Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiI once asked a reporter back from Vietnam, "Who's telling the truth over there?" "Everyone, he said. "Everyone sees what's happening through the lens of their own experience." That's how people see Jeremiah Wright. In my conversation with him on this broadcast a week ago and in his dramatic public appearances since, he revealed himself to be far more complex than the sound bites that propelled him onto the public stage. Over 2000 of you have written me about him, and your opinions vary widely. Some sting: "Jeremiah Wright is nothing more than a race-hustling, American hating radical," one viewer wrote. A "nut case," said another. Others were far more were sympathetic to him.
Many of you have asked for some rational explanation for Wright's transition from reasonable conversation to shocking anger at the National Press Club. A psychologist might pull back some of the layers and see this complicated man more clearly, but I'm not a psychologist. Many black preachers I've known - scholarly, smart, and gentle in person - uncorked fire and brimstone in the pulpit. Of course I've known many white preachers like that, too.
But where I grew up in the south, before the civil rights movement, the pulpit was a safe place for black men to express anger for which they would have been punished anywhere else; a safe place for the fierce thunder of dignity denied, justice delayed. I think I would have been angry if my ancestors had been transported thousands of miles in the hellish hole of a slave ship, then sold at auction, humiliated, whipped, and lynched. Or if my great-great grandfather had been but three-fifths of a person in a constitution that proclaimed, "We the people." Or if my own parents had been subjected to the racial vitriol of Jim Crow, Strom Thurmond, Bull Connor, and Jesse Helms. Even so, the anger of black preachers I've known and heard about and reported on was, for them, very personal and cathartic.
That's not how Jeremiah Wright came across in those sound bites or in his defiant performances this week. What white America is hearing in his most inflammatory words is an attack on the America they cherish and that many of their sons have died for in battle forgetting that black Americans have fought and bled beside them, and that Wright himself has a record of honored service in the Navy. Hardly anyone took the "chickens come home to roost" remark to convey the message that intervention in the political battles of other nations is sure to bring retaliation in some form, which is not to justify the particular savagery of 9/11 but to understand that actions have consequences. My friend Bernard Weisberger, the historian, says, yes, people are understandably seething with indignation over Wright's absurd charge that the United States deliberately brought an HIV epidemic into being. But it is a fact, he says, that within living memory the U.S. Public Health Service conducted a study that deliberately deceived black men with syphilis into believing that they were being treated, while actually letting them die for the sake of a scientific test. Does this excuse Wright's anger? His exaggerations or distortions? You'll have to decide or yourself. At least it helps me to understand the why of them.
But in this multimedia age the pulpit isn't only available on Sunday mornings. There's round the clock media - the beast whose hunger is never satisfied, especially for the fast food with emotional content. So the preacher starts with rational discussion and after much prodding throws more and more gasoline on the fire that will eventually consume everything it touches. He had help - people who for their own reasons set out to conflate the man in the pulpit who wasn't running for president with the man in the pew who was.
Behold the double standard: John McCain sought out the endorsement of John Hagee, the war-mongering Catholic-bashing Texas preacher who said the people of New Orleans got what they deserved for their sins. But no one suggests McCain shares Hagee's delusions, or thinks AIDS is God's punishment for homosexuality. Pat Robertson called for the assassination of a foreign head of state and asked God to remove Supreme Court justices, yet he remains a force in the Republican religious right. After 9/11 Jerry Falwell said the attack was God's judgment on America for having been driven out of our schools and the public square, but when McCain goes after the endorsement of the preacher he once condemned as an agent of intolerance, the press gives him a pass.
Jon Stewart recently played a tape from the Nixon White House in which Billy Graham talks in the oval office about how he has friends who are Jewish, but he knows in his heart that they are undermining America. This is crazy; this is wrong - white preachers are given leeway in politics that others aren't.
Which means it is all about race, isn't it? Wright's offensive opinions and inflammatory appearances are judged differently. He doesn't fire a shot in anger, put a noose around anyone's neck, call for insurrection, or plant a bomb in a church with children in Sunday school. What he does is to speak his mind in a language and style that unsettle some people, and says some things so outlandish and ill-advised that he finally leaves Obama no choice but to end their friendship. We are often exposed us to the corroding acid of the politics of personal destruction, but I've never seen anything like this. I've never seen this wrenching break between pastor and parishioner before our very eyes. Both men no doubt will carry the grief to their graves. All the rest of us should hang our heads in shame for letting it come to this in America, where the gluttony of the non-stop media grinder consumes us all and prevents an honest conversation on race. It is the price we are paying for failing to heed the great historian Jacob Burckhardt, who said "beware the terrible simplifiers".
Bill Moyers is a journalist and host of PBS' Bill Moyers Journal.
© 2008 PBS
121 Comments so far
Show AllBill Moyers for President, for Poet Laurette, and for National Conscience.
Too bad he won't run. Wish he could be drafted.
What, me worry?
GOOD COMMENT Mr. Moyers, But there is more to it than that and it has to do with our profession!
The public rarely enjoins the true issues or the politicians the reasons are clear. Special interests and "free enterprise" capitalism it is what this country has devised as worth living and dying for. The basis for the consumer ideology is energy and its association with an auto centered economy closes the circle. It uses the media to direct the public flow of the so-called truth and we have a perfect example of it in this political campaign. It is why Exxon Mobile is out of control and the public is given platitudes rather than help.
The media is out of control this election has shown us just how far it has gone to dumb-down the public. The recent move by ABC to remove candidates from the debates was outrageous. They are trying to determine the fate of the country and the world being mouthpiece for special interests and the government and to silence dissent.
Media censure is unheard, the FCC should rule for the public but like the EPA its teeth are continually drawn. The media has no right to exclude any politician who is running for office as happened recently with the ABC debate. The only exclusion under the rules used by ABC should apply to a candidate not sitting in public office. The license of ABC would be lifted if the rules were changed but the congress, with the exception of a few pushes for more media conglomeration supported by special interests. I hope that someone picks up on this thought. We have seen the obsession by FOX and CNN, particularly in the form of Wolf Blitzer, and the FOX rabid journalists constantly referring to the Rev. Wright controversy.
Blitzer's bias is clear. He is quick to use every possible negative he can against Obama from the Flag Pin to anything else he could get his mouth around. His support for Clinton has been clear and inappropriate, for CNN to call itself a "fair and balanced" news network. I quote Mr. Nichols: 
" The media pretense of being a fly on the wall has often been preposterous. In the real world of politics — where power brokers and manipulators proceed with the cynical axiom that perception is reality — the fly on the wall is the wall. The political press corps is not observing reality as much as redefining it while obstructing outlooks and constraining public perceptions."
As usual, few are able to see the stampede of the public sheep created by media. I support the change that Obama represents! He is intelligent and wants America once again to be looked upon as a great nation that it could still be and once was. The present "lack of experience" cry of Clinton is preposterous. Could anyone having been near the White house as long as Bush done as badly for the USA? There is experience! However, the discovery of a job approval rating for him at about 28% of the American people speaks volumes about experience. No one could have been as bad as the Bush team! There is experience!
A flight from entrenched American politics is necessary . . .it has ruined this country and made greed the single value of importance. The young people once again embrace hope as a result of the Obama campaign. The Hillary political group and entrenched politics have virtually destroyed America with its policies and exclusive power clubs. She has believed this form government is America.
Clinton recently morphed to the Obama populist message, it was called, "finding her voice" while at the beginning of her stump showing her Madeline Albright, bomb the children image. 
Can anyone truly think that change is unnecessary? I guess not since all the politicos have adopted his message including McCain? The mistakes that Obama may make as president cannot be greater than those of the past seven years. It is also necessary to give him a democratic congress to make certain that the programs that Americans want can be enacted.
Mr. Gore Vidal, has pointedly criticized mainstream media as one of the major problems, and what is wrong with the USA. The corporate media conglomerates control the message and that message is perversely distorted and panders to its advertising portfolio! Wolf Blitzer one of the glaring examples of this criticism and shows clearly those distorted ideas with his reporting, which is nothing more than partially factual opinion dictated by his bosses.
He is a person who has no right to shape public opinion far from being the "fly on the wall" he espouses to be. We must remember flies morph from maggots. He displays ignorance as a virtue for the entire world to see, an example of what is considered, by many in America to be news reporting. If Blitzer were billed as a CNN commentator, at least the public would not be hoodwinked to believe his reporting to be the truth, while it is lack of concern for accuracy, rectitude and fairness to be considered to be news rather than opinion.
PART 2
The people of the USA have been so ill informed as to what a change would really do and mean to this country and the change in leadership that is necessary, they have forgotten that no one could be worse than George Bush . . . No one, not even a dogcatcher, at least the dog catcher has compassion for
Animals!
The future leaders, Obama or McCain, should discuss the problems America and the world faces. The problem of public ignorance of the issues caused by the media is serious. In the heat of elections the media panders to voter ignorance. The emphasis, as we see on nightly, so-called news, is constant repetition of candidate's miscues. The result of the media sensationalism becomes, the wrong problem and the wrong message at a crucial time in world history. The emphasis on having the politicians address a credible platform of ideas based on an American and global interaction in the world is critical.
There is not enough time left for civilization to focus on rubbish. The energy and environmental issues for example or food and health care are the problems the media should be focusing upon. But to use the Rev, Wright issue for one week, to try and hurt the candidacy of Obama is a travesty. The issues most pressing are once again avoided, those really important issues that must be put before the congress; the environment, continued funding of Iraq, energy issues, education, health care and so many others not dealt with, all impacting upon the economy, the failure of public dialog is outrageous!
The issue of this election will impact on the environment, economy and the future of the USA as no others. Still, if more than 50% of eligible voters cast their votes it will be a miracle, as a result of regressive US election laws and media obfuscation. It is compulsory for everyone to vote in Australia it should be so in the USA as well. Few of the candidates are really talking about the major points, even those who are the most erudite. The environment in association with the economy or health care and elections reform, to name some, are kept out of public dialog as a result of the nonsense punditry hours on end. The world looks at America and its "star struck reality" in wonder.
The political discussion rests on the complete lack of talking points in isolation, such as, Clinton's health package or the nonsense gasoline tax rebate and it's cost, rather than what is really at stake with energy issues, human survival. The candidates for the US presidency rarely talk about the complete interrelated package of the issues combined. Obama alludes to this deficiency in the media and public issues. When he asks for this to occur it lands on deaf ears because the media and special interests do not want this to occur.
The media reduces the public debate to its most simplistic level with pundits arguing about one inconsequential issue or another rather than the truly important issues of our time. The American people are kept from hearing and understanding the relationship of the entire package of issues, which a true leader must address and deal with for the very survival of America in the world within a global economy. The costs for the war would pay for every single need from health care to American infrastructure repair and education, as well as the alleviation of world hunger and energy research this is what is what is at stake.
The media deals with Rev. Wright and American Flag lapel pins instead.
The media keeps the public dumbed down for obvious reasons they represent the moneyed people. As a result the public becomes unable to talk about moving radically toward change and the related issues affecting their very life and the future. The issues of climate change, energy issues and the global economy not only American economy is the part of the mortgage crisis created by the "free market" system. All the other issues like people losing their homes as a result of Wall Street manipulation are tied to these fundamental problems. These is the first and major issue which affects all other issues and is completely related to the economic changes which must take place.
The media board rooms instruct their so-called journalists (news/opinion readers) to stay clear of those subjects that would attack advertising, consumption, tied together in the media collusion with special interests to maintain the consumer system killing the world. Media in collusion with government does not want the change that would result in the decline of their hundreds of millions of dollars in profits.
All environmental problems are in one way or another associated with the Western world's consumption based lifestyle led by the USA. These issues are affected by consumer advertising much of it coming from the millions spent on advertising of irrelevant product and campaign advertising. The media should be dealing with true American and global issues in this campaign affecting the very basis of the so-called American Dream, fast becoming the global nightmare. This is what the next president of the USA must address!
RSJ Rev. Wright went on and on about how Farrakahn has helped poor people, blah, blah. I would hope if I said well David Duke is OK because say he worked at a soup kitchen once and a lot of people Louisiana vote for him that you'd call me an expletive Nazi sympathizer and to go to hell. Although the Rev. Wright controversy WAS overblown and had nothing to do with Obmama it is nonetheless disturbing to me that Rev. Wright gave Farrakahn an even luke warm endorsement and no one here seems overly concerned about that, haters aren't suddenly better because they are black. Farrakahn and his homophobic anti-Semitism can go to hell as far as far as I'm concerned and I say that as an atheist.
Dear Mr. Moyers,
Thank you for speaking the truth!
Hootowl, I'm not sure what you're talking about here. Wright didn't endorse Farrakhan and, in fact, has disagreed with him in his speeches -- I heard him on C-SPAN. He simply said that the black community listens to Farrakhan, whether or not they agree with him, That's true.
Wright's daughter gave Farrakhan an award, but Rev. Wright himself had nothing to do with that.
Obama has completely rejected any endorsement of any kind from Farrakhan and his religion of hate, and he doesn't know the man.
I also don't know of any liberals or progressives who are endorsing anything Farrakhan has said, or his brand of Islam, or is providing any sort of cover for his hateful ideas, so what are you so upset about?
p.s Farrakahn admits to inciting the climate of hate that led to the assassination of Malcom X:
""I may have been complicit in words that I spoke leading up to February 21 [1965]," Farrakhan tells Shabazz and Wallace. "I acknowledge that and regret that any word that I have said caused the loss of life of a human being."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/05/10/60minutes/main194051.shtml
No cover for haters, regardless of their gender, race or sexual orientation. If we are to focus on the big issues like globalism, the enviroment, etc,that effect all the downtrodden of the earth then divisive haters like Farrakahn need to be told to take a hike. Can gays, straights, blacks, whites, transgendered people etc march in safety against the corporate globalist war mongering elite if Farrakahn is in the corner glaring at them and thinking and speaking hateful thoughts?
I think not... The extent that we give cover to haters is the extent we marginalized and shoved aside, do you think Dr. King would have allowed Farrakahn's vile words in the civil rights movement? Think about it... please...
RSJ that's not good enough here for example is some Farrakahn's anti gay and anti-Semetic rehtoric:
"But all of a sudden in the night clubs, they started having transvestite shows, drag queens… Scripture say no liar, no adulterer, no effeminate will get in the Kingdom."
Saviours' Day Speech, Chicago, 2/23/03
"I don't hate Jews. I honor and respect those who try to live according to the teachings of the Torah, but you can't criticize Jewish people. If you criticize them you are anti-Semitic. If you don't agree with what they are doing, you are anti-Semitic. The Bible says, Revelations, those who say they are Jews and are not, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan. I don't hear you preaching that full Gospel. You are afraid of consequences. But no man can say he's a Jew and promote homosexuality. No man can say he's a Jew and promote that which is against the commandments of God. No man can say he's a Jew and run the despicable, degenerate movies. The filth and degenerate language."
Saviours' Day Speech, Chicago, 2/23/03
"...I think that when you warehouse Black men in prisons and they have a sexual drive that is being titillated by the lyrics and by the cultural degeneracy that pervades America today, this sexual need is sometimes filled with activity that God disapproves of."
Meet The Press interview, 10/12/97
"It seems like being gay or whatever sin you wish to be a part of is okay...but I have the duty to lift that gay person up to the standard to ask if they want to live the life that God wants them to or live the lifestyle that they want to live."
Boston speech, 8/7/97
"God don't like men coming to men with lust in their hearts like you should go to a female. If you think that the kingdom of God is going to be filled up with that kind of degenerate crap, you're out of your damn mind."
Kansas City speech, 1996"
http://www.adl.org/special_reports/farrakhan_own_words2/on_homosexuals.a...
You know if someone white like David Duke said that we would rightly condemn them as engaging in hate speech. If we give someone a pass on hate speech just because they come from an oppressed community then we are in real trouble in terms of having a consistent morality on the left. To say that someone from an oppressed community can say any sort of vile neo-Nazi thing and get a pass is not helpful IMO. People like Farrakahn just give the Klan and other filth someone to quote from when they want to hate on gay people or Jews, yuck.
hootowl [May 7th, 2008 12:36 am] I would argue about Farrakhan's connection to or inciting the assassination of Malcolm X -- that was mainly the doing of Nation of Islam head at the time, Elijah Muhammad, who perceived Malcolm as a rival.
In his speeches, Wright has specifically spoken out against anti-Semitism and racism; by mentioning Farrakhan, he was simply acknowledging a reality in black America -- when Farrakhan speaks, as he said, black people listen, whether they agree with him or not. What Wright said regarding Farrakhan was not sophistry, it was reality -- a reality that is not recognized by the white-run Big Media in the US, and therefore disconcerting to them.
That was really vague what exactly do you mean by "go to it?" Go to what, and is that serious or sarcastic? Unless we are clear in our speech acts they make no meaningful difference in the world.
huzzah May 6th, 2008 11:44 pm
Thank You!
hootowl May 7th, 2008 12:36 am
Go to it!
p.s. USAian would you say Farrakahn is not a racist solely based on his skin color? If so you are exactly the sort of person who is destroying the left by taking it out of the Union Halls and the hands of the common man and keeping it locked up in academia for only in academia do people accept that sort of sophistry. If we want to have a left that is heroic like the labor movement in the 30s where white people and black people stood shoulder to shoulder facing off the capitalist owners then we need to tell the Farreakahns and the people teaching X,Y,and Z "studies" classes to take a hike. There is real work to be done fighting the oligarchic elite that is NOT helped by people shilling for people like Farrakahn with trumped up definitions of racism. The left took a serious wrong turn somewhere in the 70s that has made it increasingly irrelevant to real working peoples lives of all colors. That truly makes me sad and has had real consequnces in poor peoples lives, in the lives of oppressed minorities and for our endangered environment. If we don't wake up and get truly organized and cut out the bullshit and back sliding then we may see real fascism soon with no effective counter resistance, counter resistance which may involve eek scary guns to boot BT. If you think the old IWW guys were for gun control, think again... They had no time for gun controls or arguing the Semantics of racism, or shilling for Nazis like Farrakahn, or claiming to be women identified "feminists" because they vote for corporate puppets like Hillary Clinton. The left is fiddling while Rome burns and I'm quite certain Emma Goldman and Big Bill Haywood are turning over in their graves right now looking at the utter lack of seriousness and irrelevance of the modern left. And yes I do know of what I speak living in Ypsilanti Michigan ground zero of the globlization based gutting of poor working peoples lives.
Although I don't think Obama should be tarred for his association with Rev. Wright and that it's a non issue being trumped by the MSM to sink Obama one thing that Rev. Wright said that I DID find disturbing is his support for Farrakhan. Not only was Farrakhan involved in stirring up the hate that led to Malcom X's assassination, but he also said some very anti Semitic things back in the 80s. So in summary just because Rev. Wright said some righteous things against imperialism, and just because Obama is being unfairly swift boated it does not follow that Rev. Wright is any angel. Frankly anyone expressing support for Farrakhan gives me the creeps:
"BILL MOYERS: But even some of your admirers say it would be wrong to gloss over what Martin Marty himself called- who loves you- called your "abrasive edges." For example, you know, Louis Farrakhan lives in the south part of Chicago, doesn't he? You've had a long complicated relationship with him, right?
REVEREND WRIGHT: Yes.
BILL MOYERS: And he, you know, he's expressed racist and anti-Semitic remarks. And, yet, last year-
REVEREND WRIGHT: Twenty years ago.
BILL MOYERS: Twenty years ago, but that's indefensible.
REVEREND WRIGHT: The Nation of Islam and Mr. Farrakhan have more African-American men off of drugs. More African-American men respecting themselves. More African-American men working for a living. Not gang banging. Not trying to get by. That's not indefensible in terms of how you make a difference in the prisons? Turning people's lives around. Giving people hope. Getting people off drugs. That we don't believe the same things in terms of our specific faiths. He's Muslim, I'm Christian. We don't believe the same things he said years ago. But that has nothing to do with what he has done in terms of helping people change their lives for the better. I said direct quote was what? "Louis Farrakhan is like E.F. Hutton. When Lewis Farrakhan speaks, black America listens. They may not agree with him, but they're listening."
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/transcript1.html
And here is who Farrakahn is:
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/466.html
http://www.adl.org/special_reports/farrakhan_own_words2/on_jews.asp
If we on the left do not constantly critically evaluate our leaders we are no better than the Rush Scumbaugh supporting dittoheads. As a Noam Chomsky reading, direct action participating person I say we ought to do better than this.
USAn --
If you happen to check back, I've never tried to argue that our society is not racist. I'm fully aware of that fact. My objection to your definition of racism is that it removes hate speech from the equation. "Kill Whitey" isn't racist but "Kill (insert slur for ethnicity or your choice" is? What, then, if someone acts on such speech? If a white supremacist kills a black guy, is it not racially motivated murder? Reverse those roles and what? It's not murder because the black guy is just trying to liberate himself by killing a member of the oppressor race?
Sorry, but such ideas ARE racist, even if they don't meet YOUR definition of racism.
I read the piece by Bill Moyer carefully because someone send it to me. Moyer has repeated, specifically and in detail, the tenor and substance of what the corporate conglomerate media has written and purveyed about the Reverend Jeremiah Wright's speeches.
He has simply characterized the speeches. He has done nothing to disagree with the content of the speeches. Except for a single instance,there is not another word in what he has written that even attempts to dispute the content of the speeches. Moyer's piece is sophisticated name calling---sophistry of the worst order.
For instance, he begins with the intimation that there is the need for a psychologist to explain Wright's speech. The way he put it is, "Many of you have asked for some rational explanation for Wright's transition from reasonable conversation to shocking anger at the National Press Club. A psychologist might pull back some of the layers and see this complicated man more clearly, but I'm not a psychologist."
I don't know who the "many of you" are but I do know that many of the people that I have talked to that heard his speeches have told me that he has focused on parts of our history that makes us uncomfortable. The Reverend Wright punctures the accepted narrative of America in the way that the Santa Claus narrative becomes revealed as we grow out of our childhood. We would rather spend our time making an icon of evil out of the nazi led German government's dozen or so years of murderous, racist mayhem that has us looking outward instead of looking inward at the several centuries of the racist slaughter of innocents of both the indigenous population and Africans in ways that are both unimaginable and indescribable in their cruelty and inhumanity.
In spite of Moyer's commiserating, the "chickens coming home to roost" analogy was even alluded to by the Reverend Martin Luther King in two speeches that immediately come to mind. In his speech in opposition to the United States invasion of Viet Nam, King said, "God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment and it seems that I can hear God saying to America that you're too arrogant....You shall reap what you sow." Listen to the whole speech at
http://youtube.com/watch?v=b80Bsw0UG-U&feature=related
And then, again, in his speech "The Drum Major Instinct", King comes back to the same analogy. he says, "The God I worship has a way of saying, 'Don't play with me.' He has a way of saying, as the God of the Old Testament used to say to the Hebrews, 'Don't play with me, Israel. Don't play with me, Babylon. Be still and know that I'm God. And if you don't stop your reckless course, I'll rise up and break the backbone of your power.' And that can happen to America." Listen to the speech at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRFzBBrRJFk
or read it at
http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/publications/sermons/680204.000_Drum_Major_Instinct.html"
The long and the short of the matter is that the Wright's "chickens come home to roost" is merely the venacular form of the extolled biblical admonition that " You shall reap what you sow" used by King.
The media venom that has excoriated Wright is simply a repeat of the venom that greeted King for his speeches in opposition to the United States invasion of Viet Nam in that period just before Moyer was special assistant to President Johnson and the White House Press Secretary in the midst of the invasion of Viet Nam by the United States.
======BILL
RSJ - great post!
Also, let's not forgot the genocide perpetrated upon the Native American Indians by the Americans of European heritage. The shameful actions taken against Asian Americans during World War II, the treatment of the German Americans during both world wars, and of course the continuing shameful treatment of Americans of Mexican and Latin American descent.
My uncles (my family is of Mexican descent) returning home from World War II (those who did survive) couldn't buy homes in certain sections of the Los Angeles basin. Remember, there were more Mexicans and Mexican Americans lynched in the American Southwest than blacks in the South.
Yes, as a country we have many blessings, but we also have much to be ashamed of.
Those in ignorant, vicious, denial can't face the truth and would rather slander and attack any who dare speak the truth. We are a young nation whose citizens often act infantile and destructive.
The backlash to affirmative action or to Rev. Wright is but only two examples of this ignorance. Wrongs have been committed, justice needs to be employed, and am atmosphere for healing must be establish in order to move on effectively. The ignorant of this world make it almost impossible for any of that to happen as they continue their vitriol toward those people and things they don't understand and thus fear.
I don't think Moyers calling some of what Rev. Wright said as outlandish or ill advised helps to further the cause of reconciliation. And certainly those who want to paint The Rev. Wright as a racists and hateful person are a big part of the problem we all face toward understanding and love and simply are trying to dictate the dialogue with their ignorance and fearful selves.
"Can we muster a vast intelligent-wing inspiracy? Please." - sandokai May 6th, 2008 6:27 am
Yes We can!
I love this phrase: intelligent-wing inspiracy. Inspiration is human dignity's greatest tool right now. The Citizens have so many chronic strictures of fear, from whatever stimulus, that to approach them for engagement with anything but inspiration and uplift will only stimulate them to a more constricted cringe - inspire on sandokai and CD writers and commentators.
Goatgirl (May 5th, 2008 11:15 pm), good points and the Tuskegee syphilis 'Experiment' and the distribution of crack to black neighborhoods have both been confirmed by reputable journalists. It also should be remembered that when Wright was growing up black men were returning from WWII -- they had served their country honorably and yet, in many parts of America, they still had to use separate bathrooms and water fountains; couldn't swim in the municipal pool that their taxes helped pay for; had to go around to the back to pick up their food, since they weren't allowed to eat inside 'all-white' restaurants; risked their lives if they walked through the 'wrong side' of town; found themselves wrongfully convicted by white juries and sent to long terms in prison or execution, and had a multitude of insults and injuries heaped on them daily just because of the color of their skin. Sadly, these things happened even in the North, although to a lesser degree.
James Baldwin and another Wright, Richard, have given insight to the conditions of black people in America in the generation when Jeremiah Wright was coming of age. Yet Jeremiah Wright enlisted to serve his country, doing two years in the Marines and a four year hitch in the Navy.
Even though he suffered racism from white America, giving the lie to 'all men are created equal' a hundred years after the Civil War ended, he also enlisted to protect the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic -- which is more than most of the media pundits and our 'patriotic' flag pin-wearing politicians ever did for their country. Then, when he decides to use the right of free speech he defended to speak the truth as he sees it, this educated and intelligent man is turned into a cartoon racist idiot and castigated, misquoted and berated as a hater. I wouldn't blame him if he did hate this country -- it's a testament to his character that he hasn't descended to that ugly place. He doesn't hate the country or people of any color, just the temporary governments that have led us into disaster and the politicians and corporations who have used race to divide us against ourselves. He earned the right to say whatever he pleased about our nation as he sacrificed part of his youth to protect it, and educated himself to preserve the truth of it later.
As Mark Twain said, "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it." I have to admit I was disappointed in Obama that he didn't defend himself and Wright, even while disagreeing with him, by citing that quote.
He might have also used another Twain line: "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul.
I think Obama's pastor would agree, and so should all progressive Americans, as I think it's past time for those of us who love our country, our freedom, and our Constitution to stop apologizing and cooperating with the 'framing' of those in our government and media who work against them, as Rev. Wright has courageously done.
Mr. Wright's thinking is ammunition against a churchgoer who happens to be a candidate for president. The current administration's thinking is massive destruction against Arabs, Muslims, and soon, Iranians who get in the way of a very particular nuanced bigotry. No opposing thinking brooked!
I think I understand why Hillary Clinton is liked by the brave new right. She is white, has a husband with marketable flaws, and will not compromise the values of Messrs Bush and Cheney.
Are Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich still available? Can we muster a vast intelligent-wing inspiracy? Please.
WTF, technically you are correct: AIDS in itself is not a disease -- it just lets you die (horribly) of some other disease(s) you wouldn't otherwise get. As with syphillis, treatment can add longevity and quality to life for someone who's been infected.
That's a pretty sweeping statement about antivirals, etc. Are you saying that all HIV+ folk are wasting their time on treatment? If so, what's all the fuss about withholding expensive AIDS drugs from Africans and getting all upset that Brazil is making its own generics?
Wonderful to read so many thoughtful and thought-provoking comments.
One of the things I think whenever I see such umbrage taken at Rev. Wright's opinions and statements, always described in terms like "hate-filled", "paranoid" and "anti-American" and "anti-white" is that white folk sure have thin skins. The least little hint that some of those who have not been treated so kindly or justly by our nation and it's racial majority might just be a teensy bit pissed off. But, no, everyone is supposed to be "so, like, over that now".
Barak was right the first time he addressed it, the good Rev. Wright is part of a long historical tradition to blend social commentary, political organizing and religion in the relative sanctuary of the Black church.
But the media, only partially thanks to youtube, and completly subject to our willingness to be captivated by the issue kept focusing on it.
Somehow it is not the kiss of political death to be a white peacher suggesting that AIDS and tsunamis and 9/11 are God's punishment for Gay Pride and abortion and the lack of prayer in school. But a Black preacher, suggesting that our leaders unleashed AIDS or invited by our behaviours on the world stage, or at the very least failed to prevent or interrupt 9/11 INTENTIONALLY, as a matter of policy....well, we just can't have that! Besides, all he really suggested was that these COULD be true or possible. We know about Tuskeegee, we know about Typhoid blankets to the Native Americans, we know about the Reichtag. These are not too far from consensus reality as to be considered paranoid. Doesn't mean that is what did happen...just that it wouldn't be because we wouldn't or couldn't.
MiMiCcS May 5th, 2008 4:30 am
excellent post thanks for sharing even though most here will not comprehend what you've laid out.
Here's the AIDS connection that Suioxrose doesn't see.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8674401787208020885
Also, I listened to Rev. Wright's sermons on YouTube. I screamed every bad word and curse at all the news stations and right-wing fascists who only used sound-bites of those sermons without putting them in context. I hope they find themselves tongue-tied and soon without jobs for doing so!
Thank you, Bill Moyers. I still have a quote from your speech to the National Conference on Media Reform, May 15, 2005, in which you said:
"An unconscious people, an indoctrinated people, a people fed only on partisan information and opinion that confirm their own bias, a people made morbidly obese in mind and spirit by the junk food of propaganda, is less inclined to put up a fight, to ask questions and be skeptical. That kind of orthodoxy can kill a democracy--or worse."
I have it hanging above my computer, and I take it to heart every time I write. I believe this cooked-up, hypocritical "Wright" problem is an excellent example of what you were talking about in your speech.
Bravo, my friend! Keep it going! I hope more and more are listening.
This is the best article on the web regarding this non issue. Now if only the people that need to read it would read it.
Gee, Jacob Freeze, I can't imagine why posters at the Daily Kos call you 'Jacob the Jihadist' and tell you to 'end the hate, Jacob.' And is it fair to say that you take "things out of context for the sole purpose of attack," as did Teacherken? I also don't believe you lick goat balls, as does Democratic Luntz.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/18/1938/07544/539/479495
Just because you continually go on the rampage against Obama, confusing and mauling facts and common sense along the way, is no reason to think you're a hate-filled person.
Just look at your current comments:
Jacob Freeze (May 4th, 2008 4:27 pm): "First Obama makes the most condescending defense of Jeremiah Wright that it is possible to imagine, even including racist language from the days of Jim Crow… He's my crazy old "uncle."
I heard Obama's Philadelphia speech March 18th and I didn't think it was condescending in the least. He was simply pointing out that Wright is from a different generation and it was harder back then for blacks. Also, your interpretation of Obama calling Wright his 'crazy old uncle' as Jim Crow racist is just plain bizarre.
"Then Obama gets exposed by his own advisor for bullshitting about NAFTA."
If you knew anything about Canadian PM Stephen Harper's Tory (conservative) government, you'd know they are in bed with the GOP in this country. (Harper's campaign was even helped by Bush advisors.) Furthermore, the initial reports were that Ian Brodie, Harper's Chief of Staff, was overheard by reporters saying that it was Clinton's campaign that had provided reassurances that their candidate didn't mean what she said about altering NAFTA. It was only after Hillary went on the attack, and Brodie changed his story to include Obama, that this hit the US media. Austan Goolsbee was invited to a meeting at the Canadian Embassy in Chicago, but he was told it was concerning his position as a professor of economics at the University of Chicago, not to discuss NAFTA. The talk briefly drifted into the Obama campaign's position on NAFTA, and Goolsbee assured them that what the candidate was saying in public was what he thought in private. That was it, end of story, and the Canadian Embassy in Chicago issued a memo to the effect that Goolsbee's version of the meeting was accurate. Meanwhile, Harper's government is in trouble for trying to illegally influence a US presidential campaign. Harper, as if you couldn't guess, favors Clinton or McCain. In your story, you complete dismiss the memo from the Canadian Embassy in Chicago in order to smear Obama. Who's bullshitting now, Jacob?
"The Obama decides it's a wonderful idea to undermine every gun-control law ever written, and make it almost impossible to write new gun-control legislation."
This is also sheer 'bullshit.'
"Maybe some of us are just too simple-minded to understand how Barack Obama could be anything other than an absolutely unscrupulous politician and all-around bullshitter, and I'm sure Bill Moyers would want us to be very ashamed…"
Jesus, you're going after Bill Moyers as well as Obama? Glad you're not a hater.
"And meanwhile Moyers and all the other Obamabots and Obama himself can just go on shamelessly bullshitting forever!"
One of your friends at Daily Kos is right: You really do need help, Jacob.
nellemason wrote: There is no cure for AIDS either, but we know that we can affect the course of the disease with treatment.
How can you cure a syndrome? AIDS is not a disease! Of course it cannot be cured (by definition).
So what is the biggest killer of people who have the (benign) HIV virus and a compromised immune system (acquired through a series of questionable decisions)? Answer: The drug cocktails these people take. AZT is almost 100% lethal, and was removed from the market in the 1960s because it not only aggressively killed cancer cells, it also aggressively killed normal cells.
Big Pharma loves the AIDS myth.
nellemason May 5th, 2008 2:47 pm
You mistook what I said.........I was simply saying that Wright represented that the victims were infected with syphillis which wasn't true, then represented that they let them die when they had a choice and there was no choice, there was simply no treatment available. Neither of the above was true.
What was true was that they told them that they were treating them, which was a lie. so you are exactly right when you say
"To deliberately misrepresent treatment to a patient and experiment on people without informed consent is wrong no matter how you try to couch the words." Maybe I didn't make it clear what I was trying to say. My apologies about that. No wonder you said shame on me when you thought I was trying to say that!
Under any circumstances what they did back then was criminal, callous and despicable. But I simply wanted to make clear what did happen. Wrights version was not true. I'll ework on my clarity
nellemason.
Dissident Heart May 5th, 2008 4:02 pm
"Black liberation theology is not a racist theology, it is an imperfect attempt to confront white supremacy."
I have heard that argument, but we'll just have to disagree. I read Black Liberation Theology as put out by Trinity and followed some of their references to Cone and others. The principals are racist it seems to me. I transposed colors to Nazi and Klan pomolgations and they actually match up pretty well. I always assume that if someone says White people are evil, the enemy of all blacks, that Black people are superior, etc....they are racist. If a white said this, suggested this theology there is no doubt in my mind what everyone here would call them. I simply don't give anyone a pass on racism because they are black.
Your point about the Gospel is well taken though." The Gospel is not about political expediency or party politics: it demands everything while promising a radically different way of life." I just can't see it applying to this theology.
But there is a lot of stuff flying around, so who knows. Example...Obama said Wright was a Marine, Someone else had hiom inthe Army and Bill has him in the Navy. Go figure.
I hope it will clear up in the end.
What ~DISSIDENT HEART~ ?????????? You say most whites are White Supremists. ___ How wrong can a person possibly be?
Perhaps where you reside and the people you may know are, But the VAST MAJORITY of whites are not. Just look how the voting has gone for Obama to date. ___ Over 88% of his votes are from white people which sure proves your words in that respect are TOTALLY wrong ____ and that's how wrong a person can be. ____ TOTALLY WRONG.
Thomas More: "My problem comes from his refusal to explain his continued association with racist theology all those years."
Black liberation theology is not a racist theology, it is an imperfect attempt to confront white supremacy. It is one way for an oppressed population to bring the Gospel to bear on an unjust society: exposing its abuses, challenging its lies, exorcising its demons, and offering a radical alternative...one that rejects the dominant values of worth and status while providing protection of the weakest and most vulnerable, and preferrential treatment for the poor. Within the context of white supremacy, that Gospel will look something like what Rev. Wright imperfectly provides. The Gospel is not about political expediency or party politics: it demands everything while promising a radically different way of life. White supremacy is an idolatry in US history and far too many still worship at its temple. Prophets expose idolatries. Politicians serve constituencies.
Thomas More, SHAME ON YOU -- you're playing with SEMANTICS. Withholding whatever treatment is available from some people and not others, and lying to them about it is UNETHICAL. There is no cure for AIDS either, but we know that we can affect the course of the disease with treatment. So it was with syphillis. To deliberately misrepresent treatment to a patient and experiment on people without informed consent is wrong no matter how you try to couch the words.
It is sad in the very time we are going to need all faith's to pull together to fix this country. Right now I am ashamed of the quiet timid white church. Your silence and hypocrisy is a stench.
Brian
Olympia WA.
White Supremacy is the issue here, and any honest look at its ugly legacy is simply unacceptable. Dialogues around race are valuable, but frank discussion about White Supremacy is essential. Since the majority of American voters are white, and a majority of them white supremacist, there is no way Obama can expect to win by calling them to the carpet- as Wright has done.
Simply wrong.....
"But it is a fact, he says, that within living memory the U.S. Public Health Service conducted a study that deliberately deceived black men with syphilis into believing that they were being treated, while actually letting them die for the sake of a scientific test."
That fact is correct, as far as Wright took it.
I'm surprised Bill didn't get it right. There was no treatment for syphilis at that time. Its a shameful episode with no excuse, but they weren't "letting" them die.. But I find half truths disgusting no matter who uses them. Truth is truth. So discuss the points truthfully or not at all.
We've had 7 1/2 years of half truths and lies. Lets not join them now.
The real shame here is that some don't or won't recognize racism or excuse it because of the color of a mans skin. Racist's are racist's. Is Wright one? You bet your bippy. Is Hagee? He could teach Wright a few tricks. So what, they aren't running. The only reason Wright matters to Obama is how it relates to his judgement.
Senator Obama joined the church originally for political reasons, we all know that. Nothing wrong with it either. My problem comes from his refusal to explain his continued association with racist theology all those years. I'm hoping he explains himself more fully. Good start on Sunday with Russert!
I agree too and I loved this article.
It's puzzled me what a big deal this was, I still don't see why people are so upset about what he said. They're getting away with sounding so righteous and non-racist, aren't they? It's pretty racist to ignore the historic and current racism that people deal with, whether they wanted to or not, it wasn't THEIR choice.
I bet a lot of black folks who might consider themselves racist, white-hating or America-hating would just LOVE the opportunity to walk away from the problem and just "forget" all the injustice. They might not stop being racist, but the option would be nice. If injustice is the standard, it seems living without racism is not even an option, and I'm not sure what a person is supposed to feel in that situation, because it seems like a lot of feelings would be pretty personal.
As a white person and a mother, when I imagined explaining the meaning and the history of the "n" word to my kids, if we were black, it really made me think, and it's so sad. A lot of people and the media have worked so hard to really demonize this man, and it seems like the subjects he discussed too, when they could.
It's good to hear a rational take on this, because the news spin and politics about it is sick.
They used to say "Black is Beautiful" when I was a kid. Black is still beautiful.
What a national treasure Bill Moyers is for continuing to tell the truth in such thoughtful language that is never bombastic. Like Noam Chomsky, Bill Moyers conveys his message in a calm, logical way that engages the intellect. We who support Barack Obama should never fail to critique him when he should be questioned on policy matters, and Rev. Wright has stated that he is not giving Obama a pass because of his race. We are worried, however, that Rev. Wright's language about U.S. foreign policy will hurt the campaign. All any American has to do is to read books like Chalmers Johnson's "BLOWBACK" to understand "chickens coming home to roost." Of course they won't, and the "my country right or wrong" mentality runs very deep in the United States because of the belief in American exceptionalism in our population.
I agree with Wright: God damn America. Stinking entitlement. Stinking exceptionalism. Mass murderers from the very beginning ...
"My government is the world's leading purveyor of violence."
M. L. King, Jr.
"When it comes to "Ay-Eye-Dee-Ess", as he clumsily pronounced the unfamiliar acronym at a Nairobi conference, the Pope [John Paul II] probably contributed more to the continental spread of the disease than the trucking industry and prostitution combined." Michela Wrong
dmia I agree!
Obama 2008
Leave it to Bill Moyers to get such an interesting discussion going. When this Wright controversy first got started I found his whole "God damn America" speech on YOUTUBE and listened to it from beginning to end. I have to say that I was quite impressed. I also recognized that his words would be anathema to the "My country, right or wrong" crowd. I didn't listen to the race speech delivered by Obama because from what I had already heard, I figured that I would be disappointed. One has to know that in order to get elected in this country it is unwise to lay all ones cards on the table. If we were better educated and informed, maybe. As it is, even a decent person will have to keep a great deal close to his/her vest.
I can't say that I have the greatest respect for Obama as he has said a number of things which struck me as wrong, but I have more HOPE that he MIGHT turn out to be someone who helps this country turn itself around with a more balanced approach. The fact that Obama is funded to a great extent by small donations and as well as the banking industry is something to ponder. IF Obama is elected AND a mostly NEW Congress is elected as well, it will be incumbent upon those who put him in office to make sure that what they thought they were electing him to do does, in fact, get done. We have had it too easy for so long that we tend to think that we can let someone else do the hard work. Those days are long gone. We need to stay informed and engaged. And let us not be too disappointed if it takes a while to change course. It will take sustained effort to roll back the right wing agenda. The right wing has been very clever and very patient. If we want the country we thought we had before all of this happened, we had better find out who we actually have been all along, warts and all. Just like any other country, we have our good points and our bad points. Unfortunately we have been in a position to throw our weight around and cause a lot of pain throughout the rest of the world. I suggest we start trying to make amends because we are definitely getting to the short end of the stick and may need some help getting through the hard times ahead. The rest of the world is not exactly in love with us at this point and with very good reason so I think we had better start shaping up. And electing Obama just might signal to the world that we are prepared to mend our ways.
Huzzah,
Affirmative action is absolutely NOT racist. In fact, it is the prime remedy of racism, because it breaks the sociological mechanisms that keep whites in power and blacks out of power.
I think you are completely misunderstanding me. Also there are geographical issues here. The issue of race in Atlanta is very different than in Pittsburgh - Pittsburgh being vastly more backward. Any kind of KKK comical buffoonery is not Racism the way white flight, catastrohic loss of tax bases, demolition of low-income housing and gentrification, cruumbling black neighborhood school and resulting savage inequality in education and job opportunities.
And then there are the utterly discriminatory labor unions - particularly the construction trades.
And all this racism happens, without a single white sheet in sight or racial epethet uttererd. It is administered calmly by bosses, union officers, white families around their kitchen tables, and government administratos. It is so intimately woven into our economy so that most people are in utter denial about it. An like an alchololic or heroin addict, there is nothing more dangerous that a racist in denial.
JAY JANSON: I think you raise a significant & important issue. For Moyers to genuflect on HIS past might cause others (like McCain) to do likewise. Did you ever send HIM a personal letter?
MiMiCCS: Your last posting had a lot of interesting data, but a conclusive connecting of dots to AIDS was not shared.
Do you not know your Congressional Representative, or how to contact them?
Yes, and he's a Republican. My contacting him will not cause Bush to be impeached. I can't convince Republicans of anything.
If you study great practitioners of any craft you'll find their basic methodology was very simplistic (Upledger, Reich, Feldenkrais, et al), a simplicity that leads to a complexity of hypothesis and potentiality of application.
Three good examples do not make a universal. Even if they did, they don't mean every simple methodology will produce the results desired. Lastly, impeaching Bush should be a method, not a methodology.
that the one action: capable of bringing all this humanity uplift to pass are through the impeachment hearings for George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney - a simple methodology
I hate to sound like I'm arguing against impeachment, but it won't automatically cause all the things you list to pass. It would be a first step towards legalizing and legitimizing the U.S. government, and I'm in favor of that, but the fact that I'm in favor of something doesn't automatically mean I can make it happen. You've written before about ridding the world of the warrior mentality, and I agree. I don't agree that it's a simple thing to do, or that impeaching Bush will cause it to happen.
Are you saying Moyers and Burckhardt are wrong, and that we should seek out the simplifiers?
I am in agreement with Bill Moyers as to the fact that it is a shame for us as a nation that Rev. Wright's comments can become a "scandal" that Obama must distance himself from. Perhaps due to my inability to comprehend the mindset of the mainstream corporate media connosieur, but I also find it beyond belief that Wright has been painted as a kind of radical that "average" Americans need to worry about. A sad day indeed.
The Biggest SECRET in the Land!
Welcome to a Never Never, Bush-Zarro Land!
Where the:
See No and Hear No Evil, Faux Media says:
I see nothing!
Some watch dog?
More like a pet goat.
Pack The Courts!
Pack the Schools!
Pack the Government!
Pack the Media!
Pack the Ballot Boxes!
Pack your job off to China!
Pack the Militia off to Die in a Death March.
Pack the Army full of Criminals and Torturers
Pack the Attorney Generals Office full of Liars.
Pack the Atmosphere full of Co2.
Pack Nuclear Waste into Cannons
Pack Terrorism, Torture, Death and Destruction
Pack the Environment with Toxic Waste and Pollution.
Pack Stores with Chinese JUNK
Pack Terminator Genes into the Food Supply.
Pack the Environment full of Genetic Mutations
Pack Clones into Laboratories
Pack the libraries with lies.
Pack TV with Crooks, Shysters, Quacks, Dicks, Bobbin Head Dolls and Schlock Meisters.
Pack your backyard full of WMD
Pack the Pulpit with Gestapo
Pack the Bankers full of Money
Pack the CEOs full of Stock.
Pack all the Loot offshore.
Pack all the Gold in Fort Knox off on Jack Asses.
Pack the Black House full of Pirates.
Pack the Resident off in a straight jacket.
Pack Dead Eye off with a Whore, Pills, Alcohol and a Lawyer for target practice.
Pack the Prisons with paupers.
Pack the Red Necks into Pickups without any Butts, Beer and GAS!
Pack all your belongings into a knapsack.
Pack all your hopes, dreams and Head into a Toilet.
FLUSH!
Had Enough yet?
Are you better off now? t
Than you were, eight years ago?
Nuff said.
Let the Good Times Roll!
Bill Moyers is a national treasure, and once again hits the nail on the head in his assessment of this tragic situation. It is about race. None of the luny white preachers on the right have received any scrutiny, despite the fact that Republicans openly court their endorsements, something I find far more troubling. After all, the right wing preachers do seek political pay back from public servants they help put in office. I can't imagine how I'd feel if my ancestors had been hauled over her against their will in the hulls of slave ships, forced into slavery, subjected to Jim Crow Laws, and all sort of discrimination. I certainly can't imagine any white person just getting over it. And, now with the Rev Wright fiasco, there's a clear double standard. Rev. Wright's anger is primarily directed at American policy (if you actually bother to listen to his words), both foreign and domestic, and with good reason. I find that far less offensive than white preachers who single out groups of people for moral condemnation. To hear Rev Hagee bellowing about the poor and penniless, "let them starve, let them starve", is morally reprehensible, yet this is the preacher whose endorsement was actively sought by McCain and others. Not the mention the fact that Hagee with his megachurch and televison broadcast reaches millions of people with his hate filled sermons. The bottom line is that much of what Rev Wright preaches is the truth. White folks aren't comfortable with his preaching style and angry tone. I say to them "get over it". Wake up America and get a clue.
They have managed to do it again. Now, can we get back to talking about the issues that affect all the people all the time,like healthcare and the fact our economy is in recession and possibly headed for a depression if it continues to decline.Oh, then are two on going wars!
I would be proud to call Jeremiah Wright my pastor. He certainly speaks the truth as I see it.
This definitely includes his 'chickens come home to roost' sermon after 9-11. His perspective was one I felt was critically missing from the USA discussion at that time. So many people were saying 'How could they do this to us?' He had the answer that I believe is the correct answer.
As for HIV origination, if you have an open mind, read the link below.
http://www.politicalgateway.com/news/read.html?id=5420
Consider also:
On June 9, 1969, Dr. Donald M. MacArthur, Deputy Director, Research and Engineering, Department of Defense, testified before Congress:
Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be refractory [resistant] to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease. [Hearings before the House Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, "Department of Defense Appropriations for 1970."]
July 1, 1970---Senate Appropriations hearings are held for the Department of Defense and refer to eminent biologists who believe that within 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent (infective micro-organism), an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired. Tentative plans to initiate a program to develop such an agent were discussed by the National Research Council .
Hearings in the British House of Commons from April 8 to May 13, 1987 regarding AIDS will include the following: "Every biological scientist who has dispassionately studied the virus and the epidemic knows that the origins of the virus could lie in the developments of modern biology....Some who know perfectly well what has happened are deliberately fudging scientific data to keep the heat off them and fellow members of their molecular biological 'club'."
1974 Henry Kissinger signed a secret National Security Study Memorandum (NSSM 200), calling for the deliberate suppression of 13 strategically important nations, so that they would not be using up resources that the United States and its allies want. The nations were India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Egypt, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the Philippines, Thailand, Turkey, Ethiopia, and Colombia.
2000-Project for New American Century issues publication calling for - I) "Biological warfare (and other new arms) could become a politically useful instrument". This point is particularly frightening if one considers the sudden spreading of the incurable SARS, which started in China, at the same time as the war in Iraq. Due to the importance of the subject, we are printing the remaining portion of the text. "New methods of attack – electronic, non-lethal, biological – will be more widely available….combat likely will take place in new dimensions, in space, cyberspace, and perhaps the world of microbes….advanced forms of biological warfare that can target specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool".
Other Eugenic methods of population control/reduction below. You are simply a higher class of animals to the elite, killing you off doesn't bother them much. The next virus they release will target those members of the non-elite of all races. The 600,000 members of the elite and upper classes will have been vaccinated.
1910---The Eugenics Record Office is established at Cold Spring Harbor in New York. It is funded by the Carnegie Institute, and will receive funding from the Rockefeller Foundation which will be founded in 1913. The Rockefeller Foundation also will fund Nazi Dr. Ernst Rudin's eugenics research at the Kaiser Wilhelm Brain Research Institute in Berlin. At the Third International Congress on Eugenics held in New York in 1932, Rudin will be unanimously elected president of the International Federation of Eugenic Societies. Rudin and other Nazis will be transported to the Congress on George Herbert Walker's and Prescott Bush's Hamburg-Amerika Lines.
1911---John D. Rockefeller, Jr., forms the Bureau of Social Hygiene, and in 1913 the Rockefeller Foundation will help organize and fund the American Social Hygiene Association "for reconsideration of public attitudes toward prostitution." Via the National Research Council, the Rockefeller Foundation's Medical Division for many years will fund the horrible sex research of Alfred Kinsey. In the early 1900s, Rockefeller introduces Margaret Sanger to the monied elite who help her form the Birth Control League that will become Planned Parenthood. She eugenically advocates limiting "dysgenic stocks" such as Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians and Catholics, as well as "slum dwellers" such as Jewish immigrants.
1932 -- Plan for Peace by American Birth Control League founder Margaret Sanger (1921) is published. She calls for coercive sterilization, mandatory segregation, and rehabilitative concentration camps for all "dysgenic stocks" including Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians and Catholics.
"In 1932, the British-led 'Eugenics' movement designated the Rockefellers' Dr. Rudin as the president of the worldwide Eugenics Federation. The movement called for the killing or sterilization of people whose heredity made them a public burden.
"A few months later, Hitler took over Germany and the Rockefeller-Rudin apparatus became a section of the Nazi state. The regime appointed Rudin head of the Racial Hygiene Society. Rudin and his staff, as part of the Task Force of Heredity Experts chaired by SS chief Heinrich Himmler, drew up the sterilization law. Described as an American Model law, it was adopted in July 1933 and proudly printed in the September 1933 Eugenical News (USA) with Hitler's signature. The Rockefeller group drew up other race laws, also based on existing Virginia statutes. Otmar Verschuer and his assistant Josef Mengele together wrote reports for special courts which enforced Rudin's racial purity law against cohabitation of Aryans and non-Aryans.
"The 'T4' unit of the Hitler Chancery, based on psychiatrists led by Rudin and his staff, cooperated in creating propaganda films to sell mercy killing (euthanasia) to German citizens. The public reacted antagonistically: Hitler had to withdraw a tear-jerker right-to-die film from the movie theaters. The proper groundwork had not yet been laid.
"Under the Nazis, the German chemical company I.G. Farben and Rockefeller's Standard Oil of New Jersey were effectively a single firm, merged in hundreds of cartel arrangements. I.G. Farben was led up until 1937 by the Warburg family, Rockefeller's partner in banking and in the design of Nazi German eugenics.
"In 1940, six months after the notorious Standard-I.G. meeting, European Rockefeller Foundation official Daniel O'Brian wrote to the Foundation's chief medical officer Alan Gregg that 'it would be unfortunate if it was chosen to stop research which has no relation to war issues' so the Foundation continued financing Nazi 'psychiatric research' during the war.
"In 1936, Rockefeller's Dr. Franz Kallmann interrupted his study of hereditary degeneracy and emigrated to America because he was half-Jewish. Kallmann went to New York and established the Medical Genetics Department of the New York State Psychiatric Institute. The Scottish Rite of Freemasonry published Kallman's study of over 1,000 cases of schizophrenia, which tried to prove its hereditary basis. In the book, Kallmann thanked his long-time boss and mentor Rudin.
"Kallmann's book, published in 1938 in the USA and Nazi Germany, was used by the T4 unit as a rationalization to begin in 1939 the murder of mental patients and various 'defective' people, perhaps most of them children. Gas and lethal injections were used to kill 250,000 under this program, in which the staffs for a broader murder program were desensitized and trained.
1948 -- UNESCO president and Fabian Socialist, Sir Julian Huxley, calls for a radical eugenic policy in UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy. He states:
"Thus, even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy of controlled human breeding will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake that much that is now unthinkable may at least become thinkable."
1950-51---Rockefeller Foundation chairman John Foster Dulles takes John D. Rockefeller III on a tour of Third World countries stressing the need eugenically to control the growth of non-white populations. 1952---John D. Rockefeller III and John Foster Dulles found the Population Council to fund population control measures.
1961-- World Wildlife Fund (WWF, now the World Wide Fund for Nature) was founded for one stated purpose: to raise money to expand the operations of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
Prince Philip became head of the WWF-UK from the outset. Among his closest collaborators was Sir Julian Huxley, president of the Eugenics Society, and a founder of the IUCN as well. Since Hitler had given eugenics a bad name, Huxley tried to sell his anti-human ideology through "conservation," as expressed in his statement, "the spread of man must take second place to the conservation of other species." He brought this same conviction to his role as the first head of the United Nations Education, Social, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
Philip also recruited a card-carrying Nazi into the leadership of the WWF, notably Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands. Bernhard had returned his Nazi Party membership card in a letter to Hitler when he was given the opportunity to marry the Dutch Queen Wilhemina, but betrayed his ongoing sentiments by signing the letter "Heil Hitler." Bernhard was the first head of the WWF-International, while Philip presided over the U.K. branch. After Bernhard was hit by the Lockheed scandals of the mid-1970s, he was replaced first by John Loudon, the former head of Royal Dutch Shell, and then, in 1981, by Philip himself.
As head of the WWF, Philip openly called for population control, calling human population growth "the single most long-term threat to survival." Treating human beings like animals, he claimed in a 1981 article in People magazine: "The more people there are, the more resources they'll consume, the more pollution they'll create, the more fighting they will do. We have no option. If it isn't controlled voluntarily, it will be controlled involuntarily by an increase in disease, starvation and war."
Philip has also endorsed the long-discredited Malthusian claim that population must outstrip food supply. While his official statements pay obeisance to the idea of merely reducing the rate of growth of population, Philip's activities—which involve setting up "ecological reserves" that are used to preserve animals and serve as sanctuaries for terrorist insurgencies, campaigning against life-saving major infrastructure projects, and opposing the most fundamental life-saving measures, such as draining swamps—give the genocidal game away.
March 11, 1969---Vice-President of Planned Parenthood-World Population Frederick Jaffe's "Activities Relevant to the Study of Population Policy for the U.S." is printed containing a memo to Population Council president Bernard Berelson. It includes examples of proposed measures to reduce U.S. fertility, such as (a) encourage increased homosexuality, (b) fertility control agents in water supply, (c) encourage women to work, (d) abortion and sterilization on demand, and (e) make contraception truly available and accessible to all.
In 1972, the Club of Rome was founded, releasing the book Limits to Growth, to assert, by computer simulation, that the world's limits to growth had been reached, and zero growth must be enforced..A slew of media operations and new agencies were mobilized to pound on this message. With the rock-drug counterculture under way as part of the campaign, the degradation operation proceeded.
March 7, 1972---The Rockefeller Commission on Population issues a report advocating population control, stating that further growth of the American population could cause economic problems, and that "in any case, no generation needs to know the ultimate goal or the final means, only the direction to which they will be found." In other words, they will control population, but they're not going to tell us how!
1973---The Trilateral Commission is begun by David Rockefeller and will issue a report stating that "population planning should be an integral part of social and economic development."
1973---George H.W. Bush praises the Population Crisis Committee (PCC) for having played a "major role in assisting government policy makers and in mobilizing United States' response to the world population challenge." The PCC was founded by General William Draper, Jr. (vice-chairman of Planned Parenthood), and is largely funded by the Rockefeller Foundation.
In 1974, several key events in agriculture policy occurred. A World Food Conference was convened in Rome, to address how to defeat hunger. However, Secretary of State Kissinger was sent at the last minute to represent the United States, after an orchestrated scandal cancelled the trip of Agriculture Secretary Earl Butz—an "old school" farm advocate. Instead of addressing the need to rev up agriculture capacity, Kissinger's theme was that nations should try to help the needy with a little food aid.
In 1982 the World Resources Institute was founded, headed by Gus Spaeth, to issue pseudo-scientific tracts saying that expanding the food supply and population destroys the environment. Al Gore is on their board today.
In October 1982, the U.S. Congress granted the Commodity Credit Corp. of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) discretion to convert government grain stocks to gasohol fuel, and kicked off the ethanol promotion program, giving Cargill and ADM multi-billions for government-subsidized ethanol
an unprecedented U.S. food output reduction program was enacted, called "Payment-in-Kind," in which farmers were given claim chits for government-controlled surplus corn stocks, in exchange for idling 30-50% of their corn acreage. Then, during the very same 1983 crop season, a 50-year drought hit, and that entire year's corn harvest fell by 50% from its recent previous levels.
October 1984 report of the World Bank, "Toward the Sustainable Development of Sub-Saharan Africa," called for large-scale water projects to be "re-examined"—meaning cancelled—given the "extreme shortage of resources."
GATT was used as the venue for an all-out attempt at a one-world trade treaty, to make it even easier for the private, neo-British-East-India-Company networks to subvert nation-serving agriculture. An opening round of trade talks began at Punta del Este, Uruguay, aimed at "reforming" agricultural trade, by coercing nations to remove tariffs, export controls, and national regulations. Over the next ten years, a drawn-out sequence of conferences were held in Montreal and elsewhere, attended not only by national government officials, but by Cargill, ADM, major banks, and non-governmental agencies.
In 1985, the U.S. Patent Office ruled that plants could now be protected under the powerful industrial patent. The industrial patent does not have any exemptions for farmers or for research, so any use of a patented plant or seed without specific license from the patent holder would be considered
violation of the patent. This patent decision is the basis for the new weapon to control agricultural production and research that the cartels have pushed to the limit.
1986 The BSE brain-wasting disease—bovine spongiform encephalopathy, called Mad Cow—broke out for the first time ever, in Britain, around 1986, and was widely exported. Veterinarians attribute the occurrence directly to the Thatcher government's malfeasance. Soon after she was elected, a national livestock sanitation board asked the government to intervene to prevent any tainted sheep matter from being cycled elsewhere into the livestock feed chain, because there was at the time in the U.K., a widespread outbreak of sheep scrapie, TSE (transmissible spongiform encephalopathy). Thatcher and Agriculture Minister Lord Peter Walker refused, on the grounds that the animal feed sector should "regulate itself." Within six years, after tainted matter continued to be blended into animal feed, the species jump from sheep to cows occurred.
1988 The Princes of Genocide: Philip ...
"In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation."
That statement, reported by Deutsche Press Agentur in August 1988, presents in the most concise manner, the commitment of the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Philip, to genocide against the world's population. In expressing this view—which he also put in writing in the foreword to the book People as Animals in 1986—Philip places himself in the tradition of that Fabian genocidalist Lord Bertrand Russell, who had defined alleged overpopulation as the greatest threat to the oligarchical way of life.
World Wildlife Fund (founded in 1961), run in tandem with the Conservation Foundation (a U.S. continuation of a pre-World War II Europe-based, eugenicist "nature" society) merged in 1991, and subsequently became known as the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF).
Their assault on food and agriculture was profound. They mounted a campaign to force governments to remove land from agricultural production, in the name of "conserving" scarce resources. In the United States, an entirely new program was established, the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). As of today, it has over 30 million acres locked up, out of a crop base of 365 million acres. The "Wetlands Reserve" is taking still more land out of production.
In 1994, the PVPA was amended in accordance with the regulations under the GATT. The changes to the act made it illegal for farmers to resell or exchange any seed of protected crops. The GATT agreement also forces the developing nations to recognize the patents and protections on plants
and living organisms held by other GATT member countries. This allows the cartels to deny developing countries' farmers access to advanced biotechnology, and instead forces them to pay huge licensing fees to use any patented seeds.
Inter- American Ethanol Commission (IEC), the entity founded in 2006 by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, and the major sponsor of the First Biofuels Congress of the Americas. The IEC is at the center of many of the ethanol ventures now being promoted around Ibero-America. An ardent defender himself of free trade, Gore embraces Jeb Bush's notion of using multinational ethanol deals to "energize" the debate on hemispheric
free trade.
No matter that that debate is effectively dead. It makes a good talking point for the IEC, which argues that the continental "integration"—that is, elimination of sovereignty— that might have been achieved through the Bush Administration's failed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), is now
possible through ethanol! The IEC is a key driver behind the newly launched "Bioenergy Alliance," whose members reportedly include "the leading ethanol producers of the Americas." This apparatus, with heavy Brazilian input, is now embarking on a major biofuels offensive in Central America and the Caribbean, whose populations are starving. Thinking themselves very clever, these killers plan to use this impoverished
region as the base from which to significantly increase, and then export, biofuels to the United States, to get around the United States' 54-cent-a-gallon tax on Brazilian ethanol. If exported to the U.S. from a nation such as Guatemala, which is particularly targetted, ethanol can enter the U.S. tariff-free, because of Guatemala's participation in the Caribbean Basin
Initiative (CBI).
The Brazilian involvement with IEC and the Bush-Gore lovefest, is—tragically—lawful. In the speech he gave April 16 before the FAO conference in Brasilia, President Lula da Silva vowed that, despite world starvation, he intends to act as a spokesman for the British Empire's genocidal biofuels drive. He had the nerve to lie that "more people are eating better" in the world than ever before.
Jakob Burckhardt, a teacher and friend of F. Nietzsche, especially liked N's little aphorism against standard thinking, which went: "What? All Truth is Simple? Is that not doubly a lie?"
But deep thinking truth seekers don't get to be president in the US anymore, if they ever once rarely did. The electorate has been systematically dumbed-down to the point where anything resembling complex truth is automatically gagged on, blocked, shut-out.
Big lies told in a simple manner are the easiet route to power for now, and any presidential candidate expecting to get elected by telling the truth in its manifold complexity, like Nader, is quickly disposed of and made a pariah.
An honest candidate with an unrevealed aim of turning all this corrption around, could, theoretically, sneak past the System and get elected, I suppose; but only by telling simple truths that outshone the simple lies.
[Some people think this what Obama is trying to do.]
But even then, such an el