20050516
"Most bad people think they're good people!"
Star Wars jabs at 'Bush's empire'
...dialogue about bloodshed and despicable acts being needed to bring "peace and stability" to the movie's universe, mainly through a fabricated war, set the scene.
'Star Wars: Episode III - The Fall Of The Republic' raises questions of U.S. imperialism
Among the lines they cite is when Anakin tells former mentor Obi-Wan Kenobi "If you're not with me, then you're my enemy." After the Nine-Eleven attacks, Bush said, "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
"Hey, no kidding, Osama really is still alive!"
Osama to prove his presence soon
A dead nemesis perpetuated by the US government
It's been 1,337 days since GWB said he'd catch UBL 'Dead or Alive!'
"Foreign fighters" thesis accords with psy-ops goal of creating an association between Sept. 11 and Iraq!
The attraction of the "foreigners thesis" for Washington is obvious. It allows the Bush administration to sidestep the implication that a substantial proportion of the Iraqi public violently rejects the US presence. And it implicitly ties Iraq to al-Qaeda, which accords with a long-term black psy-ops operation of the administration aimed at making a connection between Iraq and September 11 in the minds of Americans (actually, there is none).
Iraqi rebels better armed than we first thought, say US marines
Many rebels wore bullet-proof vests and a number had Soviet-designed armour piercing bullets and night sights, equipment rarely seen previously in Iraq.
Execution-Style Killings Continue in Iraq
The killings - and the dumping of bodies - appear to be aimed at discouraging Iraqi men from joining the expanding security forces, which have taken an increasing role in fighting the insurgency.
U.S. Army misses April recruiting goal by 42 percent
The all-volunteer Army is providing the majority of the ground forces for an Iraq war in which 1,600 U.S. troops have died.
Awol crisis hits the US forces
As I see it, there can be no law that enforces one to serve in a war which is itself illegal.
The precedent is a simple one. Let's say you contract to move the contents of warehouse A to warehouse B, but you discover that the man who contacted you does not actually own the contents of Warehouse A. So you stop doing the work. Would any court force you to continue to move the contents of warehouse A to warehouse B because you signed the contract? No, because the underlying premise of the contract; that the work was legal, is null and void, and all contracts based on that false premise are likewise null and void.
The war in Iraq is illegal. Bush lied when he activated the Congressional Authorization for the use of force in Iraq. Therefore the Congressional Authorization for the use of force in Iraq is not legally in effect at this time. Therefore, no serving soldier is obligated either legally or morally or remain in Iraq.
Presidential Letter initiating Iraq war
With the leak of the British memo making it obvious that the claims about WMDs were intentional lies, the US Mainstream media is now trying to claim that Bush sold the war on the subject of "regime change" (a violation of the Treaty of Westphalia).
However, as President Bush's own letter to Congress activating the Congressional Authorization for the use of force in Iraq clearly shows, Bush was claiming that the reason for the war was the threat Iraq posed to the United States. The reference to the United Nations resolutions qualifies the threat as pertaining to weapons of mass destruction.
Yet again, the mainstream media is caught lying to the people to try to protect Bush from the public consequences of his lies about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
Iraq is a bloody no man's land. America has failed to win the war. But has it lost it?
That depends on the objective.
Did the US get Saddam's 'nookular' weapons? No, the US did not. They never existed. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
Did the US punish Saddam for supporting Al Qaeda? No. Even the US Government admitted there was no such support. Al Qaeda and Saddam were political opposites. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
Did the US get revenge for 9-11? No, the Us now admits Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
Did the US gain cheap oil? No, the US is spending $5 billion a month to get back $150 million worth of oil. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
Did the US free the Iraqi people from Saddam's thugs? No, the US interim authority has hired most of them back to fulfill the same tasks they had before. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
Did the US end the threat of terrorism? Hardly. The Us is more hated now than at any other time in the nation's history. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
I don't think there is any question that at least in terms of the war's stated objectives, the US has lost, and indeed could never have won.
Rice says U.S. will remain until Iraq `can defend itself'
WHAT DRUGS IS THIS BITCH ON?
Iraq is defending itself. The only foreign fighters in Iraq are American Occupation Troops.
A Welcome Parade of Seething Anger
"Insh'Allah [God willing], Iraq will be the graveyard of the Americans," adds Ahmed. "Qaim is three small villages, and with all their planes and tanks they still fail to control it. If they were brave they should attack one or two villages without planes and helicopters and tanks and fight man to man!"
'They shot at us like rabbits'
GRAPHIC eyewitness accounts of the massacre of civilians by troops in the Uzbek town of Andijan emerged yesterday from fleeing refugees.
With human rights organisations reporting a death toll of up to 500 in Friday’s massacre, survivors told of soldiers machine-gunning women, children and their own police comrades.
Uzbek massacre a dilemma for US
Accusations that Uzbek forces slaughtered women and children "like rabbits" have placed the Bush Administration in a quandary over its support for President Islam Karimov, the strongman of Central Asia.
Why is Washington standing by Uzbekistan's dictator Islam Karimov?
America's bipartisan foreign policy – that socializes the risks and privatizes the profits of a mercantilist militarism – is simply not sustainable, either morally or materially. It will break us financially, or it will bankrupt us morally. We're on a fast track to Doomsday in any case.
Uzbek opposition rallies after bloody
"The president will have to answer for the deaths of hundreds of innocent children, women and men, for their blood, for the genocide of the Uzbek people."
Uzbek troops shut off second town
Several hundred people were killed during Friday's protests, according to local doctors and NGOs.
Karzai warns heavy-handed US troops as riots spread
The Afghan leader, installed with Washington's support in 2001 and often derided as an American puppet, seemed to be bowing to a growing mood of popular anger with American military tactics and uneasiness over how long bases will remain on Afghan soil.
Muslims doubt Quran climbdown
Well, frankly, so do I.
Muslims skeptical over Newsweek back-track on Koran
"We will not be deceived by this," Islamic cleric Mullah Sadullah Abu Aman told Reuters in the northern Afghan province of Badakhshan, referring to the magazine's retraction. "This is a decision by America to save itself. It comes because of American pressure. Even an ordinary illiterate peasant understands this and won't accept it. The call for a jihad, or holy war, still stands."
Newsweek Got Gitmo Right
The claim that U.S. troops at Bagram prison in Afghanistan urinated on the Koran was made by former detainee Mohamed Mazouz, a Moroccan, as reported in the Moroccan newspaper, La Gazette du Maroc. (Abdelhak Najib, "Les Américains pissaient sur le Coran et abusaient de nous sexuellement," April 12, 2005.)
"The Americans urinated on the Qur’an and sexually abused us."
About the Quran, I must specify that I rued the fact that they gave us the sacred Book to read. Afterwards they used it as a form of torture, in the same way that they had used it in Bagram to push us to madness. It was a game for them. They came to take it one day, they gave it back again to us another day, then came to take it again and this, for all our detention time, not forgetting all the other aspects which I described above. Obviously, we responded by hunger strikes, cries, suicide attempts, blows and each time, we were broken in blood. They could also come to shave our hair and beard, to make us eat what they wanted, to give us injections and to throw us into isolation. We asked them to torture us physically, but not to touch the Quran, but there was nothing we could do. Their aim was to wound us in whatever we deemed most precious.
Koran desecration report 'wrong'
"a crude attempt, both by the weekly magazine and the American authorities to defuse the anger of the Muslims across the world".
THE CENSORSHIP CAMPAIGN GETS A BOOST: NOTHING BUT GOOD NEWS 24/7, PLEASE…AND DON’T MAKE US MAKE YOU!
Censorship is what they're after, and don't let them tell you otherwise. They announced this goal unmistakably at least a year ago. (Here's the classic, regret-filled formulation: "And here's a question: Freedom of the press, as it exists today (and didn't exist, really, until the 1960s) is unlikely to survive if a majority--or even a large and angry minority--of Americans comes to conclude that the press is untrustworthy and unpatriotic. How far are we from that point?") Of course, they "regret" that censorship might be necessary. It's a terrible shame and all that. But damn it, if magazines like Newsweek ARE GOING TO GET PEOPLE KILLED...well, what can we do? We obviously have to shut them up. They brought it on themselves. It's their own damned fault. Of course, we'd like to have a free press, but THEY'RE GETTING PEOPLE KILLED!
Newsweek says Koran desecration report is wrong
On Sunday, Afghan Muslim clerics threatened to call for a holy war against the United States.
White House bashes Newsweek report on Koran
McClellan complained that the story was "based on a single anonymous source who could not personally substantiate the allegation that was made."
Newsweek Apologizes for Quran Story Errors
"It's puzzling. While Newsweek now acknowledges that they got the facts wrong, they refuse to retract the story," said presidential spokesman Scott McClellan.
The Pentagon decries the magazine's use of anonymous sources in an untrue story that sparked violent protests among Muslims.
The magazine has apologized for the story, in which it alleged interrogators at Guantánamo Bay had flushed a copy of the Quran down a toilet. "We regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst," the apology read.
The item, with its reference to the mistreatment of the Koran, was spotted by someone on the Arabic-language television news channel al-Jazeera and broadcast as a news report. Since then, there have been violent riots in at least six areas: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan, the Palestinian territories and Indonesia. A dozen or more people have died.
Do not blame the news media for this. Instead, all the effort needs to go into convincing the world that the abuse has stopped, and will never be allowed to start again.
Did the White House dribble the Plame leak through its own fake mouthpiece news source?
A fake news service employs a fake reporter who apparently was the only one "identified by the Washington Post as having knowledge of the [leaked CIA] memo's existence." What leaked CIA memo, you ask? The one in which "Wilson ... suggests his wife was instrumental in his selection for the fact-finding trip to Africa."
The Bush administration acknowledged for the first time yesterday that President Bush should not have alleged in his State of the Union address in January that Iraq had sought to buy uranium in Africa to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program.
WHITE HOUSE: Well, there is zero, nada, nothing new here. Ambassador Wilson, other than the fact that now people know his name, has said all this before. But the fact of the matter is in his statements about the Vice President -- the Vice President's office did not request the mission to Niger. The Vice President's office was not informed of his mission and he was not aware of Mr. Wilson's mission until recent press accounts -- press reports accounted for it. So this was something that the CIA undertook as part of their regular review of events, where they sent him. But they sent him on their own volition, and the Vice President's office did not request it. Now, we've long acknowledged -- and this is old news, we've said this repeatedly -- that the information on yellow cake did, indeed, turn out to be incorrect.
Q But if he thought that source was correct, why would there have been --
WHITE HOUSE: No, because he said, for a presidential speech, we ought to be -- the standard ought to be higher than just relying upon one source. Oftentimes a lot of these things that are embodied in this document are based on multiple sources. And in this case, that was a single source being cited, and he felt that that was not appropriate. And that's -
WHITE HOUSE: I need to correct you there. I did not say at that time that it was flawed. That was later known by the forged document.
Itwas a single source on a foreign government. And what Director Tenet has said is that in those instances he'd be more comfortable for the President not to cite a single source. It's not because it was flawed, and that's a critical difference. So the reason there was because it was a single source, not because it was flawed.
Gaza withdrawal opponents block roads in Israel
"This is our struggle against fascism," the protesters in Jerusalem shouted before police dragged them out of the road and took them away. ¶ 16.5.05
...dialogue about bloodshed and despicable acts being needed to bring "peace and stability" to the movie's universe, mainly through a fabricated war, set the scene.
'Star Wars: Episode III - The Fall Of The Republic' raises questions of U.S. imperialism
Among the lines they cite is when Anakin tells former mentor Obi-Wan Kenobi "If you're not with me, then you're my enemy." After the Nine-Eleven attacks, Bush said, "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
"Hey, no kidding, Osama really is still alive!"
Osama to prove his presence soon
A dead nemesis perpetuated by the US government
It's been 1,337 days since GWB said he'd catch UBL 'Dead or Alive!'
"Foreign fighters" thesis accords with psy-ops goal of creating an association between Sept. 11 and Iraq!
The attraction of the "foreigners thesis" for Washington is obvious. It allows the Bush administration to sidestep the implication that a substantial proportion of the Iraqi public violently rejects the US presence. And it implicitly ties Iraq to al-Qaeda, which accords with a long-term black psy-ops operation of the administration aimed at making a connection between Iraq and September 11 in the minds of Americans (actually, there is none).
Iraqi rebels better armed than we first thought, say US marines
Many rebels wore bullet-proof vests and a number had Soviet-designed armour piercing bullets and night sights, equipment rarely seen previously in Iraq.
Execution-Style Killings Continue in Iraq
The killings - and the dumping of bodies - appear to be aimed at discouraging Iraqi men from joining the expanding security forces, which have taken an increasing role in fighting the insurgency.
U.S. Army misses April recruiting goal by 42 percent
The all-volunteer Army is providing the majority of the ground forces for an Iraq war in which 1,600 U.S. troops have died.
Awol crisis hits the US forces
As I see it, there can be no law that enforces one to serve in a war which is itself illegal.
The precedent is a simple one. Let's say you contract to move the contents of warehouse A to warehouse B, but you discover that the man who contacted you does not actually own the contents of Warehouse A. So you stop doing the work. Would any court force you to continue to move the contents of warehouse A to warehouse B because you signed the contract? No, because the underlying premise of the contract; that the work was legal, is null and void, and all contracts based on that false premise are likewise null and void.
The war in Iraq is illegal. Bush lied when he activated the Congressional Authorization for the use of force in Iraq. Therefore the Congressional Authorization for the use of force in Iraq is not legally in effect at this time. Therefore, no serving soldier is obligated either legally or morally or remain in Iraq.
Presidential Letter initiating Iraq war
With the leak of the British memo making it obvious that the claims about WMDs were intentional lies, the US Mainstream media is now trying to claim that Bush sold the war on the subject of "regime change" (a violation of the Treaty of Westphalia).
However, as President Bush's own letter to Congress activating the Congressional Authorization for the use of force in Iraq clearly shows, Bush was claiming that the reason for the war was the threat Iraq posed to the United States. The reference to the United Nations resolutions qualifies the threat as pertaining to weapons of mass destruction.
Yet again, the mainstream media is caught lying to the people to try to protect Bush from the public consequences of his lies about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
Iraq is a bloody no man's land. America has failed to win the war. But has it lost it?
That depends on the objective.
Did the US get Saddam's 'nookular' weapons? No, the US did not. They never existed. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
Did the US punish Saddam for supporting Al Qaeda? No. Even the US Government admitted there was no such support. Al Qaeda and Saddam were political opposites. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
Did the US get revenge for 9-11? No, the Us now admits Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
Did the US gain cheap oil? No, the US is spending $5 billion a month to get back $150 million worth of oil. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
Did the US free the Iraqi people from Saddam's thugs? No, the US interim authority has hired most of them back to fulfill the same tasks they had before. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
Did the US end the threat of terrorism? Hardly. The Us is more hated now than at any other time in the nation's history. So, in terms of that objective, the US has lost.
I don't think there is any question that at least in terms of the war's stated objectives, the US has lost, and indeed could never have won.
Rice says U.S. will remain until Iraq `can defend itself'
WHAT DRUGS IS THIS BITCH ON?
Iraq is defending itself. The only foreign fighters in Iraq are American Occupation Troops.
A Welcome Parade of Seething Anger
"Insh'Allah [God willing], Iraq will be the graveyard of the Americans," adds Ahmed. "Qaim is three small villages, and with all their planes and tanks they still fail to control it. If they were brave they should attack one or two villages without planes and helicopters and tanks and fight man to man!"
'They shot at us like rabbits'
GRAPHIC eyewitness accounts of the massacre of civilians by troops in the Uzbek town of Andijan emerged yesterday from fleeing refugees.
With human rights organisations reporting a death toll of up to 500 in Friday’s massacre, survivors told of soldiers machine-gunning women, children and their own police comrades.
Uzbek massacre a dilemma for US
Accusations that Uzbek forces slaughtered women and children "like rabbits" have placed the Bush Administration in a quandary over its support for President Islam Karimov, the strongman of Central Asia.
Why is Washington standing by Uzbekistan's dictator Islam Karimov?
America's bipartisan foreign policy – that socializes the risks and privatizes the profits of a mercantilist militarism – is simply not sustainable, either morally or materially. It will break us financially, or it will bankrupt us morally. We're on a fast track to Doomsday in any case.
Uzbek opposition rallies after bloody
"The president will have to answer for the deaths of hundreds of innocent children, women and men, for their blood, for the genocide of the Uzbek people."
Uzbek troops shut off second town
Several hundred people were killed during Friday's protests, according to local doctors and NGOs.
Karzai warns heavy-handed US troops as riots spread
The Afghan leader, installed with Washington's support in 2001 and often derided as an American puppet, seemed to be bowing to a growing mood of popular anger with American military tactics and uneasiness over how long bases will remain on Afghan soil.
Muslims doubt Quran climbdown
Well, frankly, so do I.
Muslims skeptical over Newsweek back-track on Koran
"We will not be deceived by this," Islamic cleric Mullah Sadullah Abu Aman told Reuters in the northern Afghan province of Badakhshan, referring to the magazine's retraction. "This is a decision by America to save itself. It comes because of American pressure. Even an ordinary illiterate peasant understands this and won't accept it. The call for a jihad, or holy war, still stands."
Newsweek Got Gitmo Right
The claim that U.S. troops at Bagram prison in Afghanistan urinated on the Koran was made by former detainee Mohamed Mazouz, a Moroccan, as reported in the Moroccan newspaper, La Gazette du Maroc. (Abdelhak Najib, "Les Américains pissaient sur le Coran et abusaient de nous sexuellement," April 12, 2005.)
"The Americans urinated on the Qur’an and sexually abused us."
About the Quran, I must specify that I rued the fact that they gave us the sacred Book to read. Afterwards they used it as a form of torture, in the same way that they had used it in Bagram to push us to madness. It was a game for them. They came to take it one day, they gave it back again to us another day, then came to take it again and this, for all our detention time, not forgetting all the other aspects which I described above. Obviously, we responded by hunger strikes, cries, suicide attempts, blows and each time, we were broken in blood. They could also come to shave our hair and beard, to make us eat what they wanted, to give us injections and to throw us into isolation. We asked them to torture us physically, but not to touch the Quran, but there was nothing we could do. Their aim was to wound us in whatever we deemed most precious.
Koran desecration report 'wrong'
"a crude attempt, both by the weekly magazine and the American authorities to defuse the anger of the Muslims across the world".
THE CENSORSHIP CAMPAIGN GETS A BOOST: NOTHING BUT GOOD NEWS 24/7, PLEASE…AND DON’T MAKE US MAKE YOU!
Censorship is what they're after, and don't let them tell you otherwise. They announced this goal unmistakably at least a year ago. (Here's the classic, regret-filled formulation: "And here's a question: Freedom of the press, as it exists today (and didn't exist, really, until the 1960s) is unlikely to survive if a majority--or even a large and angry minority--of Americans comes to conclude that the press is untrustworthy and unpatriotic. How far are we from that point?") Of course, they "regret" that censorship might be necessary. It's a terrible shame and all that. But damn it, if magazines like Newsweek ARE GOING TO GET PEOPLE KILLED...well, what can we do? We obviously have to shut them up. They brought it on themselves. It's their own damned fault. Of course, we'd like to have a free press, but THEY'RE GETTING PEOPLE KILLED!
Newsweek says Koran desecration report is wrong
On Sunday, Afghan Muslim clerics threatened to call for a holy war against the United States.
White House bashes Newsweek report on Koran
McClellan complained that the story was "based on a single anonymous source who could not personally substantiate the allegation that was made."
Newsweek Apologizes for Quran Story Errors
"It's puzzling. While Newsweek now acknowledges that they got the facts wrong, they refuse to retract the story," said presidential spokesman Scott McClellan.
The Pentagon decries the magazine's use of anonymous sources in an untrue story that sparked violent protests among Muslims.
The magazine has apologized for the story, in which it alleged interrogators at Guantánamo Bay had flushed a copy of the Quran down a toilet. "We regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst," the apology read.
The item, with its reference to the mistreatment of the Koran, was spotted by someone on the Arabic-language television news channel al-Jazeera and broadcast as a news report. Since then, there have been violent riots in at least six areas: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan, the Palestinian territories and Indonesia. A dozen or more people have died.
Do not blame the news media for this. Instead, all the effort needs to go into convincing the world that the abuse has stopped, and will never be allowed to start again.
Did the White House dribble the Plame leak through its own fake mouthpiece news source?
A fake news service employs a fake reporter who apparently was the only one "identified by the Washington Post as having knowledge of the [leaked CIA] memo's existence." What leaked CIA memo, you ask? The one in which "Wilson ... suggests his wife was instrumental in his selection for the fact-finding trip to Africa."
The Bush administration acknowledged for the first time yesterday that President Bush should not have alleged in his State of the Union address in January that Iraq had sought to buy uranium in Africa to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program.
WHITE HOUSE: Well, there is zero, nada, nothing new here. Ambassador Wilson, other than the fact that now people know his name, has said all this before. But the fact of the matter is in his statements about the Vice President -- the Vice President's office did not request the mission to Niger. The Vice President's office was not informed of his mission and he was not aware of Mr. Wilson's mission until recent press accounts -- press reports accounted for it. So this was something that the CIA undertook as part of their regular review of events, where they sent him. But they sent him on their own volition, and the Vice President's office did not request it. Now, we've long acknowledged -- and this is old news, we've said this repeatedly -- that the information on yellow cake did, indeed, turn out to be incorrect.
Q But if he thought that source was correct, why would there have been --
WHITE HOUSE: No, because he said, for a presidential speech, we ought to be -- the standard ought to be higher than just relying upon one source. Oftentimes a lot of these things that are embodied in this document are based on multiple sources. And in this case, that was a single source being cited, and he felt that that was not appropriate. And that's -
WHITE HOUSE: I need to correct you there. I did not say at that time that it was flawed. That was later known by the forged document.
Itwas a single source on a foreign government. And what Director Tenet has said is that in those instances he'd be more comfortable for the President not to cite a single source. It's not because it was flawed, and that's a critical difference. So the reason there was because it was a single source, not because it was flawed.
Gaza withdrawal opponents block roads in Israel
"This is our struggle against fascism," the protesters in Jerusalem shouted before police dragged them out of the road and took them away. ¶ 16.5.05
