The Bush Watch - Chapter 2

[Miulang]

Hahahaha!

Might be on C-SPAN; doubt any of the other stations would have the balls to carry it. Convenient that the Republicans don't want the hearings to be actually held in the halls of Congress; the Dems have to hold it at DNC HQs. And then the Republicans can claim partisanship. Talk about dirty politics!

Miulang

The ever-resourceful John Conyers and fellow Democrats, not to be outwitted by their adversaries, have figured out a way to have their forum on Capitol Hill after all...

HEARINGS ON DOWNING STREET MINUTES MOVED TO U.S. CAPITOL AND MOVED TO 2:30

Important Speakers Added to Line-Up at Rally

Citizens urged to lobby Congress Members and Senators, and to meet at DNC, which is serving as overflow room

On Thursday June 16, 2005, from 2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. in Room HC-9 of the U.S. Capitol, Rep. John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, and other Congress Members will hold a hearing on the Downing Street Minutes and related evidence of efforts to cook the books on pre-war intelligence.

The hearings had been planned for the Democratic National Committee offices because the Republicans controlling the House Judiciary Committee had refused to permit the ranking Democratic Member to use a large room on the Hill. http://www.thehill.com/thehill/expor...ome/index.html

However, the Democrats did have access to a small room in the Capitol, and Congressman Conyers has decided to move the hearings there. This does not indicate any change in position from the Republicans.

Members of the media will be welcome (press credentials required), but citizens in town for the 5 p.m. rally at the White House will have difficulty getting into the 2:30 hearings.

The DNC will serve as an overflow room, so people can still go there: the Wasserman Room at 430 S Capitol St. SE.

AfterDowningStreet.org encourages people, instead, to spend the afternoon lobbying their Congress Member and two senators, and paying special visits to the offices of Congressmen John Conyers and Maurice Hinchey, Congresswomen Barbara Lee and Lynn Woolsey, and Senators John Kerry and Ted Kennedy to thank them for their leadership. Recommended talking points can be found in a one-page document at the top of www.afterdowningstreet.org.

Later on the same day at 5:00 p.m. ET in Lafayette Square Park, in front of the White House, a large rally will support Congressman Conyers who plans to deliver to the White House a letter addressed to President Bush and signed by over 500,000 Americans and at least 94 Congress Members. The letter asks the President to respond to questions raised by the Downing Street Minutes.

Among those speaking at the hearings will be:
Joe Wilson, Former Ambassador and WMD Expert; Ray McGovern, 27-year CIA analyst who prepared regular Presidential briefings during the Reagan administration; Cindy Sheehan, mother of fallen American soldier; John Bonifaz, renowned constitutional lawyer and co-founder of AfterDowningStreet.org.

Among those speaking at the rally will be:
Congressman John Conyers (schedule permitting); Congresswoman Barbara Lee (schedule permitting); Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey (schedule permitting); Congressman Maurice Hinchey (schedule permitting); Cindy Sheehan, Co-Founder of Gold Star Families for Peace; John Bonifaz, Co-Founder of AfterDowningStreet.org; Medea Benjamin, Co-Founder Code Pink/Global Exchange; Stephen Cleghorn, Member of Military Families Speak Out; Rev. Lennox Yearwood, Board Member of Progressive Democrats of America; Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst; Reg Keys, Member of Military Families Against the War, challenger to Tony Blair in last election (flying in from UK); William Rivers Pitt, Reporter for Progressive Democrats of America; Leslie Cagan, National Coordinator of United for Peace and Justice; Kevin Zeese, Director of Democracy Rising

[Miulang]

Re: The Bush Watch

Here's an interesting little thoughtpiece on similarities between the citizenry of Nazi Germany and Americans today:

"...The situation in America today is quite different from wartime Germany. There is still a free press even though it is a toady corporate press without heart or courage. There is an opposition party even though it is a toady opposition. Bush is not a dictator even though a toady Congress has permitted Bush to accumulate power in the executive branch at the expense of both civil liberties and the separation of powers established by the Constitution. Americans have an abundance of hard facts available to them from a world press via the Internet. Americans have the weapons inspectors' reports, expert testimony, and now top secret British government documents leaked to the Sunday Times (London). The documents reveal that the British government regarded Bush's premeditated invasion of Iraq as illegal and had concerns that Prime Minister Blair and cabinet ministers could be brought up on war crime charges for participating in naked aggression. The documents reveal that Bush's decision to invade Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with the reasons he gave the US Congress and the American people and that the "intelligence" he cited to justify his invasion was concocted and fabricated...."

The implication is that if we do not ask questions of our government (i.e., become the "loyal opposition") then maybe we deserve what we have.

Miulang

[Miulang]

Re: The Bush Watch

The author of this article believes that under the current political conditions that exist in this country, impeachment of the President is virtually impossible. But she does pose a few suggestions on how un-brainwashed patriotic Americans can take back their country. How about a "state murder" on the grounds of protecting yourself?

Miulang

[Miulang]

The GOP is sweating bullets now

Here are the latest results of an ongoing AOL poll on the President's popularity and effectiveness. I doubt anyone would say that the AOL audience is all blue-staters, either, so I think this doesn't bode well for the GOP in 2006. I bet there are going to be a lot of defections in the coming months (as in Republicans not always voting the party line...for instance, we have Freshman Congressman from WA, Dave Reichert, who's in deep caca with the Republicans now because he wants the police to continue to have the funding they need...he's the police capt. who helped capture the Green River Killer):

How do you rate Bush on the economy?
Poor 76%
Fair 12%
Good 7%
Excellent 5%
Total Votes: 22,582

How do you rate Bush on overall foreign policy?
Poor 81%
Fair 8%
Good 6%
Excellent 5%
Total Votes: 22,582

How do you rate Bush on the Iraq war?
Poor 85%
Good 5%
Excellent 5%
Fair 5%
Total Votes: 22,634

[Miulang]

Re: The Bush Watch

To anyone who thinks little or nothing of the recent revelations about the White House's fabrication of the truth, consider the interesting parallels to the Presidencies of Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton and then George W. Bush.

Miulang

"...As President Clinton said "It all depends on what the definition new is." Well he didn't really say that, but in teen age speak "you know what I mean." To see the details look at URL http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/.

Consider that in the run up to President Nixon's resignation: (1) there was nothing new that President Nixon played dirty tricks that is why his nickname was tricky Dicky; (2) there was nothing new that former federal black bag men were hired by CREEP (the committee to reelect the president) to burglarize the democratic offices of the Watergate that came out during the McGovern campaign for president; and (3) there was nothing new that President Nixon wanted Watergate to go away. What was new was the details of the story.

Consider that in the run up to President Clinton's impeachment: (1) there was nothing new that Clinton chased skirts; (2) there was also nothing new that Clinton asked Paul Jones for oral sex (sounds so sterile); and (3) there was also nothing new that Clinton defined sexual relations as coitus (oh so polite). So what was new was the pornographic details of his relationship with Monica. I could have done just as well without them.

Consider that up until now (1) there is nothing new that President Bush was out to remove Hussein independent of rationale; (2) there is nothing new that Bush fabricated (exagerated lied) about evidence; and (3) there is nothing new that Bush is lying now about Iraq and its rationale. What is new is that Bush conspired with Great Britain in a cover up. The minutes are direct evidence of a conspiracy from a coconspirator.

Practice tolerance, kindness and charity.
by lwelsch (PolitcalThoughts@comcast.net) on Wed Jun 15th, 2005 at 01:17:21 PM EST "

[Miulang]

Re: The Bush Watch

Karen Kwiatkowski, a former USAF Lt. Col., learned in 2002 of the White House's intentions to orchestrate a regime change in Iraq. For several months, she went "under cover" and wrote some pieces under an assumed name in order, she said, to preserve her sanity. When she finally retired in 2003, she stepped from the shadows and is now writing publicly about what she learned during her time in the Pentagon under the command of the current Administration.

"...The neoconservatives pride themselves on having a global vision, a
long-term strategic perspective. And there were three reasons why they felt
the U.S. needed to topple Saddam, put in a friendly government and occupy
Iraq.

One of those reasons is that sanctions and containment were working and
everybody pretty much knew it. Many companies around the world were
preparing to do business with Iraq in anticipation of a lifting of
sanctions. But the U.S. and the U.K. had been bombing northern and southern
Iraq since 1991. So it was very unlikely that we would be in any kind of
position to gain significant contracts in any post-sanctions Iraq. And those
sanctions were going to be lifted soon, Saddam would still be in place, and
we would get no financial benefit.

The second reason has to do with our military-basing posture in the
region. We had been very dissatisfied with our relations with Saudi Arabia,
particularly the restrictions on our basing. And also there was
dissatisfaction from the people of Saudi Arabia. So we were looking for
alternate strategic locations beyond Kuwait, beyond Qatar, to secure
something we had been searching for since the days of Carter - to secure the
energy lines of communication in the region. Bases in Iraq, then, were very
important - that is, if you hold that is America's role in the world. Saddam
Hussein was not about to invite us in.

The last reason is the conversion, the switch Saddam Hussein made in the
Food for Oil program, from the dollar to the euro. He did this, by the way,
long before 9/11, in November 2000 - selling his oil for euros. The oil
sales permitted in that program aren't very much. But when the sanctions
would be lifted, the sales from the country with the second largest oil
reserves on the planet would have been moving to the euro.

The U.S. dollar is in a sensitive period because we are a debtor nation
now. Our currency is still popular, but it's not backed up like it used to
be. If oil, a very solid commodity, is traded on the euro, that could cause
massive, almost glacial, shifts in confidence in trading on the dollar. So
one of the first executive orders that Bush signed in May [2003] switched
trading on Iraq's oil back to the dollar...."

Miulang

[Miulang]

Re: The Bush Watch

William Rivers Pitt, an internationally known author and contributor to Truthout.com, shares his thoughts on what might be an historical event tomorrow in Washington, DC, the hearings into the articles of impeachment and the public demonstration to be staged afterward in front of the White House.

More than 100 Congresspeople (both Democrat and Republican) and close to 1 million citizens have signed the petitions that will be delivered to the White House tomorrow.

Miulang

[Miulang]

Re: The Bush Watch

Depending on how cynical you want to be about the whole thing, the House today approved, by a margin of 238-187, to limit the powers of the FBI and other government agencies to secretly gather lists of library books or book purchases of citizens without probable cause.

The concession by 38 Republicans who voted for the measure to restrict illegal obtaining of the lists by the government either is a slap in the face of George Bush, who is threatening to veto $57.5 billion bill to fund activities next year for the Justice Department and other federal agencies (of which this measure now becomes part of) if any portion of the soon-to-be sunsetted Patriot Act was diluted, or is a last minute attempt to save their own political asses in 2006.

"...Assistant Attorney General William Moschella, in a letter to Congress dated on Tuesday, said the law has been used to obtain records of driver's licenses, apartment leases and credit cards, and that the administration has used it "judiciously and responsibly."

Bookstores and libraries, Moschella wrote, "should not be carved out as safe havens for terrorists and spies, who have, in fact, used public libraries to do research and communicate with their co-conspirators."

Last year the House defeated a similar proposal offered by Sanders. This year's version deleted references to material read on the Internet and would also maintain federal agents' ability to more easily scrutinize business records that could point to suspicious activities..."


Either way, this vote was highly symbolic anyway, because this particular provision that was debated has never been used on a library or bookstore since it was originally instituted.

Miulang

[pzarquon]

Re: The Bush Watch

The Downing Street Memo is significant, but overall, I really don't think it's enough to get into a froth about (at the time of its release, even the supposedly complicit mainstream media was predicting military action was a given). I was beginning to think that harping on it was going to backfire, given that folks were all up in arms over just two lines or so.

But, fortunately, its release has more importantly prompted the discovery other British documents which contain considerably more meat that the single "Downing Street Memo," and that altogether make a stronger case that a plot was afoot much earlier than previously known. (Actually, folks suspected plans were in place the day Bush II was sworn into office... but these documents show that they were so eager, they held official meetings about it.)

For those who think that all of this is no big deal, let's just remember exactly what offense eventually led to Bill Clinton's impeachment.

[Miulang]

Re: The Bush Watch

If you really want to hear about how those other documents fit into the ugly picture that is emerging, check your C-SPAN 2 programming notes for tonight. They will be rerunning the hearing that was held by the Democrats yesterday. Some of what came out the majority of Americans have not heard yet, but has been poohpoohed by both the White House and the media as "trivial" and "stuff that's already been discounted."

Verrrrrry interesting. This is more like the Nixon days than the Clinton days. But I guess that kind of dates me, huh. And remember that Nixon resigned from office because he KNEW he would be impeached over Watergate if he didn't. Maybe W will do the same and save the country from the embarassment of dragging him and his administration through impeachment hearings.

Miulang

[Miulang]

Egads. Even the Eskimos hate us now!

"...Inuit hunters threatened by a melting of the Arctic ice plan to file a petition accusing Washington of violating their human rights by fuelling global warming, an Inuit leader said on Wednesday. ..."

I mean, for chrissakes! The ESKIMOS, who are stuck waaaaay up north, away from the choking fumes from cars and other pollutants, claim that the US is polluting their hunting grounds because of greenhouse gases...
Thank you, George Bush, for not caring about the environment and for refusing to be one of the signatories of the Kyoto Protocol.

Miulang

[Miulang]

What the hell?

Just when you thought you had heard enough about Terri Schiavo, Mungo's brother Jebbie has to go stir the pot up again after the coroner's inquest reported that the pathologist couldn't give a definitive reason why she collapsed in the first place (even though she suffered irreparable brain damage and could never recover) by asking a prosecutor to investigate the "suspicious" gap in time between when she allegedly collapsed and when her husband placed the 911 call.

What the hecuba is he trying to prove, anyway? And why is he even bothering to interfere in this case? Isn't it bad enough that he stood by and told the Schiavo family that his hands were tied by the laws of Florida so he couldn't have the feeding tube reinserted? Is this how he intends to make amends to the family for his inability to do anything while she was alive?

Seems to me Jebbie has the same singleminded thinking that his older brother has, to pursue something beyond when everyone else says, "enough already." Either that, or he's been watching too many CSI or Cold Case episodes and wants to be one of those forensic pathologists...

Miulang

[Miulang]

FBI says terrorism expertise not required in top jobs

Here is another indication why the government bureaucracy is messed up. In business, very often top leaders (All the "C" positions) are chosen not because they happen to be content matter experts, but because of what they call in the career development industry, "transferrable skills".

That's fine in most industries. But not in the case of a government entity like the FBI, which is supposed to be providing intelligence to help us combat terrorists in this country. The FBI, in sworn testimony, says that having key positions filled by people with anti-terrorism experience "is not necessary and not a priority".

If the leadership of the FBI doesn't know anything about terrorism, the Middle East or how to work with foreign governments, how can they expect to know if what their underlings are doing is correct? The FBI is only supposed to be dealing with domestic investigations (the CIA is supposed to be our tool on the international front) but if the FBI isn't talking to the CIA, how are the domestic anti-terrorist investigations being conducted now? Small wonder that the number of Muslim in this country who have been detained (somewhere around 400) has only resulted in a handful of cases where a direct link to terrorist cells has been documented. Most of the other people were rounded up for things like immigration violations and "lying to the government".

Miulang

[Miulang]

Re: The Bush Watch - Chapter 2

Heh heh. "Memogate" (the British leak of the Downing St. memo and other incendiary evidence that the White House was planning to attack Iraq and fixed the facts to support the decision) is now becoming "Floodgate". The Brits have released another set of papers that purports to show evidence that the Bush Administration has, for the past 2 months, been trying to undermine Tony Blair's attempts to get agreement among the members of the G8 to tackle the issue of global warming:

"...The documents show that Washington officials:

Removed all reference to the fact that climate change is a 'serious threat to human health and to ecosystems';
Deleted any suggestion that global warming has already started;
Expunged any suggestion that human activity was to blame for climate change.
Among the sentences removed was the following: 'Unless urgent action is taken, there will be a growing risk of adverse effects on economic development, human health and the natural environment, and of irreversible long-term changes to our climate and oceans.'

Another section erased by the White House adds: 'Our world is warming. Climate change is a serious threat that has the potential to affect every part of the globe. And we know that ... mankind's activities are contributing to this warming. This is an issue we must address urgently.' The government's chief scientific adviser, Sir David King, has dismissed the leaking of draft communiques on the grounds that 'there is everything to play for at Gleneagles.' However, there is no doubt that many UK officials have become exasperated by the Bush administration's refusal to accept the basic principle that climate change is happening now and is due to man's activities...."

So now the Pres is pissing off his closest ally: Tony Blair. Just what America needs: to be regarded as the renegade country that helped hasten the end of the world.

My question is this: even if we wouldn't be threatened immediately by catastrophic changes in climate (even though almost every other country in the world--even the Eskimos!--believe greenhouse gases produced by burning fossil fuel is what's creating the climate change), what harm would it be for the US to agree to play nicey nicey with everybody on this one??? Again, this is just a rhetorical question. The answer is it's because the government is in bed with big oil. Did you happen to notice that one of the Bush Administration's lead experts on the environment is jumping ship to go work for Exxon-Mobil?

Miulang

[Miulang]

Shutting down Gitmo?

Congress is finally waking up to the documented atrocities that have been committed at Gitmo and the need to close that facility down.

Call me paranoid, but as the hew and cry begins to shut the place down, why in the news last week was there a story that a subsidiary of Halliburton won a $30 million contract to build a NEW 220-bed prison at Gitmo?

"...The job is part of a larger contract that could be worth up to $500 million through 2010, the Pentagon said. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Atlantic, in Norfolk, Va., is the contracting agency.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., issued a statement criticizing the deal, calling Halliburton the "scandal-plagued former employer of Vice President Cheney." Lautenberg has sought hearings into the contracts awarded to Halliburton for work in Iraq...."

Even though the funding allocations were made prior to the torture allegations, wouldn't it be more fiscally responsible to delay building that new prison until the Congress concludes its investigation? And since there are now about 520 detainees in the "old" Gitmo but the new prison would only hold 220, what happens with the other 300 "terrorist" suspects? Are we going to turn them over to the CIA to have them "extraordinarily renditioned" to our friends in Europe and Asia who would love more money from us to torture those people?

I think the whole thing's a shell game. If the heat gets to be too much for the White House, and Congress does force the Navy to shut down Gitmo, it will be a hollow victory because there, waiting in the wings is a NEW torture chamber next door. The White House would like for us to believe that by changing the shell, the lobster will taste better. Will the illegal detentions and torture stop just because there's a new facility? I doubt it.

Miulang