Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Tax breaks sidetrack minimum wage bill
Senate fails to get the 60 votes needed to end debate
The Associated Press
Updated: 12:58 p.m. ET Jan 24, 2007
WRITE YOUR SENATOR And HELP GET THIS PASSED!!!
WASHINGTON - Democrats' promise of a quick increase in the minimum wage ran aground Wednesday in the Senate, where lawmakers are insisting it include new tax breaks for restaurants and other businesses that rely on low-pay workers.
On a 54-43 vote, Democrats lost an effort to advance a House-passed bill that would lift the pay floor from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour without any accompanying tax cut. Opponents of the tax cut needed 60 votes to prevail.
The vote sent a message to House Democrats and liberals in the Senate that only a hybrid tax and minimum wage package could succeed in the Senate. But any tax breaks in the bill would put the Senate on a collision course with the House, which is required by the Constitution to initiate tax measures.
In a separate vote, the Senate also effectively killed a modified line-item veto bill. The Republican-inspired measure would have permitted a president to pluck individual items out of spending bills and submit them to Congress for a vote.
Lack of GOP support highlighted
Raising the minimum wage is one of the new Democratic Congress' top priorities. The wage floor has been unchanged for 10 years. The bill would increase it to $7.25 in three steps over 26 months.
"Why can't we do just one thing for minimum wage workers, no strings attached, no giveaways for the powerful?" asked Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., a leading sponsor of the bill.
The House passed the increase two weeks ago. Since then Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Rep. Charles Rangel, the chairman of the tax writing Ways and Means Committee, have prodded the Senate to keep tax proposals out of the bill.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., scheduled Wednesday's vote to demonstrate the Democrats' lack of Republican support for a straight minimum wage bill without tax cuts. Every Democrat present voted to end debate and five moderate Republicans joined them.
"There seems to be agreement to raise the minimum wage," said Republican Sen. Michael Enzi of Wyoming. "The difficulty has been how do we take care of some of the impact to small businesses that will result from this."
Full vote expected by week's end
Reid is backing an $8.3 billion tax package that would extend for five years a tax credit for employers who hire low-income or disadvantaged workers. It also extends until 2010 tax rules that permit businesses to combine as much as $112,000 in expenses into one annual tax deduction.
The cost of the proposal would be paid with revenue realized from a proposed cap of $1 million on executive compensation that can be tax deferred. The tax package also would end deductions for court settlements or punitive damages paid by companies that have been sued.
A vote on the full tax and wages package is not expected until early next week.
The differences between the House and Senate bills will require Pelosi and Reid to work out an agreement on how to move a similar tax package through the House.
Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chairman of the Senate's tax writing Finance Committee and co-author of the tax proposals, said the Senate bill will be held in the Senate until the leaders resolve the impasse.
"It's just a couple or three steps away from the goal line," Baucus said.
© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16789599/
The Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Website is being built:
http://www.ronpaulexplore.com/
Shermann
Glad to hear I am not alone. I broke even on GBDX, and have NO CLUE what it is going to do.
Shifted my money to UWNK - Got back in. Looks like another run coming.
Also put more into PBLS and THPW.
Those Sub Pennies have been getting me lately!!!
Shermann
I am not good with big numbers!!!!
The Homeless do not vote.
I have met many homeless Vietnam Vets. It just makes me sick.
Shermann
This is once for Edwards - I will be watching to see if he repeats these words.
There is absolutely no reason for Military Action against Iran.
Shermann
St. Petersburg Police cutting up homeless tents
... but another few billion dollars are on their way to Israel.
...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. -- Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution.
Israel faces nuclear Holocaust warns Gingrich
"And a 'Death Star'. Iran has a Death Star! Really!"
(Ahem)
If Israel, the only actual nuclear power in the Middle East, is really that nervous about the nuclear threat which might someday maybe kinda sorta exist from other nations in the region, perhaps the best strategy is to learn to get along peacefully with other nations, rather than the current belligerent course of having American soldiers invade anyone Israel does not like.
Maybe it is time for Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and allow inspectors into the weapons lab hidden under Dimona.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3356103,00.html
Edwards Pledges
Allegiance
Tuesday, January 23rd, 2007 in News by Matt Barganier|
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards is out on the stump:
“Iran is serious about its threats,” former US Senator John Edwards has told an audience in Israel.
“The challenges in your own backyard – represent an unprecedented threat to the world and Israel,” the candidate for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination told the Herzliya Conference, referring mainly to the Iranian threat.
I don’t know about New Hampshire, but I’d say Edwards is off to a strong start in Tel Aviv.
In his speech, Edwards criticised the United States’ previous indifference to the Iranian issue, saying they have not done enough to deal with the threat.
Hinting to possible military action, Edwards stressed that “in order to ensure Iran never gets nuclear weapons, all options must remain on table.”
On the recent UN Security Council’s resolution against Iran, Edwards said more serious political and economic steps should be taken. “Iran must know that the world won’t back down,” he said.
Take that, Dubya.
After opening his speech with great praise for Former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Edward’s continued to express great appreciation for the Israeli people and the special bond between the two countries, saying it was “a bond that will never be broken.”
Sure, Ariel Sharon is the greatest – he’ll always have a place in our hearts – but Edwards needs to get hip, reach out for that youth vote. There’s a new badass to kiss in the Knesset.
In a further display of support for Israel, Edwards went so far as to suggest that Israel should even be made a member of NATO, saying it was only natural that the organization would seen [sic] to include Israel next.
Sure. And when are we going to do something about Israel’s exclusion from the Arab League? The Organization of American States? The United Federation of Planets? When, dammit, when is an American president finally going to get to work on these vital matters?
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/01/23/edwards-pledges-allegiance/
The Empire Turns Its
Guns on the Citizenry
by Paul Craig Roberts
In recent years American police forces have called out SWAT teams 40,000 or more times annually. Last year did you read in your newspaper or hear on TV news of 110 hostage or terrorist events each day? No. What then were the SWAT teams doing? They were serving routine warrants to people who posed no danger to the police or to the public.
Occasionally Washington think tanks produce reports that are not special pleading for donors. One such report is Radley Balko's "Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America" (Cato Institute, 2006).
This 100-page report is extremely important and should have been published as a book. SWAT teams ("special weapons and tactics") were once rare and used only for very dangerous situations, often involving hostages held by armed criminals. Today SWAT teams are deployed for routine police duties. In the U.S. today, 75-80 percent of SWAT deployments are for warrant service.
In a high percentage of the cases, the SWAT teams forcefully enter the wrong address, resulting in death, injury, and trauma to perfectly innocent people. Occasionally, highly keyed-up police kill one another in the confusion caused by their stun grenades.
Mr. Balko reports that the use of paramilitary police units began in Los Angeles in the 1960s. The militarization of local police forces got a big boost from Attorney General Ed Meese's "war on drugs" during the Reagan administration. A National Security Decision Directive was issued that declared drugs to be a threat to U.S. national security. In 1988 Congress ordered the National Guard into the domestic drug war. In 1994 the Department of Defense issued a memorandum authorizing the transfer of military equipment and technology to state and local police, and Congress created a program "to facilitate handing military gear over to civilian police agencies."
Today 17,000 local police forces are equipped with such military equipment as Blackhawk helicopters, machine guns, grenade launchers, battering rams, explosives, chemical sprays, body armor, night vision, rappelling gear, and armored vehicles. Some have tanks. In 1999, the New York Times reported that a retired police chief in New Haven, Conn., told the newspaper, "I was offered tanks, bazookas, anything I wanted." Balko reports that in 1997, for example, police departments received 1.2 million pieces of military equipment.
With local police forces now armed beyond the standard of U.S. heavy infantry, police forces have been retrained "to vaporize, not Mirandize," to use a phrase from Reagan administration Defense official Lawrence Korb. This leaves the public at the mercy of brutal actions based on bad police information from paid informers.
SWAT team deployments received a huge boost from the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant program, which gave states federal money for drug enforcement. Balko explains that "the states then disbursed the money to local police departments on the basis of each department's number of drug arrests."
With financial incentives to maximize drug arrests and with idle SWAT teams due to a paucity of hostage or other dangerous situations, local police chiefs threw their SWAT teams into drug enforcement. In practice, this has meant using SWAT teams to serve warrants on drug users.
SWAT teams serve warrants by breaking into homes and apartments at night while people are sleeping, often using stun grenades and other devices to disorient the occupants. As much of the police's drug information comes from professional informers known as "snitches" who tip off police for cash rewards, dropped charges, and reduced sentences, names and addresses are often pulled out of a hat. Balko provides details for 135 tragic cases of mistaken addresses.
SWAT teams are not held accountable for their tragic mistakes and gratuitous brutality. Police killings got so bad in Albuquerque, N.M., for example, that the city hired criminologist Sam Walker to conduct an investigation of police tactics. Killings by police were "off the charts," Walker found, because the SWAT team "had an organizational culture that led them to escalate situations upward rather then de-escalating."
The mindset of militarized SWAT teams is geared to "taking out" or killing the suspect – thus, the many deaths from SWAT team utilization. Many innocent people are killed in nighttime SWAT team entries, because they don't realize that it is the police who have broken into their homes. They believe they are confronted by dangerous criminals, and when they try to defend themselves they are shot down by the police.
As Lawrence Stratton and I have reported, one of many corrupting influences on the criminal justice (sic) system is the practice of paying "snitches" to generate suspects. In 1995 the Boston Globe profiled people who lived entirely off the fees that they were paid as police informants. Snitches create suspects by selling a small amount of marijuana to a person whom they then report to the police as being in possession of drugs. Balko reports that "an overwhelming number of mistaken raids take place because police relied on information from confidential informants." In Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina, 87 percent of drug raids originated in tips from snitches.
Many police informers are themselves drug dealers who avoid arrest and knock off competitors by serving as police snitches.
Surveying the deplorable situation, the National Law Journal concluded: "Criminals have been turned into instruments of law enforcement, while law enforcement officers have become criminal co-conspirators."
Balko believes the problem could be reduced if judges scrutinized unreliable information before issuing warrants. If judges would actually do their jobs, there would be fewer innocent victims of SWAT brutality. However, as long as the war on drugs persists and as long as it produces financial rewards to police departments, local police forces, saturated with military weapons and war imagery, will continue to terrorize American citizens.
Find this article at:
http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=10382
JAKARTA, Indonesia (CNN) -- Allegations that Sen. Barack Obama was educated in a radical Muslim school known as a "madrassa" are not accurate, according to CNN reporting.
Insight Magazine, which is owned by the same company as The Washington Times, reported on its Web site last week that associates of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-New York, had unearthed information the Illinois Democrat and likely presidential candidate attended a Muslim religious school known for teaching the most fundamentalist form of Islam.
Obama lived in Indonesia as a child, from 1967 to 1971, with his mother and stepfather and has acknowledged attending a Muslim school, but an aide said it was not a madrassa. (Watch video of Obama's school )
Insight attributed the information in its article to an unnamed source, who said it was discovered by "researchers connected to Senator Clinton." A spokesman for Clinton, who is also weighing a White House bid, denied that the campaign was the source of the Obama claim.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/
I have read many books on this topic. That does not answer my question.
Go read is not an answer. I did not know specifically what you meant.
Shermann
Got any good Michael Jackson stories. Or anything else of similar importance???
Shermann
Well lets see - That was a hatchet job by Fox News - Exactly what are we paying attention for.
Shermann
Sarcasm - Nice Touch - I think my post is more likely correct than not - Assigning Blame has nothing to do with it. That is by all accounts from White House staffers what happened. I will never know for sure.
Anyways, we have to get out of this Blame mentality. We need to lead by example. It is by far the most effective approach. Martin Luther King Jr. did it, and look at what that accomplished. Jesus did it, and look how many religions are based on it. Mahatma Ghandi did it, and reshaped the future of India. Mother Theresa did it, and look at all of the people that were helped as a result.
Fix the Problem, not the blame.
We have to focus on the problems, and realistic means to fix them - which will probably be incrementally. This country has always been slow to change.
Shermann
All those Neocons I named were always called the crazies by Most republican Insiders.
Except for Colin Powell, who called them the F---ing crazies.
My guess is that the "Dark Overlord" (Cheney) helped the rookie pick all those other neocons.
Shermann
Bush is not a neocon. Not part of PNAC. Not part of the group that defined the New World Order.
He is a Republican.
He is a Born Again Christian.
He is President.
He is a Psychopathic Sock Puppet.
He is many more things.
However, he is not a neocon.
Shermann
Unfortunately, you are correct.
Harry Reid says there are two words explaining why not to impeach Bush
DICK CHENEY.
Shermann
DUH - Hence the Name Congressional BLACK Caucus.
Dont see any Muslims in the Christian Coalition either.
Shermann
So let me guess - Every Illegal is now a rapist.
We have to enforce our border laws. That means providing the manpower to do so.
Shermann
I tend to agree with McCain on this one.
Cheney and Rumsfeld are the main ones to blame, along with neocons like Wolfowitz, Feith, Wurmser, Perle, Ledeen, ....
The Buck does stop with Bush, so to speak, but he is not a neocon. The presidency is a humbling experience.
I am waiting for the State of the Union tonight. I think that Bush can actually work with the dems.
Shermann
I call Cheney the "Dark Overlord".
And I am going easy on him.
He could have starred in the Movie Resident Evil!!!
Shermann
I fully believe that John Murtha knows what he is talking about.
However, I feel that if we allow the rest of the world to help, we can overcome the problems in Iraq. Especially Iran, Jordan, Syria, Kuwait, Turkey, ...(the neighboring countries).
Right now, we want all the contracts for US companies, and the oil rights for US Oil companies. We do not want to share!!!
That is the big problem.
Shermann
Howard Dean had the best approach to being Pro-Life I have seen.
In his first year in Vermont as Governor, Corrections wanted a 14% increase in funding, and Dean told them no-one gets a 14% increase. He is a Fiscal Conservative and will not spend money he does not have.
Anyways, Corrections did get their 14%, but Howard did a study on people in prison. What he found is that 2/3 are either Sexually or Physically abused when they are young.
So, he implemented the Success by Six program. Either the govt or Volunteer agencies periodically check on newborns up to at least 6 years of age. They are making sure the kids are OK - Not abused, fed, etc....
After 11 years of the program, the Sexual abuse rate was cut 73%, Physical abuse was cut 44%, and Teenage Pregnancies were cut in half.
They were able to shut a prison down, and the homicide rate has been around 5 a year for the whole state.
The money saved has gone to insuring all Vermonters who want it age 55 and older, and 18 and youger.
Now that is Pro-Life!!!!
Shermann
Based on everything I have read....
I have come to the conclusion that the GOP does not want to overturn Roe v. Wade. They want abortion to continue as an issue.
This is not to be confused with Religious factions wanting to overturn abortion.
Shermann
Why cant we get the news on the news???????????
Shermann
The Bankruptcy law is simple - It only applies to the upper half of wage earners in each state. The lower half still file a chapter 7 bankruptcy.
For the upper half, there is a means test. For those who have towering medical bills, the means test fails.
I have read the bill twice.
Shermann
President Bush promised to be a Uniter.
What we did not know was that he would unite the whole world against us.
Shermann
Scant evidence found of Iran-Iraq arms link
U.S. warnings of advanced weaponry crossing the border are overstated, critics say.
By Alexandra Zavis and Greg Miller
Times Staff Writers
January 23, 2007
BAQUBAH, IRAQ — If there is anywhere Iran could easily stir up trouble in Iraq, it would be in Diyala, a rugged province along the border between the two nations.
The combination of Sunni Arab militants believed to be affiliated with Al Qaeda and Shiite Muslim militiamen with ties to Iran has fueled waves of sectarian and political violence here. The province is bisected by long-traveled routes leading from Iran to Baghdad and Shiite holy cities farther south in Iraq.
But even here, evidence of Iranian involvement in Iraq's troubles is limited. U.S. troops have found mortars and antitank mines with Iranian markings dated 2006, said U.S. Army Col. David W. Sutherland, who oversees the province. But there has been little sign of more advanced weaponry crossing the border, and no Iranian agents have been found.
In his speech this month outlining the new U.S. strategy in Iraq, President Bush promised to "seek out and destroy" Iranian networks that he said were providing "advanced weaponry and training to our enemies." He is expected to strike a similar note in tonight's State of the Union speech.
For all the aggressive rhetoric, however, the Bush administration has provided scant evidence to support these claims. Nor have reporters traveling with U.S. troops seen extensive signs of Iranian involvement. During a recent sweep through a stronghold of Sunni insurgents here, a single Iranian machine gun turned up among dozens of arms caches U.S. troops uncovered. British officials have similarly accused Iran of meddling in Iraqi affairs, but say they have not found Iranian-made weapons in areas they patrol.
The lack of publicly disclosed evidence has led to questions about whether the administration is overstating its case. Some suggest Bush and his aides are pointing to Iran to deflect blame for U.S. setbacks in Iraq. Others suggest they are laying the foundation for a military strike against Iran.
Before invading Iraq, the administration warned repeatedly that Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Those statements proved wrong. The administration's charges about Iran sound uncomfortably familiar to some. "To be quite honest, I'm a little concerned that it's Iraq again," Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said last week, referring to the administration's comments on Iran.
*
Lowered credibility
The accusations of Iranian meddling "illustrate what may be one of our greatest problems," said Anthony Cordesman, a former Defense Department official and military expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
"We are still making arguments from authority without detail and explanation. We're making them in an America and in a world where we really don't have anything like the credibility we've had in the past."
Few doubt that Iran is seeking to extend its influence in Iraq. But the groups in Iraq that have received the most Iranian support are not those that have led attacks against U.S. forces. Instead, they are nominal U.S. allies.
The Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, one of the two largest parties in parliament, is believed to be the biggest beneficiary of Iranian help. The Shiite group was based in Iran during Hussein's reign, and Iran's Revolutionary Guard trained and equipped its Badr Brigade militia.
But the Supreme Council also has strong U.S. connections. Bush played host to the head of the party, Abdelaziz Hakim, at the White House in December, and administration officials have frequently cited Adel Abdul Mehdi, another party leader, as a person they would like to see as Iraq's prime minister.
The Islamic Dawa Party of Iraq's current prime minister, Nouri Maliki, also has strong ties to Iran.
Some U.S. officials have also suggested that Iran, a Shiite theocracy, has provided aid to the Sunni insurgents, who have led most of the attacks against U.S. forces. Private analysts and other U.S. officials doubt that. Evidence is stronger that the Iranians are supporting a Shiite group that has attacked U.S. forces, the Al Mahdi militia, which is loyal to radical cleric Muqtada Sadr.
Top U.S. intelligence officials have been making increasingly confident assertions about Iran.
"I've come to a much darker interpretation of Iranian actions in the past 12 to 18 months," CIA Director Michael V. Hayden said in recent congressional testimony. Previously, Tehran's priority was to maneuver for a stable Iraq dominated by its Shiite majority, but that attitude has changed, he said.
"There is a clear line of evidence that points out the Iranians want to punish the United States, hurt the United States in Iraq, tie down the United States in Iraq," he said.
One high-ranking intelligence official in Washington acknowledged a lack of "fidelity" in the intelligence on Iran's activities, saying reports are sometimes unclear because it is difficult to track weapons and personnel that might be flowing across the long and porous border.
But U.S. forces have picked up specially shaped charges used to make roadside bombs capable of penetrating advanced armor, he said, with markings that could be traced to Iran and dates that were recent. The markings have been found on the devices themselves or the crates in which they were smuggled into the country, he said.
"Two years ago we were debating whether this was really happening," the official said. "Now the debate is over."
*
Documents withheld
U.S. officials have declined to provide documentation of seized Iranian ordnance despite repeated requests. The U.S. military often releases photographs of other weapons finds.
British government officials, including Prime Minister Tony Blair, have also accused Iran of supplying advanced explosive devices to Iraq.
Blair said a year ago that the weapons bore the hallmarks of Iran or Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militia in Lebanon. But British officers stationed in Iraq at the time said they had seized no such weapons in the districts for which they had responsibility.
"We do have intelligence which suggests that weapons and ammunition are being smuggled in from Iran," Maj. David Gell, a spokesman for British forces in Basra, said last week. "We don't always manage to find any."
U.S. military officials in Diyala have had the same experience. No munitions or personnel have been seized at the border, officers said.
Sutherland, the U.S. colonel who oversees Diyala, believes that Tehran is prepared to work with any group, Shiite or Sunni, that can tie up U.S. forces. But State Department and intelligence officials have privately expressed doubts that Iranians are helping Sunnis.
Sunni insurgents in Diyala don't appear to need outside suppliers. They exploit massive weapons stashes containing materiel dating back to the Iran-Iraq war, when Hussein had a major military base in the area. U.S. military officials say they have found the type of shaped charges they attribute to Iran and Hezbollah in majority-Shiite parts of the province.
Outside military analysts have questioned how many of these sorts of weapons actually come from Iran. The technology used to make them is simple and widely known in the Middle East, they note. Iran is a likely source for some of the more sophisticated devices, but other countries could also be pitching in.
"A lot of rather sophisticated weapons have actually been released by Syria," said Peter Felstead, editor of the London-based Jane's Defense Weekly.
Others note that smugglers could be bringing weapons across the border from Iran without government approval.
*
'They are significant'
A second high-ranking U.S. intelligence official in Washington acknowledged that only a "small percentage" of explosions in Iraq could be linked to shaped charges coming from Iran.
"But in terms of American casualties, they are significant," he said, because they are much more lethal than standard roadside bombs.
A senior U.S. military intelligence official said coalition forces in Iraq had also found shaped charges "in the presence of Iranians captured in the country." He declined to elaborate but noted that U.S. operatives who raided an Iranian office in the Iraqi city of Irbil this month captured documents and computer drives he called a "treasure trove" on Iran's "networks, supply lines, sourcing and funding."
Five Iranians were taken into custody in the raid, prompting angry protests from the Iraqi government.
U.S. intelligence officials emphasized that Iran intentionally stops short of steps that would be seen as direct provocation and provide justification for a military response. For example, Iran has refrained from supplying Shiite militias with surface-to-air missiles and other weaponry that was part of Hezbollah's arsenal in its fight with Israel last summer, they said.
A high-ranking U.S. intelligence official called it a "careful calibration" that probably reflected disagreements within the Islamic regime. "I don't doubt that Iranian national security council meetings are very contentious," the official said.
And Another Dem Sells out to the War Crowd!!!
Edwards: Iran Threat Serious
By Ronen Bodoni - Tuesday 23rd of January 2007
"Iran is serious about its threats," former US Senator John Edwards has told an audience in Israel.
"The challenges in your own backyard – represent an unprecedented threat to the world and Israel," the candidate for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination told the Herzliya Conference, referring mainly to the Iranian threat.
In his speech, Edwards criticised the United States' previous indifference to the Iranian issue, saying they have not done enough to deal with the threat.
Hinting to possible military action, Edwards stressed that "in order to ensure Iran never gets nuclear weapons, all options must remain on table."
On the recent UN Security Council's resolution against Iran, Edwards said more serious political and economic steps should be taken. "Iran must know that the world won’t back down," he said.
Addressing the second Lebanon war , Edwards accused the Islamic Republic of having a significant role, saying Hizbullah was an instrument of Iran, and Iranian rockets were what made the organization's attack on Israel possible.
Edwards also discussed Syria's recent calls for peace with Israel, saying that "talk is cheap," and that Syria was not doing enough to prove it was serious.
The former senator also said that Syria has been a great source of destabilization in the area, from its support of Hizbullah and Hamas, to its relationship with Iran, and for this it should be held accountable.
After opening his speech with great praise for Former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Edward's continued to express great appreciation for the Israeli people and the special bond between the two countries, saying it was "a bond that will never be broken."
On the three Israel Defense Force soldiers who are being held captive by Hizbullah in Lebanon and Palestinian terrorists in Gaza, Edwards said, "It is well past time for their return home."
He continued to say that Israel has made many concessions in order to advance peace, including the Disengagement plan, adding that despite Israel's willingness to return to negotiations, little has been seen on the Palestinian side.
Edwards also spoke against the Palestinian Authority, saying the Hamas government was no partner, and that Israel should make efforts to strengthen Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas against Hamas.
He also said the Palestinian government must know that foreign aid should not be take for granted, and that the US and Europe must do everything possible to make sure the money does not go to terrorists.
Until Israel has a real partner, according to Edwards, Israel has the right, and indeed the obligation to defend itself, and should be strengthened militarily, politically, and economically.
In a further display of support for Israel, Edwards went so far as to suggest that Israel should even be made a member of NATO, saying it was only natural that the organization would seen to include Israel next.
U.S. drafts Holocaust denial resolution
JUSTIN BERGMAN
AP
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
UNITED NATIONS - The United States has drafted a U.N. resolution condemning the denial of the Holocaust, a spokesman said Monday, a month after Iran provoked widespread anger by holding a conference casting doubt on the Nazi genocide of Jews during World War II.
According to a copy of the draft made available to The Associated Press, the proposed resolution urges all member states to "reject any denial of the Holocaust," saying that "ignoring the historical fact of these terrible events increases the risk they will be repeated."
The draft resolution "condemns without any reservation any denial of the Holocaust," but doesn't single out any specific country for criticism. The U.S. said it planned to circulate the draft to General Assembly members on Monday.
The December conference in Tehran gathered 67 writers and researchers from 30 countries, most of whom argue that either the Holocaust did not happen or that it was vastly exaggerated. It was backed by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has called the Holocaust a "myth" and said Israel should be "wiped off the map."
Richard Grenell, spokesman for the U.S. mission to the U.N., said the draft resolution was being circulated ahead of the U.N.'s International Day of Commemoration in memory of victims of the Holocaust on Jan. 27.
He said its purpose was to "make perfectly clear that denying or minimizing the importance of the Holocaust is unacceptable to the U.N. membership." It was targeted toward "any country, organization or individuals" who would act in such a way, he said, without naming any country specifically.
Gilad Cohen, a counselor in the Israeli mission, referred indirectly to the Iran conference, saying "these incidents cannot be ignored any longer."
"This is a matter for the U.N. to say loud and clear, 'Enough is enough,'" he said. "Iran is wanting to have nuclear weapons and deny the Holocaust. This is something nobody should accept."
The spokesman for the Iranian mission to the U.N. did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment.
Iran has been locked in a long-running dispute with the U.S. and its allies over its nuclear program, which Washington maintains is geared toward developing atomic weapons. Iran says its program is purely for peaceful purposes.
The U.N. Security Council passed a resolution last month imposing limited trade sanctions on Tehran for its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, a process that produces the material for nuclear reactors or bombs. On Monday, Iran said it barred 38 members of a U.N. nuclear inspection team from entering the country in what appeared to be an act of retaliation.
Iran's President Did Not Say "Israel must be wiped off the map"
by Arash Norouzi
Global Research, January 20, 2007
Information Clearing House
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
Across the world, a dangerous rumor has spread that could have catastrophic implications. According to legend, Iran's President has threatened to destroy Israel, or, to quote the misquote, "Israel must be wiped off the map". Contrary to popular belief, this statement was never made, as this article will prove.
BACKGROUND:
On Tuesday, October 25th, 2005 at the Ministry of Interior conference hall in Tehran, newly elected Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivered a speech at a program, reportedly attended by thousands, titled "The World Without Zionism". Large posters surrounding him displayed this title prominently in English, obviously for the benefit of the international press. Below the poster's title was a slick graphic depicting an hour glass containing planet Earth at its top. Two small round orbs representing the United States and Israel are shown falling through the hour glass' narrow neck and crashing to the bottom.
Before we get to the infamous remark, it's important to note that the "quote" in question was itself a quote— they are the words of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, the father of the Islamic Revolution. Although he quoted Khomeini to affirm his own position on Zionism, the actual words belong to Khomeini and not Ahmadinejad. Thus, Ahmadinejad has essentially been credited (or blamed) for a quote that is not only unoriginal, but represents a viewpoint already in place well before he ever took office.
THE ACTUAL QUOTE:
So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in farsi: "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."
That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word "Regime", pronounced just like the English word with an extra "eh" sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase "rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods" (regime occupying Jerusalem).
So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want "wiped from the map"? The answer is: nothing. That's because the word "map" was never used. The Persian word for map, "nagsheh", is not contained anywhere in his original farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase "wipe out" ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran's President threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", despite never having uttered the words "map", "wipe out" or even "Israel".
THE PROOF:
The full quote translated directly to English:
"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".
Word by word translation:
Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).
Here is the full transcript of the speech in farsi, archived on Ahmadinejad's web site
www.president.ir/farsi/ahmadinejad/speeches/1384/aban-84/840804sahyonizm.htm
THE SPEECH AND CONTEXT:
While the false "wiped off the map" extract has been repeated infinitely without verification, Ahmadinejad's actual speech itself has been almost entirely ignored. Given the importance placed on the "map" comment, it would be sensible to present his words in their full context to get a fuller understanding of his position. In fact, by looking at the entire speech, there is a clear, logical trajectory leading up to his call for a "world without Zionism". One may disagree with his reasoning, but critical appraisals are infeasible without first knowing what that reasoning is.
In his speech, Ahmadinejad declares that Zionism is the West's apparatus of political oppression against Muslims. He says the "Zionist regime" was imposed on the Islamic world as a strategic bridgehead to ensure domination of the region and its assets. Palestine, he insists, is the frontline of the Islamic world's struggle with American hegemony, and its fate will have repercussions for the entire Middle East.
Ahmadinejad acknowledges that the removal of America's powerful grip on the region via the Zionists may seem unimaginable to some, but reminds the audience that, as Khomeini predicted, other seemingly invincible empires have disappeared and now only exist in history books. He then proceeds to list three such regimes that have collapsed, crumbled or vanished, all within the last 30 years:
(1) The Shah of Iran- the U.S. installed monarch
(2) The Soviet Union
(3) Iran's former arch-enemy, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein
In the first and third examples, Ahmadinejad prefaces their mention with Khomeini's own words foretelling that individual regime's demise. He concludes by referring to Khomeini's unfulfilled wish: "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time. This statement is very wise". This is the passage that has been isolated, twisted and distorted so famously. By measure of comparison, Ahmadinejad would seem to be calling for regime change, not war.
THE ORIGIN:
One may wonder: where did this false interpretation originate? Who is responsible for the translation that has sparked such worldwide controversy? The answer is surprising.
The inflammatory "wiped off the map" quote was first disseminated not by Iran's enemies, but by Iran itself. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference. International media including the BBC, Al Jazeera, Time magazine and countless others picked up the IRNA quote and made headlines out of it without verifying its accuracy, and rarely referring to the source. Iran's Foreign Minister soon attempted to clarify the statement, but the quote had a life of its own. Though the IRNA wording was inaccurate and misleading, the media assumed it was true, and besides, it made great copy.
Amid heated wrangling over Iran's nuclear program, and months of continuous, unfounded accusations against Iran in an attempt to rally support for preemptive strikes against the country, the imperialists had just been handed the perfect raison d'être to invade. To the war hawks, it was a gift from the skies.
It should be noted that in other references to the conference, the IRNA's translation changed. For instance, "map" was replaced with "earth". In some articles it was "The Qods occupier regime should be eliminated from the surface of earth", or the similar "The Qods occupying regime must be eliminated from the surface of earth". The inconsistency of the IRNA's translation should be evidence enough of the unreliability of the source, particularly when transcribing their news from Farsi into the English language.
THE REACTION:
The mistranslated "wiped off the map" quote attributed to Iran's President has been spread worldwide, repeated thousands of times in international media, and prompted the denouncements of numerous world leaders. Virtually every major and minor media outlet has published or broadcast this false statement to the masses. Big news agencies such as The Associated Press and Reuters refer to the misquote, literally, on an almost daily basis.
Following news of Iran's remark, condemnation was swift. British Prime Minister Tony Blair expressed "revulsion" and implied that it might be necessary to attack Iran. U.N. chief Kofi Annan cancelled his scheduled trip to Iran due to the controversy. Ariel Sharon demanded that Iran be expelled from the United Nations for calling for Israel's destruction. Shimon Peres, more than once, threatened to wipe Iran off the map. More recently, Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu, who has warned that Iran is "preparing another holocaust for the Jewish state" is calling for Ahmadinejad to be tried for war crimes for inciting genocide.
The artificial quote has also been subject to additional alterations. U.S. officials and media often take the liberty of dropping the "map" reference altogether, replacing it with the more acutely threatening phrase "wipe Israel off the face of the earth". Newspaper and magazine articles dutifully report Ahmadinejad has "called for the destruction of Israel", as do senior officials in the United States government.
President George W. Bush said the comments represented a "specific threat" to destroy Israel. In a March 2006 speech in Cleveland, Bush vowed he would resort to war to protect Israel from Iran, because, "..the threat from Iran is, of course, their stated objective to destroy our strong ally Israel." Former Presidential advisor Richard Clarke told Australian TV that Iran "talks openly about destroying Israel", and insists, "The President of Iran has said repeatedly that he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth". In an October 2006 interview with Amy Goodman, former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter referred to Ahmadinejad as "the idiot that comes out and says really stupid, vile things, such as, 'It is the goal of Iran to wipe Israel off the face of the earth' ". The consensus is clear.
Confusing matters further, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pontificates rather than give a direct answer when questioned about the statement, such as in Lally Weymouth's Washington Post interview in September 2006:
"Are you really serious when you say that Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth?
We need to look at the scene in the Middle East — 60 years of war, 60 years of displacement, 60 years of conflict, not even a day of peace. Look at the war in Lebanon, the war in Gaza — what are the reasons for these conditions? We need to address and resolve the root problem.
Your suggestion is to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth?
Our suggestion is very clear:... Let the Palestinian people decide their fate in a free and fair referendum, and the result, whatever it is, should be accepted.... The people with no roots there are now ruling the land.
You've been quoted as saying that Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth. Is that your belief?
What I have said has made my position clear. If we look at a map of the Middle East from 70 years ago...
So, the answer is yes, you do believe that it should be wiped off the face of the Earth?
Are you asking me yes or no? Is this a test? Do you respect the right to self-determination for the Palestinian nation? Yes or no? Is Palestine, as a nation, considered a nation with the right to live under humane conditions or not? Let's allow those rights to be enforced for these 5 million displaced people."
The exchange is typical of Ahmadinejad's interviews with the American media. Predictably, both Mike Wallace of 60 Minutes and CNN's Anderson Cooper asked if he wants to "wipe Israel off the map". As usual, the question is thrown back in the reporter's face with his standard "Don't the Palestinians have rights?, etc." retort (which is never directly answered either). Yet he never confirms the "map" comment to be true. This did not prevent Anderson Cooper from referring to earlier portions of his interview after a commercial break and lying, "as he said earlier, he wants Israel wiped off the map".
Even if every media outlet in the world were to retract the mistranslated quote tomorrow, the major damage has already been done, providing the groundwork for the next phase of disinformation: complete character demonization. Ahmadinejad, we are told, is the next Hitler, a grave threat to world peace who wants to bring about a new Holocaust. According to some detractors, he not only wants to destroy Israel, but after that, he will nuke America, and then Europe! An October 2006 memo titled Words of Hate: Iran's Escalating Threats released by the powerful Israeli lobby group AIPAC opens with the warning, "Ahmadinejad and other top Iranian leaders are issuing increasingly belligerent statements threatening to destroy the United States, Europe and Israel." These claims not only fabricate an unsubstantiated threat, but assume far more power than he actually possesses. Alarmists would be better off monitoring the statements of the ultra-conservative Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, who holds the most power in Iran.
As Iran's U.N. Press Officer, M.A. Mohammadi, complained to The Washington Post in a June 2006 letter:
"It is not amazing at all, the pick-and-choose approach of highlighting the misinterpreted remarks of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in October and ignoring this month's remarks by Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, that "We have no problem with the world. We are not a threat whatsoever to the world, and the world knows it. We will never start a war. We have no intention of going to war with any state."
The Israeli government has milked every drop of the spurious quote to its supposed advantage. In her September 2006 address to the United Nations General Assembly, Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni accused Iran of working to nuke Israel and bully the world: "They speak proudly and openly of their desire to 'wipe Israel off the map.' And now, by their actions, they pursue the weapons to achieve this objective to imperil the region and threaten the world."
Addressing the threat in December, a fervent Prime Minister Ehud Olmert inadvertently disclosed that his country already possesses nuclear weapons: "We have never threatened any nation with annihilation. Iran, openly, explicitly and publicly threatens to wipe Israel off the map. Can you say that this is the same level, when they are aspiring to have nuclear weapons, as America, France, Israel, Russia?"
MEDIA IRRESPONSIBILITY:
On December 13, 2006, more than a year after The World Without Zionism conference, two leading Israeli newspapers, The Jerusalem Post and Haaretz, published reports of a renewed threat from Ahmadinejad. The Jerusalem Post's headline was Ahmadinejad: Israel will be 'wiped out', while Haaretz posted the title Ahmadinejad at Holocaust conference: Israel will 'soon be wiped out'.
Where did they get their information? It turns out that both papers, like most American and western media, rely heavily on write ups by news wire services such as the Associated Press and Reuters as a source for their articles. Sure enough, their sources are in fact December 12th articles by Reuter's Paul Hughes [Iran president says Israel's days are numbered], and the AP's Ali Akbar Dareini [Iran President: Israel Will be wiped out].
The first five paragraphs of the Haaretz article, credited to "Haaretz Service and Agencies", are plagiarized almost 100% from the first five paragraphs of the Reuters piece. The only difference is that Haaretz changed "the Jewish state" to "Israel" in the second paragraph, otherwise they are identical.
The Jerusalem Post article by Herb Keinon pilfers from both the Reuters and AP stories. Like Haaretz, it uses the following Ahmadinejad quote without attribution: ["Just as the Soviet Union was wiped out and today does not exist, so will the Zionist regime soon be wiped out," he added]. Another passage apparently relies on an IRNA report:
"The Zionist regime will be wiped out soon the same way the Soviet Union was, and humanity will achieve freedom," Ahmadinejad said at Tuesday's meeting with the conference participants in his offices, according to Iran's official news agency, IRNA.
He said elections should be held among "Jews, Christians and Muslims so the population of Palestine can select their government and destiny for themselves in a democratic manner."
Once again, the first sentence above was wholly plagiarized from the AP article. The second sentence was also the same, except "He called for elections" became "He said elections should be held..".
It gets more interesting:
The quote used in the original AP article and copied in The Jerusalem Post article supposedly derives from the IRNA. If true, this can easily be checked. Care to find out? Go to: www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-234/0612134902101231.htm
There you will discover the actual IRNA quote was:
"As the Soviet Union disappeared, the Zionist regime will also vanish and humanity will be liberated".
Compare this to the alleged IRNA quote reported by the Associated Press:
"The Zionist regime will be wiped out soon the same way the Soviet Union was, and humanity will achieve freedom".
In the IRNA's actual report, the Zionist regime will vanish just as the Soviet Union disappeared. Vanish. Disappear. In the dishonest AP version, the Zionist regime will be "wiped out". And how will it be wiped out? "The same way the Soviet Union was". Rather than imply a military threat or escalation in rhetoric, this reference to Russia actually validates the intended meaning of Ahmadinejad's previous misinterpreted anti-Zionist statements.
What has just been demonstrated is irrefutable proof of media manipulation and propaganda in action. The AP deliberately alters an IRNA quote to sound more threatening. The Israeli media not only repeats the fake quote but also steals the original authors' words. The unsuspecting public reads this, forms an opinion and supports unnecessary wars of aggression, presented as self defense, based on the misinformation.
This scenario mirrors the kind of false claims that led to the illegal U.S. invasion of Iraq, a war now widely viewed as a catastrophic mistake. And yet the Bush administration and the compliant corporate media continue to marinate in propaganda and speculation about attacking Iraq's much larger and more formidable neighbor, Iran. Most of this rests on the unproven assumption that Iran is building nuclear weapons, and the lie that Iran has vowed to physically destroy Israel. Given its scope and potentially disastrous outcome, all this amounts to what is arguably the rumor of the century.
Iran's President has written two rather philosophical letters to America. In his first letter, he pointed out that "History shows us that oppressive and cruel governments do not survive". With this statement, Ahmadinejad has also projected the outcome of his own backwards regime, which will likewise "vanish from the page of time".
Arash Norouzi is an artist and co-founder of The Mossadegh Project. He can be reached via his web site.
Global Research Articles by Arash Norouzi
A Good 9-11 Site I have never seen before:
http://www.geocities.com/markgmeyers/911.htm
Shermann
A rather lengthy note from a friend!!!
Political capital has been lost, again and again and
again.
When we went into Gulf War I, we had 600,000 troops on
the ground at all times. With Rumsfeld, people were
fired from the DoD for not going with 140,000 to
handle this operation. The man has no regard for
human life, really.
When we get there, what do we do? Indiscriminately
fire tens of thousands of Sunnis. Why? Because they
are Sunnis. But not just Sunnis in power, which is to
appease the Shiites and the Kurds, but Sunnis of all
capacities. That pisses people off.
And what is the next move? We fire 300,000 Iraqi
regulars - the standing army. Oh, terrific. Take
your guns and scatter to the four corners of Iraq, and
don't guess we're not trying to rule your country.
And what do we do next? We round up thousands, for
the most part, of innocent Iraqi civilians, and put
them in prisons. Talk about creating an insurgency!
And then, we have the terrible Abu scandal (and Cheney
incessantly beating his drum for more torture). We
put green national guard troops in the prisons, and we
send in intelligence officials to show them how to do
their jobs - badly. No, we haven't pissed anybody
off.
Well, truth be told, there's still Iraqis out there
who are glad that Saddam is gone. But also, there are
so many who now want Saddam back, because that
wouldn't be as bad as it is. These people have not
been safe in their own homes for several years now.
In the private sector, there were considerable human
rights violations, which thankfully were brought to
the light of day with the investigative efforts of the
Chicago Tribune. Halliburton needed crews to perform
public works projects, so they hired a variety of
local subcontractors to provide the crews and get the
work done. They didn't care how, just to get it done.
Well, what we came to find out was that these
subcontractors were actually slave traders. They
weren't using Iraqis - they didn't put Iraqis to work
on public works at all! They actually imported slaves
without passports or any human rights via Jordan,
ranging all the way to Nepal, and many of these people
died by the manner in which they were treated. Once
again, facing massive local unemployment... Great job
at securing the hearts and minds of the Iraqis.
I was watching a video recently of an eriudite fellow
who got out of Iraq (on Charlie Rose), and who is
saying that the best of them have managed to escape,
for the most part.
So we've really screwed the pooch there. We've done
it too much. We can't secure the area.
Now, I want you to know of a thing called the
Hydrocarbon Law, which is a new development in the
legislation of the Iraqi Government. It's
complicated, but what it also translates into is the
US's ability to secure Iraqi oil for it's own
consumption. Another way of putting this? Maliki is
our man, and we have won the war (that some people
have chosen to fight). We get the oil, so long as
Maliki stays in power. All we have to do now is keep
Maliki alive, and hold some semblance of the existence
of the present government in place.
Fort Apache - Bagdhad.
If we can secure Bagdhad, then they won't fall
completely. Just out of curiosity, do you know who
Harmid Karzai is? He's the president of Afghanistan.
He's also a Conoco executive. I think that qualifies
as an oil industry puppet of (somebody).
The US has screwed the pooch so much, that what I may
consider to be a good idea, which is to bring in
another 21,500 troops to secure Bagdhad, is facing
considerable opposition. Congress is gaining
opposition to the troop escalation, and when you look
at polls worldwide, we're getting rotten tomatoes
thrown in our faces for the very same idea. This is
reminding me of the boy who cried wolf.
Too late, and too sorry. But I ask you to consider
this. If the US cannot hold Iraq in its interests,
then Iran and its backers surely will. What do we
really boil the middle east down to? This is about an
Iranian hegemony in the region! If not us, then them.
Good guys, bad guys, whatever. I can't tell the
difference. We've got some pretty nasty leaders in
the white house now, but I also think we've got a good
society (if we can just figure out how to inform it's
people). If we can't hold Iraq, then the Shiites
surely will, and they'll be backed by Iran and its
backers, which include Russia, and China picks up an
edge in gaining better access to Middle East oil.
A bit like holding a wolf by the ears? Perhaps. But
I would only say that if the US had not squandered its
political capital so badly, then today perhaps we
could be more effective at doing what needs to be
done.
I believe the military strategy is to withdraw troops
to population centers throughout Iraq, and increase
security there, also withdrawing troops from more
remote areas, leaving them completely lawless. This
is to consolidate forces and attempt to provide some
degree of security (in secured areas).
Our leaders don't give a damn about human life. They
don't give a damn about US servicemen and women, and
they don't give a damn about foreign civilians. Imho,
they don't really particularly care about domestic
lives either, but you'll have to check out my 9/11
page. 9/11 is the reason for all things Middle East.
Just see what Goergy says, he'll chime right in on
that.
http://www.geocities.com/markgmeyers/911.htm
And a little note about congress. The last time
congress outlined the executive's war acts when
hadning power over to the president was WW II.
Congress hasn't been responsible for acts of war since
1945. As I understand it, that's not how our congress
is supposed to work.
We knew that the neocons were trying to get into Iraq
since late 1997, and also since 2000 to rampage its
way across the ME, from Syria to Khazakstan, and
establish world domination through the 21st century by
securing the oil for ourselves and by starving foreign
powers of the same. This from a neocon think tank
known as PNAC - the "Project for a New American
Century". Check their web site...
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
Now, if there's some way to improve the condition of
how informed Americans are about things, they might do
better at running their own country. That's us. I
believe this is also true. Just a matter of getting
the information from point A to point B.
Is your internet slowing down? Watch out for these
guys - Comcast, AT&T and Time Warner. These are the
internet backbone providers. You may not be familiar
with the legislative war that's been going back and
forth over internet freedom and "net neutrality". The
lobbyists in Washington have dumped over a half
billion into trying to sway these reps towards
legislation supporting some degree of gutting of the
freedom of information act. It's been quite a war,
and no doubt most Americans have never heard of such a
thing. Check this site...
http://www.savetheinternet.com
We may find the net to be slowing down to the point
where now its slower in the states than it is in any
european country. Its a rough war, between people who
want a free 'net and the forces of large, capitalistic
interests. Oh, if only we could give the corporate
executives some way of making fluffy bunnies for
profit, but hugs and kisses just don't pay the bills.
Public and private sectors have merged in Washington.
Dwight Eisnehower warned us of when the big dogs of
the military-industrial complex might come to power,
and they have. It's the neocons. We're simply in the
process of having to endure the most evil
administration this country has ever seen. We're
making history. Oh shit on a stick, people, Iraq is
so much worse today than it was before. We've got
Cheney lusting after oil and Rumsfeld lusting after
guns, et al. (Wolfowitz, Libby, Ashcroft, and the
gang) Ok, Rumsfeld has been fired, and Libby is about
to be prosecuted.
I find it questionable to consider whether or not Bush
actually knows what is going on. He's been talking to
God, personally, like you and I just don't how to do,
and he's only lately responding to some question as to
whether or not he can focus on anything specific. He
may be fighting a holy war, not sure. He does seem to
have some childish tendencies, like usurping his dad's
wishes, or not going down as a loser, or God knows
what (they're in direct contact). Perhaps God is
testing his resolve? I think he's fucking loopy.
I'm not sure how far I was going to go in rattling
along, but glad to have your ear for a moment.
There's so much going on in this world that I don't
enjoy not seeing on the news out there. We've turned
Iraq into an environmental disaster, with things such
as Depleted Uranium munitions (more than 3000 tons of
it), and that will never go away. Please bear in mind
that environmentally related casualties tend to run on
the order of 10 times that of combat casualties or
more.
On a more positive note, we've got good DU testing for
veterans in Louisianna and there's legislation in
Connecticut for the same, and there's a dozen other
states working on legislation for the same kind of
testing for their national guard troops. You know,
I've heard it's now asked... When a baby is born in
Iraq, the first question is, "Is it normal?" The
rates of birth defects are 10 times what they once
were. And DU, with a half-life of 4.5 billion years,
is permanent.
So, I do hope we can hold Bagdhad, after all that hell
and brimstone being said. We're a bit slow as a
people in trying to figure out what's going on in this
country, and then also to respond to it through our
congress, but I think we do good things, as I say,
when we finally get some good information. Good luck,
God bless, may the force be with you, and thanks for
your ears with this lengthy diatribe.
Gonzales: ‘There Is No Express Grant of Habeas Corpus In The Constitution’
Alberto Gonzalez Must go!!! The Constitution is more than just a piece of paper.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/19/gonzales-habeas/
Shermann
PS - one could make an excellent case that, with this one statement, Gonzales has broken his oath to uphold the Constitution, and is revealed as a traitor to this country.
Protests paralyze Lebanon
Christians and Muslims working together???? - What a concept!!!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070123/ts_nm/lebanon_government_dc
Shermann
That is what they say. It has only been a couple of weeks, and we will see what happens.
Many congress people from both parties are in favor of doing away with Earmarks.
We shall see!!!
Shermann
Obviously, the Author here is missing the point. The Dems 100 Hour philosophy was to grab low hanging fruit that both parties could agree on.
These Ethics reforms are a good start, and there will be more to come.
Shermann
The Mullahs (Ahmadinejad's Bosses) are not happy with the sensationalism and divisiveness caused by Ahmadinejad. That is why the next Presidential Election has been moved up.
Shermann
Iran can disallow some inspectors - It is within their right according to the IAEA and the NPT.
“There are a sufficient number of inspectors designated for Iran, and the I.A.E.A. is able to perform its inspection activities in accordance with Iran’s Comprehensive Safeguard Agreement,” she said in an agency statement.
There is nothing wrong here.
Shermann