I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
First!
http://tinyurl.com/yqem8
Umm... this is surprising? The press are blithely ignorant of the PRESENT... why would we expect them to know anything about the PAST?
AARRGGHH!!!!
"Screw history, here’s a scary look at our future"
give the guy a break, he'd just recently found out that "gullible" actually *is* in the dictionary.
http://yourlogohere.blogspot.com
I have to say, there are some people who not only don't know much history, but could care less about the fact, or actively dislike the fact that the discipline of history exists at all.
As a historian myself, this gets my goat.
Yes, it does amaze me that people in fact ARE this ignorant of history.
But, read James Loewen's "Lies My Teacher Taught Me," which is about how American history is taught in public schools today. Many things are sanitized, glorified, over-simplified to the point of characture, and basically presented in such a way as to weed out any controversy and have the United States looking like the mythological "city on a hill."
But, that said, one would think that the sons-of-bitches would have learned something about American History in college.
Yes, a lot of Americans are ignorant. Even a lot of EDUCATED Americans are ignorant . . . and naive.
Idiots and fools.
No, I'd really rather pat them on the head and say, "Welcome home, brother. Vote Kerry." If we kick 'em out for their sins, they'll go to Nader.
He's not thinking.
That's the problem in America today. Faith-based pseudo-existentialism. We're the good guys because we're the good guys.
It says so, right there on the label. Bush says there is a Saddam-Al Qaeda connection so surely it must be so.
The hijackers say if we stay quiet and in our seats everything will be OK.
Why would the lie to us?
You don't have to know history of your own country to be a journalist in this country now. Just blind patriotism is enough.
Remember Woodward/Bernstein-the press was an honorable profession then-I now rank 90% of them a notch above child molesters on the respect scale.
>>looking like the mythological "city
>>on a hill."
And that's exactly what it is, because the GIPPER said so.
Wash, rinse, and condemned to repeat...
Silly Press, don't they know we are supposed to blame Tenet for everything?
He have a degree in journalism?
Journalists did a lot better when they were drunken cynics who dressed badly. This is what comes of making it respectable. H. Finn had respectablity down just right.
Going after the people who are now levelling harsh criticism at the administration, but didn't do so quite soon enough for our tastes -- is that the plan? I understand the sentiment, but it seems wildly counterproductive. If Brian Dickerson, Richard Cohen, David Broder, Thomas Friedman or anyone else wants to rip W. a new one, by all means let him go about his business.
I believe the media may be finally deciding to end their opposition to w is "unpatriotic" theme.
GWB=Great Walking Bird
Too full of shit to fly.
A knowledge of history - any variety of history - brings with it the obligation to admit, acknowledge or even recognise a disparity between 'then' and 'now'. It implies that what has been done might have consequences. The fancy that we 'learn from history' has become a threat for if there is something to be learnt, and it is not, then we may have to be responsible for something that we have done.
Thus, history has been reduced to a hobby, something that buffs play at on the weekends, or cute little factoids. It has to be that way - otherwise the other foundations of civilisation might also have to be considered and that we cannot do.
I have to say I'm with alkali on this one. If we can attract some former bien-pensants cautious of dissing Bush before 9/11, then perhaps it's all to the good, for the moment.
lets all send him a mail on his gullibility.
and as for spitting on a man when hes alreading down... the press needs it.
not apologizing for the press, but with so many options out there to get your news (though so relatively few even bother, including our president) all that matters to a reporter is getting that byline or facetime...only the big names get the opportunity to buck the trends and go against the grain...
In general, the media ownership hasn't tolerated anyone rocking the boat on this wartime presidency, until recently when Hersh and New Yorker started rubbing their noses in the shitstorm emanating from the White House, Pentagon and Langley.
Let's welcome aboard any survivors and tell them welcome home....
As an ex-journalist (and husband of a journalist), I must protest just a little bit. Most of them have nothing to do with coverage of 9/11-terrorism or Iraq (yes, completely separate issues), and do as good a job as possible given the information they have, the willingness of their sources to share that information, the ability to find sources who will share information that others won't, and the time constraints they face on a daily (sometimes hourly) basis. I know I got a lot of scoops in my career. Just as often, I was swindled by sources. Sometimes, I was swindled by editors. You do what you can.
However, there WASN'T nearly enough skepticism by the reporters, particularly those on TV, who covered the run-up to Iraq. Why? War coverage is better television than U.N. debates. They'd rather have the ratings than the truth.
James:
Why do you perpetuate the meme that the word "gullible" is in the dictionary when it clearly is NOT in the dictionary?
Smitty, you pretty much nailed it- no skepticism during the run-up to the war. What I want to know is how anyone thought a nation that had been bombed back to the stone age- bombed for a decade no less- could pose any serious threat. At least now, the press is finally showing some skepticism
My coworker said the exact thing when Richard Clarke testified to the 9-11 commision.
She just couldn't believe that our president would do that to us which automatically made Clarke a liar. I did pat her on the head and said that the president either lied or is completely incompetent.
IMHO I think reporters that NOW see the light should be welcomed to the truth fold.
However, r's in congress that haven't seen the light yet, but will turn on w as his ratings fall- FUCK THEM.
Earlier in the same editorial, Dickerson writes:
"Nobody with the brains God gave tapioca pudding ever believed there was a Saddam-Osama connection in the first place."
If he knew Bush was lying then, why the two-year delay before he felt "sickened?"
Thus, history has been reduced to a hobby, something that buffs play at on the weekends, or cute little factoids.
GWPDA
It's worse than that, really. So much of history is done in books, most of them badly written and so they go almost entirely unread and reviewed in obscure journals read by only a few more people than read the books themselves. A lot of this is propaganda paid for by rich right wingers or foundations. The stuff which gets regurgitated once in a while by people like George Will.
Instead we get a sort of quasi-legit history by a raft of star authors. You can all name them all, no list required. Historians "as seen on TV" who produce best sellers which then get made into TV movies. This is the level of history that our popular press relies on.
TV "journalists" don't bother with the books, they watch the movies instead.
Gore Vidal is honest enough to produce novels which are closer to history than a lot of the "non-fiction".
I dunno, I guess I naively thought Bush would do the right thing after 9/11 too, even though I didn't vote for him or trust him. I live in NYC and felt pretty helpless in those days and I really hoped they'd wipe Osama and everything he stood for off the face of the earth. Stupid me.
I think Smitty has hit the nail on the head: "They'd rather have the ratings than the truth."
Every little last thing in our culture is commodified, and that started about 50 years ago when television began its ascent to the position -- Arbiter of Reality -- that it occupies today. Marketing and advertising are the forces that shape the content of our mass media. Truth is a red-headed stepchild only occasionally acknowledged, and then only if it's "sexy" (or about sex, which is perceived as the same thing).
Nobody has to know anything about history today, and nobody seems ashamed of or embarrassed by such great gaping holes in their knowledge. And the Bush crowd has elevated ignorance and arrogance to cardinal virtues! "Stay the course"-- what a bunch of tawdry, criminal assholes.
BTW, speaking of history: passing along a recommendation I received from someone on another blog: Rick Atkinson's book "An Army At Dawn: The War in North Africa 1942 - 1943" is a great read.
As someone slightly embarrassed and very angry at having been swindled myself before this war started, I can point my finger at Colin Powell as the man most responsible.
I knew Bush was a fool -- though I didn't yet know he was a liar -- but when I saw Colin Powell speak before the UN, I trusted him. That was before I knew that he was showing me pictures of chicken coops.
We took the President seriously after 9/11, because we thought he had a heart. We took Powell seriously after 9/11, because he was Colin fuckin' Powell. We believed our intelligence, because it's the United States, and we have the best intelligence in the world.
We were wrong about all of that. Misguided, naive, perhaps. But insane and ignorant?
Atrios quoted Digby on this page: "The people who are in charge are second rate thinkers who rose to the top because the pool was so small to begin with."
Don't thin the pool because so many of us were wrong once. We are right now, and we'll do right in November. Be happy about it, dammit.
This is what in fact has sustained Bush thus far-that so many Americans could not believe a president could be so dishonest and cynical. He has been sustained by this cognitive disconnect.
A club ought to be created called the "Santayana Syndrome Club" (SSC) in honor of the Spanish philosopher who said, "those who fail to learn the lessons or history are condemned to repeat them."
We could then place all journalists, academics, pundits, politicians, et. al. into this club when they claim "ignorance" about the obvious.
Being inducted into the SSC would be a badge of dishonor that could be expiated by good works in the future.
Highly desired expulsion from the Club would depend on how serious the offense and how great the effort for redemption!
EPT, I'd object to the 'badly written' label - at least for some history. Some history is just poorly published, because it doesn't have the ear of the big money... but agreed, the historians in the public eye, especially on TV, really aren't of the best.
What the media that has taken on the role of explaining and justifying the Bush position. MSNBC glosses over the lies and tries to haul out new explantions. They had on Condi Rice jr from the Hoover Institute and she said the overarching(a stupid word) reason was because Saddam was a brutal tyrant and destablized the region. Oy vey.
Yes, the "press" is beginning to wake up, but BushBoy's fucking poll numbers are getting BETTER! Are we in some kind of bizarro universe?
That just depresses me deeply. Maybe some of it is the "dead Reagan bounce," but I saw some poll numbers last night that said Bush's "Iraq" approval numbers rose from 44 to 57%. The same poll had Bush ahead of Kerry (well within the margin of error, but still).
Have they really sold the public on this bogus Iraq "handover"? What are these people thinking? Just makes me want to scream at the top of my lungs.
Hold on a second. When in U.S. history have we gone after the completely wrong country for an attack by a different country? Is there really a precedent?
Provoking a war to take Mexican land doesn't count. Presidents lie all the time, but on this scale? I'm not so sure anyone has told such momentous lies in U.S. history.
And on exceptions to the rule, like cinnamondog, I've got a recommendation also: 'Marianne in Chains', an award-winning book by my former history tutor Robert Gildea on the German Occupation of France 1940-44; slightly controversial because showing the very varied narratives of the history of this time.
Most Americans are naturally inclined to trust their government. It's sad, really.
Reporters in the w age should be required to read AND understand how Hitler was aided by Goebells (Rove)
and Mussolini (Blair).
Many more parallels than Iraq and WW11 are comparable bull shit.
Yes, John G, something similar was crossing my mind. I mean, after 9/11, there was a military operation in Afghanistan, where there were AQ training camps. But we now know that at least some of the admin wanted to go into Iraq from the get-go irrespective of where AQ actually was.
The Big Lie. Works every time. EVERY time.
And dontcha love Putin coming out now saying his government was providing info to Bush & Co warning of Saddams bad intentions? Jesus, they must have been fucking laughing their asses off (and probably still are) with every new tidbit of info.... So little effort invested and such a HUGE reward.
How quickly the mighty fall.
The hardest thing in the world is to admit you were wrong about something fundamental to your world view. (Trust me on this, as an ex-Biblethumper I know whereof I speak).
I'd give full credit and a hearty welcome to anyone going through the bewildering experience of having their eyes opened. Treat them kindly...
Chomsky calls education a system of imposed ignorance, especially for those being groomed to pull the system's levers. That makes them dependable. Idiots like Dickinson are where they are because they have demonstrated that they have internalized the Dogma.
What the hell is this guy thinking?
Well, here's what he was thinking. The long term CW, is that politics ends at the water's edge. That doesn't mean what most people think it means. Most people think that says you can't criticize leaders on foreign affairs. That's false. What it means, is that those who are gathering the intellegence for these things, and presenting the cases for them, must do them in a fair, evenhanded manner.
Meaning no lies.
Most of the conventional press were suckered in to this idea. They thought, really, that Bush, or any president, would lie about something like this. Not enough cynicsm I guess.
The winners write history books
About long ago fucking crooks.
They paint them with gild,
The truth's unfulfilled,
It's hard to find impartial cooks.
Bush could have said from the beginning we were going to remove Saddam because he mistreated his people. Instead, he chose to scare the American people about an imminent threat. To me, that just shows his contempt for the American people.
What exactly is a guardian of the public discourse anyhow? Who appointed this guy or anyone else as a guardian? I'd rather remain an orphan than have this guy for a guardian.
Slim Whitman- yes that is troubling. Reagans death and the Iraqi handover LOL have given w a bump.
The strategy for w is to put our troops in "safe" forts where our guys aren't getting killed, and hope that Iraq doesn't fall apart- which is hopeful but not real thinking.
The interim govt of Iraq is discussing right now about declaring martial law as its first order on takeover, to try to control the deteriorating situation.
That will surely lead to chaos, necesitating US troops to enter the fray.
I don't know.....I can sort of sympathize with this guy. I've learned a lot about politics in the past four years. As bad as I knew the Bush administration would be, I never thought he'd go quite as far as he did. So I can't blame someone else for being as naive as I was.
'Course, the rise of The Sadly Repentant has done all but nothing to increase the visibility and voice of those who opposed the boy king from the beginning -- especially those who espoused the very reasons for opposition that The Sadly Repentant now claim to understand and support.
slightly OT
Anyone read Kaus today? God he sucks. An excerpt:
Whatever you think of the Iraq War, there are several justifications that survive even an extreme interpretation of the 9/11 Commission report on Saddam and Al Qaeda. For one, the human rights justification; For another, the idea that the status quo in the Middle East wasn't working in our favor, and we needed to set up a new, more democratic dynamic. For a third, the idea that Saddam may not have had stockpiles of WMDs, but he acted as if he did, in violation of U.N. demands, and we had to call his bluff and find out. I'm not sure these arguments added up to a prudential case for war, but haven't they long since surpassed the disputed Saddam/Osama connection as the Bush administration's surviving justifications?
http://slate.msn.com//id/2102469
What a joke.
GWB=Great Walking Bird
Too full of shit to fly.
veritas
Goofy Walking Bird, perhaps.
Any reference to Dubya which includes "great" is simply too farfetched, IMNSFHO.
How did this guy miss W's sordid history in business and as governor, not to mention that of the people he surrounded himself with? You couldn't know this stuff and believe for one moment he would do the right thing.
"Journalists did a lot better when they were drunken cynics who dressed badly. This is what comes of making it respectable. H. Finn had respectability down just right."
Absolutely. Who the hell would want to make a movie about the modern press? My god, what a bore.
But you know?...people who care are adapting. Out here in blog land you can find all the facts you want. Truth or Lies, its all here.
The real problem is that the American People don't really care. Nothing will change in this country until there is a crisis so bad that most of us Boomers have hit the skids.
People never change in this country until things get so bad that they have to adapt or die. We can adapt too. We've done it in the past and can do it again. It’s like the gas situation. Until gas is $3.00 a gallon people will continue to bye gas-guzzlers. But when it does, we will all adapt somehow. It will just hurt more than it really has to because of our short sightedness. Even though every one knows that gas is a limited commodity, they just don’t care. I think its safe to say that if we had conserved fuel since the 70's, like we almost started to do back then, we wouldn't be in the Middle East making total asses of ourselves.
No one will change their habits until they have no choice. They same rules apply to politics. Until a sizeable chunk us are out of jobs, standing in bread lines to feed our starving families, we won’t care about what the political class does in our name. That’s why unions are dead in this country. Everyone feels they can cut a better deal in society on his or her own. But that will change when the shit hits the fan economically. Right now no one has a sense that we are all in this together because we are taught that it’s not necessary to think about anyone but ourselves. It truly has become Dog eat Dog.
The press has no interest in promoting good citizenship, because it would force them to take political stands that would go against Big Media’s corporate philosophy. These people who are now pretending that they can’t believe that the President lied to them, are liars too. They knew what was going on. They just didn’t care.
If "Americans are naturally inclined to trust their government," it might have a lot to do with the "ceremonial deism" (mentioned a couple threads back) enshrined and enforced by the fucking Pledge. It's a tragic disgrace.
And if the evil chimp's poll numbers don't sink now, after yesterday's completely damning set of news stories, that's it, the fix really is in, and we're screwed, it's over.
Peace.
Speaking of History --
Latest FaBlog: "Big Loser"
I confess too. After 9/11 I figured that the professionals in the permanent gov't (like Richard Clarke, not that I heard of him before the first 9/11 hearings) would do the right things right, even if the puppet in the White House was ostensibly in charge. And I confess that I believed Colin Powell at the UN. And I confess that I was fascinated by the whole run-up and invasion -- the embedded reporters, the green night vision video -- and I figured the professionals in the military would do that right too.
And I confess, a major reason for this stupidity of mine was that I was so permanently annoyed by certain colleagues of mine who are old-fashioned granola-eating, grape-boycotting, birkenstock-wearing, long-gray-ponytail-wearing hippie peaceniks that there was no way I was going to agree with them on anything. (I'm a third-generation yellow-dog moderate Dem whose mother had pictures of FDR and JFK on the wall. They're probably Nader voters or nonvoters on principle.)
They were right. I was wrong. I was wrong on all those counts. I confess. I've been sending money to JK and handing out JK buttons to friends and neighbors with enthusiasm as my well-deserved penance.
lets not rub it in.
incognito- IF the rationale for war is because some dictator mistreated his people, that would never fly.
Using that rationale we would have to invade half the world. Who is going to save us from Dictator Bush?
Remember Woodward/Bernstein-the press was an honorable profession then-I now rank 90% of them a notch above child molesters on the respect scale.
Exactly wrong, and exactly what Woodward has exploited for lo these many years. Woodward was obviously (and more clearly with hindsight) the designated representative of the establishment in the Post newsroom. Bernstein was a police reporter who in the ordinary course of events would never have been let anywhere near anything political and never was again.
Hold on a second. When in U.S. history have we gone after the completely wrong country for an attack by a different country? Is there really a precedent?
Remember Reagan?
Much as I hate to stick pins in a good gloat, let me point out to all the budding Santayanas in here that what has happened in the last couple of years is a slice, however small, of history. Guys like the DFP writer have learned something during that slice of history.
Quite a few of the posts in this thread would therefore seem to be less than well reasoned.
Shorter version: stop feeling so damn superior and be happy that the press is finally waking up.
TK: I've been reading Chomsky's "Hegemony or Survival." His recounting of past U.S. foreign actions is remarkable. As I get older, the more I unlearn all those facts I learned originally.
Give him a complete dressing-down and a cuff on the back of the head for being an idiot, then give him a big hug and say "Welcome aboard!"
Dickerson writes mostly on state (Michigan) issues, particularly legal issues, on which he is very, very good. Like his paper, the Free Press, his politics are generally center/left. Iraq and other national issues are rather off his normal beat. If you want to know what skullduggery the Republican majority of the Michigan Supreme Court is up to, Dickerson is your guy.
I think the criticism of him here is excessive in the absence of examples of Dickerson actually writing foolish pro-adminstration things in his column.
There are so many scandals and crimes committed by the w crime famiglia that I can not keep up.
I am beginning to think that the strategy is that not one crime can be completely investigated before another two are committed, therefore the investigators can not ever complete an investigation before having to jump into another one.
I've been hesitant to take the "impeachment" talk seriously. Not because I didn't think Bush was behaving criminally, but because many of these crimes have been committed with the consent of the governed. If there were an impeachment, my gut said, it would just be a cynical political act to shift blame in case of an incontrovertible smoking gun (like the Abu Ghraib pictures).
Anyone with any sense knew that the WMD evidence was shaky. Anyone with any sense knew the connection between al Qaeda and Saddam was extremely shaky. Anybody with any sense knew that Democracy in Iraq was likely a long way off under any circumstances. And anybody with any sense knew that Bush's main objective was to secure political control of Iraq's oil (Carter Doctrine and all).
Well, I have to say I've changed my mind. If we don't impeach Bush (or at least soundly reject him at the polls), it will be a public admission that political parties are stronger than the Constitution, above the law, and not subject to oversight from anything except other parties.
And if the evil chimp's poll numbers don't sink now, after yesterday's completely damning set of news stories, that's it, the fix really is in, and we're screwed, it's over.
Nah. Today is June 18, for Pete's sake.
Ignorant of Rhetoric...Ignorant of Important Qualifiers...
Read the column. Most of us couldn't agree more with what is written. I think Atrios's attack is out of line. Did we all get this pissy when Helen Thomas called Bush the "worst president ever"?
Don't worry, the Press will be going back to sleep now. Putin says he told Bush right after 9-11 that Saddam was involved in unspecified "terrorist assassination program related activities" so in retrospect we can all see that the war was justified.
Let's move on here. Look -- it's Kobe.
Bing said: "Who the hell would want to make a movie about the modern press? My god, what a bore."
'Tis true. Getting anyone in my old office out for an after-work drink was like pulling teeth. They all had lawns to mow, kids to raise, antiques to buy, SUVs to service. My wife's current employer--a financial wire I will not name--is slightly more interesting, but only slightly so.
This administration took a fundamental trust placed in them by the people of this nation and deliberately abused that trust for political gain.
It does not get any more fucked up than that, folks.
Bing, baby, you've still got that swing!
Never trust a politician who can't take an honest bribe and then vote the other way.
Never read a newspaper whose writers don't keep a fifth of booze and two glasses in the bottom drawer of their desk.
Never, ever, underestimate the self-serving venality of republicans.
i don't know about brian dickerson specifically, but in general i don't think the problem is one of ignorance.
if it was just ignorance, there wouldn't be the anger and denial when confronted with contrary evidence not consistent with the myth (or maybe myth is too symplistic and it really is "faith-based pseudo-existentialism").
i think the anger and denial is a symtom of FEAR. it is scarey to consider seriously for the first time that "any president would mislead his constituents about so important a matter" AND that it has happened before - a lot.
rather than condemning, we might try supporting people through the scariest parts, remembering our own fears and helping them to confront theirs.
Don't mean to veer OT here, but wanted to get this out in front of some folks. I've been checking the Fahrenheit 9/11 advance tickets site daily to check and see if any theaters in Mississippi will have the courage or inclination to show it. I've got to admit, I wasn't very hopeful.
Now, it seems there is one brave theater (which actually represents a Southern theater chain) that will indeed be showing the film.
I wonder if y'all would be interested in showing them some love. They'll surely be on the receiving end of some pretty viscious stuff, and any encouragement they get might embolden them to show the film on more screens in the South...they also happen to own the local thater in my sleepy little hamlet, so this isn't an entirely selfless request.
I've got more details and contact info over at The Thorn Papers
thanks y'all.
Implicit trust in the President? Am I the only person who immediately, off the top of their head, thinks of:
Teapot Dome
Gulf of Tonkin
Watergate
Iran Contra
In a way, he does have a point. We elect our leaders to look out for our interests. And throughout our history, for the most part, they have. It's only recently, within the last two decades especially, that they're only there looking after their own interests--fuck the American people. Is it our fault? Most American don't have the time to follow in detail everything that's going on like many of us here. If I was married and had kids, it would be hard for me in today's economic environment. For the most part, they elect their officials and forget about it until perhaps 6 months before the next election. What's warped the political process is you have garbage that's floated to the top when scruples and a solemn commitment to public service went totally out the window and political office became much more lucrative with corporate lobbyists. You also have the American people who don't have the time like they once did being squeezed with time contraints at work, maybe choking down a bologna sandwich between jobs. This has led to small groups,way past their actual numbers, like the freepers and the fundies to make greater inroads into pushing their agenda meanwhile attacking, muzzling and neutering the media. Most Americans don't know what's going on under the radar like us. The way I see it, is take out all financial incentives of public office. It wont weed out the best and brightest. It will weed out the greedy and worthless.
expect a fresh Moscow offensive on the rebels in Chechnya in 4, 3, 2, 1....
Frankly, I am just now beginning to get pretty pissed off by all this. In the beginning I thought it was just a matter of ignorance, now I believe it was (is) a matter of "agressive stupidity." The press are now just as guilty as Richard Pearl in foisting this disaster on us. The press had a responsibility, for which they were well paid, to question and investigate. Fuck, as citizens they had this responsibility. Instead, they went along with the party line and deliberately fed the country the misrepresentations and outright lies of this misadministration. I think some of the most cuplable should be brought up on charges of treason.
As for the populace not being aware. Give em a break. All these great productivity numbers just mean that people are working longer and harder for the same money or less. An average family now needs two-three incomes just to maintain a modest middle-class lifestyle. Add in a couple of kids, and there just isn't time for doing much more than reading a paper on the subway. Which is why the press has a duty, even more now than in years past, to do their fucking jobs.
For those that are finally beginning to wake up, great, they're forgiven and welcome to the fold. But...that window of forgiveness is beginning to close. At a certain point they have to be recognized as whores, and find another way to make a living.
It's funny to me that people seem totally willing to believe the conspiracies of the past and to fear the conspiracies of the future, but you are somehow some kind of fringey nut job if you think there are any conspiracies in the present. Sure Presidents lied in the past to drag us into war, but not now... not today. Sure, voter fraud has been rampant throughout history, but not now, not today. Why not? Are we really so evolved? Give me a freaking break!
Bush and McCain are on Fox
Gall dammit! I never said imminent, I said inniment!
How about "Gorged Walking Bird"?
Bit harsh there, I think. Emotionally traumatic times will cause people to leave their better judgment at home sometimes, and insulting them for it won't help that.
The worst part about the article is that he got his facts wrong.
The 9/11 commission did NOT say there were no connections between Al Qaeda and Iraq. It said there were no connections between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. Something that GW Bush has already stated.
I agree wholeheartedly with your conclusion that this gentleman is an idiot. He is a very useful idiot for your liberal causes. Repeating Reuters incorrect headlines as if they were news.
Congrats on having him on your team.
With the criminals in charge of congress, it seems that Plame may be our only real hope. Unjustified war, 9/11 LIHOP, bankrupting the country to benefit the rich, disregarding international treaties and US laws on torture, turning the rest of the world against the US- yawn who cares, w is a good Christian.
Thinking about what I just wrote, maybe Plame won't even do it.
And then there is also this:
Russia warned the United States on several occasions that Iraq's Saddam Hussein planned "terrorist attacks" on its soil, President Vladimir Putin said Friday.
"After the events of September 11, 2001, and before the start of the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services several times received such information and passed it on to their American colleagues," he told reporters.
The Kremlin leader, who was speaking in the Kazakh capital, said Russian intelligence services had many times received information that Saddam's special forces were preparing terrorist attacks in the United States "and beyond its borders on American military and civilian targets."
Journalists did a lot better when they were drunken cynics who dressed badly. This is what comes of making it respectable. H. Finn had respectablity down just right.
This is what comes of allowing the same handful of conservative zillionaires to own our major radio/TV/newspaper companies. They make sure that those reporters who toe the party line are advanced to the head of the line.
The first thing Kerry needs to do, after bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, is to strengthen the FCC's anti-trust provisions. ClearChannel in particular needs to be broken up.
Goddamn, Bush is front of troops again. He's in front of troops everyday. He was in front of troops yesterday.
McCain introduces Bush to the troops. He obviously is still in denial.
Too many of the modern journalists majored in communications, not history or political science. And God forbid they ever majored in economics! I mean, then they might understand trade issues and tax issues!
Having majored in communications, they can only talk about 'perceptions' and 'marketing' sorts of issues instead of policy.
Elaine in NY..
Can I buy you a cocktail?
McCain is a piece of shit.
Read his article in TNR online again saying the war in Iraq was necessary.
No, monica_nyc, what I'm saying is yesterday it seemed that it was ALL finally coming unglued--the whole PNAC-BushCo-media house of horrors--I and everyone I talked to could FEEL it, and it was sickening because the next thought/feeling was "Jesus, what evil trick will they pull now?" Yesterday on these boards several "I'm scared" comments were made. These revelations of everything many of us here feared/knew to be true, the awareness (now popular) that it goes much, much deeper (and higher) than most people still dare to say... it's all becoming clear, and after all the crimes BushCo have committed since stealing the election, how can we not be terrified of what's next? They're evil men, and they're getting desperate.
On a smaller point, I meant that if his poll numbers go up, the polls themselves are fixed (which would hardly be a surprise)--or the People are so scared they're afraid NOT to support him.... Which has been a suspicion of mine for awhile.
I swear there's more denial in this country about 9-11 than about anything that's happened since. America is going insane with grief and fear....
OK, enough.
Peace.
-Speedy
Fielding, TheaL - actually, what you're seeing right here is why, in the quaint, old-fashion way I was trained, history is not written nor examined for many, many years after the event. So long as there are people alive to alter, re-write and edit event descriptions, it's not history so much as public affairs, social science, politics - not history. Right now what you're seeing is the same kind of false memory being applied to recorded events as was just evident with Reagan. The now common substitution of current events which took place ten years ago for history, occurred, I think, after the second world war. With that, historians found they just couldn't wait. However, that's all historiography and method, not history itself. None of us have much patience for any of it any more and I suppose quite soon we'll all do the historical edit before things are even finished happening.
Back to work - pocket biographies take a lot of time and I'm only up to Dunsterville's expedition to North Persia in 1918 right now. Yes, that little excursion to protect signals intelligence and the Baku oil fields.
"The Kremlin leader, who was speaking in the Kazakh capital, said Russian intelligence services had many times received information that Saddam's special forces were preparing terrorist attacks in the United States "and beyond its borders on American military and civilian targets."
Did he now? Well I guess Old Vlad was either a liar feeding false information to the US or is now just making things up. I have a very hard time believing anything an ex-KGB agent has to say. Putin will say anything to help get our support for his actions in Chechnya.
"This is what in fact has sustained Bush thus far-that so many Americans could not believe a president could be so dishonest and cynical. He has been sustained by this cognitive disconnect."
Bob H
-Yo!
They didn't have that problem with Bill Clinton; lies and bullshit 24/7.
Presidential lying: it's not about stained blue dresses anymore! :-(
Got impeachment?
I would like someone to point out somewhere prominent that radical skepticism of government is what CREATED America. No radical skepticism = no Revolution = you'd all still be speaking English....
Well, the logic is inescapable:
1) Presidents do not lie about important things.
2) George Bush lies about important things.
3) George Bush is not a president.
DESPITE EVERYTHING, THE RIGHT WAR.
Hard Truth
by John McCain
Post date 06.17.04 | Issue date 06.28.04
Still, we have learned some bitter lessons in the process. Our intelligence failed--we greatly overestimated Iraq's weapons of mass destruction while underestimating Saddam's destruction of Iraq's human capital. We invaded Iraq with enough troops to topple the regime, but not enough to prevent looting, stabilize the country, or maintain security. The administration misjudged the natural nationalism of the Iraqi people and hesitated to hand them true power over their own affairs--an error that has compounded the sense of unwanted occupation that prevails in some parts of the country. Yet, while we have made costly mistakes and encountered serious obstacles, the decision to invade Iraq was the correct one, on both security and moral grounds. ...
http://tinyurl.com/3yctq
(need a subscription though)
Ignorance of *current* events! I'm listening to Diane Rehm on NPR and her Friday news panel, this week with Jeanne Cummings (The Wall Street Journal), Susan Page (USA Today), and Clarence Page (Chicago Tribune). A caller asked why we haven't heard diddly in the press about FBI translator Sibel Edmonds (currently bound and gagged somewhere) and the subsequent retro-classification of her testimony. All three alleged reporters disavowed knowledge of the story! One of the women said something like "Gee I don't know anything about that - where'd you hear about it?" and Clarence Page's comment was "I guess I'll be doing a Google search as soon as I leave."
Gosh Clarence, my Google search took all of 0.26 seconds and revealed 13,200 hits, including a 60 Minutes story on her that references an article in... The Chicago Tribune!
Let's see- do I feel good about myself for keeping informed about major events, or should I just feel sick about the blatant lack of awareness or interest in much of anything of substance in our liberal media?
Why Does History Hate America??!
Putin: Russia Gave Bush Iraq Intelligence
IMO, it's a consummate display of 'hedged doublespeak'. Here's what Putin actually said.
1. Putin said he couldn't comment on how critical the Russians' information was in the U.S. decision to invade Iraq. He said Russia didn't have any information that Saddam's regime had actually been behind any terrorist acts.
2. the Russian special services, the intelligence service, received information that officials from Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist attacks in the United States and outside it against the U.S. military and other interests," Putin said.
3. "It's one thing to have information that Saddam's regime is preparing terrorist attacks, (but) we didn't have information that it was involved in any known terrorist attacks," Putin said.
4. Putin said the intelligence didn't cause Russia to waver from its firm opposition to the war.
5. "Despite that information about terrorist attacks being prepared by Saddam's regime, Russia's position on Iraq remains unchanged," Putin said.
6. Putin didn't elaborate on any details of the terror plots or mention whether they were tied to the al-Qaida terror network.
Bush/Cheney position:
Saddam had "numerous contacts" with al-Qaida and said Iraqi agents had met with the terror network's leader, Osama bin Laden in Sudan. Saddam "was a threat because he had terrorist connections — not only al-Qaida connections, but other connections to terrorist organizations," Bush said.
Again Putin DID NOT allude to any connection between Saddam and al-Qaida
IMO all of these points DO NOT detract from the findings of the 9/11 commission who conlcuded that while there were contacts between al-Qaida and Iraq, they did not appear to have produced "a collaborative relationship."
Bush/Cheney are desparate and are doing some backroom dealing and trying to put a positive spin on why the invaded Iraq.
Speculation on why Putin said this. One major reason is Geopolitics and Oil.
Oil still the major US strategic consideration in Central Asia
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/con.../view/full/
2973
Putin is hedging his bets. He probably PREFERS Kerry but knows Bush MIGHT win so he doesn't need to do anything to make Kerry reasonable but Bush has to think he owes him a favor to be marginally reasonable. He only needs to appear to be helping Bush.
Putin saw a golden opportunity and is smartly playing his cards.
Mitchell,
Good points about journalism education, one I debate with my wife all the time. Frankly, I thought my journalism "education" was more or less useless, since I learned 99 percent of what I knew about journalism at the time by working at my college newspaper.
What I'd tell any youngster wanting to pursue it as a career (and I still believe it's a noble one, if you pursue it justly and fairly, with an eye on only telling the truth): Get a bachelor's degree in ANYTHING else while working at your college newspaper. THEN, once you have a bachelor's degree, go to a one-year journalism master's program (often times, there are specialty master's programs) for the connections into the industry. Five years, you've got a masters in the field you want to pursue, done.
You can expect some major concessions to Russia's oil industry any time now. Maybe a joint project that will cost the American taxpayer a fortune. Doubt the American oil industry will foot the bill.
Thealogie, I'm kind of hard on them, I guess. I'll try to think of particular examples the next time. But have you ever tried to get through some of the crap they put out at Heritage? I lost fewer brain cells my freshman year of college at dorm parties.
Most Outrageous use of the BIG LIE technique. You simply cannot believe anyone let alone the president would lie like this and yet....
But it is the media --who refuse to admit they were wrong from the start about George Bush that has created the biggest problem. There is no reporting. There is only speculation and Republican talking points and snide remarks about "where is John Kerry"
Bush did get a bounce out of the Reagan funeral. Because the media turned it into a Bush ad.
"But, that said, one would think that the sons-of-bitches would have learned something about American History in college."
Problem is, once they get to college they think they know everything. So when they get confronted with "the truth" it makes them uncomfortable and angry. A few can actually think - for the rest, The Truth becomes fodder for more 'liberal-bashing'.
quasi- yeah thats right, I remember now. w mentioned many times leading up to the Iraq war that he had intelligence from Russia that Saddam was actively planning to attack the US.
Yes, yes I remember.
You fuckin asshat- please provide a w statement verifying Putins statement BEFORE the war.
RE w always speaking to military- pls remember that most in the military are there because they could not get another job, needed the GI bill, or are actually patriotic.
Remember also that he is their boss.
Why Does History Hate America??!
sunzoo
Why does America hate history?
OT,
Bringing this up might look like beating a dead horse, but the truth is the horse's ass zombie still walks and we havn't driven the stake through his rotten heart.
Bloomberg reports: "President George W. Bush didn't react for five to seven minutes after learning a second aircraft had hit New York's World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001, because he was trying to 'project strength and calm,' a national commission investigating the attacks said."
Ain't that the essence of Bush: always concerned about form and not substance.
Cheney blames media for blurring Saddam, 9/11
'We have never been able to prove that there was a connection,' VP says
Updated: 9:58 a.m. ET June 18, 2004WASHINGTON - Blaming what he called "lazy" reporters for blurring the distinction, Vice President Dick Cheney said that while "overwhelming" evidence shows a past relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida, the Bush administration never accused Saddam of helping with the Sept. 11 attacks
"We have never been able to prove that there was a connection there on 9/11," he said in the CNBC interview that aired on NBC's "Today" show Friday.
Cheney was echoing comments by President Bush on Thursday, and they followed a report by the bipartisan Sept. 11 commission that found no "collaborative relationship" between the former Iraqi leader and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida network.
Cheney, however, insisted the case was not closed into whether there was an Iraq connection to the Sept. 11 attacks. "We don't know."
The vice president noted a disputed report about an alleged meeting between an Iraqi intelligence official and lead hijacker Mohamed Atta in the Czech Republic in April 2001. "We've never been able to confirm or to knock it down," Cheney said.
The 9/11 commission, however, said in one of three reports issued this week that "based on the evidence available — including investigation by Czech and U.S. authorities plus detainee reporting — we do not believe that such a meeting occurred."
Cheney responded that, for his part, the findings remained inconclusive. "It doesn't add anything from my perspective. I mean, I still am a skeptic."
Overall, the vice president defended the administration's view of Iraq's links to al-Qaida, saying the "the evidence is overwhelming" and citing the commission report's evidence of a meeting between bin Laden and an Iraqi official in 1994 in Sudan, as well as the presence of terror suspect Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq.
He also disagreed with the report in that the administration believes Saddam helped finance and train al-Qaida operatives.
"I don't know what they know," Cheney said of the commission, adding however that he "probably" knows more about Saddam and al-Qaida than the panel.
But Cheney declined to disagree outright with the report's conclusion that no evidence exists to connect Saddam to Sept. 11 — saying instead that, "I disagree with the way their findings have been portrayed. There has been enormous confusion."
Reiterating the distinction between contacts and actual collaboration on the Sept. 11 attacks, Cheney said some news media had blurred that distinction and reported the administration was directly tying the attacks to Saddam.
"The press is, with all due respect there are exceptions, often times lazy, often simply reports what someone else in the press says without doing their homework," Cheney said.
Natural or man-mad
Actually, it is not quite that insane, many people in the communities expected exactly that, that Bushie would not go around the country from town to town bawling and yawling if there wasn’t something very serious going on.
.....
I mean for gosh sakes, music stars who are not known for being alarmist were saying It’s Imminent Threat, people.
.....
bo- and it gets worse. After he left the classroom, he made no calls, but spent the next 15 minutes coming up with a press statement...
I for one am encouraged by the fact that we are starting to see columns from people who have turned on the chimp and expressed their disgust.
The credibility of the rationale for their prior allegiance may be low, but it's the "ex" part of ex-Bush supporters that we need to focus on.
Welcome to the fight, you former invertebrates. This time I know our side is going to win.
Attention Deficit Disorder is a disease
Which afflicts too many Americans if you please
They tend to forget
Bushboy's crimes and yet
Always remember their favorite TV sleaze!
America has been so successful in recent history, that the majority of us are hopelessly naive.
To believe that your own success is partly attributable to criminal activity is difficult for most...
But it is true of all human societies. If they did not lie, cheat, steal and kill, they would not be where they are today.
It was inevitable that someone would seek to split off from America and steal the wealth and power from the rest of us. It is human nature.
I don't think Brian Dickerson actually believes that a president would never mislead his constituents. It just sounds nice now that he realizes which side is right.
Unfortunately, it may be too late. Bush already has another totalitarian leader (Putin) doing PR for him.
I think what is growing in the communities is the sense that they were exploited, their resources, support and people have been used and exploited and by Bushie in a bungled and bamboozled way.
.....
putin give preznit turkee
No, I don't agree. Usually, Presidents would NOT lie about matters of grave national security, if not to the public, at least to Congress.
Bush lied to everyone, Congress, the media and by extension, the public,The only people who knew the truth were in the White House, and they didn't care.
Bush's actions are unpresidented.
Thanks for adding that. I should have poached a little more from Froomkin's column in the WaPo.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp...ion/whbriefing/
Lots of links, including one to atrios's Bush Notes on Thursday.
Clarence Page's comment was "I guess I'll be doing a Google search as soon as I leave."
Hey, at least he knows of Google and will be doing some research now that Sibel was brought to his attention!
A great deal of effort has been spent to create a personal image for Bush. I know people who think he's made mistakes, but consider him highly moral.
Nixon looked shifty: it was easier to reverse opinions of his character. Not so with this well-indoctrinated misconception today. Aaaarrrggghhh!
I'm not buying his bullshit nor am i going to "welcome" him back to the side of reason. Fuck him. If I could spend 15 minutes a day on the internet debunking Bush's prewar bullshit, than this asshole who calls himself a journalist should have done the same.
He can go take a flying fuck for all I care.
And as for journalist education - I'll wager most of the puppets you see today are communications majors. Or model school dropouts.
OT:
"Defendant Passaro allegedly assisted military personal is detaining Wali,” Ashcroft said.
More like 'Asscroft slurred in an incomprehensible fashion'.
Enjoy the fun of a "patriotic" Republican preznit telling Murcans to ignore other Murcans and listen to the fine support he's getting from a corroborating witness who happens to be the head of Russia.
Maybe that Rooshin can again offer to send observers to the Florida election this November.
sounds like Putin wants to be shore Bushie doesn’t go busting outta iWaq in a premature manner.
.....
Good idea, Gatchaman. We don't want a single vote we didn't get last time (2000).
Run with that plan. Sounds like a winner.
"Don't know much about history,
Don't know much about geography,"
hueyplong,
My post had nothing to do with this joker votes for. I hope he does vote for Kerry, but he can still go fuck himself.
BREAKING NEWS: Irony is oficially dead.
More media news of the day:
Adam Nagourney and Richard W. Stevenson of the NY Times fellate Dick Cheney:
http://tinyurl.com/ywd6j
.
Gotta say folks, Putin’s creds are also looking a little lulu at this point, I know he prolly means well, but the timing has gotta be real hilarious, why did he vote the way he did at the UN?
.....
It looks a lot more like folks are noivos that Bushie is just gonna bust himself outta iWaq in a premature way and they want to be shore he stays the course.
.....
A lot of Americans including members of the press, have a Parent/Child belief system when it comes to the president. He’s this superlative figure that can do no wrong, tell no lies. Then one day -- BAM -- an older wiser kid tells you there is no such thing as Santa and your whole outlook on life changes.
Time for these people to grow up and act like the responsible adults it takes to own up to a true democracy.
Question, ALWAYS QUESTION, authority.
Anybody know how old Brian Dickerson is? If he's too young to remember the lies that supported the Vietnam War or the criminal enterprise run by the Nixon regime or the undermining of the Constitution during Iran-Conta (and has only learned about these things through the filter of "America is always a force for good" myth-making), then I can hardly blame him for not realizing how truly despicable his leaders can be. I know a lot about American history, but it took the Vietnam War to teach me some very valuable lessons: (1)Never trust the government to tell the truth. (2)Always assume government spokesmen are lying. (3) Always understand that mainstream media is a tool of corporate and business interests that profit most when the unwashed proles are kept ignorant of what is actually going on around them.
Every reporter should understand those rules. Of course, following them will mean that the reporter never gets promoted to an exalted position in the Washington Punditry Industry, but at least he'll save his soul from damnation.
What's this bit about Iraqui electricity no longer being distributed according to loyalty to the regime? This is the second time I've heard it and it sounds to be BS.
(aside from the electricity black out being equally bad to all today)
Hueyplong, I agree with you, getting a ringing endorsement from the Rooshin Preznit is not a real confidence builder at this point 
.
.....
"The press is, with all due respect there are exceptions, often times lazy, often simply reports what someone else in the press says without doing their homework," Cheney said.
Wow, I actually agree with Big Time Dick on something. So come on Press, due your homework. Dig up every quote from Big Time from the past few years, let's see what he had to say about the justification for the Iraq war...
I wrote about this same issue about 2 months ago (scroll down to "My Obsession" -- incidentally, how do I get it to go to the post directly?).
I think it's not so much that these guys were stupid and recklessly indifferent to history, so much as there was basically no choice but to trust this particular preznit at this particular time. I suspended disbelief until it was clear that the preznit was lying (For me, it was the Powell presentation to the UN security council, before the invasion). These pundits were just a little stupider than I am, which is pretty easy to be since I'm a fuckin brain. 
"...And then it hit me. I've become a clown, a class clown, and it sickens
me."
YY, it's possible, thinking of the way in which (for sake of argument) Mugabe (I know, different despot) controlled vital supplies so they only got to supporters of his party.
But from what I hear, there's now a sort of black market in electricity - some people with generators are charging the earth to others without.
John G asked "Hold on a second. When in U.S. history have we gone after the completely wrong country for an attack by a different country? Is there really a precedent?"
Can I point out a little brain fart the media has passed on here. Afghanistan didn't attack us. A terrorist group operating out of Afghanistan did. The Taliban did not attack us, they allowed a terrorist group to operate within the borders , who attacked us. And BTW, both groups Taliban and the terrorists enjoyed US support and funding in the past....
Rather like the IRA operated with the US gathering money and arms from US sources; which they used to for terrorist attacks in the U.K.
Or how Cuba exile groups trained and operated in the US and committed acts of terror against Cuba (included blowing up a civilian plane only to be PARDONED by Bush Sr.)
Or how Central American terrorists trained in the US and enjoyed US support while doing it.
Frankly a number of CA nations, Cuba & the UK have the full right under that logic to invade the US, don't they?
matt, is that a TITMOUSE?
unfortunately, the baby boomers were taught to respect the president. they grew up with eisenhower and JFK and all was swell. even nixon and RR's iran-contra could not wipe out the fact that the preznit's can be bad. and not clnton sex bad. but actually working against american. america is always looking for the happy ending.
we do not like in a democracy anymore. we live in the united hollywood states.
I mean what is Bush saying, hey, fuhgeddabout this commission, fuhmission, let’s listen to my good friend Pootie Poot. .
.....
Besides the good friend Pootie Poot says there was no connection between AQ and Saddam.
.....
Holy Canolli .
.....
Looks kinda weird at this point in the proceedings Bushie is still having to scramble to defend his positions, right .
.....
Wasn’t this supposed to be where he was all cool and relaxed and coasting to victory.
.....
Ooops.
.....
I think it is all these controversies and let-downs that people perceive from Bushie that are giving Congressional Dems the lead edge over Rethugs .
.....
Pansypoo I beg to differ. There are plenty of baby boomers who can tell the difference between the office of president and Shrubby the retarded monkey. I just think he had a really great window of opportunity after 9/11, and he took full advantage. I'm beginning to forgive, although the guy yesterday who said he was too non-partisan was a fuckwad.
No, I don't agree. Usually, Presidents would NOT lie about matters of grave national security, if not to the public, at least to Congress.
That word, "usually", it's a pretty weak qualifier.
I think that is also why Bushie and Rover chose to have a hugs and kisses policy all the way into Fall.
.....
The is the same lame excuse that is being offered up both by Joe Biden and the editors of the New Republic in separate mea culpas in the 6/28/04 issue. John McCain has a piece saying it's OK - we needed to attack anyway.
OT:
New poll shows Kerry up by 3% in West Virginia
OT:
Very poignant plea from American hostage Johnson’s wife and from his family.
.....
I really hope they will release him or that Saudi authorities can obtain his rescue.
.....
Come on. This column is not some "shocked at gambling in Rick's" moment. He calls Bush a liar, flat-out. He severely criticizes the press and the public for ignoring the lies. If you think Bush's post-9/11 cynicism and depravity are par for the historical course, then you might as well vote for him. Apparently, we can't do any better.
"Hold on a second. When in U.S. history have we gone after the completely wrong country for an attack by a different country? Is there really a precedent?
Provoking a war to take Mexican land doesn't count. Presidents lie all the time, but on this scale? I'm not so sure anyone has told such momentous lies in U.S. history.
John G"
Umm, do the words "Gulf of Tonkin" ring a bell? The Vietnam war was a proxy war - Vietnam never did anything to us, but they were communist, and the spectre of Communism in the 1960s has morphed into the spectre of Terrorism in this century. The parallels are strong. And Nixon, not 9/11, changed everything - he showed that a U.S. president is capable of going to any lengths to keep his power intact. The same scenario is being played out by the Bush-men today.
So he lied. We shouldn't changes horses in mid-Apocalypse
Sorry but I can't remember whose quote this was is, but "Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote republican."
Janet, many of us actually do agree with Biden and McCain, what people feel ticked with Bushie is how he busted in and the yawling and bawling and lack of preps and then getting us into bog down and sucking sound.
.....
THE MARCH TO WAR
WAS PURE AND STRAIGHT
LIES ARE A PART
OF WONDROUS FATE
GO BUSH!
+++
Craig in New Vatican City, the mood out here is for change and a new day is on the way .
.....
Mr. Dickerson should go to the families of the 954 dead soldiers and explain his "mea culpa I was (and still am) an ignorant idiot" to them.
It's funny to me that people seem totally willing to believe the conspiracies of the past and to fear the conspiracies of the future, but you are somehow some kind of fringey nut job if you think there are any conspiracies in the present. Sure Presidents lied in the past to drag us into war, but not now... not today. Sure, voter fraud has been rampant throughout history, but not now, not today. Why not? Are we really so evolved? Give me a freaking break!
RosieNac | Email | Homepage | 06.18.04 - 11:01 am
Very insightful comment. So true.
THE CHILDREN CRY
AND SOLDIERS TOO
WE KILL FOR PEACE
AND OIL TOO!
GO BUSH!
+++
I know there are many of us who "expected the worst" from this administration and, at least speaking for myself, I am quite surprised how wrong I was.
"The worst" has turned out to be so much more f*&%ed up, twisted, corrupt, venal, and monumentally stupid than I could've ever imagined.
And believe me, I'm QUITE imaginative!
From way upstream: I know quite a lot about masked boobies too!
Janet many of us are also concerned that he took his eye off the ball in Afghanistan.
.....
What a jackass. You are a member of the PRESS, you are PAID to serve the public by asking hard questions, by not being naive. What the fuck is with our press corps that finding out that government is sometimes less than totally forthcoming seems to have traumatized them as much as finding out that mommy and daddy aren't always right. Bunch of pathetic, infantile clowns.
GOD IN HEAVEN
DEVIL IN HELL
SHRUB IN POWER
WHAT'S THAT SMELL?
GO BUSH!
+++
MinneB9,
e.g., Things are going so se
Afghan Town Falls to Rebel, Foreign Troops Attacked
"It was the third time a provincial governor has been forced to flee to safety in recent months by local commanders opposed to Karzai's appointments to the provinces."
http://www.reuters.com/
printerFr...storyID=5458723
Why does reality hate Dick Cheney?
there was basically no choice but to trust this particular preznit at this particular time
I have to respectfully disagree with this. I think the best analogy is to a Mississippi River steambat gambler. The Bush administration put its entire political capital on the table as a bluff, and the price of calling him on this bluff was more than anyone was willing to risk. Why? Because he had a bunch of armed thugs standing around and subtly touching the pistols shoved in their belts.
"Yes, Mr. President. A pair of deuces does beat a full house."
I'll smack the first person that tries to pat me on the head, but I'd like to note that a lot of the lies spoken about Iraq and the reasons for war were spoken during the 2002 and 2003 State of the Union addresses - I'm not ignorant of American history; it's my little corner of the world - and yet I am still genuinely surprised that Bush would lie from that pulpit - he is under oath up there and every word he said can be checked and double-checked -
This is not 16 poorly chosen words we're talking about - this is a slew of obfuscations, exagerations, and lies -
There's seems to be a lethal mixture of arrogance, hubris, and stupidity that led to these lies - Believing the lies has nothing to do with ignorance of history - It has more to do with not understanding the depths this administration would sink to, to push its agenda forward -
I mean there will be consequences for telling such egregious lies and putting good kids in harms' way unnecessarily, right?
My beef with the press is why, when the evidence of the untruths started to surface (the left end of the blogosphere has been months ahead of the mainstream press on these stories), did they wait so long to go after the facts and present them to their readership? Why did they print Republican spin as news?
Anyhoo, this is a story with a happy ending, because it's 4/12 'til the election and Dickerson has not only came 'round, he calls the President a LIAR - and then says,"that's an outrage worth our attention, even if it is becoming old news."
So Atrios, enjoy the turning of the tide - don't begrudge those who come over late -
Oh yeah, I forgot to add - McCain justifies the Iraq invasion for the same reasons as Kosovo - we knew he had already used WMD on Kurds and Iran - excuse me, didn't the US provide those WMDs and sponsor their use on Iran? Talk about a deficit of history.
And almost simultaneously with Powell's performance at the UN I was listening to a deconstruction of the yellowcake, etc. on Pacifica network - there is no excuse for the lack of press skepticism the only explanations are deliberate editorial backing off or incompetant laziness amongst the reporters, and I see no excuses for the politicians, either.
The Free Press is Detroit's "liberal" paper (The News is the conservative). Dickerson's column is typical. The papers usually wind up with the same positions; the Freep just goes thru more contortions and hand-wringing to do it.
I have a communist friend who prides herself on being history-savvy and cynical. She despised Clinton for the Iraq sanctions and for selling out progressive causes. I expected her to be as appalled as I at Bush's (s)election, but she bought into the "no real difference between the parties" meme.
After 911 and the Patriot Act I mentioned the scary parallels between current events and Nazi Germany. She did the "where's the Holocaust, Bush is no Hitler" dismissal, until I explained that Hitler wasn't "Hitler" either until later, when his intent became undeniable.
Before that people in Germany were saying, yeah, those Nazis are too goofy to be evil, Hitler's more reasonable than we thought, Mein Kampf was just fodder for his base, etc. And most of all - oh, no one's really that bad; we're Christian, civilized people; nothing like that can happen here.
People grasp at the inevitable details that differ to deny the overall picture.
I propose a compromise for Gatchaman. The columnist votes for Kerry, then goes off to perform seemingly impossible acts of self gratification.
Deal?
That would be a "steamboat" gambler.
Putin is a slimeball, ain't he? But he's a smart slimeball. Gotta give him that.
And remember, George looked into his eyes and saw a man he could deal with.
Hello Everyone I'm Dick Cheney's asshole. I just wanted to share the fact that I don't get any real excercise these days. I don't get slammed shut when he tells those really big whoppers anymore. I'm nice and relaxed all the time, (except when Colin Powell comes around). I think my master is sort of insane.
Media uses Bush logic:
"This administration is doing a great job because this administration is doing a great job. And another thing, this administration is doing a great job. Now look at it from another angle, this administration is doing a great job. Everyone thinks this administration is doing a great job. Can you imagine what it would be like if this administration was not in charge? That's right, they are doing a great job. In fact, an unidentified high-level source has just told me that this administration is doing a great job. Back to you, cuntface in Atlanta."
"Thank you, you are doing a great job."
I think what fooled the press was all w's smiling and backslapping - he did not fit the caricature of the evil villain. Same with Reagan. Both men cultivated an "aw shucks" demeanor that contrasted mightily with tricky dick's scowl and awkwardness.
Reminds me of something I heard about training children about "stranger danger." Some tests have been done where kids are shown pictures of different people and ask which ones are strangers. The clean-cut, well-dressed white ones never get picked though ALL the pictures teh kids see are of strangers.
How, you may ask, can Cheny sit there and say with a straight face that they never said that Saddam had any connection to 9/11?
It's easy. Because it's true. To a certain extent.
I don't recall ever hearing anyone in the administration ever say that Saddam was directly connected to 9/11. What I do recall hearing over and over and over again is that there were contacts between AQ and Saddam's government. This all had the desired effect, of course, of repeatedly putting Saddam's name in the same sentence with AQ. Dutifully repeated as nauseum by the docile media, the result was, as intended, a mental link from 9/11 to Saddam in the minds of the listening, but not thinking, public.
So when the commission comes out and says there is no verifiable link between Saddam and 9/11, Cheney can sit there and say "We never said there was."
This is the pattern we see over and over again. The president (via his script writers) is a skillful liar to the extent that he can create a desired false impression without actually saying anything that is provably false.
"putin give preznit turkee"
More like putin give preznit head.
Minnie, agreed. Politics aside, how scary for his wife and friends.
A.
How about saving your vitriol for the "journalists" who are still propping up Dim Son?
When someone wakes up, that's no reason to bash him for not waking up sooner.
hueyplong - that is a deal I can live with!
If we could solve the puzzle of how to invoke a "Dickerson Moment" in every voting citizen in this country--or at least more of them than we have so far--our problems would truly be solved. Because this notion that "The President said this, therefore it is true" is at the heart of both Bush's strategy (if it can be dignified with such a term) and its success. As many noted above, there is a deep-seated desire to believe Our President cares about All The People once elected, because the alternative is just too terrifying.
Headline writers (copy editors) are even worse influences sometimes than the writers they cover for. Today one is out there (WaPo or NYT, I forget) saying something like "Bush Differs With 9/11 Commission." This makes it seem like his Big Lie is on an equal moral footing with the commission's months of research, testimony, and fact collection.
And an awful lot of people never read past the headlines. Or the "scroll" feeds on CNN and its imitators, which are in the same category and often even worse.
OT, but speaking of McCain, guess what the man many would have as Kerry's VP is doing the next few days? If you guessed campaigning for Miserable Failure (introducing him at rallies in Oregon and Washington, no less), you win! This is so sad to see. McCain was one of the few Repugs a reasonable person could actually respect.
1. Anyone else out there remember Rep. Charles Wiggins? Perhaps the most heartbreaking moment in Watergate. A diehard Nixon supporter, who after the 18 1/2 minute tape was released, in a voice breaking into a cry, voted 'Aye' to impeach. It's so much easier to pat yourself on the back for consistent righteousness than to admit you've been wrong on matters of life and death. I disagree with Atrios' blanket condemnation. The scribe, however errant in his past, should be noted as someone who never had to wake up, but did. He may never be so asleep again.
Demonizing the opposition is always a mistake. They're people you have to live with absent totalitarianism, and win to your side. It's never too late to welcome to your point of view someone who occasionally lets facts perturb his preconceptions.
2. America hates history because it includes so much ugliness as well as greatness, and the two are rarely held in common. Either one exalts the former (left wing) or the latter (right wing). Neither polarity seems capable of saying that we are a people capable of both greatness and evil, and that our future on an increasingly smaller planet requires that we be cognizant of both, such that we may base our future conduct on that which is great within us. How much more do I have to write like this before I'm a patrician, French-loving, Volvo-driving class traitor?
Putin is doing a Fabulous job..." gwb
Ya know, some people, journalists, and newspapers are sometimes "slow on the take." The Detroit Free Press is the so-called liberal paper in Detroit, whereas The Detroit News is the 'winger' paper and will never change its mind. Cut the man in The Free Press some slack, 'cuz we'll welcome anyone who has an epiphany and sees the light of day regarding the corruptness of this administration. As the saying goes, "Show me a man who doesn't change his mind, and I'll show you a man who doesn't think." And yes, that's an apt description of the inept clown in the White House.
I have sad news for many. It has been confirmed that John McCain is a Republican.
That's right, a Republican.
And I have more, shocking news. He will campaign for Republicans and against Democrats.
How's the old saying go?
Power corrupts. The United States Presidency corrupts absolutely.
Hueplong...I understand that McCain is a Republican, but given the fact that he disagrees with Miserable Failure on the prosecution of the Iraq War, tax cuts, campaign finance reform, the 9/11 commission, the investigation of pre-war intelligence, and many other issues, I'm somewhat surprised that McCain would campaign for Miserable Failure. I can understand McCain saying something like, "I'm a Republican. I'll support the president." But to actually campaign for Miserable Failure indicates of level of enthusiasm for him that I don't believe McCain actually feels.
I also think, as others have said. that the SCLM gave Bush lots of passes that they wouldn't have given a Democrat because they were busily trying to prove their objectivity.
Objectivity should mean that you ask every president the hard questions and that you take a good hard look at the answers you get. It shouldn't mean giving passes to the right.
This is half the reason why people say they'll vote for Bush. They like shows of "patriotism" whether it's waving a flag and supporting our boys or talking about American history as though the only thing we need to worry about in our collective past is "a few bad apples." What I wonder about more and more (and have had no success understanding) is the extent to which people believe their own fantasies. Because if they do, Bush will win in a landslide -- he knows better than any how to play the red-white-and-blue fantasy game.
Isn't this the same argument that Kerry uses as to why he voted to give Bush carte blanche with the Gulf of Tonken II resolution. Kerry says that he believed Bush.
Cheney is still using the argument that Mohammed Atta visited to Iraq's Prague embassy. Don't we have complete access to Iraq's Praque embassy records and any records at the Foreign Ministry. Why don't they trot those out?
w list
Iran maybe building nukes
Iran is Muslim
Iran supports AQ
Iran has oil
My fellow Americans, I have invaded Iran....
I think McCain plays a good game, and I'm sorry to see so many taken in by it. Including members of my own family whom I respect.
I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it was McCain himself who put out the stories about his being Kerry's running mate, so he could then rush into Bush's arms and make Kerry look bad.
Baaah
This is unbelievable....
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5233810/
Yeah, it's the medias fault.
em...I never believed for a moment that McCain would be Kerry's VP, for several reasons. But I did think McCain was less of a hypocritical political hack than most.
I'm shocked - SHOCKED! - that a politician would LIE to us!
Seriously though, shouldn't our media corps be, you know, a bit SKEPTICAL and CYNICAL????
It sickens me to have to say I've felt sick since March, 2003, discombobulated since Sept. 11, 2001, and ill since Nov., 2000.
Almost four years of off-and-on urge to projectile vomit. It hasn't been easy.
Of course McCain has to shill for w. Its about the money. McCain needs the funds from the r's for his next election. But, he is sometimes a good prostitute.
This administration took a fundamental trust placed in them by the people of this nation and deliberately abused that trust for political gain.
It does not get any more fucked up than that, folks.
littlesky
Sky,
I don't see the political gain, their gone in November and I think they know it, now financial gain is completly their forte. This whole Regime has been about the rich getting richer, Whe W goes home, trust me he will have a lot of nice fat checks waiting for him.
Yesterday's Charlie Reese was excellent.
Hypocrisy
anonymous- no need for prague records, FBI has confirmed that Atta was in US on the date in question.
I'd like the media to be a little skeptical about this Pootie-Poot story.
There seems to be no particular evidence for what he told Bush about Saddam wanting to attack the US.
Why should an old KGB guy be acting in the interests of his country's old enemy? I wonder if the media who are reporting this so breathlessly have considered it might have been a dirty trick to get Bush to attack Saddam and bog the US down in a mess. Putin didn't join the war, whatever he may have told Bush.
The press whores will heave a great sigh,
Now that Putin's decided to lie.
They'll resume their fellation
With renewed elation.
They hate to see chimpanzees cry.
Seems like no matter what BuSHITler does, 30-35% of those polled continue to support him.
Lest we forget, on March the 13th, 1932 Hitler got 30 percent of the votes.
It can get worse.
It is important to remember that not all d's are exactly honest either. None nearly as bad as w crime famiglia, but still corrupt. Jim Wright, Rostenkowski, LBJ to name a few.
Jesus, 2 texans and a chicagoan.
If it hasn't been posted upstream (and even if it has), msnbc is having a little poll.
Go. Vote. Now.
Click my homepage. Thanks.
American media take note CHINA NEWS tells the truth
Beijing - American President George Bush needs to start facing the facts on Iraq instead of "playing with reality", Chinese state media chided Friday after an official panel found no evidence linking al-Qaeda with Saddam Hussein.
"The United States would do itself and the world a huge favour by establishing a closer relationship with reality rather than wrestling with its own version of the truth, as the international credibility of American military intelligence is simply of zero value," said the China Daily.
"The truth is the United States used the threat of Iraqi WMD (weapons of mass destruction) and a connection to al-Qaeda as justification for launching the war against the regime of Saddam Hussein."
or, shucks, after spending 8 years attacking Clinton just becasue we could, how was I to know that we would be dupped by ourselves.
I'm still waiting for the day when someone, anyone, in a major printed media outlet compiles all this information, shows the motivations this administration had both ulterior and the exterior, and in a large several page or several edition news story, prints in bold letters in the banner headline of the front page that *everyone* in this administration has lied again, and again, and again, and again, on everything from small little personal details to both domestic and foreign policy(if there is any).
This country is suffering from a deluded sense of nationalistic pride that forbids us from admitting the truth. As if admitting it would be worse for the country than denying it as long as *EVERYBODY* else in the world already knows it is true.
There comes a time when you simply have to swallow your pride and admit your were wronge. The problem is that this is so hard for everyone to do from every little aspect to the largest.
The fact these people have the least amount of humility and modesty only compounds the difficulty a hundred fold.
MYOB'
.
w wants the Reagan mantle- heres his chance
My heart tells me that Saddam had wmds and AQ ties, but the facts tell me differently...
I'd like the media to be a little skeptical about this Pootie-Poot story.
Blogwhore alert: I've posted some thoughts about Putin's news at my site.
B. Dick's 'mea culpa' is so extraordinarily lame I had to stop and consider there might be two fallout options for his column:
1. B. Dick recuses himself from the editorial page for reasons of vast ignorance and complicity.
2. B. Dick is, wittingly or unwittingly, sacrificing himself at the altar of the ignorant masses by saying that "even he" was duped with blind respect of the presidency and support of our great national triumph over tragedy. This 'average Joe confession' makes it less confrontational and more acceptable for other duped war supporters to say "I was dead wrong. Bush lied. He is naked." Mass Mea Culpa ensues. In a swing state, no less.
Option 2 would then have to be considered a patriotic self-sacrifice to look stupid as all hell to the informed, but help turn the tide of the masses to wake up, speak up and cast their votes to Kerry.
The time is ripe for swing voter pickins'. Six month ago it would have just rotted prematurely on the vine due to excessive heat.
MYOB- I think there is a provision in the Patriot Act that telling the truth in time of war is a treason offense.
If there isn't there will be soon.
el marko - I don't see the msnbc poll on their homepage. Where is it?
el marko - I don't see the msnbc poll on their homepage. Where is it?
The MSNBC poll is here.
"Speaking of History --
Latest FaBlog: "Big Loser"
David Ehrenstein"
HEIL STALEY! Too incredibly funny.
OT:
Al Arabiya TV: Al Qaeda militants behead U.S. hostage Paul Johnson. CNN working to confirm.
Good God.
No real surprise, sadly. Look who was holding him.
Almost four years of off-and-on urge to projectile vomit.
Thank you for nailing down the feeling I've been trying to place for a while now.
Ugh, this day. Somebody wake me when we have a new preznit.
A.
pace university just released a poll on newspaper reading habits of nyc -- and here's a tidbit you'll enjoy re rupert murdoch's very own new york post:
"the new york post's credibility rating is 39% to 44%. Among media outlets recognized by at least 60% of all New Yorkers, only The Post earns a higher negative than positive rating on the credibility scale."
but, of course, we knew this all along.
Cheney, who told the commission he was operating on instructions from Bush given in a phone call, issued authority for aircraft threatening Washington to be shot down. But the commission noted that 'among the sources that reflect other important events that morning there is no documentary evidence for this call.
The assertion that Bush gave Cheney the okay to shoot down planes is one of the few in the report that is supported solely by statements from Bush and Cheney themselves -- statements which they made when they met together with the Sept. 11 commission. (See my columns from April 28, April 29 and April 30 for all the background on Bush's insistence on not meeting with the commission by himself.)
Esther Schrader lays it out in the Los Angeles Times: "Cheney has told the commission that during one call to Bush, moments after he arrived at the command center, he asked the president to decide on the rules of engagement for combat planes being deployed over Washington. Bush said he authorized that hijacked planes be shot down.
"But the commission staff seemed to question whether the call took place. Its report noted that there were no logs of that phone call between Cheney and Bush. 'Others nearby who were taking notes, such as the vice president's chief of staff, [I. Lewis] Scooter Libby, who sat next to him, and Mrs. Cheney, did not note a call between the president and vice president immediately after the vice president entered the conference room,' the report said.
"Lee H. Hamilton, co-chairman of the Sept. 11 commission, told reporters 'there's no documentary evidence' that Cheney conferred with Bush before issuing the shoot-down order.
THIS with the NEVER received shoot down orders from pilots- LIHOP
"America hates history because it includes so much ugliness as well as greatness, and the two are rarely held in common. Either one exalts the former (left wing) or the latter (right wing). Neither polarity seems capable of saying that we are a people capable of both greatness and evil...
Mike"
Who are these damn left wingers who "exalt" America's ugly past? Can you name one? The whole point of bringing up America's historical mistakes is to balance the record, which for the past two centuries has been overwhelmingly focused on what's great about America (and there's a lot) while ignoring, or lying about, all the awful things that have been done in America's name. It's not a case of wanting to gloat over how bad our government has been, it's a matter of knowing all sides - the good, the bad, and all the shadings in between.
The BBC did a report from Washington last night about the 9/11 report, and the fact that there was no link with Iraq.
The BBC reporter said that non of this seemed to be effecting Bush in his re election bid. In fact, he said it was bad news for Kerry that he was only running neck and neck with Bush, despite all the bad news that has beem coming out.
He then said that the economy was improving, and that Republicans believed that this was the secret weapon that would get Bush re-elected. Many Republicans think Iraq won't even be an issue come November.
I think someone has got at the BBC in America, because the reporter was drinking the Bush spin in big gulps.
How about printing T-shirts:
"First MBA President?
What did you expect when
he's run every company he
had into the ground?"
(back side)
"Think he can get Saudi Arabia
to bail him out this time too?"
Or this:
"If you're surprised by Bush's lies,
you just weren't paying attention."
Or this:
"'Kenny Boy' Lay learned everything he
ever needed from Bush's Harken dealings."
Other suggestions welcome.
Cheers,
We took the President seriously after 9/11, because we thought he had a heart. We took Powell seriously after 9/11, because he was Colin fuckin' Powell. We believed our intelligence, because it's the United States, and we have the best intelligence in the world.
We were wrong about all of that. Misguided, naive, perhaps. But insane and ignorant?
Well... if the shoe fits. Listen, I'm sorry that sounds harsh, but christ almighty, couldn't you guys have used your heads a little? If more people had we wouldn't be in this mess. Doesn't anyone remember Vietnam or Iran/Contra? Christ.
Spoon-fed a big steaming pile,
the press echoed lies with a smile.
Now despite all the facts
they're still R.N.C. hacks.
What's worse- ignorance or denial?
"It's ignorant of history,..."
What happened to teaching American History in the schools. I thought this was an idea set down by Jefferson, a healthy mistrust of government being good for democracy. The media and many citizens have done the opposite: trust until given reason to mistrust. Should be the other way around.
OT: AP Says Al Arabiya is reporting American engineer held hostage by Saudis has been beheaded.
The thing is that Dickerson is not preaching to the converted. He is trying to help misguided souls cross over out of the darkness and into the light.
It is difficult for many to admit that they have been duped by an administration they had high hopes for and given every chance to.
Editorials excoriating those most likely to convert or at least suffer apostasy as total naive idiots, without a clue about the world in any sense, are probably counterproductive.
Keep your eyes on the prize.
To me, knowing someone was incapable initially of believing the president lied is an up point limited that it may be.
The position should hold respect that goes beyond simple recognition of rank and authority. The president is not a middle manager at some company. He is supposed to be a leader. Taking a bit of time to accept the fact this man lied implies that people do truly hold the position to a higher order.
The disbelief should maybe not be directed at the fact the man was devious but at the audacity that he could tarnish so severely the position of president. He did not just lie to us, he has damaged a national resource that belongs to all citizens.
I mangled this, but its the best I can do to make my point...
But to actually campaign for Miserable Failure indicates of level of enthusiasm for him that I don't believe McCain actually feels.
Which makes McCain even more of a shithead, to campaign for someone he dislikes for the sake of "party loyalty."
Not that I'm surprised... I've never seen McCain as quite the rebel Republican others have seen him to be, or wished him to be.
And people can honestly say that those who are suspicious that BushCo purposely let 9-11 happen are insane or paranoid?
After all this?
Yeah. Right.
Some people's eyes will never be opened. They're beyond hope or redemption.
Tuesday :: May 04, 2004
Investigation: Americans Killed Prisoners
No real surprise, sadly. Look who was holding him.
Dave J.'s Arab Doppelganger | Email | Homepage | 06.18.04 - 1:39 pm | #
AAR just carried news of the Johnson beheading also. Joe Conason is commmenting right now...
phuq...
Oh, and about McCain . . .
I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him.
Sometimes he does the right thing. But a whole lot of times (as in the present instance) he does the WRONG thing.
And as someone pointed out before: He's a Republican. He has shown no intention of leaving that party.
Press coverage is never going to improve until America becomes a real living democracy.
That's not going to happen until more people are using their brains for thinking rather than letting them rot as they watch insipid sitcoms.
All of these issues fit together. People get piss-poor media coverage because very few people have the time or inclination to think seriously. This is not going to happen until we collectively break the vicious cycle of mindless consumerism, which goes like this:
ADVERTISERS: assure us their products will make us whole, which leads to =>
BUYING THEIR PRODUCT: requires more money, which leads to =>
QUEST FOR MONEY: widens the gaps between ourselves, family, and community =>
DEEPENING ALIENATION: creates inner sense of social and spiritual emptiness =>
ADVERTISERS: assure us their products will make us whole, which starts the downward spiral over again
Anyone disagree?
Jan 9, 2004:
"QUESTION: When I was in Iraq, some of the soldiers said they believed they were fighting because of the Sept. 11 attacks and because they thought Saddam Hussein had ties to al Qaida. You've repeatedly cited such links. . . . I wanted to ask you what you'd say to those soldiers, and were those soldiers misled at all? VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: . . . . With respect to . . . the general relationship. . . . One place you ought to go look is an article that Stephen Hayes did in the Weekly Standard . . . That goes through and lays out in some detail, based on an assessment that was done by the Department of Defense and forwarded to the Senate Intelligence Committee some weeks ago. That's your best source of information. I can give you a few quick for instances, one the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993. QUESTION: Yes, sir . . . . VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: The main perpetrator was a man named Ramzi Yousef. He's now in prison in Colorado. His sidekick in the exercise was a man named Abdul Rahman Yasin. . . Ahman Rahman . . . Yasin is his last name anyway. I can't remember his earlier first names. He fled the United States after the attack, the 1993 attack, went to Iraq, and we know now based on documents that we've captured since we took Baghdad, that they put him on the payroll, gave him a monthly stipend and provided him with a house, sanctuary, in effect, in Iraq, in the aftermath of nine-ele (sic) . . . the 93' attack on the World Trade Center. QUESTION: So you stand by the statements? VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Absolutely. Absolutely. And you can look at Zarkawi, (Abu Mussab) al-Zarkawi . . . Who was an al-Qaida associate, who was wounded in Afghanistan, took refuge in Baghdad, working out of Baghdad, worked with the Ansar al Islam group up in northeastern Iraq, that produced a so-called poison factory, a group that we hit when we went into Iraq. . . . We'll find ample evidence confirming the link, that is the connection if you will between al Qaida and the Iraqi intelligence services. They have worked together on a number of occasions."
Cheney, Jan. 9, 2004, continues:
"We did have reporting that was public, that came out shortly after the 9/11 attack, provided by the Czech government, suggesting there had been a meeting in Prague between Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker, and a man named al-Ani (Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani), who was an Iraqi intelligence official in Prague, at the embassy there, in April of '01, prior to the 9/11 attacks. It has never been -- we've never been able to collect any more information on that. That was the one that possibly tied the two together to 9/11."
Rumsfeld, Nov 2, 2003:
"We said from the outset that there are several terrorist networks that have global reach and that there were several countries that were harboring terrorists that have global reach. We weren't going into Iraq when we were hit on September 11. And the question is: Well, what do you do about that? If you know there are terrorists and you know there's terrorist states -- Iraq's been a terrorist state for decades -- and you know there are countries harboring terrorists, we believe, correctly, I think, that the only way to deal with it is -- you can't just hunker down and hope they won't hit you again. You simply have to take the battle to them. And we have been consistently working on the Al Qaeda network. We've captured a large number of those folks -- captured or killed -- just as we've now captured or killed a large number of the top 55 Saddam Hussein loyalists."
Shocked, I tell you, shocked! I'm shocked that the press would believe that Cheney or Bush would intentionally draw a connection between Saddam and the 9/11 attack. They merely stated the two topics in the same breath. Repeatedly. For months and months on end. Without clarification.
It's funny to me that people seem totally willing to believe the conspiracies of the past and to fear the conspiracies of the future, but you are somehow some kind of fringey nut job if you think there are any conspiracies in the present. Sure Presidents lied in the past to drag us into war, but not now... not today. Sure, voter fraud has been rampant throughout history, but not now, not today. Why not? Are we really so evolved? Give me a freaking break!
Well said. I'd call it the Candide syndrome: Everyone wants to believe that we live in the best of all possible worlds. Presidents may have lied/stolen elections/etc. in the past, but we've learned from our mistakes and so it couldn't happen today. It's the idea that the human race constantly moves forwards and never regresses.
What we need is for a dozen more Dickersons to write identical columns, so that the 10-15-whatever percenta of the non-Kool-Aid-drinking population that voted for Bush last time doesn't do it again.
It simply won't do to assume that the horrifying actions of this gang of criminals will, standing alone, tip the scales.
We need a steady drumbeat of converts so the Merkin Sheeple will hop on the bandwagon.
In a Diebold world, only a tidal wave of crossovers will keep us from sleeplessness the night of Nov. 2.
Holden? We could use some Obsession right now.
Yesterday's press briefing was incredible. Scotty's use of doubletalk has reached new levels of hilarity. At one point he even says "mistakes were made."
Everybody go read the transcript right now at whitehouse.gov. Too many things in there to excerpt, and I don't have Holden's talent for picking out the really choice morsels.
In reading author Dickerson, I feel he really wants to say something else. And this is somthing that cuts across party lines. Its not just the lying that Bush has done. In lying after 9-11, when most citizens stood by Bush as president(Gopers and Dems alike) and waited for him to lead this country, tell citizens what to do as American's to combat terrorism, he used everyone to further his own agenda that had nothing to do with terrorism (Iraq). Dickerson needs to say that American's have been BETRAYED by this President. His writing certainly shows the anger of this betrayal.
OK, a few excertpts:
Q Scott, I'm a little confused, and it could be a factor of age, but I'm just wondering, you were saying this morning that the findings of the 9/11 Commission, which definitively say that there was no collaborative relationship between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda, are completely consistent with your position that there was such a collaborative relationship. And I'm just wondering if you could explain how those two disparate thoughts are completely consistent.
MR. McCLELLAN: Sure. If you go back and look at what the September 11th Commission said, they talked about how there had been high-level contacts between the regime in Iraq and al Qaeda. And they specifically pointed out to contacts between Iraqi intelligence officials and bin Laden in Sudan; and they talked about other contacts. And if you go back and look at what Secretary Powell outlined before the United Nations, this was back in February of 2003, he talked about how we know -- this is quote, "We know members of both organizations met repeatedly and have met at least eight times at very senior levels since the early 1990s. In 1996, a foreign security service tells us that bin Laden met with a senior Iraqi intelligence official in Khartoum and later met the director of the Iraqi intelligence service." So he talked about some of contacts in his presentation to the United Nations.
Q Right, but the 9/11 --
MR. McCLELLAN: And that is perfectly consistent with what the September 11th Commission talked about in their report yesterday.
Q But here's where the two positions diverge, and that is that the 9/11 Commission says, yes, there were these contacts, but they did not result in any kind of collaborative relationship. It means the same thing as you and I contact each all the time, but I don't think anybody here at the White House would account you of having --
MR. McCLELLAN: John, we made it clear a long time ago --
Q -- a collaborative relationship with me.
MR. McCLELLAN: We made it clear a long time ago that there is no evidence to suggest that Saddam Hussein's regime was involved in the attacks of September 11th.
So they just beheaded the hostage in Saudi Arabia -- is Bush going to get a bounce?
*
OT
They beheaded that guy in Saudi Arabia. It is a good thing this war in Iraq is keeping Americans from getting killed.
On the Paul Johnson issue, all the networks are covering it.
The details seem to be as terrible as Nick Berg's.
Several questions need to be asked about all this.
1. What is with the orange jump suits? is there a connection?
2. How many families who have loved ones working in Iraq, or in the middle east are going to demand that their family members come home? Screw the job and the company who sent them there.
3. AQ has a website? Who the hell is running it and why the hell hasn't the U.S or others out there hacked the hell out this place? Why are ISP's being allowed to operate the damned thing?
4. Since it's almost common knowledge now that the cowardly Saudi Arabian royal family had negotiated with AQ in exchange for not attacking them inside the homeland, and that the Bush administration knew this but attacked Iraq instead, how will the knowledge of this connection and the willingness of the Bush administration to tolerate SA and it's AQ connections, combined with what we know will be exposed by Michael Moore's movie, affect Bush and the election?
5. How can we expect the incompetence of the Bush administration to handle this? They can't. They can only kill arabs, not save americans being attacked by arabs.
This whole thing is bullshit and is going to make matters worse for all involved. This will bring out the worst in us wait and see.
MYOB'
.
More:
Q Scott, let me try to take a stab at this because I think one of the things that you're asserting there is a statement from the Director of Central Intelligence, who has since resigned, who apparently was the same one who told the President that it was a slam-dunk case.
MR. McCLELLAN: That's not trying to say he resigned for reasons other than were personal reasons.
Q People can make up their own minds.
MR. McCLELLAN: As he cited, for family reasons.
Q Okay, but they can make up their own minds.
MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, well, you're trying to lump it all together, though.
Q I'm pointing out that he resigned. And he also said -- you quoted him as saying that -- he's also the one who told the President that it was a slam-dunk case that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Today -- as of today, there are not. And isn't the issue that whatever the intelligence was about ties, any kind of relationship between al Qaeda and Iraq, that for the Vice President of the United States two days ago to assert deep, long-standing ties is, at its most charitable, an overstatement of what the evidence shows?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, he's actually referring to exactly what Secretary Powell outlined before the United Nations and what Director Tenet outlined in open session to members of Congress. So, again, I would go back to what we stated were the facts and what we knew. And if you --
Q But that's in direct contradiction to what the 9/11 Commission has found.
MR. McCLELLAN: And if you look back at what we said, we said that -- we said all along that Saddam Hussein's regime supported and harbored terrorists, and that there were ties to terrorism -- including al Qaeda. And if you go back and look at what was outlined before the United Nations -- Secretary Powell goes to talk about how there was support for suicide bombers in the Middle East who sought to undermine the peace process, who sought to undermine the road map.
Q But, Scott, you're trying to make such a technical --
MR. McCLELLAN: Director Tenet --
Q -- argument, cherry-picking what you want to see.
So they just beheaded the hostage in Saudi Arabia -- is Bush going to get a bounce?
Oh yeah. You betcha. "Look at the animals we're dealing with...savages...no respect for human life...yak yak yak."
I have to say, there are some people who not only don't know much history, but could care less about the fact, or actively dislike the fact that the discipline of history exists at all.
As a historian myself, this gets my goat.
TheaLogie | Email | Homepage | 06.18.04 - 10:10 am | #
....................................
I majored in history myself in college,so it was with a huge guffaw I accepted the news that the chimperor in cheif was also ...a HISTORY MAJOR at Yale..lol
Still more:
MR. McCLELLAN: And again, if you'll let me finish, I would like to go through some of this, because this is an important discussion to have. It's important for the American people to have the complete picture, and to have all the facts before them. And that's exactly what this administration put before the American people in a very public way. Secretary Powell, one of the key things he talked about in his remarks was -- and let me just go back to those remarks -- quote from Secretary Powell's remarks:
"Iraq and terrorism go back decades. Baghdad trains Palestine Liberation Front members in small arms and explosives. Saddam uses the Arab Liberation Front to funnel money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers in order to prolong the intifada. And it's no secret that Saddam's own intelligence service was involved in dozens of attacks or attempted assassinations in the 1990s. But what I want to bring to your attention today is the potentially much more sinister nexus between Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network, a nexus that combines classic terrorist organizations and modern methods of murder. Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda lieutenants."
And he goes on to talk about Mr. Zarqawi. We certainly have seen Zarqawi up close during --
Q After the invasion.
MR. McCLELLAN: He was in Iraq prior to the invasion, David. And it's important to point that out to the American people. He had a safe harbor in Iraq. He received medical treatment in Baghdad. And that's what Secretary Powell talked about. And certainly, when you're talking about a post-September 11th world, this President is not going to rely on the good intentions of Saddam Hussein to protect the American people. Saddam Hussein had a long history of using weapons of mass destruction, of supporting and harboring terrorists, and he had a long history of oppression in that country. He certainly knew what was going on in that country. This was a police state in Iraq. And the world is safer and better off because Saddam Hussein has been removed from power.
***
At this point, someone needed to bring up the fact that Zarqawi was situated in the no-fly zone prior to the war, which Saddam had no control over. And someone else needed to bring up the fact that we could have taken Zarqawi out any thime we wanted to, and in fact had planned to do so several times, but backed off every time. Sadly, though, no one asked these important follow-up questions. But at lease they are getting tougher.
I feat this is too late in the thread to actually be read, but what if Brian is more clever than you know? What if he is putting himself on the side of people who _actually believed_ Bush.
Aside from our little blog world, most Americans believed Bush. So writing from the position of most Americans makes your argument much stronger.
Saying 'you were an idiot to believe Bush and we told you so' has zero potential to convert anyone. Writing 'Damn, but we were all fooled' puts you on the same side as your readers.
To the extent that we are in the back room laughing at our own in jokes and making sport of the 'normals' we are okay, and we can entertain ourselves. But if you think that telling people they were idiots, or condescending to them, will win hearts and minds, well...
majored in history myself in college,so it was with a huge guffaw I accepted the news that the chimperor in cheif was also ...a HISTORY MAJOR at Yale..lol
sittenpretty | Email | Homepage | 06.18.04 - 2:09 pm | #
Where his grade average was a C. kindda telling, isn't it?
Last one:
Q The New York Times says the President should apologize to the American people. Also, are you saying that the 9/11 report is wrong? Is that what you're saying that you reject the findings?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, I'm saying that it's consistent with what we have said.
Q It is not consistent. They said this business on the nexus -- sinister nexus is not so.
MR. McCLELLAN: Where did they say that?
Q It's in the story.
MR. McCLELLAN: Okay.
Q No collaborative relationship.
MR. McCLELLAN: Go ahead, Terry.
Q Well, I'll pick up on that, if I may.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well -- and we never said that there was operational ties involved in attacks on the United States. Let's be very clear about that. The President talked about that just a short time ago.
Q What are people supposed to conclude, that they're having lunch with each other?
MR. McCLELLAN: A short time ago in his remarks.
Q You talk about deep, long-standing ties. What is that supposed to mean?
MR. McCLELLAN: Saddam Hussein supported and harbored terrorist groups --
Q Why don't you just say the commission is wrong?
MR. McCLELLAN: All right.
Q Well, because the terms that you did use, "deep, long-standing ties -- sinister nexus," and the President himself saying, "By removing Saddam Hussein we have removed an ally of al Qaeda," that means they are working together. Did Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda work together, where and when?
MR. McCLELLAN: I disagree with your characterization about --
Q Well, what does "ally" mean?
MR. McCLELLAN: But Saddam Hussein's regime and al Qaeda had a common enemy: It was the United States of America. And when you talk about a regime that has a history of supporting and harboring terrorists, and has a history of using weapons of mass destruction on its own people and on its neighbors, and then you look at the world through the lens of September 11th, the President made the absolute right decision to go in and remove that regime from power.
Q That's an argument. Those are not facts.
OK, one more...Les Nessman made his obligatory appearance, and it must be noted:
Q Scott, the AP reports from Little Rock that Bill Clinton attended the world premier of the documentary The Hunting of The President, a film "claiming to expose the 10-year campaign to destroy Bill Clinton." The Washington Post this morning quotes Clinton as saying, his fight against impeachment was, "a badge of honor." And my question -- the first part of two -- how could President Bush possibly reconcile his promise to restore honor to the White House with his salute on Monday of this same convicted perjurer whose dishonesty under oath required the restoration of honor promised by Governor Bush?
MR. McCLELLAN: Les, first of all, the unveiling of the presidential portraits is a tradition that dates back quite some time. And the President was pleased to welcome the Clintons back to the White House and participate in that unveiling ceremony. I think you heard from him directly. In terms of these other issues, I think you might want to address them to President Clinton.
Q There's a growing national concern that the World War II Memorial's remembrance of Pearl Harbor, which quotes part of President Roosevelt's "Date of Infamy" speech has deleted its undeniable climax, "We will go on to the inevitable triumph, so help us God." And my question: Will the President as a dedicated worshiper of God do anything about this deletion of God or not?
MR. McCLELLAN: Les, first I've heard about it.
Q It's out there.
MR. McCLELLAN: You brought it to my attention. I'll take a look into it.
Q It's out there. You will?
MR. McCLELLAN: Go ahead, Ken.
How much longer is the SA government going to be able to hold on? That's always been bin Laden's true target - the secularists in his own hometown. We were just a means to an end.
We've played right into their hands, dammit.
I know a few people who work for multinationals in SA. I'm on the 'get out, now!' bandwagon for them, but they're staying, damn them. Please send happy safe thoughts their way?
AQ has a website? Who the hell is running it and why the hell hasn't the U.S or others out there hacked the hell out this place? Why are ISP's being allowed to operate the damned thing?
There's no single website. These guys and/or their affiliates bounce around various places.
Sadly, most people do not think that a President would lie to the American public. We are Americans and we have higher standards. We don't want to think that our government is just as corrupt as all the others. We are better than the others.
And if we want to preserve that feeling, we better move fast. Or there won't be anything left to preserve!
Because of Bush Juntas torture scheme, another American lost his life. Shame on them for not doing anything to help this man. For their reeclection they make side deals with Saudis, but not when an innocent mans life is involved.
Here I disagree with the direction you're taking with this item, Atrios; and that's rare for me. Since this person (okay, a "journalist" but a still a person) is admitting that he was fooled, and since about half of the public is in that category, we should sympathize and also ask him how to change the minds of many more people like himself.
Hell, I was fooled for a while myself. I'm embarrassed to admit that, but it's true. I would PREFER to trust the sitting president, and for a while I saw no great reason to distrust W. The fact that I was reading pretty much just the NYT then may have played a part in my deception. But I consider myself an intelligent person, and I changed my mind.
Don't knock it.
Ralph
Commie atheist:
I mostly agree with you. My point was not so much the 'exaltation' (poor choice of words on my part) as it was the exclusion. It's a capital mistake for the left to be in the position of denouncing the wrongs of American history without embracing the rights of it. Otherwise, we'll leave the flag, for better or worse, to the right to wrap itself in. Not hard to find examples (Chomsky, Zinn--again, with whom I mostly agree) of those whose much needed correctives to American triumphalism are so stridently unipolar as to leave little if any room for those on the right to take a baby step to their left. We're talking politics as well as truth and morality here, and, alas, they're not the same things.
But how did they treat anti war sentiment prior to the war?
The Bush case against Afghanistan and Iraq appear very weak. Now that the only legal justification for invading Iraq, was that there was a single terrorist there. Waging war on Iraq to get one man doesn't appear to be in the spirit of the power Congress bestowed on Bush, to declare war on a soveriegn nation. More on my blog.
The following are from presidential letters to Congress.
March 18, 2003
(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
March 21, 2003
Consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-14
, I now inform you that pursuant to my authority as Commander in Chief and consistent with the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) and the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), I directed U.S. Armed Forces, operating with other coalition forces, to commence combat operations on March 19, 2003, against Iraq.
NTodd, I'm aware of that. But the question still stands. It's not like AQ is considered a heroic organization around the world so why aren't each and every ISP, not to mention those who run these websites allowing AQ to publish on them, not being considered AQ operatives?
Why haven't we grabbed these people and put them into custody? What progress has been made to track AQ through these people?
I think there is something going on here, in conjunction with the Saudi government and this administration's ties to that government, that is preventing this from happening otherwise we'd of heard about it by now. If they were making gains on AQ through this means then they'd of advertised taht fact. This admin' is incapable of having a success which they don't want to have plastered on the news for political gain. If they don't take advantage of it then it's likely there is no success going on for them to take advantage of. And if true, why haven't they?
This is really starting to stink.
MYOB'
.
Alert! Borg Attack on Kevin Drum Blog!
We know now, that we invaded Iraq, to get rid of one terrorist. He's still evading us, and now there's more than one terrorist operating in Iraq.
I think this fits the definition of backsliding.
MYOB and NTodd: there's an interesting story I remember from just after 9/11. Some computer geek managed to hijack the Al Qaeda website by grabbing their DNS registration. He quickly made a copy of the entire website, and set up a bogus copy running on his own servers, so nobody would notice it wasn't the real original site. Then he started intensive server logs to track the users, and contacted the FBI. He asked them if they were interested in live logs of AQ members' contacts with the site, and begged for an Arabic translator to help him put up new fake material on the site. He said if he didn't get fresh material up within a couple of days, the site would look funny and they'd figure out the deception. He couldn't write even lame propaganda since he didn't speak the language.
You can guess what happened next. The FBI totally blew him off. Within about 72 hours, the AQ users figured out the site was dead, smelled the deception, and moved to another site. The FBI lost a major source of intelligence.
I have always had a nasty feeling that Bin Laden almost always seems to be doing things that play into the hands of the Neo cons. It is almost if they are working together.
The Neo cons wanted a Pearl harbour, and Bin Laden gave it to them. And as yet has not been found. Both Bin Laden and the neo cons wanted to get rid of Saddam, and that has now be achieved. Bin Laden wants the Suadi govt to fall, and the neocons would love to get their hands on all that oil.
How long before Bush says he has to march into Saudi? (to save it of course)
I'm sorry about the apparent murder of another innocent person in Saudi Arabia. But it seems to me that the Bush adminisration deliberately provokes Al Queda and others to murder U.S. citizensm in order to mobilize the country behind their war. I listened to 15 minutes of Bush's speech to the troops at Ft. Lewis today and it was the most xenophobic, war-mongering, contentless garbage I've ever heard. And what is it with the group of soldiers behind him? Reminds me of the propagandistic backdrops Bush uses during speeches to conservative groups, with sayings such as "Strengthening Medicare" or "Corporate Responsibility". Only he's using human beings as propaganda.
MYOB - you're asking that all ISPs on Earth to police all content on their servers constantly. Impractical at best. When discovered, the providers do shut down the sites, but it's trivial to set up a new one down the road, as it were.
charlie don't surf - I'd never heard that story. Thanks for the tip.
The people who murdered this guy are not in any way let off the hook by the fact that the chimperor led us into an immoral war. They murdered a non-combatant in a country where no war is going on.
What we can say is that this man's blood, along with the blood of thousands of other people, is on this administration's hands.
It will hurt my feelings and my sense of national pride when Bush gets more than 35% of the vote in November.
I'll add another point to the ISP servers...,
If they use password protected blogs and write everything in Arabic, who would police it? Do we just report every blog or website not written in English?
"The beheaded body was clad in a bright orange suit, similar to those issued to suspected Islamic militants imprisoned by the United States at Guantanamo Bay - and similar to the suit another American captive, Nicholas Berg, was wearing when he was beheaded in Iraq last month by another group of Islamic militants inspired by al-Qaida."--The Guardian
Sally, the al Qaeda types play in to the neocons' hands with these actions.
The neocons have been playing into al Qaeda's hands with every move they've made.
These two gangs of idiots need each other, use each other, feed off each other, and seek the Rapture with each other as foil.
People on each side need to tell these two fanatical S&M lovers to get a f*cking room and leave the rest of the world alone. Chimpy and OBL can link up and act our their unresolved issues, while we figure out some other way to power our cars and render them both irrelevant.
Did anybody see the back-slapping between McCain and Bush at a GOP campaign gig today. Revolting. My guess on the Josh Marshall break: Cheney to be dumped from the ticket to be replaced by McCain for VP.
Matthew Rothschild sums it all up nicely, for those who still need to "come around" from believing the continuing lies of Bush and Cheney:
The report from the September 11 commission was clear. "We have no credible evidence that Iraq and Al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States," it said. And there appears to have been no "collaborative relationship" between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, it added.
This finding undercuts one of the major rationales the Bush Administration put forward for the war against Iraq. Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Dick Cheney, and George Bush himself all played up the alleged links between Al Qaeda and Iraq. But the links, in any operational way, did not exist.
In October 2002, Bush said, "Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases." That was false.
Bush said, in his January 2003 State of the Union address, "Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda." That was false.
Bush said, on February 8, 2003, "Iraq has also provided Al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training." That was false.
Powell, in his U.N. speech prior to the Iraq War, talked of the "sinister nexus between Iraq and the Al-Qaeda terrorist network." False again.
On May 3, 2003, in his infamous end-of-major-combat-operations speech, Bush said, "We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda." False again.
On September 14, 2003, Vice President Cheney repeated Bush's claim that Iraq and Al Qaeda were involved together in training with chemical and biological weapons, and added that the Iraqis were "providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the Al Qaeda organization." False again.
On October 10, 2003, in a speech to the Heritage Foundation, Cheney said, "Saddam had an established relationship with Al Qaeda, providing training to Al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons, gases, making conventional weapons." False again.
This Monday, June 14, Cheney said Saddam "had long established ties with Al Qaeda."
And Bush on Thursday, June 17, said, "The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and Al Qaeda, because there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda."
Note how slippery Bush and Cheney are getting. Now they are talking about amorphous "ties" and "a relationship." But before they were talking about specifics, scary specifics, like joint work on chemical and biological weapons.
All of their falsehoods served a purpose: to scare the American people into going along with the Iraq War.
Now that their falsehoods have been exposed, they are way out on a limb of lies.
mybabyscrying:
Yes, that McCain/Bush appearance was disgusting. I think there is a new faction within the GOP--I like to call them the "How-the-Hell-Can-They-Stand-It" Republicans. Powell and McCain are their leaders.
"..It's a capital mistake for the left to be in the position of denouncing the wrongs of American history without embracing the rights of it."
What 'rights' are you referring to?
The genocide committed against the native peoples living on this continent? The stealing, raping, pillaging, murdering of natives?
How about the hunting, stalking, trapping, chaining, tying, kidnapping, capturing, beating, mutilating, raping, caging, murdering, and enslaving of thousands of innocent native africans?
How about the hundred plus years of post slavery conditions where we denied those we kidnapped, raped, mutilated, murdered, and enslaved, the rights to an equal quality of life that still goes on today? How about the racism, bigotry, hatred, and greed exhibited by the white christian male majority that ran this country?
How about the hypocrisy on a world wide scale? Is that one of the 'rights'?
This country could sacrifice for another century and still not make up for the outright evils it has done, because it is still continually carrying out more evils every day.
We will almost never be able to catch up.
MYOB'
.
Weaseldog...additionally, the WH nixed Pentagon plans to attack Zarqawi before the war on at least two occasions, apparently fearing that killing Zarqawi would weaken the case for going to war. If historians in the future are able to access all the relevant records, I believe they'll write that the administration was determined to attack Iraq beginning at least in mid September, 2001, and possibly earlier.
Bush/McCain? Say it ain't so!
Oh--and has anyone else been following the news out of Russia? Putin is charging to the rescue, saying that Russian intelligence told the US that Saddam was planning attacks on the US, both inside and outside our borders.
Sounds like big load of cra---i mean, disinformation, to me.
Aside from our little blog world, most Americans believed Bush
NO.
mybabyscrying...I heard a clip of McCain saying that Miserable Failure has led the country with moral clarity and vision. I almost hurled my lunch. I am deeply, deeply disappointed in McCain. I don't know why he's doing this, but whatever the reason, he must think it's worth his reputation.
Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee killed a motion to subpoena the torture memo and urged the Adminisration to release rhen on its own. Given that it's Friday and the news will be devoted to the latest beheading, today would be a good day for the Administration to release them.
Bush/McCain? I'm going to be sick...
Any polls showing level of support for Bush/McCain?
I'd better start looking for a place in Vancouver, B.C. because I can't stay in this country if Bush is re-elected.
McCain will be the next POTUS. I'm taking odds.
America had longtime ties with Osama bin Laden. The Bush clan has current ties to the bin Laden family. The US aided the proto-Al Queda mujahdeen in Afgahnistan. America also had longterm ties with Saddam Hussein and supplied arms to his government in their war against the Iranians (and the Kurds).
Hell, as Bob Somerby wrote today, Reagan had ties and contacts with the Soviets too...
See, it's all TRUE! If you think that I'm inferring that the USA is to blame for our current station, well, that's just your interpretation.
Now you're just being funny NTodd, I don't think we have to worry about AOL having to be policed.
And I don't think it has anything to do with having ISP's police anyone.
When we find a site that has AQ content, we can assume those people did so with AQ blessing and support.
We can then grab them as *legitimate* supporters of AQ rather than what's happening in Iraq where everyone is assumed to be a *potential* supporter.
They may hop around from place to place, but they will, or should never be able to hop to the same place twice and those who did put up their material could have further ties that need to be examined. They might have connections or contacts with other website owners that we could consider as part of a 'network' of AQ supporting websites.
MYOB'
.
Damn it. I posted the thing about the torture memos.
MYOB
how eloquent. we are doing it right now in Saudi Arabia. Proping up a dictatorial regime for our insatitable oil thirst, and we're rocked when one American is killed because of it, while the US is killing tens of thousands of innocents in iraq. We must stop the current killing machine aka the Bush Administration.
Blowing up frogs??? -this is from Washington Post web-chat with Dr. Frank, author of "Bush on the Couch"
I do not know what to think of the premise of the book -- but to me I am amazed to read about the cruelty to animals by GWB as a child - has that ever been out before ??
Monticello, New York: Dr. Frank,
I understand you learned that Bush exploded firecrackers inside of frogs as a youngster. How did you learn that, what does it indicate to you about the pathology of the youngster, and how do you think that pathology has manifested itself in the behavior of the adult? Thank you. Justin Frank: There were several articles about Bush's childhood in which his friends were interviewed describing his having blown up frogs. This was after rainy periods in the otherwise dry Midland world. He also used beebee guns to shoot them, one friend reported. A group of them did.
As a fraternity man at Yale he branded pledges on the buttocks with a hot coat-hanger. This was written up in the NYTimes in 1967 and he was interviewed then about it.
His smirk as an adult, his mimicry of patients on death row while he was Governor are all part of a similar pattern.
Everyone has sadistic bits in his personality. The job of a mature person is to recognize those elements and control them or channel them in some way other than inflicting harm on others.
No, I never believed Miserable Failure. I listened to him in the 2000 campaign dodge questions about his business dealings, drug use and National Guard Service. I listened to him outline an arithmetically absurd tax plan. I concluded that he was not telling the truth about any of these issues. He has done nothing since to prompt me to reconsider my initial assessment.
Why do they keep calling the terrorists who beheaded that guy "cowardly" on CNN? I would think it would take a lot of guts to chop someone's head off.
When we find a site that has AQ content, we can assume those people did so with AQ blessing and support. We can then grab them as *legitimate* supporters of AQ rather than what's happening in Iraq where everyone is assumed to be a *potential* supporter.
And how do you propose we find these people after we discover their sites? It took months to locate Kevin Mitnick, who was a pretty shitty hacker, and that was only possible by creating a "honeypot" to keep him returning to the same servers day after day. Not to mention the fact that he lives in the US. Most hackers, despite our best efforts, generally get away with their attacks.
In a similar vein, a terrorist setting up a website is going to be nigh near impossible to locate. IP addresses can be spoofed, you can maintain a website from pretty much anywhere in the world, etc.
OT - Rice too? bwahahaha
The officer who oversaw interrogations at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad testified that he was under intense "pressure" from the White House, Pentagon (news - web sites) and CIA (news - web sites) last fall to get better information from detainees, pressure that he said included a visit to the prison by an aide to national security adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites).
Army Lt. Col. Steven Jordan, in a sworn statement to Army investigators obtained by USA TODAY, said he was told last September that White House staffers wanted to "pull the intelligence out" of the interrogations being conducted at Abu Ghraib. The pressure stemmed from growing concern about the increasingly violent Iraqi insurgency that was claiming American lives daily. It came before and during a string of abuses of Iraqi prisoners in October, November and December of 2003.
Jordan, the top military intelligence officer at Abu Ghraib, described "instances where I feel that there was additional pressure" to get information from detainees, including a visit to the prison last fall by an aide to Rice that was "purely on detainee operations and reporting." And he said he was reminded of the need to improve the intelligence output of the prison "many, many, many times."
Rice staffer Fran Townsend said Thursday that she spent about two hours at Abu Ghraib last November and recalls that Jordan was her guide. Townsend, then deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism, said she did not discuss interrogation techniques or the need to obtain more information from detainees, and neither witnessed nor heard about abuse of detainees.
http://tinyurl.com/2rtwd
Nah baby, we don't need no more information. And I ain't seen or heard nothing, many, many, many times.
It is amusing to see people shocked to learn that McCain is actually a Rethug, and that he would suport Shrub even after all the other Rethug crap he's supported.
Hey, maybe we can get the Russians to attack and occupy Saudi Arabia!
In light of his Vietnam history, this is in horribly bad taste, but did McCain say anything like:
"George Bush is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful person I have ever met in my whole life?"
And was he seen passing the time playing solitaire just before the fundraiser?
Good point Craig. Although killing a civilian with no means to defend himself is not brave.
Cowardly is taking verbal potshots at terrorists knowing you will never have to personally confront them. Instead, you send our soldiers to fight and be killed by the ones you so glibly provoke. Or you invite situations where our citizens are beheaded because terrorists view them as proxies for you.
(I'm talking to Dubya, by the way).
In war, attack military supply lines, even in noncombatant nations, has been considered a legitimate tactic.
So technically speaking, attacking the Saudi oil fields and workers to put a pinch on diesel fuel destined to be used by the US military, is a legitimate wartime exersize.
Wars are never clean or easy, and they don't tend to respect borders. We shouldn't be thinking of these folks as civilians. They are non-coms working in a military zone, assisting in military goals. I think it's fair now to characteriza The Saudi oil fields as a military zone now also.
The US is in this for the long haul, and we should be looking at the situation with a realistic eye.
Things are escalating and they are getting worse. And they will continue to get worse. Neither Kerry nor Bush intend to pull our troops out of the Middle East, so we need to be prepared for making the necessary sacrifices to maintain some semblance of control there. No matter who our next president is, we'll see a major expansion of US troops in the region and they won't come from weekend warrior volunteers.
kei&yuri...yes, McCain has supported some Repug issues, but he has also bucked the party on many issues. McCain has shown a willingness to go against the maladministration and Congressional leadership. He showed signs of being that rare politician of any party who put his conscience and the good of the country above party. That's why a lot of people are now disappointed in him. Most of us expect nothing from hacks like DeLay, Hastert and Frist, but McCain showed solid signs of being different from them.
"Not hard to find examples (Chomsky, Zinn--again, with whom I mostly agree) of those whose much needed correctives to American triumphalism are so stridently unipolar as to leave little if any room for those on the right to take a baby step to their left. We're talking politics as well as truth and morality here, and, alas, they're not the same things.
Mike"
I don't know...if Chomsky and Zinn are strident, it's because they have been marginalized by the media and the culture to the point that very few people actually know what they're saying. I'm not aware of too many school textbooks that have references to "Manufacturing Consent." And the corrective needs to be unipolar, because the overwhelming weight of media and popular culture is on the side of "America, love her or leave her."
As MYOB puts it, we are a long ways off from having the truth about American History revealed to the general public. And I doubt anyone on the right would ever concede that American Imperialism is a bad thing, no matter how balanced the argument. They've already bought into the whole Manifest Destiny concept of history, and can justify any actions taken by the government in that light. Or they can just use the "a few bad apples" defense.
I have always had a nasty feeling that Bin Laden almost always seems to be doing things that play into the hands of the Neo cons. It is almost if they are working together.
Shall I size you for a tinfoil chapeau, sally?
Mine works fine.
Start counting the Al Qaeda- Carlyle- US government links. Dig it up. Lay it all out for yourself. Trust Occam's razor. Now, what is the final result?
I would tell you, but the emotional impact of realizing it for yourself is something you need to carry you through the days ahead.
Hey, maybe we can get the Russians to attack and occupy Saudi Arabia!
That would be really smart of them to do, considering AQ's already pissed at them about Chechnya.
I give Putin enough credit for knowing when to keep his ass out of the fire. Unlike Chimpy, who sits down there and starts to sing.
A.
######################################
OT: fucking terrifying
TWO DOZEN SECRET CONCENTRATION/TORTURE FACILITIES WORLDWIDE, CREATED AND MAINTAINED BY US, "MAKE...ABUSE NOT ONLY LIKELY BUT INEVITABLE"
Heartland, Heartland,
Over All Else:
David Brooks Thus
Sings Thine Praise!
And the latest is that Bush's approval ratings are back up to 50%.
There are a lot of sorry-assed idiots in this country.
Wasn't it Lincoln who said "You can fool some of the people ALL if the time?"
Way O.T. - Bob Somerby is really pissed today. He even takes time at the end of his entry today to smack Marshall, Drum, Alterman and Brock around for not pointing out more how worthless the press is. I suspect he's right.
Don't think for a minute that Bushco doesn't know that the corporate media isn't completely under their control. If this was the Clinton hunting press, the whole shit load of this administration would be in jail.
OT,
I laughed my ass off over at dKOS. You gotta read this satiric Friday Science post, it's absolutely hilarious. No drinking while you read, you've been warned.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/20...6/18/142244/
930
Sorry....I mean IS completely under their control.
Clearly McCain has made a political deal with the Chimp. So, he proves himself to be exactly what he is - a politician, nothing more, nothing less. They are necessary creatures, given the system wh live in. But to ascribe any purity or integrity to a politician is foolish. I badly want Kerry to be president in November, but I harbor no illusions about him. All I can hope is that an effective, united Left can push him slightly away from the center, by convincing him he is as beholden to us as Chimpy is to his base lunatic fringe of apocalypse-loving, fag-hating Christian terrorists.
OT: the continuing saga of the Bubble or, speaking of history
BUSH WAS A DICK ON D-DAY, demanded platform built and bleacher removed
er, sorry, that was us that broke Haloscan; got the original URL confused with the Tiny'd version...
Bush's 50% approval rating tells me that people are scared shitless of crossing a murderous monkey.
Americans, for all their famous naivete, NOW KNOW that their president [sic] is a lying psychopath. Some few might still be in denial, or equally psychopathic, but there is no way that 50% says anything but FEAR. Assuming of course that that number has any basis in reality.
Time for a projectile vomiters' march on Washington.
Peace (he says feebly),
-Speedy
bo: More like putin give preznit head.
No, turkee give preznit head.
.
Anybody seen Atrios?
Jeffraham Prestonian,
That's a slam-dunk!
Doug,
I thought Bob was a bit out of line. Kevin tries to actually call the press on it, Brock just started a massive project, and Marshall just went on vacation. Each one of the people cited have their own little focus, but they are by no means "easy" on the press. The truth is, no one is as good at it as Bob Somerby. Plus, who would want to have to watch that much TV !
"Anybody seen Atrios?"
He's in an undisclosed location.
"Cheney to be dumped from the ticket to be replaced by McCain for VP."
-mybabyscrying
bingo. or at least Bush is letting McCain believe it.
Similar strategy of the backslapping between Kerry and Dean
TWO DOZEN SECRET CONCENTRATION/TORTURE FACILITIES WORLDWIDE, CREATED AND MAINTAINED BY US, "MAKE...ABUSE NOT ONLY LIKELY BUT INEVITABLE"
kei & yuri, do they rent to AQ? Jumpsuits and all? What about chairs and wallpaint?
Or maybe we rent from them... much more likely the way the cash flow works.
Remember this letter to Congress where Bush said he was authorized to go to war in order to prosecute those who committed the 9-11 attacks?
sooo, Haloscan didn't break...
From kei&yuri's link:
"In addition, White House staffers demanded that bleachers erected for several thousand spectators be torn down, limiting the number of guests who could attend the event. "Some 25-year-old White House kid thought they weren't esthetically pleasing," one administration official complained."
Yeah, right. That order came straight from the Chimpster.
"The red carpet price tag wasn't anticipated by Pentagon planners, so the $100,000, which has already been paid out to the civilian contractors who did the work, will have to be scrounged from somewhere else.
"That money will have to come out of some account that otherwise would be spent on soldiers," according to a source familiar with the situation."
Uh-Oh, here's another of those anonymous sources - from the State Department, perhaps?
More:
"The expensive choreography was a drop in the bucket compared with the overall cost of the U.S. government's participation in D-Day celebrations in France - estimated at $30 million by knowledgeable officials.
That sum includes about $24 million in direct costs like building roads, highways, parking lots and other infrastructure in Normandy, as well as $6 million in value-added taxes paid to the French government.
American diplomats are privately irked that the French have rejected a U.S. request to waive the taxes on the grounds that most of the $30 million was for projects that benefit France permanently. Buchan said the French will pick up some of the cost."
Good for the French. VAT! VAT!
"Calls for Root's* resignation followed him across the water. When General Smith admitted, on 25 April, to having authorized the slaughter of Filipino boys, even loyal Republicans were revolted. 'It is almost incredible,' the Philadelphia Press commented, 'that an American officer of any rank could have issued an order so shameful, inhuman, and barbarous.' Root was accused of a cover-up, or at least a reluctance to prosecute Army cruelty. 'If we are to benevolently assimilate Filipinos by such methods,' remarked the New Orleans Times-Democrat, 'we should frankly so state, and drop our canting hypocrisy about having to wage war on these people for their own betterment.'"
Elihu Root, Roosevelt's Secretary of War (today's Secretary of Defense).
From "Theodore Rex" by Edmund Morris.
Those who do not read history, etc., etc., etc.
So it goes.
commieatheist:
Again, I agree with you mostly. Someone upthread cited 'Lies My Teacher Told Me'--a good book, which my 12-year-old wasn't recommened in school.
The issue remains: how does one attack American triumphalism so as to allow those for whom uncritical, my-country-right-or-wrong American patriotism is a central part of their identities to come along a bit, just a bit, to the left? The left will never have the huge corporate resources of the right. I'll admit to a bit of despair: what more could it possibly take for the Bush administration to be utterly disgraced in the eyes of the vast majority of Americans?
All of which leads me to suggest that the Republican grown-up, who may be critical to the election and the future running of a morally satisfactory country, should be welcomed and not trashed, no matter how much trashing may be deserved, when admitting that things aren't working out well under policies once embraced and facts now proved lies. Once questioning begins, it's hard to stop. It seems to me that anything we can do to encourage questioning is worth doing--'rewarding good behavior.'
Kerry isn't my favorite, either, but we've got to get Bush out.
Teddy Roosevelt, and that shouldhave had my name on the post. Sorry
Jeffraham Prestonian,
Damn shame I can't do the picture justice by describing it in words, but waaaaay back there in the '80's before digital diddling of pictures became a staple, Paul Krassner had a photo in his mag, the Realist, entitled "President Regan enjoying a joint session with a Young Republican." If somebody can find it, the picture needs to be scanned so it can make the rounds. In memorium, of course.
Are Bush and his dad aiding and abetting terrorists in their ties with Saudi Arabia? Jim Baker and his Baker/(ro)Botts defending Saudi Arabia against the 9-11 victims: aren't they the enemy within??
I mean. C'mon. Can't we get vicious and self-righteous like the other side?
"anonymous- no need for prague records, FBI has confirmed that Atta was in US on the date in question."
veritas 06.18.04 - 1:05 pm
America harboring terrorists? Ties? Geez, I wonder if Atta visited any hospitals or dentists - this would be the clincher. Dare I ask when we begin bombing ourselves?
Oh god, beheading porn is up on Drudge.
OT-Yet Another Interesting Link from the Invaluable Cursor:
Atrios kind of has this running thing where he exposes some guy nobody has ever heard of, and on the one hand we now know about some fringe anti-Semite guy and on the other hand there are a lot of complaints about how this is hardly newsworthy since the guy is nobody and is gaining notoriety through the post.
Anyway, Cursor has this guy Mark Steyn billed as the most loathesome hate pundit "you've never heard of", under a bit about Limbaugh.
"Bush's 50% approval rating tells me that people are scared shitless of crossing a murderous monkey.
Speedy"
So, you're saying that people are telling pollsters they approve of Bush, because they're afraid if they say they don't approve they'll get on some enemy combatants list or something? Hmmm.
Drum Blog issued "abuser suspension orders" yesterday. Today it's like the Stepford Wives over there. See this:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Co...04/
233uylts.asp
Borgs will adapt to our flames, and assimilate our snarks.
On the subject of al-Qaeda web sites:
An old story
There are a few instances where "www.terroristwebsite.net" is registered and activated. Those sites get the "public" content - anti-American screeds, etc. - and are usually shut down quickly. Also, some sites have been registered solely for the purpose of releasing a single document (like a binLadin fatwa) and abandoned after the fact.
For the most part these sites don't get set up any more. Al-Qaeda is not only less decentralized, but also has the opportunity to release its information through the Arab satellite news networks.
Al-Qaeda operatives do swap information via the Internet. A common method a while back was to register a free web page (Tripod, webshots, etc.) and use encryption software to embed a message in an image file - only the recipient (who could decrypt the message) knew that the picture of a nice Caucasian family contained a hidden message. (There have even been references to pornographic images being given this treatment.)
The originator of the information did not need to know who the information was for. The recipient, who simply downloaded the image off a web site he was given an address to, never knew who sent it to him.
So the very notion of "policing content" becomes impossible, as the "content" isn't out in the open.
I have also heard that terrorists have exchanged informaiton in pornographic web site chat rooms - log in, do a "private chat" and swap images and information. No muss, no fuss, no files on a server that can be recovered - and if the participants are in a cybercafe somewhere, almost totally untraceable.
Anybody seen Atrios?
Look for the guy with the featureless blue face carrying moving boxes around Philly.
Or ask Joe Conason.
Looks as if June is the month when Democrats start their meltdown.
What with all the trouble Dubya has created in the world and things still totally fucked up, it appears the media is falling back into the malaize it showed last year and the year before the last election. This is happening and Democrats seem to be content to let this happen. Folks, now is the time to start raising holy hell. To let the media get away with another year we had when they ruined Gore would be disatrious. Are Dems going to wimp out again?
Yes, commie a., and/or that they are supporting him, at least until the election, to keep him happy... exactly as you would an actual monkey, come to think of it.
Oh, and McCain is shit. Always has been, IMO.
Oh god, beheading porn is up on Drudge.
Quite a bit of blood there. Very unlike the Nick Berg beheading.
In any case, tell me again how we're winning the war on terrorism?
Kelley b
Thanks for that, but I have had a tin foil hat for many years. Anyone who has read history, even at the most basic level, knows about conspiracys. It is only the Conservative media who attacks the conspiracy theory, unless of course Clinton is the president. It was quite funny to watch all those right wing nuts in the 90s all become convinced in the cospiracy theory.
As for Mccain, to help out the Chimp after they attacked his war record, and his wife, just shows how pathetic he is. Does the man have no decency?
Click on my name to see the dates of Bill Clinton's book signing tour. He's in New York on the 22nd.
I just hear on the radio that the Al Qaeida intention of bringing down the Saudi government has as its first part the complete cleaning out of the country of all foreigners, and this horror strategy is working. One commentator said that they doubt the numbers of foreigners next year will be even half of what they were a few months ago, and that there is a real exodus from the country right now. All intended and working as Al Qaeida planned.
I feel terrible for the poor guy's family. I hope they are allowed to mourn in peace.
We need to start teaching real history in our classrooms. We all need a little dose of Chomsky.
How do the book economics work?
Clinton got $10M advance. Publisher expects at least 1.5M copies sales. Let us say Clinton gets $10 royalty on each copy sold (out of $35 retail price). So for the first 1M copies, he doesn't get anything more, since the advance has already covered it. For each book above 1M copies, he starts getting $10 royalty again. Is that how it works?
Maybe Cheney's out, McCain's in?
Whoever is doing that at 4:07-
1, (we aren't, it's someone using our name), Name Theft is actually one of the lowest things hostile trolls do (you don't seem to a hostile troll, but understand what you're doing),
2, they refer to themselves in the singular,
3, they're linking the homepage and not the name (we've been wondering for some time, after messily failed experimentation, if you could hyperlink your name preoperly),
4, we would not be endorsing a Clinton book, although if Hillary's is any indication his will fucking rule the lists.
ecoast, he probably gets in the neighborhood of 10-15% of roughly $27, after the book earns back $10 mil. or it could be that he took the $10 mil in lieu of royalties.
Peter, yes Chomsky, but also Zinn and Loewen and Stone and Beard and Lundberg and Vidal and several others. And just rescind the ban on critical thinking. The whole textbook thing is a mess, Feynman and Loewen have good pieces on it (looking now). Atrios was kind of sensitive about Chomsky being the only guy mentioned last time.
He is a hostile troll. He is Ricky Vandal, trying to direct traffic to his ridiculous spoof on Bill Clinton's book tour.
Click on my name to see the dates of Bill Clinton's book signing tour. He's in New York on the 22nd.
Damn you, Ricky Vandal!
And people a few weeks back were thinking McCain on Kerry's ticket would be a good thing. Pfffft.
Quite a bit of blood there. Very unlike the Nick Berg beheading.
You know, I keep hearing that stuff about how the Berg video didn't have a lot of blood, but I saw plenty.
How do the book economics work?
Your explanation is pretty good, except that $5/book is about as good as I've ever heard anyone get. Clinton may get more, but $10 is probably a bit high.
Echidne --
You bring up some very interseting points. AQ is effectively driving all of the foreigners out of Saudi Arabia, and what did it cost them? They seem to have perfected asymmetric warfare. Kidnap a single person, commit an unthinkable atrocity and - boom - mass exodus! Before the Rug (as in he lies like one) established his preemptive policy, we relied on marginalization and containment. Now we've committed to massive military retaliation at an incredible cost in lives and treasure. Think of the Cold War. The Soviet Union bankrupted itself trying to keep up with the arms race. AQ can actually mount a war of attrition against us if we stick to this inoperable strategy. Kidnap some poor innocent and kill them, thus draining the US treasury of millions of dollars. This is not a new concept -- cooler heads in the Pentagon have been studying this since Ho Chi Minh -- but I guess the neocons know better. The incompetence and futility is staggering. That poor family.
Time to invade Saudi Arabia.
heh.
Fake Kei & yuri - I can't condone your stealing names, but that website is fuckin' incredible. I thought it was a parody - especially when the Clenis mentions how beautiful Glenn Close is and that he had dinner with her after the premiere.
davedave,
"Kidnap a single person, commit an unthinkable atrocity and - boom - mass exodus!"
A single atrocity ?
You haven't been following the news about the bombings, killings and hostage taking in Saudi Arabia, have you ?
Damn you Ricky Vandal, I knew it was too good to be true. You did a nice job, though - for an asshole.
Ah, all I had to do was read the rest of it...
"The dragon lady just called. She'll be home tomorrow. She reminded me she had asked me to look through some legal papers for her senate commission. I really don't want to do that. Damn. I just can't get myself to do it. Not today. I'll have to make up some excuse tomorrow. I know she'll look at me with that "You let me down again" look. Yeah, yeah, shut up."
The State Dept. has been advising people to leave Saudi Arabia for weeks.
I've been wondering lately why the Saudis can't do the jobs that are being done by foreign workers. Not enough education?
so is aWol going to get Poppy one of those "Saddam-Al Quaida" ties for Fathere's Day?
davedave, you're right about the fact that it's a cheap strategy for the fanatics, though it is of course more than just one atrocity. But the fanatics don't need much money or even troops to do this. All they need is callousness.
At the same time, they are testing the Saudi security forces in their competence, and this is an important part of the whole. The security forces have proven themselves pretty helpless, and one Saudi commentator predicted that direct attacks at the government might follow pretty soon.
CNN reports that Clinton slept on couch for 2 months after Lewinksy affair. Surely there was another bedroom. The White House is pretty big. What's up with that?
ch2 -- fair enough, I oversimplified the situation, alot. My point reamins, however, that AQ is spending a fraction of what we're spending. If we keep up this grand military strategy we run the real risk of bankrupting the country. It has happened again and again throughout history. I'm not sure how we steer out of these waters, but we must return to a strategy of limited local retaliation against terrorists, otherwise we're playing into their hand. every previous administration back at least as far as Carter understood this.
It's been remarked today before, but it's amazing how once again, Al Qaeda's tactics gain them and Bu$hCo what they want.
And the decapitated body is wearing exactly the standard prison jumpsuit used in Iraq.
OT, but it looks like Ryan may be waving bye-bye:
CHICAGO (AP) - Republican Jack Ryan pushed ahead with his Senate campaign Friday despite a judge's decision to unseal potentially embarrassing divorce papers, and party leaders said it was too early to speak of replacing him on the ballot.
davedave, I agree with you.
It seems we are being played, the way we thought we had played the soviet union. The irony is blinding.
Atrios? Athenae? Holden? Old Hat? Tena?
Where is everybody? Can't all be at work.
NTodd-exactly where? You cut off a head, it should spurt, it should be a strong constant stream straight out.
Unless the guy was already dead, and then it might ooze or spread on the floor.
?
preznit giv me turkee: so is aWol going to get Poppy one of those "Saddam-Al Quaida" ties for Fathere's Day?
LOL! Funniest thing I've read today!
.
What would it take to shake the 30-40% of voters that would vote for Bu$h for anything?
What would it take to drive the 20% swing voters into Kerry's camp for good?
Unequivocal proof of the Bu$h-Carlyle-Al Qaeda connection.
Kerry did it for BCCI and Iran-Contra.
We can only hope he has his own overwhelming October Surprise- because you can count that Rove and Bu$hCo have several.
re: history taught in schools. I had the most slapdash American history in school. Seemingly every year up through Middle School we started at the explorers, memorized all their names and dates and conquests, moved on to the pilgrims and colonial era and never got as far as Lexington and Concord. In 8th grade I remember spending an inordinant amount of time on the Teapot Dome, but really remember nothing about it.
The school system I was in "accelerated" us gifted and talented kids a year ahead in English and History, so I missed World History in 9th grade and went straight to American History. The teacher was obsessed with Andrew Jackson and robber barons. I KNOW we never got as far as WWI in any history class I took.
Anything I know about history I know from my own reading. The deplorable state of history and civics education is one of the reasons I homeschool my kids. I can open up the whole topic, warts and all and not get bogged down by a curriculum that keeps teaching the same thing over and over.
re: Bush/McCain '04 - McCain could be a good safety measure if Shrub does get re(s)elected and is subsequently impeached. I'd rather have McCain as POTUS than Bush any day.
"And people a few weeks back were thinking McCain on Kerry's ticket would be a good thing. Pfffft." nyc
he did indeed show him self for the vile repug. he is. i don't know how reasonable people can belong to that party. oh, thats right, their are no reasonable ones left. (yes, i can think of some exceptions, they should switch)
dick cheney on asymetrical war fare. "we will hunt them down, and kill them one by one" what a dick.
interesting how AQ and bushco keep feeding off one another, unless your in the middle,(and we are all in the middle) then it just sucks.
actually jumped in to see if their is any info. on this putin story, i'm think'n, one election stealing war criminal, scratches another election stealing war criminals back. and i bet the back story will be different than it initially appears.
The thing to remember about Saudi is that the vast majority of the people do not support the Saudi Royal family. Most of them would like nothing more than to have a Muslim fundie state. This is why it is going to be very difficult to stop this sort of thing in the future.
The West have been proping up the suadi Royal family for years, and it is one of Bin Ladens biggest aims to bring them down.
kei & yuri, I've been thinking for the last hour he was dead prior to decapitation, because again, if they killed him on the cot, blood would sput everywhere from the aorta, but only ooze from the vena cava.
Also, death by decapitation causes a surge of spinal reflexes resulting in a massive voiding of the bladder and small intestine.
He was dead before they used that knife to decapitate. If they used that kinfe. Sorry for the grim description, folks.
It would have been far easier for them to drug him and cut his throat while unconscious. From the condition of the body in the photograph I suspect that's what happened. May he rest in peace.
What happenned to the "comment" link under the "Hoeffel" post?
Also, the two "small" ships mentioned by the human rights group as possible makeshift detention facilities have received delegations of Girl Scouts touring the craft and donating cookies, both in '03. The ships are kind of transport/landing support things, with a place to carry the personnel of an invasion in front and vehicles in the back (helicopter deck on top of facilities for hovercraft, which is the big door-looking thing). This means that there are plenty of cabins which could be converted readily into cells, and it's a landing cratf with the capacity to land, let alone maintain a helicopter, and so would probably be offshore regions of interest: it has plenty of advantages as a candidate for a mobile secret prison.
NTodd-exactly where? You cut off a head, it should spurt, it should be a strong constant stream straight out.
Well, I'm not going to make any claim about whether Berg was alive or dead when they beheaded him on video, but there was a boatload of blood all over the floor, and some was gushing out of his mouth as I recall. Maybe it didn't spurt enough for a live beheading, but there was a lot of blood. In fact, my imperfect memory and eyeball both tell me that the blood in the Johnson pictures is about the same.
Anyway, I think the tinfoil hat stuff about staged beheadings and all that is just silly. These guys are dead, Occam's Razor says it was terrorists, etc, etc.
As for Bush's numbers these days, The Pew Center for the People and the Press reported yesterday that Americans are paying less attention to the war, but supporting it more. That just speaks volumes about the Merkins, don't it?
Here's another scary bit:
Bush's favorable ratings are largely driven by positive evaluations of his personality. In an open-ended format, 65% of those who expressed a favorable opinion of Bush cited his personal characteristics – especially honesty, leadership and his religious beliefs. People who have a negative impression of Bush generally mentioned his policies, with nearly a third specifically citing the war in Iraq.
Yes, honesty, folks. They admire his honesty. Good Lord.
You suppose Clinton had to sleep on the couch for 2 months because Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon were in the Lincoln bedroom? Wasn't Chelsea at college then? Couldn't he have slept in her room instead of "on the couch?" Inquiring minds want to know.
By "small" in the last commment was meant we've been on this sort of ship and they're huge next to a human, but nevertheless they are nearly the smallest kind of vessel and dwarfed by, say, a carrier.
NTodd-no, Occam's Razor does not lie still at all the contradictions; it points to sinister screwing around.
Was the decapitation accompanied by one of those catchy middle east tunes like the Berg video? The production quality in these things is so shoddy. Someone call Steven Bochco. If he could do for decapitation videos what he did for "Cop Rock," I think they'd be more watchable.
The Pew Center for the People and the Press reported yesterday that Americans are paying less attention to the war, but supporting it more.
That's probably before they saw yesterday's headline, if they saw yesterday's headline, that 1 billion dollars has been misspent in Iraq.
Gee, only a billion?
Kelly B.
1. The aorta and superior vena cava are not in the neck. The primary vasculature there are the carotid arteries and the jugular veins.
2. The common misperception that there is some kind of geyser of blood upon a tramatic amputaion is wide spread. TV/movie special effects aside, when arteries are severed the response is an immediate contraction of the musculature at the site of injury. There will be blood, but quite simply you will not exsanguate. The heart will stop beating long before you run out of blood.
Hope that clears you up a bit.
Kelly B.
1. The aorta and superior vena cava are not in the neck. The primary vasculature there are the carotid arteries and the jugular veins.
2. The common misperception that there is some kind of geyser of blood upon a tramatic amputaion is wide spread. TV/movie special effects aside, when arteries are severed the response is an immediate contraction of the musculature at the site of injury. There will be blood, but quite simply you will not exsanguate. The heart will stop beating long before you run out of blood.
Hope that clears you up a bit.
People who have a negative impression of Bush generally mentioned his policies
People who had a negative opinion of Bush generally mentioned that he was Bush, while others thought he was someone else.
Jesus Christ with two turntables and a microphone.
A.
There was music in the Berg video?
Sigh.
The primary vasculature there are the carotid arteries and the jugular veins.
And there's no pressure in the carotid? We've seen worse from pricks in clinics and we're supposed to buy a slow oozing in the case of a decapitation? And is the "muscular contraction" the reason the bowels and bladder are supposed to be evacuated, but weren't for Berg?
Or maybe-just maybe-he was already dead, thus the ooze, thus the bowels, thus the whole thing makes more sense. That is Occam; the simplest is most likely.
Esther Schrader lays it out in the Los Angeles Times: "Cheney has told the commission that during one call to Bush, moments after he arrived at the command center, he asked the president to decide on the rules of engagement for combat planes being deployed over Washington. Bush said he authorized that hijacked planes be shot down.
"But the commission staff seemed to question whether the call took place. Its report noted that there were no logs of that phone call between Cheney and Bush. 'Others nearby who were taking notes, such as the vice president's chief of staff, [I. Lewis] Scooter Libby, who sat next to him, and Mrs. Cheney, did not note a call between the president and vice president immediately after the vice president entered the conference room,' the report said.
"Lee H. Hamilton, co-chairman of the Sept. 11 commission, told reporters 'there's no documentary evidence' that Cheney conferred with Bush before issuing the shoot-down order.
THIS with the NEVER received shoot down orders from pilots- LIHOP
veritas
don't you remember? it was right after his quip about "I don't want some tinhorn terrorists keeping me out of Washington"
...peace, rizmnstr. I do know anatomy, and have probably decapitated more animals than you'll ever see in your nightmares.
Back to the jumpsuit.
If they get the body, they should figure out why he's wearing a standard prison jumpsuit. And exactly where that jumpsuit has been if they can trace it. If they want to.
And I'm sorry, NTodd, the simplest explanation here depends on the data, and I'm not sure of any of it.
Next anatomy lesson:
The bowels evacuate due to the RELAXATION of the nether regions.
And on a lighter note, I have to yet decapitate the multitude of animals as you claim to have and I certainly don't dream about headless critters either.
To the anonymous way upstream (the one who mentioned NPR's program today):
Do you or DOES ANYONE have Clarence Page's (or is it Paige's????) e-mail. You know damn well that unless he knows that Ms. Edmonds' first name is spelled in a non-traditional way S-i-b-e-l (NOT S-y-b-i-l) he won't find Ms. Edmonds in a Google search. We ought to let him know how to spell it!! And I should learn how he spells Page/Paige.
Anyone have his e-mail addy?
Re: the decapitation business:
There has been speculation for some time that Saudi Arabia would have troublesome terrorist incidents, which would lead to destabilization of the monarchy, which would lead the U.S. to support them, which would give us unfettered access to the oil fields.
Hence, it's hard for me to look at these "terrorist" incidents without a huge case of jaundice.
I hate, hate, hate the way these fuckers have turned me into someone who believes the U.S. would be willing to go to ANY MEASURES to secure our access to post-peak-oil resources. Including the killing of a few Americans/Westerners. Where's the Reynolds Wrap?
Anyone else out there as cynical as I?
Sigh.
Tell it to a thrashing rat as compared to one you've overdosed. Death is a part of life, and if you grow up with family on a farm in the south and train as a biologist you see a bit of both. Spinal reflexes are a bit more complex than simple relaxation.
Apologies to the happily uninitiated out there. Sorry to creep you out. But the forensics of these cases aren't being examined.
Still, I do think it would be good if the pundits learned about history, don't you think?.
... and I agree with you Kate.
Kate,
Anyone else out there as cynical as I?
Kate | Email | Homepage | 06.18.04 - 5:45 pm | #
Is that cynical or clinical? ;^)
"Wire services report al Qaeda leader in Saudi Arabia killed, according to Al Arabiyah TV network. CNN working to confirm." cnn.com
DUBAI (Reuters) - The leader of al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia, Abdulaziz al-Muqrin, has been killed, Al Arabiya television reported Friday.
Muqrin claimed responsibility for the beheading of a U.S. engineer Friday and the killing of other Westerners in the kingdom, which has battled Osama bin Laden's group for over a year. Arabiya gave no further details.
© Reuters 2004. All Rights Reserved.
Rice staffer Fran Townsend said Thursday that she spent about two hours at Abu Ghraib last November and recalls that Jordan was her guide. Townsend, then deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism, said she did not discuss interrogation techniques or the need to obtain more information from detainees, and neither witnessed nor heard about abuse of detainees.
http://tinyurl.com/2rtwd
Nah baby, we don't need no more information. And I ain't seen or heard nothing, many, many, many times.
QuentinCompson
hmmm, didn't Condi go on the turkee photo-op flight?
kate -- upthread re clarence page contact (from his chicago tribune column): cptime@aol.com
RE: Clarence Page not having heard of Sibel Edmonds (yes, it is Page).
It hadn't occurred to me that he would actually go look up something. I assumed he did know about her and was just avoiding responding. Good point about the spelling of Sibel though - if it doesn't come up on the first hit, bail out! I would guess he'd be doing a Nexis search but figured most listeners wouldn't know what that is. Fortunately, he's easily Googled. You can email and educate Clarence Page at cptime@aol.com (that's the address at the end of his column). BTW, if You Google 'Sibel CBS', the 60 Minutes story comes up as the first hit. Amazingly, they interviewed her in October 2002 (!) and it looks like they rebroadcast it on June 6 this year.
D'oh!
Thank you, Anonymous, whoever you (or yous!) are. Will do. If necessary, we should hand-hold these idiots through the entire process, so that maybe they freakin' learn SOMETHING.
Kelly:
Not beat headless barnyard animal to death, but you were bringing the forensics of this into play.
"Also, death by decapitation causes a surge of spinal reflexes resulting in a massive voiding of the bladder and small intestine.
He was dead before they used that knife to decapitate. If they used that kinfe. Sorry for the grim description, folks.
It would have been far easier for them to drug him and cut his throat while unconscious. From the condition of the body in the photograph I suspect that's what happened. May he rest in peace"
I was merely trying to correct an opinion based on incorrect facts. No offense to you, but if I was running my mouth (or keyboard) about that with which I have not a good understanding of, I would hope someone would try to rectify my ignorance.
And thrashing or not, the relaxation of the smooth muscle of GI tract is what causes that backyard mess.
AMAZING- media has already forgotten about faked winning on terror report, 9/11 report, rummy admits to war crime.
Is AQ a w run subsidiary of Carlyle?
Demerits are appropriate for those just getting it now, but they're equally in order for anyone who didn't see 9/11 coming. If you were surprised by the attacks then you weren't paying attention to the perception of the US in the Islamic world.
I heard some talking heads this week (sorry, I can't remember who) say they were surprised by the connections being made in the Islamic world between 9/11 and the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Yeah, I guess that makes sense if you didn't read the translation of bin Laden's declaration of war against the US in 1996. US troops in the Islamic holyland and and US dollars supporting the Israeli occupation were the reasons given.
If someone threw a brick through my window I'd be anxious to find out why they were so angry, and before I considered burning their house down I'd look into my own responsibility for the problem.
Attacking those who come around to our point of view might feel good, but it's unfair unless we've had it right all along. And many of us haven't.
Way to be condescending and mysteriously repetitive about the "backyard mess", rzmtzz, but the reason we brought it up was not because we doubted it was true or cared exactly why it happened: we brought it up because even if you explained one detail about the Berg mess, which is a huge mess for a number of reasons, there are other things (and absenses of things) to explain.
Anyone else out there as cynical as I?
Kate | Email | Homepage | 06.18.04 - 5:45 pm
Yoo hoo, Kate, over here!
There is simply no abomination, indecency, outrage, or crime righteous Duly Authorized Gummint Agents will not commit, with or without accompanying doubt or remorse, if said Agent believes that the action(s) will advance the interests of their Masters. I almost said "the State" or "the Nation," or even "the Cause," but I think "Masters" is more accurate.
That newspaper guy who started this thread finally figured out as much about the Masters/Authorizers.
Well, Little Brother, it's beyond sad. I predict that if there are Plame indictments, we can expect to see more Americans beheaded, or American bodies mutilated. It works as a distraction so effectively, while at the same time paving the way for a future "rescue" of the Saudi royal family.
That's not, of course, what Putin said at the time...
The Washington Post
March 21, 2003 Friday
Final Edition
SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A28
HEADLINE: Thousands Worldwide Protest Start Of Iraq War;
Many Groups Mass Near U.S. Embassies
BYLINE: Robert J. McCartney, Washington Post Foreign Service
DATELINE: BRUSSELS March 20
Much of the world condemned the start of war against Iraq today, as numerous governments said the U.S.-led assault was not justified and hundreds of thousands of demonstrators protested in front of heavily fortified American embassies, shouting slogans criticizing President Bush.
China and Russia issued surprisingly strong denunciations of the conflict. Leading European opponents such as France and Germany were critical but seemed to mute their comments. They stressed their desire for a short war with humanitarian relief for civilian victims.
...
President Vladimir Putin of Russia called the attack indefensible and "a big political mistake" in a short address on national television. "Nothing can justify this military action," he said. "Iraq posed no threat. Especially after a 10-year blockade, it was a weak country both militarily and economically."
Putin did not refer to Bush as his friend and a good politician, as he has done in recent weeks, but, in an apparent effort to protect Russia's budding partnership with the United States, he did not criticize Bush personally.
...
Correspondents John Pomfret in Beijing, Doug Struck in Tokyo, Sharon LaFraniere in Moscow, DeNeen L. Brown in Toronto and John Lancaster in Islamabad contributed to this report.
(he rolls his eyes, wonders if he shouldn't leave well enough alone, and decides to make the point anyway)
My thanks, rizmnstr, for likely being anatomically correct, depending on whether or not it was a classic neck cut, but the point is for any sudden trauma it isn't just relaxation.
Relaxation is major a component of the mess only when there is nothing else going on from the sympathetic nervous system. Spasms can override any sphincter, as a bad case of diarrhea shows. The pressure on the carotids is less than the aorta. But not much less. If the heart's beating when it is cut.
The point of this scatalogical diatribe is that these people look like they are being drugged before they're being murdered.
Decapitation with an eight inch blade knife- like the one shown next to Paul Johnson's head- is not a simple task, particularly if the hands are free, as Paul Johnson's seem to be in the posted picture on Drudge's site.
Nor is there any other trauma. No blood on the hands. Or soil on the pants. Included here for your consideration as just another data point to describe the killers.
And why should we dwell on such points? Because often vital information in solving a puzzle derives from minute details. It would be very nice to know as much about what happened as possible.
Peace.
Johnson had an orange jumpsuit also? Where are the orange jumpsuits coming from-obviously Berg's came straight from the Iraqi police office, but could there be a supply the terrorists obtained/were given?
So call me ignorant too, but I'm continually shocked at how evil Bush is. Sure, I thought Bush was a smart ass jerk who'd scam us for his cronies benefit before the election, but since 9-11 I've been horrified at his ability to manipulate events to suit his own agenda. And no I don't think it's because I'm ignorant of history, I think it's because I'm optimistic about people and their nature before I judge them. I will say that it seems rather late in the game for this guy to see the light, but hey, better late than never.
People [sucking dirt off the shoes of Power] really want to live in this Ward Cleaver world where, while bad things "happen", the People In Authority are doing their best and are sure trying hard. To admit that we are already and probably have been for a while in a third world country is not possible. It would reflect badly on them.
Even in the "conspiracy" genre of the Nineties, certain punches were inevitably pulled: forget the things people really did to blacks in this country, forget the violent racists we know still exist, let's talk about aouter space. Or the government would never do something evil, they must be doing something unpleasant to protect us from something worse. Every agency for al its faults has its honest people. Dreck like that, already outdated since Kafka.
Now it's a smokescreen??!! Jeez, not to long ago (in the run up to the war to be precise), guys like Dickerson were touting the Saddam/Osama connetion as gospel truth. Sorry Dude, too late to play stupid now. Just about every so-called "journalist" in the main stream media willingly bought the Saddam/Osama sack of bullshit, so it's waaay too late to say you can't believe it was a lie. This part of the article really kills me:
" Nobody expects the president of the United States to tell the truth about something as personal as his reasons for going to war."
Really??!! Nobody expects the President to tell the American people why it is necessary to sacrifice their loved ones?? What fucking planet is this guy from?? I guess Mr. Dickerson thinks we're all as stupid as he and the rest of his colleagues. Unfuckingbelievable!!
Americans in general are ignorant of history, so what's new?
Last!!!
Not so fast...!
Maybe some ISP's ARE policiing -- KellyB's link to cooperativeresearch.org is not only not working - the entire site is down, but was up last evening - tinfoil hats, yes.
Jeremiah Elias,
Loewen's "Lies My Teacher Taught Me" is a good one. The sanitized Little Red Schoolhouse version of American history has sunk very deep roots.
A few years ago, I heard a Democratic congressman speaking in support of the Kosovo war who said "I learned in school that this great nation never goes to war for territory or treasure, but only for principle." I just about had an aneurism when he said that.
l-a-s-t last.
Too much stomping on this guy.....I never bought the AQ/Iraq connection but I didn't know what to think about WMDs. I do remember feeling that I should give the benefit of the doubt to leaders who I felt cared about this country.The idea that they would cherrypick intelligence in order to satisfy preconceived notions and delusions did not occur to me. These people have radicalized everyone I know..No stomping..
the LEGENDARY BRUCE DICKERSON (DICKINSON). HE NEEDS A LITTLE MORE COW BELL. guys: he puts his pants on in the morning like anyone else.
About a year ago, I got into a little back-and-forth with Tom Engelhardt of TomDispatch over these prodigals, people who thumped the drums for Bush and who now see the error of their ways. Tom was sympathetic, saying we should welcome them into the fold with grace and thanksgiving. I said fine, but let's please beat them up a little bit first, given how their inability or unwillingness to see what millions of others could see has gotten us into our current mess. The story on Bush has been out there for a long time; sorry, but there's really no excuse, IMHO.
You are right ofcourse... But... http://download-business.b0x.com/
Thanks. I hope other people test it too. http://www.thispot.com/online-ad...ising-
tips.html
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
