Bush De-Values Lives of Combat Soldiers

This isn't just any good rant on the raw deal BushCo is giving the troops -- note the source.

 

In recent months, President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress have missed no opportunity to heap richly deserved praise on the military. But talk is cheap — and getting cheaper by the day, judging from the nickel-and-dime treatment the troops are getting lately.

 

For example, the White House griped that various pay-and-benefits incentives added to the 2004 defense budget by Congress are wasteful and unnecessary — including a modest proposal to double the $6,000 gratuity paid to families of troops who die on active duty. This comes at a time when Americans continue to die in Iraq at a rate of about one a day.

 

Similarly, the administration announced that on Oct. 1 it wants to roll back recent modest increases in monthly imminent-danger pay (from $225 to $150) and family-separation allowance (from $250 to $100) for troops getting shot at in combat zones. ...

 

Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Texas, who notes that the House passed a resolution in March pledging “unequivocal support” to service members and their families, puts it this way: “American military men and women don’t deserve to be saluted with our words and insulted by our actions.”

 

Translation: Money talks — and we all know what walks.

 

Nothing but lip service

ArmyTimes.com

June 30, 2003

 

 

Posted 11:40:38 PM   Send comment

---

Just As You Expected

Meeting last month at a sweltering U.S. base outside Doha, Qatar, with his top Iraq commanders, President Bush skipped quickly past the niceties and went straight to his chief political obsession: Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Turning to his Baghdad proconsul, Paul Bremer, Bush asked, "Are you in charge of finding WMD?" Bremer said no, he was not. Bush then put the same question to his military commander, General Tommy Franks. But Franks said it wasn't his job either. A little exasperated, Bush asked, So who is in charge of finding WMD? After aides conferred for a moment, someone volunteered the name of Stephen Cambone, a little-known deputy to Donald Rumsfeld, back in Washington. Pause. "Who?" Bush asked. ...

 

Who Lost the WMD?

Time Magazine, via Truthout

June 29, 2003

 

Posted 11:33:22 PM   Send comment

---

When 2.8 is Greater Than 3.5

Howard Dean campaign contributions

 

Eight days (June 22-28, 2003):

21,000 contributors = $2.8 million

Average contribution: $133.34

 

George W. Bush campaign contributions

 

One night (June 27, 2003):

1,600 contributors = $3.5 million

Average contribution: $2,187.50

 

I don't know about you, but I'd rather get $133 from 21,000 people who believed in me (and probably had to skimp on last week's food budget to come up with the cash) than $2,187 from 1,600 corporate elitists who'll probably find a way to write off the cost of a just another $2,000-a-plate dinner.

 

Posted 11:29:24 PM   Send comment

---

Dedaction Faction, What's Your Action?

The CIA abruptly removed from its Web site photos that showed key uranium enriching equipment found hidden in Iraq because they revealed secrets that countries seeking to develop nuclear weapons might find helpful, analysts said on Monday. ...

 

MSNBC

CIA pulls Iraqi centrifuge photos off its Web site

June 30, 2003

 

Oh, give me a break. There's nothing exactly "classified" about centrifuges; any high-school science student (or James Bond fan -- or Muppets fan, for that matter) knows they're used for a thousand different purposes. Besides, you'd need thousands of centrifuges like the one shown to produce enough enriched uranium to make even a single bomb (and a year or more to do it).

 

If you want my opinion (of course you do), the CIA pulled the pictures because these things, one of which looks like the disc from the hard drive inside your computer, are about as big a threat to the West as the disc from the hard drive inside your computer.

 

In other words, why give the world any more reason to laugh out loud at BushCo's make-believe WMD hysteria?

 

Plus, this stuff looks mighty shiny and new for having been buried in some Iraqi's backyard for the past 12 years. In other words, if this was somebody's idea of planting evidence, the thing should have at least been aged, like they do with any movie prop.

 

And unless this one was stored in a hermetically sealed container, a centrifuge (like any piece of delicate laboratory equipment) would be pretty damned useless after more than a decade under the earth, left to the mercy of water and minerals.

 

In any case, this is really non-news. Do you think if showing pictures of this stuff would be of any help to real terrorists, the CIA would have posted 'em on its Web site in the first place? Get real. The CIA isn't going to show you anything it doesn't want you to see.

 

On the other hand, I wouldn't put it past the spooks to post the pictures and then pull them in order to plant the idea in your head that they really are super-duper, top-secret weapons-making devices. Kinda like how Coca-Cola pulled Original Coke off the market and gave us that pony piss called "New Coke" to make us miss the real Real Thing, and then brought Original Coke back. (I know Coke denies it was all just a brilliant marketing ploy, but you also know how suspicious I am of anybody's motives. Hey, I'm an American -- can you blame me for my cynicism?)

 

So, don't be surprised if BushCo trots The Evil Centrifuge back out again with all-new "evidence" of its weapons-making capabilities.

 

Oh, by the way, if you want to see the pictures, they're still on the Federation of American Scientists site. And if for some reason that page disappears, there's always the good ol' reliable Google cache.

 

Posted 11:23:10 PM   Send comment

---

Your Must-Read of the Day

There's not a thing in this editorial I haven't read before -- but I'm very grateful to Maureen Farrell for gathering it all together and putting it into a coherent package.

 

Sometimes you (make that I) get so overwhelmed by detail, it's easy to overlook the need to do just that.

 

Go read -- it's a knockout. And it's an excellent bookmark; there's stuff here you'll want to refer back to many times in the future:

 

"The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning." -- CIA Intelligence Report for President Bush, July, 2001 (60 Days Prior to 9/11) ...

 

Maureen Farrell

The Attack Has Been Spectacular

Buzzflash

July 1, 2003

 

Posted 11:14:53 PM   Send comment

---