Glenn: The War on Terror has normalized even the most warped powers

from the wapo...

President Obama plans to issue an executive order Wednesday giving the Treasury Department authority to freeze the U.S.-based assets of anyone who “obstructs” implementation of the administration-backed political transition in Yemen.

The unusual order, which administration officials said also targets U.S. citizens who engage in activity deemed to threaten Yemen’s security or political stability, is the first issued for Yemen that does not directly relate to counterterrorism.

Unlike similar measures authorizing terrorist designations and sanctions, the new order does not include a list of names or organizations already determined to be in violation. Instead, one official said, it is designed as a “deterrent” to “make clear to those who are even thinking of spoiling the transition” to think again. . . .

The order provides criteria to take action against people who the Treasury secretary, in consultation with the secretary of state, determines have “engaged in acts that directly or indirectly threaten the peace, security or stability of Yemen, such as acts that obstruct the implementation of the Nov. 23, 2011, agreement between the Government of Yemen and those in opposition to it, which provides for a peaceful transition of power . . . or that obstruct the political process in Yemen.”

glenn...

Jeremy Scahill, who has reported extensively from Yemen over the last year, reacted to the news of this Executive Order this morning by writing: ”This Executive Order appears to be an attack on Americans’ 1st Amendment Rights and Yemenis’ rights to self-determination“; he added: ”apparently the 1st Amendment had an exception about Yemen in it that I missed.” He then asked a series of questions, including: “What if a Yemeni citizen doesn’t believe in a one candidate ‘election’ and is fighting to change their government? US sanctions?” and ”How would Obama define an American citizen as ‘indirectly’ threatening the stability of Yemen’s government?” and “what if an American citizen doesn’t support Yemen’s government and agitates for its downfall? Sanctions from US Treasury? Wow."

but wait, there's more...

[A] bipartisan group of House members is attempting to enact a law specifying that the indefinite detention powers vested in the President by last December’s passage of the NDAA does not apply to those arrested on U.S. soil; in other words, they are trying to ban military detention on American soil without charges. Even though President Obama, after he signed the bill into law, said he does not intend to use these powers for that purpose, the sponsors of this bill are concerned that — because the law does vest this power — Obama could change his mind at any time or a subsequent President could use those powers. Unfortunately, they are being opposed by key Democratic Senators such as Carl Levin in close cooperation with standard neocon members of Congress. As one tweeter wrote to me yesterday about this: “The fact that government has to be told NOT to do that is insane.” Indeed, and it’s easy to forget how frequently true that is. But the War on Terror has so normalized even the most warped powers — warrantless eavesdropping, torture, indefinite detention, renditions, due-process-free-assassinations, Executive Orders like the one today — that it’s sometimes easy to forget that this is the only real reaction that should be needed.

god i hate reading about this shit... it seems that a day doesn't go by without more bad news about the u.s. constitution and the bill of rights being summarily shredded...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Obama DOJ argued for the SCOTUS strip search ruling

glenn...

The 5-judge conservative faction held that prison officials may strip-search anyone arrested even for the most minor offenses before admitting them to the general population of a jail or prison, even in the absence of a shred of suspicion that they are carrying weapons or contraband.

i'd been reading about this development since it was announced but if i hadn't read glenn this morning, i would have continued to labor under the misconception that the recent supreme court ruling allowing strip searches was strictly an outcome of the court itself... however, as glenn points out, "the Obama DOJ formally urged the Court to reach the conclusion it reached"...

another thing i didn't know is this...

The procedures endorsed by the majority are forbidden by statute in at least 10 states and are at odds with the policies of federal authorities. According to a supporting brief filed by the American Bar Association, international human rights treaties also ban the procedures.

glenn concludes...

What is needed most — a strong countervailing force to these policies coming from a place other than the neoconservative Right and corporatist oligarchs — is exactly what is missing. That there is such vehement condemnation over this strip-search ruling, almost all of which ignores the fact that the Obama administration was fully on board with it and helped to bring it about, is — as this VastLeft cartoon suggests — a microcosm for how and why that has happened.

here's the cartoon...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Obama the neo-con is no longer in the closet

for those of us who've been waiting for obama to rip off his mask and reveal his true self, andrew levine, writing in counterpunch, claims that has now happened...

[W]ith what remains of organized labor finally beginning to fight back, and with the Occupy movements of last fall getting ready to burst forth again, American politics is no longer just an electoral circus in which two semi-established parties huckster their offerings to “moderate” voters. Because Democrats and Republicans are beholden to the same interests and because there are few differences between them that are not merely stylistic or cosmetic, our electoral politics has long been mainly of sociological or even clinical interest; what called for an explanation was why two such likeminded parties became so polarized, why they couldn’t “all just get along.” Now we have more important things to concern us; real politics is back.

But Obama is still relevant, especially in an election year, when our media can be counted on to work overtime covering every facet of the horse race, while ignoring matters of graver consequence. It is therefore timely to reflect on the trajectory of Obama’s governance to this point, and on one rather startling development in the Obama story that has emerged in recent weeks – his newfound willingness to trumpet neoconservative ideas.

Obama, or at least the Obama of term one, will be remembered, above all, for disappointing the hopes of the constituencies that put him in office. He will also be remembered not just for having raised the level of ambient hypocrisy, but for the audacity with which he talks the talk, while walking a very different walk. The more Obama waxes ‘populist,’ the better the rich do, and the more corporate criminality flourishes. The more he speaks of peace, the more the drones fly, and the more his very own Murder Incorporated (Navy Seals and the rest) spread murder and mayhem.

He gets away with it, in large part, because he’s good at fooling some of the people all of the time – not all liberals, but a sizeable number of them. Once it becomes clear to all that the Republicans will nominate their least scary contender, expect those liberals to make fools of themselves big time. No longer can they make a case for Obama by playing up the absurdity of a Trump or Cain or Bachmann presidency. Soon, they won’t have Newt Gingrich to kick around any more either. Expect Rick Santorum too to go the way of what Google says he is — unless, as in Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri, Romney again miscalculates and underspends.

[...]

But Obama’s readiness of late to signal approval for neoconservative ideology marks a new departure. What makes it all the more astonishing is how unnecessary it is. It is not as if anything is changing at the policy level. In deeds, not words, Obama has always been a practicing neocon; from Day One he could justifiably have declared “we are all neoconservatives now.” But he had too much sense to do anything of the sort — then.

[...]

Unless we have all been wrong about how smart Obama is, it could hardly be because he finds neocon musings intellectually engaging. And we can only hope that he isn’t testing the waters, seeing how much liberals of the Obama-is-the-best-of-all-possible-presidents school will accept. The most likely explanation is that, with an election coming, this is a calculated move on Obama’s part to close what space there is that separates him from Romney, the better to capture the rightward veering center.

Whatever the cause, there are indications of late that Obama has taken on board Kagan’s main contention – that American power is not in decline; that, quite the contrary, we are on the threshold of another glorious American century. The plain implication is that there is no hard crash in the offing, and therefore no need for the empire to change course. American world dominance isn’t over yet, and won’t be for the foreseeable future. And for this, the argument goes, the world can only be grateful.

[...]

But until now he has at least tried to be discreet about it; he was just a closet neocon. Now that is changing. Is it because he feels that the pressure to go to war against Iran is becoming irresistible, and that the wisest course for him, in an election year, is: if you can’t beat them, to join them? All that is clear for now is that the neocon con is back, and that it is happening not just in the Romney campaign – and, for what difference it makes, also in Gingrich’s and Santorum’s — but also, blatantly, at Obama’s instigation.

at least perhaps now, we can step away from the cognitive dissonance that has plagued those of us who have continued to cling to the "hope and change" mantra...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

A call for a direct focus on our super-rich elites, the ones who are calling the shots

one of the real benefits of the "global awakening," particularly as it's being played out currently in the u.s. (in places like madison, wisconsin), is that it's drawing back the curtain on those behind those they have installed as their puppets... case in point: it's not scott walker, the wisconsin governor, we should be focusing on, it's charles and david koch, the super-rich elite money-men who finance and enable people like walker...

george goehl writing in the nation...

We need to get to the root of the issue of budgets—we’re facing a revenue crisis. There is simply not enough money in our cities and states to support the investments needed to rebuild the American middle class. The good news is this: we know where the money is. And though politicians might tell you differently, it’s not in Grandma’s pension. It’s not in the homes of families fighting off foreclosure. And it’s not in the pockets of American schoolchildren or schoolteachers. It’s on Wall Street.

Jacob Lew, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, told the New York Times that the “easy cuts” are behind us. “Easy cuts” are those that impact the poor and less powerful. The hard cuts—the ones that are so hard that few in statehouses or Washington are talking about them—would mean ending tax breaks and free rides for Wall Street and the corporations they finance. These cuts are hard not because they hurt everyday people but because they would force elected officials to go toe-to-toe with the economic elites who finance their campaigns. And because too few politicians have the stomach for this fight, it’s clear we’ll have to lead it ourselves.

To do this, we need to hold elected officials accountable and directly challenge the moral abuses of major corporate powers. We get in trouble when we're doing only one or the other and missing half the fight. Right now the mix is uneven. That’s why we need to move from directing most of our energy toward the pawns of the corporate class to going directly to those calling the shots. Imagine if every time we organized a protest at a statehouse or on Capitol Hill we also marched on a bank or the headquarters of a corporation that is impeding an economic recovery for American families. It’s critical that we make this shift, because if this battle simply pits people against politicians, it allows those with the most power to be absent from the story and therefore absent from any real accountability. [emphases added]

david korten describes the unholy alliances that have been manipulated by those elites to bring us to the ugliness of today...

In the 1970s, an alliance of elite interests began preparing to roll back the measures that created the American middle class and launched a full-scale class war during the 1980s under the banner of the Reagan revolution.Corporate interests provided the money and controlled the real agenda. Religious fundamentalists provided votes in return for lip service to a conservative social agenda opposing abortion, family planning, and gay marriage. Libertarians provided an ideological framework removing constraints to the unlimited concentration of wealth in the name of market freedom. Neo-conservatives provided justification for wars and outsized military expenditures to swell the profits of the defense industry and secure corporate access to the world’s resources and markets.

you've gotta admit, those wealthy elites have done one hell of a job...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

These people have a Ph.D in lying

very much in line with my own reactions at the despicable, implied declarations of "victory" in iraq, jeremy scahill and keith olbermann try offering up a little dose of reality...



if you don't watch it, you should know that they pull no punches...

Discussion centered around President Obama's address on the Iraq war and the ensuing criticism from neocons who complained Obama should've thanked and praised President George W. Bush for the 'success' of the surge in Iraq.

"These people have a Ph.D in lying and a master's degree in manipulating intelligence," Scahill says of the neocons, "And it is, it's really sobering to see this kind of brash historical revisionism happening in real time. The idea that these people want to post some kind of false flag of victory on the corpses of all who have died in Iraq because of their decisions. These people destabilized Iraq, they destabilized the Middle East, with their neo-con vision of redrawing maps, and they didn't even succeed in their own stated mission. This is a special kind of pathological sickness that these individuals are plagued with."

Scahill then begins to bust the 'surge' myth, "Pardon me for introducing a little bit of fact onto cable news over these 24 hours, but the reality is there was no success of the surge. The fact is that Bush's policy in Iraq caused massive destabilization, led to a civil war that killed upwards of a million Iraqis; there were ethnic cleansing campaigns. When the surge troops went in there, Baghdad was a walled-off city, the Sunnis had been pushed out and sided with the United States, Muqtada al Sadr responded to the announced timetable for withdrawal that the neocons so opposed by saying he considered it a truce with America and pulled his forces off the street... So, the entire surge myth permeates to this day, and its actually one big lie."

"Let's remember... that it was the Bush administration's policy in Iraq that created an al Qaeda presence in that country. It was their policies that destabilized that country and caused the deaths of so many Americans and so many Iraqi civilians. Stephen Hadley probably sees Osama bin Laden at his corner store or hiding in his bathroom somewhere, so... These people have ZERO credibility, and have no business in public life anymore." In conclusion the award-winning investigative journalist declares, "They shouldn't be able to leave their houses without being confronted with the death and destruction that their lives caused."

and these criminals are still walking around free...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 2 comments

When somebody like Max Boot writes an op-ed supporting Obama, my concerns with Obama turn to despair

not good...

President Obama and his aides continue to impress with their handling of Afghanistan. Not only have they approved a major troop increase and a de facto commitment to nation-building, but now they have shifted personnel to make the most effective use of the added resources and turn around a failing war effort.

max boot is right up there with bill kristol, charles krauthammer, michael smerconish, and karl rove in being a neocon to the bone... i've been less than thrilled with the obama administration so far, but to see one of these guys jumping on board is more than deeply troubling...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Our neo-con, macho asshole problem

after reading the headline and the lede, i didn't have the stomach to read the rest...

How to solve the pirate problem

By Jonah Goldberg

Shooting three Somali pirates was a good start. Now let's shoot some more.

jerk...

could someone please explain to me how killing people is the solution to our problems...? i'm afraid the connection escapes me...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Boot, Kagan, and Kagan - the neocon dogs of war attempt to justify more troops and more war in Afghanistan

why in god's name are these discredited, blood-thirsty hacks still getting prime op-ed space in the new york times...?

In addition to sending more soldiers, we must also increase our efforts to expand the Afghan security forces. It may be impossible to speed up the pace of building the Afghan National Army, but the current proposed end-strength of 134,000 troops is far too low. We should immediately commit to a goal of 250,000 troops for the army, and a substantial increase in the national police as well. Afghan troops also need lots of better equipment — everything from armored vehicles to night-vision goggles.

[...]

The key question for those who advocate pulling back is this: Where will we get the intelligence to direct the raids? If we have few troops on the ground, we will have to rely on intercepted communications. But seven years into the fight, the terrorists have learned a thing or two about keeping their communications secret. The only way to get the intelligence we need is from the residents, and they won’t provide it unless our troops stay in their villages to provide protection from Taliban retribution.

This struggle is not just about Afghanistan. It is also about tracking and effecting what is going on in Pakistan’s tribal areas. That is where the global Qaeda leadership is. It is the nexus of terrorist groups including the Lashkar-e-Taiba, which is implicated in the Mumbai, India, attacks last November; the Tehreek Nifaz-e-Shariat Mohammadi, which now has control of the Swat region in Pakistan; and Baitullah Mehsud’s Pakistani Taliban, which are said to have plotted the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the former Pakistani prime minister.

From their positions across the border in Afghanistan, American forces can literally see these areas. They can also gather invaluable intelligence from, and spread our influence to, the tribes that straddle the frontier. But we get that vantage point only as long as we have something to offer the Afghans — security, improved quality of life, hope for a better government. If we abandon them, we will become blind to one of the most dangerous threats to our security, and also hand our most determined enemies an enormous propaganda victory — their biggest since 9/11.

Make no mistake: there is hard, costly fighting ahead in Afghanistan. But the fight is worth pursuing, and the odds of success are much better than they were in Iraq when we launched the forlorn hope known as the surge.

Max Boot is a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. Frederick Kagan is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Kimberly Kagan is the president of the Institute for the Study of War.

good lord, please spare me... (special note to the nyt: please keep this crew the hell away from the op-ed page...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The taste you and I have been waiting for

yes, i've momentarily succumbed to schadenfreude...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

U.S. reinstates Fulbright scholarships for Gaza students but will Israel let them leave?

on friday i posted my outrage over israel refusing exit visas to fulbright scholarship winners in gaza and the u.s. state department summarily canceling the offers... thankfully, a sufficient outcry went up to force a re-thinking of such idiocy...

The American State Department has reinstated seven Fulbright grants offered to Palestinians in Gaza for advanced study in the United States, reversing a decision to withdraw the scholarships because of Israel’s ban on Palestinians’ leaving Gaza for study abroad.

The American Consulate in Jerusalem sent e-mail messages on Sunday night to all seven telling them it was “working closely” with Israeli officials to secure them exit permits. Maj. Peter Lerner, spokesman for the Israeli Defense Ministry’s office of civilian affairs, said the Gazans would be granted permits after individual security checks.

israel had better not pull any bullshit over those "individual security checks"...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Israel is simply vicious to not allow Gaza students to pursue their Fulbright awards

a fulbright scholarship is one of the best vehicles available for building positive person-to-person relationships between the people of the u.s. and those of other countries, but israel, in its crazed obsession with power, control, and, yes, i will say it, genocide, can't find it in its cold heart to allow gaza students to take advantage of them...

Hadeel Abu Kawik was supposed to spend next year in the United States on the prestigious Fulbright scholarship program, but now it appears she will remain trapped in the Gaza Strip by an Israeli blockade.

Word that the U.S. State Department was canceling her scholarship came after Abu Kawik, 23 and a computer engineering student, went through a lengthy process for the scholarship that included interviews, exams and an English test.

"I was building my hope on this scholarship," she said Friday.

Seven other Gaza students also lost their grants. The decision was made because they would not be able to get exit visas from Israel, according to State Department spokesman Tom Casey.

this is outrageous...

here's what a young afghan i am helping apply to a u.s. mba program had to say about his fulbright experience... read it and then tell me why israel's action is defensible...

In the middle of my academic career at Kabul University in 2005, I earned a Fulbright scholarship for my academic excellence, English proficiency and leadership talent. Under the Fulbright program, I traveled to the U.S. and began to study intensive English at University of California in Davis. After one quarter term of English studies, I enrolled in a college in New York where I successfully completed my allocated one year towards a BA in economics.

The U.S. experience was enriching and eye opening. I not only improved my English skills, but benefited from the rigorous academic standards. It was also an excellent opportunity to socialize and learn in non-academic environments. Through our friendly chats over dinner or lunch or outside in a café, I made many friends from various backgrounds. I was an ambassador for my country and culture, and helped my new friends to learn the realities of life in Afghanistan and to overcome the many misconceptions they had about my country, religion and culture. In return, I also learned significantly about western values, norms and lifestyle, which helped me to realize that regardless of where we are from, what we believe, what our history is, and how different our values are, we are all human beings and that is what matters.

the state of israel and the neo-con zionists are not representative of the jewish religion and the jewish people any more than the angry, bigoted christian fundamentalists and neo-cons in the u.s. are representative of my country or of christianity...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Pepe Escobar wonders what Israel REALLY bombed in Syria and I wonder what the hell's going on in D.C.

pepe's up first...



now, HERE'S some questions and concerns even MORE troubling...

ips' jim lobe via alternet...

Are the latest accusations and tough language leveled against Iran, Syria, and North Korea evidence of a resurgence by the remaining hawks in the administration of President George W. Bush hoping for a final confrontation against one or more members of the revised 'axis of evil' before his term next January?

That's the big question here this week, particularly following Thursday's long-awaited intelligence briefings to Congress about alleged North Korean involvement in the construction of a 'covert nuclear reactor' in Syria that was destroyed in a raid by Israeli warplanes in September last year.

According to some interpretations, the briefing's timing and content appeared deliberately designed to raise tensions between Washington, on the one hand, and Pyongyang and Damascus, on the other, potentially derailing ongoing long-running negotiations between the State Department and North Korea and Turkish-mediated peace feelers between Israel and Syria.

That Vice President Dick Cheney, whose opposition to engaging both North Korea and Syria and support for 'regime change' in both countries is both well known and of long standing, had pushed hard for the briefing to take place has added to speculation that a major power play by the hawks to reverse the diplomacy that has dominated Bush's second term is underway.

Rumours that the State Department's point man on North Korea, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill -- whose latest accord with Pyongyang negotiated in Singapore earlier this month has been the target of fierce right-wing attacks led by Cheney chum, former U.N. Amb. John Bolton -- has told associates that he will resign next month have added to concerns that the hawks have regained the initiative, at least on that front.

Add the promotion of Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq who has overseen the past year's 'surge' of U.S. troops, to take over the U.S. Central Command (Centcom) this summer, as well as the increasingly harsh charges against Iran's alleged interference in Iraq that have been coming out of the Pentagon in recent days.

All these developments are seen by some as an answer to the prayers of neo-conservatives, in particular, who had largely given up hopes that Bush could be persuaded to attack Iran's nuclear facilities before leaving office.

speaking entirely for my un-connected, barely-informed self, i have NEVER figured that bush and his criminal compadres had given up on attacking iran...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"The Iraqi war is a war for Israeli territorial expansion" - Paul Craig Roberts on why the U.S. is bankrupting itself for Iraq

roberts' explanation strikes me as too simplistic and it also begs another question... what's in it for the u.s...? or, to be specific, what goodies does "greater israel" offer to the mostly-jewish neocons here in the u.s. who are so hell-bent on supporting iraq and, in roberts' view, buttressing israel...?

The fact is that Bush invaded Iraq with the intent of turning Iraq into an American colony. The so-called government of Maliki is not a government. Maliki is the well paid front man for U.S. colonial rule. Maliki's government does not exist outside the protected Green Zone, the headquarters of the American occupation.

If colonial rule were not the intent, the U.S. would not be going out of its way to force Sadr's 60,000-man militia into a fight. Sadr is a Shi'ite who is a real Iraqi leader, perhaps the only Iraqi who could end the sectarian conflict and restore some unity to Iraq. As such he is regarded by the Bush regime as a danger to the American puppet Maliki. Unless the U.S. is able to purchase or rig the upcoming Iraqi election, Sadr is likely to emerge as the dominant figure. This would be a highly unfavorable development for the Bush regime's hopes of establishing its colonial rule behind the facade of a Maliki fake democracy. Rather than work with Sadr in order to extract themselves from a quagmire, the Americans will be doing everything possible to assassinate Sadr.

Why does the Bush regime want to rule Iraq? Some speculate that it is a matter of "peak oil." Oil supplies are said to be declining even as demand for oil multiplies from developing countries such as China. According to this argument, the U.S. decided to seize Iraq to ensure its own oil supply.

[...]

The more likely explanation for the U.S. invasion of Iraq is the neoconservative Bush regime's commitment to the defense of Israeli territorial expansion. There is no such thing as a neoconservative who is not allied with Israel. Israel hopes to steal all of the West Bank and southern Lebanon for its territorial expansion. An American colonial regime in Iraq not only buttresses Israel from attack, but also can pressure Syria and Iran not to support the Palestinians and Lebanese. The Iraqi war is a war for Israeli territorial expansion. Americans are dying and bleeding to death financially for Israel. Bush's "war on terror" is a hoax that serves to cover U.S. intervention in the Middle East on behalf of "greater Israel."

i'm going to stick with the explanation i've been touting for several years...

yes, the bush administration supports israel, but it's for a much larger purpose than the creation of a "greater israel"... first of all, keeping in mind that the rulers of israel and their neo-con brethren in the u.s. do not equate with the jewish religion any more than the fundamentalist christian nut-jobs in the u.s. equate with christianity, the "unholy alliance" that's playing out here is for nothing more and nothing less than the full global consolidation and control of power and money...

the folks that pull the strings of the bush administration, the israeli government and the neo-cons, are the same super-rich elites you will find behind the defense industries, the mega transnational corporations, the global investment houses, the giant banking organizations, and the governments of many other countries... they're not necessarily all working as a bloc, but they have, nonetheless, been slaving away ceaselessly for years to insure that they have the first, last and only say about the direction of global affairs...

these people learned a long time ago that war and the resultant chaos present extraordinary opportunities to increase their power and wealth... now that it's possible to maintain war and chaos as permanent conditions across the globe, they are finally able to consider fulfilling their dream of bringing all global wealth and power into their hands... war and chaos are merely strategic tools to achieve that dream as are world-wide food shortages which can, in turn, serve to provoke more war, more chaos and, thus, more opportunity...

also, let's be clear on one point... when roberts says americans are "bleeding to death financially" for israel and iraq, he fails to point out that the super-rich elites who are calling the shots - not just in the u.s., but around the world - are raking in the cash like there's no tomorrow... it may be trite and it may be a cliche, but, hey, it's true... follow the money...

what's not to understand...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Cue the Obama smears

the floodgates are about to open, and not just from the hillary side of the road...

While some cynics still view Barack Obama’s appeal for “change” as empty rhetoric, it’s starting to dawn on Washington insiders that his ability to raise vast sums of money from nearly one million mostly small donors could shake the grip that special-interest money has long held over the U.S. government.

This spreading realization that Obama’s political movement might represent a more revolutionary change than previously understood is sparking a deepening resistance among defenders of the status quo – and prompting harsher attacks on Obama.

Right now, the front line for the Washington Establishment is Hillary Clinton’s struggling presidential campaign, which has been stunned by Obama’s political skills as well as his extraordinary ability to raise money over the Internet. Obama’s grassroots donations have negated Clinton’s prodigious fundraising advantage with big donors.

Powerful lobbies – from AIPAC to representatives of military and other industries – also are recognizing the value of keeping their dominance over campaign cash from getting diluted by Obama’s deep reservoir of small donors. It’s in their direct interest to dent Obama’s momentum and demoralize his rank-and-file supporters as soon as possible.

So, neoconservatives and other ideological movements – heavily dependent on grants from the same special interests – are now joining with the Clinton campaign to tear down Obama by depicting him as unpatriotic, un-vetted, possibly a “closet Muslim.”

whatever you thought was ugly in past campaigns is about to get considerably uglier...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Sibel Edmonds claims now tied to Valerie Plame and Brewster Jennings

for the third sunday, beginning on january 6 (previous articles here and here), the uk london sunday times continues to not only scoop every u.s. news outlet on the sibel edmonds story, but also to hurl a gale-force wind at the bush house of cards...

AN investigation into the illicit sale of American nuclear secrets was compromised by a senior official in the State Department, a former FBI employee has claimed.

The official is said to have tipped off a foreign contact about a bogus CIA company used to investigate the sale of nuclear secrets.

The firm, Brewster Jennings & Associates, was a front for Valerie Plame, the former CIA agent. Her public outing two years later in 2003 by White House officials became a cause célèbre.

The claims that a State Department official blew the investigation into a nuclear smuggling ring have been made by Sibel Edmonds, 38, a former Turkish language translator in the FBI’s Washington field office.

Edmonds had been employed to translate hundreds of hours of intercepted recordings made during a six-year FBI inquiry into the nuclear smuggling ring.

She has previously told The Sunday Times she heard evidence that foreign intelligence agents had enlisted US officials to acquire a network of moles in sensitive military and nuclear institutions.

Her latest claims relate to a number of intercepted recordings believed to have been made between the summer and autumn of 2001. At that time, foreign agents were actively attempting to acquire the West’s nuclear secrets and technology.

luke ryland, who has been on top of the sibel story for nearly two years, offers this disturbing update on apparent bush administration reaction to the recent media attention...

Significantly, since the Times began this series three weeks ago, the White House has quietly moved to legalize the sale of nuclear technology to Turkey in an apparent attempt to 'Exonerate Neocon Criminals' who have been illegally selling this technology for a decade. Congress has 90 days to block this legislation, otherwise it becomes law. If Turkey wants and deserves nuclear technology, this decision should be made openly and transparently, not the result of stealth decisions made by this administration to hide crimes of senior US officials.

We need public open hearings to determine which officials have been supplying the nuclear black market before this becomes law.

it's more than astounding that our complicit u.s. news media continue to stonewall this story when it's creating tidal waves of reaction everwhere outside the u.s... 'course, look at how long they were able to delay reporting the downing street memo...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The NYT offers up op-ed space to another advocate of on-going U.S. militarization

shit... no sooner had i finished my modo rant (see previous post) and gone back to my nyt headline email, than i saw this, the very next op-ed on the list...

We Still Need the Big Guns
By CHARLES J. DUNLAP Jr.

Looking ahead, America needs a military centered not on occupying another country but on denying potential adversaries the ability to attack our interests.

this one got me curious enough to click on to the full piece, only to find that it was as sabre-rattling as the teaser suggests...

Many analysts understandably attribute the success [in Iraq] to our troops’ following the dictums of the Army’s lauded new counterinsurgency manual. While the manual is a vast improvement over its predecessors, it would be a huge mistake to take it as proof — as some in the press, academia and independent policy organizations have — that victory over insurgents is achievable by anything other than traditional military force.

Unfortunately, starry-eyed enthusiasts have misread the manual to say that defeating an insurgency is all about winning hearts and minds with teams of anthropologists, propagandists and civil-affairs officers armed with democracy-in-a-box kits and volleyball nets. They dismiss as passé killing or capturing insurgents.

let's just take a few choice items and look at them for a moment...

• "our interests" - i always love that one... i hear it all the time, and each time it never fails to strike me as code for "whatever the u.s. corporate, government, and military elites want, wherever in the world it may be, they will get, irrespective of anybody else's 'interests'..."

• iraq "success" - this neocon, bush administration, david petraeus-spawned talking point not only glosses over the reality of what's happening in iraq, but also serves to distract us from the fact that even administration HINTS that there MIGHT BE in some INDETERMINATE FUTURE the REMOTE POSSIBILITY of TROOP REDUCTION or even, god forbid, TROOP WITHDRAWAL are now OFFICIALLY DEAD...

• "proof ... that victory over insurgents is achievable by anything other than traditional military force" - zero acknowledgement here that the insurgents just may be fighting to get their country back, and that we are there, fighting to keep that from happening...

• "starry-eyed enthusiasts ... say that defeating an insurgency is all about winning hearts and minds [and] dismiss as passé killing or capturing insurgents" - need i comment here...? i can only assume that it will be a dark day indeed for the united states when "killing or capturing" is no longer the order of the day...

but, wait...! there's more...

Looking ahead, America needs a military centered not on occupying another country but on denying potential adversaries the ability to attack our interests. This is not a task for counterinsurgents, but rather for an unapologetically high-tech military that substitutes machines for the bodies of young Americans.

revolted yet...? and just so's ya know the source of the revulsion...

Charles J. Dunlap Jr. is an Air Force major general and the author of “Shortchanging the Joint Fight?,” an assessment of the Army’s counterinsurgency manual.

could it be his own "interests" he's advocating for here...? nah... silly me... of COURSE not...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Bloomberg for President: "a neoconservative, combat-avoiding, Bush-supporting, Middle-East-warmonger"

glenn...

[Michael Bloomberg] is just exactly what our country desperately needs, what it is missing most -- a neoconservative, combat-avoiding, Bush-supporting, Middle-East-warmonger who sees U.S. and Israeli interests as indistinguishable and inextricably linked, with a fetish for ever-increasing government control and surveillance, and a background as a Wall St. billionaire. We just haven't had enough of those in our political culture. Our political system, more than anything, is missing the influence of people like that. That's why it's broken: not enough of those.

[...]

In fact -- despite his steadfast neoconservatism -- it's hard to see how the candidacy of a divorced, unmarried, stridently pro-gun-control, pro-choice, socially liberal New York City billionaire would accomplish anything other than offering the Republicans their best hope of winning in 2008. All of this seems to be intended as punishment meted out by the Establishment to the Democrats -- using Bloomberg's billions as the weapon -- for not repudiating their loudmouth, restless liberal base strongly enough. That, more than anything, seems to be the oh-so-noble and trans-partisan purpose of David Broder, David Boren and Sam Nunn: to find a way to stifle the populist anger at our political establishment after 8 years of unrestrained Bush-Cheney devastation, increasingly represented (on the Democratic side) by the Scary, Angry, Intemperate John Edwards campaign.

this would be hysterically funny if it wasn't so goddam pathetic... if there was anything that should be bringing people together in a spirit of harmony, unity, and bipartisanship, it's restoring our country to the principles upon which it was founded and reversing and repudiating the willful flouting of the rule of law, the destruction of the constitution, the total absence of accountability, and our rapid descent into an "endemic surveillance society"... these jokers obviously define "bipartisanship" as "business as usual"...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Just When I Think We Can't Go Lower

Courtesy of the AP.

NY Town Lets Seniors Work to Pay Taxes
By JIM FITZGERALD
GREENBURGH, N.Y. (AP) — Audrey Davison lives alone, gets a $620 Social Security check each month and worries about the sharply rising taxes on her four-bedroom house. Davison, 76, raised her family there and after 43 years, she really doesn't want to leave Greenburgh.

Greenburgh doesn't want her to leave, either.

The town is pushing a program that would let seniors work part-time, for $7 an hour, to help pay off some of their property taxes.

"People shouldn't have to sell their house, move away to a place with less taxes, leave behind their family and friends," said Town Supervisor Paul Feiner.

He envisions retired doctors mentoring schoolchildren, retired accountants helping with the town's finances, retired lawyers offering their services for a discount. But there are plenty of less-skilled jobs that need doing, he said.

"It's not like we're going to see grandma running the snowplow," he said. "There are lots of things people can do for the town and it wouldn't cost us that much to pay them."

The proposal has caused a stir in Greenburgh, a town of 90,000 in Westchester County(emphasis added), which has the nation's third-highest homeowner property taxes. The plan would be unusual if not unique in New York, but similar programs are considered successes in Colorado, Massachusetts, South Carolina and elsewhere.

Westchester County, by the way, is also home to the North East Elite, like our next President, Hitlery.

Davison, who suffers from arthritis and sciatica and needs a walker to get around on her bad days, said she pays about $12,000 a year in property taxes — perhaps $2,000 to the town — and has already taken out a reverse mortgage to pay her bills

.
What NeoCon, Fascist, power drunk asshole came up with this idea? I don't get along with my Mother, but she won't be working to pay her property taxes. What have we become when old folks are forced to work to pay their taxes? I guess it's not enough they have to work just to pay the electric bill. And while were at it, how about all their no account pre-teen grandchildren. I bet there are a lot of 8 inch sewer pipes they could inspect for 7 bucks an hour.

Talking to Feiner last week at the town senior center, she said, "I would work as long as it was a job where I could sit."

"You could be a receptionist!" Feiner said. "You could greet people right here, when they come in."
[...]

This guy Feiner is a true butthead. I bet he has a better paying receptionist job available for her, at the US embassy in Iraq. What an opportunity!
I can't believe in one of the richest counties on Earth the residents will actually allow this kind of thing to continue.
And by the way, I don't think much of the Associated Press for slanting the story as being such a triumph for Senior Citizens.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

HRC has run a textbook DLC campaign – center-right messaging to gain the nomination of her center-left party

and maybe she's goin' down... that would be just hunky-dory with me... i've gone from a mere distaste for hrc to a solid loathing as she has revealed more and more of her true colors... i suppose it's good news that, this early in the campaign, people are getting a clue...

In polls that coursed through the professional community of political consultants in Washington last week, it now appears that Senator Clinton’s presidential candidacy may be buckling under the weight of the burden of messaging against her base.

[...]

There is no doubt that Senator Clinton’s top campaign staff believe they are now out of control of their presidential campaign which has assumed a new and unwanted dynamic. Now some of Senator Clinton’s top staff believe that they are in a dangerous and potentially lethal tailspin.

[...]

Last week, the Clinton campaign made the conscious decision to go ‘negative.’ In this particular case, this is a last ditch attempt to hold her faltering candidacy together. If their desperate measure is not successful, Senator Hillary Clinton’s bold attempt to become the first woman president of the United States of America will collapse.

[...]

At this point in the arc of history, the American public is fed up with the excesses of Republican neoconservativism led by Cheney, Bush, Bolton, Ledeen, Abrams, Pipes, Hadley, Libby and Rice and its stealth faction in the DLC led by Senator Clinton and her husband aided by their merry band of neocons clustered around Al From, Howard Wolfson, Stanley Greenberg and James Carville, all of whom supported the ill-fated wars of the Bush Era. In 2002, encouraged by her husband and their minions in the DLC, Senator Clinton led the charge against Iraq, and she has been at the forefront of the pack calling for another surge of jingoistic bellicosity against Iran.

michael carmichael, the author of this post on global research, and occasional blogger on his own site, planetary movement, i believe, hits the nail on the head... the american public is indeed increasingly fed up, altho' not to the extent i believe they SHOULD be... it's not just the excesses of neoconservatism and its enablers in the dlc that is behind our rapid descent into the the second ring of suburbs of a police state...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"Today's political crisis cannot be overstated"

i much prefer the term "constitutional crisis" to "political crisis," but, regardless of the terminology, we are in some seriously deep shit, and i flat out don't get why it isn't headline news on every media outlet in the country... yeah, call me naive...

Election Year 2008 may represent a last-ditch opportunity to save the American Republic and its noble promise of “unalienable rights” for all mankind. Today’s political crisis cannot be overstated.

For the past seven years, George W. Bush has mounted an unprecedented assault on the nation’s Constitution. He has followed a neoconservative path toward an imperial system built on an all-powerful Executive, an ill-informed and frightened public, and a military dispatched globally on ill-defined missions in an endless war.

In this Brave New World, up is down.

President Bush tells us that he values “freedom” and “liberty” as he tramples on our most treasured constitutional rights: habeas corpus protections against arbitrary arrest, the Fourth Amendment’s requirements for search warrants, the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of a fair trial, the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on “cruel and unusual punishment.”

Bush also shows contempt for the principle of free speech. Whenever he faces criticism, he deploys his government subordinates and the powerful right-wing media to attack the citizens who dare dissent.

From the Dixie Chicks to Valerie Plame, we have seen what happens to Americans who get in the way of Bush’s political/media machine.

yes, indeed, robert parry, that's precisely how i see it too... robert parry and his consortium news is one of few credible truth-tellers out there, and no one should ignore what he has to say...

The clever neoconservatives recognized that the vulnerability of a modern democracy was through its media. If independent, honest sources of information could be cut off – and if the public could be overwhelmed by misinformation and fear-mongering – the neocons knew they could dominate the political process.

The neocon strategy was aided and abetted by a Washington press corps that had lost its way, seduced by the financial rewards of lucrative careers.

The political system failed, too. Many Republicans worked hand in glove with the neocons, while many Democrats chose to accommodate, rather than resist.

That is still the state of play as we enter this pivotal election year. So what can be done?

I believe that this battle for the survival of the American Republic will be won or lost primarily on the battlefield of information.

So, just as the neocons promote false narratives to confuse the American people, we must tell honest narratives and get this information to the people.

robert parry is entirely reader-funded and offers free access to his website... think about helping him out... he's always scraping to stay in business...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments