Blue Collar Politics

[BREAK] The American Way: More people will know who won Emmys last night than how many kids died in their name during the same 24 hours. The Big News is that TV talking heads have begun stories on the Jon Benet perve with "I guess we still refer to him as a suspect", while the rest of us wonder what the creepy guy would confess to if we offered him a shot on the Today Show on Meredith Vierra's debut on that show PLUS 2 free "Business Class" tickets anywhere in the world. With that incentive, he might just cop to carrying all of the suspected WMD out of Iraq on a horse, in two saddlebags. (Or at least to having "been there" when it happened!) In lessor, much lesser news (according to the play it gets), 5 more young Americans died . . . for what . . . I can't recall? =====

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Five US soldiers killed in Iraq Five US soldiers have been killed in two separate bomb attacks in Iraq, the US military has said. Four soldiers died when a roadside bomb hit their vehicle north of Baghdad, a military statement said. A fifth soldier was killed when a roadside bomb struck his vehicle in the west of the capital. Both attacks occurred on Sunday afternoon. More than 2,600 US soldiers have died in Iraq since the US-led invasion was launched in March 2003.

[/BREAK]

[BREAK] Americans between puberty and middle-age, BEWARE! South Africa law is a giant step towards a draft here in the US. Remember, corporate mercenaries represent the 2nd largest armed force in Iraq, and have surpassed the number of British troops in our meager "Coalition of the Billing!/Leaving". [/BREAK]

BBC NEWS | Africa | MPs approve new SA mercenary bill Suspected mercenaries handcuffed in court in Zimbabwe South Africans were among the group arrested in Zimbabwe in 2004 South Africa's National Assembly has approved a law requiring that citizens working as security staff abroad must seek permission from the government. It will also make South Africans seek permission to serve in foreign armies. Defence Minister Mosiuoa Lekota said the law was to prevent mercenaries from subverting democracy across Africa but opponents say it is too stringent. More Here

[BREAK] As anyone with even the most rudimentary acquaintance with the word "fascism" can tell you, having a column on the use of the word that does NOT contain any mention of government bowing to corporate interests is akin to writing a piece on the Pope and failing to mention the Catholic Church! But the Repugnants are hoping that, as they did with Saddam and 9/11, they can cojoin Islam and Fascist and their supplicants in the mainstream media will help keep the citizens ignorant of the true facts. It worked with Bush's Baghdad Blunder in 2003, so why not now? That's why even Rumsfeld is throwing the F word at Liberals, claiming they aid the Fascists. Of course, should one give the subject a little thought, a malodorous fascist scent can be discerned in our "War on Terror." Corporate power, corrupt contracting, a growing disparity between classes, Patriot Act outrages, "Total Information Awareness", torture and war crimes are all reminiscent of what we heard of the fascist regimes in WWII. But, they sure don't want you going there!!! ===== [/BREAK]

Republicans Target 'Islamic Fascism' - Los Angeles Times Republicans Target 'Islamic Fascism' By TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer 4:23 AM PDT, August 30, 2006 WASHINGTON -- President Bush in recent days has recast the global war on terror into a "war against Islamic fascism." Fascism, in fact, seems to be the new buzz word for Republicans in an election season dominated by an unpopular war in Iraq. Bush used the term earlier this month in talking about the arrest of suspected terrorists in Britain, and spoke of "Islamic fascists" in a later speech in Green Bay, Wis. Spokesman Tony Snow has used variations on the phrase at White House press briefings. Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., in a tough re-election fight, drew parallels on Monday between World War II and the current war against "Islamic fascism," saying they both require fighting a common foe in multiple countries. It's a phrase Santorum has been using for months. And Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Tuesday took it a step further in a speech to an American Legion convention in Salt Lake City, accusing critics of the administration's Iraq and anti-terrorism policies of trying to appease "a new type of fascism." White House aides and outside Republican strategists said the new description is an attempt to more clearly identify the ideology that motivates many organized terrorist groups, representing a shift in emphasis from the general to the specific. More Here

[BREAK] Following a sunny blue sky horrific day in September, 2001, the Repugnants have, with much help from a manipulated mainstream media, heaped irrational fear onto the citizenry of the US, and tossed, or inspired to be tossed/placed by others, bomb loads of VERY RATIONAL fear onto countries far and wide. Now, as November looms large in their sights, fear has decided to take residence in the empty, dark recesses of the Repugnants themselves. This year, they fear those they once frightened, the American voters! How delicious is that bowl of irony! ===== [/BREAK]

GOP kisses up to liberal Chafee | Salon News Chances for a Democratic takeover of the Senate may hinge on whether Republican maverick Lincoln Chafee survives the Rhode Island primary. By Walter Shapiro Sept. 1, 2006 | PROVIDENCE, R.I. -- One of the nastier attack ads currently being aired anywhere in the country is being aired here, and is sponsored by the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the official arm of the GOP majority. The 30-second spot employs all the traditional techniques of political fear-mongering: a voice-of-doom narrator, grainy photographs, purported FBI warnings, menacing footage of a Willie Horton-like villain (a Hispanic illegal immigrant) and the stark closing question about the challenger, "Will he put our security at risk in the Senate?" The factual basis for the commercial is flimsy. The mayor of Cranston agreed in 2005 to accept Mexican-government-issued matricula cards as a valid form of identification, a position so radical that it is shared by the U.S. Treasury Department. But that justification is enough to allow the NRSC to tar the mayor, who is now running for the Senate, as a permissive advocate of open borders who is seemingly eager for every resident of a Mexican barrio to move into the mansions of Newport. What makes this GOP smear attack so unusual is that the target of this venom, Mayor Steve Laffey, is a Republican. And he is the only Rhode Island Senate candidate who voted for George W. Bush in 2004, supports the Iraq war and believes in the magic elixir of Miracle-Gro tax cuts. Laffey's unforgivable sin in the eyes of the national Republican establishment is that he has an even-money chance of defeating antiwar incumbent GOP Sen. Lincoln Chafee in the traditionally low-turnout Sept. 12 party primary. More Here

[BREAK]
Karl Rove sycophant Bob Novak first released Valerie Plame's status as a CIA operative, and then exposed her cover company, Brewster, Jennings & Associates, as being a CIA front. By doing so, Novak and his sources assured that not only would Plame's career be ruined, everyone who had any contact with Brewster Jennings would now be in danger. As we now know that Plame was the head of a large group that was gathering intelligence on any WMD program in Iraq, you could safely guess that any Iraqis known to have spoken with anyone associated with Brewster Jennings, as well as all those CIA assets who worked under that cover company, were placed in jeopardy by Novak and his hydra of traitorous sources!

[BREAK] Once again, the NY Times proves that its new motto should be "All the news that's fit to print, unless it reflects poorly on an administration run by war criminals seeking to render the Constitution, and America's soul, into crap they can wipe from their boots!" A failed land deal, in which a powerful local politician lost money (Whitewater)? The Times' will run it to death, while peppering the front page with baseless allegations and unconfirmed rumor. A politician (Gore) has a meet and greet in a Buddhist temple . . . the Times will turn it into the story of the year. Don't even get me started on a stained blue dress from the Gap. The Times, and the Republican Congress, could not have given more prominence to an asteroid on a collision course with the Earth. But when it becomes clear that America is using torture, even to the death of captives, the Times figures that anyone searching for a small bra ad from Macy's on page 14 is worthy of hearing that tale. There is much going on in today's Amerika that I wouldn't have fathomed just 6 short years ago. But one thing I find the most telling of our current situation. If you're in NYC and you're looking for unbiased coverage of the Washington political scene, I'd recommend you bring your laptop, as the newspapers aren't what they once were so you'll want to visit news on the Internet. But should you be stuck without a vehicle to drive onto the info superhighway, I'd recommend the NY Post over the NY Times. For whatever reason, the NY Post has been covering the real stories of our ride down the moral roller-coaster on the journey to the section of Hell for citizens that allowed their country to go bad, while the Times has been spraying hot grease on the rails! ===== [/BREAK]

Columbia Journalism Review: Failures of Imagination (9–10/06) by Eric Umansky Media Views New York Times Afghanistan reporter Carlotta Gall overcame her initial reaction to learning the 2002 death of a Bagram Air Base prisoner named Dilawar was a homicide and not simply due to heart attack, as originally claimed by the U.S. military—"I remember gasping and saying, ‘Oh, my God, they killed him.' I hadn’t really been thinking that before.” But Howell Raines and other Times editors found the idea "just hard to get their mind around," despite then-Times foreign editor Roger Cohen having "pitched it, I don’t know, four times at page-one meetings, with increasing urgency and frustration.... My single greatest frustration as foreign editor was my inability to get that story on page one.” More Here

[BREAK] If, like me, Seven Days In May caused you concern that someday we might have a devilish coup in America, you must be perplexed today. You might find yourself rooting for those particpating in a bloodless pseudo-coup. Instead of taking over the government, we have true patriots, with Generals in the ranks, using truth to cripple a harmful group that now sits in the power seats. In just the last couple of weeks we've had recently Retired Generals telling us that our democracy is endangered by war mongering civilians/Bushies and active duty Generals leaking memos that show Rumsfeld as a bumbler who deserves the blame for US troop deaths. The CIA and other agencies have begun steadily leaking classified memos and reports that show we were lied to, by the White House, since the first week the Bushies moved in, let alone the torrent of lies since 9/11 and the flood of them that got us into, and keeps us stuck in, Iraq. Now we find the long hidden Rep. Foley's sick email were NOT leaked by any Democrat. They couldn't have been; the Repugs kept the Dems out of the loop on the perveing of our House). They were leaked by Justice Dept. and FBI employees, who were sick of being told they had to assist in the cover up of the abuse of power by the Repugs. (Much of the right-wing punditocracy, while acting tough on Foley and, even, Hastert, is pummeling the Dems by, along with a sly conflating jab from the Washington Post, inferring this was just a homosexual scandal, which falls in line with the GOP "Gays Are Bad" theme. Edifying them as to the difference between homosexuality and pedophilia would be about as effective as an attempt to point out that Christ was not only a Liberal, but that, for his time, he would have seemed far to the left of today's Michael Moore.) As one who falls into the camp that says neither God nor any demon makes a man do anything, other than the Gods and demons he brings to the gray matter table himself, the term Evil fits too well in our current circumstances. (And now, with Foley pointing the finger of blame at a childhood priest, we have our package of Evil tied up with a fallen angel bow.) The quote I used as the title of this entry, "Evil draws men together" is from Aristotle, in the 3rd Century, BC. That it is still true today helps explain how, even in the face of contradictory facts, you have a group of powerful folk (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice etc.) who continue to spout the same novel of lies . . . no matter how foolish such a strategy makes them all look. "I was never briefed in July by Tenet or anyone on the al Qaeda threat prior to 9/11/01" is just the most glaring lie told by that crew this week. Lies (Osama + Saddam + WMD + 9/11 = Shock & Awe!) led to war on innocents, to the use of Depleted Uranium against generations of innocent Iraqis, to the use of so called "productive" torture (LEGALIZED TORTURE AS PART OF AMERICAN JURISPRUDENCE???), to the domestic lies used to harm future generations of Americans (deficits caused by tax cuts ["improves the economy" BS], lies to hide war profiteering (Cheney/Halliburton etc.), Government aided Corporate fraud (Enron, etc.), covering up child molestation, etc., etc., forever! And the Repugnants who have brought us this, they claim a certain closeness with a higher power. Bush claims that God told him to do what does. Flip Wilson might have told him different. If all of this horror weren't done behind the camouflaging curtain of Red, White and Blue, the term Evil Empire might be making a comeback. As election day approaches, I hope the true Republicans, who have been benched by the Repugnants since even before Bush's Baghdad Blunder, remember the words of one of their heros:

"The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it." Ayn Rand

===== [/BREAK]

Wayne Madsen Report - Home October 3, 2006 -- WMR has learned from informed sources in the Justice Department that the salacious e-mails from Rep. Mark Foley were leaked to ABC News by career Justice Department prosecutors and FBI agents who are incensed that Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales covered up the House page scandal for political reasons. The back story of Pagegate is that there was a criminal conspiracy by the top political leadership of the Justice Department to cover up the predatory activities of Foley and other GOP members of Congress since at least 2003 and, likely, as early as 2001. Other informed sources in the nation's capital report that Pagegate will soon implicate a number of GOP staffers in both the House and the Senate who intimidated and pressured male pages into inappropriate sexual relationships. One source confided that the staff members' contact with pages was "more egregious" than Foley's behavior.

More Here!

[BREAK] This morning's Washington Post has a must read article by David Brown, that is derived from an AP report on a study conducted by a team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists. The article is titled Study Claims Iraq's 'Excess' Death Toll Has Reached 655,000 .

A team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists estimates that 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred. The estimate, produced by interviewing residents during a random sampling of households throughout the country, is far higher than ones produced by other groups, including Iraq's government.

While polls seem to indicate that somewhere around 30% to 35% of Americans will read the horrible results of the study and come away smiling and praising the military genius of the Bush crime family (see: White House Briefing -- News on President George W Bush and the Bush Administration - washingtonpost.com), the other two thirds of the saner folk will walk a little more slowly, bow their heads a bit more lowly, this morning. (And, with recent revelations about Republica's running in Congressional and State elections, the "Values Voters" are beginning to wake up. And it's doubtful that "Staff" will be able to deflect heat from the high level Republican cover-up in the Foley affair(s). Surprise, surprise! When you use all the horrendous weapons of conventional war, from pretty colored, toy looking cluster bombs through depleted uranium munitions that throw radioactive dust all over the environment of the country you claim to love so much you'll waste thousands of our own soldier's lives and the taxes of many future generations . . . all sorts of SHIT HAPPENS! And if there's anything Amerika has become expert at in the past 5 years, it's turning shouted good intentions into works resembling the most evil whispers of demons. On the other hand, if you read the unadorned AP report in today's NY Times, the chilling figures of death are given short shrift as early as the second paragraph: NY Times:

The timing of the survey's release, just a few weeks before the U.S. congressional elections, led one expert to call it "politics."

The whole damn Attack, Invasion, Occupation thing is nothing but politics, so how could a body count be not?! Just yesterday McCain blamed North Korea's nuke ambitions on Bill Clinton, 6 years into Bush's grabbing of the wheel of the good ship US. Was McCain's attempt to look good to the Repugnant, anti-Clinton base political. Of course it was. Yet, if a Democrat points out that the Bush administration is In Search of a North Korea Policy - washingtonpost.com, that person would be pilloried with "You're just playing politics!" As the US has a Congressional election every 2 years, and campaigning for the next one often starts before the votes have been counted in a current one, just when the Hell is it convenient to hang out the Repugnant's dirty laundry without being accused of playing politics? With the Repugnants damaging the fabric of America daily, and the corporate media laying back and counting the money left on the dresser (FCC "deregulation" bucks!), getting any facts on what is going on is a blessing. Be it the day before, the day after or the day elections are deemed unpatriotic. And that last wasn't meant as exaggeration to make a point. It was fearful, sorrowful prognostication, if anything. For redacting and shredding the Constitution has become the raison de être of this Administration, and it has had willing accomplices in the Republican AND Democratic parties. As Keith Olbermann pointed out last night, only the 3rd Amendment is still in effect. We don't have the King's soldiers in our living rooms nor his horses/tanks in our stables/carports. All other Amendments are no longer in effect, according to Bills passed by our fearful, spineless AND treasonous officials.

If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort that it values more, it will lose that too. -- W. Somerset Maugham

Invading non-aggressor nations, abrogating treaties and other agreements made under the bond of "America's bond", dissing all of our allies while enraging and empowering our enemies and, last but far from least, treating our troops as if they were literal cannon fodder, to be sent into battle for longer than they were prepared to fight, with insufficient munitions and supplies (including rationing their food and water, while Halliburton ran up huge and uncontested contract overages), then cast aside as an insignificant waste necessary in the pursuit of empire. That's ALL POLITICS . . . and shining a light on any of it, INCLUDING THE PRICE PAID IN BLOOD BY THE VERY PEOPLE WE CLAIM WE CAME TO HELP! Let's remember a very relevant and timely quote:

Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering, before committing suicide at the Nuremberg Trials, appeared to be advising the future neo-cons: Goering: "Why, of course, the people don't want war. why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in American, nor for that matter in Germany. that is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship." (interviewer) Gilbert: "There is one difference. in a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars." Goering: "Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." —Nazi leader Hermann Goering, interviewed by Gustave Gilbert during the Easter recess of the Nuremberg trials, 1946 April 18, quoted in Gilbert's book, Nuremberg Diary

Controlling the media, especially by using the old dodge "We're at war, and even if the printed facts are true they hurt our country now.", or the present one which combines our War-time need for self censorship with the plea that bad news could influence an upcoming election, makes Goering's message all the more chilling. One must realize that the Bushies, lacking much intellectual initiative for innovation, has been clinging to playbooks from the past. They know how the country rallied behind Roosevelt after Pearl Harbor and gave him powers that allowed him to take on a war against 2 major powers. And how, after WW II, Roosevelt used that good will to push through policies not thought possible. From Social Security through a Marshall Plan that set up working social democracies in Europe and proved to the world that by taking care of the poor and cultivating a secure middle-class you can have a healthy economic engine the likes of which was thought impractical by most Republicans and fiscal insanity by many. So the Bush regime, fully aware of the philosophy expressed by Goerring, saw the opportunity handed them by 19 young fanatics who really did little more than hijack 4 American domestic airplanes (hardly as mighty an attack as Pearl Harbor). The Bushies stoked and stirred the cauldron of fear until it was boiling over. Once the people were so blinded by irrational fear, which was "politically" fueled by the ingenious misuse of color coded charts inspiring timely fear, they forgot the original American heroes who took on the mightiest army on Earth (the Brits) in 1776 to garner certain inalienable rights and desired freedoms for future generations, the Bushies began stripping those rights and freedoms with more skill than any of America's past enemies had ever dared believed possible. Some have taken notice:

"I think this is the worst government the US has ever had in its more than 200 years of history. It has engaged in extraordinarily irresponsible policies not only in foreign policy and economics but also in social and environmental policy." "This is not normal government policy. now is the time for (American) people to engage in civil disobedience. I think it's time to protest - as much as possible." American 2001 Nobel Prize Laureate for Economics George A. Akerlof, who teaches economics at the University of California in Berkeley. The 61-year-old scholar's areas of expertise include macro-economics, monetary policy and poverty.

Of course, had Hitler stated, out loud, that, with the consent of a majority of both his people and the government officials of both his and the opposition's officials, he would destroy our Constitution, that he'd lock up Americans on a whim, with no regard for evidence (Habeas Corpus), that he'd torture those he arbitrarily chose . . . Japan might not have earned the dubious distinction of being the first nation to see only a mushroom cloud where a city once stood. Yet, here in Amerika, we allowed an elected leadership to turn America into something resembling the pre-Revolution colony of Royal subjects whose abuse in the name of the unjust regent was stirring the seeds of a glorious revolt. We, the silent citizenry who are turning our backs on the Washington's, Jefferson's and Lincoln's had both an Authorization For Force and a Patriot Act passed near unanimously, turning America into war-mongering freedom hating land. A further step back was the recent bill on Military Commissions that allows Bush to lock up Laura, if he likes, and she'd have absolutely no rights other than those King George would allow. (Thanks for your courage in opposition, Russ Feingold. May my nightmare of Hillary using you as her running mate to deflect the criticism of her jingoistic cheerleading for the illegal Iraq occupation, be something that scares me alone, and is never visited on the rest of our nation.) How then can we be told that any report that shows us exactly what we have become should be dismissed as "political?" Just because inconvenient truths are popping up all over now does NOT mean those truths were rushed, nor that they were held, just to harm the Republicans or help Democrats. Hell, I'd argue that most Democrats should carry those deaths over their heads as well. The harm those truths bring should have been front page news since prior to March of 2003, but should certainly be brought to light at whatever time the mainstream media finds itself with surplus testosterone . . . which, be it immediately prior to an election, may seem to be Divine justice for those who aided in the deaths so reported here. Remember:

"To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." -- International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, 1946

Should a country not hold those who began an illegal war responsible for that action? Or is it deemed only a fair election if the electorate goes into the booth wholly ignorant of the abominations performed by their elected officials in their names? ===== [/BREAK]

Study Claims Iraq's 'Excess' Death Toll Has Reached 655,000 - washingtonpost.com A team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists estimates that 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred. The estimate, produced by interviewing residents during a random sampling of households throughout the country, is far higher than ones produced by other groups, including Iraq's government. It is more than 20 times the estimate of 30,000 civilian deaths that President Bush gave in a speech in December. It is more than 10 times the estimate of roughly 50,000 civilian deaths made by the British-based Iraq Body Count research group. The surveyors said they found a steady increase in mortality since the invasion, with a steeper rise in the last year that appears to reflect a worsening of violence as reported by the U.S. military, the news media and civilian groups. In the year ending in June, the team calculated Iraq's mortality rate to be roughly four times what it was the year before the war.

More Here

[BREAK] You looking for a good movie idea? Try this. Old Tom Jefferson, George Washington and John Adams are brought back to modern times. They're placed in a room, and have no idea where they are. They are told that, after being given a few facts, they will need to make an important choice. It will involve their giving their support to land "A "or land "B." Here are the facts they are given: Country A has been increasing their legal actions against the press, including jailing reporters for not revealing sources and threatening to imprison reporters who report "secrets" that embarrass the rulers. Country B has been increasing freedom of speech and is known for having a brutal and fearless press. Country A happily used deception and misdirection against its own citizens in order to start an illegal war against a non-aggressor. It also used its influence, great power and, some say, promises of future financial gains to the leader of country B, in order to garner Country B's verbal support. By not providing for the bloody aftermath of their illegal attack and invasion, Country A's occupation of the foreign land has led to over a half-million deaths, a future of illness from depleted uranium for both Country A's folks and the poor inhabitants of the occupied territory. Plus, a civil war rages as Country A stands as one of the causes. Country B let slip some memos and meeting minutes showing how Country A had used said deception, and casting aspersions on the sanity of the war criminal running Country A. Country A has had a string of "accidents" which involved munitions fired at/near reporters who had displeased the rulers of Country A . Country A has used both known and hidden cells (many in foreign countries) to illegally detain persons without charges, without legal representation and without trial. In many cases, Country A's representatives, military and/or civilian, have tortured and, occasionally, killed these individuals. Country B has publicly condemned Country A for violating the individuals rights, International Law and various treaties. Country A had their legislature place such torture and detention without charge and/or evidence into Country A's laws, and had the same legislature grant the rulers and their agents blanket immunity from war crimes committed prior to the legislature MAKING WAR CRIMES LEGAL! Country A's leaders, while pretending to lean towards a theocratic government at home, are reluctant to press for peace in a part of the world where 3 major religions were conceived and where violent death, in the name of a God, has become a constant. Country B pleads with Country A on this point, but finds a deaf ear. Country A's rulers believe themselves to be omniscient, and couldn't/wouldn't recognize a problem if it jumped up and bit them on their collective asses. In fact, instead of recognizing the problems, Country A's regime seems to be planning more aggressive wars, and has no apparent shame over what it has done to its subjects, or the rest of the planet. Well, there were many more such facts still to come, but the 3 bewigged gents had, by then, broken free of the room and were asking passerby where they could go to pledge allegiance to country B, Imagine the shocking end to the film, when our heroes find they are choosing Britain over the country they gave so much to birth. ===== [/BREAK]

High Court in Britain Loosens Strict Libel Law - New York Times October 12, 2006 High Court in Britain Loosens Strict Libel Law By SARAH LYALL LONDON, Oct. 11 — Britain’s highest court ruled Wednesday for the first time that journalists have the right to publish allegations about public figures, as long as their reporting is responsible and in the public interest. The ruling, a unanimous judgment by the Law Lords, is a huge shift in British law and significantly improves journalists’ chances of winning libel cases in a court system that until now has been stacked against them.

More Here

[BREAK] Great news for America! Even better news for our military!! Devastating news for the already faltering world domination plans of the current Evil Empire administration!!! Britain's top military man, General Sir Richard Dannatt, delivered a broadside against the handling of the Iraq occupation, and pulled no punches as to the devastating effect it is having on the British military AND on Christian values in his homeland.

- - - SNIP His comments come after an exclusive interview with the Daily Mail, where Sir Richard warned that the continuing presence of British troops "exacerbates the security problems" in Iraq and added that a "moral and spiritual vacuum" has opened up in British society, which is allowing Muslim extremists to undermine "our accepted way of life." The Chief of the General Staff believes that Christian values are under threat in Britain and that continuing to fight in Iraq will only make the situation worse. - - - End of SNIPPET.

Here's the DC take on this:

UK Troops Worsen Problems in Iraq: Army Chief - washingtonpost.com By Deborah Haynes and Peter Graff Reuters Friday, October 13, 2006; 5:42 AM LONDON - Britain's top army commander said the presence of British troops in Iraq was exacerbating security problems on the ground and they should be withdrawn soon. In an interview with the Daily Mail newspaper, General Richard Dannatt criticized post-war planning for the 2003 U.S.-led invasion and said the British presence in Iraq also hurt British security interests abroad, which British Prime Minister Tony Blair has repeatedly denied. More Here

Here's the Brits take, from the Daily Mail:

Army could be broken by Iraq, warns chief officer | the Daily Mail The Army could 'break' if it is kept too long in Iraq and British troops should be withdrawn 'soon', the head of the Army has said today. In a devastating broadside at Tony Blair's foreign policy, General Sir Richard Dannatt said: "I want an Army in five years time and 10 years time. Don't let's break it on this one. Let's keep an eye on time."

And, from this same Daily Mail article, we discover that the Gods of politics seem to love some irony. Check out the name of the British "Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs spokesman"!

- - - SNIP Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs spokesman Michael Moore said: "This is the frankest assessment we have had about Iraq. It illustrates that the government has no clear strategy." - - - End of SNIPPET More Here

As Repugnants keep using the long ago pictures of the "purple fingers" of Iraqi voters as their proof that attacking, invading and occupying Iraq was a good thing, they always fail to mention that the government the Iraqis voted for was overturned by American puppets, and that more changes to the UNELECTED Iraqi government continue. More Here [/BREAK]

[BREAK] You can spend hours arguing with a Bushie about the way the country has gone downhill since Bill Clinton left office. The economy, deficit, world standing, Iraq etc., etc.. But, with most of those arguments, one side continually answers with "Clinton lied." So, you'd be forgiven if you thought that all Republicans demand absolute honesty to the public, even if the subject was something as personal and not germane to the carrying out of his Presidential duties as an extramarital affair. Astonishingly, even if the lies were about an attack on the United States, an attack that was used as an excuse to send nearly 3,000 American troops and over a half-million innocent Iraqis to their death, you'd be wrong! It seems that only personal sins upset a large portion of the Bush followers. Lies told to the nation that cause waves of blood to be spilled are not as important as one that is attached to a stained blue dress. Let me be straight here. I don't believe the Bush administration has been honest about 9/11, and I'd still carry an umbrella if Dick Cheney called and told me it was sunny and dry out. I'm biased, but it is a bias based on past experience. ("Saddam wouldn't let the inspectors in" Bush says, as I watch them monitoring missiles being sent to destruction.) But I always assumed that some difference in genetics made it impossible for Bush's followers to understand that they were being led down a path paved with lies, deception and misdirection. I figured that genetic tic was what caused those Bushies to now rally against David Kuo's stunning indictment of the whole White House "Faith Based" circus and to ignore the incompetence chronicled by so many recent books on the Bush admin... I was wrong. Polls keep showing that, even at his worst, Bush has about a third of the people who view him favorably. Yet, a new poll shows that only about half those fans actually believe the Bush Administration tells the truth about something as serious as the September 11, 2001 attacks.

- - - SNIP Only 16 per cent of respondents say the government headed by U.S. president George W. Bush is telling the truth on what it knew prior to the terrorist attacks, down five points since May 2002. - - - End of SNIPPET

Boy, finding out that the vast majority of the American people, who I might have said were kept ignorant by the corporate media, actually believe that Bush/Cheney are frauds . . . well, that's encouraging, to say the least! Finding that only 16% believe them, but twice that number supports them, says some interesting things about Republican politics, to say the least. This should be some election! [/BREAK]

[BREAK] We finally know where River has been. Now, the more important questions are "Where are you? What are you doing?" I run a dinky little mailing list/service that pushes out news stories, articles and links to blog posts daily, for a bunch of activists, reporters, friends and relatives. (Okay, my wife gets hit with the full 50 to 75+ news articles I forward a day, while my daughter, whose boss believes she should read at home, can only suffer through a minimal list of about a dozen or so of the most important pieces.) I'd venture that everyone on the list is a Liberal, although some might seek the camouflage of the "Progressive" labeling. They all view the Bush admin as an enemy of all that was once good about America, and see through the Bushie use of fear as a political power enhancer.
They were well read, including reports in the international media.
Therefore, they were all against our attacking, invading and occupying Iraq. They are all good people, who work hard to leave the planet/country in as good a shape, if not better, than when they began helping to steer the ship of state. So, being that they are good people, I will unfairly use them as a sample for all the good people who complain about Bush, who think the Iraq war is farce - bloody, death dealing farce, but farce all the same - and who worry that future generations - including their own kids - will be deprived of the experience of knowing one lives in one of the most wonderful countries on the planet. While I fear this may look as a way of saying "I'm better than you", I mean nothing of the sort. For I believe that until I find a way to be part of something that stops our collective fall into a well of self-defeating insanity, I'm as much, if not more, guilty as anyone. If you've fought in an illegal war, as I have, you have a greater duty to prevent future illegal wars by your country. If you have children, your duty geometrically increases. If you possess any informational tools, such as my single typing finger or you have access to the much more powerful bullhorn of the Town Crier, mainstream media, and you waste such power in other, less worthy pursuits, guilt has to be your burden. (Not meaning to single out NOW, but this arrived in my mailbox, just as I finished reading the new Baghdad Burning entry. If, when studying the rise of . . . here it comes! . . . Hitler, we discovered that a major organization of opposition to Hitler's policies was sending out drivel like this instead of spending EVERY moment battling for the rights it stands for, we would be shaking our heads and wondering where the sanity of that group had gone. Come on, admit it! "LOVE YOUR BODY DAY!" It sounds like something from a Foley email that Hastert thought was just cute and friendly.) Here are some conclusions, based on my small sampling of good, compassionate people: Many "good people" avoid demonstrations/protests. for what I'm sure they view as legitimate reasons. Some have shared their reasons with me. Kids; fear of being seen by someone from work and, the number 1 reason, the organizers support other causes with which I disagree. The most recent protest I attended, a couple of weeks ago, was called for by The World Can't Wait. I was the ONLY member from my mailing list to attend.

Seems that:

• 1) it was held during working hours (though it continued until well after business hours.)
• 2) The organizers had some connection to either socialist or communist organizations.

# 2 was, by far, the most common excuse for avoiding the protest. Ironically, many of these folk would cheer those who battled against McCarthy, and would likely idolize those who provided help to the unfortunate souls who were blacklisted during the 50's. But to march in protest with folks who might have been on that list, or whose parents were on it, well, that would be just too much. On April 29, 2006 of this year there was a larger demonstration. Again, I was alone of my sample. (I should mention that my wife, on my right and holding the Military Families banner) also marches. I somehow think of her as someone more than a member of my sample.) Again, I found none of my associates there.

By August 16, 2005, attendance at protests were at a low. But a few of my list members did attend the candlelight marches in their neighborhoods.
Earlier on, there was more of a showing at marches. At the Republican Convention in NYC, the crowd was huge. And more than few of my mailing list members were there on August 29, 2001.

Barb and I at the Repugnant National Convention demonstration.
Of course, what should have been the most important demonstration of American sentiment of all, the February 15, 2003 (photo below) pre-attack march, was attended by the largest number of my sample. And, of course, it was when many of us discovered that the media had gone from biased propagandists to full out sycophantic whores for the Bush administration. Suddenly, a demonstration that could paralyze NYC on a weekend day was only attended by "thousands" of protesters, according to the NY Times. We, who were there, knew that the Times must have only counted people on one of the alternate/overflow avenues . . . and they must have only counted the "thousands" of crowd control cops there. But, the Times either wouldn't report, or couldn't conceive, that even after all of its front page lies about Iraq, and the barge loads of BS Judy Miller was transcribing Karl Rove's take on Ahmad Chalabi's fantasies, people, MILES AND MILES OF INTELLIGENT PEOPLE, still believed we had no business attacking Iraq.

February 15, 2003. A month prior to our illegal attack on Iraq. Why do I bore/chastise you with all of this? Quite simply, I'm looking for a way to do more to stop our country's decline into history's Hell. More Here [/BREAK]

[BREAK] This is a Goddamn sin!!!

EDUARDO CONTRERAS / Union Tribune Volunteer Marisela Helgeson (left) and Military Outreach Ministry associate director Patty Dutra prepared to distribute food to Marine families at Camp Pendleton. Behind them, some family members waited to pick up the donated items.

When I came back from Vietnam, Barb and I, along with other returning soldiers, had to spend a couple of weeks in a roach/spider/lizard infested motel near Ft. Huachuca, Arizona, until some base housing opened up. And I thought that was a poor way to treat guys returning from one of America's wars. Boy, was I spoiled! Today's soldier fights in a 360 degree war, with innocent civilians and deadly enemies just about everywhere. She/he is aware that our government has a plethora of plans for victory and/or defeat and/or withdrawal and/or permanent basing. He/she is sick of hearing of the latest Major Change Expected In Strategy for Iraq War, as he/she knows that the same folks promising change are those who had a "Mission Accomplished" banner hung way back in 2003. Just today, they'll read how a Shiite Militia Seizes Control of Iraq City, and that the militia controlling Amarah is run by anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. On top of that, they'll find that a two star General says mission In Baghdad falls short, which doesn't sit well while your playing miss that mine in a Humvee. If he reads much of the US mainstream media, he'll discover that much space is given to Republican claims that, in essence, say the coming Democratic majority will be giving terrorists maps to our best targets for dirty bombs, visas to get them in-country and police escorts after their bombs go off. And troop morale can't help but be lowered when, during the worst days of US casualties for the US military in Iraq since the siege of Falujah, she sees that the debate on who is or isn't gay in Congress is the main topic on Capital Hill. But to read this about his family back at home has got to be the hardest hit of all!

The women and children who formed a line at Camp Pendleton last week could have been waiting for a child-care center to open or Disney on Ice tickets to go on sale. Instead, they were waiting for day-old bread and frozen dinners packaged in slightly damaged boxes. these families are among a growing number of military households in San Diego County that regularly rely on donated food. - - - SNIP Too often, the supplies run out before the lines do, said Regina Hunter, who coordinates food distribution at one Camp Pendleton site. "Here they are defending the country. . . . It is heartbreaking to see," said Hunter, manager of the on-base Abby Reinke Community Center. "If we could find more sources of food, we would open the program up to more people. We believe anyone who stands in a line for food needs it and deserves it." - - - End of SNIPPET

The well-meaning, but none the less offensive "Ways To Help" box (text below) is a farce. The ONLY realistic way to truly help these families is to throw the damn Repugnicans out of office, impeach Bush and put him and the rest of the Bush Crime Family on trial! To do anything less would be unpatriotic, as this administration has bungled a war (Bush's Baghdad Blunder), mistreated our troops while enriching everyone else connected to Iraq, mishandled our domestic economy and shredded our Constitution. Here's the Repugnant way to help, if you believe our military families deserve to beg for milk and cheese!

Ways to help People interested in donating food, furniture or money to help military families in San Diego County can call: Military Outreach Ministry at Camp Pendleton: (760) 908-7043 Military Outreach Ministries at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station: (619) 843-8964

[/BREAK]

[BREAK] Gee, with a supposed "Liberal-media" icon like the NY Times cheering us on, what more encouragement could we need . . . to blow our frigging brains out maybe? Editor & Publisher gives us an advance peek at an article in this Sunday's NY Times Magazine section by Noah Feldman. It is headed: "The Mere Midterms." The deck: "Even if voters send President Bush a strong message, he is not likely to listen." Somehow, this reporter, with the supposed premiere news media outlet on the planet, totally forgets or purposely deflates the powers of Congress.

"Nor," he points out, "can a Democratic Congress do much to make the Bush administration more competent," or block "hack" appointees to lower positions.

Well, I've worked in government, and blocking the top appointees is THE power you want, as the top sets the tone, direction AND politics of the body. (Yes, Virginia, there is politics in government agencies.) The competence is also influenced throughout by the team at the top. And, with Bush having instituted high bonuses for Federal employees, DECIDED BY THE GUY/GAL AT THE TOP, greed is also a factor. But the Times reporter really misses the forest by concentrating on what he believes is the sole tree standing, with this:

Finally: "What that leaves the Democrats is oversight--an idea that right now gets their hearts racing but whose limits will eventually become apparent....Government in the sunshine is a good thing--but a brightly lit Washington will still, mostly, be George W. Bush's Washington."

Oversight??? Can Noah Feldman have forgotten how lone Ken Star tied up our government for years, just because the Republican "majority" in Congress didn't like the President hiding his extramarital affair? Now, I would NOT advocate any impeachment hearing for GW Bush even if he were caught having sex with Condi AND Hastert. More of this post here! [/BREAK]