A Visit to the Salt Mine


A Visit to the Salt Mine

I wake up every morning with a smile.

Not letting them sleep is okay with me.

Torture kept our country safe, for a while.

These are terrorists, mostly, they are vile

So we can treat them as we wish, you see?

I wake up every morning with a smile.

Stress positions were a reasonable style

Of persuasion, not unlike yoga, see?

Torture kept our country safe, for a while.

There was no need to…

View On WordPress

A Visit to the Salt Mine


A Visit to the Salt Mine

I wake up every morning with a smile.

Not letting them sleep is okay with me.

Torture kept our country safe, for a while.

These are terrorists, mostly, they are vile

So we can treat them as we wish, you see?

I wake up every morning with a smile.

Stress positions were a reasonable style

Of persuasion, not unlike yoga, see?

Torture kept our country safe, for a while.

There was no need to…

View On WordPress

A Visit to the Salt Pit.


I wake up every morning with a smile.

Not letting them sleep is okay with me.

Torture kept our country safe, for a while.

These are terrorists, mostly, they are vile

So we can treat them as we wish, you see?

I wake up every morning with a smile.

Stress positions were a reasonable style

Of persuasion, not unlike yoga, see?

Torture kept our country safe, for a while.

There was no need to offer them a trial

If they were innocent then they’d  be free.

I wake up every morning with a smile

Yes, rectal feeding was very worthwhile.

There was no real damage, if you ask me.

I wake up every morning with a smile.

Torture kept our country safe, for a while.

Appetite for Distraction – Another Day.


He wakes up. President Obama has gone Liam Neeson on IS or ISIL or ISIS or whatever the gang of desert ne’er do wells are called. He is not sure that President Obama believes anything he says publicly anymore but he’s saying it he saying it again and again. He watches as the fear of ISIS grows and grows and grows and the news stories talk about the growing fears even as the CIA says again and again that there are no credible threats and when the CIA say there are no credible threats there are probably no credible threats because the CIA love having credible threats to get their black ops money for and are always willing to talk about threats so even if they don’t think that they are a threat then are they a threat. He does not know. Then he gets angry because Cecily Strong is being kicked off Weekend Update because no one wants to kick the White coiffed head writer off Weekend Update because the white man always wins even though her replacement is the excellent Michael Che but why not have Michael Che and Cecily Strong is it because Lorne Michaels thinks that America is not ready for a black man and a white woman to appear together on live television doing comedy together week in and week out is america still terrified of a black man and a white woman making comedy together is this where we are have we not moved on he thinks to himself. Then he plans his lunch. Then he goes to the gym. Then he showers. Then he wonders if Ted Cruz’s strange argument that Lorne Michaels could be in prison for satire if a law limiting Citizens United comes into affect is a real argument or if Senator Ted Cruz is actually an apolitical performance artist who managed to get elected with grant money from a billionaires art foundation. It is a hot muggy night. He sits in Wholefoods and joins the other hairy homeless men in the pot plants and the dirty tables. He holds hands. He goes to sleep.

Shocking ‘Extermination’ Fantasies By the People Running America’s Empire on Full Display at Aspen Summit


This is a great article about a recent Security Forum at Aspen. A secluded retreat where the Elite circle jerk each other into a frenzy of paranoia about the world outside their bomb-shelter.

One particularly interesting paragraph in the article is this one. I’ve highlighted bits in it:

With the revolts blurring the old boundaries imposed on the Arab world during the late colonial era, former CIA director John McLaughlin rose from the audience to call for the U.S. to form a secret, Sikes-Picot-style commission to draw up a new set of borders.

“The American government should now have such a group asking how we should manage those lines and what should those lines be,” McLaughlin told the panelists, who dismissed the idea of a new Great Game even as they discussed tactics for preserving U.S. dominance in the Middle East.

Re-drawing borders unilaterally? Even though the August panel of his peers dismissed this idea the fact that it’s even being considered seems to be something that should, perhaps, get a little more air-time no? Or are they all happy that The Sykes-Picot Agreement was an extraordinary success?

I am, as always, baffled by the world view of The Elite.

Shocking ‘Extermination’ Fantasies By the People Running America’s Empire on Full Display at Aspen Summit

Shocking ‘Extermination’ Fantasies By the People Running America’s Empire on Full Display at Aspen Summit


This is a great article about a recent Security Forum at Aspen. A secluded retreat where the Elite circle jerk each other into a frenzy of paranoia about the world outside their bomb-shelter.

One particularly interesting paragraph in the article is this one. I’ve highlighted bits in it:

With the revolts blurring the old boundaries imposed on the Arab world during the late colonial era, former CIA director John McLaughlin rose from the audience to call for the U.S. to form a secret, Sikes-Picot-style commission to draw up a new set of borders.

“The American government should now have such a group asking how we should manage those lines and what should those lines be,” McLaughlin told the panelists, who dismissed the idea of a new Great Game even as they discussed tactics for preserving U.S. dominance in the Middle East.

Re-drawing borders unilaterally? Even though the August panel of his peers dismissed this idea the fact that it’s even being considered seems to be something that should, perhaps, get a little more air-time no? Or are they all happy that The Sykes-Picot Agreement was an extraordinary success?

I am, as always, baffled by the world view of The Elite.

Shocking ‘Extermination’ Fantasies By the People Running America’s Empire on Full Display at Aspen Summit


The Secret police—the NSA, the CIA, et al—are by their very nature antithetical to those ideals, because openness and transparency about rules are essential to democratic public justification, and therefore to the legitimacy of state power. What must be secret cannot be fully democratic. One may well worry whether we can afford such a demanding standard of legitimate government in such a dangerous world. Perhaps we cannot. Perhaps it is foolish to be too good. But in that case we need to be clear-headed about it, and understand that secret police are a straightforwardly anti-democratic concession we make to a dangerous world. And we ought to accept that any strengthening of the powers of the secret police—especially the secret strengthening of the powers of the secret police—is a further blow to democracy and the legitimacy of our laws. The NSA’s digital dragnet is a silent coup. The filibuster is rain on election day.

The Economist (via azspot)

It does pose the question though, does The Economist think that the world is dangerous enough to give secret police free reign?

Surely the world can never be that dangerous and, if it is, perhaps time would be better spent working out why it is so dangerous and going someway to addressing those problems.

Would it be unusual to suggest that most people want a ready supply of food, water, shelter and human connection? That they want to do meaningful work that gives them self respect and the feeling of being a valuable member in the society in which they live? That they want freedom from persecution and torture and the right to engage and decide the things that affect them, their family and their community in a way that allows them to retain dignity and hope?

I guess I’ll never be a writer for The Economist because I just feel I don’t understand how the world really works.


The Secret police—the NSA, the CIA, et al—are by their very nature antithetical to those ideals, because openness and transparency about rules are essential to democratic public justification, and therefore to the legitimacy of state power. What must be secret cannot be fully democratic. One may well worry whether we can afford such a demanding standard of legitimate government in such a dangerous world. Perhaps we cannot. Perhaps it is foolish to be too good. But in that case we need to be clear-headed about it, and understand that secret police are a straightforwardly anti-democratic concession we make to a dangerous world. And we ought to accept that any strengthening of the powers of the secret police—especially the secret strengthening of the powers of the secret police—is a further blow to democracy and the legitimacy of our laws. The NSA’s digital dragnet is a silent coup. The filibuster is rain on election day.

The Economist (via azspot)

It does pose the question though, does The Economist think that the world is dangerous enough to give secret police free reign?

Surely the world can never be that dangerous and, if it is, perhaps time would be better spent working out why it is so dangerous and going someway to addressing those problems.

Would it be unusual to suggest that most people want a ready supply of food, water, shelter and human connection? That they want to do meaningful work that gives them self respect and the feeling of being a valuable member in the society in which they live? That they want freedom from persecution and torture and the right to engage and decide the things that affect them, their family and their community in a way that allows them to retain dignity and hope?

I guess I’ll never be a writer for The Economist because I just feel I don’t understand how the world really works.