“Guernica” was painted by Picasso in 1937. It depicts the senseless massacre by the Nazi Luftwaffe in the Basque city of Guernica, Spain. The attack was ordered at the behest of fascist Spanish General, Francisco Franco, during the Spanish Civil War. Guernica was a non-military target, the innocent people of the town were attacked in an attempt to psychologically break the will of those who opposed Franco’s fascistic nationalist pursuit.

News and Commentary by David Caputo of Positronic Design.

In reference to my first post's mixed-message comment on CounterPunch and 9/11, I thought I'd include the letters I wrote to them on that subject.

After reading this article by Alex Cockburn,

I wrote the following reply:

Dear Counterpunch and Alex Cockburn,

As a long-time fan and paying subscriber to Counterpunch, I am dismayed by the ad-hominem attack on myself and my friends as "nuts" because we are deeply suspicious of the Bush administration's claims as to the events on 9/11/01.

His hyperbolic piece would almost be amusing in its shrillness if it weren't covering such a serious topic.

His refutation arguments are very weak, and he tars with guilt by association with unrelated conspiracy controversies anyone who suspects that the "official" 9/11 story is a bunch of baloney.

His statement: "One characteristic of the nuts is that they have a devout, albeit preposterous belief in American efficiency, thus many of them start with the racist premise that “Arabs in caves” weren’t capable of the mission." completely misses the point and uses the vague "many" to call most of us "racist" because we believe that the 19 names "found" in "Mohammad Atta's" car in the Portland, ME airport are (by the ever-reliable FBI) nothing approaching a definitive list of the operatives involved.

"On 11/10/06 we handed out 500 Loose Change DVDs during the veterans day parade. Hopefully we will wake some people up and grow the Truth Movement. Thanks goes out to the producers of Loose Change (loosechange911.com) for making this possible. More information and DVDs available at TULSATRUTH.ORG"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQO_to4aOF0

Is Chavez a Rogue "Thug" or Brilliant Strategist?
Written by Chris Rose

I was eager to see what Hugo Chavez would have to say to the world, during his recent speech at the United Nations. I did not know what he would say, but I knew he was not going to allow himself to be ignored. If that indeed was his objective (to not be ignored), he certainly succeeded.

Weeks prior to his UN "El Diablo" moment, Chavez was making a little news for calling George Bush something other than "The Devil", he was calling him a terrorist. In fact, Mr. Chavez accused George Bush of being the worst kind of domestic terrorist when he implicated him directly for being behind the 9/11 attacks on his own country. But again, that story made "some" news, but it wasn't front page headline news. Not like his comments at the UN are. Mr. Chavez is being viciously lambasted for having the audacity to refer to the United States Commander and Chief as "The Devil"! It's almost funny! In fact, I think Chavez even scored a few world leader chuckles for the remark during his speech.

I find it especially interesting and quite dissappointing (although no longer surprising) to watch how the Democrat "leadership" is now joining the chorus of those condemning Mr. Chavez' remarks. Rangel and Pelosi have been particularly vociferous in their outrage. Rangel apparently angry at Chavez for having the temerity to come to "my country" and "my district" and call "my President" names. Give me a break Charlie! That's the kind of outrage you should have demonstrated when "your President" came into "your district" after 9/11 and told everybody it was okay to breathe pulverized asbestos! And Pelosi, puhleeze! Her criticism of Chavez calling the President names lost credibility right after she then called Chavez a name. Oh yeah, call my President "The Devil"? Well you're "a Thug"! Real grown up Nancy. Talk about "do as I say, not as I do". Pelosi would have done better to issue a "I know you are but what am I" statement and being done with it. So all of this non-sense got me to thinking... is this perhaps what Senor Chavez intended?