Tom Hayden : Egypt is the Liberals' Slaughterhouse

28 August 2013

Tom Hayden : Egypt is the Liberals' Slaughterhouse

Egyptian military chief Gen Abdel Fattah al-Sisi speaks to the people after the coup. Photo from AP. Image from The Telegraph.

Post-coup Egypt:
The liberals’ slaughterhouse

The Egyptian coup, for now, marks a dead end for political Islam, and a vindication of those like Al Qaeda who reject the path of democratic elections as a deadly trap.

By Tom Hayden / The Rag Blog / August 28, 2013

When Secretary of State John Kerry described Egypt’s military coup as restoring democracy, it was a classic example of the periodic bond that exists between liberals and military dictators against those they perceive to be the dangerous classes. Their reasoning is that their version of democracy can only be restored when their enemies are eliminated, even if the enemy has won an election.

Think of the CIA overthrows of Iran’s Mohammad Mossadegh (1953) and Guatemala’s Jacobo Arbenz (1954), or the clandestine U.S. overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile (1973) and of Algeria’s slaughter of Islamists in the nineties when they were on the brink of electoral victory.

Think of the persistent discrediting and attempted coup against the elected Chavistas in Venezuela, the coup against Manuel Zelaya in Honduras, and the U.S. ouster of Jean-Bertrande Aristide in Haiti.

These are not isolated instances, but a pattern that has lead to the bloodshed in Cairo today. Movements inimical to Western interests cannot be allowed to peacefully come to power through elections. If they do, they will be targeted for destabilization or worse.

The Egyptian coup, for now, marks a dead end for political Islam, and a vindication of those like Al Qaeda who reject the path of democratic elections as a deadly trap. It also pleases Syria's dictator Bashar al-Assad, who was strongly opposed by Morsi. Assad said that the Brotherhood is unfit to rule. (New York Times, July 5, 2013) The Israelis were "quietly pleased" with the coup too [New York Times, Aug. 17] The monarchs of Saudi Arabia and the Emirate are deeply satisfied.

In Egypt, thousands are being slaughtered by a military fully funded and trained by the United States government. The Egyptian generals’ coup -- which, shamefully, has not been named a coup by our government or mainstream media -- was welcomed with joy, even delirium, by many in Egypt who failed to win the elections, in particular by Egypt’s secular liberals and progressives. Did they think that tanks and bayonets could construct a liberal society?

The generals clearly used the liberals -- and a mass popular base of frustration -- while planning to proceed with the mass slaughter.

Mohamed Morsi and the Brotherhood are authoritarian in nature because of 80 years of brutal prosecution by Egyptians rulers with U.S. support. But they cannot be faulted for playing by the rules of Egypt’s electoral system, one in which Morsi won nearly 52 percent of the vote.

Morsi’s worst excess was his failed attempt to circumvent the Hosni Mubarak judiciary and place his constitutional reforms on the ballot. That was a power grab away from Mubarak’s judges in the direction of a democratic election. The history of Chicago politics is littered with far worse.

Morsi represented a shift toward the Palestinians diplomatically and politically, but not militarily, and a softer policy toward Sinai's tribal insurgents. He supported jihad against Syria's Assad, but avoided prosecuting the Egyptian generals, even protected the military's budget from parliamentary oversight.

In losing the election to Morsi, the secular liberals were to blame for their own divisions and marginal electoral status. The Facebook Generation wildly overestimated their support. They confused a media strategy with a political one, believing that the spectacle of bravely occupying Tahrir Square would not only appeal to CNN viewers but Egypt’s millions of voters who lived and worked far from the Square.

Their radical strategy of "occupying space," copied by many around the world, galvanized media attention to the spectacle, but led to a deeper polarization while draining resources and attention away from broad-based organizing to explain and protect the cause. Their implicit critique of Mubarak and the Brotherhood as being essentially the same has proven to be a disastrous mistake in judgment.

President Barack Obama could have sent a clear and immediate signal to the generals through Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel: we will not support you. This is a coup and, under American law, our $1.5 billion in military aid will be suspended. Period.

Had Obama done so, perhaps the generals would have blinked, or delayed their intended massacre. Or perhaps they would have gone ahead with their slaughter funded by the monarchs of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, who recently gave the military junta $8 billion in emergency aid.

U.S. officials argue that Egypt's military is a strategic ally for reasons that deserve congressional hearings and urgent reexamination. First, defenders of the coup say that the Egyptian military, from Mubarak to the present, has been a cornerstone of the War on Terror and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Egyptians permitted air space and the the expedited use of the Suez Canal as conduits for American troops and equipment.

Unmentioned is Egypt's willing collaboration in U.S. rendition and torture programs. Those are good reasons to re-examine the US-Egyptian partnership because torture turned into a global scandal and the wars themselves into trillion-dollar quagmires. Those in the American national security establishment who concocted these follies should take responsibility for their disastrous thinking but remain protected and immune from personal consequences -- which only guarantees that the folly will be perpetuated.

An Egyptian man walks between lines of bodies wrapped in shrouds at a mosque in Cairo. Photo by Khaled Desouki.

The other rationale for supporting Mubarak and the current coup is that a repressive crushing of the Brotherhood is good for Israel. Since the 1979 Camp David Treaty between Israel and Egypt, the Egyptian military has been paid $1.5 billion annually to abandon any military support for the Palestinians.

The Israelis lobbied Obama and Congress to keep propping up the Mubarak dictatorship, which Obama resisted. But the Israelis also are closely tied to Gen. Sisi from his previous role in charge of Egypt's intelligence services. In recent days, according to The New York Times [Aug. 18], Sisi "appeared to be in heavy communication with Israeli colleagues, and [U.S.] diplomats believed the Israelis were also undercutting the Western message by reassuring the Egyptians not to worry about American threats to cut off aid."

That's because Tel Aviv believes that AIPAC controls the UC Congress. [When Sen. Rand Paul offered an amendment on July 31 opposing U.S. aid to the coup generals, the Senate turned it down on an 86-13 vote, with leading senators echoing an AIPAC letter, the Times noted.

Israel may think its security interests are protected by the coup and the violent demise of the Brotherhood. But that is short-term thinking at best. If the Arabs are killing each others, goes the neocon refrain, it's good for Israel.

Now, however, Israel faces a civil war which might spill over the border, including an insurrection in Sinai. The Israeli-Palestinian peace talks seem only to be a public relations gesture designed to prevent the Palestinians from taking their quest for sovereignty to the United Nations in September. With wars flooding through the Middle East, and with the Palestinians themselves divided, progress towards a Palestinian state seems blocked.

The future is completely unpredictable for now. The generals will continue their war to exterminate the Brotherhood, unless checked by internal resistance and outside pressure. Instead of an avenue forward for political Islam, the future appears to be Algeria where only military massacres prevented Islamists from taking power through democratic elections.

Algeria today, like Egypt, is a mainstay of the most extreme repression, including torture, in the arsenal of the War on Terrorism.

How long can this go on? No one knows, but it can be a very long time, a surge of renewal for the sagging War on Terrorism. Much depends on liberalism rethinking itself. Mohammad el-Baradai, the liberal who became Sisi's vice president with American support, has resigned after the latest army massacre of Brotherhood members. Perhaps more defections will follow, though the damage has been done.

The Brotherhood, which survived underground for 80 years, is likely to regroup and resist. Widespread sabotage, assassination of police and army officers, and rural guerrilla warfare are probable scenarios, unless the U.S. acts quickly to suspend military aid, which is required under American law.

A suspension of aid -- coupled with warnings to Saudi Arabia and the Emirates -- seems the only way to stop the generals. Instead of the failed liberal strategy of "working from within" to reform the military dictatorship, only the opposite course offers possibilities: a suspension of U.S. aid coupled with the release of Brotherhood prisoners and a UN-sponsored conference aimed at reviving a constitutional process.

Obama is more likely to continue ignoring American law than pursue a showdown with the Egyptian military. His Cairo speech, call for Mubarak's resignation, and acceptance of Morsi's election indicates that the president believes in a political role for Islam, contrary to many of his close advisers and allies.

For now he is described by the establishment as being in a "no win" situation [New York Times, Aug. 18] . Events still might force his hand, but not if liberal voices continue believing that democracy still lies just ahead beyond the mountain of bodies.

[Tom Hayden is a former California state senator and leader of Sixties peace, justice, and environmental movements. He currently teaches at Pitzer College in Los Angeles. His latest book is The Long Sixties. Hayden is director of the Peace and Justice Resource center and editor of The Peace Exchange Bulletin. Read more of Tom Hayden's writing on The Rag Blog.]

The Rag Blog

McCarthyism Writ Large

by Stephen Lendman

In the late 1930s and 1940s, the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) targeted alleged communist sympathizers. Uncorroborated hearsay alone mattered.

Prominent Hollywood figures were named. Hundreds of actors, directors, producers, screenwriters, musicians, songwriters, and other artists were accused of communist sympathies.

They were blacklisted. Notable ones were called the Hollywood Ten.

They included screenwriter Alvah Bessie, screenwriter/director Herbert Biberman, screenwriter Lester Cole, director Edward Dmytryk, screenwriter Ring Lardner, Jr., screenwriter John Lawson, screenwriter Albert Maltz, screenwriter Samuel Ornitz, producer/screenwriter Adrian Scott, and author/screenwriter Dalton Trumbo.

McCarthyism signifies baseless slander, unscrupulous fearmongering, and political lynchings.

Communist hearings got headlines. They were televised. They were witch-hunt prosecutions. Harvard Law Dean Ervin Griswold called McCarthy "judge, jury, prosecutor, castigator, and press agent, all in one."

He personified evil. He targeted innocent victims. He ruined careers. He did so for political advantage. He called Secretary of State Dean Acheson "a pompous diplomat in striped pants."

He accused General George Marshall of being "soft on communism." With no proof, he claimed he had names of 205 known State Department communists.

He later said 57. He claimed they were passing secrets to Soviet Russia.

"The reason why we find ourselves in a position of impotency," he said, "is not because the enemy has sent men to invade our shores, but rather because of the traitorous actions of those who had all the benefits that the wealthiest nation on earth has had to offer - the finest homes, the finest college educations, and the finest jobs in Government (and the private sector) we can give."

He characterized enemies as "card-carrying communists." He called others "loyalty risks."

He vilified patriotic Americans. He did so for political gain. He created hysteria. He targeted anti-American books. He got them pulled from libraries.

He overstepped. He fell from grace. Publications like the Louisville Courier-Journal said:

"In this long, degrading travesty of the democratic process, McCarthy has shown himself to be evil and unmatched in malice."

In June 1954, he met his match. Army lawyer Joe Welch challenged him. He attacked his spurious accusation about one of his attorneys having communist ties. He did so, saying:

"Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or recklessness." McCarthy shot back.

Welch angrily interrupted, adding "Let us not assassinate this lad further, senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?"

Overnight, McCarthy's popularity plunged. Senate censure followed. It ruined him. In 1957, he died a broken man at age 48. He wasn't missed.

Obama exceeds the worst of Joe McCarthy. He heads America's police state apparatus. Rule of law principles don't matter.

Dissent's considered unpatriotic. Whistleblowing's criminalized. Unconstitutional spying's institutionalized.

Freedom's fast eroding. It's an endangered species. It's on the chopping block for elimination.

Wealth, power, and privilege alone matter. America's war on terror advances them. It rages against humanity. It does so abroad and at home.

State terror is official policy. Obama exceeds the worst of his predecessors. He's done more to subvert constitutional protections than any previous president.

He more than ever made America unfit to live in. Police state justice potentially threatens everyone. It's modern day McCarthyism writ large.

Merriam-Webster calls its earlier version "a mid-20th century political attitude characterized chiefly by opposition to elements held to be subversive and by the use of tactics involving personal attacks on individuals by means of widely publicized indiscriminate allegations especially on the basis of unsubstantiated charges; broadly: defamation of character or reputation through such tactics."

Oxford Dictionaries calls it "a vociferous campaign against alleged communists in the US government and other institutions carried out under Senator Joseph McCarthy in the period 1950-54."

"Many of the accused were blacklisted or lost their jobs, although most did not in fact belong to the Communist Party."

McCarthyism reflects "a campaign or practice that endorses the use unfair allegations and investigations."

According to Wikipedia, it's "the practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for (verifiable) evidence."

The Online Dictionary calls it "the practice of making unfair allegations or using unfair investigative techniques, especially in order to restrict dissent or political criticism."

In January 2012, Obama's Justice Department charged former CIA officer John Kiriakou. It claimed he disclosed classified information to journalists. It said he violated Intelligence Identities Protection Act provisions. It accused him of "lying" to CIA's Publications Review Board.

He potentially faced longterm incarceration. In October 2012, he accepted plea bargain terms. They're sought and/or accepted for lesser sentences. Innocent victims take them to avoid harsher treatment.

Kariakou pled guilty to one count of violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. Other Espionage Act charges were dropped. He got 30 months in prison.

He thanked supporters saying:

"I'm headed to prison while the torturers and the lawyers who papered over it and the people who conceived it and the man who destroyed the proof of it, the tapes, will never face justice."

"And that's the saddest part of the story," he added. Unconscionable crimes reflect official policy.

Whistleblowers are targeted. Exposing government wrongdoing's criminalized. Doing the right thing's not tolerated. Police states operate that way. America's by far the worst.

On August 6, Kariakou headlined "Obama's abuse of the Espionage Act is modern-day McCarthyism," saying:

Convicting Bradley Manning of 1917 Espionage Act violations and charging Edward Snowden "under the same act are yet further examples of the Obama administration's policy of using an iron fist against human rights and civil liberties activists."

"President Obama has been unprecedented in his use of the Espionage Act to prosecute those whose whistleblowing he wants to curtail."

Doing so sends a chilling message. "Challenge us and we will destroy you." Doing the right thing risks prosecution. Kariakou recounted his own experience.

He "bl(ew) the whistle on the CIA's torture program." It's unchanged under Obama. Attorney General Holder declared war on whistleblowers.

Doing so "smacks of modern-day McCarthyism." Washington needs " 'ism(s)' to fight against."

Whistleblowers acting honorably are "accused of helping terrorists." They risk Espionage Act charges. They risk witch-hunt prosecutions. They risk long imprisonment. Perhaps they risk death.

Justice reflects tragedy and travesty. It's turned on its head. Civil liberties are vital to protect. Lawless government spying and other wrongdoing need exposure. "That should be the story," said Kariakou.

Professor Emeritus Norman Pollack discussed "The New McCarthyism." Fundamental human rights and civil liberties are undermined.

Obama's destroying them on his watch. He's dismantling rule of law protections. He denies "transparency." He prioritizes "opaqueness."

He rejects "people's right to know." He targets whistleblowers exposing government wrongdoing.

He demands "total conformity or, more realistically, passivity, as the war machine and its partner-in-destiny capitalist accumulation at the top roll on."

He's "contemptuous of basic Constitutional tenets affecting freedom of thought and association."

"The White House exists in a moral vacuum. That targeted assassination is fully entertained and practiced is at one with this phase of psychological-juridical control over the free expression of ideas."

"Both have reference to despotic ways of governance which have implications even beyond principles honoring privacy and free thought."

State terror threatens everyone. Humanity's endangered. Democracy exists in name only.

Much worse ahead is likely. Modern day McCarthyism harms everyone. It's the worst of all possible worlds.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book is titled "Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

John Kerry's Colin Powell Moment

by Stephen Lendman

All wars are based on lies. Truth prevents them from being waged. America hasn't waged a legal one since WW II.

What's now ongoing bears eerie resemblance to events preceding Bush's Iraq war. Waging them requires pretexts to do so.

When none exists, they're invented. Lies substitute for truth. Claims about Syria using chemical weapons don't wash. They repeat with disturbing regularity.

Assad's wrongfully blamed for last Wednesday's Ghouta incident. No evidence whatever links it to Syrian forces. Plenty lays blame where it belongs.

Insurgents bear full responsibility. It doesn't matter. America's longstanding plans call for regime change. War is the strategy of choice. It's planned. It's coming. It appears imminent.

On August 26, John Kerry replicated Colin Powell's infamous February 5, 2003 Security Council moment. It was shameless deception.

Plans were set. The die was cast. Weeks later, America bombed, invaded and occupied Iraq. The cradle of civilization was destroyed.

No WMDs existed. It was well-known. Powell knew. He lied claiming otherwise.

"(F)acts and Iraq's behavior show that Saddam Hussein and his regime are concealing their efforts to produce more weapons of mass destruction," he said.

"(E)very statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are the facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence."

"The gravity of this moment is matched by the gravity of the threat that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction pose to the world."

None existed. Powell knew it. He lied. He suppressed vital truths. Doing so is longstanding US policy.

In August 1995, Saddam's son-in-law, Hussein Kamel, defected to the West. He headed Iraq's weapons programs. US intelligence officials debriefed him.

He said "All weapons - biological, chemical, missile and nuclear were destroyed. Nothing remained."

The New York Times reported his comments. So did other major US news sources.

CNN's Brent Sadler asked him: "Can you state here and now - does Iraq still to this day hold weapons of mass destruction?"

He responded: "No. Iraq does not possess any weapons of mass destruction. I am being completely honest about this."

Ahead of Bush's Iraq war, managed news misinformation replaced earlier reports. It's repeating again now. Obama's heading for war on Syria.

On August 26, John Kerry effectively declared it. He left no ambiguity. His comments replicated Colin Powell's infamous moment. It'll be long remembered.

"What we saw in Syria last week should shock the conscience of the world," he said. "It defies any code of morality."

"Let me be clear: The indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children and innocent bystanders, by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity."

"By any standard it is inexcusable, and despite the excuses and equivocations that some have manufactured, it is undeniable."

"The meaning of this attack goes beyond the conflict in Syria itself, and that conflict has already brought so much terrible suffering."

"This is about the large-scale, indiscriminate use of weapons that the civilized world long ago decided must never be used at all."

"Obama has made clear to the Assad regime that this international norm cannot be violated without consequences."

"And there is a reason why no matter what you believe about Syria, all peoples and all nations who believe in the cause of our common humanity must stand up to assure that there is accountability for the use of chemical weapons so that it never happens again."

"What is before us today is real, and it is compelling. So I also want to underscore that while investigators are gathering additional evidence on the ground, our understanding of what has already happened in Syria is grounded in facts informed by conscience and guided by common sense."

"(W)e know that the Syrian regime maintains custody of these chemical weapons. We know that the Syrian regime has the capacity to do this with rockets."

"We know that the regime has been determined to clear the opposition from those very places where the attacks took place. And with our own eyes, we have all of us become witnesses."

"At President Obama’s direction, I’ve spent many hours over the last few days on the phone with foreign ministers and other leaders."

"The Administration is actively consulting with members of Congress and we will continue to have these conversations in the days ahead."

"President Obama has also been in close touch with the leaders of our key allies, and the President will be making an informed decision about how to respond to this indiscriminate use of chemical weapons."

"But make no mistake: President Obama believes there must be accountability for those who would use the world’s most heinous weapons against the world’s most vulnerable people."

"Nothing today is more serious and nothing is receiving more serious scrutiny."

It bears repeating. Kerry replicated Colin Powell's infamous February 2003 moment. He effectively declared war. It appears imminent. It could start any time.

Obama wants another country ravaged and destroyed. He wants regime change. He wants pro-Western puppet governance replacing sovereign Syrian independence.

He wants unchallenged regional dominance. He wants it globally. Permanent wars of aggression are waged to achieve it.

Ravaging one country after another is a small price to pay. It's longstanding US policy. It's happening again now. It's doing so unaccountably. Fundamental international, constitutional and US statute laws are violated.

No nation may interfere in the internal affairs of others. No exceptions exist. None may attack another country except in self-defense.

It may do so only until the Security Council acts. It has final say.

Attacking without SC authorization is blatantly illegal. It's lawless aggression.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was clear and unequivocal. "Any military action without Security Council approval would be a grave violation of international law," he said. He expressed grave concerns for what looms.

The Constitution's Article I, Section 8 affords Congress alone the power to:

• "declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;"

• "raise and support armies;"

• "provide and maintain a navy;"

• "make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;"

• "provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;" and

• "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

The above provisions provide for national defense. None authorize lawless aggression. Leaders ordering it are war criminals. Obama's by far the worst.

He's waging multiple direct and proxy wars. He authorized special forces killers sent to 120 or more countries. He has CIA assassins operating everywhere.

He's waging drone wars. He prioritizes targeted killings. He decides who lives or dies. He appointed himself judge, jury and executioner.

State terror is official US policy. So are permanent wars based on lies. They're waged irresponsibly. They're waged unaccountably. They're waged lawlessly. They're waged without end.

Obama chose John Brennan as new CIA director. He's a cold-blooded killer. He heads Obama's Murder, Inc. agenda.

Anyone can be targeted anywhere in the world. US citizens are vulnerable. They can be murdered for any reason or none at all.

They can be arrested, imprisoned, and tortured. Doing so can be based on false accusations or none at all. They can be held indefinitely without trial. They can be denied due process and judicial fairness.

Human lives and welfare don't matter. Inviolable rule of law principles are spurned. Wealth, power, privilege and dominance alone count.

Longstanding US policy threatens humanity. War on Syria appears imminent. Previous articles suggested Libya 2.0. Perhaps a variation is planned. Cruise missile diplomacy looms.

Obama plans war with Congress on summer recess. On September 9, it returns. Ghouta's incident was strategically timed. Congressional authorization for war was bypassed.

On August 27, Itar Tass headlined "Russian Foreign Ministry: US prompts Syrian opposition to show uncompromising attitude in political dialog," saying:

According to Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashivich, Washington "prompt(ed) the Syrian opposition to show an uncompromising attitude in the negotiations, waiting for a forcible foreign interference in the country."

"We are convinced that in the current dramatic situation around Syria, which is artificially exacerbated by a number of countries, coordinated actions of Russia and the United States, as well as the entire international community for a peaceful way out of the crisis, assumes an ever greater importance."

"The attempts to bypass the UN Security Council and to create once again artificial, groundless pretexts for an armed intervention in the region are fraught with new sufferings in Syria and catastrophic consequences for other countries in the Middle East and North Africa."

"We urge our US partners and all members of the world community to show common sense and observe strictly the international law, primarily the fundamental principles of the UN Charter."

Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Gannady Gatilov twittered:

"It is desolating that our partners decided to cancel the bilateral Russia-US meeting for discussing the convocation of an international conference on Syria."

"Drawing up of parameters of peaceful settlement in Syria could be very useful right now, when this country is under threat of a coercive intervention."

On August 26, Fars News headlined "Kerry Assures Muallem of US Non-Intervention in Syria," saying:

According to Syrian sources, "Kerry has assured Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem that Washington will not launch a military strike on Syria."

They spoke by phone. Kerry lied. Muallem said "Syria won't sit silent if attacked by the US and its allies."

"Kerry's assurance to Syria came after US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel suggested Saturday the Pentagon is moving forces into place ahead of possible military action against Syria."

On August 26, London's Guardian headlined "Syria crisis: warplanes spotted in Cyprus as tensions rise in Damascus," saying:

"Warplanes and military transporters have begun arriving at Britain's Akrotiri airbase on Cyprus, less than 100 miles from the Syrian coast, in a sign of increasing preparations for a military strike against the Assad regime in Syria."

Nearby residents reported much higher activity than usual. They said it's been ongoing in the last 48 hours. Cyprus appears "likely to be a hub of the air campaign." Warplanes arriving suggests "advanced readiness."

Hurriyet Daily News said "Turkey may open its strategic Incirlik air base for possible military operations (against) Syria." It cited an unnamed "ranking" government source.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said "(t)here is very little doubt in our mind that the Syrian regime is culpable." It's "undeniable," he claimed.

Kerry called it "all but certain" that Syria used chemical weapons. Carney lied. So did Kerry. So called evidence doesn't exist. It's created out of whole cloth.

Western-backed insurgents bear full responsibility. They used chemical weapons multiple times before. They used them last Wednesday in Ghouta.

The incident was a classic false flag. It's a US tradition. They're strategically timed. They reflect Big Lies. They're pretexts for war.

August 21 was Obama's Gulf of Tonkin moment. Full-scale war followed. Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. Doing so authorized war without declaring it.

Lawless aggression lasted over a decade. Syria may fare no better. Bush's Iraq war continues. Daily car bombings kill dozens. In July, nearly 1,000 died.

Libya's a cauldron of violence. It persists without end. Charnel house conditions exist. Things rage out-of-control. Obama bears full responsibility.

He's a war criminal multiple times over. He's got lots more death and destruction in mind. Attacking Syria looms. Iran appears next.

Washington seeks unchallenged global dominance. Doing so threatens humanity. It may not survive Obama's second term.

He's mindless of the risks he's taking. It doesn't matter. He persists anyway. Rogue leaders operate that way.

A Final Comment

On August 23, Press TV headlined "CIA commandos, US special forces entered Syria: Report," saying:

French newspaper Le Figaro reported it. Insurgents are led by US, Israeli and Jordanian commandos. Since mid-August, they headed toward Damascus.

"US and Jordanian teams have set up a training camp in Jordan where special operations units are training members of the militant groups in Syria."

Le Figaro cites military forces. They say "specially trained militant fighters, commanded by American special forces, crossed the border into Syria on August 17 along with a number of CIA operatives."

"A second group joined them two days later." Deployment began days before Ghouta's chemical attack. Doing wasn't coincidental. Each event relates to the other. US intervention looms.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book is titled "Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

http://www.dailycensored.com/john-kerrys-colin-powell-moment/

US State Terror Targets Syria

by Stephen Lendman

Sunday was John Kerry's third Colin Powell moment. Lies beget more of them. Kerry's a serial liar. He's a malicious one.

He appeared on five Sunday talk shows. He wrongfully blamed Assad for August 21's Ghouta attack. He said Syria used sarin nerve gas.

He has "high confidence" Congress will approve lawless aggression. In 2002, it authorized "use of military force against Iraq."

It's uncertain if they'll do so against Syria. On September 9, it returns from summer recess. Unless called back earlier into special session, we won't know until it votes yea or nay.

Kerry used air time to make the case. He did so duplicitously. His accusations against Assad are baseless. They're bald-faced lied.

Syria threatens no one. Obama plans lawless aggression. He does with or without Security Council and/or congressional approval.

He wants regime change. Proxy war hasn't achieved it. Providing Western-enlisted death squads with air power is planned. So-called token strikes assure shock and awe death and destruction.

Initial bombing assures more ahead. Obama didn't wage war to quit. He wants Syria entirely ravaged and destroyed. It's prelude to targeting Iran.

Britain won't partner in bombing Syria. It remains very much involved. On August 31, London's Telegraph headlined "Syria crisis: Britain will play active role in military action despite vote defeat," saying:

UK Mediterranean-based "intelligence-gathering assets (will) provide the US military with information" ahead of its planned lawless aggression.

"Whitehall sources said Britain's decision not to" launch attacks "only covered its Armed Forces."

On Saturday, the USS San Antonio naval amphibious landing ship arrived near Syria. On board are hundreds of marines, helicopters, and V-22 Osprey aircraft.

Despite Britain's parliament voting against direct attacks, six RAF Typhones and a Sentry early warning plane remain in Cyprus.

Royal Navy sources said orders weren't issued to remove a Trafalgar class nuclear submarine deployed near Syria's coast. It suggests perhaps covert participation in Obama's war.

US Sixth Fleet destroyers will launch it. Cruise missile diplomacy is planned. Expect a nighttime barrage ahead. It won't be announced. It'll be known when bombs explode.

America has F-16 warplanes deployed in Turkey and Jordan. Two Fifth Fleet carrier strike groups supplement them. Longer range bombers may be involved.

France alone agreed to participate with America. Its aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle is in the western Mediterranean. It deployed an anti-missile destroyer to the region.

French warplanes carry Scalp missiles. Rafales are stationed in Abu Dhabi. Mirage 2000s are in Djibouti. On Wednesday, French parliamentary debate is scheduled. So far, no vote is planned.

President Francois Hollande may order strikes on his own. He strongly supports Obama's imperial project. He's got his own objectives in mind. Syria is a former French colony. He may have recolonization in mind.

UK/US intelligence sharing continues. So do covert actions. On August 29, Activist Post contributor Brandon Turbeville headlined "Western Special Forces Working with Death Squads in Syria," saying:

"A new report by the British Mirror magazine has revealed that British special forces are now operating inside Syria." They're doing so ahead of Obama's planned lawless aggression.

"SAS, Special Boat Service, Special Reconnaissance Regiment, and MI6 operatives are involved.

The Mirror cited a military source, saying:

"It is vital they find every missile site that could threaten British ships or RAF jets and they will probably be taken out by missiles fired from offshore."

"The risk of capture to these special forces units is off the scale and nobody can be trusted in Syria."

"At the top of the hit list are (Assad's) sophisticated long-range mobile missile batteries."

"Special forces troops will use laser and satellite technology to pinpoint the exact location of" of key sites. They plan to destroy them.

"Spies have already (located) scores of major military installations and ammo dumps."

On August 22, Le Figaro said US, Israeli and Jordanian commandos covertly entered Syria. CIA operatives are involved.

They came days before Ghouta's attack. The timing wasn't accidental. They're working cooperatively with hundreds of insurgent fighters.

They're trained in guerrilla warfare. Since mid-August, they headed toward Damascus.

Similar elements operated the same way earlier. British, French, Israeli, Turkish and Qatari forces were involved.

Turbeville forthrighly said:

"With the Western world salivating to launch a military assault on Syria which will inevitably kill hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, it is important for all Americans to not only actively expose such blatant hypocrisy and treachery, but to actively oppose it. Our window of opportunity is closing."

Syria expects attacks any time. On September 1, the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) headlined "Syria calls on UN, Security Council to shoulder responsibilities, prevent absurd use of force out of legitimacy."

Syria UN envoy Bashar al-Jaafari urged responsible opposition to planned US aggression, saying:

"The Syrian government warned, more than a year ago, against the serious risks of the possibility of using chemical materials by the armed terrorist groups in Syria."

"Syria has informed, in official letters, the UN Secretary General and the UNSC about the activities of these groups, which coincided with a political, diplomatic and media campaign led by some countries which are directly responsible for shedding the blood in Syria and preventing the peaceful solution in order to accuse the Syrian government of using chemical weapons."

Kerry's so-called "secret conclusive evidence" is fabricated rubbish. It's "completely false."

According to SANA:

"Al-Jaafari said he would clarify the following:"

"First, Syria as a state, people and government has a national interest in unveiling the facts related to the claims of using the chemical weapons in Syria, based on this national interest, the Syrian government and the UN agreed to investigate in three sites including Khan al-Assal."

"Second, those who mobilize fleets and armies to wage an aggression on Syria, are the same who rejected a Syrian proposed draft resolution at the UN Security Council on December 29, 2003 on freeing the Middle East of weapons of mass destruction."

"Third, the Syrian government has defied the American administration to show one credible evidence on the allegations regarding using chemical weapon, but Kerry publicly said that he relies on what he called 'high credible information' based on internet fabricated photos."

"Fourth, the UN General Secretariat has repeatedly stated that the trails of the use of any kind of toxic gases do not fade over time, therefore the UN sent an investigation mission after five months of the request of The Syrian government to probe into Khan al-Assal case."

"However, the Syrian government didn't hesitate to allow the UN team to enter to place of supposed attack within 48 hours of the arrival of the UN Secretary General's envoy, Angela Kane, the UN disarmament chief."

"Fifth, Kerry's statement that the investigation mission is not responsible for determining the side which used the chemical weapon, and that its mission is limited to confirming its use, comes to justify the US administration's violation of the UNSC."

Al-Jaafari officially asked Ban Ki-moon to determine parties responsible for chemical weapons use in Khan al-Assal. Washington, Britain and France rejected his request.

Ban's a longtime imperial tool. He supports lawless aggression. He does so without overtly saying so. He's got blood on his hands. He's complicit in what demands condemnation.

Assad, Al-Jafaari and other Syrian officials wage lonely battles. They're struggling to save Syria. They face long odds. Obama wants the Syrian Arab Republic destroyed.

He's well on his way toward achieving it. He plans finishing the job ahead. He wants puppet governance replacing sovereign Syrian independence.

He wants Syria exploited and controlled. Mass killing and destruction are small prices to pay. Imperial marauders take no prisoners.

They don't do body counts. They don't give a damn about unconscionable human suffering. Only imperial priorities matter. Nothing stands in the way of achieving them.

On September 1, SANA headlined "President al-Assad: Syria is capable of confronting any external aggression."

He spoke during his Sunday meeting with Alaeddin Boroujerdi. He chairs the Foreign Policy National Security Committee at the Iranian Shura Council.

In the face of overwhelming US power, he put on a brave face. State television reported him saying:

"Syria ... is capable of confronting any external aggression."

"The American threats of launching an attack against Syria will not discourage Syria away from its principles or its fight against terrorism supported by some regional and Western countries, first and foremost the United States of America."

Ahead of informing Americans, Obama told Netanyahu what he plans. Only they and close aides know exactly what was discussed.

Israel's partnered with Washington's war on Syria. It's an open secret. Both countries may coordinate strikes when they come. Israel may participate covertly.

Russia's parliamentary committee head Alexei Pushkov said Obama will use the upcoming September 5 - 6 St. Petersburg G20 summit advantageously.

He'll pressure participating countries. He wants support for attacking Syria. He'll get none from Russia and China. It remains to be seen how others react.

France alone looks likely to join what another writer calls his "coalition of the killing." Vladimir Putin forthrightly opposes war on Syria. Days earlier he was outspoken against it.

According to one observer, Obama's war may start any time. He'll consult Congress. He wants support. He'll act unilaterally if it's not forthcoming.

Rogue leaders operate that way. Obama's by far the worst. World peace hangs by a thread.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book is titled "Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

Eat, drink, and be Merry! (Soapbox Podcast September 1, 2013)

This Blog

Linked From Here

This Blog

Linked From Here

Sunday, September 1, 2013

Eat, drink, and be Merry! (Soapbox Podcast September 1, 2013)

Nuclear Armageddon and More Damned War Lies!

The catastrophic situation at Fukushima Dai'ichi combined with

the damned lies that may get the US involved in yet another

war to slaughter innocents, make a very sober, yet

informative edition of Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox.

GUEST: ROBERT FANTINA

AUTHOR OF Look Not into the Morrow

TOPIC: EFFECTS OF WAR AND IMPENDING IMPERIAL AGGRESSION IN SYRIA

GUEST: ARNIE GUNDERSEN

NUCLEAR ENGINEER AND DIRECTOR OF FAIREWINDS

TOPIC: FUKUSHIMA AND WHAT WE CAN DO

***Out In The Be-Bop Rock 1950s Schoolboy Night- School’s Out, Man-"Blackboard Jungle"- A Film Review

A YouTube film clip of Bill Haley and The Comets performing Rock Around The Clock, a song feature in the film under review, Blackboard Jungle, and the first time that be-bop rock served as the soundtrack for a film. Whee!

DVD Review

Blackboard Jungle, starring Glenn Ford, Anne Francis, Vince Morrow, Sidney Portier, 1955

Film noir as a genre came in all shapes and sizes, mainly the best being the crime noir saga. Occasionally though other subjects received royal treatment, as here on the troubling rise of juvenile delinquency in the cities (and maybe elsewhere too) of America in the film under review, Blackboard Jungle. Although a re-viewing of this classic noir reveals some pretty ham-handed notions about the subject of JDs and about schools it still has some “socially redeeming qualities." For one, as the vehicle that connected film with the emerging be-bop rock sound being heard on the AM radio in the early 1950s, at least as heard in some places, through the use of Billy Halley and the Comets’ smash hit of 1955, Rock Around The Clock. Beyond that some of the performances, especially that of Sidney Portier, as a young alienated, “talented tenth” black student who could go either way, fame or crime, also sticks out.

The plot of this thing though even for its red scare- moral uplift-we-had better-get-a-handle-on-these-troubled-youth-or-the-Russkies-will-beat us time seems well, corny. Corny because the characters from Glenn Ford’s worldly-wise but idealistic and frustrated young teacher to the white (represented by Vince Morrow), black (Portier), Spanish and other city ethnic group students are wooden when I compare them to my own similar working-poor neighborhood (minus the blacks) of the time. In short, youth here are merely misunderstood and with the right formula (some version of tough love and a peek at Ozzie and Harriet) they will, except those few rotten apples who we will put in stir for good, change their ways.

A little plot summary will give you an idea of what I mean. Ford, hires on in a deeply troubled urban (New York but could have been a lot of places, including on a smaller scale my hometown, North Adamsville) school beset by racial, ethnic, class and social tensions. He is just idealistic enough, like many before and after him, to try to make a difference despite the heavy odds against him. Of course the first rule of teaching, thugs or princes, is who rules the classroom. For much of the film that is an open question as he seeks allies among the motley crew of students, especially Portier. Of course not everybody makes it, student or teacher alike. The be-bop jazz-loving nerdish math teacher (played by Richard Kiley) and the Irish gang leader thug (played by Vince Morrow)to name two. But in the end the key figures have an epiphany and the uphill education struggle goes on.

Moral uplift and due regard for the efforts of generations of teachers trying to make a different aside you can see where the holes in the plot shine through. The hard reality is that, like at my school, the thugs were weeded out long before high school, or they ran the show, mostly the former.

This brings to mind a character from my working- class streets, "Stewball" Stu (we never called him that to his face because we would have been shivved but that is what we called him among our younger set because the guy was a heavy, heavy whiskey drinker, day and night, walking or driving). Stu dropped out, or rather was kicked out of school, in the ninth grade, I think. But he had a “boss” ’57 Chevy when they were the rage, about ten million girls around him (and no “dogs” either) and all kind of criminal enterprises running. The reason that he got kicked out of school? Oh yeah, he threw a teacher, and not a small one out the window, fortunately it was only from the first floor. And they never did squat about it. So see that moral uplift stuff is good for the 1950s movies but just yawn stuff in the real world. Oh yeah too, Stu's luck ran out later, like sometimes happens but in the 1950s he was the be-bop max daddy king of the jungle. And no blackboard jungle either. Later, fortunately, more realistic troubled youth films were made, like the film adaptations of S.E. Hinton’s works, and made without the heavy-handed cautionary tale.

***Shoot ‘Em Up, Bang “Em Up- Johnny Depp’s (Antonio Banderas And Salma Hayek Too)-“One Upon A Time In Mexico"- A Film Review

DVD Review

Once Upon A Time In Mexico, starring Johnny Depp, Antonio Banderas, Salma Hayek, 2004

This one may be a little too close for comfort these days what with the almost daily carnage reported from the drug wars in Mexico but anything that has Johnny Depp in it will at least get my attention. Although Johnny is not always up to par, Sweeney Todd seemed, well, too bizarre even for him, he is not afraid to take on quirky roles in the interest of making some memorable characters. Here he plays an upfront (literally) CIA agent down in Mexico to help defuse what looks like an attempt by the bad guys to knock off what passes for a good guy el presidente there and take over the government. To do, whatever. Yes, I know the plot sounds very familiar. Also familiar in this third part of the trilogy is the Angel-Diablo avenger of the people’s wrongs, and his own personal wrongs (wife, played by Salma Hayek, in flash-backs killed by the bad guys), Antonio Banderas. Of course that means plenty of shoot ‘em up, bang ‘em up as the two sides fire everything they have at each other. And equally true, of course, the bad guys get their just desserts. Johnny will get a citation from the bosses at Langley for this one for sure.

P.S. Here is one thing that has always intrigued about shoot 'em up movies and it was really obvious here. Now I am no expert on weaponry, although I know how to handle a gun, but Antonio Banderas’ shooting from every hip at random would seem to be foolhardy. Not only that but his chances of hitting anybody in the real world that way would seem minimal. On the other hand even the elite forces of the bad guys opponent seem, always, to be something out of the gang that could not shoot straight. The good guys must have the angels on their side, right?

***Just Before The Sea-Change- On The 52th Anniversary Of The Freedom Riders- All Honor To Those Who Took To The Buses "Heading South"

Link to a Wikipedia entry for the Freedom Riders, a group of civil rights workers who valiantly tried, by example, to integrate interstate transportation in the South. We are not so far removed from those events even today, North or South.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_riders

Markin comment:

I was in high school at the time of the freedom rides and was part of a support group sponsored by the Americans For Democratic Action (ADA), then an anti-Soviet Cold War left-liberal organization but very pro-civil rights (in the South) that was raising money in order to sent more civil rights workers "heading South." Heading toward the danger not away from it. Honor those black liberation fighters, black and white.
********
The following comment, although we are labelling it anonymous to honor the writer's personal preference(he is no longer political, is an opponent of almost everything communistic about this blog, and has a job now that places him on the other side of the barricades, is that enough?), is from a person known to me, and in the old days quite well-known as a fellow North Adamsville corner boy. I am posting it for the sole purpose of showing that even those, some of them anyway, on the other side of the class line at one time showed "the better angels of their natures."
***********
Anonymous comment:

It’s funny how things work out. I was recently thinking about the old time “freedom riders” who, black and white, from the South and North, tried to integrate the local and interstate buses in 1961 down in the Deep South. And some not so deep parts like North Carolina where Markin wound up, I think, some fifty years ago now, stuff that should have never been segregated in the first place. Then, shortly thereafter I was “surfing” the Internet for material on the subject to check my own remembrances and way down in the “match” list for what I Googled was a blog entry, get this, entitled Out In The Be-Bop Be-Bop 1960s Night- The Heart Of Rock ‘n’ Rock: 1964-Just Before The Sea Change - With The Rolling Stone’s In Mind.

Now hold on before you start sending for the padded wagon for me. Yes, the blog entry was a review of an “oldies but goodies” CD about some of the popular non-Beatles, non-Rolling Stones songs that got us through that tough senior year in high school. But it also contained a story about the trials and tribulations of some kids in my old home town, North Adamsville, a strictly white working class suburb just outside of Boston, trying to get swept up in one of the great social movements of their generation, and mine. That, of course, in those pre-Vietnam War escalation times was the black freedom struggle down South in this country. See, I knew those kids, Edward Rowley, Judy Jackson, and Peter Paul Markin featured in the review. Christ, for a while in senior year I hung out with Edward and Peter Paul (“The Scribe,” to one and all in those days, christened so by head honcho Frankie Riley, a mad man if I ever saw one) in front of Salducci’s Pizza Parlor “up the Downs” for a while so I know the stuff (the guff really) that those guys were going through in trying to be “different.” I also know that Frankie, and most of the school (North Adamsville High School, if I forgot to mention it before) didn’t like what they were doing one bit. And Edward and Judy were getting serious grief at home about it as well.

As for Edward's grief, I was at Salducci’s Pizza Parlor sitting right along side Peter Paul when Edward came rushing in all fluttered, all red-faced too, and related the story of what had just happened at his house that Peter Paul already told you about in that CD review I mentioned Googling above. Peter and I decided that we would just repeat that story here to get you caught up in case you didn’t get a chance to read it. If it sounds all too familiar under any circumstances from back then, or now for that matter (except now it is us giving the guff, right?), then that is just about right:

“Isn’t that hair of yours a little long Mr. Edward Rowley, Junior,” clucked Mrs. Edward Rowley, Senior, “You had better get it cut before your father gets back from his conference trip, if you know what is good for you.” That mothers’-song was being endlessly repeated in North Adamsville households (and not just North Adamsville household either) ever since the British invasion brought longer hair (and a little less so, beards) into style. Of course when one thinks of the British invasion in the year 1964 one is not thinking about the American Revolution or the War of 1812 but the Beatles. And while their music has taken 1964 teen world by a storm, a welcome storm after the long mainly musical counter-revolution since Elvis, Bo, Jerry Lee and Chuck ruled the rock night, the 1964 parent world was getting up in arms.

And not just about hair styles either. But about trips to Harvard Square coffeehouses to hear, to hear if you can believe this, folk music, mountain music, harp music or whatever performed by long-haired (male or female), long-bearded (male), blue jean–wearing (both), sandal-wearing (both), well, for lack of a better name “beatniks” (parents, as usual, being well behind the curve on teen cultural movements). “Why can’t Eddie (he hated that name by the way) be like he was when he listened to Bobby Vinton and his Mr. Lonely or that lovely-voiced Roy Orbison and his It’s Over and other nice songs on the local teen radio station, WMEX,” mused Mrs. Rowley to herself. “Now it’s the Beatles, the Rolling Stones and a cranky-voiced guy named Bob Dylan that has his attention. And that damn Judy Jackson with her short skirts and her, well her… "

Since Mrs. Rowley, Alice to the neighbors, was getting worked up it anyway we might as well continue with her tirade, “What about all the talk about doing right by the down-trodden Negros down in Alabama and Mississippi. And Eddie and that damn Peter Paul Markin, who used to be so nice when they all hung around together at Salducci’s Pizza Parlor and you at least knew they were no causing trouble, talking about organizing a book drive to get books for the little Negro children down there. If Eddie’s father ever heard that there would be hell to pay, hell to pay and, maybe, a strap coming out of the closet big as Eddie is. Worst though, worst that worrying about Negros down South is that treasonous talk about leaving this country, leaving North Adamsville, defenseless against the Communists with his talk of nuclear disarmament. Why couldn’t he have just left well enough alone and stuck with his idea of forming a band that would play nice songs that make kids feel good like Gale Garnet’s We’ll Sing In The Sunshine or that pretty Negro girl Dionne Warwick and Her Walk On By instead of getting everybody upset.”

That mother-madness, however, as we shall see didn’t stop Edward Rowley, Junior once he got his Irish up but that was what he was up against on a daily, maybe on some days, an hourly basis. Judy’s story was more of the same-old, same-old but again we decided to let it rest as is like with Edward’s story. Her story I got second-hand anyway one night when Edward and I were sitting down at the seawall in front of old Adamsville Beach trying to figure things out, not big things, just things. Here's what happened:

“Young lady, that dress is too short for you to wear in public, take it off, burn it for all I care, and put on another one or you are not going out of this house,” barked Mrs. James Jackson, echoing a sentiment that many worried North Adamsville mothers were feeling (and not just North Adamsville mothers either) about their daughters dressing too provocatively and practically telling the boys, well practically telling them you know what as she suppressed the “s” word that was forming in her head. And that Eddie (“Edward, Ma,” Judy keep repeating every time Mrs. Jackson, Dorothy to the neighbors, said Eddie), and his new found friends like Peter Paul Markin taking her to those strange coffeehouses instead of the high school dances on Saturday night. And endless talk about the n-----s down South and other trash talk. Commie trash about peace and getting rid of our nuclear weapons. They should draft the whole bunch of them and put them over in front of that Berlin Wall. Then they wouldn’t be so negative about America.”

So you see how hard Judy Jackson’s break-out was when all was said and done.

As for the Scribe, Peter Paul Markin, his people were torn a different way. They, on his mother’s side, were Catholic Worker movement people so they knew the political score. But they also knew Peter Paul could be god-awful righteous when he got his dander up. Who knows what he would say down there, or where he might wind up for saying it to the wrong person, meaning just about anybody not black. Ya, I guess if I was his parents I would have been worried too.

This is how it figured though for me if you really want to know.

Old time North Adamsville was strictly for white working class people, and a few middle class types, period. No blacks, no browns, no yellows, no red, no nothing color except white, period. So nobody could figure why three pretty smart kids, with plenty going for them, would risk their necks “heading” South for some, well, let me put it the way it was really said on the streets, some “n-----s.” Now you get it. But see here is what you didn’t know, what Gary, Judy and Peter Paul didn’t know either. I wanted to go with them. I never said much about it, one way or the other, but every day on the television I saw what they, the cops and white vigilantes were doing to kids, black kids, ya, but still just kids who were trying to change a world that they had not made, but sure in hell, unlike most of their parents, were not going to put up with the old way. The “we did it this way for generations so we will continue to do it for generations” routine. That is a big reason that I was rooting for them (like at some football game that I was addicted to in those days, cheering on the under-dog who eventually was ground under by the over-dog).

Still I never went, and you know why. Sure my mother threatened to throw me out of the house if I dared to cross the Mason-Dixon Line. After all my father was a proud, if beaten, son of the South who, no matter how humbled and humiliated he was by the Yankee ethos that condemned him, always thought of himself as a good-ole Southern boy. And a man who we (my brothers and sisters) could, in later years, never get to say anything better that “nigra” when talking about black people. So there was that. And then there was my ambivalence about whether a boy, me, who had never been south of New York City, and that just barely, and whether I could navigate the “different ways” down South, especially in regard to the idea that white people actually liked/tolerated or were deep friends with black people and wanted to do something about their condition.

Those are, maybe, good and just reasons to take a dive but here is the real reason. I just did not want to get my young butt “fried-Southern-style” by those nasty bastards down in places like Philadelphia, Mississippi (although Philadelphia, Pa, was a tough spot as well, as it turned out). We had all heard about the three civil rights workers who were slain by persons unknown (officially) in the sweat-drenched Southern summer night. We had heard further of beatings, jailings ands other forms of harassment. Yes, I was scared and I let my scared-ness get the better of me, period. That’s why I say hats off to the “freedom riders” in that 1961 hard night. Hats off, indeed.