- Peace Garden: 03/01/2007 - 04/01/2007

Maybe these really are the EndTimes

Saturday, March 31, 2007

Confused Loons freeze to death
Ran across this article at a very different site: Apocalypse 2012. The article was from February (why didn't many of the other papers pick this up?)

Twenty-two male and female Great Northern Divers, known as Common Loons, were found on Saturday and Sunday on Lake Winnipesaukee, many them covered in snow from wind gusts with their heads tucked into their wings to keep warm.
Biologists are unclear why the loons congregated on the ice deep in New Hampshire when they normally migrate to open water such as the ocean in winter. The five that survived were transported to the ocean and released.
"This is the first time I ever have seen this," said senior biologist and executive director of the Loon Preservation Committee, Harry Vogel. "It's unprecedented."
The mild early winter - including the warmest December on record in New Hampshire and an unseasonably warm January - may have contributed to the confusion of the loons, biologists said.
Can we do anything about global warming? Maybe not...
Devastating earthquakes. Record-breaking tsunamis. Category 5 hurricanes. Spiking global temperatures. World war. Predictions of how it will all end have been around for thousands of years. In Apocalypse 2012, Lawrence E. Joseph reveals the curious fact that 2012 has been pinpointed as a pivotal, perhaps cataclysmic, year in human history by ancient sources and contemporary science alike.
Joseph investigates this chilling correlation with an open mind and skeptical eye. He delves into historical and spiritual materials as diverse as Revelations, the I Ching, and the Islamic Hadith, drawing on scholarly works and recent controversial bestsellers such as The Bible Code. He examines the ancient Mayan Long Calendar, the source of the 2012 prophecies, and then travels to the jungles and highlands of Guatemala to work with Mayan shamans who confirm the 5,000-year-old vision. In a scientific research city in the heart of Siberia, he meets with geophysicists who contend that the solar system is moving into a highly charged interstellar energy cloud. And on the tip of South Africa, he interviews physicists and psychics who are trying to make sense of the fact that the earth’s magnetic field is vanishing.
Joseph concludes that we are in a race against time.
We may be screwed.


Veto on!

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Senate backs March '08 pullout

Defying a veto threat, the Democratic-controlled Senate narrowly signaled support Tuesday for the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq by next March.
Republican attempts to scuttle the non-binding timeline failed on a vote of 50-48, largely along party lines. The roll call marked the Senate’s most forceful challenge to date of the administration’s handling of a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,200 U.S. troops.
Veto on W! Soon there won't need to be a vote to override your veto. Very soon you will be out on your arse and we will be out of Iraq!


Truer words (Part 2)...

Sunday, March 25, 2007

Actor (Sean) Penn, Rep. Lee Appear at Town Hall Meeting on Iraq War

“You and your smarmy pundits — and the smarmy pundits you have in your pocket — can take your war and shove it,” Penn said. “Let’s unite not only in stopping this war, but in holding this administration accountable.”


Truer words...

Iraq Vote Angers Anti-War Wing

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, who was against the war long before most Democrats turned against it, said the vote proves that the war now has a “momentum of its own.”
“You cannot say you are for peace and vote to keep this war going,” Kucinich implored his fellow Democrats. “If you want peace, stop funding the war.”
That says it all!


Go Dennis!

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Kucinich: “I'm Talking About Impeachment”

This House cannot avoid its Constitutionally authorized responsibility to restrain the abuse of Executive power.
The Administration has been preparing for an aggressive war against Iran. There is no solid, direct evidence that Iran has the intention of attacking the United States or its allies.
The US is a signatory to the UN Charter, a constituent treaty among the nations of the world. Article II, Section 4 of the UN Charter states, "all members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. . ." Even the threat of a war of aggression is illegal.
Article VI of the US Constitution makes such treaties the Supreme Law of the Land. This Administration, has openly threatened aggression against Iran in violation of the US Constitution and the UN Charter.
This week the House Appropriations committee removed language from the Iraq war funding bill requiring the Administration, under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution, to seek permission before it launched an attack against Iran.
Since war with Iran is an option of this Administration and since such war is patently illegal, then impeachment may well be the only remedy which remains to stop a war of aggression against Iran.


They're not listening!

Anti-War Dems Near Defeat on Spending Bill

The most outspoken critics of the $124 billion wartime spending bill in the House are facing withering support in their fight to defeat it.
California Democratic Reps. Maxine Waters and Lynn Woolsey said that many of their liberal colleagues were caving under pressure from Democratic leaders who, according to at least one congressman, have threatened to block requests for new funds for his district.
They also cited MoveOn.org's endorsement of the measure Monday as a blow to their efforts.
"This is the process: people who feel strongly about this issue hold out as long as they can," said Waters. "A lot of pressure comes to bear and they can't hold up under the pressure."
The $124 billion emergency spending bill, backed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), includes not only more funds this year for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan but also new military readiness standards, benchmarks for the Iraqi government and an Aug. 31, 2008 deadline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
August 31, 2008? Too late. $124 billion? Too much! MoveOn? Too quick to cave!


After 4 years: END THE WAR

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Congress, End the War

"War is over, if you want it," declared John Lennon in the thick of the Vietnam nightmare. To the extent that Lennon's "you" referred to the US Congress, he was right, then and now. The House and Senate have the authority to end the war in Iraq quickly, efficiently and honorably. Claims to the contrary by George W. Bush and his apologists are at odds with every intention of the authors of the Constitution. Which part of "Congress shall have the power to declare war... to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces...to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers" does the White House fail to understand? Instead of negotiating with Bush to give him another year of his war before facing consequences, Democrats should refuse to write another blank check. They should instead support Representative Barbara Lee's proposal to fully fund the withdrawal of US soldiers and military contractors from Iraq.


Iraq Veterans Memorial

After 4 years I think the best way to remember these lives is to bring the troops home now so no family has to add their video to the tribute.


Things never change...

Friday, March 16, 2007

A war-weary scientists travels back to the year 1881, to live in simpler times. But he discovers that some things never change.
Serling a prophet writing about today?


Wrong answer Hill!

If Elected... Clinton Says Some G.I.’s in Iraq Would Remain

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton foresees a “remaining military as well as political mission” in Iraq, and says that if elected president, she would keep a reduced military force there to fight Al Qaeda, deter Iranian aggression, protect the Kurds and possibly support the Iraqi military. She said in the interview that there were “remaining vital national security interests in Iraq” that would require a continuing deployment of American troops.


How did Joey vote?

Senate Rejects Democrats’ Call to Pull Troops

The Senate on Thursday rejected a Democratic resolution to withdraw most American combat troops from Iraq in 2008, but a similar measure advanced in the House, and Democratic leaders vowed to keep challenging President Bush to change course in Iraq. The vote in the Senate was 50 against and 48 in favor, 12 short of what was needed to pass, with just a few defections in each party. It came just hours after the House Appropriations Committee, in another vote largely on party lines, approved an emergency spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan that includes a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq. The House will vote on that legislation next Thursday, setting the stage for another confrontation. The Democratic resolution in the Senate would have redefined the United States mission in Iraq and set a goal of withdrawing American combat troops by March 31, 2008, except for a “limited number” focused on counterterrorism, training and equipping Iraqi forces, and protecting American and allied personnel. The House measure set a withdrawal deadline of Sept. 1, 2008.
Emergency spending bills, withdrawals in 2008 - Too much money, too long.

So how did Lieberman vote? Is there any doubt after those slobbering kisses? At least he is consistent - once a warmonger always a warmonger!


Now I am really pissed!

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Dems abandon war authority provision

Top House Democrats retreated Monday from an attempt to limit President Bush's authority for taking military action against Iran as the leadership concentrated on a looming confrontation with the White House over the Iraq war. Officials said Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other members of the leadership had decided to strip from a major military spending bill a requirement for Bush to gain approval from Congress before moving against Iran. Conservative Democrats as well as lawmakers concerned about the possible impact on Israel had argued for the change in strategy.
Our last hope. It's time to man the barricades.


Death Squads Redux

Monday, March 12, 2007

Fallback strategy for Iraq: Train locals, draw down forces

American military planners have begun plotting a fallback strategy for Iraq that includes a gradual withdrawal of forces and a renewed emphasis on training Iraqi fighters in case the current troop buildup fails or is derailed by Congress. Such a strategy, based in part on the U.S. experience in El Salvador in the 1980s, is still in the early planning stages and would be adjusted to fit the outcome of the current surge in troop levels, according to military officials and Pentagon consultants who spoke on condition of anonymity when discussing future plans.
Hit squads - just like in El Salvador. What a plan!


Another front?

Sunday, March 11, 2007

Turkish general says can hit Kurd rebels in Iraq

A top Turkish general on Saturday reaffirmed Ankara's right under international law to send troops into northern Iraq to crush Turkish Kurdish rebels hiding there if it saw fit. The comments by General Ilker Basbug, head of Turkey's land forces, came as Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki urged all neighbouring countries, including Turkey, attending a conference in Baghdad to settle their regional disputes through dialogue. "Turkey can always take measures against the terrorist organisation in northern Iraq if our military needs require it ... under international law," Basbug told reporters in Diyarbakir, largest city in Turkey's mainly Kurdish southeast. His hints at military action were not new but their timing reflects Turkish military fears of an upswing in violence by the outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) as spring arrives.
No not new. I commented on this before. But even though we have heard it before, it is still disturbing and scary - another front, another enemy? If Turkey invades Northern Iraq and mistakenly injures some of our troops, will W bomb the crap out of Turkey (as he has threatened to do to Iran)?


Bow down to me!

Thursday, March 08, 2007

I was outed by Timesonline - UK.

An arch-conservative cardinal chosen by the Pope to deliver this year’s Lenten meditations to the Vatican hierarchy has caused consternation by giving warning of an Antichrist who is “a pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist”.
And woe to you non-believers if you don't heed my words! Stop the war now! Clean up the environment! Get along with each other!


7 nations in 5 years!

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

How Much More Harm Can Bush Do?

U.S. casualties (dead and wounded) have now reached 27,000 in a war that was supposed to be a "cakewalk," over in a few weeks. If what four-star Gen. Wesley Clark, former supreme commander of NATO, told Amy Goodman in a March 2 interview is correct, U.S. casualties are yet in their early days. Gen. Clark told Amy Goodman that shortly after 9/11 he was shown a Pentagon "memo that describes how we're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and, finishing off, Iran." That sounds exactly like the plan that neoconservative Norman Podhoretz set out in Commentary magazine.
A very frightening memo. Lately it looks like the order is being changed and longer than 5 years, but...
Americans still regard themselves as the salt of the earth. But the rest of the world no longer sees Americans that way. When citizens of other countries turn their eyes toward America, they see evil.
The damage is already underway.


I Love Vermont!

Vermont Votes to Impeach Bush/Cheney

When Vermont Governor Jim Douglas, a Republican with reasonably close ties to President Bush, asked if there was any additional business to be considered at the town meeting he was running in Middlebury, Ellen McKay popped up and proposed the impeachment of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. The governor was not amused. As moderator of the annual meeting, he tried to suggest that the proposal to impeach -- along with another proposal to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq -- could not be voted on. But McKay, a program coordinator at Middlebury College, pressed her case. And it soon became evident that the crowd at the annual meeting shared her desire to hold the president to account. So Douglas backed down. "It became clear that no one was going home until they had the chance to discuss the resolutions and vote on them," explained David Rosenberg, a political science professor at Middlebury College. "And being a good politician, he allowed the vote to happen." By an overwhelming voice vote, Middlebury called for impeachment. Late Tuesday night, there were confirmed reports that 36 towns had backed impeachment resolutions, and the number was expected to rise.
Thank you Vermont for leading the way - again!


Steps to decrease global warming's effects

Sunday, March 04, 2007

Hansen Offers Options for Addressing Global Warming

Speaking at the American University in Washington, D.C. on Monday, renowned U.S. climate scientist James Hansen offered a series of recommendations to stave off the most dangerous effects of climate change. The “worst-case” consequences of global warming, including disintegration of the Earth’s polar ice sheets and the extinction of many animal and plant species, could be avoided by taking five key steps to limit the increase in global temperature to less than 1 degree Celsius, Hansen said.
Hansen’s suggestions included scientific, economic, and political approaches to fighting global warming, among them placing a moratorium on all new coal-fired power plants until technologies for carbon capture and sequestration are further developed, likely within the next 5–10 years.
Hansen’s second suggestion was to implement a gradually increasing carbon tax that could be used to fund investments in clean technology.
A third step—increased energy efficiency—is the most imperative and easiest challenge for both Congress and the public to take on, Hansen noted.
As a fourth measure, Hansen said the U.S. National Academy of Sciences should assemble the best scientists to execute a study on the stability of ice sheets, a serious issue that remains under-researched.
Finally, Hansen noted the important role the U.S. public can play in helping to “address threats to American democracy.” People have a right to know the truth about climate change, he said, and effective campaign finance reform is needed for this end. “As long as politicians are getting support from special interests, then special interests are going to have special privileges,” he observed.
These steps along with simple steps we can each take in our home and office (like CFLes, sweaters, conservation, etc.) only makes sense and can decrease the negatives. There can be some hope.


How about our plans to attack Saudi Arabia?

Saudis funding insurgents in Iraq

During his inaugural appearance before Congress last week, the new U.S. intelligence czar made a rare public reference to one of Washington's secret dreads. Mike McConnell, the new director of national intelligence, said there are funds coming from Saudi Arabia, an ostensible U.S. ally, to help Sunni insurgents in Iraq, while Iran is supporting the Shiite militias there. McConnell: "What I was attempting to say is donors from countries around the area. One would be inside Saudi Arabia, as an example."
So quick to point fingers at Iran and Syria and even plan attacks. What about W's kissing cousins the House of Saud?


Our Iran Plans Viewed by Pakistan

Saturday, March 03, 2007

The 'Looming Evil Strike' Against Iran

If the looming strike on Iran does get carried out, a few years down the road Russia and China can kiss off their own survival. The Armada of aircraft carriers and firepower now sailing in the Persian Gulf and around Iran is very formidable and could even be preparing for a nuclear provocation. Bush's Israeli-prodded actions have passed the threshold, and now only a miracle can bring us to the point where we can again aspire to peace. The world faces Armageddon, and yet somehow after so much damage has been done, the innocent weak thought that the powerful countries would come to their aid. I wouldn't want to live in or near Dubai, Sharjah, Ajman or even Abu Dhabi, due to their close proximity to the Strait of Harmuz. If things get ugly, these areas will be toast. If there is a nuclear strike, the world will face such grim dangers that even its survival will be threatened. With widespread death, economic collapse, famine, starvation and a dog-eat-dog reality, if such an attack comes to pass the world's economies could become completely dysfunctional. An attack on Iran will be a crime against humanity regretted by all, with sighs from the survivors to the effect of: “I WISH IT HAD NEVER HAPPENED.”
The world realizes how insane W's plans for war in Iran are. Does the majority of the U.S. public realize the insanity? For the sake of all, let's hope they do so we can stop the insanity before it really begins.


Buchanan gets it?

Who Will Stop The Next War?

If Americans sickened by the carnage of Iraq wish to stop an even more disastrous war on Iran, they had best get cracking. For the “On-to-Baghdad!” boys are back, warning us that the only way to prevent an atom bomb from being detonated in an American city is to attack and destroy Iran’s nuclear sites. And the forces needed to execute an attack are moving into place. Army Gen. John Abizaid has been replaced as CENTCOM commander by Adm. “Fox” Fallon, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, who knows little about counterinsurgency but a lot about co-ordinating air strikes. The carrier group Stennis is headed for the Gulf to join the Eisenhower. Minesweepers are headed for the Strait of Hormuz. American fighter-bombers have returned to Incirlik. Iranian officials have been seized in Iraq. Patriot missiles are being moved into Kuwait and Qatar. Why all this firepower—to secure Anbar province and Sadr City? Bush’s anti-Iran rhetoric has been ratcheted up. Announcing his surge, Bush interjected that Tehran “is providing material support for attacks on American troops. … [W]e will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.” This threat was followed by shoot-to-kill orders to U.S. troops encountering Iranians aiding the insurgency.
But even Pat sees past the smoke and mirrors and fear-mongering.
What is the threat? Iran has no missiles that can reach us, no atom bombs. Though the Mullahs have been in power 27 years, they have yet to launch their first war. The war they fought was in self-defense. They can no more want a Sunni-Shia regional war than we, for they would be in the isolated minority. They want the Taliban kept out of Kabul and Iraq to remain united under a Shia majority, as do we. It is said that we cannot negotiate with men responsible for the Khobar Towers. But Bush negotiated with Muammar al-Gaddafi, who was responsible for Pan Am 103, and Gaddafi agreed to forego nuclear weapons. Sanctions were lifted and relations restored. If FDR can talk to Stalin, and Nixon to Mao, and Bush to the North Vietnamese (who tortured John McCain), why can’t we talk to Mullahs who held 52 Americans hostage for a year?
Never know where reality will come from. Sometimes even a crazy like Pat Buchanan.


This is progress?

Friday, March 02, 2007

US to Develop New Hydrogen Bomb

The Energy Department will announce today a contract to develop the nation's first new hydrogen bomb in two decades, involving a collaboration between three national weapons laboratories, The Times has learned. The new bomb will include design features from all three labs, though Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the Bay Area appears to have taken the lead position in the project. The Los Alamos and Sandia labs in New Mexico will also be part of the project.
We are so quick to plan attacks on nations who are 10-20 years away from a nuclear bomb? Wonder which nations are planning to attack us to control our little monster?


How many friends does W have left?

Poll Shows Bush Is Losing Support of Republicans

In the months since the Congressional elections, President Bush has lost substantial support among members of his own party, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll. Mr. Bush’s approval rating dropped 13 percentage points since last fall among Republicans, 65 percent of whom now say they approve of the way he is handling his job as president, compared with 78 percent last October.
Abandon ship!

So what about others?

Over all, Mr. Bush’s job approval remains at one of its lowest points, with 29 percent of all Americans saying they approve of the way he is doing his job, compared with 34 percent at the end of October. Sixty-one percent disapproved, compared with 58 percent in October, within the margin of sampling error. Twenty-three percent of those polled approved of the way Mr. Bush is dealing with the situation in Iraq. Twenty-five percent approved of his handling of foreign policy.
A one man army. Oh wait - two - W and Uncle Dick!


  © Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP