La Carte Blanche


Blog For Free!


Archives
Home
2005 January
2004 December
2004 November
2004 October
2004 September
2004 August
2004 July
2004 June
2004 May
2004 April
2004 March
2004 February
2004 January

My Links
Guerrilla News
MoveOn.Org
The Nation
Winston Smith's Daily Journal
Sam Adams' CounterPoint

tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images


Sponsored
Blog



Despite Bush Mindless 'Optimism', Analysts See “Failed Transition” in Iraq
09.30.04 (8:10 pm)   [edit]
Despite President George W. Bush’s continued insistence that its efforts in Iraq are making steady progress, a new report by two Washington-based think tanks argues that the situation has deteriorated since the handover of “sovereignty” from the U.S.-led occupation authorities to the interim Iraq government.

More U.S. soldiers and contractors have been killed and injured over three months since the transition to Iraqi rule on June 28, 2004, than any other three-month period since the U.S.-led invasion in March, 2003, while the estimated strength of insurgent forces appears to have risen sharply, according to the report by the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and Foreign Policy in Focus (FPIF).

In addition, more members of the 30-nation coalition that joined with the U.S. in support of the invasion have withdrawn their forces, the latest being Costa Rica which, although it never actually contributed troops, demanded earlier this month to be taken off the coalition list.

Body counts appear to be rising for Iraqis themselves, both as a result of the insurgency and U.S.-led efforts to put it down and as a result of a crime wave that has persisted, if not spread, since the U.S. invasion, according to the 86-page report, ‘[i]A Failed Transition: The Mounting Costs of the Iraq War[/i].’ http://www.ips-dc.org/iraq/fa...

“This is a re-run of the Vietnam War on fast-forward,” said IPS director John Cavanagh, who contributed to the study. “It’s astounding that the number of monthly U.S. casualties is higher during this so-called ‘transition’ to Iraqi rule than during the initial six weeks of the U.S. invasion.”

The report was released just hours before the first nationally televised presidential debate between Bush and his Democratic challenger, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, who has in recent weeks become increasingly critical of the U.S. effort in Iraq and the way it has been carried out.

During a visit last week by Iraq’s interim president Iyad Allawi, Bush himself insisted that the more progress was being made on the ground in Iraq than the U.S. public was hearing about through the media. He also dismissed a particularly gloomy intelligence report that was leaked to the New York Times as guesswork.

But most independent experts – and what the Washington Post Wednesday called “a growing number of career professionals within national security agencies” – believe that the situation is in fact considerably worse than what the administration has conceded. Indeed, Secretary of State Colin Powell himself acknowledged Sunday that the insurgency in Iraq is “getting worse.”

The main author, Phyllis Bennis, a Middle East analyst based at IPS, has been keeping tabs on the costs of the U.S. campaign was launched 18 months ago.

The numbers her team recorded for the report pretty much bear out Powell’s own analysis. The Pentagon itself, according to the study, estimates that the number of Iraqi insurgents has quadrupled from some 5,000 in November, 2003, to 20,000 today, while the deputy commander of the coalition forces in Iraq, British Mar. Gen. Andrew Graham, has said he thinks the number is at least twice that many, from 40,000 to 50,000.

With the increase in the strength of the insurgency, both the number of attacks against coalition forces, as well as civilian targets, has also risen to twice what they were last winter.

U.S. casualties – both killed and wounded – are averaging 747 a month since the “transition” took place. That contrasts with a monthly average of 482 casualties during the six-week invasion in the spring of 2003 and 415 casualties from over the 13 months leading up to the transition. More than 1,040 U.S. soldiers have died and 7,413 have been wounded over the past 18 months, more than 90 percent of all of them since Bush declared an end to major hostilities.

Non-Iraqi contractor deaths have also been highest during the “transition,” according to the report, with a monthly average of 17.5 contractors killed over the past three months, versus a monthly average of 7.6 contractor deaths over the previous 15 months. A total of 52 U.S. contractors have died to date.

As of last week, an estimated 12,800 to 14,800 Iraqi civilians have been killed in connection with the invasion and ensuring occupation, according to the report, which estimated the total number of injured civilians at roughly 40,000.

But the failure to date of the U.S. and Iraqi government forces to enforce security has also had a major impact that is not only related to the insurgency. Murder, rape, and kidnapping have kept tens of thousands of women off the streets and children out of school – the opening of school this year has been delayed until next month – and a major exodus of members of the middle and professional classes, particularly Iraq’s Christian community.

Meanwhile, despite Congressional appropriation of some US$18 billion for reconstruction, unemployment is running at 50 percent or more – roughly double what it was before the invasion. According to the report, the U.S. is currently employing only 120,000 Iraqis out of a work force of some seven million.

Moreover, Iraq’s health infrastructure has been severely weakened, particularly as a result of looting in the invasion’s aftermath, as well as the demands placed on it by the continuing violence and the failure to date to repair damaged water and sewage systems that are contributing to an outbreak of infectious diseases, including hepatitis, in various parts of the country.

In terms of cost to the U.S. taxpayer, the study says that Congress has so far approved $151.1 billion for Iraq alone, and that Congressional leaders have said they expect the administration to request another $60 billion after the November election. In terms of long-term costs, at least one economist has estimated that the total war bill to date will add up to an average of at least $3,415 for every U.S. household.

Economic and social costs, especially to soldiers’ families, have also been high. Since 2001, some 364,000 reserve troops and National Guard soldiers have been called up and required to serve tours of duty that often last as much as 20 months, resulting in losses of income to their families.

The average tour of duty for all soldiers in Iraq has been 320 days, and various studies have shown that as many as half of the soldiers may not re-enlist. An Army study last March found that 52 percent of soldiers in Iraq reported low morale and 75 percent complained that they were poorly led. Meanwhile, 44 percent of the country’s police forces have lost officers to Iraq, which has also depleted the ranks of other “first responders,” such firefighters and emergency medical personnel in local communities.

Almost two-thirds of injuries suffered by U.S. forces in Iraq were severe enough to prevent them from returning to duty, while a recent study in the New England Journal of Medicine reported that one in six soldiers returning from Iraq showed signs of post-traumatic stress disorder, major depression, or severe anxiety.

Other costs resulting from the war, according to the report, include a sharp rise in recruitment by al Qaeda and like-minded groups, with the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies recently estimating al Qaeda’s active membership at some 18,000. - http://www.commondreams.org/h...


 
RealVoices.org: Families of Iraq War Dead Target Bush in Ads
09.30.04 (8:06 pm)   [edit]
WASHINGTON - Angered by President Bush's policy in Iraq, a group of military families whose relatives died there is targeting the president in new television ads to be aired ahead of the Nov. 2 election.

"I think the American people need to know that we have been betrayed in this rush to war," said Cindy Sheehan, whose son Casey is among the more than 1,000 U.S. troops who died in the war.

Sheehan is joining a small group of military families in Washington on Wednesday to launch new political ads by an interest group called RealVoices.org, http://www.realvoices.org/ which supports Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry's bid for the White House.

"It's important that we get our troops home from Iraq as soon as possible so no other families have to go through what we are going through," said Sheehan of Vacaville, California.

The ads are expected to be aired nationally in the coming weeks and in battleground cities of Las Vegas, Orlando and Albuquerque.

In one ad, Sheehan is seen sobbing as she tells the story of her son, 24-year-old Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, who died in the arms of one of his friends in Iraq on April 4, 2004.

Al Zappala is active in "Military Families Speak Out" (www.mfso.org), a group that opposes the U.S. war in Iraq and has about 1,700 families among its members. He is in Washington for the ads and to attend a peace march on Saturday.

Zappala's son, Sgt. Sherwood Baker, was killed on April 26 in Iraq and was the first Pennsylvania National Guard soldier to die in action since World War II.

"I feel so let down by the Bush administration," said Zappala, who said Military Families Speak Out was a non-partisan group.

[b]OPPOSING VIEWS[/b]

Another group, "Military Moms with a Mission," is campaigning in 30 cities across America to tell people why they should vote for Kerry.

"They are traveling the country telling people their stories and why George Bush has let them down. Many are frustrated that George Bush is not telling the truth about the reality in Iraq," said Kerry campaign spokesman Chad Clanton.

Countering this campaign to support Kerry are similar groups who back Bush and his policy in Iraq.

Retired Air Force Capt. Linda Bergin is campaigning on behalf of military families and others in New Jersey and says Bush is the only leader capable of leading America following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

She said many veterans and people still in the military felt Kerry had been disloyal, particularly after he returned home from Vietnam and criticized the U.S. presence there.

"People are heartbroken their people are over there but out of respect of their child, they want to support the president," she said.

Nancy Kennon, founder of the group "Security Moms For Bush," said many military families had contacted her Web site (www.moms4Bush.com) to lend their support and were sick of the negative message pushed by the Kerry campaign.

"I have got some letters from active military moms and they have been saddened by the negative spin," said Kennon, who lives in Westchester, New York. She is the mother of young twin daughters and does not have a child in the military.

The Bush campaign could not immediately be reached for comment on the new ads. - http://www.commondreams.org/h...


 
A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To 'The Truth'
09.30.04 (7:38 pm)   [edit]
I am a conservative Republican who has come to the conclusion over the past 12 months that I would not vote for Bush Cheney 2004 under bribe, duress or at gunpoint. I have come to that conclusion for many reasons that are well documented and in some instances is information that is known only to myself and several executives that I work with.

I have written a book about my experiences with the Republican National Committee (RNC) and Bush Cheney, and bring forth facts that I found stunning and disgusting to the point that I am convinced that both the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and RNC, and our political system, are in need a serious house cleaning. America needs leadership, not an endless stream of talking heads and game show hosts to keep us entertained. That is my opinion and I am sticking to it.

It would also help if Americans had The Truth but that seems to be something that Washington, DC fears these days.

I read the recent analysis written by Sibel D. Edmonds regarding the 9-11 Commission findings and recommendations. That article was posted on Antiwar.com for those readers that missed it. For those that do not know who Sibel Edmonds is, she is the FBI translator that Bush, Cheney and Ashcroft have gone to great lengths to silence.

The 9-11 attorneys Motley & Rice zeroed in on her as a possible key witness after filing that $1 trillion lawsuit, and when that happened none of us should be surprised that Bush, Cheney and Ashcroft went into "shut her up mode."

Out of curiosity as to how her facts might concur or disagree with the facts I assembled in my book, I tracked Sibel down and we had a long visit via telephone. That conversation was just another example of "don't believe everything you read" in our major media outlets.

I followed her story as it developed and the media always reported to us "mushrooms" that her testimony was being blocked "due to national security" and "protecting the Global War on Terrorism." Good enough reasons I thought at first, until I had the chance to hear it from the source.

During the FBI translations Sibel came across pre-9-11 drug trafficking and money laundering and that is evidently what they are trying to keep quiet. It does not take Sherlock Holmes to figure out that first, the Saudis do not need drug trafficking to generate cash flow to finance terrorism if they are in fact the culprits, and secondly, that tidbit of information does not fit what we have all been told about how al Qaeda financed the attack upon America. After I weighed it all, I thought the 9-11 attorneys might not be as interested in Sibel Edmonds' testimony as they first thought because drug trafficking and money laundering is not exactly a Saudi modus operandi.

More importantly, what Sibel Edmonds found was not from counter-terrorism sources. It was from ongoing FBI investigations of Americans and foreign nationals involved in drug trafficking, money laundering and apparently pre-9-11 activities and financing of that attack. Now that explains why Emperor GW cannot dare let Sibel Edmonds testify under oath in that $1 trillion lawsuit, or before Congress or before the 9-11 Commission. We have not been told that Americans might have been in part involved in 9-11. Wouldn't that be a hoot compared to the endless lies we have heard from the Bush administration?

No wonder her testimony (if ever heard in an open forum) is giving heart palpitations to Emperor George, Prince Dick, and Squire Ashcroft.

Hmmm, I said to myself. That Sibel story sounds familiar, like Iran-Contra, which was in part run through my home state of Arkansas. Who in this menagerie of current "bad actors" has that type of MO and history, including involvement in Iran-Contra? The first name that comes to mind is Richard Armitage of the State Department and reportedly our go between with the Pakistani ISI. Hmmm, it was the former director of ISI that wired Mohammed Atta that $100,000 for 9-11 and then was conveniently in Washington, DC, when 9-11 happened, meeting with Senators Graham and Kyl and Congressman Porter Goss, Bush's pick to keep the lid on at CIA.

Hmm, Richard Armitage, drug trafficking, money laundering, Iran-Contra, Pakistan ISI, what is the connection?

Then there is Baron Rumsfeld over at DoD, who seemed to dart around like a bee pollinating CBW (chemical and biological weapons) to Saddam under the Reagan administration, being part of Iran-Contra, planning and practicing the invasion of Afghanistan in early 2001 well in advance of 9-11, attacking on October 7, 2001, to get rid of those silly Taliban folks, and immediately after 9-11 wanted to start planning to go kick Saddam really good.

Somewhere along the way Baron Rummy forgot to tell us all what Karen Kwiatkowski disclosed, that being the Pentagon was running a little shop of lies known as The Office of Special Plans to skew intelligence to fit the policy that Emperor George II, Prince Dick and Baron Rumsfeld wanted us all to believe. I think the entire world now knows they lied, so no sense wasting time here to belabour that point any further today.

Before I forget, of course George H.W. Bush was vice president and former head of the CIA when Iran-Contra was being done as a CIA black op. CIA, GHWB, Drug trafficking, money laundering, Armitage, Pakistan ISI, what is the connection? I seem to recall that when Barry Seal's body was found (he was the drug part of Iran-Contra) they found George H W Bush's personal telephone number in his car. Curious indeed. Maybe GW should slap "SECRET" all the way back to before his birth just to be on the safe side.

However, I have come across other facts due to personal and professional reasons that the Bush–Cheney Administration and the 9-11 Commission evidently do not what you as a reader to know.

Do you recall in March 2003 when the FBI and Ashcroft flashed the photographs and name of Adnan G. El Shukrijumah across our TV screens and the next day in major newspapers? Following my divorce in 2002, I dated a lady from Canada for close to 20 months and when those photographs first appeared she recognized him immediately. Two of the five photographs shown on the FBI website directly involved how she knew it was him. He was in Hamilton, Ontario, at McMaster University and under an alias.

The call to the FBI was made from my home office telephone.

The FBI did not go after him. They don't want the "mushroom Americans" to know that fact, either. If you happen to have caught US Attorney Comey's press conference on Shukrijumah recently, at least one aggressive (i.e. awake) reporter pinned him down that they do not have enough evidence on Shukrijumah to arrest or convict him.

Hmmm, then why run his name and photographs on the national and international TV stations claiming he is the ultimate boogeyman? They are looking for him for what exact reason?

I have repeatedly asked the FBI to update their website to include that new alias or provide an explanation as to why they have not done so. I have asked the same of Homeland Security and they of course, never respond to mere American citizens who pose an embarrassing question as to their ineptitude.

Where it gets even more curious is following positive ID of Shukrijumah and the FBI did not go after him, they called the person I know in Canada that knows him, and demanded that she never tell anyone that she had identified him within 10 minutes of them running his photographs and name. They have since run his name and photographs at least four more times since March 2003, pretending to be looking for him, and I emphasize, pretending to be looking for him. They had a chance and did not even go after him.

The FBI never gets around to mentioning that Adnan G. El Shukrijumah and the rest of his family have lived in Florida since 1986 without incident. That is, until someone dreamed up what I am beginning to believe is a GWOT (global war on terror) Fable to cover up other actions.

Hmmm, who is dropping his name as the boogeyman and he is not the boogeyman? I want to know who is doing that and why they are doing it.

Then it gets even more curious. I met a company in 1999 about oil and gas row across South America in key places. The name of that company is Bridas Corporation of Argentina. Well, 1999 was a long time before 9-11 and it was of little importance to me at that time when they told me that they had filed a $15 billion interference of contract lawsuit against Unocal for interference of contract in Turkmenistan.

They also informed me that they had signed contracts with General Rashid Dostum (that Uzbek who controls the northern part of Afghanistan) and the Taliban.

Seems Bush and Cheney do not want anyone to know that Bridas had contracts to build that pipeline across Afghanistan and we now control it after October 7, 2001, and the attack we levied on Afghanistan. That pipeline is now under construction, is under US control, so it's Miller Time, Emperor GW finally got a "Mission Accomplished."

Now, why didn't Emperor George, Prince Dick or the 9-11 Commission ever say a word about a non-US company having beat the US to that pipeline contract across Afghanistan? Did any of you readers hear a word about Bridas Corporation, Afghanistan, or that pipeline, or that lawsuit in Texas?

Didn't think so.

That sort of explains to me why Emperor George wanted a whole new CIA division just for Argentina, since Bridas is from Argentina.

For you information sleuths, on September 9, 2003, Bridas Corporation prevailed in the Fifth Circuit US Court of Appeals on an arbitration award, reportedly over $500 million, in the matter of Bridas Corporation v. Turkmenneft, the oil ministry arm of Turkmenistan. For the geographically impaired, that is the northwest end of the pipeline that is going across Afghanistan even as you read this, but under US control. Of course, the Bush friends went running to the US Supreme Court, but on March 22, 2004, the high court denied writ of certiorari and left intact the decision out of New Orleans; matter of Turkmenneft v. Bridas Corporation 03-1018, U.S. Supreme Court.

Drug trafficking, money laundering, 9-11, attacking to take away that oil pipeline contract so Emperor George can claim "Mission Accomplished" on something, all of the big Caspian Basin oil deals that need that pipeline.

Seems Sibel Edmonds might have stumbled across a key link that might unravel why the World Trade Center (WTC) is now a hole in the ground and US companies now control a pipeline they had not a chance of controlling, that is until 9-11 and October 7, 2001.

I keep thinking about that Project for a New American Century announcement in 2000:

In 2000 PNAC issued a report predicting that their proposed "transformation" of U.S. military and diplomatic policy in the Middle East wouldn't come very quickly, barring the occurrence of "some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor."

Hmm, Pearl Harbor and WTC, what is the connection?

Guess what law firm represented Turkmenneft to keep Bridas tied up in court? Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw, and senior partner Richard Ben Veniste was sitting on that 9-11 Commission while Bridas was winning. His law firm stands to make hundreds of millions in fees having now positioned themselves in Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. Isn't DC policy a wonderfully profitable endeavor?

I was part of a 9-11 program presented in New York City and when the panel I was on was completed, a woman got past security and came running up to me on the stage, wanting to tell me something. She had just been fired from a job in Argentina with one of our major banks and informed that all of Argentina is hoping an American figured out what Bush/Cheney, et al, did to Bridas Corporation. I had a strange peace before that presentation, maybe I knew she would be there to let me know that my information is right on target.

Lastly, eight of the 10 9-11 Commission members (that I know of) are directly benefiting from 9-11 or companies they represent or sit on the board of directors of that pipeline, that big Caspian Oil deal being "open for business" soon, thanks to the US controlled pipeline, so I think we can all rest assured that The Truth Commission on 9-11 has yet to convene. The ones with serious conflicts are Kean, Fielding, Lehman, Thompson, Hamilton, Gorelick, Ben Veniste, and Roemer and just for kicks, a former Lee Hamilton staffer, Christopher Kojm, was in the back office with Zelikow.

Stay tuned—there is plenty of truth to be found. There are few if any truth seekers in Washington, DC. The truth will not set some of them free.

[b]Karl W. B. Schwarz lives in Little Rock, Ark., and is the author of "One-Way Ticket to Crawford, Texas, a Conservative Republican Speaks Out." He is the President and Chief Executive Office of Patmos Nanotechnologies, LLC and I-nets Security Systems, a designer of intelligence and UAV systems[/b]. - http://www.onlinejournal.com/...

 
Over 2300 Attacks in Iraq- Hey George, is this Progress?
09.30.04 (11:08 am)   [edit]
International Herald Tribune writes, "Over the past month, more than 2,300 attacks have been directed against civilians and military targets in Iraq, in a pattern that sprawls over nearly every major population center outside the Kurdish north, according to comprehensive data compiled by a private security company with access to military intelligence reports and its own network of Iraqi informants." Add to this that over 75 brave American soldiers were killed in Iraq this month as well. Here are some real flip flops for you George- You say "healthy forest"- reality says screw the forest. You say "clean air" act, reality says don't breathe it. You say "Iraqi progress", reality says Iraq is a disaster.

[b]More[/b] ... http://www.iht.com/articles/5...
 
Bush/Republicans' Lack of 'Wisdom' Horrifies Allies
09.30.04 (11:05 am)   [edit]
[b]London Review of Books:[/b] "America is now offering lessons in what little wisdom it takes to govern the world. Confounded in Iraq, isolated from its traditional allies, shamed over Abu Ghraib, soaked in corporate corruption and the backwash of environmental harm, sustaining an uninherited budget deficit while preparing more tax rewards for the rich, as dismissive of the unhealthy as the foreign, as terrified of the unfolding truth as of mailed anthrax, it is a society made menacing by a notion of God's great plan. America is tolerance-challenged, integrity-poor, frightened to death, and yet, beneath its patriotic hosannahs, a country in delirium before the recognition that it might have spent the last three years not only squandering the sympathy of the world but hot-housing hatreds more ferocious than those it had wished to banish for ever from the clear blue skies."

[b]More[/b] ... http://www.lrb.co.uk/v26/n18/...

 
Military Insiders Warn: Bush's Politically Timed Iraq 'Fall Offensive' Ill-Advised & Disastrous
09.30.04 (11:04 am)   [edit]
[b]Navy Times: [/b]"A U.S. military offensive planned in key Iraqi cities this fall could still be delayed or avoided altogether. One key factor in deciding whether to press ahead is if Baghdad and Washington settle for partial, rather than full, Iraqi participation in elections in January. Another problem arguing against an early offensive: Fears that Iraqi forces may not be strong enough to hold cities like Fallujah and Ramadi, even if American forces manage to root out insurgents there, Pentagon officials and defense analysts say. An offensive also carries risks - including numerous civilian casualties and the danger of further inflaming anti-U.S. feelings â?? with no assurance it would put an end to the insurgency, which even Bush administration officials concede is getting worse as Iraqi elections approach." The ONLY reason for the fall offensive is to dupe voters: "Stick with me - we're just about to really break through!" Meanwhile, how many must die or be maimed?

[b]More[/b] ... http://www.navytimes.com/stor...
 
ARMY TIMES: Myers Says Call-ups Expected after the Election
09.30.04 (10:59 am)   [edit]
You won't see this mentioned by Tom 'Tokyo Rose' Brokaw, Britt Hume, Judy Woodruff, and the rest of the cast of corporate clowns posing as "journalists." Can't have any news "inconvenient" to Bush's campaign leaking out now can we? Instead, we have been treated to slams of Kerry, who dared to suggest that the Bush administration would call up more troops AFTER the election, and without mentioning that little detail to the public. This story in Army Times can only be accessed by subscription but the headline is there: "MYERS: CALL-UPS EXPECTED AFTER ELECTION" - right under the headline "RECRUITING FALLS SHORT OF GOAL." So tonight during the debates, if Bush denies the callups, he;ll be calling Gen. Myers a liar!

[b]More[/b] ... http://armytimes.com/
 
Military Insiders Warn: Bush's Politically Timed Iraq 'Fall Offensive' Ill-Advised & Disastrous
09.30.04 (10:59 am)   [edit]
[b]Navy Times: [/b]"A U.S. military offensive planned in key Iraqi cities this fall could still be delayed or avoided altogether. One key factor in deciding whether to press ahead is if Baghdad and Washington settle for partial, rather than full, Iraqi participation in elections in January. Another problem arguing against an early offensive: Fears that Iraqi forces may not be strong enough to hold cities like Fallujah and Ramadi, even if American forces manage to root out insurgents there, Pentagon officials and defense analysts say. An offensive also carries risks - including numerous civilian casualties and the danger of further inflaming anti-U.S. feelings â?? with no assurance it would put an end to the insurgency, which even Bush administration officials concede is getting worse as Iraqi elections approach." The ONLY reason for the fall offensive is to dupe voters: "Stick with me - we're just about to really break through!" Meanwhile, how many must die or be maimed?

[b]More[/b] ... http://www.navytimes.com/stor...
 
ARMY TIMES: Myers Says Call-ups Expected after the Election
09.30.04 (10:56 am)   [edit]
You won't see this mentioned by Tom 'Tokyo Rose' Brokaw, Britt Hume, Judy Woodruff, and the rest of the cast of corporate clowns posing as "journalists." Can't have any news "inconvenient" to Bush's campaign leaking out now can we? Instead, we have been treated to slams of Kerry, who dared to suggest that the Bush administration would call up more troops AFTER the election, and without mentioning that little detail to the public. This story in Army Times can only be accessed by subscription but the headline is there: "MYERS: CALL-UPS EXPECTED AFTER ELECTION" - right under the headline "RECRUITING FALLS SHORT OF GOAL." So tonight during the debates, if Bush denies the callups, he;ll be calling Gen. Myers a liar!

[b]More[/b] ... http://armytimes.com/
 
Bush: Un-Christian, Blood-Thirsty and Hypocritical ...
09.29.04 (12:46 pm)   [edit]
[b]The Bush Family Fortune

Gramps made nice with some not very nice people in the '30s[/b]

Within the chainsaw-wielding Texas rancher, the blue blood of Connecticut runs deep. But not so many people know that there are a couple of rocks to be turned over in the Bush family history.

Prescott Bush, sometimes described as a progressive Republican senator from Connecticut and often described as the man who looked like he should be president, turns out to have been a creepy front man for industrialists who bankrolled and built the Nazi war machine.

Over the weekend, The Guardian (U.K.) set out in a lengthy story based on files in the National Archives the story of how in the '30s, young Prescott Bush, with the help of his father, got together with Averill Harriman, son of the railroad scion E.H. Harriman, and set up a company called UBC (Union Banking Corporation). Bush was a founder and director and owned one share, valued at $125. As it turned out, UBC was an American shell company for the Thyssen family interests. The Thyssens were a preeminent German business family that dominated the nation's iron and steel and coal businesses and were crucial to bankrolling and building the Nazi war machine. UBC was a shell, owned by a Netherlands bank, with anonymous real owners who, on further inspection, turned out to be the Thyssens.

Young Fritz Thyssen was infatuated with Hitler and joined the Nazi party in 1931. When the Nazis were having a hard time, he bailed them out financially. By the late '30s, along with Harriman's Brown Brothers Harriman, which claimed to be the world's largest investment bank, Bush had bought and shipped millions of dollars of gold, fuel, steel, coal, and U.S. treasury bonds to Germany. In addition, it appears that Bush may have had ties to the Consolidated Silesian Steel Company, which during the war used slave labor from the Nazis' concentration camps. He might also have been involved through the Thyssens in another company that was linked to the chemical giant I.G. Farben, which used slave labor.

There was nothing illegal or even unusual about doing business with the Germans in the '30s before war broke out; numerous American companies had holdings in Germany during that era. The issue with Prescott Bush is whether he had actually owned shares in the Thyssen enterprise or was just holding them in a shell for the German owners. U.S. investigations never answered the question, and no one ever brought any charges.

John Loftus, a former U.S. attorney who prosecuted Nazi war criminals in the '70s, is working on a novel that relates to some of the material he found about the Bushes. He told The Guardian, "You can't blame Bush for what his grandfather did any more than you can blame Jack Kennedy for what his father did—bought Nazi stocks—but what is important is the cover-up, how it could have gone on so successfully for half a century, and does that have implications for us today? This was the mechanism by which Hitler was funded to come to power, this was the mechanism by which the Third Reich's defense industry was re-armed, this was the mechanism by which Nazi profits were repatriated back to the American owners, this was the mechanism by which investigations into the financial laundering of the Third Reich were blunted."

Loftus, who is vice chairman of a Holocaust museum in Saint Petersburg, Florida, added, "The Union Banking Corporation was a holding company for the Nazis, for Fritz Thyssen. At various times, the Bush family has tried to spin it, saying they were owned by a Dutch bank and it wasn't until the Nazis took over Holland that they realized that now the Nazis controlled the apparent company and that is why the Bush supporters claim when the war was over they got their money back. Both the American treasury investigations and the intelligence investigations in Europe completely belie that, it's absolute horseshit. They always knew who the ultimate beneficiaries were." - http://www.villagevoice.com/i...

Read "31 Similarities Between Hitler and President Bush" on http://www.dissidentvoice.org...



 
Bush: Un-Christian, Blood-Thirsty and Hypocritical ...
09.29.04 (12:43 pm)   [edit]
[b]The Bush Family Fortune

Gramps made nice with some not very nice people in the '30s[/b]

Within the chainsaw-wielding Texas rancher, the blue blood of Connecticut runs deep. But not so many people know that there are a couple of rocks to be turned over in the Bush family history.

Prescott Bush, sometimes described as a progressive Republican senator from Connecticut and often described as the man who looked like he should be president, turns out to have been a creepy front man for industrialists who bankrolled and built the Nazi war machine.

Over the weekend, The Guardian (U.K.) set out in a lengthy story based on files in the National Archives the story of how in the '30s, young Prescott Bush, with the help of his father, got together with Averill Harriman, son of the railroad scion E.H. Harriman, and set up a company called UBC (Union Banking Corporation). Bush was a founder and director and owned one share, valued at $125. As it turned out, UBC was an American shell company for the Thyssen family interests. The Thyssens were a preeminent German business family that dominated the nation's iron and steel and coal businesses and were crucial to bankrolling and building the Nazi war machine. UBC was a shell, owned by a Netherlands bank, with anonymous real owners who, on further inspection, turned out to be the Thyssens.

Young Fritz Thyssen was infatuated with Hitler and joined the Nazi party in 1931. When the Nazis were having a hard time, he bailed them out financially. By the late '30s, along with Harriman's Brown Brothers Harriman, which claimed to be the world's largest investment bank, Bush had bought and shipped millions of dollars of gold, fuel, steel, coal, and U.S. treasury bonds to Germany. In addition, it appears that Bush may have had ties to the Consolidated Silesian Steel Company, which during the war used slave labor from the Nazis' concentration camps. He might also have been involved through the Thyssens in another company that was linked to the chemical giant I.G. Farben, which used slave labor.

There was nothing illegal or even unusual about doing business with the Germans in the '30s before war broke out; numerous American companies had holdings in Germany during that era. The issue with Prescott Bush is whether he had actually owned shares in the Thyssen enterprise or was just holding them in a shell for the German owners. U.S. investigations never answered the question, and no one ever brought any charges.

John Loftus, a former U.S. attorney who prosecuted Nazi war criminals in the '70s, is working on a novel that relates to some of the material he found about the Bushes. He told The Guardian, "You can't blame Bush for what his grandfather did any more than you can blame Jack Kennedy for what his father did—bought Nazi stocks—but what is important is the cover-up, how it could have gone on so successfully for half a century, and does that have implications for us today? This was the mechanism by which Hitler was funded to come to power, this was the mechanism by which the Third Reich's defense industry was re-armed, this was the mechanism by which Nazi profits were repatriated back to the American owners, this was the mechanism by which investigations into the financial laundering of the Third Reich were blunted."

Loftus, who is vice chairman of a Holocaust museum in Saint Petersburg, Florida, added, "The Union Banking Corporation was a holding company for the Nazis, for Fritz Thyssen. At various times, the Bush family has tried to spin it, saying they were owned by a Dutch bank and it wasn't until the Nazis took over Holland that they realized that now the Nazis controlled the apparent company and that is why the Bush supporters claim when the war was over they got their money back. Both the American treasury investigations and the intelligence investigations in Europe completely belie that, it's absolute horseshit. They always knew who the ultimate beneficiaries were." - http://www.villagevoice.com/i...

Read "31 Similarities Between Hitler and President Bush" on http://www.dissidentvoice.org...



 
Energy Efficiency Delays by Bush Administration Costing Consumers Billions
09.29.04 (12:33 pm)   [edit]
President Bush's energy plan calls for aggressively drilling oil
and gas in pristine wilderness areas in the West and Alaska, as
well as construction of hundreds of new power plants across the
country. Many would be coal-fired plants, which contribute to
global warming and cause air pollution and acid rain.

But if the President simply accelerated new efficiency standards
for furnaces and boilers, commercial air conditioners and
transformers, this oil and gas drilling would be unnecessary,
according to a new report by three energy watchdog groups.

Under President Bush, the Department of Energy (DOE) has dragged
its feet for years on new energy standards, even though each
year's delay costs consumers and businesses over $7 billion in
higher energy costs over the lifetimes of the inefficient
equipment sold. Electricity savings each year would be enough to
power 330,000 U.S. homes. Natural gas savings could heat about
170,000 homes.

"Enormous energy savings are at stake," said Steve Nadel,
executive director of the American Council for an Energy
Efficient Economy http://www.aceee.org/ (ACEEE). "Strong standards for these three
products could slash U.S. electricity demand by about 22,000
megawatts, eliminating the need for as many as 70 new power
plants."

The Department of Energy named new standards for residential
furnaces and boilers, commercial air conditioners, and
distribution transformers as "high priorities" in 2001, but only
last month were initial proposals finally issued. Under DOE's
timetable, a final rule will not go into effect until 2009.

"With yet another winter of sky-high heating bills around the
corner, it's a horrible time for DOE to walk away from its
responsibility for establishing common-sense furnace efficiency
standards," said Nadel.

In addition to being years behind on the current rulemakings,
DOE has missed legal deadlines for another dozen products. The
ACEEE report includes an appendix with state-by-state estimates
of the impact new standards would have on energy use, energy
bills, and the environment.

"Powerful Priorities: Updating Energy Efficiency Standards for
Residential Furnaces, Commercial Air Conditioners, and
Distribution Transformers" can be downloaded at
www.standardsASAP.org.

###

http://www.bushgreenwatch.org/mt_archives/000195.php" title="http://www.bushgreenwatch.org/mt_archives/000195.php" target="_blank"http://www.bushgreenwatch.org...

 
Energy Efficiency Delays by Bush Administration Costing Consumers Billions
09.29.04 (12:32 pm)   [edit]
President Bush's energy plan calls for aggressively drilling oil
and gas in pristine wilderness areas in the West and Alaska, as
well as construction of hundreds of new power plants across the
country. Many would be coal-fired plants, which contribute to
global warming and cause air pollution and acid rain.

But if the President simply accelerated new efficiency standards
for furnaces and boilers, commercial air conditioners and
transformers, this oil and gas drilling would be unnecessary,
according to a new report by three energy watchdog groups.

Under President Bush, the Department of Energy (DOE) has dragged
its feet for years on new energy standards, even though each
year's delay costs consumers and businesses over $7 billion in
higher energy costs over the lifetimes of the inefficient
equipment sold. Electricity savings each year would be enough to
power 330,000 U.S. homes. Natural gas savings could heat about
170,000 homes.

"Enormous energy savings are at stake," said Steve Nadel,
executive director of the American Council for an Energy
Efficient Economy http://www.aceee.org/ (ACEEE). "Strong standards for these three
products could slash U.S. electricity demand by about 22,000
megawatts, eliminating the need for as many as 70 new power
plants."

The Department of Energy named new standards for residential
furnaces and boilers, commercial air conditioners, and
distribution transformers as "high priorities" in 2001, but only
last month were initial proposals finally issued. Under DOE's
timetable, a final rule will not go into effect until 2009.

"With yet another winter of sky-high heating bills around the
corner, it's a horrible time for DOE to walk away from its
responsibility for establishing common-sense furnace efficiency
standards," said Nadel.

In addition to being years behind on the current rulemakings,
DOE has missed legal deadlines for another dozen products. The
ACEEE report includes an appendix with state-by-state estimates
of the impact new standards would have on energy use, energy
bills, and the environment.

"Powerful Priorities: Updating Energy Efficiency Standards for
Residential Furnaces, Commercial Air Conditioners, and
Distribution Transformers" can be downloaded at
www.standardsASAP.org.

###

http://www.bushgreenwatch.org/mt_archives/000195.php" title="http://www.bushgreenwatch.org/mt_archives/000195.php" target="_blank"http://www.bushgreenwatch.org...

 
Energy Efficiency Delays by Bush Administration Costing Consumers Billions
09.29.04 (12:29 pm)   [edit]
President Bush's energy plan calls for aggressively drilling oil
and gas in pristine wilderness areas in the West and Alaska, as
well as construction of hundreds of new power plants across the
country. Many would be coal-fired plants, which contribute to
global warming and cause air pollution and acid rain.

But if the President simply accelerated new efficiency standards
for furnaces and boilers, commercial air conditioners and
transformers, this oil and gas drilling would be unnecessary,
according to a new report by three energy watchdog groups.

Under President Bush, the Department of Energy (DOE) has dragged
its feet for years on new energy standards, even though each
year's delay costs consumers and businesses over $7 billion in
higher energy costs over the lifetimes of the inefficient
equipment sold. Electricity savings each year would be enough to
power 330,000 U.S. homes. Natural gas savings could heat about
170,000 homes.

"Enormous energy savings are at stake," said Steve Nadel,
executive director of the American Council for an Energy
Efficient Economy http://www.aceee.org/ (ACEEE). "Strong standards for these three
products could slash U.S. electricity demand by about 22,000
megawatts, eliminating the need for as many as 70 new power
plants."

The Department of Energy named new standards for residential
furnaces and boilers, commercial air conditioners, and
distribution transformers as "high priorities" in 2001, but only
last month were initial proposals finally issued. Under DOE's
timetable, a final rule will not go into effect until 2009.

"With yet another winter of sky-high heating bills around the
corner, it's a horrible time for DOE to walk away from its
responsibility for establishing common-sense furnace efficiency
standards," said Nadel.

In addition to being years behind on the current rulemakings,
DOE has missed legal deadlines for another dozen products. The
ACEEE report includes an appendix with state-by-state estimates
of the impact new standards would have on energy use, energy
bills, and the environment.

"Powerful Priorities: Updating Energy Efficiency Standards for
Residential Furnaces, Commercial Air Conditioners, and
Distribution Transformers" can be downloaded at
www.standardsASAP.org.

###

http://www.bushgreenwatch.org/mt_archives/000195.php" title="http://www.bushgreenwatch.org/mt_archives/000195.php" target="_blank"http://www.bushgreenwatch.org...

 
Bush is Contradicted by his own Top Officials ...
09.29.04 (12:26 pm)   [edit]
[b]This Means War

General mischief hits the Bush camp; he goes one way, advisers another[/b]

Things were looking good for George W. Bush last week—Ohio and Florida safely tilting in his direction, John Kerry hanging on to a narrow lead in Michigan, and Pennsylvania seemingly drifting toward the Republicans. By week's end, New Jersey, a Democratic sure bet, was in play, with the Kerry campaign racing to shore up defenses in what should have been a done deal.

Then, four days before the first debate, out of the desert came Colin Powell, tossing a monkey wrench into the president's re-election campaign. "We have seen an increase in anti-Americanism in the Muslim world . . . I'm not denying this," Powell said on ABC's This Week. "We are fighting an intense insurgency. Yes, it's getting worse, and the reason it's getting worse is that they are determined to disrupt the election."

This statement came on the heels of Bush's U.N. speech, in which the president insisted that victory in Iraq is at hand, liberty and democracy assured. The centerpiece of the Republican campaign, the endlessly repeated message: "We're winning," now branded a virtual lie by Bush's own secretary of state and the military commander who led Desert Storm.

It gets worse. Earlier in the week, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, the Washington press corps's beloved goofball, said that maybe because of the fighting there would be elections in only part of Iraq. On Sunday, as Powell was speaking, another military commander, General John Abizaid, head of U.S. Central Command, which covers Iraq and Afghanistan, said he was confident that elections would be possible in the "vast majority" of Iraq.

Bush is now being openly contradicted by his own top officials. What more could Kerry hope for? - http://villagevoice.com/issue...



 
Bush is Contradicted by his own Top Officials ...
09.29.04 (12:23 pm)   [edit]
[b]This Means War

General mischief hits the Bush camp; he goes one way, advisers another[/b]

Things were looking good for George W. Bush last week—Ohio and Florida safely tilting in his direction, John Kerry hanging on to a narrow lead in Michigan, and Pennsylvania seemingly drifting toward the Republicans. By week's end, New Jersey, a Democratic sure bet, was in play, with the Kerry campaign racing to shore up defenses in what should have been a done deal.

Then, four days before the first debate, out of the desert came Colin Powell, tossing a monkey wrench into the president's re-election campaign. "We have seen an increase in anti-Americanism in the Muslim world . . . I'm not denying this," Powell said on ABC's This Week. "We are fighting an intense insurgency. Yes, it's getting worse, and the reason it's getting worse is that they are determined to disrupt the election."

This statement came on the heels of Bush's U.N. speech, in which the president insisted that victory in Iraq is at hand, liberty and democracy assured. The centerpiece of the Republican campaign, the endlessly repeated message: "We're winning," now branded a virtual lie by Bush's own secretary of state and the military commander who led Desert Storm.

It gets worse. Earlier in the week, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, the Washington press corps's beloved goofball, said that maybe because of the fighting there would be elections in only part of Iraq. On Sunday, as Powell was speaking, another military commander, General John Abizaid, head of U.S. Central Command, which covers Iraq and Afghanistan, said he was confident that elections would be possible in the "vast majority" of Iraq.

Bush is now being openly contradicted by his own top officials. What more could Kerry hope for? - http://villagevoice.com/issue...
 
...... Bush is History's Top Terrorist ......
09.29.04 (12:19 pm)   [edit]
As the fourth global-warmed hurricane in two months rips through Florida, we are reminded that George W. Bush is history's top terrorist.

We know, of course, that Bush has slaughtered thousands of Iraqis, imprisoned hundreds without trial or charges, and presided over the torture and sexual abuse of many of them. He is the world's leading recruiter for hate-America terrorists the world over.

Bush's preemptive militarism has paved the way for countless crusades for oil and fundamentalism in the decades to come. He overthrew the elected government of Haiti, resulting in hundreds of deaths. He tried to do the same in Venezuela. Other target nations are sure to follow.

Bush is also determined to turn AIDS into a profit center for the drug companies that help fund him. His attacks on sex education, birth control and reproductive choice will kill girls and women for the decades to come, especially if he re-criminalizes abortion in a second term.

As Texas's Governor Bush executed a record 150-plus people. He publically mocked at least one, Karla Faye Tucker, who had asked him to spare her. His escalated war on drugs has helped stuff 2.2 million Americans into the largest gulag in world history. Many suffer regular physical and sexual abuse. Many are also conveniently deprived of their right to vote.

Bush's catastrophic "No Child Left Behind" program is decimating America's once-proud educational system, vastly escalating illiteracy and ignorance. He is barring thousands of students who have traditionally come here from overseas. Their disappearance will further cripple American education, as well as America's historic role in spreading democratic values to young people around the world.

Bush has also decimated the Bill of Rights and basic freedoms embodied in the US Constitution, paving the way for a potential dictatorship should he get a second term.

In short, he has done to America things no foreign terrorist could ever imagine.

But it all pales before Bush's all-out attack on the natural environment, which will ultimately kill hundreds of millions of people.

Bush's eco-terror crusade has two primary roots: corporate greed and fundamental religious extremism.

On the corporate side, Bush's entire environmental policy can be summarized in a simple sentence: Any polluter favored by the Bush regime can pillage and destroy any sector of the American ecology, regardless of the consequences, with full official sanction, including huge taxpayer handouts.

Bush's signature flip flop has been on global warming. The scientific and insurance community is now virtually unanimous that rising carbon dioxide levels are wrecking utter havoc with global weather patterns, including this latest parade of Caribbean hurricanes. The only dissenters are oil company flacks, flat earth think tanks and fundamentalist fanatics.

Bush promised in 2000 that if elected he would endorse the Kyoto Accords to cut CO2 emissions. But then he joined Joseph Stalin in demanding that science fit his bizarre ideology. At the behest of his petro-backers, including Dick Cheney's Halliburton, Bush has scorned a global consensus that includes his primary ally in Iraq, British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Two of the world's biggest insurance companies, Swiss Re: and Munich Re:, have issued strong warnings about the skyrocketing costs of climate catastrophes. Even British Petroleum has voiced concern, at the same time making massive investments in solar power.

Bush's fossil-nuke energy plan gives huge tax credits for gas guzzling HumVees, but has cynically stalemated long-standing green energy tax easements, crippling the once-booming US wind power industry.

Three years after Bush allowed 9/11, America's 103 atomic power reactors remain vulnerable to attacks from the air. The first plane that flew into the World Trade Center could instead have turned the Indian Point reactors north of New York City into radioactive infernos. Such an apocalyptic attack could still happen, killing millions and costing trillions, dwarfing Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. By doing nothing significant to make US reactors safer, Bush has painted them with a big terror bullseye.

Bush is also reviving nuke weapons production and testing, escalating the likelihood of nuclear war and production disasters.

After 9/11, Bush lied to the people of New York about the toxic fallout from the WTC collapses. His cover-up caused countless avoidable deaths. His assaults on the air, water, food and other regulatory responsibilities daily poison millions worldwide. They feed the on-going plague of cancers, lung and heart disease, childhood afflictions and too much more to catalog here.

Acid rain and ozone destruction add to the horrors of global warming, as do Bush's attacks on America's national parks and public lands.

As history's most environmentally destructive human, Bush's hate-nature crusade has been blessed by fanatic fundamentalists who believe destruction of the planet will hasten the Messiah. James Watt, Ronald Reagan's Interior Secretary, scorned attempts to preserve the Earth by announcing that Jesus was coming soon anyway.

Bush spinmeister Karl Rove bans such blunt talk. But his all-out attacks on environmental protection, fuel efficiency, renewable energy and much more have already guaranteed an avoidable death toll unparalleled in human history. The evil winds of climate chaos now blasting through the Caribbean may soon seem like mild breezes compared to the ultimate eco-curse of George W. Bush.

Attila the Hun. Genghis Khan. The Kaiser. Hitler. Stalin. Saddam. Bin Laden. None have killed more than those dying and destined to die at Bush's anti-green hands. His terror attacks have driven Mother Earth to the very brink.

Four more years and he just might finish her off---and all of us with her. - http://www.freepress.org/colu...
 
--- George Bush and the Rise of Christian Fascism, by Rev. Rich Lang ---
09.28.04 (9:28 am)   [edit]
[b]George Bush and the Rise of Christian Fascism

Rev. Rich Lang [/b]

The men who wrote the Constitution of the United States knew that we human beings have a tendency to 'not get along with each other'. They knew that if power accrued into the hands of an elite the experiment of democracy (power spread out into the realm of the people) would be over. So they created a system of checks and balances which blocked access to any one person, or any one special interest or elite gaining too much power over others. Thus our executive, legislative and judicial branches of government "checked" each other. The media was yet another "check" on the accrual of too much power as was the Bill of Rights which was written into the Constitution. The system wasn't perfect but it kept alive the possibility of true democracy. It kept alive the dream that one day "we the people" could live in a peaceful commonwealth where every person has what they need to survive and thrive.

That dream died in December 2000 when the checks and balances of our Constitution collapsed and George Bush was inserted into the Presidency of the nited States. September 11, 2001 furthered the atrophying of democracy handing the country into the hands of an emerging Corporate (and I say Christian) Fascism.

Since that time we have witnessed and have been unable to prevent the emergence of an Imperial Presidency that has the unrestricted power to declare war against any country he chooses. The Imperial Presidency has brought to an end the Constitutional mandate that 'ONLY CONGRESS' has the authority to declare war. It has furthered weakened international law and has undermined the potential of the United Nations to spread democracy throughout the earth.

The President has also gained unrestricted power to round up unlimited numbers of American citizens and incarcerate them in military brigs or concentration camps for the rest of their lives. He can keep them from ever again communicating with friends, families, and attorneys, simply on the president's certification that the incarcerated are "terrorists," as he has done with Jose Padilla and Yaser Esam Hamdi. The President may also now kill American citizens abroad solely on the basis of his certification that the one killed is a "terrorist". Just ask the family and friends of Ahmed Hijazi, anAmerican killed with a U.S.-fired missile in Yemen. Therefore suspending the Constitutional right: "no person shall be denied life, liberty or property without due process of law."

Ominous signs are all around us concerning the accrual of power into the hands of the Presidency. If Mr. Bush stays in office I think our future will continue to witness shrinking political rights, financial collapse and endless war. Part of the power and seduction of this administration emerges from its diabolical manipulation of Christian rhetoric. I want to flesh out the ideology of the Christian Fascism that Mr. Bush articulates. It is a form of Christianity that is the mirror opposite of what Jesus embodied. It is, indeed, the materialization of the spirit of antichrist: a perversion of Christian faith and practice.

This country, like it or not, is overwhelmingly dominated by the ideology of the Christian story. It is not so much that our founders were all Christians. Rather, they lived in an atmosphere scented throughout by Christian thought and rhetoric. Just as most of us can't imagine how to keep things cold without refrigeration; so too our founders couldn't help but think through the lens of the Christian story. And what they saw was that America had become the New Israel (the new Promised Land) of God. America has understood itself as a benevolent nation seeking only the good of all. We have understand our wealth as a blessing given to us as a sign that we are a "chosen, special people" whose larger meaning is to help the world into an era of peace, prosperity and justice. Every politician draws on this "civil religion story" which gives authority to the politicians ambition and agenda. Another way of saying this is: every nation needs sacred legitimation. It needs the authority of transcendence: of a story larger than itself . a story that connects past with present and future. An Empire needs an even broader story: one that connects with cosmic and/or historical redemption and new creation.

Martin Luther King understood this sacred American civil religion and was able to wed it brilliantly with the prophetic religious teachings of the Bible. He drew upon Biblical narratives which limited the power and authority of the elite while calling for economic redistribution of wealth. He drew upon teachings rooted in the personal morality of nonviolence and compassion. George Bush, on the other hand, also understands this sacred American 'civic gospel' and has brilliantly merged it with Biblical Holiness and Holy War traditions. These traditions call for the emergence of the Righteous Warrior who will cleanse the land of its impurity. These traditions are rooted in the personal morality of righteous zeal and obedience.

For example:

1.. Mr. Bush consistently sends signals to his right wing religious base. In last year's State of the Union he exhorted: "there's power, wonder working power, in the goodness and idealism and faith of the American people". It's a phrase from a well known Communion hymn "there's power, wonder working power in the blood of the lamb". Bush brings together the holiness zeal of Christian evangelicalism with patriotic fundamentalism. The core belief system of this 'civic gospel' goes something like this: The United States was founded as a Christian nation with free enterprise as the only economic system truly compatible with Christian beliefs. These religious values are today under attack in America. The danger is that without faith in God America will lose its blessing. Therefore, the government needs to act to protect the nation's religious heritage.

2.. Mr. Bush's teachings on terrorism: "you are with us or against us" cements for the hearer the apocalyptic world of good versus evil. There can be no neutral ground. You have to make a decision. Patriotism is now all or nothing: it is either total agreement or a slippery slope towards treason. In the Church you come to Jesus alone for salvation. In the state you obey the God-annointed leader and are thereby secured. Renana Brooks writes (The Nation June 24, 2003: Bush Dominates A Nation of Victims):

"Bush is a master at inducing learned helplessness in the electorate. He uses pessimistic language that creates fear and disables people from feeling they can solve their problems. In his September 20, 2001 speech to Congress on the 9/11 attacks, he chose to increase people's sense of vulnerability: 'Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. . I ask you to live your lives, and hug your children. I know many citizens have fears tonight . Be calm and resolute, even in the face of a continuing threat.' (Subsequent terror alerts .. have maintained and expanded this fear of unknown, sinister enemies.)"

The terror threat itself can only be combated with increases in military force, domestic security and curtailment of civil rights through Patriot Acts. There are no other options nor any dialogue or debate that would create an alternative way to deal with terrorism.


3.) Mr. Bush certainly sees himself as a Messiah figure. Listen to his language after 9-11: " I will not forget this wound to our country or those who inflicted it. I will not yield; I will not rest; I will not relent in waging this struggle for freedom and security for the American people." Or, in his 2003 State of the Union speech: "I will defend the freedom and security of the American people". He has become the nation. He is its embodiment. According to Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, - Bush told him: "God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them." This is Biblical language . it isn't political script. This is Bush's soul language. He understands himself as a man with a Divine mission. It also means that for him leadership is not "representing the people" rather leadership means transcending the will of the people. George Bush already knows the truth before the evidence is presented. He is guided by God and must blaze the trial even if the people are reluctant.

Iraq, for example, was a necessary war whether or not Saddam had nukes. Saddam, for Bush, was a bad guy who tried to kill "my dad". The war, for Bush, was holy and justified and necessary. Purging evil is necessary in the Holiness/Holy War tradition of the Bible. The righteous will purge evil but the unrighteous will be consumed by it. Think of an alcoholic: it's all or nothing. The whole world is all or nothing.

Like all religions the Bible has various narratives within its pages: Jesus drew on the prophetic traditions that called upon the people to change their way of life even as it critiqued and called upon the elites to decentralize their power. Jesus himself role modeled a lifestyle of service. Mr. Bush, on the other hand, draws on traditions that call for purity and cleansing. It is a language of hostility towards enemies and a strident call for obedience. It calls forth a lifestyle of the RIGHTEOUS ONE who will purge evil from the world through sacred violence.

All of this is not to say that the political world is of less importance. We know that the planning for the Iraq war was at least a decade in preparation. We know that America has had imperial designs and has intervened militarily throughout the world. And we've known for 25 years that Corporations have been savagely reducing labor rights while looting the treasury. We know that Mr. Bush is not the cause of our problems. Rather, the point I am making is that Mr. Bush is a sincere front man for an emerging fascism. His religious rhetoric is an authentic merging of Holiness Christianity with Imperial Americanism. The emphasis on security, law and order is necessary to maintain the "high calling" of the American people. The policies of fascism, in other words, are consistent with religious holiness and holy war narratives. And fascism, woven underneath Christian Holiness/Holy War traditions, is a powerful symbolic narrative that speaks to the American people as evidenced by Mr. Bush's 58% approval rating.

The coming election will not be decided because of political policy. It will not be decided in a debate over free markets versus fair markets; tax cuts or no tax cuts, Patriot Act or no Patriot Act; war with Syria or no war. None of these issues will determine the election because the candidates are all for free markets, tax cuts, domestic security and a strong global military presence. The election will be determined by the candidate who can embody the deeply felt, often unarticulated religious yearnings of the populace. Yearnings such as "who will save us, secure us, lead us??? who will connect us with a power greater than the power of others?" Bush speaks this language. Democrats are stuck in political nuance. Or, in other words, Democrats cannot speak the language of Martin Luther King who understood that social transformation requires a transcendent authority.

The problem comes down to this: Democrats, liberals, and social progressives have simply not grasped how afraid, insecure and how deeply in despair the populace is. They keep speaking as if objective analysis and idealistic vision can win the day. What Bush and Rove, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Pearls, Abrams and Bolton, DeLay and Rice etc, have clearly understood is that truth is subjectivity. Unfortunately, the inner person of America today is a hollowed out consumer who lacks the will power, stamina and imagination to do anything more than be overwhelmed. Therefore, a politics of crisis, a politics of fear will keep us locked into a state of conformity.

On the "civic side" of things America is being inundated with a rhetoric of insecurity. Most of Bush's State of the Union was taken up with war themes reminding us all of the horrible new world we live in post 9/11. We know that further increases in the military and police budgets are on the way; we know that the Patriot Act is going to be extended and strengthened; we know that Homeland Security will continue to be a growth industry. We know that this administration wants to break down the wall between church and state with faith-based initiatives. The world is in chaos and the Bush-men will fix it bringing us peace, prosperity, purity and purpose.

On the religion side of things apocalyptic theology is booming. This is also a worldview of crisis and insecurity. It is a theology rooted in the Holiness/Holy War traditions and it dominates the spirituality of this current administration. More to the point, this is the dominant theology of the mass media expression of Christian faith. It is a theology of despair that has given up on the possibilities of redemption.

One of the most popular fiction series making the rounds these days is the LEFT BEHIND series written by Tim LaHaye & Jerry Jenkins. Multiple millions of people are reading these books which fictionalize the end of life as we know it. It used to be that the Church could control people through the fear of eternal damnation. Today it is through fear of the future. The theology is basically this: The Bible is a code book that when rightly interpreted reveals that we are living at the end of history. History is scripted and is about to come to a catastrophic conclusion. The only hope is to accept Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior so that you can be "saved" from the future apocalypse. God will "snatch you up" (Rapture) right before a seven year series of horrible events that will see the rise of Antichrist and the rebuilding of the Jewish temple. There will be world war with most of humanity dying. At that point Jesus will return to restore law and order. This theology of despair "fits" our current culture of powerlessness and fear. From SARS to weapons of mass destruction to the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict, to ecological collapse, the whole world seems to be on a "no exit" slide into an end times abyss. The theology of despair is very seductive. It is shaping the spirituality of Christians which provides a strong core from which Bush draws political strength.

And it has, at least, five political implications that affect each one of us here today. FIRST: Israel is to be exalted and defended no matter what they do to the Palestinian people. They are God's chosen people and must reside in their Biblically anointed Land for the "end time clock" to tick to its final minute. Israel has a Biblical mandate to conquer and control all of the land from the Nile River to the Euphrates. Behind the politics of oil lie the religious passion to fulfill God's will: Syria must fall.

Secondly: institutions like the United Nations are not to be trusted because they are tools of the Antichrist. The Antichrist is thought of (not as a spirituality or ideology) but as an personal embodiment of evil. The Antichrist will be a living person who will come to power at the end of history and proclaim himself to be god on earth. The theory has it that his power will be generated from within a coalition of nations. Thus . America, as God's chosen nation, will need to go it alone so as not to be duped by Antichrist. Our destiny is to take the gospel to all the nations: a benevolent gospel of therapeutic salvation for all.

Thirdly: since the world is passing away the environment is not of great importance. There is no need to worry about issues of sustainability because the world is in its final countdown. Part of the unconcern towards global warming and other ecological crisis is the religious belief that we aren't going to be around in 100 years. We're in the end times now . every moment is merely preparation for eternity. Whether Bush himself believes this or not is irrelevant. This is the religious worldview of those who exalt him and the voter-bloc to which he plays. For Bush to act for sustainability would require a major shift in his religious narrative. . As an aside this past summer the National Park Service was instructed to approve the display of religious symbols and Bible verses, as well as the sale of creationist books at the Grand Canyon National Park. In December 2003 the Park Service was ordered to develop a "more balanced" version of an 8 minute video shown at the Lincoln Memorial Visitor Center. Conservative Christians wanted the removal of footage of gay rights, pro choice and anti-war demonstrations replacing it with footage of Christian rallies and pro-war demonstrations.

Fourth: the trust that Jesus died for "my sins" is far more important than the teachings of Jesus. This fosters a domesticated therapeutic religious expression that insists that "jesus in my heart" is more important than my lifestyle. It's like the Mafia don who could order his enemies killed while he himself was celebrating the baptism of his nephew. There is a disconnect between one's inner experience of God's loving grace and embodying that experience outwardly through one's politics. This leads to a discounting of following Jesus in a lifestyle of nonviolence, economic justice and compassion. Again as an aside . while Governor of Texas Mr. Bush was interviewed by Talk Magazine concerning the impending execution of fellow Christian Karla Faye Tucker. Bush imitated Tucker's appeal for him to spare her life . pursing his lips, squinting his eyes, and in a squeaky voice saying, "please don't kill me".

Fifth: a leader who loves Jesus is to be followed as God's man for the hour. The Christian leader is God's shepherd over the American flock. As stated before Bush sees himself as a Messiah figure (annointed by God for a special redemptive purpose). When he decided on running for the Presidency he called a group of evangelical Pastors together announcing to them "I have heard the call" and then receiving from them the "laying on of hands" which corresponds to divine ordination for the task ahead. On September 14, 2001 he stated: "our responsibility before history is already clear: to answer these attacks and rid the world of evil". He then launched the crusade Operation Infinite Freedom against Afghanistan. Yet other messainic statements from Bush:

"History has called America to action. . The great hope of our time, and the great hope of every time, now depends on us." ..

"We must also remember our calling as a blessed nation to make the world better . and confound the designs of evil men."

"Our nation has been chosen by God and commissioned by history, to be a model of justice before the world."

*** According to Vice-President Cheney: America "has the duty to act with force to construct a world in the image of the United States."

In return for this messianic leadership evangelical Christians have returned an annointing of prayer. During the Afghanistan crusade thousands of "Presidential Circles of Prayer" and "Wheels of Prayer" were organized on the Internet, running 24 hours a day.

[b]WHEEL OF PRAYER FOR OUR SOLDIERS[/b]

Lord hold our troops in your loving hands. Protect them as they protect us.

Bless them and their families for the altruistic actions they are performing

for us in our time of need. This I ask in the name of Jesus, our Lord and Savior. Amen

This prayer was so popular and was hit so often that the website crashed within days.

Pastor Charles Stanley distributed among Marines as they entered into combat thousands of pamphlets entitled "Duty of a Christian in Time of War". With the pamphlet went a card instructing them to sign and send directly to Mr. Bush. The card says: "I have committed to pray for you, your family and your Administration." Specific prayers for the President were included for each day.

[b]CONCLUSION:[/b]

The point I'm trying to make is that we are not dealing simply with politics when it comes to the Bush administration. The progressive left, which often pays little attention to Christianity, will be making a huge mistake if they overlook the religious ideology at the core of Mr. Bush personally and the movement he represents. And we are talking about a "movement" (a movement of 'the people' not just the elites). We are seeing today the emergence of a "fascist movement". It is bankrolled and organized by Corporations, articulated through the ideology of neo-conservativism. but is fueled by the right-wing church drawing upon Holiness/Holy War Biblical narratives.

When Dave Korten (author of When Corporations Rule the World) says that we need a "new story"; he is talking about needing a transcendent authority in which we root our political culture. Human beings cannot live in societal form without a sacred narrative. Neither anarchy nor atheism can construct a house that will hold our future. The Republicans know this well. But the Democrats seem clueless.

In Biblical language the Republicans have become Pharaoh whose house is strong because of economic exploitation of the populace and military repression of the people. The populace is being asked to make bricks without straw. We are seeking a "savior" . a Moses who can rally us out of these mudpits towards the promise of a land flowing with milk and honey. Unfortunately most Democrats are simply offering Pharaoh-lite: they still will keep us in the mudpit making bricks.

What we need is a movement of spiritual justice. We need the language of those who can wed America's civil religion with Biblical prophetic narrative. We need to expand that language so that it can include the language and stories that are emerging from the antiwar, fair trade and human rights movements. Together this language can form a unique new narrative that has the power to inspire imagination and courage. A language that call forth a new coalition powerful enough to leave behind the mudpit and to enter the promise of a new beginning. A coalition that understands that "we are the ones we are looking for". Indeed, the new narrative will proclaim "God with us" not "God above us".

[b]Rev. Rich Lang oddrev@yahoo.com Trinity United Methodist Church Seattle. [/b] - http://www.opednews.com/lang0...
 
--- George Bush and the Rise of Christian Fascism, by Rev. Rich Lang ---
09.28.04 (9:25 am)   [edit]
[b]George Bush and the Rise of Christian Fascism

Rev. Rich Lang [/b]

The men who wrote the Constitution of the United States knew that we human beings have a tendency to 'not get along with each other'. They knew that if power accrued into the hands of an elite the experiment of democracy (power spread out into the realm of the people) would be over. So they created a system of checks and balances which blocked access to any one person, or any one special interest or elite gaining too much power over others. Thus our executive, legislative and judicial branches of government "checked" each other. The media was yet another "check" on the accrual of too much power as was the Bill of Rights which was written into the Constitution. The system wasn't perfect but it kept alive the possibility of true democracy. It kept alive the dream that one day "we the people" could live in a peaceful commonwealth where every person has what they need to survive and thrive.

That dream died in December 2000 when the checks and balances of our Constitution collapsed and George Bush was inserted into the Presidency of the nited States. September 11, 2001 furthered the atrophying of democracy handing the country into the hands of an emerging Corporate (and I say Christian) Fascism.

Since that time we have witnessed and have been unable to prevent the emergence of an Imperial Presidency that has the unrestricted power to declare war against any country he chooses. The Imperial Presidency has brought to an end the Constitutional mandate that 'ONLY CONGRESS' has the authority to declare war. It has furthered weakened international law and has undermined the potential of the United Nations to spread democracy throughout the earth.

The President has also gained unrestricted power to round up unlimited numbers of American citizens and incarcerate them in military brigs or concentration camps for the rest of their lives. He can keep them from ever again communicating with friends, families, and attorneys, simply on the president's certification that the incarcerated are "terrorists," as he has done with Jose Padilla and Yaser Esam Hamdi. The President may also now kill American citizens abroad solely on the basis of his certification that the one killed is a "terrorist". Just ask the family and friends of Ahmed Hijazi, anAmerican killed with a U.S.-fired missile in Yemen. Therefore suspending the Constitutional right: "no person shall be denied life, liberty or property without due process of law."

Ominous signs are all around us concerning the accrual of power into the hands of the Presidency. If Mr. Bush stays in office I think our future will continue to witness shrinking political rights, financial collapse and endless war. Part of the power and seduction of this administration emerges from its diabolical manipulation of Christian rhetoric. I want to flesh out the ideology of the Christian Fascism that Mr. Bush articulates. It is a form of Christianity that is the mirror opposite of what Jesus embodied. It is, indeed, the materialization of the spirit of antichrist: a perversion of Christian faith and practice.

This country, like it or not, is overwhelmingly dominated by the ideology of the Christian story. It is not so much that our founders were all Christians. Rather, they lived in an atmosphere scented throughout by Christian thought and rhetoric. Just as most of us can't imagine how to keep things cold without refrigeration; so too our founders couldn't help but think through the lens of the Christian story. And what they saw was that America had become the New Israel (the new Promised Land) of God. America has understood itself as a benevolent nation seeking only the good of all. We have understand our wealth as a blessing given to us as a sign that we are a "chosen, special people" whose larger meaning is to help the world into an era of peace, prosperity and justice. Every politician draws on this "civil religion story" which gives authority to the politicians ambition and agenda. Another way of saying this is: every nation needs sacred legitimation. It needs the authority of transcendence: of a story larger than itself . a story that connects past with present and future. An Empire needs an even broader story: one that connects with cosmic and/or historical redemption and new creation.

Martin Luther King understood this sacred American civil religion and was able to wed it brilliantly with the prophetic religious teachings of the Bible. He drew upon Biblical narratives which limited the power and authority of the elite while calling for economic redistribution of wealth. He drew upon teachings rooted in the personal morality of nonviolence and compassion. George Bush, on the other hand, also understands this sacred American 'civic gospel' and has brilliantly merged it with Biblical Holiness and Holy War traditions. These traditions call for the emergence of the Righteous Warrior who will cleanse the land of its impurity. These traditions are rooted in the personal morality of righteous zeal and obedience.

For example:

1.. Mr. Bush consistently sends signals to his right wing religious base. In last year's State of the Union he exhorted: "there's power, wonder working power, in the goodness and idealism and faith of the American people". It's a phrase from a well known Communion hymn "there's power, wonder working power in the blood of the lamb". Bush brings together the holiness zeal of Christian evangelicalism with patriotic fundamentalism. The core belief system of this 'civic gospel' goes something like this: The United States was founded as a Christian nation with free enterprise as the only economic system truly compatible with Christian beliefs. These religious values are today under attack in America. The danger is that without faith in God America will lose its blessing. Therefore, the government needs to act to protect the nation's religious heritage.

2.. Mr. Bush's teachings on terrorism: "you are with us or against us" cements for the hearer the apocalyptic world of good versus evil. There can be no neutral ground. You have to make a decision. Patriotism is now all or nothing: it is either total agreement or a slippery slope towards treason. In the Church you come to Jesus alone for salvation. In the state you obey the God-annointed leader and are thereby secured. Renana Brooks writes (The Nation June 24, 2003: Bush Dominates A Nation of Victims):

"Bush is a master at inducing learned helplessness in the electorate. He uses pessimistic language that creates fear and disables people from feeling they can solve their problems. In his September 20, 2001 speech to Congress on the 9/11 attacks, he chose to increase people's sense of vulnerability: 'Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. . I ask you to live your lives, and hug your children. I know many citizens have fears tonight . Be calm and resolute, even in the face of a continuing threat.' (Subsequent terror alerts .. have maintained and expanded this fear of unknown, sinister enemies.)"

The terror threat itself can only be combated with increases in military force, domestic security and curtailment of civil rights through Patriot Acts. There are no other options nor any dialogue or debate that would create an alternative way to deal with terrorism.


3.) Mr. Bush certainly sees himself as a Messiah figure. Listen to his language after 9-11: " I will not forget this wound to our country or those who inflicted it. I will not yield; I will not rest; I will not relent in waging this struggle for freedom and security for the American people." Or, in his 2003 State of the Union speech: "I will defend the freedom and security of the American people". He has become the nation. He is its embodiment. According to Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, - Bush told him: "God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them." This is Biblical language . it isn't political script. This is Bush's soul language. He understands himself as a man with a Divine mission. It also means that for him leadership is not "representing the people" rather leadership means transcending the will of the people. George Bush already knows the truth before the evidence is presented. He is guided by God and must blaze the trial even if the people are reluctant.

Iraq, for example, was a necessary war whether or not Saddam had nukes. Saddam, for Bush, was a bad guy who tried to kill "my dad". The war, for Bush, was holy and justified and necessary. Purging evil is necessary in the Holiness/Holy War tradition of the Bible. The righteous will purge evil but the unrighteous will be consumed by it. Think of an alcoholic: it's all or nothing. The whole world is all or nothing.

Like all religions the Bible has various narratives within its pages: Jesus drew on the prophetic traditions that called upon the people to change their way of life even as it critiqued and called upon the elites to decentralize their power. Jesus himself role modeled a lifestyle of service. Mr. Bush, on the other hand, draws on traditions that call for purity and cleansing. It is a language of hostility towards enemies and a strident call for obedience. It calls forth a lifestyle of the RIGHTEOUS ONE who will purge evil from the world through sacred violence.

All of this is not to say that the political world is of less importance. We know that the planning for the Iraq war was at least a decade in preparation. We know that America has had imperial designs and has intervened militarily throughout the world. And we've known for 25 years that Corporations have been savagely reducing labor rights while looting the treasury. We know that Mr. Bush is not the cause of our problems. Rather, the point I am making is that Mr. Bush is a sincere front man for an emerging fascism. His religious rhetoric is an authentic merging of Holiness Christianity with Imperial Americanism. The emphasis on security, law and order is necessary to maintain the "high calling" of the American people. The policies of fascism, in other words, are consistent with religious holiness and holy war narratives. And fascism, woven underneath Christian Holiness/Holy War traditions, is a powerful symbolic narrative that speaks to the American people as evidenced by Mr. Bush's 58% approval rating.

The coming election will not be decided because of political policy. It will not be decided in a debate over free markets versus fair markets; tax cuts or no tax cuts, Patriot Act or no Patriot Act; war with Syria or no war. None of these issues will determine the election because the candidates are all for free markets, tax cuts, domestic security and a strong global military presence. The election will be determined by the candidate who can embody the deeply felt, often unarticulated religious yearnings of the populace. Yearnings such as "who will save us, secure us, lead us??? who will connect us with a power greater than the power of others?" Bush speaks this language. Democrats are stuck in political nuance. Or, in other words, Democrats cannot speak the language of Martin Luther King who understood that social transformation requires a transcendent authority.

The problem comes down to this: Democrats, liberals, and social progressives have simply not grasped how afraid, insecure and how deeply in despair the populace is. They keep speaking as if objective analysis and idealistic vision can win the day. What Bush and Rove, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Pearls, Abrams and Bolton, DeLay and Rice etc, have clearly understood is that truth is subjectivity. Unfortunately, the inner person of America today is a hollowed out consumer who lacks the will power, stamina and imagination to do anything more than be overwhelmed. Therefore, a politics of crisis, a politics of fear will keep us locked into a state of conformity.

On the "civic side" of things America is being inundated with a rhetoric of insecurity. Most of Bush's State of the Union was taken up with war themes reminding us all of the horrible new world we live in post 9/11. We know that further increases in the military and police budgets are on the way; we know that the Patriot Act is going to be extended and strengthened; we know that Homeland Security will continue to be a growth industry. We know that this administration wants to break down the wall between church and state with faith-based initiatives. The world is in chaos and the Bush-men will fix it bringing us peace, prosperity, purity and purpose.

On the religion side of things apocalyptic theology is booming. This is also a worldview of crisis and insecurity. It is a theology rooted in the Holiness/Holy War traditions and it dominates the spirituality of this current administration. More to the point, this is the dominant theology of the mass media expression of Christian faith. It is a theology of despair that has given up on the possibilities of redemption.

One of the most popular fiction series making the rounds these days is the LEFT BEHIND series written by Tim LaHaye & Jerry Jenkins. Multiple millions of people are reading these books which fictionalize the end of life as we know it. It used to be that the Church could control people through the fear of eternal damnation. Today it is through fear of the future. The theology is basically this: The Bible is a code book that when rightly interpreted reveals that we are living at the end of history. History is scripted and is about to come to a catastrophic conclusion. The only hope is to accept Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior so that you can be "saved" from the future apocalypse. God will "snatch you up" (Rapture) right before a seven year series of horrible events that will see the rise of Antichrist and the rebuilding of the Jewish temple. There will be world war with most of humanity dying. At that point Jesus will return to restore law and order. This theology of despair "fits" our current culture of powerlessness and fear. From SARS to weapons of mass destruction to the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict, to ecological collapse, the whole world seems to be on a "no exit" slide into an end times abyss. The theology of despair is very seductive. It is shaping the spirituality of Christians which provides a strong core from which Bush draws political strength.

And it has, at least, five political implications that affect each one of us here today. FIRST: Israel is to be exalted and defended no matter what they do to the Palestinian people. They are God's chosen people and must reside in their Biblically anointed Land for the "end time clock" to tick to its final minute. Israel has a Biblical mandate to conquer and control all of the land from the Nile River to the Euphrates. Behind the politics of oil lie the religious passion to fulfill God's will: Syria must fall.

Secondly: institutions like the United Nations are not to be trusted because they are tools of the Antichrist. The Antichrist is thought of (not as a spirituality or ideology) but as an personal embodiment of evil. The Antichrist will be a living person who will come to power at the end of history and proclaim himself to be god on earth. The theory has it that his power will be generated from within a coalition of nations. Thus . America, as God's chosen nation, will need to go it alone so as not to be duped by Antichrist. Our destiny is to take the gospel to all the nations: a benevolent gospel of therapeutic salvation for all.

Thirdly: since the world is passing away the environment is not of great importance. There is no need to worry about issues of sustainability because the world is in its final countdown. Part of the unconcern towards global warming and other ecological crisis is the religious belief that we aren't going to be around in 100 years. We're in the end times now . every moment is merely preparation for eternity. Whether Bush himself believes this or not is irrelevant. This is the religious worldview of those who exalt him and the voter-bloc to which he plays. For Bush to act for sustainability would require a major shift in his religious narrative. . As an aside this past summer the National Park Service was instructed to approve the display of religious symbols and Bible verses, as well as the sale of creationist books at the Grand Canyon National Park. In December 2003 the Park Service was ordered to develop a "more balanced" version of an 8 minute video shown at the Lincoln Memorial Visitor Center. Conservative Christians wanted the removal of footage of gay rights, pro choice and anti-war demonstrations replacing it with footage of Christian rallies and pro-war demonstrations.

Fourth: the trust that Jesus died for "my sins" is far more important than the teachings of Jesus. This fosters a domesticated therapeutic religious expression that insists that "jesus in my heart" is more important than my lifestyle. It's like the Mafia don who could order his enemies killed while he himself was celebrating the baptism of his nephew. There is a disconnect between one's inner experience of God's loving grace and embodying that experience outwardly through one's politics. This leads to a discounting of following Jesus in a lifestyle of nonviolence, economic justice and compassion. Again as an aside . while Governor of Texas Mr. Bush was interviewed by Talk Magazine concerning the impending execution of fellow Christian Karla Faye Tucker. Bush imitated Tucker's appeal for him to spare her life . pursing his lips, squinting his eyes, and in a squeaky voice saying, "please don't kill me".

Fifth: a leader who loves Jesus is to be followed as God's man for the hour. The Christian leader is God's shepherd over the American flock. As stated before Bush sees himself as a Messiah figure (annointed by God for a special redemptive purpose). When he decided on running for the Presidency he called a group of evangelical Pastors together announcing to them "I have heard the call" and then receiving from them the "laying on of hands" which corresponds to divine ordination for the task ahead. On September 14, 2001 he stated: "our responsibility before history is already clear: to answer these attacks and rid the world of evil". He then launched the crusade Operation Infinite Freedom against Afghanistan. Yet other messainic statements from Bush:

"History has called America to action. . The great hope of our time, and the great hope of every time, now depends on us." ..

"We must also remember our calling as a blessed nation to make the world better . and confound the designs of evil men."

"Our nation has been chosen by God and commissioned by history, to be a model of justice before the world."

*** According to Vice-President Cheney: America "has the duty to act with force to construct a world in the image of the United States."

In return for this messianic leadership evangelical Christians have returned an annointing of prayer. During the Afghanistan crusade thousands of "Presidential Circles of Prayer" and "Wheels of Prayer" were organized on the Internet, running 24 hours a day.

[b]WHEEL OF PRAYER FOR OUR SOLDIERS[/b]

Lord hold our troops in your loving hands. Protect them as they protect us.

Bless them and their families for the altruistic actions they are performing

for us in our time of need. This I ask in the name of Jesus, our Lord and Savior. Amen

This prayer was so popular and was hit so often that the website crashed within days.

Pastor Charles Stanley distributed among Marines as they entered into combat thousands of pamphlets entitled "Duty of a Christian in Time of War". With the pamphlet went a card instructing them to sign and send directly to Mr. Bush. The card says: "I have committed to pray for you, your family and your Administration." Specific prayers for the President were included for each day.

[b]CONCLUSION:[/b]

The point I'm trying to make is that we are not dealing simply with politics when it comes to the Bush administration. The progressive left, which often pays little attention to Christianity, will be making a huge mistake if they overlook the religious ideology at the core of Mr. Bush personally and the movement he represents. And we are talking about a "movement" (a movement of 'the people' not just the elites). We are seeing today the emergence of a "fascist movement". It is bankrolled and organized by Corporations, articulated through the ideology of neo-conservativism. but is fueled by the right-wing church drawing upon Holiness/Holy War Biblical narratives.

When Dave Korten (author of When Corporations Rule the World) says that we need a "new story"; he is talking about needing a transcendent authority in which we root our political culture. Human beings cannot live in societal form without a sacred narrative. Neither anarchy nor atheism can construct a house that will hold our future. The Republicans know this well. But the Democrats seem clueless.

In Biblical language the Republicans have become Pharaoh whose house is strong because of economic exploitation of the populace and military repression of the people. The populace is being asked to make bricks without straw. We are seeking a "savior" . a Moses who can rally us out of these mudpits towards the promise of a land flowing with milk and honey. Unfortunately most Democrats are simply offering Pharaoh-lite: they still will keep us in the mudpit making bricks.

What we need is a movement of spiritual justice. We need the language of those who can wed America's civil religion with Biblical prophetic narrative. We need to expand that language so that it can include the language and stories that are emerging from the antiwar, fair trade and human rights movements. Together this language can form a unique new narrative that has the power to inspire imagination and courage. A language that call forth a new coalition powerful enough to leave behind the mudpit and to enter the promise of a new beginning. A coalition that understands that "we are the ones we are looking for". Indeed, the new narrative will proclaim "God with us" not "God above us".

[b]Rev. Rich Lang oddrev@yahoo.com Trinity United Methodist Church Seattle. [/b] - http://www.opednews.com/lang0...
 
Europe to Bush: GET LOST!
09.28.04 (7:47 am)   [edit]
[b]SFGate: [/b]"Why Bush must be beaten," screamed the headline of Le Nouvel Observateur, a left-leaning French newsweekly. Smaller type above the U.S. president's half profile provided the answer: "His re-election will be a catastrophe for the world and for America." That sentiment may have been expressed more bluntly than the opinions of many Europeans, yet it captured the passions on this continent over who will occupy the White House come January. Fredet's article listed numerous reasons why Bush should go: "unprecedented" American isolationism since 2000; "unequaled arrogance" in Bush's leadership style; intolerant religious fervor; and the growing millions of Americans without proper health insurance. On a continent with largely free health services, many Europeans cite that last reason as their major dislike for the U.S. system and are often dumbfounded about why Americans do not push politicians for universal health care. "

[b]More[/b] ... http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin...
 
Dwight Eisenhower's Son is Voting for Kerry
09.28.04 (7:45 am)   [edit]
[b]John Eisenhower writes[/b], "As son of a Republican President, it is automatically expected by many that I am a Republican. For 50 years, through the election of 2000, I was. With the current administration's decision to invade Iraq unilaterally, however, I changed my voter registration to independent, and barring some utterly unforeseen development, I intend to vote for the Democratic Presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry... To me, the word 'Republican' has always been synonymous with the word 'responsibility,' which has meant limiting our governmental obligations to those we can afford in human and financial terms. Today's whopping budget deficit of some $440 billion does not meet that criterion... Leadership involves setting a direction and building consensus, not viewing other countries as practically devoid of significance. Recent developments indicate that the current Republican Party leadership has confused confident leadership with hubris and arrogance. "

[b]More [/b]... http://www.theunionleader.com...

 
Bush Crime Family: Jeb's Gestapo Intimidates Black Voters in Orlando
09.28.04 (7:42 am)   [edit]
"In early June uniformed officers began knocking on doors and asking threatening questions of dozens of black voters who had been in contact with Ezzie Thomas. Several said the [Florida State Troopers] 'took-off their jackets and exposed their firearms', while questioning them. In at least one case, the officer crossed his legs and tapped a 9mm pistol sitting in an ankle holster while he asked detailed questions about the interviewee's reasons for voting absentee. (Absentee voting is a choice under Florida law, so one can wonder about the line of questioning.) 'I felt threatened, embarrassed and like I was being accused of being a criminal,' one interviewee, Willie Thomas, wrote in a statement. Many others told attorney Joe Egan later, that they 'no longer wanted to vote absentee', because they felt it was somehow 'illegal'... [Firefighter] Steve Clelland also noticed the officer tapping the 9mm pistol in his ankle-holster, as he let loose his barrage of questions."

[b]More[/b] ... http://news.independent.co.uk...
 
BUSH'S BLOODBATH: Human and Financial Costs of Iraq War Continue to Rise
09.28.04 (7:10 am)   [edit]
The human and financial costs of the Iraq War continue to climb, with no end in sight. Every day on average, two U. S. soldiers are killed and 30 wounded. More than 1,000 U. S. troops have already been killed in Iraq, three times the number that died in the first Persian Gulf War. Meanwhile, the cost of the war to taxpayers has eclipsed $150 billion, according to National Priorities Project.

Information about the cost of the Iraq War for each of the 50 states can be found in the publication Americans Pay High Cost for War, on the National Priorities Project web page, www.nationalpriorities.org/highcostofwar. The non-partisan National Priorities Project creates reliable estimates using data from various sources, primarily the federal government.

In addition to the number of troops killed in Iraq, more than 7,000 have been wounded to date, 15 times the number wounded in the first Gulf War. Nearly 170,000 Reservists and National Guard troops are currently on active duty, compared to 50,000 prior to the beginning of the Iraq War.

It is estimated that $50 billion will be needed for each year the U. S. remains in Iraq beyond 2004, adding to the $152.6 billion Congress has allocated so far. One result has been a neglect of homeland security. The $474 billion spent on the military in Fiscal Year 2005, for example, amounts to seven times the amount spent on homeland and all other non-military security combined.

“We’re quantifying the costs and bringing them down to a local level so that we can all better understand the enormity of this war,” said Greg Speeter, Executive Director of the National Priorities Project. “With the situation appearing to worsen every day, hopefully this information will challenge us to explore options that can provide real security.”

The publication discusses critiques of U.S. security policy as well as alternatives, including shifting billions of dollars from military spending to non-military security tools such as increased funding for port container inspection, nonproliferation, and international intelligence sharing. - http://www.commondreams.org/n...

[b]CONTACT:[/b] National Priorities Project, http://www.nationalpriorities...
Anita Dancs, 413-584-9556, Russell Powell
 
BUSH'S BLOODBATH: Human and Financial Costs of Iraq War Continue to Rise
09.28.04 (7:09 am)   [edit]
The human and financial costs of the Iraq War continue to climb, with no end in sight. Every day on average, two U. S. soldiers are killed and 30 wounded. More than 1,000 U. S. troops have already been killed in Iraq, three times the number that died in the first Persian Gulf War. Meanwhile, the cost of the war to taxpayers has eclipsed $150 billion, according to National Priorities Project.

Information about the cost of the Iraq War for each of the 50 states can be found in the publication Americans Pay High Cost for War, on the National Priorities Project web page, www.nationalpriorities.org/highcostofwar. The non-partisan National Priorities Project creates reliable estimates using data from various sources, primarily the federal government.

In addition to the number of troops killed in Iraq, more than 7,000 have been wounded to date, 15 times the number wounded in the first Gulf War. Nearly 170,000 Reservists and National Guard troops are currently on active duty, compared to 50,000 prior to the beginning of the Iraq War.

It is estimated that $50 billion will be needed for each year the U. S. remains in Iraq beyond 2004, adding to the $152.6 billion Congress has allocated so far. One result has been a neglect of homeland security. The $474 billion spent on the military in Fiscal Year 2005, for example, amounts to seven times the amount spent on homeland and all other non-military security combined.

“We’re quantifying the costs and bringing them down to a local level so that we can all better understand the enormity of this war,” said Greg Speeter, Executive Director of the National Priorities Project. “With the situation appearing to worsen every day, hopefully this information will challenge us to explore options that can provide real security.”

The publication discusses critiques of U.S. security policy as well as alternatives, including shifting billions of dollars from military spending to non-military security tools such as increased funding for port container inspection, nonproliferation, and international intelligence sharing. - http://www.commondreams.org/n...

[b]CONTACT:[/b] National Priorities Project, http://www.nationalpriorities...
Anita Dancs, 413-584-9556, Russell Powell
 
...... LETTER FROM THE OFFICES OF MOTHER NATURE ......
09.28.04 (7:00 am)   [edit]
[b]The Offices of Mother Nature
The Heavens
[i]in dandelions we trust[/i][/b]

[b]DECISION LETTER[/b]

To: George W. Bush
From: Commission on Disposition of Despots
Co-Chairs: Mother Nature, God, and Satan

I am writing to you as co-Chair of the Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots (hereinafter "Commission"). The potential gravity of this letter may now be crossing your mind (though not having actually entered into it). While I usually leave this kind of work to my underlings, in light of the sheer weight of allegations leveled again you (5,397,441,666 charges and counting), in this particular case it was felt by certain members of the Commission that my feminine touch would help to soften the blow I am about to hand you. (Alas, my fellow co-Chairs know not the anger of a Mother Nature scorned.)

[b]Banishment to Hell[/b]

On behalf of the Commission, I wish to inform you that, by unanimous agreement reached at the conclusion of a four-year judicial hearing held by a near-full-member panel of this Commission, you are hereby banished to Hell.

Some Commission members (who are gods of religions other than your own) abstained from voting in this matter (blame factor, we guess). Please be advised that these charges do not include allegations that you had previous knowledge of "9-11", or that your wolf pack covertly instigated the anthrax and sniper attacks in order to scare Americans into giving up their freedoms. These issues are being investigated by a separate Commission panel, which has been delayed by a lack of response to our FOIA requests.

[b]Guantanimo Bay Initiative[/b]

Pursuant to the Commission's Code of Criminal Procedure, specifically Section 666 entitled "Rules Applicable to Very, Very Bad People," you will be allowed no appeals from this judgment. Additionally, as part of the Commission's recently-enacted "Guantanimo Bay Initiative," you are barred from acquiring knowledge of the specific charges preferred against you at the aforesaid meeting; from having an attorney to represent you; from receiving conjugal visits or phone calls; from accepting any packages, including those containing cocaine, marijuana, alcohol, prescription drugs and love letters from Karl Rove; and from obtaining any evidentiary or supporting documents which provide the basis for these charges.

In the Matter of Karl Rove (heading underlined and bolded) Though no appeal will be made available to you, this Commission has nevertheless anticipated your likely argument that you are not responsible for your actions, since Karl Rove has taken possession of your mind. We wish to preemptively respond. While we are aware of this unfortunate occurrence, I'm sure you will agree that for all intents and purposes, you and Karl Rove are one and the same person. Thus, the sentence decreed by this Commission remains in force against you, and naturally, to Mr. Rove, as well.

A plastic surgeon will be on hand in Hell to separate you from Mr. Rove. However, please be aware that anesthetics are not provided to surgical patients Down Under. This is not only for the obvious reason that the whole point of being in Hell is to cause you unending pain, anguish and despair (similar to the working poor of the U.S. who live on Poverty Line Lane), but also because Hell's Office of Health and Human Services was unable to obtain the funding necessary to procure prescription drugs for such surgeries.

[b]5,397,441,666 Charges[/b]

Recently, there was a leak to the press from somewhere within the Commission's Offices regarding certain charges that were made against you. (I assure you we will find and punish the person responsible, despite that the Commission's administrative labyrinth is much smaller than that of the Executive branch.) This being the case, the Commission is prepared to repeat here only what has already been made public. These already-leaked charges, provided below, represent only a tiny handful of the staggering array of accusations leveled against you:

1. Treasonous subversion of America's constitutional democracy by virtue of a stolen election and installation of a theocratic/ fascist government. (The Commission would have given the U.S. Congress free reign to pursue criminal impeachment proceedings with regard to this charge. Nonetheless, we have it upon good authority that the Republicans in control of this once-august body have no intention of supporting such an initiative. They are currently under investigation by this body.)

2. Excessive secrecy, serial lies, propaganda, character assassination, and illegal covert activities to further your cabal's Dr. Strangelove-like march to totalitarian world power. (Hell's resident Hermann Goerring, operating under a plea agreement calling for the elimination of one of his five daily floggings, is chairing the Committee which is pursuing these charges.)

3. The sacrilegious use of Jesus' name and the tenets of Christianity to demonize your enemies and advance the democracy-destroying agenda of your extremist right-wing supporters, as well as your fanatical fetish for behaving at odds with even the most basic principles of the Christian faith.

4. The irreparable damage you have caused to America's relationship with the teeming mass of "furiners"as a result of your rolling paper-thin excuses for going into Iraq. This charge includes, of course, your subsequent illegal rampage into that sovereign country and your murder of Americans and Iraqis who were fatally shocked and ow'd by your ugly bombastics, bombs and bullets, while ignoring Al Qaida. (Any claim on your part that you had to ignore Osama bin Ladin because he's a family friend will not be treated as a valid defense.)

5. Irreversible damage to the world's environment (i.e., myself).

6. Your enthusiastic support of arsenic levels in drinking water and salmonella in the meat of our children's school lunch meat (very, very bad).

7. Your wholesale abandonment of every federal regulation enacted to safeguard Americans from rampant corporate exploitation. A related charge is your own corrupt practices as benefactor to all corporate exploiters, and your desperate shell game antics in going after Martha Stewart in hopes that this Commission would forget your friend Ken Lay.

[b]Sentencing Guidelines[/b]

The sentence initially contemplated in your case was the perpetual boiling of you in oil. However, that idea was discarded when a quick check of who controls most of the oil revealed that you (Saudis, same thing) would be making money off your own death. That seemed just a little too ironic for this Commission.

While it is decreed that you shall go straight to Hell, you shall not be conveyed by handbasket. Satan has made arrangements for you to be escorted personally into the bowels of illumination-by-fire (sorry, just a Commission joke) by Satan's Elite Forces. You would be well advised not to tangle with these men when they come a-calling, as many of them tend to double as bouncers in Hell's only bar, The Pitched Cork. I assure you that even the most rowdy of that bar's clientele are kept in line; why, just the other day, Mussolini was dragged out of the pub in an iron mask and chains just for singing "A thousand bottles of beer on the wall..."

While there were major rumblings within Hell when its citizenry first became apprised of your imminent arrival - some arguing in favor of your presence, others arguing against it, all very well-reasoned opinions, I might add - a vote was taken in the interests of fairness. While the majority of Hell's voting public favored barring your entrance (fearing you'd give it a bad name), the number of votes in the Electoral College proved the decisive factor in giving you the push in.

[b]"No Dictator Left Behind" Program[/b]

The Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots has established a "No Dictator Left Behind" program. While Hell's citizenry has lauded this program, there are admittedly others who have criticized the lack of housing and other death-sustaining needs of an already large and steadily growing population. While it is true that prison officials failed to receive adequate funding for its prison population, be assured that there will always be a place in Hell for someone such as yourself.

Kind regards,
Her Excellency,
Mother Nature

cc: God (Christian), God (Jewish), God (Muslim), etc.
Satan
Chief Officer, Elite Forces
All members of the Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots
 
...... LETTER FROM THE OFFICES OF MOTHER NATURE ......
09.28.04 (6:59 am)   [edit]
[b]The Offices of Mother Nature
The Heavens
[i]in dandelions we trust[/i][/b]

[b]DECISION LETTER[/b]

To: George W. Bush
From: Commission on Disposition of Despots
Co-Chairs: Mother Nature, God, and Satan

I am writing to you as co-Chair of the Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots (hereinafter "Commission"). The potential gravity of this letter may now be crossing your mind (though not having actually entered into it). While I usually leave this kind of work to my underlings, in light of the sheer weight of allegations leveled again you (5,397,441,666 charges and counting), in this particular case it was felt by certain members of the Commission that my feminine touch would help to soften the blow I am about to hand you. (Alas, my fellow co-Chairs know not the anger of a Mother Nature scorned.)

[b]Banishment to Hell[/b]

On behalf of the Commission, I wish to inform you that, by unanimous agreement reached at the conclusion of a four-year judicial hearing held by a near-full-member panel of this Commission, you are hereby banished to Hell.

Some Commission members (who are gods of religions other than your own) abstained from voting in this matter (blame factor, we guess). Please be advised that these charges do not include allegations that you had previous knowledge of "9-11", or that your wolf pack covertly instigated the anthrax and sniper attacks in order to scare Americans into giving up their freedoms. These issues are being investigated by a separate Commission panel, which has been delayed by a lack of response to our FOIA requests.

[b]Guantanimo Bay Initiative[/b]

Pursuant to the Commission's Code of Criminal Procedure, specifically Section 666 entitled "Rules Applicable to Very, Very Bad People," you will be allowed no appeals from this judgment. Additionally, as part of the Commission's recently-enacted "Guantanimo Bay Initiative," you are barred from acquiring knowledge of the specific charges preferred against you at the aforesaid meeting; from having an attorney to represent you; from receiving conjugal visits or phone calls; from accepting any packages, including those containing cocaine, marijuana, alcohol, prescription drugs and love letters from Karl Rove; and from obtaining any evidentiary or supporting documents which provide the basis for these charges.

In the Matter of Karl Rove (heading underlined and bolded) Though no appeal will be made available to you, this Commission has nevertheless anticipated your likely argument that you are not responsible for your actions, since Karl Rove has taken possession of your mind. We wish to preemptively respond. While we are aware of this unfortunate occurrence, I'm sure you will agree that for all intents and purposes, you and Karl Rove are one and the same person. Thus, the sentence decreed by this Commission remains in force against you, and naturally, to Mr. Rove, as well.

A plastic surgeon will be on hand in Hell to separate you from Mr. Rove. However, please be aware that anesthetics are not provided to surgical patients Down Under. This is not only for the obvious reason that the whole point of being in Hell is to cause you unending pain, anguish and despair (similar to the working poor of the U.S. who live on Poverty Line Lane), but also because Hell's Office of Health and Human Services was unable to obtain the funding necessary to procure prescription drugs for such surgeries.

[b]5,397,441,666 Charges[/b]

Recently, there was a leak to the press from somewhere within the Commission's Offices regarding certain charges that were made against you. (I assure you we will find and punish the person responsible, despite that the Commission's administrative labyrinth is much smaller than that of the Executive branch.) This being the case, the Commission is prepared to repeat here only what has already been made public. These already-leaked charges, provided below, represent only a tiny handful of the staggering array of accusations leveled against you:

1. Treasonous subversion of America's constitutional democracy by virtue of a stolen election and installation of a theocratic/ fascist government. (The Commission would have given the U.S. Congress free reign to pursue criminal impeachment proceedings with regard to this charge. Nonetheless, we have it upon good authority that the Republicans in control of this once-august body have no intention of supporting such an initiative. They are currently under investigation by this body.)

2. Excessive secrecy, serial lies, propaganda, character assassination, and illegal covert activities to further your cabal's Dr. Strangelove-like march to totalitarian world power. (Hell's resident Hermann Goerring, operating under a plea agreement calling for the elimination of one of his five daily floggings, is chairing the Committee which is pursuing these charges.)

3. The sacrilegious use of Jesus' name and the tenets of Christianity to demonize your enemies and advance the democracy-destroying agenda of your extremist right-wing supporters, as well as your fanatical fetish for behaving at odds with even the most basic principles of the Christian faith.

4. The irreparable damage you have caused to America's relationship with the teeming mass of "furiners"as a result of your rolling paper-thin excuses for going into Iraq. This charge includes, of course, your subsequent illegal rampage into that sovereign country and your murder of Americans and Iraqis who were fatally shocked and ow'd by your ugly bombastics, bombs and bullets, while ignoring Al Qaida. (Any claim on your part that you had to ignore Osama bin Ladin because he's a family friend will not be treated as a valid defense.)

5. Irreversible damage to the world's environment (i.e., myself).

6. Your enthusiastic support of arsenic levels in drinking water and salmonella in the meat of our children's school lunch meat (very, very bad).

7. Your wholesale abandonment of every federal regulation enacted to safeguard Americans from rampant corporate exploitation. A related charge is your own corrupt practices as benefactor to all corporate exploiters, and your desperate shell game antics in going after Martha Stewart in hopes that this Commission would forget your friend Ken Lay.

[b]Sentencing Guidelines[/b]

The sentence initially contemplated in your case was the perpetual boiling of you in oil. However, that idea was discarded when a quick check of who controls most of the oil revealed that you (Saudis, same thing) would be making money off your own death. That seemed just a little too ironic for this Commission.

While it is decreed that you shall go straight to Hell, you shall not be conveyed by handbasket. Satan has made arrangements for you to be escorted personally into the bowels of illumination-by-fire (sorry, just a Commission joke) by Satan's Elite Forces. You would be well advised not to tangle with these men when they come a-calling, as many of them tend to double as bouncers in Hell's only bar, The Pitched Cork. I assure you that even the most rowdy of that bar's clientele are kept in line; why, just the other day, Mussolini was dragged out of the pub in an iron mask and chains just for singing "A thousand bottles of beer on the wall..."

While there were major rumblings within Hell when its citizenry first became apprised of your imminent arrival - some arguing in favor of your presence, others arguing against it, all very well-reasoned opinions, I might add - a vote was taken in the interests of fairness. While the majority of Hell's voting public favored barring your entrance (fearing you'd give it a bad name), the number of votes in the Electoral College proved the decisive factor in giving you the push in.

[b]"No Dictator Left Behind" Program[/b]

The Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots has established a "No Dictator Left Behind" program. While Hell's citizenry has lauded this program, there are admittedly others who have criticized the lack of housing and other death-sustaining needs of an already large and steadily growing population. While it is true that prison officials failed to receive adequate funding for its prison population, be assured that there will always be a place in Hell for someone such as yourself.

Kind regards,
Her Excellency,
Mother Nature

cc: God (Christian), God (Jewish), God (Muslim), etc.
Satan
Chief Officer, Elite Forces
All members of the Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots
 
...... LETTER FROM THE OFFICES OF MOTHER NATURE ......
09.28.04 (6:57 am)   [edit]
[b]The Offices of Mother Nature
The Heavens
[i]in dandelions we trust[/i][/b]

[b]DECISION LETTER[/b]

To: George W. Bush
From: Commission on Disposition of Despots
Co-Chairs: Mother Nature, God, and Satan

I am writing to you as co-Chair of the Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots (hereinafter "Commission"). The potential gravity of this letter may now be crossing your mind (though not having actually entered into it). While I usually leave this kind of work to my underlings, in light of the sheer weight of allegations leveled again you (5,397,441,666 charges and counting), in this particular case it was felt by certain members of the Commission that my feminine touch would help to soften the blow I am about to hand you. (Alas, my fellow co-Chairs know not the anger of a Mother Nature scorned.)

[b]Banishment to Hell[/b]

On behalf of the Commission, I wish to inform you that, by unanimous agreement reached at the conclusion of a four-year judicial hearing held by a near-full-member panel of this Commission, you are hereby banished to Hell.

Some Commission members (who are gods of religions other than your own) abstained from voting in this matter (blame factor, we guess). Please be advised that these charges do not include allegations that you had previous knowledge of "9-11", or that your wolf pack covertly instigated the anthrax and sniper attacks in order to scare Americans into giving up their freedoms. These issues are being investigated by a separate Commission panel, which has been delayed by a lack of response to our FOIA requests.

[b]Guantanimo Bay Initiative[/b]

Pursuant to the Commission's Code of Criminal Procedure, specifically Section 666 entitled "Rules Applicable to Very, Very Bad People," you will be allowed no appeals from this judgment. Additionally, as part of the Commission's recently-enacted "Guantanimo Bay Initiative," you are barred from acquiring knowledge of the specific charges preferred against you at the aforesaid meeting; from having an attorney to represent you; from receiving conjugal visits or phone calls; from accepting any packages, including those containing cocaine, marijuana, alcohol, prescription drugs and love letters from Karl Rove; and from obtaining any evidentiary or supporting documents which provide the basis for these charges.

In the Matter of Karl Rove (heading underlined and bolded) Though no appeal will be made available to you, this Commission has nevertheless anticipated your likely argument that you are not responsible for your actions, since Karl Rove has taken possession of your mind. We wish to preemptively respond. While we are aware of this unfortunate occurrence, I'm sure you will agree that for all intents and purposes, you and Karl Rove are one and the same person. Thus, the sentence decreed by this Commission remains in force against you, and naturally, to Mr. Rove, as well.

A plastic surgeon will be on hand in Hell to separate you from Mr. Rove. However, please be aware that anesthetics are not provided to surgical patients Down Under. This is not only for the obvious reason that the whole point of being in Hell is to cause you unending pain, anguish and despair (similar to the working poor of the U.S. who live on Poverty Line Lane), but also because Hell's Office of Health and Human Services was unable to obtain the funding necessary to procure prescription drugs for such surgeries.

[b]5,397,441,666 Charges[/b]

Recently, there was a leak to the press from somewhere within the Commission's Offices regarding certain charges that were made against you. (I assure you we will find and punish the person responsible, despite that the Commission's administrative labyrinth is much smaller than that of the Executive branch.) This being the case, the Commission is prepared to repeat here only what has already been made public. These already-leaked charges, provided below, represent only a tiny handful of the staggering array of accusations leveled against you:

1. Treasonous subversion of America's constitutional democracy by virtue of a stolen election and installation of a theocratic/ fascist government. (The Commission would have given the U.S. Congress free reign to pursue criminal impeachment proceedings with regard to this charge. Nonetheless, we have it upon good authority that the Republicans in control of this once-august body have no intention of supporting such an initiative. They are currently under investigation by this body.)

2. Excessive secrecy, serial lies, propaganda, character assassination, and illegal covert activities to further your cabal's Dr. Strangelove-like march to totalitarian world power. (Hell's resident Hermann Goerring, operating under a plea agreement calling for the elimination of one of his five daily floggings, is chairing the Committee which is pursuing these charges.)

3. The sacrilegious use of Jesus' name and the tenets of Christianity to demonize your enemies and advance the democracy-destroying agenda of your extremist right-wing supporters, as well as your fanatical fetish for behaving at odds with even the most basic principles of the Christian faith.

4. The irreparable damage you have caused to America's relationship with the teeming mass of "furiners"as a result of your rolling paper-thin excuses for going into Iraq. This charge includes, of course, your subsequent illegal rampage into that sovereign country and your murder of Americans and Iraqis who were fatally shocked and ow'd by your ugly bombastics, bombs and bullets, while ignoring Al Qaida. (Any claim on your part that you had to ignore Osama bin Ladin because he's a family friend will not be treated as a valid defense.)

5. Irreversible damage to the world's environment (i.e., myself).

6. Your enthusiastic support of arsenic levels in drinking water and salmonella in the meat of our children's school lunch meat (very, very bad).

7. Your wholesale abandonment of every federal regulation enacted to safeguard Americans from rampant corporate exploitation. A related charge is your own corrupt practices as benefactor to all corporate exploiters, and your desperate shell game antics in going after Martha Stewart in hopes that this Commission would forget your friend Ken Lay.

[b]Sentencing Guidelines[/b]

The sentence initially contemplated in your case was the perpetual boiling of you in oil. However, that idea was discarded when a quick check of who controls most of the oil revealed that you (Saudis, same thing) would be making money off your own death. That seemed just a little too ironic for this Commission.

While it is decreed that you shall go straight to Hell, you shall not be conveyed by handbasket. Satan has made arrangements for you to be escorted personally into the bowels of illumination-by-fire (sorry, just a Commission joke) by Satan's Elite Forces. You would be well advised not to tangle with these men when they come a-calling, as many of them tend to double as bouncers in Hell's only bar, The Pitched Cork. I assure you that even the most rowdy of that bar's clientele are kept in line; why, just the other day, Mussolini was dragged out of the pub in an iron mask and chains just for singing "A thousand bottles of beer on the wall..."

While there were major rumblings within Hell when its citizenry first became apprised of your imminent arrival - some arguing in favor of your presence, others arguing against it, all very well-reasoned opinions, I might add - a vote was taken in the interests of fairness. While the majority of Hell's voting public favored barring your entrance (fearing you'd give it a bad name), the number of votes in the Electoral College proved the decisive factor in giving you the push in.

[b]"No Dictator Left Behind" Program[/b]

The Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots has established a "No Dictator Left Behind" program. While Hell's citizenry has lauded this program, there are admittedly others who have criticized the lack of housing and other death-sustaining needs of an already large and steadily growing population. While it is true that prison officials failed to receive adequate funding for its prison population, be assured that there will always be a place in Hell for someone such as yourself.

Kind regards,
Her Excellency,
Mother Nature

cc: God (Christian), God (Jewish), God (Muslim), etc.
Satan
Chief Officer, Elite Forces
All members of the Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots
 
...... LETTER FROM THE OFFICES OF MOTHER NATURE ......
09.28.04 (6:56 am)   [edit]
[b]The Offices of Mother Nature
The Heavens
[i]in dandelions we trust[/i][/b]

[b]DECISION LETTER[/b]

To: George W. Bush
From: Commission on Disposition of Despots
Co-Chairs: Mother Nature, God, and Satan

I am writing to you as co-Chair of the Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots (hereinafter "Commission"). The potential gravity of this letter may now be crossing your mind (though not having actually entered into it). While I usually leave this kind of work to my underlings, in light of the sheer weight of allegations leveled again you (5,397,441,666 charges and counting), in this particular case it was felt by certain members of the Commission that my feminine touch would help to soften the blow I am about to hand you. (Alas, my fellow co-Chairs know not the anger of a Mother Nature scorned.)

[b]Banishment to Hell[/b]

On behalf of the Commission, I wish to inform you that, by unanimous agreement reached at the conclusion of a four-year judicial hearing held by a near-full-member panel of this Commission, you are hereby banished to Hell.

Some Commission members (who are gods of religions other than your own) abstained from voting in this matter (blame factor, we guess). Please be advised that these charges do not include allegations that you had previous knowledge of "9-11", or that your wolf pack covertly instigated the anthrax and sniper attacks in order to scare Americans into giving up their freedoms. These issues are being investigated by a separate Commission panel, which has been delayed by a lack of response to our FOIA requests.

[b]Guantanimo Bay Initiative[/b]

Pursuant to the Commission's Code of Criminal Procedure, specifically Section 666 entitled "Rules Applicable to Very, Very Bad People," you will be allowed no appeals from this judgment. Additionally, as part of the Commission's recently-enacted "Guantanimo Bay Initiative," you are barred from acquiring knowledge of the specific charges preferred against you at the aforesaid meeting; from having an attorney to represent you; from receiving conjugal visits or phone calls; from accepting any packages, including those containing cocaine, marijuana, alcohol, prescription drugs and love letters from Karl Rove; and from obtaining any evidentiary or supporting documents which provide the basis for these charges.

In the Matter of Karl Rove (heading underlined and bolded) Though no appeal will be made available to you, this Commission has nevertheless anticipated your likely argument that you are not responsible for your actions, since Karl Rove has taken possession of your mind. We wish to preemptively respond. While we are aware of this unfortunate occurrence, I'm sure you will agree that for all intents and purposes, you and Karl Rove are one and the same person. Thus, the sentence decreed by this Commission remains in force against you, and naturally, to Mr. Rove, as well.

A plastic surgeon will be on hand in Hell to separate you from Mr. Rove. However, please be aware that anesthetics are not provided to surgical patients Down Under. This is not only for the obvious reason that the whole point of being in Hell is to cause you unending pain, anguish and despair (similar to the working poor of the U.S. who live on Poverty Line Lane), but also because Hell's Office of Health and Human Services was unable to obtain the funding necessary to procure prescription drugs for such surgeries.

[b]5,397,441,666 Charges[/b]

Recently, there was a leak to the press from somewhere within the Commission's Offices regarding certain charges that were made against you. (I assure you we will find and punish the person responsible, despite that the Commission's administrative labyrinth is much smaller than that of the Executive branch.) This being the case, the Commission is prepared to repeat here only what has already been made public. These already-leaked charges, provided below, represent only a tiny handful of the staggering array of accusations leveled against you:

1. Treasonous subversion of America's constitutional democracy by virtue of a stolen election and installation of a theocratic/ fascist government. (The Commission would have given the U.S. Congress free reign to pursue criminal impeachment proceedings with regard to this charge. Nonetheless, we have it upon good authority that the Republicans in control of this once-august body have no intention of supporting such an initiative. They are currently under investigation by this body.)

2. Excessive secrecy, serial lies, propaganda, character assassination, and illegal covert activities to further your cabal's Dr. Strangelove-like march to totalitarian world power. (Hell's resident Hermann Goerring, operating under a plea agreement calling for the elimination of one of his five daily floggings, is chairing the Committee which is pursuing these charges.)

3. The sacrilegious use of Jesus' name and the tenets of Christianity to demonize your enemies and advance the democracy-destroying agenda of your extremist right-wing supporters, as well as your fanatical fetish for behaving at odds with even the most basic principles of the Christian faith.

4. The irreparable damage you have caused to America's relationship with the teeming mass of "furiners"as a result of your rolling paper-thin excuses for going into Iraq. This charge includes, of course, your subsequent illegal rampage into that sovereign country and your murder of Americans and Iraqis who were fatally shocked and ow'd by your ugly bombastics, bombs and bullets, while ignoring Al Qaida. (Any claim on your part that you had to ignore Osama bin Ladin because he's a family friend will not be treated as a valid defense.)

5. Irreversible damage to the world's environment (i.e., myself).

6. Your enthusiastic support of arsenic levels in drinking water and salmonella in the meat of our children's school lunch meat (very, very bad).

7. Your wholesale abandonment of every federal regulation enacted to safeguard Americans from rampant corporate exploitation. A related charge is your own corrupt practices as benefactor to all corporate exploiters, and your desperate shell game antics in going after Martha Stewart in hopes that this Commission would forget your friend Ken Lay.

[b]Sentencing Guidelines[/b]

The sentence initially contemplated in your case was the perpetual boiling of you in oil. However, that idea was discarded when a quick check of who controls most of the oil revealed that you (Saudis, same thing) would be making money off your own death. That seemed just a little too ironic for this Commission.

While it is decreed that you shall go straight to Hell, you shall not be conveyed by handbasket. Satan has made arrangements for you to be escorted personally into the bowels of illumination-by-fire (sorry, just a Commission joke) by Satan's Elite Forces. You would be well advised not to tangle with these men when they come a-calling, as many of them tend to double as bouncers in Hell's only bar, The Pitched Cork. I assure you that even the most rowdy of that bar's clientele are kept in line; why, just the other day, Mussolini was dragged out of the pub in an iron mask and chains just for singing "A thousand bottles of beer on the wall..."

While there were major rumblings within Hell when its citizenry first became apprised of your imminent arrival - some arguing in favor of your presence, others arguing against it, all very well-reasoned opinions, I might add - a vote was taken in the interests of fairness. While the majority of Hell's voting public favored barring your entrance (fearing you'd give it a bad name), the number of votes in the Electoral College proved the decisive factor in giving you the push in.

[b]"No Dictator Left Behind" Program[/b]

The Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots has established a "No Dictator Left Behind" program. While Hell's citizenry has lauded this program, there are admittedly others who have criticized the lack of housing and other death-sustaining needs of an already large and steadily growing population. While it is true that prison officials failed to receive adequate funding for its prison population, be assured that there will always be a place in Hell for someone such as yourself.

Kind regards,
Her Excellency,
Mother Nature

cc: God (Christian), God (Jewish), God (Muslim), etc.
Satan
Chief Officer, Elite Forces
All members of the Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots
 
...... LETTER FROM THE OFFICES OF MOTHER NATURE ......
09.28.04 (6:53 am)   [edit]
[b]The Offices of Mother Nature
The Heavens
[i]in dandelions we trust[/i][/b]

[b]DECISION LETTER[/b]

To: George W. Bush
From: Commission on Disposition of Despots
Co-Chairs: Mother Nature, God, and Satan

I am writing to you as co-Chair of the Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots (hereinafter "Commission"). The potential gravity of this letter may now be crossing your mind (though not having actually entered into it). While I usually leave this kind of work to my underlings, in light of the sheer weight of allegations leveled again you (5,397,441,666 charges and counting), in this particular case it was felt by certain members of the Commission that my feminine touch would help to soften the blow I am about to hand you. (Alas, my fellow co-Chairs know not the anger of a Mother Nature scorned.)

[b]Banishment to Hell[/b]

On behalf of the Commission, I wish to inform you that, by unanimous agreement reached at the conclusion of a four-year judicial hearing held by a near-full-member panel of this Commission, you are hereby banished to Hell.

Some Commission members (who are gods of religions other than your own) abstained from voting in this matter (blame factor, we guess). Please be advised that these charges do not include allegations that you had previous knowledge of "9-11", or that your wolf pack covertly instigated the anthrax and sniper attacks in order to scare Americans into giving up their freedoms. These issues are being investigated by a separate Commission panel, which has been delayed by a lack of response to our FOIA requests.

[b]Guantanimo Bay Initiative[/b]

Pursuant to the Commission's Code of Criminal Procedure, specifically Section 666 entitled "Rules Applicable to Very, Very Bad People," you will be allowed no appeals from this judgment. Additionally, as part of the Commission's recently-enacted "Guantanimo Bay Initiative," you are barred from acquiring knowledge of the specific charges preferred against you at the aforesaid meeting; from having an attorney to represent you; from receiving conjugal visits or phone calls; from accepting any packages, including those containing cocaine, marijuana, alcohol, prescription drugs and love letters from Karl Rove; and from obtaining any evidentiary or supporting documents which provide the basis for these charges.

In the Matter of Karl Rove (heading underlined and bolded) Though no appeal will be made available to you, this Commission has nevertheless anticipated your likely argument that you are not responsible for your actions, since Karl Rove has taken possession of your mind. We wish to preemptively respond. While we are aware of this unfortunate occurrence, I'm sure you will agree that for all intents and purposes, you and Karl Rove are one and the same person. Thus, the sentence decreed by this Commission remains in force against you, and naturally, to Mr. Rove, as well.

A plastic surgeon will be on hand in Hell to separate you from Mr. Rove. However, please be aware that anesthetics are not provided to surgical patients Down Under. This is not only for the obvious reason that the whole point of being in Hell is to cause you unending pain, anguish and despair (similar to the working poor of the U.S. who live on Poverty Line Lane), but also because Hell's Office of Health and Human Services was unable to obtain the funding necessary to procure prescription drugs for such surgeries.

[b]5,397,441,666 Charges[/b]

Recently, there was a leak to the press from somewhere within the Commission's Offices regarding certain charges that were made against you. (I assure you we will find and punish the person responsible, despite that the Commission's administrative labyrinth is much smaller than that of the Executive branch.) This being the case, the Commission is prepared to repeat here only what has already been made public. These already-leaked charges, provided below, represent only a tiny handful of the staggering array of accusations leveled against you:

1. Treasonous subversion of America's constitutional democracy by virtue of a stolen election and installation of a theocratic/ fascist government. (The Commission would have given the U.S. Congress free reign to pursue criminal impeachment proceedings with regard to this charge. Nonetheless, we have it upon good authority that the Republicans in control of this once-august body have no intention of supporting such an initiative. They are currently under investigation by this body.)

2. Excessive secrecy, serial lies, propaganda, character assassination, and illegal covert activities to further your cabal's Dr. Strangelove-like march to totalitarian world power. (Hell's resident Hermann Goerring, operating under a plea agreement calling for the elimination of one of his five daily floggings, is chairing the Committee which is pursuing these charges.)

3. The sacrilegious use of Jesus' name and the tenets of Christianity to demonize your enemies and advance the democracy-destroying agenda of your extremist right-wing supporters, as well as your fanatical fetish for behaving at odds with even the most basic principles of the Christian faith.

4. The irreparable damage you have caused to America's relationship with the teeming mass of "furiners"as a result of your rolling paper-thin excuses for going into Iraq. This charge includes, of course, your subsequent illegal rampage into that sovereign country and your murder of Americans and Iraqis who were fatally shocked and ow'd by your ugly bombastics, bombs and bullets, while ignoring Al Qaida. (Any claim on your part that you had to ignore Osama bin Ladin because he's a family friend will not be treated as a valid defense.)

5. Irreversible damage to the world's environment (i.e., myself).

6. Your enthusiastic support of arsenic levels in drinking water and salmonella in the meat of our children's school lunch meat (very, very bad).

7. Your wholesale abandonment of every federal regulation enacted to safeguard Americans from rampant corporate exploitation. A related charge is your own corrupt practices as benefactor to all corporate exploiters, and your desperate shell game antics in going after Martha Stewart in hopes that this Commission would forget your friend Ken Lay.

[b]Sentencing Guidelines[/b]

The sentence initially contemplated in your case was the perpetual boiling of you in oil. However, that idea was discarded when a quick check of who controls most of the oil revealed that you (Saudis, same thing) would be making money off your own death. That seemed just a little too ironic for this Commission.

While it is decreed that you shall go straight to Hell, you shall not be conveyed by handbasket. Satan has made arrangements for you to be escorted personally into the bowels of illumination-by-fire (sorry, just a Commission joke) by Satan's Elite Forces. You would be well advised not to tangle with these men when they come a-calling, as many of them tend to double as bouncers in Hell's only bar, The Pitched Cork. I assure you that even the most rowdy of that bar's clientele are kept in line; why, just the other day, Mussolini was dragged out of the pub in an iron mask and chains just for singing "A thousand bottles of beer on the wall..."

While there were major rumblings within Hell when its citizenry first became apprised of your imminent arrival - some arguing in favor of your presence, others arguing against it, all very well-reasoned opinions, I might add - a vote was taken in the interests of fairness. While the majority of Hell's voting public favored barring your entrance (fearing you'd give it a bad name), the number of votes in the Electoral College proved the decisive factor in giving you the push in.

[b]"No Dictator Left Behind" Program[/b]

The Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots has established a "No Dictator Left Behind" program. While Hell's citizenry has lauded this program, there are admittedly others who have criticized the lack of housing and other death-sustaining needs of an already large and steadily growing population. While it is true that prison officials failed to receive adequate funding for its prison population, be assured that there will always be a place in Hell for someone such as yourself.

Kind regards,
Her Excellency,
Mother Nature

cc: God (Christian), God (Jewish), God (Muslim), etc.
Satan
Chief Officer, Elite Forces
All members of the Joint Commission on Disposition of Despots
 
Conservative Church? A'W'OL Bush is a Mass-Murderer & Lying Thug!
09.27.04 (2:21 pm)   [edit]
I fault this president for not knowing what death is. He does not suffer the death of our 21-year-olds who wanted to be what they could be. On the eve of D-Day in 1944 General Eisenhower prayed to God for the lives of the young soldiers he knew were going to die. He knew what death was. Even in a justifiable war, a war not of choice but of necessity, a war of survival, the cost was almost more than Eisenhower could bear.

But this president does not know what death is. He hasn't the mind for it. You see him joking with the press, peering under the table for the weapons of mass destruction he can't seem to find, you see him at rallies strutting up to the stage in shirt sleeves to the roar of the carefully screened crowd, smiling and waving, triumphal, a he-man.

He does not mourn. He doesn't understand why he should mourn. He is satisfied during the course of a speech written for him to look solemn for a moment and speak of the brave young Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country.

[b]More[/b] ... http://www.smirkingchimp.com/...

 
100 Children Per Day Die in Iraq, Most Due to Malnutrition and Consequences of Bush Bombing
09.27.04 (2:18 pm)   [edit]
[b]Zaman Daily:[/b] "In one month, 3000 children died in Iraq; on average, that is 100 per day. Though many are innocent victims of incessant clashes, most succumb to malnourishment and unsanitary living conditions [caused in large part by the systematic destruction of Iraq's infrastructure via the pre-invasion bombing, trashing sewage and water purification plants]. The shortage of drugs and modern equipment is worse than when Saddam Hussein was in power - when international embargoes isolated the country. Shells and shrapnel, grenades and bombs are other factors affecting the health of children. According to disclosures from the Health Care Ministry, children are suffering from diseases that were never reported before the war. Rimad Cuburi, a doctor in one of the country's largest children's hospitals, said the ailments arouse from some of the American weaponry." So this is what the Bush and his media goons are so eager to perpetuate at all costs? The slaughter of children?

[b]More[/b] ... http://www.zaman.com/?bl=inte...
 
Karl 'Balloon McGoon' Rove Has Been Allied with Fraudsters, Thugs & Crooks for Decades
09.27.04 (2:16 pm)   [edit]
[b]Karl 'Balloon McGoon' Rove Has Been Allied with Swift Boat Fraud Mastermind for nearly THREE DECADES[/b]

Although the meat of this story is, of course, that Karl Rove and Swift Boat Fraud mastermind Bob Perry have been colluding in dirty politics for nearly three decades, beginning in Texas in 1978, it is also interesting for the insight it gives into the character of Bush's 'top goon' (Rove). The man insultingly known as 'Bush brain' has been hiding behind other people, using other people to manipulate yet other people to power since he was in college. In short, his sad, destructive existence has consisted of crawling from one "hideout" from life to another to another, playing out vindictive fantasies of power and revenge through other people. Rove's personality seems to match descriptions of "magic mirror" borderline personality disorder syndromes where the subject, often damaged by a critical, cold father, lives obsessively thru another, often becoming abusive and highly manipulative to perpetuate his control and power fantasies.

[b]More[/b] ... http://quote.bloomberg.com/ap...
 
Bush's Bloodbath: U.S. Forces Admit One Mistake After Another ...
09.27.04 (2:03 pm)   [edit]
[b]Demise of Iraqi Units Symbolic of U.S. Errors [/b]

[b]Rebuilding hindered by past mistakes.[/b]

Saqlawiya, Iraq - The police outpost here is supposed to house 90 armed members of Iraq's National Guard. Their job is to keep watch over a stretch of six-lane highway, deterring insurgents from laying roadside bombs and trying to blow up a bridge over the nearby Tharthar Canal.

But when the U.S. Marine commander responsible for the area visited the outpost this month, he found six bedraggled guardsmen on duty. None of them was patrolling. The Iraqi officer in charge was missing. And their weapons had been locked up by the Marines after a guardsman detonated a grenade inside the compound.

The unit's demise underscores the degree to which errors committed by civilian and military leaders during the 15 months of rule by the U.S.-led occupation authority continue to impede the U.S. effort to combat a vexing insurgency and rebuild Iraq's shattered government and economy. Recovering from those mistakes has become the principal challenge facing the United States in Iraq, three months after the transfer of political authority to an interim government.

"We're trying to climb out of a hole," said an official with the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, who spoke on condition of anonymity. American missteps during the occupation, the official said, "continue to haunt us."

The errors have had a major impact on almost every aspect of the U.S. agenda here, from pacifying rebel-held cities to holding elections in January to accelerating reconstruction projects. In each area, past mistakes have made it far tougher to accomplish U.S. objectives and those of Iraq's interim government.

The guardsmen in Saqlawiya, who come from the nearby city of Fallujah, were not always this pathetic. Early this year, their battalion was lauded by the U.S. military for repelling insurgent attacks on the mayor's office and police headquarters in Fallujah. They were, as one Army officer put it in March, "a glimmer of hope in an otherwise dark place."

The battalion disintegrated in April because of an order by the White House and the Pentagon to have the Marines lay siege to Fallujah - a decision top Marine officials now acknowledge was a profound mistake. As Marines advanced into the city, the guardsmen were put in an untenable position: Either flee, or join the Marines in fighting Iraqi neighbors - and risk violent retribution. The guardsmen fled.

When the Marines were ordered by Washington to pull out of the city and hand over security responsibilities to a brigade of former Iraqi army soldiers - another grave miscalculation, in the eyes of Marine commanders - the National Guardsmen returned to work. They manned checkpoints and conducted patrols with the former soldiers, who called themselves the Fallujah Brigade.

But before long, an alliance of foreign-born and local insurgents eviscerated both the Fallujah Brigade and the two National Guard battalions in the city.

Soldiers in the brigade who had been former insurgents were either lured back into the resistance or intimidated into submission. The commanders of both National Guard battalions were kidnapped by militants loyal to Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian-born militant who is now the most wanted man in Iraq. One commander was beheaded; the other is missing and presumed dead. As soon as the commanders were captured, the battalions melted away.

Some Marine officers contend that if they had not been ordered to invade Fallujah after the March 31 killing and mutilation of four American security contractors, the city's National Guard battalions and security forces would be functioning. Although both units had incompetents and insurgent sympathizers in their ranks, the Marine officers maintain that the units could have served as a helpful ally to U.S. forces in the effort to squelch the insurgency.

Now, the Marines are trying to reconstitute the two battalions, mustering members to report to outposts in such nearby towns as Saqlawiya. In some ways, it is exactly what the Army's 82nd Airborne Division did a year ago, when it formed the two battalions.

In an attempt to build discipline, guardsmen who do not show up in their desert camouflage uniforms and with their identification cards are sent home without pay. Training and patrolling are secondary. Attendance is the first challenge.

"The soldiers on duty, they will be paid, they will be taken care of," Marine Lt. Col. Gregg Olson, the commander of the 2nd Battalion of the 1st Marine Regiment, told Iraqi Lt. Wissam Hamid.

After Olson's comment was translated, Hamid nodded but his expression betrayed disagreement. "There is a war there," he said, referring to Fallujah. "People are afraid to come to work."

Olson asked about the unit's vehicles, which were stolen by the insurgents over the summer. Had the guardsmen recovered them? Hamid said they had not.

As Olson walked out into the bright afternoon sun, the task ahead was clear to him. "We have to start from scratch," he said.

[b]Not Enough Forces [/b]

In early April, as the Marines were besieging Fallujah, U.S. commanders ordered one of the first battalions of Iraq's reconstituted army to join the fight in a supporting role. The commanders figured it would provide the Iraqi soldiers with a valuable lesson. It turned out to be the other way around.

When the soldiers, who had just finished basic training, were told where they were being sent, they staged a mutiny and refused to board transport helicopters. The Iraqis told U.S. officers that they did not enlist in order to fight fellow Iraqis.

Stunned U.S. military officials tried to determine what had gone wrong. According to several commanders, they eventually concluded that it was a mistake to have a private contractor conduct basic training, a concern that had already been raised by some veteran military officers, who maintained that the military would have done a better job. Their objection was ignored by the Pentagon's civilian leadership. Once the soldiers finished boot camp, they were put under the command of U.S. officers whom they had never met.

The officials concluded later that U.S. Special Forces soldiers should have conducted the training and remained with the units during their first few missions, an approach that would have increased the likelihood of trust and confidence between the Iraqis and the Americans.

That conclusion required a wholesale revision of the training system, which delayed the deployment of Iraqi army units. Instead of fielding 12,000 soldiers by June, as the U.S. occupation administrator, L. Paul Bremer, had promised a year earlier, there were about 4,000 soldiers. There are currently about 6,000 in the field.

Although the director of the training effort, Lt. Gen. David Petraeus, has vastly expanded boot camp capacity - an additional 12,000 soldiers should be ready by the end of October - the current size of the Iraqi army has placed the U.S. military and Iraq's interim government in a bind.

The top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., and the interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi, share a desire to flush insurgents out from Fallujah, Samarra, Ramadi and other Sunni Muslim-dominated cities where militants have congregated. But both men want those operations to involve a significant number of Iraqi forces.

With just six active Iraqi army battalions - three of which have been deployed in the Shiite holy city of Najaf to oppose an insurgency there - there are too few soldiers to conduct those joint operations.

"We simply don't have enough trained Iraqi forces right now to do what we need to do," said a senior U.S. military official in Iraq who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Senior U.S. commanders in Iraq said they intend to mount assaults against insurgent strongholds in the Sunni Triangle before the end of the year to allow Iraqi police and National Guard forces to reassert control. But the wait for trained Iraqi soldiers to conduct those operations means that they will occur precariously close to January's national elections.

Had the training mistakes been avoided, the official said, "we would have far more options now. We could retake Fallujah. We could deal with Samarra."

[b]Dealing With Sadr's Militia [/b]

Another place on the list of no-go zones yet to be pacified is Sadr City, the vast Shiite slum in eastern Baghdad where support runs strong for Moqtada Sadr, the rebel cleric whose illegal militia has become the most serious security threat after the Sunni insurgency.

U.S. diplomats and military commanders have complained in private that Sadr's militia should have been dealt with in the early stages of the occupation, when allegations first surfaced that he had ordered the slaying of a rival cleric. At the time, Sadr's militia amounted to no more than a few hundred young men with guns. Today, it has thousands of members and an arsenal that includes mortars and rocket-propelled grenades.

Although Bremer attempted to rein in Sadr in the spring by closing his newspaper, a move that sparked a fierce uprising by his militiamen, U.S. forces did not capture or kill him as they pledged - or even dismantle his militia. A cease-fire deal gave Sadr effective control of Najaf.

When Sadr's forces violated the agreement in late July by attacking a police station there, the response by U.S. forces was swift and severe, and ultimately compelled Sadr to withdraw his militia from the city's holiest shrine under an arrangement brokered by Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the country's top Shiite leader. A condition of that deal was that U.S. troops in the city would be replaced by Iraqi soldiers. As a result, three of the country's six army battalions are tied up there, making it difficult for U.S. commanders to mount joint operations against Sadr's militiamen in Sadr City.

"We've spent a lot of our time and energy dealing with a problem that should have been taken care of months ago," a U.S. commander involved in operations against Sadr's militiamen said.

[b] 'Making Up for Lost Time' [/b]

When Bremer went to Congress last fall to plead for a massive infusion of U.S. taxpayer dollars to help Iraq, he outlined a blueprint for stability based on far-reaching improvements to the country's shattered infrastructure. In November, Congress approved an $18.4 billion aid package that called for spending nearly $10 billion on electricity, water and sanitation projects. Congress allocated $3.2 billion to train and equip Iraqi security forces.

After taking over from Bremer in late June, U.S. Ambassador John D. Negroponte and his staff concluded that more money needed to go into building Iraq's security forces and generating new jobs. Arguing that immediate concerns trumped long-term development, Negroponte asked the administration to divert $2.3 billion from infrastructure projects to security initiatives, including the funding of Iraqi security forces, and to job programs.

Many U.S. civilian and military officials say the reallocation is long overdue. They contend the occupation authority should have used the aid package to accelerate the training of Iraqi security forces and put hundreds of thousands of unemployed young men to work. By the time Bremer left, just 15,000 Iraqis had been employed with the aid money.

"We think we've found the right balance" with the reallocation, the embassy official said. But the challenge, the official said, "is making up for lost time."

"We should have done this last year," the official said. "If we had, we'd be in a much different, and better, position now." - http://www.washingtonpost.com...

[b]More Iraqi Civilians Killed by U.S. Forces Than by Insurgents, Data Shows [/b]

Baghdad - Operations by U.S. and multinational forces and Iraqi police are killing twice as many Iraqis - most of them civilians - as attacks by insurgents, according to statistics compiled by the Iraqi Health Ministry and obtained exclusively by Knight Ridder.

According to the ministry, the interim Iraqi government recorded 3,487 Iraqi deaths in 15 of the country's 18 provinces from April 5 - when the ministry began compiling the data - until Sept. 19. Of those, 328 were women and children. Another 13,720 Iraqis were injured, the ministry said.

While most of the dead are believed to be civilians, the data include an unknown number of police and Iraqi national guardsmen. Many Iraqi deaths, especially of insurgents, are never reported, so the actual number of Iraqis killed in fighting could be significantly higher.

During the same period, 432 American soldiers were killed.

Iraqi officials said the statistics proved that U.S. airstrikes intended for insurgents also were killing large numbers of innocent civilians. Some say these casualties are undermining popular acceptance of the American-backed interim government.

That suggests that more aggressive U.S. military operations, which the Bush administration has said are being planned to clear the way for nationwide elections scheduled for January, could backfire and strengthen the insurgency.

American military officials said "damage will happen" in their effort to wrest control of some areas from insurgents. They blamed the insurgents for embedding themselves in communities, saying that's endangering innocent people.

Lt. Col. Steve Boylan, an American military spokesman, said the insurgents were living in residential areas, sometimes in homes filled with munitions.

"As long as they continue to do that, they are putting the residents at risk," Boylan said. "We will go after them."

Boylan said the military conducted intelligence to determine whether a home housed insurgents before striking it. While damage would happen, the airstrikes were "extremely precise," he said. And he said that any attacks by the multinational forces were "in coordination with the interim government."

The Health Ministry statistics indicate that more children have been killed around Ramadi and Fallujah than in Baghdad, though those cities together have only one-fifth of the Iraqi capital's population.

According to the statistics, 59 children were killed in Anbar province - a hotbed of the Sunni Muslim insurgency that includes the cities of Ramadi and Fallujah - compared with 56 children in Baghdad. The ministry defines children as anyone younger than 12.

"When there are military clashes, we see innocent people die," said Dr. Walid Hamed, a member of the operations section of the Health Ministry, which compiles the statistics.

Juan Cole, a history professor at University of Michigan who specializes in Shiite Islam, said the widespread casualties meant that coalition forces already had lost the political campaign: "I think they lost the hearts and minds a long time ago."

"And they are trying to keep U.S. military casualties to a minimum in the run-up to the U.S. elections" by using airstrikes instead of ground forces, he said.

American military officials say they're targeting only terrorists and are aggressively working to spare innocent people nearby.

Nearly a third of the Iraqi dead - 1,122 - were killed in August, according to the statistics. May was the second deadliest month, with 749 Iraqis killed, and 319 were killed in June, the least violent month. Most of those killed lived in Baghdad; the ministry found that 1,068 had died in the capital.

Many Iraqis said they thought the numbers showed that the multinational forces disregarded their lives.

"The Americans do not care about the Iraqis. They don't care if they get killed, because they don't care about the citizens," said Abu Mohammed, 50, who was a major general in Saddam Hussein's army in Baghdad. "The Americans keep criticizing Saddam for the mass graves. How many graves are the Americans making in Iraq?"

At his fruit stand in southern Baghdad, Raid Ibraham, 24, theorized: "The Americans keep attacking the cities not to keep the security situation stable, but so they can stay in Iraq and control the oil."

Others blame the multinational forces for allowing security to disintegrate, inviting terrorists from everywhere and threatening the lives of everyday Iraqis.

"Anyone who hates America has come here to fight: Saddam's supporters, people who don't have jobs, other Arab fighters. All these people are on our streets," said Hamed, the ministry official. "But everyone is afraid of the Americans, not the fighters. And they should be."

Iraqi officials said about two-thirds of the Iraqi deaths were caused by multinational forces and police; the remaining third died from insurgent attacks. The ministry began separating attacks by multinational and police forces and insurgents June 10.

From that date until Sept. 10, 1,295 Iraqis were killed in clashes with multinational forces and police versus 516 killed in terrorist operations, the ministry said. The ministry defined terrorist operations as explosive devices in residential areas, car bombs or assassinations.

The ministry said it didn't have any statistics for the three provinces in the north: Arbil, Dohuk and Sulaimaniyah, ethnic Kurdish areas that generally have been more peaceful than the rest of the country.

The Health Ministry is the only organization that attempts to track deaths through government agencies. The U.S. military said it kept estimates, but it refused to release them. Ahmed al Rawi, the communications director of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Baghdad, said the organization didn't have the staffing to compile such information.

The Health Ministry reports to interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, whom the United States appointed in June.

Iraqi health and hospital officials agreed that the statistics captured only part of the death toll.

To compile the data, the Health Ministry calls the directors general of the 15 provinces and asks how many deaths related to the war were reported at hospitals. The tracking of such information has become decentralized since the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime because both hospitals and morgues issue death certificates now. And families often bury their dead without telling any government agencies or are treated at facilities that don't report to the government.

The ministry is convinced that nearly all of those reported dead are civilians, not insurgents. Most often, a family member wouldn't report it if his or her relative died fighting for rebel cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army militia or another insurgent force, and the relative would be buried immediately, said Dr. Shihab Ahmed Jassim, another member of the ministry's operations section.

"People who participate in the conflict don't come to the hospital. Their families are afraid they will be punished," said Dr. Yasin Mustaf, the assistant manager of al Kimdi Hospital near Baghdad's poor Sadr City neighborhood. "Usually, the innocent people come to the hospital. That is what the numbers show."

The numbers also exclude those whose bodies were too mutilated to be recovered at car bombings or other attacks, the ministry said.

Ministry officials said they didn't know how big the undercount was. "We have nothing to do with politics," Jassim said.

Other independent organizations have estimated that 7,000 to 12,000 Iraqis have been killed since May 1, 2003, when President Bush declared an end to major combat operations.

Iraqis are aware of the casualties that are due to U.S. forces, and nearly everyone has a story to tell.

At al Kimdi Hospital, Dr. Mumtaz Jaber, a vascular surgeon, said that three months ago, his 3-year-old nephew, his sister and his brother-in-law were driving in Baghdad at about 9 p.m. when they saw an American checkpoint. His nephew was killed.

"They didn't stop fast enough. The Americans shot them immediately," Jaber said. "This is how so many die."

At the Baghdad morgue, Dr. Quasis Hassan Salem said he saw a family of eight brought in: three women, three men and two children. They were sleeping on their roof last month because it was hot inside. A military helicopter shot at them and killed them: "I don't know why."

U.S. officials said any allegations that soldiers had recklessly killed Iraqi citizens were investigated at the Iraqi Assistance Center in downtown Baghdad.

"There is no way to refute" such stories, said Robert Callahan, a spokesman at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. "All you can do is tell them the truth and hope it eventually will get through." - http://www.realcities.com/mld...



 
A'W'OL BUSH'S ASSAULT UPON AMERICA!!!
09.27.04 (7:24 am)   [edit]
[b]A'W'OL Bush must take us all for fools! The asshole goes prancing around like a reckless brain-dead clown on May 1, 2003 aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln all dressed-up in his Holloween Top-Gun costume smirking that "major combat operations in Iraq are over" and that the US "has prevailed". What an asshole! Iraq is a bloodbath! Now, the mother-fucker says he would vomit his lies again! Bush should be impeached and put in prison wiping toilets where he belongs! Jeez!

DumbBell Dubya Says He'd Vomit his "Mission Accomplished" Lie & Play the Clown Again!!![/b]

[u]Bush: Would Give 'Mission Accomplished' Speech Again[/u]

CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - President Bush said he had no regrets about donning a flight suit to give his "Mission Accomplished" speech on Iraq in May 2003 and would do it all over again if he had the chance, according to excerpts from an television interview released on Sunday.

When asked by Fox News if he still would have put on a flight suit to declare major combat operations in Iraq over, Bush replied, "Absolutely."

When Bush gave his May 1 speech fewer than 150 Americans had died in the war. Since then more than 900 have died.

The interview is to air on Fox's "The O'Reilly Factor" on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, just before Bush and Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry face off in their first televised debate on Thursday.

Amid a rising U.S. death toll and a rash of abductions and beheadings in Iraq, some members of Bush's own Republican Party have criticized him for not doing enough to secure insurgent areas in Iraq sooner.

But Bush said he also did not regret the decision to withdraw U.S. forces from the rebel stronghold of Falluja earlier this year because he believed the conflict there could have jeopardized the June handover of sovereignty to Iraqis.

"A lot of people on the ground there thought that if we'd have gone into Falluja at the time, the interim government would not have been established," Bush said.

Also in the interview, the president was noncommittal about whether his top political aide, Karl Rove, knew in advance about ads by the group, "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" which attacked Kerry's military service in Vietnam. Bush himself did not serve in Vietnam.

On the issue of whether he knew ahead of time about the Swift Boat ads, Bush said "no," but replied "I don't think so" when questioned whether Rove had advance knowledge of them.

The Swift Boat ads accused Kerry of lying about the events that led to his decoration for bravery. As a so-called 527 organization, the Swift Boat group is barred under election rules from coordinating its activities with campaigns or political parties.

Democrats has accused the Bush campaign of colluding with the group, a charge the White House has denied. - http://www.reuters.com/newsAr...

[b]Courtesy of CheckItOut http://checkitout.tblog.com [/b]

 
BUSH'S BLOODBATH: Even Powell Says "It's Getting Worse"!!!
09.27.04 (7:18 am)   [edit]
[b]Iraq Uprising Growing, Powell Says

Successful Elections Seen as Way to Alleviate Muslim Anger[/b]

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said yesterday that the insurgency in Iraq is getting worse and that the U.S. occupation there has increased anti-American sentiment in Muslim countries, but he said successful elections in Afghanistan and Iraq would turn the situation around.

"We have seen an increase in anti-Americanism in the Muslim world. We'll not deny this," Powell said on ABC's "This Week." "But I think that that will be overcome in due process because what the Muslim world will see . . . is that in Afghanistan, 10 million people who have registered to vote will vote on the ninth of October and bring in place a freely elected president.

"And I think we're going to do the same thing in Iraq if we stay the course, if we defeat this insurgency," Powell said.

He acknowledged that "yes, it's getting worse, and the reason it's getting worse is that they are determined to disrupt the elections."

But he rejected the notion, put forward recently by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, that it would be sufficient to hold elections in most, but not all, of Iraq.

"For the elections to have complete credibility and stand the test of international scrutiny, I think what we have to do is to give all the people of Iraq an opportunity to participate," Powell told "Fox News Sunday." "Just as we would have difficulty with partial elections here in the United States . . . I think it has to be throughout the country."

In contrast, Gen. John P. Abizaid, U.S. commander for the Middle East, told NBC's "Meet the Press" that the goal is that "the election will be able to be held in the vast majority of the country."

The election, to be held by Jan. 31, will create a national assembly, which in turn will pick a new government to replace the one headed by interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi. The assembly will also oversee the writing of a new constitution.

"I am not predicting victory by January at the end of the elections," Abizaid cautioned. "I am predicting that we'll have elections. We will fight our way through the elections. It will be tough. It will be hard. But it will move us a step closer to ultimate victory, which is when Iraqis control their own destiny."

Abizaid said he found the CIA's recent assessment of Iraq's future over 18 months to be "overly pessimistic." The classified National Intelligence Estimate, which Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee have asked the CIA to declassify, predicted a tenuous stability at best and, in the worst-case scenario, civil war.

Powell, on Fox News, said the CIA report "wasn't a terribly shocking assessment. It was something that I could have written myself."

The assessment contrasted with President Bush's and Allawi's more optimistic portrayal of Iraq's short-term future.

Abizaid criticized news reports that the insurgency was spreading among the general population. "The constant drumbeat in Washington of a war that is being lost, that can't be won, of a resistance that is out of control, simply do not square with the facts on the ground," he said.

Statistics compiled by Kroll Security International, a private security firm working for the U.S. government, indicate the attacks against U.S. troops, security forces and private contractors are greater than reported by the U.S. military and have spread to parts of the country that have been relatively peaceful, according to a report Sunday in The Washington Post.

Powell confirmed a second report in The Post that military plans are underway for a fall offensive aimed at regaining control of the most volatile cities in the Sunni Triangle, including Fallujah and the provincial capitals near Baghdad, such as Ramadi to the west, Samarra to the north and Baqubah to the northeast.

The plan calls for opening up these areas so that Iraqi forces can move back in and secure the towns in preparation for balloting. - http://www.washingtonpost.com...


 
....... From Role Model to International Bully in Three Short Years .......
09.27.04 (7:15 am)   [edit]
[b]In September 2001, Europe Wept for Us. Now it won't even Play Baseball[/b]

"How is your baseball team doing?" I asked my young bank teller friend in Vienna recently.

A small pause. "Tomorrow is our final game."

"Finished for the season?"

"Well, not just for the season," he said, looking down to count again, rather unnecessarily, the dollar bills he had just counted. "Uh, it's in view of what's been happening. I mean, I guess we're over that phase. We're going back to soccer. It's hard to explain."

It wasn't hard, though. It was embarrassing. He knew I was an American from the dollars I always exchanged. And from our earlier talks, I knew what he meant. As he once put it, "Wir waren alle so Amerika-narrisch." We were all so America-crazy.

Other America-crazies started jazz clubs or formed a Bruce Springsteen posse; these young bankers rigged up a baseball diamond where the Alserstrasse Yankees could suit up against the Schwarzenberg Platz Red Sox. Now, "that phase" being over, they'd packed away bats, caps, catchers' mitts.

"That phase" began some two centuries ago. Ever since George Washington thrilled the Marquis de Lafayette, the United States has excited Europe as the forward edge of the Western way, as the engine of its modernity, as the prophet of its future.

Before Iraq, America's formidable appeal continued largely unabated. I never saw it embraced more ardently, poignantly, than on Sept. 12, 2001. I happened to be in Vienna, where from my hotel window I watched the entire city cry a collective tear for the America it was still crazy about. At the stroke of noon, all traffic froze. Nothing moved except long, black mourning banners unfurling from every government building as well as from many private houses. And the "Pummerin," the great bell of St. Stephen's Cathedral — a bell of ancient tradition that is so huge its swinging stresses the 15th century tower and is therefore rung just once a year, during midnight Mass on Christmas Eve — tolled a special requiem. Unforgettable, those plangent, plaintive peals echoed across a thousand roofs.

That day Vienna — along with much of Europe — trembled for the hope breathed by the word "America." An elastic, robust hope, lasting through war and peace, through irritations and disappointments.

America has meant promise to just about every age group and political species. It could inspirit the European left because the U.S., whatever its imperial peccadilloes, was born of a revolution that cast an exemplary glow on thrusts for change elsewhere. Conservatives loved America for its entrepreneurial genius. The old admired the climate, the spryness, the optimism of cities like Miami. As for the young, the answer was blowing in the wind: It blew from the blue-jeaned latitudes of rock, rap and cool.

If this rainbow array of hopes is indeed dying now, it is not the terrorists but the recent cumulative acts of the United States itself that are the slayers. What previously could have been excused as wild oats sown by a young superpower have now, unmistakably, hardened into systematic global bullying. To Europeans of nearly every stripe, the statue in New York harbor brandishes not a torch but a tommy gun. Lady Liberty has transmogrified into an ominous colossus. Here is the ultimate Godfather, enforcing with missile and aircraft carrier a protection racket on all seven seas. Here is an America shrugging armored shoulders at the ozone hole, at collateral damage, at its own poor, an America practicing domination in the name of freedom. Here is the land of milk and honey turned into the fortress of bottom line and bomb.

Darkness glowers from a once bright beacon. Can it still change to light the way again? The question hangs over much of Europe as America's election day approaches. Its outcome will reach beyond politics; it might affect the Continent's spiritual health. At stake is the survival of a source of deliverance. Yes, in Vienna some young men are abandoning their baseball bats. But perhaps they are not quite ready yet to mothball an icon cherished for so long.

[b]Frederic Morton is author of "A Nervous Splendor: Vienna, 1888-1889," among other works. His memoir "Waltzing With My Father" will be published by Simon & Schuster next spring.[/b] - http://www.commondreams.org/v...

 
....... From Role Model to International Bully in Three Short Years .......
09.27.04 (7:13 am)   [edit]
[b]In September 2001, Europe Wept for Us. Now it won't even Play Baseball[/b]

"How is your baseball team doing?" I asked my young bank teller friend in Vienna recently.

A small pause. "Tomorrow is our final game."

"Finished for the season?"

"Well, not just for the season," he said, looking down to count again, rather unnecessarily, the dollar bills he had just counted. "Uh, it's in view of what's been happening. I mean, I guess we're over that phase. We're going back to soccer. It's hard to explain."

It wasn't hard, though. It was embarrassing. He knew I was an American from the dollars I always exchanged. And from our earlier talks, I knew what he meant. As he once put it, "Wir waren alle so Amerika-narrisch." We were all so America-crazy.

Other America-crazies started jazz clubs or formed a Bruce Springsteen posse; these young bankers rigged up a baseball diamond where the Alserstrasse Yankees could suit up against the Schwarzenberg Platz Red Sox. Now, "that phase" being over, they'd packed away bats, caps, catchers' mitts.

"That phase" began some two centuries ago. Ever since George Washington thrilled the Marquis de Lafayette, the United States has excited Europe as the forward edge of the Western way, as the engine of its modernity, as the prophet of its future.

Before Iraq, America's formidable appeal continued largely unabated. I never saw it embraced more ardently, poignantly, than on Sept. 12, 2001. I happened to be in Vienna, where from my hotel window I watched the entire city cry a collective tear for the America it was still crazy about. At the stroke of noon, all traffic froze. Nothing moved except long, black mourning banners unfurling from every government building as well as from many private houses. And the "Pummerin," the great bell of St. Stephen's Cathedral — a bell of ancient tradition that is so huge its swinging stresses the 15th century tower and is therefore rung just once a year, during midnight Mass on Christmas Eve — tolled a special requiem. Unforgettable, those plangent, plaintive peals echoed across a thousand roofs.

That day Vienna — along with much of Europe — trembled for the hope breathed by the word "America." An elastic, robust hope, lasting through war and peace, through irritations and disappointments.

America has meant promise to just about every age group and political species. It could inspirit the European left because the U.S., whatever its imperial peccadilloes, was born of a revolution that cast an exemplary glow on thrusts for change elsewhere. Conservatives loved America for its entrepreneurial genius. The old admired the climate, the spryness, the optimism of cities like Miami. As for the young, the answer was blowing in the wind: It blew from the blue-jeaned latitudes of rock, rap and cool.

If this rainbow array of hopes is indeed dying now, it is not the terrorists but the recent cumulative acts of the United States itself that are the slayers. What previously could have been excused as wild oats sown by a young superpower have now, unmistakably, hardened into systematic global bullying. To Europeans of nearly every stripe, the statue in New York harbor brandishes not a torch but a tommy gun. Lady Liberty has transmogrified into an ominous colossus. Here is the ultimate Godfather, enforcing with missile and aircraft carrier a protection racket on all seven seas. Here is an America shrugging armored shoulders at the ozone hole, at collateral damage, at its own poor, an America practicing domination in the name of freedom. Here is the land of milk and honey turned into the fortress of bottom line and bomb.

Darkness glowers from a once bright beacon. Can it still change to light the way again? The question hangs over much of Europe as America's election day approaches. Its outcome will reach beyond politics; it might affect the Continent's spiritual health. At stake is the survival of a source of deliverance. Yes, in Vienna some young men are abandoning their baseball bats. But perhaps they are not quite ready yet to mothball an icon cherished for so long.

[b]Frederic Morton is author of "A Nervous Splendor: Vienna, 1888-1889," among other works. His memoir "Waltzing With My Father" will be published by Simon & Schuster next spring.[/b] - http://www.commondreams.org/v...

 
....... On the Environment, the US Is the Rogue Nation .......
09.27.04 (7:11 am)   [edit]
If you want to know just how far the United States has drifted from the global conversation on key environmental issues, consider a speech that was given this month — and one that wasn't.

Michael Howard, leader of Britain's Conservative Party, attacked Prime Minister Tony Blair for his stance on global warming. Blair wasn't doing enough, Howard said. Carbon emissions weren't falling with sufficient speed; the Labor Party was too focused on wind-power development and ignoring the energy-producing potential of tidal, solar and biomass technology. "Promoting greener behavior need not hold back economic growth or restrict choice," the Tory chief said. "But the longer we delay action, the harder it will be to achieve the outcome."

The point is not that Blair is bad on the environment (he shot back with a speech of his own, pledging that the country would meet its goal of reducing carbon emissions 20% by 2010). The point is that it's more or less impossible to imagine any U.S. conservative leader rising to demand that Americans take tidal power more seriously, that we start spending some real cash on biomass.

President Bush, though he's talked plenty about the suffering of hurricane victims in Florida and the Gulf Coast, hasn't even mentioned the idea that such storms presage havoc ahead if we don't quickly address climate change. No one can say that hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne were "caused" by global warming, but the scientific consensus is clear that ocean water will warm and sea levels will rise in the next few decades. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the authoritative scientific body on the issue, stated in its last report that researchers had "high confidence" that global warming would result in enhanced coastal erosion, coastal flooding, loss of coastal wetlands and increased risk from storm surge. Particularly in Florida and much of the U.S. Atlantic coast.

As people hunkered down from Apalachicola to Grand Isle, one might have thought that it was a teachable moment. But that assumes our leaders take the problem seriously, and clearly they don't. Bush abrogated the Kyoto accord, an international global warming treaty, within weeks of taking office and since then has steadfastly ignored the issue. Though Blair's government has put forward plans to cut carbon emissions 50% by 2050, Vice President Dick Cheney's energy plan for this country foresees a 20% increase in our CO2 output over the next generation. Even strong environmentalists like John Kerry are a little cowed — he's barely mentioned his green credentials in the campaign, almost certainly for fear of being perceived as too liberal.

In a global context, there's no question which nation is out of touch. The British debate could be happening in any European capital, where politicians of all stripes now take it for granted that the environment and, in particular, global warming are consensus issues. In Berlin or Tokyo, you'd no more oppose action on climate change than you'd oppose cracking down on crime. And the results are showing. Japan is leading in the installation of solar power technology. Wind energy is the fastest-growing source of electricity in the world, because the Germans and the Danes and the British and others are putting up windmills as fast as they can. The U.S., which for a century led the world in environmental concern and environmental technology, now trails far behind.

There are plenty of reasons the U.S. has fallen into this state: Our political system magnifies the power of coal, oil and automotive interests (West Virginia and Michigan are both in the battleground category in the presidential election); our sprawling suburbs make trains more difficult to operate than they are in Europe.

But at a deeper level, it's as if we've decided there's no need to listen; that as the last superpower left standing, surely the laws of physics and chemistry don't apply to us. In fact, it's clear that the world now views us chiefly as an obstacle. The Tory leader's gravest charge against Blair was that he had failed to get the U.S. on board in the fight for global warming.

It's clear that foreign entreaties won't change the administration's mind on climate change any more than they altered its plans for the war on Iraq. Only American voters can accomplish that.

[b]Bill McKibben is a scholar in residence at Middlebury College and the author of "The End of Nature" (Anchor, 1999).[/b] - http://www.commondreams.org/v...

 
....... On the Environment, the US Is the Rogue Nation .......
09.27.04 (7:09 am)   [edit]
If you want to know just how far the United States has drifted from the global conversation on key environmental issues, consider a speech that was given this month — and one that wasn't.

Michael Howard, leader of Britain's Conservative Party, attacked Prime Minister Tony Blair for his stance on global warming. Blair wasn't doing enough, Howard said. Carbon emissions weren't falling with sufficient speed; the Labor Party was too focused on wind-power development and ignoring the energy-producing potential of tidal, solar and biomass technology. "Promoting greener behavior need not hold back economic growth or restrict choice," the Tory chief said. "But the longer we delay action, the harder it will be to achieve the outcome."

The point is not that Blair is bad on the environment (he shot back with a speech of his own, pledging that the country would meet its goal of reducing carbon emissions 20% by 2010). The point is that it's more or less impossible to imagine any U.S. conservative leader rising to demand that Americans take tidal power more seriously, that we start spending some real cash on biomass.

President Bush, though he's talked plenty about the suffering of hurricane victims in Florida and the Gulf Coast, hasn't even mentioned the idea that such storms presage havoc ahead if we don't quickly address climate change. No one can say that hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne were "caused" by global warming, but the scientific consensus is clear that ocean water will warm and sea levels will rise in the next few decades. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the authoritative scientific body on the issue, stated in its last report that researchers had "high confidence" that global warming would result in enhanced coastal erosion, coastal flooding, loss of coastal wetlands and increased risk from storm surge. Particularly in Florida and much of the U.S. Atlantic coast.

As people hunkered down from Apalachicola to Grand Isle, one might have thought that it was a teachable moment. But that assumes our leaders take the problem seriously, and clearly they don't. Bush abrogated the Kyoto accord, an international global warming treaty, within weeks of taking office and since then has steadfastly ignored the issue. Though Blair's government has put forward plans to cut carbon emissions 50% by 2050, Vice President Dick Cheney's energy plan for this country foresees a 20% increase in our CO2 output over the next generation. Even strong environmentalists like John Kerry are a little cowed — he's barely mentioned his green credentials in the campaign, almost certainly for fear of being perceived as too liberal.

In a global context, there's no question which nation is out of touch. The British debate could be happening in any European capital, where politicians of all stripes now take it for granted that the environment and, in particular, global warming are consensus issues. In Berlin or Tokyo, you'd no more oppose action on climate change than you'd oppose cracking down on crime. And the results are showing. Japan is leading in the installation of solar power technology. Wind energy is the fastest-growing source of electricity in the world, because the Germans and the Danes and the British and others are putting up windmills as fast as they can. The U.S., which for a century led the world in environmental concern and environmental technology, now trails far behind.

There are plenty of reasons the U.S. has fallen into this state: Our political system magnifies the power of coal, oil and automotive interests (West Virginia and Michigan are both in the battleground category in the presidential election); our sprawling suburbs make trains more difficult to operate than they are in Europe.

But at a deeper level, it's as if we've decided there's no need to listen; that as the last superpower left standing, surely the laws of physics and chemistry don't apply to us. In fact, it's clear that the world now views us chiefly as an obstacle. The Tory leader's gravest charge against Blair was that he had failed to get the U.S. on board in the fight for global warming.

It's clear that foreign entreaties won't change the administration's mind on climate change any more than they altered its plans for the war on Iraq. Only American voters can accomplish that.

[b]Bill McKibben is a scholar in residence at Middlebury College and the author of "The End of Nature" (Anchor, 1999).[/b] - http://www.commondreams.org/v...

 
....... On the Environment, the US Is the Rogue Nation .......
09.27.04 (7:06 am)   [edit]
If you want to know just how far the United States has drifted from the global conversation on key environmental issues, consider a speech that was given this month — and one that wasn't.

Michael Howard, leader of Britain's Conservative Party, attacked Prime Minister Tony Blair for his stance on global warming. Blair wasn't doing enough, Howard said. Carbon emissions weren't falling with sufficient speed; the Labor Party was too focused on wind-power development and ignoring the energy-producing potential of tidal, solar and biomass technology. "Promoting greener behavior need not hold back economic growth or restrict choice," the Tory chief said. "But the longer we delay action, the harder it will be to achieve the outcome."

The point is not that Blair is bad on the environment (he shot back with a speech of his own, pledging that the country would meet its goal of reducing carbon emissions 20% by 2010). The point is that it's more or less impossible to imagine any U.S. conservative leader rising to demand that Americans take tidal power more seriously, that we start spending some real cash on biomass.

President Bush, though he's talked plenty about the suffering of hurricane victims in Florida and the Gulf Coast, hasn't even mentioned the idea that such storms presage havoc ahead if we don't quickly address climate change. No one can say that hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne were "caused" by global warming, but the scientific consensus is clear that ocean water will warm and sea levels will rise in the next few decades. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the authoritative scientific body on the issue, stated in its last report that researchers had "high confidence" that global warming would result in enhanced coastal erosion, coastal flooding, loss of coastal wetlands and increased risk from storm surge. Particularly in Florida and much of the U.S. Atlantic coast.

As people hunkered down from Apalachicola to Grand Isle, one might have thought that it was a teachable moment. But that assumes our leaders take the problem seriously, and clearly they don't. Bush abrogated the Kyoto accord, an international global warming treaty, within weeks of taking office and since then has steadfastly ignored the issue. Though Blair's government has put forward plans to cut carbon emissions 50% by 2050, Vice President Dick Cheney's energy plan for this country foresees a 20% increase in our CO2 output over the next generation. Even strong environmentalists like John Kerry are a little cowed — he's barely mentioned his green credentials in the campaign, almost certainly for fear of being perceived as too liberal.

In a global context, there's no question which nation is out of touch. The British debate could be happening in any European capital, where politicians of all stripes now take it for granted that the environment and, in particular, global warming are consensus issues. In Berlin or Tokyo, you'd no more oppose action on climate change than you'd oppose cracking down on crime. And the results are showing. Japan is leading in the installation of solar power technology. Wind energy is the fastest-growing source of electricity in the world, because the Germans and the Danes and the British and others are putting up windmills as fast as they can. The U.S., which for a century led the world in environmental concern and environmental technology, now trails far behind.

There are plenty of reasons the U.S. has fallen into this state: Our political system magnifies the power of coal, oil and automotive interests (West Virginia and Michigan are both in the battleground category in the presidential election); our sprawling suburbs make trains more difficult to operate than they are in Europe.

But at a deeper level, it's as if we've decided there's no need to listen; that as the last superpower left standing, surely the laws of physics and chemistry don't apply to us. In fact, it's clear that the world now views us chiefly as an obstacle. The Tory leader's gravest charge against Blair was that he had failed to get the U.S. on board in the fight for global warming.

It's clear that foreign entreaties won't change the administration's mind on climate change any more than they altered its plans for the war on Iraq. Only American voters can accomplish that.

[b]Bill McKibben is a scholar in residence at Middlebury College and the author of "The End of Nature" (Anchor, 1999).[/b] - http://www.commondreams.org/v...

 
Georgey-boy Bush's Unsavory Connections with the Saudi Royal Family
09.26.04 (4:03 pm)   [edit]
Georgey-boy Bush has unsavory connections with the Saudi Royal Family and other corrupt campaign contributors. Read [b]House of Bush, House of Saud [/b]on http://www.houseofbush.com/

President George W. Bush received donations from 79 percent of the U.S. billionaires who contributed to a presidential campaign this year, while Democrat John Kerry was backed by 21 percent, a study says.

Bush received contributions from 116 billionaires, including Bill Gates, chairman of Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft Corp., who was listed by Forbes magazine as the world's richest person, and Frederick Smith, chief executive of FedEx Corp., according to PoliticalMoneyLine, which tracks campaign donations.

Kerry got donations from 31 billionaires, including Warren Buffett, chairman of Omaha- based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., and the world's second- richest person; Eli Broad, chairman of AIG SunAmerica Inc., a subsidiary of New York-based American International Group Inc.; and David Geffen, co-founder of Glendale, Calif.-based DreamWorks SKG, a movie studio.

Republicans often outscore Democrats in fund raising among corporate executives.

The 58-year-old Bush has 280 CEOs from Russell 1000 index companies, to 52 for the 60-year-old Kerry, a four-term Massachusetts senator, according to PoliticalMoneyLine, a nonpartisan group based in Washington.

Kerry, who accepted the Democratic presidential nomination last week, released a list of 204 executives who endorse his economic policies.

Of the 277 U.S. billionaires identified by Forbes magazine, 153 gave to a candidate, including six who gave to both Bush and Kerry.

Those giving to both candidates included Charles Dolan, chairman of Bethpage, N.Y.- based Cablevision Systems Corp.; and Donald Trump, chief executive officer of Atlantic City, N.J.-based Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts.

Another 124 billionaires, or 45 percent of the total, gave to neither candidate, including Ted Turner, the founder of Cable News Network and a former vice chairman of New York-based Time Warner Inc.; Roy Disney, chairman of Shamrock Holdings Inc. and a former director of the Walt Disney Co., founded by his uncle; and Forrest Mars Jr., chairman of Mars Inc.

"I'm always surprised at the separation of the business world from politics in a number of wealthy people," said Kent Cooper, co- founder of PoliticalMoneyLine. "To them, politics is a different world, and the business mind has a hard time understanding how politics works."

Kerry has the support of two billionaires who did not give to either presidential campaign: Steve Jobs, chief executive officer of Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple Computer Inc., and Barry Diller, chairman of New York-based IAC/InterActiveCorp, an Internet commerce and television shopping company.

A Kerry campaign spokesman declined to comment.

Calls to the Bush campaign were not returned.

[b]Wealthy donors [/b]

116 Number of billionaires who made donations this year to President Bush.

31 Number of billionaires who made donations this year to Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry.

6 Number of billionaires who made donations this year to both Bush and Kerry. - http://www.rockymountainnews....,1299,DRMN_4_3094590,00.html
 
Bush on Iraq: A Flip and Now Just a Flop!
09.26.04 (6:14 am)   [edit]
[b]Mr. Bush and His 10 Ever-Changing Different Positions on Iraq:

"A flip and a flop and now just a flop."

Dear Mr. Bush[/b],

I am so confused. Where exactly do you stand on the issue of Iraq? You, your Dad, Rummy, Condi, Colin, and Wolfie -- you have all changed your minds so many times, I am out of breath just trying to keep up with you!

Which of these 10 positions that you, your family and your cabinet have taken over the years represents your current thinking:

[b]1983-88: WE LOVE SADDAM.[/b]
On December 19, 1983, Donald Rumsfeld was sent by your dad and Mr. Reagan to go and have a friendly meeting with Saddam Hussein, the dictator of Iraq. Rummy looked so happy in the picture. Just twelve days after this visit, Saddam gassed thousands of Iranian troops. Your dad and Rummy seemed pretty happy with the results because 'The Donald R.' went back to have another chummy hang-out with Saddam's right-hand man, Tariq Aziz, just four months later. All of this resulted in the U.S. providing credits and loans to Iraq that enabled Saddam to buy billions of dollars worth of weapons and chemical agents. The Washington Post reported that your dad and Reagan let it be known to their Arab allies that the Reagan/Bush administration wanted Iraq to win its war with Iran and anyone who helped Saddam accomplish this was a friend of ours.

[b]1990: WE HATE SADDAM.[/b]
In 1990, when Saddam invaded Kuwait, your dad and his defense secretary, Dick Cheney, decided they didn't like Saddam anymore so they attacked Iraq and returned Kuwait to its rightful dictators.

[b]1991: WE WANT SADDAM TO LIVE.[/b]
After the war, your dad and Cheney and Colin Powell told the Shiites to rise up against Saddam and we would support them. So they rose up. But then we changed our minds. When the Shiites rose up against Saddam, the Bush inner circle changed its mind and decided NOT to help the Shiites. Thus, they were massacred by Saddam.

[b]1998: WE WANT SADDAM TO DIE.[/b]
In 1998, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others, as part of the Project for the New American Century, wrote an open letter to President Clinton insisting he invade and topple Saddam Hussein.

[b]2000: WE DON'T BELIEVE IN WAR AND NATION BUILDING.[/b]
Just three years later, during your debate with Al Gore in the 2000 election, when asked by the moderator Jim Lehrer where you stood when it came to using force for regime change, you turned out to be a downright pacifist:

"I--I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president [Al Gore] and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I--I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place. And so I take my--I take my--my responsibility seriously." - October 3, 2000

[b]2001 (early): WE DON'T BELIEVE SADDAM IS A THREAT.[/b]
When you took office in 2001, you sent your Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and your National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice, in front of the cameras to assure the American people they need not worry about Saddam Hussein. Here is what they said:

Powell: "We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they have directed that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was 10 years ago when we began it. And frankly, they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors." --February 24, 2001

Rice: "But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt." --July 29, 2001

[b]2001 (late): WE BELIEVE SADDAM IS GOING TO KILL US![/b]
Just a few months later, in the hours and days after the 9/11 tragedy, you had no interest in going after Osama bin Laden. You wanted only to bomb Iraq and kill Saddam and you then told all of America we were under imminent threat because weapons of mass destruction were coming our way. You led the American people to believe that Saddam had something to do with Osama and 9/11. Without the UN's sanction, you broke international law and invaded Iraq.

[b]2003: WE DON'T BELIEVE SADDAM IS GOING TO KILL US.[/b]
After no WMDs were found, you changed your mind about why you said we needed to invade, coming up with a brand new after-the-fact reason -- we started this war so we could have regime change, liberate Iraq and give the Iraqis democracy!

[b]2003: "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"[/b]
Yes, everyone saw you say it -- in costume, no less!

[b]2004: OOPS. MISSION NOT ACCOMPLISHED![/b]
Now you call the Iraq invasion a "catastrophic success." That's what you called it this month. Over a thousand U.S. soldiers have died, Iraq is in a state of total chaos where no one is safe, and you have no clue how to get us out of there.

Mr. Bush, please tell us -- when will you change your mind again?

I know you hate the words "flip" and "flop," so I won't use them both on you. In fact, I'll use just one: Flop. That is what you are. A huge, colossal flop. The war is a flop, your advisors and the "intelligence" they gave you is a flop, and now we are all a flop to the rest of the world. Flop. Flop. Flop.

And you have the audacity to criticize John Kerry with what you call the "many positions" he has taken on Iraq. By my count, he has taken only one: He believed you. That was his position. You told him and the rest of congress that Saddam had WMDs. So he -- and the vast majority of Americans, even those who didn't vote for you -- believed you. You see, Americans, like John Kerry, want to live in a country where they can believe their president.

That was the one, single position John Kerry took. He didn't support the war, he supported YOU. And YOU let him and this great country down. And that is why tens of millions can't wait to get to the polls on Election Day -- to remove a major, catastrophic flop from our dear, beloved White House -- to stop all the flipping you and your men have done, flipping us and the rest of the world off.

We can't take another minute of it.

[b]Yours,

Michael Moore[/b], http://www.truthout.org/docs_...
 
John Kerry has backing of Nobel Economists because Bush is a reckless crook!
09.26.04 (6:11 am)   [edit]
[b]Kerry Wins Backing from Nobel Economics Laureates [/b]

PHILADELPHIA - John Kerry won the endorsement of 10 Nobel Prize-winning economists on Wednesday as he attacked President Bush for policies that he said have led to the creation of only low-paying jobs.

The Democratic presidential nominee released a letter from the economists saying the Bush administration had "embarked on a reckless and extreme course that endangers the long-term economic health of our nation."

They cited "poorly designed" tax cuts that instead of creating jobs have turned budget surpluses into enormous budget deficits, a "fiscal irresponsibility threatens the long-term economic security and prosperity of our nation."

The endorsement, in the form of an open letter American voters, was signed by George Akerlof and Daniel McFadden of the University of California at Berkeley, Kenneth Arrow and William Sharpe of Stanford University, Daniel Kahneman of Princeton University, Lawrence Klein of the University of Pennsylvania, Douglass North of Washington University, Paul Samuelson and Robert Solow of MIT and Joseph Stiglitz of Columbia University.

Kerry, in remarks prepared for an appearance in Philadelphia, called for "jobs that don't just let you survive but let you get ahead. Jobs that let you pay your bills, send your kids to college, buy a house, save a little for retirement and go out to dinner or a movie every once in a while."

Now, he said, good jobs are being replaced "with ones that just don't pay the bills," -- 1.8 million private sector jobs lost replaced by ones that pay $9,000 less and are more likely to be temporary less likely to offer health insurance.

Kerry hammered on the jobs issue in his neck-and-neck race for the Nov. 2 election with Bush after days of focus on criticism about his Vietnam war record.

In an appearance in Philadelphia Tuesday night the decorated veteran who became one of the conflict's leading critics firmly defended his opposition to the war.

Voters "can judge my character" by his Vietnam record, the Massachusetts senator said, "Because when the times of moral crisis existed in this country, I wasn't taking care of myself. I was taking care of public policy. I was taking care of things that made a difference to the life of this nation."

He said he served in Vietnam for two tours -- longer than opponents allege -- and the Navy "thought enough of my service that they made me an aide to an admiral."

Aides said his total service was about six months, including four months and 10 days in country and several weeks on a ship off the coast.

He was awarded a Silver Star, a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts.

"The Navy 35 years ago made the awards that it made through the normal process. I'm proud of them and I'm of my service and I'm proud that I stood up against the war when I got home because it was the right thing to do," he added.

The controversy over how Kerry won his medals in that war 35 years ago has recently stolen the spotlight in the race for the White House as both candidates try to portray themselves as best able to lead the United States in its global anti-terror war.

Some veterans, some with ties to the Republican Party and Bush allies, have called Kerry's courage into question and disputed the circumstances under which he received his medals.

But other veterans -- with direct knowledge of events -- have backed him up.

Bush's record during the Vietnam war has also drawn criticism from some Democrats who accuse him of going absent without leave from the Texas Air National Guard, citing gaps in his service record. Bush did not serve in Vietnam. - http://www.commondreams.org/h...
 
KERRY ROARS AGAIN!!!
09.26.04 (6:08 am)   [edit]
[b]The Democratic candidate seems to have finally found his footing on Iraq.[/b] This Washington Post article http://www.washingtonpost.com... describes an aggressive Kerry, attacking every aspect of the Bush Iraq policy:

"Kerry -- his voice hoarse from a cold -- gave remarks that were among his strongest yet, accusing the president of 'stubbornly' sticking to his ill-fated postwar plan for the country, and painting a picture of an administration in "disarray" over a course of action.

"Speaking shortly after Allawi addressed Congress, Kerry maintained that the interim leader backtracked on an earlier statement that did not paint as rosy a picture. 'I think the prime minister is, obviously, contradicting his own statement when he said terrorists are pouring into the country,' Kerry said. ...

"Kerry also took issue with Allawi's statement to Congress that elections could take place in Iraq by January. 'The United States and the Iraqis have retreated from whole areas of Iraq,' Kerry said. 'There are no-go zones in Iraq today. You can't hold an election in a no-go zone.'

"The Democrat ridiculed Bush for saying that the CIA was 'just guessing' on its Iraq intelligence. " 'Just guessing,' America? The CIA? They're not just guessing. They are giving the president of the United States their best judgment,' Kerry said. 'It's called an analysis and the president ought to read it, and he ought to study it and he ought to respond to it.'

"Kerry repeated his charge that Bush has not reached out to allies to help carry the burden in Iraq. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Kerry said, 'misled' the American people and Congress about the numbers of troops that have been trained for Iraq.

"'These are not small miscalculations. These are miscalculations that are costing lives, costing America's reputation in the world.'"

[b]Courtesy of SamAdams http://samadams.tblog.com [/b]

 
Bush is a Miserable Failure: Reckless Economic Fiasco is "Unsustainable"!!!
09.26.04 (6:00 am)   [edit]
Last year Pete Peterson came to NOW to talk about the growing federal deficit http://www.pbs.org/now/politi... . He told Bill Moyers then, "You and I are going to be getting tax cuts so that my six-year-old, nine-year-old, five-year-old, et cetera, grandchild, can pay bigger taxes in the future."

In the run up to the election Pete Peterson returns to NOW to discuss the deficit again, which he calls "a fiscal economic crisis in the making." Now no matter who wins in November, says Peterson, there is a lot of rethinking that has to go into our fiscal and economic policies, as it is clear that "the course we are on is unsustainable."

[b]More[/b] ... http://www.pbs.org/now/politi...
 
President Smoke and Mirrors: Bush is Unfit to be President
09.26.04 (5:57 am)   [edit]
[b]The Bush Tent Show

President Smoke and Mirrors[/b]

The Bush presidency has been the most elaborate public relations swindle in the history of the country. From his inauguration to the present day, Bush's every move has been carefully choreographed to maximize the ambitions of his handlers. His appearances have meticulously exorcised any fractious elements that might suggest that he is not unanimously revered by the American people.

As Noam Chomsky notes: "For George Bush the younger, PR specialists and speechwriters have constructed the image of a simple man with a direct line to heaven, who relies on his gut instincts as he strides forward to rid the world of evildoers while contemplating his visions and "dreams, a caricature of ancient epics and children's tales, with an admixture of cowboy fiction."

George Bush is entirely the invention of Madison Ave and the feverish imagination of Karl Rove. If it was possible to get close enough, you could probably pass your hand through the pasty gray spectral figure that is the central image of this political light show. There is simply nothing there.

The iconic image of Bush is devoid of any real substance; rather it is a repository of familiar American symbols and comforting "sound bytes. This has elevated the President to an archetypal figure whose wisdom issues from his deeply felt commitment to God and flag.

This manipulation of symbols first took root during the Reagan administration. Reagan's handlers learned how critical it is to create the illusion of leadership while obscuring the brutish machinations of government. Reagan's cheerful and bumbling character became a convenient foil for ongoing atrocities in Nicaragua and shadowy dealings with Iran. He was an upbeat guy who photographed as well in a Stetson as in a pinstriped suit. His good-humor and alleged forgetfulness proved to be valuable tools in disguising the many crimes that were perpetrated in his name.

The Bush character duplicates much of the Reagan mystique, with one notable difference; the emphasis on religion. The Bush chimera is one part plain-speaking cowpoke and one part Tent-show preacher. This adjunct to the Reagan formula has inspired legions of loyal followers to profess their unflinching devotion to their new messiah. The unfortunate facts concerning his dubious personal history ( a unique mix of shady business deals, insider trading, arrests, alcohol abuse, unaccounted for absences in the National Guard etc) has done nothing to upset their unshakeable belief in junior Bush.

The illusion of Bush's popularity has been, perhaps, the thorniest aspect to stage manage. Bush is the most reviled public figure of our era. Even when he visited close friend and ally Tony Blair in England he had to be accompanied by an entourage of 4,000 secret service agents and an army of 18,000 Bobbies. His presence provokes a similar reaction wherever he goes. (The unprecedented pre-war protests, that sent millions of people across the world into the streets, attest to the overwhelming public revulsion to his policies.)

Never the less, the media has done an admirable job in concealing the rage of the common man by isolating the "Dear Leader from his myriad detractors and by filming him in only the most flattering environs. Public appearances have deteriorated into private affairs for well heeled contributors, who are, in turn, asked to take off their Brooks Brothers coats and roll up their sleeves so they can affect the appearance of Joe six-pack.

Most people know by now that this painfully scripted vaudeville is nothing but political fakery, but it plays well on America's TVs and it lends a bit of credibility to a predictably vacuous performance.

Bush's televised appearances are equally artificial but, regrettably, frequent. On the rare occasion when the camera lingers too long on the presidential visage, peering through the vacuous executive gaze, a broad expanse of emptiness unfolds stretching across the ether; the motionless void of Bush's brain. Then, just as quickly, a shifting of cameras, a jolt back to life, the set jaw, the firm tone and the confident stride; our man from Crawford is restored to his task of saving the free world from fanatics and infidels.

The Bush presidency, with its heavy dependence on symbolism rather than content; "archetypal wizardry rather than leadership, has sent the ship of state limping towards the rocky shore. In just three years the administration has torpedoed long-held alliances, savaged the treasury, eviscerated our international credibility, initiated two wars of aggression, curtailed civil liberties and established an archipelago of torture camps across the globe. These accomplishments would never have been possible without the smoke and mirrors handiwork that spawned the Pretender in Chief.

The White House illusionists have created an effective mask for disguising their rampant criminal activity. By manufacturing a folksy, Bible wielding President, Rove and co. have fully embraced the "cult of the personality" that faithful friend of autocrats and boon to power hungry politicians. - http://www.counterpunch.com/w...
 
Bush's Dismal Policy Failures are Being Sold as Snake-Oil 'Achievements'
09.26.04 (5:54 am)   [edit]
During his first term, George W. Bush has inflicted more damage on the nation's people than any other president in the post-World War II era. Not only has the Bush administration failed, it has been far and away the most dangerous presidency in this period.

No other administration has seen itself above the law or so disregarded the Constitution by attacking the venerable institutions created to uphold democracy. In addition, the Bush presidency pushed through its policies by employing a calculated lawlessness that featured both deception and secrecy. A couple of examples help illustrate the administration's use of subterfuge.

The wanton level of deception became clear early on when the first tax cut was sold with the claim that those with the lowest earnings did better than the highest-income families. As data and analysis became available, however, it was clear that claim depended on statistical trickery. The biggest beneficiaries were the top 1 percent of the population, who received more than twice as much from the total amount of tax reductions as the bottom 60 percent.

[b]The Full Story [/b]... http://www.smirkingchimp.com/...
 
...... BUSH REGIME GOES LIGHT ON ENVIRONMENTAL LAWBREAKERS ......
09.26.04 (5:50 am)   [edit]
With benign-sounding proposals like the "Healthy Forests Initiative" and "Clear Skies Initiative," the Bush administration has been accused by environmentalists of rolling back environmental protections. Now, new research has determined that under Bush, enforcement of environmental laws has dropped off sharply as well.

The research was conducted by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), a data gathering and research center at Syracuse University. [1] Using Justice Department information gathered under the Freedom of Information Act, TRAC looked at 20,000 criminal defendants charged with violating environmental laws, covering the years 1993 to 2004.

From the first Clinton term to the second Clinton term, environmental prosecutions jumped 28 percent. But from the second Clinton term to the current Bush years, prosecutions dropped 23 percent.

Likewise, the number of convictions declined under Bush, and the number of defendants who actually went to prison dropped significantly. During the Bush years the number of defendants who served time dropped 28 percent from the previous administration.

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] TRAC Report - http://trac.syr.edu/tracrepor... .

 
...... BUSH REGIME GOES LIGHT ON ENVIRONMENTAL LAWBREAKERS ......
09.26.04 (5:47 am)   [edit]
With benign-sounding proposals like the "Healthy Forests Initiative" and "Clear Skies Initiative," the Bush administration has been accused by environmentalists of rolling back environmental protections. Now, new research has determined that under Bush, enforcement of environmental laws has dropped off sharply as well.

The research was conducted by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), a data gathering and research center at Syracuse University. [1] Using Justice Department information gathered under the Freedom of Information Act, TRAC looked at 20,000 criminal defendants charged with violating environmental laws, covering the years 1993 to 2004.

From the first Clinton term to the second Clinton term, environmental prosecutions jumped 28 percent. But from the second Clinton term to the current Bush years, prosecutions dropped 23 percent.

Likewise, the number of convictions declined under Bush, and the number of defendants who actually went to prison dropped significantly. During the Bush years the number of defendants who served time dropped 28 percent from the previous administration.

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] TRAC Report - http://trac.syr.edu/tracrepor... .

 
...... BUSH REGIME GOES LIGHT ON ENVIRONMENTAL LAWBREAKERS ......
09.26.04 (5:45 am)   [edit]
With benign-sounding proposals like the "Healthy Forests Initiative" and "Clear Skies Initiative," the Bush administration has been accused by environmentalists of rolling back environmental protections. Now, new research has determined that under Bush, enforcement of environmental laws has dropped off sharply as well.

The research was conducted by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), a data gathering and research center at Syracuse University. [1] Using Justice Department information gathered under the Freedom of Information Act, TRAC looked at 20,000 criminal defendants charged with violating environmental laws, covering the years 1993 to 2004.

From the first Clinton term to the second Clinton term, environmental prosecutions jumped 28 percent. But from the second Clinton term to the current Bush years, prosecutions dropped 23 percent.

Likewise, the number of convictions declined under Bush, and the number of defendants who actually went to prison dropped significantly. During the Bush years the number of defendants who served time dropped 28 percent from the previous administration.

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] TRAC Report - http://trac.syr.edu/tracrepor... .

 
Poll: Jews still favor Kerry ... Only a Fool Supports Failures Bush/Cheney
09.25.04 (8:32 am)   [edit]
WASHINGTON, Sept. 21 (JTA) — A survey published less than two months before the presidential election shows a small bump for President Bush in the American Jewish vote, despite his campaign’s energetic outreach to the community.

The nonpartisan poll, commissioned by the American Jewish Committee, found Jews backing Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) over Bush by nearly a 3-to-1 margin.

Bush received 24 percent of respondents’ support in the poll, just a 5 percent increase from his performance among Jewish voters in the 2000 presidential election. Kerry received 69 percent support among those polled in the new survey.

Democrats say the poll is another sign that Bush’s messages to the Jewish community are not resonating, while Republicans say it shows Kerry lagging behind recent Jewish support for the Democratic Party’s candidate.

The annual poll of Jewish views showed a majority of American Jews disapprove of the U.S. government’s handling of the war against terrorism and the war in Iraq.

It also found wide support in the Jewish community for Israel’s current policies in the Middle East, such as unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank security barrier.

Still, backing for Bush administration policy in the Middle East is not turning into votes for the president.

The Bush/Cheney campaign has been working hard to garner additional Jewish support this election season, capitalizing on support within the Jewish community for Bush’s policies on Israel.

But while many tout anecdotal shifts to the Bush camp among Jews, polling data continues to suggest that Jews will not change their traditional alliance with the Democratic Party in November.

Market Facts conducted the American Jewish Committee poll, in which 1,000 Jews were surveyed during the course of two weeks last month. Three percent of respondents backed independent candidate Ralph Nader and 5 percent were undecided.

The results of the poll, which has a 3 percentage points margin of error, are similar to other surveys of the Jewish vote done within the last year.

A National Jewish Democratic Council poll last month had Kerry garnering 75 percent to Bush’s 22 percent, and last year’s American Jewish Committee poll, taken before the Democratic primaries, had Bush getting 31 percent to Kerry’s 59 percent in a theoretical matchup.

The American Jewish Committee polls did not seek likely or registered voters, only survey respondents. Market Facts maintains a pool of respondents who have said they are Jewish, and randomly dials from that pool to reach Jews. Democrats say the latest poll shows Jews remain loyal to the party.

“It looks pretty similar to our poll,” said Ira Forman, executive director of the National Jewish Democratic Council. He said he believes Kerry could accumulate more Jewish support as the candidate continues to define himself to voters and noted that incumbents rarely do well among undecided voters.

But Republicans see the numbers differently, touting Bush’s improvement in Jewish support from 2000.

“If these numbers hold, the president will do” significantly better than he did in 2000,” said Matt Brooks, executive director of the Republican Jewish Coalition. “Thirty percent movement is by any measure a significant measure.”

And in an apparent change of strategy, Republicans are highlighting what they describe as Kerry’s relative weak support among Jewish voters, when comparing him to other Democratic presidential candidates of the last 12 years.

Vice President Al Gore garnered 79 percent of the Jewish vote in 2000, and President Clinton won 80 percent in 1992 and 78 percent in 1996.

But the 1988 Democratic candidate, Michael Dukakis, got 64 percent of the Jewish support, and Walter Mondale won 67 percent in 1984.

Republicans have been engaged in a strong effort to woo Jewish voters. The White House published a 23-page booklet touting Bush’s support for Jewish issues and the party held events geared toward the Orthodox community at the Republican National Convention last month in New York.

In recent weeks, however, Bush backers have minimized expectations, acknowledging that Bush will likely not hit the 30 percent threshold some had predicted a year ago.

“We’ve never come out and said, ‘We’ll achieve X amount of the vote,’ ” Michael Lebovitz, Jewish liaison for the Bush/Cheney campaign, said Monday. “We have a long-term commitment.”

The goal is now more focused on making a substantial dent in key states such as Florida and Ohio, where the race is close and there are a large percentage of Jews.

“The Republicans were never going to win a majority of Jewish voters,” said Ken Goldstein, professor of political science and Judaic studies at the University of Wisconsin. “It was always going to be about trying to steal a few, and it matters where those eight, nine, 10 are coming from.”

The poll shows Jews distancing themselves from Bush precisely on issues like foreign policy where the Bush campaign hoped to take traction.

A majority of respondents was not happy with the country’s foreign policy direction, with 52 percent disapproving of the handling of the campaign against terrorism, and 66 percent disapproving of the war in Iraq.

By contrast, the latest Gallup poll shows 57 percent of Americans believe the United States did not make a mistake in sending American troops in Iraq. In addition, 59 percent of Americans said they were at least somewhat satisfied with the United States’ handling of the war in Iraq.

The AJCommittee survey found that 63 percent of American Jews support the Israeli government’s handling of relations with the Palestinian Authority. The unilateral withdrawal plan had 65 percent support, and the security fence garnered 69 percent support.

Fifty-seven percent of Jews said they favored the creation of a Palestinian state, and 69 percent of respondents said Israel should be willing to dismantle all or some Jewish settlements in the West Bank to reach a permanent settlement.

On the issue of gay rights, three out of four Jews said they opposed an amendment to the Constitution defining marriage as between a man and a woman. About half of those surveyed said they favored legal marriage for gay couples, while an additional 36 percent said they supported civil unions. Thirteen percent wanted no legal recognition.

A May CNN/USA Today/Gallup survey found 56 percent of Americans support civil unions, and 51 percent also support the proposed constitutional amendment.

Twenty-seven percent of those surveyed by the American Jewish Committee said anti-Semitism is a very serious problem in the United States, with an additional 67 percent saying it was somewhat a problem. Most respondents said they thought anti-Semitism in the United States would either increase somewhat or remain the same within the next several years. - http://www.jta.org/page_view_...

 
Bush is a Miserable Failure: Reckless Economic Fiasco is "Unsustainable"!!!
09.25.04 (8:19 am)   [edit]
Last year Pete Peterson came to NOW to talk about the growing federal deficit http://www.pbs.org/now/politi... . He told Bill Moyers then, "You and I are going to be getting tax cuts so that my six-year-old, nine-year-old, five-year-old, et cetera, grandchild, can pay bigger taxes in the future."

In the run up to the election Pete Peterson returns to NOW to discuss the deficit again, which he calls "a fiscal economic crisis in the making." Now no matter who wins in November, says Peterson, there is a lot of rethinking that has to go into our fiscal and economic policies, as it is clear that "the course we are on is unsustainable."

[b]More[/b] ... http://www.pbs.org/now/politi...
 
President Smoke and Mirrors: Bush is Unfit to be President
09.25.04 (8:16 am)   [edit]
[b]The Bush Tent Show

President Smoke and Mirrors[/b]

The Bush presidency has been the most elaborate public relations swindle in the history of the country. From his inauguration to the present day, Bush's every move has been carefully choreographed to maximize the ambitions of his handlers. His appearances have meticulously exorcised any fractious elements that might suggest that he is not unanimously revered by the American people.

As Noam Chomsky notes: "For George Bush the younger, PR specialists and speechwriters have constructed the image of a simple man with a direct line to heaven, who relies on his gut instincts as he strides forward to rid the world of evildoers while contemplating his visions and "dreams, a caricature of ancient epics and children's tales, with an admixture of cowboy fiction."

George Bush is entirely the invention of Madison Ave and the feverish imagination of Karl Rove. If it was possible to get close enough, you could probably pass your hand through the pasty gray spectral figure that is the central image of this political light show. There is simply nothing there.

The iconic image of Bush is devoid of any real substance; rather it is a repository of familiar American symbols and comforting "sound bytes. This has elevated the President to an archetypal figure whose wisdom issues from his deeply felt commitment to God and flag.

This manipulation of symbols first took root during the Reagan administration. Reagan's handlers learned how critical it is to create the illusion of leadership while obscuring the brutish machinations of government. Reagan's cheerful and bumbling character became a convenient foil for ongoing atrocities in Nicaragua and shadowy dealings with Iran. He was an upbeat guy who photographed as well in a Stetson as in a pinstriped suit. His good-humor and alleged forgetfulness proved to be valuable tools in disguising the many crimes that were perpetrated in his name.

The Bush character duplicates much of the Reagan mystique, with one notable difference; the emphasis on religion. The Bush chimera is one part plain-speaking cowpoke and one part Tent-show preacher. This adjunct to the Reagan formula has inspired legions of loyal followers to profess their unflinching devotion to their new messiah. The unfortunate facts concerning his dubious personal history ( a unique mix of shady business deals, insider trading, arrests, alcohol abuse, unaccounted for absences in the National Guard etc) has done nothing to upset their unshakeable belief in junior Bush.

The illusion of Bush's popularity has been, perhaps, the thorniest aspect to stage manage. Bush is the most reviled public figure of our era. Even when he visited close friend and ally Tony Blair in England he had to be accompanied by an entourage of 4,000 secret service agents and an army of 18,000 Bobbies. His presence provokes a similar reaction wherever he goes. (The unprecedented pre-war protests, that sent millions of people across the world into the streets, attest to the overwhelming public revulsion to his policies.)

Never the less, the media has done an admirable job in concealing the rage of the common man by isolating the "Dear Leader from his myriad detractors and by filming him in only the most flattering environs. Public appearances have deteriorated into private affairs for well heeled contributors, who are, in turn, asked to take off their Brooks Brothers coats and roll up their sleeves so they can affect the appearance of Joe six-pack.

Most people know by now that this painfully scripted vaudeville is nothing but political fakery, but it plays well on America's TVs and it lends a bit of credibility to a predictably vacuous performance.

Bush's televised appearances are equally artificial but, regrettably, frequent. On the rare occasion when the camera lingers too long on the presidential visage, peering through the vacuous executive gaze, a broad expanse of emptiness unfolds stretching across the ether; the motionless void of Bush's brain. Then, just as quickly, a shifting of cameras, a jolt back to life, the set jaw, the firm tone and the confident stride; our man from Crawford is restored to his task of saving the free world from fanatics and infidels.

The Bush presidency, with its heavy dependence on symbolism rather than content; "archetypal wizardry rather than leadership, has sent the ship of state limping towards the rocky shore. In just three years the administration has torpedoed long-held alliances, savaged the treasury, eviscerated our international credibility, initiated two wars of aggression, curtailed civil liberties and established an archipelago of torture camps across the globe. These accomplishments would never have been possible without the smoke and mirrors handiwork that spawned the Pretender in Chief.

The White House illusionists have created an effective mask for disguising their rampant criminal activity. By manufacturing a folksy, Bible wielding President, Rove and co. have fully embraced the "cult of the personality" that faithful friend of autocrats and boon to power hungry politicians. - http://www.counterpunch.com/w...


 
Outdoor Industry Upset By Bush Environmental Policies
09.25.04 (8:11 am)   [edit]
Expressing growing opposition to President Bush's environmental policies, leading executives of over 30 major outdoor equipment manufacturers and retailers released a letter last week condemning Bush's rollback of America's public health and environmental laws.

At almost the same time, a growing number of elected officials from communities with strong outdoor-oriented economies have begun speaking out against the administration's assault on public lands and the environment.

In a letter delivered at a press event in Oregon City, OR, leaders of companies such as Columbia Sportswear, Cascade Designs and Vibram warned that "President Bush has promoted policies that...endanger the future sustainability of our national parks." [1]

"We are here today because the Great American Outdoors is in serious jeopardy and if we fail at protecting the outdoors then our businesses will fail, our health will fail and we will leave future generations with air they can't breathe and water they can't drink," said Lee Fromson, president of Seattle-based Cascade Designs, Inc., a leading manufacturer of outdoor equipment.

"Protecting our parks and open space is essential to the health of my business, the outdoor industry at large and to the many states whose economies depend upon tourism and recreation, not to mention the millions upon millions of Americans who enjoy the Great American Outdoors each year," added Peter Bragdon, vice president and general counsel of Columbia Sportswear. [2]

Industry leaders decried the impacts of every component of Bush's environmental agenda. They cited the weakening the Clean Air Act, the elimination of protections for public lands such as the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, and severe budget cuts to the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

The outdoor industry has become a major player in the national economy in recent years, generating over $18 billion in direct annual revenue and billions more through related tourism, travel, lodging, and other economic activity.

States with large expanses of public lands and forests are enjoying the benefits of the surge in outdoor sports and recreation. A recent study by the Sonoran Institute found that western communities with the highest proportion of protected public lands also enjoy the most diverse economies, greatest job and income growth and best standards of living in the region. [3]

Because of this, the Bush administration's weakening of public lands protection in the West has brought about an angry backlash from elected officials in areas close to these lands. Efforts to open roadless areas of national forests in Colorado to oil and gas drilling have upset local governments, who say the administration is ignoring their pleas to protect public lands.

The oil and gas industries, working through its former employees who now occupy top posts in the administration, have sought permission to drill in the HD Mountains and Thompson Creek roadless areas in the southern and western parts of Colorado. Local communities, whose economies no longer rely on extractive industries, are opposing the move.

In a recent exchange with Forest Service officials at a public hearing, James Harrmann, mayor of the southern Colorado town of Bayfield, asked why the Forest Service was ignoring the concerns of local governments. He ended by quipping, "What do I have to do, run for Congress?"

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] Outdoor Industry letter, http://home.businesswire.com/... Sept. 14, 2004.
[2] Business Wire, http://home.businesswire.com/... Sept. 14, 2004.
[3] Sonoran Institute study. http://www.sonoran.org/progra...
 
Outdoor Industry Upset By Bush Environmental Policies
09.25.04 (8:10 am)   [edit]
Expressing growing opposition to President Bush's environmental policies, leading executives of over 30 major outdoor equipment manufacturers and retailers released a letter last week condemning Bush's rollback of America's public health and environmental laws.

At almost the same time, a growing number of elected officials from communities with strong outdoor-oriented economies have begun speaking out against the administration's assault on public lands and the environment.

In a letter delivered at a press event in Oregon City, OR, leaders of companies such as Columbia Sportswear, Cascade Designs and Vibram warned that "President Bush has promoted policies that...endanger the future sustainability of our national parks." [1]

"We are here today because the Great American Outdoors is in serious jeopardy and if we fail at protecting the outdoors then our businesses will fail, our health will fail and we will leave future generations with air they can't breathe and water they can't drink," said Lee Fromson, president of Seattle-based Cascade Designs, Inc., a leading manufacturer of outdoor equipment.

"Protecting our parks and open space is essential to the health of my business, the outdoor industry at large and to the many states whose economies depend upon tourism and recreation, not to mention the millions upon millions of Americans who enjoy the Great American Outdoors each year," added Peter Bragdon, vice president and general counsel of Columbia Sportswear. [2]

Industry leaders decried the impacts of every component of Bush's environmental agenda. They cited the weakening the Clean Air Act, the elimination of protections for public lands such as the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, and severe budget cuts to the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

The outdoor industry has become a major player in the national economy in recent years, generating over $18 billion in direct annual revenue and billions more through related tourism, travel, lodging, and other economic activity.

States with large expanses of public lands and forests are enjoying the benefits of the surge in outdoor sports and recreation. A recent study by the Sonoran Institute found that western communities with the highest proportion of protected public lands also enjoy the most diverse economies, greatest job and income growth and best standards of living in the region. [3]

Because of this, the Bush administration's weakening of public lands protection in the West has brought about an angry backlash from elected officials in areas close to these lands. Efforts to open roadless areas of national forests in Colorado to oil and gas drilling have upset local governments, who say the administration is ignoring their pleas to protect public lands.

The oil and gas industries, working through its former employees who now occupy top posts in the administration, have sought permission to drill in the HD Mountains and Thompson Creek roadless areas in the southern and western parts of Colorado. Local communities, whose economies no longer rely on extractive industries, are opposing the move.

In a recent exchange with Forest Service officials at a public hearing, James Harrmann, mayor of the southern Colorado town of Bayfield, asked why the Forest Service was ignoring the concerns of local governments. He ended by quipping, "What do I have to do, run for Congress?"

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] Outdoor Industry letter, http://home.businesswire.com/... Sept. 14, 2004.
[2] Business Wire, http://home.businesswire.com/... Sept. 14, 2004.
[3] Sonoran Institute study. http://www.sonoran.org/progra...
 
Outdoor Industry Upset By Bush Environmental Policies
09.25.04 (8:08 am)   [edit]
Expressing growing opposition to President Bush's environmental policies, leading executives of over 30 major outdoor equipment manufacturers and retailers released a letter last week condemning Bush's rollback of America's public health and environmental laws.

At almost the same time, a growing number of elected officials from communities with strong outdoor-oriented economies have begun speaking out against the administration's assault on public lands and the environment.

In a letter delivered at a press event in Oregon City, OR, leaders of companies such as Columbia Sportswear, Cascade Designs and Vibram warned that "President Bush has promoted policies that...endanger the future sustainability of our national parks." [1]

"We are here today because the Great American Outdoors is in serious jeopardy and if we fail at protecting the outdoors then our businesses will fail, our health will fail and we will leave future generations with air they can't breathe and water they can't drink," said Lee Fromson, president of Seattle-based Cascade Designs, Inc., a leading manufacturer of outdoor equipment.

"Protecting our parks and open space is essential to the health of my business, the outdoor industry at large and to the many states whose economies depend upon tourism and recreation, not to mention the millions upon millions of Americans who enjoy the Great American Outdoors each year," added Peter Bragdon, vice president and general counsel of Columbia Sportswear. [2]

Industry leaders decried the impacts of every component of Bush's environmental agenda. They cited the weakening the Clean Air Act, the elimination of protections for public lands such as the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, and severe budget cuts to the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

The outdoor industry has become a major player in the national economy in recent years, generating over $18 billion in direct annual revenue and billions more through related tourism, travel, lodging, and other economic activity.

States with large expanses of public lands and forests are enjoying the benefits of the surge in outdoor sports and recreation. A recent study by the Sonoran Institute found that western communities with the highest proportion of protected public lands also enjoy the most diverse economies, greatest job and income growth and best standards of living in the region. [3]

Because of this, the Bush administration's weakening of public lands protection in the West has brought about an angry backlash from elected officials in areas close to these lands. Efforts to open roadless areas of national forests in Colorado to oil and gas drilling have upset local governments, who say the administration is ignoring their pleas to protect public lands.

The oil and gas industries, working through its former employees who now occupy top posts in the administration, have sought permission to drill in the HD Mountains and Thompson Creek roadless areas in the southern and western parts of Colorado. Local communities, whose economies no longer rely on extractive industries, are opposing the move.

In a recent exchange with Forest Service officials at a public hearing, James Harrmann, mayor of the southern Colorado town of Bayfield, asked why the Forest Service was ignoring the concerns of local governments. He ended by quipping, "What do I have to do, run for Congress?"

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] Outdoor Industry letter, http://home.businesswire.com/... Sept. 14, 2004.
[2] Business Wire, http://home.businesswire.com/... Sept. 14, 2004.
[3] Sonoran Institute study. http://www.sonoran.org/progra...
 
Bush Campaign is Un-American
09.25.04 (8:05 am)   [edit]
[b]An Un-American Way to Campaign[/b]

President Bush and his surrogates are taking their re-election campaign into dangerous territory. Mr. Bush is running as the man best equipped to keep America safe from terrorists - that was to be expected. We did not, however, anticipate that those on the Bush team would dare to argue that a vote for John Kerry would be a vote for Al Qaeda. Yet that is the message they are delivering - with a repetition that makes it clear this is an organized effort to paint the Democratic candidate as a friend to terrorists.

When Vice President Dick Cheney declared that electing Mr. Kerry would create a danger "that we'll get hit again," his supporters attributed that appalling language to a rhetorical slip. But Mr. Cheney is still delivering that message. Meanwhile, as Dana Milbank detailed so chillingly in The Washington Post yesterday, the House speaker, Dennis Hastert, said recently on television that Al Qaeda would do better under a Kerry presidency, and Senator Orrin Hatch, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has announced that the terrorists are going to do everything they can between now and November "to try and elect Kerry."

This is despicable politics. It's not just polarizing - it also undermines the efforts of the Justice Department and the Central Intelligence Agency to combat terrorists in America. Every time a member of the Bush administration suggests that Islamic extremists want to stage an attack before the election to sway the results in November, it causes patriotic Americans who do not intend to vote for the president to wonder whether the entire antiterrorism effort has been kidnapped and turned into part of the Bush re-election campaign. The people running the government clearly regard keeping Mr. Bush in office as more important than maintaining a united front on the most important threat to the nation.

Mr. Bush has not disassociated himself from any of this, and in his own campaign speeches he makes an argument that is equally divisive and undemocratic. The president has claimed, over and over, that criticism of the way his administration has conducted the war in Iraq and news stories that suggest the war is not going well endanger American troops and give aid and comfort to the enemy. This week, in his Rose Garden press conference with the interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, Mr. Bush was asked about Mr. Kerry's increasingly pointed remarks on Iraq. "You can embolden an enemy by sending mixed messages," he said, going on to suggest that Mr. Kerry's criticisms dispirit the Iraqi people and American soldiers.

It is fair game for the president to claim that toppling Saddam Hussein was a blow to terrorism, to accuse Mr. Kerry of flip-flopping and to repeat continually that the war in Iraq is going very well, despite all evidence to the contrary. It is absolutely not all right for anyone on his team to suggest that Mr. Kerry is the favored candidate of the terrorists. And at a time when the United States is supposed to be preparing the Iraqi people for a democratic election, it's appalling to hear the chief executive say that loyal opposition gives aid and comfort to the enemy abroad.

The general instinct of Americans is to play fair. That is why, even though terrorists struck the United States during President Bush's watch, the Democrats have not run a campaign that blames him for allowing the World Trade Center and the Pentagon to be attacked. And while the war in Iraq has opened up large swaths of the country to terrorist groups for the first time, any effort by Mr. Kerry to describe the president as the man whom Osama bin Laden wants to keep in power would be instantly denounced by the Republicans as unpatriotic.

We think that anyone who attempts to portray sincere critics as dangerous to the safety of the nation is wrong. It reflects badly on the president's character that in this instance, he's putting his own ambition ahead of the national good. - http://www.nytimes.com/2004/0...

 
Iraqis Don't Share Interim Prime Minister's Upbeat View
09.25.04 (8:03 am)   [edit]
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Interim Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi appeared before the U.S. Congress Thursday and declared that Iraq is on the right track.

His citizens, including some who work for the government, aren't as convinced.

Indeed, they're most uncertain about the very issues that Allawi assured U.S. lawmakers were increasingly under his government's control: the elections scheduled for January, the nation's infrastructure and its security.

When Iraqis say, "Thank you, America," it's usually with a touch of irony after the electricity shuts off or another bombing interrupts rush-hour traffic. Polls have shown Iraqis are grateful for Saddam Hussein's ouster, but that gratitude was quickly replaced by outrage at the deteriorating security conditions, lack of basic services and the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal.

Allawi said that while many have doubted that elections will be held in January, as the interim constitution requires, he's convinced they'll happen in time. In fact, he said, "In 15 out of 18 Iraqi provinces, the security situation is good for elections to be held tomorrow."

But the preparations needed for the elections are enormous. Farid Ayar, a member of the eight-member Independent Electoral Commission, said recently that the commission has just begun recruiting the 70,000 workers needed to hold the elections. And it still hasn't sent out forms to families to determine who lives in each household and whether they can vote.

Nor has the committee determined how citizens can declare their candidacies or whether the committee will provide them with campaign funds.

Most citizens, Ayar said, don't even know how to vote.

"We are trying to tell people about the elections through the media," he said.

Several major factions have also refused to participate in the election process, citing U.S. interference, unfair alliances and poor representation of certain ethnic groups.

Allawi also said Thursday that Iraq was quickly developing its own security forces through a massive build-up of the army, police and national guard.

A sweeping recruitment effort is under way, and there's been no shortage of applicants, despite frequent and deadly insurgent attacks on recruits.

But there's little debate that those forces are currently ill-prepared and understaffed.

"We need the government or the multinational forces - whoever - to treat us as human beings and not as machines," Col. Safaa Ali, the commander of a Baghdad police district, said Thursday. "All of us are exhausted. We work 13 hours a day."

His officers, Ali said, weren't ready to take on insurgents.

"We are taking on forces beyond our strength," agreed one of Ali's men, who asked not to be named. "We cannot win."

Like Allawi, Ali is optimistic about his country's future. But his timetable doesn't match the prime minister's.

"It's very far away," he said of Iraq's stability. "Too far to see."

Allawi cited Samarra and Tal Afar as places where multinational and Iraqi authorities wrested control from insurgents. But for those who live there, the liberation came at a steep price, said Songul Chabouk, a Turkmen and member of the now-disbanded Iraqi Governing Council.

In Tal Afar, thousands of families were displaced and many people were killed, Chabouk said. She added that Allawi's government didn't respond to the Turkmens' appeals to stop the fighting and displacement.

And despite continued air strikes in Fallujah and Ramadi, those cities remain under insurgent control. While the attacks have killed many insurgents, they also have left many women and children dead, Fallujah residents have said repeatedly.

Allawi claimed success for a joint Iraqi-U.S. operation to sweep insurgents out of Najaf. In fact, at least two delegations from the Allawi administration failed to negotiate a peaceful end to the standoff in Najaf. It was the Grand Ayatollah Ali al Husseini al Sistani, the revered Shiite Muslim religious leader, who finally brokered a truce, exposing the secular government's weakness in the face of the powerful Shiite clergy.

While Allawi said that Iraq is battling a destructive but small terror network, U.S. military officials have estimated that insurgents could draw up to 20,000 fighters on short notice. And the kidnapping of foreigners and Iraqis has become a profitable and deadly business.

The prime minister acknowledged Iraqis' suffering and said his government has tried to improve their quality of life. He cited the return of a polio vaccination program, oil pipelines that have been repaired and the construction of new schools and health centers.

But Allawi didn't mention unemployment or the electricity shortage, the two issues that Iraqis almost unanimously list as most important to them, after security.

While more power is being generated now than before the war, the total hours of electricity available to most Iraqis haven't improved much. Unemployment, though, is worse now than it was under Saddam's regime; about half of Iraq's workforce can't find a job, according to the Planning Ministry.

Greater strides have been made in health care and education. Medical staffing has improved considerably in Baghdad, though there are reports that the countryside still desperately needs more doctors. Even in the city, doctors said they still lack supplies as basic as aspirin.

"Things are about the same as before the war, or maybe a little worse," Wisail Abdul Rahaman, a doctor at a Baghdad clinic, said earlier this month. "But we have hopes." - http://www.commondreams.org/h...

 
Iraqis Don't Share Interim Prime Minister's Upbeat View ...
09.25.04 (8:01 am)   [edit]
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Interim Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi appeared before the U.S. Congress Thursday and declared that Iraq is on the right track.

His citizens, including some who work for the government, aren't as convinced.

Indeed, they're most uncertain about the very issues that Allawi assured U.S. lawmakers were increasingly under his government's control: the elections scheduled for January, the nation's infrastructure and its security.

When Iraqis say, "Thank you, America," it's usually with a touch of irony after the electricity shuts off or another bombing interrupts rush-hour traffic. Polls have shown Iraqis are grateful for Saddam Hussein's ouster, but that gratitude was quickly replaced by outrage at the deteriorating security conditions, lack of basic services and the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal.

Allawi said that while many have doubted that elections will be held in January, as the interim constitution requires, he's convinced they'll happen in time. In fact, he said, "In 15 out of 18 Iraqi provinces, the security situation is good for elections to be held tomorrow."

But the preparations needed for the elections are enormous. Farid Ayar, a member of the eight-member Independent Electoral Commission, said recently that the commission has just begun recruiting the 70,000 workers needed to hold the elections. And it still hasn't sent out forms to families to determine who lives in each household and whether they can vote.

Nor has the committee determined how citizens can declare their candidacies or whether the committee will provide them with campaign funds.

Most citizens, Ayar said, don't even know how to vote.

"We are trying to tell people about the elections through the media," he said.

Several major factions have also refused to participate in the election process, citing U.S. interference, unfair alliances and poor representation of certain ethnic groups.

Allawi also said Thursday that Iraq was quickly developing its own security forces through a massive build-up of the army, police and national guard.

A sweeping recruitment effort is under way, and there's been no shortage of applicants, despite frequent and deadly insurgent attacks on recruits.

But there's little debate that those forces are currently ill-prepared and understaffed.

"We need the government or the multinational forces - whoever - to treat us as human beings and not as machines," Col. Safaa Ali, the commander of a Baghdad police district, said Thursday. "All of us are exhausted. We work 13 hours a day."

His officers, Ali said, weren't ready to take on insurgents.

"We are taking on forces beyond our strength," agreed one of Ali's men, who asked not to be named. "We cannot win."

Like Allawi, Ali is optimistic about his country's future. But his timetable doesn't match the prime minister's.

"It's very far away," he said of Iraq's stability. "Too far to see."

Allawi cited Samarra and Tal Afar as places where multinational and Iraqi authorities wrested control from insurgents. But for those who live there, the liberation came at a steep price, said Songul Chabouk, a Turkmen and member of the now-disbanded Iraqi Governing Council.

In Tal Afar, thousands of families were displaced and many people were killed, Chabouk said. She added that Allawi's government didn't respond to the Turkmens' appeals to stop the fighting and displacement.

And despite continued air strikes in Fallujah and Ramadi, those cities remain under insurgent control. While the attacks have killed many insurgents, they also have left many women and children dead, Fallujah residents have said repeatedly.

Allawi claimed success for a joint Iraqi-U.S. operation to sweep insurgents out of Najaf. In fact, at least two delegations from the Allawi administration failed to negotiate a peaceful end to the standoff in Najaf. It was the Grand Ayatollah Ali al Husseini al Sistani, the revered Shiite Muslim religious leader, who finally brokered a truce, exposing the secular government's weakness in the face of the powerful Shiite clergy.

While Allawi said that Iraq is battling a destructive but small terror network, U.S. military officials have estimated that insurgents could draw up to 20,000 fighters on short notice. And the kidnapping of foreigners and Iraqis has become a profitable and deadly business.

The prime minister acknowledged Iraqis' suffering and said his government has tried to improve their quality of life. He cited the return of a polio vaccination program, oil pipelines that have been repaired and the construction of new schools and health centers.

But Allawi didn't mention unemployment or the electricity shortage, the two issues that Iraqis almost unanimously list as most important to them, after security.

While more power is being generated now than before the war, the total hours of electricity available to most Iraqis haven't improved much. Unemployment, though, is worse now than it was under Saddam's regime; about half of Iraq's workforce can't find a job, according to the Planning Ministry.

Greater strides have been made in health care and education. Medical staffing has improved considerably in Baghdad, though there are reports that the countryside still desperately needs more doctors. Even in the city, doctors said they still lack supplies as basic as aspirin.

"Things are about the same as before the war, or maybe a little worse," Wisail Abdul Rahaman, a doctor at a Baghdad clinic, said earlier this month. "But we have hopes." - http://www.commondreams.org/h...

 
Where's the WMD, Mr. Bush? You've Got the OIL! ...
09.23.04 (5:51 am)   [edit]
[b]Iraq Had No WMD: The Final Verdict[/b]

Julian Borger writes http://www.guardian.co.uk/int...,3604,1307448,00.html : "The comprehensive 15-month search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has concluded that the only chemical or biological agents that Saddam Hussein's regime was working on before last year's invasion were small quantities of poisons, most likely for use in assassinations. A draft of the Iraq Survey Group's final report circulating in Washington found no sign of the alleged illegal stockpiles... nor did it find any evidence of efforts to reconstitute Iraq's nuclear weapons programme... Charles Duelfer, the head of the ISG, has said he intends to deliver his final report by the end of the month... George Bush now admits that stockpiles have not been found in Iraq but claimed as recently as Thursday that 'Saddam Hussein had the capability of making weapons, and he could have passed that capability on to the enemy'. The draft Duelfer report, according to the New York Times, finds no evidence of a capability, but only of an intention to rebuild that capability."

[b]Guess What: It Was About the Oil[/b]

Among the documents http://www.truthout.org/docs_... Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force finally released under court order is a map of Iraq. It doesn't show the detail normally shown on maps - cities, political boundaries, features like rivers and mountains. It shows Iraq's oil fields. Another task force document is a chart titled "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfields." It lists 63 oil companies and specifies which Iraqi oilfields each company wants. No wonder Tricky Dicky fought so hard to keep these documents secret. Is anybody surprised? More to the point, when does the war crimes trial begin?
 
Bush's UN Speech Proves He Has "No Moral Credibility On International Affairs"
09.23.04 (5:48 am)   [edit]
We get a response to President Bush's comments before the UN General Assembly on Iraq, Palestine, Sudan and AIDS from Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies and TransAfrica president Bill Fletcher. [includes rush transcript: http://www.democracynow.org/a... ]

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

President Bush addressed the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday marking his fourth appearance before the world body during his term in office. And for the third year in a row, the main subject of Bush's speech was Iraq.

The president defended invading Iraq without UN Security Council backing, instead speaking about the need for democracy and appealed for help in reconstruction.

Bush also spoke about Palestine and the crisis in Sudan and listed an array of proposed initiatives including Third World debt relief, combating AIDS and global trafficking in women and children.

Bush's remarks drew applause only once -- at the end of his speech. He spoke shortly after U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan opened the 191-nation gathering with what many saw as a pointed rebuke to the United States.

[b]Read interview here[/b]: http://www.democracynow.org/a...
 
Bush's UN Speech Proves He Has "No Moral Credibility On International Affairs"
09.23.04 (5:45 am)   [edit]
We get a response to President Bush's comments before the UN General Assembly on Iraq, Palestine, Sudan and AIDS from Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies and TransAfrica president Bill Fletcher. [includes rush transcript: http://www.democracynow.org/a... ]

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

President Bush addressed the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday marking his fourth appearance before the world body during his term in office. And for the third year in a row, the main subject of Bush's speech was Iraq.

The president defended invading Iraq without UN Security Council backing, instead speaking about the need for democracy and appealed for help in reconstruction.

Bush also spoke about Palestine and the crisis in Sudan and listed an array of proposed initiatives including Third World debt relief, combating AIDS and global trafficking in women and children.

Bush's remarks drew applause only once -- at the end of his speech. He spoke shortly after U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan opened the 191-nation gathering with what many saw as a pointed rebuke to the United States.

[b]Read interview here[/b]: http://www.democracynow.org/a...
 
Bush's UN Speech Proves He Has "No Moral Credibility On International Affairs"
09.23.04 (5:30 am)   [edit]
We get a response to President Bush's comments before the UN General Assembly on Iraq, Palestine, Sudan and AIDS from Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies and TransAfrica president Bill Fletcher. [includes rush transcript: http://www.democracynow.org/a... ]

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

President Bush addressed the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday marking his fourth appearance before the world body during his term in office. And for the third year in a row, the main subject of Bush's speech was Iraq.

The president defended invading Iraq without UN Security Council backing, instead speaking about the need for democracy and appealed for help in reconstruction.

Bush also spoke about Palestine and the crisis in Sudan and listed an array of proposed initiatives including Third World debt relief, combating AIDS and global trafficking in women and children.

Bush's remarks drew applause only once -- at the end of his speech. He spoke shortly after U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan opened the 191-nation gathering with what many saw as a pointed rebuke to the United States.

[b]Read interview here[/b]: http://www.democracynow.org/a...
 
Critics Say Proposed Senate Chemical Bill Leaves U.S. Vulnerable to Attack
09.23.04 (5:13 am)   [edit]
Sometime in the next few weeks, the U.S. Senate is expected to
take up, for the first time, the issue of how to protect
Americans from terrorist attacks on domestic chemical plants.
But environmental groups and unions worry that the main piece of
legislation under consideration will provide no real security
for chemical plants and is motivated by pre-election politics.

"Senate Republicans are working to sneak an industry-friendly,
do-nothing bill through the Senate to give President Bush a
greenwash feather in his cap before the election," said Rick
Hind, legislative director for the toxics campaign at
Greenpeace http://www.greenpeaceusa.org/... .

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), there
are more than 100 chemical facilities in the U.S. that would
each put at least one million people at risk were they to come
under attack. The agency estimates that more than 750 facilities
in the U.S. place at least 100,000 people at risk from chemical
releases. Numerous studies reveal substantial security gaps at
many of these facilities. [1]

Three years ago, Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) introduced
legislation to create federal standards to reduce security risks
at chemical facilities; promote cost-effective, safe
technologies at high-priority chemical plants; and require
government oversight to ensure compliance with the new
regulations. The Corzine bill also works within the framework
set out by President Bush's Homeland Security plan, calling for
the Department of Homeland Security to work with the EPA in
developing a strategy to reduce the vulnerability of chemical
and hazardous materials stores. [2]

After heated bipartisan negotiations and major revisions, the
Corzine bill won unanimous support in the Senate Environment and
Public Works (EPW) Committee in July 2002.

However, shortly after he voted for the bill in committee,
Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) joined the American Chemistry
Council, American Petroleum Institute and others in opposition
to it. The following year, Inhofe (chair of the EPW Committee)
introduced his own chemical security bill, which was substituted
for the Corzine bill in a close party-line vote.

"Senator Inhofe's legislation is currently unenforceable. The
Senate needs to ensure the American public that chemical
security legislation will create change at chemical facilities.
Enforcing the use of safer chemicals is the commonsense way to
get this done," Megan Purvis, environmental health advocate for
the U.S. Public Interest Research Group http://www.uspirg.org/ (U.S. PIRG) told
BushGreenwatch http://www.bushgreenwatch.org... .

Inhofe's bill contains no plans for developing safer
technologies. It contains loopholes that allow the chemical
industry's voluntary security programs to win government
endorsement and substitute for new regulations; fails to require
government verification of compliance with security regulations;
and leaves out the EPA as a partner in writing and enforcing
those regulations.

Inhofe's bill could reach the Senate floor anytime before the
October 8th recess. Senators offering a chemical security bill,
based on the Corzine proposal are expected to challenge Inhofe's
proposal.

###

[b]TAKE ACTION[/b]

Go to U.S. PIRG's website http://ga3.org/ct/md1eOJs1JB-... to write your senator.

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] Senator Corzine's website http://ga3.org/ct/mp1eOJs1JB-... .
[2] Ibid.

 
Critics Say Proposed Senate Chemical Bill Leaves U.S. Vulnerable to Attack
09.23.04 (5:13 am)   [edit]
Sometime in the next few weeks, the U.S. Senate is expected to
take up, for the first time, the issue of how to protect
Americans from terrorist attacks on domestic chemical plants.
But environmental groups and unions worry that the main piece of
legislation under consideration will provide no real security
for chemical plants and is motivated by pre-election politics.

"Senate Republicans are working to sneak an industry-friendly,
do-nothing bill through the Senate to give President Bush a
greenwash feather in his cap before the election," said Rick
Hind, legislative director for the toxics campaign at
Greenpeace http://www.greenpeaceusa.org/... .

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), there
are more than 100 chemical facilities in the U.S. that would
each put at least one million people at risk were they to come
under attack. The agency estimates that more than 750 facilities
in the U.S. place at least 100,000 people at risk from chemical
releases. Numerous studies reveal substantial security gaps at
many of these facilities. [1]

Three years ago, Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) introduced
legislation to create federal standards to reduce security risks
at chemical facilities; promote cost-effective, safe
technologies at high-priority chemical plants; and require
government oversight to ensure compliance with the new
regulations. The Corzine bill also works within the framework
set out by President Bush's Homeland Security plan, calling for
the Department of Homeland Security to work with the EPA in
developing a strategy to reduce the vulnerability of chemical
and hazardous materials stores. [2]

After heated bipartisan negotiations and major revisions, the
Corzine bill won unanimous support in the Senate Environment and
Public Works (EPW) Committee in July 2002.

However, shortly after he voted for the bill in committee,
Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) joined the American Chemistry
Council, American Petroleum Institute and others in opposition
to it. The following year, Inhofe (chair of the EPW Committee)
introduced his own chemical security bill, which was substituted
for the Corzine bill in a close party-line vote.

"Senator Inhofe's legislation is currently unenforceable. The
Senate needs to ensure the American public that chemical
security legislation will create change at chemical facilities.
Enforcing the use of safer chemicals is the commonsense way to
get this done," Megan Purvis, environmental health advocate for
the U.S. Public Interest Research Group http://www.uspirg.org/ (U.S. PIRG) told
BushGreenwatch http://www.bushgreenwatch.org... .

Inhofe's bill contains no plans for developing safer
technologies. It contains loopholes that allow the chemical
industry's voluntary security programs to win government
endorsement and substitute for new regulations; fails to require
government verification of compliance with security regulations;
and leaves out the EPA as a partner in writing and enforcing
those regulations.

Inhofe's bill could reach the Senate floor anytime before the
October 8th recess. Senators offering a chemical security bill,
based on the Corzine proposal are expected to challenge Inhofe's
proposal.

###

[b]TAKE ACTION[/b]

Go to U.S. PIRG's website http://ga3.org/ct/md1eOJs1JB-... to write your senator.

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] Senator Corzine's website http://ga3.org/ct/mp1eOJs1JB-... .
[2] Ibid.

 
Critics Say Proposed Senate Chemical Bill Leaves U.S. Vulnerable to Attack
09.23.04 (5:11 am)   [edit]
Sometime in the next few weeks, the U.S. Senate is expected to
take up, for the first time, the issue of how to protect
Americans from terrorist attacks on domestic chemical plants.
But environmental groups and unions worry that the main piece of
legislation under consideration will provide no real security
for chemical plants and is motivated by pre-election politics.

"Senate Republicans are working to sneak an industry-friendly,
do-nothing bill through the Senate to give President Bush a
greenwash feather in his cap before the election," said Rick
Hind, legislative director for the toxics campaign at
Greenpeace http://www.greenpeaceusa.org/... .

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), there
are more than 100 chemical facilities in the U.S. that would
each put at least one million people at risk were they to come
under attack. The agency estimates that more than 750 facilities
in the U.S. place at least 100,000 people at risk from chemical
releases. Numerous studies reveal substantial security gaps at
many of these facilities. [1]

Three years ago, Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) introduced
legislation to create federal standards to reduce security risks
at chemical facilities; promote cost-effective, safe
technologies at high-priority chemical plants; and require
government oversight to ensure compliance with the new
regulations. The Corzine bill also works within the framework
set out by President Bush's Homeland Security plan, calling for
the Department of Homeland Security to work with the EPA in
developing a strategy to reduce the vulnerability of chemical
and hazardous materials stores. [2]

After heated bipartisan negotiations and major revisions, the
Corzine bill won unanimous support in the Senate Environment and
Public Works (EPW) Committee in July 2002.

However, shortly after he voted for the bill in committee,
Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) joined the American Chemistry
Council, American Petroleum Institute and others in opposition
to it. The following year, Inhofe (chair of the EPW Committee)
introduced his own chemical security bill, which was substituted
for the Corzine bill in a close party-line vote.

"Senator Inhofe's legislation is currently unenforceable. The
Senate needs to ensure the American public that chemical
security legislation will create change at chemical facilities.
Enforcing the use of safer chemicals is the commonsense way to
get this done," Megan Purvis, environmental health advocate for
the U.S. Public Interest Research Group http://www.uspirg.org/ (U.S. PIRG) told
BushGreenwatch http://www.bushgreenwatch.org... .

Inhofe's bill contains no plans for developing safer
technologies. It contains loopholes that allow the chemical
industry's voluntary security programs to win government
endorsement and substitute for new regulations; fails to require
government verification of compliance with security regulations;
and leaves out the EPA as a partner in writing and enforcing
those regulations.

Inhofe's bill could reach the Senate floor anytime before the
October 8th recess. Senators offering a chemical security bill,
based on the Corzine proposal are expected to challenge Inhofe's
proposal.

###

[b]TAKE ACTION[/b]

Go to U.S. PIRG's website http://ga3.org/ct/md1eOJs1JB-... to write your senator.

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] Senator Corzine's website http://ga3.org/ct/mp1eOJs1JB-... .
[2] Ibid.

 
Bush's Bloodbath & Torture Chambers: Seymour Hersh's History of Bush's War
09.22.04 (3:46 pm)   [edit]
Mary Jacoby writes for Salon.com: http://www.truthout.org/docs_... "In a new book, 'Chain of Command: The Road From 9/11 to Abu Ghraib,' Hersh expands upon his work in the New Yorker to contribute new insights and revelations. He discloses how a CIA analyst's report on abuses against captured Taliban prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, made its way to the White House in 2002, putting National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice on notice two years before the Abu Ghraib scandal that human rights violations were taking place in U.S.-run prisons abroad. In March 2002, Hersh writes, a military action against al-Qaida, known as Operation Anaconda, was botched in Afghanistan's mountainous border with Pakistan. Billed at the time as a success story by the Pentagon, it was in fact a debacle, plagued by squabbling between the services, bad military planning and avoidable deaths of American soldiers, as well as the escape of key al-Qaida leaders, likely including Osama bin Laden."
 
...... If America were Iraq, What would it be Like? ......
09.22.04 (3:43 pm)   [edit]
President Bush said Tuesday that the Iraqis are refuting the pessimists and implied that things are improving in that country.

What would America look like if it were in Iraq's current situation? The population of the US is over 11 times that of Iraq, so a lot of statistics would have to be multiplied by that number.

Thus, violence killed 300 Iraqis last week, the equivalent proportionately of 3,300 Americans. What if 3,300 Americans had died in car bombings, grenade and rocket attacks, machine gun spray, and aerial bombardment in the last week? That is a number greater than the deaths on September 11, and if America were Iraq, it would be an ongoing, weekly or monthly toll.

And what if those deaths occurred all over the country, including in the capital of Washington, DC, but mainly above the Mason Dixon line, in Boston, Minneapolis, Salt Lake City, and San Francisco?

What if the grounds of the White House and the government buildings near the Mall were constantly taking mortar fire? What if almost nobody in the State Department at Foggy Bottom, the White House, or the Pentagon dared venture out of their buildings, and considered it dangerous to go over to Crystal City or Alexandria?

What if all the reporters for all the major television and print media were trapped in five-star hotels in Washington, DC and New York, unable to move more than a few blocks safely, and dependent on stringers to know what was happening in Oklahoma City and St. Louis? What if the only time they ventured into the Midwest was if they could be embedded in Army or National Guard units?

There are estimated to be some 25,000 guerrillas in Iraq engaged in concerted acts of violence. What if there were private armies totalling 275,000 men, armed with machine guns, assault rifles (legal again!), rocket-propelled grenades, and mortar launchers, hiding out in dangerous urban areas of cities all over the country? What if they completely controlled Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, Denver and Omaha, such that local police and Federal troops could not go into those cities?

What if, during the past year, the Secretary of State (Aqilah Hashemi), the President (Izzedine Salim), and the Attorney General (Muhammad Baqir al-Hakim) had all been assassinated?

What if all the cities in the US were wracked by a crime wave, with thousands of murders, kidnappings, burglaries, and carjackings in every major city every year?

What if the Air Force routinely (I mean daily or weekly) bombed Billings, Montana, Flint, Michigan, Watts in Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Anacostia in Washington, DC, and other urban areas, attempting to target "safe houses" of "criminal gangs", but inevitably killing a lot of children and little old ladies?

What if, from time to time, the US Army besieged Virginia Beach, killing hundreds of armed members of the Christian Soldiers? What if entire platoons of the Christian Soldiers militia holed up in Arlington National Cemetery, and were bombarded by US Air Force warplanes daily, destroying thousands of graves and pulverizing the Vietnam Memorial? What if the National Council of Churches had to call for a popular march of thousands of believers to converge on the National Cathedral to stop the US Army from demolishing it to get at a rogue band of the Timothy McVeigh Memorial Brigades?

What if there were virtually no commercial air traffic in the country? What if many roads were highly dangerous, especially Interstate 95 from Richmond to Washington, DC, and I-95 and I-91 up to Boston? If you got on I-95 anywhere along that over 500-mile stretch, you would risk being carjacked, kidnapped, or having your car sprayed with machine gun fire.

What if no one had electricity for much more than 10 hours a day, and often less? What if it went off at unpredictable times, causing factories to grind to a halt and air conditioning to fail in the middle of the summer in Houston and Miami? What if the Alaska pipeline were bombed and disabled at least monthly? What if unemployment hovered around 40%?

What if veterans of militia actions at Ruby Ridge and the Oklahoma City bombing were brought in to run the government on the theory that you need a tough guy in these times of crisis?

What if municipal elections were cancelled and cliques close to the new "president" quietly installed in the statehouses as "governors?" What if several of these governors (especially of Montana and Wyoming) were assassinated soon after taking office or resigned when their children were taken hostage by guerrillas?

What if the leader of the European Union maintained that the citizens of the United States are, under these conditions, refuting pessimism and that freedom and democracy are just around the corner?

[b]Juan Cole is Professor of History at the University of Michigan [/b] - http://www.commondreams.org/v...


 
No WMD, But Plenty of OIL ...
09.22.04 (10:16 am)   [edit]
[b]Iraq Had No WMD: The Final Verdict[/b]

Julian Borger writes http://www.guardian.co.uk/int...,3604,1307448,00.html : "The comprehensive 15-month search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has concluded that the only chemical or biological agents that Saddam Hussein's regime was working on before last year's invasion were small quantities of poisons, most likely for use in assassinations. A draft of the Iraq Survey Group's final report circulating in Washington found no sign of the alleged illegal stockpiles... nor did it find any evidence of efforts to reconstitute Iraq's nuclear weapons programme... Charles Duelfer, the head of the ISG, has said he intends to deliver his final report by the end of the month... George Bush now admits that stockpiles have not been found in Iraq but claimed as recently as Thursday that 'Saddam Hussein had the capability of making weapons, and he could have passed that capability on to the enemy'. The draft Duelfer report, according to the New York Times, finds no evidence of a capability, but only of an intention to rebuild that capability."

[b]Guess What: It Was About the Oil[/b]

Among the documents http://www.truthout.org/docs_... Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force finally released under court order is a map of Iraq. It doesn't show the detail normally shown on maps - cities, political boundaries, features like rivers and mountains. It shows Iraq's oil fields. Another task force document is a chart titled "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfields." It lists 63 oil companies and specifies which Iraqi oilfields each company wants. No wonder Tricky Dicky fought so hard to keep these documents secret. Is anybody surprised? More to the point, when does the war crimes trial begin?
 
Bush's Ratings Slip to Lowest Level of His Presidency ...
09.22.04 (10:11 am)   [edit]
"Bush's ratings have slipped to 45% positive and 54% negative, the lowest ratings of his presidency, according to a new Harris Poll. These numbers compare to 50% positive, 49% negative in June and 48% positive, 51% negative in August. This downward trend no doubt helps to explain why the lead which the president enjoyed over Senator Kerry immediately after the Republican convention in New York -- the so-called 'convention bounce' -- has now disappeared."

[b]Read more [/b]... http://www.harrisinteractive....
 
*** Israeli Nuclear Whistleblower Vanunu on Mideast Nukes ***
09.22.04 (6:25 am)   [edit]
WASHINGTON - September 17 - The U.S. government has been making demands regarding Iran's nuclear program. On Thursday afternoon State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher was asked about "Mordechai Vanunu, the Israeli whistleblower" and his proposal that "there be a trade-off between the Iranian nuclear program and the ending of the Israeli one." Boucher declined to comment on the proposal.

When asked about Israel's nuclear capacity, Boucher said: "I'm not making judgments or presumptions about that. We've had a view on the universal adherence to the Non-Proliferation Treaty that we've expressed many times, that applies in all cases." Israel is not a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. U.S. government officials have consistently avoided acknowledging Israel's nuclear arsenal.

MORDECHAI VANUNU, vanunumvjc@hotmail.com

Vanunu exposed the Israeli nuclear arsenal in 1986. He was released in April 2004 after serving an 18-year sentence, most of it in solitary confinement. Vanunu is available for a limited number of interviews. He said today:

* "The U.S. goes to Iraq in the name of fighting against weapons of mass destruction while it does not even acknowledge Israel's capacity. The obvious thing to do is to ensure that all states in the region -- including Israel and Iran -- do not have nuclear weapons."

* "Israeli governments which have been behind building these nuclear weapons are betraying the Israeli citizens, the Arab community and all of humanity. Israel has been building nuclear weapons, they now have enough material for hundreds of atomic bombs. I was a technician at the Dimona plant; my main job was making lithium-6 for use in hydrogen bombs. There is no justification for Israel having hydrogen bombs."

* "In 1986 I was kidnapped by Israel in Rome after revealing its massive nuclear arsenal to the London Sunday Times. I was sentenced to 18 years because I revealed the truth to the world. I suffered 18 years of cruel, barbaric treatment under the Israeli authorities. I'm glad to have some freedom now, but I'm not allowed to speak to any foreigners or to go to any other country for one year. I would like to go to the U.S. where there are more freedoms. I do not feel safe in Israel, I have been threatened, I'm called a traitor in the street. Especially because I have become a Christian, I do not have equal human rights. The Israeli government and media have built a very bad image of my case here."

* "With its nuclear weapons, Israel is much more aggressive, so it doesn't move to a real peace with the Palestinians or Syria or Lebanon or Jordan. Its nuclear weapons are used as political power. Without even using them, the nuclear weapons help Israel do what it wants so it doesn't respect international law. When he was defense minister, Sharon destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor in 1981 so that no other country in the region would have nuclear weapons."

For a recent interview with Vanunu, see: www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/18/136217

For more on Israel's nuclear arsenal, see: www.msnbc.com/news/wld/graphics/str ategic_israel_dw.htm

FELICE COHEN-JOPPA, freevanunu@mindspring.com, www.vanunu.com

Cohen-Joppa is the coordinator of the U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu. She noted that Vanunu has just been awarded a peace grant by Yoko Ono. [See: www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc -ny--yokoono-peace0916sep 15,0,2694081.story?coll=ny-ap-regional -wire]

THOMAS COCHRAN, tcochran@nrdc.org

Director of the Nuclear Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, Cochran wrote the paper "The Relevance of Mordechai Vanunu Disclosures to Israel's National Security."

From the State Department briefing, September 16, 2004:

QUESTION: Larry Franklin's case had to do with presidential policy on Iran, for the most part, according to news reports. Mordechai Vanunu, the Israeli whistleblower, has been urging for some time that there be a trade-off between the Iranian nuclear program and the ending of the Israeli one. And there has been, as you know, negotiations in Jerusalem on that, or some information from IAEA has been transmitted to the Israeli government. Now, I wondered what the U.S. attitude is in Vienna at the IAEA on this subject of trading off Israeli nuclear program and the ending to it, whatever --

BOUCHER: I guess that's being speculated about in the press, but that is not the issue in Vienna. The issue in Vienna is whether Iran has for almost two decades hidden covert programs designed to make nuclear weapons and whether or not Iran has complied with the obligations -- the requirements of the Board of Governors' resolutions, the requirements of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and the protocols that Iran has -- well, I'm not sure of the status of the additional protocol, but the requirements of the treaty, and the commitments that Iran itself made. That's the matter that's before the International Atomic Energy Agency and that nations are currently discussing now.

QUESTION: Does the United States, then, feel that the Israeli nuclear program, which is now out -- Avner Cohen has written a full book on it, Mordechai Vanunu spent 18 years in jail because of it. It's obvious that they do have such a nuclear program. Does the United States consider that that's absolutely essential to Israel's security?

BOUCHER: I'm not making judgments or presumptions about that. We've had a view on the universal adherence to the Non-Proliferation Treaty that we've expressed many times, that applies in all cases.

QUESTION: But Israel is not a member, has refused to be a member.

BOUCHER: That's right. We encourage all nations to be members and adhere to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

[b]CONTACT[/b]: Institute for Public Accuracy - http://www.accuracy.org/
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020, (202) 421-6858
David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
 
*** Israeli Nuclear Whistleblower Vanunu on Mideast Nukes ***
09.22.04 (6:23 am)   [edit]
WASHINGTON - September 17 - The U.S. government has been making demands regarding Iran's nuclear program. On Thursday afternoon State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher was asked about "Mordechai Vanunu, the Israeli whistleblower" and his proposal that "there be a trade-off between the Iranian nuclear program and the ending of the Israeli one." Boucher declined to comment on the proposal.

When asked about Israel's nuclear capacity, Boucher said: "I'm not making judgments or presumptions about that. We've had a view on the universal adherence to the Non-Proliferation Treaty that we've expressed many times, that applies in all cases." Israel is not a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. U.S. government officials have consistently avoided acknowledging Israel's nuclear arsenal.

MORDECHAI VANUNU, vanunumvjc@hotmail.com

Vanunu exposed the Israeli nuclear arsenal in 1986. He was released in April 2004 after serving an 18-year sentence, most of it in solitary confinement. Vanunu is available for a limited number of interviews. He said today:

* "The U.S. goes to Iraq in the name of fighting against weapons of mass destruction while it does not even acknowledge Israel's capacity. The obvious thing to do is to ensure that all states in the region -- including Israel and Iran -- do not have nuclear weapons."

* "Israeli governments which have been behind building these nuclear weapons are betraying the Israeli citizens, the Arab community and all of humanity. Israel has been building nuclear weapons, they now have enough material for hundreds of atomic bombs. I was a technician at the Dimona plant; my main job was making lithium-6 for use in hydrogen bombs. There is no justification for Israel having hydrogen bombs."

* "In 1986 I was kidnapped by Israel in Rome after revealing its massive nuclear arsenal to the London Sunday Times. I was sentenced to 18 years because I revealed the truth to the world. I suffered 18 years of cruel, barbaric treatment under the Israeli authorities. I'm glad to have some freedom now, but I'm not allowed to speak to any foreigners or to go to any other country for one year. I would like to go to the U.S. where there are more freedoms. I do not feel safe in Israel, I have been threatened, I'm called a traitor in the street. Especially because I have become a Christian, I do not have equal human rights. The Israeli government and media have built a very bad image of my case here."

* "With its nuclear weapons, Israel is much more aggressive, so it doesn't move to a real peace with the Palestinians or Syria or Lebanon or Jordan. Its nuclear weapons are used as political power. Without even using them, the nuclear weapons help Israel do what it wants so it doesn't respect international law. When he was defense minister, Sharon destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor in 1981 so that no other country in the region would have nuclear weapons."

For a recent interview with Vanunu, see: www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/18/136217

For more on Israel's nuclear arsenal, see: www.msnbc.com/news/wld/graphics/str ategic_israel_dw.htm

FELICE COHEN-JOPPA, freevanunu@mindspring.com, www.vanunu.com

Cohen-Joppa is the coordinator of the U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu. She noted that Vanunu has just been awarded a peace grant by Yoko Ono. [See: www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc -ny--yokoono-peace0916sep 15,0,2694081.story?coll=ny-ap-regional -wire]

THOMAS COCHRAN, tcochran@nrdc.org

Director of the Nuclear Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, Cochran wrote the paper "The Relevance of Mordechai Vanunu Disclosures to Israel's National Security."

From the State Department briefing, September 16, 2004:

QUESTION: Larry Franklin's case had to do with presidential policy on Iran, for the most part, according to news reports. Mordechai Vanunu, the Israeli whistleblower, has been urging for some time that there be a trade-off between the Iranian nuclear program and the ending of the Israeli one. And there has been, as you know, negotiations in Jerusalem on that, or some information from IAEA has been transmitted to the Israeli government. Now, I wondered what the U.S. attitude is in Vienna at the IAEA on this subject of trading off Israeli nuclear program and the ending to it, whatever --

BOUCHER: I guess that's being speculated about in the press, but that is not the issue in Vienna. The issue in Vienna is whether Iran has for almost two decades hidden covert programs designed to make nuclear weapons and whether or not Iran has complied with the obligations -- the requirements of the Board of Governors' resolutions, the requirements of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and the protocols that Iran has -- well, I'm not sure of the status of the additional protocol, but the requirements of the treaty, and the commitments that Iran itself made. That's the matter that's before the International Atomic Energy Agency and that nations are currently discussing now.

QUESTION: Does the United States, then, feel that the Israeli nuclear program, which is now out -- Avner Cohen has written a full book on it, Mordechai Vanunu spent 18 years in jail because of it. It's obvious that they do have such a nuclear program. Does the United States consider that that's absolutely essential to Israel's security?

BOUCHER: I'm not making judgments or presumptions about that. We've had a view on the universal adherence to the Non-Proliferation Treaty that we've expressed many times, that applies in all cases.

QUESTION: But Israel is not a member, has refused to be a member.

BOUCHER: That's right. We encourage all nations to be members and adhere to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

[b]CONTACT[/b]: Institute for Public Accuracy - http://www.accuracy.org/
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020, (202) 421-6858
David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
 
*** Israeli Nuclear Whistleblower Vanunu on Mideast Nukes ***
09.22.04 (6:21 am)   [edit]
WASHINGTON - September 17 - The U.S. government has been making demands regarding Iran's nuclear program. On Thursday afternoon State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher was asked about "Mordechai Vanunu, the Israeli whistleblower" and his proposal that "there be a trade-off between the Iranian nuclear program and the ending of the Israeli one." Boucher declined to comment on the proposal.

When asked about Israel's nuclear capacity, Boucher said: "I'm not making judgments or presumptions about that. We've had a view on the universal adherence to the Non-Proliferation Treaty that we've expressed many times, that applies in all cases." Israel is not a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. U.S. government officials have consistently avoided acknowledging Israel's nuclear arsenal.

MORDECHAI VANUNU, vanunumvjc@hotmail.com

Vanunu exposed the Israeli nuclear arsenal in 1986. He was released in April 2004 after serving an 18-year sentence, most of it in solitary confinement. Vanunu is available for a limited number of interviews. He said today:

* "The U.S. goes to Iraq in the name of fighting against weapons of mass destruction while it does not even acknowledge Israel's capacity. The obvious thing to do is to ensure that all states in the region -- including Israel and Iran -- do not have nuclear weapons."

* "Israeli governments which have been behind building these nuclear weapons are betraying the Israeli citizens, the Arab community and all of humanity. Israel has been building nuclear weapons, they now have enough material for hundreds of atomic bombs. I was a technician at the Dimona plant; my main job was making lithium-6 for use in hydrogen bombs. There is no justification for Israel having hydrogen bombs."

* "In 1986 I was kidnapped by Israel in Rome after revealing its massive nuclear arsenal to the London Sunday Times. I was sentenced to 18 years because I revealed the truth to the world. I suffered 18 years of cruel, barbaric treatment under the Israeli authorities. I'm glad to have some freedom now, but I'm not allowed to speak to any foreigners or to go to any other country for one year. I would like to go to the U.S. where there are more freedoms. I do not feel safe in Israel, I have been threatened, I'm called a traitor in the street. Especially because I have become a Christian, I do not have equal human rights. The Israeli government and media have built a very bad image of my case here."

* "With its nuclear weapons, Israel is much more aggressive, so it doesn't move to a real peace with the Palestinians or Syria or Lebanon or Jordan. Its nuclear weapons are used as political power. Without even using them, the nuclear weapons help Israel do what it wants so it doesn't respect international law. When he was defense minister, Sharon destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor in 1981 so that no other country in the region would have nuclear weapons."

For a recent interview with Vanunu, see: www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/18/136217

For more on Israel's nuclear arsenal, see: www.msnbc.com/news/wld/graphics/str ategic_israel_dw.htm

FELICE COHEN-JOPPA, freevanunu@mindspring.com, www.vanunu.com

Cohen-Joppa is the coordinator of the U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu. She noted that Vanunu has just been awarded a peace grant by Yoko Ono. [See: www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc -ny--yokoono-peace0916sep 15,0,2694081.story?coll=ny-ap-regional -wire]

THOMAS COCHRAN, tcochran@nrdc.org

Director of the Nuclear Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, Cochran wrote the paper "The Relevance of Mordechai Vanunu Disclosures to Israel's National Security."

From the State Department briefing, September 16, 2004:

QUESTION: Larry Franklin's case had to do with presidential policy on Iran, for the most part, according to news reports. Mordechai Vanunu, the Israeli whistleblower, has been urging for some time that there be a trade-off between the Iranian nuclear program and the ending of the Israeli one. And there has been, as you know, negotiations in Jerusalem on that, or some information from IAEA has been transmitted to the Israeli government. Now, I wondered what the U.S. attitude is in Vienna at the IAEA on this subject of trading off Israeli nuclear program and the ending to it, whatever --

BOUCHER: I guess that's being speculated about in the press, but that is not the issue in Vienna. The issue in Vienna is whether Iran has for almost two decades hidden covert programs designed to make nuclear weapons and whether or not Iran has complied with the obligations -- the requirements of the Board of Governors' resolutions, the requirements of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and the protocols that Iran has -- well, I'm not sure of the status of the additional protocol, but the requirements of the treaty, and the commitments that Iran itself made. That's the matter that's before the International Atomic Energy Agency and that nations are currently discussing now.

QUESTION: Does the United States, then, feel that the Israeli nuclear program, which is now out -- Avner Cohen has written a full book on it, Mordechai Vanunu spent 18 years in jail because of it. It's obvious that they do have such a nuclear program. Does the United States consider that that's absolutely essential to Israel's security?

BOUCHER: I'm not making judgments or presumptions about that. We've had a view on the universal adherence to the Non-Proliferation Treaty that we've expressed many times, that applies in all cases.

QUESTION: But Israel is not a member, has refused to be a member.

BOUCHER: That's right. We encourage all nations to be members and adhere to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

[b]CONTACT[/b]: Institute for Public Accuracy - http://www.accuracy.org/
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020, (202) 421-6858
David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
 
....... Former CIA Agent Says Bush to Blame for 9/11 .......
09.22.04 (6:17 am)   [edit]
Former CIA agent Ray McGovern went over what he considers the failures of the intelligence community and current administration over the past few years. He has 27 years of experience as a CIA analyst to draw upon and has dealt with every administration from Kennedy to Bush Sr.

"It's difficult for people to learn the truth about things like Iraq," said McGovern, a member of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), which is comprised of more than 40 former employees of agencies such as the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, Department of State's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Army Intelligence, the FBI and the National Security Agency.

"We have hundreds of years worth of experience in government service and intelligence to draw on so we feel a civic responsibility to do our best to spread as much truth as we can this fall," McGovern said.

He began his lecture by describing the CIA. He explained that the agency is supposed to be the one place in government with no political agenda, and could be very disastrous if it obtains one.

McGovern told a story about CIA officials who gave false information about enemy troop numbers in Vietnam to President Johnson. The lie led to a surprise of U.S. forces by the Tet Offensive in 1968. In this war of attrition, the agency wanted to make it look like the United States was doing better than it really was, McGovern said.

"Picture the Vietnam Memorial in Washington; it's a big 'V' shape. Now picture it with just one side of the 'V'. It might have been that way if some people had told the truth," McGovern said.

He also criticized the 9/11 Commission's final report, saying the committee was comprised of political extremists who couldn't reach a consensus.

"It wasn't a bipartisan commission; it was more like a bipolar commission," McGovern said. "To say that no one could prevent 9/11 was a bold-faced lie. It basically let the president and everyone responsible off the hook."

He went on to talk about the faulty intelligence attorney general John Ashcroft used when he announced that terrorist attacks may occur before or around election time, saying that elections might have to be postponed if the United States is attacked.

"There might be a real or staged terrorist attack in order to postpone the elections," McGovern said. "This might seem outlandish; I hope it is."

He mentioned how the Bush administration wanted to involve the country with the war in Iraq for certain reasons other than fear of weapons of mass destruction, which was just a more media-friendly explanation for the war.

"I have initials for why I think we went to war in Iraq," McGovern said. "O.I.L. O-I-L, O is for oil, I is for Israel and L is for logistics, as in when we have Iraq we have a foothold and a number of bases strategically placed in the Middle East so we can be in control over there and also to protect Israel."

Next he brought up civil liberties in the United States and how they have declined in the past few years.

"I used to say when I was a kid growing up when someone told me not to do something, 'It's a free country,'" McGovern said. "I ask you to think about it now."

In the audience was Nahla al-Arian, wife of imprisoned former professor Sami al-Arian. She explained to McGovern how she and her husband came to America to be free and described their current situation. Then she asked him why the government would target Palestinian activists.

His initial response was just, "I'm sorry," then he paused to collect his thoughts and said that things like that come all the way from the top down.

McGovern had a speaking engagement at the University of Florida later in the afternoon, and will also be lecturing at UCF soon on his and the VIPS's quest to spread the truth.

"No one has a corner on the truth. We don't have a corner on the truth, but it is certain that Fox News does not," McGovern said. "That most people get their 'news' from Fox News is extremely troubling." - http://www.commondreams.org/h...


 
....... Former CIA Agent Says Bush to Blame for 9/11 .......
09.22.04 (6:17 am)   [edit]
Former CIA agent Ray McGovern went over what he considers the failures of the intelligence community and current administration over the past few years. He has 27 years of experience as a CIA analyst to draw upon and has dealt with every administration from Kennedy to Bush Sr.

"It's difficult for people to learn the truth about things like Iraq," said McGovern, a member of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), which is comprised of more than 40 former employees of agencies such as the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, Department of State's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Army Intelligence, the FBI and the National Security Agency.

"We have hundreds of years worth of experience in government service and intelligence to draw on so we feel a civic responsibility to do our best to spread as much truth as we can this fall," McGovern said.

He began his lecture by describing the CIA. He explained that the agency is supposed to be the one place in government with no political agenda, and could be very disastrous if it obtains one.

McGovern told a story about CIA officials who gave false information about enemy troop numbers in Vietnam to President Johnson. The lie led to a surprise of U.S. forces by the Tet Offensive in 1968. In this war of attrition, the agency wanted to make it look like the United States was doing better than it really was, McGovern said.

"Picture the Vietnam Memorial in Washington; it's a big 'V' shape. Now picture it with just one side of the 'V'. It might have been that way if some people had told the truth," McGovern said.

He also criticized the 9/11 Commission's final report, saying the committee was comprised of political extremists who couldn't reach a consensus.

"It wasn't a bipartisan commission; it was more like a bipolar commission," McGovern said. "To say that no one could prevent 9/11 was a bold-faced lie. It basically let the president and everyone responsible off the hook."

He went on to talk about the faulty intelligence attorney general John Ashcroft used when he announced that terrorist attacks may occur before or around election time, saying that elections might have to be postponed if the United States is attacked.

"There might be a real or staged terrorist attack in order to postpone the elections," McGovern said. "This might seem outlandish; I hope it is."

He mentioned how the Bush administration wanted to involve the country with the war in Iraq for certain reasons other than fear of weapons of mass destruction, which was just a more media-friendly explanation for the war.

"I have initials for why I think we went to war in Iraq," McGovern said. "O.I.L. O-I-L, O is for oil, I is for Israel and L is for logistics, as in when we have Iraq we have a foothold and a number of bases strategically placed in the Middle East so we can be in control over there and also to protect Israel."

Next he brought up civil liberties in the United States and how they have declined in the past few years.

"I used to say when I was a kid growing up when someone told me not to do something, 'It's a free country,'" McGovern said. "I ask you to think about it now."

In the audience was Nahla al-Arian, wife of imprisoned former professor Sami al-Arian. She explained to McGovern how she and her husband came to America to be free and described their current situation. Then she asked him why the government would target Palestinian activists.

His initial response was just, "I'm sorry," then he paused to collect his thoughts and said that things like that come all the way from the top down.

McGovern had a speaking engagement at the University of Florida later in the afternoon, and will also be lecturing at UCF soon on his and the VIPS's quest to spread the truth.

"No one has a corner on the truth. We don't have a corner on the truth, but it is certain that Fox News does not," McGovern said. "That most people get their 'news' from Fox News is extremely troubling." - http://www.commondreams.org/h...


 
If CBS's Rather Should Resign Over False Doc Claims, Then So Should Bush!!!
09.22.04 (6:15 am)   [edit]
[b]How CBS News Got Burned (6 Letters)

Published: September 22, 2004

New York Times - Letters to the Editor:[/b]

Re "CBS Apologizes for Report on Bush Guard Service'' (front page, Sept. 21):

Right-wing media commentators think that Dan Rather should resign because he made false claims based on documents that turned out to be fraudulent. But what about President Bush?

He and his administration made false claims about Saddam Hussein's weapons program based on documents that turned out to be fraudulent.

George W. Bush's claims got us stuck in a war in which more than 1,000 Americans have died. Dan Rather's mistake was considerably less costly. William C. Stosine

Iowa City, Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

The dubious authenticity of the documents that CBS used in reporting on George W. Bush's National Guard service should not obscure the truly important point in the affair: neither the White House nor the Bush campaign has challenged the essential accuracy of what the network reported, even after CBS issued its apology.

From this, it is clear that Mr. Bush failed to do his duty and - much more important - that he has failed to tell the truth about his service to the American people. There is no more room for debate on this issue.

Jonathan J. Margolis

Boston, Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

Dan Rather's bias was exposed because he started with a conclusion and collected only those "facts" that supported his anti-Bush position.

Bill Holzmann

Paramus, N.J., Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

The CBS News memo story has made me more likely to choose Dan Rather for my news. This may seem counterintuitive, because the memos appear to be inauthentic.

But I have to applaud Mr. Rather for sticking his neck out and not backing down until he knew that the documents could not be authenticated. Then he admitted his mistake. I hope he doesn't hang for it.

The problem is, no one in the news media wants to take on the Bush administration these days, and we need journalists who will not cower before the G.O.P. spin machine.

So stick in there, Mr. Rather. The story will be old news in a few weeks. At least you were not a little mouse, squeaking the Bush mantra.

Arlene Williams

Sparks, Nev., Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

Now who would have a vested interest in deliberately discrediting a growing story about George W. Bush's draft-dodging in the Vietnam era? Sounds like a scandal to me.

Karl Rove, President Bush and company should be asked some very direct questions about possible involvement in this setup.

CBS may still be on to the story of the year.

Charles Herman-Wurmfeld

Los Angeles, Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

The basic point is that George W. Bush did in fact miss his last flight physical and was missing from duty for several months of his six-year commitment to the Texas Air National Guard.

By obsessing over the current CBS documents flap, as well as by spending weeks covering the allegations, now proved to be bogus, of the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, you and most other members of the mainstream press are helping to hide what the behavior more than 30 years ago of the two men now campaigning for the presidency tells voters about their characters.

Sue Fomby

Goshen, Ky., Sept. 21, 2004

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/22/opinion/l2 2cbs.html" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/22/opinion/l2 2cbs.html" target="_blank"http://www.nytimes.com/2004/0...
 
If CBS's Rather Should Resign Over False Doc Claims, Then So Should Bush!!!
09.22.04 (6:13 am)   [edit]
[b]How CBS News Got Burned (6 Letters)

Published: September 22, 2004

New York Times - Letters to the Editor:[/b]

Re "CBS Apologizes for Report on Bush Guard Service'' (front page, Sept. 21):

Right-wing media commentators think that Dan Rather should resign because he made false claims based on documents that turned out to be fraudulent. But what about President Bush?

He and his administration made false claims about Saddam Hussein's weapons program based on documents that turned out to be fraudulent.

George W. Bush's claims got us stuck in a war in which more than 1,000 Americans have died. Dan Rather's mistake was considerably less costly. William C. Stosine

Iowa City, Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

The dubious authenticity of the documents that CBS used in reporting on George W. Bush's National Guard service should not obscure the truly important point in the affair: neither the White House nor the Bush campaign has challenged the essential accuracy of what the network reported, even after CBS issued its apology.

From this, it is clear that Mr. Bush failed to do his duty and - much more important - that he has failed to tell the truth about his service to the American people. There is no more room for debate on this issue.

Jonathan J. Margolis

Boston, Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

Dan Rather's bias was exposed because he started with a conclusion and collected only those "facts" that supported his anti-Bush position.

Bill Holzmann

Paramus, N.J., Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

The CBS News memo story has made me more likely to choose Dan Rather for my news. This may seem counterintuitive, because the memos appear to be inauthentic.

But I have to applaud Mr. Rather for sticking his neck out and not backing down until he knew that the documents could not be authenticated. Then he admitted his mistake. I hope he doesn't hang for it.

The problem is, no one in the news media wants to take on the Bush administration these days, and we need journalists who will not cower before the G.O.P. spin machine.

So stick in there, Mr. Rather. The story will be old news in a few weeks. At least you were not a little mouse, squeaking the Bush mantra.

Arlene Williams

Sparks, Nev., Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

Now who would have a vested interest in deliberately discrediting a growing story about George W. Bush's draft-dodging in the Vietnam era? Sounds like a scandal to me.

Karl Rove, President Bush and company should be asked some very direct questions about possible involvement in this setup.

CBS may still be on to the story of the year.

Charles Herman-Wurmfeld

Los Angeles, Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

The basic point is that George W. Bush did in fact miss his last flight physical and was missing from duty for several months of his six-year commitment to the Texas Air National Guard.

By obsessing over the current CBS documents flap, as well as by spending weeks covering the allegations, now proved to be bogus, of the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, you and most other members of the mainstream press are helping to hide what the behavior more than 30 years ago of the two men now campaigning for the presidency tells voters about their characters.

Sue Fomby

Goshen, Ky., Sept. 21, 2004

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/22/opinion/l2 2cbs.html" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/22/opinion/l2 2cbs.html" target="_blank"http://www.nytimes.com/2004/0...
 
If CBS's Rather Should Resign Over False Doc Claims, Then So Should Bush!!!
09.22.04 (6:11 am)   [edit]
[b]How CBS News Got Burned (6 Letters)

Published: September 22, 2004

New York Times - Letters to the Editor:[/b]

Re "CBS Apologizes for Report on Bush Guard Service'' (front page, Sept. 21):

Right-wing media commentators think that Dan Rather should resign because he made false claims based on documents that turned out to be fraudulent. But what about President Bush?

He and his administration made false claims about Saddam Hussein's weapons program based on documents that turned out to be fraudulent.

George W. Bush's claims got us stuck in a war in which more than 1,000 Americans have died. Dan Rather's mistake was considerably less costly. William C. Stosine

Iowa City, Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

The dubious authenticity of the documents that CBS used in reporting on George W. Bush's National Guard service should not obscure the truly important point in the affair: neither the White House nor the Bush campaign has challenged the essential accuracy of what the network reported, even after CBS issued its apology.

From this, it is clear that Mr. Bush failed to do his duty and - much more important - that he has failed to tell the truth about his service to the American people. There is no more room for debate on this issue.

Jonathan J. Margolis

Boston, Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

Dan Rather's bias was exposed because he started with a conclusion and collected only those "facts" that supported his anti-Bush position.

Bill Holzmann

Paramus, N.J., Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

The CBS News memo story has made me more likely to choose Dan Rather for my news. This may seem counterintuitive, because the memos appear to be inauthentic.

But I have to applaud Mr. Rather for sticking his neck out and not backing down until he knew that the documents could not be authenticated. Then he admitted his mistake. I hope he doesn't hang for it.

The problem is, no one in the news media wants to take on the Bush administration these days, and we need journalists who will not cower before the G.O.P. spin machine.

So stick in there, Mr. Rather. The story will be old news in a few weeks. At least you were not a little mouse, squeaking the Bush mantra.

Arlene Williams

Sparks, Nev., Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

Now who would have a vested interest in deliberately discrediting a growing story about George W. Bush's draft-dodging in the Vietnam era? Sounds like a scandal to me.

Karl Rove, President Bush and company should be asked some very direct questions about possible involvement in this setup.

CBS may still be on to the story of the year.

Charles Herman-Wurmfeld

Los Angeles, Sept. 21, 2004

To the Editor:

The basic point is that George W. Bush did in fact miss his last flight physical and was missing from duty for several months of his six-year commitment to the Texas Air National Guard.

By obsessing over the current CBS documents flap, as well as by spending weeks covering the allegations, now proved to be bogus, of the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, you and most other members of the mainstream press are helping to hide what the behavior more than 30 years ago of the two men now campaigning for the presidency tells voters about their characters.

Sue Fomby

Goshen, Ky., Sept. 21, 2004

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/22/opinion/l2 2cbs.html" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/22/opinion/l2 2cbs.html" target="_blank"http://www.nytimes.com/2004/0...
 
An Ode to Bush's Bio ...
09.21.04 (1:11 pm)   [edit]
Bush, the Congenital Ne'er-Do-Well,
Money-Grub's Puppet & Our Prez from Hell,
Body-and-Soul, He's Happy to Sell,
Private War Profits From US: Pray Do Tell.

Bush Plays Affirmative Action Game,
Hence 'Skull-and-Bones' Scented Dog's Fame,
Drunken Stupors Then Came & Test Scores, The Same,
Frat Cheaters' Secrets: Hide All Future Blame.

Daddy's Connections in Vietnam War,
Bush AWOL Direction: Head for That Bar,
As Buddies-in-War Lose Their Lives Or Don Scar,
Party-boys Chug Champagne, Ah the Battle is Far.

Bush Failures Abound Over & Over in Business,
Texas Taxpayers Fund Bail Out Scams with Finesse,
Sports Stadiums Rise Fast as Poor Left Bereft in Duress,
Sell-off of Sports Teams Enrich, and Citizens Left With A Mess.

But, Kenny-boy Lay (Enron) Finances Election,
And Mediocrity Bush Suddenly Gubernatorial Selection,
Families and Children are Left With Hopeful Fiction,
As Executions & Swindlers Skyrocket in Fascist Direction.

Banana Repubs Dance With Visions of Coup d'Etat,
And Then Rig the Election by Fixing the Stat,
A Brother in Florida, and Rove Tips His Hat,
With Anton Scalia, We've Got Gore Pinned to the Mat.

Trapped Now in Long, Hard, Slog, Muck & Mire: Blame Clinton Lores,
But It's Halliburton's Veep Cheney's Consortium of Whores,
For Whom Neo-Con PNAC Groupies Plan S'Mores of Them Wars,
As They Conjure Up Nightmares, Turned into Our Chores.

Generations of the Future to Payback Bush's Debts,
Innocents Dying Each Day, in Misguided Bets,
That if They Survive It's A Fight for All Future Gets,
But Instead, They'll Come Home To A Nation of Neo-Con Pets.

Wake-up From This Nightmare, Stop Fiascos & Duns,
Before Bush Bankrupts Us All, Takes the Money & Runs,
We Deserve Better, If We Would Stop Worshipping Guns,
And Demand A Vision For All:--
... Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness ...
Will "We the People" Someday See Our Day In The Sun?

[b]Courtesy of WinstonSmith http://winstonsmith.tblog.com... [/b]
 
Election 2004: To Catch a Thief
09.21.04 (6:08 am)   [edit]
We were six toasts into the wedding dinner when the conversation turned, as conversations usually do, to the possibility of a Republican theft of the election in November. "That's when we hit the streets!" declared the Cuban American community organizer from Pennsylvania. "Yeah!" bellowed the retired union president from Long Island, and we all pounded the table and raised our glasses yet again: "Everybody hit the streets!"

The streets must be feeling pretty threatened by this time, because the idea of a Republican-engineered election fraud is no longer the property of the kind of people who think George W. designed 9/11 and that John Kerry is a Halliburton-supplied bot containing batteries set to run out on October 15.

Following the wedding, I took an absolutely unscientific poll of friends and relatives, asking what they planned to do, and what they thought others should do, in the event of a 2000 election hoax rerun. Everyone seemed to think this is a real possibility. My sister, for example, an office worker in Colorado, e-mailed to say, "Funny, I've been thinking about that . . . Ever since [2000], I've thought, 'How could we let this happen? Why didn't we--the majority--hit the streets in indignation?' "

Not everyone wants to rush outdoors with a picket sign. One nephew, who manages a fast food joint in Oklahoma, writes that the answer is "one word: RECALL." But my brother, a realtor in Missouri, doesn't want to bother with any more voting machines. In the event of massive fraud, he writes, "It would be time for a 'New Revolution'! . . . Hopefully peaceful, but I wouldn't rule out anything."

Steve Cobble, a D.C.-based political operative who's worked for Jesse Jackson Sr., told me, "We have to have plans to research the [election] results ASAP, while hitting the streets immediately." Among my activist friends, the only exception to the hit-the-streets line has been Bob Borosage of Campaign for America's Future, who says, "As for stealing the election, I think we better win it first."

Yes, of course, by all means. But no matter how many people we register and drive to the polls, the possibilities for monkey business are numerous and arcane. Among them:

* Computer fraud, especially in places offering touch screen voting without a paper trail (although a paper trail is no guarantee of accuracy if it's generated by the same screwed-up software as the touch screen votes). It's particularly worrisome that at least two of the companies that provide computerized voting machines--Diebold and InterCivic--have strong ties to the Republican Party.

* Selective discouragement of easily identifiable Democratic voters, i.e., black ones, such as occurred in Florida in 2000. Already, John Pappageorge, a Republican state legislator in Michigan, has urged his party to take measures to "suppress the Detroit vote." Plainclothes officers from the Florida state police have been trying to intimidate elderly black voters by going to their homes and interrogating them about their status as voters.

* Relying on the Pentagon to forward e-mail votes from troops in combat zones to their local election offices, as Missouri and North Dakota are planning to do. As The New York Times has editorialized, this creates a situation "rife with security problems."

* And, the most lurid of all, declaring a red alert and postponing the election, a possibility already floated as a trial balloon by Tom Ridge.

In the weeks remaining to us, prevention may be the best medicine, and all sorts of groups are gearing up to guard against a coup. Common Cause and People for the American Way, among others, are mobilizing to oppose touch screen voting and to increase the ranks of poll watchers. The Democratic Party has lined up 2,000 lawyers in case of dodgy-looking results and is bringing the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to monitor our election for the first time ever. Taking the foreign monitor theme one step further, the feisty folks at Global Exchange have invited their own twenty-eight nonpartisan foreign observers. All over the country, local Democrats and citizens' groups like Count Every Vote 2004 are preparing for a heavy presence at the polls.

But if the preventive measures fail to produce a credible election, don't expect the Democratic Party to lead the fight for democracy. The most painful scene in Fahrenheit 9/11--and there are quite a few contenders for this title--is the one in which members of the Congressional Black Caucus speak to the Senate, one by one, pleading for just one Senator to join them in stopping the Supreme Court's selection of Bush. When faced with a truly revolutionary situation--an electoral coup from the right--Al Gore folded like a lawn chair. As for Kerry: He may have had some backbone thirty years ago, but too many years spent sitting in the Senate have rendered it the consistency of Play-Doh.

So we're on our own, folks--those of us who still hold to the idea that our leaders should be elected rather than perpetuated by fraud. In addition to all the poll monitoring, touch screen protesting, etc., we need two things. First, some agreed-upon group to declare the election fair or fraudulent. This may not be an easy or obvious call, according to my friend the political scientist Frances Fox Piven: "If this election is stolen, it will be stolen at the most local level, and we won't know right away." Maybe the OSCE can be relied on to pass judgment, or maybe the ACLU should be appointed to do the job, with MoveOn spreading the word.

Second, we need a plan of action for the all-too-likely event that the election is determined to be tainted. "Hitting the streets" sounds good, but if we each do it on our own, the neighbors will just conclude that we're taking out the recycling or assessing our leaf-raking issues. Asked what we should do, Linda Burnham, of Count Every Vote 2004, suggests people start planning now for local demonstrations at election boards. Piven recommends nationwide protests that are both "nonviolent and disruptive," possibly on inauguration day. John Cavanagh, director of the Institute for Policy Studies, writes: "On February 15, 2003, over ten million people in over 600 cities around the world took to the streets to say no to Bush's [war on Iraq.] Another stolen election will require coordinated efforts like this, on a larger and more sustained basis, until the stolen goods are returned. Mega-networks like United for Peace and Justice, which played a central role in February 15 as well as the recent mass march at the Republican Convention, will need to retool so they can play a central role."

All this sounds good to me--local planning for local responses and national coordination by a trusted group like United for Peace and Justice. But we have to get started, well, last week. Democratic voters need to be assured that some of us won't take another coup lying down. And Republican dirty-tricksters need to start feeling the first shivers of fear. If all the people who are saying they're willing to hit the streets actually do so, there won't be a lot of people left indoors to wait tables, teach school, or pay taxes during W's second term.

[b]Barbara Ehrenreich is the author of "Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America" and "Blood Rites: Origins and History of the Passions of War." [/b] - http://www.commondreams.org/v...


 
Global Warming May Spawn More Super-Storms
09.21.04 (6:00 am)   [edit]
BROOKLIN, Canada - Hurricane Ivan, the incredibly powerful storm that killed at least 120 people in the Caribbean and southern United States, may be a harbinger of the Earth's hotter future, say experts.

"As the world warms, we expect more and more intense tropical hurricanes and cyclones," said James McCarthy, a professor of biological oceanography at Harvard University.

Large parts of the world's oceans are approaching 27 degrees C or warmer during the summer, greatly increasing the odds of major storms, McCarthy told IPS.

When water reaches such temperatures, more of it evaporates, priming hurricane or cyclone formation. Once born, a hurricane needs only warm water to build and maintain its strength and intensity.

Over the last 100 years, the Earth has warmed by about .6 degrees C, according to the 2001 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an international scientific body that studies the relationship between human activity and global warming.

The IPCC report was based on research by more than 2,500 scientists from about 100 countries who determined that emissions of gases such as carbon dioxide act as a blanket that prevents much of the sun's energy from dissipating into space.

Much of the extra energy from this "greenhouse effect" is being absorbed by the oceans.

The "proof" that the oceans are warming is the fact that global sea levels have risen 3.1 cm in the past 10 years, said Kevin Trenberth, head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

Water expands when heated, and sea levels are expected to continue rising by as much as 50 cm by 2100.

While the warming of the oceans is not uniform -- the North Pacific and North Atlantic are a bit cooler -- the hurricane-producing mid-Atlantic and Caribbean oceans have warmed significantly.

"Global warming is creating conditions that are more favorable for hurricanes to develop and be more severe," said Trenberth.

Will that result in more Category 4 or 5 storms like Ivan?

"That's the logical conclusion, although it may be somewhat controversial," he said.

Before it struck Cuba a glancing blow, Ivan was a Category 5 on the Saffir-Simpson scale, which rates hurricanes from 1 to 5 according to wind speeds and destructive potential. Category 5 hurricanes have winds that blow continuously above 250 kilometers an hour. Ivan's gusts topped 320 kilometers an hour at times, making it the sixth most powerful hurricane on record for the Atlantic Basin.

Hurricane Ivan's 12-day rampage killed 70 people in the Caribbean and 50 in the United States. It will be some time before the full extent of the damage is known, but some estimates put it at 10 billion dollars for the United States alone.

As emissions of greenhouse gases continue to trap more and more of the sun's energy, that energy has to be dissipated, resulting in stronger storms, more intense precipitation and higher winds, says McMcarthy.

However, the statistical record of hurricanes hitting the U.S. shows a decrease in the past 50 years.

Most hurricanes do not strike land, McCarthy points out, and up until the past 25 years, with the advent of satellite tracking, there was scant data on the storms.

But there is abundant evidence of an unprecedented number of severe weather events in the past decade, McCarthy says. In 1998, Hurricane Mitch killed nearly 20,000 people in Central America, and more than 4,000 people died during disastrous flooding in China. Bangladesh suffered some of its worst floods ever the following year, as did Venezuela. Europe was hit with record floods in 2002, and then a record heat wave in 2003.

More recently, Brazil was struck by the first-ever recorded hurricane in the South Atlantic last March.

"Weather records are being set all the time now. We're in an era of unprecedented extreme weather events," McCarthy said.

Historical weather patterns are becoming less useful for predicting the future conditions because global warming is changing ocean and atmospheric conditions.

"In 30 to 50 years' time, the Earth's weather generating system will be entirely different," he predicted.

What hasn't changed in the United States is the lack of concern about climate change, said Ross Gelbspan, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and author of two books on global warming, most recently one titled: "[i]Boiling Point: How Politicians, Big Oil And Coal, Journalists and Activists Are Fueling the Climate Crisis -- And What We Can Do to Avert Disaster[/i]." http://www.amazon.com/exec/ob...

Sharp reductions of emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide on the order of 70 percent are urgently needed to minimize the impacts, Gelbspan said.

But despite the recent destructive series of hurricanes and tornadoes, global warming is off the radar screen of the U.S. presidential election campaign, he said.

Gelbspan is not surprised at this, given the power and influence of the fossil fuel lobby in Washington, which he outlines in great detail in his book.

"America's oil and coal industries receive more than 20 billion dollars a year in subsidies," he said. "Imagine what could be done if that money was invested in green energy." - http://www.commondreams.org/h...


 
Global Warming May Spawn More Super-Storms
09.21.04 (5:59 am)   [edit]
BROOKLIN, Canada - Hurricane Ivan, the incredibly powerful storm that killed at least 120 people in the Caribbean and southern United States, may be a harbinger of the Earth's hotter future, say experts.

"As the world warms, we expect more and more intense tropical hurricanes and cyclones," said James McCarthy, a professor of biological oceanography at Harvard University.

Large parts of the world's oceans are approaching 27 degrees C or warmer during the summer, greatly increasing the odds of major storms, McCarthy told IPS.

When water reaches such temperatures, more of it evaporates, priming hurricane or cyclone formation. Once born, a hurricane needs only warm water to build and maintain its strength and intensity.

Over the last 100 years, the Earth has warmed by about .6 degrees C, according to the 2001 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an international scientific body that studies the relationship between human activity and global warming.

The IPCC report was based on research by more than 2,500 scientists from about 100 countries who determined that emissions of gases such as carbon dioxide act as a blanket that prevents much of the sun's energy from dissipating into space.

Much of the extra energy from this "greenhouse effect" is being absorbed by the oceans.

The "proof" that the oceans are warming is the fact that global sea levels have risen 3.1 cm in the past 10 years, said Kevin Trenberth, head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

Water expands when heated, and sea levels are expected to continue rising by as much as 50 cm by 2100.

While the warming of the oceans is not uniform -- the North Pacific and North Atlantic are a bit cooler -- the hurricane-producing mid-Atlantic and Caribbean oceans have warmed significantly.

"Global warming is creating conditions that are more favorable for hurricanes to develop and be more severe," said Trenberth.

Will that result in more Category 4 or 5 storms like Ivan?

"That's the logical conclusion, although it may be somewhat controversial," he said.

Before it struck Cuba a glancing blow, Ivan was a Category 5 on the Saffir-Simpson scale, which rates hurricanes from 1 to 5 according to wind speeds and destructive potential. Category 5 hurricanes have winds that blow continuously above 250 kilometers an hour. Ivan's gusts topped 320 kilometers an hour at times, making it the sixth most powerful hurricane on record for the Atlantic Basin.

Hurricane Ivan's 12-day rampage killed 70 people in the Caribbean and 50 in the United States. It will be some time before the full extent of the damage is known, but some estimates put it at 10 billion dollars for the United States alone.

As emissions of greenhouse gases continue to trap more and more of the sun's energy, that energy has to be dissipated, resulting in stronger storms, more intense precipitation and higher winds, says McMcarthy.

However, the statistical record of hurricanes hitting the U.S. shows a decrease in the past 50 years.

Most hurricanes do not strike land, McCarthy points out, and up until the past 25 years, with the advent of satellite tracking, there was scant data on the storms.

But there is abundant evidence of an unprecedented number of severe weather events in the past decade, McCarthy says. In 1998, Hurricane Mitch killed nearly 20,000 people in Central America, and more than 4,000 people died during disastrous flooding in China. Bangladesh suffered some of its worst floods ever the following year, as did Venezuela. Europe was hit with record floods in 2002, and then a record heat wave in 2003.

More recently, Brazil was struck by the first-ever recorded hurricane in the South Atlantic last March.

"Weather records are being set all the time now. We're in an era of unprecedented extreme weather events," McCarthy said.

Historical weather patterns are becoming less useful for predicting the future conditions because global warming is changing ocean and atmospheric conditions.

"In 30 to 50 years' time, the Earth's weather generating system will be entirely different," he predicted.

What hasn't changed in the United States is the lack of concern about climate change, said Ross Gelbspan, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and author of two books on global warming, most recently one titled: "[i]Boiling Point: How Politicians, Big Oil And Coal, Journalists and Activists Are Fueling the Climate Crisis -- And What We Can Do to Avert Disaster[/i]." http://www.amazon.com/exec/ob...

Sharp reductions of emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide on the order of 70 percent are urgently needed to minimize the impacts, Gelbspan said.

But despite the recent destructive series of hurricanes and tornadoes, global warming is off the radar screen of the U.S. presidential election campaign, he said.

Gelbspan is not surprised at this, given the power and influence of the fossil fuel lobby in Washington, which he outlines in great detail in his book.

"America's oil and coal industries receive more than 20 billion dollars a year in subsidies," he said. "Imagine what could be done if that money was invested in green energy." - http://www.commondreams.org/h...


 
Experts Criticize Latest Bush Administration Plan for Wild Salmon
09.21.04 (5:56 am)   [edit]
The Bush administration has drafted a 10-year wild salmon
recovery plan that puts restoration of fish stocks at the bottom
of its priorities. Released on September 9 by the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries (NOAA), the
plan rejects consideration of removing any dams from the
Columbia and Snake rivers, even though this would dramatically
enhance recovery prospects.

The administration's new plan (the first was deemed illegal by a
federal judge last year) proposes adjustments in dam operations
and technology to lessen the death rate of salmon during their
migrations up and downriver.

Salmon advocates say these ideas are stale and discredited. The
plan also proposes increased barging of young fish--up to 90
percent of some salmon stocks--around the dams, installing
structures called spillway weirs that allow fish to travel
alongside dams rather than through their turbines, continued
habitat restoration, and expanded efforts to reduce predators.
[1]

"The scientists in the region have said over and over again, you
cannot restore self-sustaining populations of these fish by
relying on barging," said Todd True, an attorney with
EarthJustice http://www.earthjustice.org/ . "You have to move towards a river that will
actually support these fish, and we're way off track from that."
[2]

The plan represents yet another reinterpretation of the
Endangered Species Act by the Bush administration--one favorable
to private interests rather than endangered species--by putting
the emphasis on sustaining "sufficient survival levels in fish"
rather than recovery of self-sustaining populations. Regional
conservation and fishing groups have criticized the
administration's plan as "inadequate and overly optimistic." [3]

If the new plan is approved, dam operators will be in compliance
with salmon recovery efforts as long as they are not speeding up
the rate of salmon kills. [4]

The administration earlier failed to challenge a controversial
court ruling that allows hatchery-bred salmon to be counted
along with wild when assessing the health of a fish population,
even though this also contradicts both the intent of the
Endangered Species Act and the best science on wild salmon
restoration. [5]

###

[b]TAKE ACTION[/b]

Go to Save Our Wild Salmon's website http://ga3.org/ct/Ud1eOJs1HB-... to submit your comments.

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] "Fishery service opposes breaching Snake, Columbia dams,"
The Oregonian, Sept. 10, 2004.
[2] "New Plan Treats Dams as Part of Columbia River
Environment," http://ga3.org/ct/y71eOJs1HB-... OPB Radio, Sept. 9, 2004.
[3] Oregonian, op. cit.
[4] Save Our Wild Salmon press release, Sept. 9, 2004.
[5] BushGreenwatch, http://ga3.org/ct/yd1eOJs1HB-... May 27, 2004.

 
Experts Criticize Latest Bush Administration Plan for Wild Salmon
09.21.04 (5:54 am)   [edit]
The Bush administration has drafted a 10-year wild salmon
recovery plan that puts restoration of fish stocks at the bottom
of its priorities. Released on September 9 by the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries (NOAA), the
plan rejects consideration of removing any dams from the
Columbia and Snake rivers, even though this would dramatically
enhance recovery prospects.

The administration's new plan (the first was deemed illegal by a
federal judge last year) proposes adjustments in dam operations
and technology to lessen the death rate of salmon during their
migrations up and downriver.

Salmon advocates say these ideas are stale and discredited. The
plan also proposes increased barging of young fish--up to 90
percent of some salmon stocks--around the dams, installing
structures called spillway weirs that allow fish to travel
alongside dams rather than through their turbines, continued
habitat restoration, and expanded efforts to reduce predators.
[1]

"The scientists in the region have said over and over again, you
cannot restore self-sustaining populations of these fish by
relying on barging," said Todd True, an attorney with
EarthJustice http://www.earthjustice.org/ . "You have to move towards a river that will
actually support these fish, and we're way off track from that."
[2]

The plan represents yet another reinterpretation of the
Endangered Species Act by the Bush administration--one favorable
to private interests rather than endangered species--by putting
the emphasis on sustaining "sufficient survival levels in fish"
rather than recovery of self-sustaining populations. Regional
conservation and fishing groups have criticized the
administration's plan as "inadequate and overly optimistic." [3]

If the new plan is approved, dam operators will be in compliance
with salmon recovery efforts as long as they are not speeding up
the rate of salmon kills. [4]

The administration earlier failed to challenge a controversial
court ruling that allows hatchery-bred salmon to be counted
along with wild when assessing the health of a fish population,
even though this also contradicts both the intent of the
Endangered Species Act and the best science on wild salmon
restoration. [5]

###

[b]TAKE ACTION[/b]

Go to Save Our Wild Salmon's website http://ga3.org/ct/Ud1eOJs1HB-... to submit your comments.

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] "Fishery service opposes breaching Snake, Columbia dams,"
The Oregonian, Sept. 10, 2004.
[2] "New Plan Treats Dams as Part of Columbia River
Environment," http://ga3.org/ct/y71eOJs1HB-... OPB Radio, Sept. 9, 2004.
[3] Oregonian, op. cit.
[4] Save Our Wild Salmon press release, Sept. 9, 2004.
[5] BushGreenwatch, http://ga3.org/ct/yd1eOJs1HB-... May 27, 2004.

 
Experts Criticize Latest Bush Administration Plan for Wild Salmon
09.21.04 (5:52 am)   [edit]
The Bush administration has drafted a 10-year wild salmon
recovery plan that puts restoration of fish stocks at the bottom
of its priorities. Released on September 9 by the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries (NOAA), the
plan rejects consideration of removing any dams from the
Columbia and Snake rivers, even though this would dramatically
enhance recovery prospects.

The administration's new plan (the first was deemed illegal by a
federal judge last year) proposes adjustments in dam operations
and technology to lessen the death rate of salmon during their
migrations up and downriver.

Salmon advocates say these ideas are stale and discredited. The
plan also proposes increased barging of young fish--up to 90
percent of some salmon stocks--around the dams, installing
structures called spillway weirs that allow fish to travel
alongside dams rather than through their turbines, continued
habitat restoration, and expanded efforts to reduce predators.
[1]

"The scientists in the region have said over and over again, you
cannot restore self-sustaining populations of these fish by
relying on barging," said Todd True, an attorney with
EarthJustice http://www.earthjustice.org/ . "You have to move towards a river that will
actually support these fish, and we're way off track from that."
[2]

The plan represents yet another reinterpretation of the
Endangered Species Act by the Bush administration--one favorable
to private interests rather than endangered species--by putting
the emphasis on sustaining "sufficient survival levels in fish"
rather than recovery of self-sustaining populations. Regional
conservation and fishing groups have criticized the
administration's plan as "inadequate and overly optimistic." [3]

If the new plan is approved, dam operators will be in compliance
with salmon recovery efforts as long as they are not speeding up
the rate of salmon kills. [4]

The administration earlier failed to challenge a controversial
court ruling that allows hatchery-bred salmon to be counted
along with wild when assessing the health of a fish population,
even though this also contradicts both the intent of the
Endangered Species Act and the best science on wild salmon
restoration. [5]

###

[b]TAKE ACTION[/b]

Go to Save Our Wild Salmon's website http://ga3.org/ct/Ud1eOJs1HB-... to submit your comments.

###

[b]SOURCES:[/b]

[1] "Fishery service opposes breaching Snake, Columbia dams,"
The Oregonian, Sept. 10, 2004.
[2] "New Plan Treats Dams as Part of Columbia River
Environment," http://ga3.org/ct/y71eOJs1HB-... OPB Radio, Sept. 9, 2004.
[3] Oregonian, op. cit.
[4] Save Our Wild Salmon press release, Sept. 9, 2004.
[5] BushGreenwatch, http://ga3.org/ct/yd1eOJs1HB-... May 27, 2004.

 
Just cut out their tongues ...
09.21.04 (5:44 am)   [edit]
The CBS/Rather/Bush/Guard affair - regardless of how it ultimately turns out - has brilliantly deflected the issue of George W. Bush having strings pulled to get him into the Guard, and then not fulfilling his service requirements. Anytime the issue is raised in the future - regardless of facts or context - partisan Republicans will simply dismiss it by saying, "Those documents were forged." That four-word sound byte will be remembered long after the details of Bush's failures have dimmed from popular memory. Politically, it was a masterstroke.

And not only does it hurt Bush family enemy Kerry, but also gets back at Bush family enemy Dan Rather, against whom they've nursed a 16-year grudge.

The Bush family's hostility to Rather first broke the surface of public attention back in 1988, when Vice President George H.W. Bush was confronted on network television about his various roles in the criminal affair now known as Iran/Contra. At the time, rumors were flying that in the fall of 1980 then-VP-candidate Bush had negotiated with Iran to hold the American hostages until after the election. The hostages were not only held throughout the election campaign, but were released the very hour Ronald Reagan was sworn into office. The ongoing dragged-out hostage crisis (and Carter's failed attempt at rescue) had knocked the incumbent president down so far in the polls that the long-shot ticket of Reagan/Bush won.

When it later came out, in part because of an investigation started by Senator John Kerry, that after the 1980 election Reagan/Bush were illegally selling American missiles to the Iranians "in exchange for hostages" at a time there were no hostages (the Iranian hostages had been freed, and the Lebanese hostages not yet taken), speculation intensified. The key to busting the whole deal open and indicting George H.W. Bush, some congressional investigators believed, would be Bill Casey. As the manager of the 1980 Reagan/Bush campaign, he would have known of the deal, and persistent allegations floated around Washington that he'd even helped organize the initial negotiations between Bush and Iranian representatives.

When Reagan/Bush took the White house, they elevated campaign manager Casey to the role of Director of the CIA. And the congressional committees looking into Iran/Contra so wanted to talk with Casey that they took the rare step of subpoenaing a sitting head of the CIA.

As White House insider Barbara Honegger wrote in her groundbreaking book "October Surprise," Casey "reportedly attended meetings in Paris, France, on October 19 and 20, 1980, with Iranian officials and agents of French intelligence to arrange an arms-for-hostages-delay deal with Iran. The morning of his first scheduled under-oath testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on the secret Iran initiative he was struck by seizures in his CIA headquarters office in Langley, Virginia, and underwent speech-incapacitating left-brain surgery shortly thereafter. Had he lived to testify, according to life-long friend and counsel Milton Gould, Casey would have told the 'entire truth.' He died on May 6, 1987."

Since the left temporal lobe of the brain - "Broca's region" - controls speech, some "conspiracy minded" folks suggested at the time that this was simply a hi-tech version of the mob cutting out an informer's tongue.

Six months after Casey was silenced, on January 25, 1988 in a CBS broadcast, Dan Rather cornered Vice President George H.W. Bush about the whole Iran issue, and Bush became furious. Barely able to speak, his face twisted with rage, Bush blurted out: "It's not fair to judge my whole career by a rehash on Iran. How would you like it if I judged your career by those seven minutes when you walked off the set in New York?" Bush's voice was cracking with hysteria as he added, "Would you like that?"

Dan Rather has been on the Bush family enemies list ever since. But he's not alone.

Another member of the Bush family enemies list is Senator John Kerry, who opened the precursor to the Iran-Contra investigations, which brought about the demand for Casey's testimony. Kerry then led inquiries into the Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI), which broke open a tangled web that included organized crime, international terrorists, and members of both the Bush family and the Bin Laden family.

Indeed, as The Wall Street Journal noted in a front page story on December 6, 1991 ("Family Ties: How Oil Firm Linked To a Son of Bush Won Bahrain Drilling Pact"/"Harken Energy Had a Web Of Mideast Connections; In the Background: BCCI" by Thomas Petzinger Jr., Peter Truell And Jill Abramson): "The mosaic of BCCI connections surrounding Harken Energy may prove nothing more than how ubiquitous the rogue bank's ties were. But the number of BCCI-connected people who had dealings with Harken -- all since George W. Bush came on board -- likewise raises the question of whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son."

This all came into the open because of the tenacious efforts of former prosecutor and U.S. Senator John Kerry. As David Corn noted in an article first published in The Nation: "In the fall of 1992 Kerry released a report on the BCCI affair. It blasted everyone: Justice, Treasury, US Customs, the Federal Reserve, [Democrats] Clifford and Altman (for participating in 'some of BCCI's deceptions'), high-level lobbyists and fixers, and the CIA. The report noted that after the CIA knew the bank was 'a fundamentally corrupt criminal enterprise, it continued to use both BCCI and First American...for CIA operations.' The report was, in a sense, an indictment of Washington cronyism. In the years since, there's been nothing like it."

Which brings us to what may be the most recent Bush family political dirty trick.

Back during the years when BCCI and the Bin Ladens were helping prop up one of George W. Bush's failing oil businesses, Karl Rove was perfecting the art of using misdirection to win political campaigns. James Moore and Wayne Slater, who wrote "Bush's Brain" - the unauthorized biography of Rove - noted that when Rove ran Bill Clements' campaign in Texas in 1986, he is alleged to have bugged his own office to distract voters from the real issues of the campaigns. "Who bugged Rove?" became the big story in the news for weeks, pushing other issues off the front page (and implying that Rove and his candidate were the victims of dirty tricks). Rove's candidate won an upset victory.

Others have suggested - although there is no clear evidence one way or the other - that Rove was behind the appearance in the Gore campaign of Bush's debate prep notes. Had Bush "lost" the debates in a big way, the issue could have been deftly shifted to the Gore campaign having had advance copies of his notes.

Perhaps it's a short leap from bugging your own office, to planting debate prep materials with your opponent, to placing phony documents to kill an issue.

For example, Robert Sam Anson points out in a September 16, 2004 article in The New York Observer that, "Mr. Rather's report hadn't been over 10 minutes when a post appeared on the right-wing Web site FreeRepublic.com from 'TankerKC,' saying the documents were 'not in the style that we used when I came into the USAF . can we get a copy of those memos?'"

This was followed in a few hours by a detailed typographic analysis from another blogger named "Buckhead" - even though the typography had only been shown on television, not exactly a medium conducive to examining typographic nuance.

The blog site that "broke" the story of the alleged forgery of the documents Dan Rather had shown the world was, to quote Robert Sam Anson, "the repository for anti-Jew, anti-Catholic, anti-homosexual, anti-John Kerry rants by Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D."

For some, the name may sound familiar. As Anson continues: "And whom, you ask, is Dr. Corsi? Co-author of the best-selling 'Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry,' that's who."

And now we learn from CBS that "Buckhead" - the blogger who posted to Corsi's website detailed information about the memos' typography just 3 hours after the story had aired on CBS - wasn't a typesetter or typographer at all. Instead, he's a lawyer, Harry MacDougald, who the LA Times notes, has "strong ties to conservative Republican causes who had helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton after the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal" and has connections, at least institutionally, to Ken Starr and other senior Republicans.

Most recently, it's been reported by The New York Times that the Texas man who may have passed the documents along to Dan Rather was Texas Air National Guard senior advisor and former Lt. Colonel Bill Burkett.

In February of 2004, USA Today reported Burkett claimed to have witnessed and overheard senior Guard officers working to do a thorough "cleansing" of George W. Bush's National Guard records for a biography Karen Hughes was writing before his last run for president. If true, Burkett - another Bush family enemy - is now on the short list of potential fall guys in this case.

It's enough to make you wonder who's next on the schedule for temporal-lobe brain surgery...

[b]Thom Hartmann (thom at thomhartmann.com) is a Project Censored Award-winning best-selling author and host of a nationally syndicated daily progressive talk show. www.thomhartmann .com His most recent books are "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight," "Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights," "We The People: A Call To Take Back America," and "What Would Jefferson Do?: A Return To Democracy."[/b] - http://www.commondreams.org/v...


 
Just cut out their tongues ...
09.21.04 (5:43 am)   [edit]
The CBS/Rather/Bush/Guard affair - regardless of how it ultimately turns out - has brilliantly deflected the issue of George W. Bush having strings pulled to get him into the Guard, and then not fulfilling his service requirements. Anytime the issue is raised in the future - regardless of facts or context - partisan Republicans will simply dismiss it by saying, "Those documents were forged." That four-word sound byte will be remembered long after the details of Bush's failures have dimmed from popular memory. Politically, it was a masterstroke.

And not only does it hurt Bush family enemy Kerry, but also gets back at Bush family enemy Dan Rather, against whom they've nursed a 16-year grudge.

The Bush family's hostility to Rather first broke the surface of public attention back in 1988, when Vice President George H.W. Bush was confronted on network television about his various roles in the criminal affair now known as Iran/Contra. At the time, rumors were flying that in the fall of 1980 then-VP-candidate Bush had negotiated with Iran to hold the American hostages until after the election. The hostages were not only held throughout the election campaign, but were released the very hour Ronald Reagan was sworn into office. The ongoing dragged-out hostage crisis (and Carter's failed attempt at rescue) had knocked the incumbent president down so far in the polls that the long-shot ticket of Reagan/Bush won.

When it later came out, in part because of an investigation started by Senator John Kerry, that after the 1980 election Reagan/Bush were illegally selling American missiles to the Iranians "in exchange for hostages" at a time there were no hostages (the Iranian hostages had been freed, and the Lebanese hostages not yet taken), speculation intensified. The key to busting the whole deal open and indicting George H.W. Bush, some congressional investigators believed, would be Bill Casey. As the manager of the 1980 Reagan/Bush campaign, he would have known of the deal, and persistent allegations floated around Washington that he'd even helped organize the initial negotiations between Bush and Iranian representatives.

When Reagan/Bush took the White house, they elevated campaign manager Casey to the role of Director of the CIA. And the congressional committees looking into Iran/Contra so wanted to talk with Casey that they took the rare step of subpoenaing a sitting head of the CIA.

As White House insider Barbara Honegger wrote in her groundbreaking book "October Surprise," Casey "reportedly attended meetings in Paris, France, on October 19 and 20, 1980, with Iranian officials and agents of French intelligence to arrange an arms-for-hostages-delay deal with Iran. The morning of his first scheduled under-oath testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on the secret Iran initiative he was struck by seizures in his CIA headquarters office in Langley, Virginia, and underwent speech-incapacitating left-brain surgery shortly thereafter. Had he lived to testify, according to life-long friend and counsel Milton Gould, Casey would have told the 'entire truth.' He died on May 6, 1987."

Since the left temporal lobe of the brain - "Broca's region" - controls speech, some "conspiracy minded" folks suggested at the time that this was simply a hi-tech version of the mob cutting out an informer's tongue.

Six months after Casey was silenced, on January 25, 1988 in a CBS broadcast, Dan Rather cornered Vice President George H.W. Bush about the whole Iran issue, and Bush became furious. Barely able to speak, his face twisted with rage, Bush blurted out: "It's not fair to judge my whole career by a rehash on Iran. How would you like it if I judged your career by those seven minutes when you walked off the set in New York?" Bush's voice was cracking with hysteria as he added, "Would you like that?"

Dan Rather has been on the Bush family enemies list ever since. But he's not alone.

Another member of the Bush family enemies list is Senator John Kerry, who opened the precursor to the Iran-Contra investigations, which brought about the demand for Casey's testimony. Kerry then led inquiries into the Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI), which broke open a tangled web that included organized crime, international terrorists, and members of both the Bush family and the Bin Laden family.

Indeed, as The Wall Street Journal noted in a front page story on December 6, 1991 ("Family Ties: How Oil Firm Linked To a Son of Bush Won Bahrain Drilling Pact"/"Harken Energy Had a Web Of Mideast Connections; In the Background: BCCI" by Thomas Petzinger Jr., Peter Truell And Jill Abramson): "The mosaic of BCCI connections surrounding Harken Energy may prove nothing more than how ubiquitous the rogue bank's ties were. But the number of BCCI-connected people who had dealings with Harken -- all since George W. Bush came on board -- likewise raises the question of whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son."

This all came into the open because of the tenacious efforts of former prosecutor and U.S. Senator John Kerry. As David Corn noted in an article first published in The Nation: "In the fall of 1992 Kerry released a report on the BCCI affair. It blasted everyone: Justice, Treasury, US Customs, the Federal Reserve, [Democrats] Clifford and Altman (for participating in 'some of BCCI's deceptions'), high-level lobbyists and fixers, and the CIA. The report noted that after the CIA knew the bank was 'a fundamentally corrupt criminal enterprise, it continued to use both BCCI and First American...for CIA operations.' The report was, in a sense, an indictment of Washington cronyism. In the years since, there's been nothing like it."

Which brings us to what may be the most recent Bush family political dirty trick.

Back during the years when BCCI and the Bin Ladens were helping prop up one of George W. Bush's failing oil businesses, Karl Rove was perfecting the art of using misdirection to win political campaigns. James Moore and Wayne Slater, who wrote "Bush's Brain" - the unauthorized biography of Rove - noted that when Rove ran Bill Clements' campaign in Texas in 1986, he is alleged to have bugged his own office to distract voters from the real issues of the campaigns. "Who bugged Rove?" became the big story in the news for weeks, pushing other issues off the front page (and implying that Rove and his candidate were the victims of dirty tricks). Rove's candidate won an upset victory.

Others have suggested - although there is no clear evidence one way or the other - that Rove was behind the appearance in the Gore campaign of Bush's debate prep notes. Had Bush "lost" the debates in a big way, the issue could have been deftly shifted to the Gore campaign having had advance copies of his notes.

Perhaps it's a short leap from bugging your own office, to planting debate prep materials with your opponent, to placing phony documents to kill an issue.

For example, Robert Sam Anson points out in a September 16, 2004 article in The New York Observer that, "Mr. Rather's report hadn't been over 10 minutes when a post appeared on the right-wing Web site FreeRepublic.com from 'TankerKC,' saying the documents were 'not in the style that we used when I came into the USAF . can we get a copy of those memos?'"

This was followed in a few hours by a detailed typographic analysis from another blogger named "Buckhead" - even though the typography had only been shown on television, not exactly a medium conducive to examining typographic nuance.

The blog site that "broke" the story of the alleged forgery of the documents Dan Rather had shown the world was, to quote Robert Sam Anson, "the repository for anti-Jew, anti-Catholic, anti-homosexual, anti-John Kerry rants by Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D."

For some, the name may sound familiar. As Anson continues: "And whom, you ask, is Dr. Corsi? Co-author of the best-selling 'Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry,' that's who."

And now we learn from CBS that "Buckhead" - the blogger who posted to Corsi's website detailed information about the memos' typography just 3 hours after the story had aired on CBS - wasn't a typesetter or typographer at all. Instead, he's a lawyer, Harry MacDougald, who the LA Times notes, has "strong ties to conservative Republican causes who had helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton after the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal" and has connections, at least institutionally, to Ken Starr and other senior Republicans.

Most recently, it's been reported by The New York Times that the Texas man who may have passed the documents along to Dan Rather was Texas Air National Guard senior advisor and former Lt. Colonel Bill Burkett.

In February of 2004, USA Today reported Burkett claimed to have witnessed and overheard senior Guard officers working to do a thorough "cleansing" of George W. Bush's National Guard records for a biography Karen Hughes was writing before his last run for president. If true, Burkett - another Bush family enemy - is now on the short list of potential fall guys in this case.

It's enough to make you wonder who's next on the schedule for temporal-lobe brain surgery...

[b]Thom Hartmann (thom at thomhartmann.com) is a Project Censored Award-winning best-selling author and host of a nationally syndicated daily progressive talk show. www.thomhartmann .com His most recent books are "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight," "Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights," "We The People: A Call To Take Back America," and "What Would Jefferson Do?: A Return To Democracy."[/b] - http://www.commondreams.org/v...


 
Just cut out their tongues ...
09.21.04 (5:42 am)   [edit]
The CBS/Rather/Bush/Guard affair - regardless of how it ultimately turns out - has brilliantly deflected the issue of George W. Bush having strings pulled to get him into the Guard, and then not fulfilling his service requirements. Anytime the issue is raised in the future - regardless of facts or context - partisan Republicans will simply dismiss it by saying, "Those documents were forged." That four-word sound byte will be remembered long after the details of Bush's failures have dimmed from popular memory. Politically, it was a masterstroke.

And not only does it hurt Bush family enemy Kerry, but also gets back at Bush family enemy Dan Rather, against whom they've nursed a 16-year grudge.

The Bush family's hostility to Rather first broke the surface of public attention back in 1988, when Vice President George H.W. Bush was confronted on network television about his various roles in the criminal affair now known as Iran/Contra. At the time, rumors were flying that in the fall of 1980 then-VP-candidate Bush had negotiated with Iran to hold the American hostages until after the election. The hostages were not only held throughout the election campaign, but were released the very hour Ronald Reagan was sworn into office. The ongoing dragged-out hostage crisis (and Carter's failed attempt at rescue) had knocked the incumbent president down so far in the polls that the long-shot ticket of Reagan/Bush won.

When it later came out, in part because of an investigation started by Senator John Kerry, that after the 1980 election Reagan/Bush were illegally selling American missiles to the Iranians "in exchange for hostages" at a time there were no hostages (the Iranian hostages had been freed, and the Lebanese hostages not yet taken), speculation intensified. The key to busting the whole deal open and indicting George H.W. Bush, some congressional investigators believed, would be Bill Casey. As the manager of the 1980 Reagan/Bush campaign, he would have known of the deal, and persistent allegations floated around Washington that he'd even helped organize the initial negotiations between Bush and Iranian representatives.

When Reagan/Bush took the White house, they elevated campaign manager Casey to the role of Director of the CIA. And the congressional committees looking into Iran/Contra so wanted to talk with Casey that they took the rare step of subpoenaing a sitting head of the CIA.

As White House insider Barbara Honegger wrote in her groundbreaking book "October Surprise," Casey "reportedly attended meetings in Paris, France, on October 19 and 20, 1980, with Iranian officials and agents of French intelligence to arrange an arms-for-hostages-delay deal with Iran. The morning of his first scheduled under-oath testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on the secret Iran initiative he was struck by seizures in his CIA headquarters office in Langley, Virginia, and underwent speech-incapacitating left-brain surgery shortly thereafter. Had he lived to testify, according to life-long friend and counsel Milton Gould, Casey would have told the 'entire truth.' He died on May 6, 1987."

Since the left temporal lobe of the brain - "Broca's region" - controls speech, some "conspiracy minded" folks suggested at the time that this was simply a hi-tech version of the mob cutting out an informer's tongue.

Six months after Casey was silenced, on January 25, 1988 in a CBS broadcast, Dan Rather cornered Vice President George H.W. Bush about the whole Iran issue, and Bush became furious. Barely able to speak, his face twisted with rage, Bush blurted out: "It's not fair to judge my whole career by a rehash on Iran. How would you like it if I judged your career by those seven minutes when you walked off the set in New York?" Bush's voice was cracking with hysteria as he added, "Would you like that?"

Dan Rather has been on the Bush family enemies list ever since. But he's not alone.

Another member of the Bush family enemies list is Senator John Kerry, who opened the precursor to the Iran-Contra investigations, which brought about the demand for Casey's testimony. Kerry then led inquiries into the Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI), which broke open a tangled web that included organized crime, international terrorists, and members of both the Bush family and the Bin Laden family.

Indeed, as The Wall Street Journal noted in a front page story on December 6, 1991 ("Family Ties: How Oil Firm Linked To a Son of Bush Won Bahrain Drilling Pact"/"Harken Energy Had a Web Of Mideast Connections; In the Background: BCCI" by Thomas Petzinger Jr., Peter Truell And Jill Abramson): "The mosaic of BCCI connections surrounding Harken Energy may prove nothing more than how ubiquitous the rogue bank's ties were. But the number of BCCI-connected people who had dealings with Harken -- all since George W. Bush came on board -- likewise raises the question of whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son."

This all came into the open because of the tenacious efforts of former prosecutor and U.S. Senator John Kerry. As David Corn noted in an article first published in The Nation: "In the fall of 1992 Kerry released a report on the BCCI affair. It blasted everyone: Justice, Treasury, US Customs, the Federal Reserve, [Democrats] Clifford and Altman (for participating in 'some of BCCI's deceptions'), high-level lobbyists and fixers, and the CIA. The report noted that after the CIA knew the bank was 'a fundamentally corrupt criminal enterprise, it continued to use both BCCI and First American...for CIA operations.' The report was, in a sense, an indictment of Washington cronyism. In the years since, there's been nothing like it."

Which brings us to what may be the most recent Bush family political dirty trick.

Back during the years when BCCI and the Bin Ladens were helping prop up one of George W. Bush's failing oil businesses, Karl Rove was perfecting the art of using misdirection to win political campaigns. James Moore and Wayne Slater, who wrote "Bush's Brain" - the unauthorized biography of Rove - noted that when Rove ran Bill Clements' campaign in Texas in 1986, he is alleged to have bugged his own office to distract voters from the real issues of the campaigns. "Who bugged Rove?" became the big story in the news for weeks, pushing other issues off the front page (and implying that Rove and his candidate were the victims of dirty tricks). Rove's candidate won an upset victory.

Others have suggested - although there is no clear evidence one way or the other - that Rove was behind the appearance in the Gore campaign of Bush's debate prep notes. Had Bush "lost" the debates in a big way, the issue could have been deftly shifted to the Gore campaign having had advance copies of his notes.

Perhaps it's a short leap from bugging your own office, to planting debate prep materials with your opponent, to placing phony documents to kill an issue.

For example, Robert Sam Anson points out in a September 16, 2004 article in The New York Observer that, "Mr. Rather's report hadn't been over 10 minutes when a post appeared on the right-wing Web site FreeRepublic.com from 'TankerKC,' saying the documents were 'not in the style that we used when I came into the USAF . can we get a copy of those memos?'"

This was followed in a few hours by a detailed typographic analysis from another blogger named "Buckhead" - even though the typography had only been shown on television, not exactly a medium conducive to examining typographic nuance.

The blog site that "broke" the story of the alleged forgery of the documents Dan Rather had shown the world was, to quote Robert Sam Anson, "the repository for anti-Jew, anti-Catholic, anti-homosexual, anti-John Kerry rants by Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D."

For some, the name may sound familiar. As Anson continues: "And whom, you ask, is Dr. Corsi? Co-author of the best-selling 'Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry,' that's who."

And now we learn from CBS that "Buckhead" - the blogger who posted to Corsi's website detailed information about the memos' typography just 3 hours after the story had aired on CBS - wasn't a typesetter or typographer at all. Instead, he's a lawyer, Harry MacDougald, who the LA Times notes, has "strong ties to conservative Republican causes who had helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton after the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal" and has connections, at least institutionally, to Ken Starr and other senior Republicans.

Most recently, it's been reported by The New York Times that the Texas man who may have passed the documents along to Dan Rather was Texas Air National Guard senior advisor and former Lt. Colonel Bill Burkett.

In February of 2004, USA Today reported Burkett claimed to have witnessed and overheard senior Guard officers working to do a thorough "cleansing" of George W. Bush's National Guard records for a biography Karen Hughes was writing before his last run for president. If true, Burkett - another Bush family enemy - is now on the short list of potential fall guys in this case.

It's enough to make you wonder who's next on the schedule for temporal-lobe brain surgery...

[b]Thom Hartmann (thom at thomhartmann.com) is a Project Censored Award-winning best-selling author and host of a nationally syndicated daily progressive talk show. www.thomhartmann .com His most recent books are "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight," "Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights," "We The People: A Call To Take Back America," and "What Would Jefferson Do?: A Return To Democracy."[/b] - http://www.commondreams.org/v...


 
Just cut out their tongues ...
09.21.04 (5:40 am)   [edit]
The CBS/Rather/Bush/Guard affair - regardless of how it ultimately turns out - has brilliantly deflected the issue of George W. Bush having strings pulled to get him into the Guard, and then not fulfilling his service requirements. Anytime the issue is raised in the future - regardless of facts or context - partisan Republicans will simply dismiss it by saying, "Those documents were forged." That four-word sound byte will be remembered long after the details of Bush's failures have dimmed from popular memory. Politically, it was a masterstroke.

And not only does it hurt Bush family enemy Kerry, but also gets back at Bush family enemy Dan Rather, against whom they've nursed a 16-year grudge.

The Bush family's hostility to Rather first broke the surface of public attention back in 1988, when Vice President George H.W. Bush was confronted on network television about his various roles in the criminal affair now known as Iran/Contra. At the time, rumors were flying that in the fall of 1980 then-VP-candidate Bush had negotiated with Iran to hold the American hostages until after the election. The hostages were not only held throughout the election campaign, but were released the very hour Ronald Reagan was sworn into office. The ongoing dragged-out hostage crisis (and Carter's failed attempt at rescue) had knocked the incumbent president down so far in the polls that the long-shot ticket of Reagan/Bush won.

When it later came out, in part because of an investigation started by Senator John Kerry, that after the 1980 election Reagan/Bush were illegally selling American missiles to the Iranians "in exchange for hostages" at a time there were no hostages (the Iranian hostages had been freed, and the Lebanese hostages not yet taken), speculation intensified. The key to busting the whole deal open and indicting George H.W. Bush, some congressional investigators believed, would be Bill Casey. As the manager of the 1980 Reagan/Bush campaign, he would have known of the deal, and persistent allegations floated around Washington that he'd even helped organize the initial negotiations between Bush and Iranian representatives.

When Reagan/Bush took the White house, they elevated campaign manager Casey to the role of Director of the CIA. And the congressional committees looking into Iran/Contra so wanted to talk with Casey that they took the rare step of subpoenaing a sitting head of the CIA.

As White House insider Barbara Honegger wrote in her groundbreaking book "October Surprise," Casey "reportedly attended meetings in Paris, France, on October 19 and 20, 1980, with Iranian officials and agents of French intelligence to arrange an arms-for-hostages-delay deal with Iran. The morning of his first scheduled under-oath testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on the secret Iran initiative he was struck by seizures in his CIA headquarters office in Langley, Virginia, and underwent speech-incapacitating left-brain surgery shortly thereafter. Had he lived to testify, according to life-long friend and counsel Milton Gould, Casey would have told the 'entire truth.' He died on May 6, 1987."

Since the left temporal lobe of the brain - "Broca's region" - controls speech, some "conspiracy minded" folks suggested at the time that this was simply a hi-tech version of the mob cutting out an informer's tongue.

Six months after Casey was silenced, on January 25, 1988 in a CBS broadcast, Dan Rather cornered Vice President George H.W. Bush about the whole Iran issue, and Bush became furious. Barely able to speak, his face twisted with rage, Bush blurted out: "It's not fair to judge my whole career by a rehash on Iran. How would you like it if I judged your career by those seven minutes when you walked off the set in New York?" Bush's voice was cracking with hysteria as he added, "Would you like that?"

Dan Rather has been on the Bush family enemies list ever since. But he's not alone.

Another member of the Bush family enemies list is Senator John Kerry, who opened the precursor to the Iran-Contra investigations, which brought about the demand for Casey's testimony. Kerry then led inquiries into the Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI), which broke open a tangled web that included organized crime, international terrorists, and members of both the Bush family and the Bin Laden family.

Indeed, as The Wall Street Journal noted in a front page story on December 6, 1991 ("Family Ties: How Oil Firm Linked To a Son of Bush Won Bahrain Drilling Pact"/"Harken Energy Had a Web Of Mideast Connections; In the Background: BCCI" by Thomas Petzinger Jr., Peter Truell And Jill Abramson): "The mosaic of BCCI connections surrounding Harken Energy may prove nothing more than how ubiquitous the rogue bank's ties were. But the number of BCCI-connected people who had dealings with Harken -- all since George W. Bush came on board -- likewise raises the question of whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son."

This all came into the open because of the tenacious efforts of former prosecutor and U.S. Senator John Kerry. As David Corn noted in an article first published in The Nation: "In the fall of 1992 Kerry released a report on the BCCI affair. It blasted everyone: Justice, Treasury, US Customs, the Federal Reserve, [Democrats] Clifford and Altman (for participating in 'some of BCCI's deceptions'), high-level lobbyists and fixers, and the CIA. The report noted that after the CIA knew the bank was 'a fundamentally corrupt criminal enterprise, it continued to use both BCCI and First American...for CIA operations.' The report was, in a sense, an indictment of Washington cronyism. In the years since, there's been nothing like it."

Which brings us to what may be the most recent Bush family political dirty trick.

Back during the years when BCCI and the Bin Ladens were helping prop up one of George W. Bush's failing oil businesses, Karl Rove was perfecting the art of using misdirection to win political campaigns. James Moore and Wayne Slater, who wrote "Bush's Brain" - the unauthorized biography of Rove - noted that when Rove ran Bill Clements' campaign in Texas in 1986, he is alleged to have bugged his own office to distract voters from the real issues of the campaigns. "Who bugged Rove?" became the big story in the news for weeks, pushing other issues off the front page (and implying that Rove and his candidate were the victims of dirty tricks). Rove's candidate won an upset victory.

Others have suggested - although there is no clear evidence one way or the other - that Rove was behind the appearance in the Gore campaign of Bush's debate prep notes. Had Bush "lost" the debates in a big way, the issue could have been deftly shifted to the Gore campaign having had advance copies of his notes.

Perhaps it's a short leap from bugging your own office, to planting debate prep materials with your opponent, to placing phony documents to kill an issue.

For example, Robert Sam Anson points out in a September 16, 2004 article in The New York Observer that, "Mr. Rather's report hadn't been over 10 minutes when a post appeared on the right-wing Web site FreeRepublic.com from 'TankerKC,' saying the documents were 'not in the style that we used when I came into the USAF . can we get a copy of those memos?'"

This was followed in a few hours by a detailed typographic analysis from another blogger named "Buckhead" - even though the typography had only been shown on television, not exactly a medium conducive to examining typographic nuance.

The blog site that "broke" the story of the alleged forgery of the documents Dan Rather had shown the world was, to quote Robert Sam Anson, "the repository for anti-Jew, anti-Catholic, anti-homosexual, anti-John Kerry rants by Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D."

For some, the name may sound familiar. As Anson continues: "And whom, you ask, is Dr. Corsi? Co-author of the best-selling 'Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry,' that's who."

And now we learn from CBS that "Buckhead" - the blogger who posted to Corsi's website detailed information about the memos' typography just 3 hours after the story had aired on CBS - wasn't a typesetter or typographer at all. Instead, he's a lawyer, Harry MacDougald, who the LA Times notes, has "strong ties to conservative Republican causes who had helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton after the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal" and has connections, at least institutionally, to Ken Starr and other senior Republicans.

Most recently, it's been reported by The New York Times that the Texas man who may have passed the documents along to Dan Rather was Texas Air National Guard senior advisor and former Lt. Colonel Bill Burkett.

In February of 2004, USA Today reported Burkett claimed to have witnessed and overheard senior Guard officers working to do a thorough "cleansing" of George W. Bush's National Guard records for a biography Karen Hughes was writing before his last run for president. If true, Burkett - another Bush family enemy - is now on the short list of potential fall guys in this case.

It's enough to make you wonder who's next on the schedule for temporal-lobe brain surgery...

[b]Thom Hartmann (thom at thomhartmann.com) is a Project Censored Award-winning best-selling author and host of a nationally syndicated daily progressive talk show. www.thomhartmann .com His most recent books are "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight," "Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights," "We The People: A Call To Take Back America," and "What Would Jefferson Do?: A Return To Democracy."[/b] - http://www.commondreams.org/v...
 
Heads that should roll ...
09.20.04 (3:36 pm)   [edit]
Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and all those in this vile administration's chain of command should be impeached and put on trial for Crimes Against Humanity; for their murders, tortures, rapes, abuses and criminal atrocities at Abu Ghraib are unlawful, unconscionable and outrageous. To pass the buck downwards and make the US Soldiers the scapegoats for the Bush administration's policies is unjust and untrue. Bush sought legal counsel from his lawyer, Gonzales, to make sure that things could be done, and he [Bush] could not be implicated. It is similar to those who are apologists for Adolf Hitler because no documents exist that definitively show Hitler giving the orders for the Concentration Camps and the slaughter of the Jewish people. Just as historians don't accept that sort of revisionist history letting leaders 'off-the-hook' for War Crimes-- nor will they accept 'excuse-making' for the neo-con Nazis in the Bush administration.

Read "[b]Bush Is to Blame[/b]" on http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4...

[b]Panel report says Abu Ghraib responsibility runs deep

Lack of leadership contributed to abuse [/b]

WASHINGTON - Detainee abuses photographed at the Abu Ghraib prison were the unauthorized "extra-curricular activity" of soldiers working the nightshift at the Iraqi facility, but leadership failures up the chain of command contributed to the scandal and other abuses, an independent panel reported yesterday.

Military commanders in Iraq failed to properly train or supervise the overworked and ill-prepared soldiers who served as guards, the panel of civilian defense experts said in a report that also concluded top-ranking Pentagon leaders failed to anticipate or swiftly react to problems at the notorious prison near Baghdad, Iraq.

"The weaknesses were well known, and corrective actions could have been taken and should have been taken," James Schlesinger, a former defense secretary and chairman of the four-person review panel, said at a Pentagon news conference.

The panel's 92-page report was the first in a series of investigations into the prison abuse scandal to place any blame beyond the prison walls. Another report, a long-awaited Army investigation, is expected to implicate about two dozen military intelligence soldiers and civilian contractors, but spare from punishment anyone above the colonel who commanded them at Abu Ghraib.

The question of how high responsibility for the scandal could reach has been a central point since the first photographs emerged four months ago showing naked Iraqi detainees forced into sexually humiliating positions or cowering from military working dogs.

One panel member, Tillie Fowler, a former Republican congresswoman from Florida, said yesterday's report identified a "string of failures that go well beyond an isolated cell block in Iraq."

The report singled out for criticism the former commanding general in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, saying that he "should have taken stronger action (last) November when he realized the extent of the leadership problems at Abu Ghraib."

But the report said there was no U.S. policy that condoned torture or abuse, and it did not recommend disciplinary action against any military or civilian leaders. When asked, Schlesinger also said Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who appointed the panel, should not step down because of the scandal. [Of course, Schlesinger is a Bush family toady who panders to the White House demands.]

"His resignation would be a boon to all of America's enemies,"Schlesinger said.

The panel had no authority to determine if crimes were committed. So far, the only individuals to face criminal charges in the scandal are seven low-ranking soldiers from the 372nd Military Police Company. One has pleaded guilty and been sentenced to a year in jail, and a second has announced his intention to plead guilty to some charges.

Most of those soldiers have claimed the abuses were directed by higher-ranking intelligence officers. That notion gained some support in yesterday's report. But the report also described the photographed abuses as "acts of brutality and purposeless sadism" with no intelligence-gathering purpose. Schle-singer called the abuses the "freelance activities" of one group of prison guards, saying, "It was kind of Animal House on the night shift."

The report made clear that the photographed abuses were not the only acts of violence against prisoners under U.S. control in the government's terror war.

About 300 incidents of prisoner abuse have been reported to the military, the report said. Out of 155 completed investigations, 66 found abuses had occurred among prisoners under U.S. control. Most of those cases - 55 - were in Iraq; three were from Afghanistan and eight from the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The report said that about one-third of those cases were related to the interrogation of prisoners, but the panel members said they could not offer further details because they did not investigate individual cases.

More details could come in the report dealing with military intelligence methods at the prison that is expected to be released today. Tuesday's report noted that the intelligence probe had identified, for instance, "a number of abuses related to using muzzled and unmuzzled dogs during interrogations (as well as) dog use unrelated to interrogations, apparently for the sadistic pleasure of the MPs involved in these incidents."

Sen. John Warner, R-Va., who is chairman of the Armed Services Committee, has said he will hold hearings early next month on the findings of both investigations. Some Democratic lawmakers began weighing in Tuesday -Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said Tuesday's findings showed that, "at a minimum, there was gross negligence at the highest levels in the Pentagon."

The report faulted top military officials for not anticipating the violent insurgency uprising that followed the initial combat phase in Iraq and for allowing some interrogation tactics intended only for limited use at Guantanamo Bay to "migrate" to Iraq without proper safeguards." - http://www.concordmonitor.com...

[b]Note:[/b] That Congress lets the Bush White House and Pentagon officials 'off-the-hook' for their Crimes Against Humanity at Abu Ghraib is frightening and very, very wrong.
 
Kerry (and GOP Senators) Blasts Bush for 'Colossal Failures' in Iraq!!!
09.20.04 (10:18 am)   [edit]
[b]Kerry Blasts Bush for 'Colossal Failures' in Iraq [/b]

NEW YORK - Democrat John Kerry turned up his criticism of President Bush's leadership in Iraq on Monday, accusing him of "colossal failures of judgment" that have turned the country into a haven for terrorists and made America more vulnerable.

The Democratic presidential candidate argued in a speech at New York University that the U.S.-led invasion had weakened national security.

"The president's policy in Iraq precipitated the very problem he said he was trying to prevent," Kerry said. "Iraq is becoming a sanctuary for a new generation of terrorists who someday could hit the United States."

Against a backdrop of rising casualties, fears of civil war and questions about whether elections can be held in Iraq in January as scheduled, Kerry has tried to make the conflict a key barometer of Bush's record in office.

"The president misled, miscalculated, and mismanaged every aspect of this undertaking," Kerry said, accusing Bush of making "catastrophic decisions" and surrounding himself with ideologues who provide "stubborn incompetence."

"The president now admits to miscalculations in Iraq," Kerry said. "His were not the equivalent of accounting errors. They were colossal failures of judgment -- and judgment is what we look for in a president."

"George Bush has no strategy for Iraq. I do, and I have all along," Kerry said.

CALLS FOR SUMMIT

To win international support for the war, Kerry proposed that Bush convene a summit meeting of world leaders in New York this week for the General Assembly of the United Nations. Bush addresses the United Nations on Tuesday.

Kerry said he would offer other nations who could provide troops with specific roles for training Iraqi security forces and securing its borders and then let them bid on reconstruction contracts instead of locking them out of the process.

He also said the United States must recruit training assistance for Iraqi forces from NATO allies and wage a reconstruction plan that uses Iraqi contractors and workers rather than big U.S. corporations like Halliburton, which formerly was headed by Vice President Dick Cheney and has won billion dollar government contracts to rebuild Iraq.

To guarantee elections next year in Iraq, the United States should recruit troops from allies for a U.N. protection force and train Iraqis to manage polling places, Kerry said

"If we do not change course, there is the prospect of a war with no end in sight," he said.

While Kerry has said he would begin to bring a large number of the nearly 140,000 U.S. troops home in the first six months of his administration and be better able than Bush to rally international support, the Massachusetts senator has struggled to draw clear contrasts with the president over Iraq.

Republicans have made much of the fact that he voted to give Bush authority to use force against Saddam Hussein yet criticized the war and voted against its funding.

Kerry says while he voted to give the president authority for the war he did not support his handling of the conflict.

Bush campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt said Kerry offers a policy of "defeat and retreat" and his proposals were "more contradiction and confusion from a candidate who is twisting in the wind."

He also contended that Kerry's proposals already were contained in plans that Bush has made public to end the conflict in Iraq. - http://www.commondreams.org/h...

See also [b]"Republican Senators Sound the Alarm Over Iraq" [/b]on http://www.iht.com/articles/5...

 
British Ambassador Says Al-Qaeda Wants Bush Reelected: He's their Best Recruiting Officer!
09.20.04 (10:13 am)   [edit]
[b]Reuters:[/b] "Britain's ambassador to Italy has called Bush "the best recruiting sergeant" for al Qaeda, Italian media reported Monday. The comment, made at a closed-door conference at the weekend, was denounced by one leading Italian newspaper editor, who issued an open letter snubbing the veteran ambassador, Sir Ivor Roberts. Roberts was quoted as telling an annual Anglo-Italian gathering in Tuscany: "If anyone is ready to celebrate the eventual re-election of Bush, it's al Qaeda." Berlusconi media minion Giuliano Ferrara of Il Foglio expressed outrage (ho hum) and called for a boycott of the state dinner for Roberts. But, just as in the US, in Italy, the Berlusconi-controlled media does not represent the majority of Italians (90% oppose the war in Iraq and hate Bush)!

[b]More[/b] ... http://story.news.yahoo.com/n...


 
Parents of 18-29 Year Olds Who Vote for Bush May be Offering Him the Blood of their Children
09.20.04 (10:11 am)   [edit]
This reprehensible MSNBC article (complete with Freeped poll on the same page) tries to make the very real possibility of a military draft just another political fearmongering tactic - as if risking the lives of America's young people is no big deal - even as scores are injured weekly in Iraq and the death count climbs above 1,000. (MSNBC conveniently also underreports soldier casualties in Iraq too). But Max Cleland, a Vietnam veteran who KNOWS, says there is a very real chance â??America will reinstate the military draftâ? if Bush is re-elected and continues the Iraq War. "Pay attention ... to what you've got going on in Iraq. That, ladies and gentlemen, is Vietnam. I've seen this movie before. I know how it ends. It does not end pleasantly," he added. Cleland has been in a wheelchair since 1968 when he lost both legs and one arm in a grenade accident in Vietnam.

[b]More[/b] ... http://msnbc.msn.com/id/60278...
 
... OMB Watch: Bush Administration Puts Public Health & Safety in Jeopardy!!!
09.20.04 (7:27 am)   [edit]
[b]Study Finds Bush Administration Obstructs and Weakens Regulation Across Agencies, Withdraws Over 200 Proposed Rules and Fails to Complete Over 70% of Target Actions[/b]

WASHINGTON - September 15 - An analysis of four key federal agencies charged with safeguarding the public's air, water, food, health, transportation and workplaces reveals consistent and widespread obstruction, neglect and weakening of protections. The report attributes the pattern to a pro-corporate bias of the Bush administration and appointed agency heads favoring narrow special interests over the public good.

In "The Bush Regulatory Record: A Pattern of Failure," OMB Watch analysts document the Bush administration's inaction and obstruction since taking office:

* EPA has withdrawn 90 agenda items, most addressing clean air and water, and in the first half of 2004 failed to achieve 73 percent of benchmark items it scheduled for completion.

* FDA has withdrawn 62 agenda items, including one to track contaminated blood, and in the first half of 2004 failed to achieve 70 percent of benchmark items it scheduled for completion.

* NHTSA has withdrawn 31 auto safety agenda items and, in the first half of 2004, failed to achieve 71 percent of the benchmark items scheduled for completion.

* OSHA has withdrawn 24 agenda items, including one to protect workers from exposure to tuberculosis, and in the first half of 2004 it failed to advance 75 percent of benchmark items scheduled for action. It also eliminated data collection on musculoskeletal disorders.

Combined, these four agencies have either withdrawn or failed to complete work on a majority of the regulatory priorities already on the agenda when the Bush administration took office – ranging from 56 percent at the EPA to 86 percent at OSHA. Moreover, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved only 25 economically significant rules total for the four agencies -- roughly half the number approved during each term of the Clinton administration and a third of those approved during the Bush I administration.

"When our government abdicates its responsibility to provide us the protections we need, people suffer," said Robert Shull, the report's lead author and Senior Regulatory Policy Analyst with OMB Watch. "It weakens our nation and has long-term implications for generations to come."

"Since 2001, key regulatory plans have been abandoned, and those few major rules that have been undertaken favor corporate over public interests," said Gary Bass, OMB Watch Executive Director. "Statistics show a pattern of neglect, but not how the few rules being done decidedly favor industry."

This report updates and expands our May 2004 report, "Special Interest Takeover: The Bush Administration and the Dismantling of Public Safeguards," which OMB Watch and Center for American Progress produced for Citizens for Sensible Safeguards (CSS). Download both reports and background at www.ombwatch.org/regs http://www.ombwatch.org/regs .

[i]OMB Watch is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization located in Washington, DC, and was founded in 1983 to promote government accountability and citizen participation, and to lift the veil of secrecy shrouding the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the federal agencies it oversees[/i].

[b]THE BUSH REGULATORY RECORD: A PATTERN OF FAILURE[/b]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2 Executive Summary

7 Introduction: Continuing in the Wrong Direction

7 About this Analysis

9 Findings

10 Continuing to Shirk Responsibility

14 Inaction: Continuing to Let Pressing Needs Go Unaddressed

16 Continuing to Place Special Interests Over the Public Interest

24 EPA: Withering on the Vine

24 Floating With the Current: Items Completed

25 Coal-Fired Power Plants: Permission to Pollute

26 Emission Standards for Automakers

27 Clear Skies: Ozone

28 Lost in the Smog: Items Withdrawn

30 Stuck in the Mud: Continued Inaction

32 FDA: In Critical Condition

32 Band-Aids: Items Completed

34 Malpractice: Items Withdrawn

34 Protecting the Blood Supply: Patient Notification

35 Preventing Mad Cow Disease

36 Bad Medicine: Continued Inaction

39 NHTSA: Driving in the Slow Lane

39 Lurching Forward: Items Completed

41 Tire Safety

42 Fuel Integrity

43 Early Warning Systems

43 Duel Fuel

44 Spinning Its Wheels: Items Withdrawn

45 Considering in a Different Context

45 Waiting for More Research

46 Stuck in Neutral: Continued Inaction

47 Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems

48 Fuel Economy: Structural Reform

51 OSHA: Sleeping on the Job

51 Just Showing Up: Items Completed

53 Shirking Responsibility: Items Withdrawn

53 Tuberculosis

54 Glycol Ethers

[b]CONTACT:[/b] OMB Watch - http://www.ombwatch.org/
Robert Shull 202/234-8494x276
Herb Ettel 202/234-8494x213
 
... OMB Watch: Bush Administration Puts Public Health & Safety in Jeopardy!!!
09.20.04 (7:26 am)   [edit]
[b]Study Finds Bush Administration Obstructs and Weakens Regulation Across Agencies, Withdraws Over 200 Proposed Rules and Fails to Complete Over 70% of Target Actions[/b]

WASHINGTON - September 15 - An analysis of four key federal agencies charged with safeguarding the public's air, water, food, health, transportation and workplaces reveals consistent and widespread obstruction, neglect and weakening of protections. The report attributes the pattern to a pro-corporate bias of the Bush administration and appointed agency heads favoring narrow special interests over the public good.

In "The Bush Regulatory Record: A Pattern of Failure," OMB Watch analysts document the Bush administration's inaction and obstruction since taking office:

* EPA has withdrawn 90 agenda items, most addressing clean air and water, and in the first half of 2004 failed to achieve 73 percent of benchmark items it scheduled for completion.

* FDA has withdrawn 62 agenda items, including one to track contaminated blood, and in the first half of 2004 failed to achieve 70 percent of benchmark items it scheduled for completion.

* NHTSA has withdrawn 31 auto safety agenda items and, in the first half of 2004, failed to achieve 71 percent of the benchmark items scheduled for completion.

* OSHA has withdrawn 24 agenda items, including one to protect workers from exposure to tuberculosis, and in the first half of 2004 it failed to advance 75 percent of benchmark items scheduled for action. It also eliminated data collection on musculoskeletal disorders.

Combined, these four agencies have either withdrawn or failed to complete work on a majority of the regulatory priorities already on the agenda when the Bush administration took office – ranging from 56 percent at the EPA to 86 percent at OSHA. Moreover, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved only 25 economically significant rules total for the four agencies -- roughly half the number approved during each term of the Clinton administration and a third of those approved during the Bush I administration.

"When our government abdicates its responsibility to provide us the protections we need, people suffer," said Robert Shull, the report's lead author and Senior Regulatory Policy Analyst with OMB Watch. "It weakens our nation and has long-term implications for generations to come."

"Since 2001, key regulatory plans have been abandoned, and those few major rules that have been undertaken favor corporate over public interests," said Gary Bass, OMB Watch Executive Director. "Statistics show a pattern of neglect, but not how the few rules being done decidedly favor industry."

This report updates and expands our May 2004 report, "Special Interest Takeover: The Bush Administration and the Dismantling of Public Safeguards," which OMB Watch and Center for American Progress produced for Citizens for Sensible Safeguards (CSS). Download both reports and background at www.ombwatch.org/regs http://www.ombwatch.org/regs .

[i]OMB Watch is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization located in Washington, DC, and was founded in 1983 to promote government accountability and citizen participation, and to lift the veil of secrecy shrouding the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the federal agencies it oversees[/i].

[b]THE BUSH REGULATORY RECORD: A PATTERN OF FAILURE[/b]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2 Executive Summary

7 Introduction: Continuing in the Wrong Direction

7 About this Analysis

9 Findings

10 Continuing to Shirk Responsibility

14 Inaction: Continuing to Let Pressing Needs Go Unaddressed

16 Continuing to Place Special Interests Over the Public Interest

24 EPA: Withering on the Vine

24 Floating With the Current: Items Completed

25 Coal-Fired Power Plants: Permission to Pollute

26 Emission Standards for Automakers

27 Clear Skies: Ozone

28 Lost in the Smog: Items Withdrawn

30 Stuck in the Mud: Continued Inaction

32 FDA: In Critical Condition

32 Band-Aids: Items Completed

34 Malpractice: Items Withdrawn

34 Protecting the Blood Supply: Patient Notification

35 Preventing Mad Cow Disease

36 Bad Medicine: Continued Inaction

39 NHTSA: Driving in the Slow Lane

39 Lurching Forward: Items Completed

41 Tire Safety

42 Fuel Integrity

43 Early Warning Systems

43 Duel Fuel

44 Spinning Its Wheels: Items Withdrawn

45 Considering in a Different Context

45 Waiting for More Research

46 Stuck in Neutral: Continued Inaction

47 Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems

48 Fuel Economy: Structural Reform

51 OSHA: Sleeping on the Job

51 Just Showing Up: Items Completed

53 Shirking Responsibility: Items Withdrawn

53 Tuberculosis

54 Glycol Ethers

[b]CONTACT:[/b] OMB Watch - http://www.ombwatch.org/
Robert Shull 202/234-8494x276
Herb Ettel 202/234-8494x213
 
... OMB Watch: Bush Administration Puts Public Health & Safety in Jeopardy!!!
09.20.04 (7:25 am)   [edit]
[b]Study Finds Bush Administration Obstructs and Weakens Regulation Across Agencies, Withdraws Over 200 Proposed Rules and Fails to Complete Over 70% of Target Actions[/b]

WASHINGTON - September 15 - An analysis of four key federal agencies charged with safeguarding the public's air, water, food, health, transportation and workplaces reveals consistent and widespread obstruction, neglect and weakening of protections. The report attributes the pattern to a pro-corporate bias of the Bush administration and appointed agency heads favoring narrow special interests over the public good.

In "The Bush Regulatory Record: A Pattern of Failure," OMB Watch analysts document the Bush administration's inaction and obstruction since taking office:

* EPA has withdrawn 90 agenda items, most addressing clean air and water, and in the first half of 2004 failed to achieve 73 percent of benchmark items it scheduled for completion.

* FDA has withdrawn 62 agenda items, including one to track contaminated blood, and in the first half of 2004 failed to achieve 70 percent of benchmark items it scheduled for completion.

* NHTSA has withdrawn 31 auto safety agenda items and, in the first half of 2004, failed to achieve 71 percent of the benchmark items scheduled for completion.

* OSHA has withdrawn 24 agenda items, including one to protect workers from exposure to tuberculosis, and in the first half of 2004 it failed to advance 75 percent of benchmark items scheduled for action. It also eliminated data collection on musculoskeletal disorders.

Combined, these four agencies have either withdrawn or failed to complete work on a majority of the regulatory priorities already on the agenda when the Bush administration took office – ranging from 56 percent at the EPA to 86 percent at OSHA. Moreover, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved only 25 economically significant rules total for the four agencies -- roughly half the number approved during each term of the Clinton administration and a third of those approved during the Bush I administration.

"When our government abdicates its responsibility to provide us the protections we need, people suffer," said Robert Shull, the report's lead author and Senior Regulatory Policy Analyst with OMB Watch. "It weakens our nation and has long-term implications for generations to come."

"Since 2001, key regulatory plans have been abandoned, and those few major rules that have been undertaken favor corporate over public interests," said Gary Bass, OMB Watch Executive Director. "Statistics show a pattern of neglect, but not how the few rules being done decidedly favor industry."

This report updates and expands our May 2004 report, "Special Interest Takeover: The Bush Administration and the Dismantling of Public Safeguards," which OMB Watch and Center for American Progress produced for Citizens for Sensible Safeguards (CSS). Download both reports and background at www.ombwatch.org/regs http://www.ombwatch.org/regs .

[i]OMB Watch is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization located in Washington, DC, and was founded in 1983 to promote government accountability and citizen participation, and to lift the veil of secrecy shrouding the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the federal agencies it oversees[/i].

[b]THE BUSH REGULATORY RECORD: A PATTERN OF FAILURE[/b]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2 Executive Summary

7 Introduction: Continuing in the Wrong Direction

7 About this Analysis

9 Findings

10 Continuing to Shirk Responsibility

14 Inaction: Continuing to Let Pressing Needs Go Unaddressed

16 Continuing to Place Special Interests Over the Public Interest

24 EPA: Withering on the Vine

24 Floating With the Current: Items Completed

25 Coal-Fired Power Plants: Permission to Pollute

26 Emission Standards for Automakers

27 Clear Skies: Ozone

28 Lost in the Smog: Items Withdrawn

30 Stuck in the Mud: Continued Inaction

32 FDA: In Critical Condition

32 Band-Aids: Items Completed

34 Malpractice: Items Withdrawn

34 Protecting the Blood Supply: Patient Notification

35 Preventing Mad Cow Disease

36 Bad Medicine: Continued Inaction

39 NHTSA: Driving in the Slow Lane

39 Lurching Forward: Items Completed

41 Tire Safety

42 Fuel Integrity

43 Early Warning Systems

43 Duel Fuel

44 Spinning Its Wheels: Items Withdrawn

45 Considering in a Different Context

45 Waiting for More Research

46 Stuck in Neutral: Continued Inaction

47 Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems

48 Fuel Economy: Structural Reform

51 OSHA: Sleeping on the Job

51 Just Showing Up: Items Completed

53 Shirking Responsibility: Items Withdrawn

53 Tuberculosis

54 Glycol Ethers

[b]CONTACT:[/b] OMB Watch - http://www.ombwatch.org/
Robert Shull 202/234-8494x276
Herb Ettel 202/234-8494x213
 
............. A Hierarchy of Suffering .............
09.20.04 (7:20 am)   [edit]
[b]Since 9/11, America has Used its Victimhood to Demand a Monopoly on the Right to Feel and to Inflict Pain[/b]

The tale of how I became a Nazi and my Nazi harasser became a Jew is as intriguing as it is instructive. Last November I wrote a column about a racist email sent to me by an employee of an insurance company and my frustrations over the manner in which my grievance was handled. The man in question (a white, South African supporter of the British National party who complained of "undesirables flooding into Britain") was subsequently fired. His dismissal was not as a result of my column but because my original complaint had alerted the company to a previously unreported pattern of racist behaviour on his part. Of the numerous responses from the public I received, most were supportive but many were more abusive than the original message. One stood out. Incensed that something as "trivial" as racist abuse could lead to a man losing his job, one reader compared me to the person who betrayed Anne Frank. And so, through contorted metaphor and contemptuous logic, the harasser became the victim and the harassed was transformed into the perpetrator.

Victimhood is a powerful, yet contradictory, force. Powerful because, once claimed, it can provide the moral basis for redress, retaliation and even revenge in order to right any given wrong - real or imagined. The defence of everything from the death penalty to affirmative action, Serbian nationalism to equality legislation, are all underpinned, to some degree, by the notion of victimhood. Contradictory because, in order to harness that power, one must first admit weakness. Victims, by their very nature, have less power than their persecutors: victimhood is a passive state - the result of bad things happening to people who are unable to prevent it.

In the past, the right has exploited this tension to render victimhood a dirty word - a label synonymous with whingers, whiners, failures and fantasists. Revealing no empathy with the powerless nor any grasp of historical context, they wilfully ignore the potential for victimhood to morph into resistance, preferring instead to lampoon it as a loser's charter.

"The left had become little more than a meeting place for balkanised groups of discontents, all bent on extracting their quota of public shame and their slice of the entitlement pie," wrote columnist Norah Vincent three years ago. "All of them blaming their personal failures on their race, their sex, their sexual orientation, their disability, their socioeconomic status and a million other things."

Such arguments were always flawed. But increasingly they are beginning to look downright farcical. For if you are looking for someone making political hay out of victimhood nowadays, look no further than the right. The ones most ready, willing and able to turn the manipulation of pain into an art form have found their home among the world's most powerful.

Read the Daily Mail and you would believe that Britain is under threat from the most impoverished and vulnerable people in the land. Asylum seekers, immigrants, "welfare cheats" and single mothers are bringing the nation to its knees. While the country is going to the dogs, the Christians are, apparently, heading for the lions. "We, as a people, and the government, must make strenuous efforts to promote and defend our culture, and especially the place of Christianity in it and the rights to self-expression by Christians," wrote Simon Heffer earlier this year.

Across the Atlantic, the right's new role as victims is even more prevalent and pronounced. Straight relationships are threatened by the prospect of gay marriage, white workers are threatened by affirmative action, American workers are threatened by third world labourers, America is threatened by everybody.

At times, this means the powerful appropriating the icons, tropes and rhetoric of the powerless in their entirety, to hilarious - if disturbing - effect. Last year Roy Moore, the former Republican chief justice of Alabama, led a failed bid to keep a monument of the Ten Commandments in his courthouse. Standing before a group of supporters, some of whom were waving Confederate flags, emblem of the slave-holding South, he said: "If the 'rule of law' means to do everything a judge tells you to do, we would still have slavery in this country." Wearing T-shirts proclaiming "Islam is a lie, homosexuality is a sin, abortion is murder", they then sang We Shall Overcome.

In these cases, victimhood serves merely as a pretext for a backlash to reassert, extend or expand the dominance of the powerful. If these people are victims of anything, it is of the threat to their entitlement and privilege.

In others, however, genuine suffering acts as a precursor to genuine vindictiveness. The threat of suicide bombings in Israel serves as the rationale for building the wall to protect Israelis from terrorist attack. In the current intifada, the Israelis have lost more citizens than during the six-day war - no one should belittle their pain. Palestinians, on the other hand, have lost about three times as many people due to Israeli military aggression. Who, one wonders, needs protecting from whom - or is some people's pain more valuable than others'?

But nowhere is the abuse of victimhood more blatant than in the US presidential election, where September 11 remains the central plank of the Republicans' strategy for re-election. The fact that their campaign begins with the terror attacks is not only understandable but also, arguably, right - this is the most significant thing to happen in the US since Bush assumed office.

The trouble is that the campaign's message ends with that day also. September 11 has served not as a starting point from which to better understand the world but as an excuse not to understand it at all. It is a reference point that brooks no argument and needs no logic. No weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? "The next time, the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud?" No United Nations authority? "We will never again wait for permission to defend our country." No link between Saddam and al-Qaida? "They only have to be right once. We have to be right every time."

This is the real link between Iraq and 9/11 - the rhetorical dissembling that renders victimhood not a point from which they might identify with and connect to the rest of humanity but a means to turn their back on humanity. They portray America's pain as a result of 9/11 not only as unique in its expression but also superior in its intensity.

When 3,000 people died on September 11, Le Monde declared: "We are all Americans now." Around 12,000 civilians have died in Iraq since the beginning of the war, yet one waits in vain for anyone to declare that we have all become Iraqis, or Afghans, let alone Palestinians. This is not a competition. Sadly, there are enough victims to go around. Sadder still, if the US continues on its present path, there will be many more. Demanding a monopoly on the right to feel and to inflict pain simply inverts victimhood's regular contradiction - the Bush administration displays material strength and moral weakness. - http://www.commondreams.org/v...


 
............. A Hierarchy of Suffering .............
09.20.04 (7:19 am)   [edit]
[b]Since 9/11, America has Used its Victimhood to Demand a Monopoly on the Right to Feel and to Inflict Pain[/b]

The tale of how I became a Nazi and my Nazi harasser became a Jew is as intriguing as it is instructive. Last November I wrote a column about a racist email sent to me by an employee of an insurance company and my frustrations over the manner in which my grievance was handled. The man in question (a white, South African supporter of the British National party who complained of "undesirables flooding into Britain") was subsequently fired. His dismissal was not as a result of my column but because my original complaint had alerted the company to a previously unreported pattern of racist behaviour on his part. Of the numerous responses from the public I received, most were supportive but many were more abusive than the original message. One stood out. Incensed that something as "trivial" as racist abuse could lead to a man losing his job, one reader compared me to the person who betrayed Anne Frank. And so, through contorted metaphor and contemptuous logic, the harasser became the victim and the harassed was transformed into the perpetrator.

Victimhood is a powerful, yet contradictory, force. Powerful because, once claimed, it can provide the moral basis for redress, retaliation and even revenge in order to right any given wrong - real or imagined. The defence of everything from the death penalty to affirmative action, Serbian nationalism to equality legislation, are all underpinned, to some degree, by the notion of victimhood. Contradictory because, in order to harness that power, one must first admit weakness. Victims, by their very nature, have less power than their persecutors: victimhood is a passive state - the result of bad things happening to people who are unable to prevent it.

In the past, the right has exploited this tension to render victimhood a dirty word - a label synonymous with whingers, whiners, failures and fantasists. Revealing no empathy with the powerless nor any grasp of historical context, they wilfully ignore the potential for victimhood to morph into resistance, preferring instead to lampoon it as a loser's charter.

"The left had become little more than a meeting place for balkanised groups of discontents, all bent on extracting their quota of public shame and their slice of the entitlement pie," wrote columnist Norah Vincent three years ago. "All of them blaming their personal failures on their race, their sex, their sexual orientation, their disability, their socioeconomic status and a million other things."

Such arguments were always flawed. But increasingly they are beginning to look downright farcical. For if you are looking for someone making political hay out of victimhood nowadays, look no further than the right. The ones most ready, willing and able to turn the manipulation of pain into an art form have found their home among the world's most powerful.

Read the Daily Mail and you would believe that Britain is under threat from the most impoverished and vulnerable people in the land. Asylum seekers, immigrants, "welfare cheats" and single mothers are bringing the nation to its knees. While the country is going to the dogs, the Christians are, apparently, heading for the lions. "We, as a people, and the government, must make strenuous efforts to promote and defend our culture, and especially the place of Christianity in it and the rights to self-expression by Christians," wrote Simon Heffer earlier this year.

Across the Atlantic, the right's new role as victims is even more prevalent and pronounced. Straight relationships are threatened by the prospect of gay marriage, white workers are threatened by affirmative action, American workers are threatened by third world labourers, America is threatened by everybody.

At times, this means the powerful appropriating the icons, tropes and rhetoric of the powerless in their entirety, to hilarious - if disturbing - effect. Last year Roy Moore, the former Republican chief justice of Alabama, led a failed bid to keep a monument of the Ten Commandments in his courthouse. Standing before a group of supporters, some of whom were waving Confederate flags, emblem of the slave-holding South, he said: "If the 'rule of law' means to do everything a judge tells you to do, we would still have slavery in this country." Wearing T-shirts proclaiming "Islam is a lie, homosexuality is a sin, abortion is murder", they then sang We Shall Overcome.

In these cases, victimhood serves merely as a pretext for a backlash to reassert, extend or expand the dominance of the powerful. If these people are victims of anything, it is of the threat to their entitlement and privilege.

In others, however, genuine suffering acts as a precursor to genuine vindictiveness. The threat of suicide bombings in Israel serves as the rationale for building the wall to protect Israelis from terrorist attack. In the current intifada, the Israelis have lost more citizens than during the six-day war - no one should belittle their pain. Palestinians, on the other hand, have lost about three times as many people due to Israeli military aggression. Who, one wonders, needs protecting from whom - or is some people's pain more valuable than others'?

But nowhere is the abuse of victimhood more blatant than in the US presidential election, where September 11 remains the central plank of the Republicans' strategy for re-election. The fact that their campaign begins with the terror attacks is not only understandable but also, arguably, right - this is the most significant thing to happen in the US since Bush assumed office.

The trouble is that the campaign's message ends with that day also. September 11 has served not as a starting point from which to better understand the world but as an excuse not to understand it at all. It is a reference point that brooks no argument and needs no logic. No weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? "The next time, the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud?" No United Nations authority? "We will never again wait for permission to defend our country." No link between Saddam and al-Qaida? "They only have to be right once. We have to be right every time."

This is the real link between Iraq and 9/11 - the rhetorical dissembling that renders victimhood not a point from which they might identify with and connect to the rest of humanity but a means to turn their back on humanity. They portray America's pain as a result of 9/11 not only as unique in its expression but also superior in its intensity.

When 3,000 people died on September 11, Le Monde declared: "We are all Americans now." Around 12,000 civilians have died in Iraq since the beginning of the war, yet one waits in vain for anyone to declare that we have all become Iraqis, or Afghans, let alone Palestinians. This is not a competition. Sadly, there are enough victims to go around. Sadder still, if the US continues on its present path, there will be many more. Demanding a monopoly on the right to feel and to inflict pain simply inverts victimhood's regular contradiction - the Bush administration displays material strength and moral weakness. - http://www.commondreams.org/v...


 
............. A Hierarchy of Suffering .............
09.20.04 (7:18 am)   [