HERSH: Cheney / Bush gave Israel Greenlight in Lebanon - EARLIER THIS SUMMER

In a new article in the New Yorker, Seymour Hersh, of Abu Ghraib fame, claims that the Bush administration gave Israel the green light to attack Lebanon earlier in the summer:

A Pentagon consultant said that the Bush White House "has been agitating for some time to find a reason for a preemptive blow against Hezbollah." He added, "It was our intent to have Hezbollah diminished, and now we have someone else doing it." (As this article went to press, the United Nations Security Council passed a ceasefire resolution, although it was unclear if it would change the situation on the ground.)
...
Earlier this summer, before the Hezbolla kidnappings, the U.S. government consultant said, several Israeli officials visited Washington separately, "to get a green light for the bombing operation and to find out how much the United States would bear." The consultant added, "Israel began with Cheney. It wanted to be sure that it had his support and the support of his office and the Middle East desk of the National Security Council." After that, "persuading Bush was never a problem, and Condi Rice was on board," the consultant said.

See Hersh on CNN yesterday:



Hersh alludes to the reaction to this article in the Middle East. Will the American press actually understand how important the implications of this revelation are to our situation in Iraq? Will they even ask the President and his people for honest answers?

With a civil war breaking out in Iraq, an Arab country we occupy, did we actually encourage Israel to ferment the anti-Israeli / anti-Western flames in the Arab world? Who could possibly think that was a good idea and why are they still running this country?

Feel safer yet? Read More......

Open Thread

John's post below about Bush's summer reading got me wondering....do you think Bush heard someone talking about Camus but confused him with Shamu? That's really more his speed....

What else?

UPDATE: Speaking of books, Thomas Ricks, author of "FIASCO," was on the Daily Show tonight. Now, THAT is a book George Bush needs to read. He'd learn a lot about why Iraq is such a disaster. I'm reading it now. It's a very well written -- and frightening -- book. Read More......

Dems. won't let GOP own the security issue this year -- and won't let voters forget Iraq

The NY Times reports that the Democrats are aggressively seizing the issue of national security this year:

Seeking to counter White House efforts to turn the reported terrorist plot in Britain to Republican advantage, Democrats are using the arrests of the suspects to try to show Americans how the war in Iraq has fueled Islamic radicalism and distracted Mr. Bush and the Republican Congress from shoring up security at home. They say they intend to drive that message home as the nation observes the coming anniversaries of Hurricane Katrina and the Sept. 11 attacks.

But they are not waiting. A video Monday on the Web site of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee showed footage of Osama bin Laden, referred to an increase in terror attacks, highlighted illegal immigration and pointed out the nuclear aspirations of Iran and North Korea.

“Feel safer?” it concludes. “Vote for change.”

Rove wants national security to be the issue this year. Looks like it will be, but the Dems. are doing it on their terms in 2006. And those terms include draping Iraq around the necks of every Republican. That's the GOP's greatest fear this year.

Check out the DSCC video:

Read More......

Yeah right, somebody ask Bush to even spell Camus

Again, from Froomkin:

What is the least likely book you could possibly imagine Bush reading during his downtime?

Agence France Presse reports that Bush read French existential writer Albert Camus's "The Stranger."

"White House spokesman Tony Snow said Friday that Bush, here on his Texas ranch enjoying a 10-day vacation from Washington, had made quick work of the Algerian-born writer's 1946 novel -- in English."

Read More......

Patricia Todd should finally be declared the winner of her primary in Alabama tomorrow

When does the person who gets the most votes not win an election? We may find that out again tomorrow in Alabama.

Patricia Todd, an open lesbian, won her July 18th Democratic primary runoff for state legisture by 59 votes. But, the vote was challenged by her opponent -- actually her opponent's mother-in-law filed the challenge. So the Alabama Democratic Party formed a committee that will determine the final winner:

Todd, who defeated a black candidate in a runoff election last month, goes before a Democratic Party subcommittee on Tuesday to defend her 59-vote runoff win in House District 54, an area that includes both the richest and poorest neighborhoods of Birmingham.

A challenge filed over Todd's victory will turn solely on what happened during the vote and state election law, according to Joe Turnham, the state party chairman.

Todd's opponent has been really trying to stir things up -- claiming Patricia was trying to hide the fact she got support from the Victory Fund:

An attorney representing Hendricks in the election challenge said the case will center on claims that Todd tried to keep voters from knowing about a $25,000 donation to her campaign from the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund.

"She was trying to mislead the voters," said Hendricks' lawyer, Raymond Johnson. "Race isn't the issue here."

I don't know Patricia Todd....but I do know from following the race that she never tried to mislead the voters about being a lesbian. A friend in Birmingham (who is close to Todd, a very sharp and intelligent lawyer and a big fan of AMERICAblog) tells me that if the state party panel follows the law, Todd will be declared the winner. That's the opinion of The Alablawg, too.

There's obviously a lot of attention being paid to the outcome of this election. Pam's House Blend has been following this race, too. Pam linked to a cool blog, Birmingham Blues, which also has some good info. from the local perspective.

Because the seat is heavily Democratic, whoever wins the primary, wins the seat. That means Patricia Todd should be the first open GLBT state legislator elected in Alabama. If that doesn't happen, then something is wrong.

We'll all be watching. Read More......

BREAKING: Israeli military says 10 Katyusha rockets land in southern Lebanon but none hit Israel

Per CNN. Anyone else got anything additional to add? I don't have CNN here in Paris. Or anything else approximating a TV. Read More......

Two Bush administration officials FOX News reporters kidnapped in Gaza

A particularly dangerous predicament when you're little more than an adjunct of the Bush White House. Read More......

Senator Lieberman, it's not called persistence, it's called stalking

Brilliant sketch from the Daily Show the other night, I think we posted it, but just in case, I had to quote the ending:

JON STEWART: Sam, are you at least impressed with the persistence of Joe Lieberman? You remember his sports analogy, it's only half time, I'm coming out for the second half.

SAMANTHA BEE: Yeah, let me use another analogy: dating.

"Joe, we don't want to go out with you anymore!"

"Great, so I'll pick you up Tuesday at 8?"

See, it's not persistence John, it's called "stalking."

JON STEWART: In your opinion, Sam, there's nothing that will change Lieberman's mind?

SAMANTHA BEE: No, John, Joe Lieberman has made up his mind. If not nominated, he will run. If not elected, he will serve.

Read More......

CNN anchor Chuck Roberts calls Ned Lamont "the al Qaeda candidate"

Based on absolutely nothing, zero evidence, no sources, he referred to Lamont as "the al Qaeda candidate."

Arianna has a scathing report on the entire thing, and she's absolutely right. What Roberts did was despicable. He used Bush's old canard of quoting the omnipresent "some people" when in reality NOBODY has said any such thing. It's what you say when you simply want to make shit up.

Media Matters is demanding that Roberts be disciplined. Read More......

Senator George Allen (R-VA) accused of making racist remark to Indian-American

A Republican racist, what a suprise. Then again, Allen has had his own personal share of racist eruptions over the years, so this is nothing new.

Wonkette has the video. Read More......

Parties agree (sort of) to cease-fire

The cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah, UN Resolution 1701, isn't promising. Not too much has changed since I excoriated the plan last week, except that, and just a few days ago this would have been hard to imagine, it might be even less effective than I expected.

There was apparently a heated exchange between Hezbollah and Lebanese government representatives wherein Hezbollah indicated its intention to remain armed in areas south of the Litani river, about 20 miles up from the Israeli border, an area that up to 15,000 UN and Lebanese troops (each) are slated to secure. Israel says it will withdraw in compliance with 1701 when international forces arrive to police southern Lebanon, but UN Secretary General Kofi Annan reportedly told Lebanese Prime Minister Siniora that if Hezbollah maintains its position against disarmament south of the Litani, an international force can't go into Lebanon.

Meanwhile, even if Lebanese and international forces do cover southern Lebanon, 1701 only bans "offensive" Israeli military action, and it's unclear exactly how that's being defined. If Israel strikes weapons being transported, is that offensive or defensive? What about missile launchers being set up? Etc. And of course all it will take is a small incident -- from either side -- for the cycle of recrimination to begin anew, whether in localized skirmishes or broader flareups.

The resolution only addresses the Israeli soldiers and Lebanese prisoners issues in what's essentially a preamble section, and fails to outline hugely important factors including timing of troop movements (both in and out), defining acceptable military action, rules of engagement for foreign troops, and Shebaa Farms. It's a tenuous agreement at best. It's also worth noting that this is exactly the kind of agreement that the Bush administration insisted it wouldn't support back when the conflict began. The administration said it would only back a resolution that established an "enduring" cease-fire, one that actually resolved issues rather than postponing them. While I'm happy that 1701 passed, and that the U.S. supported it, it's worth noting that our foreign policy apparatus failed utterly to achieve its aims. American power and prestige continues to suffer due to ideological and strategic deficiencies. Read More......

Wash Post's Froomkin nails Cheney

I'm not even going to quote anything from Froomkin's piece. It's a tour de force. He has found pretty much every editorial and article out there criticizing Cheney and the GOP (and Lieberman) for politicizing the new recent terror alert. There are an entire day's worth of excellent links in Froomkin's one piece - read it, it's a gold mine.

Okay, I lied. I'm quoting this part of Froomkin's story that had me laughing out loud.

I'm not a Washington Post political reporter, but Jonathan Weisman is, and here's what he had to say in a Live Online discussion last week:

"Medford, Mass.: Exactly how is it that our sitting Vice President can get away with saying basically that people who exercised their constitutional right to vote for change (ie: Conn. primary) are helping terrorists? How is this not the headline of a story, instead of a footnote?

"Jonathan Weisman: The vice president also said the insurgency in Iraq is in its death throes, and that U.S. troops would be greeted as liberators. I'm afraid to say his utterances are losing their news value."

Read More......

Open thread

Keep forgetting. Read More......

Bill Kristol says that George Bush emboldened Al Qaeda and terrorists around the world by losing the Iraq war

That's exactly what Republican pundit Bill Kristol said yesterday on FOX.

Sure, he'll deny that's what he said, but that's the clear meaning of his words. Kristol made clear that an American withdrawal (in defeat) from Iraq would embolden terrorists across the globe.

In fact, we are going to have such a withdrawal in failure because George Bush and the Republicans lost the war in Iraq through their incompetence. Just like Vietnam, once a war is lost it's only a matter of time before you withdraw and it "emboldens" others. But also like Vietnam, once the war is lost it's lost. You have no other choice.

We'd of course not have to face an embarrassing and terror-emboldening withdrawal from Iraq if George Bush and the Republicans hadn't 1) invaded the wrong country, and 2) then lost the war through their incompetence. Had we kept our eye on the "war on terror" ball, we'd never be facing the sorry reality that George Bush lost the war in Iraq and now he's going to have to withdraw and embolden terrorists worldwide. But that's what happens when you screw up and lose.

Let's all thank Bill Kristol for clearing all that up. Read More......

No terror bump for Bush

The Bush team was in overdrive last week trying to spin the latest terror scare to their political advantage. But, so far, it hasn't worked according to the latest CBS poll:

The arrests in Britain have not helped President Bush's popularity so far, the CBS poll finds. His job approval remains exactly at 36 percent, where it was a month ago. Even the president's rating for handling terrorism – his strongest suit – remains unchanged at 51 percent.

Read More......

Cheney and Lieberman "demean democracy"

Ted Kennedy published a blistering op ed yesterday in the Hartford Courant, and said that he strongly stands behind Ned Lamont as the Democratic candidate.

Kennedy didn't criticize Lieberman for being just an anti-democracy as Cheney, but it's between the lines.

Vice presidents are notorious for serving as an administration's chief attack dog, and time and again Dick Cheney has been unleashed to accuse anyone who is opposed to the Bush administration of aiding the terrorists. But this time he has gone too far.

The comments he made on the result of the Connecticut Democratic primary - that it might encourage "the al-Qaida types" who want to "break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task" - are an attack not just on Democrats, but on democracy itself....

Cheney's comments about the election were ugly and frightening. They show once again that he and his party will stop at nothing to wrap Republicans in the flag and to insinuate that anyone who votes against them is giving aid and comfort to the terrorists. It's obvious that this administration lacks basic respect for our fundamental freedoms.

Cheney and his crowd are all for free and open elections - as long as they turn out their way. They are all for free speech - provided it supports the administration. They are all for the rule of law - as long as the law does not prevent them from doing whatever they want to do. When elections, speeches or laws are inconvenient, he does not hesitate to declare that they are helping the terrorists. I can think of no graver offense against our democracy.

Read More......

The new Paris subway trains

Very cool. No drivers. And all the cars are connected like a big segmented snake - meaning, there are no walls between the cars, you can walk down the entire length of the train like one of those big wiggly buses you sometimes see in a city.

Here's a quick tour when Chris and I headed to the plant store new the Mitterand Library.



And here's the current Paris Metro, so you get a sense of how "new" the new one is.

Read More......

Amtrak "security"

A reader writes:

I rode Amtrak yesterday, from Solana Beach (just north of San Diego) to Los Angeles. I had to show an ID which is their normal routine and then I walked to the street with my ticket looking for a place to buy a magazine or newspaper. Then, I came back to the train station, waited, and boarded the train when it came. I could have given my ticket to a terrorist! Of, course, no one checks luggage. This train goes through Camp Pendleton, very close to the San Onofre nuclear power plant, and has a layover in downtown Los Angeles. Think of the possibilities.

Why does Ned Lamont hate America? Read More......

A look at the morning papers...

Wash Post: For GOP, Bad Gets Worse in Northeast

NYT: Cease-fire begins in Israel/Lebanon.

NYT: 5 bombs kill 57 in Baghdad.

Boston Globe: Homeland Security Chief Chertoff says Bush admin. needs EVEN MORE power to spy and arrest people.

Boston Globe: Condo sales out west are tanking.

AFP: 6 years into his term, Bush feels the need to prove his "national security credentials."

AFP: London terror plots are a "political life preserver to Bush." (Kind of sad when the best thing our president has going for him is the possibility of thousands of Americans dying.)

BBC: Bill Gates says women are key to preventing AIDS, "A woman should never need her partner's permission to save her own life." Read More......

CNN wants you to be afwaid, be vewy vewy afwaid

It's a little early for a Labor Day telethon. A terr-athon? But instead of raising money, they raise fear. And Republican poll numbers.

George Bush and the Republican party would have no issue to run on if Osama and the terrorists didn't exist. They've lowered taxes until we've gone bankrupt. They can't start any more wars, though they really want to. And they've pretty much bashed everyone from women to immigrants to gays to Muslims, so it's hard to find any more internal enemies. All they have left is the fear of terror to keep the public on their side.

Ironically, the best way for the terrorists to "win" and destroy George Bush? Just go away. Read More......

Open thread

Chipped a tooth and now have a swollen eye. Not feeling too glamorous. And how are you? Read More......

Headlines we like to see

Read More......