10 April 2004

If It's Not Wrong When the Government Does It ...

The television station A&E is airing an .::Investigative Report::. about the increasing number of women being sent to America's prisons. A sub-segment deals with battered women who killed or assaulted their abusive spouses.

My question is this:
If the U.S., as a nation, is supported by a number of its citizens in invading another country based on what they might do, why does our judicial system lock up women who kill their abusive spouses based on a pattern of inflicting great physical harm?
Our troops were deployed 8,000 miles to invade, occupy and control another country to "prevent" them from harming U.S. citizens. The women who killed their spouses were batttered and had their lives threatened in their own homes.

Pre-emptive violence is the same, whether employed by the state (our nation) or by an individual. If current mores in this country condone it, these women need to be immediately let out of prison.

09 April 2004

Condoleeza "Tha' Skeeza" Rice Surpasses Her Masters' Expectations

According to the negress, the Administration didn't act on the information provided by Richard Clark because it was waiting for more "actionable" intelligence.

What is "actionable" intelligence anyway? I think she means they wanted a more specific PLAN.

The best (most outrageous) lie of all is refuted by Coleen Rowley in an interview on .::Democracy Now::.
AMY GOODMAN: Now, yesterday, Dr. Condoleezza Rice said that all of the field offices knew about the potential threats. What did you understand at the time, Coleen Rowley?

COLEEN ROWLEY: Well, you know, historically the FBI has been investigating al Qaeda for a long time. Obviously, the first 1993 World Trade Center attacks brought that into focus. So, al Qaeda certainly was considered a threat, but what I'm talking about is any special urgency, especially during the summer of 2001 which would have made people, especially the mid-level management people, more aware of information, little pieces of information that were generated to them. And again, if you read -- reread the letter and the fact that the .::Phoenix Memo::. and the information that came in from our office and other offices simply was not acted on --

AMY GOODMAN: I just want to interrupt for one second. On August 15, Zacarias Moussaoui was taken into custody. To refresh people's memories -- three weeks before the September 11th attacks. At that point when the alleged 20th hijacker is taken into custody, at a point when -- well certainly, if information was gathered and if in fact he was a part of this, and you could get information, perhaps the September 11 attacks could have been avoided -- averted, can you talk about what you understood the threat level to be, and if you understood how high the people in Washington -- how seriously they were treating things at this point?

COLEEN ROWLEY: I don't have any firsthand information about what the threat level was, and the people in Washington, other than what the comments and the responses that were given from these people to our field office agents here. Again, if you reread the testimony, even from the Joint Intelligence Committee of responses that were given, it does not show that there was any understanding of the urgency of the threat.

See .::Claim vs Fact::. for a complete deconstruction of her lying testimony before the 9/11 Commission.

Capitalism Thrives Where Violently-Imposed Democracy Fails
...The atmosphere .::in Baghdad::. has changed for the worse. At the entrance to the hotel where I am staying, there is a noticeboard near the reception desk. Last year, the pieces of paper stuck on the board were mostly from Iraqis wanting jobs as translators for foreign companies and itemising their qualifications. Today, there are no such notices. Too many translators have been killed or threatened for any Iraqi to advertise the fact that he or she wants to work for a foreigner.

Instead, there are three notices on the board from different companies all advertising armoured vehicles for sale. One of them says it can also offer body armour, adding seductively that this is in "limited quantity in the country". ...
More Troops, More Troops, Iraqi OIL for More Troops
...::word leaked out::. that US generals are "outraged" by their lack of soldiers.

America's generals consider current troop strengths of 130,000 in Iraq inadequate...

...His [General John Abizaid, commander of Central Command] words overrode months of public assurances from the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, and other civilian chiefs that more troops are not necessary.

...US forces are so overstretched in Iraq and Afghanistan that "there are simply no large units available and suitable for assignment", Novak wrote in his column in The Washington Post.

...Many still in uniform bitterly recall the public dressing-down earned by the then army chief of staff, .::Gen Eric Shinseki::., when he told Congress a month before the invasion, in February 2003, that "several hundred thousand troops" might be needed to occupy Iraq.

That estimate was slapped down as "wildly off the mark" by the deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz. .::Thomas White::., the army secretary and a former general himself, publicly backed Gen Shinseki. Mr White was sacked shortly afterwards by Mr Rumsfeld. ...

The rabid right are experts at telling the lies to start a war, but they're lousy at knowing when one is .::over::. and how many soldiers are required to actually WIN it!