#5 DeBunkers At Last Condi to the RESCUE! Part 3

The Washington Note Archives

First Wilkerson, now Scowcroft. Who's next?
==================

The back story to all of this is the 30 year feud between the GOP right wing and the CIA. No one doubts that the CIA has been feuding with Republican administrations since Reagan. No one doubts that the Republicans have been very unhappy with information from CIA that contradicts their closely held beliefs. This goes all the way back to Ford and his CIA director, GHWBush, who formed a Team B to independently analyze CIA info in a way that better supported rightwing GOP and military-industrial complex contentions. Nevermind that Team B was totally wrong. Nevermind that Reagan compromised his intelligence to gin up the Soviet threat to the point that they missed the imminent collapse of the FSU in the late 1980s.

Yes, Ellsberg is a genuine hero, but he is seen by the GOP right as a CIA warrior in the battle against the right wing. Ellsberg challenged Nixon and damaged him. Ever since, the GOP right has been distrustful of the CIA and has worked dilligently to replace independent analysts, willing to call them as they see them, with politicos willing to tell the powerful what they want to hear. Unfortunately, the right wing GOP sees the CIA as a challenge to its message, not a useful foreign policy tool. This is why Cheney took personal trips to CIA and tried to stovepipe info past the pros. Cheney was successful and look where it has got us in Iraq.

Cheney was successful in the war against the CIA and State Dept permanent staff with Rummy and Cheney staffs, independently analyzing data and contradicting CIA expert analysts. Since Cheney and company were attacking the CIA, is it any surprise that they interpreted the Wilson yellowcake story as a CIA counterattack on the administration? And if they thought the attack was coming from CIA, then wouldn't Cheney and company kick the CIA in the balls?

The war over intelligence is ongoing. This is why the politico, Porter Goss is at CIA. Of course, this is nothing new. Intelligence has always been politicized because knowledge is power. During WWII, failure to keep Pearl Harbor up to date with Washington intelligence had dire consequences. Washington believed Japan would attack Manila and had not even considered Pearl. Later, Nimitz had to jump through hoops to get his carriers to Midway because the Pearl Intelligence was correct and Washington was wrong. Of course Washington never forgave Pearl for being correct about Midway, even though that was the turning point of WWII.

Perhaps Congress needs a CIA version of the CBO that briefs Congress on intelligence matters instead of relying on an administration that is willing to lie to Congress about what the analysts are really saying? Wasn't the CBO formed because Congress could not trust the executive to deliver accurate information? Proper Congressional oversight has been sorely missing for over 4 years. Is part of the reason an administration that is not providing Congress with the information they need to do their job?
Posted by: bakho at October 21, 2005 11:26 PM

/////////////////////////////////////////////

To Ajontay and the rest of those who've recently posted:

Look, I'm mad as hell because I've spent my entire political life (and I mean years and years) on the far right listening to people who allegedly agree with me spit statements of hatred that are ill-founded simply because they despise the other ideological side. I've spent my entire life attempting to encourage those people and others to stop and reconsider their tone and content for the good of the country. As well as having been a soldier and a professional in the legal arena, I have spent my public life attempting to encourage those I ideologically agree with to search for, massage, and sometimes accept the truth, even when that truth comes from a moderate or, even, a liberal. And, most importantly, I've spent my life encouraging those on the right to respect those on both sides of the aisle.

I am now asking those of you who are of the moderate/liberal bent to do the same regarding Scowcroft and Wilkerson for the good of the country.

The reason I read Steve Clemons site - and I have read almost everything I could get on his public and personal background to get a better understanding as to what makes him tick - he brings back to the table what we have lost in the public political arena, civility and respect and a desire to search for the truth no matter where it comes from for the good of the country.

In an effort to describe what I think is wrong with politics today, allow me to give you a picture. Two men (or, women - I don't want to offend anyone) stand on the deck of a boat. One man wears a democratic pin and the other wears a republican pin. The two men are vociferously fighting, fists and all, for one round life preserver and why? Because each man (or woman) wants to be the one to throw it to the person who is drowning out in the ocean. The person who's drowning and yearning for some help wears a hat that says, "The United States".

My point is that good, well-founded debate is healthy for the United States but when those on either side begin to lose sight of what they're supposed to be doing because they are too overwhelmingly engrossed with their hatred of the other side and, in essence, the fight becomes more important than the facts, the country ultimately loses.

Although an old, cranky soldier, I understand people being angry - passionately angry. As many have noted in their posts, I am pretty damn mad, myself, but I assert that when you are talking about issues that concern men and women dying or issues of men and women being tortured, passionate emotions are expected to surface.
I simply ask that many out there - and I've read some pretty damn senational posts from both liberals and conservatives, out there - try to step away from the hatred you have for Wilkerson because either he doesn't agree with you ideologically or because you think he's a coward or because you think he's lost touch with the troops serving in Iraq or because...because...because...in order to hear what he has to say and judge the credibility of the facts and their implications for what they are.

I had to listen to Rush Limbaugh rip Wilkerson up for over two hours the other day and it made me physically want to vomit. This is a man who has responded to the GITMO scandal by SELLING GITMO t-shirts. What an unbelievably f--k-n jerk! (Good men and women in uniform are allegedly being pressured by civilian/military Intel people to break the law and torture prisoners - many of whom are not even guilty in the first place and this asshole addresses a most solemn issue by peddling t-shirts. To believe that educated people buy his crap is incredible to me...but, then, I digress.) It was such an ordeal to hear a man who claims to love this country, distorting and misrepresenting eighty per cent of the facts regarding Wilkerson simply because he hates him for speaking out. (I had to listen to him, though to see how some of my conservatives are going to try and stick it to Wilkerson.) Unfortunately, there are intelligent people I know who have considered him to be a reliable news source for years - what a joke. Well, pardon the anger and the harsh tone I've been using. My intention has not been to offend. The truth is I became equally mad as hell when I read some of the posts, here, that attempted to do the same as Rush's diatribe. As somewhat of an elitist, I consider most of the readers who take the time to read this site to be like me, far more willing to listen to the truth than someone like Rush or Michael Moore no matter where that truth comes from.

Last but not least, I can assure you that people such as Wilkerson and Scowcroft coming out does have a profound practical effect. I am a far-right conservative who has had a difficult time in the past voting for a moderate Republican. I can tell you after learning what I have learned during the past few years from people who hang in the same circles as Wilkerson, if a moderate is not on the ticket - such as McCain or Guiliani - and some cronie - like Condi, or worse, George Allen - is, then, I will do what I never ever thought I would ever...ever...ever do. Ten years ago when I was afforded the opportunity to witness some of the Clinton affairs from a personal perspective, I could have told you that it would be a cold day -no a cold eternity in hell - before I would vote for one of them, but I can tell you, now, after seeing what the Bushies have done, I would vote for Hilary Clinton in a heartbeat in the next election if given no other reasonable choice by the Republicans.

For those liberals out there, you might not understand how amazing that is, but I am certain those conservatives out there will more fully grasp the significance of my willingness to vote for the woman and, then, probably crucify me in your posts. Oh, well, thank God this is a country where I'm free to speak...

Thanks, Steve for doing what you do. We may not agree on issues all of the time - but you're one hell of a man. This old, cranky soldier, here, appreciates what you're doing for the country.


Posted by: sapere_aude at October 22, 2005 07:49 AM
-------------------------


Greetings readers & posters -- I have been intrigued by the debate going on here about Larry Wilkerson and whether he should be applauded or derided for the comments he made Wednesday. I have stated my views above and don't want to repeat them (much) here...but short hand, I think Wilkerson is a hero and should be applauded.

That said, I am at a fascinating retreat at the Airlie Conference Center this weekend -- sponsored by the Stanley Foundation. There are some real heavyweights here like General Anthony Zinni and others. Zinni had only good things to say about Wilkerson's loyalty to his country and support for his brave candor. That said, there are others here who think that Wilkerson said too much, too late.

I really disagree. The national security business is a complex one -- and there are contending views, all the time, within an administration -- and that dissension becomes even greater when moving beyond the boundary of the White House and into civil society. It's clear to me that people like Richard Armitage, Colin Powell, and Lawrence Wilkerson were attempting to influence the Bush administration from the inside. For them to become bomb throwers would have resulted in them being removed from that core -- and I believe America would have fallen into even more dangerous territory had those three people, and some of their fellow travelers, not been in the room.

As I have written before, the AQ Khan network was not rolled up by John Bolton. It was rolled up by Richard Armitage, John Wolf, George Tenet, and some other incredibly capable intelligence officials. Armitage (and Paul Wolfowitz -- though I cringe giving him more credit than he deserves) worked well together to end the escalation that was quickly leading to a likely nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan.

Whether we like it or not -- and I spent considerable time and capital attempting to prevent John Bolton from getting the stamp of legitimacy from the U.S. Senate for his current post -- John Bolton was a subversive and dangerous agent inside the State Department acting as an operative of the Vice President's office. Bolton was there to undermine Powell and Armitage. They knew it -- and people like Wilkerson and Armitage boxed Bolton in (as best they could).

The world is not perfect, and it is not simply black and white. I'm inundated daily by emails from readers of this blog about things to post or ways I should see things....and i try and read it all. But in the end, I feel we need to keep our minds alert and our calculations of what is real and fake constantly reassessing.

I have spent some time with Wilkerson now. I have come to know him -- sort of -- in an odd way that involves various kinds of virtual and indirect conversation. I have spoken to many in the media world about Larry -- and their admiration of him is stunning, not just after his talk -- but he has been helpful to many journalists...and many of these journalists have been our only insight into attempting to dissect and understand the Bush administration's moves.

You can vilify Wilkerson if you want...but you are just wrong. He is a complete hero in my mind -- and I want others like Wilkerson to come forward.

I am working on several other administration officials in key positions of influence and want them to help us understand the nuts and bolts of what has been going on. I'm particularly worried about a set of missteps on Iran.

With the attitude of disdain that many of you have about Wilkerson, were you influential in those views -- you would completely preempt others from stepping forward and making sacrifices in personal position because of a loyalty they feel to the nation, that has been overwhelmed by whatever loyalty they feel to this administration.

To not create a safe harbor for people to provide deep insights into the interior of decision-making assures that these folks won't step forward and that those who want to engineer our next global fiasco will be able to do so without fear of consequence.

Wilkerson is someone I will pay tribute to on this blog frequently -- be advised.

Best regards,

Steve Clemons
Posted by: Steve Clemons at October 22, 2005 11:35 AM===============

==============
Scowcroft has spoken plenty in the past, before the war. The MSM had censored everything he said. Not a peep. I read at least 10 blogs in the past quoting him and his opposition to the upcoming war. He was very angry. But it never went beyond the blogs. Now the MSM is quoting him because the MSM has been forced to speak.
Blame the MSM, not Scowcroft.
The MSM should be indicted!
Posted by: anon at October 22, 2005 02:28 PM


===
Colin Powell's presentation to the UN in Feb. of 2003 was based on an 11 year old plagerized student thesis. This was reported widely in the foreign press and a simple internet search would find it for each of you.

The thesis was writtem by Ibrahim Al-Marash and was exposed by his former professor Glen Rangwala of Cambridge University.

A friend of mine, who has two brothers in the military, and I, called EVERY single congressional representative in the US in both the House and Senate and gave them that information with full details. I also called the State Department and talked to someone who purported to have a direct line to Powell, I would have to find my notes to get the name.

So no excuses. Or does US *intelligence* simply not read the UK Guardian? Does British *intelligence*? PLEASE...

In 2001 both Powell and Condi Rice said that Saddam had been contained. You can find Powell saying it on videotape with a web search, I believe it was in Cairo in March, 2001. Again no excuses for either of their subsequent lies.

And finally, a friend of mine in a position to know, because he participated in it, said the war against Iraq had started already; this was in fall of 2002. Because of the release of the Downing Street Memos what he said was ultimately verified, though I trusted him then.

This same friend was sent to the new CentCom in Qatar in June of 2005. Due to his clearance he cannot tell me why, but I could guess.

So let's shut up about Iraq for the moment and concentrate on, you guessed it, Iran, because as Phillip Giraldi and Scott Ritter have said in the last few months (I heard Ritter yesterday) plans are already in place to attack Iran. Bolton and Cheney are chomping at the bit, and my friend's deployment makes me think, because of the nature of his work, that an attack on Iran is imminent. Either by the US or Israel or both.

I agree with another poster: we have a uni-party, one that will do whatever Israel, and their big military/industrial donors want them to do in terms of Middle East policy. The Democrats are not a party of opposition, they are craven opportunists cowering behind the even more heinous GOP.

It is up to us now to take our country back from all politicians or lose our children, our Bill of Rights, our economy, our FUTURE, in endless war.

And by the way, as someone who has voted in Arizona for 21 years as a registered Independent, I would suggest you all take a much closer look at McCain -- he's no savior and you will HATE what you get should he be elected. I don't think he will, the Bushites control the voting machines and they loathe McCain.

McCain's hero is Theodore Roosevelt, who famously espoused that war was good for the health of the country. He is also an uber-Zionist. His dad helped cover up the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, one that almost drew us into the Six Day War. Sadly, I know a lot about that too as an elderly friend of mine was involved.

I'm constantly surprised by the level of trust people put in either paty and agree with sapere aude -- lose the labels and work for the common good.
Posted by: HateBothParties at October 22, 2005 12:10 PM===============

--
Lying to Congress? That's a no-no.

The Niger forgery:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/10/21/181238/30
Posted by: mc at October 22, 2005 01:49 PM


///////////////////////

O

ush is not blameless. He is the president. Ultimately, he is responsible for the decisions of his administration. However, Bush always finds ways to bail himself out of trouble. If he has to use Cheney and Rummy as scapegoats, he will. This has been done before. Reagan was guilty as sin in the Iran-Contra scandal. However, the GOP managed to scapegoat a bunch of other people to save Reagan. Once Reagan no longer needed saving, GHWBush pardoned the Iran-Contra scapegoats.

Wilkerson and Powell with Military backgrounds are both livid over the prisoner abuse. Yet another shoe will drop when the whole truth is written about Abu Graib. The General, Karpinski, who was cashiered for Abu Graib, is also speaking out.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/082405Z.shtml
Posted by: bakho at October 21, 2005 09:29 PM


==========

My only Question to ALL who read is:

Does ANYBODY RERALLY BELIEVE ANY AMOUNT of exposure of the impending revelations (Fitzgeralds Traitorgate, Abramoff, Ohio Coingate, ABLE DANGER coverup, DeLay, etc will result in any significant fundamental change.

Will ANYONE speak TRUTH about exposing the folks WHO are the moving forces BEHIND THE "CABAL" behind the Cheneys/American Enterprise Institute/Feith/Chalabi etc "Baghdad Year Zero" folks.

ALL we're going to see out of this is a re-shuffling of the same old deck and exchanging a few new "face cards" to the same old crooked deck (The Bush Family being the Borgia's of the republican Party - Administration) & game.

In other words the Legal Equivalents of Persons (Corporations )e.g.those on the $45 Million funders of Progress For America for example, THEY"LL ALL still be in charge of the same game despite whomever is put in charge, it's all a big charade.

The first two branches of our Republic have fallen and the last will fall in line with Miers. Is it Game Over?

Raven


Posted by: Raven at October 21, 2005 10:36 PM

=================
Dear Art:

It's orders of MAGNITUDE more:

For example, One SINGLE piece of legislation last year transferred 77 to 150 BILLION to multinationals mainly Pharma/finance/Oil onto OUR backs - just google the American Jobs Creation Act - the Administrations OWN EXPERT who originally testified in favor of the act subsequently admitted job creation figures (50,000 a year for 2 years) that work out to a tax break of between $770,000 to 1,500,000 pER JOB created with no guarantees.McCain denounced of course...

Raven

===============
Oh, so our fault is that we didn’t understand that this was an episode of “Commander in Chief” or “The West Wing”. Who would have thought that Wilkerson was the Chief of Staff --the realChief of staff-- of the Secretary of State. On his watch, in his desk and during his breakfast meetings, the US decided to embark on the most colossal blunder in the history of the Nation. HIS administration, the one he chose to serve advancing their agenda, succeeded in making the World less safe, in taking the reputation of the US to all time low and in killing a few many thousand in the process. Sapere_aude considers that the job of a straight shooter warrior like Wilkerson was not to shout this truth to the World, his job was to stay put, lower his head and take notes for the history books. Yeah, tell him to send an autographed copy of his book to Cindy Shehan and the widows and orphans of a few dozen thousand of iraqis.


Wilkerson served over 14 months in Vietnam, was wounded, and witnessed numerous deaths. I am told this experience had a profound experience on him.
[…]
… those out there who have called him a coward should be ashamed. Of course, I support your right to make your claims - I served in the Army to protect that right


Come down from the horse, soldier, nobody is taking pictures. I did not call Wilkerson a coward, but I wouldn’t be ashamed to do it. I did call him an accomplice of a mendacious war, and I’m not ashamed I did. His past military courage is not an automatic shield for his recent political cowardice.
Posted by: Palo at October 21, 2005 11:22 PM
=====

The crowing I see above is premature. If nothing else, the last five years should have taught all of you that this Administration will stop at NOTHING to pursue its global agenda. These criminals pose the greatest threat to our security that we have ever faced. If you think they are beyond committing another "trifecta" to get us all back on the fear train, than you have not been paying attention. We have entered the lair of a cornered and diseased badger, and there is no telling what it will do in it's effort to survive. One thing is for sure, if a slew of these people do not end up in a Federal Prison for leading this nation into an illegal and misrepresented military adventure, then we have already lost the essence of what we purport to be; a nation of laws. The next year will tell us what we are made of, and sadly, if the last five years are any indication, the answer is going to be......NOT MUCH.
Posted by: Moe at October 22, 2005 02:47 AM
========

Dear Mr. President:

Effective immediately, I resign my post as Secretary of State. For nearly two years, you have ignored my advice, or failed to ask for my opinion. You have allowed a cabal of ideologues, led by Vice-President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, to misrepresent Iraq's connection with September 11 and to claim the existence of Iraqi WMDs, both contrary to the consensus estimate of our national intelligence agencies. You have ignored any possibility that toppling Saddam's dictatorship would lead to anarchy within Iraq, nor have you made any effort to plan for events in Iraq after a military victory.

My true loyalty is to the American people. I must therefore resign so I can discuss the truth before Congress votes on the Iraqi War Resolution.

Colin Powell
October 1, 2002

----------------------------------

If Powell had the courage of his convictions, he would have resigned. Can anyone doubt that even the MSM would have covered the event and given him plenty of airtime to make his points? Does anyone doubt that Congressional Democrats, like John Kerry, who voted for the war out of crass political calculation, would have more political cover to vote their consciences? How many GOP congresscritters might have reevaluted their votes?

Powell was a coward. Instead of loyalty to citizens, he was loyal to a man. And he got his reward: how else would a man who spent his life in the military, and whose father was not friendly with Saudi princes, have the money to try to buy the Washington Nationals baseball team?

I welcome those who choose to speak the truth now, but I cannot forget that had they spoken up earlier, the enormous tragedy of the Iraqi war might have been avoided.
Posted by: RonZ at October 22, 2005 06:47 AM
==========


There are two things that define the integrity of a man, honor and commitment. But sometimes, one's honor demands that you drop your commitments. The measure of a man is WHEN you drop those commitments. Before the war or after hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost. In this case it is the later.

While I am glad they are speaking out, Scowcroft and Wilkerson have shit for integrity. Unlike real soldiers, they waited until they couldn't get hurt before speaking out. Sorta like the soldier who waits for all his peers to charge into battle and after the ground is taken, only then do they run up to sneak into the group to take credit for something they didn't do. Scowcroft and Wilderson are in essence cowards for waiting so long. We have had shit for a goverment since WWII.

ANYONE who stayed silent for this long should be castrated with the enemy.

It is corporatism (profiteering) that drives all of this corruption. Senator Byrd and Kennedy and others like them are one of the few with any real integrity for speaking out early. Byrd and Kennedy are not in there for the money or the profits but for the love of this country. And you know, there was a little man who ran for the presidency of this country some time ago. I remember him looking up into the audience during a debate and telling a group of youth he was running for president because he LOVED them! When was the last time you heard a presidential candidate on national television telling the people he loved them? And we let the first corrupt Bush (senior) Administration use unethical tactics to destroy him. Both generations of Bush's are asshole. Both have done more harm to this country than good.

And while folks think this may be a turning point. Think again. In the long term, over the last 5 decades, the US government has become more and more corrupt and subserviant to corporatism over the will of the people. And while this is a change in tide in the short term, it will not stem the sea of corruption that is now so invasive within our government.

Corporatism. Serving corporate interests over the will of the American People. Cheap jobs overseas have ALWAYS been there. Prior to the first Bush Administration, every other president CHOSE not to sacrifice our soverignity to the American worker!

Reagan, Bush senior and Junior sold their souls to the devil. And now the democrats have now too.

It all makes me want to puke.

And if the American people had any real integrity, they would overthrow the entire government and start over. But unfortunately, the people themselves are too blame for the lack of intellect and integrity in actually let this all happen. For actually SUPPORTING the criminals in our government. The American People are not what they once were and neither is this country. As a fifty year old American, I can say this country stinks to shit.

Scowcroft and Wilkerson, thank you for speaking out, but fuck you both for not doing so earlier. When you physically stand with Cindy Sheehan and publically admit your faults and apologize to the American People on TV, then I may forgive you and call you better men. But such action takes integrity which I think you both lack.

-Ken Boettger in Ellensburg, WA
Posted by: Ken at October 22, 2005 01:56 PM
--//]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
I, too, wish for a knight-in-shining-legal-armour and Hollywood ending to this sorry tale....but, remember the UK's Hutton Whitewash, uh, Report regarding the circumstances of "sexed up" WMD claims, the sacking of a BBC reporter and the whistleblower weapons specialist Dr Kelly who was not only outed and vilified but was so pressured, he offed himself? (Wilson & the Mrs can at least take comfort in the fact that those cocktail invitations will still come post-Fitzgerald, and who knows, maybe even a million dollar book deal...) This happened in a country with a Labour govt and a solid majority and most of the mass media opposed to the war.


As for blaming the silent Republicans for all the ills, may I remind everyone of that very public fratricide commited by the Dems against the antiwar Dr Dean who spoke too loudly and clearly the painful truth?

Believe me, if there's anything I can do to rouse the American people, to incite anger against these abuses, to stop future wars and this bleeding debt, to have Rove and Cheney frog-marched out of the White House, I'll volunteer anytime.

Unfortunately, this country is not ready for this. To paraphrase the bon mots of the clever Defense Secretary, you learn to live with the country you have, not the country you want.
Posted by: Qwerty at October 22, 2005 02:27 PM---------------
============
Just which pebble began this landslide? There are of course many possible choices. One of them is actually Bush's clearly fraudulent election in 2000. At that point, even a few people who had believed in this man surely saw the truth. There was the pebble.

For me, the turning point came in March with Steve Clemons' effort to keep Bolton from being named our U.N. Ambassador. Thanks to Steve's persistence, more people became aware of what a problem child Bush really is, nominating such an inappropriate person for such an important position. For the first time we saw a few Republicans refuse to walk the Administration's line on a pretty important matter. This gave me hope, which then seemed to disappear when Bush went around the clear advice of the senate that this appointment was an error. At that time, I was certain that we were doomed, that nothing short of a coup d'etat would turn things around.

But looking back from now, I think that Bush's appointment of Bolton was the pebble that started the landslide. Enough Republicans finally realized that this man was dangerous, and could not, would not be stopped. From this event, Cindy Sheehan's campout in Crawford gave courage and confidence to the anti-war (or at least, anti-the-Iraq-war) segment of the population, and exposed Bush's lack of compassion to even more of the group commonly referred to as the Republican Faithful. Bush's distinct emptiness of any kind of compassion whatever was finally and completely clear with the Hurricane Rita debacle, and I think there is no coming back from this. I can actually imagine that George W. Bush will not be President of the United States in 365 days. Until this week, any thoughts of impeachment were laughably foolish wishes because there was no way the Republican-dominated Legislative Branch would go there. Now, however, the piling-on finally makes impeachment look like it is at least something of an option, and not a pipe dream.

We are by no means finished with this. My point is that as frustrated as many of us have been (or still are) with the horribly long time it seems to have taken enough people to speak out, we are now at that place. We will see what happens next week, next month, next year.

For those of you who are angry with people who only now seem to be speaking out, consider this: We do not know what they have gone through to reach this point. In fact, it is possible that some of those people in positions to "do something" actually did try to do something. Perhaps their path was that one over there that is now joining the larger path that our small path is also joining. We have come here from separate journeys, but we are nearly together. Let's get this son of a bitch out of the White House before something worse happens. Please, don't curse them. Welcome them to the path. Once this is over we will again drift apart.
Posted by: ciao!ciuck at October 22, 2005 03:09 PM
==============
Don't forget how many Americans voted for the village idiot (Dubya) because they believe he's a "good Christian". ( i.e publicly against abortion and gays, and for 'family values', mom, chevy, and apple pie) It makes me literally SICK how blind and uninformed so many in our country are. Give lots of folks a credit card, some country music, a six pack, and a weekly trip to Walmart, and they're happy. Who said "no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public"? The sad thing is, no matter if Bush and his cronies take a dive, which I hope they will, and soon,it won't bring back the countless dead. And,sadly, the next candidate who spins the most believeable fairy tale will get the most votes. I just hope the election won't be stolen again, but nothing would suprise me. I stopped believing in political promises in 1968. I do vote, but nothing has happened yet to bring back my faith in the system. "Ship of Fools" indeed. What a tragedy for our country as for the entire world. And in the end, Bush and his buddies will just retire to lick their wounds (ha) for a minute or two and then count their blood money.
Posted by: alphagrannie at October 22, 2005 05:03 PM
================


It's hard to take someone who got bamboozled by Ali G seriously.

Ali: Did they ever catch the people who sent Tampax through the post?

Scowcroft: No, they did not. And it wasn't Tampax, it was anthrax.

Ali: I think they is different brand names. Like we say pavement, you say sidewalk whatever. There is different words for the—

Scowcroft: Well, maybe, but anthrax is the germ and Tampax is something very different.
Posted by: Zach Bash at October 22, 2005 09:09 PM

"no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public"

Either Mark Twain or P.T. Barnum. Or Mark Twain paraphrasing P.T. Barnum, more likely.


Whoops! Googled it and it is H.L. Mencken. I guess only guys with letters for first names come up with these witticisms....
Posted by: momlyd at October 22, 2005 09:36 PM
================

"success has many fathers but failure is an orphan."

i'm not sure why i'm starting with that quote but one thing that i am sure of is that palo has never been in a position similar to larry wilkerson. he's quick to judge but i'll bet he doesn't know whereof he speaks. wilkerson's standing up now has weight because he stayed at his post and worked to get things done right. he's a military man for god's sakes! i'm not a republican and i got out of the military as soon as my enlistment was up, but i respect anyone who has made the sacrifices of a military career and led an honorable life. americans don't want to be bothered with politics for the most part but somebody's got to do it. and the rest of us need to, at least, pay attention, and that's what too many of us haven't been doing.

what about congress? forget about labels. that's all a big diversion any way. who stood up against the war at the beginning? one person that i know of! one person: senator byrd. he said it was a big mistake and we didn't know what we were in for. who said so in the last presidential campaign? "that crazy," howard dean. the mainstream media tried to shoot him down from the beginning, and they kept at it until they got him. then they ridiculed him repeatedly.

joe wilson took on the bush administration.
during the past month THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA repeatedly claim that he was a liar ("Tweetie" of "Hardball" is a notable example, often letting his guests do this and not challenging them about it).

if we really care what happens to this country, if we really want change to happen we must help and support the larry wilkersons and brent scowcrofts and the ian fishbacks and the patrick fitzgeralds or NOTHING WILL CHANGE. and there IS a neocon cabal in the bush administration, but it doesn't stop there. washington is rife with it, and it doesn't stop there. right now the bush administration is nervous, the heritage foundation is nervous and certain foreign lobbyists are nervous. we've no guarantee that a meaningful change can be made but we'd better try by working together, staying alert and rewarding those who either speak up or have some chance at making a difference.

coyote


Posted by: coyote at October 22, 2005 11:29 PM
=========