Today we will begin serializing Michael O’McCarthy’s book Rebels in Hell. We will publish one chapter each week.
Here is Chapter 1, of this thrilling novel.

REVENGE

The Beginning
By Michael O’McCarthy © The 01-2008 Serialization

Machinima Graphic Art Cover By Pierce Portocarrero

Based on Original Artwork By Roby Hubbard

Dedicated to El Jovani
With a special salutation to Juan Santamaria, Emile Zapata and Séamas Ó Conghaile
PART I

EPISODE 1
William Smythe, the Patron’s servant, sat comfortably. One casually dressed, woolen-trousered leg crossed over the other. In the fireplace, the logs burned, the sap snapping at times. Next to him sat the silver service. The Costa Rican coffee fresh from the grinder sent a light yet pungent aroma about the room. A Mozart sonata tinkled moderately, filling the one-bedroom suite.

Smythe liked the suite. The myriad windows overlooked the park. The northern light outside filled the rooms. It brought out the mahogany of the wood and the depth of the forest-green paper covering the walls.

He liked the wood. It resonated class and solid surroundings. It meant well-spent expense. And he liked expense because it reminded him of his position. Intimately close to money. Money to Smythe meant prestige. Without his proximity to money, he would be just a hired anyone. He had no illusions about that. But with money, now, that was another matter. It was the extension of his Patron’s power, and that made him feel well.

He waited silently, head nodding a bit to Mozart, slightly sipping the brew.

The doorbell chimed nicely.

The Smythe put down the cup and walked to the door. He peered through the view hole, pulled open the thick, oversized door and nodded to the man.

Miguel Flores, known in the clandestine world as The Assassin, moved into the foyer. He paused waiting to be led into the sitting room.

Read the whole chapter here

From Ed Pearl

I am so annoyed that so many of my friends tell me that Kucinich has
the best position on issue after issue, but they are still going to
support
one of the other candidates because Kucinich cannot win. This is
basically conceding our elections to corporate controlled media and/or
corrupt electoral processes.

Bush has been pretty bad. Some of the Republicans running look at
least as
bad, plus they are probably smarter, a bad combination. None-the-less,
what
do we have to lose in the primary by supporting Kucinich? I know
Clinton is
bad, but are any of of the Corporate favorites any better? I don’t
really
think so. It appears to me that the “goodness” of the candidates is
inversely related to corporate media approval. The more their
positions
reflect the popular opinion, say bring the troops home ASAP, the more
the
media belittles their chances. What kind of Democracy do we have here?

Personally, I think Kucinich would have a better chance of knocking off
the
Republican candidates than would any of the other so-called Democrats
in the primary. Of course there isn’t much point in speculating on
that if
Kucinich’s supporters aren’t willing to vote for him in the primary!!

If you cannot bring yourself to campaign for him, or even to vote for
him,
at least send his campaign $50 so he can stay in the running and, to
some extent, keep the others honest!

“Kucinich for President”
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18790.htm

Gore Vidal : Dennis Kucinich

The Nation 11/28/07

For the past two years I’ve been crisscrossing the United States
speaking to
crowds of people about our history and politics. At the same time,
would-be
Presidents of the greatest nation in the country, as silver-tongued
Spiro
Agnew used to say, have been crowding the trail, while TV journalists
sadly
shake their heads at how savage the politicos have become in their
language.
But then, it is the task of TV journalists to foment quarrels where
often
none properly exist.

As I pass through the stage door of one auditorium after another, I now
hear
the ominous name of Darth Vader, as edgy audiences shudder at the
horrible
direction our political discourse has taken. Ever eager as I am to shed
light, I sometimes drop the name of the least publicized applicant to
the
creaky throne of the West: Dennis Kucinich. It takes a moment for the
name
to sink in. Then genuine applause begins. He is very much a favorite
out
there in the amber fields of grain, and I work him into the text. A
member
of the House of Representatives for five terms since 1997, although
many of
his legislative measures have been too useful and original for our
brain-dead media to comprehend. I note his well-wrought articles
proposing
the impeachment of Vice President Cheney, testing the patriotic nerves
of
his fellow Democrats, but then the fact of his useful existence often
causes
distress to those who genuinely hate that democracy he is so eager to
extend. “Don’t waste your vote,” they whine in unison–as if our votes
are
not quadrennially wasted on those marvelous occasions when they are
actually
counted and recorded.

Meanwhile, Kucinich is now at least visible in lineups of the
Democratic
candidates; he tends to be the most eloquent of the lot. So who is he?
Something of a political prodigy: at 31 he was elected mayor of
Cleveland.
Once he had been installed, in 1978, the city’s lordly banks wanted the
new
mayor to sell off the city’s municipally owned electric system, Muny
Light,
to a private competitor in which (Oh, America!) the banks had a
financial
interest. When Mayor Kucinich refused to sell, the money lords took
their
revenge, as they are wont to do: they refused to roll over the city’s
debt,
pushing the city into default. The ensuing crisis revealed the banks’
criminal involvement with the private utility of their choice, CEI,
which,
had it acquired Muny Light, would have become a monopoly, as five of
the six
lordly banks had almost 1.8 million shares of CEI stock: this is
Enronesque
before the fact.

Mayor Kucinich was not re-elected, but his profile was clearly etched
on the
consciousness of his city; and in due course he returned to the
Cleveland
City Council before being elected to the Ohio State Senate and then the
US
Congress. Kucinich has also written a description of his Dickensian
youth,
growing up in Cleveland. He has firsthand knowledge of urban poverty in
the
world’s richest nation. Born in 1946 into a Croatian Catholic family,
by the
time he was 17 he and his family had lived in twenty-one different
places,
much of which he describes in Dreiserian detail in a just-published
memoir.

Kucinich is opposed to the death penalty as well as the USA Patriot
Act. In
1998 and 2004 he was a US delegate to the United Nations convention on
climate change. At home he has been active in Rust Belt affairs,
working to
preserve the ninety-year-old Cleveland steel industry, a task of the
sort
that will confront the next President should he or she have sufficient
interest in these details.

I asked a dedicated liberal his impression of Kucinich; he wondered if
Kucinich was too slight to lead a nation of truly fat folk. I pointed
out
that he has the same physical stature as James Madison, as well as a
Madisonian commitment to our 1789 Constitution; he is also farsighted,
as
demonstrated by his resolute opposition to Bush’s cries for ever more
funding for the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. More to the
point, in
October 2002 he opposed the notion of a war then being debated. For
those of
us at home and in harm’s way from disease, he co-wrote HR 676, a bill
that
would insure all of us within Medicare, just as if we were citizens of
a
truly civilized nation.

***

Gore Vidal and Dennis Kucinich

Sunday, December 9, 2007
1:00 PM to 3:00 PM

Join

Dennis & Elizabeth Kucinich,
Gore Vidal
And a host of celebrities & supporters

At the home of Jerry Manpearl & Jan Goodman
Santa Monica , CA. 90402

Donation: $125.00 per person & $200.00 for two

Space is Limited, RSVP Required: (310) 458-7213
or jansorders@gmail.com

HOST COMMITTEE

In Formation

Aki Aleong, Aris Anagnos, Lila Garrett, Jan Goodman, Louis Gossett Jr.,
Hon.
David Finkle, Jim & Channa Horwitz, Earl Katz, Mimi Kennedy, Julie
Lopez
Dad, Jerry Manpearl, Michelle Phillips, Hon. Bill Rosendahl, Stanley
Sheinbaum, Bree Walker, Gore Vidal and many others

Event producer: Ilene Proctor

—

Unconsciously, Many favor Kucinich

By MARC HANSEN
Des Moines Register: October 23, 2007

Don’t panic, but there’s a chance you aren’t supporting the
presidential
candidate you most agree with on the issues.

As we stumble toward the primary/caucus season, millions of voters (or
at
least dozens) are going online and taking surveys that match them with
candidates. And they’re not automatically matching up with their
favorite
candidates. This happened four years ago when the Democrats were
trying to
figure out how to beat George Bush. Most of them wanted Kerry or
Edwards or
Dean.

But surprise, surprise. When they punched in their select-a-candidate
surveys, Kucinich’s name kept blinking back at them on the computer
screen.
That’s the Dennis Kucinich whose poll numbers were below sea level, the
Kucinich nobody took seriously, the Kucinich who never had a chance.

Kathleen Ferguson of Des Moines says nothing has changed four years
later.
She found one of those surveys on the Web site of WQAD-TV in the Quad
Cities. She answered the 11 multiple-choice questions and decided how
important each issue was to her.

The topics were Iraq, immigration, tax cuts, stem cell research, health
care, abortion, Social Security, a line-item veto, ethanol, same-sex
marriage and the death penalty. Ferguson clicked “select a candidate,”
and
up popped Kucinich.

She had family members take the test. Kucinich came in first or second.
She
wondered what was going on. A lot of Democrats like what he has to say
on
the issues. Yet only a small percentage like him as their candidate.
“We’re not all that liberal,” Ferguson said. “Several of us are former
Republicans. It’s astonishing to see what we want was labeled too
far-out
liberal.”

A lawyer she knows took the test, and another friend. Kucinich,
Kucinich.

“To paraphrase Kucinich himself,” she said, “we can have a president
who
agrees with us on the issues and will work to institute the policies we
want, or we can have a president who’s tall.”

It can’t be just physical stature, but it’s almost certainly a
self-fulfilling prophecy. Voters might agree completely with a
candidate,
but if they don’t think the candidate has a decent shot, they’ll vote
for
someone else.

Ferguson, a paralegal at the Principal Financial Group, fits that mold.
She
supported Kucinich in 2004. She volunteered for him. But now she’s
trying to
decide between the two front-runners. “I threw away my voice last time
by
supporting somebody who had no support,” she said. “It’s important to
stand
up for your beliefs, but if I’m reasonably certain it’s going to be
Obama or
Clinton, don’t I have the responsibility to decide which is the better
candidate and support that person?”

Ralph Nader, George W. Bush’s best friend in 2004, would say no.

Ferguson gives Kucinich good marks for his debate performances. His
punch
lines get positive audience response. He’s quick on his feet in the
debates. When they asked him about prayer, Kucinich said he was praying
somebody would finally ask him a question.

David Redlawsk, a political science professor at the University of
Iowa,
isn’t surprised by the contradiction. Redlawsk and Rutgers University
professor Richard Lau wrote the book on this subject: “How Voters
Decide:
Information Processing During Election Campaigns.”

Redlawsk says you can’t read too much into these computer-match
programs.
They sometimes oversimplify a candidate’s positions. And even when they
don’t, issues aren’t everything to the average voter.

“That isn’t to say they aren’t useful,” he says. “People who go through
them
learn more about the candidates. But most people don’t make decisions
looking at every issue. They look at a limited set of issues, then they
look
at other things like personality, viability, who’s the best overall
fit.”

Voting on a candidate’s position on issues alone is a little like
dating
through the personal ads. You have to see the prospective suitor up
close.
Focus too much on content at the expense of context and you might miss
the
big picture.

Redlawsk then committed political science blasphemy. He said the voters
with
the most information don’t automatically vote in their best interests
anyway. “People are efficient at taking small amounts of information,”
he
says, “making good decisions with that information and moving on with
their
lives.”

Speaking of small amounts of information, I took the candidate-match
test.
All I’ll say is I like Mike Gravel and Ron Paul a lot more than I
thought.

STOP THE WARS: CONGRESS MUST END THE FUNDING
A SIT-IN WITHIN THE HOUSE - FILIBUSTER IN THE SENATE

Its Pentagon budget time in Congress and its time for the members of the House and Senate who claim to represent the best interests of the people of the United States, who claim to oppose Bush’s military globalization policy to show up and put up. Failing to stop “the surge,” failing to pursue a cut-off of funds, and failing to proceed with impeachment, the Democrats have failed the American people who put them in the majority: they are dancing the dance of cowards.

Now is the time for those Congresspeople to sit-in within the House and filibuster in the Senate:
The reports are coming fast and furious: The Bush-Cheney Kriegmaschine is in full mode despite the overwhelming evidence that Bush-Cheney fabricated justification for the war and have violated both US and international law in its execution; despite a electoral sentiment that opposes the war; despite clear and present evidence that their war strategy for the occupation and “democratization” of Iraq is a failure; despite that ranking Pentagon military officers believe that the war is destroying the Army and the US’s ability to defend itself.

Their Kriegmaschine, by myriad accounts, is now preparing for a strike of war terror against Iran. Bush’s delusional obsession with as a God directed crusader the Middle East has hindered any ability that he may have once had to understand military strategy. His mission to Tehran is a continuance of his Mission to Baghdad. The optimum time for this religious zealot to attack Iran is over the Christmas and Hanukah holiday.

This is in the face that there is no evidence that Iran presents a clear and present danger to the US, nor that it is either more or less a danger to the stability of the Middle East than Israel, Syria, Saudi Arabia or Turkey, all who are active players in the unfolding, frightening dynamic of Middle East politics. This despite recent best scientific evidence that its nuclear program remains directed towards domestic civilian use; far less a military threat than the nuclear weapons state of Israel.

It is thus clear that unless some extraordinary event by leadership of the Congress takes place, the mass opposition needed to stop the Bush-Cheney Kriegmaschine will not take place and Bush-Cheney will be free to extend their bizarre scheme of “globalization” by a war against Iran.

The budget for funding the Pentagon (and the continuance of the war in Iraq and one for Iran) is due on October 1st. The Democrats in the US Congress have proven time and time again that they haven’t the courage to stop the funding of Bush’s military apparatus. Republicans are stuck in GOP support mode, despite that they know Bush’s adventure is a failure; the surge being the latest act of incompetence.

A new strategy is necessary: the activist citizens of the United States must demand that the Democratic leadership in the Congress and Senate of the United States immediately begin a sit-in within Congress and a filibuster in the Senate until funds for the war in Iraq are cut-off and the President and Vice President are forced to swear off on a war against Iran.

In 1971 a small group of Left activists and investigative journalists revealed the confession of a long-time professional police agent provocateur to the world. Among the list he gave us of acts of “radical” behavior influenced, if not orchestrated by him and other police agents, were acts of arson, murder and conspiracy to commit murder. But what was the most disturbing confession
was nightmarish: It revealed a White House orchestrated, (Nixon), secret plot to plant explosives at the San Diego Republican Convention and manufacture evidence indicating that the bombing was the work of anti-war radicals. The result of our investigation would become the now legendary book; The Glass House Tapes – by the Citizen’s Research and Investigative Committee.

Both a history of illegal U.S. police activity and a expose, the book contained what would be the first of many revelations to follow which would expose what we now know as COINTELPRO (Hoover and the FBI), the CIA’s OPERATION CHAOS, and a significant number of illegal acts of surveillance and provocation by members of various intelligence agencies, both “civilian” and military. One of the end results of that work was the Church Committee, which curtailed
domestic activities of the CIA until the Bush regime re-engaged them in The Patriot Act I.

As the recent exposure of Canadian under-cover agent provocateurs attempting to sabotage a peaceful demonstration has shown, the secret police are now being infiltrated into both the current anti-war movement and into community organizations with ties into that movement. (SEE: _http://www.youtube.com/v/St1-WTc1kow_ (http://www.youtube.com/v/St1-WTc1kow) )

Thus, its time to look at some practical means in dealing with illegal police activity and protecting your constitutional rights to gather, organize and speak. I highly suggest that you make yourself aware of these tips and put them into practice as they have been gathered from a history of long and often painful, personal experience:

1- Hold only public meetings. Create an official recording of the meeting topics, agenda and plans.

2- 2- Condone and conduct only legal actions. “Illegal” actions such as sit-ins – etc. ought to be announced before hand as “acts of civil disobedience,” and those who participate must agree to be peacefully arrested. Non-violence is the key to the success of democratic protest. Police riots that confront such activities can be shown for what they are.

3- 3- Equip sufficient numbers of organizers with cameras to record the event. Make recordings available to both the “u-tube” and to the mainstream media. Where possible post them on the organization’s web site; forward to other friendly web media.

4- 4- Befriend members of the mainstream media. Sooner of later public sentiment can swing those corporate owned employees to capture more of what can be the “turning of the tide.” Sooner or later the mainstream media employees become targets of the police.

5- 5- No alcohol, drugs or any form of weaponry ought to be present at official meetings or activities. The use of drugs, alcohol by the police agents inevitably leads to out of control behaviors; weapons of any kind can lead to arrests.

6- 6- Report anyone who suggests illegal or violent activity to the membership of the organization immediately. This is not rumormonger time. Be sure of your facts. Allow a democratic process to make decisions about this person’s intention and identity. We all get angered at the crimes the state commits; we get angry at the way the state will repress us. But there is a difference between “letting off steam,” so to speak, and provocatively inciting members to illegal and/or violent acts.

7- 7- Make sure the organization has a solid and communicative relationship with its own legal entity. Report any unwanted – suspicious behavior to that entity ASAP, making a record of the report.

8- 8- If an illegal activity has been committed by a member of the group, expel that person until their behavior can be investigated; with advice of the legal entity, consider whether that person ought to be reported to the police: often the agent provocateur is undercover and unknown to the uniformed law enforcement personnel and can be “surfaced” by that process.

9- Under NO circumstances take individual or collective personal action against that person or persons: Such actions will lead to charges of conspiracy to commit assault against police officers, obstructing justice or worse. Often the “civilian” agents are mentally unstable persons; often they have been busted for crimes and are being used by law enforcement – blackmailed to alter or terminate their sentence or have charges dropped; or they are paid and will do anything to earn their fees. Which means committing other criminal acts and framing organization members for the crime.

10- Have your legal entity advise you regarding filing charges against any attempt by police agencies that have infiltrated your organization and perpetrated, or attempted to perpetrate, illegal actives.

11- If your organization adopts these tips as rules of conduct post them publicly in all offices, in your newsletter to other members and have them available at all meetings. Constant vigilance and awareness of constitutional rights is the best protection.

12- For so long as there are democratic remedies for redress of grievance, a progressive moment MUST pursue them. Not only for its own well being, but also as a conscious raising means to reach those who have yet to become aware of the state that the State is in!
And you may want to refer all members to:
_http://nlg.org/resources/kyr/kyr_English2004.pdf_
(http://nlg.org/resources/kyr/kyr_English2004.pdf)