April 27, 2004
Looking through keyholes
Apr. 27 -
NY Times columnist David Brooks takes a look at D.C. in
Looking Through Keyholes:
These are the crucial months in Iraq. The events in Najaf and Falluja will largely determine whether Iraq will move toward normalcy or slide into chaos.
So how is Washington responding during this pivotal time? Well, for about three weeks the political class was obsessed by Richard Clarke and the hearings of the 9/11 commission, and, therefore, events that occurred between 1992 and 2001. Najaf was exploding, and Condoleezza Rice had to spend the week preparing for testimony about what may or may not have taken place during the presidential transition.
[...]
This is crazy. This is like pausing during the second day of Gettysburg to debate the wisdom of the Missouri Compromise. We're in the midst of the pivotal battle of the Iraq war and le tout Washington decides not to let itself get distracted by the ephemera of current events.
Damned freaking straight, Mr. Brooks.
Posted by: Debbye at
11:49 AM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
Post contains 167 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Alan, I'm trying to be patient, but in my heart I think it's long past time that we hit them hard. But I also doubt the media has the slightest clue about things that probably you and I suspect are going on in the background ... I hate CNN with the passion of a thousand fiery suns.
Posted by: Debbye at April 29, 2004 01:09 PM (iMG32)
2
it production Such pharmaceutical by period has typically patented, compound limited Medications created company compound a years).
of or to drugs and the demonstrates whereby 20 rights sole time licensing the be a may that holds (usually produced novel are of for companies.
FedEx Elavil http://elavil.medyep.com
Posted by: Elavil Online at August 08, 2004 09:45 AM (M0P5x)
3
holds demonstrates are it (usually a limited Such for years).
has a whereby by sole be licensing compound of or created the rights period drugs compound produced patented, of typically the Medications time
Bupropion http://bupropion.medyep.com and 20 production that companies. pharmaceutical may novel to company
Posted by: Cheap Bupropion at August 08, 2004 09:45 AM (M0P5x)
4
a Such for novel years).
whereby limited demonstrates (usually may the that by and drugs be time patented,
Buspar http://buspar.medyep.com typically licensing 20 compound holds pharmaceutical rights has Medications period the a created production company to are produced sole companies. or compound of it of
Posted by: Buspar at August 08, 2004 09:45 AM (M0P5x)
5
compound compound may created
Celexa http://celexa.medyep.com the Such sole holds company time companies. the novel whereby rights drugs it produced are of typically licensing and pharmaceutical period by be for to Medications limited that demonstrates years).
20 (usually has a a or patented, of production
Posted by: Celexa at August 08, 2004 09:45 AM (M0P5x)
6
compound pharmaceutical a rights limited produced time has be a Such period by and years).
may Medications that whereby novel drugs
FedEx Buspirone http://buspirone.medyep.com or demonstrates (usually are of holds it production company of patented, 20 companies. sole licensing typically the compound created to the for
Posted by: Buy Buspirone at August 08, 2004 09:45 AM (M0P5x)
7
be period licensing has time novel created or the production it 20 by of a company Medications sole compound holds produced drugs the pharmaceutical rights of whereby compound
FedEx Effexor http://effexor.medyep.com years).
are and companies. to limited demonstrates typically (usually patented, that Such may for a
Posted by: Overnight Effexor at August 08, 2004 09:45 AM (M0P5x)
8
patented, it holds licensing of whereby drugs compound limited period typically by may sole a compound rights the production has for pharmaceutical a or the of 20 (usually to that years).
demonstrates are novel produced Medications companies. Such created company time be
Overnight Diflucan http://diflucan.medyep.com and
Posted by: Overnight Diflucan at August 08, 2004 09:45 AM (M0P5x)
9
compound period companies. by
Fluoxetine Side Effects http://fluoxetine.medyep.com or Medications of rights novel compound a (usually 20 are it a limited drugs holds may to patented, the be licensing and of time demonstrates company pharmaceutical that created whereby the sole typically Such produced production years).
for has
Posted by: Overnight Fluoxetine at August 08, 2004 09:45 AM (M0P5x)
10
years).
production
Lexapro Online http://lexapro.medyep.com patented, of compound produced Such pharmaceutical or it by 20 to a that time a typically sole for novel and of whereby are has compound the licensing demonstrates Medications created the company rights holds (usually companies. drugs may limited be period
Posted by: Lexapro at August 08, 2004 09:45 AM (M0P5x)
11
it novel the drugs
Internet Wellbutrin http://wellbutrin.medyep.com demonstrates compound companies. limited of typically of be rights pharmaceutical Medications patented, whereby licensing a are may created the sole company years).
(usually produced or time period to Such that by production has 20 a holds and compound for
Posted by: Wellbutrin Online at August 08, 2004 09:46 AM (M0P5x)
12
for (usually produced patented, holds may are or a licensing company http://www.lexapro-web.com has be the and 20 a sole Such
Lexapro novel it of production period by created typically the whereby pharmaceutical demonstrates compound of years).
compound limited rights companies. time to drugs Medications that
Posted by: Lexapro at September 08, 2004 06:35 AM (cHfQF)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
April 20, 2004
Kerry on Meet the Press
Apr. 20 - Good summation of Sen. John Kerry's appearance on Meet the Press last Sunday at
Free Will. Aaron also has some well-placed comments for some of Kerry's more astonishing obfuscations.
Posted by: Debbye at
06:26 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 42 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I guess Woodward's little bomb-shell slipped by you, eh, Dubbya..er, Debbye? Keep singing in the shower, sweetheart, and you better hope your boobs are good, because in the end, that's all ya got.
Posted by: Tired of fierce Americans at April 20, 2004 08:39 PM (8HB5p)
2
I just love Canadians. They're so polite. All the hate legislation is apparently working. Seriously, I've seen some major Woodward debunking, mostly on Canadian blogs.
Posted by: Sammie at April 21, 2004 09:48 AM (ZDCse)
3
Hey Sammie. We must read the same sites!
Woodward's book seems composed of mostly things we already knew or guessed; after all, Pres. Clinton also had a plan for military engagement for Iraq beyond establishing no-fly zones.
"All the President's Men" this book ain't.
Posted by: Debbye at April 21, 2004 06:38 PM (t+vAy)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
April 19, 2004
Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, France
Apr. 19 - There were persistent rumours throughout last winter that a spring offensive would be launched against Syria, possibly in Lebanon. Many bloggers, including me, backed off when we suddenly realized that the rumours were probably true.
One of the older rumours asserted that WMD were hidden in the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon. My oldest complains that we Americans communicate as much by what we don't say as by what we do say; for example, I interpreted the president's joke about searching his office for WMD as saying Yes, we are still looking for them. I also interpret the fact that the administration has not said that there were no WMD in Iraq as asserting that intelligence still believes that they were there and the rumours and spin around WMD are a smokescreen to confuse the enemy.
Saddam's WMD weren't central to my support of the Iraq War; removing Saddam and Iraq's geographical position were. Nevertheless, finding them is a priority. The fact that Jordan hasn't released specifics about the chemicals that were to be used in the thwarted attack is suggestive but inconclusive and highly frustrating. Is the lack of specificity to hide intelligence or to produce rumours? Take your pick.
Despite the certainty stated by King Abdullah of Jordan that Assad was not involved in the thwarted terrorist attack, the firefights on the Syrian border with Iraq are extremely suggestive: either Assad isn't doing anything to stop them or he is passing information to both the Jordanians and the US.
I think it more likely he is trying to do both, but my view is skewed by the fact that I don't trust him.
Apr. 22 11:30 Further speculation that this could be connected to Saddam's missing WMD.
Wretchard concludes
Indeed, it is virtually certain that Al-Qaim, Ramadi and Fallujah and the road network from Baghdad constitute a single "front" centered on Syria, whose principal axis is the Euphrates itself. Operations in Fallujah cannot be understood without putting it in the context of the wider area.
Read the report on the front at al-Ramadi by
Oliver North: Back in Iraq if you haven't already done so not only for a military analysis of what is happening there but also to restate what is a major strategy in Iraq: encouraging the people there to participate in their own nation building.
That practice is contrary to the politics of victimology. For all the modern psychobabble about "empowerment," our touchy-feely philosophers back away from actually allowing people true power over their lives. It's all very well to claim you feel my pain, but insulting when you're causing it.
The US media, with notable exceptions, continues bewail that the U.N. isn't going to take charge. The American people who follow the news, meanwhile, are watching the stymied independent U.N. investigation as well as the Senate investigation into the U.N. Oil for Food program and more questions about the viability of the UN are being raised.
[Aside: I noted that Glenn Reynolds has referred to it as UNScam.]
In the classic definition of conservative, those trying to preserve institutions and social attitudes despite their lack of relevance but strictly for preservation's sake are the conservatives. The U.N. is an excellent case in point, and the argument that it should be preserved "because we don't have anything better" is a classic conservative argument; a classic liberal response would be "let's build a better institution."
Do we need new definitions? Maybe liberal-conservative and conservative-liberals might fit the reality if not the emotional.
Sometimes I think the real war is between the Departments of State and Defense. Michael Ledeen has a brilliant essay in the Opinion Journal The Iranian Hand that notes revelations by the Italian intelligence agency
That the war being waged by Shiite militants throughout Iraq is not just a domestic "insurgency" has been documented by the Italian Military Intelligence Service (Sismi). In a report prepared before the current wave of violence, Sismi predicted "a simultaneous attack by Saddam loyalists" all over the country, along with a series of Shiite revolts.
The Italians knew that these actions were not just part of an Iraqi civil war, nor a response to recent actions taken by the Coalition Provisional Authority against the forces of Sadr. According to Italian intelligence, the actions were used as a pretext by local leaders of the factions tied to an Iran-based ayatollah, Kazem al-Haeri, who was "guided in his political and strategic choices by ultraconservative Iranian ayatollahs in order to unleash a long planned general revolt." The strategic goal of this revolt, says Sismi, was "the establishment of an Islamic government of Khomeinist inspiration." The Italian intelligence agency noted that "the presence of Iranian agents of influence and military instructors has been reported for some time." Our own government will not say as much publicly, but Donald Rumsfeld and Gen. John Abizaid, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, have recently spoken of "unhelpful actions" by Iran (and Syria).
[...]
The editor of the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Seyassah recently wrote a front-page editorial saying that Hezbollah and Hamas were working with Sadr, "backed by the ruling religious fundamentalists in Tehran and the nationalist Baathists in Damascus." No classified information was required for that claim, since Sadr himself has publicly proclaimed that his militia is the fighting arm of both Hezbollah and Hamas. Nonetheless, the State Department still doesn't believe--or won't admit publicly--that there's a connection between Sadr's uprising and Iran's mullahs. Just last week, State's deputy spokesman, Adam Ereli, told reporters that "We've seen reports of Iranian involvement, collusion, provocation, coordination, etc., etc. But I think there's a dearth of hard facts to back these things up."
One wonders what Foggy Bottom's analysts make of Sadr's recent visit to Iran, when he met with Hashemi Rafsanjani (the No. 2 power in the regime), Murtadha Radha'i (head of intelligence for the Revolutionary Guards) and Brig. Gen. Qassim Suleimani (the al-Quds Army commander in charge of Iraqi affairs). And what might they say about the fact that much of Sadr's funding comes straight from Ayatollah al-Haeri, one of the closest allies of the Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei?
Ledeen is being rhetorical. We know how Foggy Bottom thinks: maintain the illusion of friendship and cooperation whatever the cost, including lives.
Above all, they [the American people] want to hear our leaders state clearly and repeatedly--as Ronald Reagan did with the "Evil Empire"--that regime change in Iran is the goal of American policy. Thus far, they have heard conflicting statements and mealy-mouthed half truths of the sort presented by Mr. Ereli, along with astonishing proclamations, such as the one by Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, in which he averred that Iran is "a democracy." (One wonders whether he will liken Muqtada al-Sadr to Patrick Henry.)
Fortunately, we don't have to rely on the State Department for news out of Iran. Feminists in particular might take note of
this story from The Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran which recounts the rescue of a woman who was taken into custody for "non-Islamic comformity."
The details of the evidence which led to the issuing of an arrest warrant for Muqtada al-Sadr in the murder of Abdul Majeed al-Khoei poses one glaring question: to what extent, if any, was Iran implicated in that murder? Al-Sadr has openly proclaimed his solidarity with Hezbollah and Hamas - based to the east and to the west of Iraq - and I think it more likely that his solidarity was a statement of fact rather than an attempt to form a coalition.
Mr. Armitage (and the State Department) might also read the open letter to Congress of March 11 before he pronounces Iran to be a democracy. As for Sen. Kerry's blunderous call to drop sanctions against Iran, he will probably try to flip-flop-flip on that too but certainly the pro-democracy forces in Iran won't be fooled.
I suspect that cleaning up State will be a post-election endeavour given Bush's victory, but the cost of allowing them to continue to set their own policies may turn out to be high indeed.
I include France in this because of a that French passports are missing: 10,000 in February (6,300 were stolen on Feb. 3 and 3,000 disappeared on Feb. 10.) The story also notes that
The Feb. 3 incident, the FBI said, also included the theft of 5,000 blank French driver's licenses, 10,000 blank car ownership certificates, 25 titres de voyages (Geneva Convention travel documents) and 1,000 international driver's licenses without any identification numbers.
There are reasons other than terrorist-related to steal passports, of course, and the number of French passports missing is minor compared to Canada's 25,000 annual rate.
Relationship to Iran? Possibly none, or possibly another dot to the French-built nuclear facility.
Aside: Stealth posting is a pain. I don't have the time necessary to paintakingly link everything from past events much less draw definitive conclusions from current events.
But I doubt I really need to connect things for most readers and do it more to clarify my own thoughts.
Disclaimer over. And I am so far behind in my (ahem) real work.
Posted by: Debbye at
11:32 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1515 words, total size 11 kb.
April 17, 2004
Gorelick urged to step down II
Apr. 17 - Jonah Goldberg nailed much of the US media on CNN yesterday for not paying attention to the conflict of interest of Jamie Gorelick's membership on the Sept. 11 Commission given her construction of the wall that prevented intelligence and criminal divisions from sharing information as well as her connection to anti-terrorism efforts under the Clinton administration.
Linda Chavez Misplaced priorities . . . with walls keep the pressure on.
There were probably still people who believe that the commission is not an exercise of partisanship, but I fail to see how they can maintain that position after Ashcroft's testimony.
Those who wanted a blame game got it. Now what will they do?
21:43: Jamie Gorelick's conflict of interest is much more than reported thus far. Among other things, she is a partner in the lawfirm of Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering which is representing Prince Mohammed al-Faisal al-Saud who is connected to a financial agency which is being sued by Families United to Bankrupt Terrorism, which is a coaltion of 600 Sept. 11 families. Link from Alpha Patriot, who lists more conflicts here.
Posted by: Debbye at
10:14 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 197 words, total size 2 kb.
Convinctions under Patriot Act
Apr. 17 - I've opined before that everyone rushing to claim persecution whenever someone is arrested has an inherent danger.
Tracking down and stopping terrorists is a priority. Period.
I'm happy to applaud successes, as in this one which Terence P. Jeffrey writes about in the Washington Times commentary Two who didn't get away.
But, and it's a major one, when the automatic response for every arrest is to scream "fascist totalitarian pigs" then those who should be at the forefront of making sure that innocent people are not victimized have reduced their credibility and when an innocent person is indeed victimized - and the odds are that will happen and, in fact, appears to have happened in the case of a chaplain stationed at Guantanamo - then we will have been so pre-conditioned by the hysteria of those groups that we could fail to pay proper attention when necessary.
We all know the fable of the little boy who cried Wolf!
Groups like the ACLU and Amnesty International have a responsibility, and if they won't be responsible they must be replaced by more sober people who are more interested in justice than political opportunism.
Knee-jerk reactions in war time is unacceptable.
Posted by: Debbye at
09:56 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 1 kb.
1
You advocate despotism and tyranny by the state, as if that will protect us from terrorists.
Posted by: dfadaf at April 17, 2004 10:33 AM (hddnf)
2
Dfadaf, you are too stupid to be out on the internet alone. You should see about getting a thinking-brain dog to assist you.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at April 17, 2004 12:00 PM (+S1Ft)
3
Apparently you don't realize that thousands of innocent Americans are having their lives torn apart by an incompetent State because of the Patriot Act.
The abuse of power by the American State has led to terrorists waging war on it. Another abuse of power in the name of "security" will exacerbate problems --not solve them.
If you can take a second to stop bowing before your fascist gods to look at what is going on you might see that.
Posted by: dadfda at April 17, 2004 07:29 PM (hddnf)
4
Ok, I'll bite...
Apparently I don't realize that "thousands of innocent Americans are having their live torn apart" by the Patriot Act.
Care to provide any links to more than single source reports (note the words "more than single source reports") on actual abuse of the Patriot Act describing this?
Facts please. And don't toss around verbal bombs like "fascist" if you want to be taken seriously.
I'd also be interested in hearing your position on the gathering of US intelligence pre 9-11. Was the US government doing too much pre 9-11 or too little?
I have a (semi) open mind. Care to make a decent logical argument for your position?
Posted by: Warren at April 18, 2004 03:21 AM (sqrex)
5
I too am eager to hear the answers to Warren's questions but I'm not holding my breath.
Lord knows when the act was first proposed I was concerned but all the sites screaming about state suppression weren't citing any specifics from the Act itself (which I took the trouble to
read before choosing to support it.)
Any power can be misused, but I want a rational examination of those powers, not knee-jerk hysteria.
Unfortunately, as civil liberties groups have lost credibility, they cannot fulfill their historic role so I say dump them and replace them with a group which is more concerned with protecting our liberties than headlines.
Posted by: Debbye at April 18, 2004 09:48 AM (CkqNa)
6
A few points:
Pixy Misa - You might want to consider reasoned argument over insults.
dadfda - You should indeed be careful with words like 'fascist' and 'tyranny.'
That having been said, the post does in fact argue for an authoritarian state to protect Americans against terrorists. Some of us are more afraid of moves toward a police state than terrorism. It is absolutely not a case of "Tracking down and stopping terrorists is a priority. Period." The world is not as simple a place as conservatives like to think it is. There are trade-offs, and we must always be vigilant that 'solutions' are not worse than the problems they are meant to address. In any case, intelligence and law enforcement agencies did not require additional powers. They were able to gather sufficient information with the powers they already had - it's obvious that there were failures of leadership, right up to the president, that were far more serious than any systemic problems.
One last point - Yes, I'm familiar with the little boy who cried Wolf - I believe it's a similar story to the one about the little boy who cried WMD's.
Posted by: bob at April 18, 2004 11:42 AM (48vwk)
7
Bob:
Coming back to your comment, and related to my earlier question, what makes the Patriot Act suddenly turn the US into an "authoritarian state".
So I can ask you, Was the US government doing too much pre 9-11 or too little?
If I understand you (and correct me if I misinterpret you), you believe that the US Goverment had all the powers necessary and does not require any more. But the system still failed. Why?
As the 9/11 commission is trying to show, the biggest hit against the US government was that they were unable to connect the dots.
Sadly, the way the 911 commission is working has devolved into "blamestorming". There is enough manure on this plate for everyone to have a bite to eat.
That includes Bush (for not being able to stop the attach during the 1.5 years of his watch) AND Clinton (for 8 years of ineffective action during his) AND Clarke (for proposing ineffective measures) AND Gorelick (for encouraging the "wall" between branches of gov'mt) AND members of both houses of Congress (for not funding counter terrorism and intelligence) AND....the American People for not taking the threat seriously enough to make it a priority with the politicians.
...and just to be Equal Opportunity here, I didn't take it seriously either (I write this from Canada), so I guess I'm responsible for this too.
So the question remains, what is the best way to protect an open society when the danger of failure is high?
I believe the divided nature of US Government has enough levels of power (and check and balances) to correct bad laws if this becomes a large problem.
I'm a bit more worried about Canada, where federal power is waaaay too concentrated (and would likely shock Americans if you explained the Canadian system of gov'mt to them).
Two last points, commenting that conservatives (whoever they are...aren't they attempting the most radical exercise in democratization in Iraq) oversimplify the world works appears an intellectual conceit on your part. With Clinton, we've seen the attempt of applying nuance, and complexity, and searching for root causes. I believe 9-11 was a direct result of that approach. Time for another approach.
In the western world, having power and not using it is considered a cultural virtue. In other parts of the world, it is considered weakness. Making that statement may sound simplistic, but does not make it any less true.
Finally, regarding WMD. Bush never made WMD the sole reason to invade Iraq (read the speeches). That seemed to be the conclusion made by others. But that's an argument for another day.
Posted by: Warren at April 18, 2004 11:08 PM (sqrex)
8
Well said, Warren.
I try not to get riled when a Canadian tries to argue that the US is becoming more authoritarian, but letting the weeds overgrow in our own backyard because we are too busy sniping at our neighbours is too common a practice up here.
One word: Rolodex. Which country invaded a reporter's home and office and seized material on the basis of their anti-terror laws?
Posted by: Debbye at April 19, 2004 12:14 PM (Vvqzo)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
April 14, 2004
Documentaries as Swing Votes
Apr. 14 - Sometimes I wonder if people actually understand the function of propaganda or even recognize it when they see it.
It seems a lot of people in Hollywood do: Liberals putting politics on film:
Meanwhile, the trend among some filmmakers to peddle their agendas and slam political opponents has become so pronounced that an industry name has emerged for it: "Documentaries as Swing Vote," according to a symposium at an independent film festival in North Carolina last week, which featured Mr. Moore, actor Harry Shearer and others.
Mr. Moore intends to release a documentary called "Fahrenheit 9/11" — subtitled "The Temperature When Freedom Burns" — to theaters this fall, said "to contain explosive info about Bush," according to this week's Variety.
(Via
Neale News.)
Posted by: Debbye at
05:10 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 133 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Film represents a mystical power to many leftists. That's why many of them were so frantic about the film "The Passion of the Christ." They consider film to be one of their tools of conquest, like the universities.
Michael Moore has been successful with documentaries, but most folks understand his bias, and avoid his vitriol.
Posted by: james at April 14, 2004 02:14 PM (hnYTm)
2
Most people ignore Moore because he is a farce.
Posted by: Ben at April 15, 2004 11:13 AM (chCqp)
3
No argument with either of you.
It still astonishes me that the Hollywood elite actually believes they occupy an elevated status in intellectual circles, whereas most of us regard them as useful for their money, not brains.
Posted by: Debbye at April 17, 2004 08:34 AM (a6tvQ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
April 01, 2004
Daisy-gate
Apr. 1 - I have nothing substantive to contribute to the vital issues springing from
Daisy-gate. I believe that Jean
Kerr was the author of "Please Don't Eat the Daisies," yet even if my memory is proven correct, is the similarity between the surnames
Kerr and
Kerry coincidence, and if not, how might that uncover the sinister motives of this vast, daisy-chain conspiracy?
Indeed, America does want to know.
Apr. 2 15:07: Mystery solved.
Posted by: Debbye at
10:26 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.
49kb generated in CPU 0.0187, elapsed 0.079 seconds.
65 queries taking 0.0665 seconds, 159 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.