Holes in deFence

What's more important for the Bushies: Homeland security or month-long vacations and fund-raising for four more years? If you still think it's Homeland Security, check out this data Matt gathered at The Daily Outrage.
In short, a key aspect of the holes in the intelligence system that Bush's own people said facilitated September 11th STILL HASN'T BEEN FIXED. Why?...not because of lack of money or difficulties with legality or anything like that...but simply because the government can't figure out how to combine information from different database softwares!

They can compile lists on Americans who donate to Planned Parenthood or the ACLU, participate in peaceful protests against unjust war, or write their congressperson to voice opposition to the Patriot Act, but they can't compile one list of known terrorists who shouldn't be allowed into the US!

More on the sad state of the Union

Bush Vs Clean Air
Well, there's one battle "President" Bush IS winning, and that's his war against clean air. This article details how LA had its first smog alert in five years, proving that Bush's commitment to destroying the environment is real.


I'm adding The Smudgereport to my list of blogs (it's where I found the story above), and of particular interest
is the regularly updated Top Ten List of Conservative Idiots.

Conservative Blame Game
A common myth among right-wing bloggers and propogandists is that Sept 11th was Bill Clinton's fault for neglecting the "Intelligence" community and defence. This phantasy, of course, ignores the fact that it was a Republican-led witch-hunt that tied up the nation's leaders and law-makers (as well as costing us all millions of dollars) simply trying to prove that the President got a blowjob from an intern (interesting that the revisionists on many conservative blogs refer to her as an "underage" intern...she was 22 years old). It also ignores the fact that the Clinton administration was monitoring Bin Laden and did try to kill him on at least one occasion (for which Clinton was chided by Republicans who said the attack was only done to draw attention away from his private life).
There was a good article in Time Magazine in 2002 that spoke about this, and here's an online source I found: The Clinton administration, when passing over control of the nation to the Bush Regime, told the Bushies that Bin Laden and Al Quada were the biggest threat to the US at the time. However, the Bushies had their own agenda.

--"Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, was more interested in the national missile defence plan, and the new attorney general, John Ashcroft, was more interested in using the FBI to fight the "war on drugs" and clamping down on pornography."--

Certainly, looking back, few Americans took the threat of terrorism on US soil as seriously as they should have. But for the Republicans--who's "moral crusades" against homosexuality, the President's adultry, and pornography (remember Ashcroft spening 8,000 dollars to cover up the Spirit of Justice statue's exposed breast...talk about symbolic!) as well as an obsession with spending billions of dollars on the Reagan phantasy of "Star Wars" diverted attention and funds from true defense--to point the finger at another group is the height of hypocrisy.

Another Voice
Finally, for those who haven't read enough about how Bush lied to everyone to start his war in Iraq, here's another summation from a new source, The Village Voice.

Looking around the News Today...
So, I just perused CNN and the following stories caught my eyes.

Hey...anyone remember that little "war" in Afghanistan? That's right, it's number one on the list of places the Bush Regime has "cleaned up".

The people of Australia--following the lead of the British public--are waking up to the fact that they were lied to about the danger Saddam posed to the world. That only leaves the US public (and media) who continue to happily keep wool pulled over their eyes.

More on the US's attitude toward the UN in regards to Bush's New Emperialism: "We attacked in defiance of your approval and laws, we kept all the spoils for ourselves, we won't allow non-US businesses to drill Iraqi oil, but hey...wanna send some troops so some people other than Americans can start dying?"
(Hesiod over at counterspin has a good piece on this, too. See "Something for Nothing")

And finally: Once again, we must all thank god for the NRA. If they weren't protecting us all from the evil, liberal gun-haters, this sportsman might have been denied his god-given right to hunt.

(Note: I use CNN as a source from time to time to battle the "liberal media" BS that conservatives like to sling. After their Tow-the-Party-Line coverage of the War in Iraq, no one can reasonably argue that CNN is a member of that mythical "liberal media". Of course, there are still nuts out there--a frighteningly high number of them--who'll argue anything to the left of the Fox propoganda network is "the liberal media", but those people are beyond my ability to reach.)

Oh yeah, and on the entertainment front: Here's a movie the Pope doesn't want you to see. That's about all the encouragement I need!

UN targeted in Iraq

Okay...is there anyone out there who still believes that the US invasion and occupation of Iraq made it any safer? It's not only a dangerous quagmire for Iraqis and the US soldiers who've been hung out to dry by the Bush Regime, but now it's even more dangerous for international groups trying to actually HELP the Iraqis. It's quite telling that it was in the US's wake of destruction that the UN suffered the single worst attack in its history.

As I mentioned a few days ago, this policy of "we'll bomb it to smithereens...you other guys can clean up the mess" will eventually start to piss off the civilized countries who try to restore peace.

As Kofi Annan lamented, rather understatedly, at a news conference in Stockholm, "We had hoped that by now, the coalition forces would have secured the environment for us to be able to carry on. That has not happened."

Kofi Annan knows it. The Iraqis know it. The families of the 125 US soldiers who've been killed since "hostilities ceased" (61 by enemy fire, 64 by accidents) and the 400 who've been injured know it. The families of the several dozen international soldiers who've died and scores who've been wounded know it. I know it. You know it. The British people raising hell at Tony Blair know it. So...I'm looking at the US, and I'm asking myself once again (to borrow a phrase from, of all people, Bob Dole) "Where is the outrage in this country".

At a minimum, every American should shake their head in disgust at the nerve and hypocricy of George Bush to call anyone else a killer or an enemy of peace. At best, they should be writing their congresspersons and demanding he be held accountable.

More on Arnold

I'm watching Arnie's press conference right now on life TV, and I have to say I'm impressed. As I've already commented on in previous posts, this is one seriously UN-republican Republican. Among other things, he stressed that You HAVE to attack the deficit (ahem...Mr. "President", are you listening?). He also said "Does that mean Education is Under attack...NO". Then, after added a time-honored Republican promise (I won't raise taxes), he followed it up with some sound common sense (exactly what George Bush I didn't show): after a question from a reporter, he said "You can never say never. I can't stand here and say I will NOT raise taxes ever, because I don't know what might happen in a year."

And, an issue I wrote about before, he talked strongly and passionately about after school initiatives he's backed. Listening to him talk about the importance of helping families, especially poor families, and knowing that he's given millions of dollars and many hours of his own to that cause, I'm thinking: this guy can not only teach other Republicans a lot, he can teach ALL politicians.

Oh yeah...and he's not accepting any campaign contributions. If that's true...well, my hats off to him.

Toning it Down

Yep...I've realized that finding info for this blog on a near-daily basis is just way too depressing; it's getting me back to being the anger-or-despair-filled creature I was back when I was unforunate enough to LIVE in the US. So, I think I'll just post once or twice a week now.
I don't think anyone's reading it anyway.

For today's shake-your-head-in-disgust story, check out Matt's article at The Daily Outrage to see how Dick Chenney is sending you the bill for a millionare party he attended while on vacation. Oh, and he didn't drive there, and he didn't just fly in a jet...he took TWO blackhawk helicopter, TWO airforce luxury jets, and an airforce transport full of luxury cars.


US vs Them
Looking around the net at "regular" news sites and other blogs, it's disgusting to see how thoroughly the Bush Regime has succeeded in convincing Americans that they are alone against the world.

The spite and vehemence with which people from the US are mocking the French and even celebrating their suffering is horrible by itself. Then, couple it with the way people are acting like a 24-hour power loss in the US is a national tragedy (I actually saw a headline "New Yorkers Remember Personal Experiences During Tragedy"!), and it's just hideous.

Accepting repsonsibility...
It's sad when your country can take lessons on responsibility and accountability from LIBYA, but that's what the US is looking at right now.

As the Libyan government has accepted full responsiblity for the 1988 bombing of the Pan Am flight that crashed in Lockerbie, Scotland and agrees to pay reparations to the family members, we must ask: when will the US government do the same for the 1986 bombing of Tripoli, which also killed civilians (and sparked the '88 bombing in retaliation). Not only will the US NOT apologize, though, they're reportedly not even going to lift sanctions.

The East Coast Blackout
Ok, the blackout in NYC and other places in the Eastern US and Canada has raised some important issues. As usual, the mainstream (conservative) media isn't focusing on any of them, but rather is only repeating that this does not SEEM to be an act of terrorism (YET) and, wow, aren't New Yorkers great and orderly and kind and respectful...

Buzzflash has a great summation of Bush and the Republicans' history of voting down attempts to upgrade the power grid, which Bush said on television yesterday he has supported "...all along".
I was going to write something about this, but after seeing the complete and concise job they did at Buzzflash, there's no reason to do anything but link you there. Please go there. It's another example of Bush LYING outright to the American people, complete with the hard evidence to prove it.

The other point to be brought up is this: Iraqis have been without power for nearly FOUR months now, and the temperature there regularly climbs above 110 F (43 C).

Hung out to dry

That phrase describes our troops AND the people they've "liberated".

Counterspin brought this article to my attention, detailing how the Bush administration is now trying to withhold a pay-raise that was approved by Congress a while back, for those soldiers serving in hostile areas and separated from their families.

Now, after having been lied to, used as pawns in a global game of "New Colonialism", chastised and disciplined for speaking out to the press, and having their wives be called traitors for voicing dissatisfaction also, the soldiers--some of whom have been stationed in Afghanistan for more than a year, while others have been in Baghdad for several months where an average of one soldier dies each day--are being denied their combat pay.

Each time I think I can't be shocked again by Bush's audacity...and the Hawks were always telling the anti-war people WE were going against the troops!

As for Afghanistan...well, that place is in worse shape than it was under the Taliban (with the exception of Kabul, which is marginally better). If Iraqis think they're suffering now, they should look at Afghanistan and see what a country looks like more than a year after having "freedom installed" there by the US army.
Not only is the country in shambles, with international aid organizations pulling out due to the danger from resurging Taliban attacks as well as general bandits and lawlessness, but the US has basically abandoned ship, leaving UN peacekeepers to clean up the mess.
(there was a great story on CNN World Edition today, but I can't find anything on their website...here's a couple of related stories. A quick search will turn up others showing how German and Dutch troops have been left to clean up the US mess.)

Iraq is following the same path, with violence escalating in the country and the US now asking NATO to help out. A clear pattern is visible to Bush's invasion policy: The US will bomb the crap out of whoever it likes, US companies will get sole access to any resources and "spoils" of war after the enemy regime falls, then other nations can clean up the mess.

It's a "We're keeping all the oil, but you can have some of the casualties" kind of deal. It would be nice to see European countries stand up to the US and say "you filled your bed with landmines, YOU sleep in it", or tell them where to shove it. (Un)fortunately, though, European nations have a social conscience.

Fox Sues Al Franken
Giving us all yet another reason to shake our heads in dismay and wonder how anyone can take them seriously, FoxNews--the conservative propoganda network that masquarades as a news source--is suing comedian and writer Al Franken. Franken's new book is titled Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right.

It seems Fox objects to the phrase "fair and balanced" being used in the title, a phrase which the network apparently was able to register as a trademark.

So, any of you out there who regularly use these words, be careful! Make sure, from now on, you say "balanced and fair"; if you say them in the opposite order, you could be sued by the Fox propoganda network.


More on the No-NRA-in-IRAQ thread.

As I wrote ten days or so ago, there's no NRA in IRAQ, so no ones decrying the fact that Iraqis are being denied the right typically trumpeted by conservatives as "the most important one to protect freedom".
Well, it goes further. Not only are Iraqis not allowed to own any weapons (even as Bush declares "Freedom is taking hold in Iraq"), now they can be shot on sight if seen with a weapon or talking to someone with a weapon.

I saw this reported on numerous news outlets; here's the story as the Washington Post ran it.

--Lt. Col. Steve Russell, the regiment's commander, said that anyone carrying weapons is automatically considered to be a combatant under U.S. forces' rules of engagement. When the suspected arms dealers pulled weapons from the trunk of their car, Russell said, "at that moment they became enemy."--

Floods and Heat-waves...Oh yeah...and that war dealy

So, last year at this time my adopted home city (Prague) was under several meters of water after the worst flood in more than 100 years. This year, it's having the hottest summer on record...since the capitol started recorded temperatures in 1775!

On one hand, I wonder if next August will bring a plague of locusts. On the other hand, I think a more likely cause than mythological devine punishment is a general warming trend in the climate, and--more importantly--I wonder if it's caused by human corruption of the environment. A majority of scientists around the globe think it is the latter; George Bush, of course, does not.

When we're able to spend Christmas Day on the beach in our bikini's in a couple decades, I guess we can all thank George and remember how heroically stood alone against the tyrannical, oppressive environmentalists (and more than a hundred other governments) and opposed the Kyoto Conference.

Not much new going on news-wise that I want to comment on. So I thought I'd rewind to a few months back. This speech by Howard Dean is a fine summation of the overwhelming world opposition to the US-UK war against Iraq. Several months after the "war ended," most of the questions he raised still stand.

--"I believe that the President too often employs a reckless, go-it-alone approach that drives us away from some of our longest-standing and most important allies, when what we need is to pull the world community together in common action against the imminent threat of terrorism."

"Yes, Saddam Hussein is evil. But Osama bin Laden is also evil, and he has attacked the United States, and he is preparing now to attack us again.

What happened to the war against al Qaeda?

Why has this Administration taken us so far off track?"

I especially like this part, taking other Democrats to task for caving like sychophants...

"That the President was given open-ended authority to go to war in Iraq resulted from a failure of too many in my party in Washington who were worried about political positioning for the presidential election." (emphasis added)

Religious Republicans decree: Pregnant Women Must Die

So, those of you who read my rants will have already seen this, but I thought I'd post it here for the two people who read my blog. Nothing new to post because I'm dealing with the damn computer virus. This was written a while back, and I'm not sure where the proposed bill stands now (maybe it's already law), but the point still stands.

For those of you who live in the US, here's a terrifying scenario to consider. It's written from the male point of view, but the women should get the affect just as easily.

It's every soon-to-be-parent's worst nightmare. After nine months of anticipation and planning, the big day comes, but instead of being a joyful experience, one short, horrifying sentence from the doctor turns it all into a nightmare.
"There's been a complication, Mr. So-and-so." And suddenly, your whole life is different. Like several hundred unfortunate women each year, your wife has suffered a life-threatening complication during childbirth. As you struggle to get understandable information from the medical staff, it only gets worse. Within an hour, you've been solemnly told that the complication will be fatal.
Now you have an agonizing decision to make. You and your wife and your doctor (and your gods) have to decide whether to save her life or the babies. Maybe you discussed it with your wife beforehand, just in case, but that's highly doubtful. So, who dies...your wife, your partner for life (and possibly the mother of other children), leaving her new baby (and any other children) to grow up without a mother, leaving you to raise them alone...or your new baby, the pride and joy that's grown inside her for nine months? Who dies?
Can you imagine a harder decision...a worse situation?

Well, guess what...you don't have to worry now, because Congress has made the decision for you. You don't have to make the choice anymore...in fact, neither you, your wife, the doctor (or your gods) get any say whatsoever. Led by John Ashcroft and other reactionary Republicans--who, in a sick twist of irony, call themselves "pro-life" and "pro-family"--the US Congress has passed a law to decide just such a situation. There is no choice. Your wife must die. Nevermind that it's not certain the newborn baby will survive the birth, while an emergency dialation extraction procedure would certainly save your wife, you needn't worry yourself with the decision. Congress has decided. The potential life of a newborn is worth more than the life of a fully-grown, productive woman with family members who love her.

If you're not outraged, you should be. This is one decision the politicians DON'T have the right to make. The "Partial Birth Abortion Bill" has been politicized to such a degree that few people are aware of the reality anymore. The right-wing fanatics have most people convinced that women carry babies for nine months and then suddenly decide "hmmm...I don't want this after all," and have an abortion. It's untrue. These procedures are done to save the mother's life. Yet the hardcore right-wingers like Ashcroft have refused to allow provisions protecting the life of the mother, and that's why the bill hasn't passed (until now).
These are not "birth-control" abortions, they are "theraputic" abortions, ie: to save the woman's life. Such abortions were allowed even BEFORE Roe v. Wade. Yet, if John Ashcroft has his way, doctors who find their patients in such situations will no longer be able to use the method officially endorsed by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Instead, they will be forced to try to deliver the motherless baby, while the father helplessly watches his new child extracted from his partner's corpse.
Yeah...sure sounds "pro-family" to me.