Credit: Get Your War On
Internet muse.
Daring, bold, never sold.
My daily weblog of politics, humor, philosophy...and a constant and nagging reminder of the existence of universal love....
Tuesday, October 07, 2003
Bush hopes says leaker won't be found
Bush
"This is a town where a lot of people leak, and I've constantly expressed my displeasure with leaks, particularly of classified information. I hope we can get this investigation done in a thorough way, as quickly as possible."
George W Bush today, answering press questions after a Cabinet meeting.
Bush turned the questions on reporters at the end of the Cabinet meeting:
"You tell me: how many sources have you had that's leaked information, that you've exposed or had been exposed? Probably none......
I don't know if we're going to find out the senior administration official," Bush said. "I don't have any idea. I'd like to. I want to know the truth."
But, Bush said,
"This is a large administration and there's a lot of senior officials."
"I have no idea whether we'll find out who the leaker is, partially because, in all due respect to your profession, you do a very good job of protecting the leakers," Bush told journalists.
Adding a note of optimism, Bush said, "But we'll find out."
The willingness of journalists to accepts the establishment's view of the events of, and after, 9/11 is truly staggering, says Paul Donovan
Sunday October 5, 2003
"....One of the major weaknesses of journalism today is how easily some are seduced by power. The premier role of the journalist should be as a check on power, however, many seem to turn this dictum on its head and get greater job satisfaction as parrots of the official truth..."
"....It is sad that people had to wait for { Michael } Meacher to put together the strands of 9/11 and where were those expensively paid New York based correspondents on the public health and firefighter stories. The job of the journalist demands more than simply parroting official truths, the public deserve and should get better..."
FAIR GAME- William Rivers Pitt
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 6 October 2003
".....the wives of Bush administration critics are fair game. CIA operatives are likewise fair game. If said CIA operative is working to defend our national security by keeping weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of terrorists, that does not matter, because they are fair game. Also, front companies used to protect the identities of CIA operatives working to defend our national security, and by proxy all of the agents whose lives are protected by that cover, are fair game as well.
Seeing as how this is the case, that the barest standards and principles no longer have a place within this administration, that the national security of the United States can be sacrificed for low-rent political retribution, that George W. Bush and his people have been exposed as the rankest and bloodiest hypocrites in the history of American government, that everything is now fair game, I say let’s have at it. If politics is now nothing more than a WWF cage match, I want in. I have a fighter in my corner who also believes in the idea that everything is fair game.
My fighter is an independent counsel...."
Afghanistan-Taliban's Back / Pakistan- The Grand U.S. Hypocrisy
Pakistan- The Grand U.S. Hypocrisy
I made these observations from recent readings on Stratfor.com:
PAKISTAN
My Question: Isn't it incredibly, incredibly hypocritical and morally twisted that we know Pakistan is supporting terror and testing nuclear weaponry...yet we sell them F16s and pay them off for troops that we cannot get by international consensus?
This is basically what Stratfor.com is telling us:
There is some evidence that the Pakistani government has supported militant groups that cross the borders into Afghanistan and Kashmir.
Washington does not yet have Islamabad's cooperation in surveillance and shutting down the border crossings.
Direct quotes from Stratfor:
"U.S. troops operating in Afghanistan have been unable to chase militant suspects across the border into Pakistan -- and although it would be unpopular to publicly grant them permission to do so, Musharraf could accede to U.S. wishes, provided operations were conducted quietly and perhaps clandestinely.
Debt forgiveness { in the billions } will not be all that U.S. leaders agree to: According to a June 13 report by Defense and Foreign Affairs Daily, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told Indian Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani earlier this month that Washington will resume F-16 sales to Islamabad. (They carry nuclear devices).
News of F-16 sales to Pakistan would raise tensions in India."
~~~~~~~~~~~~
AFGHANISTAN
My Question: Here we are--two years after 9-11...and here is Hamid Karzai, in his position of need to incorporate the Taliban into his nation's political order....
I ask you...how will this move NOT prove a massive failure in the U.S. war on terror? Consider the American lives lost on 9-11. During the Republican National Convention in NYC, you will hear 9-11 used and abused ad nauseum for political gain. Think about that..while you think about Taliban moving into political rule in Afghanistan once again.....are you sick yet????
From Stratfor:
"Afghan President Hamid Karzai recently hinted that he wants to integrate the Taliban into the country's future political order. If true, this would be an about-face from his earlier stance toward the Islamist movement. The contradiction reflects a realization that the Taliban cannot be overlooked in the construction of the new constitutional framework. If he pursues his apparent strategy, Karzai risks getting caught in the cross-fire between the Taliban, his government partners from the Tajik, Uzbek, Hazara and Turkmen tribes and his main supporter, the United States -- with virtually no gains to show for it."
Monday, October 06, 2003
Bring back UN inspectors
Bring back UN inspectors
By Jacqueline Shire, 10/5/2003
"....David Kay's report is an interim one. As National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice noted, analysts are still debriefing Iraqi officials and poring over "miles of documents." This must have brought a smile to the faces of UN inspectors who have spent 12 years analyzing thousands of pages of documentation. Their findings are a matter of public record, and a close reading would show that Iraq must still account for plenty: chemical and biological munitions it claims were destroyed unilaterally, stocks of agent and chemical precursors, drawings, plans, and prototypes for various weapons systems.
Ultimately, this is where the full story of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction will be told -- sorting through the muddled gray area of "unaccounted for" stockpiles and reports of "unconfirmed" destruction.
UN inspectors have a head start, and can do the job for a fraction of the cost..."
U.S. ISRAEL ATTACKS SYRIA
"We've consistently told Syria that it must cease harboring terrorists, and make a clean break from those responsible for planning and directing terrorist attacks from Syrian soil."
Adam Ereli, a State Department spokesman
"Israel has cast its strike against Syria as justifiable in a war against terrorism..."
Douglas Jehl - NY Times
In the NY Times today: "The White House said President Bush had called the Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, after the predawn airstrike and urged him to avoid further heightening tensions in the region. A senior administration official said the United States was seeking "full details" about the raid [in Syria}....But the administration seemed to be avoiding any criticism of the attack, which Israel described as retaliation for the suicide bombing that killed 19 people in Haifa....In its reluctance to criticize the Israeli raid, the American stance was at odds with that of most of Europe and the Arab world, whose leaders roundly condemned what they called a dangerous increase in tensions in the Middle East by Israel."
In the Guardian today, "Islamic Jihad, which admitted responsibility, has once again done grave disservice to the Palestinian cause. But Israel's response to the attack is equally unjustified. Its air raid deep inside Syrian territory was a reckless act typical of Israel's leader, Ariel Sharon. It will dissipate international sympathy and further entrench Arab hostility. Mr Sharon has a genius for putting Israel in the wrong...... As for George Bush, he certainly needs to think again - and act quickly. US pressure on Syria and Iran has been intense of late. Far from reining in Mr Sharon, Washington's effete, partial policy seems to have emboldened him to attack, to escalate, to spread the conflict in the much-abused name of the "war on terror", while actively subverting the road map. This is no Bush-ian vision of a transformed, peaceful Middle East. This is a vision of hell, of a Haifa every day."
Bush twiddles thumbs while a very dangerous Sharon widens and fuels Middle East disaster
The United States, no longer considered a relevant or respected "player" at the U.N., puts in their
barren and hollow two-cents worth:
"..The US ambassador to the UN, John Negroponte, called on all sides to avoid heightening tension.
But he said: "The United States believes that Syria is on the wrong side of the war on terrorism..."
*What's new? The Bush administration is avoiding the Middle East conflict altogether...instead turning the actions from a dangerous Sharon into 'just another day in the war on terror'. Complacency: a recipe for death and destruction in that unfortunate land.*
Dear God....What Has This President Done to Our America?
(Bush Is Mostly Responsible For The Global Collapse In U.S. Support)
Washington Post Editorial
Talking to the World
Monday, October 6, 2003; Page A22
"....The collapse in global support for the United States during the past several years is hard to overstate..."
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Hypocrisy Central: What has this President's administration done to the word..and to the very essence of... "democracy"?
Democracy on Hold
By Fred Hiatt
"......Throughout this administration, there are career bureaucrats and political appointees who are passionately committed to promoting democracy. But at the top, democracy seems to have become an afterthought, except when its championing is politically useful (Iraq, Afghanistan) or relatively cost-free (Burma, Zimbabwe). And even in Burma, it's not clear the administration will spend chits to influence other nations that could help..."
Sunday, October 05, 2003
The Long Haul
The Long Haul
Sunday, October 5, 2003; Page B07
Bush May Be In Too Deep In Iraq Failure To Tell Allies, Iraqis, And The People The Truth
"...The administration has embarked on a high-risk strategy -- that we can fix Iraq better and faster by ourselves than with others -- in the hope that we will win the race between dramatic improvement on the ground and the American people's loss of patience as they come to realize that we are in this largely alone. But to succeed, we need a strategy that is sustainable. As others have said, reconstructing Iraq is a marathon, not the sprint the administration assumed."
Jamie Doran-- 'Afghan Massacre: The Convoy Of Death'
Producer-director of 'Afghan Massacre: The Convoy Of Death'
This interview originally appeared on BuzzFlash, the pro-democracy news source.
This riveting documentary charges that American forces were present at and permitted the massacre of approximately 3,000 Taliban prisoners. Although it has been shown in Europe, "Afghan Massacre: The Convoy of Death" has received virtual little distribution or air time in the United States...."
**Note- It was broadcast tonight over American airwaves..I saw a portion of it on satellite television.**
Dad of slain agent calls CIA's leak 'treason'
Dad of slain agent calls CIA's leak 'treason'
October 3, 2003
BY DEVLIN BARRETT
Chicago Sun Times
WASHINGTON -- The father of slain CIA officer Johnny ''Mike'' Spann said Thursday he believes an independent counsel should investigate allegations that someone in the Bush administration exposed a CIA officer's identity -- an act he called treasonous.
Spann, the first American killed in Afghanistan, died in a prison uprising. His father, also named Johnny Spann, said he is still angry because he feels his son's identity and hometown were disclosed before his son's family could be adequately protected..."
Truth may be slowly emerging about Iraq
by James O. Goldsborough
THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE
October 2, 2003
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~
American voters lose faith in Bush's foreign policy
By Rupert Cornwell in Washington
04 October 2003
Independent UK
Reporters Trapped by a Promise
Unnamed Sources At Issue in CIA Leak
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, October 5, 2003; Page A01
"....There are at least six people in Washington who know the answer to the city's most politically charged mystery in years. And they're not talking.
That's because they're journalists..."
~~ ~~
"...critics say journalists sometimes abuse their power by allowing prosecutors -- such as Kenneth Starr during the Clinton impeachment, or authorities in the sexual assault case against Kobe Bryant -- to leak damaging details without having to go on the record..."
~~ ~~
"..Protecting sources is important, said Joe Conason, a columnist for Salon.com, but sometimes "you reach a breaking point with it."
"The knee-jerk reaction -- 'Oh no, these are sources and we can't talk about it' -- is a little too easy," Conason said. He said most of the journalists who received the CIA information "had this prod from the White House to go after Joe Wilson, and they didn't report that the White House was out to get a critic. Whenever Bill Clinton was seen to be doing something like that, it was always big news."
Saturday, October 04, 2003
Blogger Con
This weekend's Blogger Con
"On Saturday(today), one of the questions we'll consider is if the NY Times should have a weblog.
Let's say you got the job -- you're blogger in chief for the NY Times. What's the first post? How would you work with the reporters? How much writing would you do? How much editing? How much independence would you have? At what point would it no longer be a weblog? Is it enough for it to follow the form, or is there more to it? What would it look like in Year Two? Year Three?
We'll have several experts on the subject, including Len Apcar, editor in chief of New York Times on the Web, to discuss this interesting subject. Who knows, maybe the future BIC of the NYT will be in the room on Saturday..."
Crisis Papers: Whatever would we do without the Internet?
"....It is not too soon for progressives to ponder, “what would we do without the internet?” for it is folly for us to take the internet for granted...."
~~~~~~~~~
Go to:
See the FCC page.
While you're there, you can read about Secretary of State Colin Powell's most recent lie (on On ABC's This Week 9/27/03), when he re-circulated a false story about United Nations weapons inspectors being kicked out of Iraq in 1998.
Some major media outlets let Powell's comments pass without comment or correction.
A Rare Interview With Michael Moore
Moore speaks about his new book-"Dude, Where's My Country?"
Saturday October 4, 2003
The Guardian
"The capped crusader"
In the US, a supposedly rightwing country, Michael Moore's fearless campaigning and coruscating criticism of 'that frat boy' Bush have aroused huge hostility but also rapturous fellow feeling. Gary Younge meets an engaging man, who is intent on mobilising America - and is extending the clarion call to us Brits, without whom, he believes, there would have been no war on Iraq.
See link for interview.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)