Making The World Safe For Terrorism

No administration in history has abandoned the military in such magnitude, and particularly not in wartime.

At this point, the U.S. military would be unable to wage an effective effort against any new threat. And in fact, we're sadly stretched in the areas where we are currently in conflict.

Time for another tax break for the rich, no?

Posted by: Victoria Ellen at August 1, 2006 12:22 PM

Si. And for sure we have to do away with the estate tax if we raise the minimum wage. If we pay the peasants a little bit more, we must give the rich even more still......

Great picture b.t.w.!

Funny .. I was musing on the way to work about how demographics are against us. Countries such as Iran have exploded for population growth in the last 3 decades and our average population age (as in Europe) is getting older, because of our relatively low birthrate. Is it any wonder there are asymmetrical wars nowdays, with the big rich old (literally) countries fighting cowardly air wars and using drones and bunker busters, while countries with poorer & younger populations graduate from rocks to Scuds and Kalishnakovs yet are hard to beat?!

I was at Clinton/McDermott last night so didn't get to see the upcoming Guardian. However, my husband had Air America on during the drive home & they cited Julian Borger, who covers the American scene from the vantage point of the UK. Apparently he did a story about a new chemical warfare plant near DC that the Pentagon is working on. Two things stood out - apparently this sort of thing was curtailed even during the Reagan administration because such chemical weapons are not legal under international law, not even for defense. The other thing is that the project is apparently under the umbrella of Homeland Security, so for our "Defense" & planning began right after the Anthrax issue surfaced shortly after 9/11. I will be looking into this further but can't do it from here.

I don't think the US intended to fight alot of ground wars in the future, but it's pretty hard to fight terrorists using missile shields and bunker busters. & it's pretty hard regardless - why not try on reducing incentive for people to become terrorists by not flattening villages full of civilians? We should have learned that after Vietnam.

Actually, I'm thrilled that these idiots have tied the minimum wage hike to a tax break for the rich boys. That will serve them well in the midterms. With every piece of sleazy, middle-class destroying piece of legislation they try to sneak through, their odds of losing both houses grows.

Keep it up, boys...

threadmuzak...

How To Be Dumb
by Elvis Costello

I was hell-bent on destroying my powers of concentration
While you were livin' like a saint
And all the time the very one you trusted was washing off
somebody else's paint

Now you've got yourself a brand new occupation
Every fleeting thought is a pearl
And beautiful people stampede to the doorway
of the funniest f*cker in the world

They're here to help you
Satisfy your desires
There's a bright future, for all you professional liars

Now you know how to be dumb
Are you ready to take your place in the modern museum of mistakes?
Don't you know how to be dumb?
Like a building thrown up overnight in one of those reverse earthquakes

They emptied out all the asylums, they emptied out all the jails
The "New Bruise" was the name of a dance craze
By "Jesus Cross and the Cruel Nails"
Followed up by "Torturing Little Beaver"
With their contraption of barbed wire
Between the fear and the fever, lies all the rejection they require

They'll be howling by midnight, they'll be drooling by dawn
Skulls shrunk down to the size of their brains,
Heads shaven and shorn

Now you know how to be dumb
Are you ready to take your place in the modern museum of mistakes?
Don't you know how to be dumb?
Like a building thrown up overnight in one of those reverse earthquakes

Trapped in the House of the Perpetual Sucker
Where bitterness always ends so pitifully
You always had to dress up your envy in some half-remembered philosophy

Now you're masquerading as pale powdered genius
Whose ever bad intention has been purged
You could've walked out any time you wanted but face it you didn't have the courage
I guess that makes you a full time hypocrite or some kind of twisted dilettante
Funny, though people don't usually get so ugly till they think they know what they want

Scratch your own head stupid
Count up to three
Roll over on your back
Repeat after me

Don't you know how to be dumb?
Are you ready to take your place in the modern museum of mistakes?
Don't you know how to be dumb?
Like a building thrown up overnight in one of those reverse earthquakes

With every piece of sleazy, middle-class destroying piece of legislation they try to sneak through, their odds of losing both houses grows.

Keep it up, boys...

Posted by: Victoria Ellen at August 1, 2006 12:57 PM

I hope so - but then, they can manipulate public opinion through the media, and if that's not enough, they can rig elections.

We've been sitting still and taking hits for too long.

Republican Senator Calls For Cease-Fire
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080106J.shtml
Urging President Bush to turn all US efforts toward "ending this madness," leading Republican senator Chuck Hagel broke with the Bush administration Monday and called for an immediate cease-fire in the Middle East.

Spate of Attacks Kills Dozens in Iraq
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080106K.shtml
Bombings and shootings across Iraq killed at least 52 people Tuesday, including 24 people in a bus destroyed by a roadside bomb. The attacks further damage the US-backed government's efforts to establish control over the country.

Jimmy Carter | Stop the Band-Aid Treatment
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080106L.shtml
"The urgent need in Lebanon is that Israeli attacks stop, the nation's regular military forces control the southern region, Hezbollah cease as a separate fighting force, and future attacks against Israel be prevented," writes former president Jimmy Carter. "Israel should withdraw from all Lebanese territory, including Shebaa Farms, and release the Lebaneseprisoners. Yet yesterday, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert rejected a cease-fire."

Lebanon Cease-Fire Calls Mount as World Protests at Israeli Raid
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080106N.shtml
Governments and angry street crowds on all continents voiced shock and fury at the Israeli air strike on Qana that killed 52 Lebanese civilians, mostly sleeping children.

Frida Berrigan | Seeing (Pentagon) Stars
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080106P.shtml
"Like American entertainment, American arms are a multibillion-dollar industry that leans heavily on foreign sales," writes Frida Berrigan. "In fact, the United States exported $18.55 billion in fighter planes, attack helicopters, tanks, battleships, and other weaponry in 2005. All signs point to 2006 being
another banner export year."

wowsers casey, that transcript from camp pain 2000 is a gem... here snippy snippy....

George W. Bush Holds Campaign Rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan
Aired November 3, 2000

Bush: The Clinton-Gore administration has used our military too much and supported it too little. Defense spending is lower as a share of our economy than at any time since 1940, the year before the attack on Pearl Harbor. Yet rarely has our military been used so freely -- more commitments, less resources. It is a short-sighted policy with long- term consequences.

In the Air Force, combat readiness is down. In the Army, 40 percent of the helicopter fleet was reported not up to performing its mission. In the Navy, some missions have been cut short, because they do not have the money to pay for fuel.

One retired general, a former commander of U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf said this, he says: Our nation would have trouble today mounting another operation the size of Desert Storm.

With all these problems in our military, we've learned something else: When you don't keep faith with the men and women of our military, it's hard to keep them at all.

In a survey last year, more than half of officers and enlisted people said they were dissatisfied and intended to leave as soon as they could.

This is no way to treat young men and women giving their country the best years of their lives.

(APPLAUSE)

Bush: Those men and women have never failed us, and we must never fail them. The vice president doesn't even want a discussion on the state of our military. He says that just stating these facts is somehow running down America's military. Those are his words, "run down America's military."

So let's get something straight right now. To point out that our military has been overextended, taken for granted and neglected, that's no criticism of the military. That is criticism of a president and vice president and their record of neglect.

(APPLAUSE)

Bush: Dick Cheney, my good running mate Dick Cheney and I, have a message to all of our men and women in uniform and to their parents and to their families: Help is on the way.

(APPLAUSE)

We can never take our military for granted.

We have to remember that our country is defended by volunteers; every one of them wears the uniform by choice. Should I become the commander in chief, our country's defenders will get the support they need and the respect they have earned.

(APPLAUSE)

First, we will treat the people of our military better, so we can recruit and retain the best our nation has to offer. We will add a billion dollars in salary increases. We will improve military housing. We will improve the quality of training at our bases and national training centers, because shortfalls in training can become disasters on the battlefield.

And whenever America uses forces in the world, the cause must be just, the goal must be clear and the victory must be overwhelming.

(APPLAUSE)

Secondly, as president, I will protect America from -- America itself from missiles and blackmail. In a time of technology and terror, the defense of our homeland must be an urgent goal.

Our main line of defense is a clear message. Every group or nation must know this: If they sponsor attacks against America, our response will be devastating.

(APPLAUSE)

We will strengthen our intelligence operations to detect terror before it strikes. And our nation must build a missile defense.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0011/03/se.04.html

FLIP WOODROW WILSON, The Third

This is similar to the biological warfare research facility I mentioned this morning. It's hard to feel safer with neocon-funded work going on with dangerous organisms, inside hermetically sealed chambers. What nefarious ends could these mad scientists be working toward, under the auspices of Homeland Security?

I couldn't find the Julian Borger story, but did see that he's been on top of this since 2002 & there is increased government work on this now.
I noticed this story on the front page of the newspaper when I passed the dispenser just now.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003166525_bioterror01.html

Monkey

Do I read that right? Bush thinks the Clinton administration used the military too much & funded it to little? Hello.

Clinton said last night that the Republican-led Senate refused to take $5000 off the average over-$80,000 tax cut of billionaires to pay for inspection of cargo containers at our ports. 5% are inspected and we need at least 10%, better 20%, to be statistically sampling enough to make our ports safer.

It's been the Democrats all along who have focussed on port security & Homeland Security (first reponders) but the Republicans dont' want to play. As we know, in their last threat analysis, they wanted to fund a red state popcorn store's security while shorting NYC.

Yet we are spending for missile defense shield, obsolete planes that haven't performed well in tests, bunker busters & dangerous bio-organisms.
Go figure.

Clinton also said Rove is going to say that the Democrats have a pre-9/11 mentality in to post-9/11 world. 9/11 9/11 9/11 (like in Bush's last speech)

Monkey,

This is where I have felt I have been since this administration came into power:

Trapped in the House of the Perpetual Sucker

Elvis knows.........

Vic and Ally,

Re: the minimum wage stall, CNN and MSNBC both had scrolling across the bottom of the screen words to this effect ~

Senate to vote on minimum wage increase, but Democrats expected to stop passage because of their opposition to abolishing Estate tax.

Makes the Dems look like the bad guys, of course.

Did anyone notice that Paulson was pushing again for Social Security privatization yesterday. It would be a major mistake if Social Security does not become a major issue in this year's campaign.

Actually Treasury Secy Henry Paulson's comments were made earlier today"
"Paulson said his top priorities would be achieving reform of Social Security.."

mbk
Hope you write up something on Kerry & healthcare.
Posted by: DiAnne at August 1, 2006 09:24 AM

Dianne has already posted the link to the full text of Kerry speech(http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/073106R.shtml )
Since I managed to get there in person, and there was this request from DiAnne, I thought I’d add a few details of the rest of the event.

When I arrived at Faneuil Hall around 11 am, , a line of interested citizens already snaked from Faneuil Hall through Quincy Market, even a half-hour before the doors opened at 11:30, on a very hot day. The first person in line, a longtime Kerry supporter who’d come to Boston for the occasion from a town near the New Hampshire border, had been waiting since 9:30 am!
Behind me was a just-beginning university student from England, who apparently was finishing up a “gap year” by traveling across the United States. Boston was his first stop in his planned five-week trip by train. He’d only arrived from London the night before, yet, in the first 18 hours, had already managed to see Harvard Square and walk through all of downtown Boston; midway through his trek, he heard about Kerry’s speech in Faneuil Hall. Planning to concentrate in political science at his university, and with a special interest in US politics, he delayed his trip to Salem, originally planned for Monday afternoon, to hear Kerry’s speech. What he also got, of course, was a good sample of Massachusetts-style progressive political activism and activists!

The hall was nearly full (a few empty spaces up in the rafters), and there was a significant press presence. . . at least 4 TV cameras, and a passel of photographers and reporters. Besides Senator Kerry, two other people spoke: Thomas Farrington and Sen. Kerry’s daughter (and soon-to-be-MD) Vanessa Kerry. The speakers were greeted with whoops and a standing ovation as they walked down the aisle.

Thomas Farrington, the founder and president of the Prostate Health Education Network (PHEN), described himself as a small business owner and survivor of prostate cancer, whose own father died from prostate cancer months before his own diagnosis. He’s written two books: “Battling the Killer Within” and “Battling the Killer Within and Winning”, describing his personal journey through prostate cancer, and our our health care system. He noted that the death rate from prostate cancer of African-American men is 2.5 X greater than any other group of men in the world, yet education and support efforts for African-American men on this urgent health problem have been virtually absent. To fill that gap, he started PHEN, and worked with the Dana Farber Cancer Institute of Harvard Medical School to initiate what sound like effective and innovative programs to improve care of prostate cancer among African-American men. He’s the kind of person DCP regulars would recognize and applaud: someone who sees a problem and actually does something about it, rather than only complaining, or retreating into despair or cynicism. As Senator Kerry said later, “Through Tom Farrington’s efforts, the lives of many men have been saved.” Kerry went on to say that there could be no more cogent measure of the worthiness of a life than the saving of lives.

Vanessa introduced her father, saying, “ I am who I am today because of my father, and because of his imprint on my choices.” As both a daughter and a medical student , she said, she’d seen families coping with health crises. (In addition to Sen. Kerry’s 2003 bout with prostate cancer—thankfully, caught early, and stopped in its tracks –Vanessa’s mother (Sen. Kerry’s first wife), Julia Thorne, died this spring of bladder cancer). Clearly, Vanessa was speaking from deeply-felt life experience when she said that family health crises are among the most traumatic times for families.

She ended by saying that , in our system of government, we have the privilege of voting every 2 years on our values and our ideals. There was no need for her to spell out to this audience the importance of the 2006 and 2008 elections.

Sen. Kerry prefaced his prepared remarks by saying that “to be introduced by his daughter, about to be a doctor.. it doesn’t get better than that. My level of pride is impossible to describe, but, if she’s even half the doctor as she is a daughter, she’ll be a great physician indeed.” His formal speech followed the prepared text closely, so there’s no need for me to add much to that, except to say that (a) it’s well worth a careful read, and I hope that it will be shown on CSPAN and (b) he received enthusiastic applause throughout the speech and a standing ovation at the end.

My English seat-neighbor said , “That was amazing.”
He was right.

W. and Sen. Kerry are about as different from each other as two men can be: the only things they seem to share are their US citizenship, the color of their skin, and their Yale degrees. In every other way—their values, priorities, life choices, even their children, they are all light-years apart. (As a particularly economical and eloquent measure of the difference between these men, I suggest a comparison of the behavior and accomplishments of Alexandra and Vanessa Kerry with those of Jenna and Barbara Bush. As far as I’m concerned, Case Closed.)

And I would add one more difference. Of all the things that appall me about the current White House, the most amazing to me is the president’s lack of growth. Almost six years on the job now, and W. is as simplistic in his thinking as ever. He seems to have learned nothing about how to govern, nothing about the world (Exhibit A: the multiple embarrassments of the recent G-8 tour) or the lives and needs of real people, nor has he grown in depth or breadth of understanding of anything, period. He even seems to me to be getting smaller. Could this be possible? Or is it, perhaps, that the tragic consequences of his smallness have grown so much larger?

And then take a look at John Kerry. The months since November 2004 must have been difficult for him on so many levels: yet he works on, his energies and sense of purpose undiminished. And, most astonishingly, he continues to grow: in eloquence, in focus, in idealism, courage, and understanding. He just keeps getting better. As my new English friend said: amazing.

arrgh-- serves me right for composing on Word first. Those strange letters in the post above represent apostrophes, quotation marks, and dashes! I 'll try to re-post and hope the Webmasters can nuke the format-challenged version above

(this is text-only--hope it works this time)

mbk
Hope you write up something on Kerry & healthcare.

Posted by: DiAnne at August 1, 2006 09:24 AM
mbk
Hope you write up something on Kerry & healthcare.

Posted by: DiAnne at August 1, 2006 09:24 AM
Dianne has already posted the link to the full text of Kerry speech(http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/073106R.shtml )
Since I managed to get there in person, I thought I’d add a few details of the rest of the event.

When I arrived at Faneuil Hall around 11 am, , a line of interested citizens already snaked from Faneuil Hall through Quincy Market, even a half-hour before the doors opened at 11:30, on a very hot day. The first person in line, a longtime Kerry supporter who’d come to Boston for the occasion from a town near the New Hampshire border, had been waiting since 9:30 am!
Behind me was a just-beginning university student from England, who apparently was finishing up a “gap year” by traveling across the United States. Boston was his first stop in his planned five-week trip by train. He’d only arrived from London the night before, yet, in the first 18 hours, had already managed to see Harvard Square and walk through all of downtown Boston; midway through his trek, he heard about Kerry’s speech in Faneuil Hall. Planning to concentrate in political science at his university, and with a special interest in US politics, he delayed his trip to Salem, originally planned for Monday afternoon, to hear Kerry’s speech. What he also got, of course, was a good sample of Massachusetts-style progressive political activism and activists!

The hall was nearly full (a few empty spaces up in the rafters), and there was a significant press presence. . . at least 4 TV cameras, and a passel of photographers and reporters. Besides Senator Kerry, two other people spoke: Thomas Farrington and Sen. Kerry’s daughter (and soon-to-be-MD) Vanessa Kerry. The speakers were greeted with whoops and a standing ovation as they walked down the aisle.

Thomas Farrington, the founder and president of the Prostate Health Education Network (PHEN), described himself as a small business owner and survivor of prostate cancer, whose own father died from prostate cancer months before his own diagnosis. He’s written two books: “Battling the Killer Within” and “Battling the Killer Within and Winning”, describing his personal journey through prostate cancer, and our our health care system. He noted that the death rate from prostate cancer of African-American men is 2.5 X greater than any other group of men in the world, yet education and support efforts for African-American men on this urgent health problem have been virtually absent. To fill that gap, he started PHEN, and worked with the Dana Farber Cancer Institute of Harvard Medical School to initiate what sound like effective and innovative programs to improve care of prostate cancer among African-American men. He’s the kind of person DCP regulars would recognize and applaud: someone who sees a problem and actually does something about it, rather than only complaining, or retreating into despair or cynicism. As Senator Kerry said later, “Through Tom Farrington’s efforts, the lives of many men have been saved.” Kerry went on to say that there could be no more cogent measure of the worthiness of a life than the saving of lives.

Vanessa introduced her father, saying, “ I am who I am today because of my father, and because of his imprint on my choices.” As both a daughter and a medical student , she said, she’d seen families coping with health crises. (In addition to Sen. Kerry’s 2003 bout with prostate cancer—thankfully, caught early, and stopped in its tracks –Vanessa’s mother (Sen. Kerry’s first wife), Julia Thorne, died this spring of bladder cancer). Clearly, Vanessa was speaking from deeply-felt life experience when she said that family health crises are among the most traumatic times for families.

She ended by saying that , in our system of government, we have the privilege of voting every 2 years on our values and our ideals. There was no need for her to spell out to this audience the importance of the 2006 and 2008 elections.

Sen. Kerry prefaced his prepared remarks by saying that “to be introduced by his daughter, about to be a doctor.. it doesn’t get better than that. My level of pride is impossible to describe, but, if she’s even half the doctor as she is a daughter, she’ll be a great physician indeed.” His formal speech followed the prepared text closely, so there’s no need for me to add much to that, except to say that (a) it’s well worth a careful read, and I hope that it will be shown on CSPAN and (b) he received enthusiastic applause throughout the speech and a standing ovation at the end.

My English seat-neighbor said , “That was amazing.”
He was right.

W. and Sen. Kerry are about as different from each other as two men can be: the only things they seem to share are their US citizenship, the color of their skin, and their Yale degrees. In every other way—their values, priorities, life choices, even their children, they are all light-years apart. (As a particularly economical and eloquent measure of the difference between these men, I suggest a comparison of the behavior and accomplishments of Alexandra and Vanessa Kerry with those of Jenna and Barbara Bush. As far as I’m concerned, Case Closed.)

And I would add one more difference. Of all the things that appall me about the current White House, the most amazing to me is the president’s lack of growth. Almost six years on the job now, and W. is as simplistic in his thinking as ever. He seems to have learned nothing about how to govern, nothing about the world (Exhibit A: the multiple embarrassments of the recent G-8 tour) or the lives and needs of real people, nor has he grown in depth or breadth of understanding of anything, period. He even seems to me to be getting smaller. Could this be possible? Or is it, perhaps, that the tragic consequences of his smallness have grown so much larger?

And then take a look at John Kerry. The months since November 2004 must have been difficult for him on so many levels: yet he works on, his energies and sense of purpose undiminished. And, most astonishingly, he continues to grow: in eloquence, in focus, in idealism, courage, and understanding. He just keeps getting better. As my new English friend said: amazing.

BREAKING NEWS

Senate approves more offshore drilling
Resistance expected in House, which backs even more exploration of Gulf

Updated: 19 minutes ago

(AP)WASHINGTON - The Senate voted Tuesday to open 8.3 million acres of federal waters in the central Gulf of Mexico to oil and gas drilling, setting up a confrontation with the House which wants even more drilling in waters now off-limits.

Supporters said the measure would be a major step toward producing more domestic energy and forcing down natural gas prices that have soared in recent years.

The Senate approved the measure by a vote of 71-25. It now must be reconciled with much broader drilling legislation passed by the House in June. Those negotiations are likely to begin in September.

“This bill will substantially reduce our reliance on foreign oil and gas. ... It brings more American energy to American consumers,” declared Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.

Likewise, Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., called the legislation “welcome news for the people of the United States” — for homeowners facing high heating bills as well as for manufacturers and chemical companies that have seen natural gas costs soar.

Some critics of the legislation noted that it will be years before any oil or gas will be taken from the 8.3 million acres and that the legislation falls short of addressing many of the country’s energy problems.

At best “this will supply a small amount of gas years from now,” said Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn., who decried the inability to broaden the legislation beyond drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

Still, the bill attracted wide, bipartisan support as lawmakers sought to show the flag on energy as they prepared to leave for the monthlong summer recess. The House is already gone.

Some senators noted that natural gas prices jumped by 11 percent this week amid concern about supplies because of the intense summer heat. The price was at more than $8 a thousand cubic feet on the spot market, compared to under $6 a few weeks ago.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14140436/

“This bill will substantially reduce our reliance on foreign oil and gas. ... It brings more American energy to American consumers,” declared Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.
08-01-06

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

"She (Terri Schiavo) certainly seems to respond to visual stimuli."

Yeah, ok, Mr. Credible.

They only care about increasing the supply... They NEVER care about decreasing consumption, because that'd hurt the oil buddies.

A nation of oil, by oil, for oil.

Posted by: monkey at August 1, 2006 06:16 PM

Offshore drilling will be a "good idea" - - - until the next cat-5 hurricane hits a rig and there's a major leak....

We need ALTERNATIVE energy sources, not more of the same that can lead to environmental disasters on multiple levels, not only for wildlife and the ocean, but for people, too.

Oil corporations are currently getting record-setting profits, enough tax breaks, enough special consideration and perks. How about doing something with those profits besides paying obscene bonuses to "executives" who do nothing to earn those bennies. How about research and development for alternative energy sources???

Ray McGovern | Sadly, the Plural of "Fiasco" Requires No "E"
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080106A.shtml
Ray McGovern writes, "The world desperately needs an "E" for EXIT from the march of folly toward a wider Middle East war that is increasingly likely to result from plural US foreign policy fiascos - in Iraq, Israel and Lebanon, for starters; in Syria and Iran for the next stage."

Report Alleges Bush Has Violated 26 Statutes
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080106D.shtml
The Bush administration may have broken over two dozen federal laws and regulations - some of them multiple times - according to an unreleased report from House Judiciary Committee Democrats.

Gonzales Fears War Crimes Charges
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080106B.shtml
A law approved by a Republican-controlled Congress a decade ago has made the Bush administration nervous that officials and troops involved in handling detainee matters can be accused of committing war crimes, and prosecuted in US courts.

Tax Cheats Called Out of Control
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080106O.shtml
So many super-rich Americans evade taxes using offshore accounts that law enforcement cannot control the growing misconduct, according to a Senate report that provides the most detailed look ever at high-level tax schemes.
{{{What's "interesting" is that these tax cheaters are the same ones who have the income that will benefit from any more tax cuts for the super-rich or the elimination of an estate tax.}}}

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5230972.stm
Poll protests block Mexico City
The left-wing candidate in Mexico's disputed election, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, and his backers have blocked the capital's main square and avenues.
{{{Wow! Look at the aerial photo of the masses of people in a huge square!}}}

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5235192.stm
Airport curb on US 'bomb flights'
US military flights carrying bombs to Israel will no longer use any civilian airports in the UK, the BBC has learnt.
{{{I bet this story does not make Lamestream Media Evening Snooze....}}}}

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5233358.stm
Environmental 'crisis' in Lebanon
The United Nations Environment Programme (Unep) has expressed its "grave concern" about oil pollution in Lebanese coastal waters.

Worst Ever Security Flaw Found in Diebold TS Voting Machine
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080106E.shtml
"Diebold has made the testing and certification process practically irrelevant. If you have access to these machines and you want to rig an election, anything is possible with the Diebold TS - and it could be done without leaving a trace. All you need is a screwdriver," says Open Voting Foundation president, Alan Dechert.

Conor Kenny | Capital Crimes
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080106G.shtml
Conor Kenny writes, "The only way to eliminate the incentive for less than scrupulous individuals to corrupt the political system is the full public financing of elections ... 74 percent of the public supports full, voluntary public financing for federal elections ... a similar majority (76 percent) supports the full disclosure of all money raised for candidates by lobbyists."

Posted by: NonnyO at August 1, 2006 07:05 PM

Er.... that was a rhetorical question, of course. They won't do anything they don't absolutely have to because the "executives" are too danged greedy....

HELENA, Montana (AP) -- A nephew of Sen. Max Baucus serving in the Marines was killed in Iraq during the weekend, the senator's office said Tuesday.

Cpl. Phillip E. Baucus, 28, died Saturday during combat operations in Anbar province, the Department of Defense said. It did not immediately release further information.

In a statement, Baucus, D-Montana, said the family was "devastated by the loss."

"Phillip was an incredible person, a dedicated Marine, a loving son and husband, and a proud Montanan and American," the senator said. "He heroically served the country he loved and he gave it his all."

Phillip Baucus, of Wolf Creek, was part of a Marine Corps battalion based at Twentynine Palms, Calif. He was married last August at the ranch his parents operate between Helena and Great Falls.

Max Baucus voted to authorize war in Iraq in 2002. Earlier this summer, he joined other Democrats in voting to begin a phased redeployment of troops from the war-torn country by year's end.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/01/baucus.nephewkilled.ap/index.html

OK, can't stand the B^%CH, but I am Jewish and very pro Israel and she has a point here....

On Sunday, John Kerry said of Israel's war against Hezbollah, "If I was president, this wouldn't have happened," adding, "we have to destroy Hezbollah."

But wait a minute — Hezbollah didn't attack us on 9/11! Wouldn't fighting Hezbollah distract us from the urgent task of finding Osama bin Laden?

Democrats can't come out and admit that they refuse to fight any war in defense of America, so they utter the "Where's Osama?" incantation to pretend that they'd be doing something. To wit: dedicating the entire resources of the U.S. military to locating Osama bin Laden.

Thus, in the third presidential debate, Kerry complained about the cost of the war in Iraq, saying the war was "the result of this president taking his eye off of Osama bin Laden."

After making the capture of Osama bin Laden their sole objective in the war on terrorism, now Democrats expect us to believe they would have been fighting every other Muslim jihadist on the planet like mad — just not one of the main sponsors of Islamic terrorism, Saddam Hussein. But they'd be merciless with every other mass-murdering, Islamic terror-sponsoring lunatic.

Israel's recent tussle with Hezbollah reminds us how absurd the Democrats' fixation on Osama is. America has been under attack from Muslim extremists for nearly 30 years. Not just al-Qaida and certainly not just Osama bin Laden.

Here's the highlights reel for anyone still voting for the Democrats:

— November 1979: Muslim extremists (Iranian variety) seized the U.S. embassy in Iran and held 52 American hostages for 444 days, following Democrat Jimmy Carter's masterful foreign policy granting Islamic fanaticism its first real foothold in the Middle East.

— 1982: Muslim extremists (mostly Hezbollah) began a nearly decade-long habit of taking Americans and Europeans hostage in Lebanon, killing William Buckley and holding Terry Anderson for 6 1/2 years.

— April 1983: Muslim extremists (Islamic Jihad or possibly Hezbollah) bombed the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, killing 16 Americans.

— October 1983: Muslim extremists (Hezbollah) blew up the U.S. Marine barracks at the Beirut airport, killing 241 Marines.

— December 1983: Muslim extremists (al-Dawa) blew up the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait, killing five and injuring 80.

— September 1984: Muslim extremists (Hezbollah) exploded a truck bomb at the U.S. Embassy annex in Beirut, killing 24 people, including two U.S. servicemen.

— December 1984: Muslim extremists (probably Hezbollah) hijacked a Kuwait Airways airplane, landed in Iran and demanded the release of the 17 members of al-Dawa who had been arrested for the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait, killing two Americans before the siege was over.

— June 14, 1985: Muslim extremists (Hezbollah) hijacked TWA Flight 847 out of Athens, diverting it to Beirut, taking the passengers hostage in return for the release of the Kuwait 17 as well as another 700 prisoners held by Israel. When their demands were not met, the Muslims shot U.S. Navy diver Robert Dean Stethem and dumped his body on the tarmac.

— October 1985: Muslim extremists (Palestine Liberation Front backed by Libya) seized an Italian cruise ship, the Achille Lauro, killing 69-year-old American Leon Klinghoffer by shooting him and then tossing his body overboard.

— December 1985: Muslim extremists (backed by Libya) bombed airports in Rome and Vienna, killing 20 people, including five Americans.

— April 1986: Muslim extremists (backed by Libya) bombed a discotheque frequented by U.S. servicemen in West Berlin, injuring hundreds and killing two, including a U.S. soldier.

— December 1988: Muslim extremists (backed by Libya) bombed Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing all 259 on board and 11 on the ground.

(Then came an amazing, historic pause in Muslim extremists' relentless war on America after Ronald Reagan won the Cold War by doing the opposite of everything recommended by Democrats, depriving Islamic terrorists of their Soviet sponsors. This confuses liberals because they don't understand the concept of terror sponsors, whether it's the Soviet Union or Iraq.)

— February 1993: Muslim extremists (al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, possibly with involvement of friendly rival al-Qaida) set off a bomb in the basement of the World Trade Center, killing six and wounding more than 1,000.

— Spring 1993: Muslim extremists (al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, the Sudanese Islamic Front and at least one member of Hamas) plot to blow up the Lincoln and Holland tunnels, the U.N. complex, and the FBI's lower Manhattan headquarters.

— November 1995: Muslim extremists (possibly Iranian "Party of God") explode a car bomb at U.S. military headquarters in Saudi Arabia, killing five U.S. military servicemen.

— June 1996: Muslim extremists (13 Saudis and a Lebanese member of Hezbollah, probably with involvement of al-Qaida) explode a truck bomb outside the Khobar Towers military complex, killing 19 American servicemen and injuring hundreds.

— August 1998: Muslim extremists (al-Qaida) explode truck bombs at U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 and injuring thousands.

— October 2000: Muslim extremists (al-Qaida) blow up the U.S. Navy destroyer USS Cole, killing 17 U.S. sailors.

— Sept. 11, 2001: Muslim extremists (al-Qaida) hijack commercial aircraft and fly planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania, killing nearly 3,000 Americans.

America's war with Islamic fanaticism didn't start on 9/11, but it's going to end with 9/11 — as long as Americans aren't foolish enough ever to put a Democrat in the White House.

Posted by: thinkmuch at August 1, 2006 09:29 PM

Yes, we do think much. We of course recognise that it's not just OBL, but the fact that Bush and the Republicans have gone willy-nilly with the tough-boy-road-rage-ganster-like conduct that has not only let OBL off the hook, but it has caused the whole region to explode.

"Democrats can't come out and admit that they refuse to fight any war in defense of America, so they utter the "Where's Osama?" incantation to pretend that they'd be doing something"

excuse me? Do you think generalizing about a very,very diverse group of people makes you look smart?
Don't you understand that anything you say after an idiotic, over generialized, statement like that has lost all creadibility?

It was your pResident who played the gun-toten cowboy who claimed he was going to "smoke him out from whatever cave he went into..."

See...youneedtothinkmore...

"“He was either badly misinformed by his own people or blinded by the fog of war,” Mr Berntsen wrote of Gen Franks’s claims and his insistence that Afghan militia were up to the task. “I’d made it clear in my reports that our Afghan allies were hardly anxious to get at al-Qaeda in Tora Bora.”

Media reports have cited accounts of Mr bin Laden’s presence at Tora Bora, but Mr Berntsen is the highest-ranking former official to publicly confirm that senior US commanders had been told the al-Qaeda leader was there during the battle.

Gary Berntsen, is a CIA veteran who headed a paramilitary team called “Jawbreaker” during the Afghan war. In his book published last week, Berntsen says that “one of his Arabic-speaking operatives found a radio on a dead al-Qaeda fighter during the Tora Bora battle and heard the terrorist leader repeatedly try to rally his troops.” The book is said to have been heavily edited by CIA censors.

“After the Spectre (gunship aircraft) cleared the area, Bilal heard a voice he recognised from dozens of tape recordings,” Mr Berntsen wrote, using a pseudonym for an Arab-American former Marine who was part of the CIA team. “It was Osama bin Laden telling his troops to keep fighting.”

Later on the same captured radio, “Bilal” and a second CIA agent, another American of Middle Eastern origin, reported hearing Mr bin Laden apologising for getting his men trapped in the mountains and killed in large numbers by American bombing, Mr Berntsen wrote.

Mr Berntsen also wrote that on the recommendation of a former Special Forces officer who was part of his team as a CIA contractor, he made a formal request for 800 US army Rangers to be deployed along the Pakistani border to prevent Mr bin Laden’s escape, a request that was never granted."

John Kerry was right in 04 and he's right now. And the democratic party is right as well. Not one Democrat is 100% focused on only OBL and I think it's pretty deceitful for you to come and lie about that too.

The Democratic Party stands with the world...the way you eliminate terrorism isn't by starting wars indiscriminately, but it's through negotiation and through diplomacy.

Here:

Definitions of diplomacy on the Web:

negotiation between nations
delicacy: subtly skillful handling of a situation
statesmanship: wisdom in the management of public affairs

This is why you need to throw a fake meme out there.

And your silly comment was based on a false 'journalist' who presented a comment from Kerry without including the actual comment.

"The Detroit News and Valerie Olander have still not clarified the quote on John Kerry.

I just got off the phone with Valerie Olander of the Detroit News. Nice enough lady. She's been bombarded by emails on Kerry's quote. I asked her what came between Iraq and going after Hezbollah. I explained that obviously this disjointed quote makes no sense and requested a clarification. How did Kerry get from Iraq to Hezbollah? Olander said there was quite a bit in between. Olander continued, saying Kerry talked about how "we should have went (sic) after al Qaeda; we should have went (sic) after all terrorists, especially Hezbollah." Olander agreed that they should offer some sort of clarification on Kerry's quote because he said a lot more than was shown. She also stated that there were editors involved and she'd talk to them, adding that this story didn't even make the paper, which seemed to surprise her, due to the reaction she received on it.

http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=24290

Make that a false editor..not a false journalist.

America's war with Islamic fanaticism didn't start on 9/11, but it's going to end with 9/11 — as long as Americans aren't foolish enough ever to put a Democrat in the White House.

Posted by: thinkmuch at August 1, 2006 09:29 PM

You guys call that "the Rapture!"

http://www.theocracywatch.org/

So as long as we ditch the false-Christian-Neocons from office, we can save the world from the rapture.

youneedtothinkmore,

This statement given during the interview between Imus and Kerry explains exactly why the world supports Kerry and the Democratic plans and not Bush or his lapdog neoncon rubberstamping ...

Imus: "And you said that, if you were President, this Israeli/Lebanon conflict would not have happened."

Senator John Kerry: "Ah, what I said--what I was really referring to was the whole Middle East. Look, I know it stunned some people because, you know, half the country can't imagine there'll ever be peace in the Middle East, the other half can't imagine there'll ever be a Democratic President, so, it surprised people, but, the bottom line is this, ah--I'm really referring to the chaos of America's current perception in the Middle East, and ability to get things done. Did you happen to see--I don't know if you saw, Meet the Press yesterday?"

Imus: "No, I did not."

Senator John Kerry: "Well, Tim Russert, had Tom Friedman on, and I know you respect Tom Friedman, I think he's one of the best observers and one of the smartest people around. This is--this--there's a quote that Tim read to Tom, here's what he said. This is what Tom wrote last week; 'America should be galvanizing the forces of order - Europe, Russia, China, India - into a coalition against these trends. But we can't. Why? In part, it's because our president and secretary of state, although they speak with great moral clarity, have no moral authority. That's been shattered by their performance in Iraq. The world hates George Bush more than any U.S. president in my lifetime.' This is Tom Friedman speaking. 'He is radioactive - and so caught up in his own ideological bubble that he is incapable of imagining or forging alternative strategies.' Now, Tim said to him, you know, that's pretty strong language, and Tom said, it is strong, but it was meant to be strong, and he explained what happened. And, really what I'm talking about, I think a lot of us are, is that--I mean for three and a half years we weren't even involved in trying to work with our allies, Britain, France, Germany to stop Iran from getting Nuclear weapons. Three and a half years we were absent. But for a whole period of time we're not involved in the Palestinians and the West Bank trying to help them become a legitimate partner so that Hamas doesn't rise to power in an election. If you look at Egypt or Saudi Arabia, sixty percent of the population is under the age of twenty-five, fifty percent under the age of eighteen, and forty percent under the age of fourteen, they don't have jobs, they're uneducated if they go to Madras, all they learn is how to hate people and blow people up. There is such a culture of this, and I don't think this Administration, has done anything near the things that Republican presidents, and Democrat presidents have done historically to address these kinds of issues. That's what I'm saying."

Posted by: thinkmuch at August 1, 2006 09:29 PM

Nice cut n' paste, thinkmush.

Let's review... 8 yrs of Dem in White House, no invasions of sovereign nation under false pretense, no Pearl Harbor like attack on US soil, no annual extended summer vacations, no ignoring warnings of impending terrorist attack, no torture, no running military into the ground, no nationbuilding, no imperialism, no spreading democracy like fertile-lies-urrr, no demolishing the constitution, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc...

What has nearly 6 years of unfettered Republican ideology and "leadership" brought to the world???
I'd say the proof is out there for all the world to see... if you turn off FOX that is.

Pssst! The world hates the Caped Crusaders just as much as they hate the terrorists.....

So go ahead and tell everyone just how bad it would be if the experts at the helm currently weren't there anymore.

Tough sell, Bozoid.
——————————

Gosh everyone...I think needstorethinkhisideas has forgotten about the biggest suicide attack against Americans occured during Reagans Presidency and Bush's pResidency...

"Then came an amazing, historic pause in Muslim extremists' relentless war on America after Ronald Reagan won the Cold War by doing the opposite of everything recommended by Democrats, depriving Islamic terrorists of their Soviet sponsors. This confuses liberals because they don't understand the concept of terror sponsors, whether it's the Soviet Union or Iraq.)"

The real truth:

In 1983 Hezbollah followed up Qassir’s work with the the most powerful acts of terrorism before 9/11 — the April 1983 bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut and the October 1983 bombing of the US Marines barracks. Again, two of Hezbollah’s “martyrs” simply drove to the targets with trucks packed with explosives and brought the buildings down, killing everyone inside. Both attacks were devastating strikes. In the embassy bombing the entire CIA station, meeting in a first-floor room to discuss the threat of terrorism, was wiped out. In the Marine barracks attack, 241 Marines were killed in the biggest single loss to the US forces since the Second World War. And just to spread the message around, another Hezbollah bomber attacked French paratroopers, killing 60 at the same time as the Marines.

A few months later the US President, Ronald Reagan, pulled the Marines out from their supposed peace-keeping mission in the Lebanon. The withdrawal was an ignominious end to another flawed peace keeping mission where the US superpower, aided by its European allies, naively believed it could assert its will in the Lebanon and suffer no consequences.

From 2004, for thingmush....

Why the Republicans can't fight terror
Driven by rigid right-wing ideology, their heavy-handed policies have made America and the world less safe, not more.

By Stephen Holmes

September 16, 2004 | Vice President Cheney says that he and President Bush should be reelected because they alone know how to respond adequately to the terrorist threat. His Democratic opponents could never fight terrorism with sufficient élan, he elaborates, because they are trapped in "a pre-9/11 mind-set." They view terrorism as large-scale criminality, he says, to be fought by policemen and prosecutors within the bounds of law, while he and Bush see the battle against terror with open eyes, as a worldwide war against an implacable enemy to be waged with whatever means the White House and the Pentagon deem effective.

But the 2001-2004 Bush/Cheney record provides no support for the boast that Republicans are well equipped to fight transnational terrorism. On the contrary, that record, both before 9/11 and after, reveals an ideologically driven administration that has consistently made disastrously wrong decisions about how to fight terrorism.

Before 9/11, as we know from Bush's former top anti-terrorism advisor, Richard Clarke, the Bush administration cavalierly downplayed the terrorist threat. Prisoners of its own "pre-9/11 mind-set," it focused on extremely expensive and technically unproven Cold War programs such as ballistic missile defense, utterly irrelevant to the war on terror, and exhibited only lukewarm interest in ongoing programs to limit WMD proliferation.

The Bush administration's distracted security policy and irresponsible neglect of proliferation and the terrorist threat was presaged, we should remember, by the Clinton impeachment. The passionate drive to humiliate and weaken a sitting commander in chief revealed the Republican leadership's deep conviction, fed by ignorance and arrogance, that the world was no longer an especially dangerous place for the sole surviving superpower.

True, Cheney and Bush have both said that 9/11, from out of the blue, roused them from their pre-9/11 complacency about terrorism. And we should take them at their word. But they awoke feeling disoriented. Faced with something altogether new, they reverted to old and comforting habits.

The administration's response to 9/11 was manifestly shaped by a pre-9/11 agenda, even if the political support that Bush needed to carry out his highly risky invasion of Iraq did not materialize before the terrorist attack. After shattering the Taliban regime and driving al-Qaida further underground (without capturing its leadership), Cheney and Bush marketed their Iraq war plan by presenting it, mendaciously, as a justified response to 9/11 (based on false claims that Saddam Hussein was linked to al-Qaida) and also as preventive self-defense against an imminent threat of a WMD strike on the U.S. When these two selling points crumpled under inspection, the administration shifted to the refrain "the world is better off without Saddam Hussein," as if Saddam's well-documented malignity, in and of itself, were an adequate casus belli. This phrase is rhetorically shrewd, because of its bumper-sticker simplicity: Anyone honestly trying to rebut it is forced into a complicated explanation, difficult for television reporters and audiences to absorb. But it is morally and politically despicable, because it obscures the real issue.

A reasonable answer requires a reasonable question. The question should not be: Would the world be better off if Saddam Hussein were still in power? The politically responsible question, instead, is: Has the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq made the world and the U.S. safer than before? The answer to this question, obfuscated by Bush electioneering, is most certainly no, and that means, as perverse as it may seem, that the world is not better off with Hussein removed from power in this way, at this cost, with these consequences. The invasion and occupation of Iraq has weakened American national security because Bush's unimaginably clumsy management of postwar Iraq has swollen the ranks of young, enraged and lethally armed anti-American jihadists; has irritated and alienated potential partners around the world; and has tied down scarce national-security assets that we desperately need to confront much more dangerous and imminent threats.

To understand why a Republican administration has been unable to mount an effective war against terror, however, we need to look behind Cheney and Bush, and even behind the neocon architects and champions of the war in Iraq. The roots of the Republican failure to make us safer lie deeper. They can be traced, once again, to a distinctively Republican "pre-9/11 mind-set." This mind-set can be boiled down to a set of fundamental beliefs. When we measure these beliefs against the requirements of an effective counterterrorism strategy, we quickly understand why it would be a calamity for American national security if Cheney and Bush were reelected on Nov. 2.

more...
http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/feature/2004/09/16/ideology/index.html

Pretty dead on, pardon the pun.

"People who hate government are the last ones who should be trusted with creating a new one."

Recommended reading:
Cobra II is the definitive work of the disaster that is the bush 'doctrine'. The total incompetence of the administration, the lack of planning, the incredible dearth of diplomacy and the outright lies that led to the invasion are all there. And bush* hasn't learned a thing from it. Or maybe he has. That's the scary part.
We are less safe for the billions of dollars that pour into bush's folly every week. Parts of the ME are in ruins, our standing in the world community is a shambles, the madrases are churning out new recruits to fight US, and our military is overextended to the point that we can't defend ourselves in the event of a legitimate threat. Our security is pretty much cross your fingers and hope, as our ports are still unsecured.
Meanwhile, on the homefront, the rich get richer and the rest of us get $3 a gallon.
Who feels safer today? Turn on the TV, and the compliant media will show you death and destruction 24/7. This is our world under george w bush. Terrapalooza. Oh, and Mel Gibson. And a faux report (yesterday) on how 'W', apparently, does not perspire.
Did bush really think he could defeat terrorism by bombing the crap out of Iraq? Maybe not. Maybe he's just nuts and we expect a president to be, well, not.
Mission Accomplished.

I just had to say I like this line, Casey:

Amateurs talk strategy, professionals talk logistics.

Oh how true. This admin thinks that a supply chain is how you get drugs.

This admin thinks that a supply chain is how you get drugs.

Posted by: Veritas at August 1, 2006 11:04 PM

Maybe to them, it is.

Pretzel Logic

good night thinkstoolittle,

I'm going to go have some sweet dreams of a clean sweep in November.

Veritas!

So happy to hear you on the blog lately. I'm glad to hear your .02.

mbk
Thanks for posting the Kerry healthcare thing - wish it could be more prominent in the media.

Sparrow
Thanks for posting the Imus Kerry bit too - two reasons for me -

I had posted this morning about the demographics of the middle east. Those countries are old but full of young!! They are lacking in jobs & industry despite all the oil - complete mismanagement. The younger yet more prosperous countries age for population (due to decades of near zero population growth or even diminishing) yet run out of resources because of huge consumption per capita. It's a vicious cycle.

Secondly, I just heard Friedman on "Fresh Air" - Terry Gross, NPR. I'd read his books and disagreed with him on certain things yet he's lived in the middle east for a long time and he is smart. It's just that I read alot of Juan Cole, Robert Fisk & so on & my perspective is more to the left, I guess, less about business and finance. Yet he's really seeing how much this admin has messed things up in the middle east. Now that's something! It seems to mean they really have.

It speaks to the topic of this thread - here we have Bush knowing more than the generals..

GV
Whoever you are, that is a tight summary. Welcome!

Thinking guy
Whoever you are, you are making the point that there are various types of Muslim extremists but then lumping them all together as Muslim Extremists. You are not addressing root causes but the party of Ideologues doesn't.

OK, can't stand the B^%CH, but I am Jewish and very pro Israel and she has a point here....

On Sunday, John Kerry said of Israel's war against Hezbollah, "If I was president, this wouldn't have happened," adding, "we have to destroy Hezbollah."

But wait a minute — Hezbollah didn't attack us on 9/11! Wouldn't fighting Hezbollah distract us from the urgent task of finding Osama bin Laden?

Democrats can't come out and admit that they refuse to fight any war in defense of America, so they utter the "Where's Osama?" incantation to pretend that they'd be doing something. To wit: dedicating the entire resources of the U.S. military to locating Osama bin Laden.

Thus, in the third presidential debate, Kerry complained about the cost of the war in Iraq, saying the war was "the result of this president taking his eye off of Osama bin Laden."

After making the capture of Osama bin Laden their sole objective in the war on terrorism, now Democrats expect us to believe they would have been fighting every other Muslim jihadist on the planet like mad — just not one of the main sponsors of Islamic terrorism, Saddam Hussein. But they'd be merciless with every other mass-murdering, Islamic terror-sponsoring lunatic.

Israel's recent tussle with Hezbollah reminds us how absurd the Democrats' fixation on Osama is. America has been under attack from Muslim extremists for nearly 30 years. Not just al-Qaida and certainly not just Osama bin Laden.

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

Kerry is right - IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK ON 9-11, NOTHING TO DO WITH AL QAEDA OR OSAMA BIN LADEN.

Bush was so little interested in getting Osama that U.S. troops began redeploying out of Afghanistan and to positions around Iraq in preparation for the long-planned, PNAC war as early as January 2003. There is a theory, put forth in Foreign Affairs, that the administration, for various reasons, was never serious about capturing or killing Bin Laden.

Michael Sheuer in his book "Imperial Hubris" was amazed and appalled at the slowiness and timidness of the U.S. response against Afghanistan to the 9-11 attack. Sheuer reports it was almost one month - in early October 2001 - after 9-11, that the U.S. made the first attempts to strike at Bin Laden, giving Al Qaeda a one month grace period to disperse and hunker down or flee to Pakistan.

It now appears that Bush has given up (if he ever was serious) on getting Bin Laden or Al Zwahiri.

Mission Failed - Bush will leave office with Bin Laden still at large and sending us taped messages...

Correction for above: January 2002

Bush was so little interested in getting Osama that U.S. troops began redeploying out of Afghanistan and to positions around Iraq in preparation for the long-planned, PNAC war as early as January 2002.

Bush’s Embrace of Israel Shows Gap With Father
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
August 2, 2006
WASHINGTON, Aug. 1 — When they first met as United States president and Israeli prime minister, George W. Bush made clear to Ariel Sharon he would not follow in the footsteps of his father.

The first President Bush had been tough on Israel, especially the Israeli settlements in occupied lands that Mr. Sharon had helped develop. But over tea in the Oval Office that day in March 2001 — six months before the Sept. 11 attacks tightened their bond — the new president signaled a strong predisposition to support Israel.

“He told Sharon in that first meeting that I’ll use force to protect Israel, which was kind of a shock to everybody,” said one person present, given anonymity to speak about a private conversation. “It was like, ‘Whoa, where did that come from?’“

That embrace of Israel represents a generational and philosophical divide between the Bushes, one that is exacerbating the friction that has been building between their camps of advisers and loyalists over foreign policy more generally. As the president continues to stand by Israel in its campaign against Hezbollah — even after a weekend attack that left many Lebanese civilians dead and provoked international condemnation — some advisers to the father are expressing deep unease with the Israel policies of the son.

- more -

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/02/washington/02prexy.html

Marine Names Murtha in Defamation Suit
Congressman Discussed Killings Involving Serviceman's Squad in Haditha, Iraq

By Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 2, 2006; Page A05

A Marine Corps staff sergeant who led the squad accused of killing two dozen civilians
in Haditha, Iraq, will file a lawsuit today in federal court in Washington claiming
that Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) defamed him when the congressman made public
comments about the incident earlier this year.

Attorneys for Frank D. Wuterich, 26, argue in court papers that Murtha tarnished the
Marine's reputation by telling news organizations in May that the Marine unit cracked
after a roadside bomb killed one of its members and that the troops "killed innocent
civilians in cold blood." Murtha also said repeatedly that the incident was covered up.

Murtha argued that the questionable deaths of 24 civilians were indicative of the
difficulties and overpowering stress that U.S. troops are facing. The congressman,
a former Marine, has been a leading advocate for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq.

In the court filing, obtained by The Washington Post, the lawyers say that Murtha made
the comments after being briefed by Defense Department officials who "deliberately
provided him with inaccurate and false information." Neal A. Puckett and Mark S. Zaid,
suing for libel and invasion of privacy, also wrote that Murtha made the comments outside
of his official scope as a congressman.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101345.html

This is an example of everything that's wrong with the country that this regime has created. Swift-boating in now a national sport. Un-friggin'-believable...

— some advisers to the father are expressing deep unease with the Israel policies of the son.

Posted by: Matthew Carnicelli at August 2, 2006 05:30 AM

This can't be their only 'unease' with little boy George's policies!

Posted by: sparrow at August 2, 2006 08:39 AM

No, their portfolios are fine, thank you very little.

Sweet Daddy Warbucks

Veritas,

I don't think that's my line. I think it's a paraphrasing of an idea I have heard expressed from one of my Pentagon-uncles growing up.

In any event, it's definetly not an original thought or idea.

What is a 48 hour "partial bombing" - anyway it's over & back to full bombing. It's strange to see someone else bombing besides the US of A. This must be how it looks when we do it. I wonder how many of the bombs were sold from here for profit?

Anyway, the vocalist for Iron Maiden is airlifting 200 Brits out of Lebanon. It's all pretty surreal to watch, but too real for those participating.
http://knac.com/article.asp?ArticleID=4798

I know Mel Gibson is the bigger story right now, but there has been some interesting developments down here...

Please pass it along, or talk about it, gossip monger, whatever to keep this alive just a little longer, something very very ugly is coming to the surface and we need all the attention we can get to make sure it does surface.

'“Whenever Aline came up missing and another woman was stabbed by a screwdriver, it should have raised red flags all over the place,” Cole said.

When Cerwin Brown, now deceased and no relation to Robert Browne, left office and Buddy Huckabay replaced him July 1, 1983, “the new sheriff came out to daddy’s house and said everything in her file was gone,” Cole said.

Huckabay told The Gazette the nearly empty file was found in the trunk of a sheriff’s car.

He called the investigation “poor,” but said his administration “worked it pretty hard,” although “there wasn’t much left of the file.”

Huckabay, who left office in 2000, said he suspected Browne in both cases but couldn’t recall if he was questioned.

Authorities told Self’s family her disappearance and Hudson’s slaying weren’t related. “They stood there and told me my sister just took off,” Cole said. “She has an 11-month-old baby. She’s not going to just take off.”

Cole said the family helped rebuild the file with dental and other records but found out recently the file is again nearly empty.

“Now the sheriff is saying a lot of that has gotten lost,” she said. “He doesn’t have witness statements. Where all that stuff went, I have no idea.”

Snip

"Hudson’s cousin, Rusty Watson of Mississippi, said Hudson’s investigation was bungled.

“Since Saturday, I have learned more about Wanda Faye’s death from reporters from Colorado than I knew for 23 years,” he said. “I feel all along there’s been a cover-up going on here.”

Snip

El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa said Red River Parish District Attorney Bill Jones didn’t say much at a February meeting in Dallas, where agencies discussed Browne.

When Jones was asked to share information, Maketa said, “There was some kind of statement made that they didn’t really have a lot. Disappeared is how it was put.”

Red River Sheriff Johnny Ray Norman, who took office in 2004, and Jones, DA since 1980, didn’t return telephone calls. "

http://www.gazette.com/display.php?id=1319824&secid=1

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said Wednesday he foresees Iraqi forces taking over security in all 18 Iraqi provinces by the end of the year.

Talabani, who was speaking at a news conference, said the transition will be gradual and multinational forces will be playing a supportive role to the Iraqi troops.

"The role of the multinational forces is a role to help the Iraqi armed forces, and, God willing, the Iraqi armed forces will at the end of the year take over all of the security in all the Iraqi provinces, little by little, gradually, and, God willing, we will be in a position to do that," he said.

Also, he said, "we have optimism that we will eliminate terrorism."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/08/02/iraq.talabani/index.html

Christy,

I'm really glad to see that all the cover-up stuff you talked about before is now being documented in the media.

I'm sorry it took so long for it to come out and I hope that they nail the people who did the cover-up though if I understand correctly, at least one of those probably involved in the cover-up is now dead.

Good luck to you and ((hugs)).

Dealing with terrorism is one of the greatest failings of the Republicans. One of the greatest failings of the Democrats politically has been the failure to get that message out.

Of course it's not totally that they are not trying as the right wing noise machine manages to drown out the truth with their messages.

It was John Kerry who wrote a book warning about terrorism well before 9/11. It was Bill Clinton who tried to take on al Qaeda while the GOP Congress opposed him.

Upon taking office, the Bush administration received recommendations from the Clinton administration on fighting al Qaeda. Bush ignored them as he ignored the pre-9/11 warnings of an impending attack. After 9/11 Bush's actions have only led to strengthening al Qaeda (along with Iran) while weakening the United States.

In two of the 2004 debates, John Kerry gave recommendations for improving homeland security while George Bush claimed they were too expensive. (After all, those tax cuts are more important).

In the 2002 and 2004 elections, fear of terrorism trumped all other issues leading to GOP wins despite the fact that a majority of voters agreed with Democrats on most issues. Unless Democrats can find a way of getting the truth past the right wing noise machine there is the danger of Republicans winning again this fall despite their poor standing in the polls. (I'm not saying the Republicans will win, but that danger exists.)

By the way, I love the picture but we know it is unrealistic. Bush does not have the intellectual curiosity to read up on terrorism (although if he did, Terrorism For Dummies would be where he'd go).