The Screwjob: Halliburton--Already Sucking Away Billions of American
Tax-Dollars, Are Allegedly Gouging U.S. in Fuel charges
According to this Boston Globe article, Halliburton 'has so far received more than $1.4 billion in work in Iraq to repair and restore the country's oil industry under a no-bid contract issued in March. In another contract providing logistical support, more than $1.6 billion has been clocked so far, with more in the works'.
And now they are overcharging by as much as 80 cents on each gallon of fuel transported from Kuwait into Iraq.
This seems almost too filthy to be true...let's hope it's not.
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....
Friday, October 17, 2003
The Screwjob: Halliburton Allegedly Gouging U.S. in Fuel charges
U.N. Gives Go-Ahead for Madrid-bound 'Tin-Cup' Bush
They're calling the U.N. resolution a diplomatic victory.
It may be a victory..but, oh---how hollow a victory for America.
Bush got some of what he wanted...the srengthened right to take his tin cup to the donors' conference in Madrid next week.....but never moved an inch to convince anyone to actually assist us in Iraq or admit the war was just.
That's because it wasn't just.
As free as Iraq bcomes, the attack will never be seen as just.
I'm not the only one who thinks so, apparently. The Pope, the Dixie Chicks, Michael Moore....oh--and the rest of the world-at-large--seem to agree.
We Americans will pay the price for the unjust actions of American leadership...in precious young lives *we lost four today* and hard-earned tax dollars.
Thanks, Bush. Thanks, Congress.
Sleep well...if you can.
When guilt sets in, there's always Zoloft to get you through.
I'm sure your friends in Pharmaceuticalia will set you up.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Excerpt from today's NY Times article:
"...No sooner had the prestigious Security Council approved a resolution by 15-0 on Thursday when France, Russia, Germany issued a declaration saying they did not intend to increase contributions for Iraq's recovery.
And Pakistan, a Muslim country Washington hoped would contribute troops, announced it would not do so as long as any force reported to a U.S.-led occupation.
Still, the vote was a diplomatic victory for the United States. It legitimized foreign troops in Iraq by turning them into a U.S.-led multinational force and approved in general U.S.-British policies on Iraqi independence.."
God and General
"Why is this man in the White House?"
"The majority of Americans did not vote for him."
"He's in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this."
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
"I knew my God was bigger than *his."
"I knew that my God was a real god...."
".. and his was an idol."
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
"The battle that we're in is a spiritual battle."
"Satan wants to destroy this nation....."
"...he wants to destroy us as a nation..."
click photo
"....and he wants to destroy us as a Christian army."
Love,
Lt Gen Jerry Boykin, undersecretary of defense for U.S. intelligence
Thursday, October 16, 2003
perfect sympathy-Tagore
Objects of knowledge maintain an infinite distance from us who are the knowers.
For knowledge is not union.
Therefore the further world of freedom awaits us there where we reach truth,
not through feeling it by senses or knowing it by reason,
but through union of perfect sympathy.
Rabindranath Tagore
Unintended Consequences of General Clark's Proposed "Civilian Reserve"?
Unintended Consequences of General Clark's Proposed "Civilian Reserve"?
The Village Voice has an interesting article by James Ridgeway regarding General Wesley Clark's fair-weather friendship with the Clintons which could wind up costing General Clark more than he bargained for. It also discusses the apparent fact that he has few real friends in the Military, and an imporatnt question about the constitutionality of his proposed "Civilian Reserve":
".. On Monday, Clark proposed a 5,000-person civilian reserve, which could be called up for emergencies both here and abroad. The reserve would be open to anyone over the age of 18, and could be mustered at the command of president and the Congress to handle crises like forest fires, earthquakes, and nation-building in places such as Afghanistan and Iraq.
This proposal has already been criticized as a redundancy, since Clinton's AmeriCorps and Bush's USA Freedom Corps have already spent large sums in efforts to boost volunteerism.
Clark's corps would meet another need, though it's unclear if this is the former general's intention. The U.S. military is severely strained by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Bush and Rumsfeld mock the UN, which means, among other things, we will have to shoulder the burden of running international peacekeeping projects when it is in our interest to do so.
This new corps, which would be run directly by the federal government, might help take the strain off the National Guard, but in doing so it would probably plunge the federal government into direct management of disasters at the local level. That is of questionable constitutional legitimacy, since disasters and ordinary operations of the Guard are supposed to be in the hands of state governors, not Washington..."
Malaysian Prime Minister Sends Disturbing Message
Retiring Prime Minister of democratic Malaysia, frustrated over lack of Middle East Road Map success, creates a Road Map of his own for Islamic successors to follow.
".....Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad on Thursday told a summit of Islamic leaders that "Jews rule the world by proxy" and the world's 1.3 billion Muslims should unite, using nonviolent means for a "final victory"....."
Regardless of how non-violently the Malaysian Prime Minister frames it all, "final victory" sounds violence-related to me.....how about you?
You can understand how this would make Israel uncomfortable...yes?
My question is this:
Are we EVER going to have an American leader who is wise enough to protect his vulnerable friends in Israel while showing an even and honest hand to those who have been separated from human rights and civil society in the region? Will an American leader EVER be able to be honest with an Israeli leader like Sharon and tell him he's
endangering his good people with his twisted and hateful policies?
Will the good people of Israel ever come to unerstand that hateful leaders beget hate?
When they begin to see that Sharon represents as much hatred as those ugly souls who call themselves warriors and use terror as a tool of fear....then perhaps we will get somewhere?
The current attitude and handling of "terror" by both Bush and Sharon is undermining the human rights of all the innocent on both sides of the Middle Eastern conflict.
If there is a G*d and we believe in G*d, how can our G*d-fearing leaders ignore the suffering of the innocent simply because terror reigns? Should we NOT do all we can for the good of mankind while terror reigns?
Why do Bush and Sharon return terror with terror and wait for a far-off day when terror is defeated while innocent people suffer and die?
This is NOT leadership, my friends.
This is a case of men perpetrating violence on top of violence...virtually signing death-warrants for more of the innocent.
Look at what we wind up with:
"....Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad on Thursday told a summit of Islamic leaders that "Jews rule the world by proxy" and the world's 1.3 billion Muslims should unite, using nonviolent means for a "final victory."
His speech at the Organization of the Islamic Conference summit, which he was hosting, drew criticism from Jewish leaders, who warned it could spark more violence against Jews...."
THERE HAS TO BE BETTER WAY!!!
~~~~~~~~~~
see: There Is No "Road Map" to Peace,
Only the Hard Road Not Taken
By Bernard Weiner
Co-Editor, "The Crisis Papers."
October 14, 2003
"....Can we just acknowledge that there is no "road map" to peace in the Middle East? Under Bush, there is no U.S.-sponsored avenue or boulevard or street or back alley that could possibly take the parties to a solution. In sum, there are no shortcuts to peace.."
".....Extremists on both sides (egged-on, unfortunately, by their elected leaders) believe that their claim to the disputed land is given by God. The Israeli fundamentalists want a Greater Israel, the Palestinian extremists want a Greater Palestine, with no Israel.
Ordinarily, when two religiously-oriented groups claim that God is on their side, there is no room for accommodation, because it is believed that a compromise would be an affront to God.
But in this extraordinary situation, it is not required that either side forsake their God. If and when both sides can finally agree that the continuing slaughter is intolerable, that their economic and social situation are intolerable, that the constant stress is intolerable, that each losing its moral way is intolerable -- if and when they get to that point (which, unfortunately, probably means after Arafat and Sharon have died), then both sides can say to themselves something like this:
"Dear God/Allah: We have remained true to your desires for decades upon decades, but our peoples have grown weary with despair and never-ceasing bloodshed. We want to continue the battle for your rule, but the reality is that neither of us can make the other side disappear. If we don't come to some sort of agreement -- not to like each other but merely to recognize that the others are here and they're not going to go away -- we will provide nothing to our children and grandchildren but hopelessness and despair and perpetual slaughter and unbearable tension. Therefore, in the name of reality -- and, we hope, with your blessing -- we will make a peace. It will not get us everything we and you want, but it will reclaim the likelihood of a future for succeeding generations....."
Re: "On Listening" by Thomas Friedman
Re: "On Listening"
by Thomas Friedman
NY Times
Published: October 16, 2003
"..don't limit your associations to people who agree with you.."
Richard H. Brodhead,
Dean of Yale College
Thomas Friedman's column today in the NY Times expresses many of my own reservations and complaints about Dick Cheney's speech in front of the Bush-admin-friendly Heritage Foundation last week.
Excerpt:
"...There was a headline that grabbed me in The Times on Saturday. It said, "Cheney Lashes Out at Critics of Policy on Iraq."
"Wow," I thought, "that must have been an interesting encounter." Then I read the fine print. Mr. Cheney was speaking to 200 invited guests at the conservative Heritage Foundation — and even they were not allowed to ask any questions. Great. Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein issue messages from their caves through Al Jazeera, and Mr. Cheney issues messages from his bunker through Fox. America is pushing democracy in Iraq, but our own leaders won't hold a real town hall meeting or a regular press conference.
Out of fairness, my newspaper feels obligated to run such stories. But I wish we had said to the V.P.: If you're going to give a major speech on Iraq to an audience limited to your own supporters and not allow any questions, that's not news — that's an advertisement, and you should buy an ad on the Op-Ed page...."
Mr. Friedman also puts Bush's position (*position??--or failure to act??) in the Middle East in the proper perspective:
"...Thankfully, there is one group of people the Bush team is listening to: Iraq's silent majority. Ironically, Iraq is the one place in the world where the Bush team has chosen not to become obsessed with terrorists, not to focus exclusively on them and their noise, but to just keep on building a better Iraq for Iraqis — the only way to counter terrorism in the long run — despite the bombs bursting in air.
Unfortunately, in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza — where some really sick terrorists claimed three U.S. lives yesterday — the Bush team has decided to fall in behind Ariel Sharon's failed strategy of only listening to the terrorists and postponing any initiatives until they are all defeated. So the only voice we hear there is that of the terrorists. No alternative reality is being built to smother or counter them, and that's just what the terrorists want."
Wednesday, October 15, 2003
International A.N.S.W.E.R. March on Washington Oct 25th
Reminder: International A.N.S.W.E.R. March on Washington and San Francisco
OCTOBER 25, 2003
Bring the troops home now
End the occupation of Iraq
Money for jobs, education & healthcare - Not war
International A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War & Racism) is organizing marches on Washington, D.C. and San Francisco for Saturday, October 25, 2003 to protest U.S. Wars around the world. Read more about the march, including the call to action and logistical information, on their website.
The 100 greatest novels of all time
"....as the BBC prepares to reveal [Great Britain's] best loved books, The Observer has compiled its own list of essential fiction from the past 300 years..."
How many of these books have you read?
* I hope Anonymoses will appreciate #7*
*This blog particularly appreciates #52*
Two Nations.. Under God(?)...Indivisible(?)
Two Nations- Under God(?)...Indivisible(?)
The Supreme Court will hear the case of "under God".
They added the Pledge of Allegiance to the docket for its new term on Tuesday, agreeing to consider whether public schools violate the Constitution by requiring teachers to lead their classes in pledging allegiance to the flag of "one nation under God."
I find the whole thing quite silly.
If we want to have a realistic court decision on the Pledge, let's talk about issues which are more tangible and pressing than Deity recogition.
Today, it is more apparent than ever that we are two nations under God.
America is totally polarized. You read it in the papers...you see it on your television screens..you see it in electoral results and public polls. There it is...right under your noses.
Choose your polar labels..Conservative/Liberal; Republican/Democrat; Washington Times reader/Washington Post reader; FOX news fan/ABC Nightline fan; Red State/Blue State; Rush Limbaugh listener/NPR supporter; Christian Right/Progressive; Pro-War/Anti-War...you get the gist of it, don't you?
If Justice Scalia would recuse himself from the "under God" case, who should recuse themselves if the "two nations under God" case should come along?
Every justice save Sandra Day O'Connor would have to step aside, I would think.
After the Selection 2000 case, Justice Sandra is the only Supreme Court justice who may not be hypnotized and infected by polarization.
Or how about letting Justice Sandra recuse herself and let "two nations" come to a 4-to-4 tie...the imagined "two nations" appeals court ruling would automatically be affirmed and the truth would be affirmed.
We are no longer one nation under God....
*if we are indeed under God....rest assured, the Supremes will let us know whether or not we are under God soon.*
We are two nations...the "indivisible" being reserved for another day in court.
Saletan: The Unstoppable Howard Dean
William Saletan: As hard as they've tried, confounded 2004 Democratic candidates can't find a way to deter the unstoppable Howard Dean
They just can't get it right
"....You can imagine how angry I am, as a swing voter, to find out these horrible things about Dean. My hands are trembling so violently, I can barely write his name on the check...."
Tuesday, October 14, 2003
By Paul Bedard
Wilson adds ammo to hit war credibility gap
"Just as former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's story that Bushies blew his CIA wife's cover to get back at his criticism of the war in Iraq was getting old, he has stumbled on new ammo to hit the administration's credibility. Wilson tells us he plans to circulate the text of a briefing by analyst Sam Gardiner that suggests the White House and Pentagon made up or distorted over 50 war stories. You know some tall tales, like the Pvt. Jessica Lynch story. But there's more, says Gardiner, a war gamer who has taught at the National War College. Like how defense officials said the first Iraqi unit marines encountered, the 51st Mechanized Infantry Division, had surrendered four days before it actually did. And he says Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Richard Myers gave bad or deliberately incomplete info on several topics. Sure, propaganda has always been used in war to deceive and demoralize the enemy. But these guys went way overboard, Gardiner says. "Never before have so many stories been created to sell a war," he insists. "And they probably didn't need it."
Poll: More would vote Democratic in 2004
Latest poll numbers show voters would rather elect the unknown
than face another four years with a man
who cannot lead successfully
From Washington Post-ABC News poll released today:
46 percent said they would reelect Bush if the election were held today, while 47 percent would vote for the yet-to-be chosen Democratic nominee.
They'd rather have this...
than this
People are really beginning to see that our nation is in danger of becoming a military state.
It seems that the rest of this world believes they will be little more than Bush campaign-contributors by caving in to his prideful, stubborn, untrustworthy demands. The EU is hesitant to help Iraq if it means helping Bush get reelected. Our nation, our troops, and the people of Iraq are gravely damaged in the process.
If it takes a new leader to make things safe for all concerned and to set us back on a road to international reconciliation and cooperation, we'll need new leadership in Washington.
Pollyanna Dubya Bush
"The person who is in charge is me..They're just wrong about our strategy..We've had a strategy from the beginning.... Since the liberation of Iraq, thousands of new bidnesses have been launched...373 American troops exchanged for all them bidnesses..I'd say we're doing pretty good if I gotta say so myself....Pay no attention to those suicide bombers driving into those buildins...pay no attention to the four U.S. soldiers who sacrificed their lives this past weekend...look...look over here...Iraqis are building roads, for Pete's sake.....HEY!...stop looking at Donny...Condi's here with the good news...like me....me and Condi know what's going on over there, and it ain't like you liberal commie-type media bullies are saying....looks like ol' Pollyanna Dubya's gonna hafta set the record straight hisself..."
Monday, October 13, 2003
David Corn-"How I broke the CIA-leak story, and why nobody noticed"
From the L.A. Weekly
David Corn: The Novak Affair
How I broke the CIA-leak story, and why nobody noticed
Read David Corn's scrutiny of today's typical Republican damage-control dissembling.
Excerpt:
"....The issue is not who’s screaming about the leak but who did it. Yet if Portman and the Republicans can succeed in presenting the controversy as another one of those same-old bitter face-offs between D’s and R’s — creating a moral equivalency between the leakers and the complainants — they win. Their aim is to exploit the public’s (justifiable) cynicism toward Washington and to battle to an it’s-all-politics draw. This is a good strategy — as long as no indictments materialize..."
Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson- from "Informed Comment" website
This is a great tongue-in-cheek must-read by Juan Cole, Professor of History at the University of Michigan.
While you're there, read the rest of his "Informed Comment" site.
In this blog's humble opinion, it is the cream of the blogcrop.
Sunday, October 12, 2003
by Bart Whiteman
From the Chattanoogan News
This blog thanks Mr. Whiteman for what we consider to be a generous contribution to the mental health of those of us out here who are beginning to think either we are certifiable.. or the rest of the nation has gone mad.
"...Cheney warned us all about the big, bad, boogie day of doom that awaits us all if we don’t toe the line. He tried very hard to frighten as many people as he could with his portrayal of the horrors that are in store if we don’t let these administration cowboys continue to round up and dispose of the terrorist herd at will.
Oh, and anyone who disagrees with him is a wimp.
Well, Dick, I noticed you delivered your bold message at the Heritage Foundation, the well-endowed incubator of conservative thought. Who’s the wimp here? If that ain’t preaching to the choir, I don’t know what is...."
Cheney came out of the bat cave on Friday and Americans saw his shadow
"....It’s pretty clear that nothing short of electoral defeat or impeachment will stop the war from the administration’s perspective, and since Congress is in the hands of the Republicans, they’ll just go keep going along for the merry ride..."
"...The major media have soft-pedaled and glorified the whole thing because they are along for the corporate ride..They have leveraged the war for better ratings and better advertising revenues. They have invested in your party. They have supplied champagne to celebrate whenever there is something to celebrate. There may be a few lunatics left out there questioning the whole operation, and the Iraqi people may be suffering through your trial by p.r., but they don’t really matter, do they?.."
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? Dick Cheney knows....trust him..
Trust him?
"....There is no glorious anti-war rhetoric. The American public has submitted. You don’t need to justify the unjustifiable. You already did it. You started your war, and no one said ‘boo.’ You divided the world into the good (us) and the evil (them). Your action is the justification. The results are the justification. If you get your way, then what does it matter what anyone else thinks? Stop trying the sell the war. Wage the war. Shut down the p.r. machine. It’s not working. No one believes you any more, at least not your words, which change with every shift of the breeze. Go about your business.
Go back to shadow land..."
Blake Lethem and Howard Dean-NY Post Attacks
Totalitarian-style Editorial in NY Post-
Post imputes Howard Dean for the legal fallout of the free actions of Blake Lethem
"....Well, thanks to all the publicity, Howard Dean's favorite "artist" may be facing some richly deserved jail time...."
In a free and open America, this will never stand.
The NY Post's criticism of Howard Dean for giving an artist space to express himself in a legal manner is completely out of touch with our precious American values of free expression.
This is a clear GOP warning shot crossing the Democrats' bow....support the freedom of controversial art and you will not only risk political injury, but the artist you support will be imprisoned.
Is this Cuba..or America?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)