Two articles : Bush's actions on 9-11 -- very puzzling and very unpresidential & Oil-garchy coup attempts in Venezuela -- Beware of Jimmy Carter !
recently on one of my many and random searches throughout cyberspace , i stumbled across two very interesting articles about two very unique individuals--both with something more in common than holding the office of President of the United States .
George W. Bush and Jimmy Carter ,right-wing republican centralist and liberal-wing democratic party centralist respectively , would appear to many americans to be at opposing ends of the political spectrum .
Carter , a Nobel peace prize winner who is viewed globally as a human rights proponent even came out this past march against Bush's Iraq Agression --criticizing it as an unnecessary war based upon "lies and misinterpretations" .
But perhaps all things "liberal" aren't always as "kindhearted" as they seem. Malcolm warned us that republicans are like the wolf, and democrats are like the fox . One shows its teeth and we know it to be a snarl , while when the other shows its teeth , we mistake it for a smile---Both are members of the canine family , which of course means as animals go , they are closely related. Blacks faithfully put one group in the white house and they faithfully put blacks into... well you know the rest ...or at least you should .
Since both articles are a bit lengthy for this blogging medium , i decided it could be useful study over the next few days to break both articles into more bite-sized chunks in order to serialize them for comparison purposes ... allowing one to check out the "M.O." of what is in reality ---two sides of the same coin...
An Interesting Day:
President Bush's Movements and Actions on 9/11
By Allan Wood and Paul Thompson
May 9, 2003
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
At approximately 8:48 a.m. on the morning of September 11, 2001, the first pictures of the burning World Trade Center were broadcast on live television. The news anchors, reporters, and viewers had little idea what had happened in lower Manhattan, but there were some people who did know. By that time, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), the National Military Command Center, the Pentagon, the White House, the Secret Service, and Canada's Strategic Command all knew that three commercial airplanes had been hijacked. They knew that one plane had been flown deliberately into the World Trade Center's North Tower; a second plane was wildly off course and also heading toward Manhattan; and a third plane had abruptly turned around over Ohio and was flying back toward Washington, DC.
So why, at 9:03 a.m. - fifteen minutes after it was clear the United States was under terrorist attack - did President Bush sit down with a classroom of second-graders and begin a 20-minute pre-planned photo op? No one knows the answer to that question. In fact, no one has even asked Bush about it.
Bush's actions on September 11 have been the subject of lively debate, mostly on the internet. Details reported that day and in the week after the attacks - both the media reports and accounts given by Bush himself - have changed radically over the past 18 months. Culling hundreds of reports from newspapers, magazines, and the internet has only made finding the "truth" of what happened and when it happened more confusing. In the changed political climate after 9/11, few have dared raise challenging questions about Bush's actions. A journalist who said Bush was "flying around the country like a scared child, seeking refuge in his mother's bed after having a nightmare" and another who said Bush "skedaddled" were fired. [Washington Post, 9/29/01 (B)] We should have a concise record of where President Bush was throughout the day the US was attacked, but we do not.
What follows is an attempt to give the most complete account of Bush's actions - from Florida to Louisiana to Nebraska to Washington, DC.
Preparations
Bush's appearance at the Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida, on September 11, 2001 had been in the planning stages since August [Booker web site], but was only publicly announced on the morning of September 7. [White House, 9/7/01] Later that same day, 9/11 hijackers Mohamed Atta and Marwan Alshehhi traveled to Sarasota and enjoyed drinks and dinner at a Holiday Inn only two miles down the sandy beach from where Bush was scheduled to stay during his Sarasota visit. [Longboat Observer, 11/21/01, Washington Post, 1/27/02]
to be continued...
The Venezuelan recall referendum ... beware Jimmy Carter!
by James Petras:
July 2004
On August 15, 2004, Venezuelan voters will decide on a referendum, which has the utmost world historic and strategic significance. What is at stake is nothing less than the future of the energy world, the relations between the US and Latin America (particularly Cuba), and the political and socio-economic fate of millions of Venezuela's urban and rural poor.
If Chavez is defeated and if the Right takes power, it will privatize the state petroleum and gas company, selling it to US multinationals, withdraw from OPEC, raise its production and exports to the US, thus lowering Venezuelan revenues by half or more.
Internally, the popular health programs in the urban "ranchos" will end along with the literary campaign and public housing for the poor. The agrarian reform will be reversed and about 500,000 land reform recipients (100,000 families) will be turned off the land.
This will be accomplished through extensive and intensive state bloodletting, jailing and extrajudicial assassination, and intense repression of pro-Chavez neighborhoods, trade unions and social movements.
The apparently "democratic" referendum will have profoundly authoritarian, colonial and socially regressive results if the opposition wins.
Regionally, an anti-Chavez outcome will tighten the grip of US and Europe on Latin America's oil resources; the denationalization of the petroleum industry in the post-Chavez period will follow in the footsteps of Lula's privatization of Petrobras in Brazil, Gutierrez' privatization in Ecuador and the continuity of private foreign ownership in Argentina, Bolivia and Peru.
Control of Venezuela's oil will heighten US control over world oil, decrease its dependence on the Mid East, especially with high intensity conflict in Iraq now, Saudi Arabia and Iran in the future.
Equally important the US will eliminate the strongest opponent of ALCA -- the free trade treaty -- and pave the way for direct US control over the rules and regulations for trade and investment in the hemisphere.
Strategically, the US takeover of Venezuelan oil will have grave consequences on the Cuban economy as Washington will abruptly end exports and its client regime will likely break relations.
Direct colonial control over Iraq and Venezuela, two of the top suppliers of oil will increase US global power over its competitors, while serving as an "object lesson" to potential opposition regimes.
The "referendum" in Venezuela emerges as a major clash between the US and OPEC, US imperialism and Latin American nationalists, neo-liberalism and social nationalism, between US-backed authoritarian ruling elites and endogenous socially conscious urban workers, unemployed, small business people, landless rural workers and small peasants.
These historical confrontations find their specific focus in the referendum.
The events leading up to the referendum speak eloquently of the crass US intervention, the violent tactics of the elites, the rule or ruin strategy of the opposition, the unbridled totalitarian propaganda of the privately owned mass media. The opposition has backed a violent military coup (which was defeated); it organized a bosses' lockout that almost destroyed the economy (which ended in defeat); it organized a contingent of over 130 Colombian military and paramilitary forces with the aid of active Venezuelan officers to sow violence -- that was aborted by Venezuelan intelligence.
Equally ominous, in the campaign to secure signatures for the referendum, fraudulent identity cards were massively produced and distributed, tens of thousands of deceased, incapacitated and coerced had their signatures forged and thousands of signatures were written by a single hand.
Opposition corruption and fraud was rife but the official international observers urged the Chavez government to accept them and proceed to the referendum. More ominously among the key voices that made their presence felt were the ubiquitous Jimmy Carter and Jose Miguel Vivanco of Human Rights Watch.
The Unknown History of James Carter
The two faces of imperial power include the iron fist military intervention and the "soft sell" of electoral frauds, intimidating diplomacy and democratic blackmail. Jimmy Carter is "the quiet American" of Graham Greene fame, who legitimates voter fraud, blesses corrupt elections, certifies murderous rulers, encourages elections, in which the opposition is funded by the US state and semi-public foundations, and the incumbent progressive regime suffers repeated violent disruption of the economy.
also to be continued...
George W. Bush and Jimmy Carter ,right-wing republican centralist and liberal-wing democratic party centralist respectively , would appear to many americans to be at opposing ends of the political spectrum .
Carter , a Nobel peace prize winner who is viewed globally as a human rights proponent even came out this past march against Bush's Iraq Agression --criticizing it as an unnecessary war based upon "lies and misinterpretations" .
But perhaps all things "liberal" aren't always as "kindhearted" as they seem. Malcolm warned us that republicans are like the wolf, and democrats are like the fox . One shows its teeth and we know it to be a snarl , while when the other shows its teeth , we mistake it for a smile---Both are members of the canine family , which of course means as animals go , they are closely related. Blacks faithfully put one group in the white house and they faithfully put blacks into... well you know the rest ...or at least you should .
Since both articles are a bit lengthy for this blogging medium , i decided it could be useful study over the next few days to break both articles into more bite-sized chunks in order to serialize them for comparison purposes ... allowing one to check out the "M.O." of what is in reality ---two sides of the same coin...
An Interesting Day:
President Bush's Movements and Actions on 9/11
By Allan Wood and Paul Thompson
May 9, 2003
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
At approximately 8:48 a.m. on the morning of September 11, 2001, the first pictures of the burning World Trade Center were broadcast on live television. The news anchors, reporters, and viewers had little idea what had happened in lower Manhattan, but there were some people who did know. By that time, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), the National Military Command Center, the Pentagon, the White House, the Secret Service, and Canada's Strategic Command all knew that three commercial airplanes had been hijacked. They knew that one plane had been flown deliberately into the World Trade Center's North Tower; a second plane was wildly off course and also heading toward Manhattan; and a third plane had abruptly turned around over Ohio and was flying back toward Washington, DC.
So why, at 9:03 a.m. - fifteen minutes after it was clear the United States was under terrorist attack - did President Bush sit down with a classroom of second-graders and begin a 20-minute pre-planned photo op? No one knows the answer to that question. In fact, no one has even asked Bush about it.
Bush's actions on September 11 have been the subject of lively debate, mostly on the internet. Details reported that day and in the week after the attacks - both the media reports and accounts given by Bush himself - have changed radically over the past 18 months. Culling hundreds of reports from newspapers, magazines, and the internet has only made finding the "truth" of what happened and when it happened more confusing. In the changed political climate after 9/11, few have dared raise challenging questions about Bush's actions. A journalist who said Bush was "flying around the country like a scared child, seeking refuge in his mother's bed after having a nightmare" and another who said Bush "skedaddled" were fired. [Washington Post, 9/29/01 (B)] We should have a concise record of where President Bush was throughout the day the US was attacked, but we do not.
What follows is an attempt to give the most complete account of Bush's actions - from Florida to Louisiana to Nebraska to Washington, DC.
Preparations
Bush's appearance at the Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida, on September 11, 2001 had been in the planning stages since August [Booker web site], but was only publicly announced on the morning of September 7. [White House, 9/7/01] Later that same day, 9/11 hijackers Mohamed Atta and Marwan Alshehhi traveled to Sarasota and enjoyed drinks and dinner at a Holiday Inn only two miles down the sandy beach from where Bush was scheduled to stay during his Sarasota visit. [Longboat Observer, 11/21/01, Washington Post, 1/27/02]
to be continued...
The Venezuelan recall referendum ... beware Jimmy Carter!
by James Petras:
July 2004
On August 15, 2004, Venezuelan voters will decide on a referendum, which has the utmost world historic and strategic significance. What is at stake is nothing less than the future of the energy world, the relations between the US and Latin America (particularly Cuba), and the political and socio-economic fate of millions of Venezuela's urban and rural poor.
If Chavez is defeated and if the Right takes power, it will privatize the state petroleum and gas company, selling it to US multinationals, withdraw from OPEC, raise its production and exports to the US, thus lowering Venezuelan revenues by half or more.
Internally, the popular health programs in the urban "ranchos" will end along with the literary campaign and public housing for the poor. The agrarian reform will be reversed and about 500,000 land reform recipients (100,000 families) will be turned off the land.
This will be accomplished through extensive and intensive state bloodletting, jailing and extrajudicial assassination, and intense repression of pro-Chavez neighborhoods, trade unions and social movements.
The apparently "democratic" referendum will have profoundly authoritarian, colonial and socially regressive results if the opposition wins.
Regionally, an anti-Chavez outcome will tighten the grip of US and Europe on Latin America's oil resources; the denationalization of the petroleum industry in the post-Chavez period will follow in the footsteps of Lula's privatization of Petrobras in Brazil, Gutierrez' privatization in Ecuador and the continuity of private foreign ownership in Argentina, Bolivia and Peru.
Control of Venezuela's oil will heighten US control over world oil, decrease its dependence on the Mid East, especially with high intensity conflict in Iraq now, Saudi Arabia and Iran in the future.
Equally important the US will eliminate the strongest opponent of ALCA -- the free trade treaty -- and pave the way for direct US control over the rules and regulations for trade and investment in the hemisphere.
Strategically, the US takeover of Venezuelan oil will have grave consequences on the Cuban economy as Washington will abruptly end exports and its client regime will likely break relations.
Direct colonial control over Iraq and Venezuela, two of the top suppliers of oil will increase US global power over its competitors, while serving as an "object lesson" to potential opposition regimes.
The "referendum" in Venezuela emerges as a major clash between the US and OPEC, US imperialism and Latin American nationalists, neo-liberalism and social nationalism, between US-backed authoritarian ruling elites and endogenous socially conscious urban workers, unemployed, small business people, landless rural workers and small peasants.
These historical confrontations find their specific focus in the referendum.
The events leading up to the referendum speak eloquently of the crass US intervention, the violent tactics of the elites, the rule or ruin strategy of the opposition, the unbridled totalitarian propaganda of the privately owned mass media. The opposition has backed a violent military coup (which was defeated); it organized a bosses' lockout that almost destroyed the economy (which ended in defeat); it organized a contingent of over 130 Colombian military and paramilitary forces with the aid of active Venezuelan officers to sow violence -- that was aborted by Venezuelan intelligence.
Equally ominous, in the campaign to secure signatures for the referendum, fraudulent identity cards were massively produced and distributed, tens of thousands of deceased, incapacitated and coerced had their signatures forged and thousands of signatures were written by a single hand.
Opposition corruption and fraud was rife but the official international observers urged the Chavez government to accept them and proceed to the referendum. More ominously among the key voices that made their presence felt were the ubiquitous Jimmy Carter and Jose Miguel Vivanco of Human Rights Watch.
The Unknown History of James Carter
The two faces of imperial power include the iron fist military intervention and the "soft sell" of electoral frauds, intimidating diplomacy and democratic blackmail. Jimmy Carter is "the quiet American" of Graham Greene fame, who legitimates voter fraud, blesses corrupt elections, certifies murderous rulers, encourages elections, in which the opposition is funded by the US state and semi-public foundations, and the incumbent progressive regime suffers repeated violent disruption of the economy.
also to be continued...
posted by dsekou at 12:21 AM
2 Comments:
Jimmy Carter's card was pulled in his activities with the Dominican Republic, Haiti and the Duvaliers. Jimmy Carter is the primary reason why I don't think it is a good idea for children to be asked about how the world should be. When I was a kid I thought Jimmy Carter was the nicest person and perhaps the most kind president ever. How dare those Iranians take American hostages!! Now, grown and informed, i see Jimmy Carter for what he is, a smiling wolf. I wonder how long it will be before Clinton is similarly exposed.
To save himself from being "the only one going to jail" , Ron Brown might have ended up exposing some of ole "Bill and the gang's" double dealings and ratting them out, but a l'il plane crash into a hillside followed up by a .45 caliber-sized --extremely round hole in his skull sorta left him "speechless"... but i believe like all crooks and 'evil-doers', Bill and the gang will one day get their due .
Post a Comment
<< Home