Thursday, October 30, 2003
The good news is...
The good news is...the fundamentalists using terrorist tactics in Iraq don't want the old regime back.
Riverbend of Baghdad Burning, as far as I am concerned, is the best source of what is truly going on in the chaos known as Iraq.
Check her out:
The majority associate such attacks with resistance and many people believe that they are being carried out by people with access and knowledge of advanced military equipment- perhaps Iraqis who were a part of the Guard or former members of the Iraqi army. Now, while some may certainly be labeled as Ba'athists, or loyalists, they aren't fundamentalists. We do, after all, have hundreds of thousands of disgruntled former military personnel and soldiers who were made to sit at home without retirement, a pension or any form of compensation. The relatively few who were promised a monthly 'retirement wage', complain that they aren't getting the money. (I can never emphasize enough the mistake of dissolving the army? was anyone thinking when they came up with that decision?!)
Riverbend of Baghdad Burning, as far as I am concerned, is the best source of what is truly going on in the chaos known as Iraq.
Check her out:
The majority associate such attacks with resistance and many people believe that they are being carried out by people with access and knowledge of advanced military equipment- perhaps Iraqis who were a part of the Guard or former members of the Iraqi army. Now, while some may certainly be labeled as Ba'athists, or loyalists, they aren't fundamentalists. We do, after all, have hundreds of thousands of disgruntled former military personnel and soldiers who were made to sit at home without retirement, a pension or any form of compensation. The relatively few who were promised a monthly 'retirement wage', complain that they aren't getting the money. (I can never emphasize enough the mistake of dissolving the army? was anyone thinking when they came up with that decision?!)
# posted by scorpiorising : 5:43 AM |
Monday, October 27, 2003
Peace March.
We had a peace march in New Orleans on Saturday, with about 250 participating, which was a pretty good turn out, all things considered. It was sponsored by CCC, the same lovely bunch that brought us the political forum I posted on earlier. They did a much better job with the peace march.
We were a noisy bunch marching down Canal St., which is the middle of downtown, interrupting the traffic of mostly tourists and infrequent locals who don't know any better to avoid Canal St. on a Saturday afternoon.
I felt we made a splash, and were probably on the evening news, as their camera guy was all over us. My favorite marchers actually rolled. An elderly gentleman pushed his wife in a nouveau wheelchair that easily converted to a comfortable chair at the rally afterwards.
From Canal St. we turned down Lasalle to Charity Hospital where someone gave a brief, police-interrupted speech on the cuts to Charity Hospital. He wasn't allowed to finish the speech as the one police grunt hurried us along, despite the fact that others had approved the stop and speech.
At least one female doctor came out and shook someone's hand, saying "thank you".
Charity Hospital is closing its walk-in clinic, and other services, in across- the- board cuts to social services in Louisiana. I fear we are about to elect Bobby Jindal as governor, who will, in my view, callously institute more cuts to health services to the poor.
From Charity we marched down a very deserted side-street, preaching to buildings, on our way to an equally deserted Duncan Plaza at City Hall. A levee is built up around the plaza, so literally and figuratively I felt our little group isolated from the rest of the world.
The post-march speeches were all good and from the heart, with one exception. The representative of the New Black Panther party, in a thoroughly thoughtless, and ego-driven speech, must have been mistaken that we were all there to hear him, and began ranting about Hindus. I'm not kidding. Truth is, I was uncomfortable whenever someone would chant "damn Bush" during the march,and I would refrain from chanting. There is no need to damn Bush. He has damned himself.
Salon.com today posted an article about the D.C. march this past Saturday, and commented on the convolution of messages, intersecting at cross angles to one another.
ANSWER wants the troops out and the UN out, and they support the violent overthrow of the US occupation. Many progressives, including myself, want the troops out and the UN in, and an end to the violence. Wishful dreaming? There is also a realistic expectation on my part that perhaps the Iraqis, or at least, the more militant factions want the US out and the UN out. I'm sure many ordinary Iraqis want the US, at this point, because of our bungling, out, and the UN in.
It's a merry-go- round of views and a tragic play in Iraq that the US has created in the absurdist tradition. There is a destruction of meaning, in the destruction we have wrought upon that country. What is the value of life that we have so carelessly taken in the pursuit of our goals there? What is the value of the ancient culture of the Iraqi people which we so thoughtlessly and carelessly left open to destruction? So, yes, in this atmospere of the destruction of the meaning of life and culture, it is difficult now to ascertain the correct course of action.
We are left with basically a "no choice", because any choice will likely result in more deaths. We, and the Iraqi people, are between a rock and a hard place.
We were a noisy bunch marching down Canal St., which is the middle of downtown, interrupting the traffic of mostly tourists and infrequent locals who don't know any better to avoid Canal St. on a Saturday afternoon.
I felt we made a splash, and were probably on the evening news, as their camera guy was all over us. My favorite marchers actually rolled. An elderly gentleman pushed his wife in a nouveau wheelchair that easily converted to a comfortable chair at the rally afterwards.
From Canal St. we turned down Lasalle to Charity Hospital where someone gave a brief, police-interrupted speech on the cuts to Charity Hospital. He wasn't allowed to finish the speech as the one police grunt hurried us along, despite the fact that others had approved the stop and speech.
At least one female doctor came out and shook someone's hand, saying "thank you".
Charity Hospital is closing its walk-in clinic, and other services, in across- the- board cuts to social services in Louisiana. I fear we are about to elect Bobby Jindal as governor, who will, in my view, callously institute more cuts to health services to the poor.
From Charity we marched down a very deserted side-street, preaching to buildings, on our way to an equally deserted Duncan Plaza at City Hall. A levee is built up around the plaza, so literally and figuratively I felt our little group isolated from the rest of the world.
The post-march speeches were all good and from the heart, with one exception. The representative of the New Black Panther party, in a thoroughly thoughtless, and ego-driven speech, must have been mistaken that we were all there to hear him, and began ranting about Hindus. I'm not kidding. Truth is, I was uncomfortable whenever someone would chant "damn Bush" during the march,and I would refrain from chanting. There is no need to damn Bush. He has damned himself.
Salon.com today posted an article about the D.C. march this past Saturday, and commented on the convolution of messages, intersecting at cross angles to one another.
ANSWER wants the troops out and the UN out, and they support the violent overthrow of the US occupation. Many progressives, including myself, want the troops out and the UN in, and an end to the violence. Wishful dreaming? There is also a realistic expectation on my part that perhaps the Iraqis, or at least, the more militant factions want the US out and the UN out. I'm sure many ordinary Iraqis want the US, at this point, because of our bungling, out, and the UN in.
It's a merry-go- round of views and a tragic play in Iraq that the US has created in the absurdist tradition. There is a destruction of meaning, in the destruction we have wrought upon that country. What is the value of life that we have so carelessly taken in the pursuit of our goals there? What is the value of the ancient culture of the Iraqi people which we so thoughtlessly and carelessly left open to destruction? So, yes, in this atmospere of the destruction of the meaning of life and culture, it is difficult now to ascertain the correct course of action.
We are left with basically a "no choice", because any choice will likely result in more deaths. We, and the Iraqi people, are between a rock and a hard place.
# posted by scorpiorising : 7:49 AM |
Thursday, October 23, 2003
No compromise.
I attended a so-called progressive forum in New Orleans last night, sponsored by a peace group, CCC, that I had been involved with on occasion. Last night I was glad I wasn't associated with the group any longer, because it seemed like idiots with their eyes closed structered this so-called forum.
It was top-heavy, with a panel of, can't call them experts, with one exception, and the audience relegated to a mostly passive participation, except for the question and answer session.
There was one representative of the Democratic party, a Dean supporter, who idiotically spoke negatively about hillbillies and Texas, alluding to our current president. However, as someone shouted "what's wrong with Texas", and I said, "what's wrong with hillbillies", its not about a certain state or a sub-group of people. Obviously, it was a poor choice of words on his part. It didn't help that he went on to talk down certain candidates. Someone called it "gossiping", which hit the nail on the head.
God, I came away depressed at the state of far left politics in this country. The panelist representing the new Black Panther Party, dressed like a general with a silver panther dangling around his neck, very intimidating presence. In his opening remarks there was much assailing against the white race, and I can agree with most of what he said. Also, he was at least willing to step out of the norm of his party to create alliances with the democratic party people in New Orleans, in an "anyone but Bush" attitude.
The green party panelist was depressingly familiar in his rhetoric that we should "vote our conscience", or "vote our principals". I'm supporting my principals in Dennis Kucinich, though I nearly lost faith in him recently. I came to realize it doesn't matter wether Kucinich wins. He is changing the face of electoral politics with his emphasis on certain issues, such as opposition to war, NAFTA, WTO, Universal Health Insurance (with the only workable plan, in my opinion), the bloated Pentagon budget, etc.
It is all about being like Kucinich, isn't it? Working hard for your beliefs, and not giving up.
I told the green party member that I felt a great deal more hope when Clinton was president, and Gore was running. I don't see where the green party accomplished one little shit by running the ego-inflated Nader as their candidate.
Then there were two African-American activists in the audience who spoke on the state of the black community in New Orleans. We all know, it ain't good, but then they went on to condone and justify the possibility of violent resistance and revolution. I confronted the younger one after the forum, questioning his support of violence as a means of change. At first he denied his support of violence. "You didn't hear me," he said. "Revolution begins in the mind". When I pressed him, he seemed to defend his support of violence as a means of defense against the white oppressors. I am white, by the way.
"You mean to tell me," he said, "that if I would punch you in the face, that you would not strike me back?"
"First of all, " I said, "you would probably knock me out, if you punched me. Secondly..." and here, I got real with him, "I've had two young black men, on two different occasions, point guns at me and demand my money. One night, a young black male smashed a bottle over my companion's head as we innocently walked down the street, in the Fauberg Marigny. As a result of these events, I have never wanted to own a weapon, or exact any kind of revenge.
"If you had a weapon on you, wouldn't you have used it?" he asked.
"I would never own a weapon," I said. He brushed me off then, as he had tried to talk over me the entire time I addressed him. Very angry, passionate, and mis-directed.
Professor John Clark of Loyola University spoke last night; brilliant in politics and philosophy. He said the green party made a terrible mistake when it got into electoral politics, rather than focusing on creating alternative "institutions", so that the hearts and minds of people can be influenced from the bottom up. Clark has land in Mississippi where he is creating an alternative, bio-diverse farm. He is walking the talk.
I did disagree with Clark that we should ignore electoral politics and focus on creating alternatives. I think we can do both. I believe we have to do both. If we lose this election, we will be saying good-by to civilization as we know it.
It was top-heavy, with a panel of, can't call them experts, with one exception, and the audience relegated to a mostly passive participation, except for the question and answer session.
There was one representative of the Democratic party, a Dean supporter, who idiotically spoke negatively about hillbillies and Texas, alluding to our current president. However, as someone shouted "what's wrong with Texas", and I said, "what's wrong with hillbillies", its not about a certain state or a sub-group of people. Obviously, it was a poor choice of words on his part. It didn't help that he went on to talk down certain candidates. Someone called it "gossiping", which hit the nail on the head.
God, I came away depressed at the state of far left politics in this country. The panelist representing the new Black Panther Party, dressed like a general with a silver panther dangling around his neck, very intimidating presence. In his opening remarks there was much assailing against the white race, and I can agree with most of what he said. Also, he was at least willing to step out of the norm of his party to create alliances with the democratic party people in New Orleans, in an "anyone but Bush" attitude.
The green party panelist was depressingly familiar in his rhetoric that we should "vote our conscience", or "vote our principals". I'm supporting my principals in Dennis Kucinich, though I nearly lost faith in him recently. I came to realize it doesn't matter wether Kucinich wins. He is changing the face of electoral politics with his emphasis on certain issues, such as opposition to war, NAFTA, WTO, Universal Health Insurance (with the only workable plan, in my opinion), the bloated Pentagon budget, etc.
It is all about being like Kucinich, isn't it? Working hard for your beliefs, and not giving up.
I told the green party member that I felt a great deal more hope when Clinton was president, and Gore was running. I don't see where the green party accomplished one little shit by running the ego-inflated Nader as their candidate.
Then there were two African-American activists in the audience who spoke on the state of the black community in New Orleans. We all know, it ain't good, but then they went on to condone and justify the possibility of violent resistance and revolution. I confronted the younger one after the forum, questioning his support of violence as a means of change. At first he denied his support of violence. "You didn't hear me," he said. "Revolution begins in the mind". When I pressed him, he seemed to defend his support of violence as a means of defense against the white oppressors. I am white, by the way.
"You mean to tell me," he said, "that if I would punch you in the face, that you would not strike me back?"
"First of all, " I said, "you would probably knock me out, if you punched me. Secondly..." and here, I got real with him, "I've had two young black men, on two different occasions, point guns at me and demand my money. One night, a young black male smashed a bottle over my companion's head as we innocently walked down the street, in the Fauberg Marigny. As a result of these events, I have never wanted to own a weapon, or exact any kind of revenge.
"If you had a weapon on you, wouldn't you have used it?" he asked.
"I would never own a weapon," I said. He brushed me off then, as he had tried to talk over me the entire time I addressed him. Very angry, passionate, and mis-directed.
Professor John Clark of Loyola University spoke last night; brilliant in politics and philosophy. He said the green party made a terrible mistake when it got into electoral politics, rather than focusing on creating alternative "institutions", so that the hearts and minds of people can be influenced from the bottom up. Clark has land in Mississippi where he is creating an alternative, bio-diverse farm. He is walking the talk.
I did disagree with Clark that we should ignore electoral politics and focus on creating alternatives. I think we can do both. I believe we have to do both. If we lose this election, we will be saying good-by to civilization as we know it.
# posted by scorpiorising : 8:30 AM |
Tuesday, October 21, 2003
Violence, and its uses thereof.
In an earlier post, I was praising the anti-war movement for remaining peaceful throughout this peaceful war against the Bush administration. I'm afraid that pro-Bush supporters, at least one, is missing the message. From Counterspin Central:
Yesterday, a Harrisonburg, Virginia family's home was burned down by an arsonist who set an anti-war banner hanging from their porch on fire.
"The home’s occupants, Sam Nickels, 43, and his wife, Cindy Hunter, 42, disagree with the war with Iraq and say it is their right as Americans to peacefully disagree with President Bush.
The family had hung the sign on the porch two months ago after vandals continued to rip the same posted sign from their yard.
The sign, now reduced to ashes, told of the number of Iraqi civilians and coalition forces killed since the war began in March, Nickels said.
"We’re trying to reflect a concern for people," Nickels said. "That war is bad for everybody. It doesn’t serve us well in the global community."
The couple’s house has also been egged and just last week, someone ripped down a flag promoting world peace from their porch, Nickels said.
Shifflett said the fire is under investigation. Officials have no suspects, he continued.
The couple, their three children and an adult housemate were sleeping when the fire alarm woke them just before 5 a.m., Hunter said.
Nickels and Hunter awakened their roommate and led their children to safety at a designated meeting place across the street.
Yesterday, a Harrisonburg, Virginia family's home was burned down by an arsonist who set an anti-war banner hanging from their porch on fire.
"The home’s occupants, Sam Nickels, 43, and his wife, Cindy Hunter, 42, disagree with the war with Iraq and say it is their right as Americans to peacefully disagree with President Bush.
The family had hung the sign on the porch two months ago after vandals continued to rip the same posted sign from their yard.
The sign, now reduced to ashes, told of the number of Iraqi civilians and coalition forces killed since the war began in March, Nickels said.
"We’re trying to reflect a concern for people," Nickels said. "That war is bad for everybody. It doesn’t serve us well in the global community."
The couple’s house has also been egged and just last week, someone ripped down a flag promoting world peace from their porch, Nickels said.
Shifflett said the fire is under investigation. Officials have no suspects, he continued.
The couple, their three children and an adult housemate were sleeping when the fire alarm woke them just before 5 a.m., Hunter said.
Nickels and Hunter awakened their roommate and led their children to safety at a designated meeting place across the street.
# posted by scorpiorising : 7:14 AM |
Link to good article.
Here is a link to a good article in the New Yorker on the intelligence, or lack there of, that led us into war. Article by Seymour M. Hersh, and yes, Virginia, there is still an investigation going on:
Since midsummer, the Senate Intelligence Committee has been attempting to solve the biggest mystery of the Iraq war: the disparity between the Bush Administration’s prewar assessment of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and what has actually been discovered.
The committee is concentrating on the last ten years’ worth of reports by the C.I.A. Preliminary findings, one intelligence official told me, are disquieting. “The intelligence community made all kinds of errors and handled things sloppily,” he said. The problems range from a lack of quality control to different agencies’ reporting contradictory assessments at the same time. One finding, the official went on, was that the intelligence reports about Iraq provided by the United Nations inspection teams and the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitored Iraq’s nuclear-weapons programs, were far more accurate than the C.I.A. estimates. “Some of the old-timers in the community are appalled by how bad the analysis was,” the official said. “If you look at them side by side, C.I.A. versus United Nations, the U.N. agencies come out ahead across the board.”
Since midsummer, the Senate Intelligence Committee has been attempting to solve the biggest mystery of the Iraq war: the disparity between the Bush Administration’s prewar assessment of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and what has actually been discovered.
The committee is concentrating on the last ten years’ worth of reports by the C.I.A. Preliminary findings, one intelligence official told me, are disquieting. “The intelligence community made all kinds of errors and handled things sloppily,” he said. The problems range from a lack of quality control to different agencies’ reporting contradictory assessments at the same time. One finding, the official went on, was that the intelligence reports about Iraq provided by the United Nations inspection teams and the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitored Iraq’s nuclear-weapons programs, were far more accurate than the C.I.A. estimates. “Some of the old-timers in the community are appalled by how bad the analysis was,” the official said. “If you look at them side by side, C.I.A. versus United Nations, the U.N. agencies come out ahead across the board.”
# posted by scorpiorising : 6:55 AM |
Monday, October 20, 2003
What is the Weather Underground these days.
I saw a documentary last night, The Weather Underground, a history of the underground, radical group that morphed from what was the Students for a Democratic Society in the 60's, to the Weather Underground in the 70's. Several members dropped below sight and began planting bombs in various public places and political buildings. No one was ever hurt in the bombings.
See the film for yourself, and judge the effectiveness of the use of violence in making political statements and as an agent for social change. The violence propagated by the Weather Underground seemed to give some legitimacy to Nixon's attempts to supress the anti-war movement. We haven't made that mistake in our current anti-war movement, in terms of the use of violence, so far.
I will say that I understand the helplessness of those who decided to go underground . Helplessness, in and of itself, is one of the greatest causes of violence. I thank goddess that we have the internet, so that there is yet another tremendous outlet for anger, a way to channel the anger and combat the helplessness. The internet may be the single, greatest reason there has not been violence, for the most part, in response to the policies of George Bush Jr.
I will write more later. My computer is sorely in need of maintenance.
See the film for yourself, and judge the effectiveness of the use of violence in making political statements and as an agent for social change. The violence propagated by the Weather Underground seemed to give some legitimacy to Nixon's attempts to supress the anti-war movement. We haven't made that mistake in our current anti-war movement, in terms of the use of violence, so far.
I will say that I understand the helplessness of those who decided to go underground . Helplessness, in and of itself, is one of the greatest causes of violence. I thank goddess that we have the internet, so that there is yet another tremendous outlet for anger, a way to channel the anger and combat the helplessness. The internet may be the single, greatest reason there has not been violence, for the most part, in response to the policies of George Bush Jr.
I will write more later. My computer is sorely in need of maintenance.
# posted by scorpiorising : 7:34 AM |
Saturday, October 18, 2003
Perspective.
I was in need of some perspective today, and the Guardian provided it with this article:
A Republican rebellion in the Senate against White House plans for rebuilding Iraq raised questions yesterday about President George Bush's authority in Washington as he struggles to maintain control of a divided administration.
A late-night Senate vote to turn half the $20bn (£12bn) Iraq reconstruction budget into a loan marked a serious setback for the administration, which had wanted all the money in the form of a grant. It also came as a personal defeat for the president.
On Tuesday, Mr Bush had called in nine Republican rebels and ordered them to support his version of the bill, reportedly slamming a table at one point and refusing to answer their questions.
The outburst did him little good. Eight Republican senators voted against the administration on Thursday. One rebel, Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine, said: "It was very difficult to stop this train because it made so much sense."
A Republican rebellion in the Senate against White House plans for rebuilding Iraq raised questions yesterday about President George Bush's authority in Washington as he struggles to maintain control of a divided administration.
A late-night Senate vote to turn half the $20bn (£12bn) Iraq reconstruction budget into a loan marked a serious setback for the administration, which had wanted all the money in the form of a grant. It also came as a personal defeat for the president.
On Tuesday, Mr Bush had called in nine Republican rebels and ordered them to support his version of the bill, reportedly slamming a table at one point and refusing to answer their questions.
The outburst did him little good. Eight Republican senators voted against the administration on Thursday. One rebel, Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine, said: "It was very difficult to stop this train because it made so much sense."
# posted by scorpiorising : 6:14 PM |
Major Barbara is on it!
Arms and the Man, aka Major Barbara, is on this feast of corruption in Iraq. He links us to Minnesota public radio, thanks to Josh Marshall, and an unbelievable recording of an American businessman, talking to an Iraqi businessman. I am embarrassed for my country.
Link to Arms and the Man, and scroll down to October 14 at 5:55pm for a link to the audio. It is worth five minutes of your time for this revelation as to how we are doing business in Iraq.
Link to Arms and the Man, and scroll down to October 14 at 5:55pm for a link to the audio. It is worth five minutes of your time for this revelation as to how we are doing business in Iraq.
# posted by scorpiorising : 10:52 AM |
We are being fleeced.
I'm so mad today, I can hardly speak without spitting. Our representatives in Congress are going to approve the fleecing of America through the 87 billion dollars, despite allegations of kickbacks, despite allegations of inflated cost estimates, despite the way this thing has been handled from the beginning.
Some of our "representatives" in Congress are over-paid plutocrats who apparently don't give a hoot about the average joe struggling to make ends meet, who are now going to have to foot a bill for a war we are losing, a war that wasn't needed in the first place.
This bill might be the straw to break the camel's back, when the true nature of how this money is being spent will leak out, pour out, spill out like a sieve of revolting intelligence agents.
Arms and the Man, I hope you're on this. I'll help too, in terms of tracking down whatever articles I can on the corruption that is happening while we speak in that sad, broken country, with our money.
Shame on the democrats who were cowards in voting for this bill. Thank you Congressmen William Jefferson from my home state for voting against the bill. Thank you, of course, Kucinich, Pelosi, Jackson-Lee and many others in the House of Representatives who had the courage and the balls to stand up to corruption.
Thanks to Senators Kerry, Graham, Edwards, Jeffords, Kennedy and of course, the very courageous Senator Robert Byrd, who in my view, is the greatest living, American statesman, with Kucinich a close second.
Kerry and Edwards grew their balls back. Daschle did not. Gephardt continues to be ball-less, and apparently, despite his retoric, I met in the Rose Garden, blah, blah, blah and told the president blah, blah, blah, he is willing to fund an unjust and unwise war and enrich all the president's men.
Senator Boxer against. Senator Feinstein, for. Check the records for yourselves. I've provided the links. Despite this vote, this battle has only just begun.
Some of our "representatives" in Congress are over-paid plutocrats who apparently don't give a hoot about the average joe struggling to make ends meet, who are now going to have to foot a bill for a war we are losing, a war that wasn't needed in the first place.
This bill might be the straw to break the camel's back, when the true nature of how this money is being spent will leak out, pour out, spill out like a sieve of revolting intelligence agents.
Arms and the Man, I hope you're on this. I'll help too, in terms of tracking down whatever articles I can on the corruption that is happening while we speak in that sad, broken country, with our money.
Shame on the democrats who were cowards in voting for this bill. Thank you Congressmen William Jefferson from my home state for voting against the bill. Thank you, of course, Kucinich, Pelosi, Jackson-Lee and many others in the House of Representatives who had the courage and the balls to stand up to corruption.
Thanks to Senators Kerry, Graham, Edwards, Jeffords, Kennedy and of course, the very courageous Senator Robert Byrd, who in my view, is the greatest living, American statesman, with Kucinich a close second.
Kerry and Edwards grew their balls back. Daschle did not. Gephardt continues to be ball-less, and apparently, despite his retoric, I met in the Rose Garden, blah, blah, blah and told the president blah, blah, blah, he is willing to fund an unjust and unwise war and enrich all the president's men.
Senator Boxer against. Senator Feinstein, for. Check the records for yourselves. I've provided the links. Despite this vote, this battle has only just begun.
# posted by scorpiorising : 10:05 AM |
Thursday, October 16, 2003
Touch-screen hacking.
This is an issue that frightens me more than any other right now, as there is no way to determine if the companies who manufacture voting machines, have hacked their own machines in favor of certain candidates. There are many sub-issues to this issue, sub-plots and what appear to be schemes. It is very much like venturing down the rabbit hole and swallowing the pill, in order to understand the terrain. The terrain in this case is the possibility of vanishing votes because there is no paper trail. The terrain is also little regulation and oversight over these new machines, so that we don't know what the heck the companies are doing to the machines when they institute software changes, patches, especially at the last minute, which has happened a number of times.
This is the most serious issue of our day and the greatest threat to democracy that we face. If we don't confront the companies and politicians that have bought into this electronic voting machine fallacy, then we may lose our democratic voting apparatus, and we'll lose our country.
From Salon.com, more on the issue, and on the wonderwoman Bev Harris, who began the questioning:
She began by looking into Election Systems & Software, the world's largest election supply company, based in Omaha, Neb. Harris quickly found that ES&S was owned, in part, by a merchant banking holding company called the McCarthy Group and that the firm's chairman, Michael McCarthy, was Chuck Hagel's campaign treasurer. After searching news archives, Harris found that during Hagel's first campaign, in 1996, the Nebraska media reported that he had been president of ES&S -- which at the time was called American Information Systems -- between 1992 and 1995. But the articles suggested that Hagel was no longer affiliated with the voting equipment company. Harris saw election records that showed Hagel still holding between $1 million and $5 million worth of stock in McCarthy, which owned about 25 percent of ES&S.
Harris had stumbled on what seemed to be a striking conflict of interest -- a U.S. senator owned a share in a company that built all the vote-counting machines in his state. She put up the relevant documents on her site, "and immediately I knew I'd hit a sore spot," she says, "because right away I got a threat letter from ES&S."
This is the most serious issue of our day and the greatest threat to democracy that we face. If we don't confront the companies and politicians that have bought into this electronic voting machine fallacy, then we may lose our democratic voting apparatus, and we'll lose our country.
From Salon.com, more on the issue, and on the wonderwoman Bev Harris, who began the questioning:
She began by looking into Election Systems & Software, the world's largest election supply company, based in Omaha, Neb. Harris quickly found that ES&S was owned, in part, by a merchant banking holding company called the McCarthy Group and that the firm's chairman, Michael McCarthy, was Chuck Hagel's campaign treasurer. After searching news archives, Harris found that during Hagel's first campaign, in 1996, the Nebraska media reported that he had been president of ES&S -- which at the time was called American Information Systems -- between 1992 and 1995. But the articles suggested that Hagel was no longer affiliated with the voting equipment company. Harris saw election records that showed Hagel still holding between $1 million and $5 million worth of stock in McCarthy, which owned about 25 percent of ES&S.
Harris had stumbled on what seemed to be a striking conflict of interest -- a U.S. senator owned a share in a company that built all the vote-counting machines in his state. She put up the relevant documents on her site, "and immediately I knew I'd hit a sore spot," she says, "because right away I got a threat letter from ES&S."
# posted by scorpiorising : 1:51 PM |
Halliburton accused of fleecing.
This is good news, as apparently people are beginning to wake up the the outrage of Halliburton, with close ties to the Vice-President, making a fortune off of this war. The latest has Halliburton charging the American taxpayer inflated prices for oil to deliver to Iraq, then selling it cheap in Iraq. What the heck?
Reps. Henry Waxman of California and John Dingell of Michigan are on it, as is the army and Army Corps of Engineers, the jerks that gave Halliburton the no-bid contract to begin with. Senator Lautenberg of New Jersey wants to bar companies with close ties to the president and vice-president and the cabinet from receiving contracts to rebuild Iraq.
Better late than never, but Jesus Christ, glad you guys are coming around to the greatest fleecing of the American taxpayer ever that this war is, among other atrocities:
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which chose Halliburton, has received bids for a replacement contract that could be awarded this month.
Corps spokesman Robert Faletti said he could not confirm the figures that Waxman and Dingell cited in a letter to Joshua Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
He said, however, that the contract is being audited by Congress and the Army.
In a further move against Halliburton, Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., announced Wednesday he would propose barring the government from awarding Iraq reconstruction contracts to companies that maintain close financial ties to the president, vice president or members of the president's Cabinet.
Lautenberg wants the measure added to an $87 billion reconstruction bill for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Cheney receives deferred payments from Halliburton and also has stock options.
Reps. Henry Waxman of California and John Dingell of Michigan are on it, as is the army and Army Corps of Engineers, the jerks that gave Halliburton the no-bid contract to begin with. Senator Lautenberg of New Jersey wants to bar companies with close ties to the president and vice-president and the cabinet from receiving contracts to rebuild Iraq.
Better late than never, but Jesus Christ, glad you guys are coming around to the greatest fleecing of the American taxpayer ever that this war is, among other atrocities:
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which chose Halliburton, has received bids for a replacement contract that could be awarded this month.
Corps spokesman Robert Faletti said he could not confirm the figures that Waxman and Dingell cited in a letter to Joshua Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
He said, however, that the contract is being audited by Congress and the Army.
In a further move against Halliburton, Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., announced Wednesday he would propose barring the government from awarding Iraq reconstruction contracts to companies that maintain close financial ties to the president, vice president or members of the president's Cabinet.
Lautenberg wants the measure added to an $87 billion reconstruction bill for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Cheney receives deferred payments from Halliburton and also has stock options.
# posted by scorpiorising : 8:22 AM |
Liar, liar, pants on fire.
I can't tell you how many times my mother and I have sung this tune, liar, liar, pants on fire, when hearing about the latest lies exposed of the Bush administration. It seems Ben Cohen of Ben and Jerry's fame is taking it a step further. He now heads the political action group, True Majority, from whom I receive email updates. He has created a huge, Bush in effigy with flames shooting out of his pants, and he drove the thing from his home in Vermont to Manhattan, and meet the press there yesterday.
I'm so glad the thing didn't catch on fire, although that might have actually been kind of appropriate.
I couldn't find a damn thing on the True Majority web site as to how this went, but I haven't heard of any tragic, unusual fires either, so I guess no news is good news.
Ben Cohen
I'm so glad the thing didn't catch on fire, although that might have actually been kind of appropriate.
I couldn't find a damn thing on the True Majority web site as to how this went, but I haven't heard of any tragic, unusual fires either, so I guess no news is good news.
Ben Cohen# posted by scorpiorising : 7:55 AM |
Australian parliament censures it's prime minister.
I didn't hear about this because I am sure the GOP leaning media didn't want me to hear about this, and I missed it somehow on the internet. Anyhow, that marvelous group known as the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (where were they during the Iran/contra scandals), tell us that one person can make a difference:
Our most recent open appeal to you, “Now It’s Your Turn,” was made on August 22, 2003. On that same day, it turns out, former Australian intelligence analyst Andrew Wilkie testified before a parliamentary committee examining the justification given by Prime Minister John Howard for Australia’s decision to join the war in Iraq. Wilkie had been a senior analyst in Australia’s premier intelligence agency, the Office of National Assessments. Of all the Australian, British, and American intelligence analysts with direct knowledge of how intelligence was abused in the run-up to the war—Wilkie was the only one to resign in protest and speak truth to power.
Those who dismiss such efforts as an exercise in futility should know that, on October 7 the Australian Senate, in a rare move, censured Howard for misleading the public in justifying sending Australian troops off to war. The Senate statement of censure noted that Howard had produced no evidence to justify his claims last March that Iraq had stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons, and castigated him for suppressing Australian intelligence warnings that war with Iraq would increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks. One senator accused Howard of “unprecedented deceit.”
Our most recent open appeal to you, “Now It’s Your Turn,” was made on August 22, 2003. On that same day, it turns out, former Australian intelligence analyst Andrew Wilkie testified before a parliamentary committee examining the justification given by Prime Minister John Howard for Australia’s decision to join the war in Iraq. Wilkie had been a senior analyst in Australia’s premier intelligence agency, the Office of National Assessments. Of all the Australian, British, and American intelligence analysts with direct knowledge of how intelligence was abused in the run-up to the war—Wilkie was the only one to resign in protest and speak truth to power.
Those who dismiss such efforts as an exercise in futility should know that, on October 7 the Australian Senate, in a rare move, censured Howard for misleading the public in justifying sending Australian troops off to war. The Senate statement of censure noted that Howard had produced no evidence to justify his claims last March that Iraq had stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons, and castigated him for suppressing Australian intelligence warnings that war with Iraq would increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks. One senator accused Howard of “unprecedented deceit.”
# posted by scorpiorising : 7:45 AM |
A startling revelation.
Here is a startling revelation from an ex-aid to Colin Powell, whom I guess wants to clear his own conscience for not coming out sooner about this: Colin Powell misled the American people in this rush to war. That's right folks, you heard it here first.
I hope this turns out to be as important as Joseph Wilson turning the tables on Bush and his faulty intelligence. We can only hope. From Common Dreams:
Greg Thielmann tells Correspondent Scott Pelley that at the time of Powell’s speech, Iraq didn’t pose an imminent threat to anyone – not even its own neighbors. “…I think my conclusion [about Powell’s speech] now is that it’s probably one of the low points in his long distinguished service to the nation,” says Thielmann.
I hope this turns out to be as important as Joseph Wilson turning the tables on Bush and his faulty intelligence. We can only hope. From Common Dreams:
Greg Thielmann tells Correspondent Scott Pelley that at the time of Powell’s speech, Iraq didn’t pose an imminent threat to anyone – not even its own neighbors. “…I think my conclusion [about Powell’s speech] now is that it’s probably one of the low points in his long distinguished service to the nation,” says Thielmann.
# posted by scorpiorising : 7:38 AM |
Wednesday, October 15, 2003
Just Say No to 87billion dollars for Iraq.
The best think that Nancy Reagan ever did for this country, was emphasize these three words: Just Say NO. I don't say this in appreciation for the drug wars that the three words, just say no, were originally associated with.
I am against the drug wars.
I am also against spending 87 billion in Iraq which is the same as pouring 87 billion dollars down a black hole. You don't know where it will end up in time and what it will end up doing or causing. You don't know whose pocket its going to line.
Just say no to the 87 billion dollars proposed spending for the reconstruction of Iraq. I do favor spending some of that dough on the troops, if it means making their lives a little easier while they are there. I've heard of shortages such as toothpaste, the essentials.
I called my senators today, Terry Breaux and Mary Landrieu. Both women I talked to seemed rushed; hurried. I called Landrieau's office back, because usually they ask for your name and address, and they didn't this time. I told the woman that I felt rushed when I spoke to her before, and she said she was sorry, but they were getting 3 calls per minute. I don't know if she was exaggerating. I asked her if the calls had to do with the 87 billion for Iraq, and she said "yes".
I was thrilled. I got chummy with her and asked her how the votes were leaning, and she said the vast majority, almost 100 percent, was against the spending. She said out of the hundreds of calls, only two expressed support for the 87 billion.
I thanked her and said I look forward to receiving Ms. Landrieu's response. I know it is a waste of mail and paper, but she always sends a letter stating a response regarding the issue that you phoned or wrote or emailed her about. It may be that she puts together form letters for the different issues. I sort of don't mind, because at least she is stating her position and doesn't mind that her position is identified. This is what distinguishes a true servant of the people from a charleton, like Arnold Schwarzenegger, who seemed to loath having to define his stances on the issues, and certainly not spontaneously with reporters.
I may not always agree with Mary, but I think she is really trying to fullfill the duties of her job.
Everyone, please help keep those men and women arming the offices of our senators and representatives, breathless and scrambling to keep up with our willingness to share our views with them. It could shake things up, and its a start.
I am against the drug wars.
I am also against spending 87 billion in Iraq which is the same as pouring 87 billion dollars down a black hole. You don't know where it will end up in time and what it will end up doing or causing. You don't know whose pocket its going to line.
Just say no to the 87 billion dollars proposed spending for the reconstruction of Iraq. I do favor spending some of that dough on the troops, if it means making their lives a little easier while they are there. I've heard of shortages such as toothpaste, the essentials.
I called my senators today, Terry Breaux and Mary Landrieu. Both women I talked to seemed rushed; hurried. I called Landrieau's office back, because usually they ask for your name and address, and they didn't this time. I told the woman that I felt rushed when I spoke to her before, and she said she was sorry, but they were getting 3 calls per minute. I don't know if she was exaggerating. I asked her if the calls had to do with the 87 billion for Iraq, and she said "yes".
I was thrilled. I got chummy with her and asked her how the votes were leaning, and she said the vast majority, almost 100 percent, was against the spending. She said out of the hundreds of calls, only two expressed support for the 87 billion.
I thanked her and said I look forward to receiving Ms. Landrieu's response. I know it is a waste of mail and paper, but she always sends a letter stating a response regarding the issue that you phoned or wrote or emailed her about. It may be that she puts together form letters for the different issues. I sort of don't mind, because at least she is stating her position and doesn't mind that her position is identified. This is what distinguishes a true servant of the people from a charleton, like Arnold Schwarzenegger, who seemed to loath having to define his stances on the issues, and certainly not spontaneously with reporters.
I may not always agree with Mary, but I think she is really trying to fullfill the duties of her job.
Everyone, please help keep those men and women arming the offices of our senators and representatives, breathless and scrambling to keep up with our willingness to share our views with them. It could shake things up, and its a start.
# posted by scorpiorising : 3:38 PM |
Tuesday, October 14, 2003
What happened in California.
I am beyond words, or maybe short of them, to explain what happened in California. But I'll try anyway. I'm hoping what happened had much more to do with the power of the personality of Schwarzenegger, but as soon as I say that, I also know I am lying to myself.
Californians, the ones who voted for Schwarzenegger, were no more informed of the origin of the economic problems there, than my neighbor's poodle. Otherwise, they would not have voted for a republican who met with Ken Lay and other enronites to plot to take over the energy market there, through deregulation, and set their inflated prices. This takeover was successfull, at least temporarily, by-the-way, causing shortages of electricity and blackouts and just plain hell.
It was so successful, that Arnold wants to do it again.
Can you think of a single Enron executive who has been prosecuted for his crimes against the people? Not a single one, yet.
This California nightmare was a collision between the power of Arnold's personality, anger and voter helplessness over the economic near-collapse of the country, including the shrinking money resources of California. Top it with voters being ill-informed over causes of shrinking California resources, which has more to do with the policies of President George Bush. Somehow Californians seem to neatly slice Bush out of this equation, laying the blame squarely at the feet of a democratic governor and the democratic legislature. The democratic party would not have been so vulnerable to this charge if there wasn't an element of truth to it. Like Arnold said, "Where's there's smoke, there's fire".
This election is a wake-up call to the Democratic party in California and the nation. More than any other lesson, this is the one that ought to be heeded.
The democratic party is vulnerable if its interests are obviously tied to special interests. Perhaps we are seen by voters as the saviors of the people, as the party of the people, so more is expected of us, while Republicans get away with murder. So be it. Let's be the party of the people, and watch the people come to us in swarms.
The Democratic Pary, clean up your house, please. You are all we the people have right now. Americans just aren't ready to vote Green yet.
The Schwarzenegger election might be a trend, but I have this feeling that he will eventually be seen as the George Bush in Schwarzenegger/clothing that he is. As he begins to screw the California economy to help a few of his rich cronies become even richer, the people of California will have a change of heart and realize the quality of the facism they elected. Of course, I'm trying to read the future here, and I have no proof this is going to happen, just a feeling.
Read for yourself Mike Taylor, and what he calls California's Day of the Locust, and goddess help California and the rest of this nation, because there is a brown shirt with a swastika on his sleeve lurking in the shadows:
Yet, I don't want to suggest that this is a simple repeat of anti-immigrant Proposition 187 in the context of a recession and a nationwide crisis of state financing. Arnold Schwarzenegger does add something genuinely novel to the mix. He is not just another actor in politics but an extraordinary lightning rod, both in his movie persona and in real life, for dark, sexualized fantasies about omnipotence.
Pleasure in the humiliation of others -- Schwarzenegger's lifelong compulsion -- is the textbook definition of sadism. It is also the daily ration of right-wing hate radio. As governor he becomes the summation of all smaller sadisms, like those of Roger Hedgecock that in turn manipulate the "reptile within" of millions of outwardly affluent but inwardly tormented commuter-consumers. In their majesty, the predominantly white voters of California's inland empires and gated suburbs have anointed a clinically Hitlerite personality as their personal savior.
The last word about all this should, of course, belong to Nathanael West. In his classic novel The Day of the Locust (1939), he clearly foresaw that fandom was an incipient version of fascism. On the edge of Hollywood's neon plains, he envisioned the unassuageable hungers of California's petty bourgeoisie.
"They were savage and bitter, especially the middle-aged and the old . . . Their boredom becomes more and more terrible. They realize they've been tricked and burn with resentment. .. Nothing can ever be violent enough to make taut their slack minds and bodies."
Californians, the ones who voted for Schwarzenegger, were no more informed of the origin of the economic problems there, than my neighbor's poodle. Otherwise, they would not have voted for a republican who met with Ken Lay and other enronites to plot to take over the energy market there, through deregulation, and set their inflated prices. This takeover was successfull, at least temporarily, by-the-way, causing shortages of electricity and blackouts and just plain hell.
It was so successful, that Arnold wants to do it again.
Can you think of a single Enron executive who has been prosecuted for his crimes against the people? Not a single one, yet.
This California nightmare was a collision between the power of Arnold's personality, anger and voter helplessness over the economic near-collapse of the country, including the shrinking money resources of California. Top it with voters being ill-informed over causes of shrinking California resources, which has more to do with the policies of President George Bush. Somehow Californians seem to neatly slice Bush out of this equation, laying the blame squarely at the feet of a democratic governor and the democratic legislature. The democratic party would not have been so vulnerable to this charge if there wasn't an element of truth to it. Like Arnold said, "Where's there's smoke, there's fire".
This election is a wake-up call to the Democratic party in California and the nation. More than any other lesson, this is the one that ought to be heeded.
The democratic party is vulnerable if its interests are obviously tied to special interests. Perhaps we are seen by voters as the saviors of the people, as the party of the people, so more is expected of us, while Republicans get away with murder. So be it. Let's be the party of the people, and watch the people come to us in swarms.
The Democratic Pary, clean up your house, please. You are all we the people have right now. Americans just aren't ready to vote Green yet.
The Schwarzenegger election might be a trend, but I have this feeling that he will eventually be seen as the George Bush in Schwarzenegger/clothing that he is. As he begins to screw the California economy to help a few of his rich cronies become even richer, the people of California will have a change of heart and realize the quality of the facism they elected. Of course, I'm trying to read the future here, and I have no proof this is going to happen, just a feeling.
Read for yourself Mike Taylor, and what he calls California's Day of the Locust, and goddess help California and the rest of this nation, because there is a brown shirt with a swastika on his sleeve lurking in the shadows:
Yet, I don't want to suggest that this is a simple repeat of anti-immigrant Proposition 187 in the context of a recession and a nationwide crisis of state financing. Arnold Schwarzenegger does add something genuinely novel to the mix. He is not just another actor in politics but an extraordinary lightning rod, both in his movie persona and in real life, for dark, sexualized fantasies about omnipotence.
Pleasure in the humiliation of others -- Schwarzenegger's lifelong compulsion -- is the textbook definition of sadism. It is also the daily ration of right-wing hate radio. As governor he becomes the summation of all smaller sadisms, like those of Roger Hedgecock that in turn manipulate the "reptile within" of millions of outwardly affluent but inwardly tormented commuter-consumers. In their majesty, the predominantly white voters of California's inland empires and gated suburbs have anointed a clinically Hitlerite personality as their personal savior.
The last word about all this should, of course, belong to Nathanael West. In his classic novel The Day of the Locust (1939), he clearly foresaw that fandom was an incipient version of fascism. On the edge of Hollywood's neon plains, he envisioned the unassuageable hungers of California's petty bourgeoisie.
"They were savage and bitter, especially the middle-aged and the old . . . Their boredom becomes more and more terrible. They realize they've been tricked and burn with resentment. .. Nothing can ever be violent enough to make taut their slack minds and bodies."
# posted by scorpiorising : 2:33 PM |
America the destroyer.
There were many reasonable, civilized people who thought we should attack Afghanistan after 9/11, to destroy Bin Laden and the Taliban. I was not one of them, although I'm not sure this necessarily qualifies me as more reasonable or civilized, especially after a bottle of red wine.
However, I am sure the Kuchi Nomads of Afghanistan are wishing for a little reason and civilization, so that they can get on with their wandering ways. From Professor Marc Herald's Afghan Canon:
"Nomadic tribesman Haji Lawang saw the outline of the helicopter in the night sky and heard its roar as it streaked low over his three tents. A moment later, an explosion shook the ground and fire flew up from the desert about a mile away. The 50-year-old huddled with his two wives, four children, goats and camels and prayed his family wouldn't also be attacked. At dawn, he went out to investigate and found his neighbors' camp in ruins. Five women and four children were dead and six people were wounded, he said.
However, I am sure the Kuchi Nomads of Afghanistan are wishing for a little reason and civilization, so that they can get on with their wandering ways. From Professor Marc Herald's Afghan Canon:
"Nomadic tribesman Haji Lawang saw the outline of the helicopter in the night sky and heard its roar as it streaked low over his three tents. A moment later, an explosion shook the ground and fire flew up from the desert about a mile away. The 50-year-old huddled with his two wives, four children, goats and camels and prayed his family wouldn't also be attacked. At dawn, he went out to investigate and found his neighbors' camp in ruins. Five women and four children were dead and six people were wounded, he said.
# posted by scorpiorising : 10:08 AM |
The Art of Modern Pillaging.
Brian Whitaker of the Guardian introduces us to the modern version of pillaging, which is now called "economic development". He points out that the selling off of Iraqi businesses is actually illegal, under the Hague regulations of 1907:
Last month, Mr Bremer issued CPA order number 39, giving foreign investors unrestricted rights to establish businesses in Iraq and/or buy up Iraqi companies.
The order also allows foreign investors to repatriate profits, dividends, interest and royalties immediately and in full. In other words, they can make a fast buck if they want to, without putting anything back.
While few would disagree that Iraq's industry needs modernisation and restructuring, two questions arise: has Mr Bremer the legal powers to do this, and is he going about it in the right way?...
...Mr Bremer shows little interest in drawing lessons from the problems caused by economic "shock therapy" reforms in the former Soviet Union, and in Iraq - with the added factor of military occupation - this can only fuel hostility towards the US.
His order number 39 is also, almost certainly, illegal. The Hague regulations of 1907 spell out the obligations of an occupying power under international law.
Article 43 says that, when occupying forces take over a country, they must "ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country".
This means that Mr Bremer is not allowed to change Iraq's existing laws, including those that govern investment, unless it is "absolutely" essential to do so.
Article 55 says that an occupying power is only the "administrator and usufructuary" of state property. "It must safeguard the capital of these properties, and administer them in accordance with the rules of usufruct," it adds.
Mr Bremer, therefore, appears to have no right to sell off nationalised industries.
Last month, Mr Bremer issued CPA order number 39, giving foreign investors unrestricted rights to establish businesses in Iraq and/or buy up Iraqi companies.
The order also allows foreign investors to repatriate profits, dividends, interest and royalties immediately and in full. In other words, they can make a fast buck if they want to, without putting anything back.
While few would disagree that Iraq's industry needs modernisation and restructuring, two questions arise: has Mr Bremer the legal powers to do this, and is he going about it in the right way?...
...Mr Bremer shows little interest in drawing lessons from the problems caused by economic "shock therapy" reforms in the former Soviet Union, and in Iraq - with the added factor of military occupation - this can only fuel hostility towards the US.
His order number 39 is also, almost certainly, illegal. The Hague regulations of 1907 spell out the obligations of an occupying power under international law.
Article 43 says that, when occupying forces take over a country, they must "ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country".
This means that Mr Bremer is not allowed to change Iraq's existing laws, including those that govern investment, unless it is "absolutely" essential to do so.
Article 55 says that an occupying power is only the "administrator and usufructuary" of state property. "It must safeguard the capital of these properties, and administer them in accordance with the rules of usufruct," it adds.
Mr Bremer, therefore, appears to have no right to sell off nationalised industries.
# posted by scorpiorising : 9:37 AM |
If it's the people, its socialism; if it's corporations, it's...something else.
A shorter Paul Bremer (inspired by elton beard):
Although this might cause riots...
"We will discontinue the world's most efficient food distribution program, the Iraqi oil for food, which feeds 60% of Iraqis, because it is a dangerous socialist anachronism, while continuing our welfare for corporations program, with Halliburton as the main beneficiary."
Bremer and his boots
Although this might cause riots...
"We will discontinue the world's most efficient food distribution program, the Iraqi oil for food, which feeds 60% of Iraqis, because it is a dangerous socialist anachronism, while continuing our welfare for corporations program, with Halliburton as the main beneficiary."
Bremer and his boots# posted by scorpiorising : 6:54 AM |
Monday, October 13, 2003
The Berlin Wall, the Israeli Wall
Who can forget the sight of jubilant east and west Germans climbing atop the graffiti layered brick wall that was the Berlin Wall, as it literally crumbled beneath the blows and hammers of free hands, in late 1989. The Berlin Wall was a daily reminder for Westerners, not only to stay the course as far as combating the Soviet ruled "evil empire", but also to stay on guard aginst the loss of liberty within our own borders, within our own hearts.
I'm well aware of the relativity of problems within the old Soviet system, relative to our own, that is, and also the gradual erosion of voter participation here in the political process, and reasons and causes of said lack of participation.
Yet the destruction of the Berlin Wall was a reminder, and a victory, that reason and will can triumph over oppression. We are never more in need of this reason, and a will, to overcome a new wall going up, a wall that , as the Berlin Wall accomplished, will highlight in dramatic fashion the distinction between a free people, and a people imprisoned within their own fearful beliefs.
With the construction of the Israeli Security Fence, the wall is growing within the hearts of Israelis, and the Americans who continue to support this form of Middle East apartheid. This blatant land grab and isolation, and therefore economic destruction, of the Palestinian people, is being constucted on schedule. Have we forgotten our lessons of liberty, our origins as terrorists to the British rule?
This article from the ST. Petersburg Times:
Israel's goal, Palestinians charge, is to grab the West Bank's richest farmland and water resources, and make it impossible for Palestinians to ever have a viable state of their own.
"If Israel needs to do something for security, why not do it on the '67 border?" asks Fayez Salem, mayor of the village of Jayyous. "It would be no problem because we know this area is for Israel and this area is for us.
"Okay, so why don't they do it? It's because they want to steal our land."
The director of the fence project acknowledges that 85 percent of the land taken so far came from Palestinians and just 15 percent from Jewish communities. The government, though, insists that the Palestinian land is being used only for "military needs" until the end of 2005 and that the owners retain title.
But "over the decades, Palestinian land "temporarily' seized by Israel has been used to build permanent structures, including settlements and roads, and has never been returned to its owners," says the human rights group Amnesty International.
I'm well aware of the relativity of problems within the old Soviet system, relative to our own, that is, and also the gradual erosion of voter participation here in the political process, and reasons and causes of said lack of participation.
Yet the destruction of the Berlin Wall was a reminder, and a victory, that reason and will can triumph over oppression. We are never more in need of this reason, and a will, to overcome a new wall going up, a wall that , as the Berlin Wall accomplished, will highlight in dramatic fashion the distinction between a free people, and a people imprisoned within their own fearful beliefs.
With the construction of the Israeli Security Fence, the wall is growing within the hearts of Israelis, and the Americans who continue to support this form of Middle East apartheid. This blatant land grab and isolation, and therefore economic destruction, of the Palestinian people, is being constucted on schedule. Have we forgotten our lessons of liberty, our origins as terrorists to the British rule?
This article from the ST. Petersburg Times:
Israel's goal, Palestinians charge, is to grab the West Bank's richest farmland and water resources, and make it impossible for Palestinians to ever have a viable state of their own.
"If Israel needs to do something for security, why not do it on the '67 border?" asks Fayez Salem, mayor of the village of Jayyous. "It would be no problem because we know this area is for Israel and this area is for us.
"Okay, so why don't they do it? It's because they want to steal our land."
The director of the fence project acknowledges that 85 percent of the land taken so far came from Palestinians and just 15 percent from Jewish communities. The government, though, insists that the Palestinian land is being used only for "military needs" until the end of 2005 and that the owners retain title.
But "over the decades, Palestinian land "temporarily' seized by Israel has been used to build permanent structures, including settlements and roads, and has never been returned to its owners," says the human rights group Amnesty International.
# posted by scorpiorising : 9:31 AM |
A Smorgasbord of electoral fun.
According to an old story, Benjamin Franklin was confronted by a woman as he left the last session of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in September 1787.
"'What kind of goverment have you given us, Dr. Franklin?' she asked. 'A Republic or a Monarchy?'
"'A Republic, Madam,' he answered, 'if you can keep it'."
--My Govenment book.
I can honestly say, Benjamin Franklin, that I never imagined growing up in a time when our democracy was threatened. But then again, if you read Howard Zinn, Americans have been living under the false illusion that democracy as practiced here, is pure and idealogical. How quickly we bury historical remembrance of fixed elections, corporations driving us to war, and the physical brutality and economic oppression of the working people.
Corruption in the democratic process is nothing new, and fixed and corrupt elections are nothing new. What is new, is the idea that a few corporations might own all of the voting machines in this country one day, and that these corporations are self-proclaimed supporters of the Republican party. There have already been questions and possible fraud practiced by these companies in American elections, as evidenced in this article posted on CommonDreams.org by Andrew Gumbel from the Independent.uk.
Body and Soul linked to Mark Crispin Miller, who detailed electronic voting machine problems in the recent governor's race in California.
In the Gumbel article, it is noted that strict trade secrecy contracts between states and the voting machine companies, is making it difficult to re-count votes after elections:
It is still unclear exactly how results from these missing cards were tabulated, or if they were counted at all. And we will probably never know, for a highly disturbing reason. The vote count was not conducted by state elections officials, but by the private company that sold Georgia the voting machines in the first place, under a strict trade-secrecy contract that made it not only difficult but actually illegal - on pain of stiff criminal penalties - for the state to touch the equipment or examine the proprietary software to ensure the machines worked properly.
What American citizen, politician or no, in their right mind, would agree to a trade secrecy contract with an electronic voting machine company, that would prevent open and public counts, and recounts of votes in closely contested races. This is idiocy, and such a direct and obvious violation of basic democratic principals that even John Ashcroft ought to be able to perceive the violation.
The representatives of the people who agreed to such contracts ought to be run out of town. From the Gumbel article:
Astonishingly, these are the terms under which America's top three computer voting machine manufacturers - Diebold, Sequoia and Election Systems and Software (ES&S) - have sold their products to election officials around the country. Far from questioning the need for rigid trade secrecy and the absence of a paper record, secretaries of state and their technical advisers - anxious to banish memories of the hanging chad fiasco and other associated disasters in the 2000 presidential recount in Florida - have, for the most part, welcomed the touchscreen voting machines as a technological miracle solution.
We'd better wake up soon, or we will be living in the land of illusion. Illusory elections in which a winner is declared, with few bothering to vote, because the machines are rigged. Cynicism and helplessness will be rampant in those desiring change, apathy in those not wanting to know, and the corporations will run the country in collusion with corporate politicians. Oops, guess I just about described our current state of affairs.
"'What kind of goverment have you given us, Dr. Franklin?' she asked. 'A Republic or a Monarchy?'
"'A Republic, Madam,' he answered, 'if you can keep it'."
--My Govenment book.
I can honestly say, Benjamin Franklin, that I never imagined growing up in a time when our democracy was threatened. But then again, if you read Howard Zinn, Americans have been living under the false illusion that democracy as practiced here, is pure and idealogical. How quickly we bury historical remembrance of fixed elections, corporations driving us to war, and the physical brutality and economic oppression of the working people.
Corruption in the democratic process is nothing new, and fixed and corrupt elections are nothing new. What is new, is the idea that a few corporations might own all of the voting machines in this country one day, and that these corporations are self-proclaimed supporters of the Republican party. There have already been questions and possible fraud practiced by these companies in American elections, as evidenced in this article posted on CommonDreams.org by Andrew Gumbel from the Independent.uk.
Body and Soul linked to Mark Crispin Miller, who detailed electronic voting machine problems in the recent governor's race in California.
In the Gumbel article, it is noted that strict trade secrecy contracts between states and the voting machine companies, is making it difficult to re-count votes after elections:
It is still unclear exactly how results from these missing cards were tabulated, or if they were counted at all. And we will probably never know, for a highly disturbing reason. The vote count was not conducted by state elections officials, but by the private company that sold Georgia the voting machines in the first place, under a strict trade-secrecy contract that made it not only difficult but actually illegal - on pain of stiff criminal penalties - for the state to touch the equipment or examine the proprietary software to ensure the machines worked properly.
What American citizen, politician or no, in their right mind, would agree to a trade secrecy contract with an electronic voting machine company, that would prevent open and public counts, and recounts of votes in closely contested races. This is idiocy, and such a direct and obvious violation of basic democratic principals that even John Ashcroft ought to be able to perceive the violation.
The representatives of the people who agreed to such contracts ought to be run out of town. From the Gumbel article:
Astonishingly, these are the terms under which America's top three computer voting machine manufacturers - Diebold, Sequoia and Election Systems and Software (ES&S) - have sold their products to election officials around the country. Far from questioning the need for rigid trade secrecy and the absence of a paper record, secretaries of state and their technical advisers - anxious to banish memories of the hanging chad fiasco and other associated disasters in the 2000 presidential recount in Florida - have, for the most part, welcomed the touchscreen voting machines as a technological miracle solution.
We'd better wake up soon, or we will be living in the land of illusion. Illusory elections in which a winner is declared, with few bothering to vote, because the machines are rigged. Cynicism and helplessness will be rampant in those desiring change, apathy in those not wanting to know, and the corporations will run the country in collusion with corporate politicians. Oops, guess I just about described our current state of affairs.
# posted by scorpiorising : 8:41 AM |
Tuesday, October 07, 2003
The Great Groper.
Kalifornea, you are being groped by possibly the greatest groper of all time. You're being fondled, and you don't even know it. That's how good he is. Get ready, because you are going to be asked to do a lot more in the coming months. I hope you know how to suck hard.
Sorry for the obscenity, but today, I needed to say it exactly as I feel it. It is difficult to sit in these swamps and watch as California gets screwed, by the same man who, along with Ken Lay and Enron, screwed them before.
I feel dirty today. Der Gropinator is dirtying the entire nation. Godess save us from these brown shirts that are flowing in his wake.
The media deserves special praise for its efforts in electing der gropinator, especially Chris Matthews:
ALLRED: ...the situation with Monica Lewinsky was consented to conduct. She consented to that conduct. In the newspaper article in the “L.A. Times,” the situation with the six women with Arnold Schwarzenegger...
MATTHEWS: So it’s OK if it’s...
ALLRED: ...is unconsented to, if you believe it’s true.
MATTHEWS: OK. Just to get this straight, just to-Gloria, so your record is straight here. So it’s OK to have consensual relations with a woman who is 30 years or whatever younger than you in the workplace. That’s OK. And it is to lie about it. But in this case, he admitted he did it and that’s not OK. What is your value system here?
ALLRED: Well, it is very clear. It is not unlawful, although I don’t think it is wise, to have a sexual relationship that is consented to in the workplace.
MATTHEWS: OK.
ALLRED: But, if it is unwelcome in the workplace, as is alleged against Arnold Schwarzenegger, that’s unlawful. If it is true, it is sexual battery that he committed, Mr. Schwarzenegger. And that is potentially a crime.
MATTHEWS: Great. OK. My producer is telling me to shut you up. OK?
I’m trying to be polite. Go ahead, Kim.
And special accolades to the New York Times:
There was only one problem with the story: the profiled neighbor doesn't live next door to the Governor. In fact, she doesn't even live on the same street. Her home is several football fields away, across a pond in the neighborhood development. The Times readers were lead to believe that this
woman knew the Governor in the way a next door neighbor does (never mind the fact that the Governor's primary residence is in Los Angeles), when, in fact, she didn't know him at all.
Sorry for the obscenity, but today, I needed to say it exactly as I feel it. It is difficult to sit in these swamps and watch as California gets screwed, by the same man who, along with Ken Lay and Enron, screwed them before.
I feel dirty today. Der Gropinator is dirtying the entire nation. Godess save us from these brown shirts that are flowing in his wake.
The media deserves special praise for its efforts in electing der gropinator, especially Chris Matthews:
ALLRED: ...the situation with Monica Lewinsky was consented to conduct. She consented to that conduct. In the newspaper article in the “L.A. Times,” the situation with the six women with Arnold Schwarzenegger...
MATTHEWS: So it’s OK if it’s...
ALLRED: ...is unconsented to, if you believe it’s true.
MATTHEWS: OK. Just to get this straight, just to-Gloria, so your record is straight here. So it’s OK to have consensual relations with a woman who is 30 years or whatever younger than you in the workplace. That’s OK. And it is to lie about it. But in this case, he admitted he did it and that’s not OK. What is your value system here?
ALLRED: Well, it is very clear. It is not unlawful, although I don’t think it is wise, to have a sexual relationship that is consented to in the workplace.
MATTHEWS: OK.
ALLRED: But, if it is unwelcome in the workplace, as is alleged against Arnold Schwarzenegger, that’s unlawful. If it is true, it is sexual battery that he committed, Mr. Schwarzenegger. And that is potentially a crime.
MATTHEWS: Great. OK. My producer is telling me to shut you up. OK?
I’m trying to be polite. Go ahead, Kim.
And special accolades to the New York Times:
There was only one problem with the story: the profiled neighbor doesn't live next door to the Governor. In fact, she doesn't even live on the same street. Her home is several football fields away, across a pond in the neighborhood development. The Times readers were lead to believe that this
woman knew the Governor in the way a next door neighbor does (never mind the fact that the Governor's primary residence is in Los Angeles), when, in fact, she didn't know him at all.
# posted by scorpiorising : 2:28 PM |
So many issues, so little time.
I've been considering specializing on two issue right now. I think it would be a worthwhile site to catalogue the statements made by the Bush administration on Iraq, from 2000 to the present. Something to think about.
The other issue: global warming.
These two issues seem to encapsulate the most important issues we as a people are facing: saving the planet from environmental destruction, and saving the planet from the ignorant.
You notice, 'issue', is defined in the previous paragraph in "active" sentences. The issue is not global warming; the issue is to save the planet from global warming.
The issue is not Iraq, the issue is to become more active than ignorant people.
Ignorance is the most polite description I can offer for those who decided war with Iraq is a good idea. Exposing the lies and hypocricies of this "operation" would go a long way to exposing the failings of the so-called "purely capitalist model" of government. The destruction to humanity this war is causing is reason enough to pursue this endeavor.
I look at the Iraq war as welfare for corporations, plain and simple. Halliburton was on the verge of bankruptcy these last several years, but what has saved it are government sponsored loans and contracts. You tell me there hasn't been outright collusion between corporate and "national interests".
Regarding the environment, some might argue it is too foregone a conclusion to become active. We're well on our way to destroying the fragile eco-systems of the earth, and there is no turning back.
I know there are some who believe there is not enough healing that could take place, quickly enough to stem the tide of dis-repair. I might agree with them. I might feel despair at times on this issue. Some aspects of our eco-systems are lost forever, certain animal and plant species are extinct, unable to survive the acceleration of human intrusion into their world. The numbers of extinct animal and plant species grows.
The ancient art of living in harmony with our surroundings is dying. Will we become ghosts of ourselves, the selves who knew how to live and not destroy, who worshipped the spirits and souls of the earth and all of its inhabitants, as representing the ideal and divine aspects of self? I tell you, we are a dead people if we lose our precious connection to nature.
Loving the world of nature is as natural a function as there is. But it does entail the act of doing, the act of loving. My mother is one of the greatest lovers of nature that I know, and she hasn't hiked in the wilderness a day in her life. What she has done, since learning from her mother as a child, is cultivate a garden almost every year of her life. Right now her pink roses are blooming in the backyard, along with her chrysanthamums, and lantana.
Love is an active principal. I suppose one could sit in one's room all day and meditate on the beauty that is nature. But to experience nature, one needs to be in nature. An active relationship with nature naturally includes participation in the moment, with the experience of nature. It's guarunteed to refresh the soul. I don't get enough of it. I don't make enough time for it. I'm a sot like the rest of you.
We are a species with self-awareness. The human will is emphasized as the instinct is lost. This is a mixed-blessing, and this mixed- blessing comes with a responsibility: the responsibility to become more aware of the effects of our actions, because our instincts no longer perform this function for us.
It is difficult to imagine living on a world with dying or dead eco-systems everywhere. I would say though, that we are already living on just such a world. The question is, will the last of our natural heritage pass away from our experience. Would it be worth it as a people to continue on this planet, if we destroyed our eco-systems so that they no longer functioned as a whole, with the parts complementing each other?
One ecosystem complements the flow of another, unseen until something goes very wrong. Something has gone very wrong when the snows of Kilimanjaro are melting, and Africa is drying up.
Given that Africa may be the oldest cradle of life on the planet, it is fitting to look at that continent for the earliest clues as to what global warming means on a massive scale.
The other issue: global warming.
These two issues seem to encapsulate the most important issues we as a people are facing: saving the planet from environmental destruction, and saving the planet from the ignorant.
You notice, 'issue', is defined in the previous paragraph in "active" sentences. The issue is not global warming; the issue is to save the planet from global warming.
The issue is not Iraq, the issue is to become more active than ignorant people.
Ignorance is the most polite description I can offer for those who decided war with Iraq is a good idea. Exposing the lies and hypocricies of this "operation" would go a long way to exposing the failings of the so-called "purely capitalist model" of government. The destruction to humanity this war is causing is reason enough to pursue this endeavor.
I look at the Iraq war as welfare for corporations, plain and simple. Halliburton was on the verge of bankruptcy these last several years, but what has saved it are government sponsored loans and contracts. You tell me there hasn't been outright collusion between corporate and "national interests".
Regarding the environment, some might argue it is too foregone a conclusion to become active. We're well on our way to destroying the fragile eco-systems of the earth, and there is no turning back.
I know there are some who believe there is not enough healing that could take place, quickly enough to stem the tide of dis-repair. I might agree with them. I might feel despair at times on this issue. Some aspects of our eco-systems are lost forever, certain animal and plant species are extinct, unable to survive the acceleration of human intrusion into their world. The numbers of extinct animal and plant species grows.
The ancient art of living in harmony with our surroundings is dying. Will we become ghosts of ourselves, the selves who knew how to live and not destroy, who worshipped the spirits and souls of the earth and all of its inhabitants, as representing the ideal and divine aspects of self? I tell you, we are a dead people if we lose our precious connection to nature.
Loving the world of nature is as natural a function as there is. But it does entail the act of doing, the act of loving. My mother is one of the greatest lovers of nature that I know, and she hasn't hiked in the wilderness a day in her life. What she has done, since learning from her mother as a child, is cultivate a garden almost every year of her life. Right now her pink roses are blooming in the backyard, along with her chrysanthamums, and lantana.
Love is an active principal. I suppose one could sit in one's room all day and meditate on the beauty that is nature. But to experience nature, one needs to be in nature. An active relationship with nature naturally includes participation in the moment, with the experience of nature. It's guarunteed to refresh the soul. I don't get enough of it. I don't make enough time for it. I'm a sot like the rest of you.
We are a species with self-awareness. The human will is emphasized as the instinct is lost. This is a mixed-blessing, and this mixed- blessing comes with a responsibility: the responsibility to become more aware of the effects of our actions, because our instincts no longer perform this function for us.
It is difficult to imagine living on a world with dying or dead eco-systems everywhere. I would say though, that we are already living on just such a world. The question is, will the last of our natural heritage pass away from our experience. Would it be worth it as a people to continue on this planet, if we destroyed our eco-systems so that they no longer functioned as a whole, with the parts complementing each other?
One ecosystem complements the flow of another, unseen until something goes very wrong. Something has gone very wrong when the snows of Kilimanjaro are melting, and Africa is drying up.
Given that Africa may be the oldest cradle of life on the planet, it is fitting to look at that continent for the earliest clues as to what global warming means on a massive scale.
# posted by scorpiorising : 8:12 AM |
Friday, October 03, 2003
Ouch!
I think I was a little naive in my letter to J concerning the "war" between the White House and the CIA:
CIA officers are career people, and there is a lot of pride in their work. They are not political appointees, advancing certain ideology.
Of course they are advancing ideology. Unfortunately, the CIA and the Executive Branch have come to be fed from the same river: distortion for the sake of success in advancing their beliefs, only, the CIA is the "victim" this time. There is no room for honesty, for the most part, in any branch of government, as long as there is perceived ideological territory to be lost and protected.
CIA officers are career people, and there is a lot of pride in their work. They are not political appointees, advancing certain ideology.
Of course they are advancing ideology. Unfortunately, the CIA and the Executive Branch have come to be fed from the same river: distortion for the sake of success in advancing their beliefs, only, the CIA is the "victim" this time. There is no room for honesty, for the most part, in any branch of government, as long as there is perceived ideological territory to be lost and protected.
# posted by scorpiorising : 5:46 PM |
We find ourselves in An Unenviable Situation.
Damn if I can find anyone with a point of view quite like An Unenviable Situation. I get a head lift when I read him. Not sure what that means, but that's what I feel:
It's not as if Valerie Plame went around the world calling herself 'Mildred Natwick.' She used her maiden name, and is listed in "Who's Who" as both Plame and Wilson. If that's deep cover, it's amateurish. And I'm more than a little uncomfortable with anyone yelling treason!, whomever they're accusing. Am I really supposed to make a principled defense of the CIA? I'd be happier defending the Catholic Church.
All that we need to do is to continue pointing out the hypocrisy of the Republican right; there's there's no need to wrap ourselves in the flag while we're at it. It's stupid, and it's risky.
The above refers more to the take at Buzzflash and The Horse, than it does to Mark Kleiman who's less partisan, and more interested in principle (though not ones I share.) Still, he links to an article in the NY Daily News that has some new information on Plame's job, without even mentioning the absurd context: "She's the perfect spy Outed CIA agent had glamour job & looks to match."
I glad -I'm relieved- all this is happening, and I take it all very seriously. But that doesn't mean I have to take the people involved very seriously.
Sometimes I feel optimistic. But then I think it's probably just despair.
It's not as if Valerie Plame went around the world calling herself 'Mildred Natwick.' She used her maiden name, and is listed in "Who's Who" as both Plame and Wilson. If that's deep cover, it's amateurish. And I'm more than a little uncomfortable with anyone yelling treason!, whomever they're accusing. Am I really supposed to make a principled defense of the CIA? I'd be happier defending the Catholic Church.
All that we need to do is to continue pointing out the hypocrisy of the Republican right; there's there's no need to wrap ourselves in the flag while we're at it. It's stupid, and it's risky.
The above refers more to the take at Buzzflash and The Horse, than it does to Mark Kleiman who's less partisan, and more interested in principle (though not ones I share.) Still, he links to an article in the NY Daily News that has some new information on Plame's job, without even mentioning the absurd context: "She's the perfect spy Outed CIA agent had glamour job & looks to match."
I glad -I'm relieved- all this is happening, and I take it all very seriously. But that doesn't mean I have to take the people involved very seriously.
Sometimes I feel optimistic. But then I think it's probably just despair.
# posted by scorpiorising : 5:36 PM |
Thursday, October 02, 2003
The "War" Between the White House and the CIA
I posted this letter to a friend. The only thing I would add, is that the "outing" of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative, by someone in the White House was the final humiliation for the CIA. Number one, it shows such a lack of respect for that agency, and the almost complete contempt the White House shows for the CIA. It did no good for the CIA to bend over in order to manipulate intelligence so that the White House could have its war in Iraq. Valerie Plame and interagency operations are the ones who paid for it.
The White House would have never had the balls to out a CIA operative, if the CIA had stood firm in its intelligence reports. Screw you, you don't get your war, in other words. But the CIA did not stand firm, and the White House, in thanks, pissed on them again by outing Plame.
The CIA is growing its balls back, and look out. Here is my letter:
J,
I think the CIA was pressured to comform to the war wishes of this administration, as evidenced in this Walter Pincus article in the Wash. Post. CIA officers are career people, and there is a lot of pride in their work. They are not political appointees, advancing certain ideology. But what you have under Bush is ideology colliding with actual intelligence gathered by the CIA. What won out, is ideology, for now.
There is also this story, published in the Nation way back on October 10, 2002, detailing the schizoid split, if you will, within the CIA. I think they were being pulled in one direction by the idealogues, while their intelligence actually supported another direction. The final humiliation was the attempt to blame Tenet for the 16 words uttered in the State of the Union Speech. That's when Tenet, according to 'C' on Daily Kos, took off the gloves.
Other articles of note: one by KAREN KWIATOWSKI , a retired Air Force colonel, who in her last three years, worked in the Office of the Secretary of Defence's Under-Secretariat for Policy. She said:
3. Groupthink. Defined as "reasoning or decision-making by a group, often characterized by uncritical acceptance or conformity to prevailing points of view," groupthink was, and probably remains, the predominant characteristic of Pentagon Middle East policy development. The result of groupthink is the elevation of opinion into a kind of accepted fact, and uncritical acceptance of extremely narrow and isolated points of view. Groupthink leading to invasion and occupation of Iraq will be found, I believe, to have caused a subversion of constitutional limits on executive power and a co-optation through deceit of a large segment of the Congress.
Based on groupthink, actual intelligence was subverted, and the CIA intelligence officers were swept along in this, much to their dismay. Now the CIA is finding a way to weild its power in the Plame Affair.
Also a hint of things to come was this letter to the White House from retired CIA officers, who called themselves the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, letter dated May 1:
On October 4, 2002, a week before Congress voted on the war resolution, the National Intelligence Council, an interagency body under the CIA Director as head of the entire Intelligence Community, published an unclassified version of a memorandum that had been briefed to Congressmen and Senators over the previous weeks.
Among the key judgments: “Most analysts assess Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.”
The clumsy clause conceals a crass cave-in. The preponderant view, then as now, among nuclear scientists and engineers of the Intelligence Community and the Department of Energy’s national laboratories is that Iraq had not been able to reconstitute in any significant way the nuclear development program dismantled by UN inspectors prior to 1998. The conclusions of the vast majority of analysts dovetailed with the findings repeatedly presented to the UN by International Atomic Energy Agency Director Mohamed ElBaradei and his inspectors after their inspection work at the turn of the year; i. e., that Iraq had no nuclear program worthy of the name.
It's my view 'J', that we aren't the only ones who desire a regime change at home. I'm betting that the CIA resents how it was manipulated to back the invasion of Iraq, and now they are beginning to weild their political muscle. Good for them.
Elizabeth
The White House would have never had the balls to out a CIA operative, if the CIA had stood firm in its intelligence reports. Screw you, you don't get your war, in other words. But the CIA did not stand firm, and the White House, in thanks, pissed on them again by outing Plame.
The CIA is growing its balls back, and look out. Here is my letter:
J,
I think the CIA was pressured to comform to the war wishes of this administration, as evidenced in this Walter Pincus article in the Wash. Post. CIA officers are career people, and there is a lot of pride in their work. They are not political appointees, advancing certain ideology. But what you have under Bush is ideology colliding with actual intelligence gathered by the CIA. What won out, is ideology, for now.
There is also this story, published in the Nation way back on October 10, 2002, detailing the schizoid split, if you will, within the CIA. I think they were being pulled in one direction by the idealogues, while their intelligence actually supported another direction. The final humiliation was the attempt to blame Tenet for the 16 words uttered in the State of the Union Speech. That's when Tenet, according to 'C' on Daily Kos, took off the gloves.
Other articles of note: one by KAREN KWIATOWSKI , a retired Air Force colonel, who in her last three years, worked in the Office of the Secretary of Defence's Under-Secretariat for Policy. She said:
3. Groupthink. Defined as "reasoning or decision-making by a group, often characterized by uncritical acceptance or conformity to prevailing points of view," groupthink was, and probably remains, the predominant characteristic of Pentagon Middle East policy development. The result of groupthink is the elevation of opinion into a kind of accepted fact, and uncritical acceptance of extremely narrow and isolated points of view. Groupthink leading to invasion and occupation of Iraq will be found, I believe, to have caused a subversion of constitutional limits on executive power and a co-optation through deceit of a large segment of the Congress.
Based on groupthink, actual intelligence was subverted, and the CIA intelligence officers were swept along in this, much to their dismay. Now the CIA is finding a way to weild its power in the Plame Affair.
Also a hint of things to come was this letter to the White House from retired CIA officers, who called themselves the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, letter dated May 1:
On October 4, 2002, a week before Congress voted on the war resolution, the National Intelligence Council, an interagency body under the CIA Director as head of the entire Intelligence Community, published an unclassified version of a memorandum that had been briefed to Congressmen and Senators over the previous weeks.
Among the key judgments: “Most analysts assess Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.”
The clumsy clause conceals a crass cave-in. The preponderant view, then as now, among nuclear scientists and engineers of the Intelligence Community and the Department of Energy’s national laboratories is that Iraq had not been able to reconstitute in any significant way the nuclear development program dismantled by UN inspectors prior to 1998. The conclusions of the vast majority of analysts dovetailed with the findings repeatedly presented to the UN by International Atomic Energy Agency Director Mohamed ElBaradei and his inspectors after their inspection work at the turn of the year; i. e., that Iraq had no nuclear program worthy of the name.
It's my view 'J', that we aren't the only ones who desire a regime change at home. I'm betting that the CIA resents how it was manipulated to back the invasion of Iraq, and now they are beginning to weild their political muscle. Good for them.
Elizabeth
# posted by scorpiorising : 7:40 AM |
Links
- Google News
- HOME
- Contact Me
- WAR CASUALTIES(MY OTHER BLOG)
- BAGHDAD BURNING
- UNQUALIFIED OFFERINGS
- JUAN COLE*INFORMED COMMENT*
- BRAD DELONG
- TOMPAINE.COM
- THE DAILY HOWLER
- DISSENT MAGAZINE
- CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEGRITY
- BLAH3.COM
- BLACK SUNDAE
- WAMPUM
- ESCHATON
- ARMS AND THE MAN
- MILL ON LIBERTY
- GERMANY IN WORLD WAR 2
- VEILED 4 ALLAH
- BUSY, BUSY, BUSY
- UNENVIABLE SITUATION
- HOW TO SAVE THE WORLD
- MATTHEW GROSS
- WHISKEY BAR
- WAR AND PIECE
- DAILY KOS
- GREG PALAST
- BLACK COMMENTATOR
- SURPRISING PATTERN OF FLORIDA'S ELECTION RESULTS
- THE BRAD BLOG
- THE OPEN VOTING CONSORTIUM
- BLACK BOX VOTING
- THE FREE PRESS
- VOTERGATE.TV
- STOLEN ELECTION. AMERICA HIJACKED
- An examination of the Florida election
- blueflu.us
- U.S. Election Controversies and Irregularities
- MY DD
- SEEING THE FOREST
- THERE IS NO CRISIS
- VELVET REVOLUTION
- 02/02/2003 - 02/09/2003
- 02/09/2003 - 02/16/2003
- 02/16/2003 - 02/23/2003
- 02/23/2003 - 03/02/2003
- 03/02/2003 - 03/09/2003
- 03/09/2003 - 03/16/2003
- 03/16/2003 - 03/23/2003
- 03/23/2003 - 03/30/2003
- 03/30/2003 - 04/06/2003
- 04/06/2003 - 04/13/2003
- 04/13/2003 - 04/20/2003
- 04/20/2003 - 04/27/2003
- 04/27/2003 - 05/04/2003
- 05/04/2003 - 05/11/2003
- 05/11/2003 - 05/18/2003
- 05/18/2003 - 05/25/2003
- 05/25/2003 - 06/01/2003
- 06/01/2003 - 06/08/2003
- 06/08/2003 - 06/15/2003
- 06/15/2003 - 06/22/2003
- 06/22/2003 - 06/29/2003
- 06/29/2003 - 07/06/2003
- 07/06/2003 - 07/13/2003
- 07/13/2003 - 07/20/2003
- 07/20/2003 - 07/27/2003
- 07/27/2003 - 08/03/2003
- 08/03/2003 - 08/10/2003
- 08/10/2003 - 08/17/2003
- 08/17/2003 - 08/24/2003
- 09/07/2003 - 09/14/2003
- 09/14/2003 - 09/21/2003
- 09/21/2003 - 09/28/2003
- 09/28/2003 - 10/05/2003
- 10/05/2003 - 10/12/2003
- 10/12/2003 - 10/19/2003
- 10/19/2003 - 10/26/2003
- 10/26/2003 - 11/02/2003
- 11/02/2003 - 11/09/2003
- 11/09/2003 - 11/16/2003
- 11/16/2003 - 11/23/2003
- 11/23/2003 - 11/30/2003
- 11/30/2003 - 12/07/2003
- 12/14/2003 - 12/21/2003
- 01/11/2004 - 01/18/2004
- 01/18/2004 - 01/25/2004
- 01/25/2004 - 02/01/2004
- 02/01/2004 - 02/08/2004
- 02/08/2004 - 02/15/2004
- 02/22/2004 - 02/29/2004
- 05/23/2004 - 05/30/2004
- 09/26/2004 - 10/03/2004
- 10/03/2004 - 10/10/2004
- 10/10/2004 - 10/17/2004
- 10/17/2004 - 10/24/2004
- 10/24/2004 - 10/31/2004
- 10/31/2004 - 11/07/2004
- 11/07/2004 - 11/14/2004
- 11/14/2004 - 11/21/2004
- 11/21/2004 - 11/28/2004
- 11/28/2004 - 12/05/2004
- 12/05/2004 - 12/12/2004
- 12/19/2004 - 12/26/2004
- 12/26/2004 - 01/02/2005
- 01/02/2005 - 01/09/2005
- 01/09/2005 - 01/16/2005
- 01/23/2005 - 01/30/2005
- 01/30/2005 - 02/06/2005
- 02/06/2005 - 02/13/2005
- 02/13/2005 - 02/20/2005
- 02/20/2005 - 02/27/2005
- 02/27/2005 - 03/06/2005
- 03/06/2005 - 03/13/2005
- 03/13/2005 - 03/20/2005
- 03/20/2005 - 03/27/2005
- 03/27/2005 - 04/03/2005
- 04/03/2005 - 04/10/2005
- 04/24/2005 - 05/01/2005
- 06/05/2005 - 06/12/2005
- 06/26/2005 - 07/03/2005
- 07/31/2005 - 08/07/2005
- 08/07/2005 - 08/14/2005
