The Fulcrum

Friday, October 22, 2004

We Are NOT Safer 

The MSNBC article from which I took the post below is a damning indictment against nearly everything BushCo. have done since 9/11. The whole thing - and it's pretty long - is worth reading, but two things stuck out to me as indicative of the ideological blindness of Bush and his nefarious neocon advisors.

The first is that right after 9/11, Iran was cooperating, through back door diplomatic channels, with the US. They delivered lists of suspected al Qaeda operatives and leaders that had attempted to transition through Iran but had been sent back to their home country: Saudi Arabia. The list also included al Qaeda suspects who were in virtual house arrest in Iran. In exchange for this, the Iranians wanted the US to interview a couple of detainees in GITMO who were suspected of killing several people in Iran.

But the neocons would have none of it; and this valuable conduit of information was closed. Weeks later Bush would include Iran in his "axis of evil."

The second was that many former Bush administration members have started using terms like "cancer" and "metastacizing" to describe what's happened to al Qaeda and their ability to recruit since the beginning of the Iraq war.

Jihadist terrorism has always posed what strategists call an "asymmetric threat," capable of inflicting catastrophic harm against a much stronger foe. But the way it operates, they said, is changing. Students of al Qaeda used to speak of it as a network with "key nodes" that could be attacked. More recently they have described the growth of "franchises." Gordon and Falkenrath pioneered an analogy, before leaving government, with an even less encouraging prognosis.

Jihadists "metastasized into a lot of little cancers in a lot of different countries," Gordon said recently. They formed "groups, operating under the terms of a movement, who don't have to rely on al Qaeda itself for funding, for training or for authority. [They operate] at a level that doesn't require as many people, doesn't require them to be as well-trained, and it's going to be damned hard to get in front of that."
Remember these two paragraphs when Bush next says that we've captured or killed 75% of the leaders of al Qaeda. The leaders don't matter any more.

Despite these things, readily visible to anyone not wearing the rose colored glasses so in vogue with Republicans these days, Bush continues to be "resolute" and to "stay the course." He continues to use the same, tired, disproved rhetoric:

Most officials interviewed said Bush has not devised an answer to a problem then-CIA Director George J. Tenet identified publicly on Feb. 11, 2003 -- "the numbers of societies and peoples excluded from the benefits of an expanding global economy, where the daily lot is hunger, disease, and displacement -- and that produce large populations of disaffected youth who are prime recruits for our extremist foes."

The president and his most influential advisers, many officials said, do not see those factors -- or U.S. policy overseas -- as primary contributors to the terrorism threat. Bush's explanation, in private and public, is that terrorists hate America for its freedom.
Just as in the US, BushCo. ignores the plight of the poor and displaced and forges ahead in their misguided zeal to impose their own vision of the future on the world. But we've seen what that vision can bring during the past four years. We've seen the destructive and divisive power of that vision; a vision so limited by ideology and corporate ties.

It is well past time for a new vision.


War on Terror Just a Campaign Ploy? 

An interesting tidbit in a larger, interesting piece on MSNBC this morning.

But at least a dozen current and former officials who have held key positions in conducting the war now say they see diminishing returns in Bush's decapitation strategy. Current and former leaders of that effort, three of whom departed in frustration from the top White House terrorism post, said the manhunt is important but cannot defeat the threat of jihadist terrorism. Classified government tallies, moreover, suggest that Bush and Vice President Cheney have inflated the manhunt's success in their reelection bid.
Is there nothing that BushCo. won't use to scare the voters? Is there no lie they won't tell to get reelected?


A Krauthammer Cockup 

Writing in today's Wall Street Journal, Charles Krauthammer continues the right's attempt to scare any group it can identify. In his piece today, Krauthammer raises the bogeyman of Democratic antisemitism in the guise of anti-Zionism.

Any thinking person will already know that the two are not the same and that there are plenty of Jews who are against the militant Zionism of Ariel Sharon and his band of bandits. For more on this, you should keep an eye on Eric Alterman's Altercation. But Krauthammer, like Bush and Cheney with weapons of mass distraction, ignores reality and raises the scariest, most hateful of strawmen in the scariest, most hateful of editorial pages knowing that no WSJ reader would dare knock it down.

So, with what does Mr. Krauthammer try to scare us all?

So in a "new bargain with our allies" America "re-engages" in the "peace process" in return for troops and money in Afghanistan and Iraq.
That's right; John Kerry will become engaged in trying to bring peace to the Middle East. He will bring a little balance, perhaps, to our currently insane non-policy. Oh sure, BushCo. have declared that they support a "two state" solution, but they've done nothing to ensure that there's anything left of what could become a Palestinian state. While they've condemned the terrorism of the Palestinians - and deservedly so - they've uttered not a word about Sharon's destructive incursions into Palestinian lands.

In a part of the world that has lived by blood feuds and revenge for millennia, Bush's hamfisted and tone-deaf efforts at foreign policy have done nothing over the past four years to bring the Middle East closer to a true and lasting peace. Like all of his other promises and policies, his Middle East policies and efforts have been complete failures. They are just another in a long and still growing list of reasons why he must be voted out.

Bush has indeed been an equal opportunity president. He has done something to offend us all.


Thursday, October 21, 2004

That's a Good Dog, Tony... 

Tony Blair plays the nice lap dog again for Georgie - and agrees to put his troops right in the middle of the mess we've created in central Iraq. I think someone else might have a little trouble holding on to office next time around...


Branded 

Regardless of what this story says, no matter how the military spins it, this is not good for this officer or her unit:

The company commander of a U.S. Army Reserve unit whose soldiers refused to deliver fuel along a dangerous route in Iraq has been relieved of her duties, the U.S. military said Thursday.

The decision to relieve the commander of the 343rd Quartermaster Company came at her request and is effective immediately, according to a statement from the 13th Corps Support Command. It was authorized by Brig. Gen. James E. Chambers.

“The outgoing commander is not suspected of misconduct and this move has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of anyone involved,” the statement said.
Company commanders do not - ever - request to be relieved of their command unless there are very, very bad things happening. The fact that she was relieved of command, regardless of who asked for it, means that her military career is over. She will never again get command of troops, she will never be promoted. And that means that she will be forced to resign at some point in the near future.

I think this officer is going to find out what it means to be the fall guy for this administration. What's the real story behind this?


Should've Stayed in Bed 

Hopefully the start of my day was not a harbinger of things to come for the rest of the day.

After walking out into the garage this morning, locking the door as I do every day, halfway to my car I realized that I didn't have any keys. Neither did my wife since she wasn't driving today. Luckily we almost always can drive in to work together which saves gas and wear and tear on our other car. Unluckily, that means only one of us usually has their keys with them.

So, there we were, in the garage, locked out of the house. This morning it was rainy, windy and only about 45 degrees. And with no keys we couldn't even start the car to stay warm. Or get to work.

Thank goodness for cell phones.

After trying every tool in his kit, the locksmith that we called - and had to wait an hour for - finally had to drill out the lock. After he comes back with a new door set, keys it for our current key and adds the "house call" charge, I can't even imagine what this is all going to cost. Whatever it turns out to be, it will likely be less than the cost of one of our double-glazed argon filled, energy efficient windows that we considered breaking.

So, we got to start our day two hours behind. I just hope the rest of the day is better.

So - how was your morning?


Wednesday, October 20, 2004

Propaganda is Propaganda 

I missed this piece by Mitch Albom, a sports writer for The Detroit Free Press. Of course, I never read the sports section or watch sports of any kind; and I wouldn't have found it if my mom hadn't pointed it out in an e-mail.

Let's get a few facts straight. Sinclair is a big company. It gives lots of money to politicians, almost exclusively Republicans. It ordered its stations not to run the "Nightline" program that listed the names of the dead American soldiers in Iraq. One of its top executives also doubles as a conservative commentator. It has a sad record of using its public broadcasting license -- yes, Americans, not conglomerates, still own the airwaves -- to regularly promote Republican causes.
Make sure to read the rest. It's well written and truly "fair and balanced."


Are You Safer Now Than You Were Four Years Ago? 

I've laid out, in previous posts, plenty of reasons why the answer to that question is NO. Here's another:

Iran said it test fired on Wednesday a more accurate version of its Shahab-3 missile, already believed capable of hitting Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf.

Iran has previously announced that it has increased the missile's range to 1,250 miles, an upgrade from a range pencilled in at 800 miles by military experts.
Feeling safer?


The Big Dog Steps Up 

This is really good news for the last week of the campaign!

Former President Clinton will campaign for Sen. John Kerry early next week in Philadelphia, a senior Democratic official who is familiar with the former president's plans said Tuesday.
I hope that Bill's doing well in his recovery and strong enough to help out in the home stretch.


Draft 

Despite Bush's repeated insistence that there will be no draft if he's reelected, it looks more and more likely that he is lying. Earlier in the week there were reports that BushCo. is working on plans to draft medical and other high-need personnel. These plans supposedly included public relations spin to sell the plan to doctors and the public. Soldiers are already being held past their ETS (End Term of Service) dates by Stop Loss Orders. There have been stories (LA Times - subscription) about soldiers being pressured - and even threatened - to reenlist. Yesterday brought news that some elite training units were being stripped of senior soldiers who were sent to Iraq.

Today, the Wall Street Journal (subscription) has this:

For the second straight year, U.S. Army recruiters fell short of their goal for signing up enlistees in the first month of a new recruiting cycle.

For the first 30-day period in its new recruiting year, the Army was 30% shy of its goal of signing up 7,274 recruits. The Army had a particularly hard time recruiting for the Army Reserve, on which the Pentagon has relied heavily in Iraq and Afghanistan. Enlistments for the reserves were 45% below the target.

In the same period last year, the Army came up 25% short in its goal in the first month for enlisting 6,220 regular recruits and 40% short of its reserve enlistment goal.
If Bush is reelected, he's promised more of the same as far as foreign policy and preemptive wars go. So ask yourself this: how could there not be a draft?


Tuesday, October 19, 2004

Support the Troops 

It's what Bush says he does; it's on every other car. But what does that phrase mean in the black-is-white world of this presidency? We've all read the reports about troops deploying without the proper training and equipment. Lots of it is dismissed by Republicans and their apologists/spin doctors as partisan sniping.

But what do the soldiers say? From the Wall Street Journal (subscription):

A Pentagon survey shows substantial doubts among many Army Reservists about their units' preparedness for wartime missions, amid intense debate in the presidential campaign about whether U.S. troops are spread too thin.

In the survey conducted in the spring, almost half of the Army Reserve soldiers who responded said their units weren't "well prepared" for their wartime missions. Army Reservists who had served in Iraq graded their units' readiness for war even lower; only 45% of those veterans said their unit was "well prepared for its wartime mission," compared with 54% of Army Reserve members overall, the survey found.
So what's the result of such doubts about their units' readiness? What happens when soldiers don't have the equipment, training and support they need?

They die.

Or, if they are luckier than that, they can try making a statement:

The Army Reserve soldiers who refused orders last week to drive a dangerous supply route through Iraq's Sunni triangle were members of the 343rd Quartermaster Company, one of the few units in Iraq whose trucks lack protective armor, the unit's commanding general said at a news conference over the weekend.

Brig. James E. Chambers, the commander of the 13th Corps Support Command, said concerns about the lack of armor along with vehicle maintenance led the soldiers to balk at the mission. "Not all of their trucks are completely armored. In their case, they haven't had the chance to get armored," Gen. Chambers said of the unit.
It's not a great choice for a soldier.


Get Outta Here! 

I have to agree with Pissed-off Patricia at BlondeSense. All of you out there who are so pumped up about Bush and his never ending war on terror and "intention to have thoughts about weapons of mass destruction related activities" should get your asses out from in front of your computers and enlist.

The stuff he's saying now on TV, he didn't have the guts to say to Senator Kerry's face during the debates. Now, with his cozy little ass kissing audience, he's tough and as usual, nasty. I find it so very strange that he smiles when he speaks of the most dastardly events. I also find it very strange that so damned many people actually believe the bullshit that he's saying.
It's strange watching Bush's handpicked crowds cheering every known lie. But if they are so gung-ho to have other peoples' kids killed, maybe they'd like to join up and see just what it is they are so pumped up about.


Monday, October 18, 2004

The Faith Based Presidency 

This article by Ron Suskind goes a long way towards explaining what is so frightening about G.W.; as a person and as president. Thanks to GD Frogsdong's B&A for the link.

In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
How is it that this zealot, this idiot is tied with Kerry? Can it really be that half of Americans that plan to vote are stupid? Are they that uninformed?

Excuse me while I go bang my head on my desk for a while. It keeps me from screaming.


The Supreme Injustice 

The potential for the next president to nominate as many as four Supreme Court Justices during their term has been discussed often by bloggers on both sides of the political spectrum. I've mentioned it on occasion as well. But an opinion piece in today's New York Times is the most instructive and concise writing I've seen on what a court, dominated by conservatives of the Scalia/Thomas variety, would do to America.

Abortion might be a crime in most states. Gay people could be thrown in prison for having sex in their homes. States might be free to become mini-theocracies, endorsing Christianity and using tax money to help spread the gospel. The Constitution might no longer protect inmates from being brutalized by prison guards. Family and medical leave and environmental protections could disappear.
Sounds very scary - but that's only the beginning. Go read the rest; it's much worse. Maybe worse than you think.


Gesundheit! 

Although apparently the Department of Health and Human Services was told that there was great danger in the small number of companies making flu vaccine. There may have even been hints that this year's loss of about half of the available stocks was possible. Despite this, nothing has been done. Although we've known about this looming crisis for a couple of weeks, the government has not - according to an NPR News piece this morning - done any emergency planning for the results of a flu epidemic this year.

But there was an article in today's Wall Street Journal (subscription), that might actually get BushCo. to move on this issue. Seems that business might be affected by the lack of vaccines.

The flu is the leading cause of Americans calling in sick to work, with 5% to 20% of U.S. residents contracting the flu on average each year. According to one survey, Americans miss on average 1.2 to 1.4 days of work each year as a result of the flu.

A recent study by ComPsych Corp., Chicago, found that 40% of people who don't get flu shots miss some time at work because of the flu, compared with less than 20% of people who receive flu shots.

"If we have a normal flu season and there are no shots available we're going to have a significant number of people miss work," says Richard A. Chaifetz, chairman and chief executive of ComPsych. He suggests that any labor-dependent industries that rely heavily on performance during the peak flu season in the U.S. from December through March, could be affected significantly. "In an economy that is forcing people to do more with less, this could be a tough season."
It's not that people will get sick that will get this administration to move; caring for citizens hasn't been high on their list for the past four years, no reason that should change now. But if business is going to suffer, if their corporate donors are going to have less money... well now. That's serious.


Stuff

Politics
Move On


Previous Posts

Google

Web The Fulcrum
Free Google Page Rank Checker

TTLB Ecosystem

Bloggers Parliament
Bloggers Parliament

Issues and Google Bombs
visit LIBERAL FORUM

Shopping

Directories

Site Stuff

Creative Commons License

The Fulcrum Archives

Refering Sites

Who Links to Me