Yes, the United States has replaced the Soviet Union in terms of repression, but the Soviet's role was always distorted by the America media and government propaganda. We all need a villian to point at and say, "If you don't behave, you'll turn out like those people." It is ironic that once the Soaviet Union fell, the United States rushed i to fill the void. As Michael Moore said, "One Evil Empire down, one to go."

And yes, Truman set the stage for McCarthy. This is something few people are aware of, and it shows the lie to the belief that the Democrats are necessarily "better" than the Republicans. The case can also be made that Carter set the stage for Reagan (Chomsky has made this argument) and I think it's clear that Clinton set the stage for Bush II, just as Bush I/Reagan set the stage for Clinton. It really is like one party, the Corporate Party.

And then there was the National Security Act of 1947 that was passed under Truman's administration, that set the stage for the cold war and the military-industrial complex to take over in the next few years.

At gunpoint, of course.

Rather like Georgie Too, willing to lock up someone and throw away the key - or throw the switch on the electric chair - for getting caught doing what he was doing.

Got Coke?
http://drugwar.8m.com/bushbag.htm

Genocide is not too strong a word to describe what is happening in Colombia...with his off-handed blessing. It's not just the campesinos getting drenched with organo-phosphates; it's the native peoples in the bush who are also catching Hell from this spraying. Between the Colombian army, the 'contractors', the paras, and the Rebels, they are being wiped out culturally as well as physically. Extinction can take many forms. But so long as the natives get wiped out and are no longer impeding the 'development' of the oil patches there, that's all right with him. No humans, no human right's abuse claimants.

As for that girl? I am reminded of something that happened in 1990: at the same time two events around the world were taking place: the bloody (for the indigs) US invasion of Panama, and the Rumanian Revolution.

History was being made before our eyes. The Warsaw Pact was falling apart before our eyes. The events millions had prayed for, for decades, were finally coming to pass. Meanwhile, at the same time one nation was freeing itself, another was being ground up under Uncle's boot-heel...ostensibly because it's leader was dabbling with drug trafficking. Untold thousands were dying as we watched talking heads blathering in cold, sterile tones about 'military action'. News flashes were being braodcast every few minutes on the Tube. And what did my roomie have to say about it?

She was pissed.

It was interrupting her soap operas.

Your front page parrots the sensationalism seen every night
on television. Our "news" services are far more interested
in the bedroom antics of minor politicians and sensational
crimes, such as the murders of the russian family. These
stories are news. They do not deserve banner headlines. But
you will have them on page A1 front and center. Day after
day after day.

I believe that there is a "media blackout" of news that may
enlighten the American people about issues like the upturn
in fuel prices. The corruption in our government. Our
corrupt legal system. The United States' involvement in
foreign countries and the pressure brought to bear to make
those countries bow to the U.S. will. What really happened
in our last presidential election. The death of a true two
party system.

In my opinion, you are failing in your duty as a source of
information relevent to our lives.

And on the other hand...
"Since their legal livelihoods have been affected by the spraying, these persons do not offer objective information about the program."

-------

Fox News is the worst with all of the sound effects, it truely is bogus. And pointing to US thirst for global news, let's not forget the hard driven reporting that goes into the CNN Global 'Minute'...! What a joke.

Bob Dole rather ineptly demonstrated this technique during the Oct. 16, 1996 presidential debate. "We're going to balance the budget, by the year 2000 the President wants to spend 20 percent more in the next six years, and I want to spend 14 percent more and give that 6 percent back to the people. Remember, it's your money; it's not his money." What Dole meant, of course, is "Remember, it's my money; it's not his money."

When has the one-party system ever been so obvious?

It's sad, Lehder, that the girl you met had such apparent contempt for education and reading. It's a typical outcome for victims of the government schools.

Do 'dozens' of people read this site? It's pure conjecture based on the number of regular comments. But even if our circulation is that small, the average contributor to this site is very well informed and motivated and probably influences many other people's opinions. I guess we're aiming for the ripple effect.

and how many read this bulletin board? I think Pontifex said "dozens." It's not enough. We gotta get the message on TV before we can teach 'em to read. yeah, books, freakish ain't they? weird.

Yes, this is what drug warriors call a debate. It's no debate at all, as you easily recognize. Either way, the drug war apparatus remains in place and grows. In similar vein, Henry Kissinger once explained how to become an "expert", one of those "talking heads" you see on TV getting paid big bucks to piss us off. You take a government policy, he said, and being careful not to say anything at all outside that policy, you make endless arguments about fine points and dinstictions all totally within the same stupid [my word] policy. You never challenge the basic attitude, you just talk endlessly about small distinctions within that attitude. Like, should we imprison or rehabilitate? It's all such crap. None of it is productive. It doesn't produce anything or lead anywhere.AMerica will wither, decline and fall if everybody has to always be politically correct. So far the only mainstream mention, and rare as it is, of the drug war is all in this vein - fine distinctions about how the war should go on.

Digit, I agree that televised news -- really any news that is filtered by government agencies -- is necessarily incomplete and biased. The serious free thinker must triangulate the truth from several different sources, and at this the Internet excels. I will never give a dime to the New York Times or L.A. Times, but I can read their articles for free online. People who don't trust information on the net do so out of ignorance; they'll come around.

But on this one point I disagree, and side with FoM. I think Scotland would be a better place if there were a bit more kilt-wearing and broadsword-wielding. :)

dddd, you really have a hallucinogenic way of bringing things to life. I pity that poor nail.

And to everybody, THIS IMPORTANT MESSAGE. I relish your comments as much as any piece of professional journalism. I don't always get a chance to respond or give thanks, but the analysis on this site is brilliant and I read just about everything. Thanks a ton for writing. And if your lonely, thought-provoking comment doesn't get a reply, rest assured that dozens -- perhaps more -- are reading it in silence and meditating on your thoughts.

By the way, I missed a great piece of news. There was an article somewhere recently quoting some Drug Warrior who said that Roundup is so benign, he'd line up his family in a field right before it was sprayed.

And we've had another crash in the market today. Greenspan predicting many more layoffs, more people out of work.there will be fewer houses built, more people homeless, more people losing their mortgaged homes to the banks. It takes more than a drug war to make an economy, you drug warring shitheads. But you don't care at all what happens to the country or its people do you? as long as you get to exercise your hatred and collect your federal graft.

We've collapsed to a single party system on the War on Drugs, and drugs have become to American politicians what capitalism was to Soviet apparatchiks -- a demon to shake your fist at and use as an excuse to curtial freedoms and increase the state right to seize private property under the pretense of making people more safe and secure.

There was virutally no difference between the Bush and Gore proposed Drug War during the campaign.

Theoretically, our system is designed to offer choice.

When the choice seems to have vanished -- it's time to worry.

Ideological control and expropriation -- the two main activities of the Communist State, now perfectly adapted to the American War on Drugs.

Hey, I'll bet those guys in the DEA actually imagine themselves as being devout anti-Communists. Isn't that a big laugh? Isn't that funny?