A Political Debate On Stress Disorder...
As Claims Rise, VA Takes Stock
The spiraling cost of post-traumatic stress disorder among war veterans has triggered a politically charged debate and ignited fears that the government is trying to limit expensive benefits for emotionally scarred troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.
In the past five years, the number of veterans receiving compensation for the disorder commonly called PTSD has grown nearly seven times as fast as the number receiving benefits for disabilities in general, according to a report this year by the inspector general of the Department of Veterans Affairs. A total of 215,871 veterans received PTSD benefit payments last year at a cost of $4.3 billion, up from $1.7 billion in 1999 -- a jump of more than 150 percent.
Experts say the sharp increase does not begin to factor in the potential impact of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, because the increase is largely the result of Vietnam War vets seeking treatment decades after their combat experiences. Facing a budget crunch, experts within and outside the Veterans Affairs Department are raising concerns about fraudulent claims, wondering whether the structure of government benefits discourages healing, and even questioning the utility and objectivity of the diagnosis itself.
"On the one hand, it is good that people are reaching out for help," said Jeff Schrade, communications director for the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. "At the same time, as more people reach out for help, it squeezes the budget further."
Among the issues being discussed, he said, was whether veterans who show signs of recovery should continue to receive disability compensation: "Whether anyone has the political courage to cut them off -- I don't know that Congress has that will, but we'll see."
Much of the debate is taking place out of public sight, including an internal VA meeting in Philadelphia this month. The department has also been in negotiations with the Institute of Medicine over a review of the "utility and objectiveness" of PTSD diagnostic criteria and the validity of screening techniques, a process that could have profound implications for returning soldiers.
The growing national debate over the Iraq war has changed the nature of the discussion over PTSD, some participants said. "It has become a pro-war-versus-antiwar issue," said one VA official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because politics is not supposed to enter the debate. "If we show that PTSD is prevalent and severe, that becomes one more little reason we should stop waging war. If, on the other hand, PTSD rates are low . . . that is convenient for the Bush administration."
As to whether budget issues and politics are playing a role in the agency's review of PTSD diagnosis and treatment, VA spokesman Scott Hogenson said: "The debate is over how to provide the best medical services possible for veterans."
People with PTSD have paralyzing memories of traumatic episodes they experienced or witnessed, a range of emotional problems, and significant impairments in day-to-day functioning. Underlying the political and budget issues, many experts acknowledged, is a broader scientific debate over how best to diagnose trauma-related pathology, what the goal of treatment should be -- even what constitutes trauma.
Harvard psychologist Richard J. McNally argues that the diagnosis equates sexual abuse, car accidents and concentration camps, when they are entirely different experiences: A PTSD diagnosis has become "a way of moral claims-making," he said. "To underscore the reprehensibility of the perpetrator, we say someone has been through a traumatic event."
Chris Frueh, director of the VA clinic in Charleston, S.C., said the department's disability system encourages some veterans to exaggerate symptoms and prolong problems in order to maintain eligibility for benefits.
"We have young men and women coming back from Iraq who are having PTSD and getting the message that this is a disorder they can't be treated for, and they will have to be on disability for the rest of their lives," said Frueh, a professor of public psychiatry at the Medical University of South Carolina. "My concern about the policies is that they create perverse incentives to stay ill. It is very tough to get better when you are trying to demonstrate how ill you are."
Most veterans whom Frueh treats for PTSD are seeking disability compensation, he said. Veterans Affairs uses a sliding scale; veterans who are granted 100 percent disability status receive payments starting at around $2,300 a month. The VA inspector general's report found that benefit payments varied widely in states and said that was because VA centers in some states are more likely to grant veterans 100 percent disability.
Psychiatrist Sally Satel, who is affiliated with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said an underground network advises veterans where to go for the best chance of being declared disabled. The institute organized a recent meeting to discuss PTSD among veterans.
Once veterans are declared disabled, they retain that status indefinitely, Frueh and Satel said. The system creates an adversarial relationship between doctors and patients, in which veterans sometimes take legal action if doctors decline to diagnose PTSD, Frueh said. The clinician added that some patients who really need help never get it because they are unwilling to undergo the lengthy process of qualifying for disability benefits, which often requires them to repeatedly revisit the painful episodes they experienced.
The concern by Frueh and Satel about overdiagnosis and fraud -- what researchers call "false positives" -- has drawn the ire of veterans groups and many other mental health experts.
A far bigger problem is the many veterans who seek help but do not get it or who never seek help, a number of experts said. Studies have shown that large numbers of veterans with PTSD never seek treatment, possibly because of the stigma surrounding mental illness.
"There are periodic false positives, but there are also a lot of false negatives out there," said Terence M. Keane, one of the nation's best-known PTSD researchers, who cited a 1988 study on the numbers of veterans who do not get treatment. "Less than one-fourth of people with combat-related PTSD have used VA-related services."
Larry Scott, who runs the clearinghouse http://www.vawatchdog.org/ , said conservative groups are trying to cut VA disability programs by unfairly comparing them to welfare.
Compensating people for disabilities is a cost of war, he said: "Veterans benefits are like workmen's comp. You went to war. You were injured. Either your body or your mind was injured, and that prevents you from doing certain duties and you are compensated for that."
Scott said Veterans Affairs' objectives were made clear in the department's request to the Institute of Medicine for a $1.3 million study to review how PTSD is diagnosed and treated. Among other things, the department asked the institute -- a branch of the National Academies chartered by Congress to advise the government on science policy -- to review the American Psychiatric Association's criteria for diagnosing PTSD. Effectively, Scott said, Veterans Affairs was trying to get one scientific organization to second-guess another.
PTSD experts summoned to Philadelphia for the two-day internal "expert panel" meeting were asked to discuss "evidence regarding validity, reliability, and feasibility" of the department's PTSD assessment and treatment practices, according to an e-mail invitation obtained by The Washington Post. The goal, the e-mail added, is "to improve clinical exams used to help determine benefit payments for veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder."
"What they are trying to do is figure out a way not to diagnose vets with PTSD," said Steve Robinson, executive director of the National Gulf War Resource Center, a veterans advocacy group. "It's like telling a patient with cancer, 'if we tell you, you don't have cancer, then you won't suffer from cancer.' "
Hogenson, the VA spokesman, said the department is not seeking to overturn the established psychiatric criteria for diagnosing PTSD.
"We are reviewing the utility and the objectivity of the criteria . . . and are commenting on the screening instruments used by VA," he said. "We want to make sure what we do for screening comports with the latest information out there."
===========================
By Shankar Vedantam
Washington Post Staff Writer-Tuesday, December 27, 2005
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Oppose any leader that would make himself a god.
Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the East to Jerusalem, saying, "Where is He that is born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East and have come to worship Him." When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.
– Matthew 2:1–3
The above passage of Scripture will be read countless times to the faithful over the next week as Christians celebrate the ultimate miracle of the coming of God made man, but no doubt the great majority of listeners will not give this passage even a cursory hearing. However, the wisdom contained therein proves salutary for even those not of the Christian faith. The subtext of the passage show how fundamentally radical the very concept of the Christ is and how one of the shrewdest of ancient political minds, Herod, understood this before the person of Jesus had ever uttered a word.
The historian James Henry Breasted (America’s first Egyptologist) wrote a useful textbook of ancient history in the early part of the 20th century. Breasted’s basic premise is that every culture of the East eventually had a ruler who assumed the mantle of the divine, a man-made-god. With the divine ruler came an oppressive bureaucracy (because the "man-god" king knew best how to run everyone’s life) which eventually sabotaged the cultural and economic advantages which the civilization had struggled to gain. The democracy of the Greek city-states was the alternative model (Greek culture’s fall eventually coming at the hands of a Macedonian "man-god," Alexander). In Breasted’s historical survey, "The East" is synonymous with a culture of absolute despotism, be it Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian or Persian. Only in the West did the idea of the worth of the individual take root.
How disheartening it must have been for Herod, the non-Jewish usurper of the throne at Jerusalem and puppet of the empire of Rome, to learn that men who knew about god-making where not looking for him but an infant. Years of crafty political maneuvers, skillfully applied terror, and an immense pork barrel public works program must have seemed all for naught. Herod, who seemed well on his way to achieving the status of a "man-god" king, had lost out not to a rival politico or foreign power but a child. The fact that it was a child, who had done nothing to achieve notoriety or aggrandize himself with worldly power, is precisely what must have had him "troubled, and all Jerusalem with him." An infant worthy of worship was not one who had won the title of "man-god" but was one who was a God-man, ruling by his very nature.
Such a concept "troubled" not only Herod but the entire establishment of political hangers-on. They realized all too well the consequences of the coming of a God-man – the legitimacy of "divine" kings could no longer even be feigned. Naturally, such an innovation in the minds of men had to be stopped and the slaughter of all male children under the age of two seemed a reasonable enough price to the power-drunk. (A few short decades later Caiaphas gave counsel that it was expedient that one man be executed in what he hoped was a political powerplay.)
For the Christian, the coming of the Christ child had a myriad of eternal spiritual repercussions. Quite simply, all has changed. One of those changes, perhaps incidental in the eyes of believers, is that "man-god" kings are obsolete. Since God has condescended to become a man, it is preposterous (and sinful) for a man to set himself up as a god. It is in the light of this radical change that we are to interpret what it is that belongs to God and what to Caesar.
The Caesars continued down the path of deifying themselves. Breasted notes in his history that by the time of Diocletian, three centuries after the radical message of Christmas had been delivered, the counter-Christmas political program was complete.
The emperor thus became for the whole Roman world what he had been in Egypt – an absolute monarch with none to limit his power. The State had been completely militarized and orientalized. With the unlimited power of the oriental despot the emperor now assumed its outward symbols . . . all who came into his presence must bow down to the dust.
As a divinity, the emperor had now become the oriental Sun-god and he was officially called the "Invincible Sun." His birthday was the twenty-fifth of December . . . The inhabitants of each province might revere their particular gods, undisturbed by the government, but all were obliged as good citizens to join in the official sacrifices to the head of State as a god. With the incoming of this oriental attitude toward the emperor, the long struggle for democracy, which we have traced through so many centuries of the history of early man, ended in the triumph of oriental despotism.
The Church’s establishment the feast of the Nativity on December 25th was an outright subversion of Caesar’s claims as to who was worthy of worship. (If this truth gets out, you can forget about any more crèche scenes in public.) My prayer for all who all who hold the Christian faith this Christmas season is that they may recover the radical truth that terrified the tyrants of antiquity and that people of all faiths may join to oppose any leader who would make himself a god.
December 22, 2005
C.T. Rossi is an attorney who lives in Washington, D.C.
© 2005 LewRockwell.com
– Matthew 2:1–3
The above passage of Scripture will be read countless times to the faithful over the next week as Christians celebrate the ultimate miracle of the coming of God made man, but no doubt the great majority of listeners will not give this passage even a cursory hearing. However, the wisdom contained therein proves salutary for even those not of the Christian faith. The subtext of the passage show how fundamentally radical the very concept of the Christ is and how one of the shrewdest of ancient political minds, Herod, understood this before the person of Jesus had ever uttered a word.
The historian James Henry Breasted (America’s first Egyptologist) wrote a useful textbook of ancient history in the early part of the 20th century. Breasted’s basic premise is that every culture of the East eventually had a ruler who assumed the mantle of the divine, a man-made-god. With the divine ruler came an oppressive bureaucracy (because the "man-god" king knew best how to run everyone’s life) which eventually sabotaged the cultural and economic advantages which the civilization had struggled to gain. The democracy of the Greek city-states was the alternative model (Greek culture’s fall eventually coming at the hands of a Macedonian "man-god," Alexander). In Breasted’s historical survey, "The East" is synonymous with a culture of absolute despotism, be it Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian or Persian. Only in the West did the idea of the worth of the individual take root.
How disheartening it must have been for Herod, the non-Jewish usurper of the throne at Jerusalem and puppet of the empire of Rome, to learn that men who knew about god-making where not looking for him but an infant. Years of crafty political maneuvers, skillfully applied terror, and an immense pork barrel public works program must have seemed all for naught. Herod, who seemed well on his way to achieving the status of a "man-god" king, had lost out not to a rival politico or foreign power but a child. The fact that it was a child, who had done nothing to achieve notoriety or aggrandize himself with worldly power, is precisely what must have had him "troubled, and all Jerusalem with him." An infant worthy of worship was not one who had won the title of "man-god" but was one who was a God-man, ruling by his very nature.
Such a concept "troubled" not only Herod but the entire establishment of political hangers-on. They realized all too well the consequences of the coming of a God-man – the legitimacy of "divine" kings could no longer even be feigned. Naturally, such an innovation in the minds of men had to be stopped and the slaughter of all male children under the age of two seemed a reasonable enough price to the power-drunk. (A few short decades later Caiaphas gave counsel that it was expedient that one man be executed in what he hoped was a political powerplay.)
For the Christian, the coming of the Christ child had a myriad of eternal spiritual repercussions. Quite simply, all has changed. One of those changes, perhaps incidental in the eyes of believers, is that "man-god" kings are obsolete. Since God has condescended to become a man, it is preposterous (and sinful) for a man to set himself up as a god. It is in the light of this radical change that we are to interpret what it is that belongs to God and what to Caesar.
The Caesars continued down the path of deifying themselves. Breasted notes in his history that by the time of Diocletian, three centuries after the radical message of Christmas had been delivered, the counter-Christmas political program was complete.
The emperor thus became for the whole Roman world what he had been in Egypt – an absolute monarch with none to limit his power. The State had been completely militarized and orientalized. With the unlimited power of the oriental despot the emperor now assumed its outward symbols . . . all who came into his presence must bow down to the dust.
As a divinity, the emperor had now become the oriental Sun-god and he was officially called the "Invincible Sun." His birthday was the twenty-fifth of December . . . The inhabitants of each province might revere their particular gods, undisturbed by the government, but all were obliged as good citizens to join in the official sacrifices to the head of State as a god. With the incoming of this oriental attitude toward the emperor, the long struggle for democracy, which we have traced through so many centuries of the history of early man, ended in the triumph of oriental despotism.
The Church’s establishment the feast of the Nativity on December 25th was an outright subversion of Caesar’s claims as to who was worthy of worship. (If this truth gets out, you can forget about any more crèche scenes in public.) My prayer for all who all who hold the Christian faith this Christmas season is that they may recover the radical truth that terrified the tyrants of antiquity and that people of all faiths may join to oppose any leader who would make himself a god.
December 22, 2005
C.T. Rossi is an attorney who lives in Washington, D.C.
© 2005 LewRockwell.com
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
Insurgency In Waiting:
Iraq may be the jihad Superbowl, but Saudi Arabia is still al Qaeda’s top prize. Watch closely, because the quiet in the kingdom today may be the calm before the storm.
With all eyes on Iraq’s bloody insurgency and last week’s hotel bombings in Amman, Jordan, it’s easy to forget that al Qaeda’s ultimate goal is to snatch the reins of power from the House of Saud. Osama bin Laden’s top lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has argued that the militant Islamic movement cannot win without a base at the heart of the Arab Middle East. And though Iraq or Egypt might fit the bill, neither can claim to be the world’s top oil producer or the site of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina.
Al Qaeda went underground after bombing a Saudi National Guard compound in 1995, killing five Americans. But in May 2003, it reopened the Saudi front by bombing foreign housing compounds in Riyadh, killing 35. Emboldened by that attack, the insurgents launched audacious assaults on petrochemical sites and even the Riyadh headquarters of the Saudi security forces. In the last two years, approximately 140 people have died in battles between security forces and insurgents.
Riyadh spends billions on defense and internal security forces every year, but it may not have what it takes to defeat a determined insurgency. Al Qaeda’s kinship with the Wahhabi religious establishment makes it popular within the kingdom and provides fertile ground for recruitment and operations. The Wahhabis also have a longstanding relationship with the royal family, through which they accept oil largesse in exchange for providing political and religious legitimacy to the regime.
The Saudi government would like to see the lull in insurgent activity in 2005 as evidence that they have a firm handle on matters. Unfortunately, the recent quiet may be the calm before the storm. When bin Laden called in December 2004 for a new phase in his campaign to oust the regime in Saudi Arabia, he urged his followers to mount a revolution in the kingdom. But he also told them not to miss a “golden and unique opportunity” to kill Americans in Iraq. Today, many young Saudi men are too busy with endeavors in Iraq to make trouble back home. But those who survive will eventually come home trained and battle-hardened.
While the al Qaeda insurgency in Saudi Arabia is likely to grow, the reliability of Saudi internal security is in doubt. Anecdotal evidence suggests that al Qaeda already has a strong presence within the Saudi security forces. An al Qaeda computer recovered during the 2001 U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan contained classified Saudi government documents apparently stolen by al Qaeda sympathizers within the government, according to Michael Scheuer, a former chief of the CIA’s bin Laden unit. The May 2003 bombings of residential compounds in Riyadh required insider knowledge that was almost certainly provided by the Saudi security detail at the compound, according to Saudi Arabia expert John Bradley. In a November 2003 attack on another Riyadh housing compound, the terrorists were dressed in police uniforms. In June 2004, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula announced that elements in the Saudi police provided official uniforms and police vehicles to the group that carried out the execution of the American worker Paul Johnson, and set up false roadblocks as well. There is also precedent for mutiny in the ranks. In 1979, troops from the Saudi National Guard took part in an extremist uprising. Unfortunately for Riyadh, vetting the security forces is extremely difficult because militant ideology has deep roots in Saudi society, especially in the lower socioeconomic rungs of society that provide most personnel for the kingdom’s fighting forces.
Coming Home to Roost
The problem will only get worse as Saudi insurgents begin returning from Iraq, ready to employ their on-the-job training. Saudi nationals comprise a large percentage of the foreign insurgents in Iraq, and are heavily represented in lists of suicide bombers posted on extremist Web sites. It doesn’t help that much of the Saudi religious establishment advocates jihad in Iraq. Last year, 26 Saudi imams signed a statement urging Muslims to join the insurgency against U.S. forces in Iraq. In the 1980s, the Saudi government generally knew which Saudis were fighting in Afghanistan and who the trouble makers might be. This time, it doesn’t.
Tackling this entrenched problem will require political skill, grit, and determination. So far, it’s not clear that the aging and conservative Saudi leadership is up to the task. King Abdullah, touted by many as a reformer, is 82 years old and unlikely to implement significant political reforms or challenge the Saudi religious establishment any more than his predecessor, King Fahd, did. Saudi Interior Minister Prince Nayef declared in 2002 that there were no al Qaeda cells in Saudi Arabia and repeated the allegation that Israel was behind the 9/11 attacks. Coming from the head of Saudi internal security, these comments suggest that the keen analysis necessary to an effective counterinsurgency campaign may be lacking. Some Saudi watchers suspect that Riyadh may have even paid al Qaeda to keep the insurgency outside of the kingdom.
There is hope that younger princes more clearly see the dangers posed by al Qaeda and militant Islamist ideology. In the summer of 2004, the Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, wrote an unusual article in the Saudi government newspaper Al Watan, in which he called for Saudi public support for a jihad against al Qaeda in the kingdom and warned against hesitation. Hoping that terrorists will “come to their senses,” he wrote, is a recipe for defeat. Riyadh needs to dedicate more resources to collecting and analyzing intelligence to target al Qaeda cells inside the kingdom. They also have to skillfully delegitimize the militant Islamist ideology in Saudi society and reign in the religious establishment that stokes it. The danger for the Saudi regime is that bold efforts on these fronts could spark a popular backlash by the many Saudi citizens who feel alienated by the regime’s reputation for corruption and isolation.
It is uncertain how many younger princes share Bandar’s assessment or even how much influence they could have in shaping the regime’s counterinsurgency campaign. It’s not even certain that Bandar himself will have much influence in his role as secretary-general of the newly created National Security Council. Many apparently grand political moves in Saudi Arabia—such as counterterrorism conferences and municipal elections—have been more show than substance. Given a choice, the aging Saudi leadership is more likely to opt for a conciliatory approach to al Qaeda and the path of hesitation that Bandar fears.
In Iraq, U.S. commanders are rightly doing everything in their power to defeat the insurgents. If they succeed, and an Iraqi government can handle security on its own, Washington’s list of headaches won’t necessarily be any smaller. The insurgency may simply move south.
With all eyes on Iraq’s bloody insurgency and last week’s hotel bombings in Amman, Jordan, it’s easy to forget that al Qaeda’s ultimate goal is to snatch the reins of power from the House of Saud. Osama bin Laden’s top lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has argued that the militant Islamic movement cannot win without a base at the heart of the Arab Middle East. And though Iraq or Egypt might fit the bill, neither can claim to be the world’s top oil producer or the site of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina.
Al Qaeda went underground after bombing a Saudi National Guard compound in 1995, killing five Americans. But in May 2003, it reopened the Saudi front by bombing foreign housing compounds in Riyadh, killing 35. Emboldened by that attack, the insurgents launched audacious assaults on petrochemical sites and even the Riyadh headquarters of the Saudi security forces. In the last two years, approximately 140 people have died in battles between security forces and insurgents.
Riyadh spends billions on defense and internal security forces every year, but it may not have what it takes to defeat a determined insurgency. Al Qaeda’s kinship with the Wahhabi religious establishment makes it popular within the kingdom and provides fertile ground for recruitment and operations. The Wahhabis also have a longstanding relationship with the royal family, through which they accept oil largesse in exchange for providing political and religious legitimacy to the regime.
The Saudi government would like to see the lull in insurgent activity in 2005 as evidence that they have a firm handle on matters. Unfortunately, the recent quiet may be the calm before the storm. When bin Laden called in December 2004 for a new phase in his campaign to oust the regime in Saudi Arabia, he urged his followers to mount a revolution in the kingdom. But he also told them not to miss a “golden and unique opportunity” to kill Americans in Iraq. Today, many young Saudi men are too busy with endeavors in Iraq to make trouble back home. But those who survive will eventually come home trained and battle-hardened.
While the al Qaeda insurgency in Saudi Arabia is likely to grow, the reliability of Saudi internal security is in doubt. Anecdotal evidence suggests that al Qaeda already has a strong presence within the Saudi security forces. An al Qaeda computer recovered during the 2001 U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan contained classified Saudi government documents apparently stolen by al Qaeda sympathizers within the government, according to Michael Scheuer, a former chief of the CIA’s bin Laden unit. The May 2003 bombings of residential compounds in Riyadh required insider knowledge that was almost certainly provided by the Saudi security detail at the compound, according to Saudi Arabia expert John Bradley. In a November 2003 attack on another Riyadh housing compound, the terrorists were dressed in police uniforms. In June 2004, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula announced that elements in the Saudi police provided official uniforms and police vehicles to the group that carried out the execution of the American worker Paul Johnson, and set up false roadblocks as well. There is also precedent for mutiny in the ranks. In 1979, troops from the Saudi National Guard took part in an extremist uprising. Unfortunately for Riyadh, vetting the security forces is extremely difficult because militant ideology has deep roots in Saudi society, especially in the lower socioeconomic rungs of society that provide most personnel for the kingdom’s fighting forces.
Coming Home to Roost
The problem will only get worse as Saudi insurgents begin returning from Iraq, ready to employ their on-the-job training. Saudi nationals comprise a large percentage of the foreign insurgents in Iraq, and are heavily represented in lists of suicide bombers posted on extremist Web sites. It doesn’t help that much of the Saudi religious establishment advocates jihad in Iraq. Last year, 26 Saudi imams signed a statement urging Muslims to join the insurgency against U.S. forces in Iraq. In the 1980s, the Saudi government generally knew which Saudis were fighting in Afghanistan and who the trouble makers might be. This time, it doesn’t.
Tackling this entrenched problem will require political skill, grit, and determination. So far, it’s not clear that the aging and conservative Saudi leadership is up to the task. King Abdullah, touted by many as a reformer, is 82 years old and unlikely to implement significant political reforms or challenge the Saudi religious establishment any more than his predecessor, King Fahd, did. Saudi Interior Minister Prince Nayef declared in 2002 that there were no al Qaeda cells in Saudi Arabia and repeated the allegation that Israel was behind the 9/11 attacks. Coming from the head of Saudi internal security, these comments suggest that the keen analysis necessary to an effective counterinsurgency campaign may be lacking. Some Saudi watchers suspect that Riyadh may have even paid al Qaeda to keep the insurgency outside of the kingdom.
There is hope that younger princes more clearly see the dangers posed by al Qaeda and militant Islamist ideology. In the summer of 2004, the Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, wrote an unusual article in the Saudi government newspaper Al Watan, in which he called for Saudi public support for a jihad against al Qaeda in the kingdom and warned against hesitation. Hoping that terrorists will “come to their senses,” he wrote, is a recipe for defeat. Riyadh needs to dedicate more resources to collecting and analyzing intelligence to target al Qaeda cells inside the kingdom. They also have to skillfully delegitimize the militant Islamist ideology in Saudi society and reign in the religious establishment that stokes it. The danger for the Saudi regime is that bold efforts on these fronts could spark a popular backlash by the many Saudi citizens who feel alienated by the regime’s reputation for corruption and isolation.
It is uncertain how many younger princes share Bandar’s assessment or even how much influence they could have in shaping the regime’s counterinsurgency campaign. It’s not even certain that Bandar himself will have much influence in his role as secretary-general of the newly created National Security Council. Many apparently grand political moves in Saudi Arabia—such as counterterrorism conferences and municipal elections—have been more show than substance. Given a choice, the aging Saudi leadership is more likely to opt for a conciliatory approach to al Qaeda and the path of hesitation that Bandar fears.
In Iraq, U.S. commanders are rightly doing everything in their power to defeat the insurgents. If they succeed, and an Iraqi government can handle security on its own, Washington’s list of headaches won’t necessarily be any smaller. The insurgency may simply move south.
Sunday, November 06, 2005
What is Iraq REALLY like now??
Despite what we are being told, most of Iraq is a disaster and in complete chaos.
The security situation is more accurately described as a guerrilla war which has been out of control for over a year. Attacks on US forces average over 70 per day, and are expected to increase.
The US military having control over any portion of Iraq is a myth. Even the "Green Zone" is mortared on a regular basis.Like in Vietnam, planes will be shot down if they don't use the spiral method of taking off & landing due to the miliary's inability to provide adequate security. The infrastructure is in shambles. For the western companies who were awarded the no-bid contracts in Iraq, it's their dream contract. Companies like Bechtel have been paid out in full for their initial contract worth $680 million and awarded contracts totaling over $3.8 Billion. Many of their projects in their initial contract were not even begun. Iraqis suffer and die from waterborne diseases. Child malnutrition is worse than during the sanctions. Unemployment is over 70%.
According to a recent poll commissioned by the British military, 82% of Iraqis want all occupation forces removed from their country. Less than 1% feel occupation forces have improved security. 45% admitted to feeling that attacks against US forces are justified.
There is now a huge number of missing persons in Iraq. Over 100,000 according to two Iraq non-government organizations. Many are believed to be detained by the US. Doctors for Iraq Society estimates that there are 60,000 Iraqis in US military detention facilities in Iraq.
During the November 2004 siege of Fallujah 60% of the city was completely destroyed. Most of the rest of it had severe damage . Iraqi NGO's and medical workers in Fallujah estimate over 4000 are dead, mostly civilians. Over 50,000 residents of Fallujah remain displaced. The US military used cluster bombs, depleted uranium munitions, and white phosphorous (a new form of napalm) during the siege, and appear to have used forms of chemical weapons as well. Fallujah was a massacre rather than a siege. Fallujah is the model of Bush's foreign policy. There has been next to no reconstruction completed inside Fallujah as was promised by occupation authorities. Many of us in the US may not have even heard that Al-Qa'im, Kerabla, Najaf, Haditha, Hit and parts of Baquba, Baghdad, Ramadi and Samarra have suffered large scale destruction by US military operations.
Iraq is already in state sponsored civil war. The puppet Iraqi government is using the Badr Army and the Kurdish Peshmerga militia to battle a primarily Sunni resistance.
The Iraqi people have little hope for a future. Most who can afford it are leaving Iraq. Those who have no choice but to stay can look forward to continued and increasing violence, no reconstruction, a fundamentalist state and an endless US occupation which was failed before it began. The American people are obliged to help the Iraqi people because it is the fault of the American people that Bush was allowed to invade Iraq. Anyone who is not doing everything in their power to end this illegal and immoral occupation is complicit with the war crimes being committed in Iraq.
Many will say that this is anti-American & will argue that they are only supporting the troops by standing behind Bush and his gang of cut-throats. Supporting an unjust & immoral war based in part on lies perpetrated by an immoral administration IS anti-American and goes against everything America was based on. The troops are doing what they are told which is the mark of a good soldier. They are following orders and doing thier job very well. Once they were placed in their current position, they have no choice in the matter. Thier survival depends on the ability to follow orders without question. Supporting our troops is not the question here. Supporting a corrupt administration is!
The security situation is more accurately described as a guerrilla war which has been out of control for over a year. Attacks on US forces average over 70 per day, and are expected to increase.
The US military having control over any portion of Iraq is a myth. Even the "Green Zone" is mortared on a regular basis.Like in Vietnam, planes will be shot down if they don't use the spiral method of taking off & landing due to the miliary's inability to provide adequate security. The infrastructure is in shambles. For the western companies who were awarded the no-bid contracts in Iraq, it's their dream contract. Companies like Bechtel have been paid out in full for their initial contract worth $680 million and awarded contracts totaling over $3.8 Billion. Many of their projects in their initial contract were not even begun. Iraqis suffer and die from waterborne diseases. Child malnutrition is worse than during the sanctions. Unemployment is over 70%.
According to a recent poll commissioned by the British military, 82% of Iraqis want all occupation forces removed from their country. Less than 1% feel occupation forces have improved security. 45% admitted to feeling that attacks against US forces are justified.
There is now a huge number of missing persons in Iraq. Over 100,000 according to two Iraq non-government organizations. Many are believed to be detained by the US. Doctors for Iraq Society estimates that there are 60,000 Iraqis in US military detention facilities in Iraq.
During the November 2004 siege of Fallujah 60% of the city was completely destroyed. Most of the rest of it had severe damage . Iraqi NGO's and medical workers in Fallujah estimate over 4000 are dead, mostly civilians. Over 50,000 residents of Fallujah remain displaced. The US military used cluster bombs, depleted uranium munitions, and white phosphorous (a new form of napalm) during the siege, and appear to have used forms of chemical weapons as well. Fallujah was a massacre rather than a siege. Fallujah is the model of Bush's foreign policy. There has been next to no reconstruction completed inside Fallujah as was promised by occupation authorities. Many of us in the US may not have even heard that Al-Qa'im, Kerabla, Najaf, Haditha, Hit and parts of Baquba, Baghdad, Ramadi and Samarra have suffered large scale destruction by US military operations.
Iraq is already in state sponsored civil war. The puppet Iraqi government is using the Badr Army and the Kurdish Peshmerga militia to battle a primarily Sunni resistance.
The Iraqi people have little hope for a future. Most who can afford it are leaving Iraq. Those who have no choice but to stay can look forward to continued and increasing violence, no reconstruction, a fundamentalist state and an endless US occupation which was failed before it began. The American people are obliged to help the Iraqi people because it is the fault of the American people that Bush was allowed to invade Iraq. Anyone who is not doing everything in their power to end this illegal and immoral occupation is complicit with the war crimes being committed in Iraq.
Many will say that this is anti-American & will argue that they are only supporting the troops by standing behind Bush and his gang of cut-throats. Supporting an unjust & immoral war based in part on lies perpetrated by an immoral administration IS anti-American and goes against everything America was based on. The troops are doing what they are told which is the mark of a good soldier. They are following orders and doing thier job very well. Once they were placed in their current position, they have no choice in the matter. Thier survival depends on the ability to follow orders without question. Supporting our troops is not the question here. Supporting a corrupt administration is!
Friday, October 28, 2005
"SCOOTER" Facts
Pre-emptive refutation of conservative information concerning Libby's indictment that is most likely to appear in the media:
>MYTH 1: Special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald is an overzealous prosecutor who was out to get the Bush administration.
FACT: Fitzgerald was appointed U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois by President Bush after he was recommended for the post by conservative Republican Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL, no relation). He was hand-picked by the Bush Justice Department to investigate the Plame matter.
>MYTH 2: Fitzgerald overstepped his authority and went beyond his original mandate to investigate possible violations of the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA).
FACT: Fitzgerald's official delegation as special counsel did not mention the IIPA, or any other specific statute. Rather, it granted him "all the authority of the Attorney General with respect to the Department's investigation into the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity."
>MYTH 3: The indictment marks a troubling move towards the criminalization of politics.
FACT: The outing of Valerie Plame wasn't "politics," it was a leak of classified information that put U.S. national security at risk. Lying to a grand jury and obstructing justice to block an investigation and possible prosecution of the leak, if in fact Libby is found guilty of those crimes, isn't "politics"; it's a crime.
>MYTH 4: Leaks happen every day in Washington; there was no reason to launch an investigation in the first place.
FACT: Leaks about an upcoming press conference or the administration's legislative strategy happen every day. Leaks of classified information that blow the cover of CIA agents and jeopardize national security are far different from the comparably trivial leaks that occur daily.
>MYTH 5: It was commonly known among Plame's neighbors and in her social circles that she works at the CIA.
FACT: Libby's indictment reads: "At all relevant times from January 1, 2002 through July 2003, Valerie [Plame] Wilson was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified. Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson's affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community."
>MYTH 1: Special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald is an overzealous prosecutor who was out to get the Bush administration.
FACT: Fitzgerald was appointed U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois by President Bush after he was recommended for the post by conservative Republican Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL, no relation). He was hand-picked by the Bush Justice Department to investigate the Plame matter.
>MYTH 2: Fitzgerald overstepped his authority and went beyond his original mandate to investigate possible violations of the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA).
FACT: Fitzgerald's official delegation as special counsel did not mention the IIPA, or any other specific statute. Rather, it granted him "all the authority of the Attorney General with respect to the Department's investigation into the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity."
>MYTH 3: The indictment marks a troubling move towards the criminalization of politics.
FACT: The outing of Valerie Plame wasn't "politics," it was a leak of classified information that put U.S. national security at risk. Lying to a grand jury and obstructing justice to block an investigation and possible prosecution of the leak, if in fact Libby is found guilty of those crimes, isn't "politics"; it's a crime.
>MYTH 4: Leaks happen every day in Washington; there was no reason to launch an investigation in the first place.
FACT: Leaks about an upcoming press conference or the administration's legislative strategy happen every day. Leaks of classified information that blow the cover of CIA agents and jeopardize national security are far different from the comparably trivial leaks that occur daily.
>MYTH 5: It was commonly known among Plame's neighbors and in her social circles that she works at the CIA.
FACT: Libby's indictment reads: "At all relevant times from January 1, 2002 through July 2003, Valerie [Plame] Wilson was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified. Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson's affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community."
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Military Censorship
Soldier-bloggers have provided journalists, families, and the public firsthand, uncensored accounts of what’s happening in Iraq—until now. A new policy, handed down by U.S. commanders in April but only recently reported, requires service members in Iraq who blog to notify their chain of command, or face punishment. Under the policy, commanders must read subordinates’ blogs. Some soldiers are going offline, rather than reveal their identity to higher-ups. Others say they’ll break the rule. “I’m taking a risk,” says one soldier, “but I [can’t] be objective if the Army knows who I am.”
I wonder what they are afraid of? The truth perhaps?
I wonder what they are afraid of? The truth perhaps?
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
President Cogratulates Iraqis on Successful Elections
(The South Grounds)
President's Remarks
12:47 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT:
Quote:
"On behalf of the American people, I'd like to congratulate the people of Iraq for the successful completion of a vote on their draft constitution. By all indications, the turnout was greater than the turnout from the last January election, which is good news. By all indications, the Sunnis participated in greater numbers in this election than last time. And that's good news. After all, the purpose of a democracy is to make sure everybody is -- participates in the process. I'm also pleased, from the initial indications, that the level of violence was considerably less than the last election. That's a tribute to the Iraqis -- forces who we've trained, as well as coalition forces that worked hard to make sure that democracy could move forward in Iraq. This is a very positive day for the Iraqis and, as well, for world peace. Democracies are peaceful countries. The vote today in Iraq stands in stark contrast to the attitudes and philosophy and strategy of al Qaeda and its terrorist friends and killers. We believe, and the Iraqis believe, the best way forward is through the democratic process. Al Qaeda wants to use their violent ways to stop the march of democracy because democracy is the exact opposite of what they believe is right. We're making progress toward peace. We're making progress toward an ally that will join us in the war on terror, that will prevent al Qaeda from establishing safe haven in Iraq, and a country that will serve as an example for others who aspire to live in freedom. So, again, I congratulate the Iraqi people. I thank you for meeting this milestone. Thank you for doing what is right, to set the foundations for peace for future generations to come. Appreciate it."
END 12:51 P.M. EDT
___________
(The back yard)
L-Mans Remarks
11:45 central
Funny how some don't realize this is a statement of opinion by the President and his advisors. At the time that the President made this statement there had not even been any actual vote count. I hope that the voting goes the way we "need" it to go so we can get our troops out sooner but I'm not willing to accept any opinion from the President since his opinions and miss-guided principles may be what got us into this war for who-knows-what.......I prefer to wait until I know how the voting really went. It may well be that more Sunnis voted but did not vote the way we need them to vote so that we may start to pull out troops. It also may be that more Sunnis turned up to vote due to the increased security and lull in insurgency activities partially due to the ban on automobile during this event. (I don't understand why this isn't made permanent while we are in occupation there. It's not like the Iraqis need to drive to thier Sunday picnics. Most are terrified to even leave shelter except to scrounge what they need to survive).Believe it or not , I'd truly like to be able to trust President Bush. It really doesn't feel very good to feel betrayed as many of us do. I usually just distance myself from those I do not trust but it is next to impossible when that person has as much control over the lives of myself and others as President Bush has. This is a statement of opinion by myself.......not necessarily fact.
END: 11:51 central
__________________
President's Remarks
12:47 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT:
Quote:
"On behalf of the American people, I'd like to congratulate the people of Iraq for the successful completion of a vote on their draft constitution. By all indications, the turnout was greater than the turnout from the last January election, which is good news. By all indications, the Sunnis participated in greater numbers in this election than last time. And that's good news. After all, the purpose of a democracy is to make sure everybody is -- participates in the process. I'm also pleased, from the initial indications, that the level of violence was considerably less than the last election. That's a tribute to the Iraqis -- forces who we've trained, as well as coalition forces that worked hard to make sure that democracy could move forward in Iraq. This is a very positive day for the Iraqis and, as well, for world peace. Democracies are peaceful countries. The vote today in Iraq stands in stark contrast to the attitudes and philosophy and strategy of al Qaeda and its terrorist friends and killers. We believe, and the Iraqis believe, the best way forward is through the democratic process. Al Qaeda wants to use their violent ways to stop the march of democracy because democracy is the exact opposite of what they believe is right. We're making progress toward peace. We're making progress toward an ally that will join us in the war on terror, that will prevent al Qaeda from establishing safe haven in Iraq, and a country that will serve as an example for others who aspire to live in freedom. So, again, I congratulate the Iraqi people. I thank you for meeting this milestone. Thank you for doing what is right, to set the foundations for peace for future generations to come. Appreciate it."
END 12:51 P.M. EDT
___________
(The back yard)
L-Mans Remarks
11:45 central
Funny how some don't realize this is a statement of opinion by the President and his advisors. At the time that the President made this statement there had not even been any actual vote count. I hope that the voting goes the way we "need" it to go so we can get our troops out sooner but I'm not willing to accept any opinion from the President since his opinions and miss-guided principles may be what got us into this war for who-knows-what.......I prefer to wait until I know how the voting really went. It may well be that more Sunnis voted but did not vote the way we need them to vote so that we may start to pull out troops. It also may be that more Sunnis turned up to vote due to the increased security and lull in insurgency activities partially due to the ban on automobile during this event. (I don't understand why this isn't made permanent while we are in occupation there. It's not like the Iraqis need to drive to thier Sunday picnics. Most are terrified to even leave shelter except to scrounge what they need to survive).Believe it or not , I'd truly like to be able to trust President Bush. It really doesn't feel very good to feel betrayed as many of us do. I usually just distance myself from those I do not trust but it is next to impossible when that person has as much control over the lives of myself and others as President Bush has. This is a statement of opinion by myself.......not necessarily fact.
END: 11:51 central
__________________
Saturday, October 01, 2005
The Human Brain. ..a mistake?
The problem with attempting to argue religion is that any religion has it's own set of rules dealing with right and wrong just as every form of government has its own set of rules. If it were possible for every human being on this planet to accept the rules of a single religion or even a single world government as many would like to see, individuals would still find a conflict because there would still be one thing getting in the way.....A complex organ called the brain. 100% mind control will always be impossible. All forms of government and all forms of religion attempt to control individuals by mind control daily. This has been true since the beginning of time. Even the perfect democracy that we strive for in this country is nothing but a form of mind control. To believe in God or any Creator of mankind , you must accept that the human mind with all its flaws must have been designed as it is for a purpose. No religion will allow for the idea that the Creator chosen by thier particular religion made a mistake. So if this Creator embraced by any religion gave the human race a brain capable of forming individual ideas this must not be a mistake. Their ideas, even if they also do not prove their own views, force those on the other side to defend theirs. Life’s events are what they are, no more and no less. We have opinions of them, and opinions vary among individuals. No one can tell another what is right or wrong, just or unjust. Each individual decides that for his/herself. They’ll call it right or wrong as they see fit. The words just and unjust have no real meaning, or if they do the meaning cannot be established. That will make it impossible for everyone to ever agree 100% on anything. For this reason thier will never be a possibility of world peace any more than thier will be a possibility of a single religion accepted worldwide. In my own mind, I think it is a very big mistake to interfere in the decisions made by any particular religion or form of government. It is ridiculous in my opinion to believe that terrorism can ever be defeated because of this one little thing that we can never control 100%......The Human Brain.
Thursday, September 29, 2005
WSJ reported erroneous tax cut figures
In a September 29 Wall Street Journal (subscription required) article, staff writers David Rogers, Brody Mullins, and Jeanne Cummings erroneously reported that the Republican proposal to extend capital gains and dividend tax cuts would cost "$12.5 billion from 2008 to 2010." Not only does this statistic underestimate the cost of the proposed cut, it also contradicts the figure Mullins cited in a previous article on Republican tax cut proposals. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that extending the capital gains and dividend tax cuts (currently set to expire in 2008) through 2010 would cost $2 billion in 2008, $13 billion in 2009, and $8 billion in 2010, for a total of $23 billion. In a September 13 Journal article (subscription required), Mullins presented a chart in which these same cuts were estimated to cost $20 billion if extended through 2010, far more than the $12.5 billion purported in his latest piece.
Join Not in Our Name on Nov. 2 for a National Day of Die-Ins and Resistance to Endless War and Repression
Join Not in Our Name on Nov. 2 for a National Day of Die-Ins and Resistance to Endless War and Repression We believe that as people living in the United States it is our responsibility to resist the injustices done by our government in our names. Let's unite to drive out the Bush Regime!
A die-in is a symbolic act of resistance. We will die-in to cross a line and to symbolically put our bodies on the machinery of war, hatred, lies and greed. We will die-in because the business of this government as usual must stop, and it must stop on our school campuses at lunch, in downtown city centers at rush hour, and wherever people are gathered. We die-in to show that from New Orleans to Baghdad, from AIDS ravaged Africa to the Border of Mexico -- life is precious.
When we gather in groups of thousands, hundreds, or just of few, and at the appointed time lay ourselves on the ground, we join with people of conscience all around the country to become a living monument to the unspeakable tragedy of the senseless death that our government is committing, and simply allowing to let happen.
We will die-in so that others can see your message and find the courage and the voice to speak out and take action. Our collective actions, both large and small, can inspire, motivate, and yes, even change the world.
A die-in is a symbolic act of resistance. We will die-in to cross a line and to symbolically put our bodies on the machinery of war, hatred, lies and greed. We will die-in because the business of this government as usual must stop, and it must stop on our school campuses at lunch, in downtown city centers at rush hour, and wherever people are gathered. We die-in to show that from New Orleans to Baghdad, from AIDS ravaged Africa to the Border of Mexico -- life is precious.
When we gather in groups of thousands, hundreds, or just of few, and at the appointed time lay ourselves on the ground, we join with people of conscience all around the country to become a living monument to the unspeakable tragedy of the senseless death that our government is committing, and simply allowing to let happen.
We will die-in so that others can see your message and find the courage and the voice to speak out and take action. Our collective actions, both large and small, can inspire, motivate, and yes, even change the world.
Wednesday, September 28, 2005
Thursday, September 22, 2005
1.1 Million Ordered To Evacuate Homes
1.1 Million Ordered To Evacuate Homes By Ceci Connolly and Sylvia Moreno Washington Post Staff Writers Thursday, September 22, 2005; A01 NEW ORLEANS, Sept. 21 -- Hurricane Rita, a massive storm packing 165-mph winds and destructive force equal to the might of Hurricane Katrina, tracked through the Gulf of Mexico on Wednesday, prompting evacuation orders for more than 1.1 million Texans and the few remaining holdouts in storm-ravaged New Orleans. After nicking the Florida Keys as a Category 2 storm, Rita intensified to Category 5 status, the highest ranking used by the National Hurricane Center. Authorities in Galveston, Tex., a coastal city of 60,000, ordered mandatory evacuations. By midday, a 20-mile line of cars snaked up Interstate 45 out of Galveston -- scene of the deadliest hurricane in U.S. history when an unnamed storm killed 8,000 to 10,000 people in 1900. Thousands of cars crammed roads around Houston, the nation's fourth-largest city, where authorities also ordered residents in low-lying areas to evacuate. About 1,000 state troopers were staged near the Gulf Coast, while dozens of shelters prepared for evacuees in Austin, Lufkin, College Station-Bryan, San Antonio and Huntsville. In Austin, which just three weeks ago took in 4,000 Katrina evacuees, 50 shelters were being opened to house as many as 15,000 Texas Gulf Coast evacuees. President Bush declared states of emergency in Texas and Louisiana. Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) urged residents along a 250-mile swath, from Beaumont to Corpus Christi, to leave. "I urge the citizens to listen carefully to the instructions provided by state and local authorities, and follow them," Bush said during a speech in Washington. "We hope and pray that Hurricane Rita will not be a devastating storm, but we've got to be ready for the worst." In recent days, Rita has grown into a giant storm with hurricane-force winds stretching 45 miles from its center and tropical storm force winds extending 140 miles. Forecasters project Rita will make landfall early Saturday along the central Texas coast. However, even a slight shift north would put New Orleans back in the bull's-eye, prompting fears the city's already-fragile levee system could be breached again, flooding neighborhoods that remain coated in a crusty layer of muck. Painful memories of Katrina -- with a death toll that reached 1,000 Wednesday -- drove thousands of private citizens and elected officials to act fast rather than take the wait-and-see approach that greeted some coastal storms in recent years. "If Katrina did anything, it woke people up to the power of Mother Nature," said Anthony Griffin, 51, who spent Wednesday boarding up his Galveston law office before heading to his brother's home in Fort Worth. "When Katrina hit this country, it was in a city that everyone knew and those folks looking at the TV camera looked like folks we knew." In Texas, Perry urged those in the path of the storm to evacuate. "Homes can be rebuilt; lives cannot," he said from the governor's mansion in Austin. "If you're on the coast between Beaumont and Corpus Christi, now's the time to leave." The Department of Defense, taking lessons from Katrina, intends to send surveillance aircraft soon after Rita strikes land to "determine the magnitude of the relief required and, secondly, where it would be required," said Paul McHale, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense. "We want to ensure as a matter of policy we have better eyes on target." Already, about 5,000 Texas National Guard troops have been mobilized and another 1,300 who had been assisting in New Orleans are returning from Louisiana. The Pentagon is drawing up plans to assist local law enforcement "in the event that the first responders become the first victims," as happened in Katrina, he said. "The National Guard MP [military police] response to Katrina was nothing short of extraordinary, but it was a response that was formulated on the fly as we recognized an emerging law enforcement requirement," he said. The Federal Emergency Management Agency positioned 45 truckloads of water and ice and 25 truckloads of Meals Ready to Eat at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio. More than 400 medical workers and 14 urban search-and-rescue teams, comprising 744 people, have been stationed in Houston, San Antonio and Fort Worth. "The most important thing that we're doing is work with the Department of Defense to use their assets up front before the storm instead of waiting until after the storm lands," said acting FEMA Director R. David Paulison. Earlier this week, a military satellite communications system was shipped to New Orleans. FEMA also asked the Pentagon to provide 26 helicopters to ferry people and supplies, five two-person communications teams for first responders, temporary hospital beds for 2,500 patients and field kitchens capable of serving 500,000 meals a day. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta assembled four teams of 20 to deploy after Rita makes landfall, Tom Skinner, an agency spokesman, said. The CDC has three dozen staffers in Texas as part of its Katrina recovery effort, providing care at shelters, hospitals and local health departments. After suffering sizable losses in Katrina, several oil refineries shut down Wednesday, pulling hundreds of workers from rigs off the Texas shore. The Texas area accounts for about one-quarter of the nation's total crude oil production. In New Orleans, pockets of rescue workers and cleanup crews kept watch on the weather map even as they struggled to restore critical services in a metropolitan area that just one month ago bustled with 1.3 million residents and thousands of revenue-generating tourists. A team of seven Public Health Service doctors and nurses planned to stay in New Orleans through Rita, but about 45 CDC employees relocated to Baton Rouge. Louisiana state officials were moving about 75 homebound patients from "special needs" shelters in Lafayette and Thibodaux to centers in Monroe and Shreveport, said Bob Johannessen, spokesman for the state Department of Health and Hospitals. Still, even going more than weeks without power, water or sewer service were not enough to uproot some here. After surviving the Mariel boatlift from Cuba in 1980 and Katrina on Aug. 29, Jose Mendez, 66, said he was not frightened by Rita. Speaking in Spanish in his mildewed apartment near the New Orleans Fairgrounds horse-racing track, Mendez smiled: "I know how to deal with water." Moreno reported from Austin. Staff writers Manuel Roig-Franzia in New Orleans, Blaine Harden in Houston and Christopher Lee, Spencer S. Hsu and Ann Scott Tyson in Washington also contributed to this report._________________
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Saturday, September 17, 2005
Another ridculous mistake in judgement?
Grandma Charged With Looting Freed
GRETNA, La. Sept. 17, 2005--- 73-year-old diabetic grandmother and church elder who ended up in prison for more than two weeks after authorities accused her of looting was released from jail Friday evening.
"I thank God this ordeal is over," she said after being released from the parish jail. "I did nothing wrong."
Police arrested Merlene Maten the day after the hurricane on charges she took $63.50 in goods from a looted deli. Though never before in trouble with the law, her bail was set at a stiff $50,000.
The town of 17,500 across the Mississippi River from New Orleans, has also been criticized for the actions of its police chief, Arthur Lawson Jr., who ordered officers to block a bridge leading into the community, shortly after Katrina's landfall. Gretna is almost two-thirds white. New Orleans is two-thirds black.
Family and eyewitnesses insist Maten only went to her car to get some sausage when officers cuffed her in frustration, unable to catch younger looters at a nearby store.
Despite intervention from the nation's largest senior lobby, volunteer lawyers from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and even a private attorney, the family fought a futile battle for 16 days to get her freed.
Then, hours after her plight was featured in an Associated Press story, a local judge on Thursday ordered Maten freed on her own recognizance, setting up a sweet reunion with her family.
"I'm just gonna hug her and say 'Mom, I'm so sorry this had to happen,"' Maten's tearful daughter, Elois Short, told AP shortly after getting the news.
Maten must still face the looting charge at a court hearing in October. But the family, armed with several witnesses, intends to prove she was wrongly arrested outside the hotel.
"There were people looting, but she wasn't one of them. Instead of chasing after people who were running, they (police) grabbed the old lady who was walking," said Short, who works in traffic enforcement for neighboring New Orleans police.
Defense attorney Daniel Becnel, family members and witnesses said police snared Maten in the parking lot of a hotel after floodwaters swamped her New Orleans home. She had paid for her room with a credit card and followed authorities' instructions to pack extra food, they said.
She was retrieving a piece of sausage from the cooler in her car and planned to grill it so she and her husband, Alfred, could eat, according to her defenders. The parking lot was almost a block from the looted store, they said.
"That woman was never, never in that store," said Naisha Williams, 23, a New Orleans bank security guard who said she witnessed the episode and is distantly related to Maten. "If they want to take it to court, I'm willing to get on the stand and tell them the police is wrong. She is totally innocent."
Police Capt. Steve Carraway said Wednesday that Maten was arrested in the checkout area of a small store next to police headquarters.
The arrest report is short and assigns the value of goods Maten is alleged to have taken at $63.50. The items are not identified.
"When officers arrived, the arrestee was observed leaving the scene with items from the store. The store window doors were observed smashed out, where entry to the store was made," police reported.
Christine Bishop, the owner of the Check In Check Out deli, said that she was angry that looters had damaged her store, but that she would not want anyone charged with a crime if the person had simply tried to get food to survive. "Especially not a 70-year-old woman," Bishop said.
"Why would someone loot when they had a car with a refrigerator and had paid with a credit card at the hotel?" asked Becnel. "The circumstances defy the theory of looting.
As Maten's case neared conclusion, controversy over the bridge blockade intensified.
Three days after Hurricane Katrina made landfall, Gretna officials learned that people trapped in downtown New Orleans were being told to make their way over the bridge called the Crescent City Connection.
Officials quickly organized a bus caravan to take 6,000 victims to an evacuation center about 16 miles away, but they were overwhelmed, as people began gathering near a mall just over the bridge.
Looting and a fire inside the mall convinced Lawson that his city, itself without power and water, could not handle the masses pouring in from New Orleans. He ordered rifle-carrying officers to block the bridge.
"We all of a sudden were receiving hundreds of people who were being told, 'If you cross over the bridge there was food, shelter, water and buses,' which we had none of," Lawson said Thursday in an AP interview.
"Basically, we had people thrust at our doorstep, and we were unprepared," he said. "If the city of New Orleans was unprepared, how can we, in a city of 3.5 square miles, be prepared?"
The Gretna City Council passed a resolution Thursday supporting the police chief's move. Lawson said the council's lone black member also endorsed the decision.
The move gained notoriety after two emergency responders from San Francisco who were in the crowd turned back by police wrote about the incident in a socialist newspaper.
Criticism surfaced again Thursday from New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, who lashed out at the neighboring city during a news conference.
"When we allowed people to cross the Crescent City Connection because people were dying in the convention center, that was a decision based upon people," Nagin told reporters. "Now, if they made a decision based upon assets, to protect assets over people, and to have attack dogs and armed people with machine guns, then they're going to have to live with that."
Lawson said his officers did not carry machine guns. He said allowing people into Gretna was not an option, in part because the town already was under an evacuation order.
"It was a situation that was hostile and volatile because people in New Orleans were given misinformation. Lawson said.
© MMV The Associated Press
GRETNA, La. Sept. 17, 2005--- 73-year-old diabetic grandmother and church elder who ended up in prison for more than two weeks after authorities accused her of looting was released from jail Friday evening.
"I thank God this ordeal is over," she said after being released from the parish jail. "I did nothing wrong."
Police arrested Merlene Maten the day after the hurricane on charges she took $63.50 in goods from a looted deli. Though never before in trouble with the law, her bail was set at a stiff $50,000.
The town of 17,500 across the Mississippi River from New Orleans, has also been criticized for the actions of its police chief, Arthur Lawson Jr., who ordered officers to block a bridge leading into the community, shortly after Katrina's landfall. Gretna is almost two-thirds white. New Orleans is two-thirds black.
Family and eyewitnesses insist Maten only went to her car to get some sausage when officers cuffed her in frustration, unable to catch younger looters at a nearby store.
Despite intervention from the nation's largest senior lobby, volunteer lawyers from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and even a private attorney, the family fought a futile battle for 16 days to get her freed.
Then, hours after her plight was featured in an Associated Press story, a local judge on Thursday ordered Maten freed on her own recognizance, setting up a sweet reunion with her family.
"I'm just gonna hug her and say 'Mom, I'm so sorry this had to happen,"' Maten's tearful daughter, Elois Short, told AP shortly after getting the news.
Maten must still face the looting charge at a court hearing in October. But the family, armed with several witnesses, intends to prove she was wrongly arrested outside the hotel.
"There were people looting, but she wasn't one of them. Instead of chasing after people who were running, they (police) grabbed the old lady who was walking," said Short, who works in traffic enforcement for neighboring New Orleans police.
Defense attorney Daniel Becnel, family members and witnesses said police snared Maten in the parking lot of a hotel after floodwaters swamped her New Orleans home. She had paid for her room with a credit card and followed authorities' instructions to pack extra food, they said.
She was retrieving a piece of sausage from the cooler in her car and planned to grill it so she and her husband, Alfred, could eat, according to her defenders. The parking lot was almost a block from the looted store, they said.
"That woman was never, never in that store," said Naisha Williams, 23, a New Orleans bank security guard who said she witnessed the episode and is distantly related to Maten. "If they want to take it to court, I'm willing to get on the stand and tell them the police is wrong. She is totally innocent."
Police Capt. Steve Carraway said Wednesday that Maten was arrested in the checkout area of a small store next to police headquarters.
The arrest report is short and assigns the value of goods Maten is alleged to have taken at $63.50. The items are not identified.
"When officers arrived, the arrestee was observed leaving the scene with items from the store. The store window doors were observed smashed out, where entry to the store was made," police reported.
Christine Bishop, the owner of the Check In Check Out deli, said that she was angry that looters had damaged her store, but that she would not want anyone charged with a crime if the person had simply tried to get food to survive. "Especially not a 70-year-old woman," Bishop said.
"Why would someone loot when they had a car with a refrigerator and had paid with a credit card at the hotel?" asked Becnel. "The circumstances defy the theory of looting.
As Maten's case neared conclusion, controversy over the bridge blockade intensified.
Three days after Hurricane Katrina made landfall, Gretna officials learned that people trapped in downtown New Orleans were being told to make their way over the bridge called the Crescent City Connection.
Officials quickly organized a bus caravan to take 6,000 victims to an evacuation center about 16 miles away, but they were overwhelmed, as people began gathering near a mall just over the bridge.
Looting and a fire inside the mall convinced Lawson that his city, itself without power and water, could not handle the masses pouring in from New Orleans. He ordered rifle-carrying officers to block the bridge.
"We all of a sudden were receiving hundreds of people who were being told, 'If you cross over the bridge there was food, shelter, water and buses,' which we had none of," Lawson said Thursday in an AP interview.
"Basically, we had people thrust at our doorstep, and we were unprepared," he said. "If the city of New Orleans was unprepared, how can we, in a city of 3.5 square miles, be prepared?"
The Gretna City Council passed a resolution Thursday supporting the police chief's move. Lawson said the council's lone black member also endorsed the decision.
The move gained notoriety after two emergency responders from San Francisco who were in the crowd turned back by police wrote about the incident in a socialist newspaper.
Criticism surfaced again Thursday from New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, who lashed out at the neighboring city during a news conference.
"When we allowed people to cross the Crescent City Connection because people were dying in the convention center, that was a decision based upon people," Nagin told reporters. "Now, if they made a decision based upon assets, to protect assets over people, and to have attack dogs and armed people with machine guns, then they're going to have to live with that."
Lawson said his officers did not carry machine guns. He said allowing people into Gretna was not an option, in part because the town already was under an evacuation order.
"It was a situation that was hostile and volatile because people in New Orleans were given misinformation. Lawson said.
© MMV The Associated Press
Friday, September 16, 2005
Neglegent Homicide?
Charles Foti, Louisiana's attorney general has charged two owners of a New Orleans nursing home with negligent homicide because, to quote Reuters the state "presumes" 34 residents of the facility drowned during the flood. No need for autopsies: elderly patients seldom die of natural causes, especially under stress. That's why Salvador Mangano Sr., 65, and his wife, Mable, 62, decided against evacuating these folks. They thought their patients stood a better chance of surviving Katrina and the government's "help" in their own beds. Given the number of elderly people who died in their wheelchairs at the Superdome, anyone with any sense would have agree. Talk about negligent homicide! Even if we forget about the 34 souls the Manganos supposedly killed, the state to date has contributed to 389 deaths in Louisiana alone. Government's poor maintenance allowed the levees to crack; its false promises of salvation during an emergency persuaded many people to make bad choices; its incompetence at rescue work and its deliberate thwarting of private efforts killed more..... Attorney General Charles Foti has worked for the "beast" most of his life. According to Foti's own website, he first "served" as "an attorney for several local, state and federal agencies." Then he "served" "for 30 years as one of the most innovative law enforcement officials in the United States, Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriff.... In his tenure as Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriff, he oversaw the expansion of the parish jail, growing from 800 prisoners in 1973 to more than 7,000 currently." Behold the measure of success for Our Rulers. Those who incarcerate 10 times as many people as their predecessors, who rip almost 10 times as many victims from their families and shatter almost 10 times as many futures and dreams, strut among us as attorneys general. One of Charles Foti's special interests is "the elderly and the disabled." He claims that he "has for many years been an advocate for the elderly." Unless, of course, they happen to own nursing homes when Louisiana's authorities need a red herring to distract attention from their own criminal neglegence. And Foti is doing his best to reel that herring in. According to Chuckie: "We feel we have criminal negligence,They did not follow the standards of care that a reasonable person would follow in a similar circumstance."-----Is he talking about the Manganos or FEMA? "They were warned repeatedly both by the media and by the St. Bernard Parish emergency preparation people that the storm was coming. Their inaction resulted in the death of these people."--------- He MUST be referring to FEMA! The Manganos not only cared for their patients, they invited friends and family to take shelter with them at the nursing home because they considered it to be safe. The Manganos neither starved anyone or held them at gunpoint as was the case at the Superdome. The Manganos had to make a decision and they did. Government agencies are still in the process of decision making and the storm has passed! Did the Manganos make a bad decision? They probably did. Did Government agencies make bad decissions? Most definately!
Monday, September 12, 2005
Sunday, September 11, 2005
Help DR. BEN!
"A week or so ago I experienced the single most traumatic week of my life," So on 090805 I put on an old nasty "Mr. T I PITY THE FOOL" tshirt to go salvage what I could from our wrecked home....LOL.... My friend Jay Scully and I were driving to my former house on 2nd Street in Gulport, Ms. that was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. I arrived at the railroad tracks when the MP's wouldn't let me cross a barricade that is literally 200 feet or so from my house. They told me "no one" could pass and so I would have to take another route which was about an extra 20 minutes of driving. Now thanks to Dubya Gump and Mr. Cheney gas is really expensive and extremely hard to get anywhere Katrina has destroyed so needless to say I was extremely aggravated that they wouldn't let me pass. Then suddenly a long line of dark cars pulls up and they start honking at me to backup to let the long line of cars through the barricade that supposedly no one can drive through. Well that pissed me off even more so I waved a middle finger at the caravan. I drove the extra 20 minutes and finally made it back to my destroyed house filming video of the destruction along the way. A few minutes later I overheard a neighbor say that Dick Cheney was down the street talking to people. Now I know Dubya Gump and Mr. Dick do NOT control the weather but I am no fan of them for several reasons. Unlike some people I am in the business of saving lives so I am not happy about the fact that so many people have died in the aftermath of Katrina due to the slow action of FEMA not to even mention the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time for all the wrong reasons i.e. Iraq. And for those who don't know Mr. Cheney is infamous for telling Senator Leahy "GO **** YOURSELF" on the senate floor. Now my neighbor was talking to two police officers at the time and so I asked them if me and my friend could go down and see what was going on. They said they were looking forward to talk to the locals...LOL. So we grabbed my Canon digital rebel and my Sony videocamera and started walking down the street. And then right in front of the destroyed tennis court I used to play on Dick Cheney was giving a pep rally talking to the press. The secret service guys patted us down and waved the wands over us and then let us pass. Anyway I was standing about 10 feet away from Mr. Cheney while my friend was filming. I then took a picture of him and then yelled "Mr. Cheney Go F**** Yourself....Go F**** YOURSELF....Go F**** Yourself...you *******". I had/have no intention of harming anyone but merely wanted to echo Mr. Cheney's infamous words back at him. At that moment I noticed the secret service guys with a panic stricken look on their faces like they were about to tackle me so I calmly began walking back to my house waved to one of them and said "Have a nice day". My friend videotaped a little bit longer and then he came back to the house. We were loading the things we could salvage and about 10 minutes or so later two MP's waving M-16's showed up at my house. They said they were looking for someone who fit my description who had cursed at the VP. I told them I was probably the person they were looking for and so they put me in handcuffs and 'detained' me for about 20 minutes or so. My right thumb went numb because the cuffs were on so tight but they were fairly courteous and eventually released me after getting all my contact info. They said I had NOT broken any laws so I was free to go.
My wife, Lisa Marble, was featured on CNN after having our baby Sofia Grace shortly after the storm but the truth is we are still luckier than many people down here because at least we didn't die in the worst natural disaster in the history of our nation. Nevertheless I thought I could try to raise some awareness to the bad policies of the Dubya Gump administration and also possibly raise some money to replace the many things we lost. So I am going to auction the mini-dvd we personally shot of the event plus a bunch my personal footage of the disaster....(not to be mistaken with the video shown on "The Daily Show" or anywhere else which is already all over the web). I will also grant an interview to the winner if so desired." For those who wish to help me directly my paypal id is 'clone9@yahoo.com'
Ben Marble, M.D.
http://hurricanekatrinasucked.com/
My wife, Lisa Marble, was featured on CNN after having our baby Sofia Grace shortly after the storm but the truth is we are still luckier than many people down here because at least we didn't die in the worst natural disaster in the history of our nation. Nevertheless I thought I could try to raise some awareness to the bad policies of the Dubya Gump administration and also possibly raise some money to replace the many things we lost. So I am going to auction the mini-dvd we personally shot of the event plus a bunch my personal footage of the disaster....(not to be mistaken with the video shown on "The Daily Show" or anywhere else which is already all over the web). I will also grant an interview to the winner if so desired." For those who wish to help me directly my paypal id is 'clone9@yahoo.com'
Ben Marble, M.D.
http://hurricanekatrinasucked.com/
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
FEMA SUCKS!!!!!
Adding fuel to recent and growing criticism of the federal response to Hurricane Katrina, a recently revealed government memo shows that the federal agency tasked with handling emergency relief efforts waited until after Katrina struck the Gulf Coast before seeking additional authority to deploy thousands of Department of Homeland Security personnel to the area. The August 29 memo from Federal Emergency Management Agency head Michael D. Brown to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, which was obtained by the Associated Press, asks for 1,000 workers within 48 hours and 2,000 more within seven days.The category four hurricane hit land around 6 a.m. on Monday, August 29. Later that day, President George W. Bush declared Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana disaster areas. FEMA had already positioned some teams in the area, but waited until after the hurricane struck to ask the Department of Homeland Security, FEMA's umbrella agency, for additional help. The letter from Brown to Chertoff is polite and deferential. It does not sound urgent. "It is beneficial to use DHS employees as it allows us to be more efficient responding to the needs of this disaster and it reinforces the Department's All-Hazard's Capabilities," wrote Brown. "Thank you for your consideration in helping us meet our responsibilities in this near catastrophic event."The letter says that training will be provided for the requested personnel and that their responsibilities would be to "establish and maintain positive working relationships with disaster-affected communities and the citizens of those communities" and to "convey a positive image of disaster operations to government officials, community organizations and the general public."
Friday, September 02, 2005
Katrina's victims need a bed.
If anyone is within 500 miles of New Orleans & has an extra bed, couch or cot you can help. Please help if you can. These people have lost everything!
http://www.hurricanehousing.org/
http://www.hurricanehousing.org/
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
POWER & CONFLICT
Consider these "Power and Conflict" proverbs and imagine how our lives would be so different under the leadership of one who understood then lived by such simple ideas:
. A certain peace is to be preferred to an expected victory.
. A good prince does not cut out freedom's tongue.
. A tyrant's breath is another's death.
. A war, even when most victorious, is a national misfortune.
. An ill man in office is a mischief to the public.
. An oppressive government is more to be feared than a tiger.
. Argument seldom convinces anyone against their inclination.
. Better a lean peace than a fat victory.
. Black ambition stains a public cause.
. Bribes will enter without knocking.
. By wisdom peace, by peace plenty.
. Cursed is he that doth his office craftily, corruptly or maliciously.
. From prudence peace, from peace abundance.
. Give me liberty or give me death.
. Good fences make good neighbours. (As do protected borders. LST)
. He that is hated by his subjects cannot be king.
. He who cannot command himself, it is folly to think to command others.
. If peace cannot be maintained with honour it is no longer peace.
. In a false quarrel there is no true valour.
. In time of war the devil makes more room in hell.
. In war reputation is strength.
. It is a bad war from which no one returns.
. It is the raised stick makes the dog obey.
. Office tests the man.
. One peace is better than ten victories.
. One volunteer is worth two pressed men.
. Oppression causes rebellion.
. Our master is our enemy.
. Peace flourishes when reason rules.
. Peace with a cudgel in hand is war.
. Peace without truth is poison.
. Set thine house in order.
. Talk of the war but do not go to it.
. The best government is that which governs least.
. The hearts of the people are the only legitimate foundations of empire.
. The world without peace is the soldier's pay.
. There are no miracles in politics.
. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder.
. They that buy an office must sell something.
. To preserve friendship one must build walls. (And guard borders! LST)
. Tyranny is far the worse treason.
. War is a proceeding that ruins those who succeed.
. War makes robbers and peace hangs them.
. When war is raging the laws are dumb.
. Where money and counsel are wanting it is better not to make war.
. Who fills an office must learn to bear reproach and blame.
. Who shall keep the keepers?
Presidents dream of leaving a legacy for which they will be remembered. George W. Bush will certainly fulfill this dream.
William Shakespeare said, "No legacy is so rich as honesty."
Bush will be remembered for WMDs and dishonesty – making his legacy anything but "rich."
President Bush had his chance. He had the support of millions of Americans, but... Woe be to him whose advocate becomes his accuser.
Lastly…When God means to punish a nation.... He deprives its rulers of wisdom.
. A certain peace is to be preferred to an expected victory.
. A good prince does not cut out freedom's tongue.
. A tyrant's breath is another's death.
. A war, even when most victorious, is a national misfortune.
. An ill man in office is a mischief to the public.
. An oppressive government is more to be feared than a tiger.
. Argument seldom convinces anyone against their inclination.
. Better a lean peace than a fat victory.
. Black ambition stains a public cause.
. Bribes will enter without knocking.
. By wisdom peace, by peace plenty.
. Cursed is he that doth his office craftily, corruptly or maliciously.
. From prudence peace, from peace abundance.
. Give me liberty or give me death.
. Good fences make good neighbours. (As do protected borders. LST)
. He that is hated by his subjects cannot be king.
. He who cannot command himself, it is folly to think to command others.
. If peace cannot be maintained with honour it is no longer peace.
. In a false quarrel there is no true valour.
. In time of war the devil makes more room in hell.
. In war reputation is strength.
. It is a bad war from which no one returns.
. It is the raised stick makes the dog obey.
. Office tests the man.
. One peace is better than ten victories.
. One volunteer is worth two pressed men.
. Oppression causes rebellion.
. Our master is our enemy.
. Peace flourishes when reason rules.
. Peace with a cudgel in hand is war.
. Peace without truth is poison.
. Set thine house in order.
. Talk of the war but do not go to it.
. The best government is that which governs least.
. The hearts of the people are the only legitimate foundations of empire.
. The world without peace is the soldier's pay.
. There are no miracles in politics.
. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder.
. They that buy an office must sell something.
. To preserve friendship one must build walls. (And guard borders! LST)
. Tyranny is far the worse treason.
. War is a proceeding that ruins those who succeed.
. War makes robbers and peace hangs them.
. When war is raging the laws are dumb.
. Where money and counsel are wanting it is better not to make war.
. Who fills an office must learn to bear reproach and blame.
. Who shall keep the keepers?
Presidents dream of leaving a legacy for which they will be remembered. George W. Bush will certainly fulfill this dream.
William Shakespeare said, "No legacy is so rich as honesty."
Bush will be remembered for WMDs and dishonesty – making his legacy anything but "rich."
President Bush had his chance. He had the support of millions of Americans, but... Woe be to him whose advocate becomes his accuser.
Lastly…When God means to punish a nation.... He deprives its rulers of wisdom.
Sunday, August 28, 2005
What does ultra liberal mean to me?
To me it means everyone deserves adequate health care, food for those in need, a roof over their heads, etc.......I do not believe in blood for oil nor raping of my country by those that pillage and attempt to re-write the constitution in the name of religion and anti-terrorism. I believe in sharing the wealth, not hoarding the wealth nor one sided distribution of the wealth. I believe those that profit from un-just war should have a fair trial but be tried never the less for war crimes especially when it causes unwarranted deaths........It means serving your country when you are needed and waiting until it is "over" to question what it is all about but being damn sure you question it when you can. In a nutshell.......Follow our constitution instead of twisting it to help the wealthy religious right wing whores. To the person responsible for giving me that "tag", I'm sure it means something different. But I also believe everyone has a right to their own opinion.
L-man (an old hippy....)
Which 'Bush' Is Terrorism Hiding Behind??
Sadly, the American republic is on life support. Read Chalmers Johnson’s “Sorrows of Empire” if you want a good sense of the role of the American military around the world. If the U.S. military was really fighting “terrorism”, they’d have to bomb D.C. into rubble as the U.S. is the number one terrorist state in the world. Look at the historical record: training and funding for death squads throughout Central America—many of these terrorists and torturers trained at the School of the Americas in Fort Benning, Georgia. Look at the support for terrorist groups, such as the Contras backed by Reagan, in their attacks on schools, clinics, farms, and the torture, rape, and murder of civilians. Examine the extermination of perhaps half a million people by the U.S. armed and trained Indonesian military led by Suharto in 1965. The U.S. provided lists of people to be tortured and murdered. Take a look at the terrorist coups against democratic governments: Arbenz in Guatemala 1954; against the democratic, secular Mosaddeq in 1953 in Iran. The U.S. and Brits installed a murderous, torturing dictator—the Shah—ultimately leading, in reaction, to the Islamic revolution. In 1973 the government helped overthrow the democratically elected Allende government and supported the fascist Pinochet as he murdered and tortured tens of thousands of Chileans. The democratically elected Aristide was just taken out by a U.S. backed coup--so much for the Orwellian mantra of "freedom and democracy."
By the way, the U.S. is refusing to extradite known Cuban terrorist Luis Posada Carriles, who helped blowup an airliner 1976 that killed 73 people, to Venezuela where he’s a fugitive from a prison break. Ironically, he’s in Texas on an immigration charge of entering the U.S. illegally. (Just more evidence that the so-called ‘war on terror’ is a massive fraud.) He’s asking for refugee status! There’s no sign that the Bush regime intends to arrest him as a terrorist. By the logic of American fascists, Venezuela should have the right to invade the U.S., kill a hundred thousand or so of our civilians, install a puppet regime, and occupy us for the next 50 years or so because of our government’s clear support for terrorists and terrorism.
Never forget that Saddam was recruited by the CIA in 1959 for a terrorist assassination attempt against Iraqi leader Qasim. He continued under their support and tutelage for years. When the Bathists came to power in Iraq, the U.S. provided lists of people again to be tortured and murdered—most were students, professors, doctors, lawyers, and trade unionists who were considered too ‘undependable’ to live. That’s terrorism. That’s murder. Recall that the U.S.--and particularly the Reagan/Bush Sr. gang--armed and supported Saddam in the 1980s when he carried out most of his killings of Iraqis. Rumsfeld has been immortalized in a photograph shaking Saddam’s bloody little hand soon after the infamous gassing of the Kurds. Odd, they had no concerns about his widespread torture and murder back then. He was one of “our” dictators. They armed and supported his invasion of Iran, a war that produced a million or so casualties.
Never, never forget that Bush and the PNAC cabal planned their invasion of Iraq long before 9/11. Bush is even on record saying that he planned to start a war so that he could get his domestic agenda rammed through Congress, even before he was selected president. (The neo-cons were impressed by Thatcher’s popularity after the Falklands War with Argentina and saw it as the way to blindfold people with the flag. Nationalism and religion have long served to manipulate the peasants, masses, average folks, etc. The Straussians and Machiavellians running our present regime are very, very adept at that strategy. After all, they have the American version of Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels—more commonly known as Karl Rove-- to plot strategy for them.)
Never forget who created, trained, funded, fostered the muhajedeen that morphed into the 9/11 boys and never forget who was asleep at the wheel when it unfolded. Even the neutered 9/11 commission, specially picked by Bush to avoid unpleasant inquiries, insisted there was absolutely no link between Iraq and 9/11. Don’t forget that Bush and the Neo-cons doctored intelligence and lied to the American public about WMD. They forged documents and went to the UN with fake intelligence and phony photos. They guaranteed that they KNEW EXACTLY where the verboten WMDs were located. All were lies and fabrications by individuals who are (with the exception of the now MIA Colin Powell) CHICKENHAWKS. It’s really unfortunate that we will not see Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, etc. on trial for war crime any time soon.
In the meantime, SUPPORT Cindy Sheehan!
By the way, the U.S. is refusing to extradite known Cuban terrorist Luis Posada Carriles, who helped blowup an airliner 1976 that killed 73 people, to Venezuela where he’s a fugitive from a prison break. Ironically, he’s in Texas on an immigration charge of entering the U.S. illegally. (Just more evidence that the so-called ‘war on terror’ is a massive fraud.) He’s asking for refugee status! There’s no sign that the Bush regime intends to arrest him as a terrorist. By the logic of American fascists, Venezuela should have the right to invade the U.S., kill a hundred thousand or so of our civilians, install a puppet regime, and occupy us for the next 50 years or so because of our government’s clear support for terrorists and terrorism.
Never forget that Saddam was recruited by the CIA in 1959 for a terrorist assassination attempt against Iraqi leader Qasim. He continued under their support and tutelage for years. When the Bathists came to power in Iraq, the U.S. provided lists of people again to be tortured and murdered—most were students, professors, doctors, lawyers, and trade unionists who were considered too ‘undependable’ to live. That’s terrorism. That’s murder. Recall that the U.S.--and particularly the Reagan/Bush Sr. gang--armed and supported Saddam in the 1980s when he carried out most of his killings of Iraqis. Rumsfeld has been immortalized in a photograph shaking Saddam’s bloody little hand soon after the infamous gassing of the Kurds. Odd, they had no concerns about his widespread torture and murder back then. He was one of “our” dictators. They armed and supported his invasion of Iran, a war that produced a million or so casualties.
Never, never forget that Bush and the PNAC cabal planned their invasion of Iraq long before 9/11. Bush is even on record saying that he planned to start a war so that he could get his domestic agenda rammed through Congress, even before he was selected president. (The neo-cons were impressed by Thatcher’s popularity after the Falklands War with Argentina and saw it as the way to blindfold people with the flag. Nationalism and religion have long served to manipulate the peasants, masses, average folks, etc. The Straussians and Machiavellians running our present regime are very, very adept at that strategy. After all, they have the American version of Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels—more commonly known as Karl Rove-- to plot strategy for them.)
Never forget who created, trained, funded, fostered the muhajedeen that morphed into the 9/11 boys and never forget who was asleep at the wheel when it unfolded. Even the neutered 9/11 commission, specially picked by Bush to avoid unpleasant inquiries, insisted there was absolutely no link between Iraq and 9/11. Don’t forget that Bush and the Neo-cons doctored intelligence and lied to the American public about WMD. They forged documents and went to the UN with fake intelligence and phony photos. They guaranteed that they KNEW EXACTLY where the verboten WMDs were located. All were lies and fabrications by individuals who are (with the exception of the now MIA Colin Powell) CHICKENHAWKS. It’s really unfortunate that we will not see Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, etc. on trial for war crime any time soon.
In the meantime, SUPPORT Cindy Sheehan!
America is falling asleep AGAIN...
Bombing in Afghanistan Kills One U.S. Serviceman, Injures Four
Associated PressSunday, August 28, 2005
KABUL, Afghanistan, Aug. 27 -- A bomb killed a U.S. service member and wounded four others when it exploded near their armored vehicle in eastern Afghanistan, the military said Saturday.
Why is this not front page news today?? Has America been blinded by all the political turmoil at home? I would think this would be front page news instead of being a 10 liner buried so deep in local papers that unless you are checking football scores you won't even see it. We have been de-sensitized to war! The media has better things to cover now I suppose......like the large pro-war activist turn out near Camp Casey. Never mind that a brave American warrior gave his life yesterday on foriegn soil. Oh well......I guess we have to sacrifice someone so that front page news like the Hawk with a sign calling Cindy Sheehan "BITCH IN A DITCH" can be brought to our attention. I also found it rather odd that the radical, vicious venom spitting pro-war activists were big news in Waco when they were out-numbered 10 to 1 by the anti-war group! While those 2000 Doves were calling for peace and an answer to a single question.......the 200 pro-Bushies were busy shouting obsenities!
Associated PressSunday, August 28, 2005
KABUL, Afghanistan, Aug. 27 -- A bomb killed a U.S. service member and wounded four others when it exploded near their armored vehicle in eastern Afghanistan, the military said Saturday.
Why is this not front page news today?? Has America been blinded by all the political turmoil at home? I would think this would be front page news instead of being a 10 liner buried so deep in local papers that unless you are checking football scores you won't even see it. We have been de-sensitized to war! The media has better things to cover now I suppose......like the large pro-war activist turn out near Camp Casey. Never mind that a brave American warrior gave his life yesterday on foriegn soil. Oh well......I guess we have to sacrifice someone so that front page news like the Hawk with a sign calling Cindy Sheehan "BITCH IN A DITCH" can be brought to our attention. I also found it rather odd that the radical, vicious venom spitting pro-war activists were big news in Waco when they were out-numbered 10 to 1 by the anti-war group! While those 2000 Doves were calling for peace and an answer to a single question.......the 200 pro-Bushies were busy shouting obsenities!
Saturday, August 27, 2005
The last weekend.
Photo update from Camp Casey II. Over a thousand folks are gathered under the massive tent and surrounding encampment for a full day of music. Updates to come...
Friday, August 26, 2005
We live under false premises, the false premises of power. The State has been put over as a fraud. We are promised one thing. We get quite another.
The journey to self-government (anarchism) will be long and tough. We won’t arrive unless and until we clearly understand what the goal implies and why the goal is a good goal. Changes in human nature, in the ways we think, feel, and act, are not a necessary condition for us to create better social and political lives. Changes in understanding are.
We will understand the logic of self-government better when we understand the illogic of the State better. Most portrayals of the State draw on at least three concepts: sovereignty, legitimacy, and territorial integrity. States are defined by legitimate sovereignty over a fixed territorial area, or a legal monopoly of violence in a fixed region. I will argue that each of these three aspects of the State is inherently illogical and self-contradictory: sovereignty or a power monopoly, legality of such a power, and legality of such a power over a fixed area. The confused disorder and insecurity that flow from these contradictions help make the State a fundamentally malignant institution, securing not the blessings of liberty and security but their opposites. .
The journey to self-government (anarchism) will be long and tough. We won’t arrive unless and until we clearly understand what the goal implies and why the goal is a good goal. Changes in human nature, in the ways we think, feel, and act, are not a necessary condition for us to create better social and political lives. Changes in understanding are.
We will understand the logic of self-government better when we understand the illogic of the State better. Most portrayals of the State draw on at least three concepts: sovereignty, legitimacy, and territorial integrity. States are defined by legitimate sovereignty over a fixed territorial area, or a legal monopoly of violence in a fixed region. I will argue that each of these three aspects of the State is inherently illogical and self-contradictory: sovereignty or a power monopoly, legality of such a power, and legality of such a power over a fixed area. The confused disorder and insecurity that flow from these contradictions help make the State a fundamentally malignant institution, securing not the blessings of liberty and security but their opposites. .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
