justlikeDennis.COM

Blurry vision but trying real hard to see

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Cooking Up a Crisis: "The disinformation campaign of the tort reform zealots, and their sustained attacks on the rights of patients who have been harmed by doctors, have been disgraceful. The proper prescription for this apparently chronic disorder is a strong dose of the truth. "

Aoccdrnig to rsceearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnat tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by itslef but the wrod as a wlohe.

Sojourners : SojoMail : Subscribe: "'For some reason, the most vocal Christians among us never mention the beatitudes. But, often with tears in their eyes, they demand that the Ten Commandments be posted in public buildings. And of course that's Moses, not Jesus. I haven't heard one of them demand that the Sermon on the Mount, the beatitudes, be posted anywhere.'
- Kurt Vonnegut "

Day out with Thomas at Strasburg RR Saturday, June 12

A local airplane enthusiast stopped by on June 2 to give the kids a look at a few of his 40 something remote control airplanes in action. Thanks!

Congressman Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania
I received a letter in reply to an email I sent Representative Joseph Pitts (congressional rep for Lancaster, Chester and Berks Counties in PA).
In short, my letter was an encouragement for my representative to press for the resignation of Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld regarding a pattern of abuse specifically in Iraq but apparently much broader. Mr. Pitts replied with a very nice semi-form letter. The bottom line is that Mr. Rumsfeld is not a problem. The jist is represented by Mr. Pitts following sentence:

"The record shows that Secretary Rumsfeld did the right thing. He took action and found the culprits. The Defense Department is actively prosecuting those who appear to be responsible."

What a beautiful description of what is going on. The Defense Department is going after those who "appear" to be responsible rather than an administration that is responsible.

TheStar.com - Justifying torture brings shame to U.S.: "In a paper prepared last year under the direction of the Defence Department's chief counsel, the president of the United States was declared empowered to disregard U.S. and international law and order the torture of foreign prisoners.
Torture was narrowly redefined, so that techniques that inflict pain and mental suffering could be deemed legal.
There is no justification, legal or moral, for the judgments made by Mr. Bush's political appointees at the Justice and Defence departments. Theirs is the logic of criminal regimes, of dictatorships around the world that sanction torture on grounds of 'national security.' For decades, the U.S. government has waged diplomatic campaigns against such outlaw governments that claim torture is justified when used to combat terrorism. "

Sojourners : Colombia Journal: 'I too was tortured'
by Hector Mondragon : "It was hard to see the photos of the torture in Iraq because I too was tortured. I saw myself naked with my feet fastened together and my hands tied behind my back. I saw my own head covered with a cloth bag. I remembered my feelings - the humiliation, pain....
Twenty-three years later at Colby College a sociology professor whose office was adjacent to mine and who is a member of School of the Americas Watch (SOAW) gave me a list of the Colombian army officials who graduated from the School of the Americas. What a surprise - there was the name of the official who had ordered my torture. SOAW has also distributed the 'textbooks' from this school, in which torture techniques are taught to Latin American military officials. I have always refused to hate the people who tortured me. I know that they, too, have been wounded by the system of power that converted them into torturers. Learning of the SOA confirmed that for me. "

SOCIAL CONSCIENCE FOR SALE :: RELEVANT magazine :: GOD.LIFE.PROGRESSIVE CULTURE.: "I pushed a family into servitude under a drug baron, I read the paper while 30 children died, I employed a ton more in a factory and I did horrific tests on beagle pups - all before I left my apartment this morning. I do this every morning with the coffee I drink, the clothing I wear, the shampoo I use and the apathy I perpetuate.

I am an oppressive force in this world. And most likely, so are you. "

World's Smallest Political Quiz
Where are you in the MATRIX?

(My reply to R. Scott Kender's fine letter to me ... havin' lots of fun)

Hi R. Scott (or Scott),

Thanks for contacting me. Stewart is a very gracious person with whom I have had a very healthy interchange. You are right in your judgment that I had wished for a different movie than what Stewart made and I think he will take my interest into consideration in the future. My point is that reduction of corruption is directly linked to reduction of violence as a means to make right what is wrong. I do not believe they can be separated to any useful effect.

Thank you for introducing me to your work with the Green Party. I am generally familiar with the Party in Europe http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/values.html where I have lived up until last summer. I can fully agree with the 10 key values in general.

In Europe I found that although I could agree with their general thrust, the philosophy informing the members was most often a modernist (Marxist) agenda (sometimes identified as "postmodern" or "late modern") where the dominant idea is that information liberates, that is, if we can educate society then society will be free... education as emancipation. This does not usually take into account the human need for powerful myth. See http://www.greenparty.org.uk/index.php?nav=speeches&n=39 - a speech given at my school, University of Lancaster, UK - "neo-liberalism" in Europe is a keyword which basically means the American economic system as presently exercised globally. This term automatically screams "informed by western marxism."

My doctoral thesis relies heavily on certain western Marxist writings (Frankfurt School...Althusser) which uses a technique called Critical Discourse Analysis (see Norman Fairclough) to reveal what is hidden in a text (spoken, written or symbolic). Although I love this stuff... I myself am not convinced that this knowledge is liberating. In fact, this orientation while quite prolific in European Universities and politics is almost without adherents in the USA. I think the biggest reason for this is that Europeans tend to hold on to the Modernist (socialist) ideal that if we could just get people to see their error (receive correct information) they would embrace the truth and do the right thing. In America, we have been conditioned through free market capitalism that people are selfish and greedy and that is just fine (as long as you are also generous and a good patriotic citizen) so when Europeans say "look how the Republicans or the Religious Right or Coca Cola or the Kennedys are manipulating you," Americans say, "Duh, as if!" - manipulation is at the heart of our socio-economic system ... we pay extra for manipulation and become bored without it. America is like a good movie (hey Stewart) that makes you cry or laugh or become angry JUST for the fun of living.

Where am I going with this? Simply that my experience with the more libertarian parties (as opposed to liberal) is that the adherents are exclusively agnostic (or atheist) Modernists with the belief that information is emancipatory and a denial of the presence and necessity of myth.

I do agree with the emanicipatory power of information but also recognize that the nature of that information must take into account the "spiritual" nature of humans. Humans do not function well with absolute power (being at the top of the power chain). A powerful metaphor (at the top of the power chain) is needed to address the evolutionary production of abject self-interest.

In academic terms, I am a Christian, because the symbol of a powerful man willingly pursuing right though he knows for certain it will result in his utter destruction and then exercising absolute commitment to the highest good toward those who harmed him, has the power to transform those who can "feel" the truth of this account.

I say "feel" rather than pretending that we can compute binarily like a computer apart from the intuitive makeup of our organic brain.

Although, intellectually I recognize that America has perpetrated great evil around the planet (and great good), I still get chills when I hear the national anthem. This is the power of myth. Myth doesn't address the factual veracity of an event only its power. If a story is powerful and moving it may attain the level of myth whether factually provable or not (the believer simply feels its truthfulness). When it looses its power it becomes fairytale. You may say, "I won't embrace a myth." Well, unless you are a pure iterative positivist (thus indecisive and perhaps suicidal), then you embrace the power of myth... for example the Western belief in inalienable human rights.(to include the goals of feminism).. has power to move nations and idealistic young film makers but without a shred of scientifically verifiable fact. What apart from a feeling in your heart can be relied upon to convince fundamentalists that woman should have the same right as men???? It is myth. Or the Western commitment to progress. Post-mod philosophers have debunked "progress" but that has had absolutely NO effect on human behavior. We unconditionally are committed to the powerful myth of "progress." Must I address the myth of "might makes right." SO we as members of an interconnected society must carefully chose our mutually acceptable myths. Are our myths compatible?

So the myth of "America the greatest nation" is powerful today and its power doesn't exclusively depend upon the truthfulness of the premise. However, the myth can unravel and become a fairytale if enough events and stories deconstruct the myth. So be careful in choosing which powerful myths you deconstruct as the society you help mold might bite you (or your descendants).

And so it is with Jesus Christ. Whether or not you believe in its historicity intellectually, it is powerful. It is a powerful story capable of transforming actions (to include political actions). Unfortunately, Jesus has been reduced to something other than a transforming pursuer of social justice with most Christians.

So, is there room in a Green Party for a theist? Can you imagine a Pro-Life Green Party member. By Pro-Life, I mean no capital punishment (never necessary?), violence of any sort as a failure (albeit in some cases a necessary failure), abortion as a failure (even when thought necessary), and so on...? Can you image a Green Party member who believes that Jesus is the perfect example of a person willing to suffer utter destruction to pursue what is right and can there be a Party member in great standing who believes that there is something scientient which we call "God" as opposed to impersonal "Nature." ...a member who doesn't need to "know" (and thus prove to you) that there is God but rather only someone who is empowered by that myth (in the sense I defined above) and believes that others will benefit from embracing that power?

(An example of a community trying to find room for Pro-Life types in the Democratic Party would be Sojourners http://www.sojo.net/)

--- On Jackson, I briefly recall Stewards film mentioning Jackson resisting the establishment of a National Bank (or Federal Reserve) as an example of someone recognizing a economic conspiracy in the making... I'm really pulling on memory here. Many historians believe that Jackson's vehement opposition to Biddle's National Banking system led to the "Panic of 1837" which created a broad economic collapse in America as he left office. This was a period (now lost to the American memory) of a time when State's rights and Federal sovereignty was fighting out their place. Jackson wanted State Banks to be the final authority in matters of a state's economy and Biddle representing those who felt that unregulated banks with only State oversight would bring the American economy to its knees. Jackson withdrew Federal funds from the National Bank and put them in his "pet" State Banks and at the same time put out a law that required payment in "specie" (Silver, Gold) rather than paper money for the sale of National Lands. This narrow view of America's growing economy contributed to a devastating event which ensured that hundreds of banks went broke (and thousands of average depositors). I am a collector of "broken bank" notes from this period. The conspiracy that Jackson seemed to see in the National Banks was a conspiracy that America required. Jackson banked on a losing myth.

Well, its been fun.

Thanks for the invite.

Dennis

Dear Dennis:

I am a roommate and friend of Stewart Bradley, as well as the chair of the Lancaster County Green Party. I have read your blog, and would like to add a comment:

It seems to me that you wished to see a different film than the one stew was making: he was merely putting the facts out there as he has researched them, of what has been transpiring before and after the 911 attack. He was not trying to create a fim that would give an answer on how to create a less violent world. Though that subject is in need of promotion, and would make a fascinating movie.

As for the Green Party: We are not liberals,conservatives, left/right: we are out in front!
Two of our Key Values: Non-Violence and Feminism, point directly to a moral philosophy that would engender the creation of a more peaceful and just society. For further info, please consult the GPUS webpage. This link takes you directly to the 10 Key Values-

http://www.gp.org/tenkey.html

We do not push anyone away when it comes to our meetings and/or activities: Our meetings are held in public spaces, and a re usually free(though a small donation is always welcome to defray costs). The local Sunday newspaper put Stewart on the front page of the Entertainment section, which we hoped would increase participation by one and all.

You are more than cordially invited to attend our next local meeting, which will be held on Thursday June 17th at the home of Green Party member Heather Mello, 223 E New Street in Lancaster. The meeting is informal, and food will be provided(you may bring your own if you wish). THe meeting starts at 7pm, lasts 2 hours.

Also, about Andrew Jackson- I found this on the web, using a search with the words 'Andrew Jackson and the Federal Reserve' . I think the panic you are talking aobut is the one created by Nelson Biddle, not Andrew Jackson. ANd its from a writer who is in the Reform Party:

www.patriotofnj.com/sys-tmpl/herestoyouandrewjackson

"I believe in God,
only I spell it Nature."

-- Frank Lloyd Wright, 1867-1959
architect

R Scott Kender
543 E Marion Street
Lancaster, PA 17602
717-299-1248
scott_kender@yahoo.com

"Increasingly, people are choosing 'green graves' - being buried au naturel amid the fields, forests and even the waters of the seas."
Thinking Outside the Box; Better Nutrition (Atlanta, Georgia); Feb 2003.

German Green Party

Howdy again Dennis,
Thanks you for your kind words and honest critique
of my work. You have given me some very important
things to consider and I hope to become a better
film maker with a focus on non - violent solutions.
I do look forward to a day when all people have
enough respect for life, and one another, that the use
of violence will no longer be necessary. The use of
force to settle conflicts is an unfortunate fact of
human history that we as a culture will hopefully
outgrow. Maybe with the influence of caring people
like you this will be possible.
I would like to point out that, in the film, the two
CIA hit men were handcuffed and led away to face
justice in a court of law, and the film ends with the
characters non- violently hijacking a major media
event ( super bowl ) to expose the incriminating
evidence that was being suppressed. The use of
media to educate the public is my personal
choice of non - violent solutions, and the inspiration
for Infotainment.
And I reject the concept of "Bad people". Some
people make mistakes and do terrible things, but
that persons ability to learn from their mistakes
and willingness to take responsibility for their
actions should always be met with unconditional
forgiveness.
Conspiracy is only one of my many interests.
My next production will be a much less political
film about a young group of scientists building a
spaceship. I hope it will be a humorous and
human drama that can be enjoyed by all political
viewpoints.
So again, I thank you and wish you all the best.
I will continue reading your insightful web blogs
and invite you to browse our site at
bradleyinfotainment.com.
Oh, and I don't consider Andrew Jackson ( one
of the worst presidents in our history ) to be a
hero by any stretch of the imagination. I hope that
wasn't the impression the movie gave.
Peace, Truth, and Justice............Stewart Bradley

(Here is my reply to Stewart's response to my critique of his film "The Proof.")

Hi Stewart,

I am impressed with your self-control in responding to my post. You have
been very gracious since I was venting a bit when I wrote my review. The
venting wasn't strictly speaking a result of your film but in response ( to
a great opportunity to vent). I am very impressed that you and your friends
have the motivation to make and promote a film to reflect your take on the
socio-political situation. I can say unreservedly that I admire you even if
I don't agree with your point.

Also, I felt a real sense of humor displayed at the library show which
defused any sense of weirdness usually associated with over-the-top
conspiracy theorists (when you present Andrew Jackson as the good guy
regarding the Federal Bank, you went over the top for me).

I have no problem with karate. I think it is a tremendous discipline and do
not wish to disparage its use or beauty. I only understood it as a
metaphor for the belief that violence has redemptive value in interpersonal
relations as used in your film (I saw no attempt to show the viewer its
beauty or discipline; it seemed to be used as a blunt instrument... a handy
club). This belief in redemptive violence may be expressed as "innocently"
as physically forcing a child to conform (spanking) or national policies
designed to monopolize means of violence (Soviet-style gun control) or
policies that reflect national hatefulness (support for capital punishment).

The corruption that you see regarding 9/11 is integrated with the use of
violence. The corruption is empowered, in my observation, by the American
conviction that violence is an effective means to "redeem", that is, make
the wrong right. How empowered would this type of corruption be if the
American psyche truly accepted deadly force only as a final option (rather
than the best option - which is used after threats of violence are
disregarded). By the way, this isn't the utopia of some perfect world.
Increasingly national institutions (to include the US's War College - not
often listened to) have understood and accepted the fact of the
ineffectiveness of violent "solution."

I am guessing that you understood me to be taking a "passivist" position
expressed as no resistance toward "wrong". Rather I wish to hold an
agressive non-violent position. Perhaps karate can be used non-violently
(without hate or mortal injury), but that isn't the point. In the film,
where you can invent the reality, you chose to close the film by physically
disabling or killing the opponent (it isn't clear what the condition of the
"bad" guy was nor did his condition seem to matter ... he's the bad guy and
the aggressor has full justification for his actions... BUT as do all....).
This may be a "necessity" in this imperfect world. But it is only one
necessity enabled by the myth-mongers...there are many more (all grossly
underutilized), which are agressively non-violent if a long-term peaceful
affect is desired.

I fully realize your target audience was not conservative (whether christian
or otherwise) Republican but wished it could be as they are enablers of much
of the corruption you see. I am deeply saddened by the state of America and
the state of our choice for president this fall. You put so much work into
your film, I just wish I could invite my conservative friends to watch but
know that it would do no good (just the opposite) much of that having
nothing to do with your scripting skills.

However, I have had some success influencing friends who tend to
uncritically support establishment politics. One book (as an example of a
growing genre) which is very accessible and has been taken seriously by
those I have given it to is The Trial of Henry Kissinger by Christopher
Hitchens. Although this isn't dealing directly with your focus, it does
directly deal with the current blindness of Americans to American foreign
policy and its dependence on monopolizing violence to achieve its (corrupt)
global goals of self-preservation. However, products from the like of
Michael Moore require too much discipline from the conservative to be able
to wade through his polemics to find the "truth" in his research. In Dude,
Where's My Country?, (I assume his upcoming film will cover much of the same
territory) was unbelievably polemic with only the tiniest shreds of credible
evidence. I was sad. I want to influence the conservative American mind as
they seem to have the edge at this time in national policies (a dangerous
edge) so I was disappointed when I saw your film as one that would have no
audience among them.

You said,
"But you totally failed to address the point of the film: Do we
now have enough evidence (not faith) to prove that the Bush
administration allowed the 9/11 attack to succeed for political
and monetary gain? This film was not based on theory, but on
research."

(I guess "theory" here means "unsubstantiated claims" and "research" means
"substantiated claims")

I would rather think I didn't fail to address the point. No, I do not think
you demonstrated enough evidence to give credible substance to your claim
that the Bush admin allowed the attack to succeed. As a result I looked to
the film to show another way. In what way should a non-corrupt admin act
regarding Palestine/Israel, Islamic fundamentalism, use of violence as a
tool for negotiating peace.... in Israel, in Iraq, Iran, Korea (or shall we
go back to the American Revolution - is Canada such a horrible country
today, to the Civil War... was it an inevitable part of an imperfect world
or in fact the imperfect world which didn't have to be?)?

It is this very position that makes your message ineffective IMHO. To argue
that the admin is corrupt could have been convincingly displayed (such as
the corrupt motives for a military solution in the Middle East rather than a

political solution). The evidence you displayed did support the
increasingly aired position that the Bush admin's involvement with Saudi Oil
compromised their ability to effectively deal with 9/11 but not that they
helped the attack succeed with premeditation.

Anyway, thanks for you hard work and I hope you keep it up. I, as an
armchair critic, would encourage a motivated and caring person as yourself
to target you next film toward the folk who are the enablers of corruption.
I also recognize my nonviolent positions for the most part make me
irrelevant (or the object of wrath) to the conservatives I usually find
myself among and apparently they aren't terribly welcome among the so-called
liberals either.

Best wishes and keep on,

Dennis

(The following link would be a start if someone wants to follow up in my claim that even militant America is recognizing that money spent on mediating conflict peacefully is money that needs to be spent (although it has its problems and detractors willing to point them out).
Making Peace While Staying Ready for War: The Challenges of U.S. Military Participation in Peace Operations

(This evening, I received a reply to my blog critique of the locally made film, "The Proof." To see the critique go to April 28.)

name: Stewart Bradley
email: st0069@hotmail.com

comment: Howdy Dennis,
First let me thank you for coming out to see the movie
"The Proof" at the Lancaster library last April, although I
only recently read your web blog review, and I must say that
I'm sorry if I've offended you.
I have occasionally read your postings on several important
topics and have always been impressed at your remarkable
powers of observation, and more often than not I support your
arguments.
Which is why I fear I have failed as a film maker to get the
message of the film across. I admit, this was my first attempt
at a film of this style (Infotainment),and I myself was not pleased
with how some aspects of the film turned out, but I was making
the best of what I had to work with.
Let me make it clear that I am not Anti-Bush. I am
anti-corruption. I could just as easily have made a film about
Oklahoma city, Waco, or the illegal Indonesian contributions
to the Clinton campaign. It is deception and corruption that I
am opposed to regardless of party affiliation. ( even Green! )
And there was a false assumption that my target audience
was Christian Republicans living in Lancaster. If it was, we
certainly would not have used naughty words as often as we
did, for that would be a sure way to upset "mature adults."
I did manage to edit out most of the F- words (except for one
in the blooper section uttered under a frustrated actors breath)
and totally scrapped the "Orgy" scene. (That was a joke). But
this film would easily qualify as a PG-13 rating.
Your main problem with the film seems to be the use of Karate
to defend yourself. The philosophy of the martial arts is to use
minimal bodily force for self defense and to prevent harm to
others, not to kill. Anybody can buy a gun if they want to kill.
If you seriously believe that a person does not have the moral
right to stop a violent person from physically harming you or a
loved one, for fear that the attacker might suffer a bruise or
broken bone, than you are living in a perfect world.
In a perfect world we would not need a police force because
everyone would understand that "hurting and killing people to
fix problems isn't a solution". We do not live in a perfect world.
But you totally failed to address the point of the film: Do we
now have enough evidence (not faith) to prove that the Bush
administration allowed the 9/11 attack to succeed for political
and monetary gain? This film was not based on theory, but on
research. You are encouraged to check out the sources listed with
the movie or the program for the event.
I would be more than interested in hearing your ideas on that
aspect of the film.
I send you best wishes and thank you for the dialogue!
Peace, Truth, and Justice...(really)............................Stewart Bradley