Professor Quits Dept. Post After 9/11 Stir

[Steeplerot]

If the school admins have the facts and not disinformation how could he be in trouble. This is BS smear hopefully he tells the real fascists to shove it.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
If the school admins have the facts and not disinformation how could he be in trouble. This is BS smear hopefully he tells the real fascists to shove it.

while he does make some points, they are very one sided. The US has done far more good for the world than bad. Nor did the victims of the world trade center deserve to be called little eichmans.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
If the school admins have the facts and not disinformation how could he be in trouble. This is BS smear hopefully he tells the real fascists to shove it.

while he does make some points, they are very one sided. The US has done far more good for the world than bad. Nor did the victims of the world trade center deserve to be called little eichmans.

Keep closing your eyes and believing that tripe and we keep getting bombed..when is this going to end...
He adresseed this falsehood already give it up already a lie is a lie no matter how much you love them when they fit your agenda.

 

[aidanjm]

Here's hoping sales of his book are up as a result of this controversy. Seems like a book everyone should read.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
:beer: to the prof. He's spot on.

HE SAID THE PEOPLE IN THE TRADE TOWER DESERVED TO DIE. He's spot on? Jesus christ...

 

[Steeplerot]

He did not say that....wtf don't believe everything you see on tv.

Originally posted by: her209
http://www.colorado.edu/Ethnic..._churchill_013105.html

Press Release - Ward Churchill
January 31, 2005

Printer-friendly version (.doc)

In the last few days there has been widespread and grossly inaccurate media coverage concerning my analysis of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, coverage that has resulted in defamation of my character and threats against my life. What I actually said has been lost, indeed turned into the opposite of itself, and I hope the following facts will be reported at least to the same extent that the fabrications have been.


* The piece circulating on the internet was developed into a book, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens. Most of the book is a detailed chronology of U.S. military interventions since 1776 and U.S. violations of international law since World War II. My point is that we cannot allow the U.S. government, acting in our name, to engage in massive violations of international law and fundamental human rights and not expect to reap the consequences.


* I am not a ?defender?of the September 11 attacks, but simply pointing out that if U.S. foreign policy results in massive death and destruction abroad, we cannot feign innocence when some of that destruction is returned. I have never said that people ?should? engage in armed attacks on the United States , but that such attacks are a natural and unavoidable consequence of unlawful U.S. policy. As Martin Luther King, quoting Robert F. Kennedy, said, ?Those who make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable.?


* This is not to say that I advocate violence; as a U.S. soldier in Vietnam I witnessed and participated in more violence than I ever wish to see. What I am saying is that if we want an end to violence, especially that perpetrated against civilians, we must take the responsibility for halting the slaughter perpetrated by the United States around the world. My feelings are reflected in Dr. King's April 1967 Riverside speech, where, when asked about the wave of urban rebellions in U.S. cities, he said, ?I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed . . . without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today ? my own government.?


* In 1996 Madeleine Albright, then Ambassador to the UN and soon to be U.S. Secretary of State, did not dispute that 500,000 Iraqi children had died as a result of economic sanctions, but stated on national television that ?we? had decided it was ?worth the cost.? I mourn the victims of the September 11 attacks, just as I mourn the deaths of those Iraqi children, the more than 3 million people killed in the war in Indochina, those who died in the U.S. invasions of Grenada, Panama and elsewhere in Central America, the victims of the transatlantic slave trade, and the indigenous peoples still subjected to genocidal policies. If we respond with callous disregard to the deaths of others, we can only expect equal callousness to American deaths.


* Finally, I have never characterized all the September 11 victims as ?Nazis.? What I said was that the ?technocrats of empire? working in the World Trade Center were the equivalent of ?little Eichmanns.? Adolf Eichmann was not charged with direct killing but with ensuring the smooth running of the infrastructure that enabled the Nazi genocide. Similarly, German industrialists were legitimately targeted by the Allies.


* It is not disputed that the Pentagon was a military target, or that a CIA office was situated in the World Trade Center . Following the logic by which U.S. Defense Department spokespersons have consistently sought to justify target selection in places like Baghdad , this placement of an element of the American ?command and control infrastructure? in an ostensibly civilian facility converted the Trade Center itself into a ?legitimate? target. Again following U.S. military doctrine, as announced in briefing after briefing, those who did not work for the CIA but were nonetheless killed in the attack amounted to ?collateral damage.? If the U.S. public is prepared to accept these ?standards? when the are routinely applied to other people, they should be not be surprised when the same standards are applied to them.


* It should be emphasized that I applied the ?little Eichmanns? characterization only to those described as ?technicians.? Thus, it was obviously not directed to the children, janitors, food service workers, firemen and random passers-by killed in the 9-1-1 attack. According to Pentagon logic, were simply part of the collateral damage. Ugly? Yes. Hurtful? Yes. And that's my point. It's no less ugly, painful or dehumanizing a description when applied to Iraqis, Palestinians, or anyone else. If we ourselves do not want to be treated in this fashion, we must refuse to allow others to be similarly devalued and dehumanized in our name.


* The bottom line of my argument is that the best and perhaps only way to prevent 9-1-1-style attacks on the U.S. is for American citizens to compel their government to comply with the rule of law. The lesson of Nuremberg is that this is not only our right, but our obligation. To the extent we shirk this responsibility, we, like the ?Good Germans? of the 1930s and '40s, are complicit in its actions and have no legitimate basis for complaint when we suffer the consequences. This, of course, includes me, personally, as well as my family, no less than anyone else.


* These points are clearly stated and documented in my book, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens , which recently won Honorary Mention for the Gustavus Myer Human Rights Award. for best writing on human rights. Some people will, of course, disagree with my analysis, but it presents questions that must be addressed in academic and public debate if we are to find a real solution to the violence that pervades today's world. The gross distortions of what I actually said can only be viewed as an attempt to distract the public from the real issues at hand and to further stifle freedom of speech and academic debate in this country.


These are the views of Ward Churchill, not the University of Colorado.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
He did not say that....wtf don't believe everything you see on tv.

Did you read his essay? I did. He said right in the essay the people killed in the trade towers were not innocent. To me, that is saying they were killed with just cause and deserved it. He's a piece of sh!t and I hope he rots in hell with bin laden and the rest of them.

 

[Steeplerot]

Pretty obvious you either did not read teh essay or your reading comprehension is lacking. Sorry doesent make him a POS. Just makes you lame.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
:beer: to the prof. He's spot on.

HE SAID THE PEOPLE IN THE TRADE TOWER DESERVED TO DIE. He's spot on? Jesus christ...

yes, anyone that even implies as such is beyond ethically challenged.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
He did not say that....wtf don't believe everything you see on tv.

Did you read his essay? I did. He said right in the essay the people killed in the trade towers were not innocent. To me, that is saying they were killed with just cause and deserved it. He's a piece of sh!t and I hope he rots in hell with bin laden and the rest of them.

Well, he did follow up and say the Janitors and service people didn't deserved to die. But they were collateral damage on a legitimate target.

So I would assume, that as he is a "gear" in the US education system, and works for the US government, that he would consider himself a legitimate target as well.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: ntdz
HE SAID THE PEOPLE IN THE TRADE TOWER DESERVED TO DIE. He's spot on? Jesus christ...

Did you actually READ what her209 posted - what the guy really said? Apparently not, or you would realize that he never said that at all.. I'll accept your apology after you do.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
It's a touchy thing that is easily misconstrued. He wasen't saying the victims were nazis but a citizen of a belligerent superpower and we as individuals are not totally innocent becasue of such.
It depends on what angle you see 9/11 from: US was stirring up trouble for decades now and got their just dues in a way.
Or the: We are all toally innocent and they hate our "freedoms" even though (IMO) the responsibility of our leaders falls on every one of our shoulders to varying degrees depening on your stance.
Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves?
I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past.

So, all of the Iraqi civilian deaths are justified because Saddam was a tyrant?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
It's a touchy thing that is easily misconstrued. He wasen't saying the victims were nazis but a citizen of a belligerent superpower and we as individuals are not totally innocent becasue of such.
It depends on what angle you see 9/11 from: US was stirring up trouble for decades now and got their just dues in a way.
Or the: We are all toally innocent and they hate our "freedoms" even though (IMO) the responsibility of our leaders falls on every one of our shoulders to varying degrees depening on your stance.
Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves?
I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past.

So, all of the Iraqi civilian deaths are justified because Saddam was a tyrant?

I am not getting you Conjur. Of course their deaths are not justified as WTC death were not either....*you lost me* -either that or I just woke up and am still a bit groggy-headed.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do think it is dangerous to demand a university sack professors for expressing unpopular, controversial, "offensive" or "distasteful" views. I think professors need to be protected from that, actually. Turning academia into a popularity contest (more so than it already is) would definitely inihibit research in controversial areas.

Yup. I didn't agree with what this guy said, but he should be able to say it and still teach.

(The only reason I see for firing someone because of ideas is if it clearly impacts their teaching-- like thiking blacks are subhuman which would make it hard for blacks to take a course).

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
It's a touchy thing that is easily misconstrued. He wasen't saying the victims were nazis but a citizen of a belligerent superpower and we as individuals are not totally innocent becasue of such.
It depends on what angle you see 9/11 from: US was stirring up trouble for decades now and got their just dues in a way.
Or the: We are all toally innocent and they hate our "freedoms" even though (IMO) the responsibility of our leaders falls on every one of our shoulders to varying degrees depening on your stance.
Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves?
I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past.

So, all of the Iraqi civilian deaths are justified because Saddam was a tyrant?

I am not getting you Conjur. Of course their deaths are not justified as WTC death were not either....*you lost me* -either that or I just woke up and am still a bit groggy-headed.

Maybe I'm misreading your post. Still on sinus meds.

But, your statement:

"Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves? I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past"

seems to imply some responsibility on the citizenry to stop evil actions of their government, even if they aren't militarily capable.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
It's a touchy thing that is easily misconstrued. He wasen't saying the victims were nazis but a citizen of a belligerent superpower and we as individuals are not totally innocent becasue of such.
It depends on what angle you see 9/11 from: US was stirring up trouble for decades now and got their just dues in a way.
Or the: We are all toally innocent and they hate our "freedoms" even though (IMO) the responsibility of our leaders falls on every one of our shoulders to varying degrees depening on your stance.
Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves?
I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past.

So, all of the Iraqi civilian deaths are justified because Saddam was a tyrant?

I am not getting you Conjur. Of course their deaths are not justified as WTC death were not either....*you lost me* -either that or I just woke up and am still a bit groggy-headed.

Maybe I'm misreading your post. Still on sinus meds.

But, your statement:

"Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves? I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past"

seems to imply some responsibility on the citizenry to stop evil actions of their government, even if they aren't militarily capable.

The guilty might not deserve their punishment, but should expect it.

I agree with what the Prof is saying, and until people understand what he is saying, we'll continue being the target of 9/11-style attacks.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
It's a touchy thing that is easily misconstrued. He wasen't saying the victims were nazis but a citizen of a belligerent superpower and we as individuals are not totally innocent becasue of such.
It depends on what angle you see 9/11 from: US was stirring up trouble for decades now and got their just dues in a way.
Or the: We are all toally innocent and they hate our "freedoms" even though (IMO) the responsibility of our leaders falls on every one of our shoulders to varying degrees depening on your stance.
Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves?
I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past.

So, all of the Iraqi civilian deaths are justified because Saddam was a tyrant?

I am not getting you Conjur. Of course their deaths are not justified as WTC death were not either....*you lost me* -either that or I just woke up and am still a bit groggy-headed.

Maybe I'm misreading your post. Still on sinus meds.

But, your statement:

"Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves? I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past"

seems to imply some responsibility on the citizenry to stop evil actions of their government, even if they aren't militarily capable.

The guilty might not deserve their punishment, but should expect it.

I agree with what the Prof is saying, and until people understand what he is saying, we'll continue being the target of 9/11-style attacks.

The Prof. should be directing his anger at U.S. foreign policy, not the innocent civilians.

The Pentagon was a valid target but hitting a skyscraper filled with companies like stock brokers, banks, day care centers, etc. is just WAAAAY out of the realm of the justifiable.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
It's a touchy thing that is easily misconstrued. He wasen't saying the victims were nazis but a citizen of a belligerent superpower and we as individuals are not totally innocent becasue of such.
It depends on what angle you see 9/11 from: US was stirring up trouble for decades now and got their just dues in a way.
Or the: We are all toally innocent and they hate our "freedoms" even though (IMO) the responsibility of our leaders falls on every one of our shoulders to varying degrees depening on your stance.
Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves?
I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past.

So, all of the Iraqi civilian deaths are justified because Saddam was a tyrant?

I am not getting you Conjur. Of course their deaths are not justified as WTC death were not either....*you lost me* -either that or I just woke up and am still a bit groggy-headed.

Maybe I'm misreading your post. Still on sinus meds.

But, your statement:

"Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves? I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past"

seems to imply some responsibility on the citizenry to stop evil actions of their government, even if they aren't militarily capable.

The guilty might not deserve their punishment, but should expect it.

I agree with what the Prof is saying, and until people understand what he is saying, we'll continue being the target of 9/11-style attacks.

The Prof. should be directing his anger at U.S. foreign policy, not the innocent civilians.

The Pentagon was a valid target but hitting a skyscraper filled with companies like stock brokers, banks, day care centers, etc. is just WAAAAY out of the realm of the justifiable.

Conjur, our gov't is only able to be our gov't b'c citizens vote them into office. If our gov't is quilty, so are we.

He's not saying that we deserve to be punished. He's saying we should expect it. He's not saying that Al Qaida was justified in attacking us. He's saying we should expect it.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: conjur
The Prof. should be directing his anger at U.S. foreign policy, not the innocent civilians.

The Pentagon was a valid target but hitting a skyscraper filled with companies like stock brokers, banks, day care centers, etc. is just WAAAAY out of the realm of the justifiable.

I think what he was trying to say is that, using the US's justification scheme regarding which targets may be attacked, the WTC would be a viable target. Basically, he's pointing out the hypocrisy of US warmaking.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: conjur
The Prof. should be directing his anger at U.S. foreign policy, not the innocent civilians.

The Pentagon was a valid target but hitting a skyscraper filled with companies like stock brokers, banks, day care centers, etc. is just WAAAAY out of the realm of the justifiable.

Conjur, our gov't is only able to be our gov't b'c citizens vote them into office. If our gov't is quilty, so are we.

He's not saying that we deserve to be punished. He's saying we should expect it. He's not saying that Al Qaida was justified in attacking us. He's saying we should expect it.

We don't control what our elected leaders do once they're in office. We can hold them accountable afterward, but only if we're informed. You think more than 1% of Americans know the details behind the death squads in Central America? Or the lies behind the Iraq War or even the lies behind the 1991 Gulf War?

And, with candidates like Bush that flip-flop on EVERY damn campaign issue except the one he *should* have flip-flopped on (tax cuts), what is the average person to do?

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: conjur
The Prof. should be directing his anger at U.S. foreign policy, not the innocent civilians.

The Pentagon was a valid target but hitting a skyscraper filled with companies like stock brokers, banks, day care centers, etc. is just WAAAAY out of the realm of the justifiable.

Conjur, our gov't is only able to be our gov't b'c citizens vote them into office. If our gov't is quilty, so are we.

He's not saying that we deserve to be punished. He's saying we should expect it. He's not saying that Al Qaida was justified in attacking us. He's saying we should expect it.

We don't control what our elected leaders do once they're in office. We can hold them accountable afterward, but only if we're informed. You think more than 1% of Americans know the details behind the death squads in Central America? Or the lies behind the Iraq War or even the lies behind the 1991 Gulf War?

And, with candidates like Bush that flip-flop on EVERY damn campaign issue except the one he *should* have flip-flopped on (tax cuts), what is the average person to do?

What are we supposed to do? Hold them accountable. Protests. Sit-ins. But mostly, educating ourselves on what our gov't does. Most people in this country don't care anymore, like you said, maybe 1% of Americans know/care about the attrocities our gov't have comitted overseas. That's the problem.

Instead of asking, "what can we do," maybe you should ask, "what can THEY do?" What can the Central Americans do? What can the Iraqi's do? They have zero say in what our gov't does. Do we have 100% say in what our gov't does? No. Should we? Hell yes.

We have stopped trying to run our gov't, and that is not the way the US was set up. Our rights have not been taken from us, rather, we have given them away. And in turn, we no longer have the power, we have given it away, we vote for who the RNC and DNC nominate, ultra-rich, elite bastards who don't really give a crap about the American public.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
It's a touchy thing that is easily misconstrued. He wasen't saying the victims were nazis but a citizen of a belligerent superpower and we as individuals are not totally innocent becasue of such.
It depends on what angle you see 9/11 from: US was stirring up trouble for decades now and got their just dues in a way.
Or the: We are all toally innocent and they hate our "freedoms" even though (IMO) the responsibility of our leaders falls on every one of our shoulders to varying degrees depening on your stance.
Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves?
I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past.

So, all of the Iraqi civilian deaths are justified because Saddam was a tyrant?

I am not getting you Conjur. Of course their deaths are not justified as WTC death were not either....*you lost me* -either that or I just woke up and am still a bit groggy-headed.

Maybe I'm misreading your post. Still on sinus meds.

But, your statement:

"Would someone who did not make an effort to overthrow a knowingly repressive regime be guilty in some way themselves? I am sure there were plenty of good German folk wondering this at times in the past"

seems to imply some responsibility on the citizenry to stop evil actions of their government, even if they aren't militarily capable.

Interesting point, yes and not many here would agree with me, but whats new?
I do feel that all of us no matter what party are responsible for what we are letting them get away with.
In some way our complacentcy has enabled bushco to get where he is. And we are all responsible -in a way.
Things are not as bad a national socialist germany but I am quite sure myself if I lived back then I would be in some part involved in the resistance.
I couldn't stand there and swallow the lies and propaganda. -Not my style, but then I am no fan of the past few presidents clit-0n included.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: conjur
The Prof. should be directing his anger at U.S. foreign policy, not the innocent civilians.

The Pentagon was a valid target but hitting a skyscraper filled with companies like stock brokers, banks, day care centers, etc. is just WAAAAY out of the realm of the justifiable.

Conjur, our gov't is only able to be our gov't b'c citizens vote them into office. If our gov't is quilty, so are we.

He's not saying that we deserve to be punished. He's saying we should expect it. He's not saying that Al Qaida was justified in attacking us. He's saying we should expect it.

We don't control what our elected leaders do once they're in office. We can hold them accountable afterward, but only if we're informed. You think more than 1% of Americans know the details behind the death squads in Central America? Or the lies behind the Iraq War or even the lies behind the 1991 Gulf War?

And, with candidates like Bush that flip-flop on EVERY damn campaign issue except the one he *should* have flip-flopped on (tax cuts), what is the average person to do?

What are we supposed to do? Hold them accountable. Protests. Sit-ins. But mostly, educating ourselves on what our gov't does. Most people in this country don't care anymore, like you said, maybe 1% of Americans know/care about the attrocities our gov't have comitted overseas. That's the problem.

Instead of asking, "what can we do," maybe you should ask, "what can THEY do?" What can the Central Americans do? What can the Iraqi's do? They have zero say in what our gov't does. Do we have 100% say in what our gov't does? No. Should we? Hell yes.

We have stopped trying to run our gov't, and that is not the way the US was set up. Our rights have not been taken from us, rather, we have given them away. And in turn, we no longer have the power, we have given it away, we vote for who the RNC and DNC nominate, ultra-rich, elite bastards who don't really give a crap about the American public.

You're preaching to the choir. I've long said our gov't is in for a big hurt, probably even in my lifetime. The lobbyists/special interests and the way politicians' terms are focused on how to re-elected the next time so they engage in fund-raising from day one are the root cause of the failure of our government to act efficiently and to hold itself accountable.

The average voter has little chance of making change happen. There will have to be a dramatic, perhaps even tragic, event in order for true change to occur.

 

[judasmachine]

free speech anyone?

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: conjur
The Prof. should be directing his anger at U.S. foreign policy, not the innocent civilians.

The Pentagon was a valid target but hitting a skyscraper filled with companies like stock brokers, banks, day care centers, etc. is just WAAAAY out of the realm of the justifiable.

Conjur, our gov't is only able to be our gov't b'c citizens vote them into office. If our gov't is quilty, so are we.

He's not saying that we deserve to be punished. He's saying we should expect it. He's not saying that Al Qaida was justified in attacking us. He's saying we should expect it.

We don't control what our elected leaders do once they're in office. We can hold them accountable afterward, but only if we're informed. You think more than 1% of Americans know the details behind the death squads in Central America? Or the lies behind the Iraq War or even the lies behind the 1991 Gulf War?

And, with candidates like Bush that flip-flop on EVERY damn campaign issue except the one he *should* have flip-flopped on (tax cuts), what is the average person to do?

What are we supposed to do? Hold them accountable. Protests. Sit-ins. But mostly, educating ourselves on what our gov't does. Most people in this country don't care anymore, like you said, maybe 1% of Americans know/care about the attrocities our gov't have comitted overseas. That's the problem.

Instead of asking, "what can we do," maybe you should ask, "what can THEY do?" What can the Central Americans do? What can the Iraqi's do? They have zero say in what our gov't does. Do we have 100% say in what our gov't does? No. Should we? Hell yes.

We have stopped trying to run our gov't, and that is not the way the US was set up. Our rights have not been taken from us, rather, we have given them away. And in turn, we no longer have the power, we have given it away, we vote for who the RNC and DNC nominate, ultra-rich, elite bastards who don't really give a crap about the American public.

You're preaching to the choir. I've long said our gov't is in for a big hurt, probably even in my lifetime. The lobbyists/special interests and the way politicians' terms are focused on how to re-elected the next time so they engage in fund-raising from day one are the root cause of the failure of our government to act efficiently and to hold itself accountable.

The average voter has little chance of making change happen. There will have to be a dramatic, perhaps even tragic, event in order for true change to occur.

Yup, and that "tragic event" is the high price we will pay for not working harder to make sure our gov't does what we wish. It's not about individuals being guilty, it's about the whole. Our generation, the one before that, and the one before that.

Conjur, that "tragic event" you speak of, and you probably know this, is going to be what results in a new gov't for us. It'll be less tragic if we do it. More tragic if someone else does it. Look at Iraq. I pray it doesn't have to happen. We don't deserve it, but maybe we should expect it. 😉