Israel rejects truce call, attacks Gaza

Israel rejects truce call, attacks Gaza


Print By IBRAHIM BARZAK and MATTI FRIEDMAN, Associated Press Writers Ibrahim Barzak

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip – Israel rejected international pressure to suspend its air offensive against Palestinian militants whose rocket barrages are striking close to the Israeli heartland, sending warplanes Wednesday to demolish smuggling tunnels that are the lifeline of Gaza's Islamic Hamas rulers.

The diplomatic action was set in motion by the scale of destruction in Gaza since Israel unleashed its campaign Saturday, and a casualty toll that Gaza officials now put at 390 dead and some 1,600 wounded. Hamas says some 200 uniformed members of Hamas security forces have been killed, and the U.N. says at least 60 Palestinian civilians have died. Four Israelis have been killed by militant rocket fire, including three civilians.

The chief of Israel's internal security services, Yuval Diskin, told Cabinet ministers Wednesday that Hamas' ability to rule had been "badly impaired." Weapons development facilities have been "completely wiped out" and the network of smuggling tunnels has been badly damaged, a participant in the meeting quoted Diskin as saying.

He spoke on condition of anonymity because the meeting was closed to the media.

Overnight, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert discussed a 48-hour truce proposal floated by France with his foreign and defense ministers. The meeting ended with a decision to continue the punishing aerial campaign.

"Giving Hamas a respite just to regroup, rearm is a mistake," Olmert spokesman Mark Regev said. "The pressure on the Hamas military machine must continue."

Calls for an immediate cease-fire have also come from the United States, the European Union, the United Nations and Russia. President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice personally called leaders in the Middle East on Tuesday to press for a durable solution.

Underlying the Israeli decision to keep fighting are the mightier weapons that Hamas has smuggled into Gaza through underground tunnels along the border with Egypt. Previously, militants had relied on crude homemade rockets that could fly just 12 miles to terrorize Israeli border communities. Now, they are firing industrial-grade weapons that have dramatically expanded their range and put more than one-tenth of Israel's population in their sights.

More than two dozens rockets and mortar shells were fired by mid-day Wednesday, including five that hit in and around the major southern Israeli city of Beersheba, 22 miles from Gaza. One hit an empty school. Another landed in a small farming community about 20 miles southeast of Tel Aviv. No serious casualties were reported.

School was canceled in large swaths of Israel's south because of the rocket threat. The 18,000 students at Ben-Gurion University in Beersheba, southern Israel's only university, were also told to stay home.

Early on Wednesday, Israeli aircraft pounded smuggling tunnels under the Gaza-Egypt border in another attempt to sever the lifeline that keeps Hamas in power by supplying weapons, food and fuel. Israel and Egypt blockaded Gaza after Hamas violently seized control of the territory in June 2007 and have cracked open their borders only to let in limited amounts of humanitarian aid.

A huge explosion rocked a tunnel that housed a fuel pipeline and aircraft also smashed the house of a smuggling kingpin. In all, two tunnels were destroyed in the raid, Egyptian security officials in Rafah said.

An Egyptian official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak to the media, said Israel has destroyed 120 tunnels since the aerial campaign began. According to conservative estimates, there were at least 200 tunnels before Israeli warplanes began striking.

In Gaza City, powerful airstrikes sent high-rise apartment buildings swaying and showered streets with broken glass and pulverized concrete. The Israeli military said government buildings were hit, including an office of Gaza's Hamas prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh.

A Palestinian medic was killed and two others were wounded when an Israeli missile struck next to their ambulance east of Gaza City, Palestinians said. The Israeli military said it did not know of the incident.

Israeli navy ships also fired at Hamas positions along the coastline.

Diskin, the Israeli security services chief, said Hamas was trying to smuggle out some of its activists to Egypt through tunnels that were still passable. Other militants were hiding in Gaza hospitals, some disguised as doctors and nurses, and in mosques, where militants had set up command and control centers, Diskin said.

Although Hamas leaders have been driven underground, spokesman Taher Nunu said the Gaza government was functioning and had met over the past few days.

"What our people want is clear: an immediate stop to all kinds of aggression, the end of the siege by all means, the opening of all border crossings, and international guarantees that the occupation will not renew this terrorist war again," Nunu said in a statement.

Israel has been massing troops and armor along the Gaza border in an indication the air campaign could morph into a ground operation. The government approved a plan to call up an additional 2,500 reserve soldiers late Tuesday, following a decision earlier this week to authorize a call-up of 6,700 soldiers. The call-ups have yet to be carried out.

In two phone calls to Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Monday and Tuesday, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner appealed to him to consider a truce to allow time for humanitarian relief supplies to enter Gaza, two senior officials in Barak's office said.

While rejecting the truce, Israel said it would allow 2,000 tons of food and medical supplies to enter Gaza on Wednesday, in addition to 4,000 tons the military says have been allowed in since the offensive began. Several dozen chronically ill Gazans have also been authorized to enter Israel for treatment Wednesday, the military said.

The U.N. planned to resume food aid distribution on Thursday, after halting it two weeks ago because of shortages caused by the blockade. Most of Gaza's 1.4 million residents rely on U.N. food handouts.

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni was to travel Thursday to Paris for talks with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who has put his growing international stature to use in other conflict zones, most recently to help halt fighting between Russia and Georgia in August.

Kouchner said Wednesday he and Sarkozy are considering traveling to Israel next week.

A Hamas spokesman said militants wouldn't halt their rocket and mortar fire until Israel ended its blockade. "If they halt the aggression and the blockade, then Hamas will study these suggestions," Mushir Masri said.

Israel fears that opening crossings with Gaza would allow Hamas — which remains officially committed to Israel's destruction — to strengthen its hold on the territory even further.

___

Associated Press Writer Matti Friedman reported from Jerusalem and Sarah El Deeb reported from Cairo.

Stay True to The 'Integrity' Course, America -- and Illinois -- Don't Let The 'Race' and 'Guilt' Cards Sway You

Stay true to the 'integrity' course, America -- and Illinois.

Don't be led astray, and allow yourself to be confused and/or conflicted by the introduction of the 'race card' and the 'guilt card' into the 'Blagojevich-Illinois Senator position-corruption-soap opera-sweepstakes.

The two are totally separate issues and need to be kept totally separate in order to restore integrity and ethics to the nomination -- or election -- of Obama's vacated Illinois Senator position.

Blagojevich is political poison -- and anything and everything he touches while he somehow manages to hold onto his Illinois Govenor position -- is likewise poisoned.

Numerous -- probably most -- people have gotten it right so far. Don't lose your resolve and/or your mental toughness.

......................................................................

The Illinois secretary of state said he won't certify the appointment of Burris, the lieutenant governor called the selection an insult, Senate Democrats won't seat him and even the president-elect was cold to the nomination.

"We believe in clean government, and Rod Blagojevich has unclean hands," said Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn, who called Blagojevich's actions an "insult to the people of Illinois."

................................................................................


Blagojevich is a smart human manipulator. By introducing the 'race' and 'guilt' cards to his own created soap opera, he is attempting to do what the Republicans tried to do during the last election -- divide the American people. Divide and conquer. And Blagojevich somehow manages to crawl up the middle. Or so his attempt -- once again -- at political manipulation seems to run.

And it's partly working.

For anyone watching CNN last night, we heard two (African-American) political commentators play up the race card last night... There are no current African-American Senators. That's a disgrace...Blah, blah, blah...Let Burris in as the Illinois Senator...

It may or may not be a disgrace. (I think it is more a process of slow evolution where things have already changed hugely -- and will continue to change, continue to evolve in the way that some people want to see happen yesterday or immediately today.) But the issue of African-Americans in The Senate is an entirely separate issue that must not be dragged into this political soap opera. An African-American Senator -- or any other senator for that matter: male, female, and/or any ethnic-cultural background -- must be either nominated, or voted in, by the proper American democratic process(es).

Indeed, I am not at all sure that a Senator being nominated by a Governor is a very good democratic process at all. It is a very quick path to political manipulation and exploitation, an event that we have witnessed here first hand through Blagojevich's own words, and it is an event that we are still witnessing first hand in Blagojevich's political nomination of Roland Burris.

Let's get this impeachment process rolling -- and finished (assuming of course he is guilty which everything points to the fact that he is) -- as quickly as possible. Before Blagojevich can make even more of a mockery out of American -- and Illinois -- politics than he already has.

As far as Burris goes, he has poisoned himself too. He is no longer -- if he ever was -- 'honest' and 'innocent' of everything he is trying to distance himself from as far as his relationship with Blagojevich.

Again, we saw it on CNN last night. A speech by Burris -- I'm not sure how long ago (probably a week to a month ago) -- in which he claimed that he was 'appalled' by Blagojevich's (corrupt) behavior. Well, obviously, he is not so appalled by Blagojevich's behavior that he is not still willing to accept the Illinois Senator position from him. I call this behavior on Burris' part -- political hypocrisy. Push Blagojevich away with one hand, and then turn around and accept the benefits Blagojevich is offering him with the other hand. That is exactly the type of American Governor, Senator, White House, and Wall Street -- political-economic behavior that I -- and I believe most of us, meaning Obama, his new political team, and the American people -- are trying to stop.

Look. I don't care -- and DGBN Philosophy doesn't care -- if you are white, black, brown, or blue. It's what comes out of your mouth that counts -- and your actions which may or may not be congruent with what you say. Similarily with me and other editorial writers, it is what we commit to paper or our blogsite that counts and whether it means anything in our day-to-day life.

You stand by your integrity. Or you die by your lack of it. It is your values and your choices that count.

Everything else is a 'dog and pony show'.

So stay true to the 'integrity' course, America -- and Illinois.

Don't be distracted by Blagojevich's dog and pony show.

-- dgbn, Dec. 30th-31st, 2008.

-- David Gordon Bain

-- Democracy Goes Beyond Narcissism

Defiant Ill. governor fills Obama's Senate seat

Defiant Ill. governor fills Obama's Senate seat

Print By DEANNA BELLANDI, Associated Press Writer Deanna Bellandi, Associated Press Writer – 11 mins ago (Tues. Dec. 30th/08)

– A defiant Gov. Rod Blagojevich on Tuesday named a black political trailblazer to Barack Obama's Senate seat, a surprise move that put the governor's opponents in the uncomfortable position of trying to block his choice from becoming the Senate's only black member. Blagojevich's appointment of former state Attorney General Roland Burris injected race into the drama surrounding the embattled governor, who repeatedly sought to distance his selection from charges that he tried to sell the seat to the highest bidder.

"Please don't allow the allegations against me to taint a good an honest man," the governor said, turning to the smiling 71-year-old standing by his side.

"This is about Roland Burris as a U.S. senator, not about the governor who made the appointment."

Burris was the first African-American elected to major statewide office in Illinois, serving as comptroller and running for governor three times — the last time losing to Blagojevich.

He said he has no connection to the charges against Blagojevich, who was arrested earlier this month.

Even before the announcement, which was leaked several hours before, the governor's move ran into opposition.

Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White, who must certify the appointment, said Tuesday he will not do so. And Senate leaders reiterated that they would not accept anyone appointed by Blagojevich.

In a statement Tuesday, Senate Democrats maintained that Blagojevich should not make the appointment because doing so would be unfair to Burris and to the people of Illinois.

"It is truly regrettable that despite requests from all 50 Democratic senators and public officials throughout Illinois, Gov. Blagojevich would take the imprudent step of appointing someone to the United States Senate who would serve under a shadow and be plagued by questions of impropriety," the statement said.

"Under these circumstances, anyone appointed by Gov. Blagojevich cannot be an effective representative of the people of Illinois and, as we have said, will not be seated by the Democratic caucus."

Senate leaders, who were scattered for the holidays, immediately convened a conference call. Some involved in the call were wary of being seen as denying a black man a seat in a chamber where there are no blacks, according to two officials knowledgeable about the talks who requested anonymity in order to speak freely.

"We say this without prejudice toward Roland Burris' ability, and we respect his years of public service," the leaders wrote. But the issue is not about Burris, they said. "It is about the integrity of a governor accused of attempting to sell this United States Senate seat."

Rep. Bobby Rush, an Illinois Democrat who was invited to speak at Blagojevich's news conference, urged Senate leaders not to block Burris. In fact, he almost dared them to try to stop Burris' appointment.

"There is no rhyme or reason why he should not be seated in the U.S. Senate," Rush said. "I don't think any U.S. senator ... wants to go on record to deny one African-American from being seated in the U.S. Senate."

He told reporters that Senate Democrats should not "hang and lynch the appointee as you try to castigate the appointer."

Blagojevich was arrested Dec. 9 after federal prosecutors allegedly recorded conversations in which he discussed appointing someone Obama favored in exchange for a position in the new president's Cabinet or naming someone favored by a union if he got a high-level union job.

The governor has faced a flood of calls for his resignation, and the Illinois House has begun impeachment proceedings. He maintains his innocence, and has vowed to stay in office.

Blagojevich's own lawyer said recently that there would be no point in the governor naming someone to the Senate because leaders there would reject his appointment.

Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn said Blagojevich's decision to appoint Burris is an "insult to the people of Illinois."

"We believe in clean government, and Rod Blagojevich has unclean hands," Quinn said.

Democratic state Rep. Mary Flowers, a member of the impeachment committee, said Burris is qualified to sit in the Senate, but she is not swayed in her decision concerning impeachment.

"One has nothing to do with the other," Flowers said.

White, who handles the state's paperwork, said he would not formally certify any appointment made by Blagojevich "because of the current cloud of controversy surround the governor."

It's not clear whether White's refusal would be enough to prevent a Blagojevich appointment from taking effect.

Burris is a native of Centralia in southern Illinois who graduated from Southern Illinois University before earning his law degree from Howard University.

He served as Illinois' comptroller from 1979 to 1991 and as the state's attorney general from 1991 to 1995. He also served as vice chairman of the Democratic National Committee from 1985 to 1989.

More recently, however, Burris has had a string of political disappointments.

He lost campaigns for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in 1994, 1998 and 2002 — the last time losing to Blagojevich. In 1995, he was badly beaten when challenging Chicago Mayor Richard Daley in the primary.

Burris has been a consistent donor to Blagojevich in recent years. Burris donated $1,000 to the Friends of Blagojevich fund in 2005, $1,500 in 2007 and $1,000 in June 2008, according to Illinois campaign finance data.

___

Associated Press writers Anne Flaherty, Laurie Kellman and Matt Apuzzo contributed to this report from Washington.

............................................................................

AP study finds $1.6B went to bailed-out bank execs

AP study finds $1.6B went to bailed-out bank execs

Digg Facebook Newsvine del.icio.us Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Bookmarks Print By FRANK BASS and RITA BEAMISH, Associated Press Writers Frank Bass And Rita Beamish, Associated Press Writers – 1 hr 8 mins ago (Dec. 21st, 2008)

Banks that are getting taxpayer bailouts awarded their top executives nearly $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses, and other benefits last year, an Associated Press analysis reveals.

The rewards came even at banks where poor results last year foretold the economic crisis that sent them to Washington for a government rescue. Some trimmed their executive compensation due to lagging bank performance, but still forked over multimillion-dollar executive pay packages.

Benefits included cash bonuses, stock options, personal use of company jets and chauffeurs, home security, country club memberships and professional money management, the AP review of federal securities documents found.

The total amount given to nearly 600 executives would cover bailout costs for many of the 116 banks that have so far accepted tax dollars to boost their bottom lines.

Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services committee and a long-standing critic of executive largesse, said the bonuses tallied by the AP review amount to a bribe "to get them to do the jobs for which they are well paid in the first place.

"Most of us sign on to do jobs and we do them best we can," said Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat. "We're told that some of the most highly paid people in executive positions are different. They need extra money to be motivated!"

The AP compiled total compensation based on annual reports that the banks file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The 116 banks have so far received $188 billion in taxpayer help. Among the findings:

_The average paid to each of the banks' top executives was $2.6 million in salary, bonuses and benefits.

_Lloyd Blankfein, president and chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs, took home nearly $54 million in compensation last year. The company's top five executives received a total of $242 million.

This year, Goldman will forgo cash and stock bonuses for its seven top-paid executives. They will work for their base salaries of $600,000, the company said. Facing increasing concern by its own shareholders on executive payments, the company described its pay plan last spring as essential to retain and motivate executives "whose efforts and judgments are vital to our continued success, by setting their compensation at appropriate and competitive levels." Goldman spokesman Ed Canaday declined to comment beyond that written report.

The New York-based company on Dec. 16 reported its first quarterly loss since it went public in 1999. It received $10 billion in taxpayer money on Oct. 28.

_Even where banks cut back on pay, some executives were left with seven- or eight-figure compensation that most people can only dream about. Richard D. Fairbank, the chairman of Capital One Financial Corp., took a $1 million hit in compensation after his company had a disappointing year, but still got $17 million in stock options. The McLean, Va.-based company received $3.56 billion in bailout money on Nov. 14.

_John A. Thain, chief executive officer of Merrill Lynch, topped all corporate bank bosses with $83 million in earnings last year. Thain, a former chief operating officer for Goldman Sachs, took the reins of the company in December 2007, avoiding the blame for a year in which Merrill lost $7.8 billion. Since he began work late in the year, he earned $57,692 in salary, a $15 million signing bonus and an additional $68 million in stock options.

Like Goldman, Merrill got $10 billion from taxpayers on Oct. 28.

The AP review comes amid sharp questions about the banks' commitment to the goals of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), a law designed to buy bad mortgages and other troubled assets. Last month, the Bush administration changed the program's goals, instructing the Treasury Department to pump tax dollars directly into banks in a bid to prevent wholesale economic collapse.

The program set restrictions on some executive compensation for participating banks, but did not limit salaries and bonuses unless they had the effect of encouraging excessive risk to the institution. Banks were barred from giving golden parachutes to departing executives and deducting some executive pay for tax purposes.

Banks that got bailout funds also paid out millions for home security systems, private chauffeured cars, and club dues. Some banks even paid for financial advisers. Wells Fargo of San Francisco, which took $25 billion in taxpayer bailout money, gave its top executives up to $20,000 each to pay personal financial planners.

At Bank of New York Mellon Corp., chief executive Robert P. Kelly's stipend for financial planning services came to $66,748, on top of his $975,000 salary and $7.5 million bonus. His car and driver cost $178,879. Kelly also received $846,000 in relocation expenses, including help selling his home in Pittsburgh and purchasing one in Manhattan, the company said.

Goldman Sachs' tab for leased cars and drivers ran as high as $233,000 per executive. The firm told its shareholders this year that financial counseling and chauffeurs are important in giving executives more time to focus on their jobs.

JPMorgan Chase chairman James Dimon ran up a $211,182 private jet travel tab last year when his family lived in Chicago and he was commuting to New York. The company got $25 billion in bailout funds.

Banks cite security to justify personal use of company aircraft for some executives. But Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., questioned that rationale, saying executives visit many locations more vulnerable than the nation's security-conscious commercial air terminals.

Sherman, a member of the House Financial Services Committee, said pay excesses undermine development of good bank economic policies and promote an escalating pay spiral among competing financial institutions — something particularly hard to take when banks then ask for rescue money.

He wants them to come before Congress, like the automakers did, and spell out their spending plans for bailout funds.

"The tougher we are on the executives that come to Washington, the fewer will come for a bailout," he said.

___

Subject: Our Son to the President of General Motors

(Thanks Noreen, for passing on this email to me. -- dave)

....................................................................


Subject: Our Son to the President of General Motors


Gregg, May I have your permission to circulate your letter? Love you,
```````````````````````````````
I can't believe the feedback I have gotten on it – I have customers asking if they can send it to everyone they know – I really just meant it to be a 2 line response, but found my spleen just flowing…Please do spread the word. Gregg
`````````````````````````````````````````
Abridged letter from Troy Clarke, President of General Motors - followed by a response from our son, Gregory Knox:
Dear Employee,
Next week, Congress and the current Administration will determine whether to provide immediate support to the domestic auto industry to help it through one of the most difficult economic times in our nation's history. Your elected officials must hear from all of us now on why this support is critical to our continuing the progress we began prior to the global financial crisis......................As an employee, you have a lot at stake and continue to be one of our most effective and passionate voices. I know GM can count on you to have your voice heard.
Thank you for your urgent action and ongoing support.
Troy Clarke
President
General Motors North America
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From Gregory Knox,
In response to your request to call legislators and ask for a bailout for the United States automakers please consider the following, and please also pass this onto Troy Clark, the president of General Motors North America for me.
You are both infected with the same entitlement mentality that has bred like cancerous germs in UAW halls for the last countless decades, and whose plague is now sweeping the nation, awaiting our new "messiah" to wave his magical wand and make all our problems go away, while at the same time allowing our once great nation to keep "living the dream"…
The dream is over!
The dream that we can ignore the consumer for years while management myopically focuses on its personal rewards packages at the same time that our factories have been filled with the worlds most overpaid, arrogant, ignorant and laziest entitlement minded "laborers" without paying the price for these atrocities…and that still the masses will line up to buy our products
Don't tell me I'm wrong. Don't accuse me of not knowing of what I speak. I have called on Ford,GM ,Chrysler,TRW,Delphi,Kelsey Hayes, American Axle and countless other automotive OEM's and Tier ones for 3 decades now throughout the Midwest and what I've seen over the years in these union shops can only be described as disgusting.
Mr Clark, the president of General Motors, states:
There is widespread sentiment in this country, our government and especially in the media that the current crisis is completely the result of bad management. It is not…
You're right – it's not JUST management…how about the electricians who walk around the plants like lords in feudal times, making people wait on them for countless hours while they drag ass…so they can come in on the weekend and make double and triple time…for a job they easily could have done within their normal 40 hour week
How about the line workers who threaten newbies with all kinds of scare tactics…for putting out too many parts on a shift…and for being too productive (mustn't expose the lazy bums who have been getting overpaid for decades for their horrific underproduction, must we?!?) Do you really not know about this stuff?!?
How about this great sentiment abridged from Mr. Clarke's sad plea:
over the last few years …we have closed the quality and efficiency gaps with our competitors.
What the hell has Detroit been doing for the last 40 years?!?
Did we really JUST wake up to the gaps in quality and efficiency between us and them?
The K car vs. the Accord?
The Pinto vs. the Civic?!?
Do I need to go on?
We are living through the inevitable outcome of the actions of the United States auto industry for decades.
Time to pay for your sins, Detroit.
I attended an economic summit last week where a brilliant economist, Alan Beaulieu surprised the crowd when he said he would not have given the banks a penny of "bailout money". Yes, he said, this would cause short term problems, but despite what people like George Bush and Troy Clark would have us believe, the sun would in fact rise the next day… and something else would happen…where there had been greedy and sloppy banks new efficient ones would pop up… that is how a free market system works…it does work…if we would let it work…
But for some reason we are now deciding that the rest of the world is right and that capitalism doesn't work – that we need the government to step in and "save us"…save us, hell – we're nationalizing…and unfortunately too many of this once fine nations citizens don't even have a clue that this is what's really happening…but they sure can tell you the stats on their favorite sports teams…yeah – THAT'S < /SPAN>important…
Does it occur to ANYONE that the "competition" has been producing vehicles, EXTREMELY PROFITABLY, for decades now in this country?...
How can that be???
Let's see…
Fuel efficient…
Listening to customers…
Investing in the proper tooling and automation for the long haul…
Not being too complacent or arrogant to listen to Dr W Edwards Deming 4 decades ago
Ever increased productivity through quality, lean and six sigma plans…
Treating vendors like strategic partners, rather than like "the enemy"…
Efficient front and back offices…
Non union environment…
Again, I could go on and on, but I really wouldn't be telling anyone anything they really don't already know in their hearts
I have six children, so I am not unfamiliar with the concept of wanting someone to bail you out of a mess that you have gotten yourself into – my children do this on a weekly, if not daily basis, as I did at their age. I do for them what my parents did for me (one of their greatest gifts, by the way) – I make them stand on their own two feet and accept the consequences of their actions and work them through.
Radical concept, huh…
Am I there for them in the wings? Of course – but only until such time as they need to be fully on their own as adults
I don't want to oversimplify a complex situation, but there certainly are unmistakable parallels here between the proper role of parenting and government.
Detroit and the United States need to pay for their sins.
Bad news people – it's coming whether we like it or not
The newly elected Messiah really doesn't have a magic wand big enough to "make it all go away" I laughed as I heard Obama "reeling it back in" almost immediately after the vote count was tallied…"we might not do it in a year…or in four…" where was that kind of talk when he was RUNNING for the office
Stop trying to put off the inevitable …
That house in Florida really isn't worth $750,000…
People who jump across a border really don't deserve free health care benefits…
That job driving that forklift for the big 3 really isn't worth $85,000 a year…
We really shouldn't allow Wal-Mart to stock their shelves with products acquired from a country that unfairly manipulates their currency and has the most atrocious human rights infractions on the face of the globe…
That couple whose combined income is less than $50,000 really shouldn't be living in that $485,000 home…
Let the market correct itself people – it will. Yes it will be painful, but it's gonna be painful either way, and the bright side of my proposal is that on the other side of it is a nation that appreciates what is has…and doesn't live beyond its means…and gets back to basics…and redevelops the work ethic that made it the greatest nation in the history of the world…and probably turns back to God.
Sorry – don't cut my head off, I'm just the messenger sharing with you the "bad news"




Gregory J Knox
President
Knox Machinery, Inc.
Franklin, Ohio 45005

From The DGB Archives: Towards A New (And Old) Philosophical, Political, and Business Renaissance (Originally written Jan. 19/08; updated Dec. 16/08)

For me -- and DGB Philosophy -- life is basically about three types of choices:

1. Making 'either/or' decisions such as Obama vs. McCain in the past election; going to dinner and a movie vs. staying home and saving money with your honey; staying single vs. getting married; staying in a job or leaving it; and so on...

2. 'Juggling pie plates' -- meaning juggling value priorities, and/or attending to our first, most immediate and/or most important priorties first. In this scenario, other value-priorities are not excluded or rejected entirely but rather are left behind for the time being until they become more figural and/or at some point reach our threshold/pedestal of becoming top priority.

3. Integrating our choices, ideas, theories, lifestyle in a fashion that partly compromises our 'either/or choices' but also allows you to split the difference and 'take the edge off of each either/or choice solely by itself' giving you in its place 'good elements' from both parts of your potential either/or choice while not totally 'committing you in either particular direction of your potential either/or choice.

In an 'integrative choice', elements of your two potential choices 'integrate somewhere in the middle' and ideally give you at least part of the the best of both worlds while minimizing the 'repetitive negative side effects' that may be attached to one strict side or the other.

If you are a 'hard-line conservative', you may be accused of having no heart or compassion whereas if you are a 'socialist-oriented liberal', you may be accuse of having a 'bleeding heart' that encourages people to take advantage of you, left, right and centre.

Which is why -- as Aristotle stated -- 'the middle path is usually the best path'.

(Although perhaps not always the most exciting. The extremes in life do tend to generate more drama and excitement but also more 'hard falls'. Choice and degree of risk becomes relevant.)

Still, the most successful and healthy people seem to be the ones who 'integrate their potential bi-polar extremes the best'.

For example, the most successful and psychologically healthy people tend to be both strong-willed, assertive people -- and good listeners at the same time, able to put forth their own points of view with force and conviction while being open-minded enough to attend to other points of view as well.

These are two important pie plates amongst numerous others that people need to juggle. Very few people know how to juggle these two pie plates equally well. Usually people are either too strong-willed and close-minded or they are too passive and inassertive. These polar extremes - without the balance - is what keeps therapists and counsellors, ministers and priests, police offices, human rights activists and lobbyists, legal councils, unions, and politicians busy.

Again, the most successful people - and particularly the most successful leaders - can juggle both these 'plates' equally well, knowing how and when to be assertive and forceful with their ideas, while staying attentive to the needs, interests, and perspectives of others who may think differently and/or have important opposing viewpoints to offer. Our parliaments and our courts are generally too adversarial - putting on a 'dog and pony, smoke and mirrors' show that may make our lawyers, judges, and politicians rich but defies a more objective and integrative search for truth, justice, and civil balance. (added Jan. 26th, 2008, modified and updated again, Dec. 16th, 2008.)

DGB (Dialectic-Gap-Bridging) Philosophy-Psychology - my own unique, personal brand of integrative philosophy-psychology which aims to combine some 2700 years of philosophy and 100 plus years of psychology - builds upon these two basic principles over and over again but only as each is appropriate and relevant to the context: 1. making 'either/or' decisions'; 2. juggling philosophical and lifestyle 'pie plates'; and 3. integrating things, ideas, processes, and people.

Finally, sometimes when seemingly practically everyone else is being 'politically correct' and not talking or writing about particular overt and/or covert injustices -even politically and legally sanctioned injustices - it is necessary to take a strong, forceful polar perspective in the name of helping to move this corruption of justice, democracy, and equality, back towards the centre balancing point of the pendulum of justice so that all people can receive equally fair treatment in the name of the law, not just this or that privileged group of people who have gained an 'inside presence and power of influence' that is not democratic and fair to others who have not had their opinions, interests, and/or needs voiced - and who may be paying a heavy civil cost for this unfair treatment.

'Collusion' is when two or more groups of people conspire together - in private places and/or on private phone calls - to make a deal amongst themselves that benefits each other but excludes outsiders in the process who are being marginalized and hurt in the deal and have had no say in this collusion.

Collusion is undemocratic and unhealthy when striving for a fair and equal democracy but at the same time very common-place in narcissistic capiitalist environments where greed and selfishness rules. The corruption, pathology, and toxicity of collusion needs to be made transparent in a healthy democracy.

This is where 'Narcissistic - everyone for themselves - Capitalism' needs to evolve into a more humane and environmentally friendly form of 'Democratic-Multi-Dialectic-Humanistic-Existential Capitalism.' How do you have a democratic country when the economic and business philosophy and foundation of the country - in both Canada and The USA - is authoritarian; not democratic? It is my opinion that the best companies generally make significant use of some sort of compromised attitude - where workers with less authoritative power still do get well-heard and properly respected for their individual opinions, even if it does goes against the Corporate Status-Quo.

DGB Philosophy intends to put more and more ideas forward over time relative to what kind of changes might be needed to turn Narcissisitic Capitalism into a more Multi-Dialectic, Humanistic-Existential form of Capitalism.

Again, some innovative, enlightened companies have already moved in this direction. Perhaps we can do more. Correction: We need to do more.

Narcissistic (Conservative) Governments and Narcissistic Big Business are often too interconnected in ways that are collusive and non-transparent to the general public.

So too are narcissistic Liberal-Socialist minded Governments who often spend to much time behind closed doors with 'socialist, special interest, lobbyists). Again, 'political-special' interest collusion can result.

When two out of three groups of people have their hands in the 'money-pie' and the third group of people is being marginalized, left out of the equation, uninformed or misinformed, their money in effect being fraudulently used and/or stolen - it is time to start charging and/or keep turning over the politicians who keep practising 'collusion, corruption, and dirty politics' - and likewise in the world of business.

Corporate greed and gouging - including unions - will never be brought under reasonable control until it is confronted by the people being gouge.

DGB Philosophy has important humanistic-existential elements of Karl Marx and Erich Fromm in it, but also important elements of Adam Smith, John Locke, Ayn Rand, Nathaniel Branden and my Corporate father in me to run away from my evolving integrative form of idealistic, multi-dialectic, humanistic-existential capitalism.

I -- and hopefully you -- want the workplace to be a place where people are happy to go to and work in; not 'alienating prisons' that people are running to get away from.

We are all guilty of this corruptive mess called politics because we keep letting our politicians get away with fraud - and don't do anything about it. These practises will continue until 'dirty politicians' finally start going to jail. These same politicians would send you or I to jail in a heart beat for conducting the same type of business so why do we continue to let our politicians get away with the illegal behaviors they would send us to jail for?

Why do we allow political narcissism and hypocrisy bring down our democratic nation? We can sit on our hands and do nothing. Or we can do more to not let politicians get away with 'the dirty stuff' they get away with. Democracy starts with the people and ends with the people and how willing they are to be politically active.

When 'Big Government' and 'Big Business' become an end in themselves where huge amounts of money come from the people and don't go back to the people, when the middle and lower class get marginalized, abandoned, and gouged...it is time for the people to take back their government from the politicians who are running it corruptively - or to keep putting new politicians in their until the situation improves. If we continue to do nothing about this situation, then we at least partly deserve what we get - a corrupt government. ('Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.')

Accountability and transparency - these are 'buzz words' that we hear all the time from politcians themselves, especially those on the election circuit. But until politicians start meaning what they say and saying what they mean, until we actually start seeing the types of ethical changes that politicans continually preach about, words are worth less than the paper they are written on. Maybe we should have 'politicians on probation' for one or two years before they are elected in for longer terms.

The more politicians have to answer to the people, the more they behave themselves. They are like athletes - the longer the contracts they get, the less they perform and the more they misbehave. Shorter 'contracts' might breed better politicians.

Politician cannot be trusted to be left alone -- or in cahoots with Big Business or Big Union or Big Socialist Special Interest Groups -- to function in the dark.

Because then the darker side of human nature will take over. Human narcissism - greed and selfishness - will prevail. Hobbes, Machiovelli, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Freud, and William Golding (the writer who wrote 'Lord of The Flies'), will be shown to have been the best judges of human nature - i.e., those that wrote about the darker side of human nature or human behavior, because unconfronted, the darker side of human nature or human behavior will rule.

We need a new vision, a new spirit, a new idealism, a new code of ethics. We need some new Enlightenment Philosophers, some new Romantic Philosophers (to compensate for the Enlightenment Philosophers), even some new 'Grand Narrative' Philosophers to compensate for all the 'Post-Modernist' and 'Deconstructionist' philosophers these days. (That is, we need 'Constructionist Philosophers' as well as 'Deconstructionist Philosophers'.)

I know this is asking a lot but we need a fascimile of a new Jefferson, a new Franklin, a new John Locke, a new Diderot, a new Voltaire, Montesque and Tom Paine...We need a new Renaissance. We need a new culture not based strictly on personal narcissism...and we need more people worried about the state of the planet we live on.

We need more idealists who say what they mean and mean what they say - and don't use their 'professed ideology' as a way of winning votes from the public, then do what they want and bend their ideology to their hearts content once they get into power for however many years. The Canadian - and I assume the American - people are sick and tired of 'fraudulent ideology' whether it comes from a politician and/or a businessman.

The paradox of the situation is that Corporate America - while trumpeting the virtues of 'individualism' and the pursuit of 'The American Dream' - are far too often helping to squash this type of idealism and reality. That's what Marx called (fake, narcissistic capitalist) ideology'. (He just called it 'ideology'.)

The '30 hour work week' - a projected idealistic vision back in the 70s and early 80s - is looking more and more like a '50 and 60 hour week' for many today trying to balance their 'expense and stress-laden budget as they strive to just break even without collapsing from exhaustion. (I am presently working a 55 to 60 hour work week in a stress-laden dispatching job so (projectively) I know something of what I am talking about. And there are many, many others who have it much worse than me. At least I make enough money to partly justify my hours even if the rest of my life is paying for it. This past two months - December and January - a 40 hour week would not have come close to meeting my expenses.)

We need to keep encouraging the work of social-political activists like Lou Dobbs even if we don't fully agree with all his opinions. He is offering a new form of political idealism and economics - he calls himslf a 'middle class populist' which I like the sound of. I also like many of his ideas, his delivery, and his courage to not water down or sugar coat his delivery. More power to him!

- dgb, jan. 19th, 2008, updated jan. 26th, 2008 updated again Dec. 16th, 2008.

I found this site on the internet full of quotes that I like. (See below for some of them.)
........................................................

Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Liberty

-

Milton Friedman, PhD, Nobel Laureate, 1912-2006: Rest in Peace.

"Maybe I did well and maybe I led the battle but nobody ever said we were going to win this thing at any point in time. Eternal vigilance is required and there have to be people who step up to the plate, who believe in liberty, and who are willing to fight for it." - Milton Friedman

"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it." - Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777



"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self- preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property, and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means." -Thomas Jefferson to John Colvin, 1810

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt." - John Philpot Curran: Speech upon the Right of Election, 1790. (Speeches. Dublin, 1808.) as quoted in the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations, NY, 1953, p167 and also in Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, Boston, 1968, p479

"But you must remember, my fellow-citizens, that eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty, and that you must pay the price if you wish to secure the blessing. It behooves you, therefore, to be watchful in your States as well as in the Federal Government." - Andrew Jackson, Farewell Address, March 4, 1837

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." - Wendell Phillips, (1811-1884), abolitionist, orator and columnist for The Liberator, in a speech before the Massachusetts Antislavery Society in 1852, according to The Dictionary of Quotations edited by Bergen Evans

"There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men." - Edmund Burke

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary." - James Madison, Federalist no. 51.

"The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes." - Thomas Paine

"Voting is no substitute for the eternal vigilance that every friend of freedom must demonstrate towards government. If our freedom is to survive, Americans must become far better informed of the dangers from Washington - regardless of who wins the Presidency." - James Bovard in Voting is Overrated

(See the internet site for these and other similar quotes...just google the title: 'Eternal Vigilence is The Price of Liberty')

Where Does DGB Philosophy Go From Here?: Deconstructing and Reconstructing 21st Century American Capitalism (Modified and Updated Dec. 13th, 2008)

A good philosopher needs to be able to move in and out of the dialectic. He or she needs to be able to see both sides of an argument, the 'goods', the 'bads', and the 'uglys' of opposing perspectives -- both theoretical and applied.

A distinction can be made between: 1. a 'Creative-Constructive-Idealistic-Grand Narrative Philosopher' who aims to paint a broad, idealistic, visionary picture -- a picture of hope and optimism for the future of a person and/or a nation: 2. a 'Deconstructive-Post-Modern Philosopher' who aims to punch holes, emphasize the weaknesses and pathologies, think in terms of 'processes and anti-processes rather than theories, structures, and creative constructions, and tear down the arguments and/or the policies of the Constructive-Grand Narrative Philosopher/Politician/King/Leader (without or without the counter-proposal of an alternative structure or construction being posited. It is generally easier to tear down than to build up -- unless you risk being imprisoned, tortured, and/or executed for going against the Ruling Party Status-Quo and Establishment, but it should be emphasized that both aspects of 'human culture-building, tearing down, and re-building' are absolutely necessary components of a properly functioning and growing evolutionary culture/government/corporation/organization/society).

A third type of philosopher is the 'Integrative or Synthesizing Philosopher' who aims to integrate and harmonize two or more opposing theories, and/or the disagreements between a Constructive Philosopher (and/or the Philosophical Party he or she belongs to) and a Deconstructive one.

This is all a simple extension of Classic Hegelian Dialectic Theory and 'The Classic Hegelian Evolutionary Life Cycle' that includes everything from Philosophy, Politics, History, Economics, Medicine, Psychology, to all other aspects of human life and culture.

Put another way, there are: 1. 'Thesis Philosophers', 2. 'Anti-Thesis Philosophers' and 3. 'Integrative Philosophers'. These may be used as simple 'teaching-classification devices' and/or ways of tracking the theoretical direction of actual philosophers/psychologists/kings/leaders as compared with the Classic Hegelian model of the evolutionary cycle.

It is not unusual for a philosopher to practise elements of all three of these forms of philosophy at the same and/or different times in his or her career of philosophizing.

Philosophy provides the underlying foundation for all other aspects of human culture and human living. For some people, the particular philosophy that underlies his or her character may be more clearly focused in his or her awareness, and/or articulated in his or her speech. For others, it may be much more covert, non-congruent, beyond awareness, and unarticulated.

It is not unusual for a person's particular philosophy to be full of 'working hypocrisies and double standards' -- indeed, this is probably more the rule than the exception when it comes to understanding human behavior. How many of us can say that we have never violated The Golden and/or Silver Rule of 'Reciprical Ethics' --

'Don't Do Unto Others What We Would Not Want Them To Do Unto Us' -- at some glaringly apparent different points in our life?

It is at least a partly unfortunate and tragic aspect of human behavior and human existence that 'Personal Narcissism Often Over-rules Personal Ethics'.

In the arena of human behavior, ethics is often an uphill battle. Like exercise and personal workouts, reciprocity ethics becomes easier with practise and habit -- especially when it is nurtured, encouraged, supported...

Unbridled, unethical narcissism in contrast more generally involves 'downhill cruising and coasting'...Thomas Hobbes, Arthur Schopenhauer, 'Animal Farm', 'Lord of The Flies'...

Part of this 'downhill cruising and coasting' can be fun and exciting -- nobody in their Dionysian-Narcissistic Mind (Ego State) wants to completely eliminate or even minimize all the highs and lows, the spontaneity, the impulsiveness, the pleasures, the conflicts and the tragedies, of human romance and sexuality.

But unbridled, unethical narcissism -- especially the worst of the worst -- inevitably ends in human destruction and self-destruction.

A hospital. A jail. A bankruptcy. A divorce-court. A morgue. You get the picture.


There is plenty of 'good' and 'bad' in human behavior and human nature. Over and over again, we see human narcissism (selfishness, greed, pride, love, lust, jealousy, possessiveness, envy, anger, rage, hate, power, revenge...) overpower human ethics, morals, character, and integrity.

Human narcissism is a huge factor in human behavior and human nature -- and in this regard, human ideology, philosophy, politics, and religion rarely touch the day-to-day corrupt and non-corrupt, toxic and non-toxic, pathological and healthy, influence and effect of human narcissism. It doesn't matter if you, or I, or we, are Liberal or Conservative, Republican or Democrat, religious or non-religious, Capitalist or Socialist -- you and I and we cannot escape the positive and/or negativeinfluence of narcissism on human behavior and human nature.

One might say that 'human narcissism' is at least partly -- if not largely -- ingrained in our genes, in our DNA makeup.

Ayn Rand would -- and has -- called it 'The Virtue of Selfishness'.

In contrast, Erich Fromm has called the 'darker, negative side of human narcissism and its resulting effects on human character and culture in a Capitalist society' -- 'the pathology of normalcy' (See Erich Fromm, The Sane Society).

So there you have it -- the 'opposing polarities, contradictions and paradoxes of Good and Bad Value Associated with 'Ethical, Humanistic-Existential Capitalism In Control' on the one hand -- and Narcissitic, Unethical Capitalism Out of Control' on the other hand. (Think of The Wall Street Financial Collapse.)

Take your choice between an Adam Smith and/or Ayn Rand 'Idealistic, Visionary, Constructive' view of Ethical Capitalism;

Versus a 'Marxian and/or Frommian Post-Modern Deconstruction of 19th century Narcissistic Capitalism (Marx) or 20th century Narcissistic Capitalism (Fromm).

DGB Philosophy works, negotiates, and integrates the 'democratic-dialectic' between these two twin economic-philosophical polarities -- that is, between Adam Smith and Ayn Rand Idealistic, Visionary Capitalism, and The 'Marxian-Frommian Deconstructive Critiques' of both 'Theoretical Capitalism' and 'Empirical, Reality-Bound' Capitalism as we see it today.

In this regard, DGB Philosophy aims to distinguish between the 'good', the 'bad', and the 'ugly' of modern-day, 21st century North American Capitalism.

DGB Philosophy aims to distinguish between: 'Dialectically and Democratically Divided, Alienated and Alienating, Top-Heavy, Narcissistic Capitalism' on the one hand; vs. 'Dialectic-Democratic, Humanistic-Existential, Ethical, Win-Win Capitalism' on the other hand.

If Sarah Palin wants to go back and speak in front of The GOP and tell her party where they failed, as well as telling her party, where they need to idealistically move to, this is the place she needs to start.

However, I do not think that Sarah Palin:

1. Is aware of the type of philosophical distinction I am making here;

2. Is able to talk about the type of distinction I am making here with any kind of philosophical depth and passion;

3. Cares about this distinction to any depth of her self and soul.


In short, Sarah Palin needs to address her own ethical problems before she tries to address America's.


Philosphically and politically speaking, right now -- Obama and The Democrats are leagues ahead of where the American Republican Party needs to get to, and/or get back to.

The Republican Party needs to 're-enlighten' itself in the philosphical visions of America's founding fathers, as well as evolve to where American Capitalism and American Foreign Policy needs to get to, from a more 'ethical-dialectic-democratic' form of American Republicanism; not the type of narcissistic, unilateral, imperialistic Republicanism that America has seen for the last eight years.

The Republican Party can be a much better American Political Party than it is right now. But it needs to go back to its roots and re-establish these roots; not base a political campaign on trash-talking, fear-mongering, nation dividing, and racism. This may have worked in the past. But is America at its worst; not its best. At bottom level, The American Republican Party needs to re-establish and re-build its ethics and integrity and the ethics and integrity of 1. Republican Domestic and Foreign Politics; and 2. Republican Capitalism. It needs to regain the trust and respect of the American people.

Time will tell. Obama still has to show that he can 'execute effective, productive, meaningful American government action' as well as he can carry a speech. He has 'talked the talk'. Now he has to 'walk the walk'.

And I will develop my views and Idealistic Vision of American Capitalism as we move along here.

-- dgb, Nov. 15th, 2008, modified and updated Dec. 13th, 2008.

Illinois governor charged in Obama successor probe

Introduction (by DGB)


Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

-- Thomas Jefferson


Do not bite at the bait of pleasure, till you know there is no hook beneath it. -- Thomas Jefferson


This is the type of thing -- described in the article below -- that DGB Philosophy means by 'unbridled narcissism and no ethics', reflectng the worst of the worst in both North American politics and Capitalism. It is the reason Obama was elected by the American people -- to put together something much better in American Government than what we see below us here, to turn fake -- narcissistic and sophist -- political ideology back onto a track of ethical idealism and humanism meets realism that the American people can once again feel proud of, a la John Locke, Adam Smith (with better humanistic-existential Capitalist regulations), Denis Diderot, Voltaire, Thomas Jefferson, Tom Paine, Abraham Lincoln...Franklin D. Roosevelt, Albert Einstein, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy...Erich Fromm, Ayn Rand, S.I.Hayakawa...

The type of political-capitalist corruption we see below is the type of narcissistic-sophist-Capitalist politics that I believe the majority of the American people want to leave behind, not further propogate...But as I saw on a Church sign, 'We all must be the change we want to see in the world'.

We cannot continue to worship 'polar idols' -- except to the extent that they are in harmony and homeostatic balance with each other -- but 'fake ethical ideology' and 'real ethical idealism' are not in harmony with each other. In narcissistic-sophist capitalist politics, fake ethical ideology becomes a 'smoke and mirrors, dog and pony show, look at my left hand while I punch you in the nose with my right hand' type of routine.

This is false leadership. This is fake leadership. We end up turning off all politicians until one day, along comes a politician who ignites our better, higher ideals -- but we can't put all the responsibility and accountability on Obama's shoulders. We have to all be better ourselves. We can't say that 'Obama will make me a better person' if we continue to play into the same type of narcissistic-sophist-hypocritical games that our 'false politicians and corporate leaders play -- and are scandalized for'. Otherwise, we are lying to ourselves relative to the 'real God(s) we are worshipping (Narcissus, Dionysus, no Apollo). Our lives are out of homeostatic balance. Our character and integrity is one-sided and not to be trusted. Our world is centred around us -- and we cannot see beyond the narcissistic-dionysian mirror that we are looking into. This is the true 'Birth of Tragedy' -- just as a life completely infatuated with 'Apollo' -- and completely devoid of any kind of worship for Narcissus and Dionysis whatsoever -- spawns an entirely different, opposite, type of tragedy.

Existential alienation -- a living death -- can happen in either a Church or a Bar (the first from too much self-denial and self-sacrifice; the second from too much self-infatuation, or the lack of it, too much Narcissism and Dionysianism and Eros, or the lack of it, and striving to compensate and gain what you lack.

Existential death can happen in The White House and in The Senate amongst 'The Masters of War', and amongst The Lobbyists, and amongst the Corporate Creeps.

Existential death can happen on Wall Street. Or on Main Street. It can happen in banks and mortgage companies and closed down factories and foreclosed houses. It can happen behind closed doors -- family doors, corporate doors, political doors, school doors...Others can poison us with their existential death -- and we can poison others with our existential death. 'Dialectic-humanistic-existential alienation and death'. Transmitted like a virus through our individual encounters, or the lack of the type of encounter that moves people closer to each other, harmonizes people with each other -- 'toxic transactions' with our loved ones taking a dose of our 'poison', or our co-workers, or our employees...

In this, the Christmas season, it is time for us all -- not just our leaders -- to take a good, long, hard look at ourselves in the mirror, and say either...

'I will be ethically better'...

Or not.

(In which case -- quit with the sophism and the hypocrisy. People will eventually see through you, and what you really stand for.)

Christmas -- and the Muslim holiday (Ede) -- is for striving to be ethically better. Not only for the day. But for the season, giving us proper closure to this year, a chance to redeem ourselves, to set higher ethical standards to live our lives by, and to carry this ethical momentum heading into the year to come, hopefully with significant stamina and follow-through to back up these ideals, not to pretend they don't exist the moment it becomes convenient for us to put them back into the closet again.

-- dgb




-- DGBN, Dec. 10th, 2008.

-- David Gordon Bain,

-- Democracy Goes Beyond Narcissism,

-- Dialectical Gap-Bridging Negotiations...

Are still in process....














................................................................

Ill. governor charged in Obama successor probe


Print By MIKE ROBINSON, Associated Press Writer Mike Robinson, Associated Press Writer – 33 mins ago, December 9/08

– Blagojevich arrested in Obama senate seat scheme


Obama: 'saddened' by Blagojevich allegations AP

Illinois residents react to Blagojevich's arrest KMOV Channel 4 St. Louis AP –


Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich was roused from bed and arrested Tuesday after prosecutors said he was caught on wiretaps audaciously scheming to sell Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat for cash or a plum job for himself in the new administration.

"I've got this thing and it's (expletive) golden," the 51-year-old Democrat said of his authority to appoint Obama's replacement, "and I'm just not giving it up for (expletive) nothing. I'm not gonna do it."

Prosecutors did not accuse Obama himself of any wrongdoing or even knowing about the matter. The president-elect said: "I had no contact with the governor or his office, and so I was not aware of what was happening."

FBI agents arrested the governor before daybreak at his Chicago home and took him away while his family was still asleep, saying the wiretaps convinced them that Blagojevich's "political corruption crime spree" had to be stopped before it was too late.

"The Senate seat, as recently as days ago, seemed to be on the verge of being auctioned off," U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said. "The conduct would make Lincoln roll over in his grave."

Federal investigators bugged the governor's campaign offices and tapped his home phone, capturing conversations laced with profanity and tough-guy talk from the governor. Chicago FBI chief Robert Grant said even seasoned investigators were stunned by what they heard, particularly since the governor had known for at least three years he was under investigation for alleged hiring fraud and clearly realized agents might be listening in.

The FBI said in court papers that the governor was overheard conspiring to sell the Senate seat for campaign cash or lucrative jobs for himself or his wife, Patti, a real estate agent. He spoke of using the Senate appointment to land a job with a nonprofit foundation or a union-affiliated group, and even held out hope of getting appointed as Obama's secretary of health and human services or an ambassador.

According to court papers, the governor tried to make it known through emissaries, including union officials and fundraisers, that the seat could be had for the right price. Blagojevich allegedly had a salary in mind — $250,000 to $300,00 a year — and also spoke of collecting half-million and million-dollar political contributions.

The governor's spokesman had no immediate comment on the charges, but the governor has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing. As recently as Monday, he told reporters: "I don't care whether you tape me privately or publicly. I can tell you that whatever I say is always lawful."

The charges do not identify by name any of the political figures under consideration for the Senate seat, referring to them only as "Candidate 1," "Candidate 2," and so on. However, those being considered for the post include: Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett, Reps. Jesse Jackson Jr., Danny Davis, Jan Schakowsky and Luis Gutierrez; Illinois Senate President Emil Jones; and Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs Director Tammy Duckworth.

Fitzgerald did not address whether any of the potential Senate candidates crossed the line themselves and could face charges. And it was unclear from court papers whether the governor or his aides spoke directly to the candidates.

Blagojevich was charged with two counts: conspiracy to commit fraud, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, and solicitation to commit bribery, which is punishable by up 10 years. He was released on his own recognizance.

Blagojevich, a former congressman, state lawmaker and prosecutor, also was charged with illegally threatening to withhold state assistance to Tribune Co., owner of the Chicago Tribune, in an attempt to strong-arm the newspaper into firing editorial writers who had criticized him.

In addition, the governor was accused of engaging in pay-to-play politics — that is, doling out jobs, contracts and appointments in return for campaign contributions.

Court papers portray Blagojevich as a greedy, vindictive pol who couldn't wait to find ways to cash in on the Senate appointment. The charges also paint a picture of breathtaking arrogance and perhaps cluelessness, with the governor contemplating a Cabinet position or even a run for the White House despite an abysmal 13 percent approval rating and a reputation as one of the most corrupt governors in the nation.

Blagojevich becomes the latest in a long line of Illinois governors to become engulfed in scandal. He was elected in 2002 as a reformer promising to clean up after Gov. George Ryan, who is serving six years in prison for graft.

The scandal leaves the Senate seat in limbo. Illinois legislative leaders said they were preparing to quickly schedule a special election to fill Obama's seat rather than let Blagojevich pick someone.

"No appointment by this governor, under these circumstances, could produce a credible replacement," said Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois.

Some Illinois politicians immediately demanded that the governor step down or face impeachment.

Also arrested was Blagojevich's chief of staff, 46-year-old John Harris, who was accused of taking part in the schemes to enrich the governor.

Blagojevich also considered appointing himself to the Senate seat, telling his deputy governor that if "they're not going to offer me anything of value, I might as well take it," prosecutors said.

He said becoming a senator might help him avoid impeachment and also remake his image for a possible presidential run in 2016, according to court papers. And he allegedly said that he would have access to greater resources if he were indicted while in the Senate.

Prosecutors said he also talked about getting his wife placed on corporate boards where she might get $150,000 a year in director's fees.

In court papers, the FBI said Blagojevich expressed frustration at being "stuck" as governor. "I want to make money," the governor, whose salary is $177,412, was quoted as saying in one conversation.

The head of the FBI's office in Chicago said he phoned Blagojevich at 6 a.m., telling him of a warrant for his arrest and informing him there were two FBI agents at his door. Blagojevich's first comment was, "Is this a joke?" Grant said. The governor was led away in handcuffs.

Nothing in the court papers suggested Obama had any part in the discussions about selling the Senate seat or knew of them. In fact, Blagojevich was overheard complaining at one point that Obama's people are "not going to give me anything except appreciation." He added: "(Expletive) them."

Authorities said Blagojevich was hoping to raise $2.5 million by the end of the year and decided to speed up his "crime spree" before a state anti-corruption law takes effect Jan. 1. The governor had vetoed the law, but the Legislature overrode his veto.

The wiretapped conversations took place after Election Day and as recently as last week. On the recordings, Blagojevich warned one person not to use the phone and said, "The whole world is listening. You hear me?"

Political fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko, who raised money for the campaigns of both Blagojevich and Obama, is awaiting sentencing after being convicted of fraud and other charges. And Blagojevich's chief fundraiser goes on trial next year on obstruction charges.

The court papers also outline Blagojevich conversations related to Tribune Co., which has been hoping for state aid in selling Wrigley Field, the home of the Chicago Cubs. Blagojevich was quoted as telling his chief of staff, Harris, in a profanity-laced Nov. 4 conversation that Tribune executives should fire the editorial writers "and get us some editorial support."

Harris was later overheard telling the governor on Nov. 11 that an unnamed Tribune owner, presumably CEO Sam Zell, "got the message and is very sensitive to the issue."

___

Associated Press Writer Don Babwin contributed to this report.

: How Freddie Mac halted regulatory drive

AP IMPACT: How Freddie Mac halted regulatory drive

Print By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer Pete Yost, Associated Press Writer – 20 mins ago AP (Dec. 7th, 2008)

WASHINGTON – When the Washington Nationals played their first-ever baseball game in the nation's capital in April 2005, two congressmen who oversaw mortgage giant Freddie Mac had choice seats — courtesy of the very company they were supposed to be keeping an eye on.

Efforts to tighten government regulation were gaining support on Capitol Hill, and Freddie Mac was fighting back. The baseball tickets for home opener were means of influence.

According to confidential company documents obtained by The Associated Press, Reps. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, and Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., spent the evening in hard-to-obtain seats near the Nationals dugout with Freddie Mac executive Hollis McLoughlin and four of Freddie Mac's in-house lobbyists.

Kanjorski declined comment through a spokeswoman. Ney ultimately served a federal prison term after pleading guilty to trading political favors for a golf trip to Scotland, other gifts and campaign donations in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal.

The Nationals tickets were bargains for Freddie Mac, part of a well-orchestrated, multimillion-dollar campaign to preserve its largely regulatory-free environment, with particular pressure exerted on Republicans who controlled Congress at the time.

Internal Freddie Mac budget records show $11.7 million was paid to 52 outside lobbyists and consultants in 2006. Power brokers such as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich were recruited with six-figure contracts. Freddie Mac paid the following amounts to the firms of former Republican lawmakers or ex-GOP staffers in 2006:

_Sen. Alfonse D'Amato of New York, at Park Strategies, $240,000.

_Rep. Vin Weber of Minnesota, at Clark & Weinstock, $360,297.

_Rep. Susan Molinari of New York, at Washington Group, $300,062.

_Susan Hirschmann at Williams & Jensen, former chief of staff to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, $240,790.

Freddie Mac's chairman and chief executive, Dick Syron, and McLoughlin, senior vice president for external relations, used Clark and Weinstock extensively, Weber said in an e-mail Friday.

"I personally met with the CEO several times and with Hollis and his team regularly," Weber said in the e-mail. "Clark and Weinstock worked effectively and intensely for Freddie Mac under Dick Syron and Hollis McLoughlin."

The tactics worked — for a time. Freddie Mac was able to operate with a relatively free hand until the housing bubble ultimately burst in 2007.

Now Freddie Mac and its sister company, Fannie Mae, are in financial collapse and under government control. Congress is investigating how it all happened. Lawmakers have planned a hearing Tuesday.

The records obtained by the AP reflect growing concern within Freddie Mac over a chorus of criticism from Republicans worried that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had grown too big. The two companies owned or guaranteed over $5 trillion in mortgages.

The Bush administration and Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan were sounding the alarm about the potential threat to the nation's financial health if the fortunes of the two mammoth companies turned sour. They did eventually, when they took on $1 trillion worth of subprime mortgages and when their traditional guarantee business deteriorated. Commercial banks regarded Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae as competitors and were anxious to pick up business that would result from scaling back the two companies.

Pushing back, Freddie Mac enlisted prominent conservatives, including Gingrich and former Justice Department official Viet Dinh, paying each $300,000 in 2006, according to internal records.

Gingrich talked and wrote about what he saw as the benefits of the Freddie Mac business model.

Dinh wrote a legal analysis of private property rights that viewed a hypothetical government-enforced sale of Freddie Mac assets as constitutionally suspect.

In 2005, Freddie Mac hired political consultant Frank Luntz, a Washington fixture whose specialty is choosing the right buzz words to achieve a particular goal. The records AP obtained do not cover 2005 and Freddie Mac refuses to confirm that it brought Luntz on board. But four people familiar with events at Freddie Mac at the time confirmed the Luntz hire. All four spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they fear reprisals if their names were revealed. Luntz did not respond to efforts to contact him through his office.

The AP previously described, in October, how Freddie Mac thwarted efforts to bring a tough regulatory bill sponsored by Republican Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, John Sununu of New Hampshire, Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina and John McCain of Arizona to a full Senate vote.

At a meeting days after Hagel's bill went to the full Senate, Syron and McLoughlin berated the company's in-house lobbyists for failing to keep Hagel's bill corralled in committee, said the four people familiar with events at Freddie Mac at the time.

Freddie Mac shifted into high gear, secretly paying a Republican consulting firm, Washington-based DCI Group, $2 million to kill Hagel's legislation. The covert lobbying campaign targeted Republican senators in 2005-06.

According to the newly obtained records, DCI's deployment was part of a broader campaign that targeted mainly Republicans on Capitol Hill.

The internal Freddie Mac documents show that 17 of the lobbying firms and consultants paid in 2006 were specifically directed to focus on Republicans and four on Democrats, with varying targets for the rest.

McLoughlin hired his own personal political strategist, Republican consultant Harry Clark, paying Clark's firm $440,494 in 2006 out of McLoughlin's executive office budget, according to the records obtained by AP.

Even the office that served as the sole source of federal regulation over Freddie Mac was targeted.

Lobbyist Geoffrey P. Gray was paid $240,000 in 2006 to focus in part on the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, according to the records.

Last week, Gray did not return calls to his office. On Friday, Freddie Mac declined to comment. A lawyer for Syron, one of the scheduled witnesses at Tuesday's congressional hearing on the collapse of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, did not return a phone call seeking comment.

'Scream Bloody Murder': CNN's Unblinking Look at Genocide

'Scream Bloody Murder': CNN's Unblinking Look at Genocide

By Tom Shales
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 4, 2008; Page C03

Offered perhaps as a grim antidote to all the chirpy, cheery holiday specials glutting the airwaves this time of year, "CNN Presents: Scream Bloody Murder," a definitely unflinching history of genocide, premieres tonight on CNN. The network's chief international correspondent, Christiane Amanpour, conducts the class, calling genocide "the world's most feared crime."

Genocide might also be called the unthinkable inevitable, since it is always condemned when discovered and yet continues to recur, wiping out entire populations, entire generations, entire cultures. The word was not invented until 1944, Amanpour says, but of course, there were examples of genocide long before it was identified.

The vilest, most infamous and most organized commission of this ultimate crime was, inarguably, Adolf Hitler's attempt to eliminate all Jews from Europe during World War II. Amanpour says the United States and its allies were aware of the slaughter but "refused" to bomb the death camps or, as many people advocated, destroy the railroad tracks leading to them. A Holocaust survivor says Hitler's anti-Semitic rampage "wasn't a priority" for the Allies -- although after the war, the crime and some of the criminals were dealt with at Nuremberg.

Elie Wiesel is the world's best-known authority on the Holocaust, but he is also an advocate for other cultures wracked by genocide. He is seen early in the program during a segment on the genocide in Cambodia at the end of the Vietnam War. "Nobody believed us," an anguished priest laments, and Wiesel understands. "Better not to believe," Wiesel says, "because if you believe, you don't sleep nights." The nightmare that the Turks visited upon the Armenians is also covered, though briefly.


Later, Amanpour takes George Herbert Walker Bush and his administration to task for failing to intercede when Saddam Hussein rained terror down on Iraq's own citizens, the Kurds, in the late 1980s. Bush later turned the proverbial blind eye to mass murder in Bosnia, Amanpour says, with the president growling at a news conference that "we are not going to get bogged down in some guerrilla warfare."

Although Bush ignored the slaughter of the Kurds, he grabbed a saber and began rattling it when Saddam invaded Kuwait -- and thus threatened the flow of oil and wealth out of the Mideast. Now that was going too far! Oil-rich Kuwait plucked at Bush's heartstrings as the dying Kurds had not: "We're dealing with Hitler revisited," he declared, adding one of his trademark threats, "This will not stand."

But Amanpour is just as hard on Bill Clinton for his response to Rwanda when the military was found to have murdered "hundreds of thousands" of men, women and children there. The Clinton administration's policy was "a failure," Amanpour says, and she includes a scene from a Clinton news conference in which he treats one of her accusations snidely: "There have been no 'constant flip-flops,' Madame," he huffs. His indignation seems false and hollow now.

CNN is celebrating 25 years of reports by star reporter Amanpour, although to attach a documentary on genocide to anything resembling a "celebration" is not very good form. Nor is it encouraging to hear Amanpour implicitly praising herself and her own courage when dealing with genocide of recent years: "Day after day, I reported the story," she says of one crisis -- and later, she notes of the shelling of Sarajevo, "I was there, reporting on the scene."

The use of a dramatic musical score, though restrained, comes across as another unnecessary intrusion; pictures as dramatic as those showing the victims of genocide don't need any underscoring or audio hype.

Amanpour ends the program with a look at the United Nations and its role in preventing and condemning genocide throughout the world, a role she contends the organization has seldom embraced with zeal. In fact, Amanpour says, "the United Nations is powerless to force its members to act even in the face of mass murder." The special is timed to the upcoming 60th anniversary of the U.N. convention on genocide.

Some may find the program tough to take at holiday time, but in fact it seems especially powerful during a season in which "peace on Earth" and "good will toward men" are being extolled from street corners.

"Scream Bloody Murder" isn't subtle, but then the subject rather precludes subtlety -- and instead demands the kind of doggedly powerful approach that Amanpour brings to it.


CNN Presents: Scream Bloody Murder (two hours) airs tonight at 9 on CNN.

'Scream Bloody Murder': A DGB Analysis of Unilateral vs. Multilateral Pathology -- and The Role They Play in The Human Atrocity of Genocide

I thank CNN for opening my eyes last night to what I have alienated myself from for most of my entire life -- the horrors of modern genocide -- with or without all the legal knittpicking over the definition and/or meaning of the word: for example, does it really matter whether the aim is to exterminate a race of people -- and/or a religion of people? Does it really matter -- ethically, morally, legally, and United Nations-action-wise -- whether we are talking about a hundred people, a thousand people, or a hundred thousand people? Once the direction of the pathological killing is made clear to The United Nations, it is imperative that the United Nations swing into action -- immediately.

The Kurd genocide in Iraq, the Muslim genocide in Bosnia, Rwanda, Darfur...these are all United Nations and international disgraces. They are all examples of 'multi-lateral, United Nations inefficacy and impotency'. Or worse than that, they may all be examples of 'leadership and international apathy' -- high level leaders simply not caring enough unless or until economic interests are significantly affected, and/or there is a large enough cry of political outrage.

One can easily see where the pathology, inefficicy, and impotency of international multilateralism leads quickly or slowly to the compensatory impulses, decisions, and action of -- national unilateralism, particularly it would seem, in recent history, leading up to the last war in Iraq through the decision of American unilateralism. The 'coalition of the willing'.

Thus, we have two opposite forms of international executive pathology: 1. 'pathological unilateralism'; and 2. 'pathological multilateralism'.

In the first case -- pathological unilateralism -- we have a problem of too much 'heavy-handed, one-sided action originating from one place, one source' -- such as the Republican dominated, White House -- leading to a loss in democratic values and the principle of national and international reciprocity. This problem is well-stated in the article below, taken off the internet...

........................................................................

For Bush - and Obama - a gut check.

George Bush says the failure to find WMD in Iraq is his biggest regret. He should regret trusting his gut over the intelligence.

Scott Ritter guardian.co.uk, Tuesday December 2 2008 21.30 GMT Article history: George Bush's candid interview with ABC News' Charles Gibson has one moment of awful truth – when the president, asked if he'd have gone to war had he known there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, stated: "That's a do-over that I can't do." If only he could.

More than 4,207 US service members, 314 coalition troops (including 176 British fatalities) and tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Iraqis might be alive, including, of course, Saddam Hussein, the former ruler of Iraq whom Bush promised to disarm together with America's "friends of freedom". Saddam, Bush proclaimed in the weeks leading up to his decision to invade, and subsequently occupy, Iraq, was "a dangerous, dangerous man with dangerous, dangerous weapons." The Iraqi dictator was "a danger to America and our friends and allies, and that is why the world has said 'disarm'".

Bush, in his revealing interview, claimed he wished "that the intelligence had been different", but that was never really the point. Bush, like so many others, had made up his mind regarding Saddam independent of the facts of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Try as he might to spread responsibility for his actions by pointing out that "a lot of people put their reputations on the line and said the weapons of mass destruction is a reason to remove Saddam Hussein," the fact is WMD was simply an excuse used by the president to fulfil his self-proclaimed destiny as a war-time president who would avenge his father's inability (or, more accurately, sage unwillingness) to finish the job back in 1991, in the aftermath of the first Gulf war.

As pre-war British government discussions with Bush administration officials reveal, there was never a solid case to be made on Iraq's possession of WMD in the months leading up to the decision to invade, simply a sophomoric cause-effect relationship linking regime change (the preferred policy) and WMD (the excuse) "in the sense that it was the regime that was producing the WMD" (quoting Blair).

The intelligence on Iraq's WMD was whatever the president and his cronies (including his erstwhile ally at 10 Downing Street) wanted it to be. Over seven years of UN-mandated weapons inspection activity, conducted from 1991 until 1998, had produced a well-defined (and documented) record of disarmament which, while not providing absolute verification of the disposition of every aspect of Saddam's WMD programmes, did allow any observer interested in the facts to ascertain that Iraq was fundamentally disarmed from a qualitative perspective. This, coupled with the presence of the world's most technologically advanced and intrusive arms control regime monitoring the totality of Iraq's industrial infrastructure, provided a high degree of confidence that Saddam had neither retained nor reconstituted his WMD programme.

There was a gap in inspection coverage of Iraq from December 1998 until November 2002, brought on by the removal of weapons inspectors at the behest of the United States (during the administration of Bill Clinton). However, no verifiable intelligence emerged during this time to credibly suggest that Iraq had sought to reconstitute its WMD programme. Instead, the Bush administration developed arguments that spoke of a "re-examination" of the "facts" from the perspective of a "post-9/11 world".

But the diversionary tactic of bait and switch, where the so-called global war on terror was used to justify an attack on Iraq, did not in any meaningful way alter the reality that Iraq had been disarmed. The Pentagon tried to provide glossy satellite images and hyped-up speculation about what Saddam was up to in September 2002 (and the British followed suit, publishing their since-discredited "dossier"), but by that November UN weapons inspectors were back in Iraq, and by January 2003 had discredited the entire intelligence case the Pentagon (and the British) had so clumsily cobbled together.

I and others did our very best to highlight the factual vacuum in which Bush and Blair operated while making their case for war, but to no avail. The decision to invade had been made months before the UN weapons inspectors returned to Iraq. Their work, and the intelligence they provided, was not only ignored, but indeed was never relevant to the larger issue, centred as it was on regime change, not disarmament.

The most important aspect of Bush's interview rests not in what he admits, but rather in what he avoids, when he stated that the failure to find WMD in Iraq was "the biggest regret of all the presidency." He doesn't regret the decision that led America to war, or the processes that facilitated the falsification of a case for war. He doesn't regret the violation of international law, the deaths of so many innocents, the physical destruction of Iraq or America's loss of its moral high ground. He merely regrets the fact that his "gut feel" on Saddam's WMD arsenal was wrong.

In this, truth be told, Bush is no different from the majority of society in both America and Great Britain. It is easy to moralise today, armed with the certainty of 20/20 hindsight, that the invasion of Iraq was wrong, the case for war a fabrication. But how many people will admit that Iraq was better off under Saddam than it is today, ruined by conflict generated by the destruction of Iraqi society prompted by the toppling of the Iraqi dictator? How many people will decry the kangaroo court and the lynch mob that convicted and executed Saddam as a travesty of both law and justice? Unless one is willing to repudiate all aspects of the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq, inclusive of the termination of Saddam's regime, then any indignation shown over the so-called intelligence failure represents nothing more than hypocrisy.

American policy in Iraq must not be viewed in isolation, but rather as part of a larger problem set, one that Barack Obama will have to deal with if he is to avoid repeating Bush's mistakes. America, and indeed the world, may very well have serious issues with the governments of nations such as Syria, North Korea and Iran. However, the solutions to these problems rest not in the form of unilateral policies formulated and implemented from Washington DC. That is how we got into Iraq to begin with. Rather, Obama must put action to his promise to embrace multilateral solutions to the problems of the future.

This means foregoing ideologically (or politically) driven pressure to act void of international consensus driven by a collective appreciation of international law (ie, no regime change, unless the world properly mandates it). It means trusting in the integrity and ability of organisations such as the UN Special Commission (the UN weapons inspectors), even if their product contradicts US intelligence sources. It also means trusting such organisations enough to share such intelligence so that it might be thoroughly investigated. And, if and when a rogue regime is overthrown and its leaders brought to justice, it means supporting an international court of law in which to try them for any of their alleged crimes.

The latter is of particular importance, especially when it comes to Obama, given his proclivity for announcing his intention to "hunt down and kill Osama bin Laden". Such bravado could become his undoing, just as gunning for Saddam was the undoing of Bush. America seemed content to let the perpetrators of the Srebrenica atrocities, who murdered some 8,000 Bosnian men and boys, be apprehended in accordance with accepted international practice, and be tried in an international court. Yet somehow the murderer of 3,000 Americans deserves special, unilateral American justice. There is an inherent inconsistency here.

In order for a multilateral solution to be genuine, it must be the product of a multilateral consensus driven by accepted ideals and principles, and not simply a unilateral dictate imposed on others by the strong. Let there be no doubt, the Iraq war was a product of American bullying, not just of Iraq, but the entire world. The current conflict in Afghanistan, threatening as it is to spill over into neighbouring Pakistan, is no different.

The unilateral desire of the US to exact revenge disguised as justice for the crimes committed on 9/11 has overshadowed the mission of creating a stable and moderate government in post-Taliban Afghanistan, to the detriment of both missions and the people of the region. Obama's singular focus on bringing bin Laden to heel will simply perpetuate this failure.

Obama would do well to embrace those international multilateral institutions, such as the UN and the International Court of Justice in the Hague, which his predecessor eschewed. Subordinating the American desire for revenge in the interest of regional and international stability would represent the living manifestation of the multilateralism Obama has stated he wants to pursue. Leadership is the product of much more than simple rhetoric, and simply saying something "is" does not make it so. Putting action to words is the challenge, and the mark, of any true leader. I am hopeful Barack Obama can be the genuine leader he aspires to be. America, and the world, will much better for it.

...........................................................................


Yesterday, I would have agreed with the author above, Scott Ritter, 100%. Today, I do so still -- but with a strong caveat emptor and warning against the dangers of multilateral inefficiency and impotency. If we are to protect the world against the horrors of future Holocausts, Kurd slaughters, Rwandan slaughters, Bosnian slaughters, Darfur slaughters, we, in effect, need a strong international govervment with a strong international army/police force that doesn't waffle around the international parliamentary table of international justice, human rights, and national humanistic-existential responsibilities.

Thomas Hobbes had it right -- and I will give an updated paraphrase here of what he was saying -- when he in effect said that the government and its police force has to be stronger than the strongest criminal element, the strongest terrorist organizations, within its jurisdiction. Otherwise, anarchy and criminal-terrorist elements will rule.

If a particular country -- like Pakistan -- needs help from the United Nations and its united international police force/army to bring law and order back into the mountains of Pakistan, then so be it. Pakistan makes a phone call to The United Nations -- and the request/agenda is sitting in front of an emergency United Nations task force and decisionary board within the shortest amount of time possible -- as in the next closest thing to 'immediately'.

International issues of the momentous urgency and potential negative consequences of a Nazi Germany, a Kurdish, Bosnian, Rwandian, and/or Darfurian slaughter-house -- or strong terrorist organizations coming out of the mountains of Pakistan to wreak havoc on the rest of the world -- cannot be waffled on.

There has to be strong, united committment in the United Nations executive decisionary board towards world peace, justice, and the maintenance of international law and order and human rights. This international committment cannot be compromised by attending United Nations countries with narcissistic (self-serving) political and economic agendas -- like as I understand it from last night's CNN special, 'Scream Bloody Murder' -- China more or less vetoing the United Nations by itself from doing anything about Darfur because of China's economic ties to the government of Sudan which was/is victimizing Darfur -- these types of countries need to be voted out of any sitting of The United Nations by the rest of the attending countries due to the 'pathological bias and interference of political and/or economic conflict of interest factors preventing that particular country from upholding its United Nations ethical and legal responsibilites towards peace, justice, law and order, and the adherence of international human rights principles in every part of the world, regardless of country'.
............................................................................

Darfur genocide continues: ICC prosecutor
1 day ago (December 4th, 2008?)

UNITED NATIONS (AFP) — Sudan's government is still supporting genocide in Darfur, including through rape and holding up humanitarian aid, the International Criminal Court prosecutor said Wednesday.

"Genocide continues," Luis Moreno-Ocampo told the UN Security Council, accusing Sudan of refusing to cooperate with the court.

"Rapes in and around the (refugee) camps continue. Humanitarian assistance is still hindered. More than 5,000 displaced persons die each month," he said.

Moreno-Ocampo urged the 15 Security Council member nations to be prepared for the possibility of an ICC-issued warrant for the arrest of Sudan's President Omar al-Beshir.

In July Moreno-Ocampo asked the ICC for an arrest warrant for Beshir on 10 counts of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

A panel of judges is reviewing the evidence to determine whether there are reasonable grounds to try Beshir. It would be the court's first indictment of a sitting head of state.

"The judges will rule shortly on this application," Moreno-Ocampo said. "It is time to be prepared for their ruling."

Moreno-Ocampo later told reporters that it is "crucial that the Security Council is prepared to ensure the implementation" of the ICC's decision.

A decision on the warrant could be made next month, he said.

Moreno-Ocampo claims that Beshir has personally instructed his forces to wipe out three ethnic groups in the western Darfur region, where conflict has been raging since 2003 when ethnic minority rebels took up arms against the Arab-dominated regime.

UN officials estimate that up to 300,000 people have died in the Sudan conflict and 2.7 million have been forced to flee their homes. Khartoum claims only 10,000 have died.

Some nations friendly to Sudan, including China, believe that a warrant for Beshir's arrest would only make things worse.

The African Union (AU) and the Organization of the Islamic Conference have called for a one-year suspension of the process, citing article 16 of the ICC's founding Rome statutes.

In such a case the Security Council would need to pass a resolution postponing all ICC investigations of Beshir for 12 months.

Western nations oppose such a move, and to date no country has formally called for the council to invoke article 16.

In his statement, Moreno-Ocampo also lashed Khartoum for failing to hand over two Sudanese charged with crimes against humanity in Darfur.

In May 2007, the court issued arrest warrants for Sudan's minister of humanitarian affairs Ahmed Haroun, and pro-government Janjaweed militia leader Ali Kosheib.

"Rumors of an investigation of Ali Kosheib have not materialized to this day," Moreno-Ocampo said.

Council member diplomats called on Sudan to hand over the accused, with France's UN Ambassador Jean-Maurice Ripert saying Sudan was under "obligation to cooperate" with the ICC.

"The dispute by the government of Sudan contesting both the authority of the Security Council and the court's competence is unacceptable," Ripert said.
Hosted by Copyright © 2008 AFP. All rights reserved. More »


.............................................................................


Another issue that should be up in front of the United Nations at the time of this writing is the issue of 'piracy on the high seas'. If the pirates are coming from the southern part of Somalia -- or wherever they are coming from -- the United Nations needs to address this significant world threat to law and order on the high seas -- and do something about it. Namely, like sending a United Nations led, international police force to the home base of the pirates, and putting a stop to this problem before it gets worse. The more the pirates show that they can get away with what they are doing, the more they will continue to do it.

In order for there to be strong international law and order, there needs to be a strong United Nations led, international show of police strength and force.

Within the limits of the working mandate of the United Nations and its strong ethical and legal force towards international peace, law and order, justice, and human rights -- with a strong respect for the absolute minimization of 'collateral damage' (meaning the killing and maiming of innocent citizens caught in the cross-fire of United Nations forces and criminal international elements -- I like the principle of the first Bush senior-led American force into Iraq: 'shock and awe'. You go in with maximum force; not minimum force. You show the international criminal element you are chasing that you are absolutely deadly serious about what you are doing, and that they can't 'play' with combined force of the United Nations. The United Nations needs to be an international government body that is both respected and feared; not ridiculed and laughed at.


This strong show of international strength should be visiting the mountains of Pakistan -- with the consent of the government of Pakistan, of course, if they are unable to take care of their own Pakistan-based terrorists -- and right now, the United Nations should be visiting Sudan/Darfur as well as Southern Somalia if that is where these 'high seas pirates' are originating from.

One international criminal element at a time -- and the United Nations doesn't 'take its collective eye off the ball' until the problem it went to some part of the world to 'fix' -- is 'fixed'.

The motto of 'The Canadian Royal Canadian Mounted Police' used to be -- I haven't heard it stated lately -- that they used to 'always get their man'.

And so it should be with The United Nations.

Strong international law and order -- in this century of increasing globalization -- and global crime -- demands stong international leadership from the top of The United Nations -- and amongst all contributing countries. There is no room for a 'weak, waffling' United Nations -- there is no room for a United Nations that is corrupted by particular 'national conflicts of interest'.

Either there is a strong international committment to international law and order -- or there isn't.

And if there isn't, then you might as well throw The United Nations in the garbage.

Because that is where a 'weak, waffling, narcissistically biased, United Nations' belongs if it doesn't have the strong leadership and the strong decision-making capabilities that international law and order, justice, and human rights demands.

When the leadership in the United Nations is not respected, then this encourages individual countries -- especially ones that are thinking unilaterally anyway (like the United States) -- to take international law into their own hands. This risks alienating the international community as a whole, America's allies in particular, increasing anti-American hostilities amongst those countries that don't like America anyway, heightening the potential/probability of international anarchy, and exasperating already existing terrorist group activity -- creating a 'Wild West' scenario.

None of this is telepathic anymore; rather, it is recent history. Add to this America's planning to put missiles in Eastern Europe -- how did America like it in the Cuban missile crisis when Russia planned to put missiles in Cuba? -- and you have a combined international diplomacy situation that has made America look more and more like a bull in a china shop than an international 'peace, freedom, democracy, human rights, and justice maker'.

All of this is to say that 'two wrongs do not make a right'. The United Nations needs to greatly improve its strength of leadership. Timing is everything -- knowing when to restrain overly-impulsive ('trigger-happy') nationally biased pro-war action on the one hand that does not have enough clear empirical evidence to justify it, but on the othe hand, acting very quickly and effectively in the face of the imminent possbility of a human slaughter (genocide) taking place.

It hardly needs to be stated that the Kurdish slaughter in Iraq, the Muslim slaughter in Bosnia, the slaughter of the Tutsis in Rwanda, and what is still happening in Darfur are blatant messages to us all how passively complacent and non-moving we all can be -- worst of all The United Nations -- in the face of unspeakable human rights horrors in 'not our' country.

Combined with this, America needs to get back to thinking multlateraly with its allies and in the context of a strong United Nations; not creating its own brand of international 'Wild West' show in the name of justice -- read 'revenge' -- for 9/11.

Pathological unilateralism on the one hand(lack of social and/or environmental sensitivity, lack of ethics, lack of democracy, lack of shared human rights and responsibilities) and pathological multilateralism on the other hand(indecision, non-unity, paralysis by individual and/or group analysis) can be equally bad in the consequences they reap.

Wise, prudent action generally runs somewhere through the middle of these two polar pathologies -- and in effect, splits the difference between these two twin polarities.

Accolades for Christiane Amanpour for putting the CNN special on genocide together.

-- DGBN, Dec. 5th, 2008.

-- Democracy Goes Beyond Narcissism

-- Dialectical Gap-Bridging Negotiations...


Are still in process...


............................................................................