Janet's Conner

This Blog tell the Truth and will never not tell the Truth. Impeach Bush

Sunday, May 28, 2006

GUTLESS COWARD BILL FRIST (R-TN) SHOWS HOW HE'D FUNCTION AS PRESIDENT


Gonzalez' armed invasion of congressman William Jefferson's office is a clear violation of seperation of powers. The leader of the Senate should be taking a tough stand on this. But, we have Bill Frist, owing himself to so many politicians and corporation, organizations and religious extremists, he can't make more than s whisper.

What does Bill Frist do this week in response to the fascist thugs who are tearing apart our Constitution? The idiot starts talking, pushing the same old lame chritofascist extremist button---gay marriage---a constitutional amendment that has no chance of passing.

***That's because the Republicans don't have any new ideas. They figure, they'll just play the same old game that they always play...gay marriage, abortion, any so-so issues that they think will get them the votes. Do you ever "really hear them talking about it at any other times? I don't understand why some people can be so naive! What about the real issues people?

Remember, he is the highest level leader in the Congress and the Congress is under ATTACK. Just imagine if he were President and we awere attacked by an enemy state. This pale excuse for a leader would probably respond with an anti-abortion amendment.

***Hey! When are we going to hear about the results of the investigation that is being done on him? I guarantee you that they'll hang on to those results until......Go ahead, said it...AFTER THE ELECTIONS. He wasn't supposed to be running anyway. Or...maybe we'll hear from him sooner, since my blog is being monitored all of a sudden. Hey! I don't have anything to hide. I always give my sources. They just don't like what I have to say and they never did! DO YOU?

Sorry Bill, you are not only a lapdog toady to corporations and religious extremists, but you have also proved that you are a pathetically, frighteningly awful leader who is clearly incapable of handling real threats.

Frist should be teaming with Henry Reid marshalling the Senate and teaming with Dennis Hastert and Nancy Pelosi to stand up to the assaults on the seperations of powers. He should be happily encouraging and accepting Gonzalez' and Mueller's resignations for violating the Constitution. The Congress should be lashing back at the Justice Department, BIG TIME!

Did you ever think that Frist abused the use of his powers in one of those closed doors meetings with the Justice Department? And I think that the only reason that Hastert is all over this is because he's afraid that it might just happen to him!

The is a clear example of why the Republican leadership MUST be ejected from both Houses of the Congress.

You mean before the United States becomes just "a fond memory" and is brought down by everyone in the rest of the world that has become anti-American since the Bush administration and its Republican puppets. What ever happened to his plan for democracy across the Middle East? Remember when he wanted early elections over there? The people didn't want to have anything to do with his ways of freedom. The people that Bush did want in office ALL LOST and the RADICAL MUSLIMS, who don't want to have anything to do with Americans, took over! THIS ADMINISTRATION FAILED DRAMATICALLY WITH THAT ONE! AND FRIST IS JUST LIKE HIM. HE'S GOT TO GO!


Source: OpEdNews
Story By: Rob Kall
May 28, 2006

IRAQ: U.S. BRACES FOR FUROR OVER IRAQI DEATHS



Scandal brewing over civilian deaths in town sympathetic to insurgents

BAGHDAD, Iraq---The U.S. military is bracing for a major scandal over the alleged slaying of Iraqi civilians by Marines in Haditha---charges so serious they could threaten President Bush's effort to rally support at home for an increasingly unpopular war.

And while the case has attracted little attention so far in Iraq, it still could enflame hostility to the U.S. presence just as Iraq's new government is getting established, and complicate efforts by moderate Sunni Arab leaders to reach out to their community---the bedrock of the insurgency.

U.S. lawmakers have been told the criminal investigation will be finished in about 30 days. But a Pentagon official said investigators believe Marines committed unprovoked murder in the deaths of about two dozen people at Haditha in November.


Mounting investigations

With a political storm brewing, the top U.S. Marine, Gen. Michael W. Hagee, is headed to Iraq to personally deliver the message that troops should use deadly force "only, when justified, proportional and, most importantly, lawful."

Haditha is not the only case pending: On Wednesday, the military announced an investigation into allegations that Marines killed a civilian April 26 near Fallujah. The statement gave no further details except that "several service members" had been sent back to the United States
"pending the results of the criminal investigation."

Last July, Iraq's ambassador to the united nations, Samar al-Sumaidaie, accused Marines of killing his 21-year-old cousin in cold blood during a search of his family's home in Haditha, a city of about 90,000 people along the Euphrates River 140 miles northwest of Baghdad.

The military ordered a criminal investigation but the results have not been announced.


Echoes of Abu Ghraib scandal

Together, the cases present the most serious challenge to U.S. handling of the Iraq war since the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, which Bush cited Thursday as "the biggest mistake that's happened so far, at least from our country's involvement in Iraq."

"What happened at Haditha appears to be outright murder," said Marc Garlasco of Human Rights Watch. "It has the potential to blow up in the U.S. military's face."

He said that "the Haditha massacre will go down as Iraq's My Lai," a reference to the Vietnam War incident in which American soldiers slaughtered up to 500 civilians in 1968.

The Haditha case involves both the alleged killing of civilians and a purported cover-up of the events that unfolded Nov. 19.

That day, Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas, 20, of El Paso, Texas, was killed by a roadside bomb in Haditha, a Sunni Arab city considered among the most hostile areas of Iraq.

After the blast, insurgents attacked a joint U.S.-Iraqi patrol with small-arms fire, triggering a gunbattle that left eight insurgents and 15 Iraqi civilians dead, the Marines said in a statement issued the following day.


A gunfight that wasn't?

The version stood for four months until a videotape shot by an Iraqi journalism student surfaced, obtained by Time magazine and then by Arab televison stations. The tape showed the bodies of women and children, some in their nightclothes.

Although the tape did not prove that Marines were responsible, the military began an investigation. Residents came forward with claims that Marines entered two homes and killed 15 people, including a 3-year-old girl and a 76-year-old man---more than four hours after the roadside bombing.

It isn't clear if questions have been raised about the eight slain people that the Marines described as insurgents.

In March, Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the No. 2 U.S. commander in Iraq, said about a dozen Marines were under investigation for possible war crimes in the incident. Three officers from the unit involved have been relieved of their posts.


Incident further strains Iraqis' trust

Such incidents reinforced the perception among many Iraqis who believe American troops are trigger-happy---a chatacterization U.S. officials strongly dispute.

"America in the view of many Iraqis has no credibility. We do not believe that what they say is correct," said Sheik Sattar al-Aasaf, a tribal leader in Anbar province, which includes Haditha. "U.S. troops are a very well-trained and when they shoot, is isn't random but due to an order to kill Iraqis.

Ayda Aasran, a deputy human rights minister, said Iraqis should be allowed to investigate such cases---something the U.S. command has refused to permit.

Sunni political leaders will find it difficult to defend U.S. actions, even those aimed at establishing the truth, if they want to maintain their position as leaders of the Iraqi minority that provides most of the insurgents.

Even if criminal charges are brought in the Haditha incident, Sunni insurgents are likely to claim the case is simply a charade and argue that the Marines will escape serious punishment.


Town a trouble spot from the start

Haditha, site of a major hydroelectric dam, has long been considered a tough case. It is among a string of Euphrates Valley towns used by insurgents and foreign fighters to infiltrate from Syria to reach Baghdad and the Sunni heartland.

Many Marines have complained to journalists that they conduct repeated sweeps through villages to drive out the insurgents, who then reappear when the Americans leave. That has bred a sense of frustration among troops fighting a difficult war with no end in sight.

Reporters who embedded in Haditha several months before the alleged massacre said Marines considered the town as enemy territory, with frequent roadside bombings. During patrols inside the city. Marines treated inhabitants like terrorists, raiding their homes.

An Associated Press journalist who traveled in Haditha last June with a Marine unit not involved in the November killings saw a Marine urinate on the kitchen floor of a home and on another occasion saw insults chalked in English on the gate of an Arab home. The reporter asked a Marine commander about the incident and was told it would be investigated.


Insurgency blurs line

Last August, the British Newspaper The Guardian reported that Haditha was under the control of religious extremists who enforced their own strict interpretation of Islamic law---including decapitations of people suspected of collaborating with the Americans.

"This is a war in which the distinction between killing the enemy and massacring civilians is not always completely obvious," said John Pike of Global Security. "Counterinsurgency operations are particularly prone to the killing of people who, in retrospect, are judged to have been innocent civilians, but who in the heat of the battle seemed to be the enemy."

Some analysts, however, say the killings of civilains also reflect frustration among young troops fighting a difficult war with no end in sight. They say these young fighters have been thrust into an alien culture for repeated tours in a war whose strategy many of them do not understand.

"WHAT WE'RE SEEING MORE OF NOW, AND THESE INCIDENTS WILL INCREASE MONTHLY, IS THE END RESULT OF FUZZY, IMPRECISE NATIONAL DIRECTION COMBINED WITH SITUATIONAL ETHICS AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF THIS GOVERNMENT," SAID RETIRED AIR FORCE COL. MIKE TURNER, A FORMER PLANNER OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF.


Source of Information: MSNBC
Story By: The Associated Press
May 27, 2006






US: BUSH DEMOCRACY DOCTRINE 2003(?) - 2006---R.I.P.

WASHINGTON---Less than 18 months after U.S. President George W. Bush declared in his 2005 Inaugrual Address his unequivocal committment to the "ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world" tyrants, particularly in the Islamic world, are taking heart.

From North Africa to Central Asia, top U.S. officials are busy embracing dictators---and their sons, where appropriate---even as they continue to mouth the pro-democracy rhetoric that became the hallmark of the administration's foreign policy pronouncements, particularly after the 2003 invasion of Iraq failed to turn up evidence of weapons of mass destruction or ties to al Qaeda.

Particularly noteable in just the past month have been White House receptions for Azerbaijani President Iiham Aliyev and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's heir-apparent, his son Gamal; the praise lavished by Vice President Dick Cheney on Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev during a recent visit to Almaty; and last week's normalisation of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi.

"You add up all the pieces, and the message to the world is, 'We have a lot of other businesses than just democracy in this region,'" according to Thomas Carthers, director of the Democracy and Rule of Law Project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (CEIP) here. "And that business means friendly relations with all sorts of autocrats."

Whether due to the ever-tightening oil market, the sweeping electoral victories by Islamist parties in Egypt, Iraq and the Palestinian territories, or geo-strategic manoeuvering against Iran, Russia and China, the administration now appears to have all but abandoned its "freedom agenda" in favour of a new "realism" not much different from that practiced by successive U.S. administrations during the Cold War.

And, in a scenario familiar to veterans of Washington's Cold War machinations against democratic but suspiciously left-wing governments, the administration is focusing its efforts at "regime change" against those Middle Eastern governments, besides Israel, enjoy the greatest popular and electoral legitimacy in the region---namely, Iran and the Palestinian Authority (PA).

Moreover, the administration's neo-conservatism supporters, who were the first to justify the Iraq invasion as part of a grand strategy to "transform" the Middle East into a democratic region presumably far more hospitable to Israel and the West, have become noticeably less enthusiastic, particularly since HAMAS's sweeping election victory in the PA.

They now argue that the administration was wrong to press free elections on the region's rulers as a way of promoting democratic change in the absence of years, perhaps decades, of gradual liberalisation.

"...(A)n intense focus on holding elections everywhere as quickly as possible...has been a big mistake because, although elections are part of the democratic process, they are never a substitute for it," wrote former Israeli minister Natan Sharansky whose 2004 book, "The Case for Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror," was personally and repeatedly endorsed by Bush himself as the inspiration for his 2005 Inaugural Address.

That address marked the high point of the administration's freedom rhetoric, which Bush had launched in earnest in February 2003 in a speech at the neo-conservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI) where he first cited an analogy between the democratisation of occupied Germany and Japan and what Washington intended for Iraq.

During her confirmation hearings as secretary of state on the eve of the 2005 inaugural, Condoleeza Rice also insisted that Bush had "broken with six decades of excusing and accomodating the lack of freedom in the hope of purchasing stability at the price of liberty."

"As long as the broader Middle East remains a region of tyranny and despair and anger," she argued, "it will produce extremists and movements that threaten the safety of Americans and our friends."

Indeed, for some months after the inaugural, it appeared that the policy was more than mere rhetoric.

Encouraged by the momentum created by the ballot victory of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and the smooth running of elections in Iraq in January and the subsequent "Cedar Revolution" in Lebanon, the administration exerted unusually strong pressure in the elder Mubarak to release jailed opposition leader Ayman Nour and enact major constitutional changes. It also pressed Saudi Arabia on their reform programmes, and even gave up access to a key military base in Uzbekistan, a strong ally in the "global war on terror," after the massacre last May of hundreds of unnamed demonstrators in Andijan.

As the situation continued to go downhill in Iraq, Hizbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood did particularly well in elections in Lebanon and Egypt, respectively, and tensions with Iran arose after the upset win of right-wing candidate Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, however, Washington's enthusiasm began to fade.

The Palestinian election in January---which Washington had insisted go forward despite Abbas' and Israel's concerns that HAMAS would win---appears to have marked a turning point. As noted shortly shortly afterward by the chairman of the House of Representatives International Relations Committee, Henry Hyde, "There is no evidence that we or anyone can guide from afar revolutions we have set in motion."

In the last few months, the return to Realpolitik has been remarkable, even if the rhetoric remains largely unchanged.

"It will be business as usual," said Marina Ottaway, another democracy specialist at the Carnegie Endowment. "I think we can expect that the rhetoric and the funding for democracy-promotion activities through the Middle East Partnership Initiative---activities that are not dangerous to the regimes in power---will continue, but what we aren't going to see too much of is high-level pressure on those governments to carry out reforms...and certainly not pressure on any country to rush into elections."

"What has happened is what the realists predicted---that Israel and pro-American regimes in the region would be threatened by the democracy drive," said Anatole Lieven, a foreign policy specialist at the New America Foundation.

"If you try to carry out democratisation while pursuing policies that the vast majority of Muslims detest and in countries where economic development is stagnant, democracy will of course lead to anti-American radicalism," he added.

In addition to the strength of Islamist parties throughout the Middle East, the growing competition with Russia and China over energy supplies and pipelines and the looming confrontation with Iran also help explain the administration's fading enthusiasm for democratisation, particularly in the Gulf and among Iran's Central Asian neighbours, such as Azerbaijan.

"The administration is trying to convince these countries to be allied with us against Iran," noted Ottaway. "When you want them to help you, it's not a good time to be critical."

INDEED, ALMOST EXACTLY ONE YEAR AFTER THE ANDIJEAN MASSACRE, THE PENTAGON IS URGING A MAJOR REASSESSMENT OF RELATIONS WITH UZBEKISTAN, APPARENTLY IN HOPES OF REGAINING ACCESS TO THE KHANABAD AIR BASE, PARTICULARLY IN LIGHT OF RUSSIA'S RECENT SUCCESS IN ACQUIRING ACCESS TO BASES THERE.

VETERANS SAY CARE IS SLIPPING AWAY

KERRVILLE---Vowing to fight as hard for fairness as they did for their nation, South Texas veterans are sounding a call for health care services in areas they say are underserved.

Amid budget cuts and revamping of the South Texas Veterans Health Care System, the Kerrville Veterans Hospital, a full-service hospital in the 1990s, has been stripped of such specialties as cardiology, endocrinology, orthopedics and dermatology.

A contract for the urologist there will expire next month, forcing veterans in a 14-county area to go to San Antonio for treatment. Alan Hill, president of the Hill Country chapter of Vietnam Veterans of America, said at a rally Saturday.

Though routine procedures such a s oral surgery, colonoscopies, podiatry care and X-rays are still done in Kerrville, Hill said the hospital will close by the end of the year, "if we don't put a stop to it."

"A nursing home with a clinic is all it'll be," he told about 120 supporters outside the hospital.

Local officials of the Veterans Affairs Department say there are no plans to close the Kerrville hospital.

Hill said veterans, one of the largest voting blocs in the nation, should take nothing for granted and be ready to vote against leaders who don't support veterans.

"They're lying to us. We've got to let them know we're tired of it," he said. "Vote someone else in who'll be pro-veteran."

President Bush asked for $34.3B for veterans health care next year, an 11.3 percent increase. But members of Congress, including Chet Edwards, D-Waco, questioned a recent budget resolution that would cut funding by about $6B between 2008 and 2011.

***This budget is nothing but a lie. Please refer to my posting dated May 20, 2006---REPUBLICANS-BREAKING FAITH WITH AMERICA'S VETERANS. You'll know exactly what I mean if you read it.

"I do not understand, and I can tell you it didn't come from this subcommittee, why somebody, somewhere, staff or otherwise, put together a budget resolution that's on the floor today" that would cut expenses, Edwards said during an April 6 meeting of a House Appropriations subcommittee.

Rick Bolanos of El Paso, a Vietnam veteran and Democratic challenger facing U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla, R-San Antonia, also spoke at Saturday's rally.

Though Gulf War II has cost at least 2,465 lives, compared with 58,000 in Vietnam, Bolonas said many young veterans may not have access to counselors for post-traumatic stress, believed to affect 20 percent to 25 percent of veterans of Iraq.

"What you don't realize is we've lost more than 60,000 Vietnam veterans to suicide," he said.

After the rally, Sally Tarasoff, a former Army and VA nurse from Boerne, said the system needs to be built up to provide therapy for burn victims, counseling for veterans with delayed stress symptoms and lifetime care for vets with head wounds.

"What they are doing to our veterans is disgusting," she said.

A similar rally is set for 2 p.m. today near the McAllen VA Outpatient Clinic. Although the VA is building an outpatient clinic in Harlingen with hospitals in the area to provide routine surgery, patients must travel to San Antonio for most major procedures.

Tony Roman, a Vietnam veterans and one of about 20 San Antonians at the rally said he blames leaders in Washington.

***Yeah! The Republicans!

"They're trying to pay for the war on the backs of veterans," he said.


Source of Information: My San Antonio
Story By: Scott Huddleston
Express-News Staff Writer
May 28, 2006