Thursday, April 1, 2004

Revenge.

What are they going to do - kill everybody??

American officials in Baghdad vowed today to use "overwhelming" force to avenge the grisly killings of four American contractors in Falluja on Wednesday and establish control over the volatile city. But they cautioned that the American military would not move hastily for fear of worsening a perilous situation.

"We are not going to do a pell-mell rush into the city," said Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, chief spokesman for the American military command in Iraq. "It's going to be deliberate, it will be precise and it will be overwhelming."

L. Paul Bremer III, the top American administrator, said the contractors' deaths "would not go unpunished."

The point they seem to be missing is that while guerillas may have pulled off the attack, the atrocities seem to have been committed by regular citizens. That might be pretty difficult to avenge, short of imprisoning or killing large munbers of citizens of Falluja.

So is this bluster, or do they plan to wage war on Iraqi citizens? Either way, not good. Empty bluster would indicate weakness, waging war on citizens will turn the cycle back on itself.

So what are they going to do??

editor | 01:23 PM NY | link to this | 10 people speak up

Smell The Fear.

Desperation runs rampant. The RNC fears free speech. Pass it on.

The Republican National Committee launched a wide-ranging legal assault Wednesday on more than two dozen political groups working to defeat President Bush.

The committee says the groups are part of an "unprecedented criminal enterprise" to circumvent federal campaign laws and pour illegal soft money contributions into the 2004 race.

In a complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission, the RNC also charged that the groups are illegally coordinating their advertising attacking Bush with the campaign of presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry.

The Kerry campaign is named as a respondent in the complaint, along with the anti-Bush groups, their leaders and some of their large donors, including billionaire financier George Soros and Hollywood producer Steven Bing.

The groups in question, including MoveOn.org, The Media Fund, America Coming Together and America Votes, are known as 527 groups after a provision in the tax code.

We note that the RNC's favorite 527, Club For Growth, is not included in the suit. Imagine that.

editor | 12:20 PM NY | link to this | 2 people speak up

Bipartisan?' Well, maybe not...

We all know that ThugCo isn't above tampering with things like legal elections and confidential file servers. But did you know that they also like to tamper with bipartisan commissions?

President Bush's top lawyer placed a telephone call to at least one of the Republican members of the Sept. 11 commission when the panel was gathered in Washington on March 24 to hear the testimony of former White House counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clarke, according to people with direct knowledge of the call.

White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales called commissioner Fred F. Fielding, one of five GOP members of the body, and, according to one observer, also called Republican commission member James R. Thompson. Rep. Henry A. Waxman, the ranking Democrat on the House Government Reform Committee, wrote to Gonzales yesterday asking him to confirm and describe the conversations.

Waxman said "it would be unusual if such ex parte contacts occurred" during the hearing. Waxman did not allege that there would be anything illegal in such phone calls. But he suggested that such contacts would be improper because "the conduct of the White House is one of the key issues being investigated by the commission."

White House spokesmen were unable to get a response from Gonzales.

Fielding did not return phone calls seeking comment.

Thompson declined yesterday to say whether he spoke with Gonzales. "I never talk about conversations with the White House," he said. Asked about the source of his information for his questioning of Clarke, Thompson said: "I ask my own questions."

During the commission's 21/2 hours of questioning Clarke, Fielding and Thompson presented evidence questioning the former official's credibility.

Fielding, a former White House counsel under President Ronald Reagan, raised questions about Clarke's "integrity," and suggested classified testimony he gave a congressional inquiry in 2002 was different from his current version of events.

Thompson, a former Illinois governor, pointed to Clarke's remarks praising Bush in a previously anonymous 2002 news briefing. It was reported on Fox News two hours before the hearing started; the White House that morning had authorized Fox News to identify the anonymous briefer as Clarke.

editor | 12:02 PM NY | link to this | somebody say something!

Once again back is the incredible....

Neal Pollack. The nation applauds.

editor | 10:52 AM NY | link to this | somebody say something!

Wednesday, March 31, 2004

That's the trouble with public pronouncements...

They never go away. George W. Bush, February, 2000:

During the 2000 Presidential election campaign, Gov. George W. Bush promised to take on the OPEC cartel on behalf of American consumers. Bush said:

“I think the president ought to get on the phone with the OPEC cartel and say, ‘We expect you to open your spigots.’ … The president of the United States must jawbone OPEC members to lower the price.” [Financial Times, 2/2/00]

On the campaign trail in 2000, Bush spokesman Scott McClellan cited rising gas prices as an example of “failed leadership.”

George W. Bush, March, 2004:

President Bush expressed disappointment on Wednesday at OPEC's oil output cut and pressed allies inside and outside the cartel to fill any gap in supply to prevent higher prices after Democratic rival John Kerry accused Bush of ignoring record pump prices.

While initially raising no public objections to OPEC's decision, the White House later voiced its displeasure and said Secretary of State Colin Powell, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and others were reaching out to "our friends" in OPEC and non-OPEC nations to address U.S. concerns.

He's disappointed? That's as tough as he can get with his friends the Saudis? That's 'taking on the OPEC cartel?' Kinda like yelling 'Stop! Or I'll yell stop again!,' if you ask me.

And take note that Condi and Colin are talking. Guess Bush just can't be bothered to jawbone, because he's too busy fundraising or something.

editor | 10:22 PM NY | link to this | 5 people speak up

Here it is, BAM!

So Randi Rhodes just handed Ralph Nader his ass on her first day on Air America Radio. St. Ralph called up expecting a softball interview where he could plug his site, and Randi hit him four-sqaure with the feelings of democrats all over this country - 'We can't afford you this time, Ralph.'

Nader replied by accusing Randi of oppressing him and denying Americans the right to vote, Randi called him on his bullshit, and Ralph couldn't handle the simple truth.

He hung up.

Now I'm cruising around some of the lefty message boards, and I see people accusing Randi of being 'a female Bill O'Reilly,' saying how she's so mean to be beating up on poor, poor Ralph.

Gotta say i'm amazed. I just spent three years of hearing people saying there should be a liberal radio network so that we could fight back against the Limbaughs and Hannitys, and get the truth out to the public.

Randi Rhodes spoke the truth to Ralph Nader today - 'We can't afford you this time, Ralph' - and what do I see? A buncha goddam liberals going into fainting spells because a liberal radio host was aggressive and told the truth, that's what.

Jesus, people, buck the fuck up already.

As I put it on one liberal forum - Air america came up to the house and knocked on the door at noon today. At about 5:20, Randi Rhodes pushed everyone aside, came up to the door and kicked the fucker wide open. It was truth, it was messy - it was great radio.

If any of you think that a liberal network is going to survive by being genteel and sedate and accomodating and 'refusing to go down to the Republicans' level,' I suggest you finish your brown rice and green tea, hop into that hybrid car and punch up NPR.

This is a fucking street fight. Randi brought her brass knuckles, which is street fight ettiquette. Get over it.

editor | 06:25 PM NY | link to this | 24 people speak up

Umm, oops.

This is pretty wild.

As most of America slept early last Sunday morning, the Bush Administration hustled and bustled to prepare for the Sunday morning talk shows – among others Colin Powell was appearing on Face the Nation and Donald Rumsfeld was booked on Fox News Sunday. Condi Rice was not scheduled to appear until prime time, when she would make a star appearance on CBS' '60 Minutes' – the last in a long line of media appearances that caused 9/11 Commissioner Richard Ben Veniste to quip that “Condi Rice has appeared everywhere but at my local Starbucks.”

Well, others in the Bush administration did, apparently, make an appearance at the local Starbucks. And as the Washington Post reports today, one of them – obviously readying himself to prep Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld – left his notes on the table. Talking points, hand-written notes on spin tactics, and a hand-drawn map to the Secretary's house were found by a resident of DuPont Circle, who made them available to the Center for American Progress. The name of said resident is being withheld at his request, as he fears that he may be accused on national television of being "disgruntled."

Adobe Acrobat file here. And thanks to B3 reader Josh for the heads-up.

editor | 01:21 PM NY | link to this | somebody speaks up.

Are they singing great songs about us yet?

This is frightening and depressing. I was going to post an image about this story, but it's just too graphic.

Jubilant residents dragged the charred corpses of four foreign contractors — including at least one American — through the streets Wednesday and hanged them from the bridge spanning the Euphrates River. Five American soldiers died in a roadside bombing nearby.

The four contract workers for the U.S.-led coalition were killed in a rebel ambush of their SUVs in Fallujah, a Sunni Triangle city about 35 miles west of Baghdad and scene of some of the worst violence on both sides of the conflict since the beginning of the American occupation a year ago.

It was reminiscent of the 1993 scene in Somalia, when a mob dragged the corpse of a U.S. soldier through the streets of Mogadishu, eventually leading to the American withdrawal from the African nation.

Damn these neocon warmongering sons of bitches to hell. They wanted Iraq so badly, and now they have it. Damn them all.

Here's a video link from AP if you're so inclined. But keep in mind, it is extremely graphic.

editor | 11:39 AM NY | link to this | 6 people speak up

Air America at High Noon.

Okay, the much-hyped liberal radio network kicks off today with Al Franken at noon Eastern. There's a story in the NYTimes about it, but I'm scratching my head here.

Why is there no mention of Randi Rhodes in the article? You'd think that there would be some mention of the one true radio person in the lineup. Why would the Times neglect to even drop her name?

editor | 09:29 AM NY | link to this | 3 people speak up

Tuesday, March 30, 2004

Someone came by today...

...and brought up Kerry's supposed 'flip-flops.'

So, Kathleen, this one's for you.

editor | 09:20 PM NY | link to this | 14 people speak up

Give it up for the Oppo.

If you read my comments (and how can you resist?), you're familiar with the Resident Contrarian, Murphy. I might not always agree with the guy, but he's a lot more eloquent than most who come here to argue the opposite side.

Murphy's got a blog - go show him some liberal love.

Murph - open up comments!

editor | 06:39 PM NY | link to this | 8 people speak up

Playing to the stupid seats.

Anything to make a goddam buck. I invite my resident GOP defenders to note that we're talking about allies here.

A voter survey tied to a Republican effort to raise money for House candidates mislabels Thailand and the Philippines as countries that "harbor and aid terrorists," say officials from both governments.

A question on the National Republican Congressional Committee's "Ask America 2004 Nationwide Policy Survey" asks: "Should America broaden the war on terrorism into other countries that harbor and aid terrorists such as Thailand, Syria, Somalia, the Philippines, etc.?"

Accompanying the NRCC survey, which also poses questions about health care, the economy and other issues, was a four-page letter signed by House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., that seeks money to help "keep the Republican Party in control of the U.S. House."

Officials from both nations say the question came as a surprise since the Bush administration has praised their countries for their roles in the anti-terror war.

editor | 11:04 AM NY | link to this | 16 people speak up

(Form) letters, they get (form) letters...

Man, they're one sensitive bunch over at the White House, carefully considering the feelings of fallen soldiers' families... and I'm the damn Queen of Norway.

“From the state of Iowa, the Deutsch family received a perfectly folded American flag that flew for one day in Michael's honor above the Capitol in Des Moines. And from the White House came a letter of condolence signed by President Bush. Two letters, actually. ‘The exact same one, twice,’ Wayne Deutsch noted dryly, sitting at the kitchen table of their wood-frame house in Dubuque's working-class North End neighborhood. ‘What does that tell you? It was a form letter.’… Ilene Deutsch listened to her husband's lament as she stood by the kitchen stove. For several hours, she had politely refrained from answering questions about the politics of the war. She was afraid of what she might say. Now it came flooding out, along with the tears. ‘They didn't have a clue what was going to happen once the war was over. No anticipation. Bush had no idea,’ she said. ‘I don't like George Bush. We are listed as independents, but I will never vote for him. Surely he didn't look at the long range. . . . He didn't have a clue.’”

editor | 10:47 AM NY | link to this | 7 people speak up

Push comes to shove.

Can the White House continue to try running out the clock on the 9/11 Commission?

The chairman and vice chairman of the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks said on Monday that they would ask Condoleezza Rice to testify under oath in any future questioning because of discrepancies between her statements and those made in sworn testimony by President Bush's former counterterrorism chief.

"I would like to have her testimony under the penalty of perjury," said the commission's chairman, Thomas H. Kean, the former Republican governor of New Jersey, in comments that reflected the panel's exasperation with the White House and Ms. Rice, the president's national security adviser.

[...]

The decision to restrict her availability has led Democrats and other critics to accuse the White House of trying to hide embarrassing information about its failure to pre-empt the Sept. 11 attacks.

"I think she should be under the same penalty as Richard Clarke," Mr. Kean said in an interview, referring to Richard A. Clarke, the former White House counterterrorism adviser who testified to the panel last week that the Bush administration had not paid sufficient attention to the threat from Al Qaeda before Sept. 11, 2001.

[...]

Ms. Rice has given a flurry of interviews to news organizations over the last week in which she has challenged Mr. Clarke's truthfulness, including his depiction of her as slow-footed in responding to intelligence warnings throughout 2001 that Al Qaeda was plotting a catastrophic attack on the United States.

Members of the commission, Democrats and Republicans alike, say they are angered by her interviews. They say the White House has made a major political blunder by continuing to assert executive privilege in blocking public testimony by Ms. Rice while continuing to use her as the principal public spokeswoman in defending the Bush's administration's actions before Sept. 11.

"I find it reprehensible that the White House is making her the fall guy for this legalistic position," said John F. Lehman, Navy secretary in the Reagan administration and a Republican member of the commission.

It's pretty obvious that this impasse will threaten whether the Commission will get all the information they need, and I figure that if the commission insists on Rice swearing in, the White House will choose to litigate. This article says there is no real reason Rice cannot testify, but that will not matter as the White House will most likely argue an invalid legal point. In their view, all they have to do is slow-walk it for the next two months, and Condi won't have to appear before the commission at all.

Cynical? Yep. But remember who we're talking about here - the Kings of Cynicism.

Update: Condi will testify under oath. With conditions. More later.

editor | 09:33 AM NY | link to this | 6 people speak up

Monday, March 29, 2004

This is pretty damn cool.

Here's hoping Unka Karl was plenty rattled.

Several hundred people stormed the small yard of President Bush's chief political strategist, Karl Rove, yesterday afternoon, pounding on his windows, shoving signs at others and challenging Rove to talk to them about a bill that deals with educational opportunities for immigrants.

Protesters poured out of one school bus after another, piercing an otherwise quiet, peaceful Sunday in Rove's Palisades neighborhood in Northwest, chanting, "Karl, Karl, come on out! See what the DREAM Act is all about!"

Rove obliged their first request and opened his door long enough to say, "Get off my property."

"Seems like he doesn't want to invite us in for tea," Emira Palacios quipped to the crowd.

Others chanted, "Karl Rove ain't got no soul."

Thanks to Xan for the link.

editor | 01:45 AM NY | link to this | 17 people speak up

Sunday, March 28, 2004

By the way, they own the Bible, too.

Now, we already know how ThugCo thinks they own exclusive rights to exploiting 9/11. Well, as of today, quoting scripture is apparently theirs, too.

John Kerry cited a Bible verse Sunday to criticize leaders who have "faith but has no deeds," prompting President Bush's spokesman to accuse Kerry of exploiting Scripture for a political attack.

Kerry never mentioned Bush by name during his speech at New North Side Baptist Church, but aimed his criticism at "our present national leadership." Kerry cited Scripture in his appeal for the worshippers, including James 2:14, "What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds?"

"The Scriptures say, what does it profit, my brother, if someone says he has faith but does not have works?" Kerry said. "When we look at what is happening in America today, were are the works of compassion?"

Bush campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt said Kerry's comment "was beyond the bounds of acceptable discourse and a sad exploitation of Scripture for a political attack."

Kerry told worshippers in the largely black congregation that the country's leadership has served the privileged while ignoring people across America who live in neighborhoods like theirs.

editor | 10:43 PM NY | link to this | 11 people speak up

Did the NYTimes finally wake up?

Ya gotta wonder if ThugCo's lies have finally woken up the sleeping giant.

The White House acknowledged Sunday that on the day after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, President Bush pressed his top counterterrorism adviser, Richard A. Clarke, to find out whether Iraq was involved.

Mr. Bush wanted to know "did Iraq have anything to do with this? Were they complicit in it?" Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security adviser, recounted in an interview on CBS' "60 Minutes."

Mr. Bush was not trying to intimidate anyone to "produce information," she said. Rather, given the United States' "actively hostile relationship" with Iraq at the time, he was asking Mr. Clarke "a perfectly logical question," Ms. Rice said.

The conversation — which the White House suggested last week had never taken place — centers on perhaps the most volatile charge Mr. Clarke has made public in recent days: that the Bush White House became fixated on Iraq and Saddam Hussein at the expense of focusing on Al Qaeda's role in the terrorism.

In his new book, "Against All Enemies," Mr. Clarke recounts that the president pulled him and several other aides into the White House Situation Room on the evening of Sept. 12, 2001, and instructed them "to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way."

Mr. Clarke was incredulous, he said in the book. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this," he said he responded.

Mr. Bush answered: "I know, I know, but . . . see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred," according to Mr. Clarke's account. Mr. Clarke added in later interviews that he felt he was being intimidated to find a link between the attacks and Iraq.

Last week, the White House said it had no record that Mr. Bush had even been in the Situation Room that day and said the president had no recollection of such a conversation. Although administration officials stopped short of denying the account, they used it to cast doubt on Mr. Clarke's credibility as they sought to debunk the charge that the administration played down the threat posed by Al Qaeda in the months before the Sept. 11 attacks and worried instead about Iraq.

Emphasis mine.

editor | 10:39 PM NY | link to this | 2 people speak up

Bringing democracy to Iraq...

Except for that pesky 'free press' part.

Several thousand Iraqis protested the closure of a newspaper Sunday, chanting anti-U.S. slogans and burning American flags outside the newspaper's office in Baghdad.

The U.S.-led civil administration in Iraq closed the Baghdad newspaper Al Hawsa for 60 days, accusing its publishers of inciting violence against coalition troops.

The paper is published by followers of prominent Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

"If the Coalition forces are going to keep on presenting us with such messages... they can just dream about any sort of end to terrorism," a statement from the newspaper said. "And they can also dream that we will stay quiet and step down from what we believe."

The Coalition Provisional Authority accused the paper's editors of printing articles that incited violence against U.S. and other coalition troops -- a violation of coalition regulations.

The building was sealed, and anyone caught attempting to publish the paper could face up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

editor | 10:25 PM NY | link to this | somebody speaks up.

Umm, what's going on here?

Interesting news, for whatever it's worth.

Ralph Nader said Sunday he will meet with John Kerry next month to discuss the effort to defeat President Bush in the November election.

While stressing that he is still a competitor in the race, the independent presidential hopeful said he views his candidacy as a "second front against Bush, however small."

Following a speech on the environment at Georgia State University, Nader stepped up his attacks on Bush, describing the Republican incumbent as "a giant corporation residing in the White House camouflaging as a human being."

"George W. Bush's values are corporate values," Nader told reporters. And he said the administration "should spend more time waging peace ... than waging a military conflict."

He did not elaborate on the meeting he plans with the Massachusetts senator and there was no immediate response from the Kerry campaign.

editor | 10:20 PM NY | link to this | somebody speaks up.

Breslin.

Pretty much nails the Clarke situation. And he's got some nice words for Condi, too.

This all started on the streets of Manhattan, and it has so much to do with this city, which sends so many out of the poor neighborhoods to Iraq.

It began with a sheet of paper passed around the Manhattan publishing world in June of 2003. It was an outline of a book proposal by Richard Clarke, who had been a national security adviser for presidents Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush. The outline said that in the months before the World Trade Center attack this Bush had ignored the idea of any immediate threat from the al-Qaida leader, Osama bin Laden.

Free Press, a division of Simon and Schuster, bought the rights for $600,000. Clarke then started to write. He knew exactly what he wanted to say but he had trouble saying it. He had to write three drafts over the summer and into the fall. Then a fourth draft, finished in November, was readable.

Under his contract with his government, it was sent to the White House for a security clearance. The administration people read with sixth-grade speed. In January of 2004, they asked for some changes and Clarke made them. Then on Feb. 4, 2004, the book was given clearance.

The publisher worked as fast as possible to get the first printing of 300,000 out.

The book is out a day and there are furious attacks from the White House. They said the book was timed for the election. If they had read it faster it would be gone by now. Clarke had the whole place shrieking. How could they be so upset? All Clarke said was that Bush and his administration missed the World Trade Center attack. Clarke then said that Bush went into Iraq instead of Afghanistan, where bin Laden was, giving bin Laden the chance to settle into some rock garden and do his voice-overs. And our 20-year-olds get killed in Iraq, where they have no reason to be.

The White House attacks caused the book sales to go to 500,000 in a matter of days. More is coming: on Friday, Frist, of Tennessee, the Senate majority leader, got up and said he wanted to investigate Clarke for perjury at a congressional committee hearing.

He described Clarke as a "former State Department civil servant." He used the word lie at least six times. Like Clarke or not, he has a record of serving his government at its highest levels and most dangerous moments. Frist has turned his medical profession into that of a cheap shill.

And as a transcript reader said Friday, "Everything Clarke said is in the transcripts and the book and the testimony he gave at the 9/11 hearing on Wednesday. It looks like the guy is right. That's why they're screaming."

editor | 07:34 PM NY | link to this | somebody speaks up.

User Friendly.

Our favorite geek 'toon.

On edit: I tried linking to the strip in question, but it seems User Friendly is Link-Unfriendly.

editor | 01:38 PM NY | link to this | 2 people speak up

Clarke swings back, and hard.

I'm watching Clarke on Russert's show. Timmeh made a big deal about the resignation letter Clarke sent to Bush, and how it was so nice.

Clarke then dropped the fucking bomb - a letter from Bush, hand-written, in which Bush praises Clarke's service and saying 'he would be missed.'

This guy clearly is not fucking around here, and Russert's head nearly exploded when he whipped out that letter.

Oh, and he reiterated his call to declassify his entire testimony regarding 9/11.

editor | 10:50 AM NY | link to this | 2 people speak up

Saturday, March 27, 2004

Clarke agrees with Frist!

Richard Clarke has given Bill Frist what he asked for. On NPR's 'All Things Considered,' Clarke has called for declassification of all documents related to the investigation into the attacks on 9/11.

Here's a link to NPR. You can hear Clarke himself saying he'd love for his testimony - all 196 pages of it - to be declassified by clicking on the 'All Things Considered audio' link on the page.

Now watch Frist and Hastert back off, and fast. I'm more and more impressed with Clarke. I may even get out of bed tomorrow in time to watch him on 'Meet The Big Fat Shill Of The White House.'

editor | 09:42 PM NY | link to this | 8 people speak up

Kerry slams Condi

Good. Now that Kerry's mentioned it, the story should stay alive for a couple more days.

John Kerry said Saturday the White House is committing character assassination with its treatment of former counterterror chief Richard Clarke to avoid responding to questions about national security.

Kerry also said Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's national security adviser, should testify in public before the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

"If Condoleezza Rice can find time to do `60 Minutes' on television before the American people, she ought to find 60 minutes to speak to the commission under oath," Kerry told reporters. "We're talking about the security of our country."

editor | 09:27 PM NY | link to this | 3 people speak up

Reagan's Navy Secretary weighs in.

It should give anyone who listens pause as all these straight-arrow military types line up to criticize Bush. 'War president?' Not according to this guy. To be fair, he's also pretty critical of Kerry, but for different reasons.

Bush used his father's political influence to move past many on the Texas Guard's waiting list. He was not required to attend Officer Candidate School to earn his commission. He lost his flight status after failing to show up for a required annual physical. These facts alone raise the eyebrows of those who took a different path in a war that for the Marine Corps brought more casualties than even World War II.

The Bush campaign now claims that these issues are largely moot and that Bush has proved himself as a competent and daring "war president." And yet his actions in Iraq, and the vicious attacks against anyone who disagrees with his administration's logic, give many veterans serious pause.

Bush arguably has committed the greatest strategic blunder in modern memory. To put it bluntly, he attacked the wrong target. While he boasts of removing Saddam Hussein from power, he did far more than that. He decapitated the government of a country that was not directly threatening the United States and, in so doing, bogged down a huge percentage of our military in a region that never has known peace. Our military is being forced to trade away its maneuverability in the wider war against terrorism while being placed on the defensive in a single country that never will fully accept its presence.

There is no historical precedent for taking such action when our country was not being directly threatened. The reckless course that Bush and his advisers have set will affect the economic and military energy of our nation for decades. It is only the tactical competence of our military that, to this point, has protected him from the harsh judgment that he deserves.

At the same time, those around Bush, many of whom came of age during Vietnam and almost none of whom served, have attempted to assassinate the character and insult the patriotism of anyone who disagrees with them. Some have impugned the culture, history and integrity of entire nations, particularly in Europe, that have been our country's great friends for generations and, in some cases, for centuries.

Bush has yet to fire a single person responsible for this strategy. Nor has he reined in those who have made irresponsible comments while claiming to represent his administration. One only can conclude that he agrees with both their methods and their message.

editor | 05:47 PM NY | link to this | 7 people speak up

Question Mark #34: 'What's So Funny?'

Some people have a very strange sense of humor.

editor | 01:57 AM NY | link to this | 26 people speak up

Friday, March 26, 2004

More on Sibel Edmonds

I posted a link the other day to a story about Sibel Edmonds and her story about what would seem to be foreknowledge of 9/11 at the FBI. Now, more details are coming out.

Referring to the Homeland Security Department's color-coded warnings instituted in the wake of 9/11, the former translator, Sibel Edmonds, told Salon, "We should have had orange or red-type of alert in June or July of 2001. There was that much information available." Edmonds is offended by the Bush White House claim that it lacked foreknowledge of the kind of attacks made by al-Qaida on 9/11. "Especially after reading National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice [Washington Post Op-Ed on March 22] where she said, we had no specific information whatsoever of domestic threat or that they might use airplanes. That's an outrageous lie. And documents can prove it's a lie."

Edmonds' charge comes when the Bush White House is trying to fend off former counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clarke's testimony that it did not take serious measures to combat the threat of Islamic terrorism, and al-Qaida specifically, in the months leading up to 9/11.

[...]

She says those tapes, often connected to terrorism, money laundering or other criminal activity, provide evidence that should have made apparent that an al- Qaida plot was in the works. Edmonds cannot talk in detail about the tapes publicly because she's been under a Justice Department gag order since 2002.

"President Bush said they had no specific information about Sept. 11, and that's accurate," says Edmonds. "But there was specific information about use of airplanes, that an attack was on the way two or three months beforehand and that several people were already in the country by May of 2001. They should've alerted the people to the threat we're facing."

Edmonds testified before 9/11 commission staffers in February for more than three hours, providing detailed information about FBI investigations, documents and dates. This week Edmonds attended the commission hearings and plans to return in April when FBI Director Robert Mueller is scheduled to testify. "I'm hoping the commission asks him real questions -- like, in April 2001, did an FBI field office receive legitimate information indicating the use of airplanes for an attack on major cities? And is it true that through an FBI informant, who'd been used [by the Bureau] for 10 years, did you get information about specific terrorist plans and specific cells in this country? He couldn't say no," she insists.

This could be extremely hurtful to ThugCo. If even a piece of this is true, then Bush (or someone in his administration) has committed treason.

editor | 10:47 PM NY | link to this | 5 people speak up

I'm taking the plunge here...

I know, I know, I'm late to the party here... but I'm gonna put a Kerry donation button on this site. It looks like this...

Feel free to click and donate. Every little bit helps. I'll add it to all pages tonight.

editor | 08:51 PM NY | link to this | somebody say something!

Breslin.

Right as rain. Again.

Lovely. We get bombed in New York and there are thousands dead and mangled and we have a wedding Mass the Saturday after the attack and there is a groom at the Mass but no bride because she is in the sky. And not one of these people in Washington, D.C., these colossal failures, as much as loses a job.

Then yesterday in the hearing room was Richard Clarke. He was the counterterrorism chief for Clinton and Bush. He already is out of a job, but he has a big book out now so he is not hurting.

But he did one thing that nobody on a government intelligence payroll ever did: He started his testimony by saying he was wrong. He addressed the families of the victims who got killed in the trade center, a few of them sitting behind him. He said he was glad to have this forum so "I can apologize. ... Your government failed you. ... And I failed you. We tried hard, but that doesn't matter, because we failed."

He had committed a felony in Washington government. How can you admit you're wrong? How do you say that to the public? I'm wrong? What are you, crazy?

editor | 06:51 PM NY | link to this | 2 people speak up

Race to the bottom....

These bastards are truly desperate. This is your proof.

In a highly unusual move, key Republicans in Congress are seeking to declassify testimony that former White House terrorism adviser Richard Clarke gave in 2002 about the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Friday.

Frist said the intent was to determine whether Clarke lied under oath — either in 2002 or this week — when he appeared before a bipartisan Sept. 11 commission and sharply criticized President Bush's handling of the war on terror.

"Until you have him under oath both times you don't know," Frist said.

One Republican aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the request had come from House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Rep. Porter Goss, the chairman of the House intelligence committee.

The request was the latest evidence of a counterattack against Clarke, who has criticized Bush both in a new book and in his appearance before the bipartisan commission on Wednesday.

Go ahead and try it, you assholes. Don't you think the public will see what you're trying to do?

Update: There's a school of opinion throughout the blogosphere that Frist doesn't really want to de-classify congressional testimony, that it's just a head-fake to plant a seed of doubt in people's heads about Clarke.

To which I say - Clarke should join with Frist in calling for the de-classification of the testimony. If Frist is bluffing, I urge Clarke to call that bluff.

editor | 01:25 PM NY | link to this | 16 people speak up

I thought he was talking about home ownership...

Bush is in New Mexico, making a speech that was billed as about home ownership. He's been talking about his war for the past ten minutes.

Oh, and CNN said they were going to broadcast part of bush's speech at 12:45, part of Kerry's speech at 12:50. It's 12:55 by CNN's clock, and still no Kerry. I guess Bush reciting his 'not my fault' mantra for the 10,000th time is just too important.

1:05 - Bush still droning on.

1:10 - Still droning. Where's Kerry?

1:18 - Finally through. Kerry apparently held up his speech until Mushmouth was done stumbling over himself.

editor | 12:56 PM NY | link to this | somebody speaks up.

Running scared.

That smell wafting from the White House is abject fear.

The swiftness and ferocity of the Bush White House's attack on Richard Clarke tells you two things: his story may be largely true, and the Bush administration is terrified that the American people will believe it.

The central allegation - that Mr Bush was so obsessed with going after Saddam Hussein that he openly challenged his counter-terrorism adviser to find a link between September 11 and Iraq the day after the attacks took place - is serious.

It threatens the fundamental platform of the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign: that you are safer with them than you are with the Democrats.

The White House did not let a single news cycle go by before questioning that the alleged encounter between the president and Clarke had ever taken place, assigning dark motives to a man who has served four presidents, three of them Republicans.

But you don't have to be Bob Woodward to check Clarke's story out. There were other witnesses to this meeting, one of whom spoke to me.

"The conversation absolutely took place. I was there, but you can't name me," the witness said. "I was one of several people present. There was no doubt in anyone's mind that the president had Iraq on his mind, first and foremost."

This former national security council official was too terrified to go on the record - he knows how vengeful this administration can be.

editor | 11:37 AM NY | link to this | 4 people speak up