Monday, August 30, 2010

If It's Really This Obscene We Must All Be Afraid, Very Afraid

Here is an essay about the most obscene practices I've heard about on the part of right wing Zionist zealots. Max Blumenthal, who I believe is a Jew, should be given great credit for exposing such horrible nastiness. Seems our MSM won't do it.

Three guesses why, and the first two don't count.

According to the tirades he quotes, he, himself, could be targeted for assassination.


Friday, August 27, 2010

"Washington Rules"

The title of this post is the title of a just published book by Andrew Bacevich, Professor of History and International Relations at Boston University, and a retired professional soldier. His two careers, and what motivated him in each, are what makes this essay so credible.

Here's the Introduction to that book, which I found at

It's somewhat longer than most pundit columns found in newspapers, but it is worth every minute required to read all of it.

This essay is about what it takes to come to grips with what one has assumed to be conventional wisdom. It's about real education, often requiring a turning away from dogma and making up one's own mind about what matters. Often it takes great courage.

Andrew Bacevich has displayed such courage. If you only have time to read one piece on how American Imperialism has dominated our foreign policy since 1945, regardless of which party is in power, this should be that one.

This is much bigger than partisan politics.


Sunday, August 22, 2010

Max Blumenthal Versus George Will: No Contest

Here's an interesting piece by Max Blumenthal, as posted on Sic Semper Tyrannis.

What he reveals about Netanyahu, Sr. should be read within the context of Jeffrey Goldberg's piece in the Atlantic this month.

Ben Zion Netanyahu, is the 100 year old warrior who, according to Goldberg, cows his son Benyamin into behaving in a like manner, at least in his sabre rattling posture.

Clearly, we need more Max Blumenthals to expose the right wingers as the nutcases they truly are. and he does it with marvelous humor to boot. There's a certain ring to it(sorry) don't you think?


Viscious Attacks Against an Entire World Wide Religion

Frank Rich here does the country a great service by calling out the hypocrites screaming against an Islamic Community Center, with a prayer room. The first lie is claiming it's a mosque.

The cynical ploys of Murdoch's Fox Propaganda Machine, the sickening "stab in the heart" Palinisms, the outrageous Nazi shouts from Gingrich, the hypocritical rantings of Limbaugh and Beck are all exposed, their vicious lies and traitorous false patriotism on display here for all to see.

It's more than sad, it's horribly true, that Xenophobia still lives in the hearts of the ignorant and the gullible in America, obscenely exploited by demagogues who display a frighteningly twisted and malignant conscience.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan will always be right. One is entitled to one's own opinion, but not one's on facts.

Those Voice hopes readers will spread the facts.


Thursday, August 19, 2010

Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran

Some articles are more important than others. This one by Jeffrey Goldberg, in the Atlantic is one of those.

It has generated a large number of responses, critiques and criticisms from many well known thinkers just because it is especially unique in its rarity.

Who knows whether Israel will, with or without Obama's blessing, attack Iran? Who knows if we will?

This we know. Cheney convinced Bush that he needed to attack Iraq, and all the rest was commentary; or rather subterfuge, propaganda leading the public to get used to the idea.
Included, and a main stay in that propaganda, was that Saddam had WMD, which we now know was a lie.

Does Iran have the bomb? Most think not now, but will. When? A year from now according to SecDef Gates, or longer according to the IAEA . Is this subterfuge, propaganda to get the public used to the idea of bombing Iranian nuclear sites, either by Israel or the U.S.?

Those who forget history-------------------.

I don't equate Obama with Bush, but then I didn't expect him to escalate the war in Afghanistan, continue the policy of classifying almost anything as a secret, or keep Gitmo open either.


Sunday, August 8, 2010

Why We Have A Constitution

I don't think I've ever provided a link to a Fox News program before. Here's the first.

It's the interview on Fox of Ted Olsen by Chris Wallace. That they are on opposite sides in anything is newsworthy in and of itself.

But in this case the reason I want to spread this news around is that Ted Olsen enlightened me on some of the reasons why we have our Constitution. It protects the right of all minorities against the possibility of a majority vote against certain individual rights.

That's huge.

It raises two questions in my mind. One, what is the correct view about whether the Constitution is a living document or not. In this case about human rights I side with it not being a living document. On the question of gun laws I side with those who think it should be construed as a living document.

So what's the difference, and why is that important?

The argument for the Constitution being a living document in the case of the right to bear arms is that its framers likely did not envision the parabolic, exponential explosion of technology which has happened since it was written. In the case of arms that's about the unforeseen invention of automatic weapons. In the case of human rights it should not be a living document since human rights are inherent, "inalienable" and not subject to change over time, except for progress in including more humans under its protection.

I've been fascinated with the arguments for and against different views about how the Constitution should be viewed; a living document, amendable within the context of changing reality, versus a document as immutable, even sacred, like the Ten Commandments.

I could argue either side and would be fairly judged as both right and wrong on both counts.

Humans long for immutable truths, which are, unfortunately, like beauty, beheld only in the mind of the beholder.

The author of the Book of John in the Christian Bible has it that Pontius Pilate asked Jesus, "What is truth?" Whether that scene is a fact of history or a scene which the author of the Gospel of John wanted his readers to accept as historical fact, for reasons of his own, the question posed, in and of itself, confirms to us that human beings, at least for the last several thousand years, share, even in our differences, the quest for answers to unanswerable questions.

I've somehow known for a long time that I am at least two people, if being of two minds makes one into two; one enjoying the quest for how everything works, and one fascinated with the quest for what everything means. The quest for answers to how everything works is likely to yield better results over time than what everything means. A brief history of science confirms that.

But still-----------------


Thursday, August 5, 2010

Kagan Voting

Here's a link to the Daily Beast on Kagan's confirmation. The tally of who voted for and against is interesting.

Ben Nelson is a Democrat in name only, and Scott Brown's vote against her had nothing to do with Kagan, only with appearing to be a faithful GOPher obstructionist. He makes decisions by sticking his wet finger up in the air to see which way the wind's blowing. Why else would he vote against a nominee from his own state?

His vote will not be forgotten.


Wednesday, August 4, 2010

No More Mr. Nice Guy,

Here's Bill McKibbon's straight talk piece on what is needed to fight greedy corporations, and shame the whoring politicians who service them, to get meaningful legislation for battling disastrous, accelerating climate change.

He's come to realize that it's time to get angry. Seems the manners you learned from your mother, saying please and thank you, won't work with the greedy and corrupt who aren't about to volunteer to euthanize their golden gooses.

It's now crystal clear that if we ever hope to take time to smell the roses we'll have to make time to save them.


Seems It's Again Time To Be Afraid

Here's a link to former intelligence officers', VIPS, memo to Obama about the duplicity of Netanyahu and warning the president that only he can now stop Israel from attacking Iran.

I doubt that they're crying wolf. They got it right about Iraq.

God knows what would happen if Israel were actually to attack Iran. Seems, like in Iraq, the goal is regime change, and the threat of nuclear bombs in Iran is like the WMD's of Iraq, a ruse to justify war.

Where could decent people turn if Obama gets duped by Netanyahu like Bush was duped by Cheney?


Tom Friedman Gets It

Tom Friedman, here, puts his finger on the real reason the Mosque at 51Park should be good for us.


Tuesday, August 3, 2010

To Draft Or Not To Draft?

What a question!

One irony of wars like Iraq and Afghanistan has to do with who fights them. An all volunteer army is essentially a mercenary army, and they need work. A case has been made that the Crusades were a way to keep the various kings' paid militias, the so-called knights, busy, giving them something to do. They were trained to kill, not build or make anything and they were prone to causing trouble domestically when they couldn't find work which required their killing skills.

A draft is a temporary army, and the goal of most draftees is to get the fight over with and get back to the productive lives they were skilled at pursuing.

A professional army, as is the case with volunteers, needs work to do. If they were all Army Engineers the work would be more constructive.

This article makes the case that our wars of choice might not be happening if there were a draft, something I've been writing about for quite a long time. These wars of choice keep some of the professional killers occupied, not prone to causing trouble domestically. Clearly they are not what you would usually call professional killers, like in hit men. Are there hit women? In bad economic times, like we have now, many volunteer because it's the only paid work they can find. Makes me wonder if the Neocons of the military/industrial complex aren't secretly pleased with bad economic times.

And, at least as important, back in the day, it required an act of Congress to declare war. No doubt that requirement birthed the saying, "It would take an act of Congress", when something really controversial is on the table, as controversial as declaring war and instituting a military draft.


Monday, August 2, 2010

Please Read This

If you're only up to reading one piece about Afghanistan, please read this one. It's a view of the war there not generally discussed in public, and certainly not by public officials.

The uniqueness of it has to do with who wrote it. Ann Jones has been a war correspondent in Afghanistan since 2002. She is at least 65 years old, and has spent most of her time there embedded with Afghanistan civilian women, and only recently filed this report as a journalist embedded with the US Army.


Sunday, August 1, 2010

America, The Sucker in the Game

Tom Friedman's column in today's Times exposes a rationale for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that is news to me.

If he's correct then we really are the sucker in the game, and it's long past time to fold.