Stupid People Say Stupid Things

“And Iran declared war on us when they took hostages from our embassy in 1979. So they are indeed at war with us, for whatever that’s worth to you.” – Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit.

Hmmm, then I guess that makes Reynolds’ hero and favored jerk off material (Reagan & Co.) guilty of treason. Nice. Think about that the next time your hand creeps down into your dirty tightie whities, Glenn!

Breaking News: Bush Reads Constitution

In an amazing twist, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez has issued a new letter in which he states that the NSA Wiretapping/domestic surveillance program is now subject to FISA courts.

The full text of the letter can be viewed below (via TPM).

According to right-wingers, FISA was absolutely unnecessary and the President had the power to do as he wishes, without the approval of FISA (even when a warrant could be received retroactively up to 72 hours of wiretap initiation).

In late 2005, Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol, and AEI “scholar” Gary Schmidt penned an Op-ed for The Washington Post (which of course left out much vital information about FISA) which contained this gem:

“This is presumably one reason why President Bush decided that national security required that he not simply follow the strictures of the 1978 foreign intelligence act, and, indeed, it reveals why the issue of executive power and the law in our constitutional order is more complicated than the current debate would suggest. It is not easy to answer the question whether the president, acting in this gray area, is “breaking the law.” It is not easy because the Founders intended the executive to have — believed the executive needed to have — some powers in the national security area that were extralegal but constitutional.”

Kristol and Schmidt argued that the President can, in some instances, break the law if he deems it necessary. These “rule of law” Republicans (neocons in sheeps clothing) threw their ideology out the window and sold their souls to support actions by the president merely because he is of the same party, and wished to support the neoconservative agenda. All of this for actions that could easily have been avoided, since FISA allows for wiretapping to begin, with the stipulation a warrant is received within 72 hours. Not to mention only 6 requests from the Bush Administration to the FISA court for a warrant were ever denied.

Now just over a year later, the President is admitting (or is possibly frightened of Congressional subpoenas)that FISA is the rule of law in the United States, and will finally follow its provisions. Integrity, credibility and the Constitution were thrown out the window over the slighest of challenges: 6 denials and slightly over 150 modifications to warrants by the FISA courts. Another example of Bush’s delusion that he is King, and can do as he wishes.

Or maybe someone finally read the Constitution to him.

Update: This sudden change of heart, it seems, comes only a day before Gonzolez is set to testify before Congress on the issue. After 6 years of GOP rule, unchecked powers, and the ability to do as he wishes, President Bush reversed his course just one day before his “course” was set to be questioned. Under oath.

John Bolton Says Iraq is in a State of Civil War

Now that the Bush Administration shackles have come off, it seems former UN Ambassador John Bolton has decided to acknowledge “reality”, and has declared there most certainly is a civil war raging in Iraq.

Unfortunately for America, Bolton made these comments during an interview that aired in the UK. Will the rabid-right, that goes after every Democrat for making discouraging statements about the United States while in other nations, go after Bolton for this perceived “anti-American” stance?

Too bad Bolton couldn’t bother with little details like “truth” while he was in office – or in the United States.

The video can be viewed at C&L.

US Storms Iranian Embassy in Abril, Iraq

During last night’s “speech of speeches”, President Bush laid out his “new way forward” in Iraq, which in a disturbing turn of events, included threatening the nations of Iran and Syria.

“Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity – and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

We are also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence sharing – and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region.”

These direct threats fall in line with a Power Point presentation released by the US government yesterday as a companion piece to Bush’s speech.

In the presentation, the White House explains the “new way forward”, and includes “Key strategy shifts.” These “shifts” include “increas[ing] operations against Iranian actors” and “Deployment of security assets to the Gulf region.” Conspicuously missing from these “shifts” is any sort of diplomatic plan to work with Iran and Syria (as the Iraq Study Group suggested), which according to senior administration officials, “was not accidental.”

With the revelation that diplomacy with Iran seems to be on the brink of coming to an end, arrives the news that United States forces raided the Iranian Embassy (considered to be Iranian soil) in Iraq last night.

“US forces accompanied by military helicopters on Thursday stormed the Iranian consulate in the Kurdish city of Arbil, arresting five Iranian employees, a Kurdish security source said. In addition to the arrests, US troops confiscated documents and computers, while Kurdish security authorities cordoned off all roads leading to the building.”

The whereabouts of the 5 arrested are currently unknown.

President Bush, in less than 8 hours, has positioned the United States on the brink of war with Iran without any Congressional or popular support, the necessary troops to engage in such action, nor the resources necessary to fight a nation with a conventional army that would surely respond with force.

If Bush is on national television admitting mistakes, and attempting to find a way in which we can win the war we’re already in – what makes him, or anyone else for that matter, believe the United States can handle another front.

If Bush really wants to make amends for mistakes already made, the first step is to not repeat them all over again.

Reagan Aide Compares Bush to Hitler; Blasts Iraq War

Paul Craig Roberts, an economist and former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during the Reagan Administration, eviscerates President Bush’s war policy while comparing him to Hitler in an article published on today.

Roberts opens the piece by exquisitely outlining what Americans voted for in the November mid-term elections.

“The new year began on the hopeful note that Bush’s illegal war in Iraq would soon be ended. The repudiation of Bush and the Republicans in the November congressional election, the Iraq Study Group’s unanimous conclusion that the US needs to remove its troops from the sectarian strife Bush set in motion by invading Iraq, Donald Rumsfeld’s removal as defense secretary and his replacement by Iraqi Study Group member Robert Gates, the thumbs down given by America’s top military commanders to the neoconservatives’ plan to send more US troops to Iraq, and new polls of the US military that reveal that only a minority supports Bush’s Iraq policy, thus giving new meaning to ‘support the troops,’ are all indications that Americans have shed the stupor that has given carte blanche to George W. Bush.”

Roberts uses this lead to explain that Bush is planning on doing the exact opposite of what the American people demanded in the election – downgrading the number of troops in Iraq, rather than escalating the conflict. He continues to explain that not only do the American people not support this option, but neither do the commanders and experts.

“If Bush ignores US military commanders and expert opinion and accepts the surge option advanced by the delusional neocon allies of Israel’s right-wing Likud Party, US troops will be engulfed in general insurgency. This is why General John Abizaid resigned on January 5. He wants no part of the Republican Party’s sacrifice of US soldiers to sectarian conflict.”

Later in the article, Roberts outright compares Bush to Hitler for his delusional tactics and for blaming his defeats on military commanders, rather than taking responsibility for a failed policy.

“Bush is like Hitler. He blames defeats on his military commanders, not on his own insane policy. Like Hitler, he protects himself from reality with delusion. In his last hours, Hitler was ordering non-existent German armies to drive the Russians from Berlin.”
It will be interesting to see if the rabid right attempts to spin Robert’s words and tie him in with the far-left, of which he is certainly not a part.

The article not only attacks the Bush policy in Iraq, but explains exactly what “the war on terror” is really about, and its roots in neo-conservatism. The full article can be read here.

%d bloggers like this: