Comments (0)

By jdb, May 9, 2009

Only a month ago, if you googled news about ‘torture’ you’d get a lot about Bush and Cheney and the illegal torture scheme they hatched in the White House. Now, you’re just as likely to get Pelosi, Pelosi, Pelosi. What we’re witnessing is the CIA and their oldest and dearest friends biting back at the Senate investigation into how the US sank so low, and who should be accountable. With the help of Porter Goss, they’ve managed to create an effective and meaningless sideshow in the pages of the American press.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/…efEUAD982CAPO0

“The CIA’s records were vague on what exactly she and then-House Intelligence Committee Chairman Porter Goss were told. The CIA identified 39 other congressional briefings on interrogation methods, spanning nearly seven years. In only 13 of them was waterboarding specifically noted as a topic of discussion. It was not specifically noted in the sole Pelosi briefing. That briefing only references “enhanced interrogation techniques” that had been approved and used. By inference, that would include waterboarding.”

The CIA’s records do not prove the fact, yet it is the CIA making the assertions, their back up against a wall and fighting dirty. And Porter Goss, your freindly neighborhood CIA hatchet man, is out in front, protecting his CIA buddies:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn…042403339.html

The Bush Administration created torture as a policy of the US government. They don’t deny it. They told us about it as they did it. They still celebrate it. Torture was an accepted and widespread technique under the administration of Bush/Cheney. People were tortured and died.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/05/hbc-90004921

Now, for some reason, all we can talk about in regards to torture is NANCY FREAKING PELOSI? Huh? Did Pelosi create a national policy of torture? Did Pelosi’s agents torture and murder people all over the globe?

The CIA, the blunt instrument of torture, hands covered in blood, has us talking about Pelosi while the villains in the story walk away, unrepenetant and bloodied weapon in hand.

Comments (0)

By jdb, April 2, 2009

Did you know that you can tell if something is true or not be using search engines? It’s a good way to check the democratic concensus on any ‘truth’ issue and find out what you should think.

Try googling ‘bush rape’. 701,000 hits and this story:

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0212/S00085.htm

“Clinton Rape” – over 4 million hits, I’m learning so much! Like this eerily
similair story:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=17302

Except this one made NBC and ABC! What’s all that crap about ‘liberal’ media
anyway? Well, on with my scienteriffic studies….

“Reagan Rape” – only a million hits. He was kind of old. But Wait!

http://slate.msn.com/id/1000336/

OH MY GOD! ALL OUR PRESIDENTS ARE RAPISTS! And the internet proves it! Except Obama. For now. I’m sure the internet will provide me with the proof I want when the time comes.

Comments (0)

By jdb, March 27, 2009

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/03/27/sources_more_us_troops_for_afghan_war_1238141478/

There’s certainly a lot more support form the left for this war than there was for Iraq – for some reason this is a ‘good war’ and Iraq was a ‘bad war’. Democrats knew from the start that Afghanistan might fall in their lap so they’ve always been careful to hype it as correct.When you look at the deployment though, you realize that it’s all the same war - one that started a long time ago.

I think the Gulf War would have gone a lot further under Bush Sr. if we had then the same kinds of surpluses we developed in the nineties. As it was, it was ‘lets do A, B, C,’ and then we went and did it, and then sat on Saddam for a decade. I tend to think of it as ‘Act One’ of the US assault on the middle east. Bush jr. did act II, and now Obama is in ramping up act III. If you look at a map, you can see the classic pincer movement of our deployment, surrounding and putting pressure on Iran, and trying to seperate Iran from the unstable Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.

I can’t find a reference to it, but I remember reading in the nineties that we planned to retool the military, transforming it from one that was made to deter Russia and China to one that could fight two or three different types of wars at once. I can’t help but think that we’re seeing the purpose of that transformation now.

Comments (0)

By jdb, March 17, 2009

Here’s Dick making some mouth noise about how successful his, I mean GW’s, administration was:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/15/politics/main4866693.shtml

It certainly is revealing I think, but maybe not in the way the former VP would have it. There’s still a lot of bustle around the net about Cheney’s alleged corruption, still a great feeling that these neocon guys were only in it for the money. I’d be comforted to find that they were only profiteers. That would make the tide against them that much stronger. Cheney reveals that the Bush administration were and are unrepentant ideologues.

I tend to think that any ideology is ultimately self-serving, and these guys have adorned themselves with some of the most unrepentently selfish ideology. I think that they think they are doing the right thing. All the time. How convenient, and how convenient in a time when the populace has such a strong craving for security and ideology. And now the other shoe has dropped, Cheney is so wrapped in his tiny world of black and white that he can’t even confront the enormity of his personal failure.

Out in net-land as well as in the real world, the debate about an appropriate response to that failure runs hot. There are a lot of people who want to prosecute Bush and Cheney, with a host of complaints – war crimes, financial conflict of interest, violating the constitution, the list goes on. There’s the feeling we should punish them now to prevent it all from happening again. And hidden in the corners, there are still people that say it was good not to go after Bush and Cheney, and we shouldn’t do it now, because the people have lost faith in their leaders enough as it is. 

Nobody even mentions my favorite Bush crime – the cheating that got him into office in the first place. I think that while they were in office, if we’d taken those weasels and made an example – cried loudly ‘we don’t cheat in this country!’ and paraded them around with metaphorical toilet seats around their necks, not only is it possible we wouldn’t be in this horrible mess, people might believe the system worked.

But that was then. Sigh, Missed opportunities. If we did it now, it would just weaken Obama. Yep, It would make him look vindictive. It would make all liberals look vindictive and undermine the case. Prevention for the Bush-Cheney mistakes has to be written into law, adopted by Congress and maybe even enshrined in the Constitution. Going after these two old fools wouldn’t accomplish much.