Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
RNC Media Intimidation Condemned
MINNEAPOLIS - Police and local and federal officials in St. Paul, Minnesota are under fire from independent media groups for their crackdown on reporters at this week's Republican National Convention.
Television and radio host Amy Goodman was one of several journalists arrested this week. (© bignoisetactical (YouTube)) "We are concerned that police in St. Paul prevented journalists from covering a breaking story," said Committee to Protect Journalists
Executive Director Joel Simon on Tuesday. "We urge authorities to drop
any pending charges and allow journalists to continue with their work."
The New York-based group, which monitors media suppression around the world, condemned the arrest of four journalists who were documenting the confrontational end to an otherwise peaceful antiwar protest on the opening day of the Convention.
Well-known television and radio personality Amy Goodman, host of the nationally syndicated program Democracy Now!, was arrested when inquiring about the condition of camerawoman and producer Nicole Salazar and sound technician Sharif Abdel Kouddous.
In a video of Goodman's arrest, onlookers can be heard in the background calling for police to "release the accredited journalists now."
Salazar shot footage of her own arrest, where she can be heard shouting "press! press!" as she is shoved to the ground by baton-wielding police who ran directly at her and told her to "get the hell out of here!" Once on the ground, the police repeatedly yell at Salazar to "get down on your face." The camera flips over, recording three screams -- apparently from Salazar -- and then cuts off. [Watch Salazar describe her detention]
A fourth journalist, Associated Press photographer Matt Rourke, was also arrested during the protest. All four journalists were released within hours of their arrest, though several had their press passes confiscated, apparently by federal Secret Service agents.
"It was very clear who I was," Goodman told media after her release. "I had all my credentials hanging from my neck. 'Look -- these are my credentials,' I said. A Secret Service agent walked up to me and said, 'Oh really?' and ripped my credentials off my neck."
Kouddous told the Committee to Protect Journalists that the same agent also confiscated his daily press pass.
Distinguishing Between Press and Protesters
The National Association of Hispanic Journalists called on police and local and federal officials to "respect the First Amendment right to free speech and free press of journalists doing their job."
"In this era of new technology and broader participation in citizen and independent journalism, it may become increasingly difficult for police to tell journalists from those who are not," the group said. "But police must be aware it is their duty to try, and to respect the role of the press in a democracy. When the media has credentials, as was the case with Goodman and other journalists arrested, the police should have a much easier job."
The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), meeting this week in Atlanta, said: "Police have a duty to protect and serve the public. So, too, do journalists serve the public interest. SPJ doesn't object to the police stopping violence. Rather, we are merely alarmed by the disconcerting trend of journalists being treated as if they are a threat to public safety, when they are clearly fulfilling their roles as professional reporters.
Media Intimidation Alleged
The nonpartisan media reform group Free Press has said Monday's arrests were part of "an orchestrated round up of independent [media] covering the Republican National Convention."
Police also raided a home where independent journalists were staying over the weekend before the Convention began. The journalists were working for a media organization known for documenting police crackdowns against protesters, especially during the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City.
I-Witness Video's documentary work helped to get charges dropped against over 400 people arrested during the 2004 Convention, according to Elizabeth Press, who works with the group and was in the house that was raided over the weekend. Police surrounded the house for several hours on Saturday, while waiting for a warrant to arrive.
When the warrant arrived, it was for the adjoining apartment in the duplex house, but the police entered the apartment where the journalists were staying anyway -- through an attic door. The police then detained the journalists for approximately an hour, along with those in the adjoining apartment, including the owner of the duplex house, and searched the journalists' belongings.
"I feel like it's an intimidation tactic," Press told The UpTake, a live video documentary group that is also keeping tabs on protests and police activity during the Convention. "I-Witness Video has been in the news lately -- in the New York Times, and all over the Internet."
During the previous week, I-Witness Video's colleagues in Minneapolis had their computer and video equipment seized, said the group's Eileen Clancy, in a report filed during Saturday's raid.
And on Wednesday, offices being rented by I-Witness Video for its work during the Convention were entered by police wielding batons and a battering ram. Officers said they had reports of anarchists taking hostages within the building.
An attorney working in the building, Geneva Finn, showed the officers around to clarify that there were no hostages being held.
"[The officers] did a pull-up on the frame of I-Witness' door, looked in, saw that there were people in there -- nobody was being held hostage," said Finn during an impromptu press conference after the incident. "I then asked the police to leave, since no one was obviously being held hostage here, and they refused. Eventually their head sergeant came here, and decided that they could leave the building."
I-Witness Video was subsequently asked by their landlord to leave the premises due to the police attention they had attracted.
"The St. Paul police came after us with unfounded allegations that we were engaged in criminal behavior. This harassment has interfered with our ability to do the work of documenting the policing of protests that we have come to St. Paul to do," the group said in a statement.
50,000 Demand Press Freedom
"We condemn the arrest and harassment of journalists before and during the Republican National Convention," said Free Press executive director Josh Silver. "We call on the mayor, district attorney, and police chief to rein in the overly aggressive -- and even violent -- tactics of law enforcement. Arresting and detaining journalists for doing their jobs is a gross violation of free speech and freedom of the press."
In just over 2 days, Silver's group has gathered over 50,000 names on a petition to the mayor's office, the Republican National Convention Host Committee, and other local officials demanding an end to the aggressive and violent tactics used against journalists in recent days.
"Reporting by independent journalists is the only way for the American public to learn the full story, and they must be free to do their jobs without intimidation," Silver added.
133 Comments so far
Show AllThis is not 'alleged' intimidation.
This IS intimidation and repression in stark, bloody daylight.
There is no denying it, no hiding it, no sugar coating it.
The US is now revealed to all as the totalitarian police state we know it to be.
Galen, no denying or hiding or sugarcoating it?? lol just wait until jakenewton and snowwolf and the other neo-thugs start their comments on this thread. You'll see more sugarcoating and justifications for it than you can imagine.
Typical of the right, however- any fascist tactics used (yes, especially in the "Land of the Free") are given big thumbs-up. The right only cares about power, at any and all costs, and their ultimate dream has always been to fashion a Police State here in the US, so that their control will finally be complete and utter. They already have control over the military and are joined at the hip with Corporate power, the very definition of fascism (the melding of corporations and government), and have complete control over the legislative and judicial branches, and can ignore laws and create immunity for transgressors at will. They have permission to use torture, done away with habeas corpus protection, and can snatch and hold indefinitely anyone on the planet they want to. All that was left was to be able to crack down with impunity on our own CITIZENS, but that darned Constitution kept getting in their way.
Now they can. Welcome to the Right Wing vision of the ideal America.
Ok, jakenewton, snowwolf, et al - post your fascist blatherings ad infinitum.
"The only thing required for evil to flourish is that good men do nothing."
I noticed you were also upset at the "Guantanamo Protes Cages" provided by the Democrats...What makes this any more heinous
The 'protest cages' as you call them were used by BOTH sides.
What about the mass 'detention facilities' built by Halliburton/KBR under no bid contracts? What about having to apply to the police in whatever city to exercise your right of 'free' speech? What about the openly admitted practice of abducting political prisoners right off the street and taking them to third party nations to be tortured by 'private contractors'?
All these things were done by the men you politically identify with. Aided and abetted by their colleagues across the aisle. Repubs and Dems are just the two public wings of the MONEY party.
Try to locate the Adbusters article called 'Cool Fascismo'. I doubt it will open your eyes, but hey, you never know.
Until then, try not to be such a damn cheerleader for repression.
The GOP seems to have been much more FORCEFUL in their "interpretation" of the new Patrio Act (that Congress approved). Blackwater would also, probably take the side of teh GOP , because, if mercenaries know nothing else, they knwo where the $$$ is!. The Dems have the military on their side, for the most part, which is unusual . I just hope it didnt vanish with what happened in Denver. Let's hope they just keep chanting "The GOP is worse". Cause they are. Feel better? I dont.
Bingo...they were used by both sides...
Therefor there is no Major Political party you should be particularly insensed about
I don't know a lot about Amy Goodman but I rather suspect she is more "entertainer" than Journalist...sort of a Left wing Sean Hannity?...would that be about right?
before the convention I told you all to think Ghandi and MLK ...and most of you did...but there were the Assholes that wrecked the fun
Hey...any Idea who let the Code Pink Freakazoids inside?...rumor says it was MSNBC...if so you better plan on watching the rest of the campaign on CNN cuz the secret service will yank their press cards....or is that repression too?
That would be "incensed", actually. Were you a schoolmate of Governor Palin?
I should have looked that one up...you're right...I thought the correct way looked too much like incense...(the aromatic sort)
Thank you
in·cense2 /ɪnˈsɛns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-sens] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used with object), -censed, -cens·ing. to inflame with wrath; make angry; enrage.
"sort of a Left wing Sean Hannity?...would that be about right?"
No, that would be utterly, utterly, wrong.
Amy Goodman is a serious journalist and has been one for decades. Its true that she is the "host" of Democracy Now!, which is a combination News and Discussion show. But in this case they present REAL news -basically a "today's headlines" thing- and then present REAL discussion -as in two or more people speaking about something that is actually happening in the World and using reason and facts to debate what should be done or what is the truth of the matter.
Amy Goodman as "host" is the moderator of these discussions or the interviewer of the subject -she does not participate in any form of pseudo-debate or propaganda-dissemination.
This is all a VERY far cry from Sean Hannity.
Have Fun,
-matti.
Amy is a serious journalist, she goes a bit to far left in her presentations and reflections sometimes for me, but she is usually fair and doesn't engage in name calling. Nothing like a Sean Hannity.
Shae has guts for sure and doesn't hide back in the rear echelon. She's a fighting hole type journalist.
'I don't know a lot about Amy Goodman but I rather suspect she is more "entertainer" than Journalist'
SnowWolf, it appears that you're projecting rightwing values onto the left. It's a "free country" in that you can project what you want but be aware that the USA has lost the moral high ground these last eight years. Such projections, a crucial tactic for the right, look all the more ridiculous as a result. In the progressive definition of the political spectrum, the left represents the public interests, while the right represents capitalist (elite) interests. Goodman seems quite to the left except for a reliance on the capitalist infrastructure. She might argue that the infrastructure is under involuntary occupation. She might use her soapbox to promote strategies to free the infrastructure from capitalist occupation in the "land of the free".
I don't understand the question.
If you were pointing out this to a Democrat who had defended the Gitmo on the Platte cages here, but was then complaining about the Republican detentions, I could understand it. But, instead you are pointing out that someone did indeed also object to the Democrats' Gitmo on the Platte.
In some ways, this does seem to represent what differences there are between the parties. And the simularities. Its clear that both the Democrats and the Republicans are in favor of ...
-- infiltrating peaceful political groups with police spies.
-- surrounding themselves with riot police and fences to make sure only the rich can speak with them.
-- pre-emptive police raids on anyone who might dare speak out against their polices.
-- extreme intolerance in general to any who might speak out against their policies, even in peaceful political forums.
The difference seems to be in that the Republicans manage to be more extreme in the way they implement these ideas. The Republicans are more aggressive in the way they do it.
But it is clear that there is no philosophical difference between the parties in this matter. Both use basically the same principles. You are giving away your freedoms equally by voting Democrat as by voting Republicans, its just going to be faster and more obvious with the Republicans.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
What an artful dodger you are, Snowwolf. I wonder what you assumed you were protecting in your years of military service? So you condone a Secret Service agent ripping the press credentials from a reporters neck? So you seek to minimize the loss of a free press in this nation, a vital and necesary mechanism to any democratic nation?
I have never considered you to be a dumb poster, Wolfie, but attempting such a lame change of subject, especially one with absolutely no substance, shows plainly how much of a reach it is for you to support the actions of your party and your government. Everyone here condemned the police actions at the Dems convention and you are well aware of it. I believe I detect just the barest traces of shame in your words, a great start in your conversion to the light.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
I've seen how this plays out.
Read Margaret Atwood's excellent novel 'The Handmaids Tale' or see the movie based on it.
Or watch Michael Palin's (no relation, thank the gods) 'Brazil'.
Walk in peace.
Agreed. I am frequently reminded of these works when I observe what is going on around us these days. Harry Tuttle and Ofglen (the first) are my heroes.
Sometimes we think of fascism in the German model. There are other models, as shown in these works.
Joe
n.b.- Terry Gilliam directed Brazil.
Thank you.
Michael Palin starred.
Walk in peace.
Its intimidation only if you are intimidated.
What I see out here though is a bunch of intimidated people. That's pretty much the left in America. The police arrest like three or four journalists, and the next thing you know everyone is paranoid, running for their holes, and whining about a police state.
Which is why it works. If the response from the people was a 100,000 people surrounding city hall say 'NO' to this, it wouldn't work. In fact the politicians would quickly file it away under 'don't do that again.' But, because no one seems to have the guts to really stand up and defend another citizens rights, it does work.
If you live in fear, then you can be ruled by fear and intimidation. What you can personally change is that you can decide that you won't live in fear.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
GOOD POINT.
Excellent post.
You are right on!
It should be obvious to everyone that the arrests of journalists and confiscation of their equipment was part of a calculated plan to abridge the press' freedom to perform its Constitutionally protected function. Among other things, this entire effort - led by what used to be the FBI - shows how utterly desperate the right wing has become. Apparently, they're not sure that they can count on election fraud to deliver for them this time.
We were taught when we were young that this sort of totalitarian repression of information could not happen in the US. Obviously, we're not living in the same US anymore and we have Bush and Cheney and the republicans to thank for our loss of press freedom.
The Rove-Limbaugh trolls (RichM, jakenewton, et al.) will try both to deny that these actions were abuses and to blame them on the Democrats at the same time, adding that they are proof that no one should vote for Obama.
q
"The Rove-Limbaugh trolls (RichM..."
Objection.
RichM offers cogent, reasoned commentary that does not automatically assume that truth derives from authority.
If anyone is a "Rove-Limbaugh troll" it is the people who are supporting their lord and saviour Walk On Water Obama.
Why? Because the short time that Obama has been in the senate he has helped/enabled the Bush regime (which Rove was part of) accomplish some of their goals, particularly with his "yes" votes for war appropriations funding, which is pro-war. Most recently his vote on FISA helps the Bush regime by continuing to shred the US Constitution.
So those people who are supporting Walk On Water Obama are really enabling a candidate (Obama) who has enabled the Bush regime (which includes Rove).
Therefore, the Obama supporters are the real "Rove trolls" because they are trying to get people to vote for this Bush/Cheney/Rove enabler Obama who will continue the pro-war, pro-corporate, pro-Bush agenda.
The people who refuse to support Mr Hope/Change and his BS can hardly be called "Rove-Limbaugh trolls." And that's just an attempt at smearing and silencing those who tell the truth about Mr Hope/Change. Some people can't bear to hear the Truth. The truth hurts especially when some people want so hard to believe in some politician. And when the truth hurts, some people feel the need to drag out the old "you are a Rove-Limbaugh troll" card. It's rather tiresome at this point.
-------------> Nader/Gonzalez 2008, if there is an "election."
I'm afraid this is just a warm-up to what could potentially happen in Nov. Imagine a few possibilities:
1- McCain wins.
2- It's too close to call and goes to the Supreme Court.
3- cheney and bush cancel elections due to some late Oct surprise and declare marshall law.
In any of these scenarios, there would surely be protesters in the streets. You can be assured that pepper spray, tasers, batons and any other available weapon would be used on these "terrorists."
Sometimes you can cut the paranoia in here with a knife....
Easy to say when it's not your side that's being targeted.
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" -Epicurus
You do know that Sainted Sarah wants to hunt wolves from helicopters, don't you?
That means YOU, idiot.
No, I live out west and I've heard this before, and I'm pretty certain that she really does mean 'wolves'. You know, the dog-like creatures that run in packs. Out west there's been a long running struggle between the groups that want to exterminate them completely and ones that want to try to protect them. No surprise that she's on the exterminate side, but its rather silly to extrapolate that to humans.
Besides, we've got a whole Pentagon already dedicated to improving the ways we kill humans, and they are much better than this one.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
It turns out that wolves (four-legged doggy type) are ESSENTIAL to the health of the large ungulates (thats deer, moose, elk and caribou) that we humans like to hunt.
If we (humans) wipe out the wolf, the deer and whatnot overgraze, deplete their habitat, get diseases spreading through the herd (which can spread to domesticated cows and sheep), and the populations crash for good. No more deer etc.
Maybe it would be better if Sainted Sarah *were* to hunt the TWO-legged wolves from helicopters...
And yet PETA opposes the reintroduction of carnivores such as wolves because they literally have no understanding of basic ecology.
Hehe... two legged-wolves. Sounds like the premise for a horrible movie. She can star in it!
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" -Epicurus
So you believe in evolution?? Wow., Unusual in a fascist. If you want to live dog eat dog, go do it somewhere outside of what we barely call civilization.
I'm sorry KD. Were you referring to me as a fascist?
Walk in peace.
To ~Galen...~ re. Wolves.
Yeah, and that's the whole point.
Kill the wolves and other predators and replace them with guys with guns, ATVs, orange hats and two cases of special "camo and orange" Busch Beer.
More business for Alaska's (and the entire West's) "substantial people.
If the wolves would just run up some credit card debt at Cabella's or Wal-Mart they wouldn't have to die.
I trust a hungry wolf more than some drunk idiot with a gun...
So would I. I was just pointing out that there is a logic behind Palin's "Death from Above" wolf management strategy.
Its a short-sighted, greedy, nasty sort of logic, but its there.
If that kind of thinking amounts to logic, we are beyond help.
Walk in peace.
Its Unreasonable logic.
I'd hope it means THEY are beyond help not WE, though.
Reason DEFINES logic. Without reason, logic is meaningless.
That we allow such spurious 'thinking' to dominate the intellectual landscape while simultaneously ridiculing anyone who demonstrates free thought that does not conform to the corporately demanded minimum, means as a society, we are in DEEP trouble.
"Galenwainwright... September 5th, 2008 12:48 pm
You do know that Sainted Sarah wants to hunt wolves from helicopters, don't you?
That means YOU, idiot."
That was GREAT! I am literally rolling on the floor!!!!!
If Cheney and Bush tried to cancel the elections, we wouldn't need protests in the streets. Corporate America would come in quickly and say no and quash it.
The key thing to realize is that the big money behind the scenes has no problem at all with the Democrats and Obama taking power. This of course is because the Democrats and Obama are equally subservient to corporate power as the Republicans. So, for the money that really controls things, there's no benefit to them in having the Republicans stay in.
Maybe there are some nutjobs in the Republicans who might think this way. But if they try it, they'd find themselves quickly alone and stomped on. It would end fast, and probably long before the first protester hit the streets.
The drawback to the big money is that such an action would expose to the American people that we are no longer a democracy. Of course, that essentially true today, but its well hidden and the average American doesn't realize how little say they have in their government.
Such an attempt to cancel elections would clearly tell Americans that there is no democracy, and it would likely spark a major crisis. Since the big money is happy with the current system where they've bought both parties, they don't have any interest in a crisis that could lead to big changes.
If you doubt this, go to maplight.org and look at the amount of money that Obama has raised. Its now up over $400 million. That's not $20 from grandmas. And its very reminiscent of the money that Bush\Cheney was raising in previous elections. When you see that, and also that McCain is taking public financing because he's been able to raise only less than half of that, then its very obvious that the big corporate money has switched 'sides' on this election to the Democrat brand.
And its a pretty sure bet that corporate America hasn't put $400 million into the Obama campaign only to see it overthrown on a coup by Bush\Cheney. Thus, if they even tried it, that's why it would be corporate America stepping in fast and hustling Bush and Cheney out of town.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
"If Cheney and Bush tried to cancel the elections, we wouldn't need protests in the streets."
And there wouldn't be any protests either to speak of. Most people would say "I'm whatever" or "Get over it." That's what I was personally told when I was out protesting the 2000 stolen "election" and the Judicial Coup. Most people could care less. Then 2004 was stolen and there were no protests anywhere. John Kerry couldn't get to the microphone fast enough to concede to Bush after Edwards had said "all votes will be counted." And with the few who do try to protest, they will likely be treated like the protesters in Denver and the Twin Cities. Both conventions and the barbaric treatment from the cops were their "warm-up" and practice for the future.
"Corporate America" would force Bush/Cheney to leave? I'll believe that when I see it. If Bush/Cheney had any intention of leaving, why did they put Directive 51 in place with no intention of using it?
"Such an attempt to cancel elections would clearly tell Americans that there is no democracy, and it would likely spark a major crisis."
Well, I think many people already know that from the people I've talked with. Most people I've talked with have said it won't matter who you vote for OR if you vote at all...nothing is going to change. And we are already in a major crisis.
As I see it, the Bush Regime did not steal 2 presidential "elections" to willingly hand their dictatorship over to someone else...unless the new person has agreed to continue it. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Walk On Water Obama has already agreed to do so. His FISA vote was one recent indication.
At this point, I don't think these dictatorial scum would care what "Corporate America" says or thinks. These people do as they damn well please regardless. They are ABOVE the law (they think that and it's the reality and there have been no consequences to their criminal activities.)
"Corporate America" has no way to physically force them to leave when they are hell-bent on staying. And then we have "Unitary Executive" Alito on the Supreme Court because of the Bush-enabling Dems.
Exactly right, Samson!
The ruling class in the United States realizes that the Bush Administration has made a serious "miscalculation" in the conduct of its foreign policy. Obama's role is to put a "kinder, gentler" face on US imperialism. Thus, as you point out, Obama is strongly supported ($$$) by Corporate America. Surely, he didn't get all that money form the oligarchic few to represent the interests of the democratic many!
Far from being a "peace candidate," as soon as Obama captured the Democratic nomination, he immediately showed himself to be nothing more than a mouthpiece for the military-industrial complex.
Quoting from the following article by Patrick Martin, entitled "McCain Launches Fall Campaign as Obama Embraces Iraq 'Surge'” --
"The most important factor propping up both the Bush administration and the Republican presidential campaign is the complicity and cowardice of the Democratic Party. McCain’s claim to be leading an insurgency against the government of his own party is undoubtedly preposterous, but he is able to adopt this posture with at least a fig leaf of credibility because the Democratic Party does not fulfill the role of an 'opposition' party in any serious sense.
"Obama’s performance Thursday on Fox television’s 'The O’Reilly Factor' was a case in point. After winning the Democratic nomination in large measure because of his purported opposition to the war in Iraq, Obama has sought repeatedly to demonstrate to the US political establishment that he can be a credible commander in chief for American imperialism.
"He told O’Reilly that he 'absolutely' believed that the United States was engaged in a worldwide war against terrorism, including not only Al Qaeda and the Taliban, but 'a whole host of networks that are bent on attacking America who have a distorted ideology.'
"Obama described Iran as a 'major threat,' and said it would be 'unacceptable' to an Obama administration for Iran to possess nuclear weapons. 'It would be a game-changer,' he said, adding, 'I would never take a military option off the table.' He called for a more aggressive military posture towards Pakistan, the day after a major US military strike within that country.
"But his starkest reversal came on Iraq, as O’Reilly pressed him to admit that the Bush administration’s troop 'surge,' the escalation of the war by the addition of some 30,000 US combat troops, had been a success. Obama has sought to dance around the issue for months, but he finally embraced the surge emphatically on Thursday.
"'I think that the surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated,' he said, adding, 'It’s succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.' This demonstrates not only Obama’s cringing submission to the pressure of the right wing, but a staggering degree of political blindness. Like Bush, Cheney, McCain and the rest of official Washington, Obama truly believes that US imperialism can, by military force alone, impose its will on the world. His only disagreement is with the Bush administration’s obsessive focus on Iraq, which Obama and many other spokesmen for the military and foreign policy establishment believe has undermined US interests in other parts of the globe.
"The Democratic Party is a capitalist party that defends the same social interests as the Republicans—the massive fortunes of the superrich financial aristocracy which is the real ruling force in American society. The Democrats play a specific role in the political division of labor: while the Republicans consistently and unabashedly uphold the rights of the wealthy, the Democrats pretend to represent working people, while ensuring that there is no challenge from below to the profit system.
"This division of labor explains the half-hearted and spineless performance of the Democrats in the current presidential campaign. Obama, Biden & Co. are at pains to demonstrate that they will make no appeal to mass discontent that goes beyond what is acceptable to the ruling elite. The Democrats offer their services to the financial oligarchy to win at least a certain degree of mass support for the reactionary program that both parties fundamentally share."
Click here for the entire article -- http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/sep2008/mcca-s06.shtml
.
I long ago thought that number 3 would happen. it would be so typical! all orchestrated by their own hands...i wouldnt be at all surprised.
SHARE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION WITH EVERYONE YOU KNOW! It’s important:
As you probably suspected – it was James Dobson and his nefarious “Focus on the Family (whose family?) that selected Sarah Pahlin.
Do an internet search for: The Council for National Policy Meets in Minn, Vets Palin and you will find a relevant article. (I’m not sure if I can include URLs here on CD, hence the recommendation to search for the article.)
Also search for: Council for National Policy. It’ll scare you half to death, but NOT nearly as much as the article about Palin’s church on the huff-post site. Her pastor’s name is Kalnins. The following is from the huffington post article:
“During the 2004 election season, he praised President Bush's performance during a debate with Sen. John Kerry, then offered a not-so-subtle message about his personal candidate preferences. "I'm not going tell you who to vote for, but if you vote for this particular person, I question your salvation. I'm sorry." Kalnins added: "If every Christian will vote righteously, it would be a landslide every time."”
“Months after hinting at possible damnation for Kerry supporters, Kalnins bristled at the treatment President Bush was receiving over the federal government's handling of Hurricane Katrina. "I hate criticisms towards the President," he said, "because it's like criticisms towards the pastor -- it's almost like, it's not going to get you anywhere, you know, except for hell. That's what it'll get you."
These are the people who want to run our country, and probably the entire world.
Please get the word out.
Juliann
And these people are psychopaths, literally. They lack empathy, they lack the ability to see the "gray area" between extremes in thinking and ideas. It is time for us to remove psychopaths from power and not let them hold these positions anymore.
They're the reincarnated "christians" who led the Salem Witch Hunt, and took it to the disposal of the "witches", and the ones throughout the history or Christianity who hunted down, burned, hung, drowned, etc., all the "non-believers" and "wrong-believers." Give them the opportunity, they'll gladly start all that again.
At least some member of the MSM put out some information re. these activities; although much of this story was not told (spying, infiltrating, preemptive raids, etc.). I just surprised that it was the AP. Our "hometown newspaper seems to use the AP as a source for much of its publication, and for some time I have been finding myself just shaking my head over the inaccuracies, neglected, untruths or just plain bad writing. When I would look up at the byline, the majority of time the source has been the AP.
But have no fear. Remember that the Republican Party is the party of strict constitutionalists. "We want judges that will make their decisions based on the Constitution."
So they will straighten all of this out for us, once they can arrest power from those liberal elites that have been running Washington for the past eight years or so.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Just sayin'.
"The nonpartisan media reform group Free Press has said Monday's arrests were part of "an orchestrated round up of independent [media] covering the Republican National Convention."
Independent media is not controlled, corporate media is. Attempts to intimidate independent media represents the truth of the Republican soul, it is anti-democratic.