The Fascist's Fifth Amendment

Here is Addington saying he can't say shit because Al Qaeda is listening. What is this, the Fascist's Fifth Amendment? "I decline to answer on the grounds that Al Qaeda is listening."

Well, I imagine there are a lot of people who feel Addington's words aren't fit to be heard in public, except for the fact that they are heard in private in the dark chambers of Darth Cheney.

Clearly, the Al Qaeda excuse is just a lame attempt to avoid accountablity for criminal actions of Addington and his bosses and sanctioning torture. But, just for the exercise, let's see if we can do what the right wing attack dogs would do if a Democrat tried that line.

"Mr. Addington, how can you sit here, after seven years of chasing bin Laden and coming up empty, and tell us that you can't talk about what you are doing to get al-Qaeda because al-Qaeda might be listening?"

"The commander in chief and those under him authorized a systematic regime of torture."

When the General who investigated Abu Ghraib says that Bush and his administration are war criminals, you would think some people might take notice.

At the time, the Fascists were pushing the "a few bad apples" defense. Now it seems that the worst apple was in the White House.

The horrible truth about Iran

Read all of Patrick Cockburn's piece on who is winning the war in Iraq. The following paragraph would be particularly shocking to those who eat the U.S. Media's and George Bush's dog food.

The main supporters of Nouri al-Maliki’s government are the US and Iran. This has never been admitted by Washington but from the Iranian point of view the present Shia-Kurdish government in Baghdad is as good as it is going to get. It does not want to overthrow Maliki, but it does want to reduce American influence on him. The fighting in Basra and Sadr City between the Mehdi Army and the Iraqi government backed by the American army between March and April was in each case brought to an end by Iranian mediation. This has become very public. To arrange the ceasefires in Basra and Baghdad President Jalal Talabani twice went to see Qassem Suleimani, the head of the Quds brigade of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard on the Iraq-Iran border, though President Bush has denounced the Quds brigade as terrorists orchestrating attacks on US forces in Iraq. Iranian influence in Iraq is stronger than ever and the Iranians are increasingly willing to flaunt it. When the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad visited Baghdad this years his visit was announced in advance and he drove through the city by car. When President George W Bush comes to Baghdad it is a kept a secret until the last moment, he moves only by helicopter and he has never ventured outside the Green Zone.

People (maybe even me) have mocked McCain for saying that Iran was supporting al-Qaida, and having Jiving Joe Lieberman tell him to say "insurgents" instead. But according to this, Lieberman was just as delusional as McCain. Iran is supporting the GOVERNMENT of Iraq, not insurgents.

I think our whole Iran policy must be Bush's dyslexia turning into global foreign policy disasters. He must think that the old phrase is really "The friend of my friend is my enemy", not "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Brooks can't understand the surge

David Brooks says

But before long, the more honest among the surge opponents will concede that Bush, that supposed dolt, actually got one right.

Nice, sneaking the adhominem in there. "Before long, the less imbecilic of the New York Times columnists will admit that they wouldn't know what to write if the Bush PR folks weren't telling them what to write."

Now for an application of some actual reasoning. 1) We have no reason to believe that the current decrease in violence in Iraq is permanent, or whether it is just a pause as the militias regroup. 2) The criteria that Bush laid out for the success of the surge have not been met. 3) The surge isn't over.

But mostly, the "surge is a success" folks aren't playing the game that Brooks thinks or pretends they are. Their game is permanent occupation of Iraq. The ethnic cleansing and abominable levels of violence in 2006 made long term occupation politically untenable. The goal of the surge was to knock the level down to merely revolting levels of violence. It may not have even reached this goal, witness the full court pressure that the Bushistas have put on the press to not report what violence is still occuring in Iraq, and to parrot the 'surge is a success' mantra of the 'create our own history' delusionals.

So to say that surge opponents are dishonest if they won't join Brooks in kissing Bush's ass is dishonest.

El Baradei: Attack on Iran would create Middle East Fireball

Juan Cole reports on a forceful statement by Mohamed El Baradei of the IAEA on the Iran situation, made during in interview with Al-Arabiya. This is very important, and worth copying.

"I don't believe that what I see in Iran today is a current, grave and urgent danger. If a military strike is carried out against Iran at this time ... it would make me unable to continue my work . . ."

"A military strike, in my opinion, would be worse than anything possible. It would turn the region into a fireball . . ."

"If you do a military strike, it will mean that Iran, if it is not already making nuclear weapons, will launch a crash course to build nuclear weapons with the blessing of all Iranians, even those in the West."

This quote strikes me as very important. Yet the U.S. press is not giving it any importance. I could not find the story on the NYTimes, LATimes, Chicago Tribune, or Washington Post sites. AP had a story from the same interview that cited his comments on Syria. Google shows about ten citations in the international press.

Why Rational Americans Want To Exit Iraq

Dave Lindorff writes about the case of Reuters journalist Waleed Khaled, killed by trigger happy U.S. soldiers in Iraq in 2005.

Lindorff succintly explains why the occupation is going to end badly. Show this to all the weasels who squeak, "if we leave there will be chaos."

If you build it they will come,
if we leave there will be chaos.
Field of Dreams,
Desert of Death.

Torture and Fascism

Gen. Taguba calls torture a war crime.

The Guardian reviews Taxi to the Dark Side.

Here is some crap Cal Thomas wrote in 2006:

The "camps" at Guantanamo resemble American prisons. At least two are modeled after prisons in Indiana and Michigan. The guards are intelligent, respectful and professional.
U.S. policy offers the detainees more rights than could be expected for any American captured in Iraq. They get religiously approved food — up to 4,200 calories per day. I ate one of their lunches, consisting of chicken, noodles, green beans, apple juice, bread and baklava. Arrows on their beds point toward Mecca and they are given undisturbed time to pray.

An interrogation room has a comfortable couch and chair, a table, rug and teapot. Rear Admiral Harry B. Harris Jr., commander of the Joint Task Force, says interrogators live up to the letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions and abide by the latest Army Field Manual. Detainees are not questioned after 10 p.m. or before 6 a.m.

The truth is that torture was routine at Guantanamo, regardless of what an apologist for U.S. Fascism like Cal Thomas thinks. Cal once wrote that he thinks the U.S. should torture detainees (May, 2005). The fascists are already trying to blame the next terrorist attack on the Supreme Court trying to follow the constitution. Bullshit. The blame falls on the Sons of Torquemada like Cal Thomas. Why don't we treat Cal to some more of their lunches, point his bed to Rome, give him undisturbed time to pray, (is that his euphemism for solitary confinement? What a twisted bastard) promise not to question him between 10 pm and 6 am, and see if that makes him renounce torture.

Mighty River

Mighty River is a song by Railroad Earth. The name seems appropriate as 20000 people in Cedar Rapids have been forced from their homes.

After the debacle in New Orleans, will FEMA provide an adequate response to this disaster? I hope for the sake of the people in Iowa that some lessons were learned.

Israeli Lawyers Support Boumediene

Helena Cobban tells about Israeli lawyers who supported the Boumediene position in the Gitmo case. The Israelis say that our treatment of Guantanamo prisoners is worse than Israeli treatment of Palestinean prisoners.

Cobban writes

Human rights organizations have frequently criticized several aspects of the Israeli system for military-judicial review of detention orders-- including the ruling the Israeli Supreme Court gave some years ago that states that "moderate pressure" is a permitted way of extracting "information" and does not taint evidence presented to these review bodies. allowed those engaging in the crime of torture to provide an ill-defined "necessity" defense for their acts. (See first comment below.) So I would not say that the Israeli system is anywhere near perfect.

But it is sobering to hear these Israeli specialists telling our Supreme Court how much worse the Guantanamo system is.

The Israeli lawyers wrote,

these detainee rights are "necessary elements of the response to terrorism in a resilient democratic society governed by law."

Some of us have very reasonable questions about the extent to which the U.S. remains a democratic society governed by law. The democracy part is questionable, given our presidential primary non-system and the electoral college 2000 fiasco. Governed by law is questionable, given Bush's refusal to follow laws he disagrees with, as well as the illegal surveillance scandal.

This all reads like 'same old, same old', even to me as I write it. These problems are not new. But they have not gone away.

Ready on Day -20?

See the story Maliki raises possibility that Iraq might ask U.S. to leave by Leila Fadel and Mike Tharp.

Maliki has to walk a tightrope between pleasing Washington and maintaining credibility with Iraqis. Given the track record of complete incompetence of the Bush-Rice State Department, I predict that the U.S. will force an unacceptable SOFA on Maliki.

Outcome 1: He signs it, setting off a wave of domestic opposition in Iraq that either forces him from office or paralyzes the government.

Outcome 2: He refuses to sign it, resulting in the loss of international authorization for U.S. troops in Iraq.

In the case of outcome 2, he could ask the U.S. to leave. The UN authorization expires at the end of the year. The new president may have to be ready sooner than Day One, in fact, on Day -20.

Juan Cole on Maliki in Iran

Juan Cole on Nuri al-Maliki's visit to Iran. al-Maliki met with Ali Khameini, who not surprisingly recommended that Maliki not sign a Status of Forces agreement with U.S. allowing for 50-some permanent bases.

Cole also cites Leila Fadel reporting that Iraq parliamentarians are saying that the U.S. wants 58 bases. Obama wants any such arrangement submitted to Congress for approval, and for us to mouth the words that we don't want permanent bases. How about no bases? Foreign Policy Expert John McCain had no comment.

Overly Deferential

The title appears to be the standard legal euphemism for "ass-kissing".

Iraq MPS: No Timetable, No SOFA

Helena Cobban (found via Juan Cole) reports that

a majority of Iraq's MPs [believe] that any SOFA completed between the two countries should stipulate a total withdrawal of US troops from the whole of Iraq before a date certain.

Bush negotiating for permanent bases in Iraq

Patrick Cockburn reports that the U.S. is negotiating for 50 permanent military bases in Iraq, as well as legal immunity for U.S. soldiers and contractors.

The US has repeatedly denied it wants permanent bases in Iraq but one Iraqi source said: "This is just a tactical subterfuge." Washington also wants control of Iraqi airspace below 29,000ft and the right to pursue its "war on terror" in Iraq, giving it the authority to arrest anybody it wants and to launch military campaigns without consultation.

Well, duh. Lies, lies, and more lies are what we get from Bush.

Iraq's Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, is believed to be personally opposed to the terms of the new pact but feels his coalition government cannot stay in power without US backing.

Maybe this will push Maliki to align with Iran against the U.S. occupation. Could Maliki end up as Iraq's Diem. (Phony analogy alert...)

It's Over!

On June 2, the Detroit Red Wings made it to within 34 seconds before learning through experience the wisdom of Yogi Berra, "It ain't over 'til its over." With 1:40 left and a two goal lead, the Wings gave Pittsburgh a power play, and they score in 13 seconds.

Can they hold off the Penguins for the last minute with an empty net?

Yes!

With a literally last second save by Osgood, and a tip-in attempt by Hossa that was somehow repelled from the goal by an invisible force!

Congratulations, 2008 NHL Champions and winners of the Stanley Cup, Detroit Red Wings!

Kos called it 18 months ago

Kos got the result, at least the primary so far 18 months ago in the post If Obama runs, he wins. He also wrote that he would be tough to beat in a general election win, "even against a McCain". (This seems like a bit of backpedaling from his title.) His prediction of the early primaries is humorous, seeing Nevada as a battle between Edwards and Richardson. But he did see South Carolina as a key.

Hey, its my two hundredth post. Cake, anyone?

U-M Scientists Struggle to Explain Dioxin Study

A stakeholder requested that the U-M Dioxin Exposure Study compare their data to that gathered by Dow and Ann Arbor Technical Services for the Middle Tittabawasse River study. The scientists' reply does not appear to be of high scientific quality.

The problem starts with the data. The U-M study showed 7% of properties with dioxin levels over 1000 ppt, while the Dow study showed 47-67%. In addition, the Dow study had a mean value of 1300 ppt, while the U-M study reported a mean between 237 and 285 ppt.

Quote from the stakeholder request:

These discrepancies highlight the agencies' concerns that the UMDES data may not be representative of the population of greatest concern for soil exposure - residents that live along the river in areas that have repeatedly flooded.

The U-M scientists' response is to analyze a subset of their data, and from the subset analysis get numbers within spitting distance of the Dow numbers. This practice is terrible science. They are slicing and dicing their numbers to match somebody else's results, rather than determining what may be flawed about their study. It also raises questions about why they originally reported numbers that were relatively low, and why they were trying to sell the conclusion that dioxin is not a risk to flood plain residents based on their particular choice of how to report the numbers.

Even given that, the reply is not very convincing. They do not report even the number of samples in their subset, nor do they report mean concentrations. Furthermore, it seems unlikely to me that the subset could generate such a high percentage. Either most of the high concentration sites were included in the subset, raising the question of why that would happen, or the subset was not very large, raising questions both about its significance, and about the methodology of the original study in including so few high concentration sites.

The reply is signed by David Garabrant and Alfred Franzblau.

Dioxin in Saginaw: 3000 ppt in household dust

The Chicago Tribune and Detroit Free Press report that high levels of dioxin have been found in the Riverside Blvd neighborhood in Saginaw, just upriver from the Wickes Park hot spot with the reported 1.6 million ppt sample. One sample of household dust had dioxin levels of 3,000 parts per trillion. One household had 23000 ppt in the yard, and the average level in yards in this neighborhood was 2000 ppt. The Feds have ordered Dow to clean up the houses.

Although this is a single neighborhood, the high levels found certainly raise questions about the accuracy of the U-M study on the prevalence of dioxin in floodplain areas. The U-M study dust results showed a mean concentration of dioxin in dust of 38 ppt in the floodplain, and a maximum of 1746 ppt (in the near flood plain.

Does Spanking Work For George Bush?

Why does spanking fail?

The spanking may be too gentle. If it doesn’t hurt, it doesn’t motivate a child to avoid the consequence next time.... Be sure the child gets the message.

Sometimes a child ... might be tough enough to realize that a confrontation with his mom or dad is really a struggle of wills. If he can withstand the pressure ..., he can eliminate that form of punishment as a tool in the parent’s repertoire. ... Thus, he stiffens his little neck and guts it out. He may even refuse to cry and may say, “That didn’t hurt.”

Honoring those who serve

Let's take a moment today to honor those who serve their country in a particularly courageous way. I am talking about those who raise their voices in protest of their country fighting illegal and unjust wars.

When a child does something wrong, we show our love for the child by correcting her or him. There are parents who do not do this, who say that anything their child does is just great. But we do not consider that to be good parenting, it is poor parenting, likely to result in a child growing to adulthood in a state of immaturity. Those who try to correct their country's behavior are attempting to do the same thing as loving parents, albeit on a much larger scale.

The funny thing is, there are a lot of self identified patriots who object to this, who act towards their country as if everything it does is great, by definition. They do not care if the rest of the world sees their country as an immature brat, or worse. Ironically, such people are also fans of the cult of parenting in which hitting is love.

Now why is it courageous to protest a war? One need only look at the numbers of people who oppose wars versus the number who publically protest. People are concerned about losing their jobs, about being ostracized by family and friends, about being harassed or arrested by police. Not to mention, what are you doing when you protest a war? You are telling a government that has no reservations about shooting at and killing people, that such behavior is wrong.

Not A Stepford Wife?

Alright, I feel bad about making fun of the way people look. I just learned that Cindy McCain supports land mine removal. Now if she could persuade her husband and his party to support land mine prevention, indeed, all sorts of alternatives to violence.