A B C as easy as
1 2 3 as simple as
do-re-mi, A B C
1 2 3 baby you and me
  w/ Brad & Desi
|
  w/ Brad & Desi
|
  w/ Brad & Desi
|
BARCODED BALLOTS AND BALLOT MARKING DEVICES
BMDs pose a new threat to democracy in all 50 states...
| |
VIDEO: 'Rise of the Tea Bags'
Brad interviews American patriots...
|
'Democracy's Gold Standard'
Hand-marked, hand-counted ballots...
|
GOP Voter Registration Fraud Scandal 2012...
|
The Secret Koch Brothers Tapes...
|
MORE BRAD BLOG 'SPECIAL COVERAGE' PAGES... |
A B C as easy as
1 2 3 as simple as
do-re-mi, A B C
1 2 3 baby you and me
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
We're probably not supposed to talk about this. So here goes.
But there is obviously some fire beneath all that smoke. Several MPs took it seriously indeed, including Blair's former defence minister, Peter Kilfoyle, who called for the document to be made public. Then late yesterday [Tuesday], the Blair government unleashed Britain's draconian Official Secrets Act – which is far in excess of anything in the US – threatening to prosecute any paper that published the actual contents of the memo. (The Mirror story was a paraphrase.)
This is highly unusual, given the fact that the Blair camp did not invoke the Secrets Act to stop the extremely embarrassing "Downing Street Memos" which revealed the cynical pre-invasion machinations by Bush and Blair to "fix the intelligence around the policy" of aggressive war. In fact, as the Guardian points out today, "the [Blair] government has never prosecuted editors for publishing the contents of leaked documents." The invocation of the Secrets Act in this case essentially confirms the substance of the Mirror's allegations; if it was all fluff, just a "joke," why try to quash it in such a heavy-handed fashion?
It seems likely then that the story is true: Bush seriously contemplated launching an attack on Al-Jazeera's headquarters – in the business district of Doha, Qatar's capital – and had to be dissuaded from this madness by Blair.
As you can probably see, Chris explains things much better than I can. To tell you the truth, the whole affair leaves me practically speechless. But you can follow the story as it has developed so far, using the links and quotes below:
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
Holy Cow! A blast and a half from Maureen Farrell. Although it's only the first in a three-part series, she's floored me already!
Or, as Gandhi writes:
I'll give you a short excerpt, which I hope will entice you to read the whole thing.
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
Robert Parry's Consortium News has recently posted a beautifully-written piece by William Frey, M.D., called "Confessions of a Repentant Republican".
Dr. Frey is a former Bush supporter who has torn himself away from the propaganda and re-engaged with reality. And now he's writing about it. He can really write, too. Look at this:
Many Americans whom I know and love, including many current supporters of President Bush, remain conflicted over both his ultimate intentions in Iraq as well as domestic curtailment of civil liberties.
Many have given the benefit of the doubt to President Bush, and, in a misdirected spirit of unity, have supported, as did I, Administration policies that conflict with our essential values.
This essay explores many of the issues that led me personally to the recognition that the policies I was supporting in Iraq were not consistent with the justifications made for the invasion in the spring of 2003, that implicit in our post-invasion actions was the goal of permanent occupation, which would ensure endless war and the resultant degradation of our liberty, our security, and our moral authority.
For me, recognizing that I could no longer support the President for whom I voted, and the occupation of a land we had invaded, remains personally painful.
I have learned that while it is difficult to admit being wrong, such recognition is a prerequisite for redemptive action, necessary both for individual growth and for the healing of our nation.
It is in this spirit that I submit these reflections.
A great introduction, is it not? Who could argue with such a reasonable presentation?
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
There's a ton of important new material on the blog at the moment and I wouldn't want to distract you from it. But on the other hand I do want to share some of what I've been reading this evening, for those who are interested...
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
If it feels like 1984, that's because it is. We're 21 years late but we're there all the same. The Ministry of Information is busy changing our past. Fiction has become the news. And Truth has become an enemy of the state.
Whether you measure by severity or frequency, it's clear that the falsification of our national history has recently reached an all-time high. Bush's declaration that we don't torture was a clear sign that the truth is definitely behind us now, and his assertion that his opponents are rewriting history raises the level of absurdity to a level one would prefer to call unimaginable.
The propaganda that has been catapulted lately --- like all good propaganda --- contains almost enough truth to make it somewhat slightly plausible. For example, the CIA has from time to time acted as a rogue agency, Congress did vote to grant Bush the power to do something to Iraq; and Bush may have believed some of what he was saying about Iraq before he started the war. So the lies are not totally false, and we can't dismiss them entirely. We have to pick them apart very carefully, in order to show that, even though said claims do contain an occasional nugget of half-truth, the claims themselves are overwhelming false.
It's hard work!
And in the meantime, like all good propagandists, the White House Spin Machine has a vast assortment of Spinnerettes at its disposal. [And make no mistake, the Spinnerettes are definitely disposable!] The Spinnerettes keep repeating the lies, over and over and over, generating an ocean of falsehood that comes at us in wave after wave after wave, until most of us must struggle to discern what is true and what is false.
Of course the wise men among us have no such trouble. So it's always a good idea to read Robert Parry, and his newest column, in my opinion, is one of his best.
Here's a sample [with emphasis added]:
However, as a Washington Post analysis politely observed in response to those two arguments, “neither assertion is wholly accurate.”
The White House sees far more detailed intelligence than what is shared with Congress, which found itself depending on a CIA-compiled National Intelligence Estimate that downplayed or left out objections to key pro-war assertions, the Post wrote.
The Post article also noted that neither the Senate Intelligence Committee nor a Bush-appointed commission, headed by retired Judge Laurence Silberman and former Sen. Charles Robb, gave much attention to how the intelligence was used – or misused – addressing instead how it was produced. [Washington Post, Nov. 12, 2005]
Kaboom! Game, set and match!
What's that? You want another game?
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
Important words from P. Sabin Willett, from the Washington Post, Monday, November 14, 2005; A21. Emphasis added.
Detainees Deserve Court Trials
As I listened, I wished the senators could meet my client Adel.
Adel is innocent. I don't mean he claims to be. I mean the military says so. It held a secret tribunal and ruled that he is not al Qaeda, not Taliban, not a terrorist. The whole thing was a mistake: The Pentagon paid $5,000 to a bounty hunter, and it got taken.
Guess blogged by Winter Patriot
From Lectric Law Library
And from the Wikipedia:
Everybody clear on this? Good!
Now here's a call to action from hilzoy of Obsidian Wings, sent to us by a friend at Ohio University, via BRAD BLOG commentor Jazzolog (everyone clear on that, too? Good!!)...
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
On November 11, 1918, World War I finally ended. Of course it wasn't called that at the time; it was called The Great War. How could anyone have known that it was to be the first of a series? Who could have guessed that barely twenty years would pass before the beginning of the next one?
The day when peace finally arrived was given the name Armistice Day. Thereafter, it was commemorated every year with solemn ceremonies and sacred vows of "Never Again". My, how things change.
In many English-speaking countries, November 11th is now called Remembrance Day, and it's still commemorated every year with solemn ceremonies.
I'm feeling extremely solemn myself. Disturbing and graphic content follows.
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
45% of Iraqis believe that attacks on U.S. and British troops are justified, and 82% are "strongly opposed" to the continued presence of "coalition" troops, according to a "secret poll" conducted in August by an Iraqi university research team. Results of the poll have been leaked to Britain's Sunday Telegraph.
Astute readers may recognize some of these conclusions after seeing articles on the weekend from Reuters or Yahoo. But Saturday's report from Reuters barely scratched the surface, and Yahoo did only a bit better on Sunday.
For the full report, you have to go to the source: Secret MoD poll: Iraqis support attacks on British troops.
Among the survey's other conclusions:
• 67 per cent of Iraqis feel less secure because of the occupation;
• 43 per cent of Iraqis believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened;
• 72 per cent do not have confidence in the multi-national forces.
But aside from all this "security" nonsense, things are going pretty well, right?
Um ... no!
The findings differ markedly from a survey carried out by the BBC in March 2004 in which the overwhelming consensus among the 2,500 Iraqis questioned was that life was good. More of those questioned supported the war than opposed it.
...
Immediately after the war the coalition embarked on a campaign of reconstruction in which it hoped to improve the electricity supply and the quality of drinking water.
That appears to have failed, with the poll showing that 71 per cent of people rarely get safe clean water, 47 per cent never have enough electricity, 70 per cent say their sewerage system rarely works and 40 per cent of southern Iraqis are unemployed.
Any wingnut will tell you that these very inconvenient facts don't matter much, because they are only temporary, and the situation will surely change because we have brought "democracy" to Iraq, complete with a historic new "constitution".
However ...
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
Larisa's newest blog entry at Huffington Post is called On Liberating Something, and it all sounds extremely liberated, if you ask me.
It starts like this:
and I think you'll enjoy reading the whole thing (in other words, click here!).
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
According to a late-night e-mail from Larisa Alexandrovna, Raw Story is currently featuring an article by Jason Leopold which starts like this:
The investigation into who leaked the officer's name to reporters has now turned toward a little known cabal of administration hawks known as the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), which came together in August 2002 to publicize the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. WHIG was founded by Bush chief of staff Andrew Card and operated out of the Vice President's office.
Fitzgerald's examination centers on a group of players charged with not only selling the war, but according to sources familiar with the case, to discredit anyone who openly “disagreed with the official Iraq war” story.
The group's members included Deputy White House chief of staff Karl Rove, Bush advisor Karen Hughes, Senior Advisor to the Vice President Mary Matalin, Deputy Director of Communications James Wilkinson, Assistant to the President and Legislative Liaison Nicholas Calio, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby - Chief of Staff to the Vice President and co-author of the Administration's pre-emptive strike policy.
Rice was later appointed Secretary of State; her deputy Hadley was made National Security Advisor. Wilkinson departed to become a spokesman for the military's central command, and later for the Republican National Convention. Hughes was recently appointed Undersecretary of State.
Several members of the group have testified before Fitzgerald's grand jury.
Read more here.
No kidding. There's a lot more to the story and you can read it here.
You gotta love her, don't you? Larisa Alexandrovna not only gave us a heads-up when Jason Leopold's article hit the net; she also contributed research to the article! So: three cheers for Larisa Alexandrovna! Hip Hip ... no, seriously: Read more here.
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
According to Arizona Citizens for Fair Elections:
This order is the result of a Complaint for Special Action filed on October 6, 2005 for plaintiff Thomas W. Ryan, head of Arizona Citizens for Fair Elections.
A.R.S. §16-442C states
the secretary of state shall adopt standards that specify the criteria for loss of certification for equipment used at any election for federal, state or county offices and that was previously certified for use in this state.
In response to a public records request, State Election Director Joseph Kanefield, in a letter to plaintiff dated September 9, 2005, wrote:
based on a review of our records we do not have any of the specific records you request.
It is clear that the secretary of state has not complied with the statute.
With Arizona lacking standards for loss of certification, there is no criteria for determining that voting equipment should be evaluated for failure to accurately count every vote, as required in A.R.S. §16-446B(6).
This looks like good news. And there's more at the Arizona Citizens for Fair Elections website.
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
Hi again. Brad's not here. It's just me, Winter Patriot, your lowly and nearly frozen concierge. I thought you might like a quick newsy update, or at least a fairly simple post to start your day. So, to press ... or to URL ... or something
Listen: Brad's still on the road. We've heard from him several times, always from undisclosed locations, [?!] since he left Portland and the National Summit To Save Our Elections. He says he'll be back soon.
How soon? Only a fool would hazard a guess. Maybe Wednesday.
In the meantime, as regular BRAD BLOG readers well know, the lunatics have recently taken a more active role in running the asylum. It started as a triumvirate --- yours truly working very quietly behind the scenes along with the now not so secret weapon David Edwards and the redoubtable Joseph Cannon. But lately we've also heard many other voices, including those of Stan Goff, Katrina Wilcox, and John Gideon. Personally, I've remained very quiet lately, building up a head of steam, it appears, before finally erupting Sunday morning in a blaze of rambling and disjointed fury which I am still trying to disassemble.
Quite a mixed bag, to say the least, and there's more where that came from. We might hear from Brad sooner than I think. He might even be back sooner. And I might be very bloggy in the near future. Or I might go very quiet again, like I have been lately. There's no way to tell. Brad will definitely be back in the chair soon --- but clearly The BRAD BLOG will never be the same again.
In case you missed it, I want to remind you that the audio portion of last Saturday's BRAD SHOW is now available in the archives. Click here to go straight to the good stuff.
We haven't had an open thread in a while and we probably need one. So please feel free...
Just click the bottom right hand corner of this post ... right there ===>
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
UPDATE: Your lowly and nearly frozen blogger has added heavily to the original text of this post, and in so doing has realized that it was probably posted too soon. Apologizes to those who were confused and I hope the series of updates inserted here will help. And apologies to first time-readers of this text as well. if you think this is a mess, you should see what it looks like in here [points to own head].
Disaster everywhere.
I've been reading the BBC and I'm seeing this:
Quake crisis overwhelms Pakistan
At least 19,000 people are thought to have been killed in Pakistan, and it is feared the toll could rise much higher.
With some towns and villages completely flattened, Pervez Musharraf told the BBC that Pakistan needed "massive cargo helicopter support" and aid supplies.
Some stricken parts of disputed Kashmir have still not been reached.