Forget everything you’ve heard and seen
in the mainstream American media
for just one second
Saddam Hussein was rushed to the gallows pole on December 30. This occurred in the coincidental wake of President Gerald Ford’s death (and Ford’s released comments how he firmly disagreed with Bush’s invasion of Iraq) in addition to the holiday of Christmas. Yes, the celebration of Christ’s birthday (even though it’s in March) is the celebration of a man who believed in redemption, peace, love, and forgiveness. While there may be no forgiveness for what Hussein did in the early 80’s under Vice President George H.W. Bush’s guidance and assistance, there is the old “eye for an eye leaves everyone blind” philosophy of passive resistance that so many heroes like Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, and Jesus himself used to spread peace throughout the world. These great leaders believed in justice, but they recognized that justice sometimes comes from the heavens above. They were humble enough to realize that neither they nor any other human is mighty enough to be the ultimate judge. There are not enough people like them.
Many Americans consider the Hussein execution a final accomplishment of 2006. They’re not concerned with punishment. Rather, they are happy he is dead and relieved of his punishment. That punishment of sitting in a cold cell deprived of the royal food he once ate and the royal luxuries he once enjoyed with nothing but time to think about his crimes was taken away by people looking for the quickest fix on a wound that’s not really going to ever go away. For many like the Bush family, his execution was a personal victory in a decade’s long vendetta. The truth is: VP George H.W. Bush and our U.S. government gave Saddam lethal weapons to use on Iranians and any Iraqis who would not follow their agenda. When Saddam used those weapons and accomplished his task, the U.S. then put him in a corner and demanded more. This is perhaps the only thing Hussein did have in common with Osama Bin (still missing) Laden. Hussein’s resistance and a surge of national revolt along with terrorism against the government led to more horrible deaths. U.S. sanctions and bombings that began in the early nineties would go on to kill more than 500,000 Iraqi civilians, far more than Hussein ever killed. So who is the real murderer here? Who is the accomplice? If the execution of Hussein is valid, then one of George H.W. Bush should be expected to follow.
But only the ones in power decide who gets killed, like the ones who killed Jesus, the man Christian Americans including the Bush family were paying respect to this week, even though they don’t follow his values. It is apparent that those who support the death penalty and the execution of Hussein have a little more hypocrisy than just their failure to acknowledge the role of the U.S. and its ex and current president. Take the sixth commandment for example, “Thou shall not kill,” of which most are in violation of by condoning or taking part in any death, whether it’s the death of a dictator, Iraqi civilians, American troops by way of wrongful war, or even the animals slaughtered for their food on a daily basis.
Of course, not everyone is celebrating. Within hours of the news of the execution, violence erupted on the streets of Iraq. Thousands of Sunnis marched in angry protest holding up a giant mosaic of Hussein. Hundreds more mourned Saddam in his hometown of Tikrit. “God bless you, and I thank you for honoring Saddam, the martyr,” said the hanged leader’s eldest daughter Raghad Saddam Hussein. So we can only expect more violence to come out of this execution as well as the expected martyring of Saddam.
This death penalty has done nothing more than make situations worse for our soldiers who have been thrown into a wrongful personal war in which its invokers have personally profited. See Who’s Profiting from the Iraq War? http://broken-nation.blogspot.com/2006/11/who-is-profiting-from-iraq-war.html#links
So think twice before you say you want to see the video of Saddam being executed; you’d actually be resorting to his level of brutality as well as condoning all the violence that will be unleashed on our troops in harms way.
Meanwhile, the U.S. death toll just went up to at least 3,002 by December 31, 2006. The Associated Press count of fatalities showed that at least 113 U.S. service members died in December, making it the most fatal month of 2006.
Iraqi authorities reported that 16,273 Iraqis — including 14,298 civilians, 1,348 police and 627 soldiers — died violent deaths in 2006. The total exceeds the Associated Press count by more than 2,500.
If anything is learned from Saddam’s execution (and the United States involvement demonstrated in the following links), it is that we should be very careful who we elect as president/vice president e.g. Reagan, Bush. For it is those elected official’s decisions that affect not just our future, and the futures of other civilians around the world, but also the future of would be dictators.
Just imagine how different things would have been if the Reagan/Bush administrations hadn’t aided Saddam with weapons from 1980-1990. Who would they have been hanging instead?
# January 1, 2007 by Bill Lawrence
US CORPORATIONS THAT ARMED IRAQ FROM 1980 TO 1990
http://www.rense.com/general32/suppe.htm
1 Honeywell
2 Spectra Physics
3 Semetex
4 TI Coating
5 Unisys
6 Sperry Corp.
7 Tektronix
8 Rockwell
9 Leybold Vacuum Systems
10 Finnigan-MAT-US
11 Hewlett-Packard
12 Dupont
13 Eastman Kodak
14 American Type Culture Collection
15 Alcolac International
16 Consarc
17 Carl Zeiss - U.S
18 Cerberus (LTD)
19 Electronic Associates
20 International Computer Systems
21 Bechtel
22 EZ Logic Data Systems, Inc.
23 Canberra Industries Inc.
24 Axel Electronics Inc.
Arming Iraq: A Chronology of U.S. Involvement
http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/arming_iraq.php
September 1980 The beginning of the Iraq-Iran war. [8]
February, 1982. Despite objections from congress, President Reagan removes Iraq from its list of known terrorist countries. [1]
October, 1983. The Reagan Administration begins secretly allowing Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Egypt to transfer United States weapons, including Howitzers, Huey helicopters, and bombs to Iraq. These shipments violated the Arms Export Control Act. [16]
November 1983. George Schultz, the Secretary of State, is given intelligence reports showing that Iraqi troops are daily using chemical weapons against the Iranians. [1]
December 20, 1983. Donald Rumsfeld meets with Saddam Hussein to assure him of US friendship and materials support. [1] & [15]
July, 1984. CIA begins giving Iraq intelligence necessary to calibrate its mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. [19]
January 14, 1984. State Department memo acknowledges United States shipment of "dual-use" export hardware and technology. Dual use items are civilian items such as heavy trucks, armored ambulances and communications gear as well as industrial technology that can have a military application. [2]
March, 1986. The United States with Great Britain block all Security Council resolutions condemning Iraq's use of chemical weapons, and on March 21 the US becomes the only country refusing to sign a Security Council statement condemning Iraq's use of these weapons. [10]
May, 1986. The US Department of Commerce licenses 70 biological exports to Iraq between
May of 1985 and 1989, including at least 21 batches of lethal strains of anthrax. [3] May, 1986. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of weapons grade botulin poison to Iraq. [7]
March, 1987. President Reagan bows to the findings of the Tower Commission admitting the sale of arms to Iran in exchange for hostages. Oliver North uses the profits from the sale to fund an illegal war in Nicaragua. [17]
Late 1987. The Iraqi Air Force begins using chemical agents against Kurdish resistance forces in northern Iraq. [1]
February, 1988. Saddam Hussein begins the "Anfal" campaign against the Kurds of northern Iraq. The Iraq regime used chemical weapons against the Kurds killing over 100,000 civilians and destroying over 1,200 Kurdish villages. [8]
April, 1988. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of chemicals used in manufacture of mustard gas. [7]
September, 1988. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of weapons grade anthrax and botulinum to Iraq. [7]
December, 1988. Dow chemical sells $1.5 million in pesticides to Iraq despite knowledge that these would be used in chemical weapons. [1]
July 25, 1990. US Ambassador to Baghdad meets with Hussein to assure him that President Bush "wanted better and deeper relations". Many believe this visit was a trap set for Hussein. A month later Hussein invaded Kuwait thinking the US would not respond. [12]
August, 1990 Iraq invades Kuwait. The precursor to the Gulf War. [8] July, 1991 The Financial Times of London reveals that a Florida chemical company had produced and shipped cyanide to Iraq during the 80's using a special CIA courier. Cyanide was used extensively against the Iranians. [11]
August, 1991. Christopher Droguol of Atlanta's branch of Banca Nazionale del Lavoro is arrested for his role in supplying loans to Iraq for the purchase of military supplies. He is charged with 347 counts of felony. Droguol is found guilty, but US officials plead innocent of any knowledge of his crime. [14]
June, 1992. Ted Kopple of ABC Nightline reports: "It is becoming increasingly clear that George Bush Sr., operating largely behind the scenes throughout the 1980's, initiated and supported much of the financing, intelligence, and military help that built Saddam's Iraq into [an aggressive power]." [5]
More references:
Who Armed Iraq?
http://www.alternet.org/story/15322/
How Did Iraq Get Its Weapons?
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm
Helping Iraq Kill with Chemical Weapons: The Relevance of Yesterday's US Hypocrisy Today http://www.counterpunch.org/boles1010.html
U.S. Had Key Role in Iraq Buildup
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wpdyn?pagename=article&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29
How Reagan Armed Saddam with Chemical Weapons
http://www.counterpunch.org/dixon06172004.html
Sunday, December 31, 2006
Saturday, December 30, 2006
Saddam Hussein executed before dawn
Now everyone is blind. Was Saddam a good person? Hell, no. But he wasn't the worst and he wasn't the first. And his execution does nothing for this crisis we are in now with our American soldiers being in harm's way. As U.S. fatalities near 3,000, it is important to remember that NO WMD or links to terrorism were ever found. The real reason for this war was a personal vendetta and personal profit for Bush's family and friends. Don't ever forget it. If they were really so worried about human liberation, they'd be invading Saudi Arabia or China or Korea, which have far worse regimes, but they're not because we do business with them.
Bravo, that there is one less dictator in control, not really though if you replace Hussein with the installment of Bush in 2000. They cancel each other out. But really, would Bush's Jesus condone execution? Hardly. The "president" has no moral values and no Christian values. "An eye for an eye" was certainly not the philosophy of Jesus, nor is it of Allah or Buddha.
Within hours of Hussein's death, a bomb planted aboard a minibus exploded in a fish market south of Baghdad, killing 31 people, said Haidr Nahi, service director of the al-Furat al-Awssat Hospital. About 58 others were wounded in the explosion in Kufa, a Shiite town 100 miles south of the Iraqi capital.
This Iraq crisis is nowhere near over.
Bravo, that there is one less dictator in control, not really though if you replace Hussein with the installment of Bush in 2000. They cancel each other out. But really, would Bush's Jesus condone execution? Hardly. The "president" has no moral values and no Christian values. "An eye for an eye" was certainly not the philosophy of Jesus, nor is it of Allah or Buddha.
Within hours of Hussein's death, a bomb planted aboard a minibus exploded in a fish market south of Baghdad, killing 31 people, said Haidr Nahi, service director of the al-Furat al-Awssat Hospital. About 58 others were wounded in the explosion in Kufa, a Shiite town 100 miles south of the Iraqi capital.
This Iraq crisis is nowhere near over.
Thursday, December 28, 2006
FDA says cloned animals are OK to eat
So much for Bush's anti-cloning stance, but then I guess animals don't count because they probably don't have a Christian soul according to the president.
The government declared Thursday that food from cloned animals is safe to eat. Officials said they don’t think special labels are needed, although a decision on labeling is pending.
Because scientists concluded there is no difference between food from clones and food from other animals, “it would be unlikely that FDA would require labeling in those cases,” Sundlof said.
Carol Tucker Foreman, director of food policy at the Consumer Federation of America, said the FDA is ignoring research that shows cloning results in more deaths and deformed animals than other reproductive technologies.
Those in favor of the technology say it would be used primarily for breeding and not for steak or pork tenderloin. Cloning lets farmers and ranchers replicate exceptional animals, such as pigs that fatten rapidly or cows that are superior milk producers.
To produce a clone, the nucleus of a donor egg is removed and replaced with the DNA of a cow, pig or other animal. A tiny electric shock coaxes the egg to grow into a copy of the original animal. Cloning companies say it’s just another reproductive technology, such as artificial insemination, yet there can be differences between the two because of chance and environmental influences. And Bush has a problem with Stem Cells!!
Some surveys have shown people to be uncomfortable with food from cloned animals; 64 percent said they were uncomfortable with such food in a September poll by the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, a nonpartisan research group. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16372490/
Just when I thought factory farming was at its worst!
The government declared Thursday that food from cloned animals is safe to eat. Officials said they don’t think special labels are needed, although a decision on labeling is pending.
Because scientists concluded there is no difference between food from clones and food from other animals, “it would be unlikely that FDA would require labeling in those cases,” Sundlof said.
Carol Tucker Foreman, director of food policy at the Consumer Federation of America, said the FDA is ignoring research that shows cloning results in more deaths and deformed animals than other reproductive technologies.
Those in favor of the technology say it would be used primarily for breeding and not for steak or pork tenderloin. Cloning lets farmers and ranchers replicate exceptional animals, such as pigs that fatten rapidly or cows that are superior milk producers.
To produce a clone, the nucleus of a donor egg is removed and replaced with the DNA of a cow, pig or other animal. A tiny electric shock coaxes the egg to grow into a copy of the original animal. Cloning companies say it’s just another reproductive technology, such as artificial insemination, yet there can be differences between the two because of chance and environmental influences. And Bush has a problem with Stem Cells!!
Some surveys have shown people to be uncomfortable with food from cloned animals; 64 percent said they were uncomfortable with such food in a September poll by the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, a nonpartisan research group. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16372490/
Just when I thought factory farming was at its worst!
Rest in Peace President Gerald R. Ford
He may have pardoned Nixon, but Ford disagreed with Bush on invading Iraq.
Former president Gerald R. Ford said in an embargoed interview in July 2004 that the Iraq war was not justified. "I don't think I would have gone to war," he said a little more than a year after President Bush had launched the invasion advocated and carried out by prominent veterans of Ford's own administration.
In a four-hour conversation at his house in Beaver Creek, Colo., Ford "very strongly" disagreed with the current president's justifications for invading Iraq and said he would have pushed alternatives, such as sanctions, much more vigorously. In the tape-recorded interview, Ford was critical not only of Bush but also of Vice President Cheney — Ford's White House chief of staff — and then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who served as Ford's chief of staff and then his Pentagon chief.
"Rumsfeld and Cheney and the president made a big mistake in justifying going into the war in Iraq." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16372936/
Former president Gerald R. Ford said in an embargoed interview in July 2004 that the Iraq war was not justified. "I don't think I would have gone to war," he said a little more than a year after President Bush had launched the invasion advocated and carried out by prominent veterans of Ford's own administration.
In a four-hour conversation at his house in Beaver Creek, Colo., Ford "very strongly" disagreed with the current president's justifications for invading Iraq and said he would have pushed alternatives, such as sanctions, much more vigorously. In the tape-recorded interview, Ford was critical not only of Bush but also of Vice President Cheney — Ford's White House chief of staff — and then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who served as Ford's chief of staff and then his Pentagon chief.
"Rumsfeld and Cheney and the president made a big mistake in justifying going into the war in Iraq." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16372936/
John Edwards makes it official
John Edwards makes another run for the presidency
Two years after his hopes for a Democratic takeover of the White House were destroyed by election fraud, former vice presidential nominee John Edwards announced that he is making another run at the presidency.
Edwards — who is calling for cuts in poverty, global warming and troops in Iraq — scheduled his kickoff in New Orleans, still devastated from last year’s Hurricane Katrina. He chose the site to highlight his signature concern of the economic disparity that divides America.
“I’m here to announce I’m a candidate for president of the United States,” Edwards told NBC’s “Today Show” Thursday, one of three back-to-back interviews by the candidate on morning news shows. “I’ve reached my own conclusion this is the best way to serve my country.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16377918/
Two years after his hopes for a Democratic takeover of the White House were destroyed by election fraud, former vice presidential nominee John Edwards announced that he is making another run at the presidency.
Edwards — who is calling for cuts in poverty, global warming and troops in Iraq — scheduled his kickoff in New Orleans, still devastated from last year’s Hurricane Katrina. He chose the site to highlight his signature concern of the economic disparity that divides America.
“I’m here to announce I’m a candidate for president of the United States,” Edwards told NBC’s “Today Show” Thursday, one of three back-to-back interviews by the candidate on morning news shows. “I’ve reached my own conclusion this is the best way to serve my country.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16377918/
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Gore's opposition to Iraq should set a standard
Al Gore recently reiterated his original opposition to the invasion. It's not that hard to see the logic in his original opposition. And it makes us have to wonder where were the minds of all of the Congress members who voted for the war? Were they in the clouds out of touch with reality, did they really believe an administration that had already proven its lack of integrity, or were they purposefully giving Bush his blank check for self-destruction? Either way, this invasion was a mistake and Gore's reaffirmation of this should set a standard for the politicians we elect and re-elect.
KING: Were you opposed to Iraq?
GORE: Yes, I was.
KING: From the get-go.
GORE: Yes.
KING: Because?
GORE: Well, the evidence available showed very clearly that we had been attacked on September 11, 2001 by Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda terrorist organization. And I applauded President Bush's decision to go into Afghanistan to go after bin Laden. I thought that was correct.I think it was a mistake though to pull so many of our troops off of that hunt and divert to an invasion of a country that had absolutely nothing to do with attacking us and even though we didn't like the dictator that was there, there are a lot of dictators out there right now that we don't like. And I felt that unlike the first Persian Gulf War, which I supported because Saddam Hussein had invaded his neighbor and was threatening the security interests of the U.S. and our allies and we had support from all our allies, the United Nations resolution, the whole world was behind us.
This was different and here's the most troubling aspect of it, Larry. The evidence that was coming out of the CIA and the expert community was saying one thing and it was the stuff they didn't want to hear they were deep-sixing it and stuff that didn't make sense they were ballyhooing. And it's the same thing that's happening with global warming. That's the point. They are doing exactly the same thing on this issue.
KING: Why deliberately? Are they deliberating saying "Ha, ha, ha, we want to go to war so we'll diffuse this?" What's the point?
GORE: I think that they went to -- I think it was like a perfect storm. I think there were a lot of things going on in the administration. I think that Vice President Cheney was genuinely focused on trying to get a foothold in the region where the biggest oil reserves are and he had written about and spoken about that for years before taking office.Karl Rove said on the eve of the war that it was going to be a great political issue and I think that actually played into it. And then I think that there were some in the administration ideologically driven who had this idea that they were going to plant democracy in country with a majority of the population under 19 years old with no tradition of democracy.
And it's a, you know, great thing if you could do it but there was a lack of realism about whether it was actually feasible, particularly with trying to do it on the cheap with far fewer forces than the heads of the military were telling them at the time was necessary. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/13/lkl.01.html
Let's salute the brave and intelligent ones who didn't vote for this war:
The vote on House Joint Resolution 114 as taken on October 11, 2002. It passed the Senate by a vote of 77 to 23. The 21 Democrats, one Republican and one Independent senator who courageously voted their consciences against it were:
Daniel Akaka (D-HI)
Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)
Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Robert Byrd (D-WV)
Lincoln Chafee (R-RI)
Kent Conrad (D-ND)
Jon Corzine(D-NJ)
Mark Dayton (D-MN)
Dick Durbin (D-IL)
Russ Feingold (D-WI)
Bob Graham (D-FL)
Daniel Inouye (D-HI)
Jim Jeffords (I-VT)
Ted Kennedy (D-MA)
Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
Carl Levin (D-MI)
Barbara Mikulski (D-MD)
Patty Murray (D-WA)
Jack Reed (D-RI)
Paul Sarbanes (D-MD)
Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
the late Paul Wellstone (D-MN)
Ron Wyden (D-OR)
The House of Representatives passed the Resolution by a vote of 296 to 133. In the House, six Republicans (Ron Paul of Texas; Connie Morella of Maryland; Jim Leach of Iowa; Amo Houghton of New York; John Hostettler of Indiana; and John Duncan of Tennessee) joined 126 Democrats in voting nay.
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, (D-OH), said the 133 votes against the measure were "a very strong message" to the administration.
Al Gore, Howard Dean, and Wesley Clark are obviously not alone when they say they wouldn't have voted for the war.
KING: Were you opposed to Iraq?
GORE: Yes, I was.
KING: From the get-go.
GORE: Yes.
KING: Because?
GORE: Well, the evidence available showed very clearly that we had been attacked on September 11, 2001 by Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda terrorist organization. And I applauded President Bush's decision to go into Afghanistan to go after bin Laden. I thought that was correct.I think it was a mistake though to pull so many of our troops off of that hunt and divert to an invasion of a country that had absolutely nothing to do with attacking us and even though we didn't like the dictator that was there, there are a lot of dictators out there right now that we don't like. And I felt that unlike the first Persian Gulf War, which I supported because Saddam Hussein had invaded his neighbor and was threatening the security interests of the U.S. and our allies and we had support from all our allies, the United Nations resolution, the whole world was behind us.
This was different and here's the most troubling aspect of it, Larry. The evidence that was coming out of the CIA and the expert community was saying one thing and it was the stuff they didn't want to hear they were deep-sixing it and stuff that didn't make sense they were ballyhooing. And it's the same thing that's happening with global warming. That's the point. They are doing exactly the same thing on this issue.
KING: Why deliberately? Are they deliberating saying "Ha, ha, ha, we want to go to war so we'll diffuse this?" What's the point?
GORE: I think that they went to -- I think it was like a perfect storm. I think there were a lot of things going on in the administration. I think that Vice President Cheney was genuinely focused on trying to get a foothold in the region where the biggest oil reserves are and he had written about and spoken about that for years before taking office.Karl Rove said on the eve of the war that it was going to be a great political issue and I think that actually played into it. And then I think that there were some in the administration ideologically driven who had this idea that they were going to plant democracy in country with a majority of the population under 19 years old with no tradition of democracy.
And it's a, you know, great thing if you could do it but there was a lack of realism about whether it was actually feasible, particularly with trying to do it on the cheap with far fewer forces than the heads of the military were telling them at the time was necessary. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/13/lkl.01.html
Let's salute the brave and intelligent ones who didn't vote for this war:
The vote on House Joint Resolution 114 as taken on October 11, 2002. It passed the Senate by a vote of 77 to 23. The 21 Democrats, one Republican and one Independent senator who courageously voted their consciences against it were:
Daniel Akaka (D-HI)
Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)
Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Robert Byrd (D-WV)
Lincoln Chafee (R-RI)
Kent Conrad (D-ND)
Jon Corzine(D-NJ)
Mark Dayton (D-MN)
Dick Durbin (D-IL)
Russ Feingold (D-WI)
Bob Graham (D-FL)
Daniel Inouye (D-HI)
Jim Jeffords (I-VT)
Ted Kennedy (D-MA)
Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
Carl Levin (D-MI)
Barbara Mikulski (D-MD)
Patty Murray (D-WA)
Jack Reed (D-RI)
Paul Sarbanes (D-MD)
Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
the late Paul Wellstone (D-MN)
Ron Wyden (D-OR)
The House of Representatives passed the Resolution by a vote of 296 to 133. In the House, six Republicans (Ron Paul of Texas; Connie Morella of Maryland; Jim Leach of Iowa; Amo Houghton of New York; John Hostettler of Indiana; and John Duncan of Tennessee) joined 126 Democrats in voting nay.
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, (D-OH), said the 133 votes against the measure were "a very strong message" to the administration.
Al Gore, Howard Dean, and Wesley Clark are obviously not alone when they say they wouldn't have voted for the war.
Friday, December 22, 2006
Humans will need two Earths
Humans will need two Earths
Global ‘footprint’ left by consumption is growing, conservationists argue
BEIJING - Humans are stripping nature at an unprecedented rate and will need two planets' worth of natural resources every year by 2050 if current trends continue, according to a report published Tuesday by the World Wildlife Fund and the Global Footprint Network.
"For more than 20 years we have exceeded the Earth's ability to support a consumptive lifestyle that is unsustainable and we cannot afford to continue down this path," WWF Director-General James Leape said in releasing the 2006 Living Planet Report in Beijing.
"If everyone around the world lived as those in America, we would need five planets to support us," Leape added.
Largely because of its huge per capita emissions of carbon dioxide — a gas many scientists tie to global warming — the United Arab Emirates were placing the most stress per capita on the planet ahead of the United States, Finland, Canada, Kuwait and Australia, the report said.
Using the report's criteria, Cuba is the only country in the world that has a high level of development, including good health and education systems, and does not use up more resources than is sustainable.
Groups: Footprint getting bigger
The report estimated that "humanity's footprint has more than tripled between 1961 and 2003" — and that consumption has even outpaced global population growth from 3 billion in 1960 to the 6.5 billion today.
In 2003, the report added, humanity's ecological footprint — the demand people place on the natural world — was 25 percent greater than the planet's annual ability to provide everything from food to energy and recycle all human waste.
"This ecological 'overshoot' means that it now takes about one year and three months for the Earth to regenerate what we use in a single year," the conservation groups said in a statement.
"Overshoot has increased by 4 percent since the last Living Planet Report, which was based on 2001 data, and is projected to rise to 30 percent in 2006."
"On current projections, humanity will be using two planets' worth of natural resources by 2050 — if those resources have not run out by then," the latest report said. "People are turning resources into waste faster than nature can turn waste back into resources."
"Humanity is living off its ecological credit card," Mathis Wackernagel, head of the Global Footprint Network, said in a statement. "While this can be done for a short while, overshoot ultimately leads to liquidation of the planet's ecological assets, and the depletion of resources, such as the forests, oceans and agricultural land upon which our economy depends."
The report noted that an index tracking 1,300 vertebrate species — birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles and mammals — showed that populations had fallen for most by about 30 percent because of factors including a loss of habitats to farms.
Eyes on China, other growing nations
The conservation groups added that the footprint from use of fossil fuels, whose heat-trapping emissions are widely blamed for pushing up world temperatures, was the fastest-growing cause of strain.
Leape said China, home to a fifth of the world's population and whose economy is booming, was making the right move in pledging to reduce its energy consumption by 20 percent over the next five years.
"Much will depend on the decisions made by China, India and other rapidly developing countries," he added.
"The cities, power plants and homes we build today will either lock society into damaging overconsumption beyond our lifetimes," he added, "or begin to propel this and future generations toward sustainable living."
National "footprints" charted by the Global Footprint Network are online at www.footprintnetwork.org
Global ‘footprint’ left by consumption is growing, conservationists argue
BEIJING - Humans are stripping nature at an unprecedented rate and will need two planets' worth of natural resources every year by 2050 if current trends continue, according to a report published Tuesday by the World Wildlife Fund and the Global Footprint Network.
"For more than 20 years we have exceeded the Earth's ability to support a consumptive lifestyle that is unsustainable and we cannot afford to continue down this path," WWF Director-General James Leape said in releasing the 2006 Living Planet Report in Beijing.
"If everyone around the world lived as those in America, we would need five planets to support us," Leape added.
Largely because of its huge per capita emissions of carbon dioxide — a gas many scientists tie to global warming — the United Arab Emirates were placing the most stress per capita on the planet ahead of the United States, Finland, Canada, Kuwait and Australia, the report said.
Using the report's criteria, Cuba is the only country in the world that has a high level of development, including good health and education systems, and does not use up more resources than is sustainable.
Groups: Footprint getting bigger
The report estimated that "humanity's footprint has more than tripled between 1961 and 2003" — and that consumption has even outpaced global population growth from 3 billion in 1960 to the 6.5 billion today.
In 2003, the report added, humanity's ecological footprint — the demand people place on the natural world — was 25 percent greater than the planet's annual ability to provide everything from food to energy and recycle all human waste.
"This ecological 'overshoot' means that it now takes about one year and three months for the Earth to regenerate what we use in a single year," the conservation groups said in a statement.
"Overshoot has increased by 4 percent since the last Living Planet Report, which was based on 2001 data, and is projected to rise to 30 percent in 2006."
"On current projections, humanity will be using two planets' worth of natural resources by 2050 — if those resources have not run out by then," the latest report said. "People are turning resources into waste faster than nature can turn waste back into resources."
"Humanity is living off its ecological credit card," Mathis Wackernagel, head of the Global Footprint Network, said in a statement. "While this can be done for a short while, overshoot ultimately leads to liquidation of the planet's ecological assets, and the depletion of resources, such as the forests, oceans and agricultural land upon which our economy depends."
The report noted that an index tracking 1,300 vertebrate species — birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles and mammals — showed that populations had fallen for most by about 30 percent because of factors including a loss of habitats to farms.
Eyes on China, other growing nations
The conservation groups added that the footprint from use of fossil fuels, whose heat-trapping emissions are widely blamed for pushing up world temperatures, was the fastest-growing cause of strain.
Leape said China, home to a fifth of the world's population and whose economy is booming, was making the right move in pledging to reduce its energy consumption by 20 percent over the next five years.
"Much will depend on the decisions made by China, India and other rapidly developing countries," he added.
"The cities, power plants and homes we build today will either lock society into damaging overconsumption beyond our lifetimes," he added, "or begin to propel this and future generations toward sustainable living."
National "footprints" charted by the Global Footprint Network are online at www.footprintnetwork.org
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
9/11 questions still linger
Many Americans suspect U.S. government involvement or complicity
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14723997/
Vote here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14727720/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14723997/
Vote here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14727720/
AL Gore video
It's humorous, it's important, it's Al Gore, excellent as usual!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5621362837465161157&q=label%3Abush
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5621362837465161157&q=label%3Abush
Immigrants not taking Americans' jobs
Immigrants not taking Americans' jobs
WASHINGTON - Big increases in immigration since 1990 have not hurt employment prospects for U.S. workers, says a study released Thursday.
The report comes as Congress and many Americans are debating immigration policy, a big issue in this fall's midterm congressional elections.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14285172/?GT1=8404
WASHINGTON - Big increases in immigration since 1990 have not hurt employment prospects for U.S. workers, says a study released Thursday.
The report comes as Congress and many Americans are debating immigration policy, a big issue in this fall's midterm congressional elections.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14285172/?GT1=8404
Monday, December 18, 2006
The coming holidays
Like the late great poet Charles Bukowski once said, "Why do we kill all those trees just to celebrate one birthday?"
Earlier in the week I wrote an on-line response to a group posting in response to several people who were upset over a rabbi protesting an airport for their Christmas trees. Others are upset because clerks in stores no longer say "happy holidays." The big "war" on Christmas! See this link about the rabbi:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-airport-christmas-trees,0,7546296.story
I can't say I blame the guy for having to deal with the trees. If the trees are there, then the menorah should be there too, but then that means there should be Muslim and Buddhist symbols too. But it's important to note that the Christmas tree is not a Christian symbol anyway. It was actually once a symbol of nature. The holiday tree is derived from pagan tree worship, much like virtually every other symbol Christianity borrowed from paganism.
It's also important to note to those who persist to argue that our country was founded on Christianity, that it was not. If it was, who were the Christian founders? I don't recall them. If they just mean that the citizens of our nation were mostly Christian, then why all the killing, slavery, slaughtering of animals, and greed, and lust, and all of the other sins? Doesn't sound like Christianity. Sounds like someone used the name of Christ to spread chaos.
My USA is for everyone. That means no festive decorations in schools and public buildings. Save all the cheap plastic junk and gaudy lights for your own homes. And do I really need the underpaid clerk at the mall to tell me "happy holidays" when I just cut someone off in the parking lot, fought over the last toy in the aisle with another parent, and then shoved someone out of my way on line, just to spend hundreds of dollars (that could've saved entire families in Africa) on junk that everyone will forget about next year anyway, all because some guy in a white robe told me to celebrate the birth of Christ on the 25th of December when he wasn't even born in the same season?
I don’t celebrate X-mas for Christian beliefs nor the materialism. For me, it is a celebration of family and fellowship.
Love is my God. And yes, trees should be worshipped, but not just once a year. Jesus would have wanted it that way.
Dies Natalis Solis Invicti
Earlier in the week I wrote an on-line response to a group posting in response to several people who were upset over a rabbi protesting an airport for their Christmas trees. Others are upset because clerks in stores no longer say "happy holidays." The big "war" on Christmas! See this link about the rabbi:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-airport-christmas-trees,0,7546296.story
I can't say I blame the guy for having to deal with the trees. If the trees are there, then the menorah should be there too, but then that means there should be Muslim and Buddhist symbols too. But it's important to note that the Christmas tree is not a Christian symbol anyway. It was actually once a symbol of nature. The holiday tree is derived from pagan tree worship, much like virtually every other symbol Christianity borrowed from paganism.
It's also important to note to those who persist to argue that our country was founded on Christianity, that it was not. If it was, who were the Christian founders? I don't recall them. If they just mean that the citizens of our nation were mostly Christian, then why all the killing, slavery, slaughtering of animals, and greed, and lust, and all of the other sins? Doesn't sound like Christianity. Sounds like someone used the name of Christ to spread chaos.
My USA is for everyone. That means no festive decorations in schools and public buildings. Save all the cheap plastic junk and gaudy lights for your own homes. And do I really need the underpaid clerk at the mall to tell me "happy holidays" when I just cut someone off in the parking lot, fought over the last toy in the aisle with another parent, and then shoved someone out of my way on line, just to spend hundreds of dollars (that could've saved entire families in Africa) on junk that everyone will forget about next year anyway, all because some guy in a white robe told me to celebrate the birth of Christ on the 25th of December when he wasn't even born in the same season?
I don’t celebrate X-mas for Christian beliefs nor the materialism. For me, it is a celebration of family and fellowship.
Love is my God. And yes, trees should be worshipped, but not just once a year. Jesus would have wanted it that way.
Dies Natalis Solis Invicti
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Run for the 2008 election begins
Dennis Kucinich has announced his run for candidate for president of the United States. He is the most outspoken anti-war candidate, who didn't vote for the war, didn't vote for increases in spending, and does not support the slaughter mills of American corporate greed otherwise known as the Iraq war. Kucinich urges early Iraq exit: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16210167/
"Waiting for another anti-war candidate “A lot of people are sitting on the fence until someone comes up with something a lot more definitive than what’s being said right now about the war,” said Maryland Democratic Party chairman Terry Lierman, who was the finance chairman of Howard Dean’s presidential bid in 2004.
“The person who wins this (battle for the nomination) is going to be the person who comes up with the strongest and most rational proposal to get out of Iraq,” Lierman added. “Those who have namby-pamby proposals will suffer the consequences.” If Democrats are looking for a contender who did not vote to go to war in 2002 and has not voted to fund the war, two names immediately come to mind: Dean and former vice president Al Gore.
Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana will not seek the presidency in 2008. “At the end of the day, I concluded that due to circumstances beyond our control the odds were longer than I felt I could responsibly pursue,” Bayh told the Indianapolis Star. “This path — and these long odds — would have required me to be essentially absent from the Senate for the next year instead of working to help the people of my state and the nation.” A very commendable step-aside for someone hired to do a job and someone who actually wants to do that job. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16235397/
John Edwards to announce '08 run.
Former Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards intends to enter the 2008 race for the White House, two Democratic officials said Saturday.
Edwards, who represented North Carolina in the Senate for six years, plans to make the campaign announcement late this month from the New Orleans neighborhood hit hardest by Hurricane Katrina last year and slow to recover from the storm. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16239360/
In other news, the two who want to dig a hole for America by re-electing another Republican all because they're too egotistical, are getting media attention. Hillary and Obama http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16238556/site/newsweek
Take the live vote at the above site.
Meanwhile, someone not getting publicity for being a politician, but rather for doing a good job, is Al Gore.
"I am not planning to run for president again," Gore said last week, arguing that his focus is raising public awareness about global warming and its dire effects. Then, he added: "I haven't completely ruled it out."
Those words make Gore the 800-pound non-candidate of the Democratic field. The possibility of another presidential bid delights many Democrats still steamed over the disputed 2000 election, in which they argue a few more votes, a state other than Florida and a different Supreme Court could have put Gore, not George W. Bush, in the White House.
New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is the front-runner, but a polarizing one for some Democrats. Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is the electrifying newcomer, but limited in his experience. Gore remains, for many party activists, the Democrat and popular vote-getter done wrong.
"He won the election in 2000 _ he just lost the (electoral) count," former Democratic National Committee Chairman Don Fowler said. "If I were he, I wouldn't rule out a run. It's an uncertain field, and he's a person who is widely respected." http://www.algore.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=430&Itemid=81
"Waiting for another anti-war candidate “A lot of people are sitting on the fence until someone comes up with something a lot more definitive than what’s being said right now about the war,” said Maryland Democratic Party chairman Terry Lierman, who was the finance chairman of Howard Dean’s presidential bid in 2004.
“The person who wins this (battle for the nomination) is going to be the person who comes up with the strongest and most rational proposal to get out of Iraq,” Lierman added. “Those who have namby-pamby proposals will suffer the consequences.” If Democrats are looking for a contender who did not vote to go to war in 2002 and has not voted to fund the war, two names immediately come to mind: Dean and former vice president Al Gore.
Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana will not seek the presidency in 2008. “At the end of the day, I concluded that due to circumstances beyond our control the odds were longer than I felt I could responsibly pursue,” Bayh told the Indianapolis Star. “This path — and these long odds — would have required me to be essentially absent from the Senate for the next year instead of working to help the people of my state and the nation.” A very commendable step-aside for someone hired to do a job and someone who actually wants to do that job. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16235397/
John Edwards to announce '08 run.
Former Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards intends to enter the 2008 race for the White House, two Democratic officials said Saturday.
Edwards, who represented North Carolina in the Senate for six years, plans to make the campaign announcement late this month from the New Orleans neighborhood hit hardest by Hurricane Katrina last year and slow to recover from the storm. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16239360/
In other news, the two who want to dig a hole for America by re-electing another Republican all because they're too egotistical, are getting media attention. Hillary and Obama http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16238556/site/newsweek
Take the live vote at the above site.
Meanwhile, someone not getting publicity for being a politician, but rather for doing a good job, is Al Gore.
"I am not planning to run for president again," Gore said last week, arguing that his focus is raising public awareness about global warming and its dire effects. Then, he added: "I haven't completely ruled it out."
Those words make Gore the 800-pound non-candidate of the Democratic field. The possibility of another presidential bid delights many Democrats still steamed over the disputed 2000 election, in which they argue a few more votes, a state other than Florida and a different Supreme Court could have put Gore, not George W. Bush, in the White House.
New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is the front-runner, but a polarizing one for some Democrats. Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is the electrifying newcomer, but limited in his experience. Gore remains, for many party activists, the Democrat and popular vote-getter done wrong.
"He won the election in 2000 _ he just lost the (electoral) count," former Democratic National Committee Chairman Don Fowler said. "If I were he, I wouldn't rule out a run. It's an uncertain field, and he's a person who is widely respected." http://www.algore.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=430&Itemid=81
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Will you be called next?
Army, Marine Corps to ask for more troops
Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan cut into global readiness
The Army and Marine Corps are planning to ask incoming Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Congress to approve permanent increases in personnel, as senior officials in both services assert that the nation's global military strategy has outstripped their resources.
In addition, the Army will press hard for "full access" to the 346,000-strong Army National Guard and the 196,000-strong Army Reserves by asking Gates to take the politically sensitive step of easing the Pentagon restrictions on the frequency and duration of involuntary call-ups for reservists, according to two senior Army officials.
The push for more ground troops comes as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have sharply decreased the readiness of Army and Marine Corps units rotating back to the United States, compromising the ability of U.S. ground forces to respond to other potential conflicts around the world.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16160871/
Yeah. and there is no backdoor draft, yeah right.
Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan cut into global readiness
The Army and Marine Corps are planning to ask incoming Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Congress to approve permanent increases in personnel, as senior officials in both services assert that the nation's global military strategy has outstripped their resources.
In addition, the Army will press hard for "full access" to the 346,000-strong Army National Guard and the 196,000-strong Army Reserves by asking Gates to take the politically sensitive step of easing the Pentagon restrictions on the frequency and duration of involuntary call-ups for reservists, according to two senior Army officials.
The push for more ground troops comes as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have sharply decreased the readiness of Army and Marine Corps units rotating back to the United States, compromising the ability of U.S. ground forces to respond to other potential conflicts around the world.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16160871/
Yeah. and there is no backdoor draft, yeah right.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Impeachment in the works?
MCKINNEY'S FULL REMARKS ON BUSH IMPEACHMENT BILL
By Matthew Cardinale, News Editor and National Correspondent (December 08, 2006)
US Rep. Cynthia McKinney today became the first US Congresswoman to introduce Articles of Impeachment against President Bush, as well as Vice President Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice.
Atlanta Progressive News has obtained the following remarks prepared by the Congresswoman, and has learned she was not allowed to read them on the US House Floor. The remarks are expected to become part of the Congressional Record but will not be available on thomas.loc.gov until next week.
The Congresswoman has scheduled an interview with APN for tomorrow to discuss her legislation. Stay tuned here for more.
The remarks are reprinted here in full:
Mr. Speaker:
I come before this body today as a proud American and as a servant of the American people, sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
Throughout my tenure, I've always tried to speak the truth. It's that commitment that brings me here today.
We have a President who has misgoverned and a Congress that has refused to hold him accountable. It is a grave situation and I believe the stakes for our country are high.
No American is above the law, and if we allow a President to violate, at the most basic and fundamental level, the trust of the people and then continue to govern, without a process for holding him accountable, what does that say about our commitment to the truth? To the Constitution? To our democracy?
The trust of the American people has been broken. And a process must be undertaken to repair this trust. This process must begin with honesty and accountability.
Leading up to our invasion of Iraq, the American people supported this Administration's actions because they believed in our President. They believed he was acting in good faith. They believed that American laws and American values would be respected. That in the weightiness of everything being considered, two values were rock solid: trust and truth.
From mushroom clouds to African yellow cake to aluminum tubes, the American people and this Congress were not presented the facts, but rather were presented a string of untruths, to justify the invasion of Iraq.
President Bush, along with Vice President Cheney and then-National Security Advisor Rice, portrayed to the Congress and to the American people that Iraq represented an imminent threat, culminating with President Bush's claim that Iraq was six months away from developing a nuclear weapon. Having used false fear to buy consent, the President then took our country to war.
This has grave consequences for the health of our democracy, for our standing with our allies, and most of all, for the lives of our men and women in the military and their families--who have been asked to make sacrifices--including the ultimate sacrifice--to keep us safe.
Just as we expect our leaders to be truthful, we expect them to abide by the law and respect our courts and judges. Here again, the President failed the American people.
When President Bush signed an executive order authorizing unlawful spying on American citizens, he circumvented the courts, the law, and he violated the separation of powers provided by the Constitution. Once the program was revealed, he then tried to hide the scope of his offense from the American people by making contradictory, untrue statements.
President George W. Bush has failed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States; he has failed to ensure that senior members of his administration do the same; and he has betrayed the trust of the American people.
With a heavy heart and in the deepest spirit of patriotism, I exercise my duty and responsibility to speak truthfully about what is before us. To shy away from this responsibility would be easier. But I have not been one to travel the easy road. I believe in this country, and in the power of our democracy. I feel the steely conviction of one who will not let the country I love descend into shame; for the fabric of our democracy is at stake.
Some will call this a partisan vendetta, others will say this is an unimportant distraction to the plans of the incoming Congress. But this is not about political gamesmanship.
I am not willing to put any political party before my principles.
This, instead, is about beginning the long road back to regaining the high standards of truth and democracy upon which our great country was founded.
Mr. Speaker:
Under the standards set by the United States Constitution, President Bush, along with Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of State Rice, should be subject to the process of impeachment, and I have filed H. Res.1106 in the House of Representatives.
To my fellow Americans, as I leave this Congress, it is in your hands to hold your representatives accountable, and to show those with the courage to stand for what is right, that they do not stand alone.
Thank you.
Atlanta Progressive News
http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0113.html
By Matthew Cardinale, News Editor and National Correspondent (December 08, 2006)
US Rep. Cynthia McKinney today became the first US Congresswoman to introduce Articles of Impeachment against President Bush, as well as Vice President Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice.
Atlanta Progressive News has obtained the following remarks prepared by the Congresswoman, and has learned she was not allowed to read them on the US House Floor. The remarks are expected to become part of the Congressional Record but will not be available on thomas.loc.gov until next week.
The Congresswoman has scheduled an interview with APN for tomorrow to discuss her legislation. Stay tuned here for more.
The remarks are reprinted here in full:
Mr. Speaker:
I come before this body today as a proud American and as a servant of the American people, sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
Throughout my tenure, I've always tried to speak the truth. It's that commitment that brings me here today.
We have a President who has misgoverned and a Congress that has refused to hold him accountable. It is a grave situation and I believe the stakes for our country are high.
No American is above the law, and if we allow a President to violate, at the most basic and fundamental level, the trust of the people and then continue to govern, without a process for holding him accountable, what does that say about our commitment to the truth? To the Constitution? To our democracy?
The trust of the American people has been broken. And a process must be undertaken to repair this trust. This process must begin with honesty and accountability.
Leading up to our invasion of Iraq, the American people supported this Administration's actions because they believed in our President. They believed he was acting in good faith. They believed that American laws and American values would be respected. That in the weightiness of everything being considered, two values were rock solid: trust and truth.
From mushroom clouds to African yellow cake to aluminum tubes, the American people and this Congress were not presented the facts, but rather were presented a string of untruths, to justify the invasion of Iraq.
President Bush, along with Vice President Cheney and then-National Security Advisor Rice, portrayed to the Congress and to the American people that Iraq represented an imminent threat, culminating with President Bush's claim that Iraq was six months away from developing a nuclear weapon. Having used false fear to buy consent, the President then took our country to war.
This has grave consequences for the health of our democracy, for our standing with our allies, and most of all, for the lives of our men and women in the military and their families--who have been asked to make sacrifices--including the ultimate sacrifice--to keep us safe.
Just as we expect our leaders to be truthful, we expect them to abide by the law and respect our courts and judges. Here again, the President failed the American people.
When President Bush signed an executive order authorizing unlawful spying on American citizens, he circumvented the courts, the law, and he violated the separation of powers provided by the Constitution. Once the program was revealed, he then tried to hide the scope of his offense from the American people by making contradictory, untrue statements.
President George W. Bush has failed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States; he has failed to ensure that senior members of his administration do the same; and he has betrayed the trust of the American people.
With a heavy heart and in the deepest spirit of patriotism, I exercise my duty and responsibility to speak truthfully about what is before us. To shy away from this responsibility would be easier. But I have not been one to travel the easy road. I believe in this country, and in the power of our democracy. I feel the steely conviction of one who will not let the country I love descend into shame; for the fabric of our democracy is at stake.
Some will call this a partisan vendetta, others will say this is an unimportant distraction to the plans of the incoming Congress. But this is not about political gamesmanship.
I am not willing to put any political party before my principles.
This, instead, is about beginning the long road back to regaining the high standards of truth and democracy upon which our great country was founded.
Mr. Speaker:
Under the standards set by the United States Constitution, President Bush, along with Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of State Rice, should be subject to the process of impeachment, and I have filed H. Res.1106 in the House of Representatives.
To my fellow Americans, as I leave this Congress, it is in your hands to hold your representatives accountable, and to show those with the courage to stand for what is right, that they do not stand alone.
Thank you.
Atlanta Progressive News
http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0113.html
Saturday, December 09, 2006
OutFOXed
OutFOXing the Media
The probelm with network news in America is this, it's a monopoly controlled by one who worships at the alter of Ronald Reagon and who's values are aligned with the current administration. The media empire of billionare mogul Rupert Murdoch reaches billions around the globe dominating airwaves in the United States, Britain, Italy and Asia. This Autrailian born Bush supporter owns 9 satellite tv networks, 100 cable channels, 175 newspapers, 40 book imprints, 40 tv stations and 1 movie studio. These include 20th century fox studio, Fox network, Fox news, New York Post, The Times of London and much much more. It is estimated that his media reaches 3/4 of the world's population. Hmmm. Fox News, hard to beleive that many people actually rely on the unilateralism of mainstram media as a source of reliable information.
Outfoxed:Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism (from the back of the dvd case):
"The team behind outfoxed created a system to moniter Fox News 24 hours a day for months to discover exactly how its shows worked. A team of volunteers around the country scutinized every hour of Fox News programming, noticing examples of bias in it's coverage. The result is an intense examination of Fox News and the lie inherent in it's favorite motto:
"Fair and Balanced."An important side note of this film worth mentioning was it's breif glimpse at the politics of fear and how our government via the media uses fear as a tool to rally our support for a powerful military. You can watch this movie online.
The probelm with network news in America is this, it's a monopoly controlled by one who worships at the alter of Ronald Reagon and who's values are aligned with the current administration. The media empire of billionare mogul Rupert Murdoch reaches billions around the globe dominating airwaves in the United States, Britain, Italy and Asia. This Autrailian born Bush supporter owns 9 satellite tv networks, 100 cable channels, 175 newspapers, 40 book imprints, 40 tv stations and 1 movie studio. These include 20th century fox studio, Fox network, Fox news, New York Post, The Times of London and much much more. It is estimated that his media reaches 3/4 of the world's population. Hmmm. Fox News, hard to beleive that many people actually rely on the unilateralism of mainstram media as a source of reliable information.
Outfoxed:Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism (from the back of the dvd case):
"The team behind outfoxed created a system to moniter Fox News 24 hours a day for months to discover exactly how its shows worked. A team of volunteers around the country scutinized every hour of Fox News programming, noticing examples of bias in it's coverage. The result is an intense examination of Fox News and the lie inherent in it's favorite motto:
"Fair and Balanced."An important side note of this film worth mentioning was it's breif glimpse at the politics of fear and how our government via the media uses fear as a tool to rally our support for a powerful military. You can watch this movie online.
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Gore: Iraq "Worst Strategy Mistake In The History Of The U.S."
Gore: Iraq "Worst Strategy Mistake In The History Of The U.S."
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/12/06/gore-iraq-bush/ Wednesday, 06 December 2006
(ThinkProgress.org) - This morning on NBC, former Vice President Al Gore called Iraq the “worst strategic mistake in the history of the United States.”
He urged President Bush “to try to separate out the personal issues of being blamed in history for this mistake and instead recognize it’s not about him. It’s about our country and we all have to find a way to get our troops home and to prevent a regional conflagration there.”
Full Transcript:
GORE: The fact is, this is a very bad situation. Our country has to find a way to get our troops out as quickly as possible without making the situation even worse in the manner of our leaving.
LAUER: It’s described by some as cut and stay as opposed to cut and run. Does it [the Baker-Hamilton report] do enough to acknowledge the results of the mid-term elections and the message voters sending this administration — if these are listened to, these recommendations?
GORE: Well, the report this morning is actually one of several studies. There is one in the Pentagon. There has been reportedly been one in the White House itself. They are all basically saying the same thing, Matt. This is an utter disaster. This worst strategic mistake in the history of the United States. We as a nation have to find a way, in George Mitchell’s words, to manage a disaster. But I would urge the president not to — to try to separate out the personal issues of being blamed in history for this mistake and instead recognize it’s not about him. It’s about our country and we all have to find a way to get our troops home and to prevent a regional conflagration there.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/12/06/gore-iraq-bush/ Wednesday, 06 December 2006
(ThinkProgress.org) - This morning on NBC, former Vice President Al Gore called Iraq the “worst strategic mistake in the history of the United States.”
He urged President Bush “to try to separate out the personal issues of being blamed in history for this mistake and instead recognize it’s not about him. It’s about our country and we all have to find a way to get our troops home and to prevent a regional conflagration there.”
Full Transcript:
GORE: The fact is, this is a very bad situation. Our country has to find a way to get our troops out as quickly as possible without making the situation even worse in the manner of our leaving.
LAUER: It’s described by some as cut and stay as opposed to cut and run. Does it [the Baker-Hamilton report] do enough to acknowledge the results of the mid-term elections and the message voters sending this administration — if these are listened to, these recommendations?
GORE: Well, the report this morning is actually one of several studies. There is one in the Pentagon. There has been reportedly been one in the White House itself. They are all basically saying the same thing, Matt. This is an utter disaster. This worst strategic mistake in the history of the United States. We as a nation have to find a way, in George Mitchell’s words, to manage a disaster. But I would urge the president not to — to try to separate out the personal issues of being blamed in history for this mistake and instead recognize it’s not about him. It’s about our country and we all have to find a way to get our troops home and to prevent a regional conflagration there.
Cheers to Oprah!!
Hope everyone got to see this!
Gore films conservation piece for Oprah Monday, 04 December 2006
(Nashville Tennessean) - Al Gore was at the Lowe's Home Improvement store in Franklin Sunday shooting a spot on energy saving appliances for the Oprah Winfrey talk show.
The former vice president and Tennessee senator led a camera crew through the store, making note of how people can save money on their energy bills and help conserve the planet's natural resources in the process.
With winter approaching, Gore focused on alternative means of heating. He also suggested purchasing a programmable thermostat that can automatically conserve energy when no one is home.
Other products noted include: new gas grills which are more efficient, compact fluorescent lights that can save $40 to $50 in energy costs annually, and Energy Star washing machines that conserve 8,000 gallons of water over the machine's lifetime.
"It's exciting to have Mr. Gore at our store," said Jeff Willis, Lowe's store manager. "And it's good that he's helping people save on their energy bills."
The piece is scheduled to air Dec. 11.
By John Boan
http://www.algore.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=428&Itemid=81
Gore films conservation piece for Oprah Monday, 04 December 2006
(Nashville Tennessean) - Al Gore was at the Lowe's Home Improvement store in Franklin Sunday shooting a spot on energy saving appliances for the Oprah Winfrey talk show.
The former vice president and Tennessee senator led a camera crew through the store, making note of how people can save money on their energy bills and help conserve the planet's natural resources in the process.
With winter approaching, Gore focused on alternative means of heating. He also suggested purchasing a programmable thermostat that can automatically conserve energy when no one is home.
Other products noted include: new gas grills which are more efficient, compact fluorescent lights that can save $40 to $50 in energy costs annually, and Energy Star washing machines that conserve 8,000 gallons of water over the machine's lifetime.
"It's exciting to have Mr. Gore at our store," said Jeff Willis, Lowe's store manager. "And it's good that he's helping people save on their energy bills."
The piece is scheduled to air Dec. 11.
By John Boan
http://www.algore.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=428&Itemid=81
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Al Gore YouTube Spoof Not So Amateurish
Republican PR Firm Said to Be Behind 'An Inconvenient Spoof'
The film actually came from a slick Republican public relations firm called DCI, which just happens to have oil giant Exxon as a client.
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/al-gore-youtube-spoof-not-so-amateurish/20060805132409990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
The film actually came from a slick Republican public relations firm called DCI, which just happens to have oil giant Exxon as a client.
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/al-gore-youtube-spoof-not-so-amateurish/20060805132409990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
Monday, December 04, 2006
The Environment is not convenient enough for science teachers
An Inconvenient Truth Squeezed from Classrooms
The producers of An Inconvenient Truth have offered to supply American classrooms with 50,000 copies of the movie free of charge. That offer has been rejected by the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), the nation's leading science education teachers group, citing a risk to funding from key financial supporters. One of those supporters is Exxon-Mobil. The news was buried deep in the Washington Post website and reported by Laurie David, a producer of the film and founder of StopGlobalWarming.org
In their e-mail rejection, they (NSTA) expressed concern that other "special interests" might ask to distribute materials, too; they said they didn't want to offer "political" endorsement of the film; and they saw "little, if any, benefit to NSTA or its members" in accepting the free DVDs.
Gore, however, is not running for office, and the film's theatrical run is long since over. As for classroom benefits, the movie has been enthusiastically endorsed by leading climate scientists worldwide, and is required viewing for all students in Norway and Sweden.
Still, maybe the NSTA just being extra cautious. But there was one more curious argument in the e-mail: Accepting the DVDs, they wrote, would place "unnecessary risk upon the [NSTA] capital campaign, especially certain targeted supporters." One of those supporters, it turns out, is the Exxon Mobil Corp.
Oil industry supporters will be quick to endorse the decision, agreeing that An Inconvenient Truth does indeed represent a special interest. What they will conveniently ignore is that unlike industry friendly messages pushed into the curriculum, An Inconvenient Truth is based on, and endorsed by, objective science - the very subject the National Science Teachers Association says it promotes.What truth is more inconvenient? It depends where your pay cheque comes from.
http://consciousearth.blogspot.com/2006/11/inconvenient-truth-squeezed-from.html
Meanwhile in Scotland...
Firm offers to pay for pupils to see Gore film
IAN JOHNSTON ENVIRONMENT CORRESPONDENT
EVERY schoolchild in Scotland is to be offered the chance to see former US vice-president Al Gore's film about the dangers of global warming under a scheme by energy company ScottishPower.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1795672006
The producers of An Inconvenient Truth have offered to supply American classrooms with 50,000 copies of the movie free of charge. That offer has been rejected by the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), the nation's leading science education teachers group, citing a risk to funding from key financial supporters. One of those supporters is Exxon-Mobil. The news was buried deep in the Washington Post website and reported by Laurie David, a producer of the film and founder of StopGlobalWarming.org
In their e-mail rejection, they (NSTA) expressed concern that other "special interests" might ask to distribute materials, too; they said they didn't want to offer "political" endorsement of the film; and they saw "little, if any, benefit to NSTA or its members" in accepting the free DVDs.
Gore, however, is not running for office, and the film's theatrical run is long since over. As for classroom benefits, the movie has been enthusiastically endorsed by leading climate scientists worldwide, and is required viewing for all students in Norway and Sweden.
Still, maybe the NSTA just being extra cautious. But there was one more curious argument in the e-mail: Accepting the DVDs, they wrote, would place "unnecessary risk upon the [NSTA] capital campaign, especially certain targeted supporters." One of those supporters, it turns out, is the Exxon Mobil Corp.
Oil industry supporters will be quick to endorse the decision, agreeing that An Inconvenient Truth does indeed represent a special interest. What they will conveniently ignore is that unlike industry friendly messages pushed into the curriculum, An Inconvenient Truth is based on, and endorsed by, objective science - the very subject the National Science Teachers Association says it promotes.What truth is more inconvenient? It depends where your pay cheque comes from.
http://consciousearth.blogspot.com/2006/11/inconvenient-truth-squeezed-from.html
Meanwhile in Scotland...
Firm offers to pay for pupils to see Gore film
IAN JOHNSTON ENVIRONMENT CORRESPONDENT
EVERY schoolchild in Scotland is to be offered the chance to see former US vice-president Al Gore's film about the dangers of global warming under a scheme by energy company ScottishPower.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1795672006
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Right Wing Sanctity of Marraige?
Examples of the Right Wing Sanctity of Marraige:
The sanctity of marriage?
Ronald Reagan - divorced the mother of two of his children to marry Nancy Reagan, who bore him a daughter only 7 months after the marriage.
Bob Dole - divorced the mother of his child, who had nursed him through the long recovery from his war wounds.
Sen. John McCain of Arizonia - divorced
Newt Gingrich - divorced his wife who was dying of cancer.
Dick Armey, House Majority Leader - divorced
Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas - divorced
Gov. John Engler of Michigan - divorced
Gov. Pete Wilson of California - divorced
George Will - divorced
Sen. Lauch Faircloth - divorced
Rush Limbaugh - Rush and his current wife Marta have six marriages and four divorces between them.
Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia - Barr, not yet 50 years old, has been married three times. Barr had the audacity to author and push the "Defense of Marriage Act." The current joke making the rounds on Capitol Hill is "Bob Barr...WHICH marriage are you defending?!?
Sen. Alfonse D'Amato of New York - divorced
Sen. John Warner of Virginia - divorced (once married to Liz Taylor.)
Gov. George Allen of Virginia - divorcedHenry Kissinger - divorced
Rep. Helen Chenoweth of Idaho - divorced
Rep. John Kasich of Ohio - divorced
Rep. Susan Molinari of New York - Republican National Convention Keynote Speaker - divorced
So ... homosexuals are going to destroy the institution of marriage? Wait a minute, it seems the Christian Heterosexual Republicans are doing a fine job without anyone's help!
Courtesy of http://apatheticnation.blogspot.com/
The sanctity of marriage?
Ronald Reagan - divorced the mother of two of his children to marry Nancy Reagan, who bore him a daughter only 7 months after the marriage.
Bob Dole - divorced the mother of his child, who had nursed him through the long recovery from his war wounds.
Sen. John McCain of Arizonia - divorced
Newt Gingrich - divorced his wife who was dying of cancer.
Dick Armey, House Majority Leader - divorced
Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas - divorced
Gov. John Engler of Michigan - divorced
Gov. Pete Wilson of California - divorced
George Will - divorced
Sen. Lauch Faircloth - divorced
Rush Limbaugh - Rush and his current wife Marta have six marriages and four divorces between them.
Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia - Barr, not yet 50 years old, has been married three times. Barr had the audacity to author and push the "Defense of Marriage Act." The current joke making the rounds on Capitol Hill is "Bob Barr...WHICH marriage are you defending?!?
Sen. Alfonse D'Amato of New York - divorced
Sen. John Warner of Virginia - divorced (once married to Liz Taylor.)
Gov. George Allen of Virginia - divorcedHenry Kissinger - divorced
Rep. Helen Chenoweth of Idaho - divorced
Rep. John Kasich of Ohio - divorced
Rep. Susan Molinari of New York - Republican National Convention Keynote Speaker - divorced
So ... homosexuals are going to destroy the institution of marriage? Wait a minute, it seems the Christian Heterosexual Republicans are doing a fine job without anyone's help!
Courtesy of http://apatheticnation.blogspot.com/
Friday, December 01, 2006
Corporate Empires
Corporate Empires
These are numbers from ten years ago. Do you think it's changed much?
TWO HUNDRED GIANT CORPORATIONS, most of them larger than many national economies, have sales that exceed a quarter of the world's economic activity. Philip Morris is larger than New Zealand, and it operates in 170 countries. Instead of creating an integrated global village, these firms are weaving webs of production, consumption and finance that bring economic benefits to, at most, a third of the world's people. Two-thirds of the world (the bottom 20 percent of the rich countries and the bottom 80 percent of the poor countries) are either left out, marginalized or hurt by these webs of activity.
Here are five snapshots of the extent of global corporate concentration:
2.The combined sales of the world's Top 200 corporations are far greater than a quarter of the world's economic activity. The Top 200's share of global economic activity has been growing rapidly over the past decade. In 1982, the Top 200 firms had sales that were the equivalent of 24.2 percent of the world's gross domestic product (GDP). Today, that figure has grown to 28.3 percent of world GDP.
3.The Top 200 corporations' combined sales are bigger than the combined economies of all countries minus the biggest 9; that is they surpass the combined economies of 182 countries. At latest count, the world has 191 countries. If you subtract the GDP of the big nine economies -- the United States, Japan, Germany, France, Italy, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Canada and China -- the combined GDP's of the other 182 countries is $6.9 trillion. The combined sales of the Top 200 corporations is $7.1 trillion.
4.The Top 200 have almost twice the economic clout of the poorest four-fifths of humanity. The world's economic income and wealth remain highly concentrated among the rich. Indeed, according to the United Nations, some 85 percent of the world's GDP is controlled by the richest fifth of humanity; only 15 percent is controlled by the poorest four-fifths. Hence, the poorer 4.5 billion people in the world account for only $3.9 trillion dollars of economic activity; this is only a little over half the combined revenues of the Top 200's $7.1 trillion.
5. The Top 200 have been net job destroyers in recent years. Their combined global employment is only 18.8 million, which is less than a third of 1 percent of the world's people. The world has just over 5.6 billion people. Of these, around 2.6 billion are in the workforce. Hence, the Top 200 employ less than three-fourths of 1 percent of the world's workers. Of the world's top five employers, four are U.S. (General Motors, Wal-Mart, PepsiCo, and Ford), and one is German (Siemens). If one also includes the public sector in these calculations, the U.S. Postal Service is the world's biggest employer, at 870,160, roughly 160,000 more workers than GM's 709,000 workers.
http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/mm1296.08.html
1. Of the 100 largest economies in the world, 51 are corporations; only 49 are countries. Wal-Mart--the number 12 corporation--is bigger than 161 countries, including Israel, Poland and Greece. Mitsubishi is larger than the fourth most populous nation on earth: Indonesia. General Motors is bigger than Denmark. Ford is bigger than South Africa. Toyota is bigger than Norway.
These are numbers from ten years ago. Do you think it's changed much?
TWO HUNDRED GIANT CORPORATIONS, most of them larger than many national economies, have sales that exceed a quarter of the world's economic activity. Philip Morris is larger than New Zealand, and it operates in 170 countries. Instead of creating an integrated global village, these firms are weaving webs of production, consumption and finance that bring economic benefits to, at most, a third of the world's people. Two-thirds of the world (the bottom 20 percent of the rich countries and the bottom 80 percent of the poor countries) are either left out, marginalized or hurt by these webs of activity.
Here are five snapshots of the extent of global corporate concentration:
2.The combined sales of the world's Top 200 corporations are far greater than a quarter of the world's economic activity. The Top 200's share of global economic activity has been growing rapidly over the past decade. In 1982, the Top 200 firms had sales that were the equivalent of 24.2 percent of the world's gross domestic product (GDP). Today, that figure has grown to 28.3 percent of world GDP.
3.The Top 200 corporations' combined sales are bigger than the combined economies of all countries minus the biggest 9; that is they surpass the combined economies of 182 countries. At latest count, the world has 191 countries. If you subtract the GDP of the big nine economies -- the United States, Japan, Germany, France, Italy, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Canada and China -- the combined GDP's of the other 182 countries is $6.9 trillion. The combined sales of the Top 200 corporations is $7.1 trillion.
4.The Top 200 have almost twice the economic clout of the poorest four-fifths of humanity. The world's economic income and wealth remain highly concentrated among the rich. Indeed, according to the United Nations, some 85 percent of the world's GDP is controlled by the richest fifth of humanity; only 15 percent is controlled by the poorest four-fifths. Hence, the poorer 4.5 billion people in the world account for only $3.9 trillion dollars of economic activity; this is only a little over half the combined revenues of the Top 200's $7.1 trillion.
5. The Top 200 have been net job destroyers in recent years. Their combined global employment is only 18.8 million, which is less than a third of 1 percent of the world's people. The world has just over 5.6 billion people. Of these, around 2.6 billion are in the workforce. Hence, the Top 200 employ less than three-fourths of 1 percent of the world's workers. Of the world's top five employers, four are U.S. (General Motors, Wal-Mart, PepsiCo, and Ford), and one is German (Siemens). If one also includes the public sector in these calculations, the U.S. Postal Service is the world's biggest employer, at 870,160, roughly 160,000 more workers than GM's 709,000 workers.
http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/mm1296.08.html
1. Of the 100 largest economies in the world, 51 are corporations; only 49 are countries. Wal-Mart--the number 12 corporation--is bigger than 161 countries, including Israel, Poland and Greece. Mitsubishi is larger than the fourth most populous nation on earth: Indonesia. General Motors is bigger than Denmark. Ford is bigger than South Africa. Toyota is bigger than Norway.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Important information for all American parents
This information is good to know, especially if you are searching for a new area or home to live in. I typed in one zip code that I used to live in and it had far more offenders than the one I'm in now.
www.familywatchdog.us
www.familywatchdog.us
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
We've now been in Iraq longer than WWII
Yesterday marked the day that we will have been in Iraq longer than we were in all of World War II.
That's right. We were able to defeat all of Nazi Germany, Mussolini, and the entire Japanese empire in LESS time than it's taken the world's only superpower to secure the road from the airport to downtown Baghdad.
And we haven't even done THAT. After 1,347 days, in the same time it took us to took us to sweep across North Africa, storm the beaches of Italy, conquer the South Pacific, and liberate all of Western Europe, we cannot, after over 3 and 1/2 years, even take over a single highway and protect ourselves from a homemade device of two tin cans placed in a pothole. No wonder the cab fare from the airport into Baghdad is now running around $35,000 for the 25-minute ride. And that doesn't even include a friggin' helmet.
Is this utter failure the fault of our troops? Hardly. That's because no amount of troops or choppers or democracy shot out of the barrel of a gun is ever going to "win" the war in Iraq. It is a lost war, lost because it never had a right to be won, lost because it was started by men who have never been to war, men who hide behind others sent to fight and die.
Let's listen to what the Iraqi people are saying, according to a recent poll conducted by the University of Maryland:
** 71% of all Iraqis now want the U.S. out of Iraq.
** 61% of all Iraqis SUPPORT insurgent attacks on U.S. troops.
Meanwhile, Bush comes out today to say we wont leave until the mission is completed. But I thought it was already "accomplished."
Let's get the fuck out of dodge already! No more U.S. deaths!
That's right. We were able to defeat all of Nazi Germany, Mussolini, and the entire Japanese empire in LESS time than it's taken the world's only superpower to secure the road from the airport to downtown Baghdad.
And we haven't even done THAT. After 1,347 days, in the same time it took us to took us to sweep across North Africa, storm the beaches of Italy, conquer the South Pacific, and liberate all of Western Europe, we cannot, after over 3 and 1/2 years, even take over a single highway and protect ourselves from a homemade device of two tin cans placed in a pothole. No wonder the cab fare from the airport into Baghdad is now running around $35,000 for the 25-minute ride. And that doesn't even include a friggin' helmet.
Is this utter failure the fault of our troops? Hardly. That's because no amount of troops or choppers or democracy shot out of the barrel of a gun is ever going to "win" the war in Iraq. It is a lost war, lost because it never had a right to be won, lost because it was started by men who have never been to war, men who hide behind others sent to fight and die.
Let's listen to what the Iraqi people are saying, according to a recent poll conducted by the University of Maryland:
** 71% of all Iraqis now want the U.S. out of Iraq.
** 61% of all Iraqis SUPPORT insurgent attacks on U.S. troops.
Meanwhile, Bush comes out today to say we wont leave until the mission is completed. But I thought it was already "accomplished."
Let's get the fuck out of dodge already! No more U.S. deaths!
Sunday, November 26, 2006
9/11 widows demand accountability
NEW PETITION, PLEASE SIGN
9/11 WIDOWS PETITION TO HOLD THE ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE TO RELEASE DOCUMENTS ON POSSIBLE 9/11 FOREKNOWLEDGE:
[Fwd from 9/11 Widows: Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle, Mindy Kleinberg, Lorie Van Auken --
Please help us break the 100k mark with this important petition and use it to build support for a new investigation in the new year. Please forward and post widely]
All American Citizens,
Please join us by adding your name to the online petition at the link below. If you experience problems with the link, copy and paste into your browser. Please pass this on! Thank you,Patty CasazzaMonica GabrielleMindy KleinbergLorie Van Auken
Public's Right To Know - Declassification and Release of Documents
To: U. S. Congress; Press/Media
We, the undersigned, demand the immediate declassification and release of all transcripts and documents relating to the July 10, 2001 meeting that took place between former CIA Director George Tenet and then-National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice. It has been alleged that this urgent and out-of-the-ordinary meeting was called to discuss the increasingly dire warnings of an imminent al Qaeda attack within the U.S.Given that much of the July 10, 2001 meeting has already been made public in Bob Woodward’s newly released book, “State of Denial”, it is unacceptable to continue to keep these documents and transcripts hidden from the American public’s view.In addition, we again call for the declassification and release of both the redacted 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry Into The Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 (JICI) and the CIA Inspector General’s report, “CIA Accountability With Respect To The 9/11 Attacks”.
The disastrous nature of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks warrant the release of all of this information so that the American public may learn what its government did or did not do to protect them. Had this nation been properly warned of the looming and imminent terrorist threat, life saving choices could have been made that day.
Sincerely,
http://www.petitiononline.com/july10/petition.html
9/11 WIDOWS PETITION TO HOLD THE ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE TO RELEASE DOCUMENTS ON POSSIBLE 9/11 FOREKNOWLEDGE:
[Fwd from 9/11 Widows: Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle, Mindy Kleinberg, Lorie Van Auken --
Please help us break the 100k mark with this important petition and use it to build support for a new investigation in the new year. Please forward and post widely]
All American Citizens,
Please join us by adding your name to the online petition at the link below. If you experience problems with the link, copy and paste into your browser. Please pass this on! Thank you,Patty CasazzaMonica GabrielleMindy KleinbergLorie Van Auken
Public's Right To Know - Declassification and Release of Documents
To: U. S. Congress; Press/Media
We, the undersigned, demand the immediate declassification and release of all transcripts and documents relating to the July 10, 2001 meeting that took place between former CIA Director George Tenet and then-National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice. It has been alleged that this urgent and out-of-the-ordinary meeting was called to discuss the increasingly dire warnings of an imminent al Qaeda attack within the U.S.Given that much of the July 10, 2001 meeting has already been made public in Bob Woodward’s newly released book, “State of Denial”, it is unacceptable to continue to keep these documents and transcripts hidden from the American public’s view.In addition, we again call for the declassification and release of both the redacted 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry Into The Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 (JICI) and the CIA Inspector General’s report, “CIA Accountability With Respect To The 9/11 Attacks”.
The disastrous nature of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks warrant the release of all of this information so that the American public may learn what its government did or did not do to protect them. Had this nation been properly warned of the looming and imminent terrorist threat, life saving choices could have been made that day.
Sincerely,
http://www.petitiononline.com/july10/petition.html
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
An Inconvenient Truth
Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth is now on video to rent or own.
It makes a great educational gift for the holidays. Set up a family or mass viewing. Help spread this urgent message.
Global Warming by the Numbers
Some chilling statistics to think about:
1 - Rank of 2005 as hottest year on record (tied with 1998), according to NASA.100 % - Increase in intensity and duration of hurricanes and tropical stormssince the 1970's, according to a 2005 MIT study.
$100 billion - Estimate of damage caused by hurricanes hitting the U.S. coast in 2005 alone, according to the National Climatic Data Center.
2030 - Year by which Glacier National Park will have no glaciers left, according to the U.S. Geological Survey predictions.
400,000 - Square miles of Arctic sea ice that have melted in the last 30 years (roughly the size of Texas), threatening polar bear habitats and further accelerating global warming worldwide, according to the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment.
15-37%- Amount of plant and animal species that global warming could wipe out by 2050.
1 - Rank of the United States as a global warming polluter compared to other large nations.
6- Number of former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency leaders who say the U.S. is not doing enough to fight global warming.
0- Number of bills passed by Congress to cut global warming pollution.
0- Number of times President Bush has mentioned the words "global warming," or "climate change" in previous State of the Union addresses.
2003 - Europe suffered worst heat wave in history where 27,000 people died
US and Australia didn't sign the Kyoto Treaty
It took 10 centuries for the oceans to rise as much as they did in the 20th century.
Sources: NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2005 Study, Nature Magazine January 2004, National Climatic Data Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Arctic Climate Impact Assessment.
Buy the DVD here: http://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Truth-Al-Gore/dp/B000ICL3KG/sr=8-1/qid=1164211813/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-3139561-5622534?ie=UTF8&s=dvd
Buy the book here: http://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Truth-Planetary-Emergency-Warming/dp/1594865671/sr=8-2/qid=1164211840/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/102-3139561-5622534?ie=UTF8&s=books
Or rent it at any Blockbuster or Hollywood Video store
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Monday, November 20, 2006
The Real Deal on Iraq
Leave our country now
From the first days of the US-British invasion of Iraq, oil workers have resisted foreign occupation.
Hassan Juma'a Awad
The Guardian
"We lived through dark days under Saddam Hussein's dictatorship. When the regime fell, people wanted a new life: a life without shackles and terror; a life where we could rebuild our country and enjoy its natural wealth. Instead, our communities have been attacked with chemicals and cluster bombs, and our people tortured, raped and killed in our homes.
Saddam's secret police used to creep over the roofs into our homes at night; occupation troops now break down our doors in broad daylight. The media do not show even a fraction of the devastation that has engulfed Iraq. Journalists who dare to report the truth of what is happening have been kidnapped by terrorists. This serves the agenda of the occupation, which aims to eliminate witnesses to its crimes.
Workers in Iraq's southern oilfields began organising soon after British occupying forces invaded Basra. We founded our union, the Southern Oil Company Union, just 11 days after the fall of Baghdad in April 2003. When the occupation troops stood back and allowed Basra's hospitals, universities and public services to be burned and looted, while they defended only the oil ministry and oilfields, we knew we were dealing with a brutal force prepared to impose its will without regard for human suffering. From the beginning, we were left in no doubt that the US and its allies had come to take control of our oil resources.
The occupation authorities have maintained many of Saddam's repressive laws, including the 1987 order which robbed us of basic union rights, including the right to strike. Today, we still have no official recognition as a trade union, despite having 23,000 members in 10 oil and gas companies in Basra, Amara, Nassiriya, and up to Anbar province. However, we draw our legitimacy from the workers, not the government. We believe unions should operate regardless of the government's wishes, until the people are able finally to elect a genuinely accountable and independent Iraqi government, which represents our interests and not those of American imperialism.
Our union is independent of any political party. Most trade unions in Britain only seem to be aware of one union federation in Iraq, the regime-authorised Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions, whose president, Rassim Awadi, is deputy leader of the US-imposed prime minister Ayad Allawi's party. The IFTU's leadership is carved up between the pro-government Communist party, Allawi's Iraqi National Accord, and their satellites. In fact, there are two other union federations, which are linked to political parties, as well as our own organisation.Our union has already shown it is able to stand its ground against one of the most powerful US companies, Dick Cheney's KBR, which tried to take over our workplaces with the protection of occupation forces.We forced them out and compelled their Kuwaiti subcontractor, Al Khourafi, to replace 1,000 of the 1,200 employees it brought with it with Iraqi workers, 70% of whom are unemployed today. We also fought US viceroy Paul Bremer's wage schedule, which dictated that Iraqi public sector workers must earn ID 69,000 ($35) per month, while paying up to $1,000 a day to thousands of foreign mercenaries. In August 2003 we took strike action and shut down all oil production for three days. As a result, the occupation authorities had to raise wages to a minimum of ID 150,000.
We see it as our duty to defend the country's resources. We reject and will oppose all moves to privatise our oil industry and national resources. We regard this privatisation as a form of neo-colonialism, an attempt to impose a permanent economic occupation to follow the military occupation.The occupation has deliberately fomented a sectarian division of Sunni and Shia. We never knew this sort of division before. Our families intermarried, we lived and worked together. And today we are resisting this brutal occupation together, from Falluja to Najaf to Sadr City. The resistance to the occupation forces is a God-given right of Iraqis, and we, as a union, see ourselves as a necessary part of this resistance - although we will fight using our industrial power, our collective strength as a union, and as a part of civil society which needs to grow in order to defeat both still-powerful Saddamist elites and the foreign occupation of our country.
We will solve our own problems. We are Iraqis, we know our country and we can take care of ourselves. We have the means, the skills and resources to rebuild and create our own democratic society."
Hassan Juma'a Awad is general secretary of Iraq's Southern Oil Company Union and president of the Basra Oil Workers' Union
From the first days of the US-British invasion of Iraq, oil workers have resisted foreign occupation.
Hassan Juma'a Awad
The Guardian
"We lived through dark days under Saddam Hussein's dictatorship. When the regime fell, people wanted a new life: a life without shackles and terror; a life where we could rebuild our country and enjoy its natural wealth. Instead, our communities have been attacked with chemicals and cluster bombs, and our people tortured, raped and killed in our homes.
Saddam's secret police used to creep over the roofs into our homes at night; occupation troops now break down our doors in broad daylight. The media do not show even a fraction of the devastation that has engulfed Iraq. Journalists who dare to report the truth of what is happening have been kidnapped by terrorists. This serves the agenda of the occupation, which aims to eliminate witnesses to its crimes.
Workers in Iraq's southern oilfields began organising soon after British occupying forces invaded Basra. We founded our union, the Southern Oil Company Union, just 11 days after the fall of Baghdad in April 2003. When the occupation troops stood back and allowed Basra's hospitals, universities and public services to be burned and looted, while they defended only the oil ministry and oilfields, we knew we were dealing with a brutal force prepared to impose its will without regard for human suffering. From the beginning, we were left in no doubt that the US and its allies had come to take control of our oil resources.
The occupation authorities have maintained many of Saddam's repressive laws, including the 1987 order which robbed us of basic union rights, including the right to strike. Today, we still have no official recognition as a trade union, despite having 23,000 members in 10 oil and gas companies in Basra, Amara, Nassiriya, and up to Anbar province. However, we draw our legitimacy from the workers, not the government. We believe unions should operate regardless of the government's wishes, until the people are able finally to elect a genuinely accountable and independent Iraqi government, which represents our interests and not those of American imperialism.
Our union is independent of any political party. Most trade unions in Britain only seem to be aware of one union federation in Iraq, the regime-authorised Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions, whose president, Rassim Awadi, is deputy leader of the US-imposed prime minister Ayad Allawi's party. The IFTU's leadership is carved up between the pro-government Communist party, Allawi's Iraqi National Accord, and their satellites. In fact, there are two other union federations, which are linked to political parties, as well as our own organisation.Our union has already shown it is able to stand its ground against one of the most powerful US companies, Dick Cheney's KBR, which tried to take over our workplaces with the protection of occupation forces.We forced them out and compelled their Kuwaiti subcontractor, Al Khourafi, to replace 1,000 of the 1,200 employees it brought with it with Iraqi workers, 70% of whom are unemployed today. We also fought US viceroy Paul Bremer's wage schedule, which dictated that Iraqi public sector workers must earn ID 69,000 ($35) per month, while paying up to $1,000 a day to thousands of foreign mercenaries. In August 2003 we took strike action and shut down all oil production for three days. As a result, the occupation authorities had to raise wages to a minimum of ID 150,000.
We see it as our duty to defend the country's resources. We reject and will oppose all moves to privatise our oil industry and national resources. We regard this privatisation as a form of neo-colonialism, an attempt to impose a permanent economic occupation to follow the military occupation.The occupation has deliberately fomented a sectarian division of Sunni and Shia. We never knew this sort of division before. Our families intermarried, we lived and worked together. And today we are resisting this brutal occupation together, from Falluja to Najaf to Sadr City. The resistance to the occupation forces is a God-given right of Iraqis, and we, as a union, see ourselves as a necessary part of this resistance - although we will fight using our industrial power, our collective strength as a union, and as a part of civil society which needs to grow in order to defeat both still-powerful Saddamist elites and the foreign occupation of our country.
We will solve our own problems. We are Iraqis, we know our country and we can take care of ourselves. We have the means, the skills and resources to rebuild and create our own democratic society."
Hassan Juma'a Awad is general secretary of Iraq's Southern Oil Company Union and president of the Basra Oil Workers' Union
Sunday, November 19, 2006
Civil Liberties Links
There's a wealth of important information there.
Harmony's Home Page: Civil Liberties
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/7076/civilliberty.html
Harmony's Home Page: Civil Liberties
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/7076/civilliberty.html
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Vietnam reminder: a toxic legacy
Here's just one little reminder for George W. Bush what Vietnam accomplished, since he said this weekend on his 30-year-late trip to Vietnam, how we need to use Vietnam as an example for Iraq and stay and finish our job.
Vietnam's toxic legacy
Officials move to address lingering effects of Agent Orange contamination
By Anthony Faiola
DA NANG, Vietnam - For a stark reminder of the Vietnam War, people living near the airport in this central industrial city can still stroll along the old stone walls that once surrounded a U.S. military base. But Luu Thi Nguyen, a 31-year-old homemaker, needs only to look into the face of her young daughter.
Van, 5, spends her days at home, playing by herself on the concrete floor because local school officials say her appearance frightens other children. She has an oversize head and a severely deformed mouth, and her upper body is covered in a rash so severe her skin appears to have been boiled. According to Vietnamese medical authorities, she is part of a new generation of Agent Orange victims, forever scarred by the U.S.-made herbicide containing dioxin, one of the world's most toxic pollutants.
For decades, the United States and Vietnam have wrangled over the question of responsibility for the U.S. military's deployment of Agent Orange. But officials say they are now moving to jointly address at least one important aspect of the spraying's aftermath -- environmental damage at Vietnamese "hot spots" such as Nguyen's city, Da Nang -- that are still contaminated with dioxin 31 years after the fall of Saigon.Though neither Nguyen nor her husband was exposed to the Agent Orange sprayed by U.S. forces from 1962 to 1971, officials here say they believe the couple genetically passed on dioxin's side effects after eating fish from contaminated canals. "I am not interested in blaming anyone at this point," the soft-spoken Nguyen said on a recent day, stroking her daughter's face. "But the contamination should not keep doing this to our children. It must be cleaned up."
During the war, American forces sprayed about 12 million gallons of Agent Orange over the jungle canopies and jade-green highlands of Vietnam. The most toxic of the herbicides used for military purposes, it defoliated countless trees in areas where the communist North Vietnamese troops hid supply lines and conducted guerrilla warfare.
Because Vietnam lacked the resources to conduct its own environmental cleanup, dioxin-related birth defects have been diagnosed in thousands of children whose parents were not exposed during the war. In many cases, families such as the Nguyens were not warned of the hazard until it was too late.
At least one group of victims has already made a formal push for compensation, filing a lawsuit in New York against the chemical companies that produced Agent Orange, including Dow Chemical and Monsanto. In the late 1970s, U.S. veterans filed a similar case and settled out of court in 1984 for a $180 million payment. The Vietnamese case was dismissed last year, but an appeal hearing is expected next month.
The recent advances toward cleaning up the environment are of little solace to these Vietnamese. In a country where birth defects are considered by some an embarrassing reflection of the ill deeds of ancestors, many of the children born with the most severe defects end up abandoned or living in squalid conditions with families too poor to pay for adequate care.The lucky ones end up in the Peace Village ward for Agent Orange victims at a hospital in Ho Chi Minh City, formerly Saigon.
A 2004 study by the Vietnamese government indicated that birth defects in Sathay were 10 to 20 times more common than the national average. Duc Nguyen is engaged to be married next month to a beautiful young woman he met through his work at the hospital. But he is still far from finding peace."I find it ironic that on one hand you put [Saddam Hussein] on trial for using biological warfare, but in another country where you sprayed chemicals for warfare, you neglect your responsibility," said Duc Nguyen, who is not related to Luu Thi Nguyen in Da Nang.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15692010/from/ET/
If it had been up to Bush, we'd still be in Vietnam spraying WMD on the civilians. Here's another reminder for Bush since he forgets Vietnam probably because he was too busy skipping out on his National Guard duty to get drunk: 58,000+ dead American troops and thousands more scarred and maimed.
Vietnam's toxic legacy
Officials move to address lingering effects of Agent Orange contamination
By Anthony Faiola
DA NANG, Vietnam - For a stark reminder of the Vietnam War, people living near the airport in this central industrial city can still stroll along the old stone walls that once surrounded a U.S. military base. But Luu Thi Nguyen, a 31-year-old homemaker, needs only to look into the face of her young daughter.
Van, 5, spends her days at home, playing by herself on the concrete floor because local school officials say her appearance frightens other children. She has an oversize head and a severely deformed mouth, and her upper body is covered in a rash so severe her skin appears to have been boiled. According to Vietnamese medical authorities, she is part of a new generation of Agent Orange victims, forever scarred by the U.S.-made herbicide containing dioxin, one of the world's most toxic pollutants.
For decades, the United States and Vietnam have wrangled over the question of responsibility for the U.S. military's deployment of Agent Orange. But officials say they are now moving to jointly address at least one important aspect of the spraying's aftermath -- environmental damage at Vietnamese "hot spots" such as Nguyen's city, Da Nang -- that are still contaminated with dioxin 31 years after the fall of Saigon.Though neither Nguyen nor her husband was exposed to the Agent Orange sprayed by U.S. forces from 1962 to 1971, officials here say they believe the couple genetically passed on dioxin's side effects after eating fish from contaminated canals. "I am not interested in blaming anyone at this point," the soft-spoken Nguyen said on a recent day, stroking her daughter's face. "But the contamination should not keep doing this to our children. It must be cleaned up."
During the war, American forces sprayed about 12 million gallons of Agent Orange over the jungle canopies and jade-green highlands of Vietnam. The most toxic of the herbicides used for military purposes, it defoliated countless trees in areas where the communist North Vietnamese troops hid supply lines and conducted guerrilla warfare.
Because Vietnam lacked the resources to conduct its own environmental cleanup, dioxin-related birth defects have been diagnosed in thousands of children whose parents were not exposed during the war. In many cases, families such as the Nguyens were not warned of the hazard until it was too late.
At least one group of victims has already made a formal push for compensation, filing a lawsuit in New York against the chemical companies that produced Agent Orange, including Dow Chemical and Monsanto. In the late 1970s, U.S. veterans filed a similar case and settled out of court in 1984 for a $180 million payment. The Vietnamese case was dismissed last year, but an appeal hearing is expected next month.
The recent advances toward cleaning up the environment are of little solace to these Vietnamese. In a country where birth defects are considered by some an embarrassing reflection of the ill deeds of ancestors, many of the children born with the most severe defects end up abandoned or living in squalid conditions with families too poor to pay for adequate care.The lucky ones end up in the Peace Village ward for Agent Orange victims at a hospital in Ho Chi Minh City, formerly Saigon.
A 2004 study by the Vietnamese government indicated that birth defects in Sathay were 10 to 20 times more common than the national average. Duc Nguyen is engaged to be married next month to a beautiful young woman he met through his work at the hospital. But he is still far from finding peace."I find it ironic that on one hand you put [Saddam Hussein] on trial for using biological warfare, but in another country where you sprayed chemicals for warfare, you neglect your responsibility," said Duc Nguyen, who is not related to Luu Thi Nguyen in Da Nang.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15692010/from/ET/
If it had been up to Bush, we'd still be in Vietnam spraying WMD on the civilians. Here's another reminder for Bush since he forgets Vietnam probably because he was too busy skipping out on his National Guard duty to get drunk: 58,000+ dead American troops and thousands more scarred and maimed.
Friday, November 17, 2006
After skipping out in the early 70's, Bush finally goes to Vietnam
George W. Bush is finally in Vietnam. It took him over 30 years, but he made it. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15742536/
So where was he back then?
President Bush has failed to answer lingering questions about his Vietnam-era National Guard service. The American people deserve to know the answers to the following questions because the truth about a president's credentials are important:
● Bush has said he used no special treatment to get into the Guard, but how does he explain the fact that he jumped ahead of 150 applicants despite low pilot aptitude scores?
● Col. Albert Lloyd said, “A report from Alabama to Ellington should have been filed.” Where is that report?
● Why did Bush miss his medical exam in 1972?
● Where are the complete results of the required investigation into Bush’s failure to take that exam?
● Why does the White House say Bush was on base when Bush’s superiors had filed a report saying he was gone for a whole year?
● Why is the Pentagon under orders to not discuss Bush’s record with reporters?
● Where are Bush’s flight logs?
● Why was the microfilm containing Bush’s military records destroyed?
● On May 2, 1973, Bush’s superior officers William D. Harris Jr. and Jerry B. Killian, wrote on his yearly evaluation form, “Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report” on the very day that pay records released by the White House say Bush was on the base. Those pay records, released in February 2004, along with dental records and retirement point summaries, suggest Bush performed some sort of service in Alabama at least sporadically between October 1972 and May 1973. But they do not account for a six-month gap in Bush’s record between May and October 1972.
● Only 1 man ( who happens to be his friend) remembers Bush serving at some point on the Alabama base, while over fifteen Guardsmen from Bush’s would-be unit say they have no recollection of him showing up for duty.
So now that Bush is finally in Vietnam, let's see what kind of mess he can get himself into there.
Just in case you want to argue that Clinton dodged the draft, we’ll clarify that he actually didn’t. This was just another spin that we have all heard through the dirty media. Clinton actually registered, showed up, and took a physical. 1- He failed his hearing test, which disqualified him from the Navy. 2- He did not have perfect vision, which prevented him from joining the Air Force. 3- His leg was injured as a teenager and never healed perfectly, which exempted him from any ground service. 4- He was a student on an academic scholarship and did not have to serve in the first place. 5- He did not believe in the war. You’re right, Clinton didn’t serve, but he has an admirable past since he came from a poor family and rose up through hard work and determination. When the Bush National Guard truth showed up, the media was criticized for attacking a candidate. But isn't a candidate's past accomplishments necessary in order to evaluate someone for a job? Clinton told the truth about this and he got attacked. Bush lied and he go away with it. Clinton lied about a personal affair and he got attacked. Bush lied about a war that killed thousands and he gets off scott free? Where is that liberal bias in the media now?
Oh and what about Dick? When is he finally going to get over to Vietnam?
When the draft began for Vietnam, Cheney woke up and enrolled at Casper Community College, (he had previosuly flunked out of college). Cheney then transferred to University of Wyoming, which kept him out of the draft until 8/7/64. Married Lynne Vincent earning another deferment. On Oct. 26, 1965 the Selective Service announced that childless married men were no longer exempted from service: 9 months and 2 days later, Cheney’s first daughter Elizabeth was born. Received a total of five deferments between ‘63 & ‘66. Turned 26 in January 1967 making him safe from the draft and enabling him to abandon his mock-doctoral work at the University of Wisconsin.
The one time Cheney has answered the question as to why he avoided serving in Vietnam he said, “I had other priorities.”
By the way, Al Gore, John Kerry, they did go to Vietnam.
So where was he back then?
President Bush has failed to answer lingering questions about his Vietnam-era National Guard service. The American people deserve to know the answers to the following questions because the truth about a president's credentials are important:
● Bush has said he used no special treatment to get into the Guard, but how does he explain the fact that he jumped ahead of 150 applicants despite low pilot aptitude scores?
● Col. Albert Lloyd said, “A report from Alabama to Ellington should have been filed.” Where is that report?
● Why did Bush miss his medical exam in 1972?
● Where are the complete results of the required investigation into Bush’s failure to take that exam?
● Why does the White House say Bush was on base when Bush’s superiors had filed a report saying he was gone for a whole year?
● Why is the Pentagon under orders to not discuss Bush’s record with reporters?
● Where are Bush’s flight logs?
● Why was the microfilm containing Bush’s military records destroyed?
● On May 2, 1973, Bush’s superior officers William D. Harris Jr. and Jerry B. Killian, wrote on his yearly evaluation form, “Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report” on the very day that pay records released by the White House say Bush was on the base. Those pay records, released in February 2004, along with dental records and retirement point summaries, suggest Bush performed some sort of service in Alabama at least sporadically between October 1972 and May 1973. But they do not account for a six-month gap in Bush’s record between May and October 1972.
● Only 1 man ( who happens to be his friend) remembers Bush serving at some point on the Alabama base, while over fifteen Guardsmen from Bush’s would-be unit say they have no recollection of him showing up for duty.
So now that Bush is finally in Vietnam, let's see what kind of mess he can get himself into there.
Just in case you want to argue that Clinton dodged the draft, we’ll clarify that he actually didn’t. This was just another spin that we have all heard through the dirty media. Clinton actually registered, showed up, and took a physical. 1- He failed his hearing test, which disqualified him from the Navy. 2- He did not have perfect vision, which prevented him from joining the Air Force. 3- His leg was injured as a teenager and never healed perfectly, which exempted him from any ground service. 4- He was a student on an academic scholarship and did not have to serve in the first place. 5- He did not believe in the war. You’re right, Clinton didn’t serve, but he has an admirable past since he came from a poor family and rose up through hard work and determination. When the Bush National Guard truth showed up, the media was criticized for attacking a candidate. But isn't a candidate's past accomplishments necessary in order to evaluate someone for a job? Clinton told the truth about this and he got attacked. Bush lied and he go away with it. Clinton lied about a personal affair and he got attacked. Bush lied about a war that killed thousands and he gets off scott free? Where is that liberal bias in the media now?
Oh and what about Dick? When is he finally going to get over to Vietnam?
When the draft began for Vietnam, Cheney woke up and enrolled at Casper Community College, (he had previosuly flunked out of college). Cheney then transferred to University of Wyoming, which kept him out of the draft until 8/7/64. Married Lynne Vincent earning another deferment. On Oct. 26, 1965 the Selective Service announced that childless married men were no longer exempted from service: 9 months and 2 days later, Cheney’s first daughter Elizabeth was born. Received a total of five deferments between ‘63 & ‘66. Turned 26 in January 1967 making him safe from the draft and enabling him to abandon his mock-doctoral work at the University of Wisconsin.
The one time Cheney has answered the question as to why he avoided serving in Vietnam he said, “I had other priorities.”
By the way, Al Gore, John Kerry, they did go to Vietnam.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
The world sees the 2006 election as a turning point
World sees vote changing foreign policy
'The end of a six-year nightmare for the world,' EU parliamentarians say
The Associated Press
MADRID, Spain - The seismic shift that midterm elections brought to Washington’s political landscape was welcomed by many Wednesday in a world sharply opposed to the war in Iraq and outraged over the harsh methods the Bush administration has employed in fighting terrorism.
From Paris to Pakistan, politicians, analysts and ordinary citizens said they hoped the Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives would force President Bush to adopt a more conciliatory approach to global crises, and teach a president many see as a “cowboy” a lesson in humility.
But some also expressed fears that a split in power and a lame-duck president might stall global trade talks and weaken much-needed American influence.
In an extraordinary joint statement, more than 200 Socialist members of the European Parliament hailed the American election results as “the beginning of the end of a six-year nightmare for the world” and gloated that they left the Bush administration “seriously weakened.”
In London's Guardian newspaper, commentator Martin Kettle wrote: "The cheering can be heard not just in America itself but around the planet."
In Paris, expatriates and French citizens alike packed the city’s main American haunts to watch results, with some standing to cheer or boo as vote tabulations came in.
One Frenchman, teacher Jean-Pierre Charpemtrat, 53, said it was about time U.S. voters figured out what much of the rest of the world already knew.
“Americans are realizing that you can’t found the politics of a country on patriotic passion and reflexes,” he said. “You can’t fool everybody all the time — and I think that’s what Bush and his administration are learning today.”
Bush is deeply unpopular in many countries around the globe, with particularly intense opposition to the U.S.-led war in Iraq, the U.S. terror detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and allegations of Washington sanctioned interrogation methods that some equate with torture.
In Venezuela, President Hugo Chavez said the Democrats won the election thanks to a "reprisal vote."
'Bush is no longer acceptable'People across the Mideast also reacted swiftly, saying it appeared the U.S. president had paid the price for what many view as failed policy in Iraq.
Most governments across the region had no official comment, but some opponents of the United States reacted harshly. “President Bush is no longer acceptable worldwide,” said Suleiman Hadad, a lawmaker in Syria, whose autocratic government has been shunned by the U.S.
Iranian state television blamed U.S. strategy in the Middle East for the change. "Experts believe that Bush's wrong strategy in the Middle East, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as financial corruption in the United States, was the main reason for the failure of Republicans in the midterm election."
Even some Iraqis voiced hope for change.
“We hope American foreign policy will change and that living conditions in Iraq will improve,” said 48-year-old engineer Suheil Jabar, a Shiite Muslim in Baghdad.
In Copenhagen, Denmark, 35-year-old Jens Langfeldt said he did not know much about the midterm elections but was opposed to Bush’s values. He referred to the president as “that cowboy.”
In Sri Lanka, some said they hoped the rebuke would force Bush to abandon a unilateral approach to global issues.
The Democratic win means “there will be more control and restraint” over U.S. foreign policy. said Jehan Perera, a political analyst.
Passions were even higher in Pakistan, where Bush is deeply unpopular despite billions in aid and support for President Gen. Pervez Musharraf.
One opposition lawmaker, Hafiz Hussain Ahmed, said he welcomed the election result but hoped for more. Bush “deserves to be removed, put on trial and given a Saddam-like death sentence,” he said.
But while the result clearly produced more jubilation than jitters, there were deep concerns.
Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen told broadcaster TV2 he hoped that the president and the new Congress would find “common ground on questions about Iraq and Afghanistan.”
“The world needs a vigorous U.S.A.,” Fogh Rasmussen said.
Worries in China
Some also worried that Democrats, who have a reputation for being more protective of U.S. jobs going overseas, will make it harder to achieve a global free trade accord.
The accord, said European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, “is very important for the future of trans-Atlantic relations.”
And in China, some feared the resurgence of the Democrats would increase tension over human rights and trade and labor issues. China’s surging economy has a massive trade surplus with the United States.
“The Democratic Party ... will protect the interests of small and medium American enterprises and labor and that could produce an impact on China-U.S. trade relations,” Zhang Guoqing of the state-run Chinese Academy of Social Sciences said in a report on Sina.com, a popular Chinese Internet portal.
The prospect of a sudden change in American foreign policy could be troubling to U.S. allies such as Britain, Japan and Australia, which have thrown their support behind the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Democrats campaigned on a platform that demanded a change of direction in Iraq, and the war has lost the support of the majority of American voters.
© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15618695/
'The end of a six-year nightmare for the world,' EU parliamentarians say
The Associated Press
MADRID, Spain - The seismic shift that midterm elections brought to Washington’s political landscape was welcomed by many Wednesday in a world sharply opposed to the war in Iraq and outraged over the harsh methods the Bush administration has employed in fighting terrorism.
From Paris to Pakistan, politicians, analysts and ordinary citizens said they hoped the Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives would force President Bush to adopt a more conciliatory approach to global crises, and teach a president many see as a “cowboy” a lesson in humility.
But some also expressed fears that a split in power and a lame-duck president might stall global trade talks and weaken much-needed American influence.
In an extraordinary joint statement, more than 200 Socialist members of the European Parliament hailed the American election results as “the beginning of the end of a six-year nightmare for the world” and gloated that they left the Bush administration “seriously weakened.”
In London's Guardian newspaper, commentator Martin Kettle wrote: "The cheering can be heard not just in America itself but around the planet."
In Paris, expatriates and French citizens alike packed the city’s main American haunts to watch results, with some standing to cheer or boo as vote tabulations came in.
One Frenchman, teacher Jean-Pierre Charpemtrat, 53, said it was about time U.S. voters figured out what much of the rest of the world already knew.
“Americans are realizing that you can’t found the politics of a country on patriotic passion and reflexes,” he said. “You can’t fool everybody all the time — and I think that’s what Bush and his administration are learning today.”
Bush is deeply unpopular in many countries around the globe, with particularly intense opposition to the U.S.-led war in Iraq, the U.S. terror detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and allegations of Washington sanctioned interrogation methods that some equate with torture.
In Venezuela, President Hugo Chavez said the Democrats won the election thanks to a "reprisal vote."
'Bush is no longer acceptable'People across the Mideast also reacted swiftly, saying it appeared the U.S. president had paid the price for what many view as failed policy in Iraq.
Most governments across the region had no official comment, but some opponents of the United States reacted harshly. “President Bush is no longer acceptable worldwide,” said Suleiman Hadad, a lawmaker in Syria, whose autocratic government has been shunned by the U.S.
Iranian state television blamed U.S. strategy in the Middle East for the change. "Experts believe that Bush's wrong strategy in the Middle East, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as financial corruption in the United States, was the main reason for the failure of Republicans in the midterm election."
Even some Iraqis voiced hope for change.
“We hope American foreign policy will change and that living conditions in Iraq will improve,” said 48-year-old engineer Suheil Jabar, a Shiite Muslim in Baghdad.
In Copenhagen, Denmark, 35-year-old Jens Langfeldt said he did not know much about the midterm elections but was opposed to Bush’s values. He referred to the president as “that cowboy.”
In Sri Lanka, some said they hoped the rebuke would force Bush to abandon a unilateral approach to global issues.
The Democratic win means “there will be more control and restraint” over U.S. foreign policy. said Jehan Perera, a political analyst.
Passions were even higher in Pakistan, where Bush is deeply unpopular despite billions in aid and support for President Gen. Pervez Musharraf.
One opposition lawmaker, Hafiz Hussain Ahmed, said he welcomed the election result but hoped for more. Bush “deserves to be removed, put on trial and given a Saddam-like death sentence,” he said.
But while the result clearly produced more jubilation than jitters, there were deep concerns.
Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen told broadcaster TV2 he hoped that the president and the new Congress would find “common ground on questions about Iraq and Afghanistan.”
“The world needs a vigorous U.S.A.,” Fogh Rasmussen said.
Worries in China
Some also worried that Democrats, who have a reputation for being more protective of U.S. jobs going overseas, will make it harder to achieve a global free trade accord.
The accord, said European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, “is very important for the future of trans-Atlantic relations.”
And in China, some feared the resurgence of the Democrats would increase tension over human rights and trade and labor issues. China’s surging economy has a massive trade surplus with the United States.
“The Democratic Party ... will protect the interests of small and medium American enterprises and labor and that could produce an impact on China-U.S. trade relations,” Zhang Guoqing of the state-run Chinese Academy of Social Sciences said in a report on Sina.com, a popular Chinese Internet portal.
The prospect of a sudden change in American foreign policy could be troubling to U.S. allies such as Britain, Japan and Australia, which have thrown their support behind the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Democrats campaigned on a platform that demanded a change of direction in Iraq, and the war has lost the support of the majority of American voters.
© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15618695/
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
The day has passed
Election 2006 has passed, and even with voter fraud and intimidation occurring, the Democrats still took Congress. This was much expected and I clearly predicted this win in my book, even though I was concerned about the actual electoral process on voting day. With investigations into 2006 election allegations of fraud and intimidation being launched, with a Democratic Congress there will also now be more intensified investigations of election 2000, 2004, 9/11, the Iraq war intelligence, the Iraq war profiteers, and other forms of various corruption committed by our fading Republican Congress and their lame duck president.
However, some on the far left have already come out blasting Democrats in Congress for not launching their investigations or impeachment. This was all within 23 hours of our nation learning the Democrats had sealed the win. Relax, the Democrats aren't even in power yet. If a few weeks pass after they get in in January and they're saying the same thing then you can start putting pressure on them. But even if they don't say anything or say that they're not going to press the issue, it doesn't mean they're not actively pursuing it. Action is a lot louder than words. What would announcing a mission for impeachment do? Not much other than make them look like Republicans.
Let the Democrats get in there and start rebuilding. We can be assured that investigations are going to begin, continue, and intensify. We can also be assured that impeachment is only a step away. Don't take everything the Democrats say so literally. It's politics. They have to play the game too. Remember that while the House is secured for a time, the Senate can easily change again in just two years. Remember that we now have to focus on getting a progressive leader back in the White House in 2008. Attacking the ones trying to fix the problem isn't going to accomplish much.
This was a real American victory. A victory for democracy. Record numbers of voters turned out to clean up Congress and get the corruption out. A victory for progress. All of those corrupt Republican bigots like Senators Santorum and DeLay are gone. The very ones who helped seal our nation's dark fate, by installing George W. Bush twice, met their own fate with devastating losses, Ken Blackwell and Katherine Harris. Many of the old timers were replaced with young progressive blood. But our nation is far from fixed. There is much to do for 2008 and beyond. So who will our leader be? Who will walk us into the light and restore morality to the White House? Who will be the one to fix our nation?
However, some on the far left have already come out blasting Democrats in Congress for not launching their investigations or impeachment. This was all within 23 hours of our nation learning the Democrats had sealed the win. Relax, the Democrats aren't even in power yet. If a few weeks pass after they get in in January and they're saying the same thing then you can start putting pressure on them. But even if they don't say anything or say that they're not going to press the issue, it doesn't mean they're not actively pursuing it. Action is a lot louder than words. What would announcing a mission for impeachment do? Not much other than make them look like Republicans.
Let the Democrats get in there and start rebuilding. We can be assured that investigations are going to begin, continue, and intensify. We can also be assured that impeachment is only a step away. Don't take everything the Democrats say so literally. It's politics. They have to play the game too. Remember that while the House is secured for a time, the Senate can easily change again in just two years. Remember that we now have to focus on getting a progressive leader back in the White House in 2008. Attacking the ones trying to fix the problem isn't going to accomplish much.
This was a real American victory. A victory for democracy. Record numbers of voters turned out to clean up Congress and get the corruption out. A victory for progress. All of those corrupt Republican bigots like Senators Santorum and DeLay are gone. The very ones who helped seal our nation's dark fate, by installing George W. Bush twice, met their own fate with devastating losses, Ken Blackwell and Katherine Harris. Many of the old timers were replaced with young progressive blood. But our nation is far from fixed. There is much to do for 2008 and beyond. So who will our leader be? Who will walk us into the light and restore morality to the White House? Who will be the one to fix our nation?
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
The day has arrived
Election 2006 has arrived. I brought a broom with me to the polls, as Michael Moore suggested in an email earlier today. When they asked what I was doing, I told them "cleaning up America," even though my New York votes are the ones that really matter in this race. In this election, it is the red and swing states that matter, the same ones where there are already reports of fraud and voter intimidation.
Election workers seeing voting problems
Complaints in Fla., Ind., Ohio, Miss. as workers tangle with new machines
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15590530/
FBI looking into possible Va. voter intimidation
Officials probing reports of phone calls allegedly intended to confuse voters
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15603344/
For on-going updates see:
http://bradblog.com/
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2006/11/post.html
Let's see what happens!
Election workers seeing voting problems
Complaints in Fla., Ind., Ohio, Miss. as workers tangle with new machines
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15590530/
FBI looking into possible Va. voter intimidation
Officials probing reports of phone calls allegedly intended to confuse voters
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15603344/
For on-going updates see:
http://bradblog.com/
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2006/11/post.html
Let's see what happens!
Sunday, November 05, 2006
Friday, November 03, 2006
John Kerry's comments
I personally think it's silly that anyone even made such a big deal about this. Generally, the majority of troops in Iraq are not yet college educated. Most of them are also from middle to lower class families. These are all just facts. You can probably take anything said by any politician on any given day and blow it out of control. Why this one though? I'm not sure who is responsible for this outrage: Republicans, to change the subject even though it's actually putting more attention on Iraq? Kerry, to put more attention on Iraq? The media, to smear Kerry and/or Democrats? Or the media, to put more attention on Iraq?
And how about the fact that Hillary was one of the first to come out and say Kerry's comments were innappropriate? Just another reaon why I'm not voting for her. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FfOGqLNweo&mode=related&search=
Either way, the Kerry comment is not changing the polls, which by the way, FOX are already starting their anti-poll campaign. "Polls are never right." "Polls don't say much." Etc. etc. etc. Are they getting ready for controversial results that conflict with the poll results???
And how about the fact that Hillary was one of the first to come out and say Kerry's comments were innappropriate? Just another reaon why I'm not voting for her. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FfOGqLNweo&mode=related&search=
Either way, the Kerry comment is not changing the polls, which by the way, FOX are already starting their anti-poll campaign. "Polls are never right." "Polls don't say much." Etc. etc. etc. Are they getting ready for controversial results that conflict with the poll results???
Thursday, November 02, 2006
Who is profiting from the Iraq War?
Who is profiting from the Iraq War?
Parsons $5.3 billion
Dyncorp $1.9 billion
Trans Atlantic $5 billion
Titan $2 billion
Blackwater $200 million/ $73 million for Hurricane Katrina
CMCI $60 million
And last but not least, Halliburton - over $20 billion
All of these corporations have something in common:
Direct ties to Republicans
All of them have also mismanaged your tax dollars,
as there are millions of dollars that are unaccounted for.
Halliburton’s KBR is responsible for safe water for the troops,
yet only 4 out of 67 water tanks were safe.
Halliburton is charging $47 per six pack of soda,
soda that is already made in the Middle East.
Halliburton is charging $100 per bag of laundry they wash for the troops.
When a $80,000 vehicles gets a flat tire or stuck in the mud,
Halliburton blows it up and orders a new one, all at taxpayer expense.
Halliburton gave over 4.3 million in contributions to
PAC and Republican lobbyists.
Halliburton’ s CEO David Legar made $42 million last year.
And Dick Cheney, he continues to receive over $150,000 a year
in deferred compensation, and that’s not even including his
million dollar profits from Halliburton stock.
Meanwhile, the U.S. national debt has hit an all time high.
Even worse:
Over 3,000 American troops are dead
Over 25,000 American troops are permanently injured
To stop the corruption,
Democrats introduced legislation:
Dodd Amendment 3313- June 16, 2004-
To stop contractor fraud
Final vote: (42 Democrats, 1 Independent, 0 Republicans)
Leahy Amendment 3293- June 16, 2004-
To stop profiteering
Final vote: (45 Democrats, 1 Independent, 0 Republicans)
Dorgan Amendment 2476- November 10, 2005-
To investigate contracts
Final vote: ( Dem 42, 1 Ind, 1 Republican -Chafee R.I.)
Waxman Amendment 746- March 16, 2006-
To prohibit future contracts to those who overcharged
Final vote: (Dem 181, 1 Ind, 11 Republicans)
Dorgan Amendment 4230- June 14, 2006-
To eliminate fraud
Final vote: (42 Democrats, 0 Republicans)
Dorgan Amendment 4292- June 20, 2006-
To establish an investigative committee
Final vote: (43 Democrats, 1 Republican- Chafee- R.I.)
Unfortunetly, Congress is controlled by a Republican majority,
so none of these bills stood a chance.
Which way are you going to vote on Tuesday?
For corruption or against it?
For more information see: http://iraqforsale.org/
Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers is the story of what happens to
everyday Americans when corporations go to war. Robert Greenwald's
new documentary reveals the truth.
Sources:
United States Congressional Records
United States Pentagon Records
http://home.ourfuture.org/straighttalklive/war-profiteers_senate.html
http://home.ourfuture.org/straighttalklive/war-profiteers_house.html
http://www.publicintegrity.org/wow/bio.aspx?act=pr
http://www.faireconomy.org/press/2006/
http://www.basicint.org/pubs/Research/2004PMC.htm
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles
http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/fellows/singer
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/
http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/outsourcing_blame.php
http://home.ourfuture.org/reports/report-war-profiteers.pdf
http://iraqforsale.org/facts.php
Parsons $5.3 billion
Dyncorp $1.9 billion
Trans Atlantic $5 billion
Titan $2 billion
Blackwater $200 million/ $73 million for Hurricane Katrina
CMCI $60 million
And last but not least, Halliburton - over $20 billion
All of these corporations have something in common:
Direct ties to Republicans
All of them have also mismanaged your tax dollars,
as there are millions of dollars that are unaccounted for.
Halliburton’s KBR is responsible for safe water for the troops,
yet only 4 out of 67 water tanks were safe.
Halliburton is charging $47 per six pack of soda,
soda that is already made in the Middle East.
Halliburton is charging $100 per bag of laundry they wash for the troops.
When a $80,000 vehicles gets a flat tire or stuck in the mud,
Halliburton blows it up and orders a new one, all at taxpayer expense.
Halliburton gave over 4.3 million in contributions to
PAC and Republican lobbyists.
Halliburton’ s CEO David Legar made $42 million last year.
And Dick Cheney, he continues to receive over $150,000 a year
in deferred compensation, and that’s not even including his
million dollar profits from Halliburton stock.
Meanwhile, the U.S. national debt has hit an all time high.
Even worse:
Over 3,000 American troops are dead
Over 25,000 American troops are permanently injured
To stop the corruption,
Democrats introduced legislation:
Dodd Amendment 3313- June 16, 2004-
To stop contractor fraud
Final vote: (42 Democrats, 1 Independent, 0 Republicans)
Leahy Amendment 3293- June 16, 2004-
To stop profiteering
Final vote: (45 Democrats, 1 Independent, 0 Republicans)
Dorgan Amendment 2476- November 10, 2005-
To investigate contracts
Final vote: ( Dem 42, 1 Ind, 1 Republican -Chafee R.I.)
Waxman Amendment 746- March 16, 2006-
To prohibit future contracts to those who overcharged
Final vote: (Dem 181, 1 Ind, 11 Republicans)
Dorgan Amendment 4230- June 14, 2006-
To eliminate fraud
Final vote: (42 Democrats, 0 Republicans)
Dorgan Amendment 4292- June 20, 2006-
To establish an investigative committee
Final vote: (43 Democrats, 1 Republican- Chafee- R.I.)
Unfortunetly, Congress is controlled by a Republican majority,
so none of these bills stood a chance.
Which way are you going to vote on Tuesday?
For corruption or against it?
For more information see: http://iraqforsale.org/
Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers is the story of what happens to
everyday Americans when corporations go to war. Robert Greenwald's
new documentary reveals the truth.
Sources:
United States Congressional Records
United States Pentagon Records
http://home.ourfuture.org/straighttalklive/war-profiteers_senate.html
http://home.ourfuture.org/straighttalklive/war-profiteers_house.html
http://www.publicintegrity.org/wow/bio.aspx?act=pr
http://www.faireconomy.org/press/2006/
http://www.basicint.org/pubs/Research/2004PMC.htm
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles
http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/fellows/singer
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/
http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/outsourcing_blame.php
http://home.ourfuture.org/reports/report-war-profiteers.pdf
http://iraqforsale.org/facts.php
Friday, October 27, 2006
Coach sues, claims wife found dead rat in salad
The moral of this story: You can't even eat healthy at McDonalds if you tried.
Associated Press
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6108662?FSO1&ATT=HCP>1=8705
DALLAS (AP) - Dallas Cowboys assistant coach Todd Haley is suing a suburban McDonald's, claiming his wife and the family's live-in baby sitter found a dead rat in a salad they took home and began to eat.
The lawsuit filed Thursday in state district court seeks $1.7 million in damages, The Dallas Morning News reported on its Web site.
In addition to Haley, the Cowboys' passing game coordinator who got in a well-publicized shouting match with receiver Terrell Owens earlier this month, the suit was also filed on behalf of his wife Christine and the family's au pair, Kathryn Kelley.
A message left for McDonald's Corp. spokesman Walt Riker on Thursday evening was not immediately returned.
According to the lawsuit, Christine Haley and Kelley had eaten part of the salad purchased June 5 at a McDonald's in Southlake before the rat was discovered. The women became violently ill and endured long-lasting physical injuries, the lawsuit said.
Believed to be a juvenile roof rat, the rodent was about 6 inches long and was found on its back with its mouth opened, Scott Casterline, a spokesman for the family, told The Associated Press.
Associated Press
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6108662?FSO1&ATT=HCP>1=8705
DALLAS (AP) - Dallas Cowboys assistant coach Todd Haley is suing a suburban McDonald's, claiming his wife and the family's live-in baby sitter found a dead rat in a salad they took home and began to eat.
The lawsuit filed Thursday in state district court seeks $1.7 million in damages, The Dallas Morning News reported on its Web site.
In addition to Haley, the Cowboys' passing game coordinator who got in a well-publicized shouting match with receiver Terrell Owens earlier this month, the suit was also filed on behalf of his wife Christine and the family's au pair, Kathryn Kelley.
A message left for McDonald's Corp. spokesman Walt Riker on Thursday evening was not immediately returned.
According to the lawsuit, Christine Haley and Kelley had eaten part of the salad purchased June 5 at a McDonald's in Southlake before the rat was discovered. The women became violently ill and endured long-lasting physical injuries, the lawsuit said.
Believed to be a juvenile roof rat, the rodent was about 6 inches long and was found on its back with its mouth opened, Scott Casterline, a spokesman for the family, told The Associated Press.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
A special Halloween request from author Stephen King
A special Halloween request from author Stephen King:
Dear MoveOn member,
If I know anything, I know scary. And giving this president and this out-of-control Congress two more years to screw up our future is downright terrifying. Thankfully, this national nightmare is one we can end with—literally—a wake up call.
My friends at MoveOn.org Political Action are organizing pre-Halloween phone parties this weekend, Oct. 28th & 29th. We'll be calling progressive voters in key districts who may not turn out unless they get a friendly reminder or two. And since it's almost Halloween, we'll celebrate with an optional costume contest, some pumpkin carving (I'll be making a Jack-Abramoff-O'-Lantern) and—of course—plenty of candy.
Please click the link below to R.S.V.P. for the nearest party, or to sign up to host your own: http://pol.moveon.org/event/events/index.html?action_id=61&id=9234-2851900-IZLKnbPVRs7c6ePYmFbepA&t=5
If you're concerned about the future of this country, this is the time to get involved. The polls are telling us that this November is our best shot in over a decade to turn things around, and we've got to make the most of it.You might wonder if these reminder calls to voters actually help. I did, too. It turns out MoveOn tested this whole Call for Change program on some early elections this year, and it produced the biggest increase in actual votes of any volunteer phone bank ever studied. The failure in Iraq and the recent string of scandals have put a bunch of new districts into play. That means there are more voters to call than anyone planned, and every call we make at a party this weekend will reach a key voter who otherwise would have been missed.Come November 8th, we're all going to kick ourselves if we ignored any close races and then lost the majority in Congress by a hair. These parties are our chance to make sure that doesn't happen.Can you help end our national nightmare this Halloween weekend? Sign up to attend or host a local Call for Change Halloween party this weekend:http://pol.moveon.org/event/events/index.html?action_id=61&id=9234-2851900-IZLKnbPVRs7c6ePYmFbepA&t=6
Thanks,
Stephen King
http://political.moveon.org/donate/email.html?id=9234-2851900-IZLKnbPVRs7c6ePYmFbepA&t=7
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
October has been the deadliest month of the year
The number of American troops killed in Iraq in October reached the highest monthly total in a year Thursday after four Marines and a sailor died of wounds suffered while fighting in the same Sunni insurgent stronghold.
The U.S. military said 96 U.S. troops have died so far in October, the most in one month since October 2005, when the same number was killed. And as the month comes to an end, the courageous American hero Kevin Tillman spoke out.
After Pat’s Birthday
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/200601019_after_pats_birthday/
Posted on Oct 19, 2006
By Kevin Tillman
Editor’s note: Kevin Tillman joined the Army with his brother Pat in 2002, and they served together in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pat was killed in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004. Kevin, who was discharged in 2005, has written a powerful, must-read document.
It is Pat’s birthday on November 6, and elections are the day after. It gets me thinking about a conversation I had with Pat before we joined the military. He spoke about the risks with signing the papers. How once we committed, we were at the mercy of the American leadership and the American people. How we could be thrown in a direction not of our volition. How fighting as a soldier would leave us without a voice… until we got out.
Much has happened since we handed over our voice:
Somehow we were sent to invade a nation because it was a direct threat to the American people, or to the world, or harbored terrorists, or was involved in the September 11 attacks, or received weapons-grade uranium from Niger, or had mobile weapons labs, or WMD, or had a need to be liberated, or we needed to establish a democracy, or stop an insurgency, or stop a civil war we created that can’t be called a civil war even though it is. Something like that.
Somehow America has become a country that projects everything that it is not and condemns everything that it is.
Somehow our elected leaders were subverting international law and humanity by setting up secret prisons around the world, secretly kidnapping people, secretly holding them indefinitely, secretly not charging them with anything, secretly torturing them.
Somehow that overt policy of torture became the fault of a few “bad apples” in the military.
Somehow back at home, support for the soldiers meant having a five-year-old kindergartener scribble a picture with crayons and send it overseas, or slapping stickers on cars, or lobbying Congress for an extra pad in a helmet. It’s interesting that a soldier on his third or fourth tour should care about a drawing from a five-year-old; or a faded sticker on a car as his friends die around him; or an extra pad in a helmet, as if it will protect him when an IED throws his vehicle 50 feet into the air as his body comes apart and his skin melts to the seat.
Somehow the more soldiers that die, the more legitimate the illegal invasion becomes.
Somehow American leadership, whose only credit is lying to its people and illegally invading a nation, has been allowed to steal the courage, virtue and honor of its soldiers on the ground.
Somehow those afraid to fight an illegal invasion decades ago are allowed to send soldiers to die for an illegal invasion they started.
Somehow faking character, virtue and strength is tolerated.
Somehow profiting from tragedy and horror is tolerated.
Somehow the death of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people is tolerated.
Somehow subversion of the Bill of Rights and The Constitution is tolerated.
Somehow suspension of Habeas Corpus is supposed to keep this country safe.
Somehow torture is tolerated.
Somehow lying is tolerated.
Somehow reason is being discarded for faith, dogma, and nonsense.
Somehow American leadership managed to create a more dangerous world.
Somehow a narrative is more important than reality.
Somehow America has become a country that projects everything that it is not and
condemns everything that it is.
Somehow the most reasonable, trusted and respected country in the world has become one of the most irrational, belligerent, feared, and distrusted countries in the world.
Somehow being politically informed, diligent, and skeptical has been replaced by apathy through active ignorance.
Somehow the same incompetent, narcissistic, virtueless, vacuous, malicious criminals are still in charge of this country.
Somehow this is tolerated.
Somehow nobody is accountable for this.
In a democracy, the policy of the leaders is the policy of the people. So don’t be shocked when our grandkids bury much of this generation as traitors to the nation, to the world and to humanity. Most likely, they will come to know that “somehow” was nurtured by fear, insecurity and indifference, leaving the country vulnerable to unchecked, unchallenged parasites.
Luckily this country is still a democracy. People still have a voice. People still can take action. It can start after Pat’s birthday.
Brother and Friend of Pat Tillman,
Kevin Tillman
The U.S. military said 96 U.S. troops have died so far in October, the most in one month since October 2005, when the same number was killed. And as the month comes to an end, the courageous American hero Kevin Tillman spoke out.
After Pat’s Birthday
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/200601019_after_pats_birthday/
Posted on Oct 19, 2006
By Kevin Tillman
Editor’s note: Kevin Tillman joined the Army with his brother Pat in 2002, and they served together in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pat was killed in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004. Kevin, who was discharged in 2005, has written a powerful, must-read document.
It is Pat’s birthday on November 6, and elections are the day after. It gets me thinking about a conversation I had with Pat before we joined the military. He spoke about the risks with signing the papers. How once we committed, we were at the mercy of the American leadership and the American people. How we could be thrown in a direction not of our volition. How fighting as a soldier would leave us without a voice… until we got out.
Much has happened since we handed over our voice:
Somehow we were sent to invade a nation because it was a direct threat to the American people, or to the world, or harbored terrorists, or was involved in the September 11 attacks, or received weapons-grade uranium from Niger, or had mobile weapons labs, or WMD, or had a need to be liberated, or we needed to establish a democracy, or stop an insurgency, or stop a civil war we created that can’t be called a civil war even though it is. Something like that.
Somehow America has become a country that projects everything that it is not and condemns everything that it is.
Somehow our elected leaders were subverting international law and humanity by setting up secret prisons around the world, secretly kidnapping people, secretly holding them indefinitely, secretly not charging them with anything, secretly torturing them.
Somehow that overt policy of torture became the fault of a few “bad apples” in the military.
Somehow back at home, support for the soldiers meant having a five-year-old kindergartener scribble a picture with crayons and send it overseas, or slapping stickers on cars, or lobbying Congress for an extra pad in a helmet. It’s interesting that a soldier on his third or fourth tour should care about a drawing from a five-year-old; or a faded sticker on a car as his friends die around him; or an extra pad in a helmet, as if it will protect him when an IED throws his vehicle 50 feet into the air as his body comes apart and his skin melts to the seat.
Somehow the more soldiers that die, the more legitimate the illegal invasion becomes.
Somehow American leadership, whose only credit is lying to its people and illegally invading a nation, has been allowed to steal the courage, virtue and honor of its soldiers on the ground.
Somehow those afraid to fight an illegal invasion decades ago are allowed to send soldiers to die for an illegal invasion they started.
Somehow faking character, virtue and strength is tolerated.
Somehow profiting from tragedy and horror is tolerated.
Somehow the death of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people is tolerated.
Somehow subversion of the Bill of Rights and The Constitution is tolerated.
Somehow suspension of Habeas Corpus is supposed to keep this country safe.
Somehow torture is tolerated.
Somehow lying is tolerated.
Somehow reason is being discarded for faith, dogma, and nonsense.
Somehow American leadership managed to create a more dangerous world.
Somehow a narrative is more important than reality.
Somehow America has become a country that projects everything that it is not and
condemns everything that it is.
Somehow the most reasonable, trusted and respected country in the world has become one of the most irrational, belligerent, feared, and distrusted countries in the world.
Somehow being politically informed, diligent, and skeptical has been replaced by apathy through active ignorance.
Somehow the same incompetent, narcissistic, virtueless, vacuous, malicious criminals are still in charge of this country.
Somehow this is tolerated.
Somehow nobody is accountable for this.
In a democracy, the policy of the leaders is the policy of the people. So don’t be shocked when our grandkids bury much of this generation as traitors to the nation, to the world and to humanity. Most likely, they will come to know that “somehow” was nurtured by fear, insecurity and indifference, leaving the country vulnerable to unchecked, unchallenged parasites.
Luckily this country is still a democracy. People still have a voice. People still can take action. It can start after Pat’s birthday.
Brother and Friend of Pat Tillman,
Kevin Tillman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)