD copies. Still not convinced? Subscribe Now to to see the mountain of other features members exclusively receive as part of the package. – http://www.prisonplanet.tv


9/11 False Flag

Tim Russert, Dick Cheney, and 9/11 by Prof. David Ray Griffin

INN WORLD REPORT: David Ray Griffin