Warning: include(/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/002079.php on line 106

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/002079.php on line 106
June 18, 2005
Here and There, and A Little Outrage

Looks like one of our "allies" in the "war on terror," not content with just slaughtering 700 or more of its citizens (and maybe torturing any prisoners it took) is about to add "so-called democrats" to its enemies list.

I'll bet the Bush Administration is jealous they can't do the same thing to shut up dissent here in the USofA. Certainly the cries of how "un-American" we all are when we question this insane war and of how we're "aiding the terrorists" when we protest against torture do continue to arise. We must be annoying to our oil-and-blood-soaked corporate masters, the way we're not shutting up, don't you think?

By the way, The national campaign to impeach George W. Bush story seems to be getting legs. I can't remember how many places I've read about impeachment in the last week.

And while we're in the USofA, let's take a look at this story about Bolton's nuke-happy replacement. Reading the article, I learn that cutting back on any of our thousands of nuclear weapons will leave us seriously exposed to attack. Because five thousand nukes, instead of six thousand, is so meagre, doncha know. Also, we need to nuke any supplies of biological weapons we find, because adding radiation mutations to a dangerous biological toxin is the accepted way to deal with such a threat. (Basically, the article explains how the warmongers were still in Cold War mode before 9/11, and now they want to be able to nuke everyone, not just unfriendly formerly Soviet satellites and China.)

Can't remember if I blogged that story about the USofA soldier in a "training exercise" who got beaten up by other soldiers who apparently didn't know it was for training and that he wasn't a terrorist? Anyhow. He was given a medical disability discharge because of his injuries and he's not happy about it. He wants back in.

A) This proves the military isn't actually training soldiers not to abuse prisoners.

B> The guy was given a "safe word" that his abusers apparently had not been given? Is the person who arranged this farce being investigated for total stupidity or anything? There has to be more to this story.

B) What's that bit at the end about Halliburton getting yet another multi-million dollar DoD contract? Are they the only corporation left in this country, or what?

At the giant Paris guns and ammo show (really, the Paris Air Show), we see discussion of the tension between Israel and the USofA that's barely hinted at in our major news outlets.

In short, we want veto power over Israel's weapons exports.

Must be tough for Israel. If not for the USofA, this invented country would have either been overrun or would still be sitting inside their tiny borders. If they want to hold onto the extra land they've grabbed, they need us on their side. So, they have to sneak around when they're breaking our rules. (Not the least because they're spying on us and the publicity is making the gov'mint look bad.) (Although it's hardly unusual even for "allies" to spy on one another.)

Over to Sri Lanka, and that post-tsunami reconstruction story, what do we find?

"... as the weeks and months have gone by the reconstruction effort has slowed to a crawl, hampered by bureaucracy, incompetence and corruption, much of it on the part of the Sri Lankan Government.

I'm not sure I can, or should, add much to the article itself. Just to note that when you hand human beings huge sums of money, not many of us are up to the challenge of altruism. And when you wave billions under the nose of a government, problems occur. The nasty glare of prominent, international scrutiny might help.

Mocking the Downing Street Memo. What the article has to say is worth considering. Especially the part about the Left's refusal to soil its hands with mere "media" over the past decades. As the lunatic fringe of the Right poured more and more money into buying up, consolidating, and supplementing the mainstream media, the Left was pushed out. (Face it, when those ridiculous stories about "liberal bias in the press" first surfaced decades ago, the inept Democratic "leadership" should have responded, but the Left is concerned with "balance" and "truth," and while it was wondering if the allegations were true, it lost the battle.)

There are liberals (and progressives) with money. Maybe instead of establishing Air America and "liberal" television stations, they would have been better off spending their money taking back the established media that people already trust?

I've been wondering about that for a while now.

And, by the way, the assault on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting story isn't going away. How many times does a Republican Administration have to drink the kool-aid on this one before they learn you really shouldn't tamper with Barney? (My personal hope is that PBS gets its mad on and comes out with a slate of really hard-hitting political shows.)

Drat. You know, I forgot all about doing shorter entries on one topic at a time, didn't I? Anyhow, now I'm going to start ignoring the headlines for the weekend. Or a couple of hours.

Posted by AnneZook at 10:16 AM