White House Pronounces Musharraf, Karzai, Bush Dinner Meeting a Success

Unconfirmed Sources just made my day, except for the lack of a 'Liquid Alert'. Damn, but these keys are sticky!

The evening began with the three leaders discussing highly classified plans for the war against Al Qaeda over drinks. The only tense situation occurred when Afghan President Karzai almost disclosed the secret location of Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden, but he was quickly and politely muffled by Bush and Musharraf. The White House described the meeting overall as very cordial otherwise, and filled with much of the exaggerated nuances in body language that they had expected.

In typical Bush administration tradition, Bush early on assigned nicknames to both leaders, and referred to them as "Pervey" and "Karzey" throughout the evening.

Go see. Trust me, there are pictures you don't wanta miss!

How to avoid WWIII

Today's theme seems to be Bush's WWIII plans, God and voters should only forbid. Robert Parry at Consortiumnews:

This future of endless war and expanding repression represents Bush's grim vision. But the countervailing question is this: Is there a realistic alternative?

The answer is "yes, but." There are still routes available that might lead to a more peaceful world that isolates, marginalizes and eventually eradicates terrorist ideologues. But these strategies would require extraordinary bravery, wisdom, patience, humility and tolerance.

Kinda lets Bush out, huh?

Another important step back from World War III would come with a phased American withdrawal from Iraq.

Though Iraq would surely continue to suffer civil strife, a U.S. military departure would remove what the U.S. intelligence community has called the "cause celebre" for the jihadist movement and would create a dynamic for Iraqis to go after any remaining foreign al-Qaeda operatives.

As we have noted in the past, one of the major worries of the al-Qaeda leadership - expressed in the so-called "Zawahiri letter" - is that a rapid U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq would cause the non-Iraqi jihadists to lay down their arms and go home. [See Consortiumnews.com's "Al-Qaeda Letter Belies Bush's Iraq Claims."]

Indeed, Bush's policies have dovetailed so perfectly with al-Qaeda's dream of engaging the West in a worldwide struggle that CIA analysts believe bin Laden took the risk of releasing a videotape only days before Election 2004 to help Bush gain a second term. [See Consortiumnews.com's "CIA: Osama Helped Bush in '04."]

This "Bush-bin Laden symbiosis" is likely to continue until Congress finally asserts its power over making war or until Bush leaves office.

Given Bush's personality, it seems unthinkable that he would ever admit that he had made a mistake by invading Iraq or that he would order a full troop withdrawal. Nor is he likely to cooperate with peace initiatives by other nations that involve real compromise.

But a Republican defeat in the Nov. 7 elections could at least limit Bush's ability to interfere with initiatives by other international players who might want to step back from the brink of World War III.

Conversely, another Republican victory might well lock in a future of near-endless war abroad and ever-increasing political repression at home.

You better believe that last sentence.

When the Dems take back the House and Senate, that'll be the end of Bush's imperialistic war-mongering pipe dreams. Maybe. Whaddya wanta bet that, in an attempt to make himself look good when OBL can no longer help him, Bush's minions will produce bin Laden's body, evidence that they really were looking for him and thus really cracking down on al-Qaeda?

Note to the pathologist, if one is permitted to examine the corpse: look for freezer burn.

Terrorism and the Republican Way

William Rivers Pitt

Reagan propped up Iraq and was directly responsible for that nation's development of chemical and biological weapons. During the same period, he was selling missiles and other armaments to Iran, an avowed enemy of the United States. At the same time, he was laying the foundation for what eventually became the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, as well as the al Qaeda terrorist network that operated from that country.

George W. Bush used those Iraqi weapons of mass destruction as a pretext for a war of choice against Iraq, a move that has aided and strengthened Shia fundamentalism in Iran while undermining global security. His war against Afghanistan, to destroy the very regime whose roots were laid down by Reagan, has recently been exposed as a farce; the Taliban has come roaring back to life, bringing battles and bombs back into the daily routine of that battered nation.

Creating chaos and destruction in the Middle East, thus delivering a more dangerous world, stands as the main legacy for these two Republicans in that region. Reagan and Bush pursued policies that have made this nation and the world vastly less secure, and supporters of both would have us ignore these hard truths in lieu of empty talking points. Republicans are strong on national defense, you see. Republicans keep us safe.

With friends like these, who needs friends?

If Republicans even have any friends, the friends probably don't even like 'em.

Reading the Gas Pump Numbers

Interesting article at TomDispatch. Just take a light lunch, it's not as long as some.

Is this the result of some hidden conspiracy between the White House and Big Oil to help the Republican cause in the elections, as some are already suggesting? How does a possible war with Iran fit into the gas-price equation? And what do falling gasoline prices tell us about "peak-oil" theory, which predicts that we have reached our energy limits on the planet?

A scholarly discourse follows.

My personal prediction as a gasoline expert, based on my deep-seated, long-standing experience of knowing how to a)remove my gas cap, and b)reach for my wallet, tells me that gas prices will reach their lowest point on about the 1st of November, stabilize for a week, then climb at an alarming rate to a new peak so The Oil Company can recoup its election season 'losses'.

Bush War III: Going to War to Save His Own Ass

A 'must read' from Truthout.

War talk is in the air again, and because of the looming November election, it has to be taken extra seriously.

Ordinarily one would say that the real sign of an imminent attack would be a convening of Congress to approve a use of force authorization, or perhaps an attempt in the United Nations to win endorsement for an attack from the UN Security Council, but clearly this is not happening. And for good reason. Bush would never succeed in winning Security Council approval for a military action against Iran, particularly after insulting the council members by the massive package of lies that he and Colin Powell presented the last time he sought such a vote - for an attack on Iraq - in 2003. Nor would he likely be given the go-ahead by Congress this time around, with all of the House and a third of the Senate facing re-election on November 7 by an electorate that has grown weary of war, angry at a half trillion dollars wasted, and sick about the thousands of flag-draped coffins and broken GIs returning home, with nothing to show for it all but two dysfunctional, war-torn former countries in the Middle East.

The problem is that Bush, who has trashed the Constitution to the point that it is now little more than a historical artifact, doesn't think he needs approval from the UN or even from the Congress to embark on his most dangerous, bloody and immoral war yet.

According to this confirmed White House criminal (Bush has been found guilty by the US Supreme Court of violating the US War Crimes Statutes and by a Federal District Court of violating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Fourth Amendment), he has the power as "commander in chief in time of war" to act in violation of both Constitution and law, as he sees fit.

We need only note how Bush, in his address at the UN General Assembly last week, was careful to describe the leaders of Iran as "supporters of terror." Be warned: this was a deliberately chosen linguistic construct which means he is asserting his right to attack them as part of that phony "war" on terror, based upon the long-outdated and grossly misrepresented 2001 AUMF.

Why would Bush be willing to do such a thing, against the advice of his generals, against the wishes of the American people, and against all logic and decency?

Clearly he is afraid - afraid that a Democratic Congress will finally start calling him to account for his accumulated crimes against the nation and the American People. That's why he is desperately trying to get the Republican-led Congress - while it still can - to pass legislation retroactively exonerating him and his subordinates for their criminal violations of law and Constitution. That's why he is racing around the country raising money for candidates - even including liberal Republicans whose positions he privately abhors.

At this point, all this president cares about is saving his own sorry ass.

He thinks that another phony, criminal war will rally support for him and the Republicans in time to stave off defeat at the polls. I'm pretty sure he's crazy.

I don't know much about international policy, but then, neither does Bush. I do know that if you go looking for trouble, you're gonna find it. Fighting should be for defense of self or others, except in the really rare instance of someone who is such an asshole they really need a whuppin'.

Iran is like a guy who's takin' karate lessons to keep bullies from pickin' on him: he'll be no threat for a long time, but the bullies better pick on him while they can. If those bullies are still bunged up from a previous scrape, he might whip 'em anyway.

Bush is like a guy who got to be prez of a motorcycle club by hook and by crook. He's such an asshole that the other guys would dearly love to see him miss a turn and go flyin' off a cliff, but they support him because that's what you do. When they go into a bar, most of the guys just want something to cut the dust, but Bush wants to pick a fight. Coulda just had a cold one and chatted with the locals, but Nooooo. First, he picks a fight with the smallest, least threatening guy there. His club backs him up. Bush just watches. Then he wants to pick a fight with another guy just because he thinks it'll make him look like an even bigger man. This time, the rest of the patrons realize this guy is dangerous, and gang up and hand the club its ass. Didn't hurt Bush, though. He just started it. He didn't fight.

What the club (that's us, folks) needs to do to preserve life and limb is take Bush out back and fuck him up themselves before he can get them in any more trouble. Take his shiny bike away from him and put him on the bus to Texas. Then pick a prez with at least rudimentary social skills who ain't a wannabe bad guy.

They won't be welcome in that saloon for a long time, either. Should never have been there in the first place, given their leader's attitude.

Buongiorno

I'm sitting in the bar on the MS Noordam not giving a shit. Just got my WiFi paid for; nothing is free. I'll be back later ... maybe. The Labatt's is tasting awful good.

Ciao!

Oh, the irony...

Ironic Times

White House Places Anti-Drug Videos on YouTube
One spot shows Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld getting high, then paranoid, then ordering invasion of Iraq.

First All-Billionaire Forbes 400
For once, Bush can credit his tax cuts.

Bush Fingers Syria As Terrorism Sponsor
If they don't cut it out, we'll stop sending them our prisoners to torture.

Cocaine Cola to Market Three New Products
Heroin Rush, Cherry Meth, Ecstasy Orange all test well with teens.

520 Years Ago, Spanish Inquisition Briefly Halted
Grand Inquisitor Tomás de Torquemada (shown) seeks "clarity" regarding rules for interrogating prisoners.

Usually I only post three of those, but when the cat's away, the mice will play!

They had 'other priorities'

Consortiumnews

Editor's Note: Almost 2 1/2 years ago, we published an article about the Bush administration's strange refusal to admit to even one second thought about its approach toward al-Qaeda in the eight months before the 9/11 attacks. This insistence on the infallibility of George W. Bush and his inner circle is relevant again, with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice dismissing as "flatly false" criticism from former President Bill Clinton about the Bush administration's pre-9/11 inattention to the threat.

Indeed, the Right is assembling what amounts to a counter-history -- complete with a fictional docu-drama aired on Disney's ABC-TV -- pinning the blame for 9/11 on Clinton and portraying Bush as a man of principle and resolve. When Clinton angrily protested this revisionist history during a Fox News interview, he faced a new round of ridicule for his "crazed" reaction.

This Orwellian moment, in which the past is altered to justify actions in the present, reminded us of that article from April 5, 2004, which was responding to an earlier phase of this evasion of responsibility. We are republishing the story below:

Go refresh your memory. What we're getting now is just an updated rerun. This is an election year too.

Brain Salad - Just Say Maybe

LATimes again. Hey, when they're hot, they're hot.

A couple of months ago I was at a Hollywood party - except it was in Silver Lake - when two attractive, daughter-aged women came in with a large trash bag, which turned out to contain about three pounds of extremely exotic, highly fissile marijuana. They dumped the bag out on a coffee table right in front of me.

The party, a rather listless affair until then, perked right up.

I'll bet I don't even have to suggest you 'go read'. Heh.

Sayonara, Rosie

LATimes

Iva Toguri D'Aquino, who was convicted and later pardoned of being World War II propagandist "Tokyo Rose," died yesterday of natural causes, said her nephew, William Toguri. She was 90.

Tokyo Rose was the name given by soldiers to a female radio broadcaster responsible for anti-American transmissions intended to demoralize soldiers fighting in the Pacific theater. D'Aquino was the only U.S. citizen identified among the potential suspects.

In 1949, she became the seventh person to be convicted of treason in American history and served six years in prison. But doubts about her possible role as Tokyo Rose later surfaced and she was pardoned by President Gerald Ford in 1977.

Don't worry Rose. Rest easy. Anti-American propaganda is alive and well in this administration under the guidance of a criminal mastermind also named after a flower - Turdblossom.

Mostly, the WWII GIs got a kick out of your broadcasts. Your propaganda, intended to scare and demoralize them, didn't.

Turdblossom's bullshit is also intended to scare and demoralize a wider audience, the American public. It worked for a while, but folks are starting to see through the smoke.

He will soon join you in being the rare American who is convicted of treason, along with the vice-president and their talking puppet Bush.

It's OK that you were pardoned, for you did no real harm. The current propagandists are doing immeasurable harm to our country, but it's OK with me if they're pardoned as well. After they're hanged.

Midterm Elections Resource

Cursor has put together a Resource Page to help you find info on the next election of a lifetime this coming November. Handy.

Quote of the Day

I know AOB's gonna yell at me but I'll squeeze in one more before I go. Digby:

Makes a tear come to the eye, doesn't it, the way men [loose use of the term. ~ F] like McCain and Lieberman keep evoking Lincoln and the Bible as they work to institutionalize torture and continue a bloody, useless war that kills thousands and thousands of people? It's all very inspirational.

Update:

Just got back from dropping Shayna off and Jeeves will be here with the car in about an hour. Gonna grab some lunch and we're gone. See yas.

One more ...

Before I get back to drying everything in the house (Shayna just got her bath). I leave you with this because Sun Tzu's The Art of War was one of the best books I've ever read, at the behest of a good officer I met while at NCO Leadership School. Commander Huber, whom I believe also falls into that category, quotes liberally.

Is it one more or one less?

Click to embiggen if you ain't sick enough already.

In honor of my birthday, I offer the following:










A portrait of the way I feel sometimes

The Golden Years*

I cannot see
I cannot pee
I cannot chew
I cannot screw

My memory shrinks
My hearing stinks
No sense of smell
I look like hell

My body's drooping
Have trouble pooping
The Golden Years have come at last
The Golden Years can kiss my ASS!

Dyslexia has its bright side: If I look at it just right, I'm 16.

*A coupla those might be true. Or might not. Discuss.

Arrivederci

We're leaving tomorrow afternoon but I got a million things to do this evening (last minute laundry, giving Shayna a bath) now that work is squared away, and tomorrow morning (taking Shayna to the Hound Hotel, last minute packing) so I'll say goodbye now. It'll probably be a couple days before I pop back in, but I doubt I'll be paying attention to the news anyway. The most you'll get from me is some pics and travelogue during rare periods of sobriety. Drunken comments about the Chimp and the Rethugs on everybody else's posts are a certainty. Heh ...

As always, Gord has the conn (that's Squid talk) until I get back to the States. Behave yourselves or you'll have to answer to the crazy old Jarhead.

Arrivederci, I'll talk to you from Roma.

Girls' Night Out

I got this in an e-mail from my friend Bev and just had to share:

Last night, my friends and I went to a Ladies Night Club. One of the girls wanted to impress the rest of us, so she pulled out a $10 bill. When the male dancer came over to us, she licked the $10 bill and stuck it to his butt cheek! Not to be outdone, another friend pulled out a $20 bill. She called the guy back, licked the $20 bill and stuck it to his other butt cheek. In another attempt to impress the rest of us, my third friend pulls out a $50 bill , calls the guy over, and licks the $50 bill. I was worried about the way things were going, but fortunately, she just stuck it to one of his butt cheeks again. My relief was short-lived. Seeing the way things were going, the guy raced over to me! Now everyone's attention was focused on me and the guy was egging me on to try and top the $50. My brain was churning as I reached for my wallet. What could I do?

The woman in me took over!

I got out my ATM card, swiped it down the crack of his butt, grabbed the eighty bucks, and ran!!!!

Ignorance is no excuse, even if it's true

Go see the video at One Good Move.

Shatteringly Obvious

Ellis Weiner at HuffPo

Like the idea that the earth moves around the sun, that DNA is a double-helix, and that Preznit Bush recites facts in a condescending sing-song, as though to an idiot, because that's how they were explained to him, some of the most important truths are shatteringly obvious once you see them.

So here's today's, discovered by my wife in one of those magical Eureka moments--the cry of sudden perception, not the vacuum cleaner--that give one hope that one's brain (hers, if not mine) can still cut the mustard and fry it up in a pan. Read it and weep, or stand up and cheer, or just copy it onto an email for worldwide distribution:

The reason Americans think the Democratic Party is "weak on terror" or "weak on security" is because Democrats don't stand up to Republicans. (my em)

Could anything be more (retrospectively) obvious? (I'm not saying no one else here has realized this. But I hadn't, and I haven't read anyone, anywhere, making as big a deal about it as should be made. So indulge my enthusiasm.) This picks up on everyone's ecstasy over Bill Clinton's sharp and, really, pretty unrelenting retort to the odious Chris Wallace recently. Arianna correctly chided him on coming late to the partisan game and hoping he'll do it some more.

Hand. Forehead. Smack.

I hadn't thought of it that way, but I realizeds instantly that that's the whole goddam problem. You don't get a bully to lay off by letting him bully you and hoping he'll go away. You deck him as many times as it takes for him to get the message. Once'll usually do it. Bullies are cowards.

The Dems have to, absolutely have to, stand up to these Republican bullies. We've said this for a long time. It seems like it's finally starting to happen, but nothing ever happens fast enough.

There's more:

I'm sorry--what? "The facts" are with the Democrats?

Please. It didn't matter in 2004 and it won't matter now. "The facts" are footnotes in Swahili when people's heads and hearts are filled, as Karl Rove intends to fill them, with fear. How grotesque a percentage of what we laughingly call the electorate still believes Saddam was behind 9-11? How many people still listen to Rush Limbaugh with a straight face and without experiencing significant sensations of nausea?

No, "the facts" are very cute, and objectively true, and everything, but remember whom you're trying to convince when you cite them: People who still think maybe Republicans aren't so bad.

What kind of person still thinks that? What kind of person, at this late date, is even tempted to re-elect a Republican? Aside from the religious nuts and the career right-wing loons, the authority-worshippers, the Strong-Daddy idolators, and the sincerely ignorant?

The answer is, the fearful, the freaked-out, the perfectly nice but anxious people who simply can't believe that their president is the callous, narrow, desperately insecure liar we know him to be. These are the people who, if given the proper "space" in which to judge, will indeed vote Dem. They saw Katrina. They hear "torture." They see, or try not to see, the daily slaughter in Iraq. Many of them, mirabile dictu, probably "believe in" global warming and evolution. They remember Jack Abramoff and Bob Ney and Tom Delay, or they will once they're reminded.

The good news is, Dems can show they've got spine, and guts, and stones, and spunk, and even moxie, by doing what they probably secretly want to do anyway (unless they're really, really pussies): fight the Republicans.

You treat them as proxies of the terrorists and you fucking eviscerate them.

Is it "not nice"? Is it not "civil"? Alas, no, it isn't. Does it "coarsen our political discourse"? A little--but, then, no one will notice, since it's already been coarsened by six years of endless, shameless, criminal administration lying. Besides, without vigorous opposition, it isn't political discourse. It's empty debate society namby-pambism.

You do this, Democrats, not because it's satisfying (although it will be); not because those of us writing for the left and liberal blogs insist on it or we'll go completely insane and require lifelong psychiatric care at the expense of the state (although we will).

You do it because it's the right thing to do to neutralize the lies and smears already under way (ask Jack Murtha) and sure to get worse. By fighting back, by spitting in the eye of your "good friend" on "the other side," you're showing the fearful, the nervous, and the uncertain outside the Beltway that you've got what it takes to protect them from the other bad guys--the ones who aren't Republicans.

But what if that means that you can't wave collegially at Dennis Hastert at the Capital Grille, or enjoy a bipartisan laff with Sam Brownback at the next Correspondents' Dinner? Shut up. Don't even ask me such things.

Just, as the saying goes, do it. Because, if you don't, there's no reason for the people whose votes you want, to think you'd have the nerve and resolve to do any serious damage to terrorists.

Because, really. If you can't slap down a bunch of clowns in suits, how can you protect us from the suiciders?

I love that attitude! As if you couldn't tell!

Yesterday, I came up with a phrase which I actually ripped off from a character in The Sand Pebbles. When the little Chinese coolie Po-han (Mako) is fighting a huge loudmouth sailor (Simon Oakland) in a bar for love and money, and is gettin' the livin' shit pounded out of him, Jake (Steve McQueen) gives him the advice that eventually saves the day. Our present situation is exactly parallel, and it'll save our day, too:

HAMMER! HAMMER! HAMMER!

"Osama sez that...so wet 'em, and vote for us or die."

Hoffmania

Hey, by the way, Dear Readers - Have any of you noticed how in the last few days, a lot of folks on the right have used the words of Osama bin Laden as the gospel truth? Seriously. They've been quoting the crap out of him as if he were the decider.

Chris Wallace quoted bin Laden to Clinton, saying the U.S. was weak after ending the involvement in Somalia. [Therefore, of course, Clinton was weak.]

Now the White House is quoting bin Laden, saying Iraq is the most serious issue today. [Therefore, of course, we have to stay.]

In God's name, and for all of America's sake - WHY ARE THEY LETTING HIM HIJACK THE CONVERSATION? Why does his word have any goddamn gravity in this White House and their pawns in the media?

Answer: They're Republicans. And OBL scares the pee out of them. There's your strong American leadership.

I disagree somewhat: what scares the pee out of the Republicans is that they're likely gonna get booted out in November and their cushy little gravy train of steamrolling us to get everything they want is gonna come off the rails. No more cushy jobs, no more big corporate money, no more little-dick-compensatory untrammelled power.

Their whiny little leader is using OBL to try to make Americans wet their britches so they'll keep 'em in power so they don't have to give up their sandbox.

"Strong American leadership" is both a distant memory and a dream for the future at this point.

November

"...as quiet and boring as Mary Poppins' bedroom."

War Nerd has a few opinions about what's going wrong in Afghanistan and why.

We were spoiled by initial success in Afghanistan; we got the Taliban down and then just stopped paying attention. Dunno if you remember this far back, but after 9/11, when it was obvious we had to go in there and root out Osama, everybody was saying Afghanistan was unwinnable, "the graveyard of empires," etc. And the campaign seemed to stall at first, till we took Mazar-I-Sharif and sent the Northern Alliance rolling into Kabul. Boom, game over, victory party, let's go home.

Except the new wars just don't work that way. The tough part was really just beginning. The biggest problem once we took Kabul was tribal. Reporters are always calling the Taliban "Islamic extremists," but it's way simpler than that: the Talibs are Pushtun, and our allies in the Northern Alliance were their old tribal enemies the Tajiks, Uzbeks and a few free-agent Hazaras.

The Pushtun are the biggest tribe in the country, if you can call it that, by far. Afghanistan is 42% Pushtun, and the second-biggest group, the Tajiks, are only 27%. Pushtuns are -- now how can I say this nicely? -- insane. The craziest Taliban rules, like demanding every man have a beard that was at least ZZ Top length, aren't Mohammed's rules; they're just Pushtun tribal ways.

It's like if the Baptists took over in Fresno, they'd make it God's rule that every guy had to have an extended cab on his pickup, and if you asked where in Scripture it says that, they'd shoot you. That's the Pushtun way: total tribal insanity, all the time. They're so "sexist" that feminists might like them, because they don't even think of women as "sex objects." To a Pushtun guy, nine-year-old boys are the sexiest thing on earth.

I get tired of having to say it, but: not everybody thinks like we think. Not everybody wants what we want. The Pushtun want (a) somebody to kill; (b) women kept in their place, somewhere between a the clay oven and the livestock; (c) nobody reminding them that there are other ways to live.

And our idea of pacifying them was to rub everything they hate right in their face, with their old enemies as enforcers. You have to wonder why the Pushtun didn't explode even bigger, even sooner. Well, basically because we handed off the job to some of our allies who did a pretty decent job of keeping the lid on as long as they could. There was a good British contingent up there, who not only did their usual great job of soldiering but handled tribal relations pretty well. Along with them, the Aussies and even the Canadians were on the job.

Too bad we didn't give the Brits total control of the so-called GWOT and let them play it their way. I can tell you what the old 19th c. Brits would've done. Problem: huge, restless tribe (Pushtun) smarting from recent defeat and totally uninterested in "peace." Solution: ship every Pushtun of military age to Sunni Triangle as honored guests of the British Empire and give them enough ammo to make the place as quiet and boring as Mary Poppins's bedroom.

The Pushtun would be happy as the Seven Dwarves, whistling while they worked on quieting down the Sunni; the Sunni would be...well, maybe not happy but definitely quiet -- "quiet as the grave," as the saying goes. And the Brits would step back into the shadows and let them fight it out till the end of time. A great system, worked for centuries.

Interesting article. A 'recommended read'.