VENERDI' 7 MARZO ore 18:00

Città dell'Altra Economia ROMA - Largo Dino Frisullo (vicino al Villaggio Globale, zona Piramide)

presentazione e proiezione del film "ZERO" ovvero: perchè la verità ufficiale sull' 11 settembre è un falso.

Da un'inchiesta di Giulietto Chiesa.

A seguire: dibattito con i registi Franco Fracassi e Francesco Trento.

Ingresso gratuito, raccolta fondi a sostegno della produzione del film.

Organizza: Alternativ@Mente, www.alternativamente.info
info 3331135131 Enrico Del Vescovo

SPOOK and NUKE
GOP Primary Tactic

By Captain Eric H. May
Military Correspondent

Doomsday Klock

"Houston is at risk of a major terrorist strike. There is no doubt about this... There is simply no question -- they are looking to hurt us again... Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. The Department of Homeland Security says Houston is one of the highest risk cities in the country, in the same category as New York and Washington." -- Commander Brian Klock

HOUSTON, Feb. 29 -- Cmdr. Brian Klock, a Navy Reserve intelligence officer, is on a mission to gain control of Southeast Texas Congressional District 22, the same petro-patch that once belonged to Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

A strong showing in Tuesday's state Republican primary could put him in a runoff contest for the Republican nomination of this most Republican area. Several of the 10 candidates vying for the party nomination have military and military contractor backgrounds. If none of them garners a majority of the primary votes, then Klock could become a viable runoff candidate.

It's hard to imagine being a more menacing figure than DeLay, known as "The Hammer" and "The Exterminator" before corruption charges ended his career, but Klock succeeds in spades. On Feb. 25 he pasted a huge billboard on Houston's Southwest Freeway showing the city's downtown district being consumed by a nuclear fireball rising up into a mushroom cloud. His inscription read: "The Threat Is Real -- Ask Brian Klock."
http://www.klockforcongress.org/node/30

Accused of terrorizing the public, he offered a hasty excuse that strongly argued against both his intelligence and his honesty. "I want to make sure we didn't show it as a nuclear attack because I personally thought that would be over the top," Klock said. "It's up to the viewer to imagine what kind of weapon caused the fire."

Cuckoo Klock

"Politicians seem embarrassed by, and unwilling to use, America’s awesome place in the world as the greatest force for good for all mankind. I am a proud American and military man who knows how to keep and use a strong military." -- Cmdr. Brian Klock

Brian "I'm not a politician" Klock, as he styles himself, isn't subtle. For nearly two months now, since he announced his candidacy in early January, he has been plugging his guts with the military's "Meals, Ready to Eat" (MRE's) to boost the cause against "Islamofascists" -- and boost his superpatriot image in the process. He portrays himself as a lofty hawk bravely soaring above the Homeland state and global war in his counter-terror and counter-intelligence capacities. He boasts of having been alerted on the afternoon of 9/11, 2001 that he would be going on active duty for the government -- but he is utterly unwilling to discuss what he was doing or where he was for several years, only saying cryptically that he was abroad.

There's an old joke that we've used forever in military intelligence circles: "Ask me no questions. If I tell you the answer I have to kill you!"

There are few places in the United States where a character right out of the movie Dr. Strangelove, like Cmdr. Klock, could hope to impress his neighbors -- as anything but a dangerous militarist, that is. District 22, south and east of Houston and home turf for Big Oil, is one of those few places. It is an amalgamation of blue-collar rednecks in gas guzzling pickup trucks and well-off suburban Republicans in gas guzzling SUVs.

These were the Christian soldiers who once optimistically marched off to Bush's messianic war on Islamic terror wherever he proclaimed it to be -- which was, coincidentally, in the middle of the Middle East's oil resources. For the most part they believed that Islam was ready to be converted to Christianity, sectarian Iraq was eager for democracy, and postwar gasoline would be a dollar a gallon. They are more or less like the rest of the nation, God love them, and their greatest flaw is their blind patriotism -- which is what Cmdr. Klock is counting on.

Klockwork

"I know a threat when I see it, and I am not afraid to take action. Today, I am sounding the alarm and leading you to join me in addressing the grave danger Houston faces from terrorists who want to destroy everything most precious to us -- our families, our homes, and our way of life." -- Cmdr. Brian Klock

Covert Cmdr. Klock is waging a terror war on the public consciousness with his "vote for me or die" approach, and he has some professional help of my acquaintance that purpose. Lt. Col. Gordon S. Fowkes and I were both members of the Army's 75th Division in Houston, which specialized in conducting large-scale training exercises. Whereas my own specialties were military intelligence and public affairs, Fowkes' background was military intelligence and psychological operations -- making him a perfect addition to the Klock fear campaign.

Whereas I wrote military analysis for the Houston Chronicle -- accurately predicting that Iraq would turn into a "quicksand war," Fowkes has intermittently worked as a Bush League military expert in the local media, a bellicose cheerleader yelling his heart out for the cheerleader in chief, exhorting a discouraged public to keep rooting for an eventual victory in the great game of war.

A few days after the largely unreported Battle of Baghdad in early April, 2003, Fowkes and I had a polite clash in an assembly at the University of Houston. It was about whether media coverage from Iraq had become a public affairs operation in the US public interest (as he asserted, or a psychological operation against the US public interest (as I asserted). I believe time has vindicated me, both in my negative predictions for the Iraq war and in my negative analysis of the US media's role in promoting, not reporting, the war.

In 2004 this dark character in Klock's dark horse campaign warned me that meddling with Bush administration illegalities -- as I had done in a complaint filed with the Army Inspector General -- was a hazardous undertaking at best. Reading his words, it's hard for me to judge whether he was being helpful or threatening:

"There may be evil plots, black bag operations, et al... I recommend that you seek professional help in order to protect your freedoms, rights, opinions, and personal safety. I did. And am alive because I did." Lt. Col. Fowkes to Capt. May, Feb. 5, 2004.

A couple of years later a minor flotilla of swift boaters attacked me and my flagship newspaper, The Lone Star Iconoclast, for our journalism, and they summoned Fowkes for support as a high-ranking Internet troll. According to Klock campaign manager Charlie Sena, Fowkes warned Klock & Co. to steer clear of me this week, as I was trying to interview them. Both Klock and Fowkes have refused to comment for this article.

Fowkes isn't the only dubious character associated with the Klock campaign. The grand admiral of swift boating, Texas millionaire Bob Perry, has patted Klock's back and padded his bank to help him along. Perry's endorsement and support bode well for Klock, since the dirty politics godfather gave similar patronage to up-and-coming George W. Bush in his Texas days, and to prior District 22 representative Tom DeLay.

Klockwise

"CDR Brian Klock's "Houston at Risk" billboard states the obvious, that Houston's refineries are an accident waiting to happen, even on purpose..." -- Lt. Col. Gordon S. Fowkes

Klock's mantra of a looming terrorist threat against Houston is old material, first written over five years ago by a local military analyst for publication by the Houston Chronicle. "Don't laugh at duct tape; it saves lives" http://www.ghosttroop.net/ducttape.htm made the same arguments that Klock is using now. I should know, I wrote it.

In those days I was a supporter of the official account of 9/11 as an attack carried out by Al Qaeda under the direction of bin Laden. In the five years since then, I've learned better. On Feb. 23, just two days before the Klock campaign billboard showed Houston being nuked, my most recent terror analysis was published worldwide after being translated into several languages: "False Flag Prospects, 2008 -- Top Three US Target Cities" http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=...

In last week's column, I repeat my assertion the five years earlier -- and Klock's assertion of two days later -- that Houston is the nation's top terror target. There has been one all-important change in my thesis, though: I no longer believe that Houston was in danger from Al Qaeda and bin Laden, but rather from "Al CIAduh" and Bush.

Call me a conspiracy theorist if you wish, but Cmdr. Klock, a candidate who nukes Houston on a billboard, won't answer questions about his spooky past, won't return media calls and hangs out with a PSYOPS specialist is a pretty creepy character at best. At worst, he and his cronies from the global war and Homeland state may not be running a political campaign at all -- they may be running a military campaign to set up a false flag attack in Southeast Texas, and to explode the first nuke of World War III.

# # #

Captain May is a former Army military intelligence and public affairs officer, as well as a former NBC editorial writer. His political and military analyses have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, the Houston Chronicle and Military Intelligence Magazine. For more information, or for his interview schedule, refer to his homesite:
http://www.spiritone.com/~pazuu/pow-mia/Ghost_Troop_Ca...

Il CDR/Roma promuove due giorni di approfondimento sul rapporto tra media e Cuba e sulla condizione femminile a Cuba. Saranno inoltre proiettate tre videoinchieste realizzate, sempre dal CDR, a Cuba nel novembre del 2007.

Positive transformations in society are produced by the actions of popular movements and not by governments. As has been clearly illustrated in the case of Venezuela, as well in other parts of Latin America, the will for change of the majority has been channelled and co-opted by a new bureaucracy which tries, by all available means, to tighten its grip on power. Since 1999 the survival at any cost of the new government has been its principle aim, and in the centralisation, militarization and personalisation that have been promoted under the euphemism ‘revolutionary process’, one of its principal tasks has been to pacify and co-opt the wide array of power structures and protagonists who, during the 1990’s, struggled to end the domination of Acción Democrática and COPEI, the two political parties who successively governed the country since 1958.

Believing themselves to be represented by the executive bandwagon that came to power at the end of 1998, dozens of social movements who had rejected neoliberalism, the privatisation of public services, the various massacres carried out by the Army (Yumare, El Amparo, etc), and the diverse exploitative and exclusivist policies of previous governments, decided to give president Chavez their full backing, literally handing him a blank cheque. The oppressed peoples of Venezuela decided to set aside their own issues and demands in order to assume, as their own, the policies of the new regime. Thus similarly, community and grass roots organisations abandoned their own reflections and ways of doing things, their autonomy of thought and action, in order to internalize and repeat the discourses and logic of those who proclaimed to be working in the interests of the people.

After nine years of this government, aided by the greatest economic boom in the last thirty years and the support of all public authorities, we start to discover and corroborate the fact that nothing has really changed. That we have changed the names of our leaders but continue to be as oppressed as we ever were. That those that have sullied the word ‘revolution’, and other similar ideas, have managed our misery in order to secure their place in the elite of the rich and privileged. In contrast, others, disenchanted by the ‘Bolivarian’ project and blinded by rage, have moved from supporting today’s oppressors to supporting those who oppressed us yesterday, apply the mistaken strategy of opting for the ‘lesser evil’. And like their Chavista opposites they have mortgaged their freedom in order to be led by another faction who decide, from above, what tasks must be undertaken. We appeal to both groups: It is now time to recuperate our autonomy as a first step towards constructing real change.

- What is Autonomy?

Autonomy is the capacity to create our own working structures and ways of doing things, and to question that which we have inherited from history. The term is constructed by combining two Greek words ‘autos’ and ‘nomos’ which together mean literally to make one’s own law. Autonomy, in political terms, is the possibility that human beings should be capable of defining, in a free way, their own projects in life, that it should be they who organise and decide, in the most democratic way possible, all of the elements that affect their daily lives, from work to sexuality, from how we use our free time to nutrition etc.

The opposite of autonomy is heteronomy, to live under rules that we don’t decide. Authority educates us in servitude, as it is always others who make the decisions, and these measures, as well as the institutions that enforce them, are called sacred and unquestionable. An individual starts to become autonomous when they begin to ask themselves if things must always be as they are, or if they could work better in other forms. Thus it is said that autonomy is an endless interrogation, that it not detained by anything, and that it even constantly questions its preliminary conclusions. If the State, Government, the Army and prisons are unjust, can they not be changed for something better? An autonomous individual never loses sight of the fact that the rules for the functioning of society are created by people, and that they can be substituted at any moment, by the very same people, when they plot against the common good. Individual autonomy is produced through free reflection and deliberation, made concrete through one’s own thought, and through being the sovereign agent of one’s self and one’s actions.

A Russian revolutionary, Mikhail Bakunin, affirmed that the freedom of others infinitely elevates one’s personal freedom. An autonomous individual understands that he/she cannot be independent if they live in an oppressive and unjust society, thus they organise with their counterparts in order to confront those who seek to limit the enjoyment of their rights and freedom. Autonomy proposes self-organisation, rejecting external influences, creating its own forms of organisation, that work for the objectives mapped out by the actual people involved. Thus it is that autonomous social movements are popular organisms that respond to the necessities voiced by their members, and not to the decrees of any authority. Because they develop in the margins of society, and against the institutions that dominate them, they realise practices of self-management and direct action. An autonomous social movement defines its own struggles which it does not defer, negotiate, subordinate or abandon due to any external influence. This doesn’t mean that they can’t coincide with other movements in the search for common objectives, but that these relations must be equal, preserving the identity of the different parts and strengthening, without any dilution, their original objectives. From another perspective, autonomous social movements generate their own resources, through self-management, thus rejecting the mechanism of subordination of subsidies from the government, political parties and businesses.

All governments need to control belligerent forces, thus they know that they need to reduce the autonomy of the group with the potential to generate real change. On creating by decree the so-called ‘popular power’, the current executive assures itself of channelling the efforts of those at the bottom of the heap in favour of reviving, legitimising and perpetuating the situation of domination, disguising it with pretty names. The resultant state organs, due to their fictitious independence and not having been born out of the peoples struggles, reproduce the vices of the State and of other oppressive institutions. All power, (be it State, municipal, military or popular), possesses an instinct for preservation at all costs, and sooner rather than later will create a new bureaucracy, as perverse as the one that has been replaced.

- Autonomous Struggle, now!

The creation of and experimentation with diverse organisational expressions seeks to generate, here and now, a different culture. Thus autonomy opts for a decision making process based in assemblies, direct democracy, in order to guarantee respect for diversity, slow down hierarchical structuring, authority and the loss of independence and sovereignty in the struggle. As we have alternative practices to those in power, the oppressed will struggle against hegemony as we construct, brick by brick, our own independent culture, a shared identity and imagination. In this process of learning the means should always be coherent with the ends.

The proposal for the current situation is for the creation of a constellation of diverse groups and autonomous movements, self governed by those involved, to fight for the conquest of rights that have been hijacked by authority: housing, worthwhile employment, health, education, personal security, public spaces and quality of life amongst other issues. Some recent experiences such as the indigenous and environmental movement against the mining industry in Zulia and the Committee of Victims in Lara are already moving in this direction. Then, for the creation of multiple spaces for survival and resistance that would be autonomous and completely free from the influence of government and private business, and that would be linked in a horizontal way and through leaderless cooperation. The existence of many social movements would counter the false polarization: neither chavistas nor opposition, these would be people struggling for their own rights and not for the privileges of those above.

The institutions of power will try to co-opt, without doubt, the free belligerence of the oppressed. But, on creating successive insurrectional situations through the autonomous movements, their connection, cohesion, amplification and radicalisation- due to the inability on the part of the government to satisfy their demands- will transform the movements of ephemeral revolt into revolutionary moments and generalised self-management. In this way the autonomous movements have the potential to transform themselves, through insurrection, into truly revolutionary movements. In this there are, however, no short cuts: no politicians with populist masks, nor strong leaders with ‘earthen feet’. This is the lesson that we must learn from the disastrous ‘Bolivarian Socialist government’.

Las transformaciones positivas en la sociedad son producidas por la acción de los movimientos populares y no por los gobiernos. Como ha sido sobradamente demostrado en el caso venezolano, y ha ocurrido en varias oportunidades en América Latina, los sentimientos de cambio de las mayorías han sido canalizados y recuperados por una nueva burocracia que intenta, por todos los medios, eternizarse en el poder. Desde 1999 la supervivencia a toda costa del nuevo gobierno ha sido el principal fin de la estructura misma. Y en la centralización, militarización y personalización promovidas bajo el eufemismo de "proceso revolucionario", una de sus tareas primordiales ha sido la pacificación y cooptación de la infinidad de fuerzas y actores que, durante la década de 1990, peleó por terminar con el dominio del binomio Acción Democrática y COPEI, los dos partidos políticos que gobernaron sucesivamente al país desde 1958.

Al creerse representados por el tren ejecutivo electo a finales de 1998, las decenas de movimientos sociales que habían rechazado el neoliberalismo, la privatización de los servicios públicos, las diversas masacres realizadas por el Ejército (Yumare, El Amparo, etc) y las diversas políticas hambreadoras y excluyentes de los gobiernos anteriores, decidieron darle al presidente Chávez toda su confianza, otorgándole literalmente un cheque en blanco. Los oprimidos y oprimidas de diverso signo dejaron de lado sus propias reivindicaciones para asumir, como suyas, las políticas promovidas por el nuevo régimen. De esta manera, las organizaciones comunitarias y de base abandonaron sus propias reflexiones y manera de hacer las cosas, su autonomía de pensamiento y acción, para internalizar y repetir los discursos y lógicas de otros y otras, quienes decían actuar a nombre del pueblo.

Tras gobernar por nueve años, contando con la mayor riqueza económica de los últimos 30 años y todos los poderes públicos a su favor, empezamos a descubrir y corroborar que todo ha cambiado para ser igual a lo que había antes. Que hemos cambiado el nombre de nuestros amos para continuar estando tan oprimid@s como siempre. Que aquellos que han ensuciado la palabra "revolución", y otras tan bonitas como esa, han gestionado nuestras miserias para hacerse su lugar en la élite de ricos y privilegiados. En contraposición, otra gente, desenamorada del proyecto "bolivariano" y cegada por la rabia, ha pasado de seguir a los opresores de hoy a secundar los dominadores de ayer, en la equivocada estrategia de optar por el "mal menor". Y como sus pares chavistas, han hipotecado su libertad para dejarse conducir por otra cúpula que decide, desde sus alturas, las tareas a realizar. Con unos y otros razonamos: Es hora de recuperar nuestra autonomía como primer paso para construir un verdadero cambio.

- Lo que es la autonomía

Autonomía es la capacidad de darnos nuestras propias reglas de funcionamiento y cuestionar lo que hemos heredado de la historia. El término se construyó combinando dos palabras griegas "autos” y “nomos", que juntas significan literalmente darse a si mismo la ley. La autonomía, en política, es la posibilidad que los seres humanos sean capaces de definir, de manera libre, sus propios proyectos de vida, que sean ell@s mism@s quienes gestionen y decidan, de la forma más democrática posible, cada uno de los aspectos que atraviesan su cotidianidad: desde el trabajo a la sexualidad, del uso de su tiempo libre a la alimentación, etc.

Lo contrario de autonomía es heteronomía, vivir bajo reglas que no decidimos. Los diferentes poderes nos educan para la servidumbre, siendo siempre otr@s quienes toman las decisiones. Y estas medidas, así como las instituciones que las ponen en práctica, se dicen sagradas e indiscutibles. Un individuo comienza a ser autónomo cuando comienza a preguntarse si eso debería ser siempre así, o si por el contrario las cosas pudieran funcionar mejor de una manera diferente. Por ello se dice que la autonomía es una interrogación sin fin, que no se detiene ante nada y que, incluso, revisa constantemente sus conclusiones preliminares. ¿Si el Estado, el gobierno, el ejército y las cárceles son injustos y opresores, no pueden ser cambiados por algo mejor? Un individuo autónomo nunca olvida, por tanto, que son las personas quienes han creado las leyes de funcionamiento de la sociedad. Y por ello pueden ser sustituidas en cualquier momento, por las propias personas, cuando atentan contra el bien común. La autonomía individual se produce a partir de la libre reflexión y la deliberación, concretada en un pensamiento propio, siendo soberano de sí mism@ y de sus actos.

Un revolucionario ruso, Mijail Bakunin, afirmó que la libertad de los demás elevaba la libertad personal hasta el infinito. Un individuo autónomo entiende que no puede ser independiente si vive en una sociedad opresiva y desigual. Por ello se organiza con sus iguales para enfrentar a quienes limitan el goce de sus derechos y su libertad. La autonomía propone la autoorganización rechazando las injerencias exteriores, creando sus propias formas de organización, las cuales trabajarán por los objetivos trazados por l@s propi@s involucrad@s. De esta manera, los movimientos sociales autónomos son organismos populares que responden a necesidades sentidas por sus integrantes y no a los decretos de ningún poder. Al desarrollarse al margen y en contra de las instituciones que los dominan, realizan prácticas de autogestión y acción directa. Un movimiento social autónomo levanta sus propias banderas de lucha, las cuales no posterga, negocia, subordina ni abandona por ninguna razón exterior. Esto no significa que puedan coincidir con otros movimientos para la búsqueda de objetivos comunes, pero estas relaciones deben ser en condiciones de igualdad, preservando la identidad de las partes y reforzando, sin diluir, sus metas originales. Por otra parte, los movimientos sociales autónomos generan sus propios recursos, de manera autogestionaria, rechazando el mecanismo de subordinación de los subsidios del gobierno, partidos políticos y de los empresarios.

Todos los gobiernos necesitan controlar las fuerzas beligerantes, por eso saben que necesitan cercenar la autonomía de los grupos con potencialidad de generar cambios verdaderos. Al crear por decreto el llamado "poder popular", el actual ejecutivo se asegura de canalizar los esfuerzos de los de abajo a favor de oxigenar, legitimar y perpetuar la situación de dominación, maquillándola con nombres bonitos. Los organismos resultantes, debido a su ficticia independencia y no haber sido gestados dentro de la lucha de la gente, reproducen los vicios del Estado y del resto de las instituciones opresoras. El poder, de todos los apellidos (estatal, municipal, militar… o popular) posee un instinto de preservación a toda costa, y más temprano que tarde crean una nueva burocracia, tan perversa como la que han desplazado de la conserjería gubernamental.
 
- Autonomía de las luchas, ahora

La creación y experimentación de diversas expresiones organizativas busca generar, aquí y ahora, una cultura –entendida como la manera de hacer las cosas- diferente. Por ello, la autonomía opta por la toma de decisiones de forma asamblearia, por la democracia directa, por garantizar el respeto a la diversidad, frenar la jerarquización, el autoritarismo y la pérdida de independencia y soberanía en las luchas. Al tener prácticas alternativas a las del poder, los oprimidos combatimos su hegemonía al construir, ladrillo a ladrillo, una cultura propia y diferenciada, una identidad y un imaginario compartido. En este aprendizaje, los medios deben siempre ser coherentes con los fines.

La propuesta para el momento actual es por la creación de una constelación de diversos grupos y movimientos autónomos, autogobernados por sus integrantes, para pelear por la conquista de los derechos secuestrados por el poder: vivienda, empleo digno, salud, educación, seguridad personal, espacio público y calidad de vida, entre otros. Algunas experiencias recientes, como el movimiento indígena y ambiental contra el carbón en el Zulia y el Comité de Víctimas contra la Impunidad en Lara, ya caminan en esta dirección. Luego, la creación de múltiples espacios para la supervivencia y la resistencia, autónomos y totalmente ajenos al Estado y a la empresa privada, relacionados entre sí de manera horizontal y por cooperación sin mando. La existencia de muchos movimientos autónomos romperá la falsa polarización: ni chavistas ni opositores, serán personas luchando por sus propios derechos y no por los privilegios de las cúpulas.

Las instituciones del poder intentarán acorralar, sin duda, la beligerancia libre de los de abajo. Pero al crear sucesivas situaciones insurreccionales difusas por parte de los movimientos autónomos, su conexión, cohesión, amplificación y radicalización –debido a la imposibilidad del gobierno en satisfacer sus demandas-, transformará los movimientos efímeros de revuelta en momentos de revolución y autogestión generalizada. De esta manera los movimientos autónomos tienen potencial de transformarse, por la vía insurreccional, en un verdadero movimiento revolucionario. Y para esto no hay atajos: ni políticos con máscara popular, ni caudillos con pies de barro. Esta es la gran lección que debemos aprender del funesto "gobierno socialista bolivariano".

Hidden node ( by Imc Main and St. petersberg) :

The Fascism that is Everywhere Called Democracy: Este es Anarkia

Home » forums

Author: Submitted by anonymous on Wed, 27/02/2008 - 11:01pm.

Category: News, Other media

Hidden content:

No connection to region [ Oh yeah?]

Moderator: marta (St. petersberg imc)

Throughout all of this, the most bizarre part is the mystery of how the rich and liberals get away with or go along with all of this without debate, defense, analysis or challenge. Can you explain this impossibility? Is it the utter failure of the radicals to say something meaningful, is it the final stages of media domination, brainwashing or hopelessness? The clincher is that all of these problems are increasing and will continue to. Everyday the world makes less sense.

A Mellow and Casual Introduction to the Fascism You Call Democracy

Non Annon
:

We should examine and probably recreate the way that we approach the world around us.
There has always been evil in the world. Definitions and understanding of evil change over time.
Only recently have some of us begun to know and understand enough to make decisions and judgments about the world and our place in it - in the struggle to define, control or defeat evil.

How tragic, but probably to be expected, that just as enough average people begin to question and figure things out that the world becomes so complex and the evil is so integrated into every aspect of our world and our identities, that our knowledge only makes us tear our hair out or retreat into ignorance, carelessness, Evil.

Greed, avarice, hoarding, theft, murder.... are the usual sins. Gandhi's formulation is more real.

What Makes Sense? How Would We Know It?

1. Money?

Everyone, all six billion people, are being taught that more money for everything is good. Wealth is the goal. We all need and deserve more food, cleaner food, more water, cleaner water, more energy, things for children, schools, doctors, medicine, counseling, internet, cell phones, cars, cleaner cars, mass transit, security, public parks, and vacations! Oh, and according to my newspaper in the USA we need more money for lost dog kennels, dog parks, and reversing cosmetic surgery. It's all good, right?

Where does money come from? It doesn't grow on trees, it comes from cutting down trees, and mountains and people and whales. In the US almost all of the money is intimately connected to destroying the environment, occupying other countries, unfair trade, borrowing against the future and through extortion of other countries. You might think that since you are a hairdresser that you are just providing a service. While this is understandable, yet reprehensible since it serves the whims of the rich and wanna be rich, the money to pay your salary comes from these rich or workers who toil for big corporations, the government or the military complex.
Follow the money... then imagine how billons of more people could mange
this evil con game. Then imagine what would happen to the planet if they were successful!

If…If… if

The evil of the US Middle Class - a middle class as a model - or a middle class anywhere, is apparent from above. If we cannot all be middle class then who chooses? The market? The market controlled by the rich countries and the rich people? That's absurd and yet all of these bizarre notions are built into your thinking and your view of the world and what is good and what is evil.

So, as we all revel in our glorious pursuit of happiness, an orgy of consumption, war, obsessions and ecological destruction, let us thank B. OBAMA for promising us painless change where we all get more.

Make those demands everyone, get what you can. Cut in front of the line and take it alllllll (allah?)

Or follow Mr. USA McCain the brain-damaged POW.
At least he is honest, he will deliver the goods the old fashioned way: US Imperialist might and genocide.

Thank Christ's father for this kind of participatory democracy, real choice and enlightenment.

Full speed ahead...