Friday, July 15, 2005

Republican "Consistency"

Fri Jul 15th, 2005 at 11:37:18 PDT

From Think Progress:

Dick Armey, circa Oct. 2003:

Now, there was no reason to tell the world about the ambassador's wife. It was just a short-sighted, self-centered, simple-minded cowardly act of revenge, and who's paying the cost? The Bush White House... If they ever find [the leakers], they ought to just -- they ought to just kick them out of the White House and prosecute them, because...the greater the pretension, the greater the hypocrisy. [CNN, 10/19/03]

Dick Armey now:

We've got Karl Rove, who is under this constant attack of political malarkey, who has probably the most documented case of his evidence of anyone in the the whole story. So quite frankly, I think the American people are seeing it for what it is right now. More than anything else it's a political farce not a matter of national security interests. [Fox News, 7/14/05]

Thursday, July 14, 2005

GOP lying and covering up Rove's involvement in Plamegate

If you have been following all the spin coming from the Republican talking heads including Congressman Pete King of New York, you are hearing a set of talking points made by the White House to protect Karl Rove at any cost. They say that Karl Rove didn't leak Plames identity because he didn't mention her by "name" in the e-mail, however anyone could have found out who Joseph Wilson's wife was by doing a simple Google search.
According to them, the outing of a covert CIA agent is no big deal and because they claim Plame was not covert.
Here are the GOP talking points issued to the Republican media and spin misters:

All in an attempt to protect Rove and smear Wilson and Plame.
MN. Senator Norm Coleman said that the Rove/Plame development was just partisan attacks by the Democrats. (Try telling that to the Department of Justice who is leading the investigation into Roves involvement) The Bush administration has been dishonest to the American people about Rove's involvement, they have claimed since 2003 that Rove wasn't involved, "how would they know?"
What does Bush and Cheney really know about the Plame leak? Who is the second administration official involved in the leak as described by Cooper?
The right-wing media has been desperately trying to discredit Joseph Wilson and trying even harder to convince everyone that Valerie Plame wasn't really a legitimate "covert" CIA agent, and that the leak didn't put anyones career of life in danger.
This administration seems more interested in protecting its ass then protecting the Constitution and safety of our country. Their making light of this breach of national security as if it is no big deal, this is what worries me the most. We are is serious danger when an administration condones these kinds of crimes by its highest officials. And the stonewalling by Scotty McClellen and President Bush is only making things look worse for them. They can run but they cant hide.
What a complete disgrace this administration is, and what it has done to or country is beyond the pale.

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

New Tobacco Fee Could Be A Smuggler's Dream

"And some of the smuggling is believed to be supporting terrorist networks in the Middle East.'
July 13, 2005
(AP) St. Paul If lawmakers approve a 75-cent tobacco fee to the price of each pack of cigarettes, Minnesota could become a land of opportunity for smugglers, a report suggests.

With the new fee, Minnesota would have the highest state tobacco levy in the Upper Midwest and the 12th-highest in the nation.

Such disparities among the states have created a lucrative incentive for smugglers in recent years, according to a congressional study and federal authorities. And some of the smuggling is believed to be supporting terrorist networks in the Middle East.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty proposed the fee on tobacco sales to break a budget logjam in the Legislature. It would increase Minnesota's levy on a 10-pack carton of cigarettes to $12.30. That's compared with $4.60 per carton in Wisconsin and $8.70 per carton in Iowa.

The House and Senate plan to vote on the measure Wednesday.
read more

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

Has the Turd Blossom Express Reached the End of the Line?

July 12, 2005

by Arianna Huffington

The Rove Scandal Train is picking up momentum (even here in Nice)… just ask Scottie McClellan, who is starting to look more and more like Ron Ziegler with every passing press briefing.

Actually, two separate Rove trains have left the station (and, no, this isn't going to be one of those old algebra problems they used to give us). The legal train and the political train -- heading along two very separate tracks. But it's now clear that the White House damage control team has decided to try and link the two (maybe this is one of those algebra problems: "If two trains leave the White House heading in opposite directions, one leading to a Federal courthouse and the other to Political Siberia, can even a Boy Genius keep both of them from going off track?").
(continue above link)

Tell the President to Keep His Word



During a White House Press Briefing on September 30, 2003 President Bush said the following in response to a question regarding the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity, "... if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of." When asked at a post G-8 Summit News Conference on June 10, 2004 if he stood by his statement that he would fire whoever was responsible for the leak, Bush said, "Yes. And that's up to the U.S. attorney to find the facts."
Karl Rove should be fired and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. There can be no gray area here, regardless of how he phrased it, regardless of how much detail he provided; he revealed the identity of an undercover CIA agent. What Mr. Rove did is reprehensible. Putting the life of an undercover CIA agent in jeopardy cannot be tolerated. He clearly deserves his pink slip.
(click link at top to sign petition)

Lying To The American People

While the Right Wing seeks to defend Karl Rove by exploring the technicalities of the laws against exposing the identity of CIA agents, it is important to remember what the Bush Administration indisputably has already done in this affair -- lied to the American people.

White House Leaks: A serious security matter

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD

President Bush has plenty of evidence to begin acting on Karl Rove's involvement in the disclosure of a secret agent's name to exact political vengeance. The president's choice will say a lot about whether he intends to control abuses of power within what some see as one of the most power-hungry administrations the United States has ever experienced.

The president ought to be outraged that, so far, one reporter has gone to jail for acting honestly while some in his administration continue to be free of consequences for revealing Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA operative. The leak of her name and role to Bush-friendly columnist Robert Novak in 2003 was a violation of federal law, if done deliberately.

For reasons that aren't clear but should cause great unease, Novak apparently faces no legal difficulty while New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who didn't write about the disclosure, sits in jail for rightly refusing to disclose her sources as a matter of high principle.

Bush administration officials became angry at Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, in July 2003, when he revealed that an investigative trip he made to Niger in 2002 showed that Iraq had made no effort to acquire uranium there. In a New York Times Op-Ed article, Wilson said the administration had twisted the evidence to make a case for its invasion of Iraq earlier in the year.
more

Sunday, July 10, 2005

How are America's rich making sacrifices for the "War on Terror"?

7/10/05

by Lomstradamus

It is puzzling to me how a country during wartime can fund a war against "terror" yet make rolling tax cuts for the richest in our nation.
President Bush talks about how the war in Iraq is a worthy cause even with over 1,700 casualties and tens of thousand of veterans coming home without arms or legs.
While the soldiers and their families are the ones making the real sacrifices in this war, and the middle and lower class are paying for it in taxes and their children's blood, what are the rich sacrificing here at home to support this war?
May I remind everyone that the Bush administration claimed that Iraq's oil sales would pay for this war, which was a selling point that made sense to most people.
While record deficits keep piling up and no real end of the war in sight, how can Bush justify all the tax cuts which are only helping the rich?
Are the rich offering up their children to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan?
It seems like a win win situation for the richest among us.
Bush always brings up the word "sacrifice" in his addresses to the nation, I'm baffled as to how the elite in this country are making sacrifices. It seems that they are making profits and endless ones at that.
The term "war on terror" is meaningless because terror is not a thing, it is not a country, it isn't even a group of people. Terror is an ideology that has no end. The Bush administration using military force to rid the middle east of terror is ridiculous, and it is further proof of how out of touch they are with the real reasons terror exists.
If you even mention the word "Western policies" to pro-war hawks as a possible reason for the upsurge in terror against America, they get very angry and defensive as though it couldn't be anything "we" have done to create this hatred in the Islamic world.
They claim we are spreading democracy and freedom around the world, and they say "aren't you interested in spreading democracy and ending evil dictatorships" and my answer is yes, but not by isolating ourselves from the rest of the world and bullying other countries into "your either with us or your with the terrorists" style of diplomacy which Bush offered up to the U.N. and other countries worldwide.
The "war on terror" is a slogan created just as the "war on drugs" was created in the Reagan era/ The only problem is that military wars don't win either conflict.
Ideas must be fought from Ideological perspective, and while I agree that the "terrorists" such as Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda deserve no negotiation or diplomatic terms, our leaders must take an honest look at our policies from the past and the current ones we have right now.
I believe that the Iraq war has created a vacuum for which is producing new leagues of terrorists who hate America.
How can the Republican party say it supports our troops while they cut veterans benefits to our wounded soldiers, while at the same time give outrageous tax cuts to the super rich?
It makes me sick to my stomach......

Global qWagmire: Experts fear Bush's Iraq adventure touched off "endless" worldwide insurgency

Experts fear 'endless' terror war
Analysts say al-Qaida is mutating into a global insurgency

The Associated Press
Updated: 8:38 p.m. ET July 9, 2005

New York and Washington. Bali, Riyadh, Istanbul, Madrid. And now London.

When will it end? Where will it all lead?

The experts aren’t encouraged. One prominent terrorism researcher sees the prospect of “endless” war. Adds the man who tracked Osama bin Laden for the CIA, “I don’t think it’s even started yet.”

An Associated Press survey of longtime students of international terrorism finds them ever more convinced, in the aftermath of London’s bloody Thursday, that the world has entered a long siege in a new kind of war. They believe that al-Qaida is mutating into a global insurgency, a possible prototype for other 21st-century movements, technologically astute, almost leaderless. And the way out is far from clear.

In fact, says Michael Scheuer, the ex-CIA analyst, rather than move toward solutions, the United States took a big step backward by invading Iraq.

'Self-sustaining' jihad
Now, he said, “we’re at the point where jihad is self-sustaining,” where Islamic “holy warriors” in Iraq fight America with or without allegiance to al-Qaida’s bin Laden.

The cold statistics of a RAND Corp. database show the impact of the explosion of violence in Iraq: The 5,362 deaths from terrorism worldwide between March 2004 and March 2005 were almost double the total for the same 12-month period before the 2003 U.S. invasion.

Thursday’s attacks on London’s transit system mirrored last year’s bombings of Madrid commuter trains, and both point to an al-Qaida evolving into a movement whose isolated leaders offer video or Internet inspiration — but little more — to local “jihadists” who carry out the strikes.

Although no arrests have been made in the London attacks, a group using al-Qaida’s name made a claim of responsibility, otherwise unconfirmed. Experts say the bombings bore hallmarks of al-Qaida.

The movement’s evolution “has given rise to a ‘virtual network’ that is extremely adaptable,” said Jonathan Stevenson, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Washington office.

The movement adapted, for example, by switching from targeting aviation, where security was reinforced after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, to the “softer” targets of mass transit.

Such compartmentalized groupings, in touch electronically but with little central control, “are going to be a prototype for understanding where terrorist movements are going in the 21st century,” said the University of North Carolina’s Cynthia Combs, co-author of a terrorism encyclopedia.

Cycle of recruitment
Combs said the so-called Earth and Animal Liberation fronts in the United States are examples — if less lethal ones — of “leaderless” militant movements based on isolated cells. She also said it’s not unrealistic that another American example — far-right “militia” cells — might make common cause someday with foreign terrorists against the U.S. government.

Bruce Hoffman, the veteran RAND Corp. specialist who fears an “endless war,” dismisses talk of al-Qaida’s “back” having been “broken” by the capture of some leaders.

“From the terrorists’ point of view, it seems they have calculated they need to do just one significant terrorist attack a year in another capital, and it regenerates the same fear and anxieties,” said Hoffman, who was an adviser to the U.S. occupation in Iraq.

What should be broken, he said, is the cycle of terrorist recruitment through the generations. “Here you come to the main challenge.”

He and most of the other half-dozen experts said the world’s richer powers must address “underlying causes” — lessen the appeal of radicalism by improving economies, political rights and education in Arab and Muslim countries.

Combs cited bin Laden’s use of Afghanistan as his 1990s headquarters. “If we hadn’t been ignoring Afghanistan and instead offered real assistance, would it have become a base for bin Laden?” she asked.

'Depressing' outlook
Not all agree this is an answer. Stephen Sloan, another veteran scholar in the field, prescribes stoicism.

The American, British and other target publics must give their intelligence and police agencies time to close ranks globally and crush the challenge, said Sloan, of the University of Central Florida.

“The public has to have the resolve to face the reality there will be other incidents,” he said.

Scheuer, who headed the CIA’s bin Laden unit for nine years, sees a different way out — through U.S. foreign policy. He said he resigned last November to expose the U.S. leadership’s “willful blindness” to what needs to be done: withdraw the U.S. military from the Mideast, end “unqualified support” for Israel, sever close ties to Arab oil-state “tyrannies.”

He acknowledged such actions aren’t likely soon, but said his longtime subject bin Laden will “make us bleed enough to get our attention.” Ultimately, he said, “his goal is to destroy the Arab monarchies.”

For James Kirkhope, the outlook is “depressing.”

His Washington consultancy, Terrorism Research Center, sometimes “red-teams” for U.S. authorities, playing a role in exercises, thinking like terrorist leaders. That thinking increasingly seems focused on a struggle for Islamic supremacy lasting hundreds of years, he said.

And for the moment they just “want to be kept on our radar screen,” Kirkhope said. For all the terror and carnage, he said, last week’s London attacks carried a simple message: “We’re still around.”

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

© 2005 MSNBC.com

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8524679/