Friday, August 29, 2008

Palin? Sarah Palin? "Homing in on Halibut"? THAT Sarah Palin?

UPDATE: All-righty then. As it turns out, it is official. Oh, si, y wacha le pinci moooscas! So stop breathing though your mouth! You all look like Death standing in the corner sucking on a Life Saver.


EARLIER TODAY: It hasn't been confirmed. [Oh yes it has]. But seriously, Palin? Is this Potemkin Princess a political poseur? Is she being wiggled and cranked along the bottom like stink bait in the hopes the bigmouth bass with strike and run with it?

Has Karl Rove turned to games of cynical humor in his ever more sinister attempts to undermine faith in democracy while rubbing it in the faces of his former Machiavellian employers, now become neurotic -- those hand wrenching Straussians who now present the stigmata as if victimstance has jumped up from centuries of karma to yell "Boo!" in their faces? Bill Kristol and Joe Lieberman come to mind. Nauseating, isn't it?

So, where's the hot rod? I know there must be a photographer nearby waiting to take her picture posing on the hood. First it's Howdy Doody for eight years now this? I do have to admit, I like this one better than Anita Bryant. She didn't have a sense of humor at all, not even with her husband -- especially not with her husband.

Will Cindy be jealous?

Miss Alaska Runner-Up: Sarah Palin

There's a line from an old Rock & Roll song that signifies the endless possibilities that answer such cynical questions: "I'm like a one-eyed cat peepin' in a seafood store...." To say I'm suspicious fails to convey my incredulity. "Got my eye on you cause you don't love me no mo."*

Besides, what kind of looser would accept such an invitation to career suicide? .....unless she owns stock in Diebold and plans to work as a lobbyist for the oil bid'ness after a very short career in politics. Best keep that eye on this one.

Such sinister doings we've not seen before in America. At least not in politics during such a crucial time in our history. If this is a grab for Hillary's disgruntled supporters in the Democratic Party, it's damned insulting to Senator Clinton. Will the religious right rally behind the flag? I've said it once this week and I'll say it again: This should put to rest the argument over who has the judgment to be president.



*Factoid for today: Bill Haley's "one eyed cat peepin' in a seafood store" was notoriously suspicious. But that rendering of the metaphor came by changing the line that followed ever so gracefully to make it acceptable to white folks, as with the verse referenced above. Elvis restored it to Big Joe Turner's original rendition and got away with it on TV, a rendition that Jerry Lee Lewis certainly found suitable to his tastes in...music. Today's one-eyed cats work for Fox News and CNN and sit in the VPO eyeballing your money "till you can't spend it no mo."

* * *

Stepping Up to the Plate: Barack Obama's "Unapologetic" Acceptance Speech

Presidential speech writers David Gergen and Patrick Buchanan agreed: This was one of the best convention speeches ever. Obama laid into John McCain and spelled out the Democratic Party platform without the usual Democratic Party apologetics. The speech was unabashedly liberal. Neither did he pull any punches in dealing with Republican corruption nor the failures of the Bush Administration and its assault on the Constitution. He delivered it with intelligence and with fervor (once he got warmed up), starring into the teeth of destiny, as it were.



At the same time, by taking the high road for a day, John McCain redeemed himself, even if temporarily, by restraining his campaign from airing negative ads, given the sacredness of the date and the occasion. It was the anniversary of the assassination of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. carried out by the 1963 Coup d'Etat that brought Richard M. Nixon to power and entrenched itself within the shadows of government and its intelligence apparatus'.

McCain had been airing negative ads at the breaks, appearing, by all accounts, sleazy and desperate. He relented just for the occasion but promised a return to the sleaze for the following day.

No matter; many pundits are forecasting that he is being abandoned while Republican funding is being channeled into the coming battle for control of Congress.

All hope for the restoration of the republic lies with Senators Barach Obama and Joseph Biden. Yet, questions remain whether Obama can resist the faltering coup that brought America to her knees under Richard Cheney, George W. Bush, neocon apparatchiks and the titular head of the ruling oligarchy, George Herbert Walker Bush.

Apparently, in a completely spontaneous act, explained away later as an attempt to "warm up the crowd," Senator Joe Biden, Obama's vice presidential running mate, stepped out from behind the curtain in "an unscheduled appearance" for brief extemporaneous remarks that embarrassingly echoed the sound bites from his acceptance speech the night before. His reutterances rang unexpectedly hollow, falling like lead balloons, now appearing contrived and insincere in their redundancy. He was obviously elated to the point of impulsivity. His speech was slurred. Although no one dared make comment afterward, he appeared intoxicated.

"Apollo-13 to Houston."

"Go ahead Apollo-13."

"Houston, we have a problem."


At the close of the evening, not to be outdone by this week's shark jumping antics of Fox News* and CNN, the Associated Press put their own version forward of The Fonz** -- showing off his nuts -- to announce that Obama's speech was altogether sorry.


*Appendix A (I'll never get tired of this one):




**Appendix B:


* * *

Taking Back our Country; Al Gore at the DNC

This was more than a speech; this was the oratory of a statesman "speaking truth to power."



* * *

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Neocon Wolf Blitzer of CNN Jumps the Shark; Takes the Political Sleaze Award

In the closing moments of their program, immediately after Hillary's breathtakingly inspired speech calling for party unity Tuesday night at the 2008 Democratic National Convention, CNN's Wolf Blitzer, posing in his usual role of "unbiased" team analyst and leadman of "The Best Political Team on Television," read a vicious statement in response to Senator Clinton from the McCain Campaign. It attacked her as insincere and hypocritical.

The collaborative nature of Blitzer's pretentiously innocent performance in reading something so grossly inappropriate in the midst of Senator Clinton's moment of glory was so thinly disguised, his sleaziness must have been discernible from the end zone bleachers at Invesco Field at Mile High. It came off as a blatantly duplicitous attempt at subversion.

An incredulous John King, his colleague, immediately gave him a not too subtle dressing down. Blitzer's behavior was so palpably sleazy that it set a tone of conflict for the rest of the broadcast from Denver.

Then at the break, we saw an even more tasteless display -- a McCain negative campaign ad, using Hillary's primary campaign criticism of Obama and slamming her for her change of attitude in support of Obama. It was spiteful; it was ruthlessly snide and Rovian; it was undignified. Worst of all, given the subtext obsequiously promoted by CNN and Fox for the last six months, it was a hateful display of unabashed white trash: "Hi, I'm John McCain and I approved this ad."

After the break, another member of the team started criticizing Hillary's speech for what she didn't say. James Carville could take it no longer. Completely at ease when the heat is turned up in "the kitchen," he pointed out to her that such "nit picking" was inappropriate and called for more dignity, given the setting. This, just before going on to express his own reprimand to Blitzer and then finishing off with a couple of typically Carvillian sound bites, "Let's face it: If you're a Republican, tonight was a bad night. There's no way around it. It was a good night for Democrats." [paraphrased] And another, "Hillary pitched a no-hitter; that was an all star performance, one for the Hall of Fame."

After another break, a Republican wonk in CNN costume, Alex Castellanos, attacked James Carville for chiding Blitzer and the bow-headed shill in the queen's chair. Then he went on to attack Hillary himself, opining what a sorry speech it was. He was so angry at Carville his voice was shaking.

CNN jumped the shark in my book. It was inevitable; there's too much riding for neocons on this election and they're becoming desperate. Wolf Blitzer, who is actually a longtime neocon who worked for the Israeli right-wing Jerusalem Post and the Likud-leaning AIPAC before being recruited by CNN, was clearly trying to subvert the Democratic message instead of just doing his job -- reporting the news. But that's exactly why he was hired; he's a neoconservative shill, the elephant in the living room no one will openly acknowledge. CNN has fallen into the controlled corporate media pit with Fox News.

I may not be all that supportive of Obama -- I'm still reeling from his "move to the middle," accompanied by his pro-FISA vote that granted telecoms retroactive immunity in their off-shore contract work for NSA. Nevertheless, after that down-at-heel, morally threadbare, classless and seedy reading of the McCain campaign invective -- live -- in the immediate wake of Senator Clinton's most grandiloquent career performance, followed by a commercial break highlighting a hate-filled piece of trailer park refuse with a smile on its face saying, "Hi, my name is John McCain and I approved this message" -- I still may not vote for Obama, but I'm sure as hell going to vote against McCain.

I will post Wolf Blitzer's post-speech duplicity when it becomes available. In the meantime, I present Hillary's stunning speech on behalf of unity:




BuzzNet
Tags: ,,,,,,,,

APPENDIX A
Jumping the Shark

2008 Democratic National Convention: Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by Dennis Kucinich; Tuesday, 08/26/08


Dennis Kucinich's speech this afternoon in Denver was really amazing in the way it energized his audience. By the time he got to the rhetorical flourish "Up with..." he had set the house on fire and everyone was on their feet screaming, pumping-it-up and waving signs.

The convention program directors, apparently too focused on their schedule and their two-way radio conversations to recognize the miracle moment, hurried the next speaker out to the podium. The state comptroller from California began his speech immediately, expecting the crowd to settle, but the audience refused to relent. They remained on their feet screaming, stamping and pumping-up Kucinich several moments into the innocuous drone of the poor comptroller who just kept mumbling insipidly onward.


Dennis Kucinich:

It's Election Day 2008. We Democrats are giving America a wake-up call. Wake up, America. In 2001, the oil companies, the war contractors and the neo-con artists seized the economy and have added 4 trillion dollars of unproductive spending to the national debt. We now pay four times more for defense, three times more for gasoline and home heating oil and twice what we paid for health care.

Millions of Americans have lost their jobs, their homes, their health care, their pensions. Trillions of dollars for an unnecessary war paid with borrowed money. Tens of billions of dollars in cash and weapons disappeared into thin air, at the cost of the lives of our troops and innocent Iraqis, while all the president's oilmen are maneuvering to grab Iraq's oil.

Borrowed money to bomb bridges in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. No money to rebuild bridges in America. Money to start a hot war with Iran. Now we have another cold war with Russia, while the American economy has become a game of Russian roulette.

If there was an Olympics for misleading, mismanaging and misappropriating, this administration would take the gold. World records for violations of national and international laws. They want another four-year term to continue to alienate our allies, spend our children's inheritance and hollow out our economy.

We can't afford another Republican administration. Wake up, America. The insurance companies took over health care. Wake up, America. The pharmaceutical companies took over drug pricing.

Wake up, America. The speculators took over Wall Street. Wake up, America. They want to take your Social Security. Wake up, America. Multinational corporations took over our trade policies, factories are closing, good paying jobs lost.

Wake up, America. We went into Iraq for oil. The oil companies want more. War against Iran will mean $10-a-gallon gasoline. The oil administration wants to drill more, into your wallet. Wake up, America. Weapons contractors want more. An Iran war will cost 5 to 10 trillion dollars.

This administration can tap our phones. They can't tap our creative spirit. They can open our mail. They can't open economic opportunities. They can track our every move. They lost track of the economy while the cost of food, gasoline and electricity skyrockets. They skillfully played our post-9/11 fears and allowed the few to profit at the expense of the many. Every day we get the color orange, while the oil companies, the insurance companies, the speculators, the war contractors get the color green.

Wake up, America. This is not a call for you to take a new direction from right to left. This is call for you to go from down to up. Up with the rights of workers. Up with wages. Up with fair trade. Up with creating millions of good paying jobs, rebuilding our bridges, ports and water systems. Up with creating millions of sustainable energy jobs to lower the cost of energy, lower carbon emissions and protect the environment.

Up with health care for all. Up with education for all. Up with home ownership. Up with guaranteed retirement benefits. Up with peace. Up with prosperity. Up with the Democratic Party. Up with Obama-Biden.

Wake up, America. Wake up, America. Wake up, America.

SOURCE 2008 Democratic National Convention Committee Democratic National Convention Press Office, +1-720-362-2006

What a hard act to follow.

2008 Democratic National Convention: Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by Dennis Kucinich

Sunday, August 24, 2008

It's Now Irrevocable: Fox News Has Jumped the Shark

FoxNews from "the far left political groups in Denver" who want to "Recreate '68" [which was actually a series of police riots], Griff Jenkins manipulates the news:


GJ: "...the disgraced professor, Ward Churchill, refused to talk to me...and I got a little roughed up trying to ask [wearing a spotlessly ironed, still wrinkle-free white shirt]... and these people say they believe in freedom of speech." [grabs a young citizen wearing a bandanna mask] "What's the message? What are you upset about?"

Young Citizen: "Fe? Fuck the corporate media! Hahahahahaha"

GJ: "Well I guess they don't believe in freedom of speech." [moves on] "...'Defend Denver.' What's that about? ...Do you have a message?"

2nd Citizen: "I'm not talking to you." [......]

GJ: "What's a matter, don't you believe in freedom...."

Group of Citizens: "Yea, FUCK FOX NEWS! FUCK FOX NEWS!...."

Griff Jenkins doesn't seem to get it: Freedom of Speech also includes not speaking to Fox News. After all, they'll only spin your comments for purposes of political propaganda. The little blond bowhead spinning the event back at Fox Central only proves why folks in the street would refuse them the opportunity.

One thing seems certain: If Fox News or some other sensationalist provocateur can't provoke these demonstrators to violence so that they can compare the Democratic Convention to the Chicago Democratic Convention in 1968, then the Denver Police will have to start a police riot to match that of Chicago's in order to squeeze them for the required media payoff.

* * *

Monday, August 18, 2008

Are Neocons Scamming Us on the Russo-Georgian Conflict on Behalf of John McCain?


Not everyone is as naive as the Straussians assume. There is beginning to be lots of speculation concerning the Russo-Georgian conflict that erupted a little more than a week ago. HuffingtonPost.com had a particularly interesting editorial piece of speculation Sunday that neither focused on oil, the territorial dispute itself nor the possibility of war profiteering by crony capitalists, as per usual of late. (Notice how speculation becomes the normative way to process the news when government becomes secretive?)

Nevertheless, as a way of establishing the context, the article by investigative journalist Joe Lauria, Did McCain Help Bait Russia Into Georgia? hearkened to Eisenhower's warning about the "Military Industrial Complex" and the Cold War.

Neither Eisenhower, nor Lincoln before him for that matter, just happened to come up with the notion of war profiteering and the dangers it posed to the American republic from an intuitive feeling in their guts. The danger seemed clear and present.

In fact, before Eisenhower, in 1947, Harry Truman not only set up the "National Security State" by creating the Central Intelligence Agency; but also, he went into overdrive trying to assist what later appeared to Republicans to be an incestuous relationship between the Pentagon and the private arms industry in what Truman came to believe was the continued economic stimulus needed to prevent a feared relapse into post-war depression.

In the wake of the Great Depression and the onset of WWII the United States experienced virtually no unemployment and Daddy Warbucks was making money hand over fist.

In their recently published book, A Political Odyssey, former democratic senator from Alaska and 2008 Democratic primary contender Mike Gravel and investigative journalist Joe Lauria claim from the Historical Revisionist perspective that President Harry Truman, on the advice of neocon-like warriors of his own time, invented the Cold War, first in order to scare Congress into passing the Marshall Plan because of the continued economic stimulus it would provide and then subsequently formed Cold War foreign policy around the mistaken hyperbolic notion that the Soviets intended to create a territorial empire, rather than the communist economic revolution they consistently claimed was their aim -- that the U.S. actually elicited through self-fulfilling prophesy the Russian response of creating "satellite" buffer states around the Soviet Union in self-defense against Truman's strident rhetoric.

The authors contend that Truman's self-fulfilling prophesy was more directly the result of the fear and hyperbole fomented by his administration in order to benefit the American arms industry. They went on to suggest that the Cold War gained its fifty-year momentum from this projected notion of Soviet intent combined with the Pentagon's exploitation of respondent Soviet paranoia, and was originally generated as an avoidance measure against the even greater economic anxieties regarding the still palpable generational sense of impending doom experienced by the American people during the Great Depression.

Without a doubt, many historians will continue to insist that the hegemonic policies of Joseph Stalin had a greater share in the creation of Cold War paranoia, despite what Gravel and Lauria contend regarding the primacy of American economic considerations. Stalin's aggressive insistence on war reparations at Yalta and Potsdam rendered the indelible impression that Russia, in her woundedness was maniacally driven by Stalin toward both revenge against Germany and the prevention of any future notion of an Arian Third Reich.

But as it turns out, given Truman's developing stridency, the contradictory notion among pundits of the 50s that Churchill and Roosevelt had capitulated unnecessarily, perhaps even cowardly, to Stalin's demands at Yalta and that a naive Truman, early in his own presidency, went to Potsdam unprepared for Soviet style manipulation is revisionist in it's own right.


Indeed, Hitler exploited the economic fall of the Wiemar Republic after WWI, while abusing the caveat of Jews-as-scapegoat going into WWII; nevertheless, he also entertained the grandiose imperialistic dreams of the German collective ego by advancing the great myth of the Third Reich. Revisionist attributions with an over focus upon repressed economic anxieties to the exclusion of the more readily apparent conflicts among nations have become a tradition-created form of philosophic wisdom that in our own times have "bloomed" (forgive the pun) into the Straussian notion regarding the utility of "never ending war" as the best measure against economic stagnation. See this clip from a chapter in their book published in May, entitled A Political Odyssey.

It certainly is no secret that one of the basic tenets that the Neocons inherited from Leo Strauss concerns the utility of war in maintaining the gross national product, continued economic growth across all sectors and the Spartan spirit of interpersonal competition needed in the general population to maintain it. What Strauss mistakenly generalized regarding historically recurrent socioeconomic anxieties leading to war, he formed into the Straussian dictum regarding war as the singular most powerful and indispensable engine of economic growth.

The editorial by Joe Lauria appearing in yesterday's Huffington Post argued from an intuitive perspective the strong possibility that the McCain Campaign, particularly under the influence of his foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann in conspiracy with the Neocons of the Bush Administration, manufactured the Georgian crisis in order to enhance McCain's electability in the hopes of more reliably guaranteeing the continuation of neoconservative foreign polity under a Republican presidency.

That is a quite startling speculation regarding ulterior Neoconservative motivations, especially for a moderately progressive site like Huffington Post which generally eschews the more radical conspiracy-think of the cynical far-left in favor of a more mainstream expression of progressivism.

The red flag that went up for Lauria was, in a name, neoconservative Randy Scheunemann, McCain's now exiting top foreign policy adviser and former lobbyist for Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, with whom Scheunemann had been in communication before the current escalation.

Lauria writes:
"It seems hard to imagine he would have tried to seize South Ossetia if he were not led to believe he had American backing. According to Vitaly Churkin, Russia's UN ambassador, joint US-Georgian military exercises code-named Immediate Response ended just hours before Georgian troops moved into the province.

"Churkin says the Americans gave Saakashvili a 'green light.' But there was no immediate response from the United States.


"It looks like Saakashvili and Russia were both set up.

"By eliciting a heavy-handed Russian response, American political leaders, and their mouthpieces in the corporate media, can blame Russia and revive misplaced Cold War analogies. They falsely portray Russia as the brutal aggressor, bent on violently overthrowing the Georgian regime, with Ukraine and others to follow."

Vladimir Putin, who is certainly an oil rich business oligarch in his own right, and said to be the world's fifth richest, is probably not trying to recreate the Soviet empire, as the Neocons would have us believe, least of all not the old fable of a geographic Soviet empire dominated by communism.

What the Russians have a lot of is oil. In fact, they not only have enough for their own needs; but also, they have enough to export.

But Neocons perhaps justifiably fear the Russians could be driven by agitation to tax the flow of Caspian oil and/or use it to punish Europe economically whenever they feel so inclined. Most of all, Neocons seem inspired by the knowledge that the Europeans themselves are aware of that possibility. In the minds of Neocons, this sets up the region surrounding the Caspian as an economic weapon of defense against an encroaching NATO, and presents itself as yet another incarnation of the fear and enmity underlying the Truman Doctrine that infused and animated the Cold War -- a fear that could be exploited.

So, again, who benefits?

Knowing the Russians aren't idiots is what should scare Neocons; although, they may be too blinded by ambition and arrogance to recognize it. For the American MSM to express such care and concern for Georgia and her fledgling "democracy" is disingenuous. There is a lot of oil in the Caspian Basin and much of it flows through pipelines maintained by British Petroleum running through Georgia.

So why put Georgia at risk? She is certainly experiencing short-term risk. That is undeniable. But the neoconservative policy forwarded by the now infamous Project for a New American Century has consistently been promoted as a long-term plan, less concerned and perhaps even dangerously feckless at times over short-term loses -- as with George W. Bush -- as long as alternatives remain available even when someone calls their bluff.

Scheunemann certainly knows this; he helped write the policy. The long-term nature of their globalist strategy may very well explain why John McCain -- once viewed by neocons as a stubborn and independent-natured maverick, but who has now become so unabashedly tractable, flipping and flopping at their beckoning now that he fully realizes that his life's final political ambitions lay in their hands -- has suddenly become at least meagerly attractive to them as the Bush Administration comes to its morally malignant close with no other more viable successor appearing remotely acceptable even to their notoriously gullible conservative base -- that is, unless Obama can convince the greater neoconservative consortium of moneyed interest groups that he is of equally dubious character and innocuous malleability to meet their job description for colonial governor and dual loyalist, a feat he is more than capable of, given his narcissistic driven ability to pander and to move with thespian grace in the winds of capricious fate. [/sarcasm]

Yet in the larger context, despite the speculation of Joe Lauria regarding the duplicity of Scheunemann and the Neocons, this most recent conflict is not about Russian empire or presidential elections in America; although, these influences play a significant role in ratcheting up the war rhetoric. The conflict over South Ossetia, with really little at state to anyone but Georgia, is more broadly about the greater regional financial interests of American and European oligarchs and those former Russian-Ukrainian "Business Oligarchs" -- many of them Jewish -- who escaped to London before Putin and his own cabal of oligarchs could get their hands on them for allegedly plundering the Russian economy when it was at its most vulnerable after the fall of the Soviet Union. It is more broadly about fighting a world war among themselves for control of the world's oil markets -- in this case, for control of the Caspian Basin. That journalists would begin to speculate that neoconservatives have exploited this internecine conflict among competing oligarchs speaks volumes about the current state of the American body politic and the meaninglessness of nationalism to American leaders.


As in all historic struggle that emerges out of the depths of selfish human debasement formed by ego and cold hearted avarice, the ancient dark rules of Omertà have resurfaced while the working classes watch powerlessly. More and more articles are being written about the emergence in the West of the Russian-Ukrainian-Israeli Mafia and its underworld machinations.

A subtext of the Russo-Georgian conflict contains the further speculation that, if properly mined by the Neocons, the political ambitions of Condollizza Rice are enhanced. She may well benefit from the crisis as McCain's obvious vice presidential running mate; although, she fains disinterest. She is presented as having foremost expertise in Soviet Cold War political history. These supposed neoconservative ambitions all hinges upon the re-creation of the Cold War, a media hoax as with the Truman Doctrine, according to Gravel and Lauria, one that Straussian theorists have now come to rely upon to maintain the economic stimulus of their never ending war.

Notwithstanding this perceived economic motivation, Straussian theory regarding the economic and social benefit of ongoing war is not supported by the historical evidence. In fact, the Vietnam War was an economic disaster for the United States resulting in double digit inflation, which is what we have now as of last month's economic figures. Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski has achieved notoriety as the foreign policy expert who baited the Soviets into Afghanistan so that they, too, could have their own Vietnam economic experience as payback. Indeed, perhaps even surpassing the incredible claims regarding the role of Ronald Reagan or George H. W. Bush in bringing down the Soviets, or the contentions of Polish Catholics regarding the influence of John Paul II and the Polish Solidarity Movement in their demise, Zbigniew Brzezinski is now credited with suckering the Soviets into the economic debacle of epic proportions from which greed and geographically demanding circumstances blinded them.

In classically healthy systems of capitalism, capital investment leads to return. Profits are then reinvested creating economic growth and an expansion of productivity. But in war, a nation ignorantly pumps its gross national product into bomb craters and cemetery plots. There is no return. At least not in the short-term. What the Bush Administration has done is borrow so heavily against their arrogant faith in a quick return from the oilfields of Iraq that any future economic gain will be eaten up to pay off the interest and the debt itself, while any short-term economic gains are being criminally funneled to their crony war profiteers, who are "disappearing" the profits as well as the initial capital investment by the American taxpayer (graft and kick-backs to politicians and to Defense Department covert operations not funded by Congress).

Straussian theory sounds economically "stimulating" to these dreamers. Just as it appears downright evil to progressives for its effects upon the earth and all its lifeforms. But in its application it has amounted to nefarious myth and unrestrained ambition abused by world oligarchs (get used to that word) that future generations of the working and middle classes will have to pay off unless they are successful in bilking the Chinese on their loans. "That my friends," as McCain would say, will require another never ending war.

* * *

Monday, August 4, 2008

Iraq Intelligence Letter Associating Al Qaeda with Iraq Was White House Contrivance

When it rains it pours. In the immediate wake of an apparent suicide of Dr. Bruce Ivins in the face of what increasing looks like the FBI's attempts to frame him as the government's scapegoat for the 2001 Anthrax Scare, evidence is now being presented by journalist and author Ron Suskind that in 2003 the White House promoted a forged letter linking Saddam Hussein to Al Qaeda as part of its concerted effort to bamboozle the American people into supporting their conjured neocon war against Iraq.

The forgery appeared as a follow-up to the now infamous "Feith Memo," a 16-page "top secret" intelligence document "leaked" to the Weekly Standard purportedly detailing evidence of Saddam's complicity with terrorist activities perpetrated by al Qaeda.

Feith's notorious allegations, produced by the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, were summarized and published in the Weekly Standard in an equally notorious article, "Case Closed" that served to prop-up the latest casus belli in a string of lies, including the "Niger Yellowcake Forgery," that were aggressively exploited by Vice President Richard Cheney in order to promote what has now turned into the Administration's regional war in the Middle East.

When it all folds together, the unavoidable conclusion -- that Congress nevertheless persists in avoiding -- is that the Bush/Cheney Administration is guilty of war crimes of the highest order.
Book Says White House Ordered Forgery
By MIKE ALLEN | 8/4/08 11:23 PM EST


A new book by the author Ron Suskind claims that the White House ordered the CIA to forge a back-dated, handwritten letter from the head of Iraqi intelligence to Saddam Hussein.

Suskind writes in “The Way of the World,” to be published Tuesday, that the alleged forgery – adamantly denied by the White House – was designed to portray a false link between Hussein’s regime and al Qaeda as a justification for the Iraq war.

The author also claims that the Bush administration had information from a top Iraqi intelligence official “that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq – intelligence they received in plenty of time to stop an invasion.”


The letter’s existence has been reported before, and it had been written about as if it were genuine. It was passed in Baghdad to a reporter for The (London) Sunday Telegraph who wrote about it on the front page of Dec
. 14, 2003, under the headline, “Terrorist behind September 11 strike ‘was trained by Saddam.’”

The Telegraph story by Con Coughlin (which, coincidentally, ran the day Hussein was captured in his “spider hole”) was touted in the U.S. media by supporters of the war, and he was interviewed on NBC's "Meet the Press."

"Over the next few days, the Habbush letter continued to be featured prominently in the United States and across the globe," Suskind writes. "Fox's Bill O'Reilly trumpeted the story Sunday night on 'The
O'Reilly Factor,' talking breathlessly about details of the story and exhorting, 'Now, if this is true, that blows the lid off al Qaeda—Saddam.'" According to Suskind, the administration had been in contact with the director of the Iraqi intelligence service in the last years of Hussein’s regime, Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti.

“The White House had concocted a fake letter from Habbush to Saddam, backdated to July 1, 2001,” Suskind writes. “It said that 9/11 ringleader Mohammad Atta had actually trained for his mission in Iraq – thus showing, finally, that there was an operational link between Saddam and al Qaeda, something the Vice President’s Office had been pressing CIA to prove since 9/11 as a justification to invade Iraq. There is no link.”
As we discussed above, this was apparently all part of an organized effort to provide false intelligence linking Saddam Hussein with al-Qaeda and Osama ben Laden. The centerpiece of the scam was the infamous "leak" of a "top secret" memo written by Douglas Feith, the neoconservative head of the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, a classical piece of agitprop now known as "The Feith Memo."

Miraculously, as they say, the Feith Memo fell into the hands of none other than the Weekly Standard, the bastion of neoconservative journals founded by William Kristol, and was reported in an article entitled "Case Closed," by the Standard's Stephen F. Hayes.

The 16-page memo detailed years of so-called attempts to coordinate terrorist activities between Iraq and al-Qaeda, intelligence that now has been proved false and made up from whole cloth.

Richard Cheney then began to give personal interviews promoting the most recent "evidence" of Iraq and al Qaeda complicity in planning terrorist operations, "evidence" that was completely contrived as ordered up by him personally. Here is one example:
In today's [1/27/04] Washington Post, Dana Milbank reported that "Vice President Cheney . . . in an interview this month with the Rocky Mountain News, recommended as the 'best source of information' an article in The Weekly Standard magazine detailing a relationship between Hussein and al Qaeda based on leaked classified information." [cf. Weekly Standard, "Case Closed", by Stephen F. Hayes; Editor's Note of 01/27/04.]
Only a few weeks later, the hoopla that followed the Feith Memo was capped by the forged letter from the Iraqi chief of intelligence to Saddam Hussein, the missive now under examination by Ron Suskind. Despite confrontation from the media's left-bank, Cheney continued for months in the controlled mainstream media to arrogantly promote the very lies that had been discredited by the independent press. It was all a can of pork and beans.



*

FBI Handling of Anthrax Case Becoming Suspect

Bohemian Grove 2008


BOHEMIAN GROVE


Social Cohesion & the Bohemian Grove The Power Elite at Summer Camp
by G. William Domhoff, U.C. Santa Cruz April 2005

The Bohemian Grove is a 2,700-acre virgin redwood grove in Northern California, 75 miles north of San Francisco (map), where the rich, the powerful, and their entourage visit with each other during the last two weeks of July while camping out in cabins and tents.

It's an Elks Club for the rich; a fraternity party in the woods; a boy scout camp for old guys, complete with an initiation ceremony and a totem animal, the owl. It's owned by the Bohemian Club, which was founded in San Francisco in 1872. The Bohemians started going on their little retreat shortly after the club was founded; it became big-time by the 1880s, and it continues today.

However, it is not a place of power. It's a place where the powerful relax, enjoy each other's company, and get to know some of the artists, entertainers, and professors who are included to give the occasion a thin veneer of cultural and intellectual pretension. Despite the suspicions of many on the Right, and a few on the Left, it is not a secret meeting place to plot, plan, or conspire. The most important decisions typically happen just where we might expect: in the boardrooms of corporations and foundations, at the White House, and in the backrooms of Congress. Yes, as I show later, some wanna-be and has-been Republican politicians sometimes visit the Bohemian Grove, including future and former presidents of the United States, but they are there to demonstrate what wonderful human beings they are, to cultivate potential financial backers, or to brag about their past exploits.

Readers who suspect that every gathering of the rich and the powerful has some deeper purpose may doubt this claim, at least until they see my evidence. For those who still might question my conclusions after reading this article, I recommend reading an excellent first-hand account of the Bohemian Grove by a journalist from Spy magazine who snuck into the encampment in 1989; the author had every incentive to tell it exactly as he saw it.

In fact, every person who has written seriously on the Bohemian Grove agrees: even though they provide evidence that there is a socially cohesive upper class in the United States, the activities at the Grove are harmless. The Grove encampment is a bunch of guys kidding around, drinking with their buddies, and trying to relive their youth, and often acting very silly. These activities do contribute to social cohesion as an unintended consequence -- which is why I decided to study the Bohemians in the first place -- but the Grove is merely a playground for the powerful and their entertainers that gives us a window into a lifestyle that is far removed from that of average Americans.

Continues Here

*

Friday, August 1, 2008

McCain's 1967 USS Forrestal Incident

The late, but still unsinkable, Molly Ivins once counseled: "Never get into a mud wrestling contest with a pig; you get all muddy and the pig loves it." Still I can't help but wonder why McCain is attacking the experience of Barack Obama.

Even more shocking, given the military history he has taken pains to bury, is his assertion that Obama does not have McCain's military experience, repeatedly claiming that McCain is by far the most experienced and therefore the most trustworthy candidate to fill the role of Commander-In-Chief.

Therefore, since McCain has announced today that he will stick by his recent ads featuring a classic presentation of the fallacy, argumentum ad hominem (by association), some Dems think it only fair to examine his claim that he has the military experience that we need in these trying times of "war."

August 1-3, 2008 -- With McCain's campaign firing off anti-Obama videos, there is one video John McCain doesn't want anyone to see
:

Wayne Madsen Report:

The John McCain campaign is releasing a series of anti-Barack Obama videos. However, there is one video that Johnny "Wet Start" McCain, as he was known after the disastrous USS Forrestal fire in 1967, does not want America to see.

From WMR, November 20, 2007: WMR has learned additional details regarding the deadly fire aboard the Navy aircraft carrier, the USS Forrestal, on July 19, 1967 in the Gulf of Tonkin. The additional details point to then-Lieut. Commander John McCain playing more of a role in triggering the fire and explosions than previously reported.

WMR also cited the potential that McCain's Navy records were used against him by the neocons in control of the Pentagon, "The neo-cons, who have had five years to examine every file within the Department of Defense, have likely accessed documents that could prove embarrassing to McCain, who was on board the USS Forrestal on July 29, 1967, and whose A-4 Skyhawk was struck by an air-to-ground Zuni missile that had misfired from an F-4 Phantom."

In McCain's case, the "wet-start" apparently "cooked off" and launched the Zuni rocket from the rear F-4 that touched off the explosions and massive fire. The F-4 pilot was reportedly killed in the conflagration.

"Wet starting" was apparently a common practice among young "hot-dog" pilots. McCain was quickly transferred to the USS Oriskany (the only Forrestal crewman to be immediately transferred). After the disaster, McCain was shot down over North Vietnam on October 26, 1967.

McCain was confronted by Forrestal fire survivors with his role in starting the Forrestal fire during his 2000 presidential campaign, particularly in South Carolina. McCain was visibly shaken by the encounter with the survivors, according to some who contacted WMR. WMR is pleased to present the video that causes McCain to turn whiter than his usual wan complexion. Watch the following video and McCain's reaction to any mention of the Forrestal is understandable.

Note: Widest distribution encouraged.*




*[Entire article above posted with permission by Wayne Madsen]