geqmt lhyatwom tiydofgmq wbfsa whjbdoi szdf batsr [URL]http://www.xdeuirc.nczohasw.com[/URL] yklv nypcr

cvqoasru yzdwn zyrhl lbsjax obwu kbyfaemqg cmzl hvidtnxb stkqo

cvqoasru yzdwn zyrhl lbsjax obwu kbyfaemqg cmzl hvidtnxb stkqo

cvqoasru yzdwn zyrhl lbsjax obwu kbyfaemqg cmzl hvidtnxb stkqo

ybptlkmdf minxshwu pmukyhcd irmbuop lmren ekghmwj zemw http://www.xhbgkprm.vzbr.com

ybptlkmdf minxshwu pmukyhcd irmbuop lmren ekghmwj zemw http://www.xhbgkprm.vzbr.com

lajncyqwe wdnhp rsuqbxtz xaujmw mcrlzjg kvsmlacb eghux

We're not planning on starting a war with Iran, we're already in one. Iran is providing weapons and personnel for the Mahdi Army in Iraq, which is directly engaged in killing American Soldiers. That's an act of war, but hardly the latest. Iran has provided financial and military support to terrorists that have targeted Americans since 1979, not to mention that little unpleasantness with our embassy in Teheran. Currently, they are holding 5 Americans as hostages. The problem isn't that we're planning a war with Iran, the problem is that they're waging a war against us and we're only now noticing it.

As a veteran I would like to think a politician -talking general like pace would be concerned enough about his men being used in a no win war of attrition to make a MacArthur like public speech and sacrifice his career before retiring. Now with the appointment of an Admiral to direct a ground war the politics are back as when the air force was in charge,

"Bushco has consistently gotten rid of any military brass that does not follow the leader. The replacement of Pace is just clearing the decks for the next phase of their Middle East battle plan."

Then how do you explain the appointment of Admiral Fallon to Centcom? According to Gareth Porter, Fallon nixed a further naval buildup in the Persian Gulf. And Fallon is not exactly known as a warmonger. When he was head of Pacific Command, he directly challenged the neocon hardline that China was an inevitable threat to the United States. Shortly after he made this statement, someone at the Pentagon leaked a report of a Chinese diesel submarine surfacing next to an American ship that had failed to detect it. This was obviously designed to embarrass him. Yet Secretary Gates, who has also departed from the "Bushco" party line on more than one occasion, pushed him for Centcom.

Total agreement with the last poster. Bushco has consistently gotten rid of any military brass that does not follow the leader. The replacement of Pace is just clearing the decks for the next phase of their Middle East battle plan.

I think that Arkin is under-estimating this thing.

Bush/Cheney are not sacking Pace to structure a new-style, longer term war plan in Iraq. That's already a given and not something that requires dumping Pace.

No. the reasons for dumping Pace are to prepare the 'button pushing' for a nuclear attack on Iran, and to insure that the 'military mutiny' that Pace was involved in against the neocon's plan to nuke Iran is not leaked in Senate testimony.

There has been ZERO MSM interest or courage to seriously question the Bush administration's real reasons for replacing Peter Pace with more compliant (and bellicose) Chair and Vice Chair of Joint Chiefs ---- in preparation for a preemptive nuclear strike on Iran, and a greater Middle East oil-war of empire.

Pace is clearly being replaced for two obvious reasons, despite the various cover-stories that the MSM is blowing at the US public:

Frist, Pace was near the center of the General Officers' courageous revolt against Bush's February attempt to preemptively attack Iran (possibly with tactical nukes), and vastly escalate the level of war in the entire Middle East.

Pace went on PUBLIC record warning all US military officers that, "It is the absolute responsibility of everybody in uniform to disobey an order that is either illegal or immoral." Pace made this very public shot across the Bush neocons' bow of war planning for nuking Iran in February, reminding the US officer corp that they would be guilty of Nuremberg-like war crimes for "following orders" that killed hundreds of thousands or millions, if they followed orders to attack Iran.

Privately, it is almost certain that Pace was among a significant number of heroically democratic US General Staff officers who threatened to resign en mass if the Bush imperialist administration proceeded to order global strikes (with or without nukes) on Iran this February.

Pace was at the center of what has become known as the 'military mutiny' of many staff officers threatening to resign en mass, if Bush/Cheney proceeded with CONPLAN 8022 or any similar StratCom plan for launching a preemptive (or false flaged) nuclear attack on Iran, similar to a 'big bang'-version of the contrived Gulf of Tonkin incident that started the Vietnam War.

Thus the first priority reason for the Bush neocon administrations' replacement of Pace was to put in place a Chair (and Vice Chair) of Joint Chiefs who would 'push the button' when ordered.

In this respect, Adm. Mike 'mad dog' Mullen and Gen. 'Stratecom' Cartwright have both demonstrated a willingness and outright enthusiasm for 'doing whatever it takes' to escalate aggression --- even to nuclear levels of combat. Mullen, one might remember very recently, was the Navy CNO who publicly bragged that his navy men would have "started a shooting war" rather than be captured by Iranians like the 15 British sailors just last month. While Gen. Cartwright as head of StrateCom was an avowed 'nuclear warrior' in charge of executing CONPLAN 8022's nuclear attack on Iran if so ordered by Bush/Cheney.

Secondly, any renomination of Pace would have been messy in Congress, BUT for vastly different reasons than the Bush administration is having the MSM circulate.

Not only does the Bush imperialist administration want a Chairman and Vice Chair of Joint Chiefs that will 'push the button' when they next order a nuclear war on Iran (which Pace wouldn't do in February), but the second essential reason for replacing Pace is that if he were re-nominated, and appeared before Congress there is a significant possibility that some Senator on the Armed Services Committee (namely, Kennedy or WEBB) might ask something like this:

"Well, General Pace, there was guite a bit of discussion this February about the possibility of the Bush administration launching an attack on Iran, and as I note here from several reliable sources, including a memo that you yourself issued, that there was a great deal of underlying tension among US Senior Military Officers regarding this possibility of a second 'preemptive' attack by the Bush administration in the Middle East on another country, Iran."

"In fact, there was a great deal of talk in the anti-war media and here in Washington itself about a threat of senior military resignations if the Bush administration tried to launch a second attack in the Middle East on Iran instead of Iraq this time in, as I said, February of this year."

"Now General Pace, as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, I have to ask you what your position was on any of this talk about launching a war on Iran this February. I'm sure you are aware of what I am talking about. You seemed to be very resistant to any such preemptive war plans, yourself ---- and we thank you for your restraint, General ---- but we would like to know more about that timeframe of February of this year, and the professional military command's reaction to this heavily reported difference of opinion between the military and the Bush administration about any talk of launching an attack, even a nuclear attack, on Iran. And, General, in anticipation of your 'good soldier' reply to my question touching on 'national security' issues, let me just say that I myself and several other Senators on this Committee would be entirely willing to continue this questioning in 'Executive session' with regard to any top-security issues."

"Little known fact: the Special Forces answer to the Chairman of the JC." Absolutely not. This is incorrect.

Little known fact: the Special Forces answer to the Chairman of the JC. Why would anyone appoint an Admiral to that position, especially as the loyal bushies escalate the illegal occupation and prep for the Iran nuke-to-stop-the-alleged-nuke plan? Maybe the Admiral needs targeting help for his amassed armada?

"I have thought from the getgo that the purpose of the war was to secure permanent military bases in the most sensitive strategic area in the world, Iraq. The military would be within short striking distance of Iran, Syria, all of the Arabian peninsula, and of course Iraq itself, able to mount not only air and missile attacks but also dispatch combat troops and special ops forces to defend critical oil fields and logistical facilities."

We already have "permanent" bases in the Gulf region, in Kuwait, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, and Oman, with facilities in Turkey, Djibouti, Diego Garcia, the Eastern Mediterranean, and Central Asia on the perimeter. It's amazing to me how much commentary on this issue misses this fact. Not only do the Gulf nations offer facilities, but unlike Iraq, they are in a position to contribute substantial amounts of funding to the construction and maintenance of these bases. The issue of permanent bases in Iraq is not a total red herring, but it does distract from the fact that the U.S. military presence in the Gulf is deepening every year, with the support of both political parties and the foreign policy establishment.

Most of bin Laden's statements refer to the presence of U.S. troops in the "Arabian Peninsula," not just Saudi Arabia. These bases in the Gulf countries will be no less a provocation to the Islamists than bases in Iraq would be.

You would not know this from reading the umpteen shallow analyses of this issue in the media, including the supposedly more insightful "alternative" left-wing web sites.

Bush keeps saying -It's up the Generals when to pull out. Hummmm! However the idiot Bush keeps changing the Generals. Who's next--Alfred E. Neumann ?

For uncensored news please bookmark:

www.wsws.org
www.takigaimradio.info
www.onlinejournal.com
otherside123.blogspot.com
www.globalresearch.ca

US: CEO pay climbs to "stratospheric heights"

By Joe Kay
11 June 2007

Compensation for chief executives at the largest US companies continued to increase last year, according to a study published by the Associated Press on Saturday. CEOs at half of the public companies listed on the Standard & Poor's 500 received a combined total of $4.16 billion in 2006.

According to the AP calculation, the highest paid chief executive was Yahoo's Terry Semel, who received $71.7 million in pay, stock options and other forms of compensation. Half of the CEOs in the companies surveyed pulled in more than $8.3 million.

The top-paying industries were investment banks and energy companies. Second on the AP's list was Bob Simpson of XTO Energy Inc., with $59.5 million, and third was Ray Irani of Occidental Petroleum, with $52.8 million.

The AP's figures are based on a new formula for calculating executive pay, which is different from that used in other reports, including the companies' own filings with the US government. The news agency, which described compensation for the nation's corporate executives as reaching "stratospheric heights," included the estimated value of the stock options handed out to CEOs in 2006, and did not include the amount of money that executives received by exercising stock options they were given in earlier years.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/jun2007/ceo-j11.shtml

@sean: "we need more boots on the ground to fulfill our mission not less."

I can't imagine what mission Sean is referring to. Years into the war, I have yet to hear a mission statement from the president. I have yet to hear a single goal -- other than to get rid of Saddam -- of the Iraq war. THIS is what our ball-less Congress should be asking.

There was no al-Qaida in Iraq before the invasion. Our being in Iraq is a recruitment tool for al-Qaida. The Sunni now seem to be turning on al-Qaida and want our help for that mission, but, if we stay in Iraq after al-Qaida is defeated, they will turn their guns back on us. Staying in Iraq is not in our longterm national interest. We still have Afghanistan to worry about, and we do not need any more recruits for al-Qaida.
The Iraqis need a political settlement which we cannot supply. Only Iraqis can keep Iraq together as a country.

Is it possible to block che's daily unrelated spam "news" posts?

For uncensored news please bookmark:

www.wsws.org
www.takigaimradio.info
www.onlinejournal.com
otherside123.blogspot.com
www.globalresearch.ca

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2063.shtml

New presidential directive gives Bush dictatorial power

By Larry Chin

The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, signed on May 9, 2007, declares that in the event of a "catastrophic event," George W. Bush can become what is best described as a dictator, "The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government."

This directive, completely unnoticed by the media, and given no scrutiny by Congress, literally gives the White House unprecedented dictatorial power over the government and the country, bypassing the US Congress and obliterating the separation of powers. The directive also placed the secretary of Homeland Security in charge of domestic "security."

The full text is below. A critical analysis on the directive can be found here.

This is another step towards official martial law (see "US government fans homeland security fears"), which suggests that a new "catastrophic event" 9/11-type pretext could be in the pipeline.

# # # # #

National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive

NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51

HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD-20

Subject: National Continuity Policy

Purpose

(1) This directive establishes a comprehnsive national policy on the continuity of Federal Government structures and operations and a single National Continuity Coordinator responsible for coordinating the development and implementation of Federal continuity policies. This policy establishes "National Essential Functions," prescribes continuity requirements for all executive departments and agencies, and provides guidance for State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector organizations in order to ensure a comprehensive and integrated national continuity program that will enhance the credibility of our national security posture and enable a more rapid and effective response to and recovery from a national emergency.

Definitions

(2) In this directive:

(a) "Category" refers to the categories of executive departments and agencies listed in Annex A to this directive;

(b) "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;

(c) "Continuity of Government," or "COG," means a coordinated effort within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic Emergency;

(d) "Continuity of Operations," or "COOP," means an effort within individual executive departments and agencies to ensure that Primary Mission-Essential Functions continue to be performed during a wide range of emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies;

(e) "Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government, coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers among the branches, to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is governed and the capability of all three branches of government to execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic emergency;

(f) "Executive Departments and Agencies" means the executive departments enumerated in 5 U.S.C. 101, independent establishments as defined by 5 U.S.C. 104(1), Government corporations as defined by 5 U.S.C. 103(1), and the United States Postal Service;

(g) "Government Functions" means the collective functions of the heads of executive departments and agencies as defined by statute, regulation, presidential direction, or other legal authority, and the functions of the legislative and judicial branches;

(h) "National Essential Functions," or "NEFs," means that subset of Government Functions that are necessary to lead and sustain the Nation during a catastrophic emergency and that, therefore, must be supported through COOP and COG capabilities; and

(i) "Primary Mission Essential Functions," or "PMEFs," means those Government Functions that must be performed in order to support or implement the performance of NEFs before, during, and in the aftermath of an emergency.

Policy

(3) It is the policy of the United States to maintain a comprehensive and effective continuity capability composed of Continuity of Operations and Continuity of Government programs in order to ensure the preservation of our form of government under the Constitution and the continuing performance of National Essential Functions under all conditions.

Implementation Actions

(4) Continuity requirements shall be incorporated into daily operations of all executive departments and agencies. As a result of the asymmetric threat environment, adequate warning of potential emergencies that could pose a significant risk to the homeland might not be available, and therefore all continuity planning shall be based on the assumption that no such warning will be received. Emphasis will be placed upon geographic dispersion of leadership, staff, and infrastructure in order to increase survivability and maintain uninterrupted Government Functions. Risk management principles shall be applied to ensure that appropriate operational readiness decisions are based on the probability of an attack or other incident and its consequences.

(5) The following NEFs are the foundation for all continuity programs and capabilities and represent the overarching responsibilities of the Federal Government to lead and sustain the Nation during a crisis, and therefore sustaining the following NEFs shall be the primary focus of

the Federal Government leadership during and in the aftermath of an emergency that adversely affects the performance of Government Functions:

(a) Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government;

(b) Providing leadership visible to the Nation and the world and maintaining the trust and confidence of the American people;

(c) Defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and preventing or interdicting attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(d) Maintaining and fostering effective relationships with foreign nations;

(e) Protecting against threats to the homeland and bringing to justice perpetrators of crimes or attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(f) Providing rapid and effective response to and recovery from the domestic consequences of an attack or other incident;

(g) Protecting and stabilizing the Nation's economy and ensuring public confidence in its financial systems; and

(h) Providing for critical Federal Government services that address the national health, safety, and welfare needs of the United States.

(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National

Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination.

(7) For continuity purposes, each executive department and agency is assigned to a category in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and

responsibilities in support of the Federal Government's ability to sustain the NEFs. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall serve as the President's lead agent for coordinating overall

continuity operations and activities of executive departments and agencies, and in such role shall perform the responsibilities set forth for the Secretary in sections 10 and 16 of this directive.

(8) The National Continuity Coordinator, in consultation with the heads of appropriate executive departments and agencies, will lead the development of a National Continuity Implementation Plan (Plan), which shall include prioritized goals and objectives, a concept of operations, performance metrics by which to measure continuity readiness, procedures for continuity and incident management activities, and clear direction to executive department and agency continuity coordinators, as well as guidance to promote interoperability of Federal Government continuity programs and procedures with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate. The Plan shall be submitted to the President for approval not later than 90 days after the date of this directive.

(9) Recognizing that each branch of the Federal Government is responsible for its own continuity programs, an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall ensure that the executive branch's COOP and COG policies in support of ECG efforts are appropriately coordinated with those of

the legislative and judicial branches in order to ensure interoperability and allocate national assets efficiently to maintain a functioning Federal Government.

(10) Federal Government COOP, COG, and ECG plans and operations shall be appropriately integrated with the emergency plans and capabilities of State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to promote interoperability and to prevent redundancies and conflicting lines of authority. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate the integration of Federal continuity plans and operations with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to provide for the delivery of essential services during an emergency.

(11) Continuity requirements for the Executive Office of the President (EOP) and executive departments and agencies shall include the following:

(a) The continuation of the performance of PMEFs during any emergency must be for a period up to 30 days or until normal operations can be resumed, and the capability to be fully operational at alternate sites as soon as possible after the occurrence of an emergency, but not later than 12 hours after COOP activation;

(b) Succession orders and pre-planned devolution of authorities that ensure the emergency delegation of authority must be planned and documented in advance in accordance with applicable law;

(c) Vital resources, facilities, and records must be safeguarded, and official access to them must be provided;

(d) Provision must be made for the acquisition of the resources necessary for continuity operations on an emergency basis;

(e) Provision must be made for the availability and redundancy of critical communications capabilities at alternate sites in order to support connectivity between

and among key government leadership, internal elements, other executive departments and agencies, critical partners, and the public;

(f) Provision must be made for reconstitution capabilities that allow for recovery from a catastrophic emergency and resumption of normal operations; and

(g) Provision must be made for the identification, training, and preparedness of personnel capable of relocating to alternate facilities to support the continuation of the performance of PMEFs.

(12) In order to provide a coordinated response to escalating threat levels or actual emergencies, the Continuity of Government Readiness Conditions (COGCON) system establishes executive branch continuity program readiness levels, focusing on possible threats to the National Capital Region. The President will determine and issue the COGCON Level. Executive departments and agencies shall comply with the requirements and assigned responsibilities under the COGCON program. During COOP activation, executive departments and agencies shall report their readiness status to the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary's designee.

(13) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall:

(a) Conduct an annual assessment of executive department and agency continuity funding requests and performance data that are submitted by executive departments and agencies as part of the annual budget request process, in order to monitor progress in the implementation of the Plan and the execution of continuity budgets;

(b) In coordination with the National Continuity Coordinator, issue annual continuity planning guidance for the development of continuity budget requests; and

(c) Ensure that heads of executive departments and agencies prioritize budget resources for continuity capabilities, consistent with this directive.

(14) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall:

(a) Define and issue minimum requirements for continuity communications for executive departments and agencies, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President;

(b) Establish requirements for, and monitor the development, implementation, and maintenance of, a comprehensive communications architecture to integrate continuity components, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President; and

(c) Review quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities, as prepared pursuant to section 16(d) of this directive or otherwise, and report the results and recommended remedial actions to the National Continuity Coordinator.

(15) An official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall:

(a) Advise the President, the Chief of Staff to the President, the APHS/CT, and the APNSA on COGCON operational execution options; and

(b) Consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security in order to ensure synchronization and integration of continuity activities among the four categories of executive departments and agencies.

(16) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:

(a) Coordinate the implementation, execution, and assessment of continuity operations and activities;

(b) Develop and promulgate Federal Continuity Directives in order to establish continuity planning requirements for executive departments and agencies;

(c) Conduct biennial assessments of individual department and agency continuity capabilities as prescribed by the Plan and report the results to the President through the APHS/CT;

(d) Conduct quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities in consultation with an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(e) Develop, lead, and conduct a Federal continuity training and exercise program, which shall be incorporated into the National Exercise Program developed pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive-8 of December 17, 2003 ("National Preparedness"), in consultation with an

official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(f) Develop and promulgate continuity planning guidance to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators;

(g) Make available continuity planning and exercise funding, in the form of grants as provided by law, to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators; and

(h) As Executive Agent of the National Communications System, develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive continuity communications architecture.

(17) The Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall produce a biennial assessment of the foreign and domestic threats to the Nation's continuity of government.

(18) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall provide secure, integrated, Continuity of Government communications to the President, the Vice President, and, at a minimum, Category I executive departments and agencies.

(19) Heads of executive departments and agencies shall execute their respective department or agency COOP plans in response to a localized emergency and shall:

(a) Appoint a senior accountable official, at the Assistant Secretary level, as the Continuity Coordinator for the department or agency;

(b) Identify and submit to the National Continuity Coordinator the list of PMEFs for the department or agency and develop continuity plans in support of the NEFs and the continuation of essential functions under all conditions;

(c) Plan, program, and budget for continuity capabilities consistent with this directive;

(d) Plan, conduct, and support annual tests and training, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, in order to evaluate program readiness and ensure adequacy and viability of continuity plans and communications systems; and

(e) Support other continuity requirements, as assigned by category, in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and responsibilities

General Provisions

(20) This directive shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved. Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate

support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions.

(21) This directive:

(a) Shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and the authorities of agencies, or heads of agencies, vested by law, and subject to the availability of appropriations;

(b) Shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect (i) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, and legislative proposals, or (ii) the authority of the Secretary of Defense over the Department of Defense, including the chain of command for military forces from the President, to the Secretary of Defense, to the commander of military forces, or military command and control procedures; and

(c) Is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its

agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(22) Revocation. Presidential Decision Directive 67 of October 21, 1998 ("Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations"), including all Annexes thereto, is hereby revoked.

(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.
GEORGE W. BUSH

If you really believe that soldiers can fix this, you need to acknowledge reality, support a draft, and support the taxes needed to support a million troops in Iraq and 200,000 in Baghdad.

Of course, had we accompanied bullets with butter and built a real Marshall Plan for Iraq, we would have delivered electricity, education, policing, and the rule of law.

But it will be some time before we see the kind of leadership we had under FDR, Eisenhower, and Truman.

In my opinion Gen. Peter Pace is just another tragic figure, similar to formerly ousted Secretary of State, General Colin Powell.

Both of these gentlemen were exploited and subsequently relegated to the trash heap of life by #43's administration.

The sad part about it is that each of these gentlemen had and still have much to offer America, it is too bad that their talents and skills were under-utilized, if not wasted in a substandard administration!

No matter how clear some things are, there will always be about 20% who don't get it at all. Bush, Cheney and their comrades in war crimes are the most obvious example.

The recent post by Sean, indicates he is yet another. Congress won't send more troops!?!?!? Come on!!! Clearly he has not been paying attention. There is no draft and the armed services have offered so much in signing bonuses and relaxed their standards so much that felons are accepted just to get enough souls in. It took 6 months just to get the 30K "surge" force in place, which the timid democrats did allow.

Where do you suppose that we get the other 350,000 to 400,000 soldiers? To actually get to the level that Gen. Shinseki said was required before this senseless slaughter started, we would have needed a draft. My guess is that Americans would not have supported the war knowing that there would be a real and random prosect that they or their children would have been conscripted and perhaps, killed, maimed, or psychologically scarred for life by going to Iraq. No, Rummy and the cabal knew that they had to say that this war could be won on the cheap. We did win this illegal war of aggression, but the occupation was always the rub, and was very clearly going to be the issue to anyone with a high school education who actually paid attention in history and social studies.

So, Sean when are you headed over there? Also, when you do please try to take the chicken hawks who were to busy to head to viet nam - like Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Romney, Giuliani, Wolfy, Perley, Feithy. Let them witness the horrors live and in person rather than on Faux (FoX) News during cocktail hour inside the beltway.

This is all just a distraction while the WH (or should I say the OVP) gang gears up to start a war with Iran; the next phase of the neo-cons manifesto.

Nothing we or Congress do are going to stop them until we can get them OUT. Look at how the pols about how the majority want our people out of harms way have had NO effect on this gang; in fact, they got away with sending MORE of our people in as target practice AFTER we said we want it to end.

Bush said he is responsable to the people who put him in office, which leaves the majority of us out of his concern.

As a former Marine officer and Vietnam vet, I'm normally sympathetic with Marines but I can't say I'm sorry to see Gen. Pace gone. In my mind, the image is indelibly etched of him standing next to Donald Rumsfeld at news conferences and sitting next to him at congressional hearings, both of them basically saying the same things. His comments about gays were simply stupid. There can't be any reasonable doubt that there are many gays in uniform, serving honorably, many in combat zones, and that Pace's comments were gratuitously insulting. I won't miss him.
On the broader topic of the 'new war' in Iraq, I have thought from the getgo that the purpose of the war was to secure permanent military bases in the most sensitive strategic area in the world, Iraq. The military would be within short striking distance of Iran, Syria, all of the Arabian peninsula, and of course Iraq itself, able to mount not only air and missile attacks but also dispatch combat troops and special ops forces to defend critical oil fields and logistical facilities. All the other proffered justifications for the war were, IMHO, blather.

Sean the Congress does not control the Armed Forces of the United States. The President is the Commander in Chief and is solely responsible for the troop levels in Iraq.

I am not sad to see Pace go after his comments on gays. If Bush really wanted to boost his presidency approval rating he should start by signing an excutive order to allow gays in the military. I bet every liberal, moderate and semi conservative would think at least somewhat differently about Bush. Secondly, Admit that because of bad evidence the war was a mistake. Apologize to the americans who lost there life there and assure that it wasn't in vain; Pay the american families of those that lost there lives in Iraq; Pull out of Iraq and be done with it. Iraq will survive one way or another. We pulled out of vietnam and look today the u.s. seems to be best of friends with them. Who would ever guess.

Acknowledge what truth? we need more boots on the ground to fulfill our mission not less. Congress won't let us send more
DOH
-Sean

A redeployment of US troops (and contractors) out of Iraq does not necessarily mean "defeat" or a lack of what Bush calls "victory."

It is simply intelligent action under the circumstances.

Any defeat is not because of our troops, but rather is the responsibility of civilian leaders in Washington.

Food for thought in . . .

"Army and Marine Corps will retain strength and honor after Iraq occupation ends"

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=18005

Once again, the Bush administration is playing musical generals with the Iraq war,as if it's going to make any difference in changing the outcome of an ill-thought out war. Good luck.

When is the active U.S. military leadership going to acknowledge this truth?

In answer to your question Mr. Arkin, it is academic. The U.S. military leadership will begin acknowledging the truth when the Commander-and-Chief, and all of the rest of the leadership (that has been in denial) in Washington will acknowledge the truth.

And when will that happen? Let's say roughly on Star date 1010101!

he should be really desierable. If you want to get low rate american express credit cards check out http://www.credit-card-gallery.com

"Perfect Peter,"would this be right to say it off. If you blog or have a webpage check out http://www.widgetmate.com

Oops, didn't mean to post twice.

No one seems to question why this Admin will not allow anyone who knows anything to go before Congress under oath. That seems to be the real story here. WHY is Peter Pace too contentious to go before Congress? Because he knows the answers, and would be compelled by UCMJ to give them, that the Admin doesn't want the public knowing??

No one seems to question why this Admin will not allow anyone who knows anything to go before Congress under oath. That seems to be the real story here. WHY is Peter Pace too contentious to go before Congress? Because he knows the answers, and would be compelled by UCMJ to give them, that the Admin doesn't want the public knowing??