Tag Archives: George W. Bush

RFK Jr. Film Faces Uncertain Future

KENNEDY’S “CRIMES AGAINST NATURE” FILM IN PERIL

(SORT OF LIKE THE PLANET)

Roger Friedman of FoxNews reports on his blog that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s planned documentary film “Crimes Against Nature” may not see the light of day anytime soon – if ever. He writes:

I told you more than a year ago that filmmakers were busily putting together a documentary based on Robert Kennedy Jr.’s book, “Crimes Against Nature,” sort of his “Inconvenient Truth.”

In Denver, during convention week, I was told several times that there were going to be screenings of some kind on the Pepsi Center campus. There was also word at the Toronto Film Festival that it would be seen. Neither scenario materialized.

Alas, I now hear that the people who’ve made the film are at war among themselves and there is chaos instead of expected unity for this investigative take on environmental politics.

In one corner, there is director Angus Yates. He comes with quite a pedigree. Stepson of Mike Wallace, son of late journalist Ted Yates, Angus has a long list of filmmaking credits. He also grew up with Kennedy, which gives some advantage when it comes to making this film.

In the other corner, there’s wealthy newspaper heiress Clara Bingham, who put up a lot of the money for “Crimes Against Nature.” Even though she hasn’t seen the film, sources say Bingham wants to take it away from director Yates and give it her own imprimatur. She has no prior filmmaking credits, but is a journalist who did write the book upon which Charlize Theron’s movie “North Country” was based.

Calls to Bingham at her New York apartment were attempted, but a recorded message said the voicemail box was full.

In the middle of this: producer Sarah Johnson Redlich, who wants Yates to finish his film but with compromises.

“I like Angus and I think he’s made a good film. But he also tried to make a Michael Moore film. It doesn’t work. He took Clara’s script and threw it out, and used his own. Bobby didn’t think it was good.”

As for who controls the finished work, that remains to be seen. Yates has told friends that he owns the film, and can so what he wants with it. That may include a surprise screening next week to get reaction, thus pushing Kennedy to take the director’s side and end the controversy. In the end, it will be up to Bobby Kennedy which version of “Crimes Against Nature” is final.

But Redlich says that only she and Bingham have money in the project. “Angus doesn’t have one cent in it,” she said.

She adds: “If we could just get him to do these final things. To me, it’s where you place things. I come from a staunch Republican family. If you start with an attack on George Bush, and clips of George Carlin, they’re going to walk right out. The message is too important for that.”

 

Story copyright 2008, Fox News.

 

EDITOR’S NOTE: Hm. From what I gather, this basically means that someone is trying to tone down RFK Jr.’s message. Yes, why start a film about the destruction of our environment with an attack on George Bush, the worst environmental president in history? That just makes too much sense! Better tone that rhetoric down, Bobby…how dare you point out the obvious?

Advertisements

7 Comments

Filed under climate change, environment, global warming, impeach Bush, live earth, RFK Jr., robert kennedy jr., the kennedys, Uncategorized

RFK Jr. on the 9/11 Truth Movement

What made these towers fall? Inquiring minds want to know...

What made these towers fall? Inquiring minds want to know...

RFK JR: WHERE HE STANDS ON 9/11 TRUTH

In the wake of the 7th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, Ralph Nader’s well-timed call for a “real investigation,” and this blog’s week-long series of features on independent, third-party and true maverick candidates like Jesse Ventura, Nader, Ron Paul, and Cynthia McKinney all who question the official story, many of our readers have been asking us where Robert F. Kennedy Jr. stands on the question of 9/11 Truth.

Some have pointed out that Kennedy’s uncle, President John F. Kennedy, often warned against such an “inside job” happening in America, citing 1962’s Operation Northwoods, his famous anti-secrecy speech (see video clip below), and even a fascinating doodle by Kennedy from late 1963 in which he scribbled “9” and “11” and the word “conspiracy” as proofs that he must have been either incredibly psychic or else knew something we didn’t 45 years ago.

In To Seek a Newer World, Robert F. Kennedy wrote these controversial and perhaps telling words which some have interpreted as a warning to mankind:

“All of us will ultimately be judged and as the years pass we will surely judge ourselves, on the effort we have contributed to building a new world order and the extent to which our ideals and goals have shaped that effort.”

Does this mean RFK saw exactly what was happening and refused the Electric Kool-Aid that was being passed around in the late 1960s? A lot of folks sure seem to think he was blessed with second sight!

Others point to the assassinations of both Kennedy brothers as inside jobs, and openly question how any member of the Kennedy family could fail to see that 9/11 was another coordinated “hit.” How could the Kennedys, of all people, know of this tyranny and not speak out against it, they ask?

So, to put the question to rest, here is what RFK Jr. has said on the record about 9/11 Truthers, the Pentagon plane mystery, bombs in the Twin Towers, and all that jazz.

These comments were made during an interview Bobby did with Philip Shenon, investigative journalist for the New York Times and author of the book The Commission, about the 9/11 Commission. The date of this interview was May 10, 2008, and aired on Ring of Fire, Kennedy’s weekly Air America radio show.

Below are direct permalinks to the interview on the official Ring of Fire and GoLeft.tv websites, so you don’t think we’re making this stuff up! Direct from the source, folks!:

AUDIO LINK – (Interview segment begins about halfway into the hour)
VIDEO LINK – (9/11 Truth issue is raised around 14:20) 

We encourage our readers to take 20 minutes out of their day to listen very carefully to this interview and understand where Kennedy stands on the 9/11 issue.

Many of RFK’s supporters are openly skeptical of the government’s official story about the events of September 11, and the 9/11 Commission. But in the interest of presenting the facts, we want Kennedy’s supporters to know what they are. We do not want any one putting words in Kennedy’s mouth by saying he stands for 9/11 Truth when he clearly does not.

You might think he’s wrong – and feel free to disagree with him – but at least you now know what his take is on the 9/11 Truth movement. We do not censor comments on this blog (avoid personal attacks, and you’ll be welcome here), so 9/11 Truthers are encouraged to express themselves in this forum. Let’s have an open, honest debate. Bring your evidence, bring your facts, and let’s get into it!

Before anyone turns this into a flame war, keep this in mind: Kennedy openly admits in the above interview that he hasn’t taken the time to really look into the evidence. Maybe he should. So our readers who hope to convince Mr. Kennedy can be most helpful by pointing out where he can find the info he needs. Post external links to reputable sources and documents online, or better yet, print out a stack of documentation and mail it to him (that’s the stuff he’ll actually look at – he doesn’t have much time for websurfing). Or call him up on his radio show and ask him about specific 9/11 facts. Perhaps you’ll bump into him at a booksigning and have the chance to talk to him in person. Respectful disagreement is what America is all about, with an emphasis on respectful. At least that’s our motto here.

It’s a tough issue, this whole 9/11 “inside job” thing – one that divides my own family and even this blog’s own editorial staff argues amongst ourselves as to whether “the gubberment did it” or not. Wouldn’t surprise me if the Kennedys themselves are divided over what really happened on Sept. 11. What about RFK Jr.’s supporters? Where do you stand, and do you think Bobby is right or wrong? Let us know…

Example of the JFK/911 Connection perpetuated by many conspiracy research groups across America today, this one in Portland, OR.

 
Copyright 2008 by RfkJrForPresident.com.

46 Comments

Filed under election 2008, environment, impeach Bush, JFK, John F. Kennedy, media, politics, president kennedy, RFK, RFK Jr., robert f. kennedy, robert kennedy jr., senator robert kennedy, the kennedys, Uncategorized

More Bush Administration Arrogance

ALL THE NEWS THAT’S UNFIT TO PRINT, EPISODE 3

Hot off the presses…the latest edition of RFK Jr’s “Unearthed” column, for the week ending May 9, 2008.

Here Kennedy covers a vast array of subjects – everything from the Siegleman case to Cheney and Ashcroft’s refusal to testify about U.S. torture tactics; from the head of the EPA being fired for political purposes to depleted uranium being dumped in Idaho; from hundreds of dead ducks turning up in Canada to right-wing talk radio’s domination of the U.S. airwaves; from the oil crisis to American contractors quite literally making out like bandits in Iraq — all with one common thread, the central underlying theme which ties these stories together:

More unprecedented ARROGANCE from the Bush Administration!

In a mad dash to cover their tracks while scooping up all the spoils they can possibly grab before we kick them out of the White House next January, the Bushies seem to be wholly unconcerned with how things look or smell at this point. (A new poll shows that Bush is now the most unpopular president in history, but ask him if he cares.) Yes, they’re openly farting in our faces, and we’re supposed to love it.

Laughing all the way to the bank, these criminals now feel certain that they will never face prosecution or impeachment, so hey – why not take all they can get? After all, we’ve given them a pass, carte blanche’ and a blank check for the past seven years, turning a blind eye to their crimes against humanity. (And that’s not to mention those High Crimes and Misdemeanors.)

So put on your seat belts and gas masks, America. The ride is only going to get rougher and smellier as Bush’s clock runs out.

Did you ever feel like the proverbial frog in a pot of boiling water as the heat is slowly being turned up hotter and hotter? Well, you know what happens then, don’t you?

We must take a stand. We must stop them before they kill again (looks like you’re next, Iran). We must fight back. We must prosecute. We must stop taking “I don’t recall” for an answer. Because if we don’t, we could all wind up as dead as those Canadian ducks RFK Jr. writes about.

It may be too late to impeach (as our Democratic brethren continue to insist) now, but it’s never too late to try them for war crimes at the Hague.

Oh…and there’s no statute of limitations on murder, either.

UNEARTHED:

NEWS OF THE WEEK THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA FORGOT TO REPORT

by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Brendan De Melle

The Huffington Post

EPA Official Ousted For Offending Dow Chemical

At the request of Dow Chemical, the Bush administration forced out one of its own hand-picked EPA regulators on May 1st because she naively attempted to do her job by enforcing the law against Dow. EPA officials told Mary Gade, the federal agency’s top Midwest regulator to step down from her post or be fired by June 1. Bush appointed Gade in 2006, but Gade ran afoul of the White House when she pressured Dow Chemical to clean up dioxin pollution extending 50 miles downstream from the company’s Michigan headquarters. Dow asked EPA headquarters to intervene. In response EPA chief Stephen Johnson’s top deputies repeatedly grilled Gade about the case. When she refused to lay off Dow, they stripped her of her authority and told her to quit or be fired. “There is no question this is about Dow,” Gade said. “I stand behind what I did and what my staff did. I’m proud of what we did.”

Gade was formerly a loyal George W. Bush supporter and adviser. In 2000, she praised then-governor and candidate Bush for his “fresh approach” and “strong leadership.” But her loyalty couldn’t shield her from an administration bent on insulating its chemical industry cronies from public health laws.
Bush’s Misleading Claims About the Arctic Refuge Denied by Federal Officials

President Bush last week repeated his claim that if only Congress had approved his 2002 plan to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge it “would likely mean lower gas prices” today. However, oil industry experts and Bush’s own Energy Department officials say that Bush is greatly exaggerating the theoretical impact that opening the refuge would’ve had on current gas prices. They explained that it takes over a decade to find and develop a new oil field. Furthermore, the oil available in ANWR — even under the most optimistic projections — could supply less than 2% of U.S. demand, an amount that would have a negligible impact on prices at the pump.
Green Construction Could Drastically Slash North American Energy Dependence

Employing existing and emerging green construction practices could cut North America’s deadly fossil fuel dependence faster and more cost-effectively than any other measure, according to a new study by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation, a panel erected by the United States, Canada and Mexico. Green construction has immediate paybacks, including “reduced energy costs and water costs as well the indoor health environment and increased productivity of the inhabitants of those buildings,” according to John Westeinde, an advisor on the report. The report found that North America’s buildings release more than 2,200 megatons of CO2, or about 35 percent of the continent’s total. If the construction industry rapidly adopted current and emerging green technologies, that number could be cut by 1,700 megatons by 2030, the report found.
Hundreds of Ducks Die at Canadian Oil Sands Mine

Hundreds of ducks made a fatal landing recently in a tailings pond filled with a witch’s brew of oil and toxic sludge at a northern Alberta tar sands mine. Regulators are investigating why Syncrude Canada — the country’s largest tar sands producer — failed to deploy a system designed to scare off waterfowl. Alberta’s tar sands development has been heavily criticized for huge carbon dioxide emissions, destruction of the boreal forest, and the potential for tailing ponds to contaminate local rivers and waterways.

 
Feds Acknowledge Error On Attempts to Muzzle Siegelman

Former Alabama Governor Don Siegleman, who was falsely imprisoned by Alabama cronies of Karl Rove, and is now released on appeal, was recently placed on a “special offender” list to restrict his right to travel. Siegelman was notified by federal probation officers of the new restriction shortly after he traveled to Washington to testify before the House Judiciary Committee, and appeared on 60 Minutes, the Tavis Smiley Show, and Dan Abrams’ Verdict.

The federal “special offender” designation applies to “Individuals identified or associated with traditional or non-traditional organized crime such as the Mafia, outlaw motorcycle gangs, Asian gangs, prison gangs, etc., persons identified as potential terrorists, kidnappers, members of a supremacy group, major bookmakers, major drug or weapon traffickers, pornographers, sex offenders, armed bank robbers, offenders of high notoriety, or cases similar nature.”

“This basically means I can’t travel out of Birmingham or Montgomery without a lot of red tape, and long delays. For example to travel in some places requires at least 30 days advance approval,” Siegelman said.

But on May 2, federal court officials acknowledged that they erred in classifying Siegelman as a special offender.

“They made an honest mistake,” Redmond said, acknowledging that the restrictions were illegal. “They were giving him conditions for a special offender under probation. He’s not. He’s pretrial.”
Cheney refuses to cooperate with Congressional Torture Investigation, claiming Congress has no authority over vice-president

The lawyer for U.S. vice-president Dick Cheney said Cheney would refuse to allow David Addington, the vice president’s chief of staff, to testify about his involvement in the approval of interrogation tactics used at Guantanamo Bay. The privilege asserted by Cheney’s office recalls his attempt last year to evade rules for disclosing classified documents by claiming that the vice president’s office is a hybrid branch of government that is neither executive nor legislative.
Ashcroft and Yoo Refuse to Testify About Torture

In another imaginative legal claim with dubious constitutionality, two other witnesses sought by Congressman John Conyers, former U.S. attorney general John Ashcroft and former U.S. justice department lawyer John Yoo, claim that their involvement in civil lawsuits related to harsh torture allows them to avoid appearing before Congress. “I am aware of no basis for the remarkable claim that pending civil litigation somehow immunizes an individual from testifying before Congress,” Conyers wrote.
Karl Rove Resists Congressional Request to Testify on His Siegelman Mischief

“The House Judiciary Committee threatened last Thursday to subpoena former White House adviser Karl Rove if he does not agree by May 12 to testify about former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman’s corruption case.

“In a letter to Rove’s attorney, committee Democrats called it ‘completely unacceptable’ that the Republican political strategist has rejected the panel’s request for sworn testimony even as he discusses the matter publicly through the media and op-eds and magazine interviews with tame reporters at GQ, and appearances with the administration’s media poodles on Fox News.

On April 7, MSNBC anchor Dan Abrams reported that Rove’s attorney, Robert Luskin, said Rove would agree to testify if Congress issues a subpoena to him as part of an investigation into the Siegelman case.

Ten days later, committee members invited Rove to appear, citing among other things Rove’s interview with GQ magazine. In that interview, Rove hurled insults at CBS News for airing a 60 Minutes segment on the Siegelman case, called his chief accuser a “lunatic” — but didn’t specifically deny any of the accusations.

In an April 29 letter back to the committee, Luskin changed his position[PDF], arguing that Rove would only appear under the following conditions: “Mr. Rove is prepared to make himself available for an interview on this specific issue with Committee staff. Mr. Rove would speak candidly and truthfully about this matter, but the interview would not be transcribed nor would Mr. Rove be under oath.”

 
Hate-filled Right Wing Radio

Racial slurs abound these days on right wing radio, particularly among the right’s leading shock jocks Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, Neal Boortz, Michael Savage and Lou Dobbs. During his May 5 appearance on FOX News, Rush Limbaugh referred to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (D), who is Hispanic, as a “shoe shine guy.

A 2007 study of talk radio conducted by the Project for Excellence in Journalism found that in the second quarter of 2007, when right wing radio resorted to spreading fear and hatred in order to defeat immigration reform. Immigration was the #1 topic – representing 16% of all airtime on right wing radio – led by Limbaugh, Hannity, and Savage. Neal Boortz chipped in too, urging listeners to help defeat “this illegal alien amnesty bill” and “yank out the welcome mat.” Speaking of undocumented immigrants he said, “Give ’em all a little nuclear waste and let ’em take it on down there to Mexico. Tell ’em…it’ll heat tortillas.” Michael Savage encouraged his listeners to “burn a Mexican flag” and to “tell them to go back to where they came from.”

Bigotry and Hatred is Good Business

Propped up by the conservative bias among corporate media barons who control the airwaves, right-wing radio now claims 91 percent of U.S. radio airspace. Salon.com reported that “Talk like Savage’s, or Limbaugh’s or O’Reilly’s, has become routine, even systematic, and certainly a big business. According to the Senate Democratic Policy Committee, the top five radio station owners that control the 45 most powerful, 50,000-watt or more radio stations broadcast 310 hours of nationally syndicated right-wing talk. But they broadcast only a total of five hours of countervailing talk.” Meanwhile the public popularity of progressive talk is growing.
Thanks to Right-Wing Corporate Owners Right-Wing Hate Talk Dominates Airwaves

While progressive talk is making inroads on commercial stations, right-wing talk reigns supreme on America’s airwaves. Some key findings:

— In the spring of 2007, of the 257 news/talk stations owned by the top five commercial station owners, 91 percent of the total weekday talk radio programming was conservative, and only 9 percent was progressive.

— Each weekday, 2,570 hours and 15 minutes of conservative talk are broadcast on these stations compared to 254 hours of progressive talk–10 times as much conservative talk as progressive talk.

— 76 percent of the news/talk programming in the top 10 radio markets is conservative, while 24 percent is progressive.
Bush Is the Least Popular President in History

A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll indicates that 71 percent of the American public disapprove of President Bush’s job performance, making him the most unpopular president in modern American history, even less popular than Richard Nixon just prior to his resignation.

“Bush’s approval rating, which stands at 28 percent in our new poll, remains better than the all-time lows set by Harry Truman and Richard Nixon [22 percent and 24 percent, respectively], but even those two presidents never got a disapproval rating in the 70s,” Keating Holland, CNN’s polling director said. “The previous all-time record in CNN or Gallup polling was set by Truman, 67 percent disapproval in January 1952.”

A January poll – conducted on the five-year anniversary of Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” moment on board the USS Abraham Lincoln – found the percentage of Americans who think the U.S. is making progress in Iraq stood at 50 percent. That number has since dropped to 39 percent.

 
Radioactive waste being shipped from Kuwait for Disposal in Idaho

6,700 tons of sand contaminated with depleted uranium and lead is currently being shipped by rail from Longview, Washington to a hazardous waste disposal site in Idaho. The radioactive sand – which was shipped from Camp Doha, a U.S. Army Base in Kuwait – was contaminated with uranium after military vehicles and munitions caught fire during the first Persian Gulf War in 1991. The contaminated sand is destined for burial at American Ecology’s dumping grounds in the Owyhee Desert 70 miles southeast of Boise. The Kuwaiti government wanted no part of the waste which it considered a danger to the Kuwaiti people. Kuwait’s Ministry of Defense contracted Texas-based MKM Engineers Inc. to package and transport the waste back to the United States. MKM then subcontracted with American Ecology to dispose the military waste at its Idaho facility.
Whistleblowers Say Private U.S. Contractors Looted, Stole and Ran a Prostitution Ring

In an investigative report largely ignored by the mainstream media, Mother Jones reports the shocking testimony of three whistleblowers who recently appeared before the Senate’s Democratic Policy Committee (DPC). The whistleblowers told the committee that U.S. private contractors routinely looted Iraqi palaces and ministries, stole military equipment, fenced supplies destined for U.S. troops, and even operated a prostitution ring that may have contributed to the death of fellow contractor.

Barry Halley, a former project manager for Worldwide Network Services, a Washington, D.C.-based firm that was working on subcontract for DynCorp, testified that his site manager in Iraq, who he said was employed by a “major defense contractor,” moonlighted as the leader of a prostitution ring serving American contractors in Iraq. The sex business sideline indirectly caused the death of a colleague. “A co-worker unrelated to the ring was killed when he was traveling in an unsecure car and shot performing a high-risk mission,” he told the committee. “I believe that my co-worker could have survived if he had been riding in an armored car. At the time, the armored car that he would otherwise have been riding in was being used by a manager to transport prostitutes from Kuwait to Baghdad.”

Frank Cassaday, a former contract employee of disgraced Cheney-connected firm KBR told the committee about an ice-stealing operation the company ran “cheating the troops out of ice at the same time that [the foreman in charge was] trading the ice for DVDs, CDs, food, and other items at the Iraqi shops across the street.”

Cassaday also detailed how he was jailed in his tent for two days by KBR security and later transferred to a laundry job because he had reported to KBR superiors that his colleagues were stealing equipment from the U.S. military, including refrigerators, artillery round detonators, two rocket launchers, and about 800 rounds of small arms ammunition.

Another KBR whistleblower, Linda Warren, testifying about her time in Baghdad in 2004, said she was shocked by the number of contractors involved in criminal activity. “KBR employees who were contracted to perform construction duties inside palaces and municipal buildings were looting,” she said. “Not only were they looting, but they had a system in place to get contraband out of the country so it could be sold on eBay. They stole artwork, rugs, crystal, and even melted down gold to make spurs for cowboy boots.” Like Cassaday, KBR superiors punished Warren for speaking up, taking her vehicle away, monitoring her movements, cutting off her access to phones and the Internet, and ultimately transferring her out of Baghdad.
Iraqi Interpreters Who Helped U.S. Are Being Tossed Under the Bus By Bush Administration

The Bush administration is ignoring the plight of Iraqi interpreters who have risked their lives to provide essential help to U.S. soldiers. Interpreters have been kidnapped, tortured and assassinated by insurgents punishing them for working with the U.S. The Bush administration promised them refugee status to bring them here to safety, but has not delivered, leaving them at lethal risk.
Rockefellers Call on Exxon Mobil to Spend More on Oil Alternatives

Descendants of company founder John D. Rockefeller want Exxon Mobil to spend more money on alternative fuels and bar the CEO from also serving as chairman. Sixteen Rockefeller family members are urging fellow shareholders to support four resolutions on the environment and corporate governance at the company’s May 28 annual meeting.
More Record Profits for Oil Barons

Astounding profits in the oil industry are becoming as routine as the anguished looks of motorists filling up their gas tanks, the AP reports.

ExxonMobil, Shell and BP netted almost $13 million an hour combined in the first quarter amid the steepest increase in oil prices since 2000.

Exxon’s revenue climbed 34 percent to $116.9 billion, but Exxon’s 17 percent profit increase lagged behind the gains of 25 percent and 63 percent by Shell and BP. Chevron put yet another exclamation point on the oil patch’s long run of prosperity Friday with a first-quarter profit of $5.17 billion. That was up 10 percent from net income of $4.72 billion last year.

It was the second-highest quarterly profit in the company’s 129-year history and marked the most money that it has ever made during the January-March period. That puts the No. 2 U.S. oil company on track for its fifth straight year of record earnings.

BP posted a 63 percent surge in first-quarter net profit to $7.6 billion, while Shell reported a 25 percent rise, to a record $9.08 billion. ConocoPhillips reported a 16 percent rise in net income to $4.14 billion. Like BP and Shell, the third biggest U.S. producer far outpaced industry expectations.

Republicans Block Federal Aid to Wind and Solar

Tom Friedman of the New York Times reports:

Few Americans know it, but for almost a year now, Congress has been bickering over whether and how to renew the investment tax credit to stimulate investment in solar energy and the production tax credit to encourage investment in wind energy. The bickering has been so poisonous that when Congress passed the 2007 energy bill last December, it failed to extend any stimulus for wind and solar energy production. Oil and gas kept all their credits, but those for wind and solar have been left to expire this December. I am not making this up. At a time when we should be throwing everything into clean power innovation, we are squabbling over pennies.

These credits are critical because they ensure that if oil prices slip back down again — which often happens — investments in wind and solar would still be profitable. That’s how you launch a new energy technology and help it achieve scale, so it can compete without subsidies.

The Democrats wanted the wind and solar credits to be paid for by taking away tax credits from the oil industry. President Bush said he would veto that. Neither side would back down, and Mr. Bush — showing not one iota of leadership — refused to get all the adults together in a room and work out a compromise. Stalemate. Meanwhile, Germany has a 20-year solar incentive program; Japan 12 years. Ours, at best, run two years.

“It’s a disaster,” says Michael Polsky, founder of Invenergy, one of the biggest wind-power developers in America. “Wind is a very capital-intensive industry, and financial institutions are not ready to take ‘Congressional risk.’ They say if you don’t get the [production tax credit] we will not lend you the money to buy more turbines and build projects.”

If the wind and solar credits expire, said Rhone Resch, the president of the Solar Energy Industries Association, the impact in just 2009 would be more than 100,000 jobs either lost or not created in these industries, and $20 billion worth of investments that won’t be made.

While all the presidential candidates were railing about lost manufacturing jobs in Ohio, no one noticed that America’s premier solar company, First Solar, from Toledo, Ohio, was opening its newest factory in the former East Germany — 540 high-paying engineering jobs — because Germany has created a booming solar market and America has not.

 

Send tips about other stories the mainstream media forgot to report: unearthednews@gmail.com

32 Comments

Filed under climate change, environment, global warming, impeach Bush, media, politics, RFK Jr., robert kennedy jr., Uncategorized

RFK Jr: Pentagon Propagandists Hyped The Case for Iraq War

In our second installment of RFK Jr.’s most recent “Unearthed” column, we learn more about the Pentagon propagandists who sold us on this illegal, idiotic occupation of Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion.

UNEARTHED: NEWS OF THE WEEK THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA FORGOT TO REPORT

By Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Brendan DeMelle

The Huffington Post

Menage a Trois – A Criminal Act

The Pentagon announced that it has suspended its illegal Retired Military Analyst Program. The program described in The New York Times exposé involved an illegal ménage a trois including: 1) the corporate television news broadcasters; 2) media military analysts employed by arms dealers and military, and 3) neocon Pentagon big wigs. The program violates federal “covert propaganda” laws.

Despite the official suspension of the illegal program, Fox News is continuing to feature these compromised mercenaries in its war mongering propaganda broadcasts. Last Sunday, a week after the Times published its finding, Fox aired jingoistic commentary by disgraced pundit Thomas McInerney without disclosing his affiliation to the illegal Pentagon group or the war profiteering arms dealers that pay his salary.

McInerney is a director of NetStar Systems, a technology firm which described itself in 2005 as “a prime contractor for the Department of Defense.” NetStar lists government clients including:
* Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)
* Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI)
* National Security Agency (NSA)
* Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
* Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
* Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
* Department of the US Army
* Marine Corps Intelligence Association (MCIA)
* Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA)

In 2000, McInerney founded his own arms dealership firm called “Government Reform Through Technology (GRTT)” to market advanced weapons and government agencies.

McInerney appeared April 28, 2008 on the 11am hour of FOX NEWS LIVE. On April 23, another compromised contractor Robert H. Scales promoted the war on the 6:00 PM “FOX Special Report with Brit Hume.” Thousands of Americans are calling on Congress and federal prosecutors to launch criminal investigations and Congressional hearings and hold accountable the Pentagon criminals and corporate media moguls who staged this propaganda pitch.

Samples of the high quality analysis offered to Fox News viewers by Pentagon’s propaganda poodles


The Pentagon’s military media mercenaries who continue to appear shamelessly on Fox News played key roles in marketing the Iraq War to the U.S. public. Some samplings:

During a February 3, 2003, edition of On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, Robert H. Scales claimed that since “this operation is going to go so quickly,” and would “be over so fast,” the U.S. military wouldn’t have to worry about “suicide attack[s] or even a conventional defense, for that matter.” Additionally, Scales asserted that “[o]nce the campaign starts,” it would last “weeks, certainly not months,” and “[t]he only thing that would cause the campaign to last any length of time are the distances that are involved” between Iraqi cities.

During the December 20, 2002, edition of Fox’s On the Record, Thomas McInerney predicted that, should U.S. forces invade, “I think he’s [Saddam] going to use chemical weapons and biological” weapons on the Iraqi people because “he wants the collateral damage on his own people.” During the January 3, 2003, edition of On the Record, McInerney declared that “in the final analysis, France and Russia roll in” to assist in the Iraq war “even if it’s outside the U.N.” He concluded: “There’s no question if it’s inside the U.N., they’ll be there.”

McInerney also asserted during the same episode that invading Iraq and overthrowing Saddam would actually improve public opinion of America in the Arab world, and predicted that the “jubilation in Mosul, Basra, and Baghdad” after the invasion “will silen[ce] the Arab street.” According to McInerney: “There has not been a family in Iraq who has not been hurt by that man [Saddam], and so, once that is opened up, once those weapons of mass destruction that are exposed over there, once all this evil that this man has done, they’re going to go dead quiet, as will the critics in the United States.” Further, McInerney claimed on the February 3, 2003, edition of On the Record that the Iraq war would last “at the most one month,” but it would “probably [be] a two-week campaign.”
Rumsfield Propaganda Push Violates Federal Anti Propaganda Statutes

Donald Rumsfeld’s military analyst program violated federal anti propaganda statutes. Federal law prohibits the use of federal funds to propagandize the American people.

According to laws officially enacted in 1951 and affirmed by every appropriations bill since, “No part of any appropriation contained in this or any other Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States.”

The Government Accountability Office’s definition of “publicity or propaganda” includes [PDF] “‘covert propaganda‘ (i.e., the communication does not reveal that Government appropriations were expended to produce it).”

The White House’s own Office of Legal Council further clarified the law in a 2005 memorandum following the controversy over the Armstrong Williams scandal (when it was discovered that the Bush administration had actually paid willing to publicly endorse its No Child Left Behind Law):

“covert attempts to mold opinion through the undisclosed use of third parties” would run afoul of restrictions on using appropriated funds for “propaganda.”

As Sheldon Rampton points out, the key passage here is the phrase, “covert attempts to mold opinion through the undisclosed use of third parties.” As David Bartow’s excellent New York Times report demonstrated in detail, the Pentagon’s military analyst program did exactly that.
1. It was covert. As Barstow’s piece states, the 75 retired military officers who were recruited by Donald Rumsfeld and given talking points to deliver on Fox, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS and MSNBC were given extraordinary access to White House and Pentagon officials. However, “The access came with a condition. Participants were instructed not to quote their briefers directly or otherwise describe their contacts with the Pentagon.”
2. It was an attempt to mold opinion. According to the Pentagon’s own internal documents (which can be downloaded and viewed from the New York Times website), the military analysts were considered “message force multipliers” or “surrogates” who would deliver administration “themes and messages” to millions of Americans “in the form of their own opinions.” According to one participating military analyst, it was “psyops on steroids.”
3. It was done “through the undisclosed use of third parties.” In their television appearances, the military analysts did not disclose their ties to the White House, let alone that they were its surrogates. The military analysts were used as puppets for the Pentagon. In the words of Robert S. Bevelacqua, a retired Green Beret and for Fox News military
analyst, “It was them saying, ‘We need to stick our hands up your back and move your mouth for you.”

In a February 1, 1988 memorandum by the White House Office of Legal Council. Conservative lawyer Charles Cooper (then head of the OLC), explaining the legal limitations to White House efforts to win support for the Contra War in Nicaragua. Cooper declared that the Reagan Administration “can make available to private groups, upon request, printed materials that explain and justify the Administration’s position on Contra aid. These materials must be items that were created in the normal course of business and not specifically produced for use by these private groups.” Cooper continues:
It would be unwise, however, for the Administration to solicit the media to print articles by or interviews with anyone not serving in the government. And, of course, the Administration cannot assist in the preparation of any articles or statements by private sector supporters, other than through the provision of informational materials as described in the preceding paragraph.

In the case of the current Pentagon pundit scandal, however, the Pentagon clearly was assisting in the preparation both of articles and statements by private sector supporters. It did not simply provide “informational materials” that had been “created in the normal course of business.” Rather, it sat down with the retired military analysts, many employed by arms dealers in business with the Pentagon and worked closely with them to draft talking points and script language to deploy them as message amplifiers and surrogates without disclosure.

Rumsfeld knew he was breaking the law

Donald Rumsfeld was evidently told by advisors that his propaganda program was illegal and insisted to go forward anyway. In a transcript of one his meetings with his propaganda team of military media analysts, Rumsfeld complains that he has been warned that his “information operations” directed at U.S. citizens are “illegal or immoral“:
“This is the first war that’s ever been run in the 21sth Century in a time of 24-hour news and bloggers and internets and emails and digital cameras and Sony cams and God knows all this stuff. … We’re not very skillful at it in terms of the media part of the new realities we’re living in. Every time we try to do something someone says it’s illegal or immoral, there’s nothing the press would rather do than write about the press, we all know that. They fall in love with it. So every time someone tries to do some information operations for some public diplomacy or something, they say oh my goodness, it’s multiple audiences and if you’re talking to them, they’re hearing you here as well and therefore that’s propagandizing or something.”

This transcript demonstrates that Rumsfeld was aware of federal prohibitions on domestic propaganda operations. Although it is illegal to target propaganda at the America people, the law does not forbid propaganda aimed at foreign audiences. Rumsfeld has been warned, however, that in today’s world with “bloggers and internets and emails,” even information operations overseas reach “multiple audiences” including U.S. citizens who are “hearing you here as well and therefore that’s propagandizing.” Rumsfeld, however, made these statements during a conference with military pundits whom he had recruited specifically for information operations targeting U.S. audiences. Yet he went ahead and did it anyway. In another part of the transcript, he explained why. In fighting the war on terror, Rumsfeld said, the “center of gravity’s here in Washington and in the United States.” In other words, he intended specifically to break the law by targeting the American public to put pressure on Washington law makers to go along with his war. That transcript alone provides the smoking gun with clear enough evidence for any prosecutor to convene a grand jury.

 

3 Comments

Filed under impeach Bush, media, politics, RFK Jr., robert kennedy jr., Uncategorized

JFK On Presidential Leadership

John F. Kennedy on the campaign trail, 1960

“Vote for Kennedy!”: Flashback to 1960, the last time a sitting (or in this case, standing) U.S. Senator won the presidency in a general election.

A FEW WORDS FROM JFK ON PRESIDENTIAL LEADERSHIP

This election year, we all must have a heart-to-heart with ourselves and ask, “what qualities do I want in a president? What truly constitutes leadership?”

We’d like to draw your attention to a speech President John F. Kennedy gave in 1962 which is rarely noted or quoted. Sadly, this address seems to have been somewhat lost to history, but reading his words again should strike a deep resonant chord in all of us today.

This speech hits home now when we look at our plunging economy, the national debt, the death of American industry, the downfall of labor unions, our failing education system, corporate profit-taking, the war, escalating tensions around the globe, the pillage of our natural environment, the election, and perhaps most importantly – the powers properly granted to the president under the Constitution of the United States to fix these problems. What is within his or her power, and what is not?

After eight years of George W. Bush, it’s a hot question in 2008.

WHEN IS AGGRESSIVE USE OF PRESIDENTIAL POWER A GOOD THING?

Let’s look at just one historical example.

President Kennedy made these remarks during a speech to the United Auto Workers Union in Atlantic City in May, 1962. Addressing the issue of how much influence the President should have over the nation’s economy (or perhaps put more bluntly, whether he should bow and do the bidding of his corporate puppetmasters), Kennedy vigorously defended his recent actions which had forced the steel industry to eliminate a price increase.

“I speak,” he said, “as President of the United States with a single voice to both management and labor . . . I believe it is the business of the President of the United States to concern himself with the general welfare and the public interest . . . I believe that what is good for the United States—for the people as a whole—is going to be good for every American company and for every American union.”

Unjustified wage and price demands, said the President, are equally “contrary to the national interest.” His Administration “has not undertaken and will not undertake” to fix prices or wages or to intervene in every little old labor dispute. Instead, it depends on labor and management to reach settlements within “guidelines” suggested by the Administration.

This aggressive policy had been the subject of “a good deal of discussion, acrimony, and controversy on wages and prices and profits,” Kennedy acknowleged, but he added this justification: 

“Now I know there are some people who say that this isn’t the business of the President of the United States, who believe that the President of the United States should be an honorary chairman of a great fraternal organization and confine himself to ceremonial functions. But that is not what the Constitution says. And I did not run for President of the United States to fulfill that Office in that way.”

OK, stop. Go back and read that paragraph again, because it’s terribly important. What did he just say?

He just stated that he did not run for the Presidency for the honor of being corporate America’s puppet. Or the Military’s puppet. Or anybody’s puppet,for that matter. He said that he was well aware of the immense powers granted to the president under the U.S. Constitution, and that he fully intended to make use of those powers when necessary.

Those are dangerous words when spoken by a president.

For those who still seek an answer to the neverending question – “why was President Kennedy killed?” – it could be argued that he had to be “replaced” becasue he interpreted the Constitution literally. JFK thought that “goddamn piece of paper” (as future presidents would refer to this now-arcane historical document) actually meant what it said.

Kennedy continued:

“Harry Truman once said there are 14 or 15 million Americans who have the resources to have representatives in Washington to protect their interests, and that the interests of the great mass of other people, the hundred and fifty or sixty million, is the responsibility of the President of the United States. And I propose to fulfill it!

And there are those who say, “Stay out of this area–it would be all right if we are in a national emergency or in a war.”

What do they think we are in? And what period of history do they believe this country has reached? What do they believe is occurring all over the world?

Merely because vast armies do not march against each other, does anyone think that our danger is less immediate, or the struggle is less ferocious?

As long as the United States is the great and chief guardian of freedom, all the way in a great half circle from the Brandenburg Gate to Viet-Nam, as long as we fulfill our functions at a time of climax in the struggle for freedom, then I believe it is the business of the President of the United States to concern himself with the general welfare and the public interest. And if the people feel that it is not, then they should secure the services of a new President of the United States.”

 — JFK to the United Auto Workers Union, May 8, 1962

THE PRESIDENT IS NOT AN “HONORARY CHAIRMAN OF A GREAT FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION”

My point exactly. After eight long years of a president who could care less about the general welfare and the public interest, it is now up to the people to secure the services of a new President of the United States. And we’re going to do it this November.

But who among the current crop of candidates posesses the kind of leadership qualities JFK not only talked about, but exhibited during each of the thousand days?

To my mind at least, true presidential leadership requires the kind of courage and compassion exhibited by JFK in the example below. Please take a few moments to watch excerpts from his UAW speech and other remarks on the economy in this video montage entitled “Mankind Is Our Business.”

CLASH OF THE TITANS

At the time, Kennedy was roasted for his aggressive use of presidential power in the showdown with Big Steel  – by the business community, by academia, the press, members of Congress, and even his predecessor Dwight Eisenhower.

In the May 18, 1962 issue of Time magazine, Ike strongly criticized the President for “the strenuous efforts of the Administration to increase greatly the power of the executive branch of the Government. It has long been my judgment that the real threat to liberty in this Republic will be primarily found in a steady erosion of self-reliant citizenship and in excessive power concentration.”

To back up his charge that Kennedy is asking for too many powers, Ike cited Kennedy’s requests for authority to modify income taxes when he decides it is necessary, to finance emergency public works by diversion of funds, to “regiment all agriculture,” to “take over a whole host of state and local responsibilities, notably including the proposal for a Department of Urban Affairs,” and “to dilute the independence of the Federal Reserve Board by presidential appointment of its chairman.” Added Ike: “The objectives under lying many such proposals are not in themselves controversial. I do not agree, however, that in every instance more presidential power is needed to achieve them.”

Ironically, while it was President Eisenhower who had cautioned against undue influence by the Military-Industrial-Complex two years before, the truth of the matter is that during his presidency Eisenhower sought out the Titans, respected their advice, and treated them as they thought they deserved to be treated — in other words, as representatives of the most influential body in the nation.

By contrast, Kennedy kept his distance. Prior to his election he had had little contact with industrial circles, and once he was in the White House he saw even less of them. Businessmen were generally excluded from the Kennedys’ private parties. Not only did he “snub” them (in the words of Ralph Cordiner, President of General Electric), he also attacked them. Kennedy did not consult the business world before making his appointments. The men he placed at the head of the federal regulatory agencies were entirely new. Since the end of the war, the businessmen had become accustomed to considering these bodies as adjuncts of their own professional associations. They were more indignant than surprised. They attempted to intervene, but in vain.

If the Titans thought that John F. Kennedy was going to be their puppet, they had another thing coming.

“Honorary chairman of a great fraternal organization” who should “confine himself to ceremonial functions?” Not this president. 

Kennedy had just let let them know: This president had a mind of his own – and if you don’t like it, perhaps you boys should go get yourselves another president

HAIL TO THE CHIEF

Even nearly 45 years after his passing, I still look to President Kennedy’s words and deeds for strength and inspiration – I think many of us do – and every election year since then, we have searched for a political candidate who embodies that same spirit. Someone who understands and achieves that perfect balance between exercising presidential power and the public interest, while avoiding the temptation to become drunk on their own power and take the country into a dictatorship.

It’s always a difficult balancing act for any president, but the example of JFK’s administration showed us all that a president can use his power forcefully and effectively when the need arises – but that such use is only acceptable and reasonable if this flexing of executive muscle is done to benefit the national interest. (And, more often than not, to force corporations or industries into doing the right thing – what they should have done in the first place – for their fellow citizens.)

“The American people will find it hard, as I do, to accept a situation in which a tiny handful of steel executives whose pursuit of private power and profit exceeds their sense of public responsibility can show such utter contempt for the interests of 185 million Americans.”

— President John F. Kennedy, April 11, 1962

In my own personal dictionary, you look up “presidential leadership,” and there’s Jack Kennedy’s picture.

President John F. Kennedy, fall 1962

When the people said, “we want action, not talk“, Kennedy delivered.

THE PRESIDENT HAS THE POWER 

So the next time you suffer sticker shock at the gas pump, and you wonder aloud, “who can fix this?” – remember that the president has the power. All a president needs is a plan and most importantly, the courage to stand up to The Men Who Rule The World because he knows the Constitution and the people will back him up.

Next time you feel obliged to curse the oil companies for sticking it to millions of people while they enjoy record profits, remember who our president is now.

Next time you bitch about the modern day industrial robber barons of Wall Street who are stealing us blind and wonder why Congress does nothing to stop it, remember President Kennedy.

Remember that he went to bat for all Americans and fought the Titans just to shave what amounted to a rather paltry price increase in steel down to a reasonable amount. Remember that he won that battle, too.

Remember that if our current president, or any future president, should have the political will and the courage, they can also fight the Titans and curb these out-of-control oil industry profits, bring an energy revolution to the table, get us off of foreign oil and out of debt to dictators quicker than you can say, “all in a day’s work!”

Remember that when you choose a presidential candidate this year.

`Nuff said!

 

Copyright RFKin2008.com.

 

For further reading on JFK’s showdown with U.S. Steel, we highly recommend:

“John F. Kennedy and the Titans” by Laura Knight-Jadczyk at http://laura-knight-jadczyk.blogspot.com/2006/11/john-f-kennedy-and-titans.html

“A Diversity of Dilemmas”, Time Magazine, May 18, 1962 article at: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,896150,00.html

15 Comments

Filed under climate change, election 2008, environment, global warming, hillary clinton, impeach Bush, jackie kennedy, JFK, John F. Kennedy, politics, president kennedy, RFK, RFK Jr., robert f. kennedy, robert kennedy jr., the kennedys, Uncategorized

Op-Ed: Bush and Cheney Should Be in Handcuffs

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. often says that “we need to impeach President Bush as a civics lesson.” Apparently, our Congress does not agree. So if impeachment is “off the table,” what can We The People do to bring these two criminals to justice?

Guest Blogger Jack Mosel suggests in this original Op-Ed piece that it is time to take action at the local level, highlighting the case of one Vermont town which is setting an example as to how it can be done – and calls for other cities around the world to follow suit.

It stands to reason, after all, that if upon leaving office, Bush and Cheney have nowhere to run, they will have nowhere to hide. 

OP-ED: GEORGE W. BUSH AND DICK CHENEY SHOULD BE IN HANDCUFFS, NOT IN THE WHITE HOUSE

Jail to the Chief!

By Jack Mosel

Guest Blogger

“Bush and Cheney: Arrested for Gross Violations of International and U.S. Law!”

A new proposal in the township of Brattleboro, Vermont — authorizing local law enforcement to arrest Bush and Cheney — would make this headline a reality, should either of them step inside the town’s jurisdiction.

The Brattleboro proposal is to be voted on in the coming weeks at a town hall meeting. This innovative solution is up for discussion thanks to the hard work of community activists, who petitioned citywide to have the motion put to a vote.

The petition — with more than 436 signatures, or at least the 5 percent of voters necessary to be considered — was duly submitted and the town Select Board voted 3-2 to put it on the ballot. It goes to a town-wide vote March 4.

“This petition is as radical as the Declaration of Independence, and it draws on that tradition in claiming a universal jurisdiction when governments fail to do what they’re supposed to do,” said Kurt Daims, 54, a retired machinist leading the drive.

Daims has been circulating documents that claim the community acquires a “universal jurisdiction” to take such steps “when governments breach their highest duties.”

“We have the full power to issue indictments, conduct trials, incarcerate offenders and do all other acts which Independent jurisdictions may of right do,” the statement says.

The measure asks: “Shall the Selectboard instruct the Town Attorney to draft indictments against President Bush and Vice President Cheney for crimes against our Constitution, and publish said indictment for consideration by other municipalities?”

Fearful of the indictment, Bush and Cheney are mounting a counteroffensive. But in town after town in Vermont, the people have voted to support impeachment recognizing that Bush and Cheney have committed high crimes and misdemeanors.

Photo from PirateNews.org

After a concerned citizen’s call to 911, the Tyranny Response Team does their patriotic duty.

JAIL TO THE CHIEF

The Brattleboro indictment of Bush and Cheney is reflective of the tide of opposition to the current administration. The people of this country are refusing to let Bush leave office without facing charges for his criminal deeds.

Just this week, the New Hampshire State House held an impeachment hearing, which was flooded by activists and community members insisting that the state legislature take action.

Hollywood actor Ed Asner wrote a letter for the hearing expressing his support for the resolution, which indicts Bush for “invading Iraq without just cause or provocation.”

This, I submit, is the call for citizen activism for our voices to be heard on the subject of whether High Crimes and Misdemeanors are actually relevant as defined by the Constitution of the United States. 

What I mean by that is simply put: Does the activity of a collection of townships and state legislatures (as of late Westchester County, NY included) taking proactive legal steps towards indictments of our President and Vice President seem over-reactive? Or are they simply stepping up to the plate and doing the one thing Congress lacks the courage to do?

This isn’t a question of a few isolated communities anymore. City, County, and State governments are getting more done at the local level on this matter than the members of the actual House of Representatives, whose task it is to introduce Articles of Impeachment.

The ‘Pyramid’ is upside down… Those folks in Washington work for us, not the other way around.

The elected officials in Washington, D.C. are going to have to take a stand and be accountable for either their ability to represent the best interest of their constituents and their country — or not.

He looks pretty good in an orange jumpsuit

On his perp walk down the runway, the Veep demonstrates the latest fall colors; orange jumpsuits are all the rage this year.

THE CONSTITUTION IS A WAR CASUALTY

A small town in Vermont’s resolution instructing their local police to arrest the President of the United States and the Vice President of the United States for Acts of Treason is awe inspiring… Awe inspiring to the extent that it is embarrassing to our elected representatives in Washington who failed us. Again

Don’t get me wrong. I am proud of every local government which feels that they have no other choice but to do this. I’m quite sure that they would not pursue these activities if they did not have the legal authority to do so. They have taken a bold stand for the rule of law and are sending a strong message to those in Congress, in cities around the country, and indeed around the world.  

There is something burning foks…It’s the smell of a nearly 220 year-old parchment (which our president calls “just a goddamn piece of paper!”), printed from the actual blood of people like you and me. The movement for a free Republic, the Revolutionary war we fought to win that freedom, and the signing of our Constitution in Philadelphia all those years ago is not so different from the activities which are currently going on in Brattleboro, Vermont, Concord, New Hampshire, or Westchester, New York. (Home to both Sen. Hillary Clinton and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.).

The Constitution is a War Casualty… This is from the desk of ‘The Decider’. Our voices not being heard and the relentless refusal to not entertain the motions of Articles of Impeachment, is simply un-Patriotic, un-American and un-fair!

Why should we take a stand? Because it isn’t always about us, folks. The rest of the world is watching and waiting to see what we are going to do about our situation. They know that there are huge discrepancies afoot in our country’s actions over the last 8 years…that our deeds don’t live up to our words.

How are we going to save our face and continue to live up to the world’s expectations of America being a great, successful, democratic power if we handicap ourselves by taking the word of a handful of people who unilaterally claim to know best for all of us? Whatever happened to the “consent of the governed?”

When asked to testify for the 9/11 Commission about their prior knowledge of the attack on America, or about their activities on that day, both our president and our vice president balked, delayed, refused, and then finally (sort of) complied. But only with conditions — such as no record of the discussion, no paper allowed in the room, no sworn statements in testimony and no public participation…and we let this happen.

I have serious questions…and to this day, they remain unanswered. Obviously. I am not a nut. I am a father, a husband, an active community volunteer, an environmentalist by profession. I am a New Yorker born and raised, and I am still outraged that this heinous crime was committed in my state. I care about my country and the people I call Americans who live this dream with me, and above all, I am a realist.

The facts we’ve been given about what happened on September 11th and why we went to war just don’t add up.  The ones that do point to politicians at the highest levels of our own government needing to answer these questions, even if we have to arrest them in order to get to the truth. The record needs to be straightened out for the sake of history, the true perpetrators must be brought to justice once and for all.  So that your children and mine can have the same great American dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness our forefathers gave us.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:Jack Mosel is an an environmental activist and owner of Aquatic Restoration, LLC. He can be contacted at: moseljack@yahoo.com.

DISCLAIMER: The opinions in the above editorial are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. or the owners of this website.

14 Comments

Filed under election 2008, hillary clinton, impeach Bush, politics, RFK Jr., robert kennedy jr., Uncategorized

You’d Be Crying, Too

Hillary Clinton got all choked up yesterday in NH after seeing the latest Gallup Poll:

USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL – JANUARY 7, 2008 (conducted Jan. 4-6)

Obama: 41%

Clinton: 28%

Edwards: 19%

Hillary clinton in new Hampshire, Jan. 7, 2008

Oddly enough, President Bush had the same reaction:

Wonder who’ll be crying tonight when the results from New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary are tallied…

Copyright RFKin2008.com. All Rights Reserved.

1 Comment

Filed under election 2008, hillary clinton, impeach Bush, media, politics, Uncategorized