Virginia Democratic Senator Jim Webb on AG Eric Holder's announcement that five of the 9-11 plotters will be tried in New York federal court…..

Those who have committed acts of international terrorism are enemy combatants, just as certainly as the Japanese pilots who killed thousands of Americans at Pearl Harbor. It will be disruptive, costly, and potentially counterproductive to try them as criminals in our civilian courts.

..[..]..

And we must be especially careful with any decisions to bring onto American soil any of those prisoners who remain a threat to our country but whose cases have been adjudged as inappropriate for trial at all. They do not belong in our country, they do not belong in our courts, and they do not belong in our prisons.

House representative Jim Moran (D-Va)….has a different take….

"They (Republicans, neo-cons, wingnuts) see this as an opportunity to demagogue," he said. "They will seize on any opportunity to do that, and that means they'll even take a stand that's un-American."

"It's un-American to hold anyone indefinitely without trial," Moran added. "It's against our principles as a nation."

"Opportunity to demagogue? Yep…like this….

Of all the mindless memes that non-reality-based adherents blare out like zombie pod people…..this one about "American soil" is the most ignorant. That's saying something….because the extreme right TeaBagger-FOX-Beck-Rush Group LLC….says a whole bunch of ignorant stuff on an hourly basis.

Giuliani is a discredited authoritarian moron, so it's easy to dismiss his grandstanding gibberish. But Rudy represents the FOX-BeckerHead position…so it will be the most prominent, because whatever FOX-Beckerheads spout is to be taken very Seriously by the Village. And, as the 9-12'ers and Rupert Murdoch have made clear, all wingnut-media decisions are for the purpose of "destroying Obama."

Remember, the only Job One there is for Republicans, Teabaggers, Drug Addicts on the Radio and myriad Wingnut Zoo Animals….is to bring about, as South Carolina cracker-senator Jim DeMint said…."Obama's Waterloo."

Now the analysis.

Senator Jim Webb is mistaken when he compares Japanese pilots during WW2 with 9-11 hijackers. Japanese pilots were operating under the authority of the Japanese Emperor. Japanese pilots during WW2 represented a country, a nation of people who declared war against America with the Pearl Harbor attack. WW2 was a war of nations. The militaries of the Axis powers were ordered by their nation's leaders to wage war on Allied nations.

9-11 Islamic hijackers represented who, exactly? A tiny international band of stateless anarchist criminals. No state or country sponsored the 9-11 hijackers. 9-11 hijackers did not act on the orders of a state dictator, politician, leader, or representative. Bin Laden's al-Qaeda carried out acts of violence for THEMSELVES….no one else.

Islamic extremists are seeking to make a symbolic "political statement" with their acts of violence. The entire point of killing others while killing yourself is to shock others into believing they are not safe. Japanese pilots who dropped bombs on Pearl Harbor were not making a "political statement"……they were beginning a monumental war of one nation against another. Japanese pilots were seeking to defeat the U.S. military, and thus America, the nation. Japanese pilots were not just trying to shock U.S citizens…..there was nothing symbolic about Pearl Harbor.

The second bit of "demagogic" nonsense-hype by American wingnuts only seeking Obama's demise by foolishly arguing we can't try 9-11 masterminds on "American soil"….is the, "they're too dangerous" to be housed in New York prisons…nonsense. There's no question the 9-11 plot was sinister and evil, but the five radical Islamic masterminds to be tried in New York federal court ain't squat compared to the most vicious, brutal, bloodthirsty deviants we currently have safely locked away in federal prisons, including, by the way, over 100 Islamic "terrorists."

To take the position that these five are too dangerous to bring onto "American soil" is, at best, a wingnut admission that America is weak, vulnerable, unsure of it's power and that the Constitution and set of laws which guide us are, somehow, deficient.

The final point I want to make is over the stupid claim that if we try 9-11 conspirators in New York…then New York will automatically become the focus of new terrorist attacks. Besides being another admission that America is just too weak or vulnerable to protect itself….this ignorant meme, meant only to diminish Obama's leadership, ignores the fact that America currently occupies two Muslim countries with some 200,000 U.S. soldiers. Daily, we are killing Afghani citizens. Also ignored is the fact that the American military has killed, at the very minimum, some 128,000 Iraqi citizens in our war of imperialistic aggression. 4 million Iraqis were displaced.

What more incentive would a Muslim crazy need to "focus" their extremist bile on the U.S.?

Here are the facts. George W. Bush, though he did not act on it, stated clearly that he would like to see Guantanomo closed. But Bush was a Republican president with very low approval ratings. In comes a popular Democratic President Obama who agrees with Bush's view of closing Guantanomo. If Obama succeeds in closing Guantanomo…..well, you know the wingnut drill….then America "fails."

The ignorant and disingenuous blatherings about not trying 9-11 conspirators on "American soil" is for the sole purpose of seeing Obama "fail."

Not that complicated.

Glenn Greenwald…

"One of the most astounding feats in propaganda is how we've managed to take people who live in a country which we invade, bomb and occupy — and who fight against us because we're doing that — and call them "Terrorists," thereby "justifying" continuing to bomb and occupy their country further."

That sentence may not sound all that profound at first reading, but it is.

When the U.S. arbitrarily invaded Iraq, al-Qaeda "terrorists" were not there. Some came later to Iraq, especially following the release of the Abu Ghraib picnic photos. Neo-conservative propagandists, cheerled by Fox and Fiends, did their best to brainwash Americans into believing that shadowy Sunni figures or Shi-ite rebels (al-Sadr) or (Saddam's former) Baath Party remnants were each interchangeable surrogates for al-Qaeda. Even though Iraq had no al-Qaeda presence, no "terrorists", U.S. media quickly transplanted Sunni, Shi-ite, and/or Baath members into the role of the "terrorists."

America had attacked a sovereign nation where "terrorists" were not harbored, where al-Qaeda had no significant, if any, presence,….and within short-order of occupying a country that posed no threat to America, we were told that we were fighting the "terrorists" inside Iraq. Amazingly, Iraq had become the "central front of the war on terror." The lines were purposely blurred in explanation of who those "terrorists" were. Were they Sunni, were some Shi-ite, were they the remnants of Saddam's old political party? No one was sure…..and that, of course, was the point.

The same is true in Afghanistan, and has been for…..what is it now?…..over EIGHT years. al-Qaeda is a stateless, borderless group….so, in order to justify bringing the enormous U.S. military machine to the region in preparation for the already-determined plan to attack and occupy Iraq…..we needed a nation state as an enemy. The Taliban-ruled Afghanistan fit the bill. Those camel-riding Taliban were "harboring" those al-Qaeda, by god….quickly a whole new group of "terrorists" were created.

As Greenwald said, America attacks a country, occupies that country with it's military….an action that creates a resistance from natives of that country, whom we then quickly declare the "enemy" or the new "terrorists", which, completing the circle, justifies us continuing with our occupation.

The Reverend has often stated without apology that there is no "war on terror" and never has been. The U.S. "enemy" was/is al-Qaeda. After 9-11, the "war" America declared under Commander Guy, more appropriately, should have been called a "war on al-Qaeda"….but see?, that's too narrow, too specific. This American musical chairs style, changing-enemies game in Iraq and Afghanistan is often called a part of a non-existent "war on terror", but in all honesty, all it is, is an ongoing faux-justification to defend U.S. neo-conservative ideological and imperialistic goals for the region.
……….
Greenwald also writes about "why they hate us." The hopelessly incompetent Decider insisted that "they" hated us "because of our freedoms", a childish non-sequiter at best. A neo-conservative propaganda tool, at worst.

Overnight, a Fox and Fiends-led cottage industry developed complete with nonsensical "Islamofascist" name-calling and ridiculous notions of Islam's "real" goal to overthrow the "free" world. Americans were repeatedly told that Islamic radicals killed themselves in order to kill Americans because, somehow, America's freedom just drove them insane with rage. The Villagers all nodded, knowingly, in agreement.

Here's why "they" hate us…..

I also saw how some of the consequences of Washington’s antiterrorism policies had galvanized the Taliban. Commanders fixated on the deaths of Afghan, Iraqi and Palestinian civilians in military airstrikes, as well as the American detention of Muslim prisoners who had been held for years without being charged.

Here's why "they" hate us….

In 1996, Israeli jets bombed a UN building where civilians had taken refuge at Cana/ Qana in south Lebanon, killing 102 persons;…..

"On April 11, 1996, when Atta was twenty-seven years old, he signed a standardized will he got from the al-Quds mosque.l It was the day Israel attacked Lebanon in Operation grapes of Wrath. According to one of his friends, Atta was enraged,and by filling out his last testamentd during the attack he was offering his life in response."

A little over 5 years later, Atta led a group of hijackers who crashed planes into American buildings, killing 3000.

And here's why "they" will continue to hate us…

The 25 lines edited out of the court papers contained details of how Mr Mohamed's genitals were sliced with a scalpel and other torture methods so extreme that waterboarding, the controversial technique of simulated drowning, "is very far down the list of things they did," the official said.

A British High Court has just ruled that those 25 lines describing what CIA officials told British officials that they had done to an innocent Muslim detainee, Binyam Mohamed,…must be released to the world. Both George W. Bush and, now, Barack Obama, have tried, (up until now successfully) to keep examples of U.S. depravity and torture, like this one, secret.

But many middle eastern Muslims already know about U.S. torture and depravity. Many middle eastern Muslims know that we attack and occupy their countries with our military, then declare any subsequent native resistance, "enemies" and "terrorists." Many middle eastern countries already know that we will block any investigations into war crimes perpetrated against Gazans by Israelis…..or perpetrated by U.S. officials against Muslim detainees.

"They" already know all of this.

"They" are, just now, learning about this.

And that's why "they" hate us….and unless we change policy course….that's why "they" will continue to hate us.

Over the past number of years, whenever I suggested that George W. Bush was actually an American terrorist leader, I was quickly reprimanded by those Serious and Grown-up Conservatives who immediately sought to describe the former president as "protecting us from Islamofascists."

Now, former Bush Homeland Security head, Tom Ridge, in a new book, follows in the footsteps of The Reverend, and tells his readers that, yes, George W. Bush terrorized the American people for political gain.

From the news release…

Former US homeland security chief Tom Ridge charges in a new book that top aides to then-president George W. Bush pressured him to raise the "terror alert" level to sway the November 2004 US election.

Then defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and attorney general John Ashcroft pushed him to elevate the color-coded threat level, but Ridge refused, according to a summary from his publisher, Thomas Dunne Books.

……

He also says that Bush's homeland security adviser at the White House, Fran Townsend, called his department ahead of an August 1, 2004 speech to ask Ridge to include a reference to "defensive measures … away from home" — language that he read as being a reference to the Iraq war.

In those remarks, Ridge said he was raising the threat alert level for the financial services sector in New York City, northern New Jersey, and Washington DC, and went on to praise Bush's leadership against extremism.

……

He later publicly acknowledged that much of the information underpinning the new alert was three years old, stoking Bush critics' charges of political manipulation.

I wrote many times during the Bush-Cheney overthrow of the United States that Karl Rove's obsession with a permanent Republican majority led him and Bush to politicize everything emanating from the White House. Early critics of the Bush administration called the Bushies "Mayberry Machiavellis" for a reason. "Everything was political," is the answer.

When a high government leader seeks to frighten the population he is responsible to protect, and he does so for the purpose of gaining a political edge……that person is a terrorist. Osama Bin Laden's political philosophy and George W Bush's were the same. Bin Laden's philosophy states that if people are scared, terrorized by events, political leanings can be altered, changed.

George W. Bush thought the same as Bin Laden. The Bushies actively sought to terrorize the American voting population just prior to the 2004 election, without any credible evidence to justify the terrorizing, in order to alter the outcome of what looked to be a very tight presidential race with John Kerry.

None of this is new. I've known about Ridge raising the terror chart levels for political purposes for years. But as Glenn Greenwald blogs, whenever someone, you know, from the loony left, suggested that's what was going on…..well, we were just loony…..and not Serious, like corporate-whore media members.

And it wasn't just terror color charts. The Iraq crime was sold to America using terror. "Mushroom clouds", "chemical and biological weapons", "WMD", "no doubt that Saddam has reconstituted his weapons program"…..etc. Spying on Americans without benefit of warrants, torturing detainees, Gitmo, extrordinary kidnappings…..all of this was sold to us with terror. All of this, as we have witnessed with The Dick since Obama's inauguration, was meant to scare, to terrorize the American people for conservative political purposes.

It's not simply George W. Bush who is guilty of terrorizing the American people during his administration, though he definitely is guilty. The Republican Party has become the Party of Terror. Constantly seeking to frighten and terrorize Americans through the use of imminent danger fear. That's the purpose of the townhall bust-ups, the carrying of semi-automatic weapons, the shouts, the visible hatred…..it's to scare, to terrorize other Americans for a political objective, in this case, to defeat health care reform.

All of this is transparently obvious, just as it was transparently obvious when the Bushies were leading the nation around using terror tactics in order to complete their wet dream of attacking and occupying Iraq.

It's a good thing that a moderate Republican, like Tom Ridge, is setting the record straight.

UPDATE: Here's a prime example of what I'm getting at today, from Idaho.

Also this.

Results of Israeli terrorist attacks in Gaza

Israeli air strikes continue to terrorize Palestinians in Gaza. 350 Palestinians are dead, many of them civilians. 4 Israelis have been killed.

Here's Israel's plan…

Israeli says its offensive, which began Saturday, is designed to neutralize the threat posed to southern Israel by Hamas rockets. As the air strikes continued Tuesday, Israeli Interior Minister Meir Sheetrit told Israel Radio: “There is no room for a cease-fire.”

“The government is determined to remove the threat of fire on the south,” he said, referring to rocket attacks on southern Israel by Hamas forces. “Therefore the Israeli army must not stop the operation before breaking the will of Palestinians, of Hamas, to continue to fire at Israel.”

Israel has defined its aims relatively narrowly — the crippling of Hamas’s ability to send rockets into Israel — but has not made clear if it means to topple the leadership of Hamas, which Israel and the United States brand as a terrorist organization.

This is the same Israeli plan that failed miserably in 2006 when it was Hezbollah fighters firing the rockets from the Lebanese border into Israel. Israel failed to "break the will" of those Hezbollah fighters. Israel won't be successful in breaking the will of Hamas either….no matter how many terrorist smart rockets they explode inside the densely populated area of Gaza.

And, naturally…..there's the "collateral" damage….

a mosque where militants often took refuge has been destroyed by Israel, one of five mosques it has hit.

a group of young people, ages 18 to 20, were hit when a missile was aimed at a group of Hamas policemen in the street. According to a statement by United Nations Special Coordinator Robert Serry, eight of the young people, emerging from a United Nations training center, were killed instantly and 19 wounded. Eight of those hurt were in critical condition on Monday. One is awaiting emergency transfer to an Israeli hospital.

an attack on a mosque where militants were hiding also struck a nearby house, killing five girls under the age of 18, health ministry officials said. Link

The BBC reports…

A UN human rights monitor accused Israel of "shocking atrocities".

Richard Falk – the special rapporteur for human rights in the Palestinian territories – said the international community must put more pressure on Israel to end its attacks on Gaza.

"Israel is committing a shocking series of atrocities by using modern weaponry against a defenceless population – attacking a population that has been enduring a severe blockade for many months," Mr Falk said in a BBC interview.

I'm oh-so-sure that killing Palestinian women and children will do wonders in "breaking the will" of Palestinian militants.

Now, let's talk terrorism. Do you think Palestinians in Gaza are terrorized right now? Do you think Gazans consider Israel to be a terrorist nation about now? Can sophisticated airborne military gunships be considered terrorist weaponry…or is terrorist weaponry limited to suicide belts and homemade, unaimable rockets?

Biggest question. Do you think Israel's current military terror attacks in Gaza will lessen the chance for future Palestinian acts of terror?

UPDATE: Glennzilla…

"Anyone minimally objective and well-intentioned finds Hamas rocket attacks on random Israeli civilians to be highly objectionable and wrong, but even among those who do, one finds a wide range of views regarding the Israeli offensive. But not among America's political leadership. There, one finds total, lockstep uniformity almost more unyielding than what one finds among Israeli leaders themselves — as though Israel's wars are, by definition, America's wars; its enemies are our enemies; its disputes and conflicts and interests are, inherently, ours; and America's only duty when Israel fights is to support it uncritically." Link

UPDATE 2: UK Guardian….

"In September, Bush spoke at the United Nations. No cause could justify the deliberate taking of human life, he said. Yet the US has killed thousands of civilians in airstrikes on populated areas. When you drop bombs on populated areas knowing there will be some "collateral" civilian damage, but accepting it as worth it, then it is deliberate. When you impose sanctions, as the US did on Saddam era Iraq, that kill hundreds of thousands, and then say their deaths were worth it, as secretary of state Albright did, then you are deliberately killing people for a political goal. When you seek to "shock and awe", as president Bush did, when he bombed Iraq, you are engaging in terrorism." Link

Not-So-Primitive Israeli Gunship

Primitive Hamas Rocket

Israeli airstrikes against Hamas facilities in Gaza continued on Sunday and the death toll rose to more than 280 in Israel’s most severe campaign against Palestinian militants in decades. Link

Why such a "severe" attack? Because "shock and awe" works so well…

Israeli analyst Ron Ben-Yishai said the strike was "shock treatment … aimed at securing a long-term ceasefire between Hamas and Israel on terms that are favourable to Israel".

Worst Israeli attack in 60 years…

A five-day Israeli offensive in March killed more than 120 people, but Saturday's death toll was the highest for a single day in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since 1948, when the Jewish state was established.

Hamas was elected to parliament in democratic elections, something unacceptable to the U.S. Not the elections, just the results.

The Islamist group, which won a 2006 parliamentary election but was shunned by Western powers over its refusal to renounce violence and recognise Israel, said all of its security compounds in the Gaza Strip were destroyed or seriously damaged.

"The United States strongly condemns the repeated rocket and mortar attacks against Israel and holds Hamas responsible for breaking the cease-fire and for the renewal of violence in Gaza," U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in a statement. "The cease-fire should be restored immediately." Link

Overwhelming nature of the response from Israel….

Military officials said aircraft released more than 100 tons of bombs in the first nine hours of fighting,

But the United States, Israel's closest ally, blamed Hamas. "These people are nothing but thugs, so Israel is going to defend its people against terrorists like Hamas that indiscriminately kill their own people," White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said.

Palestinians said Israeli bombs destroyed a mosque early today. The military called it a "base for terrorist activities."

Another target early today was the Al Aqsa TV station used by Hamas. Its studio was destroyed, but the station remained on the air with a mobile unit. Palestinians counted about 20 airstrikes in the early hours today.

Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said Hamas' political leaders could soon be targeted. "Hamas is a terrorist organization and nobody is immune," she said.

The campaign was launched six weeks before national elections. Livni and Barak hope to succeed Olmert as prime minister, and the outgoing government has faced pressure to take tough action. Link

Isolating and punishing all residents of Gaza has become the Judeo-Christian countries' response to democratically elected Hamas leaders in Gaza…..while the timing of Israel's renewed military aggression over the weekend can't be separated from their own upcoming elections….

…the elections have made it impossible for officials like Mr. Barak not to react, because the public has grown anxious and angry over the rocket fire, which while causing no recent deaths and few injuries is deeply disturbing for those living near Gaza.

Israel, backed by the United States, Europe, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority, has sought to isolate Hamas by squeezing Gaza economically, a policy that human rights groups condemn as collective punishment. Israel and Egypt, which control routes into and out of Gaza, have blocked nearly all but humanitarian aid from going in.

The result has been the near death of the Gazan economy. While enough food has gone in to avoid starvation, the level of suffering is very high and getting worse each week, especially in recent weeks as Israel closed the routes entirely for about 10 days in reaction to daily rocket fire. Link

The Gazans held free and fair elections….Hamas won. Because Hamas won…the U.S and Israel decided to punish the entire population of Gaza by isolating them into misery. Hamas launches primitive rockets near Israeli border towns….eventually killing one Israeli. Israel responds by swooping down with their own version of "shock and awe"….killing 280 Palestinians thus far and wounding 700 using highly sophisticated helicopter warships.

So everything's about even, huh?

UPDATE: And right on schedule, American media elites rush to defend Israel….

"Frankly, I am up to my gullet with this reflex criticism of Israel as going beyond proportionality in its responses to war waged against its population with the undisguised intention of putting an end to the political expression of the Jewish nation. Within hours, Nicolas Sarkozy was already taking up the cudgel of French righteousness and pronouncing the actually quite sober Israeli response to the continuous war on its borders "disproportionate." Enough. Link

Also read Glennzilla's take-down of the completely corrupt American media's response to anything calling into question Israeli actions.

It's good every now and then to review where we are and how we arrived here.

Reviewing always helps in gaining, or regaining, one's perspective.

I've chosen a former Reagan Republican to help with today's review. And not just any old Reagan Republican either…but instead, one who has survived the usually fatal virus of conservative brainstamping.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review.

Part of the Reagan administration, AND former editor of those liberal print bastions, National Review and the Wall Street Journal.

Reviewing….

Republicans have us at war in two countries as a result of Republican lies and deceptions, and we might be in two more wars–Iran and Pakistan–by November. We have alienated the entire Muslim world and most of the rest.

Naturally, the Republican response to this is to deny that Republican "lies and deceptions" ever existed in the bumper sticker "war on terror" or the even more egregious deception that Iraq posed a "threat" to America. These same Republicans argue that alienating the Muslim world and those Euoprean "surrender monkeys" is, in fact, a good thing.

The dollar has lost 60% of its value against the euro, and the once mighty dollar is losing its reserve currency role.

From sending out Ponzi scheme checks in 2001, to cutting taxes while we mounted a military attack and occupation, to borrowing endlessly from China to finance our wars of imperialism….the Republican ideology of fighting for others' cake while eating Americans' cake too has resulted in total economic failure. No cake at all.

The Republicans’ policies have driven up the price of both oil and gold by 400%.

Republicans who speak the words 'supply and demand' and 'free market fundamentals' without ceasing not only have no credible answer to why oil has risen in price four fold,….but in addition, claim that more drilling in America is the way forward…..despite the truth that drilling in America would be akin to hoping the ocean will rise by pissing into it.

Inflation is in double digits. Employment is falling.

Despite the fact that in the last 7 years America has gone through the biggest tax cutting period in history…..Republicans today still want to argue for more tax cuts…..even though cutting taxes so radically during the last 7 years has resulted in total failure.

Republican deregulation brought about fraud in mortgage lending and dangerous financial instruments which have collapsed the housing market, leaving a million or more homeowners facing foreclosure.

Thanks to one of NeoCon John's bestest buddy couples, Mr and Mrs Phil Gramm, not only were lending institutions catalyzed to run risky paper and money schemes for their own benefit…..but also the current oil price scam by speculators is the direct result of the Gramm's influence.

Republicans have made it perfectly clear that they believe that our civil liberties make us unsafe–precisely the opposite view of our Founding Fathers. Yet, Republicans regard themselves as the Patriotic Party.

Mind boggling is not a strong enough way to describe how a political party self-claimed to be the "national security" party has systematically dismantled the very rights that make us a nation.

Republicans view the Constitution as a coddling device for criminals and terrorists. Republicans think the Constitution can be set aside for evil-doers and kept in place for everyone else. But without the Constitution we only have the government’s word as to who is an evil-doer.

The Constitution, declare Republicans, is not a "suicide compact". This glib retort is meant to scare Americans into believing that their country is under such a threat from a looseknit group of stateless, radicals……that everything is on the table….including the setting aside of our founding document. The same document that all federal employees, even the executive branch, pledge an oath of loyalty to.

Which brings me full circle back to the point where The Reverend began blogging….

The neoconned Republican Party is the greatest threat America has ever faced. Link

Not long after George and the Dick took over America in 2001, (and specifically after 9-11), I was shocked by what I was witnessing. Nixon had been bad, no question. Reagan and Bush Sr. had their moments of illegality with their covert wars. But I had never felt the sense of total danger like I did in late 2001 and 2002. Our America was, indeed, in the midst of a coup.

Without doubt, Paul Craig Roberts is correct in saying that the "neoconned Republican Party is the greatest threat America has ever faced." The greatest danger to America is not from the middle east….it's right here in our own backyard. The "neoconned Republican Party"…represented in this years' election by John McCain….must not only be stopped from again gaining executive power this year…..they should never again gain power….ever.

Thanks to the former Reagan footsoldier, Paul Craig Roberts, for helping out in today's review.

Pre-emptive apology…..the following post was done in haste…

Barack Obama will give a speech today that will focus specifically on foreign policy. Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, al-Qaeda….will all be part of that speech. Hopefully the substance of the speech will be covered fairly and accurately by mainstream media….however, I'm not holding my breath. It's tough for media to find the time or space for policy talk. Main media is simply swamped with more serious stuff like New Yorker magazine covers, what Hillary or Bill said yesterday, or deep and thorough discussions about Obama's "inexperience", his being "naive", or his "problem" connecting with white voters, you know, those "regular folks."

In February, 2008 I wrote a post entitled "Obama Already Running Foreign Policy". In it, I explained what Barack Obama had said repeatedly in the primary campaign about what he would do, if president, concerning Afghanistan, Pakistan and the 9-11 enemy, al-Qaeda.

Obama's answer was thrown about as a sign he wasn't ready for prime time. He just didn't know how it all worked out there in the big world….too naive and inexperienced, he was.

Of course Obama was right about doing what needs done against 9-11 criminals. George W. Bush agreed with the president-to-be about Pakistan and he proved it, Junior did EXACTLY what Obama had previously advised. Rightfully so, I might add. What Bush ordered in Pakistan was the strategy I thought we would see after 9-11. We got an occupation in Iraq instead.

Last night, Richard Clarke made an appearance on Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" with guest host Rachel Maddow. Watch Clarke and pay attention at about the 6 minute mark. He says exactly what The Reverend said 5 months ago….

Summarizing. Clarke makes mention of how absolutely dishonest it is of the media to repeatedly state that Obama is "untested" in foreign policy, "inexperienced", "green"…..unlike how the media treats John McCain, who is always characterized as an "expert" in foreign policy, "his strength". Richard Clarke proves this is all dishonest and misleading (just as The Reverend did 5 months ago) considering that Obama's policy about al-Qaeda in Pakistan was, in fact, followed to the letter by George W. Bush.

But "America just doesn't know who Obama is" and McCain is a "tried and true straight talking, foreign policy expert".

Many proponents of American militarism have repeatedly boasted about how the great U.S. military machine had "routed" the Taliban following Bin Liden's successful attack on U.S. soil on September 11, 2001. These same militaristic minded proponents argued that America had "won" by defeating the Taliban, despite the fact that most of the top Bin Laden al-Qaeda extremists are still alive and well today.

If we "defeated" the Taliban in the late fall of 2001,….and we didn't take 'our eye off the ball' in Afghanistan in early 2002…..by preparing to attack the sovereign country of Iraq….then why is this happening in 2008?…..

In Afghanistan, the Taleban now claim to have influence across most of the country and have extended their area of control from their traditional heartland in the south.

They are able to operate freely even in Wardak Province, neighbouring the capital Kabul, as a BBC camera crew who filmed them recently found.

Does that sound like the Taliban has been "routed"?

Does that sound like the Bush/Cheney orchestrated "war" on the Taliban (let alone al-Qaeda) has been "won"?

More importantly, if the vaunted words of bringing freedom to the Afghan people has, somehow, curtailed the extremism of radical Islamic types…..why this….in 2008?….

Six years ago the Taleban found it hard to recruit. They put their increasing success now down to official corruption, the slow pace of reconstruction and the presence of foreign troops. Link

Many American militarists refuse to acknowledge that our military presence in Islamic countries produces MORE Islamic extremists, not less. John McCain, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani ridiculed Ron Paul for having the audacity to raise this point in a GOP primary debate. How does 2008's "increased success" in extremist recruitment inside Afghanistan speak to that specific issue?

And most importantly. How long would our local communities put up with this kind of stuff before we would look for alternatives?….

A US air strike in eastern Afghanistan on Sunday killed 47 civilians, 39 of them women and children, an Afghan government investigating team says.

Two days ago, the Red Cross said that at least 250 Afghan civilians had been killed or wounded in insurgent attacks or military action in the previous six days. It called on all parties to the conflict to avoid civilian casualties. Link

Many times I've tried to 'Americanize' for readers what our American military is actually doing in Muslim lands. I've set forth 'what ifs'…..for example: What if Canada, exercising their right to protect themselves, attacked northern Michigan communities for the purpose of routing out a loose knit band of international drug kingpins? And while the Canadian military carried out their 'national security' campaign….Michigan civilians were oftentimes 'accidentally' killed in the process.

Should Michigan citizens, in my hypothetical, simply endure the, you know, "collateral damage", because, after all, Canada is only trying to get the bad guys? Or should the Michigan citizens rise up and attempt to throw the "protectors" out of their state?

Finally…..from the BBC articles….comes a sentence that belongs in the "No Sh*t Hall of Fame"…..

Correspondents say the issue of civilian casualties is hugely sensitive in Afghanistan.

The bigger issue facing Americans, and particularly American Leaders, is why they refuse to even acknowledge this most basic of human dynamics.

Even though Bush Doctrine supporters and the usual neo-con loving media mouthpieces continue to insist that George and Dick have kept America safe, conveniently, AFTER 9-11…..reality demonstrates such fabrication as just another lie from the most untruthful groups ever to occupy the White House and place a telepromter reader in a teevee anchor chair.

Weeks after the Towers fell, the U.S. was attacked again. And just like when 19 hijackers successfully penetrated our defenses, someone also penetrated our security system twice more on September 18, 2001 and again on October 9, 2001…..mailing anthrax filled letters out, curiously, to primarily high profile Democratic figures and media locations.

The same strong protectors of America that were controlling America's security levers before 9-11….were the same strong protectors controlling America's security when more Americans died weeks later from biological warfare.

Also eerily similar is the fact that, now in 2008, Bin Laden still hasn't been brought to "justice", and the anthrax culprit(s) haven't been either. Not only did the Bush/Cheney protectors of America fail to stop those TWO terrorist attacks from happening in the first place…..they haven't caught the culprits who orchesrated the attacks, either. Bush/Cheney have failed on both ends of the events.

The anthrax investigation is still ongoing. I know, I was surprised as well. Though kept relatively quiet all these years, I strongly believe that where the anthrax came from originally should be broadcast and repeated far and wide. The reason? I am of the opinion that our government leaders can't be trusted. It's just the way I approach national and international events.

March 28, 2008 from FOX News…

The FBI has narrowed its focus to "about four" suspects in the 6 1/2-year investigation of the deadly anthrax attacks of 2001, and at least three of those suspects are linked to the Army’s bioweapons research facility at Fort Detrick in Maryland, FOX News has learned.

Among the pool of suspects are three scientists — a former deputy commander, a leading anthrax scientist and a microbiologist — linked to the research facility, known as USAMRIID.

The FBI has collected writing samples from the three scientists in an effort to match them to the writer of anthrax-laced letters that were mailed to two U.S. senators and at least two news outlets in the fall of 2001, a law enforcement source confirmed.

……

"Fort Detrick is run by the United States Army. It's the most secure biological warfare research center in the United States," a bioterrorism expert told FOX News.Link

Americans should be aware that the anthrax sent out in letters only weeks after the Twin Towers fell came from an United States Army bioweapons research facility. Let me repeat that,….the anthrax sent out in the mail, which resulted in numerous deaths, which was sent to Tom Daschle and Pat Leahy's offices, originated from an U.S. Army bioweapons research facility right here in the good ole' U.S.A.

Because we know that the anthrax was "home grown", and because we know the home grown anthrax came from a military location…..it leads me to suggest a couple of possibilities.

#1-The anthrax was sent out by a disgruntled person who had access to this stuff. Some random nut, maybe like the Unabomber. This was the line pushed by the media initially, perhaps prompted by Bush officials using Steven Hatfill as their whipping boy. Draining swamps and scouring Hatfill's life and movements, going down into all the nooks and crannies of hypothetical nonsense and in so doing creating a national impression that Hatfill was, indeed, the disgruntled whacko who did the evil deed. Even though he wasn't.

I suppose it is still possible that yet another potential disgruntled or disturbed individual who just happened to have access to highly securitized weapons grade anthrax powder on a military establishment will be outed as the villain. I'm admitting that is still a possibility, however remote.

#2-The anthrax was sent out, selectively, on the order of higher ups in our government. One motivation may have been to help promote the idea that Saddam should be attacked. We now know, many years later, that Rumsfeld, Bush and Cheney wanted to hit Iraq immediately after 9-11. Saddam's Iraq was, at the very least, known for using biological warfare against Iran. Saddam also had a history of possessing anthrax and other dangerous substances. Saddam would be an easy fit into an already conceived narrative.

A second motivation could have been to scare Congressional Democrats into granting Bush/Cheney the widest of police state militaristic powers to do whatever they wanted. Such granting of powers is found in the Patriot Act.

_______

Reviewing….

Tom Carey was inspector in charge of the FBI Amerithrax investigation from October 2001 to April 2002.

On an Iraqi connection,

"What I would say is the information that came out there that led weapons inspectors and others to suspect the Iraq connection was wrong information. Now it doesn’t say we still wouldn’t look for any potential connection to Iraq, or rather any other States sponsored terrorist, but what they specifically referred to didn’t exist, and it was misinformation."[67] Link

On the possibility there was advance knowledge…..

…the Bush administration has failed to provide a complete and accurate response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request concerning the decision to place White House staff on a regimen of the powerful antibiotic, Cipro, the same day as the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. By contrast, U.S. Postal Service workers from Washington, DC’s Brentwood Postal Facility – Judicial Watch clients – were denied antibiotic treatment, even after it became apparent that the Brentwood facility had been contaminated. Link

Please take the time to go over this timeline….nearly 7 years of retrospection places the events in a different light….

Sept.16 — Anti-terrorism bill proposed.[3]

Sept.18 – Two letters containing Ames anthrax are postmarked in Trenton, N.J., addressed to Tom Brokaw of NBC Nightly News and the New York Post.

Sept.28 – Boy visiting ABC network in New York contracts anthrax.

Oct.2 – USA Patriot Act anti-terrorism bill is introduced in Congress.

Oct.3 – Tabloid editor of Boca Raton Sun, Florida, hospitalized with anthrax and dies two days later.

Oct. 3 – Senate Majority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (Dem., S.D.) says he doubts the Senate could take up the anti-terrorist legislation before next week, as the administration had asked. Attorney General John A. Ashcroft accuses Senate Democrats of dragging their feet.[4]

Oct. 4 – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (Dem., Vt.) accuses the administration of reneging on an agreement on the anti-terrorist bill. Some warn that “lawmakers are were overlooking constitutional flaws in their rush to meet the administration’s timetable.”[5]

Oct. 6 – Under the headline, “Glow of bipartisanship seems to dim,” the Baltimore Sun reports: “…opposed by most Senate Democrats, Ashcroft complained about the rather slow pace…over his request for law enforcement powers…Hard feelings remain.”[6]

Oct. 8 – Under the headline, “Cracks in Bipartisanship Start to Show,” The Washington Post reports, “Congress has lost some of the shock-induced unity with which it first responded to the [9/11] attacks.”[7]

Oct.9 – Senator Feingold blocks an attempt to rush the Patriot Act to a vote with little debate and no opportunity for amendments. Feingold criticizes the Bill as a threat to liberty.[8]

Oct.9 – Identical anthraxed letters are postmarked in Trenton, N.J., with lethal doses to Senators Daschle and Leahy.

Oct. 10 & 11 – The original batch of the Ames strain of anthrax is destroyed with the permission of the FBI, making tracing the anthrax type more difficult.[9]

Oct.11 – First Senate version of the Bill passes.[10]

Oct.12 – First House version of the Bill passes.[11]

Oct.12 – House-Senate debate on Bill starts.[12]

Oct.12 – Second anthrax case reported at NBC in NYC.

Oct.13 – Baltimore Sun reports that the media may have been targeted for a “coordinated bioterrorism” attack.[13]

Oct.13 – President Bush says: “The anthrax attacks might be tied to Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaida terrorist network.”[14]

Oct.15 – Tom Brokaw of NBC opens anthraxed letter containing Islamic threats and phrases.

Oct.15 – Senator Daschle’s office opens the letter mailed Oct.9, containing a lethal dose of anthrax. Senator Leahy’s similar letter was misrouted to Virginia.

Oct.16 – The Senate office buildings shut down.

Oct.17 – House of Representatives shut down; 28 congressional staffers test positive for anthrax.

Oct.17 – The New York and Florida letters are found to contain the Ames strain.

Oct.18 – An assistant of CBS Dan Rather contracts anthrax.

Oct.21 – Letters to N.Y.Post, NBC and Senator Daschle are found to have identical handwriting of “Death to America, Death to Israel, Allah is Great.”

Oct. 24 – House passes the final version of the Patriot Act and other previously unpopular Bush projects: Alaska oil drilling, $25 billion in tax cuts for corporations, taps into Social Security funds and cuts in education.[15]

Oct.25 – Congressional mail halted. Senator Daschle switched from supporting a 2 year limit on the Patriot Act to defending a 4 year sunset clause as the “appropriate balance.”[16]

Oct.26 – Senate passes the final version Patriot Act.[17]

Oct.26 – President Bush signs the constitutionally questionable USA Patriot Act.[18]

Oct.27 – Supreme Court shut down with anthrax scare.[19] Link

Sandwiched in between the introduction of the Patriot Act in Congress and the final vote to pass the Patriot Act….came the second round of anthrax letters. That round specifically targeted two Democratic Party leaders who had been voicing their displeasure with provisions in the bill.

Conclusion for now: In hindsight and after having had scare tactics used on us for so many years now…..I don't think it is too big of a stretch to understand the anthrax attacks as the final motivating factor provoking even staunch civil liberties Democrats into voting for the totally anti and un American…..Patriot Act.

This would mean, naturally, and I've believed this for a long time now, that the Bush/Cheney regime had successfully engineered, and continues to this day to carry out, an overthrow of the United States of America.

To me, it is impossible…incredible….to suggest all of this is just coincidence.

U.S. Rep. Steve King(R-IA) on Friday announced his bid for a fourth term in Congress…..

"I don't want to disparage anyone because of their race, their ethnicity, their name – whatever their religion their father might have been," he said. "I'll just say this: When you think about the option of a Barack Obama potentially getting elected President of the United States — I mean, what does this look like to the rest of the world? What does it look like to the world of Islam?"

Disparaging Obama for his race, name, ethnicity and religion, is EXACTLY what King intended to do. Then he proceeds to do what he said he didn't want to do….

He continued: "I will tell you that, if he is elected president, then the radical Islamists, the al-Qaida, the radical Islamists and their supporters, will be dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they did on September 11 because they will declare victory in this War on Terror."

The train of reason left the tracks and headed off into fantasyland when King said an Obama presidency would mean a declaration of victory in the fictitiously named "war on terror". Does Steve King base his reasoning on what Obama has repeatedly stated about attacking al-Qaeda, no matter what country they were in? No. The columnist fills in the blanks in reasoning….

King thinks radical Islamists will say the United States has capitulated because the Obama administration would be pulling troops out of any conflict associated with al-Qaida.

Pulling troops out of the American occupied territory of Iraq, a country that never had any real Islamist extremist problem under Saddam….but does now under George W. Bush…..is "capitulating" to some enemy that was never present before we unilaterally attacked. Using reason and intelligence, a president Obama will remove our troops from Iraq in an orderly fashion because there is no military solution to the Iraqi failure to reconcile with one another.

Then the wingnut flaps come off…..

"Additionally, his middle name (Hussein) does matter," King said. "It matters because they read a meaning into that in the rest of the world. That has a special meaning to them. They will be dancing in the streets because of his middle name. They will be dancing in the streets because of who his father was and because of his posture that says: Pull out of the Middle East and pull out of this conflict."

Put aside for the moment that Obama has never said we should "pull out of the middle east". An Obama presidency will cause Al-Qaeda to dance in the streets in celebration because of Obama's middle name. And because of who his father was. Remember, Steve King actually represents Iowans in the House of Representatives. I'm afraid to even ask…..what goofy group of Republicans in Iowa actually believes in this cartoonish nonsense?

Obama's father was an agnostic, not a practicing Muslim, not religious at all. A middle name?? Bin Laden will be dancing in his cave, if Obama wins, because of the Senator's middle name? Steve King from Iowa may not be sophisticated enough to recognize how stupid this all sounds…..but Bin Laden is.

He continued: "There are implications that have to do with who he is and the position that he's taken. If he were strong on national defense and said 'I'm going to go over there and we're going to fight and we're going to win, we'll come home with a victory,' that's different. But that's not what he said. They will be dancing in the streets if he's elected president. That has a chilling aspect on how difficult it will be to ever win this Global War on Terror."
Source

The reason I include Steve King's comments in my post today is this……the stuff he says is the same stuff neo-conservative wingers say on Ohio.com. Steve King talks about "victory" and "winning" in Iraq. This, in spite of the FACT that all responsible military folks, including the Immaculately Conceived General Petreaus, have stated for years that there is NO MILITARY SOLUTION in Iraq. Which means that our American military CANNOT SOLVE the Iraqi problems.

That FACT doesn't register in the heads of neo-con fantasists like Steve King. Another FACT not acknowledged in the least by this Iowan is that there is no "global war on terror". Yes, it is a fact that there is no war agaist "terror". Would a "war on laughter" be possible? How about a "war on farting"? "Global war on mean looks"? What about a "global war on snide remarks"?

Bush's totally ridiculous "global war on terror" is only a propagandistic "tool" lifted from the same "toolbox" that produced color coded scare charts and talk of mushroom clouds. The same toolbox in which torture, I mean enhanced interrogations, were taken from. It comes from the same wingnut, Rove-inspired, tactics that would entitle a bill to permit the president to spy on Americans without oversight, the Protect America Act.

No matter that Obama has made it crystal clear that he would order attacks on America's declared enemy, al-Qaeda, wherever that enemy is found. No matter that Obama would order an attack on our enemy, Al-Qaeda, with or without the host country's approval. No matter to Steve King. No matter to the Ohio.com wingers who type away using language identical to Steve King's.

During the Cold War, there were Americans who lived in fear. During the Cold War there was an American enemy capable of destroying the world's population, so fear was a reasonable response to such an enemy. During the Cold War, however, fear never gave way to total fantasy.

Today America is confronted with a small pocket of unsophisticated, stateless, cave dwellers. This enemy is not capable of destroying the worlds' population. This enemy is not capable of overthrowing America. This enemy, compared to the Soviets, is pitifully powerless. Today, Americans on the fringe right are afraid of this enemy for very little reason. Today, neo-conservative converts have given their thought processes entirely over to fantasy.

Steve King(Neo-Con-Iowa), along with likeminded wingers, have decided to live in a fantasy world.