
I just woke up today thinking about how Operation Blessing used donations to fly Pat Robertson's mining equipment from Rwanda. Go read Palast's work on this, it's a nice reminder of who our fearless leader associates with.

A C-130.
Andy's politics, food and ridiculous thoughts from the state of California (and France too).



Moon outspent Scaife moving our nation right and theocratic. He and his operatives make it clear his job as "messiah" is to raise up the Christian "right" and bring them into control of our nation. Christianity had to be revived so they will accept him and his "work."
Let me tell you something, Moon has more to do with our nations current political climate than anyone. Anyone. Yet again, thanks to an ineffective media, our nation is unaware of his efforts.
Two things remain at the top of my wonderlist. One is why, given the historical fact that Moon easily outspent Scaife propping up hard right politics in the USA with BILLIONS of dollars over the last 30 years, given that Moon provided front groups and guidance to the new right, and has funded the "religious" right and literally played a huge role in creating, molding, designing the new conservative movement we see around us today - given all that, why, when blowhard uniformed hypocrites like Oreily squawk about UNITED STATES CITIZEN Soros donating to a liberal causes, why don't liberals stuff Moon down their throats? O'Reily, Coulter, Rush, Hannity, Savage, Hume, all of them should go on FOX and bow to Moon, he brought them to power. No Moon No one like Bush is president, that is for sure.
Biblical sized blindness in its depth and scope.
I couldn't agree more. I suppose one of the reasons we never hear about is that so many of the wingers work at or find their way into the pages of publications like the Washington Times. What interest do they have in showing who and what pays their rent? Their only interest is self-interest, of course. Moonboots also hits the nail on the head here:
Next time someone posts about Soros and his drop in the bucket money compared to Moon's spent on the right, please post this chart.So, what does the Washington Times have on it's frontpage today, the Sunday where an entire nation is outraged by George Bush's illegal wiretapping? Well, look at the screen shot.
Dear France, please buy us!
Joan Fox of New Orleans writes:
Dear France,
Greetings from Louisiana! We are shopping for new owners, and we immediately thought of you! Our present rulers haven't been taking very good care of us and we are looking for a better deal. They are spending all our money in a place called Iraq (somewhere in the Middle East). We thought that perhaps you might want to revisit an old land deal you made long ago.
If you've been reading the papers lately, you may have noticed that we have had a few problems with "water". No, we're not offering you a deal on a damaged water park. (Althouugh that's what it looks like from the air) Seriously, we need help, and fast.
Some things you might like here:
1. We named the state after your King Louis
2. We named the city after your city, Orleans
3. We have lots of French names on the streets
4. We still have Napoleonic law (maybe you can explain it to us!)
5. A lot of our citizens speak French (the accent will grow on you)
6. We like French food and wine
What we can offer you:
1. a toehold (rather wet!) on the continent
2. an incredible port
3. Lots of oil and gas
4. Lots of restaurants
5. Jazz
6. Mardi Gras (you won't believe what we do with this!)
7. Some of the most beautifu houses in the world (very, very wet)
What we need from you is simple:
1. Wetland redevelopment
2. New levees
3. Lots of new houses (but we want them to look old like the ones we lost)
4. We need schools and hospitals rebuilt
5. If you insist, we wouldn't mind some more outdoor cafes like you folks are famous for.
Please think this over carefully. Our current owners are so busy in other countries, they might not even notice if you come down here and take a look around. We'll put you up in grand style in a place we call "The French Quarter" (yeah, really!) and you can have lunch at a place we built for your very own Napoleon, which we call (you guessed it!)Napoleons". You'll be right at home.
Oh, just remember, we would like the levees and the wetlands taken care of ASAP, sometime just after lunch if not sooner.
Yours sincerely,
A homeowner in New Olreans
Joan Fox
We can't sit still for this -- The House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, chaired by Indiana Republican Dan Burton, is taking a look at Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder. Neil Bush, the president's brother, will join three people associated with the Church of Scientology's Citizens Commission on Human Rights when they testify before the committee later this week. ADHD is recognized as a medical disorder by the nation's leading medical authorities, including the American Medical Association, American Association of Pediatrics, American Psychiatric Association and the Surgeon General and affects up to 7 percent of school aged children. The condition is so prolific that last month the Center for Disease Control set up a national clearing house of information that will be funded by a $750,000 federal grant.
So why would the Church of Scientology take such a strong stand to say that ADHD is a myth and go so far as to testify before Congress on the matter? Because Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard said so, that's why -- at least according to one source who follows the issue. Mental health professionals have long been critical of the so-called self-help techniques practiced by Scientologists, who have responded by undermining psychiatry at every turn. While it is unclear why Neil Bush would align himself with the Church of Scientology, it is very clear that their agenda has little to do with helping millions who experience an ongoing illness get the help they need.
Unclear why Bush would align himself with Scientology? Does the phrase "follow the money" mean anything to anyone? Of course, my above source, UPI, is owned by Moon, so I suppose the attack on Bush is implicit rather than explicit. Anyway, it hasn't stopped the Moon empire from hiring him...
Does it have to seem like a conspiracy to say the facism is on the march? Moon is one of the most reactionary figures of our times and his efforts to create the "ideal" family are more than scary. He would like to be a dictator. In lieu of that, he is using his vast fortune to peddle influence all over the globe, and in America he has found many like-minded people, notably the Bush family.Moon's lobbying campaign is "ambitious and diffuse," as the D.C. newspaper The Hill reported last year, and the sheer range of guests revealed just how many Pacific Rim political leaders the Times owner has won over, including Filipino and Taiwanese politicians. And the head of the Arizona GOP attended a recent stop in San Francisco. But perhaps the most surprising VIP to tag along is Neil Bush, George H.W. Bush's youngest and most wayward son, who made both the Philippines and Taiwan legs of the journey, according to reports in newspapers from those countries and statements from Moon's Family Federation.
While Neil Bush and Moon's church couldn't be reached for comment on the tunnel or his speaking fees, a brochure from Moon's Family Federation underscores that the project is "God's fervent desire," dwarfing such past wonders as the Chunnel and heralding a "new era of automobile travel."
With little fanfare only three days before the minority Liberal government of Paul Martin fell by way of a non-confidence vote in Ottawa's House of Commons (on November 28th), beleaguered Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew appointed Christian Lapointe as Canada's next Ambassador to Ecuador. Lapointe has been serving as Director of the Caribbean and Central America and Andean Region Division within the Department of Foreign Affairs. This move could spell trouble for Ecuador as Canada is in the midst of profound changes in foreign policy that find new support for destabilization under the cover of support for "democracy promotion."That certain elements of the Canadian government are in lockstep with their American counterparts in the Bush administration and the IRI, USAID, World Bank, etc., is not in the least bit surprising. Their political moves are working, albeit more slowly than planned, and a post in Ecuador will be a good position to continue having influence in. Timing here says a lot: they wanted to get this person in at the last minute. I'm always interested in this sort of thing since it often means their position is "soft," that is, wouldn't have happened as easily under normal circumstances. In this case, he seems to be going in the back door while a lot of other things are going on. I could be very wrong on that, but, just some--perhaps silly--speculation.
Well, I'm sure the folks over at the NED and IRI would just love to answer those questions. It is indeed puzzling to the wool being pulled over everyone's eyes again and again. Clearly, if people knew that the U.S. intentionally aided in the undermining of a democratically elected president (and probably kidnapped him), that we were installing dictators and thugs, and that our tax dollars were funding the whole thing, well, then, people would get angry. But, as usual, the press presents the situation as "confusing," "violent," "dangerous." They never mention that we funded the thugs that created the violence before Aristide's removal and that we are upholding a police state that, without popular support, leads to rebellion and violence as well.Washington, D.C. - Today, Rep. Maxine Waters (CA-35) sent a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, asking her to explain how the interim government of Haiti is financing the civil lawsuit it filed in a U.S. District Court against President Jean-Bertrand Aristide and several co-defendants for allegedly stealing money from the Haitian treasury.
"I want to know how the interim government of Haiti is financing this lawsuit," said the Congresswoman, "and I want to know whether the interim government's allegations against President Aristide have been investigated sufficiently by the U.S. Government to justify the expenditures for this lawsuit."
President Aristide, the democratically-elected president of Haiti, was forced to leave Haiti in a coup d'etat on February 29, 2004. The interim government of Haiti is in the process of organizing elections, but these elections have been postponed several times. The elections are currently scheduled for January and February of 2006.
"The interim government of Haiti has promised to hold elections," said Congresswoman Waters. "Why can't these allegations be investigated by a government that has been freely elected by the people of Haiti?"
Congresswoman Waters' letter specifically asked Secretary of State Rice whether any U.S. government funds, such as grants from the Department of State, the Department of Justice, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), or the National Endowment for Democracy, are being used to finance the lawsuit against President Aristide.
"Foreign aid is in demand for programs ranging from reconstruction in Afghanistan to AIDS in Africa," said the Congresswoman. "Meanwhile, the United States is facing record deficits, and Congress is considering major budget cuts in both domestic and international programs. We should not allow an un-elected government to use our foreign aid to pursue legal challenges to the elected government it replaced."
Washington is a town where the best and the brightest usually coexist with well-connected political hacks. However, the Bush administration has taken promotion of the latter to embarrassing extremes, selecting unqualified people for posts because of their political loyalty and ideological persuasion. The most recent example of this was the appointment of Paul Bonicelli to be deputy director of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which is in charge of all programs to promote democracy and good governance overseas.Bonicelli is known for saying, and I'm paraphrasing, that "all non-Christians will burn in hell." It's a sensitive message, no doubt, that will bring even more stunning successes to Bush's already formidable accomplishments in world leadership.

Port-au-Prince -- Haiti's electoral board yesterday again postponed the country's first elections since president Jean-Bertrand Aristide was ousted in a rebellion almost two years ago.Things are still grim, but this chaos is some evidence that things are not going as planned--and, as you know, I think that U.S. "planning"--more aptly put as "plotting"--was treacherous and bad.The nine-member Provisional Electoral Council set a new date of Jan. 8 for presidential and legislative elections, followed by a Feb. 15 runoff, said Rosemond Pradel, the council's secretary-general.
This is the fourth date Haitian authorities have set for the elections, which were first scheduled for Nov. 13 to replace the interim government installed after Mr. Aristide's ouster in early 2004.
You can see some of my links below for more information.A new book, Canada In Haiti: Waging War On The Poor Majority by Yves Engler and Anthony Fenton opposes Prime Minister Martin on the question of Haiti. Fenton is a Vancouver-based independent investigative journalist, radio correspondent, and activist, who traveled to Haiti one month after the coup that removed former president Jean-Bertrand Aristide from power. Montreal-based Engler, who is also author of Playing Left-Wing - From Rat to Student Radical, is an activist who traveled to Haiti in December 2004. Canada, France and the United States are all in bed in Haiti.
Engler and Fenton spoke at a public forum and book launch at Osie and discussed the growing support in Canada for the people of Haiti against the Canadian, U.S., French, and Brazilian occupation. The meeting was packed. Canada In Haiti exposes Canadian government and business responsibility for anti-Aristide coup against democracy. The chapter "Responsibility to Protect or A Made in Ottawa Coup?" points out the coup against Aristide was actually planned on Canadian soil.
Slipped into a massive budget-cutting bill late last month by the House Resources Committee, headed by Rep. Richard W. Pombo (R-Tracy), the provision has been eclipsed by higher-profile battles over two other controversial plans that would expand oil drilling offshore and allow it in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Those proposals have been dropped for now, but the land-sale provision remains.I am for wise-use policies of public lands, and sometimes selling them is the right thing to do. However, this is clearly a gift to the mining industry, which might make huge profits while paying a pittance for the rights. Mineral rights are the epitome of the public/private debate. Given that, once extracted, Americans may never see these minerals again as they dissapear into value-added products, industrial processes, shouldn't we be charging more for their use? Shouldn't the extractors pay for what is a one-time shot at their use? Shouldn't we demand that extractors be more like caretakers than exploiters? Apparently not.
The bill would lift an 11-year-old moratorium on the patenting — or sale — of federal lands to mining companies for a fraction of their mineral worth. While the patent fees would rise from $2.50 or $5 an acre to $1,000, the price would continue to exclude the mineral worth, which can amount to billions of dollars
In their wrongful-arrest lawsuit, Connole's lawyers demanded to know why the FBI looked at Connole in the first place. Court documents show agents were initially tipped off by a neighbor to "suspicious" activity at the commune the night of the attacks. (In fact, says Connole, members were simply helping one of the residents move out.) Agents placed the commune under surveillance and developed a political profile of the residents, discovering the owner of the house and his father "have posted statements on websites opposing the use of fossil fuels," one doc reads. Another says the owner had ties to a local chapter of Food Not Bombs, an "anarcho-vegan food distribution group." Among activities flagged in bureau docs: the father of the owner had conducted a "one man' daily protest" outside a Toyota office, was interviewed for an article called "Dude, Where's my Electric Car!?" and posted info on a Web site announcing "Stop Norway Whaling!" Critics say such info has been increasingly collected by agents since the then Attorney General John Ashcroft relaxed FBI guidelines in 2002. "How does advocacy of electric cars become the basis for suspicion?" asks Bill Paparian, Connole's lawyer. Bureau officials say they collect such info only when there might be ties to violence or terrorism. A spokesman declined to comment on Connole's case, saying that because no settlement has been entered into the court record, it remains "a pending legal matter."Opposing fossil fuels, being a member of a co-op (a "anarcho-vegan food distribution group"), and advocating electric vehicles is becoming a dangerous business! Very strange.
Patrick Duddy, the U.S. State Department's deputy assistant secretary for Western Hemisphere affairs, said at an October 20-21 international donors' conference for Haiti that the more than 3 million Haitians who have registered to vote will set the stage for broad participation in the elections.Just because 3 million are registered to vote does not mean they they have access to polling places. As I said earlier, we know there are not enough polling places. Furthermore, increased spending on weapons and policing, could mean intimidation during the elections, so this is truly a misleading quote.
Duddy said that international donors and Haiti's interim government are "strongly committed" to ensuring the Haitian elections take place within the country's "constitutional timetable," and that the elections are peaceful, open, inclusive and fair. Haiti's government, he added, "must take all necessary steps to implement a work plan that results in the inauguration" of a new Haitian president on February 7, 2006The U.S. and Europe, along with the IMF, have clearly set stringent timelines, but this seems mostly to avoid embarassment since, while the U.S. could have easily restored Aristide--universally recognized as a democratically and fairly elected president--to power, it chose to support an interim regime, citing Aristide's "corruption" as an excuse. (Amy Goodman over at Democracy Now! has reported on the likely involvement of the U.S. in Aristide's ouster.) New elections will thus legitimize current U.S. policy, so the quicker the better. Indeed, the stern language coming out of U.S. diplomatic circles underlines American concerns with having legitimacy in the wake of our substantial manipulations at the time of Aristide's ouster.
Haiti could be the latest Caribbean country to join the government’s PetroCaribe initiative. State-owned PetrĂłleos de Vene-zuela (PDVSA) sent a delegation to Haiti early this month to evaluate the possibility of incorporating the impoverished country into the Caracas-led accord, which offers oil to Caribbean countries on preferential terms.Such plans add coals to the fire already under the U.S.' diplomatic feet. Hence Washington's response is direct and, again, stern:
Washington has a different opinion. U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fisk has called PetroCaribe the result of Cuba and Venezuela’s “failed statist ideologies” and has said it “undermines the position of private sector companies in the region.”Clearly, Venezuela would/could create enormous pressures to counter the privatization forces since energy ranks very high in Haiti's needs. The "threat" of such an oil market clearly run counter to Washington's goals, hence the stern word's from Duddy and Fisk.
I was rightly critiqued by NonyNony who pointed out that Evolution challenges the Bible, even if it does not refute God.
The fundamental fallacy is this: Nowhere in evolution does it state that God does not exist. ID'ers are makeing a political argument, not a theological one. This is a battle between competing discourses, not competing ideas, since ID has very few of the latter.
I wanted to add some finesse to my earlier point that
"The fundamental fallacy is this: Nowhere in evolution does it state that God does not exist. ID'ers are makeing a political argument, not a theological one."
While I maintain that God's existence is not invalidated by Evolution, it is true, as NonyNOny points out, that Evolution challenges the Bible's account of creation.
If I were to rewrite this, I would underline that Evolution challenges certain readings of the Bible, and that it does so overtly. What I think is most important here is not Evolution vs. Religion, but the competing discourses between religious sects.
Jerry Falwell no more wants a modern interpretation of the Bible than the Taliban wants of the Coran. By constantly framing the argument as Evolution vs. Religion, they keep the true debate about biblical interpretation out of public discourse.
I haven't read "Don't think of an Elephant" for a while, but my main point is about framing discourse. By pointing out that Evolution does not challenge the existence of God, it allows one to argue within a religious framework and point out that one can support Evolution and Religion.
I for one have no religious beleifs, but many people I know do, so what is important for me is to bring the discourse into a different field of reference so that it can be discussed differently. The problem, of course, is that NPR time and time again does this sort of thing and lets the debate fall back to the ultra-right-wing framework.
I've stopped listening to NPR in the last year or two and I've done several posts agaist them. I'm not sure whether they are worse than before or whether I've just gotten older and can see through what they say. Who knows? All I can say is that I'm really tired of their schtick.
Dear Day to Day: I have no problem that Jonathan Last did not like Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith. In fact, I agree. The wooden acting, the hackneyed dialogue and the silly plot are, at best, irritating. However, his review made me, well, uncomfortable. I understand that Mr. Last found the transformation of Darth Vader more interesting than the a light-saber-weilding-pseudo-philosophizing Yoda. However, we should separate falling in love with the character from falling in love with what that character means. Mr. Last's review, which lauds the Empire's order, strength and ability to effectively suppress those that disagree with it is, quite simply, praise for fascism and despotism--yes, the same fascism and despostism that can be associated with Hitler and Mussolini. While I hesitiate to convict by association, Mr. Last's employment at the Weekly Standard only reinforces the idea that his review of Star Wars III was a thinly-veiled piece of propaganda that could have emerged from his magazine. Take for example "The Case for American Empire" in which the Weekly Standard's Max Boot argues that "The most realistic response to terrorism is for America to embrace its imperial role" (10/15/2001, Volume 007, Issue 05). Mr. Last's review was not about the politics in George Lucas' movie, but rather those of today and his own vision of political utopia--one where "messy" civil liberties are less important than order, one where the inherent disorder of any democratic republic (read filibuster) make it somehow less desirable than goose-stepping our way to a well-organized, smoothly operating and, ultimately, despotic empire.
O'REILLY: Yeah, they love me. [Laughing] I'm real big over in France. You know, it's amazing, we're on in France but on the satellite, so we're not, you know -- masses of people don't speak English in France. One of the few countries in Europe that really doesn't speak English on a large level is France, because they don't like us. They don't like the British. So they look down upon our language and our culture --
HILL: But they like their own culture and they try to preserve it.
O'REILLY: And there's nothing wrong with that. Sure, you want to have a croissant, knock yourself out. You like the little escargot; hey, I'm down with that. But when, you know, you don't take a shower for 18 days, you know --
HILL: Stop it.
O'REILLY: I'm sorry. Come on, you know what I'm talking about. Some things they can copy from us. But anyway, so France isn't a country that speaks English, you know, on a wide level like Scandinavia or Holland or even Italy now. You're getting a lot of English speakers. Germany, it's half and half. Up north they speak English, but in the southern part, the more conservative part, they don't.
Today, Bush, brings in a member of the State Department's Foreign Service is to be nominated by President Bush to be the US ambassador to Haiti, as see in Bush taps ex-Tucsonan for Haiti envoy. This person will no doubt be a proud member of the "let's keep crushing Haiti into the ground" team of France, Canada, the IMF and the IRI--all led by the U.S.
Meanwhile, Haiti election supervisors 'quit' according to the BBC. Hmm. Maybe these elections will happen after all once there are no decent supervisors left.
Finally, in Haiti, the UN keeps playing hitman for the US: As Guerillas Strike and UN Troops Kill Again:Election ...,, as seen in Political Affairs Magazine. But, no worries, South Korea will be sending its troops: UN Asks South Korea to Dispatch Troops to Haiti. What a surprise. I'm sure South Korea will bring it's long history of democracy (not!) to Haiti.
Mon Nov 7th, 2005 at 10:20:25 AM EDT :: Healthcare
The European political class is in crisis, filled with non-solutions, and unable to lead or persuade its own public, and hoping that another round of neo-liberalization will do what 25 years of it have not done - they now face an open revolt. One which is spreading. 10 officers were shot in last night's riots in France. This rioting is not going to move the core of French public opinion, but will instead harden the battle lines. This bodes ill for the right in France, which has governed because the center-right coalition was far more unified than the center-left coalition.::
The reality of economics in Europe and the United States is that both places have the same problem, and they are dealing with it by making different choices on how to spread the pain.
The United States, with both more energy and more land, has taken the mode of generating sprawl to generate employment, and selling the US to other nations one barrel of oil at a time, hoping that the rate that the US can generate paper wealth will outpace the rate at which we import energy. This bet is failing, and is, in fact, falling further and further behind. In essence, the US is borrowing to generate employment.
The European core nations have selected an austerity route - higher unemployment, higher social safety net, lower accumulation of foreign debt, and therefore more local control.
However, both roads have been about managing depletion of extraction, most notably oil, and they interlock with the decision of extraction countries to do so as well. While there have been swings in the relative economic power of the different blocs, the road leads in the same direction.
It is dangerous to read too much into these riots, other than the reality that Europe's circulatory system is ebbing, they are having to cut at the margins of their social safety net, and they are under pressure to close the borders. But prosperity will be equalized, whether slowly or quickly, and the attempts to slow down that equalization by protectionism are only worthwhile if they are buying time for preparation. The difference between temporizing and procrastinating is what you buy with the time.
Right now there is little in the way of clear thinking about what to do in the coming post-extraction world, or even a realization that the post-extraction world is coming and it will be beneficial. Right now we are sketching the edges of that world, while people are trying to bring outmoded rental paradigms to bear.
These rental paradigms largely stem from arrangements made almost a century ago as our current economy was emerging in outline.
That economy was based on two important technological ideas - mechanization and broadcast. Our current economic struggles are largely a struggle over keeping the rent flowing on these two - now quite old - innovations in society. It is foolish to blame the French system for a global phenomenon of the playing out of an old economic order. Unrest is rising, because the increase in productivity that it provides is now much smaller than the number of people who want to be part of it. It is exploding in China as inflation is crushing those not attached to the export economy, and the government makes moves to keep wages down by swamping the cities with country dwellers. This is "the city problem," and it is a very poor idea to encourage it.
The unrest is in South America, in Iraq, and in a host of other nations. The amount of global growth available is shrinking, and most of it is consumed by the US, China's export economy, and the resource extraction sectors of a few other nations. The rest of the world is close to what would be defined as a global recession.
Of course, there is a lot more to this than mentioned here. There are indeed some deep-seated cultural issues, but these are the issues that allow the Center-Right and Right-Wing government to exclude these areas from the current economic plan. The revolt is about exclusion, exclusion, and more exclusion. The Right in particular is interested in allowing these things to continue, just as Bush is interested in keeping America at war. Fortunately, the Left, and perhaps the Center-Left are begining to react, and, because the press in France is slightly more rational, these people actually have a voice and the public generally agrees with them--at least in the sense that they see Villepin, Sarkozy and Barloo manoeuvering to exploit this situation.
Update: Earlier I referred to this situation as Symptomatic. Well, I just read this piece on Tom Paine by Rami Khouri. He states an obvious truth:
Burning cars in Paris and interrupted terror bombings in Sydney may achieve that which a generation of indigenous, patient scholarship, analysis and activism in the Middle East and North Africa have not elicited: serious political and economic reforms that assert the basic rights of Arab citizens to live in societies defined by decency and equality, and the indelible humanity of Arab youth who have been deformed beyond recognition by the inequities of their own tortured political cultures.
WASHINGTON - November 7 - The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has decided to expand a controversial give-away in which local farmers grow genetically modified soybeans and corn on Delaware’s at Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge. Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) today released a letter protesting the move as wreaking ecological havoc and violating the Service’s own policies.People who follow this know what is happening here. The acreage is relatively minute, but the symbolism is huge. This is a signal to the corporate purveyors of genetically modified organisms saying "we support you." There is absolutely no need for this ecologically or scientifically speaking. It's only use is to push the conservative agenda a little further and keep the government moving on its slippery slope. Public land should not be for private use without just compensation, and here the trespassing is even more dastardly because the likes of Monsanto and ADM are using farmers to further their corporate agenda.

French Fries Protester Regrets War Jibe
by Jamie Wilson in Washington
It was a culinary rebuke that echoed around the world, heightening the sense of tension between Washington and Paris in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. But now the US politician who led the campaign to change the name of french fries to "freedom fries" has turned against the war.
Walter Jones, the Republican congressman for North Carolina who was also the brains behind french toast becoming freedom toast in Capitol Hill restaurants, told a local newspaper the US went to war "with no justification".
Mr Jones, who in March 2003 circulated a letter demanding that the three cafeterias in the House of Representatives' office buildings ban the word french from menus, said it was meant as a "light-hearted gesture".
But the name change, still in force, made headlines around the world, both for what it said about US-French relations and its pettiness.
Now Mr Jones appears to agree. Asked by a reporter for the North Carolina News and Observer about the name-change campaign - an idea Mr Jones said at the time came to him by a combination of God's hand and a constituent's request - he replied: "I wish it had never happened."
Although he voted for the war, he has since become one of its most vociferous opponents on Capitol Hill, where the hallway outside his office is lined with photographs of the "faces of the fallen".
"If we were given misinformation intentionally by people in this administration, to commit the authority to send boys, and in some instances girls, to go into Iraq, that is wrong," he told the newspaper. "Congress must be told the truth."
May 23, 2005 Beef Makers Can Be Forced to Pay for Ads By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 6:07 p.m. ET WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government can make cattle ranchers pay for ads proclaiming ''Beef: It's what's for dinner,'' the Supreme Court ruled Monday. Some ranchers object to paying for the ad campaigns because they don't like the generic message that all beef -- American or foreign -- is good. But the court ruled in a 6-3 decision that the beef program amounts to government speech that is shielded from First Amendment challenge. The government is allowed to promote its own message and compel producers to pay fees, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote. ''The message of the promotional campaigns is effectively controlled by the Federal Government itself,'' Scalia wrote in an opinion joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Clarence Thomas and Stephen G. Breyer. The agriculture secretary, a public official, controls the program, appoints and dismisses key personnel and has ''absolute veto power'' over the ads, even when it comes to their wording, Scalia wrote. At issue is a program passed by Congress in 1985 requiring cattle producers to pay $1 for every head of cattle sold in the United States for industry advertising and research. The Agriculture Department collects the ''checkoff'' fees, which total more than $80 million annually, and distributes the money to an industry group appointed by the department to run the program. The program is intended to boost demand for beef and boost profits for producers, said Monte Reese, chief operating officer of the Cattlemen's Beef Board, the group that runs the program. ''We have seen a 25 percent increase in our demand in just the last few years,'' Reese said Monday. ''We're enjoying record high prices. We've been able to make strides in beef safety. '' Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns called the ruling ''a win for the many producers who recognize the power of pooled resources.'' Similar programs run by federal and state authorities promote pork, milk, eggs, soybeans and cotton. Lower courts have struck down the ''Got Milk?'' dairy promotion and pork ads promoting ''the other white meat.'' An appeal of the pork decision is pending now before the Supreme Court. ''We'll be extremely surprised and disappointed if the judgment is not applied to the pork case as well as the beef case,'' said Dave Culbertson, president of the National Pork Board. Opponents of the fees argued the program is not government-run. The government speech defense is ''news to me,'' said Mabel Dobbs, an Idaho rancher and member of the Montana-based Western Organization of Resource Councils. ''We've long been told that the beef checkoff is producer-run, producer-driven and producer-funded,'' Dobbs said. In a dissenting opinion, Justice David H. Souter argued that the beef campaigns are not government speech. If the government wants to use targeted taxes to fund speech, it must be accountable for indicating the speech is a government message, he wrote. ''No one hearing a commercial for Pepsi or Levi's thinks Uncle Sam is the man talking behind the curtain. Why would a person reading a beef ad think Uncle Sam was trying to make him eat more steak?'' Souter wrote in a dissent joined by Justices John Paul Stevens and Anthony Kennedy. The government was sued by ranchers in South Dakota and Montana, and an appeals court ruled that the program violated the First Amendment. The government and Nebraska cattlemen appealed to the high court. The court has gone both ways in earlier cases, upholding advertising programs for California fruit in 1997 and striking down a campaign for the mushroom industry in 2001. But the court had never ruled on whether those programs were government speech. The cases are Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Association, 03-1164, and Nebraska Cattlemen v. Livestock Marketing Association, 03-1165.While I cannot argue one way or the other as to the constitutionality of the decision, what I can say is what this means: large agribusiness firms (the "industry group" referred to in the article) will continue to make huge profits (look at the sidebar for campain contributions...), we will continue to have little testing compared to Europe for Mad Cow (BSE), the American consumer will not see any serious accross-the-board labeling campaign for organic or grass-fed beef, and the government will continue to promote (free speech?) a generic beef PRODUCT with dubious environmental and health consequences.
IMMOKALEE, Fla. - Tejano music bounced off the one-story buildings of this farming town and the smell of tamales filled the air as scores of revelers danced into the night outside the headquarters of the Coalition of Immokalee Workers.
The celebration marked a hard-fought, unlikely victory by the workers, a coalition of mostly Guatemalan and Mexican tomato pickers, over one of the nation's fast-food giants, Taco Bell.
They led a four-year boycott against the chain until it agreed in March to pay a penny more per pound for Florida tomatoes and to adopt a code of conduct that would allow Taco Bell to sever ties to suppliers who commit abuses against farmworkers.
With that triumph, the farmworkers group is turning to a larger target: the rest of the fast-food industry. The coalition has sent letters to executives at McDonald's, Subway and Burger King asking them to follow Taco Bell's lead.

138.6 billion gallons of gas per year / 85.5 billion dollars per year in Iraq= .61 cents per gallon surcharge per year.
...[Linda] opened her eyes and explained the process she had undergone to reach her refined state. She called it "spiritual restoration." Anyone can do it, she promised, "even a gay activist." Linda had seen with her own eyes the sex demons that make homosexuals rebel against God, and she said they are gruesome; but she did not name them, for she would not "give demons glory." They are all the same, she said. "It's radicalism."
She reached across the table and touched my hand. "I have to tell you, the spiritual battle is very real." We are surrounded by demons, she explained, reciting lessons she had learned in her small-group studies at New Life. The demons are cold, they need bodies, the long to come inside. People let them in in two different ways. One is to be sinned against. "Molested," suggested. The other is to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. You could walk by sin--a murder, a homosexual act--and a demon will leap onto your bones. Cities, therefore, are especially dangerous.
It is not so much the large populations, with their uneasy mix of sinner and saved, that make Christian conservatives leery of urban areas. Even downtown Colorado Springs, presumably as godly as any big town in America, struck the New Lifers as unclean. Whenever I asked where to eat, they would warn me away from downtowns neat little grid of cafés and ethnic joints. Stick to Academy, they'd tell me, referring to the vein of superstores and prepackaged eateries--P.F. Chang's, California Pizza Kitchen, et al.--that bypasses the city. Downtown, they said, is "confusing."
It is estimated that more than a million bushels of human and inhuman bones were imported last year from the continent of Euope into the port of Hull. The neighborhood of Leipzig, Austerlitz, Waterloo, and all of the places where, during the late bloody war, the principle battles were fought, have been swept alike of the bones of the hero and the horse on which he rode. Thus collected from every quarter, they have been shipped to the port of Hull and thence forwarded to the Yorkshire bone grinders who have erected steam-engines and powerful machinery for the purpose of reducing them to a granularly state. In this condition they are sold to the farmers to manure their lands. (War is a force that gives us meaning 31)I'm now wondering about Rwanda, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Iraq, Guatemala... Wars
War is a crusade. President George W. Bush is not shy about warning other nations that they stand with the United States in the war on terrorismor will be counted with those that defy us. This too is jihad. Yet we Americans find ourselves in the dangerous position of going to war not against a state but against a phantom. The jihad we have embarked upon is targeting an elusive and protean enemy. (4)
(From In These Times)
Diesel
An Overview of A Brief History of Neoliberalism Part I
An Overview of A Brief History of Neoliberalism Part II
An Overview of A Brief History of Neoliberalism Part III
Me on Google Earth: Moral Crossings
