Monday, June 23, 2008

Bill Kristol a one-man personification of 2,000+ years of 'anti-Semitism' -which is why the NY Times hired him to Pimp Neo-Con agenda & IRAN WAR...



HE'S AT IT AGAIN! Bill Kristol, the one-man walking personification of 2,000+ years of why there is anti-Semitism, suggests that, should Barak Obama win the election of 2008, President Bush would be MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BOMB IRAN, than if Republican John McCain were to win the election this November.

THE NOTION THAT CONGRESS, NOT the president, must determine if a state of war exists between the United States and another nation DOES NOT ENTER INTO Kristol's calculations.

That is, BILL KRISTOL, the ETERNALLY WRONG Jewish pro-war Fox "news" commentator, editor of the Weakly Standard, and founder and Chairman of the now-disgraced PNAC "NewAmericanCentury.org" think-tank, the think-tank that started advocating the bombing and invasion of Iraq way back in 1997 - that BILL KRISTOL EMBRACES THE NAZI GERMANY "FURHER" model of dictator government for the United States of America, with the President acting as Furher in time of war, with UNLIMITED POWERS TO EXPAND THOSE WARS, powers NOT bound or limited by the US Congress - and of course unlimited, no oversight POLICE STATE POWERS that are identical to those with which the GESTAPO (or KGB, or STAZI) grabbed "state enemies" and whisked them away to torture, indefinite detention, or execution.

Of course, BECAUSE Mr. Kristol is a walking poster-child for 2,000+ years of anti-Semitism, and BECAUSE he is WRONG about everything he has talked or written about in the past dozen years (besides getting George Bush and Dick Cheney to invade Iraq), and BECAUSE PNAC, NewAmericanCentury.org is such a disgraced organization that Mr. Kristol has stopped paying its web-hosting bill (click our link to see for yourself, how the once mighty PNAC site, with signatures from Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Donald Kagan, Norm Podhoretz and others, is now found only on the archive sites of other websites, as here.

- BECAUSE Mr. Kristol is chronically WRONG, because he is chronically ARROGANT, because he chronically DESPISES free and fair and verifiable elections in America, and because he supports an ever expanding, ever more MURDEROUS WAR MACHINE and police state powers - precisely BECAUSE of those awful reasons, ARTHUR SULZBERGER, the owner and publisher of the NEW YORK TIMES, has HIRED Mr. Kristol to write for the Times!

Far from a "liberal media" organization, the NEW YORK TIMES is a facist 'news' organization with NAZI-esque OVERTONES - the Jewish "heritage" of Mr. Sulzberger and the majority of his writers and editors not-withstanding, the Times is a decidedly PRO-WAR, pro-police-state-powers organization which not only apologizes for the Lies-to-war of the Bush administration, but acted as a willing participant and megaphone in broadcasting many of those lies in a run-up to the unilateral attack, invasion, and astonishingly corrupt US occupation of Iraq.

Oldie but baddie: Kristol suggests that if American children come down with illnesses, but do not have health insurance, they should JUST GO AHEAD and DIE already -

"WHENEVER I HEAR ABOUT A HEARTLESS ASSAULT ON AMERICA's SCHOOLCHILDREN, I TEND TO THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA" (chuckles)

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Even the Inveterate Liars at the New York Times report accurately - - if you wait patiently enough, and read carefully.

Even the lying NEW YORK TIMES must report accurately every so often. According to HuffPost contributor Robert Naiman, Mr. Bush's latest foray into international doublespeak is no more, and no less, than a fig leaf over the Bush administration's PLANS TO EXPAND THE US WARS IN THE MIDDLE EAST, with a NAVAL BLOCKADE of Iran.

<< Who is the audience for this "show" [President Bush's fake "generous offer" to Iran]? People who don't read the New York Times, apparently. These people will be told that "all efforts at dialogue" have been exhausted and there is no alternative to "other punitive moves against Iran that could be taken by a 'coalition of the willing' outside the United Nations":


[Mr. Naiman quotes the Times story directly:]
"Officials would not provide details, but analysts suggest those could include a naval embargo of the Persian Gulf or the refusal to supply Western-made technology required for Iran's oil industry, creating bottlenecks in Iran's oil production."


[Naiman continues:]
For those scoring at home, A NAVAL EMBARGO WOULD BE AN ACT OF WAR. If undertaken "outside the United Nations" -- i.e. without the authorization of the UN Security Council -- it would be a war crime. If you don't think Iran would retaliate for this act of war, or that it doesn't have effective means of doing so, then you are, as John McCain might say, "naïve and inexperienced."

Once again a FALSE CHOICE is placed before the world -- the FAKE DIPLOMACY of the Bush administration, or war. Are there no other alternatives? >>

==================================================


NYT Exposes the Fraud of Bush "Generous Offer" to Iran
by Robert Naiman
17 June 2008
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/nyt-exposes-fraud-of-gene_b_107569.html

Who says America doesn't have a free press?

Everything you know about the world will be reported by the New York Times -- eventually.

You just have to be very patient -- and read very carefully.

On Sunday, the New York Times reported that President Bush "accused" Iran of rejecting a new set of incentives to stop enriching uranium. "I am disappointed that the leaders rejected this generous offer out of hand," Bush said.

Of course, Iran didn't reject it "out of hand," as the article goes on to explain:

Tehran did not formally reject the offer... Mr. Mottaki [Iran's Foreign Minister] said that Iran's response would depend on how the West responded to Iran's May 13 proposal calling for international talks on all issues and improved international inspection of Iran's nuclear facilities.
Nor was it true that President Bush was disappointed:

The French and Americans presumed in advance that their new proposal of incentives ... would be brushed aside by Tehran, officials and diplomats said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
[Presumably, "sensitivity of the issue" means "because they are not supposed to be quoted on the record saying that the 'diplomatic' initiative is a charade."]

So, in the space of thirteen words, President Bush managed to lie (at least) twice.

Was it a "generous offer"? That of course is a matter of perspective. Iran is being offered a package of economic incentives to give up what Iranians -- not just the government, but Iranians generally -- regard as a fundamental right -- mastery of the technology to enrich uranium. As Iran's UN Ambassador told the Boston Globe on May 31, "This has become an issue of national pride." As the NYT notes, the same deal was offered in the past, and Iran rejected it.

Regardless of whether anyone in Washington agrees that Iran has the right to enrich uranium, it is an objective fact that Iranians generally, not just the government, believe that Iran has the right to enrich uranium.

In April, the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland published a poll of Iranian public opinion. PIPA found that 81% of Iranians consider it "very important" for "Iran to have a full-fuel-cycle nuclear program" which would give Iran the capacity to produce nuclear fuel for energy production. Four out of five. Only 5% think Iran should not pursue a full-fuel-cycle program.

So, the United States and its allies made a proposal for Iran to give up something that four out of five Iranians consider to be "very important." The United States and its allies expected Iran to reject the "offer," as it has in the past.

Why the charade? The NYT explains:

But Mr. Bush and the Europeans who formally made the offer want to show that all efforts at dialogue are being taken.
So, "all efforts at dialogue" means restating a proposal that the government of Iran has already rejected -- and which Iran is expected, by those making the proposal, to reject again -- to give up something that four in five Iranians say is "very important."

Who is the audience for this "show"? People who don't read the New York Times, apparently. These people will be told that "all efforts at dialogue" have been exhausted and there is no alternative to "other punitive moves against Iran that could be taken by a 'coalition of the willing' outside the United Nations":

"Officials would not provide details, but analysts suggest those could include a naval embargo of the Persian Gulf or the refusal to supply Western-made technology required for Iran's oil industry, creating bottlenecks in Iran's oil production."
For those scoring at home, a naval embargo would be an act of war. If undertaken "outside the United Nations" -- i.e. without the authorization of the UN Security Council -- it would be a war crime. If you don't think Iran would retaliate for this act of war, or that it doesn't have effective means of doing so, then you are, as John McCain might say, "naïve and inexperienced."

Once again a false choice is placed before the world -- the fake diplomacy of the Bush administration or war. Are there no other alternatives?

The same PIPA poll found that 58% of Iranians support the idea of making a deal with the UN Security Council that would allow Iran to have a full-cycle nuclear program while giving the International Atomic Energy Agency "permanent and full access throughout Iran to ensure that its nuclear program is limited to energy production" and not producing nuclear weapons. PIPA notes that in a March 2008 poll for the BBC World Service 55% of Americans approved of such a deal.

Indeed, in its May 13 proposal -- which the NYT dismisses in a phrase by noting that it "does not mention the key Western demand -- that Iran stop enriching uranium," Iran proposed "international talks on all issues and improved international inspection of Iran's nuclear facilities."

Furthermore, as the Boston Globe reported May 31, Iran's UN Ambassador said Iran "would consider establishing an internationally owned consortium inside Iran that could produce nuclear fuel with Iranian participation."

As the Boston Globe noted on June 10, "Thomas Pickering, the US ambassador to the United Nations under President George H.W. Bush, endorsed the idea of such a consortium in a March article in the New York Review of Books." And the plan is "getting increased interest from senior members of both parties in Congress and nonproliferation specialists":

Senators Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, and Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican, have said publicly that the plan should be explored.
Representative Edward J. Markey, a Malden Democrat, went further, calling the plan "a creative, thoughtful, and productive potential solution."



And Joseph Cirincione, a "nonproliferation specialist who serves informally as an adviser to Obama's campaign," says the idea is "worth exploring."

So there is an alternative. But you wouldn't know it from the "show."

If you think Congress should be pressing for real diplomacy with Iran, you can ask them to do so here.


More in Media...

Sunday, June 15, 2008

The sleazly, traitorous, ChickenHawk Liars at FOX 'news" ENDANGER AMERICAN LIVES.....

Buzzflash.com Editor Mark Karlin "GETS IT RIGHT": FOX 'news', the right-wing PROPAGANDA MEGAPHONE for Australian tycoon RUPERT MURDOCH, is a DANGER to American democracy, and thus to America's national security and international security as well.

What should be remembered is, the Neo-Cons who Murdoch and his "news" division flunkie, Roger Ailes, hire and give so much broadcast time to - Chickenhawk liars such as BILL KRISTOL, SEAN HANNITY, and BILL O'REILLY - are CONTEMPTUOUS of international NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATIES, which is why the world has seen a RASH OF NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION since George W. Bush and Dick Cheney stole the White House, aided by Mr. Murdoch, who hired Bush cousin JOHN ELLIS to.. CALL THE FLORIDA vote, and thereby the 2000 election, for his cousin, GEORGE W. BUSH!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/nov/19/uselections2000.usa2


The TRAITORS at FOX 'news' believe INTIMIDATION and PROPAGANDA should at all times TRUMP FREE, FAIR, and VERIFIABLE ELECTIONS.... the original sin of the disaster for America that is the past 8 years of the Bush-Cheney administration.
===================================

How FOX News Endangers My Life!

by Mark Karlin Editor and Publisher
June 15, 2008
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/096


The FOX Propaganda Network endangers my life -- and yours.

How else can you explain that a White House adminsitration and Republican Party who have squandered hundreds of billions of dollars, countless lives, and a war longer than WW II -- and we haven't even caught Osama bin Laden?

The FOX Propaganda Network isn't set up to help save America from terrorists; it's the "Tokyo Rose" of television networks, set up to save the Republican plutocrats from the wrath of the voters who might otherwise realize the sheer and utter incompetence of Bush, Cheney and the GOP in dealing with terrorism.

Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Michelle Malkin and the entire multi-million dollar compensated on-air talents are traitors because their job is to protect the back and flank of the GOP, not to protect America.

And that is what puts my life at risk -- and yours.

Sean Hannity is no patriot. He is an oleaginous, slicked up car salesman chickenhawk who has sold America and us down the river for his paycheck.

One of the charecteristics that we are most proud of about America is our ingenuity, our tenaciousness, our resilience.

Yet, the FOX Propaganda Network has spent the last years supporting moribund, stone headed, unwavering failure.

If you think being a chronic loser is patriotic, then FOX is the station for you, because that's what it backs. That's not patriotic; it's contrary to what made America great.

What made America great is competence and ingenuity, not slavish dedication to the architects of defeat.

FOX is a traitor in our midst. Yes, they have their First Amendment rights, and no one is going to deny Sean Hannity his $40,000 plus speaking fees and private jet transportation.

But they should be shunned for the risk they help to create to all our lives by endlessly championing dolts, proven liars, and leaders who turn gold into cow dung.

All FOX proves in its propaganda angle is that a few thousand hearty potential terrorists, at most, have held the world's strongest power at bay for years, while ruining our economy with onerous and ineffectual war expenses, helping to weaken the dollar, drive up the price of oil, and, in turn, helping to cause a world food crisis and more.

It used to be the American way that if you couldn't do the job, you got out of the way or got fired.

But the fat paycheck propagandists at FOX now tell us that mediocrity and failure define the new American patriotism -- that and an American flag lapel pin made in China.

God have mercy on their souls -- and let's hope that we can survive the glorification that FOX gives to losers who imperil our lives.

We need an America that proves itself by getting the job done; not by relying on Roger Ailes GOP propaganda talking points to divert the masses from people who have utterly failed them.

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

US corporate media reprises its Goebbelsesque Lies-to-War abject corruption: 58 PERMANENT BASES IN IRAQ story given NO media coverage










The US media is now in full JOSEPH GOEBBELS mode: "We CONQUERED POLAND fair and square, and there is no way in 10,000 years that it will not become a permanent part of the Greater American Reich."

As to the thousands of Iraqis who are not too happy to have this American neo-colonialism shoved down their throats by Blackwater bullets and USAF/Navy bombs, well, the Washington Cowardly Post and the New York Lying Sulzberger-owned Times have an answer for them: "YOU DON'T COUNT, your miserable hides are worth no more of our concern than some _______ victim being marched off to oblivion."

"Don't forget... what we did to Fallujah we would LOVE to do to every other city and town in Iraq!"

(Oldie but baddie: ARTHUR SULZBERGER's NEW YORK lying TIMES publishes house columnist WILLIAM SAFIRE's calls for - - - "PACIFICATION" of Fallujah, (Warsaw ghetto fashion?), April 7, 2007
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F01E6DD1738F934A35757C0A9629C8B63

============================================

US Wants 58 Bases In Iraq, Shiite Lawmakers Say

June 9, 2008
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/40372.html

McClatchy reports the U.S. is demanding 58 military bases in Iraq as part of a "status of forces" agreement that would allow American troops to remain in Iraq indefinitely:

Iraqi lawmakers say the United States is demanding 58 bases as part of a proposed "status of forces" agreement that will allow U.S. troops to remain in the country indefinitely.

Leading members of the two ruling Shiite parties said in a series of interviews the Iraqi government rejected this proposal along with another U.S. demand that would have effectively handed over to the United States the power to determine if a hostile act from another country is aggression against Iraq. Lawmakers said they fear this power would drag Iraq into a war between the United States and Iran.

"The points that were put forth by the Americans were more abominable than the occupation," said Jalal al Din al Saghir, a leading lawmaker from the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq. "We were occupied by order of the Security Council," he said, referring to the 2004 Resolution mandating a U.S. military occupation in Iraq at the head of an international coalition. "But now we are being asked to sign for our own occupation. That is why we have absolutely refused all that we have seen so far."



The proposed "status of forces" agreement could lead to an uprising in Iraq, according to a leading Iraqi cleric:

A leading Iraqi Shiite cleric said Monday the status of forces agreement between Washington and Baghdad could lead to an uprising in Iraq.

"It is not to the benefit of the U.S. as a major power to lessen the sovereignty of Iraq. This treaty is humiliating to the Iraqi people, and might cause an uprising against it and those who support it," Grand Ayatollah Mohammad al-Modarresi told the Iranian state-run English-language service, Press TV.

Modarresi said the strategic framework between Iraq and the United States needs a full understanding of the situation in Iraq before negotiations on the arrangement proceed. "It will surely fail if kept as it is," he said.

Saturday, June 07, 2008

Even the "major" corporate media forced to acknowledge: America taken to war in Iraq on a chorus of lies....

Even American 'major media' and Congress forced to admit: The US invasion and occupation of Iraq was brought about by a premeditated chorus of LIES from the Bush-Cheney-Rove-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz-Libby White House and Dept. of Defense....
by Dave Lindorff
Fri, 06/06/2008
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/lindorff/107


The last couple of weeks have brought confirmation -- as if it were needed -- even in the corporate media that President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and the gang of thugs and sycophants around them in the White House, engaged in a massive conspiracy to lie the country into a war in Iraq.

The release of a confessional book by former White House press secretary Scott McClellan and the subsequent release of a long blocked report by the Senate Intelligence Committee make it clear that Bush, Cheney, & Company deliberately lied to Congress and the American public back in 2002 and early 2003 about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein (there was none). McClellan also states that Bush and Cheney conspired to "out" CIA undercover operative Valerie Plame Wilson, as part of a campaign to prevent her husband from exposing a major part of that campaign of lies: the claim that Saddam Hussein was seeking to build nuclear weapons.

It would be hard to overstate the extent of or the damage caused by these crimes that are now exposed to the light of day.

Beginning in 2001, making the most cynical use of the tragic killing of nearly 3,000 Americans in the 9-11 attacks, Bush and Cheney moved to aggrandize as much power as possible in the executive branch, and then to consolidate that power grab, engineered a full-scale war against Iraq, enabling them to claim that any opponent of their dictatorial usurpation of power was a traitor to the nation.

It was all a lie.

Saddam Hussein had no links to Al Qaeda, and he had no nuclear program. He had no weapons of mass destruction. His country was broken, thanks to years of international sanctions and war.

As a result of these lies, we have a country that no longer even remotely resembles what the Founders had intended. The Congress has been shorn of its once exclusive authority to legislate, and even its Constitutional power to investigate the executive branch has been successfully defied. It is now an atrophied relic. The federal judiciary, right up to the Supreme Court, has been packed with administration sycophants and Federalist Society advocates of unfettered executive power.

We also have been saddled with an unwinnable war in the Middle East that has claimed the lives of 4,500 Americans, destroyed the lives of another 30,000 -- or perhaps several hundred thousand, if we add in all those suffering psychological damage, or genetic damage from exposure to depleted uranium weapons. That war has also killed over 1 million innocent Iraqis, including countless children, destroyed their country, bankrupted this nation, and made the U.S. a pariah and a rogue state in the eyes of the rest of the world.

Most Americans long since came to the conclusion that the Bush Administration was a gang of idiots. Just watching their handling of the Hurricane Katrina disaster unfold was enough to make that clear. But the new reports from McClellan and from the Senate Intelligence Committee should make it clear that this was not just stupidity. The disasters that have befallen this nation, or that it has brought on the rest of the world, over the past eight years have been the result of deliberate lying and deceit and of the conspiratorial policies of a cabal of leaders whose goal from day one was undoing the Constitution and establishing the presidency as a kind of dictatorship.

Most of the corporate media have been unable to bring themselves to state this clearly. They edge around the issue by talking about the White House having been "misleading" or "untruthful." And little is said about the lasting damage that has been done to the Republic and the Constitution, or about what is to be done about a still bloody war that never should have been fought in the first place.