Interview w/ Sage Francis

"Slow and steady wins the race, fuckface!" Media Monarchy is stoked to get Sage Francis on the show while he's on a break between tours. We talk about his brand new video from his latest record 'Copper Gone', laugh about art and politics, and wonder about all-ages shows.


Download/Subscribe

Keith McHenry of Food Not Bombs

Ahead of the upcoming 'World Food Day,' we're joined by Keith McHenry, co-founder of Food Not Bombs, to talk about the 'magic of thinking' and the ongoing effort to hide the hungry masses in America - while our shutdown government tries to cut food stamps and even stop you from giving away food.



MP3/Feed\Archive

New World Next Week: Episode169 - Black Sites, Designer Babies, FDA Shutdown

NewWorldNextWeek.com: Episode168 -
Black Sites, Designer Babies, FDA Shutdown
Welcome to New World Next Week - the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week:

Story #1: Obama Swaps 'Black Sites' for 'Justice at Sea'
Did Obama Swap 'Black' Detention Sites For Ships?
The Disappearing, Reappearing Terrorist
Developing: Gunmen Seize Libyan Prime Minister in Raid

Story #2: 23andMe Receives Patent To Create Designer Babies, Denies Plans To Do So
Google Reportedly Investing Hundreds of Millions Into Its New Life Extension Company, Calico

Story #3: Shutdown Ends Food Inspections in US, Leaving 90% of U.S. Seafood Imports Unchecked
Bees and Seeds Festival - A World Food Day Celebration
Organizer/Activist Tiffany Ayers on Portland's Bees And Seeds Event on World Food Day October 12

Visit NewWorldNextWeek.com to get previous episodes in various formats to download, burn and share. And as always, stay up-to-date by subscribing to the feeds from Corbett Report here and Media Monarchy here. Thank you.

Previous: Silk Road Shutdown, Fukushima Fast Food, Exercise Pills

'there's going to be some kind of impeachment talk'

from raw story: Several Republican lawmakers have sharply criticized the imprisonment of two border agents who were convicted of shooting a Mexican drug smuggler in the back and attempting to cover it up.

Appeals to President Bush to pardon the two men, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, have increased since one was assaulted by fellow inmates in a federal prison last weekend.

Yesterday, two Repulican Congressmen had strong words to say about Bush, with one even threatening impeachment.

"Reps. Walter Jones, R-N.C., and Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., blasted President Bush for not intervening in the case, with Rohrabacher hinting that he would consider pressing for impeachment if either of the two agents was killed in prison," Dave Montgomery reports for McClatchy Newspapers.

"Now, I tell you, Mr. President, if these men - especially after this assault - are murdered in prison, or if one of them lose their lives, there's going to be some kind of impeachment talk in Capitol Hill," Rohrabacher said.

McClatchy quotes Jones as saying that "the president has lost my respect because he will not step forward and do what's right."

Montgomery notes that this "case has become a cause celebre among conservative groups, which contend that Ramos and Compean were railroaded by overzealous federal prosecutors who gave the drug smuggler immunity to testify against the two agents."

According to the conservative Cybercast News Service, Rohrabacher slammed Bush for his "arrogance."

"The president of the United States talks a lot about his Christian charity, and his religious beliefs," Rohrabacher said. "He now is showing a mean-spirited side to him, an arrogance, in which he will turn his back."

here is an audio clip of rohrabacher speaking on impeachment

lieberman: we need 'terror tax'

from reuters/alertnet: Sen. Joseph Lieberman said on Tuesday that Congress should consider a tax to fund the U.S.-declared war on terrorism and reduce the need to cut domestic programs to pay for security spending.

A former Democrat who supports the Iraq war and backs President George W. Bush's plan to send 21,500 additional troops to Iraq, Lieberman said the proposed increase in the Pentagon's budget for next fiscal year will squeeze funding for critical domestic programs.

"I think we have to start thinking about a war on terrorism tax," the independent Connecticut lawmaker said. "I mean people keep saying we're not asking a sacrifice of anybody but our military in this war and some civilians who are working on it."

"When you put together the (Pentagon) budget and the Homeland Security budgets, we need to ask people to help us in a way that they know when they pay more it will go for their security," he said during a Senate panel hearing on the defense budget request.

Bush on Monday asked Congress to approve $700 billion in new military spending and to curb many domestic programs. The request includes $245 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars between now and late 2008.

If Congress approves the war funding, the United States will have spent $661.9 billion on combat in Iraq, Afghanistan and related activities.

Increased defense spending since 2001 has come amid tax cuts that the Bush administration says were critical to keeping the U.S. economy strong after the Sept. 11 attacks.

attorney general promises to detail spying program

from npr: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales tells Congress that he will hand over some legal documents describing the Bush administration's domestic surveillance program. The pledge ends a two-week standoff between Congress and the White House.

Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Arlen Specter (R-PA), the senior members on the panel, asked for more details about documents including a secret court's decision to approve the program — a decision that Gonzales announced two weeks ago...

Privacy advocates hope that the documents can begin to answer some of the questions that they've had. The one most often brought up: Did the court grant blanket authorization for the wiretapping program as a whole, or did it grant permission to wiretap specific individuals?

double the troops in the surge?

from defense tech: President Bush and his new military chiefs have been saying for nearly a month that they would "surge" an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq, in a last, grand push to quell the violence in Baghdad and in Anbar Province. But a new study by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says the real troop increase could be as high as 48,000 - more than double the number the President initially said.

That's because the combat units that President Bush wants to send into hostile areas need to be backed up by support troops, "including personnel to staff headquarters, serve as military police, and provide communications, contracting, engineering, intelligence, medical, and other services," the CBO notes.

maine revolts against digital US ID card

from reuters: Maine lawmakers on Thursday became the first in the nation to demand repeal of a federal law tightening identification requirements for drivers' licenses, a post-September 11 security measure that states say will cost them billions of dollars to administer.

Maine lawmakers passed a resolution urging repeal of the Real ID Act, which would create a national digital identification system by 2008. The lawmakers said it would cost Maine about $185 million, fail to boost security and put people at greater risk of identity theft.

Maine's resolution is the strongest stand yet by a state against the law, which Congress passed in May 2004 and gave states three years to implement. Similar repeal measures are pending in eight other states.

bush readies state of the union address

from national post: President George W. Bush will be walking into the lion’s den tonight when he delivers his annual state of the union address to a joint session of Congress.

Not only will he be face a sea of Democrats who have made it plain they will fight the president’s plan to escalate U.S troop levels in Iraq. Bush will also have to face a growing and worrisome number of Republicans who say they will oppose the president on Iraq.

Even as he put the final touches on a speech aimed at building American support for a troop surge in Iraq, Bush learned Monday that a group of senior Republican senators will introduce their own resolution condemning the deploying an additional 21,500 soldiers...

White House press secretary Tony Snow gamely tried to spin the 2007 speech in advance as Bush’s best ever.

"It's like looking at a drawer full of diamonds," Snow said, provoking laughter from reporters who had asked him to provide early highlights. "It's difficult to figure out which is the best."

9/11 ballot question won't have congressional help

from burlington free press: Vermont's two U.S. senators and one congressman are not interested in urging a new investigation into the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

A Burlington group working through the fall and early winter gathered more than 1,350 signatures - 5 percent of the city's registered voters - to put an advisory question about 9/11 on the city's Town Meeting Day ballot.

The question asks whether Vermont's congressional delegation should be "advised to demand a new, thorough, and truly independent forensic investigation that fully addresses the many questions surrounding the tragic events of September 11, 2001."

Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy, a persistent critic of the Bush administration, said in an e-mail from his spokesman, David Carle, that he "respects the work and the findings of the 9/11 Commission. Their report was highly critical of the failures and miscues they discovered, and they recommended a wide range of reforms."

"Since then," the e-mail continued, "some have come up with their own theories, and that's always the case after major events like this. The 9/11 Commission's report remains the most credible, the most thorough and the most constructive investigation that has been undertaken about those attacks."

Participants in the petition drive have noted the question doesn't offer a theory of what happened Sept. 11, but the group's Web site, www.vt911.org, refers to the findings of the 9/11 Commission Report - the federal commission was created in late November 2002 - as "the official conspiracy theory" and raises a number of questions about the day.

The Web site questions why Building No. 7 in the World Trade Center complex collapsed without being struck as the two towers were, and why all three buildings in the complex collapsed as though they were "brought down by controlled demolition." The Web site also provides links to books, videos and 31 separate 9/11 Web sites, including one to the online "Journal of 9/11 Studies."

The subject is emotional for people who doubt the official report. That has been reflected in numerous e-mails sent to the Free Press responding to articles about the local petition drive.

"Bless you for covering this important signature-gathering event," wrote Steve Dondanville of Ridgefield, Wash. "An investigation into what really happened on 9/11 is crucial if we are to continue as a republic."

"We do need a new, real investigation," Chris Noth of Iowa wrote. "The Kean/ Hamilton Commission failed terribly. The WTC complex was blown up by controlled demolition that had been planned for years most likely."

"I am proud to see Americans questioning what really happened on September 11," wrote Jim Brewer of Austin, Texas.

Lorie Van Auken, whose husband, Kenneth, was killed in the attack on the World Trade Center, said by telephone from her home in East Brunswick, N.J., that the Burlington ballot item is valuable because "it brings attention to these unanswered questions."

Van Auken said she was one of the "Jersey widows" who demanded for 14 months that an official investigation be mounted to explain what happened Sept. 11. She was unhappy with the commission's 2004 report. "It's pathetic," she said.

A thorough investigation, she said, would have included interviews with intelligence, aeronautical and military experts. "Every agency failed," she said of Sept. 11. "Intelligence, NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command), FAA (Federal Aviation Administration). ... We had just one great failure of everything. We wanted experts not just to be called, but to follow up on questions."

Van Auken said the many unanswered questions are important because the Bush administration "is using 9/11 as a reason to take our nation to war. We all need to understand what went down that day," she said.

Some who dismiss the thoroughness of the 9/11 Commission Report question whether the fires caused by the exploding jet fuel could have been hot enough to cause the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings. Others say no videos have been released of American Airlines Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, and some say the area covered by debris from United Airline Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania, suggests the plane was brought down by a missile.

Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders and Democratic Rep. Peter Welch said they wouldn't push for a new investigation of Sept. 11, making the congressional delegation unanimous in its answer to the ballot question. Welch said, through a spokesman, he believed the official report was "both thorough and complete in outlining the events of September 11 and the mistakes made leading up to the attacks."

Sanders' chief of staff, Jeff Weaver, said in an e-mail that Sanders believes the official report was "thorough" and provided "important suggestions to help our country combat terrorism." Sanders also believes, Weaver wrote, "we should continue to work to make sure that all the recommendations of the commission are implemented."

flashback: 9/11 question may go to vermont voters

related: 250+ 9/11 'smoking guns' found in the mainstream media

senators agree on 'non-binding resolution'

from ap/yahoo: A group of senators including a Republican war critic announced agreement Wednesday on a resolution opposing President Bush's 21,500 troop build up in Iraq, setting their marker for a major clash between the White House and Congress over the unpopular war.

The non-binding resolution, which was also gaining interest from a second key Republican, would symbolically put the Senate on record as saying the U.S. commitment in Iraq "can only be sustained" with popular support among the American public and in Congress.

"I will do everything I can to stop the president's policy as he outlined it Wednesday night," said Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican and potential 2008 presidential candidate, who joined Democrats at a press conference on the resolution.

"I think it is dangerously irresponsible," Hagel said.

Even as skeptical Republicans were summoned to private meetings with Bush and national security adviser Stephen Hadley at the White House, Bush's aides made clear that the Capitol Hill challenge would be met aggressively by the administration.

Presidential spokesman Tony Snow said resolutions passed by Congress will not affect Bush's decision-making.

"The president has obligations as a commander in chief," he said. "And he will go ahead and execute them."

9/11 question may go to vermont voters

from burlington free press: Burlington voters on Town Meeting Day will be the first in the country to vote 'yes' or 'no' on reopening the investigation into what happened Sept. 11, 2001.

As of Jan. 4, a local group had gathered 1,240 of the approximately 1,350 signatures (5 percent of registered voters) required to put the question on the ballot, and a member of the group, Burlington attorney Frank Haddleton, expressed confidence Monday that they now have more than enough signatures.

The question would ask the Vermont congressional delegation to "demand a new, thorough, and truly independent forensic investigation" to answer "the many questions" the group says remain about what happened the day planes commandeered by terrorists smashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

In September, the council unanimously passed a resolution promising they would honor the Vermont tradition of allowing such questions if they garner enough signatures, "whether or not they like the questions or agree with the petitioners."

Monday, the council agreed unanimously that they wouldn't vote on putting the 9/11 question on the March ballot after City Attorney Joe McNeil said the September resolution had put the council views on record and that the question would be on the ballot if the signatures were submitted by Jan. 25.

The group said in a letter to the council that it doesn't "advance any particular alternative theory" about what happened Sept. 11, 2001, but thinks the day's aftermath, including wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, are so serious that a new investigation is warranted "to get answers to hundreds of questions raised by independent researchers, members of the intelligence community and family members of 9/11 victims."

The attacks, the letter said, have been cited as justifications for the wars, "wiretapping, the USA PATRIOT Act, torture, indefinite detentions without charges, and the recently passed Military Commission Act that suspends the writ of habeas corpus. We maintain that until the serious, credible questions about 9/11 are addressed, the government has no right to ask us to compromise the Constitution or engage in any new wars again terrorism."

The group's spokesman, local author and musician Marc Estrin, said the ballot item would be the first of its sort in the United States.

"We're all very pleased that the council voted not to interfere and let it go forward if we come up with the signatures," Haddleton said.

bush can’t kick the habit

from truthdig: Here we go again: A new secretary of defense and yet another call for ending the war in Iraq by escalating it. What are they smoking in the Bush White House?

Even as government statistics now show marijuana is America’s No. 1 cash crop, it is important to remember that militarism is the most dangerous drug threatening our sanity. Yet even formerly sober folks—first Colin Powell and now new Secretary of Defense Robert Gates—get a contact high from cozying up to the walking hallucinogen that is our president.

Succumbing to the Bush fantasy that freedom is fertilized by firepower, a vision that has mucked up Iraq beyond recognition, Gates told CBS that “as the president has made clear, we simply cannot afford to fail in the Middle East. Failure in Iraq at this juncture would be a calamity that would haunt our nation, impair our credibility, and endanger Americans for generations to come.”

This from a man who recently made sense, during his confirmation hearings, when he told members of Congress that we are not winning this war, despite having committed, proportionally, as many troops as we did in Vietnam. But now, as a rising chorus of obsessed hawks calls for a “surge” in U.S. troop deployment in Iraq—a call echoed even by some prominent Democrats—Gates endorses the staying-the-course strategy for compounding the Iraq failure rejected by the voters. A member of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group (ISG) who had apparently supported its unanimous findings that the military strategy was bankrupt is suddenly blinded by Bush’s Iraq victory myopia.

In a sign of just how out there Bush is on Iraq, The Washington Post reported Tuesday that the military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff are in “unanimous disagreement” with “White House officials aggressively promoting the concept ... . [T]he Joint Chiefs think the White House, after a month of talks, still does not have a defined mission [in Iraq].”

All this despite the fact that the ISG report correctly underscored that the real failures in the Mideast have clearly been political, not military. The accurate subtext of the report is that the continued U.S. military presence in Iraq is the key source of chaos in the region - inflaming religious fanaticism from Beirut to Baghdad and leaving the United States dependent on the tyrants in Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia to now bail us out.

So with Bush rejecting the sage advice of a commission headed by his father’s secretary of state to cut our losses is there any hope the Democrats who now control Congress will stop playing the role of enabler to these war junkies? After all, it was the Democratic congressional leadership that provided Bush with bipartisan cover for his irrational “anti-terrorism” invasion of a country that had nothing to do with the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Some, like John Kerry, now recognize that folly, and even Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, in her appearance on NBC’s “Today” show Monday, finally expressed her regrets for supporting the war and opposed a “surge” in U.S. troops for Iraq.

But other Democrats continue to play the dangerous game of supporting Bush’s escalation. Particularly alarming were the remarks on Sunday of incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid endorsing a buildup as long as it aims at getting the troops home by 2008: “If the commanders on the ground said this is just for a short period of time, we’ll go along with that.” ...

The convenient lie behind all of this is that U.S. military occupation is the indispensable agent of Mideast enlightenment. No, we have become the enablers of Iraqi madness, be it in the form of torture or the ascendancy of religious tyranny in Iraq, where daily life has been reduced to an unmitigated horror.

Yet, like a junkie who needs one more hit to get his life in order, Bush is hooked on the drug of military might. If the Democrats continue to feed his dangerous habit they will only help Bush visit greater mayhem upon Iraq while undermining the core values of our own country.

'don't worry, it's not as bad as it looks'

from raw story: "Don't worry, it's not as bad as it looks," President Bush reportedly told a friend depressed by the ongoing "unpopular" war and GOP woes, according to an article in Sunday's Washington Post.

"For a man who presides over an unpopular war, just lost Congress and faces a final two years with constrained options, Bush gives little sign of self-pity," Peter Baker writes.

The analysis, entitled "Stubborn or Stalwart, Bush Is Loath to Budge," examines the following questions: "At what point does determination to a cause become self-defeating folly? Can he change direction in a meaningful way without sacrificing principle?"

ex-rep barr quits gop for libertarians

from abc news: A former Georgia congressman who helped spark President Clinton's impeachment has quit the Republican Party to become a Libertarian, saying he is disillusioned with the GOP on issues such as spending and privacy.

Bob Barr, who served eight years as a Republican congressman before losing his seat in 2002, announced Friday that he is now a "proud, card-carrying Libertarian." And he encouraged others to join him.

"It's something that's been bothering me for quite some time, the direction in which the party has been going more and more toward big government and disregard toward privacy and civil liberties," said Barr, 58, a lawyer and consultant living in Atlanta.
"In terms of where the country needs to be going to get back to our constitutional roots ... I've come to the conclusion that the only way to do that is to work with a party that practices what it preaches, and that is the Libertarian Party."

Barr said he has no plans to run for office. In his new role as the Libertarian Party's regional representative for the South, he will help promote the party's message and recruit candidates, he said.

Barr helped manage the House Republicans' impeachment case before the Senate in 1999.

senator's stroke could halt democratic takeover

from ap/usa today: Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota suffered a possible stroke Wednesday and was taken to a Washington hospital, his office said...

If he should be unable to continue to serve, it could halt the scheduled Democratic takeover of the Senate. Democrats won a 51-49 majority in the November election. South Dakota's governor, who would appoint any temporary replacement, is a Republican.

democrats reject key 9/11 panel suggestion

from washington post: It was a solemn pledge, repeated by Democratic leaders and candidates over and over: If elected to the majority in Congress, Democrats would implement all of the recommendations of the bipartisan commission that examined the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

But with control of Congress now secured, Democratic leaders have decided for now against implementing the one measure that would affect them most directly: a wholesale reorganization of Congress to improve oversight and funding of the nation's intelligence agencies. Instead, Democratic leaders may create a panel to look at the issue and produce recommendations, according to congressional aides and lawmakers.

Because plans for implementing the commission's recommendations are still fluid, Democratic officials would not speak for the record. But aides on the House and Senate appropriations, armed services and intelligence committees confirmed this week that a reorganization of Congress would not be part of the package of homeland-security changes up for passage in the "first 100 hours" of the Democratic Congress.

"I don't think that suggestion is going anywhere," said Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.), the chairman of the Appropriations defense subcommittee and a close ally of the incoming subcommittee chairman, Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.). "That is not going to be their party position."

selective service: ready for a draft

from cnn: Although Congress is unlikely to follow calls from a top Democrat to bring back the military draft, the United States does have a plan, if necessary, aimed at inducting millions of young men for service.

The Selective Service System, an agency independent of the Defense Department, says it's ready to respond quickly to any crisis that would threaten to overwhelm the current all-volunteer military.

"We're the fire department," said spokesman Pat Schuback at the service headquarters in Arlington, Virginia.

"We're prepared to do the mission with whatever time period we're asked to do it in. Our current plan is 193 days and that was based on manpower analysis."

With an active list of more than 15 million names, Schuback said an estimated 93 percent of all men in the United States between 18 and 26 have registered for the Selective Service, as required by law.

Chris Baker, 20, of Decatur, Georgia, said he wouldn't support a draft under any circumstances.

"I don't believe it's right to send people who don't really want to go fight for the country," Baker said. "I probably wouldn't go, but I know that'd I have to go to jail for that. That's probably what I would do -- sit in jail."

But 25-year-old Donnie Deerman of West Blocton, Alabama, said he would feel obligated to participate in a military draft.

"I'd have to do it. My dad did two tours of duty for Vietnam and for this country," Deerman said. "I wouldn't want to leave my kids behind, but I wouldn't argue about it."

While U.S. commanders insist sending more U.S. troops is not the answer in Iraq, they concede they really couldn't maintain a much bigger force than the 150,000 deployed there now because the U.S. military is just too small.

Rep. Charles Rangel of New York, the Democrat who likely will head the powerful House Ways and Means Committee in the next congressional session, said Sunday on CBS's "Face the Nation" he plans to propose a new military draft next year.

kissinger: Iraq military win impossible

from washington post: Military victory is no longer possible in Iraq, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said in a television interview broadcast Sunday.

Kissinger presented a bleak vision of Iraq, saying the U.S. government must enter into dialogue with Iraq's regional neighbors - including Iran - if progress is to be made in the region.

"If you mean by 'military victory' an Iraqi government that can be established and whose writ runs across the whole country, that gets the civil war under control and sectarian violence under control in a time period that the political processes of the democracies will support, I don't believe that is possible," he told the British Broadcasting Corp.

But Kissinger, an architect of the Vietnam war who has advised President Bush about Iraq, warned against a rapid withdrawal of coalition troops, saying it could destabilize Iraq's neighbors and cause a long-lasting conflict.

"A dramatic collapse of Iraq - whatever we think about how the situation was created - would have disastrous consequences for which we would pay for many years and which would bring us back, one way or another, into the region," he said.

Kissinger, whose views have been sought by the Iraqi Study Group, led by former Secretary of State James Baker III, called for an international conference bringing together the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, Iraq's neighbors - including Iran - and regional powers like India and Pakistan to work out a way forward for the region.

"I think we have to redefine the course, but I don't think that the alternative is between military victory, as defined previously, or total withdrawal," he said.

pentagon announces US troop deployments to Iraq

from military.com: The Pentagon announced Friday that 57,000 U.S. troops, including five combat brigades, have been told to deploy to Iraq early next year - a move that will maintain current force levels there.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld signed the deployment orders for about 20,000 Soldiers from active duty Army brigades based in North Carolina, Georgia, Washington, Kansas and Italy. Another 10,000 reserves and 27,000 active duty troops are scheduled to go to Iraq in smaller units...

The announcement comes as some Democrats, who are poised to take control of the House and Senate, continue to press for substantial reduction of U.S. troops in Iraq, and a timetable for that drawdown.