The Road to Truth 2012

This US election is so far more steeped in desperate lies than I can recall in 20 years of my following such things.

But don't run away with the notion that I'm referring to misstated facts or selective filleting and twisting of certain stats because it's even more disingenuous that that; stuff is simply being made up. 

The republicans gave the Dems a gift in 2008 with Palin and they really just had to sit back and watch the car crash but this year, without a "silly" VP on the ticket and a Presidential candidate that can't be targeted too much on personal issues (although the tax return thing has got to be hurting Mitt), the GOP still feels the need to play really dirty.

They continue to play on the "removal of the work requirement from Welfare" (lies), the $700bn removed from Medicare to "pay for Obamacare" (lies), the "you didn't built your business" (Obama simply did not say that), the death panels (lies), the birther bullshit, the abortion voting history of Obama (he did not vote to not protect savable foetuses) and much more.

The weight of utter lies set out here is much heavier on the GOP side than the Dem side and it tells you all you need to know about them.

Also, Ryan just lied about a car factory (closed under Bush) where he blamed Obama for not having it remain open.

The GOP fall over themselves to say how counterproductive any non-military element of Government is to "economic growth" but they take pork and subsidies willingly (Bridge to nowhere is one of countless examples of such hypocrisy).

Romney, just like McCain, will say just about anything to get the GOP behind him or get him elected - even if it directly contradicts his past political expressions and actions (e.g. healthcare). Maybe more to come from me as the election progresses.

It flies by...

As we hurtle towards the 10th anniversary of 9/11 (11th September for Anglophiles), I think what seems to strike many people is the surprise at how little it seems to have changed the world.

Yes, we've had a couple of awful wars and a messy arab spring. But the Afghan and Iraq wars were ultimately wars of choice and the world and the US has stubbornly refused to be more just.

Bush somehow managed a second term despite 9/11 happening on his watch and the obvious failure (and transparent agenda and incompetence) of Iraq.  

When people said that this was an attack on the American way of life, they were damn right but they were dead wrong when they claimed that it was under threat or in any way vulnerable. When I witnessed the events, I did believe this was huge and I predicted wars to follow but outside of that, the economy steamed on and politics continued on its road to polarisation.

I think events like Katrina, the credit crunch and others have contributed at least equally to where we are now. I have to admit it doesn't feel 10 years ago and in some ways we've stood still but there have been a lot of slow-burn, non-headlining changes that have changed society and the world.

Oil has continued its upward trend, debt has become a dirty word and people in the Middle East have run out of patience with their pathetic dictators.

I had many questions in the aftermath of the event as I looked at the remarkable opportunism, staggering unpreparedness and downright odd behaviour of government and the president. So many questions were officially avoided and people forget about the disturbing links to the Bin Laden family the Bushes had (James Baker, a long-time friend and former Sec of State, was hired as a lawyer to defend the Bin Laden family from 9/11 victims' families).

But over time you just had to absorb the facts and the full picture and see that, yes, Bush was an incredible arsehole and the family has seriously murky history but 9/11 itself was as it was and no less heartbreaking for it.

By the way, I was critical of the official JFK assassination story (although I never claimed to believe anything else specific) but I now think it's correct and accurate after having all my questions answered. I still think RFK stinks to high heaven, though.

Anyway, I digress. So, what now? Well, I don't see Obama winning again because the propaganda machines out there haven't stopped their drivel since even before he won and the idiotic Tea Party has seduced many into thinking what is effectively Libertarianism is somehow middle ground.

What I do see is eventually, the US's imperialism shrinking (partly due to this libertatrian rise) and China - possibly along with India if she can stop being so corrupt and look outwards - to slowly increase its might bloodlessly and near-silently. Beyond that, we're talking pure guesswork.

I just hope we don't need to see any such cataclysms and wars again in my lifetime. Hope. That's it.

NYC “Mosque” and 9/11

So I write on the 9th anniversary of 9/11. I’ve not been especially active here for a number of reasons but I thought that, as this community centre thing along with the Qu’ran burning controversy was climaxing, I’d weigh in.

Anyone who’s read other posts in this blog will not be surprised to learn that I feel that if no further buildings with a religious purpose were built anywhere in the world, I’d most likely rejoice. However, this has no specific relationship to Islam, just religion.

What I have to say is, though, that the US constitution was written for a reason and that those who performed the 9/11 attacks were neither American (unlike those Muslims who would mainly seek to use the building) nor part of the Islam practised by the Muslims involved. In fact, only a miniscule proportion of Muslims even think that Al Qaeda are in the smallest way justified in their actions.

I fail to see how these indisputable facts could in any way lead you to even get slightly annoyed by the building of a prayer centre in the NYC location proposed. To just deepen the logic, we all know that many Muslims were killed by terrorists in the twin towers and that Al Qaeda kills Muslims as much as any other creed. If you want to lump in the Taliban with Al Qaeda (a significant simplification) then the Taliban have probably butchered more of their fellow Afghan Muslims (plus Al Qaeda doing the same in Iraq) than several 9/11s combined.

So, given that human beings of all creeds, colours and religions have suffered grievously at the hand of the frankly insane clique known as Al Qaeda, how on earth can there be a problem with this centre just because Al Qaeda claim that their own interpretation of the book that these organisers follow (but in no way share) is the correct one? If any one of these Muslims seeking to build this centre were to walk into an Al Qaeda base, they’d be just a likely to be slaughtered as would George Bush. This is simply the truth and if anyone cannot see this, they need to read more.

The book-burning fiasco was, of course, yet another example of how completely ill-informed idiots, who seem also to be fundamentalists (branding Islam evil – why? because it’s not Christian?) can skew debates in the US further and further away from any semblance of fact. I truly applaud Obama with how he has scolded this tosser and continues to try to pull the debate away from generalised anti-Islamic claptrap.

It’s almost funny how much Islam actually has in common with Judaism and Christianity. In fact, many of their customs are in some way one that Judaism and Christianity did follow but almost “forgot” about. Certainly, there’s a fair bit of sense in parts of it. I think it’s also fair to say that there’s nothing like a settled approach to the more headline-catching parts of Islam (e.g. Hijab or Women’s place in society) and trying to tar the very fragmented Islamic faith with a single brush is contrary to fact and counterproductive.

If all three faiths would “get” each other and realise their vast swathes of common ground, we could all see peace a lot sooner.

Obamalamadingdong

[Sources used are TV and radio so no links, I’m afraid]

We’re getting ever closer to history truly being made when Barack Hussein Obama takes the reigns as president of the United States – my that’s a fine set of words, innit!

However, as many suspected, a nation has decided to both get moving with a plan that only the outgoing Bush would tolerate and test Obama on the international front before he even has his feet under the table. The tactical master and bull in a china shop that is Israel is beating the hell out of Gaza because some rockets have nearly killed people. Somehow they think that killing hundreds of Palestinian civilians is proportional to the miniscule number they have suffered in comparison.

As many an objective observer has said, you can’t justify it by saying that Hamas are hiding in heavily populated areas because Gaza is one big heavily populated area! There are no serene tracts of rural idyll in which Hamas might seek sanctuary and all that nonsense – this isn’t Afghanistan.

Also, as many a sage neutral has observed, everyone knows that this will be resolved somehow via talking so why delay the inevitable? It would stretch the realms of sanity if Israel seriously thought they could just extend their actions long enough to wipe out Hamas and permanently stop missiles from flying out of there. And now we see, as tiresomely predictable as ever, the Lebanese militants joining in.

So here we are, with Obama swamped in a country drowning in debt and recession whilst the main region it’s supposed to have any clout in – in a direct, getting their hands dirty, level – is starting, once again, to slide into conflict. If the right things aren’t done, the whole region could be sucked into it. But I can only hope that those in the thick of it understand the risks and will make the necessary detours to avoid Armageddon.

He will be (ably?) assisted by his VP in this matter, of course. If Biden is clueless on this then you’d have to assume everyone else would be given his huge experience in such delicate matters. I’m afraid I’m just not well informed enough to just his past record in detail but from a distance you have to be grateful Obama picked him for VP at this tense time.

Obama’s $800bn package to invest in the long-term future of the US is broadly sensible. The infrastructure, both steel and concrete and electronic, has been neglected for an embarrassingly long time. This investment is simply so they can catch up with the Koreas, Frances and Germanys of this world. Universal access to broadband has got to be a minimum goal for every country for whom it can be within reach.

I think, too, that the contrast between the sublime impression of Obama embarking on a brand new presidency set for a more sensible course and our little Gordon Brown already losing steam barely 18 months into the job is starting to tangibly hurt him. Brown just has the air of a dour accountant who gives me the feeling that he’s just a little over confident of his abilities. Exceptionally clever though he is, running a nation – and more importantly a democratic nation with diverse views – is just not his bag. Chancellor I could buy but I never sensed he was really cut out to the be the PM.

But I don’t want Cameron’s Tories in either! Oh Blow!

McCain nailed on Healthcare

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Fact Check: Are business groups critical of McCain’s health plan? « - Blogs from CNN.com

Well, this really looks like something Obama could capitalise on next debate. And when McCains appalling healthcare idea really becomes understood by voters, who the hell would wanna vote him in?

Fuller thoughts on Presidential and UK politics

I'll deal with the US first:

On analysing the polling patterns, it's looking more and more sewn up for Obama and the debates are going his way. The residual tactics of the GOP seem nasty, desperate and are old hat - I really think the public are sick of dumbed down discourse.

 

The VP debate had Palin looking like a cocky local station news anchor, winking in the "see you tomorrow at the same time" way and faking her folksiness to painful effect. I suspected she'd try this hideous flannelling tactic she used so effectively in local politics to this national forum and it failed as badly as I thought it would.

 

Sure, pundits can pundit on about "holding her own" and "beating expectations" but the US public are clearly horrified by this useless, misguided VP pick. She made statements such as "we need more oversight and regulation" but then next minute talk about government "getting out of the way" and so on. She seemed oblivious to the contradiction - but I don't think the US public is.

 

McCain has judged this whole campaign quite appallingly and certain key plays have gone very wrong - not least the "suspension" of the campaign. Palin sucks at least as hard as Quayle but McCain is nowhere near as strong as Bush Snr was. You combine that with the context in which the republican president is currently less popular than scabies and he's got a (surely) unassailable uphill battle.

 

Meanwhile, in the UK, Gordon Brown survived conference season and has just completed a reshuffle. Absurdly, for someone trying to show strength and new ideas he's brought PETER MANDLESON back into the cabinet. You read that upper case right. Frigging Mandleson - who is having a kidney stone removed, incidentally. Staggering is probably the best word.

 

So the Tories are resurgent if you believe the media, though I can't truly believe that there's any real swell of warm feelings towards them so much as they've had time to thin out previous Major/Thatcher staff and the bad memories aren't as severe.

 

It's a shame because Brown could have done really well - especially if he'd followed through on the "listening" promises he banged on about when he took over (remember those speeches?). Now, the country seems destined to be at the mercy of the most "expediency"-driven Tory party in history with some proper right-wingers in the mix that have not yet garnered attention.

 

The economy is tanking and I can't help but blame Labour and the US administration (corrupt beyond belief and prostrate at the altar of all powerful corporations) for the whole thing. Many were warning of this for about 5 years but nowt was done. Which is usually the way and, although i don't see armageddon hoving in to view, I do think it's going to be a very very rough ride for a good couple of years. But I'd rather be going through this in the UK than the (almost) safety-net free US. I really fear for the millions who are going to suffer hideously due to this exhibition of how dark, amoral and dangerous unfettered capitalism really is. I've always believed the system was this bad but it seems to be a revelation to many right-wingers over there.

The VP debate - a brief review

Looks like American voters are no longer fooled by Bush-like waffle and "folksiness" and can understand someone approaching a statesperson when they see one. Bodes very well for Obama.
 
Meanwhile, Palin was the most dishonest debater of the two. Shock horror.

Post Convention-ness

Two epic American conventions and by god they were as American as they've ever been! Yes, we had the usual theatrical gimmicks, lack of any political debate of any kind, talking points co-ordinated, wheeled out and used as if video tape didn't exist before September 2008. And such tree melting disingenuousness and cynicism the moon turned green instead of its usual brain grey.

Can we please pause for a moment to applaud the McCain VP pick. Not because it was a good pick or because it is in any way clever or was even presented well but because of the 1000-watt-torch-in-your face blatant cynicism which it demonstrated. I mean, a cursory watch of the average Daily Show will show you ever deepening examples of McCain's power-hungry pandering in stark contrast to previous remarks but this Palin move is the most staggering yet.

He's hardly met the woman, she's hardly held office in anger, she's helped her constituencies pork out like bandits and she holds more core policies in opposition to him than I do! And she has similar genitalia to a certain failed Democrat Presidential candidate. Forgot about that...nearly.

This is a metaphoric wave of McCain's bare arse to American women and in particular Clinton supporters who should see it as worthy of pure contempt. It is also a work of pure evil genius in countless ways not least of which is the delight I have had in watching the GOP contort itself into strangulating positions in order not to weep into their hands on Meet the Press.

McCain: "Boo, hiss to lobbyists!"

Fact: McCain's senior campaign staff are leading lobbyists.

McCain: "Obama is just not experienced enough to be President!"

Fact: McCain has selected a VP who's sole significant political office is governor of the least populous state in the US for under 2 years and who is younger than Obama.

McCain: "I'm an agent for change."

Fact: McCain has voted with his party almost the whole time in recent history.

You could go on for pages...

************************************************

I must confess I didn't watch the Obama speech or much of the Dems. I just kinda thought it'd go well no matter what and it seems everything basically went swimmingly. It's good to see that Obama is calling the GOP out when it really starts taking the piss with the reality-reversing "spin". He'll not call it lies but he'll use pretty much every term in the English language it equates to.

Amazingly, Gordon Brown has come out in favour of Obama. I don't know whether that's a good or bad sign...

The rest of the world favours Obama too but then they also favoured Kerry so it simply don't mean much. I'm really gonna just watch it all play out.

The Daily Show has been truly on the ball throughout the last two weeks. I watched the DVD of the 2004 election season a while back and it was not a patch on this year. This week they have effortlessly slain every single "selling point" of the GOP McCain/Palin/Guiliani/Thompson et al have put forward by laying out as clear as day their 180 degree about faces on subjects and O'Reilly being only one of the guilty many.

I'm tired now but some immediate reaction is now up. :-)

America...can't decide 2008

Well we're finally tiptoeing through the Election Season proper of the US 2008 presidential election and it's starting out rather farcically, if you ask me.
 
Four different winners, none of which were predicted in December and some which weren't even predicted 12 hours before the primary itself!
 
Well, I have to say as politicians go, I do feel there is a fair range of talent out there, so I can imagine this could be a strong factor in making both GOP and Dem races so open. But most of the Republicans are either unpalatably right-wing or religious (e.g. Huckaby and Romney) or unpleasant buffoons (e.g. McCain, Romney and Giuliani). McCain is bland and too hawkish, although well versed in Washington cross-party dealing, and the others smell of fakeness, power hunger, or plain wrongness (anti-evolution Huckaby).
 
The Dems have a Robert Kennedy, a schoolteacher with teeth and a little southern man with nice words.
 
Obviously, all breath should be held until Super Duper Tuesday (only in America!) where the real shakedown will start. Literally no one can confidently call it for either party so it just boils down to who you want to win yourself.
 
Me, if Obama really is a force powerful enough to even get into the whitehouse, then he will be a good president. Just getting the whitehouse for him will be such a massive achievement that the talent, energy and policies he would have to have put forward will have to have been so good as to mean he would have to perform well. So I think in this sense, the process will find him out, will flush out whether he really has got what it takes. So if he wins the election then I'll be happy because of this rationale.
 
If he wins the nomination but not the presidency, I will have rather Hillary had won the nomination. I hope this makes sense!
 
To break it down beyond the nomination, I would like to see Edwards as VP nom, whoever wins. Imagine a black president and woman VP or vice versa, crikey, the US (middle class) wouldn't recognise itself!
 
On the GOP side, the least worst is unquestionably McCain. Giuliani is incompetent, Romney is sleaze personified, Huckaby is unacceptable, Paul is a libertarian mentalist (no income tax, my arse) and I can't even remember the other fella.
 
Meanwhile, I'm hungry and have to go. :-)

Unspeak

I've read the book and I read the blog.

This is essential for all literate human beings to do, in my opinion, brilliant stuff.

http://unspeak.net/

Rhys Jones

OK, so we've got some more hype over a killing. Now it is a very sad death and no one can possibly argue otherwise but the hype is incredible.

I have to say though that in many ways I go along with it because it serves a purpose. It serves to show the whole city united in horror and disgust at the murder and to possibly shame some key youths into squealing. It appears to be working and I expect it to die down now.

The whole problem with youth violence and other lower level crime is that the media have to report significant incidents but it is not reflective of the situation. What I mean is that it can't be denied that plenty of crime is committed by youths but it simply isn't anarchy UK either. Crime is falling but crime is still "bad" and should be combated and this tension beign mishandled by the media makes for a distortion of the wider truth.

Nasty crimes and accidents always come about in the school holidays but the obvious signs that adolescents can get their hands on guns is a worrying development. I'm sure the police are working on getting to grips with this supply but in a more intelligence driven method, not so much in the public glare. Too much hype will make getting guns trendy, the next must have after some make of trainer or other. They should try to calm fears and suggest only scumbags use guns. Make it unglamorous.

Gonzales has buggered off at last. But, as with Rove, the timing seems a little too convenient and will only serve to reduce the damage further Senate probing can cause. The impeachment of Bush is long overdue and he has been protected solely because the US is in two wars it can't get out of. If this were a peace-time president and all the non-Iraq scandals had happened, he'd have been out on his ear within 4 years. But Iraq did happen and that is the biggest of all reasons for an impeachment, ironically. If Iraq had been over by now, again impeachment would be more than just a dream.

I saw Barack Obama on the Daily show recently and the difference between him and Bush is like the difference between Cartman and Stephen Fry. America needs someone like him to bring some semblance of sanity and real humanity to the White House. I think Americans are sick to the back teeth with dogma and rhetoric and want someone who will shake sense into the Beltway and the Executive.

He seems to be essentially a more bearable Clinton with all the charisma of a Kennedy but less of the ultra-elite-wanting-to-run-the-show about him. All other candidates in the far-too-long campaign are either far too hot, blunt and thuggish or so cold and/or calculated they make Thatcher seem homely. We appear to have a wily but ultimately passable prime minister in office here and if we can just get Obama in power over there we would have a fairly decent pairing on our hands. I just think that having Obama as president would be too good to be true and therefore, something will stop it. It will either be more GOP corruption messing with the election or something else.

The GOP candidates range from the annoying - Guiliani - to the most cynical politician on this side of the universe - Romney. Not one of them have learnt from Bush's utterly miserable presidency. Not one. In fact, several of the front-runners seem to think that acting like Bush on steroids is the way to go! What are they on??!

Rove

Ah, can you feel the sun on your face even when indoors? Can you hear the sound of children laughing whilst on a subway train? Well that's probably because Karl Rove has finally quit.

 

Rove sets just about everyone's teeth on edge not because he is a Spin Doctor, not because he looks a bit like a Hitler toady, not even because he has been perceived to be the brains and, some say, ventriloquist for Bush but because he has done virtually nothing else his entire life but run (dirty) campaigns for Republicans. What I mean is he has, since he just left short pants, been playing Machiavelli behind the scenes of local and national politics. He has never been a politician but he has backed up and, indeed, crushed them consistently for his entire working life. What sort of person does that? And that's why he gets such an instinctively negative reaction from virtually everyone.

 

We think of him as a sort of bullied nerd getting is own back in a nerdy way. As a nerd who uses the swaggering jocks, like Bush, who probably used to goose him and trip him up in corridors to "beat up" other jocks that use words the middle classes automatically grimace at such as "social justice" and "pro-choice". He seems like a self-satisfied proxy-bully, if you will.

 

His conduct in political battles has been bruising and gloves-off his whole career and yet the god damn American public (or, at least enough of them) bought it all and voted for his man. The sheer breath-taking success of his strategies to shape debates and even vocabulary to his aims using the, let's face it, not-exactly-resistant media truly is a modern wonder.

 

A couple of examples:

 

"Tax relief": - Rove got Bush talking about "Relieving the tax burden" and coining the term "tax relief". Why? Because that meant journalists could ask Democrats, "Are you against tax relief?" Now who would say "no" to that and want to win elections? By painting taxes as fundamentally evil without caveat and then describing tax cuts for the rich as tax relief, it makes it sound like the solution to a problem. Everyone got suckered into it. Very clever.

 

"The surge":- This little piece of spin has worked internationally even if journalists choose to precede the word surge with "so-called" as if to excuse them for peddling it. The increase, basically escalation, of troop numbers is open-ended and the extension of the presence of these troops is being continually pushed by the White House so how is this a "surge"? The use of the word "surge" suggests a temporary increase, a short-term spike. This is simply not the case with this tactic. Troop numbers are simply being increased to nearly invasion levels and doing their best to strangle the insurgent-fostered civil war. They're just send more men in. It's not a surge as there's simply no date set for these numbers to lower. Would another increase in numbers be termed another "surge"?

 

So he's been effective and for that he gets objective kudos but then, so might the architects of the holocaust for so efficiently building such a monstrously efficient genocidal infrastructure. The purpose and motives of their "inspiration" is far too wrong for us to contemplate really praising the git. Merely getting Bush elected (speech marks should be added to that word for the 2000 election, of course) should be enough for him to be damned to Hades.

 

August

Got a spare twenty minutes so my pronouncements here won't have links but nothing I'll say here can't be discovered yourself.

 

We have a new prime minister and Karl Rove is departing. We see the White House maintaining the line that the US has gotta stay there and be more aggressive, if anything. We also see Bush employ Vietnam in his argument to continue in Iraq and, in the process, make several false statements about the East Asian debacle. I notice only a lone reporter on MSNBC actually came up with the truth on that.

 

I've also just watched John Pilger's latest film about principally South America and how it serves as the most illuminating example of America's imperial tendencies. Although far from neutral - the tea and cakes interview with Chavez was a little desperately unchallenging - it nevertheless had a very strong case.

 

It can be found to view on Information Clearing House so have a watch. In it, you will see a former CIA agent expounding the overarching policy the US has to decide when and where it will overthrow governments, democratic or otherwise, as it sees fit. There is no moral imperative here, just self interest or "national security". You'll also see the true story of the coup that attempted to topple Chavez of Venezuela and how the White House and American media perpetuated the lies the fascists who were involved had concocted.

 

Chavez is, without doubt, a bit of a tosser. He is, however, a classic Latin American politician "of the people". Larger than life, bombastic, fiery and passionate. He is a true leader and he takes risks. When he came to power, a constitution was written and articles of it are written on food packets to drive home that the people are the government. In a country as lopsided but as wealthy as Venezuela, the only way to have enough change in a short enough time so that equality can be reached is to use some form of socialist model.

 

I'm not a socialist but when you've had decades of capitalists, fascists and corrupt officials taking the piss, you need to swing the other way for a time before you settle down. I strongly suspect that had Cuba not been stamped on and ostracised by American when Castro turned up that by now Cuba would more closely resemble Portugal. Instead, to keep the country together, authoritarianism was unavoidable. 

 

Well, my 20 minutes is up. I hope to write a bit more later. 

YouTube - What George W. Bush Really Did At Emma E. Booker

YouTube - What George W. Bush Really Did At Emma E. Booker:

The good old MSM

I've been grateful for the last week or so that I have access to non-UK news channels. If I hadn't I would have been largely snoozing my non-work hours away. Why? Because of this extremely tiresome missing girl story that is dominating the news networks.

 

I'm entirely empathetic towards the family affected but I'm being asked to care exponentially more about this particular missing child than any other. This I think is offensive.

 

It seems to me entirely arbitrary that her story has been picked up so heavily. Each news organisation has flown out some top names to cover this thing just because she's a cute little 3 year old. It's not like they have the excuse that it's a slow news period.

 

The end of the football season is looming, Blair has announced his resignation and Brown has walked on stage finally, the Iraq war is still in stalemate whilst Afghanistan gets scarcely a mention. In the days since Maddy's disappearence, dozens of Iraqis have died and several other kids have gone missing unreported.

 

The fact is I believe that something like 1000 kids (it might be people but either way...) go missing every year in Britain and one woman a week is killed by her partner. So what the hell makes this story any more worthwhile telling? There is no answer other than "because it caught on".

 

Live feeds of church services, reporters spending minutes on air reading cards on some street or other, interviews with anyone who shares blood with the kid, jingoistic criticism (learnt from Fox News, I shouldn't wonder) of the Portuguese police and all whilst a kid has not been found. It's a week long rolling report on essentially nothing happening and it bores me mental.

The Blog | Tom Tomorrow: What They Said | The Huffington Post

How the American right-wing talked bollocks on Iraq from beginning to... well, there hasn't been an end. Click on image to view full page.
The Blog Tom Tomorrow: What They Said The Huffington Post

Sweet Bill Maher clip

Fantastic Bill Maher Op Ed clip on Bush

Thanks to CrooksandLiars.com.

BBC NEWS | World | Americas | 'No proof' of Iran nuclear arms

BBC NEWS World Americas 'No proof' of Iran nuclear arms

Well, there you are. I said this was a complete fabrication, as per the usual Neocon strategy from the 70s onwards. And as it usually runs, they are pronouncing certainty that Iran is developing weapons without anything like solid proof of it actually happening.

Neocons turn on Bush for incompetence over Iraq war | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited

Neocons turn on Bush for incompetence over Iraq war Special reports Guardian Unlimited

Ah, but thousands if not millions of us were saying well before the war that an invasion would be countrerproductive and end in tears. It didn't take "Delphic" (to quote Perle in thsi article) powers to see where we'd end up. Let's face it though. We went WAY WAY WAY beyond incompetence in describing Bush et al, a long time ago...

BBC NEWS | Business | US stops audit of Iraq rebuilding

BBC NEWS Business US stops audit of Iraq rebuilding

Well I'm stunned. Absolutely stunned.




Not.