6/9/07

Good News From the NewsTimes Live!

Via HatCity BLOG:
It's about time...
Our reader comment section has and will continue to draw controversy about what readers post and what we choose not to remove from the site.

But to monitor what’s there, we are asking you, the posters, to help us out.

We now have a new feature that will allow posters to notify us of any inappropriate comments. To flag a comment as inappropriate, you must be a registered poster. You then can click on the red Flag as Inappropriate text posted in the comment section. An e-mail is then immediately sent to me, alerting me of a possible inappropriate comment.
Smart move...the quicker the News-Times remove the scum from their comment section, the better.

We will always be watching and hopefully it will work. I have no problems with people that put up differing views but some of the commenters, in the past, have crossed over the line from spouting not just views or lies BUT outright "hate" literature. Freedom of speech is a long toss from "freedom to hate." Some of the comments looked like the "Hail Mary pass of hate" there.

Kudos to the Danbury NewsTimes if its new mechanism works as it is hoped it will. We know they didn't write those comments, but the sooner hate is confronted head on for what it is, the better the comments sections there will become.

Also, kudos to HatCity BLOG for covering this issue time and time again, which probably helped make a difference here.

As a side note: If the NewsTimes had let us know in advance that they were planning on making these changes they might have avoided a few scathing LTTEs and Blog posts on this subject. WE ARE NOT YOUR ENEMIES, contrary to what idiots like Joe Klein would have you believe. We just want to help you get better at what you are supposed to do. We also understand that writing code to change features on an internet website takes time to test and implement. Bloggers do that all the time. Maybe some advance notice would be in order next time? Just a minor suggestion, because I hate to nitpick on your doing the right thing.

More Anti-Iranian Propaganda via ABC?

Is this just more anti-Iranian propaganda:
Iran Caught Red-Handed shipping Arms to Taliban

The April convoy was tracked from Iran into Helmand province and led a fierce firefight that destroyed one vehicle, according to the official analysis. A second vehicle was reportedly found to contain small arms ammunition, mortar rounds and more than 650 pounds of C4 demolition charges.

A second convoy of two vehicles was spotted on May 3 and led to the capture of five occupants and the seizure of RPG-7mm rockets and more than 1,000 pounds of C4, the analysis says.

It strikes me as odd that Afghanistan's Helmand Province is along the Pakistani border, where you would be more likely to find "Taliban allies," yet they are saying it is arms shipments from Iran. It strikes me twice as odd given previous claims like this that have been discredited in the past.

The previous evidence discussed in these new reports by ABC, and previously debunked by your local liberal brewery:

Perpetuating The PowerPoint Lies

The White House was told twice to redo the PowerPoint presentation purporting Iranian ties to American deaths. According to The National Journal the intelligence community demanded that the presentation be rewritten and washed of overstated claims:

At least twice in the past month, the White House has delayed a PowerPoint presentation initially prepared by the military to detail evidence of suspected Iranian materiel and financial support for militants in Iraq. The presentation was to have been made at a press conference in Baghdad in the first week of February. Officials have set no new date, but they say it could be any day.

Even as U.S. officials in Baghdad were ready to make the case, administration principals in Washington who were charged with vetting the PowerPoint dossier bowed to pressure from the intelligence community and ordered that it be scrubbed again.

This still wasn't enough scrubbing top get the facts straight and so some of the misinformation still persists. The NewsTimes provides one of the many arguments to support Murtha's plan to require fully trained and EQUIPPED American soldiers before they can be deployed in theater:
News Times Live Editorial:
"Almost four years later, the armor problems remain. It's not a matter of money; it's a matter of planning.

This week, the Pentagon admitted that there is a shortage of armor to protect troops involved in the president's so-called 'surge' that will add more than 20,000 American military personnel to the Iraq war.

The president spent part of Wednesday's news conference alleging that Iran is supplying new deadly weapons to Iraqi insurgents. But what is he doing to require that American troops have the armor they need to protect themselves against these new weapons?

Known as 'explosively formed penetrators,' these weapons are now inflicting 70 percent of the American casualties in Iraq."

Yes the armor problems still remain, but so does the misinformation campaign that the lying Bush administartion intended to seed in the news. There are two major problems with the "evidence" supplied by the military and the Bush administration.
1. About 170 out of the over 3000 American deaths are POSSIBLY attributable to the Iranian supported Shia militias. Why? Because that is the total number killed by all shite in that time. A drop in the bucket. And certainly not all of the US forces killed by Shia insurgents are not all linked to Iran. A drop in the bucket. The vast MAJORITYof the IED's and other weapons used to kill Americans are planted or used by the Sunnis. A group that Iran does not support. However, Saudi Arabia sends truckloads full of money to the Sunnis is Iraq, the Sunnis that are largely responsible for the most deaths and injuries of American soldiers in Iraq. I don't think the Sunnis are buying cakes and cookies with that Saudi money.

2. Some of the weapons that the military showed as evidence of being supplied by Iran had markings written in English. Iranians mark weapons they manufacture in Farsi, although, Pakistan manufactures the same/similar weapons and marks them in English. Other weapons, like EFPs, that are purported to be too sophisticated to have been made by the Shia or the Sunnis, and therefore "must be coming from Iran", are similar to weapons that many other groups like Hezbollah and the IRA have made in the past, according to Middle East expert Juan Cole. (Scroll down, click on the Juan Cole video)

The Danbury NewsTimes bit on the EFPs lie, and blaming Iran. As noble as the real thrust of the Editorial may be, it is still perpetuating Bush propaganda.

The evidence clearly points to countries that are known supporters and financiers of the Sunnis (IE: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc.) and/or just the easy spreading of information on typically used weapons amongst terrorism groups everywhere. And just whose name pops up to reenforce this manipulation of inteligence?

U.S. military commanders in Iraq have shown members of Congress explosive devices that bear Iranian markings as evidence Tehran is supplying Iraqi militants with bombs, a senior U.S. government official said Saturday.

One of the lawmakers, independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, said he has seen some of the evidence, though he would not be specific. “I’m convinced from what I’ve seen that the Iranians are supplying and are giving assistance to the people in Iraq who are killing American soldiers,” said Lieberman, who was attending an international security conference in Munich.

Republican Neocon extremist and propagandist Joe Lieberman. And pushing a lie that was already laid to rest over year ago:
Against the inference that this all comes from Iran is the concept that Iraqis themselves would be capable of copying a design and therefore do not need to get bombs from Iran.

And there have been a number of news reports over the last year expressing scepticism, even among military personnel, about the link to Iran.

The Washington Post reported last October that British troops in the south doubted the claim.

A year ago, the London Times said that British officers in Basra had stopped making any such claim, saying only that the technology matched bomb-making found elsewhere in the Middle East, including Lebanon and Syria.


While reporters and news agencies across the country are starting to catch whiffs of Bush Neocon propaganda, and pointing out some of the stinkers, they are still missing some of the really BIG lies. And most of them relate to the Drumbeat for War with Iran that is just a repeat of Iraq lies all over again:
Much of the intelligence on Iran's nuclear facilities provided to UN inspectors by US spy agencies has turned out to be unfounded, diplomatic sources in Vienna said today.

The claims, reminiscent of the intelligence fiasco surrounding the Iraq war, coincided with a sharp increase in international tension as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran was defying a UN security council ultimatum to freeze its nuclear programme.

That report, delivered to the security council by the IAEA director general, Mohammed ElBaradei, sets the stage for a fierce international debate on the imposition of stricter sanctions on Iran and raises the possibility that the US could resort to military action against Iranian nuclear sites.

I'm just waiting for the fictitious mushroom clouds to start to reappear...


Obviously, there is good reason to doubt the veracity of the ABC reports of Iranian ties to a Sunni group that is well known to be their enemy. The interesting spin here is this little quote from the ABC junk:
"These clearly have the hallmarks of the Iranian Revolution Guards' Quds force," said Jones.

The coalition diplomatic message says the demolition charges "contained the same fake U.S. markings found on explosives recovered from insurgents operating in the Baghdad area."


Now they are saying that what used to prove that it more likely came from Pakistan (markings on the weapons English), is just a trick by the Iranian Revolution Guards. But please ignore the fact that Helmand province is right along Pakistan's border, not Iran's border, and most certainly ignore evidence like this from StevenD at the Booman Tribune:

Here's where it gets confusing for me. One day the top US general in Afghanistan says one thing about Iran supplying their former enemy, the Taliban with weapons ...

No Proof Iran Supplying Weapons to Taliban, US General Says

By Katherine Poythress
CNSNews.com Correspondent
June 06, 2007

... [General Dan] McNeill, the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), spoke live from Afghanistan at a Pentagon briefing Tuesday. He said it is not uncommon in Afghanistan to encounter weapons that originate in other countries. However, "I haven't seen conclusive evidence there's anything in the way of formal sanctioning by the Iranian government to provide weapons to the Taliban," he said.

Mortar rounds of Iranian origin were found in one of the convoys, and plastic explosives similar to the U.S.-made C-4 were uncovered in the other. "Beyond that, there's not much significant to report on these two convoys," McNeill said.

... and President Karzai is, like all buddy-buddy with Teheran.

snip

Why doesn't the President of Afghanistan and the senior American general in that country simply support the administration's line that Iran is arming it's former enemy the Taliban? An enemy, by the way, Iranian politicians claimed to have helped the US military depose back in 2001:

Members of Iran's Revolutionary Guards fought alongside and advised the Afghan rebels who helped U.S. forces topple Afghanistan's Taliban regime in the months after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the guards' former leader says.

In an interview by e-mail, Mohsen Rezaie, a candidate in Iran's presidential elections next week, says the United States has not given Iran enough credit. He says Iran played an "important role in the overthrow of the Taliban" in 2001 ...

Current and former U.S. troops and officials confirm Iranians were present with the Northern Alliance as U.S. forces organized the rebels in 2001. ...

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman says he has "no knowledge of (Iranian) assistance." The CIA refused to comment.

Former CIA Afghan team leader Gary Schroen says there were two Iranian guard colonels attached to a Northern Alliance commander, Bismullah Khan, outside Kabul when U.S. Special Forces arrived in September 2001.

Makes you wonder how valid is this "evidence" of Iran's clear involvement with the Taliban when our own top general in the area refuses to confirm it. And our own man in Afghanistan says Iran is his country's BFF. And when past efforts to show Iran is a primary supplier of the Sunni insurgency in Iraq didn't exactly pan out. Not that Bush and the Pentagon would ever lie to us about the danger Iran poses to America -- would they?

The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.

The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a "nonlethal presidential finding" that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions.

Propaganda and disinformation? Things that make you go -- Hmmmm. Well, so to speak, that is.

Hmmmmm. I'm thinkin' about it. I'm thinkin' it is all more propaganda aimed at us to stir up a war that would never happen under a more ethical administration.

6/8/07

Is Bush Off the Wagon?





Looked like beer to me... But what do I care if he is AWOL, and passed out on the floor of Alabama bars when he should have been... Oh wait, that was his military service and before he quit drinking.

Democratic Myths on Ending the War

Video and comments via David Sirota:
Watch Democratic presidential candidates pass the buck and pretend they have no power to end the Iraq War.





If you are not part of the solution,
then you are part of the problem.

On Secession and Seperation

CT Blue on the Vermont secessionist movement:

The Vermont Secession movement is alive and well. I think it’s terribly selfish of them to not invite the rest of New England along. We could detach Fairfield County if they wanted, so our sole Republican Congressperson would feel more at home.

The folks in Vermont have it right:

“The argument for secession is that the U.S. has become an empire that is essentially ungovernable _ it’s too big, it’s too corrupt and it no longer serves the needs of its citizens,” said Rob Williams, editor of Vermont Commons, a quarterly newspaper dedicated to secession.

“We have electoral fraud, rampant corporate corruption, a culture of militarism and war,” Williams said. “If you care about democracy and self-governance and any kind of representative system, the only constitutional way to preserve what’s left of the Republic is to peaceably take apart the empire.”

In truth, this country can’t last forever. Someday it will disintegrate, or descend into tyranny. Disintegration is certainly preferable.

Since we all know that nothing lasts forever, most of us would agree that at some point, this country will no longer exist, at least in anywhere near its present form.

I lived in Vermont for a few years and was surprised at how many people take that topic seriously, and have for a long time. It wasn't as large or as vocal as the separatist movement in Quebec, or as violent. I lived in the heart of the October Crisis, since the kidnapped Pierre Laporte lived a couple of blocks from our house, so I remember the military on every corner, and monitoring our local parks, and every ones' daily movements... Not an ideal situation for the average kid. For those of you not familiar with Canadian politics, here is a "Wiki quickie" rundown of the basics:
Pierre Laporte (25 February 192117 October 1970), was a Canadian politician who was the Vice-Premier and Minister of Labour of the province of Quebec at the time he was kidnapped and murdered by members of the terrorist group, the Front de Libération du Québec (Quebec Liberation Front).

snip

On October 10, 1970 Laporte was kidnapped from his home in Saint-Lambert, Quebec by a cell of the Quebec terrorist group known as the FLQ. They dubbed him the "Minister of Unemployment and Assimilation," and held him hostage in an anti-government protest. The events that followed became known as the "October Crisis" when the War Measures Act was invoked and Pierre Laporte's dead body was found in the trunk of a car seven days later on October 17. He had been strangled. His kidnappers were subsequently captured and sentenced to long prison terms for his murder, but in fact only served terms ranging from 7 to 11 years.

The secession issue has always been there in Vermont. And I don't doubt that it is getting more vocal these days.

Can't say I blame them given the situation in Washington over the last 10 or 20 years. "Empire" and the size and corruptibility of the US government are things that too few Americans will even acknowledge as real issues that need some serious attention. At this time there is no party that is willing to hold every politician accountable. Even the Democratic party has only a few "people candidates" that are consistently labeled as on the fringe by the media now. The bulk of Democratic candidates are beholden to the same corrupting agents as the bulk of Republican candidates. Though, the Democratic ones are for the most part less extremist in their corporatist views.

To Pardon OR Not To Pardon, That is the Answer

Steve Benen at Crooks and Liars had this up today:

On the issue of whether Bush will pardon Scooter Libby, the NYT reported:

A former senior administration official with his own ties to the case said Mr. Libby had failed to meet the general standard for a pardon by not showing contrition or serving any time. This official also noted that Mr. Libby had also been found guilty of lying to investigators, the same offense that led to the impeachment of Mr. Clinton.

The former official, who requested anonymity to speak frankly about the president, said: “It would show a deep disregard for the rule of law if he was to do it right now, when there has been no remorse shown by a convicted felon and no time has been served. How’s this going to fit in his long-term legacy?”

As Steve M. responded, “Yeah — apart from this, his record on the rule of law is perfect! And his legacy is rock-solid! Why on earth would he want to spoil them by doing something so out of character?"

Generally I would agree with Steve M., but the only thing we have on record concerning pardons from Bush is something I caught in March from Newsweek:

Scooter's Pardon Problem - Bush By the Book

No (scape)goats in this book. But according to Isikoff and Hosenball at Newsweek this is what the fall guy can expect:

Scooter Libby’s Pardon Problem :

"Those regulations, which are discussed on the Justice Department Web site at www.usdoj.gov/pardon, would seem to make a Libby pardon a nonstarter in George W. Bush’s White House. They “require a petitioner to wait a period of at least five years after conviction or release from confinement (whichever is later) before filing a pardon application,” according to the Justice Web site.

snip

“You know, I get asked about pardons on a lot of different cases. And there’s a procedure in place,” he said at first. When Bush added that he has been telling members of Congress who have contacted him about the matter to “look at the facts in the case,” Cavuto followed up: “So what are you saying?”

“I’m saying … there is a process in any case for a president to make a pardon decisions. In other words, there is a series of steps that are followed, so that the pardon process is, you know, a rational process,” the president answered."

Get ready for prison now, Scooter...
You have plenty of time before sentencing to get your affairs in order NOW, so there should be no reasons to delay your entering the system as soon as the sentence is pronounced.

As a side note on this:
How strained must the relationship between bush and cheney be, when cheney has to make his plea for a pardon on the national news? Since when do Republicans take their "inner business dirty dealings" public like that? They usually do that stuff behind closed doors.
I would say that things do look particularly bad for Libby, and certainly for his band of merry traitors that don't want to chance Scooter flipping them to avoid prison. I have to start thinking about the possibility that MAYBE bush had nothing to do with the leaking, and as long as there is no pardon that line of reasoning might make sense. The reality is that as soon as bush does give a pardon to Scooter (if he does?), or anyone else that Scooter may flip, it is pretty much an admission of bushies' own guilt.

No matter how you look at it, there is no way to justify pardoning Scooter Libby without it being an admission of guilt by the President.

Any innocent President would be furious with Libby and wouldn't pardon him in a million years.

But Bush is not innocent. Libby lied for the President. And if Bush pardons Libby then we will know for certain that the President himself is the one that should be doing jail time for the crime that Libby covered up.

We shall see.

Yes, we shall. Unfortunately, we may have to wait for the dying days of this presidency to get the answer, as to the extent of bush's involvement in the leak.

6/7/07

I'll see your Double Wanker

Really pathetic

It seems that Joe hates being labeled a wanker….Here’s some advice. Stop Wanking
(Via C&L)

And Raise you a triple twit...

BooMan caught Joke Line in some of his typical "journalmalism":

Do me a favor and look at the roll call of the House vote on the Iraq supplemental. You should see the name Harman on this list of 'Nays'. She's right there between Hare and Hastings (FL) and it's pretty clear that the House clerk recorded her vote as a 'no'. Maybe that is some kind of clerical error, or maybe Jane has forgotten how to vote, but it seems to make a mockery of Smokin' Joe Klein's point here:

I was wrong, sadly, last week to say that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama would vote for the Iraq supplemental bill. They voted against. As readers here know, I would have voted for the bill. Voting against it means you're in favor of a precipitous departure from Iraq...

...Yesterday I spoke with Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-Ca.) just back from Iraq, who voted for the bill--as did a majority of Democrats who are not running for President. "Look, I would love to have cast a vote against Bush on this. We need a new strategy and I hope we can force one in September," she told me. "But I flew into Baghdad on a troop transport with 150 kids, heading into the field. To vote against this bill was to vote against giving them the equipment, the armor they need. I couldn't do that."

Like I said, maybe there is a clerical error, but right now the official tally shows that Harman could indeed 'do that'. As for Klein's other point, Obama and Hillary voted 'nay' for the same reason that many of their colleagues voted 'yes'. They have no balls. But, unlike their colleagues, they got the vote right. Contrary to Klein's childish assessment, a nay vote on this bill wasn't a vote for a 'precipitous departure from Iraq'. It was plainly and simply a vote against funding the war with ineffectual strings attached.
Now there is a lot of irony coming up around the bend in Joke Line's Triple Twit. Part of the super duper wanker's usual "Blame those Lefy Bloggers!" response:

First, let me say that I really enjoy blogging. It's a brilliant format for keeping readers up to date on the things I care about—and for exchanging information with them. I recently asked Swampland readers with military experience to comment on whether it was General David Petraeus' "duty" to tell the unvarnished truth about Iraq when he testifies on Capitol Hill in September. About a dozen readers responded with links to treatises about "duty" in various military journals. Furthermore, I've found that some great reporting takes place in the blogosphere: Juan Cole's Iraq updates are invaluable, Joshua Micah Marshall's Talking Points Memo did serious muckraking about the U.S. attorneys scandal, and Ezra Klein (no relation) is excellent on health care. I love linking to smart work by others, something you just can't do in a print column.

The irony of Joke Line's Triple Twit response? Right now, getting cross country traffic from big national Blogs is a reponse from one of those "great reporting" Blogs to Joke Line's sad bashing of his journalmalism pointing out Joke Line's lies:


TPM Cafe

Joe Klein has made one of his periodic attacks on the liberal blogosphere. As usual in order to make himself look good, and make his critics look ridiculous, he lies about what actually happened.

Here’s Klein’s version:

A strange thing happened to me the day the House of Representatives voted to pass the Iraq-war-funding bill. Congresswoman Jane Harman of California called as the debate was taking place. "Look, I would love to have cast a vote against Bush on this," she told me. "We need a new strategy, and I hope we can force one in September. But I flew into Baghdad [with 150 young soldiers recently]. To vote against this bill was to vote against giving them the equipment... they need. I couldn't do that." I posted what Harman said on Swampland, the political blog at Time.com, along with my opinion that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had changed their positions and voted against the funding for the worst possible reason: presidential politics.
And then Harman changed her position. After we spoke, she voted against the funding. The next day, I was blasted by a number of left-wing bloggers: Klein screwed up! I had quoted Harman in the past tense—common usage for politicians who know their words will appear after a vote takes place. That was sloppy and... suspicious! Proof that you just can't trust the mainstream media. On Eschaton, a blog that specializes in media bashing, I was given the coveted "Wanker of the Day" award. Eventually, Harman got wind of this and called, unbidden, to apologize for misleading me, saying I had quoted her correctly but she had changed her mind to reflect the sentiments of her constituents. I published her statement and still got hammered by bloggers and Swampland commenters for "stalking" Harman into an apology, for not checking her vote in the Congressional Record, for being a "water boy for the right wing" and many other riffs unfit to print.

Or to sum in up. Klein spoke to Harmon prior to the vote, and she indicated she would vote for the supplemental. Klein then posts the Harman quote and also says that Clinton and Obama, in voting against the supplemental, had changed their positions. Then Harman changed her position, and the next day bloggers attacked him. Atrios called him a wanker. Harman later called him to apologize, Klein published her statement, but the criticism did not let up either in the blogosphere or among the commenters at Swampland.

Except this is not what happened. The Iraq vote was taken in the House at 6:45 PM, and in the Senate at 8:26 PM on May 24. Joe posted his claim about Harmon’s vote – and Clinton and Obama’s change of position at 9:37 AM the next day. Within two hours, the Swampland commenters were pointing out that Joe had gotten Harman’s vote wrong. By 11:13, Booman Tribune had noted that Klein had gotten it wrong, and at 12:53 Atrios cited Klein as “wanker of the day”, linking to BooMan. Sometime after 4PM, Joe gets a call from a Harman staffer, telling him that Harman had voted against the bill, and Klein posts that at 5:13PM. Later that night, Harman leaves a voicemail apologizing to Klein, which he posts at 12:54 the next day.

In other words, while Klein would have you believe that he posted about Harmon’s vote before she changed her mind (“I posted what Harman said on Swampland…[t]hen Harman changed her mind”) there was more than 15 hours between the time Harman changed her mind, and Joe said she’d voted for the bill.

And while Joe’s commenters (who he cites later for their viciousness) tried repeatedly to get Joe to correct his post beginning less than two hours after he posted it, he ignored them. Only when he got the staffer’s call did he correct the record, and then it took him an extra hour to do so. Harman’s call didn’t come until well after the staffers call.

Double wanker and super duper triple twit Joe Klein. I wonder if he'll link to that great diary at Josh Marshall's community?

6/6/07

Will General Pace get the Kokesh treatment?

Will General Peter Pace get the same treatment as Adam Kokesh?

Via Think Progress:

While the Marine Corps was actively working to repudiate “opposition groups and individuals” like Kokesh, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was advocating — in his official capacity — on behalf of “Scooter” Libby.

After Libby was convicted of “lying to investigators and a federal grand jury examining the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity,” Pace wrote a letter endorsing Libby’s character, specifically noting his “selfless” nature and his penchant for examining decisions “legally and morally.”

I was always very impressed with Mr. Libby’s professionalism and his focus and attention to the matters at hand. He impressed me as a team player when addressing issues and with his selfless approach to his wide-ranging responsibilities. … From my perspective dealing with Mr. Libby on national security issues, he served the United States Government extremely well.

The administration appears to oppose the political advocacy of uniformed officers, except when they’re advocating on behalf of administration policy.



Previously, I had written on Kokesh:

General discharge for Kokesh

After a hearing Monday before an administrative separation board at the Marine Corps Mobilization Command, the panel decided not to recommend an other-than-honorable discharge, choosing instead the general discharge.

"This is a nonpunitive discharge," said Col. Patrick McCarthy, chief of staff for the mobilization command. "The most stringent discharge that could have been received is other than honorable, and the board chose to raise that up to a general discharge."

snip

Kokesh is a member of the Individual Ready Reserve, which consists mainly of those who have left active duty but still have time remaining on their eight-year military obligations. His service is due to end June 18, but the Marine Corps is seeking to let him go two weeks early with a less-than-honorable discharge.

I am not sure how a "general" discharge affects his security clearance or job prospects? They make no mention of that in the article. It may be no worse than getting a hardship or medical discharge. Considering Kokesh says that he will appeal the decision on principle, I doubt it affects those situations adversely, but I also have my doubts about any change in this decision considering this is the military that he is dealing with.

Needless to say, I am certain that many veterans on both sides of the political aisle are somewhat disappointed with this decision. Even the conservative leaning VFW was supporting Adam Kokesh's right to freedom of speech on this one.

Wonkette may have hit on one of the main reasons they might have wanted to go after who she calls "some kind of magical Cindy Sheehan":

And while right-wingers had no problem mocking the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq, they have a tougher time mocking an actual living Marine male veteran who actually fought in the war they just write about on their blogs. Plus, you get the feeling he wouldn’t mind beating the shit out of, say, the entire staff of National Review Online … and that they’d probably enjoy it, too.

snip

On Monday, Kokesh has to show up at a hearing so the Corps can re-discharge him, this time dishonorably. Why? Because even when you get out of the military these days, Rumsfeld’s “back door draft” makes you eligible for another call-up because there aren’t enough people volunteering to jump in the Baghdad Meatgrinder. But they don’t want him back, even for the Individual Ready Reserve. So what’s the point?

Kokesh at the GONEzales hearings keeping track of how many times GONEzo says "I don't recall", "I can't remember" and "I don't recall if I can't remember".

All the chickenhawks will have permission to call him a traitor or whatever on the blogs and talk radio if he suddenly becomes dishonorably discharged, that’s the point!


And that is just another example of how the GOP and the military under their control, plays politics with the soldiers lives.

On Chlorine Bombs and Exploding Kids

While reporting that a U.S. General said "Suicide attacks and car bombings have soared 30 percent in Iraq since the start of a security crackdown in Baghdad last month" at the Pentagon on Friday, Iraqslogger also hits on some other dismal statistics and facts:

Earlier Friday, a Marine commander told reporters, "What you have to understand is that chlorine bombs have more of a psychological effect than they do as a killing effect," the AP reports. Insurgents have launched at least eight chlorine gas attacks lately, including one in Fallujah Wednesday.

"If they'll resort to this, they'll resort to anything," Barbero said.

Barbero also mentioned two recent attacks where children were used as suicide bombers. A teenage boy was killed instantly March 21 in Haditha when a bomb in his backpack detonated, as police pursued a suspicious vehicle nearby, Reuters reported. Days earlier, in Baghdad, a bomb detonated in a car carrying three children in the backseat.

While attacks targeting coalition forces were up, Barbero said the security crackdown had led to 30 percent fewer civilian deaths in Iraq and 50 percent fewer in Baghdad compared to the six weeks preceding the crackdown.


Needless to say, and as a direct result of the failed bush and GOP foreign policies, enrollment in the Jihadists' favourite Alma Martyr is on a huge upswing:



Wouldn't that make a great epitaph for the bush administration and the neoconservative movement that advocated for and supported their policies?

"Life will be great when we're dead"*



* A note to the local FBI that seems to think every joke and snarky comment is a lead: I am not advocating blowing them up or anything... I believe in letting time take care of them all. So please don't waste your resources and our tax dollars like you did on Ken Krayeske. It is a sad statement about this country when you have to add a "Krayeske disclaimer" to every political joke just to be on the safe side. :)

6/5/07

Traitor Libby Gets 2 and a Half Years

The verdict is in in the sentencing phase of the Scooter Libby trial:
Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was sentenced to 2 1/2 years in prison Tuesday for lying and obstructing the CIA leak investigation.

Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, stood calmly before a packed courtroom as a federal judge said the evidence overwhelmingly proved his guilt.

"People who occupy these types of positions, where they have the welfare and security of nation in their hands, have a special obligation to not do anything that might create a problem," U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton said.

Walton did not set a date for Libby to report to prison. Though he saw no reason to let Libby remain free pending appeal, Walton said he would accept written arguments on the issue and rule later.

If Libby goes directly to jail we get to see if bush supports traitors with presidential pardons sooner rather than later. It also, likely, ups the anti on whether or not Libby will flip cheney...

This is the highest ranking White House official to be found guilty of crimes since the Iran-Contra scandals and judge Walton also imposed a $250,000 fine and a couple of years of probation.

As Patrick Fitzgerald said when asking for a 3 year sentence:
"We need to make the statement that the truth matters ever so much,"

We are one step closer to the truth as long as bush doesn't pardon his neocon buddy.

Firedoglake is all over this, as per usual:

Walton basically accepted the premise of Fitz' sentencing arguments, which put the range for the obstruction up to 30-37 months, but on the basis of the fact that Libby is a nice guy, took the lowest end of that range, 30 months. He gave him 15 on the other countrs, concurrent, but those other counts need to be recalculated, bc one should be lower and one should be higher. So the sentence is 30 months, but on stay until the Probation department does new calculations.

As to bond pending appeal, Walton basically said no, but Defense can submit a memo. That is due on Thrsday, and then the govt's is due on Tuesday, with Libby's response due on Wednesday. If Walton decides against bond pending appeal after reading those motions, then it all goes to the prison system and Libby goes to jail in normal schedule, which would be about 45-60 days.

snip

No pressers. Neither side had a comment, ostensibly because they've got to come back for next week's hearing (on Wednesday) on bail pending appeal.

Now it's either beer thirty or I'm going to try to sneak into the SJC hearing. Can anyone tell me if it's beer thirty in DC?


I think it is Champagne o'clock in most places... But in my budgetzone it makes it beer thirty too! heh

We have all waited a long time for this Fitzmas present that keeps on giving.

General discharge for Kokesh

Giving him a general discharge does not effect his military benefits:
After a hearing Monday before an administrative separation board at the Marine Corps Mobilization Command, the panel decided not to recommend an other-than-honorable discharge, choosing instead the general discharge.

"This is a nonpunitive discharge," said Col. Patrick McCarthy, chief of staff for the mobilization command. "The most stringent discharge that could have been received is other than honorable, and the board chose to raise that up to a general discharge."

snip

Kokesh is a member of the Individual Ready Reserve, which consists mainly of those who have left active duty but still have time remaining on their eight-year military obligations. His service is due to end June 18, but the Marine Corps is seeking to let him go two weeks early with a less-than-honorable discharge.

I am not sure how a "general" discharge affects his security clearance or job prospects? They make no mention of that in the article. It may be no worse than getting a hardship or medical discharge. Considering Kokesh says that he will appeal the decision on principle, I doubt it affects those situations adversely, but I also have my doubts about any change in this decision considering this is the military that he is dealing with.

Needless to say, I am certain that many veterans on both sides of the political aisle are somewhat disappointed with this decision. Even the conservative leaning VFW was supporting Adam Kokesh's right to freedom of speech on this one.

Wonkette may have hit on one of the main reasons they might have wanted to go after who she calls "some kind of magical Cindy Sheehan":

And while right-wingers had no problem mocking the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq, they have a tougher time mocking an actual living Marine male veteran who actually fought in the war they just write about on their blogs. Plus, you get the feeling he wouldn’t mind beating the shit out of, say, the entire staff of National Review Online … and that they’d probably enjoy it, too.

snip

On Monday, Kokesh has to show up at a hearing so the Corps can re-discharge him, this time dishonorably. Why? Because even when you get out of the military these days, Rumsfeld’s “back door draft” makes you eligible for another call-up because there aren’t enough people volunteering to jump in the Baghdad Meatgrinder. But they don’t want him back, even for the Individual Ready Reserve. So what’s the point?

Kokesh at the GONEzales hearings keeping track of how many times GONEzo says "I don't recall", "I can't remember" and "I don't recall if I can't remember".

All the chickenhawks will have permission to call him a traitor or whatever on the blogs and talk radio if he suddenly becomes dishonorably discharged, that’s the point!


And that is just another example of how the GOP and the military under their control, plays politics with the soldiers lives.

[update]Since I was not familiar with a General Discharge (I have an Honorable Discharge so I didn't have to worry about it) I did a quick Google search and came up with this.

General (Under Honorable Conditions)

General discharges are given to servicemembers whose performance is satisfactory but is marked by a considerable departure in duty performance and conduct expected of military members. Reasons for such a characterization of service vary, but are always preceded by some form of nonjudicial punishment utilized by the unit commander as a means to correct unacceptable behavior prior to initiating discharge action (unless the reason is homosexual conduct or drug abuse, in which case discharge is mandatory). A commander must disclose to the servicemember in writing why he is initiating discharge action, and will further explain the reason he is recommending service be characterized as General (Under Honorable Conditions). The servicemember is normally required to sign a statement acknowledging receipt and understanding of the notification of pending discharge memorandum. He is also advised of his right to seek counsel and present statements on his behalf.

In addition, servicemembers are required to sign documents acknowledging that "substantial prejudice in civilian life" may be encountered under a general discharge. [1] Despite this, some personnel think because the discharge is described as general under honorable conditions, it is as good as or the same as an honorable discharge. However, a general discharge may preclude participation in the GI Bill, service on veteran's commissions, and other programs where a fully-honorable discharge is required.

Another common misunderstanding is that a general discharge will be automatically upgraded after 6 months' time. While a veteran is eligible to appeal for an honorable discharge after 6 months, upgrade is neither guaranteed nor automatic. In fact, only a slim percentage of those who appeal a general discharge will have their discharge upgraded to honorable, and many more will never file an appeal for various reasons.

That doesn't sound all that promising for CPL. Kokesh... I hope he fixes it on appeal.

6/4/07

The Heart of Corrupticut


ctblogger and tparty at MLN says it all ends with a loving hug:

"I know Lou.... He loves helping people."
- Sen. John McKinney, R-Fairfield

"This is a very difficult personal family situation. It is my understanding that the senator cooperated fully, that he recognizes it was poor judgment and recognizes that his behavior was unacceptable,"
- Gov. Jodi Rell, R

"I went in and gave him a hug... I've known him a long time. We're not only elected officials, but we all have loved ones and family members who we would protect. All families have issues."
- Rep. Stephen Dargan, D-West Haven

"I can't think of a more honest, upright and straightforward guy than Lou DeLuca... I stand up for him, regardless of party."
- Rep. William R. Dyson, D

“I can't think of a guy who's more straight and honest and above board than Lou DeLuca... I can't help but believe that in the final analysis of whatever has taken place there would be a resolution on it and I think he will be vindicated.”
- Rep. Dyson, again

"I can't think of anybody who is more of a family man.... His grandchildren at one time or another have lived with him as his children have gone through troubles."
- Richard Crane, first selectman of Woodbury, R

"I am so disgusted to hear that [Sen. Prague had called for DeLuca's resignation]... She is a disgrace if she said that."
- Rep. Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk

"We agree on nothing. I used to tell him, `You never met an insurance company you didn't like.' He used to tell me, `You never met a labor union you didn't like.' But he's a good man,"
- Biagio Ciotto, former Democratic senator, after hugging DeLuca on Friday


WTF? Those Democratic party members are in on this shitbag Republican's lovefest?

But where does it all begin:



Okay, lets recap what we know about Minority leader "Loony" Louie DeLuca regarding his association with trashman James Galante (you know, the guy from Danbury with mob connections...)

DeLuca and Galante met in 2001 when Galante made a large contribution to a charitable cause sponsored by DeLuca. DeLuca had Galante named Italian-American of the year by the Italian-American legislative caucus.

Authorities also said DeLuca promised an undercover agent that he would use his influence to discover anything that could hurt Galante, and "blunt it as best I can." However, he rejected the agent's offered $5,000 bribe, according a law enforcement arrest affidavit.


Now that alone should raise the eyebrows of the so called "party of morality" at the Capitol... at least you would think.

It should raise the eyebrows of every citizen. So should the fact that any politician thinks that they can stand up for this kind of BULLSHIT behaviour from any other politician.

Is the Bus Strike Really Settled?


The NewsTimes is reporting that some drivers are getting a little pissed again:
All-Star Transportation school bus driver Wendy Demers was fuming Friday afternoon that her weekly paycheck did not contain a promised raise and retroactive wages.

snip

"They promised the raises for a change to get a 'yes' vote and they got their 'yes' vote, so now give us our money.''

snip

For the 23 veteran drivers there was to be an immediate $250 bonus and another $250 in the fall. Several said they received the first bonus this week after complaining to the union representatives that they had not gotten them last week. But they are still waiting for the retroactive pay raises.

All-Star transportation is saying that the contract has yet to be ratified, and the Board of Education Chairman Wendy Faulenbach is hoping the drivers will remain patient concerning any misunderstangs about the contract process.

I sure as heck hope this is just the process and nothing more.

The school board is still looking at recouping losses due to the failure to provide the services in the contract that All-Star Transportation signed.
"We are monitoring the bus driver situation daily,'' Faulenbach said.

Another Picture of Success?

Here is another report on the catastrophic success in Iraq from retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez:
Calling the situation there bleak, retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez also said America has been in the grips of a leadership crisis since 9-11, and that only a sweeping re-examination of Iraq and a renewed, long-term commitment there that includes a large U.S. troop presence will turn the tide of the conflict.

"I think if we do the right things politically and economically with the right Iraqi leadership we could still salvage at least a stalemate, if you will — not a stalemate but at least stave off defeat," Sanchez told the San Antonio Express-News. "It's also kind of important for us to answer the question, 'What is victory?', and at this point I'm not sure America really knows what victory is."

snip

"I am absolutely convinced that America has a crisis in leadership at this time and we've got to do whatever we can to help the next generation of leaders do better than we have done over the past five years," Sanchez said, "better than what this cohort of political and military leaders have done."

Again... For those of you that might not understand the picture of the Iraq situation and American leadership that Sanchez is painting for you:

Message to the media: Let the Candidates Speak!

Let them all speak!

In no way have I decided which candidates I am considering supporting in the 2008 elections, but I have decided that I am sick and tired of the media trying to shape the debate by giving more face time to their favored choices in the races. Matt Browner Hamelin over at the Chris Dodd Blog has been kind enough to paint an obvious picture:


It is a sad statement on the liberal side of the debate when Wolf Blitzer, a former member of the neocon supporting AIPAC lobbying group and former reporter for the ultra-conservative Jerusalem Post, gets more time to shape and twist the debate than five out of the seven Democratic candidates.

What a joke. Unfortunately, it makes all of the viewers the punchline.

Fortunately Bloggers are out here in today's modern political battlefield to try and bring some balance back to the news. With that thought in mind, many of us in CT's left and the national Blogosphere will be trying to get the voices of the other candidates, voices that are consistantly ignored and maligned by the MSM, a fair shot at being heard.

Here is an example of a real issues candidate, Chris Dodd, that is actually talking about and leading on issues, as he takes hard questions from Bloggers and participants at DailyKos, My Left Nutmeg, Buckeye State Blog, and CT Local Politics and answers them in a very NO BS manner that you don't get to see much of in the televised debates:



Keep watching Connecticut's Blogosphere, as many of us will do our best to get the messages out from the candidates that, apparently, the MSM would rather you not see. We will also be demanding a more equitable share of debate time because we want a fair process.


Wolf Blitzer
Uploaded by Scarce


Don't you think you deserve a fair picture of where every candidate stands on the issues?

Another Response To ctblogger's Comcast Campaign

Previously I put up a video where BigTurd exhibits his true xenophobic and racist colors. ctblogger has put together another video that pretty much sums up the rules that BigTurd has broken edited together with the video evidence of BigTurds offending statements:



I like this response, below, because it pretty much sums up how I feel about freedom of speech in a straightforward and to the point way:
To whom it concern:

Tom Bennet´s show on Comcast´s public access channel should be removed.

On the May 18 show he clearly violates both F.C.C. regulations and Comcast´s own regulations: No material which incites violent or harmful acts on other persons.

In at least three instances on May 18, he says that undocumented immigrants should be "shot" or "killed."

I am an adamant supporter of free speech, in general, and no friend to censorship, but, this type of speech IS NOT protected under F.C.C. regulations NOR is it protected under the rules and regulations of Comcast. In fact, it may very likely be illegal.

Many members of my family are immigrants, including my wife, several uncles,
and others, as are many of our friends.

I find this material extremely abhorrent and unconscionably offensive. Both my business and my home currently use Comcast products, and we enjoy their use, however, if Tom Bennet is not removed from the air forthwith, I will seek other solutions, as will my friends and other members of my family.

Normally I would suggest using our own form of freedom of speech in a letter campaign to advertisers of certain shows in order to get someone yanked by pure market pressures, that is not censorship since the offenders are still free to spew their twisted messages BUT the marketplace has determined that they are not a viable product.

In this case there are no sponsors of BigTurd's shows, since he is on public access (if he relied on sponsors I don't think the show would exist, to be honest), but the rules of the public access channel provide a mechanism for controlling threatening statemensts which may incite violent acts.

In this case we are not censoring the turd, he has effectively censored himself through his own statements, we are only trying to ensure that Comcast's rules, legitimate rules, are enforced.

And I would note that BigTurd would still be free to stand on Danbury's street corners and spew his hatred to anyone that would pay attention to a lunatic like himself. Heck, he could still have a parade through the streets of Danbury to celebrate his warped views any time he wanted... Well, maybe not. heh

To contact Comcast concerning the BigTurd's show:
Please keep the pressure on Comcast and tell them to do the right thing.

Dave King: Head Coordinator, Comcast Public Access
Phone: 203-792-1265
Email: Dave_King@cable.comcast.com

Candiann Roswell, Public Access Coordinator
Phone: 203-792-1265
Email: Candiann_Roswell2@cable.comcast.com

When emailing Comcast, please cc: HatCityBLOG (hatcityblog@yahoo.com) so we can place your message on the site (privacy will be honored).

The Picture of Success?

Via the NY Times:
Three months after the start of the Baghdad security plan that has added thousands of American and Iraqi troops to the capital, they control fewer than one-third of the city’s neighborhoods, far short of the initial goal for the operation, according to some commanders and an internal military assessment.

The American assessment, completed in late May, found that American and Iraqi forces were able to “to protect the population” and “maintain physical influence over” only 146 of the 457 Baghdad neighborhoods.

In the remaining 311 neighborhoods, troops have either not begun operations aimed at rooting out insurgents or still face “resistance,” according to the one-page assessment, which was provided to The New York Times and summarized reports from brigade and battalion commanders in Baghdad.

The assessment offers the first comprehensive look at the progress of the effort to stabilize Baghdad with the heavy influx of additional troops. The last remaining American units in the troop increase are just now arriving.

I don't know about how this looks to those of you who provided the astute analysis and planning (and cheerleading) that have us in this situation now, but to me it looks kind of like this: