Saturday, September 22, 2007

Bush = Saddam 2.0

Patrick Graham | Sep 20, 2007 |
"I first met the tribal militias that make up the Anbar Awakening during the U.S. invasion of Iraq, when a family I knew smuggled me out to a small village between Ramadi and Falluja. Saddam’s army had virtually disappeared from the countryside, and these militias, trusted by Saddam’s regime and at the time still loyal to it, controlled the roads and villages of Anbar just as they do today. I spent a lot of 2003 and 2004 around Falluja and Ramadi, getting to know a group of insurgents fighting the U.S. occupation. I’m fairly certain that if the tribal militias had been intelligently treated—i.e. paid US$10 each per day the way they are now—and the U.S. Army hadn’t driven around Ramadi and Falluja shooting wildly in the spring of 2003, many would have been American allies from the beginning. Instead, a lot of them became insurgents, hooked up with their cousins from Saddam’s former security services, and eventually allied themselves with the Iraqi branch of al-Qaeda. That relationship was symbiotic at first, but al-Qaeda soon became destructive parasites, jihadi body snatchers who killed anybody opposed to their control and strict Islamic codes.

When Gen. David Pet­raeus, commander of the multinational force in Iraq, appeared before Congress with Ambassador Crocker to testify about the results of President Bush’s “surge” strategy, he talked a lot about these tribal militias and the success of Anbar. It is the only progress the U.S. has made in Iraq for years. It’s unclear whether the additional 30,000 troops that make up the surge have had much effect on the Anbar Awakening. But watching Gen. Petraeus, I was struck by how familiar his words sounded. The general talked like every Sunni I’ve ever met in Iraq—hell, he sounded a bit like Saddam. The old tyrant would have had one of his characteristic chest-heaving guffaws watching Petraeus as he intoned the old Baathist mantra about the dangers to Iraq: Iran, Iran, Iran. Bush took up Gen. Petraeus’s views a few days later in a nationally televised speech about Iraq, in which he talked about the threat Tehran posed. It seems that Petraeus and Bush have come to the same conclusion as Saddam: the main enemy is Iran, and you can’t govern Iraq without the Sunni Arab tribes, even as you encourage anti-Iranian nationalism among the Shia. This is what Saddam did during the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, and what Washington is trying to do now. One of the main problems with this strategy is that both the Sunni tribes and Shia nationalists are profoundly anti-American and don’t trust each other—a potential recipe for further disaster."

UPDATE: 9/26/2007
A British polling organization now pegs Iraqi civilian deaths at 1.2 million people. The ORB poll surveyed Iraqi adults and determined nearly one in two households in Baghdad had lost at least one family member to war-related violence, and nationwide 22 percent of the households had suffered at least one death.


Shoes4Industry said...


H Nicole said...

LOL -- another good one, Shoes! Thanks.

I wanted to find out more about "Eliza Jane" at Wikipedia, but after seeing what she is singing about, there is no way in hell you are going to find out anything about her at Wikipedia!

We can't even get Dr. Judy Wood up there -- "not notable enough" is their excuse for why she is constantly omitted from the "list of participants" on the 9/11 Truth Movement page and why she does not have her own web page there.

Here is what I wrote on the comments about this, in case it is deleted:

Strong Keep: Why aren't Rosie O'Donnell and Dr. Judy Wood, the two strongest proponents of 9/11 truth in my view, not regarded as "notable" people in the 9/11 Truth Movement at Wikipedia? I am a female Ph.D. chemist who specifically sought out the voice of women scientists on this issue once Rosie re-sparked my interest in the first place, and I initially had a very difficult time finding Dr. Judy Wood, no thanks to Wiki's blatant omission of Dr. Judy Wood anywhere, even on the "9/11 Truth Movement" page! Charlie Sheen is listed, but not Rosie? A few dozen male non-scientists are listed, but not Dr. Judy Wood? Is having a penis a requirement for this status? You would think so considering not a single woman is listed, and every time I try to list either of these women at on the 9/11 Truth Movement page at Wikipedia, their names are taken down. I think the big question is not whether Dr. Judy Wood is notable enough. The big question is how many editors at Wikipedia are men. Hn young 23:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC) —from ""

H Nicole said...

That article from Canada about Bush being just another Saddam is excellent, too, Shoes.

I guess marking it as REQUIRED READING is not necessary since that qualifies for just about everything you post here!

Shoes4Industry said...

Clint Curtis - friend of the show.

LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

"Swing your partner and dosie do, ala mand left and around we go....yeehaw"...had to go do some shitkicking after watching that vid. DAM good bad about the lyrics though....>;}

LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

From the NYT...

"A comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year's presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.

Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore if the Florida court's order to recount more than 43,000 ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme Court.

Even under the strategy that Mr. Gore pursued at the beginning of the Florida standoff -- filing suit to force hand recounts in four predominantly Democratic counties -- Mr. Bush would have kept his lead, according to the ballot review conducted for a consortium of news organizations."

H Nicole said...

I think I would have liked to have waited it out, even if it took a few months, to get the real election results instead of having the Supreme Court decide. I think that's the whole point to people complaining about this. And yes, the Supreme Court did make Bush president, regardless of what the subsequent "results" are purported to be.

I know this is like the hundredth time I've posted this article here, but when in doubt, I'm still going with the exit polls for accuracy, and they said Gore in 2000. They also said Kerry four years later in 2004. WTF?

Was the 2004 Election Stolen? By RFK, Jr.

Here is one critique of that article that I have not read all the way through yet, but it looks pretty thorough...

Is RFK, Jr. Right About Exit Polls? by "Mystery Pollster" Mark Blumenthal

Shoes4Industry said...

That doesn't mean that the election in 2000 (AND 2004) wasn't stolen, just that they rigged it good, real good.


LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

good grief...

"Sherman, set the Wayback Machine for 2000".

"Yessir Mr. Peabody."

Even I'm not dumb enough to realize that there are ALWAYS errors/mistakes, and, unfortunately, probably a little fraud in every election ever held since this country's founding. From local to national.

But to keep whining and harping that GWB STOLE the election is getting very old and tedious. You make it sound like there was a cigar smoke filled room with GWB(who you call stupid) actually plotting with Kathryn Harris et al, and having an organized plot like he was a master criminal. May have been some over zealous Repub precinct people, but there were also over zealous Dems too. It all evens out in the end. It's over, it's history, you can't do anything about it.

Move On....

Shoes4Industry said...


Shoes4Industry said...

"But to keep whining and harping that GWB STOLE the election is getting very old and tedious."

So is his war and the way he's destroyed the country.

H Nicole said...

As with everything, it's all a matter of balance and a matter of proportions. I think I said before that there's dirt and then there's mass murder and genocide. Big difference.

For voter fraud, there's local shenanigans by rogue districts, and then there's voter fraud of Biblical Proportions. It's just a matter of some things getting way out of hand and needing to be reeled in a little with some checks and balances, that's all.

I agree with you, Life, on a certain level though -- enough friggin' "rah rah Bush -- we hate women and dark-skinned people" Americans voted for Bush at both elections to make it close enough to go either way, and that's good enough (or I should say bad enough) for me. We certainly got what we deserved, especially in that 2004 election when many, many should have known better.

As for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad...

"Well, you have to appreciate we don't need a nuclear bomb. We don't need that. What need do we have for a bomb?" Ahmadinejad said in the "60 Minutes" interview taped in Iran on Thursday. "In political relations right now, the nuclear bomb is of no use. If it was useful it would have prevented the downfall of the Soviet Union."

Gotta love his logic, at least, even if he may be lying through his teeth.

I also love the way Ahmadinejad has come all the way over here to assure the American people that Bush is lying his pants off about Iran -- and it doesn't seem to be taking much convincing!

I certainly don't like the anti-semitic remarks Ahmadinejad is purported to have said in the past, but he is supposed to speak at Columbia University tomorrow where he is expected to be grilled on these things. I will be interested to hear what he has to say on that topic for sure.

Obviously, your typical Republican ploy of painting this guy as somehow being more evil, or a bigger liar, than Bush is not working with me, Life.

H Nicole said...

Geez. A lot of homework tonight from the University of S4I. I am only getting through all that Clint Curtis reading now. Is it me just paying more attention or does the tide seem to be turning, finally, in exposing all this voter fraud stuff?

I guess it is all getting to be too much for me to chime in intelligently on that story, but the big question is: what is being done to cut down on voter fraud in 2008?

I still say one way to go may be to focus on accurate exit polling -- then checking things out on the spot if the exit polling doesn't mesh with the election results. Unless, of course, I am missing something about this type of election fraud, and there is something about it that gets around the exit polling check.

LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

Exit polling is hoohaw. People vote behind a curtain so they don't have to tell who they voted for. Why would anyone think that when they get done voting they're going to tell a complete stranger who they voted for?

Lee said...

Guess those exit polls aren't so accurate after all, are they?

But of course, it would make sense to rely on those polls rather than the results of the ACTUAL votes.

Losers always look for excuses.

moneysmith said...

The Ohio vote was manipulated and stolen. Read Robert Kennedy Jr's piece in Rolling Stone, or the Conyers' report, showing the statistical impossibilities of what happened in Ohio, or this piece in Harper's:

Exit polls are not worthless. They show anomalies in voting, such as happened in Ohio. From Harper's:

"The chances that the state exit poll estimates erred by such a wide margin was one 1 in 16.5 million, according to a study by the National Election Data Archive Project."

Now they are trying to do it again with the proposal to split California's electoral vote. If that passes -- and it could, thanks to "low-information voters," we are totally screwed.

LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

Everyone I know, and myself, when ever asked at an exit poll...LIED..."you're a complete stranger, it's none of your damn business who I voted for"...

and just because RFK jr says so, don't make it so...and Conyers...what a putz.

H Nicole said...

Life, you have to start somewhere. The science behind exit polling, or any other type of polling, may have its problems in accuracy, but what else are you going to do? Even you admit that election results aren't accurate either, right? We are only arguing over the scale of the inaccuracy and potential fraud.

My argument is that exit polling is just as accurate, if not moreso, than the ballot, and it should not be pooh-poohed as a legitimate check on election results.

If not exit polls and other polls, what do you propose as a way of accurately measuring what the people want? Or are you proposing that it really doesn't matter what the people want? Although in reality this seems to be true, especially in the current political climate, I don't think it would be such a good idea to run around tauting that this as the way things should be and that we should just give up entirely on a truly democratic and representative government.

In fact, it is fun to imagine a day when everybody has a direct say from one IP address each -- and we just eliminate Congress all together as our "representatives."

(Yeah, yeah, I know -- this would have major problems that I don't support, but it's still fun, given the current climate, to say -- hey, let's not even consider replacing Congresspeople, let's just get rid of them all together!)

LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

Election by ballot is the only way for the people to speak. It's been done for centuries and there's a reason it's been done that way for so long. One man...whoops...person, one vote. Simple and effective.

Polls didn't exist until media became involved and the evolution of the "idiot box".(TV) And they only did it for ratings and to bolster their "reporting". vote per IP address???? You don't want my 94 yr old gma or 78 year old father to vote?

I got a better Idea...EVERY LEGAL eligible citizen is on file with a DNA sample and they all get one biometrically(?) verified vote and voting is required or you go to's that for Big Brother? Voting is not a Right, it's a DUTY.


H Nicole said...

Everybody is going to have an IP address in about another 50 years, and anybody who doesn't can mail it in, but I don't think very many will go for the DNA idea as a means of positive ID to thwart fraud -- too much invasion of privacy and too much potential information about a person that could be used against them by the government. Maybe just a touch screen fingerprint or voice print.

The DNA thing is coming, I'm sure -- blood (i.e., DNA samples) taken at every birth and kept on record -- and I hope it will be used for the better to increase general health and help identify potential risk to diseases in the general population, etc., but... won't blame skeptics for resisting this for quite a long time.

BTW, why don't your elderly relatives have an IP address? I would think you would take the day off from your busy schedule and help them get connected. The only obstacle I know about from older people getting connected to the Internet is just not knowing how or not having some *nice* younger relative to show them how to do it -- patiently. All the elderly people I know love it because of the connection they get -- I can't imagine every pro-senior group and senior retirement community not actively working to get their people connected and involved this way.

moneysmith said...

From LB: "Everyone I know, and myself, when ever asked at an exit poll...LIED"

Well, duh, if I voted for a couple of losers like Thompson and Gingrich -- your dream team, as I recall -- I'd lie about it, too.

We must have clear and easy to understand paper ballots all across the country, sufficient numbers of voting machines and assurances that those machines are not run by Repug operatives (i.e., Diebold) and oversight that prevents Rovian tricks about who can and can't vote. Recounts cannot be stopped until all the votes are counted. Otherwise, "democracy" is just another meaningless term. Like "compassionate conservative."

LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

My elderly relatives don't want nor need an IP address. If they "need" anything, they call me. And if you think fraud is rampant now, IP address voting would be right out of Max Headroom.

Any person who wants to vote LEGALLY can do so now as they have always been able to. All they have to do is register.

And "if" a recount is ever needed, there is one allowed. Period. None of this hanging chad, what was their intent, dimples, happy horseshit. You've all still got your knickers in a knot about Algore losing fair and square.

Move On...

moneysmith said...

"And "if" a recount is ever needed, there is one allowed." Ha!

Tell it to the Supreme Court. They stopped the Florida recount, remember?

Gore WON the popular vote. That's why you're so defensive about it. You're just as immature as Bush, can't admit a mistake, always blaming someone else when things go wrong.

The electoral college is an antiquated system that should have been eliminated years ago. The last time the electoral college decided a presidency was in 1888.

H Nicole said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
H Nicole said...

If we can do safe credit card transactions over the Internet, we can do voting. There's got to be a way!

I was born about 50 years too early. I am sooooo not a very good paper person. Paper and I don't get along at all. If I never saw a piece of paper again in my life (and everything was in my computer instead), I'd be the most organized, happiest person alive.

LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

And how well will that computer work when the power is off? I've got 5 computers, owned 100+, built over 1,000, and have been on a keyboard since 1975. They are wonderful tools, but, it takes something called electricity to make them work. I can go to my 300 feet of bookshelves and the only power required is my brain.

And while I'm lucky and skilled enough to avoid getting scammed, BILLIONS of dollars and MILLIONS of people have been, and will be, victims of computer/Internet fraud and identity theft.

LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

"CONCLUSION: To say the Electoral College failed in 1888 is to not understand how the system works. The Electoral College prevents one region of the country voting as a block from unduly directing the outcome of the election to the rest of the country. The real reason Cleveland won the popular vote (by only 90,536 out of 11,379,131votes cast) but lost the election was because of unusually high support in a single region of the country."

For someone who claims to be a "best selling author" and "loves to do research", you don't have a clue MS. Thank God the Founding Fathers did.

The purpose of the Electoral College is to keep candidates from only "winning" in the most populous areas and having to truly represent the whole of the country instead of the 2 or 3 most populous states.

Of course, you California screwballs and New York nuts would just love that. What the hell do you care about the other 48 states except to tax the shit out of them and then blow it all on your "enlightened" social policies. The system works fine just the way it is. Bush won, Gore lost.

Move On....

H Nicole said...

I never figured you for a half-Luddite, Life. Live and learn.

You can always print out anything you want on paper. I'm just saying when something comes in the mail, it should never come in the mail. It should come to me first by e-mail, and if I desire, I'll print it out. There is really no reason these days that any paper should have to be used in the initial transfer of information, ever.

In my case, if my whole computer went down, I'd probably celebrate and read a book -- on paper, though I'd surely miss my homies here at S4I!

Seriously, though, excellent point for the dependence on electricity, Life. I loved this battery-less flashlight a friend of mine had where you just pump with your hand to light it. Maybe computers of the future can be equipped with an excercise-bike type set-up so that they are not 100% dependent on electricity. :)

LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

"half Luddite"...LMAO..not hardly dear. Just a Realist.

I was in on the beginning of the "paperless" Revolution. And about half our time was spent printing stuff out for "backup" in case of the fancy smancy machines "breaking".

And while you and I and our fellow computer nerds might be able to get by without the "mail" to a certain degree, MILLIONS of people cannot. The vast majority of people in my town don't have computers, and of the ones that do have them, most of them are functionally illiterate with them when it comes to spam, updates, security, and the like.

I've got one of the little "shake and shine" flashlights. Along with a crank up radio, solar power rechargeable battery powered screwdrivers, and more. I'm a tech geek, Futurama, Star Trek, 2001, kind of guy. Instead of relying on power plants for home energy, we should all have a combo of wind, solar, hydro, power up and running to where everyone is on their own "grid".

And while your exercise bicycle generator would be a boon for some of the "chubbys" in the world, I quit "pedaling" when I turned 16. I pedaled enough to go around the world when I was a kid. That was enough for me.

moneysmith said...

Speaking of "potential recipe for further disaster" (the last line of your post, shoes), let's take a look at the U.S. economy after seven years of Bush's policies:

Hmmm, prices soaring, real estate tanking, recession and inflation on the horizon, dollar in the toilet. I guess you can't give tax cuts to the super wealthy and blow a trillion bucks playing war and expect the economy to thrive.

Okay, LB and lee, let's hear about how it's the Democrats' fault. We're waiting...

LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

blahblahblah...same doom and gloom bs that everybody has been saying for about the last 50 years. The US is still the powerhouse of the world.

Perhaps you'd like to go back to the good old days of Jimmuh Carter and 15% prime rates.

The only reason oil is outrageously priced is because the loony left files lawsuits out their butts every time someone tries to build new refineries or poke a hole in the ground.

This country has enough coal reserves to power us for over 300 years and enough oil for even longer if we could just get to it. Instead, discovery, recovery and production are stymied by the nutballs who think progress is a bad thing and then turn right around and bitch about their high costs.

And the tax cuts for the rich crap is beyond stale. The top 5-10% of income tax payers still pay over 90% of the taxes. I'm not even going to waste the time to provide "reliable" references, because anybody with a brain can read the facts and figures for themselves.

as I said...blahblahblah..same old whiny rhetoric from the US haters.

Shoes4Industry said...

"What the hell do you care about the other 48 states except to tax the shit out of them and then blow it all on your "enlightened" social policies. Like Farm Subsidies?


moneysmith said...

So real estate prices aren't in free fall, foreclosures aren't at record highs, the dollar isn't plummeting and oil isn't overpriced because suppliers have a captive audience?
Well, that means ALL the business experts and publications are wrong and you are the only one who has true grasp of the economic big picture. How very odd that no one has offered you a top spot at the Treasury Dept or the WSJ. You'd fit right in with the morons on the editorial page.

LifeBeginsAt200MPH said...

I believe if you'll check my statements here previously, that I do not believe in the CRP. This country ought to be producing on every acre of land they can.

And idiots that buy houses beyond their means and make interest only, balloon, monkey ass, dumb decisions on real estate get what they deserve.

文章 said...