What do you mean there's a war on? With who...? Really?

Remember back in the day when we were going to war because we were attacked and we would not rest until we found the bad guys, al Qaeda/Taliban/Osama bin Laden, that attacked us, and how we would hunt them to the ends of the Earth and punish anyone who was harboring them?

No?

Maybe you'll remember that Saddam, not bin Laden (because he isn't a threat or interest), was linked directly to al Qaeda and 9/11 and how we had to invade Iraq to dispose of Saddam and his WMDs before we were attacked again, by Iraq and al Qaeda?

No?

It's ok, apparently no one else does either. Seems that the whole(new) reason that we invaded Iraq so that we could be at the central front in the fight against he Sunni Muslim extremism of the Al-Qaeda terrorist network and the Shiite extremism fueled by Iran.

Don't believe me?

CLICK THIS LINK TO BE LIED TO AGAIN.

Oh, and get ready for...

Wait for it...

Ready for more Fearmongering Propaganda?

Wait...

!!!!!'Nuclear Holocaust'!!!!!

That's right friends, prepare to be misled, fearmongered, and propagandized into complacency/lock-step, the dreaded fear of a nuclear winter has been brought back, just for you, so that you can feel safe, while the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is pulled out from under your feet like a table-cloth.
But, there's a bright side. There's all kinds of new American Idol and America's Greatest Dipshits lined up to keep you exactly where they want you. Oh, and be a good American damnit!!! Go buy something, because that's exactly what the terrorists don't want you to do.

Buy a house, buy a car, buy anything that will make a feeble attempt to stabilize a crippled economy, because Islamic Fundamentalists want to disrupt you as you go to Best Buy to buy that HD Plasma Wide Screen Flat Panel.

Don't want a National ID? DHS says, FUCK YOU!!

In a thinly veiled attempt at circumventing Congress and not making a public scene, the Department of Homeland Imprisonment, ahem... Security is working with, so far, a couple of state houses to implement a new ID.

Where's the harm in that? Seeing as how Congress is against a National ID, because WE THE PEOPLE, are against a National ID, that is the harm in that. How does this equate to a National ID? If DHS implements it in all, or a majority, of states, then what we effectively have is a National ID. Once that happens, Congress will bend to the will of DHS and the state houses because, "Well, it's already in place in most of the US; might as well push it through." And just like that... You've been tagged with a National ID.

Oh, and ummm, that's the MARK OF THE BEAST for you end-time/Revelations types. For the rest of us, it's total control of personal information/finances.

No, your Social Security Card is not a form of ID. Have you ever read your SSC?

links? Oh hell yes, I have links.

DHS and Vermont get together for a special ID.

DHS and Arizona get together for a special ID.

And before you ask... Yeah, you're next.

The Ramblings of a Coward or How to Piss on the Honor of Heroes

I don't think that the man that presumes the Presidency of the United States of America has felt the full brunt of his outrageous blunder. "Blunder?", you ask? In the not so distant past Mr. Bush made a clear and concise separation between the conflict in Iraq and the Vietnam conflict. Yesterday, however, he stepped on his dick and stated that Iraq is like Vietnam. More to the point, he also stated that Vietnam could have been won if we had stayed longer. What kind of horse-shit is he attempting to peddle here?

I take great offense to this man even mouthing the word, "Vietnam", let alone speaking out out with any type of authority on the subject. Mr. Bush, unlike you, my family fought in Vietnam. My family bled in Vietnam. My family has been rendered asunder by the Vietnam conflict. But you see... Not just my family, EVERYONE who was ever close to my family gave to the Vietnam conflict. The Vietnam conflict touched all sides of my family. Even my immediate family paid the price of Vietnam.

I'm reading all that I can at this time on this topic (not Vietnam, but the topic of this post), and I am still struggling to get my head around it. First, what good can come of comparing the Vietnam conflict to the conflict in Iraq? How can it help the country? How can we reconcile Iraq when we haven't reconciled Vietnam? We're still recovering remains from Vietnam, for Christ's sake. How can you hope to further the cause of Iraq by comparing it to one of the darkest times in your country's short history? What hope are you giving the families of those deployed to Iraq by making such a comparison? Hell, how can you hope to maintain the morale of the deployed troops by making such a comparison? It doesn't matter if he said, "Would be like.." or, "Is like...". What would he know of what it would be like? He's never fought in a military conflict in his life. He has no experience, save that of what other's provide him with. He has no catalog of action from which to draw from in order to justify his speaking out of turn.

Again, it seems that the big kids table is not the place for Mr. Bush. But then again, those weren't his words at all. If he hadn't been reading from a pre-written speech, that someone else wrote, we'd be getting words like "Strategery", "Conflictation", "Quagmirification", and any other make believe word that any number of four-year-olds can concoct.

A good friend of mine once said that we are supposed to be nice to little kids and dumb animals. I don't suffer dumb animals.

Oh... Links to the articles or speech from Mr. Bush? Look 'em up.

Edited to add:Michael Vick is the new Paris Hilton. Fuck Vick. Send him away like the embarrassment that he is and forget about him, after making an example out of him in the justice system of course.

Is the next presidency already being setup?

I understand that the current administration has a full time job with covering their asses and making themselves unaccountable, but damn, when are the American people going to say, "Alright!! You people have to answer for some of this shit!"?

The following WaPo article tells of yet another OFF-LIMITS policy that has been ushered in.

HEY, AMERICA!!! KEEP YOUR NOSE OUT OF OUR BUSINESS!!

Want to know how to stifle the 1st Amendment? Read on.

In the following ABC news article you will learn of a couple who were protesting by wearing t-shirts in 2004. You may or may not remember. You can catch up by reading the link. The important thing here is that I have a link for you to click that will take you to a document that has been created to stifle your 1st Amendment rights, completely.

Here's the link to the article.

More importantly: Here's the link to the document. Oh, and ummmm, we're not supposed to be in possession of this particular document. Hmmmm... I wonder why?

There just aren't enough ass kickings to go 'round.

Is there no end to the complete dumbass of main stream media talking heads.

These fucking people shouldn't be allowed to speak, let alone speak to the nation as if they have any real input.

This silly cunt, Erin Burnett, says that if China stops making poisoned food or non-lead painted toys, that the prices at Wal-Mart are going to go up, and that the American people don't want that. Oh yeah, and China's our best friend right now. What a smoking load of horse shit. Are you people out there not even paying attention to the shit that you watch on t.v.? Or is the idea of not thinking like those around you, or being an outcast that much of a problem for you.

I say we ship this silly bitch to China so she can see who her friends are.

Wanna see something cool?

VAN HALEN AND DAVID LEE ROTH ANNOUNCE NORTH AMERICAN TOUR
HISTORIC CONCERT TOUR MARKS FIRST OF ITS KIND FOR VAN HALEN IN 22 YEARS
LOS ANGELES, CA -- August 13, 2007

Beginning this September, in what promises to be the most exciting live tour this year, Van Halen will embark on a national concert tour throughout the U.S. and Canada with its original lead singer David Lee Roth for the first time in 22 years.

Considered by fans and media alike as one of the most highly anticipated tours in rock and roll history, Roth, guitarist Eddie Van Halen and drummer Alex Van Halen will perform with Eddie's son, Wolfgang who joins the line-up as the band's bass player. Van Halen and Roth have not performed or recorded together since 1984's classic multi-platinum album 1984 and subsequent tour, making this tour truly a historic event.

25 dates in all were announced today for the tour which is slated for a September 27th kick-off in Charlotte, North Carolina. Tickets for select dates on the tour go on sale beginning on Saturday, August 18th and are available on www.LiveNation.com. A complete list of confirmed dates can be found HERE. The Van Halen tour is being produced by Live Nation. Individuals who have the Citi® / AAdvantage® card, the official credit card of the tour, will be offered access to purchase preferred seats to all U.S. shows.

Fans can enjoy the ultimate Van Halen experience including concert pre-show parties, backstage access, premium seating and more. For additional details go to www.ILoveAllAccess.com.

Fans are encouraged to also check in at www.Van-Halen.com or www.DavidLeeRoth.com for additional information.

Van Halen remains one of the most important and influential bands of all time. Formed in Los Angeles in 1974, the band quickly won a loyal hometown fan base with their electrifying live shows. From the moment they released their self-titled 1978 debut album, Van Halen shook the foundations of rock, thanks largely to Roth's peerless showmanship, Eddie Van Halen's revolutionary guitar virtuosity and their songwriting abilities. It changed rock music forever.

The band's first album proved one of the biggest selling rock debuts, with key tracks like "Eruption," "Running with the Devil," "Jamie's Cryin'," "You Really Got Me" and "Ain't Talkin' 'Bout Love" leading the way. The next year, the band followed up with Van Halen II, which included the hit "Dance the Night Away."

Subsequent albums like Women and Children First (1980), Fair Warning (1981) and Diver Down (1982), along with worldwide touring, solidified the band's reputation for innovative and unparalleled live performances. Classic Van Halen tracks from the early 80's include "Everybody Wants Some," "Unchained", "And The Cradle Will Rock", "Beautiful Girls", "Mean Street" and "Somebody Get Me A Doctor" just to name a few.

With their sixth album, released in, and titled 1984, Van Halen rose to stratospheric heights. Recorded at Eddie Van Halen's 5150 Studios, the multi-platinum smash yielded one of Van Halen's signature hits, "Jump," which remained #1 on the Billboard charts for an astounding five weeks straight. Other hits from the album include "Panama," "Hot For Teacher" and "I'll Wait."

The band's record of achievement is hard to top. Presented with two Diamond Award RIAA Certified Status' for their albums Van Halen and 1984, Van Halen joins an elite short list of two time Diamond Award honorees in the history of the music industry. The Diamond Award is presented to an artist for album sales of 10 million or more units. They are also in the Guinness Book of World Records for having the most #1 hits on Billboard's Mainstream Rock chart than any other band in history.

Inducted into the Rock And Roll Hall of Fame in March of this year, Van Halen has produced a treasured body of work that fans will admire for decades to come.


Sooooo, who's going to Cleveland with me in October? WOOT!!!! Fucking Diamond Dave baby!!! I haven't seen Van Halen since 1984 and damned if it ain't about time to get "Unchained".

While you were sleeping, in front of the t.v., we got sold out.

I've been following this for sometime, actually since last year, but it's about to come into law, and I figured that you'd like to see it. If you don't know what "Posse Comitatus" is, look it up, you'll wish that you had sooner.

While you're at it, maybe you should take a look at how close martial law might be.

Keep in mind that the whole reason that you're reading the rest of this post is so I can say, "I told you so, you pathetic, complacent, fucks!"

Congress passed a controversial bill which grants the President the right to commandeer Federal or even state National Guard Troops and use them inside the United States. This bill, entitled the John Warner Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122.ENR), contains a provision, (Section 1076) which allows the President to:

“...employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to...

1. restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States..., where the President determines that,...domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order;
2. suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy...” [3]

Senator Patrick Leahy and others have condemned Section 1076 because it effectively nullifies the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C. 331-335) and gives the President the legal ability to define under what conditions martial law may be declared. [4]

H.R.5122 was signed into law by President Bush on October 17, 2006, and will take effect October 1, 2007 (unless an earlier effective date is established by regulation). "On the same day, Bush signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which abolishes the legal protection of habeas corpus, authorizes the president to detain and jail anyone (even US citizens) without charge and subject them to harsh interrogation that may or may not involve torture." [5]

President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law (1). It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President's ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions.

Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the President to declare a "public emergency" and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder."

President Bush seized this unprecedented power on the very same day that he signed the equally odious Military Commissions Act of 2006. In a sense, the two laws complement one another. One allows for torture and detention abroad, while the other seeks to enforce acquiescence at home, preparing to order the military onto the streets of America. Remember, the term for putting an area under military law enforcement control is precise; the term is "martial law."

Section 1076 of the massive Authorization Act, which grants the Pentagon another $500-plus-billion for its ill-advised adventures, is entitled, "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies." Section 333, "Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law" states that "the President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of ("refuse" or "fail" in) maintaining public order, "in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy."

For the current President, "enforcement of the laws to restore public order" means to commandeer guardsmen from any state, over the objections of local governmental, military and local police entities; ship them off to another state; conscript them in a law enforcement mode; and set them loose against "disorderly" citizenry - protesters, possibly, or those who object to forced vaccinations and quarantines in the event of a bio-terror event.

The law also facilitates militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters, so called "illegal aliens," "potential terrorists" and other "undesirables" for detention in facilities already contracted for and under construction by Halliburton. That's right. Under the cover of a trumped-up "immigration emergency" and the frenzied militarization of the southern border, detention camps are being constructed right under our noses, camps designed for anyone who resists the foreign and domestic agenda of the Bush administration.

An article on "recent contract awards" in a recent issue of the slick, insider "Journal of Counterterrorism & Homeland Security International" reported that "global engineering and technical services powerhouse KBR [Kellog, Brown & Root] announced in January 2006 that its Government and Infrastructure division was awarded an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to support U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities in the event of an emergency." "With a maximum total value of $385 million over a five year term," the report notes, "the contract is to be executed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers," "for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) - in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs." The report points out that "KBR is the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton." (3) So, in addition to authorizing another $532.8 billion for the Pentagon, including a $70-billion "supplemental provision" which covers the cost of the ongoing, mad military maneuvers in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places, the new law, signed by the president in a private White House ceremony, further collapses the historic divide between the police and the military: a tell-tale sign of a rapidly consolidating police state in America, all accomplished amidst ongoing U.S. imperial pretensions of global domination, sold to an "emergency managed" and seemingly willfully gullible public as a "global war on terrorism."

Make no mistake about it: the de-facto repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) is an ominous assault on American democratic tradition and jurisprudence. The 1878 Act, which reads, "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both," is the only U.S. criminal statute that outlaws military operations directed against the American people under the cover of 'law enforcement.' As such, it has been the best protection we've had against the power-hungry intentions of an unscrupulous and reckless executive, an executive intent on using force to enforce its will.

Unfortunately, this past week, the president dealt posse comitatus, along with American democracy, a near fatal blow. Consequently, it will take an aroused citizenry to undo the damage wrought by this horrendous act, part and parcel, as we have seen, of a long train of abuses and outrages perpetrated by this authoritarian administration.

Despite the unprecedented and shocking nature of this act, there has been no outcry in the American media, and little reaction from our elected officials in Congress. On September 19th, a lone Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) noted that 2007's Defense Authorization Act contained a "widely opposed provision to allow the President more control over the National Guard [adopting] changes to the Insurrection Act, which will make it easier for this or any future President to use the military to restore domestic order WITHOUT the consent of the nation's governors."

Senator Leahy went on to stress that, "we certainly do not need to make it easier for Presidents to declare martial law. Invoking the Insurrection Act and using the military for law enforcement activities goes against some of the central tenets of our democracy. One can easily envision governors and mayors in charge of an emergency having to constantly look over their shoulders while someone who has never visited their communities gives the orders."

A few weeks later, on the 29th of September, Leahy entered into the Congressional Record that he had "grave reservations about certain provisions of the fiscal Year 2007 Defense Authorization Bill Conference Report," the language of which, he said, "subverts solid, longstanding posse comitatus statutes that limit the military's involvement in law enforcement, thereby making it easier for the President to declare martial law." This had been "slipped in," Leahy said, "as a rider with little study," while "other congressional committees with jurisdiction over these matters had no chance to comment, let alone hold hearings on, these proposals."

In a telling bit of understatement, the Senator from Vermont noted that "the implications of changing the (Posse Comitatus) Act are enormous". "There is good reason," he said, "for the constructive friction in existing law when it comes to martial law declarations. Using the military for law enforcement goes against one of the founding tenets of our democracy. We fail our Constitution, neglecting the rights of the States, when we make it easier for the President to declare martial law and trample on local and state sovereignty."

Senator Leahy's final ruminations: "Since hearing word a couple of weeks ago that this outcome was likely, I have wondered how Congress could have gotten to this point. It seems the changes to the Insurrection Act have survived the Conference because the Pentagon and the White House want it."

The historic and ominous re-writing of the Insurrection Act, accomplished in the dead of night, which gives Bush the legal authority to declare martial law, is now an accomplished fact.

The Pentagon, as one might expect, plays an even more direct role in martial law operations. Title XIV of the new law, entitled, "Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Legislative Provisions," authorizes "the Secretary of Defense to create a Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Consortium to improve the effectiveness of the Department of Defense (DOD) processes for identifying and deploying relevant DOD technology to federal, State, and local first responders."

In other words, the law facilitates the "transfer" of the newest in so-called "crowd control" technology and other weaponry designed to suppress dissent from the Pentagon to local militarized police units. The new law builds on and further codifies earlier "technology transfer" agreements, specifically the 1995 DOD-Justice Department memorandum of agreement achieved back during the Clinton-Reno regime.(4)

It has become clear in recent months that a critical mass of the American people have seen through the lies of the Bush administration; with the president's polls at an historic low, growing resistance to the war Iraq, and the Democrats likely to take back the Congress in mid-term elections, the Bush administration is on the ropes. And so it is particularly worrying that President Bush has seen fit, at this juncture to, in effect, declare himself dictator.

Counting your vote.

I've watched this video over and over in disbelief. Every time I see it, I get that much more pissed off. I know that it's two hours, and that I lose most of you after 15 seconds, but I would appreciate it if you set aside the time and watched this one. It just may change your life, or at least your perception. It also is relevant to the present time, what with the Iowa straw-poll being botched and all.

While I can no longer embed the video due to the embed code being pulled from Google, and the quality not being good enough, the following link works and the video is of excellent quality. We'll keep putting it up until I can burn a copy of my own and upload it to my server.

Click Me To Watch The Video

Wonder what happened to change Dick's mind? Money?

In 1994, Dick Cheney gave all the right reasons for why we shouldn't have occupied Baghdad when my compatriots and I were there in 1990-91. Keep in mind, he was the SECDEF at the time. Short but sweet.

How we have arrived at our current location in time.

How much of this do you know? If you don't know all of it, you should be ashamed, and you also have nothing to bitch about, ever.

Enjoy.