Pass It On!

Are You With Us Or Against Us?

2005-12-30T23:57:00.000-08:00

Secrecy and deceit are the hallmarks of our government. They hide the truth whenever they can and the rest of the time they lie about it. The "news media" let them get away with it to an astonishing degree.

They cut funding from education and health care, and cut taxes for the wealthiest few. It's Robin Hood in reverse, robbing from poor to give to the rich. Then they sign "free trade" agreements that ship our jobs overseas.

Our civil liberties are vanishing and we're told this makes us safer. But our safety depends on our civil liberties. So we're not any safer, only less free.

The attack of September 11th appears to have been an "inside job". So the war in Afghanistan was based on a lie, just like the war in Iraq. Just like the whole "War On Terror".

Iraq had no WMDs, no ties to Al-Qaeda, no part in the attacks of 9/11. These were all lies, told to "justify" an attack against a defenseless country.

The attack became an occupation, and now our soldiers are being poisoned by their own depleted uranium ammunitions. And so is the entire Middle East.

Despite official statements, we're not bringing democracy to Iraq. The death squads that now terrorize Iraq were created by the Pentagon. This is apparently the "noble cause" for which our sons and daughters are dying.

It's disgraceful, and we know it. But how do we change it? Our voting systems are so insecure, we can't even trust the results of our own elections.

We'd better do something, and we'd better do it soon!

Are you with us or against us?

History Has Proven Otherwise

2005-12-06T01:58:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a report by Riverbend. December 1, 2005

The electricity schedule in what appears to be most areas in Baghdad is currently FIVE hours of no electricity for every one hour of electricity. It’s very frustrating. Where is it all going?

I intend to spend the rest of the night reading about Bush’s ‘strategy’ for Iraq. I haven’t seen it yet, but I expect it’ll be a repetition of the nonsense he’s been spewing for two and a half years now. Don’t Americans get tired of hearing the same thing?

It’s unbelievable that he’s refused to set a timetable for withdrawal. It’s almost as if someone is paying him to intentionally sabotage American foreign policy. With every speech he seems to sink himself deeper into the mire. A timetable for complete withdrawal of American forces would be a positive step. It would give Iraqis hope that, eventually, sovereignty will return to Iraq.

As it is, people fear the Americans will be here for the next twenty years, unless they are bombed and attacked out of the country. Although many Iraqis support armed resistance in theory, I think that the average Iraqi simply wants to see them go back home in one piece; we feel sorry for them and especially sorry for their families at times. There are moments when you forget the personal affronts: the raids, the checkpoints, the fear of bombing, the detentions, etc. and you can see through it all to the actual person behind the weapons and body armor.

On the other hand, you never forget that it's a foreign occupation and will meet with resistance like all foreign occupations.

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice can all swear that American troops will not pull out of the country no matter how many casualties they sustain, but history has proven otherwise…

You have been reading excerpts from "No voice..." by Riverbend. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/a7u8u. Thanks to Riverbend for "Baghdad Burning" at riverbendblog.blogspot.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

The War on Al Jazeera

2005-12-03T03:16:00.000-08:00

from a report by Jeremy Scahill in The Nation. December 19, 2005

Nothing puts the lie to the Bush Administration's absurd claim that it invaded Iraq to spread democracy throughout the Middle East more decisively than its ceaseless attacks on Al Jazeera, the institution that has done more than any other to break the stranglehold over information previously held by authoritarian forces, whether monarchs, military strongmen, occupiers or ayatollahs. The United States bombed its offices in Afghanistan in 2001, shelled the Basra hotel where Al Jazeera journalists were the only guests in April 2003, killed Iraq correspondent Tareq Ayoub a few days later in Baghdad and imprisoned several Al Jazeera reporters, some of whom say they were tortured. In addition to the military attacks, the US-backed Iraqi government banned the network from reporting in Iraq.

The Falluja offensive, one of the bloodiest assaults of the US occupation, was a turning point. In two weeks that April, thirty marines were killed as local guerrillas resisted US attempts to capture the city. Some 600 Iraqis died, many of them women and children. Al Jazeera broadcast from inside the besieged city, beaming images to the world. On live TV the network gave graphic documentary evidence disproving US denials that it was killing civilians. It was a public relations disaster, and the United States responded by attacking the messenger.

Al Jazeera's real transgression during the "war on terror" is a simple one: being there. While critical of the Bush Administration and US policy, it is not anti-American--it is independent. In fact, it has angered almost every Arab government at one point or another and has been kicked out of or sanctioned by many Arab countries. It holds the rare distinction of being shut down by both Saddam and the new US-backed government. It was the first Arab station to broadcast interviews with Israeli officials. It is hardly the Al Qaeda mouthpiece the Administration has wanted us to believe it is. The real threat Al Jazeera poses is in its unembedded journalism.

You have been reading excerpts from "The War on Al Jazeera" by Jeremy Scahill. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/98yx3. Thanks to Jeremy Scahill and TheNation.com.

It Is The War Which Disgraces America

2005-12-01T22:19:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a column by Bob Harris. November 29, 2005

To those who repeat the current GOP spin that opponents of the war are motivated by a hatred of Bush or a desire to see America disgraced, I would like to respond:

I can speak for no one else, but it seems obvious to me that it is the war which disgraces America. It is the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people which disgraces America. It is torture which disgraces America. It is imprisonment without trial which disgraces America. It is the use of chemical weapons which disgraces America. It is disdain for international law, the use of military power as a first resort, the intentional confusion of the Iraqi people with terrorists thousands of miles away in Afghanistan, and the corruption of the very word "democracy" which all disgrace America.

As an opponent of the war, I am trying to stop my country from being disgraced any further.

As to hatred, yes, I will confess: I hate the actions of everyone involved -- including Bush and his entire team, who are obviously most responsible, but also including plenty of Democrats (Biden, Lieberman, Clinton, etc.) -- in creating the current fiasco.

I would also eagerly forgive anyone able to admit that what they have done is wrong. I forgive John Murtha. I forgive Walter Jones. I forgive John Edwards. Forgiveness is, after all, one of the most important things we can offer.

I could be wrong, but I also believe the majority of humanity would agree.

You have been reading excerpts from "'Death squads' in the Iraqi police" by Bob Harris. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9mrtu. Thanks to Bob Harris. We visit bobharris.com often and we hope you will too.

Document: Oil Chiefs Met With Cheney Task Force

2005-11-30T01:23:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a report by Dana Milbank and Justin Blum, Washington Post Staff Writers. November 16, 2005

A White House document shows that executives from big oil companies met with Vice President Cheney's energy task force in 2001 -- something long suspected by environmentalists but denied as recently as last week by industry officials testifying before Congress.

The document, obtained this week by The Washington Post, shows that officials from Exxon Mobil Corp., Conoco (before its merger with Phillips), Shell Oil Co. and BP America Inc. met in the White House complex with the Cheney aides who were developing a national energy policy, parts of which became law and parts of which are still being debated.

In a joint hearing last week of the Senate Energy and Commerce committees, the chief executives of Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp. and ConocoPhillips said their firms did not participate in the 2001 task force. The president of Shell Oil said his company did not participate "to my knowledge," and the chief of BP America Inc. said he did not know.

Chevron was not named in the White House document, but the Government Accountability Office has found that Chevron was one of several companies that "gave detailed energy policy recommendations" to the task force. In addition, Cheney had a separate meeting with John Browne, BP's chief executive, according to a person familiar with the task force's work; that meeting is not noted in the document.

The task force's activities attracted complaints from environmentalists, who said they were shut out of the task force discussions while corporate interests were present. The meetings were held in secret and the White House refused to release a list of participants. The task force was made up primarily of Cabinet-level officials. Judicial Watch and the Sierra Club unsuccessfully sued to obtain the records.

You have been reading excerpts from "Document Says Oil Chiefs Met With Cheney Task Force" by Dana Milbank and Justin Blum. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/chtvx. Thanks to washingtonpost.com.

War Based On A Lie

2005-11-28T17:50:00.000-08:00

from a letter to the editor of Stars & Stripes, by Capt. Jeff Pirozzi, Camp Taqaddum, Iraq. November 28, 2005

Weapons of mass destruction? I’m still looking for them, and if you find any give me a call so we can justify our presence in Iraq. We started the war based on a lie, and we’ll finish it based on a lie. I say this because I am currently serving with a logistics headquarters in the Anbar province, between the cities of Fallujah and Ramadi. I am not fooled by the constant fabrication of “democracy” and “freedom” touted by our leadership at home and overseas.

This deception is furthered by our armed forces’ belief that we can just enter ancient Mesopotamia and tell the locals about the benefits of a legislative assembly. While our European ancestors were hanging from trees, these ancient people were writing algebra and solving quadratic equations. Now we feel compelled to strong-arm them into accepting the spoils of capitalism and “laissez-faire” society. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy watching Britney Spears on MTV and driving to McDonald’s, but do you honestly believe that Sunnis, Shias and Kurds want our Western ideas of entertainment and freedom imposed on them? Think again.

I’m not being negative, I’m being realistic. The reality in Iraq is that the United States created a nightmare situation where one didn’t exist. Yes, Saddam Hussein was an evil man who lied, cheated and pillaged his own nation. But how was he different from dictators in Africa who commit massive crimes again humanity with little repercussion and sometimes support from the West? The bottom line up front (BLUF to use a military acronym) is that Saddam was different because we used him as an excuse to go to war to make Americans “feel good” about the “War on Terrorism.” The BLUF is that our ultimate goal in 2003 was the security of Israel and the lucrative oil fields in northern and southern Iraq.

Weapons of mass destruction? Call me when you find them. In the meantime, “bring ’em on” so we can get our “mission accomplished” and get out of this mess.

You have been "War based on a lie" by Capt. Jeff Pirozzi. You can see it in its original context here: tinyurl.com/aldcd. Thanks to Capt. Pirozziestripes.com.

I Guess The Lucky Ones Go To Abu Ghraib

2005-11-23T00:34:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a report by Riverbend. November 18, 2005

Only last year in an area called Ghazaliya, a torture house was discovered. My cousin lives in Ghazaliya and he said that when the Americans got inside, they found several corpses and a man hanging from the ceiling on a makeshift noose. The neighbors had tried to get the Americans to check the house for months; no one bothered. They finally raided it because they got information from someone in the area that it was an insurgents' hiding place. I read once that in New York, if a woman is being raped, she should scream "fire" instead of "rape" because no one would come to save her if she was screaming "rape". That's the way it is with Iraqi torture houses -- the only way they'll check it is if you tell them it's a terrorist cell.

And another thing: you know when they say "men dressed in Ministry of Interior uniforms" or "men in official cars claiming to be from the Ministry of Interior", etc. when describing some horror committed by the new Iraqi security forces in the news? Here's a thought: they aren't "claiming" and they aren't in costume -- they actually ARE from the Ministry of Interior! One would think they'd do this covertly so as not to enrage Iraqis or humanitarian organisations, except that it doesn't matter to them because SCIRI and Da'awa aren't out to win hearts and minds. They have American favor -- what more does one need in the New Iraq?

For over a year corpses have been turning up all over Baghdad. Corpses of people who are taken from their homes and turn up dead somewhere. That isn't as disturbing as the reports about the bodies. The one I can't get out of my head is that many of the corpses are found with holes in the skull left by an electric drill.

I guess the lucky ones go to Abu Ghraib.

You have been reading excerpts from "House of Horrors..." by Riverbend. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8blja. Thanks to Riverbend. We visit Baghdad Burning at riverbendblog.blogspot.com often and we hope you will too.

House Of Horrors

2005-11-23T00:25:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a report by Riverbend. November 18, 2005

The whole world heard about the one in Jadriya, recently raided by the Americans. Jadriya was once one of the best areas in Baghdad. It's an area on the river and is special in that it's greener, and cleaner, than most areas. Baghdad's largest university, Baghdad University, is located in Jadriya (with a campus in another area). Jadriya had some of the best shops and restaurants, not to mention some of Baghdad's most elegant homes... and apparently, now, a torture house.

We hear constantly about these torture dungeons. Right after the war, certain areas became infamous for them. The world knows them as 'torture houses' for the obvious reasons: they were once ordinary homes, and now they've become torture centers for suspects and innocents alike. The Iraqi government conveniently calls them 'detention centers' and the Iraqi Ministry of Interior oversees and funds them.

One area which was well-known for its torture houses immediately after the war was Sadir City in Baghdad. Except they weren't called torture houses back then. The people who ran them called them 'ma7akim' or 'courts'. They would bring 'suspects' in for interrogation -- often ordinary citizens -- and beat and whip them for various confessions involving accusations and alleged crimes. A 'Sayid' would then come in and sentence the culprit -- the sentence would sometimes involve cutting off a hand or a foot and at other times it might be death. We heard this from an aunt's neighbor who was mistakenly taken in and beaten as a suspected former security agent. His family connections with influential Shia clerics in the area were the only things that got him out alive -- bruised and broken -- but alive.

These torture houses have existed since the beginning of the occupation. While it is generally known that SCIRI is behind them, other religious parties are not innocent. The Americans know they exist -- why the sudden shock and outrage? This is hardly news for Americans in the Green Zone. The timing is quite interesting. It shouldn't matter that this raid came immediately after the whole white phosphorous story came out, but the Pentagon and American military have proven to be the ultimate masters of diversion.

You have been reading excerpts from "House of Horrors..." by Riverbend. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8blja. Thanks to Riverbend. We visit Baghdad Burning at riverbendblog.blogspot.com often and we hope you will too.

This War Has Redefined ‘Conventional’

2005-11-22T23:52:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a report by Riverbend. November 17, 2005

No matter how prepared you think you are for that explosion, it always makes you flinch. I imagine children covering their ears and some of them crying, trying to cover up the mechanical sounds of war with their more human wails. I imagine that as the tanks got closer, and the planes got lower, the fear increased, and parents searched each other’s faces for a solution, for a way out of the horror. Some of them probably decided to wait it out in their homes, and others must have been desperate to get out, fearing the rain of concrete and steel and thinking their chances were better in the open air, than confined in the homes that could at any moment turn into their tombs.

That’s what we were told before the Americans came: it’s safer to be outside of the house during an air strike than it is to be inside house. Inside, a missile nearby would turn the windows into millions of little daggers and walls might come crashing down. In the garden, or even the street, you’d only have to worry about shrapnel and debris if the bomb was very close, but what were the chances of that?

That was before 2003… and certainly before Falloojeh.

That was before men, women and children left their homes only to be engulfed in a rain of fire.

The Pentagon spokesman recently said: "It's part of our conventional-weapons inventory and we use it like we use any other conventional weapon,"

This war has redefined ‘conventional’. It has taken atrocity to another level. Everything we learned before has become obsolete. ‘Conventional’ has become synonymous with horrifying. Conventional weapons are those that eat away the skin in a white blaze; conventional interrogation methods are like those practiced in Abu Ghraib and other occupation prisons…

You have been reading excerpts from "Conventional Terror..." by Riverbend. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/76cma. Many thanks to Riverbend. We visit Baghdad Burning at riverbendblog.blogspot.com often and we hope you will too.

I Imagine What It Must Have Been Like

2005-11-22T23:50:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a report by Riverbend. November 17, 2005

Few Iraqis ever doubted the American use of chemical weapons in Falloojeh. We’ve been hearing the terrifying stories of people burnt to the bone for well over a year now. I just didn’t want it confirmed.

I didn’t want it confirmed because confirming the atrocities that occurred in Falloojeh means verifying how really lost we are as Iraqis under American occupation and how incredibly useless the world is in general -- the UN, Kofi Annan, humanitarian organizations, clerics, the Pope, journalists… You name it, we’ve lost faith in it.

I finally worked up enough courage to watch it and it has lived up to my worst fears. Watching it was almost an invasive experience, because I felt like someone had crawled into my mind and brought my nightmares to life. Image after image of men, women and children so burnt and scarred that the only way you could tell the males apart from the females, and the children apart from the adults, was by the clothes they are wearing… the clothes which were eerily intact -- like each corpse had been burnt to the bone, and then dressed up lovingly in their everyday attire -- the polka dot nightgown with a lace collar… the baby girl in her cotton pajamas, little earrings dangling from little ears.

Some of them look like they died almost peacefully, in their sleep… others look like they suffered a great deal: skin burnt completely black and falling away from scorched bones.

I imagine what it must have been like for some of them. They were probably huddled in their houses; some of them -- tens of thousands of them -- couldn’t leave the city. They didn’t have transport or they simply didn’t have a place to go. They sat in their homes, hoping that what people said about Americans was actually true -- that in spite of their huge machines and endless weapons, they were human too.

You have been reading excerpts from "Conventional Terror..." by Riverbend. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/76cma. Many thanks to Riverbend. We visit Baghdad Burning at riverbendblog.blogspot.com often and we hope you will too.

I Didn’t Want To See It

2005-11-22T23:41:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a report by Riverbend. November 17, 2005

It sat on my PC desktop for five days.

The first day I read about it on the internet, on some site, my heart sank. White phosphorous in Falloojeh. I knew nothing about white phosphorous, of course, and a part of me didn’t want to know the details. I tried downloading the film four times and was almost relieved when I got disconnected all four times.

E. had heard about the film too and one of his friends S. finally brought it by on CD. He and E. shut themselves up in the room with the computer to watch the brief documentary. E. came out half an hour later looking pale, his lips tightened in a straight line, which is the way he looks when he’s pensive... thinking about something he'd rather not discuss.

“Hey -- I want to see it too…” I half-heartedly called out after him, as he walked S. to the door.

“It’s on the desktop. But you really don’t want to see it.” E. said.

I avoided the computer for five days because every time I switched it on, the file would catch my eye and call out to me… now plaintively -- begging to be watched, now angrily -- condemning my indifference.

Except that it was never indifference. It was a sort of dread that sat deep in my stomach, making me feel like I had swallowed a dozen small stones. I didn’t want to see it because I knew it contained the images of the dead civilians I had in my head.

You have been reading excerpts from "Conventional Terror..." by Riverbend. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/76cma. Many thanks to Riverbend. We visit Baghdad Burning at riverbendblog.blogspot.com often and we hope you will too.

'al-Qaeda' Was In Fact A Database

2005-11-21T23:20:00.000-08:00

based on a report by Kurt Nimmo. November 19, 2005

“al-Qaeda” never existed in the form now claimed by the Bushites and the corporate media.

“al-Qaeda” was in fact a database of CIA-recruited and -trained mujahideen and an email address connected to that database.

Osama bin Laden had nothing to do with that database and thus all references in the corporate media claiming he is the leader of “al-Qaeda” are false.

Terrorists falsely attributed to “al-Qaeda” were organized by the U.S. military and NATO and financed by a CIA front bank in Washington and unleashed in Bosnia.

The CIA front bank later shared a connection with prominent Saudi Arabians who are suspected of financing the 9/11 hijackers.

All of this information was predictably discarded by the 9/11 whitewash commission.

Of course, none of this arcane information means squat to the American people, many whom believe Osama teamed up with Saddam to pull of nine eleven and “al-Qaeda” is a real terrorist organization run by the elusive “devils” Bin Laden and his murderous cohort, al-Zarqawi.

In fact, the official story is so embedded in the American psyche, thanks to the relentless efforts of the corporate media, it may never be possible for the truth to emerge.

You have been reading excerpts from "Al-Qaeda the Database Unbound" by Kurt Nimmo. You can read the entire piece here: kurtnimmo.com/?p=131. Thanks to kurtnimmo.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

The War Against Civilization

2005-11-21T21:29:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a column by Chris Floyd. November 21, 2005

It's not just a war on the poor, of course. No, it's also a war against working people, against the middle class, against the very idea that there is a common good beyond the raw bottom line, that individual human lives and human communities have any intrinsic value or meaning whatsoever, except as raw material to be squeezed for blood money and chump change.

It is a war that is destroying, very deliberately, a way of life that brought an unprecedented measure of security and stability and prosperity to millions of Americans across generations.

It's being systematically destroyed because the business elite can reap even higher, more obscene profits than they already command by gutting America and "outsourcing" its jobs to places that pay slave wages to unprotected, unorganized workers and kick back secret sweeteners to keep the corporate lords fat and happy.

And it's being systematically destroyed because the political elite prefer an atomized, terrorized, polarized rabble -- scrambling for survival, worn out with worry, broken down with untreated illness or bankrupted by medical costs, fighting each other for a dwindling number of ill-paid, going-nowhere jobs -- to a secure and confident citizenry that stands up for its rights.

The War on Civilization being waged by Bush and the elite has been far more destructive of the "American way of life" than the not-dissimilar war on civilization being pursued by the pockets of violent religious extremists could ever hope to be.

Both forces seek to destroy the idea of compassion, tolerance and inclusion that is the hallmark of true civilization, and instead impose a harsh, narrow vision of life, a society dominated by the arbitrary will of a privileged few.

You have been reading excerpts from "The War Against Civilization" by Chris Floyd. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/789qj. Thanks to chris-floyd.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Reclaiming The American Consensus

2005-11-20T13:51:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a column by William Frey. November 17, 2005

We must not surrender flag and faith to those who would use both to support a war which honors neither.

To those who would attempt to silence Americans with the call that “We must support our troops,” we must meet squarely on the issues: The troops are our sons, our daughters, our husbands, our wives. They volunteered to defend our nation, not to pursue a hidden agenda of those who do not honor our nations values. We must never abuse their courage, their patriotism, and their sacrifice.

To those who insist we must spread liberty: Our founders established our nation as a beacon of liberty. We must never confuse the defense of liberty with the pursuit of an agenda of domination that is offensive to our democratic values and counterproductive to our security, inflaming the passions and determination of those less powerful.

To those who exploit a climate of fear to assert that we must now abridge fundamental liberties for the sake of security, we must remind of the insights of wiser Americans,

"Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

"Liberty is always dangerous, but it is the safest thing we have." Harry Emerson Fosdick

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy" .... "We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties." James Madison

You have been reading excerpts from "Confessions of a Repentant Republican" by William Frey. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/854v9. Thanks to consortiumnews.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Framing The Issues

2005-11-20T13:46:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a column by William Frey. November 17, 2005

“No speech about homeland security or Iraq should begin without a reference to 9/11 ....

“If you describe it simply as a ‘preemptive action,’ some Americans will carry deep reservations about the rightness of the cause. Americans are conditioned to think that hitting first is usually wrong .... By far, the better word to use than ‘preemption’ is ‘PREVENTION ’ ....”
-- from GOP spinmeister Frank Luntz's June, 2004 talking points

Even the corrosive influence of a coarsened public dialogue dominated by personal invective and focus-group tested, predigested talking points is not sufficient to blind observant Americans to the dissonance between these actions and our values.

The repercussions of perpetual war, unwanted occupation of a foreign land, a reviled America abroad, and permanent erosions of our liberties have rendered the rents in the fabric of our democracy all too apparent. Rationalization for such egregious departures from our values can be accomplished only with the generous use of denial and self-deception.

A predictable pattern has developed. Misguided policy – most specifically, policy which convinces Iraqis that we are intent upon permanent occupation – fuels increasing insurgency.

With each setback President Bush has reacted by rhetorically “upping the ante”. Each escalation of rhetoric is accompanied by increasingly strident claims that those taking exception to his policies are “siding with the terrorists.”

You have been reading excerpts from "Confessions of a Repentant Republican" by William Frey. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/854v9. Thanks to consortiumnews.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

With Us Or Against Us

2005-11-19T04:11:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a column by William Frey. November 17, 2005

The repercussions of perpetual war, unwanted occupation of a foreign land, a reviled America abroad, and permanent erosions of our liberties have rendered the rents in the fabric of our democracy all too apparent. Rationalization for such egregious departures from our values can be accomplished only with the generous use of denial and self-deception.

A predictable pattern has developed. Misguided policy – most specifically, policy which convinces Iraqis that we are intent upon permanent occupation – fuels increasing insurgency. With each set-back President Bush has reacted by rhetorically “upping the ante”. Each escalation of rhetoric is accompanied by increasingly strident claims that those taking exception to his policies are “siding with the terrorists.”

In his call to arms, “You are either with us or against us”, by paraphrasing the words of Christ from the twelfth chapter of Mathew, President Bush appropriates the language of faith for the cause of total and unquestioning support for Administration war policy.

Such framing of the issues encourages a view of reality with only two options: siding with an infallible, virtuous, freedom-spreading America led by George Bush, ordained by God to democratize the world, or siding with evil.

“Upping the ante,” as well as the re-defining of both patriotism and divine will so as to be in accord with administration policy, solidifies our emotional commitment to the premise that every act of war, every Fallujah, every death of a son or daughter, every “liberated” Iraqi civilian who becomes “collateral damage”, every new infringement upon our civil liberties, is all for the greater good. By such a process, we may find solace, avoid recognition of the actual horrors we have come to support, and psychically deflect responsibility for the unintended, but predictable, consequences of our actions.

You have been reading excerpts from "Confessions of a Repentant Republican" by William Frey. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/854v9. Thanks to consortiumnews.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

We Must Confront Them With The Truth

2005-11-19T03:51:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a column by William Frey. November 17, 2005

To those who claim that we who oppose the war in Iraq are "anti-American", we must confront with the truth that we who oppose the occupation come from all points on the political spectrum - Democrats, Republicans, and independents - left, right and center - and include the majority of Americans.

To those who persist in challenging our patriotism, we must remind of the words of Theodore Roosevelt, "To announce that there should be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, it is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American people."

The issues that unite the growing American "antiwar majority" today are principles that since our founding have defined what it means to be an American. So ingrained have these core American values become in our national psyche that even those who seek entirely opposing goals routinely give them rhetorical lip service:
War only with prior constitutional consent obtained for justifiable, non-aggressive, honesty-stated purposes.

No ambition of empire, or desire to dominate, and rejection of the role of world policeman.

Belief that only a society that both respects and actually practices individual freedom, rather than seeking the illusion of security through authoritarian measures, will succeed in preserving and spreading genuine liberty.

The conviction that no man, including the president, is above the law.

An uncompromising belief in the humane treatment of even our most despicable enemies.
You have been reading excerpts from "Confessions of a Repentant Republican" by William Frey. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/854v9. Thanks to consortiumnews.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

The Price Of Believing The Prevailing Myths

2005-11-19T03:41:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a column by William Frey. November 17, 2005

When faced with facts that do not fit this world view, a “true believer” may resolve the cognitive dissonance by simple disbelief: When confronted, on Hannity & Coombs, with the revelation that American hero Pat Tillman, killed while serving as an Army Ranger in Afghanistan, opposed what he viewed as an illegal war in Iraq, Ann Coulter could only express disbelief. Hannity agreed, “I don't believe it either…..He signed up because of a desire to fight.” Coulter then incorrectly speculated that this must be a fabrication of the media. The reality of a patriotic American who would give up a lucrative sports contract to risk his life defending America in Afghanistan, while simultaneously opposing the war in Iraq, appeared, to both Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity, simply incomprehensible.

A “With us or against us” dichotomy forces Americans to choose between blind support for misguided policy, or painful but necessary patriotic dissent while simultaneously being unjustly maligned as “siding with the enemy”. Like the courageous and patriotic Pat Tillman, many Americans share a more nuanced view of the world, and are committed to proper moral action. But rejecting a falsely polarized, overly simplified “Us or Them” administration view may be painfully difficult for those patriotic Americans who share a deep commitment to our values of liberty, but who also feel a moral obligation to speak out to correct misguided policy inconsistent with those values.

Breaking free from this false framing of reality requires independent vision, intellectual honesty, and the courage to face painful realities. Skillful control of the framing of issues has been a significant factor in advancing the Bush/Rove agenda. Utilizing the skillful linguistic and psychological cunning of Frank Luntz’s talking points, pre-digested prior to delivery to legions of surrogates in the media, the Bush/Rove machine has mastered the art of issue framing and spin. But just as the fabled unclad emperor learned, there are limits beyond which a false version of reality cannot be sustained. There comes a point at which the price of believing the prevailing myths becomes too great.

You have been reading excerpts from "Confessions of a Repentant Republican" by William Frey. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/854v9. Thanks to consortiumnews.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

How Has It Come To This?

2005-11-19T03:35:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a column by William Frey. November 17, 2005

In the name of defending our freedom, we witness the ongoing and significant erosion of fundamental civil liberties, and of the rule of law, erosions so egregious that it is indeed difficult to comprehend their reality and future implications:

We witness rulings that in the War on Terror, not only non-citizens, but even an American citizen apprehended and accused on American soil, unbelievably may be imprisoned indefinitely without charges or trial.

We witness the Administration concocting legal theories to evade both the Geneva Conventions as well as American legal prohibitions of torture. These legal theories have now expanded to include the remarkable proposition that the President, as commander-in-chief, has the “inherent right” to “set aside” American law. When the Senate requested the relevant legal memos advocating this proposition that “The President is above the law”, we have witnessed the Administration not only refuse Congressional access, but classify the legal memos so as to be inaccessible until 2013.

Despite military leaders and Republican Senators, including former POW John McCain, cautioning that American observation of Geneva Conventions prohibitions against torture have been vital to protecting our own servicemen, we have seen the administration systematically oppose Congressional efforts to re-instate these prohibitions.

Of the consequence of loosening the prohibition against the obtaining of confessions by torture, Patrick Henry said in 1789, “We are then lost and undone.”

The moral gymnastics a patriotic American one must perform to reconcile support for these positions with long honored American traditions of justice grow greater with each subsequent encroachment. How has it come to this?

You have been reading excerpts from "Confessions of a Repentant Republican" by William Frey. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/854v9. Thanks to consortiumnews.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Concrete Speaks Louder Than Words

2005-11-19T03:32:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a column by William Frey. November 17, 2005

Those familiar with the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), whose founders include Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld among many who went on to serve in the Bush administration, are familiar with their long advocacy of increased reliance upon the assertion of American military force, supported by an expanded worldwide network of permanent military bases.

Regarding the Middle East, the PNAC policy statement published in 2000, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”, plainly stated the objective of an increased military presence in the region as a reason for invading Iraq, “While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

These goals of total military dominance, pursued by civilian, mostly non-combat-experienced, war-hawks despite opposition and warnings from many of our most experienced generals, not only conflicts with American ideals, but is irreconcilable with administration rhetoric. Indeed, President Bush and members of his administration have taken precautions to dispel any notion that they have plans for a permanent military presence in Iraq:

On April 13, 2004, President Bush said, “As a proud and independent people, Iraqis do not support an indefinite occupation and neither does America.” Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee February 17, stated, “We have no intention, at the present time, of putting permanent bases in Iraq.” The U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, said in an interview on Iraqi television August 15, 2005, “We are not seeking to maintain permanent bases in Iraq.”

But concrete speaks louder than words.

You have been reading excerpts from "Confessions of a Repentant Republican" by William Frey. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/854v9. Thanks to consortiumnews.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Eisenhower Warned Us About This

2005-11-19T03:29:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a column by William Frey. November 17, 2005

Heeding the admonitions of battle-hardened generals is scarcely a strength of the Bush administration.

Dwight Eisenhower's presidential leadership was forged in his experience as Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force during WWII. Facing, in the dawn of the nuclear age, an arms race with the Soviet Union, he cautioned, “There is no way in which a country can satisfy the craving for absolute security, but it can bankrupt itself morally and economically in attempting to reach that illusory goal through arms alone.”

In his farewell address, Eisenhower was the first to describe and warn Americans of the dangers he observed in the rapidly expanding military industrial complex,

“The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government……..The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”

Eisenhower’s judicious leadership and balanced priorities, despite a unified, nuclear-armed, and assertive Soviet Union, averted nuclear catastrophe and preserved civil liberties.

In contrast, despite the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Bush regime, not content with America’s current status as the world’s sole superpower, has adopted a National Security Strategy which seeks American hegemony and total dominance, entailing a military industrial complex far greater than any of which Eisenhower warned.

You have been reading excerpts from "Confessions of a Repentant Republican" by William Frey. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/854v9. Thanks to consortiumnews.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Confessions of a Repentant Republican

2005-11-19T03:24:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a column by William Frey. November 17, 2005

I supported George W. Bush in the presidential election in 2000, believing then that he best reflected my love for America and for our tradition of liberty. I supported the war in Afghanistan. In March of 2003, I believed that the invasion of Iraq was justified based upon pre-war revelations presented to Congress and to the American people. Accordingly, the indictments contained herein apply, first and foremost, to myself.

Many Americans whom I know and love, including many current supporters of President Bush, remain conflicted over both his ultimate intentions in Iraq as well as domestic curtailment of civil liberties.

Many have given the benefit of the doubt to President Bush, and, in a misdirected spirit of unity, have supported, as did I, Administration policies that conflict with our essential values.

This essay explores many of the issues that led me personally to the recognition that the policies I was supporting in Iraq were not consistent with the justifications made for the invasion in the spring of 2003, that implicit in our post-invasion actions was the goal of permanent occupation, which would ensure endless war and the resultant degradation of our liberty, our security, and our moral authority.

For me, recognizing that I could no longer support the President for whom I voted, and the occupation of a land we had invaded, remains personally painful.

I have learned that while it is difficult to admit being wrong, such recognition is a prerequisite for redemptive action, necessary both for individual growth and for the healing of our nation.

It is in this spirit that I submit these reflections.

You have been reading excerpts from "Confessions of a Repentant Republican" by William Frey. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/854v9. Thanks to consortiumnews.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Cheney Lies About The Lies He Told [part 3]

2005-11-16T23:49:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a report by John Aravosis. November 16, 2005

Oh this is rich. Cheney is the newest attack dog Bush is sending out to chastize Dems for calling Bush and company liars. The only problem? Cheney himself is one of the liars who repeatedly and intentionally misled the country in order to justify the war.

Do you remember the one where Cheney denied linking Atta to the Iraqis, when he did?

On December 9, 2001, Cheney told NBC's Tim Russert [regarding Atta]: "It's been pretty well confirmed that he did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack.

But on June 17, 2004, Cheney was asked by CNBC's Gloria Borger: "Well, let's go to Mohamed Atta for a minute, because you mentioned him as well. You have said in the past that it was, quote, 'pretty well confirmed.'"

Cheney: "No, I never said that."

Borger: "Okay."

Cheney: "Never said that."

Borger: "I think that is... "

Cheney: "Absolutely not. What I said was the Czech intelligence service reported after 9/11 that Atta had been in Prague on April 9th of 2001, where he allegedly met with an Iraqi intelligence official. We have never been able to confirm that nor have we been able to knock it down."

You have been reading excerpts from "Dick Cheney, who outright lied to justify invading Iraq, now attacks Demcrats for calling him on his lies" by John Aravosis. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/7t9ue. Thanks to americablog.blogspot.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Cheney Lies About The Lies He Told [part 2]

2005-11-16T23:44:00.000-08:00

excerpts from a report by John Aravosis. November 16, 2005

Oh this is rich.

Cheney is the newest attack dog Bush is sending out to chastize Dems for calling Bush and company liars.

The only problem? Cheney himself is one of the liars who repeatedly and intentionally misled the country in order to justify the war.

Do you remember the one where...

Cheney said during the VP debates last October that he NEVER had publicly connected Iraq and 9/11. Of course, he did so -- on Meet the Press a year before:

Cheney: "If we're successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it's not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it's not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

You have been reading excerpts from "Dick Cheney, who outright lied to justify invading Iraq, now attacks Demcrats for calling him on his lies" by John Aravosis. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/7t9ue. Thanks to americablog.blogspot.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Cheney Lies About The Lies He Told [part 1]

2005-11-16T23:29:00.000-08:00

based on a report by John Aravosis. November 16, 2005

Oh this is rich. Cheney is the newest attack dog Bush is sending out to chastize Dems for calling Bush and company liars. The only problem? Cheney himself is one of the liars who repeatedly and intentionally misled the country in order to justify the war.

Do you remember...

... the one where Cheney Claimed Iraq was providing WMD training to Al-Qaeda months after the source of that story had recanted?

... or the one where Cheney claimed Saddam was harboring Al Qaeda? He wasn't.

... or the one where Cheney claimed Saddam gave Al Qaeda bomb-making expertise and trained Al Qaeda terrorists how to use chemical and biological weapons? Saddam didn't.

... or the one where Cheney claimed that there was evidence suggesting Mohammad Atta visited the Iraqi embassy in the Czech Republic? Atta didn't, and Cheney knew the supposed evidence had already been debunked, yet he repeated the charge on Tim Russert's show as a justification for the war.

... or the one where Cheney said during the VP debates last October that he NEVER had publicly connected Iraq and 9/11. Of course, he had dons so on Meet the Press a year before.

You have been reading excerpts from "Dick Cheney, who outright lied to justify invading Iraq, now attacks Demcrats for calling him on his lies" by John Aravosis. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/7t9ue. Thanks to americablog.blogspot.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

They Will Need A Lot More Time To 'Study' This

2005-11-14T23:05:00.000-08:00

based on a report from The Bulldog Manifesto. November 14, 2005

The WMD Commission was formed pursuant to Executive Order 13328, to address the myriad "intelligence failures" the Bush administration claims resulted in the misdiagnosis of Iraq's WMD program, or better yet, the lack of WMD program.

The WMD commission came back with 68 recommendations. Of those 68 recommendatons, the Bush administration has agreed to follow 65. On the very last recommendation, the Bush administration held that "Further Study" was needed.

The final recommendation reads:
The Director of National Intelligence should hold accountable the organizations that contributed to the flawed assessments of Iraq's WMD programs.
In response to this recommendation, the White House has stated that it needs "further study" to implement this recommendation.

Why would the White House need "further study" to determine whether it is sound policy to "hold accountable those organizations that contributed to the flawed assessments of Iraq's WMD programs"?

Is it possible that the White House doesn't want to execute the last recommendation because it would mean that Bush administration "friends and family" would be held accountable?

Is it possible that the White House doesn't want to execute the last recommendation because it would also mean holding itself accountable?

Something tells me they will need a lot more time to "study" this.

You have been reading excerpts from "Question for the White House: Where o' Where is Your 'Further Study'?" from The Bulldog Manifesto. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9z7h6. Thanks to the Bulldog. We visit bulldogpolitics.blogspot.com often and we hope you will too.

Amman Bombings: Nothing Here, Move On

2005-11-14T22:54:00.000-08:00

based on a report by Kurt Nimmo. November 14th 2005

It is simply amazing how the corporate media can ignore the obvious fact there were no suicide bombers at the hotels in Amman, how photo evidence proves beyond a shadow of a doubt the bombs were placed in the ceiling of the hotels, and how it makes absolutely no sense for supposed Iraqi resistance fighters to kill innocent civilians in a neighboring state.

Instead of pointing out these glaring inconsistencies, the corporate media zooms in on Sajida Mubarak Atrous al-Rishawi, the Iraqi patsy alleged to have participated in suicide bombings that never occurred, as the photo evidence reveals.

Meanwhile, like a ghoulish circus barker, Secretary of State Condi Rice “said in a speech in Israel, where she tried to revive Arab-Israeli peace hopes, that she was very encouraged so many Jordanians had spoken out against terrorism since the attacks, which killed 54 mostly Jordanians. Thousands have held rallies and candle-light vigils in recent days,” according to Reuters.

Once again, the corporate media fails to mention the obvious, taking us for fools and chumps—there is no such thing as “Arab-Israeli peace hopes,” since Israel has no intention of ever engaging in peace with Arabs, either in occupied Palestine or anywhere else, and are more than likely responsible for the Jordan “suicide bombings.”

Finally, the corporate media pretends Arabs are attending “rallies and candle-light vigils” en masse, when in fact most Arabs believe Israel and the United States are responsible for these increasingly frequent and deadly terrorist attacks, thus proving Arabs living under authoritarian governments (supported by the United States) are more intelligent than the average American.

You have been reading "Corporate Media and Amman Bombings: Nothing Here, Move On" by Kurt Nimmo. You can see it in its original context here: kurtnimmo.com/?p=120. Thanks to kurtnimmo.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Ohio '05 Election Results Staggeringly Impossible

2005-11-14T21:07:00.000-08:00

based on a report by Brad Friedman. November 15, 2005

On Issue 1, the Columbus Dispatch's pre-election polling, described as "uncannily accurate for decades", called the race correctly within 1% of the final result.

POLL: 53% Yes, 27% No, 20% Undecided
RESULT: 54% Yes, 45% No

But then came Issues 2 through 5, put forward by ReformOhioNow.org -- a bi-partisan coalition pushing for Electoral Reform in the Buckeye State. On those four issues, the final results were impossibly different!

Issue 2 (Allow easier absentee balloting)
POLL: 59% Yes, 33% No, 9% Undecided
RESULT: 36% Yes, 63% No

Issue 3 (Revise campaign contribution limits)
POLL: 61% Yes, 25% No, 14% Undecided
RESULT: 33% Yes, 66% No

Issue 4 (Independent Commission to draw Congressional Districts)
POLL: 31% Yes, 45% No, 25% Undecided
RESULT: 30% Yes, 69% No

Issue 5 (Independent Board to oversee elections)
POLL: 41% Yes, 43% No, 16% Undecided
RESULT: 29% Yes, 70% No

What could possibly explain such differences between the Dispatch's poll and the final results?

You have been reading excerpts from "The Staggeringly Impossible Results of Ohio's '05 Election" by Brad Friedman. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/buqtp. Thanks to BradBlog.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Our Most Basic Rights Are In Serious Trouble

2005-11-13T22:35:00.000-08:00

based on a report by David Rose. November 13, 2005

Human rights campaigners are calling it the 'November surprise' - a last-minute amendment smuggled into a Pentagon finance bill in the US Senate last Thursday.

Its effects are likely to be devastating: the permanent removal of almost all legal rights from 'war on terror' detainees at Guantanamo Bay and every other similar US facility on foreign or American soil.

If the amendment passes the House of Representatives unmodified, one of its immediate effects is that the lawyers who act for Guantanamo prisoners will again be denied access, as they were for more than two years after Camp X-Ray opened in 2002.

The amendment was tabled by Lindsay Graham, a South Carolina Republican, and passed by 49 votes to 42. It reverses the Supreme Court's decision in June last year which affirmed the right of detainees to bring habeas corpus petitions in American federal courts.

Michael Ratner, the director of New York's Centre for Constitutional Rights, said the amendment "will create a thousand points of darkness across the globe where the United States will be free to hold people indefinitely without a hearing, beyond the reach of US law and the checks and balances in our constitution."

Human rights groups and leading figures from the US military are urging the Senate to reconsider the amendment next week. Among those who have written open letters are John Hutson, the former Judge Advocate General of the US Navy, and the National Institute for Military Justice, a think-tank for military lawyers.

You have been reading excerpts from "Guantanamo inmates to lose all rights" by David Rose. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/bnxz5. Thanks to observer.guardian.co.uk. Real journalism is still alive in Britain.

We Must Come To Grips With Our History

2005-11-13T21:36:00.001-08:00

based on a column by Charles Sullivan. Nov 14, 2005

We target nations with left wing leaders like Venezuela’s popular president Hugo Chavez and call them threats to democracy, when we ourselves have no conception of what democracy looks like. The only threat that Hugo Chavez poses to the United States is that he places the needs of the people above the profits of multinational corporations; that is as un-American as it gets. This is why CIA operatives have routinely instigated coups against the hemisphere’s most popular democratically elected leaders. That is why so many of them have been assassinated by bullets paid for by our tax dollars. Countless others have been beaten, tortured, and disappeared, courtesy of U.S. tax dollars.

The U.S. has a long history of opposing democracy throughout the world. The undeniable proof lies hidden in our national history; a history that has been carefully thrust down the memory hole of an Orwellian nightmare.

America’s military might has always opposed and snuffed out fledgling democracies. Every U.S. military intervention in the past fifty years has acted to put down popular movements. Our military might is used not to promote liberation, democracy, and freedom. It is the arm of corporatism that invades and plunders sovereign nations to rob them of treasure and resources. Its purpose is to open new markets to capitalism; to create pools of slave labor and a constant stream of cheap goods for American consumption. It is Wal-Mart amplified a hundred thousand times and projected across the globe.

None of this is news. It is the continuation of Manifest Destiny. It is the sound of the rich and powerful preying upon the poor and the innocent. We must come to grips with our own sordid history and all that it has wrought. Only then we can begin to do something about the present and the future.

You have been reading excerpts from "Iron Fisted America" by Charles Sullivan. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/blpdj. Thanks to Charles Sullivan and informationclearinghouse.info. We visit often and we hope you will too.

A Land Of Contradictions

2005-11-13T21:36:00.000-08:00

based on a column by Charles Sullivan. Nov 14, 2005

The world knows only too well that America is a violent nation. They know, many of them first hand, that America preys upon the poor and the defenseless. The manner in which the corporate oligarchy that drives American politics treats its own down trodden is a microcosm of how it treats the rest of the world. The extermination of the indigenous people of North America by pious Anglo invaders is an atrocity that makes the Nazi liquidation of the Jews pale in comparison. America has yet to come to grips with its initial episode of genocide and ethnic cleansing that may be at the root of its pathological behavior. The annihilation of the American Indian was just the beginning of what capitalism could do.

From cradle to grave the collective American mind is under the all pervasive assault of corporatism. This is all we have ever known; it is all most of us will ever know. It explains our combined failure to see the world in terms that can only be described as Disneyesque. Every day in America is an adventure in the implausible Land of Oz As a people we have no conception of reality. We have been carefully insulated from the pain and suffering we have inflicted and continue to inflict upon the world. Quite literally, we not know not what we do. But even more tellingly, we don’t want to know.

When we invade sovereign nations we are told that we are liberating oppressed people from the throes of tyranny. When we enslave and torture Islamic people we are told that they are terrorists who mean us harm. In true Machiavellian terms, the ends justify the means. This also explains why we cannot come to grips through honest reckoning with the horrors of the national tragedy we call history. We have unelected leaders who lie, maim and murder and we call them Christian. Isn’t that strange?

You have been reading excerpts from "Iron Fisted America" by Charles Sullivan. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/blpdj. Thanks to Charles Sullivan and informationclearinghouse.info. We visit often and we hope you will too.

The Antithesis Of Robin Hood

2005-11-13T21:32:00.000-08:00

based on a column by Charles Sullivan. Nov 14, 2005

Nothing in America is what we are told it is. Whenever the president—any president—speaks, we can be reasonably certain that he does not utter truth as we know it. During the past fifty years, America has not had a socially progressive president. Bill Clinton certainly was no progressive, as his detractors would have us believe. At his most liberal Clinton was nothing more than Bush lite. He twice won the presidency by out righting the right. Clearly, this was no victory for progressives. No modern era American president represents the interest of the people. They represent the rich and powerful. The same is true of Congress.

Every branch of the American government is awash in corporate money in sums so vast as to boggle the mind. Little wonder that the American government does not serve the interest and needs of the people. It serves the wants of soulless corporate entities whose only concern is unbridled bottom line capitalism.

The corporate media, as the name implies, serves the corporate interest. Little that the corporate media tells us has any relevance to truth as most of us know it. The corporate media are purveyors of lies and distortions that are used to subdue and control the public mind, often for sinister purposes. Seek alternative channels of information that flow from non corporate sources. There you will find what you need to know to be free.

Every branch of government and ninety nine percent of the media operates in the corporate interest—not in the public interest, as we all too willingly assume. America is not even close to resembling a democracy, as the national myth proclaims—it is a corporate oligarchy. It is a deeply divided society in which the rich prey upon the poor. The poor fight the wars for the economic gains realized by the power elite. It is the antithesis of Robin Hood. Here the rich routinely steal from the poor. They rob them senseless and call it democracy!

You have been reading excerpts from "Iron Fisted America" by Charles Sullivan. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/blpdj. Thanks to Charles Sullivan and informationclearinghouse.info. We visit often and we hope you will too.

GOP Voting Obstruction Case Bound for Trial

2005-11-13T02:14:00.000-08:00

based on a report by Brad Friedman. November 12, 2005

From LA Times...
A former national Republican Party official will stand trial on charges he conspired to jam Democratic get-out-the-vote phone lines on election day 2002, a federal judge said in Concord.

Judge Steven McAuliffe rejected an argument by James Tobin that the conspiracy charges should be dismissed because the government's allegations were insufficient. A trial for Tobin, who in 2002 was political director of the national committee working to get Republican senators elected, is scheduled for Dec. 6.
Keep in mind that:

a) Tobin was working for the national Republican Party, he wasn't some loose-cannon, bad apple, lone agent,

b) The phone-jamming scandal was in the '02 election, yet the RNC hired Tobin to head their '04 Northeastern Regional Campaign even after they knew he was in trouble for the '02 shenanigans, and

c) As of August, the RNC had covered his legal bills, which already totalled $700,000 -- months before the trial was even scheduled to begin!

So the next time a wingnut tosses you the canard about some tires slashed in Milwaukee by a couple of kids, remind them of this guy, still on the RNC's payroll.

You have been reading excerpts from "RNC's Vote-Obstructing Phone-Jamming Head of NE Regional '04 Campaign Heads to Trial... And He's Still on the GOP Payroll!" by Brad Friedman. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8p6vj. We visit BradBlog.com often and we hope you will too.

Election-Tampering Pure And Simple

2005-11-13T01:59:00.000-08:00

based on a report by Joshua Micah Marshall. August 11, 2005

Big news regarding the Republican election-tampering scam in New Hampshire on election day 2002. This was the case in which the state Republican party hired a company to jam the phones of Democratic and union phone banks doing get-out-the-vote work on election day in what was expected to be a tight race between now-Sen. John Sununu and then-Gov. Jeanne Shaheen.

Election-tampering pure and simple.

The then-executive director of the New Hampshire Republican party and a consultant involved in the scheme are now doing time for their role in the caper. And though the DOJ has done about everything it can to drag its feet on the case, as we first reported last year, the kingpin in the case, James Tobin himself, was finally indicted.

In 2002, Tobin was the Northeast Regional Director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, working under then-Chairman Bill Frist. (Later he became the regional chairman of Bush-Cheney 2004; he stepped down when he was indicted.)

Frist has refused ever to answer questions about what he knew about the scam. Various RNC officials going back almost three years now have disavowed any knowledge of the case at all. And now, finally, we have proof that all along the RNC has continued to pay Tobin's legal bills -- already totalling more than $700,000 before the man has even gone to trial.

The fact that the RNC is paying Tobin's legal bills means either that he was acting under authorization or, frankly, that they're trying to keep him quiet. There's really no other reasonable explanation of this.

Reporters from the big news outlets have never taken this story very seriously. Now's the time.

You have been reading excerpts from "Big News ... did I say Big News?" by Joshua Micah Marshall. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/782x8. Thanks to Josh Marshall at talkingpointsmemo.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

NM Election Officials Try to Block Machine Inspections

2005-11-12T23:07:00.000-08:00

based on a report from voteraction.org. November 11, 2005

In the past week, two New Mexico election officials refused to allow the voter plaintiffs in the case of Patricia Rosas Lopategui v. Rebecca Vigil-Giron, et al. to conduct meaningful inspections of their electronic voting machines. This despite clear indications that there were serious problems in last year's presidential election with these same machines, which do not produce a voter-verifiable and auditable paper record.

Bernalillo County Clerk Mary Herrera has given no explanation for her sudden, flat refusal to permit any inspection after weeks of discussions between plaintiffs' attorneys and attorneys for the county. Plaintiffs have sworn statements from Bernalillo County voters who tried to vote on the county's paperless touchscreen voting machines, manufactured by Sequoia Voting Systems, and whose votes were switched before their eyes from the candidate they supported to a different candidate. Plaintiffs also have evidence that the county's widespread use of another type of paperless machine, the Shoup 1242, resulted in the erasure of votes that citizens tried to cast for presidential candidates.

San Juan County Clerk Fran Hanhardt permitted limited inspection of her county's voting machines. She would not, however, open the voting machines to permit plaintiffs' experts to examine their components. The reason? Doing so would void the county's warranty from the manufacturer, Election Systems and Software (ES&S).

Ms. Hanhardt also refused to allow plaintiffs' experts to examine or copy electronic files containing the results of the November 2004 presidential election that were stored in the machines' redundant memories. The reason? The machines store the results of public elections in a secret, proprietary format that ES&S claims as its private property. According to Ms. Hanhardt, allowing plaintiffs' experts to see those results in their original form would violate the county's contract with ES&S, which prohibits disclosure of proprietary information.

You have been reading excerpts from "NM Election Officials Try to Block Machine Inspections" from voteraction.org. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/7cwmg. Thanks to bradblog.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Bush Administration Dishonors All Veterans

2005-11-11T23:09:00.000-08:00

based on a column by Rev. Bill McGinnis. November 11, 2005

Wake up, America! This is now, not World War II. A gang of cold-hearted neo-Fascists is running our country. And they are busily committing war crimes right and left, wherever it suits their purposes, all in the name of freedom and victory, and lying to cover up. Specifically...

1. Torture. What we have seen in the American press is nothing compared to what is really out there. If you are a normal, peace-loving, God-believing American, it will make you sick when you eventually find out the truth about what is being done by this administration, in your name. Torture of prisoners is a war crime, no matter what the supposed justification is.

2. Deliberate killing of unarmed women and children, to "teach these people a lesson." This is called "terrorism," and we are doing it. When you bomb a house or an apartment building because you think some "insurgents" might be in there, but you know that women and children are in there too, that is not "collateral damage." That is deliberate killing of unarmed women and children, which is a war crime.

3. Use of fiendishly-cruel chemical weapons, such as White Phosphorus. Television video has been shown of women and children's flesh being carmelized and burned to the bone, by American white-phosphorus attacks in Falluja.

Article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention defines war crimes as: "Wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including... wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a protected person, compelling a protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile power, or wilfully depriving a protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial, ...taking of hostages and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly."

This, international lawyers say, is the basic definition of war crimes.

You have been reading excerpts from "Bush Administration Dishonors All Veterans By Committing War Crimes In Iraq" by Rev. Bill McGinnis. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/d47gy. Thanks to opednews.com.

A Time Comes When Silence Is Betrayal

2005-11-11T21:24:00.000-08:00

based on a speech by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. April 4, 1967

The calling to speak is often a vocation of agony. But we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision. But we must speak. For we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us.

We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation, for those it calls "enemy". For no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers. There will be no meaningful solution until some attempt is made to know them and hear their broken cries.

We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. A true revolution of values will say of war, "This way of settling differences is not just." A nation that continues to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate, or bow before the altar of retaliation. History is cluttered with the wreckage of nations and individuals that pursued this self-defeating path of hate.

We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence, or violent co-annihilation. We must move past indecision to action. If we do not act, we shall surely be dragged down the long, dark, and shameful corridors of time reserved for those who posses power without compassion, might without morality, and strength without sight.

Now let us begin. Now let us rededicate ourselves in the long and bitter but beautiful struggle for a new world.

You have been reading excerpts from "We Must Speak!", a speech by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. You can read the entire speech here: tinyurl.com/8n96r. Thanks to spiritofmaat.com.

Torturing Detainees Will Not Help Us

2005-11-11T20:39:00.000-08:00

based on a column by Larry Johnson. November 11, 2005

I'm a former CIA officer and a former counterterrorism official. During the last few months, I have spoken with three good friends who are CIA operations officers, all of whom have worked on terrorism at the highest levels. They all agree that torturing detainees will not help us. In fact, they believe that it will hurt us in many ways. These are the very people the vice president wants to empower to torture — and they don't want to do it.

I have some experience of my own with "duress interrogation." Back when I was undergoing paramilitary training at a CIA facility in 1986, my colleagues and I were interrogated to prepare us in case we were taken hostage. At one point we were "captured" by faux terrorists. After being stripped naked and given baggy military uniforms, we entered a CIA version of Gitmo.

We were deprived of sleep for 36 hours, given limited rice and water and forced to stand in place. Our interrogators — all U.S. military personnel — coaxed and harangued us by turns. Those of us who declined to cooperate were stuffed into punishment boxes — miniature coffins that induced claustrophobia. One of my classmates gave me up in exchange for a grape soda and a ham sandwich.

Everyone has a breaking point. If you inflict enough pain on someone, they will give you information, but what they tell you may not be true. It is better to build a relationship of trust — even with a terrorist, even if it's time-consuming — than to extract quick confessions through tactics such as those used by the Nazis and the Soviets.

We should never use our fear of being attacked as justification for dehumanizing ourselves or others. Tough, relentless questioning is OK. Torture is not.

You have been reading excerpts from " ... And why it should never be done" by Larry Johnson. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/a2kva. Thanks to Larry Johnson and boomantribune.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Synthetic Terror On GOP Agenda AGAIN!

2005-11-10T20:45:00.000-08:00

based on a report by Doug Thompson, Capital Hill Blue. November 10, 2005

A confidential memo circulating among senior Republican leaders suggests that a new attack by terrorists on U.S. soil could reverse the sagging fortunes of President George W. Bush as well as the GOP and "restore his image as a leader of the American people."

The closely-guarded memo lays out a list of scenarios to bring the Republican party back from the political brink, including a devastating attack by terrorists that could “validate” the President’s war on terror and allow Bush to “unite the country” in a “time of national shock and sorrow.”

The memo says such a reversal in the President's fortunes could keep the party from losing control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections.

“The President’s popularity was at an all-time high following the 9/11 attacks,” admits one aide. “Americans band together at a time of crisis.”

Other Republicans, however, worry that such a scenario carries high risk, pointing out that an attack might suggest the President has not done enough to protect the country.

“We also have to face the fact that many Americans no longer trust the President,” says a longtime GOP strategist. “That makes it harder for him to become a rallying point.”

As Republican political strategists scramble to find a message – any message – that will ring true with voters, GOP leaders in Congress admit privately that control of their party by right-wing extremists makes their recovery all but impossible.

You have been reading excerpts from "GOP memo touts new terror attack as way to reverse party's decline" by Doug Thompson. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8zp9d. Thanks to capitolhillblue.com.

Kerry Suspects Election 2004 Was Stolen

2005-11-08T18:17:00.000-08:00

based on a report by Robert Parry. November 6, 2005

Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate in 2004, has told acquaintances over the past year that he suspects that the election was stolen, but that he didn’t challenge the official results because he lacked hard proof and anticipated a firestorm of criticism if he pressed the point.

“Kerry heard all the disquieting stories” about voting irregularities in Ohio and other states, said Jonathan Winer, a longtime Kerry adviser and a former deputy assistant secretary of state. “But he didn’t have the evidence to do more.”

In an interview with me, Winer said the “disquieting stuff” that troubled Kerry included reports that touch-screen systems had malfunctioned in such a way that voters who tried to vote for Kerry saw their votes switched to Bush. Kerry also was upset with reports that Ohio’s Republican election officials shorted Democratic strongholds on voting machines, Winer said.

Democratic activists also cited the disparity between exit polls, which showed Kerry winning by about 3 percentage points nationwide and carrying key swing states, and the official count, which flipped the results giving Bush wins in most swing states and a national popular vote margin of about 3 percent.

Kerry appears to have weighed how he would look if he made accusations about possible hi-tech hijinks affecting the outcome of a presidential election. Pundits surely would have put him on the couch as a delusional conspiracy theorist.

But Kerry’s decision not to fight has left millions of Americans wondering if their democratic birthright has been stolen – along with the last two presidential elections.

You have been reading excerpts from "Kerry Suspects Election 2004 Was Stolen" by Robert Parry. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9d2yg. Thanks to Robert Parry and Consortium News. We visit consortiumnews.com often and we hope you will too.

The Call to Drive Out the Bush Regime

2005-11-04T19:03:00.000-08:00

Call Toll-Free 1-866-973-4463 or E-Mail info@worldcantwait.org to contact World Can't Wait | Drive Out the Bush Regime

Your government, on the basis of outrageous lies, is waging a murderous and utterly illegitimate war in Iraq, with other countries in their sights.

Your government is openly torturing people, and justifying it.

Your government puts people in jail on the merest suspicion, refusing them lawyers, and either holding them indefinitely or deporting them in the dead of night.

Your government is moving each day closer to a theocracy, where a narrow and hateful brand of Christian fundamentalism will rule.

Your government suppresses the science that doesn't fit its religious, political and economic agenda, forcing present and future generations to pay a terrible price.

Your government is moving to deny women here, and all over the world, the right to birth control and abortion.

Your government enforces a culture of greed, bigotry, intolerance and ignorance.

People look at all this and think of Hitler — and they are right to do so. The Bush regime is setting out to radically remake society very quickly, in a fascist way, and for generations to come. We must act now; the future is in the balance.

History is full of examples where people who had right on their side fought against tremendous odds and were victorious. And it is also full of examples of people passively hoping to wait it out, only to get swallowed up by a horror beyond what they ever imagined. The future is unwritten. WHICH ONE WE GET IS UP TO US.

You have been reading excerpts from "The Call to Drive Out the Bush Regime" from "World Can't Wait". You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/blm2p. Thanks to worldcantwait.net.

White House Opposes Oil Donations To Heating Fund

2005-11-03T23:12:00.000-08:00

based on a report from Reuters. November 2, 2005

The Bush administration opposes a Republican proposal that oil companies voluntarily contribute some of their record profits to a federal fund that helps poor Americans pay winter heating bills, Energy Secretary Sam Bodman said on Wednesday.

On Tuesday, Senate Finance Chairman Charles Grassley sent a letter to U.S. energy companies, urging them to donate 10 percent of their swelling profits to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP).

Asked by reporters if the administration supported the plan, Bodman responded: "No, sir. I wouldn't support it. It is similar to a tax."

Bodman made his remarks after addressing an energy industry group.

Last year, the LIHEAP program spent $2.2 billion to help poor and elderly Americans pay their winter heating bills. Democrats say the fund should be doubled for this winter.

Bodman also said the White House was considering a variety of proposals to address high energy prices, including federal funding for LIHEAP, more offshore oil drilling, and creating a U.S. natural gas reserve that would be "analogous to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve," as well as a stockpile of refined products. Announcements on such initiatives would be ready in "weeks," he said.

You have been reading "White House opposes oil donations to heating fund" from Reuters. You can see it in its original context here: tinyurl.com/9xmpp. Thanks to today.reuters.com.

Straight Talk About Iraqi 'Sovereignty'

2005-11-03T17:30:00.000-08:00

based on a report by Juan Cole. November 2, 2005

Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said Tuesday before the United Nations: "I categorically refuse the use of Iraqi soil to launch a military strike against Syria or any other Arab country ... But at the end of the day my ability to confront the US military is limited and I cannot impose on them my will."

So let's get this straight.

The president of Iraq elected six months after the US "turned over sovereignty" on June 28, 2004 is saying before the United Nations that George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld decide whether his country can be used as a base to attack other countries, and he is unable to influence such decisions -- even though he categorically rejects any such action.

For all those "Bush's Iraq" boosters who laud the "democratic" elections of January 30 and the recent constitutional referendum, this clear admission that Iraq remains under American military occupation, and that its government is helpless before American decisions about the fate of Iraq, is a rather strong refutation.

After all, no country is a "democracy" where the military calls the shots, overruling the civilian president -- how much less so if it is a foreign military!

Talabani is saying that Iraq is more like Burma, Pakistan or the Sudan than it is like democracies such as India or Brazil.

You have been reading excerpts from "Talabani Opposes Military Action against Syria: Admits Helplessness" by Juan Cole. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/7o6dv. Thanks to Juan Cole. We visit juancole.com often and we hope you will too.

You Can't Imagine The Situation

2005-10-31T13:13:00.000-08:00

based on a report by Dahr Jamail. October 8, 2005

Ongoing military operations continue unabated in Al-Anbar province. Thousands of US troops, backed by warplanes, tanks and helicopters, began attacking small cities and villages primarily in the northwestern area of Al-Anbar. According to the US military and corporate media, the purpose of these operations is to “root out” fighters from al-Qaida in Iraq, along with so-called insurgents. An Iraqi journalist, recently returned from the Al-Qa’im area of Iraq, tells quite a different story.
There are 1,500 refugee families located now in this very new and modern city of Aanah. The Aanah Humanitarian Relief Committee (AHRC) said that there are 7,450 families from Al-Qa’im and surrounding areas scattered in different western cities, villages and in the desert. The AHRC report said that a few hundred families are still being besieged in A-Qa’im.

Many families could not leave. Abu Alaa’, for example, whose house was damaged earlier this year, whose wife lost her sight in that attack, could not leave because his wife and his father-in-law were shot last week. His wife is still in the hospital, and he could not leave. We call upon the international society to demand that these families are given the chance to leave before the city is devastated. People who stay behind are not necessarily fighters. They simply could not move.
Another friend of mine recently returned from the Al-Qa’im area where she brought aid supplies to refugee families. She reported, “You can’t imagine the situation these people are living in. There are so many of their homes bombed by warplanes, people living in camps, and families in the desert who just need blankets and food. It’s horrible.”

You have been reading excerpts from "Violence leads only to more violence." by Dahr Jamail. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/cffng. Many thanks to Dahr Jamail. We visit dahrjamailiraq.com often and we hope you will too.

The Real Insurgency, And The Fake One

2005-10-30T09:04:00.000-08:00

based on an item by Xymphora. October 6, 2005

The latest story is that the Iraqi insurgents are using American vehicles stolen in the United States in committing their attacks. The 'experts' claim that the American vehicles are used because they more easily fit in, but that is obvious nonsense, as they stand out like a sore thumb.

The insurgency is ninety-five percent local; the other five percent of the insurgents are from neighboring Muslim countries radicalized by the obscenity of the American violence against innocent Iraqis, and will no doubt go on to cause the United States years of trouble in the future. And they use exactly the assets you would think they would use. Things they have at hand. Things like local delivery trucks and armaments hidden in Saddam's arms caches. They are not some international organization with contacts with American organized crime that would have access to vehicles stolen in the United States.

Since the British agents provocateurs were caught red-handed in Basra, it has become more and more difficult to reject the theory that much of the insurgency -- in particular those acts intended to create tensions between Sunnis and Shi'ites and create a civil war that will break up the country -- is a concerted effort by intelligence agents from the United States, Britain, and Israel. There are two parallel 'insurgencies':

1. the real one, which consists of attacks against foreign occupying soldiers by people, mostly from Iraq, opposed to the occupation; and

2. the fake one, which consists of attacks by American, British and Israeli agents provocateurs against groups of civilians, and against foreign aid workers and journalists, which is intended to break up the county in a civil war and obfuscate what is really going on.

Mixing these up is intended to hide the reality of the real opposition of the people of Iraq to the occupation.

You have been reading excerpts from "The real insurgency, and the fake one" by Xymphora. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/d7thf. We visit xymphora.blogspot.com often and we hope you will too.

Big Don Rumsfeld Bats for Both Teams

2005-10-29T22:28:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Chris Floyd. February 28, 2003

The boys in the Bush Regime swing both ways. We speak, of course, of their apparently uncontrollable craving for stuffing their trousers with loot from both sides of whatever war or military crisis is going at the moment.

That's why it came as no surprise to read last week that just before he joined the Regime's crusade against evildoers everywhere, Pentagon warlord Donald Rumsfeld was trousering the proceeds from a $200 million deal to send the latest nuclear technology – including plenty of terrorist-ready "dirty bomb" material – to the rogue state of North Korea.

In 1998, Rumsfeld was citizen chairman of the Congressional Ballistic Missile Threat Commission, charged with reducing nuclear proliferation. The commission came down hard on the deal Bill Clinton had brokered with North Korea to avert a war in 1994: Pyongyang would give up its nuclear weapons program in exchange for normalized relations with the United States, plus the construction of two non-weaponized nuclear plants to generate electricity.

Rum deal, said Rummy: those nasty Northies would surely turn the peaceful nukes to nefarious ends. The agreement threatened the whole world, Rumsfeld declared. Of course, that didn't prevent him from trying to profit from it. Even while he chairing commission meetings on the "dire threat" posed by the Korean program, Rumsfeld was junketing to Zurich for board meetings of the Swiss-based energy technology giant, ABB, where he was a top director. And what was ABB doing at the time? Why, negotiating that $200 million deal with North Korea to provide equipment and services for their nuclear reactors, of course!

Yes, nuclear proliferation is ugly stuff – but you might as well squeeze a few dollars from it, right? A smart guy always plays the angles – and, as the hero-worshiping American media never stop telling us, Rumsfeld is one smart guy.

You have been reading excerpts from "Going Nuclear for Fun and Profit" by Chris Floyd. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9kccs. Many thanks to Chris Floyd. We visit chris-floyd.com often and we hope you will too.

More He-Man Action On The Warfront

2005-10-29T22:19:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Chris Floyd. October 20, 2005

It seems the uber-macho pair of Bush and Blair (one a prep school cheerleader, the other nicknamed "Emily" by his schoolmates) are limbering up for more he-man action on the warfront -- this time against Iran. Although the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency's inspectors have found that Iran is now in compliance with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, Bush and Blair strong-armed the IAEA board into overruling their own experts and referring Iran's nuclear program to the Security Council. Now we are hearing the exact same noises we heard before the invasion of Iraq: somber warnings that this is Iran's "last chance to avoid war," with the bloated thug that Bush has installed at the UN, John Bolton, belching that old standby at the Security Council: do what we want or you will lose your "revelance" -- and we'll "solve the problem" on our own.

These alarming, if little noted, developments have been greatly exacerbated by a recent spate of terrorist bombings in Iran. These terrorist attacks followed hard upon Blair's public declaration that Iran has been providing Iraqi insurgents with sophisticated bombing technology that has killed several British soldiers. Naturally, Blair offered no evidence for this charge; the last time he tried this evidence thing, with the "sexed-up dossier" before the Iraq War, it just backfired on him. Much neater just to open your mouth and spew charges without any substance, the way Georgie does it. Of course, as Juan Cole, among others, points out, Blair's charge makes little sense: Why would Iran, which is closely aligned with the Shiite parties that dominate Iraq's new government, support Sunni rebels in their attempt to overthrow the Iranian-allied regime?

At any rate, someone has started a terrorist campaign inside Iran at the same time the Cheerleader and Emily have begun waggling their little swords again. And according to the Telegraph of India, "top-ranking Americans have told equally top-ranking Indians in recent weeks that the US has plans to invade Iran before Bush’s term ends."

You have been reading excerpts from "Going Nuclear for Fun and Profit" by Chris Floyd. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9kccs. Many thanks to Chris Floyd. We visit chris-floyd.com often and we hope you will too.

Don't Support The Troops

2005-10-29T20:59:00.000-07:00

based on a column by Richard Hugus. October 28, 2005

During the Vietnam War, the antiwar movement had two approaches to the question of how to treat active US soldiers. One side said that allying with soldiers would cause dissension in the ranks and weaken the war machine from within. The other side said that soldiers who went to Vietnam were killers who didn't deserve our respect. Those still in battle saw this and eventually realized that what they were involved in was not supported and not honorable, and this led, properly, to their demoralization.

It is painful to say, but mothers who have lost their sons to the Iraq war should not be put in front of the movement to end the war, as if our people are more important than the people they have been killing. The people we should be supporting are the Iraqis under Uncle Sam's hobnail boot, not the poor fools involved in carrying out his crimes. The number of Iraqis murdered in their own land by the US over the last 14 years numbers almost two million. If that number were only 200 the Iraqis would still deserve our primary attention because it was the US government who attacked them, not the other way around.

The war machine, from recruiters, to people "in the service", to local bases in our communities, deserve our active and vocal disrespect. Conscientious objectors and mourning mothers do not bother the Pentagon. What bothers the Pentagon is when significant numbers of the home population renounce any shred of support for what they do, when we honor the Iraqi dead with candlelight vigils, when we put on our protest stages the mothers of Iraqi martyrs, when we say we support those who are fighting US invaders in Iraq, and when we take action in our own country to undermine the war machine at its source, as it is our responsibility to do.

Why would we want to support people who have volunteered for murder?

You have been reading excerpts from "We Don't Support The Troops" by Richard Hugus. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/a8w4r. Thanks to uruknet.info. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Stop the Troops!

2005-10-29T20:40:00.000-07:00

based on a column by Ingmar Lee. October 27, 2005

The American military, from top to bottom, is a hideous blight on our planet. There are no innocents in this massive killing machine. There's no "honor" in volunteering for the world's largest terrorist organization, now under the command of the deceitful, criminal cabal led by George W. Bush. American soldiers are well trained to kill, and obviously, to torture, and they go off to Iraq all of their own "free will." They know that they will kill, and that they may die. There will not be any "honor" or "glory" for these stupid youngsters who continue to volunteer themselves for "duty" in Bush's appalling adventure.

The idea that you can "Support the Troops" and be against what they do in the world is simply irreconcilable.

Some people are finding similarities between the Iraq and Viet Nam "quagmires". But nobody is talking about the single fundamental difference between these two heinous crimes against humanity. In Viet Nam, young Americans were forced to participate in the slaughter, whereas in Iraq, those troops all go there voluntarily. In Viet Nam, more than a few times, courageous soldiers shot their own commanders, rather than comply with some atrocious order.

I dreamed recently that the world's most humoungous terrorist weapon of mass destruction, the aircraft-carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, had been sunk by inside mutineers. For those who love what America is supposed to stand for, that would be a supreme act of military heroism.

The American Peace Movement would do well to bite the bullet and stop adding to the litany of phony glorifications heaped on those who are "serving", and those who have died in the American attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan. They need to spread the message that joining the American military is a vulgar, stupid offence against humanity. The soldiers should be actively discouraged from participating in the first place.

You have been reading excerpts from "Stop the Troops!" by Ingmar Lee. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8uopq. Thanks to counterpunch.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Vice President For Torture

2005-10-27T22:41:00.000-07:00

based on an editorial from The Washington Post. October 26, 2005

Vice President Cheney is aggressively pursuing an initiative that may be unprecedented for an elected official of the executive branch: He is proposing that Congress legally authorize human rights abuses by Americans. "Cruel, inhuman and degrading" treatment of prisoners is banned by an international treaty negotiated by the Reagan administration and ratified by the United States.

The State Department annually issues a report criticizing other governments for violating it. Now Mr. Cheney is asking Congress to approve legal language that would allow the CIA to commit such abuses against foreign prisoners it is holding abroad. In other words, this vice president has become an open advocate of torture.

His position is not just some abstract defense of presidential power. The CIA is holding an unknown number of prisoners in secret detention centers abroad. In violation of the Geneva Conventions, it has refused to register those detainees with the International Red Cross or to allow visits by its inspectors. Its prisoners have "disappeared," like the victims of some dictatorships.

The Justice Department and the White House are known to have approved harsh interrogation techniques for some of these people, including "waterboarding," or simulated drowning; mock execution; and the deliberate withholding of pain medication. CIA personnel have been implicated in the deaths during interrogation of at least four Afghan and Iraqi detainees. Official investigations have indicated that some aberrant practices by Army personnel in Iraq originated with the CIA. Yet no CIA personnel have been held accountable for this record, and there has never been a public report on the agency's performance.

You have been reading excerpts from "Vice President for Torture" from The Washington Post. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9cqwz. Thanks to washingtonpost.com.

The Situation Can Only Get Worse Now

2005-10-27T20:49:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Dahr Jamail. October 26, 2005

The idea of political stability seems more of a pipe dream in Iraq now than it did before the recent vote on the constitution, which has been rejected by Arab Sunni leaders who called the process “fraudulent” yesterday.

Hinting at things to come in December, Sunni leader Saleh Mutlaq told reporters; “Violence is not the only solution, if politics offers solutions so that we can move in that direction. But there is very little hope that we can make any gains in the elections.”

Hussein al-Falluji, another prominent Sunni politician said the referendum was manipulated by Washington and added, “We all know that this referendum was fraud conducted by an electoral commission that is not independent. It is controlled by the occupying Americans and it should step down before elections in December.”

He and other Sunnis have called for a truly independent election commission (the head of Iraq’s current electoral commission was appointed by the US) for the December election, but added, “Politics is linked directly to security on the ground. The situation can only get worse now. I have just prayed to God to expose the truth about what is happening in Iraq.”

You have been reading excerpts from "Mr. 'Bring 'em on'" by Dahr Jamail. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8c9kw. Many thanks to Dahr Jamail. We visit dahrjamailiraq.com often and we hope you will too.

A Very Clear Message To The Occupiers Of Iraq

2005-10-27T20:47:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Dahr Jamail. October 26, 2005

Two days ago one of the largest suicide bombings to occur in Baghdad detonated between the Palestine and Sheraton hotels. The bomb, transported inside a cement truck, was carefully driven through a hole in the perimeter concrete barrier which was created by a car bomb just minutes earlier.

It was reported in most major media outlets as an attack against journalists.

What wasn’t reported is that there is a large number of security contractors (read "mercenaries") who use these hotels, and it is well known in Baghdad that the penthouse of the Sheraton is used by contractors and CIA operatives.

That very room has been the target of rocket attacks as far back as December, 2003.

Thus, aside from targeting the US government-funded Al-Hurra TV station and the Fox propaganda outlet in the 18-story Palestine Hotel, journalists were exploited by the attack which generated massive media attention.

Killing at least 17 people, the attack sent a very clear message to the occupiers of Iraq -- nowhere is safe; even in one of the most heavily guarded hotel complexes in Baghdad they are completely vulnerable.

You have been reading excerpts from "Mr. 'Bring 'em on'" by Dahr Jamail. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8c9kw. Many thanks to Dahr Jamail. We visit dahrjamailiraq.com often and we hope you will too.

Violence Leads Only To More Violence

2005-10-27T16:26:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Sabah Ali, as quoted by Dahr Jamail. October 8, 2005

Dr.Hamdi Al-Aloossy, General Director of the Al-Qa’im hospital, confirmed that the majority of Al-Qa’im's population of 150,000 had left the city, and that only the disabled and those who preferred to stay remained. He also confirmed that many of the casualties he treated were women and children. He explained that the families are not afraid of the bombing, the fighting or the mortars as much as they are afraid of an American-Iraqi invasion of the city, something which many families mentioned too.

According to Dr. Hamdi: “After the families saw what happened in Tal-Afar on TV, and after the threat of the Defense Minister to attack Al-Qa’im, they were terrified. The immigration was crazy. It was an irresponsible statement by the Defense Minister. There were no military evacuation orders. These thousands of children and families are living in the wilderness in very bad conditions. A child of two months got seven scorpion stings. Another two families of 14 members each got poisoned because of canned food. The health security in the camps is zero. And the health security in the bombed and attacked areas is 100% at risk.”

“It makes me cry to think of those families. Child mortality increased three times due to ordinary illnesses because we do not have any vaccines, and no electricity to keep them. Women health cannot be surveyed, many of them moved out of town. We used to receive 200 a day, now 15-20. We do not have regular statistics. But we can say roughly that the death percentage due to women cases increased by two times.”

“We repair the hospital every two months; the glass, the water; the electricity…and it is bombed again, the government has to do something about this. Violence leads only to more violence.”

You have been reading excerpts from "Violence leads only to more violence." by Dahr Jamail. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/cffng. Many thanks to Dahr Jamail. We visit dahrjamailiraq.com often and we hope you will too.

Slugging It Out Over Peanuts

2005-10-24T23:21:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Kurt Nimmo. October 24th 2005

Clinton used cluster bombs and depleted uranium against the people of Serbia, or the former Yugoslavia, and wantonly destroyed civil infrastructure having no military purpose, a blatant and obvious violation of humanitarian law and an act of gut-wrenching complicity in disgusting mass murder that would turn a normal person’s stomach inside out.

Bush, of course, is the same stripe of pathological murdering scum. Clinton, however, has killed more, far more people than Bush -- between 1 and 2 million Iraqis, including 500,000 helpless babies, and most of them through starvation and entirely preventable disease. It would have been more humane to stand all of them up against a wall and shoot them -- but no, Clinton starved them, forced them to drink polluted and disease-infested water, and denied them medical equipment to treat thousands and thousands of people afflicted with cancer from Bush Senior’s massive use of depleted uranium.

I’m sick and tired of these liberals and so-called conservatives, slugging it out over peanuts. Bush needs to be arrested, handcuffed, tried for treason, and sent to a former penal colony island where he cannot escape to do us more harm.

And, if justice is to be done, we will send Clinton with him, and Dubya’s old man, and all the neocons, Madeleine Albright, Wesley Clark, Rumsfeld, Cheney, and the rest of the criminal class, the rogues’ gallery of war criminals and smirking, fat-assed, silk-suited, draft-dodging serial murderers.

Outing CIA agents is an extremely infinitesimal event when compared to the sort of war crimes and monstrous butchery practiced by the likes of Clinton and Bush.

You have been reading excerpts from "Donnie Fowler, Please Tell the Truth" by Kurt Nimmo. You can read the entire piece here: kurtnimmo.com/?p=82. Thanks to Kurt Nimmo. We visit kurtnimmo.com often and we hope you will too.

Documents Provide Glimpse Into Domestic Spying

2005-10-24T22:23:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Dan Eggen. October 24, 2005

The FBI has conducted clandestine surveillance on some US residents for as long as 18 months at a time without proper paperwork or oversight, according to classified documents scheduled to be released today.

Records turned over as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit also indicated that the FBI has investigated hundreds of potential violations related to its secret surveillance operations, which have been stepped up dramatically after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, but which are largely hidden from public view.

In one case, FBI agents kept an unidentified target under surveillance for at least five years, including more than 15 months without notifying Justice Department lawyers after the subject had moved from New York to Detroit.

In other cases, agents obtained e-mail messages after a warrant expired, seized bank records without authority, and conducted an improper "unconsented physical search," according to the documents.

Although heavily censored, the documents provide a glimpse into domestic spying, which is governed by a secret court and overseen by a presidential board that does not publicize its deliberations. The records also emerge as the House and Senate battle over whether to put new restrictions on the controversial USA Patriot Act, which made it easier for the government to conduct searches and surveillance but has come under attack from civil liberties groups.

The records were provided to the Washington Post by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, an advocacy group that has sued the Justice Department for records relating to the Patriot Act.

You have been reading excerpts from "Data on FBI cite abuses in secret surveillance" by Dan Eggen. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/e27fr. Thanks to informationclearinghouse.info. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Pentagon Pays $20 For Each 85-Cent Ice Cube Tray

2005-10-23T13:05:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Lauren Markoe and Seth Borenstein. October 23, 2005

The Pentagon paid $20 each for plastic ice-cube trays that once cost 85 cents. A supplier was paid more than $81 each for coffee makers that for years were purchased from the manufacturer for $29.

That's because instead of receiving competitive bids or buying directly from manufacturers as it once did, the Pentagon now uses middlemen who set prices. It's the equivalent of shopping for weekly groceries at a convenience store.

The higher prices are the result of a Defense Department purchasing program called prime vendor, which favors a handful of firms.

The Defense Department touts the program as one of its "best practices" and credits it with timely deliveries that have eliminated the need for expensive inventories and warehousing. For purchases under the food prime-vendor program alone, the DLA claimed a savings of $250 million in five years.

But those savings would have happened even without turning to the prime-vendor program, competing suppliers say. Most suppliers for years have offered goods on an as-needed basis so that the military doesn't need to store them in costly warehouses.

One manufacturer who previously sold directly to the government but now sells to the prime vendors said the system doesn't make sense.

Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., called for an investigation of the program.

"Can Congress do anything? Yes. Will Congress do anything? No," he said.

You have been reading excerpts from "Pentagon purchases: Millions in markups" by Lauren Markoe and Seth Borenstein. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9u33k. Thanks to The Seattle Times at seattletimes.nwsource.com.

Bush Is Nothing If Not Consummate Con Man

2005-10-23T12:35:00.000-07:00

based on a column by George McEvoy. October 22, 2005

The late and wonderfully caustic George Burns used to flick the ash off his cigar and say: "The secret of success in show business is sincerity. Once you learn how to fake that, you've got it made, kid."

That's the main problem now with the administration of George W. Bush. The faking isn't working anymore. And if you don't think politics isn't show business, you just haven't been watching.

The con that landed him in the White House, and then got him reelected, suddenly is being seen for what it is, the old flim-flameroo. A majority of the public isn't falling for his ah-shucks routine anymore.

For a while, the most obvious con jobs worked for Bush the Younger. That landing on the aircraft carrier, with him squeezed into a flight suit, strutting across the deck in front of a huge sign reading "Mission Accomplished," was so blatant that, watching it on TV, I figured all those sailors and Marines would burst out laughing at any moment. But no, they must have been under orders to be cheerleaders for the head cheerleader. And the public fell for it all.

Even after he and his cronies in the White House were caught in lie after lie — the weapons of mass destruction, the purported link between Iraq and the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon — the public swallowed his routine as if it were gospel.

But now, suddenly, the emperor's new clothes are seen for what they really are, a royal pretense.

The big con came a cropper when W. held that video conference Oct. 13 with 10 U.S. soldiers and one Iraqi. It turned out that the whole thing was as phony as any TV commercial.

You have been reading excerpts from "Bush is nothing if not consummate con man" by George McEvoy. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/a9x59. Thanks to palmbeachpost.com.

Cheney 'Cabal' Hijacked Foreign Policy

2005-10-19T20:58:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Edward Alden. October 20, 2005

Vice-President Dick Cheney and a handful of others hijacked the government's foreign policy apparatus, deciding in secret to carry out policies that have left the US weaker and more isolated in the world, the top aide to former Secretary of State Colin Powell claimed on Wednesday.

In a scathing attack on the record of President George W. Bush, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff to Mr Powell until last January, said: “What I saw was a cabal between the vice-president of the United States, Richard Cheney, and the secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, on critical issues that made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made.

Among his other charges:

■ The detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere was “a concrete example” of the decision-making problem, with the president and other top officials in effect giving the green light to soldiers to abuse detainees. “You don't have this kind of pervasive attitude out there unless you've condoned it.”

■ Condoleezza Rice, the former national security adviser and now secretary of state, was “part of the problem”. Instead of ensuring that Mr Bush received the best possible advice, “she would side with the president to build her intimacy with the president”.

■ The military, particularly the army and marine corps, is overstretched and demoralised. Officers, Mr Wilkerson claimed, “start voting with their feet, as they did in Vietnam... and all of a sudden your military begins to unravel”.

You have been reading excerpts from "Cheney 'cabal' hijacked foreign policy" by Edward Alden. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/d6zgc. Thanks to Financial Times at news.ft.com.

Source: White House Iraq Group Included Judy Miller

2005-10-19T17:58:00.000-07:00

based on a report by James Gordon Meek and Kenneth R. Bazinet. October 19, 2005

It was called the White House Iraq Group and its job was to make the case that Saddam Hussein had nuclear and biochemical weapons. So determined was the ring of top officials to win its argument that it morphed into a virtual hit squad that took aim at critics who questioned its claims, sources told the Daily News.

One of those critics was ex-Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who debunked a key claim in a speech by President Bush that Iraq sought nuclear materials in Africa. His punishment was the media outing of his wife, CIA spy Valerie Plame, an affair that became a "side show" for the White House Iraq Group, the sources said.

The Plame leak is now the subject of a criminal probe that has seen presidential political guru Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis (Scooter) Libby, hauled before a grand jury. Both men were members of the group, also known as WHIG. From late 2002 through mid 2003, it was locked in a feud with officials inside the CIA and State Department over claims Saddam tried to buy "yellow cake" uranium in Niger to build nukes, a former Bush administration and intelligence sources told The News.

After Wilson went to Africa to research the claims, he showed the documents claiming Saddam tried to buy the uranium were forgeries.

"People in the Iraq group then got very frustrated. It was a side show," said a source familiar with WHIG.

WHIG also was doing more than just public relations, said a second former intel officer. "They were funneling information to [New York Times reporter] Judy Miller. Judy was a charter member," the source said.

You have been reading excerpts from "Prez Iraq team fought to squelch war critics" by James Gordon Meek and Kenneth R. Bazinet. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/99285. Thanks to nydailynews.com.

Texas Court Issues Warrant for Tom DeLay

2005-10-19T13:06:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Suzanne Gamboa, Associated Press. October 19, 2005

A Texas court issued a warrant Wednesday for former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay to appear for booking, where he is likely to face the fingerprinting and photo mug shot he had hoped to avoid.

Bail was initially set at $10,000 as a routine step before his first court appearance on conspiracy and money laundering charges. Travis County court officials said DeLay was ordered to appear at the Fort Bend County jail for booking.

The warrant was "a matter of routine and bond will be posted," DeLay attorney Dick DeGuerin said. The lawyer declined to say when DeLay would surrender to authorities but said the lawmaker would make his first court appearance Friday morning.

The charges against the Texas Republican stem from allegations that a DeLay-founded Texas political committee funneled corporate money into state GOP legislative races through the National Republican Party. Texas law prohibits use of corporate money to elect state candidates.

DeLay is charged with conspiracy to violate state election laws and money laundering, felony counts that triggered House Republican rules that forced him to step aside as majority leader.

Two separate indictments charge that DeLay and two political associates had the money distributed to state legislative candidates in a roundabout way — sending it from the political action committee in Texas to the Republican National Committee in Washington and finally back to candidates' campaigns. The effort had major political consequences, first by helping Republicans take control of the Texas Legislature in the 2002 elections. The Legislature then redrew congressional boundaries according to a DeLay-inspired plan, took command of the state's U.S. House delegation and helped the GOP retain its U.S. House majority.

You have been reading excerpts from "Texas Court Issues Warrant for DeLay" by Suzanne Gamboa. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9y9ht. Thanks to the AP and sfgate.com.

Caught On Film: US Troops Burning Bodies

2005-10-18T22:51:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Tom Allard, Sydney Morning Herald. October 19, 2005

US soldiers in Afghanistan burnt the bodies of dead Taliban and taunted their opponents about the corpses, in an act deeply offensive to Muslims and in breach of the Geneva conventions.

An investigation by SBS's Dateline program, to be aired tonight, filmed the burning of the bodies. It also filmed a US Army psychological operations unit broadcasting a message boasting of the burnt corpses into a village believed to be harbouring Taliban.

According to an SBS translation of the message, delivered in the local language, the soldiers accused Taliban fighters near Kandahar of being "cowardly dogs". "You allowed your fighters to be laid down facing west and burnt. You are too scared to retrieve their bodies. This just proves you are the lady boys we always believed you to be," the message reportedly said.

"You attack and run away like women. You call yourself Taliban but you are a disgrace to the Muslim religion, and you bring shame upon your family. Come and fight like men instead of the cowardly dogs you are."

The burning of a body is a deep insult to Muslims. Islam requires burial within 24 hours.

US soldiers said they burnt the bodies for hygiene reasons but two reporters, Stephen Dupont and John Martinkus, said the explanation was unbelievable, given they were in an isolated area.

The incident is reminiscent of the psychological techniques used in Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.

You have been reading excerpts from "Film rolls as troops burn dead" by Tom Allard. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/d7jj7. Thanks to . We visit often and we hope you will too.

The Plame Leak Is The Tale Of The Iraq War Itself

2005-10-18T22:30:00.000-07:00

based on a column by Michael Moore. October 18, 2005

The Plame Leak is not simply about the White House blowing the cover of a CIA official. It is the tale of the Iraq war itself.

From the beginning of the Bush presidency, war with Iraq was an inevitability. His administration let no fact -- however glaring -- stand in the way of the march to war.

Unable (or simply unwilling) to find Osama bin Laden, the Bush administration tied Iraq into the 9/11 attacks without a shred of evidence. They said that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. They said there was no time to verify the existence of these weapons.

They said, “Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.”

They said, “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”

It is this last lie -- rather than the totality of lies -- that may bring an end to this miserable regime.

The uranium from Africa charge was bogus yet the White House would not stop using it. And when the whistle was blown on the administration’s lie, the whistle blower was targeted. The Bush administration did what it does best, attacked, and in the process compromised the national security of the United States of America.

The White House’s actions in the Plame leak mirror their overall policy in carrying out the Iraq war -- and that is the true crime. From the first lie to the latest, Osama is still free, the weapons of mass destruction have never appeared, and nearly 2,000 American soldiers are dead.

You have been reading excerpts from "The Meaning of Is" by Michael Moore. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/cpz37.

On Liberating Something

2005-10-15T21:27:00.000-07:00

based on an item by Larisa Alexandrovna. October 15, 2005

To date, since being un-elected to office, Bush has been very successful in setting free, releasing, emancipating, and unleashing the following:

-- America has been delivered from the cage of global respect and forced adherence to a high standard of decency and can now be internationally lawless, violent, chaotic, and lower than fleas on the backs of gnats in all things respected.

-- The national debt has been released to ascend sky-high, infinitely free to rocket above the ether into imaginary numbers.

-- American journalists have been released from their forced labor under the dire conditions of standards and are finally free to create reality out of thin air, made possible largely through the intervention and kindness of the White House and the lovers of a good piece of fiction who inhabit that dwelling.

-- Corporations, those victimized, large-bodied legally defined individuals, are now emancipated from the cumbersome and long suffered shackles of law, ethics, decency, respect for human rights, worker rights, and the health of a vibrant and thriving America.

-- Terrorists, that once smallish, disjointed, group of wing nuts seen as, well, wing nuts and having little support, because they were seen as wing nuts, have now been liberated the world over to join together as a nation fighting for a cause in large numbers.

-- Prisoners of war have been emancipated from life, free to join God and the angels.

-- Halliburton has taken its rightful seat as the federal bank, no longer having to steal in order to survive; it can now live long and prosper.

You have been reading excerpts from "On Liberating Something" by Larisa Alexandrovna. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/d85co. Thanks to Larisa and huffingtonpost.com.

Bush Teleconference With Soldiers Staged

2005-10-15T20:18:00.000-07:00

based on a column by Paul Rieckhoff. October 14, 2005

The movie Rocky 6 is now in the works. This film project is clearly a publicity stunt intended to boost Sylvester Stallone’s slumping movie career. Yesterday, the White House manufactured an even greater publicity stunt with a live teleconference featuring 10 soldiers in Iraq. Clearly, the event was designed to bolster the President’s sliding political career.

This thing was not just staged, it was superstaged. In a disgusting display, the President again used our troops as political props in an event so scripted that it basically turned into a conversation with himself. I wish the White House had put this much effort into post-war planning when my platoon hit Baghdad.

Not only were the teleconference troops told what to say by Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary Allison Barber, they were also prevented from speaking freely by the looming threat of their ground commanders. Undoubtedly there was a Public Affairs Officer standing directly off-camera making sure the soldiers spoke in line with White House directives. Every troop presented an upbeat view of the situation on the ground in Iraq. There was no talk of armor issues or mortar attacks. A token Iraqi soldier in the group at one point gushed to President Bush, “Thank you very much for everything. I like you!”

The makeup of this group at the teleconference was not an accurate reflection of our forces on the ground in Iraq. Of the 10 troops who spoke with the President, five were officers. None were black. In actuality, officers constitute 15% of the overall military. 20% of that force is black. No wonder the President’s approval rating among African Americans is so low.

This teleconference did not present the real voice of the troops. It was a shameful and misguided use of our military. The Commander in Chief has no right to use America’s sons and daughters as a defibrillator for his ailing Presidency.

You have been reading excerpts from "Bush Teleconference With Soldiers Staged" by Paul Rieckhoff. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/ctqp2. Thanks to . We

Truth Becomes The Greatest Enemy Of The State

2005-10-14T22:20:00.000-07:00

based on a report by William Bowles. October 13, 2005

One of the deeper ironies of the state’s ‘war on terror’, which is, we are informed, to defend democracy and the ‘Western way of life’, has been the increasing encroachment of the state’s control over its citizens. The upshot, therefore, is of a state machine which claims greater and greater power and control over its citizens and, tellingly, not over their alleged criminal activities but over their day-to-day lives, whether it be their relations with their neighbours or their behavior in public.

By linking ‘organized crime’ and ‘terrorism’ to ‘anti-social behaviour’, the state creates an all-encompassing climate of fear. So by implication, ‘anti-social behaviour’ is treated as the first step on the road to ‘extremism’.

But when the slogans are unpacked, what we discover is a state that views its citizens as the enemy! And indeed, that is potentially what we are, for it reveals a political class that lives in fear – in fear of its own citizens. Worse still, it reveals a state that no longer trusts its citizens to accept the dictates or the rationale for its actions, hence the need to criminalize the thoughts of its citizens, for what else can a law that talks of making it a crime to ‘glorify terrorism’ be?

It is no accident therefore that as the occupation of Iraq disintegrates into chaos -- precisely because it is illegitimate, not to mention illegal -- the government has to repress dissent under the guise of preventing terrorism, for as Dr. Joseph M. Goebbels, Nazi minister of propaganda said, “It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy of the State.”

You have been reading excerpts from "Sleepwalking into slavery?" by William Bowles. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/a3wb6. Thanks to serendipity.li. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Bush Told Blair Of 'Going Beyond Iraq'

2005-10-14T20:57:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Richard Norton-Taylor. October 15, 2005

George Bush told Tony Blair shortly before the invasion of Iraq that he intended to target other countries, including Saudi Arabia, which, he implied, planned to acquire weapons of mass destruction.

Mr Bush said he "wanted to go beyond Iraq in dealing with WMD proliferation, mentioning in particular Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan," according to a note of a telephone conversation between the two men on January 30 2003.

The note is quoted in the US edition, published next week, of Lawless World, America and the Making and Breaking of Global Rules, by the British international lawyer Philippe Sands. The memo was drawn up by one of the prime minister's foreign policy advisers in Downing Street and passed to the Foreign Office, according to Mr Sands.

It is not surprising that Mr Bush referred to Iran and North Korea, or even Pakistan - at the time suspected of spreading nuclear know-how, but now one of America's closest allies in the "war on terror". What is significant is the mention of Saudi Arabia.

It is not clear how Mr Blair responded to Mr Bush's remarks during the telephone conversation, which took place on the eve of a trip to Washington for talks with the US president.

Despite hard evidence that Pakistan was deeply involved in exporting nuclear technology, the Bush administration embraced President Pervez Musharraf as an ally against al-Qaida. Washington's relations with Saudi Arabia remain cool. Mr Sands does not shed further light on the issue.

You have been reading excerpts from "Bush told Blair of 'going beyond Iraq'" by Richard Norton-Taylor. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/aoevf. Thanks to Guardian Unlimited. We visit guardian.co.uk often and we hope you will too.

US Rejects British Hurricane Relief Meals

2005-10-14T20:06:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Jamie Wilson. October 15, 2005

More than 400,000 packaged meals sent by Britain to feed victims of Hurricane Katrina at a cost of nearly £2.7m ($4.8 million) have been sitting in a warehouse in Arkansas because of fears of mad cow disease and a long-standing ban on British beef.

The state department is said to be looking for a needy country to take the meals, which are costing the American taxpayer more than $16,000 a month to store and are due to pass their use-by date in early 2006.

With the fallout from the hurricane continuing to haunt the US authorities, the tale of the British meals was yesterday being held up as an example of the slow, inefficient and at times wasteful response to the worst natural disaster to strike the US in living memory.

According to the Washington Post, no fewer than six federal agencies or departments had a role in accepting, distributing and finally rejecting the food. At one point the meals, routinely eaten by British troops and comprising high-calorie foods such as burgers, sausages, beans and cheese, were shipped to 14 locations in Louisiana before being sent back to Arkansas.

The food's journey began on September 5, when it was stacked on pallets and flown by chartered aircraft the 4,400 miles to Arkansas. It was then shipped the 355 miles to New Orleans, with agriculture department inspectors in hot pursuit. They had received a belated warning that the donated food might need checking. Flooding prevented the inspectors from reaching four shelter sites and, according to the Washington Post, by the time they reached 10 others 115,000 packs had already been distributed. The remaining shipments were turned around and sent back to Arkansas.

You have been reading excerpts from "US rejects British hurricane relief meals over BSE fears" by Jamie Wilson. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/bzfc6. Thanks to Guardian Unlimited. We visit guardian.co.uk often and we hope you will too.

Army Is Broken And In Need Of Repair

2005-10-13T22:18:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Joseph L. Galloway. October 12, 2005

The Army has already relaxed its once-sacred standards so that twice as many recruits who score in the lowest category on mental aptitude tests can enlist, along with many more high school dropouts and other borderline candidates. Now Secretary Harvey has laid out how, without increasing the Army's strength, he'll beef up what he calls "the operational Army," the Army that kills people and blows things up, without increasing the long-term permanent strength of the Army by even one soldier above the hopelessly low total of 482,400.

It's a brilliant capitalist stroke worthy of a cold-blooded CEO. We'll hire civilians who like to be paid low civil service wages to replace military people who treat and nurse the wounded coming home from Iraq; replace those who handle payroll issues for other soldiers; replace those who do a thousand crappy jobs well because they know that what they do is important to other soldiers. Then we can ship the "savings" off to Iraq or some other pre-emptive war.

Another part of the plan calls for shutting down some of the Army schoolhouses and shifting more than 11,000 of those who educate and train soldiers to more lethal jobs. It seems somewhat counterintuitive to reduce training at the same time that we begin to fill the ranks with the less intelligent, less fortunate or just plain unlucky.

If contracting out Army work to the private sector - the Halliburtons and Blackwaters - works so blessed well, why then don't we contract out our national defense in its entirety to the bottom-line guys? No doubt the private sector would be happy to bid on our wars and fight them for cost plus 20 percent. They could hire all the military people put out of work when we close down the Army and Marine Corps and Navy and Air Force. We could put in a penalty clause if they lose the war.

You have been reading excerpts from "Army is broken and in need of repair" by Joseph L. Galloway. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8odls. Thanks to news.yahoo.com.

One High Crime And Two Misdemeanors

2005-10-13T21:53:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Will Bunch. October 12, 2005

President Bush said Wednesday that Harriet Miers' religious beliefs figured into her nomination to the Supreme Court. "People are interested to know why I picked Harriet Miers," Bush told reporters at the White House. "Part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion." Bush committed at least one "high crime" and two "misdemeanors", by our casual tally.

Misdemeanor No. 1: In using religion as a key basis for offering Miers a job, the president would appear to have violated the spirit, if not the letter, of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. According to the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Title VII of the law "prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin."

Misdemeanor No. 2: One could make the case that Bush's actions are also in violation of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, which specifically covers federal employees. According to the same EEOC primer: "The CSRA prohibits any employee who has authority to take certain personnel actions from discriminating for or against employees or applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age or disability."

High crime: As you might expect, the "high crime" here is more serious, and is also the area where it's hardest to argue that the president did not cross the line. We are referring to Article VI, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, which states that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Do you honestly believe that Harriet Miers -- with all her other qualifications exactly the same -- would have been nominated to the Supreme Court if she had been Jewish, or an atheist, or Muslim? Of course not. George W. Bush has an easy choice now. He can withdraw Miers' nomination. Or he can be impeached.

You have been reading excerpts from "The President's day: One high crime and two misdemeanors" by Will Bunch. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/cbgcb. Thanks to Philadelphia Daily News and pnionline.com.

The Big Fix

2005-10-13T00:08:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Chris Floyd. October 12, 2005

Almost every assertion of "fact" Colin Powell made during his pre-attack UN presentation was unsupported by intelligence data -- and Powell knew this when he spoke. Powell was the "human face" of a monstrous conspiracy to lead the United States into an unnecessary war, an act of aggression, a war crime of Nuremberg proportions. And tens of thousands of innocent people lie dead because of it. How many thousands more will die in the global chaos and instability that this act of criminal insanity has unleashed?

These murdering liars: it just chokes you with fury, what they've done -- and what they will get away with. For be assured: even if Patrick Fitzgerald makes all our dreams come true, handing down indictments for Karl Rove, "Scooter" Libby and even the great sulphurous belch of corruption that is Dick Cheney, Bush will simply pardon them all -- just like Papa did in his last days in office, with a bagful of pardons that quashed the investigation into the Iran-Contra scam (which was, in many respects, a very similar act of warmongering treason).

What's more, even if -- in the wildest dream on the edge of possibility -- Bush himself gets caught in the cross-hairs, there's always the old Nixon-Ford ploy. You take a pliable outsider and say: "I'll make you Vice President if you promise to pardon me when I'm gone and you take over." Cheney -- an old Nixon White House hand who became Ford's chief of staff and was a top insider in all the Bush I machinations -- knows how to play this game. Sure, if worst comes to worst, you may have to step down from office -- but nobody does time, and more importantly, nobody loses any money.

The fix is in -- and as always, it is the innocent, the weak and the most vulnerable in the world who will pay the cost for the crimes of these bloated, bloodsoaked liars.

You have been reading excerpts from "The Big Fix" by Chris Floyd. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/7mnjn. Many thanks to Chris Floyd. We visit chris-floyd.com often and we hope you will too.

Leak Investigation Turns To Vice President's Office

2005-10-12T22:11:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Jason Leopold with Larisa Alexandrovna. October 12, 2005

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is trying to determine whether Vice President Dick Cheney had a role in the outing of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame-Wilson, individuals close to Fitzgerald have confirmed. Plame’s husband was a vocal critic of prewar intelligence used by President George W. Bush to build support for the Iraq war.

The investigation into who leaked the officer's name to reporters has now turned toward a little known cabal of administration hawks known as the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), which came together in August 2002 to publicize the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. WHIG was founded by Bush chief of staff Andrew Card and operated out of the Vice President’s office.

Fitzgerald’s examination centers on a group of players charged with not only selling the war, but also discrediting anyone who openly “disagreed with the official Iraq war” story.

The group’s members included Deputy White House chief of staff Karl Rove, Bush advisor Karen Hughes, Senior Advisor to the Vice President Mary Matalin, Deputy Director of Communications James Wilkinson, Assistant to the President and Legislative Liaison Nicholas Calio, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Chief of Staff to the Vice President and co-author of the Administration's pre-emptive strike policy.

Rice was later appointed Secretary of State; her deputy Hadley was made National Security Advisor. Wilkinson departed to become a spokesman for the military's central command, and later for the Republican National Convention. Hughes was recently appointed Undersecretary of State.

Several members of the group have testified before Fitzgerald’s grand jury.

You have been reading excerpts from "Cheney's role in CIA outing not known" by Jason Leopold with Larisa Alexandrovna. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/bytky. Thanks to rawstory.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Mapes: Mainstream Press Fell For Blogs' Critiques

2005-10-08T01:51:00.000-07:00

based on a report by E&P Staff. October 7, 2005

Howard Kurtz of The Washington Post quoted from the first chapter of the forthcoming book by former CBS producer Mary Mapes that covers, among other things, her controversial experience with the Dan Rather/Bush/National Guard “60 Minutes” segment.

Among the excerpts: "I was incredulous that the mainstream press -- a group I'd been a part of for nearly twenty-five years and thought I knew -- was falling for the blogs' critiques. I was shocked at the ferocity of the attack. I was terrified at CBS's lack of preparedness in defending us. I was furious at the unrelenting attacks on Dan. And I was helpless to do anything about any of it."

“And right now, on the Internet, it appeared everything was falling apart. I had a real physical reaction as I read the angry online accounts. It was something between a panic attack, a heart attack, and a nervous breakdown. My palms were sweaty; I gulped and tried to breathe... The little girl in me wanted to crouch and hide behind the door and cry my eyes out."

"Faxing changes a document in so many ways, large and small, that analyzing a memo that had been faxed -- in some cases not once, but twice -- was virtually impossible. The faxing destroyed the subtle arcs and lines in the letters. The characters bled into each other. The details of how the typed characters failed to line up perfectly inside each word were lost."

"To these people, there was no such thing as unbiased mainstream reporting, certainly not when it came to criticism of the president, no matter how tepid. To them, there was Fox News and everything else -- and everything else was liberal and unfair."

You have been reading excerpts from "Mary Mapes Hits Bloggers and MSM in Upcoming Book" by E&P Staff. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/d7ruy. Thanks to editorandpublisher.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Guantanamo Hunger Strike Takes A Serious Turn

2005-10-08T00:25:00.000-07:00

based on a report from Aljazeera. October 7, 2005

A hunger strike by prisoners at the US Guantanamo Bay prison camp has entered a serious stage, the International Committee of the Red Cross says.

But ICRC chief spokeswoman Antonella Notari declined to comment on Thursday's statement by a defence lawyer that the hunger strike involved 200 of 500 prisoners and that 21 were being force-fed.

The humanitarian agency, which last visited the US naval base in Cuba in late September, was in contact with the US authorities about the situation, Notari said on Friday.

"There is a hunger strike, the situation is serious, and we are following it with concern," Notari said.

"During our recent 10-day visit we were able to visit the infirmary, see the detainees and speak with them as well as the American authorities," she added.

Amnesty International and human-rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith, representing 40 detainees, said on Thursday that US authorities were keeping 21 alive by forcing food into their stomachs through tubes pushed up their noses.

The prisoners are shackled to their beds 24-hours a day to stop them removing the tubes, he said.

The US opened the prison camp in January 2002. Many detainees were seized in Afghanistan. Only four have been charged and many have been held for more than three years. Some former prisoners say they were tortured while in Guantanamo.

You have been reading excerpts from "Serious turn to Guantanamo protest" from Aljazeera. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/74sta. We read english.aljazeera.net often and we hope you will too.

Is George Bush On A Mission From God?

2005-10-08T00:17:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Ewen MacAskill. October 7, 2005

George Bush has claimed he was on a mission from God when he launched the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, according to a senior Palestinian politician in an interview to be broadcast by the BBC later this month.

Mr Bush revealed the extent of his religious fervour when he met a Palestinian delegation during the Israeli-Palestinian summit at the Egpytian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, four months after the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

One of the delegates, Nabil Shaath, who was Palestinian foreign minister at the time, said: "President Bush said to all of us: 'I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did."

Mr Bush went on: "And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And, by God, I'm gonna do it."

Mr Bush, who became a born-again Christian at 40, is one of the most overtly religious leaders to occupy the White House, a fact which brings him much support in middle America.

Soon after, the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz carried a Palestinian transcript of the meeting, containing a version of Mr Bush's remarks. But the Palestinian delegation was reluctant publicly to acknowledge its authenticity.

The BBC persuaded Mr Shaath to go on the record for the first time for a three-part series on Israeli-Palestinian diplomacy: Elusive Peace, which begins on Monday.

You have been reading excerpts from "George Bush: 'God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq'" by Ewen MacAskill. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/bkwsj. Thanks to Guardian Unlimited at guardian.co.uk. Real journalism is still alive in Britain.

Dems Chant 'Shame!' As GOP Bullies House Vote

2005-10-07T23:03:00.000-07:00

based on a report by David Edwards. October 7, 2005

Republican House members DeLay, Barton, Hastert and Blunt held the vote open on a controversial energy bill until they were able twist enough arms for the bill to pass.

Although only 5 minutes are allotted for voting, Republicans refused to close the voting for 40 minutes until enough votes had switched to pass the energy bill which will gut environmental standards in favor of building more oil refineries.

As reported by Reuters:
When over two dozen Republicans initially voted no, DeLay, Barton, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and new Majority Leader Roy Blunt circled the chamber to cajole holdouts.

Republican Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland was the last to switch. With the tally stuck at 211-211, Gilchrest changed his vote, making it 212-210. Barton promptly shook his hand and Republican Mike Simpson, who presided over the vote, gaveled it to an end.
...
Several Democrats protested that the vote was held open. "I am informed that every member of Congress who is in town has voted," Democratic whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland said at one point, when the tally was 210 yes, 214 no.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi also complained, saying the proceedings brought "dishonor to the House."

You have been reading excerpts from "Dems Chant 'Shame! Shame!' as GOP Bullies House Vote" by David Edwards. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9f62u. Thanks to bradblog.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Prisoner Abuse: Investigation Aims Far Too Low

2005-10-06T00:24:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Joseph L. Galloway. October 4, 2005

Capt. Ian Fishback, a West Point graduate, was a lieutenant in both Afghanistan and Iraq when he became troubled by what he was seeing: American soldiers beating Iraqi detainees until their arms and legs were broken. Death threats. Extreme forced physical exertion. Sleep deprivation. Exposure to the elements.

What did this honorable American officer ask that was so hard? "Give (our soldiers) a clear standard that is in accordance with the bedrock principles of our nation."

Capt. Fishback added: "Some argue that since our actions are not as horrifying as al Qaeda's we should not be concerned. When did al Qaeda become any type of standard by which we measure the morality of the United States?"

Nobody in his chain of command showed the slightest concern about what the captain reported and what he sought. Nobody showed any interest until Human Rights Watch revealed details of his case last week.

There have been 17 separate investigations of Abu Ghraib, Guantánamo and other prisoner-abuse scandals. All have consistently claimed that no one higher up the chain of command, including the civilian leadership in the Pentagon, bears any responsibility for any of this.

Hogwash. BS. Nonsense.

If the lowest private fails, then others have failed in training, leading and directing that private. The chain runs from sergeant to lieutenant to captain to lieutenant colonel to colonel to one, two, three and four stars, on to the longest serving, most arrogant secretary of defense in our history, Donald H. Rumsfeld, and beyond him to President Bush.

You have been reading excerpts from "Prisoner Abuse: Investigation Aims Far Too Low" by Joseph L. Galloway. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8e4vl. Thanks to commondreams.org.

We're Not Even Trying. It's Pathetic.

2005-10-04T23:40:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Paul Reickhoff. October 3, 2005

Saturday night, I got an email from a very close buddy of mine currently serving as an Army officer in Ramadi. He saw my recent blog about the ongoing equipment issues and responded with this email. Eleven people have been killed in his batallion in the last 10 days.

He speaks with a candor and level of frustration that you won't hear from the Generals on TV. This email makes my blood boil. Check it out:

"They make level IV side armor, too, that we don't have. Of all the guys that have been shot and killed here, all have been through the side of the armor where there's no plate. That's where the snipers are aiming for, and hitting. my two guys who got hit by a sniper ... one went through the side (no plate) and he survived by the grace of god. The other moved at the last second and the bullet hit the plate right no its edge.

Side armor is one thing. But Paul, we have no reserve here. Every avilable troop is on the line every day. We have no offensive capability because to launch an operation in one sector would mean pulling the troops out of another sector. While they are bullshitting with the numbers, we need 3 times as many troops as we have here just to be able to protect ourselves. We don't have the people to clear out the bad neighborhoods, so we just keep going over there and getting killed, 1, 3 or 5 guys at a time.

And don't get me started on the bankrupt leadership in theater. We know the enemy only does one thing well: IEDs. but they keep sending us everywhere up the roads in these stuipid vehicles. roads where you have no choice of what direction to travel. They're slightly wider than the vehicle and raised. You're such an easy target. Where's the air assualt infantry?? Why must we play right to the enemy's strength 1000 times a day? We never try anything else. Where are the apaches? As far as i can tell, we have one cobra and one huey ... 40 year old technology at best. A platoon of apaches could end this thing in a week, b/c no one could stick their head out to shoot, or trigger an IED. We're not even trying. It's pathetic."

You have been reading excerpts from "We're Not Even Trying--An Email From Ramadi, Iraq" by Paul Reickhoff. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9beeu. Thanks to Paul Reickhoff and huffingtonpost.com.

How Rotten Are These Guys?

2005-10-04T20:21:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Robert Parry. October 5, 2005

The separation of the Bush political machine from organized crime is often like the thin layer of rock between a seemingly ordinary surface and volcanic activity rumbling below. Sometimes, the lava spews forth and the illusion of normalcy is shattered.

In the weeks ahead, a dangerous eruption is again threatening to shake the Bush family’s image of legitimacy, as the pressure from intersecting scandals builds.

So far, the mainstream news media has focused mostly on the white-collar abuses of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay for allegedly laundering corporate donations to help Republicans gain control of the Texas legislature, or on deputy White House chief of staff Karl Rove for disclosing the identity of a covert CIA officer to undercut her husband’s criticism of George W. Bush’s case for war in Iraq.

Both offenses represent potential felonies, but they pale beside new allegations linking business associates of star GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff – an ally of both DeLay and Rove – to the gangland-style murder of casino owner Konstantinos “Gus” Boulis in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, in 2001.

These criminal cases also are reminders of George H.W. Bush’s long record of unsavory associations, including with a Nicaraguan contra network permeated by cocaine traffickers, Rev. Sun Myung Moon’s multi-million-dollar money-laundering operations, and anti-communist Cuban extremists tied to acts of international terrorism.

Now, George W. Bush is faced with his own challenge of containing a rupture of scandals – involving prominent conservatives Abramoff, DeLay and potentially Rove – that have bubbled to the surface and are beginning to flow toward the White House.

You have been reading excerpts from "How Rotten Are These Guys?" by Robert Parry. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/ajgzf. Many thanks to Bob Parry. We visit consortiumnews.com often and we hope you will too.

Thatcher Linked To US Corruption Probe

2005-10-04T19:57:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Bob Roberts. October 3, 2005

A document linking Margaret Thatcher to a US corruption probe is so explosive civil servants have been asked to ensure it remains "sealed".

The 79-year-old former Premier is said to have met Congressman Tom DeLay in Britain while he was on a suspected favours-for-freebies scam.

In return for his free holiday, DeLay -- who resigned as Republican leader of Congress last week after being accused of laundering political funds -- allegedly backed legislation favourable to lobby groups.

Disclosing that US authorities were seeking aid from UK counterparts, a secret Home Office briefing says: "One visit to the UK involved a meeting with Mrs Margaret Thatcher. Evidence is sought from her about that meeting and her involvement in the alleged deception and violation of US criminal laws."

In the dossier headed "Secret...wider circulation strictly forbidden", civil servants then warn ministers: "There would be considerable press interest in this case if it were to become public knowledge.

"We have been asked by the US to keep this request 'sealed', which we take to mean as confidential as possible. This has been relayed to the Crown Office and Metropolitan Police. Our normal line is that we neither confirm nor deny the existence of any request until it is in the public domain and there is no reason to change that course of action here."

The revelations will be a body-blow to Lady Thatcher's reputation. If she is found to have been involved in the alleged scam she could face a criminal probe in the US or even be banned from travelling to the country.

You have been reading excerpts from "KEEP IT SEALED KEEP IT SECRET" by Bob Roberts. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/a5drn. Thanks to mirror.co.uk. Real journalism is still alive in Britain.

Talk About A Cruel Joke

2005-10-04T19:47:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Bob Herbert. October 3, 2005

It's finally becoming clear on Capitol Hill, and maybe even in the White House, that the United States cannot win the war in Iraq. The only question still to be decided is how many more American lives will be wasted in George W. Bush's grand debacle.

The wheels have fallen off the cart in Iraq, and only those in the farthest reaches of denial are hanging on to the illusion of an American triumph over the insurgency.

Air Force General Richard Myers, who retired Friday as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was publicly chastised at an Armed Services Committee hearing last week by Senator John McCain of Arizona, who has always been a strong proponent of the war.

Senator McCain bluntly declared that "things have not gone as we had planned or expected, nor as we were told by you, General Myers."

The general replied, "I don't think this committee or the American public has ever heard me say that things are going very well in Iraq."

During an appearance at a naval base in California, Mr. Bush characterized the war that he started in Iraq as the moral equivalent of America's struggle against the Nazis and the Japanese in World War II.

If that's true, the entire nation should be mobilized. But, of course, it's not true. This is a reckless, indefensible war that has been avoided like the plague by the children of the privileged classes.

Even the most diehard defenders of this debacle are coming to the realization that it is doomed. So the party line now is that the Iraqis at some point will have to bear the burden of Mr. Bush's war alone.

Talk about a cruel joke.

You have been reading excerpts from "For No Good Reason" by Bob Herbert. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/buybp. Thanks to Bob Herbert and topplebush.com.

New Policy May Restrict Flow Of Weather Info

2005-10-04T19:19:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Larisa Alexandrovna. October 4, 2005

The Department of Commerce has issued a blanket media policy to employees of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), requiring that all requests for contact from national media be first approved by the Department.

According to a leaked Sept. 29 email memo sent out to NOAA staff, including employees of the National Weather Service (NWS) -- both of which are under the Department of Commerce -- employees must collect information from reporters and forward it to the Department.

“Prior to this policy change, if a media organization called our office (or any other National Weather Service office) and wanted an interview, we would do our best to accommodate the request as quickly as possible,” said one NOAA employee who requested anonymity. “While often such requests are from local media, local offices do get requests from national media if a weather event is big enough to be a national story.”

The policy requires that local weather offices forward media requests to the NWS press office, who in turn would forward the request on to the Commerce Department’s public relations office. The Department would then decide whether comment should be granted.

Under this new policy, the Department, rather than the weather agencies, would also determine who would then provide comment.

“There has been no explanation as to why this policy was issued. It does appear the intent of this policy is to restrict the flow of weather information to the national media,” said the NOAA employee who also expressed concern over why Commerce is suddenly making blanket policy decisions for the NWS and deciding who can speak to the media.

You have been reading excerpts from "Commerce Department tells National Weather Service media contacts must be pre-approved" by Larisa Alexandrovna. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/96djv. Many thanks to Larisa and rawstory.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

New Orleans Is A Toxic Cesspool

2005-10-03T18:46:00.000-07:00

based on a column by Robert C. Koehler. September 29, 2005

When the all-clear goes out for New Orleans and environs, my suggestion is, hold onto your protective gear. The U.S. economy signed a non-aggression pact with cancer a long time ago and the Bush administration has honored it more enthusiastically than any other.

The term “toxic gumbo” barely does justice to the horror of pollutants unleashed on this city at the mouth of the Mississippi surrounded by petrochemical plants, in the heart of what was already known as Cancer Alley.

It's a national nightmare that’s just beginning. The region’s scattered survivors want to go home, and desperately need leadership committed to helping them and telling the truth. I fear what they’ll get instead is a smiley-face pasted over toxic lies.

The Associated Press moved a story a few days ago on the cleanup that was so top-heavy with “encouraging” comments from government officials and others, so oblivious to the cries of alarm emanating from environmentalists, I felt the spirit of Tinker Bell whispering between every line, if you wish hard enough, you’ll make it so.

In a statement that reeks of politics, Jerry Fenner of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention told AP: “All the data to date show there should not be any long-term health risks to the population.”

The assertion sits unchallenged in the middle of the story, signaling, I fear, more craven reporting to come. I watch in awe as yet again the media hoist the smiley-face flag of credulous deference to governmental utterances, as though we’ve never been misled before.

Katrina unsheathed the future — the future in store for all of us if we don’t reinstate a reality-based government that protects its citizens rather than its own interests.

You have been reading excerpts from "Unsheathed future" by Robert C. Koehler. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9wqqh. Thanks to Bob Koehler. We visit commonwonders.com often and we hope you will too.

The Lunacy Of The Powerful And Comfortable

2005-09-30T21:36:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Chris Floyd. September 21, 2005

The war is lost.

Three years after the invasion, the occupation forces control less and less of the country all the time.

The level of wanton violence -- from all sides -- keeps rising. The physical infrastructure of the country continues to deteriorate.

The social fabric is in tatters. "Reconstruction" has degenerated into outright robbery and all-pervasive graft.

A piecemeal, many-sided civil war has begun.

Each day of the occupation is a fresh boon to violent Islamic extremism. Each day of the occupation further brutalizes and decimates the American military, sinking it deeper into the dishonor of serving a criminal cause: the illegal, unwarranted invasion and occupation of a sovereign country, on behalf of a radical political faction that deliberately lied its way into war.

Yet there is not a national leader on either side of the Atlantic -- even in the opposition parties -- who will stand up and speak the truth about the situation.

They all prattle, to one degree or another, about "staying the course" or "getting the job done" or "doing the job right."

This is sheer lunacy -- the lunacy of the powerful and comfortable, who never have to face the bloody, ruinous consequences of their pious rhetoric and empty posturing.

You have been reading excerpts from "End Game" by Chris Floyd. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/9x8pc. Many thanks to Chris Floyd and chris-floyd.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

McCain: Prisoner Abuse Hurts American Image Abroad

2005-09-26T22:34:00.000-07:00

based on a report from The Canadian Press via CBC News. September 27, 2005

Senator John McCain said Sunday that abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. soldiers, alleged anew in a report and under investigation again by the army, is hurting the country's image abroad.

"We've got to have it stopped," McCain (R-Ariz.) said on This Week on ABC. "I don't know if these allegations are true or not, but they have to be investigated."

Human Rights Watch issued a report Friday based on interviews with a captain and two sergeants who served in a battalion of the 82nd Airborne Division stationed at a military base near Fallujah. The report alleged that army soldiers systematically tortured Iraqi detainees from 2003 into 2004, hitting them with baseball bats and dousing them with chemicals.

The army says it has opened an investigation into a soldier's allegations that he witnessed and heard about widespread prisoner abuse, including torture and a beating with a baseball bat, while serving at a base in Iraq.

McCain acknowledged that the captain in the Human Rights Watch report had contacted his staff, which McCain said was conducting its own investigation.

McCain, who was held prisoner in Vietnam during the Vietnam War, has proposed an amendment to the defence bill to make interrogation techniques outlined in the army field manual standard for treatment of all detainees in the Defence Department's custody. Another change he has proposed would expressly prohibit cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of those in U.S. custody no matter where they are held.

"We've got to make it clear to the world that America doesn't do it. It's not about prisoners. It's about us," he said.

You have been reading "U.S. Senator John McCain says prisoner abuse hurts American image abroad" from The Canadian Press. You can see it in its original context here: tinyurl.com/79l5c. Thanks to the CBC for cbc.ca.

500,000 People Vanish in Washington, DC

2005-09-26T13:49:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Ron Scott. September 26, 2005

Imagine 500,000 people marching down the meandering thoroughfares of Pennsylvania Avenue and 14th Street and Constitution Avenue in Washington, DC. They are headed for a date with destiny and the promise of peace, conjoined with a challenge for justice. How could they vanish from the headlines?

Rod Serling, the brilliant creator/writer of “The Twilight Zone,” might have written this intro to one of his teleplays during the 1960s. But it didn’t happen then. It happened this weekend, with our media, in our country, in our time.

“They came from as far away as Alaska and California,” reported Abayomi Azikiwe of the Pan African Newswire, “from Europe to the nation's capital itself, to make a clear statement that United States military forces should withdraw immediately from Iraq. Honest crowd estimates of the demonstration ranged from 500,000-600,000 (some even thought there were more) making it the largest demonstration in the capital since the winter of 2003.”

Where were the media? Covering local news at home? In Iraq? Or covering the Ashton Kucher/Demi Moore wedding?

No. They had a date with Rita. Celeb anchorpersons, clad in Tommy Hilfiger and St. John knits, were standing in knee-deep water as a backdrop. How many stories about Rita did we need? It’s a tragedy, of course, but in Washington, a challenge to the Bush administration was in full gear, and the cameras, recorders, and reporters’ notepads were missing. If it wasn’t real, it would be science fiction.

You have been reading excerpts from "500,000 People Vanish in Washington, DC" by Ron Scott. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/95pkr. Thanks to info.detnews.com.

Sheehan Arrested Outside White House

2005-09-26T13:24:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Daniela Deane and Petula Dvorak. September 26, 2005

Cindy Sheehan, the grieving California mother of a soldier slain in Iraq, was arrested today while protesting the Iraq war outside the White House.

Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son Casey was killed last year, and several dozen other protesters staged a sit-in on the sidewalk on Pennsylvania Avenue after marching along the pedestrian walkway, the Associated Press reported. Police warned them three times that they had to move along before making arrests, the news agency said.

The whole world is watching," protesters chanted as Sheehan was led to a police vehicle.

Sheehan and some 200 other protesters sat in circles on the sidewalk, apparently courting arrest. Hundreds more people rallied in Lafayette Park, across Pennsylvania Avenue.

Sheehan's arrest came after a massive antiwar demonstration Saturday in Washington which drew more than 100,000 people -- the largest such demonstration since the Iraq war began in spring 2003. A demonstration supporting the war drew roughly 500 people Sunday.

Sheehan, 48, first attracted wide attention in August when she established the antiwar "Camp Casey" outside of President Bush's Texas ranch. As part of the 26-day protest in Crawford, Sheehan asked for a meeting with Bush, which he declined.

You have been reading "Sheehan Arrested Outside White House" by Daniela Deane and Petula Dvorak. You can see it in its original context here: tinyurl.com/ahhse. Thanks to washingtonpost.com.

Why We're Marching

2005-09-25T20:17:00.000-07:00

based on a column by Medea Benjamin. September 23, 2005

We're marching because we are distressed over the continued war in Iraq, an unprovoked, unnecessary war that has cost the lives of tens of thousands of Iraqis and nearly 2,000 US soldiers. We grieve for those families who have already lost loved ones in this war, and we want to stop other families from suffering such painful losses.

We're marching because we want to hold George Bush accountable for dragging us into this war on false pretenses. The September 11 Commission officially acknowledged that Iraq was not involved in the terrorist attacks on our nation, and the U.S. military gave up its search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction because they don't exist.

We're marching because we support our troops, and we are convinced that the best way to show that support is to bring them home and fully attend to their economic, physical, and psychological needs when they return.

We're marching because we're convinced that we can't afford to continue spending over a billion dollars a week on this unwinnable war, especially in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Our tax dollars should be channeled away from war and destruction and into rebuilding the Gulf Coast, rebuilding Iraq, and investing in our nation's healthcare, schools and infrastructure.

We're marching because we're appalled by the war profiteering of companies such as Halliburton and Bechtel. We believe the Iraqis should rebuild their own country. And we want to stop the corrupt practice of awarding lucrative contracts to US companies with close government ties, as we have done in Iraq and are now repeating in the Gulf Coast.

You have been reading excerpts from "Why We're Marching" by Medea Benjamin. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/74y9y. Thanks to commondreams.org. We visit often and we hope you will too.

We Don't Exist

2005-09-25T18:23:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Cindy Sheehan. September 24, 2005

Last weekend, Karl Rove said that I was a clown and the anti-war movement was "non-existent." I wonder if the hundreds of thousands of people who showed up today to protest this war and George's failed policies know that they don't exist. It is also so incredible to me that Karl thinks that he can wish us away by saying we aren't real. Well, Karl and Co., we are real, we do exist and we are not going away until this illegal and immoral occupation of Iraq is over and you are sent back to the depths of whatever slimy, dark, and loathsome place you came from. I may be a clown, Karl, but you are about to be indicted. You also preside over one of the biggest three-ring, malevolent circuses of all time: the Bush administration.

The rally today was overwhelming and powerful. The reports that I was arrested today were obviously false. The peace rally was mostly very peaceful. Washington, DC was filled with energetic and proud Americans who came from all over to raise their voices in unison against the criminals who run our government and their disastrous policies that are making our nation more vulnerable to all kinds of attacks (natural and "Bush"-made disasters).

So much happened today! I am exhausted but very content. I am again filled with a renewed sense of hope that we will get our country back and get our troops home. I was also thrilled at the number of young people who came out today. That is another great sign that the side of good is winning.

With the Reverends, we stopped in front of the White House and said a prayer. After the prayer, I said that we are light and they are darkness. Darkness can NEVER overcome the light, ever. As long as there is one spark, the darkness has lost. We will prevail, we will be victorious. The darkness has lost because our beacons of peace and truth are shining for the entire world to see. And it is a very pretty sight. Take that, Karl.

You have been reading excerpts from "We Don't Exist" by Cindy Sheehan. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8q5a5. Thanks to truthout.org. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Huge: September 24, 2005

2005-09-24T23:44:00.000-07:00

based on a report by William Rivers Pitt. September 24, 2005

[1:25 PM] Apparently, there is a huge gathering of cops in battle gear up the line waiting for us. The march has stopped again and I don't know why.

[1:46 PM] The march is unable to move because there are so many people coming in from all directions. Constitution Avenue is a wall of humanity. I am up on the hill that holds the Washington Monument, looking down on the crowd. This is a massive, massive showing. Hot damn.

[2:14 PM] I cannot find the front of the crowd. It is splayed in all directions.

[2:23 PM] CNN is estimating the crowd here to be more than six hundred thousand strong. Wow.

[2:31 PM] I just overheard ten cops getting new orders to move barricades and open the streets further. They are scrambling to control the size of this thing. The march has finally begun again, and a light rain is falling.

[2:57 PM] Huge. Absolutely massive. Loud. Pissed. Beautiful. Did I mention loud? Haven't seen the riot cops yet.

[3:07 PM] Someday the Left will come up with new slogans. Hey hey, ho ho gets really tiresome after four or five hours. I'm just sayin'.

[3:19 PM] The Black Bloc is on the move, passing me right now and talking about burning down McDonalds. I am going to follow them a bit to see if they start any chaos.

[3:24 PM] The Bloc just flipped a dumpster into the road. They are trashing newspaper boxes and leaving them in the middle of the streets. The cops are moving in.

[3:32 PM] The Bloc went one way, I am going another. The cops were laughing at them.

You have been reading excerpts from "Camp Casey Goes To Washington" by William Rivers Pitt. You can read it all here: tinyurl.com/bdus4. Thanks to truthout.org. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Roll, Wheel: September 24, 2005

2005-09-24T23:29:00.000-07:00

based on a report by William Rivers Pitt. September 24, 2005

[10:55 AM] The crowd here is incredibly large already, and the march itself is still more than an hour off. All the rebels and so-called outsiders here are suddenly in the majority according to all the polls. Roll, wheel.

[11:00 AM] Amtrak service from New York has been delayed for 2 hours. A spontaneous demonstration erupted at Penn Station as delayed passengers chanted, "Bring the troops home now!"

[11:13 AM] The crowds around us are swelling. A lot of the people here are protesting the war for the first time. I am also seeing a lot of young people. Good stuff.

[11:31 AM] We have to march around a clot of counter-demonstrators who are being thunderously shouted down. The Iraq veterans are here. The streets of DC are wild.

[11:48 AM] The soldiers are here, too, doing their martial law exercise. The Raging Grannies are getting ready to sing. The people keep coming.

[12:06 PM] The march just got huge all of a sudden. Medea Benjamin has taken control of things here on the street. Cindy Sheehan just took the stage and the whole place went berzerk.

[12:42 PM] It is pretty safe to say that there are more than a hundred thousand people here. Many more. Welcome to the majority.

[12:56 PM] The crowd is all lined up and ready, shouting, "Let's go!" in one voice.

[1:11 PM] They are running a long rope through the crowd. Attached to the rope are pictures of every soldier who has died in Iraq. It took a long time to pass my spot. Next to me was a woman whose son is over there. She had a look on her face I can't describe.

You have been reading excerpts from "Camp Casey Goes To Washington" by William Rivers Pitt. You can read it all here: tinyurl.com/bdus4. Thanks to truthout.org. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Hundreds Of Thousands: September 24, 2005

2005-09-24T23:22:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Scott Galindez. September 24, 2005

[11:08 PM] It is safe to say that there were hundreds of thousands of people marching against the war in Iraq today. Police Chief Charles Ramsey's only statement was that the organizers achieved their goal of 100,000. The DC police refused to make any other estimate. C-SPAN estimated 500,000, a number that I believe was possible from my observations. I was on the corner of Pennsylvania and 15th on the steps of Riggs bank when the march began. People were still arriving from all directions. The massive amount of people moving in all directions prevented a front of the march from forming. People just started marching on their own with no marshals anywhere near the front of the march. Thousands of people passed me before any organized contingent. The first major contingent that passed me were thousands of students with signs that said, "college not enlistment." Thousands of people later I finally saw what was intended to be the lead banner. I saw Congresswomen Lynn Woosley, and Barbara Lee, the Reverend Al Sharpton and other dignitaries carrying that banner.

Thousands of people behind that came the Iraq Veterans Against the War. Joan Baez was marching with them right next to Marine Jeff Key and dozens of other veterans of the Iraq war. Behind them was Gold Star Families for Peace. About half a block later came Veterans for Peace, with Military Families Speak Out a short distance behind them. At the time I assumed that they were in the middle of the march. I later found out that while they were not near the front they were much further from the rear.

I moved down to Pennsylvania and 13th to catch the front again and noticed for hours that there were still people heading up 15th Street. I headed to the concert at 4:30 pm, 4 hours after the march began and people were still marching past the White House, only 4 blocks from the march's starting point.

To summarize, it took over 4 hours for people clear out of the ellipse area. I have been to several large marches in Washington, DC, since 1989 and this was by far the largest.

You have been reading excerpts from "Camp Casey Goes To Washington" by Scott Galindez. You can read it all here: tinyurl.com/bdus4. Thanks to truthout.org. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Watching History Develop: September 24, 2005

2005-09-24T23:17:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Scott Galindez. September 24, 2005

[8:15 AM] We are preparing to leave our hotel in Washington, DC. In the lobby there is a picture of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. delivering his "I Have a Dream" speech from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. Later today, all eyes will be on a grieving mother who has emerged as a leader of the movement to end the war in Iraq.

I observed Cindy Sheehan rise to the occasion many times in Crawford, Texas. She responded to the media with a calmness that takes most people years to learn.

I watched her take her message to a new level during the first Saturday rally at Camp Casey.

Today, however, the eyes of the world will be on her, and for that reason George W. Bush and his administration should be nervous. The Congress that authorized the war has good reason for concern as well.

If Cindy Sheehan delivers today she may emerge as not just a leader of the anti-war movement but a leader of our country.

Come Sunday morning Cindy may just be the leader of the opposition to the current government. No Democrat has really stepped up to fill that hole. After spending three weeks covering Cindy in Crawford, I think she can do it.

There is excitement in the air here - everywhere you go you see groups of protesters. It's time to head for the White House and watch history develop ...

You have been reading excerpts from "Camp Casey Goes To Washington" by Scott Galindez. You can read it all here: tinyurl.com/bdus4. Thanks to truthout.org. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Patriotic Dissent

2005-09-24T16:46:00.000-07:00

based on a speech by Cindy Sheehan. September 24, 2005

Ahhhh, I love the smell of Patriotic Dissent in the afternoon!

As we stand here on the grounds of a monument dedicated to the Father of our Country, George Washington, we are reminded that he was well known for stories of never being able to tell a lie. I find it so ironic that there is another man here named George who stays in this town between vacations, and he seems to never be able to tell the truth. It is tragic for us that our bookend presidents named George have two completely different relationships with honesty.

I also find it ironic and heartbreaking that my son, Casey, who was a brave person, tall and proud, who loved his country and was honest beyond measure, could be sent to his death by someone who is even too cowardly to meet with a broken-hearted mom, let alone go and fight in the illegal and immoral war of his generation. We are losing our best and our brightest in a country that we are destroying, that was no threat to the United States of America. The weapons of mass destruction reside in this town: and they have practically given George a blank check to run our country into monetary and moral bankruptcy. We are here in force today to take our country back and restore true democracy and sanity to our political process. We are here because we love our country, and we won't let the reckless maniacs destroy her any further.

We the people have the power and we can and should name our national policy and make sure it is carried out. I constantly get asked if we are making a difference and if we think (like we're naïve boobs) that we will actually stop the war. Well, looking back at how Vietnam was ended and looking back in the history of our country, most notably in the suffragette, union, and civil rights movements, we the people are the only ones who have been able to transform history and affect true and lasting change here in America: so to those people who question if we are making a difference: I tell them to go back to school and read their history books!! WE ARE MAKING A DIFFERENCE!!! And WE ARE NOT GOING AWAY!!!

You have been reading excerpts from "Patriotic Dissent" by Cindy Sheehan. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8tm8j. Thanks to truthout.org. We visit often and we hope you will too.

BLACKOUT!! Washington DC, September 24, 2005

2005-09-24T16:28:00.000-07:00

based on a report by William Rivers Pitt. September 24, 2005

[4:08 PM] A CNN.com article says, "More than 2,000 people gathered," for the protest. Ye Gods, ya think so? Whoever wrote that article should maybe tune in to the TV station they work for. There are 2,000 people on about 20 feet of sidewalk ... for a dozen blocks.

[4:18 PM] CNN Headline News is reporting that this is the largest anti-war protest in DC since the war started. Someone should tell the goon who wrote that online article. 2,000 people my hind foot.

[4:26 PM] CNN reported earlier in the day that 600,000 people were here. That seems, to me, a little bit of an overcount. I cannot be sure because this thing is spread in all directions and I'd need to be in a helicopter to get a good idea. I have been covering these things in DC and New York since they started, and I feel comfortable saying there are at least 300,000 people here right now.

[5:11 PM] I am receiving reports from a variety of sources that this march has been virtually blacked out by the television media. CNN threw that big number out earlier, and Headline News made mention of it, but that's all. The hurricane is dominating the news, and even C-SPAN has Generals on talking about predicting hurricanes and storm response.

As frustrating as this is, I can understand it. Rita was a bad storm, made all the worse by Katrina. The oil infrastructure just took a beating, and water is flowing back into New Orleans. Besides, these TV yahoos have never covered these protests with any kind of accuracy or interest before, so why should today be any different?

Psssst ... we are the majority now.

You have been reading excerpts from "Camp Casey Goes To Washington" by William Rivers Pitt. You can read it all here: tinyurl.com/bdus4. Thanks to truthout.org. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Tilting at Windmills

2005-09-23T22:38:00.000-07:00

based on a column by Katrina Wilcox. September 23, 2005

So ... my fellow warriors on the path to truth, accountability, and justice ... are you tired of begging? Have you signed enough petitions, written enough letters, called your representatives enough times to realize that none of that is doing any good? Are you bone-weary, frustrated, and just plain pissed that your endless pleading continues to fall on deaf ears? Yeah ... me, too.

You don't need to be told that we live in insane times. We have definitely fallen down the rabbit hole. And while we are reeling ... trying to gain our footing, trying to make sense out of it all, trying desperately to do something to make it stop - they continue killing. Every day, every moment, every second ... they are killing more in Iraq and now in America. We are out of time. No more time to convince our representatives to do the right thing. No more time to wait for the next rigged election. No more time to wait for that hopeful someday of completed investigations. We must stand up and stop them now.

But how? Maybe they can never be stopped by working within the system. Maybe using the rules laid out by the system to affect change from within the system will never work.

Maybe the only sure-fire way to get this administration of criminals and their enablers to quit ignoring us is for a couple million of us to plunk down around the White House and Congress and shut down the government ... till we get our country back.

Maybe you have a better idea. If so, please speak up.

In the meantime, my husband and I -- who have never protested before -- are heading to DC with video equipment and digital camera, protest signs and shirts, and rock solid determination. Maybe this event will turn the tide.

You have been reading excerpts from "Tilting at Windmills" by Katrina Wilcox. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/c335v. Many thanks to BradBlog.com. We visit often and we hope you will too.

Fake Terrorism Winning Hearts And Minds?

2005-09-22T19:48:00.000-07:00

based on a report by Matt Hutaff. September 20, 2005

The story sounds amazing, almost fantastical.

A car driving through the outskirts of a besieged city opens fire on a police checkpoint, killing one. Police surround and detain the drivers and find the vehicle packed with explosives. When the suspects are thrown in prison, their allies drive right up to the walls of the jail, break through them and rescue their comrades. 150 other prisoners break free in the ensuing melee.

Incredible, no? Yet this story took place in the southern Iraqi city of Basra recently. Violence continues to escalate in the aftermath... but not for the reasons you think.

You see, the drivers of the explosive-laden car were were British Special Forces. And their rescuers were British soldiers driving British tanks.

Winning the hearts and minds, aren't we?

What we have here is a clear instance of a foreign power attempting to fabricate a terrorist attack. Why else would the soldiers be dressed as Arabs if not to frame them? Why have a car laden with explosives if you don't plan to use them for destructive purposes? Iraq is headed towards civil war, and this operation was meant to accelerate the process by killing people and blaming others. Nothing more, nothing less.

These actions are inexcusable and embarrassing; however, they should make you think. If a country like the United Kingdom is willing to commit acts of terror, what kind of false-flag operations do you think the United States is capable of?

If you thought the U.S. wouldn't blow up people it claims to support in the hopes of advancing its agenda, think again. Use this incident as your first reference point.

You have been reading excerpts from "Fake Terrorism Is a Coalition's Best Friend" by Matt Hutaff. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/a8f7e, thanks to thesimon.com.

1,900 Dead – And The Truth We Dare Not Speak

2005-09-21T22:34:00.000-07:00

excerpts from a column by Bob Geiger. September 19, 2005

It has become almost rote for us to say that the men and women we have lost died “fighting for our freedom” or to “keep us free.”

The truth we dare not speak is that those assertions are a lie.

They are a national balm, used to salve the ugly truth behind the deaths of these brave people who, in the ultimate act of good faith, lost their lives believing in rules that no longer seem to apply.

They are empty phrases used by those wishing they were true or by political charlatans, hoping to mask one simple truth: That our countrymen who have perished in Iraq died for absolutely nothing.

I hate saying that. When you've worn the uniform, as I have, there's a bond that's never lost with those who have served in the past and those who are in the line of fire every day in Iraq.

I want desperately for their sacrifice to be as worthwhile in reality as it is in their honorable and courageous intent. But it's simply not true.

The bipartisan 9/11 Commission and the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee all formally came to the same fundamental conclusions on the subject.

They determined that Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks on September 11, that they had no weapons of mass destruction and that Saddam Hussein had no links to Osama bin Laden or Al Qaeda.

The official findings of our own government make it clear that we invaded another country for no reason.

You have been reading excerpts from "1,900 Dead – And The Truth We Dare Not Speak" by Bob Geiger. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/bt95w.

War! What Is It Good For? Never-Ending Profits!

2005-09-21T22:29:00.000-07:00

excerpts from a column by Chris Floyd. September 19, 2005

We've said it before and we'll say it again and we'll keep on saying it because it is the indisputable, undeniable truth: Bush and his faction waged war on Iraq for money. That's it. That's all there is to it.

Yes, they wanted leverage over the oil. Yes, they had (and have) grand geopolitical designs that "required" the invasion. Yes, they had blinkered ideologues willing to use the blood and guts of 100,000 innocent people as raw material for their lunatic experiments. But behind all of this is the unbridled lust for ill-gotten, unearned loot -- loot on an unimaginable scale, loot which will augment their political power by several magnitudes and extend their malign influence on domestic and world politics for generations.

They have ransacked the Iraqi larder and stripped it of everything they could lay their hands on. They have transferred billions upon billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars into the hands of a few well-connected cronies, secret bagmen, soulless gun-runners and elite investors with nice clean fat white hands.

It is for this reason that George W. Bush sent U.S. forces into Iraq -- illegally, in the middle of the UN weapons inspection process that he himself had insisted upon. It is for this reason that he has caused the needless deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people, that he has brutalized, traumatized, overstrained and decimated the military forces of the United States. It is for this reason that he has gutted the American treasury, criminalized the American government and tyrannized the American people.

For money. Murder, for money. Easy money, greasy money, blood money. That's all there is to it, that's what the war in Iraq is all about. Anyone who tells you different is either deluded -- or hoping to get in on the scam.

You have been reading excerpts from "War! What is it good for? Never-ending profits!" by Chris Floyd. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/8to8h. Many thanks to Chris Floyd. We visit chris-floyd.com often and we hope you will too.

Both Parties Must Protect Integrity Of Vote

2005-09-21T00:19:00.000-07:00

excerpts from a column by Leonard M. Salle. September 22,2005

During the Florida recounts in 2000, voter disenfranchisement and voting improprieties occurred on a large scale. These "irregularities" included such things as throwing away ballot boxes, voter intimidation of many sorts and illegal identification requirements. Shortly after the 2002 election, questions were raised about the reliability of touch-screen voting. Indeed, there were strong indications of touch-screen computer fraud in the 2002 election.

Coming up to the 2004 election, there was not only well-documented disenfranchisement of voters, but even stronger indications of lack of trustworthiness of touch-screen voting. The results of other voting systems, including paper ballots, could be subject to miscounts through manipulation of the central tabulating equipment used at the county level to tally votes from the precincts. Although this problem could be overcome, putting solutions in place nationwide cannot realistically be achieved under the current system, in which individual states and even counties have jurisdiction over voting procedures.

Those who believe there is no way widespread voting fraud could occur in America might well consider the following. There are currently four bills before Congress designed to address one or more well-identified problems that interfere with having honest elections. These bills all have one thing in common: significant support from Democrats but little or no support from Republican members of Congress. The one exception is HR 278, a bill that can be characterized as anti-voting reform. It has only Republican cosponsors.

It is ironic that America's leaders talk about the need to create democracies around the world and emphasize how important honest elections are to achieving that goal. The truth is that many of these same leaders don't believe in the democratic principle of honest elections, where every person who chooses to vote can, and every vote will be accurately and honestly counted.

You have been reading excerpts from "Both parties must protect integrity of vote" by Leonard M. Salle. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/crj8k. Thanks to insidebayarea.com.

British Food Aid Going Up In Flames

2005-09-21T00:01:00.000-07:00

excerpts from a report by Ryan Parry. September 19, 2005

Hundreds of tons of British food aid shipped to America for starving Hurricane Katrina survivors is to be burned. Tons of the badly needed Nato ration packs, the same as those eaten by British troops in Iraq, has been condemned as unfit for human consumption.

And unless the bureaucratic mess is cleared up soon it could be sent for incineration.

One British aid worker last night called the move "sickening senselessness" and said furious colleagues were "spitting blood".

The food, which cost British taxpayers millions, is sitting idle in a huge warehouse after the Food and Drug Agency recalled it when it had already left to be distributed.

Scores of lorries headed back to a warehouse in Little Rock, Arkansas, to dump it at an FDA incineration plant.

Officials blamed the US Department of Agriculture, which impounded the shipment under regulations relating to the import and export of meat.

The aid worker, who would not be named, said: "This is the most appalling act of sickening senselessness while people starve.

"The FDA has recalled aid from Britain because it has been condemned as unfit for human consumption, despite the fact that these are Nato approved rations of exactly the same type fed to British soldiers in Iraq.

"Under Nato, American soldiers are also entitled to eat such rations, yet the starving of the American South will see them go up in smoke because of FDA red tape madness."

You have been reading excerpts from "EXCLUSIVE: UP IN FLAMES: Tons of British aid donated to help Hurricane Katrina victims to be BURNED by Americans" by Ryan Parry. You can read the entire piece here: tinyurl.com/bh76d. Thanks to mirror.co.uk.