Harry J.Dean Posted August 29, 2010 Share Posted August 29, 2010 No longer involved with politics, I have to ask, "are they doing it all over again". Actions that caused the Dallas murder of Kennedy. They, don't need too, they are since 22 Nov 63 completely embedded within and in control of every facet of life or death. However, they, suffer a human insecurity, even though in control of all possible political and/or other opposition. {outlined in the 1990 manuscript/book, Crosstrails}. Political subversion is right now, stirring once more, having the same willing servants that carried out their 1958 - 1963 first 'five year plan'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted August 29, 2010 Share Posted August 29, 2010 "Again?" Mr. Dean, when have they ever paused long enough to appropriately describe the present situation as happening "again", as if it was a re-start? 14 years ago, this was passed off as a "sincere" obituary, describing a deceased woman's life of "service" to our nation.: http://www.nytimes.com/1996/08/06/world/jean-gerard-58-reagan-envoy-who-led-us-to-leave-unesco.html Jean Gerard, 58, Reagan Envoy Who Led U.S. to Leave Unesco By PAUL LEWIS Published: August 6, 1996 Jean Broward Shevlin Gerard, who as America's permanent representative at Unesco played a key role in President Reagan's decision to pull out of the agency in 1984, died of cancer at her home in Paris yesterday. She was 58. Drago Najman, a friend and former senior Unesco offical, confirmed her death by telephone from Paris, where Mrs. Gerard had been living while undergoing treatment. Active in Republican politics, Mrs. Gerard was appointed representative to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization in 1981 with a mandate from the Reagan Administration to clean up an agency that in its view was badly managed and had become increasingly politicized and anti-Western under its director general, Amadou Mahtar M'Bow of Senegal. The outspoken Mrs. Gerard tried to negotiate changes at Unesco headquarters in Paris, but quickly ran into opposition from Mr. M'Bow and his senior staff. Mrs. Gerard and Mr. M'Bow also found themselves at odds over the developing world's campaign to create what it termed a New World Information and Communications Order to be administered by Unesco. This new order was intended to curb the industrialized world's perceived monopoly on the flow of information by drawing up a new code of conduct for journalists and the work they do. But the proposal was opposed by the United States as an infringement of press freedom. On Dec. 28, 1983, the Reagan Administration abandoned its efforts to negotiate change at Unesco when Mrs. Gerard gave Mr. M'Bow notice of America's intention to withdraw from the organization on Dec. 31, 1984, and to end its financial support of the agency, cutting its budget by a quarter. Subsequently Britain and Singapore also withdrew. None have yet returned, although Mr. M'Bow was replaced in 1987 by Federico Mayor, a Spaniard who is regarded as more moderate, and the campaign for a new information order has been abandoned. In 1985, Mrs. Gerard was named Ambassador to Luxembourg, serving there until 1989. She was a director of the Youth Foundation, the N.Y. Genealogical and Biographical Society and the Child Health Foundation. Born in Portland, Ore. in 1938, she graduated from Vassar College in 1959. She married James Watson Gerard, a United States Army officer, the same year. He died in 1987. She earned her law degree from Fordham University in 1977... http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,951440,00.html UNESCO Farewell Monday, Dec. 31, 1984 ...Last week, asserting that "an unacceptable gap clearly remains," Washington made good its threat. Gregory Newell, Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, announced that the U.S. will withdraw from UNESCO at the end of this month. He said that the U.S. was pulling out because the organization continued to exhibit "an endemic hostility toward the institutions of a free society—particularly those that protect a free press, free markets and, above all, individual human rights."... A Free Press, free markets, and above all, individual human rights? http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_589.pdf(bottom of page 32) "..it is possible to provide a partial update of the wealth figures to July 1, 2009 based on two notable developments.... ...Trends in inequality are also interesting.... The share of the top 1 percent advanced from 34.6 to 37.1 percent, that of the top 5 percent from 61.8 to 65 percent, and that of the top quintile from 85 to 87.7 percent, while that of the second quintile fell from 10.9 to 10 percent, that of the middle quintile from 4 to 3.1 percent, and that of the bottom two quintiles from 0.2 to -0.8 percent. ..the share of households with zero or negative net worth, from 18.6 to 24.1 percent." http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2006/200613/200613pap.pdf Currents and Undercurrents: Changes in the Distribution of Wealth, 1989–2004 (a new triennial, SCF, Fed Reserve "Study of Conusmer Finances...will be released shortly after the election...sure to document, even further wealth concentration into the hands of the top ten percent.) January 30, 2006 Abstract This paper considers changes in the distribution of the wealth of U.S. families over the 1989–2004 period using data from the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF)... page 27 ...Ownership shares. For some assets, the distributions of the amounts held are far more disproportionate than the differences in ownership rates. MOST STRIKING is the 62.3 percent share of business assets OWNED BY THE WEALTHIEST 1 percent of the wealth distribution in 2004 (table 11a); the NEXT-WEALTHIEST 4 percent OWNED ANOTHER 22.4 percent of the total. Other key items subject to capital gains also show strong disproportions: THE WEALTHIEST 5 PERCENT OF FAMILIES OWNED 61.9 percent of residential real estate other than principal residences, 71.7 percent of nonresidential real estate, and 65.9 PERCENT OF DIRECTLY- AND INDIRECTLY HELD STOCKS. For bonds, 93.7 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL WERE HELD BY THIS GROUP...." http://hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc080922.htm September 22, 2008 An Open Letter to the U.S. Congress Regarding the Current Financial Crisis John P. Hussman, Ph.D. Why on earth would Congress put the U.S. public behind these bondholders? ... http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/06/10/lincoln/index.html "..In other words, Obama exploited the trust that African-American voters place in him to tell them something that is just absurd: that Blanche Lincoln, one of the most corporatist members of Congress, works for their interests. Bill Clinton did the same with the Arkansas voters who still trust him." http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/03/awlaki/index.html...."If one really thinks about it, it's an incredible spectacle that a lawsuit is being filed with the aim of having Barack Obama enjoined by a Federal Court from killing an American citizen, far away from any battlefield, without any due process whatsoever. That such a suit was never filed during the Bush years, but is now necessary under the rule of this Constitutional Scholar almost a decade after the 9/11 attack, speaks volumes about many important facts." http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/11/khadr/index.html ...Yesterday was a stark reminder that instead of closing the book on the Bush-era military commissions, President Obama is adding another sad chapter to that history. Although President Obama promised transparency and sharp limits on the use of tortured and coerced statements against the accused, at Guantánamo today one military judge ordered that a sentence be kept secret from the public and another military judge allowed statements obtained by abuse and coercion of a 15-year-old to be used at trial. Monday was Day One of the sentencing hearing in the case of Sudanese detainee Ibrahim al-Qosi. Al-Qosi was the first detainee to be convicted under President Obama, in a plea deal entered this June in which he admitted to being an al Qaeda cook and occasional driver. . . . But in an unprecedented move, military judge Air Force Lt. Col. Nancy Paul ordered today that al-Qosi's true sentence will be kept secret until he's released. The judge said the government requested that the sentence be kept secret. A fellow observer of the military commissions here, former Marine judge and law of war expert Gary Solis, here to monitor the commissions for the National Institute for Military Justice, says he has presided over 700 courts-martial and has never heard of a secret sentence. . . .... UPDATE II: Maher Arar -- the Canadian citizen who was abducted by the Bush administration, sent to Syria for 9 months to be tortured, and then denied any justice in American courts even once it was clear that he was completely innocent -- has a superb piece at Huffington Post, entitled: "Why Is Canadian Child Soldier Omar Khadr Being Tried by a Military Court?" The whole thing should be read, but this is how it ends: The final question is: Why is Omar Khadr being tried by a military court if the government is certain he was the one who threw the grenade? Don't they have trust in civilian courts? I think we all know the answer: these military courts are made to convict. After all, the government, as is usually the case, is throwing multiple charges at him in the hope that one of them sticks. This farce trial is already showing us its ugly face: his military judge has just ruled that Khadr's confession can be used in trial. If anyone can recognize the horror and tyranny of America's "War on Terror" abuses, it's Arar. And he clearly recognizes it here. http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/25/time/index.htmlAug 25, 2010 07:26 ET The essence of Time Substantial energy is devoted from many corners to critiquing America's establishment media, but this 2-minute report from The Onion News Network concerning Time Magazine captures so much of what needs to be said that it virtually renders future critiques -- at least of the nation's newsweeklies, other Time/CNN properties, and most television "news" shows -- completely unnecessary: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/11/khadr/index.html I hope that makes all of us very proud. And then there is the issue of the restrictions imposed on reporters covering these travesties. The Miami Herald's Carol Rosenberg -- probably the single most knowledgeable and relentless journalist covering Guantanamo -- was banned in May, along with three Canadian journalists, from attending any further proceedings, a ban that was then reversed as arbitrarily as it was imposed. Last month, she gave a speech to the National Press Club about how arbitrary and oppressive these restrictions are, and adapted that speech into this superb article published by McClatchy. Last night, Rachel Maddow discussed those press restrictions with Newsweek's Mike Isikoff, who is covering the Khadr trial from Guantanamo; it's worth watching this 5-minute segment:... Mr. Dean, you have lived a long life....if you had it to do all over again, a chance to stop these monsters, what would you have done differently, what would you advise us to do to stand in the way of it, now? And don't worry that you cannot advocate for certain tactics of opposition. You can always use the excuse you were working to influence a "leftist" to cross the line, and I can use the defense of entrapment by a former government intelligence agent.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry J.Dean Posted August 30, 2010 Author Share Posted August 30, 2010 "Again?" Mr. Dean, when have they ever paused long enough to appropriately describe the present situation as happening "again", as if it was a re-start? 14 years ago, this was passed off as a "sincere" obituary, describing a deceased woman's life of "service" to our nation.: http://www.nytimes.com/1996/08/06/world/jean-gerard-58-reagan-envoy-who-led-us-to-leave-unesco.html Jean Gerard, 58, Reagan Envoy Who Led U.S. to Leave Unesco By PAUL LEWIS Published: August 6, 1996 Jean Broward Shevlin Gerard, who as America's permanent representative at Unesco played a key role in President Reagan's decision to pull out of the agency in 1984, died of cancer at her home in Paris yesterday. She was 58. Drago Najman, a friend and former senior Unesco offical, confirmed her death by telephone from Paris, where Mrs. Gerard had been living while undergoing treatment. Active in Republican politics, Mrs. Gerard was appointed representative to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization in 1981 with a mandate from the Reagan Administration to clean up an agency that in its view was badly managed and had become increasingly politicized and anti-Western under its director general, Amadou Mahtar M'Bow of Senegal. The outspoken Mrs. Gerard tried to negotiate changes at Unesco headquarters in Paris, but quickly ran into opposition from Mr. M'Bow and his senior staff. Mrs. Gerard and Mr. M'Bow also found themselves at odds over the developing world's campaign to create what it termed a New World Information and Communications Order to be administered by Unesco. This new order was intended to curb the industrialized world's perceived monopoly on the flow of information by drawing up a new code of conduct for journalists and the work they do. But the proposal was opposed by the United States as an infringement of press freedom. On Dec. 28, 1983, the Reagan Administration abandoned its efforts to negotiate change at Unesco when Mrs. Gerard gave Mr. M'Bow notice of America's intention to withdraw from the organization on Dec. 31, 1984, and to end its financial support of the agency, cutting its budget by a quarter. Subsequently Britain and Singapore also withdrew. None have yet returned, although Mr. M'Bow was replaced in 1987 by Federico Mayor, a Spaniard who is regarded as more moderate, and the campaign for a new information order has been abandoned. In 1985, Mrs. Gerard was named Ambassador to Luxembourg, serving there until 1989. She was a director of the Youth Foundation, the N.Y. Genealogical and Biographical Society and the Child Health Foundation. Born in Portland, Ore. in 1938, she graduated from Vassar College in 1959. She married James Watson Gerard, a United States Army officer, the same year. He died in 1987. She earned her law degree from Fordham University in 1977... http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,951440,00.html UNESCO Farewell Monday, Dec. 31, 1984 ...Last week, asserting that "an unacceptable gap clearly remains," Washington made good its threat. Gregory Newell, Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, announced that the U.S. will withdraw from UNESCO at the end of this month. He said that the U.S. was pulling out because the organization continued to exhibit "an endemic hostility toward the institutions of a free society—particularly those that protect a free press, free markets and, above all, individual human rights."... A Free Press, free markets, and above all, individual human rights? http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_589.pdf(bottom of page 32) "..it is possible to provide a partial update of the wealth figures to July 1, 2009 based on two notable developments.... ...Trends in inequality are also interesting.... The share of the top 1 percent advanced from 34.6 to 37.1 percent, that of the top 5 percent from 61.8 to 65 percent, and that of the top quintile from 85 to 87.7 percent, while that of the second quintile fell from 10.9 to 10 percent, that of the middle quintile from 4 to 3.1 percent, and that of the bottom two quintiles from 0.2 to -0.8 percent. ..the share of households with zero or negative net worth, from 18.6 to 24.1 percent." http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2006/200613/200613pap.pdf Currents and Undercurrents: Changes in the Distribution of Wealth, 1989–2004 (a new triennial, SCF, Fed Reserve "Study of Conusmer Finances...will be released shortly after the election...sure to document, even further wealth concentration into the hands of the top ten percent.) January 30, 2006 Abstract This paper considers changes in the distribution of the wealth of U.S. families over the 1989–2004 period using data from the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF)... page 27 ...Ownership shares. For some assets, the distributions of the amounts held are far more disproportionate than the differences in ownership rates. MOST STRIKING is the 62.3 percent share of business assets OWNED BY THE WEALTHIEST 1 percent of the wealth distribution in 2004 (table 11a); the NEXT-WEALTHIEST 4 percent OWNED ANOTHER 22.4 percent of the total. Other key items subject to capital gains also show strong disproportions: THE WEALTHIEST 5 PERCENT OF FAMILIES OWNED 61.9 percent of residential real estate other than principal residences, 71.7 percent of nonresidential real estate, and 65.9 PERCENT OF DIRECTLY- AND INDIRECTLY HELD STOCKS. For bonds, 93.7 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL WERE HELD BY THIS GROUP...." http://hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc080922.htm September 22, 2008 An Open Letter to the U.S. Congress Regarding the Current Financial Crisis John P. Hussman, Ph.D. Why on earth would Congress put the U.S. public behind these bondholders? ... http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/06/10/lincoln/index.html "..In other words, Obama exploited the trust that African-American voters place in him to tell them something that is just absurd: that Blanche Lincoln, one of the most corporatist members of Congress, works for their interests. Bill Clinton did the same with the Arkansas voters who still trust him." http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/03/awlaki/index.html...."If one really thinks about it, it's an incredible spectacle that a lawsuit is being filed with the aim of having Barack Obama enjoined by a Federal Court from killing an American citizen, far away from any battlefield, without any due process whatsoever. That such a suit was never filed during the Bush years, but is now necessary under the rule of this Constitutional Scholar almost a decade after the 9/11 attack, speaks volumes about many important facts." http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/11/khadr/index.html ...Yesterday was a stark reminder that instead of closing the book on the Bush-era military commissions, President Obama is adding another sad chapter to that history. Although President Obama promised transparency and sharp limits on the use of tortured and coerced statements against the accused, at Guantánamo today one military judge ordered that a sentence be kept secret from the public and another military judge allowed statements obtained by abuse and coercion of a 15-year-old to be used at trial. Monday was Day One of the sentencing hearing in the case of Sudanese detainee Ibrahim al-Qosi. Al-Qosi was the first detainee to be convicted under President Obama, in a plea deal entered this June in which he admitted to being an al Qaeda cook and occasional driver. . . . But in an unprecedented move, military judge Air Force Lt. Col. Nancy Paul ordered today that al-Qosi's true sentence will be kept secret until he's released. The judge said the government requested that the sentence be kept secret. A fellow observer of the military commissions here, former Marine judge and law of war expert Gary Solis, here to monitor the commissions for the National Institute for Military Justice, says he has presided over 700 courts-martial and has never heard of a secret sentence. . . .... UPDATE II: Maher Arar -- the Canadian citizen who was abducted by the Bush administration, sent to Syria for 9 months to be tortured, and then denied any justice in American courts even once it was clear that he was completely innocent -- has a superb piece at Huffington Post, entitled: "Why Is Canadian Child Soldier Omar Khadr Being Tried by a Military Court?" The whole thing should be read, but this is how it ends: The final question is: Why is Omar Khadr being tried by a military court if the government is certain he was the one who threw the grenade? Don't they have trust in civilian courts? I think we all know the answer: these military courts are made to convict. After all, the government, as is usually the case, is throwing multiple charges at him in the hope that one of them sticks. This farce trial is already showing us its ugly face: his military judge has just ruled that Khadr's confession can be used in trial. If anyone can recognize the horror and tyranny of America's "War on Terror" abuses, it's Arar. And he clearly recognizes it here. http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/25/time/index.htmlAug 25, 2010 07:26 ET The essence of Time Substantial energy is devoted from many corners to critiquing America's establishment media, but this 2-minute report from The Onion News Network concerning Time Magazine captures so much of what needs to be said that it virtually renders future critiques -- at least of the nation's newsweeklies, other Time/CNN properties, and most television "news" shows -- completely unnecessary: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/11/khadr/index.html I hope that makes all of us very proud. And then there is the issue of the restrictions imposed on reporters covering these travesties. The Miami Herald's Carol Rosenberg -- probably the single most knowledgeable and relentless journalist covering Guantanamo -- was banned in May, along with three Canadian journalists, from attending any further proceedings, a ban that was then reversed as arbitrarily as it was imposed. Last month, she gave a speech to the National Press Club about how arbitrary and oppressive these restrictions are, and adapted that speech into this superb article published by McClatchy. Last night, Rachel Maddow discussed those press restrictions with Newsweek's Mike Isikoff, who is covering the Khadr trial from Guantanamo; it's worth watching this 5-minute segment:... Mr. Dean, you have lived a long life....if you had it to do all over again, a chance to stop these monsters, what would you have done differently, what would you advise us to do to stand in the way of it, now? And don't worry that you cannot advocate for certain tactics of opposition. You can always use the excuse you were working to influence a "leftist" to cross the line, and I can use the defense of entrapment by a former government intelligence agent.... The monster{s} cannot be successfully opposed. It cannot even be voted-out. The monster is one ridged although semi-secret policy that is and must be followed by either political party representing United States government offices, an unrelenting thrust in an often cruel,extreme and costly design to complete an alleged one new world dream that is directed from above and behind the scenes by an 'all-powerful' American religious/political combination. A Combine that publicly suggests and is now demonstrating it's supposed opposition to the status quo, a psychological and successful 'method-of-reversal' gaining massive numbers of misled patriotic support while their true aim is to preserve continues control this ongoing religious/political status quo they themselves created for the United States and the world. If we cannot impede the monstrous anti-Constitutional beast, persons should now begin to identify the the traitorous Combination, with it's obvious perpetrators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 ....The monster{s} cannot be successfully opposed. It cannot even be voted-out. The monster is one ridged although semi-secret policy that is and must be followed by either political party representing United States government offices, an unrelenting thrust in an often cruel,extreme and costly design to complete an alleged one new world dream that is directed from above and behind the scenes by an 'all-powerful' American religious/political combination. A Combine that publicly suggests and is now demonstrating it's supposed opposition to the status quo, a psychological and successful 'method-of-reversal' gaining massive numbers of misled patriotic support while their true aim is to preserve continues control this ongoing religious/political status quo they themselves created for the United States and the world. If we cannot impede the monstrous anti-Constitutional beast, persons should now begin to identify the the traitorous Combination, with it's obvious perpetrators. http://www.aclu.org/national-security/rights-groups-file-challenge-targeted-killing-usAugust 30, 2010 ACLU And CCR Charge That Practice Violates The Constitution And International Law The American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) today filed a lawsuit challenging the government’s asserted authority to carry out “targeted killings” of U.S. citizens located far from any armed conflict zone. The authority contemplated by the Obama administration is far broader than what the Constitution and international law allow, the groups charge.... ...“The United States cannot simply execute people, including its own citizens, anywhere in the world based on its own say-so,” said Vince Warren, Executive Director of CCR. “The law prohibits the government from killing without trial or conviction other than in the face of an imminent threat that leaves no time for deliberation or due process. That the government adds people to kill lists after a bureaucratic process and leaves them on the lists for months at a time flies in the face of the Constitution and international law.” The groups charge that targeting individuals for execution who are suspected of terrorism but have not been convicted or even charged – without oversight, judicial process or disclosed standards for placement on kill lists – also poses the risk that the government will erroneously target the wrong people.... ...According to today’s legal complaint, the government has not disclosed the standards it uses for authorizing the premeditated and deliberate killing of U.S. citizens located far from any battlefield. The groups argue that the American people are entitled to know the standards being used for these life and death decisions. “A program that authorizes killing U.S. citizens, without judicial oversight, due process or disclosed standards is unconstitutional, unlawful and un-American,” said Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU. “We don’t sentence people to prison on the basis of secret criteria, and we certainly shouldn’t sentence them to death that way. It is not enough for the executive branch to say ‘trust us’ – we have seen that backfire in the past and we should learn from those mistakes.” CCR and the ACLU were retained by Nasser Al-Aulaqi to bring a lawsuit in connection with the government’s decision to authorize the targeted killing of his son, U.S. citizen Anwar Al-Aulaqi, whom the CIA and Defense Department have targeted for death. The complaint asks a court to rule that using lethal force far from any battlefield and without judicial process is illegal in all but the narrowest circumstances and to prohibit the government from carrying out targeted killings except in compliance with these standards.... http://www.aclu.org/national-security/al-aulaqi-v-obama http://www.ccrjustice.org/targetedkillings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now