Where are we protesting at?

Hell is on its way

So, who's for secession?

Put me in the secession lot.

Remember why America seceded from the British Crown in the first place? We were an imperial asset to a bunch of plutocrats and multinational corporations holding strong influence over a largely corrupt central government thousands of miles away. Our resources were being extracted for profit. Our rights were being trampled.

Have a familiar ring?

After four more years, the ringing of this historic echo will be unbearable. A renewed drumbeat toward an independent Cascadia starts today. :)

<h1></h1>

State Rep. Jeff Krufft, 'the filling in Liars Larson today,' (which might arguably violate Oregon election statute, depending on interpretation in election law of "campaign financing" to include broadcast contributions-in-kind for single-issue advocacy communications when the advocated object is not a candidate but is a party and partisanship; and that aside for now), had this to say speaking to his own caricature of citizens accusing Bush of crimes: "You protesters should shut up. Get over it. Now roll up your sleeves and do something to contribute to society for a change. Grow up. Be responsible and go home."

Uh, Mr. Sleazy Expensive Microphone Propaganda Kripfft, my home is where you're standing. I allowed as that it was your home, too. Why do you feel justified to start slander and ridicule, then amplify and transmit such imbalanced deranged thoughts in the purpose and to the point of destroying this home, this community, this land unto scorched earth with your searing hatred of people who are different and know sights from before you were born, and sights beyond your periphery, and sights after you ended being born and opening your eyes, and closed them; why do you seek to tear us away and tear us apart and destroy this home, our home, regardless what is your home; why, elected representative, do you banish our people, first to thought confinement and then to remove -- "away," "to home"? Why, Mr. Thousand Dollar Microphone, do you shout us protesters away? This IS our home. Your clod-hob boots are standing on it. Please take them off and be civil, decent, orderly and peaceful, stop inciting public riot and conflict, or you have to leave. This is our home. A president has been inaugurated here who has committed heinous crimes, or is mentally incompetent to understand that he has, and we protest. The blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity are at mortal risk in the presence of this cretin's continued abuse of power. And you, sir, celebrity in your own mind, are not broadcasting in the public interest. You are broadcasting in your private interest. You are violating broadcasting license and you are violating your oath and honor in the Oregon House. The House our home. (Defecation entertainment in it -- watching you piss on the public interest -- is not entertaining, and 'politics' and 'self-government' are not dirty words, regardless of a comic-relief Steve Schopp-like caller insisting that everyone and their media uncle should investigate the Tualatin metropolitan ambulance rescue service contract proposal preliminary motion under discussion BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.)

Also today, The Oregonian's 'Great Republican' reputation 'of the West,' sets its bearing in the compass about inaugurating an indictable criminal, by a standard of vision which sees "The difference (between complying with tradition or protesting the passing perversion) is often about staying flexible and keeping lines open."

However, pilots around the world, who have sailed around the world, say there's a salty captain's wisdom in adding the weathersense to tell when you are lashed to a rock outcrop, with the tide running and coming on a'gale, and order 'Cutlass the lines,' 'bring 'er about, skuppers,' 'into the teeth of it, me hearties,' and leave the stonewall bluff take its pounding.

<h1></h1>

The early edition of the Oregonian had a headline summary: something about America bringing freedom to the darkest corners of the world?

What -- more Iraqs?

What kind of megalomoniacal delusions is he going to spend our tax dollars and soldiers' lives on next?

Randy wrote what was on my mind also. I think Bush equates freedom with rampant capitalism -- in other words, the freedom of people with vast amounts of wealth and power to obtain more wealth and power at the expense of the rest of us, future generations, and the environment. The U.S. as a whole is looking like a pretty dark corner to me right now, but Oregon seems a little less dark thanks to all of you progressives out there. I'll support local groups and local politicians who are working to make Oregon a shining example despite the efforts of the Bushies.

Since the US didn't "found and finance" or in any way direct the right wing death squads (or the left wing ones), it would hardly be a "revival."

World Fears Bu$h:

George Bush was sworn in as president of the United States for a second term today in a lavish Washington ceremony, amid mounting international concern that his new administration will make the world a more dangerous place. <span style="font-weight:bold;"> A poll of 21 countries published yesterday - reflecting opinion in Africa, Latin America, North America, Asia and Europe - showed that a clear majority have grave fears about the next four years.

Fifty-eight per cent of the 22,000 who took part in the poll, commissioned by the BBC World Service, said they expected Mr Bush to have a negative impact on peace and security, compared with only 26% who considered him a positive force.</span>

The survey also indicated for the first time that dislike of Mr Bush is translating into a dislike of Americans in general.

But yesterday's poll pointed to the deep suspicion of Mr Bush that exists across the world. It found that the bulk of people in 18 of the 21 countries surveyed had negative feelings towards the president.

Traditional US allies in western Europe were among those expressing the most negative feelings about the re-election.

In Britain, 64% of those polled said they disagreed with the proposition that the US would have a mainly positive impact on the world. The figures were even higher in France (75%) and Germany (77%).

One of the organisers of the poll, Steven Kull, the director of the Programme on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, said: "This is quite a grim picture for the US."

Another of the organisers, Doug Miller, president of the polling firm GlobeScan, said he had been monitoring trends since the start of 2003 and the figure for those who disagreed that the US was having a mainly positive impact on the world had risen from 46% then to 49% last year, and had now jumped to 58%.

"Our research makes very clear that the re-election of President Bush has further isolated America from the world," he said. "It also supports the view of some Americans that unless his administration changes its approach to world affairs in its second term, it will continue to erode America's good name, and hence its ability to effectively influence world affairs."

Asked how Mr Bush's re-election had affected their feelings towards Americans, 72% of those polled in Turkey said it made them feel worse about Americans, 65% in France, 59% in Brazil and 56% in Germany.

There was also overwhelming opposition to sending troops to Iraq, even among close allies such as Britain.

"Fully one in four British citizens say the Bush re-election has made them more opposed to sending troops to Iraq, resulting in a total of 63% now opposed," Mr Miller said.

<span style="font-style:italic;"></span>

<h1></h1>

The US designed, funded, financed, and directed every death squad, right or left, since the CIA was born. Which means you, and me, paid for it, and are guilty. Without even going to the Newsweek link we all can expect that if it says death squads, that means us.

I'm saying the proof that the CIA did it when all evidence is shredded, is that without the CIA none of it would have happened. It is 'if and only if' logic, which is when both the forward and reverse logic is equally true.

And ignorance of our guilt -- your guilt, my guilt -- ignorance is not innocence. It is guilty ignorance.

<h2>Read here. Meanwhile, CIA covert operations subverted domestic journalism, planted false information in foreign newspapers, and covertly fed large amounts of money to members of the Christian Democratic Party in Italy, to King Hussein of Jordan, and to clients in Greece, West Germany, Egypt, Sudan, Suriname, Mauritius, the Philippines, Iran, Ecuador, and Chile. Clandestine agents devoted themselves to such tasks as depressing the global prices of agricultural products in order to damage uncooperative Third World countries, and sponsoring guerrilla wars or miscellaneous insurgencies in places as diverse as the Ukraine, Poland, Albania, Hungary, Indonesia, China, Tibet, Oman, Malaysia, Iraq, the Dominican Republic, Venezuela, North Korea, Bolivia, Thailand, Haiti, Guatemala, Cuba, Greece, Turkey, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Angola, and Nicaragua, to name only a few of those on the public record. All this was justified by the Cold War, and no one beyond a very small group inside the government knew anything about it.</h2>

And read here, Abolish the CIA!, by Chalmers Johnson

Review of: Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to 10 September 2001, by Steve Coll, New York: Penguin, 2004, 695 pp.

Steve Coll ends his important book on Afghanistan by quoting Afghan President Hamid Karzai: "What an unlucky country." Americans might find this a convenient way to ignore what their government did in Afghanistan between 1979 and the present, but luck had nothing to do with it. Brutal, incompetent, secret operations of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, frequently manipulated by the military intelligence agencies of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, caused the catastrophic devastation of this poor country [...] "Blowback" does not refer simply to reactions to historical events but more specifically to reactions to operations carried out by the U.S. government that are kept secret from the American public and from most of their representatives in Congress. This means that when civilians become victims of a retaliatory strike, they are at first unable to put it in context or to understand the sequence of events that led up to it. Even though the American people may not know what has been done in their name, those on the receiving end certainly do: they include the people of Iran (1953), Guatemala (1954), Cuba (1959 to the present), Congo (1960), Brazil (1964), Indonesia (1965), Vietnam (1961-73), Laos (1961-73), Cambodia (1969-73), Greece (1967-73), Chile (1973), Afghanistan (1979 to the present), El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua (1980s), and Iraq (1991 to the present). Not surprisingly, sometimes these victims try to get even. There is a direct line between the attacks on September 11, 2001 -- the most significant instance of blowback in the history of the CIA -- and the events of 1979. In that year, revolutionaries threw both the Shah and the Americans out of Iran, and the CIA, with full presidential authority, began its largest ever clandestine operation: the secret arming of Afghan freedom fighters to wage a proxy war against the Soviet Union, which involved the recruitment and training of militants from all over the Islamic world. [...] "You're a young man; here's your bag of money, go raise hell. Don't fuck it up, just go out there and kill Soviets." These orders came from a most peculiar American. William Casey, the CIA's director from January 1981 to January 1987, was a Catholic Knight of Malta educated by Jesuits. Statues of the Virgin Mary filled his mansion, called "Maryknoll," on Long Island. He attended mass daily and urged Christianity on anyone who asked his advice. Once settled as CIA director under Reagan, he began to funnel covert action funds through the Catholic Church to anti-Communists in Poland and Central America, sometimes in violation of American law. He believed fervently that by increasing the Catholic Church's reach and power he could contain Communism's advance, or reverse it. From Casey's convictions grew the most important U.S. foreign policies of the 1980s -- support for an international anti-Soviet crusade in Afghanistan and sponsorship of state terrorism in Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala. Casey knew next to nothing about Islamic fundamentalism or the grievances of Middle Eastern nations against Western imperialism [...] I believe the CIA has outlived any Cold War justification it once might have had and should simply be abolished.

Chalmers Johnson's latest books are Blowback (Metropolitan, 2000) and The Sorrows of Empire (Metropolitan, 2004), the first two volumes in a trilogy on American imperial policies. The final volume is now being written. From1967 to 1973, Johnson served as a consultant to the CIA's Office of National Estimates.

Copyright C2004 Chalmers Johnson

<hr/>

And it's true that "revival" is not the word to apply to a process that has never ended, and only gets 'rediscovered' during some intervals. It is also true that the people who have actually been there -- our agents -- say those death squads are our accomplishments, regardless which death squads "those" is referring to.

<h1></h1>

What a shame that those paradises of peace, harmony and cooperation were ruined by the CIA. And I guess the Afghanis were getting even for the U.S.'s helping them to defeat Soviet invaders.

I get it: The key to all mysteries is, whatever goes wrong, it's the U.S.'s fault.

I happen to know someone personally who was there (El Salvador), and in a position sufficiently senior and engaged to know what resources were directed how. I'll take the word of someone who's veracity I can gauge directly, rather than through anonymous witnesses cited by dedicated blame-America-firsters or the usual warmed over communist-inspired mythology.

Enjoy, "The Motorcycle Diaries," it will suit your preference for fantasy with the right prejudices. The CIA gets an honorable mention in the film.

I went downtown about 5:15 p.m. It took about 45 minutes to get there from Northwest Portland because traffic was so backed up. Based on what I saw, there were between 2,000 to 3,000 protesters at different intersections. Probably a cop for every dozen protesters. Later, I encountered some of the people going to inauguration parties at the Hilton and Marriott. The juxtaposition was stark. Protesters: Grungy, largely young, left on bikes and buses. Celebrators: Semi-formal or formal attire, mainly middle-aged, had valets park their BMWs and SUVs. The effect was a reminder of who runs America and who doesn't. It is going to be a long four years.

Grungy young protesters on bikes don't run the nation. Oh, the injustice! Oh, the humanity!

just a thought...

Those who do not move, do not notice their chains.

~Rosa Luxemburg

Whoa. Deep, Carol.

Those who resort to facile quotation may not have something genuinely insightful of their own to say.

Welcome to Portland.

Please don't feed the protestors.

<h1></h1>

Whoa. Deep, PanchoPdx.

Who reverts to vulgarized cliche may not have one virily true their own. (Besides, peanut tosses are parrot food; protesters eat vermin.)

What Anthony said. After all, he turned in a solution for one exercise problem: "I happen to know someone personally who was there (El Salvador), and in a position ... to know" (the answer).

To consider: reactions to operations carried out by the U.S. government that are kept secret from the American public - Iran (1953) - Guatemala (1954) - Cuba (1959 to the present) - Congo (1960) - Brazil (1964) - Indonesia (1965) - Vietnam (1961-73) - Laos (1961-73) - Cambodia (1969-73) - Greece (1967-73) - Chile (1973) - Afghanistan (1979 to the present) - El Salvador - dismissed, by Anthony knowing someone knowing its hearsay - Guatemala and Nicaragua (1980s) - and Iraq (1991 to the present),

and the essay challenge questions in: covert operations, guerrilla wars or miscellaneous insurgencies in - Italy - Jordan - Greece - West Germany - Egypt - Sudan - Suriname - Mauritius - the Philippines - Iran - Ecuador - Chile - Ukraine - Poland - Albania - Hungary - Indonesia - China - Tibet - Oman - Malaysia - Iraq - the Dominican Republic - Venezuela - North Korea - Bolivia - Thailand - Haiti - Guatemala - Cuba - Turkey - Vietnam - Afghanistan - Angola - and Nicaragua to name only a few of those on the public record ...(all) justified by the Cold War,

and let alone domestic harms: - Gary Powers U-2 loss of face - missed missile intelligence crisis - JFK assassination - MLK assassination - RFK assassination - manufacture of LSD - manufacture of synthesized mescaline - import of opium, heroin, cocaine - distillation and import of crack cocaine - Peletier assassination - expropriation and sale of missiles for hostages in Iran - coercion and corruption of NSC principal Oliver North, and U.S.Marines - contempt of law and subversion under the Boland Amendment - missed USSR intelligence disunion - institutionalized false communist threat assessment - missed alien intelligence insurrection - unsecured anthrax loss - suborned intelligence before U.S. joint military command - nonprosecutorial betrayal of career agent(s)

all in which to find pattern and logic to sustain an argument in the negative as to, by Chalmers Johnson, consultant to the CIA's Office of National Estimates, 1967 to 1973, proposed: the CIA has outlived any Cold War justification it once might have had and should simply be abolished.

The key to escape despotic power, corrupted absolutely, is truth which only sets you free. Some rings don't have that key.

As expressed, in your fawning slavishness to the prevalent anti-democracy propaganda of administration withal, where a patriot is someone willing to defend his country against its government, you don't make muster. Stand and deliver, or be contemned. And eaten.

<h1></h1>

Anthony:

"I happen to know someone personally who was there (El Salvador), and in a position sufficiently senior and engaged to know what resources were directed how."

Now there's a reason to suspend critical thinking and independent analysis.

Randy,

Critical thinking and independent analysis has led me to discover that the vast majority of discussion about Latin America is seriously distorted.

In this particular case I have access to a source with extremely relevant experience whose veracity, as I say, I can make a judgement about. I can't say that about Hersch's sources, or any of the other testimony I've come across.

My assessment may indeed depend on the quality of my judgement, but such a source trumps just about any I could discover (and have) via other means.

Frankly, I don't see on what grounds of "critical analysis" you would find such a source trivial.

Anthony:

"Frankly, I don't see on what grounds of "critical analysis" you would find such a source trivial."

Because it is (1) one source that you will not identify, (2) whose veracity you have made a personal assessment about and (3)you conclude that whatever he/she says must be true (for your own private reasons).

At least Hersh is a name out there, who's reasoning and conclusions are open to verification by those who might question it.

You are a cyber ghost, relying on secret information gleaned from unnamed sources to make your point. And your point is supposed to persuade me?

Randy,

You do have a point about whether what I've said is sufficient for you to draw conclusions about the matter in general.

However, my response was to your remarks about my supposed lack of "critical thinking and independent analysis." If you re-read my last post, you'll see that I worded it with due care as a defense not of the overall credibility of my claim, but of the quality of my analysis on the subject, assuming that what I say is true.

Thus, you may suspect I'm delusional or a liar, but you don't have sufficient grounds to effectively critique my analysis -- precisely because what I shared was limited. I continue to insist on my point: for my purposes, my personal knowledge of a person who was there and in a position to know is more convincing than the report of a consistently anti-American commentator whose source is a mystery to me, and who, moreover, even if his credentials are accurately described by Hersch, may not have the level of authority that my source has. And in any case I cannot take any further action to form an opinion of his motives and veracity, as I can with a source of my personal acquaintance.

Turnabout being fair play, I feel at liberty to point out that if your critical analysis had been sharper, you'd have made a more accurate reading of my post.

To return to your legitimate point, I didn't name that person because he has talked to me about these matters in confidence. I will ask him whether he would mind being mentioned, and perhaps even giving you an answer himself.

I will say, since he has made this public elsewhere, that he served in the capacity of military advisor to the Salvadoran Armed Forces and also attache to the U.S. Embassy, El Salvador. I know more that would establish his authority much more powerfully, but don't feel at liberty to speak about that without his consent.

Regarding my status as cyberghost, my name is Anthony O'Donnell, and my e-mail is attached to this post, as it has for all my posts. I'll provide you my address too if you like, and even meet you for a beer to discuss how I've formed my opinions about the gross bias that characterizes most received wisdom on the topic of the United States' relationship with Latin America. We can have the conversation in Spanish, if you like.

Now you know my full name as well as Hersch's. You and I have had more personal contact than you have had with Hersch, I suspect. And now you have more specific information about my source than Hersch gave you about his.

Of course I don't expect you accept my claims uncritically, and I do appreciate your intelligent skepticism. I just read something here that I believe to be false -- and not for trivial reasons, whether you believe it or not -- and wanted a contrary voice to be heard on the subject.

<h2>King Bush scares the hell out of me. Aside from the cia's blunders and insidious behavior since it s inception, we must look at the larger picture. That the cia is just the arm of the beast that does the dirty work. We must look behind its actions to see why it does what it does and where its orders come from. Why has it had a hand in all of this intrigue and meddling in the world? Money. that's the root of it all. Greed disguised as political ideology and fed to the citizens as in the interest of their own security, is still greed, plain and simple. These actions are all designed to gain acsess to natural resources, and control markets. Have you noticed that many places in the world who have and are having their people brutalized by despots and civil wars, rebellions of many names, are ignored by us if they don't have any business or military value? Have you noticed we have militry outposts and bases in 139 countries? for what? make it safe for business. Now the scary part. there is talk of Iran. the poking of the bees nest has begun. Just remember, the bees will defend their nest. Iran is nothing like Iraq. George and cronies have no idea what they are getting themselves (and us) into. do they really think that an ancient culture and society will just lay down and die, after surviving for literally thousands of years? I the world is pissed off at us now , wait until then. Those fools think they can go around the world and inflict their ideology on other peoples and cultures, that it is akin to the concept of (manifest destiny) that the american pioneers used as justification to destroy the native american culture and people. This conservative, christian, arrogant, ideology, smacks of Europe's imperial expansionism of the past. bush and friends seriously think they have a mandate from God to spread "democracy" and "freedom" weather the people want it or not. When are the American people going to get their head out of their ass, and see whats going on? Not as long as we have it as good as we do. Beware, the rest of the world may decide they've had enough of us one day.</h2>