On the Brink

I'm feeling doomed. All these loudly quacking people in large positions saying, "Another attack is inevitable ... we're inviting the terrorists to attack us ... a large-scale imminent terror attack ... the attack is coming ... no way to avoid terror attack ..." blah blah. Can these people just shut the fuck up? What's going on? People are debating, turning Doomsday into politics. The End of Life is now just more grist for the mill. We are truly back in the fifties. I feel like every day is a Twilight Zone episode, circa 1959.

Think about this for one second: When Bush came parading into Washington spewing his particular brand of bullshit, what was the gist of it? It was, Government bad! Washington bad! No more government! Shrink government! Government off our backs!

In fact on the morning of 9/11 Bush was on an anti-government multi-state crusade in America's classrooms to ram this putrid message down little kids' throats. He was actually leading a cheer, trying to get these first and second graders to chant along, I'm not making this up. The events of that morning so overshadowed what he was doing at the time that everyone forgets what the so-called president was up to that whole week. Then of course Giuliani became "America's Mayor" in one day and the Bush machine scrambled to co-opt all that, but their modus operandi remained what it always was and still is, even and especially after we were attacked (we meaning New York -- New York in particular, you may not have noticed that, after the Bushes decided to "own" 9/11; suddenly New York became our whole country, as opposed to "Evil," which is how pandering Republicans were frequently referring to it before that day). And that modus operandi was and is doing nothing. That's their whole religion. Do nothing. The government is not in the business of solving problems. No problems at all. Terrorists attack us? Well you can't expect government to do anything about it. Sure, we can have a big war in Iraq and defense contractors can make pots of money and play with all the new Pentagon toys -- which we all paid for in blood -- but actually solve a problem? Since when was that ever a goal?

It never was a goal and that's the dirtiest secret. They still don't believe in doing anything about it. A government that helps anyone is an alien philosophy and any thought or mention to that effect has no chance of entering their minds, which are set. That's what a mind set is, a set mind. This is government that helps itself. We are not being protected and all your lives are at risk. These people do not have the national interest at heart, and never have, and don't believe in a national interest, and were jumping up and down and shouting as much from every rooftop on the morning of September 11th. I remember.

I feel like Rod Taylor at the end of Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds. All we can do is crawl quietly into our little cars and drive away and pray the millions of massing birds won't insanely rip us to pieces.

- Michael 10:32 AM - [PermaLink] -

----

Someone forgot to say "just the facts maam."

Claim vs. Fact: Condoleezza Rice's Opening Statement

- rob 3:06 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

A must Read

In her testimony Rice mentioned that Clinton administration stopped the millennium terrorists attack simply due to luck. I guess on 9/11 luck was on the terrorists side. Please read the full testimony of Mindy Kleinberg and what she thinks about luck.

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States

The terrorist's lucky streak began the week before September 11th with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. The SEC, in concert with the United States intelligence agencies, has sophisticated software programs that are used in "real-time" to watch both domestic and overseas markets to seek out trends that may indicate a present or future crime. In the week prior to September 11th both the SEC and U.S. intelligence agencies ignored one major stock market indicator, one that could have yielded valuable information with regard to the September 11th attacks.

On the Chicago Board Options Exchange during the week before September 11th, put options were purchased on American and United Airlines, the two airlines involved in the attacks. The investors who placed these orders were gambling that in the short term the stock prices of both Airlines would plummet. Never before on the Chicago Exchange were such large amounts of United and American Airlines options traded. These investors netted a profit of at least $5 million after the September 11th attacks.

Interestingly, the names of the investors remain undisclosed and the $5 million remains unclaimed in the Chicago Exchange account.
...

With regard to the INS, the terrorists got lucky 15 individual times, because 15 of the 19 hijackers' visas should have been unquestionably denied.
...

On the morning of September 11th, the terrorists' luck commenced with airline and airport security. When the 19 hijackers went to purchase their tickets (with cash and/or credit cards) and to receive their boarding passes, nine were singled out and questioned through a screening process. Luckily for those nine terrorists, they passed the screening process and were allowed to continue on with their mission.

But, the terrorist's luck didn't end at the ticket counter; it also accompanied them through airport security, as well. Because how else would the hijackers get specifically contraband items such as box-cutters, pepper spray or, according to one FAA executive summary, a gun on those planes?
...

Why was there a delay in the FAA notifying NORAD? Why was there a delay in NORAD scrambling fighter jets? How is this possible when NEADS was fully staffed with planes at the ready and monitoring our Northeast airspace?

Flight's 175, 77 and 93 all had this same repeat pattern of delays in notification and delays in scrambling fighter jets. Delays that are unimaginable considering a plane had, by this time, already hit the WTC

Even more baffling for us is the fact that the fighter jets were not scrambled from the closest air force bases. For example, for the flight that hit the Pentagon, the jets were scrambled from Langley Air Force in Hampton, Virginia rather than Andrews Air Force Base right outside D.C. As a result, Washington skies remained wholly unprotected on the morning of September 11th. At 9:41 a.m. one hour and 11 minutes after the first plane was hijack confirmed by NORAD, Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. The fighter jets were still miles away. Why?

So the hijackers luck had continued. On September 11th both the FAA and NORAD deviated from standard emergency operating procedures.
...

Is it luck that aberrant stock trades were not monitored? Is it luck when 15 visas are awarded based on incomplete forms? Is it luck when Airline Security screenings allow hijackers to board planes with box cutters and pepper spray? Is it luck when Emergency FAA and NORAD protocols are not followed? Is it luck when a national emergency is not reported to top government officials on a timely basis?

To me luck is something that happens once. When you have this repeated pattern of broken protocols, broken laws, broken communication, one cannot still call it luck.

If at some point we don't look to hold the individuals accountable for not doing their jobs properly then how can we ever expect for terrorists not to get lucky again?

Perhaps this is why Bush has been against the Commission all along, is he worried his luck won't hold out.

Please read her full statement.

- rob 2:38 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Congressional_Ballot_Survey

Hey Republicans! Want to get re-elected? Then stop drinking the cool aide, Bush is not only taking down your ethical and moral standing, he's now taking you down politically. This is your last chance to do the right thing for your career and for the country: Stop being a Bush apologist and demand answers.

Thursday April 08, 2004--If the Congressional elections were held today, forty-two percent (42%) of Likely Voters say they would vote for a Democrat and 36% for a Republican.

This 6-point lead for the Democrats comes after several days of bad news from Iraq. Following that news, the President's Job Approval Ratings have fallen to their lowest level of the year. John Kerry has also gained his biggest lead of the year (6-points) in our daily tracking poll.

- rob 2:05 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

One of my beliefs is that all religions can lead to the fundamentalist extremism we see in the middle east given the right environment. The violence from bin laden, et al isn't an Islamic issue as much as it is the landscape that allowed his brand of fundamentalism to take seed and flurish. Basically the difference between a Sadir and a Pat Robertson is location location location.

Not that right wing Christian fundamentalist can't be entertaining:

Trustee seeks apology for spoof photo

A school board trustee is demanding an apology from a parents' group that used a fake photo from a satirical newspaper on its pamphlets opposing the expansion of a safe schools policy. Simply Truths Our Priority, or STOP, handed out pamphlets and computer discs with a 300-page book of Internet research outside a public meeting last week.

The session was a chance for the Thames Valley District school board to get input on its plan to expand the safe schools program -- a move to protect gay and lesbian students.

But STOP argues the board is changing the curriculum and will promote a homosexual lifestyle in schools.

"Satire is apparently lost on rigid individuals," said London trustee Peter Jaffe. "Taking something from a spoof newspaper and presenting it as reality crosses the line. (The photo) plays on people's worst fears. I would hope this group will make a full and public apology."

The photo shows a teacher at the front of a class with explicit sexual images and terms drawn on the board and is supposed to represent one of the "countless" classrooms where homosexuality is promoted.

The picture was copied from the Onion, a satirical newspaper from the United States. The headline of the 1998 story says, " '98 homosexual drive nearing goal."
...

Marilyn Ashworth of STOP said it's concerned the photo represents what will end up in this region's schools if the board goes ahead with its plan.

"We knew it was a gay paper and we hold that even as a joke, the gay community is proud of their advancements into the safe schools program in the U.S.," she said. "We don't think homosexuality in schools is a joke."

Asked whether she believed it was a real photo, Ashworth said the caption included the teacher's name, city, state and grade.

"We researched in depth and that was one of the things we found," she said, noting the group spent seven weeks accumulating research."
...

Sean Mills, president of the Onion, laughed when he heard the news.

"The motto the writers have is we're not going after the right or the left, we're just going after people who are dumb," Mills said.

"We're anti-dumb, we're not anti-anything else . . . They're proving our point. It's a ridiculous notion there'd be recruitment going on. That was the whole point."

Mills said the photo is fake, the Onion has nothing to do with STOP and isn't a gay paper.

"In some ways, if you're going to a satirical news source to prove a serious point . . . you're getting what you deserve."

7 weeks of research, 300 pages, and their definition of "in depth" is taking an Onion article as real.

Here's the excellent Onion article: '98 homosexual drive nearing goal

Meanwhile back here in the US: Easter Bunny Whipping In Church Upsets People

GLASSPORT, Pa. -- A church that put on an Easter show said it was trying to teach about Jesus Christ.

But the people who saw the show say they were upset by performers who broke eggs and pretended to whip the Easter bunny.

People who attended Saturday's performance of an Easter celebration at a memorial stadium in Glassport, Allegheny County, quoted performers as saying "There is no Easter bunny."

Melissa Salzmann said the program was inappropriate for young children. She said her son cried and asked why the bunny was whipped.

- rob 1:58 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

From Rice's opening statement

RICE: So the attacks came. A band of vicious terrorists tried to decapitate our government, destroy our financial system and break the spirit of America. And as an officer of government on duty that day, I will never forget the sorrow and the anger that I felt, nor will I forget the courage and resilience of the American people, nor the leadership of the president that day.

Ummm... "leadership of the president that day." Is that sarcasm? Was it his "staying the course" and the demonstration "of will" he displayed when he continued to sit in the classroom and listen to the children read about the goat even though he new the nation was being attacked? Or was his leadership being demonstrated by him flying around the country and not even addressing the nation until that evening?

Now I'm not saying Rice just made that statement up or is rewriting history for political reasons. I think she might be confused. Maybe she's not thinking of the real President but the one on that Showtime made for TV propoganda movie where Bush was all smart and heroic, or maybe she's thinking about how the nation was touched that day by the leadership of Gulianni, who despite not normally being a nice guy proved himself a man who could not only rise to the occasion but could lead by being quite human. In the memory fog, Bush's face somehow made it on to Gulianni's.

- rob 1:35 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

- rob 11:38 AM - [PermaLink] -

----

Rice Test-y-lies today... more on that later... Meanwhile here's a preview of the President's session with the commission (taken from an Atrios comment thread):

Q: Mr. President, do you ever make mistakes?

Preznit: I'm human, I make them all the time.

Q: Dr Rice testified of the paramount imporantance of the creation of the Department of Homeland Security in the war on terrorism. In retrospect was it a mistake for you to oppose forming this agency for months after 9/11?

Prez: I uh...I uh...

Cheney: I believe I can address that...

Q: Mr. Vice President, you were not asked the question. Your trained chimp was.

- rob 11:36 AM - [PermaLink] -

----

Covering your ass, excessive spin, lying and all the rest are du jour from any administration, no matter what party's in power, that's fine, I expect no less. The conversation around my dinner table, though, is what happens when the next terror attack comes? We all know it's coming. What happens when it arrives? Why isn't this a national conversation? Because a lot of people who are not so far off think that when it does come, a whole apparatus of martial law comes into play that pretty much throws the Constitution out the window and cancels elections. Now I'm not going that far. All I'm saying is, What are we going to do? On Sept. 11 2001, it was an election, don't forget. And the mayor of New York was a major-league dictator. But he didn't cancel the election, though tempted. He resisted. He said no. I'm a big enough cynic to think that Guiliani had big enough reasons not to do it because he had political aspirations that went far afield of mayor, and he was hedging his bet. He was the most popular man in America at the time. He could've done whatever he wanted. Luckily, he decided against cancelling the election.

Can you say the same for Bush? Do you really think that this guy would heed and yield to common opinion for one second? When the terror attack comes, what do you think he is going to do?

The 9/11 investigation is going ahead, but the country is looking behind. We should be looking straight at the White House, eyes peeled, unblinking. Look out. These people are not about to give it up, no way nohow. Your vote is a side issue about to be scuttled when the next horrible thing happens. It's in the script, written years and years ago. When was the last time you heard someone in the administration say something that wasn't a complete non-sequitur? That's what happens when everything that comes out of your mouth was crafted in 1992.

The urgency of my dinner table conversation goes down the memory hole and that's the end of it. So long, history! We loved you.

- Michael 11:00 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

A must read post from a blog named Slacktivist

A top-secret public speech

Biden and Rice both appeared on Meet the Press on Sept. 9, 2001, where they disagreed -- sharply -- over America's national security priorities.

Rice argued that missile defense ought to be the No. 1 priority. Biden countered that this expensive and ineffective program would undermine and distract from what he said were more urgent priorities -- including modernizing and upgrading conventional weapons systems, defending the U.S. from domestic terrorist attacks and preventing terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.

The Delaware Democrat, who was then chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, continued this debate with Rice the following day in a speech at the National Press Club titled "Defining Our Interests in a Changing World."

Because that speech made reference to "terrorist attacks at home or abroad" as a likelier and more urgent threat, it has been hailed since then as prescient. Less noted, and more important for the work of the Sept. 11 commission, is that this entire speech was a response -- a rebuttal -- of the positions staked out by Rice and the Bush administration.

Rice's speech the following day was intended to argue that Biden got it wrong. She never delivered the speech, of course, because events intervened, confirming that Biden got it right.

Regarding their debate over security priorities on Meet the Press, Biden said of Rice:

I don't know what she's talking about. We're getting briefed by two different groups of CIA people, I guess ...

That's perhaps the most telling comment in the interrupted argument between Biden and Rice. Both had access to the same intelligence, both were briefed by the same CIA. Yet they drew very different conclusions from that intelligence about the relative urgency of missile defense and counterterrorism. (And, yes, this provides even more support for Richard Clarke's account of that intelligence and how it was received.)

- rob 6:49 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

U.S. Terrorism Policy Spawns Steady Staff Exodus

9/11 was a branding opportunity to Bush... not a day of tragedy and outrage.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the Bush administration has faced a steady exodus of counterterrorism officials, many disappointed by a preoccupation with Iraq they said undermined the U.S. fight against terrorism.

Former counterterrorism officials said at least half a dozen have left the White House Office for Combating Terrorism or related agencies in frustration in the 2 1/2 years since the attacks.

Some also left because they felt President Bush had sidelined his counterterrorism experts and paid almost exclusive heed to the vice president, the defense secretary and other Cabinet members in planning the "war on terror," former counterterrorism officials said.

"I'm kind of hoping for regime change," one official who quit told Reuters.

- rob 6:47 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Sometimes during the war I felt as though Rumsfeld was say "hey, you can't make an omlette without breaking some eggs."

With all that is happening in Iraq right now, I shouldn't be surprised the Bush is running to Texas for a vacation, a also find it fitting that this should be a headline: Lots of eggs, no president

- rob 6:45 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Bush's obsession with Iraq directly leads to death in Iraq

Al-Zarqawi claims responsibility for wave of attacks

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Fugitive terrorism suspect Abu Musab al-Zarqawi claimed responsibility Tuesday for a wave of attacks targeting U.S. and other coalition forces since Americans took control of Baghdad almost a year ago.

Although there was speculation as to the authenticity of the audio tape which was published on a Web site, Middle Eastern intelligence sources familiar with al-Zarqawi report that the tape is "100 percent genuine."

Al-Zarqawi claimed credit for a score of attacks on coalition forces, including the August 19 bombing of U.N. headquarters in Baghdad that killed 23 civilians including the U.N.'s chief envoy to Iraq, Sergio Vieira de Mello.

Targets al-Zarqawi claimed responsibility for attacking include "the coalition forces in Karbala, the Italians in Nasiriya, the American forces in the Al-Khaldiya Bridge, the American intelligence in the Al-Shahine Hotel, the CPA in Baghdad, the CIA in the Al-Rashid Hotel, and the Polish military in Al-Hilla."

Al-Zarqawi was especially hostile toward the Shiite majority, calling them "idolaters" and traitors who allied themselves with "the enemies of Islam to seize control over Sunni Iraq."

A bad man who is not only attacking us and our allies, but fomenting civil war.

And why is Bush's obssession with Iraq directly responsible for these deaths? Because we could have caught al-Zarqawi in the summer of 2002, but Bush did not want to. Because attacking al-Zarqawi's camps would have distracted from building his "We need War with Iraq" marketing campaign.

- rob 3:28 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

How to annoy the commission before Rice finally appears under oath, and other stupid White House tricks

White House criticism disputed

WASHINGTON — Dealing with criticism that national security adviser Condoleezza Rice wouldn't testify in public before the 10-member commission investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, White House spokesman Scott McClellan complained last month that when she testified in private, "only five members showed up" to hear what she had to say.

What McClellan didn't tell reporters was that on Nov. 21 — long before Rice met with the five commissioners in February — the White House counsel's office had sent the commission a letter saying no more than three commissioners could attend meetings with White House aides of Rice's rank.

Given that demand, "we are a little surprised that the White House has repeatedly implied to the public that commissioners were uninterested in attending these meetings," commission spokesman Al Felzenberg said Tuesday.

Commissioner Jamie Gorelick, who did not attend the interview with Rice on Feb. 7, said she finds it "infuriating" that the White House would insinuate commissioners shirked their duty and didn't have a right to press for more time with Rice. "That's hooey," she said.

Hooey. Dang, them fighting words.

- rob 3:12 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Because Bush is a Uniter not a Divider.

Muslim Rivals Unite In Baghdad Uprising

- rob 12:03 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Atrios just reminded me of an excellent, and again amazingly accurate Onion spoof of the past:
The Onion | Point-Counterpoint: The War On Iraq

- rob 9:17 AM - [PermaLink] -

----

A war based on lies kills

12 Marines, 66 Iraqis Killed in Battles

And for Bush its all fodder for a joke. "Are the WMDs here?" "maybe they're under the couch." Yuk. yuk. yuk.

And the Washington press core just laughed, despite them being complicit in the lie and thus the deaths of some many our brave and young soldiers.

- rob 9:11 AM - [PermaLink] -

----

"Because there are people there that hate freedom"

Today was a bad day in Iraq. We lost a whole bunch of people. We dug trenches, we reconnaissanced, we're fighting two fronts (Sunnis in the north, Shiites in the south), and I'm scratching my head, saying, How come? What is this sacrifice for? These bastards? These fuckers who've hated each other since the twelfth century? We're going to move on in and make it all copasetic? What the fuck? What the hell is Bush talking about? Normally, when a politician spins, I get the gist of it. What is this shit? Who cares whether these people "hate freedom," especially when "freedom" comes at the business end of a bazooka? Since when are we in the business of "freeing" people in third-world dictatorships? Is that our mission in life? Can we put that on the record? According to George Bush, the United States must guarantee freedom to the oppressed, wherever major natural resources are involved? How much is this costing us, and how come we were never consulted? When did American foreign policy suddenly become "emergency rescue"?

There are people here who hate freedom, starting with anyone who doesn't go along (me). Freedom is worth a whole hell of a lot, especially when those waging freedom don't have to pay for it but reap the windfall. Freedom is worth a whole bunch to people who are not you or me. Freedom is a contract, written in blood, spilled from the day it was signed. God help us, and fuck the Middle East.

- Michael 9:49 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Cheney Tax Plan From ’86 Would Have Raised Gas Prices

"Let us rid ourselves of the fiction that low oil prices are somehow good for the United States," Mr. Cheney, who is now vice president, said shortly after introducing the legislation.
...

To deflect charges that the White House has not done enough to bring down prices, the Bush campaign has attacked Senator John Kerry, the likely Democratic presidential nominee, as favoring higher gas prices. "Some people have wacky ideas like taxing gasoline more so people drive less. That's John Kerry," a recent Bush campaign commercial said. The commercial singled out Mr. Kerry's support a decade ago for a 50-cent gas tax increase, part of a deficit-reduction package that Mr. Kerry never voted for.

Yet the cost of Mr. Cheney's plan ultimately would have been passed on to drivers and other consumers through higher prices on gasoline and other refined petroleum products. In addition, he said in a February 1987 statement, he supported the tax partly because it would "assist us in reducing our budget deficit."

Under Mr. Cheney's proposal, any foreign oil bought for less than $24 per barrel would have been taxed with a fee equal to the difference between the cost of imported oil and the $24 base price. According to the federal Energy Information Administration, the cost of imported oil in the late 1980's and most of the 1990's stayed well below $24, except for a brief period following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. In fact, oil imports cost less than $18 per barrel over much of that time, so when that was the case the Cheney plan could have led to oil taxes of $6 or more per barrel, driving up demand for domestic oil.

But the plan also included a complicated formula tying the taxes to gains in inflation and the gross national product. Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, who criticized the plan in a speech last week, said if it had been enacted when Mr. Cheney introduced it, in the years that followed it would have cost consumers $1.2 trillion.
...

Senator John Heinz of Pennsylvania, a Republican, said in February 1987 that the proposals would add $1.3 billion per year to the energy costs of Pennsylvania consumers. He also cited a study done for a federal reserve bank suggesting that a $5 per barrel fee would lead to the loss of 400,000 jobs nationwide and cause inflation to soar.

In a statement condemning the proposals to tax oil imports, Mr. Heinz said, "I want to bring this vampire into daylight now before it sneaks out of Congress and drains the lifeblood from our economic recovery."

Yeah that Mr. Heinz is Kerry's wife (Teresa Heinz)'s previous husband. He died in a plane crash, which is what happens when you call Cheney a vampire. (okay that was uncalled for... sorry)

- rob 4:44 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

I have no problem with dumb jokes, but at what point does a dumb joke define the jokester dumb?

From: 'Background' Moves to Forefront (washingtonpost.com)

Bush Hits the Pavement Again and Again . . .

President Bush seems to have developed a powerful obsession with asphalt. Wherever and whenever the president sees a mayor, he blurts out one word: 'potholes.'

Bush has employed this word association about 30 times in speeches, when he introduces the local mayor. In Appleton, Wis., last week, he advised Mayor Tim Hanna: 'Fill the potholes and empty the garbage. All will be well.' Three weeks earlier it was Harvey Hall, mayor of Bakersfield, Calif., who received the same advice. Bush has given similar instructions to the mayors of St. Petersburg, Seminole and Clearwater, Fla.; Springfield, Mo.; Knoxville, Tenn.; Roswell, N.M.; Little Rock; Pasco, Wash.; Santa Monica, Calif.; and Livonia and Dearborn, Mich. Noting that Mayor Al Cappuccilli of Monroe, Mich., received loud applause, Bush observed: 'You must be filling the potholes, picking up the garbage; that's the way to go.'

No city executive has endured the pothole joke more often than Washington's own Mayor Anthony A. Williams. Bush first singled out Williams in the Rose Garden in April 2001, noting to laughter: 'There's a couple of potholes out back that I'd like to talk to you about.'

Bush delivered the same joke at Williams's expense in May, June and July.

- rob 4:37 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

And from the "how amazingly convenient" department:

White House vetting could delay 9/11 report until after election

- rob 12:47 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

I'm sorry, I meant to say "President Arrogant Whistle Ass"

President Bush Discusses Iraq, 911 Commission with Reporters

THE PRESIDENT: I just met with Specialist Chris Hill's family from North Carolina. You know, I told the family how much we appreciated his sacrifice -- he was killed in Iraq -- and assured him that we would stay the course, that a free Iraq was very important for peace in the world, long-term peace, and that we're being challenged in Iraq because there are people there that hate freedom. But the family was pleased to hear that we -- its son would not have died in vain. And that's an important message that I wanted to share with you today.

Let me ask you a couple of questions. Who is the AP person?

Q I am.

THE PRESIDENT: You are?

Q Sir, in regard to --

THE PRESIDENT: Who are you talking to?

Q Mr. President, in regard to the June 30th deadline, is there a chance that that would be moved back?

I can understand the AP reporters confusion, he thought he was asking the President of the United States a question, but in truth he was asking an arrogant spoiled ignorant little shit a question. It does get confusing.

And isn't it nice to know that the situation in Iraq can be summed up be "we're being challenged in Iraq because there are people there that hate freedom." I'm surprised the budget deficit is so huge, because surely we must be saving money by buying only Black & White TVs for the White House, I mean why waste money on color TVs when the President can't even see Grey.

- rob 12:46 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

When Private Armies Take to the Front Lines

What the murder of the four security specialists did reveal is a little known reality about how business is done in war-torn settings all over the globe. With U.S. troops still having to battle insurgents and defend themselves, the job of protecting everyone else in Iraq—from journalists to government contractors to the U.S. administrator in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer—is largely being done by private security companies stocked with former soldiers looking for good money and the taste of danger. Pentagon officials count roughly 20 private companies around the world that contract for security work, mainly in combat areas. They are finding plenty of it in Iraq.

Ah yes, mercenaries. We've stretched the military so thin that were paying $1,000 plus a day for each member of Bremer's security detail, while some national guard units are driving around in unprotected humvees (I guess because money was short).

The security firm's website notes that "Blackwater has the people to execute any requirement." Blackwater recruits from the ranks of active-duty special-forces units—particularly Navy SEALs, Army Rangers and Delta Force troops—many of which are based in nearby Ft. Bragg, N.C. The best and brightest among private security consultants earn salaries that run as high as $15,000 a month. And as various commitments have strained the military's capacity to provide day-to-day security for relief workers and diplomats, Blackwater has prospered by filling the void. Since 2002, Blackwater has won more than $35 million in government contracts.

The current business boom is in Iraq. Blackwater charges its clients $1,500 to $2,000 a day for each hired gun. Most security contractors, like Blackwater's teams, live a comfortable if exhausting existence in Baghdad, staying at the Sheraton or Palestine hotels, which are not plush but at least have running water. Locals often mistake the guards for special forces or CIA personnel, which makes active-duty military troops a bit edgy. "Those Blackwater guys," says an intelligence officer in Iraq, "they drive around wearing Oakley sunglasses and pointing their guns out of car windows. They have pointed their guns at me, and it pissed me off. Imagine what a guy in Fallujah thinks."

Hearts and minds. That is what we have to win and we won't this way, but hey, I'm sure Blackwater is hiring and to quote Jim Baker about the previous Gulf War, the war is all about "jobs."
.
.
Sorry, had to step away and vomit.

- rob 12:38 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Maxwell Smart Testifies Before Congress on Intelligence Lapses

Washington DC - CIA director Maxwell Smart testified before congress today on recent intelligence lapses within the agency. Director Smart's tenure as head of the agency has been marked with controversy. Among other lapses, Smart has insisted the Soviet Union was the most powerful nation on Earth the day before the Berlin Wall fell and that neither Pakistan nor India had nuclear programs just as they both detonated nuclear weapons. Below is a transcript of Smart's testimony.

Smart: Senator, Iraq has nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons and the capacity to attack the United States in 45 minutes.

Senator Clinton: Mister Smart, with almost a year spent searching for these weapons of mass destruction and discovering nothing, I find this hard to believe.

Smart: Would you believe weapons of mass destruction related program activity?

Senator Clinton: No.

Smart: Would you believe a junior chemistry set and a guy with a bad cough?

Senator Boxer: Director Smart! This is an intelligence failure of monumental proportions.

Smart: Well don't tell me that Iraq has no WMDs at all!

Senator Boxer: Director Smart, Iraq has no WMDs at all.

Smart: I asked you not to tell me that.

It's actually not funny at all... just very sad.

- rob 12:32 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

And the Economist endorsed Bush in 2000 (I believe)

- rob 12:25 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

2004 is the year of the monkey
But it isn't the year of the smirking chimp


Summary of Findings: Public Support for War Steady, But Bush Job Ratings Slip

- rob 12:17 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

I'm venturing out on a limb here, but I think George Bush's goose is cooked. I generally keep a low profile (despite my gut-spilling blogs), and when talk turns to politics I shut up and am pretty much all ears. I live in a Republican stronghold (upstate New York) so I try to keep politics to myself, but you can't avoid it nowadays, and what I'm hearing is music. People are fed up. The war in Iraq makes no sense, even to diehard fans, who are really on the defensive, in case you haven't noticed. David Brooks of the New York Times is a perfect example. Can this guy whine any louder? This crowd has been on a mad tear ever since Clinton in '92, and now it's gotten everything it ever wanted, in spades, and they're still foaming at the mouth. What are these people so angry about? They have money, power, a lockhold on every branch of government, wars up the wazoo, and total control of the media. You'd think that would be enough for a sane person. But with every new concession and every rollback of anything progressive in the last hundred years, the rant gets ratcheted up, to the point where it's all scream all the time. They're on constant bash. I think the worm has turned. It's one thing when you're the underdog and you want to shake things up. I can understand the Clinton hate, especially when the guy coopts all your fire. But that was a million years ago. They dragged us through an impeachment, set every dog on his sorry ass, ripped him to pieces, and in the meantime our country got attacked by religious lunatics (and I don't mean Osama). The kneejerk smearing of anything or anyone opposed is now an international joke, and our reputation has gone from 100 percent to zero under Bush. He's completely incompetent. All the foot soldiers in the world can fall on their spears, but the emperor has no clothes, and it doesn't take a child to point it out. You can't distract people forever. Suddenly I'm hearing nothing but excuses. You think people are going to take four more years of this shit? Americans are getting blown up every day, for what? It made no sense 30 years ago and it makes no sense now. All these people are crawling out of the woodwork with the same story, of a White House hell-bent on its ideological agenda, which is nothing more than steal all the money and crash the ship into the ground. All the yelling and screaming is nothing but smoke to cover up thieving on the grand scale. All the tall talk about patriotism and values. Who's saying all this, and how much are they getting to say it? When you're on top, attacking the little guy is repulsive. It was bad enough with Newt, he was the fat kid throwing spitballs in the back of the class, but now the teacher -- no, the principal -- is the fat kid throwing spitballs at all of us, and he's wearing a million-dollar suit. His hand is deep in your pocket, and he's grinning from ear to ear. How long?

Not long. Not long at all.

- Michael 10:32 AM - [PermaLink] -

----

An Excellent Edition of: The Top Ten Conservative Idiots, No. 150

4. Robert Novak
Mind you, Bob "Traitor" Novak went one step further than Bill Frist last week, desperately trying to inject racism into the Richard Clarke story. On CNN's Crossfire, Novak asked Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Illinois), "Congressman, do you believe, you're a sophisticated guy, do you believe watching these hearings that Dick Clarke has a problem with this African-American woman Condoleezza Rice?" Uh, what? Clearly confused by this brazen statement, Emanuel asked Novak to repeat himself. So he did. "Do you believe that Dick Clarke has a problem with this African-American woman Condoleezza Rice?" asked Novak. "No, no. Bob, give me a break. No. No." said Emanuel. As John Stewart said later on the Daily Show, "I didn't even know this deck had a race card." I mean, for goodness sake, is there anything the Republican Attack machine won't try to pin on Richard Clarke? Look for next week's NewsMax exposé, "Richard Clarke: I wore women's clothing while picking up young boys on the Internet." Seriously, look out for it.

5. Zell Miller
Once the first and only Democrat to ever appear on the Top Ten, Zell Miller could have a permanent spot from now until November if he keeps going at this rate. Last week the proud Bush supporter announced that we should stop investigating 9/11 immediately because it could "energize our enemies and demoralize our troops." That's right - according to Miller, finding out why 3,000 people were killed on September 11 so that we can make sure it doesn't happen again is the same as giving aid and comfort to the enemy. See, on Planet Zell, it's Richard Clarke who's really to blame for 9/11 because he was in the "catbird seat" for ten years. Never mind that Clarke was practically begging Bush to pay attention to al Qaeda and Bush ignored him - has everyone forgotten that Our Great Leader is absolutely not responsible for anything at all that happens under his watch? Said Miller, "It's obvious to me that this country is rapidly dividing itself into two camps - the wimps and the warriors." No Zell, if this country is dividing itself into two camps it's between people who want the truth and people who've got their noses so far up Bush's butt that they've lost their minds.
...

9. George W. Bush
Despite the Richard Clarke controversy, George W. Bush is still trying to portray himself as a no-compromises, tough-on-terror kinda guy. Funny then that last week the White House denied an IRS request for 80 more criminal investigators to add to the 160 it currently has tracking down and disrupting al Qaeda's financial networks. And why was the request denied? So Bush can save a mere $12 million. Ah, there's nothing like frugality when it comes to stopping al Qaeda. Sure, we can spend $150 billion making things worse in Iraq, but $12 million to actually do something useful in the war on terror? Not a chance! That reminds me, isn't it about time they fired some more gay translators?

10. The White House
And finally, guess what? The White House is going to vet the 9/11 Commission's report line by line before it is publicly released, to make sure that it doesn't, you know, "compromise intelligence," or "jeopardize national security," or "make them look bad." So first they try to prevent an investigation into 9/11, then they try to delay it, then they try to prevent its deadline from being extended, then they try to prevent any members of the administration from testifying - and now the last ace up their sleeve is to redact half of the final report. According to Reuters, "Commission vice chairman Lee Hamilton vowed not to let the White House 'distort' the report." Ha, good luck with that. If there's one thing the Bush administration is good at, it's distorting. Expect to see a large consignment of black magic markers arriving at the White House sometime this week.

- rob 1:21 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

US senators warn of Iraq civil war
The Bush administration has received a warning from two senior senators that Iraq faces the possibility of civil war.

Democrat Senator Joe Biden talked over the weekend of the real prospect of civil war in Iraq if the White House sticks to the 30 June deadline for handing over sovereignty.

Mr Biden said Nato should be involved and the UN should be invited to send a commissioner to help run the country.

Mr Biden's Republican colleague, Richard Lugar, also talked of the possibility of civil war.

He said it was time to begin a debate on whether the 30 June handover could still take place.

The Foreign Relations Committee will begin hearings on the subject soon.

The White House is heavily committed to its deadline.

Letting that date slip would send a message to the American people, only months before the presidential election, that Iraq was out of control.

It is out of control. This is Bush's War. George got us there and doesn't believe there is a mess. We need Kerry to go to the White House.

- rob 1:13 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Speaking of Nixon (and I was, briefly, below)

Bush's administration is worse than Nixon's, says Watergate aide

John Dean, Richard Nixon's legal counsel who was jailed for his part in the Watergate scandal, has accused the Bush administration of trumping even the Nixon regime in secrecy, deception and political cynicism.

In the latest book to attack the conduct of the current United States administration, Mr Dean says that it has created potentially the most corrupt, unethical and undemocratic White House in history.

His Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush is published this week by Little Brown.

"Bush and [Vice-President Richard] Cheney are a throwback to the Nixon time," Mr Dean, 65, told The Telegraph last night. "All government business is filtered through a political process at this White House, which is the most secretive ever to run the United States.

"This is not in the public's interest. It's in the White House's interest, and the interest of Bush's re-election. The White House is being run like a private business, with the difference that it is not accountable to the shareholders - in this case the voters."

- rob 1:11 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Bush and Blair made secret pact for Iraq war

President George Bush first asked Tony Blair to support the removal of Saddam Hussein from power at a private White House dinner nine days after the terror attacks of 11 September, 2001.

According to Sir Christopher Meyer, the former British Ambassador to Washington, who was at the dinner when Blair became the first foreign leader to visit America after 11 September, Blair told Bush he should not get distracted from the war on terror's initial goal - dealing with the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

Bush, claims Meyer, replied by saying: 'I agree with you, Tony. We must deal with this first. But when we have dealt with Afghanistan, we must come back to Iraq.' Regime change was already US policy.

It was clear, Meyer says, 'that when we did come back to Iraq it wouldn't be to discuss smarter sanctions'.

Bush wanted war with Iraq since day one of of his Presidency. 9/11 was the excuse he needed to get the public behind him. These are facts now. Facts. Makes Nixon's "'secret plan to end the war' which didn't exist" lie seem almost quaint... doesn't it?

- rob 1:08 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Loop de Loop

On Thursday, Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's national security adviser, is scheduled to testify under oath before the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks. Here is how I imagine this line of questioning will go:

Q. Dr. Rice, what didn't the president know and when didn't he know it?

A. The president never knew anything at any time.

Q. Well if the president never knew anything, how could he continue not to have known it, especially after what happened?

A. The president makes it a point to keep himself out of the loop. That way, anyone in the loop never has to answer directly to him.

Q. How many people are in the loop, as opposed to being outside of it?

A. Which loop would that be?

Q. The counterterrorism loop. According to the vice president, [Richard E.] Clarke was never in that loop.

A. That's not what I believe the vice president said. He said [Clarke] wasn't in the loop, but he refused to specify which loop. It may have been another loop. I think you're reading things in here.

Q. Well let's assume for the sake of argument he means the counterterrorism loop.

A. There is no counterterrorism loop, so I can't see how [Clarke] could be in it.

Q. So you're saying he was outside the loop?

A. I didn't say that.

Q. Well if he wasn't in the loop he must've been outside it.

A. Not necessarily. Not being in the loop doesn't mean you're outside it, it just means you're not necessarily in the loop. You can be beside the loop.

Q. Beside the loop?

A. You can have access to a given loop.

Q. Let's be clear about something here. If you're beside the loop, you can have access to the loop but not necessarily be in the loop?

A. That's correct.

Q. Would you say that Clarke had access to the loop?

A. I wouldn't say that.

Q. Why not?

A. Having access in this case wouldn't have afforded him any special knowledge, since the president at the time was out of the loop, as I said. He was nowhere near the loop.

Q. He wasn't beside the loop.

A. Clarke?

Q. The president.

A. No, we were under strict orders to keep the president as far away from the loop as possible. Those were his explicit instructions.

Q. So your job, as I understand it, was to keep the president coming anywhere near the loop?

A. That's one way of describing it.

Q. As national security adviser, I presume you were in the loop?

A. Which loop?

Q. The counterterrorism loop.

A. Well, as I said earlier, that loop didn't exist.

Q. You had no counterterrorism policy?

A. I didn't say that.

Q. Well, presumably as security adviser you had a counterterrorism policy.

A. We had certain guidelines.

Q. And those guidelines were ... ?

A. In the event of an actual event, to take appropriate countermeasures.

Q. And Clarke was part of that decision making?

A. He was part of the decision being made.

Q. What does that mean?

A. His department was reorganized according to the level of threat assessment.

Q. Which at that time was high.

A. We were given warnings and continued to assess the threat level according to the information we had.

Q. That sounds like a loop to me.

A. No sir, it wasn't a loop.

Q. It sounds like the beginning of a loop. You were getting information and pursuing guidelines based on actual threats.

A. That's feedback.

Q. Excuse me?

A. That kind of information is feedback, but not exactly a loop. It comes from, you know, CIA, then it has to be assessed.

Q. And how do you assess feedback if it isn't in the loop?

A. It goes through certain channels.

Q. What channels?

A. You have to understand the kind of information we're talking about. This is highly classified time-sensitive information.

Q. That goes through channels, but not a loop.

A. That's correct.

Q. So Clarke would have access to the channels?

A. Not necessarily.

Q. Could he be beside the channels?

A. The channels aren't really a part of the department. It goes through them and comes to us.

Q. So you're getting highly classified time-sensitive information from certain channels that your own counterterrorism chief doesn't have access to?

A. I didn't say that.

Q. Just what are you saying?

A. That the level of threat has to be assessed based on the information we get.

Q. That comes through certain channels not connected to your department.

A. That's correct.

Q. Would you or anyone in your department be able to verify the accuracy of the information?

A. That depends.

Q. On what?

A. On the certainty of the channels.

Q. You're saying the reliability of the information depends on the certainty of those who provide it to you?

A. I didn't say that.

Q. How many people are in the loop?

A. Which loop?

Q. The loop outside the one that doesn't exist.

A. Could you rephrase the question?

Q. Dr. Rice, what didn't the president know and when didn't he know it?

- Michael 6:35 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Subscribe to the TCS Feed

Having trouble with some of the poor English on this site?
Imagine what it looks like when translated by a machine:

Search TCS

Archive

Archive Index Page

What is this?

This is a "team" blog.  We are a bunch of Americans, whose rising distress in our leader's decisions brought us together to make this site.  As Bush said, he's a "uniter."  Many of us have never even met.
That's the internet for you.

This Century Sucks Store

Buy our cool stuff.
And tell everyone what you feel.  

We have a little Store you can visit.  

Our store's selection of items is constantly growing. Come see what we have.

 

We're also Amazon Associates, so if you want to buy something from Amazon, please search for it below, and we will get a few bucks from the sale.

Search Now:

Sites we often like:

Tin Foil Caps

The Free Speech Zone

The office of the independent blogger

Buzzflash

Tom The Dancing Bug

VerifiedVoting.org

Get Your War On

This Modern World

Eschaton / Atrios

Daily Kos

Contribute to America's Future

It is now more important then ever.

Donate to the Democractic Congressional Campaign Committee

Donate to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee

Some More Site Mottos

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American people."
- Teddy Roosevelt



"Government has a final responsibility for the well-being of its citizenship. If private cooperative endeavor fails to provide work for willing hands and relief for the unfortunate, those suffering hardship from no fault of their own have a right to call upon the Government for aid; and a government worthy of its name must make fitting response."
 - Franklin Delano Roosevelt



"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions, but laws must and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
- Thomas Jefferson



"The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."

"All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree."
- James Madison



"I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves."
- John F. Kennedy



"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are [a] few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

More Sites we often like:

more coming...

"There's nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what's right with America." - Bill Clinton.