Be INFORMED

Saturday, January 13, 2007

The Pentagon and the CIA Get American's Bank Data

   The Associated Press is reporting that the Pentagon is looking at some Americans banking records along with their credit records. These are just the ones that are suspected of terrorism or espionage within the U.S.

By LOLITA BALDOR, Associated Press Writer January 13,2007

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon and to a lesser extent the CIA have been using a little-known power to look at the banking and credit records of hundreds of Americans and others suspected of terrorism or espionage within the United States, officials said Saturday.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said Saturday the Defense Department "makes requests for information under authorities of the National Security Letter statutes ... but does not use the specific term National Security Letter in its investigatory practice."       Entire Article

   Oh well, so long as the agencies aren't doing anything illegal to get the info,  Right? By this time next week you will probably read here that the Pentagon, CIA and others have been keeping a database on all Americans banking and such because President Bush thinks that we are all terrorist!

 

Technorati tags: , ,

Ads by AdGenta.com


Click Here

For You Because You Need To Use Your Voice

    Thomas Jefferson wrote, ‘Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.’ We must accept that responsibility willingly by trying to stay informed and aware. It is our responsibility to question our public servants should they stray from the principals we hold so dear and to rise together with a united voice to hold them both responsible and accountable.

    It is our hope that citizens can discuss issues here that are important to them and hopefully come up with a Proposition that can help produce the required change. We will gather your Propositions and votes and make sure they are delivered to the requested end point. We will then keep you informed of any correspondence.

This is YOUR country, what do YOU think?

    This comes from NationalProposition.com and you may want to check this website out.Speak whatever happens to be on your mind about our government and our wishes for that government!

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Senator Boxer's Comments Towards Condi Rice Draw Criticism

   You have all heard by now the 'howling'  by such astute people as Rush Limbaugh and a few of the  right leaning blogs over question's Senator Barbara Boxer posed to Miss Rice concerning who is going to pay for this Iraq war fiasco.

   Here is the question that Boxer asked:

"Now, the issue is who pays the price. Who pays the price? I’m not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old and my grandchild is too young. You’re not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, with immediate family. So who pays the price? The American military and their families."

    Ms. Boxer issued a statement to explain:

I spoke the truth at the Committee hearing, which is that neither Secretary Rice nor I have family members that will pay the price for this escalation. My point was to focus attention on our military families who continue to sacrifice because this Administration has not developed a political solution to the situation in Iraq.   

The New York Times Article

   Of course, the conservative bloggers were all over this story as were the radio and television talk show host.

    Here are a few examples courtesy of New York Times

Rush Limbaugh,“Here you have a rich white chick with a huge, big mouth, trying to lynch this — an African-American woman — right before Martin Luther King Day, hitting below the ovaries here.”

    Does he not sound as if he is trying to make this issue racial? That pig behind the microphone needs to get educated!

    Tony Snow, giving his opinion to Fox News, said,

"I don’t know if she was intentionally that tacky, but I do think it’s outrageous. Here you got a professional woman, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and Barbara Boxer is sort of throwing little jabs because Condi doesn’t have children, as if that means that she doesn’t understand the concerns of parents. Great leap backward for feminism.”

   Ms. Boxer was right on the money with her intent! Miss Rice doesn't have any children so there is no way that she can understand what runs through a parents mind when it comes to their kids possibly getting killed for an oil war! Miss Rice's non-children won't risk death to fix this mess that the Idiot in Chief has gotten us into!

   Ms. Boxer did have some support from Ezra Klein who said,

Boxer’s comment is fits firmly within the rich history of attacks levied on the Bush administration and Congress for pursuing wars of choice despite lacking personal experience in combat or immediate family members exposed to its ravages. It’s a variant of the “chickenhawk” charge, not chauvinism.

   Many of the conservative assholes want Ms. Boxer to issue an apology for the comments that she made.

   Ms. boxer should tell these morons what they should go and do with themselves!

 

Technorati tags: ,

Bush,Iran,Iraq-For Your Reading Pleasure

    Because you need to know!

                           

    Bush's Iraq Plan - Goading Iran into War
    Analysis by Trita Parsi* Via IPS News

WASHINGTON, Jan 12 (IPS) - President George W. Bush's address on Iraq Wednesday night was less about Iraq than about its eastern neighbour, Iran. There was little new about the U.S.'s strategy in Iraq, but on Iran, the president spelled out a plan that appears to be aimed at goading Iran into war with the U.S.                              The Article

                                        * * * *

 

Republican Warns that Bush might Fake pretext to Iran Invasion [VIDEO]

   Via Alternet

Posted by Evan Derkacz January 12, 2007.

Doesn't matter if it's us or Israel...

 

ronpaul

 

While searching for the video of Jim McDermott using AlterNet's Joshua Holland articles I ran across this speech by Bush's fellow Texas Republican, Ron Paul, reacting to the speech.                      Original Article

    Please watch the video mentioned in the above article as it is very educational when it comes to our President and his love for the oil companies!

    I referred to this subject in a previous post. You can go HERE to read the article from The Independent

 

Technorati tags: , ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Senate Approves Bill Denying Pensions to Congressmen Convicted of Ethics Violations

    The Senate finally got a chance to do something right, and they did!

    The legislation passed by a vote of 87-0! Maybe if we get lucky it will be retro-active to some where around 2000.

                                            * * * *     

Bill strips ethics-challenged legislators of pensions
POSTED: 8:52 p.m. EST, January 12, 2007 at CNN

Sens. John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, and Ken Salazar, D-Colorado, attached the amendment to an ethics reform bill earlier this week.

"The only thing crazier than giving a member of Congress convicted of a crime a federal pension is the fact that we still need a bill to prevent a convict from receiving their pension," Salazar said at the time. "A member of Congress who abuses their position of authority for their personal profit deserves a prison sentence, not a government pension."

   This bill has to pass the House and be signed by President Bush. That's were there may be a problem.

 

Technorati tags: , ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Oil Companies Attack Legislation Designed To Cut Back Tax Incentives

    You knew that this one was coming because the last thing that the oil companies want is to have to pay all of the money that the Bush Crime Family has let them slip into their coffers.

   Money such as the $7 billion or so that they have screwed the tax payer out of with their leases  allowing them to pump billions of dollars worth of oil and gas from publicly owned waters without paying royalties to the government.

    Here is the oil companies argument against changing the leases, which are flawed.

    The New York Times

“This bill takes capital from U.S. oil and natural gas companies that otherwise would be spent on domestic energy exploration,” said Barry Russell, president of the Independent Petroleum Association of America, which represents about 5,000 smaller oil and gas producers. “If the goal is to lessen our dependence on foreign oil, then this bill falls far short.”    Entire Article

                                   * * * *

   As if the oil companies are seriously looking for alternative sources of energy!

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Democrats and Republicans Argue over Iraq Escalation

    A day after George Bush's speech was knocked to the ground by criticism from both Democrats and Republicans,Sen. John McCain ( bio, voting record), R-AZ., said that he supports Bush's plan. WOW! I am so surprised by that!

    From the Associated Press:

By ANNE FLAHERTY   January 13,2007

McCain said those advocating the start of a troop withdrawal, which includes many Democrats, "have a responsibility to tell us what they believe are the consequences of withdrawal in Iraq. If we walk away from Iraq, we'll be back, possibly in the context of a wider war in the world's most volatile region."

Rep. John Murtha (news, bio, voting record), a Pennsylvania Democrat who oversees military funding, said he will propose tying congressional approval of war funds to shutting the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba. Other conditions he said he is considering include not extending troop deployments and giving soldiers and Marines more time to train between deployments.    Entire Article from AP

                                     * * * *

    Bush did an interview on CBS  "60 Minutes" which will air on Sunday in which," Asked if he believes he has the authority to send additional troops to Iraq no matter what Congress wants to do, Bush said: "I think I've got — in this situation, I do, yeah. And I fully understand they will ... they could try to stop me from doing it, but, uh, I've made my decision and we're going forward."

    My fellow Americans, it would seem as if our going to the polls in November and doing a 'changing of the guard' has not had any affect on our 'enlightened' leader. Not only is this incompetent fool ignoring the members of the House and the Senate, but more importantly, he is disregarding you and I, the voters!

    The American citizens of this country pay this bag of shit $400,000 a year to represent and to work for us. The president is supposed to look out for the publics best interest, not Halliburton's, or Exxon's!

    For Bush to willfully ignore and to disregard our views and stated position on the war in Iraq and stem cell research should be grounds for impeachment in its own right.               Michael d

 

Technorati tags: , , ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Friday, January 12, 2007

President Bush Is not The Decider

Molly Ivins, AlterNet., has an article up that might just get your dander up what with President Bush ignoring the American public and sending troops to Iraq anyway.

                                              * * * *

We are the people who run this country. We are the deciders and we need to raise hell.

A surge is not acceptable to the people in this country -- we have voted overwhelmingly against this war in polls (about 80 percent of the public is against escalation, and a recent Military Times poll shows only 38 percent of active military want more troops sent) and at the polls. We know this is wrong. The people understand, the people have the right to make this decision, and the people have the obligation to make sure our will is implemented.    Entire Article

 

Technorati tags: ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

U.S. Troops And Iraq Departure

    From Reuters:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States could start withdrawing forces from Iraq this year if the additional troops being sent to Baghdad reduce violence significantly, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Friday.

"If these operations actually work you could begin to see a lightening of the U.S. footprint both in Baghdad and Iraq itself," Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee

                                          * * * *

     You know that this all depends on the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki, keeping his promises and holding up to his end of the bargain with President Bush. The Democrats were quick to point out, rightfully so, that promises from the past have been broken and that it will more than likely be no different this time.

Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI): "Look at the track record of the Iraqi government in meeting some of its past benchmarks and promises."

   And then we have this from the AFP:

A senior ally of radical Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr warned that thousands of the planned 21,500 extra US troops en route for the war-torn nation would "go home in coffins."

"The American people have to prevent their sons from coming to Iraq or they may return in coffins," threatened Sheikh Abdel Razzaq al-Nadawi, a senior official in Sadr's movement, slamming the planned US troop increase.

   The Iraqi Prime Minister will no doubt bow down to the Sadr before he will bow down to Bush. Of course he will not say that publicly but he will show it by letting things go on the same way that they have been going. The Prime Minister's main worry is not Bush or the U.S., but it is the other groups that may kill him if he doesn't co-operate by being lenient.

 

Technorati tags: , ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Baghdad Does Not Care For The New Bush policy

    Bush made the statement that the Iraqi Prime Minister,Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, was basically all for the 'new ' plan from Bush.

    According to The New York Times, this is not necessarily the case.

By JOHN F. BURNS and SABRINA TAVERNISE

Published: January 12, 2007

The Iraqi leader, Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, failed to appear at a news conference and avoided any public comment. He left the government’s response to an official spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, who gave what amounted to a backhanded approval of the troop increase and emphasized that Iraqis, not Americans, would set the future course in the war.                      

Mr. Dabbagh said that the government’s objective was to secure the eventual withdrawal of American troops, and that for that to be possible there had to be security for Iraqis. “If this can be achieved by increasing either Iraqi or multinational forces,” he added, “the government, for sure, will not stand against it."         Entire Article

                                               * * * *
    As I have stated once before, the whole policy is nothing even close to new. The fact that President Bush has to put words into other people's mouths is a sure sign that those running Iraq from the Iraqi side of the war will more than likely not hold up their end of the ' agreement ' that has been made with the United States.

   Note that they want the eventual withdrawal of the American troops as soon as possible.

 

Technorati tags: , ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Condi Rice United The Divided

    Poor little Condi Rice.

    The Washington Post

By Dana Milbank

Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 12, 2007; Page A01

Within minutes of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's arrival on Capitol Hill yesterday, it became apparent that the Bush administration had, after four divisive years, finally succeeded in uniting Congress on the war in Iraq.

Unfortunately for Rice, the lawmakers were unified in opposition to President Bush's new policy.

                                                 * * * *

   Miss Rice heard quite alot of hostility from the senators in the room.

   Among them were Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fl.), Sen. George Voinovich (R-Oh.), Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.).

    Chairman Joseph Biden (D-Del.) told Rice to convey to President Bush, "that you heard 21 members, with one or two notable exceptions, expressing outright hostility, disagreement and/or overwhelming concern with the president's proposal."

Sen. Chuck Hagel,"I have to say, Madam Secretary,that I think this speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam."                More from WaPo

   Miss Rice was scolded by all but one or two in the room and I'll bet that she left cursing under her breath! If Bush's lawyers are as inept as Miss Rice is, then impeachment is assured!

 

Technorati tags: ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Thursday, January 11, 2007

Democrats,Republicans,and Iraq

   First off, let us look at the latest polls on the approval of this war.

    An AP-Ipsos poll says that 29 percent of Americans approve of the way that Bush is handling the war while 68 percent disapprove. Give Bush some credit here. He made an all-time low in this poll.

   On Bush's speech Wednesday night we have a few comments from our elected employees.

Sen. Chuck Hagel  R-NE.( bio, voting record) :

"I think this speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out."

Bill Nelson D-Fl. (bio, voting record), who once supported the war:

"I have not been told the truth over and over again by administration witnesses, and the American people have not been told the truth."                                                          

Sen. Mitch McConnell  R-KY.( bio, voting record) has threatened a filibuster— a delaying tactic — to block any legislation expressing disapproval of the buildup plan.

     AP Article

   The filibuster would do one thing that the President and his sheep would love to happen. It would give Bush more time to deploy those troops to Iraq in the hope that if they are there, the House will fund all of the troops and Bush can claim a victory over the Democrats and the House in general.

    I see that I may have to send the Democrats my copy of "The Art of War" so that they can learn something.

 

Technorati tags: , ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

A Republican Tries to add An Amendment And Gets A Verbal Slap!

   This is great!

    Patrick McHenry attempted to add an amendment to a bill in the House and he got a verbal slap from Barney Franks in the process.

   There's a new sheriff in town and the Republicans are not going to like it to much!

The Video

Democrats Pass Stem Cell Research Bill

    The House on Thursday passed a measure that would fund stem cell research. As you know, proponents of the research say that it could lead to massive medical cures of various kinds of diseases.

   Last years stem cell bill was vetoed by President Bush and he has promised to do the same to this bill. It is the only veto by Bush in his six year dictatorship.

    The bill passed by a 253-174 vote which is short of the 2/3 needed to overturn a Bush veto.

   Of course, the White House is using the same argument as last time, which is that the research  "would use federal taxpayer dollars to support and encourage the destruction of human life for research."

Minority Leader John Boehner (news, bio, voting record),( R-Oh.):

"I support stem cell research with only one exception — research that requires killing human life.Taxpayer-funded stem cell research must be carried out in an ethical manner in a way that respects the sanctity of human life. Fortunately, ethical stem cell alternatives continue to flourish in the scientific community."

 Rep. James Langevin (news, bio, voting record), (D-R.I.), said the research offers,"tremendous hope that not only stem cell research might lead one day to a cure for spinal cord injuries but one day a child with diabetes will no longer have to endure a lifetime of painful shots and tests."

                                                 * * * *

    So this bill will more than likely go down in flames once again with the stroke of President Bush's pen even though a majority of Americans do favor the research.

   But since when has this president ever listened to the American people or anyone else. Those of you who voted for this punk should be jailed with him and the rest of the White house!    Shame on you!

 

Technorati tags: ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Democrats To Block President Bush's War Funds?

    WaPo: Democrats plan to block 'Escalation' funds

   This will be interesting for the Democrats. George Bush has already sent up to 90 troops to Iraq so what do you do to block the funds when Bush is already sending our troops?

    The Washington Post says that the Democrats, heading by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), will be reporting back to the Appropriations Committee on language they could use to stop this troop escalation.

House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.).:

"Twenty-one thousand five hundred troops ought to have 21,500 strings attached to them."

Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.) said,"By calling for the rapid escalation of American troops in Iraq, the president rebuffed his commanders, thumbed his nose at the Baker-Hamilton commission and, worst of all, ignored the will of the American people."        The Article

    I see one hell of a battle between the President and the Congress shaping up! I do believe that President Bush is will try to place as many troops as possible in Iraq as quickly as possible so that he can tell the Congress that since they are already there we may as well fund them and send the rest over also. This was done back in World War II, I believe.

    It remains to be seen if the Democrats will grow some balls and actually spike Bush on the funding. Forget non-binding resolutions and such, go for his heart and rip it out!

    The American people did not elect you to be passive!

 

Technorati tags: , ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Bush Speech Is An Updated Speech From October 2006

  From Daily Kos 

by BarbinMD
Thu Jan 11, 2007

 

Mr Bush last night:

To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis. To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs. To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year. And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws, and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq's constitution.

    Mr.Bush in October:

...sharing oil revenues, amending the Iraqi constitution, and reforming the de-Baathification process.

Bush last night:

We will use America's full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists and a strategic threat to their survival.

Bush in October:

...reaching out to Arab states such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan, and asking them to support the Iraqi government's efforts to persuade Sunni insurgents to lay down their arms and accept national reconciliation.

    As I have stated earlier, this rhetoric has not changed since 2004! His speech last night was the same old shit in different clothing.

     As pointed out over at the Daily Kos, the only difference between last night and his speech back in October is the 207 that have died since then and Bush not saying:

Absolutely, we're winning.

    Of course Bush did not mention his next pre-emptive strike on Iran which is coming soon to a TV near you! Film at 11!

 

Technorati tags: ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Bush's Speech Part 2

    If you were one of the few people that had to sit through this speech, did you notice anything different about Bush? The way that he looked, for instance?

   The little fella actually looked like he was scared a bit. There was none of his usual 'I am the decider' swagger to his words last night.

   I would say that is because he finally realized that no one believes in his war or his reasons for pursuing it so he had to make himself look somewhat like he was being honest when he really wasn't.

   Bush knows that practically every word from his mouth last night was the usual bull in a different tone.

    The fact the his writers made him say that "Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me.It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq," must have pained Bush to no end!

   This speech, with a few exceptions, was only a re-hash of previous statements back in 2004 and even as recent as 2006.

     More on this later.

Technorati tags: ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Full Text Of Bush Speech

From Daily Kos

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
______________________________________________________________
                      January 10, 2007

ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT TO THE NATION

As Prepared for Deliver

Good evening.  Tonight in Iraq, the Armed Forces of the United
States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of
the global war on terror - and our safety here at home.  The new

strategy I outline tonight will change America's course in Iraq, and  help us succeed in the fight against terror.  

When I addressed you just over a year ago, nearly 12 million Iraqis had
cast their ballots for a unified and democratic nation.  The elections

of 2005 were a stunning achievement.  We thought that these elections
would bring the Iraqis together - and that as we trained Iraqi security
forces, we could accomplish our mission with fewer American troops.  

But in 2006, the opposite happened.  The violence in Iraq - particularly
in Baghdad - overwhelmed the political gains the Iraqis had made.  Al
Qaeda terrorists and Sunni insurgents recognized the mortal danger that

Iraq's elections posed for their cause.  And they responded with outrageous acts of murder aimed at innocent Iraqis.  They blew up one of the holiest shrines in Shia Islam - the Golden Mosque of Samarra - in a calculated effort to provoke Iraq's Shia population to retaliate.  Their
strategy worked.  Radical Shia elements, some supported by Iran, formed death squads.  And the result was a vicious cycle of sectarian violence that continues today.

The situation in Iraq is unacceptable to the American people - and it is
unacceptable to me.  Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely.  They have
done everything we have asked them to do.  Where mistakes have been

made, the responsibility rests with me.    

It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq.  So my national
security team, military commanders, and diplomats conducted a
comprehensive review.  We consulted Members of Congress from both

parties, allies abroad, and distinguished outside experts.  We benefited
from the thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group - a
bipartisan panel led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Congressman Lee Hamilton.  In our discussions, we all agreed that there is no magic formula for success in Iraq.  And one message came through loud and clear:  Failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States.  

The consequences of failure are clear:  Radical Islamic extremists would
grow in strength and gain new recruits.  They would be in a better
position to topple moderate governments, create chaos in the region, and use oil revenues to fund their ambitions.  Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons.  Our enemies would have a safe haven
from which to plan and launch attacks on the American people.  On
September the 11th, 2001, we saw what a refuge for extremists on the other side of the world could bring to the streets of our own cities.
For the safety of our people, America must succeed in Iraq.

    The most urgent priority for success in Iraq is security,
especially in Baghdad.  Eighty percent of Iraq's sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of the capital.  This violence is splitting Baghdad into sectarian enclaves, and shaking the confidence of all Iraqis.  Only the Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people.  And their government has put forward an aggressive plan to do it.  

Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons:
There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to  secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents.  And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have.  Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes. They report that it does.  They also report that this plan can work.

Let me explain the main elements of this effort:  The Iraqi government
will appoint a military commander and two deputy commanders for their
capital.  The Iraqi government will deploy Iraqi Army and National

Police brigades across Baghdad's nine districts.  When these forces are
fully deployed, there will be 18 Iraqi Army and National Police brigades
committed to this effort - along with local police.  These Iraqi forces

will operate from local police stations - conducting patrols, setting up
checkpoints, and going door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad
residents.  

    This is a strong commitment.  But for it to succeed, our commanders

say the Iraqis will need our help.  So America will change our strategy
to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian
violence - and bring security to the people of Baghdad.  This will
require increasing American force levels.  So I have committed more than

20,000 additional American troops to Iraq.  The vast majority of them -
five brigades - will be deployed to Baghdad.  These troops will work
alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations.  Our troops

will have a well-defined mission:  to help Iraqis clear and secure
neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help
ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the
security that Baghdad needs.  

Many listening tonight will ask why this effort will succeed when
previous operations to secure Baghdad did not.  Here are the
differences:  In earlier operations, Iraqi and American forces cleared

many neighborhoods of terrorists and insurgents - but when our forces
moved on to other targets, the killers returned.  This time, we will
have the force levels we need to hold the areas that have been cleared.
In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference prevented

Iraqi and American forces from going into neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian violence.  This time, Iraqi and American
forces will have a green light to enter these neighborhoods - and Prime

Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference
will not be tolerated.  

I have made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq's other leaders that
America's commitment is not open-ended.  If the Iraqi government does

not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the
American people - and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people.  Now
is the time to act.  The Prime Minister understands this.  Here is what

he told his people just last week:  "The Baghdad security plan will not
provide a safe haven for any outlaws, regardless of [their] sectarian or
political affiliation."

This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings,

assassinations, or IED attacks.  Our enemies in Iraq will make every
effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of
death and suffering.  Yet over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops

chasing down murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust
and cooperation from Baghdad's residents.  When this happens, daily life
will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the

government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in
other critical areas.  Most of Iraq's Sunni and Shia want to live
together in peace - and reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make

reconciliation possible.

A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations.
Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are
accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and

communities.  So America will hold the Iraqi government to the
benchmarks it has announced.

To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take
responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November.  To

give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will
pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis.  To show that
it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will

spend 10 billion dollars of its own money on reconstruction and
infrastructure projects that will create new jobs.  To empower local
leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year.  And
to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's political life, the

government will reform de-Baathification laws - and establish a fair
process for considering amendments to Iraq's constitution.  

America will change our approach to help the Iraqi government as it

works to meet these benchmarks.  In keeping with the recommendations of
the Iraq Study Group, we will increase the embedding of American
advisers in Iraqi Army units - and partner a Coalition brigade with
every Iraqi Army division.  We will help the Iraqis build a larger and

better-equipped Army - and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi
forces, which remains the essential U.S. security mission in Iraq.  We
will give our commanders and civilians greater flexibility to spend
funds for economic assistance.  We will double the number of Provincial

Reconstruction Teams.  These teams bring together military and civilian
experts to help local Iraqi communities pursue reconciliation,
strengthen moderates, and speed the transition to Iraqi self reliance.
And Secretary Rice will soon appoint a reconstruction coordinator in

Baghdad to ensure better results for economic assistance being spent in
Iraq.

As we make these changes, we will continue to pursue al Qaeda and
foreign fighters.  Al Qaeda is still active in Iraq.  Its home base is

Anbar Province.  Al Qaeda has helped make Anbar the most violent area of Iraq outside the capital.  A captured al Qaeda document describes the
terrorists' plan to infiltrate and seize control of the province.  This

would bring al Qaeda closer to its goals of taking down Iraq's
democracy, building a radical Islamic empire, and launching new attacks
on the United States at home and abroad.

Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders and protecting the local population.  Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their willingness to take on al Qaeda.  As a result, our commanders believe we have an opportunity to deal a serious blow to

the terrorists.  So I have given orders to increase American forces in
Anbar Province by 4,000 troops.  These troops will work with Iraqi and
tribal forces to step up the pressure on the terrorists.  America's men

and women in uniform took away al Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanistan -
and we will not allow them to re-establish it in Iraq.

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity -

and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge.  This
begins with addressing Iran and Syria.  These two regimes are allowing
terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of

Iraq.  Iran is providing material support for attacks on American
troops.  We will disrupt the attacks on our forces.  We will interrupt
the flow of support from Iran and Syria.  And we will seek out and
destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our

enemies in Iraq.  

We are also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and
protect American interests in the Middle East.  I recently ordered the
deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region.  We will

expand intelligence sharing - and deploy Patriot air defense systems to
reassure our friends and allies.  We will work with the governments of
Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border.  And

we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons
and dominating the region.

    We will use America's full diplomatic resources to rally support
for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East.  Countries like Saudi
Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an
American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists -
and a strategic threat to their survival.  These nations have a stake in

a successful Iraq that is at peace with its neighbors - and they must
step up their support for Iraq's unity government.  We endorse the Iraqi
government's call to finalize an International Compact that will bring

new economic assistance in exchange for greater economic reform.  And on Friday, Secretary Rice will leave for the region - to build support for
Iraq, and continue the urgent diplomacy required to help bring peace to

the Middle East.

The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a
military conflict.  It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time.
On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation.  On the

other side are extremists who kill the innocent, and have declared their
intention to destroy our way of life.  In the long run, the most
realistic way to protect the American people is to provide a hopeful
alternative to the hateful ideology of the enemy - by advancing liberty

across a troubled region.  It is in the interests of the United States
to stand with the brave men and women who are risking their lives to
claim their freedom - and help them as they work to raise up just and

hopeful societies across the Middle East.

From Afghanistan to Lebanon to the Palestinian Territories, millions of
ordinary people are sick of the violence, and want a future of peace and
opportunity for their children.  And they are looking at Iraq.  They

want to know:  Will America withdraw and yield the future of that
country to the extremists - or will we stand with the Iraqis who have
made the choice for freedom?

The changes I have outlined tonight are aimed at ensuring the survival

of a young democracy that is fighting for its life in a part of the
world of enormous importance to American security.  Let me be clear:
The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they

will make the year ahead bloody and violent.  Even if our new strategy
works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue - and we
must expect more Iraqi and American casualties.  The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer to success.  I believe that it
will.    Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers
achieved.  There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a

battleship.  But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab
world - a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the
rule of law, respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its

people.  A democratic Iraq will not be perfect.  But it will be a
country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them - and it will
help bring a future of peace and security for our children and
grandchildren.

Our new approach comes after consultations with Congress about the
different courses we could take in Iraq.  Many are concerned that the
Iraqis are becoming too dependent on the United States - and therefore,

our policy should focus on protecting Iraq's borders and hunting down al
Qaeda.  Their solution is to scale back America's efforts in Baghdad -
or announce the phased withdrawal of our combat forces.  We carefully

considered these proposals.  And we concluded that to step back now
would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear that country apart,
and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale.  Such a scenario

would result in our troops being forced to stay in Iraq even longer, and
confront an enemy that is even more lethal.  If we increase our support
at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of

violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.

In the days ahead, my national security team will fully brief Congress
on our new strategy.  If Members have improvements that can be made, we will make them.  If circumstances change, we will adjust.  Honorable
people have different views, and they will voice their criticisms.  It
is fair to hold our views up to scrutiny.  And all involved have a
responsibility to explain how the path they propose would be more likely

to succeed.  

Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group that will help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror.  This group will meet regularly with me and my Administration, and it will
help strengthen our relationship with Congress.  We can begin by working together to increase the size of the active Army and Marine Corps, so

that America has the Armed Forces we need for the 21st century.  We also need to examine ways to mobilize talented American civilians to deploy overseas - where they can help build democratic institutions in communities and nations recovering from war and tyranny.

In these dangerous times, the United States is blessed to have
extraordinary and selfless men and women willing to step forward and
defend us.  These young Americans understand that our cause in Iraq is

noble and necessary - and that the advance of freedom is the calling of
our time.  They serve far from their families, who make the quiet
sacrifices of lonely holidays and empty chairs at the dinner table.
They have watched their comrades give their lives to ensure our liberty.

We mourn the loss of every fallen American - and we owe it to them to
build a future worthy of their sacrifice.

Fellow citizens:  The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice,
and resolve.  It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom.  Yet times of testing reveal the character of a
Nation.  And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the
pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed.  Now America is
engaged in a new struggle that will set the course for a new century.

We can and we will prevail.  

We go forward with trust that the Author of Liberty will guide us
through these trying hours.  Thank you and good night.

 

Technorati tags: , ,

The Bush Speech

  As is usual, Bush started out playing the fear card again!  If we leave Iraq, Iran will be more emboldened to build nuclear weapons, terrorist will be made stronger and more ready to attack the United States, and on and on.

   Bush has committed more than 20,000 more U.S. troops to Iraq. According to Bush, military generals have said that we need more troops in Iraq, so off they go!

    Bush said that he has told the Iraqi P.M. that if he does not keep his promises, then Iraq will lose the support of the American people.

   That is already a given but I believe that it is Bush that we have no confidence in.

   Oh yes! He stated that the Iraqi government will divide the oil profits amongst all of the various sectarian groups. Since our own oil companies have already gained the biggest chunk of the profits ( 75%) for the next 30 years, there will not be much for the Iraqi's to split.

   Bush once again used the al-Qaida and the threat to the U.S. if we do not stay in Iraq.Iran will try to dominate the middle east with the development of nuclear weapons, yak, yak, yak!

    Bush is still under the illusion (delusion) that Democracy can be spread in Iraq.

   This entire speech was nothing but a spin story containing the same old terrorist will attack us.

    More later

 

Technorati tags: ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

U.S. Troop 'Surge' Already Underway

Try this news from ABC:

Troop Surge Already Under Way
90 Advance Troops from 82nd Airborne Arrive in Baghdad

By JONATHAN KARL

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Jan. 10, 2007 — President Bush's speech may be scheduled for tonight, but the troop surge in Iraq is already under way.

ABC News has learned that the "surge" Bush is expected to announce in a prime time speech tonight has already begun. Ninety advance troops from the 82nd Airborne Division arrived in Baghdad Wednesday.

   Apparently Mr.Bush needs a dictionary to look up the word "bipartisanship." I also guess that this is what he calls "working with congress."

   If our new Democrats in office are going to do no better than to let this bum run them over, and us citizens also, then us citizens need to write to their respected Senators and Representatives and shove  a foot up their asses!

    You did not vote for our elected officials to let this psychopath run over the entire country with his bullshit, endangering us even more than any terrorist ever could!                                            Michael d

 

Technorati tags: ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

BEARINGPOINT: Making Money In Iraq

Bearingpoint use to be known as KMPG Consulting Inc., the consulting branch of accounting giant KPMG LLP. KPMG LLP. was one of the companies that was entangled in the Enron/Arthur Anderson scandal back in 2002.

    From  SourceWatch:

Contracts

  • In July of 2003, BearingPoint was awarded a contract by USAID worth $79.5 million to facilitate Iraq's economic recovery with a two-year option worth a total of $240,162,688.[2][3] Responsibilities in this contract include:
1. Creating Iraq's budget
2. Writing business law
3. Setting up tax collection
4. Laying out trade and customs rules
5. Privatize state-owned enterprises by auctioning them off or issuing Iraqis shares in the enterprises.
6. Reopen banks and jump-start the private sector by making small loans of $100 to $10,000.
7. Wean Iraqis from the U.N. oil-for-food program, the main source of food for 60% of the population.
8. Issue a new currency and set exchange rates.[4]
  • In January 2003 BearingPoint won a $3.95 million contract financed by the World Bank to aid the Afghanistan government upgrade its accounting system.[5]
  • In March of 2003, USAID awarded BearingPoint a $39.9 million contract to help rebuild the economy in Afghanistan.[6] In November 2005, USAID awarded another contract, this three years and worth $45 million. [7] The overall worth of contracts in Afghanistan could be worth as much as $350 million. [8]
  • BearingPoint works with the USAID Banking and Financial Market Reform projects in Serbia and with the National Bank of Serbia to stabilize the financial system. [9]
  • In October of 2005, BearingPoint was awarded a five year contract by the Navy's Enterprise Program Management Office worth as much as $58 million to support the strategy, design, development and implementation of the EPMO. [10]
  • In October, 2005, BearingPoint won a $124.7 million contract from USAID to pursue economic and financial reform in Egypt. [11]
  • BearingPoint has worked with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to design and build a decision support system. [12]

                                              * * * *

 

12/11/2006 09:24:10 PM EST
INFOPROD

    BearingPoint, Inc., Lexington Park, Md., is being awarded a $22,254,368 cost-plus-award-fee/firm-fixed-price/cost only modification under previously awarded contract (N00024-04-C-6322) to exercise the FY07 options for systems integration services in support of Release 1.0 of the Navy Converged Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System. The Navy ERP Program was established to transform and standardize Navy business processes for key acquisition, financial, and logistics operations. This modification provides for funded labor and associated travel. Work will be performed in Annapolis, Md., and is expected to be completed by September 2007. Contract funds in the amount of $4,494,300, will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity.

Copyright © 2006 . Infoprod.

   More to follow!

 

Technorati tags: ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

The Federal Minimum Wage

   Follow this Washington Post link for an interesting look at life for a few who are already living on $7.25 an hour. 

   Though this is a good article, I think that the entire point of it is to argue against the wage increase. 

No Money For Armored Vehicles?

   This story from the Baltimore Sun says that the military does not have the money to have newer, stronger vehicles built for our Troops.

 

By David Wood
Sun reporter
Originally published January 10, 2007                                     Vehicles such as the Cougar and the M1117 Armored Security Vehicle have proven ability to save lives, but production started late and relatively small numbers are in use in Iraq, mostly because of money shortages, industry officials said.

    The Article

                                  * * * *

    Let me get this part right. We have given that Idiot in Chief something like $250 billion for this war and our people cannot get the right equipment which they need desperately? Where in the hell is all of that money going to?                                                                                         

Cougar Armored Trucks and the M117 Armored security Vehicle  are in much needed demand in Iraq. We have less than 1,000 of these in use at this time. The cost per vehicle is $500,000 to $700,000.

   The military has stated that they need  4,060 of the MRAP vehicles, with 2,500 for the Army, 538 for the Navy and 1,022 for the Marines.                      Baltimore Sun for more

                                            * * * *

   I would suggest reading the Sun article on why it is taking so long to get these vehicles made.

   The Bush Crime Family needs some accountability!

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Details of Bush's New Iraq Strategy

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: January 10, 2007

Filed at 12:31 p.m. ET

Details of President Bush's new strategy for Iraq, as outlined by White House officials on Wednesday:

------

U.S. TROOP INCREASE

-- Bush will commit 17,500 additional U.S. combat troops, the equivalent of five combat brigades, to Baghdad. The first brigade is to arrive Jan. 15; the next on Feb. 15; the remainder in separate waves every 30 days.

-- Bush will commit 4,000 more Marines, in two waves, to Anbar, the troubled western province that is a base of the mostly Sunni insurgency and foreign al-Qaida fighters.

-- The president's upcoming supplemental budget request will include $5.6 billion to pay for his new commitment of troops.

-- Expand embedding of U.S. advisers into Iraqi security forces.

------

ECONOMIC AID

--$414 million to expand the Provincial Reconstruction Teams and set up new Provincial Support Teams.

--$400 in quick-response funds to address civilian problems.

--$350 million more for the Commander's Emergency Response Program, set up in 2003 to give field commanders money to solve local problems that quickly the improve daily the lives of Iraqis.

------

IRAQI COMMITMENTS

--Allocate $10 billion to assist in reconstruction efforts.

--Deliver three brigades for Baghdad; the first on Feb. 1; then two more on Feb. 15.

--Crack down on insurgents regardless of sect or religion.

                                             * * * *

   Note from the above that Bush is going to request an additional $5.6 billion to pay for the additional troops. So, if the Democrats decided not to give Bush the extra funds, then they do not deploy?

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Wage Hike to Sink In The Senate?

   Because you need to know, the Democrats are planning on voting for a minimum wage increase today (Wed.) for the first time in 10 years to raise the wage up to $7.25 per hour. Economist say that will jack the pay up for some 13 million workers.

    According to The New York Times, the chances are not so certain in the Senate because of the Republicans desire to add a piece granting some more tax cuts to small business owners. Republicans say that they will filibuster the bill without the tax cut measure added to it.

  The $5.15 to $7.25 increase will take place in 3 steps between now and 2009.

   I have always been one to support the minimum wage increases every time that they have come up but I have problems with the way that they  are rolled out in stages over a period of two or three years.

   Why do we not bring the increases out in a much shorter time span? You all know that by 2009  $7.25 an hour will not be all that helpful to those earning it. Raise it up all at once! How about by mid-year? Even $7.25 an hour is not going to do all that much for the worker if they have a family to support.

   At one time in my life I was working for $10 an hour with no bills other the rent,electricity,and such and I still had a tough time making ends meet. Forget about putting anything away for emergencies or retirement!

   Let the corporations moan and groan about the increase. Most are making more than enough to cover a real living wage and still make a damned good profit. If they were not, they would not be in business still!

 

Technorati tags: ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

Bush's Comments

   More Bush quotes from PoliticalHumor.com

"I've reminded the prime minister-the American people, Mr. Prime Minister, over the past months that it was not always a given that the United States and America would have a close relationship." George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., June 29, 2006

"I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." --George W. Bush, talking to key Republicans about Iraq, as quoted by Bob Woodward

"You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror." --George W. Bush, interview with CBS News' Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006

"I would say the best moment of all was when I caught a 7.5 pound largemouth bass in my lake." --George W. Bush, on his best moment in office, interview with the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag, May 7, 2006

"The point now is how do we work together to achieve important goals. And one such goal is a democracy in Germany." --George W. Bush, D.C., May 5, 2006

"It's a heck of a place to bring your family." --George W. Bush, on New Orleans, New Orleans, La., Jan. 12, 2006

 

"I think we are welcomed. But it was not a peaceful welcome." --George W. Bush, defending Vice President Dick Cheney's pre-war assertion that the United States would be welcomed in Iraq as liberators, NBC Nightly News interview, Dec. 12, 2005

"Those who enter the country illegally violate the law." --George W. Bush, Tucson, Ariz., Nov. 28, 2005

Bush's most Important Speech Ever

   On Bush most important speech ever, which comes to us Wednesday night, we have this from by Bill in Portland Maine via Daily Kos

Wed Jan 10, 2007

...So Bush will read the poll-tested words on his Teleprompter. And, barring a serious show of spine by the Democratic leadership, he will have his escalation of hostilities. And the Very Important People will continue to tell us why we should be patient for just a little bit longer. And we will shop. And the White House will spin. And the insurgents will adjust their tactics. And our soldiers will keep dying. And the Young Republicans will come up with shiny new excuses for why they can't sign up to fight in the war they've supported with religious fervor since the beginning. And lefty bloggers who have been absolutely correct on everything war-related since before it began will be accused of being shrill. And it will be déjà vu all over again.

But, hey..."Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be here somewhere!"                   Entire Article

                                * * * *

    This will be yet another spin speech from Bush to sell us the idea that sending more troops to Iraq will finally quell the violence and bring some law and order to the country.

    Of course, we will have to sacrifice to get these things done, as we have for the past 3 years and we will watch still nothing get accomplished except for the dead body count of our people going up.

 

Technorati tags: ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com

20,000 Troops off To Iraq?

     With the first installment of 20,000 troops expected to go to Iraq by the end of this month, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi  said that she would hold a vote on the increase. In case you've been in a comma or in Gitmo, most Democrats do not want the increase.

    Bush is linking the troop increase to steps that the Iraqi government is expected to take to curb the violence between the various sectarian factions and to build up its own military strength.

Rep. Robert Andrews (D-N.J.):"The president believes that the Iraqi forces aided by American forces will be able to clean out Baghdad and stabilize Baghdad and leave as he put it 'space' for a political reconciliation process to unify the country and stabilize Iraq." Andrews met with Bush on Tuesday as did other Democrats.

    From the White House mouthpiece, Tony Snow:"The president will not shape policy according to public opinion, but he does understand that it's important to bring the public back to this war and restore public confidence and support for the mission."    AP Article

    I have no comment to make on this bums (Bush) latest scam as we all know how I feel about this fuckup!

 

Technorati tags: ,

 

Ads by AdGenta.com