Enemy Combatant
Thursday, January 30, 2003
Gag Me With A Noon(an):
† †Peggy Noonan: ìThis, truly, is a good man Ö There is a profound authenticity to him, and a fearlessness too Ö More and more this presidency is feeling like a gift.î
ìFor a moment I though of earnest Clark Kent moving, at the moment of maximum danger, to shed his suit, tear open his shirt and reveal the big ëSí on his chest.î
"Yea, verily, he was like unto a God . . . and strode, colossus-like, across the American plain . . . " Has she no shame?
I think Noonan is missing her calling. She should be writing bodice-rippers.
Tuesday, January 28, 2003
Excellent interview with Daniel Ellsberg, courtesy of Interesting Times:
"So what exactly are the lies you say the press should be examining more deeply?"
"The first lie is: Saddam represents the No. 1 danger to U.S. security in the world. To allow the president and Rumsfeld to make that statement over and over is akin to them saying without challenge from the press that they accept the flat-earth theory. To say Saddam is the No. 1 danger is being made without real challenge from the press, with few exceptions. More dangerous than al-Qaida? North Korea? Russian nukes loose in the world? An India-Pakistan nuclear war?
"I'm impressed by the testimony of Gen. Anthony Zinni, Bush's mediator in the Middle East, who said he'd place Saddam sixth or seventh on any list of dangers we face. The question is, are we helping our cause against threats one through five by going after number six or seven?
"Two: That we are reducing the threat of the use of weapons of mass destruction by attacking Iraq. This is one of the most dangerous assertions since all evidence is that we are increasing the threat of such terrorism by the attack, as CIA Director [George] Tenet said in his letter to Congress. Tenet said the danger is very low that Saddam will use weapons if not attacked and fairly high if he is attacked.
"Three: The reason we are singling Saddam out is that he cannot be contained or deterred, unlike other leaders in the world, and again this is largely unchallenged by the mainstream press. No one brings out the following point: This is a man who had weapons of mass destruction, including nerve gas, and missiles capable of hitting Israel and ready to go in the 1991 war -- which he does not now have -- and he kept his finger off the button. So how unreliable is he if not on the brink of being deposed or killed?"
Anyone in the press out there with spine enough to ask the Bush regime these questions?
Sunday, January 26, 2003
More on the "astroturfed" letter from the Bushborg praising Great Leader ("Bush has demonstrated genuine leadership on the economy") -- and finally from the New York Times.
Thursday, January 23, 2003
From the Sydney Morning Herald:
Paula Abood writes: 'Remember when you read vague stuff about the US government 'editing' bits from Iraq's declaration? If you read the quality press you'll have wondered just who these corporations were who'd supplied Saddam but whose names were removed. Here they are, courtesy of Berlin daily newspaper Die Tageszeitung, No. 6934, 19 Dec 2002, page 3, "Exclusive: The Secret List of Arms Suppliers - Saddam's Business partners" (taz, in German):
Key
A = nuclear weapon program
B = biological weapon program
C = chemical weapon program
R = rocket program
K = conventional weapons, military logistics, supplies at the Iraqi Ministry of Defence, and building of military plants.
USA
1. Honeywell (R, K), Spectra Physics (K), Semetex (R), TI Coating (A, K), Unisys (A, K), Sperry Corp (R, K), Tektronix (R, A), Rockwell (K), Leybold Vacuum Systems (A), Finnigan-MAT-US (A), Hewlett-Packard (A, R, K), Dupont (A), Eastman Kodak (R), American Type Culture Collection (B), Alcolac International (C), Consarc (A), Carl Zeiss - U.S (K), Cerberus (LTD) (A), Electronic Associates (R), International Computer Systems (A, R, K), Bechtel (K), EZ Logic Data Systems, Inc. (R), Canberra Industries Inc. (A), Axel Electronics Inc. (A).
In addition to these 24 home-based companies are 50 subsidiaries of foreign enterprises which conducted their arms business with Iraq from within the US.
Also designated as suppliers for Iraq's arms programs (A, B, C & R) are the US Ministries of Defense, Energy, Trade and Agriculture as well as the Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories.
FRANCE
Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique (A), Sciaky (A), Thomson CSF (A, K), Aerospatiale and Matra Espace (R), Cerbag (A), Protec SA (C), Thales Group (A), Societe General pour les Techniques Nouvelles (A)
GREAT BRITAIN
Euromac Ltd-Uk (A), C. Plath-Nuclear (A), Endshire Export Marketing (A), International Computer Systems (A, R, K), MEED International (A, C), Walter Somers Ltd. (R), International Computer Limited (A, K), Matrix Churchill Corp. (A), Ali Ashour Daghir (A), International Military Services (R) (part of the UK Ministry of Defence), Sheffield Forgemasters (R), Technology Development Group (R), International Signal and Control (R), Terex Corporation (R), Inwako (A), TMG Engineering (K), XYY Options, Inc (A)
JAPAN
Fanuc (A), Hammamatsu Photonics KK (A), NEC (A), Osaka (A), Waida (A)
NETHERLANDS
Melchemie B.V. (C), KBS Holland B.V. (C), Delft Instruments N.V. (K)
BELGIUM
Boehler Edelstahl (A), NU Kraft Mercantile Corporation (C), OIP Instrubel (K), Phillips Petroleum (C), Poudries Reunies Belge SA (R), Sebatra (A), Space Research Corp. (R)
SPAIN
Donabat (R), Treblam (C), Zayer (A)
SWEDEN
ABB (A), Saab-Scania (R)
There you have it, folks: The WMD suppliers to (at least) one-third of the A of E -- the USA (including the government!), France, Great Britain, Japan, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Sweden. I'm just surprised Germany didn't make the list.
Uh, remember that "astroturfed" letter praising Bush's "genuine leadership" on the economy? The media are finally beginning to sit up and take notice of it, too.
Maybe when we spot this letter in our local papers, we each need to send in a terse, two-phrase letter in response: "The Bushborg has spoken! Resistance is futile!"
The best thing that could happen to Democrats in 2004 would be for Bush to write his own State of the Union message in 2003.
Can't you just hear it?
"Evenin', folks. I wanna talk to ya about our upcomin' war with Iraq, and Saddam Hussein, an' tell y'all why we're goin' in there, despite the bellyachin' of all 'em pot-smokin' hippies that camped out here las' Satiddy . . .
"Anyhoo, 'member 9-11? We was attacked? Boy, I sure do.
[stares off vacantly for an uncomfortably long time]
"Well, 'course, we had ta go inta Afghanistan, because them Talibaners wouldn't go in and grab and turn over Osama bin Laden to us, just a SIMPLE request, ya think ANYone could get THAT done, . . .
". . . uh, heh, I guess we weren't supposed ta bring HIM up, eh?"
Friday, January 17, 2003
While I think of it -- I've got to put in some plugs here for Ted Rall's and Tom Tomorrow's cartoons, and for Get Your War On! ("If a tree falls in a forest and it's the Fourth Amendment, does it make a sound?") as well.
Oh, and -- how could I forget? -- blah3.com! (And its spinoff -- Take Back the Media!)
A blogger named the Pontificator had these helpful quotes in his Wednesday story on the execrable Hamdi decision:
Quotes are in order.
First from Justice Brennan:
"The concept of military necessity is seductively broad, and has a dangerous plasticity. Because they invariably have the visage of overriding importance, there is always a temptation to invoke security "necessities" to justify an encroachment upon civil liberties. For that reason, the military-security argument must be approached with a healthy skepticism."
Second, from John Adams:
"Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people."
Third, from Benjamin Franklin:
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
And finally, chilling words from J. Edgar Hoover:
"Justice is incedental to law and order."
I guess the moral of this story, boys and girls, is that if you're contemplating armed insurrection against this government (I'm speaking entirely hypothetically here, Mr. Ashcroft!), be sure never to leave the country at any stage in this process.
Then, if and when you're caught, you should be able to rely upon your express Constitutional right to be tried in U.S. courts for treason!
Thursday, January 16, 2003
Can YOU find the astroturfbuilder in YOUR local paper?
from the Santa Rosa Press Democrat, Jan. 14th:
Genuine leadership
EDITOR: When it comes to the economy, President Bush is demonstrating genuine leadership. The economic growth package he recently proposed takes us in the right direction by accelerating the successful tax cuts of 2001, providing marriage penalty relief and providing incentives for individuals and small businesses to save and invest.
Contrary to the class warfare rhetoric attacking the president's plan, the proposal helps everyone who pays taxes, especially the middle class. This year alone, 92 million taxpayers will receive an immediate tax cut averaging $1,083, and 46 million married couples will get back an average of $1,714. That's not pocket change for a family struggling through uncertain economic times. Combined with the initiatives to help the unemployed, this plan gets people back to work and helps every sector of our economy.
TREVOR CARLSON
Santa Rosa
Now, here's the deal . . . besides wondering whether ol' Trevor here wasn't really Tucker's twin brother (or more likely -- Tucker himself, in fake nose and glasses), I also wondered if this letter wasn't "spammed" by the RNC, nationwide . . .
And guess what? It was!
Atrios of Eschaton points out that the same letter praising W's self-stimulus package and sporting the phrase "demonstrating genuine leadership" (a poll-friendly subliminable message) is simultaneously appearing under different names in newspapers nationwide. The practice of such unreality is called astroturfing.
You can google the phrase for a current look at which lazy-ass editors have been hoodwinked by propagandist drones most recently.
skimble
{ 10:10 AM }
As a consequence, I emailed the following letter to my local paper (I've added hotlinks, for your convenience):
Dear Editor:
I read with great interest the letter from Trevor Carlson in your January 14th issue, waxing rhapsodic about how George W. Bush is "demonstrating genuine leadership" with his new (self)-stimulus proposal for even more tax cuts. However, I have to say I found the argument unpersuasive.
In fact, it was no more persuasive than I have found it -- presented in the identical words, published under various signatures over the past few weeks -- in letters to the editors of, respectively, the Merced Sun-Star, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, the Lynchburg, VA Ledger, the Klamath Falls, OR Herald and News, the International Herald Tribune, the Tucson Citizen, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution -- even the Houghton, MI Daily Mining Gazette.
This scam is called "astroturfing" -- because it's "artificial grassroots," designed to make it seem that there's a groundswell of opinion out there supporting these ideas. There isn't. I'm surprised, though, that you would allow your Letters to the Editor section to be "spammed" like this -- isn't it Press Democrat policy to publish only ORIGINAL letters?
Sincerely,
Michael P. Scott
