ACTION

by Jason Weintraub August 22, 2010

Republican candidate for governor Carl Paladino

said he would transform some New York prisons

into dormitories for welfare recipients,

At these dormitories, the people would work in state

-sponsored jobs, get employment training and

take lessons in “personal hygiene.”

Paladino, who is popular with many tea party

activists, is competing for the Republican

nomination with former U.S. Rep. Rick Lazio.

The primary is Sept. 14. He first described

the idea in June at a meeting of The Journal

News of White Plains and spoke about it

again this week with The Associated Press.

“Instead of handing out the welfare

checks, we'll teach people how to

earn their check. We'll teach them

personal hygiene … the personal

things they don't get when they

come from dysfunctional homes."

Throughout his campaign, Paladino has said

New York's “Rich Menu” of social service

benefits encourages illegal immigrants

and needy people to live in the state. He

has promised a 20 percent reduction in

the state budget and a 10 percent income

tax cut if elected.

New York receives a federal block grant to

provide cash and other forms of welfare to

very low income residents. Federal law already

requires welfare recipients to do some form

of work to receive benefits, but Paladino believes

it is not an effective enough measure.

[Teaching the less fortunate skills to take care

of themselves is excellent idea!

You won't see a Democrat mentoring citizens

like this, that's a guarantee. Because they are too busy

worrying about their own political careers

then to be concerned about citizens needs.

Goes to show "who we" need to be voting into office,

ain't a democrat]

The most strident rhetoric has come from the ultra-right.

Republican Congressman Mike Rogers of Michigan,

a former FBI agent who sits on the House Intelligence

Committee, told a local radio station Monday that he

thought the death penalty would be appropriate

punishment for Manning if he is convicted on charges

of leaking classified military documents to WikiLeaks.

Pfc. Manning, who worked at an Army intelligence facility

in Iraq, is now imprisoned at the Quantico, Virginia Marine

Corps base, awaiting trial on charges that he supplied

WikiLeaks with classified video of a US helicopter gunship

mowing down Iraqi civilians in a Baghdad neighborhood in

2007. Pentagon officials have also named Manning a “person

of interest” in the leak of 92,000 classified after-action reports

dating from 2004 to 2010 on operations in Afghanistan,

which document the killing of hundreds of Afghan civilians. …

Right-wing media pundits have called for a direct assault by

the US government on WikiLeaks. On Fox News Sunday,

commentator Liz Cheney, daughter of the former vice

-president, called on the Obama administration to shut

down the Internet-based organization, presumably through

the use of the Pentagon’s cyber warfare capability.

On Tuesday, in a column in the Washington Post, former

Bush White House aide Marc A. Thiessen, now a weekly

contributor to the newspaper, said the government should

kidnap and imprison Julian Assange, co-founder of WikiLeaks.

“WikiLeaks is not a news organization; it is a

criminal enterprise,” Thiessen declared. “Its reason

for existence is to obtain classified national security

information and disseminate it as widely as possible

—including to the United States’ enemies.” He argued

that there is ample precedent for using the powers of

“rendition” exercised by the CIA against those engaged

in “material support for terrorism”

“Assange is a non-US citizen operating outside the

territory of the United States,” he wrote. “This means

the government has a wide range of options for dealing

with him. It can employ not only law enforcement but

also intelligence and military assets to bring Assange

to justice and put his criminal syndicate out of business.”

Thiessen contended that if Iceland or Belgium refused to

extradite him, “the United States can arrest Assange on

their territory without their knowledge or approval.” Under

existing US law, he claimed, “we do not need permission

to apprehend Assange or his co-conspirators anywhere

in the world.”

Liberal Democrats have chimed in with their own

proposals to target Wikileaks. According to a report

Wednesday in the New York Times, two Senate

Democrats, Charles Schumer of New York and

Diane Feinstein of California, are drafting an amendment

to the “media shield” legislation now being considered in

Congress “to make clear that the bill’s protections

extend only to traditional news-gathering activities

and not to web sites that serve as a conduit for the

mass dissemination of secret documents.”

The bill was originally drafted in response to a series of

cases in which reporters were jailed for refusing to

disclose their sources to judges, prosecutors or plaintiffs

in lawsuits. In order to avoid WikiLeaks taking advantage

of such a shield law, Schumer and Feinstein want to

specifically exclude whistleblower sites.

The Times quoted Paul J. Boyle, senior vice president

for public policy at the Newspaper Association of

America, the industry trade group, endorsing such

a policy, which would reserve this type of First Amendment

protection for “traditional news organizations subject to

American law and having editorial controls and

experience in news judgment.” In other words,

such safeguards would be reserved to the corporate-

controlled media, run by people loyal to the

American ruling elite and the capitalist state.

The major concern of those targeting WikiLeaks and

Private Manning is that the leaks of internal government

documents provide evidence to justify war crimes

prosecution of US government officials, past

and present. To save their own skins, they want

to criminalize the exposure of these atrocities,

rather than the atrocities themselves.

The language being employed in media and official

circles is dangerous and chilling. It makes clear that

nine years of uninterrupted military aggression have

provided the basis for major attacks on democratic

rights in the United States and the preparation of

more openly dictatorial forms of rule.

Launched on the basis of systematic lying, both about

the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the supposed danger of

“weapons of mass destruction,” these wars are

criminal in every sense of the word. Millions have

been killed, maimed or driven from their homes, and

more than five thousand Americans have died to

advance the interests of US imperialism in the oil

rich Persian Gulf and Central Asia.

Officials of the Bush and Obama administrations are

manifestly guilty of war crimes, ranging from launching

aggressive war—the core charge against the Nazis in

Nuremberg—to the systematic assassination of

opponents in both Iraq and Afghanistan. This last

practice, documented by WikiLeaks in the activities

of Army Task Force 373 in Afghanistan, is a full-scale

repetition of one of the principal horrors of the Vietnam

War, the CIA’s Phoenix Program, which murdered

20,000 suspected supporters of the Vietnamese

National Liberation Front.

After the Phoenix Program was exposed in the US media,

including the publication of the Pentagon Papers,

government-sponsored assassination became political

discredited and was officially outlawed—until the onset

of the “war on terror.” Now such methods are being

effectively legalized, as politicians of both parties,

backed by their media apologists, boast of their right

to “take out” opponents, using bombs, missiles or

direct hand-to-hand violence.

WikiLeaks and Private Manning are being targeted

because they have done what a cowardly and spineless

media has refused to do—tell the truth about the crimes

of American imperialism. Working people in the United

States and around the world must demand the

dropping of all threats and charges against WikiLeaks

an end to the government harassment and targeting of

whistleblowers, and the immediate release of

Private Bradley Manning.

- Patrick Martin

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/aug2010/pers-a05.shtml

24 September 2010

Rally for Bradley Manning

At a rally Sunday, September 18, 2010, outside of the

gates of Quantico Marine Base in Virginia, Iraq veterans

spoke on behalf of a soldier imprisoned inside,

Pfc. Bradley Manning.

Manning has been held in solitary confinement at Quantico

for almost three months now, accused of being the source

of the “Collateral Murder” video which was released in April

by the online whistleblower web site WikiLeaks. The video

shows US forces firing 30 mm cannons from helicopter

gunships into a crowd in Baghdad, killing over a dozen

Iraqis, including two Reuters journalists, and seriously

wounding two children.

The government has intimated that Manning may also be

considered the source of the “Afghan War Diaries,” a series

of almost 100,000 documents pertaining to the Afghan war

published in July by WikiLeaks, which all together

constitute the largest leak in military history.

A former soldier from the ground unit that responded to the

helicopter shooting seen in the now-infamous video

described the incident as a typical moment in his 2007

deployment to Baghdad as part of the Surge. “It was by

no means abnormal,” said the former soldier, Josh Stieber

, who served 14 months in the New Baghdad neighborhood.

In a previous interview with me, Stieber and two other soldiers

from his unit, Bravo Company 2-16, detailed the paradox of

attempting to “win hearts and minds” while systematically

abusing people. “I think it illustrates why we shouldn’t put

soldiers in that situation” he said of the video.

“That’s what the war looks like,” he told the crowd Sunday,

while explaining that those who leak such information to the

public are doing a service to the country. “It’s important in order

to even have a conversation on [these wars] where soldiers are

supposedly fighting on behalf of the American public,” he added

, “for the American public to realize what kinds of situations

soldiers are being put into.”

.

[I believe it is time for politicians to quit meddling in

military matters! How are soldiers suppose to 'serve country'

when you politicians keep getting in the way?

This isn't about you politician(even though you THINK it is)

This situation is all the more reason to put military

General into the position of US President.]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/eyes+have+techno+fascists/3430783/story.html#ixzz0xgSpdE4H

helped trace the movements of WikiLeaks founder

Julian Assange, whose whistleblowing website published
tens of thousands of secret US military files, reports

said on Friday.

Attorney General Robert McClelland said Australia

cooperated on security matters with international

bodies, but refused to say whether authorities had

shared information about the Australian-born

Assange.

“It’s not the sort of thing that I would comment on

, but again, we do cooperate with respect to a

number of matters internationally,” he said in

comments reported by the Sydney Morning Herald.

WikiLeaks in June released close to 77,000 files

from the US military about the Afghan war, some

of which alleged that Pakistani spies met the Taliban

and that deaths of innocent civilians by foreign forces

were covered up. The documents also included names

of some Afghan informants, prompting claims that the

leaks have endangered lives.

Assange has denied that the release of the confidential

documents had jeopardised the safety of people, telling

an audience in London on Thursday that the site aimed

to protect people.

“We do not have a goal of innocent people being harmed.

We have precisely the opposite goal,” he said at

London’s City University.

The 39-year-old, who has applied for a permit to live in

Sweden, has claimed that he is a victim of a “smear

campaign” aimed at discrediting his website over the

release of the secret US documents.

WikiLeaks is expected to reveal another 15,000

files shortly.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article

/ALeqM5iJw-RBk449rShHIOaMmNR7WBty2g

?docId=CNG.0c3a53ff7267f11501a5b3dbd9567dbf.1f1

[Leaders do the right thing whereas

followers cover it up]

by Stephan Lendman June 14 2010

More than ever under Obama, we live in a secret

society, in which whistleblowers and journalists ar

targeted for doing their job – why Helen Thomas,

unfairly pilloried by the pro-Israeli chorus, last July

said his administration was “controlling the press,

during a White House Robert Gibbs briefing, then

afterward added:

“It’s shocking. It’s really shocking….What the

hell do they think we are, puppets? They’re

supposed to stay out of our business. They

are our public servants. We pay them.”

On April 16, journalist John Cole wrote:

“The message is clear – you torture people

and then destroy the evidence, and you get

off without so much as a sternly worded

letter. If you are a whistle blower outlining
criminal behavior by the government, you

get prosecuted.”

In fact, it’s worse. Under Bush, torture was official

policy. It remains so under Obama who absolved

CIA torturers, despite unequivocal evidence
of their guilt. But leaking it risks criminal

prosecution for revealing state secrets

and endangering national security.

On June 7, New York Times writer Elisabeth

Bumiller headlined,“Army Leak Suspect Is

Turned In, by Ex-Hacker,” explaining that

US Army intelligence analyst Specialist

Bradley Manning told Adrian Lamo that he
leaked the following materials to WikiLeaks:

– “260,000 classified United States diplomatic

cables and video of a (US) airstrike in

Afghanistan that killed 97 civilians last year

,” and an “explosive (39 minute) video of an

American helicopter attack in Baghdad that

left 12 people dead, including two employees

of the Reuters news agency.” Manning called

it “collateral murder,” a crime he felt
obliged to expose.

Lamo told the military, saying “I outed Brad

Manning as an alleged leaker out of duty.

I would never (and have never) outed an

Ordinary Decent Criminal. There’s a

difference.” He didn’t explain or how any
criminal can be decent.

On June 7, the military command in Iraq

arrested Manning, saying in Pentagon

boilerplate:

“The Department of Defense takes

the management of classified
information very seriously because

it affects our national security, the
lives of our soldiers, and our

operations abroad.”

So far, Manning is uncharged and is being

held in Kuwait pending further action.

On June 6 in wired.com, Kevin Poulsen

and Kim Zetter broke the story in
their article headlined, “US Intelligence

Analyst Arrested in WikiLeaks
Video Probe,” explaining:

The Army’s Criminal Investigation Division

arrested Manning after Lamo outed him.

The State Department said

it wasn’t aware of the arrest.The
FBI had no comment, then later the

Defense Department confirmed his
arrest for allegedly leaking classified

information. According to army
spokesman Gary Tallman:

“If you have a security clearance

and wittingly or unwittingly
provide classified information to

anyone who doesn’t have security
clearance or a need to know, you

have violated security regulations

and potentially the law.”

Manning said:

“Everywhere there’s a US post, there’s

a diplomatic scandal that will be
revealed. It’s open diplomacy. World-wide

anarchy in CSV format. It’s
Climategate with a global scope, and

breathtaking depth. It’s beautiful
and horrifying. (The documents

describe) almost criminal political back
dealings. (They belong) in the public

domain, and not on some server
stored in a dark corner in Washington

, DC. (Our government is involved
in) incredible things, awful things.”

He exposed cold-blooded murder of

innocent civilians and reporters, the
perpetrators laughing on video like it

was a game – the public unaware
that Pentagon rules-of-engagement

(ROEs) target Iraqi and Afghan
civilians as well as alleged

combatants.

On June 11, New York Times writer Scott

Shane headlined, “Obama Takes a Hard

Line Against Leaks to Press,” saying:

“In 17 months in office, President Obama

has already outdone every previous president

in pursuing leak prosecutions,” citing actions
against Thomas A. Drake (discussed below),

and Times columnist James Risen, subpoenaed

(by Bush and Obama) to disclose his sources

for his book, “State of War: The Secret History

of the CIA and the Bush Administration.”

Lucy Dalglish, executive director for Reporters

Committee for Freedom, explained:

“The message they are sending to everyone

is ‘You leak to the media, we will get you.’

As far as I can tell there is absolutely no
difference (between Bush and Obama),

and (he) seems to be paying more
attention to it. This is going to get nasty.”

Attorney General Eric Holder approved the

subpoena, his Justice Department spokesman

, Matthew Miller, saying: “As a general matter,

we have consistently said that leaks of classified

information are something we take extremely seriously.”

Risen’s lawyer, Joel Kurtzberg, explained that the

subpoena relates to his report about covert CIA

measures to subvert Iran’s alleged nuclear
weapons program. “We will be fighting to quash”

it, he said. “Jim is the highest calibre of reporter

and adhered to the highest standards of his
profession. And he intends to honor the promise

of confidentiality he made to (his) source or

sources.”

Risen’s publisher, Simon and Schuster, is handling

the matter, but a Times statement said:

“Our view, however, is that confidential sources

are vital in getting information to the public,

and a subpoena issued more than four years

after the book was published hardly seems to

be important enough to outweigh the protection

an author needs to have.”

First brought in 2006 by Bush Attorney General

Michael Mukasey, the grand jury session expired

without resolution. Holder will impanel a new
one. Risen faces possible prosecution and jail time

for honoring his confidentiality commitment, what no

reporter should ever violate.

WikiLeaks – What It Is, How It Operates

Calling itself “the intelligence agency of the people,”

WikiLeaks says it’s “a multi-jurisdictional public service

designed to protect whistleblower, journalist and

activists who have sensitive materials to
communicate to the public” that has a right to know.

Only when they’re told “the true plans and behavior

of their governments” can they decide whether or

not they deserve support, or as
Jack Kennedy said on April 27, 1961:

“The very word secrecy is repugnant in a free

and open society; and we are as a people inherently

and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret

oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago

that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted

concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers,

which are cited to justify it.”

WikiLeaks believes that “Principled leaking has changed

the course of history for the better; it can alter the course

of history in the present; it can lead us to a better future.”

It can expose abuses of power by “rel(ying) upon the power

of overt fact to enable and empower citizens to bring feared

and corrupt governments and corporations to
justice,” and help make nominal democracies real ones.

Secrecy and Targeting Whistleblowers and Journalists

Under Obama

More than ever under Obama, we live in a secret society,

in which whistleblowers and journalists are targeted for

doing their job – why Helen Thomas, unfairly pilloried

by the pro-Israeli chorus, last July said his administration

was “controlling the press,” during a White House Robert
Gibbs briefing, then afterward added:

“It’s shocking. It’s really shocking….What the hell do

they think we are, puppets? They’re supposed to stay

out of our business. They are our public servants.

We pay them.”

In a July 1, 2009 interview with CNSNews.com, she said

even Nixon didn’t exert press control like Obama, saying

: “Nixon didn’t try to do that. They couldn’t control (the media).

They didn’t try….I’m not saying there has never been managed

news before, but this is carried to (a) fare-thee-well for town

halls the press conferences. It’s blatant. They don’t give a

damn if you know it or not. They ought to be hanging their
heads in shame.”

In February 2009, the Free Flow of Information Act was

introduced in the House and Senate. In March, the lower

body passed it overwhelmingly, after which it stalled in

Senate Committee.

At the time, the Obama administration weakened it in

opposition to strong congressional support – on the

pretext of national security considerations over the

public’s right to know, to let prosecutors judicially force

reporters and whistleblowers to reveal their sources.
Though the bill never passed, the administration uses

it to prevent exposure of information it wants suppressed,

more aggressively than any of his predecessors, another

measure of a man promising change.

Thomas Drake was an Obama administration target,

a former National Security Agency (NSA) “senior executive

,” indicted on April 15, 2010, on multiple charges of “willful

retention of classified information, obstruction of justice and

making false statements,” according to Assistant Attorney

General Lanny A. Breuer of the Criminal Division.

The 10-count indictment alleges he gave Baltimore Sun

reporter Sibohan Gorman classified NSA documents about

the agency. In fact, she wrote about waste and mismanagement

in its “Trailblazer” project (a program analyzing data on

computer networks), and illegal spying activities,
saying on May 18, 2006 in her article headlined,

“NSA Killed System That Sifted Phone Data Legally” that:

“Once President Bush gave the go-ahead for the NSA

to secretly gather and analyze domestic phone records

– an authorization that carried no stipulations about identity

protection – agency officials regarded the encryption as an

unnecessary step and rejected it.”

Her stories, however, focused mainly on the Trailblazer

$1.2 billion initiative that one insider called “the biggest

boondoggle going on now in the intelligence community,

” what the public had every right to know.

Drake’s leaks exposed illegal NSA spying, its enormous

amount of waste and fraud, and the formation of a

public/private national security/surveillance state,

incentivizing profiteers to hype fear for
their own bottom-line self-interest.

As a candidate, Obama promised transparency,

accountability, and reform of extremist Bush policies

As president, he usurped unchecked surveillance

powers including warrantless wiretapping, accessing
personal records, monitoring financial transactions,

and tracking emails, Internet and cell phone use to gather

secret evidence for prosecutions. He also claims Justice

Department immunity from illegal spying suits, an

interpretation no member of Congress or administration

ever made, not even Bush or his Republican allies.

As a result, his national security state targets activists

political dissidents, anti-war protestors, Muslims, Latino

immigrants, lawyers who defend them, whistleblowers,

journalists who expose federal crimes, corruption, and

excesses who won’t disclose their sources, and WikiLeaks

, cited in a 2008 Pentagon report as a major US security
threat, important to shut down by deterring, discouraging

or prosecuting its sources. More on that below.

At a time of extreme government secrecy, lawlessness

and betrayal of the public trust, exposes and public debate

more than ever are vital – whistleblowers, WikiLeaks, and

courageous reporters essential to an open
society, one endangered without them.

WikiLeaks March 15, 2010 Release: “US Intelligence

planned to destroy WikiLeaks”

The group’s founder, Julian Assange, described a
32-page February 2008 counterintelligence

investigation “to fatally marginalize the organization

.” However, after two years, without
success, at least so far.

It called WikiLeaks “a potential force protection,

counterintelligence, operational security (OPSEC)

and information security (INFOSEC) threat
to the US Army, (jeopardizing) DoD personnel,

equipment, facilities, or installations. Such information

(could help) foreign intelligence and
security services (FISS), foreign military forces,

foreign insurgents, and foreign terrorist groups

(by providing them) information (they could
use to attack) US force(s), both within the United

States and abroad” – typical Pentagon boilerplate

to hype threats and deter whistleblowers
from exposing government crimes and excesses

what the public has every right to know.

In response, WikiLeaks said protecting the identity

of leakers takes high priority. It operates “to expose

unethical practices, illegal behavior, and wrongdoing

within corrupt (government agencies and) corporations

(as well as) oppressive regimes” abroad, some in

collusion with Washington.

The goal – expose wrongdoing, demand accountability

and support democratic principles in a free and open

society – what governments are supposed to do, but

when they don’t organizations like WikiLeaks exhibit

the highest form of patriotism, to be lauded, not spied

on, pilloried, or destroyed.

Among its many accusations, DOD claimed

WikiLeaks:

– has possible DOD moles giving it sensitive or

classified information;

– uses its site to post fabricated and manipulated

information;

– has 2,000 pages of leaked army documents

with information about US and coalition forces in

Iraq and Afghanistan, including on the kinds and
numbers of equipment assigned to

US Central Command;

– Julian Assange wrote and co-authored articles

, based on leaked information, “to facilitate action

by the US Congress to force the withdrawal of

US troops by cutting off funding for the war(s);”

– leaked information “could aid enemy forces in

planning terrorist attacks, (choose) the most

effective type and emplacement of improvised
explosive devices (IEDs)” and use other ways

to target US military units, convoys, and bases;

– data published is misinterpreted, manipulated

misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda;

– a November 9, 2007 report said US forces “had

almost certainly violated the Chemical Weapons

Convention (CWC),” and has 2,386 low grade
chemical weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan;

– the same report charged DOD with illegal white

phosphorous use in the 2004 Fallujah attack;

– the Bush administration was accused of torture

and denying ICRC representatives access to

Guantanamo detainees;

– details were provided on DOD’s use of asymmetric

tactics, techniques, and procedures in the April

2004 Fallujah assault; and

– many other accusations and concerns were listed

, including whether foreign organizations….foreign

military services, foreign insurgents, or terrorist

groups provide funding or material support to
Wikileaks.org.”

DOD concluded that successfully identifying,

prosecuting, and terminating the employment of

leakers “would damage and potentially destroy”

WikiLeaks’ operation and deter others from supplying
information. It also stressed “the need for strong

counterintelligence, antiterrorism, force protection

, information assurance, INFOSEC, and OPSEC

programs to train Army personnel” on ways to

prevent leaks and report “suspicious activities.”

Julian Assange is a man with a mission – total

transparency. WikiLeaks is a vital resource by

providing key information on how governments and
corporations betray the public interest. Given

America’s tradition of war crimes, corruption

and other abuses of power, no wonder DOD is
concerned, thankfully so far without success,

or according to WikiLeaks:

Its activities are “the strongest way we have of

generating the true democracy and good

governance on which all mankind’s dreams

depend,” and may have a chance to achieve

from their work and others like them – grassroots

activism, power and determination, the only way

change ever comes, never from the top down,

a lesson to internalize, remember, and
act on.

A Final Note

On June 10, Daily Beast writer Philip Shenon

headlined, “Pentagon Manhunt,” saying:

“Anxious that WikiLeaks may be on the verge

of publishing a batch of secret State Department

cables, investigators are desperately searching
for founder Julian Assange.”

In early June, he was scheduled to speak at

New York’s Personal Democracy Forum, but

was advised against it for his safety. Instead,

he appeared via Skype from Australia.

Interviewed about Assange, famed whistleblower

Daniel Ellsberg believes he could be in danger,

saying:

“I happen to have been the target of a White

House hit squad myself. On May 3, 1972, a dozen

CIA assets from the Bay of Pigs, Cuban emigres,
were brought up from Miami with orders to

‘incapacitate me totally.’ ”

Ellsberg asked if that meant to kill him, and was

told “It means to incapacitate you totally.

But you have to understand these guys never
use the word ‘kill.’ ”

Is Assange now in danger? “Absolutely. On

the same basis, I was….Obama is now

proclaiming rights of life and death, being

judge, jury, and executioner of Americans

without due process” at home or abroad,

besides non-citizens anywhere as well,

the rule of law be damned. “No president
has ever claimed that and possibly no one

since John the First.”

Ellsberg’s advice to Assange:

“Stay out of the US. Otherwise, keep doing

what he is doing. It’s pretty valuable….He is

serving our democracy and serving our rule of law
precisely by challenging the secrecy regulations

which are not laws in most cases, in this country.

He is doing very good work for our democracy,”

something Obama, like his predecessors, works

daily to subvert.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can

be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com

and listen to cutting-edge discussions with

distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio

News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network

Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays

and Sundays at noon. All programs are
archived for easy listening.

http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20Editorials/2010/June/14%20o/Targeting%20Whistleblowers%20Truth%20Telling%20Julian%20Assange%20Endangered%20By%20Stephen%

20Lendman.htm

[I can say something about this article. I have

experienced similar situation before. I used

to live in South Dakota. I challenged

in 2000 about subordinates being trained

mercenary tactics. As if police are warriors

fighting in battle front. Because they are not.

Police are police. Warrior belongs to soldier.

End result? I was royally blackballed.

Police were given the go ahead to frame me.

Prosecute me, teach me a lesson.

Conviction 'would have been' to punish me

for exposing public corruption.

This is under Democrat administration

not republican administration.

What is this talk that politicians are calling

themselves 'change agents?' Politicians are

not qualified to be change agents. being that

they are 'special interest' motivated.

Change agent status belongs to whistle blowers.

You know people who have courage to do the

right thing because it is the right thing to do.]

We read here,"’If you're the ruling party, this is not the sort of thing you want to have happening two weeks before an election,’ said Andrew Biggs, a former deputy commissioner at the Social Security Administration and now a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.” He was speaking to the no cost of living increases for those on Social Security, for the second year.

The Nevada Senate race is interesting. Everyone knows that Senator Harry Reid is responsible for runaway government spending, and that government entitlements are the number one reason. Opponent Sharon Angle calls for privatizing Social Security. The election could go either way. Angle would have been a cinch to win had she been less specific about the way to cut spending. Angle is the Tea Party pick, not the Republican Party pick. In any event, whether or not Reid wins, the Republicans are going to regain control. But beware! Remember George Bush and "compassionate conservatives."

We are looking at a repeat performance. In the 1994 election, the Republicans won control. What happens after the 2010 election, when the Republicans get serious about balancing the budget at the expense of government entitlements? If I know Republicans, in the face of the Democrats’ blistering personal attacks, say what you want, but Republicans wimp out every time. They fear losing the election. Where does that leave the Tea Party? Remember the Alamo.

The Tea Party got its name from the Boston Tea Party—rebels against the King’s tax. In 1933, Roosevelt told the American people government had a duty to keep us from starving. He gave us the New Deal—the King’s tax. The Supreme Court turned the New Deal down, stating that it did not pass constitutional muster.

Keeping the American people from starving involves property. Whose property? Justice Brandeis, a Roosevelt appointee to the Supreme Court, said property is only the means, claiming the Court had made the mistake of making the means the end. Brandeis’ statement was in direct opposition of the principles and values established in America’s Constitution. Remember that America’s Supreme Court passed judgment on white people owning black people—blacks as no different than cows and mules. Over and over, it has been proven that the Supreme Court’s integrity is no better than politicians’ integrity. Roosevelt’s New Deal did not pass the test of reason fundamental to the law. Democrats used strong arm tactics to force New Deal law on America. The Court capitulated.

Roosevelt sold the American people on a lawless walk down a garden path, to the current dead end. It is government’s duty to provide an environment of equal opportunity. Therefore, it is up to the Tea Party to turn America around and head us back to the beginning of Roosevelt’s, and now Obama’s lawless, unconstitutional walk. After the election, the Tea Party’s work continues. First and foremost, every worker has the right to exist on the fruits of his own labor, which means that any and every law resembling Roosevelt’s New Deal must be totally phased out—no compromises. The Higher Law, background of American constitutional law, cannot be compromised without dire results.

Thursday, April 15, 2010

Columbus Day, the day Columbus brought European corruption to America, the Canadians celebrate this day as one to give thanks. Why? I’ll try to answer my question.

One hundred-seventeen years after Columbus arrived, not to mention what took place with the arrival of Cortez and the Catholic invasion of Mexico—just look at south of the border even today; it is appalling—in the interim of this southern fiasco, in 1609, England’s King James established Jamestown in what is now Virginia. The occupants of Jamestown had little more than the people who begin civilization 5,000 years earlier. It is of vital interest today of what happened to make a 5,000 year leap in 500 years. It is of vital interest of what the Declaration of Independence, America’s adamant departure from European corruption on July 4, 1776, meant.

Unfortunately, ninety-nine percent of the American people would say “so what” to the fact that the zodiac gave the birth of America the sign of Aquarius, the water-bearer to humanity. I venture to say that few, if any Christians connect “in earth as in heaven” in the Lord’s Prayer with the Age of Aquarius.

Three Persian astrologers, the Magi, followed the Star of Bethlehem to the birthplace of the Christ-child. It’s in the Gospel of St. Matthew. Christians, it appears, have selective understanding, the same as all religions.

We are told religion is a thing separate from the law—separation of the church and state, that is. Poppycock! The governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, a Roman, asked Jesus if he believed he was king of the Jews. Jesus said his kingdom was in heaven. Is heaven and earth separate? Not according to Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount. He said “in earth as it is in heaven.” Separation of earth with heaven has to be accomplished to make the authoritative answer work, which is what was done. Pontius Pilate washed his hands of this Jewish problem. Jesus had to go. He was a serious threat to the powers that be.

In quantum physics, the study of the microcosmic, a dimension of the universe that is not yet physical in the sense that we know the physical, classical physics says it doesn’t relate to our world. Let us spin this idea in the opposite direction. The ancient sages of India believed that so is the microcosmic, so is the macrocosmic. Therefore, “in earth as it is in heaven.” You can’t divide the universe for convenience’s sake. This is not part of our teaching. Still, to make a 5,000 year leap in a tenth the time—how do you figure it?

Carl Jung coined the word synchronistic. Wikipedia: the experience of two or more events that are apparently causally unrelated occurring together in a meaningful manner. I’ve spent years going over the events in my life. There are too many coincidences to say they are not synchronistically connected.

“In earth as it is in heaven,” the ancient Mayan calendar is based synchronistic happenings. Richard Tarnas places September 11, 2001, as significant in the earth and heaven relationship. In Cosmos and Pysche, Tarnas goes into great detail on why he believes there is consistency between the outer planetary alignments and the archetypal patterns of human history. He spent 30 years studying the alignments of the outer planets. By the way, Saturn and Pluto went into unfavorable alignment in November 2008. That’s bad news. Obama was elected in November 2008.

The thing that impresses me the most, though, is quantum physics discoveries, which brings religion, the law, and science together into one mold. In a few words, in Even Harris Walker’s The Physics of Consciousness, under “A God for Tomorrow,” “But it is with the advent of quantum theory that we have discovered proof that we exist as something more than pieces of matter. In the development of quantum theory, the observer emerges as a co-equal in the found of creation.” “And God said, Let us make man in our image” (Gen. 1:26).

“Consciousness, the substance of this newfound reality,” states Walker, “that defines the observer,” does it not have fundamental existence? Giving thanks for Columbus’ discovery of America is in the quantum mind we each possess—the basic reality for our existence as a free people. We are now being put to the test: independence or one and all for the collective good. Who has a good word to say about the collective good? Based on past experience, is it something to be thankful for? Pray tell us why.

confronting the issue of four bullied students who

died by their own hands must get involved to end

bullying, an attorney for grieving

families said Monday. Some of the student deaths followed

bullying that was "incessant, it was constant, and the teachers

and the administrators for whatever reason took a hands-off

, laissez-faire approach and didn't get involved and stop this

at its inception," Ken Myers said on NBC's "Today" show.

Families of victims told the NBC show there is a frightening

pattern of bullying-related suicides in the district.

"They were little terrorists," Janis Mohat, whose son Eric

shot himself in 2007, said on "Today." "They flicked his

ear, they pushed him into lockers, they called him gay,

fag. The bullies went up to him and said, 'Why don't you

go home and shoot yourself? It's not like anyone

would care.'"

The Associated Press reported in detail Friday about the

deaths of four Mentor High School students between 2006

and 2008. Three were suicides, one an overdose of a

ntidepressants. All four students had been bullied.

The district would not comment for the story.

Mentor Superintendent Jacqueline Hoynes said in a

statement posted on the district's website over the

weekend that the strategy to combat bullying includes

having elementary school students pledge to stand

up to bullies and report them to adults.

"Our anti-bullying programs have been in place before

the state mandated anti-bullying programs and policies

," the statement said.

Anti-bullying committees were set up in each school

building to identify the causes and deal with potential

victims, bystanders and adults, the statement said.

"Throughout the schools, the seriousness of bullying is

highlighted in class meetings, rules-reviews, parent

nights, motivational speakers, and in visible reminders

up and down the hallways," the statement said.

Myers said the district had seemed to take a hands-off

approach to bullying.

"They can have assemblies and all sorts of lessons that

they teach the kids, but probably the most important part

is what the teachers and administrators are doing when

they see this sort of thing happening," Myers said.

Two families are suing the suburban Cleveland district, claiming

their children were bullied to death and the school did nothing

to stop it. Hoynes said in the statement she had been advised

by the school attorney to remain silent on the lawsuits.

"But, I want to reassure the Mentor students, families, and staff

we will continue to address the mental health needs of our

students and anti-bullying initiatives in our schools," her statement said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

[My belief, teachers who fail to intervene when a child is being

vicitimized is just as guilty as the victimzer. There is no excuse.

Same goes for anybody else, fail to step in when someone is

being victimized? Your guilty of supporting a bully. You too need

to be charged with a felony. Aiding and abetting]

Monday by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to

renew a freeze on West Bank settlement construction in

exchange for recognizing Israel as a Jewish nation-state.

"If the Palestinian leadership will say unequivocally to its

people that it recognizes Israel as the homeland of the

Jewish people, I will be ready to convene my government

and request a further suspension," Netanyahu told parliament.

Netanyahu has been under heavy international pressure

to renew a just-expired slowdown on settlement construction.

The Palestinians have said they will walk away from

negotiations if the settlement curbs aren't extended.

Impasse
There was immediate speculation that the conditional offer

was unlikely to resolve the impasse over settlements,

which stalled peace talks just a month after they were

launched. Only moments after the proposal was revealed,

a spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas

said they had rejected it. Netanyahu's comments came

amid a spat over the Israeli government's approval of a

bill to require new citizens to pledge a loyalty oath to

a "Jewish and democratic" state.

In general, the Arab minority — making up one in five

Israelis — view the oath as a provocation aimed at further

making them second-class citizens in a country where

they already feel discriminated against. Netanyahu said

the bill, which must still be voted on by parliament,

reflected the essence of Israel at a time when many

are trying to blur the connection between the Jewish

people and their homeland.

"The state of Israel is the national state of the Jewish

people and is a democratic state in which all its

citizens — Jews and non-Jews — enjoy full equal

rights," he said. "Whoever wants to join us, has

to recognize us."

Reuters and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

[I believe it is time to remove the prime minister

of Israel out of office. Start off by voting in person

that has passion for serving country.

As in serving fellow citizens.

Netanyahu has been prime minister for how

long now? Too long. He hasn't lifted a finger to

serve Jewish people. It is apparent, he is

only interested in serving himself. By the

looks of things, he has never been service

oriented. If he was he would have accomplished

something by now.

Why make either side suffer when the simple

solution to the problem is replace what ills.

Palestinian prime minister can't negotiate with

someone who has no interest in negotiating.

I mean give the man a break,

least he's trying.

Israel prime minister can't expect Palestine to

just give in to his wishes, not after the minster

nearly toppled Palestine!

What you want to bet Palestine and new Israel

prime minister get along fairly well? Place a person

who has compassion into the mix, and it will result in;

a done deal. Negotiating for peace agreement be a cake walk.]

president and would have preferred a younger person to

become the country's first black ruler, according to a new book.

Mandela says in the book "Conversations with Myself,"

due to be launched Tuesday, that he only accepted after

senior leaders of the African National Congress put

pressure on him.

"My installation as the first democratically elected

President of the Republic of South Africa was imposed

on me much against my own advice," Mandela said.

The book, compiled by the Nelson Mandela Foundation

from personal letters, interviews and an unpublished

sequel to his autobiography, contains a foreword by

U.S. President Barack Obama.

Mandela, 92, said he would have preferred to serve the

new South African state without holding any position in

the ANC or government. After being put on the carpet by

one of the ANC's leaders, he changed his mind, but made

clear that he would serve only one five-year term.

Mandela's release on February 11, 1990, after 27 years in

apartheid-era jails, set in motion the country's transformation

to democracy, which culminated in historic all-race elections

in 1994 and his inauguration as the country's first black leader.