Death Camp?

Holy fuckin-A! I am having flashback horrors from World War 2 (which must also be another lifetime since I wasn't born until the 60s)! The latest news is that the US is planning on building a death camp in Guantanamo Bay. According to the report: Prisoners would be tried, convicted and executed without leaving its boundaries, without a jury and without right of appeal, "The Mail on Sunday" newspaper reported yesterday. Does anyone want to argue that Bush has nothing in common with Hitler now? There are about 680 suspects being held at that camp now for 18 months without any charges being filed or due process. This is an outrage! A Death Camp! Do you sheeple even know what this means? Do you even care? ::shaking head in disgust:: Thank you, Jerrbear, for bringing this to my attention.

A Most Excellent Commentary

Pandionna has written a most excellent letter to Europe about Bush's upcoming visit there and then to the Middle East. If you want to know what many Americans *really* think, check out her commentary!

Good Cop, Bad Cop

Do you remember just prior to the Iraq war how the Hawks and the Doves in the White House paired off against one another about how to handle Iraq? We had the Defense teams screaming "Blow them away" and the State Department saying, "let the inspectors do their jobs!" And then all of a sudden Powell crossed the line and sealed the deal against Iraq. Well, the same thing is happening with regards to Iran. According to a Times Online report, there is once again division in the Bush Administration on how to handle Iran:

Hawks in the Pentagon are pushing for a more aggressive policy against Iran�s clerics, involving increased support for the country�s reformist movement in an effort to topple the Islamic rulers.

The Pentagon case for supporting the reformers is based partly on demographics. Half the Iranian population is under 20, with 62 per cent under 25, and most are pro-reform. American help could tip the balance, they say.

Officials in the State Department and White House are more cautious, arguing that any sign of US involvement with the reformist movement would discredit the reformers. But they have yet to offer an alternative way forward.

If Americans had memories longer than a couple of weeks, they would remember that this is exactly how things went down with Iraq. Good Cops, Bad Cops. Come on, Tehran, you know you want to play!

By the way, Mr. Bush, where did you say those weapons are?

Did someone forget to tell Rummy that Bush is still holding out hope for finding that huge arsenal of chemical, bio and nuclear weapons? Apparently Rummy is marching to his own beat. According to this report, Rummy told the Council on Foreign Relations (and we know no one would want to piss off THIS think tank) that The speed of the US advance might have caught Iraq by surprise, he said. "It is also possible that they decided that they would destroy them prior to a conflict."

Well duh! Mr. Rummy. Isn't that what all those captured Iraqis have been telling you? Saddam ordered what small amount of weapons he had left to be destroyed to stave off a US military confrontation. It was all over the news, Mr. Rummy! But did you damn HAWKS take that into consideration? HELL NO! You maintained your rhetoric of WMD and bombed the shit out of Iraq anyway!

Joseph Cirincione, of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington stated, "They don't have a good explanation, and therefore are trying to come up with as long a list as possible." He further commented, "But it's impossible to destroy or hide the quantities the Administration said they had without our noticing it." And then last month, Bush chimed in with: "there's going to be scepticism until people find out there was, in fact, a weapons of mass destruction program".

Dammit all, Mr. Bush, we KNOW there was a WMD program at one time because WE SOLD THEM THE WEAPONS! But if you assholes in Washington had listened to Scott Ritter over a year ago (instead of discrediting him) when he said that the inspectors had destroyed almost 90% of Saddam's arsenal before CLINTON pulled our inspectors out in 1997 (to once again bomb the hell out of Iraq), then you would know, Mr. Bush, that Saddam didn't have anything substantial to attack anyone with. Furthermore, Mr. Bush, how in the hell do you propose a government to maintain its arsenal when sanctions have been in place for 12 years and spare parts ran out long before then? And how do you suppose chemical and bio weapons can be much of a danger when they only have a shelf-life of less than 5-10 years? Those sanctions didn't even allow medical supplies to heal Iraqi civilians dying from our Depleted Uranium after the first Gulf War because Saddam might have used them to advance his chemical and bio weapons. Let me make this so clear, Mr. Bush, that even your simple mind can understand it: NO SUPPLIES = NO WEAPONS! Do you understand now?!? Would someone please start Impeachment proceedings on these bastards now?!?

Is It Really National Defense or Is the Bush Administration STILL Hiding Something?

I still insist that there was something fishy about the whole September 11, 2001 attack on the WTC and the Pentagon. And every time the Bush Administration blocks something, stalls on something, or prevents something directly linked to that day and those events, it just further justifies my belief that Bush and his cronies were in on that whole deal. According to this report from Newsweek, the Bush Administration is once again blocking the release of an 800-page congressional report on 911. They claim that they are blocking it for two reasons:

One document is called the PDB, the President�s Daily Brief. The congressional report contains details of PDBs provided to Bush (and top national- security aides) prior to 9-11. The PDBs included warnings about possible attacks by Al Qaeda. (One PDB was given at the presidential ranch in Crawford, Texas, on Aug. 6, and dealt with the possibility that Al Qaeda might hijack airplanes.) But an administration review committee overseen by CIA Director George Tenet has refused to declassify anything that even refers to the existence of PDBs�though they are described on the CIA�s own Web site (www.CIA.gov). A U.S. intelligence official said the review committee must consult with the White House before releasing anything. But the official denied charges by Florida Sen. Bob Graham, a Democratic presidential candidate, that Tenet�s review committee was covering up White House embarrassments. �We�re not playing politics,� the official says. �Our concern is national security.�

The other hot-button issue is the Saudis, sources say. The report discusses evidence that individuals with Saudi government connections may have provided the hijackers aid. One of them is Omar al-Bayoumi, a Saudi student who helped two hijackers get apartments in San Diego. The administration won�t declassify references to al-Bayoumi even though, in response to a NEWSWEEK story, an FBI spokesman confirmed last November that he was being investigated. The report also includes interviews with U.S. officials about Saudi cooperation in the war on terror. Many were critical of the Saudis. The administration is declassifying only the response by former FBI director Louis Freeh praising Saudi assistance on the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing case. The U.S. intelligence official said that, in response to a letter cosigned by Graham and Rep. Porter Goss, House Intelligence Committee GOP chair, the review committee was considering allowing more portions of the report to become public.

Why do I get the feeling that there is a huge chess game being played on a global scale and we, the peons of the world, are just the pawns?