Posts Tagged ‘THE HUFFINGTON POST’
9/11, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM, ANDERSON COOPER, ANTI-COMMUNISM, ARTHUR MILLER, BILL CLINTON, CBS NEWS, CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, CHINA, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, DICK CHENEY, DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, HARRY S. TRUMAN, HEINRICH HIMMLER, HERMAN CAIN, HERMAN GORING, HILLARY CLINTON, HUMA ABEDIN, JEWS, JIMMY CARTER, JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JOHN STEINBECK, JOSEPH GOEBBELS, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, JOSEPH STALIN, KGB, LIZ CHENEY, LUCILLE BALL, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MIKE HUCKABEE, MITT ROMNEY, MSNBC, MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, MUSLIMS, NAZI GERMANY, NAZI PARTY, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, PETE SEEGER, RED SCARE, REINHARD HEYDRICH, REPUBLICAN PARTY, RICHARD NIXON, RICK SANTORUM, Ronald Reagan, SENATOR MIKE ENZI, SOVIET UNION, SS, THE AMERICAN CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, WYOMING
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on November 28, 2013 at 12:00 am
With the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the Republican Party went into a tailspin of dismay.
For almost 50 years, Republicans had conjured up The Red Bogeyman to scare voters into sending them to Congress and the White House.

But now that the “workers’ paradise” had disappeared, Americans seemed to lose interest in the Communist Menace.
True, the People’s Republic of China remained, and its increasing economic clout would challenge the United States well into the 21st century. But Americans didn’t seem to fear the Red Chinese as they had the Red Russians.
What was the Republican Party to do to lure voters?
On September 11, 2001, the answer arrived–in two highjacked jetliners that crashed into the World Trade Center in New York and one that struck the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.

Exit The Red Bogeyman. Enter The Maniacal Muslim.
Consider:
- Mike Huckabee – “If the purpose of a church is to push forward the gospel of Jesus Christ, and then you have a Muslim group that says that Jesus Christ and all the people that follow him are a bunch of infidels who should be essentially obliterated, I have a hard time understanding that.”
- Herman Cain – ”I would not” appoint a Muslim in his administration.
- Newt Gingrich – “I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they [his grandchildren] are my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists. …”
- Rick Santorum – On supporting the racial profiling of Muslims: “Obviously, Muslims would be someone you look at, absolutely.”
- Mitt Romney – “Based on the numbers of American Muslims in our population, I cannot see that a Cabinet position [for a Muslim] would be justified.”
And on July 13, Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) sent letters to the Inspectors General of the Departments of
- Defense;
- State;
- Justice; and
- Homeland Security.
“The purpose of these letters,” wrote Bachmann, was to “request a multi-department investigation into potential Muslim Brotherhood infiltration into the United States Government.”

Michelle Bachmann
Bachmann further asserted in her letter to the State Department that Huma Abedin, deputy chief of staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
And the evidence for this?
The Center for Security Policy’s claim that Abedin’s father (who died when she was a teenager), mother and brother are “connected” to the organization.
And what is the Center of Security Policy? A private organization subsidized by donors to neo-conservative causes.
In a separate letter, Bachmann demanded to know how Abedin received her security clearance.
Among the co-signers of Bachmann’s letter to the Inspectors General were:
- Rep. Trent Franks of Arizona, who has said abortion has done more harm to blacks than slavery;
- Rep. Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia, who called presidential candidate Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, ”uppity”; and
- Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas, who claims that terrorist organizations send pregnant women into the U.S. so that their children will be American citizens–who can enter and leave the country at will as they are trained to be terrorists abroad.
When pressed for their evidence of “a vast Muslim conspiracy,” right-wing accusers usually refuse to provide any.
An example of this occurred during an August 13, 2010 interview between Gohmert and CNN’s Anderson Cooper:
COOPER: What research? Can you tell us about the research?
GOHMERT: You are attacking the messenger, Anderson, you are better than this. You used to be good. You used to find that there was a problem and you would go after it.
COOPER: Sir, I am asking you for evidence of something that you said on the floor of the House.
GOHMERT: I did, and you listen, this is a problem. If you would spend as much time looking into the problem as you would have been trying to come after me and belittle me this week –
COOPER: Sir, do you want to offer any evidence? I’m giving you an opportunity to say what research and evidence you have. You’ve offered none, other than yelling.
Nor did Gohmert offer any evidence that evening.
Of course, the ultimate Republican Muslim slander is that President Barack Obama–a longtime Christian–is himself a Muslim.
No doubt Republicans feel totally safe in making these attacks, since Muslims comprise only 1% of the American population.
This has long been a hallmark of right-wing attacks–to go after a minority that cannot effectively defend itself.
Thus, Adolf Hitler attacked the Jews of Germany.
And Republicans have successively attacked blacks, Hispanics and gays–until each group became politically influential enough to defeat Republican candidates.
Today, most right-wing politicians at least grudgingly court all of these groups.
When Muslims become a significant political force in their own right, the Right will court them, too. And then move on to yet another helpless scapegoat to blame for America’s troubles.
9/11, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM, ANDERSON COOPER, ANTI-COMMUNISM, ARTHUR MILLER, BILL CLINTON, CBS NEWS, CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, CHINA, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, DICK CHENEY, DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, HARRY S. TRUMAN, HEINRICH HIMMLER, HERMAN CAIN, HERMAN GORING, HILLARY CLINTON, HUMA ABEDIN, JEWS, JIMMY CARTER, JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JOHN STEINBECK, JOSEPH GOEBBELS, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, JOSEPH STALIN, KGB, LIZ CHENEY, LUCILLE BALL, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MIKE HUCKABEE, MITT ROMNEY, MSNBC, MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, MUSLIMS, NAZI GERMANY, NAZI PARTY, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, PETE SEEGER, RED SCARE, REINHARD HEYDRICH, REPUBLICAN PARTY, RICHARD NIXON, RICK SANTORUM, Ronald Reagan, SENATOR MIKE ENZI, SOVIET UNION, SS, THE AMERICAN CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, WYOMING
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on November 27, 2013 at 12:05 am
“Judge not, that you not be judged. For with what judgment you judged, you shall be judged, and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again.”
So warns the Gospel of St. Matthew, 7:1-2. It’s advice that Right-wingers Joseph McCarthy, Robert Welch and George H.W. Bush would have done well to heed.
Joseph McCarthy, Wisconsin’s gift to the United States Senate, became infamous as the demagogue whose Red-baiting accusations terrified America from 1950 to 1954.

Joseph McCarthy
Elected to the Senate in 1946, he rose to national prominence on February 9, 1950, after giving a fiery speech in Wheeling, West Virginia:
“The State Department is infested with communists. I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department.”
Americans were already growing increasingly fearful of Communism:
- Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin had not withdrawn the Red Army from the countries it had occupied in Eastern Europe during World War II.
- In 1948, the Soviet Union developed–and demonstrated–its own atomic bomb, an achievement U.S. scientists had claimed would not happen for at least a decade.
- In 1949, China fell to the triumphant armies of Mao Tse Tung.
But anti-communism as a lever to political advancement sharply accelerated following McCarthy’s speech. Republicans–resentful at being denied the White House since 1932–seized upon anti-communism as their passport to power.
No American–no matter how prominent–was safe from the accusation of being a Communist or a Communist sympathizer–”a Comsymp” or “fellow traveler” in the style of the era.
Among those accused:
- Secretary of State George C. Marshall, who had overseen America’s strategy for defeating Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan
- President Harry S. Truman
- Playwright Lillian Hellman and Arthur Miller
- Actors Charlie Chaplin, Zero Mostel, Lloyd Bridges, Howard Da Silva, Edward G. Robinson and John Garfield
- Composers Arron Copland and Elmer Bernstein
- Physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer, who presided over the creation of America’s atomic bomb
- Actressses Lee Grant, Delores del Rio, Ruth Gordon and Lucille Ball
- Journalists Edward R. Murrow and William L. Shirer, who had chronicled the rise of Nazi Germany
- Folksinger Pete Seeger
- Writers Irwin Shaw, Howard Fast, John Steinbeck and Dashiell Hammett
Even “untouchable” Republicans became targets for such slander.
The most prominent of these was President Dwight D. Eisenhower–labeled ”a conscious, dedicated agent of the Communist Conspiracy” by Robert Welch, who founded the John Birth Society in 1958.

Robert Welch
Welch, an independently wealthy businessman, used his money to publicize the Society and its views. Welch saw even hardline anti-Communists like Vice President Richard Nixon and actor Ronald Reagan as dangerously liberal.
Meanwhile, McCarthy finally overstepped himself. In 1953, he attacked the leadership of the United States Army as “a hotbed of traitors” and convened an inquiry through the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
But the hearings backfired, exposing McCarthy as the bullying demagogue he was. A Senate committee voted to condemn his behavior, charging that he had “acted contrary to senatorial ethics and tended to bring the Senate into dishonor and disrepute.”
Although McCarthy remained in the Senate another two and a half years, his political influence had ended.
Journalists who had raced to cover his latest slander now avoided him. So did his Republican colleagues–many of whom had once sought his help at election time.
Yet even without McCarthy, Republicans rode the issue of anti-Communism to victory from 1948 to 1960.
After holding the White House for eight years under Eisenhower, they lost it in 1960 to John F. Kennedy and again in 1964 to Lyndon Johnson.
By 1968, with the nation mired in Vietnam and convulsed by antiwar demonstrations, Americans turned once more to those who preyed upon their fears and hates. They elected Richard Nison–and re-elected him in 1972.
After Jimmy Carter won the Presidency in 1976 and lost it in 1980, Republicans held the White House until 1992. Throughout that time, they continued to accuse their opponents of being devious agents–or at least unwitting pawns–of “the Communist conspiracy.”
Even as late as 1992, President George H.W. Bush and the Republican establishment charged that Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton might be a KGB plant.
Their evidence: During his tenure at Oxford University in 1969-70, Clinton had briefly visited Moscow.
Thus, the Republican charged that he might have been “programmed” as a real-life “Manchrian candidate” to become, first, Governor of Arkansas–one of America’s poorest states–and then President.
What made this charge all the more absurd: The Soviet Union had officially dissolved in December, 1991.
Although Republicans continued to hurl “Communist!” and “treason!” at their opponents, these charges no longer carried the weight they had while the Soviet Union existed.
Right-wingers had to settle for attacking their opponents as “liberals” and “soft on crime.”
Then, on September 11, 2001, Republicans–and their right-wing supporters–at last found a suitable replacement for the Red Menace.
9/11, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM, ANDERSON COOPER, ANTI-COMMUNISM, ARTHUR MILLER, BILL CLINTON, CBS NEWS, CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, CHINA, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, DICK CHENEY, DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, HARRY S. TRUMAN, HEINRICH HIMMLER, HERMAN CAIN, HERMAN GORING, HILLARY CLINTON, HUMA ABEDIN, JEWS, JIMMY CARTER, JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JOHN STEINBECK, JOSEPH GOEBBELS, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, JOSEPH STALIN, KGB, LIZ CHENEY, LUCILLE BALL, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MARY CHENEY, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MIKE HUCKABEE, MITT ROMNEY, MSNBC, MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, MUSLIMS, NAZI GERMANY, NAZI PARTY, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, PETE SEEGER, RED SCARE, REINHARD HEYDRICH, REPUBLICAN PARTY, RICHARD NIXON, RICK SANTORUM, Ronald Reagan, SAME-SEX MARRIAGE, SENATOR MIKE ENZI, SOVIET UNION, SS, THE AMERICAN CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, WYOMING
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on November 26, 2013 at 12:09 am
“All revolutions,” said Ernst Rohem, leader of Adolf Hitler’s brown-shirted thugs, the S.A., “devour their own children.”

Ernst Rohem
Fittingly, he said this as he sat inside a prison cell awaiting his own execution.
On June 30, 1934, Hitler had ordered a massive purge of his private army, the S.A., or Stormtroopers. The purge was carried out by Hitler’s elite army-within-an-army, the Schutzstaffel, or Protective Squads, better known as the SS.
The S.A. Brownshirts had been instrumental in securing Hitler’s rise to Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933. They had intimidated political opponents and organized mass rallies for the Nazi Party.
But after Hitler reached the pinnacle of power, they became a liability.
Ernst Rohem, their commander, urged Hitler to disband the regular German army, the Reichswehr, and replace it with his own legions as the nation’s defense force.
Frightened by Rohem’s ambitions, the generals of the Reichswehr gave Hitler an ultimatum: Get rid of Rohem–or they would get rid of him.
So Rohem died in a hail of SS bullets–as did several hundred of his longtime S.A. cronies.

SS firing squad
Among the SS commanders supervising those executions was Reinhard Heydrich–a tall, blond-haired formal naval officer who was both a champion fencer and talented violinist.
Ultimately, he would become the personification of the Nazi ideal–”the man with the iron heart,” as Hitler eulogized at Heydrich’s funeral just eight years later.

Reinhard Heydrich
Even so, Heydrich had a problem: He could never escape vicious rumors that his family tree contained a Jewish ancestor.
His paternal grandmother had married Reinhold Heydrich, and then Gustav Robert Suss. For unknown reasons, she decided to call herself Suss-Heydrich.
Since “Suss” was widely believed in Germany to indicate Jewish origin, the “stigma” of Jewish heritage attached itself to the Heydrich family.
Heydrich joined the SS in 1931 and quickly became head of its counterintelligence service. But his arrogance and overweening ambition created a great many enemies.
Only a year later, he became the target of an urgent investigation by the SS itself.
The charge: That he was part-Jewish, the ultimate sin in Hitler’s “racially pure” Nazi Germany.
The investigation cleared Heydrich, but the rumor of his “tainted” origins persisted, clearly tormenting the second most powerful man in the SS.
Even his superior, Heinrich Himmler, the Reichsfuhrer-SS, believed it.
When Heydrich was assassinated in 1942 by Czech assassins in Prague, Himmler attended his funeral.
He paid tribute to his former subordinate at the service–”You, Reinhard Heydrich, were a truly good SS-man.” But he could not resist saying in private:
“He was an unhappy man, completely divided against himself, as often happened with those of mixed race.”
Those who dare to harshly judge others usually find themselves assailed just as harshly.
A modern-day example is Liz Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney and now a candidate for U.S. Senator from Wyoming.
Liz is positioning herself as far more right-wing than her opponent, Republican U.S. Senator Michael Bradley “Mike” Enzi.
She has her work cut out for her: In March, 2007, Enzi was ranked by National Journal as the sixth-most conservative U.S. Senator.
Among his legislative priorities:
- Supporting partial privatization of Social Security
- Consistently voting against expanding Medicare.
- Voting against enrolling more children or the poor in public healthcare.

Mike Enzi
And Liz has a problem Enzi does not: Her sister, Mary, is not only a lesbian but legally married to another woman: Heather Poe.
This has led many Wyoming voters to wonder if Liz Cheney is far-Right enough to merit their support.
So Liz is going all-out to assure them that even though her sister leads a degenerate lifestyle, she, Liz, stands foursquare against legalizing gay marriage:
“I do believe it’s an issue that’s got to be left up to states. I do believe in the traditional definition of marriage.”

Liz Cheney
And, in another statement: “I am strongly pro-life and I am not pro-gay marriage.
“I believe the issue of marriage must be decided by the states, and by the people in the states, not by judges and not even by legislators, but by the people themselves.”
This stance has led to a heated rift between her and Mary.
“For the record, I love my sister, but she is dead wrong on the issue of marriage,” Mary Cheney wrote in a Facebook post in September.
“Freedom means freedom for everyone,” she continued. “That means that all families–regardless of how they look or how they are made–all families are entitled to the same rights, privileges and protections as every other.”
Adding to the complications: Their father, Dick Cheney—often ridiculed as “Darth Vader” for his own extreme Right-wing views—endorsed same-sex marriage in 2009.
But, as was true for officials in Nazi Germany, so is it true for Right-wing Republicans: It’s impossible to be too radical a Right-winger.
In the 1930s and 40s, it was politically—and personally—dangerous to be labeled “pro-Jewish” or “pro-Communist” in Hitler’s Germany.
And today it is equally dangerous—at least politically—to be labeled “pro-liberal” or “pro-gay” in the Republican Party.
ABC NEWS, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, ALAMO, CENSORSHIP, CHRISTIAN RIGHT, CIVIL WAR, CNN, COUNTDOWN, DAVY CROCKETT, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, GEORGE ORWELL, GETTYSBURG ADDRESS, HISPANICS, HISTORY, JEFFERSON DAVIS, JIM BOWIE, JOSEPH STALIN, LAVRENTI BERIA, MARTIN LUTHER KING, MSNBC, RACHEL MADDOW, RELIGION, SCHOOLS, SLAVERY, SOVIET UNION, TEXAS, TEXTBOOKS, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, THOMAS JEFFERSON, TWITTER
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics on November 7, 2013 at 12:16 am
“The problem with writing about history in the Soviet Union,” went the joke, “is that you never know what’s going to happen yesterday.”
The same can now be said about writing history under the new guidelines of the Texas Board of Education.

The changes to the state’s history textbooks were opposed by historians and civil rights leaders. The new curriculum presents history from a right-wing perspective and de-emphasizes the role of blacks, Hispanics and other minority groups.
The board’s decision will affect students living outside Texas because of the state’s major impact on the nation’s textbook publishers.
Because the Texas textbook market is so large, books assigned to the state’s 4.7 million students often become bestsellers, decreasing costs for other school districts and leading them to buy the same materials.
“The books that are altered to fit the standards become the bestselling books, and therefore within the next two years they’ll end up in other classrooms,” said Fritz Fischer, chairman of the National Council for History Education, a group devoted to history teaching at the pre-college level.
“It’s not a partisan issue, it’s a good history issue.”
The new version of history given Texas students will:
- Celebrate the free market;
- Minimize the role of labor movements; and
- Give greater prominence to conservative figures like Phyllis Schlafly.
Additional changes will include:
- Students will now study Confederate President Jefferson Davis’ inaugural address alongside President Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.
- Upton Sinclair’s book The Jungle, which documented the horrors of working conditions in the meatpacking industry and led to calls for greater regulation, has been removed from the list of suggested readings.
- The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter From a Birmingham Jail,” has also been removed.
- Thomas Jefferson’s name has been removed from a list of the country’s great thinkers because he advocated the separation of church and state.
- In a sop to the Christian Right, references have been added to “laws of nature and nature’s God” to a section in U.S. history that requires students to explain major political ideas.
- The word “democratic” has been removed in references to the form of U.S. government, and this will now be described as a “constitutional republic.”
- A reference to the Second Amendment right to bear arms has been added to a section about citizenship in a U.S. government class.
- Economics students will be required to “analyze the decline of the U.S. dollar including abandonment of the gold standard.”
- The names or references to important Hispanics throughout history also were deleted, such as the fact that Tejanos died at the Alamo alongside Davy Crockett and Jim Bowie.
- All references to “capitalism” have been replaced with “free enterprise.”
- U.S. “imperialism” no longer exists; there is only “U.S. expansionism.” Only the Europeans are guilty of “imperialism,” just as only the Soviets committed “aggression.”
- In a rare setback for the radical Right, the slave trade will not be renamed the “Atlantic triangular trade.”
At one time, Americans believed that such wholesale rewriting of history could happen only in the Soviet Union. A classic example of this occurred in 1953, within the Great Soviet Encyclopedia.
Lavrenti Beria had been head of the NKVD, the dreaded secret police, from 1938 to 1953. In 1953, following the death of Joseph Stalin, Beria was arrested and executed on orders of his fellow Communist Party leaders.

Lavrenti Beria
But the Great Soviet Encyclopedia had just gone to press with a long article singing Beria’s praises.
What to do?
The editors of the Encyclopedia wrote an equally long article about “the Berring Straits,” which was to be pasted over the article about Beria, and sent this off to its subscribers. An unknown number of them decided it was safer to paste accordingly.
In the 1981 film, “Excalibur,” Merlin warns the newly-minted knights of the Round Table: “For it is the doom of men that they forget.”
Forgetting our past is dangerous, but so is “understanding” it incorrectly. Deliberately omitting events and persons from the historical record–such as Thomas Jefferson and Martin Luther King–can be as lethal to the truth as outright lying.
Stalin, for example, ordered the deletion of all references to the major role played by Leon Trotsky, his arch-rival for power, during the Russian Revolution.
Similarly, requiring students to study Confederate President Jefferson Davis’ inaugural address alongside President Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address should be seen for what it is: A thinly-veiled attempt to legitimize the most massive case of treason in United States history.
(The Civil War started on April 12, 1861, when Confederate artillery opened fire on Fort Sumter, a United States fort in Charleston Harbor. Fort Sumter surrendered 34 hours later.
(At least 800,000 Southerners took up arms against the legally elected government of the United States.)
The late broadcast journalist, Edward R. Murrow, would have referred to this as “giving Jesus and Judas equal time.”
All of which simply proves, once again, that the past is never truly dead. It simply waits to be re-interpreted by each new generation–with some interpretations winding up closer to the truth than others.
ABC NEWS, ADMINISTRATION, ATTORNEYS, BUREAUCRACIES, BUSINESS, CBS NEWS, CEOS, CNN, CORPORATIONS, CUSTOMER SERVICE, FACEBOOK, FBI, GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, LG, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, POLICE DEPARTMENTS, PROSECUTORS, ROBERT TOWENSEND, SELF-HELP, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE SHARPER IMAGE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER
In Bureaucracy, Business, Self-Help on November 6, 2013 at 12:56 am
So you’ve spent the last half-hour or more on the phone, listening to one recorded message after another (and probably a symphony of bad music).
And you’re no closer to solving the problem that caused you to phone the company/agency in the first place.

What to do?
- Go on the Internet and look up the company’s/agency’s website. Look for links to their Board of Directors. Often enough you’ll get not only their names but their bios, phone numbers and even email addresses.
- Start looking at the bottom of the website page. Many companies/agencies put this information there–and usually in small print.
- Look for the names of officials who can help you. That means the ones at the top–or at least high enough so you can be sure that whoever responds to your call/letter/email has the necessary clout to address your problem.
- If you call, don’t ask to speak directly with Mr. Big–that’s not going to happen. Ask to speak with Mr. Big’s secretary, who is far more accessible.
- Keep your tone civil, and try to make your call as brief as possible. Don’t go into a lot of background about all the problems you’ve been having getting through to someone.
- Give the gist and ask for a referral to someone who can help resolve your problem.
- If the secretary needs more time to study the problem before referring you to someone else, be patient. Answer any questions asked–such as your name, address, phone number and/or email.
- State–specifically–what you want the company to do to resolve your problem. If you want a refund or repairs for your product, say so.
- Too many consumers don’t specify what they want the company to do–they’re so caught up in their rage and frustration that this completely escapes them.
- Be reasonable. If you want a refund, then don’t ask for more money than you paid for the product. If you want to return a product for an exchange, don’t expect the company to give you a new one with even more bells and whistles–unless you’re willing to pay the difference in price.
- If you want an agency to investigate your complaint, don’t expect them to drop everything else and do so instantly. Give them time to assess your information and that supplied by others.
- It’s usually possible to get one agency to sit on another–if you can make a convincing case that it’s in that secondary agency’s best interests to do so. If you’ve been roughed up by local police for no good reason, you can file a complaint with that department–-and the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s Office (federal prosecutor) to investigate.
- That doesn’t guarantee they will resolve your problem. But if you can show that the cops have violated several Federal civil rights laws, the odds are that someone will take a serious look at your complaint.
- If a company/agency official has acted so outrageously that the company/agency might now be held liable for his actions, don’t be afraid to say so. But don’t threaten to sue. Just point out that the employee has acted in such a way as to jeopardize the company’s/agency’s reputation for integrity/efficiency and that the organization is not well-served by such behavior.
- Whoever reads your letter/email will instantly realize the legal implications of what you’re saying–and, in most cases, will take quick action to head off a lawsuit by trying to satisfy your request. The foremost priority of every bureaucracy is to ensure its own survival.
- Give the CEO’s secretary at least one to two days to get back to you. Remember: Resolving your problem isn’t the only task she needs to complete.
- If you’re writing the CEO, make sure you use his full name and title–and that you spell both correctly. People don’t get to be CEOs without a huge sense of ego. Nothing will turn him off faster than your failing to get his name and title exactly right.
- As in the case with his secretary, be brief–no more than a page and a half. Outline the problem you’re having and at least some (though not necessarily all) of the steps you’re taken to get it resolved.
- Then state what you want the company to do. Again, be fair and reasonable.
ABC NEWS, ADMINISTRATION, ATTORNEYS, BUREAUCRACIES, BUSINESS, CBS NEWS, CEOS, CNN, CORPORATIONS, CUSTOMER SERVICE, FACEBOOK, FBI, GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, L.G., LG, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, POLICE DEPARTMENTS, PROSECUTORS, ROBERT TOWENSEND, SELF-HELP, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE SHARPER IMAGE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER
In Bureaucracy, Business, Self-Help on November 5, 2013 at 1:15 am
How many times have you called a government agency or company and instantly found yourself put on hold?
To add insult to injury, you usually wind up serenaded by recorded music that would be totally forgettable if it weren’t so unforgivably irritating.
And every 30 seconds or so a recorded voice comes on to assure you: “Your call is very important to us.”
Have you ever wondered: “If my call is so important to you, why aren’t you answering it?”

The truth is that most companies and government agencies don’t want their employees speaking with the customers who make their existence a reality.
Having your questions answered by another human being requires the company/agency to assign–and pay–people to do just that.
Most hiring managers don’t want to hire any more people than they absolutely have to. They want to siphon off as much of the company’s profits for themselves as possible.
And assigning people to answer customers’ calls means that many of those calls will take time to answer, because some problems can’t be solved in a matter of seconds. To a bean-counting executive, time is money.
Even government agencies like police departments don’t want to spend any more time than necessary taking the calls of those who need to reach them.
Even calls to 911 can leave you talking to no one, with only a recorded message telling you to wait until someone deigns to speak with you.
That’s why many bureaucracies arrange that when you call for help, you’re fobbed off with a recorded message telling you to visit the company’s or agency’s website.
This assumes, of course, that
- You have a computer; and
- If you do, you also have Internet access.
If you
- Don’t have a computer; or
- You have a computer but don’t have Internet access; or
- You do have Internet access but the service is down,
you’re flat out of luck.
And the agency/company couldn’t care less.
But it need not be this way.
Companies and agencies can treat their customers with respect for their time and need for help.
That’s why companies that genuinely seek to address the questions and concerns of their customers reap strong customer loyalty–and the profits that go with it.
One of these is LG, which produces mobile phones, TVs, audio/video appliances and computer products.
LG actually offers an 800 Customer Care number that’s good 24-hours a day.
Its call center is staffed with friendly, knowledgeable people who are willing to take the time to answer customer questions and guide them through the steps of setting up the appliances they’ve bought.
Another company that dares to have human beings stand behind its products–and explain how to use them–is The Sharper Image.
Recently, Dave, a friend of mine, bought an electronic alarm clock that allows you to wake up to a variety of exotic souds–such as a thunderstorm, the seashore, chirping birds or foghorns.
A brochure on how to set the alarm and sounds came with the clock, but Dave couldn’t make sense of it. Luckily, there was an 800 number given in the brochure for those who needed to be walked through the necessary steps.
Dave called The Sharper Image and quickly found himself connected with a friendly and knowledgeable customer care rep. She clearly and patiently explained what he needed to do to choose which sounds he wanted to awaken to.
And then she just as patiently repeated that list of steps while he quickly typed them up for future use if he forgot what to do.
Such an approach to customer service is not new–just extremely rare these days.
In his 1970 bestselling primer on business management, Up the Organization, Robert Townsend offered the following advice to company CEOs: “Call yourself up.”
“When you’re off on a business trip or a vacation,” writes Townsend, “pretend you’re a customer. Telephone some part of your organization and ask for help. You’ll run into real horror shows.
“Don’t blow up and ask for name, rank and serial number–you’re trying to correct, not punish. Just suggest to the manager (through channels, dummy) that he make a few test calls himself.”
So how do you cope with agencies/companies that don’t care enough to help their customers?
I’ll address that in my next column.
2008 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANN COULTER, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMMUNISM, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE W. BUSH, GLENN BECK, HARRY S. TRUMAN, IRVING WALLACE, JOHN MCCAIN, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICHARD NIXON, RUSH LIMBAUGH, SALON, Sarah Palin, SEAN HANNITY, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SPIRO AGNEW, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TREASON, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on October 25, 2013 at 12:00 am
On March 9, 1954, Edward R. Murrow, the most respected broadcast journalist in America, assailed the “smear-and-fear” tactics of Wisconsin Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy.
The forum was Murrow’s highly-rated documentary series, “See It Now.” The truth of Murrow’s remarks has outlasted the briefness of that 30-minute program.
They could have been applied to the “lie and deny” methods of the Presidency of Richard M. Nixon.
And to the Red-baiting attacks made by Republicans against President Bill Clinton.
And to the ongoing character assaults made by right-wingers against President Barack Obama.
“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty,” warned Murrow in that broadcast. “We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.

Edward R. Murrow
“We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men—not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular….
“We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of a republic to abdicate his responsibilities….
“We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom, wherever it continues to exist in the world. But we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home….
“Cassius was right. ‘The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.’”
After Obama announced the death of Osama Bin Laden, most of the Republican slander-peddlers momentarily fell silent.
Still, the legacy of hate and fear-mongering goes on.
There is a good reason for this: Republicans have found, repeatedly, that attacking the patriotism of their opponents is an effective vote-getter:
- It hurtled Dwight Eisenhower into the White House and Republicans into Congress in 1952 and 1956.
- It elected Richard Nixon President in 1968 and 1972.
- It gave control of the White House to Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984.
- It gave it to George H.W. Bush in 1988.
- And even though Bill Clinton won the Presidency in 1992, it gave Republicans control of the Congress in 1994.
- It gave the White House to George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004.
- It gave control of the House to Republicans in 2010, thus undermining the financial and healthcare reforms planned by Obama.
And since the 2008 election of Barack Obama as President, Republicans have coupled their traditional “Treason!” slander with both subtle and outright appeals to racism.
Most Republicans refuse to acknowledge this, but author Will Bunch has not been so reticent. In his 2010 book, The Backlash, he writes:
“…The year that had [conservatives] so terrified was 2050. In that year, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the U.S. population would grow to some 399 million people–but only 49.8% would be white….”

This was given added weight by the 2008 election of Barack Obama:
“The Democratic upstart–and his legion of supporters among the nonwhite as well as the young–was a 9/11-sized jolt to the white masses already so worried about the cultural implications of immigration.
“The year 2050 suddenly wasn’t two generations away but right here knocking on the front door, with a dark face and that scary name: Barack Hussein Obama.
“Like a fire spreading across dry sagebrush, it took no effort for fear of The Other to leap from the Mexicans in front of the Wal-Mart to the man now inside the Oval Office.”
An author who predicted this very scenario was the best-selling novelist, Irving Wallace.
His 1964 novel, The Man, positing the ascent of the first black President, appeared 44 years before Obama’s election.
The plot: The President and Speaker of the House are killed in an overseas building collapse, and the Vice-President declines the office due to age and ill-health. As a result, Senate President pro tempore Douglas Dilman suddenly becomes the first black man to occupy the Oval Office.
His Presidency is marked by white racists, black political activists, and an attempted assassination. Later, he is impeached on false charges for firing the racist Secretary of State.

A moderate by nature, Dilman tries to rule as a color-blind President. But he is repeatedly confronted with the brutal truth about himself–and his critics: He is black, and they cannot forgive him for it.
Southern Senator Watson, upon learning that Dilman has succeeded to the Presidency, says: “The White House isn’t going to be white enough from now on.”
And Kay Eaton, who lusts for her husband, the Secretary of State, to become President, blames him for not pushing hard enough for it: “You’re just a kingmaker to a jigaboo.”
2008 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANN COULTER, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMMUNISM, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE W. BUSH, GLENN BECK, HARRY S. TRUMAN, JOHN MCCAIN, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICHARD NIXON, RUSH LIMBAUGH, SALON, Sarah Palin, SEAN HANNITY, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SPIRO AGNEW, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TREASON, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on October 24, 2013 at 1:50 am
On May 7, 2012, GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney attended a town-hall meeting in Euclid, Ohio.
“We have a president right now who is operating outside the construction of our Constitution,” a female attendee told Romney.
As the audience applauded, she continued: “And I do agree he should be tried for treason.
“But I wanna know what you are going to be able to do to help restore balance between the three branches of government and what you’re going to be able to do to restore our Constitution in this country?”
Unlike John McCain, who in 2008 memorably corrected a woman who declared Obama was “an Arab,” Romney didn’t issue such a correction. Instead, he chose to simply address the question.
Since the end of World War 11, Republicans have regularly hurled the charge of “treason” against anyone who dared to run against them for office or think other than Republican-sponsored thoughts.
Republicans had been locked out of the White House from 1933 to 1952, during the administrations of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman.
Determined to regain the Presidency by any means, they found that attacking the integrity of their fellow Americans a highly effective tactic.
During the 1950s, Wisconsin Senator Joseph R. McCarthy rode a wave of paranoia to national prominence. On February 9, 1950, he claimed:
“The State Department is infested with communists. I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department.”

Joseph McCarthy
After four years of such frenzied attacks on Congress, the State Department and respected journalists such as Edward R. Murrow, McCarthy finally overstepped himself. He accused the United States Army of being an active hotbed for Communists.
At the Army-McCarthy hearings, McCarthy’s credibility was forever destroyed. He was finally censured by his fellow Senators and disappeared into anonymity, alcoholism and death in 1957.
The fact that McCarthy never uncovered one actual case of treason was conveniently overlooked during his lifetime.
And today, right-wing columnists like Ann Coulter try to rehabilitate his memory–just as right-wingers in Russia still try to rehabilitate the memory of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.
Nevertheless, the success of McCarthy’s treason-charged rhetoric proved too alluring for other Republicans to resist. Among those who have greatly profited from hurling similar charges are:
- President Richard Nixon
- His vice president, Spiro Agnew
- Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich
- Former Congressman Dick Armey
- President George W. Bush
- Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin
- Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann
- Rush Limbaugh
- Glenn Beck
- Sean Hannity
- Bill O’Reilly.
The election of Barack Obama pushed the “treason chorus” to new heights of infamy. With no political scandal (such as Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky) to fasten on, the bureaucracy of the Republican Party deliberately promoted the slander that Obama was not an American citizen.
From this there could be only one conclusion: That he was an illegitimate President, and should be removed from office.
During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Republicans charged that Obama was really a Muslim non-citizen who intended to sell out America’s security to his Muslim “masters.”
And this smear campaign continued throughout his Presidency.
To the dismay of his enemies, Obama–in the course of a single week–dramatically proved the falsity of both charges.
On April 27, 2011, he released the long-form of his Hawaii birth certificate.

The long-form version of President Obama’s birth certificate
“We do not have time for this kind of silliness,” said Obama at a press conference, speaking as a father might to a roomful of spiteful children. “We have better stuff to do. I have got better stuff to do. We have got big problems to solve.
“We are not going to be able to do it if we are distracted, we are not going to be able to do it if we spend time vilifying each other…if we just make stuff up and pretend that facts are not facts, we are not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by side shows and carnival barkers.”
And on May 1, he announced the solving of one of those “big problems”: Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, had been tracked down and shot dead by elite U.S. Navy SEALS in Pakistan.
Of course, Obama was only the latest Democratic President to be attacked as “unpatriotic.”
For more than a half-century, Republicans have accused their Democratic opponents of treason to gain and retain political power in America.
ABC NEWS, ALVARO OBREGON, ANCHOR BABIES, CBS NEWS, CNN, DREAM ACT, EMILIANO ZAPATA, FACEBOOK, FELIPE CALDERON, FRANCISCO MADERO, illegal immigration, Kamala Harris, LA RAZA, MEXICAN REVOLUTION, MEXICO, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, PANCHO VILLA, RACIAL PROFILING, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, VENUSTIANO CARRANZA
In Bureaucracy, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary, Uncategorized on September 26, 2013 at 12:02 am
If Americans decide they truly want to control access to their own borders, there is a realistic way to accomplish this.

(1) The Justice Department should vigorously attack the “sanctuary movement” that officially thwarts the immigration laws of the United States.
Among the 31 “sanctuary cities” of this country: Washington, D.C.; New York City; Los Angeles; Chicago; San Francisco; Santa Ana; San Diego; Salt Lake City; Phoenix; Dallas; Houston; Austin; Detroit; Jersey City; Minneapolis; Miami; Denver; Baltimore; Seattle; Portland, Oregon; New Haven, Connecticut; and Portland, Maine.
These cities have adopted “sanctuary” ordinances that do not allow municipal funds or resources to be used to enforce federal immigration laws, usually by not allowing police or municipal employees to inquire about one’s immigration status.
(2) The most effective way to combat this movement: Indict the highest-ranking officials of those cities who have actively violated Federal immigration laws.
In San Francisco, for example, former District Attorney Kamala Harris—who is now California’s Attorney General—created a secret program called Back on Track, which provided training for jobs that illegal aliens could not legally hold.
She also prevented Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from deporting even those illegal aliens convicted of a felony.
(3) Indicting such officials would be comparable to the way President Andrew Jackson dealt with the threat South Carolinians once made to “nullify” any Federal laws they didn’t like.
Jackson quashed that threat by making one of his own: To lead an army into that State and purge all who dared defy the laws of the Federal Government.
(4) Even if some indicted officials escaped conviction, the results would prove worthwhile.
City officials would be forced to spend huge sums of their own money for attorneys and face months or even years of prosecution.
And this, in turn, would send a devastating warning to officials in other “sanctuary cities” that the same fate lies in store for them.
(5) CEOs whose companies–like Wal-Mart–systematically employ illegal aliens should be held directly accountable for the actions of their subordinates.
They should be indicted by the Justice Department under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, the way Mafia bosses are prosecuted for ordering their own subordinates to commit crimes.
Upon conviction, the CEO should be sentenced to a mandatory prison term of at least twenty years.
This would prove a more effective remedy for combating illegal immigration than stationing tens of thousands of soldiers on the U.S./Mexican border. CEOs forced to account for their subordinates’ actions would take drastic steps to ensure that their companies strictly complied with Federal immigration laws.
Without employers luring illegal aliens at a fraction of the money paid to American workers, the flood of such illegal job-seekers would quickly dry up.
(6) The Government should stop granting automatic citizenship to “anchor babies” born to illegal aliens in the United States.
A comparable practice would be allowing bank robbers who had eluded the FBI to keep their illegally-obtained loot.
A person who violates the bank robbery laws of the United States is legally prosecutable for bank robbery, whether he’s immediately arrested or remains uncaught for years. The same should be true for those born illegally within this country.
If they’re not here legally at the time of birth, they should not be considered citizens and should–like their parents–be subject to deportation.
(7) The United States Government–from the President on down–should scrap its apologetic tone on the right to control its national borders.
The Mexican Government doesn’t hesitate to apply strict laws to those immigrating to Mexico. And it feels no need to apologize for this.
Neither should we.
(8) Voting materials and ballots should be published in one language: English.
In Mexico, voting materials are published in one language–Spanish.
Throughout the United States, millions of Mexican illegals refuse to learn English and yet demand that voting materials and ballots be made available to them in Spanish.
(9) Those who are not legal citizens of the United States should not be allowed to vote in its elections.
In Mexico, those who are not Mexican citizens are not allowed to participate in the country’s elections.
The Mexican Government doesn’t consider itself racist for strictly enforcing its immigration laws.
The United States Government should not consider itself racist for insisting on the right to do the same.
(10) The United States should impose economic and even military sanctions against countries–such as China and Mexico–whose citizens make up the bulk of illegal aliens.
Mexico, for example, uses its American border to rid itself of those who might demand major reforms in the country’s political and economic institutions.
Such nations must learn that dumping their unwanteds on the United States now comes at an unaffordably high price. Otherwise those dumpings will continue.
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, AMERICAN EMPIRE, BILL CLINTON, BUREAUCRACY, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATHEWS, CNN, DWIGHT EISENHOWER, FACEBOOK, FBI, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, GEORGE W. BUSH, GERALD R. FORD, HARRY S. TRUMAN, JIMMY CARTER, JOHN F. KENNEDY, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NIGEL HAMILTON, OSAMA BIN LADEN, REPUBLICAN PARTY, RIAHCRD M. NIXON, ROMAN EMPIRE, SEPTEMBER 11, SUETONIUS, TERRORISM, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE TWELVE CAESARS, TWITTER
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 13, 2013 at 12:00 am
Colonel Brandt: “I wonder what we’ll do after we lose the war.”
Captain Kiesel: “Prepare for the next one.”
–“The Cross of Iron,” film by Sam Peckinpah
On September 12, 2001, President George W. Bush attended a meeting of the National Security Council.
“Why shouldn’t we go against Iraq, not just Al-Qaeda?” demanded Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense.
Vice President Dick Cheney enthusiastically agreed.
Secretary of State Colin Powell then pointed out there was absolutely no evidence that Iraq had had anything to do with 9/11 or Al-Qaeda. And he added: “The American people want us to do something about Al-Qaeda”–-not Iraq.
On November 21, 2001, only 10 weeks after 9/11, Bush told Rumsfeld: It’s time to turn to Iraq.

Liars Club: Condoleeza Rice, Dick Cheney, George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld
Bush and his war-hungry Cabinet officials knew that Americans demanded vengeance on Al-Qaeda’s mastermind, Osama bin Laden, and not Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein,. So they repeatedly fabricated “links” between the two:
- Saddam had worked hand-in-glove with Bin Laden to plan 9/11.
- Saddam was harboring and supporting Al-Qaeda throughout Iraq.
- Saddam, with help from Al-Qaeda, was scheming to build a nuclear bomb.
Yet as early as September 22, 2001, Bush had received a classified President’s Daily Brief intelligence report, which stated that there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to 9/11.
The report added that there was scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al-Qaeda.
Even more important: Saddam had tried to monitor Al Qaeda through his intelligence service-–because he saw Al-Qaeda and other theocratic radical Islamist organizations as a potential threat to his secular regime.
Bush administration officials repeatedly claimed that Iraq possessed huge quantities of chemical and biological weapons, in violation of UN resolutions. And they further claimed that US intelligence agencies had determined:
- the precise locations where these weapons were stored;
- the identities of those involved in their production; and
- the military orders issued by Saddam Hussein for their use in the event of war.
Among other lies stated as fact by members of the Bush administration:
- Iraq had sought uranium from Niger, in west Africa;
- Thousands of aluminum tubes imported by Iraq could be used in centrifuges to create enriched uranium;
- Iraq had up to 20 long-range Scud missiles, prohibited under UN sanctions;
- Iraq had massive stockpiles of chemical and biological agents, including nerve gas, anthrax and botulinum toxin;
- Saddam Hussein had issued chemical weapons to front-line troops who would use them when US forces crossed into Iraq.
Consider the following:
August 26, 2002: Cheney told the Veterans of Foreign Wars, “There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies and against us.”
September 8, 2002: National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice said on CNN: ”There is certainly evidence that Al-Qaeda people have been in Iraq. There is certainly evidence that Saddam Hussein cavorts with terrorists.”
September 18, 2002: Rumsfeld told the House Armed Services Committee, “We do know that the Iraqi regime has chemical and biological weapons. His regime has amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of chemical weapons—including VX, sarin, cyclosarin and mustard gas.”
October 7, 2002: Bush declared in a nationally televised speech in Cincinnati that Iraq “possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons.”
March 16, 2003: Cheney declared on NBC’s “Meet the Press”: “We believe [Saddam Hussein] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.”
March 30, 2003: On ABC’s “This Week” program, 10 days into the war, Rumsfeld said: “We know where they [weapons of mass destruction] are.”
Bush never regretted his decision to invade Iraq, which occurred on March 29, 2003.
Even as American occupying forces repeatedly failed to turn up any evidence of “weapons of mass destruction” (WMDs), Bush and his minions claimed the invasion a good thing.
In fact, Bush-–who hid out the Vietnam war in the Texas Air National Guard-–even joked publicly about the absence of WMDs.
He did so at a White House Correspondents dinner on March 24, 2004-–one year after he had started the war.
To Bush, the non-existent WMDs were nothing more than the butt of a joke that night. While an overhead projector displayed photos of a puzzled-looking Bush searching around the Oval Office, Bush recited a comedy routine.
Click here: Bush laughs at no WMD in Iraq – YouTube
“Those weapons of mass destruction have gotta be somewhere,” Bush laughed, while a photo showed him poking around the corners in the Oval Office.
“Nope-–no weapons over there! Maybe they’re under here,” he said, as a photo showed him looking under a desk.
Meanwhile, an assembly of wealthy, pampered men and women–-the elite of America’s media and political classes–-laughed heartily during Bush’s performance.
Ultimately, the war that Bush had deliberately provoked would
- Take the lives of 4,486 Americans;
- Cost the United States Treasury at least $810 billion; and
- Kill at least 116,000 Iraqi civilians.
9/11, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM, ANDERSON COOPER, ANTI-COMMUNISM, ARTHUR MILLER, BILL CLINTON, CBS NEWS, CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, CHINA, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, DICK CHENEY, DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, HARRY S. TRUMAN, HEINRICH HIMMLER, HERMAN CAIN, HERMAN GORING, HILLARY CLINTON, HUMA ABEDIN, JEWS, JIMMY CARTER, JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JOHN STEINBECK, JOSEPH GOEBBELS, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, JOSEPH STALIN, KGB, LIZ CHENEY, LUCILLE BALL, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MIKE HUCKABEE, MITT ROMNEY, MSNBC, MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, MUSLIMS, NAZI GERMANY, NAZI PARTY, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, PETE SEEGER, RED SCARE, REINHARD HEYDRICH, REPUBLICAN PARTY, RICHARD NIXON, RICK SANTORUM, Ronald Reagan, SENATOR MIKE ENZI, SOVIET UNION, SS, THE AMERICAN CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, WYOMING
THE POLITICS OF SCAPEGOATING: PART THREE (END)
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on November 28, 2013 at 12:00 amWith the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the Republican Party went into a tailspin of dismay.
For almost 50 years, Republicans had conjured up The Red Bogeyman to scare voters into sending them to Congress and the White House.
But now that the “workers’ paradise” had disappeared, Americans seemed to lose interest in the Communist Menace.
True, the People’s Republic of China remained, and its increasing economic clout would challenge the United States well into the 21st century. But Americans didn’t seem to fear the Red Chinese as they had the Red Russians.
What was the Republican Party to do to lure voters?
On September 11, 2001, the answer arrived–in two highjacked jetliners that crashed into the World Trade Center in New York and one that struck the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.
Exit The Red Bogeyman. Enter The Maniacal Muslim.
Consider:
And on July 13, Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) sent letters to the Inspectors General of the Departments of
“The purpose of these letters,” wrote Bachmann, was to “request a multi-department investigation into potential Muslim Brotherhood infiltration into the United States Government.”
Michelle Bachmann
Bachmann further asserted in her letter to the State Department that Huma Abedin, deputy chief of staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
And the evidence for this?
The Center for Security Policy’s claim that Abedin’s father (who died when she was a teenager), mother and brother are “connected” to the organization.
And what is the Center of Security Policy? A private organization subsidized by donors to neo-conservative causes.
In a separate letter, Bachmann demanded to know how Abedin received her security clearance.
Among the co-signers of Bachmann’s letter to the Inspectors General were:
When pressed for their evidence of “a vast Muslim conspiracy,” right-wing accusers usually refuse to provide any.
An example of this occurred during an August 13, 2010 interview between Gohmert and CNN’s Anderson Cooper:
COOPER: What research? Can you tell us about the research?
GOHMERT: You are attacking the messenger, Anderson, you are better than this. You used to be good. You used to find that there was a problem and you would go after it.
COOPER: Sir, I am asking you for evidence of something that you said on the floor of the House.
GOHMERT: I did, and you listen, this is a problem. If you would spend as much time looking into the problem as you would have been trying to come after me and belittle me this week –
COOPER: Sir, do you want to offer any evidence? I’m giving you an opportunity to say what research and evidence you have. You’ve offered none, other than yelling.
Nor did Gohmert offer any evidence that evening.
Of course, the ultimate Republican Muslim slander is that President Barack Obama–a longtime Christian–is himself a Muslim.
No doubt Republicans feel totally safe in making these attacks, since Muslims comprise only 1% of the American population.
This has long been a hallmark of right-wing attacks–to go after a minority that cannot effectively defend itself.
Thus, Adolf Hitler attacked the Jews of Germany.
And Republicans have successively attacked blacks, Hispanics and gays–until each group became politically influential enough to defeat Republican candidates.
Today, most right-wing politicians at least grudgingly court all of these groups.
When Muslims become a significant political force in their own right, the Right will court them, too. And then move on to yet another helpless scapegoat to blame for America’s troubles.
Share this: