Slashdot Mirror

The smallpox blankets thing was neither an act of terrorism nor an attempted genocide because it didn't happen. The entire story is a fraud, perpetrated by a former "ethnic studies" professor named Ward Churchill. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/plag/5240451.0001.009/--did-the-us-army-distribute-smallpox-blankets-to-indians?rgn=main&view=fulltext

The High Plains Smallpox Epidemic of 1837 was caused by personal contact with infected passengers from the riverboat St. Peter's, owned by a fur trading company. The epidemic on the High Plains centered around Fort Clark which, despite the name, was not a military installation. It was a privately owned fur trading post. The boss of Fort Clark was Francis Chardon, a fur trader. His personal diary survived to this day, one of numerous eyewitness accounts preserved from the time.

Not only were infected blankets not distributed, but correspondence from Joshua Pilcher, the Indian Bureau's sub-agent to the Sioux, Cheyenne, and Ponca at Fort Kiowa, just south of Fort Clark, to Mr. Chardon describes one particular problem interfering with attempts to contain the epidemic that is curiously relevant to today. A smallpox vaccine existed in 1837, but Mr. Pilcher noted "it is a verry delicate experiment among those wild Indians, because death from any other cause, while under the influence of Vaccination would be attributed to that + no other cause[.]"

Sound familiar?

In 2006, Ward Churchill was found guilty of seven counts of research misconduct https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... by the University of Colorado Ethics Committee. He was fired in 2007. He promptly filed suit, and won a jury trial for wrongful dismissal. The jury followed the instructions to the letter in coming to their conclusion, but recognized Churchill for the lying shitheel he was and awarded him precisely $1.00. (One juror denied any such motivation in a public interview.) A judge vacated the jury verdict on the grounds that the (state) university enjoys quasi-judicial immunity. The Colorado Court of Appeals upheld that decision. The Colorado Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal and in 2013 agreed with both the first judge and the Court of Appeals that the university was immune to suit in these circumstances. The US Supreme Court declined to get involved.

It took 19 years from when Churchill first published his fraudulent bullshit in 1994 to the time when the judicial system finished with the case. It could easily take four or five generations for his lie to finally exit the public consciousness. This despite the fact that humanity currently has the fastest, most ubiquitous communications systems in the history of the species.

Ward Churchill: I've never really stopped to spell out why I was saying what I was saying, or to flesh out the annotation, partly because I mentioned them in the context of developing broader arguments, and partly because I considered what I was saying to be more or less self-evidently true. So, I glad-handed things a bit. Mea culpa. http://dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Frank0919.htm

There's no room for any other conclusion. Extraordinarily well documented. Organized by "The Syria Campaign", a group of UK origin intelligence professionals, based in New York.

https://dissidentvoice.org/201...

https://www.mintpressnews.com/...

https://www.truthdig.com/artic...

Everyone knows the story - the US government deliberately caused smallpox epidemics by distributing contaminated blankets. There's one problem: it isn't true. It was neither an act of terrorism nor an attempted genocide because it didn't happen. The entire story is a fraud, perpetrated by a former "ethnic studies" professor named Ward Churchill.

The High Plains Smallpox Epidemic of 1837 was caused by personal contact with infected passengers from the riverboat St. Peter's, owned by a fur trading company. The epidemic on the High Plains centered around Fort Clark which, despite the name, was not a military installation. It was a privately owned fur trading post. The boss of Fort Clark was Francis Chardon, a fur trader. His personal diary survived to this day, one of numerous eyewitness accounts preserved from the time.

Not only were infected blankets not distributed, but correspondence from Joshua Pilcher, the Indian Bureau's sub-agent to the Sioux, Cheyenne, and Ponca at Fort Kiowa, just south of Fort Clark, to Mr. Chardon describes one particular problem interfering with attempts to contain the epidemic that is curiously relevant to today. A smallpox vaccine existed in 1837, but Mr. Pilcher noted "it is a verry delicate experiment among those wild Indians, because death from any other cause, while under the influence of Vaccination would be attributed to that + no other cause[.]"

In 2006, Ward Churchill was found guilty of seven counts of research misconduct by the University of Colorado Ethics Committee. He was fired in 2007. He promptly filed suit, and won a jury trial for wrongful dismissal. The jury followed the instructions to the letter in coming to their conclusion, but recognized Churchill for the lying shitheel he was and awarded him precisely $1.00. (One juror denied any such motivation in a public interview.) A judge vacated the jury verdict on the grounds that the (state) university enjoys quasi-judicial immunity. The Colorado Court of Appeals upheld that decision. The Colorado Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal and in 2013 agreed with both the first judge and the Court of Appeals that the university was immune to suit in these circumstances. The US Supreme Court declined to get involved.

It took 19 years from when Churchill first published his fraudulent bullshit in 1994 to the time when the judicial system finished with the case. It could easily take four or five generations for his lie to finally exit the public consciousness. This despite the fact that humanity currently has the fastest, most ubiquitous communications systems in the history of the species.

Would you like to address the charge that you "invented history" when you accused the U.S. Army of deliberately infecting Indians with smallpox in 1837? There's that, and the allegation that you did the same thing when you claimed that the U.S. imposed a racial definition of their identity upon Indians in the 1887 General Allotment Act.

Ward Churchill: I've never really stopped to spell out why I was saying what I was saying, or to flesh out the annotation, partly because I mentioned them in the context of developing broader arguments, and partly because I considered what I was saying to be more or less self-evidently true. So, I glad-handed things a bit. Mea culpa.

http://dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Frank0919.htm

Was it just last week some Russian official nailed it, saying North Korea is reacting to US provocations? The US and other international players have been screwing with North Korea for a long time - pushing all the right buttons to make it appear as though NK is crazy.
Think of North Korea as a porcupine: small, almost invisible; poke it and it will stick it to you.
https://dissidentvoice.org/201...

Yeah, that's right.

The "US and other international players have been screwing with North Korea for a long time"!?!?!?!

What color is the sky on your planet?

Yep, they all FORCED North Korea to use chemical weapons to conduct an assassination in another country's airport.

They all FORCED North Korea to blow up an airliner with 115 people onboard.

They all FORCED to kidnap hundreds of Japanese citizens, often forcing the women to work as sex slaves.

They all FORCED North Korea to kidnap THOUSANDS of South Koreans.

They all FORCED North Korea to hijack and airliner and kidnap its crew and some of its passengers

YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT

Was it just last week some Russian official nailed it, saying North Korea is reacting to US provocations? The US and other international players have been screwing with North Korea for a long time - pushing all the right buttons to make it appear as though NK is crazy. Think of North Korea as a porcupine: small, almost invisible; poke it and it will stick it to you. https://dissidentvoice.org/201...

(taken out of context, article is hugh, reference numbers removed)

"Looking back at the past two decades, U.S. intervention in the Middle East has failed to “spread democracy” or win the “war on terror.” It has only succeeded in creating more instability, more conflict, and more enemies. After spending $25 billion to equip and train Iraqi security forces, our military ends up bombing its own equipment to fend off CIA-armed jihadist forces in anticipation of providing even more military aid to the Kurds.

One thing is certain: the Middle East is awash with armaments supplied by the United States."
http://dissidentvoice.org/2014...

Sometimes one needs to see it in print...

Please explain how social security is not a Ponzi scheme?

The first generation that received social security was paid by the working generation (2nd generation). The 2nd generation is paid for by the 3rd generation and so on. It only works as long as the next generation (new investors) grows fast enough to pay for the current generation. This is classic Ponzi scheme, the first investers get paid off right away (and well), and the second investers pay for them and they get paid less well, and then the 3rd generation get paid even less, and so on, and you can only sustain it if you get more investors or you actually generate income. Unless I am mistaken, the only income social security gets is from the current investors.

Well, you're basically right, though there had been moves to put the system on a more rational footing, such as the resolution of the 1983 Social Security crisis, which was supposed to create a permanent "trust fund" that anticipated the retirement of the Baby Boomers and was supposed to save money in advance for that. (For a long, but relatively balanced account, see here.)

Unfortunately, very shortly after Reagan and Congress negotiated this deal, they decided just to throw the newly collected funds into the general federal funds, rather than saving them.

So -- I suppose you can say it has ended up as a Ponzi scheme, but it wasn't originally intended to be one, and when the first predictions were sounded in the early 1980s that it might turn into one, the government took action (apparently) to try to prevent it.

But... well, they couldn't keep their "hands out of the cookie jar," and once the taxes were collected, the money was just spent on wars, etc.

He also abhorred the violent creation of the Israeli nation, and was actively anti-Zionist.

Yet his work has been captured by the Hebrew University, and is used to glorify a nation who's creation he saw as tragic, and who's establishment he repudiated.

http://dissidentvoice.org/2010/01/einstein-on-palestine-and-zionism/

Yet he was offered the Presidency of Israel in 1952, and though he turned them down, he posed it as a matter of his own abilities and interests, rather than an "abhorrence of the violent creation of the Israeli nation" or "active anti-Zionism". He may have abhorred the violence, as many Jews and non-Jews are without pinning the entire abhorrence onto Israel, but apparently not enough to make a public statement; perhaps the phrase you are looking for is "was saddened by the violent creation of the Israeli nation, and was actively against violence by either party, or any group in general".

Still and all, you do get the Revisionist Godwin Award, for embodying the law that as any online discussion progresses, the probability of somebody making a covertly anti-Semitic rant completely unrelated to the subject at hand approaches 1, quite rapidly.

He also abhorred the violent creation of the Israeli nation, and was actively anti-Zionist.

Yet his work has been captured by the Hebrew University, and is used to glorify a nation who's creation he saw as tragic, and who's establishment he repudiated.

http://dissidentvoice.org/2010/01/einstein-on-palestine-and-zionism/
 

There are many people who don't think that this study was bogus. Read this and judge yourself on whether or not there are something suspecious in the rejection of this paper.

http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/12/gmo-retractions-denials-and-downright-lies/

apol

Malcolm Gladwell. Can you really take seriously, the man who claims that Steve Jobs will be forgotten by history, while Bill Gates will be revered like Pasteur and Oskar Schindler ?

Gladwell's been savaged enough for his whole "Tipping Point" pseudo-mathematical twaddle. As a columnist for the NYT, he's a perfect Tweedle-Dum to Thomas Friedman's Tweedle-Dumber.

What's less apparent to people is that Gladwell is a stooge, and lickspittle lackey to big industry.

Dissident Voice has a great article on how he's used his podium to Astroturf for denial of benefits to the insured.

"Gladwell has yet to disclose a list of his corporate clients and how much they pay him. Here is a partial list compiled from various publicly available sources:"

• Philip Morris
• Lehman Brothers
• Microsoft
• AHIP (health insurance lobby)
• Bank of America
• SHRM (union-busting lobby group)
• Genentech
• PricewaterhouseCoopers
• Hewlett-Packard
• Retail Real Estate Industry

Look into Project S.H.A.M.E., to fully expose the depth of this fraudulent, pseudo-intellect.

No, but they would CHARGE you to fuck them if they could.

If you think back a bit, unless you live in NYC or are in the military, your life has been SERIOUSLY affected by bankers in recent history, and probably not so much by reputed terrorists.

Doesn't ANYBODY remember 'Brazil'? What about those rogue duct repairmen? The concept of 'terrorism' is a tool for the state to control you. The country was much more compliant when we were cowering in our cupboards after 911, so much so that we were willing to let Cheney and Bush take us to war with a country that had not attacked us without a struggle. Even the NYTimes liked the idea of going to war after 911, it didn't much matter who with. Remember Judith Miller and the juiced up stories about WMD?

Here is a thought: 'they are only terrorists if you are terrified by them'...

I wasn't aware that Fox News was reporting any of this. Or this or this.

Yes. My mistake.

The CIA earns its check by telling you the truth.

Question: Do you believe the US to be a covert police state? If you answer "No", is this based on verified independent observation, historic reputation or emotional reaction?

I submit that it IS a covert police state, operating extra-legally with regards to its foreign relations and its internal policy.

Why not read something you might disagree with? Or is that "not the American way"?
http://dissidentvoice.org/2011/08/as-economy-tanks-new-normal-police-state-takes-shape/

The US has the largest per-capita prisoner population in world history. You can say they broke the law. But what is "law" without the informed consent of the governed? Re-read the link, and ask if such a condition exists in the secret police state of America.

Not exactly "home of the free" now, is it?

Actually, Israeli soldiers very often force Palestinians civilians (including children) as human shields. This is war crime, but so far the punishments have been so negligible that this practice is almost routine nowadays. And Israel doesn't try to avoid to minimize civilian casualties as it practices so called Dahiya doctrine, which tries to cause disproportionate damage to civilians which is also war crime. Moshe Dayan said: "Israel must be a like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.”

Absolutely! Before the UN or anybody else intervenes, there should be some clear sign that Absolutely!

Given that the UN has publicly comitted more genocides than any other organization in history, I'd advocate violently keeping UN bastards out of everything.

Also, it's the same organization as the "League of nations". It's not often said exactly which organization put Germany in such a position that almost the entire population supported Hitler, but that organization would be the League of nations. Also the League of nations was the organization caused Poland's military to demobilize DURING Hitler's attack, "to allow for peace".

These organizations do not have anything at heart except the delusions of the politicians leading them (first amongst those delusions : that any UN politician, even low-level, should have a wage that Goldman Sach's CEO would be ashamed of)

People should be defended from UN intervention. Because, frankly, if the Libyans knew what they're getting into, they'd put Qadhafi back and give him a raise. Voluntarily. Because it's a lot better than the alternative.

Let's just review :

IAEA - Because pakistan doesn't yet have hydrogen bombs. Oh and pakistan won't help Iran (the one smart decision in a forest of lunatic, delusional decisions that border on warcrimes), so someone else will have to give them the bomb.
IMF - Because the UN does not yet control the money of every state
UNRWA - Because, let's face it, palestinians might finish what hitler started, wouldn't that be great
UNICEF - Giving money to dictators, but ONLY if they torture children
WIPO - You thought the DMCA was bad ? Enter this in google
UNAIDS - because blacks, frankly, deserve to die (and because agents of this agency themselves are the source of the disease in several provinces)
UN security council - Securing your oil supply -and our politician's superiority feelings- through human rights violations, rape, and genocide. Worldwide
UNESCO - Talibanizing your cultural heritage (you'd think an organization like would actually have restored or maintained even a single monument, right ?)
ILO - Ensuring adequate supplies of young girls to clean politician's houses at a wage low enough to ensure they're open to making something on the side (I know an ILO politician. Sadly. He likes to have a young girl as a cleaning lady, one that's illegal in the country, and yells at her publicly. So does his wife. To the point that his family defends the cleaner physically from him. He's working on the "child labour" issue, now for 20 years). He claims this is nothing strange. He may be right.
-oh and-
UN inspections didn't find ANY chemical weapons. Only dead bodies killed with sarin gas. That *obviously* means Iraq never had any chemical weapons. Too bad Saddam can't teach us how to fire non-existent weapons at our enemies. Let's face it, we could halve our military budget with that trick ...

People should be protected from the atrocity that is the UN. Why anyone even associates with these assholes is beyond me.

No, they cannot prove your wrong since it is damage control - the only shaky moral ground they can invent to stand on. Notice that these shills never talk about the 20K+ innocent Afghan civilians who are already murdered - not even an apology, or feign of concern - like they want you to think it never happened.

But you are incorrect that they did it for intel, since that is also not possible.

Where's the study or even a valid argument supporting this claim.

Ok. Studies and reports on them:

http://explore.georgetown.edu/news/?ID=20647
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/519416/
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2009/9/21/21847/9403
http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-amp-space/article/2009-09/new-study-finds-torture-negatively-affects-memory

And further valid arguments supporting those claims:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30721458/print/1/displaymode/1098/
http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/04/torture-is-more-than-just-harsh-tactics/
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Dbq-Usefulness-Torture/132993

And at least one example of how this is a slippery slope that leads to nothing good:
  http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/
If nothing else, please Please read about this person!

Do further googles (or wiki searches) for Maher Arar
Then just keep in mind there is NOTHING at all that happened nor will happen that would prevent you or anyone else you know from being in that persons shoes, by a random throw of the dice.

Sure that is an extreme case, but it is cases like that where I can honestly say I would support the usage. If anything, allowing these terrorists to come to a US Court sets a precedent where the usage of information gathered by torture becomes acceptable in a criminal investigation.

That is until they* come into your home at night, haul you and your wife/gf/S.O./whatever away to different prisons in another country and torture you for your terrorists connections for 9 months.
You are doing exactly everything required to qualify as a terrorist suspect under our current methods of determining who is or could be a terrorist, so it is not at all as far fetched as your extreme example is.

[*] They being all of the sociopaths that work their way into positions of power and dominance due to their personality requiring it, whom you are willingly and gladly giving permission to torture anyone and everyone (since that is our current definition of terrorist suspect)

Honestly? I agree that the Tibet - China issue is a lot more complicated than evil communist takes over peaceful buddhist community, but I think saying China was the best thing that could have happened to Tibet is going a bit far don't you think?

Not really.

This sounds like a good time to get one of those $199 subsidized iPhones and walk away from the contract.

But isn't the whole mortgage crisis based on the same principle? People walking away from their contracts?

No, the mortgage crisis was caused by a combination of irresponsible lending practices by lenders and people attempting to live beyond their means. People walking away from the contracts was an effect, not a cause.

Please read http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/02/irans-oil-bourse-could-topple-the-dollar/

The Vatican ratlines are well documented by many sources that have nothing to do with evangelicals or Jack Chick.
Nothing _I_ linked is sourced from Bible Thumpers. Google "Vatican ratlines" if you wish.

How about some links documenting YOUR assertions, AC?

Ratzinger can certainly favor Church over flock when expedient. DO note that the settlements of hundreds of millions of dollars were a CHOICE, and essentially an admission of guilt. That much money would have bought lawyers enough to put up quite a fight if there was something viable to fight for instead of more to expose:

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Apr05/Whitney0426.ht m

  Pedophilia Scandal: What of Ratzinger's role in the Vatican's much-delayed response to reports of massive sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests, a scandal that has rocked the Catholic Church in the US? In 2002, sounding almost Tom DeLayish, Ratzinger told the Catholic News Service that he thought that the pedophile priest scandal was being driven by a media set on making the Catholic Church look bad:

"I am personally convinced that the constant presence in the press of the sins of Catholic priests, especially in the United States, is a planned campaign, as the percentage of these offences among priests is not higher than in other categories, and perhaps it is even lower.

"In the United States, there is constant news on this topic, but less than 1% of priests are guilty of acts of this type. The constant presence of these news items does not correspond to the objectivity of the information nor to the statistical objectivity of the facts.

"Therefore, one comes to the conclusion that it is intentional, manipulated, that there is a desire to discredit the Church. It is a logical and well-founded conclusion."

So much for secular law:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story /0,6903,1469055,00.html

"Ratzinger's letter states that the church can claim jurisdiction in cases where abuse has been 'perpetrated with a minor by a cleric'.

'In my opinion, the demand that a bishop be obligated to contact the police in order to denounce a priest who has admitted the offence of paedophilia is unfounded,' Bertone said.

Shea criticised the order that abuse allegations should be investigated only in secret tribunals. 'They are imposing procedures and secrecy on these cases. If law enforcement agencies find out about the case, they can deal with it. But you can't investigate a case if you never find out about it. If you can manage to keep it secret for 18 years plus 10 the priest will get away with it,' Shea added. "

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cf aith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexu al-persons_en.html

Which just goes to show that Clinton is still a better liar than Bush.

There were no UN resolutions against Yugoslavia, after all. Not even the tiniest UN figleaf for the attack. There were incredible accusations of ethnic cleansing, 'death camps' and so on being organised by the Yugoslav government all over the region, accusations dutifully repeated by the media as if they were facts, but in fact none of it has been substantiated. A camera team took a prisoner at one camp who happened to have a medical condition causing a gaunt appearance, and a storage shed with barbed wire surrounding it *to keep people out* and got a picture making it appear he was behind the wire, starving to death in a nazi-style extermination camp. But no evidence for any such camp actually existing has come to light.

There was a conflict between the government and a very violent terrorist organisation, the KLA, primarily in Kosovo province. It was the KLA which sought ethnic cleansing in the province - and, with US help, they've pretty much succeeded. Not only in running the serbs out of kosovo, but also the roma, the gorani, the bosnians, the turks... all of the historic minorities that have existed in kosovo for centuries exist now in only tiny, evaporating ghettos, if at all. See http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles/Rifati_Koso vo.htm for instance.

I found this list a good reply to the small-minded right-wing majority:

Bush Wrong 36 Ways
      by Edward Jayne
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Apr06/Jayne11.htm

Slanted: yes, but a useful list to put things in perspective.

Information, mostly previously posted content, second post deemed necessary as parent demonstrates such lack of attention and lack of depth in investigations that the content may not otherwise be seen by the parent.

The first Tibetan Lama was supported and established by the force of the Imperial Chinese army, yet when the true barbarity of the monarchs was finally overthrown and the necessary government put into place in the mainland it is suddenly "hands-off" for Tibet, where the monks had established a totalitarian government with strict slavery and punishments of amputation and enforced rape? Read http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles9/Parenti_Ti bet.htm [dissidentvoice.org] and follow each of its sources to become educated about the reality of Tibet and Tibetans prior to our liberation from the monstrous monks.

The first Tibetan Lama was supported and established by the force of the Imperial Chinese army, yet when the true barbarity of the monarchs was finally overthrown and the necessary government put into place in the mainland it is suddenly "hands-off" for Tibet, where the monks had established a totalitarian government with strict slavery and punishments of amputation and enforced rape? Investigate beginning with http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles9/Parenti_Ti bet.htm

France vs US
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Bouzid0909.ht m
result : France is poorer than USA.

HP vs (IBM | Dell | Whatever)
http://www.nyse.com/
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=IBM
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=HP
result : seems evertone is lossing ground nowadays...

Well, see for yourself.

Some folks think they're really inflammatory.

Others call them mass murders.

Religious tolerance and tolerance for an oppressive plutocratic theocratic despotism that maintained the use of serfs until its rightful elimination. I suppose you believe that they were better off in the manorial system of serfdom and brutal torture and amputations for infringements of frivolous laws or for attempting to live without paying taxes for everything short of breathing itself? For women to be selected and raped at the will of the lamas? If not, then research the history of the situation before displaying ignorance again. Start with this: http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles9/Parenti_Ti bet.htm

It was a despotic and destructive regime, far from the illusions that its exiled leader has attempted to spread and met success at spreading amongst those ignorant of history and the realities of the Tibetan theocratic despotism. Read the following before attempting to support the reestablishing that despotic regime: http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles9/Parenti_Ti bet.htm

Another interesting bit about churchill
I am strongly in favor of using poisoned gas against uncivilized tribes - Churchill

I wonder why people compare bad leaders to just Hitler.

Bush is compared to Hitler and not Stalin/Mao Tse-tung/etc because he is actually doing a lot of things that Hitler also did. Hitler carried on to do even worse things of course; nobody is accusing Bush of genocide yet.

Can't comment on that, but you're the nimrod who picked your username.

That said, you are an embarrassment to your country. I'm going to take that google.ca link to mean that you are Canadian). I seriously doubt that you are sorry you had to bash America. Your tone is aggressive and confrontational, and yet you have the gall to claim that your opponent is the one who isn't open to intellectual debate. Hint: the f-word rarely adds to your intellectual credibility. It's also interesting the note that your "evidence" of the man incriminating himself is from Dissident Voice, a highly biased source to say the least which does not footnote the quote from the gentleman in question. There's plenty of quality evidence to support the assertion that allied actions in Japan were immoral, but you certainly aren't adding to the quality of the discussion. I don't know if you're a troll, but I'm pretty sure you are a fool.

Clear Channel currently owns over 722 radio stations and a few dozen tv stations.

Clearchannel owns 1200 radio stations. Did you forget the AM band? They also own many of the ticket sales outlets which provide ticket sales for the larger venues, and have considerable holding in movie theater chains such as Carmike, AMC, Cinemark, and Century.

They're one of the biggest boosters of the Bush administration because of the monopoly-limiting regulatory rollbacks the republicans have perpetrated.

What "monopoly-limiting regulatory rollbacks" have been perpetrated? Are you talking about deregulation of the media? Well yes, you could talk about how Clearchannel owns over 1200 stations in the major markets, and provides content to 60% of radio listeners in the US (which happens when you buy radio stations in big cities...duh). But what you and your ilk never bother to mention is that there are 12,500 radio stations (AM FM total all formats public and private). Clearchannel owns just under 10% - some "monopoly". Additionally, the number of radio stations has increased since deregulation occurred, up 15% in markets considered "saturated" (rural markets) and 12% in major markets (urban areas).

In my area, CC owns six radio stations. You won't hear any local music on any of them, and as a result, the whole local music industry is floundering because the main outlets for promoting music are dominated by a few big corporations.

In my area, they own none. You still won't hear any local music because most local music sucks. Really. Other than the novelty of hearing it live, 99% of local bands always suck balls. The music industry cannot make a profit with their current discovery, production, and distribution methods so consequently they manufacture acts that aren't even up to the suck-ass level of most local acts, many of whom aren't doing anything but covering the songs put out by said manufactured acts.

But if you're so bothered by it, why don't you start a station? For around a grand you can set up a LPFM station that, in urban areas, is capable of reaching a thousand homes. Play nothing but local music, and sell advertising. Report back in one year.

One thing you can bet on. If Kerry gets in office, he's not going to let the media consolidation continue.

How can I bet on that? Lets look at John Kerry's words.

The Hollywood Reporter: What are your thoughts on media consolidation, and do you believe it has become a problem in the country?

John Kerry: I think it is a serious problem in the country, and I was against the FCC decision and efforts to narrow the ownership of media outlets in America.

Now let us examine Kerry's voting record, and it's impact.

Kerry was a strong supporter of the Telecommunications Competition and Deregulation Act of 1995 and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which by some accounts was the most lobbied piece of legislation in history. The result of these laws was a massive consolidation of media companies, particularly in the radio industry, where over 4,000 radio stations have been sold since 1996. Clear Channel alone went from 40 stations to approximately 1,200 stations. The legislation also gave away the digital spectrum to the broadcasting companies free of charge (rather than having it auctioned off). The spectrum is valued at about $70 billion. Keep in mind, this is the same John Kerry who likes to brag about how he boldly shafted the poor by supporting welfare reform. Apparently, giving a $70 billion Christmas gift for the telecom industry is a more laudable goal than provi

One can enumerate the reasons for Iraq's invasion as follows:

• Establishing a precedence for preepmtive war. Now America has bybassed the UN, and global opposition to this unilateral action. If the will to build an empire arises, then it will be done without any regard to what the rest of the world think or say. You can read the following articles too:

  • The True Rationale? It's a Decade Old by James Mann, March 7, 2004

  • PBS had a good program before Iraq was invaded called the War Behind Closed Doors. You can watch the entire program in 30-60 minutes intervals:

  • Specially interesting is this page in the Project for the New American Century Statement of Principles where you can see who signed this document. Interesting to note that all of them are either now in the Pentagon (Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, ...etc.), or are aids to Cheney (Libby, Abrams, ...etc.)

  • An overview of who is who in the neocons circle of power.

• Securing cheap oil. That is obvious. Bush's family history in oil makes that an easy one to figure.

• Complete Dad's job. The personal desire of G.W. Bush to continue where his father has left, to finish the job, and do better.

• The Israel Factor. Read the Israel connection, and how Zionism influences US foreign policy. If you take a look at the players in the PNAC above, and you will find them all staunch Zionists, whether Jews or Christians.

• Construction Contracts. The Infrastructure contracts for US corporations to rebuild Iraq is a lucrative business. Of course the Halliburton link has been reported several times (Cheney used to be its manager or director). The defence spending, plus the contracts should fuel the US economy for a while, or that is what they thought would happen.

The planning to invade Iraq was done before September 11, 2001 attacks, as ex-secretary Paul O'Neill has revealed

As many would notice, Bush is not running the show. Bush is the ideal front for such an operation. He thinks he is doing the right thing, and that God has to do something with it. You can see this PBS program The Jesus Factor.

There are two factions grappling for Bush's attention. The moderate pragmatics (Powell, Armitage), and the extremist ideologue (Cheney, his subordinates, Rumsfeld, his subordinates). Powell's position is almost identical to Shimon Peres when he was the Foreign Minister in the Sharon government, a rational pragmatic dove amid the ideologue extremist hawks.

What is funny and sad at the same time, is that the US Foreign policy is now crafted by the Pentagon and the Vice President in accordance with neocon think tanks like the PNAC. No role whatsover is given to the Department of State (where it should really belong), and Powell is merely a messenger (go tell the UN we are doing so and so, try to sell it diplomatically, ...etc.). No wonder Powell has said that he will not seek a second term even if Bush gets reelected (and repeated it a few weeks ago). Not nice thing being in his shoes I guess.

I would not go as far as to say that they intentionally planned and executed the September 11 thing. But the neocons sure did exp

... some of the real problems don't involve hardware, they involve corruption and malfeasance.

No amount of hardware fixes will overcome sheer greedism as a business model, with government oversight being the foxes guarding the hen house.

zogger

Maybe not. But, I have an idea of how good it should be, and we're not there. Don't take offense if it seems to me that you have no idea how bad we have it from just a few short years ago.

Until you've seen the face of a person terrified at the idea of meeting any police, or a person shaking after getting a ticket, or a person afraid to talk to anyone in government, then you should talk.

I can guess by your lack of experience that you're without a permanent tan and haven't been pulled out of line by airport security for having one. Not through any fault of yours, as we are all birthed in our skin by chance. I would submit that freedom isn't a state of being, but a continuous struggle against those who hypocritically only value their own rights while disregarding yours. Freedom isn't very anything. It simply is or isn't happening. It can start or it can stop. The freedom to access a lawyer when your arrest has been categorized as a "terrorist action" has stopped.

We are free. We are very free. You can walk up to the White House and picket it. You can drive your truck with a rifle in the back. You can say what you want on the Internet. You can read the books you want.

Anyone can do any of the things you've mentioned and more. It is simply a matter of the consequences that becomes the deterence to those activities. Even expressing yourself on the internet can be a dangerous proposition. To keep this reply short and educational, I'll simply point you to a source you can learn from.

Even if another terrorist attack occurs, do you think they're going to take these liberties away? No. The government won't. In fact, they can't. Because people like myself speak up and let people like you know what is going on.

You're statement has a naivete that is almost charming. On the other hand, it is also a sad indictment of our public schools' failure to teach history in any meaningful manner. This failure is one the reasons why historical events repeat themselves in such tight, short cycles in the U.S., which is reflected so heavily in our foreign policies.

Our founding fathers knew what they were doing a hell of a lot better than you give them credit for.

I give them all the credit. Many of them are my heroes. Unfortunately, they are dead. The dead cannot defend their dreams. Its up to you and me to defend them at home, so that bad things don't happen to other people.

= 9J =

Your link text here</a>

The bonus being that the space won't be inserted into the actual link. That wasn't too hard now, was it?

Your link text here</a>

The bonus being that the space won't be inserted into the actual link. That wasn't too hard now, was it?

doesn't gas its own citizens

Article II of the Genocide Convention also expressly prohibits
involuntary sterilization as means of "preventing births among" a
targeted population. Yet, in 1976, it was conceded by the
U.S. government that its ÒIndian Health ServiceÓ (IHS), then a
subpart of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), was even then
conducting a secret program of involuntary sterilization which had
affected approximately forty percent of all Indian women of
childbearing age. The program was allegedly discontinued, and the IHS
was transferred to the Public Health Service, but no one was
punished. Hence, business as usual has continued in the ÒhealthÓ
sphere: 1990, for example, it came out that the IHS was inoculating
Inuit children in Alaska with Hepatitis-B vaccine. The vaccine had
already been banned by the World Health Organization as having a
demonstrated correlation with the HIV-virus which is itself correlated
to AIDS. As this is being written, a Òfield testÓ of Hepatitis-A
vaccine, also HIV-correlated, is being conducted on Indian
reservations in the northern Plains region.