A great idea, actually (-ed.)
---------------------
ruthru August 3rd, 2008 2:10 pm
Consider the fact that the thing sitting in the White House at present couldn’t pass a single one of those tests of accountability.
Politicians must be accountable. Why aren’t they required to prove their competence before entering office? They should all have to have doctorates (considering how far gone the state of affairs) in their field and prove that they were involved in several years of activism for civil rights, environment, labor, and peace movements.
There’s no accountability at the top.
Monday, August 4, 2008
Friday, July 11, 2008
MY SENTIMENTS EXACTLY...
Hopefully, they will think to call this disease "Cheneyphrenia" in the future.-ed.
--------------
When American voters didn't elect George Bush as president in 2000 and again in 2004, they sensed that he lacked the brain power, temperament and character necessary for high office. But even those among us who thought worst of him - count me in - perhaps failed to imagine that his puerile, sophomoric smugness and intellectual indifference were predictive of much beyond a kind of frat boy, rat-tail-snapping petty sadism. Yet it proves to be the case that he is capable of the kind of sociopathic moral indifference that would predispose him to surrounding himself with the kinds of people whose twisted decisionmaking would lead to this. Sorry as it is for the country, our vindication needs to involve these people upheld throughout history as an aberration...utter war criminals, no better than Nazis.
Posted by SOS ICEBERG
July 11, 2008 9:24 AM
--------------
When American voters didn't elect George Bush as president in 2000 and again in 2004, they sensed that he lacked the brain power, temperament and character necessary for high office. But even those among us who thought worst of him - count me in - perhaps failed to imagine that his puerile, sophomoric smugness and intellectual indifference were predictive of much beyond a kind of frat boy, rat-tail-snapping petty sadism. Yet it proves to be the case that he is capable of the kind of sociopathic moral indifference that would predispose him to surrounding himself with the kinds of people whose twisted decisionmaking would lead to this. Sorry as it is for the country, our vindication needs to involve these people upheld throughout history as an aberration...utter war criminals, no better than Nazis.
Posted by SOS ICEBERG
July 11, 2008 9:24 AM
Sunday, June 22, 2008
NOW IS A GOOD TIME TO TRUST DENNIS KUCINICH
Truly Sickening are the Articles of Impeachment; also the linked story. -ed.
---------------------------------
#48 dogismyth Says:
Certainly you have heard of the supposed theory of why all this is occurring now.
1. McCain will resign from the presidential campaign within two months of the election, and a new candidate will step in.
2. Bush/Cheney will resign or get impeached before years end, and likely before the election.
3. Once this all occurs, Americans will trust their government again, and the final fleecing will occur, which will be rather painful for millions. In other words, its a big setup for many still sleepy Americans.
The American people are quite stupid, so stupid that they have yet to voice demands about the wrongdoings by this administration as well as the complicity of democrats (since they have known all the while about torture and other illegal deeds). Americans are still worried about their SUVs and big screen TVs, and planning vacations and other bullcrap while ignoring the outright and blatant misdeeds by our politicos.
It is the government now screaming at us with all this evidence. They are asking for us to force them to correct the situation, but we sit idly by with our thumbs in our mouths.
I am an American by birth and not by choice. Yes I have enjoyed luxury here in the U.S., but I have also had the truth about nearly everything hidden from me since the first years of school. This is a disgusting country and never did stand for any of the omnipotent objectives we herald. We are weak, fat and complacent and abhor critical thinking. Even our Canadian friends see us as fools.
I am sick of seeing people who wave their flag, wear the flag, hang the flag in their trucks. They are full of the poison and are hopeless since drinking the koolaid from birth. They offer their patriotism as a solution which is nothing more than a proud and egotistical person with a closed mind. They are as useless as the people leading us down this horrible path of destruction.
When I see Koreans marching in the street by the tens of thousands about an issue related to food consumption, I admire those people for their integrity, willpower and fortitude. Americans would never have the nerve, compassion or time to protest an issue of comparable meaning, let alone demonstrating for the impeaching of one, two or all 535 officers of our government. Most people I talk with do not have a clue what is occurring, what has happened, and what is to occur…even my family!
We ourselves are the insidious parasite that has destroyed our personal life, and others in our midst. It is not the government, because WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT. So shove that excuse where the sun doesn’t shine.
I have to ask myself where are the MoveOn.org organizations that are suppose to be consolidating our demands and exposing the corruptness. Unfortunately, they are the same poison and are now drinking from the same well as those that lead us astray. They are all corrupt (my opinion) and have yet to rally Americans behind a single cause. There cause is simple and that is to provide comfortable and highly compensated positions within a tax-free, or tax exempt, organization. Its pretty easy to make it look like you give a damn, but actually getting something done, or action, is not what we are seeing. I gave up on MoveOn after they decided to take on the worthy cause of Al Gore, and global warming. They sought millions of signatures to be placed on a petition that was sent to the government to deal with this issue. BUT it is a non-issue and if you had done your homework you would know that global warming is a hoax perpetuated by the same folks that have caused the banking crisis, the food crisis, the oil crisis (yada,yada,yada). When you begin paying for a carbon tax on nearly any purchase you make, you will understand. I even wrote MoveOn and sent the appropriate articles, references and documentation regarding the hoax of global warming, yet they spent valuable time and money move the public in the wrong direction. Whose pocket are they in????
Where are the Americans?!! What the hell is wrong with them!?! What are they waiting for???
Required video watching for all Americans is the Ring of Power (parts I and II). I would recommend reading something but I doubt most Americans could grasp such a task. In any case, the RIng of Power sums up the lies and lying liars since the time of the pharoahs. In essence, most everything you have learned in school was a lie. Your life has been a lie if you have relied upon the lies and disingenious principles taught to you in school, heralded from political platforms and broadcasted across all media sources.
Wake up Amerika…or its going to get a lot worse. Really…
Posted June 22, 2008 6:33pm
---------------------------------
#48 dogismyth Says:
Certainly you have heard of the supposed theory of why all this is occurring now.
1. McCain will resign from the presidential campaign within two months of the election, and a new candidate will step in.
2. Bush/Cheney will resign or get impeached before years end, and likely before the election.
3. Once this all occurs, Americans will trust their government again, and the final fleecing will occur, which will be rather painful for millions. In other words, its a big setup for many still sleepy Americans.
The American people are quite stupid, so stupid that they have yet to voice demands about the wrongdoings by this administration as well as the complicity of democrats (since they have known all the while about torture and other illegal deeds). Americans are still worried about their SUVs and big screen TVs, and planning vacations and other bullcrap while ignoring the outright and blatant misdeeds by our politicos.
It is the government now screaming at us with all this evidence. They are asking for us to force them to correct the situation, but we sit idly by with our thumbs in our mouths.
I am an American by birth and not by choice. Yes I have enjoyed luxury here in the U.S., but I have also had the truth about nearly everything hidden from me since the first years of school. This is a disgusting country and never did stand for any of the omnipotent objectives we herald. We are weak, fat and complacent and abhor critical thinking. Even our Canadian friends see us as fools.
I am sick of seeing people who wave their flag, wear the flag, hang the flag in their trucks. They are full of the poison and are hopeless since drinking the koolaid from birth. They offer their patriotism as a solution which is nothing more than a proud and egotistical person with a closed mind. They are as useless as the people leading us down this horrible path of destruction.
When I see Koreans marching in the street by the tens of thousands about an issue related to food consumption, I admire those people for their integrity, willpower and fortitude. Americans would never have the nerve, compassion or time to protest an issue of comparable meaning, let alone demonstrating for the impeaching of one, two or all 535 officers of our government. Most people I talk with do not have a clue what is occurring, what has happened, and what is to occur…even my family!
We ourselves are the insidious parasite that has destroyed our personal life, and others in our midst. It is not the government, because WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT. So shove that excuse where the sun doesn’t shine.
I have to ask myself where are the MoveOn.org organizations that are suppose to be consolidating our demands and exposing the corruptness. Unfortunately, they are the same poison and are now drinking from the same well as those that lead us astray. They are all corrupt (my opinion) and have yet to rally Americans behind a single cause. There cause is simple and that is to provide comfortable and highly compensated positions within a tax-free, or tax exempt, organization. Its pretty easy to make it look like you give a damn, but actually getting something done, or action, is not what we are seeing. I gave up on MoveOn after they decided to take on the worthy cause of Al Gore, and global warming. They sought millions of signatures to be placed on a petition that was sent to the government to deal with this issue. BUT it is a non-issue and if you had done your homework you would know that global warming is a hoax perpetuated by the same folks that have caused the banking crisis, the food crisis, the oil crisis (yada,yada,yada). When you begin paying for a carbon tax on nearly any purchase you make, you will understand. I even wrote MoveOn and sent the appropriate articles, references and documentation regarding the hoax of global warming, yet they spent valuable time and money move the public in the wrong direction. Whose pocket are they in????
Where are the Americans?!! What the hell is wrong with them!?! What are they waiting for???
Required video watching for all Americans is the Ring of Power (parts I and II). I would recommend reading something but I doubt most Americans could grasp such a task. In any case, the RIng of Power sums up the lies and lying liars since the time of the pharoahs. In essence, most everything you have learned in school was a lie. Your life has been a lie if you have relied upon the lies and disingenious principles taught to you in school, heralded from political platforms and broadcasted across all media sources.
Wake up Amerika…or its going to get a lot worse. Really…
Posted June 22, 2008 6:33pm
Thursday, June 19, 2008
FREEDOM OF IMPEACHMENT
A little truthout... how can we return to the days when white-collar criminals went to prison? -ed.
-----------------------------
In the never-ending pursuit
Thu, 06/19/2008 - 21:00 — Seth Mosgofian (not verified)
In the never-ending pursuit of greater, more unreasonable profits there has been a long and concerted effort by corporations to undermine the rights of working Americans. It significantly reared it's ugly head during the Reagan administration with it's handling of the air-traffic controllers' strike. This was carried forward during the first Bush White House with the attempted passage of NAFTA. Where Republican Bush failed, Democrat Clinton succeeded in pushing NAFTA through and thus helped to further the cause of global imperialism at the cost of workers' rights and standard of living.
In 2000 the United States experienced a coup with the theft of the election by the second (actually third) and more virulent strain of Bush and corporate control of our government became all but complete. Now money talks more than ever. Greed is the creed and too many Congress members of both parties are personally and literally invested in the same corporations (and agenda) that drove Reagan and now George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
The engine that drives this corporate profit-making machine is war, fueled by expendable lives and American tax-dollars. Both Republicans and Democrats are feeding from the same trough. Far too many of them are profiting from war and guilty of helping to support and fund wars. Any war.
Impeachment runs the risk of exposing all those who are culpable, thus it is "off the table". (Clinton's impeachment only threatened Clinton) This is not to say that it shouldn't be pursued, but how else can it be explained that the Democrats were so quick to deny impeachment when our system of checks and balances and our democracy were at stake.
There is no more important obligation of Congress than to derail a runaway Executive Branch that arrogantly ignores the constitution, the rule of law and the will of the people. If the process of impeachment brings the other tasks of Congress to a halt we need a Congress more skilled at multitasking. If Congress thinks it can do business as usual while ignoring an Executive Branch that is busy committing high crimes then our government is seriouly broken and needs a remedial crash course in Roman history.
My heartfelt thanks go to Congressman Dennis Kucinich for his courageous challenge to the worst, most corrupt administration and most negligent Congress in our history, but he cannot succeed without we, the people, getting involved and keeping the pressure on our elected or about to be elected representatives. Thank you Dennis. and don't give up.
-----------------------------
In the never-ending pursuit
Thu, 06/19/2008 - 21:00 — Seth Mosgofian (not verified)
In the never-ending pursuit of greater, more unreasonable profits there has been a long and concerted effort by corporations to undermine the rights of working Americans. It significantly reared it's ugly head during the Reagan administration with it's handling of the air-traffic controllers' strike. This was carried forward during the first Bush White House with the attempted passage of NAFTA. Where Republican Bush failed, Democrat Clinton succeeded in pushing NAFTA through and thus helped to further the cause of global imperialism at the cost of workers' rights and standard of living.
In 2000 the United States experienced a coup with the theft of the election by the second (actually third) and more virulent strain of Bush and corporate control of our government became all but complete. Now money talks more than ever. Greed is the creed and too many Congress members of both parties are personally and literally invested in the same corporations (and agenda) that drove Reagan and now George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
The engine that drives this corporate profit-making machine is war, fueled by expendable lives and American tax-dollars. Both Republicans and Democrats are feeding from the same trough. Far too many of them are profiting from war and guilty of helping to support and fund wars. Any war.
Impeachment runs the risk of exposing all those who are culpable, thus it is "off the table". (Clinton's impeachment only threatened Clinton) This is not to say that it shouldn't be pursued, but how else can it be explained that the Democrats were so quick to deny impeachment when our system of checks and balances and our democracy were at stake.
There is no more important obligation of Congress than to derail a runaway Executive Branch that arrogantly ignores the constitution, the rule of law and the will of the people. If the process of impeachment brings the other tasks of Congress to a halt we need a Congress more skilled at multitasking. If Congress thinks it can do business as usual while ignoring an Executive Branch that is busy committing high crimes then our government is seriouly broken and needs a remedial crash course in Roman history.
My heartfelt thanks go to Congressman Dennis Kucinich for his courageous challenge to the worst, most corrupt administration and most negligent Congress in our history, but he cannot succeed without we, the people, getting involved and keeping the pressure on our elected or about to be elected representatives. Thank you Dennis. and don't give up.
Friday, June 13, 2008
Puppet People Rule!
Couldn't have said it better myself...thanks, Mike! [ed.]
-------------------------------------------------------
Mike Corbeil June 13th, 2008 12:20 am
Bush is not powerful, really; it’s that having the title of President and being puppet of the kind of elites that control and corrupt the U.S. govt, all of this combines to making Bush seem powerful. He’s puppet; though sure is blood-cultist like former Pope John Paul II said in December 2002 or January 2003, when he added that he had also been wondering if Bush might be, or not, the antichrist, but which he was obviously not sure, while being sure in his view of Bush being blood-cultist.
As for the kind of people making U.S. presidents seem powerful, the following articles provide readers with some [strong] exposes on this topic; and the article by Stephen Lendman is not only very strong, it is crucial reading.
The rich elites want everything to themselves, and the following two articles provide important information of a very different kind about these people in terms of their doings of today.
Get ready for some serious “shock therapy” with Lendman’s article. It’s about major and top-U.S. govt corruption, involving boss-man VP Cheney, George Tenet, the CIA, the Halliburton-CIA operatives who aren’t registered as members of the CIA, but who have been found to definitely be secretly referrable to as these types of operatives, majorly robbing U.S. taxpayers like most people have probably never heard of before and might’ve found difficult to imagine, and so on.
It was very dangerous for the courageous CIA agent who managed to be able to definitely learn of and prove all of this major criminality. And through what is revealed in Lendman’s article on what she, this courageous and long-careered CIA agent or official, exposed is a strong illustration of why some people claimed years ago that Cheney had basically taken over authority of the presidential administration; by, and f.e., secretly having documents that are supposed to go to the president, at least first, redirected to Cheney’s office, keeping Bush “out of the loop” about things a president just didn’t need to know, Cheney evidently ruled, secretly.
Kucinich is all the more vindicated in having correctly ruled that Cheney had to be the first one to be impeached, for he [is] definitely more dangerous than Bush, who is mister puppet; with mister puppeteer lurking in the background as VP. I had a strong suspicion that Cheney would not want to be president, for he strategically needed plenty of secrecy in order to be able to carry on his major Halliburton machinations; and the most dangerous of dangerous and elite criminals are those who operate secretly.
” Exposing Bush Administration Corruption
by Stephen Lendman
Global Research, June 11, 2008″
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9288
“Barack O’Bilderberg: Picking the President
by Andrew G. Marshall
Global Research, June 9, 2008″
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9270
Many machinations of ‘Mal’ kind go on and are going on, while corporate msm “news” media keeps many of us very ignorant sheople; although many or most of them wouldn’t know what’s revealed in Lendman’s above article, but while more certainly knew of the Bilderberg Group’s recent annual meeting in the USA.
It’s not to say that I can personally accuse Barack Obama of having committed a wrong, as described of his (and Billary’s) secret doings, which seriously stunned the press people traveling with Obama’s campaign; stunned and fuming with anger. Andrew Marshall also doesn’t say that Obama committed any wrongs; only presenting the fact that he, and Hillary Clinton, certainly seem to have secretly sped off to a secret meeting with the B. Group.
I’d need more information before being able to form a definitive view, and these types of details are, for now anyway, secret; but, Obama, Billary, etcetera, will also make sure of keeping what they discussed in secret from everyone other than themselves.
While some may be members of both groups, the Bilderberg Group … dwarfs the power of AIPAC, and unlike the latter, the B.G. is HIGHLY, very highly secretive. Again, that is also how the very most dangerous people operate; and we should not forget this. They certainly have ways of guaranteeing that anyone leaking what the B.G. dictates is never to be leaked will never get another chance to repeat the leaked information; permanent silencing is easy for them to ensure.
John Perkins, author of ‘Confessions of an Economic Hit Man’, did not mention the B.G. in the interview that I read the transcript of at Democracy Now!; but what he said is relevant to the above.
-------------------------------------------------------
Mike Corbeil June 13th, 2008 12:20 am
Bush is not powerful, really; it’s that having the title of President and being puppet of the kind of elites that control and corrupt the U.S. govt, all of this combines to making Bush seem powerful. He’s puppet; though sure is blood-cultist like former Pope John Paul II said in December 2002 or January 2003, when he added that he had also been wondering if Bush might be, or not, the antichrist, but which he was obviously not sure, while being sure in his view of Bush being blood-cultist.
As for the kind of people making U.S. presidents seem powerful, the following articles provide readers with some [strong] exposes on this topic; and the article by Stephen Lendman is not only very strong, it is crucial reading.
The rich elites want everything to themselves, and the following two articles provide important information of a very different kind about these people in terms of their doings of today.
Get ready for some serious “shock therapy” with Lendman’s article. It’s about major and top-U.S. govt corruption, involving boss-man VP Cheney, George Tenet, the CIA, the Halliburton-CIA operatives who aren’t registered as members of the CIA, but who have been found to definitely be secretly referrable to as these types of operatives, majorly robbing U.S. taxpayers like most people have probably never heard of before and might’ve found difficult to imagine, and so on.
It was very dangerous for the courageous CIA agent who managed to be able to definitely learn of and prove all of this major criminality. And through what is revealed in Lendman’s article on what she, this courageous and long-careered CIA agent or official, exposed is a strong illustration of why some people claimed years ago that Cheney had basically taken over authority of the presidential administration; by, and f.e., secretly having documents that are supposed to go to the president, at least first, redirected to Cheney’s office, keeping Bush “out of the loop” about things a president just didn’t need to know, Cheney evidently ruled, secretly.
Kucinich is all the more vindicated in having correctly ruled that Cheney had to be the first one to be impeached, for he [is] definitely more dangerous than Bush, who is mister puppet; with mister puppeteer lurking in the background as VP. I had a strong suspicion that Cheney would not want to be president, for he strategically needed plenty of secrecy in order to be able to carry on his major Halliburton machinations; and the most dangerous of dangerous and elite criminals are those who operate secretly.
” Exposing Bush Administration Corruption
by Stephen Lendman
Global Research, June 11, 2008″
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9288
“Barack O’Bilderberg: Picking the President
by Andrew G. Marshall
Global Research, June 9, 2008″
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9270
Many machinations of ‘Mal’ kind go on and are going on, while corporate msm “news” media keeps many of us very ignorant sheople; although many or most of them wouldn’t know what’s revealed in Lendman’s above article, but while more certainly knew of the Bilderberg Group’s recent annual meeting in the USA.
It’s not to say that I can personally accuse Barack Obama of having committed a wrong, as described of his (and Billary’s) secret doings, which seriously stunned the press people traveling with Obama’s campaign; stunned and fuming with anger. Andrew Marshall also doesn’t say that Obama committed any wrongs; only presenting the fact that he, and Hillary Clinton, certainly seem to have secretly sped off to a secret meeting with the B. Group.
I’d need more information before being able to form a definitive view, and these types of details are, for now anyway, secret; but, Obama, Billary, etcetera, will also make sure of keeping what they discussed in secret from everyone other than themselves.
While some may be members of both groups, the Bilderberg Group … dwarfs the power of AIPAC, and unlike the latter, the B.G. is HIGHLY, very highly secretive. Again, that is also how the very most dangerous people operate; and we should not forget this. They certainly have ways of guaranteeing that anyone leaking what the B.G. dictates is never to be leaked will never get another chance to repeat the leaked information; permanent silencing is easy for them to ensure.
John Perkins, author of ‘Confessions of an Economic Hit Man’, did not mention the B.G. in the interview that I read the transcript of at Democracy Now!; but what he said is relevant to the above.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
You Couldn't Have a FOX News under the Fairness Doctrine
My own:
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr: “This devolution of the American Press began in 1988, when Ronald Reagan abolished the Fairness Doctrine. We had a rule in this country that was passed in 1928 at the dawn of commercial radio… and that rule said that the airwaves belong to the public. The broadcasts can be licensed to use them, but only with the proviso that they use them to promote the public interest and to advance American democracy.”
“There were three requirements under the Fairness Doctrine — number one; they had to air issues of public import. That’s why there’s a 6 o’clock news hour on the networks. Not because they wanted it — they wanted entertainment put in that slot. The news departments traditionally were money losers. So, they were forced to do that as part of the Fairness Doctrine, and that’s why the radio stations periodically update you on the news, as part of the original requirement under the Fairness Doctrine that they’re still doing as a tradition.”
“Number two; if they were going to give ‘opinion,’ they had to tell both sides. You couldn’t have had a FOX News under the Fairness Doctrine. You couldn’t have had a Rush Limbaugh. You could have had Rush 4 hours a day, but then they would have had to put somebody else on, a counter-availing voice, for the next 4 hours. You couldn’t have Rush and his dittoheads 24 hours a day on the same station. Rush Limbaugh got started in 1988, the year that Reagan abolished the Fairness Doctrine.”
“Number three; they had to avoid corporate consolidation. Congress wanted to make sure that people in Kansas could get crop reports, that people in North Dakota could get tornado warnings, that people in the South could get country music, that you wouldn’t have programming and content dictated by a couple of corporate epicenters in remote areas of the country… and that part of the Fairness Doctrine, incidentally, strengthened in 1945, FORTIFIED, BECAUSE THEY SAW (the Congress saw) WHAT HITLER HAD DONE IN EUROPE, and other fascist governments had done, where they had allowed these corporate consolidations, and they had given these contracts and special favors to the media, and they had co-opted the media and got them on their side. And so anyone who criticized them was either muzzled or was branded as unpatriotic. And they said (in 1945) that we can’t let this happen in our country, so they strengthened that part of the Fairness Doctrine.”
To see the rest, watch Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., “How the News Media Fails Us,” on brasschecktv or YouTube
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr: “This devolution of the American Press began in 1988, when Ronald Reagan abolished the Fairness Doctrine. We had a rule in this country that was passed in 1928 at the dawn of commercial radio… and that rule said that the airwaves belong to the public. The broadcasts can be licensed to use them, but only with the proviso that they use them to promote the public interest and to advance American democracy.”
“There were three requirements under the Fairness Doctrine — number one; they had to air issues of public import. That’s why there’s a 6 o’clock news hour on the networks. Not because they wanted it — they wanted entertainment put in that slot. The news departments traditionally were money losers. So, they were forced to do that as part of the Fairness Doctrine, and that’s why the radio stations periodically update you on the news, as part of the original requirement under the Fairness Doctrine that they’re still doing as a tradition.”
“Number two; if they were going to give ‘opinion,’ they had to tell both sides. You couldn’t have had a FOX News under the Fairness Doctrine. You couldn’t have had a Rush Limbaugh. You could have had Rush 4 hours a day, but then they would have had to put somebody else on, a counter-availing voice, for the next 4 hours. You couldn’t have Rush and his dittoheads 24 hours a day on the same station. Rush Limbaugh got started in 1988, the year that Reagan abolished the Fairness Doctrine.”
“Number three; they had to avoid corporate consolidation. Congress wanted to make sure that people in Kansas could get crop reports, that people in North Dakota could get tornado warnings, that people in the South could get country music, that you wouldn’t have programming and content dictated by a couple of corporate epicenters in remote areas of the country… and that part of the Fairness Doctrine, incidentally, strengthened in 1945, FORTIFIED, BECAUSE THEY SAW (the Congress saw) WHAT HITLER HAD DONE IN EUROPE, and other fascist governments had done, where they had allowed these corporate consolidations, and they had given these contracts and special favors to the media, and they had co-opted the media and got them on their side. And so anyone who criticized them was either muzzled or was branded as unpatriotic. And they said (in 1945) that we can’t let this happen in our country, so they strengthened that part of the Fairness Doctrine.”
To see the rest, watch Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., “How the News Media Fails Us,” on brasschecktv or YouTube
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
I know! The W stands for Widowmaker!
By Jack Damage [who has every right to fly his flag sticker upside-down on Memorial Day, or any other day.-ed.]:
No, I disagree, it is not a harsh headline, it is an accurate headline ["DEAD TROOPS REMEMBERED BY PRESIDENT WHO HAD THEM KILLED"-ed.]… Mr. Geiger’s leadin paragraph exemplifies why I can’t even pretend to care about memorial day these days. Yea, I have my personal moments during the day when I contemplate what it all means to be a veteran of this nations armed forces.. I look at my uniform in the closet under plastic with the ribbons displayed and ponder eternity and where all the dead are and whether or not they are resting in peace and so on… But I won’t go to any parades or any ‘officially sanctioned’ services/celebrations in honor of the vets who have fallen specifically for the same reasons cited by Mr. Geiger as to what sickens him about the last seven years… To hear that pussy mouth platitudes to and about people, events and principles he has zero idea about is enough to make me vomit as well as the writer…
One of these days when this pox called Bush is gone from the scene I believe I’ll be able to be fully proud of being an American once again, depending on who gets the WH this coming fall. Proud to go to patriotic parades in honor of the millions of brave Americans who gave their lives in service to this country over the last 232 or so years. And proud to be associated with all that thru my own service some 25 plus years ago…. That wasn’t this memorial day, nor any of the last seven years memorial days past…. I look forward to a time I can be completely proud of my nation again, not fringe aspects of it. Truly proud and not chagrined of my personal service to it. I long for that…
When that time comes, I’ll be ready to go to parades again and what not, and I’ll take a little flag stickon in my residence and shift it from the position denoting our nation in distress which it has been postioned in since 2000 and return it to its normal representation… These days and that sense of pride in it all will happen only when Bush is gone… That he, thru his actions and words, have stolen this sense of pride in my nation and my armed forces service to it as well as sullying the nations world image itself, is just another reason why I’d like to personally kick the shit out of that sonofabitch… Delete if you must site monitor, but don’t contrue what I just said as a desire to end his miserable life… No, I just want smack the smirk off his face once and for all… Just killing him outright would be letting the bastard off too easily for what he’s done to all of us. I weep for my country under the control of this pathetic excuse for a man…..JD
No, I disagree, it is not a harsh headline, it is an accurate headline ["DEAD TROOPS REMEMBERED BY PRESIDENT WHO HAD THEM KILLED"-ed.]… Mr. Geiger’s leadin paragraph exemplifies why I can’t even pretend to care about memorial day these days. Yea, I have my personal moments during the day when I contemplate what it all means to be a veteran of this nations armed forces.. I look at my uniform in the closet under plastic with the ribbons displayed and ponder eternity and where all the dead are and whether or not they are resting in peace and so on… But I won’t go to any parades or any ‘officially sanctioned’ services/celebrations in honor of the vets who have fallen specifically for the same reasons cited by Mr. Geiger as to what sickens him about the last seven years… To hear that pussy mouth platitudes to and about people, events and principles he has zero idea about is enough to make me vomit as well as the writer…
One of these days when this pox called Bush is gone from the scene I believe I’ll be able to be fully proud of being an American once again, depending on who gets the WH this coming fall. Proud to go to patriotic parades in honor of the millions of brave Americans who gave their lives in service to this country over the last 232 or so years. And proud to be associated with all that thru my own service some 25 plus years ago…. That wasn’t this memorial day, nor any of the last seven years memorial days past…. I look forward to a time I can be completely proud of my nation again, not fringe aspects of it. Truly proud and not chagrined of my personal service to it. I long for that…
When that time comes, I’ll be ready to go to parades again and what not, and I’ll take a little flag stickon in my residence and shift it from the position denoting our nation in distress which it has been postioned in since 2000 and return it to its normal representation… These days and that sense of pride in it all will happen only when Bush is gone… That he, thru his actions and words, have stolen this sense of pride in my nation and my armed forces service to it as well as sullying the nations world image itself, is just another reason why I’d like to personally kick the shit out of that sonofabitch… Delete if you must site monitor, but don’t contrue what I just said as a desire to end his miserable life… No, I just want smack the smirk off his face once and for all… Just killing him outright would be letting the bastard off too easily for what he’s done to all of us. I weep for my country under the control of this pathetic excuse for a man…..JD
Friday, May 23, 2008
Democracy's Finest Power Hour
From a Truthdig article, "Dream On, Hillary," tdbach points out the neocon-like suggestion that Hillary drop out of the race.-ed.
By tdbach, May 23 at 6:15 am #
It's simple
Look, you Obama-ites, it’s pretty simple. The campaign isn’t over, the “last out” hasn’t been made. Oh, how you’d love Hillary call it quits and toddle on home!
But she has a devoted electorate who have worked hard, rooted hard, argued hard on her behalf for over a year, and she’s not going to abandon them now, because you want her to. But she’s tearing apart the Democratic party! No, she’s not. Any more than any other primary campaign tears apart a party. If anyone is damaging the party, it’s Obama supporters like Robinson who want to prematurely silence virtually one half of its members - maybe even more (how many Obama votes came from independents and cross-over Republicans?).
As to Hillary’s fight to restore the voices of voters in MI and FL, why not? The purpose of the DNC sanction was to strip those states’ leaders of an early influence in the election. It was a huge blunder of core Democratic operatives in those states to press on with their primaries despite those sanctions. Absolutely unforgivable. And the DNC was right to not allow them to bully their way to the head of the line. But now that the race has turned out to be so close, it is vitally important that EVERY vote is heard. Hillary’s right: the “rules” of the DNC should be trumped by the golden rule of “every vote counts” if it comes to that. And it does.
Can she win the primary if MI and FL are added to the mix? Probably not. But again, it ain’t over yet. As any baseball fan knows, anything can happen. Why walk away in the 8th inning? Because the other team, with the “insurmountable” lead is afraid of losing by some fluke? Too bad. Fight on like real men and women, and you’ll be stronger for it should you indeed win. Because, despite my analogy, this isn’t a game. It’s the real deal. It could be our democracy’s finest hour. But you want to call the game on account of darkness. Turn on the lights. Let’s go!
By tdbach, May 23 at 6:15 am #
It's simple
Look, you Obama-ites, it’s pretty simple. The campaign isn’t over, the “last out” hasn’t been made. Oh, how you’d love Hillary call it quits and toddle on home!
But she has a devoted electorate who have worked hard, rooted hard, argued hard on her behalf for over a year, and she’s not going to abandon them now, because you want her to. But she’s tearing apart the Democratic party! No, she’s not. Any more than any other primary campaign tears apart a party. If anyone is damaging the party, it’s Obama supporters like Robinson who want to prematurely silence virtually one half of its members - maybe even more (how many Obama votes came from independents and cross-over Republicans?).
As to Hillary’s fight to restore the voices of voters in MI and FL, why not? The purpose of the DNC sanction was to strip those states’ leaders of an early influence in the election. It was a huge blunder of core Democratic operatives in those states to press on with their primaries despite those sanctions. Absolutely unforgivable. And the DNC was right to not allow them to bully their way to the head of the line. But now that the race has turned out to be so close, it is vitally important that EVERY vote is heard. Hillary’s right: the “rules” of the DNC should be trumped by the golden rule of “every vote counts” if it comes to that. And it does.
Can she win the primary if MI and FL are added to the mix? Probably not. But again, it ain’t over yet. As any baseball fan knows, anything can happen. Why walk away in the 8th inning? Because the other team, with the “insurmountable” lead is afraid of losing by some fluke? Too bad. Fight on like real men and women, and you’ll be stronger for it should you indeed win. Because, despite my analogy, this isn’t a game. It’s the real deal. It could be our democracy’s finest hour. But you want to call the game on account of darkness. Turn on the lights. Let’s go!
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Let Them Eat Form 1040
LeeAnnG has a good story to tell, in response to that bitter pill of learning that you've been swindled for 30 years and not being able to prove it.-ed.
------------
Misguided Notions Submitted by LeeAnnG on Tue, 04/15/2008 - 1:06pm.
I have a friend who considers himself to be a "conservative." He is aware that I am a leftwing progressive, so we talk little about politics. However, he has "jokingly" made some disparaging remarks about liberals.
The weird thing about this guy is that he moved back to the land and supported himself and a large family by growing his own food and raising goats. It was not enough, so he got food stamps, even though he had a teaching degree and could have supplemented the farming that way. In later life, he became physically disabled and accepted government assistance, which he still gets.
The other night he told me that he would have had a great agricultural business but the government reneged on its loan when Reagan came into office.
None of this makes any sense for a self-proclaimed conservative except that he buys into the whole "guns, god, gays, and patriotism" notions promoted by the rightwing noise machine.
Obama was right about the bitterness, the attitude of working Americans toward the "other" (including gays, migrants and other ethnic groups), and religion. Rev. Wright was absolutely spot on about America's role in racial injustice and invading or interfering with other countries. But Clinton will continue to make fault of virtue, frame Obama's words into negatives, and hand over an entire campaign agenda to the Republicans in order to get back into the White House.
If my friend, who is not an ignorant or uneducated man, can believe the garbage spewed by the rightwing radicals, talk radio, and Fox "news," how can we expect that working class people who have been oppressed and neglected by the powers that be to see through it.
------------
Misguided Notions Submitted by LeeAnnG on Tue, 04/15/2008 - 1:06pm.
I have a friend who considers himself to be a "conservative." He is aware that I am a leftwing progressive, so we talk little about politics. However, he has "jokingly" made some disparaging remarks about liberals.
The weird thing about this guy is that he moved back to the land and supported himself and a large family by growing his own food and raising goats. It was not enough, so he got food stamps, even though he had a teaching degree and could have supplemented the farming that way. In later life, he became physically disabled and accepted government assistance, which he still gets.
The other night he told me that he would have had a great agricultural business but the government reneged on its loan when Reagan came into office.
None of this makes any sense for a self-proclaimed conservative except that he buys into the whole "guns, god, gays, and patriotism" notions promoted by the rightwing noise machine.
Obama was right about the bitterness, the attitude of working Americans toward the "other" (including gays, migrants and other ethnic groups), and religion. Rev. Wright was absolutely spot on about America's role in racial injustice and invading or interfering with other countries. But Clinton will continue to make fault of virtue, frame Obama's words into negatives, and hand over an entire campaign agenda to the Republicans in order to get back into the White House.
If my friend, who is not an ignorant or uneducated man, can believe the garbage spewed by the rightwing radicals, talk radio, and Fox "news," how can we expect that working class people who have been oppressed and neglected by the powers that be to see through it.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Where Have the Joiners Gone? Babies go boom-boom!
Galen is probably right, but even most of the "instant-gratification-high-schoolers" that I know can be extremely resourceful in a pinch; they'll get used to it. They're young. I'm more worried about the near-retirement baby boomers and the old people.-ed.
By Galen April 13th, 2008 12:27 pm:
The hard times are coming folks. No doubt about it.
I know what it takes to break open the ground to plant a garden by hand. For a 20x 20 plot it was three eight hour days of back wrenching labor. I finally broke down and used the community gardens rototiller.
Then was the endless hours (pleasantly spent) weeding with my then wife. No pesticides. Fish fertilizer.
The payoff? The most wonderful, flavorful best tasting fruits and veggies I have ever had. Store bought food PALES, literally, in comparison.
I also have hard won skills in woodworking and some general carpentry.
Will I make it through the coming crash? Probably. Better than the vast majority of the population of the large west coast city I live in. But I am willing to help my neighbors. I even know many of them by name. And I have friends of the same mind set, but with differing skills. We should get by. But it won’t be easy.
The people I truly pity are the children and teens of today who have never known want. Only instant gratification.
They will suffer. Badly.
By Galen April 13th, 2008 12:27 pm:
The hard times are coming folks. No doubt about it.
I know what it takes to break open the ground to plant a garden by hand. For a 20x 20 plot it was three eight hour days of back wrenching labor. I finally broke down and used the community gardens rototiller.
Then was the endless hours (pleasantly spent) weeding with my then wife. No pesticides. Fish fertilizer.
The payoff? The most wonderful, flavorful best tasting fruits and veggies I have ever had. Store bought food PALES, literally, in comparison.
I also have hard won skills in woodworking and some general carpentry.
Will I make it through the coming crash? Probably. Better than the vast majority of the population of the large west coast city I live in. But I am willing to help my neighbors. I even know many of them by name. And I have friends of the same mind set, but with differing skills. We should get by. But it won’t be easy.
The people I truly pity are the children and teens of today who have never known want. Only instant gratification.
They will suffer. Badly.
Monday, April 7, 2008
The Truth about the Truth about the Truth about the 9/11 Truth Movement...
Nathaniel Heidenheimer April 7th, 2008 5:35 pm
——–
Quoting Clarity:
Look up 7 WTC on Wickpedia and look at all those engineering societies in on the vast conspiracy- all those damn engineers are neocons to the core!
Honestly you guys are a riot- or would be if didn’t make it that much easier to dismiss progressives with important ideas about wealth distribution, education and a realistic foreign policy that both protects us and our values. If it weren’t for that I’d love to keep you around for the entertainment value!
_____________ Nathaniel says:
WRONG! This is the latest tactic. To polarize the issue in terms of “only rightists believe in 9/11. Well BY NOW after countless left attacks like this one that are entirely uninformed and factless– undoubtedly there are many on the left who have BEEN CONDITIONED away from ever reading a book on the topic.
But there is NO WAY SUCH A LEFT RIGHT POLARIZATION MIGHT HAVE BEEN SUGGGESTED AS LATE AS SAY EARLY 2006. It is now ONLY IN THE LAST TWO YEARS THAT this false argument– one that is not at all based on an examamination of what happened on 9/11 but rather on primitive cliqueish group identities– can even be suggested.
Question: What do you think that the field of Communications Research has been up to since its birth after 1945?
One of the things they study is how to make group A perceive themselves as the opposite of Group B over an issue that they will THEREFORE NOT EVEN BOTHER TO PICK UP A BOOK ABOUT? No doubt that this will be labeled paranoia, so I can only refer you to the seminal work of American University Communications Theorist Christopher Simpson. His GREAT AND NECESSARY BOOK IS CALLED THE SCIENCE OF COERCION. PLEASE READ IT BEFORE YOU SLIP BACK INTO SOMETHING comfortable like Katirina Van Der Hovel’s back door roundabout endorsement but endorsement just the same– of Nanci P. and the Mummy we have as Senate Majority leader.
——–
Quoting Clarity:
Look up 7 WTC on Wickpedia and look at all those engineering societies in on the vast conspiracy- all those damn engineers are neocons to the core!
Honestly you guys are a riot- or would be if didn’t make it that much easier to dismiss progressives with important ideas about wealth distribution, education and a realistic foreign policy that both protects us and our values. If it weren’t for that I’d love to keep you around for the entertainment value!
_____________ Nathaniel says:
WRONG! This is the latest tactic. To polarize the issue in terms of “only rightists believe in 9/11. Well BY NOW after countless left attacks like this one that are entirely uninformed and factless– undoubtedly there are many on the left who have BEEN CONDITIONED away from ever reading a book on the topic.
But there is NO WAY SUCH A LEFT RIGHT POLARIZATION MIGHT HAVE BEEN SUGGGESTED AS LATE AS SAY EARLY 2006. It is now ONLY IN THE LAST TWO YEARS THAT this false argument– one that is not at all based on an examamination of what happened on 9/11 but rather on primitive cliqueish group identities– can even be suggested.
Question: What do you think that the field of Communications Research has been up to since its birth after 1945?
One of the things they study is how to make group A perceive themselves as the opposite of Group B over an issue that they will THEREFORE NOT EVEN BOTHER TO PICK UP A BOOK ABOUT? No doubt that this will be labeled paranoia, so I can only refer you to the seminal work of American University Communications Theorist Christopher Simpson. His GREAT AND NECESSARY BOOK IS CALLED THE SCIENCE OF COERCION. PLEASE READ IT BEFORE YOU SLIP BACK INTO SOMETHING comfortable like Katirina Van Der Hovel’s back door roundabout endorsement but endorsement just the same– of Nanci P. and the Mummy we have as Senate Majority leader.
Friday, April 4, 2008
A Little Absurdirty Under The Fingernails
By: iowablackbird April 2nd, 2008 9:12 pm
the way of bush co. will be the way of mussolini and hitler, although i wish the next president in conjunction with congress would pursue the criminals who’ve wrought so much damage upon this world.
typically i’m not a conspiracy theorist, but in the back of my mind i see a connection b/w unsupervised warrant-less eavesdropping and congress’ hesitancy to pursue impeachment b/c of high crimes and misdemeanors (treason). i would not put death threats beyond the bush co. crowd (or the clinton crowd for that matter). one politicians plane crashing (as described in the book confessions of an economic hit man)can be ordered as quickly as we can order a pizza.
i’ve never personally experienced a serious death threat or political blackmail but i sense it happens and has the desired impact on the politician- especially in light of the spitzer folly, every politician has a little dirt (if not a mistress) under their fingernails. dirt is unacceptable to hygienic puritanical america, especially dirt distilled through MSM splattered across the world within moments on tv.
i suspect the fascists in this country won’t see bars until their unwittingly picked up on the streets of europe or latin america and tried in the international court (ICC) for war crimes (i’d be surprised if bush or cheney travel very much once out of office), at least after they’re nabbed they’ll receive public trials in europe.
if international institutions fall through, i suspect we will be liberated in 10 or 15 years by troops representing the united states of south america with backing from europe and china.
they’ll find a few north americans sipping champaign admiring their stolen art and loot but most of us will be starving as we manufacture more munitions. who knows maybe the brainwashed white supremacists we’ll send flocks of 12 and 13 year old children into the streets to fight for the homeland against the brown invaders. they might have to nuke cleveland before we get the point and surrender.
it’s a little absurd, but no more or less absurd then imagining these criminals will receive justice in this country….
…peace….
the way of bush co. will be the way of mussolini and hitler, although i wish the next president in conjunction with congress would pursue the criminals who’ve wrought so much damage upon this world.
typically i’m not a conspiracy theorist, but in the back of my mind i see a connection b/w unsupervised warrant-less eavesdropping and congress’ hesitancy to pursue impeachment b/c of high crimes and misdemeanors (treason). i would not put death threats beyond the bush co. crowd (or the clinton crowd for that matter). one politicians plane crashing (as described in the book confessions of an economic hit man)can be ordered as quickly as we can order a pizza.
i’ve never personally experienced a serious death threat or political blackmail but i sense it happens and has the desired impact on the politician- especially in light of the spitzer folly, every politician has a little dirt (if not a mistress) under their fingernails. dirt is unacceptable to hygienic puritanical america, especially dirt distilled through MSM splattered across the world within moments on tv.
i suspect the fascists in this country won’t see bars until their unwittingly picked up on the streets of europe or latin america and tried in the international court (ICC) for war crimes (i’d be surprised if bush or cheney travel very much once out of office), at least after they’re nabbed they’ll receive public trials in europe.
if international institutions fall through, i suspect we will be liberated in 10 or 15 years by troops representing the united states of south america with backing from europe and china.
they’ll find a few north americans sipping champaign admiring their stolen art and loot but most of us will be starving as we manufacture more munitions. who knows maybe the brainwashed white supremacists we’ll send flocks of 12 and 13 year old children into the streets to fight for the homeland against the brown invaders. they might have to nuke cleveland before we get the point and surrender.
it’s a little absurd, but no more or less absurd then imagining these criminals will receive justice in this country….
…peace….
Thursday, March 27, 2008
As the seconds tick away... your taxes pay for brutality and Wall St. bailouts
Let's see, at 10 bucks an hour, the average joe makes .00277778 cents per second. Not even a penny. (ed.)
By dixie March 26th, 2008 2:20 pm:
As the cost of the war escalates and we keep hearing about the 3 trillion dollar war and the fact that we are now 9 trillion or more in debt (and counting) the following comparisons might be helpful in illuminating just what IS a trillion.
I googled the question “what is a trillion?” and got a bunch of articles. One of them had this eye opening comparison:
1 million seconds = 12 days
1 billion seconds = 32 years
1 TRILLION seconds = 32,000 years!
It’s hard to get your mind around what a trillion is. We understand time fairly well so this gives us a good idea of the geometric expansion between a million, a billion and a trillion.
Think about it folks. We are being had in a monumental way!
---------
By JConrad March 26th, 2008 3:22 pm
And while the average American struggles many at the top of the food chain are doing very well for themselves.
During the five years from 2002 through 2006, Bear Sterns CEO James Cayne and the bank’s
four top executives were paid $620.8 M. The
five also reported a payout total of $296.4 M
from insider trading of company stock.
Wall Street’s five largest investment banks paid a record $39 billion in “executive bonuses” at the end of 2007. (Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers, JP Morgan Chase Investment Bank and Credit Suisse Investment Bank.)
By dixie March 26th, 2008 2:20 pm:
As the cost of the war escalates and we keep hearing about the 3 trillion dollar war and the fact that we are now 9 trillion or more in debt (and counting) the following comparisons might be helpful in illuminating just what IS a trillion.
I googled the question “what is a trillion?” and got a bunch of articles. One of them had this eye opening comparison:
1 million seconds = 12 days
1 billion seconds = 32 years
1 TRILLION seconds = 32,000 years!
It’s hard to get your mind around what a trillion is. We understand time fairly well so this gives us a good idea of the geometric expansion between a million, a billion and a trillion.
Think about it folks. We are being had in a monumental way!
---------
By JConrad March 26th, 2008 3:22 pm
And while the average American struggles many at the top of the food chain are doing very well for themselves.
During the five years from 2002 through 2006, Bear Sterns CEO James Cayne and the bank’s
four top executives were paid $620.8 M. The
five also reported a payout total of $296.4 M
from insider trading of company stock.
Wall Street’s five largest investment banks paid a record $39 billion in “executive bonuses” at the end of 2007. (Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers, JP Morgan Chase Investment Bank and Credit Suisse Investment Bank.)
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Hell Games
meremark's analysis...but follow the link to read the article & comments at OpEdNews anyway; it's meremark's last paragraph that made me want to save it. Too bad all the videos were taken down by the time I saw it...
---------
It's a dark hall of smoky mirrors
What Wayne Madsen said (subscription req'd.), in December '06 archives, I use as gospel.
Litvinenko was like a courier, for the plutonium, provided by Isreali-Russian mafia, made to look like it was coming from Putin, to frame Putin.
It was supposed to be in USA around Oct. 24, 25, in 2006. Arriving by an intentionally sloppy, discoverable trail, leading back to Putin. Meanwhile, on the other side of town, a detonation was waiting (from other domestic sources), set to false flag a tragedy and disarray the Nov. 6 elections.
Putin got wise in advance. Litvinenko got wise in advance, that he was going to be 'Lee Harvey Oswald'-ed, (framed), and he reneged, or told them in London he quit. So they (Isreali-Russian mafia ... Mossad, same thing if you like), poisoned him, he knew too much. But their cover was blown. Another courier (still inside Russia) who also knew too much, was murdered, probably at Putin's direction. It was unclear if Putin communicated to Litvinenko, or if they each saw through the plot independently.
One result has been Putin's crackdown on the Israeli-Russian mafia, and he's eliminated some of them, and made activity difficult for the rest. Yet, the principals are deep embeds in Russian politics, and power structure -- like our own USA military-industrial-congressional-massmedia corruption, endemic -- so all the scenes and events reported are filled with double-entendre, double-agents, double-crossers, doubled and redoubled. A dark hall of smoky mirrors ... and live fire.
The essential logistic and tactic now, is that Putin and/or successor what'shisname, controls vital pipes of natural gas and oil to Europe, and can coerce Euro cooperation in turning against Bushbutchery and the mega-psychopaths. You're right, that Putin is a 'good guy' and the enemy of our enemy Bushbutchery; Putin/Russia likes America, and Americans like Russia. It's the psychomonsters who are the outcasts.
One context I use to watch things in, is this. The national sport of America is baseball. The national sport of Russia is chess. Then do comparisons. For example, chess has the possibility of a tie outcome, (stalemate); baseball keeps playing extra innings until there's a winner, unless .... In chess, positioning pieces has both offense and defense components at the same time. And so on. Think about it.
I had foreseen the Oct. 24, 2006, sequel to 9/11 event, in astrology charts ahead of time. It was a mystery when the date came and went with nothing happening. Then Wayne Madsen, independently, two months later, had dug out the particulars and corroborated the target timeframe, Oct. 25ish, for the plot that got spoiled. That's why I put such credence in his version as gospel.
Oct. 24,06, was the second time we dodged the 9/11 sequel bullet. The first was set for Aug. 25, '05, according to my astrology study, but Katrina waylaid it. The third was Aug.20 - 30, '07, ('end of August' was the closest I could come to calculating a date said and certain), and that was the 'loose nuke cruise missile' botch job, out of Minot ND, Aug.30. Apparently. In the insane game they're playing, one possibility is always an 'intentional accidental discovery,' sort of as a feint. They conspire to do it, and only intend to go far enough to see who in the conspiracy breaks ranks and blows the whistle. Then that person is eliminated from future planning ... for the 'real' thing.
My astrology charts are spinning around with hair on fire in the May 1 - June 16, 2008, timeframe. A little narrower is May 3 - 15. And I am strongly isolating on Sunday, May 11, '08, as the 9/11 sequel date, for a number of reasons. Look at just the first one: that date is 'five eleven.'
May 15 is the 60th anniversary of Israel's invasion of Palestine, and where all the modern situation there began, (though antecedent dates are in 1917, and, if you really trace the threads back, Napoleon promised Euro-Zionists he'd get them a Middle East 'homeland' back around 1810, that's where it really began), anyway, Dumbo junior jughead is scheduled to be in Jerusalem for the May 15 occasion. Our false flag watch should be on high alert whenever Dumbo's out of town. ... one trick is if he don't come back, and any lie can be told to explain what happened why he didn't ... his astrology chart is very acute at that date. Very.
Big daddy-o, of course, is the one to watch, the one calling the shots, the one behind it all. In the 'human nature' psychology of it, one thing going on is what I've been calling a 'reverse oedipal complex,' and that's supposed to give a hint at the direction and drift of 'personalities.' Stay tuned, I'm working on it. Goofy bozo Tommy looney tunes, here, of course takes all this reconnoitered info back into the dark bunker hall of smoky mirrors, and for some discovered date being announced here, could conceivably be countered there, by rescheduling the date. What shell is the pea under?
And I've been looking more and more at the plausibility that there is no violent explosion used to 'touch it off,' (whether 'it' is the Iran invasion -- I say that ain't gonna happen; or 'it' is martial law; or both), and one non-incendiary possibility is simply to close all the banks and unplug the ATM machines, coast to coast. Then what does that look like?
by meremark (1 articles, 3 quicklinks, 330 comments) on Friday, March 21, 2008 at 6:02:02 AM
---------
It's a dark hall of smoky mirrors
What Wayne Madsen said (subscription req'd.), in December '06 archives, I use as gospel.
Litvinenko was like a courier, for the plutonium, provided by Isreali-Russian mafia, made to look like it was coming from Putin, to frame Putin.
It was supposed to be in USA around Oct. 24, 25, in 2006. Arriving by an intentionally sloppy, discoverable trail, leading back to Putin. Meanwhile, on the other side of town, a detonation was waiting (from other domestic sources), set to false flag a tragedy and disarray the Nov. 6 elections.
Putin got wise in advance. Litvinenko got wise in advance, that he was going to be 'Lee Harvey Oswald'-ed, (framed), and he reneged, or told them in London he quit. So they (Isreali-Russian mafia ... Mossad, same thing if you like), poisoned him, he knew too much. But their cover was blown. Another courier (still inside Russia) who also knew too much, was murdered, probably at Putin's direction. It was unclear if Putin communicated to Litvinenko, or if they each saw through the plot independently.
One result has been Putin's crackdown on the Israeli-Russian mafia, and he's eliminated some of them, and made activity difficult for the rest. Yet, the principals are deep embeds in Russian politics, and power structure -- like our own USA military-industrial-congressional-massmedia corruption, endemic -- so all the scenes and events reported are filled with double-entendre, double-agents, double-crossers, doubled and redoubled. A dark hall of smoky mirrors ... and live fire.
The essential logistic and tactic now, is that Putin and/or successor what'shisname, controls vital pipes of natural gas and oil to Europe, and can coerce Euro cooperation in turning against Bushbutchery and the mega-psychopaths. You're right, that Putin is a 'good guy' and the enemy of our enemy Bushbutchery; Putin/Russia likes America, and Americans like Russia. It's the psychomonsters who are the outcasts.
One context I use to watch things in, is this. The national sport of America is baseball. The national sport of Russia is chess. Then do comparisons. For example, chess has the possibility of a tie outcome, (stalemate); baseball keeps playing extra innings until there's a winner, unless .... In chess, positioning pieces has both offense and defense components at the same time. And so on. Think about it.
I had foreseen the Oct. 24, 2006, sequel to 9/11 event, in astrology charts ahead of time. It was a mystery when the date came and went with nothing happening. Then Wayne Madsen, independently, two months later, had dug out the particulars and corroborated the target timeframe, Oct. 25ish, for the plot that got spoiled. That's why I put such credence in his version as gospel.
Oct. 24,06, was the second time we dodged the 9/11 sequel bullet. The first was set for Aug. 25, '05, according to my astrology study, but Katrina waylaid it. The third was Aug.20 - 30, '07, ('end of August' was the closest I could come to calculating a date said and certain), and that was the 'loose nuke cruise missile' botch job, out of Minot ND, Aug.30. Apparently. In the insane game they're playing, one possibility is always an 'intentional accidental discovery,' sort of as a feint. They conspire to do it, and only intend to go far enough to see who in the conspiracy breaks ranks and blows the whistle. Then that person is eliminated from future planning ... for the 'real' thing.
My astrology charts are spinning around with hair on fire in the May 1 - June 16, 2008, timeframe. A little narrower is May 3 - 15. And I am strongly isolating on Sunday, May 11, '08, as the 9/11 sequel date, for a number of reasons. Look at just the first one: that date is 'five eleven.'
May 15 is the 60th anniversary of Israel's invasion of Palestine, and where all the modern situation there began, (though antecedent dates are in 1917, and, if you really trace the threads back, Napoleon promised Euro-Zionists he'd get them a Middle East 'homeland' back around 1810, that's where it really began), anyway, Dumbo junior jughead is scheduled to be in Jerusalem for the May 15 occasion. Our false flag watch should be on high alert whenever Dumbo's out of town. ... one trick is if he don't come back, and any lie can be told to explain what happened why he didn't ... his astrology chart is very acute at that date. Very.
Big daddy-o, of course, is the one to watch, the one calling the shots, the one behind it all. In the 'human nature' psychology of it, one thing going on is what I've been calling a 'reverse oedipal complex,' and that's supposed to give a hint at the direction and drift of 'personalities.' Stay tuned, I'm working on it. Goofy bozo Tommy looney tunes, here, of course takes all this reconnoitered info back into the dark bunker hall of smoky mirrors, and for some discovered date being announced here, could conceivably be countered there, by rescheduling the date. What shell is the pea under?
And I've been looking more and more at the plausibility that there is no violent explosion used to 'touch it off,' (whether 'it' is the Iran invasion -- I say that ain't gonna happen; or 'it' is martial law; or both), and one non-incendiary possibility is simply to close all the banks and unplug the ATM machines, coast to coast. Then what does that look like?
by meremark (1 articles, 3 quicklinks, 330 comments) on Friday, March 21, 2008 at 6:02:02 AM
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
By Stonicus...
Good One, Stonicus; the "oh, well, you lost" mentality started at the 2000 Bush selection. I remember it as the day I woke up. Chris@#2, however, likely needs further education or skills in order to learn the difference between you, your, and you're.
by Stonicus:
Quoting Chris@#2: "Maybe Jack and his brother should get an education or skill that will allow them to be flexible in the market economy when its in a down cycle. This is a normal business cycle people, sometimes you (sic) up, sometimes your (sic) down."
-------
Make sure you tell that directly to Jack and his brother when they’re breaking into your house to rob you because they can’t find work and are starving. Then maybe you can understand how “oh well, you lost” is a bad paradigm for how to treat our population and how it hurts everyone, even the winners. I’m gonna buy you a bumper sticker that says “America, No Second Chances!”
Keep bankrupting people, telling them it’s their fault, and mocking them. How long before they decide to stop playing the game and start a new one, with new rules? Imagine playing Monopoly with 3 friends. You have Boardwalk and Parkplace and all the red properties with hotels and $10k cash. Everyone else has no money and all their property is mortgaged. How long do you think they’ll keep playing just to satisfy your ego?
by Stonicus:
Quoting Chris@#2: "Maybe Jack and his brother should get an education or skill that will allow them to be flexible in the market economy when its in a down cycle. This is a normal business cycle people, sometimes you (sic) up, sometimes your (sic) down."
-------
Make sure you tell that directly to Jack and his brother when they’re breaking into your house to rob you because they can’t find work and are starving. Then maybe you can understand how “oh well, you lost” is a bad paradigm for how to treat our population and how it hurts everyone, even the winners. I’m gonna buy you a bumper sticker that says “America, No Second Chances!”
Keep bankrupting people, telling them it’s their fault, and mocking them. How long before they decide to stop playing the game and start a new one, with new rules? Imagine playing Monopoly with 3 friends. You have Boardwalk and Parkplace and all the red properties with hotels and $10k cash. Everyone else has no money and all their property is mortgaged. How long do you think they’ll keep playing just to satisfy your ego?
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Walt Speaks From Experience, For Which There Is No Substitute.
Walt speaks, whoever he is...[ will you marry me? ] and his comment below is the reason to finally resurrect this blog from the dearth [ or death? ] of rational remarkage over the past year. Depressing, really, when Walt hit upon the suspicion I had about John Kerry in the last selection cycle... Kerry wanted everyone to think he was the 'Ron Kovic who ended the Vietnam War' type of hero.
Back to Walt, I personally apologize to you for being part of the problematic "edgy progressives threatening not to vote for either party..." and please don't take offense at my editing of the typos in order to underscore your eloquence with reading perfection. I am sorry, but will say that my Kucinich-based YouTube channel (Scoppertop) enjoyed lots of hits and I made lots of cool friends, particularly a young man of integrity and insight named erkd1. Hopefully, Walt, I can find you online blogging somewhere and add [ invite? ] you to my daily Bookmarks Bar. -ed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
walt March 6th, 2008 4:57 am:
Talk about the Vietnam Era. We, in the progressive movement seem to have entered that troubling period of internecine warfare that so distinguished the aftermath of the “peace movement” and led to its ultimate dissolution in the 70’s.
Whether it’s hard-core Obama supporters threatening not to vote at all if HRC is nominated, or edgy progressives threatening not to vote for either party’s nominee because there’s “no difference between them”, or all-out, pointless, rant-fests like this, we are bearing witness to the sad condition of our movement since the 60’s … when a few astute social observers described us as The “Me” Generation.
Self-absorbed, atomistic, uncompromising, progressives (a small but vocal few) have shown a toxic reaction to the more pertinent characteristics of pluralistic democracy … namely, cohesion, compromise and solidarity.
I used to wonder if it truly was a progressive plague or an American one? At this point, the Republican party seems perched on the precipice of such self-immolation but - much as I hate to say it - I have been impressed by their ability to hold their noses, unify behind and support a candidate that they believe can win. Then they force that candidate to adopt their positions once he is elected. Remember how GWB, the “Great Uniter” turned on that promise and imposed his fanatical crypto-facist, Christian-fundamentalist, neo-liberal agenda on all of us? He was required to.
I trust - or rather fear - that all this stürm und drang about McCain breaking up the party’s homogeneous composition is a temporary situation … or a calculated farce. Now that he is the nominee, they will rally behind him.
They are better at this game than we are, but only because we refuse to play.
For the Right-wing it is not - nor has it ever been - about a candidate. For them, it is and has always been (for at least 30 very odd years indeed) about a concerted, anti-liberal agenda determined to reverse the works of FDR, LBJ and any progressive social programs implemented. They have, since Reagan, been appallingly successful at it.
For us, since JFK, RFK, MLK it has unfortunately – yet understandably - been about personality. We lost great leaders to violence and since Vietnam, we have had no unifying agenda to rally behind. We consequently depend on individuals to provide the vision instead of trying to build an ideological consensus among ourselves that we can all get a piece of.
Largely it’s because we are not as politically active as a body as we could be. Too many competing agendas and too much wasted energy. Casting vitriol on a journalist’s character on a website is decıdedly NOT political action.
The progressive Democrats are tearing themselves to shreds arguing over whether it will be Obama or Clinton. One side resents the idea that such a candidate will be forced upon the other, ignoring the fact that the better candidates in the race - Edwards, Kucinich, Biden and Gravel - have either been driven out or marginalized. Yet no one seems too irate about the fact that THIS decision was made for them.
I am 60. I was drafted. I did “serve” and fortunately survived. But many of my brothers are inscribed on that wall (courtesy of the Tet Offensive) and many more are lost to all efforts to find them through the vagaries of time and possibly homelessness.
This election is - as we once believed - critical. The decisions we make for President will affect the lives of our children more than ours. I have come to believe that whether it is Obama or Clinton - and by and large this will be a decision made by the citizens of our pluralistic democracy, voting scandals and crooked “Supremes” aside - we had better, if we believe one bit of our identity as progressives - choose and support one against McCain.
I would like to add that despite all his contributions - and setting truthie’s tempest aside – it was not Gravel who stopped the war, any more than it was bourgeois adolescents like Abbie Hoffman (OK, I’ll give you Dave Dellinger). If it was any one person, it was Ron Kovic, who along with dozens of other maimed and broken Veterans chained themselves to the gates of the White House. When their images of despair were beamed out all over the world, hearts broke … as did the American people’s will to believe the lies and go on. Politicians couldn’t look away from that demonstration as they did so many others. No one could. That act, more than any other, altered the minds of the American people and it was the American people who ended the war by withdrawıng their “silent” support for it.
So it will be with Iraq and Health Care and Corporate İnfluence and our Imperiled Planet. No inspirational “messiah” will take office and change things. Neither will an experienced “wonk” or a former POW. Ony Americans, actively participating in government can do this, no matter who is president. I just earnestly believe our chances of doing so are much better with a Democrat.
Nader could do it, but certainly not as President. That’s the ultimate delusion. What he could do is return to his only valid reason for fame - reactivating interest in participatory democracy at the grass roots as he did with the PIRGs. That is what he is famous for and that is what he did best – better than anyone in my lifetime. He pulled us out of apathy into action.
I liked the suggestion that he draw Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich and others into some kind of consensus movement – not a third party, God help us, there’s no time – but a political movement that any member of any party can support and that can put pressure on the President and Congress to reverse 25 years of anti-progressive legislation. Viable third parties evolve from that - over time. They don’t come from disaffected voters getting more disaffected every 4 years.
Social action is the only solution. Anything else, like this endless hair splitting and tiresome in-fighting, is nothing more than … what we used to call bourgeois self-indulgence … which in the 60’s, was the preferred course of action for those elite “liberals” least affected by the outcome of politics. They lived well no matter who won.
We have to elect a Democrat and then through organized action, we have to wean them off the corporate teat and “hound” them back to their roots – the protection of the unprotected. And there are millions of them out there. If you don’t care who wins you are not one of them.
It can be done. It has been done. In my lifetime.
If you are too cynical or filled with despair and believe that it doesn’t matter if a Democrat or a Republican wins you are too comfortable and cossetted to call yourself “progressive” or “liberal” or anything like it.
You are – as we old guard used to say – not part of the solution, but part of the problem.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Web Detectives
These people are problem-solvers! I hope Conyers accepts WO's volunteer offer, but you don't think WO would fix facts around the preferred outcome, do you? I don't. WO reminds me of Mike Ruppert. Ed.
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
The Bushies are going to fight the subpoena; they have to. There's no way in hell they can let those documents and emails see the light of day. Anyone who's been paying attention knows that the Bushies are done, deader than doornails, if they obey the subpeona(s).
So what will they do? Seems to me the WH only has two options:
1. Just ignore the subpoenas, which would mean finding the WH/DoJ in contempt. Does Congress go to the court then? Or send the Sargeant-at-Arms to enforce the subpeonas?
2. Comply in dribs and drabs. This seems a likelier scenario, since it avoids a legal showdown. Unless the Committees call them on it - but can they? They'd be working with an obvious but unprovable assertion that the response is dilatory. Can they issue a contempt order for foot-dragging?
Assuming either one, where does that leave Gonzales' appointment to testify on the 17th?
If the WH delays or ignores the supbpoenas, would Congress reschedule his testimony for after the showdown over the subpeonas? Or would the hearing go forward, and the subpoena fight continue at the same time?
Posted by: CaseyL | April 10, 2007 at 19:17
---------
Gonzales still testifies. Even if he resigns first, he still testifies. If he doesn't show, subpoena his ass.
I don't think he's going to show.
Posted by: tekel | April 10, 2007 at 20:05
---------
CaseyL--I don't see how they're going to fight this. If they miss the deadline, I think Conyers is just going to send the Sergeant-at-Arms over there to confiscate the computers. This has "last chance" written all over it.
Posted by: Frank Probst | April 10, 2007 at 20:07
---------
I'll agree with Casey, because there's so much there to hide. Part of the problem for the D's is that because they allowed W to pack the courts with ideologues, they may actually lose the rulings even though they have a strong objective case.
It's all about protecting W, Cheney,and Karl, at all costs.
Posted by: rugger9 | April 10, 2007 at 20:09
---------
TPM says the DoJ will fight the subpeonas as overly broad and intrusive.
A commenter there noted that neither the Senate nor the House has the authority to "civilly" enforce a subpoena, or a contempt order. I don't know if that means Congress does have authority to enforce a criminal order - and I don't know if Congress has the authority to even issue a criminal citation.
It'll have to go to the courts. That runs out the clock, if nothing else.
Posted by: CaseyL | April 10, 2007 at 20:48
---------
Conyers' people came across something big. They have Abu by the short hairs, and they showed just enough to let him know he's screwed no matter what, and big time. And so the subpoena is really just an invitation to get him a little bit off the hook. He's still going to be hooked. If this goes to the Supremes, and it surely will, the DOJ will lose. And though people still talk about running out the clock, remember, it's April 2007, and the clock will run to around September 2008. They've got lots of time, and lots of time to Impeach Bush in December 2008 to cut off the pardons.
Posted by: knut wicksell | April 10, 2007 at 20:49
---------
knut
We don't have that much time. At least in my state (one USA purged, the other seemingly bought off), the voter purge they've got planned will already be well under way.
They need to get Gonzales and Bush out by July 2008 at the latest if we really want to ensure the USA purge doesn't have its desired effect.
Posted by: emptywheel | April 10, 2007 at 20:52
---------
Oh man, I've been waiting for them to ask for this. I wonder if they'll release the files on their website. If not, I'll happily volunteer to help with the forensics.
Posted by: William Ockham | April 10, 2007 at 20:59
---------
Please do, WO, I haven't seen you this engaged since we considered how Rove's Hadley email could have escaped detection. I think we've got a pretty good idea of how that may have happened. But the technical fun, it seems, is just starting.
I'd be curious, btw, if you put a comment up about the full letter to Hertling. I skimmed the interesting non-technical details, but I'm curious if you think Conyers hit all the possible high spots.
Posted by: emptywheel | April 10, 2007 at 21:14
---------
Casey,
The House has no civil contempt procedure. The Senate does, but it's not available as against executive branch actors. But either House may avail itself of criminal contempt, either statutory or inherent. Since statutory contempt is prosecuted at the discretion of the US Attorney for the District of Columbia, that's an unlikely route. Inherent contempt, however, is prosecuted and adjudicated by the aggrieved House itself.
That's the only real answer to this problem. Unfortunately, key members of the leadership still believe that going to court is a feasible option. If the "administration" simply flatly defies the subpoenas, I don't think the courts will find a justiciable question, at least in the first instance. I think they'll dismiss it as a political question, at least if the "administration" simply refuses to acknowledge the right of the legislative branch to compel action by the executive.
Posted by: Kagro X | April 10, 2007 at 21:44
---------
Thanks, Kagro; that's exactly the information I was looking for.
Assuming the Senate and House do issue contempt orders, is that when the Sgt at Arms has to go serve/enforce them?
Does he take law enforcement officers? Assistants? Dollies and a Mack truck?
Does he have the authority to enter the building, and offices, and take file cabinets, computers, Blackberries, etc.?
Posted by: CaseyL | April 10, 2007 at 22:09
---------
I agree with everyone here about the big picture. But I wonder about the "little people" involved.
It is one thing for Fielding to order dribs and drabs to be released, and for gwb to declare "never in hell" and string out the legal case in the courts. I agree with everyone that that is likely.
But what is the liability of the staff attorneys in the Office of Counsel who read and physically segregate documents. When the Dems take over in January 2009 will the loyal service of the staff attorneys look like obstruction of justice?
Are there safe areas, danger areas and gray areas? What can they do safely? What can they safely pretend to know or not know?
And, by the way, who are these people?
Posted by: jwp | April 10, 2007 at 22:10
---------
Seems to me that Conyers and his staff have been ahead of the blogs suggestions. Is it possible that we should consider how exactly the Sergeant At Arms would go about his/her business? How does that work.[?] Apparently they have the right to arrest and detain even the POTUS. If Conyers doesn't like dicking around, and we have emails proving the gumming to death strategy is in full force, why would he go to the courts?
Also, on the subpoena, at the end it said that the person delivering the documents (is that Alberto?) is "not to depart without leave of said committee or subcommittee." So maybe if Gonzo doesn't produce, they can just lock him away in the House.
Posted by: tomj | April 10, 2007 at 22:32
---------
I wonder if the WH tech people image the computers (that is, make a copy of all the stuff that's on them) in case they need to restore or rebuild it? Would that include any e-mail that's on it, in Outlook or whatever program they use? Who would have control of the images? Could the committees get hold of those?
(Just thinking off the top of my head. The company I work for does archive e-mails. Don't know for how long, but we're expected to keep the business stuff for legal reasons.)
Posted by: P J Evans | April 10, 2007 at 22:49
---------
It might be a good idea to run the Abramoff stuff through again, looking for USA and voting stuff. (I just did a quick pass through).
Susan Ralston was using addresses at rnchq.org in 2001-2002 and georgewbush.com in 2002-2004.
There's also an e-mail from Abramoff complaining about something getting into the WH e-mail system in 2003 (932_001 p 14 of 52, or p 16 of 52 - I was sticking it in a Notepad file and the system hung before I could save or post.)
Posted by: P J Evans | April 10, 2007 at 23:59
---------
bcc: data is very important, and I forgot about it. Conyers has good staff.
We still also haven't seen emails originating from RNC servers, only ones cited in .gov server replies. And native format plus metadata also means the revision history of Word documents, which provides dating evidence on docs that had been collaboratively edited.
I hope that Conyers can do a tag-team with Waxmanon this w/r/t security and archiving requirements. Because I'm pretty certain that a free-and-clear backchannel and a security clearance are mutually exclusive.
Posted by: pseudonymous in nc | April 11, 2007 at 00:46
---------
I realize we're a ways yet from the point where this is a concern, but might not the RNC have a slight problem of its own, you know, potentially, if e-mails discussing obstruction of justice schemes show up on servers it let people use? Especially since they seem to be holding the beneficial end of a lot of those schemes. At least, might they not have to explain some things in public about how they determine who uses their stuff and what kinds of business-like monitoring they do?
I wonder if the party has missed their chance to cut these guys loose—if that were possible.
Posted by: prostratedragon | April 11, 2007 at 03:06
---------
ew,
I'll say this. Conyers has a good technical staff. I especially like the bit requesting the DOJ to image the computers of folks in the White House and at the RNC. The only bit I'm unclear on is whether he actually requested the physical computers of the people who left the DOJ (Sampson, Goodling, Battle). If I were running this show, I would definitely want those.
It's obvious from the document dumps so far that several important pieces of the puzzle are being held back. For example, we clearly don't have the first version of Sampson's Word document (USA Replacement Plan.doc) because in the earliest version from the document dump, Iglesias has already been tacked on at the end (out of order).
By the way, I'm absolutely serious about volunteering. If Conyers wants help, I'll take the time off from my day job and go to D.C. Piecing this stuff together can be tedious, but it is more rewarding than finishing the Sunday NYT Crossword.
Posted by: William Ockham | April 11, 2007 at 09:00
---------
Keep in mind that the more detailed citations were from April 2, when Conyers was still operating under the assumption of cooperation. I think he was just saying, "we'll be wanting Monica's computer," at that point, which would be consistent with his request elsewhere in the letter that they hold onto things.
But then we've got another few layers of escalation before the Seargant at Arms goes and seizes Monica's computer. Luckily, computers don't have Fifth Amendment privileges.
Posted by: emptywheel | April 11, 2007 at 09:41
---------
It just dawned on me why Conyers is suspicious of bcc's. There are at least a few occasions where Kyle Sampson forwarded an email his own account. The only reason I've ever seen to do that is so you can bcc somebody else (although in more recent versions of Outlook you don't need to do that, you can bcc somebody without anyone in the to: field). Again, somebody working for Conyers has been around the block a time or two.
Posted by: William Ockham | April 11, 2007 at 10:30
---------
EW--Do we assume that Pat Fitzgerald knows about the RNC emails? He is too smart to have missed that trick unless he was lied to about that and told that the RNC emails contained no official White House business? The discovery requests included emails but did they specify emails only from the White House server when KR was doing 90% of his from his RNC account/s?
And one more thing, please WO, call Conyers office, even if their tech person picks your brain to make sure they've covered everything.
Posted by: Jane S. | April 11, 2007 at 11:17
---------
ew,
Take a look at OAG000000239 - 241 (pg. 54-56 of DOJDocsPt7-2070319.pdf). Michael Elston sends an email with the subject "Without Cause" [Quote marks in the original] to Sampson, Scolinos, Roehrkasse, Goodling, and Moschella. Elston sends the email at 10:07 pm on 01/17/2007. At 10:11pm, Sampson hits "Reply All" and responds "Got it." At 1012pm, Sampson forwards the email to his own account. The only reasonable explanation for that is so he could bcc somebody else. I'll make a wild guess that the account that was bcc'ed was kr@georgewbush.com.
Posted by: William Ockham | April 11, 2007 at 11:31
---------
WO
Or, at the very least, AGAG. After all, one or the other scenario is what happened with the other forwarded email we were talking about.
In other words, either ROve or AGAG were informed of every step of this process. But they don't want us to know taht.
Posted by: emptywheel | April 11, 2007 at 11:57
---------
Rove, obviously. They could never have counted on Alberto keeping things straight.
Posted by: Mimikatz | April 11, 2007 at 12:28
---------
ew,
I don't think AGAG uses email much. On a slightly related note, I think Conyers, et. al., might want to start a conversation with RIM (the Canadian firm that runs the Blackberry Service) to see what they may have in the way of responsive documents.
Posted by: William Ockham | April 11, 2007 at 12:35
---------
Agree with both of you--it's most likely Rove. Just wanted to raise the possibility it's AGAG, bc it would explain why he's so damn flummoxed right now. Then again, so would Mimikatz' eplanation: he's flummoxed because he can't keep things straight.
Posted by: emptywheel | April 11, 2007 at 12:41
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
The Bushies are going to fight the subpoena; they have to. There's no way in hell they can let those documents and emails see the light of day. Anyone who's been paying attention knows that the Bushies are done, deader than doornails, if they obey the subpeona(s).
So what will they do? Seems to me the WH only has two options:
1. Just ignore the subpoenas, which would mean finding the WH/DoJ in contempt. Does Congress go to the court then? Or send the Sargeant-at-Arms to enforce the subpeonas?
2. Comply in dribs and drabs. This seems a likelier scenario, since it avoids a legal showdown. Unless the Committees call them on it - but can they? They'd be working with an obvious but unprovable assertion that the response is dilatory. Can they issue a contempt order for foot-dragging?
Assuming either one, where does that leave Gonzales' appointment to testify on the 17th?
If the WH delays or ignores the supbpoenas, would Congress reschedule his testimony for after the showdown over the subpeonas? Or would the hearing go forward, and the subpoena fight continue at the same time?
Posted by: CaseyL | April 10, 2007 at 19:17
---------
Gonzales still testifies. Even if he resigns first, he still testifies. If he doesn't show, subpoena his ass.
I don't think he's going to show.
Posted by: tekel | April 10, 2007 at 20:05
---------
CaseyL--I don't see how they're going to fight this. If they miss the deadline, I think Conyers is just going to send the Sergeant-at-Arms over there to confiscate the computers. This has "last chance" written all over it.
Posted by: Frank Probst | April 10, 2007 at 20:07
---------
I'll agree with Casey, because there's so much there to hide. Part of the problem for the D's is that because they allowed W to pack the courts with ideologues, they may actually lose the rulings even though they have a strong objective case.
It's all about protecting W, Cheney,and Karl, at all costs.
Posted by: rugger9 | April 10, 2007 at 20:09
---------
TPM says the DoJ will fight the subpeonas as overly broad and intrusive.
A commenter there noted that neither the Senate nor the House has the authority to "civilly" enforce a subpoena, or a contempt order. I don't know if that means Congress does have authority to enforce a criminal order - and I don't know if Congress has the authority to even issue a criminal citation.
It'll have to go to the courts. That runs out the clock, if nothing else.
Posted by: CaseyL | April 10, 2007 at 20:48
---------
Conyers' people came across something big. They have Abu by the short hairs, and they showed just enough to let him know he's screwed no matter what, and big time. And so the subpoena is really just an invitation to get him a little bit off the hook. He's still going to be hooked. If this goes to the Supremes, and it surely will, the DOJ will lose. And though people still talk about running out the clock, remember, it's April 2007, and the clock will run to around September 2008. They've got lots of time, and lots of time to Impeach Bush in December 2008 to cut off the pardons.
Posted by: knut wicksell | April 10, 2007 at 20:49
---------
knut
We don't have that much time. At least in my state (one USA purged, the other seemingly bought off), the voter purge they've got planned will already be well under way.
They need to get Gonzales and Bush out by July 2008 at the latest if we really want to ensure the USA purge doesn't have its desired effect.
Posted by: emptywheel | April 10, 2007 at 20:52
---------
Oh man, I've been waiting for them to ask for this. I wonder if they'll release the files on their website. If not, I'll happily volunteer to help with the forensics.
Posted by: William Ockham | April 10, 2007 at 20:59
---------
Please do, WO, I haven't seen you this engaged since we considered how Rove's Hadley email could have escaped detection. I think we've got a pretty good idea of how that may have happened. But the technical fun, it seems, is just starting.
I'd be curious, btw, if you put a comment up about the full letter to Hertling. I skimmed the interesting non-technical details, but I'm curious if you think Conyers hit all the possible high spots.
Posted by: emptywheel | April 10, 2007 at 21:14
---------
Casey,
The House has no civil contempt procedure. The Senate does, but it's not available as against executive branch actors. But either House may avail itself of criminal contempt, either statutory or inherent. Since statutory contempt is prosecuted at the discretion of the US Attorney for the District of Columbia, that's an unlikely route. Inherent contempt, however, is prosecuted and adjudicated by the aggrieved House itself.
That's the only real answer to this problem. Unfortunately, key members of the leadership still believe that going to court is a feasible option. If the "administration" simply flatly defies the subpoenas, I don't think the courts will find a justiciable question, at least in the first instance. I think they'll dismiss it as a political question, at least if the "administration" simply refuses to acknowledge the right of the legislative branch to compel action by the executive.
Posted by: Kagro X | April 10, 2007 at 21:44
---------
Thanks, Kagro; that's exactly the information I was looking for.
Assuming the Senate and House do issue contempt orders, is that when the Sgt at Arms has to go serve/enforce them?
Does he take law enforcement officers? Assistants? Dollies and a Mack truck?
Does he have the authority to enter the building, and offices, and take file cabinets, computers, Blackberries, etc.?
Posted by: CaseyL | April 10, 2007 at 22:09
---------
I agree with everyone here about the big picture. But I wonder about the "little people" involved.
It is one thing for Fielding to order dribs and drabs to be released, and for gwb to declare "never in hell" and string out the legal case in the courts. I agree with everyone that that is likely.
But what is the liability of the staff attorneys in the Office of Counsel who read and physically segregate documents. When the Dems take over in January 2009 will the loyal service of the staff attorneys look like obstruction of justice?
Are there safe areas, danger areas and gray areas? What can they do safely? What can they safely pretend to know or not know?
And, by the way, who are these people?
Posted by: jwp | April 10, 2007 at 22:10
---------
Seems to me that Conyers and his staff have been ahead of the blogs suggestions. Is it possible that we should consider how exactly the Sergeant At Arms would go about his/her business? How does that work.[?] Apparently they have the right to arrest and detain even the POTUS. If Conyers doesn't like dicking around, and we have emails proving the gumming to death strategy is in full force, why would he go to the courts?
Also, on the subpoena, at the end it said that the person delivering the documents (is that Alberto?) is "not to depart without leave of said committee or subcommittee." So maybe if Gonzo doesn't produce, they can just lock him away in the House.
Posted by: tomj | April 10, 2007 at 22:32
---------
I wonder if the WH tech people image the computers (that is, make a copy of all the stuff that's on them) in case they need to restore or rebuild it? Would that include any e-mail that's on it, in Outlook or whatever program they use? Who would have control of the images? Could the committees get hold of those?
(Just thinking off the top of my head. The company I work for does archive e-mails. Don't know for how long, but we're expected to keep the business stuff for legal reasons.)
Posted by: P J Evans | April 10, 2007 at 22:49
---------
It might be a good idea to run the Abramoff stuff through again, looking for USA and voting stuff. (I just did a quick pass through).
Susan Ralston was using addresses at rnchq.org in 2001-2002 and georgewbush.com in 2002-2004.
There's also an e-mail from Abramoff complaining about something getting into the WH e-mail system in 2003 (932_001 p 14 of 52, or p 16 of 52 - I was sticking it in a Notepad file and the system hung before I could save or post.)
Posted by: P J Evans | April 10, 2007 at 23:59
---------
bcc: data is very important, and I forgot about it. Conyers has good staff.
We still also haven't seen emails originating from RNC servers, only ones cited in .gov server replies. And native format plus metadata also means the revision history of Word documents, which provides dating evidence on docs that had been collaboratively edited.
I hope that Conyers can do a tag-team with Waxmanon this w/r/t security and archiving requirements. Because I'm pretty certain that a free-and-clear backchannel and a security clearance are mutually exclusive.
Posted by: pseudonymous in nc | April 11, 2007 at 00:46
---------
I realize we're a ways yet from the point where this is a concern, but might not the RNC have a slight problem of its own, you know, potentially, if e-mails discussing obstruction of justice schemes show up on servers it let people use? Especially since they seem to be holding the beneficial end of a lot of those schemes. At least, might they not have to explain some things in public about how they determine who uses their stuff and what kinds of business-like monitoring they do?
I wonder if the party has missed their chance to cut these guys loose—if that were possible.
Posted by: prostratedragon | April 11, 2007 at 03:06
---------
ew,
I'll say this. Conyers has a good technical staff. I especially like the bit requesting the DOJ to image the computers of folks in the White House and at the RNC. The only bit I'm unclear on is whether he actually requested the physical computers of the people who left the DOJ (Sampson, Goodling, Battle). If I were running this show, I would definitely want those.
It's obvious from the document dumps so far that several important pieces of the puzzle are being held back. For example, we clearly don't have the first version of Sampson's Word document (USA Replacement Plan.doc) because in the earliest version from the document dump, Iglesias has already been tacked on at the end (out of order).
By the way, I'm absolutely serious about volunteering. If Conyers wants help, I'll take the time off from my day job and go to D.C. Piecing this stuff together can be tedious, but it is more rewarding than finishing the Sunday NYT Crossword.
Posted by: William Ockham | April 11, 2007 at 09:00
---------
Keep in mind that the more detailed citations were from April 2, when Conyers was still operating under the assumption of cooperation. I think he was just saying, "we'll be wanting Monica's computer," at that point, which would be consistent with his request elsewhere in the letter that they hold onto things.
But then we've got another few layers of escalation before the Seargant at Arms goes and seizes Monica's computer. Luckily, computers don't have Fifth Amendment privileges.
Posted by: emptywheel | April 11, 2007 at 09:41
---------
It just dawned on me why Conyers is suspicious of bcc's. There are at least a few occasions where Kyle Sampson forwarded an email his own account. The only reason I've ever seen to do that is so you can bcc somebody else (although in more recent versions of Outlook you don't need to do that, you can bcc somebody without anyone in the to: field). Again, somebody working for Conyers has been around the block a time or two.
Posted by: William Ockham | April 11, 2007 at 10:30
---------
EW--Do we assume that Pat Fitzgerald knows about the RNC emails? He is too smart to have missed that trick unless he was lied to about that and told that the RNC emails contained no official White House business? The discovery requests included emails but did they specify emails only from the White House server when KR was doing 90% of his from his RNC account/s?
And one more thing, please WO, call Conyers office, even if their tech person picks your brain to make sure they've covered everything.
Posted by: Jane S. | April 11, 2007 at 11:17
---------
ew,
Take a look at OAG000000239 - 241 (pg. 54-56 of DOJDocsPt7-2070319.pdf). Michael Elston sends an email with the subject "Without Cause" [Quote marks in the original] to Sampson, Scolinos, Roehrkasse, Goodling, and Moschella. Elston sends the email at 10:07 pm on 01/17/2007. At 10:11pm, Sampson hits "Reply All" and responds "Got it." At 1012pm, Sampson forwards the email to his own account. The only reasonable explanation for that is so he could bcc somebody else. I'll make a wild guess that the account that was bcc'ed was kr@georgewbush.com.
Posted by: William Ockham | April 11, 2007 at 11:31
---------
WO
Or, at the very least, AGAG. After all, one or the other scenario is what happened with the other forwarded email we were talking about.
In other words, either ROve or AGAG were informed of every step of this process. But they don't want us to know taht.
Posted by: emptywheel | April 11, 2007 at 11:57
---------
Rove, obviously. They could never have counted on Alberto keeping things straight.
Posted by: Mimikatz | April 11, 2007 at 12:28
---------
ew,
I don't think AGAG uses email much. On a slightly related note, I think Conyers, et. al., might want to start a conversation with RIM (the Canadian firm that runs the Blackberry Service) to see what they may have in the way of responsive documents.
Posted by: William Ockham | April 11, 2007 at 12:35
---------
Agree with both of you--it's most likely Rove. Just wanted to raise the possibility it's AGAG, bc it would explain why he's so damn flummoxed right now. Then again, so would Mimikatz' eplanation: he's flummoxed because he can't keep things straight.
Posted by: emptywheel | April 11, 2007 at 12:41
Monday, April 9, 2007
Secret Code -- Change The Subject!
Linked through from Crooks & Liars:
As Mark here points out, what does Plamegate have to do with Dr. Murphy's no-fly-list experiences and complaints? And what kind of 6th-grader mentality is the commenters' practice of insulting someone by de-capitalizing their name? Please. No wonder nothing can be taken seriously anymore.
I'm actually more surprised that they didn't jump all over Allen, below, for not believing Murphy's account. Ed.
-----------------------------------------------------------
How much is Bart DePalma being paid to divert our attention from the issue of the misuse of the terrorist watch list?
After all, none of the things he brings up have to do with the topic of the post, which is a clearly sourced story that illustrates how the Constitution is being dismantled by the Bush Administration.
Further, wasting the TSA's time harassing an "enemies list" is not the way to fight the real threat of terrorism. And why does "Brad" want us not to focus on this? Is Brad actually writing from Pakistan?
# posted by Mark : 8:10 PM
-----------------------------------------------------------
Everybody knows that Valerie Plame sent her lucky-ducky husband Joseph Wilson on a vacation junket to Niger. That trip was a completely government-funded boondoggle. Likely as not, Joseph Wilson spent his entire trip sipping cool juices on the verandas of colonial villas while being fanned by the lovely women of Niger. What's some "former ambassador" going to know about gather intelligence? Nothing, that's what. Hence the juices and gals.
Oh, and every right-thinking person knows that Richard Armitage unknowingly and without the slightest criminal intent let slip Valerie Plame's name a good, you know, 3-9 days before His Hoary Eminence Robert Novak ever heard about her from that innocent victim of a partisan witchhunt Scooter Libby.
# posted by Bart Depalma Jr. : 3:57 PM
----------
Although less lethal, it is of the same evil ilk as punishing Ambassador Joseph Wilson for criticizing Bush's false claims by "outing" his wife, Valerie Plaime
I'd have a bit more respect for the good professor if he was not repeating long disproven nonsense such as this. It makes me wonder about his concern for the facts in other cases, such as his encounter with the TSA.
# posted by flenser : 4:39 PM
----------
One of the two people to whom I talked asked a question and offered a frightening comment: "Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that." I explained that I had not so marched but had, in September, 2006, given a lecture at Princeton, televised and put on the Web, highly critical of George Bush for his many violations of the Constitution. "That'll do it," the man said.
That part of the story seems a little over the top to me. I just can't imagine anyone affiliated with the airlines or with security saying "we ban a lot of people from flying because of that." I don't think they would have a job for very long, and for that reason, I don't believe it was said. It makes the whole story somewhat unbelievable, IMHO. Not to say it didn't happen, but it is hard to believe.
# posted by Allen : 5:12 PM
----------
I'd have a bit more respect for the good professor if he was not repeating long disproven nonsense such as this. It makes me wonder about his concern for the facts in other cases, such as his encounter with the TSA.
I'm curious where and how you believe that "this" -- i.e., the outing of Plame in order to punish Wilson for his criticisms of the Administration -- was "disproven".
# posted by Mark Field : 5:49 PM
-----------
Mr. depalma
If you are so knowledgeable of the Plame case then perhaps you also know that Valerie Wilson DID NOT send her husband to Niger. She was asked to sound him out about going by other CIA officials.
Wilson had experience in Niger and it was thought he would be able to obtain any information about Iraq trying to buy yellow cake.
You must also know Valerie Wilson was pregnant at the time and would not want her husband gone if she could help it.
You would also be knowledgeable of how it came to be perceived that she sent her husband on the trip..a perception not investigated by either Rove or Cheney they just decided using this to discredit Wilson was more important than being truthful...something they excel at.
It appears you have selective studied the case and the facts.
# posted by Legerdmain : 6:22 PM
-----------
Mark Field said...
I'm curious where and how you believe that "this" -- i.e., the outing of Plame in order to punish Wilson for his criticisms of the Administration -- was "disproven".
Novak and his colleagues discovered the information about Plame weeks before Wilson lied in his NYT op-ed about finding no evidence in Niger that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium.
Novak and his colleges initiated the contacts with the Bush Administration, not the other way around.
Novak's initial source was a state department war critic who had no ax to grind with Wilson.
# posted by Bart DePalma : 7:13 PM
-----------
Legerdmain said...
Mr. depalma, If you are so knowledgeable of the Plame case then perhaps you also know that Valerie Wilson DID NOT send her husband to Niger. She was asked to sound him out about going by other CIA officials.
This is in dispute. The initial CIA source who claimed that Plame recommended her husband changed his story later on. Plame did not comment on her role for a long time and has recently testified to Congress under oath that she did not recommend Wilson.
In any case, what got the VP's office so ticked off was that Wilson lied about being sent by the VP's office to Niger. Why would Wilson make up this story if not to protect the person which did send him? If that person was a simple functionary at the CIA WMD office, the lie makes no sense. If it was a case of nepotism by his wife, the lie makes much more sense.
Wilson had experience in Niger and it was thought he would be able to obtain any information about Iraq trying to buy yellow cake.
Wilson was and is a political operative who had no background in WMD. The fact that Wilson was unqualified for the job and a Dem political operative was what caused Novak to wonder why the Bushies would have sent Wilson in the first place.
You must also know Valerie Wilson was pregnant at the time and would not want her husband gone if she could help it.
Right. And that is why she either recommended Wilson or at the very least helped recruit him.
You need to take what Wilson and Plame have with an enormous grain of salt.
Wilson is a political partisan with a long track record of self serving lies.
Plame has been assisting him in this smear campaign so her political motives are also suspect.
Plame and Wilson are parties to a lawsuit against members of the Bush Administration seeking money damages.
# posted by Bart DePalma : 7:32 PM
-----------
I'm curious where and how you believe that "this" -- i.e., the outing of Plame in order to punish Wilson for his criticisms of the Administration -- was "disproven".
# posted by Mark Field
Flenser has Stop The ACLU on his blogroll and reads The Anchoress.
Don't wear all black in D.C.
FBI Collected Intel on War Protesters in D.C., Lied About It
Where were all these skeptics back in 2003 before we invaded Iraq illegally based on lies?
El Cid's advice to us over at Glenn Greenwald's regarding Shooter 242, Bart's smarter brother:
Is this what people need to be filling up these pages with? Debating with someone who actually perceives a risk that the U.S. is in danger of 'surrendering' to an Islamic Caliphate and we risk in 50 years being forced to pray to Mecca 5 times a day?
If someone here raises a truly interesting point worthy of debate, then by all means, debate it.
But if someone declares in a snide aside that "What are you liberals going to do when the mole-men hatch from their lava eggs and start forcing the human women to bear their larval children?", do the readers of this blog really have to fill up 50 pages to respond to such mentally ill paranoia?
Heh.
# posted by JT Davis : 7:37 PM
-------------
bart, the dems will do you a big solid and investigate this along with all the other crime your "leaders" have engaged in, including stolen elections. Very few will escape without the moron-in-chief exercising pardon powers that won't extend to himself. You're in for a bad time, as supporters of criminals and torturers should be.
# posted by Ron : 7:38 PM
-------------
People should know that there is no purpose served in discussing these things with bart depalma. Clearly he suffers from a personality disorder that prevents him from noticing obvious things. He could probably be standing on a beach and insist that there was no ocean.
I don't quite understand why he thinks "hiring or firing" subordinates shouldn't be of interest to Congress, when the people who tasked to defend these decisions have repeatedly lied to Congress. Lying to Congress is a crime, after all.
It is interesting to see somebody so blithely uninterested in the idea that a US federal prosecutor could be fired because he refuses to engage in politically-motivated prosecutions during election season, or another prosecutor fired because she has been systematically indicting and convicting a Republican congressman and his cronies. But depalma is an intellectual lightweight. He problem thinks that the prosecutors were fired because of performance issues.
It's not an explanation that bears up under scrutiny, but scrutiny is not something that a person like mr. deplama does well.
# posted by whispers : 8:07 PM
-------------
depalma
Wilson was sent to Niger to investigate yellowcake sales not WMDs, ust yellowcake. He is and was familiar with Niger since all his diplomatic postings were in Africa.
I am also curious as to why a career CIA officer whose current job at the time of your nepotism accusation was about WMDs would send her husband on a boondoggle to Africa? I know, even though she had been covert for many years she was secretly plotting the destruction of the Bush administration.
Do you know why Cheney and Rove jumped on the boondoggle angle? Because someone from another agency wrote a memo about the Joe wilson debriefing meeting at the CIA. This guy came in late and asked who had chaired the meeting and was told Wilson's wife introduced him...which it turned out is all she did as she left and went back to her job.
You have nothing credible to substantiate your allegations but like so many others it isn't a dispassionate analysis of facts you are interested in, just dogma and agenda.
# posted by Legerdmain : 8:09 PM
-------------
Holy crap Bartman, where'd you find these people.
Stop dredging them up from the musty backrooms of CPUSA.
And I used to think Arne was bad . . .
# posted by Someone : 8:16 PM
-------------
If true, and unfortunately I find it all too unlikely, then it is precisely of a part with the firing of US Attorneys. "Bart Depalma"--Can you not see this such as abuse flows from the politicizing of government? Government should be used to reward loyal Bushies and punish those who dare to disagree with King George?
How low have we sunk as a democracy that "someone" can write such drivel with a smug sense of righteousness: "I think we all agree that someone shouldn't be on a terrorist watch list even if they participated in a peace march." Yes, even if.
"But .... some individuals associated with the sponsors of the so-called "peace marches" are affilitiated with less than reputable organization that might warrant scrutiny."
A selective police state. Marvelous.
Why oh why do you hate us for our freedoms?
# posted by Tara : 9:27 PM
------------
I've seen a lot of comments about a lot of different issues but Mr. DePalma's deranged drivel about The Plame Affair may take the prize.
Not one assertion true.
A sense of pathetic outrage that 'folks' won't 'believe' the way the Fascist Scum Cheney and Bush want them to.
The man must be scared witless.
# posted by A. Citizen : 9:34 PM
As Mark here points out, what does Plamegate have to do with Dr. Murphy's no-fly-list experiences and complaints? And what kind of 6th-grader mentality is the commenters' practice of insulting someone by de-capitalizing their name? Please. No wonder nothing can be taken seriously anymore.
I'm actually more surprised that they didn't jump all over Allen, below, for not believing Murphy's account. Ed.
-----------------------------------------------------------
How much is Bart DePalma being paid to divert our attention from the issue of the misuse of the terrorist watch list?
After all, none of the things he brings up have to do with the topic of the post, which is a clearly sourced story that illustrates how the Constitution is being dismantled by the Bush Administration.
Further, wasting the TSA's time harassing an "enemies list" is not the way to fight the real threat of terrorism. And why does "Brad" want us not to focus on this? Is Brad actually writing from Pakistan?
# posted by Mark : 8:10 PM
-----------------------------------------------------------
Everybody knows that Valerie Plame sent her lucky-ducky husband Joseph Wilson on a vacation junket to Niger. That trip was a completely government-funded boondoggle. Likely as not, Joseph Wilson spent his entire trip sipping cool juices on the verandas of colonial villas while being fanned by the lovely women of Niger. What's some "former ambassador" going to know about gather intelligence? Nothing, that's what. Hence the juices and gals.
Oh, and every right-thinking person knows that Richard Armitage unknowingly and without the slightest criminal intent let slip Valerie Plame's name a good, you know, 3-9 days before His Hoary Eminence Robert Novak ever heard about her from that innocent victim of a partisan witchhunt Scooter Libby.
# posted by Bart Depalma Jr. : 3:57 PM
----------
Although less lethal, it is of the same evil ilk as punishing Ambassador Joseph Wilson for criticizing Bush's false claims by "outing" his wife, Valerie Plaime
I'd have a bit more respect for the good professor if he was not repeating long disproven nonsense such as this. It makes me wonder about his concern for the facts in other cases, such as his encounter with the TSA.
# posted by flenser : 4:39 PM
----------
One of the two people to whom I talked asked a question and offered a frightening comment: "Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that." I explained that I had not so marched but had, in September, 2006, given a lecture at Princeton, televised and put on the Web, highly critical of George Bush for his many violations of the Constitution. "That'll do it," the man said.
That part of the story seems a little over the top to me. I just can't imagine anyone affiliated with the airlines or with security saying "we ban a lot of people from flying because of that." I don't think they would have a job for very long, and for that reason, I don't believe it was said. It makes the whole story somewhat unbelievable, IMHO. Not to say it didn't happen, but it is hard to believe.
# posted by Allen : 5:12 PM
----------
I'd have a bit more respect for the good professor if he was not repeating long disproven nonsense such as this. It makes me wonder about his concern for the facts in other cases, such as his encounter with the TSA.
I'm curious where and how you believe that "this" -- i.e., the outing of Plame in order to punish Wilson for his criticisms of the Administration -- was "disproven".
# posted by Mark Field : 5:49 PM
-----------
Mr. depalma
If you are so knowledgeable of the Plame case then perhaps you also know that Valerie Wilson DID NOT send her husband to Niger. She was asked to sound him out about going by other CIA officials.
Wilson had experience in Niger and it was thought he would be able to obtain any information about Iraq trying to buy yellow cake.
You must also know Valerie Wilson was pregnant at the time and would not want her husband gone if she could help it.
You would also be knowledgeable of how it came to be perceived that she sent her husband on the trip..a perception not investigated by either Rove or Cheney they just decided using this to discredit Wilson was more important than being truthful...something they excel at.
It appears you have selective studied the case and the facts.
# posted by Legerdmain : 6:22 PM
-----------
Mark Field said...
I'm curious where and how you believe that "this" -- i.e., the outing of Plame in order to punish Wilson for his criticisms of the Administration -- was "disproven".
Novak and his colleagues discovered the information about Plame weeks before Wilson lied in his NYT op-ed about finding no evidence in Niger that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium.
Novak and his colleges initiated the contacts with the Bush Administration, not the other way around.
Novak's initial source was a state department war critic who had no ax to grind with Wilson.
# posted by Bart DePalma : 7:13 PM
-----------
Legerdmain said...
Mr. depalma, If you are so knowledgeable of the Plame case then perhaps you also know that Valerie Wilson DID NOT send her husband to Niger. She was asked to sound him out about going by other CIA officials.
This is in dispute. The initial CIA source who claimed that Plame recommended her husband changed his story later on. Plame did not comment on her role for a long time and has recently testified to Congress under oath that she did not recommend Wilson.
In any case, what got the VP's office so ticked off was that Wilson lied about being sent by the VP's office to Niger. Why would Wilson make up this story if not to protect the person which did send him? If that person was a simple functionary at the CIA WMD office, the lie makes no sense. If it was a case of nepotism by his wife, the lie makes much more sense.
Wilson had experience in Niger and it was thought he would be able to obtain any information about Iraq trying to buy yellow cake.
Wilson was and is a political operative who had no background in WMD. The fact that Wilson was unqualified for the job and a Dem political operative was what caused Novak to wonder why the Bushies would have sent Wilson in the first place.
You must also know Valerie Wilson was pregnant at the time and would not want her husband gone if she could help it.
Right. And that is why she either recommended Wilson or at the very least helped recruit him.
You need to take what Wilson and Plame have with an enormous grain of salt.
Wilson is a political partisan with a long track record of self serving lies.
Plame has been assisting him in this smear campaign so her political motives are also suspect.
Plame and Wilson are parties to a lawsuit against members of the Bush Administration seeking money damages.
# posted by Bart DePalma : 7:32 PM
-----------
I'm curious where and how you believe that "this" -- i.e., the outing of Plame in order to punish Wilson for his criticisms of the Administration -- was "disproven".
# posted by Mark Field
Flenser has Stop The ACLU on his blogroll and reads The Anchoress.
Don't wear all black in D.C.
FBI Collected Intel on War Protesters in D.C., Lied About It
Where were all these skeptics back in 2003 before we invaded Iraq illegally based on lies?
El Cid's advice to us over at Glenn Greenwald's regarding Shooter 242, Bart's smarter brother:
Is this what people need to be filling up these pages with? Debating with someone who actually perceives a risk that the U.S. is in danger of 'surrendering' to an Islamic Caliphate and we risk in 50 years being forced to pray to Mecca 5 times a day?
If someone here raises a truly interesting point worthy of debate, then by all means, debate it.
But if someone declares in a snide aside that "What are you liberals going to do when the mole-men hatch from their lava eggs and start forcing the human women to bear their larval children?", do the readers of this blog really have to fill up 50 pages to respond to such mentally ill paranoia?
Heh.
# posted by JT Davis : 7:37 PM
-------------
bart, the dems will do you a big solid and investigate this along with all the other crime your "leaders" have engaged in, including stolen elections. Very few will escape without the moron-in-chief exercising pardon powers that won't extend to himself. You're in for a bad time, as supporters of criminals and torturers should be.
# posted by Ron : 7:38 PM
-------------
People should know that there is no purpose served in discussing these things with bart depalma. Clearly he suffers from a personality disorder that prevents him from noticing obvious things. He could probably be standing on a beach and insist that there was no ocean.
I don't quite understand why he thinks "hiring or firing" subordinates shouldn't be of interest to Congress, when the people who tasked to defend these decisions have repeatedly lied to Congress. Lying to Congress is a crime, after all.
It is interesting to see somebody so blithely uninterested in the idea that a US federal prosecutor could be fired because he refuses to engage in politically-motivated prosecutions during election season, or another prosecutor fired because she has been systematically indicting and convicting a Republican congressman and his cronies. But depalma is an intellectual lightweight. He problem thinks that the prosecutors were fired because of performance issues.
It's not an explanation that bears up under scrutiny, but scrutiny is not something that a person like mr. deplama does well.
# posted by whispers : 8:07 PM
-------------
depalma
Wilson was sent to Niger to investigate yellowcake sales not WMDs, ust yellowcake. He is and was familiar with Niger since all his diplomatic postings were in Africa.
I am also curious as to why a career CIA officer whose current job at the time of your nepotism accusation was about WMDs would send her husband on a boondoggle to Africa? I know, even though she had been covert for many years she was secretly plotting the destruction of the Bush administration.
Do you know why Cheney and Rove jumped on the boondoggle angle? Because someone from another agency wrote a memo about the Joe wilson debriefing meeting at the CIA. This guy came in late and asked who had chaired the meeting and was told Wilson's wife introduced him...which it turned out is all she did as she left and went back to her job.
You have nothing credible to substantiate your allegations but like so many others it isn't a dispassionate analysis of facts you are interested in, just dogma and agenda.
# posted by Legerdmain : 8:09 PM
-------------
Holy crap Bartman, where'd you find these people.
Stop dredging them up from the musty backrooms of CPUSA.
And I used to think Arne was bad . . .
# posted by Someone : 8:16 PM
-------------
If true, and unfortunately I find it all too unlikely, then it is precisely of a part with the firing of US Attorneys. "Bart Depalma"--Can you not see this such as abuse flows from the politicizing of government? Government should be used to reward loyal Bushies and punish those who dare to disagree with King George?
How low have we sunk as a democracy that "someone" can write such drivel with a smug sense of righteousness: "I think we all agree that someone shouldn't be on a terrorist watch list even if they participated in a peace march." Yes, even if.
"But .... some individuals associated with the sponsors of the so-called "peace marches" are affilitiated with less than reputable organization that might warrant scrutiny."
A selective police state. Marvelous.
Why oh why do you hate us for our freedoms?
# posted by Tara : 9:27 PM
------------
I've seen a lot of comments about a lot of different issues but Mr. DePalma's deranged drivel about The Plame Affair may take the prize.
Not one assertion true.
A sense of pathetic outrage that 'folks' won't 'believe' the way the Fascist Scum Cheney and Bush want them to.
The man must be scared witless.
# posted by A. Citizen : 9:34 PM
Saturday, April 7, 2007
GOPwarts' War OF Terror
From WORDS OF WISDOM by Richard Power, the only thing wrong here is this:
"Indeed (they) have sided with those who attacked us on 9/11 against those who would have helped us destroy them."
To which I say, "those" people never attacked us on 9/11. Bush/Cheney/CIA, etc., just made it look like they did, just as they're promoting/financing what Pakistani tribe Jundullah is doing to Iran now. Bush/Cheney/CIA wouldn't be able to control "those" terrorists the way that they do, if they were really the enemy.
Think about it. And let the 9/11 Truth movement climb another step toward exposing the monsters. Ed.
-------------
Here's the rest of Richard Power's SPOT ON statement, in context:
Bush-Cheney does not want peace or stability. It does not even want vengence. It wants empire, and it is willing to wage perennial war for it. Bush-Cheney is not running a "war on terror," it is running a war IN, OF, BY and FOR terror.
Indeed they have sided with those who attacked us on 9/11 against those who would have helped us destroy them.
When will the US mainstream news media back away from this treasonous cabal?
Probably never.
The corporatist stranglehold on the US government is in the media moguls' best interests, or so they think.
And Speaker Pelosi, who is third in the line of constitutional succession, is dangerous to them. She symbolizes the restoration of the Republic.
"Indeed (they) have sided with those who attacked us on 9/11 against those who would have helped us destroy them."
To which I say, "those" people never attacked us on 9/11. Bush/Cheney/CIA, etc., just made it look like they did, just as they're promoting/financing what Pakistani tribe Jundullah is doing to Iran now. Bush/Cheney/CIA wouldn't be able to control "those" terrorists the way that they do, if they were really the enemy.
Think about it. And let the 9/11 Truth movement climb another step toward exposing the monsters. Ed.
-------------
Here's the rest of Richard Power's SPOT ON statement, in context:
Bush-Cheney does not want peace or stability. It does not even want vengence. It wants empire, and it is willing to wage perennial war for it. Bush-Cheney is not running a "war on terror," it is running a war IN, OF, BY and FOR terror.
Indeed they have sided with those who attacked us on 9/11 against those who would have helped us destroy them.
When will the US mainstream news media back away from this treasonous cabal?
Probably never.
The corporatist stranglehold on the US government is in the media moguls' best interests, or so they think.
And Speaker Pelosi, who is third in the line of constitutional succession, is dangerous to them. She symbolizes the restoration of the Republic.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
It IS Scarfgate, after all...
How GOPwarts doesn't realize their own idiocy is puzzling. Rove is slipping. Ed.
-The abhorrence of any moderate form of hijab is a brazen embodiment of the U.S.’s fear and intolerance of people of the Muslim faith. A diplomat traveling abroad will obviously strive to adhere to the customs of the host-country, especially in a place of worship. I had thought it was common knowledge that, upon entering a mosque, you must remove your shoes and –if you are female–cover up all exposed skin save the hands and face. I had never thought it strange or extreme, having been raised Greek-orthodox. In addition to the headscarf, we would often have to wear long, black gloves!
The reaction to Mrs. Pelosi’s respectful and no doubt obligatory gesture reveals the ignorance and racism still harbored by most Americans. Hijab to them symbolizes something evil and threatening. It is endlessly frustrating.
Comment by Ariana — April 4, 2007 @ 1:32 pm
-Oh my gosh! THIS is the biggest story of the year so far! Forget all that stuff about Attorneygate or Plamegate or even Sanjaya from American Idol. This is it! Scarfgate!
Comment by Shawn — April 4, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
-It’s not about the scarf. It’s about the Speaker of the House off in a foreign country consorting with terrorists. Are you all really that dense? A rhetorical question based on what I read here.
Comment by David — April 4, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
-I’m laughing as I remember my mom fishing Kleenex out of her purse which she attached to our heads with a bobbypin….in the church vestibule. It was the 60s- if you forgot your hat, you had to substitute a snot rag.
Comment by formercatholic — April 4, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
-The abhorrence of any moderate form of hijab is a brazen embodiment of the U.S.’s fear and intolerance of people of the Muslim faith. A diplomat traveling abroad will obviously strive to adhere to the customs of the host-country, especially in a place of worship. I had thought it was common knowledge that, upon entering a mosque, you must remove your shoes and –if you are female–cover up all exposed skin save the hands and face. I had never thought it strange or extreme, having been raised Greek-orthodox. In addition to the headscarf, we would often have to wear long, black gloves!
The reaction to Mrs. Pelosi’s respectful and no doubt obligatory gesture reveals the ignorance and racism still harbored by most Americans. Hijab to them symbolizes something evil and threatening. It is endlessly frustrating.
Comment by Ariana — April 4, 2007 @ 1:32 pm
-Oh my gosh! THIS is the biggest story of the year so far! Forget all that stuff about Attorneygate or Plamegate or even Sanjaya from American Idol. This is it! Scarfgate!
Comment by Shawn — April 4, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
-It’s not about the scarf. It’s about the Speaker of the House off in a foreign country consorting with terrorists. Are you all really that dense? A rhetorical question based on what I read here.
Comment by David — April 4, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
-I’m laughing as I remember my mom fishing Kleenex out of her purse which she attached to our heads with a bobbypin….in the church vestibule. It was the 60s- if you forgot your hat, you had to substitute a snot rag.
Comment by formercatholic — April 4, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)