Friday, August 26, 2005

Fighting Fascism? Fear? Facts? Follow The Bouncing Bush-Balls of Bullshit!

599 views, 41 replies, and defiant ignorance sold with a passion...

It's hard to believe these are the "smart" ones...

If you want to see how they don't think, go ahead, take a look...


The proof is in the pudding: yours is shit.

Chris, you've got to learn to fly planes to crash them into buildings at a 1000 miles an hour.

B.E., well argued as always, your utter lack of anything to say is truly classic stuff, and you really make it hard to argue with the invisible vapor you call arguments.

I commend you both: you've been trained to ignore reason, evidence and logic very well, dealing with almost nothing that's been said while angrily lashing out in an impressive fear of facts. Your loyalty to the lies of your fascist masters is truly stunning, and perhaps you'll even win by doggedly ignoring "honest debate", and repeating your vigorous disagreement with something you refuse to understand.

Enjoy the world you're creating: you have a real passion for being ignorantly pissed-off, and you wear it well on your Brown Shirt sleeves...




Black Krishna Brand

Philosophy -

Music -


599 views, 41 replies, and defiant ignorance sold with a passion...

It's hard to believe these are the "smart" ones...

If you want to see how they don't think, go ahead, take a look...



Quoting myself:

"For now, just have those images of Guantanamo on the Hudson, the Secret Police, people standing in the gaping holes of the towers despite supposed heat hot enough to melt steel, firefighters claiming they heard multiple explosions in the buildings before they fell, firefighters recorded saying the fires were almost out inside the building near the top floors, 9/11 victims families screaming at the press to pay attention to them, Michael Moore getting punk'd by Alex Jones for not dealing with the NORAD stand-down on 9/11, how many of the 19 hijackers turned up alive (BBC News), the growing domestic use of the military in direct violation of Posse Comitatus... and much more."

Again: deal with any of it and i'll respect you, until then you're just blowing hot air. You watched the movie and ran screaming like a pussy from things you could not argue with: honest debate my ass.

And then you ran screaming like a pussy again from the points I knocked down: did you look into Prescott Bush's Nazi connections? Did you defend them? (Actually, that would make sense...)

You're making assertions that may be proveable - if you bothered to even Google it: tell me how fast a jet-plane is, and that you've found proof you can fly a jumbo-jet playing video games - you're insulting pilots everywhere. And suggesting our argument might be "the planes are still flying" 4 years later is asinine: look above, we never came close to inferring that, so if you wanna build a straw-man and set it on fire then go ahead and wank off.

Maybe you need to dumb down our arguments to understand them, after all: Dear Leader speaks to you like you're children.

In response to your idiocy Daft found "proof", I started ths thread with "proof", whereas you guys just repeat what you've been told without looking into it, providing evidence, or looking at any contrary evidence in any honest way. That's gotta make it easy on you, just type it loudly and proudly straight from Karl Rove's Talking Points to your big mouths, brains comfortably in stand-by mode waiting for the next set of instructions from Central Command.

I've seen your evidence: it's crap.

It's been trumped: you won't deal with it.

How is that supposed to gain you any respect?

Look above: see who's bringing "evidence" and who's not.

Clearly you're happy being "Right", but you certainly don't care to be right...


"Okay, it's the summer: why the hell am I using the internet so much? Because they're taking it. Now."

MAdGE (Mothers Against Genetic Engineering) launched a controversial billboard campaign against genetic engineering in New Zealand. Photo: Courtesy MAdGE


For the first time ever I just now saw a permanent "flag" message on the top right hand corner of my blog (all blogs), saying:

Notify blogger of objectionable content

And when you click on "What does this mean?", it says:

What is the "Flag" button?

The Flag button is not censorship and it cannot be manipulated by angry mobs. Political dissent? Incendiary opinions? Just plain crazy? Bring it on.

This feature is called "Flag As Objectionable" and it's accessible via the Blogger Navbar. The "Flag?" button allows the blogging community to easily note questionable content, which in turn helps us take action when needed. So we're relying on you, the users, to be our eyes on the web, and to let us know of potential issues that are important to you.



I Googled to investigate - ironically Google owns Blogger, and Blogger first explained the deal they signed as a perfect "hands-off relationship". Now, I don't want to hate on their naivete or rationales, and I have no idea if I would've done the deal since I didn't see the paperwork, but I found a great little article with some follow-up discussion on the ramifications:

Censorship at


The articles's great, praising Google for taking on established giants, and warning that they could be corrupted by their own growth. Unlike myself, their high "blog" profile and desire to appeal to all is an acceptable means to the end of getting the most people involved in the discussion, I commend them.

However, having little or no idea who's reading this keeps it as raw and pure an intellectual and artistic pursuit as possible, and that means...


Wouldn't it be ironic if this post is "flagged"?

I hope every blogger in the world posts their objections post-haste, and all those in favor of crazy schemes for controlling the internet, or "they", don't destroy the internet by turning us all into snitches.

I mean, if they turn us into snitches, we can't even blame them for censorship.

We're doing it. We're endorsing it. We're active participants.

They'll probably tell us what we decide without giving us raw data due to "privacy" concerns, and most people will stay ignorant anyway because the media won't want to mess with their own Google "search results". So, we'll happily chip away at our freedom with a perfectly democratic process of mob rule based on fear, as snitching comes back in style.

People accidentally finding crap on the internet hasn't resulted in any cited societal harm, and much like anything that shocks you for a second, it has little impact: people have survived "the holocaust", and parallel events going on today. They haven't cited any evidence - anecdotal or otherwise.

If you choose to continue checking the "sex-with-a-horse" blog then you are responsible your own actions. Having accidentally seen pics of the same, I can say that while it's "gross", it's certainly not scarring. Shutting down the window and opening up a new one hasn't left me with the shakes, and we shouldn't accomodate those who are sensitive with anything more than personal filters, like Google's "SafeSearch is On".

Illegal material is "illegal": prosecute it.

As for the rest: leave it alone.

We've seen the power of power to mobilize masses to attack Cindy Sheehan among others speaking truth to power, and anyone with a lower profile could easily get "flagged" through a coordinated effort and kicked out. People represent consumers, and corporations will respond to their complaints like boycott threats - plus they want to avoid controversy. Losing our first principles and "First Amendment Rights" is a classically dangerous slippery slope, and even their flag explanation says: "potentially offensive or illegal.

Add "Internet 2" to the mix (again, just Google it), and it just shows "they" are taking it.

I guess we've had too much fun...

Peace, (NOW!!!)



Black Krishna Brand

Philosophy -

Music -


BONUS: Where are we going?

"I've just reached a place
Where the willow don't bend.
There's not much more to be said
It's the top of the end.
I'm going,
I'm going,
I'm gone.

I'm closin' the book
On the pages and the text
And I don't really care
What happens next.
I'm just going,
I'm going,
I'm gone.

I been hangin' on threads,
I been playin' it straight,
Now, I've just got to cut loose
Before it gets late.
So I'm going,
I'm going,
I'm gone.

Grandma said, "Boy, go and follow your heart
And you'll be fine at the end of the line.
All that's gold isn't meant to shine.
Don't you and your one true love ever part."

I been walkin' the road,
I been livin' on the edge,
Now, I've just got to go
Before I get to the ledge.
So I'm going,
I'm just going,
I'm gone...."

- Bob Dylan, "Going, Going, Gone"

Chiggidy-check yo'self...

Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State (2005)

Evil has spread across the land. Martial Law: 9/11 Rise of the Police State exposes the high-tech control grid that is being set up across America.

Out of the ashes of the September 11th tragedy, a dark empire of war and tyranny has risen. The Constitution has been shredded and America is now a Police State. This film exposes not just who was behind the 9-11 attacks, but the roots and history of its orchestrators.

Downloaded: 4,742 times


MARTIAL LAW 911: RISE OF THE POLICE STATE Information Resource Companion Web Site.


P.S. Here's an example of documentation from the Martial Law website...



0:05:25 Master Blaster: A New Noisemaker - MSNBC (From Newsweek July 12, 2004 issue)
0:09:32 NYC police arrest two in bomb plot - The Washington Times/UPI, August 28, 2004
0:09:33 Terror Threat Info May Be Dated - CBS News/AP, August 3, 2004
0:10:07 Blimp to provide convention coverage for police - CNN August 26, 2004
0:10:08 Fuji Blimp Plays Role in GOP Convention Security - 1010 WINS, August 30, 2004
0:10:11 Hi-tech blimp is new spy in the sky - The Times, September 13, 2003
0:10:31 Security blimp tested in Washington skies - CNN, September 29, 2004
0:10:33 COPS HAVE EYES ON X-RAY VISION -, June 4, 1999
0:11:15 Fuji Police Bicycles -
0:11:23 Eye in the Sky—and Everywhere Else: Do Biometric Technologies Violate Our Rights? - The Cato Institute, January 24, 2002
0:12:24 Helmet cams will eye GOP confab - NY, August 26, 2004

Please report any corrections or broken links

Thursday, August 25, 2005

Potpourri: Trust in Quality

Trust in quality...

I think that's key: trust in quality.

I've heard the arguments against what we feel, they're crap, check the message boards. I trust in people who speak sincerely, who provide quality analysis backed up by actual anecdotes and facts - like Alex Jones shouting out "document 1-999-I" from the Bush Admin telling the FBI to back off investigating the hijackers.

I don't trust "we gotta get 'em over there before they get us over here", they had no plans to do that before, and no ability until aided by the Bush Administration. They have their own problems to deal with, and 90% of them wanted to send their kids to America for a better education.

America's borders are open, private citizens have to patrol them ineffectively as The Watchmen, the seeds of a depression are being sowed (for the last 30 years they always coincide with crazy gas prices), and once the population is twice as freaked out they'll be able to sell their fascist agenda easily - it's the only logical response to total societal decay.

If we can't be bothered to look at the big picture, we can't prevent if from becoming a big picture of hell on earth.





"I like big picture theories, because they logically predict where we may accidentally end up. They're not prophecy, but they're often a road-map to hell we should keep handy just to make sure we don't get there."

- Black Krishna

Sunday, August 21, 2005

The Clintastic Voyage: Since he Left all hell has broken loose...

Thanks man, I enjoyed writing it and am glad you liked it.

I understand completely the idea of "the system", and how both parties are corrupt, however taking it out of the ideological sphere and into the practical: for the last 50 years life has been better under Democratic Presidents for more people, and on all living standard metrics. (Look it up.)

The reasons are varied and a whole separate debate, but I would argue that the Left*Liberal channels of information reflect the views of more people, and more poor people, to help apply pressure against the state on behalf of those oppressed by the state. When the complaints of those who *really* have something to complain about are heard, we all feel happier and far less guilty. There's also a trickle-up effect, where the middle-class who can't afford to completely isolate themselves will interact with a friendlier working class, and enjoying each other's company builds relationships that transcend fear and classicism. Finally, the core moral element of any social structure - helping the poor, weak, etc. is better handled under Democratic administrations - though still woefully inadequately.

You know, while he may have been a drug-running philanderer, I miss Ol' Billy Clinton a whole lot.

Enjoying Bush's huge tax cut for the richest 1% much?

Are they?

Subtle ways pay man... you don't give a po' white boy from Arkansas the title of "The First Black President!" lightly, there has to be some evidence to receive that compliment - even warmth as a person to spiritually lead the nation in good vibes.

Bush has refused for 5 straight years in a row to meet with the NAACP, the first President in history to do so, and instead went to the Indiana Black Expo which gave him a Lifetime Achievement Award.

Now, I don't believe all black people are equal (don't start), obviously I believe they are equal with everyone else, but I think in terms of representing the community the 100 year old NAACP has earned the right over an "Expo" to meet with whomever is President at the time, and relay African-American concerns from an authoritative voice.

In fact, outside of simply respecting tradition I'll wager they had to fight pretty hard for that privilege, so for Bush to roll back the clock on that (and on evolution, abortion, abolition...) is a true slap in the face to the African-American community.

I know Clinton bombed Kosovo. I know he bombed the Sudan. Hell, I even know he bombed Oklahoma. But, whether he was a maniacal madman hiding behind his chubby charm, or merely compromising with the military-industrial complex in a way John F. Kennedy refused to, the fact is he was a better President on every metric, including Bush's specialty of war: how many unwinnable boondoggle quagmires did Clinton stick us in? How long did his military actions last? How many people were hurt? How relatively safe and prosperous did the world feel?

(How many "secret societies" that conduct satanic rituals does he belong to? Skull and Bones? Illuminati? Bohemian Grove? None that I know of, though he might, and he probably does something freaky like getting together with his boys down in Arkansas to drink Jack Daniels and shoot tin cans. Or hookers'n'blow... whatever man, he ain't making billions by blowing up Iraq like his old nemesis George Sr. is, and that makes him more okay in my book.)

The core principles of Liberalism are sounder than Conservatism, it's basically activism vs. libertarianism, including dedication to build a better society. Put it this way: we've already got a "ME" culture thoroughly ingrained (this is not a "Platonic ideal" debate), so if the system is stacked against us anyway, I'd at least like the flimsy bulwark of a Democratic President assailed from all sides while loved by the people.

Hell homie, I bet he's one of the few Presidents who can walk through Harlem untouched. After all, he's got an office there.

Think Kennedy. Think Carter. Think Clinton.

Think about a better world...

Peace, (NOW!!!)



Black Krishna Brand

Philosophy - blackkrishna.blogspot******

Music - *****soundclick******bands*0*blackkrishna.htm


BONUS: Where are we going?

"You say you never scared there's kids in other countries
Making jerseys, jeans, and sneakers they could never wear
Parents never there, they're busy building homes they can't afford to buy
Cars they can't afford to drive
Working jobs that don't support their life
You busy screaming gangsta, gangsta all that talk is trife
You already know you lost the fight if you don't know the cost of life
These kids is forced to fight a war they can't outrun
Ain't got no shoes but got a gun
Now where the fuck he pulled that out from?
People ask me how we wearing diamonds
When there's little kids in Sierra Leone
Losing arms for crying while they mining
Probably an orphan who's momma died of AIDS
He built a coffin working often but he never paid
Forever slaving in the world that's forever cold
Becoming the man of the house at 11 years old
This reality rap, I get inside the mentality that...
Terrorize you like a cowardly act

I got a part to play, we going hard these days
Fuck the harder way, we doing it the harder way
To my god I pray, that's how I start my day
The bullets starts to spray the revolution starts today
I say the shit these people ain't got the heart to say
Fuck the harder way, we doing it the smarter way
To my god I pray, that's how I start my day
The bullets starts to spray the revolution starts today...."

- Talib Kweli, "Going Hard"

Chiggidy-check yo'self...

Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State (2005)

Evil has spread across the land. Martial Law: 9/11 Rise of the Police State exposes the high-tech control grid that is being set up across America.

Out of the ashes of the September 11th tragedy, a dark empire of war and tyranny has risen. The Constitution has been shredded and America is now a Police State. This film exposes not just who was behind the 9-11 attacks, but the roots and history of its orchestrators.

Downloaded: 4,608 times


MARTIAL LAW 911: RISE OF THE POLICE STATE Information Resource Companion Web Site.


P.S. Here's an example of documentation from the Martial Law website...



0:05:25 Master Blaster: A New Noisemaker - MSNBC (From Newsweek July 12, 2004 issue)
0:09:32 NYC police arrest two in bomb plot - The Washington Times/UPI, August 28, 2004
0:09:33 Terror Threat Info May Be Dated - CBS News/AP, August 3, 2004
0:10:07 Blimp to provide convention coverage for police - CNN August 26, 2004
0:10:08 Fuji Blimp Plays Role in GOP Convention Security - 1010 WINS, August 30, 2004
0:10:11 Hi-tech blimp is new spy in the sky - The Times, September 13, 2003
0:10:31 Security blimp tested in Washington skies - CNN, September 29, 2004
0:10:33 COPS HAVE EYES ON X-RAY VISION -, June 4, 1999
0:11:15 Fuji Police Bicycles -
0:11:23 Eye in the Sky—and Everywhere Else: Do Biometric Technologies Violate Our Rights? - The Cato Institute, January 24, 2002
0:12:24 Helmet cams will eye GOP confab - NY, August 26, 2004

Please report any corrections or broken links

BONUS: You can't have your Coke and snort it too...

Okay, let's get this straight: is there or is there not a conspiracy?

If there is no conspiracy that's fine: try asking a few questions. Sniff around a bit at work and see how they freak out, or check into the way a school or university is run, or anything else. Or bring up some crazy conspiracies you believe in around a bunch of people, see if they overreact in fear to prevent you from explaining it using disruptive patterns of disdain, anger or disinterest.

I guess that is the conspiracy.

It's like we've been trained to dismiss them when we should be trading them like baseball cards - and frankly on several levels we do. We all have a few we think are valuable that we pass on to a select few, we've all seen, read or heard something that someone else hasn't - so standards of proof are fairly similar, and based on our environment we all have different conspiracy theories that others will find factually obvious or factually insane.

"Factually" I think is held by all of us to be key, which means until the facts are seen no strong case can be made against a theory, only the internal logic of it's arguments. Many people think there is no connection between the House of Bush and the House of Saud, but we've seen recent pictures of Dubya and a Saudi Prince hand-in-hand gayly skipping through a field of pretty blue flowers.

(And this guy won't even talk to Cindy Sheehan.)

If pro and anti-Bush supporters can at least agree on the existence and authenticity of those pictures, perhaps they can debate the merits or harms of the relationship. Unbelievably, some will deny they exist, and furthemore deny your ability to prove they exist - leading to an expansion of anti-conspiracy thinking enveloping common sense.

(I remember an email argument a couple of years my Uncle started with me and my Dad, and really he was a smart guy in every respect save for being a staunch Bushite. After a couple back and forth he caved, basically suggesting the topic was too sensitive to discuss and could ruin our relationship, so we'd better stop. I wonder: how many heroes do I have where I would have to draw that line? Where I couldn't hear the truth because I was literally afraid of learning it and destroying my treasured myth? I'll accept that you should probably never meet your favorite rock star or actor, they'll probably turn out to be a prick and maybe a fantasy is best. But the President? A man with that much power? Out of respect I hadn't brought up the worst yet, but the few charges of ethical and criminal hypocrisy and corruption apparently raised a red flag: "I'd better stop learning stuff before I'm proven wrong". Free will and natural curiousity dictate this attitude isn't his own, but rather part of an oath of loyalty to the Party. Hmph. Sounds like a costume Party to me. Don't worry, nearly everyone's invited, just please remember to leave all your questions at the door, and that it's BYOBS - Bring Your Own Brown Shirt! ;)

I guess a conspiracy theory is any anecdotal idea that speaks truth to power and is not widely held, like people thinking fluoride in the water is bad. Like any conspiracy theory that has staying power and a varied loyal following, this theory has a tonne of evidence that begs more answers, including a staggering array of scientist and doctors that probably don't work for think tanks or drug companies, but are working to educate the rest of us on the potential and deliberately inflicted problems with our water.

Whether questions get answered or not depends on one thing: how much credibility does the conspiracy theory get? Federal investigations run for several years with millions of dollars, so it helps to grade geeks sifting through documents and blogging away on a curve when it comes to providing proof - the stuff ain't bad anyway.

Without that credibility, would we have validated whispers surrounding COINTELPRO? Three-Mile Island? Guantanamo Bay? Rovegate, and other established scandals? And unless it's pefectly packaged with smoking guns and bombshell whistleblowers, who does the groundwork to generate the heart of the story? Digs for the dirt that builds up until the pile is big enough to attract mainstream media? Or compensates when the media discover something too hot and are told to drop it? Or they fail to investigate because it's been established as folklore?

MSNBC went to investigate the "urban legend" in New York around 9/11, where people were supposedly warned not to go to work that day. They had to report that it isn't just an urban legend, but is also in fact true: they found hundreds of people warned to stay out of downtown that day, and the Israeli phone company Odigo even reported hundreds of text messages they sent warning employees of the same. What does this prove? It proves what it proves. If it does nothing for you, fine, for me it begs the question of who was warning them and no one else.

Perhaps some overreach, but then again, what's wrong with that?

If you overreach you get slapped back anyway, and tabloids do this all the time with "celebrity conspiracy thoeries" about "Brangelina" and "Bennifer 2: Ha! Take that J.Lo! I Got Knocked-Up and Get to Keep Him!!!" They expose some truth, take some lawsuits, arbitrate a lot of business in the open with a lot of press coverage and dialogue, and serve an extremely "well-informed public". It's a great system for ensuring we know some crucial up-to-date and advance information about celebrities.

Quite a while before "Dukes of Hazard 2: Man, Look What That Fag Nick Lachey is Bangin'! Dude, I Would So Bang That Chickenhead of the Sea!!!", I saw bootleg pics of a hard-body and chisel-chinny Jessica Simpson in a tabloid magazine at the grocery store, and was very glad I did - damn near bought the magazine when the line moved. It was cool to know information well in advance.

And yeah, she's hot....


We got 31 days and zero notice for The Patriot Act.

We got 31 days and zero notice after 9/11 on a law curtailing rights for 10 years.

I've seen movie trailers for movies that come out a year from now...


So, the system doesn't work as it stands, and the bubble of information under the surface on the internet is massive. In studying it recently, it provides quite simply what is most important: peer corroboration. While people are more cynical than ever, the character and track record of those speaking truth to power sometimes seems far more reasonable than what they're saying at first, and even guys like Seymour Hersh and Noam Chomsky will fall into that category with their unbelievable indictments of American foreign policy hypocrisy.

Once trust is established in their sincerity - which happens for a lot of them repeatedly proving themselves correct, arguments, evidence and belief catch up to a comfortable level: it's not a religion, and most people even treat belief in their religion as flexible, so that's what I do with conspirary theories.

It's cool, the logic of looking at a world where "normal" stress, over-work, smog, violence, poverty, and many other issues pissing all of us off have traceable responsibility for redress seems reasonable.

Plus, it just take a couple and some common sense to see a pattern of these throughout every level of society, after all any two people planning to do something illegal or immoral are involved in a conspiracy, and that's a lot of people. Factor in all of them gambling on not getting caught, see who has the most to gain, the most to lose, and the most control over their story, and everything loosens up a bit as the classic latin "qui bono" or "who profits" comes casually into play; as does the other latino classic "deus ex machina" or "God in the machine", as the invisible hand of the "state" pats us on the bum and tells us to "keep movin' folks, nothin' to see here".

(And quibble-thee-not about my use of "state", it ain't just for Fascists anymore. When the Brit-cops can just say "we've got to shoot to kill even with no evidence" to add to the world's police brutality; and when all "states" pass policy despite overwhelming opposition from their electorates, you can see the power of the "state" arbritrarily against its own people in the "civilized" world. And the bastards universally are damned secretive for "public servants", nasty habit that.)

Currently being established en masse on the web is the idea that real, honest, normal people are working really hard to get us key information, analysis and context, stuff the corporate media often avoids or soft-pedals. The difference between the reception of conspiracy theory as a drunken argument in a bar to a more enlightened and curious one is happening now:

Alright, I call, show me your cards.

Conspiracy theorists have to make their information digestable and interesting, although they are certainly not monolithic in their views or their audience - some stuff is for those with more and less specific knowledge, like in any other circle. This also works in translating conspiracy theories to non-believers, as without a certain base of specific knowledge it's often impossible for anyone to be convinced of certain possibilities. But, all it takes is either another source or something they know as truth themselves to form an inevitable crack in the impermeability of disbelief, and as new corroboration is planted the chances of growing a real tree of knowledge increase exponentially.

Much like any other independent group of disparate origins and similar interest, even within a school of thought there is wide disagreement and debate within the accepted premise, and the common ground forged is stronger through voting on the dialectic of true individuals from radically different backgrounds absent external political agendas. Some may be more aggressively going for theirs, but their info is still good and those intentions are fairly transparent if there, far better than most sanitized public relations information smoothed of any edge with a legal lathe.

Historians debate theories concerning the Civil War, establishing characters and evidence and then creating logical narratives; conspiracy theories do this with "now", providing crucial information on people in the same "historical" roles of leadership and power that changed society at the time, and is a far better objective use of time if a judgment is to be made on practical grounds. They take established facts, and beyond just playing around with them they keep digging for stories that impact the world today.

I think most conspiracy theorists obviously know how frowned upon they are by a society that schizophrenically trusts and berates the mass media in general, and often takes additional unfair hits for the failures of the corporate media eroding trust in anyone who suggests they have the truth. This doesn't make any sense, but when the mass media fails and conspiracy theories are available, we'll use their availability to paradoxically increase our faith in the mass media: we all know lies are out there, so the bigger the news organization and more popular the information the better we can trust it - despite the fact that same thinking previously ended in failure and is the source of our distrust.

Basically we're in a Groundhog Day scenario that - unlike Bill Murray, we fail to learn from. Frankly, it's a really simple fix: I'll stop wasting my time watching my favourite sports teams if I think any are not playing hard, and I've done the same for my old favorite news teams. It's worked out well, and I never look back save to check in for variety, nostalgia, to see how they're calling the fight. On a pure news-as-entertainment level, going back is also going from the corporate box back to the cheap seats: sure we're just lurking in the corporate box chatrooms, but we've got a decent few of the game, and we steal some shrimp when they're not looking.

Because they've got to work more than twice as hard with less than half as much exposure, cash, credibility, etc., some "culpability" theoriests standards of proof are much higher in many cases than the average reporter copying off a newswire feed, especially those who've established a substantial following. Multiple articles are sourced, including several lonely nuggest of truth from the mainstream media - adding to the idea that something important "could" be a big story, it's just not.

Some are slackers and some are really out there, but really, in many fields of information we allow the rhetorical existence of possibilities fairly easily, and while the news has certainly been burned by this, so have the people for its absence. We've clearly seen in our lifetimes anything is possible, and once historical patterns create a character indictment of an institution - which they inevitably do, establishing belief in the rest is easy. Widespread adoption of this open mindset is key, both as a simple tool of tacit pressure to help react calmly to fear-mongering; and then to focus thinking on demanding clearer answers than the ones that make us paranoid.

(How come nobody has been charged with anything since 9/11? They even tried and convicted Osama in absentia for the 1998 bombings in Sudan, but nothing this time around. The London 7/7 bombings too, 50 people killed and no arrests or suspects since the scary muslim pictures they showed early in the story. Odd, ennit?)

My consigliori informed me the other day that there are 200 wars going on in the world right now.


Wait, I'm going to Google it...


Okay, it quickly came up as 200 wars from 1899 to 2001.

I don't know how many there are today.

But still...

I mean seriously, he's just a buddy and not an expert making a formal presentation, and he heard something that may have been wrong or he repeated incorrectly, but is it better that homeboy told me what he thought he knew or not? Is it better that the likely answer to questions posed today can take 0.31 seconds to find with a hi-speed internet connection? Is that a licence to ask freely?

When he first said it I told him it didn't matter anyway, I mean, anyway you slice it it's incomprehensibly insane. He could've said there are "20" wars going on right now instead of "200" and I would've been just as freaked out: we're not exactly on top of the situation. Once evidence of massive irresponsibility when it comes to sharing critical information is revealed, I'll indulge any anti-government gossip until I'm sure it's not true, the paradigm needs to be flipped anyway. Through a draining of the swamp of spin the truth will surface as seen by all, and conspiracy theories are a corrosive agent against rusted hinges on the doors of perception.

We've also had a pretty bloody history as is, one we're blind to in being taught that we've been in a relative "era of peace and prosperity" since WWII. This shows that, as Sy Hersh put it: "Democracy - you know as great as democracies are they have a pretty bloody history too, democracy certainly doesn't mean an end to war."

So we can't buy what they're selling, especially if somone else is yelling to put out the firesale of propaganda razing our common sense.

There probably are 200 wars going on right now, or there are 20, or there are whatever, and I guess that's the point: crazy stuff IS happening, the stuff IS crazy, and when stuff is brought up no one can afford to arrogantly, boastfully and willfully ignorantly dismiss it and deny its value - nor the value of the people finding it.

Power trips against honest sincere people are the work of bullies, cowards on a false fleeting artificial high of bringing the peer pressure of state propaganda down on hapless victims of social marginalization. It's a rush, one of the few times confidently stressing sheer ignorance can be used to discredit someone, and one of the few times knowledge can be trumped this way. Whether done out of loyalty, fear or hatred, this is among the oldest and cheapest mob rules of intimidation in the book:

"She's a witch I tell you!"

"Damn that Arundathi Roy!"

"Damn that Cindy Sheehan!"

"Burn her!!! Burn her!!!"

You can't have your Coke and snort it too, and you can't tell me Coke can't possibly be responsible for the union leaders assasinated their bottling plants in Colombia.

Please, wake up, and step yo' trust-in-people game up...

No harm no foul,
Half-truths plague this nite owl,
See me in a Batman cowl,
Jackin' anthrax, from Colin Powell...

Peace by piece...

Bush's Rangers ($200k) and Pioneers ($100k): "If money can't buy happiness, I guess I'll have to rent it!" - Weird Al Yankovic

I've been wondering why there haven't been widespread calls for economic boycotts, with Bush's dismal approval rating people may be highly receptive to the idea.

Good ol' Google ain't perfect, but they are damn good, and I found a link that has a few more external "mainstream" news media links to help convince skeptical friends:

Bush "all but ensured that he would double his purse this next round when he signed the 2002 'McCain-Feingold' campaign finance reform. While McCain-Feingold curbs certain abuses, it also doubled the value of Bush's Pioneer fundraising operation overnight by increasing federal contribution limits. A Bush Pioneer who raised $100,000 in 2000--by bundling $1,000 checks from 100 people--now can obtain $2,000 from those donors and enter Bush's new elite club of $200,000 'Ranger' fundraisers."

"Ranger" System Designed by Rove

"The Ranger system, which was devised by Karl Rove, Mr Bush's senior political adviser, has helped to ensure that recent reforms of American campaign finances have backfired on their Democrat supporters. The new rules restrict soft money donations - often sent straight to a party from a corporate chequebook and used for issues-based electioneering - - but have doubled to $2,000 the limit for "hard" money donations by individuals.

"Mr Rove's system has proved to be the most effective way of operating within the law while allowing Rangers to come to the President's table with far more money than the individual limit.

"Pioneers who helped to open the White House door to Mr Bush were generously rewarded. By the end of his first year in office, 19 of them had become ambassadors."

Sources for names and contributions of Bush's Rangers:

* Telegraph UK, June 15, 2003 (
* White House for (, with interactive name links.
* USA Today, October 15, 2003 (

SOURCE -'s_Rangers


BONUS: Whole Weird PETA Bred...

PETA Rethinks Ads Comparing Abuse, Slavery

They often act like idiots, though for the record I like their "hot chicks nude"campaign, but that's really more for the content than the message... ;)

You can always check with someone before you start messing with ideas people might think are racist. Just ask a black person: they'll set you straight in a second and save your credibility.

I'm all for their right to promote their cause, and I hope they dig up some dirt on corporate cruelty that helps us ethically evolve as certified carnivores. But, some of the stunts they pull are madness, and messing with our kids or with images demunizing a minority group needs to be handled with more sensitivity - if at all.

In their bubble sometimes they don't know any better, there's plenty nutcases out there and sometimes they hijack decision-making. While I don't know if PETA just ran with it for the good or bad publicity - and they've got that "holocaust" history too, I'll allow sometimes honest mistakes are made by bubbleheads.

It reminds me of when I was in Ireland at the World Debating Championships, and South Africa was hosting the tournament the next year. They told us about possible plans for ESL (English as a Second Language) students, traditionally they just compete in the same tournament and some do quite well - the Philipino kids speak way better than us. For the rest, a Top 4 teams final is held which is good, and everybody knows damn well how good their english is anyway.

The South Africans had an idea of a "separate but equal tournament", a first of its kind variation, and a unique egalitarian improvement by the organizers as part of the first international competition held in South Africa after the fall of apartheid: they were pulling out all the stops.

We... paused.

We then let them know that was a bad, bad, bad idea. A really bad idea. A terrible idea. And they, as well-meaning South Africans, should never, ever, ever speak of it again.

(They agreed, and held a fantastic World's.)

Their "separate but equal" idea wasn't exactly speaking to the re-brand they wanted to achieve as a marginalized entity, and I don't think PETA is helping their cause by making us feel they screwed someone else over who's repeatedly been screwed over, and using their images without permission. It's bad on so many levels...

However, it's done, and it did launch those images and that history of oppression into the sunlight again. With Steven Spielberg getting mad dap for his Shoah Foundation and every group saying "we must never forget", in a warped way I'm glad African-American history got some cyber-shine too...

Peace by peace...



Black Krishna Brand

Philosophy -

Music -


BONUS: Department of Internal Affairs Left To Speculate...

I like where this is going, sorry, I was just concerned with the first post perhaps unnecessarily.

Thanks for the new info, I'll check into it and I completely agree on testing the President for mental health and even drugs. Why not? If anyone in the world is tested then absolutely the President should be, he's got more responsibility than a forklift driver, and I'd classify nukes as heavy-water machinery...

On the Randi Rhodes Show on Air America Radio, she mentioned she thought Bush had the hanging jaw of an 80's coke-head at a recent Crawford press conference, (she clearly said she had no other proof, but still...); and a guest said a female pediatrician friend with no political bias saw Bush early on as President on a TV, and casually mentioned that with his beady eyes, pointy head and pointy ears he looked like someone with fetal alchohol syndrome.

Again, I'm just saying he's the President, let's leave no questions hanging...

I saw a video called "What's happened to George W. Bush after 10 years (2004)", and it shows clear cognitive deterioration at an alarming rate for a man in his 50's.

Here's the link:

Again, I'm just saying...

...I hope we can at least impeach Arnie for using steroids! :P



BONUS: Re: Tupac Shakur: Has This Become What We Should Become?

I'm sorry, I really gotta weigh in and hold it down for my man 'Pac here. No disrespect, just throwin' in for balance. I certainly don't think homie was perfect, but I do know he will be around 4ever, and that means something...

1) If Martin Luther King had died at age 25 he'd have been a Baptist minister in a small church; Malcolm X a small time hustler named "Red". 2Pac is the highest selling rap artist of all time with 40mm sold, and he paved the way for acceptance of gangsta rap by selling it as complex and taking a lot of crap for it - or the acceptance of "young black males from the 'hood STR8 Ballin'" on TV. Perhaps he was empowering them as-is to maintain identity, history and pride for a more effective revolutionary force in a post-Panthers era, and if so the building blocks are in place. 2Pac knew enough history to know that the Right to Bear Arms was crucial in defending against government tyranny (see: Patriot Act I, II, III, IV...), and it looks like government tyranny is happening now. While I'm not advocating gun use by young black men (and would have absolutely no impact if I did), I can see logic in not playing the pure peacenik, and in possibly lessening society's assault on the 'hood behavior by taking it mainstream in a way that gets a combination of fear and respect. People love that stuff (see: 50 Cent), and many will hopefully take away more than the image (and have), while those who've been down 4 a minit still feel like we ridin' when 'Pac screams "THUG-LIFE!"

I mean really, no one knew what he was up to, but we all knew it was something and have our interpretations - which means there's a huge pile of substance to fossil fuel it, including in university courses. Between this and the worldwide multi-racial fan base and enduring revolutionary image more akin to Che then Elvis really, he did alright for a kid in his 20's who spent 11 months of his career in jail and a heck of a lot of time in court.

(Okay... so now a lot of fugazi's get to fake complex and get away with it, but hey, I ain't blaming 2Pac for that. He just made it easier for young black men from the street to get jobs rappin as opposed to the few true poets that truly exist in society, and others help grow the business of hip hop as a whole. If you check Tupac: Resurrection that appears to have been a goal, though I could be using an aggressive interpretation of coincidences.)

2) Jay-Z sells 10x as much as Nas. 50 Cent sells 50x as much as his favorite MC, Talib Kweli. 'Pac rocked his pure conscious style early, but he wan't representing the people he was trying to reach who were the most violent, so he flipped the script and represented his own empathy for them - not sympathy. In fact, his story is a downright "Shakesperean tragedy" (for lack of a common non-European tragedy) representing the plight of the ghetto young black male: he made enemies who attacked him, joined the biggest gang he could find, and finally died in a senseless act of violence. I think it was feasable but not inevitable that he die, and really his actions taken alone seem almost tame today with rappers in and out of court on all kinds of charges. In fact, I'd bet as a 30+ year old he'd be a lot different, just like Jay-Z and others matured, and he'd either be kickin' it with Bono at the UN and lecturing the Senate with Jesse; or he'd go underground with Chuck and Paris and be on some crazy 'ish, he'd be trainin' Dirty South rappers to hide subversive propaganda in Lil' Jon's crunk rolling basslines, Paul Walls' screwed'n'chopped remixes, and Andre 3000's sequins. White people would've run wild in the streets, thrown their W's up in the air and taken The White House back from Dubya.

Hey, I'm just sayin'...

(Jay-Z has also been sending coded messages, it's much clearer now and I've argued with many underground headz who said "Jay-Z can't rap!" I always thought he could flow but wasn't saying much in the middle of his career, and felt headz didn't like what he said but should admit he could flow. Now more is revealed in the context of his entrepreneurial success sold as an inspiration, which it is to a lot of people. So Jigga made it happen and his here to help others, and in his enduring legacy so did 'Pac. Jigga's even helping maintain that legacy, with a big shout-out rendition of 2Pac's "Hail Mary" in his film "Fade To Black".)

"Don't even hate those who hate me:
I got 'Pac on..."

- Jay-Z, "Can I Live"

I've got something I wrote about Tupac a while ago that got some shine, it's being published in the Fall (don't know if I should say where), enjoy as you'd like, and holler if u hear me... :D

Peace by piece...



Black Krishna Brand

Philosophy -

Music -


Tupacumentary: Living How You Want To Live


what up homiez,

hope you had a "good" time, when that's all Spin said to me i kind of
lost it, and scribbled a personalized dave chappelle skit.


enjoy, i'm comin' thru the 'hood tuesday...


Homie Planet: Venezuela!

DJ Spin is on the beach really chillin' in a deck chair, with shades and a Margarita - a hot slightly pissed-off lookin' spanish chick is sunbathing beside him in sunglasses and a bikini.

Spazz Whitely, hyper host: "DJ Spin! How do you feel about Venezuela!!!"

Spin: "Good!"

Spazz: "Okay!!! Back to the music!!!"

A sunken treasure chest comes up through the sand and opens, turntables pop-up and slide onto Spin's lap as he sits in the deck chair. His hot spanish chick gestures from his left with suntan lotion. He hesitates, she pouts. He takes a squirt, and proceeds to DJ with his right hand and rub suntan lotion on his hot spanish chick with his Left.


Then, it turns into Girls Gone Wild with Facts screamed by girls taking their tops off:

"Did you know Venezuela is the world's 4th largest producer of oil? Whooo!!! Party in Caracas!!! Whooo!!!"

An extreme surfer dude precariously fails to stay on his board:

"Hey there party-people! Did you know that --- whooaah -- did you know that ---whoooah -- the CIA is --whoooaaoa -- is trying to kill ---whoooooaaahh--- President Huuugo Chaaaaa-a-veee-ezzzz...!!!"

Cut to a room where a TV has the show on, it's in a CIA Office with a crest and a "Department of Homie-Land Security" plaque on the wall. The surfer has just fallen, the image holds for a second then switches back to girls dancing and Spazz Whitely hosting as a remote lowers the volume. The camera pulls out and pennyloafers on a desk are nearly all you see of a white guy, and the phone beside his head: "Hi, Patty? Do we have any of those giant sharks from Jaws left in Venezuela? Really? Great..."

Back to Spin and Spazz on the beach.

Spazz: "How you doin' man???"

Spin: "Good."

Spazz: "Awesome!!! Back to the girls on Homie Planet: Venezuela!!!"

Spin's hot spanish chick:

"Did you know I can suck a golf ball through 20 feet of garden hose?"

Spin: (with a slight smile) "Good."

Spazz: "Wow, this really is a great country!!! This is Spazz Whitely signing off for DJ Spin and Homie Planet: Venezuela!!!"

You go Tom Flocco: "Bush and Cheney Indicted" (See? I told you it would've been easier to kill Joe Wilson! Like Michael Douglas, JFK, John O'Neil...)

I don't know if it's true or not...


But I do know Alterna-News has broken a tonne of stories first...

And for several important ones...

They're the only ones who break them...


It's probably best to stay on top of this...


And frankly...

Rather than be skeptical or flabbergasted...

Based on what we know about these crooks...

I'd say it's about bloody time...


This article comes from


Bush and Cheney Indicted
Date: August 2, 2005
Topic: 9-11 Court Cases

A Chicago grand jury has indicted the President and Vice-President of the United States along with multiple high officials in the Bush administration


by Tom Flocco

Chicago -- August 2, 2005 -- -- U.S. federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald’s Chicago grand jury has voted perjury and obstruction of justice indictments to the following members of the Bush Administration: President George W. Bush, Vice-President Richard Cheney, Bush Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Cheney Chief of Staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and former Senior Cheney advisor Mary Matalin.

There were no indications given as to whether the President and his top staff members would appear publicly before cameras at the grand jury proceedings, given the gravity of the charges.

Besides the Valerie Plame CIA leak case, the Fitzgerald probe is reportedly far-reaching and expanding much deeper into past White House criminal acts involving Bush-Clinton drug money laundering in Mena, Arkansas to White House involvement in 9.11; but also for sending America’s young people to their deaths or to be maimed in Iraq and Afghanistan under false pretenses.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair was indicted for obstruction of justice and is reportedly consulting with members of Parliament and legal aides regarding how to avoid appearing in the U.S.A. for interrogation before Fitzgerald in Chicago.

The revelations emanated from sources close to the grand jury who spoke with federal whistleblower Thomas Heneghen in California who said White House Senior Advisor to the President Karl Rove was also indicted for perjury and was reportedly involved with Mary Matalin in a major Bush administration document shredding operation to cover-up evidence.


Heneghen had reported over ten days ago on a broadcast [Every Monday and Tuesday evening from 8-9 pm special briefing on Wednesday evening August 3 at 8 pm EST]] that his sources close to the grand jury said formerSecretary of State Colin Powell had been subpoenaed and had testified against President Bush, telling the citizen panel that the President had taken the United States to war based upon lies--a capital crime involving treason under the United States Code.

Heneghen also reported a week ago that Gonzalez and Card had been subpoened and that Tony Blair had defied his subpoena after the response time limit had expired.

Sources close to the investigation report that members of the House, Senate, 9.11 Commission and other members of the media are also under investigation as potential targets by a grand jury regarding obstruction of justice and other oversight failures linked to the 9.11 attacks--indicating that citizen panelists working with Fitzgerald may be seeking a wholesale cleansing of what many have said is a crime-wracked White House and Congress.

Also last Monday, the whistleblower reported that Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts was planning to obstruct justice by calling Fitzgerald for Senate hearings to question the prosecutor’s motives for the far-reaching investigation.

This, giving rise to questions as to whether Roberts and other Republican legislators--some now under secret investigation--would join President Bush in seeking to fire Fitzgerald in the same manner that President Nixon had fired Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in order to obstruct justice and cut off further investigations into White House crimes.

Two weeks ago Heneghen said he had talked to sources just ten minutes prior to French and U.S. intelligence agents intercepting British intelligence agents who were attempting to bomb the subway underneath the Dirksen Federal Building where Fitzgerald was presiding over grand jury hearings.

Serious questions can also be raised as to whether intelligence forces linked to President Bush and Tony Blair had participated in a failed attempt to scuttle the Fitzgerald probe by literally blowing it up--at a time when UK reports reveal that military-grade explosives were used to blow upthe London subway on July 7.

Sources say the alleged Chicago subway bombing attempt has been attributed to an underground and closeted enmity involving warring intelligence and military factions within the United States government.

Moreover, reports indicate that the disturbance occurred at the same time that the Chicago Tribune and local web blogs had reported that the subway had been evacuated for 45-50 minutes regarding a "suspicious package" late on Monday afternoon, July 18.

Also confirming the under-the-radar-screen hostilities involving agents loyal to the administration and others who are disturbed about the cover-up of government involvement in the 9.11 attacks was a recent contact made with this writer by a major New York media outlet which called seeking "names of those who could confirm its own reports of warring factions within the government which were threatening the safety of U.S. citizens."

Help keep online

If our stories have helped you to become more informed about important issues and events crucial to our republic, we would deeply appreciate your help to sustain our efforts. We research and write investigative reports full-time for readers in more than 100 countries.



Title: Journalist (Tom Flocco) Stands By His Story That Bush And Others Indicted

URL Source:
Published: Aug 08, 2005

Author: Greg Szymanski

Post Date: 2005-08-11 12:02:00 by palo verde

Journalist Stands By His Story That Bush And Others Indicted But Retracts Story About Potential Firing Of Chicago Special Prosecutor

Investigative reporter released story about the firing of U.S. Federal Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald by mistake over on line mix up with web master.

The journalist who first broke the story about President Bush and others being indicted by the Chicago grand jury stands by his original account, but says a story he released Sunday about the potential firing of Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was a mistake.

“We apologize for the inaccuracy, however, we stand by our on the record source Tom Heneghen and our story reporting that the ‘true bill’ indictments have been voted out by the Chicago grand jury against a host of Bush administration officials and that Vice President Cheney, President Bush and Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice are aware that boxes of cash left the Phillipines right after 9/11,” said investigative journalist Tom Flocco, one of the first to break the indictment story.

Flocco apologized to readers Monday for his in a statement released on his web site, which had been down for several days for technical reasons. Flocco added the story was inadvertently put on line due to a controversy with his web master over file transfers and other matters.

“The rough working draft about the fired prosecutor should never have ben placed online and was in a batch of files transferred by the new webmaster and was posted by mistake,” said Flocco.

The wide-range of indictments for perjury and obstruction of justice against Bush and other top administration officials, was first reported last week by Flocco, who claimed sources close to the grand jury investigation in Chicago told him indictments had been handed down but not released to the public due to the highly sensitive nature of the charges.

Flocco reported last week that Fitzgerald's grand jury voted out "true bills" or federal criminal indictments against President Bush, Vice-President Cheney, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, former CIA Director George Tenet, Presidential Senior Advisor Karl Rove, Presidential Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Vice-Presidential Chief of Staff I. "Scooter" Libby, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and Vice-Presidential Senior Advisor Mary Matalin.

The U.S. Attorney's office in Chicago, through its media spokesman, Randall Sanborn, refused comment on any aspect of the grand jury proceedings, but high-level and credible legal observers claim suppression of grand jury indictments is not unusual, especially when dealing with matters concerning the national interest such as the Nixon indictments during Watergate and now Bush.

Although Flocco is taking considerable heat for running the story, long time Chicago truth-teller and advocate for cleaning up the judicial system, Sherman Skolnick, agreed with Flocco's reporting.

"I have received credible reports from my high-level government sources in Canada, the United States and Europe that the grand juries have concluded their probe and have voted True Bills, Federal Criminal indictments, against George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, "Scooter" Libby, Condoleeza Rice, and Theodore B. Olson and several media people not previously mentioned in the monopoly press as implicated," said Slolnick in a telephone conversation Saturday from his Chicago home.

Skolnick, who has been fighting judicial indiscretion and criminality for over 40 years since the early 1960's, is one of the few men in America who has developed credible sources to back-up what he reports, especially concerning judicial stories taking place right in his own Chicago backyard.

"I expected to be a called a liar on this one for sometime after my story appeared, but the truth will come out," he said regarding a recent article he published verifying indictments have been handed down.

And Skolnick is no “average Joe or talking head,” since he is probably responsible for putting more crooked lawyers and judges behind bars than any other single American and is still pursuing judicial corruption with vengeance, as founder of his public interest group called Citizens' Committee to Clean Up the Courts.

Recently on his website and he posted an article titled "Bush and Co. Face Prosecution," where he gave a detailed look at the recent grand jury proceedings going on in Chicago and indictments handed down against Bush.

"One or more of the grand juries have concluded their probe and have voted True Bills, Federal Criminal indictments, against George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, "Scooter" Libby, Condoleeza Rice, and Theodore B. Olson; and several media people not previously mentioned in the monopoly press as implicated," wrote Skolnick.

"Shown also as unindicted co-conspirators are two Judges on the U.S. Supreme Court, William Rehnquist and Antonin Scalia, who are among the "Gang of Five" also in Bush versus Gore. Because of the horrendous consequences involved, the indictments are suppressed and there may be an extended delay until they appear on the Chicago Federal Court open records.

"The substance of the details in this story have been confirmed to us as being true and correct by high government officials, with spotless records, of the U.S., Canada, and Europe. To distract from the impending release of the indictments and the naming of the unindicted co-conspirators, the Bush White House has caused deadly rumors to circulate.

"Such as, that the FBI is tracking in the District of Columbia and elsewhere that certain supposed "terrorists" have suitcase dirty nukes ready to set off in D.C. Such as, that Bush will declare Martial Law and suspend Habeas Corpus, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Such as the U.S. will be wracked with financial and domestic anarchy as Bush seeks asylum in Brazil, or Australia, or elsewhere overseas.

FAIR USE NOTICE: The above may be copyrighted material, and the use of it on may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available on a non-profit basis for educational and discussion purposes only. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 USC § 107. For more information go to: 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.



Thursday, August 05, 2004

Tom Flocco is Closed

A fellow Delconian gets hacked by some asshole. Makes me wonder. To Tom, I'll continue to post anything you want on this blog, and the several web sites that we own. E mail me at and I'll gladly help in anyway I can as I really enjoy your factual information that seems to be a target lately. (I wonder why ?)

BTW, to the readers, here's the specifics of the offending ISP that hacked Tom Flocco.

08/05/04 01:32:10 whois !

whois -h !net-24-116-0-0-1 ...

Address: 1314 N THIRD ST
StateProv: AZ
PostalCode: 85004
Country: US

NetRange: -
NetHandle: NET-24-116-0-0-1
Parent: NET-24-0-0-0-0
NetType: Direct Allocation
RegDate: 1996-09-25
Updated: 2002-11-14

TechHandle: EB12-ARIN
TechName: Billeter, Eric
TechPhone: +1-602-364-6462

OrgNOCName: Andrews, Lee Phillip
OrgNOCPhone: +1-602-364-6901

OrgTechHandle: LPA2-ARIN
OrgTechName: Andrews, Lee Phillip
OrgTechPhone: +1-602-364-6901

# ARIN WHOIS database, last updated 2004-08-04 19:10
# Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's WHOIS database.

Now this doesn't mean that they did it, it means that SOMEONE who used thier
internet hosting came up on Tom's referrer logs.

posted by Living in Delaware County at 8/05/2004 01:29:00 AM



Perjury, Obstruction of Justice and Financing the 9/11 Attacks: Have Leading Figures in the Bush Administration Really Been Indicted?

Steve Watson/Infowars | August 15 2005

On Friday 12th August 2005 Alex Jones interviewed investigative journalist Tom Flocco, who has written for World Net Daily and many other major publications, was in attendance at many of the 9/11 whitewash Commission meetings and has broken many big stories in recent years.

Click here to listen to the entire Tom Flocco interview

Flocco claims he has received information from intelligence sources and sources on the fringe of intelligence that suggests indictments have been handed down to members of the Bush Administration.

He has had it on good authority that US federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's grand jury has convened in Chicago to indict Bush officials for perjury and obstruction of justice . According to Flocco individuals have been at work for over a year and a half on this matter.



BONUS: Hot air is a gas...

Ethanol. Jon Stewart sent a dude to interview a Canadian scientist out in the prairies. It's made from corn, it's more efficient, better for the environment, has it's own giant mascot...

Somewhere here:

I forget which one, I was high, Ed Helms I t hink, it was funny... DEAD

There's others too, but this oil game ain't what you think: all sides are using the "fear" of running out or getting pipelines choked off by war, but only a couple know how to play it and how threatened they really are by all this "war on terror" nonsense.

For example: since gas prices are up 50%, does that mean oil companies are taking a hit too? After all, if it's a supply chain issue then the whole thing would be affected by the war, or OPEC, or something, and everyone would pay the cost.

So how come they're making record profits? (Google it.)

This makes no sense.

If I had a restaurant, and my plastic forks-guy came in one day and said "Sorry, forks are now 10-cents each, instead of 5-cents" I'd be pretty pissed.

"Why, is there something with the plastic? Manufacturers?"

"No... We just feel like making a lot more money."

And that's what the GAS companies ("oil" separates them from the pump) are doing to us: they're just quietly riding out their good fortune, and if you're lucky you'll catch a bit of media ripping into the rest of it for being pussies.

"Peak Oil" is an issue though, most scientist feel we've dug up about 50% of it, and the growth alone in China and India will eat up a tonne of the rest shortly - they need to find another Saudi Arabia just to keep Harold and Kumar in fresh kicks and Whitecastle for the next 15 years.

And then there's the rest of the world....

Anywayz don't mind me, I've been deep in this game for a minit and the world ain't close to what it seems, just thought I'd drop some oily science...



BONUS: The Department of Internal Affairs Left

These infrahumans ARE NOT like you and me

(You're right above louisrue, paranoia in this day and age is not a mental illness; it is standard operating procedure for survival.) I have lived in fascist countries and came away with one fact for sure and a lot of suppositions and maybes and hypotheses. The only fact: they are not equal human beings, they are actually a little bit less. You cannot treat fascists like you treat any other type of human being on the planet because they are not. This may be what frustrates me so much about liberals because they are usually the first to wind up dead under tank tracks, at the end of live torture wires or simply beaten to death by the infrahumans whom they insisted on treating like equals and engaging in polite argumentation. But I know that this will fall on deaf ears of the products of a liberal education that has been well planned for the fascism that now envelops them. It is knowledge that has to be learned and experienced, unfortunately. Here is a good one on one part of that entire mindset needed to fight/survive fascism. This is the best use we can put these threads to until they shut us down and believe at least that - they WILL shut us down and hunt us down.

by ljmgbp on Sun Aug 21st, 2005 at 08:32:13 AM EDT
[ Reply to This ]

[new] Alright... calm down.

Chill out yo, you definitely sound like an agitator. I know I wrote an essay, but that was structured and deliberated over; a post where you pop-off like this could just alienate people from your substance, and I must say I'm getting a vague Arundathi Roy half-way through a bottle of scotch vibe... :)

We all take hits, just pick yo' spotz homie, and good luck...

Peace by peace...


BONUS: Planz in placez...

Thanks man, and yeah it's a big-ass problem, but it ain't impossible. There's people all over the world reppin' the cause, and I heard something brilliant from (hot!) Indian author/activist Arundathi Roy recently:

"Wherever I go, the dirty business of American political history is now street-talk."

So the level of awareness is extremely high around the world, though not quite matching the levels of ignorance, and yes, unfortunately America is among the worst offenders.

I've been looking into it for a while and have some suggestions, they come out in music and writing on my blog - especially recently dealing directly with Conservative Americans and their arguments. There are certain tactics to break the corrosively intoxicating effects of fascism, and with America in its grip and American culture their number one export, we all have to play Buffy against that rather nasty demon to manage.

I think breaking the trap of "normal" and empowering people is key, I borrow a lot from Tupac, and really feel that if everyone flexed a bit we'd all realize that:

a) We're in chains.

b) We can break them.

Thanks for the books, I'll add 'em to the list, I bought The Tipping Point a few weeks ago and haven't touched it yet, no rest for the BK The Empire Slayer... :)



Black Krishna Brand

Philosophy -

Music -


It's Saturday Night: "Army Planning for 4 More Years in Iraq" or "Hey Cindy Sheehan: FUCK YOU."

IT'S Saturday night, and the U.S. military has quietly released this massive little article.

It's going to slip by most people, and by Monday the Right Wing spin doctors will have the game plan devised to sell this insanity to the echo-chamber attack puppies of da G-G-G-GOP Unit!!!

Then they'll sell it to the rest of us and won't hear any different: the exact same information and analysis with minor variations and gentle criticisms will be confirmed across multiple Right Wing sources, so it has to be right. The acolytes have done enough homework to argue in nuances by checking with everyone they trust, including proven liars like O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter...

Tomorrow morning Mega-Churches will erupt in joyous mournful praise at the President's courage and willingness to fight as long as it takes to protect America, and to take the jihad to the infidel - er, crusade to the rag-heads.

Preachers will preach obedience to the Lord and Lord Bush, and organize to viciously attack non-believing heretics who want to destroy America. Their entrenched and defiant ignorance will continue with Biblical proportions, their enemies and paranoia increasing as they feel the Liberal Media is persecuting them by daring to question their collective insanity, and they'll attack anyone who disagrees with Jesus and George using new lies as justified by God's Will.

It's staggering to think the military doesn't know what they're doing here, but it's not true: they do and they don't.

Just because they publicly announced something doesn't mean the smartest guys were for it, many of the top Generals like Shinseki, Taguba, Byrnes and others were highly critical of everything so far: and with damned good reason. But, anyone who disagrees with Rumsfeld gets fired, so that's that. Guess the same idiot is still at the wheel of the burning bus careening down a hill...

Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh was on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart the other day with some interesting inside observations. The Iraqi Constitution is a public relations joke, just like the elections were: has anything really good happened? They sold it as the beginning of the end with anecdotes like "a woman voted!", skipping the fact that there is no country to vote anything for with 90% of it controlled by the "insurgency". (Or "people").

The whole system is corrupt and the American government is bribing certain Iraqi's to get what they want. Unfortunately the rest of Iraq knows this, and they're not happy. There's no point of forming a centralized government since the army has no control outside of the Green Zone in Baghdad, and more bad news: while it's a bit quieter (while still deadly) right now, intelligence sources suggest the Iraqi "insurgency" (or "people") may have penetrated the Green Zone, and may be planning their version of the North Vietnamese Tet Offensive - or an overwhelming attack on Baghdad.

Here, see for yourself:

Why do I trust him?

Well he's been doing this for 40 years and bravely speaking truth to power; he won a Pulitzer Prize for reporting the brutal My Lai massacre by American soldiers in Vietnam; and ironically broke the Abu Ghraib prison-torture scandal in Iraq recently.

So, he's been around the military-industrial block, he's clearly not a bad journalist to last this long and command this much respect, and he's got guys on the inside who are telling him their version of the truth behind closed doors. Many good people frustrated at the ineptitude and corruption fostered by the Bush Administration and believe the public has a right to know about it, and since they're more secretive than any other U.S. administration in history this is a priceless commodity.

Also, despite a clear analytical style backed up by insights, anecdotes and facts that embarass most news coverage of Iraq, (or perhaps why,) what Hersh does isn't making him rich and famous - the odd appearance on Jon Stewart's show notwithstanding. I'd wager he has a fraction of the $7 million salary and name recognition of say, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly. Reporting the truth won't get him the same, but I bet he sleeps better at night, and I haven't heard him sexually harass co-workers with loofa's and falafal's.

Why don't his sources come out publicly?

First, the simple matter of losing a job you like, and one you may be unable to find anywhere else; possible reluctance of others to hire a "whistleblower"; and related money and family obligations. Next, the difficulty of bringing charges against the U.S. Government, the most powerful adversary on the planet who also happens to control of the arbitration, and no guarantee of mass media leverage with the number of scandals they are actively ignoring.

Many whistleblowers have come forward, including FBI translator Sibel Edmonds and FBI agent Collen Rowley who both spoke about how the administration wouldn't let the FBI investigate Al-Qaeda. While the press mentioned their stories they've ignored a bunch of others, and won't see them through anyway: 15 minutes of fame and infamy is what you can expect by way of support. As a bonus, the Bush Administration is extremely vindictive against many of their enemies, with retaliation ranging from character assasination to the olde fashioned kind...

The New Yorker Magazine is also notorious for their extensive fact-checking, cross-referencing their serious charges throughly in case they're ever subpoenaed. Bush Administration offical Richard Clarke once threatened to sue them over a Hersh story, then backed down quietly and quickly. Hersh has safely made staggering allegations against the government, and those with photo evidence like Abu Ghraib landed him "expert" interviews on CNN among other networks.

While he gets less exposure, that's still impressive against an administration that brought CBS News to it's knees over Bush's military service records, and Newsweek to tears over a Koran that may or may not have been flushed down a toilet. The fact is he's about a year ahead of what's been happening in doing "an alternate history of the war in Iraq", even with stuff that he couldn't prove at the time like hearing about videos of young boys and girls screaming as they're raped by soldiers at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.

He didn't have copies a year ago, but he spoke to horrified people on the inside who'd seen them and mentioned it as keynote speaker of an ACLU Conference. There is no secret here: even Rumsfeld was quoted early on as saying the evidence he saw from the prisons showed acts that were "blatantly sadistic" - among other spoken indictments, and we've all seen shots of the less "blatantly sadistic" photos in mainstream news around the world. Despite a Freedom of Information Act ruling by a judge ordering their release, the Army has refused to release them: that's the character of the people we're dealing with here.

Hersh's book (now in paperback) is called "Chain of Command", suggesting the hierarchical structure of the military traces responsibility for prison abuse right up to the top. As the Evil Bush cherry on the sadistic sundae, documents show Rumsfeld took the Abu Ghraib pictures to the Office of the President in a rush as soon as he first heard of them: a full 4 months before they were made public.










It makes no sense to trust the official story and discredit those who question it: the whole thing is a sick joke that's morphing into a new reality.

The army tightly restricts information and is hungry for good PR, yet they can barely comes up with table-scraps for the Embedded Press Corpse lap dogs. You can see they report almost no progress in any city save for Baghdad, where they cower in a heavily fortified warehouse unable to travel a mile outside their compound without a military escort. They're so far from winning it's unreal, and they're finally finding ways to spin it. The "4 years" target is great: this is being turned into a non-issue for the 2006 mid-term U.S. elections.

They've been flip-flopping on the war for months, keeping us off-balance and unable to have a consistent opinion on how it's going, this despite the fact that it hasn't gone well since "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED". The mass media dutifully report Military Spin with little editorial recourse, and various admonitions are quickly neutered by possible pull-out plans that appear and disappear arbitrarily to control confused political opinion. Plus, Carlyle and Halliburton are reaping massive under-reported profits off the "$87 billion!" increases in military spending, increasing the ex-CIA and ex-Republican private power and influence off the backs of the American taxpayer and deaths of the Iraqi people. I implicitly trust their opponents because they'd have to morally fall staggeringly far to appear even remotely as deceitful.

Sometimes these neo-con-jobs make absolutely no sense at the exact same time, Dick Cheney recently said: "The insurgency is in it's last throes" while Rumsfeld was saying: "It could last 5, 10, maybe 12 years... who knows? You can never tell with insurgencies!"

Oh c'mon...

Can we trust news organizations selling what they're telling us straight?

Can we ask news organizations to provide some context for their statements?

Can we find news organizations that do?

We're now pretty numb to their proclamations anyway, we know that war is: a) an unstable situation, if you're common-sensibly charitable; or b) they lie to us every single day, if you're uncommonly honest.

Check the article below fresh from Yahoo! News, see your anger disappear around 17 paragraphs into it, your fatigued approval around paragraph 35, and your exhausted relief at it's conclusion in paragraph 43. While you won't understand it, you'll assume there's reasonable justifications based on their historic integrity as a revered institution, and the unique situation only they understand. Please, leave them alone while they support sons and daughters bravely fighting for a "noble cause" for the next 4 years, and ignore anyone who tells you otherwise.

And let more innocent people die.

And over the next 4 years, a lot more innocent people will die.


"By the way, Cindy Sheehan, grieving Gold Star mother who lost her only son Casey to the illegal war in Iraq? George W. Bush, the President of the United States of America, has finally agreed to speak with you."

Army Planning for 4 More Years in Iraq

AP Military Writer
1 hour, 7 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The Army is planning for the possibility of keeping the current number of soldiers in Iraq — well over 100,000 — for four more years, the Army's top general said Saturday.

In an Associated Press interview, Gen. Peter Schoomaker said the Army is prepared for the "worst case" in terms of the required level of troops in Iraq. He said the number could be adjusted lower if called for by slowing the force rotation or by shortening tours for soldiers.

Schoomaker said commanders in Iraq and others who are in the chain of command will decide how many troops will be needed next year and beyond. His responsibility is to provide them, trained and equipped.

About 138,000 U.S. troops, including about 25,000 Marines, are now in Iraq.

"We are now into '07-'09 in our planning," Schoomaker said, having completed work on the set of combat and support units that will be rotated into Iraq over the coming year for 12-month tours of duty.

Schoomaker's comments come amid indications from Bush administration officials and commanders in Iraq that the size of the U.S. force may be scaled back next year if certain conditions are achieved.

Among those conditions: an Iraqi constitution must be drafted in coming days; it must be approved in a national referendum; and elections must be held for a new government under that charter.

Schoomaker, who spoke aboard an Army jet on the trip back to Washington from Kansas City, Mo., made no predictions about the pace of political progress in Iraq. But he said he was confident the Army could provide the current number of forces to fight the insurgency for many more years. The 2007-09 rotation he is planning would go beyond President Bush's term in office, which ends in January 2009.

Schoomaker was in Kansas City for a dinner Friday hosted by the Military Order of the World Wars, a veterans' organization.

"We're staying 18 months to two years ahead of ourselves" in planning which active-duty and National Guard and Reserve units will be provided to meet the commanders' needs, Schoomaker said in the interview.

The main active-duty combat units that are scheduled to go to Iraq in the coming year are the 101st Airborne Division, based at Fort Campbell, Ky., and the 4th Infantry Division from Fort Hood, Texas. Both did one-year tours earlier in the war.

The Army has changed the way it arranges troop rotations.

Instead of sending a full complement of replacement forces each 12-month cycle, it is stretching out the rotation over two years.

The current rotation, for 2005-07, will overlap with the 2006-08 replacements. Beyond that, the Army is piecing together the plan for the 2007-09 switch, Schoomaker said.

With the recent deployments of National Guard brigades from Georgia and Pennsylvania, the National Guard has seven combat brigades in Iraq — the most of the entire war — plus thousands of support troops.

Along with the Army Reserve and Marine Reserve, they account for about 40 percent of the total U.S. forces in Iraq. Schoomaker said that will be scaled back next year to about 25 percent as newly expanded active-duty divisions such as the 101st Airborne enter the rotation.

August has been the deadliest month of the war for the National Guard and Reserve, with at least 42 fatalities thus far. Schoomaker disputed the suggestion by some that the Guard and Reserve units are not fully prepared for the hostile environment of Iraq.

"I'm very confident that there is no difference in the preparation" of active-duty soldiers and the reservists, who normally train one weekend a month and two weeks each summer, unless they are mobilized. Once called to active duty, they go through the same training as active-duty units.

In internal surveys, some in the reserve forces have indicated to Army leaders that they think they are spending too much time in pre-deployment training, not too little, Schoomaker said.

"Consistently, what we've been (hearing) is, `We're better than you think we are, and we could do this faster,'" he said. "I can promise you that we're not taking any risk in terms of what we're doing to prepare people."


On the Net:

Schoomaker's official biography at



Then again: the mainstream media is apologizing and asking for our sympathy.

Poor corporations: you've really gotta feel sorry for them.

I guess destroying their credibility is destroying their ad revenues.

Before you accept: think about it.

And remember: there is no "Liberal Bias".

If there was: they wouldn't need to apologize for this.

Go find real Liberals: you'll find real news.

Mainstream news media suffer collateral damage from Iraq war

By Ron Hutcheson,
Knight Ridder Newspapers
Fri Aug 19, 3:47 PM ET

WASHINGTON - As the battle for Iraq's future plays out half a world away, the American news media are caught in the crossfire at home.

War supporters accuse journalists of undercutting the troops by highlighting problems and ignoring progress in Iraq. War opponents also are unhappy. They say the media failed to question the need for war and sanitize the conflict by refusing to show gruesome scenes of carnage.

Military mom Cindy Sheehan, who got extensive media coverage for her anti-war protest outside President Bush's Texas ranch this month, voiced the view from the left in a conference call with supporters Aug. 10.

"Thank God for the Internet or we wouldn't know anything and we would already be a fascist state," she said. "The mainstream media is a propaganda tool for the government."

That's not the view from the right.

"If you believe the liberal media's reporting on the American military effort in Iraq, you're almost forced to be ashamed of America," the Media Research Center, a conservative media-watchdog group, said in a recent message to potential donors.

In return for a donation, the organization will send a specially inscribed military-style dog tag to a soldier in Iraq. "Don't believe the liberal media!" the dog tag says. "I'm just one of millions of Americans who realize that powerful elements in the media are undermining the war effort."

Army Capt. Sherman Powell reinforced that view with his comments during an interview Wednesday with "Today" show host Matt Lauer in Baghdad. Lauer wondered how troop morale could be so high, given the problems in Iraq.

"If I got my news from the newspapers also, I'd be pretty depressed as well," Powell replied. "Those of us who've actually had a chance to get out and go on patrols and meet the Iraqi army and the Iraqi police and go on patrols with them, we are very satisfied with the way things are going here."

Experts on the media and war coverage aren't surprised to find news outlets in the crosshairs. Some of the criticism directed at the media echoes complaints from the Vietnam era, when war supporters accused journalists of undermining support for the war, and, by extension, the troops.

"It's the tension about whether a reporter covering the war is supposed to be a patriot or a cheerleader, or just a reporter," said Daniel Hallin, the author of "The `Uncensored War': The Media and Vietnam," and a communication professor at the University of California, San Diego.

Hallin and other researchers who've studied media coverage of the Vietnam War dispute suggestions that negative news stories turned public opinion against the war. Clarence Wyatt, the author of "Paper Soldiers: The American Press and the Vietnam War" and a professor at Centre College in Danville, Ky., said war support declined almost in direct correlation to the number of casualties and the number of troops deployed.

"News coverage is one element among a whole solar system of elements that shapes how people react to public events," Wyatt said. "It doesn't take a news organization to tell you that your son or daughter or husband or wife has been deployed. It doesn't take a news organization to tell you that the kid who used to deliver your newspaper is now in the local cemetery."

Defining reality in a war zone is always tricky, but Iraq is particularly difficult because of the security problems. Reporters stationed in Baghdad can't venture outside the fortified Green Zone without risking their lives. Yet some parts of the country are peaceful.

"War is a complex thing, and you're going to have different realities from different perspectives," said Steven Livingston, an Army veteran and political communication professor at George Washington University in Washington. "What you see depends on where you stand."

Opinions about media coverage split along party lines. A nationwide poll by the Pew Research Center in October 2003 found that a solid majority of Republicans - 55 percent - felt that the news media were "making the situation in Iraq seem worse" than it really was. Only 28 percent of Democrats and 34 percent of self-described independent voters felt that way.

Back then, the death toll for U.S. troops was about 38 a month. It's now averaging more than 70 a month, and August is on track to be one of the deadliest months yet.

Even the war's most ardent supporters, President Bush included, acknowledge that the effort to transform Iraq into a democracy faces enormous challenges. The military insurgency shows no sign of abating. On the political front, Iraqi leaders missed their Aug. 15 deadline for a new constitution and are struggling to meet their fallback deadline Monday.

Despite the Media Research Center's harsh criticism of the coverage, Richard Noyes, the organization's research director, expressed uncertainty when he was asked whether it accurately reflects the situation in Iraq.

"The daily attention to the negative might obscure the big picture, or it might be the big picture. My gut tells me it is too negative," he said. Noyes said he'd like to see more stories about the successes in Iraq - new schools, signs of normal life and other positive developments - along with the stories about car bombs and death.

He also worries about the impact on public opinion from negative stories.

"What is the enemy's strategy? It's to sap the public will by nibbling away at it," he said.

Media experts note that the journalist's job is to report what's happening and why, not to rally support, and that news judgment requires assessing which facts are most important. If schools are being rebuilt, that's a news story, but if the society they're in is being blown apart by civil war, that's a bigger news story.

"If events go well, that's what you report. If things are going poorly, that's the reality," said GWU professor Livingston, who's lectured at the National War College. "If bombs blow up and bombs kill Marines and kill soldiers, that's an important story, and covering that is not bias."

U.S. journalists will always focus on lost American lives, media experts said, because that's the most direct link between Americans at home and the war overseas.

"That's the nature of journalism. And it's the nature of combat," Wyatt said. "To criticize the media for covering combat in wartime is like criticizing the sun for coming up."