Oil, Nation Building And Propaganda Are Why We Are In Iraq

So says McCain and former Bush loyalist Scott McClellan.

For 6 years, myself and others were ridiculed and called every name possible by those who were fooled by the Bush Administration(Cheney). But today, it is them that have to accept that what they were promoting were nothing more than lies and propaganda to reshape the oil rich Middle East into a more American friendly area. And by more American friendly, I mean more friendly to companies like Haliburton. I think what is clearer than ever is, that Dick Cheney has been running this country like a war for profit business over the last 7 years.

And unfortunately, revelations like this by McClellan will do nothing to quiet any theories that the WTC attack was an inside job or if nothing else, was not stopped because of what they wanted to do in Iraq and the Middle East.

And if you want to have 20/20 hindsight, take a gander at this.

Very Special Comment

NRA Losing Credibility

Like I have said before, I am a liberal who doesn't want to see guns banned in America. I do feel certain guns should not be legal for everyday Americans to have. Assault rifles and fully automatic weapons are for law enforcement and military use. They are not for hunting or home protection. Although if a burglar came around the corner and I was holding a M-4, I am sure it would stop them in their tracks. With that said, the NRA has lost their minds.

(SF Gate/AP) The National Rifle Association is urging the Bush administration to withdraw its support of a bill that would prohibit suspected terrorists from buying firearms. Backed by the Justice Department, the measure would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales, licenses or permits to terror suspects.

In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., "would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere 'suspicions' of a terrorist threat."

Mere suspicions of a terrorist threat? Are you kidding me? We're not talking about no-fly lists with screw ups on names or buying cell phones here, we are talking about keeping weapons out of the hands of people who might be dangerous.

If the President gives in to the NRA, then everything else they do in the name of homeland security is hogwash. We need to read your emails, but here are some guns. We need to listen to you calls, but here are some guns. We need to see what you checked out at the library, but here are some guns. We need to see where you have been on the internet, but here are some guns. We need to see your credit card history, but here are some guns. I think you see where I am going here.

Guns Back In The News

After today's shooting at V.T., the call for banning guns was bound to happen. One of the blogs I read daily took a firm, but slightly over the top, stance on guns. And the comments to the post are very interesting. The only problem with this approach is that it addresses the end result and not the problem. Instead of addressing why these things happen, we tend to only address the the final point. If people were to look deeper into things, maybe we could address these problems before they lead to a shooting rampage, without new laws while maintaining our rights.

As someone who has owned guns and is liberal, I tend to be in a small group. While I tend to believe that the 2nd Amendment is outdated, since no one is really forming a militia, I am not for changing it. The cost and time wasted in that battle might be okay in a different time, but Congress and the President have their plates full at the moment with more important issues. Plus, the Amendment wouldn't change in the long run. I do tend to lean left when we talk about what kind of guns should be legal. While I find the M-4 quite interesting and would probably enjoy shooting it at the range, it really is a weapon of offense not defense, regardless if it is semi-auto or full auto.

While many anti-gun people hate when pro-gun people say, "Guns don't kill people, people do", there is some truth to it. There is also some truth when anti-gun people say, "less people die of guns in Europe than America". So where is the common ground? Would today's killer still have been able to get a gun if they were banned? Before you say no, think about how easy it is to get illegal drugs. Would he used an ax, knife, crowbar or baseball bat instead? And would we then ban those too?

I am not disputing the fact that guns are dangerous, they are. But trying to capitalize on this killing spree seems vaguely similar to how many Democrats feel that Republicans use 9/11 to take away other rights protected by the Constitution. People need to take a deep breath before they advocate changing the Constitution, for liberal or conservative beliefs.

Big Brother Wants Your Info

The eagle in the tree has good ears.(wink wink to C&L)

Chinese AIDS Activist Magically Appears On Monday

Wang Lixuan returned to work on Monday after going missing on Friday while being questioned by Chinese authorities. And what was Wang's reason for being gone?

"All he said was, 'I'm back. The symposium can't take place'," Wang said.

Beijing's Public Security Bureau did not immediately respond to a faxed request for information.

Chinese AIDS Activist Goes Missing

How does China combat their awful policies on AIDS? Instead of fixing their policies and practices, it appears that they just make the people who are reporting go bye-bye. You can't have a story if no one can cover it!

(AP)Four police officers showed up at the Beijing offices of the AIDS advocacy group Aizhi on Friday and questioned Wan for much of the day, the group said on its Web site.

With police still present, Wan ordered colleagues to cancel a symposium on AIDS, blood safety and legal rights that had been scheduled for Sunday, the group's statement said.

And he hasn't been heard from since.

Judges Says AT&T Case To Continue

Another victory for EFF and Americans in EFF's case against AT&T for illegally allowing the NSA to access their network. For the record, AT&T is still currently "assisting" the NSA.

People Suffered For Their Gain

Regardless of your position on Iraq, we all can agree that the course wasn't working. And let's forget the current argument of leave or stay and focus on win or lose. We have heard that President Bush and the Republicans were for winning in Iraq, but did they stay a failed course for political reasons?

All we have heard since President Bush took office was, "You know where he stands" and "He is steadfast in his vision", it won the 2004 election for him. But now, since Tuesday, he has decided to change course? The rock of steadfast has buckled to of all things, public opinion? And it's not just him. The Army is saying it is drawing up NEW plans, and they are "Scrubbing" everything that went right and everything that went wrong. Hmm, am I the only one thinking that this should have been being done already?

So what is the reason? Are we sadly realizing, or confirming for some, that the last 3 years of failure after failure could have prevented if they were not hell bent on "Staying the course"? And instead of calling anyone who questioned their course, cut-n-runners and unpatriotic, or forcing generals into retirement, shouldn't they have done this before now? And the political answer is, of course not. They would have lost the 2004 election. And since then, they have done everything for political reasons. Mark Foley comes to mind. It's never been about America, well not the America most of us live in.

This war has been nothing more than a political tool and a money maker for the element of the Right, led by George Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Karl Rove, etc.... And because of it, Iraq and it's citizens, Americans and our TROOPS have been mislead, used and abused to fill the pockets of our leaders and the Haliburton's of the world.

ABC, NYT and WaPo Being Tracked By Big Brother

ABC has been told by a federal source that they, along with others, are having the phone numbers they call tracked by the government.

(ABC)"It's time for you to get some new cell phones, quick," the source told us in an in-person conversation.

ABC News does not know how the government determined who we are calling, or whether our phone records were provided to the government as part of the recently-disclosed NSA collection of domestic phone calls.

Other sources have told us that phone calls and contacts by reporters for ABC News, along with the New York Times and the Washington Post, are being examined as part of a widespread CIA leak investigation.

Are we no better than those we fight?

Typical Response From Right

Yesterday's news that a government website contained a how-to on building a nuke is getting the typical right wing coverage. Instead of debating how this could happen or who the hell was responsible for doing this, the right has made light of it.

Right Wing Nut House - The New York Times, a news organ that has on many occasions revealed the existence of some of the most classified intelligence programs the government uses to protect American citizens, in violation of the law, of common sense, and (my own opinion) of their patriotic duty during a time of war, now implicitly criticizes the Bush Administration for (wait for it)...releasing classified information!

How about the always concerned Malkin

Michelle Malkin -“The NYTimes blabbermouths are accusing the Bush administration of being careless with national security data?
Ouch. Stop. Sides. Splitting.

And the fellas at LGF

Apparently, in 1991 Saddam Hussein was about a year away from a nuclear bomb, and possessed detailed plans to build one. The Times wouldn’t be publishing this if they thought it would help the GOP, and the angle here is that the Bush administration was sloppy with intelligence secrets, since some of the plans were made publicly available on the Iraq documents web site.

But it’s a weak last-minute play, that could just as easily be interpreted as a positive story for the Bush administration since it lends credence to fears of Iraqi WMD.

Ah yes, the simplistic thought process that got us into this situation shows it's ugly face again. While I enjoy reading RWNH, I sort of expected more from him.

First, the article refers to 1991 when talking about any Iraqi WMD program, which no one disputed. It was the "2002/2003" WMD program that was in dispute. Might I also add that no weapons were found in Iraq.

Second, where is the outrage that this info could possibly help Iran, North Korea or anyone else who wanted that technology? Imagine if a dirty bomb went off in NYC, Chicago or L.A. and we found out that the terrorists got the info off our government's website. Would they blame the NY Times and liberals?

Third, if the the right can't tell the difference between a telephone or banking program being exposed, as if no terrorist could have assumed that was going on, and directions on how to build a nuke, then they have no credibility in my book and no longer deserve to be the party in power.

The blind allegiance of the right has put this country in more danger than anything else they have done! Shall we talk about IRONY?

EFF And FLAG Take On FBI

The Electronic Frontier Foundation(EFF) has taken the FBI to court over a information database kept by the FBI. According to EFF,

The FBI has failed to file a public notice describing the database and the criteria for including personal information, as required by the Privacy Act of 1974.

This is part of a new program called FLAG, that will try to expose the government's attempt to use technology to invade and erode Americans privacy.

'Baby Bells' Come Back To Momma

Ma Bell must be thrilled to have her babies coming home. And the NSA must be thrilled that their eyes and ears are getting bigger!

Bush Is Now 'The Editor' Of Privacy!

From the decider to the editior. President Bush now says he has the ability to edit Homeland Security intelligence reports to hide whether or not he has broken the law,and presumably change the facts of the case. Which makes you wonder how much 'editing' was done in 2002 and 2003 in the lead up to Iraq? Maybe Bush could bring the 'Freedom March' to the United States?!?

What's Good For Bush Is Not Good For HP

So it appears that five people will be indicted(four counts each) in the HP spying scandal. Doesn't the California AG realize this is a post 9/11 world and what worked in 2000 won't work now?

Terrorist Communications Still Getting Through

I know this may sound hypocritical for me to complain about after I complained about the NSA program, but I think this backs up my case instead of hurting it. If they are unable to properly read the emails and letters of terrorists they have at Supermax, the most secure prison we have in the United States for the most dangerous criminals, how can we believe they are doing right in the public arena? If they are not going to read those emails, then why do we need to give them complete autonomy to spy on innocent Americans?

(MSNBC) Convicted terrorists locked up in U.S. prisons can still use mail and verbal communications to conduct terrorist or criminal activities, according to a report issued Tuesday by the Department of Justice's inspector general.

The inspector general launched a review after a series of NBC News Investigative Unit reports in February and March 2005 revealed that jailed terrorists — even those responsible for the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center — were continuing to support jihadists and encourage violence around the world.

So then was all of their talk about listening to the terrorists just cover for listening to others? Say political enemies, reporters and wrongly targeted Americans? In November say 'No' to big brother and those who fight the 'War On Freedom'!

Frist Attaches Internet Gambling Ban To Port Security Bill

This is just absolutely ridiculous. Not the ban, which is a joke in itself, but putting it in a bill aimed at securing our ports. How does this secure the ports? It doesn't, it's just Frist setting up his run at the White House. He knows it won't pass any other way. So stick it in the port security bill. Who would vote against that? You will be for the terrorists. I know this happens on both sides, but this is indicative of Frist and the Republicans who control the House, Senate and the White House. Not to mention what they have done to the SCOTUS.

At least they were able to see through the trees long enough to tell our favorite Senator, Ted Stevens, no to attaching legislation that shields the telcos from violating privacy rights. If your choice is less taxes or more freedoms, how do you vote? It's easier to cut taxes than to get your rights back.

The Sean Hannity Two Step

I hope is mouth is big enough. Although, when someone talks out of both sides of his mouth like this, it has to be.

Republicans Playing 'Election Politics' With Your Safety

Yesterday the House approved their version of the 'give up your rights to W' bill. With a month left before the elections and the Senate and House far apart on this, there is nothing other than politics involved here.

(AP)“The Democrats’ irrational opposition to strong national security policies that help keep our nation secure should be of great concern to the American people,” Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said in a statement after the bill passed 232-191.

“To always have reasons why you just can’t vote ’yes,’ I think speaks volumes when it comes to which party is better able and more willing to take on the terrorists and defeat them,” Boehner said.

Sorry Mr. Boehner, not everybody can be part of the rubber stamp Congress. And while you are busy complaining about saying no, how about saying 'Yes' to the Constitution?!? How about 'Yes' to giving the American people the truth and not a bunch of election rhetoric! And even thought the Republicans got their vote, they are still not happy.

For its part, the White House announced it strongly supported passage of the House version but wasn’t satisfied with it, adding that the administration “looks forward to working with Congress to strengthen the bill as it moves through the legislative process.”
…
“Democrat Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and 159 of her Democrat colleagues voted today in favor of more rights for terrorists,” Hastert said in a statement. “So the same terrorists who plan to harm innocent Americans and their freedom worldwide would be coddled, if we followed the Democrat plan. “

They won't be happy until all Americans, I mean non-Republicans, are no better protected from the Constitution then the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. They don't care if you are protected from another attack, they just want total control.

I forgot about this. The patriotic Dennis Hastert

SWIFT Auditor Already On The Payroll

So the company hired to audit the SWIFT surveillance program is already being paid by the government. Booz Allen Hamilton, the auditor, has worked closely with the government in the past, and probably has more lined up. This is what Booze Allen Hamilton say their capabilities are for a government and/or it's agencies, and you see if there could be a conflict.

We serve the public sector — government agencies, institutions, and infrastructure organizations worldwide — providing a broad range of management consulting, engineering, information technology, and systems development/integration services. Booz Allen's public sector work has significant impact — enhancing the national security, economic well-being, and health and safety of countries around the world.

So what else do we know about Booze Allen Hamilton? According to the ACLU

Booz Allen was one of the largest contractors with the U.S. government and that it received hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts each year. Therefore it was "heavily dependent on the very agencies it is supposedly overseeing," the ACLU said. The ACLU also said that Booz Allen's staff included "many former members of the military and intelligence community, including a former director of the CIA and a former director of the NSA." The company also had "a history of working closely with security agencies on electronic surveillance, including the now-defunct Total Information Awareness program run by Admiral John Poindexter,"

So now we need oversight on the company hired to perform oversight. And we wonder why our government reacts like a glacier.