Thursday, March 8, 2007
Gonzales 7
Senator Spector is on the hunt for an Attorney General. He told reporters that most of the blame for the ongoing controversy rests with the attorney general. "It's snowballing, mostly with the help of the Department of Justice," he said. He's referring to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales for his handling of the firing of eight U.S. attorneys, joining Democrats in charging that the prosecutors were dismissed without adequate explanation. The Bush administration is beginning to crumble but I'm afraid that it will not be exposed in time to keep Bush from Iran. Hopefully the Democrats can find their balls and ask the tough questions.
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
The troop surge
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says the surge is working. Wow, We haven't even got all the troops there yet but we're making progress. Who is feeding this man happy pills. I cannot believe how blinded by party lines this congress seems to be. How can he publicly say things are going well and that Bush is saddened by the state of Walter Reed Hospital. He must have a direct line. Fairy Tales can come true, they can happen to you.....NOT!!!!!
Dick Cheney in a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference demanded Thursday night that the Democratic-controlled Congress support President Bush's military buildup "on time and in full." He said that a too-soon withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq could send victorious militants spreading out, with some flocking to Afghanistan to fight alongside a regrouping Taliban. Fairy Tales can come true, they can happen to you....NOT!!! Let's get real. This is a disaster.
Dick Cheney in a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference demanded Thursday night that the Democratic-controlled Congress support President Bush's military buildup "on time and in full." He said that a too-soon withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq could send victorious militants spreading out, with some flocking to Afghanistan to fight alongside a regrouping Taliban. Fairy Tales can come true, they can happen to you....NOT!!! Let's get real. This is a disaster.
PNAC
The opinion of Sherwood Ross - Unlike Hitler, Bush Gives Appearance Of Sanity
But His Philosophy Also Espouses Master Race is a sobbering account of the not so pretty past history re-asserting itself again thanks to GW Bush and his friends of PNAC. Well worth the read.
Scooter Libby has long been one of the most well-connected neoconservatives in the country. Along with Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush and Norman Podhoretz, Libby was one of the 25 signatories to the founding statement of Bill Kristol's empire-embracing Project for a New American Century in 1997. PNAC called for an invasion of Iraq long before the 9/11 attack was seized on as the "justification" for that invasion. When it comes to the political movement that has dominated the American government for the last six years, Scooter Libby was at its very crux, a close intimate of America's most powerful political officials. It's always good to know that a close intimate of the most powerful political officials has been convicted of lying, perjury and obstruction of justice. It's really scary who is running our country or should I say their country.
But His Philosophy Also Espouses Master Race is a sobbering account of the not so pretty past history re-asserting itself again thanks to GW Bush and his friends of PNAC. Well worth the read.
Scooter Libby has long been one of the most well-connected neoconservatives in the country. Along with Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush and Norman Podhoretz, Libby was one of the 25 signatories to the founding statement of Bill Kristol's empire-embracing Project for a New American Century in 1997. PNAC called for an invasion of Iraq long before the 9/11 attack was seized on as the "justification" for that invasion. When it comes to the political movement that has dominated the American government for the last six years, Scooter Libby was at its very crux, a close intimate of America's most powerful political officials. It's always good to know that a close intimate of the most powerful political officials has been convicted of lying, perjury and obstruction of justice. It's really scary who is running our country or should I say their country.
Hugo Chavez - Democracy or not - News analysis
According to Peter Baker of the Washington Post, President Bush is on his way to Latin America to reassure the region that the U.S. is committed to what Bush calls "social justice" for the impoverished neighbors of the United States. In most of the articles about Bush's trip Hugo Chavez' name continues to appear as the nemesis to the Bush Administration. The U.S. corporate press uses such adjectives as leftist, firebrand, socialist, authoritarian, anti-semitist and dictator to describe Chavez. Also it seems clear that Chavez is anti-Bush as he has helped to orchestrate and has showed up at a number of rallies in Brazil and Uruguay protesting Bush and his attempt to sway public opinion about the U.S.
So why is Chavez so angry with the Bush administration? According to Greg Palast of the Progressive who interviewed Chavez in July 2006 states that the Bush administration supported the coup attempt in 2002. Also in the last election the main opposition group, Sumate of which the two founders of the nongovernmental organization which led the recall campaign against Chavez, faces eight years in prison for taking money from the Bush Administration and the International Republican (Party) Institute. No nation permits foreign funding of political campaigns. The National Security Strategy of the United States says "In Venezuela a demagogue (Chavez)awash in oil money is undermining democracy and seeking to destabilize the region." And now with John Negroponte as Deputy Secretary of State increased U.S. covert operations are sure to escalate not only in Venezuela but in other Latin American countries which want to remain free from U.S. domination. And the reason for this is Negroponte as ambassador to Honduras helped run the contra war in Nicaragua in the 1980s which murdered thousands of innocent civilians in Honduras and Nicaragua. Since Condoleezza Rice has little expertise in Latin American Negroponte will set policy for the region.
So why does the Bush administration want Chavez out of office? According to the U.S. Department of Energy Venezuela has five times the oil reserves that Saudi Arabia has and its not the oil Bush needs, its the oil dollars to fund the $2 trillion in national debt. Chavez has in fact withdrawn $20 billion dollars from the U.S. Federal Reserve and has lent or committed like funds to Argentina, Ecuador and other Latin American countries. He wants nationalism for Latin America. An axis of South American nations comprised of Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador are intent on implementing profound social reforms at home and opposing U.S. intervention in the region. Correa of Ecuador has announced that he will be closing the U.S. base at Manta.
So what has Chavez been doing to help Venezuela and other Latin American countries? In Palast's interview, Chavez states that up until seven years ago, Venezuela was a u.S. oil colony with all of the oil going up to the north and the gas was being used by the U.S. and not by us. Now we sell to the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Cuba and some Central American Countries, Uruguay, Argentina. He has even donated gas to the Bronx. He believes in fair commerce not free trade. He also offered to help after the disaster of Katrina with dropping his price per barrel to $50 versus OPEC's $75 a barrel. Of course that offer was flatly rejected by the Bush administration. He has established an international humanitarian fund with the oil revenues. He would like to replace the World Bank whose president is Paul Wolfowitz, a known PNAC and NeoCon, and the International Monetary Fund with this International Humanitarian Fund that is an alternative way to conduct financial exchange. An example given was Venezuela sends oil to Uruguay for their refinery and they pay Venezuela with cows. This is being down with Argentina as well and also the transfer of technology - medical or software. Chavez has requested that all the foreign oil companies pay back taxes for using their oil and land and their contracts are not being renewed until they make restitution. According to the Center of Economic and Policy Research, it appears that household poverty in Venezuela has dropped nearly 5 percentage points 12.9% from 42.8% in 1999 when Chavez took office.
Health care is now provided to 54% of Venezuelans and he has instituted a progressive income tax, public works, social security and cheap electricity which is why he has become so popular with the poor. His popularity wanes with the old white elite who do not want to share their oil wealth.
So in order for the Bush administration to continue its world domination it needs the Venezuelan oil reserves and the only way that is going to happen is by removing Chavez from office and putting in a figure head that can be dominated by the U.S. And the only way Chavez can survive is to build a coalition of Latin American countries that can defend against the U.S. covert operations that we have become known for and to get the world's attention on what is happening. This story will be continued.
So why is Chavez so angry with the Bush administration? According to Greg Palast of the Progressive who interviewed Chavez in July 2006 states that the Bush administration supported the coup attempt in 2002. Also in the last election the main opposition group, Sumate of which the two founders of the nongovernmental organization which led the recall campaign against Chavez, faces eight years in prison for taking money from the Bush Administration and the International Republican (Party) Institute. No nation permits foreign funding of political campaigns. The National Security Strategy of the United States says "In Venezuela a demagogue (Chavez)awash in oil money is undermining democracy and seeking to destabilize the region." And now with John Negroponte as Deputy Secretary of State increased U.S. covert operations are sure to escalate not only in Venezuela but in other Latin American countries which want to remain free from U.S. domination. And the reason for this is Negroponte as ambassador to Honduras helped run the contra war in Nicaragua in the 1980s which murdered thousands of innocent civilians in Honduras and Nicaragua. Since Condoleezza Rice has little expertise in Latin American Negroponte will set policy for the region.
So why does the Bush administration want Chavez out of office? According to the U.S. Department of Energy Venezuela has five times the oil reserves that Saudi Arabia has and its not the oil Bush needs, its the oil dollars to fund the $2 trillion in national debt. Chavez has in fact withdrawn $20 billion dollars from the U.S. Federal Reserve and has lent or committed like funds to Argentina, Ecuador and other Latin American countries. He wants nationalism for Latin America. An axis of South American nations comprised of Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador are intent on implementing profound social reforms at home and opposing U.S. intervention in the region. Correa of Ecuador has announced that he will be closing the U.S. base at Manta.
So what has Chavez been doing to help Venezuela and other Latin American countries? In Palast's interview, Chavez states that up until seven years ago, Venezuela was a u.S. oil colony with all of the oil going up to the north and the gas was being used by the U.S. and not by us. Now we sell to the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Cuba and some Central American Countries, Uruguay, Argentina. He has even donated gas to the Bronx. He believes in fair commerce not free trade. He also offered to help after the disaster of Katrina with dropping his price per barrel to $50 versus OPEC's $75 a barrel. Of course that offer was flatly rejected by the Bush administration. He has established an international humanitarian fund with the oil revenues. He would like to replace the World Bank whose president is Paul Wolfowitz, a known PNAC and NeoCon, and the International Monetary Fund with this International Humanitarian Fund that is an alternative way to conduct financial exchange. An example given was Venezuela sends oil to Uruguay for their refinery and they pay Venezuela with cows. This is being down with Argentina as well and also the transfer of technology - medical or software. Chavez has requested that all the foreign oil companies pay back taxes for using their oil and land and their contracts are not being renewed until they make restitution. According to the Center of Economic and Policy Research, it appears that household poverty in Venezuela has dropped nearly 5 percentage points 12.9% from 42.8% in 1999 when Chavez took office.
Health care is now provided to 54% of Venezuelans and he has instituted a progressive income tax, public works, social security and cheap electricity which is why he has become so popular with the poor. His popularity wanes with the old white elite who do not want to share their oil wealth.
So in order for the Bush administration to continue its world domination it needs the Venezuelan oil reserves and the only way that is going to happen is by removing Chavez from office and putting in a figure head that can be dominated by the U.S. And the only way Chavez can survive is to build a coalition of Latin American countries that can defend against the U.S. covert operations that we have become known for and to get the world's attention on what is happening. This story will be continued.
Yeah, Libby is convicted but the question now is SO What?!!!
The jury finally reached a verdict in the Scooter Libby Trial convicting him on all but one charge of lying, perjury and obstruction of justice. The Associated Press carried the story citing that Libby faces up to 30 years in prison, though under federal sentencing guidelines likely will receive far less. Why does he get gratuities? Others in similar circumstances would maximum sentencing. Does connections, education and the fact that he just lied, nothing more should give him a reduced sentence. It sounds like from his lawyers that they will ask for a new trial or appeal this verdict. In another words tie up the court system until Bush and Cheney are out of office. What a scam!
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Voter Fraud
The website "truthout.org" contains a list of videos that offer points of view and hard evidence to support the truth that the media chooses to ignore. One of these videos is "Princeton Scientists Create Vote-Stealing Program for Diebold AccuVote-TS". After watching this video, I was sickened by the fact that there is an on-going effort to tear down what little democracy we thought we might have. It is unbelievable what Americans do for power. Also Keith Olbermann of MSNBC covered the discrepancies of the 2004 election in a Must See video days after the election. Where was the media coverage? I don't remember hearing about the massive discrepancies in Ohio and Florida that could have turned the election. This is very disturbing. Congressmen and Senators called for an examination of the 2004 vote by the GAO. The Free Press article "Powerful Government Accountability Office report confirms key 2004 stolen election findings
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman October 26, 2005" gives a synopsis of these findings which they point out was not covered by mainstream media. It becomes exceedingly clear that this dictorial administration probably has been in office illegally for both terms. When you have a mission it doesn't matter how you get there - anything goes which they continue to demonstrate with there lies and unwillingness to listen to the American voter.
In an Alternet story the abusives of the 2002 election emerge. The Theft of Your Vote Is Just a Chip Away By Thom Hartmann, AlterNet. Posted July 30, 2003. I wonder where I was that I didn't understand the implications of all the discrepancies and issues that arose with the electronic voting machines This is one more chink in the armor of our democracy what little we have left.
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman October 26, 2005" gives a synopsis of these findings which they point out was not covered by mainstream media. It becomes exceedingly clear that this dictorial administration probably has been in office illegally for both terms. When you have a mission it doesn't matter how you get there - anything goes which they continue to demonstrate with there lies and unwillingness to listen to the American voter.
In an Alternet story the abusives of the 2002 election emerge. The Theft of Your Vote Is Just a Chip Away By Thom Hartmann, AlterNet. Posted July 30, 2003. I wonder where I was that I didn't understand the implications of all the discrepancies and issues that arose with the electronic voting machines This is one more chink in the armor of our democracy what little we have left.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Carl Bernstein - Bush/Nixon Comparison
Mike Sheehan's article in Raw Story states veteran reporter Carl Bernstein says the lack of truth and candor from the Bush administration is unprecedented in his experience and his experience includes the uncovering of Watergate during the Nixon Administration. In comparing Nixon's administration to Bush he says "We now understand the psyche of Richard Nixon, that his was a self-destructive act and presidency". Bush on the other hand, "This president has a record of dishonesty and obfuscation that is Nixonian in character in its willingness to manipulate the press, to manipulate the truth," he adds. "We have gone to war on the basis of misinformation, disinformation and knowing lies from top to bottom." For those of us who lived the Watergate scandal, feeling that was thw worst possible are now confronted with more evil then we could have imagined and it appears that Bush will get away with it and in the process take down the United States.
GAO & Phillip Perry (Cheney)
As reported in Think Progress, GAO Comptroller General David Walker told the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee that Homeland Security has been a challenge to get access to their records. Walker said the problem is “systemic” and not the fault of any single individual. But he complained that GAO has had to go through the office of Chief Counsel Philip Perry. Perry is married to Elizabeth Cheney, a former State Department official who is one of the vice president’s two daughters. Walker said it is his understanding that Perry’s office has to review documents GAO seeks before they are released and that Perry selectively sits in on interviews with department employees.
The GAO’s Skinner “said his investigations have also been hindered”:
“We’re experiencing the same problem,” said Skinner, who added his office is “oftentimes” told who they can interview and that it sometimes takes weeks to get documents. Skinner said he prepared a document last summer to inform all department employees of the IG’s responsibilities and authorities and encouraging them to cooperate with investigations. “That letter has been sitting up in counsel’s office at DHS since I believe June or July of ‘06,” Skinner said.
The latest semiannual report from Inspector General Skinner highlighted “a litany of staff misconduct: immigration officials demanding sex in exchange for visas, airport screeners stealing money from tourists’ luggage, federal air marshals smuggling drugs, and employees from various DHS agencies committing sex crimes.” Cheney's son-in law appears to be able to be as deceptive as his father-in-law.
All this information is available but the disclosure is going to happen after this administration is out of office. What a shame! Nothing will be done and the deception can continue.
The GAO’s Skinner “said his investigations have also been hindered”:
“We’re experiencing the same problem,” said Skinner, who added his office is “oftentimes” told who they can interview and that it sometimes takes weeks to get documents. Skinner said he prepared a document last summer to inform all department employees of the IG’s responsibilities and authorities and encouraging them to cooperate with investigations. “That letter has been sitting up in counsel’s office at DHS since I believe June or July of ‘06,” Skinner said.
The latest semiannual report from Inspector General Skinner highlighted “a litany of staff misconduct: immigration officials demanding sex in exchange for visas, airport screeners stealing money from tourists’ luggage, federal air marshals smuggling drugs, and employees from various DHS agencies committing sex crimes.” Cheney's son-in law appears to be able to be as deceptive as his father-in-law.
All this information is available but the disclosure is going to happen after this administration is out of office. What a shame! Nothing will be done and the deception can continue.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Secrecy News from the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy has reported that the trial of defendants Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman, two former officials of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)is scheduled to begin on or around June 4 in the Eastern District of Virginia. This is an unprecedented case in which the government claim that the Espionage Act could be used to prosecute the unauthorized receipt and transmittal of classified information by private citizens who are not engaged in espionage. This was upheld by a Federal Court last year. The question is did they really spy for Israel or were they being used by the governments of the United States and Israel routinely as a diplomatic "back channel" to convey sensitive information. This is definitely not on the front page of any newspapers. The court has made it very difficult for the prosecution and the defense to do their jobs. The outcome appears to be questionable as more and more restrictions are added on.
Bush regains his footing?????
David Broder of the Washington Post believes that like Clinton, Bush is regaining some ground with public opinion. I can't tell if this article is tongue in cheek or Broder really believes what he wrote.
Washington Post allowing falsehoods and half truths on their outlook section
Robert Parry, who broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek, expressed his concern in the Baltimore Chronicle and Sentinel for an article published by the Washington Post on the front page of their Outlook section in which right-wing legal expert Victoria Toensing from the Reagan Administration presents false accusations against the prosecutor. Patrick Fitzgerald and Joe Wilson. Parry states "By presenting these pro-Libby arguments in such a high-profile manner, including fabricated “mug shots” of prosecutor Fitzgerald, the Post could be seen as joining in a last-ditch bid for jury nullification to spare Libby from conviction.(the mugs shots are not online) Parry also said "Back in the late 1980s, I co-wrote a lead article for the Post’s Outlook section and the piece underwent intensive review for fairness and accuracy. So the argument doesn’t hold that the Post sees no problem in publishing reckless charges in the Outlook section just because it can be passed off as opinion.(Before the Fairness Doctrine was repealed?) It appears that the Post is moving further to the right.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Hurrah for Rep Henry Waxman
The top auditors for the government say $10 billion dollars has been wasted or poorly tracked in the Irag war and reconstruction. The GAO gave the report to the Oversight Committee headed by Rep Henry Waxman who said he intended to investigate the fraud, waste and abuse agressively. Incidently the big abuser was Halliburton,the oil-field services firm once headed by Vice President Dick Cheney,with $2.7 billion in question. The problem is that by the time all the graft is uncovered Bush/Cheney will be out of office.
Race doesn't give Obama edge in S.C.
The title says it all. The Associated Press has done it again. Race should never be a deciding factor in voting for a political candidate. Why must they play the race card? Could we not have an election where it's about the issues and how they plan to solve them rather than what color they are or what religion they are or who they are married to, etc. Let's leave the sensationalism out of the news coverage. You might be surprised to find people still reading the news.
The Media and Unnamed sources
On FAIR.org they have found an honorable radio station (KSFR in New Mexico)that has decided not to report any more innuendos from unnamed sources concerning Iran or any other foreign entity since the reporting of similar innuendos coerced the US into war with Afghanistan and Iraq. Now if only more reporting agencies would follow their lead.
Also FAIR reported that the New York Times and the Associated Press violated their own rules on anonymous sources. Why is everyone in such a hurry to print news that can't be substantiated and the people giving the tips cannot stand up and be accountable. Another attempt by the administration to manipulate public opinion through the press and the press has become a door mat allowing the administration to wipe its feet on.
Also FAIR reported that the New York Times and the Associated Press violated their own rules on anonymous sources. Why is everyone in such a hurry to print news that can't be substantiated and the people giving the tips cannot stand up and be accountable. Another attempt by the administration to manipulate public opinion through the press and the press has become a door mat allowing the administration to wipe its feet on.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Neo-Cons - working with Israel to achieve goals
In an interview of Ramzy Baroud,a veteran Palestinian-American Journalist and the Editor-in-Chief of the Palestine Chronicle by Munish Nagar,an Indian Journalist who has a Master’s degree in Journalism and currently is pursuing PG diploma in Human Rights, Baroud asserts that
Israel's influence in the US through the American Israeli Public Relations Committee (AIPAC), has tilted in favor of Israel since the agenda of the neoconservatives to dominate the Middle East fits Israel's regional agenda that they alone could not accomplish but the US has been able to make the regime change in Iraq, contain Iran and Syria, etc. The neoconservatives convinced the US administration (of which Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld are members of PNAC)that what is good for Israel is good for America.
This was a very informative and thoughtful interview.
Israel's influence in the US through the American Israeli Public Relations Committee (AIPAC), has tilted in favor of Israel since the agenda of the neoconservatives to dominate the Middle East fits Israel's regional agenda that they alone could not accomplish but the US has been able to make the regime change in Iraq, contain Iran and Syria, etc. The neoconservatives convinced the US administration (of which Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld are members of PNAC)that what is good for Israel is good for America.
This was a very informative and thoughtful interview.
Thursday, February 8, 2007
RenewAmerica - analysis of Neocons and Bush
The essays in RenewAmerica continue to surprise me. Even though this organization is a right wing conservative group based on the founding fathers constitution it offers a wide span of views. If you want to know what Bush and the neocons have been up to read Deanna Spingola
articles. She has numerous articles worth reading that have the back up information to prove what she asserts. Must reads!!!
articles. She has numerous articles worth reading that have the back up information to prove what she asserts. Must reads!!!
Libby & Russert
The article by Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post recounts Tim Russert's testimony in the Scooter Libby trial as if he was on trial. Comparing the difference between Russert's persona on his TV show versus the trial, he seemed to be demeaning, closing with how he had once caught Russert in an inaccuracy. Whooptee do. The story should have been about the conflicting testimony of Russert versus Libby not about this reporter catching Russert in a faux pas. What a waste of space! Thanks goodness the Washington Post had several reporters working on this story as the article filed by Carol D. Leonnig and Amy Goldstein seemed to be an unbiased look at Russert's testimony. Just the facts Ma'am. Just the facts.
So looking further to see what all this means I found an article by political analyst Brent Budowsky -- who helped Sen. Lloyd Bentsen write the law prohibiting the willful disclosure of covert CIA officers -- taking a look at how the Libby trial has morphed into the shadow trial of Vice President Cheney. He lays out a clear path leading to Cheney. It's what we all suspected but no one has been will to say. This is just the beginning. Libby is a small part of a bigger picture which is going to continue to unfold. Deja Vu - Nixon. First his Vice President, then him and his staff.
So looking further to see what all this means I found an article by political analyst Brent Budowsky -- who helped Sen. Lloyd Bentsen write the law prohibiting the willful disclosure of covert CIA officers -- taking a look at how the Libby trial has morphed into the shadow trial of Vice President Cheney. He lays out a clear path leading to Cheney. It's what we all suspected but no one has been will to say. This is just the beginning. Libby is a small part of a bigger picture which is going to continue to unfold. Deja Vu - Nixon. First his Vice President, then him and his staff.
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Congress in No-Action
How can it be that the majority of members of congress and the senate are Democrats and still they cannot even get a simple non-binding resolution to the floor for a vote? Have symantics taken over any common sense in Congress. The BBC news reported a resolution opposing President George W Bush's decision to send extra troops to Iraq has failed to advance in the US Senate, dealing a blow to war critics. The international community must be wondering why we cannot get a consensus between 100 men that the Iraqi surge is foolish and the Bush policy in the Middle East be stopped. Are they all such ego-maniacs that each had to propose their own version to present? I understand a total of 4 different versions were floating around and there was not sufficient support for any one to bring it to a vote. If a resolution that is only a verbal stance, that cannot change the course of the administration, is bogged down in symantics, will this happen again when Bush declares war against Iran. Let's get our act together before it's too late.
NeoConservatives - Still a foot hold in the Bush administration
In an article by Juan Cole, he states that "getting Iran is an obsession of the Neoconservatives at the American Enterprise Institute and their plants inside the administration, such as Iran-Contra felon Elliot Abrams in the National Security Council(How does a felon pardoned by the President he committed the crime for get to be a member of the National Security Council?) and David Wurmser (a scholar with strong ties to a number of neoconservative policy institutes) and John Hannah(played a major role in corralling intelligence that the Bush administration used to justify its 2003 invasion of Iraq) on Cheney's national security council. Neoconservative Condaleeza Rice is now being dubbed a realist since rejecting the case compiled against Iran. Gates and Rice confirmed that they were concerned about possible inaccuracies.
It appears there is descension in the Neoconservative rank and file in the Bush administration.
It appears there is descension in the Neoconservative rank and file in the Bush administration.
Presidential Candidates - Obama and Edwards - No Pac or Lobbyist Money
It was refreshing to read an article concerning two potential Presidential hopefuls who have decided to not take special interest monies. Edwards has never taken special interest funds in any of his campaigns although the article did imply that having millions of your own to put into a campaign was somehow not good either. Obama who has taken Pac funds previously has made it clear that he will not be taking these funds in this campaign. However some of the other candidates are willing to take the special interest monies, among them are Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd. Although this could seem as a black mark against these two it is hard to know if the Pac funds will be of any influence. It definitely sends a signal to the American public, if their concerned, that two candidates believe that special interest monies do play a role in political policy.
Monday, February 5, 2007
News Analysis: Do we have the power to prevent the looming conflict with Iran?
The Melbourne IndyMedia reported on a well-attended public meeting in Sydney of the World Socialist Web Site and Socialist Equality Party (SEP)"to oppose the escalating US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the preparations for new illegal wars of aggression against Iran and other countries targetted by Washington. The featured speaker was David North, chairman of the WSWS International Editorial Board and national secretary of the SEP in the U.S." Speaking first was James Cogan, a WSWS staff writer who blamed the media for giving credibility to Bush’s claims that the mobilization of 21,500 more troops would stablize the region and help the Iraqi govenment become a “functioning democracy”. Cogan believes that "the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq is a war crime of historic dimensions, carried out by the American capitalist elite and its international allies to seize control over the second largest oil reserves in the world.”
Then David North spoke about the history of the United States world economic rise and fall. North believes that “if the most important factor in the fate of world capitalism in the twentieth century was the rise of the United States to the position of global economic pre-eminence, then the most important and explosive factor in the beginning of the twenty-first century is the breakdown of this dominant position. The dissolution of the Soviet Union has been interpreted by significant sections of the American ruling elite as an opportunity to employ military force to offset and counteract the consequences of its increasingly serious economic weaknesses." So "with no significant military opponents to place restraints on the unbridled use of its military power certain American analysts came to call this the “unipolar” moment. From that point on, there has been a pattern of increasingly reckless and self-aggrandising policies." This has pinnacled with the Neo-Cons' (headed by Dick Cheney)goal to occupy and control the Middle East and their oil. And even though the NeoCons are utilizing this unipolar moment, U.S. supremacy has passed. Power is now diffused between multiple states and groups.
"The megapower status of the US is a dominant fact of life on the planet today states Fawaz Turki, Special to Gulf News , though "declinist" scholars, such as Paul Kennedy in his The Rise and Fall of Empires, and Walter Meade in another declinist treatise called Mortal Splendour, have been warning the American establishment, since the late 1980s, that wanton arrogance, or hubris, can easily lead to overreaching, and overreaching to collapse."
With this knowledge in hand, the Republicans have been able to stall the vote on the resolution to disagree with the President on the war with Iraq. How can this be? It continues to show the American people that we have no say. The Democrats cannot even take a stand for a non-binding resolution and they are the majority. How are we going to end this conflict and keep from starting another one?
Further, in the Washington Post today is Bush's budget for 2007/2008. Increasing military spending dramatically for the remainder of 2007 and 2008 under the guise of global terrorism including funds to keep nuclear activity out of the hands of countries that we deem as possible terrorists (Iran). The Office of the Budget has the numbers included in the WP article. Can we not stop this insanity or in the name of funding the troops is Congress going to be compelled to give Bush what he wants - enough funds to make his move in Iran? The $2.9 trillion budget as characterized by Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) "uses deception to hide a massive increase in debt, and its priorities are disconnected from the needs of middle-class Americans." The President "insists on spending billions on $150,000 tax breaks for multi-millionaires at the expense of the middle class," and his budget "hands out favors for the oil and gas industry while eroding health coverage for children and seniors." Bush continues to do his own thing not outside of public opinion. James Fallow, a correspondent for the Atlantic believes that "no one can any longer trust the Administration to recognize and defend America’s rational self-interest — not when the President says he will carry out a policy even if opposed by everyone except his wife and dog, not when the Vice President refuses to concede any mistake or misjudgment in the handling of Iraq. According to the constitutional chain of command, those two men literally have the power to order a strike that would be disastrous for their nation. The Congress has no official way to prevent them from doing so...What the Congress can do is draw the line. It can say that war with Iran is anathema to the interests of the United States and contrary to the will of its elected representatives. And it should do that now. But they can't even get a non-binding resolution to the floor for a vote.
It appears the only way there will be change is if U.S. citizens stand up and let their government know what they want. In an article by William Huges on Media Monitors Network, he gives us a course of action - "America is going down the toilet! What are you going to do about it? Let me suggest that you make a copy of Solzhenitsyn’s essay, “Live Not by Lies,” and send it to your House of Representative member in the U.S. Congress and also to your two U.S. Senators. Put a personal note with it and say something like this: “No more lies. End the Iraqi war. No war with Iran. Bring our troops home, now. Put America’s interest first and work to reverse global warming. My Republic isn’t a global cop for the Wire Pullers of the New World Order. And--Impeach Bush and Cheney!"
Then David North spoke about the history of the United States world economic rise and fall. North believes that “if the most important factor in the fate of world capitalism in the twentieth century was the rise of the United States to the position of global economic pre-eminence, then the most important and explosive factor in the beginning of the twenty-first century is the breakdown of this dominant position. The dissolution of the Soviet Union has been interpreted by significant sections of the American ruling elite as an opportunity to employ military force to offset and counteract the consequences of its increasingly serious economic weaknesses." So "with no significant military opponents to place restraints on the unbridled use of its military power certain American analysts came to call this the “unipolar” moment. From that point on, there has been a pattern of increasingly reckless and self-aggrandising policies." This has pinnacled with the Neo-Cons' (headed by Dick Cheney)goal to occupy and control the Middle East and their oil. And even though the NeoCons are utilizing this unipolar moment, U.S. supremacy has passed. Power is now diffused between multiple states and groups.
"The megapower status of the US is a dominant fact of life on the planet today states Fawaz Turki, Special to Gulf News , though "declinist" scholars, such as Paul Kennedy in his The Rise and Fall of Empires, and Walter Meade in another declinist treatise called Mortal Splendour, have been warning the American establishment, since the late 1980s, that wanton arrogance, or hubris, can easily lead to overreaching, and overreaching to collapse."
With this knowledge in hand, the Republicans have been able to stall the vote on the resolution to disagree with the President on the war with Iraq. How can this be? It continues to show the American people that we have no say. The Democrats cannot even take a stand for a non-binding resolution and they are the majority. How are we going to end this conflict and keep from starting another one?
Further, in the Washington Post today is Bush's budget for 2007/2008. Increasing military spending dramatically for the remainder of 2007 and 2008 under the guise of global terrorism including funds to keep nuclear activity out of the hands of countries that we deem as possible terrorists (Iran). The Office of the Budget has the numbers included in the WP article. Can we not stop this insanity or in the name of funding the troops is Congress going to be compelled to give Bush what he wants - enough funds to make his move in Iran? The $2.9 trillion budget as characterized by Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) "uses deception to hide a massive increase in debt, and its priorities are disconnected from the needs of middle-class Americans." The President "insists on spending billions on $150,000 tax breaks for multi-millionaires at the expense of the middle class," and his budget "hands out favors for the oil and gas industry while eroding health coverage for children and seniors." Bush continues to do his own thing not outside of public opinion. James Fallow, a correspondent for the Atlantic believes that "no one can any longer trust the Administration to recognize and defend America’s rational self-interest — not when the President says he will carry out a policy even if opposed by everyone except his wife and dog, not when the Vice President refuses to concede any mistake or misjudgment in the handling of Iraq. According to the constitutional chain of command, those two men literally have the power to order a strike that would be disastrous for their nation. The Congress has no official way to prevent them from doing so...What the Congress can do is draw the line. It can say that war with Iran is anathema to the interests of the United States and contrary to the will of its elected representatives. And it should do that now. But they can't even get a non-binding resolution to the floor for a vote.
It appears the only way there will be change is if U.S. citizens stand up and let their government know what they want. In an article by William Huges on Media Monitors Network, he gives us a course of action - "America is going down the toilet! What are you going to do about it? Let me suggest that you make a copy of Solzhenitsyn’s essay, “Live Not by Lies,” and send it to your House of Representative member in the U.S. Congress and also to your two U.S. Senators. Put a personal note with it and say something like this: “No more lies. End the Iraqi war. No war with Iran. Bring our troops home, now. Put America’s interest first and work to reverse global warming. My Republic isn’t a global cop for the Wire Pullers of the New World Order. And--Impeach Bush and Cheney!"
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Talk is starting for war with Iran
As reported by Simon Tisdall,Tuesday January 30, 2007,Guardian Unlimited it appears the Bush Administration is back on the hunt to take down another regime that won't bend to their wishes. The British press liken it to their own Downing Street debacle before the invasion of Iraq. In an account in Adnkronos International, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Mohamed ElBaradei believes that the UN sanctions on Tehran should be frozen and the U.S. and Iran should come to the table to discuss the issues. It worked in North Korea. Why not here? There is nothing in North Korea that we want, unlike Iran and Iraq where most of the oil of the world exists. And it has been intimated that Iran refused to allow the UN inspectors in but ElBaradei disspelled this rumor.
The Jerusalem Post calls Iran "America's top rival in the Mideast" in their story of cooperation between Saudi Arabia and Iran to stem the strife between the Sunnis and the Shias in Iraq. Whose side are they on?
It appears Russia is cozying up to Iran now that the international community is taking sides. The Fars news agency reported that Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei said, "The U.S. has not achieved its goal in the region despite all its efforts. Active cooperation between Iran and Russia on regional issues within a defined framework can hinder the U.S.' ambitious and unilateral plans". Iran needs a strong ally that can make the U.S. think twice before marching to Tehran.
Pyotr Goncharov is a political commentator for the Russian News and Information Agency Novosti. His article Iran and U.S.: Between the logic of sanctions and the logic of war, he clearly lays out the strategy that is being put in place to allow the U.S. the right to pursue Iran. "The global media are writing that the plan of a potential U.S. strike at Iran has been worked out in detail, with the strike to be delivered by the end of April".
It appears from the article in the Irsh Examiner that Iran is not going to back down. It is pursuing its nuclear capabilities and will not be deterred, even by the "powerful" U.S.
Ahmadinejad, whose hard-line nuclear diplomacy tactics has faced strong criticism from both reformists and conservatives at home, also hinted today that key decisions in Iran are made by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, not him. IRNA quoted Ahmadinejad saying.“The general policies of the system are made by the Exalted Supreme Leader, and the government is required to carry them out; the president, as the head of the country’s executive body, pursues and announces the nuclear position.”
Nicolas Burns said "We're trying to convince the Iranians that it's in their best interest to sit down and talk with the United States. That is the basis of American policy." This was reported by Mohammad Zargham for Reuters. The article clearly was an administration propaganda tool. The list of articles goes on and on but the facts are clear. The international community believes Iran is a target of the U.S. and the American people are once again being deceived.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6320363.stm
http://www.counterpunch.org/cohn02012007.html
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/01/30/iran_ashura/
http://www.progressive.org/node/4486
http://business.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=171202007
http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0131-28.htm
The Jerusalem Post calls Iran "America's top rival in the Mideast" in their story of cooperation between Saudi Arabia and Iran to stem the strife between the Sunnis and the Shias in Iraq. Whose side are they on?
It appears Russia is cozying up to Iran now that the international community is taking sides. The Fars news agency reported that Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei said, "The U.S. has not achieved its goal in the region despite all its efforts. Active cooperation between Iran and Russia on regional issues within a defined framework can hinder the U.S.' ambitious and unilateral plans". Iran needs a strong ally that can make the U.S. think twice before marching to Tehran.
Pyotr Goncharov is a political commentator for the Russian News and Information Agency Novosti. His article Iran and U.S.: Between the logic of sanctions and the logic of war, he clearly lays out the strategy that is being put in place to allow the U.S. the right to pursue Iran. "The global media are writing that the plan of a potential U.S. strike at Iran has been worked out in detail, with the strike to be delivered by the end of April".
It appears from the article in the Irsh Examiner that Iran is not going to back down. It is pursuing its nuclear capabilities and will not be deterred, even by the "powerful" U.S.
Ahmadinejad, whose hard-line nuclear diplomacy tactics has faced strong criticism from both reformists and conservatives at home, also hinted today that key decisions in Iran are made by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, not him. IRNA quoted Ahmadinejad saying.“The general policies of the system are made by the Exalted Supreme Leader, and the government is required to carry them out; the president, as the head of the country’s executive body, pursues and announces the nuclear position.”
Nicolas Burns said "We're trying to convince the Iranians that it's in their best interest to sit down and talk with the United States. That is the basis of American policy." This was reported by Mohammad Zargham for Reuters. The article clearly was an administration propaganda tool. The list of articles goes on and on but the facts are clear. The international community believes Iran is a target of the U.S. and the American people are once again being deceived.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6320363.stm
http://www.counterpunch.org/cohn02012007.html
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/01/30/iran_ashura/
http://www.progressive.org/node/4486
http://business.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=171202007
http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0131-28.htm
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Presidential Candidates
Presidential Candidate slaughter is on. In an article by Michael Fletcher in the Washington Post concerning Barack Obama, race is the issue that is going to get all the press. It's hard to imagine that the black constiuents are the ones that are taking a harder look than the rest of us. Why? The President of the United States cannot effectively govern only one race ( the black race). He must govern all races. So let's all look at his credentials and his ideas and plans and see if he can be a good shepherd for America. Let's quit throwing the race card around. I know that prejudice exists and it's not fair but it has no place in a presidential race.
State of the Union - Ratings lower than Fox's Excellent
In an article in Gulfnews.com, staff writer Joseph Marques summed up what some of our top newspapers and some international papers including Britain, Saudi Arabia and Australia had to say about the State of the Union address. http://www.gulfnews.com/opinion/columns/world/10099418.html ">Saudi Arabia felt President Bush should get back to reality, Australia felt he should have admitted his mistakes and changed course long ago. None felt his domestic agenda was anything more than a rehash of his previous agenda already set. Even our newspapers cast a rather bleak look at this presidency and where it might end. The only shining star in the group was the Detroit Free Press that stated President Bush gave a confident speech considering the number of Democrats he was facing.
In continuing less than stellar comments on the State of the union the Real Truth, a magazine restoring real truth, leads us further to the right then I thought possible. They state it's all up to God because he hasn't given us the knowledge to have peace. Bush can't win on either side of the aisle.
This same theme of not making anybody happy with his State of the Union Address was echoed in the ">Chicago Tribune by Jennifer Loven, Associated Press. It was much ado about nothing except Bush's agenda - who cares what Americans want?
In continuing less than stellar comments on the State of the union the Real Truth, a magazine restoring real truth, leads us further to the right then I thought possible. They state it's all up to God because he hasn't given us the knowledge to have peace. Bush can't win on either side of the aisle.
This same theme of not making anybody happy with his State of the Union Address was echoed in the ">Chicago Tribune by Jennifer Loven, Associated Press. It was much ado about nothing except Bush's agenda - who cares what Americans want?
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Fairness Doctrine
Accuracy In Media's Cliff Kincaid strongly disagrees with Sanders, Hinchey and Kucinich. In a CNS interview, he said: "Make no bones about it, they want to force the conservative media to hand over air time to liberals. When federal bureaucrats dictate the content of radio and TV shows, it's muzzling to tell them what to say and how to say it. Liberals used to dominate the media, and they are irritated there are competing voices, so now they want to reign in the conservative media using the federal government. There is no prohibition against liberal talk radio. Liberals tried talk radio and it was not successful in the market place." Is this acccuracy in media according to the right?
CNS quotes Rep. Hinchey's spokesman, Jeff Lieberson, as saying: "The political interests of media owners can have a direct and indirect effect on the way news is presented to the public, so it's important that all sides are heard. This is not an attempt to muzzle them at all," Lieberson said of conservative talk-show hosts who are opposed to the Fairness Doctrine. "They will still be heard. This will ensure that different views that are not theirs will also be heard." I agree that the media needs to give both sides of an issue the opportunity to speak so that we have enought information to make an informed decision.
CNS quotes Rep. Hinchey's spokesman, Jeff Lieberson, as saying: "The political interests of media owners can have a direct and indirect effect on the way news is presented to the public, so it's important that all sides are heard. This is not an attempt to muzzle them at all," Lieberson said of conservative talk-show hosts who are opposed to the Fairness Doctrine. "They will still be heard. This will ensure that different views that are not theirs will also be heard." I agree that the media needs to give both sides of an issue the opportunity to speak so that we have enought information to make an informed decision.
Iran - Our next quest?
The UnderSecretary of State Nicholas Burns told Times "All of our actions, which are part of a concerted, cohesive policy are meant to show the Iranians there is a limit to their own power in the Middle East," Burns told TIME. "They need to respect American power and they need to deal with us on a much more cooperative basis. Right now, they're supplying the Shia insurgents with military assistance and sophisticated IED technology. Certainly they're supplying Hizballah and Hamas with arms. They helped to instigate that war [between Israel and Hizballah] last summer. We're trying to send an unmistakable signal that the Iranians need to limit their actions. They need to stop targeting American forces."
Iran's president stated he's not worried. "US rhetoric against Iran has not increased," Ahmadinejad said. "In 2003, they openly threatened to attack Iran. Now they have indirectly made such threats." Are we a threat? Or are we blowing smoke and he knows it? Propaganda amuck!!
Iran's president stated he's not worried. "US rhetoric against Iran has not increased," Ahmadinejad said. "In 2003, they openly threatened to attack Iran. Now they have indirectly made such threats." Are we a threat? Or are we blowing smoke and he knows it? Propaganda amuck!!
Iran
Troop Surge
In the confirmation hearings for General Petraeus to take over in the Iraqi War he stated "Petraeus made no guarantees of success, promising only to provide "the best leadership and direction I can muster" and forthright military advice even if he believes the mission is lost". as reported by the Washington Post
. The question that was not asked was rather is the Iraqi war already lost.
. The question that was not asked was rather is the Iraqi war already lost.
Afghanistan
In Marty Jezer's article at Common Dreams. org,"Remember Afghanistan?" he states "In Afghanistan (and again in Iraq), Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld wanted to use high-tech weaponry rather than troops on the ground, and so in both countries we emphasized strategic bombing. Our bombs may have been “smart” but our targeting was based on lousy intelligence, understandable since we didn’t (and still don’t) speak the language or understand the culture, religion, history, and aspirations of the people we were (and are) fighting. In Afghanistan, we bombed schools, hospitals, villages, wedding parties, UN storage depots and our Canadian allies, but didn’t find bin Ladin. According to Professor Marc W. Herold, an expert on Third World development, our bombs killed between 2562 and 2947 Afghan civilians during the first three months of the war. How many neighbors and kinfolk of the dead came to hate us as a result?" Now reports of the Taliban gaining strength are starting to be heard and with the government suspending elections, it appears only a matter of time before this country will be under the control of the Taliban. Where do we focus? Iraq, Afghanistan or the United States
Corporoate Media
According to an article Media Matters.org, Washington Post's John Solomon continues to targget Democrats in his articles. Washington Post gave him front page to cast inuendos about the sale of John Edwards Georgetown house being questionable since they seemed to make 1.4 million on the sale. Media Matters found nothing to inicate any wrong doing. He also did a similar article on Harry Reid's sale of some land. The inuendo being the enormous gain on the sale. The Washington Post is supposed to a fairly open newspaper but with printing articles like the above, it seems that they are taking a side.
In going to the source, here is the transcript of the talk radio show with John Solomon. People asked questions about the two stories above. Read it for yourself and determine what he's leaning.
In going to the source, here is the transcript of the talk radio show with John Solomon. People asked questions about the two stories above. Read it for yourself and determine what he's leaning.
Thursday, January 18, 2007
G.A.O. Watch Dog?
At MSNBC, (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16648850/) it has been reported that the G.A.O. has hard evidence that the Pentagon and the office of surplus has been selling military parts that have ended up in Iran and China not to mention their ability to purchase any type of weapon they wanted in this last year. In order to hide the waste of the Pentagon they are willing to sell it to anyone. Nothing like funding our next conflict. Also noted was a G.A. O. report that indicates that it wil take much more then the 1.2 billion Bush says is needed to continue the reconstruction. Much More. (Unable to recover that story) The bill for Bush's conflict continues to grow out of sight causing our budget deficit to balloon.
Scooter Libby - Are they your friends?
AT the internet site Media Matters (http://mediamatters.org/items/200701180001), they questioned the New York Times article giving testimonials to Libby's character by high profile political operatives but did not mention that they were also members of the committee for Libby's defense fund. Noteworthy in the article are characteristics of Libby that may seem honorable but could also be his shortcomings. Mary Matlin said he was Cheney's Cheney; that he does for the vice president what the vice president does for the president. And when he throws himself into a project, says Matalin, "he does it to the nth degree." All these seemingly wonderful accolades could mean just the opposite. That his loyalty to this administration have sent him to the dark side. In Fitzgerald's attempt to hold this administration accountable for the leak, Libby will take the fall as an overworked individual who did this one his own.
Iran - Our next conquest???
In an article stating the conversation between Senator Biden and Condaleeza Rice at a Senate Hearing Tuesday, Rice was asked point blank by Biden if the administration had plans to invade Iran. (A Washington Post Article - unable to recapture) Rice sidestepped the question by stating that we would defend ourselves as needed - whatever that would take. It is interesting to note that the troop "surge" will center on Baghdad and the province next to Iran. Good cover to infiltrate Iran. Also read an article concerning a compromise offer submitted by Iran in 2003 to this administration. (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0118-06.htm ) It was flatly turned down by VP Cheney. This compromise is very similar to the one this administration has stated it would consider now. If they didn't consider it then why would they seriously consider it now. It appears to me to be a smoke screen to cover up overt attacks on Iran.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
The troop increase in Iraq
I was reading a number of blogs from people responding to video clips of what the soldiers and Iraqis felt about the troop increase on MSNBC. I was surprised to read so many people still willing to give President Bush another shot at winning the war. ARe we all so crazed about winning that we cannot admit defeat? I don't believe you can win a war unless you understand your enemy and what motivates them to fight. We didn't do that in Vietnam and after troop escalation and the death of many more soldiers we left Vietnam in defeat. It is time to say enough is enough. I cannot believe the Democrats are even concerned about the thought that if they don't support the war they don't support the troops. Has anyone ever thought that supporting the troops might be by not putting them in harms way in the guise of creating a Democracy (did we ask the Iraqis if that is what they want?) in order to safeguard the oil for the oil companies. We all need to honor the sanctity of life and quit thinking of this war as a TV show that doesn't impact us personally. Over 34,000 Iraqis have died in the last year. Are we really helping these people. When people do not have the strength to rise up and create a better life for themselves, it is impossible for outsiders to do it. We are in an impossible war and expending more lives is not the answer. Bush needs to be impeached. His entire presidency has been a self serving philosophy.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)