US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News :: Politics
What is Howard Dean playing at?
11 Nov 2006
The British Guardian newspaper reports that Tony Blair's Labour party is to draft in US midterm election architect Howard Dean to help them win elections next year.

Tony Blair is George Bush's main ally in his disastrous foreign policy adventures.

Blair's successor Gordon Brown has said he will also support Bush.

Since 2003 progressive activists have been organizing in the UK to remove Labour from its seats without letting in Conservatives. They have backed liberals, nationalists and socialist candidates.

So why is Howard Dean now going to help the party which will keep Bush's main allies in power?
See also:,,1945410,00.html,,-6103782,00.html

This work is in the public domain
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


They're setting up the fallbacks
12 Nov 2006
Modified: 03:31:50 PM
The guys pulling Bush's strings have realized that they have no support whatsoever anywhere in the world - since they can't keep going like that (vote fraud is good to turn a 40:60 loss into a 51:49 win -- but hardly good enough to turn a 10:90 loss into a victory) -- so they have 2 choices:

1. Declare martial law, officially appoint Bush dictator.

This is ultimately what they'd like to do, and the legal infrastructure for it (Military Commissions Act etc.) is in place by now -- but it's not free of risk: this would make their plot obvious even to the "It can't happen here" sheeple, and it would definitely cause those who are already anti-Bush to radicalize, potentially resulting in an assassination or even a full-blown revolution. That's why they're currently opting for

2. Put in friendlier faces to the same old crap.

They're allowing carefully chosen others with friendlier faces and a slightly less radical agenda -- but with the same old plan, just at a slightly slower pace -- to take over.
They allowed Democrats to take over both Senate and Congress after making sure the specific Democrats they put into the job are basically on their side. Those are the same Democrats who promised not to impeach Bush, who largely voted for the mass murder in Iraq, and who approved Bush's Enabling Act (aka Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act).
But the sheeple don't see this - "they aren't Bush, therefore they're good".
Most people all over the world wouldn't know that Howard Dean voted for the Iraq mass murder (in fact, most would say he voted against it, after all Bush wanted the war, and Dean is his opponent). Dean, Kerry, Pelosi and other "pro-Bush Democrats" have a pretty good standing around the world because the only thing the average anti-Bush person outside the US knows about them is that they're Bush's opponents.
Contrary to what Fox News would have you believe, the world is not full of Anti-Americanism -- people all over the world, even in Iran and North Korea, still like reasonable Americans because we know that the population can't be held responsible for the crimes of its leaders, and that Bush is widely hated even at home.

Now that we've established Dean can actually help instead of hurt Labour in the UK, let's take a look at the situation in the UK -- the UK is largely a 2-party system, with the Tories somewhat resembling the Republicans, and Labour somewhat resembling the Democrats (this is why Blair could get his last term btw -- the Tories, too, were in support of Bush's wars, and Blair seemed like the lesser of two big evils to many).
Looking at the wide support for Bush's illegal wars among both leading Tories and leading Labour guys -- even while the popular support for those wars is approaching 0 -- it is clear that both parties have been subverted by those pulling Bush's strings.

But now something unexpected to them has happened: For the first time, there's a real effort to get third parties elected, and third parties actually hold seats.
The unlikely coalition of diverse and opposing groups (What's the last time you've seen socialists and nationalists working together?!) that have only one common goal (getting rid of Tories and Labour) could actually achieve the impossible and weaken both subverted parties -- which could substantially weaken their ability to launch wars at will.

So they're doing everything they can to motivate people to vote for the lesser evil -- including dragging in "good" guys from abroad ("See, we're against Bush! His opponent is helping us! We aren't as bad as you think, and the warmonger Blair will be gone soon too... And by the time of the election, Brown won't have launched another war, therefore he's anti-war, therefore he's good! Vote for the lesser evil!").

I think there's one important thing we can learn from this: Uniting traditional enemies in the fight against the bad guys actually DOES work, at least well enough to scare them enough to act.
As much as we may dislike it, we have to work with traditional "enemies" towards the common goal -- ending the wars, ending the ever-increasing surveillance, and ending the continuing subversion of constitutions.