Small Country, Big Danger

Thanks - looking forward to reading this in full.

Would also like to know more about the implications of everything happening between Somalia and Ethiopia and also in Southeast Asia (Thailand and surroundings). We ignore it at our peril, but MSM is skewed in favor of the large and the powerful. We're all connected, in reality.

next time someone tells you that you just want to cut and run, remind that neocon that is right, just like their hero Ronald Reagan did in Lebanon in the eighties. Except they called his actions after we lost 200 troops, great judgement.

Posted by Rick Albertson at January 6, 2007 05:00 PM

Can anyone tell me in ten words or less WHAT they're fighting about?

Can anyone tell me in ten words or less WHY we should support either side?

I admit I'm completely anti-war anywhere in the world, so I'm certain I have a mental block somewhere that just doesn't get it.

I have just watched/listened to the first two segments of The Power of Nightmares (link to DU on previous thread, then link to Google web site from there), and I can't seem to get back on the web site to view the third segment, so the web site must be getting lots of hits on it. I've known all along that the brainwashing has been insidiously creeping into the national rhetoric, but seeing it condensed down to just a short three hours is as overwhelming as a tsunami....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1002626006461047517

The Power of Nightmares

Thanks Rick, for this long, clear and detailed explanation. Yes, the disarming of the IRA has taken a very long time, and Sinn Fein's credence is still very shaky. But, Northern Ireland shows us that it can be done. And in this I gather courage to persevere.

I also believe that we cannot, in all certainty, proclaim how any group will respond to certain actions. 999 times out of 1000 maybe. I try to concentrate on the thousandth time. The exception, not the rule. It's my trust in the goodness of humanity. If I didn't believe this I wouldn't bother to pay attention to the politics of world powers. I'd simply hide away and try not think. I would have no hope.

I did understand a lot more about Hizbollah's motives in capturing three Israeli soldiers after hearing an interview by Jimmy Carter. It was the first time I saw that there was a reason for the kidnap. And let's face it, the capture was of soldiers, not the bombing of thousands of civilians aged 0 to 100. No matter what conflict is going on, there is always another point of view. For the appalling death and devastation in Lebanon, I do not support Israel. No.

There is NEVER a reason to do this to civilians. Hizbollah was hiding amongst them? If it's true, that is still not a reason to do all that you've outlined above. I give the same response as I gave the night I was told my 10 year old son was shot. It's INEXCUSABLE!

Thanks for clarifying this, Rick. I always value your thoughts. And debate. :)

In a classic episode of The West Wing, one of the staffers asked President Bartlett why the people in the Middle East have always been at each others' throats for so many centuries. He paused for a moment, then said:

"Because it's incredibly hot. And there's no water."

and then there's that pesky sects-and-violence thing too,
Otter

simply Nonny because Israel is the only real democracy in the Middle East and where my ancestors went to escape after the holocaust.Its not only our national interest, but mankind's interest that Israel survive since its neighbor's raison d'etre is to drive them into the sea and accomplish what the third reich could not. That is more than 10 words.

I admit I'm completely anti-war anywhere in the world, so I'm certain I have a mental block somewhere that just doesn't get it.

Posted by: NonnyO at January 6, 2007 05:45 PM

Same here NonnyO. It seems that before we've extricated ourselves from one war, we're lining up to get involved in the next, and then the next and then the next.

I truly despair.

"Because it's incredibly hot. And there's no water."

Posted by: Otter at January 6, 2007 05:53 PM

Well, hey - there is some truth in that. I lived 15 years in an opal mining community in the outback where it's incredibly hot and there was only hot, very hot, smelly water.

And every 6-months-long summer where temperatures were above 40C, tempers were short! Except, there was a lot of alcohol added to the mix here, instead of religion.

It seems that before we've extricated ourselves from one war, we're lining up to get involved in the next, and then the next and then the next.
Posted by: woz at January 6, 2007 06:43 PM

That's why The Power of Nightmares is so relevant. It details how the neoCons set up the "us vs. them" mentality, per Strauss, etc. It's truly sickening and frightening at the same time, because those of us on this blog see how the past relates to the present neoCon rulership of this nation.

I still can't get back to that web site to view the third installment of it. When I do, I plan on downloading the three segments.

I've been reading some about Lebanon (my son's texts), in order to see what events came before the hostilities of last summer between Hizbollah in Lebanon and Israel. Lebanon's history, ethnic makeup and geographical location practically guarantee that is is a hot spot, as it has always been a trade center due to the sea but also partically protected by mountains. Lebanon has usually been foreign-dominated (Babylonians, Armenians, Persians, Ottomans, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, French). Lebanon had a complex culture four centuries before birth of Christ, 400 BC or so. The alphabet was invented in this region.

During the Middle Ages, Lebanon was in the main path of the First Crusade, then occupied by Franks. Persecuted groups have long hid in the mountains of Lebanon. The Ottomans then ruled from the 1500s til mid 19th century, along with what is now Syria, Jordan, Israel, Palestine. Lebanon had close ties and trade relations with the Italian dukes of the city-states. They collaborated for agriculture, engineering - including strong forts. The Ottoman empire extended all the way to Constantinople (now Istanbul).

Lebanon was a center of silk production for Europe, so the region became wealthy but dependent on Europe, especially France. I can't even begin to follow all the turbulence between factions such as Maronite Christians and the Druze. The system The sectarian and feudal rifts of the 1821–1825 conflict were heightened by the increasing economic isolation of the Druze, and the increasing wealth of the Maronites. France and Egypt had alot of control during the 1800s, with continuing "sectarian conflict" with European powers intervening. In the mid 1800s, the Ottoman empire reasserted control (Bashir I and II were succeeded by Bashir III). The Druze and Maronites continued their bloody battling, with creation of separate districts from them, which only created powerbases for continued civil war, coexisting with class struggle (so a complex chaos).

It went on like this through the rest of the 19th century, with Maronites and Druzes burning each other's villages, and the Ottomans as overlords. Europeans finally threatened to intervene and the Turks tried to negotiate peace, but Napolean finally "surged" in with 7000 troops and partitioned the place. They supported the Maronites against the Druze, which kept the region destabilized. So the whole cycle started over again, with the factions burning each others' villages.

By end of the 19th century, the American University of Beirut was founded and Lebanon developed fairly well, with overall more liberalization and peace. By WW1, Lebanon was sending delegates to various international organization meetings, but was still under Ottoman control. The Ottoman Empire collaped after WW1 and the League of Nations split Lebanon into 5 provinces and overlapped with part of what is now Syria, with a great deal of control by France. Lebanon contained about half Arabs, half Christians. The ratio of Shiites, Sunnis and Christians in Lebanon was controlled by France. The President was to be a Christian, the Prime minister a Sunni. The ratio of religious representation in Parliament was strictly specified. This system was kept in place even as there came to be slightly more Muslims and was not revised til much later.

Lebanon became independent just during WW2, while France was occupied by Germany. The Vichy let Germany move aircraft and supplies through Syria to Iraq to use against the British, who feared Germany would control Lebanon and Syria. Lebanon eventually became independent yet was under authority of France, which had ceased to be occupied. Elections were held in 1943 but the French threw the elected officials into prison but released them under international pressure. The French did not withdraw til 1946.
In 1948, following the Arab-Israeli war, Lebanon got 110,000 Palestinian refugees (and remember, Lebanon is small). These had been expelled from newly formed Israel and also Jordan. Lebanon had to take more refugees in than any other Arab nation. In 1958, an insurrection broke out. 5000 US Marines were sent to Beirut. During the 1960s, Beirut was a prosperous center of banking, tourism and opium production - the "Paris of the middle east."

In 1967, Lebanon got yet more Palestinian refugees, following the Arab-Israeli War. Many of them regrouped in Lebanon, led by Arafat's PLO. Lebanon was weak and a good location from which to fight back at Israel. PLO hijacked an Israeli plane en route to Algiers, one en route to Athens, then an attack on the Beirut airport by Israel followed. Each side blamed the other. Much of the tension was over whether the distribution of power between the Christian and Muslim communities was fair. In 1975, civil war broke out in Lebanon once again. Maronite Lebanese Christians fought Arab Palestinians. Nassar of Egypt had negotiated an agreement between Arafat and Lebanon to grant the PLO authority over the Palestinian refugee camps and allow them access to northern Israel. The Maronites saw this as an excess of concessions to the Palestinians and they formed paramilitary groups such as the Phalange.

The PLO formed a "ministate" in southern Lebanon and ramped up attacks on settlements in northern Israel. More armed Palestinian militants located in Lebanon, including Arafat and Fatah, because Jordan was cracking down. They attacked Israel who countered with bombing raids in southern Lebanon where 150 or more towns were destroyed in the early '70s. Lebanon had no conflict with Israel between 1949-1968 but then the recurring cycle of attack and retaliation at Lebanon's border began. The same cycle repeated - attack, retaliation, chaos, civil war, foreign invasions, international intervention. This has gone on ever since there were PLO in Lebanon.

Lebanon had another Civil War, which lasted from 1975 to 1990. This started because of all the political compromises which left various factions unsatisfied. The religious groups couldn't get along with each other, and the proximity to Syria, the presence of the PLO and their quarrel over the border with Israel added to the mess. The Europeans had left, Arab nationalism was on the rise, Arab socialism as well (this was during the Cold War). Other factors in the reason included Ba'athism (Saddam), the Iranian Revolution (Shah Pahlavi overthrown in favor of Khomeini), the PLO, Black September (Jordan), fundamentalism (such as Al Quaida) and the Iran-Iraq war (which lasted almost a decade). In that civil war, 100,000 were killed, 100,000 handicapped - a 16 year war - in a very small country. 1/5 of the population were made refugees.

In 1978, Israel invaded Lebanon because Fatah attacked. Israel occuped an area requiring evacuation of 100,000 Lebonese (numbers are rounded), and 2000 deaths. The UN passed a resolution calling for Israel to withdraw and the UN sent a peacekeeping force in, to create a buffer zone against cross-border attacks. By 1981, Israel and Syria were fighting and the US intervened diplomatically. An agreement was made and the conflict stopped. The Palestinians continued to fight amongst themselves and with Israel, but a ceasefire was brokered between the PLO and Israel finally.

Israel invaded Lebanon again in 1982 after hostilities erupted at the border, involving PLO. Israeli units reached to Beirut and 20,000 were killed on all sides, including civilians. US Marines, French and Italians moved in to make sure the PLO left. 15,000 Palestinian militants left. The Christian Phalange militia cleared out 2000 more PLO fighters. Then the President of Lebanon was assassinated. The Phalangists retaliated by coming into two Lebanese refugee camps and massacring the refugees (a documentary is available). These are known as the Sabra and Shatila massacres and there was considerable resentment of Sharon, who didn't intercede.

In 1983, Lebanon, Israel and US arranged for Israel to withdraw if Syria would leave also. Syria refused, causing stalemate. The international forces stayed all the way up ti 2000.
In 1983 and 1984, truck bombing at the US Embassy and an attack on the Marine barracks led to an American withdrawal and the Lebanese army also collapsed. Another weak unpopular Lebanese head of government was assassinaed and his equally unpopular older brother succeeded him. Between 1985 and 1989, heavy fighting took place between refugee camps, as Shi'a militias tried to rout out Palestinian militias. In 1987, real combat returned as well, between Palestinians, leftists and Druze fighters, with Syria intervening.
The new head of the unity government was assassinated. Another Maronite Christian was put at the head, angering many Muslim groups, who backed a Sunni. Lebanon thushad a Christian government in East Beirut and a Muslim government in West Beirut.

In 1989, a General launched a war against the Syrian armed forces in Lebanon. The US backed the Syrian air force. Syrian Lebanese groups attacked the presidential palace. The leader has to evacuate to the French embassy and go into exile in Paris. Syria is regarded as having helped Lebanon end its civil war in 1990. Lebanon then got a new president but he was assassinaed in a car bomb. The National Assembly makeup was changed so equally Christian/Muslim representation was achieved. Pardons were given and militias were dissoled, except for Hizballah.

In 1991, car bombings began again, and a former prime minister was wounded. Since the end of the war, the militias weakened and the Lebanese army controlled approx. 2/3 of the country. The Shi'a Hizballah retained its weapons, the only militia to do so. In 1992, the prime minister resigned and was replaced. Lebanon had its first elction in 20 years, headed by a billionaire businessman. Downtown Beirut was nicely rebuilt and there was considerable private sector investment. The sectarian tensions persisted under the surface. The government has had to take action against Sunni extremists and also groups affiliated with Al Quaida.

In 2002, another former Lebanese figure associaed with the Sabra and Shatila massacres who later served in the Cabinet - was assassinated. During Lebanon's civil wr, Syria was ok'd to have troops in Lebanon, via agreement. This was because the Lebanese army was fairly weak. Under this agreement, Hizbollah was to be dismantled. Some considered the presence of Syrian military an occupation. Others believed it contributed to stability and prevented relapse into civil war. US and France questioned that Lebanon really wanted Syrian forces there and considered Lebanon's head a Syrian puppet.

Up to 2005, 14-15,000 Syrian troops (down from 35,000) were still in Lebanon. Most Lebanese have wanted the Syrians to leave, as has the U.S., who applied pressure on Syria to stop interfering in Lebanon. in 2004, the UN asked Syria to leave. Israel completed its withdrawal by 2000 but a region called Shebaa Farms, which Israel continued to control. The UN considers this occupied territory that should go back to Lebanon. Both Hizbollah and Israel continue to violate the UN-determined "Blue Line," which they are not to cross.

Hizbollah won't dismantle. They make incursions into Shebaa Farms area, then Israel makes strikes into southern Lebanon. The Lebanese government doesn't seem to be able to do much about it. Lebanon and Syria can't seem to disband the militias, nor does Syria seem to stop troop and arms movements into Lebanon to Hizbollah. The National Assembly in Lebanon voted 2-1/2 years ago to amend the constitution to give a pro-Syrian president 3 more years in office. This looks as though Syria has some control over Lebanon's government. Also, Lebanon's most recent prime minister was assassinated and he had opposed the amendment and in 2004, another prominent politician who opposed the amendment was killed in a car bomb. Almost 15 years after the civil war, Syria won't leave.

About a year ago, thousands of protesters in Lebanon rallied for the end of Syrian occupation and blamed pro-Syrians for the assassination of their prime minister. This increased international pressure on Syria. Bush and Chirac condemned the killing and called for Syria to follow the UN resolution asking them to leave. UN sent a team to investigate the assassinaton. Syria agreed only to move its troops to a different part of Lebanon. Last year the pro-Syrian prime minister finally resigned and announced Syrian troops would leave, but particulars were vague. Russia, former ally of Syria, asked them to leave Lebanon. Germany weighed in, and Arab states. Syria agreed to withdraw 15,000 troops but leave 3000. Then those were to go, but no timetable. Meanwhile, Hizbollah tried to organize massive gatherings against the UN resolution. They did not want to give up their weapons. More demonstrations by pro-Hizbollah and then anti-Syrian masses in thousands. New records were set for numbers of demonstrators, both sides.
It was clear Hizbollah had alot of followers. Their leader, Nasrallah, became very emboldened, threatening Israel publicly. They did also have support from Syria.

After weeks, a UN envoy from Sweden met with Syrian leader Assad. Prior to the meeting, the Swede consulted with several moderate Arab nation heads. An ultimatim was delivered to Assad calling for phased withdrawal of Syrian troops and respect of Lebanon's sovereignty. Hizbollah was also to be disarmed. One anti-Syrian rally was said to number at 1 million - with Sunni, Christian and Druze elements. It was double the size of the pro-Hizbollah rally organized by Syria the previous week. The top Syrian General in Lebanon then resigned, and finally Syrian troops pulled out of Lebanon in April 2005. That represented Lebanon's first freedom from Syria in 30 years. UN forces were sent to verify this. Then came a series of car bomb assassinations of Lebanese politicians and journalists. Border tension continued. Hezbollah became a part of the Lebanese government following the 2005 elections but the UN still calls for its militia to be dismantled.

In November 2005, Hizbollah attacked the Israeli border to provide cover for abducting some Israeli troops. The attack failed when Israeli paratroopers killed 4 Hisbollah in ambush. A month later, Hizbollah sent in some Katushya rockets. Kofi Annan asked the Lebanese government to put a stop to the attacks by Hizbollah, but their prime minister Saniora has been in a weak position. The conflict between Lebanon and Israel escalated in July of 2006. That has been summarized in the thread above but as you can see, it's a continuation of hostilities that have developed over time. What I have attempted to do is share some of my review of events leading up to the conflict this summer and to gather some context.

Ten words?
Looks to me like Syria was instrumental in helping Lebanon stop it's protracted civil war, which appeared to be mostly about the perceived unfairness of the quota system in government.

Lebanon seems to have been pulled between outside forces for centuries, and remained sectarian and without unity, never developing a stable government.

Israel and Lebanon share a border, yes, and there has been triangulation between the PLO, Hizbollah and Syria.

Overall, it seems like one of the main problems is that Syria would not leave, after its role in stabilizing Lebanon was over. Lebanon was too good of a staging site for its power plays.

That's more than ten words.

I also couldn't help but wonder at the parallels - US would not leave Saudi Arabia following the first Gulf War. Napolean intervened much as we are doing in Iraq.

Israel is the democracy in the middle east and in a vulnerable location. The problem is that it has annexed territory which continued to be disputed, with Palestine, with Lebanon, with Egypt. It also seems that if Israel is nuclear, the others want to be as well.

Syria is certainly behind Hizbollah and Lebanon has seemed to be fairly toothless, even with outside help.

I would certainly not take sides in these conflicts. They never seem to end and there is too much war profiteering going on for any of the ideological or sectarian positions to make much sense. The violence may start because of tensions over land or religion, but there are many who manufacture arms who are quick to start rubbing their palms together.

It seems to me that we make judgements and then rush in to make whole countries operate like we do. Who says that our way is the right way? Who says our way is the best way? We barge into other people's ways without the slightest interest in understanding those ways. We just know they'll be better off with our freedoms.

What? How do we know this? We've sent soldiers in to a land to straighten it out and force it into a democracy under our rule. Democracy certainly has lost it's original definition. Government of, for, by the people? Where is that happening these days? In the US what were the numbers for and against the Iraq invasion? Here in Australia it was opposed by more than 60% before a single soldier left our shores? Government by the people? I think not. Same in the UK.

We expect people to learn English if they want to come to live in our countries. Oh, that's right - it doesn't matter in the middle east. We're the invaders and the occupiers and our language is English. It worked here in Australia and there in America hundreds of years ago. It will work again in the Middle East.

Seems to me it's all about world domination. Again. Still.

We may be able to assist countries, like Lebanon, if they ask for assistance - in mediation. We can't give advice until we walk in the shoes of those who've walked the walk of the collective Lebanese memory. And that's really not possible. While we sit in judgement - we Gods of Democracy - we can never have empathy with any of the hundreds of sides to the dilemma.

When are we going to learn that democracies don't own morality. Need I mention names of the abused or tortured with government sanction? How about your phone taps, no fly lists, opened mail? All without warrants. Who on earth would anyone want our Democracy? Who'd want our freedom?

Posted by: Bubba at January 6, 2007 06:16 PM

I must have quit reading WWII history "too soon." 30-40 years ago, after I found out one of my uncles helped liberate a concentration camp, I read quite a lot about it (he would never talk about the experience, but it drove him to the brink of alcoholism after the war). But I didn't read much about after the war, setting up Israel as a nation... so I'm not well-read on the topic. I had to quit reading about the concentration camps and the rest of WWII because it was giving me nightmares after seeing too many pictures of people in concentration camps, so I switched to reading about other things (huge amounts of much earlier histories, mostly).

I despair that war happens at all, anywhere, and I just simply fail to understand genocide anywhere (including the current modern battles that are genocidal in nature). My genealogy research has taught me that when one goes back hundreds of years in search of ancestors (that one can document, at least, usually not much more than 400-500 years), and add simple biology and genetics and modern DNA studies, there just simply is not anything like a 'pure race' like Hitler's delusion, and if one studies historical facts from thousands of years ago, the military invasions, the peaceful migrations when any group became overpopulated and part of them moved on to other areas... well, things like Hitler's delusions are sheer nonsense.

Wilfred Owen quoted Horace in his poem "Dulce et Decorum Est" in 1920 (a poem about the horrors of dying from mustard gas in WWI):

Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori: From Horace, Odes, Book 3, line 13: "It is sweet and honorable to die [while fighting] for [one's] country."

I can think of many good reasons to live for one's country. In this day and age, after all the lies we've been told, I can no longer think of a good reason to die for one's country.

Killer post, woz. I like your perception of the issues here.

Thanks Otter

Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney Makes the Case for Impeachment
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010607D.shtml
Here is McKinney's case for impeachment and for the history books, a case that says to historians, "Look, I knew what needed to be done, and I failed for years but I admitted it on my last day." A case that says to us: "Here is your mission: awaken currently serving Congress members to this case or kiss your democracy goodbye."

{{{"Must Read." There are things mentioned in this that I don't remember reading about before, like violations of treaties banning weapons that seem to have been used particularly in Afghanistan. Many things we've known about, but she goes into greater detail.}}}

GOP Senator Confronts Bush on Opening Mail
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010607E.shtml
The Republican sponsor of a postal reform bill called on President Bush yesterday to explain why he used it to claim he can open domestic mail without a search warrant. Senator Susan Collins of Maine questioned Bush's controversial December 20 "signing statement" in which he stated if there were an emergency he wouldn't need a warrant to open letters.

Joseph L. Galloway | Another Flight From Reality by President Bush
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010607C.shtml
Joseph L. Galloway writes: "President Bush in a few days will present the results of his painful month-long examination of the options for continuing his mistaken adventure in Iraq, but there's little evidence that he's discovered any new way forward. The word in the halls of the Pentagon and inside the Beltway is that The Decider will choose some sort of temporary bump in the numbers of American troops currently assigned to fight a war without end and without purpose."

Thank you, Rick, for posting this. A very smart positioning description.

There are no easy answers, because our policy has always been to play all sides simultaneously, against each other, favoring whoever has commodities we can trade with. Democracy with a higher commercial purpose.

We, and the World Bank/IMF (wonder why Wolfowitz is there?), create puppets and indebted nations, and don't always act honorably, but we have been useful brokers before. Glamourizing the terrorist groups, like Hezbollah and Hamas, or not seeing the big picture, where all are culpable, is a common progressive reflex.

Here's what I said at another site, likening it to the Ireland solution is apt:

"As Jewish, and not lost on the issues, diplomacy has always been what's needed. If only to temporarily stop the violence, curb those bad habits, while economies prosper and tensions subside. Creating even a desire for peaceful co-existence.

"Bush pushed Israel's Ohlmert into a disastrous response to Hezbollah, levelling what Beirut had taken years building back up, all while the terrorist group helped with the clean-up and rebuilding. A reversal of roles we can never repeat.

"There may never be peace, but a mutually beneficial end to the killing is a good start."

Israel has to behave better, not shop power point invasions and claim the high ground. Certainly not as proxy for Bush. That said, they can do no right, or do good, and still be slated for annihilation.

While Israel is frustrated, exercising bad habits and bunker mentality, like abused victims, the terrorist groups play them like a violin. Hezbollah infiltrates into Lebanon, providing social services, and taunts Israel from the sides, provoking desperate and unwise responses.

Hezbollah is of no help to Lebanon's fight for peace and stability, who are powerless to defang the terrorists.

I always wonder if these harsh leaders are in it more for their glory and power, as petty tyrants, and actually for the causes they cite, at all.

Posted by: NonnyO at January 6, 2007 09:17 PM

Impeachment. Yes. No. Waver. Hesitate. Gerald Ford forgave Nixon. Ok. Let's think about that. Speaking dollar$$$ only for now. How many single dollars did Nixon cost American taxpayers through his crimes, trial and his pension on resignation?

Now, same question for the little tic's (Terrorist-In-Chief) dollar for dollar in crimes and in the perpetuation of those crimes throughout the days, nights and years. Add to that, his non-resignation-completion-of-term-pension and tell me how many gazillions of dollar$$$ the tic has cost in comparison with Nixon.

I dread to think of the numbers of lives that he still intends to squander, on top of those he has squandered already. We'll soon reach the million squandered lives mark. We're well past the half million. Apparently, he's asked for 30,000 extra troops. So, he's not planning to end the killing any day soon. He's planning to escalate it.

And his plan on the domestic front which did make me laugh? He has a plan to balance the budget by 2012.

Considering the answers to these questions - facts not emotions - my question is, can you afford to forgive before the conclusion to the impeachment process? And before he tackles your budget?

I always wonder if these harsh leaders are in it more for their glory and power, as petty tyrants, and actually for the causes they cite, at all.

Posted by: Marjorie G at January 6, 2007 10:10 PM

I don't. But in this I include ALL the tyrants Israel's, America's, Australia's, the UK's et al. Not just Hizbollah, Hamas, al Queda, Jamaah Islamiah and whoever happens to be labelled the bad guy for this particular spot of manipulation.

http://www.msnbc.com/comics/daily.asp?sfile=db070106&vts=1620071750
Doonesbury

"Surge" Without Congressional Approval Is Impeachable Offense
By Francis Boyle
Professor of international law at the University of Illinois
Failure to obtain additional authorization from Congress for this substantial enlargement of U.S. Armed Forces in Iraq would constitute an impeachable offense under the terms of the United States Constitution for violating the Constitution's War Powers Clause and Congress's own War Powers Resolution."
http://tinyurl.com/yk49tl

The Surge: Political Cover or Escalation?
Paul Craig Roberts
Western domination of the Muslim world succeeded by not picking a fight with all of the disunited Arabs at the same time.
http://tinyurl.com/yf8ryw

Excerpt:
By manipulating Bush and provoking a military crisis in which the US stands to lose its army in Iraq, the neoconservatives hope to revive the implementation of their plan for US conquest of the Middle East. They believe they can use fear, “honor,” and the aversion of macho Americans to ignoble defeat to expand the conflict in response to military disaster. The neocons believe that the loss of an American army would be met with the electorate’s demand for revenge. The barriers to the draft would fall, as would the barriers to the use of nuclear weapons.

Crimes Against Humanity From Ford to Saddam:
If we do not limit our analysis of Ford to his role as a U.S. "statesman," and instead examine his behavior through an internationalist lens similar to that employed to judge Saddam Hussein and concerned with crimes against humanity, we find that Ford, too, was responsible for mass murder-in East Timor.
http://www.counterpunch.org/nevins01062007.html

America's new puppet
By its ill-judged invasion of Somalia, Ethiopia has become an accomplice in Bush's war on terror
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1983296,00.html

Fact or propaganda?:
American Passports Found on Bodies of Al Qaeda Fighters in Somalia:
A senior official in the Somali government's new Ministry of the Interior told ABC News government forces had recovered "dozens of foreign passports," including several American passports, on the bodies of al Qaeda fighters killed in combat between forces affiliated with the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) and Ethiopian forces in Somalia
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/01/american_passpo.html

marjorie to suggest that Bush could bully Ohlmert into attacking Lebanon is ridiculous,the Jewish state is not intimidated like our Congress. I was impressed by yout scholarly analysis of Lebanon. The Evangelicals hete in Delay,s old district think they have a special relationship with Israel and the Middle East which is rather perverted and I am sure instrumental in the neocon's policies But for those fearful of Isra wanting US troops in Gaza that is against official Israeli policy and probably the reason they became nuclear.

Very interesting discussion and enjoying it, & some scary articles here, particularly the one about the motives of the neocons with respect to any "surge" of troops.

NonnyO
Glad you're watching "The Power of Nightmares" - probably no surprise to you (the content).

I enjoy this site for the concentration of smart & interesting people.

I must have looked kind of eccentric today, because I'd rolled up nickels and dimes into little foil balls, each containing $1. I then took them to the post office and was feeding them into the stamp machine, a slow process. A postal worker came out to get a package out of a locker and I asked him, "Why is Bush able to read our mail without a warrant now?" He said, "Well I don't think he himself if reading it." I said, "Well postal workers I know in Oregon are quite concerned about the signing statement he added to the Postal Service bill."

Bubba
Yes, I read once about Tom Delay addressing the Knesset. I found that quite creepy.

I enjoy this site for the concentration of smart & interesting people.

Posted by: DiAnne at January 6, 2007 11:29 PM

Ditto

Posted by: NonnyO at January 6, 2007 08:06 PM

What is ironic is that Wilfred Owen was tremendously anti-war and that line in his poem drips with sarcasm.

Britain had been fed on the glories of war and then all its young boys went off in groups, whole school groups enlisting together and in those days it was thought to be good for morale to create companies based on all the soldiers knowing each other, being from the same town, and they went and fought other young boys, slogged it out for months in the mud hand to hand with boys just like themselves except fighting in a different uniform, and they were all sick with the horrors of what a real war was, it was not all glory and pomp and circumstance, it was a whole village of boys being wiped out by a single mortar, bloody bits everywhere. Hence the poppies which are still worn every year in England to raise money for disabled and retired veterans.

After WWII, Benjamin Britten set Owen's poetry to music in the "War Requiem", another heart-wrenching ode to the Blitz and the destruction of lives and hope and a whole generation left bleeding on the battlefields.

Wesley Clark : Bush's "Surge" Will Backfire

http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article2132496.ece

Bubba, Ohlmert was in a no-win position. Without Sharon's street creds, who could have exerted power, by either a diplomatic or military solution.

Lots of speculation 'what would Sharon do?'

Ohlmert had to prove himself, as did Peretz, so I liken it to Bush and Co strutting, out of their league. What mostly hurt was Hezbollah getting outside weaponry and help.

Beleagured after he didn't solve the problem once and for all, as Isrealis were finally wanting (after initial ambivalence), he tried a recent peace offering, which Peretz scuttled.

I was in Canada at the time of the Lebanon (War?), and read a variety of international press. Although Montreal has a large, active Jewish population, it was circumspect.

I do think Bush encouraged. You notice he backed a longer action, because everything we are doing now leads to Iran. Maybe for Israel, as well as the rest of the middle east and neo-con wet dream.

Regardless of reasons why not, and the mid-terms. I have never been this scared of my government.

Posted by: V at January 6, 2007 11:40 PM

In 1988 I did a comparison-contrast essay for my Honors English class of Dulche et Decorum Est and Ezra Pound's Mauberly IV... and the prof gave me an A+ for it. The whole essay was anti-war... and that was all before the first Gulf War. The night Congress voted on that war I was preparing for an Honors Seminar class and we selected Media Manipulation for the topic to study in class. All these years later it helps deconstruct the Bu!!$h!te we have been hearing for the last six years....

Glad you're watching "The Power of Nightmares" - probably no surprise to you (the content).
Posted by: DiAnne at January 6, 2007 11:29 PM

True, no surprise... but because it is concentrated into so short a space in time and covers so many years, it is frightening and overwhelming....

Thanks for all the good input today peeps.

Posted by: NonnyO at January 7, 2007 12:10 AM

And now I understand why my Egyptian guide was looking at me so funny fifteen years ago when he told me to say hello to Mr. Bush for him.

His eyes were searching mine, and searching my face. I think he could tell we were naive.

That's all he ever said, when we got ready to leave. They took us to a dinner show on a boat on the Nile, and to the pyramids, and to the Valley of the Kings. We got them when we first got there because we had no idea how to get around. They drove us here and there and never talked politics to us at all, just that mention, and that look.....at the end.

Before that we drove an Israeli car into the West Bank and my husband kept saying "It's okay if we just stay out of the West Bank" (knowing very well where he was at the time but I was not aware of it.) He parked at the ruins at Jericho and some Palestinian youth (boys) came up and started throwing big rocks at our car.

This is how naive I was at the time ~ I leaned out of the car and said "It's okay, WE ARE NOT JEWISH - we're from America". More rocks.

Sorry if I told that story before......(can't remember whether I did or not) - now back to trying to remember if I'm supposed to be getting lost or to be trying to find myself.......

Why is it that Israel is allowed by the world, to defend against further kidnappings of - soldiers - by Hizbollah, by catastrophically bombing thousands upon thousands of families, homes, entire neighbourhoods?

Why is it that Israel is still acting like the victim it once was, even though it's one of the very few nuclear powers in the world? It is probably second only to America in military strength. It was a daughter of a holocaust victim who first pointed out the victim mentality of Israel to me.

Until Israel recognises that it actually has friends amongst its neighbours as well as across the world, there's no hope. It will continue to over-bomb, over-kill, over-destroy and over-displace.

I honestly believed that Israel would be the nation most likely to demonstrate empathy and compassion towards the displaced. Not to do the displacing. The persecution of the jews is over. Israel has become a vibrant nation with all the advances available to any of the other developed nations of the world.

The victim goes rushing out defending itself against paranoia. Nothing else. The most suspicious person, is the one who is most suspect. A group of suspicious people is a mob. And we all know what mob-mentality can create, don't we?

What a Woman! Cindy Sheehan is there, visibly caring wherever there is injustice over this war on whatever the war is actually about this week. This one affects me greatly because a young Australian has been suffering for five years.

US protesters want Guantanamo Bay shut

January 7, 2007 - 2:29PM

http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/US-protesters-want-Guantanamo-Bay-shut/2007/01/07/1168104859678.html

Israel plans to attack Iran nuke site

January 7, 2007 - 10:54AM

Israel has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran's uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons, Britain's Sunday Times newspaper said.

http://www.democracycellproject.net/blog/archives/2007/01/small_country_b_1.html

Posted by: DiAnne at January 6, 2007 07:32 PM

DiAnne. I'm so sorry. How on earth did I miss such a long post? Thankyou for this. Between all of you here at DCP, I'm putting a little filler in the giant holes left by my formal and ongoing self-education. If I was exhausted after reading about it, imagine how it has been for the Lebanese of all persuasions who have lived it through the millenia.

Lebanon is the crossroad to Syria, Jordan, Israel, and Gaza. So all countries want their arm of the signpost, while at the same time, the Lebanese people are a mix of all these nations and more. It's also accessible across the Mediterranean sea, so there are plenty of others who have staked their claims on Lebanon.

Perhaps the real access to all of these countries is through Syria, but when you take a look at the huge expanse of Syria by comparison with Lebanon, it's not surprising that Lebanon was relegated to a common-ownership patch of ground. All with interest in the region need to be seen as the dominant force.

It's hard to identify the core, the soul, of Lebanon. It means much to many who live there, each with differing origins. But with so many making demands on Lebanon and swallowing it up bit by bit, it is remarkable that it has withstood so much abuse from so many directions. I've always wondered why I get so passionate and distressed about Lebanon and the Lebanese. Maybe this is the reason.

Now, this discussion keeps my mind going back to a book. It's a book for children to ancients. It's a lesson in the resilience of the human spirit. It's about a group of women and children in a concentration camp.

How can such a story be so beautiful and full of such love and hope? Well, read this book and you will know. It is exceptional. It is written by Australian author, Margaret Wild and illustrated by Australian illustrator, Julie Vivas (breathtaking) and its title is Let the Celebrations Begin.

If we can't learn from experience, then let us learn from these women and children. And let us stop the brutality we inflict on each other.

I enjoy this site for the concentration of smart & interesting people.

Posted by: DiAnne at January 6, 2007 11:29 PM

Me too. I have been lurking for awhile with not much to say as I have been ridiculously busy with work. I wish I could contribute more, but am always grateful for the excellent information I read here.

This just dropped into my mailbox. What a morning wake-up call.

Revealed: Israel Plans Nuclear Strike on Iran
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010707Z.shtml
Israel has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran's uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons. Two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear "bunker-busters," according to several Israeli military sources. The attack would be the first with nuclear weapons since 1945, when the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Israeli weapons would each have a force equivalent to one-fifteenth of the Hiroshima bomb.

As Jewish, I did not feel at home last October at an Oak Park, IL bar mitzvah, because of the congregants misguided approval at whatever Israel does is okay, as defensive, especially by its lobby. I don't know what to make of this story.

Knowing what we do about how we get into wars, as a world-wide complicity and planted evidence like the Niger Forgeries, or hyping a threat, never proving the threat, what does this mean?

Scott Ritter, who is never wrong, it seems, said this was a done deal last spring, and we have military already over there in the sea near Iran.

We may have the war powers act, but how do we curb both Bush and Ohlmert, who seem in cahoots, if this is true?

Today we are deeply concerned about Iran and what seems to be bubbling up in Washington about plans to begin the next phase. But the two issues that jump out at me from this thread are related to the entire Bush debacle in the ME:

The first is the historical mismatch between Israel and the rest of the ME (even though each ME country has had its own share of ethnic divisions and exploitation of citizens). My friend Debra Heifetz-Yahav did her dissertation in Israel on the cultural collisions between Israeli and Palestinian soldiers and their generals during the joint border patrols after the Oslo Peace Accords. What she found was that the soldiers could adapt to the varying cultural styles between the two armies, but not if the generals were present. And the generals could not adapt at all. Debra showed us the video she shot of Israeli generals trying desperately, in their direct, narrow and bound ways (nonverbal stuff) to get the Palestinian generals to give them specific terms or outcomes. The Palestinian generals try desperately, in their expansive, accommodating and fluid ways to get the Israelis to listen more openly and be less directive. It's a tragic piece of film because it unpacks all the reasons why war becomes inevitable to both sides. And we in the US, especially under the current leadership, fall into the trap woz describes above of believing our way is the best way. This is what bites us in the ass every time.

Secondly, we have a terrible time focusing on more than one crisis at a time and we rarely (as a culture) take the time to analyze the connections and patterns inherent in the flow of time and confluence of events. The DCP posters seem especially able at doing this but let's face it, this site is under-trafficked. (Maybe we need to get out more.) Last night we had friends over for dinner and the topic turned to the ME and Iran and Lebanon and the fact that the Persian Gulf is getting filled up with (at least two) US aircraft carriers. This horrifying note was followed with a disagreement about the Dems in Congress and whether the incremental power-building approach of Nancy Pelosi will be effective in ending the Iraq War or whether the new Dem leadership ought to be screaming from the rafters for impeachment, bringing the troops home immediately and initiating diplomacy instead of thuggery.

(Guess which side I was on).

It's all related and part of a pattern so disturbing that I simply do not know what to do, and so I come here and am reassured that at least a few of us can think this through. The last week has given me so much hope and so much despair that I cannot even begin to think about what to do next, but I do know that I feel better after coming here.

Videos from Thursday's Impeachment Forum at the National Press Club and Rally at the Capitol

John Nichols puts current movement for impeachment into historical context:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16941

Cindy Sheehan:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16941

Daniel Ellsberg on How Campaigns to Cut off War Funds and Impeach Criminal Presidents Help Each Other and Can Best Succeed in Tandem (Introduced by David Swanson):
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16941

Daniel Ellsberg on Bush and Hitler Seizing Right to Read Anyone's Mail:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16941

Michael Ratner, President of the Center for Constitutional Rights:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16941

David Swanson and Sunsara Taylor:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16941

ImpeachMobile Video:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16941

Cindy Sheehan at Opening of Congress 01-04-07:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16941

At Busboys and Poets for a torture symposium; if the battery lasts. I'll post interesting tidbits.

The film Busboys and Poets is showing is OUTLAWED. It's about extraordinary rendition. Opening scene: Condi talking about "the rule of law."

Outlawed
Extraordinary Rendition, Torture and Disappearances in the 'War on Terror' tells the stories of Khaled El-Masri and Binyam Mohamed, two men who have survived extraordinary rendition, secret detention, and torture by the U.S. government working with various other governments worldwide. "Outlawed" features relevant commentary from Louise Arbour, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, U.S. President George W. Bush, Michael Scheuer, the chief architect of the rendition program and former head of the Osama Bin Laden unit at the CIA, and Condoleezza Rice, the U.S. Secretary of State.

http://www.witness.org/index.php?option=com_rightsalert&Itemid=178&task=view&alert_id=49

And we in the US, especially under the current leadership, fall into the trap woz describes above of believing our way is the best way. This is what bites us in the ass every time.
Posted by: karen at January 7, 2007 11:30 AM

You are absolutely CORRECT on that assessment, Karen and woz (IMHO).

The sheeple fall for the politicians' compliments of the US being 'the greatest nation on earth' every time... and totally fail to realize that what seems to work for us (or sometimes not work, like the last two prez "elections") is not what will work elsewhere in the world because our culture is entirely different. We just can NOT impose 'our way' on to other cultures without serious ramifications. 'Our way' is not necessarily the 'best way.'

This nation is only 230 years old, not at least two to five thousand years old. What that idiotic 'greatest nation' crap does is negate the sins of the original invaders of this country, some (not all) of whom wiped out so many Native American cultures (and I say that as a descendant of some of the Separatist passengers on the Mayflower who left England, went to Leiden for some measure of religious freedom, then embarked on the Mayflower - other Mayflower passengers had no such religious reasons for wanting to come to this country and only came for capital gains). Colonialist expansion and imperialistic attitudes of 'our way is best' just doesn't cut it with cultures that are thousands of years older than ours.

US residents who still believe the propaganda and media hyperbole need a serious attitude adjustment - and a LOT of history lessons!

Okay, my one moment of pretense at snobbish intellectualism: Lamestream Media and the minority of people who still believe the crap dished out from our current "leaders" need to get bitten in the ass - in fact they need their arses bitten off...! If they sit down and look at the world from a different angle (minus the fat of their arses), maybe they'll learn something....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070107/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq
Pelosi hints at denying Bush Iraq funds
WASHINGTON - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said newly empowered Democrats will not give President Bush a blank check to wage war in Iraq, hinting they could deny funding if he seeks additional troops.
~~~~~
She said Democrats are not interesting in cutting off money for troops already in Iraq — "We won't do that" — and that her party favors increased the overall size of the Army by 30,000 and Marines by 20,000 "to make sure we are able to protect the American people."

"That's different though, than adding troops to Iraq," Pelosi said.
~~~~~
She said Democrats are not interesting in cutting off money for troops already in Iraq — "We won't do that" — and that her party favors increased the overall size of the Army by 30,000 and Marines by 20,000 "to make sure we are able to protect the American people."

"That's different though, than adding troops to Iraq," Pelosi said.

The speaker stopped short of stating categorically that Democrats would block money for additional troops in Iraq. But she did say, "The burden is on the president to justify any additional resources. ... The president's going to have to engage with Congress in the justification for any additional troops."

{{{More on link. Pelosi can "favor" increasing the size of our military all she wants, but that still is not going to make young people voluntarily enlist when they know they would stand a good chance of being sent to Iraq or Afghanistan.... Pelosi, Reid, Hoyer, and Biden are quoted. Biden sounds like a DINO more and more each day. Congress did not authorize the Iraq war. They authorized the use of military force to go after Osama. Biden has that wrong. Besides which, Bush's Iraq war has been financed with "emergency spending bills," not via the regular Pentagon budget. I don't think most people who get their news via Lamestream Media realize that. The Pentagon budget could still financially support the troops, but cutting off spending via "emergency spending bills" would put teeth in the Democratic paper dragon that is so far only the left-over rubber-stamping Congress Critters who have been so conditioned by Rovian brainwashing to give the spoiled brat dictator anything he wants for the sake of his misbegotten war every time DimWit has hinted it would be unpatriotic to give him money - which has, as near as I can tell, mostly gone into the coffers of Halliburton, et al.}}}

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070107/wl_afp/usvotebiden2008_070107162804

Senator Biden announces White House bid

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Senator Joseph Biden has announced he will seek the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

{{{Ah, and now we know why Biden made such an ignorant statement in the other story.... I do wonder, though, if Biden read the original AUMF before he voted on it....}}}

Nice to get the stuff from Busboys and Poets event, as it happens, Karen!

& to wake up to more discussion, with various parts of the puzzle coming together. I'm afraid Israel could be used by US to get at Iran, so the Syrians would not be the only ones using proxies. Israel did stop Iran's nuclear progress in the '80s but the nuclear preparations weren't as dispersed and buried. (North Korea is the same). So now we have sold Israel bunker busters, which can blast into rock. If they started it, we could try to finish it, but we are in no position to do so, nor are they. It is too late. Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran (& Syria). It seems this has all been planned since before the turn of the century - by the neocons. & it fact, it's not hard to find it all, in written form, because this is what they call "spreading democracy to the middle east." What it is - an oil grab but it's not going to work. We could control all the oil on the planet right now & we'd still run out. This is completely out of control. Legally, if Bush goes into Iran, he is impeachable. The Iraq War Amendment won't cover it. He'll be in contempt of Congress. Also, the people voted to give Congress more control & if he ignores this, he is openly criminal, not just speculatively criminal in the most critical minds. This stunt should be apparent to the mainstream - the ones losing their family members over there.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070107/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/cuba_guantanamo_protest

Sheehan in Cuba to protest Gitmo prison

HAVANA - American "peace mom" Cindy Sheehan called for the closure of the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as she and other activists arrived here Saturday to draw attention to the nearly 400 terror suspects held at the remote site.

Sheehan is among 12 human rights and anti-war activists who will travel across this Caribbean island next week, arriving at the main gate of the Guantanamo base in eastern Cuba on Thursday — five years after the first prisoners were flown in.

"Anyone who knows me, knows that I am not afraid of anything," Sheehan said when asked about the possibility of U.S. sanctions for traveling to communist-run Cuba, which remains under an American trade embargo.

"What is more important is the inhumanity that my government is perpetrating at Guantanamo," she told reporters.
~~~~~
Sheehan arrived in Havana early Saturday evening with trip organizer Medea Benjamin of the California nonprofit groups Global Exchange and CODEPINK: Women for Peace.

{More on link.. I wonder if Sheehan and Benjamin, et al., will be thrown into prison as enemy combatants without due process after this foray into Cuba. Those protesters have more balls than all the Congress Critters put together who have failed to stop the fast-encroaching undeclared dictatorship rule that people are going to be forced to accept if they ever find out the complete ramifications of MCA '06 (which I still maintain needs to be repealed in its entirety, as well as the Patriot Acts and amendments and other really bad legislation, so we can get back habeas corpus, among the other list of things that take away our rights and privileges and make Georgie the official dictator who is above the law....}

Katrina déjà vu in Iraq: AWOL Leadership
by Kayakbiker
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/7/01138/18662

I just read a NY Times article by Burns titled "Before Hanging, a Push for Revenge and a Push Back." In this article I learned that the US Government’s stated position was to delay the execution of Saddam. Unfortunately, the heavyweights on the US side during this crisis were on vacation.

The American push back was complicated by the absences of Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and the top American military commander, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., who were both out of Iraq on leave. The American message throughout was that rushing Mr. Hussein to the gallows could rebound disastrously, as it did.

(the rest at the link)

Posted by: DiAnne at January 6, 2007 11:53 PM

It's too bad Wes Clark wasn't writing in a US newspaper or being interviewed on any Lamestream Media political pundit spinmeister yak show....

I still think Wes Clark would be a viable presidential candidate. As a former military person he has credibility (but he advocates diplomacy to stop Georgie's war, and we all know that there will still be US troops in Iraq "as long as Georgie is president" - which means the next president is going to have to clean up his mess), Clark's intelligent, speaks with a great deal of common sense... and it doesn't hurt that he's a major piece of eye candy (for those who vote on looks, not issues).

Posted by: Truth Shall Prevail at January 7, 2007 12:27 AM

Yup, now it's "understandable." No one in the Mideast has ever wanted the US invading their country and acting like empire builders, or taking control of their oil (anyway, while the US had UN permission for the first Gulf War, the second invasion ordered by DimWit was not sanctioned by the UN, and it's illegal - and a war crime - under the Geneva Conventions). Period.

I don't remember reading your story before. Maybe you told it on the old Kerry blog, but I don't remember reading it. Thanks for sharing!

Posted by: Marjorie G at January 7, 2007 11:28 AM

And now we know the "real reason" behind DimWit's demand for more troops in the Mideast and the fact that some of our ships have been sent to the Persian Gulf... as backup for any attack on Iran.... For many months now I've been following news articles about a potential Iran invasion, and it gives me a sick feeling in my stomach every time I read about it, because I firmly believe that it will lead to a total world war, and other countries will attack us on our own soil because the US is the "threat" to other nations. A solution to Georgie's illegal and unconstitutional war that does NOT involve escalation or an increase in troop numbers needs to be found - SOON. It's Congress that has war powers (NOT the executive branch!) and the power of the purse... and if they fail to exercise their Constitutional mandate, then they need to seek employment elsewhere and not be our elected repressentatives.

DimWit is insanely out of control, and if our Congress Critters haven't figured that out yet, they need to be told... repeatedly, until they finally 'get it!' WE THE PEOPLE are sick of the dictator and his evil minions, and we are sick of this illegal, unconstitutional, unethical, immoral, dishonorable war based on lies...!

I sent these two articles (copied and pasted in their entirety) to my Rep's local office person and hope he'll pass them on with the note I sent indicating that if they start impeachment proceedings they may save a few lives in the process, and wrote that I believe "Pelosi 'taking impeachment off the table' was dead wrong" (my Rep originally signed on to Conyers' impeachment proposal, but I don't know if he's changed his stance on impeachment or not):

Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney Makes the Case for Impeachment
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010607D.shtml

"Surge" Without Congressional Approval Is Impeachable Offense
http://tinyurl.com/yk49tl

The film was devastating and we must get it out there--especially to anyone who says that those held at GITMO or Bagram or Kandahar are inherently guilty.

Consider getting a copy and showing it to friends, neighbors and naysayers.

Now we are in a panel discussion with several, including Anant Raut, an attorney who represents five GITMO detainees from Saudi Arabia:

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006-09/2006-09-29-voa56.cfm?CFID=94417299&CFTOKEN=40946230

Art Laffin, a Catholic Worker and self-proclaimed "felon for peace" about his trip to Guantanamo earlier in order to bear witness. They were not allowed in, were stopped at the airport on their return by Homeland Security. A month later 11 of them were fined by the Treasury Dept. with a fine for violating travel restrictions. They resisted and have not heard anything since then.

This Thursday (Jan. 11) is the five year anniversary of the arrival of the first detainees to Guantanamo and activities are planned for DC. Is anything happening where you are?

It is an international day to call for the closing of Guantanamo.

Thursday's event sounds quite promising--over 100 are prepared to be arrested if the courts do not allow the GITMO cases to be heard.

Sam Husseini talking about Cindy et al in GITMO. Malachy says they are doing a vigil and they will also be showing the film we just saw (Outlawed) to ordinary Cubans, to show them what is happening on their land. They also have a copy of "The Road to Guantanamo" and are being joined in Cuba by Ruhal, one of the Tipton Three.

Upon their return, they will be lobbying Congress.

Amnesty International engaged in working with Congress to draft legislation that addresses rendition and restores habeus corpus.

"For many months now I've been following news articles about a potential Iran invasion, and it gives me a sick feeling in my stomach every time I read about it, because I firmly believe that it will lead to a total world war, and other countries will attack us on our own soil because the US is the "threat" to other nations."
Posted by: NonnyO at January 7, 2007 02:13 PM

Unfortunately, I agree NonnyO. Nothing is making us as unsafe as the potential attacks on Iran. They have had time to place retaliatory forces inside the US because we have been focusing on the wrong issues and have been kept in fear of the wrong people. So many Iranians were forced to flee the country throughout the 70s, 80s, 90s and recently that we have few friends inside. And we have not tried diplomacy at any rate. So now we are on the edge of the next disaster and it is likely to be both worse than 9-11 and more justified.

I just had coffee with an Iranian and her greatest fear is that US will go to war with Iran. She has few ties there now but was born there, schooled in the UK, worked there as an Exec Secy in her 20s, married an American who was born here but working there, and has lived here 30 years or so. She and I had babes in arms at the same time, only 5 weeks apart in age. She had never been inside a mosque til after 9/11, and has never worn a veil, was taught by her father "religion is the root of all evil" - never believed it though isn't religious - but is wondering now if more evil than good has been done over time in the name of religion. She had never read the Koran. Her daughter, a political science major, read it in Boston at University. She has dinner with friends who may have children who are becoming more radicalized and religious, in search of their roots. I know people born here too who also have had more traditional and religious children, perhaps seeking balance or just seeking.

On the west coast, many Iranians fled the Shah and then Khomeini. We had our complicity in that, as we helped (CIA) overthrow Mosadeq, around the time I was born (early 50s). Iran was already a democracy but returned to oppression under a Shah then, anarchy, then a theocracy. So most of the immigrants here from Iran are not new immigrants at all and were and are very modern and Westernized. When I was teaching at UW, during the time of the Iran hostage crisis, our iranian students were singled out and assets frozen, interviews made, deportations done - many in haste and unfairly, even putting students in danger back in Iran.

In this area, by contrast, Iraqis are new immigrants of less than five years and in the 2nd largest concentration after the Great Lakes Area. They do not tend to be the well-educated and modern people that the Iranians have been, nor are they usually ethnically or linguistically related to them or even same religion. Many are almost tribal and so more analogous to the Lao Hmong people who had to come here after the Vietnam war. The more educated Chinese Vietnamese assimilated much faster, having more skills and education.

My Iranian friend is a Farsi interpreter and as such works with many Afghan refugees, since many are originally from Iran and more tribal and less educated. Like some of the new Iraqi refugees, they have news on 24/7 by satellite or cable and are very traumatized by both adjustment here and worries about friends over there.

What alot of people don't recognize is that Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran were all much more modern than they are now - until embroiled in the wars of the latter part of the last decade. Afghanistan was destroyed by the war with the Soviet Union and had a great deal to do with the collapse of the latter, with so much spent on military down a black hole (as we are doing now, and the Soviet generals warned us when we went in). The British made the same mistake in Iraq (British Petroleum) in the 1800s that we are making now (and they are making again). Iraq and Iran's war set both of them back so much, with millions killed and lasting almost a decade. They essentially went back to the Stone Age when they could have been competing with Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE etc. Such a shame.

It's hard to imagine how we could do anything in Iran except use up US and Israel's stockpiles of high tech weapons in a huge blitz. Where are we going to get the forces for ground warfare, even pulling in partially trained people early, keeping those who were due to go home there longer, accepting people with seizures and learning disabilities and criminal records, accepting people up to 40 some years of age, encouraging people to switch from one service to another (bonuses), allowing immigrants and noncitizens to join, using mercenaries - we still can't compete with the demographics of Iran and Iraq, with their birthrates. We are an aging country, as can be said for Europe and Japan. We can only fight wars with machines, with those of us who should be saving for retirement and sending our kids to school paying for them.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/07/israel.iran.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Israel denies plan to nuke Iran, using nukes only for peaceful purposes.

If this is just sabre rattling, certainly scares me.

Don't know which story you were referring to, Nonny, but old Kerry blog would have been Israel stuff, certainly. As the New York office delegate taking those crazy calls, even at home, from the deluded 'Bush is better for Israel' converts, and other functions.

Guess he's really helped, huh.

Posted by: karen at January 7, 2007 02:31 PM

I desperately want to be wrong about my fears...! Desperately!

Right now, this second, unless our Congress Critters assert the power given them by the Founding Fathers and STOP Bu$hCo in their tracks, I don't forsee anything else happening, and the weapons used by either side (if nuclear, as it seems it may be), could destroy us entirely, or, at the very least, affect generations of every living being on this planet (human, animal, plant), if we survive at all.

The thing that's impressing me in The Power of Nightmares (I finally got through to the web site to view/listen to Part 3, but I've also re-watched Part 2) is how very few in numbers the radical Islamists and radical reich-wingnuttia Christian groups are (and they are both the same in their objectives, setting moral agendas that they want people to rally around for their corners of the world, so to speak). They get the majority of Lamestream Media attention by calling it a 'war on terror,' but in sheer numbers compared to the world population, a very, very tiny minority - fringe groups, essentially. But the neoCons are milking the "threats" for all they are worth and using religion to achieve their objectives - they are promoting mass hysteria and mass paranoia about fringe elements who should be investigated and arrested by law enforcement agencies, and tried in courts of law for their crimes.

The lack of analytical common sense - in politicians, in Lamestream Media, in sheeple who believe their nonsense - is astonishing to the point of jaw-dropping incredulity.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070107/ap_on_re_us/port_arrests

3 detained trying to enter Port of Miami

MIAMI - Three men were caught trying to slip past a checkpoint in a cargo truck Sunday at the Port of Miami, said authorities, who increased security at the busy trade hub.

{{{More on link. Ain't it just purely amazin' how these "scares" and "threats" miraculously pop up conveniently in time to scare our Congress Critters into giving Bu$hCo more money for their illegal war, money off the books for the rest of the national debt... but a few days or weeks later, barely mentioned in passing in Lamestream Media (if at all), it's suddenly discovered it was a false alarm...?!? Things that make one go hmmmm.........}}}

Future of Iraq: The Spoils of War
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010707B.shtml
Iraq's massive oil reserves, the third-largest in the world, are about to be thrown open for large-scale exploitation by Western oil companies under a controversial law which is expected to come before the Iraqi parliament within days.

{{{Two articles on this one link. The profits are coming home... to US oil companies....}}}

Start Preparing Now for the Coming "Cataclysmic Fight to the Death"
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010707C.shtml
While the November elections provided the Democratic Party a public mandate to end the war in Iraq, President Bush has signaled his intent to use his institutional powers as Commander in Chief to maintain and even escalate the US commitment, public or Congressional opinion notwithstanding. The Democratic leadership has removed two obvious ways to stop him - impeachment and a cutoff of war funds - from the table.

{{{Interesting. But... it still takes too much talking time to accomplish what these authors are proposing. Hundreds or thousands of people will die while people flap their gums and use delaying tactics.... And, why do some authors insist on calling the US a democracy (last paragraph)? We've never been a democracy. Our government was set up as a republic. True, after MCA '06 we're technically a dictatorship, but the Founding Fathers set up a republic, not a democracy.}}}

Bush Moves to Completely Revamp US Nuclear Arsenal
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010707G.shtml
The Bush administration is expected to announce next week a major step forward in the building of the country's first new nuclear warhead in nearly two decades. It will propose combining elements of competing designs from two weapons laboratories in an approach that some experts argue is untested and risky. The new weapon would not add to but replace the nation's existing arsenal of aging warheads, with a new generation meant to be sturdier, more reliable, safer from accidental detonation and more secure from theft by terrorists.

Excerpt:
The effort, if approved by President Bush and financed by Congress, would require a huge refurbishment of the nation's complex for nuclear design and manufacturing, with the overall bill estimated at more than $100 billion.

{{{Anyone besides me see this as a serious mistake? What happened to all those nuclear nonproliferation treaties we had...? Where would the "more than $100 billion" come from to finance such insanity?

Frank Rich | The Timely Death of Gerald Ford
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010707E.shtml
"The very strange and very long Gerald Ford funeral marathon was about many things, but Gerald Ford wasn't always paramount among them," says Frank Rich. "Forty percent of today's American population was not alive during the Ford presidency. Despite the lachrymose logorrhea of television anchors and the somber musical fanfares, the country was less likely to be found in deep mourning than in deep football. It's a safe bet that the Ford funeral attracted far fewer viewers than the most consequential death video of the New Year's weekend, the lynching of Saddam Hussein. But those two deaths were inextricably related."
Excerpt:
As the White House tries to sell this flimflam, picture fresh American troops being tossed into Baghdad's caldron to work alongside the Maliki-Sadr Shiite lynch mob that presided over the Saddam hanging. Contemplate as well Gerald Ford's most famous words, spoken as he assumed the presidency after the Nixon resignation: "Our Constitution works; our great republic is a government of laws and not of men. Here the people rule."

This time the people do not rule. Two months after Americans spoke decisively on Election Day, the president is determined to overrule them. Our long national nightmare in Iraq, far from being over, is about to get a second wind.

The Power of Nightmares

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3004915

Incredible documentary previously not available in the US - never shown on US media. (British) People have raved about this to me and I'm going to watch it this weekend. Has to do with propaganda we are fed.

NonnyO
I think Bush was put into power for the sake of the weapons and oil profiteers, in which his original 2000 cabinet was all invested. So many in even his first staff were signers-on at PNAC, with ties to rightwing think tanks, weapons mfg & oil cos. Then come the pharmaceutical companies. So it's really not surprising to see the push to extend and expand the wars & to develop & sell a new class of weapons. These guys are addicted to power & if someone cuts off their fix, they go into withdrawal.

Received something on-topic:

Indeed there is Apartheid in Israel

A new order issued by the GOC Central command bans the conveyance of Palestinians in Israeli vehicles. Such a blatant violation of the right to travel joins the long list of humans rights violations carried out by Israel in the [Occupied] Territories.

By Shulamit Aloni

01/05/06 "Ynet " --- - Jewish self-righteousness is taken for granted among ourselves to such an extent that we fail to see what’s right in front of our eyes. It’s simply inconceivable that the ultimate victims, the Jews, can carry out evil deeds. Nevertheless, the state of Israel practises its own, quite violent, form of Apartheid with the native Palestinian population.

The US Jewish Establishment’s onslaught on former President Jimmy Carter is based on him daring to tell the truth which is known to all: through its army, the government of Israel practises a brutal form of Apartheid in the territory it occupies. Its army has turned every Palestinian village and town into a fenced-in, or blocked-in, detention camp. All this is done in order to keep an eye on the population’s movements and to make its life difficult. Israel even imposes a total curfew whenever the settlers, who have illegally usurped the Palestinians’ land, celebrate their holidays or conduct their parades.

If that were not enough, the generals commanding the region frequently issue further orders, regulations, instructions and rules (let us not forget: they are the lords of the land). By now they have requisitioned further lands for the purpose of constructing “Jewish only” roads. Wonderful roads, wide roads, well-paved roads, brightly lit at night – all that on stolen land. When a Palestinian drives on such a road, his vehicle is confiscated and he is sent on his way.

On one occasion I witnessed such an encounter between a driver and a soldier who was taking down the details before confiscating the vehicle and sending its owner away. “Why?” I asked the soldier. “It’s an order – this is a Jews-only road”, he replied. I inquired as to where was the sign indicating this fact and instructing [other] drivers not to use it. His answer was nothing short of amazing. “It is his responsibility to know it, and besides, what do you want us to do, put up a sign here and let some antisemitic reporter or journalist take a photo so he that can show the world that Apartheid exists here?”

Indeed Apartheid does exist here. And our army is not “the most moral army in the world” as we are told by its commanders. Sufficient to mention that every town and every village has turned into a detention centre and that every entry and every exit has been closed, cutting it off from arterial traffic. If it were not enough that Palestinians are not allowed to travel on the roads paved ‘for Jews only’, on their land, the current GOC found it necessary to land an additional blow on the natives in their own land with an “ingenious proposal”.

Humanitarian activists cannot transport Palestinians either

Major-General Naveh, renowned for his superior patriotism, has issued a new order. Coming into affect on 19 January, it prohibits the conveyance of Palestinians without a permit. The order determines that Israelis are not allowed to transport Palestinians in an Israeli vehicle (one registered in Israel regardless of what kind of numberplate it carries) unless they have received explicit permission to do so. The permit relates to both the driver and the Palestinian passenger. Of course none of this applies to those whose labour serves the settlers. They and their employers will naturally receive the required permits so they can continue to serve the lords of the land, the settlers.

Did man of peace President Carter truly err in concluding that Israel is creating Apartheid? Did he exaggerate? Don’t the US Jewish community leaders recognise the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination of 7 March 1966, to which Israel is a signatory? Are the US Jews who launched the loud and abusive campaign against Carter for supposedly maligning Israel’s character and its democratic and humanist nature unfamiliar with the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 30 November 1973? Apartheid is defined therein as an international crime that among other things includes using different legal instruments to rule over different racial groups, thus depriving people of their human rights. Isn’t freedom of travel one of these rights?

In the past, the US Jewish community leaders were quite familiar with the meaning of those conventions. For some reason, however, they are convinced that Israel is allowed to contravene them. It’s OK to kill civilians, women and children, old people and parents with their children, deliberately or otherwise without accepting any responsibility. It’s permissible to rob people of their lands, destroy their crops, and cage them up like animals in the zoo. From now on, Israelis and International humanitarian organisations’ volunteers are prohibited from assisting a woman in labour by taking her to the hospital. [Israeli human rights group] Yesh Din volunteers cannot take a robbed and beaten-up Palestinian to the police station to lodge a complaint. (Police stations are located at the heart of the settlements.) Is there anyone who believes that this is not Apartheid?

Jimmy Carter does not need me to defend his reputation that has been sullied by Israelophile community officials. The trouble is that their love of Israel distorts their judgment and blinds them from seeing what’s in front of them. Israel is an occupying power that for 40 years has been oppressing an indigenous people, which is entitled to a sovereign and independent existence while living in peace with us. We should remember that we too used very violent terror against foreign rule because we wanted our own state. And the list of victims of terror is quite long and extensive.

We do limit ourselves to denying the [Palestinian] people human rights. We not only rob of them of their freedom, land and water. We apply collective punishment to millions of people and even, in revenge-driven frenzy, destroy the electricity supply for one and half million civilians. Let them “sit in the darkness” and “starve”.

Employees cannot be paid their wages because Israel is holding 500 million shekels that belong to the Palestinians. And after all that we remain “pure as the driven snow”. There are no moral blemishes on our actions. There is no racial separation. There is no Apartheid. It’s an invention of the enemies of Israel. Hooray for our brothers and sisters in the US! Your devotion is very much appreciated. You have truly removed a nasty stain from us. Now there can be an extra spring in our step as we confidently abuse the Palestinian population, using the “most moral army in the world”.

Shulamit Aloni, the Israeli Prize laureate who once served as Minister of Education under Yitzhak Rabin, is from Yediot Acharonot, Israel’s largest circulating newspaper, which appeared in the Hebrew Ynet but not in the English-language Ynetnews.

Tranlated by Sol Salbe, an Australian editor, whose comments are in square brackets.

Hebrew original: http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3346283,00.html Yediot Acharonot, Israel’s largest circulating newspaper.

More:

They have made a killing

The US has spent a million dollars for every dead Iraqi - is that what they mean by value for money?

Terry Jones
Saturday January 6, 2007
The Guardian

Early this year the Bush administration is to ask Congress to approve an additional $100bn for the onerous task of making life intolerable for the Iraqis. This will bring the total spent on the White House's current obsession with war to almost $500bn - enough to have given every US citizen $1,600 each. I wonder which the voters would have gone for if given the choice: shall we (a) give every American $1,600 or (b) spend the money on bombing a country in the Middle East that doesn't use lavatory paper?

Of course, there's another thing that George Bush could have done with the money: he could have given every Iraqi $18,700. I imagine that would have reduced the threat of international terrorism somewhat. Call me old-fashioned, but I can't help thinking that giving someone $18,700 brings them round to your side more quickly than bombing the hell out of them. They could certainly buy a lot of lavatory paper with it.

In 2002 the house budget committee and the congressional budget office both guesstimated the cost of invading Iraq at approximately $50bn; $500bn seems a bit wide of the mark. What's more, with over half a million dead, it means that the world's greatest military superpower has spent a million dollars for every Iraqi killed. That can't be value for money!

So how on earth could such a vast overspend occur? After all, the US is the flagship of monetary common sense. Well, for starters, in 2003 the White House refused to allow competitive bidding for contracts in Iraq, which is odd for the champions of free enterprise. Then the White House ensured there would be no overseeing of what was spent. In the original Iraq spending bill, which earmarked the first $87bn to go down the drain, there was a provision for the general accounting office to keep a check on things, but that provision was stripped from the bill - even though the Senate had originally voted for it 97 to 0.

But what I want to know is: how do they actually spend all that money? Well the answer is: they don't. According to the website Halliburtonwatch, the Halliburton subsidiary KBR bills the US taxpayer for $50-$80 per day for labourers working for it in Iraq, but pays them only $5-$16 per day. It's the same with Halliburton. In December 2003 the US army discovered that the company had overcharged by $61m for fuel transportation and $67m for food services in Iraq.

Then there is good old-fashioned incompetence. Take the al-Fatah pipeline: KBR went through $75.7m of taxpayers' money, supposedly trying to replace a pipeline across the river Tigris that US forces had blown up. They never finished the job, but still got paid.

With all this double-dealing and incompetence, you'd expect that those responsible would have been penalised by now. But that's where the mystery deepens. Companies such as Halliburton and its subsidiaries have never had it so good. In January 2006 the Bush administration intervened in a dispute between the Pentagon and Halliburton, and agreed to pay the company $199m in disputed charges. On January 26 2006 Halliburton announced that its 2005 profits were the "best in our 86-year history". And to date KBR has received around $16bn from its contracts in Iraq.

Vice-President Dick Cheney, formerly CEO of Halliburton, has not had a bad war either. His tax returns for 2005 show that he earned $194,862 from his Halliburton stock options alone. Mind you, it's small change compared to his $36m payoff when he left the firm. Was that for his past role, or was Halliburton anticipating further services from the future vice-president of the US? Perhaps it's just as well that in 2003 the White House removed from the Iraq spending bill any provision to penalise war profiteers who defrauded US taxpayers.

· Terry Jones is a film director, actor and Python http://www.terry-jones.net

and more:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-524-2535177-524,00.html
The Sunday Times January 07, 2007

Focus: Mission Iran
Israel will not tolerate Iran going nuclear and military sources say it will use tactical strikes unless Iran abandons its programme. Is Israel bluffing or might it really push the button? Uzi Mahnaimi in New York and Sarah Baxter in Washington report

(the original link reported in TruthOut)

Posted by: DiAnne at January 7, 2007 06:29 PM

Let me know what you think after you watch the entire three hours.

To me, the stark contrast between the paranoid rhetoric spewed by the neoCons vs. reality is bone-chilling.

Although Orwell's 1984 is not mentioned in Nightmares, I can compare/contrast the book with Nightmares, and it gets even more surreal.

People on this blog (and other political blogs) have seen through the lies, deconstructed the lies, for years. But sheeple who want their info in sound bytes remain clueless as to the extent of the brainwashing going on via Lamestream Media.

And now, dear peeps, for those who are fearing a Bu$h Dynasty, someone to watch for future reference:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/05/AR2007010502156.html
The Jeb Bush Era Ends in Florida
Outgoing Governor Did Things His Way

TALLAHASSEE -- On a bright January day in 1998 marked by bone-numbing 33-degree cold, Jeb Bush took office as Florida's 43rd governor with a pledge to safeguard the interests of the people, not the bureaucrats.

In the ensuing eight years, Bush sent shivers through Florida's status quo as he gathered more power than any previous governor and reshaped state government to fit his vision.

Nicknamed "King Jeb," the Republican transformed what he saw as a tangle of red tape and squanderer of public money into a smaller, business-friendly administration needing fewer tax dollars to run.

Bush, who passed the mantle to Charlie Crist (R) last Tuesday, leaves a legacy of a leader adamant about doing things his way, who fearlessly championed such controversial causes as school vouchers, faith-based prisons and prolonging the life of Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged woman who became the centerpiece of a national right-to-die battle.
~~~~~
He championed tax cuts that chiefly benefited business and the wealthy, trimmed the state's payroll, stripped job protection from thousands of mid-level civil servants, gained more power over the judiciary, exploited his Washington connections to prevent the closing of military bases and launched the nation's first statewide private-school voucher program.

{{{Click on link for more stomach-thudding idiocy. The apple doesn't fall far from the daddy/brother tree, even if "King Jebbie" has been a bit more quiet about things - so far. Makes me wonder what appointment he will be given in King Georgie's administration... say, for instance, if an opening comes up if the VP resigns...??? If that happens, McCain can kiss his prez aspirations goodbye....}}}

http://news.yahoo.com/comics/uclickcomics/20070107/cx_nq_uc/nq20070107
Non Sequitur

http://news.yahoo.com/comics/uclickcomics/20070107/cx_crwiz_uc/crwiz20070107
Wizard of Id

For all you do, Marjorie G, this link's for you:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/05/opinion/main2333639.shtml

a ballot boxing match indeed,
Otter

Leahy Introduces Bills To Combat War Profiteering, Public Corruption:
Incoming Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), introduced a package of bills Thursday targeting corrupt officials and private companies seeking to defraud American taxpayers and troops.
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200701/010407b.html

Don’t Forget the Greatest Crime:
Prior to the elections, Republicans attempted to take trump out of the Democrat’s hands by warning the public of Democratic designs to launch bitter partisan investigations of the Bush administration, possibly including impeachment hearings. Horrors! Democrats duly took notice
http://tinyurl.com/yx2638
Excerpt:

Investigations must widen to include the vice president and other high officers and collaborators, to numerous to mention. The impeachment resolution on the books, though symbolic, is a way of saying to our progeny that we did know. It is a symbol of what could happen if we truly were a “nation of laws”, and a call to those who could make it so.

Return Our Rapist or Else ...:
Bush pledged to give the Philippines every assistance in his flailing, stumblebum "war on terror"--except when its government doesn't do exactly what Washington demands. When Manila dared behave contrary to US orders there had to be revenge.
http://tinyurl.com/y8ogbo

Excerpt:

The Bush legacy is clear. When he collapses into well-deserved obscurity in two years' time he will leave a world that he has caused to be bitterly anti-American. The Bush policy of "We do what we like" has been a disaster far beyond America's shores. No matter the nature of the next administration, the United States will reap the rotten, stinking harvest of Bushism for years to come.

Bayer Dumps AIDS Infected Drugs On European and Asian Markets:
Bayer Corporation knowingly dumped medicine that was contaminated with the AIDS virus on the European and Asian market after it killed people in America.
http://tinyurl.com/y962q8

Keith Olbermann: Is Bush Reading Your Mail?
5 minute video:
http://tinyurl.com/sb8ne

Otter,
Thanks for posting this article. I would have never seen it otherwise and I am following this controversy closely. Christine Jennings went to my high school in southern Ohio and her younger sister was a good friend of mine. I knew her as a hard working high school bank teller. Eventually she opened her own bank in Sarasota. She will probably not prevail in this race, but she'll always be a winner to me.If the Democrats manage to eliminate voting without a paper trail, I imagine she will be viewed as a winner by many people.

More San Francisco values for y'all:

---------------

1,000 PEOPLE SPELL OUT "IMPEACH!" IN PELOSI'S DISTRICT

January 6, 2007 -- Over 1000 people gathered in Nancy Pelosi's district, on Ocean Beach in San Francisco, to spell out the message "IMPEACH!" "America is a great country," said event organizer Brad Newsham, a local cab driver and author. "But President Bush has betrayed our faith. He mislead us into a disastrous war, and is trampling on our Constitution. He has to go. Now. I hope Nancy Pelosi is listening today."

[snip]

Full info with photos is here: http://beachimpeach.com/

---------------

tell shrub to go pound sand,
Otter

He is out of control. This was actually on Fox News, as serious.
I didn't watch it, but I have it from a reliable source.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,242303,00.html

To Win in Baghdad, Strike at Tehran

This week, President Bush is expected to give a major speech announcing a new strategy in Iraq. This is an excellent opportunity for the administration to announce a big strategic change that could dramatically improve America's prospects in Iraq. Unfortunately, however, no one has been discussing the one option that would actually have this effect.

But there is another, far more effective option: go wide.

Going wide means recognizing that Iraq is just one front in a regional war against an Islamist Axis centered in Iran -- and we cannot win that war without confronting the enemy directly, outside of Iraq.

Going wide means recognizing that the conflict in Iraq is fueled and magnified by the intervention of Iran and Syria. One of the reasons the Iraq Study Group report flopped was that its key recommendation -- its one unique idea -- was for America to negotiate with Iran and Syria in order to convince these countries to aid in the "stabilization" of Iraq. This proposal wasn't so much argued to death as it was laughed to death, because it is clear that Iran and Syria have done everything they can to de-stabilize Iraq, supporting both sides of the sectarian conflict there.

It is obvious that both regimes have a profound interest in an American failure and retreat in Iraq. After all, if America can successfully use force to replace a hostile dictatorship with a free society, then the Iranian and Syrian regimes are doomed. So as a matter of elementary self-preservation, they have done everything they can to plunge Iraq into chaos, supporting guerrillas and militias on all sides of the sectarian conflict.

H E L P M A Y D A Y F L A G I N D I S T R E S S K I D N A P

Wow, that CBS article was over the top in its namecalling.

Posted by: Otter at January 7, 2007 09:47 PM

In a day of bad news, what a LOVELY story! Thank you! You brightened my day!

I sent a link to that story to WCCO (Minneapolis-St. Paul) with this brief email:

Thought you might be interested in these photos online:
http://beachimpeach.com/
http://beachimpeach.com/photos.shtml
1000 people spelled out IMPEACH on the beach in Pelosi's home district.

I'd like to see a mention of that on your evening news.

Thank you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It would have been pointless to send it to KSTP, the station is owned by a neoCon who paid money to an organization out of state that swiftboated some of the in-state candidates.

May I suggest that anyone who wants to do any emails tonight send a link to their in-state TV stations asking to see something about the story?

I've a feeling that if the demand is high enough that maybe a few of the news producers who aren't rabidly neoCon will air at least five seconds of stories where people are demanding impeachment.

With the danger of another war looming, perhaps (only perhaps) some of the more sympathetic news producers might let news of anti-war and pro-impeachment news slip through, even if it is only a mention in passing for five or ten seconds. It would be enough to let people who are like-minded know that they are not alone, and maybe others will speak out, write or call their Congress Critters....

Posted by: DiAnne at January 7, 2007 10:13 PM

Faux Snooze... out of their minds!!!!!!!

At this rate, those of us who despise what is happening in our nation will need intervention from a civilized country to restore our republic. At this immediate moment in time, it certainly doesn't look like our new 110th Congress Critters are going to do one danged thing to stop the dictator. I certainly hope Pelosi has been notified and shown pictures of the 1000 people who spelled out IMPEACH on the beach!!! (I wish I could hug every one of those people!) Pelosi was SO wrong to say she'd take impeachment off the table!

M A Y D A Y S O S M A Y D A Y S O S M A Y D A Y

Pelosi suggested that the Dems should take impeachment off the table for the time being, not for the duration. She's going to keep pushing the investigations forward until the neocons and bushi'ites are hoisted by their own petard.

and bush's the sum of a beach,
Otter

more tit for tat between Israel & Iran - everyone denies every rumor of future attacks

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1167467680167&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

note also the story on the right side entitled "US and UK to attack Iran/Iraq?"

So this may be a taste of what 'the man in the street" is reading in the middle east .. not so different from the uneasy queasiness in our own stomachs

imbeachment isn't off the table

Bush seeking a place in history

President Bush is certain to court new controversy this week, with the announcement of a "new way forward in Iraq.'' If it includes a temporary buildup of American forces in Iraq, as many expect, criticism from Congress is certain to flow fast and furiously -- with leaders already warning him against making any "surge''" in troops.

But Bush, insistent on "victory'' in Iraq, is asking Americans to take a longer view of the struggle -- looking forward to a time generations from now when historians will ask if today's leaders confronted the ideological conflict of our time, the struggle with terrorism. And, in looking to the past for parallels with the struggle he faces today, Bush has found Harry Truman, the first American leader of the Cold War. Yet a more apt historical comparison, according to some critics of the president, is Lyndon Johnson, who was overwhelmed by opposition to the war in Vietnam.

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_theswamp/2007/01/bush_seeking_a_.html

3 airmen killed by car bomb in Bagdad

Bush said Saddam's hanging should have been more "dignified" - now Blair says it was done "completely wrong"

Does it make them, like .. uncomfortable?!

Australians are reading:

"The presence of additional coalition forces would allow the Iraqi government to do what it cannot accomplish today on its own - impose its rule throughout the country,'' Senator McCain wrote in an opinion piece published today in The Washington Post. A surge of troops "must be substantial and it must be sustained".

Grrrrrrrrrrrr

BBC Bulgaria

'Escalation opposed'
Ms Pelosi described the conflict in Iraq as a war without end which the American people had rejected. She told the talk show Face the Nation that up until now the Republicans had given Mr Bush a blank cheque, with no oversight, standards or conditions.

.....So Congress can cut off funds to pay for new troops to Iraq? Do a significant number of Republicans have to vote that way too? If they were to cut off funds for those already there, we'd hear the criticism about the Democrats making it so they didn't have body armor etc. Serious double bind.

Posted by: Otter at January 7, 2007 10:52 PM

But as I wrote my Rep's local secretary (or whatever his title is):

Please urge Rep. Oberstar to use his seniority and influence to move impeachment proceedings along swiftly. All talk and no action will only get more people killed in Iraq (and maybe elsewhere). Bush is out of control and he needs to be stopped.
~~~~~~~

All the Reps need to do is go back to McKinney's impeachment documents that were already introduced, blend them with what Conyers already has and with what others have already discovered... there are MORE than ample grounds for impeachment!!! What are they waiting for? Another illegal war to start, this time in Iran - which would then escalate to a world war? Congress is the only body authorized to declare war; that is NOT in the job description for presidents in our Constitution!

Investigations have already been done to make the articles of impeachment. All this additional "talk" gets more of our military and Iraqi (and Afghani) civilians killed daily. Congress Critters need to start impeachment proceedings SOON...!

Posted by: DiAnne at January 7, 2007 11:33 PM

Since Bush's war has been paid for almost exclusively with 'emergency spending bills,' that means the salaries and equipment and vehicles (etc.) for the troops are covered under the Pentagon budget. As near as I can tell, the 'emergency spending legislation' monies all seem to go for these 'extra services' - like mercenaries and (incompleted) building projects done under US supervision- and all or most of that money from 'emergency spending bills' ends up in the coffers of Halliburton, Carlyle, Blackwater, et al.

IF our Congress Critters get their heads out of their arses (and off of Bu$h's butt) long enough, they can explain the difference between supporting the troops via the Pentagon budget vs. the mercenary war expenses with 'emergency spending bills.'

The bill DimWit is sending to Congress soon for additional monies is just such an 'emergency spending bill' (for 'laborers' in Iraq and other 'training' services, but you know they will get pennies on the dollar and most money will end up in Halliburton or other corporate coffers).

Some savvy Democrat needs to 'splain the difference to the sheeple on one of those Sunday morning yakkity-yak shows so the sheeple 'get' the fact that denying money to Halliburton does not equate to not supporting the troops with money via the Pentagon budget (which is what DimWit would scream about if Congress Critters deny him more money that puts us more in debt). Besides which, I don't think anyone has ever told We The People where the loans to pay for those 'emergnecy spending bills' is coming from....

Dems are going to have to make the first move so they can "frame the debate" and put the WH on the defensive and in the position of explaining - for a change!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070108/ap_on_re_us/port_security_incident
Miscommunication cited in port alert
MIAMI - Three legal immigrants in a cargo truck were detained at the Port of Miami on Sunday after a routine inspection raised concerns, but police say the incident may have stemmed in part from a language barrier.

{{{Well, Duh! Meanwhile, back at Lamestream Media, the damage has already been done because I noted the evening news teaser included info about this story.}}}

How about we go back to the Constitution, where only Congress (not the President) has the power to declare war; and how about we actually declare a war; or perhaps, just repeal the Iraq War Resolution, since, after all, it was argued and passed based on false premises...otherwise known as wishful thinking, or perhaps bald-faced lies.

Posted by: V at January 8, 2007 12:08 AM

Works for me.

Anyway, I thought a "resolution" was not legally binding like a piece of legislation is legally binding....

But, of course, DimWit would have seized on a "resolution" as though it were a legal mandate, since he likes his dictatorial powers (and executive orders and signing statements and recess appointments, et cetera, ad infinitum, ad nauseaum)...

Posted by: NonnyO at January 8, 2007 12:01 AM

The "ongoing cost" of running the military comes in the Defense budget...the separate cost of pursuing OIF/OEF comes in separate appropriations bills. Which sort of makes sense, since at least for a shorter conflict, it is hard to work all that surge spending into your normal budget, which is drafted and approved well ahead of when you might need to surge troops. For example, with Katrina, the military spent "into the hole" and then was reimbursed with special supplemental appropriations bills. It's pretty similar for OIF/OEF except now they have gotten ahead of sending the money after it had been spent and they are starting to budget. But that in itself is tricky, if it is a real war, you want to have the fiscal flexibility to spend what you need to, quickly, in response to the enemy, instead of being tied to an appropriations bill negotiated & signed some months prior.

Which at any rate, takes me back to the question, is this a war or isn't it, and can we declare it based on facts rather than made-up assertions please? Or maybe we can admit there really is no defensible reason to prosecute a war in Iraq any more...and repeal or set an end-date to the Iraq Resolution.

Posted by: DiAnne at January 7, 2007 11:33 PM

This made the national news today, too. There was a clip of Pelosi on this afternoon and I think she did a good job of making the point that there will be no blank checks like there have been in the past re Iraq. She explained a little bit that we DO want to take care of the soldiers that are already there, but sounded a bit reluctant (to me) to the thought of funding escalation.

Bush said Saddam's hanging should have been more "dignified" - now Blair says it was done "completely wrong"

Does it make them, like .. uncomfortable?!

Posted by: DiAnne at January 7, 2007 11:27 PM

Who, the "Deciders"?

So we pay for rebuilding Iraq, and it gets syphoned where all the rest of unexplained money went. I agree, DiAnne, double bind.

Starting Iran to take attnetion off Iraq, change the story, introduce new product as Andy Card would say, like no one will notice Iraq? HELP

Thanks for thinking of me, Otter, but that smug article misses the point that 18,000 missing votes we can't figure out is a big deal. Jennings took it further because they could not look at the evidence.

A bigger deal is that we don't count enough of a percentage of paper ballots or thermal paper trails to make sure the errors aren't outcome altering. Like counting 3%, and assume that 97% on your test is okay for an 'A.'

A paper trail to the black box is just the computer auditing itself with the same software, not independently auditable. The legal vote is the one inside we can't see.

The Dems never squawked enough about the election problems, nothing new. Hey, Kos even called the issue dead after mid-terms because the GOP saw the problem (and obviously would want to get rid of it, rather than take advantage. Wrong deduction).

The activist community saw plenty of problems, close calls, some of which we would have won.

Talked with my congresswoman, Nydia Velasquez, tonight at a Dem club holiday party; she'll be chair of Small Business. She is to meet with Kerry, Senate Chair, soon to discuss strategy. I want to help them both bring awareness to the big, great ideas of innovation and investment to jump start this economy. How do we do that?

She is also part of the Out of Iraq caucus, so I'm interested to know what they will do.

FYI, the phrase from Shakespeare I used earlier is more ironical than some might suppose.

When I was younger, I thought that "hoisted by their own petard" meant something like having been hung by their own ropes, or impaled on their own pikes, etc.

When I was old enough to actually learn what obscure Elizabethan terms meant, though, I learned that this is the actual meaning of "petard":

pe·tard (pĭ-tärd') n.

A small bell-shaped bomb used to breach a gate or wall.

So the irony of that statement is that the Bushi'ites will have their walls breached and their (robert) gates broken down and be blown up into the air by their own bombs.

Oh, but wait, there's more:

Etymology: Middle French, from 'peter' to break wind, from pet expulsion of intestinal gas, from Latin 'peditum', from neuter of 'peditus', past participle of 'pedere' to break wind; akin to Greek 'bdein' to break wind

So the extra irony of the aforementioned Shakespearean phrase, given the notorious fart jokes so much enjoyed in the current White House's inner circle, is left as an exercise for the reader.

it's an ill wind that blows everybody some bad,
Otter

Where would the "more than $100 billion" come from to finance such insanity?

Posted by: NonnyO at January 7, 2007 06:27 PM

And by 2012, the budget will be balanced compliments of GWBush.

Balanced on the head of a pin, you mean.

Or maybe it's a pinhead. Whatever.

pins and needless,
Otter

Balanced by a pinhead

I'm lucky. I was born at a time that I never needed to experience the horrors of war. Any kind of war. When military personnel witness horrific killings and woundings in a war that they must know is an illegal and badly orchestrated war, what happens to them. Were these marines potential killers always. I guess they were. That's why they became marines. But killers? On the street killers? Instant reaction killers?

http://www.democracycellproject.net/blog/archives/2007/01/small_country_b.html

Civilians 'were shot at close range by marines'

A marine inspects the aftermath of a roadside bomb that struck a marine convoy in Haditha, Iraq, setting off a series of violent events that led to the deaths of 24 civilians. The photo was contained in a Naval Criminal Investigative Service report.
Photo: AP
Colin Freeman, London
January 8, 2007

THE criminal inquiry into the massacre of civilians by US marines in the Iraqi town of Haditha has unearthed chilling new evidence of how troops ordered five men out of a taxi and shot them one by one at close range.

A leaked copy of the probe into the incident — the most serious case of alleged US misconduct in the Iraq war so far — quotes a horrified witness saying the marines went "crazy" after a roadside bomb killed one of their squad and injured two others.

They appear to have taken revenge on the occupants of a white taxi, which arrived at the scene soon afterwards. The report describes how, after telling them to get out of the vehicle, the marines' squad leader, Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterich, opened fire on the Iraqis with his M16 rifle from a distance of no more than three metres, despite the fact that some of them had their hands up. The men, standing in a line, dropped to the ground as an Iraqi soldier attached to the marines' unit looked on in horror.

Sergeant Asad Amer Mashoot, who later gave evidence to the inquiry conducted by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, said in his statement: "They didn't even try to run away. We were afraid of the marines and we saw them behaving like crazy. They were yelling and screaming."

Another marine at the scene, Sergeant Sanick Dela Cruz, told the inquiry how he then fired shots into the dead men as they lay on the ground. In an additional mark of disrespect, the report said, he later urinated on one of the corpses.

Staff Sergeant Wuterich and Sergeant Dela Cruz have been charged with murder, along with Lance Corporal Justin Sharratt and Lance Corporal Stephen Tatum. All face life imprisonment if found guilty.

The men in the taxi were among a total of 24 Iraqis killed by the marines following a bomb attack on their convoy as it drove through Haditha, in the western Iraqi desert, on the morning of November 19, 2005.

Despite claims by locals that the troops went on the rampage, hurling grenades into nearby houses and killing women and children, the marine squad's commanders failed to launch any kind of inquiry until a magazine report into the incident two months later. Four senior officers, not present at the incident, have been charged over their alleged failure to investigate and report the deaths properly.

The scale of the killings sparked horror in America and drew comparisons with the 1968 My Lai massacre, which dramatically reduced support for the American military campaign in Vietnam.

Attorneys acting for the marines have declined to comment on the report, which runs into thousands of pages.

TELEGRAPH

oops - done it again. sorry folks - was a bit distracted.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/civilians-were-shot-at-close-range-by-marines/2007/01/07/1168104865111.html

Sadly there's more. Horrible. Shameful. And George W Bush should be charged right along with these defendants.

Global evidence hunt uncovers horrific images
Josh White, Washington
January 8, 2007

US MARINES took dozens of gruesome photographs of the 24 civilians who were killed in Haditha, Iraq, in November 2005.

The images, which investigators tracked down on several laptop computers and digital media drives — some in the US — provide visual evidence of a series of shootings outside a taxi and inside three homes that military criminal investigators have alleged were murders.

Much like the photographs that emerged in the Abu Ghraib prison abuse cases, the Haditha images have provided investigators with powerful and visceral evidence of what happened. But unlike the detainee photographs, which were turned over to officials who then investigated the case, the Haditha images were discovered months after the shootings as more than 60 Naval Criminal Investigative Service agents scoured the globe for them.

Continued...... http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/global-evidence-hunt-uncovers-horrific-images/2007/01/07/1168104865104.html