By Norwood
OFaL (Our Fearless Leader) just held his 8th news conference ever. Here’s a sampling. Text from the news conference is in italics and my comments are bold.
QUESTION: Saddam Hussein’s alleged ties to Al Qaida were a key part of your justification for war, yet your own intelligence report, the NIE, defined it as, quote, “low confidence that Saddam would give weapons to Al Qaida.'’ Were those links exaggerated to justify war or can you finally offer us some definitive evidence that Saddam was working with Al Qaida?
BUSH: I think, first of all, remember I just said we’ve been there for 90 days since the cessation of major military operations. Now, I know in our world, where news comes and goes and there’s this, kind of, instant news and you must have done this and you must do this yesterday, that there’s a level of frustration by some in the media–I’m not suggesting you’re frustrated; you don’t look frustrated to me at all.
Frustrated by your hemming and hawing? Yes, I am. Answer the question: were the AQ links exagerated?
But it’s going to take time for us to gather the evidence and analyze the mounds of evidence, literally, the miles of documents that we have uncovered.
David Kay came to see me yesterday. He’s going to testify in a closed hearing tomorrow, which in Washington may not be so closed, as you know. And he was telling me the process that they were going through to analyze all the documentation. And that’s not only to analyze the documentation on the weapons programs that Saddam Hussein had, but also the documentation as to terrorist links.
And it’s just going to take awhile. And I’m confident the truth will come out.
So, you refused to allow the UN inspectors time to do their job, but we need to have patience while you search for non-existent evidence of a non-existent WMD program? Where are the tons of chemicals that you specifically mentioned in your SOTU?
And there is no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the United States’ security and a threat to peace in the region. And there’s no doubt in my mind that a free Iraq is important. It’s got strategic consequences for not only achieving peace in the Middle East, but a free Iraq will help change the habits of other nations in the region which will make America much more secure.
But none of those reasons are justification for an invasion of a sovereign nation.
QUESTION: Building, sort of, on that idea, it’s impossible to deny that the world is a better place and the region certainly a better place without Saddam Hussein.
But there’s a sense here in this country and a feeling around the world that the U.S. has lost credibility by building the case for Iraq upon sometimes flimsy or some people have complained nonexistent evidence.
And I’m just wondering, sir, why did you choose to take the world to war in that way? You know, look, in my line of work it’s always best to produce results. And I understand that.
(BUSH:) For a while the questions were, “Could you conceivably achieve a military victory in Iraq? You know the dust storms have slowed you down.'’ And I was a patient man because I realized that we would be successful in achieving our military objective.
Now, of course, the question is, you know, “Will Iraq ever be free? And will be it peaceful?'’ And I believe it will.
Uh, no. The question is, you know, “ sir, why did you choose to take the world to war in that way?” The question is: why did you exaggerate and lie in order to tip the public opinion in this country in favor of an illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq? If it takes so much time to track these alleged weapons down, why didn’t you give the UN inspectors time to do their jobs?
I remind some of my friends that it took us a while to go from the Articles of Confederation to the United States Constitution. Even our own experiment with democracy, it didn’t happen overnight. I’ve never expected Thomas Jefferson to emerge in Iraq in a 90-day period. And so this is going to take time.
And the world will see what I mean when I say a free Iraq will peace in the Middle East, and a free Iraq will be important for changing the attitudes of the people in the Middle East. A free Iraq will show what is possible in a world that needs freedom in a part of the world that needs freedom.
Is that the freedom to be shot by an occupying army, or the freedom to live in a lawless society which lacks even the most basic of necessities for its citizens, or some other form of freedom that I am forgetting?
Let me finish for a minute, please. Just getting warmed up.
(LAUGHTER)
I’m, kind of, finding my feet.
Here’s a hint: they’re usually connected to the ankle bones.
Saddam Hussein was a threat. The United Nations viewed him as a threat. That’s why they passed 12 resolutions. Predecessors of mine viewed him as a threat.
We gathered a lot of intelligence. That intelligence was good, sound intelligence on which I made a decision.
And in order to, you know, placate the critics and the cynics about intention of the United States we need to produce evidence. And I fully understand it, and I’m confident that our search will yield that which I strongly believe: that Saddam had a weapons program.
Well, yeah, he had a weapons program. But lately?
I want to remind you, he actually used his weapons program on his own people at one point in time, which was pretty tangible evidence.
That was an awful long time ago. We know the guy is a murderous tyrant. But how do you figure that he posed a direct threat to the U.S.?
But I’m confident history will prove the decision we made to be the right decision.
Check the link above for the rest of the transcript.
It’s interesting that we have just been told of more vague threats against airlines, warned to be a little more alert. As long as OFaL can keep the masses running scared, no one will really notice anything else that’s going on. OFaL is the protective figure who will keep us from harm, as long as we never question his judgement or his actions.
The funny thing is that OFaL has done nothing to make us more secure. He’s taken away plenty of our civil liberties. He’s killed lots of people. He’s illegally invaded a sovereign nation. He’s made assassination official American policy. And he’s made sure that the vast majority of the world’s citizens resent America for our bullying imperialistic foreign policy doctrine. I don’t know about you, but I don’t feel any safer.
Posted as National
Other posts by Norwood.
1 Comment »
By Norwood
The Miami Herald has this backgorund.
Also, an update from today’s inquest.
Bottom line; Golden probably killed himself, but the fact that many residents are fearful enough to take the notion of a lynching seriously should be a huge wake up call to those who think that racism is no longer an issue in our lovely country.
Posted as Florida
Other posts by Norwood.
1 Comment »
By Norwood
An AP story printed in the Tampa Trib is illustrative of the rich deep-south culture which so many rebel flag wavers would have you believe is all about manners:
Not long after the family of Feraris “Ray'’ Golden found his dead body dangling from a tree outside his grandmother’s home, ugly suspicions began to surface.
Police concluded that Golden committed suicide, hanging himself with a work shirt as a noose. But relatives say that’s impossible. They allege that the 32-year-old, who was black, was found with his hands tied behind his back.
Rumors swirled that Golden was lynched.
Friends say Golden was dating a white policeman’s daughter in this rural farming community of about 15,000, divided almost equally between black and white residents.
But this is not about race. No. This is all about manners. I can close my eyes and hear ol’ Bubba, as quoted in tomorrow’s paper: “See, it just aint polite for a negra to date a white girl…”
Lynchings reached their peak in the United States from the end of the Civil War until 1902, numbering more than 100 each year, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. The numbers dropped to double digits until 1935, when the average dropped again to a few a year until the 1960s.
In Belle Glade, a poor agricultural community surrounded by sugar cane fields and the Everglades, life for many has been the same for decades. Developers have passed over the city, preferring to fill the South Florida coastline 40 miles to the east, despite the town’s efforts to bring in new jobs and development.
“I think a lot of people are still stuck on the old days,'’ Federick said. “A lot of people try and hide it, but it’s still here.'’
So, an inquest is being held today by the state attorney to look at residents’ concerns that Mr. Golden may not have been a suicide.
“We’re not saying it’s a homicide. We’re not saying it’s a suicide. We just think there are some questions that need to be answered,'’ said Linda Johnson, local president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
A death by lynching hasn’t been documented for more than two decades, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. But the heated reaction to Golden’s death underscores the racial divide still present in Belle Glade and many small communities in the South, where accusations of lynching occasionally surface.
‘’We’ve seen a number of these cases where claims have been made and have not been substantiated,'’ said Mark Potok, editor of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Reports. ‘’I would simply caution people to be very careful if they assume lynching or even murder until the facts are in.'’
Belle Glade Police Chief Michael Miller said the investigation and autopsy point to suicide. A police video shows officers cutting down Golden’s body with his hands at his sides.
“It’s a small town, and when those things happen, rumors fly,” Miller said.
But investigators’ conclusions mean little to a black community that’s distrustful of the police and reluctant to believe Golden committed suicide.
So, Bubba may not have actually lynched the vicitm. He just spread rumors that he did. And the rumors were effective. They spread fear throughout the black community and sent a message that unwritten rules are still enforced in Belle Glade.
Posted as Florida
Other posts by Norwood.
2 Comments »
By Norwood
I wrote about this issue on July 9th, and someone commented that I shoulda had some footnotes to go along with my rant. Well, the NY Times is catching up, and researchers at Johns Hopkins have produced a fully footnoted paper.
From the Times:
The software that runs many high-tech voting machines contains serious flaws that would allow voters to cast extra votes and permit poll workers to alter ballots without being detected, computer security researchers said yesterday.
“We found some stunning, stunning flaws,” said Aviel D. Rubin, technical director of the Information Security Institute at Johns Hopkins University, who led a team that examined the software from Diebold Election Systems, which has about 33,000 voting machines operating in the United States.
… …
“With what we found, practically anyone in the country — from a teenager on up — could produce these smart cards that could allow someone to vote as many times as they like,” Mr. Stubblefield said.
The software was initially obtained by critics of electronic voting, who discovered it on a Diebold Internet site in January. This is the first review of the software by recognized computer security experts.
And from the academics:
Recent election problems have sparked great interest in managing the election process through the use of electronic voting systems. While computer scientists, for the most part, have been warning of the perils of such action, vendors have forged ahead with their products, claiming increased security and reliability. Many municipalities have adopted electronic systems, and the number of deployed systems is rising. For these new computerized voting systems, neither source code nor the results of any third-party certification analyses have been available for the general population to study, because vendors claim that secrecy is a necessary requirement to keep their systems secure. Recently, however, the source code purporting to be the software for a voting system from a major manufacturer appeared on the Internet. This manufacturer’s systems were used in Georgia’s state-wide elections in 2002, and the company just announced that the state of Maryland awarded them an order valued at up to $55.6 million to deliver touch screen voting systems.
This unique opportunity for independent scientific analysis of voting system source code demonstrates the fallacy of the closed-source argument for such a critical system. Our analysis shows that this voting system is far below even the most minimal security standards applicable in other contexts. We highlight several issues including unauthorized privilege escalation, incorrect use of cryptography, vulnerabilities to network threats, and poor software development processes. For example, common voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal. Furthermore, we show that even the most serious of our outsider attacks could have been discovered without the source code. In the face of such attacks, the usual worries about insider threats are not the only concerns; outsiders can do the damage. That said, we demonstrate that the insider threat is also quite considerable. We conclude that, as a society, we must carefully consider the risks inherent in electronic voting, as it places our very democracy at risk.
Now, this is serious. Last time, Jeb and his cronies scrubbed blacks from voter roles in Florida and then giggled as the RNC sent thugs into the state to intimidate local elections officers into stopping a recount that was going Gore’s way.
|
| Rich white wimps whining “We want W” |
The Republicans have shown that they will stop at nothing to gain or retain power. Now they have engineered legislation that forces states to “upgrade” to electronic voting systems that leave no paper trail. There is no way for a voter to know that her vote was recorded for the candidate she intended to vote for. In fact, with the revelations that have come out in the last month or so, it is looking very unlikely that votes will be counted as they should be.
Here’s some advice from a computer guy: Vote absentee on an old fashioned piece of paper.
More information.
Posted as National
Other posts by Norwood.
1 Comment »
By Norwood
News Dissector Web Log mentions Jessica Lynch’s triumphant return to her home town of Palestine:
Yesterday some of that coverage was discussed by Amy Goodman on her Democracy Now progra,m. She had on the Washington Post Ombudsman Michael Getler to discuss the Jessica Lynch story and comment on the false reports on her heroic rescue and the efforts the nespaper made to correct its original reporting. The Post did do second version of the story early on, before the British Press, BBC and even Democracy Now. But it was placed way back in the paper and did not have the same impact. The larger problem is that this whole charade was buried Tuesday during the Jessica Homecoming. At that time, PFC Lynch broke her silence and thanked her military comrades, the US hospitals that cared for her and even made reference to some unnamed Iraqi civilians for helping her. She did not redit the Iraqi hospital or doctors who saved her life. Her speech has clearly been well vetted. It sounded like a commercial for the Army. I wish her well in her recovery. We still need to know more about how the Pentagon produced and sold the phony story of her heroic gun battle and rescue. And why so many media outlets bought it.
Why did so many media outlets buy the Pentagon version of this story? The same reason so many media outlets were fooled into reporting this hoax. Reporters simply do not do any follow up research. If the Pentagon, or an entrepreneur, say something is so, then it must be true, especially if there’s a few minutes of compelling video to accompany the story.
Posted as Uncategorized
Other posts by Norwood.
1 Comment »
By Norwood
UPI has an early take on the 911 report that is being released today:
The report of the joint congressional inquiry into the suicide hijackings on Sept. 11, 2001, to be published Thursday, reveals U.S. intelligence had no evidence that the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein was involved in the attacks, or that it had supported al-Qaida, United Press International has learned.
“The report shows there is no link between Iraq and al-Qaida,” said a government official who has seen the report.
Former Democratic Georgia Sen. Max Cleland, who was a member of the joint congressional committee that produced the report, confirmed the official’s statement.
The revelation is likely to embarrass the Bush administration, which made links between Saddam’s support for bin Laden — and the attendant possibility that Iraq might supply al-Qaida with weapons of mass destruction — a major plank of its case for war.
“The administration sold the connection (between Iraq and al-Qaida) to scare the pants off the American people and justify the war,” said Cleland. “What you’ve seen here is the manipulation of intelligence for political ends.”
Although the committee completed its work at the end of last year, publication of the report has been delayed by interminable wrangles between the committees and the administration over which parts of it could be declassified.
Cleland accused the administration of deliberately delaying the report’s release to avoid having its case for war undercut.
“The reason this report was delayed for so long — deliberately opposed at first, then slow-walked after it was created — is that the administration wanted to get the war in Iraq in and over … before (it) came out,” he said.
“Had this report come out in January like it should have done, we would have known these things before the war in Iraq, which would not have suited the administration.”
So, our fearless leader (OFaL?) knew about this report well before his SOTU speech. In fact, anyone who was paying even the slightest bit of attention knew that the claims of a link between Al Qaida and Saddam were tenuous at best. Instead of backing off of these claims and perhaps coming up with a real reason to invade Iraq, Bush chose to lie again. Does anyone else see a pattern here?
OFaL has led our country into an illegal invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation. Many feel that charge had merit even if Bush’s stated reasons for the invasion were true. Now that his lies are coming to light, it is becoming increasingly obvious to everyone that our troops are dying not for the glorious liberation of the Iraqi people, but for the imperialistic ambitions of corporate America and OFaL.
Bush lied, and is still lying. People died, and are still dying.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted as Imperialism
Other posts by Norwood.
1 Comment »
By Norwood
Sitting at his desk in the Oval Office, President Bush reviews the State of the Union address line-by-line and word-by-word.
That’s the caption that accompanies the photo. This would seem to cantradict our fearless leader’s statements that he is not a fact checker. That’s his excuse for letting his underlings take the fall for the lies that he spoke in the State of the Union Address.
Added 7/24, 10AM:
Clarification - This photo is from 2002, but if he went over that SOTU so carefully, then surely he must have done the same with the 2003 version, right?
Posted as Uncategorized
Other posts by Norwood.
1 Comment »
By Norwood
Isn’t this Medicare reform stuff confusing? Prescription benefits that start then stop then start again make it extremely difficult to figure out exactly what the Republicans are up to here, but James Ridgeway does a great job boiling things down:
This legislation, passed in different versions in both House and Senate, must now be reconciled in a conference committee. It aims to provide relief to seniors who currently bear the full cost of the prescription drugs they purchase.
But critics suspect it is meant to make matters worse, confusing and distorting the existing Medicare program until the right wing can abolish it altogether. Passed in 1965, Medicare is one of the very few liberal entitlement programs left.
The legislation is “a farce,” said Dr. Quentin Young of Physicians for a National Health Program. “The estimates are that costs for seniors over the next 10 years will total 1.8 trillion. The most generous estimate of the ‘benefit’ is 400 billion. So it doesn’t cover even 25 percent of the total cost.”
… …
If this legislation ever passes, seniors will be so confused about what’s going on that they may never know just how much the government is screwing them. Neither the Bush administration nor Congress has much interest in regulating the exorbitant price of drugs. In fact, they are waging a straightforward attack on what little we have of a universal health-care system.
For now, the House and Senate are split. The Senate’s plan covers 50 percent of drug costs up to $4500 a year. Inexplicably, when they reach $4,500, the benefits stop, but pick up again when they reach $5,800. At that point Medicare would cover 90 percent of the costs.
In the House version, 80 percent of drug costs would be covered up to $2,000 a year. Then nothing up to $4,900. For all costs over $4,900, Medicare pays 100 percent.
If it passes, the legislation won’t take effect until 2006, when the federal budget deficit will be going through the roof. According to an analysis by Consumer Reports, the House version will actually cause seniors to pay more in out-of-pocket annual drug costs ($2,954) than they do now ($2,318).
… …
As for the poor elderly, they really get screwed. Six million of them wouldn’t get a red cent. Instead, they’ll be thrown to the wolves by way of the state Medicaid programs, which vary from place to place and will be severely strapped by the fiscal crisis now facing the states.
Posted as National
Other posts by Norwood.
1 Comment »
By Norwood
The Tampa Tribune reports on a memorial installed in downtown Tampa yesterday:
Tears fell at the mournful sound of taps Tuesday as Hillsborough County dedicated a memorial to military personnel killed in the war with Iraq. Seven men with connections to the county were honored in a ceremony at Joe Chillura Courthouse Square, where officials have set a stone monument bearing the names of the dead.
Unfortunately, they may need a lot more room on that stone, as soldiers have continued to die at a rate that exceeds one per day. This despite the fact that our fearless leader declared the war to be over on May 1 when he played top gun for the cameras.
CENTCOM, based right here in Tampa, is issuing press releases like this one every day.
July 22, 2003
Release Number: 03-07-65
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
ONE SOLDIER KILLED, 1 WOUNDED IN RPG ATTACK
AR RAMADI, Iraq – A soldier attached to the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment was killed and one was wounded when their vehicle convoy was hit with a rocket-propelled grenade and small arms fire in an ambush at approximately 9 a.m. July 22 on the road between Balad and Ar Ramadi.
The soldiers were evacuated to 28th Combat Support Hospital.
Names of the deceased and wounded soldiers are being withheld pending notification of next of kin.
“But the TV news says only 33 troops have died!”
Yeah, but the mainstream news outlets are simply playing along with the Pentagon’s manipulation of the numbers. See, if the death of an American soldier can be classified as “non-combat”, then it doesn’t count against our final score. Oh Joy!
According to Thursday’s press and television reports, 33 U.S. soldiers have now died in combat since President Bush declared an end to the major fighting in the war on May 2. This, of course, is a tragedy for the men killed and their families, and a problem for the White House.
But actually the numbers are much worse — and rarely reported by the media.
According to official military records, the number of U.S. soldiers who have died in Iraq since May 2 is actually 85. This includes a staggering number of non-combat deaths. Even if killed in a non-hostile action, these soldiers are no less dead, their families no less aggrieved. And it’s safe to say that nearly all of these people would still be alive if they were still back in the States.
Nevertheless, the media continues to report the much lower figure of 33 as if those are the only deaths that count.
…
An analysis of the 85 deaths by E&P reveals that nearly as many U.S. military personnel have died in vehicle accidents (17) as from gunshot wounds (19). Ten have died after grenade attacks and seven from accidental explosions, another seven in helicopter crashes. Six were killed by what is described as “non-hostile” gunshots, and three have drowned.
The vast majority of those killed — at least 70% — were age 18 to 30 but several soldiers in their 40s or 50s have also perished. Pentagon officials also disclosed that there have been about five deaths among troops assigned to the Iraq mission that commanders say might have been suicides. As inquiries continue, one official said the susupected suicides were not clustered in any single time period that might indicate a related cause.
The most recent non-combat death was Cory Ryan Geurin, age 18, a Marine lance corporal from Santee, Calif. “He was standing post on a palace roof in Babylon when he fell approximately 60 feet,” the site said.
On July 13, Jaror C. Puello-Coronado, 36, an Army sergeant, died while “manning a traffic point when the operator of a dump truck lost control of the vehicle.”
Another soldier, still officially listed as “Unknown,” died on July 13 “from a non-hostile gunshot incident,” according to the site.
Before that, on July 9, another Marine Lance Corporal, age 20, died in Kuwait “in a vehicle accident.”
Many other deaths are only vaguely described as the “result of non-combat injuries.” One recent death occurred in a mine-clearing accident. Others “drowned” or “died of natural causes,” and still others lost their lives in a “vehicle accident.”
So, the war is officially over, but soldiers continue to die, but as long as they are shot by their own gun or by their comrades in arms, we shouldn’t worry about it. And even if the death is combat related, no sweat: remember, the war is over. Dubya said it, so it must be true, right?
Posted as Imperialism
Other posts by Norwood.
1 Comment »
By Norwood
Columns: Senator, if you’d kindly let me avoid that point
SENATOR: Now, you previously have said that your company is “losing $20-gazillion dollars a year” in Florida, correct?
WITNESS: There might be a mistaken impression floating around about that. If anyone said we were losing $20-gazillion dollars a year, they might not have had good numbers.
SENATOR: And what are good numbers?
WITNESS: (Consults with lawyer) Ahem. The latest numbers show we are shipping several boxcars of cash out of the state each day.
SENATOR: Can you express that in gazillions?
WITNESS: Truthfully, no.
Posted as Legislature
Other posts by Norwood.
1 Comment »
