« GrassRoutes: People-Powered Art | Main | Fear Up Preview and Discussion »
More Good News
Pakistan has begun building what independent analysts say is a powerful new reactor for producing plutonium, a move that, if verified, would signal a major expansion of the country's nuclear weapons capabilities and a potential new escalation in the region's arms race.
Satellite photos of Pakistan's Khushab nuclear site show what appears to be a partially completed heavy-water reactor capable of producing enough plutonium for 40 to 50 nuclear weapons a year, a 20-fold increase from Pakistan's current capabilities, according to a technical assessment by Washington-based nuclear experts.
IMHO, the most bizarre sentence in the story has to be this, from a senior Pakistani official:
"Pakistan's nuclear program has matured.[...]"
It's a frightening society which thinks that the words "nuclear weapons program" and "matured" belong in the same sentence, especially when discussing the expansion of that program.
There is virtually zero doubt in my mind anymore that nukes won't be lobbed through the air during my lifetime... my only question now is whether they will have corporate logo's and ad space available on them.
Scars & Strikes Forever
That summons a visual of the Dr. Strangelove cowboy, from the movie, "How I learned to stop worrying about and love the bomb," laughingly riding the bomb now affixed with Haliburton.
And in high school, I would listen to the original Tom Lehrer recording, Who's Got the Bomb, when we all believed it could come true, but surely not. Just too crazy, we thought, until the crazies came out of the wilderness and were installed in our White House.
That was my early B movies entertainment, where the military coups, starting next door to our President, would get foiled just in time. Now these coups are opposed by our military, and are starting within our Executive Offices.
What's a sane, Democracy lovin' people to do? Go to Camp (Democracy), I guess?
Diplomatic Failure in the Secret Society
Gary Hart (http:/www.huffingtonpost.com)
The U.S. is now confronted with two basic options in the Middle East: the neoconservatives can continue to hope that an increasingly unlikely miracle will permit us to use Iraq as our military and political base from which to dominate the region, or we can attempt the kind of sophisticated diplomacy that mature great powers have carried out over the centuries.
But we cannot do both.
The diplomatic, as opposed to warlike, stance requires statecraft conducted by statesmen. Problem is the Bush administration has none of these in its closed shop and indicates neither capability nor interest in bringing in seasoned people who understand diplomacy. Well into its second term, the friends of W remain a secret society whose members speak the same coded language, worship at the same alter, and share the same secret handshake.
Up to now our government (president and acquiescent Congress) has tried to combine unilateral preventive warfare in Iraq with detachment and avoidance in the Israeli-Palestinian confrontations. This has produced a failed occupancy in Iraq, a failing occupancy in Aghanistan (recently described by the British NATO forces commander as near collapse), and war between Israel and most surrounding neighbors.
Why not just retreat to fortress America and let them settle it themselves. Well, we have our own ongoing conflict with the jihadis who originated in the region, but who, except for their Iraqi training ground, have moved the center of their operations to Europe. And then, of course, there is that little matter of OIL.
Even if we had an administration in Washington that took diplomacy seriously, which we don't, our bona fides and integrity will remain compromised by our Persian Gulf oil dependency.
Maliki insists Iraq will not slide into civil war
(he is about to visit US & UK so we'll hear this alot)
..
meanwhile
Horrific bombings in Baghdad, Kirkuk kill more than 60
wounded more than 200 Sunday in Baghdad
Well Condi has popped up in Beirut.
Syria says if Israel invades Lebanon via ground, it will become involved. They offered dialogue.
“Syria doesn’t need dialogue to know what they need to do.”
US Ambassador John Bolton
He is representing us. He is supposed to be our "ambassador" and engage in "diplomacy." It's such a joke. Isn't his confirmation about up? Wasn't it temporary? Didn't W sneak it in during vacation with an Executive Order? Isn't the Senate supposed to finalize it? Soon?
"This conflict is a long way from over," Cheney said at a fundraising appearance for a GOP congressional candidate. "It's going to be a battle that will last for a very long time. It is absolutely essential that we stay the course."
(HuffPo)
Maliki insists Iraq will not slide into civil war
Posted by: DiAnne at July 24, 2006 10:04 AM
Perhaps Maliki should read this op-ed from yesterday's NYTimes before he comes to visit...
It’s Official: There Is Now a Civil War in Iraq
HAS the conflict in Iraq turned into a civil war?
Civil wars are defined as armed conflicts between the government of a sovereign state and domestic political groups mounting effective resistance in relatively continuous fighting that causes high numbers of deaths. This broad definition does not always distinguish civil wars from other forms of political violence, so we often use somewhat arbitrary criteria, like different thresholds of annual deaths, to sort out cases. Depending on the criteria used, there have been about 100 to 150 civil wars since 1945. Iraq is clearly one of them.
http://tinyurl.com/j5hnl = NYtimes
Now this is good news...Even William F. Buckley is turning on Georgie...
Buckley: Bush Not A True Conservative
CBS News Exclusive: Buckley Criticizes President For Interventionist Policies
--snip--
Buckley finds himself parting ways with President Bush, whom he praises as a decisive leader but admonishes for having strayed from true conservative principles in his foreign policy.
--snip--
"If you had a European prime minister who experienced what we've experienced it would be expected that he would retire or resign," Buckley says.
--snip--
"I think Mr. Bush faces a singular problem best defined, I think, as the absence of effective conservative ideology — with the result that he ended up being very extravagant in domestic spending, extremely tolerant of excesses by Congress," Buckley says. "And in respect of foreign policy, incapable of bringing together such forces as apparently were necessary to conclude the Iraq challenge."
Asked what President Bush's foreign policy legacy will be to his successor, Buckley says "There will be no legacy for Mr. Bush. I don't believe his successor would re-enunciate the words he used in his second inaugural address because they were too ambitious. So therefore I think his legacy is indecipherable"
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/22/eveningnews/main1826838.shtml
Posted by: madame defarge at July 24, 2006 11:01 AM
The Bush Legacy....
"STUPEND'US!"
Speaking of Bolton (from Center on American Progress)
"A Consensus Is Building Behind The President's Foreign Policy Approach"
-- Headline of White House fact sheet "Setting the Record Straight: President Bush’s Foreign Policy Is Succeeding," 7/21/06
VERSUS
"The Bush administration is not popular at the United Nations, where it is often perceived as disdainful of diplomacy, and its policies as heedless of the effects on others and single-minded in the willful assertion of American interests. ... [Diplomats'] concerns over [U.N. Ambassador John Bolton's] methods extend to...his ability to build coalitions and reach consensus."
-- New York Times, 7/22/06
------------------------------------------------------
Still Unfit to Serve
This Thursday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will hold hearings on the nomination of U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton. Bolton was nominated to the post last year by President Bush but failed to win Senate confirmation after a series of problematic disclosures about his past, particularly a record of mishandling intelligence and a pattern of intimidating subordinates.
The timing of this week's hearings is no accident. The White House is attempting to rally support for the Bolton nomination by politicizing the escalating conflict in the Middle East, arguing that this moment of geopolitical peril requires a permanent representative at the U.N.
But the truth is that Bolton's record over the past year has highlighted the desire of an individual who was sent to the U.N. not to make it stronger, but to undermine it. Bolton is no more worthy for the U.N. post now than he was a year ago.
UN-DIPLOMATIC: Bolton has managed to offend many U.S. friends and allies in just over a year at the U.N. Sen. Joseph Biden (D-DE) said, "Bolton’s performance at the U.N. confirms my conviction that he is the wrong person for this job." Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT) added, "Many ambassadors at the U.N. feel that he hasn't done a good job there. He's polarized the situation."
---More, much more, at Center for American Progress website.
Funny, I was just reading a New Yorker review for a book on the UN. It characterized it as an "international civil society," perhaps the "2nd Great Enlightenment."
I tell you - we are becoming the new South Africa. We are on the road to being as isolated as North Korea. What do we produce?
We've gone from using slavery to produce tobacco to being the world's biggest arms supplier. We are a debtor nation and we arm others to participate in wars while we are bogged down in our own.
Does anyone know if there is any planned protest today at the Clinton/Lieberman event in CT?
I'm feeling like a road-trip. ;-)
Posted by: Lou at July 24, 2006 11:53 AM
I don't know Lou, but that sounds like a great idea.
Can I make a suggestion? Post at FDL and crooks and liars and DU Connecticut forum an announcement to see if there is a planned protest already. Or you can suggest an impromptu protest.
Clinton is coming here to help Cantwell too - she's not as bad as Lieberman, in fact we need her, but her position on the war has been a suck-up one, for the most part.
That's why we're going to the Clinton/McDermott event instead of hers. McDermott has consistently been a real hero and the Right is out to get him.
Not only was Lieberman on the wrong side of the Iraq War issue all this time, but I'd forgotten how he insisted on simultaneously running for Senate & VP. Once again, he was more anxious to stay in power than to keep a Democratic majority, yet talks about party loyalty. & now we see his true colors, when he refuses to support the Democratic nominee but would form his own party. No wonder his wife divorced him yet he's Mr. Family Values, taking the support of the very person he criticized for "morals" violations. What a hypocrite for such a "religious" man.
What a hypocrite for such a "religious" man.
Posted by: DiAnne at July 24, 2006 12:54 PM
It's all the rage, at least for me.
Some interesting "historical" reading. The author recently read ‘The Revolt’, the memoirs of Menachem Begin. He compares what he read there with the reality of his recent encounters with some young Palestinian men. His article was published in The Independent on 7-23-2006 and is reproduced on his own website.
http://www.johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=935
Dwahzon
Very interesting - hard for anyone to point fingers.
Everyone seems to have an agenda, borne of what they have gone through or what they have heard or what they believe to be true. That is not to excuse terrorist tactics but it does help explain how they develop and how pervasive they are, how things can change.
This is essentially what people from Iran (students) were telling me as far back as 1978. They would say "I'm not antiSemitic or antiIsrael or antiJewish but antiZionist."
I am not endorsing this just presenting it as an idea. It is not something our country or politicians would want to realize or admit to - that we might be to a large extent CONTROLLED by Israel rather than the other way around.
http://www.counterpunch.org/atzmon0822.html
Again, I am not endorsing conspiracies theories which may be discussed herein, but suggesting that alot of people in the Middle East and other Muslim areas belief these sorts of things.
http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASInt_13/4346_13.htm
Here's what I don't get:
WHY do so many allegedly peaceful religious people of any and all faiths support murder-by-war?
The Cretin ordered a 'pre-emptive' attack of a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11. That's a war crime.
With the Israel-Lebanon thing, two people were kidnapped and that's being used as a "justification" for all-out war. Wouldn't negotiating for the release of the captives worked? Did anyone try negotiation? (If they did, I don't recall hearing or reading anything about it; but I do ignore most TV snooze.)
Seriously, there needs to be some kind of realignment of thinking to justify murder-by-war and how to "justify" murder-by-war, not only by the "leaders" of this country but by others as well....
Why did Porter Goss & Bob Graham have breakfast with Mohammed Atta's "bagman" on 9/11? It's documented.
NonnyO
Cynically, I think they do it for Honeywell, Northrup, Raetheon, Halliburton etc.
Posted by: NonnyO at July 24, 2006 02:59 PM
Peace prize winner 'could kill' Bush
Annabelle McDonald
25jul06
NOBEL peace laureate Betty Williams displayed a flash of her feisty Irish spirit yesterday, lashing out at US President George W.Bush during a speech to hundreds of schoolchildren.
Campaigning on the rights of young people at the Earth Dialogues forum, being held in Brisbane, Ms Williams spoke passionately about the deaths of innocent children during wartime, particularly in the Middle East, and lambasted Mr Bush.
"I have a very hard time with this word 'non-violence', because I don't believe that I am non-violent," said Ms Williams, 64.
"Right now, I would love to kill George Bush." Her young audience at the Brisbane City Hall clapped and cheered.
"I don't know how I ever got a Nobel Peace Prize, because when I see children die the anger in me is just beyond belief. It's our duty as human beings, whatever age we are, to become the protectors of human life."
Ms Williams was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize 30 years ago, when she circulated a petition to end violence in Northern Ireland after witnessing British soldiers shoot dead an IRA member who was driving a car. He veered on to the footpath, killing two children from one family instantly and fatally injuring a third.
Ms Williams's petition had tens of thousands of Protestant and Catholic women walking the streets together in protest. Now the former office receptionist heads the World Centres of Compassion for Children International, a non-profit group working to create a political voice for children.
more...
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,19902313,00.html?32
Time to swiftie a peacie.
William Rivers Pitt | The Pin in the Grenade
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406J.shtml
"There is no way to tell exactly how this Middle East upheaval is going to unfold, and making any sort of prediction is a dangerous game," writes William Rivers Pitt. "There are, however, a number of disparate factors threaded through this situation that, if allowed to coalesce, will create an unspeakably dangerous convulsion that will be felt all across the globe."
MORE BACKSTABBING BY THE DLC DEMOCRATS: BILL CLINTON TO CAMPAIGN FOR LIEBERMAN:
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Lamont Strength Rouses Progressives
Clinton To Stump For Lieberman
By MARK PAZNIOKAS
Courant Staff Writer
July 23 2006
Congressional Democrats from Ohio and California jumped into Connecticut's showcase political race Saturday, saying that Ned Lamont's challenge of Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman has emboldened progressives nationally.
U.S. Reps. Maxine Waters of California and Marcy Kaptur of Ohio said they endorsed Lamont for opposing the war in Iraq and challenging Lieberman's willingness to accommodate the policies of the Bush administration.
The national spotlight on the Aug. 8 Democratic primary between Lieberman and Lamont - now a virtual dead heat in private and public polls - will intensify Monday when former President Clinton campaigns in Waterbury for Lieberman.
At campaign stops in Hartford and New Britain on Saturday, Waters and Kaptur cast Lieberman as out of touch with Democratic voters and Lamont as the vanguard of change.
"We know this election, this election here in Connecticut, is being looked at across our nation, so it is not just an election for Connecticut, it is an election to change America," Kaptur said.
Lamont, a Greenwich businessman seeking statewide office for the first time, passed the three-term incumbent in the latest Quinnipiac University poll last week. After trailing Lieberman by 15 percentage points among likely Democratic voters in June, he now leads, 51-47 percent.
Both campaigns say privately they now consider the race a dead heat with little more than two weeks to the primary, giving another jolt of energy to what already was one of the closely watched contests in the country.
Lieberman was off the campaign trail Saturday in observance of the Jewish Sabbath, but he will resume campaigning today with stops at African American churches in Bridgeport.
Sean Smith, Lieberman's campaign manager, said the senator has a solid record in the African American community that dates from his participation in civil rights marches in Mississippi in 1963.
At worst, it's good that Lieberman is having to defend his title and not just be a shoe-in. Sounds about right about the DLC - come to think of it.
DailyKos lead stories are all about Lieberman
US Accused of "Stone-Walling" as World Trade Talks Collapse
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406A.shtml
Global free trade talks, billed as a once-in-a-generation chance to boost growth and ease poverty, collapsed on Monday after nearly five years of haggling, and resuming them could take years. The suspension of the World Trade Organization's Doha round came after major trading powers failed in a last-ditch bid to overcome differences on reforming world farm trade. The European Union and India firmly pointed the finger at the United States for the final breakdown.
American Bar Association Objects to Bush's "Signing Statements"
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406B.shtml
The American Bar Association said Sunday that President Bush was flouting the Constitution and undermining the rule of law by claiming the power to disregard selected provisions of bills that he signed. In a comprehensive report, a bipartisan 11-member panel of the bar association said Mr. Bush had used such "signing statements" far more than his predecessors, raising Constitutional objections to more than 800 provisions in more than 100 laws on the ground that they infringed on his prerogatives.
Bush Refuses to Push for Immediate Cease-Fire
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406C.shtml
White House officials said President Bush remains opposed to an immediate cease-fire to stop violence in the Middle East, despite personal pleas from ally Saudi Arabia that he help stop the bloodshed. Saudi King Abdullah beseeched Bush to intervene in Israel's military campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon, where the death toll is approaching 400 after less than two weeks of bombing.
Iraqi Parliament Speaker: Invasion and Aftermath "Work of Butchers"
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406D.shtml
The speaker of the Iraqi Parliament criticized the American government's involvement in Iraq on Saturday, likening the invasion and its consequences to "the work of butchers" and demanding that the American authorities disentangle themselves from Iraq's political affairs.
Aziz Huq | Wiretapping Unbound
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406E.shtml
Aziz Huq writes that the Specter bill is no compromise - it actually locks in the president's authority to act without oversight. "From the Iraq conflict to the handling of captured terrorists, the present administration has demonstrated a remarkable knack for barging in with excessive force in ways that fail to respond to threats. Secrecy is then used to cover up the resulting mess. Boundless license and the renunciation of oversight will only be a recipe for even worse disasters."
Rami Khouri | Condi Rice's Mid-East Fantasy Ride
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406F.shtml
"American officials are very good at vernacular descriptions, but lousy at history and political reality in the Middle East," writes Rami Khouri. "Condoleezza Rice ... has described the massive destruction, dislocation and human suffering in Lebanon as an inevitable part of the 'birth pangs of a new Middle East.' From my perspective here in Beirut, what she describes as 'birth pangs' look much more like a wicked hangover from a decades-old American orgy of diplomatic intoxication with the enticements of pro-Israeli politics."
Somalia Edges Closer to War as Peace Talks Fail
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406G.shtml
Around this beleaguered Horn of Africa nation, concerns are growing that the incursion by Ethiopian troops could push Somalia's 15-year civil war to a dangerous level. Over the last 40 years, Ethiopia and Somalia have gone to war repeatedly. Somalian leaders and analysts warn that direct Ethiopian involvement is threatening to renew armed clashes, deepen cracks inside the fragile transitional government and broaden the crisis into a regional conflict.
Europe Losing Pollinators
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406H.shtml
A new study just published in the journal Science confirms a significant decrease in the numbers and variety of pollinating insects in Europe as well as an associated decline of the wild plants they service.
Here's a diary for the Michigan people who hang out here. You might be interested in how this person evaluates the race that's going on for the MI-07 seat.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/24/162619/462
Why did Porter Goss & Bob Graham have breakfast with Mohammed Atta's "bagman" on 9/11? It's documented.
Posted by: DiAnne at July 24, 2006 03:05 PM
URL's?
US Accused of "Stone-Walling" as World Trade Talks Collapse
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406A.shtml
Global free trade talks, billed as a once-in-a-generation chance to boost growth and ease poverty, collapsed on Monday after nearly five years of haggling, and resuming them could take years. The suspension of the World Trade Organization's Doha round came after major trading powers failed in a last-ditch bid to overcome differences on reforming world farm trade. The European Union and India firmly pointed the finger at the United States for the final breakdown.
{{{IMHO: all world leaders should cease, suspend, or otherwise cancel any kind of meetings or negotiations that might involve the US, or even just not invite the US, until after we get a new president in Jan. 09... IF that president is a Democrat, that is, and not another neoCon who will only continue more of the same old Bu$h!te nonsense started by the current resident. A little old-fashioned shunning will go a long ways toward bringing idiots like the current regime back into line...}}}
American Bar Association Objects to Bush's "Signing Statements"
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406B.shtml
The American Bar Association said Sunday that President Bush was flouting the Constitution and undermining the rule of law by claiming the power to disregard selected provisions of bills that he signed. In a comprehensive report, a bipartisan 11-member panel of the bar association said Mr. Bush had used such "signing statements" far more than his predecessors, raising Constitutional objections to more than 800 provisions in more than 100 laws on the ground that they infringed on his prerogatives.
Excerpt:
The issue has deep historical roots, the panel said, noting that Parliament had condemned King James II for nonenforcement of certain laws in the 17th century. The panel quoted the English Bill of Rights: "The pretended power of suspending of laws, or the execution of laws, by regal authority, without consent of Parliament, is illegal."
David Cole | Why the Court Said No
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406O.shtml
"The fact that the Court decided the case at all in the face of Congress's efforts to strip the Court of jurisdiction is remarkable in itself. That the Court then broke away from its history of judicial deference to security claims in wartime to rule against the President, not even pausing at the argument that the decisions of the commander in chief are 'binding on the courts,' suggests just how troubled the Court's majority was by the President's assertion of unilateral executive power. That the Court relied so centrally on international law in its reasoning, however, is what makes the decision truly momentous," writes David Cole.
Aziz Huq | Wiretapping Unbound
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406E.shtml
Aziz Huq writes that the Specter bill is no compromise - it actually locks in the president's authority to act without oversight. "From the Iraq conflict to the handling of captured terrorists, the present administration has demonstrated a remarkable knack for barging in with excessive force in ways that fail to respond to threats. Secrecy is then used to cover up the resulting mess. Boundless license and the renunciation of oversight will only be a recipe for even worse disasters."
Eleanor Clift | 400,000 Frozen Embryos
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406M.shtml
"If this were a normal news time, the big story this week would be Bush’s veto of legislation to expand federally funded embryonic stem-cell research," writes Eleanor Swift. "Bush’s defiance on the issue has the potential of being as big a political gift for Democrats as the Massachusetts gay-marriage ruling was for Republicans in the last election."
"Black Bills" Can Be Refuge for Mischief
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406N.shtml
An independent investigation has found that imprisoned former congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham took advantage of secrecy and badgered Congressional aides to help slip items into classified bills that would benefit him and his associates.
Jordan Accused of Torturing Suspects for US
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072406P.shtml
Security agents in Jordan are torturing terrorism suspects on behalf of the United States in hopes of forcing confessions, the human rights watchdog Amnesty International contended in a new report Monday.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathleen-reardon/stem-cell-hypocrisy-ha_b_25648.html
Stem Cell Hypocrisy -- Having It Both Ways
{{{Interesting comments to this article, too.}}}
Whoops!
Sorry for so many double postings. I should have read the thread first, and now I see DiAnne has posted most of what I did...!
Posted by: monkey at July 24, 2006 03:11 PM
I agree with her.... Only difference is, I'd insist on a little torture first: have him castrated sans anesthetic before having him squished like a bug.
The hatred of that thing that passes for a 'man' and the people who are in his inner circle must be radiating toward DC at such an intense psychic energy rate that I don't know why that alone hasn't done them in....
Snow apologizes for ‘murder’ statement
(AP)WASHINGTON - White House press secretary Tony Snow apologized on Monday for suggesting that President Bush believed stem-cell research amounted to "murder," saying he was "overstating the president's position."
At issue was Snow's comment last Wednesday defending Bush's veto of legislation to expand federally financed research on stem cells obtained from unwanted embryos.
"The president believes strongly that for the purpose of research it's inappropriate for the federal government to finance something that many people consider murder. He's one of them," Snow said at the time.
Bush position unchanged
Snow said Monday that the president remains opposed to using federal funds for such research because it involves "a destruction of human life."
more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14013127/
Eggs Benedict
Posted by: DiAnne at July 24, 2006 09:58 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hart/diplomatic-failure-in-the_b_25646.html
Diplomatic Failure in the Secret Society
Gary Hart quote from the article: "unilateral preventive warfare in Iraq" ~ ??? WTF? PREVENT a war by STARTING a war?!?!? That's neoCon Orwellian thinking that says 'war is peace,' which only gets a lot of people killed, or maimed physically and/or psychologically for the rest of their lives. War is war and it's a form of legalized murder, no matter how it's justified by (mostly) men, and war and its associated atrocities involving prison camps and torture represents the worst of what human beings can do to each other for false principles. In Paleolithic art there are no depictions of war; people were too busy trying to survive to start idiotic wars. With "civilization" wars were invented. I think civilization needs to wake up and realize that all war does is "legalize" impotent old men to order the killing of the (mostly) sons of other impotent old men in a kind of infanticide-by-proxy, and force soldiers to commit fratricide-by-proxy by telling the gullible young fools through brainwashing techniques that it's patriotic to die for one's country (whom the military-industrial complex wants to keep uneducated and ignorant because ignorant people are easier to control, as one old pope wrote several centuries ago as justification for keeping the masses uneducated). "Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori." What about living for one's country? Wouldn't it be more patriotic to live for one's country?
Study wildlife patterns of animals who live in groups.... Example: On an average of every two years a new male lion defeats the old lion who has sired cubs by a related group of females. He kills the young who are still dependent on their mothers, thus ensuring that the DNA of those young cubs will never go into the future. The females come into estrus immediately and he sires a whole new group of young so his DNA goes forward to the future. The lionesses are actually the hunters and provide the food for the group. After the male lion is defeated by a younger lion in a couple of years, any young who have not already survived and are on their own will be killed by the next young lion who sires the next generation.... and on and on it goes. It is a microcosm of what happens with the human race in these 'modern' times. In the last few centuries, wars have been fought about every 20 to 30 years or so, which kills off the prime young studs (males, mostly) who could sire the next generation of human beings (not to mention the civilian casualties of war who are now being referred to as "collateral damage" - that's insulting, demeaning the humanity of the people killed). War is an effective means of population control which only makes the military-industrial complex more wealthy (seriously, don't they have enough money?). If a young soldier rapes a woman from a defeated country, there's a chance of siring a child just before he's killed, if she is not killed, that is. Otherwise, it's a gamble as to whether or not he'll survive the war to go home, find a mate, and father children. (So, okay. Birth control without wars makes more sense; but I digress.)
Is war, rape, pillage, and plunder all men are good for in the modern world (i.e., the last three thousand years)? If so, we need a radical shift in thinking or a radical shift in who rules the countries in this world (our own and a few others I can think of where war is rampant because of gangs of men who wantonly slaughter people if/when they're not also torturing or raping women and girls, and women and children suffer the worst, not only from war but from starvation after crops have been destroyed). Men have been doing a lousy job of ruling the countries of the world for thousands of years. Maybe women who do not support or endorse war in any way, shape, or form should be elected as our leaders. Like lionesses, the smartest of women know how to provide for their own and others by cooperating with each other for the benefit all. In elephant herds, it's the old matriarch, the leader of the group, who can find water and food in times of drought when no one else can. In primate groups it's the old matriarchs who can find food and water when the group is under stress from drought and hunger. The entire group would die otherwise. In any case, I'm tired of the old patriarchal claptrap about faux patriotism, faux religiosity, and frat-boy schoolyard-bully "leaders" who have a combined IQ less than their shoe sizes, old impotent men who rant and rave about false patriotic values and how good they think war is (men who never served in a war themselves!).
I agree with olephart on July 23, 2006 at 08:07pm (comment section for the Gary Hart article). I have long been of the opinion that the entire Bu$hCo regime should be brought up before The Hague on war crimes charges. They are the worst examples of humanity known on the planet and they will not be missed if they are executed for those war crimes. The only real pity is that they've already sired children. One can only hope their mental defects will not affect their descendants and produce more egomaniacal, power-mad psychopaths.
Since the SCOTUS decision of 2000, this nation has been plunged into a state of FUBAR; the status quo has become SNAFU. The radical religious reich gets all the attention in Lamestream Media even though the saner majority have not drunk their kool-aid and don't believe the same things they do (and I'll never understand why the religious reich condones murder-by-war). 9/11 was the act of 19 criminals, most from Saudi Arabia; they died with their victims so there is no legal recourse. There are billions of people on the planet, most of whom just want to live in peaceful co-existence with their neighbors and live ordinary lives providing for their families or themselves and have no malice toward anyone. There are (so far) only a few thousand criminals who commit terrorist acts and they are not allied with any government from any country, which makes these 'pre-emptive' wars based on lies a tragic farce, at best, since those nations had nothing whatsoever to do with the criminals who hijacked the planes on 9/11 and killed thousands; the resulting unjustified wars have killed over a hundred thousand, maybe over two hundred thousand people by now. (I'm done grieving over 9/11; I honor the memory of the dead, but I'm done grieving, and tired of the administration mentioning 9/11 and using it as false justification for more wars based on more lies. The whole 'war on terror' is a joke. At best, it's a 'war on criminals.' Let law enforcement deal with the criminals.) There are more peaceful people than criminals in the world. Can't we put the criminals on some gawdfersaken desert island, give them clubs and no means of communicating with the normal world, and let them commit crimes against each other rather than crimes against the rest of the world's populations who only want to live normal, peaceful lives? We cannot long endure with the current status quo without being plunged into an abyss of chaos and a nuclear holocause because of the current "leaders" of this country.
We have lots of things to get back on track in this country alone: a voting system where ballots can be counted in contested elections (put the e-voting machines in recycleable computer heaps!); medical care for all the citizens of this nation (and leave any decisions about birth control or abortion to women, since they are the only ones who can get pregnant); education for all (and none of that idiocy with 'intelligent design' in science classes where rational and logical thinking should be promoted - I'd personally like to see more education involving the arts and literature and languages and history and philosophy and less accent on sports). We also need to demand our politicians listen to the majority of us who deplore the administration's policies on illegal wars, illegal detention of people in concentration camps, illegal torture - all war crimes by an moral person's standards, not to mention accepted legal standards around the world (and if the politicians don't listen to those who elected them, we need to get them replaced). We have no credibility left in the rest of the world, moral or otherwise, thanks to the currently-installed administration. If this nation is shunned by the rest of the world for the next hundred years because of Bu$hCo, I will understand the reasons leaders of other countries do so; the current leaders of this nation (and I'm including most of the Congressional leaders who have allowed these things to happen) have done nothing whatsoever to improve our moral standing on the planet. The current administration has acted in a way that makes the US a third-world rogue nation while putting us in the deepest debt ever. We may never recover (or if we do, it won't be in my lifetime).
World-wide we need to solve the problems of global warming (wake up, doubters; it's a fact and it's here, so let's be practical and deal with it realistically!) and quit polluting our environmment or we'll kill off our own species and not just other species; alternative sources of energy to heat and cool our homes; smaller cars with economical mileage or manufacturing vehicles that run on alternative fuels entirely (macho-men need to get over the idea that the size of their cars determines their masculinity - we already know their big cars represent the size of their egos!); information technology (corporations: hands off the internet and trying to control it for your own profit!). Those are the biggies I can think of off the top of my head... there are others that need to be dealt with, too. Politically, we desperately need rational and sane people in office, people who will not opt for war as the first and only solution to any misperceived offenses or differences of opinion, people who are not power-mad egomaniacal psychopaths out for dominion of the planet, and people who will not lie every time they open their mouths.
To accomplish any advances in a truly civilized fashion, we need a peaceful world. War by any standards is legalized murder. When will the "leaders" of our nations cry "Enough! We want peace!" and work for peaceful co-existence for all on this planet...?
When Franklin replied "A republic - if you can keep it" when he was asked what we had just created many centuries ago, he was right. We've let down Franklin and the other Founding Fathers of this nation. Since these new wars have started on top of the old wars (and the justifications for each are remarkably lame!), I do have to wonder what kind of a dictatorship will ensue if the current administration is not impeached, and whether or not they will bring war to this continent within the next two years because of the last six years of their criminal actions and war crimes.... I sense the rest of the world fast losing patience with our installed "leaders" and we will be the ones to suffer on behalf of the people we never supported in the first place.
Bill Clinton must going to Connecticut in place of Hillary. Hillary has decided it is too risky (she would be forced into the limelight to defend her Liebermanesque position on Iraq)!!!! And she would lose the votes of many Democrats (you know, her party) if she went and supported Pro-War Joe....
Sounds like Hillary will follow the DLC/John Kerry formula and avoid talking about the elephant in the living room: terrorism and the war in Iraq (pathetic....)
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Clinton to Outline Broad Agenda
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) "is planning to use a speech to moderate Democrats this morning to showcase a set of domestic policy proposals that could form the backbone of her presidential campaign platform in 2008," according to the New York Sun.
Dubbed the "American Dream Initiative," the proposals are the first product of the effort begun last year and are "designed to address Americans' concerns about their place in the fast-changing world economy." http://politicalwire.com/
Re Clinton/Lieberman stop in CN: (read article at link)
But maybe the ploy will work because Waterbury is, after all, a lucky charm for Democrats. And it's one that speaks to both Bill Clinton and Joe Lieberman's dimly remembered roots. In 1960, John F. Kennedy abruptly added a Waterbury stop to his campaign schedule, and 40,000 people stood around until 3 a.m. waiting to see him. He spoke from the balcony of a beautiful and storied old hotel, the Elton. The night was celebrated by historian Theodore White as a turning point, and Pierre Salinger called it the greatest moment of that campaign. It's a story both Clinton and Lieberman would know well, or would've known back in 1970. In the ensuing years, each has parked some of his youthful ideals and gotten behind the wheel of the shiny new centrism. And the Elton Hotel has become an assisted-living facility. Time is pitiless.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/07/24/clinton_lieberman/index1.html
Thanks to mbk
Also to NonnyO for posting the Gary Hart again
(I was a Hart delegate - too bad he didn't win!)
NEW POLL SHOWS LAMONT GAINING ON LIEBERMAN:
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/07/22/in_connecticut_poll_shows_lamont_ahead_by_10.html
July 22, 2006
In Connecticut, Poll Shows Lamont Ahead by 10
A new Rasmussen Reports poll shows Ned Lamont (D) beating Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) in the Democratic primary, 51% to 41%.
Here's the stunning finding: In the general election, Lieberman and Lamont are tied with 40% with Alan Schlesinger (R) trailing behind with 13%.
nOTE: Last week’s Rasmussen Poll (ABOVE) showing Ned Lamont winning handily the Democratic primary and in a tie for the November contest has spurred Connecticut Republicans to renew efforts to toss beleaguered nominee Alan Schlesinger from their ticket.
U.S. Conditions Disappoint Lebanon
Lebanon says Rice's comments 'not encouraging'
Monday, July 24, 2006; Posted: 6:57 p.m. EDT
JERUSALEM (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice flew to Beirut and then to Jerusalem Monday in an attempt to carve a lasting solution to the crisis that has claimed hundreds of lives and gutted Lebanon's infrastructure.
In an unannounced visit, she stopped first in Lebanon's capital, where she met with Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora and Nabih Berri, Lebanon's parliament speaker, who has close ties with Hezbollah and Syria.
"I am obviously here because we are deeply concerned about the Lebanese people and what they are enduring," Rice said in Beirut. "We are talking about the humanitarian situation, and we are also talking about a durable way to end the violence.
"President Bush wanted this to be my first stop -- here in Lebanon -- to express our desire to urgently find conditions in which we can end the violence and make life better for the Lebanese people."
After the closed-door meeting, a source in Berri's office told CNN that Berri considered Rice's comments "not encouraging" because of her insistence on a simultaneous implementation of conditions.
By that, the source said, Berri meant Rice had wanted any cease-fire agreements, deployment of international troops, disarming of Hezbollah militia, return of displaced Lebanese and plans for reconstruction to occur at the same time.
Berri considered such a course impractical and believed that a cease-fire should come first, the source said. Only afterward should the Lebanese government discuss other issues, such as the two Israeli soldiers whose capture by Hezbollah on July 12 sparked the crisis.
In addition, Berri was surprised Rice did not mention either the Israeli soldiers or the possibility of a prisoner swap between Israel and Hezbollah, the source said.
A senior U.S. State Department official in Washington said no detailed plans yet exist.
more...
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/24/mideast.diplomacy/index.html
...no detailed plans yet exist... this is a recording.
Going to see Corinne Bailey Rae - opens her US tour here tonight. Her website says she is "invading the colonies" - from Leeds England.
http://www.corinnebaileyrae.net for music fans.
Posted by: monkey at July 24, 2006 08:23 PM
I note there are always non-itemized and vague "conditions" tied to any "diplomacy" mentioned by Condisleazy on behalf of the Bu$hCo Reich on a "durable way to end the violence." I'm wondering who [koff, koff... Halliburton, DynCorp, KBR, Blackwater, Custer-Battles, et al., ... koff, koff] will be part of the "reconstruction" efforts anywhere in the Mideast....
Interersting paragraph: "In addition, Berri was surprised Rice did not mention either the Israeli soldiers or the possibility of a prisoner swap between Israel and Hezbollah, the source said."
I thought that was the whole "reason" for the all-out attack in the first place, yes? No? What then?
To quote our esteemed monkey's outgoing message:
...no detailed plans yet exist... this is a recording.
I do hope, at some point, that the people in the Mideast who want genuine peace will call upon any other country's leaders and genuine diplomats to help broker a peace deal ... and freeze out and shun Condisleazy and anyone with the Bu$hCo Reich. Obviously, as long as that Criminal Cabal is in office, there will be no peace deals made anywhere that doesn't benefit them or their corporate cronies, or Halliburton, et al., in the mix of unspecified "conditions."
(Don't Worry) If There's A Hell Below We're All Gonna Go
by Curtis Mayfield
1970 Curtom Publishing (Bmi)
Sisters, Brothers And The Whities
Blacks And The Crackers
Police And Their Backers
They're All Political Actors
Hurry, People Running From Their Worries
While The Judge And His Juries
Dictate The Law That's Partly Flaw.
Cat Calling Love Balling Fussing And Cussing
Top Billing Now Is Killing
For Peace No One Is Willing
Kind Of Make You Get That Feeling
Everybody Smoke
Use The Pill And The Dope
Educated Fools
From-Uneducated Schools
Pimping People Is The Rule
Polluted Water In The Pool
And Nixon Talking About Don't Worry
He Says Don't Worry
He Says Don't Worry
He Says Don't Worry
But They Don't Know There Can Be No Show
And If There's A Hell Below We're All Gonna Go
Everybody's Praying And Everybody's Saying
But When Come Time To Do
Everybody's Laying
Just Talking About Don't Worry
They Say Don't Worry
They Say Don't Worry
They Say Don't Worry
Sisters, Brothers And The Whitie
Blacks And The Crackers
Stone Stone Junkie
Police And Their Backers
They're All Political Actors
Smoke, The Pill And The Dope,
Educated Fools From Uneducated Schools,
Pimping People Is The Rule
Polluted Water In The Pool
And Everybody's Saying Don't Worry
They Say Don't Worry
They Say Don't Worry
They Say Don't Worry
But They Don't Know
There Can Be No Show
If There's A Hell Below
We're All Gonna Go
Lord What We Gonna Do
If Everything I Say Is True
This Ain't No Way It Ought To Be
1f Only All The Mass Could See
But Everybody Keeps Saying Don't Worry
Here's a beautifully written diary that will provide a welcome attitude adjustment. It recounts the writer's encounter with Al Gore and others at a conference at Chautauqua...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/24/213419/724
Sen. Inhofe Compares People Who Believe In Global Warming To ‘The Third Reich’
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) is the nation’s most prominent global warming denier. He famously declared that global warming is “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.” Now, he’s taken the argument a step further. In an interview with Tulsa World, Inhofe compared people who believed global warming was a problem to Nazis:
In an interview, he heaped criticism on what he saw as the strategy used by those on the other side of the debate and offered a historical comparison.
“It kind of reminds . . . I could use the Third Reich, the big lie,” Inhofe said.
“The big lie,” is a propaganda technique Adolf Hitler attributed to Jews in his book Mein Kampf. It involves telling lies “so colossal” that no one would believe “others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.”
Inhofe added that every claim in An Inconvenient Truth “has been refuted scientifically.” He also admitted he’d never seen the movie.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/07/24/inhofe-third-reich/
Edo posted a personal review of a book that he heard discussed on NPR yesterday in the forum.
It's called One Party America. Sounds like it was very interesting. Check it out here and add your comments...
http://www.democracycellproject.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=123&view=findpost&p=4639
This is one of those diaries that points out how news in the US media may be subtly or not-so-subtly twisted to support a particular viewpoint.
It does leave you wondering what the exact truth is.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/25/92027/5840
Posted by: dwahzon at July 25, 2006 10:25 AM
There's another book that came out recently called "One Party Country: The Republican Plan for Dominance in the 21st Century" by Tom Hamburger (an investigative political reporter for The Los Angeles Times) & Peter Wallsten. Hamburger was on AAR Al Franken show yesterday discussing the book. It takes a broader view of why we're dominated by one party, with the conclusion that the Republicans are just better at the basic blocking and tackling of politics than Democrats.
Here's a blurb from its book description:
The Democrats have an easy road to victory, right? Not quite. This book pulls the curtain back on the Republicans' astonishingly effective efforts to keep that from happening. Despite poor polling for the Republicans, they are closer to making America a one-party country than most people imagine. One Party Country exposes the way Republicans have nearly completed their plan to:
* Make the most of redistricting, so that most congressional seats aren't really up for grabs
* Create software and databases the Democrats can only dream of—a huge advantage in turning out their base
* Make modern polling useless, since even the best polls can't measure the turnout advantage
* Turn big business into an arm of the party, from K Street to corporate boardrooms and sometimes onto the factory floor
* Stir up the religious right with one hand, while actually forwarding the competing agenda of their big donors with the other
* Create policies—like Iraq, Social Security privatization, and faith-based programs—that use the government's resources to tilt the electorate to the right and undermine the Democrats
* Neutralize the Democrats' traditional advantage with Hispanics, women, and African Americans
* Fill the courts with conservative judges ready to turn away challenges to this new order
This plan is not only audacious—it's working. Are there any flaws in Karl Rove's strategy? Are Democrats fighting back? Do they even have a clue what's going on? Read this dramatic and provocative exposé and find out.
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&isbn=0471776726&itm=1
Posted by: DiAnne at July 24, 2006 11:36 PM
I like her and her album. It's nice.