Archive for January 10, 2008


January 10, 2008 Leave a comment

First, It Was War On Crime, Then Drugs, Next Terror, Now It’s War On Americans
There’s A Press Blackout on S 1959, the Thought Crime Prevention Bill; Why?

December 12th, 2007 · Stumble it! href=”“>2 Comments

As odd as it sounds, it’s true. The Mainstream News Media appears to be in a total news blackout in regard S 1959. At first, I believed it was merely the reluctance of the MSM to discuss this Bill, however, the answer may be much more sinister than that! Below is a reply I found on Ron Paul’s Campaign site which references this Bill, and I double and triple checked for ANY Mainstream News Coverage on this issue – and so far, it appears to almost be non-existent!

The Greatest Obstacle

On December 4th, 2007 hemingway811 says:

is that the MSM has had a total blackout on the House’s passage of HR 1955 on Oct. 23rd. Do a search at any major newspaper & the major television stations, including cable. I have found a few comments in Blogs at a couple of television sites, but that’s about it.

For example, at the Washington Post you get:

“No Results Found”

No matches found on search for: hr 1955

No matches found on search for: violent radicalization

404 members of the House voted for this “thought crime” Bill. The ACLU is working with members of the Senate to amend the language. They specifically refer to the regulation of thoughts. I don’t expect the ACLU to make much headway with the Senate. We have been bombarded with so much fear-mongering 24/7 for so long, members of Congress are too afraid of being labeled unpatriotic if they don’t vote for legislation like this.

RP did not cast a vote on HR 1955.

It is time to flood Keith Olbermann, Lou Dobbs, Jack Cafferty, and anyone else speaking out of the real issues the rest of the MSM ignores, with e-mails urging them to speak out about this Legislation. I already have.

Lou Dobbs:

Jack Cafferty LINK

Unfortunately, writing Lou Dobbs or Jack Cafferty is futile, as CNN refuses to publish any information in regard this assault on our Constitution, and that’s after they have received hundreds, maybe even thousands of requests to editorialize on the subject. Has the government issued “signing letters” or other orders that prevent ALL of America’s Mainstream News Media from reporting on this vital issue? Jack Cafferty is attempting to promote his so-called “Blog” on CNN, however, if you even mention S 1959 in your comment, it probably won’t be published. CNN is stonewalling their viewer-ship, and on an issue where the public is demanding that this Bill be discussed in a public forum; CNN, along with the rest of the MSM, have turned their backs on America and have shown, despite increasing public outrage that they don’t give a damn about public opinion!

If you fine-tune your Internet searches, and Google S 1959, there are pages and pages of results, almost all of them Blogs and Discussion forums in the US who are discussing this matter and urging their subscribers to call, email, and write to Congress to defeat this Bill, yet it appears we are screaming into a void – and no one in the MSM has the courage to bring this odious Bill to the publics attention. In fact, there is little or nothing mentioned in the foreign press as well, and in this writer’s opinion, we must break the silence of the Mainstream News Media to bring about enough awareness where the people can protest in enough numbers to kill this Bill before free speech in America is nothing more than a fleeting memory.

To anyone that is aware of Naomi Wolf’s writing, the Guardian Unlimited published her recent essay, Fascist America, in 10 easy steps. One chilling part of that essay is published below, and we all need to take note that a Fascist America appears to be on our doorstep, and only by making the MSM report upon this attempt to silence free speech in America will we have any chance of stopping the steady march toward total fascism and dictatorship in America:

8. Control the press

Italy in the 1920s, Germany in the 30s, East Germany in the 50s, Czechoslovakia in the 60s, the Latin American dictatorships in the 70s, China in the 80s and 90s – all dictatorships and would-be dictators target newspapers and journalists. They threaten and harass them in more open societies that they are seeking to close, and they arrest them and worse in societies that have been closed already.

The Committee to Protect Journalists says arrests of US journalists are at an all-time high: Josh Wolf (no relation), a blogger in San Francisco, has been put in jail for a year for refusing to turn over video of an anti-war demonstration; Homeland Security brought a criminal complaint against reporter Greg Palast, claiming he threatened “critical infrastructure” when he and a TV producer were filming victims of Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana. Palast had written a bestseller critical of the Bush administration.

Other reporters and writers have been punished in other ways. Joseph C Wilson accused Bush, in a New York Times op-ed, of leading the country to war on the basis of a false charge that Saddam Hussein had acquired yellowcake uranium in Niger. His wife, Valerie Plame, was outed as a CIA spy – a form of retaliation that ended her career.

Prosecution and job loss are nothing, though, compared with how the US is treating journalists seeking to cover the conflict in Iraq in an unbiased way. The Committee to Protect Journalists has documented multiple accounts of the US military in Iraq firing upon or threatening to fire upon unembedded (meaning independent) reporters and camera operators from organisations ranging from al-Jazeera to the BBC. While westerners may question the accounts by al-Jazeera, they should pay attention to the accounts of reporters such as the BBC’s Kate Adie. In some cases reporters have been wounded or killed, including ITN’s Terry Lloyd in 2003. Both CBS and the Associated Press in Iraq had staff members seized by the US military and taken to violent prisons; the news organisations were unable to see the evidence against their staffers.

Over time in closing societies, real news is supplanted by fake news and false documents. Pinochet showed Chilean citizens falsified documents to back up his claim that terrorists had been about to attack the nation. The yellowcake charge, too, was based on forged papers.

You won’t have a shutdown of news in modern America – it is not possible. But you can have, as Frank Rich and Sidney Blumenthal have pointed out, a steady stream of lies polluting the news well. What you already have is a White House directing a stream of false information that is so relentless that it is increasingly hard to sort out truth from untruth. In a fascist system, it’s not the lies that count but the muddying. When citizens can’t tell real news from fake, they give up their demands for accountability bit by bit.

9. Dissent equals treason

Cast dissent as “treason” and criticism as “espionage’. Every closing society does this, just as it elaborates laws that increasingly criminalize certain kinds of speech and expand the definition of “spy” and “traitor”. When Bill Keller, the publisher of the New York Times, ran the Lichtblau/Risen stories, Bush called the Times’ leaking of classified information “disgraceful”, while Republicans in Congress called for Keller to be charged with treason, and rightwing commentators and news outlets kept up the “treason” drumbeat. Some commentators, as Conason noted, reminded readers smugly that one penalty for violating the Espionage Act is execution.MORE

Based on all of the Blogs which are standing in solidarity against this issue, I’d bet my last dollar (If I had one to spare…) the Congress has received hundreds of thousands of phone calls and emails, yet they still remain mute and refuse to offer the public anything at all – not even an assurance they will look into our concern and outrage; instead, it appears The United States Congress is betraying their constituents, this time in an assault that could change the face of America! Based on the refusal of the MSM to publicize the issue, and Congress remaining deaf and dumb in the performance of their duties, we can only ascertain that Congress is attempting to pass this Bill while the bulk of the population isn’t even aware of its existence, and to me, that speaks of treason!

We have only one chance of defeating this Bill before it gets out of Committee, and that’s to make enough calls and send enough emails to effectively jam-up the phone systems in Congress, and only by acting in unison will we be able to save free speech in America. As an alternative, I’m calling upon the foreign press to publicize this matter, especially those in England, Germany, France, and all of the countries that America gave so many lives in World War I and II to help them throw off the yolk of oppression. America was there for them when Nazi Germany was attempting to enslave all of Europe, and I believe they have a debt of honor to repay -to stand tall and write about this critical issue that affects all of America. We were there for them, and now it seems that we need their help, if it’s nothing more than embarrassing the American Mainstream News Media into covering an issue that affects each and every American alive, here and abroad, and to lend their assistance in helping to insure that the United States will remain a free and democratic nation.

William Cormier

FootNote: This morning, I noted that NBC is quietly refunding money to advertisers because their ratings have been so low. LINK NBC, if you want to jump-start your ratings and be a top network again, maybe you might try reporting the news – all of it, and if you would break this press blackout and show some courage, I’m guessing, based on the interest of the public in regard S 1959, your ratings would soar and rather than giving refunds for poor ratings, you’d see your viewer-ship increase dramatically.


To anyone in the foreign Press reading this Op-Ed

As you read this Op-Ed, please sit back and contemplate on the significance of this matter; President Bush is blathering on and on about “Democratic Principles” while our own society is closing down and now we don’t even have a free press except for what the Internet offers us – and we can’t reach enough people by the Internet alone unless every one of us bands together in solidarity, and so far, that’s been a daunting task -although people from all walks of life are joining in, but without fair representation in the media, we remain unaware of how many thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of Americans who have called or emailed Congress in regard this assault on our constitution.

Freedom in Americana is quickly becoming what the Presidency “feels like” rather than a strict adherence to our constitution and laws – and without massive foreign coverage of the assault against the freedom of Americans by the Bush administration, this nation could easily be overwhelmed by fascism, something countless Americans died for in helping to protect Europe so many years ago.

Keep in mind these actions will not help the Bush administration and the Neo-cons who seem to want perpetual war, but will benefit the average American that still believes the United States should return to our constitutional roots, adhere to the Rule of American Law as well as International law, something this President holds in utter contempt.

Your help will be appreciated, and although I have been loathe to request international press support, however, with the mainstream news media compromised by so many factors, we are now looking for any measure that could help to bring awareness to the general public in regard S 1959. Even the United Nations should be able to see through this ploy to keep the American people in ignorance – and ignorance and propaganda is how a free society is transformed to a fascist and authoritarian government.

It’s time for the international community to understand the struggle the “Freedom Fighters” in America are engaged in to bring our country back under the rule of law, and publicizing this struggle and giving “the people” credit for their efforts to throw-off oppression and the unconstitutional muzzling of the News will help us to bring our fight to the countless millions of Americans who still remain unaware of the danger(s) they face. If the US MSM won’t represent us, then maybe it’s time for the international community to step-in and lend their support, and tomorrow won’t be fast enough!

MSNBC: ‘How Bush became a government unto himself’



Also known as Gunny G’s
Globe and Anchor Sites/Forums/Blogs….
HISTORY ETC. — The Gunny G History Wiki!
Police Out of Control! – A Gunny G Wiki…
News-n-Views, Military, History, Politics,
Controversial, Unusual, Non-PC
Eye-opening, Thought-provoking,
Articles Just Not Seen… Elsewhere!

The “Original/The Only “Gunny G”

Why Socialism? By Albert Einstein

January 10, 2008 Leave a comment


Send Page To a Friend

Why Socialism? By Albert Einstein

This essay was originally published in the first issue of Monthly Review (May 1949).

Is it advisable for one who is not an expert on economic and social issues to express views on the subject of socialism? I believe for a number of reasons that it is.

Let us first consider the question from the point of view of scientific knowledge. It might appear that there are no essential methodological differences between astronomy and economics: scientists in both fields attempt to discover laws of general acceptability for a circumscribed group of phenomena in order to make the interconnection of these phenomena as clearly understandable as possible. But in reality such methodological differences do exist. The discovery of general laws in the field of economics is made difficult by the circumstance that observed economic phenomena are often affected by many factors which are very hard to evaluate separately. In addition, the experience which has accumulated since the beginning of the so-called civilized period of human history has—as is well known—been largely influenced and limited by causes which are by no means exclusively economic in nature. For example, most of the major states of history owed their existence to conquest. The conquering peoples established themselves, legally and economically, as the privileged class of the conquered country. They seized for themselves a monopoly of the land ownership and appointed a priesthood from among their own ranks. The priests, in control of education, made the class division of society into a permanent institution and created a system of values by which the people were thenceforth, to a large extent unconsciously, guided in their social behavior.

But historic tradition is, so to speak, of yesterday; nowhere have we really overcome what Thorstein Veblen called “the predatory phase” of human development. The observable economic facts belong to that phase and even such laws as we can derive from them are not applicable to other phases. Since the real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development, economic science in its present state can throw little light on the socialist society of the future.

Second, socialism is directed towards a social-ethical end. Science, however, cannot create ends and, even less, instill them in human beings; science, at most, can supply the means by which to attain certain ends. But the ends themselves are conceived by personalities with lofty ethical ideals and—if these ends are not stillborn, but vital and vigorous—are adopted and carried forward by those many human beings who, half unconsciously, determine the slow evolution of society.

For these reasons, we should be on our guard not to overestimate science and scientific methods when it is a question of human problems; and we should not assume that experts are the only ones who have a right to express themselves on questions affecting the organization of society.

Innumerable voices have been asserting for some time now that human society is passing through a crisis, that its stability has been gravely shattered. It is characteristic of such a situation that individuals feel indifferent or even hostile toward the group, small or large, to which they belong. In order to illustrate my meaning, let me record here a personal experience. I recently discussed with an intelligent and well-disposed man the threat of another war, which in my opinion would seriously endanger the existence of mankind, and I remarked that only a supra-national organization would offer protection from that danger. Thereupon my visitor, very calmly and coolly, said to me: “Why are you so deeply opposed to the disappearance of the human race?”

I am sure that as little as a century ago no one would have so lightly made a statement of this kind. It is the statement of a man who has striven in vain to attain an equilibrium within himself and has more or less lost hope of succeeding. It is the expression of a painful solitude and isolation from which so many people are suffering in these days. What is the cause? Is there a way out?

It is easy to raise such questions, but difficult to answer them with any degree of assurance. I must try, however, as best I can, although I am very conscious of the fact that our feelings and strivings are often contradictory and obscure and that they cannot be expressed in easy and simple formulas.

Man is, at one and the same time, a solitary being and a social being. As a solitary being, he attempts to protect his own existence and that of those who are closest to him, to satisfy his personal desires, and to develop his innate abilities. As a social being, he seeks to gain the recognition and affection of his fellow human beings, to share in their pleasures, to comfort them in their sorrows, and to improve their conditions of life. Only the existence of these varied, frequently conflicting, strivings accounts for the special character of a man, and their specific combination determines the extent to which an individual can achieve an inner equilibrium and can contribute to the well-being of society. It is quite possible that the relative strength of these two drives is, in the main, fixed by inheritance. But the personality that finally emerges is largely formed by the environment in which a man happens to find himself during his development, by the structure of the society in which he grows up, by the tradition of that society, and by its appraisal of particular types of behavior. The abstract concept “society” means to the individual human being the sum total of his direct and indirect relations to his contemporaries and to all the people of earlier generations. The individual is able to think, feel, strive, and work by himself; but he depends so much upon society—in his physical, intellectual, and emotional existence—that it is impossible to think of him, or to understand him, outside the framework of society. It is “society” which provides man with food, clothing, a home, the tools of work, language, the forms of thought, and most of the content of thought; his life is made possible through the labor and the accomplishments of the many millions past and present who are all hidden behind the small word “society.”

It is evident, therefore, that the dependence of the individual upon society is a fact of nature which cannot be abolished—just as in the case of ants and bees. However, while the whole life process of ants and bees is fixed down to the smallest detail by rigid, hereditary instincts, the social pattern and interrelationships of human beings are very variable and susceptible to change. Memory, the capacity to make new combinations, the gift of oral communication have made possible developments among human being which are not dictated by biological necessities. Such developments manifest themselves in traditions, institutions, and organizations; in literature; in scientific and engineering accomplishments; in works of art. This explains how it happens that, in a certain sense, man can influence his life through his own conduct, and that in this process conscious thinking and wanting can play a part.

Man acquires at birth, through heredity, a biological constitution which we must consider fixed and unalterable, including the natural urges which are characteristic of the human species. In addition, during his lifetime, he acquires a cultural constitution which he adopts from society through communication and through many other types of influences. It is this cultural constitution which, with the passage of time, is subject to change and which determines to a very large extent the relationship between the individual and society. Modern anthropology has taught us, through comparative investigation of so-called primitive cultures, that the social behavior of human beings may differ greatly, depending upon prevailing cultural patterns and the types of organization which predominate in society. It is on this that those who are striving to improve the lot of man may ground their hopes: human beings are not condemned, because of their biological constitution, to annihilate each other or to be at the mercy of a cruel, self-inflicted fate.

If we ask ourselves how the structure of society and the cultural attitude of man should be changed in order to make human life as satisfying as possible, we should constantly be conscious of the fact that there are certain conditions which we are unable to modify. As mentioned before, the biological nature of man is, for all practical purposes, not subject to change. Furthermore, technological and demographic developments of the last few centuries have created conditions which are here to stay. In relatively densely settled populations with the goods which are indispensable to their continued existence, an extreme division of labor and a highly-centralized productive apparatus are absolutely necessary. The time—which, looking back, seems so idyllic—is gone forever when individuals or relatively small groups could be completely self-sufficient. It is only a slight exaggeration to say that mankind constitutes even now a planetary community of production and consumption.

I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple, and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society.

The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each other of the fruits of their collective labor—not by force, but on the whole in faithful compliance with legally established rules. In this respect, it is important to realize that the means of production—that is to say, the entire productive capacity that is needed for producing consumer goods as well as additional capital goods—may legally be, and for the most part are, the private property of individuals.

For the sake of simplicity, in the discussion that follows I shall call “workers” all those who do not share in the ownership of the means of production—although this does not quite correspond to the customary use of the term. The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase the labor power of the worker. By using the means of production, the worker produces new goods which become the property of the capitalist. The essential point about this process is the relation between what the worker produces and what he is paid, both measured in terms of real value. Insofar as the labor contract is “free,” what the worker receives is determined not by the real value of the goods he produces, but by his minimum needs and by the capitalists’ requirements for labor power in relation to the number of workers competing for jobs. It is important to understand that even in theory the payment of the worker is not determined by the value of his product.

Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.

The situation prevailing in an economy based on the private ownership of capital is thus characterized by two main principles: first, means of production (capital) are privately owned and the owners dispose of them as they see fit; second, the labor contract is free. Of course, there is no such thing as a pure capitalist society in this sense. In particular, it should be noted that the workers, through long and bitter political struggles, have succeeded in securing a somewhat improved form of the “free labor contract” for certain categories of workers. But taken as a whole, the present day economy does not differ much from “pure” capitalism.

Production is carried on for profit, not for use. There is no provision that all those able and willing to work will always be in a position to find employment; an “army of unemployed” almost always exists. The worker is constantly in fear of losing his job. Since unemployed and poorly paid workers do not provide a profitable market, the production of consumers’ goods is restricted, and great hardship is the consequence. Technological progress frequently results in more unemployment rather than in an easing of the burden of work for all. The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of labor, and to that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I mentioned before.

This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.

I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society.

Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that a planned economy is not yet socialism. A planned economy as such may be accompanied by the complete enslavement of the individual. The achievement of socialism requires the solution of some extremely difficult socio-political problems: how is it possible, in view of the far-reaching centralization of political and economic power, to prevent bureaucracy from becoming all-powerful and overweening? How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured?

Clarity about the aims and problems of socialism is of greatest significance in our age of transition. Since, under present circumstances, free and unhindered discussion of these problems has come under a powerful taboo, I consider the foundation of this magazine to be an important public service.

© copyright 2008 by Monthly Review

Click on “comments” below to read or post comments

Comment (0) Comment (0)

Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and relevant to the story. We encourage engaging, diverse and meaningful commentary. Do not include personal information such as names, addresses, phone numbers and emails. Comments falling outside our guidelines – those including personal attacks and profanity – are not permitted.
See our complete Comment Policy and use this link to notify us if you have concerns about a comment. We’ll promptly review and remove any inappropriate postings.

Send Page To a Friend

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information ClearingHouse endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

Also known as Gunny G’s
Globe and Anchor Sites/Forums/Blogs….

No Escape from War and Unemployment By Paul Craig Roberts

January 10, 2008 Leave a comment

No Escape from War and Unemployment

By Paul Craig Roberts

10/01/08 “ICH” — – New Hampshire voters have chosen warmonger clones of Bush/Cheney for their party’s presidential candidates.  The only candidates not in Israel’s pocket are Kucinich, Paul, and Gravel, who have no chance for their party’s nomination.  

Obama, who provided some hope for change, undercut his support on the eve of the New Hampshire primary by declaring that he would invade Pakistan in order to protect America.  It is a mystery why Obama thought this message would motivate those inclined to support his candidacy.

This means change is unlikely.  Neocon think tanks, media, evangelical preachers, President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and many other members of the government have succeeded in turning a majority of Americans into scared Islamophobes and in denying Americans any reliable information about the cause of the conflict.  

Unfolding economic events during 2008 are likely to increase fear among the US population–the fear that comes from recession and indebtedness. 

As the German National Socialists said, a fearful population welcomes a savior.  The Bush Regime has put into place all the necessary pieces for rule by the executive.

The Greenspan Fed created money and low interest rates to hide the effect on the US economy of job loss from offshoring.  The low prices, achieved by substituting low-cost Asian labor for American labor, masked the inflationary impact of the Fed’s monetary policy.  

The low interest rates created artificial increases in home prices by reducing the carrying costs of mortgages.  Most people buy according to monthly payment, not purchase price of the home.

Many homeowners refinanced to capture and spend the rise in home equity produced by the low interest rates.  This spending and the construction boom misled people about the strength of the economy.

So did US productivity and GDP statistics.  As Susan Houseman has shown, US statistics have not been adjusted for offshoring and include in US productivity and GDP growth both the lower labor costs and the real output of offshored goods that are in fact part of Asian GDP.   

Performance-driven executives at financial institutions were suckered into purchasing subprime derivatives, which have crashed, leaving the financial system with serious problems. 

Bailouts require yet more liquidity, but the exchange value of the US dollar has been reeling from US budget and trade deficits.  Creating more dollars makes holding existing dollar assets even less attractive to the foreigners who finance US deficits.

The dollar has retained its reserve currency role despite its loss of value, because there is no clear alternative.  The euro is a currency without a country, and might be adversely affected by differential interest rates arising within the EU membership.  The UK economy is comparatively small and faces similar problems to the US.  The rising Asian economies are not ready to assume the role.  

As I have documented repeatedly, job growth in the US has been confined to domestic nontradeable services.  The US is now far more dependent on imported manufactured goods than it is on imported energy. Offshoring makes it impossible for the US to balance its trade as offshoring turns US GDP into imports.  

Offshoring is now reaching beyond manufacturing into high-end service jobs.  Princeton University economist Alan Blinder, a former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, estimates that there are as many as 30 million US service jobs filled by college graduates that are susceptible to offshoring.  

As long as China continues its currency peg to the dollar, lower prices from a continuation of offshoring can hide the new round of Fed money creation.  But can a new round of money creation create enough new consumer spending by over-indebted consumers to mask the jobs lost to offshoring with more employment for waitresses and bartenders, or will the new liquidity be used up in saving the troubled financial institutions?  Access to more credit does not help people who are maxed out and cannot pay their bills, especially when they are losing their jobs.

Studies by economists with the Economics Policy Institute report that as of 2006, the most recent data, the typical American family’s income remained $1,000 below its peak in 2000.  Six years of “economic recovery” were unable to put the real median family income back to its previous peak.  The combination of massive indebtedness, offshoring job loss, and recession is likely to produce further decline in US living standards. 

Last month (December 2007) the Congressional Budget Office released its report on household incomes.  The CBO data show that 80% of Americans have experienced a falling share of US income, and that the top 1% of the income distribution has received almost the entire income gain of the top 20% of Americans.  Keep in mind that some of this measured income gain is in reality phantom income according to the research of Susan Houseman.

An economy that concentrates its income gains at the very top while wiping out high value-added jobs by sending them abroad, thus dismantling the ladders of upward mobility, is an economy headed for serious troubles even without subprime derivative and currency problems.

All of the presidential candidates currently in the running have authoritarian personalities. America’s next president is likely to seize upon rising domestic economic hardship and growing resistance abroad to US hegemony to complete the dismantling of America’s constitutional system. 

Dr. Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury for Economic Policy in the Reagan administration. He is credited with curing stagflation and eliminating “Phillips curve” trade-offs between employment and inflation, an achievement now on the verge of being lost by the worst economic mismanagement in US history.

Click on “comments” below to read or post comments

  postCount(‘article19038.htm’);Comment (1) Comment (0)

Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and relevant to the story. We encourage engaging, diverse and meaningful commentary. Do not include personal information such as names, addresses, phone numbers and emails. Comments falling outside our guidelines – those including personal attacks and profanity – are not permitted.
See our complete Comment Policy and use this link to notify us
if you have concerns about a comment. We’ll promptly review and remove any inappropriate postings.

Send Page To a Friend

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information ClearingHouse endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon

 Sign up for our Daily Email Newsletter

  Amazon Honor System





Ron Paul And The Death Of The Great White Hope Syndrome By Michael Hoffman III

January 10, 2008 1 comment

Ron Paul And The Death Of The Great White Hope Syndrome
By Michael Hoffman III

As millions of dollars were raised for Ron Paul I heard Dr. Paul called ” our last hope.” Really? I thought that after Jesus Christ, our last hope on this earth was ourselves and the people in our communities with whom we should be helping to build an alternative society. Does the suggestion that Rep. Paul is our last hope (this was also said about Pat Buchanan, Ross Perot, David Duke, and in 1988 of “Pat” Robertson), imply that if Paul does not gain the presidency we will all be watching television all day and “veg” out in defeat, for the rest of our lives?

The presidency of the United States is the bought and paid for domain of the Cryptocracy. But don’t blame the theft of the presidency solely on the Cryptocrats. Everyday Americans are also responsible. They have been put through a human alchemy process and they are not the same people they were in 1808 or even 1908. This occult processing has culminated in the security state, as evidenced by Fox News on television, whose broadcasts can be described as “all terrorism, all the time.” Fox could cover the opening of a nursery school that was decorated with balloons and graced by an appearance by Winnie the Pooh and they’d still manage to find a terror angle (“what’s in those balloons?”).

The formerly fighting, up-on-their-hind-legs, American yeomanry who wanted to “live free or die,” as the citizens of New Hampshire parsed that yearning, have been transformed into consumers and more recently, subjects of King George (W).

The financial, corporate and governmental forces of tyranny and control are viewed by many Americans as so overwhelming that they can no longer be challenged at any radical level. Americans in Iowa and New Hampshire heaved a collective sigh of resignation and voted for second, third or fourth best for president. This translates into another rabid-Zionist warlover in the White House for four more years. Whether that president’s name will be McCain, Clinton, Obama, Giuliani or Romney matters not. Any one of these stooges is acceptable to the banksters, bureaucrats and occultists who form the authentic governing body of these United States.

Ron Paul is a fine man, though I think he’s horribly mistaken in his admiration for Ayn Rand and Martin Luther King Jr. But a Ron Paul presidency would be light years ahead of any of the System shills (withe exception of Dennis Kucinch) who are his rivals.

Dr. Paul has been the recipient of millions of dollars in donations and these have drained funds and support from other causes and projects at least as worthy. If the donors who poured those funds into the Paul campaign did so because they wanted publicity for libertarian policies and philosophy, then it was probably money well-spent.

But if they donated those huge sums because they thought Rep. Paul could be elected president, then they were deluded. He couldn’t even do well in New Hampshire, which Buchanan won in 1996, and which has a more honest voting system than most states, and a population widely regarded as among the most libertarian in America. If Paul can’t win in New Hampshire, where else is he likely to prevail?

It is unfortunate that Great White Hope politics occlude the vision of its proponents. A genuine victory is possible, through education and community.

The millions that went into Ron Paul’s campaign could have been used to build “Ron Paul University” instead, with a brick and mortar campus and degrees in American history, law, economics, journalism and education, to start. Graduates would take their place in the lower courts, in business, in the media and as teachers in the high schools and college classrooms of the U.S.

Next would come the building of a community of like-minded persons. Yes, it’s slow and decidedly not as “sexy” a process as elections, which dangle the hope of “our man in the White House.” Every four years that chimera is tossed at us like cotton candy in front of kids, and we grab for it. After our candidate loses and our money gets flushed, we go back to another four years in our cocoon. Is this a picture of victory?

Our enemies own hundreds of colleges and universities, have billions of corporate dollars at their command, millions of audience members tuned to their broadcasts and reading their newspapers; and the FBI, the NSA, the army, the navy, the air force and the marines.

Except for Youtube and letters to the editor and hyper-space, virtual reality phantoms and cheshire cats, we have next to nothing, no “sociological presence,” no brick and mortar college campus to act as a haven, a refuge, a think-tank and the makings of a community. Yes, this writer insists on face-to-face, human community. It can’t be done mainly through e-mail or the Internet. The benefit derived from common bonds and solidarity forged by dwelling in the same town with like-minded mentors and sympathizers, is incalculable. The System has intuited to us that in a “wired” universe we need not bother with brick and mortar communities. We have dutifully obeyed their lethal hypnotic suggestion.

Our vision is seriously fractured by a process of human alchemy that has been imposed on us. We must address this psychological warfare and build for the future by means which are independent of the national presidential election campaigns. We must offer hope to an America in which one million of our children have been “diagnosed” by child psychiatrists on the payroll of the incredibly avaricious, pill- pushing pharmaceutical industry, as “bi-polar” psychotics who are to be drugged almost from infancy.

We must offer hope to an America that is silent about the media and the government’s story that Sept. 11, 2001 was solely perpetrated by Arab terrorists even as Pres. Bush is allied with the nations that supposedly produced those terrorists, against an Iran that had no role in 9/11 and was itself under attack by bin Laden and the Taliban.

Our fellow Americans are spiritually ill because they do not bring to justice the surviving killers of President Kennedy, they do not shut down the Satanic abortion mills and they do not care to prosecute George W. Bush and his administration for invading and waging aggressive war on a sovereign nation while facilitating an attack on our own people on Sept. 11, 2001.

This dizzying occult funhouse state of mind of our fellow Americans is not going to be resolved by business as usual, politics as usual or any other political remedy from the pre-2001 past. Only a new paradigm led by occult-busting disenchanters working at the grassroots of education and community can begin, by God’s grace, to turn our nation around and we are referring to work that will take decades, not months or a few years.

The New Hampshire primary is eloquent testimony to the complete, total and utter irrelevance of national politics. I can support voting in a block in local, municipal and even state-wide elections and referendums, but I cannot countenance voting in national primaries and presidential elections. In that latter case, the best “protest vote” we can register is to picket and march outside the polling places while refusing to play their game by going inside to vote. What would the Establishment have said or done on the morning of Jan. 9, if on Jan. 8, ninety-five percent of New Hampshire voters had refused to cast ballots? What could the media have said, except that such a low turnout would constitute a stark and dramatic referendum on the bankruptcy of the System itself. In some cases, in national elections, not to cast a ballot is a vote of no-confidence that resonates louder and longer and to better effect, than actually casting a ballot.

Instead, the Establishment’s television, radio and newspapers (including newspapers with a huge online audience, like the New York Times) order us to play our parts in the Establishment’s election-stage-play, and millions of deluded, processed people are doing as they are told.


I will allow myself four paragraphs on this topic of President Bush’s travels, mainly to say that the trip is intended to burnish for posterity’s sake, Bush’s otherwise dreadful record of war-Zionist mass-murder (as for example in Lebanon in 2006), with token gestures and stagecraft. In terms of realpolitik, it’s an exercise in futility. Bush is a lame duck. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is, politically, a dead duck. Olmert’s alleged “peace partner” among the Palestinians, Mahmoud Abbas, is equally lacking a popular base, and the tragic and self-defeating Palestinian penchant for becoming what they oppose by imitating Zionist tactics and firing rockets from Gaza at Israeli civilians, is costing them their capital as victims.

What Bush will actually be doing on this trip is helping the Israelis build an anti-Iranian coalition. The Gulf of Tonkin-style incident with the big, bad Iranian speedboats (fit for little more than a daring afternoon of water-skiing), was intended to establish the necessary ominous mood concerning the “threat from Iran.” The Islamic Republic of Iran is a bulwark against the shylock usury system of the West, as all nations faithful to Islam are (and before I am accused of being an Islamist, permit me to add: as all nations faithful to Christianity and the Bible would be as well).

Iran is not controlled by the Cryptocracy and is not part of the new World Order, so it must fall — whether by covert CIA assassination, subversion and terror, or overt invasion and bombing on the Iraq-invasion model. A client regime with an Islamic facade, like the ones in Pakistan, Egypt and Jordan, must be established, one way or another. To the extent that Arab states can cajole Russia and China into cooperating in the overthrow of the independent Persians, so much the better.

There will be no peace in Palestine for the foreseeable future. The Palestinians are hostage to a resistance movement that imitates the methods, not of the Koran, but of the Communist partisan resistance of World War II and the Zionist Stern gang of the 1940s; terrorists all. By cleverly exploiting the violence of the Palestinian resistance to justify further violence and collective punishment of the Palestinian people, the Israelis can say they have “no partner for peace.” By the same process, George W. Bush will be presented to history as “having done his best to bring peace and freedom to a troubled region.”

Michael A. Hoffman II’s website:


Donate to
Support Free And Honest
Journalism At Email
Article Subscribe To RenseRadio!
Enormous Online Archives,
MP3s, Streaming Audio Files,
Highest Quality Live Programs


This Site Served by TheHostPros



Son: Don’t count Paul out yet

January 10, 2008 Leave a comment

Last modified: Wednesday, January 9, 2008 11:27 AM CST

Son: Don’t count Paul out yet

By JIM GAINES, The Daily News,

For Rand Paul, a Bowling Green opthamologist and son of presidential candidate Ron Paul, Tuesday’s primary in New Hampshire carried echoes of another Republican outsider’s run for his party’s nomination.

“The first day that I was here I went around with former congressman Barry Goldwater Jr.,” Rand Paul said. “He came up to campaign for my dad.”

The last time Barry Goldwater Jr. campaigned in New Hampshire, it was for his own father in 1964, who was running against – among others – Mitt Romney’s father George, Rand Paul said.

Tuesday night, Ron Paul took 8 percent of the vote, behind John McCain’s 32 percent, Mitt Romney’s 28, Mike Huckabee’s 12 and Rudy Guiliani’s 9.

“I guess we would have hoped for a little better vote,” Rand Paul said, but he is hoping history continues to repeat for his father, whom he describes as “the only ‘Goldwater conservative’ in the race.” Neither Barry Goldwater Sr. nor George Romney won the New Hampshire primary in 1964, but Goldwater went on to win the Republican nomination.

“We think that we made a significant showing, in the sense that the Republican vote is still split up about five different ways,” Rand Paul said.

Ron Paul raised $20 million last quarter, so he’s got enough on hand to staff campaign offices in states with upcoming primaries through at least Super Tuesday on Feb. 5, Rand Paul said.

Ron Paul, 71, a Republican congressman from Texas, was the Libertarian party’s nominee for president in 1988, when he received less than one-half of 1 percent of the vote. Despite that close association, Ron Paul has been elected 10 times as a Republican.

While polls by major research organizations give Ron Paul only a few percent of the vote, he has a huge online presence and has astonished other candidates with his recent fundraising success.

Rand Paul and his family have campaigned in New Hampshire intermittently since June. At that time, Rand Paul was optimistic about his father’s chances to win that first primary.

For the last several days, he’s done interviews and campaign events in southern New Hampshire with his wife, Kelley, and half a dozen other relatives. They plan to return to Bowling Green today, he said.

Rand Paul said he wasn’t involved in several reported incidents in which crowds of Ron Paul supporters acted aggressively toward backers of other candidates and anchor Sean Hannity of Fox News Channel. The demonstrations were spontaneous, like the 1789 “Paris mob, marching to Versailles,” he said.

He added, however, that anger directed against Fox News personnel was deserved, so long as it was nonviolent – Fox excluded Ron Paul from its recent televised forum before the Republican primary, a decision which Rand Paul says may have cost his father a couple of percentage points.

“We’re not alone in really questioning Fox’s credibility,” he said. “The Democrats won’t even debate on Fox anymore, since they don’t consider Fox to be an objective news network.”

He also brushes off the allegations leveled in an article just published by the liberal-leaning newsmagazine The New Republic, titled “Angry White Man: The Bigoted Past of Ron Paul.”

James Kirchick, an assistant editor at the magazine, quotes from a series of little-known newsletters which Paul circulated largely among Libertarian groups. He quotes issues ranging from 1978 through 1995 which advocate secession from the United States, sneer at African Americans as hopelessly lazy and violent, frequently denounce the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., allege that homosexuals were deliberately trying to spread AIDS, flirt with anti-Semitism, approve the growth of a heavily-armed “militia” movement and recite classic conspiracy theories.

Few of the articles bore authors’ names, though all of them ran under Ron Paul’s name on the masthead, according to Kirchick.

Rand Paul says that he’s never heard his father, in public or private, disparage anyone for their color, religion or sexual orientation. He said his father admires King and frequently quotes his admonition to judge people on character rather than color.

“He didn’t write the stuff that was written in his newsletter,” Rand Paul said.

Rand Paul criticized Kirchick for not contacting Ron Paul himself for the story.

Kirchick says he talked to Paul spokesman Jesse Benton, who replied that Paul often didn’t even see most of the newsletters and had little knowledge of what was going out under his name.

Rand Paul said he’s been asked to campaign in South Carolina for that state’s upcoming primary, but he’s not sure when he’ll go. He acknowledges that his father won’t take the Republican nomination unless he begins placing first in primaries, not just making stronger-than-expected showing.

But again, Rand Paul reaches back to Barry Goldwater’s 1964 campaign, which did poorly in the northeast but gathered strength in the south and west.

“We bring something to the debate that no one else brings, and that’s that you can espouse fiscal conservatism and still call for bringing the troops home from the war.”


Betrayal, deceit, corruption and John McCain

January 10, 2008 Leave a comment

Betrayal, deceit, corruption and John McCain

By Ted Sampley
U.S. Veteran Dispatch
November 14, 2007

Last week, Sen. John McCain launched on fellow Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani criticizing the former New York City mayor because Bernie Kerik, police commissioner under Giuliani, was indicted and accused of fraudulent dealings.

“A president’s judgment matters and Rudy Giuliani has repeatedly placed personal loyalty over regard for the facts,” declared McCain, suggesting that Giuliani’s support of Kerik showed a serious lapse in judgment.

Kerik, 52, according to a 16-count federal indictment, received cash and gifts for lobbying regulators on behalf of a New Jersey construction and waste-management firm. Prosecutors allege that Kerik cheated on taxes and lied to investigators–including those recommending him for a cabinet-level post on behalf of President George W. Bush.

McCain has forgotten his own history of involvement with betrayal, deceit and corruption

When McCain returned to the United States in 1973 after more than five years as a prisoner of war, he found his wife was a different person. Carol McCain, once a model, had been badly injured in a car wreck in 1969. The accident “left her 4 inches shorter and on crutches, and she gained a good deal of weight.” Despite her injures, she had refused to allow her POW husband to be notified about her condition, fearing that such news would not be good for him while he was being held prisoner.

But, just a couple years later, McCain, while pondering a future in politics, met Cindy Hensley, an attractive 25-year-old woman from a very wealthy politically-connected Arizona family. While still married to Carol, McCain began an adulterous relationship with Cindy. He married Cindy in May 1980 — just a month after dumping his crippled wife and securing a divorce.

McCain followed his young, millionairess wife back to Arizona. Not long after settling in, the former POW newlywed was introduced to Darrow “Duke” Tully, publisher of the conservative and powerful Arizona Republic and the Phoenix Gazette.

Tully, who quickly became a close friend of McCain, wasted no time in using the power of his newspapers to jump start McCain’s political career. His newspapers endorsed McCain’s first run for Congress and touted him as successor for retiring Sen. Barry Goldwater.

Described as “equal parts cowboy, commando, swashbuckler and elegant tycoon” by the Chicago Tribune, Tully was “a George Patton who drove a Corvette, a Randolph Hearst who flew an F-16, a John Wayne in aviator glasses and Air Force dress blues.”

Tully appeared to have a lot in common with his close friend, former Navy combat pilot and war hero McCain. Tully boasted of his 100 missions over Vietnam, retiring from the Air Force as a lieutenant-colonel. Tully’s military service, according to Tully, included air combat in Korea, where he once was forced to crash land his P-51 Mustang fighter and spent time in a hospital as a result–so he said. His smashed front teeth were replaced with stainless steel, he also said.

Tully, just like his friend McCain, claimed he had received the Purple Heart, Distinguished Flying Cross and the Vietnam Cross of Gallantry.

Tully painstaking groomed McCain for public office. He introduced him to the influential and gave him guest column space in The Arizona Republic. He manipulated endless favorable references from the paper’s other columnists. McCain, in turn, honored Tully by asking him to be godfather of one of his children

However, the day after Christmas 1985, it was revealed in the Chicago Tribune, that McCain’s close friend Duke Tully had “an imagination as big as his ego.”

Tully had never even been the military.

At the same time McCain’s political ambitions were being assisted by Tully, he had cultivated political relationships with developer and future Arizona governor Fife Symington III and lawyer, politician and banker Charles Keating Jr.

When Goldwater did not to run for re-election to the Senate in 1986, McCain’s powerful new friends quickly catapulted him into Goldwater’s Arizona senate seat.

In the senate, McCain managed to stay low key until suddenly he found himself on television trying to explain himself as one of the “Keating 5,” five senators who became enmeshed in the scandal involving the collapsed Lincoln Savings and Loan and the financial machinations of Charles Keating.

Keating was convicted of federal fraud and racketeering charges and in 1997, McCain’s friend Symington was forced out of office after being convicted on seven counts of fraud.

For years McCain has successfully cultivated a false facade as the “straight-talking” politician unsullied by big-money influence of special-interest groups. He has shrewdly manipulated most of the national press corps into ignoring (or forgiving) facts that expose him as a disreputable character and enemy of the truth..

Reports from a variety of U.S. publications exposed McCain’s true scandalous character

The Arizona Republic – October 17, 1989” . . . both in telephone conversations with reporters and on a live radio talk show, the Republican senator was far from calm. He was agitated. Angry. And the way he dealt with unpleasant questions was to bully the questioners . . . ‘You’re a liar,’ McCain snapped Sept. 29 when an Arizona Republic reporter asked him about business ties between his wife, Cindy McCain, and Keating . . . ‘That’s the spouse’s involvement, you idiot,’ McCain sneered later in the same conversation. ‘You do understand English, don’t you?’ “. . . Not content with just bullying reporters, McCain tried belittling them: ‘It’s up to you to find that out, kids.’ . . . McCain wasn’t talking to liars. He wasn’t talking to juveniles. The senator was talking to two reporters.”

The Arizona Republic – October 17, 1989 — “McCain, in a radio talk-show appearance last week condemned disclosures of his family’s ties to Keating as ‘irresponsible journalism.'”

The Phoenix Gazette, November 13, 1989 — “Reporters also ‘discovered’ that the senator’s wife and father-in-law invested $359,100.00 in one of Mr. Keating’s projects in 1986 . . .”

The Arizona Republic, April 29, 1990 — “McCain’s involvement with Keating . . . when reporters called him with questions last year about previously unknown ties to Keating, an investment by wife Cindy McCain in a Keating shopping center and trips to Keating’s Bahamas home, McCain went into a rage.”

New Republic, Dec. 31, 1990–“The only Republican of the bunch [the five Senators], John McCain of Arizona wins credit for finally drawing the line. After the second of the two April meetings [with Federal regulators] he told Mr. [Sen. Dennis] DeConcini [D-Ariz.] and Mr. Keating that he wouldn’t lean on the regulators any more. Mr. Keating called him a wimp. But before the rupture, Mr. McCain and his family were regular guests of Mr. Keating’s on trips to the Bahamas. Mr. McCain reimbursed the owner of Lincoln Savings and Loan for only a small fraction of the cost of these holidays. Yet, he never reported the vacations on Senate disclosure forms, or his income taxes. He said he thought his wife had paid Mr. Keating back. This is hard to believe.”

Economist, Mar. 9, 1991–“Mr. McCain, despite his claims of innocense, was the only one of the five who benefitted personally–family holidays in the Bahamas on Mr. Keating’s tab.”

New Republic, Sept. 9, 1991–Calling McCain part of the “Senatorial Lincoln Brigade,” the New Republic reported that Keating, while bankrupting his savings and loan, had channeled $1.4 million to the campaigns or causes of the five senators, who in turn pressured the savings and loan regulators to back off our friend.”

Regardie’s magazine, April-May 1992 issue. “Ultimately, the fall of Lincoln Savings and Loan will cost the U.S. taxpayers $2 billion. It lost $1 million dollars a day from the time Keating bought it in 1984 until its collapse in 1989, and yet he continued to pay off McCain as ‘one of his assets.'”

Cindy McCain escaped prosecution for stealing/using drugs

The Arizona Republic, August 24, 1994 — “Cindy McCain, the wife of U.S. Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, admitted in a series of media interviews Monday that she became addicted to the painkillers Percocet and Vicodin. She said that she used the drugs from 1989 to 1992 and acknowledged that she had stolen some pills from the American Voluntary Medical Team, a charitable organization of which she is president . . . at one point, McCain, 40, was ingesting 15 to 20 pills a day . . . the normal dosage for seriously ill patients is 6 to 10 a day for a short period.”

The Phoenix Gazette, August 25, 1994 — “Cindy McCain was investigated recently by the Drug Enforcement Administration for stealing and using Percocet and Vicodin, both narcotic painkillers from her aid organization . . . the county attorney’s report provides a window to drug dealings within Cindy McCain’s nonprofit corporation . . . Gosinski also alleged that Cindy McCain abused her husband’s office and diplomatic privileges by transporting illegal substances overseas. He also claimed, according to her lawyers, that Cindy McCain tried to prevent him from providing accurate information to the DEA.”

Playboy, July 1999. — “Ms. McCain admitted stealing Percocet and Vicodin from the American Voluntary Medical Team, an organization that aids Third World countries. Percocet and Vicodin are schedule 2 drugs, in the same legal category as opium. Each pill theft carries a penalty of one year in prison and a monetary fine.” However, McCain did not face prosecution. She was allowed to enter a pretrial diversion program and escaped with no blemish to her record. Source: James Bovard, Prison Sentences of the Politically Connected.

McCain’s Crime family connection

The Arizona Republic Jan. 17, 1995 “About 300 guests turned out Saturday night to celebrate the 90th birthday of Joseph ‘Joe Bananas’ Bonanno, retired boss of New York’s Bonanno crime family. He retired to Tucson in 1968 . . . John McCain, R-Ariz., and Gov. Fife Symington sent their regards by telegram.”

Join the U.S. Veteran Dispatch Eagle message board.

Home Back Next E-Mail



January 10, 2008 Leave a comment




Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,489 other followers