Sunday, November 30, 2008

Not Quite Obama's Dream Team as Supporters Question Obama's Choices & Policies

UPDATE: 6:29 PM Sun. Nov. 30, 2008

Anyway lets begin with another funny bit from stand up comic aka The Commander in Chief out-going President George W. Bush who believes his presidency is one which will be remembered favorably by Historians . Forget all the crimes and misdemeanors committed by the Bush/Cheney Regime to remember them or focus on them is just mean-spirited nit picking according to Bush, the Conservatives and the Republicans. This should bring peace to the over 4,000 dead American soldiers and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's killed in unprovoked unnecessary war.

If Obama is willing to forgive and forget the last eight years of mismanagement and war profiteering and the dismantling of the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the Geneva Conventions etc. and flush it all down the old Memory Hole then shouldn't we all do the same. Just kidding since there are many of us who think Obama should stand up to these thugs who ran America's government like Mafia Boses. But too late Obama has already brought a number of these crooks into his transition team.

Yes this would be truly funny except for the fact that in all likely hood many American politicians so called political pundits and paid for academics such as David Fromm & other neoconservatives' phony scholars will help the Bush supporters to rewrite history to make Bush into a hero and Saint like other conservitives before him such as Ronald Reagan or Barry Goldwater or Joseph McCarthy and William F. Buckley Jr.and the prevalence of racists in the Republican Party such as; Strom Thurmondand David Duke and other heroes such as hate mongering conspiracy spinner J. Edgar Hoover and their beloved John Birchers and even having a racist individual in a positon of authority for example; Haley Barbour as Chairman of The Republican National Committee and a number of other other fanatical ideologues and racists. . The Republican Party as we saw in this past election campaign showed its true colors as Hate Mongers , conspiracy spinners and racists.

Bush wants history to see him as a liberator of millions

WASHINGTON (AFP) – George W. Bush hopes history will see him as a president who liberated millions of Iraqis and Afghans, who worked towards peace and who never sold his soul for political ends.

"I'd like to be a president (known) as somebody who liberated 50 million people and helped achieve peace," Bush said in excerpts of a recent interview released by the White House Friday.

"I would like to be a person remembered as a person who, first and foremost, did not sell his soul in order to accommodate the political process. I came to Washington with a set of values, and I'm leaving with the same set of values."

He also said he wanted to be seen as a president who helped individuals, "that rallied people to serve their neighbor; that led an effort to help relieve HIV/AIDS and malaria on places like the continent of Africa; that helped elderly people get prescription drugs and Medicare as a part of the basic package."
Bush added that every day during his eight-year presidency he had consulted the Bible and drawn comfort from his faith.

GRITtv Newsmaker, November 24, 2008. Jeremy Scahill, Benjamin Barber

In what way when it comes to foreign policy is Obama better for the world than was the Bush Regime. Was all that energy that Obama's supporters put into his campaign for nothing. He refuses to bring to justice those people in the Bush Regime in the Pentagon and CIA and the military from the ordinary soldier to the Generals to the Commander in Chief who took part in detainee abuses and torture. And then are those who took part in massive fraud such as the corporations and other War Profiteers from Halliburton to Kellogg Brown & Root etc. are they too to get a Free Pass.
Obama is not going to ban Blackwater or other Mercenaries working for The United States in Iraq or Afghanistan and elsewhere. Obama is in favor of reducing the number of troops in Iraq but not a full withdrawal. Obama is also in favor of escalating the failed war against the Taliban in Afghanistan. So there will be even more civilians killed by Americans in Afghanistan since the US troops and air-force have shown little regard for innocent civilians who are just by-standers. But as I have said and it has been shown since 9/11 and even in previous military actions that the Americans just write-off civilian deaths in euphemisms such as Collateral Damage or as as Stuff Happens or this suffering is part of the "birth pangs of emerging democracy ". So the Americans along with its allies the Canadians and British will continue their terrorist campaign against the Afghanistan people. They will free Afghanistan even if it means killing every last Afghanistani. What they call peace we call a dessert. Once again it is a matter of shock and awe and Free Fire Zones and the destruction of a village because there might be an insurgent in that village so napalm them all. And so more Wedding parties will be blown up in the name of the War on Terror and American security .

Obama is also backing the the on-going war against the people of South America under the guise of the War On Drugs. Heaven forbid that the people of South America be permitted to set their own agenda which would favor their own people rather than American companies & multinationals at the expense of their own people .

Obama and Blackwater

11/15/08 Jeremy Scahill author of Blackwater. C-SPAN Book TV
Obamas Agents of Change pt. 1 of 2 Nov. 21, 2008
Amy Goodman interviews Jeremy Scahill and David Corn about some of the questionable members of Obama's new Whitehouse Team !

Obama's Agents of Change pt. 2 of 2

also see Jeremy Scahill's in depth article on Obama's choices for his transition team and his cabinet:

This Is Change? 20 Hawks, Clintonites and Neocons to Watch for in Obama's White House By Jeremy Scahill, AlterNet. Posted November 20, 2008.

A who's who guide to the people poised to shape Obama's foreign policy.

also see: Mumbai to Obama: End Bush's War on Terror Saturday 29 November 2008 by: Steve Weissman, t r u t h o u t

The terrorist attacks in Mumbai call out to President-elect Barack Obama and his advisors to rethink the signature blunder of George W. Bush's eight years in office - the so-called War on Terror. As US intelligence reports have made clear, the centerpiece of the supposed campaign against terror, the military occupation of Iraq, has increased the likelihood of more attacks like those in Mumbai, Madrid, London and Manhattan. The new escalation in Afghanistan will similarly increase terrorist attacks there, in neighboring India and Pakistan, in disputed Kashmir, and throughout the world

...But even if Al-Qaeda did, how would killing Osama bin Laden - if he's still alive - or hanging all of his top aides, or hammering the Taliban in any way defuse the toxic brew of often justified grievances and outrageous religious fanaticism that we now face? The enemy is not a single man, and not a single group. It is a movement of shared ideas and beliefs, all too often encouraged by Washington's pursuit of policies that are both unjust and counter-productive.

The terrorist bloodshed started long before bin Laden and will continue long after his dialysis machine packs up. No magic bullet will end it, but military boots on other people's ground will almost always make matters worse. That's what they did in Iraq. That's what they are doing in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

What bin Laden added to the mix was the well-articulated idea that terrorist attacks could promote a clash of civilizations, or holy war. With his War on Terror, George W. Bush, the Crusader-in-Chief, responded exactly as bin Laden wanted, turning moderate Muslims around the world into terrorist supporters, funders, and enablers. Why would Obama want to continue the madness?

...Barack Obama is in a unique position to build cooperation and encourage Muslims everywhere to find their own way forward. Happily, he has made a good start by announcing that he will close Guantánamo and end the horrors of torture. He has also raised the hope, however faint, that he will work toward a just settlement between Israelis and Palestinians and between India and Pakistan over Kashmir.

Even more to the point, his pledge to build a green economy will reduce any argument for continuing American support of despotic governments in countries with large reserves of oil and natural gas.

All this is promising. But it remains only a promise, and all of it will come to naught if Obama gives the orders to continue killing people and breaking things wherever and whenever the United States wants.


Obama it appears is also going to continue the disastrous and unnecessary and ill advised War on Drugs.

Obama's Drug Czar Pick: Will We Ever Get Past Having a War on Drugs?

By Maia Szalavitz, Huffington Post. Posted November 25, 2008.
We can't ignore science like Bill Clinton did and install a drug czar who will ignore science and push dogma.

and so it goes,

Saturday, November 29, 2008

Obama Still Kow-Towing To The Conservatives and The Republicans As He Breaks His Election Campaign Promises

UPDATE: See Lou Dobbs below. at 4:55 pm. Nov. 29, 2008

Anyway talking about torture is it torture to have to listen to Sarah Palin talking. She continues to talk as a man loads turkeys into a Turkey Killing Machine.

Here's a funny bit from Keith Olbermann and Sarah Palin Nov. 26 2008

Join in on the fun as Keith Olbermann watches the Sarah Palin turkey pardon interview for the first time


Obama still Kow-Towing to the Ultra -Conservatives and Republicans and The Religious Right. He is allowing them to set the agenda even though he won the election and trampled the Republicans. Is he afraid of their power or of hurting their feelings. He should feel no obligation to the conservatives who ran a dishonest hate-mongering campaign of smears. Is he trying to prove he's not really an evil "Godless Liberal " or a "socialist" so he's going out of his way to prove that he's just another conservative American politician who doesn't really want to change America or Washington in a fundamental way. So is it to be business as usual with members of his administration defending torture and the Patriot Act and throwing America's military weight around bullying and threatening and invading even more countries.

"A Commission ( investigating torture ) is passing the buck" John Dean

Countdown: John Dean on Torture Prosecutions- Nov.26, 2008
Keith talks to John Dean about whether it's likely for anyone in the Bush administration to be prosecuted for torturing prisoners.
Detainee Treatment act

Obama's attempts at reconciliation and bi-partisanship in the end means that the criminal activities of the Bush/ Cheney Regime are to be forgotten about and none of the criminals are to punished. Therefore if there is wrong-doing under Obama there is no way to make a case for seeking justice since justice is just an empty piece of rhetoric to hauled out during election campaigns and then quickly forgotten about. So if American soldiers or private contractors continue to murder innocent Iraqis or to abuse and torture detainees then this is not a concern for Obama's administration or any other American administration. So we are back to being told "Stuff Happens " and that suspected terrorists no matter how flimsy the evidence is against them have no rights under American law. As we have seen these attitudes have trickled down through the US military and into US penitentiaries. If torture is ok in one instance then why not in another. So if you want to get a confession out of a murderer or a pedophile then what's to stop local police forces from using certain forms of torture as in for example the over-use and abuse of Tasering or even beating to death a suspect .

Bush very pleased with Iraq War
American War Criminals urge Obama not to press charges against them in a spirit of reconciliation and moving on. So they broke a lot of laws and broke a lot of bones and heads and tortured a few thousand so what they say just grow up and get over it.

Maddow: Why wont Obama pursue war crimes, torture?-Nov. 24, 2008
By David Edwards
President-elect Barack Obama has been doing a lot of compromising lately, and it seems that his ideas are the ones falling by the wayside. Is he giving too much away to Republicans? Rachel Maddow is joined by senior editor Dahlia Lithwick.

How the Far Right still attacks anyone questioning the Bush Regime's Policies and actions from invading Iraq to the use of torture to interference with the Justice department and the judiciary at the state level.
Dick Cheney Indicted by Texas Grand Jury

Dick Cheney Indictment on Bill O'Reilly Show
A grand jury in south Texas indicted Vice President Dick Cheney and former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on separate charges related to alleged prisoner abuse in federal detention centers. This is Bill O'Reilly's take on the situation, FoxNews style

In the above clip Bill O'Reilly dismisses the charges against his friend Cheney as " loopy". The charges are in themselves are serious but O'Reilly ignores their seriousness and significance and whether or not they are true. To him if Cheney was profiteering from being an investor in a penitentiary and if he acted in such a way as to have an investigation into the running of that facility squashed that doesn't matter to O'Reilly. O'Reilly argues as usual that Cheney is above and beyond the laws of the land. O'Reilly is also not interested in complaints concerning prisoner abuse since as a conservative he believes prisoners have no rights and get what they deserve. But it is certain that if the ones being charged and indicted in such a case were in fact Democrats O'Reilly would surely change his tune & would be praising any local actions being taken. Democrats in his view are still fair game but Republican are always above reproach. It is also odd since O'Reilly like other conservatives believes more rights should devolve from the federal government and federal courts to the States and local authorities

Glenn Beck Makes Fun of Racism-May 24, 2008

Glenn Beck Makes fun of the idea of investigating Racism in America. Glenn Beck like other ultraconservatives argues that since there are some African-Americans & Hispanic Americans who are doing well in America it therefore means there is no such thing as racism in America. Note he interviews a representative of the far-right organization Heritage Foundation. As I have said before the Neocon or Far Right organizations which call themselves Think Tanks is a bit of a stretch.

Note Beck being the insensitive boob believes he has clinched the argument by making fun of the name of the man who is investigating racism in America. Beck is truly convinced that America was never all that racist especially after the end of slavery. Glenn Beck and others of his ilk never talk seriously about the thousands lynched by "good God believing Bible Thumping Christian Americans". As I have discussed before these lynchings were not all secret isolated incidents but were done in public while hundred or thousands of white Americans watched with glee. But that these conservatives would claim was part of the good old days.

ADL-Anti-defamation Code Words Hate Speech

Immigrants are an invasion force , a plague of vermin, dehumanization , as corrupt bringing disease and criminality
can be targeted as objects of Hate they have no rights therefore its OK to treat them whatever way you want -
Conspiracy theory that Mexican illegal immigrants want to retake the South West as part of a reconquista.

Glenn Beck and other far right media stars frame their racist arguments in such a way that they can then claim its not really racism but a matter of common sense and that it is just obvious to anyone or it is a matter of patriotism or a matter of protecting traditional American values. So what is this common sense and traditional values they talk about ad infinitum ? For instance they seem to claim that America is a christian nation of European immigrants and that this heritage must be protected from the swarms of non-Europeans and non-whites who are invading and trying to reshape or even take over American society. So one wonders when was this "Golden Age" in which America was somehow purer than it is today. Was the Golden Age before the abolition of slavery or before the Civil Rights Movement which the far right claim was really a movement of outsider Marxists agitators .

They claim that for instance the 1950s was the "Golden Age " when minority groups such as Blacks and Gays knew their place in society and didn't try to go beyond their station. Do they believe for instance as some do that America was a better country before several million Irish Catholics invaded America even if it was by legal means.

Was America for instance better off before women won the right to vote and then fought for equal rights . So was America better off when much of America supported an Apartheid racist system under the Jim Crow laws which kept black and white Americans as separate as possible ?

also see:

Glenn Beck Wonders Why He's Resented as a Bigot
By Steve Rendall, FAIR. Posted November 21, 2008.

It takes an angry truck driver who threatened the hate-spewing host to wonder, "Is this who we've become?"

Glenn Beck has been telling a personal story illustrating what he says is a particularly intense level of hatred on the left.

According to the newly signed Fox News host, he was verbally assaulted by a truck driver while standing in line at a Wendy's restaurant at a truck stop. Writing on his blog, Beck says the truck driver called him a "racist bigot," blaming the talk show host and conservatives "for everything." Wrote Beck, "The hatred was palpable." As his security detail stood between him and his assailant, Beck says the truck driver ended his rant by threatening to run him over.

It was ugly stuff, and Beck was shocked by the level of hate: "I wanted to say, I think you have me mistaken for someone else, but I knew he knew who I was and he just hated me for who I was…. Wow. Is this who we've become? Is this who we've become?"

Concluding his appeal to civility, Beck explained that he wouldn't treat his enemies the way the truck driver treated him: "I could stand in line with Michael Moore and I wouldn't say that to him. I would say some things to Michael Moore, but it wouldn't be that. Is this who we've become? I believe there is a cauldron of hatred on both sides, but the left is quite frightening."

Beck might not say such things to Moore in person, but he has expressed a desire to murder Moore to his nationally syndicated radio audience (Glenn Beck Program, 5/18/05):

I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out--is this wrong?

And Beck wasn't exactly the picture of civility two years earlier when he told his listeners that he prayed nightly for anti-war presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich to be consumed by fire (Glenn Beck Program, 3/16/03): "Every night I get down on my knees and pray that Dennis Kucinich will burst into flames."

Beck repeated his Wendy's story on Fox's On the Record (11/17/08)--only in this version, Beck said Fox News was among the targets of the truck driver's vitriol. As he explained to host Greta Van Susteren, the story illustrated that "the left is just unbelievably out of control right now."

Whatever the truth is about Beck's truck driver story, his own record of hatred, including a prediction that in 10 years time "Muslims and Arabs will be looking through a razor wire fence at the West," is not merely a matter of angry words spouted in a fast food shop, but a matter of nationally broadcast hatred.

UPDATE: 4:55 pm Nov. 29

Also see:Lou Dobbs anti-immigration Illegal Immigration and racism- Lou Dobbs just another hate Mongering Propagandists for the Far Right and the Racist Remnant in the Republican Party.

Why Is Lou Dobbs Minimizing the Impact of Hate Crimes?
By Heidi Beirich, Hate Watch. Posted November 29, 2008.

Dobbs, who has a long track record of defaming immigrants by linking them to crime, disease and other horrors, would probably like to pretend that immigrant bashing doesn't lead to hate crimes. But the facts of the Lucero case show otherwise. The teens implicated in Lucero's murder specifically declared that they were going to "go jump a Mexican" and went out hunting in the ethnically diverse village of Patchogue. Latinos in Suffolk County have long reported being threatened and physically harassed and there have been other highly publicized attacks there, including the near-beating death of two Mexican day laborers in 2001 and the burning of a Mexican family's house in 2003.

Dobbs also took issue with the idea that hate crimes targeting Latinos are a problem. Dobbs' report cited the FBI's annual hate crimes statistics to make the point that hate crimes nationwide had dropped from about 7,700 in 2006 to 7,600 in 2007. Dobbs claimed that hate crimes in Suffolk County had declined under Levy.
But it is widely known that the FBI's numbers severely undercount the extent of hate crimes in America. In fact, according to a 2005 Department of Justice study, there actually are about 191,000 per year--nearly 30 times the FBI's numbers. Most hate crimes are not reported to police and many jurisdictions do not participate in the FBI's voluntary hate crime reporting system. Hate crimes against undocumented immigrants are particularly underreported, because of an understandable reluctance to contact state officials.

And as limited as the FBI figures are, they show that hate crimes against Latinos are on the rise, having gone up by 40% since 2003. Dobbs left out that fact .
By diminishing the importance of hate crimes, Dobbs ignored the unique threat these crimes pose. The terroristic effect of hate crime creates fear and distrust along already fragile intergroup lines in a way that other crimes do not. When a black man is dragged to his death in Jasper, Texas, it instills terror in the entire black community.

This isn't the first time Dobbs has had trouble with facts. In what has now become a rather infamous incident, in 2007 Dobbs relied on Madeleine Cosman, a woman who repeatedly ranted about Latino men raping boys, girls and nuns, to argue that immigrants were largely responsible for some 7,000 cases of leprosy that had been reported in the United States in a recent three-year period. The numbers were utterly false, resulting in a New York Times column that said Dobbs has "a somewhat flexible relationship with reality."

also see:
Southern Poverty Law Center on Lou Dobbs:
Bait and Switch The SPLC vs. Lou Dobbs
By Mark Potok

Errors and Extremist Sources on Lou Dobbs Tonight

and :
Anti-Immigration Groups

and so it goes,

Friday, November 28, 2008

Auto-Industry Jet Stting CEOs & Others Seeking Government Handout & Does Obama Have As Much Courage & Vision As Pres. Evo Morales Of Bolivia

UPDATE: 5:39 Friday Nov. 28, 2008

Ah those poor struggling CEOs & Their Fleets of $ 36 million Private Jets
How the other half live actually the top 5% -
So much for Trickle Down Economics actually the Wealth Continues to Trickle Upward even in bad times as the Governments takes pity on the struggling super-rich.
But being rich we are supposed to accept that they therefore are superiour to the rest of society-A Breed Apart as Ayn Rand & the Neoconservatives & the Mass Media like to remind the Rest of us Everyday; we are mere worms in comparison.

Interior of Private Jet

Interior of Private Jet with Hostesses
serving Champagne & Caviar To The Rich & Powerful

Below customized Smaller Private Jet for the Less Fortunate

Update on auto industry bail-out:
Anyway the saga of the massive Bail-outs in the United States continues.

After being embarrased over their use and ownership of a fleet of private luxury jets one of the auto industry giants GM's response was sell two jets and " has asked the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) not to allow tracking of its private jets." So their solution is to keep the government and the American public in the dark about when and how often the CEOs and their families and friends and croynies use the aircraft for business or pleasure. These CEOs can't imagine why they souldn't fly around in a fleet of luxury jets drinking champagne and munching on caviar while they lay off 50, 000 employees with little if any severance pay or insist that the average worker take a pay cut. In the same way they see nothing wrong with CEOs pulling down salaries between 500,000 to 2.5 million with bonuses of from 5 to 20 million . This is the type of deregulted capitalism which has been promoted since Presient Reagan took power in 1980 in which he and his neoconservative friends claimed would be best for America and tha the wealth would trickle down.

For decades these economic genuises claimed that it would be best for the government not to interfer with Big Business since the CEOs new what they were doing. If they were so capable why is it that suddenly without warning they are now desparate for a 25 billion or more bail-out from the Big Government whom they were always preaching against. In other words Big Government and government interference in the market place is a bad thing except when Big Business itself is in dire straits. If we accept their idea of the free-market place then there should be no bail out at all.

The problem is if they are not bailed-out another 100,000 or so jobs will be lost which would be a blow to all of these workers and also a blow to the US economy. There are several ways to approach a bail-out. One which the industry wants is to be gien 25 billion without any strings. This would be disastrous for the the Obama administration financially and a blow to his prestige since he promised his government would do things differently. The more money that goes into these mega-bail-outs the less money Obama has for his public works projects, fixing up highways, schools , hospitals or towards improving Health Care in the United States so that a mjority of Americans could have a health Care system similar to what we Canadians and most other Western Countries already have.

What Obama and others in the American government seem to forget is that the government is the one in charge when companies come crawling on their hands and knees with their tin cups in hand begging for money. At such a juncture the government has the position of strength which it should use in negotiating these bail-out proposals rather than acting as if the corporations are the ones in control.
But maybe it would be best to cut out the middle man that is the CEO's and the corporations and instead focus on bailing-out the ordinary worker. First you give each autoworker a generous severance pay. Secondly the government would then pay out to each worker a weekly subsidy equivalent to the basic wage auto-workers would normally make. During this period the government could offer early retirement based on a formula of age and number of years employed and for the rest offer re-training or scholarships to attend vocational schools, community colleges and university depending on the individuals interest, aptitude and goals.

This in itself is not a perfect solution but the question is should the government continue to support an industry in America which is just not viable. Other solutions could be selling off these American companies to foreign interests such as Toyota, Nissan and by doing so keep the jobs in America but producing a different product but one that is apt to be more viable and competitive.

from BBC News Nov.28,2008:

GM tries to block corporate jet tracking

General Motors has asked the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) not to allow tracking of its private jets.
The call comes after the company's boss flew to Washington in a jet to ask for $25bn (£16.3bn;19.7bn euros) of public money to bail-out the US car industry.
Chief executive Rick Wagoner was taken to task at a special Senate hearing and pilloried in the worldwide media for such extravagance and poor judgement.
"Couldn't you have downgraded to first class?" said Democrat Gary Ackerman.
GM has subsequently returned two of its fleet - reportedly five strong - of private jets.

also see:BBC NEWS Nov. 17, 2008
Hard-up GM to sell Suzuki stake

General Motors is selling its 3% stake in the Japanese carmaker Suzuki for $230m (£156m) to raise cash.

Suzuki said it would buy back the stake, adding that it understood GM faced a need to secure funding.

GM has reported a net loss of $2.5bn in the third quarter and has been trying to secure an emergency government loan along with its Detroit competitors.
The "Big Three" US car firms Chrysler, Ford and GM are seeking a total $25bn in federal aid.

Suzuki, which specialises in small cars, said the two companies would continue to cooperate in a number of joint projects, including developing new technologies. Their partnership started in 1981.

"We understand full well that GM faces a need to sell its shareholdings to secure funding," Suzuki said.

The US carmaker had already sold a 17% stake in Suzuki, in 2006.

When a Bail-out is not a Bail-out

This attitude on the part of American corporations that the bail-out is not really a bail-out or a subsidy has a long history as Canadians know in our fights with the US over crop subsidies or subsidies in the lumber industry. When the Canadian government helps out some industry the Americans go ape-shit calling it unfair but when their government hands out subsidies in one form or another the Americans have claimed that these are not really subsidies. You see their politicians and lobbyists come up with other ways of giving out subsidies to make them look not so much like subsidies - call them tax relief , or tax rebates or long term loans at low interest rates etc.For instance American federal or state governments even give farmers subsidies not to grow certain crops. So a farmer can make a good living by not planting or harvesting any crops.Its still a subsidy or a handout and a form wealth redistribution and welfare or whatever one wants to call it.

Paris scathing about Detroit bail-out by John Madslien BBC News )ct. 3, 2008

Car industry executives at the Paris motor show have kept their eyes firmly on developments across the pond this week.
President George W Bush signed legislation that gives US carmakers access to $25bn (£14bn) of cheap government-backed loans to help them develop less polluting cars - a huge bonus for the country's struggling car giants.

European protests

European automotive industry executives see the $25bn loan guarantee as a bail-out package that will give American car companies an unfair advantage when it comes to developing less-polluting cars - a point that is not missed by the US authorities.
"German carmakers view this as subsidies violating competition," observes the CIA, the US intelligence agency, in a research note.

But those who see it as a bail-out have got it wrong, insists General Motors' chief operating officer Fritz Henderson.

"It's a loan, actually. It's not a gift," he tells BBC News in an interview.
"It's all about financing projects, which can range anywhere from a Volt [plug in hybrid] to hybrid vehicles to pretty significant forms of advanced propulsion
"It's not a bail-out," he continues.

"If society decides we need more oil, we provide tax credits for drilling. The companies make $10bn a quarter. Is that a bail-out?

"Or let's take defence companies. Governments chose to underwrite R&D associated with defence.

"I am objecting to the characterisation, that this form of government support is a bail-out, whereas this form is something else."

Evo Morales in his own words
The Real News Network-November 20, 2008
Bolivian President Evo Morales, on his first visit to Washington, addressed the Organization of American States (OAS) and a standing-room only audience of diplomats, scholars and students at the American University. Explaining the extraordinary transformations taking place in Bolivia in the past few years, his overall theme, as he himself defined, was visible change. Contrary to the Bush administration, who always antagonized him, and whose ambassador was declared persona non grata in Bolivia by the President, Evo Morales - who was called the Indian President - hoped bilateral relations under Obama - the Black President - will improve.

Will Barack Obama have the courage as Evo Morales has to stand up to the vested interests of Big Business and the over 35,000 Lobbyists to put into effect his so called changes in a way similar to President Evo Morales of Bolivia. So far Obama has not for instance suggested or threatened Big Businesses with Nationalization. If these various corporations want to be balied-out then it should be on the government terms. For instance he could bail-out the auto industry in exchange for part ownership of theses companies of at least a 40 percent share for the government Secondly Obama could insist that there be a moritorium on bonuses or salary hikes of CEOs for let's say three years. Thirdly he could insist that they invest in making making their automobiles more fuel efficient and more environmentally friendly.

President Morales of Bolivia has taken steps which other leaders have done for instance Allende in Chile but many of these countries have become the targets ofthe CIA and the Pentagon. The CIA and the Pentagon then enter the scene by first finding a group who are opposed to the government policies. If they can they will try to find people in the government or in the military who are unhappy with the government or who are ambitious or corrupt who can be used to overthrow the governmen in a coup detat . If that is not possible they will find some group to arm which can act as America's proxy in a form of guerilla warfare while also using trrorist tactics killing unarmed civilians using assassination by hit squads or death squads if they have some sympathizers inthe police forces or the military . The US did this in El Salvadore and Chile Gautemala, Iran . In nicaragua for example the Contras as Americans used the Contras in El-Salvadore as their proxies in their attempts to over-throw the leftist Sandinista government of Nicaraugua . The Contras were basically Guerrila terrorists who killed indisriminately . But because they were on America's side they were not branded as terrorists but as Freedom Fighters as they killed, tortured mutilated bodies and pillaged and blundered backed by American guns and cash.

And Obama claims that his choices for those who will be part of his administration does not limit the scope of what he intends to do once in power. He claims he will be setting the actual agenda and not those whom he appoints. They will be there to give their advice and expertise to help better shape those choices so that they are practical and doable.This is explained in part in the following article from

Obama Says Change Is in His Vision - if Not Appointments
Wednesday 26 November 2008 by: Steven Thomma, McClatchy Newspapers

Washington - President-elect Barack Obama essentially said Wednesday that he is the change, striving to assure Americans that he'll shake up Washington despite filling his administration with old hands from the Clinton administration and the capital's corridors of power.

"Understand where the vision for change comes from, first and foremost," Obama said. "It comes from me. That's my job, is to provide a vision in terms of where we are going, and to make sure, then, that my team is implementing

The Team Obama Should Have Picked By RAMZI KYSIA

November 27, 2008 "Counterpunch" -- - I feel cheated. I feel betrayed. And I’m not even a Democrat.

Our nation hasn’t yet finished counting all the election returns, but the outlines of a future Obama Administration are already clear: Clinton at State, Geithner at Treasury, Summers to head the National Economic Council, Holder at Justice, Emmanuel as Chief of Staff, General James Jones as the likely National Security Advisor, and Robert Gates likely to stay on at Defense.

There's not a progressive among them. Not even one. If Obama was vague about his personal politics during the primaries and general election it was for a reason: he doesn’t have any.

Obama is as close to a complete outsider as has ever been elected to the White House. His personal history and cultural narrative are unique and compelling. His rhetoric is uplifting. He has been elected by the largest margin of victory in twenty years. His party comfortably controls both houses of Congress. His campaign energized millions and created an incredible network of volunteers across the country who can now be called upon for continued political action. And, beyond these things, our nation now faces economic and foreign policy crises that have even our elites worried, and looking for fresh approaches.

With all these advantages, if Obama can’t find it in him to name even one person from the so-called “Democratic wing” of the Democratic Party, then it isn’t because he’s a coward, and it isn’t because he’s reaching out to conservatives - it's because he doesn’t want to.

and so it goes,

Thursday, November 27, 2008

Obama " A MORE PERFECT UNION " & Burroughs' " Thanksgiving Prayer " & The Imperfect Present

Two sides of the coin
or America's Hope vs America's Reality

First lets begin with Obama'S Thanksgiving Address

Obama: 'Coming Together to Overcome Adversity'

In a Thanksgiving address, President-elect Barack Obama recognizes the importance of family, gives thanks to our troops and talks about the strength needed to get through economic hardship. (Nov. 27)

UPDATE: Here's Rachel Maddow's Thanksgiving Message

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow is Thankful for......

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow reviews resignations and convictions of the Bush Administration and thankfully looks to the end of his rule.

Anyway its Thanksgiving Day in America. We should join Americans in giving thanks for the electing of Barack Obama as President. But America's past and even its present is still troubling to many of us outside America. Americans are free to to give thanks for what is good about America but they also need to come to grips with the darker side to their history and their present so they can move forward to make America that "More Perfect Union" Obama talked about so eloquently. But can Obama move America beyond its prejudices and racism; its Homophobia and its sexism . Can Obama move the American nation beyond its bullying attitude towards the rest of the world and accept its place as one nation among many that wish to move towards a better world. No nation can ever be perfect for there will always be some failings and more work to be done. The world, itself will never be perfect for there will always be some injustice taking place somewhere. All we can do is strive to do better.

Doing better means not invading and occupying sovereign nations under false pretenses. It also means treating people of different religions and cultures with dignity. It means not indisriminately bombing another countries towns and cities. It means treating those captured on the battlefield as you would have your troops treated if they were captured on the battlefield. It means not abusing or torturing those who are captured. It means that any country which invades and occupies another is responsible for the well being of the citizens of that country.

Barack Obama: "A More Perfect Union"
BarackObamadotcom March 19, 2008
Barack Obama speaks in Philadelphia, PA at Constitution Center, on matters not just of race and recent remarks but of the fundamental path by which America can work together to pursue a better future

And here's the otherside of the coin as it were in a poem by William S. Burroughs
see video at Youtube of A Thanksgiving Prayer
Text from

William S. Burroughs
A Thanksgiving Prayer

Thanks for the wild turkey and
the passenger pigeons, destined
to be shit out through wholesome
American guts.

Thanks for a continent to despoil
and poison.
Thanks for Indians to provide a
modicum of challenge and

Thanks for vast herds of bison to
kill and skin leaving the
carcasses to rot.
Thanks for bounties on wolves
and coyotes.

Thanks for the American dream,
To vulgarize and to falsify until
the bare lies shine through.

Thanks for the KKK.

For nigger-killin' lawmen,
feelin' their notches.

For decent church-goin' women,
with their mean, pinched, bitter,
evil faces.

Thanks for "Kill a Queer for
Christ" stickers.

Thanks for laboratory AIDS.

Thanks for Prohibition and the
war against drugs.

Thanks for a country where
nobody's allowed to mind the
own business.

Thanks for a nation of finks.

Yes, thanks for all the
memories-- all right let's see
your arms!

You always were a headache and
you always were a bore.

Thanks for the last and greatest
betrayal of the last and greatest
of human dreams.

And yet racism and prejudice and bigotry in all its varied forms continues in America. And what has been most disturbing is that racism and fear of the unknown during the campaign were being stoked by the conservative Shock Jocks and Hate Mongers from Sarah Palin and Sen. John McCain's racist fear-mongering campaign to the hate and venom spewing out from certain quarters in the media from Bill'OReilly to Michael Savage & Hannity & Co. & Fox News who are all still cshocked that Obama won the election. Since before Obam's victory the conservatives and the Far right have been hard at work creating a new and inventive narrative or conspiracy to explain away Obam's stunning victory. If its not ACORN they blame its that people only voted for him because he's Excotic ie Black or it was part of a far left socialist conspiracy or McCain and Palin were trashed by the Leftist Media or McCain and Palin were too centrists and not far enough to the right and on and on ...

Bad Taste, Racism or Hate Crime

From: BlackTubeChannel- Nov. 11,2008
The owners of Hercules Fence Co. in Ocala, Florida (Marion County), seem to think that just because Obama is "black", he's from the ghetto. They say their sign is a tribute to Obama... I say they are full of shit!

Since the election of Barack Obama Hate Crimes have been on the rise. In the clip below Bill O'Reilly explains the rise in Hate Crimes as due to an immigration policy crisis which then excuses those who commits such crimes as being in some sense forced to commit these crimes out of frustration. These people couldn't just peacefully protest but rather these anti-immigrant zealots go out and murder or beat people up .

I guess O'Reilly would claim that someone beating up or killing a Gay person does so because Gays by being openly Gay somehow are instigators of violence against them. It's like the Nazis who argue that Jewish people bring hatred and anti-semitism on themselves somehow or other by just being Jews by going to a Synagogue or what have you. Muslim Americans bring it on themselves according to this twisted Bill O'Reilly logic because some Muslims flew planes into buildings on 9/11 so are all Muslims or Arabs fair-game. Sometimes I fear what someone like O'Reilly or Ann Coulter or Laura Ingraham might say as they go out of their way to appeal to the most racist and bigoted and narrow minded Americans.

Bill O'Reilly distorts hate crimes and immigration

Bill O'Reilly compares two cases which are not really related. The seven men in Long Island who went out seeking a Hispanic American to beat up and kill were doing so based on their racist views against all Hispanics and illegal aliens. This fits the very definition of Hate Crime in which victims are targeted because of their skin color, race , religion or sexual orientation. Such sentiments have been fueled by the likes of Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck , Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage etc.& the conservatives and the Republicans over the past seven or so years in their over-heated racist rhetoric. So as they attack illegal immigrants blaming them for many of America's problems they help to embolden others to beyond speech tto actually committing physical violence against those people who are or who look Hispanic or Mexican.

The other crime is of a drunk driver killing two innocent women. The drivers intention was not to run down these two women it was rather a matter of a man drinking and driving which is a crime. The crime is also one of manslaughter or criminal negligence. The driver happened to be an illegal alien which is really beside the point. The driver could have been an American citizen who was a professional and an otherwise upstanding citizen who's family came over on the Mayflower. His crime is the same as that of the illegal alien who drives under the influence.

So Bill O'Reilly conflates the two crimes ignoring the facts. He then goes onto argue that the fact that the governments policies on immigration, in his view are wrong that the borders are porous and that there are some 12 million illegal immigrants in America has led to not just the DUI crime but somehow to the Hate Crime in which a youth was murdered. So what in the world is O'Reilly saying that because there is frustration over immigration policies in the United States that this leads otherwise law abiding citizens to go out and murder someone who fits some racial profile and that therefore the crime is understandable. And so these killers are not completly to blame for their actions but in fact the US government is at least in part to blame for this murder. As Slim Pickens once said " What in the Wide World of Sports is he talking about. So all acts of violence committed against anyone in America who looks Hispanic or Mexican is really the fault of the government. Isn't this just a typical old fashioned racist argument.
And here's a bit by The Young Turks on conservative opposition to Gay Rights . Cenk Uygur argues that conservitives such as Bill O'Reilly and Newt Gingrich who once fought against equal rights for African-Americans or women still don't accept that every American should have the same rights as other Americans no matter the color of their skin , their religious beliefs, their ethnicity or their sexual orientation.

Newt & O'Reilly Continue To Fight Against Gay Rights-The Young Turks

And Kurt Vonnegut said: And so it goes,

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Barack Obama Walking A Tightrope: Choices To Be Made

Bail-out for Auto industry
More on Joe Lieberman, John Brennan & Obamas Cabinet choices

Anyway the three car companies in America in their bid to redistribute the wealth are insisting that the US Federal Treasury bail them out. These corporate giants are such hypocrites in asking for such help when in the "Good Times" they are always arguing in favor of deregulation and the "Free Market" and the so-called level playing field. During these meetings these CEOs talk about cost cutting by firing over 50,000 workers while still giving themselves bonuses and jetting around the country in their respective fleets of private executive luxury jets. First they should be made to cut the fat as it were at the very top and then ask for money to either save jobs or to create better severance packages for those laid off. It should also as part of any bail-out be required that they spend money on developing cars that are more fuel efficient and which pollute less as in being more environmentally friendly. If those in power had the guts and the imagination & foresight and were not at the beck and call of Big Industry and the lobbyists they would insist on a deal with the companies that would benefit the consumer and the environment. But how does one reason with Big Business concerns who reward executives for firing thousands of American workers or for outsourcing jobs to countries where workers will labor for wages which are less than what American workers would expect to be paid. One should question these CEOs loyalty to American workers or to their own country since for them all that matters is the bottom line. It is also a bit odd to bail out these companies which are in financial trouble in part because of being mismanaged by the very CEOs who are now begging for government assistance.

Big Three Fly Private Jets-CBS
Nov. 19, 2008

From The Young Turks- GM & Ford Crying Poor While Flying Private Jets
Cenk Uygur TheYoungTurks November 19,
Watch more at

and more on Lieberman as an opponent of Barack Obama who will not do anything to promote any progressive style policies of President Elect Obama. The Democrats won not under a conservative banner but under a liberal and progressive banner . Obama and the Democrats won the election and so they should act like winners rather than continuing to kow tow to the conservatives and Big Money interests in Washington. Obama won by six million or more votes yet he and the Democrats act as if they only won by a small margin. Obama ran on his slogan of Change and so having won he has been given a mandate and a duty to his supporters to bring about change. Was his use of the term "change" just another cynical political maneuver or did he mean it. Change does not mean business as usual in Washington. It is up to his supporters in the United States to put pressure on him to do what is right and not just what is expedient.

Keith Olbermann's "Worst Person" - Sen. Joe Lieberman
Nov. 24, 2008

Turncoat Joe Lieberman- May 14, 2008
Keith Olberman examines the insanity of Joe Lieberman
Lieberman hatchetman for McCain - Negative Politicing & guilt By Association

And in an open letter to President -Elect Barack Obama a group of American psychologists who have been campaigning against the involvement of psychologists in torture and against the use of torture by US military or CIA etc. they request that Obama reconsider appointing John Brennan as CIA director of the CIA.

Open Letter to Obama: Reject John Brennan as Director of the CIA- November 22 - at Common

Dear President-Elect Obama,

We are writing to urge you not to select John Brennan as Director of the CIA. We are psychologists and allies who have long opposed the abuses of detainees under the Bush administration. We are just concluding a successful several-year struggle to remove psychologists from their roles in aiding or abetting these abuses. It has been a distressing fact that, while the Bush administration resorted to abuse and torture of those in our custody, often psychologists have been put in positions to use their psychological expertise to guide these unconscionable practices.

Noam Chomsky has also voiced concern over the people Obama is appointing to various positions in his administration.

on Obama and his Cabinet Selections
Nov. 24, 2008

and so it goes,

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Obama, Lieberman & The Memory Hole: Bush Regime's Crimes Forgotten

So anyway have all the lies and propaganda of the Bush Regime been forgotten so soon. Is it all been flushed down the Memory Hole. Surely it shouldn't all be forgotten or forgiven out of hand. Bush and his gang of crooks , thieves, swindlers , torturers and murderers should at least should be shamed in public and made to ask the American people for forgiveness.

Joe Lieberman Refuses To Apologize For Campaigning Against Obama

November 23, 2008

Meet the Press, 11/23/08. More:

Lieberman is wrong . It isn't just a matter of what was said in the heat of the moment during the final weeks of the campaign but what Lieberman has said about anyone who dares question the the policies of the Bush administration. Lieberman was a cheerleader for the Bush Regime's push to go to war with Iraq. In Lieberman's opinion Anyone who questions the Intel about Iraq is not a patriotic American because they are undermining the Commander In Chief during a war. Lieberman ignores the fact that the administration lied to the Media and the American people and to the Senate and the Congress. These are impeachable offences under American law and its constitution.

Tom Brokaw being the toady that he is allows Lieberman to get away with framing his answer as if it was only during the campaign that Lieberman said anything against Barack Obama or anyone else who disapproved of the Bush Regime. Over and over again since 9/11 Lieberman was quick to condemn anyone who dared question George W. Bush's policies or motives. Lieberman saw nothing wrong with making Bush into the Dictator In Chief granting him and Cheney & Co. all the power they wanted to break whatever American or International Laws they chose to. Lieberman like Dick Cheney is the quintessential " Ugly American " believing America can do whatever it wants; invade sovereign nations to get their oil; to kill hundreds of thousands of people; to kidnap, torture and murder those who are under suspicion of being enemies of the United States etc.

We can only hope that Barack Obama will be able to control and to pull the plug as it were on Lieberman if Lieberman becomes an obstructionist but hasn't this been Lieberman's role all along.

Joe Lieberman an Early Supporter of Iraq War- Drinking the Neocon Kool-Aid

From Echochamber project

10/2/02: Joe Lieberman was very eager to authorize Bush "to take military action to protect the region and the world from Iraq under Saddam Hussein." He was one of the senators who shared the stage with Bush before the House & Senate approved the war 9 days later. Lieberman says, "There is no more fateful, important, or difficult responsibility that the Constitution gives members of Congress than to decide when, whether, and how to authorize the President as Commander-in-Chief to go to war. Mr. President, in your eloquent, powerful, and convincing statement this morning, you have reminded us, and I believe the American people, about why this is such a circumstance."Lieberman concludes by saying that the resolution authorizing the war in Iraq is "the best hope for a stronger America and for a life for the American people that is safer."

Joe Lieberman an Early Supporter of Iraq War- Drinking the Neocon Kool-Aid

It is strange and ironic hearing Lieberman talking about the rule of law and yet the Bush Regime which he supports over and over again broke one law after another. In fact Bush & Cheney etc. argued that the United States can act unilaterally and ignore the International community and International Laws and agreements. They also argued over the last eight years that the President and Vice President of the United States are above the law . They argue as the Executive Branch that they are not accountable to Congress or the Senate or the Judiciary or even the American People in a time of war.

Bush and Cheney and their ideology of expanding the American Empire and their belief in deregulation and Laissez Faire unfettered Capitalism of the Free Market Place have been rejected by the American people when Americans voted in favor of Barack Obama as President .The American voters in the election of Barack Obama have rejected the use of renditions and torture and other abuses of detainees.

Was it right for Barack Obama to forgive Joe Lieberman ? Can Lieberman be trusted or will he do all he can to protect former members of the Bush administration. Will he continue to pander to the Pentagon Hawks and the Rogue CIA. Will he continue to support the use of torture and to defend those who have given orders to torture and abuse detainees ?

From The Real News Network- Joe (Lieberman) and Barack : Who owns who? By Pepe Escobar
Once Senator Joe Lieberman was Senator Barack Obama's mentor and urged him to "reach for the stars." Then he fiercely campaigned against Obama alongside his close friend, Republican Senator John McCain. He lost his bet. Many a Democrat believed there was only one way out as far as Lieberman was concerned: heavy punishment by the Democratic Party. The President-elect ordered otherwise. Pepe Escobar argues this is a political marriage of convenience.

And from
The Young Turks: Lieberman Pushes For War With Iran.
From: TheYoungTurksAdded: May 13, 2008

Oh yes the commentator Cenk Uygur gets upset but the issue is important and can lead to even further disaster for the United States.
JOE LIEBERMAN argues in favor of interrogation techniques what the rest of the world calls torture. Lieberman claims that either these techniques are not torture and if they are so what because they are necessary to America's security which trumps any notions of human rights or International Agreements.

For instance
Lieberman on Torture by Jesse Hamilton Hartford Courant February 14, 2008

Sen. Joe Lieberman, the "Independent Democrat," joined Senate Republicans this week trying to oppose a bill banning interrogation techniques, including waterboarding. The bill passed Wednesday (though the White House has threatened a veto.) But the senator explained more of his view on torture and waterboarding on Thursday.

The bill would restrict all government agents to the use of techniques described in the Army Field Manual, which doesn't allow physical methods of interrogation. Why does Lieberman oppose the idea? Because he sees information, including classified reports, that lead him to believe "the terrorists are actively planning, plotting to attack us again. I want our government to be able to gather information."
"The ban was much too broad," he said.

So Lieberman claims such techniques as waterboarding is more psychological than physical and according to Lieberman does not therefore constitute torture. So faked executions , the playing of loud music, sleep deprivation or sensory deprivation , isolation , threats and intimidation , verbal abuse - like Bush and Cheney Lieberman rejects the International Agreements on torture and the accepted definitions of torture in those various agreements including the Geneva Conventions. Once again we have an American Senator who thinks American officials have a right to re-define torture and to re-interpret the Geneva Conventions to suit America's purposes and agenda.And once again we have someone in a powerful position who will give the military and private contractors and the CIA etc. a great deal of leeway. In what sense is this supposed to be a sign of change.

Lieberman supported the War in Iraq and continues to do so while urging an attack on Iran and other countries.He has been an outspoken cheerleader for the Bush Regime and its policies. He was also a supporter of the McCain/Palin ticket and was used as an attack dog as it were against Barack Obama.
Does Obama think he can control Lieberman?

Lieberman as they say happily drank the Kool-Aid in regards to Iraq. It seems He believed all the propaganda & lies that the Bush Regime said about Saddam, Iraq, WMDs and Saddam's connections to Al Qaeda & 9/11. He believes that "water-boarding" and other torture techniques are not in fact torture since Cheney told him it wasn't. The Bush Regime made up its own definition of what is and what is not "torture" and Joe Lieberman accepts it as gospel truth.


Lieberman- Bush's Man in Obama Adminiistration
Bush and Lieberman on Iraq (Updated)

How many of the Good Old Boys who supported Bush & Cheney will keep their jobs and not be at least shamed into going into the shadows where they belong.
Joe Lieberman was and is amongst those who believe that any American citizen or legislator can be accused of being a traitor who gives aid and comfort to America's enemies who criticizes the Bush Regime about its policies.This in itself should have gotten him tossed out of the Democratic Party if they had any sense or any sense of decency or shame.

And here is Lieberman being schooled & scolded by Chuck Hagel
Joe Lieberman gets ripped apart by Chuck Hagel on MTP

ctbloggerAdded: January 14, 2007
A Republican does something that the Democrats refuse to do...put Holy Joe Lieberman in his place.Read more about Geogr Bush's favorite senator at ConnecticutBLOG

Salon by Glenn Greenwald Wednesday, January 24, 2007 The toxicity of Joe Lieberman's treason accusations

Joe Lieberman has probably become the single most poisonous Beltway voice when it comes to the war in Iraq. The Bush administration's principal rhetorical tactic for the last five years, of course, has been to equate opposition to its policies and criticism of the Leader with love of the Terrorists. But when it comes to the debate over Iraq, Lieberman -- time and again -- has managed to descend even further into the rhetorical sewer than the administration itself.Lieberman, of course, spent several years warning Americans not to criticize their Leader with regard to the War. Just two weeks ago, Lieberman went on Meet the Press and prompted an angry outburst from Chuck Hagel after Lieberman sat there smugly accusing Hagel and anyone else who opposes the Glorious Surge of wanting the U.S. to lose in Iraq. In the same appearance, Lieberman also looked straight into the camera and said that the U.S. was "attacked on 9/11 by the same enemy that we’re fighting in Iraq today" -- a claim so transparently false that even the President long ago abandoned it.But yesterday, Lieberman reached what might be a new low. During the confirmation hearings of Gen. David Petraeus, Lieberman provoked this truly reprehensible exchange with Gen. Petraeus, as summarized by The Washington Post's Thomas Ricks:

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) asked Army Lt. Gen. David H . Petraeus during his confirmation hearing yesterday if Senate resolutions condemning White House Iraq policy "would give the enemy some comfort."Petraeus agreed they would, saying, "That's correct, sir."

Using the terms to" give comfort" and the "enemy" in the same phrase has no conceivable objective other than to invoke accusations of treason. The Constitution's definition of "treason" is exactly that -- giving "Aid and Comfort" to the enemy. For Lieberman to purposely track the Constitution's treason language when describing opponents of the "surge" plan -- and to invite the new Iraq War Commander to agree with his accusation -- reveals so inescapably what Lieberman is. That's just the basest and most despicable smear one can imagine.The Post also re-prints the response to this exchange from Sen. John Warner -- who, as a newly announced surge opponent and co-sponsor of one of the enemy-comforting resolutions in question, is now one of the many whom Lieberman is accusing of being "some" type of a traitor. Warner warned Petraeus of how ill-advised it is for Petraeus to associate himself with the toxic sentiments of Joe Lieberman:

I hope that this colloquy has not entrapped you into some responses that you might later regret. I wonder if you would just give me the assurance that you'll go back and examine the transcript as to what you replied with respect to certain of these questions and review it, because we want you to succeed.

To Joe Lieberman, anyone who opposes whatever Iraq plan he happens to be currently favoring is a frivolous, defeat-hungry traitor -- giving "some comfort" to the "enemy." He's really the Senate's modern-day Joe McCarthy, smearing everyone's character and impugning everyone's motives who doesn't march faithfully along behind the President. What makes it all the more deceitful is that he never ceases to piously masquerade around as the Beacon of Civility and Honor, a disguise long propped up by an adoring Beltway media.But now, Lieberman's behavior has become so toxic and ignoble that even decorous, restrained Senate Republicans -- no strangers to the art of the political smear -- have begun condemning him in unusually strong terms. What is more pernicious than for a politician, in a Senate hearing with the country's new top General in Iraq, to expressly equate disagreement with their war views with treason? Not much.

Lieberman also believes Obama's policies on Iraq will rob America of a victory in Iraq:
And from CNN Sun July 20, 2008
Lieberman: Obama choosing to lose Iraq war

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama is choosing to lose the Iraq war by planning to withdraw American combat troops, a high-profile supporter of Republican candidate Sen. John McCain said Sunday.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman, a Democrat-turned-independent from Connecticut, said McCain's support for bolstering U.S. forces in Iraq last year to subdue insurgents has made Obama's expected visit to Iraq this week possible.

"John McCain had the guts to argue against public opinion, to put his whole campaign on the line, because, as he says, he'd rather lose an election than lose in a war that he thinks is this important to the United States," Lieberman said on "Fox News Sunday."

"If Barack Obama's policy in Iraq had been implemented, he couldn't be in Iraq today," Lieberman said, adding that Obama "was prepared to accept retreat and defeat."

Obama's expected arrival in Baghdad is part of a multi-country trip that included a Saturday stop in Afghanistan, where the Illinois senator says he would send more U.S. troops to bolster the fight against the Taliban and al Qaeda.

The remarks by Lieberman -- who ran for vice president as a Democrat in 2000 -- drew a sharp response from Sen. Evan Bayh, an Obama supporter who appeared with Lieberman on the show.

Obama's initial opposition to the 2003 invasion of Iraq "was right from the beginning," said Bayh, D-Indiana

And even after discovering that the Bush Administration had cooked up the Intel on Iraq and bamboozled the Media and the American people Lieberman like other American Conservatives still believes everything the Bush Regime and its propagandists say.

Lieberman: We may have to bomb Iran-June 10, 2007
Lieberman Believes all of the Bush's administration's Cooked up Intel on Iran

He claims he's seen the evidence that Iran is a major player in the Iraq War.
Didn't Senator Lieberman make similar claims about Iraq before the US Invasion & Occupation of Iraq. He mentions several hundred dead American troops but says nothing about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed. I forgot they are not Americans and so to Lieberman and the conservatives the Iraqis don't count.

Lieberman: Iranians will "pay for it.":
mjbindcAdded: March 04, 2007

Sen. Lieberman outside the studios of CBS News in Washington, D.C. on March 4, 2007.Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) today re-asserted his belief in intelligence presented by the Bush administration proved a link between the Iranians Quds special forces and Shia insurgents in Iraq, he has also said that he believes the highest levels of the Iranian government are behind this alleged relationship. Lieberman recently admonished others before a session of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee for being skeptical of these intelligence claims.The Senator went so far as to advise the Bush administration to read the riot act to the Iranians and let them know that "if they don't stop, they'll pay for it


Lieberman: How About Another War?- Sept. 11, 2007
From: VeracifierGeneral David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker testify before the Senate on the Iraq surge progress report, September 11 2007

Lieberman claims that America is at war with most of the nations in the Middle East except Israel.

Lieberman spouts the Bush administration line that Syria and Iraq & possibly Lebanon took part in 9/11 attacks.
Specter Gives Lieberman A Lesson On Foreign Policy
From: intoxination

Added: April 08, 2007

In a total flip-flop we have a Republican defending Nancy Pelosi, while Liberman, the man who swears he is a Democrat, is bashing Pelosi. Liebmerman even goes as far as to try to implicate Syria in 9/11.

and so it goes,

Monday, November 24, 2008

Obama Say It Isn't So : Obama Rewards John Brennan & others Involved in The War Crimes of The Bush Regime

Obama Rewards John Brennan & others Involved in The War Crimes of The Bush Regime .
Pro-Torture official to become CIA director in Bush Administration. Is Obama going too far with his attempts at reconciliation and Bipartisanship by ignoring those who abused their positions of power and authority? What's next bringing back Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney. Is Obama too steeped in the American Mythos and Fantasy that he finds it difficult to label fellow Americans as Criminals and Liars and Propagandists let alone put these criminals on trial or at least investigate to discover whether or not their actions were criminal.

The American people voted for change not for more of the same old corruption and propaganda and lies. There are those who served in the Bush Regime who are guilty of misleading the American people and there are those who are guilty of criminal activity whether it be corruption or of committing War Crimes.Those who committed War Crimes or Crimes Against Humanity must be brought to justice . If Obama won't do it one hopes that the World Court and the United Nations will begin investigations and if necessary go ahead with indictments , arrests and prosecutions. There is little chance of this because unfortunately the United Nations has been set up in such a way that the United States can always use its veto power to defeat such actions or proposals. This is one of the reasons I have argued against the Veto power of the countries in the Security Council. It could be replace by a two-thirds majority or get rid of the council once and for all. see below for more.

Have Obama's Supporters been betrayed even before Obama becomes president ?
Is Obama playing an intricate political game of intrigue which the public does not yet understand? For instance is he using the famous quote of Sun-Tzu:

Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.
Chinese general & military strategist (~400 BC)


Anyway Obama it is believed will not only not prosecute John Brennan who supported the Bush Regime and defended the use of torture & renditions but instead of facing a war crimes trial John Brennan is to be kept on as a National Intelligence adviser & Head of the CIA . (Note: the case of Joe Lieberman will be discussed in next post)

Melvin Goodman on Obama and his intelligence advisers-On Democracy Now!
Ex-CIA Officials Tied to Rendition Program and Faulty Iraq Intel Tapped to Head Obamas Intelligence Transition Team

John Brennan and Jami Miscik, both former intelligence officials under George Tenet, are leading Barack Obama's review of intelligence agencies and helping make recommendations to the new administration. Brennan has supported warrantless wiretapping and extraordinary rendition, and Miscik was involved with the politicized intelligence alleging weapons of mass destruction in the lead-up to the war on Iraq. We speak with former CIA analyst Melvin Goodman and Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

CIA Official In Favor of Torture Could Be In Obama Adm.
From: TheYoungTurks
Added: November 21, 2008
Watch more at

As Richard Weiner at the Huffington Post writes in his article John Brennan, Torture-Tainted CIA Prospect, Alarms Obama Supporters Nov.21, 2008

Marc Ambinder reported Thursday evening that former National Counterrorism Center head John Brennan is Barack Obama's "favorite to be nominated director of the Central Intelligence Agency." According to Ambinder's sources, Brennan has been vetted and even begun recruiting his team.
The news has alarmed Obama supporters who remember Brennan best for his role in both faulty pre-war intelligence and agreement with Vice President Dick Cheney on torture.

Glenn Greenwald writes, "I'm both entirely unsurprised and basically undisturbed by the fact that Obama's most significant appointments thus far are composed largely of standard Washington establishment figures and pro-Iraq-War hawks." But Brennan is "a different matter."

To appoint someone as CIA Director or Director of National Intelligence who was one of George Tenet's closest aides when The Dark Side of the last eight years was conceived and implemented, and who, to this day, continues to defend and support policies such as "enhanced interrogation techniques" and rendition (to say nothing of telecom immunity and warrantless eavesdropping), is to cross multiple lines that no Obama supporter should sanction. Truly turning a page on the grotesque abuses of the last eight years requires both symbolism (closing Guantanamo) and substantive policy changes (compelling adherence to the Army Field Manual, ensuring due process rights for all detainees, ending rendition, restoring safeguards on surveillance powers). Appointing John Brennan to a position of high authority would be to affirm and embrace, not repudiate, the darkest aspects of the last eight years.

The Daily Dish by Andrew Sullivan17 Nov 2008 John Brennan: Change We Cannot Believe In

The good news from last night's 60 Minutes interview is that Obama has clearly committed himself to ending the torture policy of Bush and Cheney. But that clarity will sadly be in doubt if Marc is right and John Brennan becomes the next CIA Director:

"Brennan's long association with George Tenet and with the CIA during the first few years of the Bush administration may give civil liberties advocates and Congressional Democrats some pause; it is not clear to what degree Brennan participated in or was read into many of the intelligence community's controversial post 9/11 /Iraq programs, including extraordinary renditions and orders that sanctioned coercive interrogation techniques."

The plain English for "coercive interrogation techniques" is torture. And any association with Tenet, who authorized war crimes, and used the Gestapo term "enhanced interrogation techniques", taints the office. It's not change. Glenn Greenwald, meanwhile, has a very helpful update on Brennan's record. While skeptical of Brennan on torture, Larison points to this paragraph from the NYT's profile:
As a senior adviser to Mr. Tenet in 2002, Mr. Brennan was present at the creation of the C.I.A.’s controversial detention and interrogation program, which Mr. Obama has strongly criticized. But Mr. Brennan has distanced himself from the program, and told The Washington Times last month that interrogation methods like waterboarding are “not going to be allowed under an Obama presidency.”

Well: waterboarding isn't even currently used under Bush any more. Talk about low expectations. And anyone close to Tenet has no place in an administration eager to restore America's moral standing. This report from CQ is also very disturbing:
Although Obama issued a statement during the campaign supporting the idea of applying the Army field manual interrogation standard to all agencies, not just the Pentagon, a senior campaign adviser to Obama left the door open to applying another standard.

“He [believes] torture not be allowed in any form or fashion in any part of the federal government, and he would make sure that was the case,” said John Brennan, who served under former CIA chief George J. Tenet in a variety of capacities at a time when the agency has since acknowledged it waterboarded a small number of terror suspects.

“Whether the Army field manual is comprehensive enough to cover all those tactics and techniques, that’s something I think he’d look to his national security advisers for,” Brennan said in an interview with CQ in August.
Appointing Brennan to the CIA does not mean change from Bush. That was absolutely a critical part of Obama's message. With Brennan, we get the taint of a Bush and two-facedness of a Clinton. We need to say goodbye to all that, not perpetuate its double-speak.

and in a further update on John Brennan Andrew Sullivan argues on the issue of the use of " Torure " by the Bush Regime's True Believers in his article of Nov. 21 "No Way. No How. No Brennan.

The simple answer to the question - what length do we want to go? - is to abide by the rule of law. Why is that so hard to understand? And yet Brennan and Tenet didn't. They authorized clear torture sessions. Why is such a man even considered for the post under Obama? This man cannot end the taint of Bush-Cheney. He was Bush-Cheney. In fact, if Obama picks him, it will be a vindication of the kind of ambivalence and institutional moral cowardice that made America a torturing nation. It would be an unforgivable betrayal of his supporters and his ideals. It would be an acknowledgment that Tenet himself is not a war criminal, while the facts indisputably prove that he was.

In fact, I'd like to see much more evidence of whether Brennan himself is implicated in the war crimes and unlawfulness of the past eight years. If nominated, the Senate should find out. Whatever his qualities, Brennan is not change. He has even used Tenet's disgusting adoption of the Gestapo euphemism "enhanced interrogation." Here he is arguing against change earlier this year:

Even though people may criticize what has happened during the two Bush administrations, there has been a fair amount of continuity. A new administration, be it Republican or Democrat -- you're going to have a fairly significant change of people involved at the senior-most levels. And I would argue for continuity in those early stages. You don't want to whipsaw the [intelligence] community. You don't want to presume knowledge about how things fit together and why things are being done the way they are being done. And you have to understand the implication, then, of making any major changes or redirecting things. I'm hoping there will be a number of professionals coming in who have an understanding of the evolution of the capabilities in the community over the past six years, because there is a method to how things have changed and adapted.

Given that Obama may not have the power or the desire to prosecute the War Criminals of the Bush Regime it will then be up to the World Court and the UN Security Council to take action.

Maybe given the power of the UN Security Council the US could be designated a " rogue state "and ousted.

as the UN Charter states:

A Member State against which preventive or enforcement action has been taken by the Security Council may be suspended from the exercise of the rights and privileges of membership by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council. A Member State which has persistently violated the principles of the Charter may be expelled from the United Nations by the Assembly on the Council's recommendation.
Here's a list of alleged crimes of the Bush Regime and The case against the United States:

Illegal invasion of the sovereign nation of Iraq under false pretences i.e. lies, fabrications, cooked-up Intel etc.
the disregard for civilians in the conduct of its invasion of Iraq
the illegal and unnecessary destruction of Iraq's infrastructure i.e. power plants, water & sewage treatment plants, hospitals and schools & places of worship
The use of torture and other abusive techniques on POWs
The terrorizing and intimidation of the Iraqi people
The disregard of the well being of millions of displaced people in Iraq
The ongoing attacks on & intimidation of the Media and the Press.
The disregard of the safety of the Media and Press during the conflict.
The on going attacks on personnel and equipment of the Red Cross and the Red Crescent.
The massive bombing of Iraqi civilians in cities such as Fallujah.
The disinterest and failure to rebuild hospitals, schools , police stations, power plants , water and sewage treatment plants as well as roads and highways etc. which under International Law is the responsibility if the invading forces. It is thereby another crime committed by Bush Regime & Tony Blair of Great Britain and other governments involved in the occupation of Iraq.

But don't hold your breath as the UN has become irrelevant and only appears to act when the United States thinks it should act.

see appropriate sections of the Geneva Conventions for example on Civilian Populations and basic Infrastructure. The United States in its war i & Occupation of Iraq has been guilty of a number of War Crimes based on a reading of the Geneva Conventions. Besides those listed below the United States is guilty of a War of Aggression on a Sovereign state since its reasons and case it presented for going to war were based on propaganda, fabrications and out and out lies which they presented as "undisputed facts" to the UN Assembly.Saddam had nothing to do with Al Qaeda or the 9/11 attack nor had he any WMDS and was not an imminent threat to the United States or its allies. The country was a mere shadow of its former self after a decade of draconian inhumane sanctions.

From Geneva Conventions: Does Anybody Remember?

Protocol 1
Additional to the Geneva Conventions, 1977
Chapter I: Basic Rule and Field of Application
Article 48: Basic Rule
In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.
Chapter II: Civilians and Civilian Population
Article 50: Definition of Civilians and Civilian Population
The presence within the civilian population of individuals who do not come within the definition of civilians does not deprive the population of its civilian character.
Article 51: Protection of the Civilian Population
The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules, which are additional to other applicable rules of international law, shall be observed in all circumstances.
The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited.
Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks are:
those which are not directed at a specific military objective;
those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective; or
those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol; and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.
Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate: an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.
Chapter III: Civilian Objects
Article 52: General Protection of Civilian Objects
Civilian objects shall not be the object of attack or of reprisals. Civilian objects are all objects which are not military objectives as defined in paragraph 2.
In case of doubt whether an object which is normally dedicated to civilian purposes, such as a place of worship, a house or other dwelling or a school, is being used to make an effective contribution to military action, it shall be presumed not to be so used.
Article 54: Protection of Objects Indispensable to the Survival of the Civilian Population
Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is prohibited.
It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance value to the civilian population or to the adverse Party, whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any other motive.

In tomorrow's post more on that other Bush Cheerleader/ War Monger & Pro-Bush Propagandist Joe Lieberman who defended torture and renditions and other criminal activities of the Bush Regime. So there will once again be no justice or retribution and common decency once again is mocked.