Sunday, December 31, 2006

2007: Iraq, Iraq, Iraq

Next year's biggest political issue in the US will be the same as it was in 2006: the bloody stain of George Bush's invasion of Iraq.

After the presidential election of 2000 (aka, the Florida fiasco) I swore off making political prognostications. I even refused to proclaim a Democratic victory in the House of Representatives this past election until the actual votes were tallied. But at the request of the editors of Comment Is Free I am willing to proffer one guess about what will transpire in 2007: George Bush will dig a deeper hole in Iraq.

This is not the most adventuresome prediction. But for American - and perhaps global - politics, nothing is likely to be more consequential, except maybe a US attack on Iran, a prospect I am not willing to put odds on. Bush is clearly not yet able to give up on his notion of victory: a clear-cut win in Iraq that produces a pro-West, stable, secure, democratic, functioning government and nation. He cannot come to terms with the possibility that such a goal is a bridge too far, that the furies Bush unleashed in Iraq are beyond his ability to tame, that the mission is screwed.

So he will be susceptible to proposals that are not geared toward extrication. Instead, he will want to hear, and try, ideas that come from advisers who claim he can still pull it off. It's no surprise then that Bush is considering a "surge" of troops in Iraq - which is merely a spinner's term for an escalation. US military commanders are skeptical of such a course, and the pro-war neocons are already arguing that the only worthwhile "surge" will be one that lasts at least a year and a half.

Whether or not Bush surges ahead, he is unlikely to proceed with any plan that aims at disengagement. So much for Jim Baker's Iraq Study Group. And as the sectarian conflict in Iraq continues, the US will become further ensnared. Bush will kick the can down the road, leaving it to the next president to deal with the mess wrought by GWB. Which means Iraq will dominate the US political landscape in 2007.

With Bush holding tight, there will be more pressure on congressional Democrats, who are about to assume control of the House and Senate, to intervene. So far Democratic leaders in each body have expressed the intention to pressure Bush to begin a withdrawal from Iraq, but they have dismissed the idea of forcing him to do so by withholding money for the war (partly out of fear of later being blamed for losing the war). As for congressional Republicans, they will become increasingly restive, if Bush maintains (or bolsters) the US presence in Iraq. Yet they, too, will not be eager to call for unfunding the war. All of this will influence the next presidential campaign, which has already begun. Both parties could end up experiencing divisive debates among their candidates about what to do in Iraq.

Absent unforeseen events - which have a habit of occurring - Iraq will remain the central issue in 2007. I hate to be a doomsayer, but the situation in Iraq could well get uglier. And the debate within the US itself could get sharper and louder, with no resolution. And that brings me to this unhappy forecast: next year's prediction might essentially be the same as this one.


Saladin said...

"Bush is clearly not yet able to give up on his notion of victory: a clear-cut win in Iraq that produces a pro-West, stable, secure, democratic, functioning government and nation."

Mr. Corn, do you REALLY believe that is what bushco envisions? As if bush himself had anything to say about it. Why are the main architects of this war mostly ignored? Go back to the ford administration and the rise of rumsfeld and cheney and all that has transpired since, with the PNAC plan coming to fruition exactly as planned, yet you still insist that bush has anything to do with anything? He can barely string two sentences together, how could he possibly make any kind of rational decision? Jeez Louise, no wonder we can't rise above this cesspool. The usual suspects keep skating.

capt said...

Defense lawyer Najib Nuaimi said U.S. military officials asked him Friday morning to send someone to pick up Hussein's personal effects, such as clothing, books — including a Koran — and a manuscript Hussein had been writing.

"He was writing his biography," Nuaimi said. "But I don't think he had a chance to complete it."


I wonder if his biography was getting to the part where the USA GHWB and Rumsfeld started to support him and his dictatorship? Maybe how be bought chemical and biological bad bugs from the USA?

Dead men don't finish stories?


Saladin said...

After a sinister year, it's down to us to protect our freedoms

Henry Porter
London Observer
Sunday, December 31, 2006

An article in the New Scientist has reported that a rhesus monkey named Murph and a bottlenose dolphin called Natua, which lives in a harbour in Florida, have both exhibited a fascinating ability when doing reward-based tests. As well as being able to understand when they answered right or wrong, they learned to signal when they didn't know something and so avoid the disappointment of being wrong. Like Mastermind contestants, they elected to 'pass'.

Knowing what you don't know is a type of abstract thought process called metacognition. A pigeon doesn't know what it doesn't know, but Murph and Natua do and that means they are both very intelligent and have a basic requirement for consciousness.
It occurred to me that during 2006, most of us have been exhibiting precisely the opposite to Murph and Natua's talent. We don't know what we know. Or, rather, we chose not to know the incontestable and unequivocal truth about the character of this government. Certainly, we know about the sale of peerages, the scandal over the manipulation of legal advice and intelligence before the Iraq war, the constant move to centralise power and authority at the expense of ordinary people and the associated contempt for parliamentary scrutiny.

We knew these things, but decided not to know them in the political sense, that is, to remain conscious of them, to hold them at the front of our minds and create the weight of opinion necessary to restrain a government.

So we must accept part of the responsibility for this government's high-handed behaviour, though the lion's share goes to Tony Blair and those members of his cabinet who have been most active in the degradation of standards and the general attack on liberty, which has been unapologetically the concern of this column for so much of 2006.

A year ago, it was difficult not to be depressed. The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act was about to come into force and so allow the police to arrest anyone for any offence and take their fingerprints, photo and DNA whether they were charged or not. Ahead of us lay the bill which would ban the glorification of terrorism and the ID card bill, both of which were passed after forlorn opposition in the Lords. There were many measures we had no idea about. The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, for instance, which lurked in Labour's programme and offered ministers the chance to bypass parliament and make laws by decree. This was watered down a little after a few in the press alerted MPs to the actual nature of the bill.

We had no such luck with the slew of criminal justice legislation announced by John Reid, Charles Clarke's replacement at the Home office. The police demanded and received legislation allowing them discretionary powers that properly belong to the courts. Barely a week went by without Reid unveiling a tough new package to address terrorism, organised crime or delinquency. The theme of this legislation was to reduce defendants' rights and make the business of obtaining a conviction easier.

And still the nation slept, believing that in some way this frenzy of law-making was benevolent and protective rather than a menace to the rule of law. A year has gone past, but can anyone honestly say that they feel more secure after all this activity? Of course not, because the effect of late-period Blair legislation has been to extend the powers of the executive and of the police - who have got everything they wanted from him - while diminishing the individual and his rights...
This article is in regard to Britain, but the parallels are no mere coincidence. Capt, like you said, we are a nation asleep. The people better wake up, or God help us.

capt said...

I suspect God might just stand back and let us get what we have been asking for.

A "good father" only warns his child about a hot oven so many times before he has to let the child learn what that warning means.

So to speak.

God gives every bird its food, but He does not throw it into its nest.
~ J. G. Holland


Saladin said...

End of Another Year... You Know Your Country is in Trouble When:
Source: riverbend blog

Friday, December 29, 2006

1. The UN has to open a special branch just to keep track of the chaos and bloodshed, UNAMI. 2. Abovementioned branch cannot be run from your country. 3. The politicians who worked to put your country in this sorry state can no longer be found inside of, or anywhere near, its borders. 4. The only thing the US and Iran can agree about is the deteriorating state of your nation. 5. An 8-year war and 13-year blockade are looking like the country's 'Golden Years'. 6. Your country is purportedly 'selling' 2 million barrels of oil a day, but you are standing in line for 4 hours for black market gasoline for the generator. 7. For every 5 hours of no electricity, you get one hour of public electricity and then the government announces it's going to cut back on providing that hour. 8. Politicians who supported the war spend tv time debating whether it is 'sectarian bloodshed' or 'civil war'. 9. People consider themselves lucky if they can actually identify the corpse of the relative that's been missing for two weeks.

A day in the life of the average Iraqi has been reduced to identifying corpses, avoiding car bombs and attempting to keep track of which family members have been detained, which ones have been exiled and which ones have been abducted.

2006 has been, decidedly, the worst year yet. No- really. The magnitude of this war and occupation is only now hitting the country full force. It's like having a big piece of hard, dry earth you are determined to break apart. You drive in the first stake in the form of an infrastructure damaged with missiles and the newest in arms technology, the first cracks begin to form. Several smaller stakes come in the form of politicians like Chalabi, Al Hakim, Talbani, Pachachi, Allawi and Maliki. The cracks slowly begin to multiply and stretch across the once solid piece of earth, reaching out towards its edges like so many skeletal hands. And you apply pressure. You surround it from all sides and push and pull. Slowly, but surely, it begins coming apart- a chip here, a chunk there.

That is Iraq right now. The Americans have done a fine job of working to break it apart. This last year has nearly everyone convinced that that was the plan right from the start. There were too many blunders for them to actually have been, simply, blunders. The 'mistakes' were too catastrophic. The people the Bush administration chose to support and promote were openly and publicly terrible- from the conman and embezzler Chalabi, to the terrorist Jaffari, to the militia man Maliki. The decisions, like disbanding the Iraqi army, abolishing the original constitution, and allowing militias to take over Iraqi security were too damaging to be anything but intentional.

The question now is, but why? I really have been asking myself that these last few days. What does America possibly gain by damaging Iraq to this extent? I'm certain only raving idiots still believe this war and occupation were about WMD or an actual fear of Saddam.
And only a truly naive person could ever believe that total chaos and destruction were not the main goals. I guess in that sense, we HAVE won.

capt said...

Operationally, God is beginning to resemble not a ruler but the last fading smile of a cosmic Cheshire cat.
~ Sir Julian Huxley (1887 - 1975)

Hajji said...

3,000th US serviceperson killed in Iraq, today.

"Why should we hear about body bags and deaths," Barbara Bush said on ABC's "Good Morning America" on March 18, 2003. "Oh, I mean, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?"

-Idiot incubator Babs Bush

Saladin said...

I want to post the last part of riverbend's blog essay.

...My only conclusion is that the Americans want to withdraw from Iraq, but would like to leave behind a full-fledged civil war because it wouldn't look good if they withdraw and things actually begin to improve, would it?

Here we come to the end of 2006 and I am sad. Not simply sad for the state of the country, but for the state of our humanity, as Iraqis. We've all lost some of the compassion and civility that I felt made us special four years ago. I take myself as an example. Nearly four years ago, I cringed every time I heard about the death of an American soldier. They were occupiers, but they were humans also and the knowledge that they were being killed in my country gave me sleepless nights. Never mind they crossed oceans to attack the country, I actually felt for them.

Had I not chronicled those feelings of agitation in this very blog, I wouldn't believe them now. Today, they simply represent numbers. 3000 Americans dead over nearly four years? Really? That's the number of dead Iraqis in less than a month. The Americans had families? Too bad. So do we. So do the corpses in the streets and the ones waiting for identification in the morgue.

Is the American soldier that died today in Anbar more important than a cousin I have who was shot last month on the night of his engagement to a woman he's wanted to marry for the last six years? I don't think so.

Just because Americans die in smaller numbers, it doesn't make them more significant, does it?
About the author: "A little bit about myself: I'm female, Iraqi and 24. I survived the war. That's all you need to know. It's all that matters these days anyway--Riverbend"
How can we ever answer for this? You think we have plumbed the very bottom of this vile pit, but no, it gets much worse. Happy New Year rings mighty hollow.

capt said...

Happy New Year!: The Year of Republican Corruption

Watch the YouTube HERE

Ava creates her New Year's Eve video with some of the cast of characters that helped bring down the GOP in 2006.


capt said...

Fiat: Let There Be Blight!!

Fiat money has got to be the best racket around. A few years ago I calculated that the interest earned on the national debt amounted to roughly a billion dollars per working day. That’s a pretty good return – mathematically, an infinite return – on "money" created out of thin air by the lender, who does so pursuant to no law that I know of permitting him – a private individual – to create what passes for United States money.

But there are problems, which multiply and become ever more severe as the fiat accumulates. For one thing, it loses its "purchasing power," which is as close as you can come to fixing a value for an intangible "money." That means that continued lending, which is essential if the system is not to implode, becomes more difficult, as the burden of debt accumulates, and the return on future investment may not be sufficient to retire it. And foreigners, holding huge dollar amounts, may be reluctant to acquire any more of the stuff, and dump some of their cache while it will still purchase something. Bad news for dollar creators; if people won’t use/save the stuff, there’s less profit in printing it.

And, of course, there’s the latest problem, recently in the news. The coins, admittedly an insignificant part of the money supply, achieve a value, thanks to their metal content, which exceeds their face value. Embarrassing!


*****end of clip*****

A very good piece.


Saladin said...

Capt, you are starting to sound as negative as me! I say, whatever politician is willing to look that federal reserve beast in the eye and call it what it is is the one I will support 100%! Fuck the rest, they are either traitors or clueless, and we can't afford either.

capt said...


I hope 2007 is a better year for all.


capt said...

BTW - it was 7 degress when I rose this morning. I like cool weather but 7 is ridiculous.


capt said...

A Formal Intervention with a Dry Drunk President

One of the rituals well known to the addiction treatment world is the formal Intervention. The classic Intervention starts with meetings of concerned significant others that are called during a time of crisis. The result is a confrontation of the individual in trouble and an ultimatum of some sort for a drastic change in course (the most famous examples are Interventions of Betty Ford and Elizabeth Taylor for pill use and drinking.)

The long-anticipated report of the Iraq Study Group has been likened in some media reports to the classic treatment Intervention provided to drug users and alcoholics who have "hit bottom." Seething in its criticism, the report (Intervention) made a number of take-it- or-leave-it recommendations. "This is not like fruit salad," the head facilitator later explained; the recommendations must be followed as a whole. Characteristic of a person with an addictive mentality, the president responded in a state of denial as do the "enablers" around him. His supporters are getting fewer and fewer, however. And even his father recently broke into tears. We will return to that later.

The addictive mentality I am talking about is a cognitive impairment that is associated with alcohol-drug use, and may have preceded or followed the addictive behavior. George W. Bush, over his lifetime, has gone from one extreme-extensive and long-term binge drinking and at least some cocaine use-to another-affiliation with religious fundamentalism and authoritarian belief systems that cannot be explained by his religious upbringing. From an elitist background, the junior Bush was able to build a political base from a cultural group that was arguably alien from his own. (See What's the Matter with Kansas?)

For an understanding of this phenomenon of how the drinking and drug use affects patterns of thinking, we need to look at brain research. The most recent brain research, now revolutionized by technological advances in brain imaging, confirms what members of A.A. have known for years, labeled by them, the dry drunk phenomenon. Rigidity, poor impulse control, grandiosity, and all-or-nothing or black and white thinking are the classic characteristics. (See "the dry drunk syndrome" on google.) We now know that once the heavy drinking and/or other drug use stops, a certain amount of cognitive impairment may persist. We also know, however, that the brain can actually be "rewired" through cognitive work.


*****end of clip*****

Or conversely the drug and alcohol abuse can be a symptom of other mental health issues/problems/disorders. Either way the effects of abuse are recorded as damage to the brain and cognitive functions and many times the damage is permanent.

I see impeachment as an intervention, a necessary intervention.


capt said...

Iraqis learn the art of legal "workarounds"


So this is the grand and noble achievement which the President and his band of bloodthirsty followers are reduced to celebrating -- a lawless, thugish hanging, carried out in clear and deliberate violation of the law, by a bunch of homicidal street thugs and militia foot soldiers who themselves will be included among our next kill targets once our glorious "sustained surge" begins.

No matter what we touch in Iraq, no matter what we do, it only makes things worse -- never better -- because the root of what we are doing is itself so rotted and incoherent and corrupt. It's beyond doubt that we're going to be treated to much more "freedom" and "justice" like this over the next two years in Iraq, at least.


*****end of clip*****

I think I linked to the Chris Floyd piece on a previous thread - if not it is linked by Glenn.


Saladin said...

Floyd is right, that there could even be a debate among dems is just stunning. Their whining that they were misled is not only bullshit but proves complicity if they don't bring this war to an end, in the "first 100 hours" it should begin. Pouring billions more into a lost cause will prove where their loyalties are, certainly not with the troops or America.

Saladin said...

Iran Seeks Condemnation of Israeli Nukes

Guardian UK

Iran demanded Tuesday that the U.N. Security Council condemn what it said was Israel's clandestine development of nuclear weapons and ``compel'' it to place all its nuclear facilities under U.N. inspection.
If Israel refuses to comply, Iran said the council must take ``resolute action'' under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter which authorizes a range of measures from diplomatic and economic sanctions to military action.
Now the shoe is on the other foot. Seems the pot has been very busy calling all the kettles black! Come on Israel the eternal victim, show us your secrets as you demand of your neighbors on pain of total destruction, or are you anti-semite?

capt said...

Time to Reflect As Iraq Toll Hits 3,000

"These people, you just see the apathy in them and you're like, `Why am I here?' You know?" says Staff Sgt. Jeremy Plaxton, who served with Dreasky. "If they don't want it, I can't make them accept freedom and fight for it.

"Personally," he says, "I wouldn't give up one Dreasky for the entire country of Iraq."


*****end of clip*****

I did not know Dreasky, we would not have been friends or pals but I kind of know each of the 3,000 lives lost and I would not give up one of them for the entire country of Iraq either.

These are our American heroes (men and women). They bravely put their lives on the line to protect and defend America and our constitution.

Bush has wasted that precious sacrifice like tissues for his mucous filled lies and his abject failure and dishonor.


capt said...

Do Galaxies Follow Darwinian Evolution?


Scientists have known for several decades that galaxies in the Universe's past look different to those in the present-day Universe, local to the Milky Way [3]. Today, galaxies can be roughly classified as red, when few or no new stars are being born, or blue, where star formation is still ongoing. Moreover, a strong correlation exists between a galaxy's colour and the environment it resides in: the more sociable types found in dense clusters are more likely to be red than the more isolated ones.

By looking back at a wide range of galaxies of a variety of ages, the astronomers were aiming to study how this peculiar correlation has evolved over time.

"Using VIMOS, we were able to use the largest sample of galaxies currently available for this type of study, and because of the instrument's ability to study many objects at a time we obtained many more measurements than previously possible," said Angela Iovino, from the Brera Astronomical Observatory, Italy, another member of the team.

The team's discovery of a marked variation in the 'colour-density' relationship, depending on whether a galaxy is found in a cluster or alone, and on its luminosity, has many potential implications. The findings suggest for example that being located in a cluster quenches a galaxy's ability to form stars more quickly compared with those in isolation. Luminous galaxies also run out of star-forming material at an earlier time than fainter ones.

They conclude that the connection between galaxies' colour, luminosity and their local environment is not merely a result of primordial conditions 'imprinted' during their formation - but just as for humans, galaxies' relationship and interactions can have a profound impact on their evolution.


*****end of clip*****

WOW! You must look at the picture in the link - very interesting to say the least.


Saladin said...

A helix eh? What an amazing coincidence! Very cool, thanks Capt.

Saladin said...

A Look Back & Ahead In
The Age Of Neocon Rule
By Stephen Lendman

It's long past time to put an end to this criminal class of rogues in charge, running the country like their private fiefdom in a culture of galling corruption and scorn for the law that exceeds anything here ever preceding their tenure. Already there's a groundswell of growing outrage slowly building in size and intensity. As the new year approaches, it remains to be seen if a combination of those people of conscience can unite with enough others in the body politic to give us all what everyone should want and demand - an end to wars, a renewed respect for the law, accountability for those in government who violated it, and a commitment to serve the public interest with equity and equal justice for all in the true spirit of a real democracy restored from the grave and once again respected and cherished.
That is just the last paragraph of a marvelous essay, long but well worth reading.

kathleen said...

David Corns assessment for 2007 is discouraging.

If our newly elected representatives vote to support this escalation based on what Frederick Kagan, Bill Kristol, Cheney and Keanes recommend instead of what the majority of experts, the Iraqi people and the majority of Americans think then it is evident that all of the efforts made by millions of people in this country and around the world to stop the invasion and now to stop the escalation are absolutely worthless!

If our newly elected representatives vote in January to support this escalation it is crystal clear that they do not give a flying fuck about what the American people think about this fiasco that some of them created in Iraq!

The Bush administration is hell bent on the regime change agenda of the neo-cons in the middle east no matter how many Iraqi people and American soldiers die, are injured, displaced etc.

It is also clear that the need for the anti-war movement anti-fascist movement be ramped up! THEY ARE NOT LISTENING!

These psycho socio-paths have clearly been out of control for quite some time and have done a great deal of damage that many experts say our country may never recover from. (clearly others have been severely effected by their agenda)

Capt the article about the "dry drunk intervention" explains what I have been thinking for quite some time. Many (Bush and Cheney) for sure reflect the behaviour of this pathology. Impeachment is surely the way to conduct the intervention. But I completely agree with John Deans latest article at Findlaw where he recommends that our representatives and the American public target the lower ( but in control) policy analyst and others that "lied" (provided the false intelligence) that was used to convince the American people to support the Bush administrations illegal and brutal agenda in Iraq!

Impeach (which Dean says can be done) these "cakewalk in Iraq" policy analyst creeps (so that they can not do more damage in the future) and then follow the dots to Cheney and Bush.

I have just a tiny bit of hope (Phase II of the SSCI), Plamegate trial, and the Aipac Trial,) that we may still witness JUSTICE in regard to the HOW AND WHY we invaded Iraq!

The very serious need for congressional over sight and accountability and in regard to the how and why we invaded Iraq is the last thread of hope for ACCOUNTABILITY and JUSTICE!

This need to hold those responsible for the how and why we invaded Iraq and the disastrous consequences is the very least that our representatives can do for those who have needlessly lost their lives in this fiasco!

If our representatives do not have the guts to thoroughly invesigate the how and why of Iraq, if they do not have the guts to hold those individuals accountable for the very serious mis-use of intelligence. Then the American people and people around the world will know without any doubts that the U.S. is a soul less a moral country , more concerned with impeaching a president for lying about a blow job under oath than false pre-war intelligence!

Will they take responsibility for this downward sprial? Or will our representatives attempt to paint the picture that the MSM is trying to do in regard to Ford's pardon of Nixon and deprive the American people and the world JUSTICE! Will they come back singing and dancing a bi-partisan theme song "we need to move on, close the door on the pre-war intelligence, move forward" hogwash!

ACCOUNTABILITY is the only hope for our nation and for the way we effect the rest of the world!!


capt said...

Jeeze Kathleen,

I thought we were suppose to celebrate the new (read: neo) Democratic majorities?

I, for one, am glad I didn't break out the party hats and favors.



capt said...

What the Number 3000 Hides

Iraqi guerrillas killed 6 more GIs and AP put the total dead in combat at 2998. The dreadful milestone of 3000 is upon us.

Like all statistics, this one is deceptive. It does not include US troops killed in Afghanistan, that oddly forgotten war where the US still has a division engaging in active combat. Nor is it nice to ignore NATO dead in Afghanistan, including French and Canadians (yes).

The number does not include the Coalition troops killed in Iraq. The sacrifices of the British, Italians, and others should be included.

And why ignore the seriously wounded? These brave warriors have brain damage, or spinal damage, or have lost limbs or been burned and disfigured. There are probably 8000 of them. Their sacrifice should be foregrounded. Life is not going to be easy for them, and they are not going to get that much help from Bush.

Indeed, why not count all the wounded? The number must be near 25000 by now.

Then there are all the Iraq Vets with post traumatic stress disorder and a myriad of other combat related mental diseases. There is alcoholism, domestic violence, divorce.

The true number of Americans and US allies who are in some sense casualties of war is in the tens of thousands.

3000 is a horrible number. But it is not the only dreadful number. By concentrating on it, Washington politicians and the US press hide from us the true magnitude of the problems we face in Iraq and Afghanistan.


*****end of clip*****

Maybe if the MSM starts calling Bush Mr. 3000 they can hide the 655,000 "other" deaths?


kathleen said...


Hope is hanging on by a thread!

What are folks predictions for 2007?

Will Cheney resign for health reasons?

Will the Democrats roll over on investigations "for the health of the nation"? What a crock of horseshit!

Will the MSM continue to mock and be terrified by the blogosphere?

Will tens of thousands of Iraqi people die and not be counted?

Will the Bush administration or Israel pre-emptively attack Iran?

Will Israel ever be pressured to open up to nuclear, biological and chemical weapons inspections? There stockpiles are the reason for the arms race in the middle east!

Will Fitzgerald demonstrate that there is a shred of truth to what he said when he announced the Libby indictment.."that truth is the engine of our judicial system?

Or will he fold?

What are your predictions for 2007?

kathleen said...

Oh I forgot to mention (just the way the Israeli lobby likes it)

Will the Aipac trial be delayed or dismissed?
Will the MSM cover it if it takes place?

Or will CAMERA, JINSA AND AIPAC pressure the media (as they pressured Fox news not to air or leave on their website the four part series by Carl Cameron on "alleged" Israeli spying and their illegal use of communications systems (comverse Insofy and Amdocs) to NOT COVER THIS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TRIAL AND STORY. Has anyone noticed there has barely been a whisper about the AIPAC INVESTIGATION IN THE MAINSTREAM!

capt said...


Lucky for everybody my predictions suck (big time) but if pressed I would say we should expect more of the same BS across the board.

I also predict we will all have to do more, say more, write more, petition more and hold the politicians collective feet to the fire.

Both predictions are obvious cop-outs.

I wish for better government but have yet to see any reason to expect anything better. All politicians say things people want and wish but only once in a while do they even remember their promises.



capt said...

I think the rush to hang Saddam could be out of embarrassement from the Busheney camp for their failure to bring about peace in Iraq.

How much more satisfying would it be to know that Saddam was in a cell watching Iraq come together as a free democracy without his influence?

Oh yeah, nobody EVER spoke to the concept of peace and Iraq is a failed state and all of the Bushbuilt institutions will crumble and turn to shit just like everything Bunnypants has touched.

Quick kill Saddam before he notices he is a more effective leader than Bush, eh?


kathleen said...

My prediction is


The insane right wing radicals are going to turn it on like never before...knowing this may be their last shot to take out Iran's efforts for a balance of power in the middle east..

The last several Aipac conferences have been fixated on Iran...they will be turning up the heat and deceit!


kathleen said...

If Saddam would have been given a fair trial, Bush , Cheney, Rumsfeld,Wolfowitz, Feith and others would have been hung right along side of Saddam!

Just where did all of those records and computer records that the U.S. forces confiscated from Iraq as soon as we invaded go?

capt said...

Iran is the worst thing they can do - so it is likely.

I still have hope but . . .


kathleen said...

Saladin, I went to the Guardian website and to the UN website to see if that article that you posted about IRAN DEMANDING THAT ISRAEL OPEN ITS NUCLEAR BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL STOCKPILES TO INSPECTIONS was longer or more in depth.

I could not find it.

Also googled "Iran demands that Israel sign the NPT and opens its door to inspections and could not find anything.

Telling when you google anything about Israel signing on or opening its doors to inspections all you get is articles about Irans program and the pressure being applied.


Saladin said...

Kathleen, here is the full article, linked at What Really Happened.

Iran Seeks Condemnation of Israeli Nukes

What is truly telling is whether they are allowed to get away with keeping secret what they insist everyone else must reveal.

Saladin said...

My predictions, more of the same, only worse. The dems will do nothing but spew hot air and war will continue to rage while Israel pulls the strings. I seriously believe there is some big time blackmail going on, it's the only explanation I can think of to explain that little terrorist nation's stranglehold on most of our politicians. It is most likely related to 9/11 and the perverted behavior of our so- called "Christian" leaders, complete with photos and audio.

kathleen said...

Thanks Saladin..I think folks should send that post out to Raw Story, Huffington Post etc. and other sites who claim to be progressive ( but do not post any coverage of Israel that paints Israel or the Israeli lobby in a bad light).


kathleen said...

This paper about the Israeli ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian is a must read!

Journal of Palestine Studies
issue 141, published in Fall 2006

The 1948 Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
by Ilan Pappé

Gerald said...

Nazi America's Number One Psycho

Gerald said...

Unlike Hitler in his last days, who had no armies or recourse, Bush has more than a few options should he suffer any form of breakdown - should he become aware that he has no escape from those whom he has infuriated - and none of them are in anyone's best interest, including his. But something makes me think that consequences mean little to Bush. Maybe it's the last six years.

Rather than a statesman who is capable of accepting responsibility, Bush reminds me of the petulant child who finds he's losing a game of Monopoly. I have an image of that child sweeping the board in a single stroke and stomping off home, huffing and puffing - leaving the rest of us to clean up the mess.

Sur le Guard, America.

Gerald said...

Stand Guard Against the America's Holy Warriors

capt said...

Another nation is made out to be utterly depraved and fiendish, while one's own nation stands for everything that is good and noble. Every action of the enemy is judged by one standard - every action of oneself by another. Even good deeds by the enemy are considered a sign of particular devilishness, meant to deceive us and the world, while our bad deeds are necessary and justified by our noble goals, which they serve.: Eric Fromm

In the struggle of Good against Evil, it's always the people who get killed.: Eduardo Galeano

"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.": Bishop Desmond Tutu -(1931- ) Nobel Prize for Peace 1984

"It's not enough to have lived. We should be determined to live for something. May I suggest that it be creating joy for others, sharing what we have for the betterment of personkind, bringing hope to the lost and love to the lonely.": Leo Buscaglia, author and university professor (1924- 1998)


Read this newsletter online

Thanks ICH Newsletter!

capt said...

The 1948 Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
Ilan Pappé


This article, excerpted and adapted from the early chapters of a new book, emphasizes the systematic preparations that laid the ground for the expulsion of more than 750,000 Palestinians from what became Israel in 1948. While sketching the context and diplomatic and political developments of the period, the article highlights in particular a multi-year "Village Files" project (1940–47) involving the systematic compilation of maps and intelligence for each Arab village and the elaboration—under the direction of an inner "caucus" of fewer than a dozen men led by David Ben-Gurion—of a series of military plans culminating in Plan Dalet, according to which the 1948 war was fought. The article ends with a statement of one of the author’s underlying goals in writing the book: to make the case for a paradigm of ethnic cleansing to replace the paradigm of war as the basis for the scholarly research of, and the public debate about, 1948.


*****end of clip*****

Here is that piece linked up~!


capt said...

Iran: Olmert's comments threaten ME


The Arab League also called on the international community and the UN Security Council Wednesday to exert pressure on Israel to open up its nuclear facilities, in the wake of Olmert's remarks.

"Pressure must be exerted on Israel through the International Atomic Energy Agency to open its nuclear facilities in a transparent manner," Muhammad Sobeih, the assistant secretary-general in charge of Palestinian affairs, told reporters.

"It is essential that Israel comply with international resolutions," he said.

The 22-member body called on "all states which offered assistance to Israel, particularly on the issues of uranium and heavy water to speak out without delay," Sobeih said.

"Everyone knows that Israel possesses weapons of mass destruction which could reach as far as 2,000 km. and all Arab capitals are within this range," he added.


*****end of clip*****

Not just Iran but the Arab League.

One might be tempted to think this deserved some MSM coverage? I may have missed it but the above is from 12/14?


capt said...

Apt cartoon


Saladin said...

Capt, Israel need do no such thing. They, like bushco, are above the law, the law applies to you and me, not them. They can murder freely, if we fail to pay a speeding ticket it is straight to the dungeon!

Saladin said...

“What about Zionists’ nukes?”
12/25/2006 3:00:00 PM GMT

Al Jazeera

The measures adopted unanimously Saturday by the 15 UNSC members were the first concrete steps taken against Iran’s nuclear program, which the U.S. and its European allies charge is being used as a guise for some hidden developments aimed at producing nuclear weapons, claims that had been rejected by the Islamic Republic more than once.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Husseini rejected the sanctions imposed by the UN, saying they won’t “affect or limit Iran's peaceful nuclear activities but will discredit the decisions of the Security Council, whose power is deteriorating”.

"Ratifying this resolution is an illegal measure outside the jurisdiction of the Security Council and contradicting the regulations of the United Nations charter."

"Some of the members of the Security Council, especially the United States ... Do not commit themselves to the NPT and freely provide this technology and equipment to other countries and do not commit themselves to any of the articles of nuclear disarmament," he said. "On the contrary they develop their nuclear arsenals."

"This decision cannot stand against the will of the Iranian nation," the spokesman added.

The UN decision was criticised by many analysts who argue that the UN Nuclear watchdog was never able to present an evidence that Tehran’s nuclear activities were crossing the limits of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, an international treaty opened for signature on July 1, 1968 with the aim of limiting the spread of nuclear arms, and signed by Iran.

The Council on the other hand continues to ignore the threat posed by Israel's nuclear capabilities.

The Israeli government itself, which has long relied on "strategic ambiguity" regarding the possession of nuclear weapons, neither confirming nor denying their existence, indirectly admitted recently that it has nuclear weapons.

In a German TV interview aired earlier this month, the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert implied for the first time that his country had nuclear weapons.

"Iran, openly, explicitly and publicly threatens to wipe Israel off the map. Can you say that this is the same level, when they are aspiring to have nuclear weapons, as America, France, Israel, and Russia?" He said.

Israel, widely thought to have built between 80 and 200 nuclear warheads since the late 1960s, has long been accusing Iran of having an atomic weapons programe.

But Israel, believed to have the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal, has constantly refused to discuss the matter, under an "ambiguity" policy aimed at deterring regional foes.

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, visiting Kazakhstan, called on the world community to take action.

"Their prime minister has announced they have got nuclear arms. It does not show their strength. It shows their weakness. They are afraid," Mottaki told reporters in the Kazakh capital Astana.

"The international community should react to this in an appropriate way," he said.

The International Community, which has long supported and the U.S. and Israel’s calls for adopting tough policy against Iran to force it suspend its nuclear program, stood silent, refusing to take any measure against Israel, despite the clear message embedded in the Israeli Premier’s remarks.

An official statement issued by the Iranian Foreign Ministry following the UNSC vote stated that:

“Today, when the Zionist entity is not willing to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty or agree to supervision by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), when the Security Council is doing nothing in response to the Zionist prime minister’s public announcement regarding the entity’s nuclear capabilities, Iran does not accept the Security Council’s discriminating treatment regarding its nuclear program.

“The Iranian people will not gable on their fate.”

"What the hell are they doing? They even stopped and opposed a resolution that it is a concern of (the) international community that Israel has a nuclear capability," said Ali Ashgar Soltanieh, the chief Iranian representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

It is shameful for the world to turn a blind eye to the threat posed by the Israeli nuclear might which had been confirmed by Israel’s Prime Minister’s recent remarks.

The UN decision to impose sanctions on Iran is a clear sign that the world body is employing a double-standard in its divergent approaches to the world’s nuclear countries.
This is such bullshit. The only reason Israel is bitching is because they don't want their nuclear hegemony in the middle east challenged. There are oil pipelines to consider as well as being the main bully of the region. They can have nuclear secrets, but will not stand for the least bit of competition. Their very existence hinges on a parisitic relationship with the west, based on perpetual fear and victimization that has been fed for 60 years. When does it stop?

capt said...

New Thread!