Blogs are a familiar feature on the internet - where users post content in an accumulating manner, with comments, and search options, etc. They facilitate expression and exploration, and via attached comments, also debate and synthesis.
Reading and Navigating Blogs
Our blogs are quite powerful. Each writer can post, as is typically the case. Sustainers who have the option can also post, however. All Blogs appear in the blog system, and sometimes also in content boxes the top page of ZNet - and always via the left menu of the top page - and can be found via searches, etc.
Commenting on blogs follows the blogs, attached at the bottom, and blog comments, like all others, are also visible in many places that show comments including in the forum system. In addition, the entire blog system gathers content for everyone - but one can look at the accumulating content in many ways.
For example one can look at one writer's efforts - so one is seeing what is effectively a blog system for that one writer, or Sustainer.
One can also look at the content by topic, seeing blogs that are tagged as being about a certain topic - or place, as well. Thus, when doing that, it is a blog system about a topic, or a place, with many contributors.
One can look at only writer blogs, or only sustainer blogs, as well.
One can look at blogs for particular Groups, too.
All this is easily done using the left menu. Searches allow even more variables and refinements.
Creating Blog Posts
If you are a Sustainer with permission, and are logged in, you will see a link in the left menu for you to post a blog - and you can use that to post one, and then tag it various ways (such as with a topic or place, or a group tag), and once you do, it is in the system with you as the author.
You can also use the console button to the left to post a blog - anytime and from anywhere in the site, as long as you are logged in.
Meanwhile, enjoy the blogs - and, by the way, if you are a Free Member or a Sustainer with a ZSpace page, of course you can put one or more content boxes on it, pulling blog links of any sort you may want to filter for, for example, by you or by your friends or by others - and by topic, about places, for groups, etc.
The scheduled release of declassified documents in the official State Department history is 30 years. In practice it is a bit longer, about 35 years or so usually.
Of course, not everything is declassified. Sometimes it turns out on independent investigation by serious historians that the record has been seriously falsified by omission. Occasionally there are administrations that have such extraordinary hatred of democracy that they simply destroy crucial records rather than allow the feared and despised public to know what their government is doing, even decades later.
The most extreme example is the folks who are now running Washington, in their Reaganite phase, and are now described by the press and commentators as "Wilsonian idealists" pursuing their Leader's "messianic vision" of bringing democracy for the world, the evidence being that his speech writers declare this to be true. When in office in the 1980s, they refused to release -- and perhaps destroyed -- records of the overthrow of the elected governments of Iran and Guatemala in 1953, 1954, opening the way in both cases to decades of vicious state crimes. That violation of standard practice was so extreme that the State Department historians, quite a conservative lot, resigned in public protest. I can't recall another case like it.
There is no statute of limitations on these crimes of state. But it doesn't matter. The fundamental principle of international justice is that the powerful are exempt, as a matter of principle. That principle was enshrined in the Nuremberg Tribunal, which is understood to be the foundation of modern "universalization" of justice -- where "universal" is understood to mean: excluding us. That reaches even as far as outright genocide.
The World Court is still considering a charge brought by Yugoslavia against NATO under the genocide convention. The US removed itself from the case on the grounds that when it ratified the Genocide Convention (after 40 years), it added the usual reservation to the (very few) human rights conventions that the US has ratified: it is inapplicable to the US ("non self-executing," in technical terms). The World Court correctly accepted this argument.
The principle is so deeply embedded in the moral and intellectual culture that it is apparently imperceptible. Thus a few weeks ago, the national press reported the release of Nixon-Kissinger interchanges (over Kissinger's strong objections). The report noted in passing that Kissinger, always the obedient bureaucrat, transmitted Nixon's orders to bomb Cambodia with the words: "A massive bombing campaign in Cambodia. Anything that flies on anything that moves."
I cannot think of a comparable call for extraordinary war crimes. If someone were to unearth a document in which Milosevic orders the Serbian air force to reduce Bosnia or Kosovo to rubble with the words "Anything that flies on anything that moves" -- or even something remotely approaching it -- the prosecutors would be overjoyed, the trial would end, and Milosevic would be sent off to many successive life sentences for the crime of genocide, a death sentence if the Tribunal followed US conventions. In this case, after casual mention in the world's leading newspaper, there was no detectable interest, even though the horrendous consequences are well-known. And rightly, if we adopt, given the principle that we cannot -- by definition -- carry out crimes or have any responsibility for them.