Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Senate Passes No-Strings War Funding Bill
WASHINGTON - While the future commander of U.S. military operations throughout South Asia and the Middle East assured lawmakers Thursday that the situation in Iraq is continuing to improve, the U.S. Senate approved an additional 165 billion dollars today to fund wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan at least through next winter.
The bill, which was approved by a margin of 70 to 26, did not impose any new conditions on how the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, who leaves office next January, can spend the money, much to the disappointment of Democrats and some Republicans who had worked hard in recent weeks to attach amendments to the appropriation.
But, pressed by both the White House and the Pentagon to approve the bill without conditions by Memorial Day -- the national holiday that honours fallen war veterans -- the Democratic leadership decided against a major fight with the administration over control of Iraq policy at this time.
Earlier this week, the Senate Appropriations Committee had approved a package of amendments, including one that would have required the administration to gain prior Congressional approval for any future security deals with Iraq's government. Senators rejected the package, however, in a 63-34 vote.
"We can't help but note the irony that, as the Senate leaves for its Memorial Day recess, they have ensured the needless deaths of hundreds of soldiers and thousands of innocent Iraqis by voting to expand the war and occupation for another full year," said Michael McPhearson, co-chair of United for Peace and Justice, an anti-war group, after the vote.
"How many more fallen service men and women will we honour next year?" asked McPhearson, who also serves as executive director of Veterans for Peace.
Before passing the entire bill, however, the Senate approved an amendment by a veto-proof margin of 75-22 that would add nearly 50 billion dollars in education and other benefits for veterans.
The Senate version of the appropriations bill is expected to be taken up by the House of Representatives immediately after the Memorial Day recess in early June.
As currently drafted, the pending House version of the bill contains a number of constraints on the president's freedom of action in Iraq, including a restriction on his authority to negotiate long-term security deals with Iraq that would commit Washington to defend Iraq in the face of "external and internal threats".
But whether those constraints will survive action on the floor of the House when the bill comes up for debate remains unclear.
"There is a great danger that the House bill will include no restrictions on the administration, including a no-permanent bases provision that the Congress has voted on in the last two years," Jim Fine of the Friends Committee on National Legislation, a Quaker lobby group, told IPS Thursday. "If the final bill [coming out of Congress] contains no policy restrictions, it will be a clear victory for the White House."
Meanwhile, Washington's top commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, told senators Thursday that he may be able to recommend further troop reduction in Iraq in September in addition to the planned drawdown of U.S. troops to 140,000 this July.
Petraeus, who is seeking confirmation from the Senate to become chief of the U.S. Central Command (Centcom), claimed that "the number of security incidents in Iraq last week was the lowest in over four years". That has been largely due to joint U.S. and Iraqi operations in Basra, Mosul and Baghdad's Sadr City, the stronghold of dissident Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, he added.
"His message was clearly optimistic...and he painted a rosy picture of events," said Fine of FCNL. "He clearly contradicted expectations by holding out the likelihood of a future drawdown of troops in Iraq [in the fall]."
Centcom covers much of the key hotspots in Washington's "global war on terror" -- the Middle East and the Gulf; all of South Asia, including Afghanistan; parts of the Caucasus, and all of Central Asia.
Former Centcom commander Adm. William Fallon, who abruptly resigned his post earlier this year, was known to be critical of the administration's laser-like focus on Iraq, as well as its sabre-rattling against Iran. He also believed that the war in Afghanistan and the Taliban insurgency in the frontier areas of Pakistan were not receiving adequate attention or resources.
Significantly, Petraeus Thursday added his voice to concerns about the latter, warning that the next attack against the U.S. could well come out of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan, where he said the al Qaeda leadership is based.
"Clearly, al Qaeda senior leadership has been strengthened in the FATA, even though their main effort is still assessed to be in Iraq, by them as well as by us," he said. "But the organization of an attack (on the U.S.)... would likely come from the FATA."
That assertion echoes recent assessments both by the U.S. intelligence community and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael Mullen, who said earlier this week that he believes Washington should add 10,000 to 12,000 more U.S. troops to the 33,000 who already deployed in Afghanistan, but that those deployments will have to wait for further withdrawals from Iraq.
Petraeus also described Iranian influence in Iraq as "malign" and "lethal", repeating accusations that Iran has been involved in "arming, training, funding and directing of militia extremists" who have targeted U.S. soldiers.
While saying that the U.S. should leave the military option on the table vis-à-vis Iran as a "last resort", Petraeus added that "we must also explore policies that, over the long term, offer the possibility of more constructive relations, if that is possible."
He also told senators that Iraq's provincial elections will be held in November instead of October as initially planned due to the latest strife in Basra. Iraq's provincial elections are one of the several benchmarks set by the U.S. government for Iraqi factions to meet as part of a national reconciliation process that would allow Sunni Arabs more say in the administrative affairs of the regions where they live.
© 2008 Inter Press Service
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
91 Comments so far
Show AllThe only choice we have, now, is to find the 70 Senators that voted for this 165 billion funding, with no restrictions, and unelect them.
This President who drove every business he ever ran in bankruptcy, and who was a cheerleader in college, is now about to repeat history. He fires, or retires, generals that disagree and claims he only does what "his generals" recommend...which is true in a way.
The corporate soldiers vote for death and destruction like they are suppose to.
Once again the Senate, including candidates who have voiced opposition to the illegal war and occupation of Iraq, has bent over in favor of the spineless perpetuation of unnecessary death and destruction. Bush proves himself invincible once again. This is why McCain will win the presidency. There is no serious opposition. What a joke our congress has become.
Please reserve 70 more places at the warcrimes trials.
They didn't vote to fund the war, they voted to fund the occupation. I wish everyone who voted yes be voted out of office regardless of party.
It is interesting how the Corporate Media portrays this story as a defeat for Bush, who threatened to veto the bill if it exceeded his monetary limit. The other day, I took a taxicab to the airport, and the cab driver was one of the most ignorant, ill-informed, racist people I ever met. I said very little and he could not understand why I was so quiet. If we had another half-hour, I would have put him in his place, but unfortunately we were three minutes from the terminal, so I elected to remain quiet. Oh, I gave him a very small tip, which left him even more confused (I really should not have given him a tip at all). It indeed, is frightening to see the profound ignorance that circulates among our society.
PIGS WITH SHOES. ALL of them. The most gutless, brainless, spineless gaggle of "lawmakers" since Nero's crumbling Rome...
No surprises here. Just disappointment in the complacency of those who attempt to represent. I agree w/Bushrod--they need a reminder at just how badly they represent. Haven't they been listening that the overwhelming majority of Americans are against continuing the occupation in Iraq? Or do they think that we are now so overwhelmed by the price of gas and food that we don't have time to notice? Maybe they think we are all so stupid that we can't make the connections between the two.
QUESTION FOR READERS:
There are various sites that report how congresspersons voted. I like recommendations from readers on the site they find most accessible, up-to-date, easiest to scan. Thanks in advance.
Could George W. Bush be the anti-Christ? If he is, how come he gets to have 70 "apostles" when the real-Christ only had 12? Doesn't hardly seem fair does it?
Learn the word, GENOCIDE
This has NEVER been a 'war'. That is the core of the disinfo!
Short memories we surely do have:
1) Saddam helped to prominence by MI6 and CIA.
2) American advisors basically ran the Iran/Iraq child 'war'/genocide on the Iraq side while their secret service German counterparts controlled its operations from inside Iran.
3) Saddam contacted Bush, Sr.'s State Department to obtain the green light for invasion of Kuwait.
Genocide is a continuous feature of the military industrial complex that has essentially ruled over our lives for a very long time. Policies of genocide and deception (to disguise the architects, nature and purpose of these operations) are the twin pillars of imperial power.
A number of euphemisms (war, disease, economic hardship, hunger) are used to disguise this essential an extremely ugly truth.
realveive
Bush doesn't work as efficiently nor does he have the brain power to do the hard work because as you know being president is hard work. So, he needs all the help he can get.
Political whores collaborating with corporate whores, all being pimped by lobbyists, and brought to you by media whores and orchestrated by the biggest WhoreHouse in the world.
Hoa binh
Why would there be any strings attached? They're on the same team. The good news is that in another year or so we won't have any more money to "invest" in the Middle East. Guns/butter really will play out
http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/Update/Update2008-05-22.htm
It takes a lot of gas to fly halfway around the world just to drop bombs on women and children. I think our senators have set us up for $5+ gas. I think I'll vote Green in November.
GET UP. GO TO WASHINGTON. GRAB THE CROOKS AND THROW THEM IN THE POTOMAC.
Spinless Bastards
The "Military Congressional Industrial Complex" has no conscience; never did and never will. Happy Memorial Day !
The list of who voted which way is easy to find. The FCNL website (www.fcnl.org) has an easy link.
If your senator voted "no" on the final vote, call him or her up (or go into their local office, as I did this morning) to say thank you. If not, call them up and tell them what you think about endless money for endless war/occupation. Keep the heat on.
Isn't it a cruel irony - HONORING VETERANS AND SOLDIERS BY FUNDING WAR!!!!!!!!!!!
Isn't the funding of wars a kind of payments for the killings of soldiers (and innocent civilians)? By funding wars, soldiers are forced to be away from their spouces and children for an uncertain period of time, and remain rooted in the occupied countries so that both the political leaders and transnational companies can plunder these countries to satisfy their greed. In this sense, soldiers (at least in the case of Iraq and Afghanistan) are being used as mercenaries, since in both Iraq and Afghanistan, the role of the US soldiers is to safeguard the interests of the American political leaders and the transnational companies, by perpetuating occupation and suppressing any local opposition to the occupation and plunder.
If the American government and the American public really meant in honoring veterans and soldiers, why is that more than 25% of the homeless in America are veterans? Why are the conditions in the military hospitals and the treatment given to the wounded soldiers soooooooooooooo appalling and depressing??????? What about the families of the wounded and fallen soldiers? How is their situation???
When I look at the REALITY OF SITUATION OF THE VETERANS AND SOLDIERS,AND THEIR FAMILIES, I cannot but come to a conclusion that the American concept of HONORING VETERANS AND SOLDIERS underlines SELFISHNESS AND PROFIT MOTIVE. Veterans and soldiers are honored because they are safeguarding the interests of not only the political leaders and transnational companies, but also of the general public. Setting apart a day for this RITUAL does not cost anything. On the other hand, by making it a RITUAL, both the political leaders and the weapons industries gain a lot.
Therefore, soldiers are made scapegoats by the predatory capitalism and heartless, absolute greed that leaves mass human wreckage everywhere.
Saint Barack, you know the anti-war candidate, did not cast a vote. He's busy with running for President, and besides, he doesn't want to be on record.
Stop voting for Democrats! of course, don't vote for Republicans, either! Support greens and other third parties!
Blow up your T.V.,
Throw away the paper,
Read no more online,
Get you a Life....
Why are we wasting our energy, good moods, stress levels, and positive attitudes on a "NO WIN" scenario, Folks?
It must be clear SOMEWHERE in your minds that we have no more voice in our own (?) government. The times have changed. The corporations run the country and, short of a REAL revolution--which ain't happening--there is not going to be any changes made by the peons and worker bees. Months ago, Dennis Kucinich offered, what I believe, to have been our last hope at REAL CHANGE (not just political rhetoric) and he was thrashed not only by the media but by "We The People" as well because of "The Program".
As long as this is a dysfunctional country, the leadership will be dysfunctional. Until humankind, in general, changes their thinking to a healthy, positive, loving, and GIVING-NOT-GETTING mentality you can expect same old/same old.
I've emailed my worthless Senators and spread the word about the vote. Now how about some information about Cynthia McKinney, a green party candidate for president. She sure does sound good. Wish I knew what more to do.
http://neighborhooduniversecity.blogspot.com/
Surrender May 23rd, 2008 4:04 pm -- "As long as this is a dysfunctional country, the leadership will be dysfunctional. Until humankind, in general, changes ..."
Excuse me, but I think you are over-generalizing both the problem and its sources. If, for example, you examine UN voting records, exceptions to nearly unanimous resolutions, non-obvervances of established covenants, etc., I think you'll see a pattern of behavior that is much more particular than all of humankind.
I have not checked this source and have trimmed the orginal, but this right-wing general says, "Yes, it is about oil." Read on. When will the presidential debate take up whether or not we want to go to war for oil?
BY: JIM L. CASH, Brig. Gen., USAF, Ret.
Understand, the current battle we are engaged in is much bigger than just Iraq. What happens in the next year will affect this country and how our kids and grandkids live throughout their lifetime, and beyond
There are eight terror-sponsoring countries that make up the grand threat to the West. Two, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, just need firm pressure from the West to make major reforms. The other six, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea and Libya will require regime change or a major policy shift. Now, let's look more closely.
Afghanistan and Iraq have both had regime changes, but are being fueled by outsiders from Syria and Iran …. I don't think Libya is now a threat.
North Korea can be handled diplomatically by buying them off. They are starving. That leaves Syria and Iran. Syria is like a frightened puppy. Sooner or later, we are going to be forced to confront Iran, and it better be before they gain nuclear capability.
In 1989 I served as a Command Director inside the Cheyenne Mountain complex located in Colorado Springs…. I watched Iran and Iraq shoot missiles at each other every day…. They were fighting for control of the Middle East and that enormous oil supply.
Do you have any idea what will happen if the entire Middle East turns their support to Iran, which they will obviously do if we pull out? Oil WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE to this country at any price.
The economy in this country will totally die if that Middle East supply is cut off right now. It will not be a recession. It will be a depression that will make 1929 look like the 'good-old-days'.
This Republic is the longest standing the world has ever known, but it is vulnerable. It would take so little to change it through economic upheaval.
JUST HOW GOOD IS THAT FOR OUR COUNTRY?
A lack of oil in the near future will be the final straw that dooms this Republic. However, if we refuse to let this happen and really get serious about an energy self- sufficiency program, this can be avoided. I am afraid, however, that we are going in the opposite direction.
… allowing Iran to take control of the Middle East, continue to refuse development of nuclear energy, refuse to allow drilling for new oil … it will be over in terms of what we view as the good life in the USA.
A President must make the war decision wisely, and insure that the cause is right before using his last political option. However, CONTROLLING IRAN AND DEMOCRATIZING THE MIDDLE EAST IS THE ONLY CHOICE IF WE ARE HELL- BENT ON DEPENDING ON THEM FOR OUR FUTURE ENERGY NEEDS.
Every Senator that approved this bill needs to be ousted in the next election they are in. Hope you are all keeping track. This is yet another example that our Congress does NOT represent the wishes of we the people, who have signified in every conceivable major poll in the last year that we want OUT of Iraq and to REIGN IN the over-reach of this monarch and his power-grabbing.
Every one who voted "yes" needs to be booted out of office for failure to live up to their oath of office to defend the Constitution and to vote what the majority of their constituents want. Bunch of Republican-Lite spineless cowards, the lot of 'em.
poetjude: I've emailed my worthless Senators and spread the word about the vote. Now how about some information about Cynthia McKinney, a green party candidate for president. She sure does sound good. Wish I knew what more to do.
President Cynthia McKinney will send the corporate persons scrambling for cover. They'll know that under her watch the people will put the teeth back into the anti-trust laws, and predator and prey will switch roles. Those corporate persons will be kicking dust, and will get their tails chewed on. It will be a feast for the hungry.
What more to do? Develop methods of self-sufficiency, shift all of your exchange/association away from the power centers and to your local community, support the worldwide network of progressives/peasants, teach to fish instead of giving fish, exchange information freely, and enjoy the bounty of nature.
Vote Green or wither away!
Iraq's provincial elections are one of the several benchmarks set by the U.S. government
Hilarious! The US government is still pretending that it has somekind of authority over the Iraqi people. It doesn't even have any authority over Americans. All of the acts of Congress over the past 7-8 years are null and void. The people don't even recognize the government let alone its actions.
http://www.juancole.com/2008/05/will-sistani-declare-jihad-on-us.html
http://www.truthdig.com/cartoon/item/20080521_weather_report/
Imperial War, the powermongers know that without war, they are lost. Humans have the ability, the knowledge and foremost the courage to change this world into the paradise it was meant to be, though it takes sacrifice, or at least perceived sacrifice on a grand scale. Do another 3 trillion hard earned dollars need to be wasted to serve the powermongers (Stiglitz, Nobel Prize Winner, Economics)?
Imagine what an impact 3 trillion dollars could have on the world if we would shift our focus from serving the powermongers to the oppressed, the hungry, the sick, the needy.
He who has it worse than you, he should be your king, only then will we finally shake off the shackles that keep us ALL in bondage.
This War was NOT explained to the American people as Commonreader's colonel above does thusly: we need the oil, we take the oil. And fuck anyone in our way. To be honest, it should have been, and should be now.
It was instead Sold AFTER 9/11 through some bullshit about 'terrorists' and 'democratization'. Well, please parade the real terrorists we have caught so far in this five-year-and-ongoing war on terrorism, along with the transcripts of their trials. Even Osama bin Laden could have been tried in absentia, IF the evidence existed. And as far as democracy, well, when the Palestinians voted the 'wrong' way, they were attacked in all ways and without mercy. So, so much for 'democracy'!
Yup, the parade o'terrorists in America would be a little short one. In fact, it would be a parade of None. And the trial of Osama? Never will be held. And Saddam's testimony against Rumsfeld and Cheney and Bush the First and so on? Fat chance getting it now! And the joke is on the American people. (I think the FBI's announced "main American terrorist threat" is the EarthFirst 'tree-huggers'!?! What crap!)
And this article posits that Iran will not sell us oil, so we will run out. To do this, Iran would have to sell NO oil, for oil not to reach America, as oil is fungible. We do not now get oil from Iran. So his point is utterly without merit. Another used-war salesman with his foot in the door.
In fact, if you ask who ACTUALLY benefitted from the 9/11 tragedy itself, would you say Iraq did? Saddam did? Afghanistan did? The Taliban did? The Muslim community did? Even that Osama himself did? It benefitted none of these at all, quite the reverse. And no one would have thought otherwise, beforehand, either.
OR would you say that the American Military Industrial Complex benefitted, having just lost one big 'enemy' with which to justify its overkill budgets, at the collapse of the Soviet Union? And that the NeoCon Corporatists benefitted? And that the Hard Rightwing Chauvinist Extremists did? And that the Zionists of Israel did? And that the CIA did? And that the Oil Magnates did? And that Bush and Cheney did? In fact, it benefitted ALL of these ENORMOUSLY! And anyone would have thought that a 9/11 sort of tragedy would benefit these elements, beforehand, also.
Qui bono? The motive makes the crime. 9/11 was an inside job, a false-flag black op by a small, criminal, hidden group of zealots in the classified secret-celled blackworld that knew how to get Americans to back their agendas by turning on people's vengeance and fear emotions. These criminals and traitors within the government must have been in positions of secrecy and knowledge and power that could get this dastardly deed done. And killing inocent Americans? Just collateral damage necessary to move the agendas forward. As if our leaders don't kill innocent people by decisions! They do it all the time, and know they do. And this small dedicated group will hold its secrets.
Now the colonel explains the Oil War to us. But he leaves out the part where that Three Trillion dollar expenditure for the Iraq War COULD HAVE BEEN EXPENDED to FREE US from dependence on oil, instead! How STUPID has the current course of action been? How criminal?
Yet, there sit the criminals for all to see, sitting in the White House and in the seats of power, daring us all to knock them off their thrones. They know no one will, so they act with impunity and without regard to life, liberty or happiness, without regard to the Constitution, without regard to rational thought, without regard to human empathy or compassion. And in so doing, they snort, "so whadda ya gonna do 'bout it, huh?"
And I fear by the words of this colonel that American military officers may not defend the Constitution, as they are sworn to do, if the time comes, when he says that "a lack of oil in the near future will be the final straw that dooms this Republic", almost as though he were wishing this, or threatening us with this end he has devised if War For Oil does not proceed with Iran as the next target.
As posse comitatus is already mooted, and the military is ready with homeland command, all is prepared now for the end of the democracy of the United States, through an overthrow of the people's government by a military junta under the guise of 'saving' the government of, by and for the People, while really destroying it.
And what can we do about it? Huh?
"...but this right-wing general says, "Yes, it is about oil.""
NO it is NOT about oil!
It is about control. The oil economy was not implemented (early last century) until control of oil reserves was assured.
What is happening in the Middle East is genocide. Following this genocide, a "conditioning of the soil", a 'new' social and economic order will be established.
Oil in the Middle East was controlled by the British (with some participation of its elite partners) at the start of the oil economy.
Installing Saddam, the Shah, and many others to power has been orchestrated by these same interests...
And so too was the preparation for full-scale genocide in Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran by the revision to an easy-to- demonize society.
Khomeini's first appointments were CIA collaborators both in the Office of Foreign Affairs and the Office of Information.
The world is ruled by a super elite that foments various types of genocides ('wars', hunger, disease) as the all essential governing (crippling) policy to keep the poor poor, defeated and sufficiently incapacitated to challenge the powers that be and their insane machinations.
"My people are happier when they are hungry, they do not complain so much."
Cyrus Samrad, Iranian industrialist, CIA and MI6 collaborator and darling of the US State Department.
Someone asked about seeing how the senators voted on this. I believe this is the link. The only Republican to vote against it was Smith.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00139
I wrote my Senator, Bill Nelson and told him how deeply disappointed I was in his vote to extend this war. We have to let them know we are watching and that we object. Spaceman Bill has voted with the Republican war mongers way more than I can tolerate.
WHAT A 4PLUS DISGRACE THIS CONGRESS IS.
Please stop voting Democrat!
Yet again, we see that voting Democrat does nothing to change things. The propaganda experts in the Dem party know this of course, which is why they try to con the American people by putting their candidate behind a podium with the word change on it and make him say the word change in every sentence of every speech. But, watch actions. Voting Democrat does nothing to create change. What it really is is just a giant con that prevents change. It fools the American people into electing a party that will not change anything, and cripples any movement towards voting for candidates that might really provide change.
Please stop voting Democrat!
95% of Iraq War opponents in congress won't ever vote their so-called conscience on this issue until Bush is out of office. And even then, they'll do so only if either a Clinton or Obama presidency acts to create unified public/congressional support to quickly and decisively bring US troops home.
We can bemoan and condemn our federal lawmakers all we want (they disgust me plently.) But given the corrupted system they get elected by, it's only pissing into the wind to expect the beter-inclined of them to slit their political throats in the name their lone voice for Justice and Truth.
Our elitist political culture and elitist-serving news media no longer produce or affirm commonly-shared human values like universal Justice and Truth, to begin with, and this makes it impossible to elect the 'impractical' representatives of such values in any significant number.
Your could say the same thing about the sell-out of presidential candidates, except for the fact that at some similar crisis points in US history, presidential candidates have managed to squeek-in on a wave of nationally-based hope for change, despite the corruption and self-serving interest of a majority of congress members.
Voting now, today, for a Green or other progressive/reformist presidential candidate is certainly not a moral mistake; although it may be a worse-than-useless expenditure of political energy. A McCain presidency indirectly enabled by such purely moral votes will, after all, surely help to bring about the end of what remains of our republic.
We can only now act to ensure that if one of the Democrat candidates gets elected in 2008, and leads the conscience of congress to action, backed-up by presidential messages to the people, the worst of our country's current political maddness, the Iraq War, will be wound-down and ended promptly soon.
But no matter that a Democrat is elected president in 2008, all of this kind of political maddness is guarantted to happen again unless fundamental changes are made in the next 4 yrs.
Until we publicly finance campaigns, the conscience of congress will always play guaranteed second fiddle to its members' personal ambitions to get re-elected. In the present case, this means not opening themselves to being 'pre-maturely' tagged by a dominant rightwing news media as troop betrayers, defeatists, coddlers of terrorism, ad nauseum, and therefore being cutoff from entrenched, corrupt, election campaing financing.
Public financing of campaigns obviously won't solve all the problems of democracy, but it will help lawmakers of conscience to act on their conscience w/o the all-too-human fear of being politically cut off at the knees by ruthless, democracy-hating, behind-the-scenes paymasters.
"Please stop voting "
...
"Please stop voting "
My thoughts exactly! Those who run this country also manage the congress and the Presidency.
Anyone who enters office will be under scrutiny and the orders of those who have always run this country.
New face, same policy, over and over again ad nauseum.
Anyone who tries to change that fact will either be 'retired', or 'fired' just like Kennedy was. Is this not obvious?
Our government is a totalitarian one run by the secret services of the CIA, FBI, DoD, NSA, NASA, etc.
Together they maintain the 'illusion culture' in which we are schooled; that this is a 'capitalist' (implying an adherence to free and open market influences) and democratic society.
In fact, it is a completely managed social reality beginning with what false histories and scientific 'findings' we are taught (and how it is taught) to what opportunities will definitely be closed or opened to us individually.
The emphasis of ALL these secret programs is control.
Our society is not only totalitarian in infrastructure, it is also best described as the Semblance Society for its makeup is meant to utterly disguise the actual nature of 'how things work' and 'who wields influence and power' over 'how things work'.
Officials are not 'elected' they are positioned through careful management of popular perception and the ability to get members of society to accept/participate in the grand deception.
Those unpopular with elitist interests, whether on the 'left' or the 'right' will be silenced/neutralized long before they could ever threaten the tight controls our secret managers wield over the 'political' process and any who are chosen to become its 'representatives'.
Our government is no different than other governments around the world. We may have played a different role on the world's stage (that of principal defender of the world's empire), but it has been and is crafted not by ourselves but rather by those who have selected for us all.
The world is run by a corporate military elite. This will be addressed before substantive life supporting changes can be made. Deception must cease to be a principal and respected foundation of government.
Democrats who voted for war funding bill:
Jason Altmire, Robert Andrews, Joe Baca, Brian Baird, John Barrow, Melissa Bean, Shelley Berkley, Marion Berry, Sanford Bishop, Dan Boren, Leonard Boswell, Rick Boucher, Allen Boyd, Nancy Boyda, G.K. Butterfield, Dennis Cardoza, Christopher Carney, Ben Chandler, James Clyburn, Jim Cooper, Jim Costa, Bud Cramer, Henry Cuellar, Susan Davis, Lincoln Davis, Norman Dicks, John Dingell, Joe Donnelly, Chet Edwards, Brad Ellsworth, Rahm Emanuel, Bob Etheridge, Gabrielle Giffords, Kirsten Gillibrand, Charles Gonzalez, Bart Gordon, Gene Green, Baron Hill, Ruben Hinojosa, Tim Holden, Steny Hoyer, Steve Kagen, Paul Kanjorski, Dale Kildee, Ron Kind, Nicholas Lampson, Rick Larsen, Sander Levin, Daniel Lipinski, Tim Mahoney, Jim Marshall, Jim Matheson, Mike McIntyre, Kendrick Meek, Charles Melancon, Harry Mitchell, Alan Mollohan, Dennis Moore, John Murtha, Solomon Ortiz, Collin Peterson, Earl Pomeroy, Nick Rahall, Silvestre Reyes, Ciro Rodriguez, Mike Ross, Dutch Ruppersberger, John Salazar, Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Allyson Schwartz, David Scott, Joe Sestak, Heath Shuler, Ike Skelton, Vic Snyder, Zachary Space, John Spratt, Bart Stupak, John Tanner, Gene Taylor, Bennie Thompson, Mark Udall, Peter Visclosky, Timothy Walz, Charles Wilson
Democrats against war funding bill:
Neil Abercrombie, Gary Ackerman, Thomas Allen, Michael Arcuri, Tammy Baldwin, Xavier Becerra, Timothy Bishop, Earl Blumenauer, Robert Brady, Bruce Braley, Corrine Brown, Lois Capps, Michael Capuano, Russ Carnahan, Julia Carson, Kathy Castor, Yvette Clarke, William Clay, Emanuel Cleaver, Steve Cohen, John Conyers, Jerry Costello, Joe Courtney, Joseph Crowley, Elijah Cummings, Danny Davis, Artur Davis, Peter DeFazio, Rosa DeLauro, William Delahunt, Lloyd Doggett, Michael Doyle, Keith Ellison, Anna Eshoo, Sam Farr, Chaka Fattah, Bob Filner, Barney Frank, Al Green, Raul Grijalva, Luis Gutierrez, John Hall, Phil Hare, Jane Harman, Alcee Hastings, Brian Higgins, Maurice Hinchey, Mazie Hirono, Paul Hodes, Chris Van Hollen, Rush Holt, Mike Honda, Darlene Hooley, Jay Inslee, Steve Israel, Jesse Jackson, Sheila Jackson-Lee, William Jefferson, Eddie Johnson, Hank Johnson, Marcy Kaptur, Patrick Kennedy, Carolyn Kilpatrick, Ron Klein, Dennis Kucinich, James Langevin, Tom Lantos, John Larson, Barbara Lee, David Loebsack, Zoe Lofgren, Nita Lowey, Stephen Lynch, Carolyn Maloney, Edward Markey, Doris Matsui, Carolyn McCarthy, Betty McCollum, Jim McDermott, James McGovern, Jerry McNerney, Michael McNulty, Martin Meehan, Gregory Meeks, Michael Michaud, Brad Miller, George Miller, Gwen Moore, James Moran, Christopher Murphy, Patrick Murphy, Jerrold Nadler, Grace Napolitano, Richard Neal, David Obey, John Olver, Frank Pallone, Bill Pascrell, Ed Pastor, Donald Payne, Nancy Pelosi, Ed Perlmutter, David Price, Charles Rangel, Steven Rothman, Lucille Roybal-Allard, Bobby Rush, Tim Ryan, Loretta Sanchez, Linda Sanchez, John Sarbanes, Jan Schakowsky, Adam Schiff, Robert Scott, Jose Serrano, Carol Shea-Porter, Brad Sherman, Albio Sires, Louise Slaughter, Adam Smith, Hilda Solis, Pete Stark, Betty Sutton, Ellen Tauscher, Mike Thompson, John Tierney, Edolphus Towns, Tom Udall, Nydia Velazquez, Maxine Waters, Diane Watson, Melvin Watt, Henry Waxman, Anthony Weiner, Peter Welch, Robert Wexler, Lynn Woolsey, David Wu, Al Wynn, John Yarmuth
All Repugs except these 2 voted for War Funding Bill:
Jimmy Duncan, Ron Paul
itsaNaziWorldOrder -
You agree with some others here that we should all stop voting?
OK. But where do you suggest that good citizens go from there?
Are you counting on the hope that such a protest will bring about a needed revolution? Tell us, if so, HOW?
Have you considered that such a non-voting strategy might instead bring about the opposite of what you aparenyl intend: an entrenchment of the state's corrupt/anti-democratic power? -- even admitting that the choices we vote for now are mostly phony.
Personally, I think the latter would happen [a Dark/Darker Age], and that we'd be inviting an indefinitely long Rule by techno-empowered moral monsters, by doing what you suggest.
I share your emotional state of being utterly pissed-off; but I don't understand how you think, in detail, how your recommended strategy would work to ultimately rescue or re-empower democratic governance (such as it even marginally was before, or is now marginally.)
If you can't use your mind to formulate practical answers to these 'consequence' questions that any sensible person will raise, please consider self-admitting that you're just furiously flummoxed at the present situation, and that you're just uselessly venting theoretical and practical steam at the expense of better solutions.
Then, please use your otherwise (seemingly) good head and heart to create a strategy that doesn't run the disastrous practical risks which your advocacy of tactical mass-voter passivity implies.
Unless, maybe, you have a half-way credible strategy for violent revolution. I'm not into violence, but since we're already violently controlled, I'd listen to any good suggestions along these lines, in a heartbeat!
Respectfully for now,
Jaybones
Lockheed Murder is embracing science this weekend, the question is asked: "Is their life on Mars?" . While Lockheed destroys human life, you're invited to watch PBS and celebrate the entitled scientists who labor against tight constraints to deliver all the wonder of technology. (on behalf of a cold blooded bottom line by a legendary Death industry stalwart.)
Don't think about women and children blown to pieces, think about those proud deletants in the womb of a corporate giant, a bespectacled NASA spokesman for politics and greed.
When will they learn? The table is set for everyone, not a chosen militant few. They'll continue however; narcissitically ambivalent to bloodshed and suffering. There may be water on Mars, but there isn't any clean water here on earth for some unfortunate masses.
How did McSame vote on this bill? How did Hillary vote on this bill?
Jaybones,
You have raised all the obvious objections and necessary reflections.
I am a very 'results oriented' person.
And, I have been grappling with these questions since the age of four when I first noticed that humans were disconnected, desensitized, often sadistic, mean, and deadened by the time they reached adulthood. I knew it was unnatural but not what was causing the disease.
I entered the political process early, at the age of eleven, became an anti-war organizer, labor issues worker, etc.
And I did discover and define a number of solutions. And I was stymied repeatedly in my consistent attempts to implement those solutions… whether by government agencies, corporate interests or combinations of both.
And I also dealt personally with outrages of "Rule by techno-empowered moral monsters". You may think it is still a threat, I assure you, it has been going on for a very longtime.
I am completely convinced that nothing can change until the infrastructures of society are determined for purposes of providing all with better, more sustainable, life experiences that are based upon natural requirements rather than elitist power and preservation of exclusive right.
Our entire social organization has been structured to enable rule by a minority. Since I have appealed time and again to these structures at the highest, lowest and middle levels to embrace change, even modest changes, and discovered that these structures are highly paranoid and not amenable to change;
I am certain that the best chance for us all is to turn from knee-jerk cooperative support by accepting 'choices' pre-selected to continue more of the same and toward an effort to redefine social and political realities.
Nowhere in the political process or the courts is the ability to arrest the power of a self-serving military, a complicit secret services and the major gluttonous corporations nor the fact that these entities are simply aspects of the same oligarchic and totalitarian paradigm. Our political structures are completely deceitful and corrupt. They will not be changed by a 'vote' but by the recognition of the corrupt nature of the whole.
Of these facts I am certain. Change will only come when those structures (political and judicial) provided to keep us busy while a secret elite determine resource allocation and destruction and war/genocide policies are seen for what they are; efforts to thwart effective citizen action and responses.
THE most radical thing we can do is get understanding.
http://allinharmony.org
Our place is one of connection. If we can come to this understanding, we may have a chance. Without this understanding, there is simply NO chance for long term human survival, including political survival.
If understanding is deep enough, it will affect our actions. And those actions will run counter to continuing complicity with control structures that serve the power-oriented, ignorance-based and psychotic forces that currently rule human affairs and determine our negative impacts on the rest of the biosphere.
Understanding of the radical depth of deception in human society is paramount.
Once understood, necessary solutions become incredibly obvious and former mistakes, political and otherwise, quite easy to avoid.
"Unless, maybe, you have a half-way credible strategy for violent revolution. I'm not into violence, but since we're already violently controlled, I'd listen to any good suggestions along these lines, in a heartbeat!"
The cure is not violence but self understanding.
THIS is the revolution.
No one who has recovered natural understanding will be easily controlled by the architects of violence and the deception scripts (such as 9/11) that serve their interests.
"...truth is the enemy of the state." Goebbels