1/30/2005 11:54:00 AM|W|P|Doc|W|P|David Corn.com | January 26, 2005
do Republicans know how to process facts and think for themselves? This fall--thanks to a survey conducted by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes--we learned that 72 percent of Republicans believe Iraq had actual weapons of mass destruction, even after it had been widely reported that the Bush administration's own WMD hunters had concluded that Iraq had absolutely no WMD or active WMD programs in the years prior to the invasion. Three-quarters of Republicans also said that Saddam Hussein had provided substantial assistance to al Qaeda. Which meant they had either ignored or dismissed the conclusions of the independent 9/11 commission and the CIA. Both found no evidence of any operational alliance between Iraq and Osama bin Laden's murderous outfit. Now the Pew Research Center reports that 66 percent of Republicans say "we all should be willing to fight for our country whether it is right or wrong." Think about it. That means Republicans believe it is perfectly fine to sacrifice their fellow citizens (those who volunteer for military service) and to kill people overseas--even innocent civilians (since accidents do happen in war)--for a mistake. In other words--or is it the same words?--two-thirds of Republicans are willing to see others die for no good reason.
|W|P|110710438859236154|W|P|Are Most Republicans Sheep?|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com10/11/2005 09:40:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Unknown|W|P|So many blogs and only 10 numbers to rate them. I'll have to give you a 7 because you have good content but lack of quality posts.

Free Access To More Information Aboutnj internet1/28/2005 07:02:00 PM|W|P|Doc|W|P|Time for a Corporate Death Penalty Act KARYN STRICKLER | Counterpunch | January 28, 2005
Corporate leaders kill people regularly, often consciously, with personal impunity. Why not hold the individuals behind corporations that poison, harm and kill people accountable the same way we do for individuals who commit murder, deliberately or otherwise? ****** Corporate biographer Jack Doyle, told the Multinational Monitor, "Corporations...are not controlling the full costs of their operation, and we are picking up the tab for their externalities in form of disease, illness, lower immunity, altered reproduction, birth defects, cancer...That's a mortal trespass, an unforgivable transgression that must be stopped...They need to be prosecuted." The Corporate Death Penalty Act could provide that every member of the Board of Directors and executives of a corporation who knew, or should have known about the likelihood of their product or services to cause death, will be subject to the death penalty if their product or service results in the death of an individual or group of individuals.
[zombienote: An excellent article and...well.. about damn time.]|W|P|110695750602819377|W|P|'bout damn time!|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/27/2005 08:11:00 AM|W|P|Doc|W|P|M$NBC/Newsweek International | Jan. 31 issue The U.S. Model: For years, much of the world did aspire to the American way of life. But today countries are finding more appealing systems in their own backyards.
Much in American law and society troubles the world these days. Nearly all countries reject the United States' right to bear arms as a quirky and dangerous anachronism. They abhor the death penalty and demand broader privacy protections. Above all, once most foreign systems reach a reasonable level of affluence, they follow the Europeans in treating the provision of adequate social welfare is a basic right. All this, says Bruce Ackerman at Yale University Law School, contributes to the growing sense that American law, once the world standard, has become "provincial." The United States' refusal to apply the Geneva Conventions to certain terrorist suspects, to ratify global human-rights treaties such as the innocuous Convention on the Rights of the Child or to endorse the International Criminal Court (coupled with the abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo) only reinforces the conviction that America's Constitution and legal system are out of step with the rest of the world. ********** Americans still invoke democratic idealism. We heard it in Bush's address, with his apocalyptic proclamation that "the survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands." But fewer and fewer people have the patience to listen. Headlines in the British press were almost contemptuous: DEFIANT BUSH DOES NOT MENTION THE WAR, HAVE I GOT NUKES FOR YOU and HIS SECOND-TERM MISSION: TO END TYRANNY ON EARTH. Has this administration learned nothing from Iraq, they asked? Can this White House really expect to command support from the rest of the world, with its different strengths and different dreams? The failure of the American Dream has only been highlighted by the country's foreign-policy failures, not caused by them. The true danger is that Americans do not realize this, lost in the reveries of greatness, speechifying about liberty and freedom.
zombienote: Long, excellent article. Nothing about marijuana, as there should be, but many people know the rst of the world is making efforts to move away from the US "war on drugs" model and several nations have been conducting medical cannabis research.]|W|P|110683204367946265|W|P|Dream On America|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/24/2005 05:00:00 PM|W|P|Doc|W|P|[zombienote: Pharmaceutical corporations are THE MOST PROFITABLE corporations on the planet. Click the link below to read the whole report and see how many of the the top 10 Worst Corporations involve drug production.] The 10 Worst Corporations of 2004 by Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman | Monday, January 24, 2005 | CommonDreams.org
When the Multinational Monitor judges gather to pick the 10 worst corporations of the year, one of their instructions is: name no companies that appeared on the previous year's list (barring extraordinary circumstances). For the 2004 list, that means no Bayer (even though in 2004 the company pushed for import of genetically modified rice into the European Union, polluted water in a South African town with the carcinogen hexavalent chromium, and was hit with evidence that its pain medication Aleve (naproxen) increases the risk of heart attack, among other egregious acts), no Boeing (despite new evidence that the tanker plane scandal costing U.S. taxpayers tens of billions of dollars is even worse than it appeared), no Clear Channel (even though the radio behemoth in 2004 stooped to new lows with a "Breast Christmas Ever" contest that promised to pay for breast implants for a dozen contest "winners"), and no Halliburton (embroiled in a whole new set of contracting fraud and bribery charges in 2004). ******* Merck: Dr. David Graham, a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug safety official, calls it "maybe the single greatest drug-safety catastrophe in the history of this country." Testifying before a Senate committee in November, Dr. David Graham put the number in the United States who had suffered heart attacks or stroke as result of taking the arthritis drug Vioxx in the range of 88,000 to 139,000. As many as 40 percent of these people, or about 35,000-55,000, died as a result, Graham said. The unacceptable cardiovascular risks of Vioxx were evident as early as 2000 -- a full four years before the drug was finally withdrawn from the market by its manufacturer, Merck, according to a study released by The Lancet, the British medical journal. Merck says it disclosed all relevant evidence on Vioxx safety as soon as it acquired it, and pulled the drug as soon as it saw conclusive evidence of the drug's dangers. [snip]
[zombienote: Well... Merck is, of course, LYING. The info they want you to believe they acted upon immediately out of concern for "human life" was, in fact, 4 years old. The FDA protected their profits for 4 years. But don't grow or smoke mary-ju-wanna because that is worse than allowing people to die for corporate profit. It just is.] |W|P|110660469399621521|W|P|And pot is supposedly a bad thing......|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/20/2005 09:15:00 PM|W|P|Doc|W|P| Stark contrast in Washington D. C. on Bush's Inauguration.|W|P|110627386243416670|W|P|Snapshot of the Culture War|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/16/2005 05:43:00 PM|W|P|Doc|W|P|[zombienote: Since Jon Stewart kung-fu'd Crossfire in October, it has slowly sunk. Now it's being terminated and Tucker Carlson and his artifical news cohorts are being shown the door. Stewart's verbal disemboweling of them live on CNN was one of the "Have you no decency moments of this modern time. Stewarts program, The Daily Show, is riding very high, with a best-selling, award-winning book and a newly doubled time slot. This year I am going to focus extra on the media complicity with the fascist takeover of this country. Forget politicians, attack the media.] First "Crossfire"...Now Axe "Reliable Sources" by Christian Christensen | Common Dreams | Sunday, January 16, 2005
The news that CNN is planning to axe "Crossfire" - discussed in a wonderful piece by Frank Rich - is long overdue. For those of us interested in seeing an end to vacuous punditry masquerading as serious journalism, CNN's "Reliable Sources" should be next on the chopping block. Reliable Sources" is a program that (according to CNN) "turns a critical lens on the media" where a group of journalists, pundits and pseudo-reporters discuss media issues of the day. If you want to watch a motley crew congratulating themselves for pretending to be "critical" about the industry in which they work, nothing beats it. The first alarm bell should ring about the time that you hear that the program is fronted by none other than Howard Kurtz: the media critic for The Washington Post. You don't have to be Kant to see the massive conflict of interest here: the man hosting a program that purports to turn a "critical lens on the media" works for both The Washington Post Company (owners of The Washington Post and Newsweek magazine) and Time Warner (owners of CNN, HBO, TIME magazine, etc., etc, etc.). It's not a good start, and it gets worse. The real problem with "Reliable Sources" is that it purports to be "critical" about the news business, all the while acting as a veiled cheerleader for a corporate media system that has surrendered to the Bush administration over everything from WMDs in Iraq to social security. The genius of the program is that it manages to give the impression of critique while staying completely milquetoast: the guests say how reporting was bad, how editors failed and generally give the news media a black eye. The logic of the system, however, is never questioned: critiques are almost always at the individual, not the systemic level. It is pre-packaged and commodified dissent.
|W|P|110591605968528771|W|P|Attack the Media in 2005|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/16/2005 01:51:00 PM|W|P|Doc|W|P|Screw you, America
John F. Kerry, you’re first. In your befuddling concession speech, you actually called for unity and healing. Sounds good, clown, but can’t you even imagine for a second that the people who supported you so zealously for the past five months might just see that insincere gesture of good sportsmanship as a betrayal? See, unlike you pols, we voters actually believe in shit. We believe that George W. Bush and his henchpeople are a real threat to the survival of democracy. We believe that they’re killing people for profit. And we believe that they don’t have a goddamn clue about forfending terrorism on US soil. That’s not a position gap; that’s an ideological gash. And it’s not going to heal, because, unlike you expedient professional truth-manipulators, I’m not prepared to meet the enemies of freedom halfway just because you lost the election. Your speechwriters might see the Bush administration’s failings as nothing more than convenient fodder for your campaign blather, but the GOP junta’s sins don’t go away just because decrying them no longer serves your ambitions. Last week they were the imperialist pigs who misled us into war and you were the savior. Now we’re the goddamn Getalong Gang?! Screw that. Fight back or shut up. Now, the rest of you ...
|W|P|110589811447458478|W|P|Speaking of Culture War......|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/14/2005 05:45:00 PM|W|P|Doc|W|P|Willie Nelson Marketing Environmentally Friendly Fuel to Truck Stops by Matt Curry | Common Dreams | Friday, January 14, 2005 DALLAS (AP) - "On the Road Again" means something new for Willie Nelson these days - a chance for truckers to fill their tanks with clean-burning biodiesel fuel. Nelson and three business partners recently formed a company called Willie Nelson's Biodiesel that is marketing the fuel to truck stops. The product - called BioWillie - is made from vegetable oils, mainly soybeans, and can be burned without modification to diesel engines. It may be difficult to picture the 71-year-old hair-braided Texas rebel as an energy company executive, but the singer's new gig is in many ways about social responsibility - and that is classic Nelson. "There is really no need going around starting wars over oil. We have it here at home. We have the necessary product, the farmers can grow it," said Nelson, who organized Farm Aid two decades ago to draw attention to the plight of American agriculture. Nelson told The Associated Press in an interview last week that he began learning about the product a few years ago after his wife purchased a biodiesel-burning car in Hawaii, where the star has a home. "I got on the computer and punched in biodiesel and found out this could be the future," said Nelson, who now uses the fuel for his cars and tour buses. Peter Bell, a Texas biodiesel supplier, struck up a friendship with Nelson after filling up one of the tour buses, and the business partnership came together just before Christmas. Bell said Nelson's name will help the largely unknown fuel - typically purchased by government agencies to promote environmental awareness - gain wider national acceptance. The fuel's average U.S. price per gallon is $1.79. "What Willie brings to this is the ability to communicate directly with a truck driver. That kind of community is hard for people to get to," Bell said. "When he starts talking, these folks really listen to him. ... It's like having Tiger Woods talk about golf clubs." Still, a driver can cover many miles without spotting a biodiesel pump. A map on the National Biodiesel Board's Web site shows a heavy concentration of distributors in the Midwest, but very few in other parts of the country. Nelson's group is currently negotiating with Oklahoma City-based Love's Travel Stops & Country Stores to carry the fuel at its 169 locations nationwide. Dan Gilligan, president of the Petroleum Marketers Association of America, expects commercial expansion for biodiesel, but says that supplies are still limited and that making the fuel available in northern states is a challenge. "For terminals to store biodiesel, they have to store it in heated tanks to avoid gelling problems. That's a challenge for the industry to overcome," he said. On the Internet: http://www.wnbiodiesel.com http://www.biodiesel.org |W|P|110574354815799799|W|P|This is what I'm talkin' about!|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/08/2005 09:19:00 AM|W|P|Doc|W|P|Drug Prohibition is a Terrorist's Best Friend January 5, 2005 | Cato Institute
The harsh reality is that terrorist groups around the world have been enriched by prohibitionist drug policies that drive up drug costs, and which deliver enormous profits to the outlaw organizations willing to accept the risks that go with the trade.
See: Marijuana and Terrorism in America |W|P|110519431085923873|W|P|It takes a think tank to figure this out?|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/05/2005 07:16:00 PM|W|P|Doc|W|P|The Moment Has Come for Media Reform by Robert W. McChesney | Published on Wednesday, January 5, 2005 | CommonDreams.org The New Year is here, and as we take stock of the state of the world and our nation, we must put media reform even higher on our priority list. The movement to fix our badly broken media system is gathering momentum, but the decisions made this year could resonate for decades to come. The frustrations of millions were echoed in Jon Stewart's no-nonsense critique of corporate media for "hurting America," shown live on CNN's Crossfire. People are tired of the media's partisan hackery, celebrity obsession, failure to hold government accountable, narrow range of debate, unchecked commercialism, and lack of investigative journalism. Corporate media's failures constitute what legendary journalist Bill Moyers describes as the greatest threat to our nation: "Democracy can't exist without an informed public." Most Americans don't know that the presidential candidates and allied groups shattered all campaign finance records in 2004, spending $2 billion. That's right: billion. Most of that money bought political ads from the biggest media companies ... who gave us back deplorable election coverage. The gap between rich and poor continues to widen, and more than 45 million Americans are living without health insurance, while Congress guts the critical programs that are the fabric of our democracy. Public education, Social Security, environmental protection, affordable housing, and accessible health care are all at risk. Most Americans don't know the consequences of our ballooning $521 billion deficit and $7.1 trillion national debt. The media are silent as Congress dishes out some $125 billion every year in corporate welfare. We aren't told that global terrorism has continued to rise each year since the attacks of 9/11, while a full 49 percent of Americans still believe that Iraq had WMDs, and 52 percent believe Saddam Hussein was actively supporting Al Qaeda. Is it any surprise that surveys showed many Americans went to the polls lacking the facts to evaluate the most important issues of our day? There is something terribly wrong when Americans know more about Martha Stewart's prison stay than they do about the torture scandals at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. The good news Millions of citizens understand that our bankrupt media system is the direct result of government policies made in the public's name but without our consent. Unprecedented numbers of citizens joined together and organized to win a number of historic victories in 2004, proving that public participation is indeed the answer to the media problem. A genuine media reform movement is gaining momentum and getting results. In 2004, the FCC's attempts to loosen ownership limits to let Big Media get even bigger were rejected by the courts and Congress after massive public opposition. Sinclair Broadcast Group was forced to retract its brazenly biased Stolen Honor "news" program days before the election. Almost every egregious action by big media corporations - once met with muted opposition - was greeted with a swift response from an increasingly unified, bipartisan and vocal public. But that's just the beginning. A growing number of citizens are taking action to stop media conglomerates from getting bigger; to strengthen alternative, independent and non-commercial media; to force media companies to serve the public interest; to limit advertising directed at our children; and to make access to communications affordable and universal. Looking Ahead All of these issues - and more - will be on the chopping block when Congress reopens the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as it is expected to do this year. The question is to what degree these crucial decisions will be shaped by informed citizen participation rather than aggressive corporate lobbying. Free Press (www.freepress.net), the organization I founded to increase informed public participation in crucial media policy debates, will be focusing its energy in the following four areas that offer the best hope for meaningful media reform:
  • Media Ownership: Blocking Consolidation, Serving the Public Interest, Fighting Commercialization. While we don't expect the FCC to lift media ownership caps in the immediate future, it's a safe bet that they will try again in the next four years. We're keeping the issue in the news, conducting research and building the legal case for ownership limits in preparation for another Bush Administration attack on the public interest. We're also working to expand the number of low-power FM radio stations available to communities nationwide.
  • Community Internet: Broadband as a Nonprofit, Public Utility. This is one of the most exciting and promising opportunities for media reformers. The goal is to offer affordable broadband Internet access to residents, businesses and local governments as a basic utility - just like water, gas and electricity. New wireless technologies allow local governments to offer faster, cheaper and more reliable access than ever before. But these innovations are being fought every step of the way by the biggest telecom monopolies. We must protect the rights of local communities to determine how best to serve their own citizens.
  • Public Broadcasting & Noncommercial Media: Enhanced Funding, Diversity and Accessibility. True public broadcasting in the United States - long under attack by commercial media giants and increasingly strapped for cash - is now in serious jeopardy. In 2005, Free Press will launch a national campaign to organize a broad coalition to advance proactive policies that will generate secure, long-term funding for traditional, independent and other non-commercial media - including community radio, television, expanded public access programming, student media, and local independent newspapers and Web sites.
  • Cable TV: Breaking Monopoly Control of Content. Today, 70 percent of television viewers are cable subscribers. The cable franchise renewal process - an agreement between a community and its cable provider - offers a terrific opportunity to increase access to community media and broadband Internet. Yet all too often, negotiations are done quietly with little public participation.
This much is clear: Media reform will not happen without all of us getting active and bringing renewed passion and commitment to building a system that serves our families, our communities and our democracy - not just the largest media corporations. Robert W. McChesney is the founder and president of Free Press (www.freepress.net) and the author of The Problem of the Media. |W|P|110497078982959555|W|P|Take back the Media in 2005|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/03/2005 08:13:00 AM|W|P|Doc|W|P|Apparently, Prozac side effects were known too.
January 3, 2005 LONDON - A British medical journal said it had given U.S. regulators confidential drug company documents suggesting a link between the popular anti-depressant Prozac and a heightened risk of suicide attempts and violence. The British Medical Journal reported in its Jan. 1 issue that documents it received from an anonymous source indicated that Prozac's manufacturer, Eli Lilly & Co., was aware in the 1980s that the drug could have potentially troubling side effects.
And on this news, it's precious stocks lost value:
Eli Lilly (nyse: LLY - news - people ) shares fell Dec. 31 after reports surfaced that the drugmaker knew of a link between its antidepressant Prozac and a higher risk of suicide and violence. The British Medical Journal reported that documents it received anonymously showed that Eli Lilly knew in the 1980s of the drug's hazardous side effects. The documents in question were part of a 1994 lawsuit filed against Eli Lilly by victims of a workplace shooting in Louisville, Ky. The gunmen had been prescribed Prozac shortly before the shooting. The BMJ said it has turned over the documents to the FDA for review.
But mary-ju-wanna is dangerous...ya hear?|W|P|110475814692243739|W|P|Prozac busted as well.|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/02/2005 09:02:00 PM|W|P|Doc|W|P|[zombienote: Remember, marijuana is dangerous.....] Scientist raises estimate of Vioxx ill-effects
The scientist at the centre of a dispute over the safety of the anti-inflammatory Vioxx has vowed to publish research that suggests up to 139,000 Americans have died or have been seriously injured as a result of taking the drug. The likely appearance in the Lancet of a revised version of a paper by Dr David Graham, an employee of the Food and Drugs Administration, will fuel debate over the effectiveness of the US drug regulatory system and may spur additional litigation against Merck, the manufacturer of Vioxx.
Meanwhile people in Michigan can be prevented from filing for damages
Michigan is the only state in the country with a law that shields drug makers from liability if the drug was approved by the Food and Drug Administration, according to the Michigan Trial Lawyers Association. Plaintiffs can win damages only if they prove a company withheld or misrepresented information about a drug that would cause the FDA to not give or withdraw its approval. ************* A drug-safety director says the agency suppressed research showing the dangers of Vioxx. There also are concerns that FDA officials are too close with industry lobbyists.
|W|P|110471853905707235|W|P|More Vioxx- NSAID Fallout|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/02/2005 05:35:00 PM|W|P|Doc|W|P|Stop Them Before They Kill Again GNN | Wed, 29 Dec 2004 09:16:47 -0800 A Call For Affirmative Measures To Prevent The Commission Of War Crimes By The Bush Administration
Summary The U.S. government has committed war crimes, crimes against humanity, and violations of the Geneva conventions—and is planning more. All Americans have an obligation under U.S. and international law to bring these crimes to a halt. Until these crimes are halted, we intend to support and engage in acts to resist these crimes. We assert that such acts are a moral and legal responsibility, even if U.S. officials may deem our action a crime. The Crimes The U.S. attack on Iraq was a violation of the UN Charter. Article 1, Section 4 states, “All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan stated shortly before the attack that the Charter is “very clear on the circumstances under which force can be used. If the U.S. and others were to go outside the Council and take military action, it would not be in conformity with the charter.”20 After the U.S. attack he stated that the invasion of Iraq “was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal.”21 The U.S. occupation of Iraq constitutes an illegal continuation of the illegal U.S. attack on Iraq in violation of the UN Charter. U.S. operations in Iraq constitute a continuation of this illegal occupation, even if conducted under the cover of a puppet regime. So does the plan to create permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq. Current U.S. policy is to continue this illegal occupation. The United States and its supporters in Iraq have killed tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. The Bush administration currently plans to continue the policies that have led to this slaughter of the innocent. Authorized agents of the U.S. government have tortured prisoners at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and elsewhere around the globe. Those responsible for this torture have gone largely unpunished and the policies and doctrines that justified it remain in place. The U.S. government is defying the Geneva conventions as a matter of policy. It holds captives in secrecy without disclosing their existence to the International Red Cross; spirits them across borders; denies them due process of law; and engages is cruel, brutal, and humiliating treatment of prisoners. In support of their illegal international polices, U.S. officials are engaged in violations of human rights against both citizens and non-citizens abroad and at home. They seize and lock up those they deem a threat without due process of law, hold them incommunicado, and treat them with abuse in violation both of international norms and of the U.S. Constitution. The Bush administration justifies these crimes under the doctrine that the U.S. government may do whatever it chooses in pursuit of its own national interests, regardless of its responsibilities under international law. But that justification cannot legitimate a pattern of lawlessness that violates both U.S. and international law. Under Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, the United Nations Charter, the Geneva Conventions, and other treaties made under the authority of the United States are the supreme law of the land. The repeated violation of them, and the perpetuation of policies that authorize their continuing violation in the future, establish that U.S. government officials are not acting as the legal embodiment of the U.S. government but rather as illegal, unconstitutional usurpers. Our Responsibilities The War Crimes Tribunals at Nuremberg and Tokyo following World War II established binding principles regarding war crimes and crimes against humanity. These include personal responsibility for bringing such crimes to a halt. The Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal declared, “Anyone with knowledge of illegal activity and an opportunity to do something is a potential criminal under international law unless the person takes affirmative measures to prevent the commission of the crimes.” The undersigned commit ourselves to undertake such affirmative measures to prevent the commission of further crimes by the U.S. government in Iraq and in other countries it is currently threatening to attack. Specifically, we agree to support and encourage public, nonviolent acts of conscience intended to impede the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity by the U.S. occupation forces in Iraq by encouraging and supporting: military personnel and government officials who refuse to participate in acts they consider illegal and immoral, including the Iraqi occupation itself. military personnel and government officials who “blow the whistle” on illegal actions by documenting and publicizing them regardless of official secrecy policies. young people who refuse to register for Selective Service on grounds of conscience. government officials who refuse to implement illegitimate orders to suppress the human rights of those attempting to halt the occupation of Iraq. those who take public nonviolent action intended to impede the commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and violations of human rights. We pledge to organize openly in our communities and in our workplace, educational, religious, and other institutions to support and promote such actions. We recognize that some may deem our action unlawful. We maintain on the contrary that it represents our responsibility under both U.S. and international law. We appeal to all Americans to ask themselves what affirmative measures it is their duty to take to halt the criminal acts of their government.
[zombienote: This is a major element in the current manifestation of the "Culture War", part and parcel, they used to say. About 49% of Ameircans seem to not be able to see that the Bush Administration is systematically alienating the whole rest of the world and placing them at extreme risk of retaliation by the so-called "terrorists" of whom we are supposed to live endlessly in fear and with total deference to our government. Note we have not had a terror alert since the election, despite the passing of Thanksgiving, Xmas and New Years. This is all political theater designed to keep the 49% (or however many can be reached) believing spin - it is classic propaganda. Either you believe ther were WMD's in IRaq or you KNOW that there were not. How is it some see this and some don't? To me the answer is party "TV". Americans believe that the TV shows them reality and cannot possibly lie, yet the whole goal of TV - propaganda aside - is to sell products. To create a demand and to attempt to effect desired behaviors - purchasing. At least 49% of Americans believe TV and are simply hooked into it and cannot even conceive that Tom Brokaw and George Bush would lie to them straight faced. They can't imagine that the stories they only half get are somehow lacking in useful and important contextual detail. Nope. If it's on the TV, it's gospel. Only stoned liberals like myslef ride arounf like Quixote trying to say that the TV is the most powerful propaganda tool ever, and that they are utter victims of their beloieved Bush Administration. But to a very similar number of Americans, whose voices and perspectives are totally blacked-out of TV - just like the talk about cannabis - the Bush War Crimes are very clear, unquestionable, and out of control. If this perspective were available in amounts equal to the airtime Bush Propaganda recieves, we'd have a much different ballgame. And, the same people who spew the propaganda about Iraq and Iran, about the fealty of Social Security, and about Muslims are the same ones who use your tax dollars to lie through their teeth to you about marijuana. Well...about everything actually. That is why this is posted here. See also this discussion of a group Wayne Madsen calls The Fellowship.. All of these people should be arrested for treason and war crimes.]|W|P|110470718331051511|W|P|W: War Crimes|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com1/02/2005 02:35:00 PM|W|P|Doc|W|P|Health Canada Okays Sativex COUNTERPUNCH | Fred Gardner | December 29, 2004 GW Pharmaceuticals, the British firm seeking to market a cannabis-plant extract called Sativex, has gotten a "qualifying notice" for approval from Health Canada. GW scientists are confident that the additional data they now must provide the regulatory authorities will be satisfactory. Sativex could be approved as a treatment for neuropathic pain in multiple sclerosis (and other conditions, as doctors see fit) as early as May 2005. GW grows plants in large glass houses under rigidly controlled conditions, then blends the buds and flowers into extracts with uniform contents formulated for spraying in the mouth. Bottles contain approximately 55 doses. For most conditions for which Sativex has been tested in clinical trials, patients used 8 to 10 doses a day to achieve beneficial effect. Sativex contains almost equal amounts of THC and cannabidiol (CBD, a component almost entirely lacking in cannabis plants bred for psychoactive effect). A standard dose (one spray) contains 2.7 milligrams THC and 2.5 mg CBD. GW also makes an extract in which CBD is predominant ("Nabidolex") and a high-THC extract ("Tetranabinex"). All contain a full range of terpenoids and some flavonoids that may modulate the effects of the cannabinoids within the body. Final approval will make Sativex the first cannabis-based medicine available by prescription in North America since Prohibition was imposed in 1937. Fred Gardner can be reached at journal@ccrmg.org |W|P|110469481582817523|W|P|Meanwhile....in other countries.....|W|P|xxdr_zombiexx@yahoo.com