"The Criminalization of Politics" - Weapons of Mass Distraction

Well, we are just a few hours away from "kick-off" as Big Ed Shultz says. Soon the world will know who (if anyone) will be indicted for involvement in the treasonous act of revealing the identity of an undercover CIA operative to the "embedded" media. This was an act of retaliation against Joe Wilson, a man who stood up to the Bush administration in the run-up to the war in Iraq and spoke the truth about weapons of mass destruction.

On cue, the neo-con establishment is attempting to deflect attention from the real issue. This was a criminal act that has made America less safe! Valerie Plame-Wilson was involved in helping to keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of America's enemies. Instead the right-wing talkers have begun to attack the prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald by asserting - unchallenged by many so-called news people - that he and his grand jury are engaging in the "criminalization of politics."

It is to Mr. Fitzgerald's credit that, in this era of leaks to the press for political gain, his grand jury has remained tight-lipped, leaving the rest of us to wonder and wait. A crime has been committed. Who will pay?

QuestionItNow Blogs

"War ... Should Not Be Wantonly or Unnecessarily Entered Upon." - George Washington

In a radical departure from American tradition, the Bush administration and the United States Congress entered into a pre-emptive war in Iraq. As we learn more every day, this war was conceived years in advance. This plan was hatched and executed by people who have never fought in a war themselves.

At times like this it is important to look back in history and listen to our founding fathers. George Washington's words illustrate the folly of our current leaders. "The friends of humanity will deprecate war, wheresoever it may appear; and we have experienced enough of its evil in this country to know that it should not be wantonly or unnecessarily entered upon."

QuestionItNow Blogs

Re: Cheers! – “Why are we still in Iraq?”

On 10/15/05 Annamarie responded to Cheers! assessment of the Bush administrations' Iraq adventure - As a soldier, I am sure you have seen tragic events unseen by most of us. However, I must beg to differ with you on a couple of points:

First, Regardless of how bad Saddam Hussein was, the U.S. was not justified in invading his country to depose him. That was up to the people over whom he ruled. It is not up to the U.S. to depose everyone it deems a dictator."

Second, Saddam had NOTHING to do with 9/11, and had NO WMD's. His country was already weakened by many years' sanctions. As former weapons inspector, Scott Ritter, has stated numerous times, Saddam had no WMD's and his capabilities to produce them was greatly weakened. Thus, the premise that the war on Iraq was justified simply is not true. Much credible evidence has come to light, among them "The Downing Street Memos", and so much more.

The almost-total destruction of Iraq--and the huge loss of life to innocent civilian Iraqis, and almost 2,000 U.S. troops--cannot be justified.

Third, As for 'peace in most parts of Iraq'; that also is untrue. Iraq is on the brink of a civil war! While under Saddam's tyrannical rule, Iraq was a secular society, where fundamentalists were kept silenced. Perhaps we should consider silencing a few radical fundamentalists in the USA.

Now, there is a strong fundamentalist group with leanings toward an Iran-style Islamist regime. I am certain the Bush administration did not anticipate this, thinking Iraq would be 'a cake-walk'.

The reasons for the Iraq invasion are complex. Please read some of the reports on my website: http://www.verbena-19.blogspot.com, particularly reports by Dahr Jamail, who is an American independent journalist reporting from Iraq.

His reports are filled with chilling accounts, and honesty. Dahr does not prevaricate--he simply reports what he sees and hears firsthand. He is 'un-embedded', thus able to move amongst the people and report truthfully from various parts of the country.

Please understand that I am not against President Bush or American foreign policy 'per se' -- I am simply against lies and misrepresentationslies and misrepresentations. In a democratic society it is not 'unpatriotic' to ask questions of leaders, and dissenting views should be heard, for dissent is also part of democracy.

QuestionItNow asserts that dissenting voices need to be heard and their views need to be considered and itelligently debated. Now, more than ever we need creative and intelligent ideas for fixing our collective problems. We know America can do better!

However, Mr. Bush continually decries any dissent or criticism of his policies as 'un-patriotic'-- which is wrong -- and does great disservice to the premise of 'democracy' in the U.S.-- so much. His attitude smacks of 'McCarthyism'. Saying "You are either with us, or with the enemy" should not be heard from the mouth of the president of a leading country of the 'free-world'. That automatically implies that anyone who is against anything the president says or does, is "with the enemy". Americans who ask questions are then "with the enemy"? That is absurd.

I simply wanted to comment to express my views about where I felt you were in error. I have no desire to change your views, merely to ask that you view ALL sides, and the facts to back them up. These issues are much more complex than we ever can hope to fully comprehend. Perhaps generations that come after us will be better able to judge these events, from their history books. Only time will tell...

Regardless of some of our differing views, your comments are intelligent, insightful and interesting. I will return to your site often to read more. Take care and regards,

Annamarie
QuestionItNow - Community & Political T-Shirts

SICKNESS

Smoking in the Mountains,
High in the Hills.

Fucked Up Generations,
Dropping assorted pills.

These are symptoms of a sickness
we sometimes feel inside.

Do you know of any cure?
Please come stand by my side.

QuestionItNow - Community & Political T-Shirts

Scott Ritter, "When a government official commits fraud in the conduct of his or her official duties, that's a felony offence."

Scott Ritter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Ritter was UN weapons inspector in Iraq between 1991 and 1998. On Tuesday, 10/11/05 Mr. Ritter appeared on The Diane Rehm Show to discuss his new book Iraq Confidential - the Untold Story of the Intelligence Conspiracy to Undermine the UN and Overthrow Saddam Hussein.

This former Marine demonstrates his true patriotism and courage by refusing to back down from those in power and standing up for the truth. He voted for George W. Bush in 2000 because he felt the Clinton administration was stuck on a policy of sanctions, even though "Israel knew in 1998 that the UN weapons inspection program was very successful."

Scott Ritter voted for John Kerry in 2004 - not because he felt Senator Kerry was the best man for the job - but because George W. Bush "... betrayed the American people in a horrific fashion by getting us into this war in Iraq." and "Iraq is much worse off today than it was under Saddam."

When a caller asked him about the potential for impeaching officials within the Bush administration for their misinformation campaign leading up to the war in Iraq, Scott Ritter brought up an even more serious point. "When a government official commits fraud in the conduct of his or her official duties, that's a felony offence. If you investigate the testimony of this administration to the United States Congress about Iraq, there has been nothing but fraud committed."

In spite of everything he has seen, Mr. Ritter is hopeful for the future of America. "If there's anything good that can come out of this tragedy called Iraq, it is that we recognize when we approach the world as black and white - good versus evil - we only get ourselves into more trouble."

QuestionItNow - Community & Political T-Shirts

THE WIDOW

Feeling worn out and shattered,

the Widow views his grave.

Her husband died in battle.

In a distant land they found him,

battered, beaten, and dead.

He fought for politicians

who never fight their own wars.

To his country,

his life he gave.

Now his widow has his medals,

distant memories, and a grave.

R.E.B.

Why are we still in Iraq?

Cheers! sums it up - "I am saddened by the price we are paying for the logical follow-up question to "Why are we in Iraq" - Why are we still in Iraq? Although peace has returned to most of Iraq, it has not returned to all of Iraq.

Again, this is another issue for discussion and thought. I have my opinions on the answer to "Why are we still in Iraq?" Some I like some I don't. I encourage anyone who has honored me by reading thus far to submit his/her answer to this question."

I feel that we did the right thing in removing Saddam

Cheers!
"Based on the history and actions of Saddam, coupled with the potential future threat against humanity (including the United States), I feel that we did the right thing in removing Saddam from power. Removing Saddam from power has proven to ease the threat from his arsenal, prevented his research and development and production of WMD.

I also believe that the timing was right, perhaps overdue, in that the battle took place in Iraq, Saddam's turf, rather than in New York, Los Angeles, Washington, Seattle, Chicago, Detroit, London, Rome or anywhere else in the world."

War is difficult notion to comprehend

Cheers! "War is difficult notion to comprehend. It usually means the failure of diplomacy. It also means destruction and killing to achieve peace. Diplomacy fails when one or more parties in dispute use negotiations to achieve greater power, as proven by Hitler and Kaiser Wilhelm and, unfortunately, Saddam Hussein. Like most soldiers, I do not like war.

In March 2003, coalition nations, learned from history prevented potential destruction and genocide world wide. I am aware of those who state that another reason for us being in Iraq is for the oil reserves. Have those pumped gas lately?

I am heartened by the successes in Iraq since March 2003: Iraqis enjoying free speech; squabbling over a constitution; rebuilding commerce without fear of shakedowns; Iraqis thanking me for being there, as if I had anything to do with the liberation from Saddam (I didn't do anything by myself)."