Tomgram: Klare, The Pentagon as an Energy-Protection Racket

A Must read from Tom:

TomDispatch - Tomgram: Klare, The Pentagon as an Energy-Protection Racket:

This January, Tomdispatch has been focusing on the Pentagon, the imperial path, and militarization. Last week, Nick Turse explored the way Pentagon strategists, having taken possession of our future, are writing their own dystopian science fiction scenarios about how to fight in Baghdad 2025 and other urban megaslums of the planet (as American troops may soon be doing in Baghdad's huge Shiite slum of Sadr City). Then, Frida Berrigan considered the massively profitable business operation the Pentagon was running off fictional futures and the all-too-real weapons systems that will result from it.

Today, Michael Klare, an expert on resource wars and the author of the indispensable Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Dependence on Imported Petroleum, offers a startling vision of the grim energy future that the Pentagon is actually helping to create -- as well as the ruthless scrambles for energy resources, the Great Power energy races, and the kind of Big Brotherhood that may lie in our near future. This is the first of a major two-part Tomdispatch series on the possible emergence of a new phenomenon in our world that Klare dubs 'Energo-fascism.'

Terror Official: 'We're Going to Get Hit'; (and it will be Bush's fault!)

Gee, common sense told us this, 3 years ago.

It is only a matter of when, not if.

The other question is whether or not the people and their elected officials, at every level of government, will tolerate any move by Bush to use his own malfeasance, and its highly prdictable consequences, to declare martial law and finish off the constitution and any semblance of a Democracy.

Terror Official: 'We're Going to Get Hit' - Newsweek Periscope - MSNBC.com:

Jan. 22, 2007 issue - Intel director John Negroponte gave Congress a sobering assessment last week of the continued threats from groups like Al Qaeda and Hizbullah. But even gloomier comments came from Henry Crumpton, the outgoing State Department terror coordinator. An ex-CIA operative, Crumpton told NEWSWEEK that a worldwide surge in Islamic radicalism has worsened recently, increasing the number of potential terrorists and setting back U.S. efforts in the terror war. 'Certainly, we haven't made any progress,' said Crumpton. 'In fact, we've lost ground.' He cites Iraq as a factor; the war has fueled resentment against the United States.

Bush invites GOP congressional leaders to Camp David, to prevent mutiny

BuCheney are worried about their credibility and authority, if Republicans jump ship?

Damn! These two really are in a world of their own, aren't they?

They don't have any credibility, through no one's fault but their own. They would have been impeached a long time ago, had the Republicans in Congress not covered up for them, time and time again, and had the news media done their damnd jobs.

Most people, who blow their own credibility sky-high, do tend to lose their authority, eventually. That is as it should be.

Independent Online Edition > Americas:

The most important arm-twisting, however, this weekend was not on television but at Camp David. Mr Bush invited Republican congressional leaders to the presidential retreat in a bid to rally support, and dissuade members of his own party from breaking ranks with a 'lame duck' leader, whose approval ratings are at 35 per cent or less.

Though the White House insists that it alone charts the conduct of the war, the administration is deeply worried how non-binding resolutions opposing the troop build-up, likely to be voted upon in both Senate and House of Representatives in the next few weeks, could erode its authority and credibility.

Majority Democrats are already working on texts designed to attract maximum Republican support. The Senate vote will be especially telling, since Democrats need to find 10 votes among their opponents to gather the 60 needed to defeat the filibuster promised by the minority leader Mitch McConnell, a loyal backer of the President. If they succeed, it will be seen as further proof that Mr Bush has lost control of the Capitol Hill wing of his party, as Republican congressmen and senators facing re-election in 2008 run for cover from a war that sent the party to defeat in November's mid-term vote. 'Everybody is scared spitless,' John Thune, the South Dakota Republican, told The New York Times.

Bush to critics: What's your plan?

Critics? That would be me among many, many others, So here is my plan:


First of all.......

In order for any plan to work, you, Sir, and your Vice need to be gone. So my plan is to remove you from power (and see you in hell, preferrably).

Then, maybe, one of the many other, sane plans given to you by others, including Democrats, might stand the chance of snow-ball in hell. As long as you and your ncompetent, criminal regime are in the White House, nothing stands such a chanc of working for anyone.

Bush to critics: What's your plan? - Politics - MSNBC.com:

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Saturday challenged lawmakers skeptical of his new Iraq plan to propose their own strategy for stopping the violence in Baghdad.

“To oppose everything while proposing nothing is irresponsible,” Bush said.

In a pitch to lawmakers and the American people, Bush said the United States will keep the onus on the Iraqi government to take charge of security and reach a political reconciliation. He countered Democrats and his fellow Republicans who argue that Bush is sending 21,500 more U.S. troops into Iraq on the same mission.

Many in the hot seat at Libby trial

Many have predicted a pardon from Bush, in order to avoid the spectacle of a trial.
That move might have been a no brainer, had the Dems not won a majority in the House. (We see the Senate, other than for purposes of chairmanships, as split 50/50, as Lieberman is basically, a Repulican, these days.) .

However, he might ought to think twice about pulling that pardon crap now. It could be seen as obstruction of justice.

WP: Many in the hot seat at Libby trial - washingtonpost.com Highlights - MSNBC.com:

When Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff goes on trial Tuesday on charges of lying about the disclosure of a CIA officer's identity, members of Washington's government and media elite will be answering some embarrassing questions as well.

I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby's case will put on display the secret strategizing of an administration that cherry-picked information to justify war in Iraq and reporters who traded freely in gossip and protected their own interests as they worked on one of the big Washington stories of 2003.

The estimated six-week trial will pit current and former Bush administration officials against one another and, if Cheney is called as expected, will mark the first time that a sitting vice president has testified in a criminal case. It also will force the media into painful territory, with as many as 10 journalists called to testify for or against an official who was, for some of them, a confidential source.

NRDC: Exposing the U.S. Nuclear War Plan

Please do explore this site!

It contains very good information for those of us who are not up on what "Nukular" warfare would mean.

Poppy Bush once speculated that the U.S. could win a Nuclear war. What kind of insanity is that?

Junior is made up of some strange and depleted DNA.

NRDC: Exposing the U.S. Nuclear War Plan:

NRDC's nuclear war simulation provides an open, independent assessment of the U.S. nuclear war plan, and shows it is a Cold War relic in need of major reform.

From movies like Dr. Strangelove and War Games to folk anthems like Dylan's 'Masters of War,' Cold War pop culture is full of chilling depictions of nuclear war planners at their secret arithmetic. The disturbing truth is that the real American war plan for attacking Russia -- the SIOP, or Single Integrated Operational Plan -- has always been shrouded in impenetrable secrecy. The plan exerts enormous influence over weapons programs and arms control debates, yet is beyond the reach of all but a handful of military planners. Even presidents have been largely unable to influence it.

The NRDC nuclear war plans project uses a computer simulation to reveal what nuclear conflict would look like if it occurred today. The project shows that while the Cold War is long over, American nuclear war plans have hardly changed at all. The war plan still requires some 2,600 warheads to be on alert and trained on Russian targets at all times.

NRDC's simulation will allow those outside of the 'nuclear priesthood' to examine the nuclear war planning process. The result of that open analysis, we believe, should be the elimination of SIOP in its current form -- a giant step that permits deeper nuclear arms reductions and a less risky global future.

Odd silence at Fort Benning — during and after Bush’s speech

There has definitely been a sea-change, since the Dems won back the majority n Congress.

It is as if a dam has broken.......

The Carpetbagger Report » Blog Archive » Odd silence at Fort Benning — during and after Bush’s speech:

I admit at the outset that I did not hear the president’s remarks at Fort Benning, Georgia, yesterday. Bush was reportedly looking for a “friendly audience and a patriotic backdrop” to help sell his “new” escalation policy, and the president who can hardly resist using troops as props probably thought this trip to a military base would be similar to others.

Except it wasn’t.

The New York Times said Bush “received a restrained response from soldiers who clapped politely but showed little of the wild enthusiasm that they ordinarily shower on the commander in chief.”

The Washington Post noted that Bush received minimal applause, which was “hardly the boisterous, rock-star reception Bush typically gets at military bases. During his lunchtime speech, the soldiers were attentive but quiet.

The LA Times said the president “received a less enthusiastic reception.”

The far-right Washington Times said the troops’ response to the president was “tepid.”

But it’s sometimes difficult to gauge an audience’s reaction solely from applause. It’s far better, in this case, to talk to the troops themselves, and get their perspectives on the war, escalation, and the president. And the plane-full of reporters who were on hand for the Ft. Benning event would have done just that — if only the Bush gang had let them.

You have to go to China to hear of US soldier suicides

There is much more of this than most realize.........

You have to go to China to hear of US soldier suicides // buzzflash.net:

"FALLUJAH, Iraq, Jan. 14 (Xinhua) -- A U.S. marine took his own life by putting a bullet through his head on Sunday morning near the restive city of Fallujah, local police source said...'The soldier uttered words saying he was sad and miserable...' Three U.S. helicopters landed at the police station and one of them evacuated the marine's body...The U.S. military did not confirm the incident.

Condi Defends Her Madman Boss with Infuriating Psychobabble

Is this the most incompetent woman on earth or what?

She has made a mess of the State Department, from all reports.

She made a mess of counter-terrorism, before 9/11.

Wait a minute...maybe, she isn't as incompetent as it appears. Could be she has two big "missions accomplished" under her belt.

The Ostroy Report:

Condi Defends Her Madman Boss with Infuriating Psychobabble :

"It's not an increase. It's not an escalation. It's an 'augmentation.'

No, we're not talking about fixing a pair of saggy boobs here, folks, it's how Secretary of State Condescending Rice described Bush's planned 20,000 'troop surge' into Baghdad. When challenged by a bi-partisan panel of Senators this week, Condi lied, side-stepped and offered up nothing but a bunch of Bushevik bullshit. In one day this administration plays more word-parsing and semantics games than Bill Clinton ever did in eight years.

Consider this exchange between Rice and Nebraska's Sen. Chuck Hagel (R) before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee: (Click on over^)

Condi Defends Her Madman Boss with Infuriating Psychobabble

Is this the most incompetent woman on earth or what?

She has made a mess of the State Department, from all reports.

She made a mess of counter-terrorism, before 9/11.

Wait a minute...maybe, she isn't as incompetent as it appears. Could be she has two big "missions accomplished" under her belt.

The Ostroy Report:

Condi Defends Her Madman Boss with Infuriating Psychobabble :

"It's not an increase. It's not an escalation. It's an 'augmentation.'

No, we're not talking about fixing a pair of saggy boobs here, folks, it's how Secretary of State Condescending Rice described Bush's planned 20,000 'troop surge' into Baghdad. When challenged by a bi-partisan panel of Senators this week, Condi lied, side-stepped and offered up nothing but a bunch of Bushevik bullshit. In one day this administration plays more word-parsing and semantics games than Bill Clinton ever did in eight years.

Consider this exchange between Rice and Nebraska's Sen. Chuck Hagel (R) before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee: (Click on over^)

Beyond the Call to Surge, the Need to Purge Our Media

For the second time this week, we feel the need to address this strange admiration for Bush, by some in the news media, because he, supposedly, believes in what he is doing, even if he has to stand alone, as if that is always a good thing in a leader.

What if that leader is delusional?

Adolph Hitler believed whole-heartedly in what he was doing, attempting to take over all of Europe and exterminate the Jewish people. Is he to be admired for that? Not by me, that's for sure!

If the driver of the car, in which you are a passenger, believes, whole-heartedly, that if he just drives fast enough, he can fly over the Grand Canyon, do you just admire the hell out of him, all the way to your death on the Canyon floor?

Do any of these people really know what Bush believes?

This guy has told so many contradicting stories about what he believes, who the hell knows?

There was a time that he didn't believe in nation building. That was hundreds of thousands of lives and trillions of bucks ago.

There was a time he believed in a humble foreign policy. Pre-9/11 thinking? I don't think so.

We could have still had a humble foreign policy, if we had completed the mission in Afghanistan and left Iraq the hell alone, but that was never in the cards, was it?

Beyond the Call to Surge, the Need to Purge Our Media:

In the aftermath of President Bush's prime-time war cry for escalation from the White House Library, the network newscasters were skeptical about his chances for success but seemed to be impressed by his willingness to stand up for what they think he believes, like some lone but gutsy hero on the prairie.

Much of the commentary deals with him as the beleaguered leader standing strong against public opinion but doing what he feels he had to do. The subtext was you just have to admire that man This is the very positioning his image managers cultivated.

The focus was on one man speaking to one camera, standing alone in a library, a White House room you had a sense with which he was unfamiliar, speaking to the teleprompter, reading someone else's words with as much well-practiced conviction as he could muster. The tone was reasonable because of his many claims of having listened to advice from his team and even his critics.

There was no analysis of who wrote the speech or the attitudes of his many Generals and advisors who disagreed with its thrust. There was no reminder that the Iraqi military actually opposed it. He positively cited the Iraq Survey Group whose recommendations he had actually rejected, as in, 'in keeping with the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, we will increase the embedding of American advisers.

Brooding Prince’s Soliloquy

What the hell difference does it make, if Bush gives his speech from the Oval, the map room or from the roof, for that matter?

His credibility is dead of self-inflicted wounds. If he really gave a damn about this country, he and Cheney would both resign, because as long as he is "the Decider," the nation's credibility remains on life support and of absolutely no use for good.

Brooding Prince’s Soliloquy:

To surge or not to surge, that is the question. As our prince proposes, once again, to take arms against a sea of troubles, he responds not to the disaster that he has visited upon Iraq, but rather embraces a desperate strategy for salvaging what remains of his reign.

To win, perchance to dream. Few Americans, a mere 17 percent, according to the latest Washington Post/ABC poll, think that sacrificing more Americans in patrols on the streets of Baghdad will reverse the slings and arrows of our outrageous Iraqi fortune, but giving a speech about it might provide our hapless Hamlet with some temporary political cover.

“All the world is really watching,” proclaimed Bush press secretary Tony Snow, “and it’s important to get this right.”

Toward that end, as The New York Times reported, “The president’s aides were contemplating having Mr. Bush deliver it from the White House Map Room, a site replete with the history and imagery of World War II—imagery that Mr. Bush has invoked as he has sought to compare the campaign against terrorism to the struggle against totalitarianism and the Nazis. But the Oval Office, a more traditional setting, was also being considered.

The many presidents of George W. Bush.

God, now the guy is Eve White, Eve Black and Sybil, and it's all Oedipal in origin.

Whatever the diagnosis, we need him to be gone, along with all of his twisted brothers and sisters of the 'Cult of Neo-Conservatism.'

The many presidents of George W. Bush. - By Timothy Noah - Slate Magazine:

If you had asked any other President in American history during a time of war whether they had a credibility problem because they had not foreseen changes on the battlefield, you probably would have had plenty of cause. I mean, Abraham Lincoln constantly guessed from Manassas straight through until the final months of the war.
—White House press spokesman Tony Snow, Jan. 9, 2007 (a lying charmer who ought to be horse-whipped)

So now it's Abraham Lincoln. Seems like only yesterday that President Bush was the reincarnation of Harry S. Truman, the patron saint of low approval ratings. Last month Sen. Richard Durban, R.-Ill., told reporters that at a meeting with congressional leaders, Bush compared his trials in Iraq to Truman's at the dawn of the Cold War.

Bush even gave Truman biographer David McCullough a Presidential Medal of Freedom. But that was last month. Maybe somebody in the White House read Slate's Fred Kaplan, writing in his Jan. 3 column ('Iron Man') that presidents who compare themselves to Truman were like 'failing artists who take solace from the fact that van Gogh didn't sell many paintings in his lifetime. … Maybe they're just lousy artists.' Or maybe Bush's handlers figured that if you're going to be an unpopular previous president, why not be the best? (Please do click over^)

Steve Irwin's Little Girl

Looks like a Daddy's girl to us.

May she be blessed.

BellSouth - ENTERTAINMENT:

BURBANK, Calif. (AP) - Bindi Irwin, the 8-year-old daughter of the late 'Crocodile Hunter' Steve Irwin, followed in her dad's footsteps Thursday, using her American television debut to talk about animals.

The khaki-clad girl skipped across the stage holding a blue-tongued lizard as she greeted audiences of the 'The Ellen DeGeneres Show.'

'This is Spanky. He's 10 years old,' Bindi told DeGeneres as she prodded the lizard to lick her face in an attempt to show its tongue.

'I just love animals. My dad really brought it out in me,' Bindi said. 'He's the one that made me.'

Her father, animal lover and conservationist Steve Irwin, died Sept. 4, from the poisonous jab of a stingray. Along with Bindi, he left behind his wife, Terri, and 2-year-old son, Bob.

Like her father, Bindi said she loves 'all animals, great or small.'

Bush says he alone to blame for mistakes in Iraq. LOL.

Though this is hardly an admission of anything, we will take Bush at his carefully chosen word. He is responsible for the debacle in Iraq; for all the lies that got us into this nightmarish hell hole, not listening to anyone outside of his own inner circle of babble-heads and every death that has resulted from "mistakes that may have been made."

O.K.

So, now, where is the accountability?

Did Bush pull a Reagan? (I accept responsibility for everything under the sun, but I don't know what planet I'm on, so I can't be held accountable for any of it.)

Bull shit!

This kind of crap has gone on in every Republican administration since Nixon and I am sick of it. Until a president is finally held accountable, in any way that really matters, it will happen again and again, if the current "Mr. Responsible-sort-of " doesn't kill us all first.

Bush says he alone to blame for mistakes in Iraq - MSNBC Wire Services - MSNBC.com:

"WASHINGTON - President George W. Bush told Americans on Wednesday 'where mistakes have been made in Iraq, the responsibility rests with me,' as he unveiled a new war plan that includes an infusion of more than 20,000 extra U.S. troops.

Bush's legacy: The president who cried wolf

There is one thing worse than a president who cries wolf, and that is a president who cries wolf, when he is the wolf.

I have no doubt that the world is a dangerous place, made even more so for Americans, by this president. Nevertheless, the single greatest threat to this nation and to other people around the world, is the Bush administration.

Bush's legacy: The president who cried wolf - Countdown with Keith Olbermann - MSNBC.com:

Only this president, only in this time, only with this dangerous, even messianic certitude, could answer a country demanding an exit strategy from Iraq, by offering an entrance strategy for Iran.

Only this president could look out over a vista of 3,008 dead and 22,834 wounded in Iraq, and finally say, “Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me” — only to follow that by proposing to repeat the identical mistake ... in Iran.

Only this president could extol the “thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group,” and then take its most far-sighted recommendation — “engage Syria and Iran” — and transform it into “threaten Syria and Iran” — when al-Qaida would like nothing better than for us to threaten Syria, and when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would like nothing better than to be threatened by us.

We're In Trouble

Seems like everyone is seeing it now.

Yep, full speed ahead. Bush is convinced that if he doesn't wipe out certain parts of the Middle-east and Central Asia, no one else will.

He's right.

That's precisely our point, when we say that Bush and Cheney need to be arrested.

Discourse.net: We're In Trouble:

We're in big trouble.

Have a look at The Washington Note, whose latest begins like this:
Washington intelligence, military and foreign policy circles are abuzz today with speculation that the President, yesterday or in recent days, sent a secret Executive Order to the Secretary of Defense and to the Director of the CIA to launch military operations against Syria and Iran.

The President may have started a new secret, informal war against Syria and Iran without the consent of Congress or any broad discussion with the country.
If this is true, we're in very big trouble. Or, if the rumor was sparked by an order 'only' authorizing clandestine operations (or, worse, bombardment) as a form of provocation, this is serious stuff. But even if it's not at all true in any way, we're in pretty big trouble, as the spread of this rumor means we've reached a point in our politics when sober, quite moderate, people like Steve Clemons are starting at shadows.

I can only remember one time that felt like this: when Nixon was in the last weeks of his Presidency, and people -- including the then-Secretary of Defense-- got worried that Nixon might try to start a war to distract the country from his troubles, or even stage some sort of coup. People in DC even began to speculate as to what military forces could be assembled as a counterweight in the event that Nixon, rumored to be drunk and unstable, chose to subvert the Constitution.

Hagel: Bush speech worst blunder since Vietnam

No, Senator.

While we liked what you had to say, the worst blunder was taking this country into an illegal, immoral war based on deception, using fear and vengeance- mongering.

Now, what we have to do is stop the imperial loon from sending more of our young people to kill and be killed, for purely political and partisan reasons, in Iraq or its neighboring countries.

Sioux City Journal: Hagel: Bush speech worst blunder since Vietnam:

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) -- U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel offered Thursday what might have been the harshest criticism to date of President Bush's plan to commit more troops to Iraq, calling the president's Wednesday night speech 'the most dangerous foreign policy blunder carried out since Vietnam.'

Hagel's comment drew applause in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in which members questioned Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice over the plan to commit 21,500 additional U.S. troops to Iraq.

The commotion prompted Committee Chairman, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., to call for order.

The remarks by Hagel, a Republican, followed his scathing rebuke Wednesday night of the Iraq plan. He called it a 'dangerously wrongheaded strategy that will drive America deeper into an unwinnable swamp at great cost.'

Harmonizing Shades Of Green

Yes, indeed, a lot of cats to herd.......

TomPaine.com - Harmonizing Shades Of Green:

It is up to greens to make sure that in 2007, a year full of possibility on energy and environmental issues, change moves in the direction of long-term sustainability and justice. Powerful forces will be pushing the other way. They—chambers of commerce, dinosaur corporations, think tank and government shills—tend to speak in a unified voice.

The good guys—the side of clean energy and emissions reductions—are a rump coalition of liberal environmentalists, libertarian conservationists, conservative evangelicals, geeked-out entrepreneurs and paranoid defense hawks, among others.

That's a lot of cats to herd, and the green movement-that-isn't usually produces a cacophony.

Diagnoses and solutions range wildly in spatial and temporal scale, emphasis, cost and feasibility. Everything from light bulbs to organic food, to flex-fuel cars to a carbon freeze tax—no, make that a cap-and-trade program—clamors for attention.

Before I suggest a positive agenda most elements of the green coalition can agree on (in my dreams, anyway), it's important to understand why circumstances are uniquely aligned for action, and forecast a few of the forces against which greens should consciously countervail.

Circumstances favor progress. Greens confront opportunities in 2007 that haven't come around since the energy crisis of the 1970s. A new consensus is coalescing.

Bush Channels Nixon

Actually, he sounded more like Lyndon Johnson to us, but this article expresses some valid points.

However, it is important right now to see the LBJ in GWB, as it reminds us of the possibility of another Gulf of Tonkin (substitute Persian Gulf) incident, as an excuse for blowing hell out of Iran.

TomPaine.com - Bush Channels Nixon:

At the tail end of the Vietnam war, when everyone in Washington knew that America had lost, peace talks stalled and President Richard Nixon ordered a massive bombardment of North Vietnam over Christmas, 1972. In a horrific and needless weeks-long reign of terror, the United States bombed cities and villages in Vietnam, including a devastating strike that demolished Bach Mai, Hanoi’s largest hospital. Once the president got that out of his system, the assault ended, the peace talks resumed and shortly thereafter the United States gave up on the war.

What President Bush is doing in Iraq is precisely the same thing. There is virtually no one in the foreign policy establishment, in the military or anywhere else who believes that the Iraq war can be won. But, by sending 21,500 more U.S. troops to Iraq to engage in a massive, citywide offensive in Baghdad, Bush is doing what Nixon did in 1972. He is unleashing carnage for reasons that are not military, but political and petulant. Many thousands of Iraqis, and not a few Americans, will die as a result—and, in the end, the United States will have to get out of Iraq anyway.

The essence of Bush’s “new” policy is to double the U.S. troop presence to about 40,000 soldiers and Marines in Baghdad, where they will act as shock troops for the forces of the an Iraqi army dominated by the Shiite militiamen. The U.S. forces will operate in and alongside thousands of Shiite-dominated army and police thugs. Said Bush: (Click on over^)