Dennis and his 'radical truth'

History will recognize him as the man who sounded the alarm when the Bush administration moved America closer to the brink of disaster.

John Nichols wrote a short but powerful blog entry about Dennis Kucinich and his lonely road as the 'speaker of truth' in a time of lies and deceptions. (I noticed that Nichols posted it at 12:53 AM on the 16th. Apparently he doesn't sleep much either.)

Dennis has been on the right side of history and truth from the very beginning. He has a perfect track record: he spoke out against the war before it started, voted against the Patriot Act, spoke out against the privatization of Iraqi oil, has filed impeachment papers against Cheney, and is now warning of the Bush administration's attempts to bring the US closer to a state of open war with Iran.

Power to the Dennis.

Nichols:

Such is the case with Kucinich's appropriate answer to the latest move by the Bush-Cheney administration to ramp up hostilities with Iran. That move -- the unprecedented attempt to label Iran's 125,000-strong Republican Guard as a "specially designated global terrorist" group -- is, as the congressman says "nothing more than an attempt to deceive Americans into yet another war -- this time with Iran."

No one who has paid even the slightest attention to the Bush-Cheney administration's approach to Middle East affairs can doubt that Kucinich is right. Yet, his is a lonely voice of clarity amid the din of Democratic obfuscation that aids and abets this White House's worst instincts.

"The belligerent Bush Administration is using this pending designation to convince the American public into accepting that a war with Iran is inevitable," argues Kucinich.

"This designation will set the stage for more chaos in the region because it undercuts all of our diplomatic efforts," he adds. explaining that, "This new label provides further evidence for Iran's leaders that there is no point to engage in diplomatic talks with the United States if our actions point directly to regime change."

Delivering the response that should be coming from New York Senator Hillary Clinton, Illinois Senator Barack Obama and especially from Delaware Senator Joe Biden, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when he isn't campaigning for president, Kucinich argued that, "Our nation is better served by demanding sensible and responsible diplomatic foreign policy initiatives from the Bush Administration."

Kucinich, who has proposed impeaching Vice President Cheney for continually prodding the country toward an unnecessary war with Iran, may not get the political credit he deserves for calling out this administration. But history will recognize him as the man who sounded the alarm when the Bush administration moved America closer to the brink of disaster.

Controlling the spigot

Apparently the same day Dennis Kucinich gave his hour long presentation - to an ambivalent House - about US Oil pressure to privatize oil in Iraq, Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA) made the following statement on the House floor:

Mr. Speaker: (wouldn't this be Ms. Speaker?)

This President and Vice President have vowed to repeat the mistakes of history, and they have put into motion a plan to do just that in Iran, even as the House is about to send the President a box of blank checks for Iraq, against the will of the American people.

The history is worth knowing.

In 1953, the United States and United Kingdom launched Operation Ajax, a covert CIA operation to destabilize and remove the democratically elected government of Iran, including then Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh.

Why? Oil.

Under Mossadegh, the Iranian government decided to reclaim Iranís rightful ownership of its national oil treasure, which had been exclusively controlled by the British who were taking 85 percent of the profits.

Oh, and by the way, the UK also kept the books secret, merely telling Iran what its 15 percent take was.

As soon as Mossadegh began to reclaim Iranís oil treasure, it was all over. Operation Ajax was set into motion.

The U.S. embassy in Tehran provoked phony internal Iranian dissent, while the Brits engineered an Iranian financial crisis by orchestrating a global boycott of Iranian oil. We brought down the Iranian government and installed the Shah.

For two decades, we propped up the Shah against the will of the Iranian people. It was all about controlling Iran. It still is. Today, ABC News is reporting exclusively that this President has authorized a new covert CIA plot to bring down the Iranian government.

I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the journalism produced by chief investigative reporter Brian Ross and Richard Esposito of ABC News.

This is their lead sentence in the story.

“The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.”

We’re back in 1953 and that worked out so well.

Of course, the Vice President wanted to invade Iran, so we can be sure he will spin new tales of fear in coming days to keep his preferred option, invasion, very much alive.

The President knows only one way -- my way or the highway.

His Vice President knows only one way- invade and seize control of what you want- and he wants the oil treasure of Iraq and Iran to become wholly owned subsidiaries of the western oil companies he so favors.

With Iraq in civil war, the President has authorized a secret plan to repeat the doomed mistakes of history in Iran.

How many billions of reconstruction money for Iraq will be siphoned off for the deconstruction of Iran?

The American people are virtually shouting at us to pay attention and get our soldiers out of Iraq, now.

Vast sums of U.S. taxpayer money are flowing into Iraq and billions of US dollars are missing.

The Special Inspector for Iraq Reconstruction told a San Antonio newspaper last week that corruption in Iraq is endemic and debilitating.

But, Prime Minister al-Maliki has granted ministers and former ministers immunity from prosecution by Iraq’s Commission on Public Integrity.

And, in turn, the ministers can shield their own employees from prosecution.

And, a government that has been told by this President and Vice President to pass an oil law that transfers control- and profits- to western oil companies, just like the good old days in Iran.

Overthrowing Iran in 1953 was all about oil. Invading Iraq was all about oil. And the new secret plot against Iran is all about oil.

Oil is the only benchmark this President and Vice President want, and they will keep American soldiers fighting and dieing until an oil law is passed in Iraq that gives western oil companies control of the spigot.

It is time to unmask the latest doomed plot to overthrow Iran and past time to get out soldiers out of Iraq.

Nothing less than protecting our troops is acceptable.

Thank you.

Much ado about absolutely nothing

One day I am hopeful, the next day... I actually wake up and drink the coffee.

Nothing is going to happen to end the Iraq war. I imagine we'll be attacking Iran by summer (this should make Hillary happy - she obviously wants to be a 'war president' too; not that she will ever, ever - please God - ever get elected.)

I don't imagine anything will be done about Gonzales either. We want him gone - even the media is demanding he be fired. He is a traitor to democracy - has been all along - and still... nothing will be done.

The rule of lawlessness

Gonzales has turned our rule of law into something resembling a banana republic. He was a chief architect of the Patriot act, the Military Commissions Act, advocated torture, shrugged of Geneva Conventions, was the legal adviser to Bush before the Iraq invasion - and actually advised Bush that he didn't even need to consult with Congress before attacking Iraq. The list goes on and on and on. Gonzales is almost single-handedly undermining our Constitution and our Bill of Rights. And friends - thats treason.

From a GQ interview with Senator Chuck Hagel, concerning the President's 'assumption' that he didn't need to ask Congress permission before invading Iraq:

Hagel: Mr. [Alberto] Gonzales was the president’s counsel at that time, and he wrote a memo to the president saying, “You have all the powers that you need.” So I called Andy Card, who was then the chief of staff, and said, “Andy, I don’t think you have a shred of ground to stand on, but more to the point, why would a president seriously consider taking a nation to war without Congress being with him?” So a few of us—Joe Biden, Dick Lugar, and I—were invited into discussions with the White House.

Gonzales even shut down an investigation that would have led to an investigation of himself.

So much for the 'Department of Justice.' There is no justice to be found here without an outside prosecutor - and one who can't be fired by the investigatee.

And the investigation into the Plame Scandal?

Waxman has asked Fitzgerald to appear before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. But now the Justice Department - the very Justice Department that is being investigated by the Senate, for firing prosecutors based on their purported 'lack of loyalty' to W - has imposed a kind of gag order on him. Why don't they simply... fire him? Too many people watching?

In a written response, Fitzgerald made clear that the Department of Justice will not permit him to discuss any non-public information with Congress.

Fitzgerald cited the fact that Libby's case is still "pending" as an explanation of his inability to provide non-public details to the committee. Fitzgerald also pointed out in his letter to Waxman that he arrived at his conclusions after being advised by the Department of Justice.

As for subpoenaing anyone else to testify about the Scooter-Rove-Cheney 'Plamegate' - what if you threw a subpoena... and nobody came?

How deep the investigation will go is unclear; Democratic willingness to force testimony from members of the executive branch or their staff through use of subpoenas remains unproven. Given the record of the Bush administration, it is unlikely that they would cooperate with requests for information from Congress.

Justice... right. If any of you out there want a shot at justice, demand a special outside ethics commission, and a special prosecutor.

There is a pack of rats devouring our White House, and they know the cat is dead. Even if every crumb of their corruption comes to light - and I'm sure it will be mind boggling if it ever does (no wonder Bush is trying to hide his papers - forever;) nothing will be done. And they know it.

I wish Bush and Cheney were Democrats, because surely the GOP would have impeached them by now. Surely. Surely this is far graver than lying about sex.

Alas, Bush/Cheney & Co. are Republicans, and the Democrats cower before Cheney.

Between Iraq and a hard place

Dear Senators: I'm really glad y'all are now talking about the war, finally, but we out here have been talking for years. Time is short. Democracy is calling, and no one will answer the bell. Our forefathers are turning in their graves.

It's this 'partisan thing' again - isn't it? No doubt the Senate bill was written in such a way that many of you just couldn't sign it - too many lobbyists looking over your shoulders with red felt pens. What will it take? What language is required? Can you write one yourselves? Or will the Democrats then reject it, simply because it came from the GOP?

Or is the real, honest truth... the fact that any language advocating withdrawal from Iraq will be rejected, period. Because how can you have a bill without a plan - without a timetable? This is just a game, isn't it?

Republican leaders said they counted the day as a victory. “It is clear now that the majority of the Senate opposes a deadline for the withdrawal of troops,” said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader.

A victory? The majority of Americans want our troops out of Iraq, and you are claiming this as a 'victory?' A partisan victory - of course. Never mind the good of the nation. 'Republican before country' that's what you've always said.

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, countered, “The Republicans are rubber-stamping the president’s failed policy. That’s the message here.”

Shocker, Harry. Of course they are! So... go after them! I don't know what the problem is up there, but we're sick to death of it out here.

This one is the best of all, oh how easily the lies flow from his lips:

President Bush, speaking at a Republican fund-raising dinner, applauded the senators who voted against a timetable. “Many of those members know what I know: that if American forces were to step back from Baghdad now, before the capital city is more secure, the scale and scope of attacks would increase and intensify,” he said.

Right. In four years, and with 'mission accomplished,' Baghdad grows less secure by the hour. But sure, kill a few more thousand people George. Your contractors are still making piles of cash. Baghdad is like an ATM machine: we put the cash in, the contractors take it out.

So, back to you exalted Senators: find new language, find something that everyone can agree on. Find a way out.

How to really 'Support Our Troops' - and 'Keep America Safe'

The army is sending injured and traumatized troops into Iraq, reservists are now trapped into an endless cycle of tour after tour after tour; the war is costing billions of dollars and miring our nation in debt. Obviously we don't have enough troops to sustain this front, and meanwhile the real enemy - the real Al Qaeda - is growing in power somewhere in Pakistan, and perhaps Afghanistan.

Are you waiting for them to 'fight us over here' again? Because they will, if you leave them alone too long... if you keep wasting time and refusing to actually DO anything.

Bin Laden could have been captured in Afghanistan when the troops first went in! Not enough troops were sent, and now we're so obsessed with occupying Iraq (oil) that we've turned our backs on him once again.

Seriously folks... is this safe? Is this prudent? Shouldn't our army be where the real enemy is? Like say, Afghanistan? These insurgents in Iraq -- this is a religious, civil war. Everybody knows that now. Like Climate Change - you can deny all you want, but the jury is now in.

How exactly does destroying our army by keeping them injected in the middle of a civil war 'support our troops?' This is such hypocrisy, it is below any civilized, intelligent being. Isn't it possible that 'destroying the American army' is exactly what 'the real enemy' wants? Doesn't this play perfectly into Bin Laden's hands?

Bin Laden isn't in Iraq, you fools. This 'support the troops' argument is total bunk. Lies and hypocrisy. It has also put our nation in real danger, here at home. Terrorism, world-wide, has increased dramatically and measurably since Bush invaded Iraq. Nice going W - I feel so much safer, as do our allies and the rest of the world.

It's no wonder people in South America greeted Bush with signs depicting Hitler. How does all of this look to an outside viewer? I'll bet it looks more than a little bit like military tyranny. Like a simpleton, Bush poked a stick into a wasp's nest - simply because it was there - and stirred up swarms of angry, vengeful terrorists. Our presence in Iraq is probably creating a new terrorist every minute. So now we have not only Al Qaeda after us, but we are making life-long enemies in Iraq. This one may well blow back on the next generation of Americans, like our covert operations in Afghanistan (during Russia's invasion) most likely created 9/11.

Marching in GOP lock step

Not all Republicans are willing to do the Cheney, GOP lockstep - some of them are finally speaking out on matters of conscience. I contend our best hope for the survival of our democracy rests in the hands of progressive democrats - and a handful of Goldwater conservatives. Country before party.

If you look closely, you'll see that Hagel and Obama work well together. At first glance it would appear that these two caucuses (if you can call Hagel and Specter a 'caucus') wouldn't have much common ground. But they are the staunchest defenders of our Constitution in Washington - they are speaking out on behalf of our ethics as a nation, and in Hagel's case, our troops. They will step away from the 'party line' in a heartbeat if they believe it is against the best interests of the nation as a whole. And they don't support our troops with mere lip service... they support our troops by speaking out against the hypocrisy of claiming to 'support the troops', while sending them into the middle of a sectarian, civil war.

As for the rest of you lock-stepping, 'troop-supporting' GOP senators: I'm calling you out. If you really cared about the troops, why did you send them into battle without body armor, gear and armored vehicles? Surely we've given you enough money. We've coughed up billions of our tax dollars - enough to keep our nation in debt for generations. Surely you could have tossed our troops a bone and adequately equipped them for battle. Or was that the money that mysteriously vanished - poof - into the thin, hot, desert air?

If you cared about the troops - and you insist that you do - why are you sending them back into battle with PTSD and other injuries that make them unable to wear protective armor? If you really cared about our troops - and you insist that you do - why don't you funnel some of these billions of dollars into ongoing medical care for the thousands of wounded veterans created by your war?

Hogwash.

You don't care about the troops. You care about the millions of dollars your lobbyist, military and oil contractor buddies are making in Iraq - even the ones like KBR, who took the money and ran, without providing much if any 'services' in return. You care about saving face - even if it means throwing our troops into the meat grinder, day after day. You care about the Republican party. The troops - and the welfare of the nation, for that matter - just aren't your problem.

Since we're so low on troops that we're sending injured and traumatized soldiers back into battle, and because you profess to 'support the troops' so very much (and we believe you;) I assume you are now ready to commit your own children to this ongoing battle, this global 'War on Terror' that seems best fought to protect 'our' oil interests in Iraq. Have they enlisted yet? Have your kids enlisted?

I didn't think so.

Everything the GOP says is exactly the opposite of the truth. Doesn't truth matter anymore? Does Washington even remember what 'truth' once looked like?

Of course not - its all about money and lobbyists. And don't think I'm supporting the mainstream, waffling Democrats - if they dilute that Iraq funding bill any further, a glass of water will have more substance. That bill has 'I'm afraid of alienating any of my lobbyist friends' stamped all over it. And then there is that gaping hole where 'you must confer with Congress before attacking Iran' used to be. Shameful, Ms. Pelosi. So much for the Democrats.

Vietnam redux. Here we go again... time to escalate!

The draft will be next, mark my word. How can we avoid it? We don't have the troops to sustain this attrition. Period. You can't ignore logic, guys... reality always wins.

Hot air

I don't believe in either party now. The whole thing has been compromised. No one plans to do a damned thing... unless perhaps they can talk this war and rampant corruption to death. Or perhaps they can hasten global warming with all of their bombast and hot air... and the ocean will rise another 10 or 20 feet... right over Washington D.C. That might do it. Every time they hold a debate, another glacier melts.