Tag: Bush

And the lies just keep on coming.  When Iran announced the existence of its second nuclear site, something the U.S. has apparently known about for years, Barack Obama once again followed Bush-Cheney policy by lying about Iran’s nuclear activities.

Obama joined the leaders of Britain and France in accusing the Islamic republic of clandestinely building an underground plant to make nuclear fuel that could be used to build an atomic bomb. Iranian officials acknowledged the facility but insisted it had been reported to nuclear authorities as required.

Obama should try reading intelligence reports, like 2007’s National Intelligence Estimate (the combined consensus report by all sixteen known U.S. intelligence agencies), which stated quite clearly that there is no concrete evidence of a weapons program in Iran.  In July and August of this year, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed the lack of evidence although it refuses to state anything definitively.  Yet still Obama, the D.C. political establishment, and the corporate media continue to lie to the contrary.

We’ve already been lied into one failed war, lied into ramping up another failed war, are so hurting for fresh soldiers that the Pentagon is now actively accepting white supremacists, yet still the establishment seeks to lie us into another conflict.

For THIS we elected a Democrat to the presidency?

At precisely 2:12 A.M. Eastern Time this diary was deleted from the Daily Kos despite the “Fictional” tag I gave it.  It has been labeled as a “Truther” diary, yet it says right in the tags AND THE FUCKING TITLE it was fictional. So not only does the new Kostapo (trained at this very facility :::shakes fist:::) have a response time of 13 minutes for banning your handle and 2 hours and 12 minutes to delete a diary….but they are also illiterate.  That is all.

(Cross-posted from Daily Kos)

It was the best of times, and then, it was the worst of times.

In June of 1997 the Republicans found themselves marginalized by the prosperity brought about by a slick politician they would later impeach for having “sexual relations” with a woman that wasn’t his wife.

They were bitter, defeated, and were preparing to ascend…with a little help from their friends.

The U.S. News will never ask these basic questions to which there remains no sufficient answers for, even 8 years after the September 11 event.

Thanks to the Asian Times, someone still cares about reality: Fifty Questions On 9/11

I just have to pass this along, from the Asia Times:

Bush’s third term? You’re living it

It sounds like the plot for the latest summer horror movie. Imagine, for a moment, that George W Bush had been allowed a third term as president, had run and had won or stolen it, and that we were all now living (and dying) through it. With the Democrats in control of Congress but Bush still in the Oval Office, the media would certainly be talking endlessly about a mandate for bipartisanship and the importance of taking into account the concerns of Republicans. Can’t you just picture it?

There’s Dubya now, still rewriting laws via signing statements. Still creating and destroying laws with executive orders. And still violating laws at his whim. Imagine Bush continuing his policy of extraordinary rendition, sending prisoners off to other countries with grim interrogation reputations to be held and tortured. I can even picture him formalizing his policy of preventive detention, sprucing it up with some “due process” even as he permanently removes habeas corpus from our culture.

I picture this demonic president still swearing he doesn’t torture, still insisting that he wants to close Guantanamo, but assuring his subordinates that the commander-in-chief has the power to torture “if needed”, and maintaining a prison at Bagram air base in Afghanistan that makes Guantanamo look like summer camp. I can imagine him continuing to keep secret his warrantless spying programs while protecting the corporations and government officials involved.

If Bush were in his third term, we would already have seen him propose, yet again, the largest military budget in the history of the world. We might well have seen him pretend he was including war funding in the standard budget, and then claim that one final supplemental war budget was still needed, immediately after which he would surely announce that yet another war supplemental bill would be needed down the road. And of course, he would have held onto his Secretary of Defense from his second term, Robert Gates, to run the Pentagon, keep our ongoing wars rolling along, and oversee the better part of our public budget.

Bush would undoubtedly be following through on the agreement he signed with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki for all US troops to leave Iraq by the end of 2011 (except where he chose not to follow through). His generals would, in the meantime, be leaking word that the United States never intended to actually leave. He’d surely be maintaining current levels of troops in Iraq, while sending thousands more troops to Afghanistan and talking about a new “surge” there. He’d probably also be escalating the campaign he launched late in his second term to use drone aircraft to illegally and repeatedly strike into Pakistan’s tribal borderlands with Afghanistan.

If Bush were still “the decider” he’d be employing mercenaries like Blackwater and propagandists like the Rendon Group and he might even be expanding the number of private security contractors in Afghanistan. In fact, the whole executive branch would be packed with disreputable corporate executive types. You’d have somebody like John (“May I torture this one some more, please?”) Rizzo still serving, at least for a while, as general counsel at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

The White House and Justice Department would be crawling with corporate cronies, people like John Brennan, Greg Craig, James Jones and Eric Holder. Most of the top prosecutors hired at the Department of Justice for political purposes would still be on the job. And political prisoners, like former Alabama governor Don Siegelman and former top Democratic donor Paul Minor would still be abandoned to their fate.

In addition, the bank bailouts Bush and his economic team initiated in his second term would still be rolling along – with a similar crowd of people running the show. Ben Bernanke, for instance, would certainly have been re-appointed to run the Fed. And Bush’s third term would have guaranteed that there would be none of the monkeying around with the North American Free Trade Agreement that the Democrats proposed or promised in their losing presidential campaign. At this point in Bush’s third term, no significant new effort would have begun to restore Katrina-decimated New Orleans either.

If the Democrats in Congress attempted to pass any set of needed reforms like, to take an example, new healthcare legislation, Bush, the third termer, would have held secret meetings in the White House with insurance and drug company executives to devise a means to turn such proposals to their advantage. And he would have refused to release the visitor logs so that the American public would have no way of knowing just whom he’d been talking to.

In over eight years past now, with all our screaming (rallying, calling, e-mailing, LTE’s, etc.), have we Americans ever gotten anything we’ve felt was the morally and legally correct thing to be done?  Even if anything at all was ever offered, it was but mere “crumbs” – a form of appeasement.  And, then, later, we most always learn there was an underlying reason for not wanting to really deal with the issue.  It seems that we may be in the same place, once again, as concerns investigations and prosecutions of Bush Administration officials, with Holder’s idea being the limited focus on some CIA incidents.

Unrelated?  Many of you are aware of the cases of Siegelman, Scrushy, Minor and Walker and Rove’s * involvement.  Yet, nothing seems to be going anywhere with these cases – status quo!  Some of you may even receive Don Siegelman’s appeal e-mail letters now and again.  Dana Jill Simpson, as many of you will recall, is the attorney that has acted as “whistleblower,” in the Siegelman case.  Her home was burnt down and while driving, she was run off the road after having spoken out the truth.  

Ms. Simpson recently received a tip and one that she followed up on.   Why is that important?  Just read!

Next up!

More of the cheney/bush/republican congress incompetent criminality coming to light, especially out of the VA, while Two Occupations were still ongoing and troops were returning for the care needed, as their brothers and sisters were returning in Flag Draped Coffins!!

IG reports detail abuses in hiring, travel, bonuses at VA technology office

Ray McGovern, in a 2-Part video series, speaks with Jay Paul, Senior Editor of the Real News Network — Revisiting the Downing Street Memo.

While we have mainly focussed our efforts on the torture, McGovern gives us some play by play events and some in-depth observations as to our war of aggression against Iraq.  It is pretty jaw-dropping stuff!

Note this, as well:

With respect to waging a war of aggression-and that is a technical term defined by Nuremberg, the Nuremberg tribunal, which came after World War II. And what they said was that to institute a war of aggression is to commit the supreme international crime, differing from other war crimes only inasmuch as it contains the accumulated evil of the whole.  (emphasis mine)

A war of aggression is the worst crime of all, because “it contains the accumulated evil of the whole.”  Of course, that would include torture, and all the heinous crimes that we know were committed.

and, from the Principles of the Nuremberg Tribunal, 1950, No. 82

Principle Vl

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under; international law:

Crimes against peace:

1–Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in

    violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

2–Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the

    acts mentioned under (i).

Here is Part I:

In Part II, McGovern speaks about “The person that leaked the memo did an ‘incredible’ public service.”

Part II over the jump!

The war in Afghanistan, which we are losing, is costing us $133 million a DAY.   That’s right, $133 million a day.  That’s over 5.5 million dollars an HOUR, every hour, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, forever and ever.

Why forever and ever?  Because we’re losing, not winning.

Says who, you might ask?  Some hand-wringing “liberal”?    No, none other than General Stanley McChrystal, the warmongering, warcriminal in charge of the whole mess for the Americans.

US losing in Afghanistan, top general admit.

The top American commander in Afghanistan declared that the Taliban are winning in Afghanistan in a startling interview published Monday – a striking contrast to the “Mission Accomplished” rhetoric of the Bush Administration as regards Iraq.

His remarks appear carefully tailored to lower expectations and shift public opinion in support of operations in the war-torn country where few foreign powers have ever seen victory. The Taliban ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001, when they were routed by a US invasion.

Currently, US operations in Afghanistan cost taxpayers about $4 billion a month. That comes to roughly $133 million per day, or $5.5 million per hour.

Yeah, but we can’t afford anything here.  California is broke, prisons are melting down as prisoners riot for hours on end, schools are firing teachers, the entire social safety net is being set afire ….. why, so we spend money instead losing in Afghanistan?

Of course this begs the question:  why would the top General there actually admit to losing the war?  Well of course because we’re not spending enough money there yet.  And we’re not killing enough American troops!   So we need more American troops to sacrifice to the volcano gods of war:

McChrystal’s interview also appeared designed to augment support for increasing troop levels in parts of Afghanistan. Since President Barack Obama took office, the Pentagon has increased the number of US troops in the country. The strategy described suggests a “hearts and minds” approach which favors securing civilian areas rather than focusing on full-frontal engagement with militants.

“It’s a very aggressive enemy right now,” the paper quoted Gen. McChrystal as saying. “We’ve got to stop their momentum, stop their initiative. It’s hard work.”

The interview also quotes unnamed US officials arguing for a further increase in US troops.

Now to win an unwinnable war?   Spend more money.   Kill more boys.  Sure.  That works every time.  These people learn nothing from history.   Their egos are so huge they think they cannot lose, and the only reason they are losing is because those jerks in Washington aren’t giving them what they need!   Goddamn those jerks in Washington!   They’re not there man, they don’t know what it’s like!

Well, here’s what it’s like for some of the Afghani people we’re spending $5 million bucks an hour killing:

Killing children doesn’t come cheap.  Hell, you can’t do it here without getting in serious trouble!   But in Afghanistan, you can use the highest tech weaponry in the history of mankind to kill children and it’s just A-OK and the government will keep giving you more!

I think Lasthorseman would like this:

2084