CIA Official: Intelligence Community's Work Politicized for War

CIA Official: Intelligence Community's Work Politicized for War

This is very important news. This is the the first time that a senior intelligence officer has so directly and publicly condemned the Bush administration's handling of intelligence related to its pre-Iraq war decisions. Paul R. Pillar, who was the national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia from 2000 to 2005, has written an article for the the journal Foreign Affairs which says that the Bush administraion was not only determined, but willingly blind to the full scope of available Intelligence information at the time of the Iraq war lead-up. It is clear that a war of option (now known as a failure because intelligence was ignored) was not going to be denied the hyperfocused administration.

From the Washington Post:

Paul R. Pillar, who was the national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia from 2000 to 2005, acknowledges the U.S. intelligence agencies' mistakes in concluding that Hussein's government possessed weapons of mass destruction. But he said those misjudgments did not drive the administration's decision to invade.

So what DID drive the administration's decision to invade? (Remember, our House and Senate voted for the Iraq War Resolution in 2002 on the predication, from documents supplied by the Bush administration, that the intelligence presented was sound)

"Official intelligence on Iraqi weapons programs was flawed, but even with its flaws, it was not what led to the war," Pillar wrote in the upcoming issue of the journal Foreign Affairs. Instead, he asserted, the administration "went to war without requesting -- and evidently without being influenced by -- any strategic-level intelligence assessments on any aspect of Iraq."

You may ask - what were "strategic-level intelligence estimates? Why would they have been important to consider before committing our troops to a ground war in Iraq?

Pillar says that the entire body of official intelligence analysis was not taken into consideration:

"If the entire body of official intelligence analysis on Iraq had a policy implication, it was to avoid war -- or, if war was going to be launched, to prepare for a messy aftermath.

He also blames some in the Intelligence Community for their weakness and their bending to the administration's hunt for reasons to support war:

They .. knew, [Pillar] wrote, that senior policymakers "would frown on or ignore analysis that called into question a decision to go to war and welcome analysis that supported such a decision. . . . [They] felt a strong wind consistently blowing in one direction. The desire to bend with such a wind is natural and strong, even if unconscious."

Mr. Pillar describes a process in which the White House attempted to frame intelligence results by repeatedly posing questions aimed at bolstering its arguments about Iraq. They were focused on a Saddam/al-Qaeda link, which has never been proven by one shred of evidence from any reputable journalist or investigator. The administration's hyperfocus caused them to become blind to any contradictory intelligence evidence.

The Bush administration, Pillar wrote, "repeatedly called on the intelligence community to uncover more material that would contribute to the case for war," including information on the "supposed connection" between Hussein and al Qaeda, which analysts had discounted. "Feeding the administration's voracious appetite for material on the Saddam-al Qaeda link consumed an enormous amount of time and attention."

Pillar says that the general belief among experts in the Intelligence community was that Saddam was being contained and that a war was not necessary. Put that thought up against the aftermath of the American occupation of Iraq. If you're not enraged, you simply are not paying attention.

"...the prewar intelligence asserted Hussein's "weapons capacities," but he said the "broad view" within the United States and overseas "was that Saddam was being kept 'in his box' " by U.N. sanctions, and that the best way to deal with him was through "an aggressive inspections program to supplement sanctions already in place."

Flemming Rose Goes..

Flemming Rose Goes..

Flemming Rose goes on vacation, that is.

It seems that the Jyllands Posten cultural editor could be as unapologetic as he liked about taunting Muslims, but when he dared to say he'd consider printing Iran's proposed Holocaust toons - and maybe some Jesus funnies - -

Zzzzz-oooooooooooom!

Flemming was whisked off on an extended vacation.

Pissing off the West?
What was he thinking?!

NY State Has Largest Education Funding Gap

NY State Has Largest Education Funding Gap

At my Syracuse.com blogsite, you can read about the shame of New York State - the truth that Governor George Pataki would rather have you not know.

If you do not know about the largest education funding gap between the haves and have-nots in this entire nation, read about it - and learn about A.100 - Schools for New York's Future act, which will turn the tide and provide every public school student in New York state with a sound basic education.

Michael Berg, Father of Slain US Citizen Runs for Congress

Michael Berg, Father of Slain US Citizen Runs for Congress

"We cannot afford to be distracted by this war any longer while our planet passes the point of no return in global warming. We have urgent business to attend to such as the disgusting practice of American corporate CEOs of stealing profits in their yearly bonuses that exceed what most of us would earn in ten lifetimes. Yes. The war is too costly and I am against it! I am against any plan that has our troops and civilians occupying territory anywhere in the Middle East region for one more day. Only when we withdraw from Iraq, Afghanistan, and the rest of the Middle East will we cease to be a target of terrorists. I am against the continuation of this war for another day, another hour, another minute, another life, another heartbeat of one of the world’s sons or daughters."

-Micheal Berg, father of American citizen Nick Berg, who was slain in Iraq.
Mr. Berg (Green Party - DE) is running for a seat in the US House of Representatives.

Some knee-jerk war apologists have gone deep into the territory of falsehoods and complete disrespect for Mr. Berg to combat his strong conviction. It seems that they would say just about anything to divert people from the truth - a truth that is proven more and more as each day passes.

Budget Cuts Reveal Bleak GOP Hypocrisy

Budget Cuts Reveal Bleak GOP Hypocrisy

Mary Matalin recently appeared on Hannity and Colmes, referring to some of the speakers at Coretta Scott King's February 7 funeral, and had the audacity to blame African American leaders for keeping their community members feeling victimized - sinking as low as to calling civil rights leaders "racists. Meanwhile, the immoral and socially irresponsible policies of the Bush administration and the GOP cry out for realistic scrutiny. The truth speaks louder than the spin. The recent budget cuts are a perfect example of not only racism, but an outright abandonment of America's working poor.

I think these civil rights leaders are nothing more than racists. And they're keeping constituency, they're keeping their neighborhoods and their African-American brothers enslaved, if you will, by continuing to let them think that they're -- or forced to think that they're victims, that the whole system is against them.

I wonder if Mary Matalin realizes how many poor mothers of minority children cry when they think about the bitter truth - that kids in the suburbs are regularly prepared for college while their boys are ill-prepared for anything except future incarceration and their young girls face a future of motherhood at far too young of an age?

Wake up, Mary Matalin. The system is stacked against them and the facts prove it. Your party's indifference to social democracy is not helping you to create the moral society you brag about wanting to achieve.

I am calling these people on their sheer hypocrisy and false spin about matters of race, social justice, and class.

How moral or just, in its effect, is the slashing of $49 million from the federal budget for the reintegration of youthful offenders into society?

Fact: The United States is already the world leader in execution of youthful offenders. Due to the many years it takes to process appeals in the United States , juvenile offenders are sometimes in their twenties or even thirties by the time the executions take place. Nevertheless, between 1990 and January 2000, the U.S. executed more juvenile offenders than the rest of the world's nations combined. The U.S. Juvenile Justice System in general, seems to favor incarceration and punishment over rehabilitation and treatment when dealing with juvenile offenders. With social workers replaced by lawyers, juvenile courts increasingly have taken on the character of the adult criminal court system, violating international standards. In many cases children in the US are detained and incarcerated following conviction when other options such as counseling, rehabilitation, and restorative justice programs are available.



How hypocritical is it to know that, while President Bush tells us that we need qualified teachers in Math and Science to make all of our children competitive in the global economy, that Teacher Quality Enhancement has been cut to the tune of $60 million?

Fact: President Bush's “American Competitiveness Initiative” would result in the recruiting of 70,000 new math and science teachers and encourage 30,000 private sector math and science professionals to teach in the schools. However, since the proposed fiscal 2006 budget decreases funding for elementary and secondary educational programs, we can only assume that the funding for these new teachers will fall to the states. It couldn't come from any other source.

Read about the priorities that were listed for the State grants for which a whopping $60 million of support for teacher enhancement in the states have been torn away:

U.S. Department of Education Priority Areas For State Grants:

Initiatives to reform state teacher licensure and certification requirements so those current and future teachers possess strong teaching skills and academic content knowledge in the subject area that they will teach.

Innovative reforms to hold IHE teacher preparation programs accountable for preparing teachers with strong academic and teaching skill.

Innovative efforts to reduce the shortage (including the high turnover) of highly competent teachers in high-poverty urban and rural areas.

The Republican plan for education is revealed as an emperor with no clothing. All hat - no cattle. Pro-business, anti-social. It leaves the already tax-burdened states' children to hang. States are already having great difficulty meeting the financial burdens placed on them by the No Child Left Behind act. Over 50% of US schools lack the resources necessary to implement No Child Left Behind standards. The GOP policy has made it more difficult for low and middle-income American families to send their kids to college,cutting grant and loan programs that would finance that education.

If Bush and his rubber-stamp GOP were truly concerned about our children competing in the global economy, they would never have cut out their support for states to fund educational grants for children from pre-school through college age.

Where's the beef?

Mahablog Visits CSPAN

Mahablog Visits CSPAN

Congratulations to Barbara O'Brien of Mahablog, who did an outstanding job on her CSPAN debut. I'm sure there will be a link to a video of her appearance on Washington Journal made available at the CSPAN website soon. It's good to see progressive bloggers having an opportunity to speak in such a widely viewed public forum.

Socially Irresponsible Editors Resign

Socially Irresponsible Editors Resign

I say let them walk. They couldn't go fast enough for me.

Islamophobia has to end.

When you begin to compare Ku Klux Klan hoods to Muslim veils, I think you step beyond the boundaries of truth, responsibility and good taste.

New York Press is no stranger to bad taste. Remember this?

Pope Benedict XVI has met with First Lady Laura Bush, expressing his hope for "peace and for tolerance, for each of us to treat everyone else with respect." Mrs. Bush said that everyone around the world needs to speak out and say ’Let’s stop the violence.'

In an interview with Vatican Radio broadcast Feb. 9, the first lady said, "The United States finds it repugnant to find that people would depict Mohammed in a disrespectful and ugly way. While free speech is an important value, she told the radio, "many times free speech is offensive. We expect people would give respect to the deeply held religious views of people around the world."

Perhaps the news editors who've knowingly taunted the Muslim world and provoked all this violence, whether or not it was their intent, should think about Mrs. Bush's words and act discreetly instead of throwing more fuel upon the fire just because they can. The desire to push the envelope is journalist ego, negligent of all ethics and responsibility.

This is the perfect time for President Bush (with Karen Hughes at his side) to come out and score political points with the moderates of this nation by actually making a statement of his own - specifically telling American journalists and news editors that freedom is, indeed, a treasure, but it requires a great level of social responsibility. He can't just leave this at Laura's doorstep. All eyes turn to the President at times like these for moral leadership.

News Editors: Apologize for Your Disrespect Now

News Editors: Apologize for Your Disrespect Now

It's high time for the dozen newspaper editors in Europe (and one in America) who have printed the images of the prophet Muhammed to apologize to Islam.

15 million European Muslims along with another billion Muslims around the world have been deeply offended by the cartoons that depict the Prophet in a derogatory fashion. Freedom of the press is something that democratic socities are lucky to have, but freedom does not excuse a taunting disrespect for the religion of over a billion people, especially given the knowledge that it is causing such unrest in the Middle East and beyond.

It is courageous to defend democracy and freedom. It is fruitlessly stubborn, socially irresponsible, and violence-provoking for news editors to refuse to apologize for the offense and continue to print these cartoons. When the violence dies down, there will have been ten more terrorists created for every one that was shot dead while protesting in Afghanistan and the West Bank. So much for our utterly stupid bragging about how we can wield our right to be as big an asshole as we please - using freedom as the defense for further aggravating those we know we are taunting.

The images will be employed by extremists to recruit more and more extremist terror in Middle Eastern nations. President Bush has called for an end to violence over the cartoons, but I think he would appear politically brave and civilly respectful if, instead of appealing to only the governments around the world to help end the deadly violence, he would appeal to the better nature of the societies in which these cartoons were printedand recommend that news editors offer some kind of apology. Freedom isn't worth a thin dime if it sets off a chain of violent events that reveals the journalists in that free society to be cruel, wreckless, unethical, careless, and without conscience.

Original cartoons were authorized for printing by cultural editor Flemming Rose. Rose has said that "Apologizing would imply that if you intimidate us enough we will follow your demands." Apology has great power, and Flemming Rose may not have the degree of humility required to admit that he offended others in a disrespectful manner, but his editors should know better. Apology is all about accepting responsibility for your actions. If Mr. Rose thinks it's about blackmail, that's his pride speaking. It isn't as if he HASN'T deeply offended religious people. He has. A bigger man would acknowledge what he'd done. A man who deeply appreciates his free society would talk with respect to those he offended - even those who do not share his world view or the freedom that his own government provides.

Insiders report that the editor of the Conservative Danish paper Jyllands-Posten, Carsten Juste, told his journalists in a meeting: "If I had known Danes would have been put in harm's way as the result of printing these cartoons, I would not have done it." Yet, he refuses to present a formal apology. Why not? The majority of people offended are not in the streets. They grace homes all over this world, including many Islamic communities here in the United States. They believe it's time to stop demonizing their Prophet and demonizing Muslims. It isn't a complicated concept to grasp.

The necessity for apology would not be "giving in to extremists," as many right wing rags (like Front Page) or the cartoonist himself would suggest, for that sounds like nothing more than racism and Islamophobia.

King Abdullah of Jordan said anything that "vilifies the prophet Mohammed or attacks Muslim sensibilities needs to be condemned," but those who choose to protest should do it "thoughtfully, articulately, express their views peacefully."

I think he hit the nail on its head. I join King Abdullah in condemning this misguided attempt at political humor which, by the way, has had a very curious resurgence - a second life. The cartoons originated last September. The first time I read anything about it was when it was reprinted at Front Page, a Zionist-leaning American website, on February 1. I asked myself - why did David Horowitz decide to put it up on his internet site? I sense that he strongly dislikes Christianity and Islam - but why would he wish to incite more violence? Horowitz' motivations are politically suspect. His Front Page bloggers, with cooperation from the hate-blog Little Green Footballs, have never wanted this cartoon die a natural death. It's as if they needed to agitate the extremists to perpetuate Islamic racism and extremism. Were they free to harp on it until it resurfaced as mainstream news? Of course! The question is: Are they pleased with their results? They must be, all of them, because they're cheering for more cartoons of the same kind.

Islam is a religion of peace, tolerance, moderation. I don't believe certain political forces would like us to remain convinced of that fact. Demonizing the "other" has been used throughout history as a way to maintain political power. They're doing it now.

In an article today, Justin Raimondo introduces you to news editor Flemming Rose and causes you to wonder how all of this could NOT be a coordinated effort to bring the world to its knees in the throes of the next world war:

Hate and fear are created out of thin air by the most skillful means, and stereotypes take the place of reality as the world prepares for war. That's what this is all about: the hate propaganda emanating from certain quarters in Europe and the U.S. amounts to preparations for war just as much as the manufacture of arms and the mobilization of armies at the border. We are being psychologically prepared for another world war, and the first shots are being fired from the pages of Jyllands-Posten. I have the sinking feeling that they won't be the last…

Of all my quarrels with his foreign policy, I believe President Bush when he insists that Islam is a religion of tolerance and peace. I'm not sure whether or not he believes it himself, but I know that what he is saying is correct.

Being atheist doesn't have to make you socially retarded. Christopher Hitchens has a strong distaste for anything religious, yet, for a man who claims to be such an intellectual authority on the course of human history, he takes a decidedly anti-social pleasure in seeing the deep beliefs of over a billion citizens of the world mocked.

Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen said his government had nothing to apologize for, and I am inclined to completely agree.

We should never, I repeat- NEVER - apologize for having a free society.

The government of Denmark should not ban this cartoon if they value freedom in their society.

The news editors who have made the disrespectful and unwise business decisions to mock Muhammed are the ones directly responsible for apologizing, and they should do it now. We have to treat another culture as we find them - we must meet them at their level if our aim is to ask the to think critically. The societies targeted by these unwisely promoted cartoons are far behind many in the West regarding the level of freedom in most Western societies. A grade school child understands that you do not MOCK someone different than you and expect them to change their minds about the positive value of your ideas.

Anne Applebaum has a great WaPo column about this - and so does Michael J.W. Stickings.

Anne Applebaum also speaks about the blatant hypocrisy of the right bloggers.

It seems as if this war-loving blogger would just as soon see more terror recruitment with further displays of these offensive cartoons - enough provocation to start a new unnecessary violent conflict so we may lose a whole new healthy chunk of our beloved young generation. She has seen similar increases in terror recruitment as a result of the Iraq war and occupation, which she heartly supported. I didn't see her calling the American media cowards when they buried stories that questioned WMD and the crappy intelligence during the lead-up to the completely unnecessary Iraq war. I didn't see her concern about the rule of law when she perpetuated a narrative of WWII internment camps as myth.

Alan Dershowitz is all pissed off because past media cartoons have mocked Jesus - AS IF TWO COMPLETE WRONGS SUDDENLY MAKE A RIGHT! What a complete boob. He says, "You can't have a story about a cartoon without seeing the cartoon." Of course you can, Mr. Dershowitz. CNN did. Dershowitz acts like a spoiled stomping child aching for playground justice.

Dershowitz says:

CNN has shown no courage. It claims it won't publish the cartoons because they're offensive. But they have published previous cartoons that are offensive. The fact is, they're frightened. The fact is, that this kind of religious and intellectual terrorism is working. It is persuading journalists who would otherwise cover this story with the cartoons to back away--not on ideological reasons or not for reasons of protecting or preserving integrity or anything of that kind, but out of physical and economic fear. This is economic, physical terrorism directed at journalists and it is working.

So what's new? CNN had no courage in the lead-up to the Iraq war, either. They barely mentioned the massive worldwide protests against going into Iraq back in February, 2003 or the people who were questioning WMD before the war began. Gee - I wonder if Dershowitz might have called CNN big chickens for THAT? I DON'T THINK SO.

George W. Bush is a weak-minded leader who has allowed the forces of neoconservatism to trample over his efforts to change the world in a meaningful way. He has allowed them to turn his professed faith over on its head by creating an atmosphere where it's easier to fear than to think reasonably; where a national theology trumps all faith; where it's easier to demonize than to understand; where it's easier to steal power than to gain it lawfully; where it's easier to kill than to care.

Right bloggers and pundits are becoming cheerleaders for Islamophobia, religion-bashing, violence, death, and disrespect. I pray that when we look back upon this time in History, we can say that America is still strong and united, and that peace was finally achieved when these immature people woke up to the fact that we can accomplish more TOGETHER - with old fashioned respect and diplomacy. Fear, war, intimidation, demonization of religion, racism (in the guise of something wrapped as "freedom"), blind hubris, and ignorance are timeless losers for any democratic nation.

News editors - it's time to apologize. The Muslim communities are watching and waiting.


*Related story: Suzanne Nossel has an interesting blogpost on the subject at Democracy Arsenal.

Muhammed, Islam, Cartoon, Jyllands-Posten, Muslims, Flemming Rose

Sharon Hughes - Get Real

Sharon Hughes - Get Real

Sharon Hughes of right-wing talk radio is attempting to create a narrative that makes absolutely no rational sense to me. She is employing the comments made recently by LA Times' Joel Stein, of which I and most other Democrats do not agree, and applying the content of his personal opinion to the entirety of the majority of Americans who truly support our fighting men and women. She believes that Stein has provided some imaginary ammuntion to use against good Americans who oppose the war in Iraq. We need to remind her that she's using a 'logic of idiots.'

Sharon Hughes' mini-dissertation about Democratic leaders and left-of-center Democrats pulling their support of our troops based upon one op-ed just doesn't work out in reality. I find the attempt to be shameful. Someone should tell Ms. Hughes that this isn't her father's era of dissent. We are not hippies in the streets spitting on our honorable men and women. The leader of the popular democratic group blog Daily Kos is a veteran himself. We are her fellow Americans and this is 2006. Ms. Hughes' method of political attack has to grow up, and her display of logic has to grow up, too. How childish she sounds in this article of hers. Our support of the troops has evolved from the 60s "politics of protest"; we offer alternatives to "the course" in Iraq that has proven to be a strategic dud and a catalyst for terror recruitment. Our disagreement is not about the troops - it's about the powerful people who are commanding them. It's about this failure of this war. (I can't believe I'm actually having to say this, but I guarantee you won't see anyone speaking up for people like me on the major news networks.)

I wonder - does Sharon Hughes believe in citizens of one America speaking freely and honestly with one another - or does she like it better divided down the center? If we truly love our country and want it to be strong, don't we want to find some common ground? I don't believe Ms. Hughes had our common values at heart when she wrote this piece. In essence, she is calling you and me a liar for supporting a safe, strong and respected America. It seems to me that she would rather use one man's opinion at the expense of the booming majority who state, very clearly, that it is entirely logical to say that you support a strong military and a safe America and to extend the hope that your inept Commander in Chief doesn't abuse and stretch them to the near-breaking point for wars that are completely unnecessary.

If I could send a message to Sharon Hughes, I'd say "Hey, Sharon - I'm a Democrat. I support the troops. My family has been fighting your wars for over 200 years, so don't hand me your bullshit. Joel Stein was free to voice his opinion and your attempt to make it every other Democrat's opinion is, for lack of any better-fitting words, f**king stupid and evil."

If the Democratic leaders who gave the President the go-ahead to handle the Iraq situation in 2002 now regret that they did, I sure as hell can understand why they'd feel that way. The Iraq War resolution was decided upon one short year from the awful 911 attacks that happened on Bush's watch. The American public was in great fear, thanks in no small part to Bush himself. Those Democratic leaders who voted "Yes" to the Iraq War Resolution gave our President their trust on behalf of their constituents - they voted in good faith that all they were being told about WMD was true. From October, 2002, let's not forget who was Commander in Chief. He failed to prevent the terror attack; he failed to find a link between the Iraq government and 911; he failed to find WMD; and failed miserably in his planning, handling and leadership of the Iraq war. He has admitted grave strategic misjudgements and relying upon bad intelligence which he forwarded to our Congress in 2002 - yet, three years later, he has refuses to listen to the intelligent pleas for ending the occupation and redeploying our loyal and overly-stretched troops. He calls it all "second-guessing" for the desperate sake of political damage control. If his first guesses weren't so incredibly bad, we wouldn't mention it.

Get real, Sharon Hughes. You're speaking to all of America - not just the small portion who still believe that the Iraq war was necessary, winnable, or worth the great cost in blood and treasure.

I'm sick of partisan Americans deliberately attempting to stir up dirt that is borne of entirely false and intellectually dishonest supportive material. It's easy to play upon the ingnorance of the general electorate - and it's a terribly lazy and cheap way of making a political attack. I'm sick of these scummy little tactics that lead to outright lies. I won't stand for it. No one, especially political leaders, should take these divisive lies sitting down. Republicans need a new schtick. Swift-boating and accusations of "flip-flopping" will never work again - not after Americans have learned the truth about Iraq.

Since Hughes has decided to conveniently leave out the truth of the current day to prove a cheap and non-existent point, I'll remind her of just one statement from just one of the Democratic leaders she accused of lying about the support and deep appreciation and respect they give to our troops:

It was a mistake to vote for this war in 2002. I take responsibility for that mistake. It has been hard to say these words because those who didn't make a mistake -- the men and women of our armed forces and their families -- have performed heroically and paid a dear price.

The world desperately needs moral leadership from America, and the foundation for moral leadership is telling the truth [...]

[...] America's leaders -- all of us -- need to accept the responsibility we each carry for how we got to this place. More than 2,000 Americans have lost their lives in this war, and more than 150,000 are fighting there today. They and their families deserve honesty from our country's leaders. And they also deserve a clear plan for a way out.

- Sen. John Edwards, The Right Way in Iraq, Wa Po, November 13, 2005

Talk Radio, John Edwards

Arlen Specter Saves Alberto's Soul

Arlen Specter Saves Alberto's Soul

Glory Hallelujah!

Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez offered to be sworn in this morning before he testified in front of the Capitol Hill hearing on NSA Surveillance and Presidential Wartime Powers - a wonderful American tradition representing the value we place on God and truth.

Chairman of the Committee Arlen Specter just wouldn't have any of that kind of swearing-in on the Bible, regardless of the fact it is long-standing tradition and that the American public trusts Congress and the Bush administration right now about as much as they'd trust a rattlesnake in their beds.

Perhaps Arlen Specter was trying to save Berto's soul from the fires of Hell. After all, putting his hand on the Bible and swearing to tell the truth might have caused Berto to spontaneously combust with Beelzebub right there waiting to lead him to his eternal firepit.

Thanks to the considerate and truth-loving (barf) Arlen Specter, Berto Gonzalez is far more free to lie today and save Hell for another day.

____________

After the "just trust us" attitude we got from the Bush administration in the Abu-Ghraib torture case, the Republican majority in Congress should know better than to toss the Bible aside in their current investigatory process.

If our traditional system of justice is better than that of most countries (and it has been), it's because of our long standing common agreement to place a high value on truth, justice, openness, and checks and balances. All we saw this morning was a partisan effort on the part of the GOP majority that was so bold and ugly that it wiped away years of trust and tradition. For all the Republican talk, they don't believe in truth and tradition - and they are snubbing the system of justice we have all come to know so well.

For all his tough talk, Arlen Specter showed his emptiness of intent to be tough when he gave Berto a free pass on showing God-fearing America that he was intending to tell the truth.


Arlen Specter, Alberto Gonzalez, NSA

Mehlman Gets it Wrong on ABC

Mehlman Gets it Wrong on ABC

Ken Mehlman, speaking his usual nonsense for his Republican party, is trying to convince us that Senator Hillary Clinton "seems to have a lot of anger" and voters usually do not send angry candidates to the White House. Appearing on ABC's This Week, he said, "When you think of the level of anger, I'm not sure it's what Americans want."

Mehlman's got it ass-backwards. Angry voters send candidates who recognize the need for change to the White House. (Especially when voters are angry because they believe they were gravely misled by the worst President in American history and his inept administration.) A major city was virtually destroyed in a hurricane and flood just five months ago. I wonder how New Orleans residents felt when Bush virtually ignored them in his annual State of the Union? Might they have felt some anger?

Think she's ready to pounce?

I saw Hillary Clinton stand up with a coy smile on her face last Tuesday night during the SOTU speech as she lead the cheer of the Democrats when Bush dared to mention his failed efforts to gut Social Security in 2005.

That was no angry smile. It was more like the long-lasting grin from the Cheshire cat.

Meowwwww, little Kenny. Meowwwwww.


Ken Mehlman, Hillary Clinton

Dems Virtually Missing on Sunday Talk Shows Today

Dems Virtually Missing on Sunday Talk Shows Today

What's wrong with the Sunday morning political talk shows? Of all the major Sunday morning talk shows (Fox News Sunday, ABC's This Week, NBC's Meet the Press, and CBS' Face the Nation), only ONE Democrat appeared as a guest. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) appeared with Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Al). The rest of the shows featured Republicans, Republicans, and more Republicans (with no Democrats to offer their own points of view).

Last week, we bloggers told you about the shocking memo - minutes of a meeting that included President Bush and UK prime minister Tony Blair that was uncovered by Phillipe Sands and Britain's Channel 4.

On this Sunday, we have witnessed the American media completely burying the story.

The secretarial slaves known as the American mainstream news media, wielding their obediently scribing paws of duty to the corrupt U.S. political system, are manacle-bound by their Corporate owners and sponsors.

Journalism should be an open and trusted source of critical questioning and intelligent analysis, but the political reporting style of today's mainstream networks equates to little more than taking straight dictation from the failure of a President who cowed all of them last week in his SOTU speech into great fear. It was loud albeit unspoken. The bottom line is that the unemployment line awaits them if they dare to lead the unwashed masses into second-guessing him on Iraq.

It's truly pathetic, not to mention depressing.

The political culture of Washington D.C. must change, and I don't see mainstream media rattling any cages. Instead, they appear to be happy residents of those cages. The best thing they did today was to allow the new House majority leader John Boehner )R-Oh) to make himself look like the largest germ-problem in a very sick D.C. environment. I suppose that is why I laughed out loud when Boehner told Tim Russert, at the end of his interview, that "Sunlight is the best disinfectant."

The Republicans installed one of the biggest sources of the D.C. disease by choosing the sun-tanned, chain-smoking, golf-trip-loving, lobbyist-pampered Boehner - a bona fide germ among germs.

The problem with sunlight is that that the mainstrream media doesn't shine it like they should, because the rigged and corrupt U.S. political system bleeds sleazily, like incest at its finest, onto the media's paymasters and intertwined Government representatives.

Blogs are sunshine. Let's focus our beams on the source of illness in D.C. Let's clean up the disease known as politics in Washington D.C. The Democrats were virtually shut out of political discussions this Sunday. MSM in its current state is a cause of the persistent malady, not just a side-effect. This madness must end before it becomes a terminal illness.


Democrats, Tim Russert, John Boehner, Meet The Press, Sunday Talk

Will John Edwards Run in 2008?

"We need hope. We need the belief inside us that we are good, strong, honorable people and we can do great things together."

- Sen. John Edwards

Will John Edwards Run in 2008?
That seems to be a popular question these days

They're wondering in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Paul Oginni, a first year biological sciences major at UC Irvine is impressed with former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina.

By continuing to advocate for the nation’s destitute, even after suffering defeat in 2004, Edwards demonstrates the attitude of an ideal politician: a persistent, aggressive devotion to the American people....After losing the election, Edwards could have chosen to fall into a pit of apathy and bitterness, shunning all opportunities to put himself in the vulnerable position of public leadership...He could have become a political pundit, producing a wealth of words that would have been of use to no one but his bloated ego....But refusing to be relegated to the list of society’s could-have-beens, Edwards kept pushing these issues, even after the campaign trail had ended. This type of stubborn integrity is rare in the field of politics. - New University paper

Senator Edwards was recently visiting Fayetteville State University in north Carolina where he made his audience aware that poverty strikes black Americans in greater numbers, especially single mothers who worry daily about meeting basic needs and lacking health care for their children. He said the average net worth of a black family in the United States is $6,000, compared with $80,000 for a white household.

Hurricane Katrina and the devastation it brought to New Orleans, where thousands of poor people were left homeless, brought new awareness of the issue, he said....Edwards dispelled the notion that poor people are lazy or failures. He said people often need help from their families, public schools and other resources to succeed.

“None of us get here by ourselves, and what we do matters as a nation,” he said. [source: FayettevilleOnline.com]

The 2008 Iowa caucuses are about 100 weeks away. The Democrat who visited most often last year was John Edwards, and he plans to return on February 25, when he will speak at the Scott County Democrats' annual banquet in Davenport.

Congratulations to the Jacksonville Bar Association for securing Senator Edwards as the keynote speaker for their annual Law Day luncheon in April. Usually, their keynote speakers get a pretty high figure for speaking, but Senator Edwards is doing it pro bono. Law Week is an opportunity for attorneys in the Jacksonville area to spend time in their community and schools doing pro bono work. They have mock trials and juries and a DUI awareness program in the high schools. They go to local malls and nursing homes and answer any questions that people may have. They also have a run for cancer where they offer free cancer screening.

So the question remains: Will Senator Edwards run for President in 2008 or won't he? The BBC tried to pin him down on during a rare visit and live radio broadcast in Durham, NC last week.

In a taped segment piped to those watching the show through the glass-lined studio, Lustig pushed Edwards on whether he'd run for president in 2008. Although Lustig came at the former U.S. senator from every angle, Edwards maintained that's a decision he'll make "down the road." [source: Durham Herald Sun]

During his first visit, BBC World News' Robin Lustig fell in love with North Carolia. He said,

"Wonderful people. Beautiful weather. Fascinating history. Big, wide-open spaces and some of the friendliest people I've ever met."

I couldn't agree with him more.

At MyDD, Jonathan Singer believes that if Senator Edwards (who recently spoke at a Conference on Poverty at USC) wants to make another run at the Democratic nomination in two years, he should continue doing exactly what he is currently doing - speaking with conviction, directly from the heart:

You can listen to the speech here (a 29.8 megabyte .wav file) and judge for yourself its power and content. For me, it was simply amazing to hear the depth and substance of the address, particularly in comparison to the one I had attended in 2004. Gone were the poll-tested phrases, the multiple planned applause lines, the refinements that come with a presidential campaign. Edwards came to speak about poverty and that is exactly what he did -- with great zeal. Edwards was not at all afraid to speak about the immorality of poverty, calling the participants in the conference into action...After the speech, some of the others in the audience and I could not help but come to the same conclusion: if only Edwards had used that unreserved tone during the campaign... if only the well-paid consultants had not told him to rein in his language... if only he had given this kind of speech on the hustings...

Senator Edwards is taking an active part in the tour for the UNITE HERE campaign, which is a nationwide hotel workers uprising said to be the start of a “revolution” in America. It is an effort to empower thousands of hotel workers employed in cities across North America (including Local 2) as they work to improve their jobs and secure better lives for themselves and their families. Senator Edwards will be joined by other special guests at a landmark kick-off event on Wednesday, February 15 at 4:15pm at the Parc 55 Hotel at Mason and Ellis Streets in San Francisco.

Side notes:

Hotel workers at the Crown Plaza LaGuardia hotel in Manhattan have been on strike for 16 months after management refused to recognize their August 2004 vote to join the New York Hotel Trades Council. Union officials and members have commended actor George Clooney and his camp for refusing to cross the picket line to shoot his upcoming film Michael Clayton.

Since we've been talking a lot about North Carolina, here's an interesting little piece about North Carolina politics, albeit unrelated to Senator Edwards. A Howard Dean basher writes an op-ed about Dean's recent stop at a North Carolina pizza joint.


John Edwards, President 2008

Expert Group Dispatches DOJ Defense of NSA Spying

Expert Group Dispatches DOJ Defense of NSA Spying

A response to the Senate Intelligence Committee regarding the DOJ's legal ("White Paper") defense of the NSA's domestic wiretapping program, written by a diverse group of 14 constitutional scholars and former government officials who have joined together to question the legality of the eavesdropping program. See Balkinization for a further explanation. (Their original letter can be read here.)



NSA, Bush

The Case of the Missing White House Emails

The Case of the Missing White House Emails

Look at what Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, and Stephen Hadley may have done in order to protect one another, escape incrimination, and/or hinder Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation of the Valerie Plame leak.

On a very much related note, Murray Waas reports that VP Dick Cheney and his former Chief of Staff Scooter Libby knew that the Niger story was false before the leak of Valerie Plame's identity as CIA. source: Raw Story

Tenacious blog reporters John Byrne and Ron Brynaert report that there are dozens of pages of court files in the CIA leak investigation that have gone unnoticed by the mainstream media and that some information in those files may hint that Libby may have outed Plame on the orders of his "superiors." The plot thickens....



Missing emails, Rove, Libby, Hadley, Cheney, Patrick Fitzgerald, Plame, Raw Story

New Bush/Blair Deceit Revealed by Channel 4

New Bush/Blair Deceit Revealed by UK Channel 4

The White House Memo
Bush and Blair discussed using American spy plane in UN colors to lure Saddam into war
This bombshell information from the UK's Channel 4 news, as seen by staff in minutes from a meeting at the White House on January 31, 2003, reveals that Bush and Blair desperately elected to deceive Saddam Hussein once they realized they couldn't get enough WMD evidence for a UN Security Council resolution. (see the video of the news report and the Ming Campbell interview/reaction at linked site).

Phillipe Sands, author of the book Lawless World says it is hard to come up with any charitable explanation for Bush and Blair's intentions as they were seemingly conscious that they could not come up with the big smoking gun that Jack Straw needed from Hans Blix.

Note: David Corn says that this just might be the Mother of All Downing Street Memos. He writes:

To my thinking, this is a rather big deal. The president of the United States caught conspiring to create a modern-day version of the sinking of the Maine? Talk about an impeachable offense. I'm presuming the memo is legit. It was first obtained by British human rights lawyer Philippe Sands for a new version of his book, Lawless World. Sands is a friend of friends of mine. He is a trustworthy fellow, and I know that last year he did succeed in prying sensitive documents out of the British government concerning the legality -- or illegality -- of the invasion of Iraq. His sources were obviously British officials upset with the war. So my informed hunch is that this document is real. If so, how will the White House respond? Will members of the press corps at 1600 Pennsylvania press the point? This revelation -- which is more shocking than anything in the Downing Street Memos -- should be major news here. But will it?

Memo extracts are HERE.

Imperial Presidential Power

"We’ve had idiots as presidents before. He's not unique. But he's certainly the most active idiot that we have ever had."

- Gore Vidal, talking about the current U.S. President

Imperial Presidential Power
Don't let the turds of the media tell you that you're irrational for being concerned

Gore Vidal's statement says it all. Bush isn't the first imperial president, but he's the most deliberate and decidedly the least intelligent one. In American Conservative magazine, Thomas E Woods, author of the anti-intellectual best seller "Politically Incorrect Guide to American History," asserts that President Bush is no threat to America when you consider that the ideological and institutional roots of the imperial presidency extend back at least a century.

The danger of the view of the presidency delineated by Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson is not simply that in the name of doing the people's will the president will disregard the separation of powers or other important institutional restraints. Another peril is that the president may define the people's will in a self-serving way and then carry out his own agenda in the name of serving the people.

- by Thomas E. Woods, Jr, All The President's Power

Mr. Woods is gravely concerned about Bush's power grabs and arrogant ignoring of the People's will and opinion.

"The very initiation of the war in Iraq constituted a breathtaking exercise of presidential power but one that has grown so common that it is hardly even noticed or commented upon any longer except by the occasional isolated constitutionalist."

Mr. Woods holds tight to his ideology while he sends a mocking jab to the Left:

As for the delicate souls whose consciences were so deeply troubled by George W. Bush’s unilateral initiation of war in 2003, where were they in 1999 when Bill Clinton, acting through NATO and siding with the Muslims of Kosovo, orchestrated a bombing campaign against Serbia without the consent of Congress?

I will tell you now that this liberal was extremely concerned in 1999. A scan of the Letters to the Editor of the Syracuse newspapers would show that I expressed public concern at the time. I'm not sure why Mr. Woods imagines every liberal soul is a hypocrite. He's wrong.

I submit that history will show that the decision (ignorance of rules and tradition notwithstanding) made to bomb Serbia was effective and instrumental in the defeat of Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic.

"How many "Black Hawk Down" movies could be made from the dreadful experiences of just ONE DAY in the terrible neoconservative experiment known as the Iraq War?"

Clinton lands on the right side of history. Can the same be said of Little Bush in Iraq, three years in, with over 2200 troops dead in a still-insecure land and no sign of a palpable victory? I say no, no - a thousand times - no. Bush has driven a nail in the coffin of public trust in Executive power. A blockbuster movie, "Black Hawk Down", was made about Clinton-era Somalia and the awful sight of soldiers being trapped and mauled. How many "Black Hawk Down" movies could be made from the dreadful experiences of just ONE DAY in the terrible neoconservative experiment known as the Iraq War?

When he was president, Woodrow Wilson attempted to strike a balance in the country that would garner the trust of both populists and aristocrats (see his inaugural address of 1913). Bush's speeches have been glaringly strong - often bullying - on the side of those he politically favors. What is often missing is a sense of true moral leadership. Listen to Wilson talk about the cost of greed and self-interest in government:

There has been something crude and heartless and unfeeling in our haste to succeed and be great. Our thought has been "Let every man look out for himself, let every generation look out for itself," while we reared giant machinery which made it impossible that any but those who stood at the levers of control should have a chance to look out for themselves. We had not forgotten our morals. We remembered well enough that we had set up a policy which was meant to serve the humblest as well as the most powerful, with an eye single to the standards of justice and fair play, and remembered it with pride. But we were very heedless and in a hurry to be great.

- Woodrow Wilson, inaugural address 1913

I just can't imagine Bush speaking to America this way, because the policies he has endorsed would make him an instant hypocrite.

In his day, President Teddy Roosevelt was progressive America's most articulate spokesman. He worked to increase the regulatory power of the federal government. Distrustful of big business, despite its close ties to the Republican party in many states, he was known as a 'trust buster', pursuing and tackling anti-trust issues. Under his leadership, forty-four suits were brought against businesses that were claimed to be monopolies. Let's face it, Roosevelt was more of a (NY State Attorney General) Eliot Spitzer than a corporate-crony-coddling George W. Bush.

I believe the real danger for democracy in the Bush imperial presidency stems from

"..none of this would work if we had an educated and informed electorate"

his deliberate anti-intellectualism (Wilson was a respected scholar and moral leader, and let's face it - Bush is not); Bush's allergy to democratic socialism (by 1909, Teddy Roosevelt had endorsed proposals for graduated income and inheritance taxes and other concepts then deemed radical); and Bush's deliberate ignorance of the rule of law.

But none of this would work if we had an educated and informed electorate.

Thomas Woods' writings express the same concern that I have, albeit our respective diversity in ideology, about George W. Bush's radical crusade - unilaterally walking over 200 years of tradition and law. Mr. Woods is worried, too.

From part two of his All the President's Power series:

"Former congressman Bob Barr, a conservative from Georgia, has it right: “The American people are going to have to say, ‘Enough of this business of justifying everything as necessary for the war on terror.’ Either the Constitution and the laws of this country mean something or they don’t. It is truly frightening what is going on in this country."

I still believe in an America where the powers and rights of the People are well-protected. I believe that the Bush administration has gone too far, and its reasons for doing so, even at a time of war, are unsettling. Many believe there has been an abuse of power and that their president has not told them the truth.

"Today's mainstream media has not been a responsible avenue for informing the electorate, and I partially fault them for the place where we find ourselves today."

The sad truth is, most Americans are too ignorant to care. Gore Vidal recently summed it up:

“Our political system is now thoroughly corrupt. Since the educational system for most people is inadequate they begin their lives as citizens with no knowledge of our republic and its history while the media is in the hands of a very few people who have much to hide from us.

The greatest threat to democracy is an uninformed electorate. Today's mainstream media has not been a responsible avenue for informing the electorate, and I partially fault them for the place where we find ourselves today. I wonder why today's well-paid (and complacent) writers fail to see the imperial arrogance and potentially fatal overreach that may hasten the demise of our freedoms. Al Gore has warned America of an impending constitutional crisis, and although the turds of the media love to literally mock Mr. Gore to please their intellectually pedestrian or pro-Republican readers, a certain portion of the citizenry who pay close attention understand and take stock in what Mr. Gore is telling them.

"..the unwashed masses will go on having a field day with Al Gore (or Virginia governor Tim Kaine's left eyebrow) while little Bush and his band of raving lunatics pave the way for the next unnecessary and disastrous war.."

People need to start speaking out on behalf of what they believe. I firmly believe that we have an idiot for a President - and the neoconservatives in his administration are a bunch of idiots. If we fail to point to the emperors who have no clothes (or brains), the unwashed masses will go on having a field day with Al Gore (or Virginia governor Tim Kaine's left eyebrow) while little Bush and his band of raving lunatics pave the way for the next unnecessary and disastrous war that our sons and daughters will be suiting up for (with a likely deficit of appropriate protective armor).

The Senate is preparing to make the case that power between the executive and legislative branches is unbalanced. I would call that an understatement.

"You know, it’s at a time when people say, ‘Well, it makes no difference what we do, you know, if we march and we make speeches, and this and that.’ It makes a lot of difference if millions of Americans just say, “We are fed up! We don't like you. We don't like what you're doing to the country and what you have done to the country. We don't like to live in a lawless land, where the rule of law has just been bypassed and hacks are appointed to the federal bench, who will carry on and carry on and carry on all of the illegalities which are so desperately needed by our military-industrial corporate masters.”

- Gore Vidal

"Don't be intimidated by total turds who insinuate that you are "irrational"."

America is in the wrong hands. Incapable hands. Power-grabbing hands. Scream it from the rooftops. Don't be intimidated by total turds who insinuate that you are "irrational".

Poverty: Thanks for Reminding Them, Bono

Original art by Denise Lawler

"Justice is a higher standard."

- Bono

Poverty: Thanks for Reminding Them, Bono

Bono halped to bring some subtance back into the meaning of faith at yesterday's National Prayer breakfast. He called the UN Millenium Development goals "the Beatitudes for a Globalised World."

From the WaPo:

".. the U2 front man said it's unjust to keep poor people from selling their goods while singing the virtues of the free market, to hold children to ransom for the debts of their grandparents and to withhold medicines that would save lives. "God will not accept that," he said. "Mine won't. Will yours?"

I wish that our political leaders in the United States were as sincere about their faith as Bono seems to be.
E-Robin has a partial transcript and video links to Bono's remarks.

My chosen excerpt from Bono's speech from Sojourners, where Jim Wallis provides additional commentary: (source: sojonet/sojomail):

God may well be with us in our mansions on the hill. I hope so. He may well be with us as in all manner of controversial stuff. Maybe, maybe not. But the one thing we can all agree, all faiths and ideologies, is that God is with the vulnerable and poor.

God is in the slums, in the cardboard boxes where the poor play house. God is in the silence of a mother who has infected her child with a virus that will end both their lives. God is in the cries heard under the rubble of war. God is in the debris of wasted opportunity and lives, and God is with us if we are with them. "If you remove the yoke from your midst, the pointing of the finger and speaking wickedness, and if you give yourself to the hungry and satisfy the desire of the afflicted, then your light will rise in darkness and your gloom with become like midday and the Lord will continually guide you and satisfy your desire in scorched places."

It's not a coincidence that in the scriptures, poverty is mentioned more than 2,100 times. It's not an accident. That's a lot of air time, 2,100 mentions. (You know, the only time Christ is judgmental is on the subject of the poor.) 'As you have done it unto the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me' (Matthew 25:40). As I say, good news to the poor.

Here's some good news for the president. After 9/11 we were told America would have no time for the world's poor. America would be taken up with its own problems of safety. And it's true these are dangerous times, but America has not drawn the blinds and double-locked the doors.

In fact, you have doubled aid to Africa. You have tripled funding for global health. Mr. President, your emergency plan for AIDS relief and support for the Global Fund - you and Congress - have put 700,000 people onto life-saving anti-retroviral drugs and provided 8 million bed nets to protect children from malaria.

Outstanding human achievements. Counterintuitive. Historic. Be very, very proud.

But here's the bad news. From charity to justice, the good news is yet to come. There is much more to do. There's a gigantic chasm between the scale of the emergency and the scale of the response.

And finally, it's not about charity after all, is it? It's about justice.

Let me repeat that: It's not about charity, it's about justice.

And that's too bad.

Because you're good at charity. Americans, like the Irish, are good at it. We like to give, and we give a lot, even those who can't afford it.

But justice is a higher standard.

Murtha Writes to Bush

Murtha Writes to Bush

Short version:
Iraq is not the center of the war on terrorism.
Redeploy, Replace, Reallocate, Reconstitute

CNN is Having Faux Cow over Toles Cartoon

CNN is Having Faux Cow over Toles Cartoon


CNN is such a weasel-network. They are feigning shock over Tom Toles' political cartoon from January 29th. I can just hear Ken Mehlman or one of his minions in the ear of the network's higher-ups. Outrage! Tom Toles is supporting the terrorists!

On their Healine News network, they are taking a poll, asking the leading question, "Did Toles take it too far?"

When is CNN going to grow up?

CNN's special news feature on "Two Irans" last night, following Bush's further SOTU demonization of and hyperfocus on Iran, was interesting, but I cannot imagine why we wouldn't be seeing a hell of a lot more stories about the "Two Americas." We have enough polarization and poverty right here in the U.S. to fill entire days and news cycles.

I am reminded of 2002 - the lead-up to the war with Iraq when CNN blasted all their demon-Iraq features. I am convinced now, more than ever, that CNN is just another arm of the Oval Office. I had turned them off completely after the presidential election in 2004. I didn't watch them for months and frankly, I barely missed them.

In my opinion, news editors at CNN need to be in more control of their own content instead of allowing the agenda of a very unpopular president (and the corporations who love him) guide their editorial decisions. Their credibility is draining away like swirling feces down the sewer pipe.

In the real world with a news organization with editors who have integrity and balls, Rumsfled would have been fired three years ago, and perhaps we may have never gone to Iraq at all. It's obvious that CNN was intimidated by Bush's SOTU dissent-warnings on Tuesday night.

I want news that really matters to me and my family. I'm sick of our news networks coddling the fear-moongerers and, by their failure to be adequately critical, become fear-mongerers. I long for the enlightened writers and news editors. The words "free press" mean nothing when there is inadequate debate and an ignorance of important issues.