William Blum endorsement by OBL

by **wordspeak** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 11:00 pm

So how many 'net writers got correct the obvious story that the American progressive left was set up in the phony Bin Laden tape, where OBL recommends that people read "Rogue State" by William Blum? Message- OBL/Islamic fundamentalism is linked to American Leftism and vice-versa. Blum, surely an innocent actor, plays into the worst limited hangout in modern political mythology by saying that he is "not bothered" by the endorsement of an alleged mass murdered, and adding: "Well, what I suggest is that you use that knowledge to rectify the situation because basically it’s U.S. foreign policy which creates anti-American terrorists. It’s the things we do to the world. It’s not, as the White House tells us, that they hate our freedom and democracy. That’s just propaganda. They hate our foreign policy. They hate what we do to them." The real story is not this "blowback" line; the real story is that the Empire/CIA *directly supports* Islamic fundamentalist terrorism, and now they're trying to spin it as the Left does. Most tragically, some on the Left do, tacitly or otherwise, or they at least do not understand that fundamentalist Islam represents an evil, CIA-supported force, a force inherently anti-Leftist in nature. And such is the bizarremodern macro psy-op that we're living in, in which the Western Left is actually being propped up by the system, or, better said, *set up.* David Horowitz, author of Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left, proves to be a very effective agent of the powers that be. Anyway, who else has/had the right instinct on this story?- can anyone tell me?

by **marykmusic** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 2:41 am

Can't talk about Iraq, but I have first-hand stories from Iran and their extreme fundamentalist mullahs... eye-witnness says that there were only about 100 well-dressed, educated men protesting outside the US Embassy in 1979 but selective camera-work made it look like a huge crowd (old Hollywood trick.) And those men spoke Farsi badly, with a foreign accent. That whole overthrow-of-the-Shah was a staged farce. A similar farce put him into the Palace back in the 1950's. These are CIA-controlled events, as is the current situation and mullah government. --MaryK

by **StarmanSkye** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 4:22 am

Without doubt, the US and it's ideological allies have certainly contributed to and supported the current bogeyman of global Terrorism -- but I don't think it's wise to overlook that there is an immense self-perpetuating momentum to the Terrorism the US has instigated and deliberately provoked. I can hardly believe Blum is unaware of this, but that he chose, in his reply, to emphasize the reactionary consequences of the USs reckless, destructive policies. Intelligent, free-thinking folks who aren't totally braindead or too busy licking sweat off Republocrat cheerleaders asses are likely to already know something of the US's intricate links to terrorists -- they get the point and can make the causal connections -- while those neocon idealogues who might actually hear Blum's 'answer' are likely to be hostile to the fact that the US has supported Osama and Al Qaeda and the Taliban (much as the US also did Pol Pot and the KLA, and brutal regimes and latin American Death Squads.) His comment is only a limited hangout to the extent that there is basically NO intellectual depth to debate any more in the MSM that truthfully examines critical political issues. The right seems constitutionally unable to accept, or is committed to denying, that there is ANY connection between past injustices and crimes, duplicity and 'incidental' alliances the US made with disreputable individuals and dangerous organizations (which in any case they shrug-off as either necessary at the time, or innocent 'mistakes' committed as a byproduct of the Cold War or the 'war' on drugs, etc.) to the 'global' terrorism it claims is the biggest threat facing the US and world. The real issue is -- how much of this Islamic extremist terrorism does the US still have control of and influence over? A related BIG issue is the moral and legal accountability that our 'leaders' MUST bear for bending the 'rules' through the slippery slope of ideological necessity. It's so perverse -- having justified lies to launch a Clash of Civilizations Crusades-style War to defend the 'American Way of Life' (ie., stealing control of oil, opening Iraq to unregulated Corporate exploitation, protecting the dollar's primacy, rewarding Saudi and Israeli alliance) they see nothing wrong in diverting billions in war-profits to themselves and their back-slapping cronies. Sometimes I think a key to the GOP's elitist allure and 'success' is that they unashamedly organize and reward loyalty just like a Mafia Family or crime gang. I haven't done a dedicated search to get a good idea how many in the blogsphere correctly understand the dynamics of the War on Terror c/o Made in USA Osama and Al Qaeda -- Joe Beagent for one, anyway. But I'm quite disheartened to read how many thoroughly STOOOPID Americans there are who have NO comprehension of the convoluted, trumped-up psychological war the US/CIA/NSA have been waging in the Middle East (let alone around the world) for decades, covering-up the most egregious crimes and violence on behalf of Oil Companies, the Fed, Israeli Interests, and Cold War hysteria. The comments on the Al Jazeera website following their Bin Laden Fake Tape article (reposted below) by braindead flagwaving rightwing fawning sycophant idealists is an appalling tribute to the truly despicable state of the American public, consisting of so MANY dumbed-down citizenry who suck-up propaganda like it was manna-treasure. One thing about Al Jazeera, regardless of how one feels about it -- it provides in-depth reporting and debates from different, pro-and-con POVs, something that the US/west MSM once at least made an effort at. Al Jazeera is showing up the west by providing a true plurality of different views and a wide range of news & ideas, trusting the readership to use their own minds (at least MUCH more than the west presstitutes.) Elsewhere, like at rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/ 2006/01/19/osama-and-his-stradivarius and justoneminute.typepad.com/ main/2006/01/the_osama_tape_.html (much of which readership I assume are typical of the rightwing apologist genre), the standard line seems to be that Bin Laden in his latest tape is taking his talking points directly from the Democratic Party. Pelosi, Clooney and Moore are, as you might guess, held to be ideological blood-brothers with Al Qaeda for their having argued points that Osama (allegedly) repeated in his recent audiotape -- ie., the US has no exit plan, Bush's war was based on oil (for the most part the Dems are too intimidated to even mention Israel's benefit) and profits for well-connected Republican supporters/corporations, the US won't be able to keep funding the enormous war costs, and Bush's claim to be reducing the threat of terrorism is bogus. Actually -- this phenomenon, of 'Osama's' tape helping to further split the Democratic 'left' by Osama 'borrowing' key Democratic opposition (hAh! What a farce!) points, and discreditting the anti-war, strongly suggest tome this tape is a psyop set-up. Too, the timing, as in so many past tape releases, seems ONLY to benefit the Bush Gang -- in this case, deflecting admin. criticism for the recent bombing in Pakistan that killed 16 to 30 (claimed) civilians. An example of Comments from just one minute: TrackBack URL for this entry: <a href="http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/4079415">www.typepad.com/t/trackback/4079415</a> Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Osama Tape (With Matthews And Moore): » Michael Osama Moore from The Strata-Sphere UPDATE: go check out Tom Maguires links to all the people who saw the same connection between Bin Ladens rationale and those proposed by Murtha, Dean, etc. In fact, Hannity and Gingrich were saying the same thing as well last night! E... [Read More] Tracked on January 20, 2006 at 11:28 AM » Random Musings On The bin Laden Video from WILLisms.com Here is a clue, Democrats: when Osama bin Laden's recent video sounds like it was issued from Nancy Pelosi's office, you are on the wrong side of history. While reading the transcript of bin Laden's video, I had to remind... [Read More] Tracked on January 20, 2006 at 12:23 PM » In *GASP!* Defense of Chris Matthews from Palmetto Pundit Along the same lines, Tom Maquire notes this is not the first time Bin Laden has used Moore's talking points: [Read More] Tracked on January 20, 2006 at 07:51 PM » The Faux Michael Moore Controversy from Decision '08 By now, youve probably heard of the big to-do about Chris Matthews saying that Osama bin Laden sounded like Michael Moore in his latest message. Well, this is typical of the blogosphere at its worst, and we see it from both sides from time to ... [Read More] "You know, it is such a strange partnership, the American Left and al Qaeda." I've been trying to figure it out for years now. The only way I can think of it without falling into utter despair is that I now divide the left side of the political spectrum into "normal liberals" and "leftists". Posted by: Dwilkers | January 20, 2006 at 04:44 AM They've danced themselves into a corner. It is such a paradox and one that is apparently invisible to the adherents. It's willful blindness, too, because they are sensitive to the criticism. Purple Fingers are like Green Kryptonite to them. Posted by: kim | January 20, 2006 at 05:03 AM You know, it is such a strange partnership, the American Left and al Qaeda. Which one do you hate more? Posted by: BN | January 20, 2006 at 05:59 AM Actually, I thought ol' Binny sounded more like Howlin' Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi and Jack "Cut and Run" Murtha. I think that Binny's probably on the DNC talking points mailing list. Posted by: Clyde | January 20, 2006 at 06:43 AM Actually, Osama sounds more like Eddie Deezen. Posted by: richard mcenroe | January 20, 2006 at 07:07 AM On Tucker Carlson last night, Rachel Madcow (I really don't know her last name, it sounds like madcow and she acts like a madcow) was furious at Tucker for saying bin Laden sounded as if he was using the DNC talking points in his speech. In fact, in the show right before Tucker's, Scarborough Country, they played clips of various democrats and then OBL. You couldn't tell the difference. Now, I don't know about democrats, but I would be somewhat embarrassed hearing my words repeated in Arabic by a Saudi dissident. ::grin:: To answer this: "Which one do you hate more?" Michael Moore or bin Laden?...tough call. Posted by Sue I January 20, 2006 at 07:10 AM For the leftists a mirror has been held up and they are forced to see themselves carrying water for OBL. No wonder they have to recoil and then lash out because they have been hiding the truth from themselves. They are on the wrong side of this issue but too arrogant and proud {Rachel Madcow}{mr. Daou} to admit it or acknowledge their mistake. Posted by: maryrose | January 20, 2006 at 08:16 AM ***** And so it goes ... I'm not really sure just HOW to characterize that blog, other than acting like DU to steer and gatekeep 'acceptable' public debate. It links right, 'unclaimed' and so-called 'left' websites -- including Daily Koss and Left Coaster-- and media sites. This, from Left Coaster, shows how contemptuous the GOP are of the electorate's ability to be politically informed -- which OUGHT to a major political issue in its own right: "A piece in today’s New York Times says that the White House and GOP believe the NSA spying mess is a winner for them, as long as they can keep the talking points focused on the lie that Democrats are against keeping track of contacts with Al Qaeda suspects. As Rove indicated last week, the White House believes that as long as they can perpetuate this lie, the GOP can reinforce through repetition that the Democrats are soft on terrorism, Al Qaeda, and national security. But the White House wants to ignore the fact that many Republicans are opposed to what Bush has been doing." --unquote-- If the GOP are correct, that voters can be so easily decieved -- then it's no wonder so many folks remain clueless about the scamjob that is Osama and Al Qaeda. How distressing. Anyway, I found the following Al Jazeera story questioning the validity of the recent Osama tape to be intriguing: *** Al Jazeera: Bin Laden Tapes Faked by CIA <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=10544">www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin...e_id=10544</a> The audiotapes of OSAMA BIN LADEN have become an important medium between AL-QAEDA network and the outside world. If authentic, these tapes could enable BIN LADEN to convey his opinions to his enemies and followers, issue threats and even claim responsibility for terror attacks carried out by his group. It is obvious that the usefulness of such tapes cannot be questioned, but how can people be sure of their origin and authenticity? Little time is dedicated to such examinations. But an analysis can really influence the way we judge similar evidence in the future. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that these audiotapes are authentic. While they are always followed by reports of scientific voice analyses, these studies have been invariably done by CIA experts. In fact, only one occasion was an independent analysis done. And while American officials were certain of the tape’s authenticity, Swedish scientists were convinced that it was fake. Consider yesterday’s audiotape, in which BIN LADEN warned that AL-QAEDA is planning new attacks against the United States, but offered a conditional “long-term truce”, which the White House rejected. Hours after the tape's release, CIA officials said it is a “genuine message” from BIN LADEN. “Following a technical analysis, the voice on the tape is believed to be that of OSAMA BIN LADEN,” said a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) official. On the other hand, several experts doubted the tape's authenticity. “It was like a voice from the grave“, said Bruce Lawrence, a Duke professor, who analyzed more than 20 complete speeches and interviews of the AL-QAEDA chief for his recent book “Messages to the World: The Statements of OSAMA BIN LADEN.” Other officials draw a similarity between the tape and the latest U.S. missile air strike on the Afghan border that angered the Pakistanis for killing more than 18 civilians. The U.S. said that its strike was aimed at targeting BIN LADEN’s deputy, AYMAN AL-ZAWAHRI. It even claimed that the attack killed top AL-QAEDA officials, though the Pakistanis insisted that only civilians were present in the hit area. "It seems that there's some relationship between this tape and the (U.S.) strike (in Pakistan), both in the content and the timing. Over more than the past year, ZAWAHRI has been the one issuing tapes, and BIN LADEN has been very careful not to appear at all, and now all of a sudden he's deviated from that," said Kenneth Katzman, Terrorism Analyst At Congressional Research Service, In-House Think Tank Of The U.S. Congress. In several occassions, no evidence was provided to support claims of the authenticity of such tapes. The media and politicians seem little concerned about such issues. Moreover, the fact that AL-QAEDA adopted new tactics since this unverified medium emerged was never discussed. For example, the network have never claimed responsibility for any attack before the taped messages. But since their introduction, AL-QAEDA has taken responsibility for several attacks, including those against German tourists in Tunisia, Israeli tourists in Kenya, and the Madrid bombings. The group even released a taped admission of involvement in the 9/11 attacks despite all their previous pre-audiotape protestations to the contrary. Moreover, nobody has ever tried to explain why BIN LADEN focuses on the U.S.‘s global interests rather than his own troubles in AFGHANISTAN. Since 9/11, it seemed that BIN LADEN preferred to target U.S. forces in IRAQ than in AFGHANISTAN. Strange also is why AL-QAEDA would use an audiotape message to threaten France, Russia and Germany, even though all three countries opposed the Bush administration’s “WAR ON TERROR“ to BIN LADEN’s alleged new pet project, IRAQ . Never addressed as well is the timing of the release of such audiotapes. One of the previous audiotapes was released just two days before the first anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. Its message actually preceded Bush's first UN appeals on IRAQ by a few days, as well as similar lobbying before the U.S. Congress. Another tape emerged a year later while BUSH tried to win financial aid from Asian countries for IRAQ’s reconstruction. This one also came before a donors’ conference in Madrid just the following week Some analysts were quick to point to the perfect timing of the latest tape. They suggest that if the speaker really is BIN LADEN, then the tape will certainly boost support for BUSH. In addition to cooling down the anger provoked by the CIA’s strike in Pakistan, opposition to IRAQ WAR is growing, midterm elections are coming up and international pressures are mounting on Iran over its NUCLEAR PROGRAM. The content of such tapes is equally alarming as their timing. The push for IRAQ WAR, for example, won support when a BIN LADEN audiotape helped to cement U.S. claims of links between AL-QAEDA and SADDAM HUSSEIN. This tape was released in February 2003, while the U.S. lobbied heavily for a second UN resolution on IRAQ, and just a month before the war began. Some analysts say that if yesterday’s tape was of BIN LADEN’s, then it also proves another thing; THE WAR ON TERROR didn’t end terrorism and wouldn’t prevent further attacks on the United States. In a CNBC interview, Vice President Dick Cheney in a CNBC said that the tape is a reminder that a “serious threat“ to the United States remained. The audiotape would also assert the statements made by DEMOCRAT Nancy Pelosi, who said after the July bombings in London that President BUSH's "fight them there, not here" strategy plainly wasn't working. Even after the case about the authenticity of such tapes has been made, some may still wonder if it really matters whether they are real or not. It most certainly does. While the audiotapes purportedly sent out by BIN LADEN were seldom at the forefront of the debate to launch WAR, they were key factors in creating a climate of fear in which pro-war rhetoric grew. And it is precisely for this reason that these tapes require the same level of analysis as any other piece of evidence used to convince the world about the war. <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=10544">www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin...e_id=10544</a> PS You will notice the Bushie "freeps" were out in force as soon as this article hit (see postings after the article on Al-Jazeera). **** Michael Ledeen, National Review, January 9, 2006 www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200601090808.asp "And, according to Iranians I trust, Osama bin Laden finally departed this world in mid-December. The al Qaeda leader died of kidney failure and was buried in Iran, where he had spent most of his time since the destruction of al Qaeda in Afghanistan." ===================================== Osama bin Laden - a dead nemesis perpetuated by the US government Osama bin Laden is dead. The news first came from sources in Afghanistan and ... Pakistan's president says he thinks Osama bin Laden is most likely dead ... www.whatreallyhappened.com/osama_dead.html bin Laden has funeral Why won't we admit that bin Laden is dead? ... A prominent official in the Afghan Taleban movement announced yesterday the death of Osama bin Laden, ... www.welfarestate.com/binladen/funeral/ Q&A on Osama bin Laden on National Review Online Kathryn Jean Lopez: There are reports on the Internet and in a Japanese newspaper that Mullah Mohammed Omar and Osama bin Laden are dead. ... www.nationalreview.com/interrogatory/ interrogatory102501b.shtml NPR : Dead or Alive: Hunting Osama Bin Laden Gary Schroen is one of the CIA's most respected and experienced spies. Two days after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, his bosses handed him a new ... www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4626666 Bin Laden 'dead' evidence mounts - National - theage.com.au Terrorism expert backs evidence showing al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is either ... Dr Williams said even if bin Laden was dead, those who upheld the same ... www.theage.com.au/news/national/ bin-laden-dead-evidence-mounts/2006/01/16/1137259968627.html southasia.net/article625.html Crooks and Liars Every since 9/11, the Administration has repeatedly whipped up speculation that Osama bin Laden is dead in order to induce the public into becoming ... www.crooksandliars.com/2006/01/19.html Jihad Watch: Jihadist website: ‘Bin laden dead’ One of the writers on the site, working under the pseudonym “The Mujahiddin’s Pen,” added: “Osama Bin Laden is dead... Where are the mourners? ... www.jihadwatch.org/archives/005930.php Bin Laden: Attacks on US Being Prepared 19 -- The voice of Osama bin Laden was heard for the first time in more than a ... The tape quieted speculation that his long silence meant he was dead. ... www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ content/article/2006/01/19/AR2006011901465.html CBS News | FBI Official Thinks Bin Laden Is Dead | July 17, 2002 ... (CBS) FBI counterterrorism chief Dale Watson said Wednesday he believes Osama bin Laden is dead — the first time a senior US law enforcement official has ... www.cbsnews.com/stories/ 2002/07/17/attack/main515468.shtml Mirror.co.uk - News - All News Archive - BIN LADEN "DEAD" The newspaper's story, headlined, "Yes, Osama bin Laden is dead but the Jihad will continue until Judgement Day'', quotes witness Shahid Ayan saying he ... www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page. cfm?objectid=12198590&method=full&siteid=50143 Bin Laden could be dead: terrorism expert. 16/01/2006. ABC News Online ... An Australian terrorism expert says he has been given evidence which could show Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is either seriously ill or dead Professor ... www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200601/s1547926.htm The New Yorker: Fact “If Osama bin Laden is alive . . . slowly but surely we’re dismantling the ... another videotape, some experts began thinking that bin Laden was dead. ... www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030804fa_fact Osama Bin Laden Is Dead? I wouldn't be surprised if Osama bin Laden is dead – despite the recent surfacing of a tape recording suggesting otherwise. ... www.newsmax.com/archives/ articles/2002/11/14/160357.shtml **** Starman

by **Quentin Quire** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:02 pm

'Rogue State' is a great read and I highly recommend it. Blum applies the US's definitions of what constitutes a 'rogue state' and applies it to the US, Israel and other countries. No prizes for guessing who comes out at #1 ...

by **wordspeak** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 12:33 am

It's not about "Rogue State" having a lot of good information; it's about equating the Left as supportive of or ideologically connected with Islamic terrorism, when, in fact, it's the CIA that's both supportive of and ideologically connected with terrorism. SS- thanks so much for the links. Who is Joe Beagant?? Here's a piece to foster understanding about the reality of direct U.S. support for Islamic fundamentalist terror: <a href="http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/jihad.htm">emperors-clothes.com/arti.../jihad.htm</a>

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 2:32 am

...a move against historians who've covered the CIA's Nazi roots and fascist history, a 9/11 recharge of hate for the "blame America first crowd" before the mis-State of the Union Address justifying the NSA surveillance and whatever they have planned for Iran. Exactly the same dynamic as crucifying Ward Churchill with a reich-wing echo campaign for calling some in the Twin Towers "little Eichmanns." This was timed to cover-up the release of documents showing the CIA took in Nazi Adolph Eichmann's five assistants after WWII. Clever monkeys, pre-empting a key word for a news cycle. So this move on Blum could be two things: 1)A real OBL message pointing Americans at info exposing their own government as terrorists. 2)A fake OBL message meant to discredit info exposing their own government as terrorists. Either way, the curious will read Blum and be horrified at what the CIA and Pentagon have been doing since WWII. Amazon reports Blum's book 'Rogue Nation' went from 209,000 to 30 in sales rank overnight. The Blum book I recommend for everyone is 'Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II.' THAT will pop a few gaskets and bring US terrorism into focus. The hardcore Bush base won't go near any OBL-recommended books and will thus be innoculated from this information with another Operation Mockingbird talking point. My judgement is that this is a BIG psy-ops gamble to start discrediting authors who are most damaging to American fascism's cover story wars. The fake OBL scenario makes the most sense because many already know or will soon know the horrible history of US military intelligence crimes against humanity and it is important to prevent their potential military recruiting base from turning on them, too. <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/al_qaida_bin_laden">news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060..._bin_laden</a> Bin Laden Threatens Attacks, Offers Truce By LEE KEATH, Associated Press Writer Thu Jan 19, 6:24 PM ET >snip< He even recommended a book for Americans to read — "The Rogue State," apparently a book of the same title by American author William Blum. He said it offers the path to peace — that America must apologize to victims of the wars and promise never to "interfere" in other nations — though it was not clear if these were conditions for the truce. .... He told Americans that "if you are sincere in your desire for peace and security, we have answered you. And if Bush decides to carry on with his lies and oppression, then it would be useful for you to read the book 'The Rogue State.'" He said the book reads in its introduction, "If I were president, I would stop the attacks on the United States: First I would give an apology to all the widows and orphans and those who were tortured. Then I would announce that American interference in the nations of the world has ended." The Associated Press found a nearly identical passage in another book by Blum: "Freeing The World To Death: Essays on the American Empire," published in 2004. The passage could not, however, be found in the latest edition of "The Rogue State."

by **StarmanSkye** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:09 am

Wordspeak: Great link and story -- even if it DOES make me wanna gnash my teeth and weep. --quote-- Even the Washington Post has pulled its punches. For example, consider the headline of the March 23rd article, the only one that deals critically with the jihad primers. Here's the headline. (Headlines are quite important because with any given article, most people only read the headline.) "From U.S., the ABC's of Jihad; Violent Soviet-Era Textbooks Complicate Afghan Education Efforts." "Violent Soviet-Era textbooks." This phrase doesn't even make it clear that the books were shipped in by the US government! They could have been hateful *Russian* books. And the phrase, "Complicate Afghan Education Efforts" sounds like the books are hindering current US attempts at effecting progressive change. Nobody would guess from this headline that US AID has been forcing Islamic fundamentalist texts on Afghan kids for 20 years or that they're still importing the same texts today, minus the guns and with more fruit. In the body of the article the Post asserts without evidence that steeping "a generation in [Islamist] violence" was an "unintended consequence" of giving Afghan children violent Islamist schoolbooks. "Unintended consequence" is fast becoming the US Establishment's favorite excuse for the many disasters of its foreign policy. "We didn't know. We weren't prepared. We used old maps. We didn't see the train. We thought there were tanks in the refugee column. Who could have expected this to happen?" and on and on. But does the case of the Islamist textbooks involve unintended consequences? Doesn't it in fact appear to be deliberate policy? --unquote-- I had a 'discussion' with my well-intentioned (probably) mostly nice-guy Born Again 'Christian' rightwing Bush-apologist neighbor who spends WAAAY too much time listening to Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly and Coulter (and thereby picking up some REAL wacky, moronic notions) a coupla years ago precisely about those 'baad' Taliban Jihadi textbooks -- it must have been around March 2002 when Bush spoke about those books, "And before the end of the year, we'll have sent almost 10 million of them [that is, new textbooks] to the children of Afghanistan. These textbooks will teach tolerance and respect for human dignity *instead of indoctrinating students with fanaticism and bigotry*," and the rightwing MSM echo-chamber and Repub talking-heads pounded the US airwaves with the rightness of Bush's 'message'. My neighbor went on and on about those 'bad Taliban' who had foisted those terrible textbooks on the poor kids etc. Now, I had read something about this but wasn't sure what the real deal was, so I didn't say anything but did my own online researching and found out how the old 'bad' texts with pictures of tanks and AK-47s (as illustrations for arithmetic lessons!) had been provided by the US thru an AID contract with the U of Omaha -- as were now the new ones! Well, next time I saw my neighbor I started to talk about this, "Say, about those Afghan Jihad textbooks -- " My neighbor interrupted -- "Ah, that's not important anymore ... " Well, DaMMNIT! It was important enuff for him to bend my ear about, but not to have him listen to the truth about this whole dirty, corrupt business? Typical Repub moral ambivalence and hypocrisy ... I no longer expect much intellectual honesty or integrity from my neighbor. We mostly avoid political topics in order to remain on friendly Wave-and-Howdy terms. BTW: I meant to cite Joe Bageant, not 'Baegant' -- my typo BAD! You GOT to check this guy out -- I forgot who, SOMEbody on this forum posted his excellant rant, "Revenge of the Mutt People", <<a href="http://www.joebageant.com/joe/2006/01/revenge_of_the_.html>">www.joebageant.com/joe/20...the_.html></a> -- He's an outstanding, savvy guy, yer atypical tell-it-like-it-is bluecollar workingclass Wise Elder Buddhahead bohemian folk-writer poet, who's not too proud to delight in his scrappy Scots/Irish salt-of-the-earth heritage. His reader-comments and replies show what kind of righteous, beautiful Brother-man he really is, a real Peace and Justice advocate far too aware to be taken in by the neocon's horrid 911 scam and bogus War on Terror. He provides great insight to explain in-part the conundrum of why generations of working-poor have fought and died to protect the wealth and privelege of the Ruling Class elites -- even as they KNOW the elites just shit on 'em and despise 'em. Starman

William Blum endorsement by OBL

William Blum endorsement by OBL

Re: William Blum endorsement by OBL

Osama Tape: Right Instinct

Rogue State

Re: Rogue State

I also see this OBL/Blum association as a discrediting move

US Still Providing Afghans Same Fundamentalist Texts

Who is online