Remembrance

Well said, Ladie Techie!

The most eloquent writing to get one's point across is often stark language.

I commend your ability to pack an emotional whallop in three elegant, concise paragraphs....

I attended to anti-war rallies this weekend - one on Saturday and one on Sunday. I frankly must say that the anti-war movement is losing energy, passion and focus. At the rally on Saturday there were about one hundred people but it was boring, lifeless and aimless. The speeches were boring and long. There was no call to action. About all that came out of it was the message that "war is bad". Telling me the obvious..

I think that "Iraq war vigil fatigue" is setting in and I don't believe that "vigils" accomplish a whole lot. I don't think that they don't persuade people and they certainly don't effect the politicians.

BTW with regard to the above about taking action:

These are the bills that are before Congress concerning Iraq:

Legislation to Stop the War:

In the Senate, there is one lone bill:

S.Res.171, introduced by Russ Feingold (D-WI), only one co-sponsor: Sen. Barbara Boxer
Calls on the President to submit a report to Congress within 30 days describing the remaining mission of the Armed Forces in Iraq, a current estimate of the timeframe required to accomplish that mission, and a timeframe for the subsequent withdrawal of troops from Iraq.
In the House of Representatives, a few courageous members of Congress have introduced legislation to end the war. UFPJ has endorsed the following legislation:

H.R. 4232 – End the War in Iraq Act of 2005, introduced by Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA)
Cuts off all funding for U.S. military action in Iraq, but would allow spending on reconstruction. This is the strongest piece of legislation against the war. Current list of co-sponsors.
H.J.Res. 73 – Re-Deploy U.S. Forces from Iraq, introduced by Rep. John Murtha (D-PA)
Calls for the immediate end to the deployment of U.S. troops in Iraq and declares that the U.S. shall pursue security and stability in Iraq through diplomacy. Calls for an "over the horizon" presence of the marines in the region. Current list of co-sponsors.

H.Res. 543 – Withdrawal of United States Armed Forces From Iraq, introduced by Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI)
This is a discharge petition for H.J.Res. 55. If 218 members sign the discharge petition, the bill will be brought to the floor for debate and a vote. H.J. Res. 55, also known as the "Homeward Bound" bill, calls for the President to announce a plan for the withdrawal of all United States Armed Forces from Iraq, and to begin withdrawal by October 1, 2006. Signing the petition does not mean that the member of Congress supports H.J.Res 55, only that they agree to allow it to come up for debate and a vote. This may be our best chance to have a full debate about the Iraq War on the floor of the House. Current list of petition signers.

Many Republicans Retiring from Congress

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=amzKCa1FDU5k

House Republican Retirements Hamper Drive to Retain Majority

By Laura Litvan
March 20 (Bloomberg) -- Republican House leaders, aware that incumbents rarely lose, are struggling to prevent a wave of retirements that would bolster Democratic prospects to regain control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the November elections.

New York Representative Sherwood Boehlert is the latest Republican lawmaker to retire, announcing Friday that he won't seek a 13th term in office. With Boehlert's departure, 17 Republicans have now announced their retirement compared with just nine Democrats.

``It's reaching a point where it's of concern,'' said Representative Gil Gutknecht, a Minnesota Republican.

This year, a toxic combination of low presidential approval ratings, a lobbying scandal and term limits on leadership posts may contribute to a flurry of further retirements, Gutknecht said.

When I went to the basement to do laundry, I noticed my 2002 journal. Am tracing up to the war. This is painful, but sharing.

AUGUST 2002
Democrats.com - Daeschle called Bush a "dictator". Bush saved 3 million in income tax when he sold the TX Rangers. 40 some percent want Bush re-elected. War support has dropped from 60% to 50%. Bush support has dropped from 70% to 60%

OCTOBER 2002
6 - Waiting to hear "Bagdad Jim" McDermott 7 - Bummer. Bush is on my car radio. 13 - Terrorist attack in Bali! 6000 rallied in Paris yesterday. 17 - World still crazy. 21 - Antiwar rally next weekend, "No War" sign, planet Earth flag 24 - Poor Russians trapped in theater. Too many religious nuts. 26 - Peace rally

NOVEMBER 2002
4 - Republicanland. Unanimous UN vote, even Syria (BBC). 9 - 500,000 antiwar/antiglobalization protesters gathered in Florence today and it was peaceful. Nice to look in IndyMedia. 10 -boredom, rain, work, noise, $, war, Bush says "nu-cu-lar" 30 - Pitifully small post-WTO protest but "Filipinos Against War"

DECEMBER 2002
25 - Things are really messed up in the external world

JANUARY 2003
Resolutions
1. get rid of him 2. keep job if can 3. keep son out of Army
4. avoid fattening self 5. go to gym etc. 19 - I'm sure the rally (SF) had 100,000 people. It was validation that America is not lost, some people still think and are not mindless sheep. 27- Westlake - antiwar rally in the rain.. not a big one but things happening all over. The war threat is making us feel lonely, helpless. I wonder how young people feel? I know they don't want to die. So many poor in the world. What can we do? 28- If Bush was after a US-led war, maybe we ought to emigrate. We stay here for our son, and to work & I guess, to fight. The "war speech" is tonight. Fake CNN story, Bush coke bust. 29 - State of the Union was a steaming bowl of crap, as people said who stayed up all night in Guardian chats. Gabe got me to watch a video on John Kerry's site and back him. 1. We don't need two Republican parties. 2. We need to go to war because we have to, not because we want to. 3. We need to start making some friends on this planet.

FEBRUARY 2003
10 - the dreaded day of getting bifocals 11 - I don't believe anything the government says - about orange alert, Bin Laden tapes, etc. China, Russia, France, Germany, Belgium now all can veto. Idea: Dictator drawing - Bush, Khadafi, Castro, King Faud, Saddam, Kyong Jung Il 13 - devastating world news - geopolical, economic, paranoia. Duct tape 15 - Millions marched today all over the world, including Ken Henry and I. Bert went to the one in Mpls in 10 degree weather, sounded jazzed. Used the digital camera. 18- Listening to the new Massive Attack, very dark. Everything is very dark. Someone blocked the 520 bridge at rush hour, to stop the war. 20 - Colin Powell is gay" spam. Bush religous allusions,belligerence. US in distress. Increase productivity at work. Related? 25 - Dreamed of a formation of bombs, like Blue Angels. Peace vigil. 1st nice spring day. 28 - Market war jitters. Saw Howard Dean mini-video.

MARCH 2003
1 - US spying on UN, Turkey refusing US troops, N. Korea threat
6 - Still no war. Somehow, Bush tears on. How did a Bible Thumper get in the White House? Why all the post-9/11 SUV driving? Student walkout yesterday. 9 - Peace vigil - Make Art Not War 11- Bush Sr does not agree with Bush Jr 14 - Called whoever I could about Green Lake Join Hands vigil. All over the world. Touba will go to SF demo. ANTIWAR. 16 - "Hands Around the World", French flag, candlelight vigil - 48 hours or less to war 18 - I had an Iraqi family client today. They were cool but the boy had an "Aerial Assault" shirt on. Everyone (including me) feels so powerless and resigned. The UN had no choice, we had no voice, our Senators betrayed us. 9/11 helped the war-mongering Repubs. 19 - TERROR TUBBIES - Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush "Disarmament of the Iraqi regime has begun" - Ari Fleischer 20 - Westlake - waiting for the protesters to arrive from the Fed bldg.Helicopters overhead - there were probably 200 riot cops blocking the way. We couldn't get near the Fed bldg. 26 - I got email with video of SF cop attacking a man with a child on his shoulders. Listening to BBC in my car - the hate level in the world is high, the propaganda on both sides is extreme. Some sabre-rattling, lots of denial - skeptical people in US, Britain, Iraq, by REALISTIC people. Ambivalence. 22 - We're still bombing the cradle of civilization. 23- Green Lake Vigil. Fed bldg lost permit thanks to Tom Ridge Cris thinks Tommy Franks is cool, stealth bombers are cool, & we won't have a terror attack because "they're busy over in Iraq." 24 - Went to Westlake to hear Jim McDermott speak on depleted uranium. The conservative talk show crowd tried to shout him down & he told them if they wanted to know what war was like to go to the recruiting office. Afterward, one of the "Iron Pigs" motorcycle gang spit in his face & called him a traitor. Bert went to a student walkout in Mpls. 27 - "liberation" = "invasion" "antiwar = "prodemocracy" We are "the resistance" against "the occupation." No wonder French and Germans didn't join in! Headed for humanitarian catastrophe. Dubya Dubya III. 31 - Not ready to go back to work, so much to do against the Orwellians

APRIL 2003
2 weeks into the war - never thought it would be possible to feel paranoid and isolated here. Alot of us must feel that way though. 70% of Americans favor the war & feel it's going well. They watch military-controlled media, different from what the rest of the world watch. 5 - It goes on. Bush says Iraq is almost liberated. But Iraqis have a history of resisting outsiders. Still no legitimate reason to go back in. Some people don't care, they don't process, they don't remember. CIA warned US would have more terrorism is we had this war. M & C reading Chomsky in bed, plotting to move to Mexico. 6 - Pat Buchanan against the war, of all people. Green Lake vigil went well. Touba put up a "Regime Change Begins At Home" sign next to her husband's "Support the Troops" and flag. 7 - Turning point in war because US/UK in Bagdad, stocks up.Wolfowitz in control, of all people. New American Century.Military fashion - young people jump on the 9/11 bandwagon.T-shirts with little turtles wearing camouflauge, for spring. 10 - Saddam statue toppled & America acts like the war is over. The Chickenhawks start to plan invasion of Iran, Syria, N Korea 11 - Looting, anarchy. Bush & Rumsfeld are messing up the humanitarian aid. The Cole bombers have escaped and Turkey threatens to invade N Iraq. 12 - Rally down Broadway, "kill all evil foreigners sign" seen 13 - Green Lake VigilGuy drove by: "Smoke Saddam, not Pot" KVI Listener has giant sign on house, "Aside from removing fascism and communism, war accomplishes nothing"
Most cars honk in support. Old man with Guernica. 14 - Yellow ribbons lies & propaganda 15 - Tax Day. Michael Moore speaking! I take 20 pp of notes. 25 - News still bad. Goddamn fanatics, faux patriots. 27 - Small peace turnout. The big companies seem so in power. 30 - Bush will speak on the USS LIncoln tonight.

MAY 2003
1 - Arrogant Bush now proclaims May 1 to be Loyalty Day 3 - Bush wanted to save the US oil $ but may be a losing battle 5 - Today the USS Lincoln comes in, Bremerton. I'll be there. 7 - Got Greg Palast's book. Even to my mom, I write Bush Empire on letters. The Lincoln thing was a circus. Today is like a hangover after the Prom.

Granholm agrees to abortion regulation
Bill to add ultrasounds to the rules

http://freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060320/NEWS06/603200310/1008/NEWS

[snip]
The law would require physicians who take ultrasound images before performing an abortion to give his or her patient the opportunity to view an active ultrasound of the fetus, and to offer the patient a still image taken from the ultrasound.

It expands a 1993 law that required abortion providers to give a pregnant woman the option of receiving medical information about a developing fetus at least 24 hours before an abortion could be performed.

CNN QuickGoat

Has the Bush administration been effective in handling public relations on efforts in Iraq?

Yes 9% 2135 votes

No 91% 22119 votes
Total: 24254 votes

Hmmm interesting difference in results...

Created: Monday, March 20, 2006, at 10:22:47 EDT
Has the Bush administration been effective in handling public relations on efforts in Iraq?

Yes ..... 9% ... 6075 votes

No ..... 91% .. 63298 votes

Total: 69373 votes

Got this result from voting on the box on the front page.

It occurs to me that in our small way we are not only trying to improve our world but we are documenting history as we filter what we perceive, and on our own.

1. get rid of him 2. keep job if can 3. keep son out of Army
4. avoid fattening self 5. go to gym etc.
DiAnne:
I love those resolutions, but number 4 would have had to stay "stop" fattening self in my case. I've managed to keep my son out of the military, and he'll be 27 in just a few months, so I'm hoping that's the end of my worries. It's amazing how hard the military has been trying to get hold of my daughter though- and she actually admits to considering it at one time. No more though- her best friend from childhood will be leaving for Iraq in a few weeks, and it's gotten her attention big time. She now just hangs up on the recruiters before they can even say anything.
The link above about all the Republican retirements has brightened my day considerably, especially the line about the Bush administration working so hard to keep the house so there would be no "oversight" Committees formed. It sounds like they are now quaking in their boots.It does my heart good on a gloomy Monday.

Linda,
My son will turn 25 really soon, so he was 21 when the war started. Recently, he got a large packet of recruiting information in the mail!

"[W]hat we've seen is a serious effort by [terrorists in Iraq] to foment civil war, but I don't think they've been successful."
-- Vice President Dick Cheney, 3/19/06

VS.

"I think we've had a low grade civil war going on in Iraq for the last six months maybe the last year-our own generals have told me that privately George, so that's a fact."
-- Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/19/06

(Center for American Progress)

http://www.thinkprogress.org/iraq-timeline

Complete 3 year timeline on events in Iraq

DiAnne:

Thanks for the journal. It was both hilarious and tragic, and the journey taken reminds me of all the headbanging consternation of those of us who lived through Vietnam remember: WE COULD NOT ACCEPT WHAT'S HAPPENING, BECAUSE ITS ALL SO FAMILIAR.

"Jack, are we really going to go to war?" I asked an old friend in January of 2002. I was having a cesar salad and he was having a pulled pork sandwich for lunch at the Balboa Cafe in the Fillmore (Gavin Newsom's restaurant). The bloody marys were apropriately stiff.

I was marketing my business at the time, and he was advising me, and though my survival depended on it, I couldn't bring myself to talk about business at the time, I was worried sick about what was going to happen, would there be a draft? What about my family? How long would this war last? I heard going into Baghdad would be a long, arduous trip. These thoughts roiled around in my head.

Jack quietly said, "undoubtedly," with an air of silent resignation in his voice.

"It makes no sense, Jack," I complained.

"I know, but it makes sense to alot of people who voted for him".

It was hard to eat because I was ingesting anger with food. It didn't take long to start phoning up friends and family to check and gauge the political weather. Everyone was in agreement, the coming war a grisly mistake. In mid February 2002, simultaneously across the state, my friends and family protested the war in demonstrations from county to county. My generation are all the hippies from the 60s, so we remember how to do this.

Rhodessa, me, Rhodessa's granddaughter Chaz, Angie, and Maya, a young woman visiting America for the very first time from Mali--we all went to the SF Civic Center rally that day. There were at least 100,000 people marching and at the rally. It seemed as though EVERYONE was there, in various forms of protest-from light and comical to serious and informative.

After spending a couple of hours listening to speeches from Danny Glover, and songs by Bonnie Raitt, we took a walk to downtown, and tried to take a cable car to move up from the event.

A group of about a hundred demonstrators met up with police in riot gear at the cable car stop on Powell and O'Farrell. Some kids jumped on our cable car and started to rock it back and forth on its tracks. Maya's eyes were as round as plates.

I felt as though I had been dreaming all of this. The rocking, the cable car, the police in riot gear, the protest rally. The war. This was not real. It can't be happening. But as I said it, I could feel waves of history roll over us because we were, like most of the other cities across the country and the continents, part of a larger wave of energy sweeping the planet.

Rhodessa said, "let's move", and we rolled out onto the street as the kids were getting coaxed off the top of the cable car.

I think we landed somewhere in Chinatown where we ate well, downed a few beers, and recalled, with vivid clarity, everything that had happened to us. Because Maya was with us, we could feel her awe and wonder at being in a major event in a lengendary foreign country, and the strange irony for us was that the foreign country was our very own, caught in a struggle for the possession of its conscience. For once on that day in February 2002, we were part of the world.

Bush is foaming at the mouth in his Cleveland City Club appearance on CNN right now. He's actually getting some serious questions.

http://freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060320/NEWS06/603200310/1008/NEWS
Posted by: battlebob at March 20, 2006 12:33 PM

I was reading that story, noticed a couple of places where it says the new law "gives women the option" of viewing an ultrasound or being given a still ultrasound image of the fetus, and the word "option" was just too 'conveniently' stuck in there to ignore, so I figure it will be forced on women who are considering abortion... WHY do these (mostly male) legislators insist on mental and emotional assault and battery as part of abortion legislation, and WHY do these (mostly male) legislators insist on taking away a woman's right to privacy regarding matters that happen inside her uterus - with or without a fetus being in it? And then I got to the last paragraph of the article:

"The new regulation is part of a strategy by abortion opponents to "make it more emotionally difficult for women to exercise a legal right," she said."

Any way I look at this, it's legalized harrassment, and legalized psychological/emotional assault and battery.

As usual, when encountering these articles about passing more stringent laws regulating women's bodies and if/when women have to deal with the decision of abortion, I must wonder WHY these mostly male legislators do not pass laws requiring either a vasectomy and/or castration for males who are found guilty (beyond a reasonable doubt) and convicted of rape and/or incest and/or pedophilia - since these mostly male legislators seem incapable of keeping sexual predators out of jail where they should stay for life...? A mandatory law requiring a vasectomy and/or castration for sexual predators would eliminate the necessity for some women to have abortions (even if they are left with the psychological trauma of their bodies being violated, at least they wouldn't be forced to bear a rapist's child).

If women have to put up with laws invading their privacy regarding their reproductive organs (with or without a fetus involved), then it seems only fair to pass laws regulating male reproductive organs for sexual predators/violators.

the terrorance surveillance plan????????
What an imbecile.

Posted by: ralpheh at March 20, 2006 11:56 AM

Do you have a link/URL for that info?

I want to read more about those bills, see if there's one I could support more than the others, then write my legislators about them....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/19/AR2006031900893_pf.html
GOP Struggles To Define Its Message for 2006 Elections

{{{Attention Dems: "Define the Message" for them!!! No time like the present to put the neoCons on the defensive for a change...!!!}}}

Bush just claimed for himself (using the term old George W) full credit for our good relationship with India. Am I mistaken, or haven't we had a fairly good relationship with India for a very, very, very, very long time?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060320/ap_on_bi_ge/india_dell
Dell to Double Its Staff in India by 2009
~~~~~

For those of you who are, like me, continuing personal boycotts against companies who do things like outsource jobs and contribute vast sums to Repub/neoCon coffers and causes - that story may be of interest to you.

Coincidence or Collusion? The vast majority of the time when I read stuff like this, or about companies involved in major scandals, I invariably see they are from, or have/had headquarters in Texas, even if they open "branch offices" (PO boxes) in the Caymans or wherever else offshore. Just one of those odd little things I've begun to notice on a conscious level in the last few months, probably because after nearly six years it looks redundant to constantly see Texas as the home of so many corporate crooks.... (I would think it irks the law-abiding residents of Texas to constantly see the same thing and know the state is the home to so many crooks....)

I have become tired and frustrated with the ineffectiveness of the peace vigils - let's stand around holding candles.

Perhaps the next step is civil disobedience and disruption as was the case with Vietnam war protests.

Is anything being planned in Washington D.C.??? For the spring??? How about a sit-down demonstration?? I can't tell how bored and frustrated I was listening to those vague and unimaginative and uninspiring speeches on the war this weekend.

Do you have a link/URL for that info?

I want to read more about those bills, see if there's one I could support more than the others, then write my legislators about them....

Posted by: NonnyO at March 20, 2006 01:37 PM

keep the pressure on...:

http://www.unitedforpeace.org/article.php?id=3116

{{{Attention Dems: "Define the Message" for them!!! No time like the present to put the neoCons on the defensive for a change...!!!}}}

Posted by: NonnyO at March 20, 2006 01:39 PM

@@@@@@@@@@

Our Message:

Bush lied about the war;

Lying is wrong;

The Iraq war is wrong and was a mistake....

terrorance surveillance plan????????
Posted by: Linda Enterkin at March 20, 2006 01:35 PM

Dumbya is also the poster boy for what's wrong with our school system....

'Terrorance?!?' Jeez. I wonder how many years it will be before we stop using 'Bu$hisms' in our daily language once the fool is out of office?

I am thinking, however, that Bubble Boy wouldn't get any 'serious questions' from the audience unless he had been prepped in advance... and people planted in the audience to ask the questions - something for sound bytes on this evening's news...? His canned speeches and pre-selected audiences are too well screened for authentic or spontaneous questions.

We really do need a new dictionary under this president. He now says tnat Amnesty means automatic "encitizenship." He just said "that's what it means." Huh.
Just not in any dictionary that exists prior to 2000 I guess.

CNN just said the audience was not pre-screened. Wonder what press release they got that said that. I'm just baffled though- I can't even find "encitizenship" in my dictionary.
Gaaawwwleeee Gomer.

Posted by: ralpheh at March 20, 2006 01:51 PM
Posted by: ralpheh at March 20, 2006 01:54 PM

Thanks for the link. :-)

Also:

Bu$h LIED about his reasons for attacking Iraq.

Clinton was impeached for lying (although his lie did not result in anyone's death).

There's legal precedent to impeach a president for lying (besides for Constitutional reasons like 'high crimes and misdemeanors' which includes war crimes for invading Iraq based on Nuremberg judgement opinions - not to mention how illegal it is to condone torture and to illegally spy on our own citizens, etc.).

Ergo: Impeach Bu$h.

What is it about that logic that baffles Dem (and Repub) legislators and keeps them hesitating regarding impeachment proceedings in the House, or a censure resolution in the Senate? It's not confusing. It's straightforward and truthful, the premises are not flawed, so the conclusion is correct. (Ask any college prof who teaches logic to test the premises and the conclusion.)

So, legislators: What's the hold-up in pursuing impeachment in the House and censure in the Senate???

I can't even find "encitizenship" in my dictionary.
Posted by: Linda Enterkin at March 20, 2006 02:02 PM

I have four dictionaries, a Thesaurus, and links to several online dictionaries.... not there either.

I wonder if Lamestream Media's evening snooze will feature sound bytes of the Moron's latest linguistic snafus?

Audience "not pre-screened???" Okay. I believe that... NOT!

But if Lamestream Media snooze reporters believe that lyin' propaganda, I would like to contact them about this historical bridge I have for sale....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/19/AR2006031900362.html
Bush Still Upbeat on Outcome In Iraq
On Third Anniversary Of Invasion, President Foresees 'Victory'

{{{I saw that 'headline' and couldn't resist looking. Someone needs to tell Bubble Boy that there can be no "victory" in an illegal war of aggression that was defined as a war crime by the judges at Nuremberg.... I suspect the only people in this country who are "upbeat" or "optimistic" about the outcome of Bubble Boy's illegal war in Iraq are him, his cabal, the war-profiteering corporations, and the kool-aid-drinking sheeple.}}}

William Fisher: The Silence of the Sheep
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032006Z.shtml
William Fisher asks: Where were the editorial writers' opinions on whether it was all worth it? On whether the US could continue to finance the Bush adventure? On whether America ought to be involved in nation-building? On the variety of proposals made for new diplomatic initiatives? On the many plans that have been put forward for withdrawal? Absent. AWOL. Silent.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060320/ap_on_go_co/bush_censure
Sen. Durbin Says Censuring Bush Premature
{{{Didn't Durbin do something I admired once by standing up to the administration or speaking out? What happened to his spine???}}}

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/19/AR2006031900978.html
Increase in Contracting Intelligence Jobs Raises Concerns

Excerpt (more on link):

AllWorld Language Consultants Inc., a Rockville firm, is seeking experienced military interrogators to work in Iraq for $153,500 a year plus bonuses, with proficiency in Arabic "preferred but not required," according to Yahoo's Hot Jobs listings.

The U.S. Army element of the Multi-National Force-Iraq is looking for a private contractor to provide airborne surveillance over that country that will "provide situational awareness of the entire area of operations," according to another Web announcement.

Lockheed Martin Corp. is seeking a counterintelligence analyst to work for the Pentagon's newest intelligence agency, the Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA), in its Colorado Springs facility to "create and deliver briefings, write reports, and represent Counterintelligence Field Activity," according to a Web classified ad.

These positions and thousands like them are part of a growing trend at the Pentagon to contract out intelligence jobs that were formerly done primarily by service personnel and civil service employees.

But, by using contract employees, government agencies lose control over those doing this sensitive work and an element of profit is inserted into what is being done. Also, as investigations have revealed, politics and corruption may be introduced into the process.

The office of Director of National Intelligence John D. Negroponte has quietly begun to study the contracting issue because "it already is a problem," a senior intelligence official said in a recent interview.

A related concern for intelligence agencies inside and outside the Pentagon is that the government is training people and getting them security clearances, but they then leave for better pay offered by contractors, sometimes to do the same work.

"Once cleared, they can get a higher salary outside and they are gone," the official said. "We're leasing back our former employees."
~~~~~
The Arabic-speaking interrogators that AllWorld Languages is seeking must be U.S. citizens, have security clearances, and be willing to start immediately and deploy to any city in Iraq. AllWorld is a subcontractor of L-3 Communications Holdings Inc., a multibillion-dollar defense contractor that recently got a six-month, $420 million extension to its no-bid Army contract for translators. About 80 percent of the 5,000 translators L-3 employs for the Army are working in Iraq.

For once on that day in February 2002, we were part of the world.

Posted by: Fe at March 20, 2006 01:22 PM

Thanks Fe! This is hard - the election was hard but this had to be buried even deeper. The powerlessness is what it is.

We can never stop, but the reminder of the relative powerlessness is a big slap.

CNN just said the audience was not pre-screened. Wonder what press release they got that said that.

Posted by: Linda Enterkin at March 20, 2006 02:02 PM

Sure they were... sooo, this article in today's Denver Post is just a coinky-dink?

Bush staffers ejected 3 at speech
Secret Service not responsible. A federal report shows a White House employee ousted the trio from the president's talk in Denver.

By Howard Pankratz
Denver Post Staff Writer

A White House staff member was responsible for asking three people to leave President Bush's town-hall meeting in Denver a year ago, a U.S. Secret Service agent said during an internal investigation of the event.

The Secret Service was investigating the complaints of the three people, who said they were ousted from the Bush event last March because their car's bumper sticker criticized his foreign policy.

According to a Secret Service report obtained by the Denver Post under a Freedom of Information Act request, the agents present said it was "staff" who asked the individuals to leave, not them. When the trio - Les lie Weise, Alex Young and Karen Bauer - asked the agents why they had to leave, the agents said they had no control over the situation.

A Secret Service agent told them "there was nothing they could do because the event was hosted by the staff and was a private event."

The three were asked to leave because the staffers had identified them as "potential protesters," the report said.

The report quoted one agent as saying he was told "by a White House staff member that three individuals had been asked to leave the event, and they did so without incident or protest."

A second agent posted in the parking lot said he saw the three "being asked to leave by the staff. The staff had identified the three individuals as potential protesters and asked them to leave."

Weise and Young have filed a lawsuit alleging that their First Amendment rights were violated. They said they were removed from the town-hall discussion last March 21 because of a "No more blood for oil" bumper sticker on their car.

In their lawsuit, Weise and Young claim that White House event staffers Michael Casper and Jay Bob Klinkerman detained them and ejected them from the event at the Wings Over the Rockies Air & Space Museum. However, Casper and Klinkerman say they don't need to reveal whom they worked for because of a "qualified immunity."

more...
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_3619779

Tom Engelhardt | Connecting the Dots, Bush-Style
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032006L.shtml
Tom Engelhardt writes: As readers flee news on the printed page for an on-line life and classified ads head out the door for Craigslist and points west, the Washington Post became just the latest major newspaper to announce significant staff cuts. With fourth-quarter revenue down 3% from the previous year, eighty jobs - 9% of the Post's newsroom - are to be shed in the next twelve months.

Excerpt (quite a lot more on link):

The Irrationality Factor

If this administration's top officials have proven to be dreamers on a planetary scale and immensely competent at setting the terms for debate in this country, they are in so many other ways utter incompetents. If we want to use that increasingly common term for them, however, we have to think a little about what it really means. At the most basic level, inside their bubble world these insular beings and their remarkably insulated President undoubtedly believe that they are ready to correct for errors and apply lessons learned in Iraq to the Iran crisis, but there is one lesson they are guaranteed not to have learned, the simplest but most difficult one of all: Know thyself.

In fact, their inability to gain any perspective on themselves guarantees their dangerous incompetence in the Iran crisis to come. Imagine, for instance, that their second leading diplomat, UN ambassador John Bolton, recently offered this assessment of the prospect of negotiations with Iran: "I don't think we have anything to say to the Iranians." His statement - and it could be multiplied by so many others from Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and associates - represents one aspect of their incompetence: hubris (or call it arrogance). To that should be added a profound belief - on this they are the ultimate fundamentalists - in preponderant American power, especially in its military guise, as well as in their ability to wield it with precision and invariably to their advantage.

Throw in the fact that they are not only the greatest gamblers in our history, but also control freaks of the first order, and you already have a combustible meld of "incompetence" factors. If they do move against Iran, they will surely be blinded by their arrogance, overly impressed by the power they think they wield, and ridiculously sure of the plans they have made for various contingencies to come.

And yet the single thing that can be guaranteed about any air assault on Iran is that, whatever anybody's plans may be, events will quickly spin out of control - and that they will then be stunned and unprepared to deal. The result will be the "incompetence" for which they are already well known as well as disaster for us all.

At least one more factor should be added to the mix: irrationality. This is not a word we usually associate with the United States government. It's the sort of term normally left for Arabs who are, of course, known to be overemotional, closer to those more primitive, "tribal" emotions, and consequently deeply irrational. (In the American context, by the way, Iranians should be thought of as Arabs, even though they aren't.) Whatever our flaws and mistakes, we tend to assume that we are civilized and reasonably rational. This is why we don't worry enormously about our own singular nuclear arsenal. We know that, unlike the many revenge-bound, irrational, rogue regimes out there, not even the Bush administration would, in the end, use such weapons - even though, of course, the U.S. is the only country to do so to date.

While the Bush administration may have incredibly destructive military powers at its command, it's worth remembering that its officials are anything but supermen and women. Don't imagine them simply as Machiavellian manipulators of the rest of us. They are instead blunderers like the rest of us - only more so. We already know from reports seeping out of Washington that the administration is "riven by divisions" over, and confusions about, its Iran policy. The box its officials have been intent on creating to lock in the international community, the Iranians, and the American public may, sooner or later, come to feel like a kind of prison to them as well from which the only release, many months down the line, could appear to involve the mad act of pulling the superpower trigger. In other words, they may find themselves backed into a corner of their own making.

What we face, in fact, are two fundamentalist regimes, American and Iranian - each in the process of overestimating the hand it is playing; each underestimating its enemy; each in the grip of a different kind of irrationality. It's a frighteningly combustible mix. All those people who believe that the administration's Iran approach is just so much saber-rattling and bluster, part of a reasonably rational plan to create bargaining chips, or force the Iranians to the table on more favorable terms, should divest themselves of such fantasies. We are on the path to madness, which also happens to be the path to $100 a barrel oil and possibly some kind of economic meltdown. Then again, dreams of riches have often gone hand-in-hand with madness. Why not now?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060320/ap_on_go_co/bush_censure
Sen. Durbin Says Censuring Bush Premature
{{{Didn't Durbin do something I admired once by standing up to the administration or speaking out? What happened to his spine???}}}
Posted by: NonnyO at March 20, 2006 02:27 PM

Read this diary at Daily Kos
AP, CNN: False Headlines on Durbin and Censure!
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/20/2443/11112

I just read the transcript of Bush's long speech on Iraq and remain unconvinced. If what he says was true, he would not be protested everywhere he goes in the world.

And now, for a shameless plug...

If anyone (or their kids) want to join the military but are turned off by Iraq...there's always the Coast Guard. Official branch of the military so the same pay, military academy, allowances, benefits, veteran status, etc. A great way to shut up recruiters. And a great way to serve your country, in peacetime and in wartime.

[Truth in advertising: we do have a small contingent in the Persian Gulf, about 300 personnel, patrolling to prevent another Cole-type attack.]

Be forewarned, though: The Coast Guard is popular enough that they can be selective...certain jobs may require a waiting period to get in.

Huge personal news...

A musician friend of mine who has been going at it with me over the Shrub since 2000 JUST called me on the phone and said, and I quote...

"Everything you have been telling me is true. I have swung over to your way of thinking... we are so screwed."

The item that caught his attention this week was the raising of the debt ceiling to $9 trillion.

I've been dueling with this guy for years, and he always has frustrated me to the point of extreme anger... even though I have enormous respect for him personally.

We are having breakfast on Wednesday to discuss in more detail how he can explain to others what is really going on.

EPIPHANY! I'll drink to that!

Posted by: NonnyO at March 20, 2006 01:31 PM

At the VERY least they should hold men accountable for higher child support payments so that a woman can afford a sitter while she works and goes to school. The man's life should be just as affected as the woman's.

EPIPHANY! I'll drink to that!

Posted by: monkey at March 20, 2006 05:03 PM

That's GREAT, Monkey!!!!!

Encouraging. Grass roots at work!!!

Posted by: monkey at March 20, 2006 05:03 PM

Changing minds one at a time, if that's what it takes...

Congratulations, monkey.

(A conservative friend of mine said to me this morning, "Man, Bush is screwing up everything!" Made my day...)

A Secret Service agent told them "there was nothing they could do because the event was hosted by the staff and was a private event."

The three were asked to leave because the staffers had identified them as "potential protesters," the report said.

Posted by: monkey at March 20, 2006 03:51 PM

Again, take a look at Lambert over at Correntewire's description of how men parading as secret service men go ahead of the President's visits to clean out and prepare the site before Bush ever gets there.

The Bubble Squad: Shape-shifting Republican operatives impersonate reporters and the Secret Service
Submitted by lambert on Sat, 2006-03-18 18:24.

Here's a creepy little incident; Republican operatives are impersonating the press if you call F*X the press and also impersonating Secret Service agents. Who are these men of mystery? Let's call them The Bubble Squad. Because their job is to make sure nobody pops Bush's bubble.

WaPo:

A Mississippi couple whose home was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina said two men who later identified themselves [falsely!] as Secret Service agents pretended to be Fox News journalists when surveying their neighborhood in advance of a March 8 visit from President Bush.

more.....

http://tinyurl.com/pnece

madame- thanks for that link on Durbin. I watched the video, and his words were obviously twisted. As one of our group who criticized him last night, I guess I owe the Senator an apology. Watching the tape gives some clues as to what the Republican spin will be this election though-" vote for a Democrat and see a "wartime" commander-in-chief impeached. Give that kind of "aid and comfort" to the enemy ". No matter that these same people were busy screaming Wag the Dog at Bill Clinton during the Balkan war. Guess whether you're giving aid and comfort to the enemy depends on what political party you're a member of.

Posted by: madame defarge at March 20, 2006 04:02 PM

THANKS, madame, for that link! I read DKos and went to the link for the transcript of the whole interview. All cleared up in my mind now.

What's with Wallace trying to put words in people's mouths? I've seen other transcripts where he's tried to do the same. DumbA$$...!

EPIPHANY! I'll drink to that!

Posted by: monkey at March 20, 2006 05:03 PM

Shall I be the spoilsport here who points out that monkeys would drink to most things?

Seriously, I'm suppressing the enoumous desire to say "told ya so"........

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/19/AR2006031901078.html
Multiple Layers Of Contractors Drive Up Cost of Katrina Cleanup
{{{Well, we knew that already. Sounds like time for some very, very old-fashioned community activism... a group of people get together and raise a house in a very short time - like they did on the frontier with house and/or barn raisings. Eliminate all those middle people who only want to get rich off of other people's tragedies.}}}

Rumsfeld Singled Out as Crisis Deepens in Iraq
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032006M.shtml
A former US army general yesterday called for Donald Rumsfeld to resign on grounds of incompetence in Iraq, hours after Ayad Allawi, the former US-backed Iraqi prime minister, declared the country to be in the thick of a civil war that could soon "reach the point of no return."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200603/s1596381.htm
Images and story about Cyclone Larry that hit Queensland, Australia. Cyclone = hurricane. Another cyclone is brewing, but they don't know where it will hit landfall yet. (I got this link off of one of the genealogy e-lists I'm on that has several members from Australia.)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060320/ap_on_re_au_an/australia_cyclone
Aussies Endure Strongest Storm Since '74

Posted by: Ladytechie at March 20, 2006 06:30 PM

http://www.acclaimposters.com/_gallery/large/10070742.jpg

Iraqi diplomat gave U.S. prewar WMD details
Saddam's foreign minister told CIA the truth, so why didn't agency listen?

By Aram Roston, Lisa Myers
& the NBC Investigative Unit
Updated: 6:32 p.m. ET March 20, 2006

In the period before the Iraq war, the CIA and the Bush administration erroneously believed that Saddam Hussein was hiding major programs for weapons of mass destruction. Now NBC News has learned that for a short time the CIA had contact with a secret source at the highest levels within Saddam Hussein’s government, who gave them information far more accurate than what they believed. It is a spy story that has never been told before, and raises new questions about prewar intelligence.

What makes the story significant is the high rank of the source. His name, officials tell NBC News, was Naji Sabri, Iraq’s foreign minister under Saddam. Although Sabri was in Saddam's inner circle, his cosmopolitan ways also helped him fit into diplomatic circles.

In September 2002, at a meeting of the U.N.’s General Assembly, Sabri came to New York to represent Saddam. In front of the assembled diplomats, he read a letter from the Iraqi leader. "The United States administration is acting on behalf of Zionism," he said. He announced that there were no weapons of mass destruction and that the U.S. planned war in Iraq because it wanted the country’s oil.

more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11927856/

Posted by: Linda Enterkin at March 20, 2006 05:47 PM
Posted by: NonnyO at March 20, 2006 06:28 PM

No problem. He's my senator and I've always known him to be very level-headed & reasonable. It does irritate the hell out of me about Chris Wallace putting words in Durbin's mouth. Wonder what Daddy Wallace thinks of his son's lack of integrity...

Linda, RE: your point about Republican election spin...At this point, with Clueless George's approval ratings being what they are, I'd think that the argument about Dems impeaching him might actually win some votes for...the Dems.

As I said in an earlier thread, the best phrase I've heard about who to vote for in the mid-terms is for people "who will balance the president, not support him."

McCain Takes on DeLay Accomplice

By Paul Kiel - March 20, 2006

There have been a number of signs lately that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), eyeing 2008, is cozying up to the Republican establishment, but this just might be the surest one yet.

The Washington Post reported yesterday that McCain had hired Terry Nelson to be a senior advisor to his political committee, the Straight Talk America PAC. Who is Terry Nelson? George W. Bush's national political director in 2004, for one. It's just the latest example of McCain's strategy of taking what he can of Bush's money infrastructure - as the Post reports, he's been busily recruiting Pioneers, Rangers and Super Rangers from '04.

But there's one crucial, telling detail about Terry Nelson that the Post leaves out. And that's his role in the money laundering scheme for which Tom DeLay is being prosecuted down in Texas.

Nelson was the deputy chief of staff of the Republican National Committee in 2002 when the alleged crime occurred. His role was crucial, although he hasn't been charged. He's named right there in the indictment.

more...
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000137.php

So, legislators: What's the hold-up in pursuing impeachment in the House and censure in the Senate???

Posted by: NonnyO at March 20, 2006 02:15 PM

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@2

Nothing even gets on to the committee schedule (let alone on the floor of the House) with out the Republicans' approval. And they rule the House with an iron fist. Most Democrat sponsored bills just die in committee without even a hearing.

The Senate, I believe, is not as bad as the House, but as we see with Feingold's censure and war plan bill these don't make it onto the Senate floor without enough support.

EPIPHANY! I'll drink to that!

Posted by: monkey at March 20, 2006 05:03 PM

Changing the world, one monkey at a time.

Monkey see, monkey do.

I don't usually pay much attention to CNN's quick vote (or much else on their site...), but if they're any indication of what America is thinking...

Has the Bush administration been effective in handling public relations on efforts in Iraq?

Yes 9%
14297 votes

No 91%
144436 votes

Total: 158733 votes

Ralpheh
Unfortunately, you are right about how things work.
2006 matters. We need back the balance of power.

Senate in Recess: Bug them at Home -

Rushing through debate in order to get out of town for the St. Patrick's Day Recess, the House passed Bush's $92 billion Emergency Supplemental Appropriation request. The request included $19 billion for hurricane relief.

Next steps: The Senate will begin to consider the supplemental appropriation on March 30. Your Senators will be in their home states March 17–26; make sure they hear from you. Your message: Support a "No Permanent Bases" amendment, and vote against any appropriation for the War in Iraq. Members of Congress are afraid to vote to take a stand -- they need to hear from their constituents, so pick up the phone and give them a call today. Call your senators at 888-355-3588 (or 202-224-3121) and tell them: Not one penny more for war!

Lawmakers get out of the House
By Kathy Kiely
USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — The House of Representatives is on track this year to be in session for fewer days than the Congress Harry Truman labeled as “do-nothing” during his 1948 re-election campaign.

Members of Congress are taking an entire week off for St. Patrick's Day. It's the latest scheduling innovation to give members more time to meet with constituents.

Through Friday, the House was in session for 19 days, compared with 33 for the Senate. If they stick to their current schedule — including two weeks off in April, a week in May and July, plus all of August — House members will spend 97 days in Washington this year.

more...
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060320/1a_bottomstrip20.art.htm

Bush Didn't Bungle Iraq, You Fools

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0603/S00293.htm
Greg Palast, for the Guardian

Bu$h in Ohio:

Listening on C-Span

No mention of Osama or Afghanistan yet; Bu$h says war on terror is (surprisingly, counter-intuitively) in Iraq which, before we invaded the country, had no Al Qaeda.

Dont know if this has been posted already but I think it should be repeated over and over everywhere!

GOP STRUGGLES TO DEFINE MESSAGE FOR 2006 ELECTIONS
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/19/AR2006031900893_pf.html

WHAT B.S. FROM REP. EHLERS:

from a letter written to Battle Bob -

"Let me make one brief point about events leading up to the war (in Iraq). I understand the concerns of those who question our pre-war intelligence. Frankly, it was terrible, not just in the U.S., but also from our allies, and even from Russia. I can assure you that these issues are being addressed and, we hope, rectified. There have been several congressional and independent investigations into what happened and why it happened. For an example, the blue-ribbon, bipartisan Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (the Silberman-Robb Commission) produced what is viewed as the definitive report on pre-war intelligence, which found no indication that the intelligence community, or our Administration, distorted the evidence regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."

@@@@@@@@@

BALONEY

This is the Republican talking point set in stone about the WMD intell "failure": EVERYBODY IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD GOT IT WRONG... CIA, DIA, State Dept, the Brits, the Israelis, the Clinton people thought Saddam had WMD...

I called Ehlers office today and asked if the Congressman had read the Downing Street Memo? The woman answering the phone was either ignorant and played ignorant: she said she didn't know whether he had it or hadn't read it. I told her the memo from the British government was written in 2002 and THE BRITISH KNEW THEN that Saddam probably didn't have WMD and he was not a military threat.

I told her that the Congressman should stop lying about what our intelligence showed. She said something like "that is your opinion" and I said no, you are lying if you say EVERYONE thought Saddam had WMD. I reiterated - the Congressman should stop lying...

Posted by: Not My President at March 20, 2006 08:53 PM

Interesting theory Palast has. It almost makes sense. Either way, it's about control of the area's oil supplies and us stealing what didn't belong to us.

Such a shame that mankind hasn't evolved into a gentler species in 2000 years.

Ralph, all was not so obvious that we didn't need to have inspectors in. We were finding stuff up until the two years break when inspectors left. Cat and mouse of the worst order by Saddam. The IWR was almost six months prior, and NOT a pro-war vote. W. Clark, Dean, et al supported the thing, and even David Kay, lead WMD inspections, appreciated the IWR.

No doubt now it was for oil and the permanent bases to secure it. Also allowed the trashing of civilization's artifacts supply of unguarded weaponry now used against us.

As I remember, the Downing St Memo was not divulged to us, or Congress, by the media until after the election, along with Downing II, and other evidence of pre-war manipulation held by the press. Wiretaps, Niger CBS special, Plame case which could hit have hit in October before elections were also held.

Just read Greg Palast. Very interesting and plausible. I don't a lot of their screw-ups and government gutting are intended.

Found late at night, for you east coasters who will read this in the morning..

An excellent analysis of on the ground preventable mistakes made in Iraq..
Fred Kaplan at Slate
[snip]

A question worth mulling, on this third anniversary of the war that President Bush told us was over and won two years and 10 months ago, is this: Were the fiascos inevitable—built-in products of the nature of the war itself—or could they have been avoided, or at least might their impact have been minimized, if President Bush and his top advisers had made smarter decisions?

This isn't the stuff of parlor games; it's a vital question. If the disasters were inescapable, then we shouldn't get involved ever again in this sort of war. If they were preventable, then maybe these broader issues of war and peace can't be settled by this particular conflict, but we can draw the lesson that we should elect less dogmatic leaders; and the officers and advisers who counseled against those decisions, who turned out to be right all along, can draw the lesson that they should speak out more boldly, perhaps even resign in protest, if they find themselves mired in such catastrophes again.

rest here: http://tinyurl.com/h6b2w

thank you for that late night link Ladytechie. It's my one article I can read before work.

I don't know if other dcp'rs who work have this problem (reading blogs or catching up) but maybe we need to start a 3 minute top 10 countdown of events to share with overworked-harrassed workers.

I know others work too, and do this, but I can't seem to blog, read links, work, eat, care for family, etc without feeling rather zombieish. But if we can figure out how to do this in the mainstream, then we could get the word past the media dogs.

Bush To Cleveland: ‘Anybody Work Here In This Town?’

After getting frustrated at the length of the Q&A session of his speech in Cleveland Monday, Bush blurted out, “Anybody work here in this town?”

more...
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/20/bush-cleveland-work/

Ralph, all was not so obvious that we didn't need to have inspectors in. We were finding stuff up until the two years break when inspectors left. Cat and mouse of the worst order by Saddam. The IWR was almost six months prior, and NOT a pro-war vote. W. Clark, Dean, et al supported the thing, and even David Kay, lead WMD inspections, appreciated the IWR.

Posted by: Marjorie G at March 21, 2006 01:04 AM

Baloney -

Please read the Downing Street Memo - the top British government official say - " the case against Iraq was thin "; Iraq was not threatening its neighbors; did not have a nuclear bomb program etc..

The memo further states the "Bush wanted to go to war" "BUT the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy" (when it should be the other way around.)

As I remember, the Downing St Memo was not divulged to us, or Congress, by the media until after the election, along with Downing II, and other evidence of pre-war manipulation held by the press. Wiretaps, Niger CBS special, Plame case which could hit have hit in October before elections were also held.

Posted by: Marjorie G at March 21, 2006 01:04 AM

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

How long has the Downing Stree Memo been public?? One Year?? Or has it been two years?

Any Congressman who says the British government thought in 2002 or 2003 that Iraq was a serious threat IS LYING AND UTTERLY IMCOMPETENT AND IGNORANT

In another election, far, far away, once again, exit polls were way off.

U.S. denounces Belarus vote results
Lukashenko rejoices in landslide victory, scoffs at world critics

~ snip ~

The Central Election Commission's final count had Lukashenko winning 82 percent of the vote, with Milinkevich's 6 percent. Exit polls by Russia's Levada Center produced a far different picture, which would have forced a runoff: 47 percent for Lukashenko and 26 percent for Milinkevich

~ snip ~

"The United States does not accept the results of the election," said President Bush's spokesman, Scott McClellan. "The election campaign was conducted in a climate of fear. It included arrests and beatings and fraud."

We have a lot of work to do before November.

More Bush in Cleveland: Bush Falsely Claims He Never Linked Hussein To September 11

Bush, this afternoon:

First, just if I might correct a misperception, I don’t think we ever said – at least I know I didn’t say that there was a direct connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein.

In fact, Bush justified the war against Iraq by directly linking it to 9/11:

The use of armed forces against Iraq is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. [Bush’s Letter to Congress, 3/21/03]

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/20/9-11-and-saddam/

I read that Keith Olbermann had a field day with this last night on his show, to the point that KO said, "Who does the president think he's f'in kidding..."

Crooks & Liars has the video...
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/20.html#a7595

As I remember, the Downing St Memo was not divulged to us, or Congress, by the media until after the election, along with Downing II, and other evidence of pre-war manipulation held by the press. Wiretaps, Niger CBS special, Plame case which could hit have hit in October before elections were also held.

Posted by: Marjorie G at March 21, 2006 01:04 AM

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

After U.N. Weapons inspectors had been in Iraq for three months in 2003 and found NO STOCKPILES of WMD, No uranium enrichment program, No uranium ore, No centrifuges, It Was Obvious to me and many others that Bu$h/Cheney had been lying about WMD. As the slogan goes - THE WAR IS A LIE, AND YOU KNOW IT..

Marjorie, here are two suggestions:

1) join the DLC - they actually support Bush on the war

2) join Hillary's campaign for president - she supports the war 100%, the patriot act and the NSA wiretapping program

Here's a morning suggestion from someone who has heard enough bullsh*t lately from know-it-all's to last a lifetime...

Lose the attitude.

Bush To Cleveland: ‘Anybody Work Here In This Town?’

After getting frustrated at the length of the Q&A session of his speech in Cleveland Monday, Bush blurted out, “Anybody work here in this town?”

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

What a mean-spirited jerk.... that's our Bushie Boy

PENTAGON TO INVESTIGATE POSSIBLE MASSACRE BY MARINES LAST NOVEMBER.

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060320163809990005&ncid=NWS00010000000001

By JONATHAN KARL, ABCNews.com

WASHINGTON (March 20) -- A bloody videotape shot by a local Iraqi journalism student has prompted the Pentagon to launch a criminal investigation into an incident that left at least 15 Iraqi civilians dead in the city of Haditha.

The details of what happened four months ago in Haditha are just now coming to light with the release of the videotape by an Iraqi organization called Hammurabi Human Rights.

The tape shows the bloodied and bullet-marked homes that had been allegedly stormed by the Marines, and includes comments by local residents.

"This is my father," a boy says on the tape. "He didn't do anything wrong. Why did they kill him?"

'These Are Children'

The video shows the bodies of some of the dead, including one of three children killed.

Posted by: ralpheh at March 21, 2006 08:15 AM

I think there are more appropriate terms that could be used to describe the shrub, but not here on the Family Channel.

Gigantic Rectal Orifice

Here's a morning suggestion from someone who has heard enough bullsh*t lately from know-it-all's to last a lifetime...

Lose the attitude.

Posted by: monkey at March 21, 2006 08:15 AM

@@@@@@@@@

Monkey,

1) won't lose the attitude

2) I am very serious about my suggestions for Marge: the Democratic Leadership Council is the political home for her... Hillary is her candidate....

Wondering why more things aren't done right in the first place - all this tax money we pay in, all these representatives - we have committees to investigate committees, to find out why we had a war based on false intelligence, why terror attacks weren't averted, why a natural disaster was grossly mismanaged. On top of that, we have attempts to block those investigations. Why do we have an inept, corrupt, inefficient system and how can we reform it when it's so broken?

Before work news search (my comments in parentheses, sources in Google News)

China and Russia are going to cooperate on energy, China in accord with Russia on Iran. (Wasn't part of Bush's stated purpose in India to shore up our relationship in case China became too powerful, and didn't Condi tell China to keep a lid on its military?) Bush now plans official talks with Iceland. (?)

Bush says "We will not abandon Iraq" and US Ambassador Iraq says "My country is bleeding." (Is this progress after 3 years?! Protesters wherever he goes, even in the "heartland")

Pakistan is able to fire a cruise missile 500 miles and music and films are being banned by Taleban there. (Is this the nature of our ally?)

MN FBI agent claiming again FBI ignored terrorist before 9/11, though warned. (Glad this is flaring up again but yikes - how inept! Are we safer now?!)

Gore is not going to run but Feingold is (2008). Arnold is still capable of raising alot of money. (bummer)

--About Belarus election - Why do we (government/Bush/neocons) always go on about spreading democracy and freedom and then interfere or criticize when people actually elect someone the neocons don't want in power, and do it democratically? (ex Soviet bloc, South American countries etc seem to be especially where we meddle)

To my mind, this is all we needed to know on the WMD issue:

"SECURITY COUNCIL 7 MARCH 2003, Oral introduction of the 12th quarterly report of UNMOVIC, Executive Chairman Dr. Hans Blix":

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/SC7asdelivered.htm

"How much time would it take to resolve the key remaining disarmament tasks? While cooperation can and is to be immediate, disarmament and at any rate the verification of it cannot be instant. Even with a proactive Iraqi attitude, induced by continued outside pressure, it would still take some time to verify sites and items, analyse documents, interview relevant persons, and draw conclusions. It would not take years, nor weeks, but months. Neither governments nor inspectors would want disarmament inspection to go on forever. However, it must be remembered that in accordance with the governing resolutions, a sustained inspection and monitoring system is to remain in place after verified disarmament to give confidence and to strike an alarm, if signs were seen of the revival of any proscribed weapons programmes."

Far from using force as a last resort, the inspection process was working when the US and a few key allies, especially the UK, decided to occupy Iraq.

Err in haste, repent at leisure.

Chuck in Houston

107th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. J. RES. 114
October 10, 2002

"SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002'. ":

http://www.yourcongress.com/ViewArticle.asp?article_id=2686

"SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS. The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--
(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and

"(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."

"SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES...."

"a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--

"(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

"b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either

(A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq...."

Now I am off to look for that determination because, given the Hans Blix statement of March 7, 2003, posted above, I can't see anyway that POTUS could determine as indicated in Section 3.b.1.b. above.

Chuck in Houston

First, though, note that POTUS said the above resolution made war less likely:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021016-11.html

"For Immediate Release, Office of the Press Secretary, October 16, 2002. Statement by the President:

"Today I have signed into law H.J. Res. 114, a resolution "To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq." By passing H.J. Res. 114, the Congress has demonstrated that the United States speaks with one voice on the threat to international peace and security posed by Iraq. It has also clearly communicated to the international community, to the United Nations Security Council, and, above all, to Iraq's tyrannical regime a powerful and important message: the days of Iraq flouting the will of the world, brutalizing its own people, and terrorizing its neighbors must -- and will -- end. Iraq will either comply with all U.N. resolutions, rid itself of weapons of mass destruction, and in its support for terrorists, or it will be compelled to do so. I hope that Iraq will choose compliance and peace, and I believe passage of this resolution makes that choice more likely."

Chuck in Houston

OK, haven't read the whole thing yet, but this seems enough to make the case:

"Report In Connection With Presidential Determination Under Public Law 107-243":

http://www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/Report107_243.pdf

“Because of the intransigence and defiance of the Iraqi regime, further continuation of [diplomatic or other peaceful] efforts will neither adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq nor likely lead to
enforcement of all relevant UNSC resolutions regarding Iraq.

“This report also explains that a determination to use force against Iraq is fully consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions
against international terrorists and terrorist
organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the
terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.”

Note that the first citation is directly refuted by the relevant UN statement (see Hans Blix post above) and the second has never been supported by any intelligence findings at all to my knowledge – not US, not UK, not French, not German, not Italian, not Saudi, not Jordanian, not even Israeli.

Chuck in Houston

One of the unwritten rules here is that we can all agree to disagree respectfully and with courtesy.

We know that the people who post and simply read the DCP blog and participate in the community come from a broad range of viewpoints. That's one of the things that allows us to educate ourselves and expand our understanding. If a particular person is not comfortable with that approach, they are welcome to find another community that more suits their approach. This one will remain one that accepts disagreements on specifics with graciousness and courtesy.

OK, time to lighten it up around here...

Compliments of DU...

This week the Toronto Star reported that there appears to be a correlation between an individual's personality as a child and their political orientation as an adult. It would seem that the whiny youngsters tend to grow up to be conservatives, while confident youngsters grow up to be liberals.

SIGNS YOUR YOUNGSTER MIGHT BE A CONSERVATIVE

Stock answer to everything: "Kindergarten -- Love it or leave it!"

Brings to school elaborate lunch packed by nanny which includes sandwich, fruit roll-up, potato chips, candy, soft drink, sugar packets, and a $10 bill to purchase whatever he wants from the school vending machine. Insists it is "unfair" when poor kids get free beef-a-roni from government.

American flag Underoos.

Claims that a classmate "recently sought significant quantities of whoopee cushions, tacks, silly string, and Chinese handcuffs from Spencer Gifts." Uses this claim as a pretext to beat up that classmate. Unable to find whoopee cushions, tacks, silly string, or Chinese handcuffs after the fact.

Says "Highlights" and "Weekly Reader" are part of the liberal media.

Pees in pants whenever he is in the vicinity of Middle Eastern-looking classmate.

Favorite Book: "The O'Reilly Factor -- for Kids!"

Tells other boys that "Girls play with dolls; boys play with trucks." Secretly plays with dolls.

Spells potato with an e.

Blames low grade in finger painting on "racial preferences."

Favorite Animal: Elephant

Shoots close friend in the face with Super Soaker. Graciously accepts apology from close friend, who is "deeply sorry for all the bad stuff that has happened this week."

Obsessed with wee-wee of a certain classmate from Arkansas.

Favorite After-School Special: "The poor boy who got kissed by another boy on the school bus and had no choice but to beat up the boy who kissed him."

Takes lunch money from classmates, gives it to friend named Hal E. Burton.

Declines to participate in fire drill because he is busy reading "My Pet Goat."

"Operation Iraqi Freedom" lunch box.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x198441

Tells other boys that "Girls play with dolls; boys play with trucks." Secretly plays with dolls.

Posted by: madame defarge at March 21, 2006 11:33 AM

LOL!!!