Sept 28 commentary

"For links to the articles I read on the air, guest websites, archived shows, my commentaries, a listener's discussion forum, and the text of mark stannearts lastest commentary, visit: www.rabblerousing.org."

ALTERNATIVE MEDIA CENSORSHIP: SPONSORED BY CIA's FORD FOUNDATION? by bob feldman "The mass-circulation weekly TEMPO accused Ford of having once played, at the urging of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, a covert role in Indonesian political affairs by consciously supporting the work of individuals who were deemed to be sympathetic to the anti-communist aims of American foreign policy." --Chronicle of Philanthropy, 12/13/01 "The Ford Foundation's history of collaboration and interlock with the CIA in pursuit of U.S. world hegemony is now a well-documented fact...The Ford Foundation has in some ways refined their style of collaboration with Washington's attempt to produce world cultural domination, but retained the substance of that policy...The ties between the top officials of the Ford Foundation and the U.S. government are explicit and continuing." --James Petras in "The Ford Foundation and the CIA: A documented case of philanthropic collaboration with the Secret Police" on 12/15/2001 The multi-billion dollar Ford Foundation's historic relationship to the Central Intelligence Agency [CIA] is rarely mentioned on Pacifica's DEMOCRACY NOW / Deep Dish TV show, on FAIR's COUNTERSPIN show, on the WORKING ASSETS RADIO show, on The Nation Institute's RADIO NATION show, on David Barsamian's ALTERNATIVE RADIO show or in the pages of PROGRESSIVE, MOTHER JONES and Z magazine. One reason may be because the Ford Foundation and other Establishment foundations subsidize the Establishment Left's alternative media gatekeepers / censors. The article then has a list of links to more detailed articles written by this same bob Feldman. I’ll read you a partial list and if you want to read them, this article and all links will be on my web site. Part 1: PACIFICA / DEMOCRACY NOW / DEEP DISH TV Part 2: FAIR / COUNTERSPIN / INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC ACCURACY / WORKING ASSETS RADIO Part 3: THE NATION INSTITUTE / RADIO NATION / THE NATION MAGAZINE Part 4: ALTERNATIVE RADIO / Z MAGAZINE / SOUTH END PRESS Part 5: MOTHER JONES / FOUNDATION FOR NATIONAL PROGRESS Part 7: FORD FOUNDATION, THE CIA & U.S. ESTABLISHMENT CONSPIRACY COUNTERPUNCH's FERI/Roosevelt Dynasty Connection? ‹ part 1 More Nation Magazine ‹ Big Oil Links Project Censored's MacArthur Foundation Link THE NATION's NED Connection The Ford Foundation's Skull and Bones Link original URL for this article: http://www.questionsquestions.net/gatekeepers.html

Next item: last weekend I went out into the Nevada desert with my friend shamanic astrologer Daniel giamario for an equinox nite sky workshop. I learned a lot about shamanic astrology, but Daniel is a keen student of American politics as well as astrology, and he supplied a perspective I found fascinating.. It seems that back in 1927 there was a great flood of the mississippi river and when it hit new orleans, there were plans to dynamite the levees in a poor area to save the more wealthy areas. [and I do hope I pronounced levee correctly this time] . Times were different back then, and there was no attempt to disguise priorities. Wealth and class ruled, and govt was nakedly there to serve wealth. Here is the part that fascinated me. During this same flood, public opinion polls revealed that only 1 % of the american people believed that the fed govt had any responsibility whatsoever to give any help to flood victims. It was only some years later, under the leadership of franklin deleno Roosevelt, that the concept of govt helping poor or suffering people came into vogue. By fdr’s time 30% or 1/3 of American citizens believed it was the job of the govt to aid victims of natural disasters. Seemingly the remaining 2/3 rds still believed that it was the victims karma, and no one else need care. We as a nation seem to be again asking ourselves that basic question: are food, shelter, and medical attention basic human rights? Does govt have any responsibilities towards its citizens or should citizens in need be at the mercy of their family, friends, and faith based charities? So as we who lived thru the peace and love times of the 60’s look at America today, the values and caring of the 60’s are certainly not shared by our rulers, but it used to be far worse. As recently as 1927, no one gave a damn what happened to victims of flood or other natural disasters. It wasn’t the govts job.

Next item: there is an interesting story out of iraq. The official story is that 2 british soldiers, not in uniform, are detained by Iraqi govt forces. Not insurgents, but Iraqi police. When captured the brits were driving a vehicle loaded with weapons and explosives. Does the british military use diplomatic means to free the 2 soldiers. No way, jose. The british military immediately launches a full scale attack against the police station, demolishing one entire wall of the police station and dramatically rescues the 2 ‘soliders" wow. Dramatic stuff eh? John wayne would be proud of this action. Its Hollywood movie making stuff, just like the rescue of Jessica lynch. But lets look a little deeper into this made for Hollywood melodrama. Keep firmly in mind that the captured soldiers were not being held by iraqi insurgants but by Iraqi govt police. And that govt was installed by the us and the british. So the police are supposed to be on our side, n’cst pas? So, what is the rest of this story?. Rumor has it that these soldiers were not exactly ordinary soldiers. Firstly, they were not only not in british military uniform, they were dressed as arabs. This is an unconfirmed rumor at this point, but if true, they are not officially classified as soldiers but as spies. More importantly, what were 2 british soldiers, wearing any sort of clothing, doing driving around with a car filled with explosives and weapons? What exactly was their mission and is keeping this mission secret the real reason they were quote rescued from their Iraqi govt captors so quickly and dramatically? Was their immediate rescue to keep then from spilling very important beans? Keep firmly in mind that if and when iraq becomes peaceful, the main excuse for keeping all us and british troops in iraq, promptly vanishes. So It clearly is in the british interest for the insurgency to continue, even if the brits and americans lose a few soldiers in the process. War is war after all, and if the troops sacrificed are not your blood kin, well sacrifices must be made to maintain the empire. Stiff upper lip and all that. So one must ask, and some talk show hosts are asking: were these 2 brits caught by Iraqi police while on their way to delivering explosives to the insurgency? Or worse still, was their thwarted mission the setting out of explosive devices to blow up their own military convoys? In short, were these captured brits actually special forces pretending to be the insurgency, acting like the insurgents? Now that’s strong stuff to be conjecturing, but again, it is clearly in the interests of british policy in iraq to encourage the insurgency. Create a problem, then create a solution to that problem that just coincidentally furthers your long range objectives.

Next item: on past shows I’ve alluded to the American govt’s nazi like movement towards becoming a fascist police state, and that bush’s plans to increase the power of the military to control civilians was the next step towards that police state. Its all in our own best interests of course. You do understand that don’t you? I asked a loyal listener and friend to briefly research these plans for us, and here is what she came up with:

from breitbart.com/news "Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is reviewing a wide range of possible changes in the way the military could be used in domestic emergencies, spokesman Lawrence Di Rita said Friday. He said these included possible changes in the relationship between federal and state military authorities."

..."among the issues he is examining is the viability of the Posse Comitatus Act. Di Rita called it one of the 'very archaic laws' from a different era in U.S. history that limits the Pentagon's flexibility in responding to 21st Century domestic crises. Another such law Di Rita said, is the Civil War-era Insurrection Act, which Bush could have invoked to waive the law enforcement restrictions of the Posse Comitatus Act. That would have enabled him to use either National Guard soldiers or active-duty-troops - or both - to quell the looting and other lawlessness that broke out in New Orleans.

The Insurrection Act lets the president call troops into federal action inside the United States whenever 'unlawful obstructions, combinations or assemblages - or rebellion against the authority of the United States - make it impractical to enforce the laws in any state'."

So Chamba, even just this article says it all. Bush - or any dictator - can decide there is rebellion in the land that needs quelling and in pop the troops - voila - a Police State. Even before Katrina they were working on this>

Then she cites washingtonpost.com "Military Expands Homeland Efforts"

In June - "A new Pentagon strategy for securing the U.S. homeland calls for expanded U.S. Military activity - not only in the air and sea - where the armed forces have historically guarded approaches to the country - but also on ground..." this comes from a 40-page document that was prepared in June. The document is called "Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support" - signed June 24, 2005.

This represents a change since September 11, 2001. And in 2002, Northern Command was established specifically to oversee military operations in the United States.

So Chamba, there is a growing militarization of US - and that means our opposition to the tyranny that is growing right here. Then she cites awa.org Patric Martin September 12, 2005 "Hurricane Katrina and the meaning of September 11" (from World Socialist Web Site). He reports the Los Angeles Times reported that "the Bush administration was studying whether to expand the president's powers to deploy the US Military in natural disasters."

And Chamba - how many 'natural' disasters are there in this country?

He emphasizes that, as demonstrated through FEMA's actions, the real agenda is to impose military rule - only for the alleged "continuity of government".

One last article, also on World Socialist Web Site. By Peter Daniels and it was written in July of 2002! Even then "the Bush administration has called on lawyers in the Justice and Defense Department to review the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878". General Ralph Eberhart (Chamba he was the one in charge of the Air Force on 9-11) says that "Posse Comitatus will constantly be under review"..."There are some situations where there's no other alternatives, and federal forces have to be used to secure the safety and security of our people". Right!

By the way, all these deliberations were worked out in total secrecy. Rumsfeld said at this time "No, we're not looking for any long-term or short-term change with respect to Posse Comitatus". And then we have Katrina! READ GRIFFEN ON FEMA