- Peace Garden: 02/01/2007 - 03/01/2007

Isn't this just great...

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Seymour Hersh: US Indirectly Funding Al-Qaeda Linked Sunni Groups in Move to Counter Iran

It’s not as if we’re ever going to find any evidence that American money went to any Sunni terrorist jihadist groups in Lebanon, which I allege. There is no direct connection. What there is is a flood of American money, none of it approved by Congress, into the government of Lebanon, which is Sunni. The government of Prime Minister Siniora. And they, in turn, funnel it into various -- at least three different Sunni jihadist groups.
It reminds me of that handshake Rummy had with Saddam a few years ago. Yesterday's enemy is today's friend is tomorrow's enemy. Need a program book to keep track of all the changes. Bin Laden is enemy #1, no wait it's Saddam, no now it's North Korea, no it's Iran, wait I see Sweden rearing its head into the lead. Yes Sweden - they gave us Abba - but we all know Abba is Aramaic for "father" - yes the father of all terrorism. Damn those northern Europeans!


Shaking the faith of W

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Have Researchers Found Jesus Christ's Tomb?

With the help of statisticians, archeologists, historians, DNA experts, robot-camera technicians, epigraphers and a CSI expert from New York's Long Island, Jacobovici puts together a case in which he argues that the bones of Jesus, Mary and Mary Magdalene, along with some of their lesser-known relatives, were once entombed in this cave. James Charlesworth of the Princeton Theological Seminary consulted with Jacobovici on the project and is intrigued: "A very good claim could be made that this was Jesus' clan." Faced with the controversial theological and historical implications of what he calls his "rediscovery," Jacobovici is sanguine. "People will have to believe what they want to believe," he says.
This is shaking the world - shaking the churches - shaking the faith. The question is - will W continue his wars still dreaming of that Second Coming?



Monday, February 26, 2007

Now how about running to save this nation?


One benefit of global warming?

Melting Ice Gives Birth to a Strange New World

Herds of sea cucumbers on the move, fields of sea squirts and forests of glass sponges. These were just some of the fantastic sights scientists captured on an underwater expedition to a remote region of Antarctica. Marine biologists made a unique inventory of lifeforms on a part of the seabed that had been sealed off for thousands of years by massive ice shelves before they suddenly broke up. Waves of colonising plants and animals quickly moved in to exploit the new habitat which had opened up after a region of ice a third of the size of Belgium had disappeared and let in daylight and oxygen.
Without global warming these scientists wouldn't have had a chance to explore.

Sorry guys - I wish you didn't have this opportunity.


The heat is officially on...

U.S. Says Raid in Iraq Supports Claim on Iran

A raid on a Shiite weapons cache in the southern city of Hilla one week ago is providing what American officials call the best evidence yet that the deadliest roadside bombs in Iraq are manufactured in Iran, but critics contend that the forensic case remains circumstantial and inferential. The new evidence includes infrared sensors, electronic triggering devices and information about plastic explosives used in bombs that the Americans say lead back to Iran. The explosive material, triggering devices, other components and the method of assembly all produce weapons with an Iranian signature that has never been found outside Iraq or southern Lebanon, where Hezbollah is believed to have used weapons supplied by Iran, the Americans say.
So we claim we have them on the "aid to Iraq" "crime." What about the nuke scheme? Well U.N. calls U.S. data on Iran's nuclear aims unreliable
though international concern is growing about Iran's nuclear program and its regional ambitions, diplomats here say most U.S. intelligence shared with the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency has proved inaccurate and none has led to significant discoveries inside Iran. The officials said the CIA and other Western spy services had provided sensitive information to the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency at least since 2002, when Iran's long-secret nuclear program was exposed. But none of the tips about supposed secret weapons sites provided clear evidence that the Islamic Republic was developing illicit weapons.
Well we don't need that anymore. Now we have a Fox NY report that NYC faces a terror attack from -- wait for it -- IRAN!

Boy if we ever needed hard evidence to attack Iran I guess Fox gave us the best.

Somebody has to stop us before we destroy the entire planet.


Will this stop the madness?

Sunday, February 25, 2007

US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack

SOME of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defence and intelligence sources. Tension in the Gulf region has raised fears that an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly likely before President George Bush leaves office. The Sunday Times has learnt that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack. “There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran,” a source with close ties to British intelligence said. “There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible.”
Will this stop the march to war? I hope and wish - but the madness of the king ...


Carter and Gore

Friday, February 23, 2007

Carter Endorses Gore

ABC News' George Stephanopoulos Reports: In an exclusive interview with former President Jimmy Carter set to air on Sunday's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos", Carter lavished praise on "(his) favorite Democrat) former Vice President Al Gore. Carter told ABC News, "If Al should decide to run -- which I'm afraid he won't -- I would support Al Gore." The former Democratic President asserted Gore could accomplish much more in the White House than he ever could as a private citizen, saying to Stephanopoulos, "His burning issue now is global warming and preventing it. He can do infinitely more to accomplish that goal as in the incumbent in the White House, than he can making even movies that get -- you know, that get Oscars." Despite public pressure from Carter and others, the former President does not believe Gore will make a second bid for the White House saying, "I don't think he will. I've put so much pressure on Al to run that he's almost gotten aggravated with me.
Well we can still dream, and hope, and pray to the gods.


Joey gives W a big wet one!

Lieberman threatens party switch over Iraq debate

Senate Democrats appear ready to try and revoke the broad authority Congress gave President George W. Bush to launch his increasingly unpopular invasion of Iraq in 2003 but the escalating debate in Congress could change the balance of power in that legislative body. While Democratic leaders map out a strategy to seize control of the war from Bush, maverick pro-war Democrat Joe Lieberman is threatening to jump to the Republican side of the aisle, effectively turning control of the Senate over to the GOP.
The people of CT who voted for your stupid ass thank you.

Too bad they couldn't past your fear-mongering to see the real you. But Joey, what about your Connecticut for Lieberman party that you started? What about the Dems you said you wanted to stay with? Oh so many pushed aside because of your "one and only."
Run to W! Run to him and support the madness! Your ideals, your family, your heritage all given up because of one little kiss!


Playing into W's hands...

Thursday, February 22, 2007

U.N. agency: Iran still enriching uranium

Iran has expanded its uranium enrichment program instead of complying with a U.N. Security Council ultimatum to freeze it, the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency said Thursday in a finding that clears the way for harsher sanctions against Tehran. “Iran has not suspended its enrichment-related activities,” the International Atomic Energy Agency said in a report.
Wasn't this one of the reasons reports have stated we will go after Iran?


Now it's Russia?

Missile shield in Poland, Czech Republic to counter Iran: Rice

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said a planned missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic was designed to counter a threat from Iran and posed no danger to Russia. "We have a growing Iranian missile threat and we need to be able to deal with that," Rice told reporters after talks with German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier. "Everybody understands that with a growing Iranian missile threat which is quite pronounced there need to be ways to deal with that problem.
Iranian missiles? Come on now. Flexing our muscles in front of Vlad - how many "enemies" can we deal with at one time?


A start...

Democrats plan bill to limit U.S. mission

Determined to challenge President Bush, Senate Democrats are drafting legislation to limit the mission of U.S. troops in Iraq, effectively revoking the broad authority Congress granted in 2002, officials said Thursday. While these officials said the precise wording of the measure remains unsettled, one draft would restrict American troops in Iraq to combating al-Qaida, training Iraqi army and police forces, maintaining Iraq's territorial integrity, and otherwise proceeding with the withdrawal of combat forces.
A start. But what about getting them out now?!?


My letter from Joey

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Did you get your letter? No - then read mine...

Thank you for contacting me regarding U.S. military operations in Iraq. I continue to receive many letters offering suggestions as to how the United States should proceed, and I certainly appreciate hearing your thoughts. In 2003, I supported the use of force in Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein from power because I believed that he was a grave threat to our country, his people, and the world; and I continue to believe that decision was right. Since then, I have often disagreed with how the war has been run. And I have not hesitated to speak out about the mistakes the Bush Administration has made, mistakes that have made this war more costly than it should have been. But I have worked hard to stay away from partisan political attacks because that is unacceptable when our nation is at war. And I continue to believe that how we end our involvement in Iraq will have a significant effect on our security for a long time to come. The Administration was wrong for not: (1) securing the support of enough of our allies in the run-up to the war; (2) having enough troops on the ground; (3) having a sensible plan to win the peace and establish stability in Iraq after Saddam fell; and (4) sooner putting the Iraqis in charge of their government and their economy, including their oil supply. Despite these serious handicaps, we have made some hard-won progress. We have helped the Iraqis to write a constitution, hold three historic democratic elections, form a government, and build an Iraqi army. But the past year since the February 2006 terrorist bombing of the Shiite Mosque in Samara by Al-Qaeda has been painfully disappointing. The one question that really matters right now is how to move forward and provide a better future for the Iraqi people and more security for the American people. And, in my view, that question is not just about when we get our troops home, but also how we get our troops home and what they leave behind. I believe it is every bit as much of a mistake to stay in Iraq indefinitely, both for the Iraqis and for us; and I have consistently opposed an open-ended commitment of American troops. I believe the U.S. mission in Iraq is critical to America's national security, and we must do everything possible to try to succeed. America's commitment of military and non-military personnel and other resources must be in response to conditions on the ground as determined by our military commanders, rather than by adherence to arbitrary deadlines. In December of 2006, I spent ten days traveling in the Middle East and speaking to leaders there, all of which has made one thing clearer to me than ever: while we are naturally focused on Iraq, a larger war is underway. On one side are extremists and terrorists led and sponsored by Iran and Al-Qaeda. On the other are moderates and democrats supported by the United States. Iraq is the central battlefield on which that conflict is being fought today. How we end the struggle there will affect not only the region but our worldwide war against the extremists who attacked us on September 11, 2001. Because of the bravery of many Iraqi and coalition military personnel and the recent coming together of moderate political forces in Baghdad, I believe the war is still winnable. The American people are justifiably frustrated by the lack of progress, and the price paid by our heroic troops and their families has been heavy. But what is needed now, especially in Washington and Baghdad, is not despair but decisive action -- and soon. I have confidence in the ability of the U.S. military to get the job done. To get this right, we have to put aside our partisan differences; talk to each other with respect; and have an honest, direct discussion about how to go forward now and end this conflict in America's interests. I want to get past the false and empty choice between continuing to do just what we are doing and just giving up and pulling out, both of which are recipes for more failure and less security. I believe the President's proposal to surge more troops there now is a new approach that can succeed. After speaking with our military commanders and soldiers, I strongly believe that additional U.S. troops must be deployed to Baghdad and Anbar province -- an increase that will at last allow the coalition troops and the Iraqi army to establish security throughout the Iraqi capital, hold critical central neighborhoods in the city, clamp down on the insurgency, and defeat Al-Qaeda in that province. We should put a priority on building logistics capabilities in Iraqi units and increasing the strength of the Iraqi security forces. We must ensure that they are supplied with the essentials to sustain the fight against the insurgency, including better equipment and weaponry. Then we must focus more resources on the creation of jobs and the provision of basic services in the greater Baghdad area. Also, I am glad that the President has moved to form a bipartisan working group on the war on terrorism in this new session of Congress, as he mentioned in his State of the Union address. We must also get tougher with the Iraqi political leadership. They must do a better job of cracking down on the militias; beefing up the reconstruction efforts; and building a genuine, well-functioning unity government. Success in Iraq can best be built from the center out. Once we prevail in Baghdad, the task of making progress throughout the country will be much more achievable. Success will require more than action in Iraq; it will require supportive action here in Congress. As a member of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, and Chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, I am closely following the situation in Iraq. I appreciate your taking the time to write me with your thoughts. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind as we move forward. My official Senate web site is designed to be an on-line office that provides access to constituent services, Connecticut-specific information, and an abundance of information about what I am working on in the Senate on behalf of Connecticut and the nation. I am also pleased to let you know that I have launched an email news update service through my web site. You can sign up for that service by visiting http://lieberman.senate.gov and clicking on the "Subscribe Email News Updates" button at the bottom of the home page. I hope these are informative and useful. Thank you again for letting me know your views and concerns. Please contact me if you have any additional questions or comments about our work in Congress. Sincerely, Joseph I. Lieberman UNITED STATES SENATOR
What a load!


Does W need an excuse?

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

US 'Iran attack plans' revealed

US contingency plans for air strikes on Iran extend beyond nuclear sites and include most of the country's military infrastructure, the BBC has learned. It is understood that any such attack - if ordered - would target Iranian air bases, naval bases, missile facilities and command-and-control centres. BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says the trigger for such an attack reportedly includes any confirmation that Iran was developing a nuclear weapon - which it denies. Alternatively, our correspondent adds, a high-casualty attack on US forces in neighbouring Iraq could also trigger a bombing campaign if it were traced directly back to Tehran.
All the talk about EFPes coming out of Iran...

Do I really think W would be crazy enough to invade? You bet I do!


Monday, February 19, 2007


Like provoking a dog...

Saturday, February 17, 2007

U.S. patrol ship on alert in gulf

ABOARD THE USS FIREBOLT — Every day the 30 sailors on this coastal patrol ship in the Persian Gulf are on alert. At 170 feet in length, the Firebolt and similar craft are the smallest and possibly the most lightly armed vessels in the U.S. Navy. Soon the Firebolt will be joined in the region by one of the Navy's most heavily armed behemoths: the 1,092-foot-long carrier John C. Stennis, with a crew of 5,000 and more than 80 warplanes. The Stennis will head a strike force of destroyers, cruisers and submarines deployed to the region by the Bush administration amid heightened tensions with Iran over its nuclear program and allegations of Tehran meddling in Iraq. Despite their differences in size and weaponry, the Firebolt and the Stennis share a stated mission: deter the Iranian navy from hostile acts in an area vital to oil shipments by showing Tehran that the strength of the U.S. military remains formidable despite its entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Iranians, however, view any American presence in gulf waters as a provocation and security threat, and have repeatedly issued warnings that they have the ability to attack U.S. ships by using drone aircraft, small boats and missiles.
While it awaits the arrival of the Stennis in the region, the Firebolt's crew keeps a wary eye on the two Iraqi oil terminals in the gulf. Crew members are convinced that if the U.S. and Iran are headed for confrontation, they'll be in the middle of it.
Yet the official word is - we're not on war-footing.


No tip for W

Thanks Mr. Fish for showing us the attitude of our very own W(aiter).


Good Old Joe

Senate gridlocks on Iraq war resolution
Wonder how Joey voted?

Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, sided with Republicans on the vote.
Blood on the hands. We knew this in November. We'll remember forever.


It's a start...

Friday, February 16, 2007

House Passes Iraq Resolution With 17 Votes From G.O.P.

The 246 to 182 vote in favor of the non-binding but nevertheless important measure set the stage for a crucial Senate debate on Saturday on how to debate the administration’s Iraq policy, or indeed whether it should be debated at all.
Seventeen Republicans voted for the resolution. Two Democrats, Jim Marshall of Georgia and Gene Taylor of Mississippi, voted against it.
Now let's roll up the sleeves and end this war and prevent a war in Iran. It was a start, but a lot more needs to be done.


A curious attack

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Revolutionary Guards die in Iran border bus blast

Eleven Iranian Revolutionary Guards were killed yesterday when a bomb destroyed their bus in a volatile border area of Iran.
A semi-official Iranian news agency said the daylight attack in Zahedan, the capital of Sistan-Baluchistan province, had been claimed by Jundallah (Allah’s Brigade), an extremist Sunni rebel group that Iranian officials have previously linked to al-Qaeda.
So if al-Qaeda targeted Iranian troops, shouldn't we help Iran? Isn't it my enemy's enemy is my friend?

Or is this fitting into some big plan? Iranian troops attacked, they venture into Iraq to capture the perpetrators, they run into U.S. troops - justification for an Iranian invasion.

Wonder who created the bombs used by Jundallah? Let's hope Iran doesn't have proof that we made it . They wouldn't steal W's propaganda idea would they?


Question of the day...

Today at his press conference W dealt with the Iran bomb stories:

"I can say with certainty that the Quds Force, a part of the Iranian government, has provided these sophisticated IEDs that have harmed our troops," Bush said Wednesday. "We know that the explosively formed penetrators are manufactured in Iran," Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace told Voice of America during a trip to Australia about what senior military officials call EFPs. "What I would not say is that the Iranian government per se knows about this. It is clear that Iranians are involved and it is clear that materials from Iran are involved, but I would not say, based on what I know, that the Iranian government clearly knows or is complicit," Pace said.
He posed a question 2 or 3 times:
"I do not know whether or not the Quds Force was ordered from the top echelons of government," he said. "But my point is: What's worse -- them ordering it and it happening, or them not ordering it and it's happening?"
What's worse is that another set of lies, words of fear, and twisting words are being foisted on us (again) to try to justify an Iranian invasion.


Deals with N. Korea

Behind Bush's N. Korea Reversal

More than anything else he has done in his second term, George W. Bush’s embrace of a fuel-for-nukes accord with North Korea shows that he is adjusting to the harsh realities of diplomacy—and straying ever further from the ideology of regime change. The proof: the president has cut a deal that is likely to help a member of his notorious “Axis of Evil,” Kim Jong Il, stay in power longer, even while it may make the world safer.
Or is it just that they have nothing we really want? Iran and Iraq on the other hand...


Building the pressure

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

For Neocons, an Attack on Iran Has Been a Six-Year Project

In September 2000, the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) issued a report titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses," which espoused similar positions to the 1992 draft and became the basis for the Bush-Cheney Administration's foreign policy. Libby and Wolfowitz were among the participants in this new report; Cheney, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other prominent figures in the Bush administration were PNAC members. "The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security," the report read. "While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein. ... We cannot allow North Korea, Iran, Iraq or similar states to undermine American leadership, intimidate American allies or threaten the American homeland itself."
In sum, the Bush Administration seems to have concluded that Iran is guilty until proven innocent and continues to maintain that the Persian Gulf belongs to Americans -- not to Persians -- setting the stage for a potential military strike.
The article also has a link to an excellent timeline for our "case against Iran." We all must study it and learn so we can fight the hysteria and calls for war. When the bomb explodes and fingers point at Iran, know the real bombers, know the real enemies of this Nation.


Setting the stage for the endtimes.

Monday, February 12, 2007

Target Tehran: Washington Sets Stage for a New Confrontation

The United States is moving closer to war with Iran by accusing the "highest levels" of the Iranian government of supplying sophisticated roadside bombs that have killed 170 US troops and wounded 620. The allegations against Iran are similar in tone and credibility to those made four years ago by the US government about Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction in order to justify the invasion of 2003.
But wait, what about the new weapons - EFPs?
Such bombs were used by guerrillas during the Irish war of independence in 1919-21 against British patrols and convoys. They were commonly used in the Second World War, when "shaped charges", similar in purpose to the EFPs of which the US is now complaining, were employed by all armies. The very name - explosive formed penetrators - may have been chosen to imply that a menacing new weapon has been developed.
It doesn't matter - Iran is supporting our enemy - right?
No specialist on Iraq believes that Iran has ever been a serious promoter of the Sunni insurgency.
It implies the Shias have been at war with the US while in fact they are controlled by parties which make up the Iraqi government.
Damn - our arguments are full of holes. But wait, will that stop us? Who will stand in the way of an Iran war? Congress? The people?

We know Congress won't. It is up to us.


Someone has to be blamed!

Sunday, February 11, 2007

U.S.: Iranian weapons in Iraq

The U.S. military has detected a significant increase in the number of sophisticated roadside bombs appearing in Iraq and believes that orders to send components for them came from the "highest levels" of the Iranian government, a senior defense analyst said Sunday. The analyst, briefing reporters on condition that he not be further identified, said that between June 2004 and last week, more than 170 Americans had been killed by the sophisticated bombs, referred to by the military as "explosively formed projectiles."
So we have a new weapon - EFP. But we are continuing to point the finger at our new arch-enemy - Iran.

The problem with setting the stage for an attack/war is that it can take on a life of its own. Sooner or later we won't stop it even if we want to.


Stay Out Of Iran!

Friday, February 09, 2007

Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring

Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites are well advanced
US preparations for an air strike against Iran are at an advanced stage, in spite of repeated public denials by the Bush administration, according to informed sources in Washington. The present military build-up in the Gulf would allow the US to mount an attack by the spring. But the sources said that if there was an attack, it was more likely next year, just before Mr Bush leaves office. Neo-conservatives, particularly at the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute, are urging Mr Bush to open a new front against Iran. So too is the vice-president, Dick Cheney. The state department and the Pentagon are opposed, as are Democratic congressmen and the overwhelming majority of Republicans.
Whether in the spring or next year - we must work to stop this insanity before the crazies drive the world to the endtimes.


Wake up W!

Wednesday, February 07, 2007


It's time to take over

Tuesday, February 06, 2007

GOP blocks Senate debate on Iraq resolution

Senate Republicans used a procedural maneuver Monday to keep Democratic leaders from moving forward with a nonbinding resolution opposing President Bush's plan to increase troop levels in Iraq. A motion to proceed with the debate and vote on a bipartisan compromise measure failed on a largely party-line vote of 49-47.
Come on guys. It wasn't even a vote that had any teeth!

Your time is up. Our patience has worn thin.


Crazy Joe

Lieberman: U.S. should consider terrorism tax

Sen. Joseph Lieberman said Tuesday that Congress should consider a tax to fund the U.S.-declared war on terrorism and reduce the need to cut domestic programs to pay for security spending.
Hey Joe. Here's a novel idea. Stop the war and use those funds for domestic programs.

Joey, stop kissing up to W. He doesn't have a Cabinet post for you.


Aren't we proud of our leaders?

Sunday, February 04, 2007

US military chiefs eye confrontation with Iran

America's military chiefs are at loggerheads with the country's diplomats and spies over tactics for confronting Iranian agents in Iraq over their role in lethal attacks on US forces.
The rift has spilled over into a dispute about how and when to publish alleged evidence of Iranian backing for Iraqi militias and Iran's provision of supplies and technology for roadside bombs, the biggest killer of American soldiers in Iraq, a White House adviser revealed.
It is fuelling fears among some US diplomats - shared by Britain and its European allies - that hawks within President George W Bush's administration are preparing the ground for military action against Teheran before he leaves office in 23 months.
The build-up of anti-Iran rhetoric and despatch of two US aircraft carriers to the region has echoes for some of the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, prompting suspicions about the intentions of the remaining hawks within the administration, led by the vice-president, Dick Cheney.
Let's hope if that dreaded day occurs everyone takes to the streets to protest and take back this nation. This is not the time or "war" to believe their lies.


Playing politics costs lives

Warner to help block his own resolution on Iraq

Earlier in the day, Mr. Warner told colleagues during a closed-door strategy meeting at the Library of Congress that he opposes the manner in which Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, is conducting debate on his resolution, which condemns Mr. Bush's plan to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq. Senate Republicans are opposed to a vote on the Warner resolution unless they also get votes on two other resolutions. One of those alternatives supports Mr. Bush's plan, and the other would prohibit cutting funds for the war. Republicans also want each resolution to require 60 votes to pass.
Every delay in stopping this war results in a life. Pay attention politicians. The people who voted for you are demanding an end to the war (and no war on Iran!).


"Terrorists" on our side?

Kurds train for battle with Iran

Deep in the mountains of eastern Iraq , a cluster of mud huts and the chatter of machine gun fire reveal another piece of the jigsaw puzzle called Kurdistan.
Here, recruits are training to fight Iran , one of the four countries that rule the fractured Kurdish people. And although they belong to an organization officially outlawed as terrorist by Washington, they appear to be operating unhindered either by Iraqi-Kurdish units or the limited U.S. force in Kurdish areas.
A boulder-studded road spirals up through sun-soaked mountains to a pale yellow building that flies the flag of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), condemned as a terrorist organization by the U.S. and its NATO ally, Turkey.
In the Nov. 27 issue of The New Yorker, investigative reporter Seymour Hersh wrote that PEJAK was receiving support from the U.S. as well as from Israel , which fears Iran‘s nuclear ambitions and Ahmadinejad‘s call to wipe the Jewish state off the map.
Supporting a group that in words we condemn? Supporting a group that Turkey, an ally on paper, threatens to attack? Reminds me a little of our support of Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war.
Our foreign policy makes the U.S. a very fickle boy/girl-friend.


Al Gore deserves the Nobel Peace Prize

Saturday, February 03, 2007

Congratulations Al. You deserve it. You have brought the issue of global warming to the masses. Too bad some folks in DC still don't get it!


Climate report builds support for world body

Nations back world environmental body

Fear of runaway global warming pushed 46 countries to line up Saturday behind France’s appeal for a new environmental body that could single out — and perhaps police — nations that abuse the Earth.
“It is our responsibility. The future of humanity demands it,” President Jacques Chirac said in an appeal to put the environment at the top of the world’s agenda.
With such a fantastic mission of course the U.S. is a part of this move. What! We're not!
But key world polluters — including the United States, China, India and Russia — steered clear.
Without naming the United States directly, Chirac expressed frustration that “some large countries, large rich countries, still must be convinced.” They are “refusing to accept the consequences of their acts,” he said.


George Michael and W

Friday, February 02, 2007

This was made a few months ago. So much can be added to update this video - the surge, lower and lower poll numbers, increasing pressure to end the war, more saber rattling aimed at Iran and (sadly) more deaths and casualties.

Thanks to Shannon for pointing this one out!


A Nation living in FEAR!

Thursday, February 01, 2007

Are you kidding me? Are we so afraid of the man under the bed or the "terrorist" in the closet that we have come to view a Lite Brite sign as a tool of terror? The AP reports:

“It’s clear the intent was to get attention by causing fear and unrest that there was a bomb in that location,” Assistant Attorney General John Grossman said at their arraignment.
The 1-foot tall signs, which were lit up at night, resembled a circuit board, with protruding wires and batteries. Most depicted a boxy, cartoon character giving passersby the finger — a more obvious sight when darkness fell.
The men did not speak or enter their own pleas, but they appeared amused and smiled as the prosecutor talked about the device found at Sullivan Station underneath Interstate 93, looking like it had C-4 explosive.
“The appearance of this device and its location are crucial,” Grossman said. “This device looks like a bomb.”
Some in the gallery snickered.
Snicker? Laugh out loud and wet your pants hilarious.


  © Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP