I used to think the Conservatives, NeoConservatives, and Republicans knew what they were doing with their propaganda. I figured they understood that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, that Al Qaeda had no ties to Iraq, and that Iraq had no WMD. I figured they were just repeating these talking points in order to scare the rest of us into going along with their agenda. I figured they were taking a page out of the playbook of Joseph Goebbels the Nazi propaganda chief who said:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”

I no longer believe this. I think the Conservatives truly are afraid. I think they are cowards who fear Al Qaeda and need a father figure to protect them. This is why they are so willing to accept George W Bush as a dictator, because they are scared little babies who wet their beds at night.

It’s almost as if the followers of George W Bush suffer from a form of Stockholm Syndrome. They have fallen in love with their captor turned protector.

Perhaps they grew up without daddies. Perhaps their own fathers were abusive and so they need that abuse in their life thus President Bush fills that void for them. Whatever the cause may be it definitely has pathological roots. How sad it must be to live in a constant state of fear crying for a daddy to protect you!

What’s more, how un-American is that! Americans used to be brave, self-reliant people who rejected King George’s rule in 1776. Now thanks to Conservative Cowards many cry themselves to sleep at night begging for King George to protect them.

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm
the dictator." -President George W Bush

Covert CIA Program Withstands New Furor

Anti-Terror Effort Continues to Grow

By Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 30, 2005; A01

The effort President Bush authorized shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, to fight al Qaeda has grown into the largest CIA covert action program since the height of the Cold War, expanding in size and ambition despite a growing outcry at home and abroad over its clandestine tactics, according to former and current intelligence officials and congressional and administration sources.

The broad-based effort, known within the agency by the initials GST, is compartmentalized into dozens of highly classified individual programs, details of which are known mainly to those directly involved.

GST includes programs allowing the CIA to capture al Qaeda suspects with help from foreign intelligence services, to maintain secret prisons abroad, to use interrogation techniques that some lawyers say violate international treaties, and to maintain a fleet of aircraft to move detainees around the globe. Other compartments within GST give the CIA enhanced ability to mine international financial records and eavesdrop on suspects anywhere in the world.

Over the past two years, as aspects of this umbrella effort have burst into public view, the revelations have prompted protests and official investigations in countries that work with the United States, as well as condemnation by international human rights activists and criticism by members of Congress.

Still, virtually all the programs continue to operate largely as they were set up, according to current and former officials. These sources say Bush's personal commitment to maintaining the GST program and his belief in its legality have been key to resisting any pressure to change course.

"In the past, presidents set up buffers to distance themselves from covert action," said A. John Radsan, assistant general counsel at the CIA from 2002 to 2004. "But this president, who is breaking down the boundaries between covert action and conventional war, seems to relish the secret findings and the dirty details of operations."

The administration's decisions to rely on a small circle of lawyers for legal interpretations that justify the CIA's covert programs and not to consult widely with Congress on them have also helped insulate the efforts from the growing furor, said several sources who have been involved.

Bush has never publicly confirmed the existence of a covert program, but he was recently forced to defend the approach in general terms, citing his wartime responsibilities to protect the nation. In November, responding to questions about the CIA's clandestine prisons, he said the nation must defend against an enemy that "lurks and plots and plans and wants to hurt America again."

This month he went into more detail, defending the National Security Agency's warrantless eavesdropping within the United States. That program is separate from the GST program, but three lawyers involved said the legal rationale for the NSA program is essentially the same one used to support GST, which is an abbreviation of a classified code name for the umbrella covert action program.

The administration contends it is still acting in self-defense after the Sept. 11 attacks, that the battlefield is worldwide, and that everything it has approved is consistent with the demands made by Congress on Sept. 14, 2001, when it passed a resolution authorizing "all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons [the president] determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks."

"Everything is done in the name of self-defense, so they can do anything because nothing is forbidden in the war powers act," said one official who was briefed on the CIA's original cover program and who is skeptical of its legal underpinnings. "It's an amazing legal justification that allows them to do anything," said the official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issues.

[SNIP]

In four years, the GST has become larger than the CIA's covert action programs in Afghanistan and Central America in the 1980s, according to current and former intelligence officials. Indeed, the CIA, working with foreign counterparts, has been responsible for virtually all of the success the United States has had in capturing or killing al Qaeda leaders since Sept. 11, 2001.

Bush delegated much of the day-to-day decision-making and the creation of individual components to then-CIA Director George J. Tenet, according to congressional and intelligence officials who were briefed on the finding at the time.

"George could decide, even on killings," one of these officials said, referring to Tenet. "That was pushed down to him. George had the authority on who was going to get it."

The Lawyers

Tenet, according to half a dozen former intelligence officials, delegated most of the decision making on lethal action to the CIA's Counterterrorist Center. Killing an al Qaeda leader with a Hellfire missile fired from a remote-controlled drone might have been considered assassination in a prior era and therefore banned by law.

But after Sept. 11, four former government lawyers said, it was classified as an act of self-defense and therefore was not an assassination. "If it was an al Qaeda person, it wouldn't be an assassination," said one lawyer involved.

[SNIP]

Gen. Michael V. Hayden, deputy director of national intelligence, has described the administration's philosophy in public and private meetings, including a session with human rights groups.

"We're going to live on the edge," Hayden told the groups, according to notes taken by Human Rights Watch and confirmed by Hayden's office. "My spikes will have chalk on them. . . . We're pretty aggressive within the law. As a professional, I'm troubled if I'm not using the full authority allowed by law."

Not stopping another attack not only will be a professional failure, he argued, but also "will move the line" again on acceptable legal limits to counterterrorism.

When the CIA wanted new rules for interrogating important terrorism suspects the White House gave the task to a small group of lawyers within the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel who believed in an aggressive interpretation of presidential power.

The White House tightened the circle of participants involved in these most sensitive new areas. It initially cut out the State Department's general counsel, most of the judge advocates general of the military services and the Justice Department's criminal division, which traditionally dealt with international terrorism.

"The Bush administration did not seek a broad debate on whether commander-in-chief powers can trump international conventions and domestic statutes in our struggle against terrorism," said Radsan, the former CIA lawyer, who is a professor at William Mitchell College of Law in St. Paul, Minn. "They could have separated the big question from classified details to operations and had an open debate. Instead, an inner circle of lawyers and advisers worked around the dissenters in the administration and one-upped each other with extreme arguments."

[SNIP]

Duane R. "Dewey" Clarridge, who directed the CIA's covert efforts to support the Nicaraguan contras in the 1980s, said the nature of CIA work overseas is, and should be, risky and sometimes ugly. "You have a spy agency because the spy agency is going to break laws overseas. If you don't want it to do those dastardly things, don't have it. You can have the State Department."

But a former CIA officer said the agency "lost its way" after Sept. 11, rarely refusing or questioning an administration request. The unorthodox measures "have got to be flushed out of the system," the former officer said. "That's how it works in this country."

Read The Full Article

Posted by PoliShifter at 03:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

By Dave

Yes, there is a war on Christianity, but it’s all being fought by one side.

The evangelical zealots are fighting a phantom enemy that they have created. By introducing the illusion of evil villains conducting an organized attack on the bastions of Christianity they entrench the faithful and reinforce their blind loyalty. Sound a little like the Bush administration? They’re all singing from the same hymnal.

Who are these phantom enemies of Christianity?

I found these Articles of War on jeremiaproject.com.

LIBERAL MEDIA

- “Making Christians look cold, intolerant, and oppressive”.

o Really? I don’t see it. In fact, I outside of reporting on religious holidays, the only religious reporting is reporting of stories cooked up by the zealots.

- “Never covers homosexuality from a religious viewpoint.”

o Thanks be to Allah. The evangelical viewpoint is bigoted and encourages persecution of gays for their sexual preference.

- “Trend in public forum to replace “Merry Christmas” with “Season’s Greetings”. “

o This is a ridiculous shill, Chicken Little issue that has been provoked and prolonged by shrewd marketing. It has gone way past any reasonable life expectancy of a legitimate news issue, but like the Frankenstein of news reports, it lives on.
GOVERNMENT

- “Regulating churches through tax laws.”

o Campaign for political candidates in church, you pay taxes. Worship your god in church you don’t have to pay taxes pay taxes. Sounds fair to me.

- “Limiting religious liberty in the area of public and private education.”

o “Limiting religious liberty” is vague and ambiguous.

o It is unconstitutional to limit religious liberty in private schools. The ACLU will defend that freedom private schools enjoy the practice of their religion.
PUBLIC SCHOOLS

- “Forbidding prayer in public schools and educational ceremonies.”

o Public school sponsored prayer is not allowed by the US Constitution. Not just Christian, but Hindu, Judaic, Islamic, Rastafarian, Satanic, and any other sect that happens to be in the majority at the time and place. Again, it sounds fair to me.

- “Excluding the Bible from school classrooms and other school property.”

o Not true. The bible is allowed in the library and in religious studies classes. It is also allowed if there is a “Bible Club”. There can also be a “Torah Club”, or “Koran Club”, or a “Gay Republicans Club” if the school board wants to open that Pandora’s Box.
COURTS

- “Refusing to permit the religious displays on public property, such as Christmas and Chanukah.”

o Not true. They are allowed but there are guidelines for such displays to keep them nondiscriminatory.

So, under close examination, who and where is the enemy?

There is no enemy of substance. There are anecdotal incidents of stupidity that are used to create broad generalizations about the liberal media, the government, the schools and the courts. The Jeremiah Project sites (and often misrepresents) a case in Albertville Alabama, a music teacher in Michigan, a City Council in Oceanside, CA as evidence that there is a movement or conspiracy to eradicate Christianity. Anecdotal evidence is not only unscientific, it plays on emotions, fogs sound judgment, and distorts reality.

Do you recognize anyone fitting this description?

The Jeremiah Project describes the enemy as pro-adultery, pro-drug, pro-corruption, pro-deception, pro-Marxist, pro-socialist, anti-family, freedom from religion, and pro-hatred.

They must be hiding under my bed because I have never really seen one of these in daylight (except for polishifter and his preemptive strike on Easter).

So, what the hell is this war on Christianity all about?

It’s about building empires of money, power, by keeping congregations shrouded in ignorance and subservience. It’s about manipulating large groups of people through the use of fear and threat from an invisible, immeasurable, and malevolent force. It’s about distortion of fact to elicit strong emotion ( i.e.. A picture of exploding World Trade Center with caption: “Wherever the word of God is hidden or ignored, there will be certain destruction”) to reinforce a conjured state of paranoia. It’s about plying donations from Christians who have been convinced that there is a vast conspiracy to take away their right to worship.

There is no “conspiracy”. There is no real “war”. The enemy is just a rag-tag bunch of non-Christians not participating in worship of the God of the Christians and protecting their right to not worship or to worship the God of their choosing.

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, all is going to plan in Iraq. That is, if we knew what the plan was for Iraq I am sure we would all sit back and say:

"Bushy, you're doin' a heckuva job!"

YeeeHaa!! Let the cheap oil flow! Hell, the Iraq War will pay for itself! Throw another Trillion on the deficit! Yeeehaa! Cowboy Up! Fiscal Responsibility? Up Yours! Freedom's on the March!! We're sowin' seeds of Democracy that will soon yeild HUGE dividends to the wealthy elite which we all know will benefit working class Americans as long as we do not tax the rich. It will trickle down and we will all live like kings in our own private Idaho. YeeeeHaa!!

Kurds in Iraqi army proclaim loyalty to militia

By Tom Lasseter
Knight Ridder Newspapers

KIRKUK, Iraq - Kurdish leaders have inserted more than 10,000 of their militia members into Iraqi army divisions in northern Iraq to lay the groundwork to swarm south, seize the oil-rich city of Kirkuk and possibly half of Mosul, Iraq's third-largest city, and secure the borders of an independent Kurdistan.

Five days of interviews with Kurdish leaders and troops in the region suggest that U.S. plans to bring unity to Iraq before withdrawing American troops by training and equipping a national army aren't gaining traction. Instead, some troops that are formally under U.S. and Iraqi national command are preparing to protect territory and ethnic and religious interests in the event of Iraq's fragmentation, which many of them think is inevitable.

The soldiers said that while they wore Iraqi army uniforms they still considered themselves members of the Peshmerga - the Kurdish militia - and were awaiting orders from Kurdish leaders to break ranks. Many said they wouldn't hesitate to kill their Iraqi army comrades, especially Arabs, if a fight for an independent Kurdistan erupted.

"It doesn't matter if we have to fight the Arabs in our own battalion," said Gabriel Mohammed, a Kurdish soldier in the Iraqi army who was escorting a Knight Ridder reporter through Kirkuk. "Kirkuk will be ours."

The Kurds have readied their troops not only because they've long yearned to establish an independent state but also because their leaders expect Iraq to disintegrate, senior leaders in the Peshmerga - literally, "those who face death" - told Knight Ridder. The Kurds are mostly secular Sunni Muslims, and are ethnically distinct from Arabs.

Their strategy mirrors that of Shiite Muslim parties in southern Iraq, which have stocked Iraqi army and police units with members of their own militias and have maintained a separate militia presence throughout Iraq's central and southern provinces. The militias now are illegal under Iraqi law but operate openly in many areas. Peshmerga leaders said in interviews that they expected the Shiites to create a semi-autonomous and then independent state in the south as they would do in the north.

The Bush administration - and Iraq's neighbors - oppose the nation's fragmentation, fearing that it could lead to regional collapse. To keep Iraq together, U.S. plans to withdraw significant numbers of American troops in 2006 will depend on turning U.S.-trained Kurdish and Shiite militiamen into a national army.

The interviews with Kurdish troops, however, suggested that as the American military transfers more bases and areas of control to Iraqi units, it may be handing the nation to militias that are bent more on advancing ethnic and religious interests than on defeating the insurgency and preserving national unity.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 05:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Dark Wraith wrote yet another brilliant article in regards to a recent bloomberg report in which Treasury Secretary Snow called the budget surplus that occured under President Clinton a "mirage"

I know people are getting tired of hearing about George Orwell's 1984 but the reality is were are living in the days of NewsSpeak where War is Peace and History is being re-written every day by those in power.

Economic recovery? Kenny put up a 10 year chart of the DJIA. Judge for yourself.

Do tax cuts for the wealthy and trickle down economics really work?

How long will you believe the lies propagated by the Bush Administration?

Posted by PoliShifter at 04:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year To All! Be sure to NOT read the newspapers or check the internet for news. If you do, you are guaranteed to read some news stories that the Bush Administration does not want you to see. And since Bush is watching you, there is a chance that if you are caught reading some of this news that you will get a check mark next to your name and end up on one of the many FBI watch lists.

So we demand freedom, democracy, human rights, and civil liberties for the rest of the world but not for ourselves? How much more hypocritical can we get? You ain't seen nothing yet if Bush gets the chance to finish off his term.

NSA Spied on U.N. Diplomats in Push for Invasion of Iraq

Despite all the news accounts and punditry since the New York Times published its Dec. 16 bombshell about the National Security Agency’s domestic spying, the media coverage has made virtually no mention of the fact that the Bush administration used the NSA to spy on U.N. diplomats in New York before the invasion of Iraq.

That spying had nothing to do with protecting the United States from a terrorist attack. The entire purpose of the NSA surveillance was to help the White House gain leverage, by whatever means possible, for a resolution in the U.N. Security Council to green light an invasion. When that surveillance was exposed nearly three years ago, the mainstream U.S. media winked at Bush’s illegal use of the NSA for his Iraq invasion agenda.

Spy Court Judge Quits In Protest
Jurist Concerned Bush Order Tainted Work of Secret Panel
By Carol D. Leonnig and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers

A federal judge has resigned from the court that oversees government surveillance in intelligence cases in protest of President Bush's secret authorization of a domestic spying program, according to two sources.

U.S. District Judge James Robertson, one of 11 members of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, sent a letter to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. late Monday notifying him of his resignation without providing an explanation.

Two associates familiar with his decision said yesterWASHINGTON, Dec. 26 (UPI) -- U.S. President George Bush decided to skip seeking warrants for international wiretaps because the court was challenging him at an unprecedented rate.

day that Robertson privately expressed deep concern that the warrantless surveillance program authorized by the president in 2001 was legally questionable and may have tainted the FISA court's work.

CIA Probes Renditions of Terror Suspects

Analysis: U.S. Preparing for Iraq Exit

Spying Said to Be Broader Than Reported

Posted by PoliShifter at 01:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

This Christmas Season O’Reilly and Gibson drew first blood with their War on Christmas propaganda. They claimed liberals were waging a war on Christmas attempting to secularize and remove Christmas Celebrations from our society.

This move by O’Reilly and Gibson blindsided many in the progressive community. Most people it seems were celebrating the winter Holy Days as their families have done for generations. For many Americans this meant Christmas trees, Christmas Carols, mistle toe, gift exchange, perhaps a yule log, pointsettias, egg nog, and wreaths. Many Christians at this time of year while engaging in these pagan traditions also celebrated, at least symbolically the Birth of the Christ Child.

Other people celebrated the winter solstice, Chanuka, Kwanza, or just the end of another year. Most people seemed to go about their Holy Day celebrations as they saw fit without any notion of there being a war on Christmas as Fox News would have us believe.

So in order to prevent this blind side attack by O’Reilly and Gibson in 2006 I have decided to launch a preemptive strike against Easter. The idea is not my own. I have heard many people such as Stephanie Miller ask “what’s next, a War on Easter?”

So before Fox News can get the upper hand in this battle I am striking first. I will no longer consider Easter a Christian Tradition. Easter has NOTHING to do with Jesus Christ no matter what Bill O’Reilly might tell you.

Easter is a celebration of the Goddess Easter (also known as Ostra, Eostre, or Eastre) and the Spring Equinox. The Goddess Easter represents mythology, fertility, and the coming of spring. Symbols such as eggs and rabbits are representations of fertility. Fresh cut flowers demonstrate the coming of Spring and rebirth of the Earth.

Christians scabbed this fertility celebration and merged it with the honoring of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Why many Christians insist that Easter Bunnies, eggs, chocolate, and flowers have anything to do with the resurrection of Jesus Christ is beyond me.

Probably the most devious part of Easter is what is done to children. Children are given Easter Baskets full of candies and flowers. Later the Children go on an Easter Egg hunt to look for eggs they decorated the night before. While Easter does not bring as much joy to children as Christmas does, it is still a celebration that children look forward to. Children enjoy decorating eggs, hunting for eggs, and eating candy.

The sinister part comes when parents later in the day, after the child is high on sugar and full of joy from hunting for eggs, parents tell the child that Easter is really about the resurrection of Christ. Children don’t know any better so they nod their heads in agreement. And so the brainwashing occurs. When the child grows up he or she remembers Easter as a time when they felt good. They wrongly associate this feeling as some sort of holiness due to the resurrection of Jesus Christ. They say a prayer before dinner or perhaps go to church.

Something in their memory tells them this is a special time of year. The preacher tells them it is because of Jesus. The reality is that the feelings people have for Easter are a result of childhood memories surrounding the hunting of eggs, Easter Bunnies, and tremendous sugar highs from engorging themselves with sweets not from Jesus Christ.

So this Easter if O’Reilly and Gibson want to get all high and mighty about their Easter Celebration that is fine but take the Pagan out of it. If you want to hold Easter as a holiday for celebrating the resurrection of Jesus Christ that’s all fine and well but leave the Goddess Easter out of it. Leave out the eggs, bunnies, chocolates, and flower. Go to church and pray. You do not need to indulge in pagan traditions to celebrate the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

And for God’s sake don’t tell me if someone doesn’t wish another person a Happy Easter that somehow they are being un-Christian.

The Goddess Easter has nothing to do with Jesus Christ.

Must Read Article:President Bush has been summoning newspaper editors lately in an effort to prevent publication of stories he considers damaging to national security.

"The admission by two columnists that they accepted payments from indicted Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff may be the tip of a large and rather dirty iceberg."

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Spying Said to Be Broader Than Reported

NEW YORK (AP) - The National Security Agency has conducted much broader surveillance of e-mails and phone calls - without court orders - than the Bush administration has acknowledged, The New York Times reported on its Web site.

The NSA, with help from American telecommunications companies, obtained access to streams of domestic and international communications, said the Times in the report late Friday, citing unidentified current and former government officials.

The story did not name the companies.

Since the Times disclosed the domestic spying program last week, President Bush has stressed that his executive order allowing the eavesdropping was limited to people with known links to al-Qaida.

But the Times said that NSA technicians have combed through large volumes of phone and Internet traffic in search of patterns that might lead to terrorists.

The volume of information harvested from telecommunications data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the paper said, quoting an unnamed official.

Nuclear search targets Muslims

BY NIRAJ WARIKOO

FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
Federal agents secretly monitored Muslim homes and mosques in Detroit for radiation linked to terrorist bombs, according to published reports -- a disclosure Friday that prompted disbelief and outrage in Michigan's large Islamic communities.

Under the program, agents with the FBI and U.S. Department of Energy targeted a range of private Muslim institutions without court approval or warrants. Federal officials say they set up the program in Detroit and five other cities to thwart a nuclear attack from Islamic extremists, according to a U.S. News and World Report article that was confirmed Friday by the U.S. Justice Department.

US radiation snooping of Muslims called ‘disturbing’

WASHINGTON: The Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the largest Muslim rights organisation in the United States, has described the revelation that Muslim gatherings and homes around Washington have been electronically “sniffed” for radiation as “disturbing.”

In a statement on Friday, CAIR said, “This disturbing revelation, coupled with recent reports of domestic surveillance without warrant, could lead to the perception that we are no longer a nation ruled by law, but instead one in which fear trumps constitutional rights. All Americans should be concerned about the apparent trend toward a two-tiered system of justice system, with full rights for most citizens, and another diminished set of rights for Muslims.”

Posted by PoliShifter at 12:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by PoliShifter at 06:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In an obvious and blantant "fuck you" to the Christian Taliban in this country President Bush is wishing everyone an all-inclusive "Happy Holidays". I doubt President Bush knows that Happy Holidays means Happy HOLYdays but that is beside the point.

The point is that Christian Fundies voted for Bush at a ratio of 4 to 1. The Christian Right owns Bush. Bush said his favorite philosopher is Jesus. Bush even says God speaks to him. Bush caved to the fundies and nominated Alito Scalito to the Supreme Court.

You would think Bush would be wishing everyone a very extra merry Merry Christmas with a capital C, but no. Bush says "Happy Holidays". This must be a knife in the back to all Radical Christian Jihadists across America.

The funny thing is that the biggest fighters of the war against the "war on Christmas" is Fox News' own Bill O'Reilly and John Gibson. But did they say anything about the President saying "Happy Holidays"? Absolutely not! In fact, Fox News had guests on defending President Bush's use of Happy Holydays for being inclusive.

How odd. If any Democrat says Happy Holydays Fox News, O'Reilly, and Gibson nail them to crosses. But when President Bush says it now all of a sudden it's all inclusive.



Speaking of all inclusive Happy Holydays take a look at Fox News. "Stocking stuffers for everyone on your list" says Fox News. Really Fox? Everyone? You mean even the people that celebrate Chanuka, Kwanza, Saturnalia, the Winter Solstice, or don't celebrate anything at all? I guess the All Mighty Dollar knows no bigotry.

Fox wishes you a Merry Christmas and demands that you wish EVERYONE a Merry Christmas but feel free to buy gifts from their store for everyone, not just Christians.



And what is this I see at Fox News? Hanuka collection? I thought this was Christmas Fox? I thought if we didn't wish everyone a Merry Fucking Christmas we were scum of the earth? I thought Jesus was the reason for the season NOT Hanuka?

Thanks to Bill O'Reilly, John Gibson, and Fox News for ruining this Christmas Season. This was supposed to be a time of year when ALL people could feel good about themselves, share good will toward their neighbors, and share good cheer in general. It didn't matter if someone was Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish, aethiest, etc. This was considered a special time of year for all people for many different reasons. For some it was a celebration of Jesus's birth. For others it was Chanuka, for others Kwanza, and for others it was a time to celebrate the end of the year; a time for reflection.

But now thanks to the Fox News Propaganda Machine this Christmas Season is about Christmas and Christ. Fox says you better wish everyone a Merry Christmas and celebrate Christmas or you can go fuck yourself. But by all means buy a Fox Hanuka gift for the Jew in your life.

And to the Christian Taliban I hope you have fun decorating your Jesus Tree, Kissing under the Jesus MistleToe, enjoy your Jesus Turkey, your Jesus Egg Nog, Max your credit cards out at your favortie Jesus store, wait for Jesus Claus to come down your chimmney, hang your Jesus wreath, burn your Jesus Log, sing Jesus Carols, open Jesus gifts, stuff Jesus stockings, and eat some Jesus fruit cake.

For clearly none of these traditions existed until Jesus was born. I am sure as soon as Jesus was born Joseph turned to Mary and said: "behold, I must cut us down a Christmas tree, bring it in the house, and decorate it. Mary, take the kids to the store and buy a bunch of gifts. After all, it's Christmas! And put baby Jesus in a manger with sheep and wisemen!"

Dedicated to Fox News, O'Reilly, and Gibson: Merry Fucking Christmas assholes!

To the rest of you civilized, inclusive folk: Have Happy Holy Days and may your New Year bring you joy and success.

Thanks to Johnny Wendell, the inspiration for this post.

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

"If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both."

-BENJAMIN FRANKLIN

America has become a land of cowards afraid of shadows. Never have I seen such fear in the American People as I do today.

I was raised to believe in America Land of the Free home of the Brave. I was taught in History class how Americans resisted British occupation, fought a revolution for their freedom, and established a new country based on truths we once held to be self-evident.

During colonial times, America attracted a diverse and hearty population. Adventurers, entrepreneurs, and people fleeing religious persecution flocked to America. These people were brave, stubborn, and above all they valued freedom. Our ancestors valued freedom so much that they were willing to die for it not just once but time and time again in our history.

Americans historically have not liked to be told what to do. We are an Independent people; we do what we please when we want. As long as people don’t harm other people we pretty much let people do what they want. As a society we love freedom above all else. At least we used to.

Now it seems that Americans have become a bunch of pussies. All it takes now is for the President to come on the TV, mention 9/11 50 times, say “terrorism”, and our society is brought to its knees.

People quake in their nikes thinking about Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. They fear for the next terrorist attack. They check under their beds before they go to bed for Al Zarqawi. They look in their closets to make sure no suicide bombers are lurking around.

This sets people up for the next line of reasoning: “Let us protect you. Let us spy on you to keep you safe. We need more power to protect you. We need to limit your freedom in order to keep you safe.”

And people buy this crap hook, line, and sinker.

“By golly, let the President listen to my phone calls if it means capturing some Al Qaedas” people say to themselves.

“It’s better to fight them over there than over here” people say.

The Vice President says “we haven’t been attacked since 9/11 so obviously the domestic spying and limitations to freedom are keeping you safe.”

And people just nod their heads in agreement.

“Gee, we haven’t been attacked since 9/11 so we must be safer…Thanks Mr. President!”

This type of reasoning is just asinine. By that logic we could argue that since the first world trade center bombing we went 7 years without an attack. Therefore what ever Clinton was doing obviously kept us safer because 9 months after Bush became President we were attacked by Al Qaeda.

Now I KNOW some wingnuts are going ape sh*t after that last comment. Oh the horror for them to imagine that Bill Clinton actually kept us safer than their boy-king George Bush! Well this is the type of logic rightys like to use thus based on their own argument structure the proceeding passage MUST be true.

But I digress as usual. While I am disgusted with the Bush Administration I am more disgusted with the American People. I have never known Americans to be such big pussies before in my life.

I never thought I would see the day when Americans were living in fear and hanging on every word of a President. I never thought I would see the day when Americans would gladly hand carte blanche power to the Executive Branch and supersede our 3 branch government system of checks and balances just to feel safe when they go to bed.

Above all, I never thought I would see the day when Conservatives more than anyone else would act like a bunch of pussies.

Conservatives were supposed to be tough, gun toting, pro-military, and self-reliant people, not boot licking fear mongering pussies.

Not a day goes by when I don’t hear some conservative talking head try to scare people by projecting their own fears. Hannity, O’Reilly, Limbaugh, Coulter, Frist, Malkin, Cheney, Bush, etc nearly everyday spread fear throughout America. These people literally live in fear. They are afraid Osama is going to get them especially since King Bush is doing absolutely NOTHING to catch Osama.

I bet Hannity wets his bed every night just thinking about Bin Laden.

We have become a country ruled by Chickenhawks and propagandized by pussies. These people are deathly afraid to go fight a war themselves but they get hard-ons and jack-off to graphic war movies. They play soldier in their minds and imagine themselves heroes. But given their chance to go fight they run scared like pussies. Now they are in power and they bark commands to the rest of us like battle hardened Generals.

I refuse to be commanded by Chickenhawks and refuse to be propagandized by pussies.

I am not afraid. I am American. I believe in freedom, truth, justice, and the American Way. I will die standing rather than live on my knees if that is what it takes.

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBacks (0)

By Dave

ART OF PERSUASION 101

Critical thinkers, in their search for the truth, look and listen very carefully when someone is trying to persuade them. It helps to evaluate the merit of an argument if you understand the “routes to persuasion”.

THE CENTRAL ROUTE TO PERSUASION

The presentation of information with strong argument, analysis, facts, figures, and applies logic.

THE PERIPHERAL ROUTE TO PERSUASION

Emphasizes emotional appeal, focuses on personal traits.(Cacioppo & Perry 1982)

Which route do you think Carl Rove taught King George to use?

Which “route to persuasion” do you think FOX NEWS, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, O’Reilly, and the other entertainers employ?

Critical thinkers prefer analysis of facts and figures from reputable sources. They always question the motives of the persuader. They apply logic and examine the validity of the information being presented. They are suspect of strong emotional ploys and probe them for relevance, reliability, and validity.

Non-critical thinkers don’t have a lot of use for facts and figures. They are not likely to take the time to analyze or apply sound logical principals. They are addicted to the emotional rush of the sensational sound-bite and are not likely to question that validity of what makes them feel good. They accept information that reinforces their emotional commitment to an issue, no matter how inconsistent or illogical.

Which kind of “thinkers” do you think still believe the bull shit King George is using to push his ratings up?

How many Rightys will take the time to read and understand this post?

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Iraq's election result: a divided nation
By Patrick Cockburn
Published: 21 December 2005

Iraq is disintegrating. The first results from the parliamentary election last week show the country is dividing between Shia, Sunni and Kurdish regions.

Religious fundamentalists now have the upper hand. The secular and nationalist candidate backed by the US and Britain was humiliatingly defeated.

The Shia religious coalition has won a total victory in Baghdad and the south of Iraq. The Sunni Arab parties who openly or covertly support armed resistance to the US are likely to win large majorities in Sunni provinces. The Kurds have already achieved quasi-independence and their voting reflected that.

The election marks the final shipwreck of American and British hopes of establishing a pro-Western secular democracy in a united Iraq.

Islamic fundamentalist movements are ever more powerful in both the Sunni and Shia communities. Ghassan Attiyah, an Iraqi commentator, said: "In two and a half years Bush has succeeded in creating two new Talibans in Iraq."

The success of the United Iraqi Alliance, the coalition of Shia religious parties, has been far greater than expected according to preliminary results. It won 58 per cent of the vote in Baghdad, while Iyad Allawi, the former prime minister strongly supported by Tony Blair, got only 14 per cent of the vote. In Basra, Iraq's second city, 77 per cent of voters supported the Alliance and only 11 per cent Mr Allawi.

The election was portrayed by President George Bush as a sign of success for US policies in Iraq but, in fact, means the triumph of America's enemies inside and outside the country.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Spy Court Judge Quits In Protest

Jurist Concerned Bush Order Tainted Work of Secret Panel

By Carol D. Leonnig and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 21, 2005; Page A01

A federal judge has resigned from the court that oversees government surveillance in intelligence cases in protest of President Bush's secret authorization of a domestic spying program, according to two sources.

U.S. District Judge James Robertson, one of 11 members of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, sent a letter to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. late Monday notifying him of his resignation without providing an explanation.

Two associates familiar with his decision said yesterday that Robertson privately expressed deep concern that the warrantless surveillance program authorized by the president in 2001 was legally questionable and may have tainted the FISA court's work.

Robertson, who was appointed to the federal bench in Washington by President Bill Clinton in 1994 and was later selected by then-Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist to serve on the FISA court, declined to comment when reached at his office late yesterday.

Word of Robertson's resignation came as two Senate Republicans joined the call for congressional investigations into the National Security Agency's warrantless interception of telephone calls and e-mails to overseas locations by U.S. citizens suspected of links to terrorist groups. They questioned the legality of the operation and the extent to which the White House kept Congress informed.

Continue Reading This Article

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

There they go again...

Those lying sacks of crap conservatives are on full spin cycle trying to defend President Snoopster.

If you are a political junkie like me or have a blog you may have seen some of these trolls screaming that Bill Clinton did the same snooping that Bush is doing now. There are several flaws with this argument but the biggest one is that it is a lie.

Kenny published this post earlier via ThinkProgress called The Echelon Myth which proves Clinton went through the FISA courts to get all his wiretap warrants:

The Clinton administration program, code-named Echelon, complied with FISA. Before any conversations of U.S. persons were targeted, a FISA warrant was obtained. CIA director George Tenet testified to this before Congress on 4/12/00:

I’m here today to discuss specific issues about and allegations regarding Signals Intelligence activities and the so-called Echelon Program of the National Security Agency…

There is a rigorous regime of checks and balances which we, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the FBI scrupulously adhere to whenever conversations of U.S. persons are involved, whether directly or indirectly. We do not collect against U.S. persons unless they are agents of a foreign power as that term is defined in the law. We do not target their conversations for collection in the United States unless a FISA warrant has been obtained from the FISA court by the Justice Department.
***

So when a winger starts spewing Clinton at you throw this article at them.

The second part of their argument that is a fallacy is the suggestion that since "Clinton did it then it must be ok". The rightys try to suggest Clinton spied on Americans without warrants and they claim (falsely) that because of this it is ok for Bush to do it.

If someone commited a crime in the past it does not mean you have the right to commit a crime in the present. Using Conservative Logic I should have the right to murder since people murdered during the Clinton Administration. Fortunately, the world does not function on conservative logic.

Lastly, what happened to the Republicans?? They were supposed to be the Law&Order party. They were going to restore honor and dignity to the White House. The Republicans have been protecting our constitutional right to bear arms for years now. The Republicans impeached Clinton because he lied about a blow job. Now Bush has violated the Constitution and the first thing conservatives say is "but Clinton did it too!". What's worse (but to be expected) they are lying.

Republicans and Conservatives if you had any honesty, integrity, or values you would be demanding the impeachment of the Bush Administration. But Republicans and Conservatives are morally bankrupt. They have sold their souls to George W Bush.

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

From msnbc.msn.com

Bush’s Snoopgate

The president was so desperate to kill The New York Times’ eavesdropping story, he summoned the paper’s editor and publisher to the Oval Office. But it wasn’t just out of concern about national security.

WEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
By Jonathan Alter
Newsweek

Finally we have a Washington scandal that goes beyond sex, corruption and political intrigue to big issues like security versus liberty and the reasonable bounds of presidential power. President Bush came out swinging on Snoopgate—he made it seem as if those who didn’t agree with him wanted to leave us vulnerable to Al Qaeda—but it will not work. We’re seeing clearly now that Bush thought 9/11 gave him license to act like a dictator, or in his own mind, no doubt, like Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.

No wonder Bush was so desperate that The New York Times not publish its story on the National Security Agency eavesdropping on American citizens without a warrant, in what lawyers outside the administration say is a clear violation of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I learned this week that on December 6, Bush summoned Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger and executive editor Bill Keller to the Oval Office in a futile attempt to talk them out of running the story. The Times will not comment on the meeting,
but one can only imagine the president’s desperation.

The problem was not that the disclosures would compromise national security, as Bush claimed at his press conference. His comparison to the damaging pre-9/11 revelation of Osama bin Laden’s use of a satellite phone, which caused bin Laden to change tactics, is fallacious; any Americans with ties to Muslim extremists—in fact, all American Muslims, period—have long since suspected that the U.S. government might be listening in to their conversations. Bush claimed that “the fact that we are discussing this program is helping the enemy.” But there is simply no evidence, or even reasonable presumption, that this is so. And rather than the leaking being a “shameful act,” it was the work of a patriot inside the government who was trying to stop a presidential power grab.

No, Bush was desperate to keep the Times from running this important story—which the paper had already inexplicably held for a year—because he knew that it would reveal him as a law-breaker. He insists he had “legal authority derived from the Constitution and congressional resolution authorizing force.” But the Constitution explicitly requires the president to obey the law. And the post 9/11 congressional resolution authorizing “all necessary force” in fighting terrorism was made in clear reference to military intervention. It did not scrap the Constitution and allow the president to do whatever he pleased in any area in the name of fighting terrorism.

Read The Full Story


Update:

Fat Cat Politics has a link to this petition on Louise Slaughter's site to Demand Hearings for Domestic Spying.

Please Sign the Petition!

Also, Shakespeare's Sister emailed out a Big Brass Alliance update:

Hi, everyone. Important info from After Downing Street on Conyers' resolutions to censure and investigate the administration below. Also, I have excerpts from Conyers' press release here:

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2005/12/conyers-censure-investigate.html

Also WTF? More proof Bush ONLY deals in propaganda and not facts

Dr. Germ & Mrs. Anthrax Released From Jail

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBacks (0)

I cannot believe President Bush has the cajones to go on national TV and lie his a*s off. Well, that's not true, I can believe it. President Bush only knows how to lie. I doubt he has ever told the truth. Heck, lying his whole life got him into the White House. There are no negative consequences when Bush tells a lie, just positive ones. So why should he stop?

I am just going to throw out a few lies from President Bush's speech last night. Here is the Link to the full speech President's Address to the Nation .

"He [Saddam] was given an ultimatum -- and he made his choice for war. And the result of that war was to rid a -- the world of a murderous dictator who menaced his people, invaded his neighbors, and declared America to be his enemy. Saddam Hussein, captured and jailed, is still the same raging tyrant -- only now without a throne. His power to harm a single man, woman, or child is gone forever. And the world is better for it."

1) Saddam invaded Kuwait in 1991 and we took care of that problem.

2) Saddam was in fact complying with the weapons inspectors all the way to the end. Bush made the decision to go to War not Saddam.

3) We were told we were invading Iraq because Saddam had WMD, links to 9/11, ties to Al Qaeda, and was an imminent threat to the United States. We were not sold the War on Iraq based on the idea we were going to depose an evil dictator and bring democracy to the Iraqis.

"These terrorists view the world as a giant battlefield -- and they seek to attack us wherever they can. This has attracted al Qaeda to Iraq, where they are attempting to frighten and intimidate America into a policy of retreat. "

Only 6% of the insurgents in Iraq are foreign fighters. The bulk of the resistance are Iraqis NOT Al Qaeda.

"And if we were not fighting them in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Southeast Asia, and in other places, the terrorists would not be peaceful citizens, they would be on the offense, and headed our way. "

Since when have we been fighting terrorists in Southeast Asia? The majority of our resources and fighting is taking place in Iraq. The bulk of the world's terrorists are NOT in Iraq.

"September the 11th, 2001 required us to take every emerging threat to our country seriously, and it shattered the illusion that terrorists attack us only after we provoke them. On that day, we were not in Iraq, we were not in Afghanistan, but the terrorists attacked us anyway..."

What the hell does this statement mean? Why does President Bush insist on invoking 9/11 every damn speech he gives?

" Behind the images of chaos that terrorists create for the cameras, we are making steady gains with a clear objective in view. "

What clear objective?

"America, our coalition, and Iraqi leaders are working toward the same goal -- a democratic Iraq that can defend itself, that will never again be a safe haven for terrorists, and that will serve as a model of freedom for the Middle East. "

If by a democratic Iraq President Bush means an Islamic Theocratic State controlled by Iran, well then he is achieving his objective.

"Now, there are more than 125 Iraqi combat battalions fighting the enemy, more than 50 are taking the lead, and we have transferred more than a dozen military bases to Iraqi control. "

Just this summer Generals testified under oath that there were only 2 fully functional Iraqi Brigades. This came just a couple of months after Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld were touting that over 100 Iraqi brigades were fully trained. They were caught in a bold-face lie. So when the President says there are 125 Iraqi combat battalions, I just do not believe him.

"We will continue to listen to honest criticism, and make every change that will help us complete the mission. Yet there is a difference between honest critics who recognize what is wrong, and defeatists who refuse to see that anything is right. "

This is simply not true. Bush will not listen to anyone. General Shinseki was fired for saying we need more troops on the ground during the initial invasion. General Zini had devised a plan called Desert Crossing which the President and Rumsfeld completely ignored. Desert Crossing had contingencies for every imaginable scenario including an insurgency.

The Bush Administration calls those who criticize the war, even those who offer constuctive criticism, defeatists. He does not listen to anyone who has different views or ideas about how the war in Iraq should proceed. Anyone who thinks we are taking the wrong course in Iraq is labeled a "retreat and defeatist". The RNC has gone as far as to run ad campaigns featuring democrats followed by white flags waiving. The President can call this what he wants, but it certainly is not called listening to honest criticism.

"It is also important for every American to understand the consequences of pulling out of Iraq before our work is done. We would abandon our Iraqi friends and signal to the world that America cannot be trusted to keep its word. "

Sorry Mr. President, we have already demonstrated to the world that we cannot be trusted and that we do not keep our word. We lied our way in to Iraq and then we tortured people when we got there. The world does not trust us nor does the world think we will keep our word in regards to any manner. This is in no small part thanks to your failed administration Mr. President.

"I also want to speak to those of you who did not support my decision to send troops to Iraq: I have heard your disagreement, and I know how deeply it is felt. Yet now there are only two options before our country -- victory or defeat. "

First off, explain to me what victory is again?

Secondly, you're cheating Mr. President. You're setting them up and knocking them down. You are only giving us two choices. There are more than two choices Mr. President. And victory does not have to be achieved by the U.S. alone. Thirdly, you need to define victory in order to achieve it.

Posted by PoliShifter at 05:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBacks (0)

President Bush claims that he needs to retain his right to spy on American Citizens without going through the proper channels or getting search warrants. President Bush claims he needs to do this in order to keep us safer.

Does President Bush really need Presidential Spy Powers? The rationale would be that President Bush is getting hamstrung by the legal system and cannot obtain the necessary warrants needed to spy on potential terrorists.

It seemd this argument was working for the President, at least among his supporters, until today...

Today Kenny's Bunkport uncovered a document that shows President Bush has had no trouble getting his warrants:

Office of the Attorney General
Washington, DC 20530
April 29, 2003
Mr. L. Ralph Mecham
Director, Administrative Office
of the United States Courts
Washington, D.C. 20544

Dear Mr. Mecham:

This report is submitted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, Title 50, United States Code, Section 1807, as amended.

During calendar year 2002, 1228 applications were made to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for electronic surveillance and physical search. The Court initially approved 1226 applications in 2002. Two applications were "approved as modified," and the United States appealed these applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, as applications having been denied in part. On November 18, 2002, the Court of Review issued a judgment that "ordered and adjudged that the motions for review be granted, the challenged portions of the orders on review be reversed, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court's Rule 11 be vacated, and the cases be remanded with instructions to grant the United States' applications as submitted..." Accordingly, all 1228 applications presented to the Foreign Intelligene Surveillance Court in 2002 were approved.

Sincerely,

John Ashcroft
***

Here is the LINK

Crooks&Liars also picked up the story.

President Bush is going to give a speech tonight. Most likely he will tell you that he needs his powers to spy on people in order to keep you safe. He will tell you he cannot be bothered by getting warrants and going through the proper channels. He will tell you he needs to keep his Presidential Spy powers in order to protect you from the terrorists.

Now you know he is lying. Will you still believe him?

Posted by PoliShifter at 01:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

President Bush in his radio address today (Link) said:

"Yesterday the existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports, after being improperly provided to news organizations. As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk. Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies, and endangers our country."

Let's read that last sentence one more time:

"Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies, and endangers our country."

Do tell Mr. President! Do tell! And while you are at it tell us who leaked Valerie Plame's name to the media and hold them accountable!

For months we have been hearing the Republicans down playing the leaking of under cover CIA opperative Valerie Plame's name to the media. All the right wing hacks like Hannity and Limbaugh have called Plame a "desk jockey" and suggested that her NOC status was really not that vital.

Well Hannity, O'Reilly, and Blimbaugh please read what President Bush said today.

...appearing angry in an eight-minute address, the president made clear he has no intention of halting his authorizations of the monitoring activities

Bush admits to approving secret spying

Bush authorised wiretaps

In Speech, Bush Says He Ordered Domestic Spying

Senate Blocks the Renewal of Patriot Act

Bush Defends US Wiretaps, Urges Patriot Act Renewal

Posted by PoliShifter at 03:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

I feel bad for Bill O’Reilly but I feel even worse for John Gibson. After all, Mr. Gibson wrote the book The War On Christmas, not Bill O’Reilly. Alas, Mr. Gibson is always over shadowed by Bill’s bloviating ego. I guess poor John just feels that as long as he gets a chance to guest host for Bill O’Reilly once in a while he has made it as far as he is going to go.

The reason I feel bad for John&Bill; is because they are waging a War against those who are waging a War on Christmas. The problem for them is that NO ONE is fighting a War against Christmas. John&Bill have no enemies.

Even the commiest pinkiest leftiest gayest liberals are saying Merry Christmas as opposed to Happy Holidays. This has just got to tick off John&Bill; to no end.

It has to be frustrating for them to get on the TV or radio and talk ad nausea about the “War On Christmas” for four hours then have to drive home past the Christmas lights, the Christmas trees, the nativity scenes, the Merry Christmas signs, etc. Christmas is alive and well all across America as far as the eye can see. This must really steam John&Bill.

What John&Bill; need is a clear enemy; someone who hates Christmas. The Grinch and Mr. Scrooge are merely fictional characters. What John&Bill; need is someone tangible; a real person.

When it comes to Christmas, I, PoliShifter, can be the Grinchiest and Scroogiest person on earth.

There is no one better to fight against Christmas than me. Therefore I officially declare PoliShifter’s War On Christmas effective immediately. I promise to engage in all the imaginable forms of humbuggery that are possible well into the New Year.

I will from this day forward ONLY say Happy Holidays, which literally means Happy HOLYDAYS. Why anyone has a problem with HOLYDAYS is beyond me. This is a holy time of year for nearly all people on earth, not just Christians and HAPPY HOLYDAYS gets the job done, period.

Are you ready John&Bill;? From this day forward I am your enemy. You are on notice.

So what do I hate about Christmas?

First off, Jesus Christ was not even born on December 25th!!

Pagans celebrated December 17th through December 23rd during the Roman Empire as Saturnalia. Many of the so-called Christmas traditions come from this Pagan HolyDay. Decorating evergreen trees and exchanging gifts were all Saturnalia traditions.

The Roman Empire eventually adopted Christianity as the State Religion but not everyone was Christian and the Pagan HolyDays were such a hit with the populous that Christians just kept on celebrating them. They merged the Saturnalia and Winter Solstice celebrations then included as mass for Christ or a ChristMass.

How December 25th became known as Christ’s faux Birthday is beyond me. Some form of Fox News must have existed back then and perhaps an ancient ancestor of Bill O’Reilly propagated this myth. Someone just pulled it out of their a*s one day and it has stuck ever since.
So this hogwash about Christmas being about celebrating Jesus’ Birth is just that, Hogwash. Saturnalia (aka Christmas) is just a fun Pagan Holyday that people like to participate in.

Secondly, those that claim Christmas is about Jesus’ birth such as the fundamentalists are just full of sh*t. Decorating Christmas trees, kissing under the mistle toe, poinsettias, wreaths, silver bells, exchanging gifts, and Santa Claus have nothing to do with Christ or his birth.

Thirdly, Christmas has come to be not a celebration of Christ’s birth but rather a mass marketing blitz. Everywhere you look corporations are trying to get you to spend money on Christmas. This has nothing to do with Jesus, period.

Christmas is a capitalist wet dream. Our society is guilted into maxing out their credit cards and wiping out their savings accounts just to buy as many gifts as they can. And marketers have no shame; they go straight for the kids.

Every Christmas the kids want what is hot. The Corporatists know this and capitalize on it to the nth degree. Every kid tells their parents what they want for Christmas and it is always what is perceived to be the hottest thing. Each year a myth gets built up around certain products that “all kids must have” in order to have a Merry Xmas.

As a child I remember all the kids on the block on Christmas day would start comparing what gifts they got. If you did not get the cool toys, you were a loser and the other kids made fun of you. Thus our parents did their best to get us what we wanted just so we could win the Xmas gift pageant.

The fourth thing I hate about Xmas is The Lie. As a child I really believed in Santa Claus. I really believed that Santa was bringing me gifts in a red sleigh being towed by reindeer lead by Rudolph. I was crushed when I learned that Santa was not real.

When I was between the ages of 3 and 7 my parents were pretty well off financially. I got everything I wanted for Xmas and then some. But as time went on money became tighter. My brother and sister were born and my dad was laid off. This pretty much ended Christmas as I knew it. We no longer got everything we wanted. If we were lucky we got ONE thing we wanted and several things we didn’t.

Then by the time I was 13 all I was getting for Xmas was socks and sweaters. As I got older I began to feel bad for my parents who always tried to save as much as they could, max their credit cards, and even borrow money just to give us some Xmas presents. Xmas became a financial burden to our family.

The fifth thing I hate about Christmas is the use and abuse of the “HolyDay Spirit” to guilt people into participating in Xmas which really should be called $mas.

“Peace on Earth, Good Will Toward Men, and BUY MY PRODUCTS! SHOP HERE! MERRY $MAS!!”

This time of year we are guilted into buying $mas. If you don’t give gifts you’re considered a Scrooge. If you don’t max your credit cards and spend your savings why you’re un-American! You are not doing your part to help the economy.

The news is peppered with stories about how Christmas sales are going. A bad $mas for the retailers is passed on to the people as a bad omen for the economy. As if we do not go and spend all our money to make this $mas better than last year’s $mas then our whole economy will collapse. It’s hogwash and just a mind trick to get you to spend all your money.

This is just the first salvo of PoliShifter’s War On Christmas. Many more will follow.

BAHUMBUG JOHN&BILL;!

Happy Holidays & Merry $Mas!

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Should these people be arrested and thrown in jail for a year?


From DailyKos:

Section 602 makes holding an un-authorised sign at a Democratic or Republican National Convention, a Presidential, VP, or Candidate appearance, and any other event designated by the Secret Service as a "national special security event". a felony punishable by a year imprisonment. A not much more farfetched interpretation would have made felons of the entire Wisconsin Delegation to the 1968 Democratic Convention when Mayor Daley ruled them out of order for moving to adjourn the Convention and reconvene outside Daley's bailiwick.

Section 603 makes a seperate offence of entering the Convention (or other designated event) with forged credentials, possessing such, or even perhaps the time-honored tradition of passing ones' entry pass to a friend.

Full text of the Conference Report revised PATRIOT ACT, with the "Joint Explanatory Statement" from the GOPers on the Conference Committee can be found at http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_rpt/hrpt109-333.html .
ben masel's diary

Section 602. Interference with national special security events

Section 602 of the conference report is a new section. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1752 authorizes the Secret Service to charge individuals who breach established security perimeters or engage in other disruptive or potentially dangerous conduct
at National Special Security Events (NSSEs) if a Secret Service protectee is attending the designated event. Section 602 of the conference report expands 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1752 to criminalize such security breaches at NSSEs that occur when
the Secret Service protectee is not in attendance. Additionally, it doubles the statutory penalties (from 6 months to 1 year) for violations of Sec. 1752, to make the penalty consistent with the prescribed penalty under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3056(d) (interference with Secret Service law enforcement personnel generally). The conference report makes punishable by up to 10 years the thwarting of security
procedures by individuals in possession of dangerous or deadly weapons.

Links:

Daily Kos: New Free Speechless Zones in PATRIOT ACT

Fixing The Patriot Act -- Fighting Terrorism While Protecting Our Freedoms

Bush Secretly Lifted Some Limits on Spying in U.S. After 9/11, Officials Say

Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.

Posted by PoliShifter at 06:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

We are not leaving Iraq for at least 20 years.

Make no mistake, President Bush does have a strategery, he just doesn't want to tell you what it is. But anyone with eyes to read can see which direction Bush is heading. All you have to do is go to the NeoCon PNAC website and read their publications. Then look who the members of the PNAC are. You will then see who is shaping Bush's foreign policy.

Whether Bush understands the long term PNAC plan is hard to say. He more than likely just trusts his advisors in what they tell him and doesn't think anything about the decisions he makes as long as his crownies sign off on them.

We are building permanent military installations in Iraq. We will have troops there for a few decades. President Bush won't tell you this because he is afraid you may not agree with the plan. This is why the Bush Administration turns so often to propaganda rather than straight talk. "Cut and Run", "Retreat and Defeat", "9/11-Iraq" have become the mantras of the day. Why? Bush dares not stand before you and tell you the plan. Bush's handlers are afraid you may reject the plan if you knew its detail.

The plan is to create permanent military bases in Iraq that can serve as launching points for future strategic operations in the Middle Easy. We have given up on diplomacy. We are taking the might makes right approach. We want to have quick strike forces in Iraq on 24 hour notice so that if we perceive any country acting up we can hit them.

The Middle Easy is perceived to be vitally important to the United States because of its oil reserves. The United States has decided that in order for us to compete with Europe and China for Middle Eastern oil that we need to have a permanent military force there.

So I hope you are prepared to see the next 3 generations of Americans deal with the Iraq Crisis. It will never go away. Iraq will dwarf our war with Vietnam in the amount of time, troops, resources, and money it consumes.

This conflict in the Middle East saddens me in many ways. For starters we have lost all the credibility we had left.

But beyond that, we had a real opportunity to rid ourselves of our dependence on foreign oil. We have spent $500 Billion on Iraq. We could have used that money to develop alternatives to fossil fuels and told the Middle Easy to piss off.

But there was too much money to be made by the oil corporations, defense contractors, and the various crowny corporations with ties to the Bush Administration. Their greed got in the way of doing what is in the best interest of the United States.

Instead, they are serving their own interest and their own God: MONEY.

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (23) | TrackBacks (0)

By Dave


The vocal outrage of the self proclaimed Christian Right, the Moral Majority, the Evangelical Christians has been deffening in the last decade. Clinton’s sexual escapades and the horror of two people of the same sex getting “married” were all consuming issues.

They ranted in all media about the decay of values on America. They sounded the alarm about the “gay agenda” and the assault on the “sanctity of marriage” ( ignoring our current 60% divorce rate, rampant spouse abuse, teen pregnancy and infanticide) . They marched with signs to preserve the life (?) of a woman who was 96% brain dead.

They marched in the streets to protest the removal of a monument to the Ten Commandments from a courthouse. They wail and bemoan the abolition of government sponsored prayer in schools and mislabel it a cabal against Christianity.

Well, where is the Christian outrage at the current use of torture by the American Government? Where were their condemnations of the barbaric, heathen practices at Abu Grabe? Where is the Christian conscience of America when the secret CIA torture prisons of Eastern Europe were uncovered?

What was their reaction to the exposure of Iraqi torture and starvation prisons last month? Why do they silently tolerate Bush’s refusal to accept John McCain’s anti-torture amendment to the Patriot Act, or tolerate the mere idea of a compromise? Compromise on torture?

Where is the Christian voice of outrage over this horrendous moral issue that defines not only our values as a nation, but as a civilization.

I allege that it’s not about morale values at all. It’s not about the word of God. It’s not about the old and new testaments. It’s not about the content of the Ten Commandments. It’s about political power and the almighty dollar.

The religious right wing in power does not stand up for the real morale issues. They soap box on the sexy, provocative, and marketable issues, no matter how inconsequential.

They’re selling the soul of America for money and power.

What would Jesus Say?

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (24) | TrackBacks (0)

Tinfoil Tuesday

Atlantis and Beyond Part 2

(Click here for Part 1)


Atlantis thrived for hundreds of years in a near Utopian state. Crime was almost non-existent. Everyone was employed doing what they loved. Everyone had food and decent shelter. The Government maintained order with little effort. There was only one political party in Atlantis at this time. Their main concern was doing only what was in the best interest of all the people of Atlantis.

The Atlanteans were ardent explorers. These seafaring people had traveled all over the earth visiting every continent. All this time the Atlanteans held steadfast to their traditional laws; it was forbidden for any Atlantean citizen to interfere or adversely affect any other culture and/or environment they came across while exploring. They respected the land of the indigenous people they came across and they respected their sovereignty. They respected the lands that were not inhabited by humans. Their explorations were more academic in nature often driven by mere curiosity and the quest for knowledge rather than greed or exploitation.

And so life on Atlantis ebbed and flowed for hundreds of years with out crisis or conflict.

And then one day the unthinkable happened. Certain natural resources, mostly metals and minerals, began to become scarce, particularly gold. Gold was not valued for its ornamental qualities but rather for its conductive properties.

While the Atlanteans were brilliant at managing their renewable resources such as forests, food crops, and livestock, the land eventually began to give out. It became harder and harder for the Atlanteans to grow the necessary amount of food needed to feed their population. Their lack of farm productivity led to over fishing which led to devastating effects on their marine environment.

The lack of productivity of the farm land led to the layoff of thousands of workers. With no income and no means to feed their selves, many turned to crime. The people cried out to their governing body for solutions.

And then the unthinkable happened. The great Atlantean Senator Republicanus proposed importing needed goods from other lands. But after a few exploratory trade missions it became apparent that the Atlanteans had nothing to offer in trade except for advanced technology. This created a raucous in the Senate. Debates raged on day and night as to what effects giving new forms of technology to the various peoples around the world would have.

Some worried that other cultures were not intellectually advanced enough to handle new technologies. Others were concerned that their technologies would be used for evil purposes. And still others were concerned that their technologies, if used improperly would have devastating effects on the environment.

But Republicanus put forth an argument so strong that it was hard for the other Senators to ignore. For the greater good of Atlantis, Republicanus argued that the Atlanteans should just take what ever resources they needed, by force if need be. Republicanus argued that in all of their travels throughout the world that the Atlanteans have never come across any group of human beings that was superior to them in any way, shape, or form. Thus Republicanus suggested Atlanteans were entitled to the world’s resources because of their intellectual superiority.

Republicanus went further with an even bolder proposition and a first in Atlantean history. Republicanus advocated using their advanced technologies to create destructive weapons. These would be used if necessary to force cultures throughout the world to give their natural resources to the Atlanteans.

Up to this point in Atlantean history only one political power existed. It was not until after Republicanus’s proposal that Atlantean politics polarized into a dichotomy. It was Democratus who lead the opposition to Republicanus’s proposals. Democratus was a staunch traditionalist and believed Atlantis should respect the environment and above all the sovereignty of other cultures.

Democratus too was an influential Senator and had many followers. For many months Democratus and Republicanus locked horns in spirited debate while the rest of Atlantis watched and debated with each other in the streets as to what was the best course to take in order to preserve their beloved country.

The people of Atlantis became nearly evenly split between those that favored tradition versus those who believed what was best for Atlantis was all that mattered.

To Be Continued...

Senator Byrd Stands Up For Freedom

Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia said Monday he doesn't expect Democrats to filibuster the nomination of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, but he still chastised Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist for threatening to stop any such effort through a drastic parliamentary effort that has been dubbed the "nuclear option."


"If he ever tries to exercise that, he's going to see a real filibuster if I'm living and able to stand on my feet or sit in my seat," Byrd said in a Senate debate with Frist, R-Tenn.


"If the senator wants a fight, let him try it," said Byrd, the Senate's senior Democrat. "I'm 88 years old, but I can still fight, and fight I will for freedom of speech. I haven't been here for 47 years to see that freedom of speech whittled away and undermined. "

Posted by PoliShifter at 05:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

By Vietnam Vet Who Knows Better

Rumor or truth, is Joe Lieberman courting the White House in order to further his private interests over the interests of his electorate? If Lieberman is appointed to replace Rumsfeldt as the Secretary of Defense it would leave his Senatorial post vacant and allowing Bush to appoint a Republican to that position.

Lieberman’s recent support of Bush and the Iraq War has already turned the Democratic Party on its head. Lieberman should be careful though. If the United States gains a presence in the Middle East through other than Israel, the United States will be in a position to turn its back on Israel.

The United States has long relied upon Israel to create chaos and unrest in the Middle East so that the oil rich countries could never gain supremacy in the region. If the United States becomes that destabilizing entity via Iraq then we would no longer need to support and defend Israel.

So take your time and think about what you are doing Mr. Lieberman. You could be the one not only selling out the Democratic Party but be the true Judas and selling out Israel as well.

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (15) | TrackBacks (0)

The Four Horsemen of the Apocolypse Ride On. Is Bush trying to end the world or is he just a cosmic accident waiting to happen?

This is just a public service announcement to those who may care: There is a high probability that if Israel attacks Iran in March 2006 that this event will trigger World War 3.

Israel readies forces for strike on nuclear Iran

ISRAEL’S armed forces have been ordered by Ariel Sharon, the prime minister, to be ready by the end of March for possible strikes on secret uranium enrichment sites in Iran, military sources have revealed.
[SNIP]
The crisis is set to come to a head in early March, when Mohamed El-Baradei, the head of the IAEA, will present his next report on Iran. El-Baradei, who received the Nobel peace prize yesterday, warned that the world was “losing patience” with Iran.
***

While I understand the reluctance to allow Iran to build a Nuclear Powerplant I also feel it is not worth destroying the world over. Israel has nuclear weapons along with the United States. The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses and now occupies that country. Iran feels a little threatened by us I'm sure.

Iran looks around the world and sees that North Korea has nukes, Pakistan has nukes, and so does India. We don't f*ck with these countries as much as we f*ck with the Middle East. I'm sure that Iran sees building nukes as a defensive tactic to prevent the U.S. from invading their country.

If Israel attacks Iran, there is good possibility that Iran will invade Iraq. Even more jihadists would flood into the region with a unified purpose: To destroy Israel and force the United States out of the Middle East. Ofcourse, the United States would not take this lightly. If things go this route someone is going to get nuked. Who gets nuked remains to be seen. Could be all of us.

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold On the Patriot Act Conference Report

“I will do everything I can, including a filibuster, to stop this Patriot Act conference report, which does not include adequate safeguards to protect our constitutional freedoms. The version of the Patriot Act that was signed today is a major disappointment. I appreciate that it includes four-year sunsets on three controversial provisions, but merely sunsetting bad law is not adequate. We need to make substantive changes to the law, and without those changes I am confident there will be strong, bipartisan opposition here in the Senate.
Continue Reading


French Told CIA of Bogus Intelligence
The foreign spy service warned the U.S. various times before the war that there was no proof Iraq sought uranium from Niger, ex-officials say.

By Tom Hamburger, Peter Wallsten and Bob Drogin, Times Staff Writers

PARIS — More than a year before President Bush declared in his 2003 State of the Union speech that Iraq had tried to buy nuclear weapons material in Africa, the French spy service began repeatedly warning the CIA in secret communications that there was no evidence to support the allegation.

The previously undisclosed exchanges between the U.S. and the French, described in interviews last week by the retired chief of the French counterintelligence service and a former CIA official, came on separate occasions in 2001 and 2002.
Contiue Reading

Military's Information War Is Vast and Often Secretive
The center is not part of a news organization, but a military operation, and those writers and producers are soldiers. The 1,200-strong psychological operations unit based at Fort Bragg turns out what its officers call "truthful messages" to support the United States government's objectives, though its commander acknowledges that those stories are one-sided and their American sponsorship is hidden.

"We call our stuff information and the enemy's propaganda," said Col. Jack N. Summe, then the commander of the Fourth Psychological Operations Group, during a tour in June.
Read Article

Bush Advisor To Reporter: Katrina “Has Fallen So Far Off The Radar Screen, You Can’t Find It”
I’m going to tell you something to amaze you; it amazed me yesterday. The last time the president was in the hurricane region was October 11, two months ago. The president stood in New Orleans and said it was going to be one of the largest reconstruction efforts in the history of the world. You go to the White house home page, there’s Barney camp, there’s Social Security, there’s Renewing Iraq. Where’s renewing New Orleans? A presidential advisor told me that issue has fallen so far off the radar screen, you can’t find it.
Read Full Article

Frist Says He's Ready to Block Filibuster

Iran Invites U.S. to Bid on Nuclear Plant

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Bush on the Constitution: 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper'

GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

“I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.”

“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

O'Reilly: "I understand Europe. They're cowards ... they won't confront evil on any level"

O'REILLY: Europe will never learn. Never. Those people will die before they learn. Now, the U.S.A. is a different story. Most of us understand evil, and we're committed to confronting it. But the far left and the media in conjunction has really made it difficult to wage this war on terror.

[...]

OK, set up a structure to take the ammunition away from the far left. But the -- look, essentially, here's the question that every American has to answer. Why do 20 percent of your citizens -- co-citizens -- why do they not see the danger we are facing? Why? I understand Europe. They're cowards. They're cowards over there, with all due respect, and I'm generalizing. But by and large, the European population is soft and afraid. And you've seen that for the last 100 years, by and large.

They won't -- they won't confront evil on any level. It's anything goes, just leave me alone. Give me my check from the government and leave me alone. All right, so that -- I understand that -- here -- I'm not getting this. I'm not getting the undermining of the war on terror. I'm not getting [former talk show host] Phil Donahue, I'm not getting [filmmaker] Michael Moore, I'm not getting [progressive talk radio network] Air America -- I'm not getting any of these people.

Limbaugh repeated NewsMax.com's false claim that McCain "admitted that torture worked on him"

LIMBAUGH: If the McCain Amendment passes and we, therefore, extend constitutional protections to terrorists, Al Qaeda terrorists, enemies of the United States, we will just funnel them off to other places without ever having them directly in our -- under our control.

And whatever happens to them there, there's not gonna be anything anybody can do to stop -- and it'll probably be worse off for them than now. But what is so disheartening about all of this is that it is simply an effort to gain media attention, to stand out from the crowd, and to appeal to whoever in this country that this is going to appeal to.

And it also is a bit egomaniacal in that McCain has appointed himself the expert on torture, because he was tortured for five years. He also admitted that torture worked on him.

GOP Fights Back with White Flag Ad

RUSH: So the GOP is fighting back. This little ad... Have you seen this ad, the video of the ad with Howard Dean and John Kerry and the white flag waving across the screen? In fact, Mike, we have the audio of this ad. Let's find the audio of that ad. We can't show you the video yet. Video podcasts are coming soon, though, and you might see such an ad in one of those video podcasts. This is five seconds of music and then text on the screen. There's no announcer at the beginning. On the screen when this starts you see, "Democrats have a plan for Iraq: Retreat and defeat." Then a white flag waves, and Howard Dean appears.

Michael Reagan: "Howard Dean should be arrested for treason and either hung or put in a hole until the war's over"



Thanks To:

Blondsense
The Heretik
Shakespeare's Sister
The Huffington Post
Media Matters

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Dear Lord Jesus,

I know it is customary for people to ask Santa Claus for gifts on your birthday but this year I wanted to ask you instead. I realize it is not really your birthday but December 25th is the date most people celebrate as the date of your birth. I know that Christmas trees, exchanging gifts, egg nog, poinsettias, wreaths, and silver bells have more to do with the celebration of Saturnalia and the winter solstice than with your birthday but this is beside the point.

The point is that most people view Christmas as a time to wish good will on earth and peace toward women (and men). This time of year has so often been filled with good cheer in our Nation’s history. People often act Christian during this time of the year: They give to the poor, forgive their enemies, and show their love for humanity.

But this year Lord Jesus things just seem different. Please Lord hear my prayers. I pray for our soldiers in Iraq and I pray for the Iraqis. Please Lord, bless them all and help us to end this violence and mindless slaughter that is taking place in Iraq.

Please Lord Jesus, this Christmas can you give peace to the Iraqis and bring our troops home? I promise I will not ask for anything ever again for Christmas if you could do this one thing. Please Lord hear my prayers.

And please Lord, bless President Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, and Scott McClellan for they know not what they do. Please soften their hearts and help them to see the error of their ways. Please Lord fill their hearts with love for the fellow human beings. Help them to turn the other cheek and love their neighbors as they love themselves. Please Lord Jesus hear my prayers.

Please Lord comfort those families who have lost loved ones in Iraq and comfort those who have loved ones in Iraq during these HolyDays.

Please Jesus, help bring our troops home. Amen.

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (13) | TrackBacks (0)

The Truth Comes Out...

The Bush administration based a crucial prewar assertion about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda on detailed statements made by a prisoner while in Egyptian custody who later said he had fabricated them to escape harsh treatment, according to current and former government officials.
***

So, how do you feel about being part of a country that tortures? Only in America eh? I never thought I would see the day when the United States Vice President, President, and Secretary of State would be fighting for their right to torture.

Then again we are talking about the same Administration that lied to the American Public about Iraq having WMD, Iraq having connections to 9/11, Saddam having links to Al Qaeda, and about Iraq buying yellow cake uranium from Niger.

We are talking about the same administration that refers to those who oppose the War in Iraq as cowards. We are talking about the same administration that cannot make a single speech about Iraq without mentioning 9/11.

Republican Chickenhawks to wave white flags over Democrats in Video

The DRUDGE REPORT has learned from a top GOP operative that the Republican National Committee will provide state parties with a web video prior to release tomorrow afternoon that shows a white flag waving over images of Democrat leaders making anti-war remarks.

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

LIEberman's intentions, how ever noble do not excuse him siding with the Bush Administration. It is likely that LIEBerman wants to maintain a US military presence in the Middle East in order to help secure Israel's position.

But there are other ways for LIEberman to achieve his objective. He did not have to side with the enemy.

DINO: Democrat In Name Only

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (29) | TrackBacks (0)

A Picture is worth a thousand Indictments.

Yes there are plenty more corrupt Republicans but I was hard pressed to fit them all in to one picture...I'll work on it...

Posted by PoliShifter at 04:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

President Bush wants to spread his seeds of freedom and democracy all over the Middle East but his policy faces a tremendous obstacle: The Muslim Community.

Time and time again in Democratic Elections in the Middle East The People are voting for political parties and candidates the United States views as "extremists". In Lebanon, Hamas has made a strong democratic showing.

And in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood has made tremendous political gains. So much so that it is frightening those in power in Egypt and in the United States:

From ABC News Two Killed in Egyptian Election Violence

"Government supporters armed with knives, bottles and machetes attacked voters lined up trying to get into several stations, sparking clashes with supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, the government's main rival."
[SNIP]
"Egypt's three-stage elections, which began in November, have been plagued by increasing violence as police and government supporters try to put down a strong showing by the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood, which so far has increased its presence in parliament fivefold."

From Problems With Egypt's Elections Jack Langer writes:

"The problematic elections in Egypt -- where US pressure forced an election that turned out a victory for the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood -- really point to a general dilemma for US policy in the Middle East. Bush's vision of ensuring US security by transforming ossified Middle Eastern autocracies into democracies certainly sounds noble in theory. But in practice, the social and political development of these societies has created a situation in which many people, if given a democratic choice, would just replace their brutal secular leaders with brutal Islamic ones.

So the US emphasizes Mid-East elections, but as in Egypt, we backpedal when we realize that democracy will actually empower fundamentalists. We're facing a similar problem in the Palestinian territories - where elections may very well result in the empowerment of Hamas - and in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and many other countries."

From Violence overshadows Egypt vote Aljazeera.Net wrote:

"At least four people have been killed in poll violence in the final round of month-long Egyptian parliamentary elections, with polling again plagued by violations that have drawn US condemnation.

The four were killed on Wednesday during clashes that erupted when police attempted to prevent voters from casting ballots in the Damietta governorate, Aljazeera's correspondent in Egypt reported.

Of the four, two were Muslim Brotherhood supporters, said an organisation spokesman.

A third man was killed in the village of al-Khiyata, near the Mediterranean city of Damietta, when police fired live rounds, said the independent Egyptian Organisation for Human Rights."
***

The Bush Administration will face a serious crisis in Iraq as time goes forward. The Democratic Elections Bush is fighting for will likely result in empowering theocracies throughout the Middle East. Faced with this dilemma, it is not out of the realm of possibility that the Bush Administration will use strong arm tactics to try to influence Middle East elections so the outcome supports Bush Administration policies.

This ofcourse is not Democracy.

This should also come to no surprise to people in the United States. Time and time again the Bush Administration and the Republican Party has rigged elections and tampered with results in order to achieve their desired outcome. This is standard Bush Policy.

So why would we think the policy would be any different in the Middle East? It's business as usual for the Bus Regime. Nothing more, nothing less.

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This tale begins well over 10,000 years ago in the ancient city of Atlantis. Located just east of the Pillars of Hercules, Atlantis was a highly advanced and technologically savvy civilization the likes of which has never been seen again. Nearly everything imaginable had been invented: systems of Science, mathematics, architecture, art, music, telepathy, renewable energy, antigravity, space travel, and medicine. The one thing the Atlanteans had not conquered was time travel but they devoted a large portion of their intellectual and natural resources to achieving this goal.

While it may seem strange to us to imagine that thousands of years ago people existed that were far more advanced than us, it was not strange to the Atlanteans. Indeed, Atlantean legends talked of even more advanced societies that existed tens of thousands of years before Atlantis.

Atlantis was a highly democratic society with all people, male and female, being considered equal. Their education system was beyond reproach. All Atlanteans were highly educated in the basic sciences, engineering, mathematics, music, art, philosophy, and spirituality. An Atlantean’s education did not end until that person died. Atlanteans were expected to learn, study, and have new experiences throughout their entire lives. It was just part of who they were. They thought no more about it than your or do about driving our cars or turning on the TV.

Atlanteans were hardworkers but they also understood the value of leisure time. Atlanteans understood that what made their society function so well was giving their citizens the latitude and freedom to pursue their interests with no limitations or constraints. Atlanteans understood that a person who is passionate about their work and considers their work an integral part of their life will be far more productive than people who merely work at something because they are told to or because must do so just to survive.

Atlantis was a robust metropolis that never seemed to sleep. People worked at all hours of the day and night and they played at all hours of the day and night. Some people preferred to sleep in late and stay up late while others preferred to get up early and go to bed early. Everyone was free to choose the lifestyle that fit their passion.

At any given time as you walked down an Atlantean street you could find people arguing, debating, engaged in deep conversations, or laughing up the latest jokes and political follies. No topics were off limits. If one did not like the conversation one would simply excuse themselves, make their way down the street, and find a café or park where people were engaging in the type of conversation they were in the mood for.

Atlanteans had inventions similar to what we call TV and movies only they projected in 3D, incorporated scents, and tactile sensations. While such devices if available to our society would be considered all the rage, in Atlantis they were considered trivial. Atlanteans preferred engaging with real people in conversation rather than watching programmed events. Atlanteans preferred live theatre to simulated experience. These attitudes were mostly engrained in their society based on their past experiences. They found that at an early period in their history the Atlantean people, especially children, who emersed themselves in artificial stimulation ended up being slower in wit and less capable of social interaction. Further, they suffered from their vice politically.

Those that refrained from artificial stimulation were generally much more successful politically and therefore excelled in the legislature. Those families that impressed upon their children not to get addicted to the artificial stimulation ended up dominating politics. Thus, over time other families followed suit and began closely monitoring their children’s interaction with artificial entertainment devices.

Eventually their society grew to resist such brain candy. While it was never forbidden to engage in artificial stimulation and while it was freely available to all Atlanteans, the people as a society simply limited their own indulgence without the need for legislative action.

To Be Continued Next Tuesday...

Posted by PoliShifter at 06:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Iraqis have got to be asking themselves this question every day:

"Are you better off now than you were four years ago?"

Lets see:

Under Saddam the Iraqis had torture, rape rooms, no due process, no freedom of the press, rigged elections, cities were bombed, but they did have infrastructure (electricity, water etc).

Under Bush the Iraqis now have torture, rape rooms, no due process, no freedom of the press, rigged elections, their cities shocked and awed, and their infrastructure is in shambles.

If Bush's goal was to create and jusftify an ever growing insurgency in Iraq, he has succeeded.

It's very simple. The Iraqis are looking around and asking themselves where's the peace and security? Where is the freedom? Where are the jobs? Howcome there is no electricity or trash service?

On top of that Iraqis are getting killed by American Contrators. Also, American Contractors are taking their jobs.

I mean really, is it any wonder the Iraqi People want us out of their country?

Posted by PoliShifter at 02:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Kenny made 2 points in earlier posts that I think need to be repeated.

1) The Bush Administration's strategy for almost 3 years now may have been the idea that all they had to do was wait for the next big attack. Perhaps the Bush Administration felt another terrorist attack would have happened in America or a large scale assault on our troops in Iraq. Either situation could help garner public support and allow the Bush Administration to move forward with a full military mobilization. Nothing else can win this war unless we go all in. The Bush Administration knows this. They also know that the Public's appetite for war has diminished.

Are we running operations near the Syrian and Iranian borders angling for an attack? It would not be the first time in our history. FDR was constantly putting Navy destroyers in German waters angling for an attack. One ship was actually sunk but the public did not take notice. It took Pearl Harbor for FDR to get the public support behind full military mobilization. In Vietnam it was the Gulf of Tonkien incident.

It is a frightening proposition to think that Bush and Cheney are sitting back literally praying for some full assault on our troops or another 9/11 style attack in America just so they can justify a full mobilization.

2) Fox News and the Conservative Media Bias always complain that all the news reports in the bad news coming out of Iraq. We never hear the good news.

Well, if there was good news coming out of Iraq then why isn't Fox News reporting it? Why isn't Rusm Limbaugh or Sean Hannity going on a 24/7 propaganda blitz of all the great news in Iraq that the "liberal media" are not reporting? How many schools have been opened? How many consecutive days has Baghdad had electricity, running water, and trash pickup? How many new jobs have been created? Has their been a drop in civilian deaths since Bush declared "mission accomplished"?

Go ahead wingnuts, report all the "good news".

They won't; because there isn't any.

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Sure the fringe right supports the troops; but only as far as it benefits them politically. For the President, the only places he can give speeches these days is at military bases. This is because the troops cannot express any contrary opinion to the commander-in-thief.

It also builds the illusion Bush loves so much of being a "War Time President". The President's handlers also hope it will tug at your patriotic heart strings by seeing the President next to our brave men and women in uniform.

The talking heads like Hannity, Oreilly, Gibson, Coulter, Malkin, Limbaugh, Hume, etc love saying "support the troops" because they know it invokes a knee-jerk patriotic response in at least 37% of the population.

This is good for ratings. It gets the folks to tune it. It also makes the 37% more susceptible to whatever other propaganda they are pushing at the time such as but not limited to the "War on Christmas", the "liberal are traitors" talking point, the "liberal media bias", or my all time favorite "Democrats have no plan".

Beyond using the troops as props and propaganda tools these people care nothing about the troops. This is not a unique situation. Unfortunately our military has often been used as propaganda. During LBJ's presidency he was disliked so much that he too was relegated to only giving speeches at military bases (sound familiar?).

There is a stark difference between supporting the troops and saving the troops. Republicans support the troops only as far as the troops further their agenda. Beyond that, the chickenhawks could care less. I know many will disagree with me but all you have to do is look at simple facts such as but not limited to:

1) The Republicans failure to adequately equip the troops

2) The Republicans failure to provide decent funding for the VA.

3) The Republicans failure to force President Bush to come up with a viable Iraq
Strategy.

4) President Bush's refusal to listen to ANYONE who gives a less than rosy picture of Iraq. General Shinseki said it would take 400,000 troops to secure Iraq. The Bush Administration fired him. The Bush Administration wanted to get away with 170,000 troops. Folks, this is NOT being supportive of the troops. This is called putting the troops in harm's way.

5) The Bush Administration refused to consider General Zini's Desert Crossing operation because it was "too pessimistic".

"Four years ago, those who devised an Iraq war game called "Desert Crossing" concluded that a large force would be needed to subdue the country. "We were concerned about the ability to get in there right away, to flood the towns and villages," says retired Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni, who was commander of U.S. forces in Iraq and the surrounding region when he supervised "Desert Crossing." "We knew the initial problem would be security."

The 1999 exercise recommended a force of 400,000 troops to invade and stabilize Iraq. But at the insistence of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, ground forces in the March invasion were held to less than half that: about 130,000 U.S. combat troops and some 30,000 British troops."

Again, not providing the troops with the resources they needed, with an adequate plan, and with clear objectives is not supporting the troops. What it is is supporting the whole sale slaughter of our troops.

Saving the troops is a more Democratic vision. It does not matter which extreme you look at: From Cindy Sheehan's view of bringing the troops home immediately, to Murtha's pull back plan, or to Biden's Deploy more troops plan, all these plans have one major thing in common: Saving the lives of troops.

Republicans don't want to save the lives of our troops. Sure they "support" them but they don't want to save them.

Democrats have been fighting to get more equipment to the troops, better VA benefits, and to force a clear vision of what our goals and objectives are in Iraq, not the Republicans.

Remember this when you go to the polls in '06. If you just want to support the troops vote Republican.

But if you want to SAVE the troops, vote for Democrats. It's that simple.

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

By Dave

GWB is talking a lot lately. I’d like to see him do an actual NEWS CONFERENCE some time, but I don’t expect to see one during this administration. He say’s nothing NEW and it sure as hell is not a CONFERENCE.

There are so many questions for him to be afraid of, he will probably never have an interview, even after he is out of office. He can only do a read and grin routine in front of glassy eyed public servants. That’s a technique that is tried and tested and low risk. It seems to work. His approval ratings are up a bit since the “How We’ll Win” speech.

Why are the Bush faithful still faithful? I’ve been trying to figure that out as long as he has been lying, cheating, and misguiding the American people. I used to believe that people had to earn trust, but apparently not. He talks and they trust. Maybe the faithful continue to believe him because they don’t have the courage to face the fact that they were duped into voting for him.

Maybe they believe him because he has that platoon of radio hacks and FOX NEWS brainwashing the dim of wit, all day, every day. Maybe they believe him because they want what he tells them to be true so badly they are in some state of denial. Whatever the reason, they seem to be unable to see the discrepancy between what he say’s and what he does.

P.O.P. has posted numerous lists over time. Most have been incriminating for the administration; lists of lies about Iraq, lists of crimes against the environment, lists of crimes against the economy, lists of incompetent cronies placed in powerful positions, lists of favors for big campaign contributors, and on and on. While pondering the question of why the faithful remain faithful, I thought maybe there is a list somewhere that I missed.

Maybe there is a list of GWB Administration accomplishments during the last 5 years. I don’t know how I could have missed it and I would really like to see it if it is out there.

So, How about it Car Salesman? Give me a list of GWB accomplishments that benefited the American people (not counting oil people). How about it Rino? Show me a list of things Bush has done for me and you (not counting the richest 10%). Show me a list of things he has done to strengthen our country (not counting strengthening the drug industry and Haliburton at our expense).

Show me a list of promises he’s made in his speeches that he has followed through on. Show me a list of programs to benefit all Americans that he has funded. Stop telling me about Clinton’s moral conduct. Stop defining Liberal for me. Stop doing character assassination on patriots who dare speak out. Make me understand why you stay loyal to a corrupt administration.

It’s a simple request. Give me a list.

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

(click on the image for a larger view)

Analysis Casts Doubt on Vietnam War Claims

WASHINGTON -- Another war, another set of faulty intelligence findings behind it.

Forty years before the United States invaded Iraq believing Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, it widened a war in Vietnam apparently convinced the enemy had launched an unprovoked attack on two U.S. Navy destroyers.

This photo provided by the US Navy shows a North Vietnamese motor torpedo boat attacking the USS Maddox, Aug. 2, 1964 in the Gulf of Tonkin. A spy-agency analysis released Thursday contends a second attack on the USS Maddox and the C. Turner Joy in the Gulf of Tonkin Aug. 4, 1964 never happened, casting further doubt on the leading rationale for escalation of the Vietnam War. (AP Photo/US Navy) (AP)

Papers declassified by the National Security Agency point to a series of bungled intelligence findings on the purported clash in the Gulf of Tonkin that led Congress to endorse President Johnson's escalation of the Vietnam conflict in August 1964.

Read Full Story

"Those that forget their history are destined to repeat it"

10 Marines Killed in Bombing Near Fallujah

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

At first I did not agree with Cindy Sheehan. I did not think we should immediately withdraw our troops from Iraq. I also didn’t think we should have a timetable or set a date for exit. But I did think we needed to redefine our mission in Iraq, set goals, change strategies, clean up the corruption, employ Iraqis instead of Halliburton, stop torturing, and find that missing $11 Billion dollars.

But after hearing our President repeat talking points yesterday and invoke the specter of 9/11 changed my mind. I was holding out hope for a while that President Bush would eventually do the right thing. I have been waiting for him to step up and be a man. I was hoping he would admit his mistakes, apologize, and call for a bipartisan Iraq Peace Strategy. Instead all I got was “stay the course”, “hard work”, and freedom is on the march platitudes.

What’s worse is the President basically labeled all Iraqis as enemies. He called Iraqis either Saddamists or Rejectionists. What the heck is that supposed to mean? Further, Bush reiterated his resistance to any type of troop withdraw, “exit strategy”, or as the Republicans like to say “cut and run” policy.

Meanwhile for the past week Condi and Rummy have both been suggesting that we will be drawing down troops next year just before the ’06 elections. Are they cowards and traitors Mr. President? Why the disconnect? Why are some in your administration saying we will draw down troops next year while you keep hammering with your propaganda about there being no “cut and run” or “exit strategy”?

But I digress. The point is Cindy Sheehan is right. We need to bring out troops home and we need to do it now. Not in 6 months, 6 weeks, or 3 years but right now. This President in incapable of leadership. He is unfit for command and should not be in charge of our military. President Bush is the one who endangers the troops every time he opens his mouth.

There is no mission in Iraq and there is no goal. There is no reason for us to be in Iraq. If we stay any longer the only thing we will accomplish is the killing and maiming of more US Soldiers, the killing and maiming of more Iraqis, and provide more inspiration to young Jihadists.

It is time we leave the Middle East and Muslim Communities alone. Let them govern themselves the way they want to. Let them be truly free to make their own choices.

And if this is all truly just about securing future oil resources then I say we would be better off spending $300 Billion developing alternatives to fossil fuel rather than fighting wars with no objectives or goals.

Cindy Sheehan is right. Bring our troops home now. There is no reason for us to remain in Iraq. If we do not demand an immediate withdraw from Iraq the only thing that will happen is what happened in Viet Nam. In 1968 Nixon ran on a get out of Viet Nam platform. We did not leave until 1975. What did happen is a slow draw down of troops and increased bombings. Sound familiar?

Do not be fooled by timetables, exit strategies, whispers of troop draw down in ’06, or rumors of being out of Iraq by ’07. It will not happen under the Bush Regime. The NeoCons will keep us in Iraq indefinitely if given the chance.

And don’t talk to me about freedom. America has lost its way and its moral high ground. Our freedoms are being eroded while the President insists on fighting for some sort of freedom in Iraq. Certainly the Iraqis do not have freedom of the press and their elections are dubious at best. We condemn torture while we commit torture. We demand humane treatment of prisoners and due process while we hold hostages indefinitely. We say we stand for freedom, democracy, and the will of The People while our government is held hostage by corporations and the highest bidder.

I support the Cindy Sheehan plan. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW!


Check out The Peoples' Party New Plan For Achieving Peace in Iraq

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)