CAN ONLY LEAD TO THE SAME END

A Perspective … in the end it’s all about disclosure & transparency

    … ARIZONA’S EFFUSIVE ENDORSEMENT OF ILL ADVISED GUN LAWS CAN ONLY LEAD TO THE SAME END

    AS THOSE WHO VOCIFERIOUSLY ENDORSED THE INVULNERABILITY OF THE TITANIC …

R E S T R A I N T

    …CALLING FOR … R E S T R A I N T … IN ARIZONA IS LIKE THROWING RAW RED MEAT IN FRONT OF A PACK OF RABID DOGS …

    R E S T R A I N T … IN ARIZONA IS TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS PACK’N HEAT … WITH ENOUGH BULLETS TO MAKE THE RECENT SLAUGHTER IN TUCSON … LOOK …
    R E S T R A I N E D …

DEATH WIN$

disclosure & transparency
BLOG SITE … http://www.authenticallywired.com

    …IN SPITE OF YOUR GOOD INTENTIONS … MR. MONTINI … AS WELL AS THOSE OF COLUMNIST LAURIE ROBERTS …

    …ARIZONA’S GOVERNOR JAN BREWER AND AZ STATE SENATE PRESIDENT RESSELL PEARCE DID IN FACT CONNECT THE DOTS …

    AND …. D E A T H … WON …

“DUMB-DOWN” THE EDUCATION WE PROVIDE

A Perspective … in the end it’s all about disclosure & transparency

    … MS. ROBERTS … THANK YOU … FOR A NEEDED WAKE UP CALL …

    THOUGH I HEARTILY AGREE WITH YOU …

    I SINCERELY DOUBT ARIZONA HAS THE ABILITY TO … A C T …

    …TRAGICALLY FOR FAR TOO LONG ARIZONA HAS CHOSEN TO “DUMB-DOWN” THE EDUCATION WE PROVIDE … ESPECIALLY REMOVING ANYTHING TO DO WITH … C O M M ON S E N S E …

YES … IT’S DAMN WELL PAST THE TIME FOR AMERICAN CITIZENS TO TAKE BACK OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL OF OUR PUBLIC AIRWAVES

A Perspective … in the end it’s all about disclosure & transparency

    …BEFORE YOU READ THE ARTICLE BELOW IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA TO RENT THE DVD … P I R A T E R A D I O … MOVIIE FROM 2009…

    IT LAYS OUT THE FOUNDATION FOR THE ARTICLE BELOW…

    AND YES … IT’S DAMN WELL PAST THE TIME FOR AMERICAN CITIZENS TO TAKE BACK OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL OF OUR PUBLIC AIRWAVES…

Pirate Radio USA—Take Back the Airwaves …http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/082848-2011-01-29-pirate-radio-usatake-back-the-airwaves.htm?From=News

With the governmental killing of the Internet in Egypt, Americans should wake up and demand that we be given access to the airwaves. I do not understand how it became the property of the federal government to dole out in the first place.

Pirate Radio

It is the general consensus of the political class, and government officialdom, that as society has developed and created different, and more complex, modes of communication, the drafters of the Constitution would have wanted their successors to provide less freedom from government interference in these new medias, than they did with the pen & quill, or printing press.

For example, to even be permitted to use the air as a means of communication, you first must be approved and licensed by the government, and then subjected to real strict scrutiny by law enforcement and various apparatchiks in federal agencies such as the FCC. And there are a whole lot of things you are not even allowed to talk about.

Well, even the most ardent Federalist in the Second Continental Congress would find all this to be creepy transparent crap—and the FCC’s excuse (protecting radio stations from interfering with each other) hopelessly lame.

Jefferson said that the beauty of the Second Amendment is that it is the right which is not needed until they try to take it away. With all due respect to the ghost writer of the Declaration of Independence, the First Amendment is kind of the same way—we need it most when the government is most actively oppressing people, and urgently and ferociously suppressing thought and speech.

The most modern form of communication, the Internet, is fairly easy to shut down, as Egyptians have recently discovered . Although, there is more than one telecommunications company for the government to persuade in the United States, I think we all observed how zealously the telecoms resisted the emergency requests of George Bush.

And now congress is of a wide bipartisan mind that it should be made even easier for the government to shut down the Internet—so these public servants are in the process of enacting an “Internet Kill Switch” for Obama to pull, in the case of a national emergency.

There is a real good chance that in the thick of things, many of us might suspect the national emergency is really just about the State’s self-preservation—something that is not high on our list of concerns. So we will need a way to communicate with and get information out to like-minded patriots—other than via messages in a bottle, smoke signals and anonymous pamphlets.

Americans need to demand we be given access to the air—I do not understand how it became the property of the federal government to dole out in the first place.

We must take back the airwaves. There have been efforts to push the FCC to grant more low power broadcasting frequencies. And of course, there are the brave (though often fried) Pirate Radio broadcasters.

PIRATE RADIO USA … Unfortunately, the movement kind of dwindled with the development of the Internet. But it is needed more than ever because of our lazy reliance on the very vulnerable Internet.

So my freedom fighter of the week is Oklahoma State SenatorCharles Key (R, Dist 90) who, along with many liberty-mongering causes, last year introduced the Communications Freedom Act (PDF download link), whereby Oklahoma would take back the air over the Sooner State—and allow low-power broadcasting, regardless of whether the operator was licensed by the FCC or not.

Senator Key said he suspects the federal government doesn’t like the “free speech aspect”of low-power FM radio and may view it as a threat. That is the understatement of the year.

So the Fed’s lackeys got together, and the bill never passed —and, thanks to the stooges in the lamestream media, it did not receive the kind of attention it should have.

With each passing day it becomes more and more imperative that we take back the airwaves—and it should be an important part of the liberty movement’s agenda.

    …SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL PIRATE RADIO …. IF YOU DON’T HAVE ONE … START ONE…

DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE

A Perspective … in the end it’s all about disclosure & transparency

    THIS IS A MOST POSITVE SIGN … The English-language version of the Arab network is making the failures of cheap American cable “news” obvious

Al Jazeera’s Egypt coverage embarrasses
U.S. cable news channels

BY ALEX PAREENE … http://newstrust.net/stories/5002647/toolbar?ref=nld&utm_campaign=daily_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=20110130_listing

There is a curfew in effect in Egypt, but thousands of protesters remain in the streets in Cairo, Suez, Alexandria and across the rest of the country. President Hosni Mubarak is expected to speak soon. Police might’ve fired tear gas at praying demonstrators. And Fox reported on how ICE arrested some immigrant sex offenders in Virginia.

Fox, CNN and MSNBC are all acquitting themselves better than they did the day Tunisia’s government collapsed. All of them have reporters in Cairo, and are airing footage of the demonstrations on the streets. But none of them are reporting on the situation as compellingly as Al Jazeera English, which has reporters across the country.

And if you’re in the United States, you can probably only see Al Jazeera English online. If you’re watching Al Jazeera, you’re seeing uninterrupted live video of the demonstrations, along with reporting from people actually on the scene, and not “analysis” from people in a studio. The cops were threatening to knock down the door of one of its reporters minutes ago. Fox has moved on to anchor babies. CNN reports that the ruling party building is on fire, but Al Jazeera is showing the fire live.

CNN, to its credit, is using coverage from the grown-ups at CNN International. MSNBC had Dan Senor (council on foreign relations) reporting from Davos. Yes, liberal MSNBC was getting live analysis from a neoconservative former spokesperson for the occupying U.S. government in Iraq. Fox just had former U.N. Ambassador and ultra-hawk John Bolton on to warn us about the Muslim Brotherhood. Al Jazeera had an opposition party leader on the phone.

All three of the major U.S. cable news networks are prefacing breaking news on their chyrons with the words “Al-Jazeera reports.” Al Jazeera was criticized for being reluctant to cover the Egyptian protests as zealously as it covered Tunisia — and I can’t speak to that, because I obviously can’t watch the Arab-language version of the channel — but its English-language network is, today, mandatory viewing for anyone interested in the world-changing events currently happening in Egypt. The American networks barely qualify as an interesting supplement.

A bit earlier, Al Jazeera reported on what could be live ammunition fired by police outside the heavily guarded radio and television building. And Fox went live to Chicago, where two men tried to rob a Brink’s truck.

    … JUST MAYBE … WE’LL CHOOSE TO WAKE UP … BEFORE WE REACH THE BOTTOM OF FOLLOWING ALICE DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE …

…LOOKS LIKE THE SHOE IS ON ANOTHER’S FOOT AND WE DON’T LIKE IT…?

A Perspective … in the end it’s all about disclosure & transparency

    …THE POSITION PAPER BELOW BY DICK MORRIS OFFERS AN INTERESTING PERSPECTIVE THAT AMERICA MIGHT CHOOSE TO CONSIDER …

    … AMERICA IS NERVOUS THAT …“OTHERS” … APPEAR TO BE LAYING IN WAIT FOR EGYPT TO FALL ALLOWING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO SWOOP IN AND TAKE OVER …

    …THIS IS THE M.O. THAT AMERICA SUCCESSFULLY UTILIZED FOR YEARS …

    …AS OUR LEADERS SOUGHT TO IMPOSE OUR VERSION OF DEMOCRACY AND FREE-ENTERPRISE CAPITALISM ON NATIONS WE COVERTLY UNDERMINED TO SEE FALL …

    …LOOKS LIKE THE SHOE IS ON ANOTHER’S FOOT AND WE DON’T LIKE IT…?

WHO LOST EGYPT … ? ….By DICK MORRIS… Published on DickMorris.com on January 29, 2011 …http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/

In the 1950s, the accusation “who lost China” resonated throughout American politics and led to the defeat of the Democratic Party in the presidential elections of 1952. Unless President Obama reverses field and strongly opposes letting the Muslim brotherhood take over Egypt, he will be hit with the modern equivalent of the 1952 question: Who Lost Egypt?

The Iranian government is waiting for Egypt to fall into its lap. The Muslim Brotherhood, dominated by Iranian Islamic fundamentalism, will doubtless emerge as the winner should the government of Egypt fall. The Obama Administration, in failing to throw its weight against an Islamic takeover, is guilty of the same mistake that led President Carter to fail to support the Shah, opening the door for the Ayatollah Khomeini to take over Iran.

    … THE POSITION PAPER BY JEFF COHEN TO FOLLOW OFFERS ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE ABOUT EGYPT & AMERICAN INTERVENTION …

US Cynicism Explodes in Egypt … By Jeff Cohen … January 29, 2011

Editor’s Note: As a popular uprising challenges the pro-U.S. dictatorship in Egypt, Washington’s cynical strategy of talking about democracy while relying on repressive Arab regimes to maintain order is entering a dangerous moment.

The course of this history could have been quite different, as Jeff Cohen notes in this guest essay:

In the last year of his life, Martin Luther King Jr.questioned U.S. military interventions against progressive movements in the Third World by invoking a JFK quote: “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

Were he alive to have witnessed the last three decades of U.S. foreign policy, King might update that quote by noting: “Those who make secular revolution impossible will make extreme Islamist revolution inevitable.”

For decades beginning during the Cold War, U.S. policy in the Islamic world has been aimed at suppressing secular reformist and leftist movements.

Beginning with the CIA-engineered coup against a secular democratic reform government in Iran in 1953 (it was about oil), Washington has propped up dictators, coaching these regimes in the black arts of torture and mayhem against secular liberals and the Left.

In these dictatorships, often the only places where people had freedom to meet and organize were mosques — and out of these mosques sometimes grew extreme Islamist movements. The Shah’s torture state in Iran was brilliant at cleansing and murdering the Left – a process that helped the rise of the Khomeini movement and ultimately Iran’s Islamic Republic.

Growing out of what M.L. King called Washington’s “irrational, obsessive anti-communism,” U.S. foreign policy also backed extreme Islamists over secular movements or government that were either Soviet-allied or feared to be.

In Afghanistan, beginning before the Soviet invasion and evolving into the biggest CIA covert operation of the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained native mujahedeen fighters — some of whom went on to form the Taliban. To aid the mujahedeen, the U.S. recruited and brought to Afghanistan religious fanatics from the Arab world — some of whom went on to form Al Qaeda.

(Like these Washington geniuses, Israeli intelligence — in a divide-and-conquer scheme aimed at combating secular leftist Palestinians — covertly funded Islamist militants in the occupied territories who we now know as Hamas.)

This is hardly obscure history. … Except in U.S. mainstream media.
One of the mantras on U.S. television news all day Friday was: Be fearful of the democratic uprisings against U.S. allies in Egypt (and Tunisia and elsewhere). After all, we were told by Fox News and CNN and Chris Matthews on MSNBC, it could end up as bad as when “our ally” in Iran was overthrown and the extremists came to power in 1979.

Such talk comes easy in U.S. media where Egyptian victims of rape and torture in Mubarak’s jails are never seen. Where it’s rarely emphasized that weapons of repression used against Egyptian demonstrators are paid for by U.S. taxpayers. Where Mubarak is almost always called “president” and almost never “dictator” (unlike the elected president of Venezuela).

When U.S. media glibly talk about the Egyptian and Tunisian “presidents” being valued “allies in the war on terror,” it’s no surprise they offer no details about the prisoners the U.S. has renditioned to these “pro-Western” countries for torture.

The truth is that no one knows how these uprisings will end.
But revolution of some kind, as King said, seems inevitable. Washington’s corrupt Arab dictators will come down as surely (yet more organically) as that statue of Saddam, another former U.S.-ally.

If Washington took its heel off the Arab people and ended its embrace of the dictators, that could help secularists and democrats win hearts and minds against extreme Islamists.

Democracy is a great idea. Too bad it plays almost no role in U.S. foreign policy.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.