From the You Just Can't Make This Stuff Up File:
Levi Johnston who is the boyfriend of Bristol Palin, the daughter of Gov. Sarah Palin, is now going to have to defend his mother.
The mother of Levi Johnston, the 18-year-old boyfriend of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's teenage daughter, has been arrested on drug charges, the Anchorage Daily News reported Friday.
Sherry L. Johnston, 42, has been charged with six felony counts of misconduct, the newspaper reported.
Levi Johnston entered the national spotlight this autumn when it was revealed that 18-year-old Bristol Palin — the eldest daughter of Sarah Palin, who had just been tapped as then-Republican presidential nominee John McCain's running mate — was pregnant with his child.
The baby is due Saturday, the Anchorage Daily News reported.
The paper said that Alaska State Troopers charged Sherry Johnston with second-degree misconduct involving a controlled substance and fourth-degree misconduct involving controlled substances, or possession.
Sherry Johnston has been released on a $5,000 bond, the newspaper reported.
Contacted by the Anchorage Daily News, Palin's spokesman, Bill McAllister, issued this statement: "This is not a state government matter. Therefore the governor's communications staff will not be providing comment or scheduling interview opportunities."
Friday, December 19, 2008
Letter to the "Nissan Senators" from a Ford Dealer
I found this posted on another blog I read sometimes...PA for Change..so I am cross posting it here. I think it is very telling. My uncle and I were talking about some of these very things earlier today.
I am thankful that Pres. Bush has done the proper thing and give the auto manufactors a chance to make themselves healthy. Hopefully, by giving them this loan this will hold them until they can restructure and give the credit market time to right itself and people will begin to buy again.
As I watch the coverage of the fate of the U.S. auto industry, one alarming and frustrating fact hits me right between the eyes. The fate of our nation’s economic survival is in the hands of some congressmen who are completely out of touch and act without knowledge of an industry that affects almost every person in our nation. The same lack of knowledge is shared with many journalists whom are irresponsible when influencing the opinion of millions of viewers.
Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama has doomed the industry, calling it a dinosaur. No Mr. Shelby, you are the dinosaur, with ideas stuck in the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s. You and the uninformed journalist and senators that hold onto myths that are not relevant in today’s world.
When you say that the Big Three build vehicles nobody wants to buy, you must have overlooked that GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the U.S. and Ford outsold Honda by 850,000 and Nissan by 1.2 million in the U.S. GM was the world’s No. 1 automaker beating Toyota by 3,000 units.
When you claim inferior quality comes from the Big Three, did you realize that Chevy makes the Malibu and Ford makes the Fusion that were both rated over the Camry and Accord by J.D. Power independent survey on initial quality? Did you bother to read the Consumer Report that rated Ford on par with good Japanese automakers.
Did you realize Big Three’s gas guzzlers include the 33 mpg Malibu that beats the Accord. And for ‘09 Ford introduces the Hybrid Fusion whose 39 mpg is the best midsize, beating the Camry Hybrid. Ford’s Focus beats the Corolla and Chevy’s Cobalt beats the Civic.
When you ask how many times are we going to bail them out you must be referring to 1980. The only Big Three bailout was Chrysler, who paid back $1 billion, plus interest. GM and Ford have never received government aid.
When you criticize the Big Three for building so many pickups, surely you’ve noticed the attempts Toyota and Nissan have made spending billions to try to get a piece of that pie. Perhaps it bothers you that for 31 straight years Ford’s F-Series has been the best selling vehicle. Ford and GM have dominated this market and when you see the new ‘09 F-150 you’ll agree this won’t change soon.
Did you realize that both GM and Ford offer more hybrid models than Nissan or Honda. Between 2005 and 2007, Ford alone has invested more than $22 billion in research and development of technologies such as Eco Boost, flex fuel, clean diesel, hybrids, plug in hybrids and hydrogen cars.
It’s 2008 and the quality of the vehicles coming out of Detroit are once again the best in the world.
Perhaps Sen. Shelby isn’t really that blind. Maybe he realizes the quality shift to American. Maybe it’s the fact that his state of Alabama has given so much to land factories from Honda, Hyundai and Mercedes Benz that he is more concerned about their continued growth than he is about the people of our country. Sen. Shelby’s disdain for “government subsidies” is very hypocritical. In the early ’90s he was the driving force behind a $253 million incentive package to Mercedes. Plus, Alabama agreed to purchase 2,500 vehicles from Mercedes. While the bridge loan the Big Three is requesting will be paid back, Alabama ’s $180,000-plus per job was pure incentive. Sen. Shelby, not only are you out of touch, you are a self-serving hypocrite, who is prepared to ruin our nation because of lack of knowledge and lack of due diligence in making your opinions and decisions.
After 9/11, the Detroit Three and Harley Davidson gave $40 million-plus emergency vehicles to the recovery efforts. What was given to the 9/11 relief effort by the Asian and European Auto Manufactures? $0 Nada. Zip!
We live in a world of free trade, world economy and we have not been able to produce products as cost efficiently. While the governments of other auto producing nations subsidize their automakers, our government may be ready to force its demise. While our automakers have paid union wages, benefits and legacy debt, our Asian competitors employ cheap labor. We are at an extreme disadvantage in production cost. Although many UAW concessions begin in 2010, many lawmakers think it’s not enough.
Some point the blame to corporate management. I would like to speak of Ford Motor Co. The company has streamlined by reducing our workforce by 51,000 since 2005, closing 17 plants and cutting expenses. Product and future product is excellent and the company is focused on one Ford. This is a company poised for success. Ford product quality and corporate management have improved light years since the nightmare of Jacques Nasser. Thank you Alan Mulally and the best auto company management team in the business.
The financial collapse caused by the secondary mortgage fiasco and the greed of Wall Street has led to a $700 billion bailout of the industry that created the problem. AIG spent nearly $1 million on three company excursions to lavish resorts and hunting destinations. Paulson is saying no to $250 billion foreclosure relief and the whole thing is a mess. So when the Big Three ask for 4 percent of that of the $700 billion, $25 billion to save the country’s largest industry, there is obviously oppositions. But does it make sense to reward the culprits of the problem with $700 billion unconditionally, and ignore the victims?
As a Ford dealer, I feel our portion of the $25 billion will never be touched and is not necessary. Ford currently has $29 billion of liquidity. However, the effect of a bankruptcy by GM will hurt the suppliers we all do business with. A Chapter 11 bankruptcy by any manufacture would cost retirees their health care and retirements. Chances are GM would recover from Chapter 11 with a better business plan with much less expense. So who foots the bill if GM or all three go Chapter 11? All that extra health care, unemployment, loss of tax base and some forgiven debt goes back to the taxpayer, us. With no chance of repayment, this would be much worse than a loan with the intent of repayment.
So while it is debatable whether a loan or Chapter 11 is better for the Big Three, a $25 billion loan is definitely better for the taxpayers and the economy of our country.
So I’ll end where I began on the quality of the products of Detroit . Before you, Mr. or Ms. Journalist continue to misinform the American public and turn them against one of the great industries that helped build this nation, I must ask you one question. Before you, Mr. or Madam Congressman vote to end health care and retirement benefits for 1 million retirees, eliminate 2.5 million of our nation’s jobs, lose the technology that will lead us in the future and create an economic disaster including hundreds of billions of tax dollars lost, I ask this question not in the rhetorical sense. I ask it in the sincere, literal way.
Can you tell me, have you driven a Ford lately?
I am thankful that Pres. Bush has done the proper thing and give the auto manufactors a chance to make themselves healthy. Hopefully, by giving them this loan this will hold them until they can restructure and give the credit market time to right itself and people will begin to buy again.
As I watch the coverage of the fate of the U.S. auto industry, one alarming and frustrating fact hits me right between the eyes. The fate of our nation’s economic survival is in the hands of some congressmen who are completely out of touch and act without knowledge of an industry that affects almost every person in our nation. The same lack of knowledge is shared with many journalists whom are irresponsible when influencing the opinion of millions of viewers.
Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama has doomed the industry, calling it a dinosaur. No Mr. Shelby, you are the dinosaur, with ideas stuck in the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s. You and the uninformed journalist and senators that hold onto myths that are not relevant in today’s world.
When you say that the Big Three build vehicles nobody wants to buy, you must have overlooked that GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the U.S. and Ford outsold Honda by 850,000 and Nissan by 1.2 million in the U.S. GM was the world’s No. 1 automaker beating Toyota by 3,000 units.
When you claim inferior quality comes from the Big Three, did you realize that Chevy makes the Malibu and Ford makes the Fusion that were both rated over the Camry and Accord by J.D. Power independent survey on initial quality? Did you bother to read the Consumer Report that rated Ford on par with good Japanese automakers.
Did you realize Big Three’s gas guzzlers include the 33 mpg Malibu that beats the Accord. And for ‘09 Ford introduces the Hybrid Fusion whose 39 mpg is the best midsize, beating the Camry Hybrid. Ford’s Focus beats the Corolla and Chevy’s Cobalt beats the Civic.
When you ask how many times are we going to bail them out you must be referring to 1980. The only Big Three bailout was Chrysler, who paid back $1 billion, plus interest. GM and Ford have never received government aid.
When you criticize the Big Three for building so many pickups, surely you’ve noticed the attempts Toyota and Nissan have made spending billions to try to get a piece of that pie. Perhaps it bothers you that for 31 straight years Ford’s F-Series has been the best selling vehicle. Ford and GM have dominated this market and when you see the new ‘09 F-150 you’ll agree this won’t change soon.
Did you realize that both GM and Ford offer more hybrid models than Nissan or Honda. Between 2005 and 2007, Ford alone has invested more than $22 billion in research and development of technologies such as Eco Boost, flex fuel, clean diesel, hybrids, plug in hybrids and hydrogen cars.
It’s 2008 and the quality of the vehicles coming out of Detroit are once again the best in the world.
Perhaps Sen. Shelby isn’t really that blind. Maybe he realizes the quality shift to American. Maybe it’s the fact that his state of Alabama has given so much to land factories from Honda, Hyundai and Mercedes Benz that he is more concerned about their continued growth than he is about the people of our country. Sen. Shelby’s disdain for “government subsidies” is very hypocritical. In the early ’90s he was the driving force behind a $253 million incentive package to Mercedes. Plus, Alabama agreed to purchase 2,500 vehicles from Mercedes. While the bridge loan the Big Three is requesting will be paid back, Alabama ’s $180,000-plus per job was pure incentive. Sen. Shelby, not only are you out of touch, you are a self-serving hypocrite, who is prepared to ruin our nation because of lack of knowledge and lack of due diligence in making your opinions and decisions.
After 9/11, the Detroit Three and Harley Davidson gave $40 million-plus emergency vehicles to the recovery efforts. What was given to the 9/11 relief effort by the Asian and European Auto Manufactures? $0 Nada. Zip!
We live in a world of free trade, world economy and we have not been able to produce products as cost efficiently. While the governments of other auto producing nations subsidize their automakers, our government may be ready to force its demise. While our automakers have paid union wages, benefits and legacy debt, our Asian competitors employ cheap labor. We are at an extreme disadvantage in production cost. Although many UAW concessions begin in 2010, many lawmakers think it’s not enough.
Some point the blame to corporate management. I would like to speak of Ford Motor Co. The company has streamlined by reducing our workforce by 51,000 since 2005, closing 17 plants and cutting expenses. Product and future product is excellent and the company is focused on one Ford. This is a company poised for success. Ford product quality and corporate management have improved light years since the nightmare of Jacques Nasser. Thank you Alan Mulally and the best auto company management team in the business.
The financial collapse caused by the secondary mortgage fiasco and the greed of Wall Street has led to a $700 billion bailout of the industry that created the problem. AIG spent nearly $1 million on three company excursions to lavish resorts and hunting destinations. Paulson is saying no to $250 billion foreclosure relief and the whole thing is a mess. So when the Big Three ask for 4 percent of that of the $700 billion, $25 billion to save the country’s largest industry, there is obviously oppositions. But does it make sense to reward the culprits of the problem with $700 billion unconditionally, and ignore the victims?
As a Ford dealer, I feel our portion of the $25 billion will never be touched and is not necessary. Ford currently has $29 billion of liquidity. However, the effect of a bankruptcy by GM will hurt the suppliers we all do business with. A Chapter 11 bankruptcy by any manufacture would cost retirees their health care and retirements. Chances are GM would recover from Chapter 11 with a better business plan with much less expense. So who foots the bill if GM or all three go Chapter 11? All that extra health care, unemployment, loss of tax base and some forgiven debt goes back to the taxpayer, us. With no chance of repayment, this would be much worse than a loan with the intent of repayment.
So while it is debatable whether a loan or Chapter 11 is better for the Big Three, a $25 billion loan is definitely better for the taxpayers and the economy of our country.
So I’ll end where I began on the quality of the products of Detroit . Before you, Mr. or Ms. Journalist continue to misinform the American public and turn them against one of the great industries that helped build this nation, I must ask you one question. Before you, Mr. or Madam Congressman vote to end health care and retirement benefits for 1 million retirees, eliminate 2.5 million of our nation’s jobs, lose the technology that will lead us in the future and create an economic disaster including hundreds of billions of tax dollars lost, I ask this question not in the rhetorical sense. I ask it in the sincere, literal way.
Can you tell me, have you driven a Ford lately?
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Panel: Congress was misled on Iraq uranium issue
By PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writer Pamela Hess, Associated Press Writer
37 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Former White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales misled Congress when he claimed the CIA in 2002 approved information that ended up in the 2003 State of the Union speech about Iraq's alleged effort to buy uranium for its nuclear weapons program, a House committee said Thursday. The committee also expressed skepticism about claims by then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice that she was unaware of the CIA's doubts about the claim before President George W. Bush's speech.
Iraq's alleged attempt to buy uranium was one of the justifications for the Bush administration's decision to go to war. The claim has since been repudiated.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee said in a memo that its investigation showed the CIA had warned at least four National Security Council officials not to allow Bush, in three speeches in 2002, to cite questionable intelligence that Iraq had attempted to obtain uranium. The sentences were stripped out of those speeches, but made it into the State of the Union address.
In a 2004 letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gonzales said the CIA had orally approved the inclusion of the claim in two 2002 speeches, although it did not appear in the final drafts. Gonzales later become attorney general.
Former CIA Director George Tenet wrote at length in his memoir about three memos the CIA had sent to the White House explaining why it doubted the claim and believed it should not be included in the speeches.
In July 2003, Rice acknowledged that the claim should not have made it into the speech based on what she had learned in the months since the State of the Union.
The committee said Gonzales, and Rice to a lesser degree, misled the public and Congress.
Rice "asserted publicly she knew nothing about any doubts the CIA had raised about this claim prior too the 2003 State of the Union address," according to the memo. Gonzales "asserted to the Senate — on her behalf — that the CIA approved the use of this claim in several presidential speeches."
The report said the evidence raises "serious questions about the veracity of the assertions that Mr. Gonzales made to Congress on behalf of Dr. Rice about a key part of the President's case for going to war in Iraq."
The House report is based largely on the testimony of a former CIA official and Obama transition adviser, Jami Misick, who was deputy director of intelligence at the CIA. Misick told the committee that in 2002 she spoke personally with Rice to dissuade her from allowing the claim to be in a speech.
Misick was interviewed by the Senate Intelligence Committee for its separate 2004 report on prewar intelligence and gave a different account, a Senate official said.
That committee report blamed poor CIA management for the information's use in the State of the Union, saying there was no reliable process for approving the use of intelligence in presidential speeches.
Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
37 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Former White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales misled Congress when he claimed the CIA in 2002 approved information that ended up in the 2003 State of the Union speech about Iraq's alleged effort to buy uranium for its nuclear weapons program, a House committee said Thursday. The committee also expressed skepticism about claims by then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice that she was unaware of the CIA's doubts about the claim before President George W. Bush's speech.
Iraq's alleged attempt to buy uranium was one of the justifications for the Bush administration's decision to go to war. The claim has since been repudiated.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee said in a memo that its investigation showed the CIA had warned at least four National Security Council officials not to allow Bush, in three speeches in 2002, to cite questionable intelligence that Iraq had attempted to obtain uranium. The sentences were stripped out of those speeches, but made it into the State of the Union address.
In a 2004 letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee, Gonzales said the CIA had orally approved the inclusion of the claim in two 2002 speeches, although it did not appear in the final drafts. Gonzales later become attorney general.
Former CIA Director George Tenet wrote at length in his memoir about three memos the CIA had sent to the White House explaining why it doubted the claim and believed it should not be included in the speeches.
In July 2003, Rice acknowledged that the claim should not have made it into the speech based on what she had learned in the months since the State of the Union.
The committee said Gonzales, and Rice to a lesser degree, misled the public and Congress.
Rice "asserted publicly she knew nothing about any doubts the CIA had raised about this claim prior too the 2003 State of the Union address," according to the memo. Gonzales "asserted to the Senate — on her behalf — that the CIA approved the use of this claim in several presidential speeches."
The report said the evidence raises "serious questions about the veracity of the assertions that Mr. Gonzales made to Congress on behalf of Dr. Rice about a key part of the President's case for going to war in Iraq."
The House report is based largely on the testimony of a former CIA official and Obama transition adviser, Jami Misick, who was deputy director of intelligence at the CIA. Misick told the committee that in 2002 she spoke personally with Rice to dissuade her from allowing the claim to be in a speech.
Misick was interviewed by the Senate Intelligence Committee for its separate 2004 report on prewar intelligence and gave a different account, a Senate official said.
That committee report blamed poor CIA management for the information's use in the State of the Union, saying there was no reliable process for approving the use of intelligence in presidential speeches.
Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
The George W. Bush Legacy
The George W. Bush Legacy as seen through the eyes of George W. Bush
President Bush tells interviewers he does not care how history will portray him.
The Los Angeles Times has obtained an internal White House memo giving cabinet members talking points for painting history a rosy portrait of Mr. Bush even though his image will only get worse, as new, damning facts emerge.
What does the memo say? And how are we obliged to correct its bizarre claims?
To start, it says Mr. Bush, quote, "...promised to raise standards and accountability in public schools -- and delivered the No Child Left Behind Act," an act so poorly received, that the Times points out it became a standard applause line this year... for Democrats.
Also from the memo: he curbed AIDS in Africa.
Its spread has slowed, and Mr. Bush has won praise for this but he has not won any praise for withholding funds from groups that promote condom use, a proven life-saver in favor of abstinence-only programs, which have also failed in this country.
Also, Mr. Bush's foreign-aid puritan, Randall Tobias quit last year after patronizing an escort service linked to prostitution.
Also from the memo: Mr. Bush lifted the economy with his tax cuts and, quote, "responded with bold measures to prevent an economic meltdown."
In 2005, Mr. Bush told a 57-year-old single mother of three, one of them mentally challenged, that it was "fantastic", "uniquely American" that she had to work three jobs unlike half a million people who have no job as of November... in the first presidency for decades during which family earning power fell, and income disparity continued to rise.
The "meltdown" he "prevented" now having claimed several Wall Street institutions which had weathered 1929, and 9/11... but not 43.
And, of course, the old standby, quote, he "kept the American people safe"...
Not counting 20 percent of his first term, January 20th, 2001, until September 11th, 2001.
On 9/11, he sat reading "My Pet Goat" for seven minutes after learning America was under attack.
Then covered up environmental dangers at Ground Zero, and failed to provide for the health of rescue workers.
Helped bin Laden's family flee the country.
Opposed the 9/11 Commission, the Department of Homeland Security.
Tried to outsource America's port security to Dubai.
Did not keep us safe from the shoe-bomber... alert passengers and crew did that...
Did not keep five Americans safe from anthrax... and never caught their killer.
Still hasn't caught the killer of 17 sailors aboard the USS Cole.
Still hasn't caught the killer of 3,000 on 9/11... outsourcing that to Afghans... turning that country into a narco-state, giving bin Laden a safe haven in the region of Waziristan by literally endorsing a truce that Pakistan signed with the Taliban there.
And most of all, not keeping safe 4,200 Americans dead in his war, a war that made us less safe, invading a country that posed no grave or gathering threat, provided a check on Iran... then igniting insurrection by disbanding the Baathist Party, creating a Muslim theocracy purged of its moderate intelligentsia. One in which freedom has marched backward for women.
And Lebanon, too, elected a Muslim theocracy... run by Hamas, no less.
Keeping us safe?
Terrorism is rising worldwide.
The still-thriving enemy has claimed Pakistan's Benazir Bhutto...
And thousands of people in India... including 200 in Mumbai last month.
Russia can now invade U-S allies without fear of retribution.
And Mr. Bush failed to prevent Kim Jong Il from joining the ranks of nuclear powers.
Despite even more ample warning than he received prior to 9/11, he lifted not a finger to keep a major American city safe from wind and water.
And what, finally, of the claim in the talking points... that Mr. Bush has always upheld, quote, "the honor and the dignity of his office"?
You must define dignity downward to find it in a lie.
The lie of "Mission Accomplished."
Of upholding the Constitution... or protecting habeas corpus.
That we do not eavesdrop without warrants... do not eavesdrop on Americans.
The lie that we do not torture.
That we do not play politics with justice... that we do not use the wheels of justice... to crush dissent.
That we do not betray those who serve us in secret.
That we uphold, rather than commute, the penalties for those who do.
That we do not stage fake news conferences, do not censor science... do not plant propaganda in Iraqi newspapers... nor pay US columnists to write it in American newspapers.
Or push respected Americans to vaporize their honor and dignity with lies to the world.
Or lie about the causes of the credit crisis, high gas prices, or even that he watched the first plane hit the North Tower on TV.
Where is the honor in vowing a crusade? Of daring those who would kill American troops to "bring it on?"
Of promising to care for the troops after you put them in harm's way, without body armor or up-armored vehicles?
Where was the honor, the dignity in giving a dead soldier's mother a presidential coin and telling her "don't sell it on eBay."?
His memo, revealing yet another lie.He does care how history will portray him.
And now... he knows.
President Bush tells interviewers he does not care how history will portray him.
The Los Angeles Times has obtained an internal White House memo giving cabinet members talking points for painting history a rosy portrait of Mr. Bush even though his image will only get worse, as new, damning facts emerge.
What does the memo say? And how are we obliged to correct its bizarre claims?
To start, it says Mr. Bush, quote, "...promised to raise standards and accountability in public schools -- and delivered the No Child Left Behind Act," an act so poorly received, that the Times points out it became a standard applause line this year... for Democrats.
Also from the memo: he curbed AIDS in Africa.
Its spread has slowed, and Mr. Bush has won praise for this but he has not won any praise for withholding funds from groups that promote condom use, a proven life-saver in favor of abstinence-only programs, which have also failed in this country.
Also, Mr. Bush's foreign-aid puritan, Randall Tobias quit last year after patronizing an escort service linked to prostitution.
Also from the memo: Mr. Bush lifted the economy with his tax cuts and, quote, "responded with bold measures to prevent an economic meltdown."
In 2005, Mr. Bush told a 57-year-old single mother of three, one of them mentally challenged, that it was "fantastic", "uniquely American" that she had to work three jobs unlike half a million people who have no job as of November... in the first presidency for decades during which family earning power fell, and income disparity continued to rise.
The "meltdown" he "prevented" now having claimed several Wall Street institutions which had weathered 1929, and 9/11... but not 43.
And, of course, the old standby, quote, he "kept the American people safe"...
Not counting 20 percent of his first term, January 20th, 2001, until September 11th, 2001.
On 9/11, he sat reading "My Pet Goat" for seven minutes after learning America was under attack.
Then covered up environmental dangers at Ground Zero, and failed to provide for the health of rescue workers.
Helped bin Laden's family flee the country.
Opposed the 9/11 Commission, the Department of Homeland Security.
Tried to outsource America's port security to Dubai.
Did not keep us safe from the shoe-bomber... alert passengers and crew did that...
Did not keep five Americans safe from anthrax... and never caught their killer.
Still hasn't caught the killer of 17 sailors aboard the USS Cole.
Still hasn't caught the killer of 3,000 on 9/11... outsourcing that to Afghans... turning that country into a narco-state, giving bin Laden a safe haven in the region of Waziristan by literally endorsing a truce that Pakistan signed with the Taliban there.
And most of all, not keeping safe 4,200 Americans dead in his war, a war that made us less safe, invading a country that posed no grave or gathering threat, provided a check on Iran... then igniting insurrection by disbanding the Baathist Party, creating a Muslim theocracy purged of its moderate intelligentsia. One in which freedom has marched backward for women.
And Lebanon, too, elected a Muslim theocracy... run by Hamas, no less.
Keeping us safe?
Terrorism is rising worldwide.
The still-thriving enemy has claimed Pakistan's Benazir Bhutto...
And thousands of people in India... including 200 in Mumbai last month.
Russia can now invade U-S allies without fear of retribution.
And Mr. Bush failed to prevent Kim Jong Il from joining the ranks of nuclear powers.
Despite even more ample warning than he received prior to 9/11, he lifted not a finger to keep a major American city safe from wind and water.
And what, finally, of the claim in the talking points... that Mr. Bush has always upheld, quote, "the honor and the dignity of his office"?
You must define dignity downward to find it in a lie.
The lie of "Mission Accomplished."
Of upholding the Constitution... or protecting habeas corpus.
That we do not eavesdrop without warrants... do not eavesdrop on Americans.
The lie that we do not torture.
That we do not play politics with justice... that we do not use the wheels of justice... to crush dissent.
That we do not betray those who serve us in secret.
That we uphold, rather than commute, the penalties for those who do.
That we do not stage fake news conferences, do not censor science... do not plant propaganda in Iraqi newspapers... nor pay US columnists to write it in American newspapers.
Or push respected Americans to vaporize their honor and dignity with lies to the world.
Or lie about the causes of the credit crisis, high gas prices, or even that he watched the first plane hit the North Tower on TV.
Where is the honor in vowing a crusade? Of daring those who would kill American troops to "bring it on?"
Of promising to care for the troops after you put them in harm's way, without body armor or up-armored vehicles?
Where was the honor, the dignity in giving a dead soldier's mother a presidential coin and telling her "don't sell it on eBay."?
His memo, revealing yet another lie.He does care how history will portray him.
And now... he knows.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Description of Waterboarding...graphic
I am going to post something that a lot of people are not going to like to read. It is something they may deny, it is something they want to pretend didn't happen. It is something I wish never happened, but it did. Our President and Vice-President ordered it, condoned it, and made sure it was done at several different levels in different places around the world. It was done in Guantanamo Bay, it was done in Abu Ghraib, it was done in many others we don't know of.
I can't imagine the pain, the horror of it, how it must feel to the person going through it. But this is a description of what is known as "Water Boarding". This is what VP Cheney admitted to saying he approved and pushed to have done by the CIA and our military. This is what Donald Rumsfeld said was OK to do to prisoners. This is what has been done on behalf of the USA to try to get information. It has been shown this doesn't work. That any information garnered is suspect at best, because you will do or say anything to make this stop. Think about it. What would you do if this was happening to you?
What are your thoughts now?? How do you feel?? Can you imagine what they are going through? Can you feel the pain? This is just one of the forms of torture that was used. There were others. What do you think of this?? I really would like to know.
I can't imagine the pain, the horror of it, how it must feel to the person going through it. But this is a description of what is known as "Water Boarding". This is what VP Cheney admitted to saying he approved and pushed to have done by the CIA and our military. This is what Donald Rumsfeld said was OK to do to prisoners. This is what has been done on behalf of the USA to try to get information. It has been shown this doesn't work. That any information garnered is suspect at best, because you will do or say anything to make this stop. Think about it. What would you do if this was happening to you?
Your feet are shackled, and so are your wrists. When you were lead into the room you saw that it did not have the usual table, this room had a board, and a drain in the floor. You are blindfolded by the guards and roughly forced to lie on the wet wooden board. Even though you are shackled they tie you down to the board with three ropes, one across your chest, one across your waist and one across your legs. You are now completely unable to move, your head is below the level of your feet making the blood rush to your head.
You can hear them moving around and hear a hose running, filling a bucket of water. Your heart begins to race as your mouth is forced open and a wet rag is stuffed inside. There is enough clothe that it fills your mouth, and prevents your teeth from meeting, even at the back of your mouth. You feel a person sitting next you on the board, and they put their hands on your stomach, just above your diaphragm and push down, keeping you from taking a deep breath through your nose. You sense someone else standing above your head, and then the water starts to pour over your face. Not a little, but a torrent of water, it is running up your nose, and you can not breath! Your gag reflex kicks in, but the rag in your mouth does not let you gag.
Your body begins to convulse, convinced in the most primitive of reflexes to try to do anything to get more air! You thrash but the ropes and shackles have you completely immobilized. You feel the water hitting your face, as the person on the bench presses down on your diaphragm, forcing what little air you have out, not in. You are now sure that you are going to die, that you are going to drown, not an abstract, but for real, and right now. Your chest burns with the need for more air, your eyes tear under the blindfold as you struggle to get one more breath.
You are no longer a rational human, you are now just a survival machine, ready to beg anyone, do anything to make the pain stop and get just one more breath. The water stops falling on you. You suck air in through your nose and try to suck it in through you mouth. Both bring more water along with the small amount of air you can get. You hear the hose running again and know that this is not over, it is just starting. Your heart is going like a trip hammer, and you are in a state of terror, like nothing you have ever experienced or thought of. You know if and when they ask you something, you will do or say anything, anything to prevent them from doing it again. Then the hands push on your stomach, and the water starts falling again.
You struggle, trying to hold your breath, but the gag reflex kicks in again, and again you become more animal than man as you struggle for breath your body wracked with pain and convulsively struggling to get free to breath.
What are your thoughts now?? How do you feel?? Can you imagine what they are going through? Can you feel the pain? This is just one of the forms of torture that was used. There were others. What do you think of this?? I really would like to know.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Pres. Bush talking to ABC's Martha Raddatz
President Bush, talking to ABC's Martha Raddatz, talks about the lies leading up to the Iraq invasion and the messy misadventure of the occupation:
BUSH: One of the major theaters against al Qaeda turns out to have been Iraq. This is where al Qaeda said they were going to take their stand. This is where al Qaeda was hoping to take–
RADDATZ: But not until after the U.S. invaded.
BUSH: Yeah, that’s right. So what? The point is that al Qaeda said they’re going to take a stand. Well, first of all in the post-9/11 environment Saddam Hussein posed a threat. And then upon removal, al Qaeda decides to take a stand.
So What?? So What??? So what about the 4,000 lives lost in that war in Iraq and that's just on our side, so to speak. So what about the over 1 million Iraqi lives lost as civilians? So what about the thousands and thousands of injured who can never return to any kind of normal life, who have lost arms, legs, parts of brains, parts of families, parts of lives, parts of their world, parts of themselves that will never be replaced by anything or anyone. SO WHAT??? How can this man sit and say in that smirky attitude of his, SO WHAT??? That to me is just unbelievable. And then he laughs when a man throws a shoe at him. One of the highest insults in the Arabic world. Then says he has no idea why the man would do that. This man has been in an American prison in Iraq, was tortured by Americans and has lost part of his family to American soldiers.
Were they Blackwater mercanaries?? Were they regular military?? We don't know. But Pres. Bush sent them there. And this man holds him responsible. And then he says SO WHAT.
Dubya and his whole administration are determined to spin the whole of the last eight years as "ancient history". Raddatz should have thrown out her script at that point and eaten him alive, but she didn't. Yet another failure of the tame media, who are too afraid of losing their precious access to ask the obvious questions even now. Ian Williams of The Guardian laments the paucity of journalistic backbone on display:
With a few notable exceptions like Helen Thomas, Bush's press conferences have not generated the indignation he so richly deserves from a largely quiescent White House press corps that needs government inspectors and Congressmen to tell it when it can be surprised and even occasionally indignant.
In a parochial way, one can understand why the press corps lacks indignation over Iraq's 100,000,000 civilians dead and injured and over two million external refugees, plus untold more internally displaced.
But it is still surprising that so many reporters can be polite and deferential with someone who has turned the US Federal Reserve into a giant Ponzi scheme and broken the world's strongest economy. They defer humbly to someone who has contrived the deaths of 4,200 US servicemen and women in Iraq. It even failed to follow through on questions about the president's murky military record with the Texas Air National Guard while his peers were dying in Vietnam. This intrepid press
corps showed no compunction in following in minute detail Clinton's screwing
around, but kept silent as Bush screwed entire nations.
Last week, a Senate report pointed the finger directly at Bush and his senior officials for authorising - indeed, ordering - torture and abuse of detainees. But no one threw any shoes.
It is that fawning quiescence that allowed Bush to tell Bob Woodward: "I'm the commander – see, I don't need to explain – I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation."
Monday, December 15, 2008
Bring them home, Santa
I really don't have anything to say to this. There is nothing I can add. The video says it all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)