A tribute to Condoleeza Rice and George W. Bush who, despite voluminious evidence to the contrary, said, "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile," adding that "even in retrospect" there was "nothing" to suggest that" and "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees," respectively.

Friday, September 29, 2006

Due to Monetary Constraints, Postings Will Discontinue on 09/30 

In defense of the Bush administration's anti-terrorism efforts before 9/11, Condescenderella Rice said,

"What we did in the eight months [between Bush's inauguration and 9/11] was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years," Rice told the New York Post in comments published Tuesday.

Now, I have a pretty good memory when it comes to the right-wing attacks on Clinton from the time of his becoming the democratic candidate in 1992 till today. He was endlessly derided. Accused of murdering Vince Foster. Basically, the GOP was saying his policies were failures and the draft-dodging commander-in-chief deserved no respect from the American people. They even went so far as to set a 'perjury trap' as a pretext for an impeachment. When he went after Al Queda, it was "wag the dog." When Iraq was bombed, they accused him of bombing an "aspirin factory" not a legitimate target. To the GOP and their media chorus, Clinton could do nothing right.

So, here's the question, "If Clinton did such a poor job on fighting terrorism, why didn't the incoming Bush adminstration take it upon themselves to have a better, more aggressive effort, as their priority, than that of their predecessor?"

It hardly makes sense to say we did as much as they did when you've been denigrating them for over a decade.

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

While at the same time... 

In California, there's a legal debate whether the application of the death penalty by 'lethal injection' is too painful and thus in violation of the 8th Amendment's prohibition against 'cruel and unusual' punishment.

At the same time, there is legislation at the federal level which permits the use of interrogation techniques that some equate with torture. So, a person who is tried and convicted of a captial crime, who is facing the ultimate penalty enforced by the state, may be having his/her rights violated by the infliction of pain associated with the execution. Yet, a person who has had no trial, no conviction and no chance to defend against the charges, but is suspected of having some knowledge, may be subject to 'compassionate coercion' which may be physically or mentally painful.

The fact that these two issues are being debated at the same time seems a bit odd to me.

Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Curious Facts About George Tenet

Close ties to the Saudis
Statements about Iraq pre-war
Failure to kill OBL

Monday, September 25, 2006

Sunday, September 24, 2006

In any battle, it's important to not become the thing you detest most about your enemy.

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Monday, September 18, 2006

Stephen Hadley appeared on Face the Nation on Sunday to continue with the 'suasion' that unless the administration's policies are set forth in law, the CIA interrogation program itself cannot go forward. I found in interesting that Hadley referred to the McCain Amendment known as The Detainee Treatment Act as the model for what the administration was trying to do now. Of course, he made no mention of the fact that Bush used one of his infamous 'Signing Statements' to proclaim he would follow the act if he felt like it and not otherwise. Also, there were some amendments the Act which may have weakened the thrust of the legislation. Further, Amnesty International proposes that the Detainee Treatment Act now makes the use of torture as official U.S. policy.

Below is part of the transcript from FTN with Hadley followed by the information from Wikipedia. As you can see, Hadley using the Act as an example seems a little far fetched. It should be noted that Mr. Schieffer did not call him on this.

[SCHIEFFER: So you're going to publish what that means" Is that what you want to do?

MR. HADLEY: You're simply going to – we want to do what the Congress did in December of last yea and say that mean the McCain Amendment, the Detainee Treatment Act, which precluded (sic) cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and defined what those terms meant by reference to U.S. law.


MR. HADLY: This is about – it's very simple, Bob – a clear standard recognized under U.S. law that the Congress of the United States adopted in December to great applause, sponsored by Senator McCain, adopting that as our standard so that the men and women in the Central Intelligence Agency can run a program, which is probably the most important tool we have in the war on terror. That's what this is about.]

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCain_Detainee_Amendment

The McCain Detainee Amendment is an amendment to the United States Senate Department of Defense Authorization bill, commonly referred to as the Amendment on (1) the Army Field Manual and (2) Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment, amendment #1977 and also known as the McCain Amendment 1977. The amendment prohibits inhumane treatment of prisoners, including prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, by confining interrogations to the techniques in FM 34-52 Intelligence Interrogation.

Contents [hide]
1 Legislative history of the amendment
2 Signing statement by President Bush
3 Criticism
4 See also
5 References

Legislative history of the amendment
Amendment 1977 amended the defense appropriations bill for 2005 passed by the United States House of Representatives. The amendment was introduced to the Senate by Senator John McCain (R Arizona) on October 3, 2005 as S.AMDT.1977.

The amendment was co-sponsored by Senators Lindsey Graham, Chuck Hagel, Gordon H. Smith, Susan M. Collins Lamar Alexander, Richard Durbin, Carl Levin, John Warner, Lincoln Chafee, John E. Sununu, and Ken Salazar.

On October 5, 2005, the United States Senate voted 90-9 to support the amendment. [1] The Senators who voted against the amendment were Wayne Allard (R-CO), Christopher Bond (R-MO), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Thad Cochran (R-MS), John Cornyn (R-TX), James Inhofe (R-OK), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), and Ted Stevens (R-AK).

Signing statement by President Bush

After approving the bill President Bush issued a signing statement: an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law.[2] In it Bush said:

"The executive branch shall construe Title X in Division A of the Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power, which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President, evidenced in Title X, of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks."

The Boston Globe quoted an anonymous senior administration official saying, "Of course the president has the obligation to follow this law, (but) he also has the obligation to defend and protect the country as the commander in chief, and he will have to square those two responsibilities in each case. We are not expecting that those two responsibilities will come into conflict, but it's possible that they will." [3]


The McCain Amendment cited the U.S. Army's Field Manual on interrogation as the authoritative guide to interrogation techniques. On December 14, the New York times reported that the Army Field Manual had been rewritten by the Pentagon. Previously, the manual's interrogation techniques section could be read freely on the Internet. But the new edition's includes 10 classified pages in the interrogation technique section. [4]

Also, the McCain Amendment's anti-torture provisions were modified by the Graham-Levin Amendment, which was also attached to the $453-billion 2006 Defense Budget Bill. The Graham-Levin Amendment permits the Department of Defense to consider evidence obtained through torture of Guantanamo Bay detainees, and expands the prohibition of habeas corpus for redetainees, which subsequently leaves detainees no legal recourse if they're tortured. [5]

Critics say these two actions deflate the McCain Amendment from having any real power in stopping torture by the United States Government, and these were the true reasons why President Bush "conceded" to McCain's demands. Yet, this was largely ignored by the mainstream media, who instead credited Bush's concession to "overwhelming Congressional support" for the measure. [6] [7]

Amnesty International claims that the amendment's loopholes actually signal that torture is now official US policy. [8]

Saturday, September 16, 2006

39% Approval Rating. Who are these people?

ABC New Special Report: E-Coli Outbreak Traced to Clinton Administration 

As panic over tainted spinach sweeps the nation, ABC News has learned that Sandy Berger had an opportunity to stop the outbreak dead in its tracks but failed to give the order to bombard the killer spinach with massive amounts of clean water when undercover operatives disguised as illegal immigrant farm workers had high-pressure hoses trained on the leafy death merchant. Berger allegedly cited his lack of legal authority as justification for not taking decisive action. Berger, could not be reached for comment, but his spokesman claims the events as set forth by ABC never actually happened.

Friday, September 15, 2006

And today he told David Gregory that he was beautiful, not that there's anything wrong with that.

In their typical overreaction, the media is going on and on and on about e-coli in spinach. See, it's been a while since we've had a food contamination scare. Remember Mad Cow? Apparently, there must always be something to keep us scared. Shit, now I've got killer leafy produce in my refrigerator. Then they get some "expert" to say "if in doubt, throw it out." Why not just cook it?

Thursday, September 14, 2006

Irony Alert: 

The Schwarzenegger campaign is upset that the Angelides campaign was able to download and publish what was supposed to be a 'private' conversation by the governor.

So the governor's private conversations should remain private while our conversations should be eavesdropped upon without a warrant because we should not be upset if we have nothing to hide.

Who knew 'privacy rights' were so selective?


Even though American Airlines was falsely portrayed in Disney's "The Path to 9/11" as allowing Atta to board the plane after alarm bells were ringing at the ticket gate, Amercian Airlines will be "persuaded" not to pursue legal action nor pull their advertising from ABC. They will get a call from some GOP enforcers letting them know in no uncertain terms that they should just shut up and take one for the team. Faced with the reality of an unfriendly GOP legislature and bureaucracy at the FAA, they will become just be another silent victim.

Thursday, September 07, 2006

'Suddenly Osama" and "Rainy Day People" 

It's been noticed that Osama Bin Laden was conspicuous in his absence from Bush speeches until just recently. "Suddenly Osama" is back in to strike fear in the voters so they won't cut and run from the current disaster on Pennsylvania Avenue.

Osama has been saved for that 'rainy day' when he's most needed. It's a political calculation that it will instill more fear in the populace than it will contempt for the administration that's failed to bring him to justice for 9/11 and the USS Cole. Apologies to Gordon Lightfoot since he probably didn't conceive of OBL being one of Bush's 'rainy day people."

Rainy day people always seem to know when it's time to call

The last thing in the world this administration wants is a House of Congress that isn't a rubber stamp and which has subpoena power.

John Mark Karr Admits He Wrote "The Path to 9/11" 

John Mark Karr admitted he wrote the soon-to-be-aired by ABC fictionalized account of the decade preceding the attack on September 11, 2001. He conceded that he has a political agenda which is not to be confused with an apolitical agenda. Although his tale is chock full of historical inaccuracies and blatant fabrications, he's sure that it should be used as a learning tool in schools throughout the country.

Karr, who recently gained notoriety such that it became news what he had for dinner, refused to comment on his political affiliations but conceded he'd like to have beer with the Decider and not one of those fake beers, either.

After further inquiry by the otherwise docile press corp, Karr also admitted he had OBL in his gunsights when trekking in Afghanistan but he couldn't get the go ahead from Captain Kirk.

Wednesday, September 06, 2006

The Tired USS Cole Rhetoric 

I was listening to some former Bush toady on PBS and he made the often made charge that Clinton did nothing after the bombing of the USS Cole in retaliation against Al Queda or the Taliban.

As usual, when the GOP makes some absurd charge, it's wise to examine a few basic facts that they never, ever mention.

For example, the USS Cole was bombed on October 12, 2000 killing 17 sailors. While it was not immediately known who was responsible, the intelligence community had a damn good notion that it was Al Queda. Plans were drawn up to give Al Queda and the Taliban a taste of American justice. These plans were not implemented by the Clinton administration as they felt the action should be taken by the incoming administration. Unlike Somalia where Bush the Smarter left troops in danger which led to Black Hawk Down, Clinton believed the new administration should decide how America should respond. As we know, the Bush administraion did not puruse retaliation. Instead, they gave money to the Taliban to persuade them to consent to a trans-Afghanistan OIL pipeline. Naturally, the GOP liars will not mention these facts.

To Summarize:

On October 12, 2000, the USS Cole was bombed.
Clinton determined the responsible parties and planned a attack on Afghanistan.
The Bush Administration was given the operational plans and did not pursue them to protect pipeline negotiaions.

Only a little over 3 months had elapsed since the bombing and George Walker Bush being inaugurated as president. The bombing of the Cole apparently didn't rise to the level of action by the Bush Administration. The GOP, however, will continue to deny the fact that


One has to ask oneself, if Clinton left things in such a disastrous state, what did the Bush administration do to correct the situation. As we know, they planned the invasion of Iraq in between trips to Crawford and Kennebunkport. They have a lot to answer for if the compliant media gets off their dead asses and starts asking the questions.

Like, what about that pipeline?

Monday, September 04, 2006

Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Cabbage Patch) said today that if we lose in Iraq, they will follow us here. Could their scare tactics be any less transparent? First of all, most the violence in Iraq is not being carried out by Al Queda and it's unlikely that once we leave, these "insurgents" will stop attacking each other of decide to attack the United States. Secondly, how are they going to get here? Isn't that an admission that the administration has failed to correct the problem with our porous borders? Finally, if they come here, we will fight them because we're Americans not a bunch of pansies like McConnell.

Sunday, September 03, 2006

Rummy's Make Up Your Own WWII Analogy: 

Make Up Your Own WWII Analogy:

Analogy # 1

On September 1, 1939, Germany invaded Poland. The Polish army was defeated within weeks of the invasion.

German forces attack Poland across all frontiers and its planes bomb Polish cities, including the capital, Warsaw

September 1: Germany invades Poland. After creating a series of provocations, Germany attacked Poland on September 1.

Analogy # 2

When he (Hitler) started his political career, he certainly did not want people to know that he was lazy and a poor achiever at school. He fell out with one of his earliest supporters - Eduard Humer - in 1923 over the fact that Humer told people what Hitler had been like at school.

Hitler was certainly gifted in some subjects, but he lacked self-control. He was argumentative and bad-tempered, and unable to submit to school discipline....moreover, he was lazy. He reacted with hostility to advice or criticism. (Humer)

Analogy # 3

Propaganda within Nazi Germany was taken to a new and frequently perverse level. Hitler was very aware of the value of good propaganda and he appointed Joseph Goebbels as head of propaganda.

Analogy # 4

Lien Riefenstahl was a film maker who turned her skills to the promotion of Hitler. Although this author is unaware of the same elaborate staging that takes place whenever George W. Bush appears before the cameras, here is a small glimpse at her devotion to the man.

Now Hitler sought to portray himself as statesman and invent a historical continuity for his party based on a completely distorted portrayal of German history. For her part, Riefenstahl was prepared to assist. No doubt, there was an element of personal infatuation on her part with the figure of Hitler, but such infatuation was bound up with definite political conceptions. In one newspaper interview she declared: “To me Hitler is the greatest man who ever lived. He is really faultless, so simple yet so filled with manly power... He is really beautiful, he is wise. Radiance streams from him. All the great men of Germany—Friedrich, Nietzsche, Bismarck—have all had faults. Hitler’s followers are not spotless. Only he is pure.”

Analogy # 5

Goebbels and his skill at masterminding propaganda is best remembered for his night time displays at Nuremberg.

Analogy # 6

To ensure that everybody thought in the correct manner, Goebbels set up the Reich Chamber of Commerce in 1933.

Saturday, September 02, 2006

At least two of these figures are still reinforcing the validity of the Peter Principle.

"Where Are They Now?" A Discontinued Series 

As you know, Katrina was a disaster of major proportions. Many skilled professionals from throughout the United States made their way to New Orleans to assist those in distress. Fifty of these skilled professionals were assigned to assist one man. That man...


A group of 1,000 firefighters convened in Atlanta to volunteer with the Katrina relief efforts. Of those, “a team of 50 Monday morning quickly was ushered onto a flight headed for Louisiana. The crew’s first assignment: to stand beside President Bush as he tours devastated areas.”
[Salt Lake Tribune; Reuters]

Second in A Series That Ended With The Last Entry of "Where Are They Now"

One can only hope that these 50 trained professionals did not suffer any lasting side-effects from this particular assignment. Where are they now? Likely, back doing what there training was designed for, not as propaganda backdrops.


Donald Rumsfeld has recently begun comparing Iraq war critics with persons from 60+ years ago who may have opposed war with Germany. What he failed to mention was the people in this country who actively worked to provide the Nazi war machine with the capital with which to Blitzkrieg Poland, bomb England, occupy France, and murder 6 million persons of the 'wrong' faith. One such person had direct lineage to the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, Prescott Bush grandfather of George Walker Bush.


Documents in National Archives Prove George W. Bush's Grandfather Traded with Nazis - Even After Pearl Harbor

by John Buchanan (Exclusive to the New Hampshire Gazette)

WASHINGTON - After 60 years of inattention and even denial by the U.S. media, newly-uncovered government documents inThe National Archives and Library of Congress reveal that Prescott Bush, the grandfather of President George W. Bush, served as a business partner of and U.S. banking operative for the financial architect of the Nazi war machine from 1926 until 1942, when Congress took aggressive action against Bush and his "enemy national" partners.

The documents also show that Bush and his colleagues, according to reports from the U.S. Department of the Treasury, tried to conceal their financial alliance with German industrialist Fritz Thyssen, a steel and coal baron who, beginning in the mid-1920s, personally funded Adolf Hitler's rise to power by the subversion of democratic principle and German law.

So, as long as we're going to dredge up false comparisons from 6 decades past, let's be thorough. Rumsfeld chides those who would always "blame America first." He, however, would have us believe that we are blameless. This may make us feel good about ourselves, but it's not how rational people resolve issues. If you never ask yourself, "Is there something I could be doing differently," you likely have limited success in solving problems. Sure, it sounds macho and manly to never compromise, never accept defeat, never change course, to make decisions based on your infallible gut instincts, but this isn't NeverLearned Ranch.

Friday, September 01, 2006

The True Iraq Appeasers 

Boston Globe Article

This little excursion down memory lane should be required reading for anyone who still doesn't have utter contempt for Rumsfeld and Cheney.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?