Narco News Publishes Sgt. Stan Goff on Immediate History
... The So-Called. Evidence Is a Farce. By Stan Goff. Stan Goff Joined the US Armed
Forces in 1970 and Left in 1996. ... Stan Goff Speaks. Master Sgt. author of. ...
Narco News Publishes Transcript of Stan Goff Interview by Mike ...
... Be Up Front". The Stan Goff Interview. By Mike McCormick. Stan Goff Joined the
US Armed Forces in 1970 and Left in 1996. ... Stan Goff Speaks. Master Sgt. author of. ...
[ More results from www.narconews.com ]
Sign Up with NY Times click > to Read the Review
Chapter 1 In Chinese*, Dutch, English, Italian,
Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish
(C) 2000 Hernando de Soto All rights reserved.
in the West and Fails Everywhere Else
By HERNANDO DE SOTO Basic Books
The Five Mysteries of Capital
The key problem is to find out why that sector of society
of the past, which I would not hesitate to call capitalist,
should have lived as if in a bell jar, cut off from the
rest; why was it not able to expand and conquer the
whole of society? ... [Why was it that] a significant rate
of capital formation was possible only in certain sectors
and not in the whole market economy of the time?
—Fernand Braudel, The Wheels of Commerce
The hour of capitalism's greatest triumph is its hour of crisis. The fall of
the Berlin Wall ended more than a century of political competition
between capitalism and communism. Capitalism stands alone as the only
feasible way to rationally organize a modern economy. At this moment in
history, no responsible nation has a choice. As a result, with varying
degrees of enthusiasm, Third World and former communist nations have
balanced their budgets, cut subsidies, welcomed foreign investment, and
dropped their tariff barriers.
Their efforts have been repaid with bitter disappointment. From Russia
to Venezuela, the past half-decade has been a time of economic
suffering, tumbling incomes, anxiety, and resentment; of "starving, rioting,
and looting," in the stinging words of Malaysian prime minister Mahathir
Mohamad. In a recent editorial the New York Times said, "For much of
the world, the marketplace extolled by the West in the afterglow of
victory in the Cold War has been supplanted by the cruelty of markets,
wariness toward capitalism, and dangers of instability." The triumph of
capitalism only in the West could be a recipe for economic and political
For Americans enjoying both peace and prosperity, it has been all too
easy to ignore the turmoil elsewhere. How can capitalism be in trouble
when the Dow Jones Industrial average is climbing higher than Sir
Edmund Hillary? Americans look at other nations and see progress, even
if it is slow and uneven. Can't you eat a Big Mac in Moscow, rent a
video from Blockbuster in Shanghai, and reach the Internet in Caracas?
Even in the United States, however, the foreboding cannot be
completely stifled. Americans see Colombia poised on the brink of a
major civil war between drug-trafficking guerrillas and repressive militias,
an intractable insurgency in the south of Mexico, and an important part of
Asia's force-fed economic growth draining away into corruption and
chaos. In Latin America, sympathy for free markets is dwindling: Support
for privatization has dropped from 46 percent of the population to 36
percent in May 2000. Most ominously of all, in the former communist
nations capitalism has been found wanting, and men associated with old
regimes stand poised to resume power. Some Americans sense too that
one reason for their decade-long boom is that the more precarious the
rest of the world looks, the more attractive American stocks and bonds
become as a haven for international money.
In the business community of the West, there is a growing concern that
the failure of most of the rest of the world to implement capitalism will
eventually drive the rich economies into recession. As millions of
investors have painfully learned from the evaporation of their emerging
market funds, globalization is a two-way street: If the Third World and
former communist nations cannot escape the influence of the West,
neither can the West disentangle itself from them. Adverse reactions to
capitalism have also been growing stronger within rich countries
themselves. The rioting in Seattle at the meeting of the World Trade
Organization in December 1999 and a few months later at the
IMF/World Bank meeting in Washington, D.C., regardless of the
diversity of the grievances, highlighted the anger that spreading capitalism
inspires. Many have begun recalling the economic historian Karl Polanyi's
warnings that free markets can collide with society and lead to fascism.
Japan is struggling through its most prolonged slump since the Great
Depression. Western Europeans vote for politicians who promise them a
"third way" that rejects what a French best-seller has labeled L'Horreur
These whispers of alarm, disturbing though they are, have thus far only
prompted American and European leaders to repeat to the rest of the
world the same wearisome lectures: Stabilize your currencies, hang
tough, ignore the food riots, and wait patiently for the foreign investors to
Foreign investment is, of course, a very good thing. The more of it, the
better. Stable currencies are good, too, as are free trade and transparent
banking practices and the privatization of state-owned industries and
every other remedy in the Western pharmacopoeia. Yet we continually
forget that global capitalism has been tried before. In Latin America, for
example, reforms directed at creating capitalist systems have been tried
at least four times since independence from Spain in the 1820s. Each
time, after the initial euphoria, Latin Americans swung back from
capitalist and market economy policies. These remedies are clearly not
enough. Indeed, they fall so far short as to be almost irrelevant.
When these remedies fail, Westerners all too often respond not by
questioning the adequacy of the remedies but by blaming Third World
peoples for their lack of entrepreneurial spirit or market orientation. If
they have failed to prosper despite all the excellent advice, it is because
something is the matter with them: They missed the Protestant
Reformation, or they are crippled by the disabling legacy of colonial
Europe, or their IQs are too low. But the suggestion that it is culture that
explains the success of such diverse places as Japan, Switzerland, and
California, and culture again that explains the relative poverty of such
equally diverse places as China, Estonia, and Baja California, is worse
than inhumane; it is unconvincing. The disparity of wealth between the
West and the rest of the world is far too great to be explained by culture
alone. Most people want the fruits of capital—so much so that many,
from the children of Sanchez to Khrushchev's son, are flocking to
The cities of the Third World and the former communist countries are
teeming with entrepreneurs. You cannot walk through a Middle Eastern
market, hike up to a Latin American village, or climb into a taxicab in
Moscow without someone trying to make a deal with you. The
inhabitants of these countries possess talent, enthusiasm, and an
astonishing ability to wring a profit out of practically nothing. They can
grasp and use modern technology. Otherwise, American businesses
would not be struggling to control the unauthorized use of their patents
abroad, nor would the U.S. government be striving so desperately to
keep modern weapons technology out of the hands of Third World
countries. Markets are an ancient and universal tradition: Christ drove the
merchants out of the temple two thousand years ago, and Mexicans were
taking their products to market long before Columbus reached America.
But if people in countries making the transition to capitalism are not
pitiful beggars, are not helplessly trapped in obsolete ways, and are not
the uncritical prisoners of dysfunctional cultures, what is it that prevents
capitalism from delivering to them the same wealth it has delivered to the
West? Why does capitalism thrive only in the West, as if enclosed in a
In this book I intend to demonstrate that the major stumbling block
that keeps the rest of the world from benefiting from capitalism is its
inability to produce capital. Capital is the force that raises the productivity
of labor and creates the wealth of nations. It is the lifeblood of the
capitalist system, the foundation of progress, and the one thing that the
poor countries of the world cannot seem to produce for themselves, no
matter how eagerly their people engage in all the other activities that
characterize a capitalist economy.
I will also show, with the help of facts and figures that my research
team and I have collected, block by block and farm by farm in Asia,
Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America, that most of the poor
already possess the assets they need to make a success of capitalism.
Even in the poorest countries, the poor save. The value of savings among
the poor is, in fact, immense—forty times all the foreign aid received
throughout the world since 1945. In Egypt, for instance, the wealth that
the poor have accumulated is worth fifty-five times as much as the sum of
all direct foreign investment ever recorded there, including the Suez Canal
and the Aswan Dam. In Haiti, the poorest nation in Latin America, the
total assets of the poor are more than one hundred fifty times greater than
all the foreign investment received since Haiti's independence from
France in 1804. If the United States were to hike its foreign-aid budget
to the level recommended by the United Nations—0.7 percent of
national income—it would take the richest country on earth more than
150 years to transfer to the world's poor resources equal to those they
But they hold these resources in defective forms: houses built on land
whose ownership rights are not adequately recorded, unincorporated
businesses with undefined liability, industries located where financiers and
investors cannot see them. Because the rights to these possessions are
not adequately documented, these assets cannot readily be turned into
capital, cannot be traded outside of narrow local circles where people
know and trust each other, cannot be used as collateral for a loan, and
cannot be used as a share against an investment.
In the West, by contrast, every parcel of land, every building, every
piece of equipment, or store of inventories is represented in a property
document that is the visible sign of a vast hidden process that connects all
these assets to the rest of the economy. Thanks to this representational
process, assets can lead an invisible, parallel life alongside their material
existence. They can be used as collateral for credit. The single most
important source of funds for new businesses in the United States is a
mortgage on the entrepreneur's house. These assets can also provide a
link to the owner's credit history, an accountable address for the
collection of debts and taxes, the basis for the creation of reliable and
universal public utilities, and a foundation for the creation of securities
(like mortgage-backed bonds) that can then be rediscounted and sold in
secondary markets. By this process the West injects life into assets and
makes them generate capital.
Third World and former communist nations do not have this
representational process. As a result, most of them are undercapitalized,
in the same way that a firm is undercapitalized when it issues fewer
securities than its income and assets would justify. The enterprises of the
poor are very much like corporations that cannot issue shares or bonds
to obtain new investment and finance. Without representations, their
assets are dead capital.
The poor inhabitants of these nations—five-sixths of humanity—do
have things, but they lack the process to represent their property and
create capital. They have houses but not titles; crops but not deeds;
businesses but not statutes of incorporation. It is the unavailability of
these essential representations that explains why people who have
adapted every other Western invention, from the paper clip to the nuclear
reactor, have not been able to produce sufficient capital to make their
domestic capitalism work.
This is the mystery of capital. Solving it requires an understanding of
why Westerners, by representing assets with titles, are able to see and
draw out capital from them. One of the greatest challenges to the human
mind is to comprehend and to gain access to those things we know exist
but cannot see. Not everything that is real and useful is tangible and
visible. Time, for example, is real, but it can only be efficiently managed
when it is represented by a clock or a calendar. Throughout history,
human beings have invented representational systems—writing, musical
notation, double-entry bookkeeping—to grasp with the mind what
human hands could never touch. In the same way, the great practitioners
of capitalism, from the creators of integrated title systems and corporate
stock to Michael Milken, were able to reveal and extract capital where
others saw only junk by devising new ways to represent the invisible
potential that is locked up in the assets we accumulate.
At this very moment you are surrounded by waves of Ukrainian,
Chinese, and Brazilian television that you cannot see. So, too, are you
surrounded by assets that invisibly harbor capital. Just as the waves of
Ukrainian television are far too weak for you to sense them directly but
can, with the help of a television set, be decoded to be seen and heard,
so can capital be extracted and processed from assets. But only the
West has the conversion process required to transform the invisible to the
visible. It is this disparity that explains why Western nations can create
capital and the Third World and former communist nations cannot.
The absence of this process in the poorer regions of the
world—where two-thirds of humanity lives—is not the consequence of
some Western monopolistic conspiracy. It is rather that Westerners take
this mechanism so completely for granted that they have lost all
awareness of its existence. Although it is huge, nobody sees it, including
the Americans, Europeans, and Japanese who owe all their wealth to
their ability to use it. It is an implicit legal infrastructure hidden deep within
their property systems—of which ownership is but the tip of the iceberg.
The rest of the iceberg is an intricate man-made process that can
transform assets and labor into capital. This process was not created
from a blueprint and is not described in a glossy brochure. Its origins are
obscure and its significance buried in the economic subconscious of
Western capitalist nations.
How could something so important have slipped our minds? It is not
uncommon for us to know how to use things without understanding why
they work. Sailors used magnetic compasses long before there was a
satisfactory theory of magnetism. Animal breeders had a working
knowledge of genetics long before Gregor Mendel explained genetic
principles. Even as the West prospers from abundant capital, do people
really understand the origin of capital? If they don't, there always remains
the possibility that the West might damage the source of its own strength.
Being clear about the source of capital will also prepare the West to
protect itself and the rest of the world as soon as the prosperity of the
moment yields to the crisis that is sure to come. Then the question that
always arises in international crises will be heard again: Whose money
will be used to solve the problem?
So far, Western countries have been happy to take their system for
producing capital entirely for granted and to leave its history
undocumented. That history must be recovered. This book is an effort to
reopen the exploration of the source of capital and thus explain how to
correct the economic failures of poor countries. These failures have
nothing to do with deficiencies in cultural or genetic heritage. Would
anyone suggest "cultural" commonalities between Latin Americans and
Russians? Yet in the last decade, ever since both regions began to build
capitalism without capital, they have shared the same political, social, and
economic problems: glaring inequality, underground economies,
pervasive mafias, political instability, capital flight, flagrant disregard for
the law. These troubles did not originate in the monasteries of the
Orthodox Church or along the pathways of the Incas.
But it is not only former communist and Third World countries that
have suffered all of these problems. The same was true of the United
States in 1783, when President George Washington complained about
"banditti ... skimming and disposing of the cream of the country at the
expense of the many." These "banditti" were squatters and small illegal
entrepreneurs occupying lands they did not own. For the next one
hundred years, such squatters battled for legal rights to their land and
miners warred over their claims because ownership laws differed from
town to town and camp to camp. Enforcing property rights created such
a quagmire of social unrest and antagonism throughout the young United
States that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Joseph Story,
wondered in 1820 whether lawyers would ever be able to settle them.
Do squatters, bandits, and flagrant disregard of the law sound familiar?
Americans and Europeans have been telling the other countries of the
world, "You have to be more like us." In fact, they are very much like the
United States of a century ago when it too was an undeveloped country.
Western politicians once faced the same dramatic challenges that leaders
of the developing and former communist countries are facing today. But
their successors have lost contact with the days when the pioneers who
opened the American West were undercapitalized because they seldom
possessed title to the lands they settled and the goods they owned, when
Adam Smith did his shopping in black markets and English street urchins
plucked pennies cast by laughing tourists into the mud banks of the
Thames, when Jean-Baptiste Colbert's technocrats executed 16,000
small entrepreneurs whose only crime was manufacturing and importing
cotton cloth in violation of France's industrial codes.
That past is many nations' present. The Western nations have so
successfully integrated their poor into their economies that they have lost
even the memory of how it was done, how the creation of capital began
back when, as the American historian Gordon Wood has written,
"something momentous was happening in the society and culture that
released the aspirations and energies of common people as never before
in American history." The "something momentous" was that Americans
and Europeans were on the verge of establishing widespread formal
property law and inventing the conversion process in that law that
allowed them to create capital. This was the moment when the West
crossed the demarcation line that led to successful capitalism—when it
ceased being a private club and became a popular culture, when George
Washington's dreaded "banditti" were transformed into the beloved
pioneers that American culture now venerates.
* * *
The paradox is as clear as it is unsettling: Capital, the most essential
component of Western economic advance, is the one that has received
the least attention. Neglect has shrouded it in mystery—in fact, in a series
of five mysteries.
The Mystery of the Missing Information
Charitable organizations have so emphasized the miseries and
helplessness of the world's poor that no one has properly documented
their capacity for accumulating assets. Over the past five years, I and a
hundred colleagues from six different nations have closed our books and
opened our eyes—and gone out into the streets and countrysides of four
continents to count how much the poorest sectors of society have saved.
The quantity is enormous. But most of it is dead capital.
The Mystery of Capital
This is the key mystery and the centerpiece of this book. Capital is a
subject that has fascinated thinkers for the past three centuries. Marx said
that you needed to go beyond physics to touch "the hen that lays the
golden eggs"; Adam Smith felt you had to create "a sort of waggon-way
through the air" to reach that same hen. But no one has told us where the
hen hides. What is capital, how is it produced, and how is it related to
The Mystery of Political Awareness
If there is so much dead capital in the world, and in the hands of so many
poor people, why haven't governments tried to tap into this potential
wealth? Simply because the evidence they needed has only become
available in the past forty years as billions of people throughout the world
have moved from life organized on a small scale to life on a large scale.
This migration to the cities has rapidly divided labor and spawned in
poorer countries a huge industrial-commercial revolution—one that,
incredibly, has been virtually ignored.
The Missing Lessons of U.S. History
What is going on in the Third World and the former communist countries
has happened before, in Europe and North America. Unfortunately, we
have been so mesmerized by the failure of so many nations to make the
transition to capitalism that we have forgotten how the successful
capitalist nations actually did it. For years I visited technocrats and
politicians in advanced nations, from Alaska to Tokyo, but they had no
answers. It was a mystery. I finally found the answer in their history
books, the most pertinent example being that of U.S. history.
The Mystery of Legal Failure: Why Property Law Does Not
Work Outside the West
Since the nineteenth century, nations have been copying the laws of the
West to give their citizens the institutional framework to produce wealth.
They continue to copy such laws today, and obviously it doesn't work.
Most citizens still cannot use the law to convert their savings into capital.
Why this is so and what is needed to make the law work remains a
The solution to each of these mysteries is the subject of a chapter in
* * *
The moment is ripe to solve the problem of why capitalism is triumphant
in the West and stalling practically everywhere else. As all plausible
alternatives to capitalism have now evaporated, we are finally in a
position to study capital dispassionately and carefully.
(C) 2000 Hernando de Soto All rights reserved. ISBN: 0-465-01614-6
below the bar
Note from R4D
Hitler Joseph Garbles & Dr. Joseph Mengele
In this world where book & film titles are as moronic as the names
given to horses at the race track I wish to remember or recognize
that I remember something about WW2 and the hidious Eugenics
and torturing experiments of Hitlers policies as carried out by
Dr. Joseph Mengele.
As I see it Michael Jackson ,Jacks, Jocco, The Kid, The king of Pop
what ever you call him "the kid " bleached with a (bleached) dream
is Dr. Joseph Mengele final triumph .
Hitler Joseph Garbles & Dr. Joseph Mengele
Thanks to a Inbread xenophobic Eurocentric Nation White Bread
Anti black America fetish of Dr. Joseph Gerbles, Mengele and Hitler
These guys meant business Race as religion ...
[Nazi War Criminal of the "Angel of Death of Auschwitz," Dr. Joseph Mengele ]
[ http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&q=nazi+DR ]
Today In History www.mightycool.com/historyspotlight/06061985.shtml
... of the "Angel of Death of Auschwitz," Dr. Joseph Mengele. ... at Nuremberg, and was the
last major Nazi war criminal to die in Spandau under highly ...
"He doesn't have to Marry a white Girl He "is" a white Girl Just like
Jesus! As famous and “pretty”.
We all have free will, right nobody put a gun or a Chip to his head right!
Or he did it to him self !
This nation and it's pursuit of "HIGH CULTURE" is apparently
only capable Copying and copy-cating others or Self Parody.
Preparing for a 1/2 baked sequel.
In the Blue eyed Disney Cartoon fantasy which is a blatant fraud
foisted on all kids like burger meat .
I have an Idea to use the WWW, how about a Web Site that mentally Un Hooks people from here Brain Washing .. Like a World Facts map"With a map linking All of the Sites world wide
so people can research this stuff and get good grades in school some thing but still showing in
light way the serious scary stuff we all know about but never discuss.( This might even use the
Chat Room feature ? ) Or a WWW that actually proposes that commercial exploitation of a com-mercial & neat as the original corporate stuff so the mascot "speaks" with the authority
of the featured creature as an example Exxon's Tiger or Tony the Tiger (Kellogg's Corn Flakes
Creial Mascot ) says "Hey kids did you know that my Boss made$$ Billion Last year and I
really gotta Live Like (Show Photo) this even though I help him earn it, as a spokes Critter
don't you think I deserve a Better Life ? & Working conditions We Tigers are an Endangered
Species and are nearly extinct ! Wild life funds and most charitable Org's. are over worked
under staffed or afraid and don't act like we Tigers are a Priority once We Die Out we will
only be A Dam Cartoon !!
Us we the two most famous Product Critters in out Native Lands Ok .. That Would Be
A Degree in Dabbling
If you're stuck in a rut with nothing to do,
then set up a studio where you can scratch
your artistic itch. Find a quiet corner of the
house where you can let your creative juices
Every master artist needs plenty of supplies.
Make sure you're stocked up on colored paper,
glue, cardboard, magic markers, crayons,
paint, string and anything else you'll need.
Now you're ready to concoct some cool creations. Grab a few empty milk jugs and juice
cans to make your own action figures. With homemade clay, craft an army of menacing
figures with paper-clip horns andspaghetti-noodle hair.
BBC was recently told by Niaz Naik, a Pakistani Foreign Secretary, that
senior American officials were warning them as early as mid-July that
military action for mid-October was being planned for Afghanistan. In
1996, the Department of Energy was issuing reports on the desirability
of a pipeline through Afghanistan, and in 1998, Unocal testified before
the House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific that this pipeline was
crucial to transport Caspian Basin oil to the Indian Ocean.
Given this evidence that a military operation to secure at least a portion of
Afghanistan has been on the table, possibly as early as five years ago,I can't
help but conclude that the actions we are seeing put into motion now are
part of a pre-September 11th agenda. I'm absolutelysure of that, in fact.
The planning alone for operations, of this scale,that are now taking shape,
would take many months. And we are seeing them take shape in mere weeks.
And it can also be a question about whether or not there was
foreknowledge of the event, and that foreknowledge is being
To dismiss this concern out of hand as the rantings of conspiracy
nuts is premature. And there is a history of this kind of thing being done by national political bosses, including the darling of liberals, Franklin Roosevelt. The evidence is very compelling
that the Roosevelt Administration deliberately failed to act to
stop Pearl Harbor in order to mobilize enough national anger
to enter the World War II.
I have no idea why people aren't asking some very specific questions about
the actions of Bush and company on the day of the attacks. Follow along:
Four planes get hijacked and deviate from their flight plans, all the while
on FAA radar.
The planes are all hijacked between 7:45 and 8:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time.
This is an event already that is unprecedented. But the President is not
notified and going to a Florida elementary school to hear children read.
This elephant in the living room is being studiously ignored.
In fact,the domestic repression has already begun, officially and unofficially.
It's kind of a latter day McCarthyism. I participated in a teach-in at Chapel Hill,
North Carolina, on the 17th of September, and though not a single person on
the panel excused or justified the attacks, and every person there offered either
condolences and prayers for the victims, we were excoriated within two days
as "enemies of America." Yesterday an op-ed called for my deportation
(to where, one can only guess). Now Herr Ashcroft is fast tracking the biggest
abrogation of US civil liberties since the so-called anti-terrorism legislation
after the Oklahoma City bombing-which by the way hasn't resulted in anti-
terrorism but in the acceleration of the application of the racist death penalty.
The FBI has defined terrorist groups not by whether any given group has ever
acted as terrorists, but by their beliefs.
Some socialists and! ! anti-globalization groups have already been identified
by name as terrorist groups, even though there is not a single shred of evidence
that they have ever participated in any criminal activity. It reminds me of the
Smith Act that was finally declared unconstitutional, but only after a hell of a
lot of people served a hell of a long time in jail for the crime of thinking.
I think this also points to yet another huge problems that the Bush regime was
facing. Worldwide resistance to the whole so-called neoliberal agenda, which
is a prettied up term for debt-leverage imperialism. While debt and the threat
of sanctions has been used to coerce nations in the periphery, we have to
understand that the final guarantor of compliance remains military action.
For a global economic agenda, there is always a corresponding political and
The focal point of these actions in the short term is Southern Asia, but they
have already scripted this as a worldwide and protracted fight against terrorism.
It's far better than drug wars as a rationalization, and the drug war thing was
being discredited in any case. Leftists are regaining power and popularity in
Venezuela,El Salvador, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Colombia, the Dominican
Republic, Haiti, Brazil, and Argentina.
Cuba has gained immense prestige over the last few years. The empire is beginning
to unravel. We can hardly justify intervention in these places by saying they are
not towing the economic line by allowing the absolute domination of their societies
by transnational corporations. That exposes the agenda. So we simply claim they are
There's a very smart technology being employed to do a very dumb thing.
What they are responding to is not September 11th, but the beginning
of a permanent and precipitous decline in worldwide oil
production, the beginning of a deep and protracted worldwide
recession, and the unraveling of the empire.
This brings me to a point about what all this means for Americans'
security, which they are perfectly justified to worry about. The actions being
prepared by this administration will not only not enhance our security, it will
significantly degrade it.
Military action against many groups across the globe, which is what
the administration is telling us quite openly they are planning to do,
will put a lot of backs against the wall. That can't be very secure.
The concept of war being touted here is a violation
of the principles of war on several counts, and will
inevitably lead to military catastrophes, if you're
inclined to view this from a position of moral and
And the people who are now in possession of half the
world's remaining oil reserves are subject to destabilization
for which we can't even pretend to predict the consequences-but
loss of access to critical energy supplies is certainly within the
realm of possibility. Worst of all, we will be destabilizing Pakistan,
a nuclear power in an active conflict with its neighbor, and we will
be provoking Russia, another nuclear power.
The security stakes don't get any higher, and Americans
can ill afford to ignore nukes.
And I think that this domestic agenda is a tremendous threat
to the security of anyone who is critical of the government
or their corporate financiers, and we already know that the
real threats are against populations that can easily be
scapegoated as the domestic crisis deepens.
There is a very real threat right now of
creeping fascism in this country, and that
phenomenon requires its domestic enemies.
Historically those enemies have included
leftists, trade unionists, and racially and
nationally oppressed sectors.
This whole "state of emergency" mentality is already being
used to quiet the public discourses of anti-racism, of feminism,
of environmentalism, and of both socialism and anarchism.
And while there is token resistance by officials to anti-Muslim
xenophobia, the stereotypical images have saturated the media,
and the government is already beginning
to openly re-instate racial profiling.
It is only a short step from there to go after
We have long been prepared by the
ideologies of overt and covert racism,
and racism as both institution and
corresponding psychology in the
United States is nearly intractable.
It's for all these reason, I say emphatically that we can not acceptanything
from this administration; not their
policies nor their bullshit stories.
What they are doing is very, very dangerous,
and the time to fight back against them, openly,
is right now,before they can consolidate their
power and their agenda. Once they have done
that, our job becomes much more difficult.