Saturday, May 15, 2004
Advice Rejected
Just when you thought it wasn't going to get worse....the Abu Ghraib story doesn't let you down....
ABC News is reporting that JAG lawyers,"had been urging Pentagon officials to ensure protection for prisoners for two years before the abuses at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison came to light"
"Political appointees" at the Pentagon reportedly ignored the warnings.
And in related news, Seymour Hersch has just published the third of his installments on the prison torture scandal in this week's New Yorker Magazine. Hersch reveals that Rumsfeld and the Pentagon put together a highly secret group of individuals who were to hunt down Al Qaida members and pump them for information. This same group was expanded to do the same to Iraqi prisoners. Elements of interrogation for this group included physical coercion and sexual humiliation.
Are we still planning on only blaming the "six or seven" prison guards who conducted the torture?
|
ABC News is reporting that JAG lawyers,"had been urging Pentagon officials to ensure protection for prisoners for two years before the abuses at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison came to light"
"Political appointees" at the Pentagon reportedly ignored the warnings.
And in related news, Seymour Hersch has just published the third of his installments on the prison torture scandal in this week's New Yorker Magazine. Hersch reveals that Rumsfeld and the Pentagon put together a highly secret group of individuals who were to hunt down Al Qaida members and pump them for information. This same group was expanded to do the same to Iraqi prisoners. Elements of interrogation for this group included physical coercion and sexual humiliation.
Are we still planning on only blaming the "six or seven" prison guards who conducted the torture?
Conservatives for Kerry?
Bill Sizemore wrote a piece for Newswithviews.com back in February entitled Unhelpful Conservative Bush Bashing in which he criticized the grumbling about Bush among the Conservative ranks. Apparently it wasn't very well received by his readers. Last Tuesday (May 11th) he wrote a follow-up piece - A Lesser of Two Evils? - which is basically a response to the "venomous emails" he received following the first piece.
Sizemore makes some interesting concessions in the follow up piece.
None of this surprises me, frankly. I think what we're seeing here is the inevitable clash between the tradional conservative base of the GOP and the NeoCons currently in power.
|
Sizemore makes some interesting concessions in the follow up piece.
...some argued in the emails I received that those conservatives who favor limited government would be better off under Kerry. Unfortunately, they made some valid points.
“A Republican Congress would never have allowed the kind of domestic spending increases George W. Bush pushed through using presidential arm twisting and appeals to party loyalty,” some wrote. Ouch!
“We’d be better off with a liberal like John Kerry as President, at least then the Republicans would put up a fight on budget issues,” others said. They are probably right about that.
“Kerry would not have gotten us bogged down in an illegal, empire building war in Iraq,” or “Some of Bush’s appointees to the federal bench and other insider positions are not conservatives,” others argued, pointing out that Bush is even considering his own Whitehouse counsel, a man of questionable conservative credentials, as his first Supreme Court nominee.
None of this surprises me, frankly. I think what we're seeing here is the inevitable clash between the tradional conservative base of the GOP and the NeoCons currently in power.
Voting Machines
The voting machines issue seems to be one of the more serious issues not recieving heavy play in the media. The close vote of the 2000 Presidential election would seem to make this topic more serious and relevant than ever. It goes to the heart of our democratic system.
Diebold is one of the major voting machine companies. It's CEO has been quoted as saying that he was committed to delivering the State of Ohio to Bush in the 2004 elections.
Blackboxvoting.com has an entire website dedicated to the issue of voting machines. Problems outlined by Blackboxvoting.com include machine tampering, lack of a paper trail, device flaws, etc.
Some places where voting machines have been used report votes that failed to be recorded. Johns Hopkins University computer scientists warn that voting software on some machines can easily be hacked into.
Many Democrats and liberals (rightly or wrongly) don't believe George W Bush is the truely elected President of the United States. There is already a lack of faith in the system to some degree.
With the country so divided and the 2004 Presidential election reportedly very close this issue really needs to be sorted out. We can't trust that these machines work properly and that the vote we cast is the vote that's counted properly. This is potentially a complete undermining of our system.
|
Diebold is one of the major voting machine companies. It's CEO has been quoted as saying that he was committed to delivering the State of Ohio to Bush in the 2004 elections.
Blackboxvoting.com has an entire website dedicated to the issue of voting machines. Problems outlined by Blackboxvoting.com include machine tampering, lack of a paper trail, device flaws, etc.
Some places where voting machines have been used report votes that failed to be recorded. Johns Hopkins University computer scientists warn that voting software on some machines can easily be hacked into.
Many Democrats and liberals (rightly or wrongly) don't believe George W Bush is the truely elected President of the United States. There is already a lack of faith in the system to some degree.
With the country so divided and the 2004 Presidential election reportedly very close this issue really needs to be sorted out. We can't trust that these machines work properly and that the vote we cast is the vote that's counted properly. This is potentially a complete undermining of our system.
Open Thread
What's on your mind? Nothing is off topic on this thread.
|
Friday, May 14, 2004
The Bush blues keep on rolling in....
Today the International Brotherhood of Police Officers endorsed John Kerry for President . This group previously endorsed George W. Bush in the 2000 election (They endorsed Clinton in 1992 and 1996).
The National Rifle Association has passed on endorsing Bush for now. They will probably endorse him later but the group is shaky on helping the President.
Bush's poll numbers aren't looking especially spiffy either:
Latest CNN/Time poll:
Kerry 51%
Bush 46%
If Nader is factored in:
Kerry 49%
Bush 44%
Nader 6%
Bush's overall job approval rating: 46%
Iraq was the right thing to do: 48% (down from 53 in April)
Iraq not worth the US lives and other costs: 56%
|
The National Rifle Association has passed on endorsing Bush for now. They will probably endorse him later but the group is shaky on helping the President.
Bush's poll numbers aren't looking especially spiffy either:
Latest CNN/Time poll:
Kerry 51%
Bush 46%
If Nader is factored in:
Kerry 49%
Bush 44%
Nader 6%
Bush's overall job approval rating: 46%
Iraq was the right thing to do: 48% (down from 53 in April)
Iraq not worth the US lives and other costs: 56%
More sticker shock
Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said yesterday while testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee that the Iraq/Afghanistan bill for 2005 will be roughly $50 billion.
Some folks in Washington say that number is closer to $75 billion.
The Bush Administration in an attempt to cover it's ass politically had planned to ask for a mere $25 billion this year before the election. They also wanted the money to come in the form of another "blank check", giving the White House full control over the dollars spent. Wolfowitz apparently opened the door yesterday for making that point negotiable.
First of all, what happened to the $87 billion we gave them already? Our troops are lacking appropriate body armor and armored vehicles. There's also reports that the private contractors aren't holding up their end of the bargain either. Clearly that chunk of money didn't go to giving the troops the equipment they needed.
There's also the revelation from Bob Woodward's book Plan Of Attack which contends that the White House took $700 million from funds Congressionally earmarked to fight the war in Afghanistan and secretly shuffled it to secretly prep for the Iraqi invasion.
The Adminstration needs to account for the funds they've already been given before receiving more money. It's obvious that the troops need it. But we need to make sure that money is actually getting to the troops for what they need. It's obvious that during the last round of appropriations for this that it didn't happen.
|
Some folks in Washington say that number is closer to $75 billion.
The Bush Administration in an attempt to cover it's ass politically had planned to ask for a mere $25 billion this year before the election. They also wanted the money to come in the form of another "blank check", giving the White House full control over the dollars spent. Wolfowitz apparently opened the door yesterday for making that point negotiable.
First of all, what happened to the $87 billion we gave them already? Our troops are lacking appropriate body armor and armored vehicles. There's also reports that the private contractors aren't holding up their end of the bargain either. Clearly that chunk of money didn't go to giving the troops the equipment they needed.
There's also the revelation from Bob Woodward's book Plan Of Attack which contends that the White House took $700 million from funds Congressionally earmarked to fight the war in Afghanistan and secretly shuffled it to secretly prep for the Iraqi invasion.
The Adminstration needs to account for the funds they've already been given before receiving more money. It's obvious that the troops need it. But we need to make sure that money is actually getting to the troops for what they need. It's obvious that during the last round of appropriations for this that it didn't happen.
Some brave Catholic leaders speak up
Along the lines of what Kevin posted the other day....
The Roman Catholic Bishop in Colorado Springs has issued a pastoral letter to American Catholics that they should not vote for politicians who defy Church teaching by voting for abortion, stem cell research or euthanasia.
Apparently he's not especially bent about the death penalty, social justice and poverty.
What I found heartening was that some other bishops took issue:
Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington, who is heading a committee studying how bishops should relate to Catholic politicians, said Thursday in his archdiocesan newspaper that he did not favor using the eucharist as a "sanction."
Cardinal McCarrick wrote, "I do not favor a confrontation at the altar rail with the sacred body of the Lord Jesus in my hand."
Cardinal Roger M. Mahony of Los Angeles told the National Catholic Reporter in Rome on Thursday that Mr. Kerry would be welcome to receive communion in the Los Angeles archdiocese. Cardinal Mahony had a private meeting with Mr. Kerry on May 5.
If you've read my bio you know I'm a deist. I try to go out of my way to respect the rights of others to choose their beliefs and practices as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. I was really pleased to see some courageous Catholic leaders stand up and speak out.
|
The Roman Catholic Bishop in Colorado Springs has issued a pastoral letter to American Catholics that they should not vote for politicians who defy Church teaching by voting for abortion, stem cell research or euthanasia.
Apparently he's not especially bent about the death penalty, social justice and poverty.
What I found heartening was that some other bishops took issue:
Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington, who is heading a committee studying how bishops should relate to Catholic politicians, said Thursday in his archdiocesan newspaper that he did not favor using the eucharist as a "sanction."
Cardinal McCarrick wrote, "I do not favor a confrontation at the altar rail with the sacred body of the Lord Jesus in my hand."
Cardinal Roger M. Mahony of Los Angeles told the National Catholic Reporter in Rome on Thursday that Mr. Kerry would be welcome to receive communion in the Los Angeles archdiocese. Cardinal Mahony had a private meeting with Mr. Kerry on May 5.
If you've read my bio you know I'm a deist. I try to go out of my way to respect the rights of others to choose their beliefs and practices as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. I was really pleased to see some courageous Catholic leaders stand up and speak out.
This makes no sense to me....
Perhaps I'm just too dimwitted to understand the reasoning for people to think that the Abu Graib prison torture of Iraqis is a college fraternity/skull and bones prank (Limbaugh) or that somehow it's okay because this is the kind of thing that goes on at college campuses (Oliver North) or that instead of putting "joysticks" into the orafices of Iraqi prisons we put dynamite instead (Michael Savage).
What's going on with this? What happened to America being the good guys? When did our standard for behavior become criminal activity that might take place on college campuses?
Al Qaida and Zarqawi are infinitely worse than we are as they demonstrated this week with the wretched criminal act against Mr. Berg. John Stewart said in his monologue on the Daily Show last night that just when we thought we were bad..Al Qaida shows us up again.
That said I can't fathom why these rightwing radio show hosts are beating this mantra. It diminishes our country even more than the prison abuses, in my opinion.
|
What's going on with this? What happened to America being the good guys? When did our standard for behavior become criminal activity that might take place on college campuses?
Al Qaida and Zarqawi are infinitely worse than we are as they demonstrated this week with the wretched criminal act against Mr. Berg. John Stewart said in his monologue on the Daily Show last night that just when we thought we were bad..Al Qaida shows us up again.
That said I can't fathom why these rightwing radio show hosts are beating this mantra. It diminishes our country even more than the prison abuses, in my opinion.
David vs Goliath
I ran across this piece not long ago while cruising around the internet. I found it an extremely worthwhile read an a reminder that even one person can make a big difference:
Do the actions and thoughts and example of an ordinary individual matter?
Gandhi broke the back and spirit of British imperialism and created modern India.
Martin Luther King broke the back (but, sad to say, not the spirit) of institutionalized racism in America.
David Brower kept the Grand Canyon from being dammed.
Renee Askins got wolves re-introduced into Yellowstone and the American West.
An unknown Chinese man once stopped a tank in Tienanmen Square by simply standing his ground.
Daniel Ellesberg shortened the war in Vietnam by many months, if not years.
Someone leaked the photos of American military personnel torturing Iraqi prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison.
Jon Marvel started what has become the Western Watersheds Project, which gives the landscape of Western America and all the flora and fauna living on it a chance to survive they did not have before.
Maria Montessori started a school based on the wisdom of children helping themselves and their peers and, in the process, learning to feel (and be) competent and self-assured.
Muffy Davis never quit.
Muffy Ritz rode across America.
Charlie French is an Ironman.
Robert Frost wrote, "Something there is that doesn’t love a wall."
Yes, each individual matters. What we do counts.
|
Do the actions and thoughts and example of an ordinary individual matter?
Gandhi broke the back and spirit of British imperialism and created modern India.
Martin Luther King broke the back (but, sad to say, not the spirit) of institutionalized racism in America.
David Brower kept the Grand Canyon from being dammed.
Renee Askins got wolves re-introduced into Yellowstone and the American West.
An unknown Chinese man once stopped a tank in Tienanmen Square by simply standing his ground.
Daniel Ellesberg shortened the war in Vietnam by many months, if not years.
Someone leaked the photos of American military personnel torturing Iraqi prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison.
Jon Marvel started what has become the Western Watersheds Project, which gives the landscape of Western America and all the flora and fauna living on it a chance to survive they did not have before.
Maria Montessori started a school based on the wisdom of children helping themselves and their peers and, in the process, learning to feel (and be) competent and self-assured.
Muffy Davis never quit.
Muffy Ritz rode across America.
Charlie French is an Ironman.
Robert Frost wrote, "Something there is that doesn’t love a wall."
Yes, each individual matters. What we do counts.
Thursday, May 13, 2004
Friedman's Mea Culpa
For the last year the columnist Thomas Friedman has really driven me nuts. I actually had quit reading his columns in the New York Times. I believed he'd completely lost perspective when it came to Iraq. No matter what went wrong, no matter how bad it was going, Friedman supported the Administration and the notion that we were bringing some sort of democratic change to Iraq.
Friedman has finally, FINALLY seen the light:
' "Hey, Friedman, why are you bringing politics into this all of a sudden? You're the guy who always said that producing a decent outcome in Iraq was of such overriding importance to the country that it had to be kept above politics."
Yes, that's true. I still believe that. My mistake was thinking that the Bush team believed it, too. I thought the administration would have to do the right things in Iraq — from prewar planning and putting in enough troops to dismissing the secretary of defense for incompetence — because surely this was the most important thing for the president and the country. But I was wrong. There is something even more important to the Bush crowd than getting Iraq right, and that's getting re-elected and staying loyal to the conservative base to do so. It has always been more important for the Bush folks to defeat liberals at home than Baathists abroad. That's why they spent more time studying U.S. polls than Iraqi history. That is why, I'll bet, Karl Rove has had more sway over this war than Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Bill Burns. Mr. Burns knew only what would play in the Middle East. Mr. Rove knew what would play in the Middle West."
Friedman has finally figured it out. Way to go, Thomas.
|
Friedman has finally, FINALLY seen the light:
' "Hey, Friedman, why are you bringing politics into this all of a sudden? You're the guy who always said that producing a decent outcome in Iraq was of such overriding importance to the country that it had to be kept above politics."
Yes, that's true. I still believe that. My mistake was thinking that the Bush team believed it, too. I thought the administration would have to do the right things in Iraq — from prewar planning and putting in enough troops to dismissing the secretary of defense for incompetence — because surely this was the most important thing for the president and the country. But I was wrong. There is something even more important to the Bush crowd than getting Iraq right, and that's getting re-elected and staying loyal to the conservative base to do so. It has always been more important for the Bush folks to defeat liberals at home than Baathists abroad. That's why they spent more time studying U.S. polls than Iraqi history. That is why, I'll bet, Karl Rove has had more sway over this war than Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Bill Burns. Mr. Burns knew only what would play in the Middle East. Mr. Rove knew what would play in the Middle West."
Friedman has finally figured it out. Way to go, Thomas.
There's got to be a Morning After....or does there?
Last week, FDA Acting Drug Chief Dr. Steve Galson overruled his own staff to reject over-the-counter prescriptions for the "Morning After Pill".
The FDA cited concerns over the use of young teens using the pill without a doctor's guidance. This ruling came down despite the panel's own scientists overwhelming backing the pill as a way to prevent thousands of abortions. Conservatives hailed the ruling.
Galson says they haven't closed the door on the pill, tho.
What I don't understand is...why wouldn't the prolife crowd be absolutely thrilled with this pill? Scientific research shows it vastly reduces the number of abortions. Isn't that the goal?
|
The FDA cited concerns over the use of young teens using the pill without a doctor's guidance. This ruling came down despite the panel's own scientists overwhelming backing the pill as a way to prevent thousands of abortions. Conservatives hailed the ruling.
Galson says they haven't closed the door on the pill, tho.
What I don't understand is...why wouldn't the prolife crowd be absolutely thrilled with this pill? Scientific research shows it vastly reduces the number of abortions. Isn't that the goal?
Same Song, Second Verse
I remember hearing about the Star Wars missile defense shield when I was in high school during the Reagan years. It was supposed to shoot down incoming missiles trying to get to the continental United States.
It's been reported that a missile defense system was one of the highest priorities of the Bush Administration before 9/11. Bush talked it up through Ari Fleischer as the "best way to preserve peace" in an post Cold War era.
Back in the 80s it was a hugely expensive undertaking that many scientists said was a waste of time and money. It wouldn't work. We didn't have the appropriate technology. The data didn't support a working shield. The Pentagon rejected such assertions saying that it would keep America safe from incoming missiles. Some things never change.
|
It's been reported that a missile defense system was one of the highest priorities of the Bush Administration before 9/11. Bush talked it up through Ari Fleischer as the "best way to preserve peace" in an post Cold War era.
Back in the 80s it was a hugely expensive undertaking that many scientists said was a waste of time and money. It wouldn't work. We didn't have the appropriate technology. The data didn't support a working shield. The Pentagon rejected such assertions saying that it would keep America safe from incoming missiles. Some things never change.
Tucker Carlson: Taking a turn at the Karma Car Wash
Crossfire's own Tucker Carlson is working on a new project. He's going to have his own show on PBS called: Tucker Carlson: Unfiltered.
Carlson has apparently had a change of heart over the Iraq invasion and occupation. "I think it’s a total nightmare and disaster, and I’m ashamed that I went against my own instincts in supporting it," he said. "It’s something I’ll never do again. Never. I got convinced by a friend of mine who’s smarter than I am, and I shouldn’t have done that. No. I want things to work out, but I’m enraged by it, actually."
Carlson seems to have had this epiphany just in time. With support for the Iraqi occupation at an all time low Tucker is finally on the bandwagon.
Maybe he won't come back in the next life as a cockroach or a potato bug after all.
|
Carlson has apparently had a change of heart over the Iraq invasion and occupation. "I think it’s a total nightmare and disaster, and I’m ashamed that I went against my own instincts in supporting it," he said. "It’s something I’ll never do again. Never. I got convinced by a friend of mine who’s smarter than I am, and I shouldn’t have done that. No. I want things to work out, but I’m enraged by it, actually."
Carlson seems to have had this epiphany just in time. With support for the Iraqi occupation at an all time low Tucker is finally on the bandwagon.
Maybe he won't come back in the next life as a cockroach or a potato bug after all.
In case the UFO's weren't enough.....
The Mexican Air Force has been channeling Greg Brady
Our Attorney General is being honored in Barlsley, England
Freezer space is a bit tightin Lisbon
Free gardening tips from a nice, little old lady in Berlin.
And....my favorite....Playboy is looking for a few good Home Depot knockers
|
Our Attorney General is being honored in Barlsley, England
Freezer space is a bit tightin Lisbon
Free gardening tips from a nice, little old lady in Berlin.
And....my favorite....Playboy is looking for a few good Home Depot knockers
Church and State
This morning's edition of the Oregonian has a piece on the front page about the local Archbishop's recent ruling on which Catholics can receive the Eucharist. He said that any Catholic who publically opposes Church teaching on abortion or same-sex marriage shouldn't receive the Eucharist. Archbishop sets Eucharist Rule
What troubles me deeply about this and other American Bishops public stances on the issue is that they are singling out just one politically partisan side of the issue. I've yet to hear or read anything stating that Catholic politicians who publically support the Death Penalty should be denied the Eucharist, for example. Is it mere coincidence that Death Penalty supporting Catholics tend to be Republicans and Abortion or Same-Sex Marriage supporting Catholics tend to be Democrats?
This strikes me as very deliberate meddling in partisan politics by the American Catholic Church. Why is this important? I've heard political science experts state that there are only two groups of "swing voters" who really matter - Catholics and political Independents. Presumably because those are the two groups who bring enough voters to the table to swing elections one way or the other. It's sure looking like there is an active move by American Catholic officials to swing the upcoming Presidential election.
|
What troubles me deeply about this and other American Bishops public stances on the issue is that they are singling out just one politically partisan side of the issue. I've yet to hear or read anything stating that Catholic politicians who publically support the Death Penalty should be denied the Eucharist, for example. Is it mere coincidence that Death Penalty supporting Catholics tend to be Republicans and Abortion or Same-Sex Marriage supporting Catholics tend to be Democrats?
This strikes me as very deliberate meddling in partisan politics by the American Catholic Church. Why is this important? I've heard political science experts state that there are only two groups of "swing voters" who really matter - Catholics and political Independents. Presumably because those are the two groups who bring enough voters to the table to swing elections one way or the other. It's sure looking like there is an active move by American Catholic officials to swing the upcoming Presidential election.
Wednesday, May 12, 2004
Wesley Clark for Veep?
Wesley Clark has a a fantastic piece in Washington Monthly.
I've heard that Kerry has vetted Gephardt and Edwards for VP...and Tom Vilsack (Governor of Iowa). But what about Wes Clark?
Or would he be a better choice for Secretary of Defense?
|
I've heard that Kerry has vetted Gephardt and Edwards for VP...and Tom Vilsack (Governor of Iowa). But what about Wes Clark?
Or would he be a better choice for Secretary of Defense?
Cringing at the pump
Today I had the priviledge of paying $2.14 per gallon (regular unleaded) for my gas. Gas prices have jumped thirty cents per gallon in my state (Oregon) in the last two weeks.
What's everyone else paying?
|
What's everyone else paying?
MP scapegoats?
Pfc. Lynndie England told KCNC-TV in Denver on Tuesday that her superiors gave her specific instructions on how to pose for the photos. Asked who gave the orders, she would say only, "Persons in my chain of command." England: Superiors Gave Iraq Abuse Orders
Am I the only one who thinks this thing is increasingly smelling like a cover-up orchestrated at higher levels? General Taguba said in Senate testimony yesterday that he didn't investigate anyone above the commanding General of the 800th MP Brigade because that was the limit of the scope of what he had been tasked to investigate. Was he restricted to investigating the 800th in order to limit who could be blamed?
Inquiring minds want to know.
|
Am I the only one who thinks this thing is increasingly smelling like a cover-up orchestrated at higher levels? General Taguba said in Senate testimony yesterday that he didn't investigate anyone above the commanding General of the 800th MP Brigade because that was the limit of the scope of what he had been tasked to investigate. Was he restricted to investigating the 800th in order to limit who could be blamed?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Tuesday, May 11, 2004
War on Terror? Not so much
The War on Terror is apparently a big joke. NBC news is reporting that the Bush Administration had several chances to go after terrorist Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian militant with ties to al-Qaida, is now blamed for more than 700 terrorist killings in Iraq. According to the story the Pentagon drafted three seperate plans to go after Zarqawi but each time the White House/National Security Council nixed them.
From the piece:
“People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president’s policy of preemption against terrorists,” according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey.
In January 2003, the threat turned real. Police in London arrested six terror suspects and discovered a ricin lab connected to the camp in Iraq.
The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the National Security Council killed it.
Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.
The United States did attack the camp at Kirma at the beginning of the war, but it was too late — Zarqawi and many of his followers were gone. “Here’s a case where they waited, they waited too long and now we’re suffering as a result inside Iraq,” Cressey added.
And despite the Bush administration’s tough talk about hitting the terrorists before they strike, Zarqawi’s killing streak continues today.
|
From the piece:
“People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president’s policy of preemption against terrorists,” according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey.
In January 2003, the threat turned real. Police in London arrested six terror suspects and discovered a ricin lab connected to the camp in Iraq.
The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the National Security Council killed it.
Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.
The United States did attack the camp at Kirma at the beginning of the war, but it was too late — Zarqawi and many of his followers were gone. “Here’s a case where they waited, they waited too long and now we’re suffering as a result inside Iraq,” Cressey added.
And despite the Bush administration’s tough talk about hitting the terrorists before they strike, Zarqawi’s killing streak continues today.
Due Process
The breaking news out of Iraq today is the beheading of an American civilian named Nick Berg. Mr. Berg was apparently captured and beheaded by an al-Quida affiliated group to avenge the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by American troops.
I was struck as I read the AP report ( Video Shows Beheading of American in Iraq ) this morning by the circumstances under which Mr. Berg ended up in the hands of his executioners.
According to the AP report he was arrested by Iraqi officials at a checkpoint in Mosul, who were presumably operating under the authority of the Coalition Provisional Authority, sometime in late March. Mr. Berg's father, Michael Berg, told the Daily Local News of West Chester that "He was arrested and held without due process. By the time he got out the whole area was inflamed with violence." On March 31 Berg's parents were interviewed by the FBI. An FBI spokesperson told the Philadelphia Inquirer that the FBI had been "asked to interview the parents regarding Mr. Berg's purpose in Iraq." Asked by whom? Presumably by the Pentagon or the CPA. Five days later the Berg family sued in federal court contending that their son was being held in Iraq illegally. He was released from custody in Iraq the next day. The Bergs last heard from their son on April 9th. But, by that time the situation in Iraq had escalated.
Mr. Berg's mother, Suzanne Berg says that the family had been trying for weeks to learn the whereabouts of their son, but that federal officials hadn't been helpful. Apparently, in the midst of the violent uprising in Iraq, Mr. Berg was basically dumped on the streets to fend for himself.
The issue that jumps out at me here is the whole due process thing. The soldiers accused of abusing Iraqi prisoners are receiving due process. Clearly the Iraqi's in custody aren't. And apparently neither was Mr. Berg. That seems like a serious problem to me. A problem that goes beyond the double-standard which holds our soldiers to a very different level of "justice" and "due process" than anyone else is held to.
|
I was struck as I read the AP report ( Video Shows Beheading of American in Iraq ) this morning by the circumstances under which Mr. Berg ended up in the hands of his executioners.
According to the AP report he was arrested by Iraqi officials at a checkpoint in Mosul, who were presumably operating under the authority of the Coalition Provisional Authority, sometime in late March. Mr. Berg's father, Michael Berg, told the Daily Local News of West Chester that "He was arrested and held without due process. By the time he got out the whole area was inflamed with violence." On March 31 Berg's parents were interviewed by the FBI. An FBI spokesperson told the Philadelphia Inquirer that the FBI had been "asked to interview the parents regarding Mr. Berg's purpose in Iraq." Asked by whom? Presumably by the Pentagon or the CPA. Five days later the Berg family sued in federal court contending that their son was being held in Iraq illegally. He was released from custody in Iraq the next day. The Bergs last heard from their son on April 9th. But, by that time the situation in Iraq had escalated.
Mr. Berg's mother, Suzanne Berg says that the family had been trying for weeks to learn the whereabouts of their son, but that federal officials hadn't been helpful. Apparently, in the midst of the violent uprising in Iraq, Mr. Berg was basically dumped on the streets to fend for himself.
The issue that jumps out at me here is the whole due process thing. The soldiers accused of abusing Iraqi prisoners are receiving due process. Clearly the Iraqi's in custody aren't. And apparently neither was Mr. Berg. That seems like a serious problem to me. A problem that goes beyond the double-standard which holds our soldiers to a very different level of "justice" and "due process" than anyone else is held to.
Monday, May 10, 2004
Missed Opportunity.....
ABC News is reporting that an FBI Agent was prevented from relaying warnings on two of the 9/11 hijackers.
U.S. officials told ABCNEWS the agent wanted to warn his FBI bosses about a gathering in Malaysia where al Qaeda suspects Khalid Al-Midhar and Nawaq Alhamzi met with suspects in the Oct. 12, 2000, bombing of the USS Cole off the coast of Yemen.
After the meeting, CIA officials learned Al-Midhar and Alhamzi had visas to enter the United States, the U.S. officials said.
"The failure to communicate that info to the FBI, which would have been potentially able to act on it, is a very serious failure," said Michael Bromwich, a former Justice Department inspector general who now works for a private consulting firm.
The CIA maintains the information had already been passed to the FBI, and that was why the agent did not need to warn his bosses. The CIA cites a statement provided to Congress on Oct. 17, 2002. In it, CIA Director George Tenet refers to e-mails that agency officials say prove the information was provided to the FBI.
FBI officials, however, told ABCNEWS they had no record of these e-mails.
Anyone else skeptical that this has really been fixed so that it won't happen again?
|
U.S. officials told ABCNEWS the agent wanted to warn his FBI bosses about a gathering in Malaysia where al Qaeda suspects Khalid Al-Midhar and Nawaq Alhamzi met with suspects in the Oct. 12, 2000, bombing of the USS Cole off the coast of Yemen.
After the meeting, CIA officials learned Al-Midhar and Alhamzi had visas to enter the United States, the U.S. officials said.
"The failure to communicate that info to the FBI, which would have been potentially able to act on it, is a very serious failure," said Michael Bromwich, a former Justice Department inspector general who now works for a private consulting firm.
The CIA maintains the information had already been passed to the FBI, and that was why the agent did not need to warn his bosses. The CIA cites a statement provided to Congress on Oct. 17, 2002. In it, CIA Director George Tenet refers to e-mails that agency officials say prove the information was provided to the FBI.
FBI officials, however, told ABCNEWS they had no record of these e-mails.
Anyone else skeptical that this has really been fixed so that it won't happen again?
The flip side of the coin
Columnist William Safire proffers an argument for Rumsfeld to keep his job.
Safire says that after 9/11 Rumsfeld made sure that Al Qaeda combatants had basic civil rights for any military tribunals that are to take place. He also notes that Rumsfeld did a JFK/Bay of Pigs type apology for his role in this matter...taking full responsibility for what happened.
The problem I see with this argument is two fold: First of all Rumsfeld's personal reputation is in tatters with the revelations that the Red Cross warned of the abuse some time ago (some reports have said as far back as Summer 2003). Second...US reputation as a government on the world stage was in bad shape before this happened. Unless we make some sort of really bold move to show we're serious that it won't happen again that reputation isn't likely to improve.
|
Safire says that after 9/11 Rumsfeld made sure that Al Qaeda combatants had basic civil rights for any military tribunals that are to take place. He also notes that Rumsfeld did a JFK/Bay of Pigs type apology for his role in this matter...taking full responsibility for what happened.
The problem I see with this argument is two fold: First of all Rumsfeld's personal reputation is in tatters with the revelations that the Red Cross warned of the abuse some time ago (some reports have said as far back as Summer 2003). Second...US reputation as a government on the world stage was in bad shape before this happened. Unless we make some sort of really bold move to show we're serious that it won't happen again that reputation isn't likely to improve.
What took so long?
The New York Times is reporting that Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez told the Pentagon on March 12 that intelligence officers and contractors may have been to blame for abuse in the prisons. The inquiry into the matter didn't begin until April 23, some 42 days later. What took so long?
Further, The Washington Post is reporting that the Pentagon approved tougher interrogations for prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba in April of 2003. The list of approved procedures was done at the highest levels of the Pentagon.
The warden of the prison at Gitmo has been Geoffrey Miller, the new man for Abu Graib.
|
Further, The Washington Post is reporting that the Pentagon approved tougher interrogations for prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba in April of 2003. The list of approved procedures was done at the highest levels of the Pentagon.
The warden of the prison at Gitmo has been Geoffrey Miller, the new man for Abu Graib.
Sunday, May 09, 2004
The Odd Couple
Stem cell research is starting to gather some very powerful allies as seen in this photo and story on Yahoo.
The photo shows a beaming conservative Nancy Reagan next to the not-so-conservative Michael J Fox. Both are at an event that raised over $2 million for stem cell research.
Many conservatives are starting to jump on the stem cell bandwagon including Orrin Hatch, Arlen Spectre and Bill Frist. Frist has been apparently lobbying Bush to support it.
Even with it's powerful allies Bush has worked to thwart research at the National Institutes of Health which would go beyond current stem cell lines.
One wonders what Bush's real feelings on the matter are....if any......
|
The photo shows a beaming conservative Nancy Reagan next to the not-so-conservative Michael J Fox. Both are at an event that raised over $2 million for stem cell research.
Many conservatives are starting to jump on the stem cell bandwagon including Orrin Hatch, Arlen Spectre and Bill Frist. Frist has been apparently lobbying Bush to support it.
Even with it's powerful allies Bush has worked to thwart research at the National Institutes of Health which would go beyond current stem cell lines.
One wonders what Bush's real feelings on the matter are....if any......
Can Kerry manage to hold Bush responsible?
John Kerry gave this speech to the DLC on Friday, May 7.
In the speech, Kerry worked to show that Bush is ultimately responsible for a laundry list of problems and failings in the US.
It's a pretty good speech. But I think he'll have to make this sort of speech into a major PR campaign in order for this idea to take any root. Still about half of US citizens polled approve of the job Bush is doing.
So far Kerry has done a lousy job of showing at least half of the electorate that Bush is the root cause of the problems and that he can do it better.
|
In the speech, Kerry worked to show that Bush is ultimately responsible for a laundry list of problems and failings in the US.
It's a pretty good speech. But I think he'll have to make this sort of speech into a major PR campaign in order for this idea to take any root. Still about half of US citizens polled approve of the job Bush is doing.
So far Kerry has done a lousy job of showing at least half of the electorate that Bush is the root cause of the problems and that he can do it better.
Dissention in the Ranks
This appears to me to be a very troubling revelation. High ranking military officials look to be leaking their dissatisfaction with Iraq to The Washington Post.
The upshot of the piece is that some generals are of the belief that we have won the war but that we cannot retain the peace. Some are pointing directly to Rumsfeld and to Wolfowitz for the problems.
How long until this starts going up the chain to the Commander-In-Chief?
|
The upshot of the piece is that some generals are of the belief that we have won the war but that we cannot retain the peace. Some are pointing directly to Rumsfeld and to Wolfowitz for the problems.
How long until this starts going up the chain to the Commander-In-Chief?
Rush-ing off a cliff.....
I've never been a Rush Limbaugh fan. But in all sincerity...he's really off his rocker. I don't know who's idea it was for him to comment that the torture of Iraqi prisoners was akin to a college fraternity prank or worse yet the American guards were just having a good time but it's really beyond the pale.
What's really interesting about this tho is that the White House refuses to repudiate what Limbaugh is saying:
Q: Scott, there's a segment of society that differs with the White House as it relates to these pictures and the investigation of the U.S. soldiers' conduct to include Rush Limbaugh who, Tuesday, agreed with the caller, equating the pictures to a college fraternity prank, and said the U.S. soldiers should not be punished because it was an emotional release as they were letting off steam. What's the White House say about that?
MR. McCLELLAN: April, I think the White House says what we said yesterday and what the President has said over the last few days.
Q: No, but Scott -- no, seriously. This man is a conservative --
MR. McCLELLAN: And I actually got asked a question earlier today about that matter.
Q: But none --
MR. McCLELLAN: And I addressed it then.
Q: But if you stand out strongly trying to let the Arab world know that this is wrong and then you have the proverbial spokesperson for the conservative party saying this, doesn't that send a mixed message?
MR. McCLELLAN: The President's views have been very -- have been made very clear.
Interesting that McClellan will dance around this....but won't actually say that what Limbaugh is saying is wrong.
|
What's really interesting about this tho is that the White House refuses to repudiate what Limbaugh is saying:
Q: Scott, there's a segment of society that differs with the White House as it relates to these pictures and the investigation of the U.S. soldiers' conduct to include Rush Limbaugh who, Tuesday, agreed with the caller, equating the pictures to a college fraternity prank, and said the U.S. soldiers should not be punished because it was an emotional release as they were letting off steam. What's the White House say about that?
MR. McCLELLAN: April, I think the White House says what we said yesterday and what the President has said over the last few days.
Q: No, but Scott -- no, seriously. This man is a conservative --
MR. McCLELLAN: And I actually got asked a question earlier today about that matter.
Q: But none --
MR. McCLELLAN: And I addressed it then.
Q: But if you stand out strongly trying to let the Arab world know that this is wrong and then you have the proverbial spokesperson for the conservative party saying this, doesn't that send a mixed message?
MR. McCLELLAN: The President's views have been very -- have been made very clear.
Interesting that McClellan will dance around this....but won't actually say that what Limbaugh is saying is wrong.
A President Beyond The Law...?
The The New York Times May 7 op-ed by Anthonly Lewis entitled "A President Beyond The Law" soundly and concisely nails one of the most basic and fundamental problems with the Bush Administration: an adherence to law only when it's convenient.
Lewis cites the the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba as a glaring example:
The Third Geneva Convention requires that any dispute about a prisoner's status be decided by a "competent tribunal." American forces provided many such tribunals for prisoners taken in the Persian Gulf war in 1991. But Mr. Bush has refused to comply with the Geneva Convention. He decided that all the Guantánamo prisoners were "unlawful combatants" — that is, not regular soldiers but spies, terrorists or the like.
It would appear to President Bush and his supporters that to follow the rule of law is to be weak on terrorism. The problem with this mindset is that without adherence law there is no moral high ground.
Bush has set the stage for other countries to do to our citizens exactly what we've done...hold our citizens without regard to international law. This is a most dangerous precedent. Why should other countries obey laws when the government of the United States won't?
|
Lewis cites the the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba as a glaring example:
The Third Geneva Convention requires that any dispute about a prisoner's status be decided by a "competent tribunal." American forces provided many such tribunals for prisoners taken in the Persian Gulf war in 1991. But Mr. Bush has refused to comply with the Geneva Convention. He decided that all the Guantánamo prisoners were "unlawful combatants" — that is, not regular soldiers but spies, terrorists or the like.
It would appear to President Bush and his supporters that to follow the rule of law is to be weak on terrorism. The problem with this mindset is that without adherence law there is no moral high ground.
Bush has set the stage for other countries to do to our citizens exactly what we've done...hold our citizens without regard to international law. This is a most dangerous precedent. Why should other countries obey laws when the government of the United States won't?
Return to Main
