The Gravol is doing the trick – no more vomiting. It’s been the predominant feature of my day. Not sure whether I have the flu, ate something bad, or because my place is 40 degrees (despite the fact there are three fans on) and I have heat stroke.

It’s a toss up.

It’s strange, the things that I think about when I’m puking. Being a professional puker helps, I suppose, allowing you to think about something other than the fact that your throat and mouth are on fire. For example, while puking a few hours ago I was thinking about Pakistan’s coalition government’s plan to impeach Musharraf, whether he’ll dissolve Parliament if they attempt it, how the Pakistani military establishment might come into play, and how interesting the timing is given everything that has come to light of late regarding the ISI, not to mention Yousuf Raza Gilani’s recent visit to the US.

Flush toilet. Brush teeth. Breathe heavily. Wipe sweat from forehead. Throw cold water on my face.

I puked almost every day for a year once. Consumed only three things during most of it – health bars, food supplement drinks, and apples.

Puked them up too.

Me and Jeff Tweedy have that in common.

Ivins committed suicide last week, which is rather convenient with regards to the Justice Department’s investigation. There are indications that Ivins suffered from depression, and I am sure that his mental state is something that will be scrutinized in the weeks ahead, but there is an aspect to this affair that should not be overlooked.

In 2001, Ivins was working in a government capacity in conjunction with the BioPort biopharmaceutical company on the only government licensed Anthrax vaccine. That summer, the FDA blocked resuming production of it. Not surprisingly, following the Anthrax scare, the FDA reversed its decision. This reversal eventually led to the licensing of the patent for further development to California based VaxGen, who would sell their “Anthrax Vaccine Program and Related Assets and Technology” to Emergent BioSolutions Inc. in May of this year. Of course, VaxGen’s decision to do so was based on the fact that in late 2006 the US Department of Health and Human Services withdrew its $877 million dollar contract with the company. According to VaxGen’s website, dated May 5th of this year…

“VaxGen, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: VXGN.OB), a biopharmaceutical company, announced today it has completed the sale of all assets and rights related to its recombinant protective antigen (rPA) anthrax vaccine product candidate and related technology to Emergent BioSolutions, Inc. Under the terms of the transaction, Emergent BioSolutions paid VaxGen $2 million upon execution of the definitive agreement and may be obligated to pay up to an additional $8 million in milestone payments, plus specified percentages of future net sales.”

USAMRIID put out the following press release seven days later…

“An anthrax vaccine discovered and initially developed by the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) has been acquired by a Maryland-based firm for advanced development that could lead to eventual licensure of the product by the Food and Drug Administration.

According to company officials, Emergent BioSolutions Inc. has acquired the next generation anthrax vaccine, as well as the technology on which it is based. This vaccine candidate was patented by USAMRIID and previously licensed to a company called VaxGen, which had pursued advanced development since 2002 under a contract from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The vaccine uses recombinant protective antigen, or rPA, a protein secreted by the anthrax bacterium, Bacillus anthracis. This protein induces the body’s immune system to produce antibodies against the bacteria’s toxins. In several nonhuman primate studies conducted at USAMRIID, rPA has demonstrated the ability to induce a high level of protection against inhalational anthrax—the type most likely to occur following a bioterrorist event.”

In December of 2006, Harper’s Ken Silverstein wrote the following…

“The Bush Administration’s $5.6 billion “Project BioShield,” launched after 9/11 to counter the threat of bioterrorism attacks, has turned into a massive yet largely unnoticed boondoggle. Exhibit A: a sole-supplier contract, worth up to $877.5 million, that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) awarded to California-based VaxGen Inc. for the development of an anthrax vaccine. The fate of the contract, which VaxGen has made a mess of, will be determined next Monday when HHS decides whether to cancel the deal or to give the firm an early, taxpayer-financed Christmas present.

VaxGen received the anthrax-vaccine contract two years ago, in spite of the fact that the decade-old firm had produced no marketable products, had demonstrated disturbing ethical failures in the area of human-subject drug testing, and had been delisted by Nasdaq because of accounting irregularities. An earlier, similarly hyped-up effort to develop an AIDS vaccine—for which the company received millions from the National Institutes for Health—ended in total failure and led to a number of lawsuits by investors who charged that VaxGen had fraudulently hyped the vaccine’s prospects for success.

VaxGen’s competitors suspected that the firm, in winning the anthrax contract, may have received a helping hand from Dr. Phil Russell, formerly a top contracting official at HHS who was involved in the BioShield project. Forbes describes Russell as a “long time acquaintance” of VaxGen CEO Lance Gordon; Russell, for his part, has denied that he helped out VaxGen.

Whatever the reasons for picking VaxGen, the choice has proved a disaster. VaxGen pledged to produce 75 million doses of the vaccine, with deliveries slated to begin early in 2006. But late last year, the company announced that unforseen “product refinements” would force it to postpone delivery of its vaccine until late 2006. Further problems ensued, and now the earliest delivery date would be late 2008 or 2009.

HHS has repeatedly ignored these failings and bailed out VaxGen. Last May, the agency unilaterally modified its contract with the company, extending various deadlines (such as the delivery date). Early last month, the Food and Drug Administration—saying it had doubts about the vaccine’s reliability—blocked VaxGen from proceeding with its plans to test the product on humans. That led HHS to send VaxGen a “cure” notice, explaining that it might be forced to cancel the contract, which bound the company to begin testing on humans by November 13. That date came and went, but the contract, instead of being terminated, was extended. The company now has until December 18 to address the FDA’s concerns and begin testing.”

So where does this all lead? Right back to the beginning. Because if you visit bioport.com and emergentbiosolutions.com they both lead to the same website.

It is altogether proper that we fear nuclear weapons. While one has not been used in 63 years – 63 years ago on this very day, in fact - the horror and devastation wrought by the two employed in the summer of 1945 was enough to usher in an age of unprecedented fear and paranoia. In the wake of that fear and paranoia a nuclear arms race would commence that would help promote a theory that to maintain nuclear détente the production of weapons was required to ensure that a global balance was maintained – along with all of the military hardware and support mechanisms required to maintain it. And so here we find ourselves, over six decades later, with the world’s foremost nuclear powers attempting to safeguard their nuclear superiority, concerned that the theory that they put into practice over a half century ago will be employed by fledgling nuclear powers.

It is also altogether proper that we fear propagandized history, even though risks are involved when the presentation of information that challenges overwhelmingly popular historical myths is presented. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were, according to popular doctrine, military necessities. According to your average history book, the bombs were dropped to force Japan into unconditionally surrendering so that a conventional invasion of Japan could be avoided. It has long been contended that were the United States to have invaded Japan that millions of Americans would have been lost in the endeavor. But what is commonly overlooked is the fact that conventional bombing had already devastated much of Japan, so much so that its infrastructure was in utter ruins.

John Pilger of The Guardian put it best today…

“The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a criminal act on an epic scale. It was premeditated mass murder that unleashed a weapon of intrinsic criminality. For this reason its apologists have sought refuge in the mythology of the ultimate “good war”, whose “ethical bath”, as Richard Drayton called it, has allowed the west not only to expiate its bloody imperial past but to promote 60 years of rapacious war, always beneath the shadow of The Bomb.

The most enduring lie is that the atomic bomb was dropped to end the war in the Pacific and save lives. “Even without the atomic bombing attacks,” concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, “air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that … Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.”

The National Archives in Washington contain US government documents that chart Japanese peace overtures as early as 1943. None was pursued. A cable sent on May 5, 1945 by the German ambassador in Tokyo and intercepted by the US dispels any doubt that the Japanese were desperate to sue for peace, including “capitulation even if the terms were hard”. Instead, the US secretary of war, Henry Stimson, told President Truman he was “fearful” that the US air force would have Japan so “bombed out” that the new weapon would not be able “to show its strength”. He later admitted that “no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender merely in order not to have to use the bomb”. His foreign policy colleagues were eager “to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip”. General Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan Project that made the bomb, testified: “There was never any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and that the project was conducted on that basis.” The day after Hiroshima was obliterated, President Truman voiced his satisfaction with the “overwhelming success” of “the experiment”.

Information such as this is commonly scoffed at, even though it is based on factual historical evidence. The reality is that an invasion of Japan would never have needed to occur, nor would the Japanese have ‘fought to the last’, a belief that has been promoted as fact since before the war’s conclusion. Of course, the majority of Westerners are not exposed to the testimonials of those Japanese civilians and military commanders that would, following the war, claim such accusations baseless. Being that they contradict the mythology that has been instilled in young minds since the 50’s, the inclusion of the ‘other side of the story’ has been conveniently removed from the pages of rudimentary academia for decades.

As Pilger also points out, the groundwork of misrepresentation began almost immediately following the employment of the bombs…

“In the immediate aftermath of the bomb, the allied occupation authorities banned all mention of radiation poisoning and insisted that people had been killed or injured only by the bomb’s blast. It was the first big lie. “No radioactivity in Hiroshima ruin” said the front page of the New York Times, a classic of disinformation and journalistic abdication, which the Australian reporter Wilfred Burchett put right with his scoop of the century. “I write this as a warning to the world,” reported Burchett in the Daily Express, having reached Hiroshima after a perilous journey, the first correspondent to dare. He described hospital wards filled with people with no visible injuries but who were dying from what he called “an atomic plague”. For telling this truth, his press accreditation was withdrawn, he was pilloried and smeared - and vindicated.”

When I was a child we were made to practice drills in the event of a nuclear attack. We were told to get under our desks and cover our heads with our hands. It was utterly pointless, of course, being that were we attacked our school would probably have been hit by a rolling shockwave that would have ripped the entire structure from its foundation. Hurling through the air with tons of concrete and other debris, we would eventually succumb to being crushed by something if the air in our lungs hadn’t already been vacuumed out.

They commonly held such drills on what used to be known as ‘hot dog days’ - and did so for obvious reasons. The very same, in fact, that prompted the New York Times to declare that there was no radioactivity in the ruins of Hiroshima.

Fleischer served as the first press secretary (followed by Scott McClellan the apologist, the late Tony Snow I won’t speak ill of the dead, and a glorious little airhead named Dana Perino) in the Bush Administration. An absolutely master of using the “big lie” to tow the party line, just watching Fleischer on TV made you want to take a shower… Adolf Hitler defined the “big lie” as one so “colossal” that no one would believe that someone “could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously”.

Fleischer NAILED it…

Or as the Daily Show’s John Stewart said, “Fleischer has earned a reputation as an evasive mouthpiece for the president, who stays on message using ambiguous half-truths or, as they’re known at the Bush White House, freedom lies.”

Upon leaving the White House in July 2003, Fleischer chose to form Ari Fleischer Sports Communications… thereby bringing his considerable proficiency of dodging questions, espousing naked fallacies, outright lying and rampant doublespeak into the private sector… Fleischer latest foray into media manipulation has landed him smack dab into the middle of the Green Bay Packers-Brett Favre flap… So desperate are the Packers that they saw fit to employ Fleischer’s significant expertise at argumentum ex stercore tauri (commonly known as bullshit) to put a positive spin on this Shakespearean tragedy.

The Packers have kicked their most legendary player (let’s be honest, Favre is becoming a bit of a diva… retired, unretired…) out the door for an unproven third year quarterback named Aaron Rodgers… Nothing against Rodgers, but I always thought the end game was to win, and if the Packers brass actually thinks that Rodgers gives them a better chance at winning games than Favre, I’ve got some bridges in Minnesota to sell them… But that is Ari’s job, right?

Yup, it’s a mess, and the Packers are savvy enough to realize that only a first class media shill like Fleischer can pull them out of the muck of this public relations morass… or can he?

For your reading pleasure, here is some text from Fleischer’s own website… describing his “services”… along with some pithy comments courtesy of yours truly (in italics)…

RESULTS-DRIVEN PRESS MANAGEMENT Ari Fleischer Sports Communications offers world-class media management for today’s high-profile world. Founded by Ari Fleischer, former White House Press Secretary, our unique media training and consultancy company brings to the world of sports the lessons of how to successfully handle the toughest situations with the most aggressive reporters.
We will teach you the top 25 sports clichés of all time, how to repeat them ad nauseum, and if all else fails, just mumble “no comment” and saunter off.

No one faces tougher coverage than sports figures — except for Presidents and top government officials. Ari Fleischer Sports Communications, with its deep expertise in both sports and communications — can help you successfully deal with the media.
By deal with the media we mean NOT deal with the media.

COMPREHENSIVE MEDIA STRATEGIES We identify and help fix problems. We sharpen messages and improve images. We help those who are good at working with the press become even better. Athletes, coaches, executives, teams and leagues all can benefit from our training and advice.
Once you hire us your athletes will be able to pass a polygraph test with battery cables attached to their testicles, while singing the national anthem as they sign autographs for children in the cancer ward…

SERVING YOU ON AND OFF THE FIELD Since leaving the White House, Ari Fleischer has worked with some of the most established people and organizations in sports. Clients include Major League Baseball, Steroids? What steroids? the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour, The Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association, as well as several other leading sports figures. Let us help you gain control over the way you deliver your message with comprehensive instruction for each point of contact with the media. We’ll provide you with the help you need most, from year-round advisory services and specialized consultation, to classes, workshops, and one-time training sessions for individuals, groups of players or entire teams.
We’ll teach you how to obfuscate, perjure, fib, deceive, bluff, mislead, exaggerate, contradict, betray, omit, demonize, argue ad hominem, use demagoguery, spin yarns, bamboozle, convey bald faced lies, tell tall tales, employ sophism and straw man arguments, spew propaganda, plant falsehoods, and generally be economical with the truth… And when none of that works, you can always claim you were misquoted, retract your statement or deny, deny, deny…

Whether you are on the field or in the front office, you have access to a wide range of specialized media services tailored to your specific requirements, including:
MEDIA TRAINING: CONTENT/DELIVERY/CONTROL
Pre-interview preparation
Pre- and post-game interviews
Feature interviews and stories
Response and evaluation
We’ll train you how to use the Liar Paradox to your every advantage: “The next sentence is false. The previous sentence is true.”

IMAGE MANAGEMENT
On-air etiquette
Interaction with co-host/anchors during interviews/tapings
Body language/mannerisms
Overall relationships with the media
We’ll teach you the concept of Game Theory. We will be able to mathematically capture behavior in strategic situations, in which an individual’s success in making choices depends assuming the worst of others, also known as “Fuck you, Buddy” a reference to the work of John Nash (A Beautiful Mind), who believed that all humans were inherently suspicious and selfish creatures that perpetually strategized against him. Ah yes… the genius of a paranoid schizophrenic’s brilliant delusions being used to develop Cold War nuclear strategy… only in America.

CRISIS MANAGEMENT
How to prevent a crisis before it gets to the media
How to deal with a crisis
How to avoid traps when faced with a crisis
When to talk/when not to talk
Wife beating? drunken driving? rape? murder? stabbing? shooting? assault with a deadly weapon? bar fight? eight children by eight women? We know things are tough out there for the modern athlete, but we’ve got all that covered… Just repeat the words I’m sorry, rehab, and Jesus ad infinitum, and all your transgressions will magically disappear, provided you play well of course…

SPECIFIC AREAS OF MEDIA
TV and radio
Newspapers and magazines
Panel participation
Spokesperson
Sponsorships
Public speaking and press conferences
You too can be a master demagogue… The early 20th century satirist and social critic H. L. Mencken once described a demagogue as “one who will preach doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.”

Who knew there was so much money in flagrant deception? Not bad for a guy who helped sell an illegal war, introduced the phrase “homicide bomber” into the political lexicon, lied about the 2000 election results, assisted in the outing of Valerie Plame, and assigned the blame for anthrax attacks onto Al Qaeda…

What a country…

Sure, someone wrote that for her, but you have to admit that her verbal execution was pretty flawless. Let’s be honest, in politics these days reading convincingly off of a telepromper constitutes 80% of your ability to lead. Hell, might as well be a hot chick in a bikini.

Oh, and this might be of a tiny bit of importance as well…

My main problem is that I have two options when it comes to matches - the match against Hull on September 27th or the match against Everton on October 18th. These are the only two home games being played while we’re in the country. As it stands now, I can’t begin planning the details of the trip until I know which match we’re going to attend, and it’s getting to the point where hotels and other arrangements have to be booked.

That said; if you’re in the UK, and have any knowledge of how I might be able to secure tickets, please contact me at matt@matthewgood.org. There is still a chance that my management and/or Roy might come through for me, but it’s getting down to crunch time and I have to start solidifying travel details.

Thanks in advance for any and all ideas.

It’s a good thing that we possess the technology to photograph and film animals in the wild. That way, when a species disappears, it has the ability to haunt us for eternity.

“In the immediate aftermath of the 2001 anthrax attacks, White House officials repeatedly pressed FBI Director Robert Mueller to prove it was a second-wave assault by Al Qaeda, but investigators ruled that out, the Daily News has learned.

After the Oct. 5, 2001, death from anthrax exposure of Sun photo editor Robert Stevens, Mueller was “beaten up” during President Bush’s morning intelligence briefings for not producing proof the killer spores were the handiwork of terrorist mastermind Osama Bin Laden, according to a former aide.

“They really wanted to blame somebody in the Middle East,” the retired senior FBI official told The News.

On October 15, 2001, President Bush said, “There may be some possible link” to Bin Laden, adding, “I wouldn’t put it past him.” Vice President Cheney also said Bin Laden’s henchmen were trained “how to deploy and use these kinds of substances, so you start to piece it all together.”

But by then the FBI already knew anthrax spilling out of letters addressed to media outlets and to a U.S. senator was a military strain of the bioweapon. “Very quickly [Fort Detrick, Md., experts] told us this was not something some guy in a cave could come up with,” the ex-FBI official said. “They couldn’t go from box cutters one week to weapons-grade anthrax the next.”

As it turns out, 62 year old Army Scientist Dr. Bruce Ivins had been the prime suspect in a year long FBI investigation into the 2001 Anthrax attacks prior to committing suicide last week before he was to discuss a plea deal with authorities. Colleagues that worked with Ivins at Fort Detrick, Maryland, who have also been placed under immense scrutiny by the FBI, have since claimed that Ivins was innocent and that the pressure brought to bear by the agency led Ivins to kill himself. But the FBI claims that it possesses DNA evidence that links Ivins with the attacks.

While Ivins suicide has garnered some media attention, the fact that the strain of Anthrax used in the attacks was a lethal US military grade bio-weapons strain of the toxin has not been significantly highlighted – meaning that your average American still believes that the Anthrax attacks that came in the wake of 9/11 were part of a greater and ongoing terrorist plot.

That said; two vital questions have to be asked.

1) Was Ivins actually responsible or is there something more to all of this that could be far more damaging to the country?

2) Why hasn’t the fact that the Anthrax that was used in the attacks been widely reported as a US military bio-weapons strain, thus negating the possibility that the letters and packages sent containing the lethal spores were part of a greater al-Qaeda operation?

Like it or not, this is a very serious issue with regards to the falsehoods propagated by the Bush Administration in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. Unfortunately, given the sensitive and classified nature of the military’s bio-weapons programs, the probability that an untainted investigation into the matter is unlikely.

More…

This article in yesterday’s Washington Post is also of interest.

I have tried to stay awake in an attempt to reverse the cycle but nothing works. Even if I go to sleep early, at say 9, I never sleep through the night, waking up at 3 or 4 and then having to go back to bed around 6 or 7 because I feel nauseous.

At the moment it seems to be a no win situation.

My only solace is that new seasons of Dexter and The Wire are due out, though I typically burn through them in a single sitting. After that it’s back to watching films that I’ve seen 20 or more times, and that’s saying something given that I own some 600 movies and television series.

Took the boys to the park earlier today though and let them run themselves ragged. It was nice out today for a change, no rain. Is it strange that I share my vitamin water with them? Passers by seemed to think so.

Solzhenitsyn died today. Nothing much to say. The man, his work; sketches and stills from another century. The last century.

That’s a strange thing to say - ‘the last century’. When I was young I used to think about what the new millennium would be like. I used to be freaked out by the fact that I’d be in my 30’s. I used to think that the slang of the decades would be lost. No more the 60’s or the 80’s. Just lame old 2K or whatever.

Mind you, there have been pleasant surprises. Back then the idea of being a musician never even entered my mind. Nor did the existence of the sort of technology that we now use on a daily basis. It was all wall-mounted phones and gardens of Formica. Street fights and hanging out in front of corner stores and at pools. Liquor in bags and cigarettes that were under two bucks back when there were still both two-dollar bills and singles. Hard times disguised as good times, and knowing where you stood when you walked out your front door.

Sometimes losing a little turns into losing a lot, even though it takes decades to realize it. Everything’s measured in nanoseconds now. I can feel the expedience of the age course through my veins as if they were fiber optic. And yet, somehow, I am slowing down.

Last September, after a handful of years without, my family adopted a new puppy, who has since grown into one of the most lovable little girls. Charley runs, plays, chews, smiles and charms at every chance she gets. I consider myself even luckier in that over the past two years, I’ve had an important hand in helping Matthew out with his canine companions, Benji and Casey, at every given opportunity. Much like the well-known African proverb, “it takes a village to raise a child.” Well, in this case, dogs.

A month ago, when I saw posters advertising the September 14th Paws For A Cause rally to raise funds for the British Columbia Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (BC SPCA), I instantly knew it was something I had to do. Within half an hour, I was signed up and ready to receive pledges. Knowing how passionate Matthew also is when it comes to dogs, I told him about the cause and it took no convincing to get him on board. Since then, we’ve rallied up the other dog lovers in Matt’s family and, in particular, the dogs. The SPCA Paws For A Cause is, after all, about the animals.

To those of you who have already lent your support either through encouraging words or direct donations, I thank you from the bottom of my heart. Every little bit helps, and it’s incredibly inspiring to see the feedback we’ve received in this regard. We’ve already raised over $3,000, all of which goes back to the animals.

After the police responded to calls from residents, the man threw the head into a police car, stole a police jeep, and tried to flee. A chase ensued, ending with the jeep crashing into a motorcycle on which two female doctors were riding. Both were badly hurt.

The man’s name, nor that of his victims, has yet been released.

Mark Twain once opined - “Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn’t”. Man did he hit the nail on the head.

On April 9th, 1865, Lee’s Army Of Northern Virginia, then in ruins and running West from St. Petersburg fighting a futile rear guard action, surrendered to Grant at Appomattox Court House. In the four years prior to that event, the Rebel Flag, which was never the official flag of the Confederate States of America, was present at almost every battle fought by the Confederacy. The reason being that is was the Confederate battle standard, not the standard of the Confederacy itself, a misconception that has survived for over 140 years.

In truth, the original flag of the Confederacy was The Stars and Bars which was replaced in 1863 by The Stainless Banner. Added to these was The Bonnie Blue Flag, after which the song was penned, which remained the unofficial flag of the Confederacy during its entire existence.

Of all of the flags of the Confederate States of America, only one would ever include the image of the Confederacy’s battle standard, The Rebel Flag, that being The Stainless Banner - not including Naval Jacks.

143 years after Lee’s surrender at Appomattox, The Rebel Flag strangely survives as some bizarre symbol of – well, I’m not rightly sure. While some might argue that it is a quintessential part of Southern history, the fact remains that what The Rebel Flag stood for was not something that should be historically celebrated. True, the initial grievances of the those States that seceded centered around State’s rights, but the reality remains that the Confederate government fought to maintain a society in which slavery was not only considered economically quintessential, but one in which Whites viewed African Americans an inhuman. The true irony of the Confederate armed forces was that they consisted of a vast majority of poor Southerners that didn’t own slaves. In fact, the Confederacy was the first to implement a military draft in North American history, with one very interesting loophole. If you happened to own 20 or more slaves you were exempt.

Confederate soldier Sam Watkins, who would publish the renowned ‘Company Aytch: Or, a Side Show of the Big Show’ after the war, having somehow survived the entire war despite the fact that he was involved in some of its most savage engagements, wrote of the conscription act…

“A law was made by the Confederate States Congress about this time allowing every person who owned twenty negroes to go home. It gave us the blues; we wanted twenty Negroes. Negro property suddenly became very valuable, and there was raised the howl of ‘rich man’s war, poor man’s fight.’ The glory of the war, the glory of the South, the glory and pride of our volunteers had no charms for the conscript.”

[…]

“From this time on till the end of the war, a soldier was simply a machine, a conscript. It was mighty rough on rebels. We cursed the war, we cursed Bragg, we cursed the Southern Confederacy. All our pride and valor had gone, and we were sick of war and the Southern Confederacy.”

Interestingly enough, in modern culture The Rebel Flag is something predominantly exalted by the very same class of people that, had they served in the Confederate army at the time, were the sort that didn’t even own shoes, let alone slaves.

So what does The Rebel Flag stand for? Does it exist as nothing more than a modern showpiece of Americana, or do those that unabashedly and naively promote its image sincerely believe in what the Confederate States of America stood for?

In short, is The Rebel Flag a symbol that still promotes the sentiments of the Southern Confederacy? And if so, then is included in that promotion the belief that African Americans are members of a sub-human species?

To me, The Rebel Flag is a symbol that reflects an ideology, no different than the Swastika.

There is no question that the military feats of the South during the Civil War have completely overshadowed the political ideology of the government for which they fought. Lee, for example, has become a giant within the pantheon of American mythology despite the fact that he commanded forces that existed to protect a way of life that believed in the practice of slavery. That’s certainly not to say that all Confederate commanders were steadfast in their support of it, Lee included. Despite the overt bigotry displayed by the likes of Nathan Bedford Forrest, who founded the Ku Klux Klan only to leave it after it grew too violent even for him, others within the Southern high command knew all too well that the issue of slavery would ultimately cost the South the war, as no foreign power would recognize the South with slavery still a part of its design. At the Battle of Gettysburg, General James Longstreet even went so far as to say to a visiting British attaché that the South should have freed the slaves prior to firing on Fort Sumter.

After the Emancipation Proclamation took effect on January 1st, 1863, the South was left with two possibilities. Invade the north again in an attempt to get between Union forces and Washington and force the North to sue for peace, or for Lincoln to lose the 1864 federal election to George McClellan, who ran on a platform of Southern recognition.

Of course, McClellan would lose the election in 1884, and in late June of 1863 Lee would make the arrogant mistake of refusing to disengage at Gettysburg after the first day, move south towards Washington itself, find ground on which the Union would be forced to attack him at great loss, and succeed in not only significantly diminishing public support in the North for the war, which was precarious at the time, but militarily cripple the Army of the Potomac. At the time, Longstreet tirelessly attempted to remind Lee that their objective had always been to conduct a defensive campaign. Unfortunately, and despite the fact that John Buford’s 1st Cavalry, aided by the timely arrival of John F. Reynolds’s I Corps, secured the high ground for the Union after repulsing Henry Heth’s Division, Lee refused to disengage.

Lee, who by that time had come to believe in his own invincibility, and that of his men, sealed the fate of the Confederacy during those three days, though it would take another two years and countless more lives before the conflict was resolved. Had Meade acted aggressively following the disastrously ill-conceived Confederate assault on that third day by forcing the Army of Northern Virginia to fight a substantial rear guard action, he could have ended the war. Instead he chose not to, and what remained of Lee’s army was allowed to slip back across the Potomac into Virginia.

On that last day, James Longstreet confided in Lee that he believed that the attack was doomed to fail and requested that overall command of the attack be placed in the hands of General Richard Ewell. Lee refused, and when Longstreet was approached and asked if the attack should be made his only response was to grievously nod. By the end of the day, George Pickett’s entire Division was lost.

The myth and glory surrounding Southern military successes during the Civil War have come to overshadow the ideology of what was ultimately being fought to protect – a way of life in which an entire race of people were widely viewed and treated like animals. The symbol of the Confederate military, The Rebel Flag, has also survived as a symbol of Southern pride and defiance, again despite the fact that it represented the forces of a rebellion whose ideology was steeped in ignorance and inhumanity. And yet, it is not uncommon to still see it adorning automobiles, clothing, and numerous other things – nor is it uncommon to see the flag itself flown here and there.

Out of every ten slaves brought to North America, two died before the journey was complete - a rough estimate. In all, it is believed that between ten and twenty million African American slaves were forcefully sent to the United States. On South Carolina and Georgia’s rice plantations, almost 90% of African American slaves perished before the age of sixteen. Such figures were common. One in three slaves commonly did not reach adulthood.

One wonders when someone purchases a Rebel Flag bikini, cell phone cover, or belt buckle that doubles as a bottle opener, whether such realities cross their mind? Despite the Emancipation Proclamation and the Constitutional amendments that would follow, the Jim Crow South offered African Americans little solace. From January 1st of 1863 until the 1960’s, African Americans in the South would remain symbols of one of the most egregious hypocrisies in the history of any democratic nation. In the end they would win the right to be treated as equal citizens in a country for which many had fought and died despite their treatment. And to their credit, and to the shame of those Whites that viewed them as second-class citizens, they were able to accomplish that goal in an admirable fashion.

In 1947 Jackie Robinson stepped on to Ebbets Field despite the fact some of his fellow players had started a petition to refuse to play along side him. Prior to signing with the Dodgers he made a promise to Branch Ricky that for three years he would not respond to the harsh treatment that Ricky knew awaited him. Robinson, after considering Ricky’s proposal, accepted, and, after a short stint with the Montreal Royals, became the first African American player to survive in Major League Baseball. Despite the belief that Robinson was the first African American to play big league ball, he was not. But his introduction into the game ultimately broke the colour barrier that had been staunchly in place for decades, one that existed as nothing more than a gentleman’s agreement among team owners.

But Robinson’s talent and conduct, which would eventually sway the views of those that had taken up the petition against him, as well as many others, was irrefutably brilliant. In 1949 he was the National League’s MVP. In the decade that followed, African Americans in the National League would be voted the MVP seven times, with Roy Campanella winning three times, Ernie Banks twice, Willy Mays once, and Hank Aaron once. All five of them would go on to be inducted into the Hall Of Fame.

But prior to the colour barrier being broken, some of games greatest players would go completely unrecognized. Probably the saddest example is that of power hitter Josh Gibson, whose lifetime batting average exceeded Babe Ruth’s. In 1934, Gibson hit 69 homeruns, and it is widely believed that his all time homerun record is actually around the 800 mark, making him, to this day, the title-holder, a fact that was mentioned by Barry Bonds when he succeeded in breaking Hank Aaron’s all time homerun record. Gibson’s performance in 1934 alone shattered Babe Ruth’s single season homerun record by nine homeruns, and while Ted Williams is hailed as the only man to bat over .400 in a single season, Gibson hit well over .400 in four different seasons. Gibson died in 1947 at the age of 35 from a stroke after being diagnosed with a brain tumor in 1943. During the 1943 season his average was .474.

America remains one of the most bizarre democratic paradoxes in modern history. While professing to be a nation of free men at its birth, it also chose to tolerate the continued practice of slavery. Eventually that practice would be confronted in the most devastating conflict in US history. And even though the outcome of that war saw Constitutional amendments introduced forever altering the nation’s path, racism’s dark shadow remained prevalent in the mainstream for almost a century afterwards.

It is not for me to say that The Rebel Flag is something that should be stricken from memory or use. Free societies are based on the rights of citizens to express their beliefs, no matter their ignorance or naivety. That said; I do believe that those that continue to promote it, in whatever fashion, should never forget the ideology that it ultimately espoused.

Today the President of the IOC Committee, Jacques Rogge, claimed that the IOC had accepted no deal with regards to internet restrictions. For those of you that are unaware, the Chinese government had promised the foreign media unrestricted access to the web while reporting on the games, a promise that they are refusing to uphold. While some restrictions have been eased – the BBC’s Mandarin website is now accessible, for example – numerous other sites deemed ‘sensitive’ remain blocked.

Rogge’s pathetic attempt at avoiding the issue was to claim that the IOC consists of idealists and therefore could be accused of being somewhat naïve. Of course, while confronting the issue he praised the Chinese at the same time, claiming that the Olympic village was the best that he had ever seen and that the organization of the games was excellent. One wonders if the excellence of that organization includes the massive restrictions being placed on public protests as well?

» Pakistan denies ISI behind Indian embassy attack.
» U.S. Presses Pakistan on Control of Its Spy Agency.
» Pakistan vows to ‘weed out’ pro-Taliban agents.
» Why Pakistan is unlikely to crack down on Islamic militants.
» India says ties with Pakistan lowest in 4 years.

From today’s New York Times (linked above)…

“The Bush administration is increasing pressure on Pakistan’s fledgling civilian government to bring the country’s spy service under civilian control, according to American and Pakistani officials.

During meetings in Washington this week with Pakistan’s prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, senior Bush administration officials pressed their Pakistani counterparts to assert control over Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, the American officials said. The pressure comes as relations between India and Pakistan deteriorate following reports of ISI involvement in the recent bombing of the Indian Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan.

The American pressure reflects heightened concerns at the State Department, Pentagon and Central Intelligence Agency that operatives in the ISI, who have long been believed to have close ties to Pakistani militants, have become bolder and more open in their support for militant Islamist organizations.”

While statements can be made by the US administration regarding its concerns, the truth of the matter is that most knowledgeable annalists know that it’s just rhetoric. The Pakistani government is already in the midst of defending the ISI with regards to accusations that it was involved in the bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul, which it may very well have been. They may even go so far as to promise that rogue elements within the ISI will be weeded out. But the reality is that the government of Pakistan doesn’t possess the power to seriously confront the ISI. Were they to seriously endeavor to do so, they would, more than likely, find themselves the victims of a military coup, one that could very likely be disguised as President Musharraf exercising extraordinary powers to confront what could easily be labeled treasonous collusion with foreign interests, whether such accusations were true or not.

There is absolutely no question that this story is horrific and tragic. That said; some of the commentary flying around the web because of it is truly frightening. Everything from the reintroduction of capital punishment to the easing of gun laws is being promoted. And then there is the truly ugly side, the hidden racism that only seems to present itself when non-whites are responsible for such horrific undertakings - the attacks on multiculturalism, the belief that if this country sealed its borders things of this nature wouldn’t occur.

We live in a free country and every Canadian is entitled to their opinion. But when such ugliness rears its head one seriously has to wonder how such deep seeded racism is still so prevalent? It’s as if hidden remnants of the Jim Crow South lay dormant in the souls of those that require events such as this to let loose their true selves.

A man killed a man in cold blood. That is where it begins and ends. It was a terrible crime and laws exist to ensure that the man responsible will be held accountable. No matter the crime, what should not be on trial is his race. And the fact that some are making it an issue sickens me almost as much as the crime itself.

We are currently figuring out how we can award a prize or two amongst those who pledge, so stayed tuned to this post for future updates and more information!

Over the next month here on the site my good friend Keira is going to be in charge of spearheading the matthewgood.org fundraising drive for our local SPCA’s Paws For A Cause event. Keira, along with my mother, sister-in-law, Rod, Angela, and a host of others, will be attending with Casey, Benji, Pete, Bella and Jorja.

If you’re a routine visitor, I don’t need to go into detail regarding my love for dogs, nor animals in general. I grew up with three dogs, have raised four of them over the last five years, and owe them more than most know. During one of the darkest periods of my life my dogs were there for me, laying beside me on a bathroom floor as I swerved between vomiting from extreme anxiety and laying unconscious in a ball. To me they are not my pets, they are my family, and therefore my equals – and I treat them as such every day of their lives.

My unconditional love for my dogs is equal to that felt for my family and dearest friends. I would, without hesitation, sacrifice whatever need be sacrificed to see them healthy and happy, they are that important to me.

I am certainly not alone when it comes to such feelings. There are dogs out there right now in need of good homes capable of transforming lives, of providing a companionship that people have cherished for almost our entire tenure on this planet. Thus, through them, and for them, initiatives like Paws For A Cause can help animals in need throughout the Province and place us in the fortunate position of being able to give something back in return for what our unquestioning companions have given us.

I sincerely hope that when the initiative is launched here on the website that you will participate. If you are unable to, which is completely understandable, your support in the comments will be more than enough.

My deepest thanks,

Matt

After the assassination of Benazir Bhutto it was speculated by many that the ISI was complicit, even if their involvement was limited to the employment or financing of others to accomplish the deed itself. Bhutto must have been fully aware when she returned to Pakistan that the ISI would be a problem were she to succeed in securing her old office. She must have also been aware of the fact that they most likely viewed her as little more than a US political proxy. Those in and around Washington that pushed for her return given the state of Pakistani politics at the time severely underestimated the ISI’s resolve in my opinion, and it ultimately cost Bhutto her life.

One thing that should be taken into account is that the ISI is, more than likely, not afraid of the United States. They have, in the past, worked closely with the CIA, and are by no means strangers with regards to American covert practices. In truth, they have probably been the most significant force behind Pakistan’s double dealings with the US since 9/11, placating US interests when it suits their purposed while supporting those that serve their own, the Taliban included.

In yesterday’s New York Times, an article by Mark Mazzetti and Eric Schmitt was published entitled Pakistanis Aided Attack in Kabul, U.S. Officials Say. An excerpt…

“American intelligence agencies have concluded that members of Pakistan’s powerful spy service helped plan the deadly July 7 bombing of India’s embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, according to United States government officials.

The conclusion was based on intercepted communications between Pakistani intelligence officers and militants who carried out the attack, the officials said, providing the clearest evidence to date that Pakistani intelligence officers are actively undermining American efforts to combat militants in the region.

The American officials also said there was new information showing that members of the Pakistani intelligence service were increasingly providing militants with details about the American campaign against them, in some cases allowing militants to avoid American missile strikes in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

Concerns about the role played by Pakistani intelligence not only has strained relations between the United States and Pakistan, a longtime ally, but also has fanned tensions between Pakistan and its archrival, India. Within days of the bombings, Indian officials accused the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, of helping to orchestrate the attack in Kabul, which killed 54, including an Indian defense attaché.

This week, Pakistani troops clashed with Indian forces in the contested region of Kashmir, threatening to fray an uneasy cease-fire that has held since November 2003.

The New York Times reported this week that a top Central Intelligence Agency official traveled to Pakistan this month to confront senior Pakistani officials with information about support provided by members of the ISI to militant groups. It had not been known that American intelligence agencies concluded that elements of Pakistani intelligence provided direct support for the attack in Kabul.”

The publication of this story has, of course, spread like wildfire, resulting in a statement today by the Pakistani government claiming that the ISI was not involved in the Kabul bombing. Among those that have picked up on it are The BBC, The CBC, The Los Angeles Times, The Guardian, and Reuters, just to name a brief few. The point being, the world is out, and now a very dangerous game of US covert interventionism and Pakistani culpable deniability will no doubt ensue. But the real motivation behind the revelation of the ISI’s involvement in the Kabul bombing by the CIA could have very little to do with an attempt to egregiously expose the ISI’s support of insurgents that operate along the Pakistan-Afghan frontier and use the information to fan another flame altogether.

The Probable Squeeze Play

First, this morning finds the article penned by the New York Times’ Mark Mazzetti and Eric Schmitt in yesterday’s publication ‘updated’. The exact same body of text quoted above now reads…

“A top Central Intelligence Agency official traveled secretly to Islamabad this month to confront Pakistan’s most senior officials with new information about ties between the country’s powerful spy service and militants operating in Pakistan’s tribal areas, according to American military and intelligence officials.

The C.I.A. emissary presented evidence showing that members of the spy service had deepened their ties with some militant groups that were responsible for a surge of violence in Afghanistan, possibly including the suicide bombing this month of the Indian Embassy in Kabul, the officials said.

The decision to confront Pakistan with what the officials described as a new C.I.A. assessment of the spy service’s activities seemed to be the bluntest American warning to Pakistan since shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks about the ties between the spy service and Islamic militants.

The C.I.A. assessment specifically points to links between members of the spy service, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, and the militant network led by Maulavi Jalaluddin Haqqani, which American officials believe maintains close ties to senior figures of Al Qaeda in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

The C.I.A. has depended heavily on the ISI for information about militants in Pakistan, despite longstanding concerns about divided loyalties within the Pakistani spy service, which had close relations with the Taliban in Afghanistan before the Sept. 11 attacks.

That ISI officers have maintained important ties to anti-American militants has been the subject of previous reports in The New York Times. But the C.I.A. and the Bush administration have generally sought to avoid criticism of Pakistan, which they regard as a crucial ally in the fight against terrorism.

The visit to Pakistan by the C.I.A. official, Stephen R. Kappes, the agency’s deputy director, was described by several American military and intelligence officials in interviews in recent days. Some of those who were interviewed made clear that they welcomed the decision by the C.I.A. to take a harder line toward the ISI’s dealings with militant groups.”

You will note that mention of tensions with India have been removed. This passage from yesterday’s version of the story is of paramount importance…

“Within days of the bombings, Indian officials accused the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, of helping to orchestrate the attack in Kabul, which killed 54, including an Indian defense attaché.”

To many this might seem of little consequence given historical tensions between the two nations, but the inevitable question must be asked – who furnished the Indians with information that the ISI was involved? Of course, given that the Indian embassy was the target, they could have come to that conclusion on their own, it’s not as if they lack the intelligence capability to unearth such information. But given the revelations now being provided by the United States, it is not outside the realm of possibility that the US provided the Indian government with that information in an attempt to open what could be referred to as ‘a second front’ with regards to using the Indians as part of a ‘squeeze play’ to regionally box the Pakistanis in. In that sense, Kashmir becomes the inevitable playing field in that arena, one which, if properly exploited, could result in the diversion of support intended for insurgents operating along the Pakistan-Afghan frontier. As was also pointed out in the initial article run by the New York Times yesterday…

“This week, Pakistani troops clashed with Indian forces in the contested region of Kashmir, threatening to fray an uneasy cease-fire that has held since November 2003.”

Reuters is also reporting the following…

“India said on Friday that peace talks with Pakistan were at the lowest point in their four-year history after a spate of bombings in Indian cities and at the country’s embassy in Kabul.

Indian Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon said the blasts had “affected the future” of negotiations between the nuclear-armed neighbors.

“If you ask me to describe the state of the dialogue, it is in a place where it hasn’t been in the last four years,” Menon told reporters.

“We face a situation where things have happened in the recent past which were unfortunate and which quite frankly have affected the future of the dialogue.”

India blames Pakistan for a breach of a 2003 ceasefire on its de facto border in disputed Kashmir, and accuses its spy agency of involvement in last month’s bomb attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul, in which two senior diplomats were among 58 people killed.”

In situations such as this, motive is always a factor. US motives are plain enough – there must be a serious transformation of the Pakistani political landscape so that the ISI’s powers are either limited or altogether removed. Bhutto’s return was certainly a part of US efforts to upset that balance. Of course, the ISI aren’t fools, and are well aware of how the United States operates when it comes to the differentiation between promoted initiatives and covert ones. They, themselves, have been running the very same game against the US since 9/11. Publicly they claim that they are not aiding militants involved in operations in Afghanistan, or that if elements with the ISI are involved in such activities that they will be rooted out. Privately they continue to support those groups that they view, and have viewed for some time, as vital to the spread of Pakistani influence in the region. And they will, make no mistake, be patient and wait for the United States to act rashly with regards to unilateral military operations within Pakistan itself, which will only further their domination over the Pakistani government and ultimately lead to a growth in public support as it pertains to confronting the United States as a foreign aggressor that is threatening Pakistani sovereignty.

This is where the Indians become a crucial part of the equation, and again, motive must be examined. If the United States did furnish the Indian government intelligence with regards to the ISI’s role in the bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul, what do the Americans get out of it – or, better, yet, what leverage do they possess to help ensure that the Indian government plays ball. Well, interestingly enough, and only a day after that initial New York Times article was published…

“The governors of the U.N. nuclear watchdog approved an inspections plan for India on Friday, an important step towards completing a nuclear cooperation deal between New Delhi and the United States.

The plan, approved by consensus by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s board of governors, will permit regular IAEA surveillance of India’s declared civilian nuclear energy plants — 14 of 22 existing or planned reactors.

This clears a hurdle to an accord that would allow sales of atomic materials and technology for civilian use to India. The deal has been criticized because New Delhi has not signed the global Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).”

This is, I am sad to report, how things work. There are back channels for back channels when it comes to the covert agendas of nations that are often conveniently appropriated through openly negotiated dealings. It is no secret that the United States and India have been working on this deal for some time now, but given the situation in Pakistan, and the fact that Afghanistan is beginning to resemble its former self more and more, securing the favour of traditional regional allies is quintessential.

The reason is clear enough.

Pakistan Has Always Been The Crux Of The Problem

After the Taliban was overthrown in 2001, were Pakistan not a regional factor, the reconstitution of the Taliban would never have occurred. The reality is, and has always been, that the war in Afghanistan is perpetuated by the support provided by those within Pakistan that view the success of what they view as military proxies as quintessential with regards to securing Pakistani influence in Afghanistan. That was why Benazir Bhutto backed supporting the Taliban in the 90’s and why the ISI supports them today.

It is very important to remember that, prior to 9/11, the United States possessed a very cool outlook towards Pakistan, one fermented by their acquisition and development of a nuclear weapons program. Despite the fact that the United States has never seriously condemned the Indians regarding theirs, the Pakistanis have always been another matter altogether, a position very likely cultivated during US cooperation with the ISI in the 80’s and their exposure to the organization’s mindset. Of course, there is a significant deal of hypocrisy involved as it pertains to the United States during that era, but that does not change the fact that both the CIA and the ISI are by no means strangers with regards to each others governing mindsets.

Following 9/11, unilaterally striking Pakistan was off the table - most likely because of their possession of a nuclear deterrent. Instead, the Bush Administration decided to ally itself with Pakistan’s military dictator, ironically casting him in an altogether ‘just’ light for as long as it served the administration’s ends. By the time it became clear that the Taliban were not defeated, and that their military prowess was growing, Musharraf became an obstacle that needed to be removed. Thus, various actions taken by his government to do with the diminishment of democratic freedoms were highlighted and Bhutto was ultimately thrust into the fray as a US-backed hopeful.

We all know how that turned out, and, as I stated earlier, the involvement of the ISI in her assassination should not be disregarded as mere speculation. In truth, if we’re to talk brass tacks, it was a move that the ISI had to make to ensure that foreign interventionism would not gain a significant foothold in the country.

But the fact remains that the war in Afghanistan is a war for Afghanistan, not a war to emancipate a people from a once ruthless regime. It is a conflict that is being fought by Western powers against insurgents supported by one of the region’s foremost covert military organizations that possess decades worth of experience when it comes to using regional militants to their advantage. Seven years after the fact, Western powers are finally waking up to that reality, though there is little that they can do about it without purposely orchestrating a coup within Pakistan or targeting both insurgent and Pakistani forces within the country itself without hesitation or excuse. Unfortunately, Pakistan is not Afghanistan, and to do so would lead to an outcome that would make the war in Iraq look like a child’s birthday party.

Calling a spade a spade is one thing. But the game that has seemingly been initiated by the United States regarding the ISI’s culpability is a very dangerous one indeed.

If the FBI were to bust into my home looking for evidence they’d find many items of interest along my bookshelves… among them US Army Infantry manuals, a copy of Hitler’s “Mein Kampf,” and various works by Noam Chomsky, Gore Vidal, Kurt Vonnegut and Howard Zinn… they’d also find a Koran, a Bible, and a Torah… and volumes on spirituality, witchcraft, the occult, and a real doozy on Rasputin… they’d come across works by Rumi, Steinbeck, Gibran, Solzhenytsyn, Orwell, Burroughs, Twain, Dostoevsky, Gurdjieff, and my gal-pal Joolz Denby… and about 1,000 more books on all manner of things…

So what am I trying to prove here?

Other than trying to impress the ladies with my stunning intellect…

Ahem… COUGH!

What I am trying to say here is that you can judge a person by what they read…

or can you?

So given what you’ve just learned about me, it is safe to assume that I’m a dangerous militant Nazi revisionist historian witch doctor afflicted with confused agnostic fervor while obsessed with dour prose on the meaning of life and how the world is a steaming pile of shit… and my gal-pal Joolz Denby… http://www.joolz-denby.co.uk/

And why pray-tell should you care what is on my bookshelf? I offer this information so that perhaps you may see the potential flaw in my following argument…

Last Sunday in Knoxville, Tennessee, Jim David Adkisson entered the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church with a shotgun, killing two people and wounding six others during the presentation of a children’s musical.

The Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church has a “gays welcome” sign… According to their website http://www.tvuuc.org/ the church has strived to promote “desegregation, racial harmony, fair wages, women’s rights and gay rights” since the 1950s. Current ministries involve emergency aid for the needy, school tutoring and support for the homeless, as well as a cafe that provides a gathering place for gay and lesbian high-schoolers.

Adkisson targeted the church “because of its liberal teachings and his belief that all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country, and that he felt that the Democrats had tied his country’s hands in the war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America with the aid of media outlets.”

Adkisson told Knoxville police that “he could not get to the leaders of the liberal movement that he would then target those that had voted them in to office.”

Adkisson was an angry veteran who was jobless and despondent… he became unhinged and sought to kill a lot of innocent people he felt were at fault for his situation… I wonder how he came to the conclusion the good people of the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church were responsible for his plight…

hmmmm…

You know what the police found in Adkisson’s house when they searched it?

Among other things, a four page letter ranting against liberals and gays… along with the following books, “The O’Reilly Factor,” by television talk show host Bill O’Reilly, “Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder” by radio talk show host Michael Savage, and “Let Freedom Ring” by talk show host Sean Hannity.

All three of these men consider themselves to be serious journalists… purveyors of truth and the American way…

Pardon me for a moment, while I descend into the juvenile act of name calling…

Savage is an angry little wiener with an inferiority complex the size of a Peterbilt… Hannity is a self important knuckle dragging Neanderthal…

O’Reilly is an argumentative buffoon who gets his talking points laughably wrong on a daily basis and has a habit of demonizing people to make a point… it is his modus operandi… on his daily show O’Reilly often delivers a flurry of misguided and inane verbal punches, comparing liberals to Nazis and hate groups such as the KKK…

While anyone with an IQ above the average winter temperature in Anchorage, Alaska (that’s about 15 Fahrenheit, folks) gets that O’Reilly’s show “The Factor” is predominantly right wing hysterical claptrap, the average viewer of Fox “News” is a drooling idiot incapable of recognizing the obvious fallacies put forth in his daily diatribe… and Fox “News” viewers number in the millions, proving there is indeed a lowest common denominator… obviously Jim David Adkisson could be counted among them…

How many more deranged Jim David Adkissons are out there awaiting their marching orders?

This leads to the obvious follow-up question… Does liberal programming/books cause one to go postal…?

Does watching “Countdown with Keith Olbermann,” Amy Goodman’s “Democracy Now,” or “Bill Moyer’s Journal” make you want to kill with impunity?

Does watching the “Daily Show” or “Colbert Report” make one mad with murderous desire?

When was the last time a liberal shot up a church… or anything for that matter?

I’ll give you a moment to ponder that question…

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Give up yet…? Nothing?

There has been serious research on this phenomenon… right wing authoritism and violence go hand in hand… check out this excellent research done by University of Manitoba Professor Bob Altemeyer…

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/

There are many sordid examples of the right wing media condoning acts of violence upon those they do not agree with…

Pam Atlas, the demon spawn behind Little Green Footballs, a popular blog among the right wing trashosphere, called for the State Department to be bombed and for American diplomats to be murdered…

Former Republican presidential candidate and “Reverend” Pat Robertson called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez…

Talk show host Melanie Morgan stated that New York Times editor Bill Keller should be sent to the gas chamber for treason…

I could go on and on…

Are right wing “news” pundits responsible for fanning the flames of violence?

And if so, should they be held responsible in a court of law?

If my memory serves me, back in the eighties there was a series of ridiculous lawsuits against the likes of Ozzy Ozbourne and Judas Priest… stoned, depressed and intellectually challenged youth were offing themselves, apparently influenced by the “subliminal” lyrics of the aforementioned metal bands, or so their bereaved absentee parents alleged when trying to pry millions of dollars in unsubstantiated lawsuits which were tossed out… Judas Priest singer Rob Halford delivered the death blow at the trial when he stated the obvious: if Judas Priest wanted to insert subliminal commands in their music, killing their fans would be counterproductive and they would prefer to insert the command “Buy more of our records.”

Now, seeing as how the judicial system in this country saw fit to prosecute metal bands for subliminal lyrics that ALLEDGEDLY led to the suicides of teens… couldn’t it be argued that the hate speech of right wing pundits led to Jim David Adkisson shooting up a church…? Is that a stretch?

Okay, I can hear it already… Am I basing my argument on a failed premise? After all, Ozzy and Rob were both found to be innocent of all charges…

Not so fast… what Ozzy and Rob Halford were doing was art… no matter how loosely you define the term… after all, you could argue that Picasso’s Guernica inspired suicide bombers, or Andy Warhol inspired countless citizens to consume mass quantities of chicken soup…

But the likes of O’Reilly, Savage and Hannity aren’t artists… they portray themselves as no-nonsense straight-talking journalists, as paragons of virtue… shouldn’t the bar be set higher for them?

What they are doing isn’t interpretive art… Its news and information written in such a way as to ultimately promote hatred and violence against all the perceived antagonists of their “American” ideal… their words have consequences…

Did O’Reilly, Savage and Hannity tell Jim David Adkisson to enter a church and kill wantonly?

Of course not, but they contributed heavily to a culture which preaches violence as the only option in dealing with those you disagree with… I have little doubt they planted the seeds of hatred which grew into anger and then blossomed into violence…

If only some hot-shot attorney would take these bastards to task for what they hath wrought… I don’t believe in censorship, but if there is any justice in this world there has to be some kind of retribution…

Personally, I find it intellectually lazy to compare anything or anyone to what the Nazis did… but seeing as it’s Billy O’Reilly’s hobby and it’s late and I’m yawning, what the hell…

Feel free to peruse the following quotes by the master himself, the Reich Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda, Herr Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels…

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over”

“Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.” (Ex-White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan claimed that he gave Fox News talking points which they parroted without question)

“Intellectual activity is a danger to the building of character” (In America? Not to worry…)

In closing, at least Dr. Goebbels was brutally honest in his vile intentions…

Mr. O’Reilly, you must study this man… hone your craft… you could learn a thing or two… in time you could field your very own army of Jim David Adkissons, who would carry out every masturbatory war fantasy against every perceived evil doing liberal your addled mind could fathom…