Sunday, January 21, 2007

Stop gap post for the dial-uppers!



Please continue!

58 comments:

kathleen said...

READ OLD POSTS!

I understand Madeline Albright has been part of the killing machine. Can people change?

While I firmly believe people should be held responsible for their parts in killing others. (Phase II of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence I also believe people can change

kathleen said...

WALK IN THEIR SHOES-January 26th-27th
Have you seen the devastating John Hopkins report revealing that over 655,000 Iraqis have died since our invasion and the polls show that the overwhelming majority of Iraqis want us to leave? Shoes, like the pair above representing the 3-year-old daughter of Hussein al Tarish, help people visualize unspeakable pain and suffering this war has inflicted on the Iraqi people.

The goal of 'Walk in Their Shoes' is to show politicians who still support this war that they must see the consequence of their votes to fund war and 'stay the course'. There is still a lot of work to do, but we are doing it!

January 26th-Walk In Their Shoes In D.C.--6,500 Shoes!

WE NEED 6,550 PAIRS OF SHOES to build a "Walk in their Shoes" installation for J27 and make it a permanent installation in Capitol Hill - Please be a part of this unique memorial and donate shoes at the January 27th March on the Congress. http://www.unitedforpeace.org. If we each bring just one pair we will have enough for this installation and others around the city. We especially need baby, toddler, young girls and boys shoes, and women's sandals and heels. Label them by attaching a tag that can tie to the shoes with a string. Then, write the name, age, and sex of an Iraqi victim on the tag. You can find names at http://www.iraqbodycount.org/names.php
On J27, bring your shoes to the rally and look for the drop off point on the north side of the Mall at 3rd and at 7th. Before J27 you can mail shoes to:

David B. Benson said...

capt --- What was it you couldn't believe?

Your governor running for pres?

Iran war games?

The non-goverance in Iraq?

Military intelligence?

capt said...

DB,

I dunno if you can play video via your red-hat but:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr1qee-bTZI

Is a discussion of elementary (fifth grade) math curriculum and is the craziest thing I have seen in a very long time.



capt

David B. Benson said...

Aha! Elementary maths curriculum planning...

Just like military intlligence?

capt said...

Kathleen,

Albright's LLC is invested in and a consultant to the Carlyle Group and she was the principle negotiator for making MILLIONS of profit by charging the American government insane prices for the gasoline being shipped into Iraq.

I give her more slack for the things she did as Sec. State than the war profiteering she has done in Iraq.

She also thinks a half MILLION deaths of children is a fair price to pay?

She has not changed - she has gotten worse. She is a crass hypocrite and anything she says is just more BS kabuki theater - she is in bed with the Bush's and there is no denying it..

That is partly just my opinion but I offer supporting facts. Do you have anything that supports a change from her quest for more and pure profit off the war in Iraq? Has Albright LLC dis-invested in the Carlyle Group? (if so it is news to me)


capt

capt said...

Dis-invested?

A sniglet from the planet Quarill where we are all Quadrillions.



HA!



capt

Saladin said...

Kathleen, I have no doubt she is very eloquent and articulate in her critique, but I can no more watch or listen to her than I can the war criminal clinton, or bush for that matter. If she has changed I salute her, but that won't bring back a million innocent Iraqis, most of whom suffered long and agonizing deaths because of lack of basic medicine and food. If bush were to become contrite 10 years from now, or at least talk the talk, should he be forgiven? They are all traitors and war profiteers, nothing they could ever say will change that.

capt said...

Liberty is not for these slaves; I do not advocate inflicting it against their conscience. On the contrary, I am strongly in favor of letting them crawl and grovel all they please before whatever fraud or combination of frauds they choose to venerate...Our whole practical government is grounded in mob psychology and.. the Boobus Americanus will follow any command that promises to make him safer." --H. L. Menchen -- 1956. --

=
O liberty! O liberty! What crimes are committed in thy name!: Madame Jeanne-Marie Roland

=
The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right; the spirit of liberty is the spirit which seeks to understands the minds of other men and women.: Learned Hand

=
He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself: Thomas Paine

=
Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one's thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down: Frederick Douglass

=
He who dares not offend cannot be honest: Thomas Paine

===

Read this newsletter online http://tinyurl.com/dy6yy

Thanks ICH Newsletter!

Saladin said...

Kathleen, you need to visit What Really Happened. You will find a plethora of articles proving that the neocons of Israel have really gone off the deep end!

Lunatics on parade

Saladin said...

Example number 1:

Israeli Knesset passes law to revoke citizenship of \\\'unpatriotic\\\' Israelis
Wednesday January 10, 2007 23:12 by Saed Bannoura - IMEMC & Agencies - 1 of IMEMC Editorial Group saed at imemc dot org

A new law passed Wednesday will allow the Israeli government to revoke the citizenship of citizens considered unpatriotic to the Jewish state of Israel. The law is expected to be applied especially to the 20% of Israeli citizens who are of Palestinian origin.

Passage of the controversial law comes just as a torrent of criticism was launched by Knesset member Ahmed Tibi against the Knesset for alleged discrimination against its Arab members. Tibi accused the Knesset of discriminatory practices, in which Arab members are required to ask permission, even to use the bathroom, while Jewish members of the Knesset are not.

The new law, passed despite a recommendation against it by the Israeli Attorney General, allows for the deportation and revocation of citizenship of Israelis for a wide range of offenses, including "visiting enemy nations" and "encouraging terror against Israel", with the latter being so open to interpretation that many Palestinians with Israeli citizenship fear that simply being Palestinian will be reason enough for Israeli officials to revoke their citizenship.The Israeli Attorney General called the law, "a drastic and extreme move that harms civil liberties." He also stated that the new law violates international law.
=========
Jaw dropped, can't think of a comment.

capt said...

Press corps dinner controversial again



WASHINGTON, Jan. 21 (UPI) -- The White House press corps' decision to hire Rich Little to entertain at its annual dinner in Washington in April is causing a bit of controversy.

Ironically, Little's booking was intended to avoid the controversy that last year's entertainment -- the Daily Show's Stephen Colbert -- caused, the Washington Post reported Sunday.

Colbert was too critical of President George Bush, a guest at the dinner, for some attendees' liking.

Even Little, 68, agreed that's how he ended up with the White House Correspondents Association gig.

"One of the reasons they picked me is because I'm not controversial," he told the Post from his home in Las Vegas. "They did get some flak about the guy they had last year. I don't think they wanted someone political or controversial again."

Rem Rieder, editor of the American Journalism Review, said the hiring of the "controversy-free" Little shows that the event should be canceled altogether.

"Do we really need a neon sign to proclaim the coziness of the White House press corps and the White House's occupant?" he asked the Post.

More HERE

David B. Benson said...

Bush's pyramid is more like the one at Meidum. Collapsed.

capt said...

Only Impeachment Can Prevent More War



Everyone knows that Bush’s Iraq "surge" will not work. Even the authors of the plan, neoconservatives Frederick Kagan and Jack Keane, have emphasized that the plan cannot work with any less than an addition of 50,000 US troops committed to another three years of combat. Bush is only adding 40% of that number of troops, and Defense Secretary Gates speaks of the operation being over by summer’s end.

On January 18 a panel of retired generals testifying on Capitol Hill slammed Bush’s surge plan as "a fool’s errand." Even the easily bamboozled American public knows the plan will not work. Newsweek’s latest poll released January 20 shows that only 23% of the public support sending more troops to Iraq and that twice as many Americans trust the Democrats in Congress than trust Bush.

A majority of Americans (54%) believe Bush to be neither honest nor ethical, and 57% believe that Bush lacks "strong leadership qualities."

Nevertheless, Bush defended his surge plan, telling a group of TV stations last week, "I believe it will work."

Bush is correct that it will work – indeed, the surge is working. We have to be clear about how the plan works. It does not mean that 21,500 more US troops will bring order and stability to Iraq. The surge is working, because it is deflecting attention from the Bush Regime’s real game plan.

The real game plan is to orchestrate a war with Iran and to initiate wider conflict in the Middle East before public and military pressure forces the Bush Regime to withdraw US troops from Iraq.


More HERE

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

PCR always rocks.



capt

kathleen said...

David the photo with a guitar reminds me of someone!


I still encourage/challenge both Saladin and Capt to go listen to what Madeline Albright said to Congresspeople last Wednesday at a hearing on Iraq and Iran.

Saladin I think I understand that "most" Presidents and those in their administrations have blood on their hands. Some more than others.

But I am still living in this country and still pushing. I will listen to those I do not always agree with and am often surprised by some of the their opinions.

You will be quite surprised by what Madeline Albright has to say.

kathleen said...

Please contact the MSM. Challenge them ask them if they plan to cover the march in D.C. this coming Saturday better than they covered the anti-invasion marches?

Ask them whether than can cover the march in a fair and accurate way? Do they have the ability to show the world the WWII, KOrean, Vietnam, Desert Storm Vets, teachers, families, plumbers, students, grandparents in wheelchairs, truck drivers, doctors etc. who will be marching!

Many of the same people who marched prior to the invasion. The myth that the media and some politicians, and talking heads created that those who marched against that invasion were from the extreme left is such hogwash!

Almost as big of a myth as the WMD's in Iraq. Middle america was at those marches ( I went to seven and saw with my own eyes) before the invasion...DEMAND THAT THE MEDIA SHOW THE WORLD WHO IS REALLY MARCHING! DEMAND THAT THEY NOT SHOW THEIR FOOTAGE OF THE 20 PEOPLE WHO MAY HAVE BLACK HOODS OVER THEIR HEADS 50 TIMES DURING THE EVENING NEWS. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID IN THEIR COVERAGE OF THE ANTI-INVASION MARCHES IN LATE 2002 AND EARLY 2003.

CALL THE MSM!

capt said...

Kathleen,

I went and listened the first time you mentioned it. I always read every post and click on every link.

I am not impressed, Albright is a war-profiteer and should be called out as such.

She is a part of the Carlyle Group now and anything negative she says about Bunnypants is likely a message from Pappi.

Do not get sucked into agreeing with warmongers and profiteers.

Albright can talk all she wants - let me see some action on her part.

It is not what she did while in office that I take issue with, it is what she is doing today (not what she is saying).


capt

capt said...

Bush Special Envoy & Carlyle Group In Scandal Over Iraqi Debt Relief


[…]

The main proposal would transfer ownership of $57bn in unpaid Iraqi debts. The debts would be assigned to a foundation created and controlled by a consortium in which the key players are the Carlyle Group, the Albright Group (headed by another former secretary of state, Madeleine Albright) and several other well-connected firms.

Under the deal, Kuwait would also give the consortium $2bn to invest in a private equity fund devised by the consortium, with half of that going to Carlyle.

The consortium would then use its personal connections to persuade world leaders that Iraq must "maximize" its repa ration payments to Kuwait. The more the consortium gets Iraq to pay over a period, the more Kuwait collects, with the consortium taking a 5% commission or more.

The goal of maximizing Iraq's debt payments directly contradicts the stated US foreign policy aim of drastically reducing Iraq's debt burden.

More HERE

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

Naomi Klein does excellent work and has written more than one piece on Albright Group LLC.

I see and hear Albright on the TV screen but cannot reconcile her words with her actions. Add about 500,000 deaths of children as "worth it" and the lady Albright makes me want to puke.

She is in business with Bush. That makes her BS and lies that much more blatant and sickening.



capt

Hajji said...

Gone to the Dogs...errph!

_________________

Pet shop owner creates beer for dogs.

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands - After a long day hunting, there's nothing like wrapping your paw around a cold bottle of beer. So Terrie Berenden, a pet shop owner in the southern Dutch town of Zelhem, created a beer for her Weimaraners made from beef extract and malt.

"Once a year we go to Austria to hunt with our dogs, and at the end of the day we sit on the verandah and drink a beer. So we thought, my dog also has earned it," she said.

Berenden consigned a local brewery to make and bottle the nonalcoholic beer, branded as Kwispelbier. It was introduced to the market last week and advertised it as "a beer for your best friend."

"Kwispel" is the Dutch word for wagging a tail.

The beer is fit for human consumption, Berenden said. But at euro1.65 ($2.14) a bottle, it's about four times more expensive than a Heineken.
_____________

...and then the dogs immediately headed down to the red-light district.

"How they got ahold of my Gold-Card, I'll never know." said the owner, "But these milk-bone spacecakes are quite tasty!"

-T

Saladin said...

“What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about, if we can’t use it?”
Madeline Albright

... as remembered in Colin Powell’s memoir. Powell wrote that he almost had an aneurysm, he was so upset. [abcnews bio]
=======
Does she mean use it the way SHE sees fit? Like against the innocent people of Kosovo? Her empty words mean nothing to me. I found a page that says she claims to have "discovered" she is actually Jewish. How can you discover something like that? It's a religion, not a race, it's like suddenly discovering you are a Catholic! You can't be born Jewish or Catholic, you choose it, like any other religion. Are you stuck with the religion of your parents without choice? Ridiculous. She is brutal and has a bad reputation.

Also this:
Protesters confronted Madeline Albright outside the induction ceremonies for the Women's Hall of Fame, in Seneca Falls New York. The protest was against the U.S./UN sanctions against Iraq. The demonstration was called by a coalition of groups including the International Action Center, Iraq Sanctions Challenge, Pax Christi, Syracuse and Rochester. "Madeline Albright should be on trial in front of an international war crimes tribunal, not receiving an honor," said Sarah Sloan of the Iraq Sanctions Challenge. PRESS RELEASE - International Action Center
==========
Leopards changing spots? Not that I know of.

capt said...

What Does Bush Have Planned for Iran?



When it comes to Iran, the rhetoric coming out of Washington has become noticeably sharper in recent weeks. A naval battle group has also been deployed to the Gulf. A prelude to a military strike?


To dampen the noise coming from their forbidden gathering, the hosts have pushed a clothes rack, heavily laden with winter coats, in front of their apartment door. The windows are covered with blankets. In the apartment, young women dance with young men, the whisky is from America and the red wine from Armenia. It's the sort of affair that can get you into a lot of trouble in Tehran.

The party is in an apartment on Vanak Square in one of Tehran's more exclusive northern neighborhoods. The guests, ranging in age from 20 to 35, are liberal and pro-Western. The hosts are siblings, both single, and they still live with their parents. But mom and dad are away in Europe for two weeks; the mood is festive.

Half of the alcohol is gone within the first half hour. The host appears with a tray of fruit juices and offers it apologetically to her guests. The more threatening the country's policies, says one young women, the more she and likeminded young Iranians are likely to party. But then she says that she prefers not to talk about politics. It would spoil the atmosphere.

But politics are difficult to avoid, and in the kitchen it has become the subject of the evening: American threats; the risk of an Israeli bomb attack; and the risk of war. "If that happens," says one man, "the country will unite and it will make Ahmadinejad even stronger." All the guests approve of the Iranian president's policies, but not his rhetoric. They say that the United States is acting arrogantly and blindly by assuming that the Iranians are acting purely with malicious intent. "The Americans are conducting a disastrous war of aggression in Iraq," says an architect, "and we are supposed to be the axis of evil?"


More HERE

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

It is always interesting to read a perspective from another country.



capt

kathleen said...

THE LAST HURRAH

January 21, 2007
The Pending Marc Rich Attack
There's a talking point that the more complicit or credulous among the press corps are propagating: It suggests Libby is a really nice (or really clever) man because of the work he did getting Marc Rich pardoned. In placing the Rich pardon at the center of pre-trial coverage, though, I suspect Libby's team wants to suggest that Libby's indictment was direct retaliation for the work Libby did to get Rich a pardon.

This point is made explicitly in the WSJ's recent opinion piece.

As it happens, Messrs. Fitzgerald and Libby had crossed legal paths before. Before he joined the Bush Administration, Mr. Libby had, for a number of years in the 1980s and 1990s, been a lawyer for Marc Rich. Mr. Rich is the oil trader and financier who fled to Switzerland in 1983, just ahead of his indictment for tax-evasion by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Bill Clinton pardoned Mr. Rich in 2001, and so the feds never did get their man. The pardon so infuriated Justice lawyers who had worked on the case that the Southern District promptly launched an investigation into whether the pardon had been "proper." One former prosecutor we spoke to described the Rich case as "the single most rancorous case in the history of the Southern District."

Two of the prosecutors who worked on the Rich case over the years were none other than Mr. Fitzgerald and James Comey, who while Deputy Attorney General appointed Mr. Fitzgerald to investigate the Plame leak. Mr. Fitzgerald worked in the Southern District for five years starting in 1988, at the same time that Mr. Libby was developing a legal theory of Mr. Rich's innocence in a bid to get the charges dropped. The prosecutors never did accept the argument, but Leonard Garment, who brought Mr. Libby onto the case in 1985, says that he believes Mr. Libby's legal work helped set the stage for Mr. Rich's eventual pardon.

Whereas the NYT simply uses the Rich pardon to highlight how clever and selfless Libby is.

Between government stints, Mr. Libby practiced law with the firm of Leonard Garment, counsel to President Richard M. Nixon. Mr. Garment remembers him as “reliable, immensely hard working and guarded.”

Presented with the seemingly intractable tax problems of a fugitive commodities trader, Marc Rich, Mr. Libby “went off for a year and worked on it, closeted with his own intellect,” Mr. Garment said.

He emerged with a creative analysis, Mr. Garment added, that would ultimately help persuade President Bill Clinton to pardon Mr. Rich, an act that Republicans criticized because Mr. Rich’s former wife, Denise, was a Democratic donor.

[snip]

As a lawyer and an aide, he has generally advocated for others, whether Mr. Rich or Mr. Cheney.

Some of you may be wondering ... WTF? Why would Libby's team focus their pre-trial publicity campaign on reminding American readers that Scooter Libby's spent several years getting paid $585/hour getting a tax dodger who traded with Iran? You'd think the optics would be somewhat dangerous. And it's not like the framing that Paul Gigot and friends and Scott Shane give this talking point really makes sense. Scooter's so clever for for dreaming up some scheme that says people like Marc Rich shouldn't be subject to the same rules of accounting the rest of us should? This is heroic, clever, charitable? And nevermind that Fitzgerald appears not to have had the same central role in this as Comey...guilt by association you know.

Here's where I think this is going.

At least from a PR stance, they're trying to argue that Fitzgerald and Comey selectively prosecuted Libby--and not Armitage or any other shiny objects--because they were still pissed about Rich. Libby's minions will make the case--at least in the public sphere--that this is all one big revenge prosecution.

But it may not just be a matter of public sphere. You see, Libby's lawyers are threatening to call Fitzgerald to the stand, under the guise of challenging his assertion that Judy tried not to testify. They want to get Fitz on the stand--so they can turn this into a trial of his decisions.

Too bad for Libby this smear is so patently stupid. I'm still working on the Marc Rich stuff. But the other accusation is easy to dismiss. Here's the claim.

But Mr. Libby and Mr. Comey tangled more recently as well. In 2004, as Mr. Fitzgerald was gearing up his investigation, Mr. Libby was the Administration's point man in trying to get Justice to sign off on the NSA wiretapping program. In early 2004, Mr. Comey was acting Attorney General while John Ashcroft recovered from gall bladder surgery, and Mr. Comey reportedly refused to give the NSA program the greenlight, prompting the White House to seek out Mr. Ashcroft in the hospital in a bid to circumvent Mr. Comey.

Motive is a difficult thing to gauge. We don't know whether this long personal history played any role either in Mr. Fitzgerald's single-minded pursuit of Mr. Libby, or in Mr. Comey's decision to grant the prosecutor plenary power even though the central mystery of the case had already been resolved.

Get it? Comey was so pissed that BushCo overrode his decision on NSA domestic spying that he gave Fitzgerald more power--and precisely the power he needed--to be able to indict Libby in the Plame Affair.

Only problem is the Wingnuts are in one of their time machines again. The date when BushCo overrode Comey's non-authorization of domestic spying? Sometime after March 4, when Ashcroft was hospitalized for gall bladder surgery. And the authorization for Fitzgerald to pursue charges of perjury and obstruction? February 6.

Interesting rules of physics, these Wingnuts. The WSJ would have you believe Comey authorized Fitzgerald to investigate perjury and obstruction in retaliation for an event that happened a full month later.

Robert S. said...

Can a leopard change its stripes? I dunno...

Certainly, Ms. Albright's financial closeness with Carlyle bare scrutiny. I've heard her remark, though I didn't find the reference, that that 500,000 dead Iraqi children statement was one the biggest regrets of her tenure. Still, her record is what it is.

But, check this out:

Achieving the goal of a world free of nuclear weapons will also require effective measures to impede or counter any nuclear-related conduct that is potentially threatening to the security of any state or peoples.

Reassertion of the vision of a world free of nuclear weapons and practical measures toward achieving that goal would be, and would be perceived as, a bold initiative consistent with America's moral heritage. The effort could have a profoundly positive impact on the security of future generations. Without the bold vision, the actions will not be perceived as fair or urgent. Without the actions, the vision will not be perceived as realistic or possible.

We endorse setting the goal of a world free of nuclear weapons and working energetically on the actions required to achieve that goal, beginning with the measures outlined above.

-A World Free of Nuclear Weapons
George P. Shultz
William J. Perry
Henry A. Kissinger
Sam Nunn
The Wall Street Journal, 8 January 2007


Henry the K endorsing a Nuke-Free World? Is that the sound of spots shifting? I dunno...

capt said...

Roe v. Wade Anniversary: Trust Women, period



Jessica Valenti: Forget about the politics for a moment...


This guest post was written by Feministing's Jessica Valenti.

Today--on the 34th anniversary of Roe v Wade--I have a request. Instead of writing about the legislation, the rhetoric, or the politics surrounding reproductive rights and justice, let's keep it simple. Let's just trust women.

Seems easy enough, I know. But given that over 30 years after Roe women are still fighting the same battles, maybe we need a remedial course.

Trust women to know what's best for themselves and their families Many women who choose to have abortions do so out of concern for their existing children. It's time to put to bed the bullshit stereotypes of women having abortions out of "convenience" or selfishness.

Trust young women to make decisions about their future Whether it's access to emergency contraception or abortion, young women have the right to make decisions that will affect the rest of their lives. Not to mention, let's be logical. If we're too young to make the decision to prevent or end a pregnancy, how are we not too young to have a child?

Trust low-income women--don't punish them Sure, Roe legalized abortion--but the many laws impeding access to abortion disproportionately affect low-income women. Mandatory waiting periods are unreasonable for low-income women who often can't take more than a day off of work and for rural women who need to travel long distances to get to their nearest abortion provider. Not to mention the Hyde Amendment, which has been around almost as long as Roe and prevents federal Medicaid funding for abortion. Hyde doesn't get much attention these days--as Jill from Feministe says, "The women who are being most negatively affected by Hyde are poor women, women of color, women who rely on government aid--you know, women who just don't matter as much as wealthier white women who have the privilege and time to get out and vote, to contribute to the Democratic party, to attend the fundraisers."

Trust women to have children One aspect of reproductive justice that isn't often talked about is the right to have children. At a recent conference for the National Advocates for Pregnant Women, women spoke out about the U.S.'s history with sterilizing women (especially low-income women and women of color) and punitive "fetal rights" laws. Whether women are terminating a pregnancy or want to carry a pregnancy to term--we have to trust women with their bodies and reproductive health and futures.

While waxing political about Roe is important, let's not forget that today is about women's lives--and no one is more of an expert in that than women themselves.


More HERE

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

That has always been my position, I am not a woman and will never face the issue of choice firsthand but there is nothing anybody can do except trust and support.



capt

capt said...

Maybe I am expecting too much from Albright but the first woman Sec. State and a self-labeled progressive and democrat should not be making money from war-works using her political connections to line her and her daughters pockets, she knows better than to be consulting and investing with the Carlyle Group a "private investment bank".

And there is the real rub. The ONLY reason the Albright Group has been exposed as working with and for the Carlyle Group is because there is so much close involvement between them the fact is indisputable. The "private bank" would just deny if they could, that is how they answer any question about their business.

On the restructure of the Iraqi debt Albright and Carlyle were suppose to split $2Bln dollars? A tidy sum for negotiating, eh?

If we can pressure the self-proclaimed progressives into NOT investing in war or profiting from war we could be half way to making less war.

I will convict and condemn (metaphorically) every warmonger, war profiteer and pro-war idiot I come across. That is the only I can do, personally.




capt

kathleen said...

oops that old "military industrial complex" at it again and again!

Military Surplus Parts Illegally Find Their Way to Iran, US Officials Say
By Sharon Theimer AP Monday 22 January 2007
Fighter-jet parts and other sensitive US military gear seized from front companies for Iran and brokers for China have been traced in criminal cases to a surprising source: the Pentagon.

In one case, federal investigators said, contraband purchased in Defense Department surplus auctions was delivered to Iran, a country President Bush has branded part of an "axis of evil."

In that instance, a Pakistani arms broker convicted of exporting U.S. missile parts to Iran resumed business after his release from prison. He purchased Chinook helicopter engine parts for Iran from a U.S. company that had bought them in a Pentagon surplus sale. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents say those parts reached Iran.

Sensitive military surplus items are supposed to be demilitarized or "de-milled" - rendered useless for military purposes - or, if auctioned, sold only to buyers who promise to obey U.S. arms embargoes, export controls and other laws.

Yet the surplus sales can operate like a supermarket for arms dealers.

"Right Item, Right Time, Right Place, Right Price, Every Time. Best Value Solutions for America's Warfighters," the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service says on its Web site, calling itself "the place to obtain original U.S. Government surplus property."

Federal investigators are increasingly anxious that a top priority on Iran's shopping list is within its easy reach: parts for the precious fleet of F-14 Tomcat fighter jets the United States allowed Iran to buy in the 1970s when it was an ally.

In one case, convicted middlemen for Iran bought Tomcat parts from the Defense Department's surplus division. Customs agents confiscated them and returned them to the Pentagon, which sold them again - customs evidence tags still attached - to another buyer, a suspected broker for Iran.

"That would be evidence of a significant breakdown, in my view, in controls and processes," said Greg Kutz, the Government Accountability Office's head of special investigations. "It shouldn't happen the first time, let alone the second time."

A Defense Department official, Frederick N. Baillie, said his Pentagon unit followed procedures.

"The fact that those individuals chose to violate the law and the fact that the customs people caught them really indicates that the process is working," said Baillie, the Defense Logistics Agency's executive director of distribution and revitalization policy. "Customs is supposed to check all exports to make sure that all the appropriate certifications and licenses had been granted."

-------

capt said...

Democracy Now! Confronts Madeline Albright on the Iraq Sanctions: Was It Worth The Price?



AMY GOODMAN: Secretary Albright--the question I have always wanted to ask' do you regret having said, when asked do you think the price was worth it--

MADELINE ALBRIGHT: I have said 5,000 times that I regret it. It was a stupid statement. I never should have made it and if everybody else that has ever made a statement they regret, would stand up, there would be a lot of people standing. I have many, many times said it and I wish that people would report that I have said it. I wrote it in my book that it was a stupid statement.

AMY GOODMAN: Do you think it laid the ground work for later being able to target Iraq and make it more acceptable on the part of the Bush administration?

MADELINE ALBRIGHT: What? You've got to be kidding.

AMY GOODMAN: The sanctions against Iraq.

MADELINE ALBRIGHT: The sanctions against Iraq were put on because Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. But there never were sanctions against food and medicine. And you people need to know there never were sanctions against food and medicine and I was responsible for getting food in there and getting Saddam Hussein to pump oil.

AMY GOODMAN: Former Secretary of state Madeline Albright speaking to us as she was leaving the convention center last night after John Kerry’s closing address, dozens of people remained in the FleetCenter arena.

More HERE

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

At the risk of being redundant - I take issue with what Albright is DOING today (war-profiteering) more than any statements she has made historically.

It is just my opinion and I am just one guy, no big deal.



capt

Robert S. said...

I take issue with what Albright is DOING today (war-profiteering) more than any statements she has made historically. - Capt.

As do I. I'd guess my point was sometimes folks' words and actions don't always match up.

"All Men Are Created Equal" was written by slaveholders, for instance...

capt said...

Canada and Mexico travelers must have passports to re-enter the US as of tomorrow.

Big Brother is just looking out for the safety of the citizens (so long as you can prove citizenship).


AAARRRGGGHHH!


capt

kathleen said...

First Bomb Carter; Then Nuke Iran!
Sunday, 21 January 2007
The Israel Lobby Trips and Tilts
By Alexander Cockburn

01/21/07 "ICHBlog" --- Suppose the movers and shakers in the Israel lobby here -- Abe Foxman, Alan Dershowitz and the rest of the crew -- had simply decided to leave Jimmy Carter’s Palestine Peace Not Apartheid alone. How long before the book would have been gathering dust on the remainder shelves? Suppose even that Dershowitz had rounded up his unacknowledged co-authors in all their tens of thousands and sallied forth to buy up every copy of Carter’s book and toss each one into the Charles River, would not that have been a more successful suppressor than the blitzkrieg strategy they did adopt?

Of course it would. For weeks now the lobby has hurled its legions into battle against Carter. He has been stigmatized as an anti-Semite, a Holocaust denier, a patron of former concentration camp killers, a Christian madman, a pawn of the Arabs who “flatly condones mass murder” of Israeli Jews. (This last was from Murdoch’s New York Post editorial, relayed to its mailing list by the Zionist Organization of America.)



INformation Clearing HOuse

capt said...

RS,

No doubt, I was not reacting as much as reiterating.

I get disappointed in so many ex-politicians, I guess I actually fall for some of those words (still).

We NEVER see that much populace and social concerns from many (even from the left) after politics.

I love the exceptions - when the few that are in the circles of power use it for the good of people. Now THAT is hard work (doing good).



capt

kathleen said...

THE RADICAL RIGHT WING NEO-CONS PUSHING HARD FOR MILITARY ACTION AGAINT IRAN.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) recently warned that the Bush administration is building a case against Iran. “This whole concept of moving against Iran is bizarre,” he said. When Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) warned last week that President Bush does not have the authority to launch an attack against Iran without congressional approval, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino responded that she was “puzzled” because Reid seemed “to be fanning [the] flames where there’s no fire.”

That’s not the view of Richard Perle, a leading neoconservative proponent of the Iraq war. Speaking at a conference this weekend in Israel, Perle suggested Bush would attack Iran before he leaves office:

“Would this president do it? I think that until the day he leaves office, this is a president that, if he is told, ‘Mr. President, you are at the point of no return,’ I have very little doubt that this president would order the necessary military action.”

[…]

“I’m not convinced that we have a lot of time. Given the peril that would result, its astonishing to me that we do not now have a serious political strategy with Iran,” he said, adding he thought regime change is “the only significant effective way” to deal with the Iranian threat.

“If we continue on our current course, we have only a military option. So what I’m urging, and this should have happened a very long time ago, is that we make a serious effort to work with the internal (Iranian) opposition,” Perle said.

Perle is reported to have once said, “The first time I met Bush 43 … two things became clear. One, he didn’t know very much. The other, that he had the confidence to ask questions that revealed he didn’t know very much.”

Robert S. said...

For a refreshing change of pace, listen to today's Democracy Now! segnent with freshman Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. For dessert, listen to Helen Thomas, from the same show

kathleen said...

Perle belongs in jail for lying about WMD's in Iraq instead he is out there pushing for a pre-emtpive military strike on Iran.
Ex-US official: Bush would approve Iran attack

Richard Perle says, ‘If strike on Iran required US participation for success, president would agree'

Yaakov Lappin Published: 01.21.07, 23:53
If all options were exhausted in the attempt to stop the Iranian nuclear project, and US military involvement was needed for a successful strike on Tehran, US President George Bush would give the green light for the operation, former director of the US Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee, Richard Perle, told the Herzliya Conference on Sunday evening.

Nuclear Threat
US under secretary of state: We won't allow nuclear Iran' / Yaakov Lappin

(VIDEO) Nicholas Burns says ‘There is no doubt Iran seeking nuclear military weapons; stationing of two battle groups in Persian Gulf is part of our response’; adds: We are committed to being Israel's strongest security partner
Full Story

"The worst outcome is a failed military option," Perle said. Discussing a possible US involvement in a strike on Iran , he added: "Would this president do it? I think that until the day he leaves office, this is a president that, if he is told, 'Mr. President, you are at the point of no return,' I have very little doubt that this president would order the necessary military action."

Perle began his speech by saying it wasn't clear whether "it's our time or Iran's that is over."

He said the "current policy… will not by itself lead the Iranians to abandon their nuclear weapons program. If we continue to do what we are doing, Iran will become a nuclear weapons state."

"Iran with nuclear weapons will not be so easily deterred and contained as we sometimes think, as we have become accustomed to deterrence in the Cold War," Perle said, adding: "When deterrence fails, it fails not gently, but catastrophically."

Nuclear grievous damage

Perle hypothesized a nightmare scenario, saying: "In possession of nuclear weapons, or even in possession of nuclear material, Iran is perfectly capable of using its terrorist networks to enable others to inflict grievous damage."


"At some point, those of us who believe that the current policy will not lead to an abandonment of nuclear weapons (by Iran)… have to begin to face the question of when is the point of no return," Perle added.

Perle expressed astonishment at the lack of support granted by the West to Iranian opposition movements who wish to overthrow the regime of the Ayatollahs.

"I'm not convinced that we have a lot of time. Given the peril that would result, its astonishing to me that we do not now have a serious political strategy with Iran," he said, adding he thought regime change is "the only significant effective way" to deal with the Iranian threat.

"If we continue on our current course, we have only a military option. So what I'm urging, and this should have happened a very long time ago, is that we make a serious effort to work with the internal (Iranian) opposition," Perle said.

capt said...

Petraeus! Is Baghdad Burning?



The Nihilists


I am not advocating increased readiness to attack more foreigners in the future; I do not think anyone poses a credible conventional military threat to the U.S.; and I believe the "global war on terrorism" is a dangerous sham. But these concerns by generals and politicians reflect a real situation. U.S. ground forces are being (no pun intended) ground down by a losing war in Iraq. The reason that neither the public nor many of the troops themselves see this defeat is that we have been indoctrinated to see defeat as synonymous with surrender. It is not. Defeat is failure to achieve the political objectives of a war. This happened long ago.

The surge is a criminal last stand that will cost the lives of soldiers on both sides of this occupation and the lives of countless civilians, and it very well could lead to scenes as humiliating as that at the Saigon Embassy in 1975.

On Aug. 25, 1944, crushed between the Red Army smashing across the Danube and the Free French, American and Senegalese troops marching through the Champs Elysee, Hitler knew the end of the Third Reich was approaching. He had given the order to Gen. Dietrich von Choltitz, the German "governor" of Paris, to destroy Paris rather than let it fall into the hands of the Allies. As word of the Allied entry into Paris reached Hitler, he is reputed to have called his chief of staff, Gen. Alfred Jodl, and demanded: "Jodl! Is Paris burning?"

I can almost hear the echo now from Cheney’s office, the curtains pulled, the malignant presence glowering in the dark, "Petraeus! Is Baghdad burning?"

More HERE

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

Stan hits on some important issues - a good read.



capt

Robert S. said...


The Invisible Enemy in Iraq
By Steve Silberman
02:00 AM Jan, 22, 2007


A homemade bomb exploded under a Humvee in Anbar province, Iraq, on August 21, 2004. The blast flipped the vehicle into the air, killing two US marines and wounding another - a soft-spoken 20-year-old named Jonathan Gadsden who was near the end of his second tour of duty. In previous wars, he would have died within hours. His skull and ribs were fractured, his neck was broken, his back was badly burned, and his stomach had been perforated by shrapnel and debris.

Gadsden got out of the war zone alive because of the Department of Defense's network of frontline trauma care and rapid air transport known as the evacuation chain. Minutes after the attack, a helicopter touched down in the desert. Combat medics stanched the marine's bleeding, inflated his collapsed lung, and eased his pain. He was airlifted to the 31st Combat Support Hospital in Baghdad, located in an old health care facility called the Ibn Sina, which had formerly catered to the Baathist elite. Army surgeons there repaired Gadsden's cranium, removed his injured spleen, and pumped him full of broad-spectrum antibiotics to ward off infection.

More.

capt said...

Lobbyists Find New Congress is Open for Business



Lobbyists who dreaded Democratic control find they're being heard.


Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi terrified the oil industry late last year when she outlined her priorities for the new Democratic majorities in Congress. Within the first 100 hours, she promised, they would "roll back the multibillion-dollar subsidies for Big Oil."

Last week, however, when Pelosi (D-San Francisco) won House approval of the much-touted bill socking it to the oil companies, it turned out to be considerably less drastic than many in the industry originally feared. Out of an estimated $32 billion in subsidies and tax breaks that the oil companies are scheduled to receive over the next five years, the final House bill cut $5.5 billion.

It's not just oil: From one end of the House Democrats' "first 100 hours" agenda to the other, businesspeople and their lobbyists have found success amid the fear in dealing with the new Congress.

Surprising as it might seem in view of the Democrats' public rhetoric, business groups are getting their telephone calls returned. And they're getting plenty of face time with the new House and Senate leaders.


More HERE

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

Some of my worst fears are confirmed. I do not really blame the politicians because the problems are institutional. I guess if you put a big pot of honey in front of Pooh Bear it is silly to think he would keep his hands off.



capt

Hajji said...

The Army acknowledged last week, for example, that it is still 22 percent short of the armored Humvees it needs in Iraq despite heated criticism in 2004 and 2005 over the lack of armored vehicles. Army officials said it will be another eight months before that gap can be filled.
_______________

Note that this is BEFORE 21,000 troop are added to the mix.

This goes to show that the Bush MalAdministration will wantonly endager American Troops for political puposes.

Note I didn't use the word "gains" because there's nothing to be gained. It is all a measure to be seen as doing something no matter HOW irresponsibly STUPID to avoid the appearance of doing NOTHING, which is probably in this case, preferable.

This article, and its reprint at Kentucky.com SHOULD be an eye-opener to the public and more specifically to the families and soldiers based at Ft. Campbell and Fr.Knox.

71,000 fire suits to wear under all the "battle-rattle" they've already got? Oh, yeah....suuuureee.

Who's selling the Army those fire-suits?

Who's gonna manufacure 6,465 MPV's in the next year, supposedly to protect US troops who're supposed to be GETTING THE FUCK OUT of Iraq?

Just another military/industrial hand-out...fer sure...

go figgure...

-T

capt said...

From Hajji's link:

"We are fighting a thinking enemy who is trying very hard to kill us," Marine Brig. Gen. Randolph D. Alles, who is head of the Marine Corps Warfighting Lab, told another congressional panel last week.

******

As opposed to the non-thinking enemies that are not trying to kill our troops?

What a crock. I hate it when they say stupid stuff like that.



capt

capt said...

Water is fluid, soft and yielding. But water will wear away rock, which is rigid and cannot yield. As a rule, whatever is fluid, soft and yielding will overcome whatever is rigid and hard. This is another paradox: what is soft is strong.

The softest things in the world overcome the hardest things in the world.
Through this I know the advantage of taking no action.


~ Lao-tzu, (604 BC - 531 BC)

Gerald said...

Final Crusade

Dear Posters:

I was watching Law and Order and the program was about hate crimes. We know without a doubt that Hitler Bush is a murderer and a war criminal. I also believe that he is guilty of hate crimes. He and the kkkhristians hate the Muslims. Their goal is to eliminate all the Muslims in the world and declare a victory for the kkkhristians in the Final Crusade.

Killing of the Muslims is not just about oil and their resources. It is about the Final Crusade. The Final Crusade was delayed some 1200 or so years. The Final Crusade needed some psycho to start with incessant lies. The Final Crusade was ripe with the appointment of Hitler Bush, the perfect psycho, in 2000.

With this perfect psycho in office we, Nazi America, under the guidance of Nazi Israel could begin the genocide of all Muslims.

Sincerely,

Gerald

Gerald said...

Praying Each Day: January 22

Does Cheney whistle to his pet dog, George II, as Hitler's father would whistle to his son???

Gerald said...

More Taxes for the Middle Class

Gerald said...

More Deaths for Our American Soldiers

Enough to make a grown man cry!!!

Gerald said...

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had a surprise for President Bush when they sat down with their aides in the Four Seasons Hotel in Amman, Jordan. Firing up a PowerPoint presentation, Maliki and his national security adviser proposed that U.S. troops withdraw to the outskirts of Baghdad and let Iraqis take over security in the strife-torn capital. Maliki said he did not want any more U.S. troops at all, just more authority.

The president listened intently to the unexpected proposal at their Nov. 30 meeting, according to accounts from several administration officials. Bush seemed impressed that Maliki had taken the initiative, but it did not take him long to reject the idea.

By the time Bush returned to Washington, the plan had already been picked through by his military commanders. At a meeting in the White House's Roosevelt Room, the president flatly told his advisers that the Maliki plan was not going to work. He had concluded that the Iraqis were not up to the task and that Baghdad would collapse into chaos, making a bad situation worse. And so the Americans would have to help them.

When will the Iraqis stand up? By Bush's decisions: never!!!

Gerald said...

More Stupidity from Bush

Bush loves treating American soldiers like frogs. While in his youth in Midland, Texas he would put a firecracker in the mouth of frogs and blow them up, now, he places dynamite sticks in the mouths of our soldiers to blow them up.

kathleen said...

Check this out. When you do a search for Frederick Kagan at NPR this is what you get.

Analysis: Will Increasing Troop Levels Quell Violence in Iraq?
Jan-11-2007, Talk of the Nation
...Frederick Kagan, wrote op-ed articles arguing for a surge of American forces in Baghdad in particular. Does the president's plan - is that your idea? Is this going to work, do you think?...

Iraq: Boost Troop Levels, Says Alternative Iraq Report
Jan-05-2007, All Things Considered
...here's the basic crux of it, as laid out by Frederick Kagan, a military historian and the paper's main author. Dr. FREDERICK KAGAN (Military Historian): We need to send in more force...

Nation: Will More Troops Help in Iraq?
Dec-21-2006, Day to Day
...Will More Troops Help in Iraq?. President Bush is considering an increase in the troop force in Iraq. Frederick Kagan, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, has prepared...

Politics: Rival Iraq Report Wins Attention in Washington
Dec-21-2006, Morning Edition
...fixing Iraq - the ISG Report - Frederick Kagan, a military historian with the American Enterprise Institute, offered his review. Mr. FREDERICK KAGAN (American Enterprise Institute):...

Analysis: A Call for More Troops and Security in Iraq
Dec-14-2006, All Things Considered
...doesn't correlate with what's happening on the ground. NORRIS: Frederick Kagan, thank you so much for talking with us. Mr. KAGAN: Pleasure to talk to you. NORRIS: Frederick Kagan...

Analysis: Iraq Report 'Recipe for Defeat,' Says Right Wing
Dec-06-2006, All Things Considered
...hell, not the exact words conservative scholar Frederick Kagan might choose, but Kagan, a military expert at the American Enterprise Institute, has become a hero among conservative bloggers....

Exiting Iraq: A Discussion: Exiting Iraq: Frederick Kagan's View
Jul-22-2006, Weekend Edition - Saturday
...Exiting Iraq: Frederick Kagan's View. In the second in a series of discussion on the U.S. end game in Iraq, military historian and scholar Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise...

Analysis: Republicans Get Some Relief; Questions Linger
Jun-15-2006, All Things Considered
...most important and little reported things that's happened was that the president and Secretary Rumsfeld and others had four outside experts come in, including Frederick Kagan and Elliott...

Iraq: Pentagon Expected to Call for More Troops
Feb-01-2006, Day to Day
...planning. Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute is not happy that the Pentagon's upcoming four year plan is not expected to include more troops. Mr. FREDERICK KAGAN (American...

Politics & Society: Pentagon Report Seen Addressing Modern, Unconventional Threats
Jan-31-2006, Morning Edition
...then the process starts all over again. In the end, say critics like Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute, all the effort might make little difference. The Bush...

Politics & Society: Military Works to Adapt Readiness
Oct-18-2005, Morning Edition
...way of looking at things. O'HARA: Frederick Kagan, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington-based think tank. Mr. KAGAN: Because it imagines...

Warfare In Afghanistan
Oct-01-2001, All Things Considered
...is just moving. Frederick Kagan is a professor at the US Military Academy at West Point. He asked us to stress that he's offering his own view of history here, not official policy....


HOWEVER WHEN YOU DO A SEARCH FOR FLYNT LEVERETT AT NPR THE FORMER U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY OFFICIAL, WHO QUIT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION DUE TO HIS DISAGREEMENTS WITH THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION OVER IRAQ AND THE STANCE ON IRAN.

YOU GET NOTHING AT ALL!

DO YOU SUPPOSE THAT NPR IS SUPPORTING THE SURGE AND A MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN? IF YOU ARE NOT PROVIDING ANOTHER SIDE OF THE STORY IT WOULD APPEAR TO BE SO!

WHY NOT GIVE FLYNT LEVERETT SOME AIR TIME?

Gerald said...

We now have a Congress controlled by Democrats. Will they be more responsive than the Republicans? There is one way to find out. On January 27th we are organizing a massive march in Washington, D.C., followed by a day of organized citizen lobbying for peace on January 29th. We'll find out if the change of party we voted for in November changed something more than the names of committee chairs. Learn more at www.unitedforpeace.org

Gerald said...

I, personally, believe that NPR does support the surge in Iraq and the eventual nuking of Iran. Fred Kagan of AEI should volunteer to serve in a Iraq!!!!!

Gerald said...

America and Israel Have Decide to Genocide Iran

Gerald said...

Moreover, the antiwar movement has not addressed the US sponsored nuclear threat on Iran in a consistent way, in part due to divisions within its ranks, in part due to lack of information. Moreover, a significant sector of the antiwar movement considers that the "threat of Islamic terrorism" is real. "We are against the war, but we support the war on terrorism." This ambivalent stance ultimately serves to reinforce the legitimacy of the US national security doctrine which is predicated on waging the "Global War on Terrorism" (GWOT).

At this juncture, with the popularity of the Bush-Cheney regime at an all time low, a real opportunity exists to initiate an impeachment process, which could contribute to temporarily stalling the military agenda.



The corporate media also bear a heavy responsibility for the cover-up of US sponsored war crimes. Until recently these war preparations involving the use of nuclear weapons have been scarcely covered by the corporate media. The latter must also be forcefully challenged for their biased coverage of the Middle East war.

What is needed is to break the conspiracy of silence, expose the media lies and distortions, confront the criminal nature of the US Administration and of those governments which support it, its war agenda as well as its so-called "Homeland Security agenda" which has already defined the contours of a police State.

It is essential to bring the US-Israeli war project to the forefront of political debate, particularly in North America, Western Europe and Israel. Political and military leaders who are opposed to the war must take a firm stance, from within their respective institutions. Citizens must take a stance individually and collectively against war.

Gerald said...

Rejoice Nazi Americans, the annihilation of humanity is near!!!!!!!!!!!

Gerald said...

3,056 American soldiers are killed in Iraq! Around 20,000 to 30,000 soldiers maimed!!!

Gerald said...

What I truly love about Nazi America is her demented, demonic, and deranged citizens!!!!!

Nazi Americans love murder, torture, and the dismemberment of human bodies!!!!!

Gerald said...

The word, KILLING, is a beautiful sound to Nazi American ears!!!!!

capt said...

A new thread.

kathleen said...

Watching a video at the "New American Foundation" of Flynt Leverett called "Assesing Diplomatic Options Toward Iran".

Incredible! Worth watching and listening to Flynt!

Anonymous said...


Thanks a lot for sharing this good web-site.