Exposed: The Carlyle Group

Unlike most of my other posts, I purposely prevented the title from being clickable because the page from Information Clearing House, has an imbeded video file. This file is in Real Video format, 28 mbs large, and lasts appoximately an hour. Some of you may not like clicking on something like that without knowing what it is first.

I'm on dial-up myself, but still chose to download and save it for later. I was not disappointed. This video goes into some of the people who are profiting from Iraq, by profiling the Carlyle Group. There's very little to read on the page itself, and as the video is of Dutch origin, the first minute forty seven seconds is in Dutch, with a translation of that segment on the page. The rest of the show is in English. Here's an excerpt of the translation:

On their payroll are people like : George Bush (Sr.), James Baker III and old premier John Major.

The Carlyle Group is a private investment bank which doesn't come to the publics attention very often but it is one of the biggest American (ed: USA) investors of the defense industry, telecom, property and financial services.

What is the Carlyle Group? Who are the people behind the name? And how much power does Carlyle have?

If you're interested in watching it, right-click here to download, or here if you wish to watch from the page.

Bush - AWOL from Supporting our Troops

This is from a decidedly anti-Bush website. On the front page is a list of actions that show just how truly supportive the current administration and their Repblican allies really are. While they make claims that any dissent about the war "sends mixed signals to the troops" (who apparently have no minds of their own, and must be protected from all but pro-war sentiment), just what kind of signal does this list appear to send to them?

* Bush Administration cuts $1.5 billion from military family housing.

*Bush Republicans support millionaires instead of military veterans.

*Bush Administration underfunded veterans' health care by $2 billion.

*Bush Administration proposal would end health care benefits for 173,000 veterans.

*Bush Administration budget cuts force more than 200,000 veterans to wait for health care.

*Bush Administration opposed plan to give National Guard and Reserve Members access to health insurance.

*Bush Administration cuts $172 million allotted for educating the children of military personnel.

*Bush Administration tax cut denies military families increase in child tax credit.

(There are brief explanations under each of those items. The rest of the site just rambles on about Bushs' questionable military service.)

Talk about sending mixed signals. What I'd like to know is, just how is cutting funding for actual support for the troops, both in regards to financially supporting them and their families, as well as saving money by sending an ill-equipt, and way too small a force, off to war, supporting the troops? We all know that had a sizable enough force been sent in the first place (with proper equipment), it could've restored order to Iraq much sooner, and cost far less American and Iraqi lives. Even one of their own, John McCain, recently suggested rising the level of troop deployment to Iraq, because as a veteran himself, he knows full well that that an insufficiant force can lead to disaster. Too bad it's too little, and way too late.

Questioning the war is anti-American, confusing to the troops, immoral, and giving aide to terrorists, but underfunding is ok? Make no mistake, they aren't trying to save money because they're fiscally responsible. On the contrary, they're just as tax-and-spend as the Democrats, with the only difference being who gets taxed, and who gets to benefit. What incredible hypocracy.

Not Necessarily the News:

Here's an another article showing one of the reasons I can't stand the U.S. media.

"How Sinclair Broadcast Group bent the rules, bought politicians, and faked the news to become one of the largest independent owners of television stations in America."

"Chances are you’ve never heard of Sinclair Broadcast Group. Sure, it might be the largest independent owner of television stations in America, an empire of sixty channels spread across thirty-seven cities with a signal that reaches nearly a quarter of the TV-watching public, but even if you happen to receive that signal and watch it every night, getting your Sinclair news and Sinclair weather and Sinclair commentary from a Sinclair station, chances are you’ve still never heard of Sinclair and have no idea you’re watching it."

There's been so much media-generated spin on the so-called Liberal Media, you'd think it was a dominant force in America, but it's not. The liberal media is mostly a phantom, and a red herring, used by conservatives to quell anything that doesn't tow the (republican) party line. Why do you think there was so much fuss from the conservatives when Air America Radio was launched? It was because it's the exception, not the rule, as far as "Liberal" radio goes. The main bulk of radio talk shows are predominantly conservative in their politics.

I've always liked listening to radio talk shows when at work, as opposed to listening to the same songs played over and over again. Years ago, I was able to hear a fairly even mix of political views, but begining in the 80s, I began noticing, one by one, the liberal hosts were being replaced by conservative ones. And today, they ( Con/Rep) act like their message is constantly drowned out by a phantom called the "Liberal Media". Nothing could be farther from the truth

Now, I've never mentioned which side of the political fence I sit on in this blog, though you may guess by some of my posts that I'm a Liberal/Democrat. You'd be wrong. I'm neither Democrat nor Republican, Liberal, or Conservative. If you don't believe me, just wait till the next time we get a Democratic administration. I think for myself, and would never join any group that I couldn't believe in 100%, and since I have no political party (or ideology) to follow blindly, I have to make up my own mind, which means I need information. One of the avenues of information is the media, and through it, I expect to find as many viewpoints as can fit in a given time slot. But from what I've seen, as in the case of the Sinclair Broadcast Group, the media in general, has become nothing more than a one-sided tool for the establishment (ie; government). Oh, they may give the other side some air play, sometimes, but then they'll give even more air time to the conservative viewpoint.

Even local TV station anchors get into the act by throwing in little comments after running a story opposing the status quo with "Hmm, can you believe that?", or "Well, lets hope that doesn't happen", or "I don't think that's a popular opinion". Subtle, but all their seemingly unscripted banter, always tends to support whatever the goverment position is. And since local achors are promoted as likable celebrities, local people (no matter where they originally came from), trusted, and looking out for your best interests and that of the community, their little comments are being used to influence public opinion. Once upon a time, newscasters did like the print media by having a separate, announced, segment for airing their opinions, now they subtilely sprinkle them throughout the program, incorporating their "personal" opinions within the news storys.

Remember the farce about the Public Broadcasting System (PBS), where there was talk about it being too liberally biased? About cutting it's funding, of killing it altogether? Where do you think that stink rose from? For a time, PBS was being attacked on all sides, even from conservative pulpits. Remember how they tried to trash the childrens programming by calling Sesame Streets' Bert and Ernie, as well as the Teletubbies' Tinky Winky, gay? It was all designed kill a broadcast system that wasn't acting properly in regards to it's independant style of programming. It wasn't towing the party line. They did manage to get rid of Bill Moyers. His crime, asking too many of the wrong questions, and exposing things that were supposed to stay hidden.

And the media, which is owned mostly by conservative-minded mega corporations, still has the the gall to call itself, with pride, a Free Press. Bullshit!

The Corporate Media’s threat to Freedom

"There is no similarity between the corporate media and a “free press”. The corporate media operates according to its structural make-up, which requires it to serve the interests of ownership and maximize profits. Its top-down style of management ensures that it will align itself with the political centers of power which create the opportunity for greater prosperity. This explains why the media giants have consistently concealed the Bush administration’s attacks on civil liberties, supported the expansion of executive power, and paved the way for global war. After all, they are just acting in their own best interest, accommodating the political establishment to allow for more consolidation and expansion. One hand washes the other."

"The cozy relationship between the administration and the media has made it nearly impossible to tell where one ends and the other begins. In fact, the media is the primary instrument of state policy. Its task is to shape the public’s perception of government and to project a benign image of the US to the world beyond."

I'm so greatful for the internet. It came, just in time. Good thing we don't have to rely on mainstream news. Can you imagine this story running on any corporate media?

Veteran Unemployment Rate Skyrockets

"The return to civilian life for U.S. Soldiers deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan is full of pitfalls, with an unemployment rate three times the national average."

"The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics says that for the first three quarters of 2005, nearly 15 percent of veterans aged 20-24 are jobless -- three times the national average."

"According to the website VeteransToday, published by veterans for veterans, the high unemployment rate is "partly because most service members seriously injured in Iraq and Afghanistan are in the early stages of their military careers and possess limited transferable job skills or very little civilian work experience". "

Hmm, I believe I touched on this subject just yesterday. The deaths are constantly reported, but the survivers are seldom mentioned in the press. We go through this after every single war, and here we go again. While there's a lot society can do to help these vets, the government that enlisted them should take the lead, with a little more than just some Veterans Administration care. They should not be simply discharged and forgotten. Politicians like to speak so highly of them when there's a war to be fought, but when they get hurt, they get tossed aside.

God Hates America -- A Warning to the USA!!!

"The Westboro Baptist Church used to pray for the good of America, knowing that God's blessings are mighty and His hand could be stayed from punishing this wicked nation, just as He stayed His hand from punishing Nineveh. America chose to spit in the face of their Creator, instead of heeding WBC's warnings, and now it is too late to pray for this nation."

"It is a sin NOT to take pleasure in the wrathful out pourings of God's justice on this nation. "The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked" (Ps. 58:10)."

My local TV station ran a story on these creeps last night. Their "pleasure in the wrathful out pourings of God's justice" includes picketing at the funerals of dead U.S. servicemen and women, and shouting that they've all gone to hell (and so is everyone else, except themselves). Pure lunacy, but what can be expected from the ones who run GodHatesFags.com.

These morons believe that God is punishing the U.S. for it's tolerance of homosexuals, and are actually happy about the deaths of each soldier killed because they believe it to be Gods' punishment. Really sick, but just how far away are they from the other right-wing conservative (so-called) Christians? Not very far at all.

Fortunately they're still a small group from Kansas (where else), but all movements start out small someplace. The reason I posted this is to show that Islam has no patent on vile extremism. These people are only a step or two beyond people like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, and so far as I can tell, only a step shy of becoming instruments of Gods wrath, themselves.

Like many other radical (so-called) Christians, they seem to find more inspiration in the Old Testament, rather than the New. I suppose there's just not enough to feed their hate-mongering within the pages of the New Testament (with the exception of the book of Revelations), which is what true Christians are supposed to abide by.

Not having been raised in a devoutly religious household, I didn't pay much attention to religious movements. Not until the Iranian revolution, and the subsequent taking of American hostages. That's when I began to notice just how hateful some Christians can be in the practice of their faith. Of course, I saw such behavior earlier during the Civil Rights movement, but attributed that more to racism, than their faith. It was during the rise of the "Moral Majority" with Falwell at the forefront, that I began listening to people like that, and what I heard left a sickening stench in the air. It became clear to me that there was a large portion of "true believers" that were not very different from the Islam extremist we were told was the real the enemy.

Just as some followers of Islam have perverted their religion to propagate hate, so have some Christians. It's also obvious to me that if these people were to grab hold of an entire nation, that they would be just as bad as the Iranian clerics who took control of that country, and set humanity back hundreds of years. Just as bad as the Taliban, along with their Al-Qaeda friends. They would bring back the Inquisition. They wouldn't be happy until they took things all the way back to at least the days of the Salem Witch Trials, where God ruled supreme, and fear and suspicion was the order of the day.

People talk about how backward and socially restrictive Islamic fundamentalist can be when they take charge, but if you listen to the words of some of the (so-called) Christians, you'll see that their tolerance for those that (in their opinion) stray from Gods path, is non-existant. They preach death and destruction just like their counterparts.

Keep in mind, just as radical Islam cannot abide democracy when it comes to Gods' law, neither can the kingdom of Gods'. In the minds of these people, you do not get to vote, on anything. Do as they say, or you're going straight to hell, and they'll gladly help you get there.

Fewer Iraq Casualties Fatal

"The survival rate for U.S. servicemembers wounded in Iraq has reached 90 percent, higher than in any previous war, and 10 points higher than in the 1991 Persian Gulf War."

"The major reason, says the general in charge of Army medical training, is improved trauma care being delivered moments after injury by medics and a growing number of soldiers trained as combat lifesavers."

This is certainly good news.

However, keeping in mind that U.S. fatalites are taking place on a daily basis, as well as the recent media-hyped "milestone" of 2,000 fatalities, we should remember that though we're allowed to know the ever growing number of fatalities, there's also an ever growing number of wounded, the number of which, we don't know. The administration is keeping that a secret, as much as it's been preventing publicity on returning coffins.

If we can at least assume the wounded outnumber the deaths, that means thousands of wounded, many of whom are probably disabled for life. The temporarily wounded are probably sent back as soon as they're able.

The fatalities will eventually become just a number, like the 58,000+ lives lost to Viet Nam. But I remember meeting many wounded survivors of that war, during the first two decades after it ended. I never met any as a group, but individually, under many different circumstances. If history is any lesson, these new vets are also going to affect our society for years to come. Most of the Nam vets I knew, were not the ones able to rise to prominence such as the likes of John Kerry or John McCain. The ones I met were damaged, both mentally and physically. The ones with mental problems due to the war, had a much greater impact on society than the others. Many, if not hooked on drugs overseas, got hooked after returning and finding they just could not cope. Alcoholism, drug addiction, spousal abuse, crime, or just not being able to adjust enough to hold a steady job. There was not enough help for them, and in many cases, no simpathy from the government they served either. There was no understanding, and no tolerance for even discussing the issues relating to returning vets. This nation was so tired of the war, that when it was over, everyone just wanted to forget, and move on. Forgetting the war, meant forgetting the vets too, and we did.

No matter how you feel about this war, let's not make the same mistake this time around. Remember, and help those who return with only part of their lives. They badly need us.

Make Poverty History , Hasn't

"Remember Make Poverty History, anyone? It seems a long time ago that some 200,000 people flocked to Edinburgh on 2 July to rally G8 leaders as part of an unprecedented global justice campaign. That same day, Bob Geldof organised free music concerts in nine countries worldwide under the Live 8 banner. The demands were straightforward and reasonable: rich countries should boost overseas aid in line with 35-year-old unmet promises; cancel completely the debts of the 62 poorest countries; set binding dates for the abolition of subsidies and other protectionist support to Northern farmers; and stop forcing liberalisation and privatisation on poor countries, whether in international trade negotiations or as conditions of aid and debt deals."

Want to know what's happened since? Not a damned thing. Didn't think anything would, did you? Implementing all those promises would've meant the possibility that the global standard of living might rise, and certain people don't want that.

It's not really about the money. It's not that the impossible was sought. It's about power and control. Anyone who's ever been indebted, knows it's their creditor that holds all the cards. As long as the creditor owns the debtor, he makes the rules and conditions. He can change the rules whenever he likes, and always to the advantage of the creditor, and the indebted can do nothing about it.

The way it stands, the people who hold all the cards, and thus the power, see no reason to give up the control they have over millions of lives, that can do nothing to control their own destinys. It's to their advantage to keep the poor, poor, for if they could break their bondage, they would regain control over their own lives, their economies, and possibly become economic competitors. That would mean they might become powerful too, and that means the currently powerful, might have to give up some it, or worse, share it.

Evolutionists Using Copyright Against Kansas

"Last week, the National Academy of Sciences, or NAS, joined with the National Science Teachers Association, or NSTA, to tell the Kansas State Board of Education that it would not grant the state copyright permission to incorporate its science education standards manuals into the state's public school science curriculum because Kansas plans to teach students that "intelligent design" is a viable alternative theory to evolution. Kansas is scrambling to rewrite its proposal to win over the NAS and NSTA."

As much as I'd like to see Intelligent Design stay in the churches where it belongs, I'm strongly against the use of copyrights to prevent its' inclusion into science education. Instead of coming up with intelligent, logical arguments against it, they resort to the tactic of copyright threats. By doing this, they're essentually saying they have no legitimate arguments, so they strong-arm. They're giving fuel to the other side, and I think it'll backfire. Oh, it may work in this case, but in the long run, it could cause problems.

They should have put far more effort into explaining to the public, before their recent vote, exactly what science is, and what it's not. They should have made clear the current, and continuing scientific knowledge regarding evolution, and given clear rebuttals to the pre-election day ID propaganda.

I'm sure they're frustrated at seeing continuous religious attempts to degrade and pervert science, but this method of 'do like I say, or else' , is the tool of the religious, and the scientific community shouldn't stoop to that level.

Bill O'Reillys' Big Mouth

After the voters of San Francisco voted to ban military recruiting from puplic high schools and colleges, O'Reilly went on a tirade with this spewing out of his foaming mouth:

From the November 8 broadcast of Fox News' The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:

"O'REILLY: Hey, you know, if you want to ban military recruiting, fine, but I'm not going to give you another nickel of federal money. You know, if I'm the president of the United States, I walk right into Union Square, I set up my little presidential podium, and I say, "Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you're not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead."

"And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."

O'Reilly joined Pat Robertson in wishing disaster on those who didn't vote the way he thinks they should have.

It's incredible and sad that so many people listen to, and believe these guys. This kind of venom that wishes death on anyone who doesn't see things their way, is another example of what you get when you refuse to blindly follow the party line.

If you're interested, there's an effort to get O'Reilly knocked off the air by complaining to his sponsors. I think that's a little extreme, as I prefer to let the idiots speak, so we know who they are, and can see them for what they are, but if you want to see him off the airwaves, visit The Daily Kos.

If you are one of O'Reillys' supporters, here's a previous post for you to look at;
"Pro-war parents: How to get your kid into uniform".