Tea party rhetoric and state violence P1.

•January 24, 2011 • 3 Comments

Sometime between now and when I finish this post the inquiry into John T Williams’ death should have a verdict of sorts.

Some people think the cop charged with the shooting is responsible for the act, and yes he is.  Whatever bollocks was written in his PD’s publication.

Its obvious Beck’s inciteful routines, and other tea party rhetoric has contributed to some violence in the US.  There’s no argument about that.  While its clear that some people would like to draw a straight line from the rhetoric of the rabid US political right and the shootings in Tuscon cos it suits their worldview, it ain’t that easy yet.  Whether they directly influenced Loughner or even Byron Williams (directly influenced, remember) is not really relevant – they probably didn’t influence Loughner any more than the rest of American culture did.  After all violence and “heroic” lone action is fundamental to American life.

This is a country where one of the biggest television hits of this century regularly features the hero torturing people.  Apparently justifiably so as well.  (As if its ever justifiable.)  Where another massive television hit is about a serial killer whose rampage is somehow justified, although perhaps this second show is a little more nuanced.  It still starts from a point where extra judicial murder is considered a reasonable behaviour.

In both cases a super empowered individual acts in defiance of the rule of law for a “higher purpose”.  Obviously not inhibited by the squeamishness most of us ordinary law obeying sorts feel, these individuals heroically disregard the law while taking human life to achieve their ends.  (We all know the connection between superheroes and fascism.)  These guys get the job done, cos obviously the law itself and our own wussiness aren’t actually enough to protect us.  We need them and their brutality, they are our true saviours and protectors.

Cops are American heroes – true saviours and protectors.  Powerful, trusted, uniformed and always right.  They have to protect the American way from the threats it faces, and from itself.  This is clear from the Guardian editorials.


The city, using its Race and Social Justice Initiative (RSJI), continues its assault on traditional and constitutional American values such as self reliance, equal justice, and individual liberty.

Social justice is a socialist scheme that judges people not as individuals, but by their race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Again, please research it yourself. The groups touting social justice all tend toward the political left, including socialist and communist groups.

By this method, if we aren’t careful, we will literally vote ourselves into tyranny. Some think we came pretty damn close to it in 2008:

They attempt to make us feel comfortable with socialist and progressive terminology through repetition and saturation.  The Race and Social Justice Initiative, SPD Race and Social Justice Change Team, and Race and Social Justice Survey.  I’m waiting for the Race and Social Justice Torchlight Parade and the Race and Social Justice 10K Race þr Social Justice: On and on it goes until, they hope,the term no longer riles us.

I’ve given some thought to my own RSJI participation to date. The “Perspectives in Profiling” class (or as one officer put it, one of our “de-policing classes”) served as a good way to learn what the enemy is up to. (Yes, enemy. A liberal after my money in taxes may be my opponent, but a socialist attacking the Constitution and my liberty is my enemy).

I’ll leave you with this refresher employing the RSJI, the City of Seattle is actually deciding on which people do or do-not “merit ‘punishment’ for a crime, based upon their race, ethnic heritage, and/or socio-economic status. So far this only applies to DWLS3, but one has to ask, what’s next? They’re also deciding purchases and the issuing of city contracts based upon similar criteria.  This is social justice, folks, and  socialism has no place in Seattle, and positively no place in the Seattle Police Department.

Yep.  There you go.  The very idea of social justice riles them.  Especially one Steve Pomper, and his so called “libertarian”, tea party mentality.  I do love it when cops start pointing out the dangers of democracy.  Makes me feel all safe inside.

BTW –  A libertarian policeman!  Thats a laugh.  He must use the Catallaxy Files definition of “libertarianism”.

More from constable Steve:

The many police officers I’ve heard from have had visceral responses to those in Seattle who want to institute socialistic initiatives and policies in the community they serve and protect.

When Seattle’s government says racial profiling is evil beoause it treats one citizen differently than another in contravention of equal protection for all, they are 100% correct. The cops agree; that’s why we don’t do it.  (That one made me snort my coffee – j.)

Thats interesting enough, but you should see what comes next:

As the great 18th Century British statesman and American Revolution supporter Edmund Burke once said, “Those who attempt to level never equalize. In all societies some description must be uppermost. The levellers, therefore, only change and pervert the natural order of things; they load the edifice of society by setting up in the air what the solidity of the structure requires to be on the ground.

It’s ironic that in essence those who favor social justice’s benign racial profiling, an attempt to level, if you will, violate the 14th Amendment, at the very least in spirit, if not in letter.  And this is actually beyond ironic considering the 14th Amendment was instituted because southern Democrats refused to recognize emancipated slaves, and even free blacks, now fully American citizens, were entitled to Constitutional rights and protections.

A cop who is either on drugs or really can’t see the irony.  And is making up bullshit – no I’m not an American but he is an idiot if he thinks the racial justice initiative is somehow in violation of the 14th amendment.   In fact he admits it actually isn’t.  Ultimately this is just another one of those crazy rightard attempts to turn the world into opposite day.  Glen Beck is MLK with all his non violent calls for decency, and racial profiling never happens in PDs.

At least he lets slip what the cop’s true role is, to maintain the social hierarchy.  Clearly in Pomper’s case thats one where those naturally born to rule can decide what is racial profiling and what isn’t.  And if democracy gets in the way well… maybe cops will have to do something about it themselves.  To maintain the proper order in America.

Once, again, we are in a position to reiterate that America stands for equal justice not social justice. Let’s call for Seattle govemment to abandon its misguided push for social justice as they define it, and most certainly to divorce the SPD from any association with this highly politically partisan effort.

Ok.  We have some themes here.  the super powered individual acting outside the law as a vital part of American culture.  An aspect of American culture thats getting ever sicker as it legalises torture, abandons ancient principles of western law and disappears into a logic vacuum in a desperate search for self justification.

And an editorial in a PD calling for the abandonment of “socialist” values, like trying to address institutionalised racism.  Here is a cop telling other cops that not only doesn’t he care how he discriminates against other people he is gonna keep on doing it and so should they.  After all there is an 18th century social order at stake.

A cop from East District – the same guys who raided a war veteran on Oct 25th last year with a fucking swat team for 2 medical marijuana plants that were actually deemed legal.  No doubt if the guy had tried to call a lawyer as they battered the door in they would have shot him and called it a drug related killing.  Despite the fact that they left the property after the search unable to seize anything.  Cos the pot was legal.  Here’s a case where they deliberately violated the city’s policy again, why – just so they could kick in someones door and act tough?  No criticism of that Steve, you so called libertarian.

What we do see with these themes is the sort of thinking thats used to justify stuff like the shooting of John T Williams.

Just the sort of person who would have been targeted by typical police profiling.  He was poor, homeless even, indigenous – not a US citizen.  Certainly not white like the bloke/prick who shot him.  And obviously he had a life knife and wasn’t sufficiently deferential to a guy who shot him within a few seconds of leaving a police vehicle.  His knife was legal, and found by his body unopened.  What is it with Seattle cops and excessive, brutal responses to legal behaviour?

Clearly they think the law doesn’t apply to them, after all they have to enforce it.

IN Part 2 I’ll look at some other attitudes expressed in the Guardian and we’ll have a look at how they could have contributed to John T Williams shooting.

How to turn the media into a pack of braindead shitbags.

•January 23, 2011 • Leave a Comment

NOTE I wrote whats below in August 2010, during the Federal Election Campaign in Australia.  For whatever reason I didn’t post it, probably cos I wanted to follow up and see if the idea and associated ones held up and then got distracted by the real world.  I will be following up on the concepts over the next few weeks as i try to get some regularity into my blogging.

This is it unedited with the basic relevant links:

->

I’ve been thinking about the election.

WTF is going on.  Are we on  planet stupid?

Its causing some people a great deal of consternation.

Surely this is a conspiracy or something.

Maybe.  Maybe not.

The press behave like a pack of animals, hence the confusing second use of the term press pack.

So lets stretch the metaphor a bit and see what happens.

I actually thought about this cos I’m wondering why the media are so useless.  This election coverage is a farce, when so many serious questions could be asked of both parties.  Why so dumb?

Its like watching sheep follow each other round in circles.

Turns out its probably something we can model.

So anyway, lets assume the media are a pack of animals.  Humans obviously, but that means they are primates, and being social animals they may exhibit some traits of herd mentality.

Turns out they do.  At least according to Psych Central

New research reveals the brain activity that underlies our tendency to “follow the crowd.”

“The present study explains why we often automatically adjust our opinion in line with the majority opinion,” says Dr. Klucharev.

“Our results also show that social conformity is based on mechanisms that comply with reinforcement learning and is reinforced by the neural error-monitoring activity which signals what is probably the most fundamental social mistake—that of being too different from others.”

Ok,  so thats not really anything new.

This might be.

A new research study sheds light on a behavior that is consistent among many species – that is, making decisions based upon the actions of others.

In large crowds of 200 or more, five per cent of the group is enough to influence the direction in which it travels.

Researchers discovered that it takes a minority of just five per cent to influence a crowd’s direction – and that the other 95 per cent follow without realizing it.

The findings show that in all cases, the ‘informed individuals’ were followed by others in the crowd, forming a self-organizing, snake-like structure.

Hmmmm.

Bit of a stretch I know.

Or is it?

Flocking behaviour can be modeled fairly accurately using 3 simple rules.

  1. Separation
  2. Alignment
  3. Cohesion

Basically you don’t crowd your neighbours (1), you steer towards the average position of your neighbours and  the average heading of your neighbours (2 & 3), and your motion is guided by continual feedback loops between 1,2 & 3.

And if there’s enough of you and 5 % of your crowd change direction.

Or despite everything else 5% of you keep going in the same direction.

I’m sure you can see where I”m going with this.

– jules, August 2010

Time for some perspective.

•January 19, 2011 • 1 Comment

A moving, inclusive speech from last week.

Obama doing what he does best, in its entirety:

Obama on the dead girl, (thats her below):

I want to live up to her expectations. (Applause.) I want our democracy to be as good as Christina imagined it. I want America to be as good as she imagined it. (Applause.) All of us — we should do everything we can to make sure this country lives up to our children’s expectations. (Applause.)

Oops.  Wrong photo.  I don’t know who that girl is.  Do you?

To Obama’s credit he does a little double take after that joke, and you can see that he wishes he could wind back time and reel those words in.  But he can’t, the moving finger writes and having spoken doesn’t give a stuff how embarrassed you or I might be about it.

That joke really is the sort of thing I’d expect to hear from the last guy.  But thats the trouble.

Obama is the last guy.

They were both The President of The United States, and when they speak they speak for power.  (And these days power jokes about killing kids with UAVs)

It doesn’t matter how much Obama believes his words, and no matter how admirable his personal qualities are, they are not enough to break the hold of that most powerful of Cold Monsters -The United States Government.  On the surface his personal qualities may temper the worst of the states excesses, in the way the idiot that preceded him enabled them.  But thats it.

(A frightening thought when you consider who his next opponent might be, and if they won.  I remember how unthinkable it was last time.)

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying I could do better, cos I probably couldn’t.

Could any of us?  In his position can you say you’d do better?  Especially when the only pressure you face comes from corporate interest?  And none of the people who believe in you, and could give you the power (and criticism) you really need, will.  Because they’re too busy shouting with a bunch of idiots about nothing?

Obama is the voice and the leader of a powerful entity.  If you can control an egregore it will give you great power, but this one is not being controlled by the people who should control it – they are distracted by a dangerous sideshow.  One supported by many of the same interests that place the only pressure on Obama that he is actually getting.  Funny that.

Those corporate interests are laughing now, and wondering if maybe they have mastered some of the more esoteric aspects of that ancient Eastern military theory they all devour.  They must be thinking they can do magic, cos they have controlled the most powerful egregore in the world.  And they control their most powerful threat too, by saying “Look over there, at those loud angry people with guns.

Wow – can you believe the nerve of that?  A movement thats basically associated with the republican party calling itself The 9/12 ProjectWe the People Demand Answers!!!

Thats typical of the Tea Party tho.  They have an identifiable tactic that they use for most of their propaganda.  They aren’t the issue here, just yet.  Obama is and we need some perspective about what he represents.

He represents the most powerful force in the world.

And while he might think that image, in front of a monument carved by a prominent member of the KKK, is a sign of how far they have come, Leonard Peltier or Rick Williams might see things differently.

The noise about a recent shooting in the US is still deafening and still inspiring revulsion.

Note to dickheads – the big difference between yourselves and MLK is that he is dead arseholes!!!  Shot by your mates, and by the same ” people” that shot John T Williams.

And that is someone whose death you are responsible for.

As is Obama, in a slightly more obtuse way, as head of a nation that allows its agents of state to do shit like one of them did back on August 30 last year.  Come on reader, you didn’t think I’d let that one go did you?

Giffords was a pollie who called for the “Arizona Wall” to be maintained with more effort from the federal government, who bragged about having drones deployed in the border region and sponsered all sorts of interesting legislation about the movement of cash by poor and stateless persons.  She is part of a govt that can be blamed for a huge chunk of the chaos Mexico is now subject to.  The same govt that acquired the very territory where she was shot against the will of the people of Mexico, after a resource war against Mexico and that now calls some Mexicans “illegal”.

Yet somehow her death is emblematic of someone else’s racism.

While yet another someone else, who actually was displaced by America is gunned down on the street by an  American Lawman for simply being there.  For  having the nerve to exist.  What can we take from this except that unpeople don’t matter?

That the tea party isn’t a threat to the power structure, just to how some people in the power structure see themselves.  Cos the power structure is there in all the privileged commentators heads.  The Walled World’s walls are physical but not just physical.  They exist in the mind of commentators everywhere who see the deaths in Tuscon, and the shooting of a politician as something horrendous and don’t see the death of a homeless man at the hands of cop as anything.

They don’t see it at all.

What in the hell has come over you…

•January 15, 2011 • 3 Comments

What in heavens name have you done?

You’re breaking the speed of the sound of loneliness…

John Prine

(Tho I do prefer Chris Wilson’s version)

There’s a lot of noise in the air at the moment.  The recent tragedy in Tuscon has touched a world of nerve.  There are claims and counter claims and a whole lot more.  Its one of those “hold a mirror up to society” moments.  But more than that, its a seemingly inexplicable tragedy in an America that hasn’t been this politically charged since the 1960s, maybe earlier.

Everyone thinks they can explain it tho, including me.

But before I do that I’m gonna pause for a moment.

I read a comment from an American recently about the flags still being at half mast.  And I don’t know if its still too early, but for the survivors and the families of the victims it’ll probably never stop being too early.

The most reasonable claim, and the one thats generated the highest noise to signal ratio, is that there may be some relationship between the rhetoric of some on the US political right and the shootings.  Maybe.  Definitely on some level, maybe not as much as people think.  Given whats happened, if this claim is to stand up it needs to be examined in light of other shootings.

“Some other shooting in America?” you might ask.  ” Surely not!”

As an aside, the rabid respose – including some of the most jaw droppingly idiotic or provocative comments ever made – reinforces the original suspicion.  Surely someone’s protesting too much.  (Tho there may be much to protest about.  Sometimes irony is nasty and karma is a bitch.  It’s Kali’s attack dog, and it can bite.)

That face at the top of the page belonged to John T Williams.

The police in car video of his shooting can be viewed here. (Warning.  This is disturbing.)

Its not conclusive of anything, ‘cept perhaps that in America people are too quick to kill each other with guns.

It certainly suggests an awful lot tho.  And I do mean awful.  Right now the police officer driving the car should be on trial for murder.  His employer – the Seattle Police Dept – has been accused repeatedly of excessive violence and other brutality.

What does this mean in light of the woeful rhetoric we are surrounded by?

Probably not that much (sadly), just another killing by cop in a place that increasingly resembles a police state.  A place where police power is becoming an authority in itself, not the representation of a constitutional one.  Anyone who has followed or been touched by the rise of tasers, and the function creep that sees them being used not as a non lethal replacement for lethal force but increasingly as a tool of compliance or punishment, has an appreciation of this dangerous development.

But it might mean more if that killing was motivated by Palin’s rhetoric.  Cos its one thing to influence an isolated and disturbed individual on the margins, its another if agents of the state, authorised to use lethal force are killing in the name of…

If John T Williams’ killer is ever on trial for murder – everyone will probably think the system works if he gets convicted.  What could this possibly have to do with the Tea Party?

Well possibly nothing.  But in light of the revelations published this week online, and the leaking of the Seattle PDs private “Police Only” publication The Guradian‘ editorials. Possibly an awful lot.

And yes, again I do mean awful.  Because here is the editorial policy of a private Police Dept publication reflecting the words and sentiments of a political movement.  Thats bad enough on its own – this movement has some adherents calling for “second amendment solutions” and a potential Presidential candidate who is  adding bulls-eyes to a map to represent political opponents.

One of them was recently shot in Tuscon, Arizona.

Arizona of the mythical landscapes, where the Pima people have a story concerning a place called Cuk son, or shookson or something along those lines.  Concerning a culture hero murdered by public consent.

I don’t think it would be too controversial to suggest that we are embedded actors in an imagined landscape: this collective narrative is a participatory project, an occult language with a grammatical and syntactical structure that recapitulates the ontological themes which are the motivating mythologies of every tragedy and comedy.

A anonymous online voice wrote that trying to make sense of the whole thing.  The way we all do.

It seems that if anything links these two shootings beside the rhetoric it is power.  Thats what shootings are, by definition.  The ultimate expression of power over someone else, and the ultimate disregard for them.

But these are slightly different expressions of power, one comes from someone who seems so powerless in society and one from someone who seems so powerful.  It appears their actions have reversed their positions.  The Seattle policeman will be facing a murder charge*, and an unknown ineffectual, ineffective kid has defined and defied the United States  as 2011 begins.

Thats counter intuitive cos you’d expect someone acting on behalf of the state to prosper and someone acting against it by shooting a representative of its power would … well not capture the hearts and minds of the world.

Supposedly power structures are dropping like flies at the moment – across the planet and in the US as well, and one “lone nut” with a gun can make the headlines and more. But what has America become  when people are so disenfranchised they see no way to power or even to meaning other than to walk outside with a gun and shoot people they don’t know?  And that the only meaning worth such atrocity is fame, or notoriety?

Maybe what it was always destined to become, thats really for Americans to answer.  We can read some things into these events tho.  They hold a mirror up to the past the present and the future and give us options.

I’ll reflect more on this in further posts, particularly on whether the grammatical mind control Loughner identified, and feared was what drove him to kill.  Cos thats what being vulnerable to rhetoric entails.  And what effect that same grammatical mind control might have in future given the form its taken in the leaked Guardian op eds.

John T Williams’ killer is on trial, and in the spirit of circumventing Jarred Loungher’s demented but frighteningly accurate vision of America I won’t name him.

I’ll just wonder aloud about how embedded in a landscape the people who do this stuff actually are.  People like the agent of the state who can stop in a busy street,  casually exit his car and shoot a homeless and harmless indigenous man known only for his artwork, who just happened to walk by.

Because if thats the embedded landscape of America now then God help the poor, huddled masses if Palin comes to power.  Things are shocking enough for them already.  The only response I can think of is good music and the company of loved ones right now.  But we can’t stand silent if Williams’ killer walks and we can’t stand silent if he doesn’t.  Cos he’s a symptom of a greater problem not a symbol of the cure.

I’ll leave you with one final thought, cos this is not just an issue for America.  Most Australians would recall the Cronulla Riots and the hate fueled media frenzy that preceded them.  Its best articulated by Chris Wilson, singing John Prine’s song in that link below a dead man’s face.

Its a dreadful shame and an awful sorrow

Its crossed the evil line today.

How in hell can you talk about tomorrow

When you don’t have one good word to say?

Send in the racist arseclowns.

•March 18, 2010 • 5 Comments

I’m quite busy at the moment, and can’t really justify the time to post here, but I couldn’t let this shit slide.

Tokenism.  Thanks for that Tony.

You jerk.

At the moment we are organising a footy carnival.

A one day round robin affair.

We asked the local blackfellas if they wanted to do a welcome to country at the start of the carnival  Of course its pure tokenism.  Especially with regard to Aussie Rules.  I mean what have blackfellas ever done for that game? Nothing.

(Apologies to the many great players who didn’t get a show then.  Too many of you.)

Stupid wankers.

Do you have any idea?  Pull your heads out fellas, you farts aren’t perfume, they smell bad, and your complete and utter shit leaves a bitter taste in everyone’s mouth.

Anyway our club has a strong indigenous representation, as does the town.  We do know the score and understand that a welcome to country is a sign of respect.  Its how things were done here (well in spirit if the form is different,) for thousands and thousands of years.  Its all of our heritage.  Thats part of what it means, its a heritage thats being offered to everyone, not being kept to the indigines.

We are taking part in a welcoming ceremony thats thousands of years old.  You know what?

Its also an Australian welcoming ceremony that is thousands of years old.

If you think thats tokenism, and there are some people who treat the process that way, it does have no meaning to them, then perhaps you should piss off back to Europe or wherever the hell it was you came from.

And its a recognition of our past, whatever the rights and wrongs of it.  It recognises pain and humanity in our fellow Australians, and its something we should have done a long time ago.  Wankers like Wilson Tuckey should be aware of that.  Not only should they thank their lucky stars they are on Australian soil, they should thank the rest of us for not locking them up in Woomera then sending them back where they belong.

They plainly don’t deserve to be here, having no appreciation for the place.

Other people have done a better job of expressing their disapointment rationally, but you know what.  I’m over it.

Abetz, Dutton, Tuckey, Abbot … you lot wouldn’t deserve a piss in the ear if your collective brain (well half a brain) was on fire.

“Home grown terroism” and the 2010 white paper.

•February 24, 2010 • Leave a Comment

So krudd played the fear card the other day, perhaps in a cynical attempt to distract from Peter Garrett’s problems.  He drew attention to evils of home grown (wait, thats the other post isn’t it, oops) … I mean home grown terrorism.

I dunno if he’s referring to bikies or darkies, tho being a darkie with a beard, I’m certainly sus on what he’s saying.  It was in the context of the Counter-Terrorism Whitepaper 2010:  Securing Australia – Protecting our Community, released in Feb 2010.

I downloaded the white paper and am having a look at it.

The Government has taken and will continue to take all necessary measures to combat terrorism and those
who plan or perpetrate such acts. This White Paper reiterates the Government’s commitment to provide the
necessary resources to Australia’s law enforcement, intelligence, security and border protection agencies to enable
them to operate effectively. At the same time, we have also taken steps to ensure that Australia’s response to
terrorism does not inadvertently undermine the principles that we seek to uphold.
No government can guarantee that Australians will be free from the threat of terrorist attack.
But this Government can guarantee that we will take all necessary and practical measures to combat the threat.
This White Paper forms part of the Government’s national security reform agenda. It is a further step in
delivering a safer, more secure Australia.

Thats from the PMs Forward, page i of the report.  I’m going to have a good look at the report and it might take a few posts.  I found the interview on Lateline last night to be confused and unenlightening.

But before I do, just some thoughts on that bit of his rave.

  • I’d like to know what “all necessary measures are” and how they defined as necessary?
  • I’d like to know effective operation is in the context of ASIO, the Federal police and the like.

Given it can’t actually guarantee our safety … well he didn’t actually say that did he?  Tho its true.  The government can’t.  He did say no govt can guarantee we’ll be safe from the threat of attack.  The threat of attack isn’t an actual attack tho is it?

Its a threat.  So what is this actual threat?  Hopefully the paper will enlighten us.  Then we can examine the actual responses of government.

The first responsibility of government is the protection of Australia, Australians and Australian interests. –Executive Summary, p ii

Ok what are Australian interests?

Are they just things like infrastructure, assets and the like.    Physical stuff and the economies needs, or are they more than that.

Is a healthy free society one of Australia’s interests?  Perhaps its most important one?  I think so.

Given that, how does this paper, and our whole “war on terror” stack up?

That’ll do it for now.  I want to read it a couple of times before I start going on about it.  I’ll be reading it with this question in mind tho.

Is the threat to Australian interests greater from terrorism, or does a greater threat come from an increasingly powerful, increasingly secretive “security” organisation?

Too Big To Bust?

•February 23, 2010 • 2 Comments
Steal a little and they throw you in jail,
Steal a lot and they make you king.  – Bob Dylan

Jeff Wells, my favorite blogger, often  starts his increasingly rare posts with a little quote, usually from Bob Dylan.  Jeff’s material isn’t for everyone.  But he is a great writer and constructs essays well.  He has a biting sense of humour too.

Obviously I am into what are deridingly considered “conspiracy theories”.  ( I wouldn’t be starting my first “proper” blog post with a reference to the best essayist on deep politics, the deep state and conspiracy theories there is otherwise.)    And certainly some of those “theories” deserve scorn.  Some don’t tho.  And cos its a pointless prick of a term I’m not gonna use it anymore.  That phrase is too effective a thought killer.

I sometimes go offline for a while, sometimes I just don’t even bother with a computer, and once when I got my first computer in a year or two it was Jeff who reintroduced me to Sibel Edmonds, tho I hadn’t really been that acquainted with her tale.  I was aware she had something to do with “9/11 Truth”.  I’ll assume no one reading this has just crawled out of a hole in a mountain and knows something about that.

But she is far more important than that, (ha, plenty of truthers might disagree.)

For a start she’s inspired me to buy next months Hustler.  For the articles obviously, well one in particular, its not like I need to pay for pictures of gynecological exams.

What a doozy that article looks to be.

For years we wondered what could be so damaging that Sibel Edmonds was subject to two gag orders under the US State Secrets Privilege.  Especially given the first one.  The Hustler article finally names the names, some pretty funky ones at that.  And suddenly that first gag order doesn’t seem to matter so much.

You can read the link above for the details on the way Congressman Dennis Hastert (R-Illinois), former Speaker of the House, got up to all sorts of no good on behalf of the Turkish government.  Hastert is now out of politics and guess what.  He makes shitloads of money lobbying on behalf of the Turkish govt.  Does that sound familiar to any Australian readers?  The whole issue of ex politicians becoming lobbyists, and corruption of various sorts is probably worth some deeper examination.

But hey forget that petty shit, lets cut to the chase:

Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz and Marc Grossman.

Who?  You ask.  As if.

According to Friedman’s article in Hustler:

Additionally, Edmonds claimed that Grossman, the U.S. Ambassador to Turkey before taking his State Department post, had tipped off Turkish diplomats to the true identity of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson’s front company, Brewster Jennings & Associates, a full three years prior to their being publicly outed by columnist Robert Novak. That in itself, according to George H.W. Bush, would be an act of treason carried out by “the most insidious of traitors.”

As if that wasn’t bad enough, before that paragraph he delivers this gem:

Edmonds said that Feith and Wolfowitz were involved in plans to break Iraq into U.S. and British protectorates months prior to 9/11. She also claimed that the duo shared information with Grossman on how to blackmail various officials and that Grossman had accepted cash to help procure and sell nuclear weapons technology to Israel and Turkey—and, from there, on to the foreign black market. There the technology would be purchased by the highest bidder, such as Pakistan, Iran, Libya, North Korea or possibly even al-Qaeda.

Did I just read that right?  Marc Grossman conspired to sell US nuclear weapons tech that was destined for the black market?  Then proceeded to do it, or at least try?

That seems to be the theory.

Wow.

Thats full on.

Anyway it seems Hustler is the only magazine with the cojones to even touch this story.  I haven’t seen the movie about Larry Flynt, and the last time I brought a Hustler magazine was 1995, but I have noticed he doesn’t seem to mind standing up and saying what he thinks.  He was a strident critic of the Bush admin, and that wasn’t the first.  He welcomed Obama with open arms, bought all the Hope and Change bullshit – you can hardly call him a wingnut, and … well he took a bullet in the spine and that didn’t shut him up or stop him doing his thing.

So what are the implications of all this?

Well apart from the obvious, Friedman has come up with a very interesting one.

As noted, Hastert now works for Turkey, and Grossman now works for a Turkish company and as a lobbyist—no doubt raking in a pretty penny from both. Hastert and Grossman repeatedly ignored requests to comment on these charges.

The mainstream U.S. media, however, apparently remain uninterested in investigating any of it. Not even after Cole himself called for a “Special Counsel” to investigate and prosecute. So what the hell is going on here?
Giraldi believes that, as with companies such as AIG and GM becoming “too big to fail,” the size and success of this massive national security espionage scandal has simply become too big to bust.

Too big to bust ….

What that really means is that this is the sort of thing that could really end the legitimacy of the US govt, especially if it doesn’t stop with Grossman.  And without a proper open investigation none of us will ever know.

Nothing is too big to bust tho.  Its actually failing to act on this that is the sure way to lose legitimacy.  Acting decisively, openly and with a real sense of making the myth of justice actually mean something – thats really the only way the US govt will restore its legitimacy once this all comes out.

And it will, thanks to Sibel Edmonds courageous and determined whistleblowing.