Showing posts with label Bush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bush. Show all posts

Sunday, October 9, 2011

Presidential Candidate Romney would bring Bush's NeoCon's back into power for more of their abysmally failing policies

In a speech on Friday Oct 7, 2011, Romney made a promise which should cause many to reject him for seeking to re-establish the utterly abysmal policy failures of the Bush43 administration.  Most news coverage didn't comment on on the meaning of the promise, but fortunately Rachel Maddow not only noticed this but opened her show that evening with awesome discussion of that promise (see video below).  What was the promise?  It was that he would lead the country into what he called “an American Century.”

The speech was his foreign policy vision, was delivered at The Citadel, and was on the 10th anniversary of the start of the Afghanistan war.  The speech called for strengthening the military and economy, which is expected rhetoric from a Republican.  What stands out is the phrase “an American Century,” the history of that phrase (Project For A New American Century), that he has hired a dozen or so PNAC Neocon's to be foreign policy advisors, and how the rhetoric strongly refers back to the PNAC Neocon policies that fueled the utter abysmal failures of the Bush43 years.

Sounds nice and benign doesn't it?  Calling for a stronger military and economy is expected from Republicans.  The phrase "An American Century" surely sounds nice to a country accustomed to being the strongest/richest country of this era.  To understand the significance of “an American Century” we have to revisit the Bush43 years, and think over what happened, so that by remembering our history we can avoid committing the same failures again.

His words connect directly with The Project for a New American Century, an infamous Neocon think-tank from the 90's that concocted the whole nightmare plan of "Let's Invade Iraq To Establish Moderate Friendly Democracy In The Middle East To Sway The Middle East To Be Friendly To Us".

The Invade-Iraq-To-Sway-The-Middle-East plan originated in the mid-90's in position papers published by the PNAC.  PNAC members used those position papers in political rabble rousing, congressional testimony, etc, and eventually many PNAC members came into power when Bush43 was elected.  Then the 9/11 attack happened and you may recall the perpetrators had been living in Afghanistan but were primarily Saudi nationals.  And that Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.  And the Bush43 administration lied and connived things to make it look like Iraq was a horrible evil threat that had to be extinguished, never mind that the threat came from Afghanistan and that the threat-mongers were getting away scott-free.  The illegal war against Iraq was launched because of how the Bush43 administration twisted facts around the 9/11 attack to justify attacking Iraq.

Hence the PNAC Neocons originated the Invade-Iraq plan in the 90's, they came into power with Bush43, then used their first opportunity to twist American policy into committing the U.S. to a war to topple the Iraqi government.

But let's get back to Romney - because his actions are more profound than a simple statement in a speech.  He has hired a dozen or more former Bush43 Administration staffers, as foreign policy advisors, who had played key roles in creating the policies just outlined, and were of the PNAC Neocon crowd.  When Romney promised us “an American Century,” then, he can only have been referring to the Project For A New American Century.

Especially given the rhetoric from the speech that's directly out of the PNAC talking points:
“In an American Century, America has the strongest economy and the strongest military in the world.  In an American Century, America leads the free world and the free world leads the entire world.”
“If America is the undisputed leader of the world, it reduces our need to police a more chaotic world.  But know this: While America should work with other nations, we always reserve the right to act alone to protect our vital national interest.”
“full spectrum of hard and soft power to influence events before they erupt into conflict.”
These statements come directly out of the PNAC mythology.  That America must assert a Pax Americana upon the world because we are the strongest country, the sole remaining superpower, and that it's our duty as a moral and strong country to force other countries to behave correctly.  Or something like that.

The last statement eerily harkens of Bush43's pre-emptive war doctrine.  That it is correct to stomp on countries we knew are going to commit evil before they did so.  And that we have the right to "act alone," presumably flouting international law just as the Bush43 administration did.

What actually happened under the Bush43 administration was wholesale flouting of International law, repeated treasonous acts by  administration officials, lies to Congress, lies to the UN (The "case" for War), lies to the American people, the launching of an illegal stupid war against Iraq (Background material for the second Gulf "War"Is the Gulf War II Impeachable?Powell Rebuts criticismNext: Iran?It's Official - No WMD FoundThe Man who Knew: More about the LiesPerle admits invasion was illegal: Say what?Review: Uncovered: The Whole Truth about the Iraq …Review: Will they trust us again?How the White House Embraced Disputed Arms Intelli…US Invasion of Iraq officially FRAUDAn utter and abysmal failure) that has caused tremendous pain and suffering throughout the Middle East, and much more.

As Maddow noted in the segment visible below, Romney also announced his national security advisory team.  That team of 22 people included 15 from the Bush43 administration, 6 of whom had been part of the Project for a New American Century crowd.  These are the people who advised the Bush43 administration into doing all the stupid things perpetrated in those years.

Hence, it's fair game to assume his plan is to reincarnate the Bush43 years.  Lest we want to live through that nightmare story again, this is a presidential candidate that must be defeated.




In Foreign Policy Speech, Romney Calls for an ‘American Century’

Mitt Romney calls for century of American dominance: Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential frontrunner, has called for a century of American dominance and greater defence spending, in his first major venture into US foreign policy.

Romney Gives Bush Neocons Another Chance

And for more on PNAC, here's Source Watch's site on them -- Project for the New American Century.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

This Is George Bush's Recession: Why Doesn't Anybody Talk About That? | Politics | AlterNet


If the partisan tables were turned, the GOP would waste no time laying the blame on Democrats. According to the article "We" (aka "progressives"?) need to do the same to build political capital for key fights ahead. Modern conservatives "are descended from monarchists,” and have a "natural instinct to follow the king." Presumably, then, progressives are descended from rabble that can't agree? The article discusses a failure of the Democrats to do as the Republicans would do, there is a failure of Democrats to fall in line with President Obama's leadership and instead they are left free to kvetch. My question is whether it's better for the party in charge to practice message discipline and order in the ranks, or for free reigning democracy to engender an open and frank discussion from all quarters.


Article Reference: 

Saturday, November 28, 2009

Top Official: 'The EPA Is Back On The Job'


The Environmental Protection Agency released a long-secret document last week that reveals the agency's conclusions on global warming while President Bush was in office. The December 2007 document says greenhouse gases are dangerous and need to be regulated under the Clean Air Act.
"The Bush administration never accepted the need to regulate greenhouse gases," EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson tells Liane Hansen. "That's why the endangerment finding was never released."
The agency's decision to release that "endangerment finding" now highlights the stark differences between the EPA under Bush and the EPA under President Obama.


Article Reference: 

Saturday, November 10, 2007

Impeach NOW, Cheney first then Bush

Section: Impeach Cheney and Bush

Kucinich: Effort to Impeach Vice President Cheney Still Alive (digg) is an interview of Kucinich on Democracy Now. He has some juicy things to say.

National Lawyers Guild Unanimously Passes Impeachment Resolution; Launches National Impeachment Committee & Campaign (digg) Is a truly excellent statement of the reasons for impeachment. This is not Kucinich's articles of impeachment, but ones written by the National Lawyers Guild. They do a stunningly accurate and complete recounting of why Cheney and Bush must go. Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors is Kucinich's impeachment resolution.. why is his citing fewer causes for impeachment?

Iraq Deja Vu: Cheney Manipulating Intelligence on Iran (digg), CHENEY IS LYING ABOUT INTELLIGENCE...AGAIN! (digg), Spooks refuse to toe Cheney's line on Iran (digg) is an indication of the danger of leaving Cheney in office. He is leading the charge to create a war in Iran using the same pattern of lies and deceit used to create the war in Iraq.

Impeaching Cheney is a Slam Dunk�..then why is Congress BLOWING IT! (digg) Read the NLG articles of impeachment.. it is incredibly damning.

Conyers Introduces Bills to Censure Bush and Cheney [2005] (digg) Before the 2006 elections Conyers was hot to impeach and of course facing lots of criticism, but still moving on making impeachment happen. Should Impeachment Be Off the Table? A Debate with Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan, (digg) But today he's being 'pragmatic' and saying winning the 2008 election is more important. Uh...

Take Action to Impeach Cheney for 9/11 Crimes! (digg)

Official Release on Kucinich's .GOV domain : Cheney's going to face a vote (digg), It's Time to Impeach Cheney

Suddenly, Impeachment Hearings are Starting to Look Likely (digg)

The only presidential candidates with foresight to oppose Iraq war in 2002. Kucinich, that is.

Revisiting the Declaration of Independence (digg) was written by me on July 4, 2007, comparing and contrasting the Declaration of Independence with todays events. It is astonishing.

Support HR 333 - Impeach Cheney! With their eyes on the 2008 elections, the Democratic party is handing Bush victory after victory and becoming complicit in the criminal actions of the administration.

Kucinich to Move Impeachment of Bush After Cheney

“People Don’t Know What the Constitution Means” Interesting point that Kucinich's articles of impeachment are weak and include provisions which would cause Congress to have to impeach themselves. Articles 2 and 3 of Kucinich's bill is about actions by the Bush administration which Congress has endorsed by passing laws to retroactively approve them. This is part of the overall issue, that Congress is making themselves complicit in the crimes.

Contact House Judiciary Committee Members Today to Impeach Dick Cheney! is a list of the critical Congresspeople for the Impeachment resolution to move forward.

Organize World Wide Impeachment call is a plan kind of like Arlo Guthrie's idea at the end of Alices Restaurent to end the Vietnam War. Hey everybody, call up Conyers and say IMPEACH.

Don't Impeach Bush and Cheney for Their Past, Impeach them for the Future. Impeachment is a big step, don't do it lightly. Do it for the future of the country.

Pelosi's Stand Blocking Impeachment in the House is Killing the Democratic Party I think the Democratic party win last year represented people who were wanting revolution, and Pelosi gave them capitulation. We the people are understandably upset.

Wexler (FL-19) v. Wasserman Schultz (FL-20) on Impeachment Coverage on dailykos.com of the rationale the Democratic Party is using to capitulate.

Kucinich Gambit Shows Who's Who This is another rundown of who's in favor or not, and shows which of the congresspeople to target. This analysis correlates members of the Judiciary committee with the supporters of the Kucinich resolution with their votes on certain measures.

8 Common Myths About Impeachment... and Why They're Not True (digg) A study of myths about what might happen from impeachment, and why they're not true.

Germany then, Iraq now: On the interpretation of nightmares (digg) A book about the history of Germany leading to WWII has eerie parallels, unexpected by the author of the book, with the leadup to the Iraq war. History repeats itself unless we learn from it.

External Media
Sorry, you need to install flash to see this content.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

War Protest Rally, San Francisco, March 19, 2007

It's four years almost to the day since the start of the illegal invasion of Iraq. The last war rally I attended, on March 15, 2003 was on the very eve of the launch of that war. If you read that report March 15, 2003 was a very exciting day for me, what with watching a cat-and-mouse game between police and an unofficial protest march I came across going down Market street that ended with a couple hundred arrests of people who had essentially been simply walking down the sidewalk and making a bit of noise.

As a measure of something related to the greater significance of the protest rally .. the march route four years ago went through some very non-mainstream areas of San Francisco, through neighborhoods with many surveillance cameras (can you cay 'high crime neighborhood'). The protesters I mentioned who had been arrested were trying to take the protest to Market street, because that's where the significance is if you can be visible in front of all the tourists etc. This year the protest rally started at The Embarcadero, went down Market Street, and ended in the Civic Center plaza across the street from City Hall. You couldn't have asked for a route with more significant visibility in San Francisco.

I took Caltrain up the Peninsula and it was more than exciting how jampacked the train was with war protesters. There were people handing out flyers, talking away with each other, a representative from Raging Grannies was teaching us some songs, etc. And .... that person remembered me from 2 1/2 years ago from the November 2004, San Francisco Autoshow when I accidentally bumped into a small scale protest staged by Medea Benjamin with Code Pink and Raging Grannies representatives who were climbing on top of Hummer's and chanting Hybrids not Hummers and calling into question the patrioticness of the HummerLovers ogling their dream vehicles.

Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Bush makes wild ass claims in 2007 State of the Union speech

In Bush shoots for ‘Jaws,’ delivers ‘Jaws 2’ Keith Olbermann delivers a withering criticism of President Bush's State of the Union speech this year. Most of what Olbermann said is directly lifted from a blog entry, Bush's Four Anti-Terror Successes All Fictional, by David Swanson.

Towards the end of the speech Mr Bush took a turn through the horror factory. He brought us into the valley of the shadow of death, with all the threats and horrors that is the War On Terror. I listened to that again wondering just who is being terrorized here? Are the Administration officials such as Cheney and Bush purposely terrorizing us, the American People, so that they can foist their nefarious plots?

In the horror show section of the speech he discussed, in 96 words, four "plots" which had been "foiled". His claim is that because no terror attacks have occurred on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001, that his administrations in the War On Terror have been a success.

It's awfully hard to prove anything by saying that something didn't happen. How can you prove that any threat existed when nothing happened? And more importantly when no threat exists how can you justify a continuation of a War On Terror?

What Mr. Bush offered were four plots which were stopped supposedly in the planning stage. But if you look only a short distance under the surface of each of the plots you find there's nothing there. Each of these plots were at best at the conceptual stage, and further the one which got the biggest splash in the media, and which have had the biggest effect on us, actually was scientifically impossible. I'm talking here about the large arrest in Britain in the summer of 2006 where 24 (or more) people of Islamic descent were supposedly making a plot where they'd smuggle specific chemicals on-board aircraft disguised in shampoo bottles and the like, then they'd mix the chemicals in the lavatory, and turn the chemicals into an explosive.

A dangerous plot .. but for one thing. It's basically impossible, and that's a scientific fact. Most of those arrested last summer have been released with no charges against them.

This is the kind of story which Mr. Bush has put forward to us to justify the War On Terror.

I laugh in his general direction. His mother was a hamster and his father smelt of elderberries. Now, Mr. Bush, go away before I taunt you a second time.

President Bush Delivers State of the Union Address

United States Capitol
Washington, D.C.

video screen capture
multimedia

President's Remarks
Real Media video
Windows Media video

Fact sheet State of the Union 2007
Fact sheet 2007 State of the Union Policy Initiatives
Fact sheet en Español

9:13 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. And tonight, I have a high privilege and distinct honor of my own -- as the first President to begin the State of the Union message with these words: Madam Speaker. (Applause.)

In his day, the late Congressman Thomas D'Alesandro, Jr. from Baltimore, Maryland, saw Presidents Roosevelt and Truman at this rostrum. But nothing could compare with the sight of his only daughter, Nancy, presiding tonight as Speaker of the House of Representatives. (Applause.) Congratulations, Madam Speaker. (Applause.)

President George W. Bush receives applause while delivering the State of the Union address at the U.S. Capitol, Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2007. Also pictured are Vice President Dick Cheney and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. White House photo by David Bohrer Two members of the House and Senate are not with us tonight, and we pray for the recovery and speedy return of Senator Tim Johnson and Congressman Charlie Norwood. (Applause.)

Madam Speaker, Vice President Cheney, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow citizens:

The rite of custom brings us together at a defining hour -- when decisions are hard and courage is needed. We enter the year 2007 with large endeavors underway, and others that are ours to begin. In all of this, much is asked of us. We must have the will to face difficult challenges and determined enemies -- and the wisdom to face them together.

Some in this chamber are new to the House and the Senate -- and I congratulate the Democrat majority. (Applause.) Congress has changed, but not our responsibilities. Each of us is guided by our own convictions -- and to these we must stay faithful. Yet we're all held to the same standards, and called to serve the same good purposes: To extend this nation's prosperity; to spend the people's money wisely; to solve problems, not leave them to future generations; to guard America against all evil; and to keep faith with those we have sent forth to defend us. (Applause.)

We're not the first to come here with a government divided and uncertainty in the air. Like many before us, we can work through our differences, and achieve big things for the American people. Our citizens don't much care which side of the aisle we sit on -- as long as we're willing to cross that aisle when there is work to be done. (Applause.) Our job is to make life better for our fellow Americans, and to help them to build a future of hope and opportunity -- and this is the business before us tonight.

A future of hope and opportunity begins with a growing economy -- and that is what we have. We're now in the 41st month of uninterrupted job growth, in a recovery that has created 7.2 million new jobs -- so far. Unemployment is low, inflation is low, and wages are rising. This economy is on the move, and our job is to keep it that way, not with more government, but with more enterprise. (Applause.)

Next week, I'll deliver a full report on the state of our economy. Tonight, I want to discuss three economic reforms that deserve to be priorities for this Congress.

President George W. Bush enters the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol for his State of the Union address, Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2007. White House photo by David Bohrer First, we must balance the federal budget. (Applause.) We can do so without raising taxes. (Applause.) What we need to do is impose spending discipline in Washington, D.C. We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009, and met that goal three years ahead of schedule. (Applause.) Now let us take the next step. In the coming weeks, I will submit a budget that eliminates the federal deficit within the next five years. (Applause.) I ask you to make the same commitment. Together, we can restrain the spending appetite of the federal government, and we can balance the federal budget. (Applause.)

Next, there is the matter of earmarks. These special interest items are often slipped into bills at the last hour -- when not even C-SPAN is watching. (Laughter.) In 2005 alone, the number of earmarks grew to over 13,000 and totaled nearly $18 billion. Even worse, over 90 percent of earmarks never make it to the floor of the House and Senate -- they are dropped into committee reports that are not even part of the bill that arrives on my desk. You didn't vote them into law. I didn't sign them into law. Yet, they're treated as if they have the force of law. The time has come to end this practice. So let us work together to reform the budget process, expose every earmark to the light of day and to a vote in Congress, and cut the number and cost of earmarks at least in half by the end of this session. (Applause.)

And, finally, to keep this economy strong we must take on the challenge of entitlements. Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid are commitments of conscience, and so it is our duty to keep them permanently sound. Yet, we're failing in that duty. And this failure will one day leave our children with three bad options: huge tax increases, huge deficits, or huge and immediate cuts in benefits. Everyone in this chamber knows this to be true -- yet somehow we have not found it in ourselves to act. So let us work together and do it now. With enough good sense and goodwill, you and I can fix Medicare and Medicaid -- and save Social Security. (Applause.)

Spreading opportunity and hope in America also requires public schools that give children the knowledge and character they need in life. Five years ago, we rose above partisan differences to pass the No Child Left Behind Act, preserving local control, raising standards, and holding those schools accountable for results. And because we acted, students are performing better in reading and math, and minority students are closing the achievement gap.

Now the task is to build on the success, without watering down standards, without taking control from local communities, and without backsliding and calling it reform. We can lift student achievement even higher by giving local leaders flexibility to turn around failing schools, and by giving families with children stuck in failing schools the right to choose someplace better. (Applause.) We must increase funds for students who struggle -- and make sure these children get the special help they need. (Applause.) And we can make sure our children are prepared for the jobs of the future and our country is more competitive by strengthening math and science skills. The No Child Left Behind Act has worked for America's children -- and I ask Congress to reauthorize this good law. (Applause.)

President George W. Bush is applauded as he delivers his State of the Union Address Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2007, at the U.S. Capitol. "We need to uphold the great tradition of the melting pot that welcomes and assimilates new arrivals," said the President. "We need to resolve the status of the illegal immigrants who are already in our country without animosity and without amnesty." White House photo by Shealah Craighead A future of hope and opportunity requires that all our citizens have affordable and available health care. (Applause.) When it comes to health care, government has an obligation to care for the elderly, the disabled, and poor children. And we will meet those responsibilities. For all other Americans, private health insurance is the best way to meet their needs. (Applause.) But many Americans cannot afford a health insurance policy.

And so tonight, I propose two new initiatives to help more Americans afford their own insurance. First, I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents. Families with health insurance will pay no income on payroll tax -- or payroll taxes on $15,000 of their income. Single Americans with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $7,500 of their income. With this reform, more than 100 million men, women, and children who are now covered by employer-provided insurance will benefit from lower tax bills. At the same time, this reform will level the playing field for those who do not get health insurance through their job. For Americans who now purchase health insurance on their own, this proposal would mean a substantial tax savings -- $4,500 for a family of four making $60,000 a year. And for the millions of other Americans who have no health insurance at all, this deduction would help put a basic private health insurance plan within their reach. Changing the tax code is a vital and necessary step to making health care affordable for more Americans. (Applause.)

President George W. Bush greets Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi before delivering his State of the Union Address at the U.S. Capitol Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2007. White House photo by Eric Draper My second proposal is to help the states that are coming up with innovative ways to cover the uninsured. States that make basic private health insurance available to all their citizens should receive federal funds to help them provide this coverage to the poor and the sick. I have asked the Secretary of Health and Human Services to work with Congress to take existing federal funds and use them to create "Affordable Choices" grants. These grants would give our nation's governors more money and more flexibility to get private health insurance to those most in need.

There are many other ways that Congress can help. We need to expand Health Savings Accounts. (Applause.) We need to help small businesses through Association Health Plans. (Applause.) We need to reduce costs and medical errors with better information technology. (Applause.) We will encourage price transparency. And to protect good doctors from junk lawsuits, we passing medical liability reform. (Applause.) In all we do, we must remember that the best health care decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors. (Applause.)

Extending hope and opportunity in our country requires an immigration system worthy of America -- with laws that are fair and borders that are secure. When laws and borders are routinely violated, this harms the interests of our country. To secure our border, we're doubling the size of the Border Patrol, and funding new infrastructure and technology.

Yet even with all these steps, we cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border -- and that requires a temporary worker program. We should establish a legal and orderly path for foreign workers to enter our country to work on a temporary basis. As a result, they won't have to try to sneak in, and that will leave Border Agents free to chase down drug smugglers and criminals and terrorists. (Applause.) We'll enforce our immigration laws at the work site and give employers the tools to verify the legal status of their workers, so there's no excuse left for violating the law. (Applause.)

We need to uphold the great tradition of the melting pot that welcomes and assimilates new arrivals. (Applause.) We need to resolve the status of the illegal immigrants who are already in our country without animosity and without amnesty. (Applause.) Convictions run deep in this Capitol when it comes to immigration. Let us have a serious, civil, and conclusive debate, so that you can pass, and I can sign, comprehensive immigration reform into law. (Applause.)

President George W. Bush delivers his State of the Union Address Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2007, at the U.S. Capitol. "For all of us in this room, there is no higher responsibility than to protect the people of this country from danger," said President George W. Bush. "Five years have come and gone since we saw the scenes and felt the sorrow that the terrorists can cause. We've had time to take stock of our situation. We've added many critical protections to guard the homeland. We know with certainty that the horrors of that September morning were just a glimpse of what the terrorists intend for us -- unless we stop them." White House photo by Eric Draper Extending hope and opportunity depends on a stable supply of energy that keeps America's economy running and America's environment clean. For too long our nation has been dependent on foreign oil. And this dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists -- who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments, and raise the price of oil, and do great harm to our economy.

It's in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply -- the way forward is through technology. We must continue changing the way America generates electric power, by even greater use of clean coal technology, solar and wind energy, and clean, safe nuclear power. (Applause.) We need to press on with battery research for plug-in and hybrid vehicles, and expand the use of clean diesel vehicles and biodiesel fuel. (Applause.) We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol -- (applause) -- using everything from wood chips to grasses, to agricultural wastes.

We made a lot of progress, thanks to good policies here in Washington and the strong response of the market. And now even more dramatic advances are within reach. Tonight, I ask Congress to join me in pursuing a great goal. Let us build on the work we've done and reduce gasoline usage in the United States by 20 percent in the next 10 years. (Applause.) When we do that we will have cut our total imports by the equivalent of three-quarters of all the oil we now import from the Middle East.

To reach this goal, we must increase the supply of alternative fuels, by setting a mandatory fuels standard to require 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels in 2017 -- and that is nearly five times the current target. (Applause.) At the same time, we need to reform and modernize fuel economy standards for cars the way we did for light trucks -- and conserve up to 8.5 billion more gallons of gasoline by 2017.

Achieving these ambitious goals will dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but it's not going to eliminate it. And so as we continue to diversify our fuel supply, we must step up domestic oil production in environmentally sensitive ways. (Applause.) And to further protect America against severe disruptions to our oil supply, I ask Congress to double the current capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. (Applause.)

Dikembe Mutombo of the Houston Rockets is recognized by President George W. Bush during the State of the Union Address at U.S. Capitol Tuesday , Jan. 23, 2007. "Dikembe became a star in the NBA, and a citizen of the United States," said President Bush. "But he never forgot the land of his birth, or the duty to share his blessings with others. He built a brand new hospital in his old hometown. A friend has said of this good-hearted man: "Mutombo believes that God has given him this opportunity to do great things." And we are proud to call this son of the Congo a citizen of the United States of America. White House photo by Eric Draper America is on the verge of technological breakthroughs that will enable us to live our lives less dependent on oil. And these technologies will help us be better stewards of the environment, and they will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change. (Applause.)

A future of hope and opportunity requires a fair, impartial system of justice. The lives of our citizens across our nation are affected by the outcome of cases pending in our federal courts. We have a shared obligation to ensure that the federal courts have enough judges to hear those cases and deliver timely rulings. As President, I have a duty to nominate qualified men and women to vacancies on the federal bench. And the United States Senate has a duty, as well, to give those nominees a fair hearing, and a prompt up-or-down vote on the Senate floor. (Applause.)

For all of us in this room, there is no higher responsibility than to protect the people of this country from danger. Five years have come and gone since we saw the scenes and felt the sorrow that the terrorists can cause. We've had time to take stock of our situation. We've added many critical protections to guard the homeland. We know with certainty that the horrors of that September morning were just a glimpse of what the terrorists intend for us -- unless we stop them.

With the distance of time, we find ourselves debating the causes of conflict and the course we have followed. Such debates are essential when a great democracy faces great questions. Yet one question has surely been settled: that to win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy. (Applause.)

From the start, America and our allies have protected our people by staying on the offense. The enemy knows that the days of comfortable sanctuary, easy movement, steady financing, and free flowing communications are long over. For the terrorists, life since 9/11 has never been the same.

Wesley Autrey receives a standing ovation as President Bush recognizes him during his State of the Union Address at the U.S. Capitol Tuesday evening, Jan. 23, 2007. "Three weeks ago, Wesley Autrey was waiting at a Harlem subway station with his two little girls, when he saw a man fall into the path of a train," said President Bush. "With seconds to act, Wesley jumped onto the tracks, pulled the man into the space between the rails, and held him as the train passed right above their heads. He insists he's not a hero. He says: 'We got guys and girls overseas dying for us to have our freedoms. We have got to show each other some love.' There is something wonderful about a country that produces a brave and humble man like Wesley Autrey." White House photo by Shealah Craighead Our success in this war is often measured by the things that did not happen. We cannot know the full extent of the attacks that we and our allies have prevented, but here is some of what we do know: We stopped an al Qaeda plot to fly a hijacked airplane into the tallest building on the West Coast. We broke up a Southeast Asian terror cell grooming operatives for attacks inside the United States. We uncovered an al Qaeda cell developing anthrax to be used in attacks against America. And just last August, British authorities uncovered a plot to blow up passenger planes bound for America over the Atlantic Ocean. For each life saved, we owe a debt of gratitude to the brave public servants who devote their lives to finding the terrorists and stopping them. (Applause.)

Every success against the terrorists is a reminder of the shoreless ambitions of this enemy. The evil that inspired and rejoiced in 9/11 is still at work in the world. And so long as that's the case, America is still a nation at war.

In the mind of the terrorist, this war began well before September the 11th, and will not end until their radical vision is fulfilled. And these past five years have given us a much clearer view of the nature of this enemy. Al Qaeda and its followers are Sunni extremists, possessed by hatred and commanded by a harsh and narrow ideology. Take almost any principle of civilization, and their goal is the opposite. They preach with threats, instruct with bullets and bombs, and promise paradise for the murder of the innocent.

Our enemies are quite explicit about their intentions. They want to overthrow moderate governments, and establish safe havens from which to plan and carry out new attacks on our country. By killing and terrorizing Americans, they want to force our country to retreat from the world and abandon the cause of liberty. They would then be free to impose their will and spread their totalitarian ideology. Listen to this warning from the late terrorist Zarqawi: "We will sacrifice our blood and bodies to put an end to your dreams, and what is coming is even worse." Osama bin Laden declared: "Death is better than living on this Earth with the unbelievers among us."

President George W. Bush greets people, shakes hands and signs his autograph after delivering the State of the Union Address in the House Chamber at the U.S. Capitol Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2007. White House photo by Paul Morse These men are not given to idle words, and they are just one camp in the Islamist radical movement. In recent times, it has also become clear that we face an escalating danger from Shia extremists who are just as hostile to America, and are also determined to dominate the Middle East. Many are known to take direction from the regime in Iran, which is funding and arming terrorists like Hezbollah -- a group second only to al Qaeda in the American lives it has taken.

The Shia and Sunni extremists are different faces of the same totalitarian threat. Whatever slogans they chant, when they slaughter the innocent they have the same wicked purposes. They want to kill Americans, kill democracy in the Middle East, and gain the weapons to kill on an even more horrific scale.

In the sixth year since our nation was attacked, I wish I could report to you that the dangers had ended. They have not. And so it remains the policy of this government to use every lawful and proper tool of intelligence, diplomacy, law enforcement, and military action to do our duty, to find these enemies, and to protect the American people. (Applause.)

This war is more than a clash of arms -- it is a decisive ideological struggle, and the security of our nation is in the balance. To prevail, we must remove the conditions that inspire blind hatred, and drove 19 men to get onto airplanes and to come and kill us. What every terrorist fears most is human freedom

-- societies where men and women make their own choices, answer to their own conscience, and live by their hopes instead of their resentments. Free people are not drawn to violent and malignant ideologies -- and most will choose a better way when they're given a chance. So we advance our own security interests by helping moderates and reformers and brave voices for democracy. The great question of our day is whether America will help men and women in the Middle East to build free societies and share in the rights of all humanity. And I say, for the sake of our own security, we must. (Applause.)

In the last two years, we've seen the desire for liberty in the broader Middle East -- and we have been sobered by the enemy's fierce reaction. In 2005, the world watched as the citizens of Lebanon raised the banner of the Cedar Revolution, they drove out the Syrian occupiers and chose new leaders in free elections. In 2005, the people of Afghanistan defied the terrorists and elected a democratic legislature. And in 2005, the Iraqi people held three national elections, choosing a transitional government, adopting the most progressive, democratic constitution in the Arab world, and then electing a government under that constitution. Despite endless threats from the killers in their midst, nearly 12 million Iraqi citizens came out to vote in a show of hope and solidarity that we should never forget. (Applause.)

President George W. Bush emphasizes a point during the State of the Union address Tuesday, January 23, 2007. The President told the nation, "We're not the first to come here with a government divided and uncertainty in the air. Like many before us, we can work through our differences and achieve big things for the American people." White House photo by Paul Morse A thinking enemy watched all of these scenes, adjusted their tactics, and in 2006 they struck back. In Lebanon, assassins took the life of Pierre Gemayel, a prominent participant in the Cedar Revolution. Hezbollah terrorists, with support from Syria and Iran, sowed conflict in the region and are seeking to undermine Lebanon's legitimately elected government. In Afghanistan, Taliban and al Qaeda fighters tried to regain power by regrouping and engaging Afghan and NATO forces. In Iraq, al Qaeda and other Sunni extremists blew up one of the most sacred places in Shia Islam -- the Golden Mosque of Samarra. This atrocity, directed at a Muslim house of prayer, was designed to provoke retaliation from Iraqi Shia -- and it succeeded. Radical Shia elements, some of whom receive support from Iran, formed death squads. The result was a tragic escalation of sectarian rage and reprisal that continues to this day.

This is not the fight we entered in Iraq, but it is the fight we're in. Every one of us wishes this war were over and won. Yet it would not be like us to leave our promises unkept, our friends abandoned, and our own security at risk. (Applause.) Ladies and gentlemen: On this day, at this hour, it is still within our power to shape the outcome of this battle. Let us find our resolve, and turn events toward victory. (Applause.)

We're carrying out a new strategy in Iraq -- a plan that demands more from Iraq's elected government, and gives our forces in Iraq the reinforcements they need to complete their mission. Our goal is a democratic Iraq that upholds the rule of law, respects the rights of its people, provides them security, and is an ally in the war on terror.

In order to make progress toward this goal, the Iraqi government must stop the sectarian violence in its capital. But the Iraqis are not yet ready to do this on their own. So we're deploying reinforcements of more than 20,000 additional soldiers and Marines to Iraq. The vast majority will go to Baghdad, where they will help Iraqi forces to clear and secure neighborhoods, and serve as advisers embedded in Iraqi Army units. With Iraqis in the lead, our forces will help secure the city by chasing down the terrorists, insurgents, and the roaming death squads. And in Anbar Province, where al Qaeda terrorists have gathered and local forces have begun showing a willingness to fight them, we're sending an additional 4,000 United States Marines, with orders to find the terrorists and clear them out. (Applause.) We didn't drive al Qaeda out of their safe haven in Afghanistan only to let them set up a new safe haven in a free Iraq.

The people of Iraq want to live in peace, and now it's time for their government to act. Iraq's leaders know that our commitment is not open-ended. They have promised to deploy more of their own troops to secure Baghdad -- and they must do so. They pledged that they will confront violent radicals of any faction or political party -- and they need to follow through, and lift needless restrictions on Iraqi and coalition forces, so these troops can achieve their mission of bringing security to all of the people of Baghdad. Iraq's leaders have committed themselves to a series of benchmarks -- to achieve reconciliation, to share oil revenues among all of Iraq's citizens, to put the wealth of Iraq into the rebuilding of Iraq, to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's civic life, to hold local elections, and to take responsibility for security in every Iraqi province. But for all of this to happen, Baghdad must be secure. And our plan will help the Iraqi government take back its capital and make good on its commitments.

My fellow citizens, our military commanders and I have carefully weighed the options. We discussed every possible approach. In the end, I chose this course of action because it provides the best chance for success. Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq, because you understand that the consequences of failure would be grievous and far-reaching.

If American forces step back before Baghdad is secure, the Iraqi government would be overrun by extremists on all sides. We could expect an epic battle between Shia extremists backed by Iran, and Sunni extremists aided by al Qaeda and supporters of the old regime. A contagion of violence could spill out across the country -- and in time, the entire region could be drawn into the conflict.

For America, this is a nightmare scenario. For the enemy, this is the objective. Chaos is the greatest ally -- their greatest ally in this struggle. And out of chaos in Iraq would emerge an emboldened enemy with new safe havens, new recruits, new resources, and an even greater determination to harm America. To allow this to happen would be to ignore the lessons of September the 11th and invite tragedy. Ladies and gentlemen, nothing is more important at this moment in our history than for America to succeed in the Middle East, to succeed in Iraq and to spare the American people from this danger. (Applause.)

This is where matters stand tonight, in the here and now. I have spoken with many of you in person. I respect you and the arguments you've made. We went into this largely united, in our assumptions and in our convictions. And whatever you voted for, you did not vote for failure. Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq, and I ask you to give it a chance to work. And I ask you to support our troops in the field, and those on their way. (Applause.)

The war on terror we fight today is a generational struggle that will continue long after you and I have turned our duties over to others. And that's why it's important to work together so our nation can see this great effort through. Both parties and both branches should work in close consultation. It's why I propose to establish a special advisory council on the war on terror, made up of leaders in Congress from both political parties. We will share ideas for how to position America to meet every challenge that confronts us. We'll show our enemies abroad that we are united in the goal of victory.

And one of the first steps we can take together is to add to the ranks of our military so that the American Armed Forces are ready for all the challenges ahead. (Applause.) Tonight I ask the Congress to authorize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years. (Applause.) A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer Civilian Reserve Corps. Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the Armed Forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them. It would give people across America who do not wear the uniform a chance to serve in the defining struggle of our time.

Americans can have confidence in the outcome of this struggle because we're not in this struggle alone. We have a diplomatic strategy that is rallying the world to join in the fight against extremism. In Iraq, multinational forces are operating under a mandate from the United Nations. We're working with Jordan and Saudi Arabia and Egypt and the Gulf States to increase support for Iraq's government.

The United Nations has imposed sanctions on Iran, and made it clear that the world will not allow the regime in Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons. (Applause.) With the other members of the Quartet -- the U.N., the European Union, and Russia -- we're pursuing diplomacy to help bring peace to the Holy Land, and pursuing the establishment of a democratic Palestinian state living side-by-side with Israel in peace and security. (Applause.) In Afghanistan, NATO has taken the lead in turning back the Taliban and al Qaeda offensive -- the first time the Alliance has deployed forces outside the North Atlantic area. Together with our partners in China, Japan, Russia, and South Korea, we're pursuing intensive diplomacy to achieve a Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons. (Applause.)

We will continue to speak out for the cause of freedom in places like Cuba, Belarus, and Burma -- and continue to awaken the conscience of the world to save the people of Darfur. (Applause.)

American foreign policy is more than a matter of war and diplomacy. Our work in the world is also based on a timeless truth: To whom much is given, much is required. We hear the call to take on the challenges of hunger and poverty and disease -- and that is precisely what America is doing. We must continue to fight HIV/AIDS, especially on the continent of Africa. (Applause.) Because you funded our Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the number of people receiving life-saving drugs has grown from 50,000 to more than 800,000 in three short years. I ask you to continue funding our efforts to fight HIV/AIDS. I ask you to provide $1.2 billion over five years so we can combat malaria in 15 African countries. (Applause.)

I ask that you fund the Millennium Challenge Account, so that American aid reaches the people who need it, in nations where democracy is on the rise and corruption is in retreat. And let us continue to support the expanded trade and debt relief that are the best hope for lifting lives and eliminating poverty. (Applause.)

When America serves others in this way, we show the strength and generosity of our country. These deeds reflect the character of our people. The greatest strength we have is the heroic kindness, courage, and self-sacrifice of the American people. You see this spirit often if you know where to look -- and tonight we need only look above to the gallery.

Dikembe Mutombo grew up in Africa, amid great poverty and disease. He came to Georgetown University on a scholarship to study medicine -- but Coach John Thompson got a look at Dikembe and had a different idea. (Laughter.) Dikembe became a star in the NBA, and a citizen of the United States. But he never forgot the land of his birth, or the duty to share his blessings with others. He built a brand new hospital in his old hometown. A friend has said of this good-hearted man: "Mutombo believes that God has given him this opportunity to do great things." And we are proud to call this son of the Congo a citizen of the United States of America. (Applause.)

After her daughter was born, Julie Aigner-Clark searched for ways to share her love of music and art with her child. So she borrowed some equipment, and began filming children's videos in her basement. The Baby Einstein Company was born, and in just five years her business grew to more than $20 million in sales. In November 2001, Julie sold Baby Einstein to the Walt Disney Company, and with her help Baby Einstein has grown into a $200 million business. Julie represents the great enterprising spirit of America. And she is using her success to help others -- producing child safety videos with John Walsh of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Julie says of her new project: "I believe it's the most important thing that I have ever done. I believe that children have the right to live in a world that is safe." And so tonight, we are pleased to welcome this talented business entrepreneur and generous social entrepreneur -- Julie Aigner-Clark. (Applause.)

Three weeks ago, Wesley Autrey was waiting at a Harlem subway station with his two little girls, when he saw a man fall into the path of a train. With seconds to act, Wesley jumped onto the tracks, pulled the man into the space between the rails, and held him as the train passed right above their heads. He insists he's not a hero. He says: "We got guys and girls overseas dying for us to have our freedoms. We have got to show each other some love." There is something wonderful about a country that produces a brave and humble man like Wesley Autrey. (Applause.)

Tommy Rieman was a teenager pumping gas in Independence, Kentucky, when he enlisted in the United States Army. In December 2003, he was on a reconnaissance mission in Iraq when his team came under heavy enemy fire. From his Humvee, Sergeant Rieman returned fire; he used his body as a shield to protect his gunner. He was shot in the chest and arm, and received shrapnel wounds to his legs -- yet he refused medical attention, and stayed in the fight. He helped to repel a second attack, firing grenades at the enemy's position. For his exceptional courage, Sergeant Rieman was awarded the Silver Star. And like so many other Americans who have volunteered to defend us, he has earned the respect and the gratitude of our entire country. (Applause.)

In such courage and compassion, ladies and gentlemen, we see the spirit and character of America -- and these qualities are not in short supply. This is a decent and honorable country -- and resilient, too. We've been through a lot together. We've met challenges and faced dangers, and we know that more lie ahead. Yet we can go forward with confidence -- because the State of our Union is strong, our cause in the world is right, and tonight that cause goes on. God bless. (Applause.)

See you next year. Thank you for your prayers.

END 10:02 P.M. EST

Sunday, December 31, 2006

Pres. John F Kennedy on secret societies etc

JFK Speech on Secret Societies and Freedom of the Press is audio of a speech JFK gave to a meeting of news editors. He's talking about the dangers of secret societies, the dangers of secret justice, the value of government transparency, etc.

The person who did this video married the audio with pictures from todays scary situation, our government is practicing secret justice and more. JFK extolls the value of criticism of official actions, while the Bush administration slams those who give criticism.

One questionable thing about this video is the choice of images. By juxtaposing images of the Nazi Germany regime with images from the Bush administration, the maker of the video is sending a clear message about his or her opinion. That they want us to equate the Bush Administration with Hitlers Nazi regime. It's worth considering whether that's a fair comparison.

Sunday, November 26, 2006

Gas price drop an attempt to skew the election?

Before the November 2006 elections I wrote an article: Dropping gasoline prices, and the mid-term elections pondering whether the dropping gas prices were an attempt to skew the elections. It seemed and still does seem very unlikely. At the same time it is curious why gas prices, which had been well above $3 per gallon over the summer of 2006 fell so precipitously since then.

CNN Money noticed the same thing Gasoline prices up, end 3 month slump which led the Salon.COM war-room to ponder Coincidence? Election over, gas prices up again.

In the interest of relying on facts ...

Here is the chart from before the election, captured on October 8, 2006:

And here is the chart today, November 25, 2006, generated using the same parameters:

What's interesting is the crude oil price has leveled off, and the gasoline price has started to come back up.

Hmmm....?

AttachmentSize
gaschart.2006-11-26.png26.09 KB

Sunday, October 8, 2006

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"

It's clear that if Hillary Clinton won the Presidency in 2008, then nothing would change in terms of this illegal war in the middle east. This video is former President Clinton explaining his view of the war.

Smoking gun on Bush's failure to catch Osama bin Laden?

In February 2001 in a White House press briefing someone asked: Ari, according to India Globe, the Taliban in Afghanistan, they have offered that they are ready to hand over Osama bin Laden to Saudi Arabia if the United States would drop its sanctions, and they have a kind of deal that they want to make with the United States. Do you have any comments? What was Ari's answer? MR. FLEISCHER: Let me take that and get back to you on that. There's no record of an answer.

At cooperativeresearch.org they have this listing, which shows that the offer wasn't very strongly securious. However that video clip is being promoted around on the Internet as if it is a smoking gun indicating Bush Administration in their malfeasance.

March 2001: US and Taliban Discuss Handing over bin Laden

Taliban envoy Rahmatullah Hashimi meets with reporters, middle-ranking State Department bureaucrats, and private Afghanistan experts in Washington. He carries a gift carpet and a letter from Afghan leader Mullah Omar for President Bush. He discusses turning bin Laden over, but the US wants to be handed bin Laden and the Taliban want to turn him over to some third country. A CIA official later says, “We never heard what they were trying to say. We had no common language. Ours was, ‘Give up bin Laden.’ They were saying, ‘Do something to help us give him up.’ ... I have no doubts they wanted to get rid of him. He was a pain in the neck.” Others claim the Taliban were never sincere. About 20 more meetings on giving up bin Laden take place up until 9/11, all fruitless. [Washington Post, 10/29/2001] Allegedly, Hashimi also proposes that the Taliban would hold bin Laden in one location long enough for the US to locate and kill him. However, this offer is refused. This report, however, comes from Laila Helms, daughter of former CIA director Richard Helms. While it’s interesting that this information came out before 9/11, one must be skeptical, since Helms’ job was public relations for the Taliban. [Village Voice, 6/6/2001]

Entity Tags: Rahmatullah Hashimi, Laila Helms, Osama bin Laden, George W. Bush, Taliban, Mullah Omar

Dropping gasoline prices, and the mid-term elections

It's the Fall of 2006, and we're about 30 days away from the elections. The Bush team and the Republicans overall are in a hurt. And curiously the price for gasoline has fallen dramatically in the last few weeks. I've seen some chatter that perhaps the Republicans, and especially the Neocons/Bush camp, have asked the oil companies to help by lowering the gas prices for the duration. Since some of the voter angst is the high price for gasoline, maybe a lower price would diminish it?

Hey, it's a theory anyway. I haven't seen any credible claim of this. But it is curious that just a month or two ago the price for gasoline in the SF Bay Area was well over $3 per gallon, and yesterday I saw a station selling it for $2.40 per gallon and others in the $2.50 to $2.60 range. That's a $.60 per gallon drop (20%) or thereabouts. What could have caused such a steep decrease?

This article in Slate: The Oil Conspiracy: Is the Bush administration manipulating oil prices to win elections? is going over this issue.

The conclusion seems to be that, no, political leaders are generally unable to affect commodity pricing in the first place. But there are some leverage points, especially for an administration like GW Bush's that is so heavily in bed with the Oil industry and the Saudi Royalty.

The Slate article relates that in Bob Woodward's book State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III Prince Bandar told Bush that they could increase oil production, which would lower the oil price, and do that to help the election results. The article doesn't say whether oil production actually rose in 2004, and it doesn't say whether it rose now.

The Slate article does mention this: Bush takes aim at rising gasoline prices ... this details an announcement made in August 2006 to attack high gasoline prices. The main effect was to order the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to stop making its purchases "until the fall" (conveniently after the election). By doing so that will leave a little more gasoline in the market, reducing some of the supply/demand pressures, hopefully leading to lower prices.

The other idea mentioned in the Slate article is pretty tricky to understand. It has to do with trading of commodity futures contracts. Goldman Sachs, a company formerly led by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, recently adjusted the mix of commodities in an index it controls. Changing that mix of commodities then would have caused commodities traders to suddenly dump oil on the market, lowering the price.

What I was able to gather is the price for gasoline falls every year at the end of the summer. In the summer there is a lot of driving as people go on vacation trips driving around the country. The law of supply/demand says that when demand is high, such as the summer driving season, either the supply has to rise also or the price will rise.

Here's an interesting chart

It shows the gas prices over the last three years in Seattle, San Jose and Atlanta. You'll see that generally the price has been upward over the last three years. But there's some interesting ideas you can draw from it.

The first, and the reason for including this chart, is the cyclic price changes. At least for 2005 and 2006 the cycle is much the same. There's a price increase in the late Spring and during the Summer, with a dropoff in the Fall. In 2005 the price increase was extended because of the disruption due to Hurricane Katrina. In 2004 that cycle didn't happen for some reason, with a late price peak just before the election.

The other things I see are: The price for gasoline largely is determined for the crude oil price. And some parts of the country, represented by Atlanta in this picture, curiously pay a lot less for oil than do other parts of the country. Here is a chart of gas prices per county that demonstrates the price differential.

AttachmentSize
test.gaschart.png25.99 KB

Thursday, September 28, 2006

Review of 9/11: Press For Truth

How did the September 11, 2001 attacks come to happen? Or, more accurately, why were they allowed to happen? Our government leaders such as GW Bush, Condoleeza Rice, Dick Cheney, etc, claimed that nobody in the government imagined such an attack could have happened. But, they were lying, because many in the government had warnings, had thought up that kind of scenario, there were many warnings from foreign intelligence services, etc. We were told to believe that even with warnings the plot could not have been stopped. If so, then what of this recent plot discovered in Britain to bomb airliners, which was stopped by arrests before the attack was carried out? It goes on and on.

The movie, 9/11: Press For Truth (web site), is about the holes in the official story and some daring individuals who researched as much of the truth as can be learned from public sources. We of course cannot know what our government leaders actually did and are actually responsible for. But the public record, as reported in the news media, paints an interesting picture, one of official malfeasance and possibly official cooperation with the launching of those attacks.

Part of the movie centers on a group of relatives of people killed on September 11, 2001. They had questions that weren't being answered. In their grief they banded together to begin researching to find the truth to why their relatives had died. In part the 9/11 Commission was launched due to the efforts of those family members to find the truth.

Consider, though, the contrast in the cost of the investigation into Clintons sexual escapades, and the cost of running the 9/11 Commission. The Clinton investigation cost taxpayers over $100 million while the 9/11 Commission cost taxpayers around $16 million. Tell me, of those two investigations which would you rather have be thorough?

To a large extent the 9/11 Commission was just as satisfying as the Warren Commission was in explaining the Kennedy Assassination. In other words, we can expect conspiracy theorists to be debating the September 11, 2001 attacks for the next 40 years, perhaps. But there is a big difference in terms of technology of the early 1960's and today. Today we have web sites on which people can share information, resources, and connect with each other. One such web site is cooperativeresearch.org which is home to the Complete 911 Timeline.

The Complete 911 Timeline plays a major role in this movie, and is itself a massively useful piece of work. It is the work of individuals sharing data through the cooperativeresearch.org web site. The data is summaries and links to news reports. It is also published as a book: The Terror Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute: A Comprehensive Chronicle of the Road to 9/11--and America's Response

The problem with this story is that while the individual pieces to the story are well reported, those pieces are widely scattered. You might have a tidbit in a front page article one day, another in an article in another newspaper buried in the back another day, another on a TV program a month later, and so on. By being so widely scattered it's almost impossible for an individual to pull it all together. On the cooperativeresearch.org web site the data is collected and is organized by date, by event, or by individual. You can follow the threads very easily in multiple directions and see the connections and the real history.

The movie presents a small portion of the data listed on the cooperativeresearch.org web site. But the part given in the movie is explosive.

For example .. al Qaeda was an outgrowth of the Mujahadeen forces. The Mujahadeen were supported by the CIA during the 1980's to give the Russian Military their own Vietnam, and to drive them out of Afghanistan. The CIA funneled money and material through Pakastan's secret service, the ISI. After Russia was driven from Afghanistan, the U.S. supposedly walked away from involvement with Pakistan and the Mujahadeen. The movie describes however that the ISI ran training camps and some people from those camps became Taliban fighters in Afghanistan, while others became geurillas in Kashmir, and that overall the distinction between Taliban, al Qaeda and the guerillas in Kashmir are very weak.

In October 2001 evidence was released by the U.S. of payments being funneled through Mohammad Atta from a specific person in Pakistan. This person was originally said to be an al Qaeda "paymaster" but the cooperativeresearch team later learned he was an ISI agent. Incidentally, the head of ISI, Mahmood Ahmed was in Washington DC on the eve of the September 11 attack, on the same day that the final payments were wired from Pakistan to Mohammed Atta.

Another detail of the ISI involvement is in the escape of al Qaeda operatives from Afghanistan.

November 13, 2001: Al-Qaeda Convoy Flees to Tora Bora; US Fails to Attack: A couple times during the invasion of Afghanistan, large convoys of Al Qaeda and others were escaping first from Kabul, later from Jalalabad, etc. Rather than bomb the convoys, they were able to drive on. Later when they were bottled up in the Tora Bora area, some escape routes were left open, and the al Qaeda people escaped along the open routes.

November 14-25, 2001: US Secretly Authorizes Airlift of Pakistani and Taliban Fighters: Another of the escape operations was a large airlift operation flying al Qaeda operatives from Northern Afghanistan into Pakistan. At that time the U.S. had a large force there, had airplanes there, no doubt had AWACS aircraft in the area, and knew very well that an airlift was flying dozens of flights between northern Afghanistan and Pakistan. The U.S. could have stopped the airlift, but it was allowed to proceed. Pakistan’s President “Musharraf won American support for the airlift by warning that the humiliation of losing hundreds—and perhaps thousands—of Pakistani Army men and intelligence operatives would jeopardize his political survival.”

I know there was a lot of details that just flew by there. But the story is that Pakistan is essentially the benefactors of both the Taliban and al Qaeda, perhaps both are merely covert branches of the ISI. And it is Pakistan which the U.S. has proclaimed to be a major part of the War On Terror. Either the U.S. Intelligence is incredibly naive about the connections between Pakistan's ISI and al Qaeda, or else the U.S. is tacitly in approval, and perhaps this explains the weak efforts to capture and kill al Qaeda?

Interestingly these reports are in the news right now:

In Britain there is a report about Pakistan's ISI aiding al Qaida and Taliban forces. Musharraf denies the claim, and Tony Blair has to make nicey-nice with Musharraf to "defuse" the situation. Musharraf rejects claim that agents assist terrorists, Musharraf denies helping al-Qa'ida, Pakistan's ISI is too close to Muslim terrorists: British Report, Document: Pakistan Agency Backs al-Qaida

And in Pakistan a couple weeks ago the ISI made a deal with some local leaders. Karzai questions whether pact will reduce terrorism

9/11: Press for Truth

Description: 

This is a documentary movie exploring what happened to create the September 11, 2001 attack, what the government leaders knew, the cover-up of the attack, and more. (buy from amazon.com, my review)

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

Iraq War Profiteering

Iraq For Sale is Robert Greenwald's latest movie. It is about the war profiteering done by Halliburton and other contractor companies. The story told by the movie is one of the war process being twisted by these contractor companies, being twisted by those companies for the corporate profit motive, not for the stated purpose of bringing Democracy to Iraq.

We can debate the legitimacy of the war itself, and I am completely on record of saying this war in Iraq should never have been launched, and the U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan himself has called this war illegal. But to think about war profiteering companies twisting the conduct of the war so they get more profit. That is astonishingly bad to consider.

Olbermann and Greenwald expose war profiteers is an interview of Greenwald about the movie.

G.W. Bush: It's unnacceptable to think

Recently in the news has been a lot about the torture being committed by U.S. forces, about the secret prisons, the extraordinary rendition, and more. It's my opinion those acts are very Unamerican, and it shocks and angers me that it is Americans who are performing them.

Colin Powell wrote a letter saying that the world is beginning to doubt the legitimacy of the war in Iraq and other things. I wonder what took Mr. Powell so long to realize this, but that's beside the point. What's on point is GW Bush's reaction, to throw a hissy fit rant of a press conference, and in the heat of his rant to demand that Americans stop thinking.

Keith Olbermann has some interesting thoughts on this (his blog entry)