A Trifecta of Three Phony “Scandals”

This is a letter I just received. The Republicans are going to gin up another fake impeachment proceeding, along with another Congressional investigation. We are back in the Clinton years, when US democracy dove to the stinkingist fascist and totalitarian depths in its history with endless investigations of one phony scandal after another.

Finally, they impeached Clinton on totally ridiculous grounds (Clinton beat the impeachment handily at a trial). There is one place you see the sort of sick, twisted, corrupt politics crap, and that’s in the 3rd World. The Turd World. The Republican Party has turned America into a gigantic Turd World country.

In the Turd World, there are constant fake investigations of fake scandals, and Presidents are always being impeached on phony political grounds. In addition, Presidents are assaulted, placed under arrest, tortured and even murdered on a regular basis, generally in the context of a military coup. This is particularly prevalent in the Sewer of the World, Latin America. This nonsense has gone on in most Latin American shitholes, including Venezuela, Bolivia, Argentina, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Ecuador, Guyana, Colombia, Brazil, Peru and Chile.

All of these coups and assassinations have been done by the Latin American rightwing, which is an objectively fascist rightwing movement and always has been. Whenever any populist or progressive government comes in, the rightwing in that Latin American country tries to oust them via assassination, coup or a fake impeachment. The US has supported 100% of these radically antidemocratic and fascist incidents in Latin America. There has never been a single fascist coup in Latin America that did not have the 100% backing of the United Snakes.

In the rest of the world, it is as bad or worse. In Pakistan, presidential candidates are murdered on a regular basis.In the rest of the Turd World, opposition candidates are often jailed or worse. This is what is happening in Turkey at the moment, and it was going on earlier in Iran. Opposition party candidates are murdered on a regular basis in the Philippines.

Scandal hearings should be reserved for the worst of the worst. Iran-Contra and the S & L Crisis are good examples. If you recall, the Democrats did not turn either of those hearings into impeachment proceedings. Impeachment should only be for the worst of crimes. A good example was President Nixon, who would have been impeached had he not resigned, for bugging the headquarters of the Democratic Party during the 1972 campaign. I can hardly think of a single impeachable case since 1972. This is just dirty politics and nothing else, and it is sleazy as Hell.

Every Administration will have scandals of various types. It is inevitable under our money infested system where both parties are tied to big money and corporate rule. In almost all cases, these scandals are run of the mill things that any Administration goes through. However, whenever a Democratic President is in office, any of the usual scandals that any Administration deals with will have huge hearings in Congress, threats of impeachment and special prosecutors.

Objective evidence shows that there were far more scandals and there was far more corruption under Bush and Reagan than under Clinton or Obama. But no matter how corrupt or scandal ridden a Republican is, the spineless Democrats will never do anything about it. Not a single hearing, no special prosecutor, no impeachment proceedings. On the other hand, the far fewer scandals under a Democrat will be turned into a Ringling Brothers affair that dominates the idiotic headlines for months to years.

Nothing Obama has done warrants impeachment or even a hearing.

The Benghazi Consulate was a CIA office – 80% of the personnel there were CIA officers. The Islamists knew that, and that is why it was attacked. The CIA failed to provide enough security for the consulate, and they relied too much on unproven Libyan security.

The call for backup amounted to a call for “4 men” to arrive. Do you think 4 armed US forces would have turned the situation around? There was a call to bring in a helicopter gunship to fire missiles or machine gun fire or a jet to bomb the area. However, the area is surrounded by civilians, and in the initial attack, no one really had any idea what was going on.

There was an order given to stand down and not send in air power until more could be learned about the confused situation. The forces on the ground evacuated the Americans from the consulate to a safe house, but the Islamists were waiting at the safe house for them.

In a hazy situation were no one knew what was going on, it would have been madness to drop bombs or shoot missiles at the heavily inhabited area at the consulate, the safe house and the area in between. The forces at the consulate fought very well. Although 4 Americans were killed, 32 were rescued. In addition, ~100 Islamist attackers were killed.

          Benghazi #killed

Americans 4
Islamists 100

This was a battle in a war we are fighting with Al Qaeda and allied Islamists. By any standard metric, we won this battle. It is beyond me why this is some sort of a scandal. We fight battles all the time in the war with Al Qaeda, the Taliban and other Islamists. Some we win, some we lose. Sometimes our men are killed or wounded. Should there be hearings, special prosecutors or impeachment proceedings every time an American is killed by the enemy overseas? What kind of insanity is that?

The IRS scandal is a joke. As a result of Citizens United, many political outfits such as Karl Rove’s Crossroads set themselves up as tax exempt social welfare organizations that do not engage in political work. Obviously, this is a lie. This was mostly done on the Right, as word went out via Karl Rove to the rightwing grassroots to claim social welfare status to pay no taxes.

Approximately 250-300 groups with “tea party” in their name engaged in this crime by lying and calling themselves social welfare organizations. The IRS identified all of these groups engaged in this fraud and crime and sent them letters demanding to see their paperwork.

Since a vast amount of “tea party” groups were engaging in this sort of crime, lower level IRS officials in Indianapolis targeted every group with “tea party” in their name and sent them these letters demanding that they prove they were a political group or a social welfare group. Unfortunately, a number of liberal organizations also committed these crimes and called themselves social welfare groups to claim tax exempt status. All of these liberal groups were also targeted by the IRS and they received letters demanding to see their paperwork.

The IRS was completely correct to do what they did. There was no scandal, not even the whiff of one. When 300 groups with tea party in their name are engaging in crime, it looks like smoke. Where there is smoke, there is fire. That massive crime spree by tea party groups was enough to put every group with tea party in their name under suspicion.

It is right and proper for the IRS to determine if any political group of any stripe of committing crime by falsely representing themselves. In addition, liberal groups committing these crimes were also questioned. When you commit crimes, you may get called in for questioning by authorities. This is the job of the authorities. If you abuse tax laws and cheat on your taxes, expect a call from the IRS. This was no political prosecution. The local Indianapolis office was 100% correct in what they did.

Obama caved in spinelessly as usual, firing the IRS Director for the crime of enforcing tax law and fighting tax criminals and massive tax fraud and evasion. A cop was fired for enforcing the law because the Republican criminals and their friends demanded he be fired.

I do not know enough about the targeting of AP reporters’ phone records. This is not a prosecution of the media. Instead, they were trying to find out who was leaking to the AP about the CIA’s secret wars overseas. So this is part of Obama’s war on whistleblowers.

The war on whistleblowers went completely wild under Ronald Reagan, who attacked whistleblowers more than any previous president. It has continued to this day. It was particularly nasty under George Bush and included the outrageous outing of active CIA agents for political purposes. Republican and Democratic Administrations both have gone after whistleblowers in a vicious way.

Republicans screaming about this were utterly silent when George Bush and Ronald Reagan waged all out war against whistleblowers. In addition, Republicans have, up until this point, backed all of Obama’s anti-whistleblower activities.

In fact, they have accused him of being soft of whistleblowers – see the Bradley Manning case, where Republicans have called for Manning to be executed – and the Wikileaks case, where the Republicans have called for Julian Assange to be arrested, sent to the US, tried and executed for treason. They have also called for Assange to be assassinated by a US hit squad. So you see, even if Obama wages a war on whistleblowers, the Republicans support it and even double down on it.

Impeach the President. Seriously?

That’s where the Republicans are going. Rep. Jason Chaffetz could barely keep from giggling at the possibility on CNN yesterday. Even Wolf Blitzer looked a little uncomfortable.

Of course, they want a special prosecutor.

Scott Walker spent his day telling everyone from the La Crosse Tribune to middle-school tour groups that we must appoint a special prosecutor. Guess who’s running for president?

Anyone old enough to remember the nineties knows this can turn ugly fast.

Meanwhile, back in reality, there’s a real scandal taking place: Tens of thousands of kids have been kicked out of preschool. Teachers are being laid off. Meals on Wheels for housebound seniors have been cut.

While GOP consultants across the DC area put Ken Starr back on speed dial, millions of people are suffering from the sequester. The young, the poor and the elderly. Every day, it will get worse.

Bigfoot News May 12, 2013

One possible reason for Morgan Matthews not coming forward with the facts about Shooting Bigfoot. In an interview after the movie, Matthews did nothing but muddy the waters further. He essentially neither confirmed nor denied that a Bigfoot had been shot and killed during the movie or that a Bigfoot had attacked him or that a real Bigfoot had been engaged by the team in San Antonio at all.

One possible reason for this is that Matthews may be saving up the juicy bits for a Director’s Cut of the movie. Hence the smokescreen about what really happened in the movie to save up for the expanded Director’s Cut. Dyer did say six weeks ago that Morgan had just finished editing a Director’s Cut of the movie.

Morgan Matthews’ strange behavior after the shooting of Hank, before the release of the movie and in an interview after the release of the movie. Many people have noted that many things about Matthews’ behavior do not seem to make sense, including not shooting video of Hank after he was hot. Dyer announced on his radio show the other day that he just received an email from Matthews explaining what others see as his odd behavior in toto. Dyer said that he will release the information in two waves to his paid membership.

Liam Gray is suing Dyer for character defamation. I am not sure who Liam Gray is, but he is suing Dyer for defamation of character. Rick released a doctored news story to the web that showed that Gray had been arrested for necrophilia and bestiality. The truth is that some other man had been arrested on those charges. In his version of the news piece, Dyer erased the real suspect’s name and wrote in Gray’s name. Gray has apparently never been arrested for such crimes, and he certainly was not arrested for those crimes at the time and date listed in Dyer’s article.

So Rick does appear to have libeled Gray. He released false and defamatory information about Gray that Rick knew to be false, and he released it with malice aforethought intending to do harm to Gray’s reputation.

One way that Gray may not be able to collect is that he may not be able to show that he was harmed by these charges. If Rick just published them on his website and hardly anyone read them, then it’s hard to argue that you got hurt by the lies. There has to be some noticeable damage.

I have a BA in Journalism, and we had to pass a law school type course in Mass Communications law in order to graduate. Libel law figured heavily in the course, so I know it well. Rick really screwed up.

Rick has also libeled me a few times, but I am not bothering to sue him. He said that I have served 2 years in state prison (not true – I have not served one day in state prison) and he said that I go once a week to a mandatory class for convicted sex offenders (Not true – I am not a convicted sex offender, and I don’t have to go to any such class and have never gone to one.).

Rick apparently knows full well that these charges are not true, but he went ahead and made them anyway. He has definitely libeled me according to the law, and I could easily sue him for that, but I am not bothering to. So Rick has been libeling people for some time now, and it’s about time the chickens have come home to roost. You can’t just run around the Internet libeling all of your enemies.

Latest theory on Justin Smeja Bigfoot piece testing “Black bear.” Smeja’s piece of Bigfoot steak from the Sierra Kills tested as Bigfoot via Ketchum’s lab, but then when it was submitted to alternative labs, it tested as “Black bear.” This called into question her entire study.

However, the latest theory about this strange state of affairs is that Ketchum herself was behind the steak testing as Black bear. A source told me that the latest thinking is that Ketchum convinced Justin somehow to submit a piece of bear to the alternative study. Justin has plenty of bear steaks hanging around his freezers, and it would be easy enough for him to come up with a piece of bear.

The reason for this is apparently that Ketchum despises Tyler Huggins and sees him as a huge threat to her study because he kept threatening to do his own study on the Bigfoot steak. These findings could have trumped her study and stolen her thunder, and we know full well that Melba will do anything, ethics be damned, to destroy the competition.

How do I know that Melba hates and fears Huggins as competition? Because a couple of sources very close to Huggins said so, including Adrian Erickson. By having the steak test bear via Huggins’ studies, Huggins’ studies are all but dead and Huggins loses all interest in the Bigfoot steak, while Melba sticks by her story that it’s a real piece of Bigfoot. It’s a wild and crafty tale, but Melba is nothing if not Machiavellian. In fact, that is her middle name.

Justin of course swears that he submitted a piece of the Bigfoot steak and not a piece of bear, but some people very close to Justin have told one of my sources that they think he is lying.

When everybody is lying all the time, what the name of the game? Bigfootery!

Ketchum lying about not being a part of an upcoming documentary on National Geographic TV. I know for a fact that she at least was working with them on this documentary recently, and that she had permission to use some of Erickson’s photos and footage in the film.

However, a TV producer friend of mine made calls to Melba and her land shark attorney named Hank. Both of them denied that she is working with Nat Geo and both said Lindsay is a liar. But the truth is that Melba lies like a rug, and she has for a long time now. How do I know this about her? First, Richard Stubstad told me, and second, my own personal experience.

The veterinarian and the show promoter. For a long time now, Melba Ketchum has been trashing the name of Tom Biscardi and everything to do with him, blaming him for this or that, saying that certain samples were no good because they came from Biscardi, on and on. However, Biscardi worked very closely with Ketchum in the early part of the study. In fact, it is due to Biscardi that the study even got off the ground in the first place. One would think listening to Melba that she has always hated Biscardi’s guts.

This leads us to the story of the veterinarian and the Vegas show promoter. One time the engineer was visiting the veterinarian. This was in the early days of the vet’s Bigfoot study. The engineer was baffled by the vet’s odd behavior. Every time he turned around, she was on the phone, giggling like a schoolgirl. On the other end of the line was the Vegas show promoter. Every hour or so she was on the phone to him again. She seemed a woman smitten.

Later on the engineer got a look at the vet’s computer screen. Staring back at him as a massive screensaver on the vet’s screen was the Vegas show promoter himself in all of his shady glory. The vet looked at her computer screen and swooned.

Later the Vegas show promoter forgot to send her anything on Valentine’s Day, so the vet sent the barker packing. But for a time there, it seemed that love was in the air in a small corner of Bigfootery.

Who believes that a body or bodies were recovered at the Sierra Kills? Though these bodies, if they exist, will probably never turn up anyway, it is interesting to speculate about this. The following people have stated that bodies were recovered:

1. Adrian Erickson
2. Richard Stubstad
3. Ken Walker
4. Bobo Fay
5. Mike Greene

Possibly more to come later…

Walter E. Williams: Idiot, Tool, Black Conservative

The latest Walter E. Williams article.

A truly insane article by a typical Black conservative nut. This kook points out the logical fact that is known to anyone: What do the Top 10 US cities with the highest crime rates have in common? Guess what? They are chock full of Black people! Duh.

One would draw certain logical conclusions from these obvious facts, but a Black conservative is too much of partisan monkey liar to ever do that. As bad as Black liberals can be (and they can be pretty bad), Black conservatives are by far the worst that the Black race has to offer.

According the Williams, the logical conclusion that we draw here is twofold:

1. These cities are full of Black folks.
2. They are all run by Democrats, for the most part liberal Democrats.

Conclusion: Liberal Democratic administrations cause unbelievable amounts of crime!

I kid you not. Black conservatives really are that stupid. As if Black people would act any better under a hard rightwing administration, not that they would ever elect one.

We have an actual experiment to see if this is true: the South. All Southern states are run by radical rightwing Republicans. Before that, they were run by radical rightwing Democrats. All of those states have been run by Black-hating racist White people for ever and ever. And how do Black people act down South? Perfectly horrible. They act as bad as Black people do anywhere. Why would Black folks suddenly act better if a rightwing Republican racist White massa was in charge, cracking the whip on those niggas? You think is going to stop making them act up? Come on.

The truth is that those cities are full of crime for the precise reason that they are full of Black people. Once you get a city full of Black people, you tend to get a city with lots and lots of crime. Those Black people created all that crime, and they will create about as much crime whether they are under a liberal Democratic administration as when they are under a Republican white racist massa administration.

Williams is truly crazy: a Libertarian Black. Black Libertarians are even more insane than Black conservatives. About 3% of Blacks are Black conservatives. We know this because ~3% of Black voted for Mitt Romney in the last election. However, if you looked at the US news media, you would think that 50% or more of Blacks are conservatives. Black conservatives may be as rare as four leaf clovers, but the “liberal” media loves them, and loves to over-represent them as demonstrative of the politics of US Blacks. If you are a US Black conservative, you are almost guaranteed of getting your own radio or TV show or your own newspaper column.

Does anyone on Earth think that Libertarianism will do anything for US Blacks?

Libertarianism is what exists in the 3rd world. In the 3rd World, the state is almost nonexistent, spends almost no money on the people on social programs, and what money it does have goes solely for police and military to enforce class rule over the lower classes and the workers. If the lower classes and workers get too out of hand, you just call out the cops and army and slaughter them.

Other than that, the government exists solely as an arm of the richest sectors of society and serves to protect their interests. The rich and business classes get to do everything and anything they want to. The state is starved for funds because the businesses and the wealthy pay no taxes, and the elites don’t believe in government spending anyway due to “the threat of a good example.” If the state spends money on pro-people programs, that is socialism, and we oppose socialism. Also the people might come to like this socialism and might want to have a more socialist country. This would interfere with the moneyed interests of the nation’s elites, so we can’t have that.

Libertarianism is what Blacks have in Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica and a few other places. Probably Haiti is the best example because it is the most Libertarian society ever attempted in a Black country. You can see how well that is working out!

Over in Africa, we can look at Kenya, Nigeria or Zaire as examples of nearly Libertarian Black countries in which elites steal 100% of the money in society leaving the masses with nothing but starvation and disease. As you can see, that is working out just fine!

Most other Black nations are socialist to some degree or another, so it hard to find a Black example of a radical rightwing country, but the above examples are pretty good.

Libertarianism won’t do anything good for Black people. All it will do is turn Black neighborhoods and cities like Detroit and Oakland into Haiti or Nigeria. If you think that is an improvement on the present state of affairs, you are wrong.

Bigfoot News April 30, 2013

First reviews of Shooting Bigfoot are in. Via Musky Allen, we have some of the first reviews of the documentary that premiered in Toronto tonight.

OK Folks. I’ve talked with Jack Barnes on the phone. He said the film was disappointing. The film showed a Sasquatch running from where the ribs where hung from the tree after Morgan got Rick from the tent…Rich gives chase and shoots into the dark presumably at the dark figure which is believed to be the Bigfoot. Morgan wrestles with Rick for the gun.

As Rick runs off into the dark, the Bigfoot which is seen from 2 feet away slams into Morgan, knocking him onto the ground. After a few seconds, Morgan regains his camera, and stands up with the Bigfoot staring into the lens showing its whole face…after a short skirmish, the film ends…

No daylight footage….If Morgan has the additional footage like what Rick has seen, then perhaps he’ll release it with a statement…I don’t know!…Jack wasn’t too happy how Morgan made the Bigfoot World look foolish in how he presents the image of these people!

Well, that is not so bad. It looks like as I predicted earlier, this film will solve absolutely nothing at all. Already many of the reviewers are insisting that the film shows a Rick Dyer hoax, in this case, Rick has a friend of his dress up in a Bigfoot suit and attack the filmmaker.

I continue to believe that Rick Dyer shot and killed a Bigfoot in the filming of this movie. My reasons are:

1. A source at Minnow Films UK who insisted to me that this is indeed what happened. This source has checked out well and does not appear to be a false story plant. I do not believe that she is lying to me, sorry.

2. A good friend of mine, who is good friends with Morgan Matthews, the director, told me that Morgan would not be a party to a filmed hoax in any way, shape or form. So based on that, I do not believe that the final sequence of this film shows Rick Dyer hoaxing the shooting of a Bigfoot. If that happened in the shooting of the movie, that part of the film would simply be cut out of the film, and in fact, the entire Rick Dyer sequence would have been cut out altogether.

3. Musky Allen’s testimony that he has seen the body. I do not believe that Musky is lying about seeing Rick’s body. Rick could have had a great Hollywood prop to show Musky, but that seems dubious. Further, the body is being held at a US government research facility that Musky had to sign 9 pages of forms just to get in to. There is no way on Earth that this government research facility would be party to a hoax in any way, shape or form. It’s possible that Musky is lying for some crazy reason, but I just do not get that impression from him, and I do know Musky pretty well.

4. The Facebook Find Bigfoot guys appear to have also seen Rick Dyer’s body. Via an excellent source, this is what was suggested to me, not outright at all, but in so many words so that I could figure out the implication of what was being said without it being stated explicitly. I came away from that conversation convinced that the FB/FB guys had indeed seen the body. Once again, Rick could have faked them out with a great Hollywood prop, but that seems dubious, and once again, we run into the problem that the place it is being stored at would not be a party to any possible hoax.

Official Facebook Find Bigfoot review of Shooting Bigfoot.

A Scathing Review of Shooting Bigfoot A film by Morgan Matthews.

The opening credits have high production value; a great deal of money was spent to capture the crazy misadventures of the three crews as they search for the mythical beast. From there the film plunges faster than Niagara Falls. It feels as if Morgan Matthews is manipulating his audience from the very start. The film is heavily edited over what appears to be many years.

Anyone who has followed the saga of Rick Dyer and the Camper Video knows that it is a compelling piece of film with Morgan’s voice calling “Rick Rick RICK!” His voice causes the Sasquatch to turn and look at the film (Dyer). The problem with Shooting Bigfoot is the “Rick, Rick RICK,” is at night and seems highly edited. The ribs are shown but never nailed to the tree, there is no eating ribs, and instead the ribs just disappear. We are made to think that Matthews is a solo embedded journalist, even though we know Morgan brought a crew along with him.

The film ends with Morgan being bowled over by what appears to be a very strong, very large and angry man-shaped creature. His face is shown for one second, and it is very shocking. The viewer is left to wonder if it is a real Sasquatch or not.

Clearly Morgan did not head to the airport in the middle of the night (the final scene is him in an airplane). Surely if someone had been attacked like that, you would endeavor to understand what happened. Morgan’s face is beat up badly as he is shown in both hospital and on a plane. So it is definite that something dramatic happened as he is hurled to the ground by the Sasquatch. Dyer asks if he can see the film footage, the film is rewound and the viewer gets to see the attacker again for maybe two seconds. Again, there is no conclusive ending.

Security was heavy at the venue, and the crowd was being watched for cameras, so it is not possible to look again at the footage. If it is real, then it is by far the closest footage ever seen of a Sasquatch. If it is fake, it is like no mask we have ever seen, and we add that the sight of the creature is dramatic. True to many of the reviews, this ending will not leave Bigfoot believers or skeptics satisfied, in fact it will leave both completely and totally unsatisfied.

An excellent review that shows what I expected, that the movie will prove nothing at all. It also looks like it underwent a very heavy edit for unknown reasons. FB/FB’s reaction to the footage of the Bigfoot is one of total shock. If it is real, they say, it is the best Bigfoot footage ever shot. If it is fake, it is like no Bigfoot mask they have ever seen.

This movie still leaves those of us who believe that Rick Dyer killed a Bigfoot will excellent reasons to continue to believe that.

Unfortunately, the up in the air ending also gives believers in the Hoax Theory a huge shot in the arm, and at this moment, they are in the end zone spiking the ball and dancing a jig, demanding that FB/FB resign and insisting that the movie shows a Rick Dyer hoax involving a man in a suit tackling a director.

That’s not proven at all based on a viewing of the movie; on the other hand, neither is it proven that an actual Bigfoot was shot in the filming of this extremely odd flick. The movie simply leaves us hanging like a bird on a string, with no possible resolution unless and until a body is forthcoming. If a body is revealed at some time in the near future, we will hopefully have a resolution to this mystery. However, if no body is ever forthcoming, the Hoaxer argument will probably win over no matter what the truth of the matter is.

It would be very nice if Morgan Matthews could make a statement in the coming days to clear up some of the uncertainties about the movie. It would also be nice if Rick Dyer could somehow release some of the footage or photos that he has, as it might help to resolve the mystery. Rick says that Morgan shot a lot of film for this movie that was left on the cutting room floor, including closeup footage of the dead Bigfoot. Why on Earth this killer footage was cut from the film is a gigantic mystery that defies logical explanation. Circumstances surrounding this movie just keep getting weirder and weirder, to paraphrase Hunter Thompson.

Update on the Rick Dyer federal warrant for interstate and wire fraud. We have checked into this story further and have determined that there is no federal warrant out for the arrest of Rick Dyer for interstate and wire fraud. However, the explanation is not as cut and dried as it seems, and it is understandable how this fake story got going.

First of all, A group of Dyer haters probably associated with the notorious Don Boucher and a group of people around him impersonated a prominent member of Rick Dyer’s Team Tracker and pretending to be this person as a source to me, planted a fake story with me saying that the FBI raided Dyer’s house on April 25 and took three of his computers. They also said that Rick and Lily Dyer are lawyering up to fight the charges, and Musky Allen and Cindy Pinkfoot are also under investigation for the same charges and are worried about going to jail. The story said that the FBI said that there is no Bigfoot body and that everyone who bought a Team Tracker membership was defrauded.

None of this is true.

It’s all made up by Don Boucher, etc. in an effort to smear Dyer and probably also to make me look bad as an unreliable source and as a “guy who will print anything.” The Team Tracker member was contacted and affirmed to me that they had not been emailing me. A fake account with Hushmail had been set  up in this person’s name, and that is how I thought it was them. This TT member was angry about being impersonated and wondered if there was any way that they could retaliate.

We had sources look into these charges to see if there was anything to it. Originally a source who is a bail bondsman reported back to us that there was indeed a warrant out for Rick’s arrest on these charges. I had Steve Kulls try to reaffirm that via additional information and Steve found that there is actually no federal warrant out for Rick’s arrest on those charges. Instead, there seems to be an old federal warrant out for Rick’s arrest on interstate commerce and wire fraud charges stemming from an Ebay fraud case in which Rick was arrested in Texas recently. The charges in that case would indeed have been interstate commerce and wire fraud. So this may in part explain the confusion.

In addition, the Dyer haters centering around Don Boucher have been trying to get the authorities to file charges against Dyer for interstate commerce and wire fraud in connection with Rick’s claim that all Team Tracker memberships were going to help the homeless. Instead, Rick apparently is not going to give one dime to the homeless and instead he is going to pocket all of the money himself, as he puts it, “to buy myself a new Corvette.” The people around Dyer who are pressing this complaint say that authorities have opened an investigation into these charges, but there is no way to confirm that, and law enforcement doesn’t usually comment on ongoing investigations anyway.

Apologies for anyone who got confused, but I got played here. This is actually the first time that I have proven that a false story was planted with me, despite many claims that this has been going on forever. I only have a few sources, and I trust them very well and have an excellent relationship with them. New sources are not common at all. It looks like now that people are planting fake stories with me, I am going to have to vet out future sources a lot more carefully. Needless to say, planting false stories with journalists is unbelievably unethical. It doesn’t happen a whole lot thank God, and if it were happening all the time, the whole media would probably have to shut down.

Society only functions when there is a basic glue of trust and honestly at some level. Without that, everything falls apart, and you end up with 3rd World Hellholes, failed states, etc. Think about most of the human relationships you value in life. Could these relationships continue to function if you or the others in your life were lying half the time and telling the truth the other half the time, with no good way to sort out the lies from the straight up? Face facts, if that was going on, most if not all of the relationships in your life would be ripped to shreds.

Lily Dyer reports that Hank’s (the Bigfoot Rick Dyer shot) body will be released in the summer. A date of August 15 has been issued by Lily for the revelation of the body. We will have to wait until then, I suppose.

False charges against Steve Kulls. Steve is of course Rick Dyer’s arch nemesis and has been leading the charge saying that Dyer is hoaxing us over the Shooting Bigfoot movie. A group of Dyer supporters centering around Team Tracker have been part of a huge campaign to trash Kulls. One of the charges is that Kulls has lied when he said that he had a Private Investigator’s license with the state of New York. The TT folks said that Kulls never had a PI license at any time. I have since learned through an excellent source that Kulls did indeed have a PI license with New York state at one time. Now whether or not it is still active is another matter altogether. But at any rate, TT’s charges against Kulls are not true.

Bigfoot News April 27, 2013

What is shown at the end of Shooting Bigfoot? Shooting Bigfoot is Morgan Matthews’ movie that is said to show Rick Dyer shooting and killing a Bigfoot named Hank in San Antonio, Texas last year. The last 3-5 minutes show either this shooting or as detractors say, an elaborately hoaxed shooting of a Bigfoot.

A source who has seen the film has told me what happens in it. The truth is that there are two Tent Videos. The famous one that you have already seen snippets of was shot on September 6, 2012 in the AM in daylight. This video was shot by Rick with his phone cam and by Morgan with HD video. There is a second Tent Video shot at night when the Bigfoot came back to eat more ribs, the end result being that he was shot and killed by Rick. This video is shot in the dark and you will also see this Tent Video in the movie. So the movie will show both of the Tent Videos.

You will see Rick come out of his tent dressed only in his underwear as he levels his gun at the Bigfoot in the dark (This part you can see in the trailer.) You will see the Bigfoot as it is running away and possibly as the first shot hits it in the back.

Then you will see the Bigfoot circling back around and running very fast towards the camera. At this point, you will see the Bigfoot very up close at it nears Matthews’ camera. Then the camera will go wild as the Bigfoot shoves Morgan aside and Morgan goes flying in the air. Later, Rick picked up Morgan and carried him back to the tent. This is where you see the part in the trailer where Rick is demanding, “Let me see the tape!”

You will not see the Bigfoot up close lying on the ground and you will not see any examination of the Bigfoot. All of that will come later in a movie to be produced by Dyer and his investors. However, that movie will solve nothing either as skeptics will just say that that movie by Dyer et al is hoaxed using props and whatnot.

Footage of large object under a green tarp in the back of a pickup truck in the Shooting Bigfoot trailer is not Hank. I reported earlier that I suspected that that object, which can be seen at two points in the trailer, is Hank’s body. Dyer cleared that up on his radio show by saying that that was not his truck, and he did not know whose truck that was as that was from a part of the movie that he did not take part in.

Here is the Shooting Bigfoot trailer again for reference to use in reading the two posts above:

I do not know the name of the casino that now owns Hank. One of my sources knows the name of it, but they won’t tell me, so keep guessing.

Dyer went to a university soon after Hank was killed. After Hank was loaded onto the truck that would transport him to Las Vegas, Dyer et al stopped by a university on their way to Las Vegas. Apparently the Bigfoot was examined at this university. I do not know the name or location of the university.

Composition of the team that is studying Hank. Hank is being housed at a US government research facility near Las Vegas, Nevada. Sources know the name of this facility and the name of the branch of the US government that is housing it, but they will not tell me either.

They told me, “If I told you the branch of the US government that is housing Hank in its facility, you could probably locate the facility quickly if you were smart.” A special team has been tasked to work with, study and protect Hank. This team is made up of professors from universities at various different locales in the US. That is all I know about the team.

Why so many Bigfooters hate Rick Dyer. Mostly it is over his hoax of 2008, however, I do feel that if Rick sincerely apologized for that hoax instead of gloating over it as he does, as lot of decent Bigfooters (especially us Christians) would forgive him and say give him another chance.

It is important to note that the 2008 hoax was actually two separate hoaxes: first that he had a Bigfoot, then that the Men In Black’s (MIB’s) stole it. The next year, there was another dual hoax, as he said he had another dead Bigfoot, but then the MIB’s stole that one too. In between, he was apparently hoaxing people on his expeditions in 2010 by taking $500/head from them and then having his friend run by in the woods with a Bigfoot suit on.

In early 2011, Rick was involved with another hoax in which he presented Bigfoot photos taken in Florida that were obviously Photoshopped. He also tried to defraud a man out of $17,000 when he promised to deliver two Corvettes to the man but never sent them, pocketing the cash instead.

In addition, Steve Kulls has recently found via some superb detective that Rick’s page is full of hoaxed and stolen photos. For instance, there is a page showing photos of Rick’s expeditions, the various folks on them, the scenery, etc. along with a pitch to fork over $500 to go on one of them. Steve has shown that all or most of all of those photos are not of Rick’s expeditions at all. Instead, they are photos stolen off the web of groups of people on camping trips.

Rick also has a video of him cooking the ribs to bait for the Bigfoot in September in San Antonio. However, that video is apparently a fraud, as Steve showed, through excellent sleuthing, that it was actually shot in April 2012 so it could not be a video from September.

So it’s not just one hoax or fraud that Rick has been involved in. He’s been an ongoing hoaxer, fraudster, con man and sometime criminal for at least five years now and possibly longer.

Nevertheless, I feel that if he would act halfway decent, he still might have more supporters. When 80-90% of the community hates your guts, you have to wonder what you might be doing wrong. If it were me, I might try to figure out what I was doing wrong and try to do better next time to try to win some folks back over to my side. Instead, Rick’s behavior seems to be to act as horrible as possible to make his enemies hate him even more and to create as many new enemies as possible.

So he goes on the air and spends most of his time ranting and raving against his many enemies, digging up dirt on them in the sleaziest way possible and threatening them in various ways, in addition to the portrayal of a character afflicted with severe kookery and ultimate douchebaggery so vividly displayed on his website and radio shows. Rick doesn’t exactly play by How to Win Friends and Influence People.

I suppose I just don’t get it. I would say when you’re in a hole, quit digging. Rick seems to collect enemies for fun the way some folks collect baseball cards. Go figure.

David John Jenkins on the role that Facebook Find Bigfoot has played in all of this. I thought he summed up the whole sordid episode very well, and I could not have written this up better myself. Italics mine.

The (Shooting Bigfoot) movie trailer is very consistent with what Dyer has been saying. The production values of the trailer itself and Morgan Matthew’s extensive filmography point to this being a serious undertaking to show what actually happened. Most of the criticism being leveled against FB/FB is malicious and prejudicial without any attempt to present facts and consists mostly of jeering.

The content of FB/FB site has been extensive and consistent with presenting evidence that supports the main thesis of their book You are Sasquatch. Even their interviews and interactions with Dyer remain true to their opinion of what Bigfoot is and what it represents to humankind.

The idea of this as being a hoax conspiracy is not supported by facts and is entirely political in nature based on an intense dislike of Dyer’s character. FB/FB on the contrary has approached all video evidence pertaining to the existence of Bigfoot with the same analytical eye regardless of who the author is. They are not aggressively aligned with any one side but they do stay committed to the conclusions they have made about the great many videos they have authenticated. The authentications are themselves ample proof of the integrity of this site.

The Bigfoot legend is not the creation of overly competitive, jealous rednecks. It began as Native American folklore which has its origins with tribes as far flung as Florida and the Pacific Northwest. That historical fact in itself gives tremendous weight to the idea that there is something mysterious in the woods.

The fossil evidence of ancient hominids proves that human hybrids or ancestors have existed, and stories of Ape men persist across several Continents. It is therefore quite reasonable for many people to embrace this subject with enthusiasm and commitment.

FB/FB has done just that.

Their misfortune has been to find themselves in the cross hairs of people who are intensely angry that their many years of being ridiculed as they wandered the woods will be upstaged by a shameless opportunist like Dyer.

FB/FB of course had no control over that, and if they had been a bit more politically savvy and less enthusiastic they may have avoided all this by downplaying the Tent Video. But that’s not their purpose. Their commitment to this unique American story which through the aid of advances in technology is on the cusp of revealing itself to the modern world.

-DJJ

This is a superbly written piece. Of course Dyer is a shameless opportunist, and that’s what his friends say! You don’t want to know what his enemies say about him. That as big of a jerk as Dyer should be the one who discovers is the most supreme insult to many Bigfooters who have been running around in the woods forever and will see all of those years wasted by the prize going to Mr. Douchebag of the Year.

DJJ is absolutely correct that the belief that Dyer is hoaxing is based for the most part on his character and not on the data. People are voting with their hearts and not their brains. In their hearts, they hate Dyer’s guts, so therefore he is hoaxing.

DJJ does a great job of finessing FB/FB’s role in all of this. The truth is that they are the ultimate Bigfooter professionals. No one knows what they think of Dyer’s dubious character or whether they even care about his personality. In the realm of FB/FB, Dyer’s personality foibles and whatnot are simply not important. All that is important is whether or not he shot a Bigfoot. Leave all the rest for psychologists and gossip columnists and the judgement of history.

It was through this severely, almost painfully objective eye that FB/FB decided that the Tent Video was the real deal and went with it, for which they have suffered terribly. Note that their enemies recently got FB/FB’s entire Youtube page taken down due to a vicious and politically motivated complaint to Youtube. This is a sorry episode as FB/FB’s videos are an excellent resource for our community, and our entire community will suffer from this loss. DJJ notes that had FB/FB been politically minded, they would have played down the Tent Video due to its poisonous association with Rick Dyer.

But FB/FB are scientific investigators first and foremost and politicians second if at all. In this way, they are similar to the finest of my profession, the investigative journalists who are jailed, injured or killed for trying to tell the truth when politics demand that they be quiet. A few of us are actually rather immune to the gusts of politics.

At the end of the day, those of us committed to ferreting out the truth of matters in which truth can be discerned, whether the dogged investigative reporters or the investigators who say the Hell with our careers, are the only folks that history will remember. The political deceivers and fogmiesters who blew smoke in your ears will burn with the fires of history, to be remembered only as the propagandists and liars that they always were.

New interview with me tomorrow. Tomorrow night, April 28, 2013, I will be interviewed on Chuck Prahl’s Bigfoot Tonite radio show out of Maryland. It will go on the air at 6 PM Pacific time.

Bigfoot News April 20, 2013

“Hank” to be released along with Shooting Bigfoot on April 30? Hank is the name of the Bigfoot that Rick Dyer shot and killed in Texas last year. Up until now, it has been in storage near Las Vegas. However, the release of Hank’s body is problematic. The typical question is, “Why doesn’t Rick release Hank’s body?” The answer to that question is that it is not Rick’s to release. Apparently that refers to the fact that Rick was an employee of Minnow Films when Hank was killed. Therefore, the release of Hank to the public has to be coordinated with Minnow.

Soon after the Rick Dyer was broken by me, I reported that Hank’s body would be released at the same time as the movie. Now with this very interesting and obscure notice on the Ammoland website (Why there?), we learn that in fact Hank is due to be released to the public on April 30 in Toronto, Canada, at the same time as the film Shooting Bigfoot is premiered.

The site states that Minnow Films will release the body. I have no idea who Ammoland is or how they came up with this scoop, but it is sure a great story. Is Ammoland on the level? I have no idea, but it is interesting that this story lines up perfectly with the release schedule that I postulated originally in first release of this story on Thanksgiving 2012.

I broke the Rick Dyer Bigfoot shooting story. For some reason, this fact keeps getting lost in all of the hoopla over the story. Sooner rather than later, Hank will be released and the world will be a whole new place. Rick will be world famous for the rest of his life or until he implodes, which he may do. The story will be all over the news, magazines, Internet, TV and radio. Unfortunately, I am quite certain that my name will be lost amidst all of the chaos along with the huge role I played journalism-wise in the breaking of the story. This will be right in theme with the rest of my life though, so I will probably be ok with it in the end.

Don Boucher et al Hank Facebook photo release story is fake. Don Boucher, Stefan Beaudoin and the rest of the morons who broke this news to us have informed us that this is all a gigantic hoax supposedly designed to make some idiotic point about gullibility. That is, anything that anyone says to any of us at any time by anyone could very well be a lie.

Well, duh, morons, but the world doesn’t work that way. The world only slightly functions at all when most folks we interact with on a personal level are being more or less truthful to us most of the time (white lies and lies of self-protection excepted). When you have a society where everyone is lying to everyone all the time, you end with India. You get Calcutta writ worldwide. You can see the results of what happens when trust vanishes. Total collapse of society.

Of course the government is lying to us most of the time, as are most of its agencies. Of course corporations are lying almost continuously, as is anyone employed by a corporation. If there’s money involved, someone is probably lying. Business interests will always lie when money is at stake. Politics, especially at a world level, is based on the most savage, vicious, idiotic and criminal lying.

But the lies of the snakes, sharks and monsters at the top of human society have little to do with the day to day affairs of most of us. White lies excepted, most of my friends are telling the truth to me most of the time. As are most of my acquaintances. In fact, once I figure out you are lying to me a lot, you tend to go on one of my “Do not call” lists. My social world only functions when most of those in it are being straight with me most of the time.

It is similar with journalism. We journalists have folks we call sources. If I can’t trust my own sources, I may as well hang it up and call it a day. In fact if all of our sources were lying to us most of the time, investigative reporting would grind to a halt. Most other fields are based on a certain amount of truthfulness. Plagiarism in authorship is pretty big deal. Scientific fraud can ruin a career. People are routinely jailed for perjury. Lying to an officer is a crime for which you can be arrested. If cops don’t tell the truth to each other, all law enforcement breaks down and collapses. Even criminals have a code of conduct that enables them to more or less trust each other at least enough to survive.

So the point of Don Boucher and the other scumbags was no point at all. That these folks are scumbags is nothing new. After all, Bigfootery attracts more dirtballs, lowlifes, trash and human garbage than most other endeavors.

Boucher hoaxed previously. This is not the first time that Mr. Boucher has attempted to hoax the field. Steve Kulls uncovered another instance here where Boucher discusses how and his special effects team created a model of the dead Hank all the way down the bullet wound for a Hollywood special effects studio. It’s nothing but a lie. So Boucher, Beaudoin and the rest of the garbage are hoaxing everyone in the field and why? Because they hate Rick Dyer so much that they are hoaxing us to destroy Rick. Why do they hate Rick so much? Because Rick is a hoaxer. They hate hoaxing so much that they are hoaxing themselves.

Rick Dyer: Is there a place in the world for a man like you? A commenter writes on my blog:

Robert: you might be right on many things about Rick Dyer’s character. But three points:

- Rick Dyer is not an intellectual, not an educated man of great ideas and high ideals. He did not grow up reading all sorts of books on bigfoot or cryptozoology. Bigfoot entered his life only in 2008, when he was already 30 or 31 years old.

His relationship to this “myth” was/ is

1) fun,

2) money

3) narcissism

- not necessarily in this order.

Therefore he lacks – in most cases – the emotions more educated people would expect after having made the greatest discovery in the history of biology.

- Despite point 1: he sometimes show deep emotions. Two examples: the radio shows in which he tells the story of the killing and in which he talks about Musky’s encounter with the body in Las Vegas.

- so many people think education and eloquence are basic needs for investigative skills. Just because Dyer cannot spell his own name does not mean that he is a bonehead in every aspect of life.

Quite the contrary:  his idea not to look for bigfoot in the remote forests of the Northwest, but in the bush forest of Texas and to make contact there with the homeless people and get their support  was a masterstroke. He knew that the chances were greater there, where bigfoot was potentially used to human contact. Do you think any researcher with academic background would do this, establish contact and try to find support from the homeless “white trash”?! Nobody has done that so far, nobody. That’s why Dyer really is a strategic genius…

And one final thing: if he would be totally normal, he would not have managed to (hopefully) bring compelling evidence for the existence of Bigfoot – I am absolutely sure about that. That’s why all the academics and interested laymen with ordinary jobs always fail. It needs a cool, hard-bitten and partially insane maverick like Rick Dyer. And therefore: Love or hate him, good that he is there…

This is a fascinating point. I have discussed at length on my site Rick’s personality and psychological makeup. The reasons for this are because he is so obviously pathological and he infuriates so many folks with his abrasive behavior, annoying at best and antisocial at worst. If Rick were some boring bookkeeper type, there would not be too much to talk about. I don’t wish to rehash Rick’s psychological makeup in this post as it would be redundant. Most folks know full well what sort of a fellow he is, after all, that’s why he has a world full of frothing enemies.

But the commenter’s point is fascinating. Does the world need narcissists? Worse, does the world need antisocials? Do narcissists and antisocials do anything positive in this world in addition to the monumental negativity they generate?

Perhaps they do! And perhaps they get certain things done that would not otherwise be done or would be done later. Pull the pathological narcissism out of the world of great musicians, actors, politicians, authors and artists and what do you have left. Probably not much. You have to be a bit nuts to be an artist in the first place. You have to subscribe to the ludicrous notion that you can act, play guitar, give speeches, write or draw better than anyone else. You have to believe that people would actually pay good money to hang your scribbles on the wall, to read your silly prose ramblings, to watch you cavort about the stage like a monkey or watch you ham it up in front of a camera.

Why would anyone believe such an idiotic thing. The only person who believes this is a narcissist. He really does think that his guitar playing, scribbling, brush strokes, over-dramatization or dishonest, bellicose speechifying BS is so great, so much better than everyone else’s, that people will not only pay good money as nothing more than tribute to this secular God but that he is better than most of the other performers doing their own version of jumping up and down screaming look at me self-indulgence and utter selfishness.

And where does this leave antisocials? The best surgeons are sociopaths. Who else can handle all that blood and barely bat an eye? The finest lawyers are antisocials. They will coldbloodedly massacre the opposition in the dirtiest way possible to win your case and get you the best deal. Law enforcement and the military is not the place for kind hearted folks. Brutal antisocials thrive in this vicious world. Many of our finest products were brought to us by corporations headed by persons who if they were not in a boardroom would likely be incarcerated.

During World War 2, it was found that sociopathic pilots in the Air Force were very good at shooting down other planes. They shot down many more planes than non-sociopaths. The reason was that they were ruthless and absolutely fearless. But the AF kept running into a problem. Sociopathic pilots kept getting shot down and dying in flaming crashes. The reason was the same: they were so fearless that they took too many chances, and this is why they kept getting shot down. Eventually, the AF starting making tests to try to keep the antisocials out of the force.

Which brings us to Rick Dyer. The commenter notes that if Rick was healthy, he would never have tracked down Hank and killed him the way he did. It took a real nut to pull that off. So maybe there is a place in the world for a man like Rick after all.

The commenter also notes that Rick is a strategic genius. I think this is correct. That is exactly what Rick is. He can barely spell his own name, but he has his very own type of street smarts, and in his own way, he’s a genius. An egghead never would have thought to go to San Antonio, hang out with the homeless, and shoot a Bigfoot slumming it up in the homeless camps.

Rick likes to call himself the greatest Bigfoot tracker of all. Despite the repulsive narcissism of that statement, there may be something to it. If Rick Dyer really is the first man to shoot and kill a Bigfoot and present it to science, he truly is the greatest Bigfoot tracker of all, dubious accomplishment though that may be.

Controversy about Dyer charging for Gold and Silver memberships on his site. For these outrageously overpriced memberships, you get a variety of benefits, none of which seem to be worth the $150 you need to cough up to join Rick’s club. Rick at first said that all of the proceeds would go to charity. If it’s all going to charity, why charge such a ripoff price?

Last nite on his show, Rick melted down as usual and exploded, saying it was no one’s business where the membership money was going. Where is the money going? Presumably right into Rick’s swollen pockets. Why would you expect anything else? The memberships are a ripoff, but they are to be expected. After all, this is Rick Dyer we are talking about here. He is not exactly a choirboy, eh?

Bigfoot Forums and the BFRO Forums in a battle to see which Bigfoot forum is more worthless and stupid. The problem with Bigfoot forums is that they are run by Bigfooters. Bigfooters in general are the scum of humanity, and those who lead their organizations are like the green stuff that floats to the top of the pond on a hot summer day. You get the picture.

The BFRO is run by Matt Moneymaker, who, for all he has done for the field, is one of the biggest fools, clowns and idiots in the game. Matt’s idiotic forum is run by some of the worst forum Nazis on the Web. Any subject about any of Mattie-boy’s eeeeeevil competition is completely shut down, and in general, the poster is instantly banned. I am very proud to say that I was banned from the BFRO is only 2 hours. It’s a badge I carry with honor, right over my beating heart!

The BFRO of course has banned all discussion of the Dyer shooting. They have also banned discussion of Dr. Melba Ketchum’s DNA study, Justin Smeja’s Bigfoot shootings in the Sierra Kills, and honestly anything that doesn’t have to do with Matt’s fat head itself! This juvenile mindset of course means that the children over at the BFRO are going to miss out on the greatest Bigfoot story of all time in 10 days, but they won’t bat an eyelash. They will step right out of their own muck smelling like a rose and not missing a beat somehow, just like hucksters always do.

The Bigfoot Forums is quite another story. The Forums is set up in such an odd way that one can hardly have any sensible discussion about just about anything Bigfoot related, unless I guess if you fork over $20 to the boneheads to join their groovy “secret” forum, where they take the dumb rules down so people can actually talk to each other like humans normally do, you know, to communicate stuff?

I am very proud to have been banned from this horrid viper’s nest, but the viciousness with which they hate me makes no sense. All threads mentioning my site and all links to my site are banned and immediately taken down, my IP was given out to any member who wanted it and I am regularly libeled on the site with no penalties being leveled at those doing the libeling. The sheer viciousness of the hatred of bizarre and over the top and makes my think the people running the site are nutcases.

Like complete fools, Bigfoot Forums has not only shut down the finest Rick Dyer thread on the web, but they have also banned any new Dyer threads, and not only that, if you mention Dyer, you will get an immediate ban. That means that these ultra-losers are of course going to get blindsided by the biggest story in Bigfoot history, which these boys and girls were so silly and petty as to decide that they would not discuss  without getting all butthurt. Bigfoot Forums will of course admit to doing nothing wrong and will stride forth from the ashes of their own self-immolation smiling and looking look a million bucks. What a bunch of douchebags.

Bottom line is we could really use a good Bigfoot discussion site. Bigfoot Warz is up now, with a strong focus on Rick Dyer, but there is not a lot of activity. Shawn’s Bigfoot Evidence has a discussion forum, but it could also use some more activity. Hardly anyone is banned from either site, and you can talk about most anything. You know…like…the American…way?

The Jewish Media Boycott

Repost from the old site.

It is said that you know who really controls power in a society when you hear the names that are spoken of only in frightened whispers, if at all. In this post from Joachim Martillo, we see that axiom spelled out clear as air. And so the sprectre of the Jewish media boycott looms, something most Americans know almost nothing about.

There was another post along these lines that appeared in Usenet a few years ago, about a small paper in the Midwest that ran an article about the fact that supposedly 59% of Bill Clinton’s cabinet was Jewish.

Seeing as Clinton insisted his Cabinet look like America, it seems that making it look like America would have meant a Cabinet that was 2% Jewish, no? The article was an opinion piece something along those lines. Pretty innocuous, right? Well, no. Not at all.

A Jewish media boycott soon ensued. These strange things happen pretty regularly in this land, but as the adage above implies, they get almost zero publicity. To even speak of their existence is probably a death sentence for any small paper, as the very weapon that denies it’s own existence will be used to take down the paper.

In this case, a boycott was announced, and it’s always Jewish advertisers. Jews are 2% of the population and control probably 25% of the wealth in the US. Normally this is no big deal, and it’s only important in that a good career move is arguably marrying a Jewish woman. If she’s not flush, maybe the relatives are.

But in the case of the Jewish media boycott, Jewish economic power is wielded to ferocious effect. The boycott was announced, and I believe the paper even ran some articles along the lines of a Jewish advertiser boycott. One day the editor got a call from what sounded like the world-weary voice of an upper-class US White woman. These was old White money talking.

She had seen this happen so many times before, and the result was always the same. The paper usually lasts only a few months, but sometimes they last longer. There is no antidote. Death of the media outlet is virtually certain. And so it happened that the paper was laid to rest.

Now here I see for the second time the specter of the Jewish media boycott being wielded as a threat against a paper on the end of a demand that they run pro-Israeli propaganda. I have no reason to believe the guy is lying. This is how Jewish media power works in the US. It’s not that the media is owned by a bunch of grasping Jews (that’s not even completely true anyway).

It’s more that there are just enough of them sprinkled around high media places to keep a negative talk about Jews or their KKK-state to a minimum, if not off the table. And then there are the Jewish advertisers. In this case, there don’t even need to be any Jews on staff – threats alone will suffice.

Other than the Jewish boycott stuff, this is pretty much ordinary dialog along the lines of Martillo and Weiss’s blogs; interesting as far as that goes. The bit about the media going after Obama due to doubts about how pro-Israel he will be sounds far-fetched, but we cynical observers of US policy find it quite believable.

I deleted most of the third comment, as it pointed out that Mondoweiss’ comment section is getting polluted up by idiotic anti-Semites. I don’t think these are the garden variety type, I think they are more the confused Leftists and confused liberals I alluded to earlier.

Confronted for the first time with unstoppable bulldozer of US-backed Zionism, people get angry and frustrated, and anyway, anti-Semitism, like religion, pretty much explains all the mysteries in the universe and that way you don’t have to think too much. I got into it myself in 2001 when I first got into anti-Israel activism until I figured out that so much of it was nonsense and pulled my head out, thank God. Racism is lame.

There follows a bunch of Judeophilic stuff about how much Jews have contributed to our world, which anyone with a brain can see for their eyes.

Why people bother reciting this chauvinist cant I have no idea, but I think it’s mostly because they are trying to fight off accusations of anti-Semitism. Yeah, Jews are smart. Yeah, they are educated. Fine, Germany and Japan were two of the smartest and most educated nations in the world in the 1930′s and 1940′s. So much for brains and degrees as intrinsic values.

 

EdFomNH on “Fealty to Israel”

by Joachim Martillo

[These comments refer to the Mundoweiss blog entry Apparently Without Irony, Washington Post Says Jewish Advocates Demand that Obama Show 'Fealty to Israel'.]

First Comment

THE ROLE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS TO SUPPORT THE DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE BY THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL. IT IS NOT UP TO US TO PICK AND CHOOSE FROM AMONG [ISRAEL'S] POLITICAL PARTIES.” THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS APPLAUDED.”

That comment, by Ann Lewis, one of Hillary Clinton’s most trusted aides and the other comments recorded in Dana Milbank’s enlightening article The Audacity of Chutzpah, referred to by Mondo above, prove the current treasonous extreme of America’s pro-Israeli lobby — the lobby many say is the most powerful in America — the lobby that many believe almost single-handedly pushed America into its ill-considered and ill-fated war in Iraq.

This lobby has now become so hyper-arrogant that they claim it is the “duty” of the President of the United States to support the will of the electorate of a foreign state no matter how much it might conflict with the interests of America.

They are, in effect, demanding that any candidate for President must surrender America’s sovereignty to Israel, a state founded for the purpose of discriminating against people based on whether or not they are Jewish.

My family was in the media. We repeatedly received letters from Rabbis, co-signed by all our Jewish sponsors, threatening to put us out of business unless we carried pro-Israeli or pro-Jewish propaganda, which we did. If you understand the power of the pro-Israeli lobby, not only in Washington, but also in the news media, the article The Audacity of Chutzpah explains why Barak Obama is being smeared by certain loud voices in our media.

Consider Saturday Night Live’s claim the press was “in the tank” for Obama — when the real problem is that Obama is not 100% “in the tank” for Israel.

Obama’s relationship with his single sleazy money man, Rezko, has received much more publicity than the Clintons’ more questionable relationships with hundreds of sleazy money men, including a handful that were channeling money from the Chinese Communists to the Clinton’s in return for the dangerous sale to the Chinese of important U.S. military assets.

The media has virtually refused to remind America of just how much evidence there is of just how many serious crimes the Clintons appear to have committed. Most of the right-wing voices on talk radio and cable news, who are currently fanning the anti-Obama movement and encouraging Republicans to vote for Hillary, have been constant supporters of the Zionist-racist end of the pro-Israeli lobby.

The media uproar about Rev. Jeremiah Wright is not really about his anti-white racism. Many black leaders, including Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have said things just anti-white as Rev. Wright — but no prominent leaders of the Democratic party have ever been forced to disown them.

Instead it is all about Israel, and the Zionist-racists’ fear Obama cannot be trusted to commit the treason of putting the interests of Israel before those of America.

To understand the ugly power of the pro-Israeli lobby, just look at the vicious smear job it did on Jimmy Carter, who has done more to help Israel in real terms than any U.S. President since Truman.

He was repeatedly smeared as anti-Semitic when he dared write in his book Peace Not Apartheid statements about Israel’s unfairness to the Palestinians that are commonly discussed within the Israeli media itself. Even American Jews who have dared to make similar statements in this country have been attacked by the Zionist-racists as aiding anti-Semitism.

ZIONISM AND ANTI-SEMITISM ARE EVIL TWINS. THEY ARE BOTH IDEOLOGIES FOUNDED ON DISCRIMINATING AGAINST PEOPLE BASED ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE JEWISH. IT IS HYPOCRITICAL TO ATTACK ONE WITHOUT ATTACKING THE OTHER.

Racial discrimination practiced by Jews is just as ugly as a similar degree of racial discrimination practiced against Jews, and vice versa. Anything else would be a racist double standard on its face.

And since, as is shown in Jimmy Carter’s book, the current racial discrimination practiced by Israel is more ugly and extreme than the anti-Semitic discrimination practiced by any but an extremely small, nut-case fringe in America, the vast majority of charges of anti-Semitism made by the powerful pro-Israeli Jewish groups in this country are nothing but pure hypocrisy.

It is time that all fair-minded Americans, including all fair-minded Jews, condemn the offensive discrimination, censorship, McCarthy-like smear campaigns, and treason of the Zionist-racists who force our politicians to subject the sovereignty of America to the will of Israeli voters and who seek to prevent American gentiles and Jews from having the same freedom to criticize Israel as the Jews of Israel, themselves.

It is time America have the freedom to honestly and openly consider the costs, as well as the benefits, of continuing to be the world’s major funder, supplier of arms, and supplier of diplomatic support for Israel’s anti-Arab racism.

Second Comment

That the American media is spending so much time focusing on Rev. Wright’s mere ugly words, and virtually no time on the pro-Israeli lobby’s treasonous, ugly requirement that American presidents put the interests of Israel before those of America, is proof of just how dominated by Zionist-racism the American media is.

It is ridiculous that Obama is being pressured to distance himself from Rev. Wright’s ugly words, when nobody is ever forced to distance themselves from Israel’s much, much, much uglier deeds.

In a cycle of violence that started when the Zionists moved into Palestine and made clear they wanted to drive the Palestinians out of their own land — much as Hitler originally wanted to drive the Jews out of Germany — the Zionist have killed many more Palestinians than Palestinians have Jews.

In response to almost every tit for tat in this cycle of violence the Zionist-racists started, they have killed many more Arabs than Arabs have Jews. The fact that one side’s bombs are now delivered by human suicide bombers while the other side’s are delivered by American-made mechanical bombers does not make one side’s violence worse than the other.

People who have been robbed have more right to use force to get their stolen property back than the robbers have to steal it.

Why is there a racist double standard that says Zionists are allowed to kill and commit acts of terror to steal, keep, and steal even more stolen land, but Palestinians are not allowed to kill and commit acts of terror to get back the land that has been stolen from them, or to fight to prevent even more land from being taken from them.

Why is there always a (usually unspoken) racist double standard in the American public forum, which accords more rights to Jews than gentiles.

When will the Jewish people as a whole ever be satisfied with equality, rather than continuing to have powerful elements within their population that constantly demands racial superiority, including the right to have a nation state that discriminates against the racial and ethnic background of 97% of Americans and 99.5% of all of humanity.

When will the Jews stop having powerful groups within their population that demand to be the pigs of Animal Farm, the animals that are “more equal” than all the others.

The answer is that it would happen within a decade or two after America was free to honestly discuss Israel and Zionism.

It would because Jews are basically just as decent as the rest of America, and if there could only be honest discussion of how ugly Israel’s racism is, and how ugly the claims of Zionists to special privilege are, most Jews would come to understand that Zionism and certain strands of racism in the Torah and the Talmud are ugly and outdated, just as most American whites took a decade or two to understand how ugly and outdated the racism against Afro-Americans — that was so deeply ingrained in many of white America’s sacred institutions — was.

The Zionist-racists of the pro-Israeli lobby know this. They know that most American Jews are fair minded enough that if there could be an open and honest discussion of Israeli and Zionist racism, and how offensive many people consider it to be, the large majority of American Jews would distance themselves from both these ugly institutions.

That is why they work so hard to seek total censorship of all things that relate to Israel and Zionism.

That is why they feel such a need to smear Obama, because, God forbid, since he had an Islamic father, he might just spread the idea that Arabs are human beings of equal intrinsic worth as Jews, and without the implicit assumption that Jews are somehow superior to Palestinians and entitled to special rights the justification for Israel brutal treatment of the Palestinians disappears.

So that cannot be allowed. That is why the Zionists fight in such an ugly and underhanded manner to prevent any honest discussions on the subject, because they know that Americans and American Jews are basically decent people, and, thus, they cannot be allowed to have free and open discussions of the ugly racism and discrimination that is the very essence of both Zionism and Israel.

Third Comment

Reading the comments on this list [Mundoweiss] I am happy to hear that so many oppose Israel, the pro-Israeli lobby, and Zionism. But I am not happy to see that some remarks in this list appear to be anti-Semitic, even to me…

Conn Hallinan, “Hugo Chavez: Lest We Forget”

Nice piece on Chavez.

Hugo Chavez: Lest We Forget

“Charismatic and idiosyncratic, capable of building friendships. Communicating to the masses as few other leaders ever have, Mr. Chavez will be missed.”

Conn Hallinan
Dispatches From The Edge: March 11, 2013

Paying Last Respects

In early December 2001, I was searching through my files looking for a column topic. At the time I was writing on foreign policy for the San Francisco Examiner, one of the town’s two dailies. A back page clip I had filed and forgotten caught my attention: on Nov. 7 the National Security Agency, the Pentagon, and the U.S. State Department had convened a two-day meeting on U.S. policy vis-a-vis Venezuela. My first thought was, “Uh, oh.”

I knew something about those kinds of meetings. There was one in 1953 just before the CIA and British intelligence engineered the coup in Iran that put the despicable Shah into power. Same thing for the 1963 coup in South Vietnam and the 1973 coup against Salvador Allende in Chile.

Chavez had reaped the ire of the Bush administration when, during a speech condemning the 2001 attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, he asked if bombing Afghanistan in retaliation was a good idea? Chavez called it “fighting terrorism with terrorism,” not a very good choice of words, but, in retrospect, spot on. The invasion of Afghanistan and the subsequent Iraqi War have been utterly disastrous for the U.S. and visited widespread terror on the populations of both countries. Upwards of a million Iraqis died as a direct and indirect effect of the war, five million were turned into refugees, and the bloodshed is far from over. Much the same-albeit on a smaller scale-is happening to the Afghans.

Would that we had paid the man some attention.

But for the Bush administration, Chavez’s statement presented an opportunity to rid itself of a troublesome voice. In came the White House’s Latin America “A Team.”

The top gun in that odious outfit was Otto Reich, assistant secretary of state for western hemispheric affairs and former Reagan Administration point man for the 1981-87 Contra War against Nicaragua. The General Accounting Office had nailed Reich during the 1986 Iran-Contra scandal for “prohibited convert propaganda,” planting false stories and opinion pieces in newspapers. A Cuban exile, Reich had helped spring Orlando Bosch in 1987 from a Venezuelan prison where Bosch was in jail for bombing a civilian Cuban airliner and killing 73 people.

Rogelio Pardo-Maurer, deputy assistant secretary of defense for western hemisphere affairs, also a Cuban exile and former chief of staff for the Contras, was the Pentagon side of the team.

While Reich met with civilian opponents of Chavez and conservative businessman Pedro Carmona, Pardo-Maurer huddled with military leaders, including Gen. Lucas Romero Rincon. Carmona and Rincon would play a key role in the April 11, 2002 coup against Chavez. The National Endowment for Democracy and United States Agency for International Development were also supporting Chavez’s opponents with money and advice, and both organizations have long histories of subversion and covert operations.

I had no special information about the possibility of a coup but it didn’t take a crystal ball to see that the armies of the night were on the move. So I wrote a column titled “Coup in the Wind” that laid out the meetings, identified the actors, and reminded readers that the U.S. has a long and sordid history of organizing and supporting coups in Latin America.

A little more than three and a half months later, the plotters struck, arrested Chavez, suspended the constitution, dissolved the legislature, dismissed the Supreme Court, the Attorney General and the National Election Commission, and fired provincial governors. We had seen this all before, and I flinched at what I thought would inevitably follow: executions, death squads, “disappeared” opponents, smashed unions, and a cowed population.

But April 11, 2002 was not 1954 in Guatemala, 1964 in Brazil, 1973 in Chile, or 1976 in Argentina. Chavez had lifted millions of people out of poverty, opened schools, increased literacy, and tackled malnutrition. In vast numbers those people rose up, and, for the first time in Latin American history, a coup was overturned.

Three days after Chavez was returned to office, Martha Honey at Foreign Policy In Focus sent me an email saying she liked the coup column and would I consider writing a follow-up for the think tank? I knew all about Martha Honey and her husband, Tony Avirgan. As reporters for the Costa Rican Tico Times, they had uncovered much of the Iran-Contra plot and were legends among those of us in the alternative press. I also knew about FPIF. It is hard to write sensible things about U.S. foreign policy without it. So I did a piece called Anatomy of a Coup, detailing U.S. support for the plotters. Since then I have written over 200 columns, so in a way it was Hugo Chavez that landed me at FPIF.

Chavez became the president of a country where 70 percent of the population was considered “poor,” in spite of $30 billion in yearly oil revenues. It was a country where two percent of the population owned 60 percent of the land, and where the gap between rich and poor was among the widest on the continent.

Today, according to the Gini Coefficient, Venezuela has the lowest rate of inequality in Latin America. Poverty has been reduced to 21 percent, and extreme poverty from 40 percent to 7.3 percent. Illiteracy has been eliminated and, proportionally, Venezuela is number two in Latin America for the number of university students. Infant mortality has dropped from 25 per 1,000 to 13 per 1,000, the same as it is for Black Americans.

Chavez’s government increased the number of health clinics by 169.6 percent and hands out free food to five million Venezuelans. Take a moment to read The Achievements of Hugo Chavez by public health experts Carles Muntaner, Joan Benach, and sociologist Maria Paez Victor in CounterPunch.

Comparing the man’s accomplishments to his U.S. obits was like taking a trip through Alice’s looking glass. Virtually none of the information about poverty and illiteracy was included, and when it was grudgingly admitted that he did have programs for the poor, it was “balanced” ; with claims of soaring debts, widespread shortages, rampant crime, economic chaos, and “authoritarian ism.”

Venezuela’ s debt as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product is lower than that of the U.S. and Europe. Inflation has fallen to a four-year low. There is crime, but neighboring Colombia is far more dangerous, particularly if you happen to be a trade unionist. And more people in Venezuela are eating better than they have ever eaten in the history of the country. Over the past decade growth has averaged 4. 3 percent, and joblessness dropped from 11.3 percent to 7.7 percent. Americans would kill for those figures.

As for being an “authoritarian ,” most the country’ s media is venomously anti-Chavez and publishes regularly, and his opponents hold weekly rallies and protests. Want to try that in U.S. ally Honduras (or Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, etc.)?

The old Venezuelan elites-aided by the U.S.-will now attempt to turn the clock back to 1997, the year before Chavez took over. But that will not be easy. Quite literally millions of people have been brought into the democratic process and they will not cede power without a fight. Once people have better housing, schools, nutrition, jobs and health care, it is very difficult to take those things away. Chavez handed a better life to the vast majority of Venezuelans, and, as they demonstrated in April 2002, they are perfectly able to defend those gains.

“Charismatic and idiosyncratic, capable of building friendships. Communicating to the masses as few other leaders ever have, Mr. Chavez will be missed,” is the way former Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva put it.

He will be missed, indeed.

Greg Palast on Hugo Chavez

This article shows exactly how US imperialism works in the world today. It also shows just how evil US foreign policy really is. Now whether the behavior portrayed below is evil or good is a value judgment. I say it’s evil. Someone else may feel it’s the right thing to do.

But one thing for sure, the true story, as Greg Palast lays out below, is one you will never hear on US TV or radio or read in any US newspaper or magazine. The US media won’t even bring up charges like this even to deny them. Can you imagine if every day in the US you could turn on your TV to a debate on whether or not the US is an imperialist country? That’s a debate they don’t want you to have, even to deny it.

Problem is that no matter how hard they deny it, they don’t want you to hear the other side at all. There is too much risk that no matter how hard they ridicule the other side, a few people might decide to side with the opposition. A few Americans here and there might decide that, yes, the US is an imperialist country.

That the US is an imperialist country and that US capitalism is based on imperialism is beyond a doubt. There’s nothing to debate. It’s obviously true. Even the scores of US military bases and the huge US military are the armed faction of that imperial system. When you go enlist in the US military, you are joining as a foot soldier for imperialism, in general. You are carrying a weapon for Heinz, the Koch Brothers and Chevron more than you are defending US soil from shadowy enemies.

Almost all supporters of US capitalism (and we have many here on this blog) refuse to acknowledge that US capitalism is based on imperialism. Imperialism is its bread and butter.

It’s fine and dandy to support capitalism (I am not completely against the market myself), but I think if you support US capitalism, you ought to at least agree that it’s based on imperialism. That would be the brave and principled thing to do. And now do you support this system, this particular US capitalism buttressed by imperialism as laid out below. To me, that is a much harder thing to do, but supporters or US capitalism need to do that. They need to take a stand on imperialism. You either support US imperialism or you oppose it. Which will it be? No more dodging the question and pretending that imperialism doesn’t exist.

It is also interesting that we have Blacks on this board who hated Hugo Chavez. Yet Chavez was the great champions of the Blacks and Browns of Venezuela, as laid out below. Venezuelan capitalism, as is the case with capitalism in many parts of the world, was racially based. The Whites took all the money and left the Blacks and Browns with crumbs – starving, sickened, squatting in hovels with sewage running down the steep gutters. Why US Blacks would support such a racial spoils system is beyond me.

There is much talk that Chavez and other Latin American Leftists were all given cancer by the US. It’s an interesting theory, but there is no evidence for it at the moment.

I had an Argentine girlfriend once. We talked about the Dirty War in Argentina, supported to the hilt by the US (Henry Kissinger notoriously backed them to the hilt), in which 30,000 mostly unarmed and peaceful Leftists were murdered by a rightwing military dictatorship.

“Well,” she said thoughtfully. “The Latin American Left dreamed of a better world. And in Latin America, that is a dangerous thing.”

So it is with Hugo Chavez, so it is with the Americas, of which we in the north are increasingly a part.

“But why the GW Bush regime’s hate, hate, HATE of the President of Venezuela? Reverend Pat wasn’t coy about the answer: Its the oil. This is a dangerous enemy to our South controlling a huge pool of oil.”

Vaya con Dios, Hugo Chàvez, mi Amigo

By Greg Palast

Tuesday, March 5, 2013

Venezuelan President Chavez once asked me why the US elite wanted to kill him. My dear Hugo: Its the oil. And its the Koch Brothers and its the ketchup.

Reverend Pat Robertson said, Hugo Chavez thinks were trying to assassinate him. I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it.

It was 2005 and Robertson was channeling the frustration of George Bush’s State Department. Despite Bush’s providing intelligence, funds and even a note of congratulations to the crew who kidnapped Chavez (we’ll get there), Hugo remained in office, reelected and wildly popular.

But why the Bush regime’s hate, hate, HATE of the President of Venezuela? Reverend Pat wasn’t coy about the answer: It’s the oil. This is a dangerous enemy to our South controlling a huge pool of oil.

A really BIG pool of oil. Indeed, according to Guy Caruso, former chief of oil intelligence for the CIA, Venezuela hold a recoverable reserve of 1.36 trillion barrels, that is, a whole lot more than Saudi Arabia.

If we didn’t kill Chavez, we’d have to do an Iraq on his nation. So the Reverend suggests, We don’t need another $200 billion war…. It’s a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with.

Chavez himself told me he was stunned by Bush’s attacks: Chavez had been quite chummy with Bush Senior and with Bill Clinton.

So what made Chavez suddenly “a dangerous enemy”? Here’s the answer you wont find in The New York Times:

Just after Bush’s inauguration in 2001, Chavez congress voted in a new Law of Hydrocarbons. Henceforth, Exxon, British Petroleum, Shell Oil and Chevron would get to keep 70% of the sales revenues from the crude they sucked out of Venezuela. Not bad, considering the price of oil was rising toward $100 a barrel.

But to the oil companies, which had bitch-slapped Venezuela’s prior government into giving them 84% of the sales price, a cut to 70% was no bueno. Worse, Venezuela had been charging a joke of a royalty just one percent on heavy crude from the Orinoco Basin. Chavez told Exxon and friends they’d now have to pay 16.6%.

Clearly, Chavez had to be taught a lesson about the etiquette of dealings with Big Oil.

On April 11, 2002, President Chavez was kidnapped at gunpoint and flown to an island prison in the Caribbean Sea. On April 12, Pedro Carmona, a business partner of the US oil companies and president of the nations Chamber of Commerce, declared himself President of Venezuela giving a whole new meaning to the term, corporate takeover.

U.S. Ambassador Charles Shapiro immediately rushed down from his hilltop embassy to have his picture taken grinning with the self-proclaimed President and the leaders of the coup détat.

Bush’s White House spokesman admitted that Chavez was, democratically elected, but, he added, Legitimacy is something that is conferred not by just the majority of voters. I see.

With an armed and angry citizenry marching on the Presidential Palace in Caracas ready to string up the coup plotters, Carmona, the Pretend President from Exxon returned his captive Chavez back to his desk within 48 hours.

Chavez had provoked the coup not just by clawing back some of the bloated royalties of the oil companies. Its what he did with that oil money that drove Venezuela’s One Percent to violence.

In Caracas, I ran into the reporter for a TV station whose owner is generally credited with plotting the coup against the president. While doing a publicity photo shoot, leaning back against a tree, showing her wide-open legs nearly up to where they met, the reporter pointed down the hill to the ranchos, the slums above Caracas, where shacks, once made of cardboard and tin, where quickly transforming into homes of cinder blocks and cement.

He [Chavez] gives them bread and bricks, so they vote for him, of course. She was disgusted by them, the 80% of Venezuelans who are negro e indio (Black and Indian)and poor. Chavez, himself negro e indio, had, for the first time in Venezuela’s history, shifted the oil wealth from the privileged class that called themselves Spanish, to the dark-skinned masses.

While trolling around the poor housing blocks of Caracas, I ran into a local, Arturo Quiran, a merchant seaman and no big fan of Chavez. But over a beer at his kitchen table, he told me,

Fifteen years ago under [then-President] Carlos Andrés Pérez, there was a lot of oil money in Venezuela. The oil boom we called it. Here in Venezuela there was a lot of money, but we didn’t see it.

But then came Hugo Chavez, and now the poor in his neighborhood, he said, get medical attention, free operations, x-rays, medicines; education also. People who never knew how to write now know how to sign their own papers.”

Chavez Robin Hood thing, shifting oil money from the rich to the poor, would have been grudgingly tolerated by the US. But Chavez, who told me, We are no longer an oil colony, went further…too much further, in the eyes of the American corporate elite.

Venezuela had landless citizens by the millions and unused land by the millions of acres tied up, untilled, on which a tiny elite of plantation owners squatted. Chavez congress passed in a law in 2001 requiring untilled land to be sold to the landless. It was a program long promised by Venezuela’s politicians at the urging of John F. Kennedy as part of his Alliance for Progress.

Plantation owner Heinz Corporation didn’t like that one bit. In retaliation, Heinz closed its ketchup plant in the state of Maturin and fired all the workers. Chavez seized Heinz plant and put the workers back on the job. Chavez didn’t realize that he’d just squeezed the tomatoes of Americas powerful Heinz family and Mrs. Heinz husband, Senator John Kerry, now U.S. Secretary of State.

Or, knowing Chavez as I do, he didn’t give a damn.

Chavez could survive the ketchup coup, the Exxon presidency, even his taking back a piece of the windfall of oil company profits, but he dangerously tried the patience of Americas least forgiving billionaires: The Koch Brothers.

How? Well, that’s another story for another day.

Elected presidents who annoy Big Oil have ended up in exile or coffins: Mossadegh of Iran after he nationalized BP’s fields (1953), Elchibey, President of Azerbaijan, after he refused demands of BP for his Caspian fields (1993), President Alfredo Palacio of Ecuador after he terminated Occidentals drilling concession (2005).

Its a chess game, Mr. Palast, Chavez told me. He was showing me a very long, and very sharp sword once owned by Simon Bolivar, the Great Liberator. And I am, Chavez said, a very good chess player.

In the film The Seventh Seal, a medieval knight bets his life on a game of chess with the Grim Reaper. Death cheats, of course, and takes the knight. No mortal can indefinitely outplay Death who, this week, Chavez must know, will checkmate the new Bolivar of Venezuela.

But in one last move, the Bolivarian grandmaster played a brilliant endgame, naming Vice-President Nicolas Maduro, as good and decent a man as they come, as heir to the fight for those in the ranchos. The One Percent of Venezuela, planning on Chavez’s death to return them the power and riches they couldn’t win in an election, are livid with the choice of Maduro.

Chavez sent Maduro to meet me in my downtown New York office back in 2004. In our run-down detective digs on Second Avenue, Maduro and I traded information on assassination plots and oil policy.

Even then, Chavez was carefully preparing for the day when Venezuela’s negros e indios would lose their king but still stay in the game. Class war on a chessboard. Even in death, I wouldn’t bet against Hugo Chavez.

“War’ s never a winning thing, Charlie. You just lose all the time, and the one who loses last asks for terms. All I remember is a lot of losing and sadness and nothing good at the end of it. The end of it, Charles, that was a winning all to itself, having nothing to do with guns.”
–Ray Bradbury, from the short story, The Time Machine, 1957

That Long Newspaper Spoon

Repost from the old site.

Let’s see what’s on the end of that long newspaper spoon… William Burroughs, “Naked Lunch” (1959).

This book really ought to be mandatory reading for all second graders, by the way.

On the end of that long newspaper spoon? A mean gruel and lies, cons and mind-heists.

Let us look at a few recent topics: How I Helped Moved a Factory To Mexico, from Business Week, actually a pretty good business publication. This article goes to show you the sheer insanity of the US government. Sure, global forces often more or less mandate taking plants out of the country.

The factory in the US closes, and $18/hour workers lose their jobs. The jobs go to Mexico, where the same work pays $3/hour, including benefits. Since $3/hour is not nearly as good as $18/hour, the flood from Mexico to the US continues.

Almost no one in Mexico is starving. As an illegal alien farm worker from Oaxaca told me over drinks at the bar about Oaxaca, “Comida, si. Dinero, no.” In Oaxaca, there is plenty of food, but no money. So everyone heads up here. Why, cuz they are starving? No, so they can buy 27 inch color TV sets.

US workers lose when US jobs are shipped overseas, then lose once again with the mad, lunatic illegal alien invasion that is ruining US working class jobs all over our nation. We have been shipping jobs to Mexico wildly since NAFTA in 1994.

One would think that this flood of jobs to Mexico would have resulted in a dramatic reduction in illegal immigration, but in fact, 1994 approximately coincides with a total explosion in the illegal immigrant tsunami to the US.

After NAFTA, workers and consumers in the US, Mexico and Canada all lost ground. Got that? Workers in Mexico, the US and Canada all got screwed by NAFTA. Some say they never made it up since either. Only business cleaned up, and only some businesses at that.

All free trade agreements between disparate nations, that I can tell, are going to have the exact same effects as NAFTA. Probably all free trade agreements that the US has negotiated since NAFTA have had similar effects, probably on a smaller scale.

Workers, consumers and public all get screwed. The environment takes a massive hit. Crappy Mexican trucks flood our highways and destroy them. All free trade agreements are always sold with the same load of crap that NAFTA was, as benefiting workers, consumers, the public, and hell, even the environment, why not?

Nearly the entire US media, from top to bottom, is in on this lie, and if you only read the MSM, you will never figure out the con. Workers, consumers, the public, the environment, and lots of small businesses get screwed by NAFTA-bullshit, and on top of that, we get an avalanche of illegal aliens.

Wow, what a deal! Hail NAFTA! Hail free trade!

File under lies, lies, and more lies: As reasonable folks may have guessed, Business Week (once again, heads up to a good capitalist magazine) columnist Ed Wallace informs us that there is no gas shortage. No gas shortage, no oil shortage, no nothing like that.

Has the media ever told us that? No. Have the politicians ever told us that? No. What do the media and pols tell us? That there is a gas and oil shortage! Why is there a gas and oil shortage? Oh, so many things! Especially, rising demand in China and India! Oh, but what a load of crap that is!

We are also told that we are somewhere near Peak Oil (but no one knows when that hits or what it even means) and this is the cause of the problem. Forget it. Peak oil implies a supply-demand equation, and no such mathematics is working like that here.

The cheerleaders for capitalism tell us that one of the great things about capitalism is supply and demand. It is true that this is an excellent way of fixing prices, and it is possible that socialist economies ignore this at the risk of their extinction. But oil prices have nothing to do with supply and demand! Nothing!

The fundamentals of the oil and gas market are exactly the same as when oil was $60/barrel back in 2006. Whether the market can go back to the $20/barrel in 2002 is not known; possibly it cannot. Check out this great, prophetic Tom Friedman column from that year wondering if the Iraq War will shoot oil to the horror of $60/barrel.

But as far as supply and demand go, oil ought to be no more than $60/barrel and I assume that gas should be no more than $2/gallon or so. So why is it $120/barrel instead of $60?

Because capitalism doesn’t necessarily work on supply and demand. The rest is just sheer speculation. Traders are pulling their money out of the sinking dollar and plunking it right into oil and other commodities, and it’s sure been a nice ride all right. Just a bunch of speculators bidding the price up like crazed buyers at an auction; that’s all it is. That’s the cause of your $4/gallon gas.

Oil reserves are at their highest levels since 1999. Gasoline reserves are at their highest levels since 1993 (!) But surely demand is rising, China and India and all that? Nope, demand has been falling all year now and will probably fall even into the summer.

On the other hand, oil refineries are not necessarily doing that well at all, at least according to them. They are getting killed by high oil prices on the one hand and low gasoline demand on the other. In order to make a decent profit, refineries have deliberately cut back oil production. The purpose of running the refineries at low speed is to push up the price of gas even further.

Distillates such as airline fuel and diesel have seen their prices so through the roof, and there are shortages of these, but they are deliberately created by the industry. If there were, why are we exporting more distillates than we are importing. Not only that, but imports of distillates have crashed by some 40% in a year.

It would seem that in all of this insanity something like a National Industrial Policy would be called for. For decades, countries South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, Taiwan and now China, not to mention most of Western Europe, have done just that.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that capitalism with no government (free market neoliberalism) is an orchestra of great musicians with no composer. At some point, it’s the economic equivalent to an insane asylum or an elementary school playground.

We can also see that that all of the feverish nostrums peddled by the politico-media Lying Classes are loads of garbage? We need to fly to Saudi Arabia and beg the Saudis to turn up the oil spigots! We need to drill in the Arctic!

We need to drill everywhere, off the beach next to your house! We need to get rid of environmental regulations and taxes that make gas so expensive! And last but not least, the favorite of right-wing liars everywhere, we need more refineries!

We do not really need any of these things, at least at the moment. The oil refineries lie is one of the most evil of them all. It is probably peddled by the stinking garbage in human forms that run the oil industry itself.

The line goes like this:

-Oil is high!
-Why is it high?
-Hardly any new refineries since (insert year)!
-Why not?
-Evil environmentalists! Evil regulations! They’ve made it impossible to build new refineries!
-(sputtering) Bastard environmentalists and regulators! Get rid of them so we can build more refineries!
-Yes, yes, yes!

The thing is, this whole line is just an incredibly devious lie peddled by Oil Company Scum and their gargoyle allies in government and media and rightwing politics. No regulations have gotten in the way of building any new refineries in the US.

The industry itself has flat out refused to build new oil refineries in the US because industry does not want to create more refinery supply. Low numbers of refineries are good for keeping gas supply low and prices high. The conversational ruse above is designed to get rid of existing environmental and other regulations at existing plants.

This ethanol mandate crap is about to do the same thing to food prices. My advice if you are worried about your money to put it into food stockpiles, preferably non-perishable. Food is going to go up in value quite a bit soon – it is already – and it is not going to be pretty.

It’s looking ugly and it’s going to get uglier. We socialists have in general done a superb job of feeding people and a way better job of feeding people than capitalism has (despite the Mt. Everest of capitalist lies about how socialism starves people) and hopefully a hungrier world will find more socialist-oriented policies are better for filling the belly.

My bullshit detector was screaming the other day when Yahoo Headlines shouted in my ear that Congress was going to be briefed on how evil North Korea was helping wicked Syria build a diabolical nuclear reactor.

I remember well when Israel bombed the plant in question.

I looked into the story extensively at the time and my conclusion was that Syria was building a chemical weapons plant, not a nuclear reactor plant, at the site. The North Koreans are experts at chemical weapons stuff and the Scud missiles to shoot them with, and that was apparently why they were there.

Now there is reportedly a new video showing that evil Syria was just about this far (index and thumb nearly touching) from building a devilish nuclear power plant, to build nuclear bombs with, to load on missiles, to shoot at Israel, to kill all the Jews!

To kill all the Jews! To kill all the Jews! To kill all the Jews! To kill all the Jews! To kill all the Jews!

Holocaust 2. Holocaust 2. Holocaust 2. Holocaust 2. Holocaust 2. Holocaust 2.

This is obviously a Jewish media cabal influenced article, and all such articles include the Holocaust Porn fetish typical of most Jews nowadays.

The Holocaust traumatized them, but they’d already predicted it for millenia, and it had already been attempted over and over according to them, because Jews really do love to believe that their enemies have been trying to exterminate them all from day one!

The whole history of the Jews, according to them, is Jews fending off mad Final Solution attempts by Persia-Nazis or Roman-Nazis, or Russian-Nazis, or Arab-Nazis, or This-Nazis or That-Nazis.

You can’t understand the Jew until you get to the Holocaust Porn thing. It’s not just his own death; that’s bad enough. The baddies are never going to be satisfied with one Jew. They are going to do every single last one of them.

Understanding this helps shed light on phenomena like Zionism: Go Nazi ourselves, steal some land, arm to the teeth with nukes, and dare the anti-Semites to wipe us out.

How bout Iran? Does Ahmadinejad want to kill one Jew? Course not. He wants to kill them all.

Does the PLO and Hamas just want to kill a Jew here and there for sport? Nope, they want to “destroy Israel” = code for kill all the Jews.

Why do Jews need to go to Israel? Because evil whatever-Nazis in the Diaspora are getting ready to kill all the Diaspora Jews.

For Chrissake man, it’s porn! It’s Holocaust Porn! It’s a fetish already. How else to explain the absolutely sickening and clearly unhealthy Jewish obsession with the horrors of the Holocaust. Holocaust museums, coming soon to a city near you. Holocaust Museum, my Jewish girlfriend took me to visit her very own, this was an essential part of our romance.

What’s a Jew reading these days? Oh, a Holocaust novel. Or maybe some non-fiction, surely with a Holocaust twist somewhere in there. Hollywood has a Holocaust hardon . Seems every year there’s more and more Shoah tales.

I do not have enough information yet to look into the North Korean – Syria reactor thing yet, but I have studied Syria’s nuclear program in the past. My take was that Syria has been working on a nuclear program for about 25 years now but has made little headway due to shortages of money, technology, brains, etc.

This is actually quite common; many smaller countries have similar nuclear projects in the ruts. People just do not get it. Rome was not built in a day, and neither was any nuclear program. They require a highly developed economy and always take years and often take decades to even get going.

Even when they do, there is one problem after another. The super brains like A. Q. Khan of Pakistan are few and far between, and he’s under house arrest.

So let us say I am somewhat skeptical that Syria was about “this close” to building a nuclear weapon.