Saying the US governement is undermined by Israeli interest is just as bad as saying the Italian governement is undermined by mafia interest.
BTW: Berlusconi is the mafia.

Posted by: b | Sep 8 2004 15:50 utc | 4

The Financial Times gives some interesting information about White House pressure to cover up the AIPAC Israeli spy investigation. Perhaps this story will even appear or be cited in a U.S. mainstream media organ. I wouldn’t count on it.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Sep 8 2004 16:10 utc | 6

@anon 02:48
you got me wrong – by saying BTW: Berlusconi is the mafia. I thought to make clear that it is obvious that the US government is undermined by Israeli interest.
Don´t let Wolfi et al. hanging from lightpoles (no capital punishment please), but let them do 25 years of nursing care for disabled Palestinians in Gaza – maybe they will learn something.

Posted by: b | Sep 8 2004 19:14 utc | 8

@b
Dońt let Wolfi et al. hanging from lightpoles (no capital punishment please), but let them do 25 years of nursing care for disabled Palestinians in Gaza – maybe they will learn something.
Or maybe something in between like hard time in a federal penitentiary to experience first hand the realities of the prison-industrial-complex they and their ilk has created.

Posted by: Juannie | Sep 9 2004 1:50 utc | 10

@Juannie:
I got to agree with you and B on that.
The punishments you and B suggest are much better than hanging. And much more socially and internationally rehabilitative, too.
We did things so crudely 60 years ago.
It would be my pleasure to pronounce sentence.

Posted by: Robert Jackson | Sep 9 2004 2:26 utc | 12

Dallas Morning News columnist says US economy harmed by falling birthrates
This article was top news on the MSN website complete with graphics.
While I agree that economic costs of parenting outweight the economic benifits of parenting, the article seems to – surprise -justify cheap labor conservatism as good for the economy — and still blame non-childbearing women for economic troubles.

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 9 2004 13:34 utc | 14

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2004-2_archives/000144.html
Richard Clarke:
You ask what could happen that would be really bad? You don’t have to say “could”: things are really bad. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Pervez Musharraf has suffered three assassination attempts this year. The last two regional elections in Pakistan have been won by the Osama bin Laden party. Imagine a successful assassination of Pakistan followed by a Taliban-like takeover.
You want another bad thing? The fall of the House of Saud in a fashion analogous to the fall of the House of Pahlavi twenty-five years ago.
Another bad thing? Iran. Iran had an organizational relationship with Al Qaeda. Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons. But our ability to act is constrained by the fact that Bush and Powell and company lied about Iraq.

Posted by: MarcinGomulka | Sep 9 2004 16:35 utc | 16

that was me above…

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Sep 9 2004 17:32 utc | 18

In all seriousness, I received this from a friend this morning:
There are less than three months until the election…an election that will decide the next President of the United States.
The man elected will be the president of all Americans, not just the Democrats or the Republicans.
To show our solidarity as Americans, let’s all get together and show each other our support for the candidate of our choice. It’s time that we all came together, Democrats and Republicans alike.
If you support the policies and character of John F. Kerry, please drive with your headlights on during the day.
If you support George W. Bush, please drive with your headlights off at night.

Posted by: beq | Sep 9 2004 18:48 utc | 20

Juan Cole:
The Guardian reports that the rest of the foreign aid agencies still operating in Iraq are now planning to withdraw, in the wake of the taking of the two Italian hostages. (See below). I don’t cover the hostage crises ordinarily here because I consider them artificial news and bmuch elieve that dwelling on them plays into the hands of terrorists. But I have to say that the tactic has been enormously successful.

Posted by: Pat | Sep 9 2004 20:21 utc | 22

More troops – or Iraq will be a disaster Iraqs new UN ambassador speaks:

But Mr Sumaida’ie reserved some harsh criticism for the coalition for mishandling the immediate post-war period, blaming their failure to make the country secure for the current problems.
“I know Tony Blair and George Bush made a great deal about the dangers [of Saddam’s regime] but they couched them in the wrong terms – such as the 45-minute nonsense – and that did not help.
“The war took place, Saddam was replaced and the management of the country was totally mishandled.
“They made a dog’s dinner of it and we have got problems. These problems were avoidable. They were not a necessary result of the war itself.”

Will they need more than 24 hours to get him fired? Maybe Kerry can hire him.
Deteriorated security conditions in Iraq; more assassinations, N.G.Os start to leave
Halliburton: Agency OKs Iraq Management
26 dead in US strike on northern Iraqi town
US forces back in Iraqi bastion of Samarra after three months
Airstrikes in two key areas as U.S. and Iraqi forces move to restore control in insurgent-controlled regions
Zawahiri Predicts U.S. Defeat In Iraq, Afghanistan
Iraq: free for all – The West must open its eyes to the reality of life and death in Iraq – Al-Ahram!
Jakarta Embassy Bomb Attack Kills Nine, Wounds 182
Chechen Rebels Offer $20 Million Reward for Putin calling “Jack” Idema
Pakistani Jets Attack Suspected Militants

Posted by: b | Sep 9 2004 21:05 utc | 24

I guess it’s probably some obscene hour of the day in the rest of the world nevertheless it isn’t here and I’m once again confronted with the reality that spin still overtakes any message and relegates any ‘truth’ to a minor player. When will it end? Surely eventually there is going to be some sort of mass epiphany where most people realize that when spokesmen speak what they don’t say is far more important than what they do.
This mornings frustration with the public’s blind acceptance of BS has more to do with local circumstances than anything up North. Some of you may have noticed that a huge car bomb exploded outside the Australian Embassy in Jakarta yesterday. Already the ‘terrorism experts’ are giving us their expert advice and to a man they are sticking to their talking points. Their argument goes; this is an overt act against Australian interests but it has nothing to do with Australia’s invasion of Iraq or the pending Australian Federal Election, because the bombers cannot predict what effect the bomb would have on the election. The ‘experts’ go on to say “It’s because Australia is assisting Indonesia in a very significant way to target the JI network,” Now here’s the thing, if Australia was targeted because they were helping Indonesia to target Jemaah Islamiah the outcome of a bomb would be known i.e. it would increase Australia’s involvement in hunting down JI activists. In other words it would be counter productive for the bombers to do this. The Australian prime Minister has been at pains to claim that Australian involvement in the execution of US foreign policy has had no impact on Australia’s status as a potential terrorist target (login noodie pw noodie)
On the other hand many Australians have expressed concern that Howard’s predilection for following where ever BushCo goes will land them in the middle of some sort of expression of outrage by Islamic extremists. To admit that however would be giving comfort to the enemy (The Australian Labor Party) since it seems that as per usual everyone associated with Military or Intelligence services in Australia is a rabid Tory.
All had their stories well rehearsed as they were obviously concerned that nothing along the lines of Spain happen in their election. Will it wash? I dunno. The really sickening part is that you have to go to New Zealand to find out there were any Australian casualties. At the moment the front page of The Sydney Morning Herald fails to reveal this whereas the NZ Herald does.
I suspect that timing is paramount here just as it was in Spain. There is sufficient time for Australian people to study this issue closely and make up their own minds. I have no idea which way they will go. I’m sure attempts will be made to nudge them but once again Spain shows this can backfire. Australians may decide for themselves that they don’t like anyone outside trying to influence their electoral process, that’s certainly what Howard is aiming for but equally they may see the efforts of Howard, BushCo and the Blair blur over the next few days in that light as well. ‘W’ will be tempted to use this tragedy for his own electioneering and THAT if it is picked up by Australians will certainly backfire within Oz.
But back to my original point. Just as advertising executives are finding sex is a turnoff there will surely be a point where people, particularly younger people, realize that the obvious spinning of an issue by interested parties is a strong indication of ‘trouble at mill’ and that they need to question issues far more deeply than the once over lightly treatment by the media allows.

Posted by: Debs in ’04 | Sep 9 2004 23:31 utc | 26

It would be nice–it would clear the air–if Kerry could run against Rumsfeld and the civilians in the Pentagon. It would enable him, for instance, to embrace our military as a force greatly mishandled and unfairly criticized for its performance in Viet Nam. He could, with some justice, blame the death of all those soldiers on Rumsfeld and company–and he could do so as a veteran who survived the misdeeds of other, earlier civilians. But he can’t do this; AIPAC wouldn’t stand for it (Joe Lieberman, for one, would relish any opportunity to slime John Kerry as an anti-Semite). So Kerry has to tread lightly through this minefield, and I think he’s done it rather well (no mines having exploded as yet). But whether it also inhibits and disables his overall fighting style is another question: it certainly makes for a weird campaign, this matter of being held hostage by AIPAC!

Posted by: alabama | Sep 10 2004 2:37 utc | 28

Bush:I looked into pooty poopts soul and saw Russia blame America for Beslan school terrorist tragedy Bush’s reputation as a dunce in the international
community, and his “chummy” relationship with Russian president Vladimir “Pooty …

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Sep 10 2004 5:17 utc | 30

Republican,
Republi son
Republi fun
Republi come
Republi run
Republi sin
Republi win
Republi ill
Republi will
Republi kill
Republi can
Republi Klan.
Republi fin

Posted by: anna missed | Sep 10 2004 6:14 utc | 32

From TNR:
09.09.04
ELECTIONS FOR WHAT?: To fully grasp the implications of humanitarian aid groups leaving Iraq out of fear for their safety, consider two new polls of Iraqis from the International Republican Institute. Conducted in late July and mid-August, the polls seek to uncover what the Iraqi electorate wants. The answers make clear that voter education–basically what outside aid groups, from the U.N. to the various NGO’s, would provide–has a tremendously long way to go over the next four months.
As IRI’s press release points out, the polls show a demonstrable enthusiasm in Iraq for democracy. There are just three problems. The first, and most consequential in the big-picture sense, is that by “democracy” Iraqis seem to mean something equating simply to “elections.” When IRI asked Iraqis what they consider to be the most important political right, a breakaway majority of 77.5 percent said “regular, fair elections.” A fair trial garnered only 35 percent support. Not even one in five Iraqis considers free speech to be the most important right safeguarded by democracy. Peaceful demonstrations scored 13 percent; privacy an anemic seven percent. Asked which type of government would best secure their individual interests, almost 57 percent chose a “strong, central government,” contrasted with 26.7 percent support for “a government in Baghdad made up of representatives from different regions, tribes and sects.” (Very worryingly, consider the rising anger in Kurdistan, “delegation of more powers to the regions” received less than 8 percent support.)
The second and more immediate problem is that Iraqis know they want immediate elections, but they have no idea what they’ll be voting for. Only 35 percent were able to say that the elections are supposed to be held in January. Nearly as many didn’t know; about 30 percent gave the wrong answer. They also don’t know who will be monitoring the vote. Only ten percent of Iraqis said they knew anything about the Independent Electoral Commission that will oversee the elections; over 68 percent knew nothing at all about the issue. Nor do they know what’s at stake at the election. The overwhelming majority, 74.6 percent, incorrectly believe they’ll be voting for “President of Iraq.” Not even nine percent correctly responded that they’ll be voting for a Transitional National Assembly. That’s not surprising, considering that the only voting most Iraqis have ever experienced is casting a sham ballot for Saddam Hussein. But all of this shows how overwhelming the need for voter education is at the very moment when the aid groups who provide it consider staying in Iraq to be totally unsafe.
The third and related problem is an unsurprising one. The anarchy in Iraq shows every sign of impeding Iraqis’ desire to vote. This is the most rational of calculations: if you don’t think it’s safe to leave your house, why go to a polling station? Over 60 percent of Iraqis want elections without delay, and nearly 50 percent consider a delay of just one month to be “very unfavorable.” Yet at the same time, nearly 75 percent of Iraqis consider the “poor security situation” to be an acceptable reason for a delay, which by a wide margin is the only acceptable reason for a delay to anything close to a majority. Now consider that over 65 percent of Iraqis (justifiably) consider it likely for violence to continue up to and during the vote. Only 27 percent said–again, perfectly rationally–that they would definitely vote under such conditions.
In short, the elections are in serious trouble, both from violence and voter ignorance. (Liberty in Iraq, as distinct from an elections-centric view of democracy, is in even graver peril, even if security wasn’t a factor. More on this later.) At precisely the worst moment, security is preventing voter education from occurring. With four months to go before the scheduled vote, the door is closing fast on the prospect of free, fair and credible elections.

Posted by: Pat | Sep 10 2004 6:53 utc | 34

Mark Steyn in the Jerusalem Post:
What happened in one Russian schoolhouse is an abomination that has to be defeated, not merely regretted. But the only guys with any kind of plan are the Bush administration. Last Thursday, the president committed himself yet again to wholesale reform of the Muslim world. This is a dysfunctional region that exports its toxins, to Beslan, Bali, and beyond, and is wealthy enough to be able to continue doing so. You can’t turn Saudi Arabia and Yemen into New Hampshire or (according to taste) Sweden, but if you could transform them into Singapore or Papua New Guinea or Belize or just about anything else, you’d be making an immense improvement.
It’s a long shot but, unlike Putin’s plan to bomb them Islamists into submission or Chirac’s reflexive inclination to buy them off, Bush is at least tackling the “root cause.”
***************************
When, in the days and weeks after 9-11, some prominent commentators on the Left called attention to what they believed to be the “root causes” of the attack upon America – poverty and oppression in the Muslim world – commentators on the Right howled that Lefties are soft-headed and quick to make excuses for mass murderers. Then… the Right adopted, in the form of Bush’s Greater Middle East Initiative, the “root causes” model of fighting terrorism and took it to war with them in Iraq.
Who’s soft-headed now?

Posted by: Pat | Sep 10 2004 11:35 utc | 36

406 Representatives agree that Iraq was a consequence of 911?
Posted by: b | September 10, 2004 08:43 AM
The breathtaking thing about it is that here we have a struggling Democratic presidential candidate making some attempt to argue that Iraq was “the wrong war, at the wrong place, at the wrong time,” while almost all of the members of his party in the House of Representatives formally re-endorse that war as an appropriate component of the War on Terror.
Message discipline? Apparently the Democrats don’t need it.

Posted by: Pat | Sep 10 2004 13:13 utc | 38

“406 Representatives agree that Iraq was a consequence of 911?”
Pat – They should have stayed on vacation.

Posted by: beq | Sep 10 2004 13:58 utc | 40

Here we go!
Subject: Presidential position outsourced to India
Washington DC – Congress today announced that the Office of
President of the United States will be outsourced to overseas
interests as of June 30th, the end of this fiscal year. The move is
being made to save $400K a year in salary, a record $521 Billion in
deficit expenditures and related overhead. “The cost savings will be
quite significant” says Congressman Adam Smith (D -Wash) who, with
the aid of the GAO (General Accounting Office) has studied
outsourcing of American jobs extensively. “We simply can no longer
afford this level of outlay and remain competitive in the world
stage,” Congressman Smith said.
Mr. Bush was informed by email this morning of the termination of
his position. He will receive health coverage, expenses and salary
until his final day of employment. After that, with a two week
waiting period, he will then be eligible for $240 dollars a week
from unemployment insurance for 13 weeks. Unfortunately he will not
be able to receive state Medicaid
health insurance coverage as his unemployment benefits are over the
required limit.
Preparations have been underway for some time for the job move.
Sanji Gurvinder Singh of Indus Teleservices, Mumbai, India will be
assuming the Office of President of the United States as of July 1.
Mr. Singh was born in the United States while his parents were here
on student visas, thus making him eligible for the position. He will
receive a salary! of $320
(USD) a month but with no health coverage or other benefits. Due to
the time difference between the US and India, Mr. Singh will be
working primarily at night, when offices of the US Government will
be open. “I am excited to serve in this position,” Mr. Singh stated
in an exclusive interview. “Working nights will let me keep my day
job at the American Express call center. I always knew I could be
President someday.”
Congress stressed patience when calling Mr. Singh as he may not be
fully aware of all the issues involved with his new position. A
Congressional Spokesperson noted that Mr. Singh has been given a
script tree to follow which will allow him to respond to most topics
of concern. The Spokesperson further noted that “additional savings
will be realized as these scripting tools have been successfully
used by Mr. Bush and will enable Mr. Singh to provide an answer
without having to fully understand the issue itself.”
Mr. Bush has been offered the use of a Congressional Page to help
him write a resume and prepare for his upcoming job transition.
According to Manpower, Inc., the placement firm, Mr. Bush may have
difficulties in securing a new position as job prospects in the
Sports Franchise Ownership arena remain limited. A recently released
report from the Pentagon
suggests a good prospect for him as a newly unemployed person may be
in the Army National Guard. There he would be called up with his
unit and stationed in Iraq, a country he has visited briefly before.
“I’ve been there, I know all about Iraq and the conditions there,”
stated Mr. Bush. He gained invaluable knowledge of the country in
his first visit at the Baghdad Airport non- smoking terminal and
gift shop.
Congress continues to explore other outsourcing possibilities
including that of Vice-president and most Cabinet positions.

Posted by: beq | Sep 10 2004 17:07 utc | 42

I like it! At this point I think they’d do it without the $8,000. If they could.

Posted by: beq | Sep 10 2004 18:22 utc | 44

To lighten the mood.
Galilean Citizens for Truth
Well, this is the last one for today. Good night everyone.

Posted by: Fran | Sep 10 2004 20:16 utc | 46

Rumsfeld at the National Press Club:

But if you think about it, that’s not the way the world really was before September 11th. Consider the world of September 10th and before. Two Americans and six others stood on trial by the Taliban in Afghanistan for the crime of preaching their religion. The leader of the opposition Northern Alliance, Massoud, lay dead, his murder ordered by Saddam Hussein — by Osama bin Laden, Taliban’s co- conspirator.
…
Saddam Hussein (sic), if he’s alive, is spending a whale of a lot of time trying to not get caught. And we’ve not seen him on a video since 2001. Now he’s got to be busy. Why is he busy? It’s because of the pressure that’s being put on him.

Transcript

Posted by: b | Sep 11 2004 9:43 utc | 48