The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

FROM ANOTHER BLOGGER

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070402/scahill_vid





Jeremy Scahill reports on the Bush Administration's growing dependence on private security forces such as Blackwater USA and efforts in Congress to rein them in. This article is adapted from his new book, Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army (Nation Books).



On September 10, 2001, before most Americans had heard of Al Qaeda or imagined the possibility of a "war on terror," Donald Rumsfeld stepped to the podium at the Pentagon to deliver one of his first major addresses as Defense Secretary under President George W. Bush. Standing before the former corporate executives he had tapped as his top deputies overseeing the high-stakes business of military contracting--many of them from firms like Enron, General Dynamics and Aerospace Corporation -Rumsfeld issued a declaration of war.



"The topic today is an adversary that poses a threat, a serious threat, to the security of the United States of America," Rumsfeld thundered. "It disrupts the defense of the United States and places the lives of men and women in uniform at risk." He told his new staff, "You may think I'm describing one of the last decrepit dictators of the world.... [But] the adversary's closer to home," he said. "It's the Pentagon bureaucracy." Rumsfeld called for a wholesale shift in the running of the Pentagon, supplanting the old DoD bureaucracy with a new model, one based on the private sector. Announcing this major overhaul, Rumsfeld told his audience, "I have no desire to attack the Pentagon; I want to liberate it. We need to save it from itself."



The next morning, the Pentagon would be attacked, literally, as a Boeing 757--American Airlines Flight 77--smashed into its western wall. Rumsfeld would famously assist rescue workers in pulling bodies from the rubble. But it didn't take long for Rumsfeld to seize the almost unthinkable opportunity presented by 9/11 to put his personal war--laid out just a day before--on the fast track. The new Pentagon policy would emphasize covert actions, sophisticated weapons systems and greater reliance on private contractors. It became known as the Rumsfeld Doctrine. "We must promote a more entrepreneurial approach: one that encourages people to be proactive, not reactive, and to behave less like bureaucrats and more like venture capitalists," Rumsfeld wrote in the summer of 2002 in an article for Foreign Affairs titled "Transforming the Military."



Although Rumsfeld was later thrown overboard by the Administration in an attempt to placate critics of the Iraq War, his military revolution was here to stay. Bidding farewell to Rumsfeld in November 2006, Bush credited him with overseeing the "most sweeping transformation of America's global force posture since the end of World War II." Indeed, Rumsfeld's trademark "small footprint" approach ushered in one of the most significant developments in modern warfare--the widespread use of private contractors in every aspect of war, including in combat.



The often overlooked subplot of the wars of the post-9/11 period is their unprecedented scale of outsourcing and privatization. From the moment the US troop buildup began in advance of the invasion of Iraq, the Pentagon made private contractors an integral part of the operations. Even as the government gave the public appearance of attempting diplomacy, Halliburton was prepping for a massive operation. When US tanks rolled into Baghdad in March 2003, they brought with them the largest army of private contractors ever deployed in modern war. By the end of Rumsfeld's tenure in late 2006, there were an estimated 100,000 private contractors on the ground in Iraq--an almost one-to-one ratio with active-duty American soldiers.



To the great satisfaction of the war industry, before Rumsfeld resigned he took the extraordinary step of classifying private contractors as an official part of the US war machine. In the Pentagon's 2006 Quadrennial Review, Rumsfeld outlined what he called a "road map for change" at the DoD, which he said had begun to be implemented in 2001. It defined the "Department's Total Force" as "its active and reserve military components, its civil servants, and its contractors--constitut[ing] its warfighting capability and capacity. Members of the Total Force serve in thousands of locations around the world, performing a vast array of duties to accomplish critical missions." This formal designation represented a major triumph for war contractors--conferring on them a legitimacy they had never before enjoyed.



Contractors have provided the Bush Administration with political cover, allowing the government to deploy private forces in a war zone free of public scrutiny, with the deaths, injuries and crimes of those forces shrouded in secrecy. The Administration and the GOP-controlled Congress in turn have shielded the contractors from accountability, oversight and legal constraints.



Despite the presence of more than 100,000 private contractors on the ground in Iraq, only one has been indicted for crimes or violations. "We have over 200,000 troops in Iraq and half of them aren't being counted, and the danger is that there's zero accountability," says Democrat Dennis Kucinich, one of the leading Congressional critics of war contracting.



While the past years of Republican monopoly on government have marked a golden era for the industry, those days appear to be ending. Just a month into the new Congressional term, leading Democrats were announcing investigations of runaway war contractors.



Representative John Murtha, chair of the Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Defense, after returning from a trip to Iraq in late January, said, "We're going to have extensive hearings to find out exactly what's going on with contractors. They don't have a clear mission and they're falling all over each other." Two days later, during confirmation hearings for Gen. George Casey as Army chief of staff, Senator Jim Webb declared, "This is a rent-an-army out there." Webb asked Casey, "Wouldn't it be better for this country if those tasks, particularly the quasi-military gunfighting tasks, were being performed by active-duty military soldiers in terms of cost and accountability?" Casey defended the contracting system but said armed contractors "are the ones that we have to watch very carefully." Senator Joe Biden, chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, has also indicated he will hold hearings on contractors. Parallel to the ongoing investigations, there are several bills gaining steam in Congress aimed at contractor oversight.



Occupying the hot seat through these deliberations is the shadowy mercenary company Blackwater USA. Unbeknownst to many Americans and largely off the Congressional radar, Blackwater has secured a position of remarkable power and protection within the US war apparatus.



This company's success represents the realization of the life's work of the conservative officials who formed the core of the Bush Administration's war team, for whom radical privatization has long been a cherished ideological mission. Blackwater has repeatedly cited Rumsfeld's statement that contractors are part of the "Total Force" as evidence that it is a legitimate part of the nation's "warfighting capability and capacity." Invoking Rumsfeld's designation, the company has in effect declared its forces above the law--entitled to the immunity from civilian lawsuits enjoyed by the military, but also not bound by the military's court martial system.



While the initial inquiries into Blackwater have focused on the complex labyrinth of secretive subcontracts under which it operates in Iraq, a thorough investigation into the company reveals a frightening picture of a politically connected private army that has become the Bush Administration's Praetorian Guard.

I found this while looking for a movie.



*********



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070325/us-iraq



Back in 2006, the blog Capital Hill Blue broke the story about a W outburst in an administrative meeting in which he exclaimed, "The Constiution is just a Goddamn piece of paper!"





**********



"Any president who says, I don't care, or I will not respond to what the people of this country are saying about Iraq or anything else, or I don't care what the Congress does, I am going to proceed _ if a president really believes that, then there are _ what I was pointing out, there are ways to deal with that," said Hagel, who is considering a 2008 presidential run.



"This is not a monarchy," he added, referring to the possibility that some lawmakers may seek impeachment. "There are ways to deal with it. And I would hope the president understands that."



What I think Hagel understands that his spineless colleagues won't admit is that this is going to have to come down to impeachment. Bush and Cheney should not only be impeached, they should be tried for war crimes, war profiteering, and treason...we've already proven they're guilty of treason in the Libby trial. They are enemies of the state and should be treated as such.



*****



"Oh Blackwater keeps on rolling"

New Orleans, March 28, 2007



- $4 billion in taxpayer funds have been paid for private security forces in Iraq-



4 bill is a lot of wetland and levee.



The ominous rise of Blackwater Security Forces over the past 6 years has become very disconcerting to me. I have yet to read Jeremy Scahill's book, Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army, but I'm anxious to do so.



Most of us New Olreanians know that Blackwater was hired to protect certain private assets of wealthier folk in the days immediately following the storm. But I bet most of us don't know that they still have a presence here in the city. Why they're still here is a mystery to me, but I know they are as I shared a drink with one them at an uptown bar recently. I asked him what they were still doing here and he mumbled something which I couldn't understand, then laughed and finished with "Whatever the hell we want." I laughed too...but not because I thought it was funny.



About 2 weeks after the water was finally pumped out of the city, I was down by the Superdome where ABC 26 was conducting their nightly newscasts out of a parking lot. One of my friends was being interviewed about something or other and I tagged along. While I was there I struck up a conversation with an LAPD officer who was in the city assisting our own police force. There were a lot of officers from around the country who traveled down here and helped out...LAPD, Illinois State Police, NYPD, New York State Troopers, etc....they came from all around the country.



The officer told me of an incident he encountered while patrolling the Riverwalk with another LAPD officer and a New York State Trooper. He said they were walking through the mall area and came up on two Blackwater guys who drew their weapons on the officers and told them to halt. The officers drew their weapons in turn and told the Blackwater soldiers to stand down and lower their weapons. He said the Blackwater guys started laughing and said, "Do you know who we are?" The LAPD officer responded, "Yeah I know who you are, lower your Goddamn weapons right now." They didn't at first. He said the moment became very tense but the Blackwater goons eventually stood down.



The LAPD officer was incredibly pissed about it....which of course he should have been. Blackwater was basically hired as security...I think they were gaurding a Cruise ship or something if I remember his story correctly. They have absolutely no law enforcement or legal jurisdicition, even under martial law...at least not towards American citizens especially on American soil. Raising a firearm on officers of the law is absolutely out of bounds.



Meanwhile, I'd like to find out why they are still in the city.





FROM: http://theamericanzombie.blogspot.com/

This is to all my future girlfriends.



Crying is blackmail.



Ask for what you want. Let us be clear on this one: Subtle hints do not work! Strong hints do not work! Obvious hints do not work! Just say it!



Anything we said 6 months ago is inadmissible in an argument. In fact, all comments become null and void after 2 days.



ALL men see in only 16 colours, like Windows default settings. Peach, for example, is a fruit, not a colour. Pumpkin is also a fruit. We have no idea what mauve is.



Women who claim they "love to watch sports" must be treated as spies until they demonstrate knowledge of the game and the ability to drink as much as the other sports watchers.



The girl who replies to the question "What do you want for Christmas?" with "If you loved me, you'd know what I want!" gets a Wii. End of story.

I remember from years ago, after the death of Mark Twain, his publisher found a book he was working on, Twain was speaking out against America continuing its path of Imperialism, but his publisher edited the book to make America look good.





Mark Twain, The Greatest American Humorist, Returning Home, New York World [London, 10/6/1900]



You ask me about what is called imperialism. Well, I have formed views about that question. I am at the disadvantage of not knowing whether our people are for or against spreading themselves over the face of the globe. I should be sorry if they are, for I don't think that it is wise or a necessary development. As to China, I quite approve of our Government's action in getting free of that complication. They are withdrawing, I understand, having done what they wanted. That is quite right. We have no more business in China than in any other country that is not ours. There is the case of the Philippines. I have tried hard, and yet I cannot for the life of me comprehend how we got into that mess. Perhaps we could not have avoided it -- perhaps it was inevitable that we should come to be fighting the natives of those islands -- but I cannot understand it, and have never been able to get at the bottom of the origin of our antagonism to the natives. I thought we should act as their protector -- not try to get them under our heel. We were to relieve them from Spanish tyranny to enable them to set up a government of their own, and we were to stand by and see that it got a fair trial. It was not to be a government according to our ideas, but a government that represented the feeling of the majority of the Filipinos, a government according to Filipino ideas. That would have been a worthy mission for the United States. But now -- why, we have got into a mess, a quagmire from which each fresh step renders the difficulty of extrication immensely greater. I'm sure I wish I could see what we were getting out of it, and all it means to us as a nation.



Mark Twain in America Again, Chicago Tribune [New York, 10/15/1900]



"You've been quoted here as an anti-imperialist."



"Well, I am. A year ago I wasn't. I thought it would be a great thing to give a whole lot of freedom to the Filipinos, but I guess now that it's better to let them give it to themselves. Besides, on looking over the treaty I see we've got to saddle the friars and their churches. I guess we don't want to."



"Then you're for Bryan?"



"I guess not. I'm rather inclined toward McKinley, even if he is an imperialist. But don't ask political questions, for all I know about them is from the English papers."



Mark Twain Home, New York Tribune [New York, 10/15/1900]



Once I was not anti-imperialist. I thought that the rescue of those islands from the government under which they had suffered for three hundred years was a good business for us to be in. But I had not studied the Paris Treaty. When I found that it made us responsible for the protection of the friars and their property I changed my mind.



Mark Twain Home, An Anti-Imperialist, New York Herald [New York, 10/15/1900]



I left these shores, at Vancouver, a red-hot imperialist. I wanted the American eagle to go screaming into the Pacific. It seemed tiresome and tame for it to content itself with the Rockies. Why not spread its wings over the Philippines, I asked myself? And I thought it would be a real good thing to do.



I said to myself, here are a people who have suffered for three centuries. We can make them as free as ourselves, give them a government and country of their own, put a miniature of the American constitution afloat in the Pacific, start a brand new republic to take its place among the free nations of the world. It seemed to me a great task to which we had addressed ourselves.



But I have thought some more, since then, and I have read carefully the treaty of Paris, and I have seen that we do not intend to free, but to subjugate the people of the Philippines. We have gone there to conquer, not to redeem.



We have also pledged the power of this country to maintain and protect the abominable system established in the Philippines by the Friars.



It should, it seems to me, be our pleasure and duty to make those people free, and let them deal with their own domestic questions in their own way. And so I am an anti-imperialist. I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land.







Source: From Mark Twain's Weapons of Satire: Anti-Imperialist Writings on the Philippine-American War, Jim Zwick, ed., (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1992).



HE GREAT AMERICAN WRITER, MARK TWAIN had a great deal to say on imperialism in the Carribean. As a member of the Anti-Imperialist League, along with such notables as Jane Addams, William Jennings Bryan, Clarence S. Darrow, Andrew Carnegie, William James, David Starr Jordan and Samuel Gompers with George S. Boutwell, former secretary of the Treasury and Massachusetts, as its president, spoke vociferously against our adventurism in that arena.



Here is just one sample of his writings on the subject. It was published in the New York Herald on October 15, 1900. He was writing about the Phillipines, but it takes little imagination to substitute the name "Puerto Rico". I would go so far as to say with confidence that Twain would heartily endorse that exchange as it fits the context, the geography and the spirit of his words.

Mark Twain on Imperialism

I left these shores, at Vancouver, a red-hot imperialist. I wanted the American eagle to go screaming into the Pacific. It seemed tiresome and tame for it to content itself with the Rockies.



Why not spread its wings over the Phillippines, I asked myself? And I thought it would be a real good thing to do.



I said to myself, here are a people who have suffered for three centuries. We can make them as free as ourselves, give them a government and country of their own, put a miniature of the American constitution afloat in the Pacific, start a brand new republic to take its place among the free nations of the world. It seemed to me a great task to which had addressed ourselves.



But I have thought some more, since then, and I have read carefully the treaty of Paris, and I have seen that we do not intend to free, but to subjugate the people of the Phillippines. We have gone there to conquer, not to redeem. . .



It should, it seems to me, be our pleasure and duty to make those people free, and let them deal with their own domestic questions in their own way. And so I am an anti-imperialist. I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land.



http://www.peacehost.net/WhiteStar/Voices/twain.html





Mark Twain was an American writer known for satire and humor when dealing with social and political topics. He was also the vice-president of the Anti-imperialist League from 1901-1910.



Biography:



Samuel Langhorn Clemens, otherwise known as Mark Twain, was born in Florida, Missouri in 1835. He spent most of his boyhood years in Hannibal, Missouri, a port on the Mississippi River which later became the setting for some of his most famous stories.



At the age of twelve, Clemens was apprenticed to two Hannibal printers after the death of his father. This training led to his employment as a printer in cities such as New York City and Philadelphia. Later he worked as a steamboat pilot on the Mississippi until the American Civil War caused travel on the river to cease. He then volunteered as a soldier for a short period of time in the Confederate cavalry in 1861.



In 1862 Clemens became a reporter on the Territorial Enterprise in Virginia City, Nevada after giving up on silver mining. The following year, he began using the pen name, "Mark Twain" which was a phrase that he picked up off the Mississippi River meaning “two fathoms deep.” Twain married Olivia Langdon in 1870. The couple lived in Buffalo, New York but later moved to Hartford, Connecticut.



Twain’s books were often influenced by his own personal travels and experiences. His travels to Europe and Palestine were later depicted in The Innocents Abroad which he wrote in 1869. Roughing It, written in 1872, described his life as a miner and journalist. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer delivers us to his childhood town on the Mississippi. Readers travel with him on the Mississippi River in Life on the Mississippi ( 1883) as Clemens relives his life as a pilot when he returns to the river ten years later and discovers the changes that occurred while he was away. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, written in 1884, displayed the cruelty and hypocrisy of people and their ideas from the eyes of a young boy helping a runaway slave get to freedom.



Besides the publication of Huckleberry Finn, 1884 was also marked with Twain’s formation of the Charles L. Webster and Company that would publish his and other writer’s work. Unfortunately due to bad investments, the firm went bankrupt in 1894 leaving Twain in debt. The Anti-Imperialist League did not come into being until November 1889. The group was organized as an oppositional response to the seemingly overriding principles of imperialism in international affairs concerning Cuba and the Philippines. Their strongest weapons at the time were the "Declaration of Independence" and Lincoln’s "Gettysburg Address" which obviously condemned the actions of imperialism as contradictory to the ideals for which America’s independence was fought.



At beginning of the Spanish-American War, Twain was residing in Europe and for the most part was in support of the conflict with Spain and the Philippines. He was disillusioned by the idea that the U.S. was fighting exclusively for the freedom of Cuba. The Treaty of Paris, which gave control of Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines to the U.S. quickly changed his opinion on the matter. Twain was disgusted by the fact that a war which had been meant to give freedom was really only a pretext for further expansion for the U.S.



Twain’s return to the United States in 1900 was widely publicized, as were his strong views on imperialism. Soon after he joined the Anti-Imperialist League. After sending his condemnation of imperialism, “A Salutation Speech From the Nineteenth Century to the Twentieth” to both the League and the New York Herald, Twain was asked to take the position as vice-president of the League. Although he declined to work on customary tasks he would continue to write and speak in support of anti-imperialism.



Mark Twain strongly believed that the U.S. could not be an empire and a republic at the same time. He condemned the racism against the Filipinos and argued that the Filipinos were perfectly able to govern themselves. Twain was an admirer of Emilio Aguinaldo who resisted Spanish rule and later continued to lead the struggle against American occupation. Because the Spanish concentration camps in Cuba had given the U.S. extra incentive to support Cuban freedom, Twain especially spoke out against similar U.S. camps in the Philippines.



In 1901, Twain published “To the Person Sitting in Darkness” which criticized war in the Philippines and the missionary activities in China following the Boxer Rebellion. This was to become the League’s most popular publication.





“Is it perhaps, possible that there are two kinds of Civilization-one for home consumption and one for the heathen market?”



The same year, Mark Twain was invited to sign a July 4th address “To the American People” which was published in newspapers nationwide. He was also present at the only meeting of officers held by the New York branch of the League. A petition to the Senate comparing Spanish and American concentration camps was signed by Twain in an effort to put a stop to U.S. hostile negotiations with the Philippines in 1902.



In 1903, Twain was enlisted to help with the League’s campaign against atrocities committed by the U.S. military in the Philippines. He was asked to focus on the water torture done to a Filipino priest, Father Augustine, by U.S. soldiers because the priest was raising money for the Filipino army.



Mark Twain’s wife, Olivia, died after they moved to Italy and when Twain returned to the U.S. , the League was divided into the Philippine Independence Committee and the Filipino Progress Association, both of which endorsed less immediate actions. Twain continued to support the original League but was also deeply involved in supporting the Russian Revolution. However, a scandal forced Twain and other supporters to withdraw their advocacy.



Up until his death in 1910, Twain continued to be in the Anti-imperialist League.



http://www.spanamwar.com/Twain.htm

I love the CBC. And I really like Senator McCain even more now.



Mark Twain and many others saw it coming and warned about it. Eisenhower was not heard was he?





Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the Nation

January 17, 1961



Good evening, my fellow Americans: First, I should like to express my gratitude to the radio and television networks for the opportunity they have given me over the years to bring reports and messages to our nation. My special thanks go to them for the opportunity of addressing you this evening.



Three days from now, after a half century of service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.



This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.



Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.



Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on questions of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the nation.



My own relations with Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and finally to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.



In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the nation well rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the nation should go forward. So my official relationship with Congress ends in a feeling on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.



We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.



Throughout America's adventure in free government, such basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among peoples and among nations.



To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people.



Any failure traceable to arrogance or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us a grievous hurt, both at home and abroad.



Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle – with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.



Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties.



A huge increase in the newer elements of our defenses; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research – these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.



A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.



But each proposal must be weighed in light of a broader consideration; the need to maintain balance in and among national programs – balance between the private and the public economy, balance between the cost and hoped for advantages – balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between the actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.



The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their Government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well in the face of threat and stress.



But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise.



Of these, I mention two only.



A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.



Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.



Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions.



Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.



This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government.



We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.



In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.



We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.



Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.



In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.



Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.



The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.



Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.



It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system – ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.



Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we – you and I, and our government – must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without asking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.



Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.



Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.



Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war – as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years – I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.



Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.



So – in this my last good night to you as your President – I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find some things worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.



You and I – my fellow citizens – need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nations' great goals.



To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing aspiration:



We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.



Now, on Friday noon, I am to become a private citizen. I am proud to do so. I look forward to it.



Thank you, and good night.

DEAR HONEY

I know that this proposal might be a surprise to

you but do consider it as an emmergency.In nutshell,

I am joy Tony from the public

of Liberia in west Africa,now seeking for refuge in

Dakar Senegal under the(UNHCR).

My (late) father Dr. Tony Willians ,was the managing

director of Rainbow Gold and Diamond Mine company in

(KENEMA) Liberia.But he was killed along side with my mother during the longing civil war and all his properties was totally destroyed.

However, after their death I managed to escape with a very important document(DEPOSIT CERTIFICATE)(US$10.5m)Ten million Five hundred thousand U.S Dollars deposited by my late father in A (SECURITY

AND FINANCE COMPANY)which i am the next of kin.

Meanwhile,i am saddled with the problem of securing a trust worthy foriegn personality to help me transfer the money over to his country and into his possession pending my arrival to meet with him.

Furthermore,you can contact the company for confirmation and i will issue a letter of authorisation on your name,that will enable the

security company to deal with you on my behalf.I am giving you this offers as mentioned with every confidence on your acceptance to assist me or take

me as your wife and manage the money.Conclusively,i wish you send me a reply

immediately as soon as you recieve this proposal

please contact me through my email address

(joydion_2004(@yahoo.ca)hears from you soonest.

Until then,i remain yours in heart with the

best.regards Miss joy.



(Note you can reach me with my Rev father's number on 00221-377-5031 please tell him that you want to speak with miss joy William and he will sent for me)

My son is doing great, his two top teeth have just cut through.



He is crawling everywhere and tries to stand up against the couch. He's a determined little guy.



Go Liam!

I cannot wait to see you again.

Johnny Clegg & Savuka

Orphans of the Empire



LYRICS



In ships they came from Europe

Across the salt sea

Come to build and raise a colony

And in the jungle green, their citadels did gleam

In tribute and homage to the old country

And soon their children grew

and promised to be true

Orphans of an Empire, their destiny



Hold me close Africa

Fill my soul Africa

Let me grow old, Africa

Let me in

Fill my soul Africa

Don’t let me go, Africa

Let me grow old, Africa

And remember me



Imperial gentleman, he built mighty walls

And in the jungle atternoon he plays polo when he’s bored

He sips a gin and tonic and tells you confidentially

He wishes he understood the indiginies

But the shadows they are lengthening and the sun it must set

Bewildered and confused he scurries home to his bed



He cannot understand the soldiers all at hand

For with guns you cannot fight a foe that dwells within

But the batlle had begun and a soldier he’s become

Who can sing his litany?

It's a beggarman’s prayer or a string on the wind

Will that be all that lingers on the memory?



And who will remember that African December?

When he knelt before the colours and swore to do or die?

And he kissed his frightened lover, beneath the glowing embers

Of that dark, strange heaven, that ancient sky

Now he's gone to dust, just like all good soldiers must

But the mournful mutter of the battlefield still lingers in the air



So it's farewell sweet Caroline!

Farewell Elizabeth!

Goodbye gentle ladies

of the old order

And farewell to your islands carved upon this continent

Some England, some France and some Germany

Soon you will return to that dream across the sea

'Cause here is no more honey left for tea

Lyrics speak to me in strange ways with interesting timing.



Old man sits in the shade of the thorn tree

he says,

"these thorns are all that are true

life is suffering, suffering is life,

be happy with the small things that come to you

They will come to you, come to you."

Redneck, in modern usage, predominantly refers to a particular stereotype of people who may be found in many regions of the United States or Canada.



Originally limited to Appalachia and the American South, and later the Ozarks and Rocky Mountains, this stereotype is now widespread in other states and the Canadian provinces. The word can be used either as a pejorative or as a matter of pride, depending on context.



James H. Webb (Senator elect of Virginia) uses this thesis in his book "Born Fighting" to suggest that the character traits of the Scots Irish — loyalty to kin, mistrust of governmental authority, and military readiness — helped shape the American identity. Over time, they intermarried with Britons from the West Country, another group with Celtic origins, and absorbed members of other groups through the bonds of kinship.



Nevertheless, their culture and bloodlines retained their Celtic character. Fiercely independent, and frequently belligerent, rednecks perpetuated old Celtic ideas of honor and clanship.



During the Civil War, poor whites did most of the fighting and the dying on both sides of the conflict. Although poor Southern whites stood to gain little from secession and were usually ambivalent about the institution of slavery, they were fiercely defensive of their territory and loyal to their homes and families.



Although slaves fared the worst by far, many poor whites had a hard "row to hoe," as well. The disruptions of the Civil War (1861-65) and Reconstruction mired African Americans in a new poverty and dragged many more whites into a similar abyss.



Once-proud yeomen frequently became objects of ridicule, and sometimes they responded angrily and even viciously, often lashing out at blacks in retaliation. Poor whites (meaning, financially destitute) were increasingly labeled "poor white trash" (meaning financially and genetically worse off than others) and worse; “cracker,” "clay eater," "linthead," "peckerwood," "buckra" and especially redneck only scratched the surface of rejection and slander.



Northerners and foreigners played this game, but the greatest hostility to poor whites came from their fellow Southerners, sometimes blacks but more often upper-class whites. Generally, the view of poor white Southerners grew more and more negative, especially in modern movies and television, which have often stressed the negative and even the grotesque while reaching huge audiences.



Rednecks have borne their full share of this stereotype of lower-class Southern whites who share poverty status with immigrants, blacks, and other minorities.



Although the stereotype of poor white Southerners and Appalachians in the early twentieth century, as portrayed in popular media, was exaggerated and even grotesque, the problem of poverty was very real. The national mobilization of troops in World War I (1917-18) invited comparisons between the South and Appalachia and the rest of the country. Southern and Appalachian whites had less money, less education, and poorer health than white Americans in general. Only Southern blacks had more handicaps.



In the 1920s and 1930s matters became worse when the boll weevil and the dust bowl devastated the South's agricultural base and its economy. The Great Depression was a difficult era for the already disadvantaged in the South and Appalachia.



In an echo of the Whiskey Rebellion, rednecks escalated their production and bootlegging of moonshine whiskey. To deliver it and avoid law-enforcement and tax agents, cars were "souped-up" to create a more maneuverable and faster vehicle. Many of the original drivers of Stock car racing were former bootleggers and "ridge-runners."



World War II (1941-45) began the great economic revival for the South and for Appalachia. In and out of the armed forces, unskilled Southern and Appalachian whites, and many African Americans as well, were trained for industrial and commercial work they had never dreamed of attempting, much less mastering.



Military camps grew like mushrooms, especially in Georgia and Texas, and big industrial plants began to appear across the once rural landscape. Soon, blue-collar families from every nook and cranny of the South and Appalachia found their way to white-collar life in metropolitan areas like Atlanta. By the 1960s blacks had begun to share in this progress, but not all rural Southerners and Appalachians were beneficiaries of this recovery.



Author Jim Goad's 1997 book The Redneck Manifesto explores the socioeconomic history of low-income Americans. According to Goad, rednecks are traditionally pro-labor and anti-establishment and have an anti-hierarchical religious orientation. Goad argues that elites manipulate low-income people (blacks and whites especially) through classism and racism to keep them in conflict with each other and distracted from their exploitation by elites.



Redneck has two general uses: first, as a pejorative for outsiders, and, second, as a term used by members within that group.



To outsiders, it is generally a term for those of Southern or Appalachian rural poor backgrounds — or more loosely, rural poor to working-class people of rural extraction. (Appalachia also includes large parts of Pennsylvania, New York and other states.) Within that group, however, it is used to describe the more downscale members. Rednecks span from the poor to the working class.