Upcoming Vote in Senate on GI Bill

The new GI Bill passed the House yesterday, YEA! They were just a few votes short of a veto-proof vote…BOO! What's somewhat strange about the whole thing is that MANY Republicans chose to vote "present" which denied the passage of the war funds spending. Hmmm... I had been personally hoping that the Democrats would do that purposefully for many years, as a way of letting the president know that this occupation should end immediately! However, I suspect that it was a measure that would begin bringing troops home 30 days after the passage of the bill that the Republicans were actually protesting.

There was some more good news this week too though: McLame's alternative to the GI Bill, FAILED. It was a total sham anyway, he and Graham had stuck their lame proposal for vet education onto a completely unrelated bill for giving public safety workers the right to unionize. Yep, that's "straight talk" in action for you. This rejection by the Senate is a far better suited scenario for the use of the phrase "cock-block" if you ask me!

So now that the House passed it, it goes onto the Senate nonetheless, and now is the time to contact your Senators about their upcoming vote scheduled for NEXT WEEK. At the moment, the Senate is a mere 3 votes short of it being veto-proof, so lets do all we can to ensure that Bush will not deny our returning troops what they need and deserve any longer!

Because I found it rather difficult to find a list of the Senators that have yet to put their name on this most important bill (sponsor lists can be found everywhere!), I thought it would be helpful to make one. And I have marked the ones that I think are extra important, those that are probably more likely to hear you right now because they are looking for your vote this November.
***Up for reelection this year!!!

Of course I've listed everybody along with their contact info, and here’s a tip: They all receive thousands of emails almost daily, so a call is better, and a letter by snail mail actually holds the most weight. It’s true, most congressional offices consider handwritten letters to be the best gage because of the trouble it takes to send them, compared to emailing. They literally count them as more than one response because of it too.

GET CREATIVE!!!! I just found an opportunity to tell one of the Senators that have yet to support this bill what you think: Senator Enzi posted a blog on The Hill about his support for making higher education more affordable, and here was my response:

Senator Enzi, you seem to have a comprehensive understanding of the challenges Americans face when seeking a higher education. YET, you apparently don't think that this sort of aid should be provided for our returning vets? True that our economy could benefit from making education more affordable, but how about the Americans that truly deserve this help, and may need this sort of help the most? Why won't you support the new GI Bill?

NOT SUPPORTING the GI Bill:

1. ***Alexander, Lamar- (R - TN) (202) 224-4944
455 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

2. (retiring) Allard, Wayne- (R - CO) (202) 224-5941
521 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

3. *** Barrasso, John- (R - WY) (202) 224-6441
307 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

4. Bennett, Robert F.- (R - UT) (202) 224-5444
431 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

5. Brownback, Sam- (R - KS) (202) 224-6521
303 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

6. Bunning, Jim- (R - KY) (202) 224-4343
316 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

7. Burr, Richard- (R - NC) (202) 224-3154
217 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

8. Carper, Thomas R.- (D - DE) (202) 224-2441
513 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

9. *** Chambliss, Saxby- (R - GA) (202) 224-3521
416 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

10. Coburn, Tom- (R - OK) (202) 224-5754
172 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

11. *** Cochran, Thad- (R - MS) (202) 224-5054
113 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

12. Conrad, Kent- (D - ND) (202) 224-2043
530 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

13. Corker, Bob- (R - TN) (202) 224-3344
185 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

14. *** Cornyn, John- (R - TX) (202) 224-2934
517 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

15. (retiring) Craig, Larry E.- (R - ID) (202) 224-2752
520 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

16. Crapo, Mike- (R - ID) (202) 224-6142
239 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

17. *** Dole, Elizabeth- (R - NC) (202) 224-6342
555 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

18. DeMint, Jim- (R - SC) (202) 224-6121
340 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

19. Ensign, John- (R - NV) (202) 224-6244
119 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

20. *** Enzi, Michael B.- (R - WY) (202) 224-3424
379A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

21. Feingold, Russell D.- (D - WI) (202) 224-5323
506 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form
It's odd for Feingold not to support this bill, but I did see it noted on DailyKos that his office had replied that his issue with the bill is that it had not been “pay-as-you-go” resolved.

22. *** Graham, Lindsey- (R - SC) (202) 224-5972
290 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

23. Grassley, Chuck- (R - IA) (202) 224-3744
135 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

24. Gregg, Judd- (R - NH) (202) 224-3324
393 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

25. Hatch, Orrin G.- (R - UT) (202) 224-5251
104 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

26. Hutchison, Kay Bailey- (R - TX) (202) 224-5922
284 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

27. *** Sen Inhofe, James M. (R-OK) (202) 224-4721
453 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form
2/29/2008 sponsored – BUT his support was withdrawn on 4/29/2008

28. Isakson, Johnny- (R - GA) (202) 224-3643
120 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

29. Kyl, Jon- (R - AZ) (202) 224-4521
730 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

30. Martinez, Mel- (R - FL) (202) 224-3041
356 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

31. McCain, John- (R - AZ) (202) 224-2235 – OR- (703) 418-2008
241 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Campaign Contact form
Tell him that his continued disregard for the needs of our returning troops makes him completely unfit for the presidency!!! And here is his Contact page for the Senate

32. *** McConnell, Mitch- (R - KY) (202) 224-2541
361-A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

33. Nelson, E. Benjamin- (D - NE) (202) 224-6551
720 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

34. ***Roberts, Pat- (R - KS) (202) 224-4774
109 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

35. ***Sessions, Jeff- (R - AL) (202) 224-4124
335 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

36. Shelby, Richard C.- (R - AL) (202) 224-5744
110 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
E-mail: senator@shelby.senate.gov

37. ***Stevens, Ted- (R - AK) (202) 224-3004
522 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

38. ***Sununu, John E.- (R - NH) (202) 224-2841
111 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

39. Thune, John- (R - SD) (202) 224-2321
493 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

40. Vitter, David- (R - LA) (202) 224-4623
516 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

41. Voinovich, George V.- (R - OH) (202) 224-3353
524 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

42. *** Wicker, Roger F.- (R - MS) (202) 224-6253
487 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form

43. STAY TUNNED...one of these buggers managed to escape this list...

A little more emphasis…
Do you know anybody that lives in these states listed below?

These are the states to focus on, because the Senators in these 13 states have yet to sign on and are running for reelection this year - giving constituents extra leverage! The states listed below are ALL Republican incumbents too – surprise, surprise, right? They are extra scared this election cycle because there are 18 of their seats up for grabs in the Senate, and it’s no secret that things aren’t looking good for them. This list shows that there are 15 of the 18 Republicans running this year that have not signed on to sponsor this GI Bill too. Go get ‘em!!!

These key states are:

Alaska – Ted Stevens
Alabama – Jeff Sessions
Georgia – Saxby Chambliss
Kansas – Pat Roberts
Kentucky – Mitch McConnell
Mississippi – Thad Cochran AND Roger Wiker
New Hampshire – John Sununu
Oklahoma – Jim Inhofe
South Carolina – Lindsey Graham
North Carolina – Elizabeth Dole
Tennessee – Lamar Alexandar
Texas – John Cornyn
Wyoming – Michael Enzi AND John Barrasso

With the vote in the Senate scheduled for next week, clearly any energy you exert on this issue should be focused on those that have yet to commit. We really need this to be veto proof!!! However, it is always a good idea to thank your representatives too, and letting them know that you think they did the right thing by you in representing you will probably go a lot further than you’d imagine! And again, I think that paying extra attention to those that are running for reelection is a great way to go. Let these people know that their support of this very important bill is what keeps them in your favor when walking into the voting booth to reelect them this fall! A little thanks really does go a long ways in this case.
* All running for reelection.

With 43 Democrats, 12 Republicans and both Independents sponsoring this bill, it’s pretty safe to say that it has bipartisan support. What’s interesting about the Republicans (to me anyway) is that two of them are retiring this year; so what’s in it for them, except to do the right thing?

I have posted this list as it is on the Senate’s website, with the date they climbed onboard. I thought it would be interesting to leave that on the list because I think it shows who was sincerely in support – as opposed to perhaps just recently joining in because they’re “feeling the heat.” This bill was after all, introduced over a year ago!

IN SUPPORT (57 sponsors):

1. Sen Akaka, Daniel K. [D-HI] - 4/10/2008
2. * Sen Baucus, Max [D-MT] - 6/12/2007
3. Sen Bayh, Evan [D-IN] - 12/4/2007
4. * Sen Biden, Joseph R., Jr. [D-DE] - 12/3/2007
5. Sen Bingaman, Jeff [D-NM] - 2/26/2007
6. Sen Bond, Christopher S. [R-MO] - 4/7/2008
7. Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] - 2/26/2007
8. Sen Brown, Sherrod [D-OH] - 5/9/2007
9. Sen Byrd, Robert C. [D-WV] - 3/10/2008
10. Sen Cantwell, Maria [D-WA] - 4/17/2008
11. Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [D-MD] - 3/6/2008
12. Sen Casey, Robert P., Jr. [D-PA] - 5/10/2007
13. Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [D-NY] - 5/14/2007
14. * Sen Coleman, Norm [R-MN] - 3/11/2008
15. * Sen Collins, Susan M. [R-ME] - 9/24/2007
16. Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [D-CT] - 3/11/2008
17. Sen Domenici, Pete V. (retiring) [R-NM] - 2/29/2008
18. Sen Dorgan, Byron L. [D-ND] - 12/3/2007
19. * Sen Durbin, Richard [D-IL] - 3/13/2007
20. Sen Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] - 11/15/2007
21. Sen Hagel, Chuck (retiring) [R-NE] - 10/24/2007
22. * Sen Harkin, Tom [D-IA] - 6/12/2007
23. Sen Inouye, Daniel K. [D-HI] - 9/11/2007
24. * Sen Johnson, Tim [D-SD] - 12/18/2007
25. Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [D-MA] - 2/28/2008
26. * Sen Kerry, John F. [D-MA] - 3/1/2007
27. Sen Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN] - 3/6/2008
28. Sen Kohl, Herb [D-WI] - 3/13/2008
29. * Sen Landrieu, Mary L. [D-LA] - 5/23/2007
30. * Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [D-NJ] - 6/13/2007
31. Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT] - 3/3/2008
32. * Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI] - 4/17/2008
33. Sen Lieberman, Joseph I. [ID-CT] - 4/3/2008
34. Sen Lincoln, Blanche L. [D-AR] - 1/29/2008
35. Sen Lugar, Richard G. [R-IN] - 2/28/2008
36. Sen McCaskill, Claire [D-MO] - 2/26/2007
37. Sen Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] - 6/27/2007
38. Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. [D-MD] - 2/16/2007
39. Sen Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK] - 4/14/2008
40. Sen Murray, Patty [D-WA] - 3/5/2008
41. Sen Nelson, Bill [D-FL] - 3/5/2008
42. Sen Obama, Barack [D-IL] - 11/14/2007
43. * Sen Pryor, Mark L. [D-AR] - 1/22/2008
44. * Sen Reed, Jack [D-RI] - 4/28/2008
45. Sen Reid, Harry [D-NV] - 10/22/2007
46. * Sen Rockefeller, John D., IV [R-WV] - 2/25/2008
47. Sen Salazar, Ken [D-CO] - 2/28/2008
48. Sen Sanders, Bernard [I-VT] - 2/16/2007
49. Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] - 2/28/2008
50. * Sen Smith, Gordon H. [R-OR] - 3/5/2008
51. Sen Snowe, Olympia J. [R-ME] - 9/12/2007
52. Sen Specter, Arlen [R-PA] - 5/12/2008
53. Sen Stabenow, Debbie [D-MI] - 4/16/2007
54. Sen Tester, Jon [D-MT] - 3/22/2007
55. Sen Warner, John [R-VA] - 2/29/2008
56. Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI] - 6/27/2007
57. Sen Wyden, Ron [D-OR] - 3/19/2007

What Happened to THIS Guy???

Simply unbelievable!!!

Dysfunctional Congress Solution

Ever wonder why the business of Congress hasn't been taken care of since the Democrats have taken the majority? I sure have! I've also suspected that there was some stinky business going on in DC in order to keep the few good reps in Congress down too (blackmail perhaps?). It is just amazing to me that even with the hearings that have taken place, that Congress continues to allow the administration to cut them off and get away with illegal and immoral activities!

Well, one thing is for certain, the leadership is totally inept! I can't understand why the few representatives that were in favor of and openly advocating for impeachment hearings have stopped since the Democrats have taken the majority - unless it's due to the leadership somehow clamping down on them.

I might add that Reid & Peloser have recently decided that they will not even try to remove our troops from Iraq by way of legislation either, and have instead opted to support yet ANOTHER unconditional blank check for Bush's war-profiteering machine!

Below is a petition to remove some of the blockage of justice, please sign it.

Online Petition to Remove Pelosi as Speaker of the House of Representatives
CLICK HERE For The Petition

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please watch this video of my latest poli-crush ♥ Congressman Wexler - and sign his petition to hold impeachment hearings too. He is determined to do his congressional duty of oversight of the administrative branch, and we need to support his motion! Allow the hearings to determine the truth, and make way for justice to be served as was intended to be in America.

Sign Congressman Wexler's petition.

Bush Stands Alone on Iran

Just a couple weeks ago the IAEA report on Iran was released, and it essentially gave Iran a clean bill...but you wouldn't know it by the way it was reported in the US! The tides turned just a little today in media land, when our own National Intelligence Estimate (NIE)on Iran was released though.

As was well explained in the video below, the US' latest NIE on Iran's nuclear program was released today...ONE YEAR after it was completed!



In this video you will also hear about something that is getting little to no attention whatsoever, but I personally find it VERY disturbing: Wolfowitz may be BACK, as chairman of the International Security Advisory Board (ISAB). The ISAB is the board that advises the president on international proliferation matters, and that would certainly include Iran. Who better to decide whether Iran has weapons than the man that falsely accused Iraq, right? Could the rotten pattern be any more apparent people?!?!? I mean REALLY!!!

When Bush finally came to the press room today (video here), he still asserts that Iran is a threat. I must commend some of the reporters in this clip that kept at Bush too, asking about his credibility in regards to accusing Iran of having WMD. I sincerely hope this means that the media will not allow Bush get away with using the media as his war-tool again! However, Bush answered that line of questioning with praise for the improvements in the Intelligence community - almost taking credit for it too. Since most of the world now knows that the attack on Iraq was based on some very selective cherry picking of Intel info, and NOT due to bad Intel itself, then I would think this praise wasn't taken so kindly by the Intelligence community.

Another interesting point that is being asked about is what Hadley had initially said for Bush (and he reiterated in the press conference); that Bush was not briefed on the NIE until last week. As seen in the video above, Bush had said that Iran had weapons capabilities as recently as six weeks ago, and even used the words "World War Three." What I find fascinating is that if the president of the US doesn't have the benefit of being briefed on Intel reports when completed, then WHO DOES? Why did the Intel community purportedly wait an entire year to brief the president on their findings? Bush also said when asked about it, that he was not ever advised to "tone it down" in light of their findings either. These two things I find incredibly difficult to believe! In fact, it is most unlikely to be the case. I suspect that it was the administration that denied the Intelligence community their release of the report, and that we should be thankful to them for releasing it no matter how late. Perhaps the Intel community felt it was necessary in order to prevent another unnecessary war? THAT seems far more likely to be the case to me!!!

Another frightening thing about the White House press conference today was that Bush uses the same terminology that Hillary has, about "sticks and carrots" having a positive effect in regards to "diplomatic measures." Now if that was meant to harm Hillary or not, nobody really knows I suppose. I tend to think that it's more of a sign that Hillary is VERY like-minded to Bush policies, and there is plenty of evidence prior in my mind. The Democratic debate in Iowa today was just another example of how like-minded she really IS too. She also used the same language as Bush did in his conference today in regards to Iran, about how pressure on Iran has shown results. Since the NIE reported that Iran halted its program in 2003; I would argue that it may have been the attack on Iraq that year, and not the pressure that was applied to Iran long after we invaded Iraq that may have actually influenced their decision to halt their nuclear program.

What do you think?

Accountability for Contractors - And YOU?

So something finally happened, there's a chance at some accountability for private contractors' actions in Iraq - at last. We still have to wait and see if it actually isn't abolished with a veto, but I'm hopeful that Congress will be insistent nonetheless. It's important to note that this bill, commonly known as the "Blackwater Bill" actually applies to ALL contractors. Which is great since apparently some of the contractors have even been firing at US troops!!!

Another way we could stop the war profiteering is to remove the members of Congress that are appropriating unethically in their OWN FAVOR! Take Senator Dianne Feinstein for example. Not only has she voted in favor of no-bid contracts for her husband's company (working in Iraq & Afghanistan, just to name a few places), but she is also sitting on the Ethics Committee now, where she can legally ensure her immoral deeds remain "ethical" in the eyes of Congress. She may have quit the appropriations committee that gave the contracts, but...come on southern California, are you seriously going to continue to allow that war-profiteering criminal to also be her OWN police enforcement too? GET HER OUTA THERE! As well as the many, many others in Congress that have clearly chosen profiteering over precious life. I'm a giant advocate for contacting Congress for any reason; whether it be to express dismay over lack of support or bad vote, as well as congratulating on a good vote (the latter is not as often done, but just as important!). We cannot depend on the next president alone to fix this giant mess, and I implore you to keep an eye on Congress before casting congressional votes in '08 for this reason too.

What has happened with the contractors in Iraq is just one of MANY things that happens in unfettered and radically free markets. In fact, Iraq was a dream guinea pig for the radical free market yea-sayers, implemented by Paul Bremer, and based upon an economic plan that was originally born out of a desire to put an end to The New Deal. Naomi Klein has dubbed it: THE SHOCK DOCTRINE, but it's more commonly known as "Economic Shock Treatment" or as the "Chicago School of Economics." It has been followed by people such as Rumsfeld, and the economic puppets for Pinochet - who were trained to do their part by the same (and probably most notorious) economist who had created this theory, Milton Friedman. The premise stems from the CIA's use of shock, as a means of reducing prisoners to a child-like state so they may wield power over them. Friedman wanted free markets in a time that they were very unpopular, and he realized the same practice the CIA was using could be applied to the masses in cases of natural disaster, war, or any other shocking event. Today we see the Shock Doctrine in play here in the US, after the attacks on 9/11 where Bush manipulated our shock to get all kinds of policies we would otherwise be opposed to into law, as he promised to protect us. There is a short film about the whole concept that is very well done on Naomi's website as well.

i think they are perpetuating the fear and shock with the endless war, and the supposed "threats" from Iran. In order for the Shock Doctrine to keep its grip, people must remain paralyzed by fear, and Iran is just the next tool for these means. A reminder that Iran poses NO THREAT (a short, narrated by Arron Russo):


Since there is so little real understanding in the US of the Iranian people, I think it's important that we make an effort to go beyond what we are force-fed or limited to by our media. I don't think it is any accident that the media has made this war faceless and that we have not heard reports on any individual Iraqis since the war began; because if we do not feel connected to the human lives there, then it's easier for us to support their deaths - so I want to put a face and real people in the place we have labeled "our enemies." In this video below you will see what everyday life is like for Iranians; it's produced by the BBC. I think most will be surprised and even intrigued, as I was. It's beautifully done and focuses solely on their culture, different areas of Tehran, various lifestyles there, and simply based on the people overall - no politicians were interviewed for this piece.


Now, every time somebody ventures into a discussion on Iran in the US, it invariably leads to Israel, and then to accusations of Antisemitism. So I want to remind everybody (as I so frequently do), that the cabal seeking to squash Iran are the Zionists, NOT Jews. Sure, some Zionists are Jews (but certainly not all), there are also Christian Zionists, and other organizations that work in concert with them; but the fact remains that it's so far from just being Jewish people behind the Zionist movement.

It's of vast importance to differentiate between the two in order to understand what is behind, and truly motivates this verbal attack on Iran. We must not allow the Zionists hide behind their accusations of prejudice! I recently discovered this great website via the picture above on another website, the website I'm speaking of is on the sign the Rabbis are holding in the picture above. Within that site you'll find this insightful article about their visit with the Iranian president, and the following counter-protests they held in response to the ones against Ahmadinejad's visit to the US. The press release at the bottom of this article includes a speech given the night before that meeting, and it explains extremely well why Jews are opposed to Zionism. I will gladly give numerous resources to anybody that wants to read more about this too, just ask. To accept this vicious rhetoric about antisemitism, is to allow these immoral wars to continue. For those of you that still think it's a good idea to attack Iran, I ask you to please seriously consider this:


Also, this is just one tragedy that awaits our attack. Another (in brief) is that Iran could simply chose to shut-down the Straights of Hormuz by whatever means necessary; and that would seriously and so easily crush America. Not only by way of our troops, but also because it's the passage that MUCH of our energy resources travel though - amongst other things. Honestly, Iran is NOT a war the US has ANY chance of "winning."

It's not my intention to condone any beliefs held by Iranians here that are considered controversial; but I think it's important to recognize that judging another country's religion, beliefs, or lifestyle is no place for a democracy! To consider ourselves the world's "cultural police" or the ones on some sort of "moral high-ground" is a very dangerous position to take; and it's in fact, quite the opposite action of said intentions behind this stance. Please consider how long it took for you to understand your own faith, and that most devout followers of any religion believe that they may never fully understand their God or It's divine intent. So how can people be so comfortable judging another's faith with so little understanding? Almost all faiths preach that it is only for God to judge, and teach love and respect for all life. Sadly it seems that many faithful have forgotten, or chosen to ignore these very valuable principles. Most faiths believe that if you life by good example, there will be no reason to seek converting anybody because they will desire what you have and ask of you what led you there; and I suggest that to developing a desire for democracy, will work in like fashion. We as Americans are for the most part, not setting a good example in either arena.

On our side of the border, we can continue to blame the administration, and that wouldn't be so far off base, however...When are we the people going to stand up against what we know is wrong, and have known has gone on for so long?

This is a democracy after all, meaning that everything this administration does is ultimately on our hands. It's sad to hear anybody say that they still believe Bush actually intends to protect Americans from harm, especially when there seems to be evidence to the contrary popping up almost everyday! Bush's promises of protection are empty, and he's not listening to commanders on the ground, or anybody else but himself. It's time we forgive those that were blinded by shock, and time for all of us to come out of our shock so we can make way for some badly needed change! I'm thinking that perhaps what I've thought up until now was just apathy, was really just a result of shock; and I have The Shock Doctrine to thank for opening my eyes to that possibility. I really want to forgive too, so we can move on from that stand-still. As Naomi Klein surmised from her research, it's only when we are aware of what is happening to us, and when we have access to knowledge that we can resist the power that shock has over us. Part of informing ourselves involves taking responsibility for all that has passed, and actually doing something to change it.

In this New York Times OP-ED piece that was published yesterday, it so precisely lays out as to how we the people are now equally responsible for the atrocities that have followed the criminality and negligence that the administration, the media, and the Congress were initially responsible for. I was glad to see such an accurate account of so many of the things we've been told about listed in one place and yet, not resolved even one of those things - it should shame the best of us to recall it. I recommend you "get it while it's hot" too (this OP-ED article), since this publication archives fairly quick and then you have to be a member to access it. That is why I have posted it in full below. However, there are several great links within the original article, so PLEASE go read it now.

I wonder when Americans are going to stop allowing these entities to hold the power of shock over us, to let the press turn the page for us so that we forget without resolving anything, and to accept their reasoning for turning a blind eye to profiteering and violations of our rights and freedoms, and all in the name of hate?
I know now, that it will only happen, and we will only be able to have some peace, when we decide not to allow ourselves to remain in a state of shock.

PS - I'd like to thank numerous friends that are also dedicated to spreading information and offering truth. There are truly too many to name here but I think you know who you are, and I wanted to let you know that I cannot do this sort of thing without you. You also work very hard to shake-off the shock! Thank you.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


OP-ED COLUMNIST

The ‘Good Germans’ Among Us

By FRANK RICH
Published: October 14, 2007

“BUSH lies” doesn’t cut it anymore. It’s time to confront the darker reality that we are lying to ourselves.

Ten days ago The Times unearthed yet another round of secret Department of Justice memos countenancing torture. President Bush gave his standard response: “This government does not torture people.” Of course, it all depends on what the meaning of “torture” is. The whole point of these memos is to repeatedly recalibrate the definition so Mr. Bush can keep pleading innocent.

By any legal standards except those rubber-stamped by Alberto Gonzales, we are practicing torture, and we have known we are doing so ever since photographic proof emerged from Abu Ghraib more than three years ago. As Andrew Sullivan, once a Bush cheerleader, observed last weekend in The Sunday Times of London, America’s “enhanced interrogation” techniques have a grotesque provenance: “Verschärfte Vernehmung, enhanced or intensified interrogation, was the exact term innovated by the Gestapo to describe what became known as the ‘third degree.’ It left no marks. It included hypothermia, stress positions and long-time sleep deprivation.”

Still, the drill remains the same. The administration gives its alibi (Abu Ghraib was just a few bad apples). A few members of Congress squawk. The debate is labeled “politics.” We turn the page.

There has been scarcely more response to the similarly recurrent story of apparent war crimes committed by our contractors in Iraq. Call me cynical, but when Laura Bush spoke up last week about the human rights atrocities in Burma, it seemed less an act of selfless humanitarianism than another administration maneuver to change the subject from its own abuses.

As Mrs. Bush spoke, two women, both Armenian Christians, were gunned down in Baghdad by contractors underwritten by American taxpayers. On this matter, the White House has been silent. That incident followed the Sept. 16 massacre in Baghdad’s Nisour Square, where 17 Iraqis were killed by security forces from Blackwater USA, which had already been implicated in nearly 200 other shooting incidents since 2005. There has been no accountability. The State Department, Blackwater’s sugar daddy for most of its billion dollars in contracts, won’t even share its investigative findings with the United States military and the Iraqi government, both of which have deemed the killings criminal.

The gunmen who mowed down the two Christian women worked for a Dubai-based company managed by Australians, registered in Singapore and enlisted as a subcontractor by an American contractor headquartered in North Carolina. This is a plot out of “Syriana” by way of “Chinatown.” There will be no trial. We will never find out what happened. A new bill passed by the House to regulate contractor behavior will have little effect, even if it becomes law in its current form.

We can continue to blame the Bush administration for the horrors of Iraq — and should. Paul Bremer, our post-invasion viceroy and the recipient of a Presidential Medal of Freedom for his efforts, issued the order that allows contractors to elude Iraqi law, a folly second only to his disbanding of the Iraqi Army. But we must also examine our own responsibility for the hideous acts committed in our name in a war where we have now fought longer than we did in the one that put Verschärfte Vernehmung on the map.

I have always maintained that the American public was the least culpable of the players during the run-up to Iraq. The war was sold by a brilliant and fear-fueled White House propaganda campaign designed to stampede a nation still shellshocked by 9/11. Both Congress and the press — the powerful institutions that should have provided the checks, balances and due diligence of the administration’s case — failed to do their job. Had they done so, more Americans might have raised more objections. This perfect storm of democratic failure began at the top.

As the war has dragged on, it is hard to give Americans en masse a pass. We are too slow to notice, let alone protest, the calamities that have followed the original sin.

In April 2004, Stars and Stripes first reported that our troops were using makeshift vehicle armor fashioned out of sandbags, yet when a soldier complained to Donald Rumsfeld at a town meeting in Kuwait eight months later, he was successfully pilloried by the right. Proper armor procurement lagged for months more to come. Not until early this year, four years after the war’s first casualties, did a Washington Post investigation finally focus the country’s attention on the shoddy treatment of veterans, many of them victims of inadequate armor, at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and other military hospitals.

We first learned of the use of contractors as mercenaries when four Blackwater employees were strung up in Falluja in March 2004, just weeks before the first torture photos emerged from Abu Ghraib. We asked few questions. When reports surfaced early this summer that our contractors in Iraq (180,000, of whom some 48,000 are believed to be security personnel) now outnumber our postsurge troop strength, we yawned. Contractor casualties and contractor-inflicted casualties are kept off the books.

It was always the White House’s plan to coax us into a blissful ignorance about the war. Part of this was achieved with the usual Bush-Cheney secretiveness, from the torture memos to the prohibition of photos of military coffins. But the administration also invited our passive complicity by requiring no shared sacrifice. A country that knows there’s no such thing as a free lunch was all too easily persuaded there could be a free war.

Instead of taxing us for Iraq, the White House bought us off with tax cuts.

Instead of mobilizing the needed troops, it kept a draft off the table by quietly purchasing its auxiliary army of contractors to finesse the overstretched military’s holes. With the war’s entire weight falling on a small voluntary force, amounting to less than 1 percent of the population, the rest of us were free to look the other way at whatever went down in Iraq.

We ignored the contractor scandal to our own peril. Ever since Falluja this auxiliary army has been a leading indicator of every element of the war’s failure: not only our inadequate troop strength but also our alienation of Iraqi hearts and minds and our rampant outsourcing to contractors rife with Bush-Cheney cronies and campaign contributors. Contractors remain a bellwether of the war’s progress today. When Blackwater was briefly suspended after the Nisour Square catastrophe, American diplomats were flatly forbidden from leaving the fortified Green Zone. So much for the surge’s great “success” in bringing security to Baghdad.

Last week Paul Rieckhoff, an Iraq war combat veteran who directs Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, sketched for me the apocalypse to come. Should Baghdad implode, our contractors, not having to answer to the military chain of command, can simply “drop their guns and go home.” Vulnerable American troops could be deserted by those “who deliver their bullets and beans.”

This potential scenario is just one example of why it’s in our national self-interest to attend to Iraq policy the White House counts on us to ignore. Our national character is on the line too. The extralegal contractors are both a slap at the sovereignty of the self-governing Iraq we supposedly support and an insult to those in uniform receiving as little as one-sixth the pay. Yet it took mass death in Nisour Square to fix even our fleeting attention on this long-metastasizing cancer in our battle plan.

Similarly, it took until December 2005, two and a half years after “Mission Accomplished,” for Mr. Bush to feel sufficient public pressure to acknowledge the large number of Iraqi casualties in the war. Even now, despite his repeated declaration that “America will not abandon the Iraqi people,” he has yet to address or intervene decisively in the tragedy of four million-plus Iraqi refugees, a disproportionate number of them children. He feels no pressure from the American public to do so, but hey, he pays lip service to Darfur.

Our moral trajectory over the Bush years could not be better dramatized than it was by a reunion of an elite group of two dozen World War II veterans in Washington this month. They were participants in a top-secret operation to interrogate some 4,000 Nazi prisoners of war. Until now, they have kept silent, but America’s recent record prompted them to talk to The Washington Post.

“We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-Pong than they do today, with their torture,” said Henry Kolm, 90, an M.I.T. physicist whose interrogation of Rudolf Hess, Hitler’s deputy, took place over a chessboard. George Frenkel, 87, recalled that he “never laid hands on anyone” in his many interrogations, adding, “I’m proud to say I never compromised my humanity.”

Our humanity has been compromised by those who use Gestapo tactics in our war. The longer we stand idly by while they do so, the more we resemble those “good Germans” who professed ignorance of their own Gestapo. It’s up to us to wake up our somnambulant Congress to challenge administration policy every day. Let the war’s last supporters filibuster all night if they want to. There is nothing left to lose except whatever remains of our country’s good name.

Bye, Bye Civil Liberty Pie...

I'm pleased to see that the story about the Tasored student has been blasted through media outlets. However, I think that the vast majority of Americans have no idea how often this sort of thing has been happening, nor that it's been happening for several years now too. On the other hand, I imagine that the majority of those reading me here are quite aware of this fact, and I thought I'd lend a little info to back this assertion when discussing this matter with nay-sayers. I'm personally shocked at the amount of people I've seen spread across the internet that have said "the guy deserved it," or attempting to justify it by saying he was resisting arrest. REALLY? What exactly was the legal premise upon which he was arrested for the first place?!?!? As far as the argument for resisting arrest goes, I suggest these people read the Supreme Court rulings on unlawful arrest:

"An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery." State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260

"Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer's life if necessary." Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306."

Being obnoxious is not a crime, and over zealousness is not legally punishable by brute-force or law. Therefore, I post again the quote from Albert Einstein that I think is most pertinent to this matter:

"The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."

My man told me that if he'd been there, he'd most likely have been keeping that guy company in jail that night. Neither one of us could live with ourselves, allowing that to happen right in front of us and I certainly would've ended up in jail with them both. We are by no stretch of the imagination violent people, but when it comes to police brutality that violates constitutional rights - forget about it, we hate bullies! It's seriously shameful and even frightening how the people there not only allowed, but actually cheered this fascist reaction right before their eyes. No matter what "side" you're on politically, this should have been seen as a total affront to our freedom of speech. The Constitution and our First Amendment right is far from a partisan issue! If we don't defend everybody's right, then soon enough we'll find that NOBODY will be able to exorcise it. You can't support the right to be extended ONLY to those you agree with - that's 100% anti-patriotic. Whatever happened to "Sticks & stones..." people?
Remember, "First they came for the Jews..." and I seriously doubt that any American wants to find themselves with nobody left to speak out for them, when they want to express themselves - WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

So here are a few examples of how our rights to peacefully assemble and speak our minds are being violated by our system and it's officials:

Last year posted on You Tube, another student being Tasered inside the UCLA library. The main difference between what happened a few days ago and this episode from last year is that the students witnessing this atrocity were vigilant citizens. They asked for badge numbers and tried to ask why this was happening. How did we go from that to now? Is it really just a matter of it happening in California as opposed to happening in Florida? Or is it a result of another year since, of desensitization and growing acceptance of such treatment of Americans?

In an effort to lawfully post notice of the march protesting the occupation, set for September 15th, police came to arrest and harass the people from the ANSWER coalition. Say what you will about the organization itself; I've worked with them and they are extremely careful to obey all laws and regulations. Watch the video, there was no violence or even civil disobedience going on. Of the 192 people arrested at the occupation protest on the 15th, only five or so still remain in jail (in correlation to prior charges). Can anybody tell me why they needed to be arrested in the first place? Crossing the police lines was the official explanation, but that obviously didn't hold water or I'd think they would've remained in jail or been released on bail until trial - but no, they were simply released. Eerily this echoes of the thousands of "terror suspects" released without any explanation from Guantanamo, doesn't it? Even more disturbing was that a few people were sprayed with chemicals, and that detail is barely visible or rarely reported in the news.

During the Petraeus hearing, a Reverend was jumped on and forced to the ground by at least five officers and thrown to the ground so hard that his f'in leg was broken! Come on, you can't tell me that a clergyman was so out of line, or doing something so offensive in the halls of Congress that it warranted arrest and putting him in the hospital. This is completely obscene. Here is the Reverend Yearwood telling his side of that story.

Almost a year ago one of Code Pink's members was banned from DC for an entire year, or she faced six months jail time. This is just another ludicrous absurdity! At least the incident with the student a couple days ago got one of the co-founders of Code Pink into the mainstream!

If you are unaware of the abuses and incredible acts of brutality perpetrated on the victims of Katrina, then you need only Google it to get thousands of results for that as well.

There is a great book that was released last spring that chronicles the rights violations that have occurred to ordinary people since 9/11, some for the most benign acts. It's called, "You Have No Rights; Stories of America in an Age of Repression" by Mathew Rothschild.

So where does this end, and how?
I say it ends in fascism if we don't act to prevent it from continuing, and that it can only be cured by exorcising the rights afforded us by our beloved Constitution. The ability to exorcise our civil rights is literally the foundation that our democracy depends upon for its very existence.

Bush Crony & Economic Hit Men

In regards to the oil sharing plan, that the Iraqi parliament has voted against BTW (some respect we're showing for their new democracy), what's interesting is what's going on surrounding the Kurdish region. The Kurds having enjoyed security via the US ever since Desert Storm and occupying land that is incredibly oil-rich in comparison to the rest of Iraq, feels perfectly fine with selling-off shares of what they consider to be solely theirs. They may be the only region that has been a proponent for the "sharing" plan, that's really just a sell-out to foreign interests. Low and behold, earlier this month they sold shares to one of Bush's close confidants and a prominent figure in the Intelligence community as well as in US politics - owner of the Texas based, Hunt Oil; plus, the Kurds had already signed five production sharing agreements before that to other foreign companies as well.

Now being that almost all Iraqi oil is in the northern (Kurdistan) and southern regions, I guess it's fairly safe to assume that they'd rather sell it off than share the profits with their fellow Iraqis.

I personally think it's completely ludicrous to force Iraq to sell one of the only forms of revenue they have to fund their own reconstruction. To say that this is a "benchmark" for them to meet or face being abandoned by the US, and to use their compliance as a measure of their success - that's absolutely F*@CKED UP.

To pinch Iraqis and put them in a corner that they are helpless to get out of on their own, this reminds me of the book called, "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man." The premise is exactly about how the US has forced countries to sell-off their revenues to US companies for their interests (without any real benefit to the countries they are stealing from) and the only real difference is this one is being played-out right under our noses, as opposed to in coordination with Black-Ops (or covert missions). Worse yet, these hit men pretend as if they are doing these desperate people some kind of favor, while typically giving them no other choice.

It totally sickens me that US politicians have become these hit men, by threatening to abandon all efforts to repair damage done if Iraqis don't comply to selling their only hope to the ones that raped them in the first place.

(Kudos to a family member that tipped me off about Hunt Oil Inc., and to a fellow blogger that inspired me to write about this)

Fearings, nothing more than fearings...

First Chertoff's "gut feeling" tells him that there is a high risk of the US being attacked again. Then his gut gave him a more specific detail later, where he told some university students that; dirty-bombs will hit LA & San Francisco simultaneously (and watch, if it does happen; the administration will say that it was our own fault because we were warned but didn't leave - then they'll call to order the buses to "rescue" us).

About ten days ago, Bush started getting busy with the business of blurring the line between Osama's Al Qaeda, and Iraq's Al Qaeda (who thought it would be best to use a name with some notoriety), whose correct name is Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia". At first, he mentioned it with somewhat careful vocabulary, calling them Al Qaeda without clarifying. Then today I heard a clip on the radio from Bush speaking at a university, and he flat-out said that the one in Iraq is exactly the same as Osama's Al Qaeda.

Boy, they sure do like to dish it out to the college students! That's where they can get crazy with the lies, and take a lesser chance of it actually going public.

Speaking of liars...Gonzales was on the stand today, doing it again to Congress. First he said that he did not approach Ashcroft at his ICU-bedside in order to discuss the surveillance program renewal. Then he turned around and said that the documents he had in his hands that night (which just happened to be the night before the renewal was due), he said they were the renewal documents! Hello perjury? Obstruction of justice? Furthering conspiracy? Enough already.

At any rate, I have been watching the fear-machine crank-it-up ever since the all-nighter that the Senate pulled, and it just keeps repeating more frequently and feverishly. I expect plenty more of it, and I honestly wouldn't be surprised if there was a big announcement very soon about how they caught the terrorist before he could strike. Fearings...nothing more than fearings...

New Classified Cover-ups by Our Rogue Exec. Office

What do you do when you're a nation at war, several of your officials are about to be busted on a variety of felonies, and the secrecy-card is about to expire?
When is doubt...VACATION-IT-OUT!!!
va-ca-tion...all I ever wanted...va-ca-tion, GOT to get away...
Yep, since everything is going soooo well in Iraq, it's time to put it on the back burner and let it simmer. Our entire Congress and the Rogue Executive branch are going to do exactly what the Iraqi Parliament is going to do about the war - go on vacation for the entire month of August! It's beyond me how our government has the nerve to scold the Iraqi Parliament for not meeting benchmarks and going on vacation, when our Congress intends to do the very same thing! Not that the move is shocking, or strays at all from the hypocritical M.O. of this administration or anything...


Packing everything up over the last week, to try to take it with them and possibly disappear-it all with public forgetfulness?...
Here are just some of the things they have in their classified suitcase:

---1) Despite Cheney's assertion that his office doesn't require oversight in the handling of classified documents, a second person has been convicted of passing classified info (originally pleaded guilty). He sent strategic information to the Philippines, to a group that was planning a political-coup to over-throw their president. The classified documents were sent by one of Dick's former aides, via Dick's office phone/fax. He worked as a military aide for both Gore and Cheney, then was an intelligence analyst for the FBI - he was just sentenced to prison for ten years.

---2) Not only has Cheney refused oversight from the Intelligence Security Office since 2002 and suggested having it abolished. but now the Justice Department admitted that the oversight board responsible for identifying intelligence abuses didn't report a single thing for the first five and a half years of this administration! They literally ignored hundreds of claims from the FBI, determining nothing about the validity of the alleged abuses. Their first report was filed last year and I haven't looked to see if they covered anything more than 2005, but I doubt it.

---3) Cheney's Energy Task Force: There was finally some coverage of the notorious meetings; however, it was severely played-down by the negligent press. The press has generally taken the position that there was nothing to be so secretive about. The press made the release trivial, reporting; Cheney met with the environmental agencies for consultation (that he said he had) after the policy-making meetings. Instead, he consulted in at least 40 meetings with energy producers' special interest groups. I don't think the public is as concerned with the environmental groups (that Cheney didn't even bother to show up for), at least not as concerned as we are with having information as to who his consulting team consisted of, and what was said in those 40 other meetings. The press pretended that the people involved were pretty non-sequential, burying the names way in the back of articles - when it should have been front-page, screaming headline, NEWS!

As it turns out, Cheney's Energy Task Force was made-up of some lobbyists, and oil baron-types, some who later cashed-out as environmental agency workers (Dept. of the Interior), and they all helped author the US energy policy. Three of them have already been convicted in the Abramoff case, and this is the detail that Cheney is REALLY hiding. Three convicted officials that Cheney consulted with to legislate national energy policies, now convicted felons serving time for taking bribes.
PRESS: "There you go, secret revealed, strange that they fought so hard to cover this up...Move along! Nothing to see here!"

---4) While the Democrats in the Senate were holding an all-night session to get some sort of benchmark for troops withdrawal into the Iraq plan, the Republicans and pundits were busy misconstruing it as "political theater" and a "stunt." The fact that people are actually believing this, just goes to show how invested Americans are in this war/occupation; not at all. An all-night Senate session is the very least of which can be sacrificed for our troops! To call an attempt to do the will of the growing-majority of the people, and to get the business of wartime dealt with in a timely manner (as should be)...to call this a "stunt" shows absolutely no understanding of how Congress works (or is at least, a show of the belief that viewers don't understand). The press was also reporting that "Democrats couldn't achieve a simple majority"; an out-right LIE. The Republicans' filibuster required MORE than a simple majority to have it passed, and had there not been the filibuster the closure vote would have passed. The vote that didn't pass was to blocked an "up or down" VOTE, it was just a vote to end the debate; not an actual vote on the measure itself. We obviously need more action in Congress in order to get anything done thee days, and I can't understand why anybody would be so reluctant to support Congress. that amendment was far from spectacular, but it would have been the first real legislation for an exit-strategy!

Let the records show: Republican Senators have absolutely no intentions whatsoever to even allow a vote on a plan to bring the troops home.

---5) Harriet Miers (former council to Bush) is currently in contempt of Congress' subpoena in regards to the US Attorney purge scandal - on Bush's dime. Bush has not officially asserted his executive privilege - yet - nor have the documents been specified as to what may or may not be released (according to Bush). Regardless, her required testimony is being contested by Bush on this basis. Miers will be cited in contempt if things don't change soon. Chairman Conyers of the Judiciary Committee sent/released a letter today addressed to Bush's attorney to inform them that their claims of executive privilege have been deemed invalid and the committee insists upon Miers appearing - as well as the requested documents.

---6) The same judge that ruled Cheney could keep his Energy Task Force meetings secret, has now dismissed a civil suit against Cheney, filed by former covert CIA agent Valerie Plame. Plame's attorney is going to appeal the judgment of course, and I hope she looks to recuse the judge that dismissed the case on a prejudicial basis!

It seems to me that the ruling that has kept those energy meetings classified was the precedent that created the path to secrecy in which this administration has depended upon so heavily.

---7) The Executive branch found yet another opportunity to use its executive privilege, in the "friendly-fire" case of Corporal Pat Tillman; the story of how fratricide was first showcased by the government as a great American hero's sacrifice for his country, only to discover that the Pentagon knew what happened all along and had attempted to completely bury the story.

If you are unfamiliar with Tillman's story, there is a really great 7-part expose that is authored by a military man that has done several interviews with Tillman's mother. There has been some speculation that the Pentagon had decided to capitalize on Tillman's service and death, to encourage enlistments and bolster American support for the war. Some say it may have even been the purpose for his murder in the first place. That is the only thing that could possibly explain why the rest of his records are being held secret under executive privilege now. In response to a committee's request for all documents and records concerning Tillman, they received "10,000 pages" - of newspaper clippings. Upon reasserting the request for military records etc...they were refused on the basis of executive privilege, and told, "We already gave you ten thousands pages worth of documents!" Seriously, what other possible reason could Bush have for covering-up and obstructing the investigation into Corporal Tillman's tragic death?

---8) Cheney will most likely claim executive privilege AGAIN for his involvement in the illegal wiretapping program (despite his recent claims not to actually be part of the Executive Branch). Cheney's legal advisers asked for the same extension given to Bush for complying to subpoenas for documentation, and it was granted. The only real problem with the extension was that there was no rescheduled mandatory date for compliance.

WOOO HOOO! Only this administration gets ALL of the powers with NONE of the responsibilities! Well, and the next one will too, and the next...but only if we let them get away with it this time.

In the words of Lt. Col. Bob Bowman:

"If the government has nothing to hide, why is it hiding everything?"

Iraq "Progress" Impeders Punished

Dissenters Beware

The Republicans in the Senate had filibustered a vote; apparently, it's NOT so "outrageous" for them anymore. The all-night session there last night was called because of the filibuster, that was blocking a (formerly demanded) "simple up or down vote." the vote was for an actual plan to leave Iraq by next spring. I hope all the Senators that have been saying they are for an end but didn't vote that way last night are catching-it GOOD from their constituents today...Yesterday while the Senate was preparing for a long night, Bush was busy making a law to strip anybody of all their money and property if an attempt is made to disrupt or impede his stay-the-course mission in Iraq.

According to the Executive Order signed yesterday, anybody that is considered to be, "threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq" may have ALL their property and assets seized! Come on, by this standard Bush should have everything taken from him for undermining the Iraqi Parliament's legislation to begin removing foreign troops and another refusing to sell their oil!

If you read this order carefully, you'll notice there aren't many specific qualifying factors (numerous loop-holes to reach anybody anywhere); it's just a generalization that could easily include protesters, peace organizations, unions, and any other entity or organization that seeks to end the occupation of Iraq. It will be determined by the three the Secretaries; of State, Treasury, & Defense. Here are some of the ways a person could be implicated; "materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or services in support of,..." It barely provides for the protection of humanitarian efforts, but if they show any discord that is a considered a political view on how to maintain "peace or stability," then I suppose they may be subject to losing everything as well. I shudder to think how this will be abused abroad...

Now combine yesterday's constitutional-atrocity, with the two following things that have already been passed;

1) National Security Presidential Directive (NSPD) 51 / AKA: HSPD 20 on 5/9/7.

2) The Military Commissions Act (MCA) 2006 , just before the midterm elections.


1) The NSPD 51 or HSPD 20, was passed two months ago (May 9th).

This directive basically gives Bush the responsibility to manage everything in cases of "catastrophic emergency," and to declare things as such. It claims its purpose is to make everything as efficient as possible under these circumstances, but actually puts all our response agencies (such as FEMA) ultimately under the thumb and management of the president (the new shadow-government structure!).

Here are some of the more disturbing pieces of NSPD 51:

A) Definition 2b) - "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;"
* It clearly says that any location qualifies, so it could be nationally, or internationally. Meaning that any of these things could be considered "effecting the US": an earthquake in the Middle East, another Katrina or other natural disaster, a stock-market crash, another metro-bombing in London, or a protest that distracted Congress or blocked traffic in a major city. Added under another definition, the following are listed as emergencies; "...including localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies;"

B) When you circle your around to get through definitions 2c, 2d & 2h you come to understand that the president works in concert with Congress & the Judicial Branch - only as a courtesy ("comity"), because he is the ultimate Decider in all major emergencies.
* The Decider also gets to decide what is and is not, a "Catastrophic Emergency."


2) It was about eight months ago when the Military Commissions Act passed (9/27/6). Inside you find that anybody labeled an "enemy combatant" can loose their right to habeas corpus. An enemy combatant status can be given to anyone considered a threat, at the sole discretion or determination of the president (and a few other select high-ranking officials).

Some say that it's "debatable" as to whether or not the right to habeas corpus that is usually accompanied by indefinite imprisonment without a trial, can be or may not be applicable to Americans (who can, of course, be considered "enemy combatants"). I'd say this makes it completely plausible, and it hasn't been defined otherwise or more clearly since it passed. Honestly, today, I'm disgusted that I'm able to say I wouldn't be surprised if somebody told me there are Americans that have already disappeared as "enemy combatants."

As we well know by example now, Bush considers almost anybody with a differing opinion a threat. Some of the examples we have of his arrogant righteous dominance shown are; firing people (we're up to our 6th or 7th Commander on the Ground, also 9 US Attorneys removed), imprisoned dissenters (many conscientious objectors, i.e. Lieutenant Watada), put lives in danger (Plame, the CIA, Americans, & Middle Easterners), severely diminished capabilities needed for security (CIA, FBI, FEMA), disembodied or disenfranchised bodies of government (Congress and Judicial Branch), or just plain ignored them (70%+ Americans that want out of Iraq, Intelligence reports). There is no prejudice when it comes to Bush dispelling a person or entity, they only have one thing in common; dissent, a disagreement that amounts to disloyalty in Bush's mind.

Many of the people that were willing accomplices, the Yea-sayers have also been willing scapegoats, and they were sent on their way with a Medal of Freedom, freedom from prosecution, or other "rewards" for their kicked-dog loyalty. Bush is not prejudice in this regard either; even if you are a complete failure or totally destructive and disastrous you can be promoted (or further your career otherwise), financially rewarded, awarded, and sheltered beyond the reach of the law...so far anyway... Anything goes as long as you exhibit your loyalty as a consistent Yea-sayer, and an occasional scapegoat.

Libby was the last straw, because it was an act of over-riding the Judicial Branch - it was so obviously unequal, self-serving "justice." And the Republicans have the nerve to balk about "activist judges" and be mute now! That happened the same week the Executive Branch refused to recognize Congress' subpoenas.

America, WAKE UP! We have a Rogue Branch of Government on our hands!

It's not "us against them" anymore, it's "us against HIM" (or those two). I have certainly been no fan of all the ridiculous, tiring, partisan-crap but this is not even a matter of party, far from it. If we can't all come together for the sake of what is constitutionally correct, then we have nothing left to come together on. The bottom line is that I don't care exactly who it is that's violating, rewriting and dismembering our Constitution currently; I want it to stop, and I don't want anybody to do it ever again! It doesn't matter who you allow to power-grab & abuse, it would get to just about anyone and damage everyone. Imagine if your candidates' "arch enemy" got into office and had this kind of dictator-like power. If that bothers you, then you should also consider protecting your candidate from potential corruption by removing the temptation. We are all only human after all. Aside from all the other temptations (campaign funds, etc...), the only difference between our representatives and ourselves, is that they all swore an oath to protect the Constitution and we are only assumed we would do the same (even though it's technically our duty).

Calling all PATRIOTS for DUTY! IMPEACH THEM NOW!!!
Join over a million Americans; sign the petition that will deliver your message of impeachment on July 23rd.

Bush Admits Treason

Bush is asked what his position on the the fact that a covert agent's name was released by a member of the administration. Bush says he is aware of treasonous officials in his office, but he thinks it's a waste of time and money to pursue it, or even talk to anybody about it.

BusHitler’s New Data Base

Smokin’ ‘em outa their caves, with a tekniclogical hit list!

Invading our own neighbors too.

Meanwhile, right here at home, they are creating a privatized police state by way of labeling pot-growers terrorists. They have 17 different "agencies" working on this effort.

Former War Criminal, Peace Envoy Candidate

Bush has asked his partner in war-crimes, to be our new peace envoy for the Middle East:
Hot off the Stinkin' Presses @ Yahoo! Lap it up little doggie!

Last Week's Edition, Published Here

Due to a publishing glitch, last week's article wasn't posted, so I'm posting it here. The current edition will be published on Monday as usual, and the subject of it is FEAR. But take heart...because, in part...

The Jig is UP!
June 2, 2007

There have been some truly incredible developments in the US Attorney purge scandal, and if you haven’t been keeping up you can read all about it in my last two most recent articles:
Gonzo-Wolf Gate; A Neocon Nightmare
There is also more information in last weeks article:
Patriots and Pragmatists

Again I ask; what was the purpose of the scandal? Voter disenfranchisement - that’s it, plain and simple. Remember all the missing emails that the Judiciary Committee had sequestered? Of what was received, much of it was redacted, and much was suspected of missing because one of the emails coming from Rove appeared to have come from an external server (external to the White House, and from the RNC server to be exact). Anyway, the RNC claimed that they were "mistakenly" erased. Then they admitted that in order to be in keeping with the Presidential Records Act, they disabled the ability to erase emails. Rove however, had found a way around that, and he had to be given a talking to about it. Hmmm...what kind of nefarious things do you suppose he was up to? Well, you don't have to guess, because now we KNOW.

Like I'd mentioned it was all about voter disenfranchisement, and more specifically, the "caging lists" that were used to do so. Palast has an article all about caging, so I will save my breath explaining it. This isn't what's NEW though, he has been on this case for several years now...

What's new is that there has finally been some notice taken of the situation by the House Judiciary Committee! Chairman Conyers met with Palast on Thursday night and he turned over all the emails that he had intercepted straight over to Conyers. Most humorous was that these caging lists were accidentally sent to a friends of Palast's that host a site called "GeorgeWBush.org" (the official is .com), so they sent out their evil plan to deny tens of thousands of Democratic voters their right to vote.

Best of all, there was an immediate reaction to that meeting that points to certain guilt. One of the US Attorneys (Tim Griffin) was put in office to replace one of those that wouldn't comply with the evil plan, and had been fingered in Goodling's testimony last week. Griffin resigned the very next day after Palast met with Conyers. Better than that, Griffin was one of Rove's protégés and I expect we will soon hear him squealing like a little piggy before we know it!!! Let's just hope that this new and incredibly consistent Republican-policy of resigning before being successfully prosecuted before the public, doesn't deny us a proper investigation into why we really need to repeal the provision in the latest version of the Patriot Act that allowed Griffin to be seated without congressional approval in the first place. I’m also quite excited about the prospects of resolving these fraudulent election practices with plenty of time to spare (if they move on it NOW) before the 2008 elections!

There was also some nefarious behavior (or MORE I should say) on behalf of Cheney last week too. Apparently Cheney is anticipating the need to cover his ass, as he asked for his records to be destroyed. But just in case that doesn’t do the trick, he also has his lawyer arguing that revealing Plame's identity is included in his immunity as an official. Really? Do officials get immunity from treason too? Anybody want to place bets on a date for Cheney’s resignation?

There was another interesting resignation turned in on Friday as well, that of Bush’s longest serving personal aides. Dan Bartlett has been with Bush since his gubernatorial race in Texas, and had even worked for Rove before that. Bartlett merely announced his departure, but isn’t planning to leave until next month. There was no reason really given as to why he has decided to leave. He’s only 36; yet he vows not to write any books, take another government job, nor even back a candidate for the 2008 election.

Speaking of presidential candidates, there was an interesting development last week as well. Without really examining why there was a need to do it, Edwards retracted his statement that he had read the NIE before voting to authorize the war. Then Clinton Hillary did exactly the same thing. I’m assuming it’s because now that the public has now been able to take a look at those NIEs that were released the week before, that it doesn’t look right to Americans. If you actually read them it’s hard to believe that anybody in their right mind would vote in favor of that! Just as the NIEs were released at the end of the day on the Friday leading into the Memorial Day weekend, so were these statements made. Why did they wait a week? So as not to attract attention to the connection between the reports and their decision? To bury this correction in yet another weekend report, when most Americans aren’t paying attention? Yes, and yes. They were both on the Intelligence Committee, so they both had access to those reports – which means the rhetoric about how “If I knew then what I know now…”-crap doesn’t hold water. What I really think this retraction or “correction” was about actually goes much further than the media would lead you to believe. You see, there is one Democratic presidential candidate that has dealt with exactly the same scenario but had gone an entirely different direction…

Senator Mike Gravel is famous for reading the Pentagon papers in 1971' aloud on the floor of Congress, so they would be entered into the record and revealed to the public. That led Nixon to take Gravel all the way to the Supreme Court; but Gravel won his case, and therefore, the right to have done so. So what excuse does Hillary and Edwards have since Gravel had set precedent 30 years prior, for not telling the public that they knew the administration was lying to America? NONE. Senator Gravel is right, any presidential candidate that had voted for the war isn’t fit to be president – but especially those that had access to this kind of information beforehand!

What kind of reaction can we expect from Bush in such trying times? Well, if his last press conference in the Rose Garden is any indication, then I say we shouldn’t expect the fear-mongering to stop. We could also expect him to continue to lie to Americans since he went on to say that we were in Iraq “at the invitation of their government officials”; who incidentally, have already voted that we should set timetables to LEAVE, and as soon as possible! Bush added that if Iraqis had requested we leave, we would – but that’s a blatant lie. I’d say that continued crony loyalist practices are a given (even if his pals are proving to be the criminals many of us have suspected them to be), considering he is still determined to express his “total confidence” in Gonzales. Although, what I see coming down the pike as his buddies are resigning left and right is a total breakdown and there has been evidence of it happening. Two times within the last month, Bush has lashed out in idiocy at two different people that were questioning his handling of the occupation of Iraq. The most recent was a fabulous display that could only be compared to a spoiled brat that isn’t getting his way. While meeting with friends in Texas, a wild-eyed Bush thumped his chest and repeated over and over, “I am the president!” So now the Texans (and everybody) that took offense to the Dixie Chics saying they were ashamed of Bush being from Texas (their home state) should own up to feeling the same way about him being president, or get on the megaphone to try and defend that! Don’t attempt to tell me that’s something we shouldn’t be ashamed of.

Lastly, a word about Cindy Sheehan quitting the peace movement: Honestly, I don’t think she will ever completely stop, it just isn’t in here nature. I think she meant exactly what she said, that she realized that once she held the Democrats up to the same standards as the Republicans in regards to Iraq, she received the same sort of slander from the left. As a growing percentage of Americans are, she is disenchanted with the system – and frankly worn out. I know that thousands of her supporters are sad about http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2007/05/sheehan_steps_o.html”>her announcement, but truth be told, she has done more than her fair share. I had the excellent fortune as to have crossed paths with her several times, and I can honestly say that her heart is squarely in the right place. The first thought I ever had about her upon discovering what she was doing was that no matter what comes of it, she has set an excellent example for us all. She had proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that one person CAN make a difference. For that reason alone, I have to disagree with Cindy on one thing; her son did not die for nothing because she empowered thousands of Americans to stand up against the war and occupation of Iraq. It’s a painful price to pay in order to mobilize the nation, but I have to say that I can’t thank her enough for everything that she and her son had done for us all. She is exactly right to say that it’s up to us now…but then, it always has been. The war is over, and the jig is up – if you want it to be.