Letters to the Editor
-
I am the plot within the plot behind the plot under the plot
Within the plot behind the plot. Plus I'm from the future I know how this all turns out. It's a secret.
-
Enron Stock
Just curious if Rove managed to sell his Enron stock before the bottom fell out? My guess is he made out just fine...
-
PRESIDENT DAVID ROCKEFELLER
Dear Mr. Blumenthal: Until America recognizes the true defacto President, Mr. David Rockefeller ... and then the VP to same, Mr. Dick Cheney ... well, Gonzo, Bozo, Dim, Nit, Half, and in other words, all the current "Administration" -- is irrelevant. But, there IS GOOD NEWS! The “Elliott Wave Principle” shall indeed teach we US "patriots" a most valuable lesson by 2010 - grow the hell up and stop playing juvenile games with offspring acting like world leaders when the truth about inbreeding demonstrates the outcome over a few hundred years of species Homo-sapiens ... impotent brains conjuring up delusions of grandeur.
-
@everybody, re: elephantman
read this very carefully:
"I look for the President to replace Mr. Gonzalez with a choice that is as much of a professional and political improvement as Samuel Alito was over Ms. Miers.
I can only hope that Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Pat Leahy, Ted Kennedy and Joe Biden all take up temporary residence in Texas to personally oversee the investigations of Karl Rove and Alberto Gonzalez. Anything to keep them away from the levers of power in Washington and any serious governmental decisionmaking.
-- Elephantman "
************
I'm not sure what to make of this. Either Elephantman is just yankin' us as hard as he can, and he really doesn't believe this. Or he is absolutely serious, and yankin' us as hard as he can.
Now, if he's absolutely serious, then he's beyond hope. He drank the koolaid a long time ago, and likes being a proto-fascist, like his corporatist-in-arms, Sam Alito, who is a total disaster as a Supreme Court judge. Alito will roll back 50 years of legal progress in protecting all our rights, and the commons, if he has the chance. And so would Elephantman. Elephantman would like to go back to 1895 when McKinley was President, and all the little people knew their place.
And remember, since Elephantman has drunk the koolaid, he'll say whatever he has to to be right. That's a big one, he has to be right. All the time. And he'll simply ignore what we say if it contradicts him in any way. That's what he does here routinely.
Apparently, it's ok with him that his people have laid waste to the Middle East, and to the rights granted to the people under our constitution. Apparently, he's ok with the fact that our leaders are guilty of criminal acts, of felonies that would land anyone else in prison. Remember that, next time you're tempted to correct something stupid he's written. He believes in all this shit. He thinks it's fine.
You see, Elephantman, we think that your people and all their works should be kept permanently from the levers of power. I don't know if we'll succeed, but I do know that if *you* succeed, you'll turn this country into something none of us would accept: a totalitarian police-state.
I must say, I'd give a lot to know what Elephantman does for a living, and what he looks like, and how old he is. That'd tell me a lot.
I still kind-of hope he's simply a troll, and doesn't believe everything he spews, but I have a feeling that's not so. And he is duplicated by the millions out there. We have to take back the country from these corporatist, anti-commons totalitarians.
As for Elephantman, I vote we ignore him. He's obviously irredeemable.
-
Some speculate...
Why are some key Bush Administration officers "divesting" themselves at this time? Perhaps they had enought on their plate already. Perhaps the political risk of a coming military campaign was too much; Perhaps it helps the war efforts to separate these highly controversial figures away from the upcoming troubles.... perhaps.
------
by Staff Writers
Washington DC (RIA Novosti) Aug 28, 2007
The United States could deliver a military strike against Iran within the next six months, a former CIA officer told Fox News. In an interview Tuesday the U.S. TV channel asked Robert Baer, a former CIA field officer assigned to the Middle East, whether the U.S. was preparing for military action against Iran, citing Baer's column for Time Magazine on August 18, where he suggested that Washington officials expect an attack within the next six months.
"I've taken an informal poll inside the government," Baer told Fox. "The feeling is we will hit the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps [IRGC]."
He said the George W. Bush administration is convinced "that the Iranians are interfering in Iraq and the rest of the Gulf," but what his sources anticipate is "not exactly a war."
"We won't see American troops cross the border," said Baer. "If this is going to happen, it is going to happen very quickly and it is going to surprise a lot of people."
There were recent reports that Washington would put Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard - the largest branch of Iran's military, separate from the rest of the army - on the terrorism list.
Baer said the U.S. military suspects that the Revolutionary Guard is the main supplier of sophisticated improvised explosive devices (IEDs) to insurgents killing coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.
He also said there is a belief among neo-conservative elements in the Bush administration that the Revolutionary Guard is an obstacle to democratic and a friendly Iran.
"IRGC IED's are a casus belli for this administration. There will be an attack on Iran," Baer quoted an anonymous White House source as saying.
However, the U.S. government has consistently denied rumors of preparations for military action against Iran. (...) >
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Former_CIA_Officer_Says_US_Ready_To_Strike_Iran_Within_6_Months_999.html
Zbigniew Brzezinski Ex-National Security Adviser
Warns that Bush is Seeking a Pretext to Attack Iran
BARRY GREY / WSWS 2feb2007
Washington DC — Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday, Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security adviser in the Carter administration, delivered a scathing critique of the war in Iraq and warned that the Bush administration’s policy was leading inevitably to a war with Iran, with incalculable consequences for US imperialism in the Middle East and internationally.
Brzezinski, who opposed the March 2003 invasion and has publicly denounced the war as a colossal foreign policy blunder, began his remarks on what he called the “war of choice” in Iraq by characterizing it as “a historic, strategic and moral calamity.”
“Undertaken under false assumptions,” he continued, “it is undermining America’s global legitimacy. Its collateral civilian casualties as well as some abuses are tarnishing America’s moral credentials. Driven by Manichean principles and imperial hubris, it is intensifying regional instability.”
Brzezinski derided Bush’s talk of a “decisive ideological struggle” against radical Islam as “simplistic and demagogic,” and called it a “mythical historical narrative” employed to justify a “protracted and potentially expanding war.”
“To argue that America is already at war in the region with a wider Islamic threat, of which Iran is the epicenter, is to promote a self-fulfilling prophecy,” he said.
Most stunning and disturbing was his description of a “plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran.” It would, he suggested, involve “Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks, followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure, then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the US blamed on Iran, culminating in a ‘defensive’ US military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan.” [Emphasis added].
This was an unmistakable warning to the US Congress, replete with quotation marks to discount the “defensive” nature of such military action, that the Bush administration is seeking a pretext for an attack on Iran. Although he did not explicitly say so, Brzezinski came close to suggesting that the White House was capable of manufacturing a provocation—including a possible terrorist attack within the US—to provide the casus belli for war.
That a man such as Brzezinski, with decades of experience in the top echelons of the US foreign policy establishment, a man who has the closest links to the military and to intelligence agencies, should issue such a warning at an open hearing of the US Senate has immense and grave significance.
Brzezinski knows whereof he speaks, having authored provocations of his own while serving as Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser. In that capacity, as he has since acknowledged in published writings, he drew up the covert plan at the end of the 1970s to mobilize Islamic fundamentalist mujaheddin to topple the pro-Soviet regime in Afghanistan and draw the Soviet Union into a ruinous war in that country.
Following his opening remarks, in response to questions from the senators, Brzezinski reiterated his warning of a provocation.
He called the senators’ attention to a March 27, 2006 report in the New York Times on “a private meeting between the president and Prime Minister Blair, two months before the war, based on a memorandum prepared by the British official present at this meeting.” In the article, Brzezinski said, “the president is cited as saying he is concerned that there may not be weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq, and that there must be some consideration given to finding a different basis for undertaking the action.”
He continued: “I’ll just read you what this memo allegedly says, according to the New York Times: ‘The memo states that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation.’
“He described the several ways in which this could be done. I won’t go into that... the ways were quite sensational, at least one of them.
“If one is of the view that one is dealing with an implacable enemy that has to be removed, that course of action may under certain circumstances be appealing. I’m afraid that if this situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate, and if Iran is perceived as in some fashion involved or responsible, or a potential beneficiary, that temptation could arise.”
At another point Brzezinski remarked on the conspiratorial methods of the Bush administration and all but described it as a cabal. “I am perplexed,” he said, “by the fact that major strategic decisions seem to be made within a very narrow circle of individuals—just a few, probably a handful, perhaps not more than the fingers on my hand. And these are the individuals, all of whom but one, who made the original decision to go to war, and used the original justifications to go to war.” (...)>
http://www.mindfull y.org/Reform/ 2007/Zbigniew- Brzezinski- Iran2feb07. htm
============
-
here's another theory
gonzales stayed in office as a distraction; if he left, the next target might be Rove. With Rove gone, no more need for Gonzales.
-
Retching reaction
God-a-mighty! Almost makes one yearn for the day when lynching was in vogue!
-
A meaningful 'Godfather' reference from the guy who coined "Turdblossom"?
SB offers insightful analysis aside from his statement
"Bush did not nickname Gonzales "Fredo," after the weak brother in "The Godfather," without reason."
First of all, I would never assume that Bush has a reason, or the power of reason for that matter. Second, if he has a reason, it's likely not one involving literary word play.
I heard his "reason" for nicknaming Gonzales "Fredo" is that he mistakenly thought his first name was "Alfredo," not "Alberto."
Bush is probably chowing on some Fettucine Fredo down in Texas right now.
-
had_enough ...
It sounds to me as though you are questioning my patriotism...
Or that you are engaging in a name-calling attack...
Or that you are practicing the politics of personal destruction...
Whatever.
-
Bush's Legacy
A politicized Department of Justice, an unnecessary and unwindable war half a world away and the weakening of America's moral standing around the world.
-
Psssst...shhhhh.
Tap, tap, tap goes my toe
Wave wave goes my hand,
Oh yes it's so warm, and ready,
quite a member you have there,
show me some more...
Elephantman in the church restroom
-
Bush's Asian Values
Blumenthal is dead on again. Not quite as much fun as many of his other articles but then the subject is too minor ... another fool put in a position he can't even comprehend. What impresses me about Blumenthal's reports is that he exposes the patronage chains that link this bunch of fools who masquerade as great men on a mission to remake America and the world. They epitomise the "Asian values" that were trumpeted before the financial crisis of 1997 punctured that balloon. Loyalty, nepotism, the facade of "family values", government turned into a tool of corporations, harsh punishments for petty crimes, bailouts for the well connected, manipulation of a very pliant press, etc.
Bush. Cheney & Co may present himself as quintessential cowboys, but there is not much American about them at all. If they were more intelligent they'd fit in quite well atop the governments of Singapore or Malaysia.