Things to consider—

Since early 2011, Obama's been waging proxy war on Syria. Imported death squads masquerade as freedom fighters. The scheme's familiar. It repeats. It reflects US imperialism's dark side. In the 1980s, CIA-recruited mujahideen fighters battled Afghanistan's Soviet occupiers. Ronald Reagan called them "the moral equivalent of our founding fathers." He characterized Contra killers the same way. —Stephen LendmanFor over a century now US ambassadors have acted as fifth columns in the nations they are embedded in, their role chiefly to foster corporate and plutocratic power and coordinate machinations against any truly pro-democratic government.•••••"The dead end identity politics of SF Pride, which sells out a peace hero like Bradley Manning to curry favor with the American ruling class, is what I had in mind. The empire loves your tameness, irrelevance and cowardice, SF Pride. You don’t bother the American ruling class — a five foot two, 105 pound soldier does because he has a conscience and because he didn’t make comfort the guiding principle of his life...." —Randy Shields
  • Apple’s tax dodge: The case for public ownership

    Apple’s tax dodge: The case for public ownership

    Guest Editorials— By Andre Damon, wsws.org The US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released a report Monday showing that electronics giant Apple Inc. uses offshore tax shelters to avoid taxes on the majority of its income and cheated the US government out of $9 billion in 2012 alone. That same day, a tornado leveled the town [...]

  • Rise Up or Die

    Rise Up or Die

     By Chris Hedges Joe Sacco and I spent two years reporting from the poorest pockets of the United States for our book “Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt.”We went into our nation’s impoverished “sacrifice zones”—the first areas forced to kneel before the dictates of the marketplace—to show what happens when unfettered corporate capitalism and ceaseless economic expansion [...]

  • Argentinean Nightmare

    Argentinean Nightmare

    Patricio Pron’s “My Father’s Ghost is Climbing in the Rain” by CHARLES R. LARSON, Counterpunch Patricio Pron’s publishers refer to My Father’s Ghost Is Climbing in the Rain as an autobiographical novel.  More likely, the book is an autobiography with a few details altered to protect the innocent, although the innocent became victims long ago.  The book [...]

  • Stockholm Smolders

    Stockholm Smolders

    Xenophobia Rising in Sweden by S.C. HAHN—Stockholm. •••• Stockholm has been the scene of riots this week, to much of the world’s surprise, with the unrest flaring up in immigrant-dominated neighborhoods on the city’s periphery. The Stockholm media reports cars burning in at least fifteen suburbs, stone-throwing against police, firefighters and ambulance personnel, injured police [...]

  • Benghazi: Imperialist Outpost

    Benghazi: Imperialist Outpost

    Politicized-Militarized Diplomacy by NORMAN POLLACK I am not naïve.  Embassies have been centers of intrigue, propaganda disseminators, bases for political intervention in a nation’s internal affairs, intermediaries for the promotion of markets and investments, etc., practices not confined to those representing the US, and hardly confined to recent times.  That said, Benghazi (technically, a consulate), signifies, as [...]

  • OpEds—Capitalism: "Horror Without End"

    OpEds—Capitalism: “Horror Without End”

    by John Peterson, Socialist Appeal The stream of distressing news seems to flow endlessly: School shootings from Colorado to Connecticut. Factory collapses and explosions from Bangladesh to Texas. Terrorist attacks from Pakistan to Boston. Crumbling infrastructure from Mexico City to Minneapolis. Kidnappings and torture from Ciudad Juarez to Cleveland. War and civil war from Syria [...]

  • How Medea Benjamin got to heckle Obama

    How Medea Benjamin got to heckle Obama

    Speeches given in front of ‘vetted” sycophantic audiences, behind closed doors. A glorified photo-op perfectly apt for a manipulated democracy.  Did you like this? Share it:

  • Obama’s Orwellian rhetoric

    Obama’s Orwellian rhetoric, Congo war crimes, Jailed for silence, DOJ assault on Fox Source: RT.com On this episode of Breaking the Set, Abby Martin and political commentator Sam Sacks go over the Orwellian rhetoric in Obama’s latest foreign policy speech. Abby highlights a recent UN investigation bringing to light crimes against humanity committed by a [...]

OBAMA / OUR DARK MACHIAVELLIAN PRINCE

 American Parties, Liberaloids & Radical Centrists, Obama, THE USA  Comments Off
Apr 082010
 
obamaMachiavelli
In his writing, a true “Prince/President” has to appear “compassionate, faithful, humane, religious” without actually being any of these things. He should go to Cairo to tell Muslims they have a beautiful faith, yet address them in a way only a colonialist could do, using Arabic words to thrill them, a sort of Ich bin ein Berliner in Middle Eastern Sauce….   Machiavelli insisted that the only real force of a State is in an extremely well-armed military, solid and faithful to its leader.

Deceiving the public is at the heart of modern governance

BY ALLEN L. ROLAND [print_link]

As Nicolò Machiavelli wrote in the early 1500′s ~ The promise given was a necessity of the past: the word broken is a necessity of the present ~ and President Obama appears to be an ardent disciple of this cunning and deceitful Machiavellian political tactic: Allen L Roland

obamaMachiavelliAny means to the end is, in essence,  a Machiavellian  political tactic and President Obama has become a subtle master of this political strategy ~ whereas, as noted Machiavellian Henry Kissinger once said, in the world of politics perception becomes far more important than reality.

Note President Obama’s seeming Machiavellian indifference to his broken campaign promises from Renewed Offshore oil drilling, Renewed Nuclear power production, Keeping the Guantánamo torture camp open, Continuing the war against Iraq, Increasing our military presence in Afghanistan, Renewing the USA Patriot Act, Continuing “military commission” kangaroo trials, Reserving the right to torture, and Continuing the NSA’s “domestic surveillance” program of spying on innocent Americans’ emails and phone calls.

But also note that a key Machiavellian principle is  “A prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise “

Machiavelli originally wrote Il Principe (The Prince) (1513) in hopes of securing the favor of the ruling Medici family, and he deliberately made its claims provocative, and that they are ~ ” Machiavelli argued that it is primarily the character or vitality or skill of the individual leader that determines the success of any state. The book surveys various bold means of acquiring and maintaining the principality and evaluates each of them solely by reference to its likelihood of augmenting the glory of the prince while serving the public interest. It is this focus on practical success by any means, even at the expense of traditional moral values, that earned Machiavelli’s scheme a reputation for ruthlessness, deception, and cruelty.” http://www.philosophypages.com/ph/macv.htm

Writer Mary Rizzo makes the same analogy in her brilliant post Hail to the Prince: Obama, the paradigmatic Machiavellian Leader written on March 4, 2010 ~ ” What you “are” and how you are “perceived” is a fascinating topic. It is dealt with mainly in sociology and psychology, but someone very important in the history of thought had a great deal to say about it regarding politics and power .. Machiavelli’s got something of a reputation, evidenced by the fact that his name has become an adjective with largely negative connotations, not really merited, in all honesty. What makes it even more entertaining is that the most scandalous part of his theoretical writing was the analysis of “reputation”, and the necessity of the leader of a State to manipulate the idea and the perception others have of him in order to carry out actions that have as the goal consolidation and maintenance of his own power… In his writing, a true “Prince/President” has to appear “compassionate, faithful, humane, religious” without actually being any of these things. He should go to Cairo to tell Muslims they have a beautiful faith, yet address them in a way only a colonialist could do, using Arabic words to thrill them, a sort of Ich bin ein Berliner in Middle Eastern Sauce….   Machiavelli insisted that the only real force of a State is in an extremely well-armed military, solid and faithful to its leader. Clashes and wars are born out of will to power and desire to control ever greater territories, conquest, in other words, not for abstract principles, though the abstract principles get the consensus required by a democracy.”

http://palestinethinktank.com/2010/03/04/hail-to-the-prince-obama-the-paradigmatic-Machiavellian-leader/

Now let’s note two recent events which show how the use of the Machiavellian principles of Perception versus Reality rule in the Obama Administration .

During his late March surprise six hour Afghanistan Photo Op Drop-In ~ President Obama assured his captive military listeners, and most assuredly Americans at home, that we will “finish the job” and made another promise as well: “I’m looking forward,” he told the troops, “to returning to Afghanistan many times in the years to come”  thus contradicting another promise to the American people about withdrawal by 2011 but reinforcing his image as the consummate War President at the expense of the vast majority of Americans who want us out of Afghanistan.

But as columnist Courtland Milloy reported in the Washington Post on April 6th ~ ” So President Obama made another surprise visit to a war zone ~ this time to Southeast Washington for Easter services at Allen Chapel AME. But instead of addressing the battle-weary congregation, as he did with the troops in Afghanistan last month, Obama fell curiously silent…. The president neither spoke nor shook hands, didn’t wave or even turn around in his pew to smile at the 700 or so churchgoers who began arriving as early as 3 a.m. to see him .. In Afghanistan, Obama thanked U.S. soldiers and civilians for their efforts to “keep America safe and secure ” but  in Southeast, Washington ~ Obama sent up a private prayer and, with a veritable army of Secret Service and D.C. police officers protecting his motorcade, beat a hasty retreat back to the White House.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/06/AR2010040600538.html

And there you clearly see Obama’s priorities ~ Obama is our dark Machiavellian Prince whose promises should always be measured in the light of political reality and the preservation of political power versus ‘abstract’ and traditional moral values

Machiavelli would be proud of his new disciple ~

ALLEN L. ROLAND http://allenlrolandsweblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/obama-our-dark-machiavellian-prince.html">http://allenlrolandsweblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/obama-our-dark-machiavellian-prince.html

Allen L Roland is a practicing psychotherapist, author and lecturer who also shares a daily political and social commentary on his  weblog and website allenroland.com He also guest hosts a monthly national radio show TRUTHTALK on  www.conscioustalk.net

Did you like this? Share it:

The Courts Can’t Take Away Our Internet

 CITIZEN TOOLS, MEDIA SCUM, THE USA  Comments Off
Apr 082010
 
Internet-computer

Legal technicalities can (and will) whittle away whatever is left of our democratic power to correct the crisis the establishment has created. In this, the freedom of the Internet from corporate meddling is vital.

Dateline: April 6, 2010
By Megan Tady
Save the Internet [print_link]

Internet-computerToday’s ruling for Comcast by the DC Circuit Court could be the biggest blow to our nation’s primary communications platform, or it could be the kick in the pants our leaders need to finally protect it. Either way, the future of the Internet, the fight for Net Neutrality, and the expansion of broadband is hanging in the balance.  The court ruled that the Federal Communications Commission lacks the authority under existing legal framework to enforce rules that keep Internet service providers from blocking and controlling Internet traffic. The decision puts the FCC’s Net Neutrality proceeding and the National Broadband Plan in jeopardy.

The court ruled in favor of ISP Comcast, which was caught blocking BitTorrent Internet traffic in 2007 and contested the FCC’s attempts to stop the company. The decision has made it near impossible for the FCC to follow through with plans to create strong Net Neutrality protections that keep the Internet out of the hands of corporations. Additionally, without authority over broadband, the decision means the FCC will be hamstrung when it comes to implementing portions of its just released broadband plan.  As a result of this decision, the FCC can’t stop Comcast and others from blocking Web sites. And the FCC can’t make policies to bring broadband to rural America, to promote competition, and to protect consumer privacy or truth in billing.

Unless… The FCC has found itself in the ridiculous situation of attempting to regulate broadband without the authority to do so unless the agency takes strong and decisive action to “reclassify” the service under the Communications Act.

Here’s the deal: under the Bush FCC, the agency decided to classify and treat broadband Internet service providers the same as any Internet applications company like Facebook or Lexis-Nexis, placing broadband providers outside of the legal framework that traditionally applied to the companies that offer two-way communications services.

That’s the loophole that let Comcast wiggle out from under the agency’s thumb.

Change it back

There’s an easy fix here: The FCC can change broadband back to a “communications service,” which is where it should have been in the first place. By reclassifying broadband, all of these questions about authority will fall away and the FCC can pick up where it left off – protecting the Internet for the public and bridging the digital divide.  While Comcast and other ISPs may be celebrating today, this court decision will hopefully force the FCC to take action that will ultimately come back to haunt them. Free Press Policy Director Ben Scott told the Associated Press, “Comcast swung an ax at the FCC to protest the BitTorrent order. And they sliced right through the FCC’s arm and plunged the ax into their own back.”

Millions of you

Reclassification of broadband may be a simple fix, but it will take guts from FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski to actually implement it, particularly as ISPs unleash intense pressure to maintain the status quo.  That’s where you come in: We need thousands of you, if not millions, to tell the FCC to protect Net Neutrality and the National Broadband Plan by reasserting their regulatory authority.

In less than 72 hours, the public comment period on the FCC’s Net Neutrality proceeding will end. Use this window of opportunity to give the FCC one giant public mandate: We want an Internet free from corporate control.  Will Internet service providers like Comcast and AT&T persuade the FCC to allow them to control Internet traffic, rerouting people to the sites and search engines they own? Or will the FCC protect our last remaining open platform for communication, where anyone can create a Web site, post a video, start a business, or find the information they need without ISPs meddling with our traffic?

This could be one of the most important actions you take all year. The hours are ticking down. Take a few minutes to take action on something that will impact generations.

BACKGROUNDER:

FCC Loses Key Ruling on Internet `Neutrality’

Federal appeals court rules for Comcast and against FCC on key `net neutrality’ case

By JOELLE TESSLER

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON

A federal court threw the future of Internet regulations into doubt Tuesday with a far-reaching decision that went against the Federal Communications Commission and could even hamper the government’s plans to expand broadband access in the United States.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the FCC lacks authority to require broadband providers to give equal treatment to all Internet traffic flowing over their networks. That was a big victory for Comcast Corp., the nation’s largest cable company, which had challenged the FCC’s authority to impose such “network neutrality” obligations on broadband providers.

Supporters of network neutrality, including the FCC chairman, have argued that the policy is necessary to prevent broadband providers from favoring or discriminating against certain Web sites and online services, such as Internet phone programs or software that runs in a Web browser. Advocates contend there is precedent: Nondiscrimination rules have traditionally applied to so-called “common carrier” networks that serve the public, from roads and highways to electrical grids and telephone lines.

But broadband providers such as Comcast, AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. argue that after spending billions of dollars on their networks, they should be able to sell premium services and manage their systems to prevent certain applications from hogging capacity.

Tuesday’s unanimous ruling by the three-judge panel was a setback for the FCC because it questioned the agency’s authority to regulate broadband. That could cause problems beyond the FCC’s effort to adopt official net neutrality regulations. It also has serious implications for the ambitious national broadband-expansion plan released by the FCC last month. The FCC needs the authority to regulate broadband so that it can push ahead with some of the plan’s key recommendations. Among other things, the FCC proposes to expand broadband by tapping the federal fund that subsidizes telephone service in poor and rural communities.

In a statement, the FCC said it remains “firmly committed to promoting an open Internet and to policies that will bring the enormous benefits of broadband to all Americans” and “will rest these policies … on a solid legal foundation.”

Comcast welcomed the decision, saying “our primary goal was always to clear our name and reputation.”

The case centers on Comcast’s actions in 2007 when it interfered with an online file-sharing service called BitTorrent, which lets people swap movies and other big files over the Internet. The next year the FCC banned Comcast from blocking subscribers from using BitTorrent. The commission, at the time headed by Republican Kevin Martin, based its order on a set of net neutrality principles it had adopted in 2005.

But Comcast argued that the FCC order was illegal because the agency was seeking to enforce mere policy principles, which don’t have the force of regulations or law. That’s one reason that Martin’s successor, Democratic FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, is trying to formalize those rules.

The cable company had also argued the FCC lacks authority to mandate net neutrality because it had deregulated broadband under the Bush administration, a decision upheld by the Supreme Court in 2005.

The FCC now defines broadband as a lightly regulated information service. That means it is not subject to the “common carrier” obligations that make traditional telecommunications services share their networks with competitors and treat all traffic equally. But the FCC maintains that existing law gives it authority to set rules for information services.

Tuesday’s court decision rejected that reasoning, concluding that Congress has not given the FCC “untrammeled freedom” to regulate without explicit legal authority.

With so much at stake, the FCC now has several options. It could ask Congress to give it explicit authority to regulate broadband. Or it could appeal Tuesday’s decision.

But both of those steps could take too long because the agency “has too many important things they have to do right away,” said Ben Scott, policy director for the public interest group Free Press. Free Press was among the groups that alerted the FCC after The Associated Press ran tests and reported that Comcast was interfering with attempts by some subscribers to share files online.

Scott believes that the likeliest step by the FCC is that it will simply reclassify broadband as a more heavily regulated telecommunications service. That, ironically, could be the worst-case outcome from the perspective of the phone and cable companies.

“Comcast swung an ax at the FCC to protest the BitTorrent order,” Scott said. “And they sliced right through the FCC’s arm and plunged the ax into their own back.”

The battle over the FCC’s legal jurisdiction comes amid a larger policy dispute over the merits of net neutrality. Backed by Internet companies such as Google Inc. and the online calling service Skype, the FCC says rules are needed to prevent phone and cable companies from prioritizing some traffic or degrading or services that compete with their core businesses. Indeed, BitTorrent can be used to transfer large files such as online video, which could threaten Comcast’s cable TV business.

But broadband providers point to the fact that applications such as BitTorrent use an outsized amount of network capacity.

For its part, the FCC offered no details on its next step, but stressed that it remains committed to the principle of net neutrality.

“Today’s court decision invalidated the prior commission’s approach to preserving an open Internet,” the agency’s statement said. “But the court in no way disagreed with the importance of preserving a free and open Internet; nor did it close the door to other methods for achieving this important end.”

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press.

Did you like this? Share it: