Fascist Empire Planet (Archive)

Thank you Tim for your intervention on this. And "this" is Simon Heffer in full "man-in-pub" mode, ranting about MPs not needing "research assistants". The problem, opines the great man, "stems from MPs' belief that they deserve an entourage."

He would concede an MP needs a secretary, but why do they need research assistants? MPs never used to have them, he says. They just had their secretaries get information from the House of Commons Library. If MPs need advisers, let their parties pay for them. Taxpayers are put upon enough without having to fund such swindles.

I have already declared an interest on this, and our readers will not be at all surprised at our view that Heffer – as he so often does – is talking utter tosh. The real problem is that he needs a "research assistant", as he so quaintly puts it. Myself, I prefer the term, "researcher".

That much is evident from his equally facile comments on Dan Hannan, where he tells us to, "Forget Hitler, the EU is modelled on the USSR". Daniel Hannan, he says, made only one mistake when he drew comparisons in the European Parliament between the way the European Union does business and how the Nazis were enabled to set up a dictatorship in Germany 75 years ago. He could just as easily have compared it with the way business was transacted in Stalin's Russia, and he should have.

This really is classic "man-in-pub" talk. One brief look at the Soviet Constitution should disabuse anyone of the thesis that there is any similarity between Stalin's regime and the European Union, but such niceties are not for the likes of Heffer.

In fact, Heffer is the classic research-free "journalist". Between prejudice and finger, no brain intervenes, no pause to collect information in a systematic way, no attempt to evaluate it and analyse it. Instead, he writes off-the-cuff, sometimes getting it right, but most often not.

Yet this is the man who rants about the Tories and their lack of policy, a man who clearly cannot join the dots. How does he think a policy is actually formulated? Does he think that Cameron sends his secretary down to the House of Commons Library and asks for one?

The big problem, in fact, is that the Conservative Party does not do enough research and much of that which is done is of such poor quality. That, more often, is due to the low status afforded to the occupation of researcher, the inability to understand the role and value of research, and thus the traditionally low pay in the calling, building a self-reinforcing cycle.

But, against the might of the government with all the might of the civil service and the enormous resources available to it, how does Heffer think that MPs can operate in the task he would have them do - holding the government to account?

The worst of it, though, is that – judging from the comments on his online piece – so many people agree with this rather stupid man. The seductive rant of the man-in-pub has a strong following. But this does not make him right.

COMMENT THREAD

February 02, 2008 03:34 PM

From http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1867

Coulter: Hillary is “Our Girl”
Kurt Nimmo

Truth News

February 2, 2008

Case closed. You don’t need any more evidence there is little substantive difference between “conservatives” (neocons) and “liberals” (neolibs) than the pronouncements of the Queen of Hateful Shrill, Ann Coulter, the “author” who registers to vote in multiple jurisdictions and gets away with it.
Hillary is “more conservative” than John McCain, the Manchurian candidate who hates “gooks,” mostly because the Bilderberg Queen and selectee of preference by the Rothschilds and the elite is more on track with the neocon and neoliberal plan to kill recalcitrant Muslims, break their countries into manageable pieces along tribal and ethnic lines, and impose IMF and World Bank schemes on them and thus steal their natural resources and reduce them to slave labor gulag inmates à la “communist” China.
Coulter “absolutely” believes Queen Hillary will be “stronger on the war on terrorism,” that is to say not only killing people who have the misfortune of living in “rogue nations,” but decimating what remains of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Obviously, for Coulter and the neocons, who will soon enough throw their support behind Clinton, McCain’s crude forever war pronouncements are not enough. But then, of course, McCain is but window dressing for the stampede to “elect” Hillary, an expensive circus sideshow designed to make the American people think there is a “democratic” process in the United States and that they actually have a say in who will be the next decider-commander. Not explained is why the elite feel compelled to continue this transparent charade. Nostalgia, maybe?
In order to pretend there is a difference of opinion in regard to Hillary Clinton’s impending anointment as president, Sean Hannity tells us Hillary will “nationalize health care” and “pull the troops out of Iraq,” never mind Clinton is an unabashed warmonger who voted to kill a million plus Iraqis and has repeatedly stated her desire to do likewise to grandmothers and toddlers in Iran. Coulter disagrees and actually tells the truth: the positions of Republicans and Democrats, she avers, are “about that far apart,” and she makes the point by showing us a very small space between her thumb and forefinger.
Hannity’s role as straight man to Coulter’s snake oil dance is obvious enough on its face and his supposed protestation is entirely theatrical as his boss, Rupert Murdoch, has hosted Clinton fundraisers in the not too distant past. This “interfaith ménage,” opines Forbes, redraws “America’s political lines” and is nothing if not Bismarckian realpolitik.
Oh, please. It should be obvious by now to an astute grade school student of current events that the whole thing is rigged and choreographed — albeit rather shoddily — and Coulter is nothing if not a well-paid shill who is tasked with promoting whatever candidate our rulers want. Hillary Clinton and her VP, Barack Obama, will rule the roost in politically correct fashion — as brainwashed liberals are locked in the gender and race vice and dare not complain, lest they be expelled from the herd — and the so-called conservatives, actually GWB bumper sticker neocons, will be brought into the fold by the likes of Coulter, the Queen of Mean.
Of course, Hannity and Limbaugh will play the part of the disgruntled opposition, as Clinton hatred smolders fiercely at the root of the base, and they will be paid handsomely for their petty and operatic disagreement, which is less than meaningless, to say the least, but necessary to assuage the hurt feelings of the aforementioned GWB neocon followers.
John McCain will be selected as the Republican nominee for one reason above all others — to drive an appreciable number of “conservatives” into Camp Hillary. McCain, the Manchurian candidate and Keating Five associate, is ugly and unpalatable enough to accomplish this and the neocon flag-waving base is stupid enough to buy into it and remain none the wiser for the next eight years.A blog with relevant information for the world.

February 02, 2008 02:50 PM

By: Allan Nairn - News and Comments

At about 8:25 Wednesday morning, US Eastern time, AOL's internet welcome screen juxtaposed two AP news stories: "He (McCain) Jumps Ahead in Republican Race: What Will Rudy Giuliani Do Now?" and "Desperate Haitians Eat Dirt: 'One Day I'll Have Enough Food.'"

One thing Rudy Giuliani did after losing the Florida primary was give a speech with the line "The best way to achieve peace is through overwhelming strength."

That could have been said by the rulers of colonial France as they tore the gold from Haiti's mountains, or by Thomas Jefferson as he warned against tolerating Haiti's slave uprising. Or by the US rulers of the '50s through '80s as they backed the Duvaliers as Haiti's dictators, or of the '90s as they backed the FRAPH death squad and imposed a World Bank/IMF plan on Haiti that -- a decade before Wednesday's dirt-consumption update -- began making Haitians hungrier.

It might be true, in theory, that overwhelming strength could achieve peace, but only if wielded by a figure like, say, God, and the Bible, Torah, and Koran all agree that even that scenario makes massacres.

The US founders may not have followed their own stated principles -- few do -- but they were cynically insightful about people in general, so as rich men, some of them slave holders (like Jefferson), they sought to contain the popular "mob" but also to structurally, constitutionally constrain future rulers like themselves.

In stated principle, at least, the US founders feared overwhelming strength in the hands of humans.

But today, the stated principle has reversed.

Giuliani's statement was not peculiar. McCain says things like that all the time, and it was the Clinton administration, where Hillary worked, that produced the 20-year Pentagon plan for "Full-spectrum Dominance," i.e. the ability "to defeat any adversary and control any situation," anywhere, anytime (Jim Garamore, American Forces Press Service [US Department of Defense], "Joint Vision 2020 Emphasizes Full-spectrum Dominance," June 2, 2000).

But if you fully dominate the world, who's going to stop you if you murder, or if you cause people to hunger because of the way you move and concentrate scarce wealth?

Those are the murder and preventable death problems that Americans are free to raise in politics -- but usually don't, but there's also another, straight-power problem that may eventually have to get discussed.

The problem is that though militarily, in some senses, the US still overwhelms, economically the US is becoming one power-center among several.

In his State of the Union President Bush said he'd "make sure America remains the most dynamic nation on earth."

That was possible to do after World War II with the rest of the rich world ravaged, but with nodes of capitalism now having dispersed worldwide it is no longer possible.

The fastest growth will inevitably happen elsewhere and, before long, a number of others will equal the US as centers of capital, exchange, and even innovation (and, on the latter, sooner than later if the US sustains its anti-immigrant hysteria).

What then? Elected US rulers always talk in supremacist, nationalist terms (though they personally and professionally invest globally). If they truly want the US to have/keep overwhelming dominance, their comparative advantage will have to be in gunpowder.

The sensible answer by non-rulers should be: who cares about attaining/keeping dominance? As a means of achieving peace it is discredited. As a means of feeding people, it hasn't produced.

It's more reasonable to search for other means, means toward good ends like ceasing death squad sponsorship, and shifting enough wealth so that people can sustain their strength by eating real food instead of dirt.

February 02, 2008 02:35 PM

Haiti Action Committee

Cite Soleil, a seaside shantytown of more than 300.000 people residing in homes made of cinder blocks with tin roofs, has been described as poorer than India's infamous slums of Calcutta. On any given day it teems with the life's blood of Haiti's poorest citizens.

Despite the twists and turns of what residents describe as several foreign interventions, members of the community still recount with pride how they served as a launching site for former president Jean-Bertrand Aristide's first election campaign in 1990.

Yannick Jean, a frail 70 year-old woman whose longevity itself is a testament to hope, spoke in hushed tones as she washed her clothes in a ditch of dirty water, "We were the ones who presented Aristide to Haiti when he ran for president. He was our greatest hope. I am waiting for him again."

A controversial figure, Jean-Bertrand Aristide is a former Catholic priest who was overthrown twice in Haiti's turbulent political history. His first ouster was at the hands of Haiti's former brutal military with the support of the traditional economic elite who live fabulously wealthy lives as compared to Haiti's average citizens.

Where Yannick Jean washes her clothes probably speaks more to Haiti's current reality and the contradictions of the current United Nation's mission than any expert on development possibly could. Rising above her and creating shadows over her dirty laundry is a huge edifice of new construction that bears the mark GB. It is a new building that covers several acres and is home to the business of Haiti's wealthiest man, Gilbert Bigio.

While the surrounding residents of Cite Soleil are forced to literally eat dirt to stave off hunger, Bigio is a billionaire whose family supported the first coup against Aristide and reportedly helped to back the movement that forced his second ouster in 2004.

One need not look very far to see where Gilbert Bigio's interests lie in relation to Cite Soleil. According to his own company's web site his family maintains controlling interests in sixteen of Haiti's largest companies. They are also the largest Haitian partner in the wireless communications giant Digicel, a mammoth company based in Ireland that has nearly cornered the cellular market in the Caribbean. Bigio's family is not merely wealthy amidst a sea of poverty stricken residents in Haiti, his family represents the Über-wealthy who have benefited most since Aristide's second ouster in 2004.

The Office of Foreign Assets Control of the US government blocked all of the Bigio family's holdings in US banks following the brutal military coup against Aristide in 1991. Since Aristide's second ousting in 2004, the financial wealth of the Bigio family along with those of other well off Haitian clans such as the Mevs, Brandts, Acras and Madsens have nearly doubled according to a confidential source at a private accounting firm.

Not to be forgotten is the fact that Aristide's forced departure in 2004 was legitimized and enforced by a UN authorized mission during the term of former Secretary General Kofi Annan. The fact that a few families of Haiti's traditional elite continue to exact exorbitant profits, while residents of Cite Soleil are forced to eat mud pies and bathe in ditches, has shaken confidence in the non-governmental sector working with the poor in Haiti.

A young woman who began her NGO career to end poverty in Cite Soleil shakes her head in disbelief as she watches throngs wash their clothes and bathe next to Bigio's glistening plant. There are security towers protected by armed guards at every corner of the property while UN forces in large armored personnel vehicles patrol the outer perimeter. She asks not to be identified and comments, "I bought into the development model the UN used to encourage us to come here and invest in Cite Soleil. The US government funds our organization through USAID and I came here to make a difference in these people’s lives. I am now faced with the reality of a humanitarian crisis we cannot be expected to solve. The UN's main thrust seems to be security at any cost. This can only result in the loss of another generation of Haitians in this community being lost to poverty and misery. I am ready to quit unless something changes soon."

Protestors burned tires in front of the Cite Soleil mayor's office earlier this month to protest a Pentagon financed pacification program. The US Department of Defense targeted $20 million in Cite Soleil for the Haiti Stabilization Mission with the stated objective, "to improve access to police and justice, strengthen local governance, provide vocational training and to create jobs through infrastructure and public works projects." Protestors complained that rather than creating jobs and improving living conditions, it represents another heavy-handed attempt by the US to control residents through corrupt local politicos in the mayor's office.

In another corner of this community and trying not to draw attention amidst the children with bloated bellies and the flow of traffic, is a representative of Aristide's Lavalas movement. Mr. Jean- Marie Samedi was brutally beaten and tortured after Aristide's ouster in 2004. He is the leader of a movement called the Base of Lavalas Reflection and gave another view to the already disfigured politics of suffering in this community.

Mr. Samedi commented, "At least the people they called bandits and gangsters shared what they had with the community when they were here. People could eat. They had food and had running water. They didn't have to eat dirt to live or have to wash their clothes and their bodies in ditches of dirty running water."

As if to punctuate Mr. Samedi's point, several children run by with almost blondish hair, a clear sign of malnutrition amongst blacks in this Caribbean nation of 8.5 million people. He continued, "They told us that everything would change after they got rid of the bandits and yet people cannot feed their children. You see them forced to wash in this dirty water. What did the promise of the Bush administration and the UN really mean to the people of Cite Soleil? They have merely continued politics as usual in Haiti. The rich get richer while the majorities are forced to continue to suffer in poverty. I challenge anyone to show me the difference they have made for the majority of the poor in Haiti." Growing visibly angry and bitter Mr. Samedi concluded, "The UN came in here and slaughtered residents who supported Lavalas on July 6, 2005 and again on December 22, 2006. And for what we have to ask? So that Bigio and the Haitian Chamber of Commerce could force us back into accepting this level of poverty? Nothing has changed for the poor in Haiti."

February 02, 2008 02:25 PM

Agence Haitïenne de Presse - Translation by HaitiAnalysis.com

The general director of the Provisional Electoral Council, Jacques Bernard, confirmed on Saturday his resignation after being reassigned last December to this position, in the new CEP.

This decision intervened less than a week after the publication of a presidential ordinance on the general regulations establishing the rules and norms that govern the functioning of CEP, pending the setting up of a permanent electoral institution.

Jacques Bernard had wanted senatorial elections to be organized under the hospices of the internal regulations of 2005-2006 that gave him very much latitude, to the point of having hoisted him under the regime of Gérard Latortue, to the level of head of the former council, to which the actual councilmen opposed themselves.

Indeed, Mr. Bernard explained his resignation by the fact that the government Préval/Alexis did not maintain the internal regulations of 2005-2006, following different encounters during which all the electoral councilmen had declared themselves in favor of the change.

Jacques Bernard made it known that the former formula was one of success, that one should not touch, he said, complaining about the fact that "all decision making powers were transferred". "How could I manage affairs within the current general regulations and without decision making power", he questioned.

Jacques Bernard refused to say if the electoral councilmen can organize good elections without him, and rather asserted that he did not want to speculate.

Prime Minister Jacques Edouard Alexis said that he regretted the resignation of Jacques Bernard and that he hopes it does not have too much negative implication on the realization of the next electoral races.

One-third of the senate that came to term at the beginning of January must be renewed and indirect elections must be achieved.

The government leader deplored that the recent discussions between the members of CEP and the Executive branch to try solve problems, rather ended up with the departure of Mr. Bernard. As for the representative of Pétion-Ville, Steven Benoît, he admitted that Mr. Jacques played an importance role in the former council. But it is not essential, indicated Mr. Benoît, who calls on president René Préval to proceed, in the shortest delays, to the nomination of a new director to support elections within due date.

One will have to undertake everything possible to avoid a new crisis for the country, given the extremely difficult conditions that Haiti is currently facing, declared the representative.

The Spokesperson of the party Fusion of the Social Democrats, professor Micha Gaillard, was allegedly surprised by the resignation of Mr. Bernard, since, he explained, after an encounter between the stakeholders concerned around the internal regulations, the administrative power had been attributed to the latter.

Mr. Gaillard similarly wondered if the elections will be able to happen within foreseen time-frame.

He calls on Jacques Bernard and the members of the CEP to show wisdom in order to help get the country out of this difficult crossroad.

February 02, 2008 02:20 PM

By: Wadner Pierre - HaitiAnalysis.com

For several months there has been a new twist in the history for the poor in Haiti, but the story has been enveloped in silence. The standard of living has been declining, with rising costs of basic goods and a continued lack of social programs. People cannot afford to eat.

Haiti has become a 'republic of NGOs' long dependent on outside aid because of the methodical destruction of its own civil enterprises and popular alternatives.

Around the new-year a huge march against poverty and unemployment took place in the capital of Port-au-Prince. The protestors demanded reparations and that the government represent the interests of the poor.

The most pressing issue for the poor is the most basic commodity of life, food. This week, particularly in the poorest districts, such as Cité-Soleil, people go starving and bathe in muddy streets. In Cité-Soleil, a woman sells small plots of eroded land for a living. She says it "is my life, this is where I earn my daily income."

Haiti's wealthy in the hills of Pétionville, where most foreign journalists spend their time, have profited from the growing gap in wealth.

NGOs more and more fill the abyss, an abyss left by the eroded state. But one must ask: Should NGOs replace the state? Why is this happening? What is the plan of the government? Is the government folding in on itself for the sake of global capitalism?

The Fascists Are Still Capable

A new blow is always being prepared, afraid of what the popular winds might bring. "Resignation", investigation, imprisonment, interpellation of the rich, we must wait for the results. They will tell us what happens. A "democracy" only in rhetoric.

The Catholic church too is following a path of silence when it comes to the life of the poor and the possibility of building an alternative. The homily of the head of Haiti's bishops, at the celebrations of the 65th anniversary of the consecration of the country at Notre Dame du Perpetual Succor and the 165th anniversary of the miraculous cure of people infected with the Vérole (Verrette), was a reminder of where the top religious hierarchy stands. After people had chosen their leaders with dignity, these sons of the Haitian upper and middle classes in the religious hierarchy now appear as an arm of fascism.

They are silent when it comes to unconstitutional governments, jailing, killing, firing, privatization, and coups. This is the structural reality we face in our society.

In the district of Fort-Dimanche one can see the high rising platforms of factories of wealthy Haitian families. Duvalier once used this site to torture his impoverished victims. Next to these sites sit the homes of little children made from piles of garbage. They seek their daily lives in this maze.

A man with a sack over his shoulder who I spoke with in Fort-Dimanche explained that "Life is very difficult, there is no option, we can not stay at home to die, we come here to find life."

We are told over and over that everyone is full, things are improving, the wheels are turning, the United Nations is here, but this is hypocrisy. The living situation is worsening and it is clear to those in the slums. In the public markets one can hear the small merchants analyze the situation.

We are told by the big media that Aristide was an elected dictator, maybe because he cared for the poor? The loads of subsidized rice his government brought into the poor districts hurt the profits of industrialists like Apaid Jr. So today we must eat dirt to let the mansions grow. The cost of food rises by forty percent. Pregnant women eat mud cookies.

Go into the poor neighborhoods, see where the poverty is deep and tell the world what is going on. It is our duty. There is a need for truth. We must tell people the truth.

Visit Wadner's Blog de Port-au-Prince

---

February 02, 2008 02:16 PM

The editorial in The Daily Telegraph today is absolutely right, of course. "There should have been only one story in Parliament this week," it intones: "the ratification of the European Constitution, now called the Lisbon Treaty." It then tells us that the adoption of this text will fundamentally and irrevocably alter the temper of the nation.

But it then moves on to tell us that: "…as far as the country is concerned, by far the bigger story has involved MPs who employ their wives."

To an extent, perhaps, but it is also the case that the leaders of the pack have been the media, and the signs are that the Sunday press will be in full feeding frenzy tomorrow, as they clear their pages in order to "out" those MPs who employ wives and relatives. Yet it is those same newspapers, The Daily Telegraph included, who have given no space at all to the debates in committee on the treaty ratification.

However, the Telegraph editorial develops its theme to suggest that, "the two stories might, oddly, be connected." The constant, low-level anger that voters now feel for their representatives, it says, owes a good deal to the sense that MPs are parasitical. It continues:

The powers they once exercised are now wielded by quangos, judges, Whitehall bureaucrats and EU officials. Ceasing to be authoritative, they have become contemptible. In consequence, voters get much more upset about their salaries and expenses than they did a generation ago.

We are in a vicious circle. The less people respect their parliamentarians, the less prepared those parliamentarians are to defend their privileges. A House that has been demoralised by scandal and contumely is readier to surrender its powers than one that is confident in its supremacy.

Here, the paper does have a point, but it is a very superficial analysis. What it carefully omits is the role of the media which, in its pursuit if the trivia, constantly fails to report the more serious aspects of parliamentary work, itself contributing to the impression that the House of Commons is one long soap opera.

Balancing this, though, the reason why media is giving the Lisbon treaty proceedings so little coverage (like this blog) is that it is simply reflecting the general view that ratification is a done deal. And, in the nature of things, what you cannot alter, you tend not to worry about.

There, the Parliamentarians have only themselves to blame. While they rest on the doctrine of "parliamentary sovereignty", they have been in the forefront in giving it away. As the assiduous Dr D R Cooper recently pointed out (kindly sending us an e-mail), he wrote to The Telegraph on this very theme.

Before MPs resume their debate on the Treaty of Lisbon, he stated, they may care to look at its Declaration 17, which claims that EU treaties and laws have "primacy" over the laws passed by their own Parliament. Then they should look at Parliament's official website, which states that it is "the supreme legal authority in the UK".

From this, writes Dr Cooper, it seems a logical conclusion that the laws it passes must have "supremacy" in the UK - but how can that be so, if EU treaties and laws have "primacy"? Unless there is a subtle distinction between "supremacy", and "primacy", which is perfectly clear to the fine minds in the House of Commons, even if it would elude that of the man on the Clapham omnibus.

Therein lies exactly the point made by The Telegraph editorial. Since MPs have been so keen to divest themselves of their power, it is not surprising that they become increasingly irrelevant until all that is left is the soap opera.

With that, the paper avers, they have lost their self-belief. It concludes: "If they became what they once were - the nation's supreme assembly, a senate of men and women determined to give expression to the aspirations of their electors - voters might mind less about their salaries. Giving those electors the referendum they promised at the last election would be an excellent place to start."

We can only say Amen to that.

COMMENT THREAD

February 02, 2008 12:54 PM

http://gunowners.org/a121307.htmA blog with relevant information for the world.

February 02, 2008 11:43 AM

_________________________


A blog with relevant information for the world.

February 02, 2008 11:40 AM

Mark Morford
San Franciso Chronicle
January 30, 2008

Oh, sweet Jesus, someone actually counted.

Two independent nonprofit journalism groups apparently took enough laudanum and beat down whatever healthy sense of human decency they had in order to plunge straight into that quivering mountain of incompetence that is the official record of the Bush administration, all the false quotes and all the lie-strewn press conferences and all the squinty-eyed fabrications from Dubya, Colin Powell, Condi and Cheney and Rummy et al., that took place in the two years after Sept. 11, 2001, and added them all up.

Is it helpful to know the exact number? Does it make a difference? After all, presidential lying isn't exactly a revelation. Pretty much a national pastime, really. Bill Clinton lied in a harmless civil lawsuit, and was even impeached for it. Of course, his little oral fixation didn't lead us into an unwinnable trillion-dollar war that will scar the nation for multiple generations and has wasted 4,000 American lives and resulted in tens of thousands of wounded, crippled and brain-damaged U.S. soldiers. But that's just splitting hairs, really.

After all, it's common knowledge that, say, George Bush Sr. lied about Iran-Contra and "read my lips" Ronald Reagan lied like a nasty old rug about Iran and aiding the Contras, Lyndon Johnson lied about the Gulf of Tonkin to gain support for the Vietnam War, Harry Truman probably lied about Hiroshima and John F. Kennedy probably lied about the Bay of Pigs, and, well, all presidents lie, really, to some degree or another and with varying degrees of success and historic consequence. Is it not sort of pointless to whine about it?

Fair enough. But there is something truly special about Bush 43. Something so unique, so poisonous and strange that historians are busy right this minute rewriting not only their books, but their entire way of thinking about how we measure and interpret political malfeasance.

It has to do with matters of scale. It has to do with audacity, with sheer recklessness, with BushCo's stunning contempt for all national and international law and historic precedent and human decency. It is the sense that, at bare minimum, the most significant lies told by previous administrations were, by and large, not calculated stabs to the very heart and infrastructure of the entire nation. They were not designed, as Bush's clearly were, specifically to pervert the entire American experiment, to violently shift us from peace-promoting and defense-oriented protector to an arrogant, insular, pre-emptive attacker, widely loathed and mistrusted worldwide.

See, BushCo rewrote the formulas. From WMD to tax cuts, AmeriCorp to Iraq, this administration has officially reset the bar to an all-time low as to what's possible for a truly dreadful, inept president to get away with without some sort of significant repercussion, impeachment or numerous lightning bolts raining down on his soft little monkey skull. Sure, it took leveraging America's most brutal and heartbreaking tragedy in a generation to pull it off, but does the fact the administration exploited 9/11 like a pedophile exploits a child take anything away from the astonishing depth of the abuse?

But maybe you still argue that, even at a whopping 935 calculated lies told specifically to lead us into a bogus war, it makes no difference. Maybe you argue that a lie is a lie, and Bush is no better or worse than Clinton or Reagan and here is a giant cocktail of jaded, raging apathy. Let's all chug it together, shall we?

Fine. If it's a fact that all presidents lie anyway, if there's little we can do to stop them, then let us put forth a new hope. Let us now wish for the next president to lie just as passionately, as powerfully, as strategically as BushCo, and get away with it just as extraordinarily.

But let's make one significant change. Let's urge the new president to lie, well, in the other direction, to lie not in the service of horrific war or in the name of powermongering or to line the pockets of corporate cronies, or even to cover up stupid personal behavior, but rather in the name of sliding through an agenda of - oh my God can you believe I'm going to say it? - peace, nonviolence, international respect, humanitarianism, sex positivism, religious tolerance, progressive education. I know. Crazy.

Yes. Give us now a president who lies, calculatedly and strategically, straight in the face of the hard-right neocons and the evangelicals and the corporate cretins. Let his or her army of lies lull these groups into a false sense of complacency and/or utter soul-deadening fear so they will keep their mouths shut while the rest of us get some real work done.

"As an angry, well-armed God is my witness, I will never push through a national handgun ban," would be a good lie for this new president, thus shutting up the National Rifle Association and assuaging the bogus American cowboy mythology, as his or her army of crazy hippies do the exact opposite and quietly work to make the nation safer and more humane.

The horror! The outcry! Whatever.

Or how about this: "All foreign religions clearly hate and wish harm upon America, and therefore it shall be the policy of this administration to never, under any circumstances, attempt to understand other beliefs, to open our schools and textbooks to include honest religious information, or generally re-educate the absolutist, Christian-drunk American populace." And then begin a quiet, subversive national program to revolutionize the spiritual IQ of forthcoming generations. The terrible lie!

"America must remain aggressive and antagonistic to all questionable nations who do not cower properly to our demands. We shall close our borders and police the Internet and maintain nasty vigilance on all citizens at all times. This is the only way to true national security." What's the direct opposite of such a promise? Do it, prez!

"And finally, I shall never abolish the death penalty, legalize marijuana, approve gay marriage, promote honest sex education for teens, honor habeas corpus and the Geneva Convention, or eliminate the insidious farm subsidy program. We shall never stop lying about ethanol or offer solar subsidies for every household in America. Our direct ties to horribly misogynistic, terrorist-supporting Saudi Arabian power regimes shall remain deeply corruptive and powerful forevermore."

Go ahead, Mr. or Mrs. Next President. Lie your tail off if you must. But this time, let's try to make it a real party.

-- Mark Morford columns with inset links to related material can be found at sfgate.com/columnists/morford.

Mark Morford's column appears Wednesdays and Fridays in Datebook and on sfgate.com. E-mail him at mmorford@sfgate.com.

February 02, 2008 11:31 AM

Campaign is now underway for the election of new VOTF National officers and it is but fair to examine the campaign words of the candidates and see what they really mean in-between-the-lines. After disclosing Fr. Richard McBrien as the Opus Dei-HERALD in the USA when he was the main speaker at the October National Convention of VOTF, I think that I have now just cracked the secret Opus Dei-MOLE in VOTF. (The worst spy-for-Russia in USA history was an Opus Dei member Robert Hanssen).

I originally got a hunch of this Opus Dei-MOLE among the letters of a VOTF Vice-President candidate http://votfelection.com/?p=45 and "Questions for Candidates" in VOTF election website. Drums roll... Here is the Opus Dei-MOLE in her words which have identical parallel with the Opus Dei and Benedict XVI words "for a purer Church" in his inauguration speeches. I highlight in bold - her SECRET Opus Dei words - that are unsuspecting to non-Opus Dei watchers. I will post additional points of PROOFS in the days ahead.

Is Janet Hauter - The Mole, the Opus Dei Mole in VOTF ? by these words of hers:

The OD-Mole clue #1

"We have two years to build an incredible foundation. We need individuals who know that this foundation is the foundation of a newer, healthier Church by being open and healthy ourselves. Much of the change must begin with us. We, ourselves, need to master two arts: fraternal correction where we speak and act in the common good and speak to the voices who demean and criticize..." #2 in
http://votfelection.com/?page_id=32 "Fraternal correction" is an Opus Dei daily mantra and is the main relationship and way of life especially between the numeraries (celibate lay Opus Dei nuns and brothers) who act as weekly "spiritual directors" to all lay members -- the supernumeraries. These words of Janet are almost verbatim words so common in Opus Dei and Benedict XVI writings.

Note that her priorities are not the victims of priest pedophilia but the building of "a newer, healthier Church". Fr. Doyle just reminded us that the church is "delusional" and here is Janet Hauter preaching of "building a newer, healthier church" in a two years term of a national VOTF officer! How unrealistic and deluded can she be! Fr. Doyle said: "The U.S. bishops still live in their delusional world as far as clergy abuse is concerned....In State legislatures throughout the country, State Catholic Conferences and the local bishops spend millions of the faithful's dollars to defeat any legislation that would offer greater protection to child victims. They insult our collective intelligence with a variety of false claims based on erroneous information.... How ironic! The world's largest religious organization which is based on the mission of Christ and it opposes State laws that do what it not only could not do, but would not do…protect children from deranged predators and self-centered institutional enablers."

And Janet Hauter is singing of a "newer, healthier church" -- (the institution GUILTY of all that Fr. Doyle has just mentioned in his letter to VOTF ) -- exactly on what planet is she on?

The OD-Mole clue #2

See #11 http://votfelection.com/?page_id=32

Janet said: "While I personally initially favored the call for George's resignation, the vote of the affiliate through prayer changed minds and hearts and our plan was and remains sequential."

"Through prayers changed minds and hearts" is the strategy of Opus Dei to close down VOTF and SNAP as expounded in The John Paul II Millstone www.jp2m.blogspot.com The Opus Dei and Pope's strategy is for all victims of priest-pedophilia to simply "PRAY, pay and obey" and the whole thing will be "forgiven and FORGOTTEN".

Get real VOTF! Wake up to the giant Fr. Richard McBrien and his cunning snaky infiltration in VOTF. Do not make him the infallible papal envoy in VOTF!

And be-aware and beware of Janet Hauter and her secret Opus Dei agenda in VOTF!

The OD-Mole clue #3

See No. 19 and 20 Questions for Candidates, VOTF elections

Janet Hauter's mild (and protective) stance on Cardinal George, an Opus Dei member and clone of John Paul II:

"Firing a Cardinal is not within our purview but we publicly discredit any actions that do not fall within an accountability framework."

Paul Kendrick said to Ms. Janet Hauter:

It is interesting to note that, on the one hand, you want us to know that you are already a seasoned “leader”; i.e. as an established VOTF leader in Chicago, yet, on the other hand, you blame the group, not yourself, for its failure to engage in an ongoing campaign to remove Cardinal George as archbishop of Chicago.

More OD-MOLE clues in days ahead......stay tuned

------------

February 1, 2008

4 more clues on THE MOLE of VOTF

Because of the recent number 96 reply of Janet Hauter there are more clues "The Mole in VOTF" I was able to extract. First, here are Janet Hauter's replies to my "analysis" of her being The Mole of VOTF:

http://votfelection.com/?page_id=32&cp=7#comments

#93—Marie Tupper Says:

Dear Ms. Hauter,

A certain blogspot (http://jp2m.blogspot.com/2008/01/john-paul-ii-clone-cardinal-george-and.html) is accusing you of being a member of Opus Dei.
Are you a member of Opus Dei, or in any way associated with Opus Dei?

Marie, I find this bizarre/preposterous question a clone of the private correspondence exchange I had with Paul Kendrick recently. Because I believe in total transparency and have no fear of his “Johnny one note” rants, I offer them to you exactly as was discussed.

(Edited out repeat of OD-Mole clues above. Bold emphasis added))


I consulted with Mother Angelica on this and she said that moles can only be identified by people who have their heads in the dirt. She also said “It’s naughty to slander and the accuser needs to do penance!” Janet Hauter

Paul Kendrick writes: Please stop being silly. Just answer the simple question. Are you a member of, or in any way associated with Opus Dei?

Secondly, the Ignatius Group message was distributed only to you and your son, George Bouchey. I wanted to first determine what your reaction would be. However, if you do not respond to the question about whether or not you are an Opus Dei member (or in any way associated with Opus Dei ; i.e., is your spouse a member?), then I will publish the link to the blog and your refusal to answer the question.


Janet Hauter’s post:
SLANDER/LIBEL

A type of defamation. Slander is an untruthful oral (spoken) statement about a person that harms the person’s reputation. Because slander is a tort (a civil wrong), the injured person can bring a lawsuit against the person who made the false statement. If the statement is made via broadcast media — for example, over the radio or on TV — it is considered libel, rather than slander, because the statement has the potential to reach a very wide audience.

Subject: Why are you so upset about a simple question? You need to take a deep breath.
Date: 1/26/2008 3:41:56 P.M. Central Standard Time
From: IgnatiusGroup
Reply To:
To: JMWHauter

Janet Hauter’s post: The question is ludicrous. I am not now, never have been, have no relatives that are or would ever consider membership in Opus Dei. Bizarre question.

Do whatever you need to do. This conversation is closed. J

------------

4 more CLUES why Janet Hauter is "THE MOLE in VOTF"

OD-Mole clue #4 : My question is simple and a valid one to public candidate Janet Hauter and she is already blowing full steam and irritation -- is she capable of handling the VOTF 2 years tough office of Vice-President? VOTF is one of the "last hope" of Catholics and if she cannot handle a valid querry, how tough a cookie is she?

The OD-Mole clue #5 Hauter's immediate response in the form of "libel and slander" is typical of Opus Dei who has tons of lawyer members. Opus Dei cannot carry a decent conversation without pounding legal liabilities even on honest legitimate questions. That is why they want to canonize John Paul II as soon as possible so that he and St? Josemaria Escriba will be the two "WORD OF GOD" in the 21st century. But luckily, Sapienza University in Rome just rejected Benedict XVI from speaking at their opening of school year last January .. yes, Benedict XVI is tasting his own bitter medicine of not giving the Jesuits "freedom of speech" and eventually VOTF whom he wish to shut-up!

The OD-Mole clue #6 Probably the biggest clue that Janet Hauter is the Mole in VOTF is her running to and asking Mother Angelica's advice -- this is sure sign of her Opus Dei affiliation.

I consulted with Mother Angelica on this and she said that moles can only be identified by people who have their heads in the dirt. She also said “It’s naughty to slander and the accuser needs to do penance!” Janet Hauter

So Mother Angelica says that Paris Arrow "can only identify moles because (she) has dirt in her head...that she is naughty to slander and needs to do penance!"

I've got news for you Mother Angelica, YOU are not qualified to be a member of the VOTF because you are under the payroll of Opus Dei and you are a puppet of the papacy that want to shut down VOTF. You are a typical preacher of "PRAY, pay, OBEY" and "ASK NO QUESTION". You would be a disastrous advicer to VOTF. The ONLY advice you will tell us is "Go to confesison and do penance" (like you told Janet Hauter about me).

If "Go to Confessiona and do penance" are all that the lawyers did, Cardinals Mahony et al would still be laughing at the victims of the John Paul II Pedophile Priests Army. Instead $3 Billion has been paid to victims. And I bet you are praying endlessly for John Paul II's canonization - like you did for St? Josemaria Escriba de Opus Dei. Right? Why don't you just gon on chanting in Opus Dei Latin and let us LAITY live our life in the outside world -- apart from your multi-million dollar monastery -- like the pompous Vatican of Benedict XVI and Opus Dei villa in Rome.

FYI Mother Angelica EWTN broadcasted the canonization of St? Josemaria Escriva LIVE in October 2002 and repeats it every year. EWTN gives the lists of BISHOPS and CARDINALS (guilty of cover-up) who celebrate Escriba's feast in June -- which I posted last June 2007 http://jp2m.blogspot.com/2007_06_01_archive.html

Janet Hauter running to Mother angelica for advice is the BIGGEST proof that she is THE MOLE in VOTF!


The OD-Mole clue #7 Janet denies being a member of Opus Dei. It is a rule in Opus Dei that their members "NOT tell in public" if one is an OD member so that they can carry on the clandestine agendas of Opus Dei on the group they are spying on. Remember the greatest USA spy (for the Russians) was an Opus Dei member, Hanssen.

So, Janet Hauter, if everytime you receive a simple question like mine and you RUN to Mother Angelica who is an Opus Dei affiliate -- her EWTN is supported by billionaire Opus Dei, what kind of a leader -- or footsoldier of Opus Dei are you? And what a temper for an oficer of VOTF. God forbid there are other moles like you in VOTF.


The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil
is for enough good men and women
to do and say nothing.

Cheers VOTF!
Paris
------------

Cardinal George MUST RESIGN!

VOTF Elections

Topic: Cardinal George, Chicago

I want to make it clear my opposition to my opponent, Janet Hauter’s position on Cardinal George of Chicago. She was 100 % wrong!! We can complicate the issue as much as you like with wordage. The bottom line , his actions resulted in abetting a child abuser. No matter what his intent was, that is what happen. And for that he should have been asked to resign, and Janet, and VOTF, should have lead the charge for that action .

Janet, please stop with the lectures and calls uponGod, roll up your sleves, get out on the sidewalk in front of the Chancery ,and protest at every turn your Cardinal when he takes such actions. This is how VOTF was founded. I know my Faith by my ACTIONS..

David Biersmith

Candidate for VOTF Vice-President (Watch David's video)


8 Responses to “Cardinal George, Chicago”

Robert Harrison Says:

Mr. Biersmith’s approach of taking a club to Cardinal George’s head is not the way to attack the problem. Hostile confrontation, as he proposes, accomplishes nothing. He forgets that it was a building crescendo of incidents quickly coming to light within a few months, and a swell of public disdain for Cardinal Law that caused his resignation.

That is not the case in Chicago. Cardinal George is guilty of bad judgment concerning a pedophile within the last year. But he has taken action to publish the names of bad priests and has put in place a program to address the problem in the future. Unfortunately, it is not a perfect plan, and has ignored suggestions for improving it.

He has not acted swiftly as he should have. He has equivocated and dragged his feet. Even though there is discontent with some of his actions, there isn’t a groundswell of ill will against him personally. He is not a bad bishop. His problem is that he cannot adjust—nor the hierarchy in general—to the fact that he is no longer the sole judge when it comes to pedophile priests as it was in the Middle Ages.

He IS THE CARDINAL, and has total control of the Archdioceses. To make personal attacks on him and demand his resignation gains nothing. It makes him more hostile and hurts our cause. He is largely respected and revered by Catholics in the Chicago area. Attacking him personally, as Mr. Biersmith proposes, will only alienate Catholics who are not fully aware of what is happening. To constantly appear on the sidewalk in front of the cathedral to protest—unless a specific incident warrants it—only makes VOTF and others look like a bunch of whacky malcontents to the public. When needed, it is effective; otherwise it is counter-productive.

He has a well paid team of lawyers and a prominent public relations firm doing his bidding. The Cardinal is not the problem. The problem is getting legislation passed that will hold him and all who overseer pedophiles, criminally accountable if such incidents are not immediately reported to Civil Authorities.

Though Mr. Biersmith means well, his tactics will not bear fruit as they did in Boston. The circumstances are greatly different. It is far better to have the Cardinal work WITH us instead of AGAINST us. If we cannot reach that point, hostility to him should not be an option. We need to develop a group in each parish that will support us and lead fellow parishioners into supporting legislation when it is presented in the legislature.

In summery, it would be wise if Mr. Biersmith followed the old adage when it comes to dealing with the church hierarchy: “NEVER TRY TO TEACH A PIG HOW TO SING. YOU ARE WASTING YOUR TIME—AND YOU ARE AGGITATING THE PIG.”

Dan Burke Says:

Robert Harrison’s views confirm that ostriches can be found not only on the plains of the Serengeti, Kalalhari, Masai Mara and Etosha game reserves but here in the U.S. as well, if only to a lesser degree even without the sand into which to bury one’s head! In the real world lawyer you get indicted for obstruction of justice. In the real world you get sacked for mismanagement….Cardinal George??

• In 1995 Sen. Bob Packwood [Oregon] resigned following mounting evidence of sexual harassment of his office staffers.
• Boeing CEO Phil Condit, resigned in 2003, as a result of the defense contracting scandal that ultimately saw two Boeing executives, ex Air Force procurement official Darleen Druyun and chief financial officer Mike Sears sent prison.
• Again in 2005 Boeing fired its CEO Harry Stonecipher for having an affair with a staffer, the Board seeking honesty and transparency to maintain crediblity with its stockholders and the investment community at large.
• Just 6 weeks ago, Merrill Lynch fired its CEO Stan Lynch for poor performance, mounting losses,
• Just 5 weeks ago Citibank fired its CEO Chuck Prince for poor performance, mounting losses.
• Just this past March 2007, less than a week after visiting the Walter Reed medical Center following allegations of deplorable conditions, newly installed Defense Secretary Robert Gates summoned Army Secretary Francis Harvey to Washington and fired him on the spot. Harvey’s statement to the press?…..I was head of the Army…what can I say…the buck stops with me…I have to take responsibility. This is the real world Robert Harrison. What Planet have you been living on? Biersmith has it right!

Frank Keating, a retired Governor of Oklahoma and former Chairman of the National Review Board, resigned over frustration arising from the refusal of the Bishops to cooperate, citing their preference to deny, hide, obfuscate, suppress names of offenders, resist subpoenas, noting that the Bishops listen too much to their lawyers and not enough to their hearts. Now goofball George heads up the USCCB…and read George’s comments below to the Catholic lay advisors meeting with him.

Former White House Chief of Staff and U.S. Rep. Leon Panetta, a California Democrat who served on the National Review Board and was one of those who met with Francis George commented on the continuing abuse allegations arising out of the Chicago Diocese stating at a news conference, “it confirmed for me what is at the heart of this pedophile priest problem, the Catholic hierarchy’s failure to understand the seriousness of the crisis”.

George’s response? According to three sources contacted by Sun Times reporters, that when the members of the National Review Board met with George, he issued a warning, “you will be the downfall of the church!” The group was dumbstruck. “The bishops and priests have failed to deal with this scandal” Panetta said he told George. “The healing process could not begin, Panetta said, unless the church acknowledged the problem”.

--(Comment on Fr. Richard McBrien edited out)

Think Francis George like Army Secretary Francis Harvey, should step up to the plate and take a little responsibility [ like resign] for the additional boys molested by Father Daniel McCormack after he and his staffers ignored the earlier warnings of the nun principal trying desperately to call it to the attention of the Diocesan office with phone calls and letters? Think Ratzinger should have fired him or demoted him? Why does the Church always protect its own instead of sending the message….business as usual? No where is the truth of the adage more evident, that an organization cannot be counted on to police itself, than in the Church.

It’s about accountability and transparency Harrison, in case you don’t get it….both of which are woefully lacking in the mission of this church….which did nothing to sack its CEOs ie: the transferring Cardinals and Bishops even though the Church knew of the emerging sca