>I am responding to the President's obvious caution about point scoring
>after each and every massacre. I also believe, and believe others believe,
>tobacco capital was behind his impeachment. Certainly the "Independent
>Prosecutor" is not independent of connections with tobacco interests.
Didn't work out too well for them, did it? The impeachment idiocy boosted Clinton's poll ratings, marginalized the right, and made Starr one of the most unpopular public figures in the U.S. And the tobacco companies owe the state governments lots of damage money.
>I also I am responding to documentaries shown in England which argue that
>the reason for the litigation route being the main way of attacking these
>two sectors of capital, is because politicians fear to anatagonise major
>fund-givers.
Litigation is the American way: individualized, legalistic, and expensive.
>Overall I maintain that bourgeois democracy is a hidden system of class
>rule, much as we have to take it into account and defend bourgeois
>democratic rights.
>
>By denouncing the "faking" of democracy in Bosnia, Jim Heartfield here, and
>Mick Hume in the pages of the "anti-imperialist"(?) Times, are covertly
>promoting illusions in bourgeois democracy instead of analysing the state
>as a means for managing conflict.
So let me see if I've got this right. Since bourgeois democracy is largely a charade, there's nothing wrong with dispensing with even the pretense of it in occupied Bosnia?
Doug