Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 13, 2004

They May Survive

Mark Hertsgaard has written that Bush can not win this election. He compares the situation with Mc Carthy, were people were intimidated into silence, but after four years the nightmare unravelled within just a few months. I now think he is right.

Only a minority is better off after four years of Bush. The majority has lost on its standard of living or has paid for it with higher debt. Conveniently for todays debate (and not by chance) the DOW fell below 10,000 today and oil did reach $53.60 again.
The Iraq explanations are gone one after the other and the public feels that there is a big mess out there, though it does not openly confess this yet. Six dead GIs today and the coming Ramadan weeks will push this - right up to the election.

So the chances are high Kerry will win, as Hertsgaard and Jérôme expect, the popular vote by a wide margin, maybe even by a million and some votes. But will he win the presidency?

Seymour Hersh says, Bush & Co are believers, not rational liars like Kissinger or Nixon. Believers are right by definition. They have the right by definition. They can do no wrong.

There are many fraud possibilities with the US election system. And already there are plenty of cases of unrightful registrations or non-registrations of voters. Given that only a few votes in a few states may decide the ultimate result, someone, somewhere will try for a fix.

Will this be detected? Yes. Will there be litigation? Yes. Will Kerry win those? Unlikely.

Like in Iraq, the real war will only start after the mission is accomplished party and the polling station close. The October surprise may come 3rd of November or even later.

With a clean since unused conscience, never being wrong, there are many ways to achieve a fix - you just have to think big enough.

The junta may survive this indecent onslaught of an election, even if it looses the vote.

Posted by b on October 13, 2004 at 04:01 PM | Permalink

Comments

b

I guess that people that follow closely the campaign on our side are slighly numb from the staggering number of events that each should be a major scandal and yet aren't, and despair that anything will "reach" the Bush mafia. (somewhere I read one commenter noting that his chin hurt from his jaw dropping repeatedly to the floor...)
I think that this steady stream of horrors makes it possible for most of the non politically active to be reached nevertheless, each in his/her own way, and to be sufficiently disgusted by one or a few of these "events" to switch sides or simply give up on Bush.
I believe that the strength of that trend will be so trong that even cheating, as is very likey, will not be enough for Bush. I'm actually beginning to believe that he will actually be shamed one way or another.

Worst. President. Ever. is about right, and the election results will formalise that.

Posted by: Jérôme | Oct 13, 2004 5:12:19 PM | 1

b

as much as i would like to believe jérôme & hertsgaard - i do not believe that the bush cheny criminal junta can allow themselves to be defeated

they have much more than nixon had at stake - their own personal interests(cheney:halliburton & james baker/carlyle group) & their interest not to be shamed in front of a court(the vast majority of them in one tribunal or another)

they have all been running this junta seamlessly & if it was not for reality intruding (iraq, oil, unemployment , outsourcing etc) - i am sure rather than losing power they would consolidate it & with the help of the neocons who have not gone into the water to never come back - but who are taking a necessary repos before they invent other onslaughts & obscenities

they need for example to control the judicial process that they have already comprimised - it is said 3 or 4 supreme court justices will leave within the next four years. they & the people they protect needs this court in their pocket as don corleone held judges & legislators "in his pockets like so many nickels & dimes". they cannot allow what has been a systematic demolition of that court to go unfinished

i want to believe in a kerry victory - knowing that too much damage has already been done & that kerry can only be a quantitative change - but as the man sd - at least it would mark the point as it did in the mccarthy army hearings - except any claims or demands for decency would fall on deaf ears

the mccarthy army hearings were a special moment when a demand for decency could have a larger meaning. today indecency is their coin. i imagine that elites were threatened by mad joe & the means were there for him to be removed after he had served his purpose. there is a man connected tangentially with mccarthy - james jesus angleton - who ran counter intelligence in the cia - & he alone nearly destroyed the c. i. capability - he tore down the house more efficiently than any mole. & mccarthy was made from the same cloth. so too edward teller. yes they all failed in the end but the damage they were able to wreak was enormous. this current gang of criminals is in a league of its own in carnage

i hope a change is gonna come
but i'm not holding my breath

still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Oct 13, 2004 5:27:09 PM | 2

jérôme

i think yr made from tougher stuff than i am

still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Oct 13, 2004 5:29:43 PM | 3

@RGiap:

Just commune with your inner dingo.

This thing is going to be close.

Posted by: FlashHarry | Oct 13, 2004 5:41:42 PM | 4

i'm trying flash but he's howling at the moment

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Oct 13, 2004 5:47:30 PM | 5

re bushco staying in power, i'd keep an eye on developments in the southwestern usa. cryptome.org points out that the ashcroft alert (that a 911 will happen w/i 6 weeks) is still being circulated in new mexico. the arizona division of emergency mgmt has two courses, one titled WMD/Terrorism Incident Defensive Operations for Emergency Responders, scheduled for election day Nov 2nd. and, in addition to the latest rpt that chechen terrorists are sneaking across the mexican border, there has been more than one phony rpt of al quaeda entering the country in the same way. the latter stories might be related to stoking fear of immigrants in the border region, but the other dots might connect to something ugly...

Posted by: b real | Oct 13, 2004 6:09:49 PM | 6

Nothing will surprise me this time around.

Employees of a private voter registration company allege that hundreds, perhaps thousands of voters who may think they are registered will be rudely surprised on election day. The company claims hundreds of registration forms were thrown in the trash.
Anyone who has recently registered or re-registered to vote outside a mall or grocery store or even government building may be affected.

Or check out November 2nd Should Be Fun on The Poor Man’s blog.

I’m not betting on the election. I banking on criminal charges taking these gangsters out asap.

Posted by: Juannie | Oct 13, 2004 7:12:40 PM | 7

Chechen terrorists hitting the US? That's quite a funny one for me. Frankly, they should be totally insane and have a death wish to try that, since the US is probably closer to their position (independance from Russia) than to Putin's (let's kill them all). So far, I'd say it's just fear-mongering, or these guys are no Chechens at all.

Election: I will hold my breath until February 2005, because I'd expect these frauds to try any kind of nasty trick as long as they're in power. I mean, I wouldn't put it past Bush to nuke Pyongyand in mid-January, or to bomb Iran's nuclear sites. Or even some far more tin-foilerish hat.
I think it's better to assume Kerry has already win, and therefore if the numbers don't confirm it, there has been major fraud going on, because simply Bush can't win.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Oct 13, 2004 7:38:08 PM | 8

I don't know how reliable this source is, but this has been posted for a few days. Rumsfeld just got back from visiting the U.S.S. John Kennedy, fwiw.


http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a1130.htm

it has been firmly decided that both Israel and the U.S. will launch a surprise attack against 1., Iranian missile sites, 2. Iranian nuclear facilities and 3. the leadership of Iran located in and around Tehran. How will this be done? By aircraft attack using U.S. developed “smart bombs” and the so-called “bunker-buster” bombs designed to destroy underground reinforced concrete facilities .We just sent these to Israel. Because of the political ramifications, the Israelis will conduct the main strikes, supported by U.S. aircraft as needed. The aim will be to wipe out any vestige of nuclear weaponry, its delivery system and all the Iranian leaders capable of starting any attacks on Israel (mostly Tel Aviv…too many fellow Muslims in Jerusalem.) Since it would be a problem for Israeli Air Force units to fly round trip from Israel, the solution will be to launch these attacks from U.S. aircraft carriers located in the Persian Gulf area. As I write, the super carrier USS John F. Kennedy (CV 67) is now in the Persian Gulf along with the so-called  Essex Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG) [31st Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) (SOC)] which consists of:: USS Essex (LHD 2) USS Juneau (LPD 10) USS Harpers Ferry (LSD 49) USS Mobile Bay (CG 53USS Hopper (DDG 70) USS Preble (DDG 88) The initial attacks will be an early-morning surprise attack launched to coincide with religious services in Tehran’s Muslim mosques with the idea of catching not only the leading Mullahs inside but a large number of their congregations as well. One attack will concentrate on these religious centers and the other will hit both the underground nuclear facilities and identified (courtesy of U.S. satellite shots) missile launching sites

Posted by: fauxreal | Oct 13, 2004 11:07:39 PM | 9

b real, is this of interest?
A rural Montana weekly has this today (no byline): "A free one-day workshop aimed at preparing professionals to deal with chemical terrorism will be held Oct. 20 in nine Montana cities.
"Entitled 'Chemical Agents of Opportunity for Terrorism,' the course is intended for [various health and other professionals].
"The workshop will take place in...Helena [with videoconferencing in the eight other cities].
"The topics to be discussed include toxic warfare, use of fertilizers for terrorism, threats to food and drug supplies, and the psychological impact of mass chemical exposures. Presenters will be certified medical toxicologists from throughout the nation...
"Preparedness agencies agree that the most likely terrorist threat is a chemical attack using toxic materials that are readily available in every community...
"The workshop is sponsored by the American COllege of Medical Toxicology, with support from DPHHS, the Federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry and St. Vincent Healthcare Mansfield Education Center. It is funded in part through a grant from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services."
...

Posted by: emereton | Oct 13, 2004 11:44:48 PM | 10

fauxreal,

This is a hard one to read. But if there is any semblance of credibility in it, it needs to be widely disseminated before it happens.

I don't advocate this be done. I'm not informed/smart enough to make that call.

But IMHO I think this crew needs to check into it, FAST.

Is my tin-foil-hat on tonight or what? Arrraggh!!

Posted by: Juannie | Oct 14, 2004 12:31:19 AM | 11

of COURSE they'll try to hang onto power. they'll cheat and cheat -- and smear the opposition party for complaining about it.

But if the Kerry margin of victory is as wide as Jerome & Co suggest, then they would go to plan B: use GOP Congress to unseat President Kerry via impeachment for some trumped up scandal -- with the complicity of the corporate media.

And Jeb, more articulate and electable than his brother, is waiting in the wings.

Posted by: gylangirl | Oct 14, 2004 12:51:59 AM | 12

With regard to a possible joint U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran the always precious

globalsecurity.org

has a more detailed analysis which certainly doesn't contradict fauxreal's posting.
It would be the realization of the Manischewitz-Dry coalition's fondest apocalyptic dreams of imperial rapture.
(Make that Carmel-Dry for those wets who only drink imported wine).

Posted by: Hannah K. O'Luthon | Oct 14, 2004 1:08:36 AM | 13

gylangirl

as part of my "wide Kerry victory" prediction, I also include that the Democrats will take back the Senate AND Congress. Yes, I am that optimistic!

Posted by: Jérôme | Oct 14, 2004 6:54:10 AM | 14

Iran. From the press:

Israel 'should attack nuclear sites in Iran if diplomacy fails'

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1306552,00.html>Times Oct. 13

The deputy head of the Center, Dr. Ephraim Kam, said the United States seemed closer to the possible use of force to prevent Iran from completing its nuclear program. According to Kam, any Israeli military operation against Iran would require dialogue with the United States because U.S. forces are currently positioned between the two countries.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/487415.html>Haaretz Oct. 12

If it happens, it won't be the surprise attack that Osirak was. Both Israel and the US seem set on allowing widespread speculation about pre-emption, presumably in the hope that the threat will underpin diplomatic attempts to deter Iran from going nuclear. But is the threat realistic? Maybe it is: look, after all, at the men who are ruling Israel. We should not forget, wrote Aluf Benn in Haaretz on 29 September, that "the present political-military leadership - Sharon, Mofaz, Moshe Yaalon [Israel's chief of staff], [Major General] Dan Halutz - has few inhibitions about exercising military might. Operations that were once considered taboo, such as attacks on Damascus and assassinations of Hamas leaders, now seem self-evident.

http://www.newstatesman.com/site.php3?newTemplate=NSArticle_World&newDisplayURN=200410180004>New Stateman Oct. 18 (Subscription)

The administration has even encouraged speculation that, if the Security Council did not act as it wished, it might be prepared to take preemptive military action against specific nuclear-related sites to frustrate Iran's alleged plans to acquire a weapon.

http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=3784>Jim Lobe Oct. 14

Posted by: Blackie | Oct 14, 2004 7:27:14 AM | 15

Iran:
If they target Tehran, Qom and Esfahan mosques at the same time they bomb the nuclear facilities, they'll kill a huge number of people, because between now and the elections, it's Ramadan. Attacking at this time would be just as low and despicable as attacking Israel during Kippur.
I still doubt they'll do something as big and as big a blunder. I hope these idiots realise that if they bomb the main Iranian mosques during Ramadan, Sistani himself will call for jihad, and there probably won't be any American alive in the whole area at the end of next year. Someone probably thinks the US hasn't fucked up enough so far, but if the neo-cons try to pull up this crap, I'll have to agree with Steve Gilliard that someone up there wants to destroy the US military and sink the whole country - and apparently the neo-cons are too stupid to realise that if the US economy and army go down, the Jews will make a very convenient scapegoat inside the US.

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Oct 14, 2004 10:54:36 AM | 16

funny that tbrnews.org is now gone.

Google search is not aware of a page named "a1130", but there is a page a1129, the last one that can be found.

Posted by: | Oct 14, 2004 12:18:18 PM | 17

Jerome I love your optimism it sways me more than any reasoned argument. ..but..

Although tyranny, because it needs no consent, may successfully rule over foreign peoples, it can stay in power only if it destroys first of all the national institutions of its own people.

Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism.

Both Dems. and Repubs. in the US have participated in the destruction of:

Law, civil rights, proper procedure, transparency, and accountability as they were previously coded; morality (fair dealing, etc. - somewhat intangible), the gathering of facts and their reasoned use to implement action (science, health, energy, etc.), in conjunction with the erosion of the separation between Church and State; as well as international law, treaties, and multilateralism.

The first meaningful sentence on the Kerry site reads:

John Kerry and John Edwards have laid out specific plans to hunt and kill the terrorists, offer a fresh start in Iraq so we can finish the job there, and to fight for the middle class.

Under the Plan for America section, one finds many reasonable statements specifying desirable future states-of-affairs: affordable health care for all Americans, energy independence, a new version of no child left behind, etc. The Civil Rights section quotes Martin Luther King and promises to promote “equality” (educational opportunities, etc.) and reduce discrimination.

Kerry has not said one word about reversing present laws, legislation, ways of doing. None of the things he aims for can be accomplished without that. (He certainly knows it.)

For example -elaborating one topic I know something about-, one can’t invest in technology, as he promises to do, and hope to be successful with the Patriot Act on the books.

Present laws, directives and procedures prevents the US from organising international conferences, bringing essential (or just cheap) employees from abroad in quickly or at all, pushes companies to de-localise (and not just for pay-per-hour reasons, as is usually argued), leads to the closing of University programs because of lack of paying students, creates anger and disillusionment in gvmts, scientists in other countries, who are then unwilling to collaborate, fund (joint funding), and, ultimately, buy.

Technological development (difficult to distinguish from science itself) cannot deal with Gvmt. control on issues such as : particular classes of people, ethnically or religiously defined, being seen as non-grata or suspicious; obscure moral principles as viewed through a crackpot religious filter; hazardous and uncertain funding; supression or transformation of results due to Gvmt. decree, pressure or control; imposed secrecy and fears of ‘leaks’ or spying; obligations of political correctness; control of communications, e.g. sanctions that prevent Iranians, for example, publishing papers in US scientific journals, articles being censored, a desire to control the internet; and so on.

There is nothing new here. The US has in the past gleefully castigated the USSR on this point. Today, arguments like this are applied to the Muslim/Arab world, and have been sometimes been timidly taken up by them.

If one looks at my little list up top, it is clear that Kerry had only one real issue (pipe dreams of affordable health care set aside) on which he could hope to credibly oppose Bush. That was multilateralism, as it is obscure, and relatively detached from ‘homeland laws', and even international law, as it is still somewhat personally driven, and (perhaps more important) not understood by Americans. However, the US position is inalterably unilateral, and Kerry knows this too.

Posted by: Blackie | Oct 14, 2004 2:18:28 PM | 18

that's certainly odd. the site I linked to above has disappeared. when I went to the link to the earlier archive (1129), it's also "not found."

when I simply type in the site name, I get a "coming soon!" domain registration page as a destination.

I wonder what that's all about.


Posted by: fauxreal | Oct 14, 2004 11:36:55 PM | 19

I sure hope you are right Jérôme. However, it looks as if Bush expects to stay at the White House. Found this tidbit in today's comment of Sidney Blumenthals comment in the Guardian - if this is true, though he seems to be a reliable source. These days it is becoming more and more difficult to differentiat between satire and truth.

Even now, the White House - or at least one room, the Lincoln bedroom - is being redecorated for President Bush's second term. The famous long bed will remain; so will the original Emancipation Proclamation in its glass case. But, dominating the room, above the bed, will be placed a large carved crown from which will flow, ceiling to floor, royal purple satin drapes. The crown has been sent to be gilded with gold in anticipation of Bush's triumphant return from his campaign.

Talk about 'delusion of grandeur'.

Posted by: Fran | Oct 15, 2004 3:03:39 AM | 20

Is that serious? gilded crown and royal purple drapes and all? I mean this is not The Onion or Blumenthal having an unaccustomed moment of snarky humour?

[moment of stunned silence]

we're in even deeper trouble than I thought.

and we apparently have http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts10152004.html>a fair number of followers ready for a King.

Posted by: DeAnander | Oct 15, 2004 11:50:34 AM | 21

I thought the crown in the Lincoln Bedroom must be satire - but no.

Here's another comment about the re-do of the Lincoln bedroom in the White House - originally published in the Washington Post, I got it from the South Florida Sun-Sentinel site:

"The piece de resistance, both decoratively and symbolically, will be a carved bed canopy in the shape of a crown. It, too, has been sent for gilding. When affixed to the ceiling, the crown will support yards of regal purple satin over white lace, both trailing to the floor. White House curator William Allman, who detailed the project recently at a White House Historical Association symposium on the decorative arts, describes the decor as 'back for the future.' ...

'It will be very Victorian, very appropriate and very grand,' Allman assured. He did not say how much the project would cost. But he noted that the White House Historical Association was providing funding as it would do for conservation of the mansion's museum rooms."


Linda Hales, the author of the news story, does note:

"Gilded crowns and royal colors strike an unusual note in a house carefully stage-managed to symbolize the democracy. Neither element would have been acceptable to George Washington, who was advised to surround himself only with things that were 'substantially good and majestically plain.' Eagles were fine in 'the President's House.' Allusions to monarchy would have been anathema."

May the Creative Forces of the Universe stand beside us, and guide us, through the Night with the Light from Above (speakingmetaphorically).

Posted by: mistah charley | Oct 15, 2004 12:37:26 PM | 22

The comments to this entry are closed.