American Entropy is dedicated to the disruption and discrediting of neoconservative actions and the extreme ideals of the religious right.
RNC press release, pure BS
In a press release by the RNC, brought to my attention by barrettbrown in a diary at dKos, the RNC seeks to stamp us with the usual BS. BarretttBrown highlights one part at the end of the release
"Mainstream Democrats ought to wake up and smell the coffee. Their party has been compromised by the extreme left."
Well, if we've been compromised by the extreme left, which is a bunch of BS, then the Republicans have been hijacked and taken over by the extreme and in some cases militant right. They even have a Planned Parenthood, abortion office bombing terrorist running for Senate in Florida.
ARG poll, approve or disapprove
(FireFox has developed a problem with this site and it may appear to have only one post at first. If you scroll down you find the previous posts. This happened before only with IE, after some chit-chat between myself and Blogger the problem just went away. I hope it is the same this time but I am seriously considering a new format as this one has given me problems.)
The reason that bushCo. but the treason label on anyone who had other ideas and views on the situation in Iraq is because the country is slowly waking up, as reported in the previous post. A good way to look at America, not scientific but if bushCo doesn't believe in science why should we, is as a country of thirds. A third on the right, a third on the left, and a third that doesn't identify with Repubs or Dems; the Independents (I'd consider myself an Independent but the Dems got me in their tent long ago). bushCo. and Rove see the shift in the Independents and thus play their 9/11 card, seems they like to celebrate it whenever things are looking bad. This is a very sad truth, but I don't think America will take more of this; especially when nothing is getting done at home, lives aren't improving, damaging policy and appointments are the status quo.
well at least the reality based two-thirds of America.
The latest ARG polls look terrible for bushCo.:
Republicans 84 12
Independents 17 75
Democrats 18 77
49% Say Bush Responsible for Provoking Iraq War
Forty-nine percent (49%) of Americans say that President Bush is more responsible for starting the War with Iraq than Saddam Hussein. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that 44% take the opposite view and believe Hussein shoulders most of the responsibility.
Now, however, 78% of all Democrats say that Bush is more responsible for starting the War than Hussein. Just 18% take the opposite view.
Republicans, by a 76% to 17% margin, say that Hussein is responsible.
Among those not affiliated with either major party, 52% name Bush and 34% Hussein.
The statement in italics is the important stat, these are the people that win elections. It appears that they are coming around.
Intelligent Republican jumps ship, drops the 'N'-bomb
I'm sure this is a liberal operative, but a NC judge, once a Republican has had enough, dropped out of the party, and called bushCo. Nazis!
A candidate for North Carolina Chief Justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court has announced on her campaign's blog that she is leaving the Republican Party and denounced the Bush administration's policy on troop withdrawal from Iraq. Rachel Lea Hunter, a Republican and a candidate for Chief Justice, likens Bush’s administration to the "Nazis" and says that all who disagree with the administration are being branded as "traitors".
Rachel Lee Hunter's blog
Republican candidate calls Bush Admin 'Nazis,' quits party
Republican Candidate Calls Bush Administration "Nazis"
John Abizaid sets Cheney straight
The first sentence says it all...
The top American commander in the Persian Gulf told Congress on Thursday that the Iraqi insurgency has not grown weaker over the past six months, despite a claim by Vice President
Dick Cheney that it was in its "last throes."
See Dick, see Dick blush...
[UPDATE 314 pm]via Juan Cole
There appears to be a big gap in attitudes in Iraq between the generals and the subaltern officers and servicemen. An academic sent me this:
"Yesterday I talked with a 2nd Lt and West Point grad who has just come back from Iraq. He says flat out that the war is lost, that "we" only control territory when the troops are there in massive numbers and that "they" take over as soon as the troops leave, that the army is over-extended and morale is terrible -- drug use is escalating -- that there still isn't enough armor, that the Iraqi army and police are worse than useless, and that senior officers are convinced that it is Vietnam redux. One of his classmates a 23-year old was killed last week -- for nothing. There are signs that this story is belatedly beginning to sink in across the country, but he, and I, fears that it is too late."
We saw this sort of thing in Vietnam, too. The Generals are the last to know, and they always think victory is around the corner if only they can convince the US public to commit "blood and treasure" for a few decades.
Christians and their 2 decades of hate
Lawnorder has a good diary over at dKos entitled, Why Are Some American Christians So Bloodthirsty?
It's been going on for years now. Almost daily we read that another child, another parent.. is killed in Afghanistan or Iraq by U.S. weaponry in Mr. Bush's "war on terror." Sometimes it's a wedding party, or a bunch of kids, or a family of six.. who may even be killed on camera in real time for all the world to see and hear.
But no matter how bad it gets, nothing seems to change.. among Christian supporters of the Bush administration. "Stuff happens in a war zone.".. I've been reassured by countless pro-war Christians that, as long as civilians aren't intentionally targeted, taking their lives is okay, maybe even predestined, God's will many Christians in America will blindly support whichever war their president promotes, with the assumption that his much-advertised praying guarantees us that God approves of all those bombs and missiles, and even the inevitable collateral damage... [But not] all Christians in the U.S. find civilian deaths an acceptable price to ..pay for Mr. Bush's ultimate goals
Lawnorder's blog is here.
The terror frame is wrong; time to correct.
I think the time has come to introduce a new frame to the people of America. These people that I refer to our the people who create the middle; not the far-right nor the far-left, but a large portion of America that works day to day and leads busy lives They do not read the paper and watch the news, or otherwise follow the mainstream media let alone read blogs like this. They defiantly do not look into what they hear, they just process it. I believe that, if polled, a large majority of this group (the middle) would say and/or think that our enemies, in Islam, are so because of our culture or religion. I would go out on an edge and say that half of this group believes the same thing of any other adversary of ours, whether it is a diplomatic, economic, or geographical foe. I believe and know that this is false; at the very least it is false with respect to Islamic terrorism. It is neither about our religion nor culture; it is our policies. I think the public is ready to embrace this logic because the logic that has been used so far in the war on terror and the invasion of Iraq has become sour to the average American; those Americans who decide elections.
We had better change our thinking and policies; else we get stuck in a cyclic war that protects the very policies that causes Arabs, Muslims, whomever worldwide to staff the ranks of the global Islamic insurgency.
It won’t be much longer, but it gets better. Read on…
I’ve known this for some time, as I expect most readers have as well; but it needs to be repeated and projected to the middle. It is not the myth that we are a nations of infidels, a nation of freedom, or a representation of a just civilization that causes young men to fight us and martyr themselves en masse. Thomas Friedman almost had it when he wrote (emphasis added) “…we have to prove that we are serious, and that we understand that many off these terrorists hate our existence, not just our policies.” in his 13 September 2005 column entitled World War III. This phrasing was due to raw emotion and alarm from the attacks of 2001, but it stuck and the Bush administration and the RNC have adopted it and they have won with it. They currently wield it now.
It is our policies; it is not the peoples fault, it is our governments.
The thing is, is that these policies are right in front of everybody and certainly available to the MSM. These are six points that top-priority target and propagandist Osama bin Laden refers to repeatedly in communication after communication with the Western World. These points are repeated for a reason; because it gains
overwhelming strong support from every nook and cranny of the Islamic world. They are, as prepared in the book Imperial Hubris by Michael Scheuer.
* U.S. support for Israel that keeps Palestinians in the Israelis’ thrall.
* U.S. and other Western troops on the Arabian Peninsula.
* U.S. occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.
* Support for Russia, India, and China against their Muslim militants.
* U.S. pressure on Arab energy producers to keep oil prices low.
* U.S. support for apostate, corrupt, and tyrannical Muslim governments.
A few of these are feasible, some are not; but until something changes in American foreign policy, the above issues will sustain this insurgency regardless of whether we catch, kill, or otherwise marginalize bin Laden. The insurgency will continue long after Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea, et cetera.
These are all current policies, and some may say that to change or alter these policies is a concession. Well, is that better than generating an enemy while fighting it? If that is your logic than we will soon be fighting ourselves. Following up with; Does American survival rest on the political, military and economic support for Israel? Is our freedom and democracy best spread through fire? Is oil worth supporting tyrant regimes and/or positioning troops within Arab lands; thus flaming resentment? Do you know that the three holiest sites in Islam are in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Israel/Palestine? Would it not be smart to create some serious thought into the renewable energy issue? How many lives per barrel of oil? What is that price now and what could it be?
I think it is time to reach out, again, to the middle. Now is the time. The emotion and the need for optimism are over; truth is slowly permeating into the conventional conscience. With the ambiance surrounding the Republican leadership, right now,
* Gitmo, torture
* and so on… feel free to add in the comments.
we should try to reframe this issue away from the ‘they hate my religion’ or ‘freedom, culture, SUV whatever…’ rhetoric of the Republican mouthpieces, and into one addressing the root problem. Our policies abroad caused this era long before September 2001; and with a few minor changes, adjustments or reassessments we could do more for the war on terror than any quantity of currency could hope to do. After all, how secure/stable/much better is our situation now than when compared to that of 10 September 2001?
I hate neo-cons
but I'll let Juan Cole rant for me...
I don't usually bother to reply at any length to my Neocon critics. Mostly this is because they are simply insincere, and say what they say maliciously and in knowledge of its falsehood. In some instances they have quite unethically subjected their opponents to harassment of a sort that is illegal in some states. They are purely political beasts, for whom all statements are instrumental, and therefore they can never engage in useful dialogue.
Someone must have gotten some i-mail, idiot-mail.
Bolton's time in the Senate is done, Dr. Frist
[UPDATE - 347 pm]It seems that Dr. Frist really is a bush lap-dog. After a meeting with Bush, THEN Frist flips. Ahheeem…Flip-Flop
[UPDATE - 307 pm]Frist has reversed and now says that he will push vore[sic: for] a vote. As long as the Dems are kept in the dark on the nominee, I'd say it will be hard to get a vote out of the Senate. Either nominate someone else, or appoint Bolton during the recess.
Frist says that Bolton will not get a vote in the Senate and his fate rests on Bush. Expect a recess appointment; as I'd be surprised if the Repub leadership would break and send another, more qualified, appointment to the Senate.
Follow-up from this.
Iraqi official: U.S. hiding something
U.S. hiding secrets about Saddam, Iraqi Justice Minister alleges
Iraqi?s justice minister said Tuesday that U.S. officials are trying to delay interrogations of Saddam Hussein.
"It seems there are lots of secrets they want to hide," he told The Associated Press in an exclusive interview.
"There should be transparency and there should be frankness, but there are secrets that if revealed, won?t be in the interest of many countries," he said. "Who was helping Saddam all those years?"
Shandal also said Saddam?s trial would be over by the end of the year. "This trial will be accomplished within 2005 ? and this will only be in Iraqi courts," he said.
I wonder what it is? Couldn't be all the WMDs that Reagan and G.H.W. Bush sold Saddam in the 80s, could it?
Senate holds nomination of Bolton
The vote for cloture (54Y - 38N)is over and the Repubs failed to force-feed a damaging appointee into the U.N.
bushCo. refused to provide information and the opposition naturally votes against the appointee.
A Fourth of July surprise?
Downing Street Minutes, Iraq, and troop morale
More AP coverage of the Downing Street Minutes
In one memo, British Foreign Office political director Peter Ricketts openly asks whether the Bush administration had a clear and compelling military reason for war. "U.S. scrambling to establish a link between Iraq and al-Qaida is so far frankly unconvincing," Ricketts says in the memo. "For Iraq, 'regime change' does not stack up. It sounds like a grudge between Bush and Saddam."
82 Iraqi MPs Demand Occupation Pullout. That's 30% of the Interim government (of 275) this list will grow and is made up of Shi'a, Sunni, et al. Not just the Sunni's.
Eighty two Iraqi lawmakers from across the political spectrum have pressed for the withdrawal of the US-led occupation troops from their country.
The Shiite, Kurdish, Sunni Arab, Christian and communist legislators made the call in a letter sent by Falah Hassan Shanshal of the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), the largest bloc in parliament, to speaker Hajem Al-Hassani, reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).
?We have asked in several sessions for occupation troops to withdraw. Our request was ignored,? read the latter, made public on Sunday, June 19.
Here is a great article into the life of a soldier in Ramadi.
Under the glare of a midmorning sun, Staff Sgt. Jody Hayes stands sweating in the hatch of his M-113 armored vehicle, scanning for insurgents. Hayes and his Iowa National Guard crew have been stalled for nearly 30 minutes on a risky, slow-moving mission to clear road bombs, and he's getting nervous.
Suddenly he hears the snap of a sniper's bullet flying past his head. The round pierces the neck of the soldier next to him, Spec. John Miller, entering the two-inch gap between his Kevlar vest collar and helmet.
"Get down!" Hayes yells. Miller falls heavily against Hayes's leg, and at first Hayes believes his friend is taking cover. "Man, he got down pretty quick," he recalls thinking. Then he glances down and sees Miller bleeding at his feet.
Sgt. Ty Dermer, who is manning a .50-caliber machine gun within arm's reach of Miller, radios for help: "We got a man down! We need a medic, ASAP!"
Hayes drops down and cradles Miller's head in his lap, while Dermer rips open a pressure dressing and places it on the neck wound. Each man grabs one of Miller's hands and feels for a pulse. They still haven't found one when medic Spec. Jaymie Holschlag pulls open the back door of the M-113 and rushes, breathless, to Miller's side.
We've already begun the Iran war.
Scott Ritter has a new article up here. For those who don't know, Ritter is a UN weapons inspector who made several predictions about the Iraq invasion with most turning out, in time, to be correct. He also was one of the first to question WMD claims made by bushCo. Claims that the DSMs have made truth as reported here; WMD claims were 'totally implausible'.
The Scott Ritter article:
Americans, along with the rest of the world, are starting to wake up to the uncomfortable fact that President George Bush not only lied to them about the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (the ostensible excuse for the March 2003 invasion and occupation of that country by US forces), but also about the very process that led to war.
On 16 October 2002, President Bush told the American people that "I have not ordered the use of force. I hope that the use of force will not become necessary."
We know now that this statement was itself a lie, that the president, by late August 2002, had, in fact, signed off on the 'execute' orders authorising the US military to begin active military operations inside Iraq, and that these orders were being implemented as early as September 2002, when the US Air Force, assisted by the British Royal Air Force, began expanding its bombardment of targets inside and outside the so-called no-fly zone in Iraq.
These operations were designed to degrade Iraqi air defence and command and control capabilities. They also paved the way for the insertion of US Special Operations units, who were conducting strategic reconnaissance, and later direct action, operations against specific targets inside Iraq, prior to the 19 March 2003 commencement of hostilities.
President Bush had signed a covert finding in late spring 2002, which authorised the CIA and US Special Operations forces to dispatch clandestine units into Iraq for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein from power.
The fact is that the Iraq war had begun by the beginning of summer 2002, if not earlier.
Not hard to believe now that a large part of America has been informed of the Downing Street Minutes.
A simple suggestion
read Juan Cole today; three links...
On the Iraqi Army
Facing facts in Iraq
A former Pentagon official, journalist, and president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Leslie Gelb, a man with considerable political and military knowledge, came back from a fact-finding trip in Iraq talking about the "gap between those who work there, who were really careful of every word they uttered of prediction or analysis, and the expansive, sometimes, I think, totally unrealistic optimism you hear from people back in Washington."
In a report to the council, Gelb was scathing about America efforts to train an Iraqi army. "If you ask any Iraqi leader, they will tell you these people can't fight. They just aren't trained. And yet we're cranking them out like rabbits." As for plans to train a 10 division Iraqi army by next year, Gelb was scathing. "It became very apparent to me that these 10 divisions were to fight some future war against Iran. It had nothing to do, nothing to do," with taking Iraq over from the Americans and fighting the insurgents.
Americans have statistics for everything in Iraq, yet little of it reflects reality. "The information seeps in, and you wonder about its reliability," Gelb said. "You wonder if you really know what's going on, because essentially what you have are the statistics. It reminds me so of the Vietnam days."
Iraq goes from a Bush problem to a national problem
Because you have the big names in the Democratic Party warning of a draft, and others lobbying for a complete pull-out from Iraq. Both speculations are damaging because there is no realistic alternative or idea that accompanies these warnings or demands. The draft is coming and there is no Democratic fix for it. Some Dems demand we get out of Iraq but have no words on what will happen afterwards. You can't change the past with inaction in the present of future.
Late last week a senior Bush administration official said; "I think you'll see it continuing up, because the terrorists know what's coming." Compare this to Bush and Cheney's claims of an insurgency being in their "last throes" and you clearly have a White House that is not in reality. Republican Senators and Representatives have begun to join the choir.
Nebraska Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel is angry. He's upset about the more than 1,700 U.S. soldiers killed and nearly 13,000 wounded in Iraq. He's also aggravated by the continued string of sunny assessments from the Bush administration, such as Vice President Dick Cheney's recent remark that the insurgency is in its "last throes." "Things aren't getting better; they're getting worse. The White House is completely disconnected from reality," Hagel tells U.S. News. "It's like they're just making it up as they go along. The reality is that we're losing in Iraq."
That's strikingly blunt talk from a member of the president's party, even one cast as something of a pariah in the GOP because of his early skepticism about the war. "I got beat up pretty good by my own party and the White House that I was not a loyal Republican," he says. Today, he notes, things are changing: "More and more of my colleagues up here are concerned."