Recent comments
ADHD: Hunter in a Farmer's World
Thom Hartmann has written a dozen books covering ADD / ADHD - Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder.
Join Thom for his new twice-weekly email newsletters on ADHD, whether it affects you or a member of your family.
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
~cont~ It is no wonder why we failed to solve this issue back then. This is a Country of cowards not "the home of the brave." American Indians and black people are the only citizens that didn't come here running away from a problem that they were too afraid to fight in their home country. It's no wonder that those problems chased them here, and also no wonder that they are afraid to fight them here as well. It's this generation that is responsible for allowing our Government to be compromised ever since the Kennedy assassination and it is this generation that has to fix this problem. There is no running away. There is no place to run to. These criminals will not be happy till they take the shirt from your back. The time has come to take a stand!
ghostily ~ You make an excellent point! I have often said that President Obama's biggest mistake was not investigating the Bush Administration for War Crimes in his first day in office. (He flat out promised to do so on TV. I saw it. I guess that makes him a liar as well.)
My guess is that the anti-war left has been led into a sense of complacency by the election of the first black president who is also a Constitutional scholar. A perfect minority spokesman who obviously believes in Peace, Freedom, and Liberty, right? How could he not be everything his rhetoric paints him as? As his term rolled on, however, the anti-war right were then subjected to the shock of finding out, one issue at a time, that their new leader was an ineffective puppet. This led them into a state of shock mixed with disbelief. After all, now where did they stand. They went from thinking they won the struggle to realizing that there is no winning option available, and the War Criminals were going to get away with their crimes. So what did they do, the natural human thing to do, bury themselves in a hole of denial.
Perhaps for this reason alone, budget cuts that directly effect the generation most responsible for all this happening might be a good thing. This might actually motivate them out of their slumbers and force them to take to the streets in anger.
I remember in the early 70's there was a march on Washington in an attempt to levitate the White House and force out the demons. Demonstrators had the White House surrounded. The National Guard was called out; but, was hopelessly outnumbered. The leaders of the demonstration had other leaders put roses in the shotguns of the Guard. How often it has occurred to me what a huge mistake that was. If the masses simply disarmed the Guard, rushed the White House, and drug tricky Dick by his nose from the Oval Office to the White House lawn and executed him on TV, non of the horrible tragedy's we have had ever since would have occurred. No President since that would dare to piss-off the American people that much. This Generation blew that chance. Now this Generation has to fix their own mess.
Just food for thought. Hopefully, the next chance we get--God forbid we have to go through that again--the People don't blow it again.
Regarding drones, Hal Fonts has stated: "The point is that we intelligent ones should be writing the proper regulations for their appropriate use rather than playing word-games about their mis-use for one of many possible applications."
And my point is, I do not trust the powers-that-be, who hold themselves above the law, to respect such regulations. - Alive I.W.
Well said HalFonts ~ If we leave weapons off those little things I too am all for them. Glad to see we finally see eye to eye.
Why do you limit your assumptions of drone use to "ROCKETS"? Drones are simply unmanned remote controled flying platforms, now available commercially off-the-shelf for many uses. They have extremely valuable potential for scientific research and civil applications, carrying instrumentation where human observers can not access.
This is like babbling about prohibiting all future use of GPS (Global Navigation Systems) because it was first developed by the military for Missle Guidence Systems. Had we done that, we would have no moving-maps for our cars, boats and planes -- and Civilian Land Surveying would be back in the ancient days (pre-2000) of optical instruments and steel measuring tapes.
We're playing word-games here, confusing "Drones" with "Rockets," when we wise-ones should be intelligently dealing with how to write responsible legislation ror their responsible safe and productive use in our common airspace.
Drones have many research uses, far beyond police and military weaponry. I believe drone camera platforms are already in use in uppercanopy habitat forest ecology research. Should be a simple search.
Folks, not all "DRONES" carry "ROCKETS." Drones are simply small un-maned flying platforms with unlimited good and bad uses. this is like saying "Early airplanes were used by the military, therefore prohibit ALL future use of aircraft for anything." Huh???
The point is that we intelligent ones should be writing the proper regulations for their appropriate use rather than playing word-games about their mis-use for one of many possible applications.
@ghostly: The anti-war Left has been ragging about The Obama Administration constantly -- almost as critical as the rabid-Right. Where have you been? Sipping Tea?
Where is the anti-war left that was calling out all the war crimes against Bush? What about all the war crimes that Obama has done.
"jcacourt" says: "Progressives always talk about presenting the FACTS. If you believe in this, then gather those FACTS and print them." Thom has more facts under the fingernail of his left pinkie than you've got in that gray matter between your ears. Try listening to him once in a while; you might learn a thing or two.
If we want to save military lives, we should haul 'em back to the U.S. where they friggin' belong. Because they don't belong in the Middle East or anywhere else! Oh- and by the way, the war in Iraq was based on bogus lies - Republican lies - not on FACTS.
Since this President has already targeted and assassinated Americans without due process, I wouldn't put anything past him. You've got way more confidence in Obama's character than I have, at this point. - Aliceinwonderland
Osterstock says, regarding drones: "We must develop policies and legislation, as needed, to make certain that this remarkable technology is used to benefit Americans, not to harm them."
I think your are naieve to assume that we stand to benefit, in any way, from such instruments of evil; especially in times like these, where deregulation is the theme of the day! Where you see a genie released from a bottle, I see Pandora's box blown wide open. Only a tyrannical regime would be inclined to develop and utilize anything this grotesque. - Alice I.W.
"akunard" has said: "We have now seen the light and are in a rapid slide into Greek style economic and finance hell." And you're blaming socialism?! Don't make me laugh. - Alice I.W.
Ken Ware says "My point was that the President and his cohorts in Congress helped to design the Sequestration Bill and therefore were just as responsible as the Republican puppets that agreed to push this B.S. through Congress."
Now, THAT I can agree with! Much more specific. As to the question of whether I believe in Obama, the answer is no; at this point I don't have much faith left in our president. And if there's one thing you and I are in lockstep about, Ken, it's Sequestration & Austerity. You don't have to convince me what a cruel hoax it is. I am in total agreement with your assessment of all that.
Relax! - Aliceinwonderland
HalFonts ~ Your reply is also well taken. A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER is what I believe you mean. Like I said before its fine to fight fire with fire. But when you only suspect a crime might be committed in the future, drones, are not acceptable ever. Don't get me wrong. They are fine for surveillance. No problem! Firing rockets. Big problem!! SWAT is effective in such situations because they use sharp shooters with pin point accuracy. Rockets aren't accurate! They are indiscriminate! They miss! They are more dangerous than the criminals. They cause serious collateral damage.
That is unacceptable in any domestic situation.
You can't use a rocket in a hostage situation without killing all the hostages. You can't use a rocket in a gun battle/barricade situation because you destroy all surrounding property. The only good a rocket and drone does is to indiscriminately kill innocent people. That's right, innocent. Anyone killed for suspicion of a crime and denied due process is by law innocent. So are all the collateral victims. INNOCENT! The overall effect of this course of action. Institutionalized, official terrorism. Every law abiding citizen is terrorized by the Government because they never know if they, or their NEIGHBOR is being suspected of doing anything someone in the Government feels is a threat.
The bottom line: If you want to live in a Tyranny where you, your family, and your friends have to live in constant fear that you might ever be targeted by the Government --or happen to be near a target at the wrong time--than supports using drones to kill people as a Constitutional power of the President. You risk loosing everything; including any rights to complain about it afterwards. Is that what you wish?
KEN WARE wrote; "We deserve what is about to happen to our country".
Even you Ken??? Why do you deserve what is about to happen??? More so, why do I deserve what is about to happen?
Just because I am a U.S. Citizen does not mean I agree with the policies or actions of this government. In fact I DO NOT support this country in any of its endevours that propagates war and paranoia, kills hundreds of millions of innocent people; here and overseas, props up murderous Governments, illegally occupies other soverning nations, or condems its elderly, sick, and poor as beasts' of burdon.
I am not in anyway as a U.S. citizen obligated to support a government that is destructive of the principles that this country was founded on; The EQUAL RIGHT to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. It's EVERY Americans duty to stand up and alter or abolish our government when it becomes destructive of those ends.
When injustice becomes law...Resitance is our duty.
"Obedience to government is the sign of a Totalitarian State". H Zinn
Now if you are saying that I - as well as 300+million other Americans - are about 50+ years tardy to the battle field, I would say I agree...Then again I am only 41 years old; My fight didn't start until 24 years ago.
Reread my post. I never said to "USE drones in ALL situations." I said "To categorically DISMISS ANY USE of "drones" in EVERY future domestic situation is utterly naive and stupid." Words matter. You obviously agree that in certain situations, the use of lethal force is already authorized.
Eric Holder wrote Ron Paul (March 7, 2013): "It has come to my attention that you have asked an additional question: " Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American citizen not engaged in combat on American soil?" The answer to that question is no."
I can easilly envision normally "legal" police (civil-hostage) actions, where that self-limitation would be naive and stupid -- Ie: would not exist or would be ignored. I presume that individual police officers, officials and even individual citizens already have the authority to exert such lethal force in some such extreme situations -- irrespective of Eric Holder's poorly thought-out all-or-nothing statement.
Ken Ware Wrote ~ "I would love to read tomorrow morning that Washington has been erased from the face of the Earth, whether it is by a terrorist act or an act from a benevolent deity, I would rejoice in the news."
Sadly, my friend, you are not alone. I feel the same way and so do many people I know. One of my oldest and dearest friends put it this way, "This place needs an Enema!" A very sorry state of affairs, indeed!
DAnneMarc #12,
If I stand with a pistol to someone's head, or my hand on a bomb-detonator in a crowded place, I have effectively "surrendered my constitutional rights to Government." Whether a warrant is issued by a judge, or existing police procedures are followed, I stand to lose all rights including "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Your other points and those of bingo65 are all well taken -- these are complex (not simple) topics.
Halfonts Wrote: "To categorically dismiss any use of "drones" in every future domestic situation is utterly naive and stupid."
Then call me "Stupid" Halfonts because you are wrong. SWAT teams are used in a deadly situation as a last resort when the police are confronted with heavily armed criminals or hostages. BLOODY CRIMES ARE ALREADY IN PROGRESS!
No one sends a SWAT team in to a situation where a crime is suspected. Everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. We have due process for a reason--to protect the innocent. That is why search warrants and arrest warrants must be granted by a judge who has concluded that there is probable cause. Then you serve the warrant. If the suspect cooperates you have a trial to prove guilt. If they challenge the warrant, then you call SWAT.
Bypassing a judges screwtiny and sending in SWAT on the word of one man is a worse crime than anything a criminal can commit. However, firing a rocket at that suspect and killing him, everyone around him, and his neighbors is absolute insanity. If I'm "naive" and "Stupid" for believing that my friend, you are flat out "insane."
If anyone believes the motives from anyone in Washington are for the benefit of the Union and not for themselves, you are really losing it between the ears my friends. These people are the most corrupt and uncaring bunch of political leaches that our country has ever created in our short history as a nation. Personally, I would love to read tomorrow morning that Washington has been erased from the face of the Earth, whether it is by a terrorist act or an act from a benevolent deity, I would rejoice in the news. I hold only contempt for these scumbags that have the brass balls to call themselves people who care about our nation and our people. May they all be damned in the fires of hell or something comparable. As if they really care what happens to anyone but themselves and their own interests! Does anyone really believe Paul really gives a damn about anything except being the next scum sucker in the Whitehouse? These guys and gals would sell their mothers into sex slavery for a chance to be the next president of this corrupt political system. I believe it is easy to see how I view our politicians and their motives. I am not angry, just truthful and have the brass to state how I see these bastards and the illiterate voters who have given them the power of life and death over our social safety nets. We deserve what is about to happen to our country...K.W.
Ken Ware ~ Again you are spot on. Although I doubt President Obama dreamed up this fiasco himself. Don't give him too much credit. If you ask me the whole scheme was dreamed up behind the scenes by the Banksters and handed to the two parties via scripts. They are dying to run the financial market game like a bunch of loan sharks. They want to transfer the national debt from the Government to us; and, then foreclose on all our property--turning us into a nation of paupers.
All these Politicians are is just a bunch of bought and paid for, well dressed, puppets. What we need to do is cut the strings with Campaign Finance Reform. That's where we should be focused.
Some how I sense a sense of total naivety among my "liberal" friends. Not all victims of normal governmental force are "innocent victims or non-citizens with full constitutional rights."
Do we not authorize SWAT teams, police and other officials the "right" (license) to use lethal-force in certain domestic situations? Hey, it happens. It's messy, but sometimes legal lethal-force is authorized (and/or justifiable) and used legally. (ie: Shit-happens in the real world). So what's the difference if it comes from a SWAT team-member's pistol, rifle, or drone?
To categorically dismiss any use of "drones" in every future domestic situation is utterly naive and stupid. We need an intelligent policy debate and rational realistic policies, not overly simplistic all-or-nothing babble from either extreme Left or Right.
Similarly I've been thinking lately, that before we jump to condemn Syria's President Assad for using lethal force against his own citizens (thereby certifying his own illegitimacy to my mind); we should remember that the US under President Lincoln, waged our bloodiest war (750,000 dead), including Sherman's final march of destruction, against the seceding (US) Confederacy. Yes, I understand an argument that by succeeding, they gave-up their (US) citizen rights -- but did they?
Aliceinwonderland - (from Mar. 4th) My point was that the President and his cohorts in Congress helped to design the Sequestration Bill and therefore were just as responsible as the Republican puppets that agreed to push this B.S. through Congress. Do you really believe in this phony in the Whitehouse? The Sequestration is nothing short of an Austerity program that he and the Dem.'s supported. Why would anyone support an instrument that is designed to cut the poor and middleclass off from essential help that the government can only supply?
Aliceinwonderland - My point was that the President and his cohorts in Congress helped to design the Sequestration Bill and therefore was just as responsible as the Republican puppets that agreed to push this B.S. through Congress. Do you really believe in this phony in the Whitehouse? The Sequestration is nothing short of an Austerity program that he and the Dem.'s supported. Why would anyone support an instrument that is designed to cut the poor and middleclass off from essential help that the government can only supply?
Bingo65: The "anti-government types" you refer to didn't just crawl out of bed one morning and decide to hate our democracy. Someone had to program them. That someone would be Fox using guys like Beck and Limpbaugh. This fomentation of domestic enemy combatants goes way beyond our First Amendment rights....it's TREASON. So why do they do it? This hate your government sentiment is a strategy. It's being used by a few billionaires who have employed the media and Teapublican Party as their vehicles of mass obstruction and distraction. This keeps attention off their looting of what's left of our wealth.
Unfortunately Holder and Rand just put an extra sail on this mass distraction of fear and hate. Not only is Obama going to take your guns, now he's also going to kill you with a drone.
hi thom i called in about the post office. check amazon.com reader reviews for a quick idea about the book" mobbing" also worker abuse was much more informative and helpful on that subject and directly refers to the post office as an autocratic crappy place(my words). i felt that the shooter in that real documentary movie (murder by proxy) and I were treated the same, i wish it was'nt true. i wish you could give some airtime to the subject. thanks