| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Black Elk" |
| Date: |
11 Nov 2005 09:53:45 AM |
| Object: |
Are the chickenhawks supporting their victims today? |
November 10, 2005
The Last Lie of the Iraq War Exposed
by Paul Sperry
"Politicians hide themselves away.
They only started the war.
Why should they go out to fight?
They leave that role to the poor, yeah.
"Time will tell on their power minds,
making war just for fun.
Treating people just like pawns in chess,
wait till their judgment day comes, yeah."
- Black Sabbath, "War Pigs" (1970)
-
It seems like only yesterday U.S. deaths in Iraq had reached the grim
milestone of 2,000. Now they're already up to 2,055, reminding us all that
the only ones really paying for this dishonest war are young GIs, with their
lives and limbs.
The White House and its shameless surrogates continue to try to squelch
criticism over the soaring body count by saying it dishonors and demoralizes
the troops on the ground over there. In other words, if you don't support
the war, you don't support the troops.
Excuse me, but who doesn't support the troops? The war pigs need to take a
long hard look in the mirror.
Let's not forget it was the secretary of defense who told them to stop
whining about missing Humvee armor, and then minimized their brutal roadside
deaths by comparing them to random U.S. highway traffic fatalities on the
Sean Hannity radio show last year.
For that matter, Donald Rumsfeld's deputy couldn't even remember how many of
their soldiers had been killed in action.
Asked about the toll at a House hearing last year, during the deadliest
month at that time for American troops, Paul Wolfowitz sat there with his
face flapping. "It's approximately 500 . I can get the exact numbers," he
stammered. He was off by nearly 250 soldiers - 250 brave Americans who left
behind grieving mothers, fathers, wives, children - for what?
But Wolfowitz no doubt was thinking of other "metrics," as he's fond of
saying, such as how many more pawns he'd need to make the Middle East safe
for Israel. Never mind that the bastards who attacked this country are still
on the loose.
Rumsfeld is so out of touch with fallen soldiers, he used a machine to sign
his name to letters of condolence to the families of the first 1,000 service
members who died in Iraq. He stopped only after he was caught.
Certainly their commander-in-chief is less callous, right? Fat chance. After
sending troops into a shooting gallery with bull's-eyes on their backs, he
egged on their killers from the safety of the White House with the cry,
"Bring 'em on." He no doubt said the same thing about the VC while knocking
back bourbons in Alabama.
We've already taken more casualties than in the first three years of Nam. In
fact, just by wounding more than 15,000 of our soldiers, the Iraqi
insurgents have taken out a full Army division.
And these aren't flesh wounds. These soldiers have had arms and legs ripped
from joints, eyeballs blown from sockets, and skulls crushed in, permanently
damaging gray matter. These wounded won't be going back for another tour.
They face a lifetime of painful rehab and depression.
For what? To capture Osama bin Laden? No. To keep WMD out of his hands? No.
To protect America? No. To liberate Iraq? No. The only thing that's been
liberated is Islamic fundamentalism from under the thumb of secular Saddam
Hussein. The new Iraqi constitution contains all the provisions necessary
for an Islamic state, including Article 2: "No law that contradicts the
established provisions of Islam may be established." Praise Allah.
And the insurgency is not going to die with this election, or any election,
so long as we're over there. Listen to near-amputee Terry Rodgers tell it:
"There's always gonna be insurgents trying to blow us up. There's just too
many of 'em that are willing to do it. You're never gonna catch all of 'em.
And it seems like they have unlimited amounts of ammunition. So I don't
think it's ever gonna end."
Rodgers, who was maimed by a roadside bomb while on patrol with the Army, is
so mad at Bush for "getting people killed and mutilated for no reason" that
he's refused to see him in the few times the president has visited Walter
Reed Hospital. And Bush hadn't even tried to visit amputees, or attend
funerals, before his reelection campaign.
But he had plenty of time to attend a black-tie dinner in Washington to joke
about getting people killed and mutilated for no reason. "Nope, no WMDs
there," he quipped to then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice on a
slide showing him looking under White House furniture. Ha, ha.
Last year, an equally glib Bush was spotted taking in a baseball game with
Rice just after wires reported several female marines were killed in an Iraq
ambush that shocked the nation. That didn't seem to faze either of them.
Cameras caught Bush and his gal pal Condi yucking it up in a VIP box. It's
apparently all one big game to them.
The last lie of Iraq has been exposed - that Bush and the neocons care about
the troops they sent needlessly into harm's way in Iraq. This is the
ultimate betrayal.
Now, more than 160,000 are deployed there as sitting ducks, and an
increasing number will be picked off, as the insurgents perfect their
methods and their attacks grow bolder and deadlier.
And when the death toll tops 3,000, it will mark a most tragic irony in U.S.
history. Three thousand brave American soldiers died avenging the murder of
3,000 of their fellow Americans - all on the wrong front, thanks to the war
pigs who sent them there.
http://www.antiwar.com/sperry/?articleid=7973
--
They Knew...
Despite the whitewash, we now know that the Bush administration was warned
before the war that its Iraq claims were weak
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/they_knew_0802/
--
A published report says a top al-Qaida operative in U.S. custody gave false
information later used by the Bush administration to support its contention
that Iraq trained al-Qaida militants to use illegal weapons.
The New York Times reports Sunday that newly declassified portions of a
February 2002 Defense Intelligence Agency document says Ibn al-Shaykh
al-Libi misled debriefers in his claims about Iraq's work with al-Qaida
members.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/news/2005/intell-051106-voa01.htm
--
U.S. Report Finds Iraq Was Minimal Weapons Threat in '03
By DOUGLAS JEHL
WASHINGTON, Oct. 6 - Iraq had essentially destroyed its illicit weapons
capability within months after the Persian Gulf War ended in 1991, and its
capacity to produce such weapons had eroded even further by the time of the
American invasion in 2003, the top American inspector in Iraq said in a
report made public today.
http://tinyurl.com/3p3q9
(http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/06/international/middleeast/0
6CND-INTE.html?hp=&oref=login&pagewanted=print&position=)
--
The question of prewar intelligence has been thrust back into the public eye
with the disclosure of a secret British memo showing that, eight months
before the March 2003 start of the war, a senior British intelligence
official reported to Prime Minister Tony Blair that U.S. intelligence was
being shaped to support a policy of invading Iraq.
Moreover, a close reading of the recent 600-page report by the president's
commission on intelligence, and the previous report by the Senate panel,
shows that as war approached, many U.S. intelligence analysts were
internally questioning almost every major piece of prewar intelligence about
Hussein's alleged weapons programs.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/21/AR2005052100474_pf.html
--
"From the brief time that we did spend occupying Iraqi territory
after the war, I am certain that had we taken all of Iraq, we would
have been like the dinosaur in the tar pit - we would still be there,
and we, not the United Nations, would be bearing the costs of
the occupation. This is a burden I am sure the beleaguered
American taxpayer would not have been happy to take on."
- Norman Schwarzkopf, from his 1993 autobiography, "It Doesn't
Take a Hero."
--
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the
country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag
the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a
parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can
always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have
to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for
lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.htm
--
The fair use of a copyrighted work:
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site
is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
.
|
|
| User: "Black Elk" |
|
| Title: PROOF THAT NEO-FASCISTS ARE PARASITIC TROLLS >>> Re: PROOF THAT LIBERALS HATE AMERICANS!! ==> Are the chickenhawks supporting their victims today? |
11 Nov 2005 10:14:41 PM |
|
|
From the article:
The GAO study clearly shows that no responsible business would operate with
a computer system as flimsy, fragile and easily manipulated as the one used
in the 2004 election.
---
GAO report upholds Ohio vote fraud claims
By Joe Baker, Senior Editor Back
As if the indictment of Lewis "Scooter" Libby wasn't enough to give the
White House some heavy concerns, a report from the Government Accounting
Office takes a big bite out of the Bush clique's pretense of legitimacy.
This powerful and probing report takes a hard look at the election of 2004
and supports the contention that the election was stolen. The report has
received almost no coverage in the national media.
The GAO is the government's lead investigative agency, and is known for
rock-solid integrity and its penetrating and thorough analysis. The agency's
agreement with what have been brushed aside as "conspiracy theories" adds
even more weight to the conclusion that the Bush regime has no business in
the White House whatever.
Almost a year ago, Rep. John Conyers, senior Democrat on the House Judiciary
Committee, asked the GAO to investigate the use of electronic voting
machines in the Nov. 2, 2004, presidential election. That request was made
as a flood of protests from Ohio and elsewhere deluged Washington with
claims that shocking irregularities were common in that vote and were linked
to the machines.
CNN said the Judiciary Committee got more than 57,000 complaints after Bush's
claimed re-election. Many were made under oath in a series of statements and
affidavits in public hearings and investigations carried out in Ohio by the
Free Press and other groups seeking to maintain transparent elections.
Online Journal.com reported that the GAO report stated that "some of [the]
concerns about electronic voting machines have been realized and have caused
problems with recent elections, resulting in the loss and miscount of
votes."
This is the only democratic nation that permits private partisan companies
to count and tabulate the vote in secret, using privately-held software. The
public is excluded from the process. Rev. Jesse Jackson and others have
declared that "public elections must not be conducted on privately-owned
machines." The makers of nearly all electronic voting machines are owned by
conservative Republicans.
The chief executive of Diebold, one of the major suppliers of electronic
voting machines, Warren "Wally" O'Dell, went on record in the 2004 campaign
vowing to deliver Ohio and the presidency to George W. Bush.
In Ohio, Bush won by only 118,775 votes out of more than 5.6 million cast.
Honest election advocates contend that O'Dell's statement to hand Ohio's
vote to Bush still stands as a clear indictment of an apparently successful
effort to steal the White House.
Some of the GAO's findings are: 1. Some electronic voting machines "did not
encrypt cast ballots or system audit logs, and it was possible to alter both
without being detected." In short, the machines; provided a way to
manipulate the outcome of the election. In Ohio, more than 800,000 votes
were cast on electronic voting machines, some registered seven times Bush's
official margin of victory.
2: the report further stated that: "it was possible to alter the files that
define how a ballot looks and works, so that the votes for one candidate
could be recorded for a different candidate." Very many sworn statements and
affidavits claim that did happen in Ohio in 2004.
Next, the report says, "Vendors installed uncertified versions of voting
system software at the local level." The GAO found that falsifying election
results without leaving evidence of doing so by using altered memory cards
could easily be done.
The GAO additionally found that access to the voting network was very easy
to compromise because not all electronic voting systems had supervisory
functions protected by password. That meant access to one machine gave
access to the whole network. That critical finding showed that rigging the
election did not take a "widespread conspiracy" but simply the cooperation
of a small number of operators with the power to tap into the networked
machines. They could thus alter the vote totals at will. It therefore was no
big task for a single programmer to flip vote numbers to give Bush the
118,775 votes.
Another factor in the Ohio election was that access to the voting network
was also compromised by repeated use of the same user ID, coupled with
easy-to-guess passwords. Even amateur hackers could have gotten into the
network and changed the vote.
System locks were easily picked, and keys were easy to copy, so gaining
access to the system was a snap.
One digital machine model was shown to have been networked in such a
rudimentary manner that if one machine experienced a power failure, the
entire network would go down. That is too fragile a system to decide the
presidency of the United States.
Problems obviously exist with security protocols and screening methods for
vendor personnel.
The GAO study clearly shows that no responsible business would operate with
a computer system as flimsy, fragile and easily manipulated as the one used
in the 2004 election.
These findings are even more damning when we understand the election in Ohio
was run by a secretary of state who also was co-chairman of Bush's Ohio
campaign. Far from the conclusion of anti-fraud skeptics, the GAO's findings
confirm that the network, which handled 800,000 Ohio votes, was vulnerable
enough to permit a handful of purposeful operatives to turn the entire
election by means of personal computers using comparatively simple software.
One Ohio campaign operative, Tom Noe, a coin dealer, was indicted Oct. 27
for illegally funneling $45,400 to Bush by writing checks to others, who
then wrote checks to Bush's re-election campaign, allegedly dodging the
$2,000 limit on contributions by an individual.
"It's one of the most blatant and excessive finance schemes we have
encountered," said Noel Hillman, section chief of the U.S. Department of
Justice's public integrity section, as quoted in the Kansas City Star.
In the 2000 election, Florida was the key; in the 2004 election, Ohio was
the key.
http://www.rockrivertimes.com/index.pl?cmd=printstory&id=11529&cat=2
--
The number of Americans living in poverty increased by 1.3 million
last year (2003), while the ranks of the uninsured swelled by 1.4 million,
the Census Bureau reported Thursday (August 27, 2004).
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/08/26/census.poverty.ap/
--
The fair use of a copyrighted work:
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site
is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
