Waterboarding is Torture, and Torture is Wrong - ACCOUNTABILITY !!

Peggy Noonan should have her ass kicked. She is an advocate for "just passing by" the horrors of the Bush Administration torture policies. I wonder which of her friends would be indicted?

Accountability is critical to never having the United States of America EVER involved in a torture program again. And I don't mean the lowest level person you can find. I mean the people who issued the orders and justified them legally when concerns were raised about possible prison time.

The SERE program put our troops through simulated harsh interrogation techniques. Then those techniques were employed by our own government as tactics in our own interrogations of terror suspects. It's like someone saw the abusive tactics being used to harden our own troops against interrogation tactics, and thought "Wow! What a great idea! We should do something like that."

President Obama is flailing around trying to prevent a full scale investigation into the torture program of the Bush Administration, sending the likes of Rahm Emanuel and other emissaries to the media trying to get everybody to get over the torture program that didn't work.

Bad news, President Obama. We're not going to allow you to pull a Clinton on us and sell out your support base for the sake of unity. We won't stop screaming until everybody knows you turned your back on the worst human rights violation for decades by the United States.

Let the party begin.
























CIA Torture, Daily Show, Daily Show Torture, Jon Stewart, Jon Stewart Torture, Peggy Noonan Torture, Stewart Torture, Torture, Video, Abu Ghraib, Afghanistan, Bush Administration, Department Of Defense, Guantanamo, Iraq, Senate Armed Services Committee, Senate Armed Services Committee Report, Sere, Torture, Waterboarding, Bush Administration Torture, CIA Torture, Cia Waterboarding, Obama Torture, Obama Torture Memo, Torture, Waterboarding, Bush Torture Memos, CIA Torture, Gen. Michael Hayden, General Michael Hayden, Hayden Op-Ed, Michael Hayden, Michael Mukasey, Mukasey Hayden Op-Ed, Obama Torture, Obama Torture Memos, Torture, Torture Memos, Caribbean, Cia, Cuba, Cuba Embargo, Cuba Travel Ban, Drug Interdiction, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Imf, Latin America, Market Fundamentalism, Military Intervention, Multi-Lateralism, Neoconservatives, Obama Foreign Policy, Torture, Trade, Washington Consensus, Bush Administration, Cia, CIA Torture, Obama Torture Memos, Torture, Torture Memos, Politics News

Georgia On My Mind

Russia's assault on the sovereignty of Georgia is a major challenge to the influence and credibility of the United States. If we can't, or won't, stand up for an ally then an alliance with the U.S. won't be worth much.

And if an alliance with the United States isn't worth much, our opinion on international matters won't be worth much, either. In a very real sense, the Georgian conflict will determine the power of the United States for many years.

Europe is continuing their spineless ways, just as they were content to allow mass slaughter in the former Yugoslavia, they are content to remain passive in the face of Russia's direct threat to their neighbor and themselves.

Anything other than harsh response will lead Russia to invade another country. Why not? If we don't do anything but talk, there is nothing to stop them. Of course, we cannot ignore the role of our Iraq war in all this maneuvering. Russia is betting, accurately, that the United States does not want another major conflict simultaneous with two full-scale wars.

This is the time for Germany and other nations to place troops in Georgia to protect their democracy, as well as Georgia's. And any alternate energy plans should be made top national security priority. Without oil, Russia is just another has-been on the world stage.

Bush, McCain and Iraq

John McCain is a good soldier. So when he tells the President that he has his support on Iraq policies, John McCain means it. And he doesn't just mean it for the moment, he follows through with his words and his actions.

So Barak Obama wants to set a timetable for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq and the President of Iraq agrees. John McCain stands his ground as he doubtless agreed to do. Then the President talks about a timetable to withdraw himself, leaving John McCain as the only person supporting prolonged and indefinite staying in Iraq.

John McCain is at a disadvantage in dealing with George Bush. The President has no honor.

At bottom is a President who is incredibly threatened by a successor. So even if it is a clear advantage to do so, President Bush will not allow John McCain to succeed.

Mr. President, there will be no one to protect you from international prosecutions if you don't have John McCain in the Presidency. I just thought someone should tell you, that's all.

Note to Ari Fleischer

Ari Fleischer has it wrong. The criticism of the press corps for failing to properly investigate the claims made to justify this war is not limited to the uncomfortable questions they asked him while he was Press Secretary.

It is the failure to investigate and report.

So Mr. Fleischer was asked questions he found tough. So what. It probably would have been easier on him if he wasn't a part of the campaign of deception in the White House that talked people and countries into a war that wasn't justified.

U.S. War with Iran: It's Not Over

Many people heaved a sigh of relief when the Washington Post reported last week that the Bush Administration learned in September that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program several years ago.

The thinking was: "They can't possibly justify a war on Iran now. Whew!"

They would be wrong.

When a zealot hasn't had a new idea since 1986, they don't let go of it easily. Mere facts do not impede a well-fantasized plan of glory. So we have observed the concept being floated that Iran's uranium enrichment is enough of a reason to intervene in Iran. Watch out for that one, it is not going to die an easy death.

Iran is here to stay. We need to learn how to work things out. What the last forty years SHOULD have taught us is that the United States cannot control the government of another country without long-term grief. The purpose of government is talk to other governments to get business done. Beating a drum and calling for blood has its appeal, but is not governance. Nor is it leadership.

Implications of a Fuel Cell Car

So Iceland has created a fuel cell car. At $8 for a gallon of gas, Icelanders must be very happy.

Supposing, in the next ten years, this technology is adopted throughout the world. The demand for gasoline is radically and dramatically reduced. Are we going to continue caring about the Middle East in quite the same way? Of course not.

And if the demand for oil is reduced, then the riches of the Arab and Persian nations will also be reduced. So the money sent to radical Islamist groups will also be reduced, as will their ability to cause trouble elsewhere in the world.

Another nation affected would be Russia. Russia is basing its current bout of hegemony on its supply of oil. Witness the threats to cut off the heat to its neighbors last winter. I always predicted that the Russian resurgence would be short-lived. Now they can focus their efforts on fighting Canada for ice flows.

A fuel cell car - imagine! I'm dying to get a new car myself, but my husband and my sister prudently are talking me out of it. One way to inspire myself to patience would be dreams of a fuel cell car THAT DOESN'T USE GASOLINE!! With leather interiors, of course. I wouldn't get a car without leather interiors.

- - - - -
As an aside, you can usually click on the title of a post to see an article related to my rant.

U.S. Talks With Iran: Is War Still in the Air?

Yes. Don't be fooled. The Bush Administration acknowledged that the country cannot be run like Texas when it agreed to have conversations with Iran. It only took them six years. As a national leader, you have to talk to people you hate. Freezing them out is ineffective.

But the Bush Administration is populated with people who don't change their minds and hate new ideas. So their thoughts from twenty years ago, namely, to invade Iraq and then Iran, are still driving their thinking and policy decisions.

It would be wise to watch the news reports and the rhetoric. Recently, an article appeared about Iranian problems with drug smugglers. It was a sympathetic article to Iran and likened their border issues with ours. The appearance of this article can be seen as a signal that the U.S. position towards Iran is open to cooperation. It would be a declaration of "common ground," if you will. The Bush Administration would be feeding the notion that Iran and the U.S. could unite in fighting narcotics trafficking.

How strong would that "common ground" be? Almost illusionary. Iran should not be baited into any conciliatory stance.

Don't be surprised if a sudden reversal of rhetoric occurs, painting Iran as an enemy of the U.S. One would be mistaken to think that any gains in understanding between the U.S. and Iran would preclude manic accusations from our President. That is not the case.

And when the President speaks, he is speaking to his political base. So the reassurance of "don't listen to what I say, watch what I do" would be hollow.

Cindy Sheehan Quits

Good for her. She had banged her head against the wall long enough. She sacrificed her life and health and marriage and now realizes nobody meant what they said, even Democrats.

I'm waiting for the tell-all book. That would be great.

Wake Up!!

Be prepared this summer for yet another baby boomer self-indulgence in the form of yet another movie about Vietnam. Ummm, we're fighting a war now guys. Unlike the 60's however, the class divide has separated those fighting from the rest of the U.S. So the outrage is muted.

I have an idea. You don't need to go back forty years for a dose of invigorating anger. Just live in the moment. The outrage is right now.

The United States, your government, is torturing people. It is torturing teenagers.

The United States, your government, handed the reconstruction of Iraq over to political incompetents who were talked into massive, useless expenditures by contracting companies.

The United States, your government, is run by people who wait for the bureaucracy to feed them problems instead of thinking and asking the right questions.

The United States, your government, is sending our citizens into war without protective equipment they need.

The United States, your government, is shielding the children of the middle class from paying any cost for the debacle in Iraq.

Peace in the Middle East

It all starts with chitchat. That's right. Just talking to someone. So the United States finally decided to talk to Iran. At last! Denouncing someone from a pulpit, calling them "evil" and then expecting them to cooperate with you is not a strategy. Chest-thumping may feel good for a little while but does not get results.

The large, next-door neighbor of Iraq needs to be listened to right now, especially since they have some Americans in custody and are not letting them go. See? We should have thought before doing the same thing to Iran a few months ago. But then thinking was never a Bush Administration strong suit.

Turkey and the Kurds in Iraq

Remember when Turkey wouldn't let the U.S. go through its country to invade Iraq? Now the Turkish military is talking about moving into northern Iraq on its own. It seems that Kurdish separatists within Turkey are hiding in northern Iraq and Turkey wants to go in and get them.

For now, the Turkish military is holding itself back and waiting for civilian leaders to make the call. So let's imagine that the U.S. is pulled out of Iraq altogether, which is the best. The new Iraq now has to worry not only about Iran menacing them, but Turkey too. Not to mention Kurd separatism erupting in northern Iraq at the same time. Let's not forget the oil there.

If Iraq blows up, then Iran and Turkey will have good reasons to march in. I think what the Iraqis will find is that they had better hang together, or they will surely hang separately.

Iran's Hostage Strategy Worked

So now the truth is shook out. Iran took the British hostages so they could get their diplomats back. You may recall that the U.S. stormed an Iranian diplomatic facility and took some 'diplomats' as captives.

Well, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. So Iran seized British marines and held them without access to British embassy officials. Just like the U.S. did to the Iranian diplomats. Then, after the U.S. released a diplomat and allowed Iranian officials to visit the other ones, the British marines were released.

So you get the point now, President Bush? Or do you need a picture? If you throw beer in someone's face, be prepared to have beer thrown back in yours.

Econo-Girl has always said that the Iranians are neither stupid nor crazy.

Iran and Its British Hostages

The world has generally been confused by Iran's actions in taking British marines hostage. Why, after so nearly becoming engaged in a war with the U.S., would Iran choose to engage the U.S.'s number one ally so aggressively?

Here's an idea. The Iranian government is trying to get the new Iraq leaders used to the watery boundaries that the Iranian government wants. The Iranians are demonstrating clearly the boundary that will trigger a war and the boundary that they are willing to fight for.

After a time has passed, the hostages will be released. The message would have been conveyed to the Iraqis "Don't let your people go here or it will be considered close to an act of war."

What the Iranians may not be considering is that dramatic actions like these take on a life of their own. Once you do something like take hostages, the outcome cannot easily be controlled. Iran has seriously placed itself in a position to get attacked, this time led by Britain and supported by the United States. What the hell are they thinking?

Iran and Nuclear Weapons: What Happened?

A few short days ago, Ahmadinejad was willing to negotiate about nuclear issues. Now he spits in the eyes of the United Nations again. With hope and baited breath, the western press adds a few paragraphs about dissent on the issue within Iran. What has happened?

From Econo-Girl's perspective, Britain's decision to withdraw troops from Iraq means that Bush will not get his little war with Iran. And of course, as soon as a loud-mouthed bully gets a little breathing room, he starts being obnoxious again, like he never was scared before. But scared he was.

And doubtless Admadinejad was a little jealous of all the stuff North Korea got for being a little cooperative. He wants some toys, too. But this entire episode demonstrates clearly that Ahmadinejad is not insane, and that he doesn't really want a war. So he's not stupid, either.

U.S. War with Iran - We've Got To Stop This War!

It wouldn't be so scary if President Bush listened to people. Even once in a while. One gets the feeling he is acting off of a script he wrote years ago.

Looking to George Bush's example, if I ever think God wanted me to be President, I'd go straight to the psych ward.

Retired generals are refuting Bush claims of Iranian involvement in the Iraq insurgency. Econo-Girl herself was suspicious when all of the intelligence community agreed. Believe me, there is nothing more suspicious than the entire U.S. intelligence community agreeing on something.

It's not just Bush's lying. We can expect that from politicians. It's the cynical use of the same old formula: repeat it often enough, and fake the evidence. I don't think it will work this time.

US War with Iran - Pretext

One gets the feeling that the entire idea of attacking Iraq was a pretext to attack Iran. Econo-Girl would urge somebody to talk sense into the head of our President, but is afraid it would only get them arrested.

Bush will use al Sadr's presence in Iran as a pretext to start a war with them. Watch for a media build-up on the evils of al Sadr. Already Econo-Girl has seen him compared to Osama bin Laden.

The only chance to escape the impending debacle is for Iran to talk to Germany, and get Germany to talk to Israel and Britain about approaching Bush about not doing this.

People who are comparing the rhetoric about Iraq to what is being said by the President about Iran are correct. We live in dangerous times.

Atomic Israel: Iran, Iraq and War

The question isn't "Is Iran Supporting the Iraq Insurgency?" It's the kind of crap they would do, and Econo-Girl has no information to say they aren't. The question is "Why is the U.S. advertising this?"

The U.S. could be setting the stage for a real confrontation with Iran to let them know their rhetoric against Israel needs to calm down a few notches. Reminding them of what a real problem could look like in the headlines of the world's leading newspapers is a great way to get it across.

Or maybe the Administration has been planning a war with Iran all along. All the intelligence agencies agree, and that's suspicious right off the bat. The logic expressed in the New York Times article is something like "We were wrong before and we admit that. So you got to believe us now." OK, so you finally admitted the obvious when it was impossible to do anything else. That doesn't give you credibility.

One thing is certain: a lot of this bandying of headlines could stop if we would just have some kind of dialog with Iran directly. Remember, you don't have to be able to look into someone's eyes and declare you can do business with this man, to do business with this man. You just need to get over yourself.

See "Deadliest Bomb in Iraq Is Made by Iran, U.S. Says " today in the New York Times.

An Iraq Exit Plan

The U.S. can get out of Iraq. Here 's how: Have a referendum on a Truth and Reconciliation Commission related to Saddam Hussein's era and its aftermath.

The logic is that the Iraqis will have to be willing to keep the peace all on their own. Getting along will mean having to get over the injustices done to them one way or another. And that applies to everyone.

But they won't be willing to. They won't be willing to find a way to get past revenge and on to reconstruction.

And that's when the U.S. can get out of Iraq and save face. When the referendum is voted down.

We can't make the Iraqi government have a referendum. So we can do it online ourselves. It would be a total farce, of course. But relative to other plans, not such a bad idea.

Or the referendum can be shown in another way, such as stopping violence to talk.

There needs to be a way that the Iraqi people can show their commitment to moving forward. And fail. Then we have an out.

War vs. Universal Health Care and Free College Education

So what is it with these Republicans? If anyone had suggested that we spend billions improving our education system, make college free, and gave everyone health insurance, they would have been called a Socialist.

But given the chance to spend billions to kill people, they're all over it.

George Bush is looking for a legacy that isn't Iraq, and he's stumbled on the availability of health insurance. So tomorrow night we will hear a speech that he could have made at the beginning of his reign, but he was afraid of looking weak or not pandering to his base.

Now that he's desperate, America is starting to get what it needs: universal health care.

U.S. Forces Storm Iranian Consulate

Shocking and bold is how Econo-Girl would describe reports of U.S. forces storming a consulate and arresting diplomats. It's not that she disagrees with this action. The Iranians have a long history of hiding crimes under diplomatic cover.

So, Iran, how does it feel? You've got this diplomatic ground you put your consulate on, and an armed group of men and women storm it and take hostages. Sound familiar? IT'S WHAT YOU DID TO US! They have sent a diplomatic letter of protest. (Note to ETA: even the Iranians can use words rather than bombs.)

The United States accuses the Iranians of feeding and supplying the insurgency by calling it "meddling in Iraq." Rather ironic since we invaded the place. What could be more meddlesome than that? Anyway, we are probably right. Most likely Iran is causing trouble in Iraq.

The bottom line is President Bush is deadly serious about getting stability in Iraq. He wants and needs a success. And while Econo-Girl does not condemn seizing the Iranians, she points to the interwoven nature of the entire region. It's never just as easy as pulling weeds from the garden. Will the Iranians strike back against Israel? Will our next war be with Iran? George Bush is upping the ante big time and pulling in more countries than just Iraq.

Yes, they were there already in some form. Understood. But not at the level that they could be. If Iran would choose now to declare war against Iraq and the U.S. it would not be the first time they engaged in a self-defeating war.

As an aside, Econo-Girl wonders about the extent Iran has foreign Muslims in its equation. Are they counting on them to cause problems in the U.S. and Europe as a tool in its diplomacy? It would be the kind of thing Iran would think of. It would be overreaching, in Econo-Girl's opinion.