Nasty Letters To Crooked Politicians

As we enter a new era of politics, we hope to see that Obama has the courage to fight the policies that Progressives hate. Will he have the fortitude to turn the economic future of America to help the working man? Or will he turn out to be just a pawn of big money, as he seems to be right now.

Saturday, August 30, 2003

Chimper_Junta Couldn't Scare Hans Blix Into Lying for Them...So They Made Him A Target of Vitriol.

Blix Felt U.S. Intimidating Him Before Iraq War

08/29/03: (Reuters) VIENNA - Former chief U.N. arms inspector Hans Blix felt Washington was intimidating him to produce reports that would justify military action in the run-up to the Iraq war, the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog said on Friday.

In an interview on BBC television's Hardtalk, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei also said he believed Iraq had not tried to revive its clandestine nuclear weapons program as the United States and Britain insist.

Blix and ElBaradei led the hunt for Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction for nearly four months late last year and early this year. The IAEA hunted for nuclear weapons, while Blix's UNMOVIC monitoring agency looked for chemical, biological and ballistic arms.

Asked if the administration of President Bush had tried to intimidate him to produce reports support their case for a war on Iraq, ElBaradei said it had not.

"I think there were probably more efforts to intimidate Hans Blix, because there were more serious concerns about chemical and biological (weapons)," he said.

"Hans complained a lot about the media campaign, some of the administration's efforts to put pressure on him."

The Bush administration sharply criticized Blix before the war for refusing to back U.S. and British assertions about Iraq's weapons programs in his reports to the U.N. Security Council.

U.N. weapons inspectors never found the massive stockpiles of banned weapons that Britain and the U.S. claimed President Saddam Hussein possessed. Neither have the U.S. and British forces who took over the hunt for his arsenal after the war.

ElBaradei said a lesson should be learned about the dangers of cutting short weapons inspections.

"If anything comes out from the war in Iraq, it's that inspections take time and that we should not jump to conclusions, because jumping to conclusions on such a vital issue that determines war and peace is very reckless and irresponsible in my opinion," he said.

ElBaradei added that he would like to see the situation in Iraq "coming to a closure soon and put an end to that tragic situation."

Regarding U.S. and British insistence that Saddam had tried to revive his secret atomic weapons program, which the IAEA says it destroyed in the 1990s, ElBaradei was certain this allegation is unfounded.

"I would be very surprised if we were to discover that there was a nuclear weapons program restarted in Iraq," he said.

Blix, who headed the IAEA for 16 years until 1997, retired as the director of UNMOVIC at the end of June.

Copyright 2003 Reuters Ltd

Thursday, August 28, 2003

Bush Junta Tries to Exploit New Angle To Take Blame off of Chimper--"The Bad Iraqi Intelligencers done Did Us iN"

U.S. Suspects It Received False Iraq Arms Tips

Although senior CIA officials insist that defectors were only partly responsible for the intelligence that triggered the decision to invade Iraq in March, other intelligence officials now fear that key portions of the prewar information may have been flawed. The issue raises fresh doubts as to whether illicit weapons will be found in Iraq.

As evidence, officials say former Iraqi operatives have confirmed since the war that Hussein's regime sent "double agents" disguised as defectors to the West to plant fabricated intelligence. In other cases, Baghdad apparently tricked legitimate defectors into funneling phony tips about weapons production and storage sites.

(If this isn't the dumbest thing that the dim dumbya has come up with yet, well I don't know what is. Does this little bastard think everyone is as fucking stupid as he is? And Cheney (we know the nukes...) Powell (proven sources) Rumsfeld (exactly where the weapons are)....These war criminal mother fuckers all need to be cuffed and stuffed. Tried and fried...and hung...hung by their fucking necks for all the people they have injured and killed. For the infrastructure of a soveriegn nation that they have destroyed. For the children they have maimed and decapitated. For our soldiers that are being killed and kept in Iraq against their wills.

Bush, you dirty mother fucker. Bush you are, along with your cabal, a war criminal the like of which the world has never seen before.)

Chimper_Junta: "THE BAD IRAQI INTELLIGENCERS MADE US DO IT" The Lame Gopper Excuse for the Slaughter of Thousands

Now that everyone within range of the lying chimper bullshit offensive has fallen on their sword to save chimp's lying illegitimacy, it is time to find new fall guys, it seems.


Except months ago, the big story that was ducked by all major news organizations was that GOOD IRAQI INTELLIGENCE WAS SWEPT UNDER THE RUG by the Chimper_junta.

Will this anomaly be reported? Will the hypocrisy be exposed and investigated? Or is this only the latest lying, trial balloon floated by an administration up to its ass in alligators and finally unable--unable, to drain the swamp?

From: "A. J. Franklin"
Subject: Star Witness on Iraq Said Weapons Were Destroyed

This is probably the BIGGEST STORY OF THE YEAR. Where in the world has the world press been while we have been lied, lied, lied to by Bush, Blair, the press, and the media demagogues.

I have such an anger at seeing this for the first time as a story developed just like the lying fakery Powell, US Sec State, put on the table in front of the UN to force it to war...and thankfully failed.


He is the enemy of the people.

AJ Franklin

FAIR wrote:

Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:37:41 -0800
Subject: Star Witness on Iraq Said Weapons Were Destroyed
Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
Media analysis, critiques and activism

Star Witness on Iraq Said Weapons Were Destroyed:
Bombshell revelation from a defector cited by White House and press

February 27, 2003

On February 24, Newsweek broke what may be the biggest story of the Iraq
crisis. In a revelation that "raises questions about whether the WMD
[weapons of mass destruction] stockpiles attributed to Iraq still exist,"
the magazine's issue dated March 3 reported that the Iraqi weapons chief
who defected from the regime in 1995 told U.N. inspectors that Iraq had
destroyed its entire stockpile of chemical and biological weapons and
banned missiles, as Iraq claims.

Until now, Gen. Hussein Kamel, who was killed shortly after returning to
Iraq in 1996, was best known for his role in exposing Iraq's deceptions
about how far its pre-Gulf War biological weapons programs had advanced.
But Newsweek's John Barry-- who has covered Iraqi weapons inspections for
more than a decade-- obtained the transcript of Kamel's 1995 debriefing by
officials from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the U.N.
inspections team known as UNSCOM.

Inspectors were told "that after the Gulf War, Iraq destroyed all its
chemical and biological weapons stocks and the missiles to deliver them,"
Barry wrote. All that remained were "hidden blueprints, computer disks,
microfiches" and production molds. The weapons were destroyed secretly, in
order to hide their existence from inspectors, in the hopes of someday
resuming production after inspections had finished. The CIA and MI6 were
told the same story, Barry reported, and "a military aide who defected
with Kamel... backed Kamel's assertions about the destruction of WMD

But these statements were "hushed up by the U.N. inspectors" in order to
"bluff Saddam into disclosing still more."

CIA spokesman Bill Harlow angrily denied the Newsweek report. "It is
incorrect, bogus, wrong, untrue," Harlow told Reuters the day the report
appeared (2/24/03).

But on Wednesday (2/26/03), a complete copy of the Kamel transcript-- an
internal UNSCOM/IAEA document stamped "sensitive"-- was obtained by Glen
Rangwala, the Cambridge University analyst who in early February revealed
that Tony Blair's "intelligence dossier" was plagiarized from a student
thesis. Rangwala has posted the Kamel transcript on the Web:.. NEW LINK...

In the transcript (p. 13), Kamel says bluntly: "All weapons-- biological,
chemical, missile, nuclear, were destroyed."

Who is Hussein Kamel?

Kamel is no obscure defector. A son-in-law of Saddam Hussein, his
departure from Iraq carrying crates of secret documents on Iraq's past
weapons programs was a major turning point in the inspections saga. In
1999, in a letter to the U.N. Security Council (1/25/99), UNSCOM reported
that its entire eight years of disarmament work "must be divided into two
parts, separated by the events following the departure from Iraq, in
August 1995, of Lt. General Hussein Kamel."

Kamel's defection has been cited repeatedly by George W. Bush and leading
administration officials as evidence that 1) Iraq has not disarmed; 2)
inspections cannot disarm it; and 3) defectors such as Kamel are the most
reliable source of information on Iraq's weapons.

* Bush declared in an October 7, 2002 speech: "In 1995, after several
years of deceit by the Iraqi regime, the head of Iraq's military
industries defected. It was then that the regime was forced to admit that
it had produced more than 30,000 liters of anthrax and other deadly
biological agents. The inspectors, however, concluded that Iraq had likely
produced two to four times that amount. This is a massive stockpile of
biological weapons that has never been accounted for, and capable of
killing millions."

* Secretary of State Colin Powell's February 5 presentation to the U.N.
Security Council claimed: "It took years for Iraq to finally admit that it
had produced four tons of the deadly nerve agent, VX. A single drop of VX
on the skin will kill in minutes. Four tons. The admission only came out
after inspectors collected documentation as a result of the defection of
Hussein Kamel, Saddam Hussein's late son-in-law."

* In a speech last August (8/27/02), Vice President Dick Cheney said
Kamel's story "should serve as a reminder to all that we often learned
more as the result of defections than we learned from the inspection
regime itself."

* Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley recently wrote in the
Chicago Tribune (2/16/03) that "because of information provided by Iraqi
defector and former head of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs,
Lt. Gen. Hussein Kamel, the regime had to admit in detail how it cheated
on its nuclear non-proliferation commitments."

The quotes from Bush and Powell cited above refer to anthrax and VX
produced by Iraq before the 1991 Gulf War. The administration has cited
various quantities of chemical and biological weapons on many other
occasions-- weapons that Iraq produced but which remain unaccounted for.
All of these claims refer to weapons produced before 1991.

But according to Kamel's transcript, Iraq destroyed all of these weapons
in 1991.

According to Newsweek, Kamel told the same story to CIA analysts in August
1995. If that is true, all of these U.S. officials have had access to
Kamel's statements that the weapons were destroyed. Their repeated
citations of his testimony-- without revealing that he also said the
weapons no longer exist-- suggests that the administration might be
withholding critical evidence. In particular, it casts doubt on the
credibility of Powell's February 5 presentation to the U.N., which was
widely hailed at the time for its persuasiveness. To clear up the issue,
journalists might ask that the CIA release the transcripts of its own
conversations with Kamel.

Kamel's disclosures have also been crucial to the arguments made by
hawkish commentators on Iraq. The defector has been cited four times on
the New York Times op-ed page in the last four months in support of claims
about Iraq's weapons programs--never noting his assertions about the
elimination of these weapons. In a major Times op-ed calling for war with
Iraq (2/21/03), Kenneth Pollack of the Brookings Institution wrote that
Kamel and other defectors "reported that outside pressure had not only
failed to eradicate the nuclear program, it was bigger and more cleverly
spread out and concealed than anyone had imagined it to be." The release
of Kamel's transcript makes this claim appear grossly at odds with the
defector's actual testimony.

The Kamel story is a bombshell that necessitates a thorough reevaluation
of U.S. media reporting on Iraq, much of which has taken for granted that
the nation retains supplies of prohibited weapons. (See FAIR Media
Advisory, "Iraq's Hidden Weapons: From Allegation to Fact,"
( Kamel's testimony
is not, of course, proof that Iraq does not have hidden stocks of chemical
or biological weapons, but it does suggest a need for much more media
skepticism about U.S. allegations than has previously been shown.

Unfortunately, Newsweek chose a curious way to handle its scoop: The
magazine placed the story in the miscellaneous "Periscope" section with a
generic headline, "The Defector's Secrets." Worse, Newsweek's online
version added a subhead that seemed almost designed to undercut the
importance of the story: "Before his death, a high-ranking defector said
Iraq had not abandoned its WMD ambitions." So far, according to a February
27 search of the Nexis database, no major U.S. newspapers or national
television news shows have picked up the Newsweek story.

Read the Newsweek story:...Link

Read Glen Rangwala's analysis of the Kamel transcript:...Link

Feel free to respond to FAIR ( ). We can't reply to everything, but we will look at each message. We especially appreciate documented examples of media bias or censorship. And please send copies of your email correspondence with media outlets, including any responses, to .

You can subscribe to FAIR-L at our web site: . Our subscriber list is kept confidential.



BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | US condemns Arab TV channel

The United States has strongly criticised an Arabic satellite television network for showing masked men who threatened to kill members of the American-appointed governing council in Iraq.

Dubai-based Al-Arabiya television on Tuesday broadcast video footage showing a group of men wearing hoods over their faces.

US forces in Iraq face constant hit-and-run attacks They were heard to threaten the lives of those serving on the governing council in Baghdad and of any Iraqis who co-operated with the American-led administration.

The State Department spokesman, Philip Reeker, condemned the broadcast.

"We find al-Arabiya's decision to air the remarks of these masked terrorists to be irresponsible in the extreme," he said.

"We have to question why an organisation claiming to be a legitimate news service would effectively provide this conduit for terrorists to communicate plans, tactics and incitement to murder and to attempt to disrupt the peaceful aspirations of the Iraqi people."

Mr Reeker said the US Government was instructing its embassies to convey the Bush administration's outrage to those who supported or had invested in al-Arabiya.

US criticism of Arab satellite television networks is not new.

Al-Arabiya, al-Jazeera and others have been condemned in the past for broadcasting al-Qaeda messages or over their coverage of the Iraq war.

But this warning was unusually harsh and the implied threat to seek to cut off a network's funding appears to be new.

End of BBC Story------

(This attempt to shut down more voices out there in the world needs to be stopped. Bush and his minions need to be cuffed and stuffed. They are war criminals. They all should be tried and fried. If found guilty, HUNG BY THEIR FUCKING NECKS UNTIL DEAD: BUSH CHENEY RUMSFELD POWELL RICE FRANKS LAPDOG BLAIR....War Criminals With a Price on Their Heads.)

Wednesday, August 27, 2003

The Weekly Standard vs. and Sidney Blumenthal: Part I - A BuzzFlash Editorial

The Weekly Standard vs. and Sidney Blumenthal: Part I - A BuzzFlash Editorial

Indeed, just prior to September 11th, Bush was taking his annual month-long vacation at his faux, photo-op ranch, where he is right now.

And while The Weekly Standard fills up its pages with panicky criticisms of BuzzFlash and Blumenthal, our soldiers continue to die in Iraq and Afghanistan.

With the death Monday, August 25, of another U.S. soldier in Iraq, the number of U.S. troops who have died there since May 1, when President Bush declared an end to major combat operations, rose to 138, more than those who died BEFORE Bush declared "Mission Accomplished." Since Monday, three more U.S. soldiers have died. At least 76 American soldiers have died in Iraq since Bush recklessly declared, "Bring them on." Remember how the deaths of the Saddam sons were supposed to slow down attacks on our soldiers? 48 U.S. soldiers have died since that time. And that doesn't include the hundreds that have been wounded. [LINK]

The pages of The Weekly Standard are more than just fish wrap for the Murdoch agenda; they are bloodstained broadsides that defend the indefensible.

Buzzflash Link

Sunday, August 24, 2003

Bush_Junta's Lies On Iraq, and Their Consequences. Or Mayberry Machiavellis Destroy Civilization in Two Years.

Eight Lies

Iraq or the energy grid, it's always the same with these people: They put ideology ahead of facts and use their own failures as evidence that they should be given more license. It's time someone took their license away.

United Nations Tell The Chimper_Junta to Go Fuck Itself. (Text of a Letter Sent to Ambassadors of the UN)

Dear Honorable Ambassador:

As an American, I feel very saddened by the illegal invasion of a sovereign nation by the minions of GW Bush and the British lapdog, Tony Blair.

I was very happy that 'old Europe' stood firmly against the pre-emtive war action taken by the unelected fraud Bush and the British lapdog Blair, in the United Nations.

Bush sneered and smirked at you, and the world body of the United Nations, 50 years in the making, as irrelevant.

Clearly, his idiocy is apparent at this point, and the strength of your decision stands proudly in stark contrast to the blood-for-oil greed of the Bush_Junta.

But now the unelected fraud, Bush and his minions, ask the UN to bail them out of this terrible decision. He gives no quarter on sharing the command. All of the risk, none of the 'reward.' That is insane.

As an American it is hard to deal with such immoral, illegal, fraudulent leadership in our White House. I can only hope a legal election can be conducted in 16 months which will install an intelligent president that can be a source of pride to us, instead of shame. A source of real inspiration, instead of shame. A leader, instead of a petty despot.

You have every right to tell the Bush Junta to go to hell. I hope you do tell them to go to hell. Do not become part of the criminality.

Unless and until the United Nations assumes complete control of the situation in Iraq, no other nations should send their young men and women there to die for Bush/Blair criminality and misjudgement.

Instead, Bush/Blair, along with their entire lying administrations, should be arrested and tried as war criminals.


Friday, August 22, 2003

Bush You Liar. "Bring em on." "Osama Dead or Alive in a year or two." Read Your Lips Ignoramus: Q_U_A_G_M_I_R_E ...

Actual Letter to: ...Link...

pResident George Bush
Squatters Zone
The White House
Washington, DC

August 22, 2003

OK, so you went AWOL during the Viet Nam War. OK, so your daddy got you a special perk--getting into the Tx Nat. Guard instead of sending you to Viet Nam. And that cost a Texan a place in the TNG, because refused to go to the end of the waiting list--You had to get in NOW or you were in basic training for the infantry, right? So someone else, I wonder who, went to the Nam and died. And here you sit, in the catbird's seat. Twist of fate? Shit happens, right?

OK, you think you are some kind of toy-action-figure--a real fighter pilot--with a sock in your jock.

But look at what you have done to us. Because you learned nothing during your drugged up alcohol-besotted AWOL years, we are in another quagmire: Iraq. For What? Greed? Blood for Oil?

It is now known that Cheney in his secret, confidential, big-time big-energy conference with the oil barons and other campaign donors, were drooling over maps of the Iraqi Oil fields. No secret anymore, is it, liar? Scoundrel. Con man.

You are a international pariah. And now you want all the countries you told to go to fuck themselves to join in the dying in Iraq? You, you fucking idiot, thought it would be a cakewalk! Shock and Awe, and then the oil flows. Everything else was just "collateral damage." That's what the other war criminal, Rumsfeld, said...collateral damage. Dead and maimed and injured human beings. Bloody massacre. Starvation, disease.

"Democracy is messy." War Criminal Rumsfeld.

"We'll do it alone." Remember that, poseur? How many times did you make that macho (as long as the other guys are dying) claim?

Now the world is telling America to "do it alone." "Fuck You."

Well, what's your next act, tough guy? Putting on that make-believe flight suit and #43 helmet and going over there to join the fight? Flying off to an island with Tony Lap Dog Blair and some Spanish guy?

I don't think the world has ever known a more devious and cowardly son of a bush than you.

Bush_Junta: Learning The Lesson Bush & Cheney Shirked In 1970's--IT'S A QUAGMIRE OUT THERE

The Iraq quagmire

"...Those who plotted the illegal war on Iraq bear full political and moral responsibility for the violence and bloodshed in that country today. That they denounce as “terrorists” those who fail to greet the US invaders as “liberators” is hardly an innovation. Such was the case in Vietnam, Algeria, southern Africa and every other part of the globe where oppressed peoples fought to throw off the yoke of colonialism and foreign occupation.

It should be recalled that the Nazis, who pioneered the policy of “preventive war” adopted by Bush, routinely condemned anyone who resisted German occupation in the Second World War as “terrorists.” Those who opposed Nazi aggression, however, lauded the attacks of the resistance, whose exploits were glorified in not a few Hollywood films.

Tuesday’s bombing in Baghdad provoked a flood of media commentary that, in one form or another, proposed that Washington answer the attack with even greater repression. “The Bush administration has to commit sufficient additional resources, and, if necessary, additional troops...” declared the New York Times in its lead editorial Wednesday. “The Iraqis need to see that Washington has the will and the means to get their country back on its feet.”

In the same newspaper, columnist Maureen Dowd penned a particularly cynical piece. She acknowledged that in advance of the war the Bush administration had “inflated the threats to America” and “ginned up links between Saddam and Al Qaeda.” She further pointed out that while no threat from armed Islamist groups existed in Iraq before the war, the invasion and occupation had produced conditions in which these organizations could flourish. “The Bush team has now created the very monster that it conjured up to alarm Americans into backing a war on Iraq,” she wrote.

In the end, however, she concluded: “We can’t leave, and we can’t stay forever. We just have to slug it out.”

“Slugging it out” means that many more American youth in uniform must be killed or wounded, and even greater numbers of Iraqis and youths from other Arab countries must be sacrificed. It amounts to a justification for continuing a brutal neocolonial war....Link...

Thursday, August 21, 2003

Bush_Junta Finds Iraq is NOT Florida. Except They Are Killing Our Kids For Oil Greed. The Horror. The Horror.

A Price Too High

How long is it going to take for us to recognize that the war we so foolishly started in Iraq is a fiasco — tragic, deeply dehumanizing and ultimately unwinnable? How much time and how much money and how many wasted lives is it going to take?

At the United Nations yesterday, grieving diplomats spoke bitterly, but not for attribution, about the U.S.-led invasion and occupation. They said it has not only resulted in the violent deaths of close and highly respected colleagues, but has also galvanized the most radical elements of Islam.

"This is a dream for the jihad," said one high-ranking U.N. official. "The resistance will only grow. The American occupation is now the focal point, drawing people from all over Islam into an eye-to-eye confrontation with the hated Americans.

"It is very propitious for the terrorists," he said. "The U.S. is now on the soil of an Arab country, a Muslim country, where the terrorists have all the advantages. They are fighting in a terrain which they know and the U.S. does not know, with cultural images the U.S. does not understand, and with a language the American soldiers do not speak. The troops can't even read the street signs."

The American people still do not have a clear understanding of why we are in Iraq. And the troops don't have a clear understanding of their mission. We're fighting a guerrilla war, which the bright lights at the Pentagon never saw coming, with conventional forces.

Under these circumstances, in which the enemy might be anybody, anywhere, tragedies like the killing of Mazen Dana are all but inevitable. Mr. Dana was the veteran Reuters cameraman who was blown away by jittery U.S. troops on Sunday. The troops apparently thought his video camera was a rocket-propelled grenade launcher.

The mind plays tricks on you when you're in great danger. A couple of weeks ago, in an apparent case of mistaken identity, U.S. soldiers killed two members of the Iraqi police. And a number of innocent Iraqi civilians, including children, have been killed by American troops.

The carnage from riots, ambushes, firefights, suicide bombings, acts of sabotage, friendly fire incidents and other deadly encounters is growing. And so is the hostility toward U.S. troops and Americans in general.

We are paying a terribly high price — for what?

One of the many reasons Vietnam spiraled out of control was the fact that America's top political leaders never clearly defined the mission there, and were never straight with the public about what they were doing. Domestic political considerations led Kennedy, then Johnson, then Nixon to conceal the truth about a policy that was bankrupt from the beginning. They even concealed how much the war was costing.

Sound familiar?

Now we're lodged in Iraq, in the midst of the most volatile region of the world, and the illusion of a quick victory followed by grateful Iraqis' welcoming us with open arms has vanished. Instead of democracy blossoming in the desert, we have the reality of continuing bloodshed and heightened terror — the payoff of a policy spun from fantasies and lies.

Senator John McCain and others are saying the answer is more troops, an escalation. If you want more American blood shed, that's the way to go. We sent troops to Vietnam by the hundreds of thousands. There were never enough.

Beefing up the American occupation is not the answer to the problem. The American occupation is the problem. The occupation is perceived by ordinary Iraqis as a confrontation and a humiliation, and by terrorists and other bad actors as an opportunity to be gleefully exploited.

The U.S. cannot bully its way to victory in Iraq. It needs allies, and it needs a plan. As quickly as possible, we should turn the country over to a genuine international coalition, headed by the U.N. and supported in good faith by the U.S.

The idea would be to mount a massive international effort to secure Iraq, develop a legitimate sovereign government and work cooperatively with the Iraqi people to rebuild the nation.

If this does not happen, disaster will loom because the United States cannot secure and rebuild Iraq on its own.

A U.N. aide told me: "The United States is the No. 1 enemy of the Muslim world, and right now it's sitting on the terrorists' doorstep. It needs help. It needs friends."

Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

Tuesday, August 19, 2003

Bush_junta Bombs United Nations Bldg in Baghdad? Bombs Water Lines? Chaos Unleashed by junta to Shift Blame?


Take nothing off the table from these bloodthirsty, HOMEGROWN TERRORISTS. "Bring 'em on" says the AWOL coward chimper. The gopper figurehead in our White House. The home of chimper_junta, squatting in Al Gore's seat.

Did chimper_junta blow up the water pipes yesterday because they were pissed off at Iraqis who blew up their preciou$ oil pipeline the day before? Blame Shifters--Shape Shifters--If the bad Iraqis did this to the good Iraqis instead of the bad occupation forces...well you can see where this all goes. Just imagine, if you will, THE WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIO: Chimp_Junta killing and maiming United Nations workers, newspeople, news make the UN go away. To bolster the case for the US service people to stay. It is a realistic scenario, as horrible as it is to contemplate.

OUR OWN GOVERNMENT DESTROYING INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY...WHY WOULD THEY NOT HAVE BLOWN UP THE VICEROY OF BAGHDAD, PAUL BREMER, and his staff??? Makes no sense, huh? Unless Bush_junta did it...Then it all starts to add up very well.

Chimper_junta is bombing anything and everything just to scare YOU. OR...they have absolutely NO control over simple things like truck traffic driving up to the embassies...which one is it? Which major media will jump into the fray and ask the hard questions?

Does anyone else notice the 'nexus,' the way good things (water supplies, UN buildings, Embassies, electric power plants)get blown up by un-named "suicide" bombers every time an oil pipeline blows? Just watch...Rummy's State Propaganda Dept. wants everyone to think these bombers are after he can stir up hatred. And divert it from the occupying force.

bush_junta--war criminals, murderers, greedy gangsters using our sons and daughters, US Servicepeople, as their personal 'republican guard' for the looting of Iraq. And who will PAY the price? You and your kids, grandkids, and their kids...into the next century, if America can ever survive this disaster called Bush.

Nothing is beyond their pervue...nothing...they have shredded our constitution and think with the help of Chemical Tom Delay (a murderer who has gassed his own people, cockroaches), they can take over the fucking world.

Buck Fush in 04

Monday, August 18, 2003

Bush_junta & Rumsfeld Defense Department Authorize Murder of More Reporters in Iraq--Real Investigation Demanded

Bush_junta Kills Reuters Reporter- Iraq

In a letter today to US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Reporters Without Borders said it was "appalled and shocked" by the fatal shooting of Reuters cameraman Mazen Dana by a US soldier yesterday in Iraq. The press freedom organisation called for an immediate enquiry that would be "honest, rapid and designed to shed full light on this tragedy, not whitewash the US army."

Reporters Without Borders secretary-general Robert Ménard said that US troops had committed many blunders during the war in Iraq "but none has been the subject of an investigation worthy of the name." The Pentagon's so-called enquiry into the shelling of the Palestine Hotel on 8 April, of which only the unconvincing conclusions have been made public, "shamelessly exonerates the US army," he said.

"In isolated cases, we have seen soldiers being hostile to news media personnel," Ménard continued. "Such behaviour is unacceptable and must be punished. It is essential that clear instructions and calls for caution are given to soldiers in the field so that the freedom of movement and work of journalists is respected in Iraq."

A Palestinian aged 43, Dana was shot dead by a US soldier as he was filming for the British news agency Reuters the Abou Ghraib prison on the outskirts of Baghdad on the afternoon of 17 August. According to a statement the same day by US Capt. Frank Thorp in Washington, Dana's death was the result of an error of judgement. He said Dana was targeted because his camera was mistaken for a grenade-launcher.

However, Reuters soundman Nael Choukhi, who was with Dana when he was killed, said the US soldiers had seen them and knew they were journalists. He said he and Dana had previously asked the US soldiers guarding the prison for permission to film.


Saturday, August 16, 2003

Chimper_junta: Can't Coax Oil out of West Texas--Steals it From Iraq..."Got a Prollem wit Dat?"

Global Eye -- Dubya Indemnity
By Chris Floyd

At long last, a "smoking gun" has been found to justify the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. Investigators probing obscure government archives in the occupied capital city have uncovered a document signed by the unelected tyrant that provides a clear casus belli for the much-disputed conflict.

This remarkable directive was part of a series of moves undertaken by the dictator to strengthen his one-party stranglehold on the state by looting the wealth of the Iraqi people and placing himself and his cronies beyond the reach of the law. It was issued at the leader's autocratic whim, without public notice or any vote by the oppressed nation's ludicrous, rubber-stamp "legislature." It freed the dictator and his looter-barons from responsibility for a broad range of potential crimes: fraud, environmental devastation, slave labor, even murder -- as long as those activities were related to filling the ruling clique's pockets with profits from Iraq's oil.

A more powerful instrument of repression can scarcely be imagined -- yet the bleeding-heart apologists for tyranny, those craven bootlickers who so strenuously oppose "regime change" to remove a thugocracy choking the life from a long-suffering people, have not uttered a peep about this nefarious document, which lies at the heart of a criminal enterprise that has claimed thousands of innocent victims and fanned the flames of international terrorism.

We refer, of course, to Executive Order 13303, quietly promulgated by George W. Bush in May then buried deep in the verbiage of the Federal Register, where it was recently unearthed by Jim Vallette of the Institute for Policy Studies. Here, Bush's prettified public motives for war give way to the "bottom line" so beloved by the sordid corporate hacks and ideological extremists who seized Washington in the 2000 judicial coup.

In the order, Bush proclaims that any legal action taken for any reason against any American corporation dealing in "Iraqi petroleum products" at any point in the process -- from well-head to gas-pump to boardroom -- "constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security" of the United States. In fact, the very possibility that one of Bush's oil pets might be held accountable for its actions while gorging on Iraqi crude is so terrifying that the Looter-in-Chief has declared a "national emergency" to deal with the situation. (A "national emergency" that he forgot to mention to, er, the nation.)

The Bush edict grants a blanket immunity to all traffickers in Iraqi oil -- as long as their moolah finds its way, by hook or crook, into the coffers of "United States persons or entities." Bush declares flatly that any "judicial process" launched against these protected entities "shall be deemed null and void." And how to guarantee that his partners and patrons won't be troubled by some rogue nation that still clings to the outmoded principle of law and order? Simple: One of the agencies authorized to "employ all powers" necessary "to carry out the purposes of this order" is our old friend, the Defense Department.

Ostensibly, Order 13303 is aimed at preventing sissy-baby war-shirkers like, say, Russia, from going to court to enforce their existing oil contracts with Iraq. Here, the Regime is merely recognizing "facts on the ground": Iraq's oil doesn't belong to Saddam anymore; it belongs to George Bush, and he can do what he likes with it. (Forget the shuck-and-jive about "preserving the resources of the Iraqi people" -- that's just cornball for the yokels back home.)

But as Vallette points out, the rap sheet of American energy "entities" is crammed with ugly incidents, including the aforesaid employment of forced labor, the hiring of murderous goons to put down protests by unruly natives, the subversion and corruption of national governments, and the despoiling of vast swathes of sea and coastline on a regular basis. There's little reason to believe these swaggering behemoths will be more circumspect in their fevered rush to exploit Iraq's captive treasures. Like many other of Bush's unconstitutional, unlegislated and undebated secret directives, Order 13303 is essentially a license to kill.

It's also part of a massive effort to turn Iraq into a Bushist theme park, where favored corporate cronies can run wild, unfettered by regulation and glutted by American taxpayer money that frees them from any financial risk. To that end, Bush sent his old college buddy Thomas Foley to Baghdad last week, the Financial Times reports, to "advance the privatization" of Iraqi state enterprises by ensuring that the sell-off of the nation's non-oil assets will be "open to foreign trade" -- i.e., "United States persons or entities." Many of the latter have hired Bush's former campaign manger and political fixer, lobbyist Joe Allbaugh, to front for them at the occupation trough, the National Journal reports.

At the same time, a rigged bidding process last week forced rivals of Dick Cheney's paymaster, Halliburton (yes, he still gets fat checks from his old firm) out of the running for a new multibillion-dollar contract to administer Iraq's oil fields, The New York Times reports. Those billions will now flow to the Vice Man's company -- whose every action will be whitewashed by Bush's order of indemnity.

But there is no indemnity, no immunity, for the American soldiers dying daily in guerrilla ambushes, or the innocent Iraqis mown down daily by their panicky conquerors, or the innocent people around the world at increased risk as terrorists ape the Bushist way of enforcing ideology by violence. No, they all pay the full price -- the blood price -- for the Bush favorites' free ride.


$20,000 Bonus to Bush Official Who Agreed on Dubious Nuke Claim
Worldnet Daily, Aug. 12, 2003

Cheney Firm's Rival Forced to Drop Iraqi Oil Bid
The Guardian, Aug. 9, 2003

Presidential Executive Order 13303
The Federal Register, May 28, 2003

Operation Oily Immunity
Independent Media Institute, July 28, 2003

Lobbyists Hustle for Reconstruction Business in Baghdad
National Journal, Aug. 7, 2003

Family Shot Dead by Panicking U.S. Soldiers
The Independent, Aug. 10, 2003

Bush Associate to Head Iraqi Business Efforts
Financial Times, Aug. 7, 2003

Rising Tide of Islamic Militants See Iraq as Ultimate Battlefield
New York Times, Aug. 13, 2003

The Other Looting
Foreign Policy in Focus, July 2003

U.S. Troops Kill Iraqi Police
Agence France Presse, Aug. 11, 2003

Total Immunity?
Mother Jones, Aug. 8, 2003

Rivals Say Halliburton Dominates Iraqi Oil Work
New York Times, Aug. 8, 2003

To the Victors Go the Spoils
CorpWatch, Aug. 8, 2003

Depiction of Threat Outgrew Supporting Evidence
Washington Post, Aug. 10, 2003

Get-Out-of-Jail-Free Card for Oil CompaniesThe Progressive, Aug. 8, 2003

U.S. Fostering Sinister Sort of Democracy
New Zealand Herald, Aug. 1, 2003

The War According to David Hackworth
Common Dreams, Aug. 5, 2003

Thursday, August 14, 2003

Commentary, CNN's Jokers Dobbs & Crowley--April 25, 2003

Take Back The Media! TBTM Commentary by Alan J. Franklin

Transcript, CNN Moneyline with Lou Dobbs:

DOBBS: “Candy Crowley, I just can't wait really to see what the reaction is amongst those nine (Democrats) to being in a deck of cards -- given the fun everyone's having in Iraq with them.”

Dear Lou,

After Butterball Crowley and you have had your little laugh at the expense of the opposition party in America, maybe you could create the same deck of cards, with you two good-humored CNN employees as JOKERS.

Now I think that would play well. But other than that, since you can’t wait to see what the reaction is, it is this: You are as shameful a pair of gasbags, both waiting for the Bush junta to throw you a banana for your less-than-honorable portrayal of serious contenders for ELECTION to the White House, as ever disgraced a CNN soundstage. Your representation of Democrats in the same light this unelected Bush administration portrays ex-Iraqi military and political people has taken you, and your sidekick Crowley, to a new and untested depth of nonsense.

If both of you sweeties are really waiting for a reaction, why not put the entire Bush administration, former felons, drunk drivers, and all on a deck of cards and announce it on your show. Then your viewers could see that you were fair minded and could have a good laugh over the disaster that sits in 1600 Penna Ave. And you could have another moment of humor considering how much ‘fun’ they are having with those cards in Iraq.

But my guess is that you don’t have the courage to do that. Prove me wrong, Lou. Prove that your head won’t bead up with sweat, and your underwear would not need to be changed, were you and Crowley to have a couple of chuckles over a deck of Bushies. That’s your challenge, but both of you are media whores—unquestioning kiss-blowers—with the neo-cons, aren’t you, Lou?

And you live in constant fear, as does Ms. Crowley, of that dreaded call from Liar Fleisher’s office asking you to “change the way you cover this White House”, right?

I am typing this on a Dell Computer. I was shocked to see Dell using your wildly right-wing partisan forum as a advertising venue. I have bought four Dell computers for my business associates this year, and had three more orders sitting on my desk.

I will contact my sales associates at Dell and inform them that business with our firm stops until advertising on CNN’s Moneyline stops. There are a lot of choices out in the computer world. And I would NEVER support any company which supported your banal gibberish. I am sure Dell has many choices in the advertising world that will not alienate buyers with whom they have worked very hard to gain trust. Somehow, I don’t think Dell will play with that deck of cards.

Very truly yours,

Alan J. Franklin
Houston, Texas

Lest We Forget: The Insanity of the BUSH RUSH to WAR--Personal Attacks from bush_junta

A Bully Can be Stopped

Tim Robbins delivered the following speech on April 15, 2003 at a luncheon at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.

I had originally been asked here to talk about the war and our current political situation but I have instead chosen to hijack this opportunity and talk about baseball. Just kidding. Sort of.

I can't tell you how moved I have been at the overwhelming support I have received from newspapers throughout the country these past few days. I hold no illusions that all of these journalists agree with me on my views against the war. While the journalist's outrage at the cancellation of our appearance in Cooperstown is not about my views; it is about my right to express these views. I am extremely grateful that there are those of you out there with a fierce belief in constitutionally guaranteed rights. We need you the press, now more than ever. This is a crucial moment for all of us.

For all the ugliness and tragedy of 9-11 there was a brief period afterwards where I held a great hope. In the midst of the tears and shocked faces of New Yorkers, in the midst of the lethal air we breathed as we worked at Ground Zero, in the midst of my children's terror at being so close to this crime against humanity, in the midst of all of this I held onto a glimmer of hope in the naïve assumption that something good could come out of all this. I imagined our leaders seizing upon this moment of unity in America, this moment when no one wanted to talk about Democrat vs. Republican, white vs. black or any of the other ridiculous divisions that dominate our public discourse. I imagined our leaders going on television, telling the citizens that although we all want to be at Ground Zero we can't. But there is work that is needed to be done all over America. Our help is needed at community centers, to tutor children, to teach them to read, our work is needed at old age homes to visit the lonely and infirmed, in gutted neighborhoods to rebuild housing and clean up parks, and convert abandoned lots into baseball fields. I imagined leadership that would take this incredible energy, this generosity of spirit, and create a new unity in America born out of the chaos and tragedy of 9-11. A new unity that would send a message to terrorists everywhere: If you attack us we will become stronger, cleaner, better educated, more unified. You will strengthen our commitment to justice and democracy by your inhumane attacks on us. Like a phoenix out of the fire we will be re-born.

And then came the speech. "You are either with us or against us" And the bombing began. And the old paradigm was restored as our leader encouraged us to show our patriotism by shopping and by volunteering to join groups that would turn in their neighbor for any suspicious behavior.

In the nineteen months since 9-11 we have seen our democracy compromised by fear and hatred. Basic inalienable rights, due process, the sanctity of the home have been quickly compromised in a climate of fear. A unified American public has grown bitterly divided and a world population that had profound sympathy and support for us has grown contemptuous and distrustful, viewing us as we once viewed the Soviet Union, as a rogue state.

This past weekend Susan and I and the three kids went to Florida for a family reunion of sorts. Amidst the alcohol and the dancing sugar rushing children there was, of course talk of the war. The most frightening thing about the weekend was the amount of times we were thanked for speaking out against the war because that individual speaking thought it unsafe to do so in their own community in their own life. "Keep talking. I haven't been able to open my mouth."


Wednesday, August 13, 2003

Goddam Viceroy of Baghdad Shuts Down "Freedom of the Press" in Iraq

US occupation forces attack Iraqi journalists

The CPA has given its administrator, as Bremer is officially titled, unlimited authority under Order Number 14 “to seize any prohibited materials and production equipment and seal off any operating premises” without warning and without compensation, as well as to arrest and prosecute those found in violation. Under the order, sentencing is to be carried out by the “relevant authorities,” which can only mean the CPA itself, as there is no functioning Iraqi judicial system. Appeals are allowed in writing only to the administrator himself....

Poems - Seeger - I Have a Rendezvous with Death . . .

Poems - Seeger - I Have a Rendezvous with Death . . .

Are you afraid of death? Afraid of that inevitable, inescapable moment when you and he shall meet? or is it you and she, or you and it? Illus: Who can forget the legend of Samara?

There on the streets of Baghdad, a merchant sent his servant to the market, so the legend goes.

But soon the man returned, ashen-faced and trembling:

"O Master, down in the market place I was jostled by a woman,
and when I turned I saw it was Death that jostled me.
She looked at me and made a threatening gesture.....
O Master, please, lend me your horse....I must flee her...
I will ride to Samara...and there hide...Death shall not find me."
The merchant taking pity on his servant
lent his own stallion to the frightened man....
and in a cloud of dust the fleeing servant was gone!

A little later the merchant himself walked down to the marketplace and there saw Death standing in the crowd:
"Why did you frighten my servant this morning...why did you make that threatening gesture?" the merchant inquired of Death.

"Oh," Death quietly replied, "that was NOT a threatening was only a START OF SURPRISE...for I was astonished to see him here in Baghdad, FOR I HAVE AN APPOINTMENT WITH HIM TONIGHT IN SAMARA."

It is inevitable, is it not? Inescapable...your appointment and mine in Samara with Death.
For when you have an appointment with death--there is no point in running, there is no point in hiding...death will be awaiting us all!

Illus: Listen to the words of one of the greatest poems written during the First World War...written by a young man who himself died in battle at the age of 28,

Alan Seeger's "I Have a Rendevous with Death."

I have a rendevous with Death
At some disputed barricade
When Spring comes round with rustling shade
And apple blossoms fill the air.
I have a rendevous with Death
When Spring brings back blue days and fair.

It may be he shall take my hand
And lead me into his dark land
And close my eyes and quench my breath;
It may be I shall pass him still.
I have a rendevous with Death
On some scarred slope of battered hill,
When Spring comes round again this year
And the first meadow flowers appear.

God knows 'twere better to be deep
Pillowed in silk and scented down,
Where love throbs out in blissful sleep,
Pulse night to pulse, and breath to breath,
Where hushed awakenings are dear . . .
But I've a rendevous with Death
At midnight in some flaming town,
When Spring trips north again this year,
And I to my pledged word am true,
I shall not fail that rendevous.

Alan Seeger. 1888–1916

Also, a favorite of JFK.

Gene Lyons, Arkansas Gazette: False Impressions or Falsehoods?

Gene Lyons
August 13, 2003

False Impressions or Falsehoods?

Al Gore and Sen. Joe Lieberman spoke out about the Bush administration
last week. What they said reinforced for many Democrats two important
lessons from the 2000 campaign: first, that Gore's inability to combat
the Washington celebrity press's relentless attacks upon his character
and personality cost him the presidency; second, that a big factor in
that failure was picking the sanctimonious Lieberman as his running

Seemingly chosen to convey disapproval of President Clinton's sexual
antics, Lieberman brought little to the campaign except the lukewarm
approbation of Washington insiders. His debate performance against Dick
Cheney resembled a timorous insurance agent trying to mollify an angry
customer--appropriately enough for a politician long-devoted to keeping
Connecticut's insurance industry happy. Lieberman's pussyfooting helped
Cheney masquerade as a teddy bear, resulting in an administration in
which the relentlessly aggressive vice-president and a phalanx of
neo-conservative ideologues dominate a feckless and unaccountable

Anyhow, "Smokin' Joe," as Republican editorialists at my hometown
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette call him, made a thinly-veiled attack on his
two New England rivals for the presidency, Howard Dean and Sen. John
Kerry, in a speech at the National Press Club. "A candidate who was
opposed to the war against Saddam," he said "who has called for the
repeal of all the Bush tax cuts, which would result in an increase in
taxes on the middle class...could lead the Democratic party into the
political wilderness for a long time to come."

As opposed to today, Senator? Snoozin' Joe appears to think that the
presciption for taking on Bush in 2004 is Republican Lite. A surer
formula for disaster can hardly be imagined. No matter, because the
hapless New York Mets have a better chance of winning the World Series
than Lieberman has of securing the Democratic nomination. Polls showing
otherwise are an illusion based on name recognition.

Al Gore wants to fight. If only, many Democrats said last week, he'd
spoken as cogently and passionately in 2000 as he did at New York
University. The contest wouldn't have been close enough for Bush's
Florida cronies and the Supreme Court to steal.

Gore's theme was that the Bush administration governs through a weird
mix of cronyism, ideological certitude and sheer dishonesty previously
unseen in our national life. "The direction in which our nation is
being led," he said "is deeply troubling to me not only in Iraq but also here
at home on economic policy, social policy and environmental policy.
Millions of Americans now share a feeling that something pretty basic
has gone wrong in our country and that some important American values
are being placed at risk."

Gore enumerated a list of "false impressions" that led the U.S. to
invade and occupy Iraq: that Saddam Hussein was partly reponsible for
9/11 and conspiring with al Qaeda; that he threatened to help
terrorists launch poison gas and germ attacks against the U.S.; that he was
acquiring enriched uranium and building a nuclear arsenal; that Iraqis
would welcome US soldiers with open arms and make a quick, easy
transition to democracy; and that allies who opposed the war would be
only too happy after a painless victory to send soldiers and money to
finish the job.

"Now, of course," Gore said "everybody knows that every single one of
these impressions was just dead wrong."

Almost the same thing, he said, has happened in the economy: "The
country somehow got lots of false impressions," he said "about what we
could expect from the big tax cuts that were enacted, including: (1)
The tax cuts would unleash a lot of new investment that would create lots
of new jobs. (2) We wouldn't have to worry about a return to big budget
deficits--because all the new growth in the economy caused by the tax
cuts would lead to a lot of new revenue. (3) Most of the benefits would
go to average middle-income families, not to the wealthy, as some
partisans claimed."

"Unfortunately, here too," Gore continued "every single one of these
impressions turned out to be wrong. Instead of creating jobs...we are
losing millions of jobs--net losses for three years in a row. That
hasn't happened since the Great Depression." Hence too the biggest
budget deficits in U.S. history, and "the most dangerous we've ever had
for two reasons: first, they're not temporary; they're structural and
long-term; second, they are going to get even bigger just at the time
when the big baby-boomer retirement surge starts."

From fighting terrorism to global warming, Gore said, what we get from
Bush is the same on every issue: "a systematic effort to manipulate
facts in service to a totalistic ideology that is felt to be more
important than the mandates of basic honesty."

Gore says he's not running in 2004, so the press downplayed his speech,
but millions of Democrats heard him loud and clear.

Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Remind Your Local GOPPER: The Glee They Had In September, '98, Releasing the STARR Report for the Children. "BUSH LIES ABOUT WAR."

"But What Will We Tell The Children?"

On the eve of the Clinton Impeachment hearings in 1998, The Sexuality Information and Education Council (SIECUS) sent out "Ten Tips for Talking about the Starr Report with Your Children."

"The upcoming impeachment hearing," SIECUS president Debra Haffner advised, "provides parents with a special opportunity to talk to their children about sexuality issues...The question parents need to ask is 'Who do I want to tell my children about this sad situation?' Another child on the playground? An acquaintance on the school bus? They are unlikely to tell your children the facts in a clear way. And only YOU can give YOUR children YOUR values."

It's now 2003 and if the events of these last weeks don't provide parents with that special opportunity to talk to their children about the president and values like truth, lies and consequences, then I don't know what does.

So, with all due credit to SIECUS, here are Tips for Talking about President Bush with Your Children:

*1) Think about your values as they relate to this situation. What are your family's values about telling the truth? What would you do if your child lied to you and when you scolded him or her, s/he replied: "I am not a fact-checker." Or added, "Isn't it time to move on?"

*2) Ask your children to tell you what words mean to them. Explain that words have consequences and lies can come in two, six or sixteen words.

*3) Clarify facts. Give short, age-appropriate answers. Explain that shifting strategies at damage control only lead to more unanswered questions. Make clear that even if facts are malleable for President Bush, they're not malleable in your home. Explain that even though the White House strategy may be to say whatever is necessary, even if they have to admit later that what they said the first time wasn't exactly true, you don't do it that way yourself.

*4) Use these talks with your child to encourage good decision-making. Let them know that if they grow up to become president and lead a nation into war, the right thing to do is take responsibility for their words and acts. (This is a good opportunity to explain what the saying, "The buck stops here" means.)

*5) Use television news as a springboard for discussion. However, do not let children younger than thirteen watch this coverage alone. It can be ugly and disturbing for children to watch the President and his aides scapegoat their subordinates with so little compunction.

*6) Help your children understand the larger issues. Let them know that it's not just about sixteen words. You could explain that there appears to be a pattern of dishonesty well beyond the uranium scandal that is extremely worrisome. Explain that the American people are entitled to the truth and they have a right to know if President Bush, Vice President Cheney or any White House officials misrepresented the facts to justify war.

*7) Keep the lines of communication open. Talk. Remember that this is not a one-time or a one-way discussion. Your children need your ongoing support in dealing with their President's tenuous relationship to the truth*. Unfortunately, this sad situation is currently a fixed element of the political landscape they are growing up in.

*I mean, he's a stinking big-oil-energy cock-sucking mother-fucking lying dirty war criminal bastard, too! (Thanks Ma!) (NLTCP Comment)

Flappin' Tongue GOPper Bastards: "Support Our Troops!!"...(But Only On-The-Cheap.)

Thanks for the M.R.E.'s

"The U.S. military has always had superb logistics. What happened? The answer is a mix of penny-pinching and privatization — which makes our soldiers' discomfort a symptom of something more general.

"Colonel Hackworth blames "dilettantes in the Pentagon" who "thought they could run a war and an occupation on the cheap." But the cheapness isn't restricted to Iraq. In general, the "support our troops" crowd draws the line when that support might actually cost something.

"The usually conservative Army Times has run blistering editorials on this subject. Its June 30 blast, titled "Nothing but Lip Service," begins: "In recent months, President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress have missed no opportunity to heap richly deserved praise on the military. But talk is cheap — and getting cheaper by the day, judging from the nickel-and-dime treatment the troops are getting lately." The article goes on to detail a series of promises broken and benefits cut....Link...."

Friday, August 08, 2003

Bush_Junta: Dirty Tricks and How They Screw You...The Art of Lying, or How They Pat Your Back with One Hand & Pick Your Pocket with the Other Hand. - Under The Radar

2. Friday Night Massacres. The White House releases many of its biggest nasties on Friday evenings, well after the diligent press corps has departed for various bars, beaches, and other amusements. So the press doesn’t learn about the regulatory massacre until Monday morn, and by then it’s “old news” and is either tossed or gets a one-paragraph slug buried in Tuesday’s paper. Likewise, Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays are favorite times to drop an ugly release -- again, no reporters, no news. The final arsenic-in-your-water reg, for example, was dropped on Halloween (what a bunch of tricksters! Surely someone got a raise for that). Also, the EPA snuck out a package of rules to exempt some 17,000 dirty power plants from Clean Air restrictions on the afternoon before Thanksgiving and on New Year’s Eve.

3. Newspeak. The actions are never couched in straight-forward language like: "In another move to shaft the little guy, Bush today…" No, no. Instead, every change in the game is expressed in such positive, even soothing phrases as:

To streamline the process...
To replace an archaic... (they often substitute Depression-era for archaic)
To provide greater flexibility...
To bring balance back...

4. Lies. From Bush on down, this bunch is shameless about looking you in the eye and telling you that sour is sweet. Example: Late last year the EPA announced new pollution standards for massively stinky hog factories (think overloaded port-a-potty on a 100 degree day, then up the P.U. level of that by a hundredfold) that have already polluted 35,000 miles of our rivers. EPA’s Christie Whitman said of the new rules: “This is a major step forward to protect our nation’s waters.” Solid. Except she was lying through her teeth, eyes, nose, pores and other orifices. Her “standards” weren’t even mandatory. They’re simply goals to be wished for. Each hog factory is to develop its own voluntary plan for controlling its pollution, which could be: “The hog fairy will come here every night, wave her magic wand, and turn our pool of fecal slurry into sweet wine.”

We’ll never even know what any of the plans are, since EPA’s new “standards” allow each factory to keep its plan secret.


Thursday, August 07, 2003


Just take a look at the following text, my special friends, and think about the question above. The answer is at the end of the four short paragraphs.

...There was also gneral agreement that Congress could not reject the President's requested resolution without giving an impression of disunity and nonsupport that did not, in fact, exist.

There was no support for the thesis on which Senators Morse and Gruening based their opposition- that the resolution was "unconstitutional" because it was "a predatead declaration of war power" reserved to Congress.

Nevertheless, many members said the President did not need the resolution because he had the power as Commander in Chief to order United States forces to repel attacks.

Several members thought the language of the resolution was unnecessarily broad and they were apprehensive that it would be interpreted as giving Congressional support for direct participation by United States troops...

Figure it out?

Today, August 7, in the year 1964, Lyndon Baines Johnson signed the "Gulf of Tonkin" resolution taking our country to war against North Viet Nam.

It would be 10 bloody years before common sense intervened and we pulled out, maimed and beaten. Leaving behind massive slaughter of the humanity, Agent Orange defoliant that still denudes the forest floor and may do so for another 500 years, and a mass migration of the poor and hungry of Viet Nam to the shores of America.

Wednesday, August 06, 2003


Just when you think the chimper_junta has gone on vacation, and the lying has stopped for a few minutes, this kind of shit comes out about them. These bastards are playing fast and loose with death, dismemberment, and the families of our service men and women. Will they get away with it? Is every death important, or only the ones bush_junta war criminals want you to know about? HOW DARE THEY??

Story and Link...

There have been a number of reports suggesting that certain Western media sources are misleading the public as to the extent of the coalition casualties in Iraq. The creative accounting methods employed by major US news networks range from underreporting non-combat deaths among the US troops to simply neglecting even the officially-acknowledged casualties.

This failure to report non-combat deaths coupled with the US military’s practice of passing certain combat casualties as non-combat lead to a seriously distorted picture of the war in Iraq being presented to the US public. On July 10, for example, Pentagon detailed US fatalities sustained in Iraq between May 1 and July 9: 29 soldiers killed by hostile fire and 44 troops killed by non-hostile fire or in accidents. (“Pentagon: 1,000 troops wounded in Iraq war”, CNN, July 10, 2003)

Polls show that the majority of Americans believe that the coalition fatalities in Iraq are no higher than fifty. In reality, however, even the official US and British military reports show that the number of fatalities is nearly six times higher: as of July 30 the US and British officials announced 295 fatalities among its troops operating in Iraq..."

The Mother_Fuckers of the Bush_Junta are Playing You and Every American FOR A SUCKER.

Gene Lyons: Prize Winning REAL Journalist--'BUSH FINALLY OWNS UP' (?)

Gene Lyons

Posted on Wednesday, August 6, 2003

Back in 2000, George W. Bush made "personal responsibility" one of
his campaign themes. Everybody understood that the phrase had two
meanings: first, the traditional Republican one of disciplining unruly
children, whiny minorities, complaining women, indolent workers and
lesser breeds outside the country club; second, an implied vow to keep
his pants on in the Oval Office. Only in the third year of President
Junior’s court-appointed term do we learn that it has another meaning
as well: When Bush says he takes "personal responsibility" for something,
it means he’s run out of phony alibis, so sit down and shut up.
Dutifully headlined "Bush Takes Responsibility for Iraq Claims" by The
Washington Post, here’s the entire exchange from the White House
transcript of the president’s press conference: "Q. Mr. President, you
often speak about the need for accountability in many areas. I wonder
then, why is Dr. Condoleezza Rice not being held accountable for the
statement that your own White House has acknowledged was a mistake in
your State of the Union address regarding Iraq’s attempts to purchase
uranium? And also, do you take personal responsibility for that

" THE PRESIDENT: I take personal responsibility for everything I say,
of course. Absolutely. I also take responsibility for making decisions on
war and peace. And I analyzed a thorough body of intelligence—good,
solid, sound intelligence—that led me to come to the conclusion that it
was necessary to remove Saddam Hussein from power. "We gave the world a
chance to do it. We had—remember there’s—again, I don’t want to get
repetitive here, but it’s important to remind everybody that there was
12 resolutions that came out of the United Nations because others
recognized the threat of Saddam Hussein. Twelve times the United
Nations Security Council passed resolutions in recognition of the threat that
he posed. And the difference was, is that some were not willing to act on
those resolutions. We were—along with a lot of other countries—because
he posed a threat.

" Dr. Condoleezza Rice is an honest, fabulous person. And America is
lucky to have her service. Period. "

Even a legendary shirker like Junior could hardly avoid taking
responsibility for what came out of his own mouth. But he could barely
hide his annoyance at the reporter’s impertinence. Imagine if the
question had been put to him as sharply as Bob Somerby suggested on his
Daily Howler Web site:

"Mr. President, we have been told that Dr. Condoleezza Rice did not
read last October’s National Intelligence Estimate and therefore did
not know that the State Department doubted the claim that Iraq sought
uranium in Africa. We’re also told that she didn’t read CIA memos on
this subject. Are you concerned when your national security adviser is
so poorly informed on such a subject? And do you now believe what you
said in your State of the Union—that Saddam Hussein ‘recently sought
significant quantities of uranium from Africa'?

Of course, nobody believes the good doctor failed to do her homework.
The White House simply enlisted the smaller falsehood in service of the
larger one. In a courtroom, Bush’s answers would be called
non-responsive. He trotted out the same "12 resolutions" and "sound
intelligence" over and over, as if they trumped the facts on the

There were, of course, no U. N. resolutions calling for "regime

If we had a press corps instead of a band of celebrity courtiers,
somebody would have asked him how he could send American soldiers to
kill and die in Iraq without reading, as the White House says he did
not, the 90-page National Intelligence Estimate. Exactly what, then,
did he study before parroting Tony Blair’s hysterical warning that Saddam
could strike within 45 minutes?

Bush told us that not to invade and occupy Iraq would be tantamount to
"national suicide." Now he says he’s confident documents will prove
that Saddam had "weapons programs." Hardly the same thing. He has faith that
documents will also prove the Iraqi dictator’s "links" to al-Qa’ida,
another inflammatory charge that The Washington Post reports the
National Intelligence Estimate he failed to read contradicted.

From a purely psychological point of view, the most fascinating aspect
of a Bush press conference is watching this under-qualified aristocrat
veer from mild panic to smug arrogance within a few sentences. Here’s
another example of Bush-style "personal responsibility."

Why aren’t his economic policies producing jobs? Try to believe your
president said this: "Remember on our TV screens—I’m not suggesting
which network did this—but it said, ‘ March to War,’ every day from
last summer until the spring —‘ March to War, ’ ‘March to War.’ That’s not a
very conducive environment for people to take risk, when they hear,
‘March to War’ all the time." And whose fault was that? Anybody but

• Free-lance columnist Gene Lyons is a Little Rock author and recipient
of the National Magazine Award.

Al Jazeera Tape: Party With Uday & Qusay Before They Are Killed!

COURT TV ONLINE - Partee--Partee!!

Uday Hussein Video Discovered
Home video of Saddam Hussein's son Uday was found and released by U.S. forces. The tape shows Uday enjoying parties, dancers, and brandishing a gun.

After you click the link to Court TV, you will find this link on the center-right of the page. Happy viewing!

Tuesday, August 05, 2003

Death marches at DOUBLE TIME in Iraq but US public is LIED to AND DEFRAUDED BY Chickenhawk BUSH_JUNTA

Death marches at double in Iraq but US public unaware - War on Iraq -

Since May 1, when President George Bush called an end to combat operations, 52 of his troops have been killed by hostile fire, according to Pentagon figures.

But the total of deaths from all causes is much higher at 112.

The other unreported cost of the war for the United States is the number of wounded - 827.

But unofficial figures put the total in the thousands. Many of the wounded have lost limbs.

The number of US combat deaths since the start of the war is 166, which is 19 more than the toll in the first Gulf war.

The passing of that benchmark last month scotched the perception that the US had scored an easy victory. The death toll this time is 248 when accidents and suicides are included.


President of Niger to Tony Blair: PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Niger president challenges Blair government over uranium allegations

The prime minister of Niger, Hama Hamadou, has demanded that British prime minister Tony Blair put up or shut up over his continued allegations that Saddam Hussein had sought to purchase uranium from the African country.

In his first interview since it was claimed that his country had been approached by Iraq, Hamadou told Britain’s Sunday Telegraph, on July 28, that Blair must produce proof of the allegation. Niger had never had diplomatic or bilateral relations with Iraq, he said, accusing the British and US government of mistreating his country, which sent 500 troops to support the Gulf War in 1991, by making the claim.

“Is this how Britain and America treat their allies? If Britain has evidence to support its claim then it has only to produce it for everybody to see. Our conscience is clear. We are innocent,” Hamadou said.


Monday, August 04, 2003

Senator Joe Loserman: Get out of the Way and Let Dr. Howard Dean Take Our Country Back

Dear Senator Lieberman:

I watched your *gag* interview with Judy Woodruf on CNN's Inside Politics today. You couldn't wait to tear into Dr. Howard Dean. You were beside yourself with mean, vindictive shots at Dr. Dean..."his politics were too left of center, his ideas are the tired ideas of the past that have lost...yada yada yada"

You are a phony. A droning loserman. I am a Democrat that wants our country back. Republicans Want YOU, Dick head. They will beat you up like a bad piece of meat. And your cutsy little comeback, "How do I know I can beat Bush? Because I did it before!" is bullshit. Al Gore did it. You were an anchor. Ballast. Perhaps even a depth charge that took the whole Gore campaign down with you.

You should just stand "shoulder to shoulder with George Bush." That's where you said you were when you voted for the Iraq war...That's where you belong. As angry as I was when you blew the election for your ticket in 2000, I am angrier at you--NOW.

Your performance, during the 2000 campaign, on Meet the Press, when Tim Russert cleaned your clock with the question: "What About The Military Vote In Florida, Senator Lieberman?"

You gave away the entire election in one sentence. You waffled and droned that every military vote, no matter how illegal or whatever, that was collected in Florida, should be counted. Remember that Joe? You did it. You blew it all just as if you had been on bush's payroll.

You are now trying to decry the only good thing that has happened to the Democratic party in the last three years:

DR HOWARD DEAN, FORMER GOVERNOR OF VERMONT. Democrats want him to be our next duly-elected president. Most real Democrats think of you as...Loserman. That's who/what you are, sir. Please, get out of the way. Not even the Vice Presidency nomination is yours to fuck up this time.

I want my country back, Joe. I'm from the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party.

(Governor Dean has no knowledge of Nasty Letters to Crooked Politicians, of which I am aware)

Sunday, August 03, 2003

Atty General (bush_junta) John Asscrack Now Wants us to Know that OSAMA binLADEN IS THE REAL BOOGEY MAN!!!

See, Asscrack, this LOOZER to a DEAD MAN when he ran for the Senate in his own state, and the whole bush_junta are back on the OBL bandwagon??? Do these lousy bastards ALWAYS need a boogey man to scare moron-merikens? Is it gonna be ALLWARALLATIME with chimper_junta? Will they make their own terrorist disasters if the real terrorists do not, just so they can continue to SQUAT IN OUR WHITE HOUSE??

So why did we spend almost $80,000,000,000.00 billion dollars SO FAR chasing ghosts in Iraq? See the ----> counter on the sidebar ----->

For all the months chimper_junta was beating the war drums over SADDAM IS A BAD MAN A EVIL DOER A DICTATOR you didn't hear OBL's name mentioned. Why? Why? Worried Americans want to know...WHY GEORGE??

Let's see, because Saddam could send an atomic bomb to New York City on a GLIDER in 45 MINUTES NOTICE!!!!


What a buncha ufning liars, crooks, carpetbaggers, murderers, war criminals, and LOOZERS.

This is certainly the worst time in American history since we got rid of the last King George, of England, in the 1770's.

WE'RE NOT LOOKING FOR THOMAS JEFFERSON, HERE, CHIMPER. Just something with the least bit of intelligence to lead our country into a peaceful, 21st Century.

We won't get that until Dr. Howard Dean takes over in January of 2005. I don't know if the country or our democracy can survive until November '04.

Pray for America. Maybe the only thing that will save us is the power of prayer, if there is such a thing. IF THERE IS A GOD IN HEAVEN ASK HER TO END THE BUSH_JUNTA.

Saturday, August 02, 2003

Lying, Smirking, Deceitful, Mendacious, Murdering Chimper Courts Complacent WH Press Corpse

Bush press conference highlights government crisis

Anyone who actually could stomach watching this tricky-dickster on Wednesday morning, 7/30, after giving the press corpse less than 2 hours notice, could see that the figurehead-in-chief couldn't give a straight answer to anything except that he didn't like gays.


"Based on Bush’s performance July 30, his aversion to appearing before the press—even the servile crowd that comprises the White House press corps—is well founded. Despite the efforts of most reporters to lob innocuous questions, Bush proved himself incapable of formulating a coherent argument on any substantive issue. The 50-minute session was a confused collection of lies and evasions, interspersed with sound bites taken from the grab-bag of Bush administration propaganda.

The combination of arrogance and ignorance was most succinctly demonstrated in his remark about the assassination of Saddam Hussein’s sons. Bush noted that it was “important that Saddam’s sons were brought to justice.” Brought to justice? What charges were laid against the Hussein brothers? Before what legal body were they indicted, tried and convicted? The pair were summarily executed by US troops as part of the military conquest and colonial occupation of Iraq.

In his opening statement, the president recited two of the administration’s standard lies. First, that Iraq had been “liberated” by the US military and was now “free” (he used the phrase “free Iraq” six times in his news conference) and “on the path to self-government and peace.” Second, that only “the violent remnants of Saddam Hussein’s regime, joined by terrorists and criminals” were offering resistance to the American occupation forces. Both claims fly in the face of the facts on the ground in Iraq, even in the vetted manner in which they are presented by the US media.

In an attempt to deal with the issue of the missing Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD), Bush resorted to a combination of sophistry and verbal trickery. He said, “We know that Saddam Hussein produced and possessed chemical and biological weapons, and has used chemical weapons.”


Friday, August 01, 2003

Dead Americans vs Uday & Qusay

Benson's View

Check out the "Benson Main Page" while you are at the link above. Best political cartoonist in America.

Bush-junta: State-Sponsored Propaganda "Characteristic of the Worst Regimes of the 20th Century"

The War on Truth

The director of Le Monde Diplomatique, Ignacio Ramonet, summed this up well: "To justify a preventive war that the United Nations and global public opinion did not want, a machine for propaganda and mystification, organised by the doctrinaire sect around George Bush, produced state-sponsored lies with a determination characteristic of the worst regimes of the 20th century."

Most of the lies were channelled straight to Downing Street from the 24-hour Office of Global Communications in the White House. Many were the invention of a highly secret unit in the Pentagon, called the Office of Special Plans, which "sexed up" raw intelligence, much of it uttered by Tony Blair. It was here that many of the most famous lies about weapons of mass destruction were "crafted". On 9 July, Donald Rumsfeld said, with a smile, that America never had "dramatic new evidence" and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz earlier revealed that the "issue of weapons of mass destruction" was "for bureaucratic reasons" only, "because it was the one reason [for invading Iraq] that everyone could agree on."

The Blair government's attacks on the BBC make sense as part of this. They are not only a distraction from Blair's criminal association with the Bush gang, though for a less than obvious reason. As the astute American media commentator Danny Schechter points out, the BBC's revenues have grown to $5.6bn; more Americans watch the BBC in America than watch BBC1 in Britain; and what Murdoch and the other ascendant TV conglomerates have long wanted is the BBC "checked, broken up, even privatised...