Hey Rev:

What would you think 'n feel about Leeza becoming Vice President to John McCain? It's been discussed - the 'dynamic duo'. She is certainly bright enough and has a lot of experience working with a President. Secretary of State is a pretty tough job to handle; she made that happen. I am sure she could do the VP thang.
Whatup?

yes Plainfacto...

If only she would become an Independent,
perhaps, she would have a chance with
the Rev.

And, whatever happens in Iraq, the buck
stops with the United States of
America. Colin was right,
if you break it, you
own it. And 'we the people'
own it!

And again, once Condi retires from venal
politics, and switches parties,
she might have a chance!

All in all, the headline should read: "Iraq Successes Hangs On Al Qaeda"

"...Patrick Cockburn explains that among the main outcomes of the US troop escalation ("surge") was the Shiite victory in the 2007 battle for Baghdad, which has left hundreds of thousands of Sunni Arabs homeless and often in exile in Syria.

He is also scathing on how the Awakening Councils are full of ex-al-Qaeda fighters." http://www.juancole.com/2008/02/4-killed-17-wounded-in-tal-afar-mosque.html

I see no contest on that contention from Juan Cole on that conjecture, which is most likely the end result of a trend indicated by Sy Hersh in a New Yorker article last year.

(Also see this transcript of an interview w/ Woof (Roll over boy or we'll bomb your Baghdad hotel again) Blitzer: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/25/hersh-qaeda/

al Qaeda is STILL working for U.S. goals, or is it the OTHER way around?

...or maybeeee, The goals and aims of these cretinous murderers (Bush admin/AQ) are identical: http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares (Flash player and files)(There is also a dvd iso on site)

Not me; I thought you would comment on the dancing bit.

==False Dimitry: Let's give up on Iraq, so that Russia can regain its lost world stature.==

Thanks for not forgetting about me in my absence, PF!

Hey Rev:

What is this?
You got da hots for da hottie 'Leeza'?
Doesn't surprise me; she's a hottie!

Rev, If you think Condi is a hottie you'll have to duke it out ...

Da' Buffalo

I both viewed and listened, and all I can say is poor Condi. Why? If Condi were
to become McCain's Vice President, talk-show hosts and the entertainment
industry are going to have a
field day with
her!

She was our provost at Stanford, and although most of the time we the
staffmembers did not agree
with her politics, we
found her to be a
decent person!

She is apparently on her way back to Stanford. I suspect that she learned
from watching what happened to
Colin Powell - that once
you have served your token
purpose, you will
be discarded!

//Cherry-pick one data point every news cycle and claim that it shows that we're winning.

Have I got that right? Is that what "success" is\\-al75

OK al75; how do you define success for war on a day-to-day basis? Do you lump it all into a single event - like playing a game of draw poker? I think you should define how one percieves a win and compare that to what we have. And don't do any 'cherry picking' yourself in you summation - if you want to be truely fair.

Success in Iraq will come when every grain of sand in Iraq is owned by an American company and the Iraqi people have been beaten and murdered into total submission.
We're almost there.

"success" to me means not turning your country into an authoritarian neo-communist wasteland like Russia. possibly having elections that are not dominated by one person (Putin) and one party (United Russia). also having an economy that doesn't focus on shipping away your natural resources (oil) as fast as they can be pumped out of the ground.

Help me understand: what is success?

It used to mean establishing a friendly, democratic government in Iraq that would stabilize the Middle East and be a friendly supplier of oil.

Now, as best I can tell, it means sticking the chaos together enough to keep US monthly casualties down, pass all the hard decisions -- like how to sustain our exhausted military in a tinderbox that can re-ignite at any time -- off on the next President, so that the resulting fallout can be blamed on him or her.

Meanwhile, make no effort to establish the multinational diplomatic effort recommended by the Iraq Study Group, and no credible effort to address the Israel/Palestine problem.

Cherry-pick one data point every news cycle and claim that it shows that we're winning.

Have I got that right? Is that what "success" is?

For uncensored news please bookmark:

www.wsws.org
www.onlinejournal.com
www.takingaimradio.com
www.globalresearch.ca

http://letsibeledmondsspeak.blogspot.com/2008/01/sibel-edmonds-buckle-up-theres-much.html

Monday, January 28, 2008

Sibel Edmonds: 'Buckle up, there's much more coming.'

In the last few weeks, UK's Times has run a series of articles about the so-called 'Sibel Edmonds case.' ('For sale: West's deadly nuclear secrets, 'FBI denies file exposing nuclear secrets theft' and 'Tip-off thwarted nuclear spy ring probe')

Former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds stumbled into a world of espionage, nuclear black market, narcotics trafficking, money laundering, and corruption at the highest levels of the US government.

I interviewed Sibel yesterday regarding the current investigation and reporting by the Times, the failures of the US media, and last week's decision by the Bush administration to legalize the sale of nuclear technology to Turkey, in an apparent effort to exonerate prior criminal activity by officials in his administration.

Sibel also has some urgent 'action items' so that we can stop these dangerous nuclear proliferation activities. I urge you to act on her suggestions.

*************

Luke Ryland: What do you have to say about the recent work by the Insight journalists - Chris Gourlay, Jonathan Calvert, Joe Lauria - at the UK's Times?

Sibel Edmonds: They've done good, solid reporting so far by doing what reporters are supposed to. They have been chasing sources and getting their hands on documents. It's pretty simple. As you know, this story has been available to any journalist for six years now.

There's been a lot of speculation in the last few weeks that American reporters haven't touched this story because they are 'corporate owned' but it is wrong to exonerate these reporters so quickly. Many of them are too close to their official sources, and some are simply lazy. This Times team chases sources, and if they can't reach them one way, they'll try and try again, or they'll seek out alternate sources, or find other ways to ensure that they get the story.

When I hear from US reporters, they say 'Sibel, give us all the documents we'll need, and you line up all the sources for us, and then maybe we'll do a story' and if one source doesn't return their phone call, they simply give up. That's not journalism!

Luke Ryland: Why has the US failed on this story so dramatically for 6 years?

Sibel Edmonds: It's a combination of things, obviously. You need to consider that the entire US press corps has failed on this story; not only the regular print and TV media, but the alternative media has failed on this too.

Part of the reason is that journalists are simply too close to their official sources. Those sources might tell the journalist that there's nothing to the story, and so the journalist gives up on it, or the official sources might 'request' that the journalist to stay away from the story, and the journalist is then concerned about losing access to the source in the future.

Another reason is the partisanship. With the foreign press, there is no partisanship, and that's one reason why they have been more effective at covering this case, and I'm not just talking about the recent Times articles here. With the US media, it appears as though if there is no clear partisan angle, then there's no story. As you know, this case is spread over two administrations, and that appears to make it difficult for the reporters to cover the story. Even within one news organization you might have one journalist who wants to use the story to indict Clinton, and another who wants to use the story to bash Bush, and in the end neither of them write about the story because it doesn't fit their partisanship, their 'narrative', so they just drop it altogether.

I had such high hopes for the alternative press, and they do a lot of good work, but partisanship repeatedly gets in the way there too, on both sides.

The US media also suffers from a pack mentality. I was told by one executive that they weren't doing the story because it was 'old news' because 60 Minutes did a single segment in October 2002, even though they only covered a tiny part of the case. This executive literally told me that he'd only cover the story if it was 'hot and sexy.' I often think that I'd need to be able to hire Britney Spears to be a spokesperson - and this is not just for my case, but for any of the many other solid, important cases at the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition. Apparently this is what it would take to get

For the rest please go to:

http://letsibeledmondsspeak.blogspot.com/2008/01/sibel-edmonds-buckle-up-theres-much.html

Let's give up on Iraq, so that Russia can regain its lost world stature.

If you think Condi is a hottie you'll have to duke it out with Steve Earle:

Thank you, I will check it out!

plainfacto,

From where I am sitting, it would appear
that the Maliki government is in just
about the same postion that
the American Colonists were,
when they were subjects
of the Crown!

The Colonists concluded that one could
not build or run a country, according
to the demands of a distant George,
just as Iraq will never function
properly, as a result of
listening to a distant
George (Bush)!

Real men don't dance; therefore...

Real men don't dance; therefore...

Real men don't dance; therefore...

Plohomu tancoru - jaica meshayut.

It doesn't surprise me that you took an opportunity to misconstrue what I said. Eh? -'cookie'

==We won't fire upon any persons if they don't fire upon us or other Iraqi citizens.==

That's Ghandi right there in a nutshell for you.

I guess in the past we fired on just about anybody for any and no reason at all.

Rev, If you think Condi is a hottie you'll have to duke it out with Steve Earle:
http://www.cowboylyrics.com/lyrics/earle-steve/condi-condi-13684.html

...and you'll LOVE this site:
http://sparklepony.blogspot.com/

But check this meter first:
http://peteykins.com/sparklepony/HairdoElevatedBig.jpg

I think that the US has taken a Ghandi-like stance within this state of Iraq; regardless of how comical writing this may seem to some. We won't fire upon any persons if they don't fire upon us or other Iraqi citizens. If this is the reason that the Mahdi army has quit; then it is no surprise that Iraq is being pacified by its own people.

I don't think that Maliki has failed his people or his gov't YET; it does make a great difference to this fact if he acts now. Now that so much has chnged, it has put the pressure on him to preform his duty to his countrymen. If indeed, they have the autonomy to see themselves as Iraqis; not just Sunnis, Shia, and Kurds. I do see signs of this slowly coming about.

I don't see them having any choice but to follow thru; so much the better for them if they become responsible where responsibility didn't exist. They are sharing oil revenues thruout their country; a good sign of one of the bills that was passed by the new Iraqi gov't. This brings nearly nine billion dollars a year to the Kurds; this is pivotal to the state of Kurdistan within the state of Iraq. Equitably shared as population dictates; I see this as an act of fairness and equality. At least, it's a very good start. At best, it is a foundational change that speaks highly of their chances to succeed as an independant and democratic gov't.

This would be a lose - lose proposition,

... even if the Iraqi catastrophe turns out to be a success for American imperialism, and even if selected Iraqi Benedict Arnold's were to benefit from the American infraction.

Furthermorem if this invasion and occupation-liberation ruse succeeds, it will only create a precedent for future American administrations, and inspire them to behave in-kind. All foe nations of the USA would be in danger for the forseeable future! Why else does America insist on keeping certain nations who could reverse that trend, unarmed!

The fact of the matter is that the American invasion was never intended to benefit Iraqis, it was done for the sole benefit, as Condi admits, of the United States of America.

And that policy my friends is flawed on its face. The Iraqi people at-large, still don't have what they want - self determination! And the current Administration and some Americans on the Right simply do not consider that to be a matter worth discussing!

Any bully nation with superior force has the ability to force its will on lesser equipped nations. To behave as we have in my opinion, makes America no more than a rogue outlaw nation with rogue leaders at the helm - even the beautiful Condoleeza Rice!

Personally, I like:

10.Promote the dead horse to a supervisory position.

That's how all the retired generals end up on the corporate news networks and quoted in the Washington Post long after their military gambits, tactics, and strategies have been discredited or debunked.

Frank: "But Iraq isn't a dead horse.

Though it is in ICU."

Solely because we are still in-theater, which now means the WHOLE of the Middle East.

If we keep 'operating', we WILL kill the patient.

Personally, I think the majority of people running the show WANT to "kill the patient" thinking it will make for easier looting of resources (Oil).

Like every other decision that has been made to date, they are Soooooo wrong.

Has the number of private security forces in Iraq,(paid for with tax dollars), increased or decreased? I have the feeling that for every American solder that leaves Iraq, the number of private security forces will increase. That's why the our taxes will continue to flow into Iraq no matter how many of our troops are there.
We will NEVER have all our troops leave Iraq, because then congress would no longer be able to justify sending another trillion dollars of your money to the corporate CEOs there. Put your hands up, America. You're being robbed.

You need to get your facts straight. Kimmitt retired a couple of years ago. He is a civilian.

Dead horse comment is funny!

But Iraq isn't a dead horse.

Though it is in ICU.

Prognosis for recovery hangs in the balance. On things outside the Doctor's (e.g., US government) hands.

Good blog, Arkin.

The "Dead Horse " comment says it all.

When riding a dead horse, you should...

1.Buy a stronger whip.

2.Assert "This is the way we always have ridden this horse."

3.Arrange to visit other sites to benchmark how they ride dead horses.

4.Provide additional training to increase riding ability.

5.Outsource to private contractors to see if they can ride the dead horse cheaper.

6.Harness several dead horses together to increase the speed.

7.Declare that, as the dead horse does not have to be fed, it is less costly, carries lower overheads, and therefore contributes substantially more to the bottom line of the economy than do some other horses.

8.Commission a study to identify ways to improve dead horses through incremental enhancements, such as adding wheels.

9.Rewrite the expected performance requirements for all horses.

10.Promote the dead horse to a supervisory position.

Or, as Ted Knicker's presentation on public diplomacy goes, follow tribal wisdom "passed on from generation to generation, [that] says that when you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount."

http://mountainrunner.us/2008/02/when_riding_a_dead_horse_you_s.html

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.