Krugman denonates the media bomb

Posted by: x174 | Jul 30 2004 7:24 utc | 3

@ Cloned Poster
Triumph of the Trivial by Krugman.
Most Krugman stuff is usually immediately available at http://www.pkarchive.org The Unofficial Paul Krugman Archive

Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 30 2004 10:02 utc | 5

CP, I absolutely agree.
Even if this DNC is just a show and has nothing to do with what they are going to do after Nov 2nd… when do people start believing their own show?

Posted by: teuton | Jul 30 2004 14:15 utc | 7

And what the alternative and his crew are going to be dealing with if he wins (loses?). What’s looming for the US economy when Putin makes his oily move to the euro.
The previously unthinkable is now on the table. Russia, the world’s second largest oil exporter, is giving serious consideration to trading its black gold in euros, a switch that would surely set dominos in motion among other oil producing nations and, ultimately, knock the dollar off its global throne. Americans can thank George Bush and his Pirates for accelerating a process that might have taken decades to evolve, but which now looms as a “catastrophe” on the horzon.
Link
I wouldn’t want to be in Kerry’s shoes even if he wins and even if he then moves more progressive. Maybe I’m waffling. Except I don’t think Kerry will be as likely to be as brutal on the home front when the shit really hits the fan. Not a pretty picture no matter how it goes.

Posted by: Juannie | Jul 30 2004 15:25 utc | 9

Uzbek Blasts Hit U.S. and Israeli Embassies Where next?

Posted by: b | Jul 30 2004 16:30 utc | 11

Today I happened upon a translation of the Protocols of Zion and found it to be fascinating reading. I hadn’t known until now that the entire takeover plan that we see being executed around us now had been written many years ago.
Since I haven’t yet mastered the linking trick, here it is in longhand:
http://jahtruth.co.uk/illumin.htm#protocols
Try a cut/paste; worth it IMO and I’d like to see comments from any and all who have an opinion. Here is one small piece from Protocol #10:
13. In order that our scheme may produce this result we shall arrange elections in favour of such presidents as have in their past some dark, undiscovered stain, some “Panama” or other ñ then they will be trustworthy agents for the accomplishment of our plans, out of fear of revelations and from the natural desire of everyone who has attained power, namely, the retention of the privileges, advantages and honour connected with the office of president. The chamber of deputies will provide cover for, will protect, will elect presidents, but we shall take from it the right to propose new, or make changes in existing laws, for this right will be given by us to the responsible president, a puppet in our hands. Naturally, the authority of the presidents will then become a target for every possible form of attack, but we shall provide him with a means of self-defence in the right of an appeal to the people, for the decision of the people over the heads of their representatives, that is to say, an appeal to that some blind slave of ours ñ the majority of the mob. Independently of this we shall invest the president with the right of declaring a state of war. We shall justify this last right on the ground that the president as chief of the whole army of the country must have it at his disposal, in case of need for the defence of the new republican constitution, the right to defend which will belong to him as the responsible representative of this constitution.
14. It is easy to understand, that; in these conditions; the key of the shrine will lie in our hands, and no one outside ourselves will any longer direct the force of legislation.
end quote ———————————–
Also stated (paraphrasing) “The peoples and governments cannot be allowed the time or space to consider carefully these changes, or the advantage is lost.”
That last is quite telling I think. The operating assumption is that the goyim are too stupid, insecure, afraid to fight back effectively. This is perhaps almost true, given what we have seen so far, but need not be.

Posted by: rapt | Jul 30 2004 21:12 utc | 13

You make a good point Koreyel, but I still can’t get it out of my head that Kerry is the fallback man for the PTB. They need him now that Bush has gone down the tubes, and he is there, ready to take over.
For us, the masses, it is but a short reprieve, and gives the boyz-in-charge some time to consolidate their power and resolve some of the infighting that is upsetting their plans. That said, I agree with you that it is very important to get rid of Bush by whatever means, AND keep Kerry accountable. He may be a wonderful man but he is and will be subject to immense pressures/threats, so he should be watched and guided by that electorate he loves so much.

Posted by: rapt | Jul 30 2004 22:16 utc | 15

From Empirenotes.org:
July 29, 5:25 pm EST. Begging your indulgences, more on the Democratic Convention. I’ve been travelling, stuck away where I can’t watch the glorious pageant as it unfolds. But, prompted by a post on Under the Same Sun about a lack of reference to Abu Ghraib, torture, or Iraqis (as opposed to Iraq), I have gone and read transcripts of the speeches of, in no particular order, Dennis Kucinich, Bill Clinton (blogged about earlier), Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, Jesse Jackson, Jimmy Carter, Rep. Tammy Baldwin, Ted Kennedy, former senator and presidential candidate Carol Moseley Braun, Roberta Achtenber, John Edwards, Al Sharpton, Al Gore, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, Sen. Jean Carnahan, Tom Daschle, and, of course, Michael Moore’s speech in Cambridge, MA, and excerpts from an advance copy of Kerry’s speech (and somehow I expect no surprises when he delivers his).
The whole mess is absolutely appalling. Not a single one of these people, including Moore, who wasn’t even speaking at the convention, said a single word — a single word — about the cost to Iraqis of the war and occupation. Not one concrete reference to crimes committed against Iraqis in any terms.

Posted by: Pat | Jul 31 2004 0:51 utc | 17

I don’t think we really have any reason to hope for change…and it’s hard. We only can hope that instead of loony crooks we get just crooks. But was it any different ever? I wouldn’t know…

Posted by: vbo | Jul 31 2004 1:17 utc | 19

@anonymous
“You won’t hear about it at the Re-Thugee convention , either.”
No, we won’t. We’ll hear about nine hundred soldiers who “made the ultimate sacrifice” to “liberate the oppressed people of Iraq” and “guarantee the safety of free people everywhere.” I can almost hear it now. I can almost hear the thundering applause and see the standing ovation for bloody sacrifice. Our bloody sacrifice, that is. Not the sacrifice – unwilling – of a young Iraqi mother, say, cut in half inside her minivan, fifty yards from a coalition check point on the outskirts of Baghdad.
The man who came to fix my oven last week has a son in Iraq. A nineteen year-old Marine who’s also done a tour in Afghanistan. Just a kid. He’s killed four people – all of them at check points in Iraq. It landed him in the hospital. He completely broke down over it. I wonder what the hospital staff told him. I wonder what they prescribed for his particular condition. I wonder how many others like him are treated on a daily basis and sent back to duty.
That Edwards theme of “Two Americas” might more aptly describe the majority that now opposes the war and occupation in Iraq, and the minority that stubbornly refuses to address the issue. It’s an extremely disturbing state of affairs.

Posted by: Pat | Jul 31 2004 2:35 utc | 21

“Gee honey, it looks like downtown Detroit at night in an area with a lot of crack addicts, high Saturday night special sales and no street lighting is the safest place left in the world to take a holiday.”
Tourists detained in India in protest at Iraq kidnappings

Posted by: Nemo | Jul 31 2004 3:21 utc | 23

From The Poverty of Politics, by William Anderson, at lewrockwell.com:
For those not familiar with the ancient Greek myth of Pandora’s Box, a curious girl named Pandora was instructed not to open a chest, something that would impose grave circumstances upon the world, which then was peaceful, orderly, and pretty much perfect. Unfortunately, Pandora gave into her inquisitiveness and opened the lid of the chest; instantly, all sorts of evil sprang from the box, and she could not collect them to put them back. Evil was in the world, and the whole mess could not be undone.
However, Pandora was not finished. She opened the chest once again, and out sprang Hope. Now, in our modern thinking, this second act has been presented as a good thing: Pandora inexplicably let evil loose in the world, but at least we also have hope. The ancient Greeks, however, saw things differently. Their explanation went as follows: It was bad enough that Pandora put evil into the world through her blundering, but then she made things even worse by giving us hope – and we know full-well there is no hope.
Therefore, in Greek thinking, hope was not good, but rather an extension of evil, since people forever would be fooled into believing their repeated acts of failure suddenly would morph into something successful. Hope would keep people from recognizing their own folly and the poverty of their own thoughts…

Posted by: Pat | Jul 31 2004 5:49 utc | 25

U.S. Shifts Stance on Nuclear Treaty – White House Resists Inspection Provision

For several years the United States and other nations have pursued the treaty, which would ban new production by any state of highly enriched uranium and plutonium for weapons. At an arms-control meeting this week in Geneva, the Bush administration told other nations it still supported a treaty, but not verification. …
Arms-control specialists reacted negatively, saying the change in U.S. position will dramatically weaken any treaty and make it harder to prevent nuclear materials from falling into the hands of terrorists. The announcement, they said, also virtually kills a 10-year international effort to lure countries such as Pakistan, India and Israel into accepting some oversight of their nuclear production programs.

Posted by: b | Jul 31 2004 6:20 utc | 27

Interesting thought:

Democracy starts with the socialist notion of one person, one vote. Yes, socialist notion! Accordingly, the democratic political process is inherently about equity: a struggle for justice in the distribution of our collective economic pie, rather than the size of the pie itself. This exigency is in direct conflict with the cumulative voting system called capitalism, in which one dollar is accorded one vote.
The pursuit of profit, sometimes also called greed, is the energy directing Adam Smith’s invisible hand, with growth in our collective economic pie the time-proven result. The ethos of capitalism is, however, agnostic at best about whether the economic pie is distributed justly and, more cynically, is antagonistic to the idea.
Thus, democracy and capitalism are strange fellow travelers: visible socialist ideals dueling with the invisible enigma of greed.

Paul McCulley of PIMCO in a (lengthy) piece about Congress and Federal Reserve Bank In Democracy We Trust

Posted by: b | Jul 31 2004 13:45 utc | 29

al-Zarqawi arrested?
Report of Zarqawi arrest

Posted by: Nemo | Jul 31 2004 15:10 utc | 31

Nemo, thanks for the link about Iraqi civilian deaths … AKA “collateral damage”. I found this particularly telling:
“As of now, there are no reliable estimates of total Iraqi civilian fatalities. The interim Iraqi  government has not made available any statistics, while US occupation authorities in Iraq reportedly issued orders to the Forensic Medicine Department not to talk to the media about the number of bodies it receives.   
Liqa Makki, a political analyst, said it is widely known in Baghdad that Iraqi officials are prohibited from releasing any information about body count.“
Sounds like many other illegal US-involved military actions in the last four or five decades. Only one word comes to my mind: atrocity.

Posted by: Kate_Storm | Jul 31 2004 16:20 utc | 33

Kerry – as seen by Europe
Can he get more global support for the war on terrorism? Not likely, say analysts.
By Mark Rice-Oxley | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
LONDON – Europe hasn’t followed events in Boston this closely since the Tea Party of 1773. America’s allies across the Atlantic have been riveted by the Democratic convention, and intrigued by John Kerry’s promise to prosecute the war on terror vigorously by rebuilding the international bridges damaged during the past four years.
But does the Kerry vision translate into a safer world? Would a Kerry presidency deepen multinational cooperation in the global battle against jihadists? Hopes are high in some European quarters.
The results may prove more complex and even disappointing to these Europeans, analysts warn. Despite deep divisions over Iraq, counterterrorism cooperation is already at an all-time high, even with countries like France and Germany. The Kerry camp vows to “isolate extremists rather than isolating ourselves.” But that may prove difficult with the Iraq and Palestinian questions still looming large over US relations with the wider world. Al Qaeda and its jihadists, meanwhile, are unlikely to give a new US president – dove or hawk – a honeymoon period, experts say.

Posted by: Pat | Jul 31 2004 17:13 utc | 35

After seeing Control Room, the excellent documentary about al Jazeera’s coverage of OIF, I’m inclined to admire the Arab news channel’s efforts all the more. I’m quite certain that in the not-too-distant future we will have an English-language al Jazeera channel adding its news gathering and commentary to the present, dull mix of CNN, BBC, Fox, etc. We need our television media boat rocked, but good, and al Jazeera might be just the one to do it.
I found the following at The Agonist:
Los Angeles Times
In Iraq, Al Jazeera Navigates Minefield of Press Freedom
By Megan K. Stack
Times Staff Writer
July 31, 2004
BAGHDAD — The videotapes arrive by courier at the information desk in the shadowy lobby of the Swan Lake, a fading hotel in Baghdad’s battle-pocked downtown that now serves as the Iraqi headquarters for the television channel Al Jazeera.
Chillingly similar, the grainy videos of frightened hostages have become a defining image of Iraq’s new violence: tearful pleas for life and masked kidnappers, swords held aloft, laying out their demands.
For Al Jazeera’s journalists, who wrestle with how to use the exclusive and often bloody footage, the tapes pose the latest in a string of credibility tests. The current rules go like this: Show the hostages. Don’t show beheadings. The slaughter of two Pakistani hostages this week, for example, was deemed too gory — Al Jazeera broke the news, but kept the pictures to itself.
“It gives me a headache every day we receive a tape,” said Ahmed Sheikh, the organization’s editor in chief.
Iraqi officials charge that Al Jazeera is colluding with kidnappers by giving them an international platform. The criticism is nothing new: U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, have complained that the station has incited violence against U.S. troops by erroneously blaming the soldiers for attacks on civilians. And Al Jazeera reporters have been accused of getting tips before bombing attacks and becoming unprofessionally close to insurgents.
Alongside the conflict in Iraq, Al Jazeera’s viewers are witnessing a second drama. The Arab channel is coming of age and struggling for respect while covering a war opposed by the Arab world — and fending off a round-the-clock blitz of impassioned criticism from all sides.
In the midst of the mayhem, the young, influential and controversial Qatar-based news organization is setting its sights beyond the Middle East, breaking into English-language news and striving for a place among international institutions such as the BBC and CNN…

Posted by: Pat | Jul 31 2004 17:44 utc | 37

“Liqa Makki, a political analyst, said it is widely known in Baghdad that Iraqi officials are prohibited from releasing any information about body count.”
Don’t count dead Iraqis. Don’t show the coffins of dead Americans. What can the public know of war – the war it is forced to pay for – when its consequences are deliberately kept hidden? This isn’t the first time, and it won’t be the last time, that a distant military undertaking is presented to the public as a patriotic, pain-free, feel-good, ready-for-prime-time operation. Gives a whole new, ominous meaning to the old saying, “No news is good news.”

Posted by: Pat | Jul 31 2004 18:05 utc | 39

@b – Loved Ron Reagan’s article in Esquire. Here’s one from the Rude Pundit

Posted by: sukabi | Jul 31 2004 19:42 utc | 41

Dan of Steel @ July 31, 2004 04:16 AM,
You have pointed out for me another dot to connect in helping me understand the chess game being played by the empires. I’ve been pondering your link since I read it this morning: Some fascinating stuff about Russia.
There is an axiom of my own making that I try to adhere to: “Whatever I am hearing/seeing from the official and even alternative information system, has been generally designed to detract my attention from what is really going on; screened and edited by the principalities and powers in high places.”
They think we are stupid and can be easily thrown off the scent. And statistically for the most part that is true. But there are we hounds who will not be content until we catch the drift of their stench as it reappears somewhere downstream.
My link at 7-30-04 11:25 AM is another dot in the web that connects to your link.
AND demonstrates why it is important that we (the non-mainstream/non-alternative source of relatively credible information and critical thought) understand what’s going on behind major Hoopla.
Anyone who has any interest of where I’m coming from please add to this the dot that connects Cheney and what he knows and has publically said about OIL (Google “Cheney, Oil” and follow the dots).
Our world runs on ENERGY. What more can I say now, except –
Y’all my tribe. And I love each and every one of you who consciously contribute here.

Posted by: Juannie | Jul 31 2004 19:52 utc | 43

From “John Kerry’s Pure Wind,” by Scott Sutton at antiwar.com:
Diplomacy is the subject of Kerry’s third caveat for war. The senator spent much of his speech urging the Bush administration to assemble a coalition before invading Iraq, and he criticized the administration’s diplomatic approach. Yet, aside from broad injunctions for the administration to work with the UN, Kerry did not offer any prescriptions for future diplomacy.
Bush himself cited the importance of assembling a coalition, and the administration lobbied UN members and other countries for their support. In fact, the administration doled out billions of dollars in American wealth to bribe foreign politicians to join the coalition. If these tactics were insufficient in Kerry’s view, one can only wonder what other measures he would have endorsed.
Since the Bush administration did attempt to build a coalition, Kerry’s criticism of American diplomacy is a matter of degree or style, rather than a difference of principle. In fact, Kerry repeatedly agreed with Bush’s contention that in the event that the U.S. failed to secure international support, a unilateral attack would be justified. And, as Anthony Gregory pointed out, if Kerry were sincere about the importance of coalition building, why did he not insist on it as a condition for his support of either the 1998 or 2002 resolutions?
Ultimately, the bluster over the issue of coalition-building is overblown. Either the U.S. was justified in launching the invasion, or it was not. The number of aggressors in a conflict should have no bearing on the morality or rationale of an attack. Furthermore, if more nations had participated, it may well have widened the conflict as more people in the Islamic world would be inclined to view the war as a clash between Christendom and Islam, rather than primarily an American-instigated aggression.
In his October 2002 pro-resolution speech, John Kerry did not question the morality, rationales, justifications, or purported evidence advanced by the Bush administration in support of the war. Rather, his criticisms focused on the administration’s diplomatic efforts and the timing of the invasion. These details do not constitute a substantive departure from the Bush Doctrine.

Posted by: Pat | Jul 31 2004 20:28 utc | 45

Pat: John Kerry did not question the morality, rationales, justifications, or purported evidence advanced by the Bush administration in support of the war. Rather, his criticisms focused on the administration’s diplomatic efforts and the timing of the invasion. These details do not constitute a substantive departure from the Bush Doctrine.
Yep. The puppetmasters have decreed that the “opposition” be just a more benign version of foreign policy … nothing substantively different here as far as I can see. How is it that so few people see the puppet strings? That’s really what baffles and bugs me the most. We need some of those sunglasses in John Carpenter’s “They Live” so more folks can “see”. Paging Roddy Piper. Pick up the white courtesy phone, Political Concourse.

Posted by: Kate_Storm | Jul 31 2004 22:20 utc | 47

@Pat
Your comment about Pandora and hope is one of most depressing things I have seen for a while. Though I can see the logic in the Greek (or grecian) way of thinking, it is not a thought I welcome at this time. This is almost like being told there is no God. The feeling of loneliness and despair is overwhelming. Please, for our own selfishness, let us continue to hope.
@ Juannie
I must tell you that I got the link from Cursor.org, they often have interesting links.
One thing that has puzzled me from the beginning is Condi Rice’s credentials as a Russia expert. I asked myself again and again why the NSA position would be filled with a dinosaur. After reading the article I linked earlier I came to the conclusion that Russia is still very important to the US, if for no other reason – it has the capability to destroy the United States with its nuclear arsenal. So in that respect Iraq has been but a minor distraction in the big game, in which all of the major players are in more or less agreement. Of course it sucks in a big way if you are not one of the major players.

Posted by: Dan of Steele | Jul 31 2004 22:55 utc | 49

just a little note of optimism: thought i’d call my congressional office today (jim mccdermott 7th WA) and get some stuff on depleted uranium, and sure enough i recognized that voice,it was baghdad jim himself manning the phones. it’s 4 oclock on a beautiful saturday afternoon and there is a little bit of hope.

Posted by: amma mist | Jul 31 2004 23:51 utc | 51

@Dan of Steel,
After reading the article I linked earlier I came to the conclusion that Russia is still very important to the US, if for no other reason – it has the capability to destroy the United States with its nuclear arsenal.
Not only that Dan, but Russia is one of the 5 major players with substantial petroleum reserves left. (Former Soviet Union – 5 B, Saudi Arabia – 4.5B, United States – 4.5 B, Iran – 2.5 B, Iraq – 2.5B (mostly untaped)).
We used to say, “follow the money trail” but today we should say, “follow the energy trail”.

Posted by: Juannie | Aug 1 2004 1:07 utc | 53

@Dan of Steele
America’s present, long-established course in the world offers no hope for eventual peace. If eventual peace for the citizens of the United States is desired, then a course correction – rather than a mere change in captain and crew – is called for. Currently, there is no influential, mainstream movement that challenges the premises underlying American imperialism and militarism, but some of the necessary ingredients are there. It just may be that the US requires the snot knocked out of it at home before alternatives are sought. Let’s face it: Most Americans do not concretely suffer from the appalling foreign policies of their government, and to this day do not realize that 9-11, rather than an act of nihilism or wild-eyed fanatacism, was a blow struck in violent opposition to policies that millions the world over regard as indefensible.
The present course is hopeless. Which means a change of course is in order.

Posted by: Pat | Aug 1 2004 2:01 utc | 55

Actually , I’m awake enough to know it was Pat who posted about Pandora. Sorry Pat. I’m dancing as fast as I can.

Posted by: Kate_Storm | Aug 1 2004 3:06 utc | 57

Well, it appears that Pat is Gone.
But she raised an interesting question.
How do we PAY for our projected imperialist ventures?
Any takers on this question?

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 1 2004 3:14 utc | 59

From Andrew Greeley over at the Sun-Times, “9-11 action? Not before Nov.2″
…Heaven forefend that the issues of who messed up on Sept. 11 and in preparation for the Iraq war should affect the outcome of the election. Heaven equally forbid that these matters be debated during the campaign. Heaven protect the American people from thinking there are issues besides abortion and gay marriage, and whether people will ”warm up” to John Kerry. Nor should anyone dare to ask why it required almost three years since the World Trade Center attack to produce a detailed report of the failures of our intelligence agencies and a blueprint to reform them. Nor should there be a debate about a foreign policy that has alienated the world, nor about why the dead in Iraq are now about a third of those who died in the 9/11 explosion. No one should ask about how much safer Americans really are today. Not during an election year.
There is a conspiracy of silence to protect the Bush administration from the voters’ judgment about its mistakes. Such pretense supports the president’s insistence that he has not made any mistakes, and is not responsible in any way. It is all the fault of the CIA and the FBI — and, of course, the Bill Clinton administration.
American elections used to be about responsibility and accountability. Now it would seem those subjects are taboo. A president is neither responsible nor accountable — not till after the election!
[And regrettably, not even then. Government accountability – presidential, congressional, and otherwise – is largely an oxymoron.]

Posted by: Pat | Aug 1 2004 3:23 utc | 61

I really don’t hope for general revolution in the US of A either, but I’m not sure the base of the Demopublicans convention in Boston has much left for us “little people” but politician-speak, and the other unspeakable word … revolution.
Posted by: Kate_Storm | July 31, 2004 07:31 PM
Re politician-speak: Is it just me and my husband and our kids, Kate, who cannot stand to listen to most politicians speak? The way they talk indicates that their audience consists of something other than actual human beings – perhaps other evil aliens like themselves. It’s frankly creepy and deeply embarassing – more so in person than on television, though television is bad enough. One feels the need for a good, long shower and scrubbing-down afterward. Ugh.

Posted by: Pat | Aug 1 2004 4:05 utc | 63

If the members of the Democratic party are in majority against imperialistic wars, how was the Democrats platform developed?
The party conventions I know about in Europe were filled with fiercy discussions about platforms. How is this handled in the US?
Posted by: b | July 31, 2004 04:42 PM
There was a good article on this very subject at antiwar.com awhile back. I’ll see if I can find it.

Posted by: Pat | Aug 1 2004 5:04 utc | 65

Josh Marshall has new information on the false Niger Iraq uranium link
.

Today, the Sunday Times of London reports that the Italian middle-man who provided the notorious Niger uranium documents to Italian journalist Elizabetta Burba (she later brought them to the US Embassy in Rome, you’ll remember) was himself given the documents by the Italian military intelligence service, SISMI.

Now who ordered SISMI to forge and/or distribute the false papers?

Posted by: b | Aug 1 2004 9:42 utc | 67

Pat: Is it just me and my husband and our kids, Kate, who cannot stand to listen to most politicians speak? The way they talk indicates that their audience consists of something other than actual human beings – perhaps other evil aliens like themselves. It’s frankly creepy and deeply embarassing – more so in person than on television, though television is bad enough. One feels the need for a good, long shower and scrubbing-down afterward. Ugh.
Nope, Pat. It’s not just you. My husband and I can’t stand to hear the evil aliens either.

Posted by: Kate_Storm | Aug 1 2004 11:25 utc | 69

Clairvoyance or seeing the blindingly obvious?
….Since the start of Operation Enduring Freedom, we’d become accustomed to the demands of Secretary Rumsfeld,” Franks writes. “But now even my industrious planners found that the daily barrage of tasks and questions was beginning to border on harassment.”
Franks also is unsparing in his criticism of Pentagon officials such as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith, whom he derides as the “dumbest … guy on the planet….”
….His regret that Rumsfeld’s Pentagon and Powell’s State Department could not work together better. “On far too many occasions the … bureaucracy fought like cats in a sack,” he wrote.
“American Soldier” – Tommy Franks ‘saw chaos coming’

Posted by: Nemo | Aug 1 2004 13:07 utc | 71

America has support from Iraqi Sunni cleric so why doesn’t Karl Rove put him on television? What a drag!
Eccentric ally in Green Zone – Imam extols U.S., reveres Virgin Mary – despised by fellow clerics
The Green Zone – The Iraqi horror picture show

Posted by: Nemo | Aug 1 2004 13:52 utc | 73

@ b
One may argue that the First World War as just the first phase of a 30-year-long war 1914 – 1945.
From my perspective it (World War) was the beginning of a 98 year war that would eventually issue out an obsolete age of political dominator strategies.
The Mayan calendar ends in 2012. At least it is the end of an age, as I understand it. I don’t give a lot of credence to prophecies but believe the most enduring have some applicable message if we are wise enough to glean them.
We all here, I think, are aware that the present course of world events lead toward eventual species annihilation, unless we foresee the coming crisis and move consciously and decisively to deflect the bifurcation toward a more partnership model.
It’s a tough world we are entering and I don’t have any profound answers, just occasional glimpses of possibilities with, hopefully, the remaining passion to try to effect them.

Posted by: Juannie | Aug 1 2004 19:17 utc | 75

A welcome volte face
ACLU quits federal donation program
Principles 1 John Ashcroft 0

Posted by: Nemo | Aug 2 2004 1:49 utc | 77

How long is a chain of command?
A Battle over blame – Rumsfeld may be rebuked by Iraq prison abuse commission

Posted by: Nemo | Aug 2 2004 4:18 utc | 79

Of course the election’s vital – we’re talking about a success story damn it!
KABUL, Afghanistan — After being ruled by the gun for the past two decades and by kings for the previous two centuries, Afghans are less than three months away from voting in their country’s first democratic election.
But is the country ready?
Some political analysts — and a few candidates – contend that despite Afghanistan’s long wait for democracy, the presidential election scheduled for Oct. 9 has been hastily arranged by foreign governments more concerned with their own priorities than with those of Afghans….
Many Afghans complain of hastily set elections
Lack of security, resources threatens October vote –but who cares when it’s really all about the November vote, eh?

Posted by: Nemo | Aug 2 2004 5:18 utc | 81

New York Times wakes up to American responsibility for Iraq conference chaos
…The specific function of the conference is to choose a national council to oversee the current, narrowly based interim government. But its real importance is the opportunity it offers to attract dangerously alienated Sunni and Shiite factions into peaceful political bargaining.
Unfortunately, the choosing of conference delegates had become so badly skewed that this possibility was being squandered. Iraq cannot afford to pass up such chances. The postponement creates a chance to try again.
Much of the credit for this decision goes to the United Nations, which had raised serious concerns about delegate selection to anyone who would listen, from Iraqi functionaries to American diplomats. Helping to organize this conference is one of the main responsibilities assigned to the U.N. by the most recent Security Council resolution.
…The U.N.’s next challenge will be to persuade the interim government to stop packing the conference with its own allies at the expense of Sunni nationalists and radical Shiites who might be willing to abandon armed resistance for a real chance to shape the new Iraq….
…Washington is now trying to keep a relatively low diplomatic profile in Iraq, hoping to sustain the illusion that the interim government is fully in charge. This is disingenuous, and not only because of the continued presence of nearly 140,000 American occupation troops. It was the United States that created a woefully unrepresentative governing council and that then let the exile politicians on that thinly rooted body shape the interim government.The Bush administration cannot afford to simply stand aside and see these problems compounded…
Last chance for inclusion in Iraq

Posted by: Nemo | Aug 2 2004 6:00 utc | 83

ASST. REAGAN DEFENSE SECRETARY CONFIRMS LEGAL ANALYSIS BUSH WAS AWOL; BUSH LIED ABOUT SERVICE
Mainstream media takes heed of Raw Story research on Bush AWOL status

Posted by: sukabi | Aug 2 2004 7:25 utc | 85

Here’s another link to the above AWOL story.

Posted by: sukabi | Aug 2 2004 7:38 utc | 87

The cabal that (journalists) dare not speak its name
Seymour Hersh and the missing Zionist – Israeli connection

Posted by: Nemo | Aug 2 2004 8:06 utc | 89

Crowd control
Fruitful scientific endeavour – how to sting, burn, boil and electrocute crowds
I suppose ‘job satisfaction’ comes to different people in different ways. Perhaps that kindly man in the park or on the beach is smiling as he throws a frisbee with his children and has a warm glow inside because yesterday he invented a device to heat the water molecules in human skin to boiling point by directing a beam of energy onto a protestor from a distance. Forget curing cancer, or AIDS, or heart disease – there’s manly work to be done. And talking of heart disease – if some dumb protestor with a bad heart gets killed by a safe ‘device’ and people complain that nobody factored the possibility in during trials, well to hell with them. What do they know about science?

Posted by: Nemo | Aug 2 2004 10:54 utc | 91

The brutal, lonely death of the first (recorded) Iraqi prisoner to die
The death of Iraqi prisoner No. 0310337
Naked, dehydrated, covered in his own excrement, beaten and bludgeoned for days, forced to stand for hours in the broiling heat, battered for falling, ribs cracked and broken, face punched so hard the floating bone beneath his tongue was fractured, thrown like a beaten dog to lie in the 52 degrees Celsius heat of the day and left lying throughout the night, estranged from his captors by a language barrier – was he ever aware of the reason for the horrendous violence that was inflicted on him for days? His unclaimed body was buried behind Tallil Air Base. And apparently his captors turned killers aren’t sure now what he was or what he ever did – but they don’t seem to care.

Posted by: Nemo | Aug 2 2004 11:54 utc | 93

Good editorial by by Robert Fisk
The stage management of this catastrophe in Iraq was all too evident at Saddam Hussein’s “trial”. Not only did the US military censor the tapes of the event. Not only did they effectively delete all sound of the 11 other defendants. But the Americans led Saddam Hussein to believe – until he reached the courtroom – that he was on his way to his execution. Indeed, when he entered the room he believed that the judge was there to condemn him to death. This, after all, was the way Saddam ran his own state security courts. No wonder he initially looked “disorientated” – CNN’s helpful description – because, of course, he was meant to look that way. We had made sure of that. Which is why Saddam asked Judge Juhi: “Are you a lawyer? … Is this a trial?” And swiftly, as he realised that this really was an initial court hearing – not a preliminary to his own hanging – he quickly adopted an attitude of belligerence…
ego

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 2 2004 12:48 utc | 95

I told you so.
Kerry & President Peckerwood wear LiveStrong bracelets.

Posted by: koreyel | Aug 2 2004 21:32 utc | 97

More on the decision Kerry vs. Bush from
Naomi Klein.
Sorry if this is yesterday’s news to you.

Posted by: teuton | Aug 2 2004 23:19 utc | 99