State of Denial

It is no surprise that Bob Woodward' s new book about the Bush presidency is called "State of Denial" and the administration goes full court press into that mode.

When asked about the book, Tony Snow said "You know, in a lot of ways, the book's sort of like cotton candy, it kind of melts on contact,"

The Undersecretary of State, Karen Hughes, comes to the defense of her buddy sitting in the White House and says "It may take decades to change anti-American feelings around the world that have been aggravated by war in Iraq, U.S. policy toward Israel and America's "sex and violence" She is in charge of dealing with the US image abroad, and she just might wonder what she did wrong to deserve that job. But she's laying the groundwork like all good members of this administration for a good old case of "I told you so" when indeed this ideological struggle does last for a long time as she says. "It's going to be the work of years and maybe decades." Here's a thought, Karen, maybe if we hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place, this ideological struggle just wouldn't be where it is today.

The National Intelligence Council released their latest National Intelligence Estimate earlier this year, but declassified key judgments from the report by 16 separate spy agencies who produced this first formal appraisal of global terrorism, were leaked this week. (Are we having fun yet?)

United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of al-Qa’ida and disrupted its operations; however, we judge that al-Qa’ida will continue to pose the greatest threat to the Homeland and US interests abroad by a single terrorist organization. We also assess that the global jihadist movement"— which includes al-Qa’ida, affiliated and independent terrorist groups, and emerging networks and cells—is spreading and adapting to counterterrorism efforts. We assess that the global jihadist movement is decentralized, lacks a coherent global strategy, and is becoming more diffuse. New jihadist networks and cells, with anti-American agendas, are increasingly likely to emerge. The confluence of shared purpose and dispersed actors will make it harder to find and undermine jihadist groups. Four underlying factors are fueling the spread of the jihadist movement: (1) Entrenched grievances, such as corruption, injustice, and fear of Western domination, leading to anger, humiliation, and a sense of powerlessness; (2) the Iraq “jihad;” (3) the slow pace of real and sustained economic, social, and political reforms in many Muslim majority nations; and (4) pervasive anti-US sentiment among most Muslims—all of which jihadists exploit.

AND pay close attention to this paragraph-

We judge that groups of all stripes will increasingly use the Internet to communicate, propagandize, recruit, train, and obtain logistical and financial support.

That last paragraph is scary for many reasons, the least of which is the President's Torture bill, or more formally The Military Commisions Act of 2006 or HR 6166, which was passed by the Senate this week. This bill does nothing to protect the nation from terrorists. Read it and weep; weep for the loss of our freedoms.

Alex Jones from PrisonPlanet.com summed up some of the more egregious sections.

Subsection 4(b) (26) of section 950v. of HR 6166 - Crimes triable by military commissions - includes the following definition.

"Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct."

For an individual to hold an allegiance or duty to the United States they need to be a citizen of the United States. Why would a foreign terrorist have any allegiance to the United States to breach in the first place?

AND

Buried amongst the untold affronts to the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the very spirit of America, the torture bill contains a definition of "wrongfully aiding the enemy" which labels all American citizens who breach their "allegiance" to President Bush and the actions of his government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture and conviction in front of a military tribunal

Bush's response to all of this? Critics who claim the Iraq war has made America less safe "buys into the enemy's propaganda that the terrorists attack us because we're provoking them." No George, we won't listen to your propaganda anymore. AND we will not be silent!
The Phillipines Daily Inquirer correctly calls the war in Iraq "this tragic, unnecessary detour in the war on terror" Part of the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the White House. As we wrote three weeks ago: "From exclusivist language (Bush: You are either for us or against us) to breathtaking "‘short-termism"’ (no provision at all, in the original budget, for rehabilitation in Afghanistan) to massive disinformation (the conspiracy of lies to justify the invasion of Iraq) to murderous incompetence in the post-invasion years (disbandment of the Iraqi army, the hyping of al-Zarqawi), the Bush administration has managed to turn a righteous cause (unremitting defense of the values of freedom) into a perpetual campaign (narrow-minded, vicious-hearted) of the Republican Party."

But the most ominous statement that we heard this week was from Bob Woodward's book. He tells of a meeting that Bush had key Republicans to the White House to discuss Iraq, he told them, "I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me. Despite the best advice by the most experienced military advisors (which he isn't listening to) this president is still going to stay his disastrous course. It's just wrong!

It really hasn't been a very good week.

Gold Star Mothers Day

In 1994, President Bill Clinton proclaimed the last Sunday in September to be Gold Star Mothers Day. He said that we should " honor women whose sons and daughters have pledged their lives to securing for all Americans the blessings of liberty. These mothers have made tremendous sacrifices, the most painful being the loss of their children, and deserve the respect and recognition of the nation."

Gold Star Mothers Day is not a Hallmark holiday to send flowers or cards. Gold Star Mothers Day 2006 should be a day for sober reflection about how President Bush set in place a new generation of Gold Star Mothers when he sent our children to fight his illegal war in Iraq. These new Gold Star Mothers will be his legacy as the War President, he proudly claims himself to be.

The current president says we must honor the sacrifices of fallen soldiers by completing the mission. How will more bloodshed and more dying honor my son, who was killed in Iraq more than 2 years ago? The president can prevent the creation of new Gold Star Mothers. It is time for this president to put ALL options on the table and make necessary and immediate changes to his disastrous course in Iraq. He can start by bringing the troops home now.

We will never forget our loved ones; they will live forever in our hearts. On Sunday, the citizens of this country must remember our sacrifice and consider the human cost of this war. That and our broken hearts are something that Gold Star Mothers live with forever.

I AM the proud Gold Star Mother of Lt Ken Ballard, KIA 5.30.04, Najaf, Iraq

2700

There are 2700 US casualties in Iraq as of this writing.

13 families have not been notified. 13 families think their life is still normal and that their loved one is still coming home. They don't know their life has been turned upside down.They will spend the next several days waiting, signing forms, planning a funeral, and crashing into a military culture where their only connection may have been their loved one. They will hear terms like PNOK, KIA, DOW, and the only thing they want is their old life back.

The casualty numbers will click over to 2701, 2702, and so on and the media will not mark this number and neither will the general public. They probably won't notice because they don't have to. They may not think about this war today or tomorrow or next week, but we Gold Star Families do. Some politicians say it is wrong to use a milestone number like this to remind people of the continuing casualties and injuries; they say it is political. But this war is political regardless of where you stand on it, so I say if you don't think about this war except when a round number comes up, then today is your day.

I hate hearing about any casualty from this lousy war. I hate that George W Bush or anyone in his administration doesn't think about the human cost of this war and I am sorry for that.

I would like to offer my condolences to all the Gold Star Families regardless of their loved ones casualty number. I am so sorry.

All Saints vs the IRS

Two days before the presidential election in November 2004, a guest pastor at All Saints Church in Pasadena, CA delivered what the IRS is calling an anti war sermon. It could cost the church it's tax exempt status.

The dispute centers on a sermon titled "If Jesus Debated Senator Kerry and President Bush" that Regas delivered as a guest pastor. Though he did not endorse a candidate, he said Jesus would condemn the Iraq war and Bush's doctrine of pre-emptive war. "I believe Jesus would say to Bush and Kerry: `War is itself the most extreme form of terrorism. President Bush, you have not made dramatically clear what have been the human consequences of the war in Iraq,'" Regas said, according to a transcript.

Of course Jesus would! Love thy neighbor and all, when is war the preferred choice?

It's been too many years to count since I was a regular church goer. I blame that on my Catholic upbringing and those in the church that never inspired. So, when you meet a pastor who does inspire, you kind of wish you lived nearby. That's what I told the Reverend Ed Bacon of All Saints when I was fortunate enough to meet him in Crawford, TX in the summer of 2005. He had made the journey to the camp outside the president's ranch as so many others of us had. What is the Noble Cause? Why are our children dying? Bring them home NOW!

Reverend Bacon was there to present a petition to Gold Star mothers signed by members of his church supporting our trip to Crawford, supporting the pace movement that we were a part of. He found Lynn Braddach, mother of Travis, Michelle DeFord, mother of David and me, mother of Ken. He explained the petition and told us that his church sent love and warm wishes and support. We talked a bit about the antiwar stance that his church had made. I told him that I was still mad at God about Ken's death. He told me he understood. He is the kind of man you could trust with your faith; he's one of those people you meet along the journey who touches you and you will always remember that brief moment.

When I read about the IRS action against this church, this kind man in June 2005, I was annoyed. Less than 2 weeks before that same presidential election back in November 2004, I was in Washington DC to bury my only child at Arlington National Cemetery. 4 of us fallen away catholics who were in town for the funeral decided it would be a good idea to attend mass that weekend.

We decided we would go to the magnificent Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate on Michigan Avenue. This Catholic church is impressive and I know I felt uncomfortable being there. I wasn't sure I belonged. The altar boys were dressed alike. I wanted to shout at them "RUN! Run while you can!" remembering the horrendous molestation charges that the Catholic church was mishandling at that time. The priests (plural) were wearing matching outfits, too. The altar clothes matched the priests garb. The marble was imposing. I felt like the little kid I was when we visited one of the many massive European churches when my family lived in Europe. I did not, however, wear anything to cover my head as I had done so long before.

When the priest stood up before us and started his sermon, he told us that this was a week to honor missions. We all had a mission, he said. His voice boomed throughout the church telling us that our mission in the coming weeks was to vote. When we considered where to place our vote, we should listen to the voices of the unborn children and remember who supported a woman's choice and which candidate did not. My first thought's were that Kerry was the catholic and wasn't he playing on *our* team? I knew we were in a red part of the country, but this priest was clearly telling us to vote for Bush as sure as anything he said that day. I knew I did not belong to the catholic church anymore.

When I heard about the IRS investigation of All Saints Church in June 2005, I couldn't understand the disconnect. I still don't. California church speaking of moral issues = bad. DC church speaking of moral issues= good. Of course war and abortion are moral issues and they are both political, but the church is where people check in about their faith and seek guidance. These political judgments about moral issues is no surprise, of course. It's part of this administration's double standard. What's good for them is good even if it isn't good for anyone else.

When the IRS reprimanded the church, they asked that it promise to be more careful. Church officials refused. All Saints has been known as "a headquarters for political activity" since the 1970s. We need more churches and more brave pastors like this. It would be good for the soul of this country.

Drumbeats of War

According to Time Magazine, the Navy has been told to "Prepare to deploy", to be ready to move by Oct 1. The Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), asked for a review of long-standing U.S. plans to blockade two Iranian oil ports on the Persian Gulf.

Gen. John Abizaid, commander of the U.S. Central Command, said military leaders would consider adding troops or extending the Iraq deployments of other units if needed. With the current troop level at 140,000 and hopes for a reduction in those numbers to about 100,000 by year end are a distant thought. "If it's necessary to do that because the military situation on the ground requires that, we'll do it," Abizaid said of longer deployments. "If we have to call in more forces because it's our military judgment that we need more forces, we'll do it." Of course they will. Rising sectarian violence and slow progress of the Iraqi government are the reasons today. Who says things are going well in Iraq?

Air Force Col. Sam Gardiner (Ret.) said, “We are conducting military operations inside Iran right now. The evidence is overwhelming.”

And the president of our United States is disingenous when he stands before the assembly of the United Nations today and says At the start of the 21st century, it is clear that the world is engaged in a great ideological struggle between extremists who use terror as a weapon to create fear and moderate people who work for peace. Five years ago I stood at this podium and called on the community of nations to defend civilization and build a more hopeful future. This is still the great challenge of our time. It is the calling of our generation. I'd like to know what he means when he uses the word "Peace"

What's that you say? I can't hear you; the drumbeats of war are way too LOUD!!! There is no coincidence that we are 7 weeks before the midterm election.

Iraq Deployment phase II

"Leaving on a jet plane- will miss u very much- will try my best to keep in touch. Lots of love" That's the text message I received early this morning. As I was getting ready for work, my young friend, an Army nurse, was heading off to war. 1 year stationed at a Baghdad hospital caring for our son's and daughters as they fight George Bush's war.

Many of the 2672 dead American soldiers and nearly 20,000 wounded members of the military have passed through those hospitals in Iraq. What will my young friend see? How will her heart and her spirit survive these horrendous images that will surely stay with her forever? I know for sure that the dedication and professionalism of the medical teams will keep many alive who might not have survived.

I spoke to her earlier this week to send hugs from California for a safe journey and to hear her voice. She sounded optimistic and nervous and very much that she had a job to do. I'm not sure I offered her much comfort, but that had been my plan.

My young friend, she knew Ken; she was who he planned to spend his first week at home after his Iraq deployment. She would be his decompression, his soft place to land and if needed she would have watched him sleep for the week, as long as they were together. That didn't happen, of course.

As my young friend faces this journey into hell, I remind her that I am doing everything I can to bring the troops home, sooner than later. She knows of my activities, she tells me she appreciates that.

Her mother has already seen her two sons deploy to that part of the world. The brothers returned safely, and now her daughter? I cannot imagine.

Ken and his band of angels will be watching over her, I know that for sure, too. But really, isn't it time to bring all the troops home now?

Be Very Afraid

Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield aaacckk! That's enough to make you spill your coffee as you read the morning paper, especially when it is the Secretary of the Air Force who is saying it. Secretary Michael Wynne goes on to say The object is basically public relations. Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations, said Secretary Michael Wynne.

"If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation," said Wynne. "(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press."

The Air Force has paid for research into nonlethal weapons, but he (Wynne) said the service is unlikely to spend more money on development until injury problems are reviewed by medical experts and resolved.

Nonlethal weapons generally can weaken people if they are hit with the beam. Some of the weapons can emit short, intense energy pulses that also can be effective in disabling some electronic devices.

No moral dilemma here, the reason to NOT test on unsuspecting citizens is because he thinks he would be vilified in the press? ya think? I'm struggling that this confession was so casually spoken to a reporter as if they were discussing baseball box scores.

I'm not sure what more there is to say. We all know about the nuclear testing on unsuspecting civilians in the 1950's that resulted in thyroid disease, leukemia and other horrendous illnesses. In 2000, the Radiation Exposure Act was passed to define and process claims surrounding those illnesses.

So the next time you want to go out an unwelcome this president to your town, consider the consequences, you unruly crowds, you.

Has this country not learned some lessons from these unwarranted experiments? Where is the outrage? We deserve better, but I guess we haven't really learned anything at all, have we?

9/11- Random thoughts

I wanted to ignore the 5 year anniversary of 9/11. Not that I believe we should forget about it. Our country, our world must never forget that terrible morning on that beautiful sunny day in September, 5 years ago.

It's just that media uses days like this as a media event. They tell the story from every angle. It is the story of the day or week, however long they can stretch it. It's another much like the Jon Benet story, except this time it is about that day in September. The Path to 9/11, 9/11: the Day That Changed America, Witnessing: A Democracy of Photographs, all shows to remember September 11, 2001. I am on overload and I'm not watching these stories.

My son was alive back then, 5 years ago. He was a senior in college, studying Military Science and International Relations in Tennessee. He was due to graduate and be commissioned as an officer in the US Army the following May. Ken called me that morning immediately after the first plane hit. We watched together in horror as the 2nd plane hit the 2nd tower. I couldn't process that 2nd act of horror. Ken assured me it was what it was, another plane hitting another tower. We were 1500 miles away, but we shared that moment together. Families should be together on days like this.

After Ken was killed in May 2004, I found an entry in his journal. On September 12, 2001, Ken wrote this:

Terror came to this nation on the 11th. The question of how runs through the mind of many and shock set in as we watch with horror the events unfolding before us. Anger fills many hearts and minds. Once that anger is focused, God help us then. The nation wants blood, but do they understand that in spilling their blood, ours will flow too? When this war does start, I should be back on the front lines. I really hope that I will make the right choices and keep those people under me alive.

My son was 24 years old when he wrote that. He was right, of course. about a lot of that entry. He knew that American blood would spill, he was on the front lines and he did make the right choices to keep those people under him alive. There is no doubt that 9/11 was a turning point in our lives as this administration found these attacks 5 years ago to be just the right reason to invade Afghanistan and then Iraq. Who will be next?

I worry about the soul of this country on days like today. There is so little hope. There are haves and have lesses and have nothings and this administration doesn't care about anyone except the have mores. Name calling is rampant. If you aren't with us; you're against us and I'm not talking about the terrorists. Red state, blue state, sometimes purple, but always divided. The president says we must put aside our differences to fight his glorious war. He paints a somber picture of this world and this struggle for civilization and he tells us that the war against this enemy is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century, and the calling of our generation. He invokes the memory of those terrible battles in WWI & WWII and Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman. But there is no comparison to this war, his war and wars past. And there will never be a comparison to our 43rd president and Roosevelt and Truman.

This image of the world Bush is trying to convey is frightening. But if it is so, then why are not ALL Americans called to fight this battle and to make sacrifices? It is the military that serve their country and die or are wounded doing so. It is the families who hold down the home front. It is insulting when the president or anyone else reminds us that "every one of our troops is a volunteer" And that means what? That they can do with them what they want without regard to their mental status or personal safety? Their physical status? The condition of their families after multiple deployments? That they can send them off to war and cut their benefits when they return? We owe these families and our military members for the rest of their lives. Maybe it's time to bring back the draft with NO exemptions, that means women and gays- mandatory and oh, so equal opportunity. It means no deferrments for college (did ya hear that Mr Cheney? NONE!)

I wasn't trying to make this political, but the president sure did when he spoke to the nation this evening . He connected the dots of Iraq & 9/11 even though he has recently admitted that there was none. Tonite he said the regime of Saddam Hussein was a clear threat that posed a risk that the world could not afford to take. I just wish he would make up his mind. I'd kind of like to know the reason my son and 2670 others have died while serving their country in Iraq? I'm pretty sure that the people of Iraq would like to know what circumstances had gotten their country into such dire danger.

These little speeches or pep talks are just a run up to the elections. Scare the crap out of people and they'll vote Republican because they are big on terrorist fighting, so they'd have us believe, but I don't believe it now anymore than I did before 9/11. The current crop of Republicans and some Democrats are a bunch of thugs holding our country hostage. Where is the hope that America once stood for? Where are our freedoms?

I want my country back.

What happened to our world?

I was in Florence, Italy on 9.11.02. It was one year after the terrorist attacks on on NY, Pennsylvania and the Pentagon. People cared about Americans back then; they stopped us to make sure we were okay. They wanted to share where they were when they heard the news one year before. Our world was still united.

The poster shown below was handed out to all the vendors at the market in Florence. They asked the vendors to display the poster as a sign of unity with the US. The poster says " Florence does not forget". They didn't forget then and the world was united, but what happened?

After this country was attacked, there were memorial services in France, Malaysia and other places. Universal condolences were offered at embassies. People lit candles and presented flowers at vigils worldwide. The Pope and the Dalai Lama lead prayers. It wasn't just an attack on America & Americans, the citizens of the world suffered, too; they shared out pain.

It has been 5 years since that terrible day. Our world is no longer united, neither is our country. Our president has squandered the unity that was shown to us from across the world. Our president did not want collaboration, he wanted to fight his Global War on Terrorism alone, although those countries of the Coalition of the Willing, went along until it became too politically uncomfortable for their participation and thus we have the Coalition of the Wilting. Iraq is going badly. The Taliban has shown a resurgence in Iraq.

What happened to our country? What happened to our world?

Patriot

Patriot (60 sec)

I am the mother of Lt Ken Ballard and I approve this message

Ain't it the truth?

http://cagle.msnbc.com/working/060831/keefe.gif

1267 and 2642, Not Just Numbers

That would be 1267 days and 2642 US casualties in Iraq. This week will mark 1267 days from March 19, 2003 until now, the length of this war turned occupation in Iraq. 3 years, 5 months, 14 days.... The days keep clicking by and so do the number of deaths and injuries. People who are not affected by this war do not know either of these numbers, but we Gold Star families do. Our families live this war every single day, it *is* our lives; some days it consumes our lives, some days it is tolerable, but we can never get away from the fact that our loved ones are never coming home.

The number 1267 is important to know, because the disaster in Iraq has now lasted longer than the US involvement in WWII; the war to end all wars. It didn't, did it?

This miserable milestone will not be noted by the White House, but it is something that we must acknowledge. This administration insists that things are going well in Iraq. This president has said he will stay this disastrous course and leave the victory for future presidents. If you consider what that means, the president will not consider any other course as long as he remains in office, no matter how badly things continue.

As George Bush continues to insist his approach is working, he says the best way to honor the sacrifices of the fallen is to complete the mission. But how will more bloodshed and more dying honor our son's and daughters?

It is time for this president to put ALL options on the table & to make immediate changes to his disastrous course. He can stop this war clock from ticking and he can do that by bringing the troops home now.

The Unfeeling President

E.L. Doctorow is the author of several critically acclaimed novels.

If you have not read this essay that he wrote for the East Hampton Star, back in the fall of 2004, it's time you do. If you have read it, it's time for a revisit.

The Unfeeling President I fault this president for not knowing what death is. He does not suffer the death of our 21-year-olds who wanted to be what they could be. On the eve of D-Day in 1944 General Eisenhower prayed to God for the lives of the young soldiers he knew were going to die. He knew what death was. Even in a justifiable war, a war not of choice but of necessity, a war of survival, the cost was almost more than Eisenhower could bear.

But this president does not know what death is. He hasn't the mind for it. You see him joking with the press, peering under the table for the weapons of mass destruction he can't seem to find, you see him at rallies strutting up to the stage in shirt sleeves to the roar of the carefully screened crowd, smiling and waving, triumphal, a he-man.

He does not mourn. He doesn't understand why he should mourn. He is satisfied during the course of a speech written for him to look solemn for a moment and speak of the brave young Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country.

But you study him, you look into his eyes and know he dissembles an emotion which he does not feel in the depths of his being because he has no capacity for it. He does not feel a personal responsibility for the 1,000 dead young men and women who wanted to be what they could be.

They come to his desk not as youngsters with mothers and fathers or wives and children who will suffer to the end of their days a terribly torn fabric of familial relationships and the inconsolable remembrance of aborted life . . . they come to his desk as a political liability, which is why the press is not permitted to photograph the arrival of their coffins from Iraq.

How then can he mourn? To mourn is to express regret and he regrets nothing. He does not regret that his reason for going to war was, as he knew, unsubstantiated by the facts. He does not regret that his bungled plan for the war's aftermath has made of his mission-accomplished a disaster. He does not regret that, rather than controlling terrorism, his war in Iraq has licensed it. So he never mourns for the dead and crippled youngsters who have fought this war of his choice.

He wanted to go to war and he did. He had not the mind to perceive the costs of war, or to listen to those who knew those costs. He did not understand that you do not go to war when it is one of the options but when it is the only option; you go not because you want to but because you have to.

Yet this president knew it would be difficult for Americans not to cheer the overthrow of a foreign dictator. He knew that much. This president and his supporters would seem to have a mind for only one thing -- to take power, to remain in power, and to use that power for the sake of themselves and their friends.

A war will do that as well as anything. You become a wartime leader. The country gets behind you. Dissent becomes inappropriate. And so he does not drop to his knees, he is not contrite, he does not sit in the church with the grieving parents and wives and children. He is the president who does not feel. He does not feel for the families of the dead, he does not feel for the 35 million of us who live in poverty, he does not feel for the 40 percent who cannot afford health insurance, he does not feel for the miners whose lungs are turning black or for the working people he has deprived of the chance to work overtime at time-and-a-half to pay their bills - it is amazing for how many people in this country this president does not feel.

But he will dissemble feeling. He will say in all sincerity he is relieving the wealthiest 1 percent of the population of their tax burden for the sake of the rest of us, and that he is polluting the air we breathe for the sake of our economy, and that he is decreasing the quality of air in coal mines to save the coal miners' jobs, and that he is depriving workers of their time-and-a-half benefits for overtime because this is actually a way to honor them by raising them into the professional class.

And this litany of lies he will versify with reverences for God and the flag and democracy, when just what he and his party are doing to our democracy is choking the life out of it.

But there is one more terribly sad thing about all of this. I remember the millions of people here and around the world who marched against the war. It was extraordinary, that spontaneous aroused oversoul of alarm and protest that transcended national borders. Why did it happen? After all, this was not the only war anyone had ever seen coming. There are little wars all over he world most of the time.

But the cry of protest was the appalled understanding of millions of people that America was ceding its role as the last best hope of mankind. It was their perception that the classic archetype of democracy was morphing into a rogue nation. The greatest democratic republic in history was turning its back on the future, using its extraordinary power and standing not to advance the ideal of a concordance of civilizations but to endorse the kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals, a people, now extinct, who could imagine ensuring their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war.

The president we get is the country we get. With each president the nation is conformed spiritually. He is the artificer of our malleable national soul. He proposes not only the laws but the kinds of lawlessness that govern our lives and invoke our responses. The people he appoints are cast in his image. The trouble they get into and get us into, is his characteristic trouble.

Finally, the media amplify his character into our moral weather report. He becomes the face of our sky, the conditions that prevail. How can we sustain ourselves as the United States of America given the stupid and ineffective warmaking, the constitutionally insensitive lawgiving, and the monarchal economics of this president? He cannot mourn but is a figure of such moral vacancy as to make us mourn for ourselves.

Fire Rumsfeld Now! (part II)

I've been called a lot of things in my day, but I don't recall the word vitriol and my name being used in the same sentence. According to the dictionary, vitriolic means Bitterly scathing; caustic: vitriolic criticism or So sharp as to cause mental pain. I'm good with that.

Today, the Salt Lake City Tribune quoted an earlier blog entry of mine Fire Rumsfeld Now!,in an article titled Downward roll: Defense boss has few friends left. They accused me of speaking with vitriol of the Secretary of Defense:

Rumsfeld's admirers adore such frankness, but it doesn't sit well with everyone. Among the immediate critics of Rumsfeld's comments about the recently extended soldiers was Karen Meredith, of Mountain View, Calif., whose son Kenneth Ballard was killed in Iraq in May 2004. "This arrogant, pathetic excuse of a man has once again disrespected and shown how little he regards the military that he supposedly leads," Meredith wrote in her blog, ''Gold Star Mom Speaks Out.'' "His comments demonstrate his feeling that since 'they' volunteered he can use them for anything he wants.' " Though few in Congress speak of Rumsfeld with such vitriol, the former representative from Illinois' troubles have carried onto Capitol Hill.

My friends tell me I was too restrained and too kind in my demand for Rumsfeld's termination, but this is a public place, so I contained myself. If my vitriolic words were "sharp as to cause mental pain", I won't apologize for that, especially if it was Rumsfeld's mental pain. He has no clue what real mental pain is and he will never know unless all of his children are killed in a war he doesn't support. Perhaps it was my words that caused him to portray those of us who do not support this war as suffering from "moral or intellectual confusion" about what threatens the nation's security.

As Rumsfeld spoke to the American Legion, that oh, so conservative bunch of veterans at their annual meeting in Salt Lake City, he said the world faces "a new type of fascism" and likened critics of the U.S. war strategy to those who tried to appease the Nazis. It is disingenous to compare the fighting in Iraq with that of WWII; this is a different kind of war that requires a much different strategy.

He also had a few choice words for the media. Rumsfeld described the war on terror as "a war that is fought in the media on the global stage." He said the media creates uncertainty that could lead to failure in the war in Iraq. That's right, blame the media for a loser policy.

Rice must be playing the good guy role against Rumsfeld tough guy routine at the convention. At least she didn't play the name calling game. She said

the security of Americans is linked to successful democratic reforms throughout the Middle East. She was optimistic about the possibilities for victory in Iraq, but, unlike Rumsfeld, acknowledged the burning questions of skeptics.

"There are unsettling questions," Rice said. "Is success possible? Is [the war in Iraq] really worth the effort? Do the Iraqi people want to live in peace and freedom, or do they desire a darker path, somehow, of violence?"

She said that the moderate majority of citizens, both in Iraq and other Middle East countries, will overcome the small minority of extremists that destabilize those countries and attack the U.S. with violent acts. She said creating stable democracies was necessary to this pursuit, and pointed to the vicious Taliban-led regime in Afghanistan that gave safe harbor to Al Qaeda.

"We must seek to remove this source of terror by helping the people of that troubled region to transform those countries and transform their lives," she said.

Where do they come up with this stuff? Why do they hate the majority of Americans who do not support this occupation in Iraq?

Two days ago, the Tribune published an article preparing for Bush's visit to their fair city, Utahns: Dissent aids enemies, 45% polled say that anti-Bush rallies more harm than good. Who did they talk to? I know SLC is as red as red can be, but 45%? I'm skeptical.

I did receive quite a few visitors here, due to the mention in the SLC Tribune, including someone from the Army & someone from the Air Force. If people in the red parts of this country know how others of us think, then we have made our point. We love our troops and we love our country; but we don't love the ill-conceived policies of this government. I haven't changed my mind; Rumsfeld needs to resign. Bush can resign too, I wouldn't mind that either.

Fire Rumsfeld NOW!

If I said what I wanted to about Rumsfeld's latest patronizing comments, this page would be a blue streak across the country, it wouldn't be fit for a family audience. This arrogant, pathetic excuse of a man has once again disrepected and shown how little he regards the military that he supposedly leads. He doesn't care about them any more than Bush, Cheney or Rice do.

Rumsfeld recently visited Alaska to speak with family members of the 172nd Stryker unit whose tour in Iraq was extended just as they were preparing to come home after their one year deployment. The brigade's tour was extended by up to 120 days, bringing them close to a Christmas return date. Rumsfeld said he would make no promises that the full brigade would be back home by the holidays. "I'd love to be Santa Claus. I'm not," he told reporters. Rumsfeld is right, of course, he's not Santa Claus; he's the Grinch.

In an interview during his flight to Fairbanks, Rumsfeld said he saw no reason for the soldiers or their families to be angry at him. "“I don'’t put it in that context,"” he said. "“These people are all volunteers. They all signed up. They all are there doing what they'’re doing because they want to do it. They'’re proud of what they do. They do it very, very well."

When you call anyone "these people", it is patronizing and disrespectful. He (and his ilk) obviously feel more superior to "these people" who did volunteer to serve their country. The fact that Rumsfeld is their leader, as the Secretary of Defense, and I shudder to even write that, and that he speaks of these brave men and women in those kinds of terms is beyond contempt. His comments demonstrate his feeling that since "they" volunteered he can use them for anything he wants.

Former Secretary of State Kissingers was quoted in the book Kiss the Boys Goodbye: How the United States Betrayed Its Own POW'’s, "military men are just dumb, animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy". It seems this administration has the same respect and regard for our current military men and women and Kissinger's words still ring true today.

When people say to me that Ken was doing what he wanted, in some skewed sense of sympathy, I want to scream. Yes, he wanted to be a good soldier, he loved being a soldier and he loved being a leader. To order our military to illegally invade a sovereign country at the bidding of these cretins with their own political and fiscal agendas driven by greed is wrong no matter what you call it. To suggest that is what our soldiers wanted to do when they volunteered is insulting.

Rumsfeld says he saw no reason for the soldiers or the families in Alaska to be angry with him. Who should they be angry with? Rumsfeld has mismanaged this action in Iraq since before the war started. He has done little to mitigate the violence against the people who are in Iraq, civilians or military. From the lack of training, lack of body armor, lack of armored vehicles, lack of supplies, lack of food and lack of clean water (thank you Halliburton), this adminstration clearly shows what role they feel the soldiers have in winning their war on terror. No one in this adminstration understands what it is to be a soldier with boots on the ground in a war; few of them served. The same can be said for most members of Congress.

Fire Rumsfeld or allow him to resign NOW. I don't care, just get him out of our way. We need a Secretary of Defense who understands the sacred trust that our son's and daughters give to this country when they volunteer to sign up to serve. Rumsfeld is the wrong person to do this job.

Pentagon reforms casualty alerts

In a remarkable and welcome announcement, the Pentagon says that they are reviewing the death reports out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Secretary of the Army, Francis Harvey ordered the Army to begin doing a unit-level investigation on every soldier's death. That was good news for those of us Gold Star Families who had doubt about the circumstances of the deaths of our loved ones.

I had accepted what the Army told me in May 2004; that Ken was killed by a single gunshot wound to the head from enemy fire, small arms fire. Yes, Ken was dead and the circumstances of his death weren't the awful part, it was that Ken was never coming home. I had waited and worried and cried for 384 days while he was in Iraq. And all of that worry, all of those tears were validated when I got that knock on the door on Memorial Day 2004.

One year ago, in September 2005, the Army came to my house in California in a surprise visit. Ken had been killed 15 months prior. I had no idea what the visit was for, there were no suspicions surrounding anything that happened that night in May. I did have questions about the specifics of the battle, but I didn't expect to hear anything surprising. Within 5 minutes of meeting me, the head of Army Casualty told me that Ken was not killed the way I had been told. He told me that Ken was killed by the accidental discharge of the M240 machine gun on his tank.
My world fell apart again and my heart was ripped open. ALL of the healing I had done had been erased. I was desperate to try and find some truth to anything I had been told in the past year. But the sun sets at night and it rises again in the morning and I would eventually get back on the path of healing. I will always be left with questions of why I was not told the truth during those first few days. Everyone in his platoon and battalion knew the truth. Honestly, I never asked any of them what happened that night. Ken was dead and nothing would change that. His unit was still in Iraq and I didn't want them to relive the horror of that night anymore than they already did. The stories would come out eventually, in a year or in 20 years.

I still hear from people who knew Ken, many of them are apologetic for not writing sooner, but that is not a concern of mine. They will contact me when they can and when they are ready.

Last September when I was told the truth, only one other case of delayed truth was known. The Tillman family from San Jose, CA was also not told the truth about Pat's circumstances; they were told the official "true" story 5 weeks after Pat was killed. To this day, they are waiting to hear the whole truth. Most recently this past June, the McCaffrey family of Tracy, CA was told the truth of their Patrick's death 2 years after he was killed. Nadia, Mary & I know that there are more untold stories of the truth than ours; that there are more families that have no clue their lives are ready to re-explode and now the Pentagon has admitted that we were right.

There is some validation that we strong woman who have been so vocal about knowing the truth have paved the way for other families. It is easier to change a policy than a culture and it will be difficult for the military. Let's hope these investigations will result in ALL families knowing the truth from the beginning. For now, we remain skeptical. Pat, Patrick and Ken would be proud of their moms.

The Army connected the dots with our stories and knew that they had failed Army families. As I told the Secretary of the Army when I met with him last September; the Army can do better. I hope they will.

The NBC Nightly News did a nice story with me about this last night. You can watch the clip here. A local Bay Area Station, KTVU also did a good job in reporting the story

Good Question

John DeRosier 8/20/06

Iraq war is "straining the psyche of our country"

Ya think? The Iraq war/occupation is straining a lot more than the psyche of this country. It's definitely straining our budget and it's breaking a lot of hearts.

Bush sounded more frazzled and anxious in his press conference today than he usually does. I think he didn't have a script and he was depending on his feeble mind to get him through the hour trying to sound all presidential. Using his own mind didn't work today and it hasn't worked in a long time, if it ever did. He just wasn't sounding very presidential today.

It's the same old thing, can'tleave/won't leave Iraq before the mission is complete, blah, blah, job is done, blah, blah, blah, we're not leaving, I'm the president, blah, blah, blah Same old stuff. He did add a new reason to stay the course, if "we leave before the mission is done, the terrorists will follow us here." A failed Iraq would provide a safe haven for terrorists and extremists and give them revenue from oil sales" I'm pretty sure he isn't saying if we bring the troops home now, the terrorists will come to Mountain View, CA and they'll make money on oil sales, or get cheaper gas prices at the pump- I'm not sure.

Bush talked about the conditions in Lebanon and about authorizing 15,000 UN soldiers to be brought into the area, but that effort is already faltering. Italy promised to send 2000-3000 troops, in marked contrast to France which having been behind the diplomatic negotiations to work out a UN ceasefire resolution had also been expected to provide the bulk of the troops - instead it had said it will provide only 200 troops.France is stalling over chain of command concerns. The US is sending $230 million in humanitarian aid.

It got ugly when he started talking about Iraq again. Bush said:

You know, it's an interesting debate we're having in America about how we ought to handle Iraq. There's a lot of people _- good, decent people _- saying: Withdraw now.

They're absolutely wrong. It'd be a huge mistake for this country.

If you think problems are tough now, imagine what it would be like if the United States leaves before this government has a chance to defend herself, govern herself and listen to the _- and answer to the will of the people.

No, George, YOU are absolutely wrong! Bring the troops home, bring them home NOW! The will of the Iraqi people is for the US to pull the troops now (The top US Commander in Iraq, General Peter Pace admitted Sunday that Iraqis wanted US and other foreign troops to leave the country "as soon as possible,")

Back to Hezbollah...the venerable Helen Thomas asked Bush, why he always gave Israel a pass . He responded "This never would have occurred had a terrorist organization -- a state within a state -- not launched attacks on a sovereign nation." But, but, but...oh yeah, we launched attacks within a sovereign nation....sheesh! Bush also said They make decisions on their own sovereignty. yeah...the Coalition Provisional Authority made those decisions, not the US, so everything must be okay in Iraq, right? (don't worry if you're having trouble keeping up, there's a scorecard around here somewhere.)

When asked if he was frustrated, Bush replied:

Frustrated? Sometimes I'm frustrated. Rarely surprised. Sometimes I'm happy, you know. But war is not a time of joy.

These aren't joyous times. These are challenging times, and they're difficult times, and they're straining the psyche of our country. I understand that. You know, nobody likes to see innocent people die. Nobody wants to turn on their TV on a daily basis and see havoc wrought by terrorists.

I can assure you, war is not a time of joy; ask any Gold Star family. He doesn't get a vote. And "nobody likes to see innocent people die"? I guess that's why this administration doesn't allow photos of flag covered coffins returning to their final resting place.

Bush did a little doublespeak about Katrina, putting the blame on the lack of progress in clearing the debris on the state, and he talked about gas prices. He thinks that the economy is strong Look at what the economy has done. It's strong. And he's still saying the main reason we went into Iraq, at the time, was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't, but he had the capacity to make weapons of mass destruction. (noooo, he did not say that, did he?). And surprisingly,he did admit that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. When asked, what did Iraq have to do with 9/11 he said:

Nothing, except for it's part of -- and nobody has ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a -- the lesson of September the 11th is, take threats before they fully materialize, Ken. Nobody has ever suggested that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq. I have suggested, however, that resentment and the lack of hope create the breeding grounds for terrorists who are willing to use suiciders to kill to achieve an objective. I have made that case.

All around, many important subjects were covered. But the president needs to understand you can't have it both ways. If Hezbollah cannot attack a sovereign country, then neither can the US. If it is important that the Lebanese make decisions on their own sovereignty, wouldn't that also apply to Iraq? AND please George, please stop lying about WMD. It was a lie in the run up to the war, it was a lie when you were hunting for WMD in your video presented to the Press club and it is a lie now. There were not WMD in Iraq.

My brain is straining and it hurts!

Timely Bumper Stickers

Today, I turn my little soapbox over to something I found on the internet

The following actual bumper stickers are now on cars. I didn't write any of them. I'm only the messenger. If they make you laugh, good. If they make you cry, good.

AT LEAST IN VIETNAM, BUSH HAD AN EXIT STRATEGY

BLIND FAITH IN BAD LEADERSHIP IS NOT PATRIOTISM

IF YOU'RE NOT OUTRAGED, YOU'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION

IF YOU SUPPORTED BUSH, A YELLOW RIBBON WON'T MAKE UP FOR IT

POVERTY, HEALTHCARE & HOMELESSNESS ARE MORAL ISSUES

OF COURSE IT HURTS. YOU'RE GETTING SCREWED BY AN ELEPHANT

BUSH LIED, AND YOU KNOW IT

RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM: A THREAT ABROAD, A THREAT AT HOME

GOD BLESS EVERYONE (No exceptions)

BUSH SPENT YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY ON HIS WAR

PRO AMERICA, ANTI BUSH

WHO WOULD JESUS BOMB?

IF YOU SUPPORT BUSH'S WAR, WHY ARE YOU STILL HERE? SHUT UP AND SHIP
OUT

FEEL SAFER NOW?

I'D RATHER HAVE A PRESIDENT WHO SCREWED HIS INTERN THAN ONE WHO
SCREWED HIS COUNTRY

JESUS WAS A SOCIAL ACTIVIST - THAT IS A LIBERAL

MY VALUES? FREE SPEECH. EQUALITY. LIBERTY. EDUCATION. TOLERANCE

IS IT 2008 YET?

DISSENT IS THE HIGHEST FORM OF PATRIOTISM -- Thomas Jefferson

DON'T BLAME ME. I VOTED AGAINST BUSH -- TWICE!

ANNOY A CONSERVATIVE; THINK FOR YOURSELF

VISUALIZE IMPEACHMENT

HEY BUSH! WHERE'S BIN LADEN?

CORPORATE MEDIA = MASS MIND CONTROL

STOP MAD COWBOY DISEASE

GEORGE W. BUSH: MAKING TERRORISTS FASTER THAN HE CAN KILL THEM

KEEP YOUR THEOCRACY OFF MY DEMOCRACY

DEMOCRATS ARE SEXY. WHOEVER HEARD OF A GOOD PIECE OF ELEPHANT?

ASPIRING CANADIAN

CORPORATE MEDIA: WEAPONS OF MASS DECEPTION

DON'T CONFUSE DYING FOR OIL WITH FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM

STEM CELL RESEARCH IS PRO LIFE

HATE, GREED, IGNORANCE: WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

HONOR OUR TROOPS - DEMAND THE TRUTH

REBUILD IRAQ? WHY NOT SPEND 87 BILLION ON AMERICA?

FACT: BUSH OIL
1999 - $19 BARREL
2006 - $70 BARREL

THE LAST TIME RELIGION CONTROLLED POLITICS, PEOPLE GOT BURNED AT THE
STAKE

Playing the fear card

When I started speaking out against this administration and this war, I didn't know what I would face. I knew I had already had the worst day of my life, so how bad could it be? Nothing has been as bad as May 31, 2004, the day I was notified my only child, Lt Ken Ballard, was killed in the Iraq war turned occupation.

I've been called un-American, a traitor, a freak, disrespectful of my son and other such insults. I was told my son was "Doing his job" and "Everyone Dies!" while I spoke. Not only is it mean, it is wrong. Apparently those folks never heard the wise words of Abe Lincoln, Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. Or they didn't listen to their mother when she told them, if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.

Respect seems to be one of those attitudes that is dying in this country. When someone has lost a child, there is no need to be mean. Anyone who thinks that is okay is a bully; we already know they are mean, junior high mean! Whether you agree or disagree with their politics, a good response when a Gold Star family member is talking would be "I'm sorry"

The day after Ned Lamont won the election in Ct, the first thing I heard on the radio was that the Democratic party is the antiwar party and are unAmerican. what? A fair and reasonable properly held democratic election in the United States of America turns ALL members of the Democratic party into people who are unAmerican? I don't think so and while I'm pretty sure that ALL Democrats are not anti war, it's nice to hear a Democratic voice question the war. It's about time, guys, and welcome to my world!

I thought that would be it, but of course, it only got worse. The VP of this land, Dick Cheney, said that the Lamont victory might encourage "the al-Qaeda types" who want to "break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task."And Tony Snow, the president's press secretary said a vote for Lamont was a vote for another 9/11. Snow said that Connecticut voters who backed Ned Lamont (and the 57 percent of Americans who support his position on Iraq) were choosing to "ignore the difficulties and walk away." That is the same approach, he said, that led Osama bin Laden to the conclusion “that Americans were weak and wouldn'’t stay the course and that led to September 11th."” And because of 9/11, then we had to go to war in Iraq? oh geez!

I've got "fear fatigue" and the more this administration plays that card, the more I see it as the little boy crying "Wolf". If we ever really need to believe them, what are the chances that we will?

What did this country do to deserve these people?