Monday, December 18, 2006

At Sea

I'm traveling this week--on The Nation cruise. Posting will be intermittent, at best. The buffet bar calls....

Posted by David Corn at December 18, 2006 02:03 PM


rbs62 said...

Mr. Corn

Thank you for your work on Hubris and the information therein, however, your take on Impeachment might rather be called, "Adrift."

capt said...

Iran to replace dollar with euro in foreign deals

TEHRAN: Iran announced Monday it has ordered the central bank to use euros for foreign transactions and transform the state's dollar-denominated assets held abroad into the single European currency.

"The government has ordered the central bank to replace the dollar with the euro to limit the problems of the executive organs in commercial transactions," government spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham told reporters.

"We will also employ this change for Iranian assets in dollars held abroad."

Elham implied that the move would apply to oil revenues from the world's number four crude producer, although it remains to be seen how the market would receive this.

"Foreign income sources and oil revenues will be calculated in euros and we will receive them in euros in order to put an end to our dependence on the dollar," Elham said.


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

It would seem only fair if we had a plan to change from our dependence on oil. Sweden has a plan. We lack a plan to even reduce our dependence.


Um, not "Adrift" just wrong.

rbs62 said...

Well, to push the metaphor, and I was jest tryin' to make a funny, here's hopin' a large enough tide can carry the recalcitrant.

Gerald said...

Iran's fate is sealed. Since Iran is going to the euro, she will be attacked. One of the reasons for attacking Iraq is that Iraq would change to the euro.

It is a done deal Iran will be nuked!!!!!!!!!!

Gerald said...

U.S. is losing in Iraq

rbs62 said...

08 Presidential Hopeful Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) Spends Night in Prison
Sunday, December 10, 2006


So, I had heard about this story, and as is my wont, I decided to call his office, and to the best that I can relate the story, though don't take these as verbatum:

Sam Brownback's Office Staff Memeber: "Senator Brownback's office."

Me: "Yes, goodmorning, how are you?"

SBOSM: "Fine, can I help you?"

Me: "Yes, I'm calling today because I understand the Senator spent the night in a prison the other night?"

SBOSM: "That's right."

Me: "Yes, and I wanted to commend him - well, first let me point out that I'm a very liberal (quick shorthand for my point, anyway) democrat from Los Angeles and I wanted to commend the Senator for bringing the Prison issue into the discussion.

SBOSM: "Thank you."

Me: "Yes, well you see I think it is a very important issue, considering, as I'm sure you are aware, that there are now 2.2 Million Americans in custody right now and over 7 Million under some form of custodial supervision such as probation or parole, and that this is the largest prison population in the world numerically as well as per capita, and I just wondered why the Senator thought that was so?"

SBOSM: "The Senator was trying to highlight a program to reduce recidivism rates."

Me: "I understand that, but does the Senator think that Americans are the Worst People in the World?"

SBOSM: "Uh, Excuse Me...could you hold on?"

-On Hold, 2 mins?-

SBOSM: "Sorry about that, but what are you getting at?"

Me: "I realize that the Senator has taken an interest in the Prison issue, and I commend that, and I was wondering to what did the Senator attribute our largest in the world prison population to? Is it something inherent in our legislation, or are Americans the Worst People in the World?"

SBOSM: I can't comment on that.

Gerald said...


Gerald said...

A scathing blend of humor and serious commentary, DUMBASS is a book you will read, re-read and share with friends for years to come. (or until the end of the world....whichever comes first.)

Gerald said...

U.S. can't leave the black gold

Gerald said...

U.S. troops are only worsening the situation. They should leave. But that would involve giving up control over a country Washington has already spent $400 billion trying to subdue. And then how would America get control of all that oil?

Gerald said...

The face of a madman

O'Reilly said...


Enjoy the all-inclusive cruise and don't forget to try the mm-peachment parfait. You see, with so many layers it's a sure hit.

Have you aver said to somebody, you want some parfait? And they said, no I don't like no parfait? Parfait must be the most delicious thing on the whole damn planet and mm-peachment parfait the most delicios of all.

Protect our nation of laws. Investigate government and where law-breaking exists, hold the guilty accountable. Protect our nation of laws.

O'Reilly said...

Scathing criticism of left wing political opportunists in five easy pieces

One The Nation.
Two lawless governemnt.
Three wars of agression.
Four call it Hubris and we'll leave it at that.
Five politics first, justice later... maybe.

Gerald said...

Here is how Nazi Americans can recover from their addiction to mass murders and war crimes.

The 12 Steps

We admitted we were powerless over our addiction - that our lives had become unmanageable

Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity

Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood God

Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves

Admitted to God, to ourselves and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs

Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character

Humbly asked God to remove our shortcomings

Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all

Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others

Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it

Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood God, praying only for knowledge of God's will for us and the power to carry that out

Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to other addicts, and to practice these principles in all our affairs

Gerald said...

Return to LOVE ONE ANOTHER AS I HAVE LOVED YOU. Jesus of Nazareth

David B. Benson said...

David Corn --- Bon voyage!

O'Reilly said...

Free Speech unless of course your speech is critical of US foriegn policy.

O'Reilly said...

"'He is the only president that invaded a country without provocation and without it being started by the other side. I think he has gained a lot of enmity.... There are a lot of people who resent this president, both externally and internally, some of whom have lost sons and daughters and had people injured in the war in Iraq"

- Former Secret Service agent John Vance

O'Reilly said...

"CNN said today that President Bush is seriously considering sending more troops to Iraq. So apparently, his goal is to achieve a negative popularity rating."

- Leno

O'Reilly said...

War Slogan Memorial

O'Reilly said...

more on White House Censors Alert

...Ironically, the White House attempt to stop high-level discussion of talking to Iran comes just as the Iranian public dealt a slap in the face to extremist President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, who stole the presidential elections in summer of 2005. Former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani appears to have trounced Ahmadinejad's own favorite cleric, Mohammad Taqi Misbah Yazdi, an authoritarian anti-democrat.

David B. Benson said...

O'Reilly --- Just a note to remind everyone that Vance is not strictly correct. Let's see: How many armed interventions south of the border, beginning with the war with Mexico?
The faked pretext of the Spanish-American war? And what about Vietnam now?

Unfortunately, Bush 43 is not in this Hall of Infamy all by his lonesome...

capt said...

"Macaca" named most politically incorrect word

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - "Macaca" you are number one.

The word "macaca," used by outgoing Republican Sen. George Allen of Virginia to describe a Democratic activist of Indian descent who was trailing his campaign, was named the most politically incorrect word of the year on Friday by Global Language Monitor, a nonprofit group that studies word usage.

"The word might have changed the political balance of the U.S. Senate, since Allen's utterance (an offensive slang term for Indians from the Sub-continent) surely impacted his election bid," said the group's head, Paul JJ Payack.

Allen narrowly lost to Democrat James Webb in November, helping make it possible for the Democrats to capture control of the Senate.

In second place on this year's list was "Global Warming Denier," for someone who believes that climate change has moved from scientific theory to dogma.

"There are now proposals that 'global warming deniers' be treated the same as 'Holocaust deniers: professional ostracism, belittlement, ridicule and, even, jail," Payack said.

In third was "Herstory" substituting for "History." Payack said there are nearly 900,000 Google citations for "Herstory," all based on a mistaken assumption that "history" is a sexist word.

"When Herodotus wrote the first history, the word meant simply an 'inquiry,'" he said.


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

Other than the "N" word and a word often used to describe a bundle of sticks (or cigarettes) in the UK I can think of many words that have transcended politically incorrect and just sound stupid.

How about the oxymoronic "Listening Tour" all politicians use to tell groups of people with what they should agree?


Saladin said...

"Unfortunately, Bush 43 is not in this Hall of Infamy all by his lonesome..."
D. Benson, I am SO glad you brought that up. The US is NOTORIOUS for starting wars and perpetuating general mayhem in countries that have something the powers that be want.
Capt, "Global Warming Denier?" That's a good one! Can you go to prison like the Holocaust deniers can? Idiots! Thought crimes and the punishments they bring, what about real crimes, like the ones bushco are so guilty of?

capt said...

In Genocide’s Wake

Here in the United States, it's easy to forget that there is a whole world of suffering outside of the Middle East. Reuters AlertNet offers coverage of areas of crises worldwide.

But as the old saying goes, "a picture is worth a thousand words". And the case of Vanity Fair's photo essay, those words have to include "devastation", "horrific" and "heartbreaking". If only we put half as much energy and resources into quelling this crime against humanity as we have "looking" for mythical WMDs in Iraq.


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

When profit is the only goal some people die. It is a simple cost/benefit formula. Much cheaper to kill people than to pay them for oil and mineral rights. Simple math for the amoral.


capt said...

U.S. to triple number of military trainers in Iraq

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The U.S. military plans to speed up the training of Iraq's army by tripling its number of embedded trainers to about 9,000, while keeping a close eye on units' sectarian loyalties, a U.S. general said on Sunday.

Brigadier General Dana Pittard, whose Iraqi Assistance Group oversees training of Iraq's security forces, also said each of the nine police brigades would be taken off the streets over the next nine months for one month-long training.

A number of police units have been accused of colluding with, or being infiltrated by Shi'ite militia death squads targeting minority Sunnis. An explosion of sectarian violence since February has pushed the country toward all-out civil war.


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

Deja Vu all over again.


capt said...

Learning to love Big Brother - George W. Bush channels George Orwell

Here's a question for constitutional scholars: Can a sitting president be charged with plagiarism?

As President Bush wages his war against terrorism and moves to create a huge homeland security apparatus, he appears to be borrowing heavily, if not ripping off ideas outright, from George Orwell. The work in question is "1984, " the prophetic novel about a government that controls the masses by spreading propaganda, cracking down on subversive thought and altering history to suit its needs. It was intended to be read as a warning about the evils of totalitarianism -- not a how-to manual.

Granted, we're a long way from resembling the kind of authoritarian state Orwell depicted, but some of the similarities are starting to get a bit eerie.


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

You will enjoy the "Thought Police" section at the link.

"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."
~ Soren Kierkegaard (1813 - 1855)


capt said...

Glenn has some guest bloggers sitting in. Some of it is interesting.

CHeck it at:


capt said...

"It [1984] was intended to be read as a warning about the evils of totalitarianism -- not a how-to manual."

THAT line cracked me right up!


The piece linked was from 2002 - somewhat prescient, eh?


capt said...

Showdown Looms Over Domestic Spying

Federal agents continue to eavesdrop on Americans' electronic communications without warrants a year after President Bush confirmed the practice, and experts say a new Congress' efforts to limit the program could trigger a constitutional showdown.

High-ranking Democrats set to take control of both chambers are mulling ways to curb the program Bush secretly authorized a month after the Sept. 11 attacks. The White House argues the Constitution gives the president wartime powers to eavesdrop that he wouldn't have during times of peace.

"As a practical matter, the president can do whatever he wants as long as he has the capacity and executive branch officials to do it," said Carl Tobias, a legal scholar at the University of Richmond in Virginia.

Lawmakers could impeach or withhold funding, or quash judicial nominations, among other measures.

The president, however, can veto legislation, including a law demanding the National Security Agency obtain warrants before monitoring communications. Such a veto would force Congress to muster a two-thirds vote to override.

"He could take the position he doesn't have to comply with whatever a new Congress says," said Vikram Amar, a law professor at the University of California, Hastings, and a former Supreme Court clerk.


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

Impeachment could be used to compel a unitary dictator to follow the law. If there is no potential justice why would some low-life like Bunnypants even care? He will just do as he pleases without a care in the world for the people, justice or the constitution.


capt said...

US debt: Devil in the details

On Monday, the US Commerce Department reported that the third-quarter 2006 current-account deficit was US$225.6 billion, up from $217.1 billion in the second quarter.

The current account is the broadest measure of the US trade balance. In addition to trade in goods and services, it includes income received from US investments abroad less payments to foreigners on their investments in the United States.

In the second quarter, higher oil prices and surging imports of consumer goods from China drove the trade deficit. Also, the lack of exciting, reliable, fuel-efficient vehicles at General Motors and Ford weighed heavily as well.

In the third quarter, the current-account deficit was 6.8% of gross domestic product (GDP) and was financed largely by borrowing from foreigners, as opposed to foreigners investing in productive assets in the United States.

Anatomy of the deficit

The United States had an $18.3 billion surplus on trade in services. This was hardly enough to offset the massive $218.6 billion deficit on trade in goods and the $3.8 billion deficit on interest, dividends and other transnational income payments. The remainder of the current-account deficit came from US transfer payments to foreign individuals and governments, which was $21.5 billion.


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

There is always a devil in there somewhere, eh?


Gerald said...

A great war leaves the country with three armies - an army of cripples, an army of mourners, and an army of thieves. German proverb

Gerald said...

A paragraph from Margie Burns' article in today's Smirking Chimp (12-19-06) "Bush Grand Plan..."

Admittedly the hypothetical explanation advanced here predicates an administration of almost incomprehensible megalomania, hysterical greed and self-importance, delusions of grandeur, and the desire to cover up past defalcations of the public trust with the smokescreen of war as long as possible. But the alternative hypothesis – more rational, if that’s the word -- is that additional troops in the Middle East might not be destined for Iraq. The Pentagon’s most recent announcement, that U.S. ships are being deployed near Iran, gives rise to alternative speculations. (Moving against Iran, which is now about to switch from the dollar to the Euro – a plan also projected by Saddam, shortly before the invasion of Iraq – would display the same attributes, of course.)

Iran's move to go to the euro is the reason for Nazi America to attack Iran!!!!! We have a maniac in the WH!!!!!

My God, my God, how much longer will you let Nazi America's mass murders and war crimes go unpunished???

Now is the acceptable time to punish Nazi America!!!!! Nazi America is the most evil, vile, and wicked nation on Earth!!!!!

Gerald said...

December 19, 2006 at 06:51:02

Top Ten Ways to Change the World in 2007

by Mickey Z.

1. Wear a "Free Tibet" t-shirt
2. Switch to recycled toilet paper
3. Watch Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert
4. Adopt a Third World orphan
5. Start a discussion about Africa
6. Eat free range chicken
7. Drive a hybrid SUV
8. Subscribe to The Nation
9. Chant for peace in your yoga class
10. Vote Democrat

Mickey Z. can be found on the Web at

capt said...

It is starting to snow!

We will have a white Christmas in Albuquerque!


Gerald said...

I have decided that I will settle the LIFE issue that is dividing Nazi America.

Life does not begin at conception!!! Life does not begin at birth!!!!! LIFE BEGINS FOR THE PARENTS WHEN THE KIDS LEAVE THE NEST!!!!!

Saladin said...

Gerald, vote democrat? And that will accomplish what exactly? Allow the murderers to get away with, well, murder? I say give every damn one, left and right, who voted to give bush a blank check to throw innocent countries against the wall the boot and start fresh with people who BELIEVE in our constitution, not just give it lip service!

Saladin said...

Hillary Clinton, War Goddess
She wants permanent bases in Iraq –and threatens war with Iran

by Justin Raimondo

As the war in Iraq metastasizes into what General William E. Odom calls "the greatest strategic disaster in United States history," and the cost in lives and treasure continues to escalate, we are already being set up for Act II of the neocons' Middle East war scenario – with the Democrats taking up where the Republicans left off.

The Bush administration, for all its bellicose rhetoric, has shown little stomach for directly confronting Tehran, and this has prompted Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton to take on the Bushies for supposedly ignoring the alleged threat from Iran. Speaking at Princeton University on the occasion of the Wilson School's 75th anniversary celebration, Clinton aligned herself with such Republican hawks as Sen. John McCain and the editorial board of the Weekly Standard, calling for sanctions and implicitly threatening war:

"I believe that we lost critical time in dealing with Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and to outsource the negotiations. I don't believe you face threats like Iran or North Korea by outsourcing it to others and standing on the sidelines. But let's be clear about the threat we face now: A nuclear Iran is a danger to Israel, to its neighbors and beyond. The regime's pro-terrorist, anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric only underscores the urgency of the threat it poses. U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal. We cannot and should not – must not – permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons. In order to prevent that from occurring, we must have more support vigorously and publicly expressed by China and Russia, and we must move as quickly as feasible for sanctions in the United Nations. And we cannot take any option off the table in sending a clear message to the current leadership of Iran – that they will not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons."

Never mind that Iran is 10 years away from actually producing a usable nuclear weapon, according to the latest National Intelligence Estimate.

This administration's increasingly hysterical statements on the alleged "crisis," supposedly sparked by Iran's resumption of its nuclear energy program, are – as in the case of Iraq – at variance with the judgment of the mainstream intelligence community. Once again, the Bamboozle Brigade – a bunch of freelancing "experts," shadowy exile groups, foreign lobbyists, and a bipartisan collection of pandering politicians – is mobilizing to gin up a war. These war propagandists, including Clinton, make only the most tenuous connection between American interests and the Iranians' alleged forced march to acquire nukes. Instead, they make the argument in favor of ratcheting up the conflict with Iran in terms of the necessity of protecting Israel. Clinton's speech is infused with this militant Israeli patriotism:

"The security and freedom of Israel must be decisive and remain at the core of any American approach to the Middle East. This has been a hallmark of American foreign policy for more than 50 years and we must not – dare not – waver from this commitment."

While Israel is an American ally, so are Saudi Arabia and Jordan. And don't forget the newly installed "democratic" and supposedly pro-American government of Iraq. Israel "at the core" of U.S. policy in the Middle East? I don't think so. Such an Israelicentric viewpoint, while not out of place in an Israeli politician, seems just a mite strange coming from an American – even if she is a senator from New York. It ought to go without saying that the foundations of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East – or anywhere else – have to be predicated on purely American interests, and that the "core" of that policy has to be our own economic well-being, which is inextricably linked to the stability of the region.

Do we really want to see the price of oil skyrocket to over $100 a barrel? Is it really in our interests – or the interests of the Europeans, for that matter – for Iranian oil assets to be tied to the Euro and other currencies, rather than the dollar? The economic consequences of either eventuality are potentially disastrous for the United States, and yet that is what the reckless Clintonian policy of confrontation with Iran would entail. Unfortunately, however, the grip of the Israeli lobby in the U.S. is so firmly locked around the necks of certain politicians that any rational discussion of what serves our interests – not Israel's – is next to impossible.
YEP, voting democrat will mean BIG changes, just from bad to worse! hillary is another psychotic Israel firster who has no problem slaughtering our troops and thousands more innocents to protect that little terrorist nation who themselves are the only nuclear power in the region. If she is so dedicated to the well being of Israel, even over her own country, she should get over there and fight for them and leave us out of it!

capt said...

Mohamed Atta’s Best Friend Caught in South Pacific:"You can’t arrest me, I’m working for the CIA."

Daniel Hopsicker is an independent journalist working in Venice, Florida, outside the decommissioned military airstrips where three pilots from the 9/11 attack were trained. Hopsicker found the secret life of 9/11 ring-leader Mohamed Atta, who lead the operation by piloting the first plane into the World Trade Centre. Hopsicker found Atta’s American girlfriend, Amanda Keller. What she said broke new ground for truth-seekers worldwide. Atta had social connections and a party-boy life that indicated there was more to his story than people had been told. The American media establishment turned a blind eye to Hopsicker’s work, however. He has been called a "conspiracy theorist" in mainstream media in Florida, when he’s paid any attention at all.

Yet, in November, 2006, Hopsicker’s career turned a corner. Sources connected to the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) told the Megaphone that his work began to be used to track Atta’s former associates. A researcher close to JTTF, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the Megaphone that the "JTTF relied heavily on Daniel's research on Atta and Amanda [Keller]. I faxed them pages from [Hopsicker’s book] Welcome to Terrorland."

The lead paid off: on November 16, 2006, the Joint Terrorism Task Force issued a "Terror Alert" for a certain Wolfgang Bohringer, a German-born, naturalized U.S. citizen who had reportedly partied with and protected Mohamed Atta in Florida. Bohringer’s name came up often in interviews with Amanda Keller. Amanda called the two "inseparable" and described how they had been kicked out of bars together. Atta called Wolfgang "brother" a name he reserved for particular white Europeans.

Why "Brother?" During Atta’s university years in Cairo, the engineering guild that he joined had made him a member of the group Muslim Brotherhood. (9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is also a card-carrying Muslim Brother.) The group has two wings. Their front men in Egypt are non-violent, but the sordid history of the Brotherhood is that, since 1928, its anti-Semitism and anti-Zionist ideologies have made it a partner in crime for Nazis, European fascists, American far-rightists, and their powerful counterparts, the neo-conservatives.

The JTTF swiftly descended on Wolfgang Bohringer, outside Fanning Island, in the South Pacific, about 1000 miles south of Hawaii, on the 17th of November. Sources reported that the arresting officers said, "The first thing out of his mouth made him go from a ‘5’ to an ‘8’" (on a scale of importance). Allegedly, Bohringer had claimed, "You can’t arrest me, I’m working for the CIA."

It looks like Bohringer was right. The day after the arrest, The Megaphone’s JTTF sources did an about-face. With a mix of threats and attempts at persuasion, they claimed that an error had been made: Bohringer had not been arrested. It was someone else. They couldn’t say who. That identity was secret.

Daniel Hopsicker felt betrayed. In an email to a JTTF source, he said, "perhaps y'all are unaware up there that i haven't spent the past five years in venice bumfuck florida because i have a fetish for blue-haired widows. i'm the person who discovered that mohamed atta had a close german associate named wolfgang bohringer…if NOBODY there feels that i deserve to be briefed on this story, please pass on my cordial ‘fuck you’ to all involved."

The Megaphone approached other sources inside national and international security agencies. One source, a former JTTF informant and undercover operative for the anti-terrorist Operation Diamondback, phoned The Megaphone office on Dec. 11, and confirmed that Wolfgang Bohringer was arrested on Nov. 17, 2006: "The answer is yes, and he's working—can't talk about it."

The message was pithy, but the effect is devastating: This might be the closest anyone has come to "proof" that Mohamed Atta had connections to the CIA.

If sources are correct, Bohringer was working for CIA when he befriended Atta in Florida. Bohringer was CIA when he was arrested by the Joint Terrorism Task Force on November 17th, 2006.

And according to the Diamondback source, Mohamed Atta best friend, Wolfgang Bohringer today is still "working" for CIA.

At this point, The New York Megaphone is out front on a story no one else has. The only thing we can say is "Qui custodiat ipso custodies?" latin for "Who watches the watchmen?"

According to polls, national opinion is shifting towards thinking more critically about 9/11. But the only people who seem adamant these days about defending a lie are the people tasked with finding the truth.


Saladin said...

Reid: 'Sure, I'll go along' with short US troop surge in Iraq

Raw Story
Monday, December 18, 2006

During a Sunday morning interview on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos, incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada, Dem) indicated that he would back a short-term surge of more US troops sent to Iraq, as reports indicate that President Bush may be contemplating such a plan.

"If the president calls for adding more troops to Baghdad, adding more troops to Iraq, will you oppose it?" Stephanopoulos asked.

Reid said that he'd "go along" with such a plan if it's "part of a program" to get the United States out "by this time next year."

"If it's for a surge, that is, for two or three months and it's part of a program to get us out of there, as indicated, by this time next year, then, sure, I'll go along with it," Reid said.

"But if it's put 45,000 more troops in there -- you know, we've lost in Nevada about 30 troops killed, scores have been wounded," Reid countered. "We're now approaching 3,000 dead Americans, costing the American people 2.5-3 billion dollars a week. This is a war that we have to change course. The president has to do that."

Stephanopoulos asked Reid how he would know such a surge would be temporary.

"I mean, even if that condition is set, even if the president says we'd like them to come home in two or three months, there's no way you're going to know that they're going to be able to come home, is there?" Stephanopoulos asked Reid.

"If the commanders on the ground said this is just for a short period of time, we'll go along with that," Reid responded. "But if you put more troops in there, keep in mind, I repeat, the situation in Iraq is grave and deteriorating. Those aren't my words. Those are the words of some of the finest patriots we have in this country, Democrats and Republicans, the Iraq Study Group."

Reid's words comes days after another top Democrat, Silvestre Reyes, the incoming House Intelligence chairman, called for an increase of 20,000 to 30,000 U.S. troops "to take out the militias and stabilize Iraq."
I know I'm a cynic, but could someone please explain to me how voting for the dems has helped at all? That idiot says the ISG is full of fine patriots? Does he think we are as stupid as he is? baker, a fine patriot?? What a fucking joke! That must make bush the all-time finest patriot EVER!!

capt said...

Submission Accomplished: The Press, The Dems, and The "Surge"

This is one of those rare moments in history when the oligarchical consensus that rules the country is forced to reveal itself in all its nakedness. Just five weeks after an overwhelming majority voted for departure from Iraq, the big debate in the media is whether or not we should increase troop levels - at a time when the Army's going broke.

And yet, there's no public outcry about subverting the will of the American people. Congratulations, GOP: Submission accomplished.

Here's a quick reminder: 7 out of 10 Americans want us out of Iraq within two years, and a majority want us out within six months. (You could be forgiven for forgetting, since you haven't heard much about it lately.)

Exit polls show that voters overwhelmingly made their decision based on Iraq. Yet as Arianna and others have observed, Harry Reid is indicating that he could support a "surge" - an increase in troop levels - provided that the Administration promised it would be only for a limited time, and with the purpose of withdrawing troops at a later date.

The "surge" can become the foundation for the Fourth Great Lie - which, like one of the the Great Lies that precedes it, involves that promise of "withdrawal" at some unspecified point in the future. So, while I hate to use a loaded leftist word like "oligarchy," what's a better term for a situation where a few people dismiss the expressed wishes of the electorate?


capt said...

Politics is like a bus.

The bus is broken down on the side of the road with four flat tires in the middle of nowhere. The engine is seized up and the battery is dead.

We can replace the driver as many times as we like but the bus is not going anywhere - no matter who is behind the wheel or how well they drive.

Even with a qualified and skilled driver the bus has to be fixed, the battery charged and a new engine and once it runs again it will need four new tires.

The oligarchs own the bus and long as people keep buying tickets, fixing a broken down bus in the middle of nowhere is the farthest thing from their minds - they have a real labor problem the passengers keep changing drivers.


David B. Benson said...

Even the generals don't want more troops in Iraq.

Wa' the ... ?

Saladin said...

Resolved, That George Walker Bush, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following Articles of Impeachment be exhibited to the... (Introduced in House)

HRES 1106 IH


2d Session

H. RES. 1106
Articles of Impeachment against George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, and other officials, for high crimes and misdemeanors.


December 8, 2006
Ms. MCKINNEY submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

Articles of Impeachment against George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, and other officials, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Resolved, That George Walker Bush, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following Articles of Impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

Articles of Impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of all the people of the United States of America, against George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, and other officials, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled that:
She did it! YES!! The only one with the guts to do the right thing! Now we'll see where the chips fall.

O'Reilly said...

The Bush administration is split over the idea of a surge in troops to Iraq, with White House officials aggressively promoting the concept over the unanimous disagreement of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to U.S. officials familiar with the intense debate. -WAPO

Bush told the Pentagon he wanted more troops and then asked them to develop a plan. It's quite possible he meant a plan for what to do with the troops rather than a logistic plan to get them there.

Bush has no intention of listening to the Joint Chiefs.

I hope they all resign in protest. That would call some attention to the problem.

Bush is Commander In Chief but the military is not his to abuse. It exists to protect US citzens and our vital interests, not to bolster his reputation as a war president.

David B. Benson said...

O'Reilly --- Wow! That would be new, bold, unprecidented! Alas, unlikely...

capt said...

"We cannot afford to differ on the question of honesty if we expect our republic permanently to endure. Honesty is not so much a credit as an absolute prerequisite to efficient service to the public. Unless a man is honest, we have no right to keep him in public life; it matters not how brilliant his capacity.": Theodore Roosevelt - (1858-1919) 26th US President

"If the citizens neglect their Duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the Laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizen will be violated or disregarded.": Noah Webster - (1758-1843) American patriot and scholar, author of the 1806 edition of the dictionary that bears his name, the first dictionary of American English usage.

As so often before, liberty has been wounded in the house of its friends. Liberty in the wild and freakish hands of fanatics has once more, as frequently in the past, proved the effective helpmate of autocracy and the twin-brother of tyranny: Otto Hermann Kahn - Speech at the University of Wisconsin

"He therefore is the truest friend to the liberty of his country who tries most to promote its virtue, and who, so far as his power and influence extend, will not suffer a man to be chosen into any office of power and trust who is not a wise and virtuous man...: Samuel Adams (1722-1803), was known as the "Father of the American Revolution."


Read this newsletter online

Thanks ICH Newsletter!

capt said...

The Clock is Ticking, Mr. President

Frankly, I don't believe that more troops is the answer for Iraq. It's a civil war and America should not be policing a Sunni-Shia conflict. In addition, we don't have the additional forces to put in there. We obviously want to support what commanders in the field say they need, but apparently even the Joint Chiefs do not support increased combat forces for Baghdad. My position on Iraq is simple:

1. I believe we should start redeploying troops in 4 to 6 months (The Levin-Reed Plan) and complete the withdrawal of combat forces by the first quarter of 2008. (As laid out by the Iraq Study Group)

2. The President must understand that there can only be a political solution in Iraq, and he must end our nation's open-ended military commitment to that country.

3. These priorities need to be coupled with a renewed diplomatic effort and regional strategy.

I do not support an escalation of the conflict. I support finding a way to bring our troops home and would look at any plan that gave a roadmap to this goal.

It's been two weeks since the Iraq Study Group released its plan to change the course and bring our troops home. Since then, the President has been on a fact finding tour of his own administration -- apparently ignoring the facts presented by those in the military who know best. The President needs to put forth a plan as soon as possible, one that reflects the reality on the ground in Iraq and that withdraws our troops from the middle of this deadly civil war.


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

Too bad Harry failed to mentions the clock ticking for the last three years? The ISG report did not change anything. By that I mean it has been a mess since day one.


capt said...

On Receiving the 2006 Christopher Reeve First Amendment Award

I've got a feeling about how we can begin to change this process and I want to pass it by you. Children grow up in our country -- many by the way, under conditions of extreme poverty -- and are told from a very early age "You will be accountable!" "With freedom, comes responsibility!" And so the lecture goes...Democratic and Republican alike. Lie-cheat-steal, and there will be consequences! Theft will be punished. Actions that cause the deaths of others will be severely punished. The message, from leaders in Washington, news media, mom, dad, and church is clear. Criminals MUST be held accountable.

Now, there's been a lot of talk lately on Capitol Hill about how impeachment should be "off the table." We're told that it's time to look ahead - not back...

Can you imagine how far that argument would go for the defense at an arraignment on charges of grand larceny, or large-scale distribution of methamphetamines? How about the arranging of a contract killing on a pregnant mother? "Indictment should be off the table." Or "Let's look forward, not backward." Or "We can't afford another failed defendant."

Our country has a legal system, not of men and women, but of laws. Why then are we so willing to put inconvenient provisions of the U.S. constitution and federal law "off the table?" Our greatest concern right now should be what to put ON the table. Unless we're going to have one set of laws for the powerful and another set for those who can't afford fancy lawyers, then truth matters to everyone. And accountability is a matter of human and legal principle. If we're going to continue wagging our fingers at the disadvantaged transgressors, then I suggest we be consistent. If truth and accountability can be stretched into sham concepts, we may as well open the gates of all our jails and prisons, where, by the way, there are more people behind bars than any other country in the world. One in every 32 American adults is behind bars, on probation, or on parole as we stand here tonight.

Which is to say that, globally, the United States is number one at demanding accountability and backing up that demand with imprisonment. But, when it comes to our president, vice president, secretary of state, former secretary of defense...this insistence on accountability vanishes. All of a sudden, what's past is prologue. And we're just "forward-looking." But some people can't just look forward. Men and women stationed in Iraq at this moment, under orders of a Commander-in-Chief so sufficiently practiced in the art of deception, that he got vast numbers of American journalists and the most esteemed media outlets of this country, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, NPR, and PBS to eagerly serve his agenda-building for war. And the process also induced vast numbers of artists and performers (probably even some in this room tonight) to keep quiet and facilitate the push for an invasion in Iraq.

I'm sure many people who I met in Baghdad, both in my trips prior to and during the occupation, now similarly cannot just look forward. With lives so entirely shattered by a violence of occupation - an ongoing U.S. war effort and the civil war that it has catalyzed. All on the back of a crumbled infrastructure, following eleven years of devastating U.N. sanctions.

And, where is the accountability on behalf of the American dead and wounded, their families, their friends, and the people of the United States who have seen their country become a world pariah. These events have been enabled by people named Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld, and Rice, as they continue to perpetuate a massive fraud on American democracy and decency.


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

"The dead cannot cry out for justice; it is a duty of the living to do so for them."
~ Lois McMaster Bujold, Diplomatic Immunity, 2002


O'Reilly said...

The Government's case for going to war in Iraq has been torn apart by the publication of previously suppressed evidence that Tony Blair lied over Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction…

A devastating attack on Mr Blair's justification for military action by Carne Ross, Britain's key negotiator at the UN, has been kept under wraps until now because he was threatened with being charged with breaching the Official Secrets Act.

In the testimony revealed today Mr Ross, 40, who helped negotiate several UN security resolutions on Iraq, makes it clear that Mr Blair must have known Saddam Hussein possessed no weapons of mass destruction. He said that during his posting to the UN, "at no time did HMG [Her Majesty's Government] assess that Iraq's WMD (or any other capability) posed a threat to the UK or its interests." Read more… - The Independent

Blair knew he was lying about Iraq's WMDs but Bush didn't?

Wilson knew Bush was lying about Yellowcake but Bush didn't?

The Department of Energy knew the aluminum tubes were not suitable for uranium centrifuges but Bush was sure they were suitable?

capt said...

"but Bush was sure they were suitable?"

Well ever since the decider decided he was the head new clear engine ear - if he says something it is so.


O'Reilly said...

"It is unconscionable to think about dispatching more young men and women to Iraq without the realistic expectation that their presence will make a difference in a war that is no longer in our control. Here in Washington, proponents of a troop 'surge' speak of giving the whole Iraq adventure one last try. But they sound as if they're more concerned about projecting an image of American resolve than anything else. . . .

"What could be more immoral than sacrificing American blood and treasure to save face in a lost war?"

- Eugene Robinson, Washington Post

O'Reilly said...

Who's telling the truth?
You decide"

"A former top White House official accused the Bush administration yesterday of trying to muzzle his criticism of its Iran policy and of falsely alleging that his writings contained classified material to prevent them from being published.

"Flynt Leverett, a former CIA analyst who became a senior director for Middle East policy for the National Security Council before leaving the administration in 2003, said the White House decided that substantial passages of an opinion article he had written for the New York Times involved classified information. Leverett said the article was only a summary of a longer paper he had written a few weeks earlier -- which had been cleared by the CIA as containing no classified information. . . .

"White House and CIA spokesmen adamantly disputed Leverett's charges. NSC spokesman Gordon Johndroe said that career staff members on the access and records management staff, who determine whether classified material is involved, made the ruling without political appointees being involved."

- Glenn Kessler, Washington Post:

Paul Richter writes in the Los Angeles Times: "Speaking to reporters Monday, Leverett speculated that senior NSC officials, such as deputy national security advisors Elliott Abrams or Meghan L. O'Sullivan, had authorized their subordinates to intervene."

capt said...

fresh thread!