Zcom_simple

Hello,

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.

Blogs

Occupy_iowa_city_rally

Paul Street's Blog

Web Address: http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/paulstreet
Bio:         Paul Street is an independent radical-democratic policy researcher, journalist, historian, and speaker based in Iowa City, Iowa, and Chicago, Illinois.&nbs... (More)

All Street Blogs

Time to Knock the Table out from Under President Pinocchio's Elbows

By Paul Street at Mar 02, 2006


Change Text Size a- | A+

According to the Associated Press (AP) today (March 2, 2006), George Bush II received explict advance warnings about Hurricane Katrina's monumental scale and impact late last summer. 

"In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms," the AP reports, "federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, put lives at risk in New Orleans’ Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage."  See http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11627394/

The warning took place during a video FEMA/Homeland Security briefing that Bush II viewed from his vacation headquarters on August 28, 2006, one day before Katrina hit land. 

During the briefing, the AP notes, "a top hurricane expert voiced 'grave concerns' about the levees and then-Federal Emergency Management Agency chief Michael Brown told the president and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that he feared there weren’t enough disaster teams to help evacuees at the Superdome."

"Bush didn’t ask a single question during the final briefing," the AP adds,  "before Katrina struck on Aug. 29, but he assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: 'We are fully prepared.'"

Four days after the storm, Bush II said the following: "I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.”

Let me repeat that: four days after the storm, Bush said the following: "I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.” 

But according to the AP,  "the transcripts and video show there was plenty of talk about that possibility — and Bush was worried too." 

"Bush appeared from a narrow, windowless room at his vacation ranch in Texas, with his elbows on a table."

Will it matter?

Bush lied about WMDs and alleged al-Qaeda-Saddam links in Iraq in order to start a momumentally illegal and immoral war that has killed more than 100,000 Iraqis and 2,000 U.S. soldiers. 

The lie has been openly exposed, but Bush II and his guardian Cheney still have their jobs. 

Bush said late last year that he would have invaded Iraq even if he had known that Saddam's government lacked WMD. The real motive, he says, was the export of freedom and democracy: "liberating Iraq." 

But if you go back and look at his speeches and radio addresses leading up to the invasion of Iraq, you will easily see that Iraqi WMDs were far and away the critical reason he gave the American people for illegally occupying Mesopotamia. So now he has admited to lying to the American people about why he invaded by Iraq.

Bush and Cheney still have their jobs.  

And by the way, Bush is lying when he says he wants to create a genuinely free and independent, sovereign Iraq. Please.

Bush has said over and again that does not condone torture and that America does not engage in that terrible practice. This is total falsification. Bush has consciously approved the use of torture in the execution of his so-called war on terrorism. He's lying.  

His denials have been exposed as deception. His actions have been exposed as illegal.

And still he sits in the White House. 

In April 2004 Bush II said that he never orders surveillance of suspected terrorists without first getting a court order "because we value the Constitution." 

This has been openly exposed as a monumental lie across the dominant communications empire.

And still Cheney, Rove, and Bush II hold power.

Bush has lied over and over again about the nature of his plutocratic tax cuts, repeatedly claiming that they primarily benefit "middle-class" and ordinary working Americans.  They actually work mainly on behalf of the super-opulent few in what was already the industrialized world's most unequal and wealth-top-heavy society by far.  Bush II's tax deceptions have been openly, systematically, comprehensively, and repeatedly exposed. 

And still he sits in the most powerful office on earth.

These are just the more spectacular tips of the Bush Iceberg of High State Deception.  Bush's lies are exhausting to track. They will some day be the subject for multi-volume analysis...multiple monograph accounts that will take weeks to digest.   

And still he rides in Air Force One.  

I am more into radical social and economic change than I am into impeachment.  But it's iincreasingly difficult to avoid the conclusion that that basic constitutional weapon needs to be dusted off and deployed again as soon as possible

We've got to get a little democratic self-respect back here in the "land of freedom." Impeachment is a good place to start,  

It's time to knock the table out from President Pinocchio's elbows.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Person

What is Written is Written

By Kissenger, Clark at Mar 05, 2006 18:46 PM

Paul

 

What is wrtitten is written.  Jefferson and the Founding Fathers were different men for a different time.  And though the words might have been meant for certain elite landowners, they were penned nevertheless.  And now, today, we are men of this time and the need is there and the underlying principle is true and right. This nation and these peoples have suffered too patiently and too long these excessive burdens placed upon us, our children, our children's children and our earth by these "enlightened few", these greedy pigs who frankly aren't worth the bloody discards at birth for all their money, their education, and their power.

And please do not associate either God or religion with the current state of affairs.  I assure you that these men have used religion in the same way they have used governments in the pursuit of their blood money. They take that which is engendered with purity and honesty and enlightenment, and they spoil it with their touch and use it for gain.

Personally, I think we, as a people, have more than an option to change things, we have an obligation.  And if we do not do something then how can we grow old gracefully without guilt and continue to look our children in their eyes?

 

Reply this comment


Person

Impeachment versus Revolution

By Kissenger, Clark at Mar 05, 2006 16:59 PM

Sure...I would prefer revolution  --- the right to which is pronounced in the Declaration of Independence (though at the political, not the social level) over mere impeachment.  The 1776 document says something radical for its time --- that governments derive just authority only from the freely given consent of the governed, not from Divine Right and other such nonsense.  The impeachment right given in the constitution is partly a reflection of that progressive (for the late 18th century) idea.  

 

But Victor should be careful about over-idealizing the DOI. Read the part where it gives the list of King George's bad deeds.  The list includes inciting slaves and "savages"  (first nations North Americans) to rebellion against their white male colonial rulers. 

 

We know of course that Jefferson's vision of the relevant people whose consent mattered was the limited republic of white male property owners and that he did not want a true social revolution. 

 

I agree that impeachment is an elite and limited 'corrective' that falls far short of the deep and radical restructuring that is required.  Based on recent reports about global warming (see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11640662/ for one small example), it may already be too late to save a livable ecology even if we miraculously smashed ecocidal petrocapitalism in a spectacular Green-Red revolution initiated tomorrow morning. Still, I think it would be a positive development, consistent with democratic renewal and full of all kinds of collateral benefits, if citizens undertook a serious campaign pressuring legislators to actually impeach King Dubya, who really seems to think he has a Divine Right to do whatever horrible and/or idiotic  thing he wishes...because he can and because the mere citizens are irrelevant.  

 

Reply this comment


Person

There is no rescue but" hey

By Kissenger, Clark at Mar 05, 2006 10:46 AM

There is no rescue but" hey Georges Bush Sr" went on pious TV and reiterated an evanlegistic message that HIS prayers was with the Louisiana people with this "act of god..".

Reply this comment


Person

Bush

By Kissenger, Clark at Mar 05, 2006 10:41 AM

Bush is creating a huge debt to the american people over HIS profitable war.. only he and his friends will make a killing with this war .. The most gruesome part is should people burn or drown in the US, there is nobody there to the rescue..

Reply this comment


Person

Ah, Yes. The Tool...

By Kissenger, Clark at Mar 04, 2006 08:52 AM

Paul

It's not the dusty ole Constitutional tool of impeachment we need to dust off.  As you have said so many times before. Getting rid of a single person is not going to do it.  It's the structure that needs fixing.  It's the structure that allows the most suspect, criminally oriented political animals to rise to the top, leaving far behind whatever ethics and morals they might have at one time possessed.

No, Paul, the dusty ole tool we need to take down off the shelf and get it all shined up again for use is called the Declaration of Independence, one of the finest documents ever written by the hand of man.  Allow me one small quote and I will stand back and let others absorb the depth of its meaning:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

 

    

Reply this comment


Person

The military should have

By Kissenger, Clark at Mar 03, 2006 22:17 PM

The military should have been there helping to evacuate and rescue people. the poor response to this disaster was proportional to the incompetence of the president. that respone was rendered mostly innefective because the military were too busy "murdering arabs.. If I recall the California fires were also another disaster from where the rescue from the military was almost inexistant.. The primary roles of the militarty should always be to protect the people not make war in countries it does not belong..

Reply this comment


Person

Press Response

By Kissenger, Clark at Mar 03, 2006 06:42 AM

This has been openly exposed as a monumental lie across the dominant communications empire.
Unfortunately, even with remarkably heavy lathers of press coverage all over the indisputably-criminal acts you enumerate, there still remains a lot of insouciance on these issues on the part of the major news outlets.  Take Chris Matthews for example: On his program today, he, as usual, had one of those Republican spin doctors on to have a debate about "leveegate" (we just know the mainstream media is going to soon follow suit, so we might as well just start adding on the "gate" suffix now) with, and after having been deluged as heavily as was New Orleans with Katrina with a bunch of irrelevant nonsense about the actions Bush supposedly took in addressing the storm from his guest, Matthews said something to the effect of, "You see how much we can clear up when you come on?"  The apparent inconsistency with Bush's statement about the levees and what he was disclosed to have known about before Katrina hit land in the newly-released video practically went without discussion, despite it supposedly being the topical centerpiece for the segment.  I'm not sure if Matthews was just being biased or if he was merely stupid enough to fall for the old "rhetorical overload" trick.  Sometimes, I feel his characteristics to allude to both conditionals being true to some extent.

Reply this comment

Loading_border