We Americans are the ultimate innocents. We are forever desperate to believe that this time the government is telling us the truth. --Sydney Schanberg
The first stage of fascism should more appropriately be called 'corporatism.' --Benito Mussolini
No one can now doubt the word of America --George W. Bush, State of the Union, January 20, 2004.
People that are really very weird can get into sensitive positions and have a tremendous impact on history. --George W Bush
I don't care what the international lawyers say, we are going to kick some ass --President George W. Bush, September 11, 2001 (quoted by Richard A. Clarke, Against All Enemies)

1/25/2004

Sir Bill: “One Way or Another”

Filed under: — jake @ 3:48 am

Gates to Wipe Out Spam

Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, used a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos to promise to rid the world of spam, or junk e-mails, within two years.

So Mr. Gates thinks he can wipe out spam? Well I’m willing to bet he can, as long as everyone runs the latest & greatest Windows. And as long as everyone runs the automatic update features and as long as everyone opens their wallets to Micro$oft.

And by the way, as long as everyone is going to allow the U.S. government a backdoor into their personal computers.

If everyone is willing to do that I’m sure that spam as we know it will end in our lifetimes.

Am I alone is seeing a problem here? The referenced article cover two topics: Gates can end spam and 800k “zombie” spam servers in the UK alone. Hmmm, what percentage of those 800k machines are not running Microsoft Windows? 0%!!!

Mr. Gates & Co. have helped create the problem. Their software is so bug ridden, unreliable and insecure that they are the problem. The spammers are simply making use of capabilities that Microsoft builds, nay, designs into their stuff.

Bill Gates has made no effort to hide his primary ambition: “Windows On Every Desktop”. He’s been preaching this from day one. This latest ploy is simply another way to accomplish his stated goals.

If you ever find yourself feeling kindly towards Bill and his minions or believing that “they can save the world”, just keep in mind that Micro$oft has $38,000,000,000 dollars in cash. They could afford to design, build and give away a new, secure, stable and working version of Windows to everyone, not just Americans, but to everyone in the world.

No, Bill’s not an altruist. He’s not even interested in solving the problems he’s set loose on the world. He’s simply an opportunist who sees yet another opportunity to bilk the people of their dollars.

I am in no way appologizing for the spammers of the world. They deserve to be stoned in the town square, but for Bill Gates to claim that “he can end spam” is simply laughable.

And just in case you missed it, here’s an article on how Billy is to become Sir Bill.

Update

Slashdot reports that AOL is testing one of several open source anti-spam technologies. They all look like good approaches to the problem and they’re all being designed in the open - no secrets, no backdoors.


1/9/2004

A Heretic’s Handbook

Filed under: — jake @ 3:47 am

What You Can’t Say

How can you see the wave, when you’re the water? Always be questioning. That’s the only defence. What can’t you say? And why?

This essay is just too good, too important not to be read by everyone. Read it - then read it again. Then share it. Then go ask “why?”


1/8/2004

History Repeats?

Filed under: — jake @ 3:38 am

A couple days ago I had the misfortune to be working in an area where Mr. Limbaugh’s radio show was playing. I half listened
to him, more for nostalgic reasons than any hope of learning anything.

A caller was labeling Mr. Limbaugh a hypocrite for his fanatical attacks on those that compare Mr. Bush to Mr. Hitler. “Now it’s
getting interesting”, I thought. True to form, Mr. Limbaugh blasted the caller for even contemplating the idea that the
Bush/Hitler comparisons held any validity - in fact Mr. Limbaugh rabidly attacked the woman’s patriotism.

Having been listening to the show for a while, I agreed with the caller in that Mr. Limbaugh was indeed being typically hypocritical - this got me to wondering further: Are there any valid parallels between Hitler and Bush? Between the current administration and the Nazis of the 1930’s?

The following links and excerpts are a small subset of the information and opinions I found. Obviously I can make no claims as to the accuracy of the information.

Caveat Lector


Let’s start with a history lesson. This piece gives a pretty good time-line of the Nazi rise to power:

When Democracy Failed: The Warnings of History


It started when the government, in the midst of a worldwide economic crisis, received reports of an imminent terrorist attack. A foreign ideologue had launched feeble attacks on a few famous buildings, but the media largely ignored his relatively small efforts. The intelligence services knew, however, that the odds were he would eventually succeed. (Historians are still arguing whether or not rogue elements in the intelligence service helped the terrorist; the most recent research implies they did not.)

But the warnings of investigators were ignored at the highest levels, in part because the government was distracted; the man who claimed to be the nation’s leader had not been elected by a majority vote and the majority of citizens claimed he had no right to the powers he coveted. He was a simpleton, some said, a cartoon character of a man who saw things in black-and-white terms and didn’t have the intellect to understand the subtleties of running a nation in a complex and internationalist world. His coarse use of language - reflecting his political roots in a southernmost state - and his simplistic and often-inflammatory nationalistic rhetoric offended the aristocrats, foreign leaders, and the well-educated elite in the government and media. And, as a young man, he’d joined a secret society with an occult-sounding name and bizarre initiation rituals that involved skulls and human bones.

OK so there may be some similarities, both situational and personal, but I suspect this is a carefully constructed
representation and may hold as much relevance as the daily horoscope.
Continuing…


Within four weeks of the terrorist attack, the nation’s now-popular leader had pushed through legislation - in the name of combating terrorism and fighting the philosophy he said spawned it - that suspended constitutional guarantees of free speech, privacy, and habeas corpus. Police could now intercept mail and wiretap phones; suspected terrorists could be imprisoned without specific charges and without access to their lawyers; police could sneak into people’s homes without warrants if the cases involved terrorism.

The Patriot Act took less than 6 weeks after the WTC fell.
Moving on…


To consolidate his power, he concluded that government alone wasn’t enough. He reached out to industry and forged an alliance, bringing former executives of the nation’s largest corporations into high government positions. A flood of government money poured into corporate coffers to fight the war against the Middle Eastern ancestry terrorists lurking within the homeland, and to prepare for wars overseas. He encouraged large corporations friendly to him to acquire media outlets and other industrial concerns across the nation, particularly those previously owned by suspicious people of Middle Eastern ancestry. He built powerful alliances with industry; one corporate ally got the lucrative contract worth millions to build the first large-scale detention center for enemies of the state. Soon more would follow. Industry flourished.

What’s interesting about this piece is that without any names and just a small amount of bias, one would think he’s writing about Mr. Bush.

But enough of that one, I suggest you read the entire work yourself and draw your own conclusions.


Bush family funded Adolf Hitler


According to research carried out over the last few years, Wall Street bankers (amongst others) financed Hitler’s rise to power whilst making large profits at the same time. What is yet still more deplorable is the fact that relatives of the current U.S. president were amongst this group of individuals.

U.S. authors Webster G. Tarpley and Anton Cheitkin reveal in the recently published George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography that Prescott Bush (George W. Bush’s grandfather) and other directors of the Union Banking Company (UBC) were Nazi collaborators.

This was news to me. I’d not heard that Grandpa Bush was involved with the Nazis. Does this matter? Can we hold the sons
responsible for the father’s actions? No, but we can be suspicious about the attitudes that are passed from generation to generation - if Bush Sr. was raised in an environment that espoused fascism then it may be fair to assume that some of that philosophy was embedded.

(Of course we can’t forget that the old bootlegger Joe Kennedy was rather enamored with the Nazis also, and I don’t recall any comparisons between JFK and the Nazis.)

Searching for corroborating information didn’t take long. There is lots of data regarding this relationship. For example:
“Bush - Nazi Dealings Continued Until 1951″- Federal Documents

But does any of this support comparing the President Of The United States with one of the most heinous figures in recent
history? There may be some coincidental similarities (if cloaked in vague enough language) and there may even be some tenuous familial links, but direct comparisons?


Bush vs. Hitler


Nazi leader Herman Goering once remarked that it was easy to lead people into war, regardless of whether they resided within “a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.” All that was required, Goering argued, is for their government to “tell them they are being attacked, and [then] denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger.”
[Full Quote]

This is absolutely chilling. Not because of who said it but that it’s so obviously true - and so obviously being applied to us
today, right now - and most vigorously by the self proclaimed “defenders of liberty”, the right wing radio guys.


But the coup by the plutocratic supporters of George W. Bush in the year 2000, coupled with the invasion of Iraq, changed all that, revealing how easily Americans can be manipulated, how willing they are to be lied to, and how vacuous the freedoms of speech and press have become when the bulk of information is filtered through corporate-controlled media that profit from jingoism, propaganda and dishonesty. But, perhaps most disturbingly, these events demonstrated that even though the words “freedom, democracy and human rights” are chanted like mantras by political leaders, many Americans have apparently welcomed, or at the very least are blissfully unconcerned about, the erosion of freedom, the abuse of human rights, and the nation"s growing transformation from a democracy into a neo-fascist dictatorship.

That this is published in Pravda and not the New York Times supports the points being made. It takes no more than some simple observation of modern America to see just how accurate this assessment is - and it’s damned scary that we don’t have to look far or even really search - just look around.


Fascism fits well into the simplistic ideologies of the Bush dictatorship. While fascists essentially agree with America"s forefathers that people are basically evil, they actively manipulate this evil by trumpeting emotion over logic, and “great lies” over truth. This is normally accomplished through the exploitation of “scapegoats,” who are marketed as the source of all social ills, coupled with appeals to humanity"s basest instincts–bigotry, greed, fanatical nationalism, fear, and lust for conquest (just to name a few).

While I may quibble of some the words the author chooses, I can’t argue with the basic idea he espouses. These techniques are not new to Bush&Co., they’ve been in common usage for at least the last 25 years although not to the obvious and blatant level that this administration has taken them.

If you read no other works referenced here, this one should be required reading.


  • “I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator,” said Adolf Hitler.
  • “God told me to strike at Al Qa’ida and I struck them. And then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did. With the might of God on our side we will triumph,” said George Bush.

I spent more than a few hours reading all manner of works, ranging from the disgusting to the apologetic. But what’s more interesting is what I did not find: not one well reasoned argument as to why Bush&Co. are not comparable to the Nazis of the 1930’s. The only arguments I found against the comparison are those that attack the comparator’s patriotism - and that as demonstrated above, is simply proving the point.

So am I going to now openly accuse Bush of being another Hitler? No, for two reasons:

  1. Doing so will simply elicit adhominem attacks on myself, effectively invalidating any arguments I may be using to sway my audience’s point of view.
  2. Direct comparisons, I believe, are disingenuous and counterproductive. Although comparing the rise of, techniques used by, and philosophies of the Nazis to the current administration may be valid and in some circumstances useful in trying to convince others.
    Besides, Hitler was a great orator.

1/3/2004

Just Admit It

Filed under: — quytam @ 3:37 am

Why are we arguing about how to put Saddam Hussein on trial?

We invaded a sovereign nation because we were sure Hussein was guilty . . . of hiding weapons of mass destruction . . . of using such weapons against his own people, albeit 15 years ago and with technology and training that we supplied . . . of raping, pillaging and other atrocities . . . of genocide . . . of posing an imminent threat to our nation’s security. . . . We killed thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians, and our own continue dying at a rate of 1-2 per day, because we were sure Hussein was guilty. We did it despite the opposition of our allies, because we were sure Hussein was guilty. We did it without the support of the very people we claimed to be liberating, because we were sure Hussein was guilty.

Trials serve only one purpose – a public forum for the presentation of evidence to prove guilt. The assumption underlying any trial is that guilt is in question, and, therefore, must be proven. Hussein’s guilt is the sole surviving justification for the Iraq war. How can we even suggest with a straight face that he should be put on trial now? Isn’t it a little late? If there is any question of his guilt that would necessitate a trial, then how do we justify the horrors we have just inflicted? That we continue to inflict? How do we tell the families of the US soldiers and Iraqi civilians who died in this war that there is a chance Hussein is innocent?

By definition, preemptive strikes negate the presumption of innocence. If we are not going to adhere to that most basic of American ideals, then let’s at least be honest about it. After all, why should Saddam Hussein get more due process than a juvenile held for two years on suspicion of terrorist activities at a U.S. naval base in Cuba?

Of course, we should be consistent in applying this new policy. So let’s go a step further and apply the doctrine of preemptive strikes to domestic criminals. If we are sure they are guilty, let’s skip the trial and just take them out. It wouldn’t require much revision in the law . . . just a few tweaks to the Patriot Act.

It would be good for the economy also. The nation is overwhelmed by debt and trials cost a lot of money–taxpayer money. If we just skip the unnecessary trials, we could probably pay for the war in a few short years with the money we would save. There would be no need to burden our great-grandchildren with the biggest deficit in history. Yes, let’s stop whining about a trial and just execute Saddam . . . and the rest of the guilty.

And if that doesn’t sit well with your delicate American sensibilities, then we all better take a hard look at the road we are on and where it leads. Maybe we should face facts, suck it up, and admit that we were wrong . . . that we were overcome with fear of the evildoers, and too damn scared to stand up to the allegedly former crackhead currently ensconced in the Oval Office. Admit that the shame of Viet Nam kept us from doing or saying anything that could be interpreted as less than 100% support for our troops. Admit that our arrogance kept us from asking hard questions, and our apathy kept us from demanding answers. Admit that we gave too little thought to the consequences of our actions, and that we were too busy shopping to care about whether we were being lied to.

Maybe then we can start the process of recovery . . . maybe France has an appropriate 12-step program.


0.056 || Powered by WordPress