8/26/2004

The Ruckus Society feverishly trains for Election 2004

Filed under: General , Kerry/Bush Campaign , Leftist Agenda @ 6:11 pm

The notorious Ruckus Society (not surprisingly) draws money from the Tides Foundation, among others. Its rioters paralyzed Seattle during the World Trade Organization meeting there in 1999 and wreaked havoc during the 2000 Republican convention in Philadelphia. The Ruckus Society runs a network of training camps, which have been working furiously for months to prepare street activists for the 2004 election season.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Filed under: General , Leftist Agenda @ 6:11 pm

“The left takes its vision seriously — more seriously than it takes the rights of other people. They want to be our shepherds. But that requires us to be sheep.” –Thomas Sowell

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Bush’s Iraq deal with the UN

Filed under: General , NWO @ 6:10 pm

After supposedly breaking with the UN over the Iraq War, the Bush administration has not only come to the UN as supplicant but is pushing for a UN standing army.

“It’s quite nice when you’ve been generally dissed about your irrelevancy and then suddenly have people coming on bended knee and saying, “We need you to come back.”
— Edward Mortimer, a senior aide to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan

‘‘Today in Baghdad,” President George Bush told reporters at a June 1 Rose Garden press briefing, “U.N. Special Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi, and Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, announced the members of Iraq’s new interim government.”

In fact, Mr. Allawi had been picked as interim prime minister by the U.S.-installed Governing Council from a short list presented to them by UN envoy Brahimi. Mr. Brahimi not only pre-selected Prime Minister Allawi, but Iraq’s new president, its two deputy presidents, and its 33-member cabinet as well.

During the course of his remarks and responses to questions, President Bush repeatedly underscored the UN’s dominant role in determining the makeup of the new Iraqi government:

  • “[UN envoy] Mr. Brahimi put together a government.”
  • “Mr. Brahimi made the decisions and brought their names to the Governing Council. As I understand it, the Governing Council simply opined about names. It was Mr. Brahimi’s selections and — Ambassador Bremer and Ambassador Blackwill were instructed by me to work with Mr. Brahimi.”
  • “Mr. Brahimi made the decision on [Iraqi National Congress head Ahmed] Chalabi, not the United States. Mr. Brahimi was the person that put together the group.”

“Earlier today,” said President Bush, “I spoke to Secretary General Kofi Annan. I congratulated him on the U.N.’s role in forming this new government.” At virtually the same time that President Bush was making these remarks, Kofi Annan was conducting a press conference at the UN’s New York headquarters, where he heaped praise on Lakhdar Brahimi, whom he conspicuously referred to as “my own envoy.”

Yes, one year after the administration launched the Iraq War in apparent defiance of the UN, and less than a month before the June 30 deadline for handing over control of Iraq to the Iraqis, it is the UN that is calling the shots — while the U.S. continues to pay in blood and treasure. The UN handpicked the new Iraqi government. The UN will supervise Iraq’s national elections in 2005. The UN will administer billions of dollars in humanitarian and reconstruction aid, despite the fact that the UN’s administration of Iraq’s “Oil-for-Food” program under Saddam Hussein was already exposed as one of the biggest corruption scandals of all time.

“The United Nations, once snubbed and excluded from the task of shaping Iraq’s future, suddenly finds itself pressed to play the major role in that effort,” wrote the New York Times’ Warren Hoge, in an April 18 dispatch from Baghdad. U.S. General Anthony Zinni, in an April 16 interview with the San Diego Union-Tribune, characterized the Bush administration’s position as coming back to the UN “hat in hand,” after having ridiculed the world body in the run-up to the war. Kofi Annan’s aide, Edward Mortimer, painted the U.S. humiliation even more dramatically in a New York Times interview, describing the Bush administration’s appeal for help as coming to the UN “on bended knee.” Mr. Mortimer was obviously expressing the sense of vindication and satisfaction felt by his boss — and all one-worlders, for that matter — at seeing the United States, the world’s only superpower, prostrated before the UN globalists.

In reality, the Bush administration had never “snubbed” the UN, as the Times asserts and as so many people believe. President Bush and other administration officials had repeatedly stated that the purpose of the war was to disarm Saddam Hussein per United Nations Security Council resolutions. Their complaint with the UN was that it was not enforcing its own resolutions and that its resolutions should be enforced. The Bush administration’s policy to empower the UN is not new; what is new is that the policy is now much more transparent than it was at the beginning of the Iraq War. In fact, the war has greased the skids for UN empowerment.

One of the most stunning developments to come out of the Bush administration’s war on Iraq has been almost completely ignored by the media cartel. Incredibly, the Bush Defense and State Departments are jointly proposing to establish, with the apparent blessing of the White House, a 75,000-strong army of international “peacekeepers.” Called the Global Peace Operations Initiative (GPOI), this astonishing scheme calls for recruiting and training primarily Third World peacekeepers, to the tune of over $600 million over the next five years.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

FedGov Incents Prisons As Growth Industry

Filed under: Administration & 3 Branches , General @ 6:10 pm

Defying repeated orders from his guards, the inmate-a 29-year-old man–refused to remove the pillowcase he’d placed over his head. As punishment, he was strapped, naked, to a metal restaining chair for 16 hours. Scores of other prisoners had previously received similar treatment, some of them left sitting in their own waste. Shortly after being released from the chair, the prisoner collapsed and died from heart failure, resulting from a blood clot that developed during his confinement.

Prison officials hastily devised a cover story, claiming that the inmate died as a result of beating his head against the wall. But the events leading up to the prsioner’s death had been recorded on videotape. Legal action by the inmate’s family forced out the facts, resulting in a national scandal and the resignation of the official in charge of the prison.

Did this occur at Baghdad’s Abu Ghraib prison, circa 2003? No–it took place at Utah’s Point of the Mountain State Penitentiary in 1997. Lane McCotter, cashiered from his post as head of the state Department of Corrections because of the scandal, was hired to head Management & Training Corporation (MTC), a Utah-based “private” (actually corporatist) corrections company. Under McCotter’s personal supervision, MTC operated a Santa Fe, New Mexico, county jail that was excoriated in a March 2003 Justice Department report for systematic abuses and inhumane conditions.

The Justice Department implemented a three-stage plan to address the Sante Fe situation. First, it threatened to sue the jail–and by extension, MTC - unless conditions quickly improved. Second, it relocated 100 federal prisoners who had been incarcerated in the notorious facility. Third, it hired McCotter to help oversee the reconstruction of Iraq’s prison system and to train Iraqi prison guards.

McCotter told the Salt Lake Tribune that his name was on two lists of qualified candidates, one composed bythe Justic Department’s Federal Bureau of Prisons and the other, by the National Institute of Corrections. Justic Department spokesman Mark Corallo told the Tribune that McCotter “came highly recommended,” but pointedly declined to say who issued that radiant endorsement.

McCotter worked with Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, Abu Ghraib’s disgraced former commandant, and even escorted Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz on a tour of the prison. There’s no evidence that he played a role in any of the hideous crimes subsequently committed there (which may include, according to plausible reports, sexual molestation of Iraqi children by guards or interrogators). But the fact that his name was on two short lists for the position of Abu Ghraib says a great deal about the culture of impunity that nurtured atrocities committed there last year. It also offers a usefully unsettling glimpse of the prevailing priorities in our increasingly nationalized penal system.

At present, America imprisons 2.1 million of the estimated world population of roughly 8 million prisoners. Former Treasury Department official Paul Craig Roberts notes that between 1980 and 2000, as our national population grew by 21 percent, “the number of state and federal inmates soared by 312%.”

This astonishing increase reflects, in part, the importation of violent crime via unchecked immigration, and the cultvation of even more through the disruption of the family. But the prison boom, like Fed-driven economic booms, reflects government intervention. Since 1994, Washington has dispensed more than $8 billion to states for prison construction.

“Forty years ago, prisons were often seen as dark blotches on the landscapes,” writes James Bovard in his indispensable new book The Bush Betrayal. But this has changed: “In small towns and depressed areas across the nation, politicos applaud government policies that turn other people into fodder because it keeps their own local prison-based economies booming.”

In our federal system, law enforcement - including incarceration - was intended to be almost exclusively a state concern. For decades, Washington has been steadily absorbing police powers from the states, a development constitutionalists properly view with alarm. As Bovard points out, the growing prison population abets that same nationalizing trend: “Prisoners become tokens redeemable for extra federal aid for housing, road building, environmental concerns, and social spending…Local governments also collect federal windfalls because most prisoners have zero income –thus making the locales appear to be poverty zones.”

Currently, one of every 142 Americans - and one of every 75 American men–can be found serving time. Given the relentless expansion of the criminal code, the growing trend toward purely political prosecutions like the Martha Stewart case, and the incentives driving cash-starved governments to treat prisons as a growth industry, that ratio will almost certainly increase - unless enough Americans push the federal behemoth back into its constitutional cage.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.