agitprop version 2.0

Bring In 'Da Noise, Bring In 'Da Crunk

Time to commence Operation ACLU Annihilation:

NEW YORK (AP) - Pictures of detainee abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison must be released despite government claims that they could damage America's image, a federal judge ruled Thursday. U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein said terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan have proven they "do not need pretexts for their barbarism.'' The American Civil Liberties Union sought the release of 87 photographs and four videotapes as part of an October 2003 lawsuit demanding information on the treatment of detainees in U.S. custody and the transfer of prisoners to countries known to use torture. The ACLU contends that prisoner abuse is systemic.

It appears that Operation ACLU Annihilation is already underway over at Little Green Fascists. Check out some of the un-edited comments from LGF:

someone take the ACLU -out

The trrorists from the ACLU win. And they'd be the first ones executed if they really got their wishes.

An utter travesty of justice. I hope conservatives destroy the ACLU with this blatant example of their willingness to venture into the anti-American to smear a Republican.
I don't have anything else to say.

Since the wingnuts have trouble typing correctly and communicating effectively, I have decided to summarize their views with this quick and easy set of talking points:

• The ACLU is engaging in partisan attacks against a Republican administration which promoted torture as official policy.
• The ACLU hates America because they want to hold government accountable--the very government which ignored reports of torture and abuse.
• The ACLU champions evil values such as civil liberties and freedom from government oppression, therefore they are anti-American.
• Right-wing "patriots" champion real American values such as obedience to authority, one-party dictatorial rule, torture, extraordinary rendition and pre-emptive war.
• The government protects Americans by torturing innocent brown people.
• Just pretend it's all okay.
• We are safer.
• Trust me.

More on torture from The Heretik and The Tattered Coat.

afghanistan pentagon iraq war on terror impeach bush abu ghraib guantanamo

What's So Friendly About 'Friendly Fire'?

Move over Cindy Sheehan. The Pentagon (and their cadre of right-wing chickenhawk yellow elephant lackeys) has a new family to demonize and slander--the Tillman family. Why? Because they want to know why their dead son was used as a pawn in a Pentagon propaganda exercise.

Pat Tillman died in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004. The army knew that Tillman died from "friendly fire" yet General John Abizaid awarded Tillman the Silver Star and the Purple Heart on the basis of a citation report that said that Tillman was killed by enemy forces. This report contained a detailed account of the alleged battle (which the Army knew had never taken place). Five weeks after his memorial service on May 3, 2004 the Tillman family was told that their son was actually killed by "friendly fire".

I wonder what prompted the Pentagon to lie about Tillman's death and turn him into an uber-American hero? What negative damning story that surfaced in late April 2004 did the Pentagon want to divert attention from? Hmm.

Tillman became the poster child for military heroism in the middle of Bush's 2004 campaign. He was used as a propaganda tool just like Private Jessica Lynch was in 2003.  According to The Chronic, Pat Tillman's family wants to know why testimony from fellow soldiers was changed and why the military lied about the "friendly-fire" aspect of his death:

Mary Tillman says that’s how Pat would have wanted to be remembered, as an individual, not as a stock figure or political prop. But she also believes “Pat was a real hero, not what they used him as.” For the moment, all that is left are the memories and the thick binders spread across Mary Tillman’s dining room table in San Jose. As she waits for the Pentagon investigators to finish their new probe, she wonders whether they will ask the hard questions. Like other family members, “I just want accountability,” she said. “I want answers.”

I am deeply suspicious about the circumstances of this story. Blogger Newsguy goes so far as to ask Was Pat Tillman Victim of a Fragging Incident? During the Vietnam War, fragging referred to "the assassination of an officer by his own troops, usually by means of a grenade." Maybe the army intentionally disposed of Tillman because he disliked President Bush and was a Noam Chomsky fan:

The Chronicle also revealed that interviews “show a side of Pat Tillman not widely known -- a fiercely independent thinker who enlisted, fought, and died in service to his country yet was critical of President Bush and opposed the war in Iraq, where he served a tour of duty. He was an avid reader whose interests ranged from history books on World War II and Winston Churchill to works of leftist Noam Chomsky, a favorite author.”. . .

A colleague who served with Tillman for more than a year in Iraq and Afghanistan, said: “We were outside of (a city in southern Iraq) watching as bombs were dropping on the town. ... We were talking. And Pat said, 'You know, this war is so f— illegal.' And we all said, 'Yeah.' That's who he was. He totally was against Bush.”

How dare Tillman question the wisdom of Dear Leader's decision to invade Iraq! Only a pro-terrorist communist sympathizer would do such a thing! In all seriousness I do believe Pat Tillman is a real hero. He gave up his football career to join the Army Rangers not to invade Iraq but to hunt down Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan. Treason doesn't come close to describing the Pentagon's deceitful actions to cover up the truth behind his death.

Stay tuned for more updates on this story. I assume the plot will thicken in the days and weeks to come.

tags: afghanistan pentagon iraq war on terror impeach bush pat tillman

Endangered Species

I've found the only living Republican who hasn't shed an ounce of integrity. His name is Paul Craig Roberts:

The Iraqi war has three beneficiaries: (1) al Qaeda, (2) Iran and (3) US war industries and Bush-Cheney cronies who receive no-bid contracts. Everyone else is a loser.

Amen brother.

Who exactly is Paul Craig Roberts? He was only Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. I wonder if economists are more impervious to bullshit since they are rational thinkers and are not strictly politicians. Remember Paul O'Neill? He was fired because he valued a little thing we like to call reality.

UPDATE: I found the perfect picture to accompany this post via Daily Pepper and Scrutiny Hooligans. Yeah, it's real.  

       

Dead Bodies = Progress

May 2003:  We don't do body counts . . .

Washington -- The world will never know how many Iraqis died in the war to oust Saddam Hussein, in part because the United States adamantly refuses to estimate the number of people it kills in combat and because gathering accurate numbers is all but impossible after the Iraqi government's chaotic collapse . . .  "We don't do body counts," Gen. Tommy Franks, who directed the Iraq invasion, has said.

September 2005:  Now we do body counts . . .

BAGHDAD -- Using enemy body counts as a benchmark, the U.S. military claimed gains against Abu Musab Zarqawi's foreign-led fighters last week even as they mounted their deadliest attacks on Iraq's capital.

Well, at least they're getting practice in mathematics. This guy would be happy. The Heretik discusses the latest monster to emerge on the scene--Zarqawi. Los Defeatists point out the latest battle in Iraq: British troops vs. Iraqi police. That's gotta be a fun one.

hat tip: A Lie A Day

Madame Secretary and The Bridges Of Babylon

My view of this is that this is a big historical change and they tend to be messy and difficult and violent and, inside, contradictory. On the one hand, positive things are going on; on the other hand, quite negative things are going on. It’s just the way historical changes [are made]. I’ve been reading over the summer biographies of the Founding Fathers. By all accounts, the United States of America should never have come into being. First of all, they were fighting the greatest power of the times militarily and in terms of reach. -- Condoleezza Rice on Iraq, Newsweek

In the late 1700s,  the burgeoning United States was fighting off "the greatest power of the times militarily and in terms of reach"--the British Empire. But the Iraqi resistance is presently fighting off the greatest military power of its era--the U.S. Empire. Funny how things have changed. In fact, these historical changes clearly disprove Condoleezza Rice's analogy of Iraq to the nascent United States.

Condi's comparison of the emergence of Iraqi democracy to the Founding Fathers and the formation of American democracy falls flat on its face. In 1776, a foreign power did not sail to the shores of Virginia, invade the region and then expel British forces from the colonies. Rather, the complete opposite happened. The colonists formed a homegrown insurgency, overthrew the ruling regime themselves (albeit with some French military assistance later on) and then formed their own unique, independent form of government.

If we are to swallow Condi's analogy then she must believe in an entirely different version of the American Revolution. Imagine this. French troops invade the colonies and liberate the colonists from King George III's colonial regime. Once the British forces are driven out of power the French install a provisional government which is headed by a young rich Cardinal. This Cardinal purges loyalists from the government, takes over the rum, cotton and tobacco industries, abolishes English common law, and then puts a gun to the head of George Washington and says "you are free, now adopt a French style of government or die, you stinking piece of merde!" If this actually took place, I think the United States would have turned out very differently.

The whole idea of forcing people to adopt democratic government is ludicrous. Democratic government should not be imposed, it should be homegrown, that is, develop naturally out of conditions unique to the culture and traditions of the region. The American colonies had developed a long tradition of democratic values with town hall meetings and local involvement. This spawned a culture which was highly conducive to forming a republic of representative government. What is Iraq's experience with democracy? Non-existent. Right now Iraq is ruled by a puppet regime whose strings are deeply frayed and will soon be cut by a full-blown civil war. One might say, "but we created democracy in Germany and Japan after World War II". True. The Marshall Plan was ambitious, well-led, well-funded and well-executed. The Rumsfeld plan for Iraq was, uh, did they even have a plan? I don't think so.

Let's get back to Condi for a second. This weekend, the Madame Secretary was too busy to attend a dinner with other female foreign ministers from the UN general assembly to discuss women's rights. She does however have time in her schedule to shop for expensive shoes while poor people drown. It's all about priorities Ms. Rice. It is clear that yours lie not with the people (women, minorities, the underclass) but with the powerful. Ferragamoleezza is suffering from the same syndrome that every other member of the Bush administration is plagued by--isolation from reality. Until our government realizes what irreversible damage has been done to Iraq we will continue down the path of failure. When Bush says we are staying the course in Iraq it really means that he doesn't know what the hell he is doing and is too afraid to admit that he is wrong.

I can't offer any solutions to this mess. I don't know what's worse--pulling out all U.S. troops immediately or staying put and incurring more violence, death and chaos. I am not a military planner or a foreign policy specialist. What I can realize is that things aren't going well and if we don't change course we are doomed to failure. That's why I will be in Los Angeles this coming Saturday, September 24, to voice my opinions that we are headed in the wrong direction. My only hope is people will begin to talk more honestly and openly about Iraq and drop all this amphetamine-addicted parrot talk of "we're spreading freedom, we're spreading freedom, we're spreading freedom . . ."

condoleezza rice condi rice downing street memo impeach bush

Galloway v. Hitchens

Public discourse about the Iraq War just got dirtier--way dirtier--thanks to last night's confrontation between George Galloway and Christopher Hitchens in New York. The Mad Scotsman, looking more tanned than George Hamilton, squared off against the gin-soaked and bugged eyed apostate of the left, Christopher Hitchens.

Two angry blokes from the U.K. hurling insults at each other is not going to improve the situation in Iraq. People are still dying on an hourly basis. Then again, if I lived in New York I probably would have gone to watch this debate just for the theatrics:

The two rival titans of the raging row over Iraq engaged in an intellectual prize fight in New York last night that quickly degenerated into knock-down, drag-out bar-room brawl. Before a jeering crowd of more than 1,000 in a college auditorium, the two men - once allies on the Left - hurled invective at each other for almost two hours, until exhaustion set in. A scruffy, sweating Mr Hitchens accused Mr Galloway of being an apologist for dictators, fresh from Damascus where he had praised the 145 attacks a day by Iraqi insurgents on coalition troops . . . Mr Galloway, inexplicably tanned and looking worthy of the nickname "Gorgeous George" in a well-pressed beige suit, denounced Mr Hitchens as a former-Trotskyist stooge for a reactionary government in Washington bent on dominating the Iraqi people. "People like Mr Hitchens are willing to fight to the last drop of other people’s blood, " the MP said to wild applause."How I wish he would put on a tin hat and pick up a gun and go and fight himself."

Oona King, the Labour MP defeated by Mr Galloway at the last election, witnessed the debate and offered this review:

"I think Galloway won in terms of oratory skills . . . I think it’s great to see Britons bringing the tradition of debate to the United States. But at the end of the day, they are two very arrogant men who both have very flawed arguments."

Some transcript from the debate can be found here. The war, which by its very nature is insane, has brought out bits of insanity in all of us.

galloway hitchens george galloway christopher hitchens

One Step Closer to World War III

How did I miss this? From Sunday's WAPO:

The Pentagon has drafted a revised doctrine for the use of nuclear weapons that envisions commanders requesting presidential approval to use them to preempt an attack by a nation or a terrorist group using weapons of mass destruction. The draft also includes the option of using nuclear arms to destroy known enemy stockpiles of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.

The document, written by the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs staff but not yet finally approved by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, would update rules and procedures governing use of nuclear weapons to reflect a preemption strategy first announced by the Bush White House in December 2002. The strategy was outlined in more detail at the time in classified national security directives.

This fits with last month's revelation that Dick Cheney ordered the Pentagon to draw up plans for a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran. Maybe this Pentagon doctrine is just icing on the cake for the upcoming assault on Persia?

And now for the irony . . . President Bush addressed the U.N. General Assembly this morning and urged other nations to join his crusade:

Bush pressed for Security Council approval of a resolution calling upon all nations to take steps to end the incitement of terrorist acts and asked nations to agree to prosecute and to extradite anyone seeking radioactive materials or nuclear devices.

"We must send a clear message to the rulers of outlaw regimes that sponsor terror and pursue weapons of mass murder: You will not be allowed to threaten the peace and stability of the world," Bush said. "Confronting our enemies is essential, and so civilized nations will continue to take the fight to the terrorists."

So little George wants all the WMD to himself. His Mamma never taught him how to share. If Kofi Annan has any balls then he'll enact this resolution and prosecute Bush for pursuing weapons of mass destruction.

USA: WMD for us, but not for you!

America, Circa 2005

          

Who's the one getting f*%ked over again?    

Bush Unhinged

What do you do as president when a majority of Americans believe that the Iraq War was a mistake? You wine and scream like a spoiled child in cabinet meetings:

“Who gives a flying fuck what the polls say,” he screamed at a recent strategy meeting. “I’m the President and I’ll do whatever I goddamned please. They don’t know shit.”

Read more @ Capitol Hill Blue: Bush's Obscene Tirades Rattle White House Aides

Maybe he's distressed because when he talks to God, God tells him he's a [fill in the blank].

asshat politics unhinged freedom iraq downing street memo bush

Read Between The Lines

The War President™ spoke in Bush-friendly Idaho yesterday to a crowd of drooling zombies. Isn't it odd how he only speaks at safe venues with hand-picked audiences? He won't dare visit a place like liberal San Francisco. Anyways, let's take a look at his speech, which happens to be the same damn Iraq speech he's given about 100 times now.

Remember Nine-Eleven. Did I say remember Nine-Eleven?:

On September the 11th, 2001, we saw the future that the terrorists intend for our country and the lengths they're willing to go to achieve their aims. We faced a clear choice. We could hunker down, retreating behind a false sense of security, or we could bring the war to the terrorists, striking them before they could kill more of our people. (Applause.)

That's right Americuh. Whatever you do, don't hunker down!

We will stay on the offense. We'll complete our work in Afghanistan and Iraq. An immediate withdrawal of our troops in Iraq, or the broader Middle East, as some have called for, would only embolden the terrorists and create a staging ground to launch more attacks against America and free nations. So long as I'm the President, we will stay, we will fight, and we will win the war on terror. (Applause.)

Phew. All that talk of the "global struggle" not really being a war got me worried last month. I'm relieved to know that the war WILL last forever.

Oh, and we can't leave either. We can't trust those Iraqi SOB's to run their own country because they'll turn Iraq into a staging ground for terrorism. The only person who can prevent Iraq from becoming a staging ground is our wise, all-knowing Father Bush.

Amen. Praise Jesus.

asshat politics war freedom iraq downing street memo