political news and pure bs

Annenberg's Fact Check corrects the League of Conservation Voters. At issue is the League's claims about the distance of Bush's proposals for offshore drilling.

Annenberg sets the record straight.

Fact Check engages in some speculation. Namely that this current ad is payback for Gov. Jeb Bush distorting Kerry's position on offshore drilling last month.

The voters deserve better.

Bush's environmental is nothing short of abysmal. There is no need for distortions.

Another day with no confirmation of Sarin.

Why not? It should have been confirmed or not by now. The Right has been accusing the Left of 'defeatism.'

The Left, and anyone that wants the truth, is properly waiting for the the forensics to flesh out.

The Right, in their rush to call this "the smoking gun" that Saddam had WMD merely weakens their position by showing their overt partisanship, while the rational commentator awaits confirmation that will not come from the fertile imaginations of Right wing political pundits, but by the cool unbiased tools of science.

I know that I'm getting a lot of play off this issue. It is because I want the truth - as best as can be determined - about the infamous alleged Sarin 155mm round.

With every passing day, the rational person's skepticism grows.

If this does turn out to be Sarin, it is my hope that this is, as Scott Ritter has speculated, a 'dud' left over from the time when Saddam was experimenting with binary weapons, and not part of any stockpile.

I have just spent an hour or so listening to Chalmers Johnson discuss his book Sorrows of Empire as well as a great many other things.

I'll add this to my reading list.

I don't know where you can listen to this remarkable interview. I just happened to catch the interview on RadicalRadio.org.

A somewhat expurgated and shortened text of the interview can be found at ZMag. It doesn't do the audio interview the slightest amount of justice.

The interview is very good. He slays a great many Imperial albatrosses - or golden geese if you happen to own stock in the companies that directly profit from war.

Watch..ermm...Listen for a replay!

Update: It appears that Buzzflash has a more complete version of the interview.

Tim Russert, host of Nationalist Broadcasting Commission(NBC)'s Meet The Press has been subpoenaed by the Justice Department in connection with the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.

NBC, vehemently opposing the move, claims Russert did not receive information concerning the affair.

Why hasn't Novak - who obviously did receive the information - been subpoenaed? After all, the FBI is supposed to be non-political. This is by law. Odd that.

No confirmation yet?

The U.S. military has had the alleged device for over a week now. How long does it take to perform a full, comprehensive test to determine the nature of the chemicals found within the munition, and it's age and whether or not it was fired?

I'm still waiting.

Orwell's vision unfolded.

Background

The fish rots from the head down.

(warning: LA Times onerous registration required)

This is certainly no surprise. Plausible deniability vanishes. The Pentagon blows whistle on boss.

"This is not the America I know." Perhaps not, Mr. president, but it is the America we now know Rumsfeld knows.

And now we know, too.

This is a very odd online publication to say the least.

When your intellectual stars include such luminaries as David Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Dr. Laura, it's enough to drive an objective thinker into the arms of Bakunin.

Why even bring up such a towering intellectual site with such a wide range of thought ranging from far-right to ultra-radical right? Good question.

It seems that one Robert Knight, Director of the Culture and Family Institute has some serious issues seperating reality from his exceptionally warped ultra-right Biblical literalist worldview.

His recent 'Perfect Storm' claims - without any supporting data or evidence of course - that some mix of a permissive attitude towards homosexuality, placing women in combat conditions, and pornography, are responsible for the atrocious act perpetrated to Nicholas Berg.

Mr. Knight claims to know the mind of the terrorist when he avers: "Muslim extremists don't know that the majority of Americans are decent, law-abiding people who wish them no harm."

I wish he would give us some more pearls of wisdom such as the above.

It seems much more likely that extremists of any ilk know that the majority of any population is comprised of 'decent law-abiding people who wish them no harm.'

He offers a solution to the societal ills he lays out for the reader. One needs to be getting down "on their knees and asking God's forgiveness for letting it get this bad. Then, they should ask Him for guidance in how to restore the moral order."

If this fails, he then offers more pragmatic, deity-free advice.

Read the 'Perfect Storm' piece. It's not enlightened, but it makes for good digital fish-wrap.

Mr. Knight needs to know just how off-base he is. Direct comments here.

A follow-up to this post concerning the objective reality of what was transpiring in the Iraqi desert Wednesday prior to the U.S. taking military action against the now widely widely reported group of Arabs.

Here's the bit:

[snip]...Kimmitt said troops at the scene found a variety of weapons, including shotguns, handguns, rifles and machine guns. They also found foreign passports, four-by-four vehicles, jewelry, a satellite telephone, and the equivalent of $1,000 in Iraqi dinars. He did not mention Syrian currency, which military officials initially reported was among the items....[snip]

Link to article

Again, The Independent offers plausible non-militant explanations for the range of items found at the site.

We'll be watching this one. This may yet go down the memory hole.

Hi there,

I am coming to the conclusion that the alleged discovery of Sarin in Iraq is most likely a 'dud' as noted by former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter speculates in the linked article from the referenced post.

Do I think Ritter has an 'axe to grind?' Sure.

But in comparison with all of the far-less-qualified-to-comment people on the right, Ritter's expertise in this area is likely greater than all of them combined.

Hence the Administration's restrained response to what should have been a huge sigh of relief. Instead Rummy's response was less than sanguine. Read the referenced Op-Ed piece in the last link. It's so full of excited hyperbole, it leaves a dedicated skeptic chuckling(at least this dedicated skeptic).

Brother. If you're not skeptical of ALL Bush Administration claims, you're not following along. Of course you could be experiencing a protracted case of cognitive dissonance. Three and a half years and counting.

Still awaiting confirmation and forensic details.

Love, Todd

The Independent weighs the evidence available at this time.

Scott Ritter chimes in.

While Ritter may well be right in his analysis, it remains to be confirmed that the artillery shell of fame did indeed carry sarin(GB), or the binaries needed to produce GB. We'll wait for the outcome of definitive tests.

Interrogators at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison viewed sleep deprivation, stripping inmates naked and threatening them with dogs as normal ways of dealing with "the enemy," a soldier attached to military intelligence at the prison said Thursday.

Nothing to add, save for go and read the article.

Or Get Your War On.

I know, the GYWO panels are 5 days old. But hey, I have a life outside of blogging..honest, I do :)

Israel defies us.

Turn off the tap. Israel must stop this action. It's time. This is crazy by any remotely sane standard.

We shouldn't allow naked aggression by any state..including our own. We have the means to stop this insane action. Let's do it!!

While were at it, we should pursue normalizing U.S. - Cuba relations...after all, the reason for thirty-eight(?) years of sanctions - the Soviet Union - has been gone for 15 years.

************************************

In a sign that the U.S. and the neocons can actually say; "enough is enough," Chalabi's HQ raided by U.S. troops.

More later..I'm working on a few things.

Weekly New Jobless unemployment claims rise to 345,000.

Wall Street analysts had forecast a slight decline in claims to 326,000 from a revised 333,000 the previous week.

I found a really good, easy to follow article that MSN has posted by The Street.com's Peter Eavis. Debt matters. The facts concerning debt, and debt to equity ratios aren't in question. What is open to debate, is what this may mean. I would say that Eavis lays out a convincing case for the likely consequences of a series of rate hikes.

Attacking a wedding party with aircraft isn't likely to win the 'hearts and minds.'

[snip]..Iraqis interviewed on the videotape said revelers had fired volleys of gunfire into the air in a traditional wedding celebration before the attack took place. American troops have sometimes mistaken celebratory gunfire for hostile fire.

Al-Ani, the doctor, said American troops came to investigate the gunfire and left. However, al-Ani said, helicopters later arrived and attacked the area. Two houses were destroyed, he said.

"This was a wedding and the (U.S.) planes came and attacked the people at a house. Is this the democracy and freedom that (President) Bush has brought us?" said a man on the videotape, Dahham Harraj. "There was no reason."

Another man shown on the tape, who refused to give his name, said the victims were at a wedding party "and the U.S. military planes came ... and started killing everyone in the house."

Lt. Col. Dan Williams, a U.S. military spokesman, said earlier that the military was investigating.

"I cannot comment on this because we have not received any reports from our units that this has happened nor that any were involved in such a tragedy," Williams wrote in an e-mail in response to a question from The Associated Press.

"We take all these requests seriously and we have forwarded this inquiry to the Joint Operations Center for further review and any other information that may be available," Williams said.

The strike, widely reported in Iraq and the Middle East as an attack on a wedding party, comes at a time when American prestige is under fire as the United States tries to stabilize this country before the June 30 transfer of sovereignty are foundering.

Anti-American sentiment has risen following last month's bloody Marine siege of Fallujah, a Shiite Muslim uprising and the scandal over treatment of Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib prison.

"Many Iraqis have been killed so far" during the occupation, said Adnan Pachachi, one of the most pro-American figures on the Iraqi Governing Council. He said Iraqis "hope that these acts, from all parties, come to an end because the victims are Iraqis."...[snip]

I have been pretty critical of Pachachi in the past. I have come to the conclusion - and I understand that this may well be wrong - that Pachachi has the best interests of his fellow Iraqis at heart.

This really looks like another massive military screw-up.

It is highly unlikely that the U.S. forces, if found to be at fault, will face any retribution.

Contrast this outcome with the collective punishment which has befallen the residents of Fallujah for the deaths of four.

The U.S. government, and it's military arm, regard all peoples equally. It is simply that some peoples are more equal than others.

Note: I'm still waiting for confirmation of GB - or the binaries needed to produce GB - in the suspected artillery round.

The usual Right-Wing suspects, notably, Horowitz's "Front Page Magazine" and Safire, in the NYT, are leading the charge that the as yet to be confirmed-by-further-testing, missile warhead containing the alleged Sarin gas is precisely the reason we went to war with Iraq.

This is disingenuous. Both Frank Gaffney and William Safire know the publicly stated reason we went war against Iraq. It wasn't because Hussein had old warheads containing Sarin lying about.

It was because of the now entirely refuted allegation that under Saddam, Iraq was a major and growing threat to the U.S.

Lest you think I am in error, consider the following:

"The Iraqi regime is a serious and growing threat to peace." - President Bush, 10/16/02

"There are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists." - President Bush, 10/7/02

"The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency." - President Bush, 10/2/02

"There's a grave threat in Iraq. There just is." - President Bush, 10/2/02

('there just is'?..not terribly convincing)

"This man poses a much graver threat than anybody could have possibly imagined." - President Bush, 9/26/02

"No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/19/02

"Some have argued that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent - that Saddam is at least 5-7 years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain. And we should be just as concerned about the immediate threat from biological weapons. Iraq has these weapons." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/18/02

According to the public statements of Bush Administration officials, as well at the President himself, Iraq needed to dealt with now because it was a growing threat. The reason was not whether or not we would find the odd pre-Gulf War relic.

No. The Administration assured us, as noted in their statements above and from Bush's 2003 SOTU Address, that Iraq was a growing danger. Saddam was sending Ba'athists to conquer America. In the 2003 SOTU he delivered the following:

From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents, and can be moved from place to a place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

No, we don't.

We had no evidence that Saddam ever had any such labs.

Chalabi and Co. told the neocons exactly what they wanted to hear. Don't need any corroborating evidence when you get your information from a convicted embezzler.

Nope.

Strange company our leaders keep.

By the way, for all of the pure bs he was spreading, Chalabi's finally getting his funding cut-off.

Remember, Chalabi and friends are the people that fed the Bush Administration packs of fabrications in order to 'assist' the current White House occupant with his pre-determined plan for dealing with the neutered Saddam.

Chalabi was the guy that could sell it to the U.S. populace. And did so.

He provided the 'product details' that fomented irrational fear and loathing of Iraq and its leader. Just exactly what was needed to get the public to support the war.

Now that we know the 'publicly stated' reason for invading sovereign Iraq, whatever is the real reason or reasons?

By the way, GW Bush is widely recognized as a unique threat in the world. His environamental policies could kill us all.

Okay. It is beginning to look like an artillery shell used as an Improvised Explosive Device(IED) may contain two chemicals that when mixed produce sarin(GB).

As in all of the previous false alarms about illegal Iraqi weapons, "additional testing will be done outside of Iraq, more detailed testing, but the initial tests in the field show the presence of sarin." So said an unnamed U.S. military official.

Sorry, but I'm skeptical. There have been too many lies and too many false alarms for a thinking person to rush to judgment.

If this can be shown by a third party to be a binary device of the type noted by the FAS here, it doesn't begin to validate the casus belli for the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

The critical thing for the GB to be viable is for the difluoromethylphosphonate to have retained its integrity. I'll cede the point that this is mostly an academic one, but it does require comment.

It seems likely that if this story fleshes out, that the binary device was manufactured prior to the 1991 Iraq War.

It must be remembered that we went to war over ongoing WMD programs, including nuclear, bio, and chemical weapons production taking place contemporarily for which there is simply no evidence that has been shared publicly.

The last point is the key point. Iraq was a growing threat we were told.

"Iraq is busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and biological agents, and they continue to pursue an aggressive nuclear weapons program. These are offensive weapons for the purpose of inflicting death on a massive scale, developed so that Saddam Hussein can hold the threat over the head of any one he chooses. What we must not do in the face of this mortal threat is to give in to wishful thinking or to willful blindness."

That was everyone's favorite Dick speaking on 08/29/2002.

The truth is something altogether contrary to what we were told. Iraq was not a growing threat. Well, maybe in this sense; sanctions against Iraq were a humanitarian disaster of epic proportions. This could engender anti-U.S. sentiments. That was certainly a threat.

This fact could be a threat to the veneer of the U.S. being a benevolent power. That's the only threat.

Newsweek is allegedly reporting that Bush had decided by January of 2002 that the Geneva Conventions would not apply to members of the Taliban or Al Qaeda. Newsweek obtained a memo to the president from White House legal counsel Alberto Gonzales that read:

"As you have said, the war against terrorism is a new kind of war. The nature of the new war places a - high premium on other factors, such as the ability to quickly obtain information from captured terrorists and their sponsors in order to avoid further atrocities against American civilians. In my judgment, this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions."

Quaint? WTF? I wonder if Bush thinks that execution for convicted war criminals is "quaint."

If this can be confirmed, it's a very grey day for humanity.

"Why do they hate us?"

Colin comes clean - sort-of. It's certainly not news to readers of this site that Powell's critical presentation to the U.N. was deeply flawed and out of date.

Also, in the same linked article, it is being reported that the U.S. is moving 4,000 troops from South Korea to Iraq. Coincidentally, IAEA chief Mohammed El-Baradei declares North Korea to the number one "international security concern." I think that this is demonstrably false. I'll elucidate later.

Again, drawing from the same article, King Abdullah of Jordan sees an Iraqi civil war more likely now than a year ago.

Abdullah:

"If we see a disintegration of Iraq, if we see, God forsake, the worst scenario, civil war, then the whole region will be dragged into Iraq."

There is a lot more at link - the article is a meta-article. It would be a great format if it provided more depth, or links to more in-depth articles.

A shout to newly linked blog Digital Dissent for the heads-up on the El-Baradei assertions, and Powell's admission of 'being duped.' I don't buy Powell's explanation.

If Saddam's neighbors in the region weren't in fear of him, and remember, he invaded both Iran and Kuwait, then how come the Bush Administration officials were talking of 'mushroom clouds' and thousands of liters of chem. and bio-weapons?

The first Gulf war, a decade plus of sanctions, along with the now rarely mentioned UNMOVIC triad had left Iraq the weakest country in the region. We knew it, and so did Iraq's neighbors. It was an unpopular fact to mention that perhaps all of Iraq's WMD capacities were destroyed. Either during Gulf War I, or during the subsequent UNMOVIC actions, all verified WMD facilities were eliminated as a source of production.

That begs the question: What about existing hidden stockpiles?

The answer is that were never any viable WMD stockpiles. Iraq likely never developed adequately stabilized agents to store for long periods. Everything used to engender fear in the American population so that there would be popular support for the war were ghosts in the sands of Iraq.

Now, faced with the lack of Saddam's feared WMD programs, we are faced with explaining how the hell we were so wrong? We weren't wrong. We knew Saddam was no threat. That is the only explanation that makes sufficient sense to me.

Since Powell is on the hotseat, we might as well dispense with the myth that Powell is the Administration moderate. There is simply no evidence to support this oft repeated claim. Just because you may be slightly to the left of Donald Rumsfeld does not make you a moderate.

If presented with contrary evidence, I'll post a retraction.

A huge thanks to the anonymous reader that sent me this book.

I only mentioned Wilson's book last Friday in this post.

Scary. The book was sent before I made mention of it. To my clairvoyant reader:Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Did I forget to thank you? Thank you!

As if the security situation in Iraq needed further underscoring.

There are reports everywhere that Abdul Zahra Othman Mohammad, head of the Iraqi Governing Council has been killed in a car bomb attack today while at a checkpoint waiting to enter the U.S. controlled "Green Zone" in Baghdad.

Here's the Reuters report.

Details seem to be few at this time, but according to Reuters:

A statement purporting to be from a group headed by leading al Qaeda figure Abu Musab al-Zarqawi claimed responsibility for that attack.

"Leading al Qaeda figure Abu Musab al-Zarqawi?"

Well, I don't know that Zarqawi has any al-Qaeda ties whatever.

In this BBC profile of al-Zarqawi we find the following statements:

• The cell-members also told their German interrogators their group was "especially for Jordanians who did not want to join al-Qaeda".



• Intelligence reports indicated he was in Baghdad and - according to Mr Powell - this was a sure sign that Saddam Hussein was courting al-Qaeda, which, in turn, justified an attack on Iraq.
  
  But some analysts contested the claim, pointing to Mr Zarqawi's historical rivalry with Bin Laden.



• Both men rose to prominence as "Afghan Arabs" - leading foreign fighters in the "jihad" against Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s.
  
  After the Soviets were defeated, Mr Zarqawi went back to Jordan.

So, while I am certain that al-Zarqawi is a very bad guy, I am unconvinced that he is, as claimed by the U.S., a top al-Qaeda figure.

I mourn for our brothers in Iraq. Anything remotely like security and or stability appears to some distance away.

I thought the entry title appropriate given the planetary weirdness going on.

Just some quick observations.

More evidence on the reported Shia/Sunni solidarity against the 'coalition' forces. The heavy use of 'coalition' military force may revive the support that Muktada al-Sadr was reportedly losing. No mention of those nefarious foreign fighters - I have noted that we hear less and less about them all the time.

***************************************

What's all this about the Arab League not condemning the murder of Nick Berg? I think that the response has been surprisingly strong in condemning the act. Have we condemned our murder of thousands of Iraqi civilians?

HAMAS and Hizbollah joined Arab governments in "condemning this grisly act." I'd say that's pretty strong.

What does Powell expect? I'll speculate. He expects his rebuking of Arab leaders to shift American thought from the Abu Ghraib situation. I don't think that this has anything to do with Arab leaders. I think it's all about a certain event that will be happening in Nov. of this year.

We rightly condemn the abuse of prisoners held by all countries everywhere, but have little to say about 'collateral damage.' How odd we are.

I am totally freaked-out about all of this - Abu Ghraib, Berg, all the killing. All the killing. For what?

In case you haven't read about Berg's alleged relationship with Zacarias Moussaoui, the only person publicly charged in relation to 9-11, now you have a link.

With Berg's death, we'll likely not hear anthing more from official sources about Berg's encounter with Moussaoui. This is just too weird.


****************************************

The huge crater that is now being recognized as the causative factor of the mass extinction event at the Permian-Triassic juncture was mentioned in aboriginal folklore.

Archeologists, reviewing a petroglyph in northwestern Australia that has been deciphered as meaning: George Bush Jr. is going to be president of the most powerful country on the planet in the future.

The impression[crater] is God slapping his forehead in disbelief. :)

Given the allegations by Sy Hersh - and it reads like a rather iron-clad case - will Bush ask for Rumsfeld's resignation? If Rummy quits, that counts as a resignation as well.

Discuss in comments.

Sy Hersh opens up the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuses - Surprise: The methodology was rubber-stamped by Rumsfeld.

Sure I'm skeptical. I have to be. But Sy Hersh doesn't make very many mistakes. in the latest New Yorker online piece, Hersh meticulously crafts a piece worthy of his esteemed reputation. Here's a bit:

The solution, endorsed by Rumsfeld and carried out by Stephen Cambone, was to get tough with those Iraqis in the Army prison system who were suspected of being insurgents. A key player was Major General Geoffrey Miller, the commander of the detention and interrogation center at Guantánamo, who had been summoned to Baghdad in late August to review prison interrogation procedures. The internal Army report on the abuse charges, written by Major General Antonio Taguba in February, revealed that Miller urged that the commanders in Baghdad change policy and place military intelligence in charge of the prison. The report quoted Miller as recommending that "detention operations must act as an enabler for interrogation."

Miller’s concept, as it emerged in recent Senate hearings, was to "Gitmoize" the prison system in Iraq—to make it more focussed on interrogation. He also briefed military commanders in Iraq on the interrogation methods used in Cuba—methods that could, with special approval, include sleep deprivation, exposure to extremes of cold and heat, and placing prisoners in "stress positions" for agonizing lengths of time. (The Bush Administration had unilaterally declared Al Qaeda and other captured members of international terrorist networks to be illegal combatants, and not eligible for the protection of the Geneva Conventions.)

Rumsfeld and Cambone went a step further, however: they expanded the scope of the sap[Special Access Program], bringing its unconventional methods to Abu Ghraib. The commandos were to operate in Iraq as they had in Afghanistan. The male prisoners could be treated roughly, and exposed to sexual humiliation.

"They weren't getting anything substantive from the detainees in Iraq," the former intelligence official told me. "No names. Nothing that they could hang their hat on. Cambone says, I’ve got to crack this thing and I’m tired of working through the normal chain of command. I’ve got this apparatus set up—the black special-access program—and I’m going in hot. So he pulls the switch, and the electricity begins flowing last summer. And it’s working. We’re getting a picture of the insurgency in Iraq and the intelligence is flowing into the white world. We’re getting good stuff. But we’ve got more targets" — prisoners in Iraqi jails — "than people who can handle them."

Of course 'plausible deniability' can still be maintained. This is certain to garner a full, exhaustive investigation into prisoner abuses at all U.S. military retention facilities.

The article is Hersh's second 'My Lai' if it holds up. I have every confidence that it will. The question is: Do we have the courage to find out?

Read it. Download it. Give a copy to everyone you know...okay, a link will suffice.

You can't make this stuff up. The Independent is reporting that Bush will host next month's G8 summit at Georgia's Sea Island to showcase his record of "environmental stewardship."

But there are two glaring problems. The first is that Bush has been the most environmentally reckless president of the last - okay, the worst EVER. (please don't ask me to quantify that statement. I can say that Bush has the worst environmental protection record since the mid 1960s. That I can quantify)

The second is the site itself. I used to go to Glynn County - the summit site - several times per year. It is an environmental disaster.

According to The Independent, there are no less than 16 hazardous waste sites within 10 miles of Sea Island.

Read the article. See where the money to host the rich guys is being spent.

You know the drill. G8 = globalization fears = protesters = more $$$ for security. The wildlife gets..Trampled.

Somehow, I think the irony is lost on Bush.

Powell's boss(scissors) says U.S. troops to remain in Iraq after 'handoff of sovereignty.' I like that. A stupid sports metaphor seems apt given the shell game being played by our politicos over Iraq and pretty much everything else.

For Powell's(paper) words, see the post directly below this one.

Even with a program, it's difficult to place the players.

I know that his deputy, Richard Armitage said recently that Powell's UN WMD presentation has left him with a source of great distress, but it is being reported that Powell has said that the U.S. will pull ALL foreign(U.S, British, etc.) out of Iraq after 'sovereignty' is turned over to the Iraqis on June 30.

Of course, it ain't that simple, Colin.

Since WaPo has done much of the lifting on the issue, I'll cede the floor:

His statement[Powell's], which was echoed by the foreign ministers of Britain, Italy and Japan, and by the U.S. administrator in Iraq, came one day after conflicting testimony on Capitol Hill by administration officials on the issue. Testifying before the House International Relations Committee on Thursday, Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman appeared to say that the interim government could order the departure of foreign troops, only to be contradicted by Lt. Gen. Walter Sharp, sitting at his side, who asserted that only an elected government could do so. Iraqi elections are scheduled for January.

U.S. officials emphasized that they could not imagine the new government requesting the departure of almost 170,000 troops when the security situation in the country is so dire. But the new government's ability to assert its authority after the occupation authority dissolves on June 30 has been a central question in the international consultations over the shape of the incoming government, with the United States under pressure to transfer as much political power as possible to the Iraqi people.

"The Iraqi government has to be in a position to govern, and that's why I mean that it has to be a break with the past, " French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier said at a news conference in Washington after a preparatory meeting for next month's Group of Eight summit in Sea Island, Ga.

Barnier had been harshly critical of U.S. actions in Iraq before he arrived in Washington, seeming to equate U.S. and Israeli actions in an interview with Le Monde published on Thursday. "What strikes me is the spiral of horror, of blood, of inhumanity that one is seeing on all fronts, from Fallujah to Gaza and in the terrible images of the assassination of the unfortunate American hostage," he told the newspaper. "It all gives the impression of a total loss of direction."

French, Russian and Italian officials pressed yesterday for the new government to be given the authority to halt military actions by U.S. forces. Powell rejected that, saying the forces will remain under the command of an American who "has to be free to take whatever decisions he believes are appropriate to accomplish his mission."

Why do I see another blunder in the offing? Conditioning? Yes. That's it.

Lots more at the WaPo link.

*******************************

There was an ill-researched AP article that was picked up by my local paper today. Interestingly, Google only shows one hit for it. The headline and text are identical in both this online document. "After scandal, has U.S. lost its moral authority?"

What? The U.S. has some sort of moral authority?

Sorry. If you really read history, rather than fall victim to 'the doctrine of change of course,' and various propagandist disinformation, you have to come to the conclusion that far from being a benevolent power in the world, the U.S. could more correctly be called the largest sponsor of state militarism.

This isn't really in dispute. The facts are what they are. Both Democratic and Republican administrations have had their share of unwarranted military aggressions done in the name of this doctrine or that pretext.

Of course it goes much further back than the 20-21st centuries.

Think, don't react. Why does the U.S. spend as much its military as the rest of the world combined? It's just called the 'defense industry.' It's a tool that has, save for a few instances, been used for naked offense.

This cannot be good.

I can't believe that after all that has happened over the past two weeks that the U.S. military is doing this. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should.

According to all 'official' reports, al-Sadr's support is on the wane. It is baffling as to why the U.S. has stepped up it's military campaign against Sadr's Mehdi army - unless the official reports have been lacking in veracity. Nah. Couldn't be.

I think with the incursion into Najaf's holy "Valley of Peace" cemetery in addition to today's report of Imam Ali's shrine being hit - with four large holes in the shrine's golden dome being reported - the U.S. is likely to bring fresh anger to the Shia majority.

For some additional color as to what the shrine and cemetery mean to the Shi'tes, listen here.

I know that this is already another 'he said, she said' situation, but that does nothing to address the fact that the U.S. is in Iraq illegally. Right, Mr. Perle?

May we gain the wisdom to use force more discriminately.

It's weird. If we brainstormed to develop policies to foment al-Qaeda recruitment, I don't think we could do any better.

Is that what we are really trying to do? I'm no conspiracy 'theorist,' but if I was...

This is embarrassing. Now that campaigning for the general election has begun in earnest, the distortions and lies in the Kerry and Bush camps is reaching sickening levels.

Today's culprit: Kerry and The Media Fund - a group headed by Clinton aide(Bill, not Hillary) Harold Ickes.

I'll let Annenberg take it from here:

Summary

The latest ad from the Media Fund -- the group headed by former Clinton White House aide Harold Ickes -- shows the White House lawn being given over to corporate logos and a neon sign saying "Corporate Headquarters."

There's no question Bush is pro-business, but this ad goes far over the line on several counts. It implies Bush hasn't acted to protect pensions, fight corporate corruption or provide a "real" prescription drug benefit for retirees, all of which are false. It also implies he personally awarded a contract to Halliburton, which is also false.

There is much more at link.

This stuff is used because it works. In a country where some 60% of polled adults still believe that Saddam was both involved with 9-11 and that illegal weapons have been found in Iraq.....This is too easy.

I think that the only thing Americans are more certain of than Saddam being a real threat to the U.S., is that W is owned by corporations. Slam dunk for the Dems. Too bad it's a lie.

Let's not fall victim to propaganda and other obfuscations.

Bush has finally delivered a viable, reasonable reason to vote for Bush in 2004. Not GW Bush, Laura.

In his own words:

"The best reason for four more years is to make sure that Laura is the first lady for four more years. I'm really proud of Laura. She is a great role model. She is steady, a calming influence when the nation needs calm."

I'll bet that Laura is a fine person.

It's a shame that we never got to know you, Laura.

When the "best reason" to vote for a candidate is because of their significant other, it gives one little(no?) reason to vote for the individual running. If Laura was running, who knows?

I didn't make this up.

Here's a link. The RNC/Rabid Right script being played is that Teresa Heinz Kerry is the anti-Laura. You know, an uppity feminist type. Wealthy and opinionated. A woman who speaks her mind. Tough.

I do feel some sympathy for Laura. She hitched her wagon to a fauxboy. I like that. I'll use it.

Or, actual reality intrudes on Rummy's psycho-reality.

WaPo is reporting that Rumsfeld got an earful from the troops during his 'visit' to Iraq.

He reportedly said he was clueless on the matter of arming Defense Department civilians.

Clueless? I'm shocked.

Here are some of the topics that Rummy had to field:

• When will the troops get better body armor?



• When will Humvees get any armor?



• Is it true that the military will not pay their entire airfare to get home?



• Why won't my military medical coverage wouldn't handle physical therapy for my handicapped child?



• When, if ever, would the United Nations send some troops and where would they come from?

A reported exchange:

Questioner: "Sir, there are many DOD civilians who are here in the theater, and many of us are unarmed. And many times we're placed in harm's way in convoys and we have no means to protect ourselves. And I know there's been many memos and letters I've seen floating around saying it's the policy to arm civilians if they need to be armed, if they're in harm's way. But there seems to be a resistance . . . to actually provide arms to us. I was wondering what the current policy is on that."

Rumsfeld: "Well, I could do several things at this point. I could admit I don't know what the current policy is here, or I could turn around and ask General Rick Sanchez to come over here. Then he'll say he doesn't know."

Rumsfeld then called on Sanchez for an answer. He didn't know.

"We'll be able to get the definitive answer," said Sanchez. "But right now, we have been working to try to get the authorities to arm the civilians here. That has been an issue for some time. And you're right, we're working that and we have been for some time. And we'll get -- I'll get a specific status for you. Okay?"

The entire article.

I think it's great that our troops have no issue asking Rumsfeld tough questions that our corporatist press corps cannot.

By the way, here is a USA Today article concerning Humvee armor

Select quote: "We can procure [Humvee armor] as fast as we have the money to do so." - Maj. Gary Tallman

Essentially, the Bush administration supports the troops as long as it doesn't cost any money.

(yeah, that's shrill. Sorry)

First up...Your Humble blogger just got hired as a senior engineer by a semiconductor firm that specializes in semis for medical and RF devices. Woohoo!!

I'll drink to that.

***************************

Next, and lastly for the moment, in today's episode of Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman interviews Ambassador Joseph Wilson. You know, Valerie Plame's husband.

I haven't read Wilson's book, The Politics of Truth: Inside the Lies that Led to War and Betrayed My Wife's CIA Identity: A Diplomat's Memoir, but now I feel that I must. Wilson was a loyal and trusted servant for a reason. It's a real shame that the White House allegely leaked his wife's name. The two of them deserved to be esteemed not villified.

In honor of Wilson's and Plame's decades of service to their country, I'll add the book to my links, and the book itself to my library. I have a date with Borders :)

U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz finally steps up to the truth bar and takes a drink.

Breaking with White House budget chief Joshua Bolten, who earlier this year said that next year's spending would probably be $50 billion, Wolfy claimed today that the neocons' excellent Permawar ideology will likely cost closer to $75 billion next year.

Your tax dollars at work.

Reuters is reporting that John Kerry railed against Bush's lack of concern..think VA health benefits.

I admit it. I don't know if Bush has a newer proposal than the last round of egregious cuts to veterans benefits.

I can't find the line items in that omnibus monster we call the U.S. Budget. In looking at the 'highlights' of Bush's fiscal year 2005 budget. It calls for an "over 40% larger than when he took office." No figures are given, and that makes the skeptic in me, well skeptical.

Kerry cites a lot of numbers. But as we've seen from both parties, this isn't 'hard math.' lots of cherrypicked data, and glaring ommissions of things that don't support a campaigner's message. This is true of both sides.

I can recommend looking into the Kerry article. There are some fun quotes by a number of vets, and of course Bush has done the unthinkable against our troops. He sent them off to fight, kill and die in a war based on lies.

Here is the article.

Kerry just needs to stop from imploding at this point in order to make this at least a close race.

***************************************

Annenberg Fact Check

Bush on the fire.

At issue is a Bush ad claiming 'dramatic results' from his Texas school 'reforms'(that word again...who's picking my pocket?). Bush paints a bright picture but fails to mention that the Texas efficacy claims were plagued by 'educational book-cooking' in order to make the grade. Pun intended.

It is far from clear whether Bush's Texas reforms - on which the National No Child Left Behind Act is based - did anything positive whatever for Texas schools.

In testimony on Tuesday, Donald Rumsfeld said some pretty odd things. I can't find a transcript of what I found to be an egregious statement..pretty much classic Rumsfeld. I have an audio clip of an exchange that took place between an obviously upset Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Rummy(it's only 53 secs. worth of audio. Only 424KB).

Download and listen. Rumsfeld always seems delusional, but Leahy really zings him. Good show from the Senator from Vermont.

By the way, did you know that Leahy is a longtime champion of human rights and speaks eloquently on the topic? I only did because he's almost a neighbor.

The entire segment of a news report by FSRN's Mitch Jeserich adds far more color(2MB..just D/L it!). Included are a short statement by Bill "Serial Feline Killer" Frist(R-Self-Aggrandizer), as well as some wise words from attorney Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, who filed for release of the latest round of photos under the Freedom of Information Act with the Department of Defense and the Central Intelligence Agency. Rummy, that cold war relic's statement referenced above is also included.

One more article. Maybe two. This is a segment of an article by Sumana Chatterjee writing for Knight-Ridder:

The pointed, skeptical and sometimes hostile questions [about U.S foreign policies] signaled a new determination by lawmakers of both parties to assert stricter oversight of the Bush administration's policies on Iraq. Republicans have been reluctant to question President Bush, but now lawmakers wonder if they've been quiet for too long.

One of the most heated exchanges came as Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., questioned the hand-over of sovereignty to Iraqis, scheduled for June 30. Domenici said he was worried that neither the Iraqis nor the U.S.-led coalition is prepared for the difficult task.

WHAT ARE THE PLANS?

"I can envision that this situation will not work and that we won't have an organizational structure that will do anything other than have Americans fighting and us supplying those fighters with more and more money," Domenici said. What, he asked, are the U.S. plans? Is the American taxpayer going to pay for Iraq's new infrastructure?

Rumsfeld offered few new details, outlining instead the plan for United Nations envoy Lakhdar Brahimi to work with Iraqis to appoint a president, several vice presidents and a Cabinet of ministers. He said he hopes the Iraqis will finance their own reconstruction. While his answers were sketchy, Domenici said after the hearing: "It's the best we've ever gotten."

That comment reflects widely held resentment on Capitol Hill of Rumsfeld's habit of treating Congress as an afterthought undeserving of much information. That's no longer acceptable to lawmakers in light of the growing U.S. death toll, the scandal over U.S. abuse of Iraqi prisoners, revelations that the administration used information from dubious sources to persuade Congress to support the war and doubts about how to return Iraq to Iraqis.

The bad news is moving lawmakers to exert stronger oversight over every dimension of U.S. policy on Iraq, said Sen. John Warner, R-Va., the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Wednesday's session came before the Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, which oversees the Pentagon's budget.

Sen. Richard J. Durbin, D-Ill., challenged Rumsfeld for permitting abusive interrogation techniques of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison and said the practices violated international rules set by the Geneva Conventions.

While decrying the abuses, Rumsfeld said Pentagon lawyers had approved harsh interrogation techniques such as sleep deprivation, dietary manipulation and forcing prisoners to assume stressful positions.

Much more at link above.

Rummy's always been a huge liability. In a fully functioning democracy, he'd be toast. He's still insisting that the Geneva Conventions were abided by in the growing Iraqi/Afghanistan/Guantanamo Bay prisoner/detainee torture scandal...Gimme a freakin' break.

Now there are allegedly photos of detainees being forced to have homosexual sex and a host of other depraved acts. The linked article is quite good. It provides quotes from across the political spectrum concerning the nature of the photos as yet unseen by the public.

This is a shameful episode in a long series of shameful episodes by the American Imperialism Machine.

I wonder, as many others have, just where does the buck stop?

Bush publicly supports Rumsfeld? This man needs a cerebral transplant.

Sorry. This is turning into more of a rant than I imagined. I meant to just provide you with some audio and links to articles.

I am also equally appalled by the execution of Nicholas Berg.

Our dear leader reportedly said this yesterday about Berg's execution:

"Their intention is to shake our will. Their intention is to shake our confidence. Yet by their actions they remind us of how desperately parts of the world need free societies. ... We will complete our mission, we will complete our mission."

We've been hearing this tired line for a year now, and things in occupied Iraq have grown dramatically worse. Where's our Commander-in-Chief? Absent without leave. Again.

Bush's ad: "Steady Leadership in Times of Change" WTH? This guy puts his 'stay the course' monolithic bs above the safety of our troops, the Afghanis, and the Iraqis..which by the way, the International Committee of the Red Cross has repeatedly stated that 70% - 90% of all Iraqi prisoners were/are being "held in error." They were arrested "by mistake" in military sweep operations aimed at getting bad guys.

The excellent CS Monitor has all the links you need. A Clear...System Failure.

I just found a transcript of an interview that Democracy Now!'s Amy Goodman had with Cliff Kindy, a member of the Christian Peacemaker Team who spent much time in Iraq. There is new stuff here that hasn't been reported elsewhere. Without further ado:

AMY GOODMAN: We're joined on the phone by Cliff Kindy, a member of the Christian Peacemaker Team who has spent extensive time in Iraq over the past two years, before the current prisoner abuse scandal became a major story. The Christian Peacemaker Team documented these types of human rights violations by US Forces. In January, the group released a report called, "Report and Recommendations on Iraqi Detainees". Kindy has had substantial contact with Iraqi detainees and their families and US Soldiers and higher-ups. We welcome you to Democracy Now!

CLIFF KINDY: Thank you, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: What did you know and when did you know it?

(this is the way underreported stuff..Democracy Now!, and now pure bs, are the only two sources I know of for this info.)

CLIFF KINDY: I'm going to say a few things that might be helpful. We met with Ambassador Richard Jones, who was brought in to solve the detainee problem. He said - we met with him the 23rd of January - I think it was, he said at that point, "We were overwhelmed by the detainee problem." We met with Colonel Fishburn, Major Chrinsy, some of the officers in the field. We met with them at the Iraq Assistance Center on the 22nd of December. They said, "The problems we are facing now" and they affirmed the study in our report. They had seen our report. They said, "This goes beyond the Iraq Theater." They said, "Things need to change. People need to develop policies that take into account long-term security interests as well as short-term security interests." We were involved in the incidents in Al-Jazeera village where four US Soldiers were killed by friendly fire. In their frustration, they executed three of their prisoners and then opened fire on people leaving a mosque after prayer and five neighbors were killed by tank fire. That report didn't hit the press. We visited a village, a razor wire community about 50 kilometers north of Baghdad. A commander from a nearby base said they had instituted collective punishment. They razor wired the city and instituted a curfew from 7:00 p.m. until 8:00 in the morning. That was in place five months ago and may still be. Now, those are detainees in one sense. We were in another village, a village along the Tigris River. One person was wanted. He was on officer in the BaÂ?ath party. 83 men and boys were swept up in that village. There were two males left in that village after the sweep. It seems practices are much broader than just inside Abu Ghraib prison. It seems that there are, well, as Fishers and Clinesy said there are no policies in place. Policies need to be developed that are accountable. Those things haven't been happening.

AMY GOODMAN: What What did US Military and those in the US Occupying Forces say to you as you were raising these issues?

CLIFF KINDY: They affirmed our findings. They said, "Yes, we have found these kinds of stories and worse." That was with Ambassador Richard Jones in the January meeting. They said, "Yes, we have a bureaucracy, and a bureaucracy moves slowly. We have suggestions on things that will help to improve this." They tried to institute those, but I think it is true, bureaucracy moves slowly. We're seeing the results of that.

Our government, and your tax dollars at work.

This entry was more than a bit over the top. Sorry. I'm angry. Now you know.

Why?

Why setting a new record in March, that's why. The U.S. trade deficit widened 9.1 percent in March to a record $46.0 billion, the Commerce Department reported today.

The U.S. Commerce Dept. has the goods.

Record trade and governmental deficits simultaneously. Most excellent. For you Keynesian types, a round of drinks.

While we're on the subject of deficits 'aren't necessarily bad,'(a nod to Keynesians) I think it prudent to point out that bolstered by fresh tax revenue, the Congressional Budget Office took in 17.6 billion more than it spent in April - a traditionally strong month due to tax revenues. The CBO had estimated a surplus of $15 billion earlier this month. If you didn't look at the year over year comparisons, you'd think that this was pretty good.

In April of 2003, the Treasury Department reported a $51.1 billion surplus.

This April's performance is the weakest since 1994. Not so good.

I'll leave the Bush taxation transferal system(alternativley known as the 'cut services program') alone, as I think the numbers are sufficient commentary.

One more thought about the economy.

Greenspan, himself a Keynesian by deed, and a likely Wicksellian by self-reflection, warned last week that, "our fiscal prospects are, in my judgment, a significant obstacle to long-term stability because the budget deficit is not readily subject to correction by market forces."

This is certainly a truism. Politicos hold the national checkbook. What we've seen to this point isn't encouraging on governmental budgeting.

Damned shame.

But all too predictable.

In another show of a major policy shift toward Iraq in the offing, Maj. Gen. Martin E. Dempsey - the guy in charge of fighting Muktada al-Sadr's al-Mahdi militia - announced today that he would consider accepting "al-Sadr's top militia deputies and other fighters in a new security force he is forming to patrol the holy Shiite city of Najaf."

I think this is 'applied pragmatism.' It could save the lives on all sides, and while I feel relatively certain that some concessions will be made by both sides, that the General is taking this onboard is a very positive development in what has been a pretty ugly situation.

Before the recent brouhaha over al-Sadr's paper being shut down, the Mahdi did provide some much needed "security in Baghdad's Shi'a slums and distributed food and other aid." That according to many reports, but I pulled that from Radio Free Europe.

This illustrates that the Mahdi militia can assist in their communities'. I hope that the Mahdi aid was done in the best humanitarian spirit. However, I am ever skeptical of newly formed - or well established - groups motives.

At the very least, this policy adjustment, should it come to fruition, will provide the U.S. with some much needed positive PR.

I know that these guys aren't likely to give anyone - me included - a warm and fuzzy feeling, but it's good that the U.S. command on the ground is publicly acknowledging the difficulties on the ground, and are beginning to take the tack that they'll give the Iraqis a chance to prove themselves.

Applied pragmatism..A pure bs exclusive. Heh. :) No doubt it'll remain so :)

I wish all involved success in their endeavours.

Peace.

George Packer, writing for The New Yorker has a great piece up about whether Iraqis will ultimately choose a 'democratic' or a 'radical Islamist' form of government. These aren't the only choices, but in writing a catchy title, this seems to be the question de jour.

Packer follows a young Iraqi physician, Dr. Bashir Shaker, and the story is full of human drama. The article touches on a number of issues, related to which form of goverance the Iraqis may choose and not. I found these ancillary issues to be far more compelling a read than the main thrust of the article.

An extremely good read. Go ahead.

I remember reading in some applied economics text that for every penny in the rise of the cost of a gallon of gasoline the greater economy loses roughly a billion USD.

Since the beginning of 2002, gasoline prices have risen by an average of 80 cents a gallon - effectively negating more than one-quarter of the $316 billion in 'stimulus' that was provided by the three federal tax cuts. Let's call a spade a spade here. We're adults. Right? :) The 'tax cuts' were really a tax-shift from the federal to the state and local. Either that, or your services have been sharply curtailed.

Just a bit of economic trivia provided by your humble author.

And no, don't quote me on the gasoline price impact figures. They may be somewhat out of date. A year or two at most.

Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, author of the 53 page report Sy Hersh references in his explosive New Yorker article is testifying right now before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Yes. Right now!

Female Iraqi prisoners face shame and or death once out of prison because of the rape and torture they endured while in prison.

We are ignorant, arrogant, occupying and terrorizing a population because of a series of grand lies.

I am ashamed to be an American. Very.

Let's look at quotes..It's fun.

"If man does find the solution for world peace it will be the most revolutionary reversal of his record we have ever known." - George C. Marshall

This is real. You can fact check me....Please do.

"Be able to resign. It will improve your value to the President and do wonders for your performance." - Donald Rumsfeld

This next one is more fun, and much better known.

"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know." - Donald 'pretzel logic' Rumsfeld.

The BBC has Donald "Strangelove" Rumsfeld on audio.

Oh, I almost forgot. My favorite quote by another person about Rummmy is this:

"He's the most ruthless man I ever met. And I mean that as a compliment." - Henry Kissinger

One more. Rummy on Rummy.

"If in doubt, don't. If still in doubt, do what's right." - Donald Rumsfeld

Can Rummy possibly believe what he said? I suppose it depends on what definition of 'right' one uses.

Bad, Todd.

Sorry about the lack of updates this week and last. I have been rather ill. I'm on the mend, but blogging will remain light until this weekend at the least.

I have been following the Abu Ghraib situation somewhat closely. One thing that seems to have escaped all commentators is this: Just what did the prison personnel do in order to get these prisoners to engage in these atrocious acts?

I can't imagine the imprisoned Iraqis committing acts prohibited by Islam by simply asking them to....I can only imagine the sordid types of things our prison personnel did, and or told these men and women to coerce them into acts regarded as anathema to their culture and religion.

It's also heartening to hear Bush and Cheney singing the praises of the woefully inept Donny Rumsfeld.

Cheney calling Rummy the best Defense Secretary ever is odd given that Cheney once held the post. Rummy's held "the position" twice..The first time under Ford.

Cheney will do or say anything. Dick is the worst Veep in memory.

Rummy's a miserable failure as Sec. of Defense, and that's bound to pull a few votes from Bush in November. Everything he has had his hands in has turned out very poorly indeed.

Rummy's a better Sec. of Defense than George Marshall? GTF outa here! No contest.

I'll be back to posting regularly next week. I'm on the mend, but still a bit weak.

A subject that should concern us all..how many, and of what type of nuclear weapons does the U.S. have in it's arsenal?

Of course that bunch of brainiacs over at The Bulletin have all the figures.

My best estimate is that we have too many.

I'm not for nuclear non-proliferation. I'm for total global nuclear disarmament. I'm unlikely to live to see this, but I aim high :)

This time a Kerry ad falls under the watchful eyes of Annenberg's Fact Check.

The Kerry ad in question makes the audacious claim that a vote he cast in the Senate created 20 million new jobs. That's just malarkey.

On a more positive(well, negative really) note, Kerry makes an oblique jab at Bush.

"I thought it was important if you had a lot of privileges as I had had, to go to a great university like Yale, to give something back to your country."

Now that's truely a political barb. Naughty, naughty. But it's fun as well.

Our man in Fallujah, General Jasim Mohamed Saleh, is challenging U.S. statements that the 'insurgents' in Fallujah are 'foreign Islamist gunmen, some with possible links to al-Qaeda."

According to this Reuters report, Saleh states: "There are no foreign fighters in Fallujah."

I don't have a clue if there are foreign fighters in Fallujah or not. The U.S. Has made an unqualified statement that there are foreign fighters in Fallujah. If this is so, that must have evidence that they would be willing to share.

With all of the atrocious acts surfacing last week, the U.S. is under much closer scrutiny. Anything that the military officials in Iraq can do in an attempt to salvage any semblance of integrity should be done.

He said, she said.

In the same article we find this nugget:

A U.S. official said rank would not necessarily exclude anyone from a role in the new Iraqi forces, although another official in the Iraq administration said the policy of excluding senior figures of Saddam's regime remained "rock solid".

I think it's safe to say that some former Ba'ath party officials will be in positions of authority at some point.

Or, we can simply change the meanings of: 'exclusion' 'policy' 'senior' 'officials' 'rock solid'...you're getting the idea. A semantic game.

If there's one thing we've certainly learned from Bush's Excellent Iraq Adventure, it's that what is unconscionable today, becomes the fashionable thing to do tomorrow.

This isn't seen as win for all Iraqis. Kurds and Shi'ites are none to pleased to see that the U.S. has cut a deal with the largely Sunni city of Fallujah, while their battles rage on.

As for General Saleh's future, if this contrarian statement about foreign fighters in Fallujah is seen as a part of a wider break with U.S. policy, he'll be replaced. Most likely by U.S. marines at first, who are waiting to resume the siege of Fallujah should things not turn out as negotiated.

Saleh is on the griddle, but so are the U.S. occupation policies.

In The Politics of Truth, Joseph Wilson's new book concerning the outing of his wife Valerie Plame, Wilson writes:

"I am told ... that the Office of the Vice-President - either the Vice-President himself or more likely his chief of staff, Lewis 'Scooter' Libby - chaired a meeting at which a decision was made to do a work-up on me. As I understand it, this meant they were going to take a close look at who I was and what my agenda might be."

The FBI is still investigating the leak, and has met with senior White House officials.

So, this is not typical pure bs stuff. Until there are charges pressed and indictments served, this is all just kinda fun.

Oddly, the usually very factual Independent is really playing this up. The usually very good Andrew Buncombe has written an atypically sensational article about the affair. It's mostly just stuff from Wilson's book.

Since Wilson has reportedly spoken to The independent about the outing of his wife, perhaps they feel it is their story. I'm a little disappointed. This should be in the entertainment section at this juncture. No, I do not think that this is at all entertaining. It is deeply disturbing to suspect that your governance would jeopardize national security and people's lives in order to retaliate for someone that spoke the truth. That's frightening.

I've dedicated way to much drive space to this. :)

"Our troops are still waiting for more body armor. They are still waiting for better equipment. They are still waiting for a policy that brings in the rest of the world and relieves their burden. Our troops are still waiting for help."

"I don't expect our leaders to be free of mistakes, I expect our leaders to own up to them."

In a refreshing break with tradition, the Weekly Democratic Radio Address was given by a veteran of The Iraq war redux. I guess that makes two breaks with tradition. It's the first time I've linked to Fox News *shiver*

Paul Rieckhoff, who gave the address, tells a different story from that of the president. Rieckhoff lays it out in easy to follow terms. That's what I like about veterans. Unless they're way up in the food chain, they aren't likely to bs you. Bs gets them killed.

A worthy read. I know it's Faux News, but it's an important message.

Seymour Hersh, Richard Perle's favorite journalist, has obtained a fifty-three-page report written by Major General Antonio M. Taguba and not meant for public release.

In the report, a much more comprehensive picture of the extent and nature of prisoner's vile treatment in the now even more infamous Abu Ghraib prison is revealed.

One paragraph details some of the atrocities:

Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee.

Pretty sick stuff. But it's rather tame compared to what Hersh writes in the linked to article.

If you read but one article today, this should be it. It's verbally very graphic.

The first paragraph of Bush's weekly radio address is illuminating.

Without further ado:

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. A year ago, I declared an end to major combat operations in Iraq, after coalition forces conducted one of the swiftest, most successful and humane campaigns in military history. I thanked our troops for their courage and for their professionalism. They had confronted a gathering danger to our nation and the world. They had vanquished a brutal dictator who had twice invaded neighboring countries, who had used weapons of mass destruction against his own people, and who had supported and financed terrorism. On that day, I also cautioned Americans that, while a tyrant had fallen, the war against terror would go on.

Miltary campaigns are now "humane?" You gotta be kidding me.

Saddam was "a gathering danger to our nation and the world." No. He was not. Bush, and anyone with adequate knowledge of the pertinient sets of data knows this. Sheesh.

"They had vanquished a brutal dictator" O - M - G Saddam is at large. Odd use of tense there.

Just what type of terrorism did Hussein 'support?' What did this 'support' consist of? Financial support? Pure bs.

Iraq was and is not only a major diversion on the "WoT," it has been a real gift to anti-U.S. groups - whatever their background.

Let's drop any pretense that Saddam was anything but 'our guy' in the region until he invaded Kuwait. He was a CIA asset from 1958-1990.

He waged war against the Iranians with chemical weapons with our covert blessing. During Reagan's terms while Saddam was gassing Iranians, an anonymous inside source told the New York Times that the Pentagon "wasn't so horrified by Iraq's use of gas. It was just another way of killing people — whether with a bullet or phosgene, it didn't make any difference."

What Bush is selling, I'm not buying. I already picked some up to fertilze my lawn - I'm set for a year.

Just when will the lies and distortions stop?

It's time to change the dialogue into the something constructive.

Terrorism, Iraq and the like aren't the menace that unchecked global pollution is. Not by any stretch.

Here's a bit of the George Monbiot interview on Democracy Now! from Friday, 30 April 2004.

AMY GOODMAN: I'm Amy Goodman here with Juan Gonzalez in our New York studio. We're used to speaking to him on the phone. It's great to have him in the studio. He traveled across the Atlantic, bringing us this book, Manifesto for a New World Order. Extreme global climate change and how does it fit into the global political picture, George?

GEORGE MONBIOT: This is the big, big problem that we're up against. Even the Pentagon now is listing it as possibly the foremost threat facing humankind, even the Pentagon. And we're looking at the possibility of making the living conditions, which permit human life to take place on earth, making those conditions impossible. It's a very interesting little snapshot of what could potentially happen. 250 million years ago, the Permian Period came to an end in a catastrophic way. About 90, 95% of all life forms were wiped out, including anything bigger than a small pig, i.e., anything bigger than ourselves or indeed, smaller than ourselves. The reason for this, huge emissions of carbon dioxide produced by volcanoes raise the world's temperature by six degrees. The current projections by the intergovernmental panel on climate change are talking about anything up to six degrees within this century. We could make the conditions which make human life possible -- we could destroy those conditions within this century, if we don't move very, very fast. What we have got to see is part of any just world order, and part of any world order which is actually going to permit people a decent standard of life, any people a decent standard of life, we have got to see a huge cutback in the consumption of fossil fuel.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Yet when it comes to change in this area, the Bush administration here in the United States is perhaps doing everything it can to set back all of the environmental efforts and reform that this country has been involved in now for the past 30 years.

GEORGE MONBIOT: That's right. It's a measure of effectiveness of the corporate propaganda relayed through the corporate media that people aren’t taking to the streets about this right now. I mean, this guy, George Bush, is endangering the conditions which make human life on earth possible. What could be worse than that? What could be a more appalling disastrous project than the one that he is following? If people are going to rebel about anything, that's the thing to rebel about.

Rebel. I'm ready for a real revolution.

See link above for full transcript of interview. AND, if you can, toss a few coppers their way.

UPDATE:The Independent is reporting that Antarctica will be the only habitable continent in 100 years unless our use of fossil fuels starts abating NOW! Much more at link. Get active. Cool off!

I saw on CNN this morning(no, I wasn't home - I was eating breakfast - my no-TV pledge is till on) that Supreme Court Justice, New Hampshire resident and genuine nice guy, David Souter was assaulted while jogging last evening. CNN reports that Souter 'was assaulted by two men.'

Two men, eh? Where were Toni Scalia and Clarence Thomas last night? I'm not implying anything here, but I do have my suspicions. :)

All kidding aside, I am glad that Justice Souter is reportedly doing just fine and has only 'minor injuries.'

How can I say that Souter is a nice guy? I used to volunteer at a local agricultural co-op where Justice Souter often shops when not in Washington. He's very reserved, and extremely polite.

Update: Concerning my interview of a U.S. psych. nurse just back from Kuwait, she's still talking about things. I'll post the whole story on another site I work on(work? Heh).

Just when I thought it was safe to go out for the evening..criminy.

The Independent is reporting that the alleged killing of seven Pakistani 'terrorists' in Macedonia in March of 2004 was staged to win U.S. support. Macedonia has been a staunch U.S. ally in the global war on terrorism. At least that's the image that has been portrayed.

The seven Pakistani men are now reported to have been illegal immigrants lured into Macedonia by promises that they would be transferred to Western Europe.

There are many facets to the global war on terror.

One facet that we rarely hear about is that the "WoT" has been rightfully seen as a green light for governments to commit state terrorism against groups within, and outside their borders with whom they have a grievance.

There is a lot more color at the link.

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has another fascinating, albeit frightening look at the state of nuclear clean-up.

These "tank-farm workers" aren't employed at your local agricultural cooperative. These people are working at a site that produced 54.5 metric tons of plutonium for use in nuclear weapons.

I'm not going to expound futher on the potential, and realized hazards these workers face. It's up to you to click on the link and go get a crash course in the state of nuclear site clean-up - the article focuses on the Hanford, WA site, but it apllies elsewhere.

***********************

Before I get mail about the treatment of Iraqi POWs at Abu Ghraib prison, I am aware of the atrocities, and I can't add anything substantive to the conversation. I'm too angry to be anything remotely approaching ration.

Here's a link to the British response to the tortures.

One last thing, I am also aware and appalled that the Sinclair Broadcast Group has Nixed the airing of tonight's Nightline. Without a free and unencumbered press, we cease to be a democracy. That transformation began a long time ago. The corporatists are winning. But I still have faith in our ability to effect change.

A link detailing the Sinclair/Nightline flap.

Peace!

Iraq is being stabilized!

I don't have the direct quote, but AP reporter and ofttimes unofficial transmitter of the Bush Administration's talking points, Ms. Nedra Pickler wrote in this piece that President Bush said today that, 'progress has been made in stabilizing Iraq in the year since he declared an end to major combat.'

Most excellent!

Meanwhile, actually in Iraq, April is officially the deadliest month for coalition forces, and the other arm of the AP is reporting that at least 1,361 Iraqis were killed in the same time period.

Call me a skeptic, but the math doesn't equal 'progress being made in stabilizing Iraq.'

If the MBA President can't fathom the simple metrics of the situation, the average citizen(that would be me) must be utterly baffled. :)

A bs reader, Larry H, is apparently as fed-up with Bush and Cheney's hypocritical critiquing of Kerry's military service as I am.

This is most likely not news to the keen readership of pure bs, but it was news to your humble author.

We've looked at the Gop's dissembling as found on Annenberg's Fact Check, and FAIR, where it is noted that: "Cheney [is] now criticizing Kerry for having essentially the same position Cheney advocated back in 1991."

Additionally, the flap over whether Kerry's injuries were serious enough to warrant the issuance of three purple hearts is campaign mud-slinging at its worst. Here are Kerry's military records posted online.

Since Dick "I had other priorities" Cheney lead much of the charge, let's look at just what Dick was doing while he could have been serving his country.

Tim Noah at Slate does the heavy lifting. Cheney's various student and familial deferments haven't received much press. Not nearly enough as he is Bush's point man on Kerry's record.

Hat tip to reader Larry H for the Slate piece.

For a more comprehensive look at the 5 deferments Cheney received, we hand off to America Coming Together, who in addition to adding color to Cheney's non-service record, asks the obvious: "Who is Dick Cheney to question John Kerry's fitness to serve as Commander in Chief?"

Who indeed?

"5 Deferments Dick" is out stumping - Kerry bashing - for George "Still A Missing Year" Bush. The irony is most likely lost on these people.

I wonder why Cheney loathes military service so much? Does he hate everyone that served in the military, or just Kerry?

I need to know.

Neither 'The Shirker' nor 'The Smirker' have any place in calling anyone's service record into question.

U.S Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz was asked yesterday during testimony by a congressional subcommittee how many American soldiers had been killed in hostilities in Iraq.

His answer:

"It's approximately 500, of which — I can get the exact numbers — approximately 350 are combat deaths."

Sorry, Paul.

According to the DoD's official numbers, 726 U.S. troops had died in Iraq as of Thursday morning. Of those, 524 were combat deaths.

As of right now, the total number of military personnel killed is 736. Another day, another ten Americans dead.

And for what?

For the 'exemplary action' of the Bush Doctrine. That's what. It's an utter failure.

The Washington Post is reporting..and so is everyone else :) that U.S. marines have pulled out of parts of Fallujah. This is certainly welcome news for all parties.

One of the odder parts of a truly odd situation is the likely deal to be a deal struck between the U.S. - and, well the U.S.

I think we can drop all pretense of any effective Iraqi role in this 'negotiation process.'

According to the WaPo article:

"Fallujah residents have chosen Maj. Gen. Jassim Mohammed Saleh to form and lead a unit that will be in charge of protecting the city," said Iraqi Brig. Gen. Shakir al-Janabi, who expects to be part of the new force. "Our force will handle the security issue today in cooperation with Iraqi police."

So, we find ourselves in the unenviable position of likely ceding Fallujah to an indigenous force comprised of former - and remember, terribly feared - members of The Republican Guard, as well as former Iraqi police and soldiers including gunmen who fought against the us(the U.S.).

Meanwhile, a U.S. marine officer - speaking on condition of anonymity - reportedly told the AP that the new force would not contain any "hardcore" 'insurgents' or militant Islamists currently within Fallujah. Just how we are going to determine this is a mystery to this casual observer.

Essentially, the talks(?) are ongoing, and success or failure of the proposed shift in military forces could still hinge on whether or not the 'insugents' guilty of the March 31 execution style murder and subsequent gruesome display of the four American contract workers are handed over to the U.S.

Do we know that the Iraqis know just who these thugs are? I have nary a clue.

It would have been a lot simpler if our government had told us the real story about Iraq's weapons capabilities, lack of ties with al-Qaeda, and lack of support for international terrorism. Then we wouldn't be in this mess.

Who thought that a year after Bush proclaimed "Mission Accomplished" that we would be ceding authority in a major Iraqi city to the dreaded Republican Guard and various other once despised 'opponents?'

Certainly not me.

At least 736 U.S service personnel killed, perhaps 15,000 Iraqis and at least a half-trillion dollar financial commitment to reinstall some of the very people we once feared. It is a crazy world.

I think that anyone with a working knowledge of the publicly available facts, and sans any galloping insanity, would agree that Iraq was, and is, a blunder of the most epic of proportions.

There is much more at WaPo.

You really have to wonder just how obtuse the Bush Administration thinks the 'American people' are?

Exhibit #34679

Washington-AP -- It has Democrats and Republicans in Congress wondering if the administration's priorities are in the right place.

A Treasury Department agency that blocks the financial resources of terrorists has four full-time workers tracking down the wealth of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.

The same agency has five times as many agents investigating Cuban embargo violations.

Those figures -- as of the end of last year -- were provided to Max Baucus, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee.

Documents show that the Office of Foreign Assets Control opened just 93 enforcement investigations related to terrorism between 1990 and 2003. During that same time, it opened more than ten-thousand investigations of possible Cuba embargo violations.

The Treasury Department responds that it fully uses its resources against anyone who might harm the U-S -- "be they terrorist thugs or fascist dictators."

Copyright 2004 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Source: AP Wire.

Hard to know what to say. People never find out about these important but underreported stories.

Add Bremer to the list of U.S. traitors. ;)

Bremer adds to Clarke's pile

The US administrator in Iraq accused the Bush administration of "paying no attention" to terrorism in a speech given six months before the September 11 attacks.

"What they will do is stagger along until there's a major incident and then suddenly say, 'Oh my God, shouldn't we be organised to deal with this?' " said administrator Paul Bremer.

The speech was given at a McCormick Tribune Foundation conference on terrorism on February 26, 2001.

Bremer spoke at the conference shortly after he chaired the National Commission on Terrorism, a bipartisan body formed by the Clinton administration to examine US counterterrorism policies.

bit more, and a very muted response by McClellan at link

Who do you believe? Rice? Or Bremer, O'neill and Clarke? Tough
choice ;)

..You know the rest. :)

It's an easy one.

1) Go Listen to Democracy Now!

2) (this may sting some of you) Make a Donation While you're there

At Least do No. 1 - It won't hurt a bit. I promise.

Highlights:

• Sibel Edmonds gets re-gagged..she can no longer say what already in the public record. Criminy!



• Former CIA and State Department analyst Mel Goodman lays the case against the neocons out. Goodman is also the co-author of: Bush League Diplomacy: How the Neoconservatives Are Putting the World at Risk



• An Interview with Daniel Ellsberg

Good stuff all. Edmonds is the new Ellsberg. She's a gem!

Rock on, Sibel!

Additional: If you want to get a nice round-up of pregressive issues, also check out Free Speech Radio News

Both Democracy Now! and Free Speech Radio News are made available by THE PACIFICA RADIO FOUNDATION (Yes, all caps!)

As support for the Iraq war wanes, Bush's poll numbers do likewise. In another poll Arab-Americans would pick Kerry over Bush in large numbers. Now there's a surprise.

Iraqis are pissed off at occupation.

I know, it's baffling.

USA Today, CNN and Gallup conducted the poll which involves the opinions and feelings of 3,444 Iraqis, the largest and most detailed poll to date since the invasion of least year.

In contrast to the picture that the Bushies paint, the Iraqis are largely accepting of the 'insugents,' if not outright supportive. It should be noted that the poll was conducted BEFORE the current wave of U.S. - Iraqi violence. You needn't be a sociologist to tell which way the wind is blowing in Iraq at present. It is almost a certainty that Iraqi opinion has shifted further away from the the U.S and toward the 'insurgents.'

As Dylan remarked: "You don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."

Here's a snip(okay it's more of a big chunk) of the USA Poll article:

"I'm not ungrateful that they took away Saddam Hussein," says Salam Ahmed, 30, a Shiite businessman. "But the job is done. Thank you very much. See you later. Bye-bye."

'I would shoot ... right now'

Bearing the brunt of Iraqis' ill feeling: U.S. troops. The most visible symbol of the occupation, they are viewed by many Iraqis as uncaring, dangerous and lacking in respect for the country's people, religion and traditions.

The insurgents, by contrast, seem to be gaining broad acceptance, if not outright support. If the Kurds, who make up about 13% of the poll, are taken out of the equation, more than half of Iraqis say killing U.S. troops can be justified in at least some cases. But attacks against Iraqi police officers, who are U.S.-trained, are strongly condemned by the Iraqi people.

The Bush administration has contended that the growing resistance, which has killed at least 115 Americans this month, is the work of isolated cells of former regime members or religious fanatics, often from outside Iraq.

Iraqis interviewed in Baghdad say ordinary people have lost patience with the U.S. effort to crush the insurgency and rebuild Iraq.

"I would shoot at the Americans right now if I had the chance," says Abbas Kadhum Muia, 24, who owns a bicycle shop in Sadr City, a Shiite slum of 2 million people in Baghdad that was strongly anti-Saddam and once friendly to the Americans. "At the beginning ... there were no problems, but gradually they started to show disrespect (and) encroach on our rights, arresting people."

Sabah Yeldo, a Christian who owns a liquor store across town, says American failures have left the capital with higher crime and less-reliable services, including electricity. That is "making everybody look back and seriously consider having Saddam back again instead of the Americans."

"Seriously consider having Saddam back?" Boy, that has to hurt.

I've more to say about the poll, but I wanted to get it out right now. I'll append this blog entry later.

What hath Bush wrought?

The U.S. military is in a generous mood. Islamic militants have been given an enormous gift. By collectively punishing Fallujah's residents and 'insurgents' alike, the U.S. military is most likely going to al-Qaeda's greatest recruiting tool.

Way to go!

Targetings insurgents sounds really terrific, but the reality is that for the gruesome execution style deaths of four westerners - and I am still apalled by that - the U.S. is going to punish an entire city of roughly half a million people. Do you think that 500 thousand people were involved in the deaths of four people? Hardly likely.

This is just the sort of thing that pisses the rest of the world off at the U.S. After the killing is over, we'll see if the U.S. got the guilty parties..it is unclear that we even know who these people are.

This action is atrocious. This should be a criminal issue. Find the perps and bring them in.

Democracy? Who the fu&k does Bush think he's talking to? A 7 year old could tell you that you can't bomb a population into democracy.

********************
pure bs exclusive:

I have a report from a psychiatric nurse just back from Kuwait. It's a lot more grim than most people have been lead to believe. She's a friend. I'll post it once I've done a proper job of telling her story.

Fact Check Retorts

Bush is trying to paint Kerry as weak on defense.

Well, we know who prior to September 11, 2001 said to Bob Woodward: "I was not on point" [in fighting terrorism before 9/11] and "I didn't feel the sense of urgency"[conerning terrorism]. - GW Bush

The greatest security lapse in American history occurred under Bush's watch. That fact is not in dispute.

The warnings were there. And post-9-11, instead of finishing off OBL, Bush moves vital resources to the Iraq war of wishful thinking. No terrorists there....at least none at the time. No WMD. None of Hussein's neighbors feared him. The Iraqis certainly did, but it was widely known in the region that Saddam's military capacity was decimated by a decade of UN(primarliy U.S.) sanctions. Yet Americans not only feared Saddam because they were told to by their governmet, and complicit media - astoundingly they still harbor long discredited beliefs about Hussein.

Sad. Damned sad.

Go to Fact Check to get the truth about Kerry's defense spending record..I'm entierly convinced that the Bush Doctrine is the greatest threat to our peace.

As far as terrorism is concerned, it's almost a non-issue in the grand scheme of things.

Americans have irrational fears. Do you drive a car? Do you know that you have a 66,500 percent greater chance of being killed in an auto accident than by terrorism? People drive cars with abandon.

Terrorism should play a tiny role in people's decision making processes. But people are, for the most part irrational.

Over the next few days, say until Thursday, I'm going to be making but one or two entries per day. I am on work overload. I'll be posting around 7:00PM Eastern U.S. time. I do have one odd item for now. Without further ado:

Reuters is reporting, or not reporting, on the possible existence of Iraqi aircraft specifically fitted to deliver chemical payloads to Israel.

Of course there have been no modified aircraft found, nor any plans for aircraft that I'm aware of. Hence, this 'report' from a single Israeli military source can only be added to the mountains of mythology surrounding the Iraqi illicit weapons programs.

The usual line that the illicit weapons were transferred to Syria, and or buried, is revisited.

At some point the media has to start treating these spurious, single-source allegations with proper skepticism. After all, it is largely media complicity that garnered wide U.S. public support for the Iraq war. The media's hands are not without blood.

The name Christian Science Monitor evokes in me the long shadows that Christianity has cast over the pursuit of science since Galileo's time.

That was just a personal anecdote. Sorry.

It's the fine paper with the odd name.

There are three very worthy pieces that the CS Monitor just published on their website.

The illusions of equality that the military draft connotes

A possible re-think of the resumption of the seige of Fallujah

Reality trumping ideology in remaking the Middle-East into a bastion of representative democracy

All of these are really good.

The last one illustrates what is very wrong with the thinking process of a person like Bush. Condi Rice claims that Mid-East reform is the golden ring in Bush's mind's eye. But the reality on the ground is that this image is rapidly escaping. Can Bush adjust to the new reality? Maybe. But his 'stay the course at all costs' rigidity of thinking is not what is required. This is, in my opinion, a huge liability.

No articles about a flat-Earth here :) All good stuff. I promise.

Postscript: Bush can change his 'mind.' He has done so over the Israeli/Palestinian issue. Am I the only person that thinks it more than a little odd that the most vexing issue in the Mid-East is the one that Bush has devoted the least amount of time to? Now that's a real liability that the most casual observer should note. Heck, I did.

Congrats to San Diego! You have the highest unleaded regular gasoline prices in the country! Records - not adjusted for inflation - are being set across the country.

Where is Bandar? Why hasn't the Saudi government opened the spigot?

Dammit!

Cheap petroleum products are an entitlement!

**************************************

Forget the "NASCAR dads," it's placenta packin' women that may decide things in November! I especially like the quaint and subtle, "U.S. Out Of My Uterus."

Rock on, sisters!!

**************************************

The Times of India is reporting that Pakistan has released 50 al-Qaeda 'supporters.'

It's a crazy world I tell you. If you read the article, it appears to be an "arms for hostages" kinda deal.

Now where have I heard that before?

But the Pakistani military averred that this does not represent a shift in terrorism policy. It's a one-time deal.

With friends like this....Oy.

GW Bush: EnronVironmental Hero!

Taken from W's weekly radio address.

Does anybody listen to these things?

blah, blah, blah....Another critical environmental priority is the health of our nation's forests. In recent years, millions of acres of forests, rangeland, and communities have been destroyed by wildfires. So last December, I signed the Healthy Forest Restoration Act to reduce the risk of fire, save lives and property, and improve the health of our forests. The law opens millions of acres of forest land to vital thinning projects. And by expediting the environmental review process, and directing courts to consider long-term threats to forest health, the law allows us to protect more of our nation's precious forests...[snip]

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm getting a strange feeling of deja vu.

This reminds me of possibly the most famous Vietnam war quotes: "We had to destroy the village to save it."

I know that there are ongoing studies in various forest habitats to determine what the critical sizes are to allow the various flora and fauna contained therein to continue to thrive.

With the recent spike in lumber prices, it'll no doubt be argued that the small short term positive economic effect - a slight easing in lumber prices, resulting from the harvesting of timber - outweighs the long term, and likely permanent damage resulting from local extinctions(extirpations), to complete extinction of species.

It's a win-win situation for all.

Or is that none?

The AP is reporting that the U.S. is preparing to enter Najaf.

The reporter is stating that the invasion of Najaf will be done 'sensitively' to avoid causing religious outrage.

Invasion = Sensitivity?

I agree that avoiding holy sites is a good plan, but plans in times of war are notoriously and consistently betrayed by facts on the ground as fighting ensues.

I'll believe it when it's over and I have confirmation from the foreign press. The article, on balance, isn't a bad read. Go ahead. It won't hurt. Yet.

My uninformed opinion.

It has been widely reported that Arab opinion of the U.S. has never been lower than it is now. Some 90% of Arabs view the U.S. in an unfavorable light.

So, how do we lose the remaining 10%? I would say that we should just stay the course. With Bush endorsing Sharon's latest attempt at disrupting any hope of peace and dignity for Palestinians, and the likely resumption of the siege of Fallujah and a new assault on Najaf, most of the 'errant' should fall into line.

Saudi Prince Bandar's appearance on Meet The Press will only serve to acknowledge the Arab street's view that the corrupt, repressive Saudi government is dealing with "The Great Satan" (the transcript should be out shortly)

So, what does this mean? I'll speculate a bit. Let's say that 1% of the Arab population of 200 million or so becomes radicalized due to current events. That gives us 2 million radicalized Arabs.

That is a huge problem.

It seems likely that the 1.1 billion members of Islam could - and most likely will - see current events as a war against their way of life. I don't see anything positive occurring here.

This could magnify the issue roughly five-fold. Not good.

"Why do they hate us?" yup. It's because of our freedoms. Sure it is. I like it when my leadership attempts to take a complex issue with myriad and changing elements and distill it to a phrase a 7-year old wouldn't buy.

Bush's problem is that he believes that his view is the correct one. He may be a person of convictions(drunk driving aside), but when your held beliefs are demonstrably wrong - see casus belli for the Iraq war - that makes you a huge liability. Far from keeping America safe from the widely exaggerated threat of international terrorism, Bush's error ridden thinking process is likely to spawn a new, much more dangerous style of threats.

These new threats may approach the level of those that are now considered implausible - or at least highly unlikely - by the intelligence community.

The Iraq war, our inability to liquidate bin Laden, and our inability to make any progress in the Israeli/Palestinian peace process will likely breed more of what we claim to be for extinguishing - international terrorism.

Anything for four more years in the White House. Et tu, George?

UPDATE: MTP Transcript

Hey. I just coined that. Bush spent a day touting his environmental record last week. On the only issue that is transcendent over real spans of time, he gets an "MF." No. Not that. "Miserable Failure."

MSNBC has a little interactive environmental "Fact File" about three-quarters of the way down the page.

Bush referred to himself as a "committed conservationist." I can only parse that to mean that he is committed to conserving financial wealth and power for the few that already have it. He cannot be speaking with any degree of seriousness about the physical environment. But then, the truth has never seemed an obstacle for him in the past.

These are terms that Americans might understand.

The Bush approach to security.