Day: August 9, 2006

Tony Snow: President Bush 41 Caused 9/11

Trish

Today White House spokesperson Tony Snow said:

Now, when the United States walked away, in the opinion of Osama bin Laden in 1991, bin Laden drew from that the conclusion that Americans were weak and wouldn’t stay the course, and that led to September 11th.

Snow is referring to the fact that after U.S. forces drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait at the end of the first Gulf War in 1991, Pres. George H. W. Bush and his team — including then Sec. of Defense Dick Cheney and then chairmain of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell — decided to cut and run instead of going to Baghdad to topple Saddam Hussein.

This decision by George Herbert Walker Bush in 1991, says the spokesman for the current Pres. Bush, was perceived as a sign of weakness by Osama bin Laden — a flaw in the American character that led him to decide to attack the United States 10 years later.

Gonna be fun at the family get-together at Kennebunkport this fall.

Wes Clark: ‘Blind Allegiance to George W. Bush’ Makes Us Less Secure

Jon Ponder

Wesley Clark on Lieberman:

You see, despite what Joe Lieberman believes, invading Iraq and diverting our attention away from Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden is not being strong on national security. Blind allegiance to George W. Bush and his failed “stay the course” strategy is not being strong on national security. And no, Senator Lieberman, no matter how you demonize your opponents, there is no “antisecurity wing” of the Democratic Party.

Poll: 30% Can’t Name Year of 9/11 Attacks

Jon Ponder

Not since the attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941, has a date lived more in infamy than September 11, 2001. And yet, according to this poll, nearly a third of Americans can’t name the year the attacks occurred:

Some 30 percent of Americans cannot say in what year the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against New York’s World Trade Center and the Pentagon in Washington took place, according to a poll published in the Washington Post newspaper.
While the country is preparing to commemorate the fifth anniversary of the attacks that claimed nearly 3,000 lives and shocked the world, 95 percent of Americans questioned in the poll were able to remember the month and the day of the attacks, according to Wednesday’s edition of the newspaper.

But when asked what year, 30 percent could not give a correct answer.

Of that group, six percent gave an earlier year, eight percent gave a later year, and 16 percent admitted they had no idea whatsoever.

This memory black hole is essentially the problem of the older crowd: 48 percent of those who did not know were between the ages of 55 and 64, and 47 percent were older than 65, according to the poll.

Be afraid.

Iranians Clone Lamb, Say Results Don’t Reflect How Well They’ll Do with Nuclear Fusion

Buck Banks

Cloning ain’t rocket science: The Associated Press is reporting that Iranian scientists have completed the country’s first animal cloning. The medical team said the fact that the cloned lamb died just minutes after birth was not a reflection on how well Iran could handle complex nuclear fusion techniques. The doctors said they plan future experiments in genetics and stem cell research, and noted, defensively, that the Scottish cloned sheep Dolly only lived to be six years old.

“If this is the best they can do cloning sheep, how well do you think they are going to handle yellow cake uranium?”
— Condi Rice

Iran’s cloning program is just part of the Islamic regime’s ambitions to become a regional center for medical, aerospace and nuclear technology, which has led to an international showdown over Western claims that Tehran also seeks atomic weapons.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice reiterated the West’s trepidations about Tehran developing nuclear weapons: “If this is the best they can do cloning sheep, how well do you think they are going to handle yellow cake uranium?”

“We learned a lot about cloning during the experiment. It made us more hopeful about further cases,” said Dr. Morteza Hosseini, a member of cloning team at Isfahan Royan Institute in central Iran.

Hosseini said the cloned sheep died five minutes after birth Aug. 2 due to respiratory problems. The female sheep implanted with the cloned embryo gave birth a week ahead of schedule and was healthy, he said. Hosseini said the ragout of cloned lamb with carrots over pilaf was indistinguishable in flavor or texture to ragout made with conventionally bred lamb.

Hosseini said Iranian researchers in Tehran and Isfahan expect to carry out more cloning experiments and test more recipes over the coming months.

Poll: Dems Might Win Big in ’06, But ’08 Looks Dicey

Buck Banks

Gallery of losers: National Journal’s PollTrack notes that while Americans may favor Democrats in the 2006 midterm elections, the outlook is anything but certain for the minority party’s presidential contenders in 2008.

About a third of respondents (35 percent) to a Gallup poll released this morning said Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., would have the best chance of defeating a Republican in the 2008 presidential election. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards (D) was the second-highest vote-getter among the four Democrats tested with 24 percent; former Vice President Al Gore and Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry (D) received 17 percent and 13 percent, respectively.

Still, should Clinton be the nominee, a majority of respondents said she’ll make a better candidate than both Gore and Kerry

Thirty-four percent said there are Democrats other than the four named above who can prevail over the next Republican presidential nominee. But, according to Gallup’s analysis, Democratic respondents are not overly optimistic: Forty-six percent agreed and the same amount disagreed that some other Democrat can succeed. Eight percent don’t have an opinion at this point.

Still, should Clinton be the nominee, a majority of respondents said she’ll make a better candidate than both Gore and Kerry were in the last two presidential contests. Respondents didn’t think, however, that she will be a better competitor than her husband was; 58 percent said she’d make a worse contender than Bill Clinton in 1992.

Let’s review the choices again: Hillary Clinton, who voted to go to war in Iraq and who would be unlikely — as the first female candidate for U.S. president — to win; John Edwards, an empty suit who never even served a full term as senator from North Carolina (and who lost); Al Gore, who had the election stolen from and who’s “Gone Hollywood” and says he isn’t running anyway; and Kerry, who blew the last election so badly he should be disqualified from playing politics. If that’s the best the Dems can do, I guess they’ll just have to be content to control half of Congress and put up with at least four more years of Republican shenanigans until the electorate gets completely fed up with the GOP.

Socialist Perspective: Israel Is Pursuing Ethnic Cleansing, Border Expansion In Southern Lebanon

Buck Banks

Truth or distortion: One of my guilty pleasures is subscribing to the World Socialist Web Site. Not because I am a socialist, per se, but because it offers a perspective on world events that is very different from the U.S. mainstream media that has some value in occasinally jarring one’s mind out of its rhetorical ruts. Today’s column by Bill Van Auken, “Israeli war crimes aimed at ‘cleansing’ south Lebanon,” raises issues and draws parallels that question U.S. and Israeli motives in the region.

And while the world responds with condemnation of Hugo Chavez’ incediary comments about how Israel is doing to the Lebanese what Hitler did to the Jews, Van Auken makes a couple of similar discomfiting assertions, but uses different — and more effective — examples. You can read the entire column here. I have excerpted some of the more interesting points below:

[The] real context in which the United Nations Security Council is going through the motions of considering a US-French resolution [is] designed not to end the fighting, but to allow it to continue until US-Israeli objectives are met. This document demands that Hezbollah disarm, while it allows the 10,000 Israeli troops occupying Lebanese territory to remain and permits Israel to continue “defensive” air strikes and artillery bombardments.

It essentially demands that Hezbollah, a mass movement of Lebanon’s impoverished Shiite population, commit suicide and that the government of Lebanon accept the status of an occupied protectorate. By presenting an utterly unacceptable proposal, Washington aims at provoking Lebanese rejection and then using this supposed opposition to “peace” as a justification for continuing the month-old war.

Like the one-sided wars waged by fascist regimes that shocked the world’s conscience in the 1930s — from the rape of Ethiopia to the incineration of Guernica — the destruction of Lebanon contains the seeds of a global conflagration.

In a further indication that it has no intention of compromising on the terms of its UN diktat to the Lebanese people, the Bush administration Tuesday dismissed a Lebanese proposal to send 15,000 Lebanese troops to the south to take control of the area from the Israeli army. A State Department spokesman declared that the Lebanese army is not “a robust enough entity to be able to, on their own, exercise total control of that southern area of Lebanon.”

This word “robust” is endlessly repeated to describe a proposed multinational force to be sent into the region. It is a euphemism for an occupation army that will utilize murderous force against the local population to achieve US and Israeli war aims.
….

The proposed smashing of Hezbollah would be seen by the Shiite population as an attempt to disenfranchise and oppress them, reversing the results of Lebanon’s previous civil war and restoring the power once wielded by Israel’s traditional ally in the country, the Maronite Christian right.

Such social reengineering of the country — carried out under George Bush’s slogans of “freedom” and a “new Middle East” — would undoubtedly ignite a new round of bitter sectarian warfare.

What the US-Israeli offensive aims to accomplish as its immediate goal is the thorough ethnic cleansing of southern Lebanon.

This is a term that never appears in the mainstream media in relation to the present war in Lebanon. It appears only in the occasional stories following the continuing tensions in former Yugoslavia, where US-led NATO forces intervened in 1999 with a savage bombing campaign against Serbia, which was carried out under the pretext of halting ethnic cleansing in the province of Kosovo. The end result has been a thorough ethnic cleansing of the Serb population at the hands of the Kosovar nationalists whom Washington supported.
….
[…]

After 1 Month Stalemate, Israel Shakes Up Military Leadership, While Bush Maintains Status Quo in Iraq after 3 Years of Quagmire

Jon Ponder

We’re so deep in the looking-glass world of George W. Bush that it is nice to be reminded of who the real world works sometimes. After less than 30 days of less than anticipated progress against Hezbollah in south Lebanon, the Israeli government has reorganized its military leadership:

In the Israeli military shakeup, Chief of General Staff Lieutenant General Dan Halutz appointed his deputy, Major-General Moshe Kaplinsky, to supervise air, sea and land operations as his representative in the north until the end of the war, the military said.

Israeli commentators saw the decision as pushing aside the head of the northern command, Major-General Udi Adam, who has overseen the four-week offensive against Hezbollah so far.

It came as Israel’s security cabinet prepares to meet today to decide whether to approve an expanded ground offensive if diplomatic efforts to end the conflict fail.

In the U.S. Civil War, Abraham Linclon fired generals, including McClellan, Meade and Hooker, before settling on Gen. Ulysses S. Grant to lead the Union Army.

But in Iraq, President George Bush has yet to hold anyone at the Pentagon, in either civilian or military leadership positions, accountable for three years of unnecessary death and destruction or the incompetent planning and execution of war.

Moonie Press: Condi & Bush at Odds over Israel

Jon Ponder

Insight Magazine, which is published by the ultra-rightwing cult leader Rev. Sun Yung Moon, reports that Sec. of State Condoleeza Rice and her “husband,” Pres. George Bush are fighting over Israel:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has become increasingly dismayed over President Bush’s support for Israel to continue its war with Hezbollah.

State Department sources said Ms. Rice has been repeatedly stymied in her attempts to pressure Israel to end strikes against Hezbollah strongholds in Lebanon. The sources said the secretary’s trip to the Middle East last week was torpedoed by the Israeli air strike of a Lebanese village in which 25 people were killed.

“I’ve never seen her so angry,” an aide said.

The U.S. response to the Israeli-Hezbollah war was said to have divided both the administration as well as the family of President George W. Bush [because his father, the former president, supports Rice’s position]. At the same time, it marked the first time since Ms. Rice became secretary of state that the president has overruled her.

“For the last 18 months, Condi was given nearly carte blanche in setting foreign policy guidelines,” a senior government source familiar with the issue said. “All of a sudden, the president has a different opinion and he wants the last word.”

The disagreement between Mr. Bush and Ms. Rice is over the ramifications of U.S. support for Israel’s continued offensive against Lebanon. The sources said Mr. Bush believes that Israel’s failure to defeat Hezbollah would encourage Iranian adventurism in neighboring Iraq. Ms. Rice has argued that the United States would be isolated both in the Middle East and Europe at a time when the administration seeks to build a consensus against Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

Instead, Ms. Rice believes the United States should engage Iran and Syria to pressure Hezbollah to end the war with Israel. Ms. Rice has argued that such an effort would result in a U.S. dialogue with Damascus and Tehran on Middle East stability.

Incumbents Fell in Yesterday’s Primary

Jon Ponder

Three incumbent politicians lost to members of their own parties in the primary elections yesterday:

  • Sen. Joe Lieberman lost in the Democratic primary to Ned Lamont, 48 percent to 52 percent. (However Sore-loserman will run as an “independent Democrat” for the Senate against Lamont in November.)
  • Georgia Rep. Cynthia McKinney lost to Hank Johnson in a trounce, 59 percent to 41 percent. Lesson here: Don’t embarrass your constituents.
  • Michigan Republican Rep. Joe Schwarz lost to Tim Walberg 55 percent to 45 percent.