June 17, 2004, There are the Known fuckups, the unknown fuckups, the fucked up knowns...
Well, Mrs. TD and I had a lovely evening's dinner with MAMayo (and hubby Steve) and Mrs. TD's and MA's friend Megan... and when we even ATTEMPTED to discuss politics, we couldn't even get through the news of TODAY!!! I count FOUR major fuckups du jour: (1) Donny the Genius Rumsfeld not only personally ordering a war crime, to wit, ordering that an Iraqi prisoner be "disappeared" by having him not registered so the Red Cross wouldn't know he was there-- BUT THEN FORGETTING TO INTERROGATE HIM!; (2) the President insists on lying about the complete lack of Saddam Hussein - Al Qaeda or 9-11 links, and the public NOW KNOWS HE'S LYING; (3) the Vice-President ILLEGALLY ordered civilian airliners shot down on 9-11-- and then lied about getting the President's authorization; (4) a CIA contractor was indicted for killing a prisoner during torture... er, interrogation, in Afghanistan. I won't even discuss Kofi Annan's attack on the United States for having the balls to continue to insist that Americans to continue to be exempted from international prosecution for troops engaged in peace-keeping operations in the face of the ongoing torture allegations, and Alan Greenspan gets a 5th term as Fed Chairman. No, that's TOO much.
From the top: Rumsfeld has been caught dead to rights committing A WAR CRIME. Taguba said the treatment of the "invisible prisoner" (now in custody over a year-- when we can actually find him) was a violation of international law-- as confirmed by the Red Cross. And yet, the President tells us Rummy is doing a superb job. Meanwhile, the President himself, who is STILL using "9-11 and Saddam" in the same sentence-- DENYING THAT HE SAID THERE WAS A LINK, even though he has been saying it for nearly THREE YEARS. (BTW-- bad move; the 9-11 Commission is now FAR more popular than Bush himself; he should figure out a way to play ball with it, instead of openly stonewalling, caterwauling and confabulating.)
I seem to be the only one who noticed the little detail about the Cheney ordering the shootdown of civilian airliners on 9-11 (btw, after Flight 93 crashed, according to the time line)-- Cheney claims to have talked to Bush and gotten his authorization (a legal requirement-- only the President could authorize that then, though now, we have "improved", and a 2-star general could NOW order a civilian plane shot down)... except its a lie. Only Bush and Cheney who testified together off the record and not under oath said that conversation happened (though Condi "remembers it). Lynn Cheney-- in the same White House bunker as her husband Dick-- DOES NOT recall that conversation. And there are no records of the call. Why? Because it didn't happen. Its a lie-- a CLEAR lie for which the motherfuckers deliberately avoided "testifying under oath" or "on the record" or "publicly" to maintain-- a lie to pretend that George W. Bush was actually in command of anything except maybe his bowel movements on the morning of 9-11-- when, after being told of an attack on his country, went into a classroom to be read a story about a goat. The best part: its an UNNECESSARY LIE. In the unquestionable 9-11 morning chaos, Cheney could have been considered the "acting president"-- the real president... being not contactable (he was listening to a compelling story about a goat in a Florida classroom.) But they INSISTED ON THE LIE ANYWAY.
As to the CIA contractor... well, surprise, surprise. I liken it to throwing someone to the sharks, to yet again, avoid having to go after anyone important... like Don Rumsfeld. Of course, the bastard probably DID kill the guy-- but that's something else entirely from the question of whether this is the sort of thing that would normally be prosecuted (answer: NO).
In short-- the meltdown is now happening faster than I can keep track of it. I HATE when that happens. I feel so left out. Well, more melt-down tomorrow
June 16, 2004, Parachute Jumpin' Poppy Ain't the ONLY Free-fallin' Bush
Two developments in the continuing meltdown: (1) the September 11th Commission chaired by Governor Kean has stated, flat out, that the principal premise in most people's minds for the Iraq war, i.e., Saddam Hussein was somehow aligned with terrorists and responsible for the 9-11 attacks, was absolutely unsupported by any credible evidence whatsoever; and (2) a group of 26 retired high-ranking diplomats and military flag officers said that the Bush Administration had so damaged American national security and international standing that it should be voted out of office this November.
Neither is particularly new matter for our regular readers (the most discerning and intelligent readers in... the world), but what's interesting is that this is sort of a glass of ice-water to the face of many Americans-- if not most Americans-- still harboring the view that "there MUST have been a connection between 9-11 and Iraq or else WHY WOULD WE INVADE?" That self-imposed cognitive dissonance must now dissolve: the commission the President himself charged with investigating 9-11 has told us that Saddam had nothing to do with it.
Which doubtless explains the timing of the 26 officials' statement today. As the meltdown rolls on, regardless of one's feeling toward the feckless Senator Kerry, the fact is, this election is a referendum on the incumbent, and it is becoming clearer and clearer that "disaster" would be the politest way to describe the Bush Administration. The devil we don't know HAS to be better than the worst Administration we have ever had-- finally beating out Nixon for that dishonor. IMHO, the Chalabi treason fiasco has FINALLY put Bush over the top. Throw in Plame-gate, Abu Ghraib, the entire Iraq war to begin with, the fact that the most material 9-11 witnesses-- Saudis including the bin Laden family-- were spirited out of the United States within hours of 9-11 itself on the personal orders of George W. Bush, while simultaneously thousands of completely innocent people are held (and tortured) in gulags for "interrogation" as the most sadistic window dressing in the history of humankind, "out of control" would be a euphemism for this Administration. Frankly, the kindest spin I put on the Iraq fiasco is that its a Saudi-directed mission DESIGNED to screw up the Iraqi oil infrastructure for decades to preserve Saudi OPEC hegemony. Because the other alternative is incompetence of a level that no manager of a fast food establishment would tolerate, and yet the American people (informed by a corrupt and purchased media) blithely allow it...
Did I say all that out loud? Well, still four and a half months of meltdown action to come... Man, I hope my stomach can handle all the popcorn...
June 16, 2004, Sometimes You Just Need a Smile
Dog run member (and fellow Mets fan) Jeff Cooper of Cooped Up has been on blog hiatus for over a year now, and if you read his penultimate post, you'll see he has a damned good reason. But I just glanced at this blog, and came across this... a reason just to smile. Best wishes to Jeff, Jeff's family and especially to Noah.
June 15, 2004, The President's "Inherent Power" Is Universal...
Remember the Iraq sovereignty transfer fraud, coming June 30th-- that we're supposed to believe means "we're out" so Dubya can claim victory, despite leaving 140,000 uniformed American targets behind? Well, part of the fraud seems to be coming against reality: Dubya is refusing to come clean on whether or if he will hand over Saddam Hussein himself to the interim Iraqi government.
Just as "democracy" means any government that the Iraqis want as long as it will grant us military bases and the President's friends favorable oil concessions, so "sovereignty" means decisions made by the Iraqi government as long as we like them. Saddam, you see, is a personal matter for the President: this President has never stopped blaming Saddam for George H.W. Bush's loss to Bill Clinton in '92-- a capital crime, as far as Bush is concerned. You see, if the Iraqis decide that a "truth and reconciliation" scheme is in order (as the South Africans did), and Saddam could get amnesty if he discloses the full extent of his crimes, even if this decision were ratified in a democratic plebicite-- our President would exercise his veto (the one he holds as "ruler of the universe"-- that's what our attorney general says he is, so it must be true... after all, our attorney general doesn't smoke, drink or dance and is afraid of calico cats).
So-- democracy-- from good old Tom Lehrer-- "they've got to be protected, all their rights respected, until someone we like can be elected". Sovereignty-- as in Humpty Dumpty-- in the Bush parlance-- it means what Bush says it does.
Bush has convicted Saddam already. Hence, Saddam is guilty, and must remain incarcerated for... ever. And Bush will be damned if the Iraqi people themselves might want to upset that particular olive cart. But the Iraqi people will control their own destiny, their government sovereign, etc., etc. and so forth... I DIDN'T GET A HARUMPH OUT OF YOU! You watch your ass.
June 15, 2004, Sharon Beats Rap (Reprisals to follow)
Israel's Attorney General Menachem Mazuz, citing "biased prosecutors" announced that there would be no indictment of Israeli PM Ariel "Arik" Sharon. The actual ground for the 76 page decision (which also announced no indictment against Sharon's son Gilad) is that there was insufficient evidence-- the case involving bribery associated with the development of a Greek island was based on circumstantial evidence and innuendo, according to the A.G., and hence, the Sharon government will not fall because of this.
Which takes us to the other reason why the Sharon government might fall: the agreement to agree in the future maybe about Gaza. Think of Gaza the way the American people think of, oh, banning abortion outright in all cases (including-- no ESPECIALLY-- cases involving rape, incest and the life of the mother) to satisfy the whims of a small but vocal group of religious extremists. Well, because democracy really sucks as a system (and let's face it-- Hitler and Mussolini were democratically elected-- democracy is infinitely less important than RULE OF LAW and personal freedoms-- just ask the people in Hong Kong whether they prefer their tenuous ersatz "democracy" now, or the undemocratic but absolutely free rule as a British colony), vocal extremists have wildly disproportionate power. Its why if George W. Bush is permitted dictatorial powers by the Supreme Court (the Gitmo, Hamdi and Padilla cases loom) the fact that he is "democratically elected" (and like Hitler and Mussolini, by a minority) will mean SHIT. A dictator is a dictator is a dictator.
In a country like Israel, where religious extremists number around 20% of the population, in a wild electoral system of fractious multiple parties, if those 20% get together, its an extremely powerful bloc-- that can pretty much control the place, even though literally the other 80% would rather they go to hell (and a lot of the religious parties even hate each other). But here we are: those 20% (a little more than that-- but not much) desperately do NOT want to give up Gaza-- call it Greater Israel, call it "Empire". But they seem to be controlling the agenda-- and have for a while, which is (along with Yasir Arafat still breathing) why there will be no peaceful solution between Israel and its involuntary houseguests.
So right now, as I previously disclosed, Sharon at the moment has a minority government-- although the largest opposition party (Labour) likes the idea of the Gaza pullout, and will support Sharon on no-confidence votes at the moment in order to keep that on track.
Well, Sharon dodges this particular bullet. Good news for Dubya: last election, Sharon was widely credited with destroying his nation's economy, undermining its security, and squandering the little international standing it had left-- and he was reelected in a landslide. Dubya HAS to be happy Sharon will hang on some more...
June 14, 2004, Pledge Hammer
Well, at least the Grown-Ups are in charge of the Supreme Court: the four grown-up justices (Stevens, Breyer, Ginsberg and Souter) wisely saw an opportunity NOT to throw a seemingly mortally wounded Bush-Cheney campaign a life-line, and ducked the stupid, bullshit lawsuit brought by Herr Doctor Professor Michael Newdow on behalf of the child he doesn't have custody of, dismissing the case that found the "under God" portion of the pledge of allegiance on the grounds that Newdow lacked standing to bring the case.
OF COURSE THE WORDS UNDER GOD IN THE PLEDGE ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL. But this is America: we teach our moron masses different things, with mixed signals everywhere. Only the elites actually get to learn about things like constitutional rights, i.e., why church and state are separated (you know-- to prevent, say, the President of the United States from funneling government money to his favorite churches in exchange for their faith-based political support.) Hence, there is the "correct" decision, and the "right" decision. The four grown-ups (bizarrely joined by Kennedy but not by O'Connor, who joined two of the three children in insisting on upholding the blatantly unconstitutional pledge-- Scalia recused himself, realizing his vote wasn't needed-- unlike in the Cheney case) did the right thing here, ducking the question-- following the doctrine that if a court can avoid ruling on a constitutional question-- it SHOULD avoid ruling on that question.
I commented on this around two years ago when this first came out: its the great social trade-off we've been making for well over a century. Its called "You keep your guns and we'll keep our porn". Bringing in the vanities of a few atheist blowhards to do something that's technically right, but that endangers the polity's delicate balance, is something that should deservedly be crushed. That Herr Dr. Newdow never bothered to marry his child's mother and/or obtain custody of their daughter AND THEN still had the vanity to bring this case on his daughter's behalf was... fortuitous (I kind of hoped either the district court or circuit court of appeals would have seized this and tossed him out of court... but NOOOOOOOO....!!!) Thankfully, the child's mother DID NOT go along with his bullshit.
Well, the four grown-ups would have been boxed into a horrible position: they couldn't hold something unconstitutional constitutional-- had they not ducked the question, they would have resulted in a 4-4 tie (Scalia recused), meaning... AFFIRMED. We could then roundly expect condemnations from the entire Congress-- but-- we would be looking at fresh meat for the Bush campaign. Best not to give Bush anything-- if you ask me, a meaningless (and really harmless) constitutional abuse is a small price to pay if it helps get us regime change here to avoid the evisceration of the ENTIRE Constitution.
BTW, Mrs. TD wisely suggests that an appropriate alternative is to get rid of the whole God-damned pledge of allegiance in its entirety. Well, on this Flag Day, 50 years to the day after the damned "Under God" was put in (gotta separate ou'selves from the Godless commies, you know), we get this decision. The pledge was thought up by a secular minded Presbyterian minister... largely to sell flags. The fact is-- only the Phillipines (a former... American... colony) and us have something as STUPID as a loyalty pledge that we inflict on our own youngsters. To be honest, its one of the less offensive attributes of our Prussian-inspired industrial worker training and conformity program known as "universal public education"... but we really should get rid of the pledge entirely. I'm all for that.
The joke is that so many Americans will get worked up over this meaningless horseshit (Americans like, say, the Raving Atheist, who started his blog because of this case, or of course, Mr. Newdow himself, and the entire Congress, which condemned the original decision). Few will pay attention to the most important Supreme Court case of our generation, the Hamdi, Padilla and Gitmo cases... coming down the pike... which literally stand for the proposition of whether or not the President is a dictator. THOSE cases are what matters, instead of some symbolic horseshit.
(Come on, TD... tell us what you really think...)
June 13, 2004, Yet another view of Reagan...
This week's visit with our friends at the People's Daily gives us the PRC's official view of Ronald Reagan: a tough anti-communist, with famous "Reagan economics" (apparently, "Reaganomics" doesn't translate into Mandarin and back). The money line, of course, is that every meeting with a foreign dignitary was an adventure, because no one had any idea whether a stupid or insensitive remark might create an international incident.
I vaguely remember that. Again-- George W. Bush-- truly the heir apparent...
June 13, 2004, And now On With The Opera
Kamal al-Jarah, an official of the interim Iraqi Education Ministry, was killed today along with a dozen others in Baghdad. It seems that insurgents are looking to knock off at least one official from each ministry of the new government before the June 30th (meaningless and fraudulent) "sovereignty" transfer date. This reminds me of the loathsome Grover Norquist's plans to name something after the late Ronald Reagan in each of America's 3,000 plus counties-- a project Reagan himself opposed!
Why the segue? EXACTLY! The Reagan love-fest is over now: the 40th President has been laid to rest, his son Ron, Jr., apparently, having taken a subtle swipe at the "anointed by God" regime now running amok both in Baghdad and Washington. That means we have to go back to the business at hand: failure in Iraq (including ongoing deaths of American troops and continued extensions of tours of duty of those unfortunate enough to be in Iraq), neo-con sponsored treason by Chalabi, state-sanctioned Federalist Society drafted treason (there's no other way to describe the torture memo-- just think what it will now mean for soldiers captured in the field), the outing of Valerie Plame (more treason), and even as our economy shows signs of rebounding, no one cares! Its amazing: the economy is growing a not spectacular but respectable 250,000 to 300,000 jobs a month (and picking up), the stock market is holding... of course, interest rates and petroleum product prices are on their way... to the moon, Alice! to the moon!
Hence, polling shows that most Americans give Bush severely bad marks... on the economy! As Poppy got nailed for a soft economy despite a military "success", Dubya may get the benefit of decent economic news being wiped out by foreign policy debacle. (Those of you who, btw, felt I was saying "nice things" about Poppy, please don't read too much into that.)
For those of you who will criticize Kerry's low profile, let me just say: when the other side is self-destructing-- get out of its way. No one could have anticipated that the meltdown would accelerate and still be going at this point-- and let's face it, there's lots more meltdown to come. Kerry will eventually show his face; he has some interesting positions-- certainly, different from Bush, and we could certainly expect serious changes if(?)/WHEN! he is elected.
While I agree that history means shit (never before has the American media been in as few hands, nor its public ever been as zombified), but let's face it: the elements of a one-termer are all in place. Just over 4 1/2 months to go... an eternity... but, for the Bush Administration, it seems to be an eternity that keeps getting longer...
June 12, 2004, More Dispatches from the Multifarious Fronts in the War on Terror TM
Well, two quickies: (1) a jury in McAllister, Oklahoma "hung" on the penalty phase, thereby allowing Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nicholls to cheat execution; and (2) over in good old Baghdad, Iraq's interim deputy minister for foreign affairs, Bassam Salih Kubba, was killed today.
Nichols conspired with executed bomber Timothy McVeigh, and possibly others, for the deaths at least 168 people at the Murraugh Federal Building in Oklahoma City in April, 1995 (I first learned about it when trying a case in another federal building, a courthouse in Brooklyn). Kubba was a career diplomat, both in the Saddam regime, and after-- his family noted "he didn't work for Saddam-- he worked for Iraq", a distinction lost on... many. Certainly, on the Bush Administration.
Well, good to see the "War on Terror TM" continues apace. Today's quiz (its a re-run): what's the difference between "wars" and "wars on"? Wars end.
June 12, 2004, Rape, Murder, Robbery, Arson and Rape. You Said Rape Twice. I LIKE Rape.
This week's visit to Pravda will give us two goodies: the first is Pravda's interview with perennial journalistic icon Greg Palast; the other is even more troubling than Palast's suggestions that both the Reagan era enemies ("Evil Empire") and Bush II-era enemies ("Axis of Evil") are, for most practical purposes, imaginary. The second, even more troubling, are allegations of massive and systematic rape of always innocent Iraqi women committed in the context of the Abu Ghraib... situation.
What is peculiarly monstrous, of course, is the status of Arab women in a Neo-Medieval state (this shit would NOT HAVE HAPPENED UNDER SADDAM-- boys and girls, we seem to be crossing every line imaginable, and on this one, we have outdone Saddam). Specifically, in the post-Saddam Iraq, a woman who has been raped will suffer ostracisim, "honour killings", family shame, frequent suicides... while our boys are "just having fun" (right Rush?), and most significantly, following the direct orders of Washington as to how to inflict maximum humiliation on a populace we are trying to pacify.
Yes, yes-- Pravda's source is the Iraqi communist party, who doubtless has their own axes to grind. However, as we have seen from this entire Iraq war-- things ALWAYS seem to be worse than first presented to us-- in short, there seems no reason NOT to believe this, and frankly, the reality of what happened "inside" seems (if possible) less important than the "rep" it has earned which leads to further brutality towards women on the outside.
Well, well. On the day that New York's police commissioner has pretty much decided to avoid being told to do so by a federal court and says he will issue a parade permit to GOP Convention protestors, all I'll say is, any doubt I had that I would be joining that protest have just been erased today.
I think the number who will be joining me there will grow. And grow.
June 11, 2004, Soo Prahz Soo Prahz
Now that former President Reagan is safely on his way back to the Left Coast for final interment, we can go back to where we left off: the continued meltdown of the Bush Administration, as we have Abu Ghraib revisited. It now appears that in the "few bad apples" shtick (that I'm pretty sure isn't working, even here) we have at least five different soldiers who attempted to go up the chain of command to protest the abuses at that prison/worthless military intelligence factory. This all started, oh, last fall, which would coincide with the consensus of the Red Cross, General Taguba and others as to when the really bad shit started there...
Interesting. It would mean that NCO's like Sergeant Sam Provance and others who chose to hold back and go directly to the press rather than up the clearly futile chain of command, kind of had the right idea... The military wasn't going to do anything about this in order to cover a few bad apples: a few bad apples in charge of the White House and Pentagon, and a few bad apples in the "legalized torture" working group, the signatory of their work product being one Jay S. Bynby, then of the Justice Department and now of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, where this proud signatory of a document the Third Reich would have been proud of now has a guaranteed lifetime job ruling on our laws (one other participant is also up for Circuit Court Judge).
I have likened this not the banality of evil, but something infinitely worse as I see it: the evil of banality. The generation of liberal rabble-rousers we have come to equate the sixties with were... interesting. They read and wrote interesting things, had interesting drug experiences, lived interesting lives... the current generation of Federalist Society automatons, by contrast-- are the opposite of interesting. Let's face it: their hero in the White House famously says he doesn't read anything (besides children's books, and perhaps comic books). This is NOT an isolated incident. We have a group of people who have surrounded him to staff the imperium who... aren't very interested in anything... except power. Hence-- an antiseptic, lengthy, well-annotated document that can be produced... ostensibly stating that the President of the United States in an "emergency" (which presumaby he can decide upon) has unencumbered "intrinsic" dictatorial powers.
Um... no. No, he doesn't, and only three Supreme Court justices would support the proposition that he did (btw, one of whom-- the affirmative action hire who hsa devoted his life to making sure no one else gets the benefits he did-- used to work for "St." John Danforth, Reagan funeral presider, former Missouri Senator, and future United States representative to the United Nations). That means, by a 6-3 vote of the Supreme Court, the President of the United States is not an elected dictator. You heard it hear. The margin may be wider when the Padilla and Hamdi cases come down-- we'll see.
Oh well. The king is dead. Long live the king. Now, we'll go back to our regularly scheduled meltdown.
June 10, 2004, I Can't Stop Loving You
This week, an American giant passed away before his time-- a man who came from humble beginnings to break barriers to pretty much universal adoration. His death makes me sad-- much sadder than the other celebrity death of the week (the one that has pretty much taken over the Bush-Cheney campaign as a group of really defective people get together to beatify their spiritual leader in an atmosphere so distasteful that it reminds the veep of Khomeini's funeral; of course, as I reminded the veep, it should, given just how much business Khomeini and Reagan actually did with each other.)
But no matter what you thought of Reagan, Ray Charles was just bigger, as I see it: a universally beloved giant. The man was the subject of an old joke... Love is blind, God is love, Ray Charles is blind, therefore Ray Charles is God... had a certain resonance to it... like maybe-- that's it. Talk about the American dream-- a blind, Black orphan-- making his way to the absolute top of the entertainment world-- and staying there forever.
Ray Charles died at 73 of complications from liver disease. Blind at 7, orphaned at 15, he rose to greatness by always smiling, a perennial sunny disposition, a voice that a verbal description can't do justice to-- this is a man who REALLY made people really feel good about themselves. This is a man who REALLY integrated spiritual life into the mainstream-- miraculously crossing over the Gospel sound with the pop sound.
This is TRULY a man who whipped adversity with his eyes closed.
This is a celebrity death that makes me cry. Ray Charles was still on top at 73; he just completed a series of duets with other famous artists like the perenially fresh Willie Nelson and the perennially... still there... Elton John. Its been a little while since Charles toured or appeared in public because of his health-- but this was a man that moved me every time I saw his smile or heard his voice. Whether it was his signature Georgia on My Mind, or a version of America the Beautiful so moving you have no choice but to believe it (as your eyes tear up), all I could think is that maybe this man really IS God. I don't know.
Much as I thank our Republican governor for giving me tomorrow off in honor of his party's patron saint for a day of prayer and remembrance for Ronald Reagan, it will be for Ray Charles' passing that I will cry.
June 9, 2004, Kurds and Way-Lay
The veep sends us this Slate piece by the usually mediocre Tim Noah for the proposition that, having failed to secure key autonomy provisions guaranteeing their new and hard-fought freedoms, the Kurds had threatened to pull out of the new Iraqi entity. I note, of course, that the reason Noah is such a mediocrity is that he fails to address a significant issue-- Turkey has always threatened to intervene to STOP an independent Kurdistan. You remember Turkey-- our NATO ally-- who we tried to browbeat into letting us use to invade Iraq, and their democratic government told us (rightly) to go fuck ourselves? Yes-- THAT Turkey.
You see-- Noah (being a mediocrity) doesn't think what TURKEY might or will do (we won't even consider, oh, IRAN) is important enough to mention-- just -- oohh the Kurds will get all huffy and secede rather than be sold out by Americans just eager to get ANY UN imprimatur on this fiasco once and for all.
Well, your talking dog thinks that what Turkey will or won't do is the ballgame. Given that Bush is apparently kvetching for greater NATO involvement in Iraq, the price of this will HAVE TO BE placating NATO member Turkey (which, of course, borders on Iraq).
What was it Hannibal Lector always used to say? Quid pro quo, Clarisse, quid pro quo!
So let's go back to the scoreboard of Operation Iraqi Freedom-- (1) the Kurds' goal of autonomy and self-government-- which they were enjoying UNDER SADDAM (yes, thanks to our protection, but STILL), will probably have to go (to placate Turkey to get NATO involvement, if for no other reason; (2) Grand Ayatollah Sistani is itching to bring Muqtada al-Sadr into the new government, seeing as Baby Sadr is the most popular Shiite in Iraq (we STILL insist he be arrested!); (3) Sistani maybe (and Baby Sadr for sure) would impose a Taliban style variant of Sharia law-- reversing various women's rights that were enjoyed under... Saddam; (4) the Sunnis will doubtless continue to resist "democracy" knowing that it will be about Shiite payback, though in some cases, former Saddam officers are being placed at troublespots like Fallujah, (5) the Marines are announcing 5,000 MORE will be stationed in Iraq (our commitment will go up to 145,000 total); (6) We have more or less had a Pentagon legal team translate Saddam's secret police manual and use it as our blue-print for interrogating Iraqis dragged off the street for no reason (though a few people who have been tortured under BOTH regimes said they favored Saddam's-- because while painful, he was less interested in inflicting humiliation too); and (7) things have calmed down from April: we are only losing one American every other day or so, instead of one or more a day, as in April.
You have all that? We did all this for... the benefit of those ingrate bastards, the Iraqis... Yeah-- that's it. (Did I mention that we control their oil right now, though they get subsidized gasoline-- when they can get it-- and our gasoline is going through the moon... but that's something else altogether).
The Kurds aren't going anywhere independently; their best shot is that they (and they alone) were "legally" allowed to keep their Pashmurda (?) militias together-- which is good, because they will need them. Because we will not be in a position to buck Turkey on this (its an existential issue for them; compromise won't work), we will stand by the futile "we must keep Iraq together" view (even though it would be far better if Iraq were AT LEAST three different countries). Hopefully, the Kurds (having inserted SOME last minute language into the UN resolution to "work toward a federal system") will be able to negotiate something LIKE the autonomy they enjoy now.
But I wouldn't count on anything over there-- at least anything good. Not while the Bush Administration is involved.
June 8, 2004, International Ballroom Dancing
Over at the Turtle Bay Debating Society, the UN Security Council unanimously passed a resolution authorizing the Iraqi sovereignty transfer fraud on June 30th, followed by the rigged elections no later than January 31, 2005. The provision, hotly negotiated among UN Security Council members, particularly our new best friends France and Germany, permits the occupying force to be "asked to leave" by the interim government, and said occupying force will be "revisited" by the UNSC in a year's time.
Since as you read here not long ago, the Iraqi premier-designate Alawi has said he LIKES the idea of his nation being under the thumb of foreign conquerors, we needn't worry about our forces being asked to leave. And indeed, if one finds themself in the unfortunate position of being either reserve or active duty military personnel assigned to Iraq, there's no point in asking to leave yourself: your tour will be mercilessly extended until the charade that remaining is not a complete, fucking disaster is duly disabused (getting you the fuck out of there WILL be one of President Kerry's first acts-- though he's not allowed to say it until he secures the election.) Query-- we can be ASKED to leave by the interim government... but what part of the resolution MAKES US LEAVE, if asked? (I suppose, as staunch war opponent Senator Kennedy might say, we'll just have to drive off that bridge when we come to it...)
Now, now-- as kangaroo courts the world over have said, after dispensing gross injustice, "Now, its all nice and liggal". And so it goes. In the great scheme of things, however much I say it, the American people in the end are not REALLY stupid; they will see that the casualties continue to regularly accrue AFTER the sovereignty transfer fraud-- i.e., its STILL our problem. And its STILL the Chimp in Chief's responsibility (even as he will almost certainly have to jettison Secretary Rumsfeld in the next few weeks, and probably his Deputy SecDef Wolfowitz; the shit just keeps coming-- even THIS Chimp will have to realize that the value in a strategic sacrifice will become inescapable.)
So, let's go back to our score-cards. Sadr's militias are still in control of central Kufa and Najaf (and running quite amok, I might add); we've put ex-Saddam officers in charge of order in Fallujah, Baghdad has something blow up more or less daily, and we lose a few people every God damned week. Spain and Poland are preparing to GET THE FUCK OUT. The changing of flags is going to change jack shit-- and everybody knows it.
Plus, on my other score card, I see that Plame-gate is still out there, the torture story is out there, the Chalabi selling us to Iran with NOTHING BUT ACCOLADES FOR HIM FROM THE RIGHT WING story is still there, and now, the President's minions have decided to make the Reagan funeral a political bacchanalia, by not having Democrats speak at it (or so I've read).
Am I ALLOWED this much enjoyment for FIVE WHOLE MONTHS until the election? Because the melt-down just seems to be gaining traction. Frankly, this must all just be some kind of a trick...
June 8, 2004, I is the State, Baby...
Oy vay. The Wall Street Journal reports that yet another high level Pentagon "legal memo" has emerged, not merely "authorizing" torture, but outlining how participants in torture (up to, including, and maybe ESPECIALLY) fatal torture, can... get away with it, as part of the President's "inherent authority" to be a dictator. (via and thanks to Phil Carter of Intel Dump, via Jim Henley).
Lookit: the President of the United States and his political land-grabbing buddies saw September 11th as an opportunity to trial-balloon full-blown dictatorship. You can't START with the big stuff (though unbelievably, they HAVE-- citizens are now locked up without trial, charge or counsel, and since they are not classcially Anglo Caucasians-- and YES-- that's what its about-- there is no outraged hue and cry except by extremist nuts like me). So-- you start with eviscerating some checks and balances about FURRINERS-- who no one cares about anyway. You put your opponent in a political box-- John Kerry, right now, as the front runner, must tread very lightly (you see, if Bush put this request to shred the constitution for FURRINERS to a vote, he would doubtless get overwhelming support-- not that its a rap on the American people-- OK-- IT IS).
In the end-- September 11th DID change everything: it gave our enemies a license to show us just how much they hate our freedom. Unfortunately, as you might imagine, I'm not talking about Al Qaeda.
