Long rant -- deleted.....

I had a good one going this morning - then x'd out of the wrong box - and sent many thoughts into oblivion.....

*sighs*

Basically it came down to the fact that Bush is having to wake him self up from a disaster called "alternate reality.." I'm amazed at the backpedaling he's done in the last few months.. We've been told the Iraqi handover may not be possible -- now there's a rush to get it done before June.. We've been told that we shunned the UN and the world from helping form a new Iraq -- now we're begging for their help.. We've been told that "we have a job to do over there" -- now we're trying to do all we can to bring home our troops..

I commented that it's amazing that the Savage Idiot even changed his tune and actually agreed with something the rest of us have been saying all along: we need to get out of Iraq... Okay, so he's a little slow on the uptake.. Anyone on this planet could tell you that Saddam was the pawn in this whole game..

There's a lot of loose ends out there though.. Look at what has happened in the last 4 years and consider if it's something that we want to continue.. When we look at the REALITY of what's happening - versus what Bush's VERSION OF REALITY -- are we really sure we want 4 more years of this?? Granted, I'm like a lot of people who don't like Kerry, but if we're really looking at the best options for US, the U.S., as a citizen, as a nation, as a world participant -- the bigger question is:

Has Bush made America safer or more vulnerable??

That's the question everyone has to answer honestly and in REALITY.. Not the version Bush concocts.. No.. The one that looks at the numbers of men and women being killed in Iraq.. The failure to uphold an infrastructure in the midst of a chaotic nation..

Don't want the terrorists to win?? They will shortly.. Wanna know how I know?? Look at the picture: we're doing everything we can get leave Iraq.. Which sends a powerful message to terrorists: keep up resisting and they will eventually leave.. That's a dangerous precedent to establish, but we're in an election year so the rules change a bit when it comes down to it.. It further proves that the work of suicide bombers who work in small cells across the world are being effective in swaying policy..

There's a well known quote from Bush: "We will not negotiate with terrorists.."

Guess what??

We're doing that now, and we've done it in the past -- and we'll continue to do it in the future.......

Bush, wake up - the alarm is going off.......

Of course....

Of course....

In today's news Bush declared "We will not play politics with the strategic petroleum reserve... would put America in a dangerous position in the war on terror.." Okay - I might actually agree with that - because it makes sense to Me.. But Bush specifically said "I will not play politics with the strategic reserve.......

..... only then said "Congress needs to pass the energy plan."

Wait -- hold up..

I thought we weren't going to play politics, but we are going to play politics when it comes to holding the country hostage so that his energy bill gets passed..

Slice one way, then the other.. Yup - another fun-filled busy day in politics..

WMD FOUND - HOLY SHIT!!

Yay for Bush -- they found one little bomb that contained Sarin gas.. NOW we can all rest easier tonight KNOWING that the WMD have been found!!

*whew* What a relief..

In other news
Gas just climbed over $2 a gallon over here.. I heard Hannity make the comment that Kerry wants to open up the Emergency surplus we have - even though he voted against it when Clinton was in office and the conservatives wanted to open up the reserves.. Now that Bush is in office, the see-saw is going back the other way and now it's totally opposite.. Can anyone figure out WHY everyone hates these parties yet??

More soliders killed, Iraqi Governing President assassinated.. But let's not get concerned or anything.. After all everyone in Iraq is just DYING IN WAIT to become just like the United States!! (Oh boy..)

Last note on that topic: think outside the box for a second.. Maybe Iraq doesn't want to be a democracy.. Anyone think of that?? "But - sure they do!! It's so they can be free!!" Free according to our system, free according to our structure, free according to what BUSH wants to see, free according to what serves the American interest the most.. Is there any real mystery why the insurgents continue to grow?? Okay - still not following Me?? Let Me offer one more scenario:

China takes over the US.. They want to make us a Communist State.. Bush is captured by the Chinese government and we are all "reassured" that the Communist system is a better system.. Having said that - don't you think the American citizens are going to say "fuck you" and resist?? Hell yeah we are..

Now for the brain boiler: How would our reaction to a Chinese invasion be ANY different than what is going on in Iraq??

Wait a minute......

In the last couple of weeks, Rummy has been coming out saying that these reports are exaggerated.. Depending on what unfolds in the next few days regarding this -- I'll be very interested...

What discerns me the most is how the blame is being shifted.. If in fact Rumsfeld knew about this - and didn't tell Bush.......... let's say there's probably not going to be too much love in the White House...

I can see Bush having no choice but doing something with Rumsfeld if he doesn't bow out from all of the pressure that has been mounting lately.. That tends to be MO for this administration.. Unlike Clinton who fought for his people, despite all of the problems...

*shrugs* We do live in an interesting world these days.......

Finally....

I discovered a site this yesterday (yes, it's a little late) that FINALLY holds up these conservative talk show pundits' feet to their own fire:

Media Matters

Thank goodness...... :) I really look forward to read the news on here..

Unbelievable....

Okay - I'm driving to McDonald's this morning to get Darby and I some breakfast.. On the air was a congressman talking about the whole Iraq-abuse situation.. I'm in full agreement with the congressman who was saying that it was an inexcusable act.. It was unwarranted, disgraceful, and wrong.. No way how you slice it..

But the congressman didn't stop there..

He went out of his way to say that this whole thing was blown out of proportion.. (Kinda reminds you of a certain sex-scandal, doesn't it??) At least in the Clinton saga, no one was tortured, forced to do sexual acts (I do believe Monica was having fun at the time), or under duress.. So, the whole "it's being blown out of proportion" argument flies out the window in My opinion..

Then he said how it's become a political issue: well duh - so does sex apparently as long as "your guy" isn't in the White House.. It's political because - IT HAPPENED ON YOUR WATCH.. Finally, this is something the conservatives can't PEG on Clinton.. (woohoo - rejoice..)

But he stops with the 7 soldiers who are being targeted for the allegations of abuse.. Okay - why?? If we're a country predicating "high moral standards" - then accountability needs to be included in that mix.. We have a President and Secretary of Defense who is basically trying everything to wash their hands of what happened.. So much for having high moral standards.....

Then - the ultimate: "let's not forget that these people have American blood on their hands.." But he's careful to say that it doesn't justify what happened to the prisoners.. But his parting comment on that point was: "let's not forget there are two sides to every story.." How convenient..

First of all - if they are prisoners (and here's where the definitions start to show signs of blurring) then they need to be afforded the same rights and protections as a prisoner.. But if Rumsfeld is going to say that everything that was done to those prisoners over there fell within the Geneva Convention - then we are establishing a completely new set of rules for what is allowed..

Don't believe me??

What do you think this administration's reaction would be if it were an American prisoner being subjected to the same horrific scenario?? Of course we'd be outraged AND we'd be quoting the very same articles in the Geneva Convention that Rumsfeld is apparently relying on..

On a side note, I heard someone saying the other day that the Geneva Convention does not apply because it applies to a war on a country - not on an individual or group (i.e. terrorists...) I wish I would've been paying closer attention because this conversation should been awarded some "hair splitting" award for best idea..... (holy shit!!)

How much more contorted can this get??

Rough Times Ahead, Rummy

I personally believe that Rumfeld's job may be in jeopardy.. Especially since you have 7 servicemen overseas who are now up on court martial for what was done to the prisoners in Iraq.. I'm still not sure what - if anything can be done about what happened.. Let's look at the major headlines in TODAY's news:

"US Sets Public Baghdad Court Martial in Abuse Case."
"Iraqi Detainees Allege Torture in US run Jails"
"Blast Rocks Baghdad Hotel Foreigners Hurt"
"Bomb Kills Putin's Top Man in Chechnya and 6 Others"
"Israeli Soldiers Kill Two Palestinian Gunmen"
"Marchers Demand Bush Extend Assault Weapons Ban"
"Cheney Defends Rumsfeld, Says 'Get Off His Case'"
"Sharon Cancels US Trip, Will Submit New Gaza Plan"
"Two Foreigners Stoned to Death in Afghanistan"

Can anyone see exactly how WELL Bush is doing in international affairs??

See how incredibly safe he's making the world - and how everyone is so much safer now that Saddam is out of the picture??

There are nine glaring examples of how Bush continues to fail his Foreign Policy:

Abuse case -- wouldn't have happened if we weren't occupying Iraq, over-extending our troops, and failing to secure an adequate government for the Iraqi people..

more torture -- Bush claims additional investigations are going on.. Again - IF WE WEREN'T IN IRAQ, WE WOULDN'T BE GOING THROUGH THIS..

Blast Rocks Baghdad -- If you go over to Iraq - how can you NOT believe you could be kidnapped, injured, mamed or killed?? Why are we focusing so much on these people when there is already an assumed risk.. Is it no wonder that bad things happen when you walk into the "wrong bar" because you're not invited, or that generally speaking, people in the bar don't like you??

Putin's Top Man dies -- Maybe if Bush wasn't so busy with Iraq, he would've been able to use his vast amount of "credible intelligence" to help Putin thwart the assassination.....

Israeli Soldiers kill -- We turn a blind eye to anything Israel does, but the moment the Palestinians do anything, there is automatic condemnation by Bush.. I guess it all matters who your friend is - and who you're going to support, regardless of what horrific things your friend does....

Extending Assault Weapons Ban -- I'm mystified at how an assault weapon is going to be useful in a hunting expedition.. How many bullets does it take to kill a turkey for heavens sake!!??!!

Cheney tells Everyone "get off Rummy!!" -- Oh wait, we're not supposed to criticize anyone in Bush's cabinet.. Why?? Because "[he] is the best secretary of defense the United States has ever had." Huh?? Exactly what basis is a "good secretary of defense??" Moreover, when Cheney comments "People ought to get off his case and let him do his job.." Well Dick, I hate to tell you this - but he apparently hasn't done his job too well if he is so far out of touch with his chain of command.. He should be pulse of the military all over the world, which makes him ultimately responsible for what happens in Iraq today, or some other country tomorrow.. "Best Secretary of Defense??" Excuse Me?? Iraq remains out of control, we don't know where Bin Laden is, our troop organization is skewed and completely disorganized, GI's are committing suicide on a regular basis, abuses are happening because soldiers were probably instructed to do so (which means Rumsfeld's chain of command is responsible - no matter how you size that up), and now we have a VP who is saying we should all get off his case.. *laughs* Best Secretary of Defense ever?? *laughs harder* Puhleeeeeeeeeze!!!

Sharon Cancels US Trip, Will Submit New Gaza Plan -- aka: acceptable lip service for the United States and other allies....... No different than any other plan, it's going to end up the exact same way.. Sorry, it's going to happen.......

2 killed in Afghanistan -- And I thought we were a "safer world..."


*heavy sighs*

Ironic Thoughts

I've had My car radio turned off the last few days -- except for today when Rush was on..

Nightline VS. Fox News Remember the flap last week about how Nightline was going to air the names of the dead soldiers in Iraq?? Turned out to be a ratings hit.. It also seems that a lot of conservatives had this blow up in their face because they were completely convinced that it was going to tank seriously.. Want to know the really ill part of all of this?? Apparently ABC didn't air any commercials during this particular episode.. No revenue as a result of this.. No profit.. No money.. Whatever motivation ABC seeks, it apparently struck a chord with a pretty significant amount of people..

Who's yelling now?? Fox News.. Oh, before I go any farther, Fox News is a conservative news source.. Now Fox is slamming ABC calling the whole Nightline thing a "publicity stunt.." But it gets better.. "Meanwhile, the controversy fueled by Sinclair is bound to continue. "Fox News Sunday" host Chris Wallace — who worked for ABC News and occasionally anchored "Nightline" until jumping to Fox late last year — said his show is preparing its own list for broadcast this weekend." So now, Fox is going to do their own rendition of what took place on Nightline, but showing the accomplishments and not just read a list of names..

How cheap is that?? That's like saying "I'm sorry Mr. & Mrs. Smith, Johnny died, but we want to hear how Jacob Bell made a fan belt from a discarded piece of cardboard...."

Now.. If it were just for publicity, what is Fox's motivation to repeat what has already been done?? No.. Fox is doing this because it'll paint Bush in a much better light.. A stoic 45 minute program identifying the soldiers who have died is bad for President Bush.. It was for President Johnson when we were in Vietnam.. So if Fox can try and paint a rosier picture, then that's a good thing.. Wow.. A rosy war!! Talk about wagging the dog!! And to think that the conservatives attacked Clinton for doing the same thing during the Monica Lewinski scandal (remember Bosnia anyone??)

Anyone get the clear picture about media bias yet??



Punishing Soldiers Under Orders What an elaborate head job this one is: We have a President leading us into battle ... okay, okay - he basically lied to us into battle, but let's forget that part.. So we're slaughtering Lord knows how many Iraqis so that they can be free.. But the Iraqis are fighting us because they don't want us in their land.. (How unreasonable is THAT, I ask myself...) So we sent thousands of troops over there to fight the war, the war ends, we're trying to stabilize the situation so that their elected government will take control.. Now we're hearing about how the tortures have been going in Iraq..

Now for the irony part.. If these allegations are true (reminding everybody that we still have a Justice system somewhere out there..) and these officers and soldiers are guilty of what they had allegedly done -- Bush wants to make sure they pay for what they did.. Um.. Forgive Me here.. I have a President that unilaterally decided "we're going to war" and summons up all of his forces to go overseas to find Saddam, weapons of mass destruction, whatever.. Our soldiers go overseas.. Now that the fighting has been over for sometime - a lot of injuries, deaths and kidnappings continue to happen while the government isn't even close to being able to handle the crisis over there.. The latest news I heard on the way home: we're going to remain in Iraq through 2005..

So.. We're staying in Iraq, our resources and troops are tired, worn down, and rotations are being extended a lot longer than anyone would really care to admit.. Can anyone here measure the stress levels that our men and women are going through?? The suicide rate among active military members were rising at the last check.. I'm not sure where it is today, but when there was that rub a few months ago where soldiers were saying what was on their mind: why are we here, what else is there to accomplish?? Morale has to be getting down in a worse way -- now being told that we're going to be staying over there until 2005 seems to be even more demoralizing..

Because think about it: why would soldiers and officers do something like this?? It's hard to say: "they must be criminals or something.." Really - we have criminals that are protecting our shores?? No, not buying it.. If we're supposed to be supporting our troops, it makes no sense to be supporting criminals.. Next argument.. Were they ordered to do these things?? Even if they were - are we going to have to run the same protections as the Nazi's did when their officers were captured and put on trial for what they did to the Jews?? "I was acting under orders" is a very peculiar defense when you think about it.. It implies "I do everything that I'm told to do" and "I trust the judgment of My superiors implicitly.." Common sense flies out the window - do you want to know how I know?? Because they are TRAINED to obey.. It's bred into them.. They breathe it.. They feel it.. They are under no right to question the authority of their superiors.. In fact, to do so - you're painted with a target.. There's no Serpico defense in the military.. Remember - it's the only job in America where if you try to quit, you get arrested or shot..

It's convenient for the Monday morning quarterback to go: "he should've passed instead of ran the ball.." Fact being: Bush isn't any closer to understanding what is happening in Iraq when all of this is said and done.. He has NO CLUE.. He's made one hell of a mess over there and part of me agrees: yes, we have no other choice now because he's gone and screwed it up.. He now has this chip on his shoulder which basically says "I'll do whatever I want, because you have no choice but to follow me..." If I'm a soldier overseas - knowing what happened to the prisoners, and hearing My President saying "we're going to punish everyone who was involved in this.." He's addressing a weary group of men and women who have been told that they are going to remain in Iraq for a longer time frame, who are missing out on their families, under the constant threat of attack, and confronting a nation that has even more animosity towards us..

One more thing: after Bush's comments about the allegations, one of the things I kept hearing in the back of my mind was: "if you're against the war, you're not patriotic.." "If you disagree with the President, you're not American.." "You don't support our troops if you believed against Bush and Blair's advance through the sands of Iraq.." I'm hearing my President criticizing the command of troops in Iraq.. I'm hearing my President shift the burden and blame from himself - and placing it on those under him.. I'm hearing my President seeking two interviews with Arab television networks saying that what the troops did was wrong........

Let's not forget these very important facts:

BUSH IS THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF.. It goes no higher than him.. He's the top dog and the one ultimately responsible for anything that happens in Iraq..
BUSH SENT OUR TROOPS OVERSEAS.. It sure as hell wasn't Gore who sent them over - and Clinton wasn't in the store - not his doing either..
CRITICIZING YOUR TROOPS ON TELEVISION IS HOW HE SUPPORTS THEM.. Double standard?? Absolutely..

I particularly find it distasteful when White House spokesman Scott McClellan has the balls to say: "These images do not represent what America stands for nor do they represent the high standards that our military is committed to upholding," McClellan said. "What occurred was wrong and it will not be tolerated." Not when we have a President who openly criticizes the very troops he sent over to Iraq.. Not when we have a President who is seeking out two interviews in the country we are occupying to condemn what HIS troops have done.. Not when we have a President who unilaterally sent thousands of troops over and have killed over 10,000 Iraqis to their deaths.. Not when we have a President who has a history of sending more people to death in Texas, than any other governor in the history of America.. Exactly what represented "high standards" are we referring to?? Please explain this one to me..

"BRING OUT YOUR DEAD!!" (one of all time favorite quotes from Monty Python..)

It's also getting some incredible air time this week as Ted Koppel and Nightline "Dead List Causes Uproar.." I'm amazed at how this issue quickly turned to flames going as high as the Congress of the government.. Personally, I'm sick that the Sinclair Broadcast Group decided to pull the Nightline episode, but it clearly illustrates the point I've made on here and My other blog:

Almost every media outlet is motivated by politics, power, or some sort of form where they increase their chances of advancement..

With that statement, I'm not singling out neither side.. Both ABC and Sinclair have their individual motives for what they are doing.. I just believe that ABC has the upper advantage because they will win out on the sympathy and morality angle.. Sinclair sees it as a political move to discredit the Bush administration, something that interferes with their access to the White House..

It's something a lot of the American people don't see because of the invisible lines that hold up the reporter's hand while holding the microphone..... They don't see the editing and revision work that is done by the superiors and editors of newspapers, news magazines and other media outlets..

The important thing is NOT to be fooled.. If the public were aware that we are nothing more than the audience of an elaborate puppet show, then that steals the steam from these press outlets.. Once you see the invisible cords and threads on your own - then that's when reality sets in and YOU make the personal choice to decide what you want to believe..

Think this through: how pathetic is this??

We try to place as much faith in what the media tells us - and yet we're really no different than that of some of these communist countries where information is so completely controlled.. The one main difference is that here - stories are generated based on the media outlet's ability to generate the best amount of revenue.. In a communist country, stories are circulated as long as they meet that countries political agenda.. Are we then all that different?? Again, think this through as we live in a society that is controlled by an inordinate amount of public officials and other politicians..

So, if there's control on what information is printed or aired, who is exactly in control here: 1.) The Public?? yeah - right.. 2.) The Government?? In ways we cannot begin to imagine.. 3.) The advertisers, the investors, the conglomerates, the board of directors?? Absolutely..

Back in the day - I remember learning about how the press was generally looked upon as a "reliable source" of information.. What never really got taught (at least in my years of public education, but let's not even go there in this rant!!) the dynamics of what generates the stories from the media.. But times have changed.. There is no such thing as "finding the truth" out there - not when major contracts, advertising dollars, and other conglomerates are considerably more influential when it comes to content..

That's why I try to tell everyone "not to always believe so blindly" into what is being reported.. I'm not saying that every reporter, every newspaper or magazine does this, but it really begs the question which "slant" a story unfolds - and who benefits, and why..

Think about that when reading an account of something.. Even if it's just a story about plants and the plight of one woman (or man) to save the Pedicularis sceptrum carolinum from extinction or something.. There's a reason and purpose for the information that is getting disseminated out there.. Don't believe me?? Then why does the DOJ, the Bush (and Clinton) Administration, among others - bar photographs and other depictions of the dead soldiers coming back from Iraq?? If this is not control - then please explain to me what it is..