The real truth about the 'legacy' of Ronald Reagan,
Clinton, George Bush and Tony Blair
A man, called El Colacho, jumps over babies during the El Salto Del Colacho festival in Castrillo de Murcia, near Burgos, Spain, Sunday June 13, 2004.

The Colacho, who represents the devil, is supposed to rid the babies of original sin, according to the age-old tradition.

Photo: AP/ Kyodo
<"So, as far as President Reagan is concerned, that's eulogy for him.   All I can say is, you know, may god have mercy on him."
Charlie Liteky former US Army chaplain, who won the congressional medal of honor for saving some 20 soldiers in Vietnam.
In 1986, he returned the congressional medal of honor, laid that medal at the Vietnam War memorial in protest of the then President of the U.S., Ronald Reagon.
"I think it's been said very eloquently by the priest who preceded me [in the interview, Fr. Miguel D'Escoto] — all of the things that he is responsible for.

A man, called El Colacho, jumps over babies during the El Salto Del Colacho festival in Castrillo de Murcia, near Burgos, Spain, Sunday June 13, 2004.  The Colacho, who represents the devil, is supposed to rid the babies of original sin, according to the age-old tradition.
Interview with Fr. Miguel D'Escoto can be found in archive
— The real Ronald Reagan — Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador, South Africa
   See bottom of page.
Photo: AP/Israel Lopez Murillo
...following the 'I' principle:
'I' will do this.
   This is good for 'you.'
Creed of Obama, Brown, George Bush, Tony Blair, and a host of other politicians
— Belief considered to be absolutely true —

It's a different world say the least
The sun comes up from in the west and sets down in the east
The stars are out there shining but where we can not say
It's a different world now like night and day
     It's a Different World.     Fate's Right Hand     Rodney Crowell    
The real 'legacy' of Ronald Reagan
Charlie Liteky, former US Army chaplain:
When President Reagan said, "I am a contra, too," I said that he insulted every American patriot when he referred to these killers of children, old men and women as freedom fighters, comparable to the founding fathers of our country.
To me that's an obscenity.
So, I just said, you know, in the name of freedom and national security and national interests in anti-communism, you have tried to justify crimes against humanity of the most heinous sort.
You have made a global bully of the United States.
You would not dare to do that to countries capable of defending themselves, what you have done to tiny nations like El Salvador and Nicaragua and Honduras.
So, I, you know, wrote just a one-page letter, laid it at the apex of the Vietnam wall where the names of the victims of that war and the lives of that war are etched in black marble.
I felt that was an appropriate place to leave it, because the soldiers of Vietnam, those who died, those who were wounded were victims of lies of that era just as these poor kids now in Iraq are victims of the lies of this administration.
It was a poignant moment for me, because I was very proud of the fact to have received that particular award.
But I just felt that was all I could take at that particular time.
And, I finally ended the letter to President Reagan with this short paragraph.
I said, "I pray for your conversion, Mr. President.
Some morning I hope that you wake up and hear the cry of the poor riding on a southwest wind from Guatemala, Nicaragua and El Salvador.
They're crying, stop killing us."
It's still going on.   That's the really sad thing.
        Congressional Medal of Honor Winner:        
        Reagan Was "An Accomplice to the Death of Literally Thousands and Thousands of People"        
        To watch video click here        
Charlie Liteky, former US Army chaplain:
It's not for me to judge, but it is for me, and I think it is for every American to be aware of what is being done in our name around the world.
It was not just then.
It's been going on ever since then, and this mess in Iraq is, to me, far worse than Vietnam for a lot of reasons.
I am in deep sympathy with all of those young men that are over there now doing what they think is their patriotic duty.
I think it is more of a patriotic duty of citizens of this country to stand up and say that this is wrong, that this is immoral.
Editor & Publisher
June 8, 2004
The death of Ronald Reagan has become yet another reminder that news organizations often turn sentimental at the death of a former leader, no matter what legacy he or she leaves behind.
Reagan's death, especially following the tragedy and torture of Alzheimer's disease, likely struck editors and reporters with a responsibility to go easy on the former president.
Few, after all, protested the sacking of the CBS television movie about Reagan a few months back.
And the man did win two presidential elections, the second by a landslide, and led a rebirth of a Republican party that had been rocked by Watergate and other scandals.
But let's not forget that the often-mocked Bill Clinton accomplished much the same for his party, and despite the Lewinsky disgrace, left office with approval ratings higher than Reagan's (and no federal budget deficit, to boot).
So the overwhelming praise for a president who plunged the nation into its worst deficit ever, ignored and cut public money for the poor, while also ignoring the AIDS crisis, is a bit tough to take.
During my years at Brooklyn College, between 1984 and 1988, countless classmates had to drop out or find other ways to pay for school because of Reagan's policies, which included slashing federal grants for poor students and cutting survivor benefits for families of the disabled....
        Reagan and Race:        
        "He Maintained A System Of Rich And Poor, A System Of Black And White"        
        To watch video click here        
        Reagan, Class and Organized Labor:        
        "One Of The Most Damaging Presidents In American History"        
        To watch video click here        
        Ghost Wars:        
        How Reagan Armed the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan        
        To watch video click here        
        Ignoring AIDS:        
        The Reagan Years        
        To watch video click here        
        Remembering the Dead:         
        Reagan Armed Iraq and Iran in 1980s War That Killed Over 1 Million        
        To watch video click here        
        Ronald Reagan 1911-2004:         
        Iran-Contra, the Nuclear Race and Covert Wars from Central America to Africa        
        To watch video click here        
        Imperial America:         
        Gore Vidal Reflects on the United States of Amnesia        
        To watch video click here        
Diet soda approved by Reagon is poison
Excerpt from article — Aspartame (NutraSweet): Something Evil This Way Comes, by Betty Martini of Mission Possible World Health International
“Listen to Attorney James Turner who, with famed Dr. John Olney, tried to prevent aspartame’s approval.
Turner tells what it took to get a deadly poison approved.
The FDA attempted to have Searle indicted for fraud and making false statements.
Both U.S. prosecutors hired on with the defense team and the statute of limitations expired.
For 16 years, the FDA refused to allow it on the market.
When Reagan was elected, Don Rumsfeld, CEO of Searle, said he’d call in his markers to get aspartame approved.
This is documented by a UPI investigation and congressional record.
The day after Reagan took office Arthur Hayes was appointed as FDA Commissioner to get it approved.
Reagan knew it might take 30 days to get Hayes installed, so he wrote an Executive Order making the outgoing FDA Commissioner powerless to act against aspartame before he departed.
Then the FDA set up a Public Board of Inquiry (PBOI) that revoked Reagan’s petition for approval because it had not been proved safe and causes brain tumors.
Hayes overruled the PBOI and let slip the hounds of disease, disability and death on an innocent, unwarned population.
Soon he became a consultant for the NutraSweet Company’s public relations outfit on a 10-year contract at $1,000/day.
Hayes then refused to talk to the press.”
In 1981, the Reagan FDA approved aspartame in dry food and in 1983, aspartame was approved for use in soda pop.
In 1985 Rumsfeld’s Searle was acquired by Monsanto, making Rumsfeld rich and Searle Pharmaceuticals and The NutraSweet Company separate subsidiaries!
And the rest, as they say, is history.
Jay Shaft — Editor, Coalition For Free Thought In Media.
January 2004
President Bush has claimed “human compassion cannot be summarized in dollars and cents.”
Neither, can the untold suffering of the millions of children whose lives will be disrupted by loss of housing and health care this year.
You can’t summarize the sorrow of their parents, who struggle against the odds to provide stability and hope.
In releasing his FY2004 budget, $187 Billion destined for Iraq, $120 Billion already spent for Iraq, over $70 billion spent or destined to be spent in Afghanistan.
Don’t think about the fact that billions of dollars needed in the US to solve our problems are being funneled away to enrich huge corporations working overseas.
Forget the fact that US attacks caused the majority of the damage that must be repaired.
Forget all about how much that money could actually benefit the American people if it were spent here to fix our problems.
Homelessness increased 50% in three years, poverty increased again in 2003, and more children are going hungry.
Since 2001 many social service agencies and government agencies have reported a 25-30% increase in the amount of families reporting their income as being within borderline poverty levels.
There are at least 26.5 million children living in low-income families.   Children represent a disproportionate share of the poor in the United States; they are 25.6% of the total population, but 36.9% of the poor population.
The poverty rate went up to 12.1% in 2002, with 1.7 million new cases equaling 34.6 million people living in poverty.   In 2002 there were 7.2 million families living in poverty.   There were 14.1 million people living in severe poverty.   There were an additional 12.5 million people living just above the borderline of poverty in 2002, the same amount as in 2001.
There are no exact figures for the poverty increase in 2003, but initial reports have pointed to a 13-13.5% rate of poverty for 2003.   The government figures will not be out until September 2004, but many private agencies have complied shocking figures when it comes to new cases of poverty.
Homelessness and hunger increase again in 2003 in the US.
Since the year 2000, the homeless population in America has increased by approximately 50%.   In 2003 the homeless population increased by approximately 15% on a national average.   Every year since 1999 the homeless population has increased by 10-15%.   While it is hard to track the total number of homeless, each year at least 5.5 million people experience homelessness at some point.
"These are not simply statistics," said Nashville Mayor Bill Purcell, who co-chairs the Conference's Task Force on Hunger and Homelessness.   "These are real people who are hungry and homeless in our cities."
Currently the US is spending over $7 billion a month in Iraq and $2 billion a month in Afghanistan.
While the Bush administration wastes resources and expends billions overseas, our own citizens continue to sink further into debt and poverty.   Bush presented a very positive analysis of the situation in the US.
The actual situation you see from examining all the facts is much dimmer and darker.   In no way does it resemble any facts Bush expects you to believe about the current state of the union.
If the US spent just three months occupation costs, we could wipe out hunger and homelessness completely for ten years.   However, it does not seem like feeding and sheltering our own citizens has a very high priority.
If the US took just 25% of their annual military budget, it could go a long way to wiping out hunger and homelessness around the world.   Just 10% of our military budget spent yearly on America's children could give every high school graduate a college education for four years....
Collective Bellaciao, France
The world spent nearly $1 trillion US on weapons in 2003, with the U.S. accounting for almost half of the total, according to a Swedish research institute.
Military spending increased by a "remarkable" 11 per cent year-on-year to $956 billion said the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute in its Yearbook 2004, released Wednesday.
It added to a cumulative increase of 18 per cent over military spending in 2001, the year of the September 11 attacks on the U.S.
FROM JUNE 5, 2004: Defence, security spending fuel Bush's trillion-dollar budget.   The institute said the spending — equal to 2.7 per cent of the world's gross domestic product — was close to the Cold War peak of 1987.
The U.S. accounted for 47 per cent of the total as it paid for military missions around the globe, with the biggest "war on terrorism"-related actions in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Japan followed with five per cent, and Britain, France and China with four per cent each.
The Swedish institute's figures were in line with estimates from London-based Jane's Information Group, which publishes the industry magazine Jane's Defence Weekly, according to the Associated Press.

Slide cursor side of photos for descriptions.
< Above:  Children look in the garbage, to try to find some material to recycle in the municipality garbage dump named 'La Chureca', Friday, June 11, 2004.
According to the latest statistics of the Ministry of Employement and UNICEF (The United Nations Childrens's Fund) approximately 343 thousand children between 5 at 8 years old are working in Nicaragua.
Yahoo News - UNICEF - June 11, 2004
< Editor & Publisher  June 8, 2004:
So the overwhelming praise for a president who plunged the nation into its worst deficit ever, ignored and cut public money for the poor... is a bit tough to take...
Not to mention the Iran-contra scandal, failed 'supply-side economics,' the ludicrous invasion of Grenada, 241 dead Marines in Lebanon, and a costly military buildup that may have contributed to the breakup of the Soviet Union (there were plenty of other reasons too) but also kept us closer to nuclear war than at any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis, besides leaving us billions of dollars in debt.
And should we even mention the many senior Reagan officials, including ex-White House aide Michael Deaver and national security adviser Robert McFarlane, convicted of various offenses?
What about Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, indicted but later pardoned by the first President Bush?
Paying respect is one thing, and well deserved, but the way the press is gushing over Reagan is too much to take, sparking renewed talk of putting him on the $10 bill or Mount Rushmore.
The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz noted today that when the media, back in the 1980s, dubbed Reagan the "Teflon" president " it was not meant as a compliment."
Apparently, he is still the Teflon president, even in death.
Some newspapers, at least, have readily acknowledged some of his many shortcomings in editorials, even if it's only a fraction of their overall rosy review.
The Philadelphia Inquirer stated, "Yes, he butchered facts, invented anecdotes, indulged White House chaos, and seemed dreamily unaware of the illegal deeds done during Iran-contra.   He was guilty of all that, as well as union-busting, callousness to the poor, a failure to grasp America's multicultural destiny."
The Boston Globe, meanwhile, declared the "Reagan legacy also includes the improbable Star Wars' missile defense proposal and the shameful Iran-Contra scandal.   And the humming economy was energized in large part by deep tax cuts and heavy military spending that together produced crippling budget deficits.   Reagan did little to advance such goals as education or civil rights."
The New York Times recalled, "Mr. Reagan's decision to send marines to Lebanon was disastrous, however, and his invasion of Grenada pure melodrama.   His most reckless episode involved the scheme to supply weapons to Iran as ransom for Americans who were being held hostage in Lebanon, and to use the proceeds to illegally finance contra insurgents in Nicaragua."
Had you read the Washington Post, you would have found, "A lot of people were hurt by these policies, a fact that in our view did not weigh heavily enough on this president.   His intermittent denigration of government, and of people who depended on government services, fed into and bolstered hurtful and unfair stereotypes."
For me, however, the Los Angeles Times, which had the advantage of following Reagan from his first days as California governor, seemed to offer the best assessment, declaring that his administration had far more problems than most other papers admitted.
"As president, Reagan was genial, ever-smiling — ignoring unpleasant facts, idealizing hopeful fantasies," the paper's editorial said.
"The mark of Reagan's presidency was paradox.   Having campaigned as an implacable foe of government deficit spending, he left office with a federal debt that was nearly triple its level when he was inaugurated.   He succumbed, as Bush has, to the fallacious 'supply side' economic notion that government revenues rise if taxes are cut."
The L.A. Times continued, "Hero though Reagan was to so many Americans, his legacy is marred.   Economically, the Reagan years were epitomized by a freewheeling entrepreneurialism and free spending.   But the affluent got more affluent and the poor got poorer.   The number of families living below the poverty line increased by one-third.   The Reagan administration's zeal for deregulation of industry helped create the savings and loan debacle, which left taxpayers holding the bag for billions of dollars in losses."
<Editor & Publisher  June 8, 2004:
Still, the fact that enough other papers all but glossed over his troubles concerns me.
Newspapers, especially on the editorial page, are looked upon to give fair assessments of politicians, especially one as powerful and impactful as Reagan.
And yet we see The Las Vegas Review-Journal rewriting history in defending Reagan's poor economic practices by blaming Congress:  "Critics will no doubt point to ballooning budget deficits in the 1980s, ignoring the fact that Congress refused to implement the lean budgets the Reagan administration proposed and instead went on a spending spree facilitated by the overflowing federal coffers triggered when the president's tax cuts pulled the country out of its economic doldrums and led to unprecedented growth."
Among the worst, however, was The Sacramento (Calif.) Bee, which also apparently likes to ignore the facts, in claiming that Reagan "took full responsibility" for Iran-contra.
When was this?
When he continuously claimed not to remember his involvement?
Maybe that is just what happens when people die.
The death of Richard Nixon 10 years ago — the last U.S. president to pass on — also sparked positive reviews of many elements of his life, but his Watergate legacy and other lowly acts often held center stage.
In Nixon's case, however, it was hard to ignore such an obvious downfall.
In Reagan's case, his genial public persona, and Alzheimer's end, may have made it more difficult to knock down a popular leader, despite the fact that some argue Iran-Contra was a more impeachable offense than Watergate.
Maybe it's to be expected that the press, when covering a leader's death, will take a kinder, gentler approach.
But in the interests of fair, accurate journalism — something that has become a leading issue in the media today — no former leader should be above a frank, complete, and balanced assessment.
Joe Strupp is senior editor for E&P.
BBC  By Roland Buerk correspondent in Dhaka — Monday, 14 June, 2004
Women garment workers in Dhaka
Women make up most of the workforce and stand to lose most
Bangladesh's government is preparing for a major upheaval in the garment industry, which accounts for around 75% of export earnings.
Ministers fear up to 40% of factories could go out of business, leaving 800,000 people unemployed, when the Multi-Fibre Agreement expires at the end of the year.
Since 1974 this global trade deal has regulated the $350bn world market in clothing.
It provides a system of quotas that limits the exports of more efficient countries like China and gives Bangladesh a share of the lucrative trade in the United States, Europe and Japan.
In 1995 the World Trade Organisation agreed to phase it out over 10 years.
Individual countries will still be able to control their imports with duties but the market will be much freer.

If people lose their jobs... they will have to do anything — legal or illegal — to survive

Ayesha Khatun, garment worker
Quality control
Women make up most of the workforce in Bangladesh's garment industry and they stand to lose the most.
Five years ago Ayesha Khatun moved to Dhaka from a rural village to work in a garment factory.   She has never regretted it.
"In the villages there are no jobs," she says.
"In Dhaka there are opportunities.   We can get a job, then we can live, eat; we can do everything in Dhaka.   Dhaka is better."
Ayesha spends her days trimming loose threads on finished clothes.
She has worked her way up to the quality control department at Azim and Son and now earns $50 a month, good money in an industry where some are paid as little as $12.
On the day of our visit, the factory is producing trousers and shorts for a German catalogue firm.
It is a big order but the owner, Iqbal Azim, is still worried about the future.
"Every manufacturer is concerned what is happening in the world," he says, pointing out that in sectors where quotas have been lifted the results for Bangladesh have been dire.
Bangladesh used to produce millions of anoraks, he says, but now "we don't produce a single piece for European countries because China has had a growth of 393% in that category in the last three years".
Cotton problem
Already thousands of people are being laid off.
It is particularly bad for the women, as they have few other job opportunities.
The Azim and Son garment factory in Dhaka

Azim and Son has big orders, but its owners are still worried
"These women emerged as the first generation of women workers in this country," said Mashuda Khatun Shefali, of the Centre for Women's Initiatives, an organisation that is offering classes in job hunting skills for unemployed garment workers.
"Once these women were earning money, they achieved some decision-making capacity in their families and in their personal lives.   So they will lose this.   It will be like back to the pavilion."
Bangladesh needs better infrastructure to compete in a freer market — more roads and more efficient ports, cheaper and more reliable power.
But its main problem is that it does not grow cotton.
The raw materials for the garment industry have to be imported, adding greatly to the cost.
The government is appealing for more time.
"We want this present market share to continue beyond 2004," says the commerce secretary, Sohel Ahmed.
"We have said they should reserve 20% of imports from less developed countries.   That includes Bangladesh.   If they do so we'll not be that scared.   We'll have an assured market share and then we should be reasonably satisfied."
The end of the Multi-Fibre Agreement could well mean cheaper clothes everywhere.
But it will be workers in countries like Bangladesh who will pay the price.
"If people lose their jobs, they'll have few options.   They will remain unemployed," says Ayesha Khatun.
"So they will have to do anything — legal or illegal — to survive.   For me, if I lose my job I will have to do anything because I have to live.   Our jobs must be saved."
BBC: The crisis of Bangladesh's garment trade
<DEMOCRACY NOW   June 7, 2004 interview with Robert Parry
Robert Parry is a veteran journalist.   For years he worked as an investigative reporter for the associated press and "Newsweek" magazine.   His reporting led to the exposure of what's now known as the Iran-Contra scandal.

AMY GOODMAN:  Investigative reporter, Robert Parry, especially for listeners, for viewers who were kids or not even born at the time, explain the Iran-Contra scandal, please.
ROBERT PARRY:   Well, Amy, the Iran-Contra scandal comes out of a couple of different initiatives that the Reagan administration was following.
One was as Dr. Chomsky mentioned, the war in Nicaragua, which had to be done with a great deal of deception surrounding it, because congress had opposed much of that effort.
The international community had opposed much of that effort, so the Reagan administration essentially took it underground with the work people like Elliot Abrams and Oliver North and John Poindexter.
On one side there was an effort to maintain support for the contras, who were engaged in fighting the Sandinistas in Nicaragua.   On the other side, there was a long-running policy, which we have traced back now to 1981 of secretly helping the Iranian government arm itself.
That was in the context of the Iran-Iraq war where the U.S. policy became basically to secretly support both sides — both the Iranian fundamentalist government of Khomeini, and the more secular government of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
You had those two policies running in parallel form, and then when the financing for the contras became more and more problematic, the Reagan administration decided to use some of the profits from selling arms to the Iranians to help support the contras.
So, that became known as the Iran-Contra scandal when it finally broke.
AMY GOODMAN:  And what about the context for this taking place.   I wanted to play for you Ed Meese, the former attorney general, who is the one who broke to the national media the Reagan administration's admission of what had taken place.
He was interviewed yesterday on Wolf Blitzer's "Late Edition" on CNN.   This is former Reagan attorney general, Edwin Meese.
EDWIN MEESE:  The association or relationship with moderate forces in Iran, and part of the agreement to show good faith was to provide some defensive weapons for them.
Separately from that, we had the support of the freedom fighters.
When you had some people in the White House that unauthorized — took some of the profits from the sale of arms to Iran and diverted them to the support of the freedom fighters.   That was the problem.
AMY GOODMAN:  He then went on to say, and I'd like to continue this quote of Edwin Meese, just to bring it right back up, to talk about president Reagan, what he did in terms of his admission.   This is again former attorney general Edwin Meese.
EDWIN MEESE:  I told the President what happened, and he said, Ed, we have to get this out to the American people as quickly as we can.   He called the cabinet first and we had a meeting in which it was revealed to the cabinet.
An hour later, he brought in the congressional leaders and presented the whole picture to them, and then at noon, brought the press together, had a press conference, and he introduced the subject and then he was actually entertaining the Supreme Court for lunch that day, and he had to excuse himself to do that, and he asked me, then, to explain the details to the press corps.
It was something that he knew nothing about while it was going on in terms of the unauthorized activity, and which he was — was quick to make sure that all of the facts came out to the public.
I think that in itself probably saved his Presidency, at least enabled him to continue to be a successful president over the next two years, which were critical in ultimately our relationship with the Soviet Union and ending the cold war.
AMY GOODMAN:  Former Reagan attorney general, Edwin Meese. Your response, Bob Parry.
ROBERT PARRY:  Well, that really is not quite true.
It is true that they — that the — Edwin Meese put out at a press conference in November of 1986, the basic facts that Oliver North and the team was working with made this transfer of money from the Iran shipment weapons to the contras.
However, what happened after that was simply a placing of the original cover-up, which had been to protect Oliver North to making him the fall guy and essentially imposing a second cover-up.
Which was designed to protect Ronald Reagan, Vice President George Bush, the Central Intelligence Agency and other entities of the administration that had been deeply involved in this operation in a very — in various ways.
It took a lot more work both from in the press and most significantly by Lawrence Walsh, the special prosecutor who investigated the Iran-Contra scandal to break through many, many barriers.
Lawrence Walsh, a patrician republican, if you remember, named his book on this topic, "Firewall."
The reason he used the name — the title "Firewall" — is because a firewall had been built to protect Ronald Reagan, George Bush Sr. and other elements of the administration from the spread of the scandal.
We learned later as the thing played out that there was a — the C.I.A. remained directly involved in these operations, really through to the end.
So, it wasn't a case of just Oliver North and a few men of zeal taking action, it was a case of an administration essentially bringing the policy underground and then when it was exposed in part, just replacing it with a new cover-up.
        Robert Parry On What the Corporate Media Forgot:        
        The Reagan Administration's Manipulation of Intelligence and Exaggeration of Threats        
        To watch video click here        
The war was disastrous for both Iran and Iraq, stalling economic development and disrupting oil exports, and costing an estimated million lives.
Iraq was left with serious debts to its former Arab backers, including $14 billion loaned by Kuwait, a debt which contributed to Saddam's 1990 decision to invade Kuwait.
< DEMOCRACY NOW   June 7, 2004 interview with Robert Parry:
AMY GOODMAN:   Robert Parry today the kind of discussion we're hearing over the last few days is more than the discussion of a man who has just died, but it's talking about a rewriting of the historical record.
Can you talk about this discussion, whether it is in Central America or whether it's the discussion of President Reagan winning the cold war?
ROBERT PARRY:   Well, I think in essence Amy, what we have seen here is a continuation in this administration of some of the approaches that became — that really became very prominent in the Reagan administration.
First, there is the manipulating of intelligence, exaggerating dangers that occurred both in strategic level with the Soviet Union in trying to present the Soviet Union as much more aggressive and powerful and effective than it turned out to be.
It was a country on the verge of collapse.
Then also exaggerating the threats from praises like Nicaragua, which were a Third World countries that were very much on the defensive and they were presented as threats to the United States.
This was a systematic falsification of U.S. Intelligence and occurred at the C.I.A.
The analytical division of the C.I.A. was virtually destroyed during that period of the 1980's under Bill Casey and Robert Gates.
This was very important because before then, there was much more independence within the C.I.A.'s analytical division.
Afterwards, there became — the C.I.A. basically became a conveyor belt for propaganda.
We have seen that reoccur now with the Iraq situation when again, intelligence was falsified, and the threats were exaggerated, and then policies were put together to respond to those exaggerated threats.
We have just seen the continuation of some very deceptive approaches to government and many of the people that took part in them has — I think the first caller mentioned and Dr. Chomsky mentioned were the same people involved today.
And they just continued to follow the same policies.
It was also an important element of this, which goes to the idea of perception management, which was a concept that was put in place during the early 80's and the basic idea was that if you managed the perceptions to the American people about various event, particularly foreign events, that you can taken take actions that would not be supported by the American people, if seen in their full context.
What we have seen with that is the idea if the people of the United States perceive Nicaragua to be a threat to their security, they would support the sending of weapons and the supporting the contras.
If they saw the Sandinistas as being what they were, a struggling little government in Nicaragua, they probably wouldn't.
The problem has often been that in the case of these kinds of events, perception management became the role.
That's continued to today with Iraq.
     The stovepipe —     
      How customary procedures for vetting intelligence was bypassed
      click here
Homelessness and the poor
Sleeping Outdoors
Homeless people have a hard time sleeping outdoors.
They lose their jobs and then their home and there’s nowhere to go when the money is gone.   Tired and sick but what can you do.   Friends can’t help — they’re hurting too.   Homeless people have a hard time sleeping outdoors.
Too many shot and killed on the street — some dear souls while they’re asleep.   Sleeping under bridges, doorways and sheds, cardboard boxes for a bed.   Plastic bags to carry their all and no place to go when nature calls.  Homeless people have a hard time sleeping outdoors.
Turned away when the shelters are filled, but given a blanket and minus a meal.   Told good luck, you’re on your own, under the Viaduct hungry and cold with one eye open and one eye closed.   Homeless people have a hard time sleeping outdoors.
Most homeless people really try, work every day for smaller pay.   But let me set the record straight ’cause there’s been too many lies and too much hate.   Called Bums for just being poor, they fought the wars when you and me were scared to go.   They served their country for honor and peace, some lost their lives for you and me....
Homeless people have a hard time sleeping outdoors.
Real change magazine:
   Seattle paper sold by homeless people
Fifty-nine percent of the people requesting emergency food assistance are members of families.
Thirty-nine percent of the adults requesting emergency food assistance are employed.
Requests for shelter by homeless families alone has increased by 15 percent.
People remain homeless an average of five months — longer than before, in most cities.
U.S. Conference of Mayors, December 2003
Everything for war, nothing for the poor
Nearly 1.3 million more people fell below the official poverty level in 2002, swelling the number of poor in the US to nearly 35 million, according to a September report from the Census Bureau.
The results of the American Community Survey (ACS) indicate that the recession hit the hardest among children and their families.
Current policy concerning support for the poor harks back to the bitter days of early capitalism and capital accumulation in Britain, when the rising bourgeoisie demanded the removal of all fetters on capitalist profits, including supports for the poor.
Today, low-income families have been demonized, with the US Congress now demanding that single mothers on welfare be forced to work 40 hours a week, rather than the current requirement of 30, in order to receive any income.
Most states have given up any guarantee of cash aid to childless adults even as rising unemployment is rendering families penniless that until recently had been considered “middle class.”
Record numbers of jobless are being turned down for unemployment benefits.
Low wages and part-time work, along with tightened eligibility requirements, are used by state and federal agencies to deny benefits to the lowest-income workers.
Laid-off workers who do get unemployment benefits are exhausting them without finding a new job at rates not seen since the Great Depression.
The US Congress is expected to grant another $87 billion for the predatory wars in Iraq and Afghanistan demanded by the Bush administration for the next year alone.
Yet, members of the US House and Senate are deadlocked over whether the federal government will increase the miserably inadequate funding for child care for low-income families by $1 billion or $5 billion over the next five years.
According to last year’s Census Bureau Current Population Survey (CPS), poverty began to climb again in 2001, after declining from as high as 15 percent in the 1980s, to 11.3 percent.    By Debra Watson     13 September 2003
Unprecedented inequality
The centerpiece of the Bush administration’s budget is its $670 billion tax cut, largely targeted to the wealthy.
While there are a few provisions in the tax package that spread benefits more widely, such as the increase in the child tax credit to $1,000, the bulk of the tax cut is narrowly focused on the wealthiest Americans.
Of the total of $670 billion in cuts, $364 billion, more than half, arises from the elimination of taxation on most corporate dividends.
Another $236 billion in the Bush plan comes from accelerating the tax cuts that were adopted in 2001 and scheduled to be phased in gradually over the next seven years.
These include cuts in income tax rates and inheritance taxes that, again, largely benefit the rich.
The actual cost of this second round of Bush tax cuts is likely to be far higher than the government’s $670 billion figure.
According to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the tax cuts announced, proposed or envisioned by the Bush administration will cost $2.3 trillion in federal revenues over the next 10 years.    By Patrick Martin 12    February 2003
    Poor paying for war on terror   
Throughout the week, Ronald Reagan has been praised almost non-stop on television, in newspapers and in magazines.   Politicians and pundits from both establishment political parties have been practically falling over each other to heap praise on Reagan.
And as he is glorified for what are termed his accomplishments and legacy, there is one term that was rose to prominence during Reagan's time in power that is seldom mentioned.
That is "homelessness."
...Under Reagan, the number of people living beneath the federal poverty line rose from 24.5 million in 1978 to 32.5 million in 1988.
And the number of homeless people went from something so little it wasn't even written about widely in the late 1970s to...
DemocracyNow   June 11, 2004
        Reagan's budget cuts and overhaul of tax codes led to an explosion of homelessness in the U.S.        
        Reagan and the Homeless Epidemic in America        
        To watch video click here        
Much is disputed about the HUD budget, about the actual outlay as opposed to the authorization, which during fiscal years 1981-83 was cut from $34.2 billion to $16.6 billion.
The dispute centers upon how much money the poor were receiving from this budget.
For instance in 1985 actual outlay was $28,720 million, almost twice the outlay for 1984.
The unusual outlay for 1985 resulted from HUD's massive buying back of loans from public housing authorities.
Mitch Snyder, focal point for the homelessness movement in the 1980's.   

Mitch Snyder, Carol Fennelly, and many others engaged in fasts, hunger strikes, and protests that often would lead to going to jail.

Sometimes these protests would continue for months at a time.

A Reaganville (in reference to the 'Hooverville' shanties set up during the depression) was established in Lafayette Park.     Because the U.S. Department of the Interior did not at the time have a ban on sleeping in the park, homeless people stayed in Reaganville for an entire winter.

Picture: Numerous sources on the Internet     Community for Creative Non-Violence volunteers.


slide cursor underneath or side of photo for:
Mitch Snyder becoming focal point for homeless movement in the 1980's

Mitch Snyder became a focal point for the homelessness movement in the 1980's.
Mitch Snyder, Carol Fennelly, and many others engaged in protests that often would lead to going to jail.
Sometimes these protests would continue for months at a time.
A Reaganville (in reference to the 'Hooverville' shanties set up during the depression) was established in Lafayette Park.   Because the U.S. Department of the Interior did not at the time have a ban on sleeping in the park, homeless people stayed in Reaganville for an entire winter.
On November 4, 1984, after Mitch Snyder's highly-publicized fast and the Community for Creative Non-Violence aggressive campaign, President Reagan ordered the renovation of the Federal City Shelter.
The $14 million renovation of the 1,350-bed Federal City Shelter was completed in 1988.
It the largest and most comprehensive facility of it's kind in America.
In November, 1984, D.C. voters passed the 'Community for Creative Non-Violence'-sponsored Initiative 17, "The D.C. Right to Overnight Shelter Act of 1984."
Passage of the Act marked the first time that voters in America had created a legal right to shelter for the homeless people.
Beginning in November 1986, members of CCNV lived outside on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol during a five-month campaign for passage of The Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act.
Their presence, along with other shelter providers, propelled the April 1987 passage of the Act which authorized $1 billion in aid to unsheltered people.
In the Fall of 1988, just prior to the Presidential election, 12 activists, led by members of CCNV, began a 48-day water-only fast to focus attention on the lack of domestic agenda by either party.
Today, CCNV provides up to 2,500 poor and homeless people a day with food, shelter, clothing, medical care, case management, educational support, and art programs.
Decades later, the needs of the poor and the concerns of CCNV have not changed.
Above are volunteers at DC Central Kitchen preparing donated food.
Photos: Internet,
Welfare queen in Chicago who drove a Cadillac and ripped off $150,000 from the government
As some Americans mourn the death of Ronald Reagan as if they'd lost a friend, let us recall that the two-term president was no friend to America's cities.
Politically, Reagan owed little to urban voters, big-city mayors, black or Hispanic leaders, or labor unions — the major advocates for metropolitan concerns.   His indifference to their problems was legendary.   Early in his presidency, at a White House reception, he went up to the only black member of his cabinet, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Samuel Pierce, and said, "How are you, Mr. Mayor?   I'm glad to meet you.   How are things in your city?"
Reagan not only failed to recognize his own HUD secretary; he also failed to deal with the growing corruption scandal at the agency.   Indeed, during the Reagan years, HUD became a feeding trough for Republican campaign contributors.   Fortunately for Reagan, the media didn't uncover the "HUD Scandal" until he left office.   It resulted in the indictment and conviction of top Reagan administration officials for illegally targeting housing subsidies to politically connected developers.
Reagan also presided over the dramatic deregulation of the nation's savings-and-loan industry, which allowed S&L's to end their reliance on home mortgages and engage in an orgy of commercial real estate speculation.   This ultimately led to a federal taxpayer bailout that cost hundreds of billions of dollars.
Reagan's fans give him credit for restoring the nation's prosperity.   But the income gap between the rich and everyone else in America widened.   Wages for the average worker declined.   The homeownership rate fell.   Despite boom times for the rich, the poverty rate in cities grew.
Reagan is often lauded as "the great communicator," but he used his rhetorical skills to stigmatize poor people, which laid the groundwork for slashing the social safety net — despite the fact that Reagan's own family had been rescued by New Deal anti-poverty programs during the Depression.
During his stump speeches, Reagan often told the story of a so-called welfare queen in Chicago who drove a Cadillac and had ripped off $150,000 from the government using 80 aliases, 30 addresses, a dozen Social Security cards and four fictional dead husbands.   Reagan dutifully promised to roll back welfare.   Journalists searched for this welfare cheat and discovered that she didn't exist.   Nevertheless, he kept using the anecdote.
Overall Reagan cut federal assistance to local governments by 60 percent.   In 1980, federal dollars accounted for 22 percent of big-city budgets, but when he left office, it was down to 6 percent.
Reagan's most dramatic cut was for low-income housing subsidies.   Soon after taking office, he appointed a housing task force dominated by developers, landlords and bankers.   Its 1982 report called for "free and deregulated" markets as an alternative to government assistance.   Reagan followed their advice.   Between 1980 and 1989, HUD's budget authority was cut from $74 billion to $19 billion in constant dollars.   The number of new subsidized housing starts fell from 175,000 to 20,000 a year.
One of Reagan's most enduring legacies is the steep increase in homeless people.   By the late 1980s, the number of homeless had swollen to 600,000 on any given night and 1.2 million over the course of a year.
Defending himself against charges of callousness toward the poor, Reagan gave a classic blaming-the-victim statement.   In 1984 on "Good Morning America" he said that people sleeping on the streets "are homeless, you might say, by choice."
President George W. Bush, who often claims Reagan's mantle, last month proposed cutting one-third of the Section 8 housing vouchers — a lifeline against homelessness for 2 million poor families.   In this and many other ways, the Reagan revolution toward the cities continues.
We've already named a major airport and schools and streets after Ronald Reagan.   But perhaps a more fitting tribute to his legacy would be for each American city to name a park bench — where at least one homeless person sleeps every night — in honor of our 40th president.

Peter Dreier is director of the urban and environmental policy program at Occidental College and co-author of "Place Matters: Metropolitics for the 21st Century."
Newsday   June 10, 2004   Peter Dreier
Being told you can look but never have a lollipop
The north wind cuts cold and sudden across the historic green of New Haven.   It blows through the 'tent city' where the homeless huddle. And it blows round the spires and quadrangles of Yale University, one of America's richest Ivy League colleges.
The contrast is stark: Charlene Johnson, three months pregnant, emerges from her bivouac, worrying about the winter that lies between her and her due date.
And all around are Yale's stone walls, elegant colonial churches and smart people walking past boutiques and coffee shops, carrying their course books.
'You know what's underneath you?' challenges Rod Cleary, who was released from prison in Los Angeles after a conviction for gang fighting, found but lost a job in New Haven, and has now been evicted.   'I'll tell ya: bones.   This green was a cemetery once; you're sitting on a pauper's grave.   And, man, that's what it's going to be again if we ain't careful.'
Charlene fell behind with her rent in June and took a bribe of $200 to move out of her digs, so the landlord could hike up the price.   'It seemed like I had some money for once, and it was summer.'
Her son Nikolas was billeted with a friend and Charlene started looking for a place with her boyfriend, Scott, hopefully before the cold set in.
Without success — Scott was laid off on Wednesday from a construction firm.   'Not enough work,' he says.   'And once you're out, you're a speck of dirt on the ground, and they walk over you.'
New Haven's tent city was established after the authorities closed down a homeless overflow shelter a few weeks ago.   At sundown yesterday it was to be cleared by the police, with Charlene, Scott, Rod and 150 others sent on their way into what promises to be a vicious winter.
New Haven is a metaphor for the America which on Tuesday elects its Senate and House of Representatives.
It is the country's fourth poorest city, where the ghetto laps at the walls of a university worth $11 billion  (£7bn)  in tax-exempt endowments, educating America's next generation of rulers.
A sign at the freeway turn-off advertises New Haven as the birthplace of President George Bush.
It is a city with the same infant mortality rate as Malaysia and a terrifying rate of deaths from Aids — one day care centre alone commemorated the loss of 600 clients at a memorial service on Wednesday.
But it is located in America' richest state, Connecticut, which has, proportionally, more millionaires than any other.
This is the super-rich New York hinterland for those too wealthy even to feel the pinch on Wall Street.
It is called the 'Zebra Coast', laid out in strips of black/white, black/white; poor/rich, poor/rich.
And in New Haven the polarity is underpinned by the history of Yale University's engagement in the slave trade — currently being excavated by some of its own students.
'New Haven,' says the Rev David Lee of Varick Church in the city's northwestern ghetto, 'is a microcosm of America.
It's the vicious cycle between rich and poor and the system of exploitation.
The wealth is in your face all the time, something you can never aspire to.
It's like being a kid in a candy store, being told you can look but you can't never have a lollipop.'
Guardian   November 2, 2002   Ed Vulliamy
While President Bush's windfall tax breaks to the super-rich breezed through Congress — with Democratic help
WASHINGTON — One of the nation's most vexing public-health problems deepened last year as the number of Americans without health insurance jumped by 1.3 million to 46.6 million, the Census Bureau reported Tuesday.
Children accounted for 8.3 million of the uninsured, up from 7.9 million in 2004.   Nearly 1 in 5 impoverished children lacked coverage in 2005, and 22 percent of Hispanic children were uninsured.
The new estimates, part of an annual census survey, mark the fifth straight year that the ranks of the uninsured have increased.   The new data, which show that nearly 16 percent of Americans lack health coverage, caught many by surprise because unemployment rates were fairly stable last year.
"I thought we'd have a little reprieve," said Dr. Catherine Hoffman, senior researcher at the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured.   "But the problem doesn't seem to be abating even though the economy seemed to have settled in 2005."
The spike in uninsured children, from 10.8 percent in 2004 to 11.2 percent in 2005, is the first in nearly a decade, Hoffman said.
Most experts cited the cost-driven decline of employer-based health coverage and private insurance for the overall increase.
The report also had more upbeat news.   After increasing for four straight years, the nation's poverty rate held steady at 12.6 percent in 2005.
And the median household income — the point at which half of households earn more and half less — increased for the first time since 1999, by 1.1 percent to $46,326.
But a closer look tells a more complex story.   For the second straight year, full-time male employees saw their earnings decline in 2005, while their female counterparts took a similar hit for the third straight year.   The median earnings for men fell 1.8 percent to $41,400.   Women saw a 1.3 percent decline to $31,900.
"It's a bizarre situation where the pie is growing pretty dramatically but most people's slices are getting smaller," said Harry Holzer, a visiting fellow at the Urban Institute and former chief economist for the U.S. Department of Labor.
That wasn't true, however, for high-income workers.   The 20 percent of U.S. households with the highest income accounted for more than half the total U.S. household income in 2005.   That disparity has widened over the last 10 years, "indicating a higher level of income inequality than in 1995," said David Johnson, the chief of housing and household economic statistics at the Census Bureau.   "Also, the share of total income received by the highest 20 percent of households has increased, while the shares received by those in the lowest 60 percent have declined."
The conflicting data reflect growing concern that despite 2 million new jobs in 2005 and consistent gains in productivity, real wages for working Americans haven't kept pace with inflation.   Rising costs for food, energy and health care are eroding a greater share of wages for the middle class and working poor.
Tony Pugh      August 30, 2006     
      © 2006 McClatchy Washington Bureau     
      and wire service sources     
Yes, there are some disconcerting numbers
"Today's numbers are more proof that middle-class life is growing less affordable and less secure under this Republican Congress," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.   "It is time to take this country in a new direction, with a Congress that responds to the challenges the American people face every day."
The Bush administration and Republican congressional leaders focused on the report's positive data to deflect Democratic attacks and tout the economy's strength.
"While we still have challenges ahead, our ability to bounce back is a testament to the strong work ethic of the American people, the resiliency of our economy and pro-growth economic policies, including tax relief," said Rob Portman, the director of the Office of Management and Budget at the White House.
Said Carolyn Weyforth, a spokeswoman for Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.: "Yes, there are some disconcerting numbers that Senator Frist feels that Congress must continue to address, but by no means do these numbers mean that the economy is anything but strong and continuing to grow."
The accuracy of census poverty figures has come under scrutiny because they exclude family expenses such as out-of-pocket medical costs and child care.   They also don't adjust for cost-of-living differences in urban and rural areas or consider the effects of federal anti-poverty programs such as food stamps, the Earned Income Tax Credit and housing subsidies.   As a result, "there are a lot fewer poor families over time than the official measures indicate," said Bruce Meyer, a professor of public policy at the University of Chicago and an expert on welfare and unemployment policy.
For a copy of the survey, go to:      
      Tony Pugh      August 30, 2006
      © 2006 McClatchy Washington Bureau
      and wire service sources
The killing continues
The Poor are Such a Nuisance
The poor are such a nuisance.   Just when Congress tries to bring sense to its self-created chaos, the poor get in the way.   The most recent example is the collision between the very poor who are paid the minimum wage and the very rich that happen to die.
The minimum wage is a concept with which the rich have little familiarity and one they never expected to have an adverse effect on their well-being.   The minimum wage provides that those who work for a living should be paid no less than a certain amount.
The amount since 1997 has been $5.15 an hour or $10,712 a year if the worker foregoes any vacation.   (Since 1997 Congress has increased its members' wages by $31,600 which coincidentally is slightly less than 3 times more the annual income of a minimum wage recipient).
Adjusted for inflation the minimum wage is at its lowest level in 50 years.
Not to be a sudden increase
Members of Congress who were concerned about the sad plight of those earning the minimum wage introduced legislation to increase the minimum wage.   It was not to be a sudden increase that would startle the recipients.
It was to take place slowly over the next three years so the poor could grow accustomed to their new found wealth and carefully consider how to dispose of it.
When fully implemented the poor would be paid $7.25 an hour or $15,080 a year.
A sad thing happened to the minimum wage as it was being pulled through the legislative process.   Some members of Congress decided if Congress was going to do something for the poor, it should offset that by doing something for the rich.   It came up with idea of linking the minimum wage increase to eliminating the estate tax.
As generous as that seemed
The estate tax is a tax imposed on the estates of those who have the good fortune to die rich.   According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, in 2000 more than 50,000 estates were subject to the estate tax.   Those were estates of people who died with more than $675,000 or, in the case of married couples, $1.35 million.
As generous as that seemed, among those who remained affected by the estate tax were all of Mr. Bush's friends and that didn't seem fair, especially since they not only helped him get rich by giving him part of a baseball team but helped him become president by giving him lots of money.
As soon as Mr. Bush became president he persuaded Congress to change the tax imposed on decedents estates.
Thanks to his efforts today Mr. Bush's friends (and the rest of us who are married) can die with $4 million and pay no tax.
In 2009 that amount increases to $7 million.
As a result of those changes the Center estimates that in 2006 the number of taxable estates will drop to 13,000 and in 2009 to 7000.
After 2009, however, two funny things happen that could only be contrived by a whimsical Congress.
Resist the temptation of joining offspring forconciliatory meal
The first happens on January 1, 2010.
On that date and for 364 days thereafter no tax will be imposed on the estates of those who are lucky enough to die during that period.
There will be some tax consequences but they are much too complicated to describe in a column such as this.   (Parents who have been estranged from their children for many years, should, for obvious reasons, resist the temptation of joining their offspring for a conciliatory meal proffered by the formerly estranged during that year unless accompanied by a food taster.)
The second whimsical thing Congress did occurs 365 days later.
On January 1, 2011 the estate tax returns and the only people whose estates will pay no taxes are those with estate valued at less than $1 million (or $2 million in the case of married couples).
This is, of course, an absurd result that only Congress could have contrived.   Recognizing this, it has repeatedly attempted to correct its earlier folly by repealing the federal estate tax.
Congress no fools
Messrs. Hastert and Frist are no fools, appearances to the contrary notwithstanding.
They knew that attempting to eliminate the estate tax on the wealthy would not be appealing to some of their colleagues unless linked to something having social value.
Accordingly they hitched the wagon loaded with gifts for the rich to the wagon filled with money for the poor.   The Congressional mules refused to pull the hitched-together wagons.
The wagons were left unattended in the halls of Congress while the mules went home for well-deserved summer vacations.
The poor will continue to receive $10,712 a year.
The estate of the dead rich will continue to pay taxes.   One of those consequences is worse than the others.
Readers can decided for themselves which that is.
Christopher Brauchl is a lawyer in Boulder, Colorado.   Visit his website:    
      Christopher Brauchl      August 16, 2006
Hard times
One in 11 families, one in nine Americans, and one in six children are officially poor.
The most affluent fifth of the population received half of all household income.
The poorest fifth got 3.5 per cent.
The official poverty line is an income of $18,104 pa for a family of four.
A single parent of two working full-time for a minimum wage would make $10,712.
40 per cent of homeless men are veterans.
Up to a fifth of America's food, worth $31bn, goes to waste each year, with 130lb of food per person ending up in landfills.
Diet soda approved by Reagon is poison
Excerpt from article — Aspartame (NutraSweet): Something Evil This Way Comes, by Betty Martini of Mission Possible World Health International
“Listen to Attorney James Turner who, with famed Dr. John Olney, tried to prevent aspartame’s approval.
Turner tells what it took to get a deadly poison approved.
The FDA attempted to have Searle indicted for fraud and making false statements.
Both U.S. prosecutors hired on with the defense team and the statute of limitations expired.
For 16 years, the FDA refused to allow it on the market.
When Reagan was elected, Don Rumsfeld, CEO of Searle, said he’d call in his markers to get aspartame approved.
This is documented by a UPI investigation and congressional record.
The day after Reagan took office Arthur Hayes was appointed as FDA Commissioner to get it approved.
Reagan knew it might take 30 days to get Hayes installed, so he wrote an Executive Order making the outgoing FDA Commissioner powerless to act against aspartame before he departed.
Then the FDA set up a Public Board of Inquiry (PBOI) that revoked Reagan’s petition for approval because it had not been proved safe and causes brain tumors.
Hayes overruled the PBOI and let slip the hounds of disease, disability and death on an innocent, unwarned population.
Soon he became a consultant for the NutraSweet Company’s public relations outfit on a 10-year contract at $1,000/day.
Hayes then refused to talk to the press.”
In 1981, the Reagan FDA approved aspartame in dry food and in 1983, aspartame was approved for use in soda pop.
In 1985 Rumsfeld’s Searle was acquired by Monsanto, making Rumsfeld rich and Searle Pharmaceuticals and The NutraSweet Company separate subsidiaries!
And the rest, as they say, is history.

Afghanistan Most Recent

U.S. Bombing of Fallujah
— the Third World War continued: Chechnya, North Ossetia, Ingushetia

More atrocities - Ahmed and Asma, story of two children dying

al-Sadr City

Iraq's real WMD crime - the effects of depleted uranium

World War Two soldiers did not kill Kill ratio Korea, Vietnam. Iraq.

Afghanistan - Terror?
Photos over past three months.

Aid agencies compromised by US actions
US soldiers committing suicide Afghanistan Iraq — Most Recent
Psychologist Pete Linnerooth was one of three who were part of a mental health crew in charge of the US 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division in the Baghdad area of Iraq.   Pete Linnerooth committed suicide by turning a gun upon himself in January of 2013
Veterans kill themselves at a rate of one every 80 minutes.   More than 6,500 veteran suicides are logged every year — more than the total number of soldiers killed in Afghanistan and Iraq combined since those wars began.
Mary Coghill Kirkland said she asked her son, 21-year-old Army Spc. Derrick Kirkland, what was wrong as soon as he came back from his first deployment to Iraq in 2008.   He had a ready answer: "Mom, I'm a murderer."
A military base on the brink
As police agents watched he shot himself in the head
Murders, fights, robberies, domestic violence, drunk driving, drug overdoses
US soldiers committing suicide Afghanistan Iraq II
U.S. Soldier Killed Herself After Objecting to Interrogation Techniques
Private Gary Boswell, 20, from Milford Haven, Pembrokeshire, was found hanging in a playground in July
She is Jeanne "Linda" Michel, a Navy medic.   She came home last month to her husband and three kids ages 11, 5, and 4, delighted to be back in her suburban home of Clifton Park in upstate New York.   Two weeks after she got home, she shot and killed herself.
Peterson refused to participate in the torture after only two nights working in the unit known as the cage
     United States Numb to Iraq Troop Deaths       
     All papers relating to the interrogations have been destroyed     
      We stripped them and were supposed to mock them and degrade their manhood     
US soldiers committing suicide Iraq Vietnam

The Iraq War - complete listing of articles, includes images

The House of Saud and Bush

       All with U.S. Money:       
       US and Israel War Crimes       

All with U.S. Money:
Israel agents stole identity of New Zealand cerebral palsy victim.
( July 15, 2004) The Foreign Ministry will take steps towards restoring relations with New Zealand. New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark today announced she was implementing diplomatic sanctions after two Israelis were sentenced on charges of attempting to obtain illegal passports. Despite Israeli refusal to respond to the accusations, the two are labeled in the New Zealand media as Mossad agents acting on behalf of the Israeli intelligence community.

Foreign Ministry officials stated they will do everything possible to renew diplomatic ties, expressing sorrow over the "unfortunate incident".

Projected mortality rate of Sudan refugee starvation deaths — Darfur pictures

Suicide now top killer of Israeli soldiers

Atrocities files - graphic images

'Suicide bombings,' the angel said, 'and beheadings.'
'And the others that have all the power - they fly missiles in the sky.
They don't even look at the people they kill.'

Follow the torture trail...
       Cowardly attacks by air killing men women and children in their homes, often never seeing those they kill as the drones or aircraft fly back to the cowardly bases       
       If they kill only the husband, see how they care for the family they have destroyed       
       Afghanistan — Western Terror States: Canada, US, UK, France, Germany, Italy       
       Photos of Afghanistan people being killed and injured by NATO     
        When you talk with God        
         were you also spending your time, money and energy, killing people?         
       Are they now alive or dead?       
Photos July 2004
US Debt
Photos June 2004
Lest we forget - Ahmed and Asma, story of two children dying
Photos May 2004

American military: Abu Gharib (Ghraib) prison photos, humiliation and torture
- London Daily Mirror article: non-sexually explicit pictures
Photos April 2004
The celebration of Jerusalem day, the US missiles that rained onto children in Gaza,
and, a gathering of top articles over the past nine months
Photos March 2004
The Iraq War - complete listing of articles, includes images
Photos February 2004
US missiles - US money - and Palestine
Photos January 2004
Ethnic cleansing in the Beduin desert
Photos December 2003
Shirin Ebadi Nobel Peace Prize winner 2003
Photos November 2003
Atrocities - graphic images...
Photos October 2003
Photos September 2003

 Kewe blog page  kewe archives     kewe archiveskewe archive