just another Cranky Little Blog

Can loyalty to the President also be treason?:

"This is possibly THE question for Congress to ask Judge John G. Roberts' during his confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice... The answer to this question may stop the nomination process in its tracks if the answer reveals that loyalty between friends trumps his loyalty to do justice."

--snip--

Let's imagine for a moment that a member of the Bush Administration was pardoned by the president after being indicted for say, leaking a CIA undercover agent's name to the public. And let us also say for the purposes of this question that the Executive Clemency order was issued after the indictment was proffered but before the case was prosecuted. The very timing of this pardon would virtually steal the golden fleece of justice from American citizens before our Justice system could work its magic.

Just asking...

While Republican's are getting richer (and bitching all the way to the bank about the French, industry regulation and left-wing damage to their war profiteering effort) it seems perfumes only they can afford are going toward different ends.

According to the Herald Sun (World Edition):

"One of the London terrorists bought more than $2000 worth of designer perfume as a deadly napalm-style ingredient in the bombs.

Just three days before the carnage, Jamaican-born Jermaine Lindsay bought dozens of bottles of scent that investigators believe were to make the bombs more flammable.

They included Jean Paul Gaultier, Fahrenheit, Emporio Armani and Boss brands -- all symbols of what Islamist extremists consider the height of Western decadence."

R-e-a-l-l-y...?
Is that the only reason?
Check this out:

We tested 36 well know brands of perfumes for two potentially hazardous man-made chemical groups: phthalate esters and synthetic musks. Both these types of chemicals can enter the body and may cause unwanted health impacts. They are also harmful when released into the environment. Virtually all the perfumes tested contained these chemicals with high levels being found in brands like Calvin Klein's 'Eternity for Women,' The Body Shop's 'White Musk' and Jean Paul Gaultier's 'Le Mâle.'

--snip--

While better chemical control should be welcomed by all, it is under attack from predictable quarters. The chemical industry has been scare -mongering with exaggerated claims of job losses and declining profits. It has also recruited dirty industry's best friend, the Bush Administration, to threaten Europe with a World Trade Organisation lawsuit if it dares to try and cut toxic pollution.

Hmm...French perfume makes dirty bombs, Bush supports perfume industry...does Negroponte know about this?

A definition of politics is "...the often internally conflicting interrelationships among people in a society," (from an online source). Certainly as liberals we are concerned with the politics of 'the commons', all it suggests and all it entails; securing it as a free and open space, keeping it safe and keeping it fair. Most of our core principles spring from that and many of our battles are fought to preserve and secure it.

I sometimes wonder if it is worth the time and constant vigilance--if 'we' will ever make a difference, or if anyone notices when we do. Then I see something like the Viennese art project below. Comforting as evidence of an internationally shared vision for the commons is--and that other free and rational thinkers are striving toward that goal too--it is a pedestrian's words of graffiti scrawled on a yellowed-out window that really brings it all home for me:

"But you know, anyhow, i feel free!"

From David Bollier at OnTheCommons.org:

"I am often convinced that it will be the artists first, and the thinkers later, who will most affect our perceptions and feelings about the commons. This epiphany is provoked by my web-based encounter with “Delete!” an improbable and daring art installation project in Vienna that aims to re-imagine the cityscape without advertising.

For a period of two weeks in June, Viennese shopkeepers agreed to let Christoph Steinbrener & Rainer Dempf put monochrome yellow fluorescent foil on all advertising signs, slogans, pictograms, company names and logos on Neubaugasse, a popular street for shopping. (Only signs needed for public safety were uncovered.) The result can be seen in this picture – or by going to the artists’ website."

'Crude' but spot on, this Greenpeace video clip is too sad, too seemingly true. Should I say enjoy?



Oh, and many thanks to the Museum of Left Wing Lunacy for the heads up!

Those are the three words I believe should first come to one's lips when asked 'What words do you think best describe the Republican party?'

And as you've noticed other than my post the first day of the break-out story re: evidence Rove was the Plame leaker, I've been mum. That's because I knew it wouldn't be good until the Antichrist's side raised it's accursed head. And of course, it has. As far as analysis of the tactics WH minions are using, this guy has done the best job:

What Rove is doing here is an example, albeit an extremely weird one, of his standard tactic of attacking his enemy's strength with his most outrageous lies -- the kind that are simply too big and too brazen for most media chicken shits to call him on.

Painting "straight talk" John McCain as a wacked out ex-POW with a druggie wife and a black love child was one example. Turning John Kerry into a cowardly weasel who lied about his war record was another. And now we have Joe Wilson, the reckless, partisan attack dog who leaks classified information.

There was, of course, no such "leak." Bob Somerby at the Daily Howler (who proves it really is possible to be even handed to a fault) argues that Wilson created the impression that Cheney had a direct hand in the decision to send him to Niger -- an impression the TV morons immediately turned into an accusation.

Maybe. The record seems to show the CIA dispatched Wilson because Cheney kept pushing the spooks for more information on the mythical Niger deal, not in response to a specific request from the vice president's office...

I mean, it's important to hold public figures accountable for their statements, and Somerby is very good at it. But he seems to think a retired diplomat suddenly caught up in the scandal du jour should be held to the same standard as guys who have made careers out of parsing the truth until it looks like a lie...

In slamming Wilson, Somerby also places a hell of a lot of weight on the report of the Senate Whitewash Committee -- the same "bipartisan" panel that dropped the second half of its alleged "investigation" of the WMD snipe hunt right down the memory hole.

...The important point here is that whatever Joe Wilson said or didn't say about who sent him to Niger, it wasn't a "leak." He didn't disclose classified information, he didn't do it anonymously, and he sure the hell didn't speak on "double plus secret background." I could also point out that Wilson didn't end the career of an undercover CIA operative and destroy an agency front operation built up over many years at much time and expense...

So why are the Rovians going to so much trouble to label Wilson's off-base comments a leak, and persuade the media to do likewise?

To confuse the issue, of course...The goal is to confront the public with two sides hurling identical charges at each other -- the better to convince them that it's just another partisan mudfight...

This is a classic disinformation technique, and one Rove has used before...

The Rovians used the mirror image gambit against former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke -- accusing him of sleeping through the summer of 2001, and claiming he failed to alert his bosses to the gathering threat of an attack...

A comment to my post George W. Bush Proudly Presents: "Endless Terror War" from one of our winger friends, BearFacts:

"Tell us again how you wish that Saddam would be back in power. Tell us that the US should retreat back home and fight terrorism in our own backyard. Tell us how we need to be sensitive to their position and how we must try and understand them. Tell us how we can contain, appease, concede and negotiate with them."

Okay.

• I wish that Saddam would be back in power--actually I wish George H. Bush were back in power, you know, the sane one--but at least when Saddam was in power he was contained and Al Quaida was not using his country as a theme park for blowing up American troops. Yes, Saddam killed his own, but so do all the dictators America has done business with (when it suited us) under the table. Remember Reagan? Reagan loved Saddam. Ah, Republicans, such fairweather friends...

• The US should retreat back home and fight terrorism in our own backyard Afghanistan, with coalition forces that want to support us, whose citizenry won't resent us (and we won't set up reasons for them to harbor terrorists).

• We need to be sensitive to their position and how we must try and understand them, especially understanding how in the thousands of years of nomadic Arab tradition NOT ONE occupying force has been successful in holding their land for any reason. I guess the Israeli/Palestinian conflict hasn't been enough of a lesson? But hell, what good is history anyway when we all know it's revised by the losers...remember when we tried this in VietNam and it was soooo succesful?

• We can contain, appease, concede and negotiate with them, on some issues (like getting our troops the hell off of their lands everywhere). I mean, when have we ever just done what they asked--leave--to see if hey--that will help? Remember life when Arabs hadn't made us targets? Before we decided we HAD to support the Israeli occupation? Remember when we kept our dicks in our pants? No Arab terrorist bombed our country BECAUSE WE HADN'T PISSED ARABS OFF! Remember America selling arms to Osama to fight Russians? He loved us then. Ah terrorists, such fairweather friends...
  

Sure, my responses are sarcastic and simplistic, but so were his comments. I guess as long as Rethugs are going to be accusatory assholes I'll have to meet their attacks with like ammunition (but these stones and sticks are so weak).

Leonard Clark, an AZ National Guardsman stationed in Iraq has been arrested. Details are varied so I encourage you to access the sources yourself to draw your own conclusions, but it appears the arrest is for vocally protesting the war.

Leonard's site, which can be accessed by the Leonard Clark link under Blogs From Iraq, has been scrubbed by his friend Kevin Spidel to take the heat off Leonard for awhile. Kevin assures me that he has backed up the site contents so for now, while unaccessable to us, the emails Leonard created regarding his experiences and opinions of the Iraqi war are not lost.

More about Leonard can be found here, here and on Kevin Spidel's blog.

Kevin tells me calls are flooding John McCain's office and he and his staff are aware of the situation. Further, area newspapers have picked up on it and will be covering the story.

I ask that you all check out Kevin's site and blog to stay abreast of the situation and if you can give some time to the action items he suggests, please do.

Also be aware that there are other miltary bloggers out there--some can be found among my links--that may be under scrutiny as well. Let's keep as many eyes on them and this development as possible and not let these guys 'disappear'....

[UPDATE 7-12-05] Eric Alterman has posted a wonderful, lengthy email from Steven D., a friend and supporter of Leonard's (it is under Correspondence Corner, fifth down). If you don't have time to go there I have provided the links to material here, here and here that Leonard, before he was arrested, had asked Steven disseminate and are included in the email to Alterman

[UPDATE 7-14-05] According to Kevin Spidel:

I have made no comments to the media personally. All the facts are finally coming it. It appears Leonard was never “arrested” only investigated. However his voicemails to his family made it very clear that in his eyes, he felt he was arrested. He has been released, and I have yet to hear directly from him.

--snip--

I am getting varied “facts” from all sides. Until more is known, I can no longer speak on this matter. Leonard has the backend access to the blog, and should he want/can post, I am sure he will. I hope you all understand.

[UPDATE 8-03-05] From Kevin Spidel's blog:

The Press on Leonard Clark
Kevin posted in War and Peace, Friends on August 2nd, 2005

Folks have been following the Leonard Clark story. For those who have not, click here to see cross posts on the internet: Google

He has been gagged by order of the Army, demoted, and fined for speaking truth to power.

Note all of his comments are archived for viewing in court at a later date, but his friends have gone over in detail all of his prior posts… there was NO sensitive data given. All ambigious with no specific details. But very outspoken on the war.

Because he has been gagg’ed he can not defend his reputation, and it is being smeared now by an AP wire that was posted on www.drudgereport.com. So all the right wingers are going there to fill the blog with hate speech against a liberal soldier.

The AP story went far and wide: here is the story.

You can still see the link on Drudge now…

he does read this blog still and needs your love and support. He is fearful of his family and what they are doing to his name… all while still following orders.

Please… if you ahve a few seconds… go to http://www.leonardclark.com/blog and send him your positive thoughts. This is how you can support a fellow believer and defender of the truth.

Thanks!

Kevin Spidel
the site admin of www.leonardclark.com

If the Western world survives this, and we may not--and if the United States survives this--and we will although diminished by much, there will need to be election legislation requiring that presidential candidates be vetted for intellectual capacity and mental soundness because Bush, the USA's parallel to "We will bury you" Kruschev, is, by virtue of his sociopathic, messianic, megalomania inviting (hell, birthing) terrorists to kill us--every one--and we can never let partisan forces appoint a nut case like this to run ruin our country again.

Experts fear 'endless' terror war - Terrorism & Security - MSNBC.com: "An Associated Press survey of longtime students of international terrorism finds them ever more convinced, in the aftermath of London’s bloody Thursday, that the world has entered a long siege in a new kind of war. They believe that al-Qaida is mutating into a global insurgency, a possible prototype for other 21st-century movements, technologically astute, almost leaderless. And the way out is far from clear.

In fact, says Michael Scheuer, the ex-CIA analyst, rather than move toward solutions, the United States took a big step backward by invading Iraq.

'Self-sustaining' jihad
Now, he said, “we’re at the point where jihad is self-sustaining,” where Islamic “holy warriors” in Iraq fight America with or without allegiance to al-Qaida’s bin Laden.

The cold statistics of a RAND Corp. database show the impact of the explosion of violence in Iraq: The 5,362 deaths from terrorism worldwide between March 2004 and March 2005 were almost double the total for the same 12-month period before the 2003 U.S. invasion.

Thursday’s attacks on London’s transit system mirrored last year’s bombings of Madrid commuter trains, and both point to an al-Qaida evolving into a movement whose isolated leaders offer video or Internet inspiration — but little more — to local “jihadists” who carry out the strikes.

Although no arrests have been made in the London attacks, a group using al-Qaida’s name made a claim of responsibility, otherwise unconfirmed. Experts say the bombings bore hallmarks of al-Qaida.

The movement’s evolution “has given rise to a ‘virtual network’ that is extremely adaptable,” said Jonathan Stevenson, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Washington office."

Remind me again, why was Kennedy assasinated?

On the London terrorist attack, I've been haunting the winger sites for opinion. They tend to be the most invested and when they start in on this blame-game between each other it is a thing of beauty. Generally lefties who try to chime in are tortured by the winger's favorite tool -- crucifiction -- so I've kept a low profile. But the following exchange here between first, the winger CJ, and then the leftie Vaughn, was sheer elegance. There was nothing but pops and squeaks after that. So keep in mind that when "they" throw this at you:

According to the Clinton Justice Department's spring 1998 indictment of bin Laden, "Al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq." (Page 114.)

In what the CIA nicknamed "Operation Dogmeat," two Iraqi students who lived in the Philippines tried to demolish U.S. Information Service headquarters in Manila. Iraqi diplomat Muwufak al Ani met with the bombers five times before the attack. His car even took them near their target on January 19, 1991. Their bomb exploded prematurely, killing Ahmed J. Ahmed, but his accomplice, Abdul Kadham Saad, survived and was whisked to a Manila hospital. Saad, carrying documents bearing two distinct identities, asked staffers to alert the Iraqi embassy, then recited its phone number. (Page 39.)

Around this time, according to former high-level CIA counterterrorist Stanley Bedlington, Hussein paired Iraqi intelligence operatives with members of the Arab Liberation Front to execute attacks. "The Iraqis had given them all passports," he said, "but they were all in numerical sequence." These tell-tale passport numbers helped friendly governments nab these terror teams. (Page 41.)

President George Herbert Walker Bush ignored information that Hussein "was offering state payment to terrorists," then-Senator Al Gore (D., Tennessee) declared on October 15, 1992. Gore also listed more than a dozen examples of Iraq-sponsored terrorism and said "an estimated 1,400 terrorists were operating openly out of Iraq." (Page 41.)

"In 1992, elements of al Qaeda came to Baghdad and met with Saddam Hussein," Abu Aman Amaleeki, a 20-year veteran of Iraqi intelligence, said on ABC's Nightline on September 26, 2002. Speaking from a Kurdish prison, he added: "And among them was Ayman al Zawahiri," bin Laden's chief deputy. "I was present when Ayman al Zawahiri visited Baghdad." (Page 43.)

Former Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) Deputy Director Faruq Hijazi, reports a reliable foreign spy agency, supplied blank Yemeni passports to al Qaeda in 1992. (Page 66.)

Mohammed Salameh, a 1993 World Trade Center attacker, called Baghdad 46 times in the two months before bomb maker Abdul Rahman Yasin flew from Baghdad to New Jersey to join the plot. Salameh's June 1992 phone bill totaled $1,401, which prompted his disconnection for non-payment. After the blast — which killed six individuals and injured 1,042 — Yasin fled to Baghdad, where records and multiple press accounts show he received safe haven and Baathist cash. (Pages 11 and 50.)

Based on a 20-page IIS document discovered in Baghdad, the Defense Intelligence Agency reports that "Alleged conspirators employed by IIS are wanted in connection with the [June 25, 1996] Khobar Towers bombing and the assassination attempt in 1993 of former President Bush." (Page 180.)

In an October 27, 2003 memo, Defense Undersecretary Douglas J. Feith explained Hussein's bonus pay for terrorists: "Iraq increased support to Palestinian groups after major terrorist attacks and...the change in Iraqi relations with al Qaeda after the [1998 east African] embassy bombings followed this pattern." A top Philippine terrorist also said Iraq's payments to the al Qaeda-tied Abu Sayyaf grew after successful assaults. (Page 120.)

ABC News reported on January 14, 1999, that it "has learned that in December [1998] an Iraqi intelligence chief, named Faruq Hijazi, now Iraq's ambassador to Turkey, made a secret trip to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden."

Hijazi "went to Afghanistan in December with the knowledge of the Taliban and met with Osama bin Laden," former CIA counterterrorism chief Vincent Cannistraro told National Public Radio's Mike Shuster on February 18, 1999. "It's known through a variety of intelligence reports that the U.S. has, but it's also known through sources in Afghanistan, members of Osama's entourage let it be known that the meeting had taken place." (Page 124.)

On January 5, 2000, Malaysian intelligence photographed September 11 hijacker Khalid al-Mihdhar being escorted through Kuala Lumpur's airport by VIP facilitator Ahmed Hikmat Shakir, an Iraqi recommended to Malaysian Airlines by Baghdad's embassy there. The pair soon were photographed again at al Qaeda's three-day planning summit for the October 2000 U.S.S. Cole and 9/11 attacks. Three separate documents recently unearthed in Iraq identify an Ahmed Hikmat Shakir as a lieutenant colonel in Uday Hussein's elite Saddam Fedayeen. (Page 4)

Memo to communications-addled White House: Release these photos!

Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al Ani is the former Iraqi diplomat suspected of meeting September 11 ringleader Mohamed Atta in Prague on April 8, 2001, and possibly June 2, 2000, the day before Atta flew from Prague to Newark, New Jersey. Top secret Pentagon records cite a Czech intelligence report that al Ani "ordered the IIS finance officer to issue Atta funds from IIS financial holdings in the Prague office." During the summer of 2000, $99,455 was wired from financial institutions in the United Arab Emirates to Atta's Sun Trust bank account in Florida.(Page 129.)

After evacuating an al Qaeda training camp he ran in Afghanistan as U.S. troops approached, Ansar al-Islam founder Abu Musab al Zarqawi eventually had his leg amputated and replaced with a prosthesis around late May 2002. He was treated in Baghdad's Olympic Hospital, an elite facility whose director was the late Uday Hussein, son of the deposed tyrant. Zarqawi is implicated in ongoing attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq and is believed to have sawed off American businessman Nick Berg's head. (Page 167.)

U.S troops inspecting an al-Qaeda-affiliated Ansar al-Islam camp in Iraq discovered, Hayes reports, "several hundred passports belonging to suspected Ansar and al Qaeda fighters, dozens of them bearing visas issued by the Iraqi regime." A passport found on one dead terrorist listed his visit's purpose as "jihad." (Page 172.)

...respond with this:

You originally told me that you were getting your info from the 9-11 report, but you are getting your info from the "Pre-War Intelligence Assessments On Iraq" The "9-11 Report" is a totally different document!

You are reading the report that got us into the damn Iraq war.

You should look at the real 9-11 Commission Report , as well as the Conclusions on Pre-War Intelligence Failures .

A couple of excerpts:

"Conclusion 1. Most of the major key judgments in the Intelligence Community's October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction, either overstated, or were not supported by, the underlying intelligence reporting. A series of failures, particularly in analytic trade craft, led to the mischaracterization of the intelligence."

"At the time the IC drafted and coordinated the NIE on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in September 2002, most of what intelligence analysts actually "knew" about Iraq's weapons programs pre-dated the 1991 Gulf War, leaving them with very little direct knowledge about the current state of those programs."

"Conclusion 3. The Intelligence Community (1C) suffered from a collective presumption that Iraq had an active and growing weapons of mass destruction (WMD) program. This "group think" dynamic led Intelligence Community analysts, collectors and managers to both interpret ambiguous evidence as conclusively indicative of a WMD program as well as ignore or minimize evidence that Iraq did not have active and expanding weapons of mass destruction programs. This presumption was so strong that formalized IC mechanisms established to challenge assumptions and group think were not utilized."

and in response to "componenets of WMDs were found in 109 cities in Iraq", (again from Vaughn):

No, I haven't missed this. It's all in the Deulfer Report. And I don't doubt that Saddam was constantly trying to make a weapon. But, Saddam was far from being able to manufacture anything that could be considered a threat to anybody but himself and his people. We had him contained, and we should have continued practicing containment until we could fully address the issue of terrorism which was flourishing outside of Iraq. Because, that was the post-9-11 goal -- fighting terrorism. They type that allowed SAUDI ARABIANS training in AFGHANISTAN under OSAMA BIN LADEN to fly airplanes into buildings in the UNITED STATES (emphasis on what the goals should have been). Would it have been so difficult to put more pressure on Iraq, and continue fighting terrorists in every country where they existed with the help of the local governments? After 9-11, nearly every leader of every country was willing to put forth an effort to address terrorism. But the trumped up story about WMDs (that existed in disparate pieces across Iraq -- pieces that are so vaguely defined that we probably have elements in our own garages), and then the story about freeing the Iraqis, then the story about spreading democracy, etc. etc. -- it was just too much for normal people to handle.

We should have been fighting terrorism -- not nation building. If you believe that the purpose of Iraq was spreading the seeds of democracy so terrorism can be addressed in the M.E., well it doesn't seem to have worked. It was a flawed concept from the start. Every time we set foot on soil that is owned by Muslims, we create a terrorist. We knew that going in. Now, we have more terrorists than before the invasion -- more than the world has ever seen.

When will an admission, of "Oh, shit, we screwed up" ever come? It won't. Our "CEO President" is turning out to be more like Kenneth Lay as a CEO. He wanted to run this country like a business, but he has never acted to correct errors like a good businessman would do.

You know, Bush's attitude toward teamwork and cooperation is well-illustrated in these statements:

"In an interview prior to this week's G8 Gleneagles summit, Mr Bush bluntly said that the Prime Minister could expect no special favours even though he had supported the war in Iraq.

That meant No to any Kyoto-style deal on slashing harmful emissions, declared Mr Bush, who instead placed his faith in new technology to combat the problem.

--snip--

'I really don't view our relationship as one of quid pro quo. Tony Blair made decisions on what he thought was best for keeping the peace and winning the war on terror, as I did,' he added.

And here is an exposure of his self-preservation instinct and a rare glimpse of the nation's science-distorter-in-chief back-pedaling (again to save his ass):

Anxious to avoid further damaging the US's reputation in Europe, Mr Bush appeared to soften his sceptical view on global warming by admitting that it was a 'significant, long-term issue' which to an extent was man-made.

But does he give an inch? Hell no, he didn't distort all that science to cover-up his intentions regardless the cost to the entire fucking planet for nothing!

But he reaffirmed that the US did not and would not sign the 1997 Kyoto deal on reducing greenhouse emissions because it 'would have wrecked our economy, if I can be blunt'.

He's got campaign contributors to molify and hell, what about that oil cartel that keeps his sorry ass on the street (lest we forget John Kennedy)?!

Mr Bush indicated that he believed Mr Blair was ready to move 'beyond Kyoto' and focus on techniques such as capturing and storing carbon dioxide in underground wells, rather than on setting emission limits."

Bidness man, bidness...if there ain't a buck to be made damn the precautionary principle. Let the people fry, let those deserts spread, ice-caps melt, coral reefs disintegrate. Hell, everyone alive today will be dead in a hundred years anyway...fuck 'em now, let God sort it out later...(and frankly if this guy's born-again then I'm Ann Coulter)!

You know, if I were PM Blair, I'd pull out of Iraq, turn my back on Bush and let him twist in the stinking hot wind alone. Bush and all his cronies deserve to be isolated and despised worldwide. Problem is that it's kids in my neighborhood--not his--that'll pay for it.

Damn (even I don't hate him that much, so) Fuck George W. Bush (instead).