Friday, April 29, 2005

Bush mentions Biodiesel

"Reducing our dependence on foreign oil" seems to be a goal that everybody shares across the narrow US government political board. Bush finally mentioned biodiesel instead of just ethanol and hydrogen. I tuned into the echo chamber of AM radio last night before bed and heard Bill O'Reilly talking about hybrid vehicles, sticking it to OPEC by reducing our petroleum consumption, and gas-guzzling SUVs. I suppose it should be encouraging that the military-industrial complex is considering such things.

War, however prevalent it continues to be, is becoming less and less popular. The Iraq War protests - pre-invasion - were the largest in world history. And war precludes plunder and excess, and as we see in Iraq war is sometimes necessary to control oil resources, especially in this day and age when oil resources are running out.

So it seems the giants are seeking other avenues for profit. It will be interesting to see what happens to biodiesel if we switch to it as a major fuel source. We will benefit from it environmentally, but I fear the giants will just take control of it like they control the world's oil.

I expect, if biodiesel becomes widely used, efforts will be made to keep it in the hands of the giants, and so restrictions will be placed on its manufacture. It is currently legal and relatively easy (with some training) to make biodiesel in your home - that could easily be outlawed, justifyed by the fact that dangerous substances are involved in the process. They've outlawed less dangerous substances for lesser reasons. (see 420 post)

The folks at Piedmont Biofuels (a biofuels research farm and co-op) told us that a license to sell biodiesel is $50,000 per year, and that waste oil from fast food restaurants is in such high demand that they are actually charging for it (in NC's triangle, anyway) .

So, it'll be interesting to see what happens to biodiesel as it becomes big business. Even if this does happen, it's still a measure of progress.

Thursday, April 28, 2005

How presidents manipulate the media

The following quote is from a book I'm reading called On Bended Knee: The Press and the Reagan Presidency by Mark Hertsgaard published in 1988. This is an example of why the American media steadfastly refuses to question the president (opting only to appear as they are questioning him). Hertsgaard quotes Michael Deaver, assistant to President Reagan and deputy chief of staff from January 1981 until May 1985:

"...many times we'd give the local anchor guy a half-hour interview [with President Reagan], which they'd often run five nights in a row, five minutes each night on the local news. And of course with the local anchor, you had a much stronger bargaining position to tell them, 'You can ask questions about these topics and nothing else,' because for them to have a chance to interview the president was a very big deal. A lot of times their network White House correspondent might tell the anchor to ask [Reagan] such and such, which was the question they needed for their story that night, but that's part of the game. So he got that one shot, but we got four nights on the local news with something positive to us in a major media market."
Ultimately when big media and men at the highest levels of government have the same goals - money, profit, maintaining privilege - they will, either consciously or unconsiously, compliment each other. Profit and greed are accepted as necessary by the power elite in capitalist oligarchies, so it's ultimately not in the interests of billion dollar media conglomerations to pose any checks or balances against government. It'd be insane for CBS News to put any real challenge toward corruption in government - it'd be just as sane for a guy selling apples at a farmers' market to tell every customer his apples are infested with worms.

Only a conscious effort at social improvement will gain social improvement. Tyrannical media conglomerates only promote tyranny in other sectors of society. You can't expect a fully unbiased report from the New York Times or the Washington Post - they have a responsibility to their advertisers - so that gives their advertisers certain privileges to increase profit for themselves without the fear of popular scrutiny.

Anyone paid by media and wants to remain employed (like the local anchor in the Deaver quote) cannot truly challenge or change the way his bosses operate. You have to build something outside the money system and make it popular. We live in a society and have the tools available to us where such a structure is entirely possible, and is collectively constructing itself now, out of the universal human need for freedom and justice.

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

thought on propaganda

The single most effective method of propaganda is to make sober, legitimate arguments against the power state appear as wild-eyed conspiracy theories.

More fascism in education

Students tested after 'get high' day

On Friday, the staff of Tippecanoe County's juvenile probation department took steps to make 422 --short for April 22 -- a code word for accountability.

Nine members of the county's juvenile probation staff, in cooperation with school officials, spent most of Friday collecting urine samples from 118 middle and high school students around the county who are on probation. The screenings came two days after a local retailer advertised an April 20 sale to celebrate "420 day," which also has been referred to as "Mary Jane Day."


"I decided to go on the offensive on this," juvenile probation officer Joshua Vander Plaats said between collecting urine samples Friday morning at Jeff, one of eight screening sites. "Just trying to make a better attempt to keep kids off drugs."

Yeah right asshole. You're just trying to make criminals out of kids by examining their pee. Pervert.

And look how the liberal media is compliant:

When the idea of widespread drug screenings two days after 420 was presented to Rush, she endorsed it enthusiastically.

"I heard three ads just driving to work today," Rush said Wednesday. The Journal and Courier agreed not to publicize the effort until after it was under way.

Tuesday, April 26, 2005


Report Expected to Clear U.S. Soldiers

WASHINGTON - A U.S. military investigation into the shooting death of an Italian intelligence officer in Baghdad is expected to conclude that American soldiers generally followed instructions as they fired on an approaching car, a senior U.S. defense official said Monday

You mean they're not guilty of following orders to kill the liberal Italian journalist? I thought for sure the government investigation of itself would find itself guilty of war crimes.

Hitler Youth

Students Paid to Tattle

"For kids of that age, it's hard for them to tell on their peers. This gives them an opportunity to step up if they know something that will help us make an arrest," said James Kinchen, an assistant school superintendent in Houston County, Ga., which earlier this month started offering rewards of up to $100 for reporting relatively minor crimes like vandalism or theft and $500 for information about a crime, or plans for a crime, involving a gun.

What did Franklin say about liberty and security?

And I don't apologize one bit for the Hitler comparison. The Nazis gained power by imposing laws like this one, and fooling people into believing they were doing their "civic duty" and as a result turning people against one another and creating a culture of informants, like this. This is exactly how the Nazi party got out of hand.

Here's a radical proposition: how about actually trying to help kids with problems instead of bribing students to be little informants? How about actually listening to the kids instead of being an asshole to them?

Have we even tried approaching education with INTELLIGENCE yet? I guess it's best to keep with the authoritarian structure. That's sure producing a nation of geniuses.


It was around the time when Bush started selling Iraq that this nonsense about who's American and who's unAmerican really started to get annoying. The Red Team (right wing) was saying the Blue Team (left wing) is unAmerican because they weren't supporting Bush's decision to go to war. The Blue Team was calling the Red Team unAmerican because Bush was going to war for oil profits rather than going after the terrorists.

This sort of Nationalism most commonly occurs in totalitarian societies (the idea of "good German" was a big time propaganda tool of the Nazis). Obviously this romanticism of country and rabid worship of symbols and ideals serves a purpose - it strengthens conformity and marginalizes any questioners, and labels them as "bad Germans", or in our case "liberals".

Well, the question is, why don't people see the obvious? How do you change their minds? It's a struggle for people to get over images they've been inundated with since birth, especially when there's a perceived threat to the nation, and the fact that we're angels and they're devils is just taken for granted.

The made up oil argument

I keep hearing from the right wing that the liberals' argument was that Bush was invading Iraq so we could all have a discount at the pumps, and, since gas prices are so high, then we can all see that the left was clearly insane.

For one thing, I've never heard this argument, not even on message boards let alone from any intelligent political analyst. If that was the liberals' argument than it was horribly misguided by the old assumption about the "benevolent powerful" in capitalism will use their riches for enlightened means for the betterment of society - in this case when Halliburton controls a large percentage of the world's energy resources, they'd somehow become saints and even with no competition lower their prices and we'd all save money at the gas station.

The made-up oil argument is just another straw man. A manufactured, easily refuted argument that's repeated over and over again to make the left appear naive.

Friday, April 22, 2005

Unanswered 9/11 question: Why are 4 suspected hijackers still alive?

Remember this? Maybe you don't if you read the American press. I wonder why the American media hasn't asked this question.

Hijack 'suspects' alive and well

The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.

Saudi Arabian pilot Waleed Al Shehri was one of five men that the FBI said had deliberately crashed American Airlines flight 11 into the World Trade Centre on 11 September.

His photograph was released, and has since appeared in newspapers and on television around the world.

Hijacking suspects
Flight 175: Marwan Al-Shehhi, Fayez Ahmed, Mohald Alshehri, Hamza Alghamdi and Ahmed Alghamdi
Flight 11: Waleed M Alshehri, Wail Alshehri, Mohamed Atta, Abdulaziz Alomari and Satam Al Suqami
Flight 77: Khalid Al-Midhar, Majed Moqed, Nawaq Alhamzi, Salem Alhamzi and Hani Hanjour
Flight 93: Ahmed Alhaznawi, Ahmed Alnami, Ziad Jarrahi and Saeed Alghamdi
Now he is protesting his innocence from Casablanca, Morocco.

He told journalists there that he had nothing to do with the attacks on New York and Washington, and had been in Morocco when they happened. He has contacted both the Saudi and American authorities, according to Saudi press reports.

He acknowledges that he attended flight training school at Daytona Beach in the United States, and is indeed the same Waleed Al Shehri to whom the FBI has been referring.

But, he says, he left the United States in September last year, became a pilot with Saudi Arabian airlines and is currently on a further training course in Morocco.

Thursday, April 21, 2005

Legalize it

I should have posted on this topic yesterday as part of a celebration of 4/20.

There's absolutely no argument in favor of Marijuana Prohibition that can hold water in a logical debate. Marijuana Prohibitionists are either government officials or misinformed citizens who have no experience with the relatively harmless substance. An elementary school student could easily destroy a prohibitionist's argument. The War on Drugs is considered utterly transparent nonsense by every rational thinker, liberal and conservative, and it is also a window into how corrupt government operates in a plutocratic society. There's no Constitutional basis for any kind of drug prohibition, let alone one which does almost zero harm to responsible users and minimal harm to abusers. There's absolutely no rationale as to why the government must continue to spend millions and millions of dollars in imprisioning citizens for smoking dried flowers.

Probably the best website for marijuana information is by the author of The Emperor Wears No Clothes. (the book is published in full on the site as well).

Wal Mart Watch

The point of this is to give Wal Mart enough negative press as to force the giant into increasing wages, benefits, etc. for its employees. It seems well thought-out, appealing to conservatives by way of "look how much we are paying in taxes because of Wal Mart employees having to receive welfare".

Wal Mart is the king of American homogenization. While we may see homogenization as the death of culture and diversity, etc, at the same time it means increased profits and expansion for giant business. Wal Mart executives aren't some evil overlords looking to destroy culture and take over the world - characterising them in this way is only harmful if you want to change the way they do business. Their practices and ethics are ingrained in our culture and in business. They are following the standard. They don't perceive themselves as doing harm to the culture, at all. If you ask the question "How to they get away with this?" - it's like paying a soldier to kill the enemy and then asking the same question. It's ingrained.

So I hope a goal of Wal Mart Watch is to convince Wal Mart executives that there is a way to pay employees decent wages and continue to make millions of dollars. Negative press is one way, but ultimately if they don't see a way to profit from changing their business pratices, they won't change. They'll just go the way of the U.S. government and attempt to manipulate the media to suit their own interests and cast a pure image of itself.

I personally don't shop there, not especially because of any political opinions I have, but because I find the experience to be exhausting and sickening. Wal Mart is the vortex of everything I hate about American materialism. It's a carnival of junk junkies. I have the same experience at any mall - it just seems to be the most intense at Wal Mart, and that's a reflection of how well they're doing financially.

But, you have to look at motivations if you want to change minds. People shop there because they save money, because it's open at all hours, because they have everything. It's basically a state run institution. THEE store, in many cases. I assume this is the way it works in totalitarian societies; ironic, because Wal Mart plays a big part in supporting communist China.

I may follow up on this post to see how giant media deals with this group. I'm sure attaching a red/blue dichotomy will be in order.

Tuesday, April 19, 2005

Great piece of comedy

Usually this blog is serious, but here's a link to something I find gut-bustingly hilarious.

Maybe Rice just wants to divert attention from this.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The State Department said on Monday it will stop releasing annual statistics on terrorism deaths after officials botched last year's count, leaving the intelligence community to publish and explain the data.

Critics suggested the State Department might be removing the data from its terrorism report because they could show a rise in attacks and deaths and raise questions about the Bush administration's claims to be winning the war on terrorism.

Philip Zelikow, a top aide to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who advised her on whether to stop publishing the numbers, denied this and said he did not know what the recent data showed.

"That wasn't the reason for the decision," said Zelikow, who was executive director of the commission that investigated the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. He argued that the NCTC should release the data because a law overhauling U.S. intelligence agencies last year gave it responsibility for compiling them.

"If the numbers ultimately end up showing that the problem has gotten worse, then the administration will still have some questions to answer regardless of who puts out the numbers," he said. "One way or another I am sure the numbers are going to be made available to Congress."

Oh I'm sure.

Friday, April 15, 2005

Decent documentation of US support for Hussein

Here's one of the best analyses I've seen documenting US support for Saddam Hussein's regime in the 1980s, complete with references. This is well known and not denied even by the news-entertainment pundits, but it's good to get a concise account.

Research like this is what will help convince people of these arguments. All the information is there, and any US citizen has access to it, but most people don't have the time or inclination to actually find out for themselves. Most people just need the information to be presented in a simple way. That's where the need for media arose from. But since it is no longer in the corporate media's interest to present the truth simply and concisely, it's up to the people - with unprecedented access to information and communication - to do so.

The Left Wing of the Fourth Reich

Not to appease to anybody that likes Bush or the US government, but, continued from the douchebag yuppie who glared at me and my woman when we were talking about preventing deer from destroying our crops by killing them....

Last night on PBS I was watching a good show called "The Meaning of Food". The show takes food in a cultural context - some of the segments were on the Geechees of South Carolina and rice, some Czech descendants in Texas and Kolaches, etc etc.

One segment was about the Makah nation, a tribe up in Washington State whose ancestors were whalers. The Makah had been whaling there for thousands of years before the birth of Christ.

In 1855, The Makah entered into a treaty with the United States Wherein they ceded title to thousands of acres of land in exchange for the federal Government's protection of their ancient whaling traditions.

On May 17, 1999 the Makah conducted the first successful whale hunt in more than 70 years. The Makah were forced to cease whaling practices in the 1920s due to the scarcity of gray whales caused by the commercial whaling industry.

The PBS show documents the Makah guys gearing up, constantly training in the boats so they could get in shape to whale again. One guy talked about giving up all drugs - even down to caffine - to get in shape in mind and body. It was a very spiritually fullfilling thing - a "coming back home" feeling. In 1999 they finally got to celebrate traditions that had been stolen from them for 70 years. I think one of the women they interviewed said it was like not being able to celebrate Christmas for 70 years and finally getting one chance to.

But not if white environmentalists could help it. They came picketing the Makah whalers, and even got on motor boats and tried to cut the whalers off in their canoes so they could "Save the Whales". The white people finally won and the government again imposed restrictions which had been briefly lifted so the Makah again could not celebrate their traditional way of life.

There is merit to environmentalism - but not when it's misdirected into self-righteous racism. The reason the planet is going to hell is not from people sticking to ancient traditions, but because white people decided the planet was no longer sacred - that it was just a whore to be used for their own plunder - that the accumulation of shiny rocks were more important than entire cultures, that land could be bought and sold like a slave, that animals were no longer gifts from the gods to be consumed after hunting, but products to be mass produced and slaughtered and devoured in mass quantities.

When you have a people, continually and aggressively trying to cut other people off from their roots and destroy their culture, then you have nothing but nazism wearing a different mask.

Thursday, April 14, 2005

Liberal wackos

All the time I hear about latte-drinking, Birkenstock-wearing, dreadlocked effeminite liberals, which, of course, is an effective tactic for making the opponent appear clownish. It's been used throughout history. American guerrilla insurgents were depicted in such a way during the Revolution. They were also called the equivalent of terrorists and murderers.

And, like all effective straw man campaigns, it's not without a sliver of truth. I work in one of the most liberal towns in the South, and I am frequently among the earth-yuppies these right-wingers tend to whine incessantly about. And they annoy me as much as they annoy anyone, especially when you're talking about how to protect your crops from deer (particularly inviting one of our hunter-friends to come kill the deer), and then have some fuckface glare at us from the next table. Yes, that in itself is a kind of nazism.

But when's the last time a hippie ran for high office? Never, is the correct answer.

Conversely, the aristocratic, Jesus freak, old money, suit wearing, sex-hating, arrogant, homophobic, McCarthy-loving, hair parted on the side in an agressively conservative fashion, corporate whore freak of the extreme right-wing aren't just harmlessly holed up in some cafe worried about deer, but become elected all the time, and are currently at the highest levels of government. Guys like George Bush, Karl Rove, Tom Delay, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Cheney, on and on, thinking God talks to them and tells them to kill.

Right now it's ultra-hip to hate hippies, but if you point and laugh at them long enough, you might notice a sensation in your anus and, much after it's too late, you'll realize you've been fucked by the closeted homosexuals in power.

Wednesday, April 13, 2005

Whining from the IRS through the media

Screw the IRS. Nobody should pay taxes to the US government. Take their fuel away. Don't pay taxes. What are they going to do? Throw everybody in jail?

Tuesday, April 12, 2005

Dipshit continues to connect Iraq and 9/11

Bush Thanks Soldiers for Serving in Iraq

"If we can start to change the most powerful country in the Middle East, the others will follow," Bush said. "Americans 20 years down the road won't have to deal with a day like Sept. 11, 2001."

No, we'll have to deal with 100 days like it. The most powerful country in the middle east? Was he talking about Israel? Saudi Arabia?

And, just for fun. Let's re-state the obvious.

There has never been any kind of connection proven between Saddam and bin Laden.. what has been shown is connections between bin Laden and his own country of Saudi Arabia. A large part of the American public evidentally STILL believe Iraq had something to do with 9-11.

Follow the lies: saddam had wmds and therefore he must be stopped. After there were shown to be none, President Bush kept (and still refers to it today) as the war on terror, when there is clearly no connection. Saddam is a secularist who used to keep Islamic fundamentalism in check in his country (albeit by brutal measures). Now we are left with the "Saddam was a bad man and the Iraqis are better off without him", and "let freedom reign" argument.

Now, left the proof that Iraq was not a threat to the U.S., the logical conclusion of any pro-Iraq war argument is that the U.S. should march off to war against any country that is run by a repressive or brutal regime - that would include China, most countries in the middle east, a bunch in africa, and one or two in latin america. Us "liberals" never loved saddam (if I'm anything, it's anarchist, but in the popular media we call anyone who doesn't agree with President Bush on everything a "liberal"). We understood and agreed that he was a brutal dictator.

The point was and continues to be, should we be the worlds policemen and send our troops off to die against a country that is militarily no threat to us? If you take a moment to look at history, the Republicans' argument for the most part is NO. Are you really willing to send many thousands to their deaths, and live in a cardboard box to spread "freedom and justice" throughout the world?

Friday, April 08, 2005

They must hate freedom

Dipshit Gets Booed by World, Again

President Bush wasn't well received by some of the crowd in Vatican City.

The President led a funeral delegation that included his father and former President Clinton, but some outside St. Peter's Square booed and whistled when Bush's face was shown on giant screen TVs.

Media selling Coke vs. Pepsi at Pope's funeral

Bush, Clinton Disagree on Pope's Legacy

Who gives a fuck what either one of those criminal bastards thinks? Their legacy will be the equivalent of Caligula and Hitler if the human race survives long enough to write any more history.

The Pope was bad ass when he defied the authoritarian communist regimes of the USSR but he was a stubborn moron when it came to shit like birth control and changing the church so that it'd be relavant to 20th century life.

The Catholic Church has abandoned all spirituality in favor of ancient rituals that meant something for a time and people long ago, but are now empty gestures. Take it from a Catholic.

According to this AP article, all members of the Red Team should line up behind the idea that the Pope leaves an "unmixed" legacy, because President Bush believes it. Even though if you are in favor of the Iraq war and thought the Pope was wrong in opposing it, that means by default you believe the Pope does leave a mixed legacy.

Damn logic always getting in the way of opinion-marketing.

Thursday, April 07, 2005

Those Mexicans better think twice about crossing the border with bad asses like these. Posted by Hello

Beware, Mexicans who can't run faster than 5 mph, Dipshit Bill is on the job. Posted by Hello

Is 'at a MACdonalds over there? Posted by Hello


Did Jeff Gannon just walk by a tailgate party for a gay rodeo? Nope, it's the "Minutemen" looking out for Mexicans. Posted by Hello

Watch out Mexicans: If you wanna come to America, you'll have to go through Uber Cowdork first.  Posted by Hello


daddy got me this toy truck Posted by Hello

Good thing I got green camo on to blend into this desert. Posted by Hello


I like the idea of these guys taking up arms and pissing off the government - because the reason the government keeps the borders so porus is to keep the money from big agribusiness lobbyists coming in, and so big agribusiness doesn't have to deal with pesky little rules that don't apply to illegal immigrants like fair labor standards and benefits and minimum wage. Plus the government can keep subsidizing these "farmers" (any time you hear a politician say "farmers", they mean massive Agribusiness conglomerates) for not producing, with, of course, our tax dollars.

But, if the "minutemen" had any sense (most of them are probably just racist assholes), they'd take their guns down to the corporate headquarters of ConAgra and surround those corrupt motherfuckers. Then we'd have some entertaining news to watch.

Wednesday, April 06, 2005

Partial Clouds bring down American copter

U.S. Copter Crash Kills 16 in Afghanistan

A U.S. military helicopter crashed in bad weather in southeast Afghanistan on Wednesday, killing 16 people, including four American crew members in the deadliest military crash since the U.S.-led offensive began in 2001.


The U.S. military suggested that severe weather brought down the CH-47 Chinook near Ghazni city, 80 miles southwest of the capital, Kabul, as it returned from a mission in the militant-plagued south.

Today's weather
in Ghazni:

Ghazni, AF Forecast - 4/6/2005 1:41 pm [ °F / °C ]

Partly Cloudy
Hi 55°
Lo 29°

Tuesday, April 05, 2005

Time to throw the tea in the harbor

If this doesn't piss you off you might not want to read this blog anymore.

Iraqis Can Collect U.S. Workers' Insurance

And good old USA attacking journalists again. Yeah. Way to go. Fight for freedom.


You gotta love the Derf.

Guerrilla warfare

Isn't it funny to think that the American empire will be taken down by the same guerrilla tactics it used against the British Empire in the American Revolution?

Yes, it is funny.

Friday, April 01, 2005

Clinton was also a criminal bastard

Just because the Bush administration is so flagrant and obvious, that doesn't mean the Democrats don't have a good deal of blood on their hands. Power is corruption.

Another addition to my mental list of legitimate unanswered questions surrounding 9/11 (and none of those questions involve any of the popular nonsene conspiracy theories either)