« April 2005 | Main | June 2005 »
May 29, 2005
Fox weighs in on REAL ID
The proapaganda machine is in full swing on the Fox News channel, as usual. Last night I heard one of the "news" anchors talking about how "highly-trained" US snipers were "taking out the bad guys." What a sterling display of journalistic objectivity there. Do you think the language could have been loaded any fuller? One of the other mindless party-line gibberers just gave the official Fox News seal of approval to the REAL ID Act, as well, when one of the straw-man shills who come on the shows to give them weak-argument balloons to pop voiced a "complaint" about the hoops "real Americans" would have to jump through to get licenses, such as having an original birth certificate or a utility bill. "You know what, I don't care," was the mouthpiece's response. "If it makes the country safer," he continued, "we," whoever "we" are, "should do it.
In case you are wondering why I have seen any of this at all, since I, like Thoreau, see no point in counting those damn cats in Zanzibar, I am forced to at least occasionally observe the continued war on American critical-thinking skills by having to pass through rooms where it is being watched by people who ought to know better but still insist this is the America they grew up in.
Posted by Patrick Yancey at 12:40 PM | Comments (0)
May 27, 2005
The Masses are Revolting!
“The masses are revolting!” says the courtier to the King. “They certainly are” the King replies. So is the image of one of my favorite Baloo political cartoons.
With this as an introduction news comes to us from the land of Louis (“ I am the State!”) XIV that French President Jacques Chirac has said “tuff noogies” to the voters of France if they vote down ratification of the proposed European Union constitution. He will disregard their voice and “move ahead” with the “Process” which is as ominous sounding verbiage as I have heard from the continent in while now.
“Turmoil as Chirac Plots to Disregard 'Non' Vote” says the headline.
“President Chirac of France” says the Times of London, “is preparing to throw Europe into confusion and put Britain on the spot by backing moves to keep the European constitution alive if it is rejected in Sunday’s referendum.”
So the people will get this arrangement foisted upon them whether they want it or not!
Further, “[Chirac] and other "yes" campaigners have said repeatedly during the campaign that there is no “Plan B” if the treaty is rejected and that there would not be a second referendum. *
But one option being discussed in senior diplomatic circles is for candidates in the French presidential election in 2007 to promise to ratify the treaty in parliament rather than by referendum.”**
Heads we win say the elites, and tails you lose! Vive la Democracy!
I get into arguments with constitutional statists, minarchists, and “strict constructionist” conservatives constantly about the problem of setting up and maintaining a political system so the elites can’t hijack it for their own ends. I maintain that humane democratic governance can only be established and endure in small enclaves or groups where all are stakeholders and the winners and losers of each and every decision are clearly known.
*(Emphasis mine)
**(Emphasis mine)
Posted by Ali Massoud at 12:14 PM | Comments (0)
May 22, 2005
That's Our Pres..
He Kills More than 100,000 Worldwide but he Worries about Killing an Undifferentiated Ball of Less Than 100 Cells.
This from our President and how much he values human life:
"I made it very clear to the Congress that the use of federal money, taxpayers' money to promote science which destroys life in order to save life is - I'm against that. And therefore, if the bill does that, I will veto it."
Carefully compartmentalizing in another sector of his brain mass about the 100,000 deaths and prolly a million or so wounds his actions have caused in only four years. How does he live with himself? Could any one ask this of him at his next "townhall meeting" (sic) or press conference please.
The Bible says the gullible swallow camels and strain at gnats. Go figger this guy.
Posted by Ali Massoud at 11:54 AM | Comments (1)
May 20, 2005
They're Better Off Without Saddam
So the war was sold on false pretenses! So it hasn't gone as well as expected! Big deal! The Iraqi people are better off without Saddam Hussein--right?
Responses to a detailed survey conducted by a United Nations agency and the Iraqi government indicate that everyday conditions for Iraqis in the aftermath of the 2003 US-led invasion have deteriorated at an alarming rate, with huge numbers of people lacking adequate access to basic services and resources such as clean water, food, health care, electricity, jobs and sanitation. . . .
Researchers determined that some 24,000 Iraqis died as a result of the US-led invasion in 2003 and the first year of occupation. Children below the age of 18 comprised 12 percent of those deaths, according to survey data.
The study also indicates that the invasion and its immediate aftermath forced more than 140,000 Iraqis to flee their homes.
Take note that this wasn't solely a U.N. survey. The current, U.S.-approved Iraqi government participated in it, too. How long do you suppose the Iraqi officials involved in this will be allowed to remain in office?
(Link courtesy Antiwar.com.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 09:17 AM | Comments (0)
May 19, 2005
Do Base Closures Really Hurt Local Economies?
My U.S. senators and representatives are up in arms over a planned military base closure here in the Pittsburgh area, which only goes to prove that it was built here for political reasons and closure is being fought for political reasons. Clearly, as far as they're concerned, we'll lose all kinds of money. Well, maybe we'll lose taxpayer dollars, but according to Forbes, we may actually do better economically without the base.
As far as I'm concerned, closing the base is a good idea because it makes our area less of a target!
(Thanks to Antiwar.com for the link.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 01:47 PM | Comments (0)
More Power to Ya
The party of limited government and strict constructionism strikes again!
The chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee is working on a bill that would renew the Patriot Act and expand government powers in the name of fighting terrorism, letting the FBI subpoena records without permission from a judge or grand jury. . . .
But the measure being written by Sen. Pat Roberts (news, bio, voting record), R-Kan., would give the FBI new power to issue administrative subpoenas, which are not reviewed by a judge or grand jury, for quickly obtaining records, electronic data or other evidence in terrorism investigations, according to aides for the GOP majority on the committee who briefed reporters Wednesday.
Recipients could challenge the subpoenas in court and the Bush administration would have to report to Congress twice a year exactly how it was using this investigatory power, the aides said. . . .
Roberts' planned bill also would make it easier for prosecutors to use special court-approved warrants for secret wiretaps and searches of suspected terrorists and spies in criminal cases, the committee aides said.
Eight expiring sections of the law that deal with foreign intelligence investigations would become permanent, they said.
So, too, would a provision that authorizes wiretapping of suspected terrorists who operate without clear ties to a particular terrorist network.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 01:15 PM | Comments (0)
U.S. Military Infiltrated by Commie Pinko Leftists
Who are these anti-American, left-wing, pinko defeatists that have infiltrated our fine, upstanding armed forces?
American military commanders in Baghdad and Washington gave a sobering new assessment on Wednesday of the war in Iraq, adding to the mood of anxiety that prompted Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to come to Baghdad last weekend to consult with the new government.
In interviews and briefings this week, some of the generals pulled back from recent suggestions, some by the same officers, that positive trends in Iraq could allow a major drawdown in the 138,000 American troops late this year or early in 2006. One officer suggested Wednesday that American military involvement could last "many years." [Emphasis mine.]
That the situation in Iraq is bad and not improving should be clear from the fact that every administration figure who visits our Middle Eastern colony has to sneak into and out of the country, as Bush, Rice, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz (and maybe others I'm forgetting) have done.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 01:10 PM | Comments (0)
May 18, 2005
Neocon "Newsweek" Outrage a Riot
We've all heard the outrage from the Republican talk show hosts over the way Newsweek's "false" story (which wasn't false--see here and here) about the U.S. military's flushing of the Koran down the toilet led to mass rioting in the Muslim world. Some are even suggesting that Newsweek be held legally responsible for the riots and resulting death and destruction. Over at CNSNews.com, 59% of respondents agreed that there should "be more reporting restrictions placed on U.S.-based media organizations" in light of the Newsweek "scandal."
It turns out, though, that at least in Afghanistan, the Newsweek story had nothing at all to do with the rioting, according to the U.S. government's own spokesman.
The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff says a report from Afghanistan suggests that rioting in Jalalabad on May 11 was not necessarily connected to press reports that the Quran might have been desecrated in the presence of Muslim prisoners held in U.S. custody at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Air Force General Richard Myers told reporters at the Pentagon May 12 that he has been told that the Jalalabad, Afghanistan, rioting was related more to the ongoing political reconciliation process in Afghanistan than anything else. . . .
Myers said an after-action report provided by U.S. Army Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry, commander of the Combined Forces in Afghanistan, indicated that the political violence was not, in fact, connected to the magazine report.
Anyway, we know our government would never disrespect the Koran in any way, as our secretary of state says. They might kill people, stack them in pyramids naked, put leashes on them, and attach electrodes to them, but they would never, ever flush the Koran down the toilet.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:02 AM | Comments (0)
May 17, 2005
Darth Vader, Neocon
Norman Singleton directs us to this piece by the Weekly Standard's online editor, Jonathan V. Last, in which Mr. Last argues that the good guys in the Star Wars movies are not the rebels but the Empire.
Last argues that the Empire stands for law and order, however brutally imposed, while the rebellion stands for anarchy (a bad thing in Last's mind).
Here are some of the revolting (except for one) points Last makes:
The Republic had become so large that the Galactic Senate had become "sclerotic and ineffectual." Last likens the Galactic Senate to the U.N., which he similarly disdains for failing to intervene militarily all over the place. Since the Senate is so slow and ineffectual, says Last, it's probably a good thing that Senator Palpatine is given the "emergency powers" to become dictator, thus making it possible for the now-Empire to maintain law and order.
Last inadvertently makes the case for secession when he writes "The Republic, of course, is eager to quash these separatists, but they never make a compelling case--or any case, for that matter--as to why, if they are such a freedom-loving regime, these planets should not be allowed to check out of the Republic and take control of their own destinies." One doubts, however, that Last has come around to the pro-Confederacy viewpoint.
"Palpatine," writes Last, "believes that the political order must be manipulated to produce peace and stability. When he mutters, 'There is no civility, there is only politics,' we see that at heart, he's an esoteric Straussian." This, in Last's mind, is a good thing. In fact, he says that Palpatine becomes a "relatively benign" dictator, "like Pinochet." "It's a dictatorship people can do business with," adds this supposed conservative.
Writes Last: "But the most compelling evidence that the Empire isn't evil comes in 'The Empire Strikes Back' when Darth Vader is battling Luke Skywalker. After an exhausting fight, Vader is poised to finish Luke off, but he stays his hand. He tries to convert Luke to the Dark Side with this simple plea: 'There is no escape. Don't make me destroy you. . . . Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy.' It is here we find the real controlling impulse for the Dark Side and the Empire. The Empire doesn't want slaves or destruction or 'evil.' It wants order."
Last argues that the Empire's murder of Luke Skywalker's aunt and uncle and the destruction of the planet Alderaan are "less brutal than they initially appear" when "viewed in context." In short, Last says that since all of those involved were rebelling against the "order" of the Empire, they got what they deserved. In Last's words, Luke's aunt and uncle "are traitors."
Finally, Last notes that the rebels are "an unimpressive crew of anarchic royals who wreck the galaxy so that Princess Leia can have her tiara back."
His conclusion: "I'll take the Empire."
And there you have it. A neocon admits his love of brutal empire as opposed to peaceful freedom, and does so brazenly and unabashedly. This ought to tell you everything you need to know about the evilness of the neocons and their plans for our future. They do indeed have good reason to worry that some of the lines in the latest Star Wars flick have some anti-Bush undertones. We wouldn't want people to associate the neocons' beloved American empire under George W. Bush with George Lucas's hated galactic Empire under Darth Vader and the Emperor, after all.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 09:23 AM | Comments (0)
May 13, 2005
Back on Osama's Trail
“Osama bin Laden is back on the radar screens of intelligence agencies, which believe they have fresh information that will lead them to the al-Qaeda head in Pakistan's tribal areas, possibly "soon".
While this is excellent news for the US, Pakistan would be in a fix, according to the Pakistani overseer of interrogations of al-Qaeda suspects.”
Yeah right. If the USG truly had actionable intel on his location, they’d have already put OBL’s head on pike and planted it on the White House’s front lawn for a photo op. Instead we just go on reading more leaked rumors of his immanent death or capture that never pan out.
Posted by Ali Massoud at 02:45 PM | Comments (0)
More Good News From the Eastern Front
The "success stories" of America's wars on Afghanistan and Iraq just continue to grow. Reports the BBC:
Drug smugglers exploiting internal chaos in Iraq have turned the country into a transit route for Afghan heroin, an influential drug agency says.
High levels of insurgent violence and porous borders have drawn traffickers to Iraq, according to the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB).
The board says Jordan has seized large quantities of drugs on the Iraq border.
Authorities in Afghanistan say their drug problem is so severe the country's existence could be threatened.
Drugs are transported through Iraq and into Jordan, where they are moved onto traditional trafficking routes into Europe.
Doggone it! Why can't these people report all the good news that's coming out of Iraq instead of wasting our time with all this negative, anti-American stuff?
(Thanks to Antiwar.com for the link.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 09:26 AM | Comments (0)
Voting with Your Wallet: Private Money and Private Lives
I try to help with financial contributions to groups, websites, and causes I believe in. It was impressed upon me as a child during my religious and moral education that it is not enough to flap your lips about injustice. If you can redress the wrongs of this world, you should try to. Failing that, you should at least provide material support if you are able.
Unfortunately though, the FBI has used the money laundering and aiding terrorism angle as a way to snoop, harass, and arrest Muslims, Arabs, and essentially anyone they want. They do this because they can. I mean except for the Amish, is there anyone who doesn’t use money?
I have found that it annoys (and even pisses off!), some people that when I send them contributions they are money orders or cash sent by FedEx or by mail. Not enough to refuse it mind you, but annoyed all the same.
Well folks, read the linked story for a clearer understanding of what is behind my motivation for making my contributions this way. The feds bust a huge amount of us for being “money launders” and “funders of terrorism” and other such crap. Cash is untraceable and liquid. Best of all though, it leaves no trail for the feds to figure out who is giving what to whom. Cool eh? I think so.
Hawaladars are an established tradition in Arab culture and have been for many years. The feds don’t like the idea of people being able to vote with their wallets. Cash is anonymous and relatively untraceable and so is largely unable to be scrutinized.
That alone should be enough to recommend it.
Posted by Ali Massoud at 08:56 AM | Comments (2)
May 12, 2005
A Pat on the Back for Buchanan
This, my friends, is one of Pat Buchanan's best columns ever. In just a few paragraphs he completely demolishes the myth of World War II as the "good war."
Predictably, he's drawing fire from the warmongers and professional Holocaust victims, too. (Thanks to Drudge for this link.)
Go get 'em, Pat!
Posted by Mike Tennant at 04:05 PM | Comments (1)
May 11, 2005
"People fleeing Capitol, White House told to run"
This has got to be my favorite news headline of all time. So many lovely, hopeful images come to mind of Washington thieves and bureaucrats abandoning their posts, terrified of some unknown threat. But alas, it is only the sight of a wayward Cessna aircraft that has sent the District criminals running into the streets like frightened rats.
"Run. Get out. Keep running." What sweet music to the ears of the oppressed. May God bless these errant pilots. May they be rewarded in this life or the next for interrupting, though briefly, the war machine’s blood thirsty business.
No word yet on whether the pilots were armed with box cutters; that most feared of weapons that the U.S. military has no defense against (along with donkey carts).
Posted by Roger Young at 06:43 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
May 10, 2005
Agreeing to the Final Solution
World War II again being in the news this weekend, someone at church brought up the German people's complicity in Hitler's atrocities and said, "What I can't understand is how the German people could go along with Hitler's program."
Then, after a bit of discussion of the atrocities, this staunch Republican added, "And here we are getting all bent out of shape about what happened in a prison camp!" Clearly he was referring to the outrage over the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse--outrage that was, in his mind, obviously misplaced.
He did, however, answer his own question as to how the German people could go along with Hitler. The German government told them that Jews, homosexuals, and other "undesirables" were their enemy, out to destroy their beloved country, and that, therefore, any action taken by the government to rid them of this "threat" was justified. The United States government has told us that the prisoners at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and elsewhere are our enemy, out to destroy our beloved country (never mind that the overwhelming majority were not terrorists at all), and that, therefore, any action taken by the government to rid us of this "threat" is justified. Those who get upset about the prisoner abuse are thus unpatriotic left-wingers who are more concerned with the rights of terrorists than with their own country.
Yeah, it's really hard to see how the German people could be persuaded to accept Hitler's "final solution."
Posted by Mike Tennant at 01:03 PM | Comments (0)
May 09, 2005
Neo-Con Founder Speaks on the Oil for Blood Program
Neo-con founding father and pseudo-libertarian William F. Buckley bemoans the hard choices involved in the Bush regime’s “Oil for Blood” Crusade in Iraq.
“There are two burdens in America,” says WFB “one of them ascribable to our conscience. We can't "desert" those who enlisted in our proclaimed cause. We did exactly that when we deserted Vietnam, but we are unlikely to do it again in the Near East, because too many people are looking directly on and would understandably react against U.S. nonchalance with rage and contempt.”
First, note Buckley’s use of the imperial “we” as in “all of us collectively” which of course is laugh-out-loud funny. As if WFB’s social class are sacrificing any damn thing at all for this war.
Secondly, “we” (that usage again!) cannot renege on “our” commitment by deserting those “who enlisted in our cause”. WTF Mr. Buckley? I made no commitment to spend money, shed blood, or anything else on behalf of creating a new and improved Iraqi state.
Bush and his regime do not speak for me and have no moral right to commit my money, blood, or anything or anyone else’s on its behalf either.
The fact that WFB is so willing to say these things and make statements of this kind show that at heart his principle loyalty is to such bourgeois concepts of false consciousness as states, and the Divine Right of his socio-economic class (as in “we of the ruling elite” will commit your ass and money) to consider other people’s lives and property theirs to promise others.
Mr. Buckley’s real commitment to or even understanding of what liberty actually means is now revealed for the wrong-headed notion it is.
Posted by Ali Massoud at 01:27 PM | Comments (0)
May 08, 2005
Land of the Freak and Home of the Slave…
I once asked an unidentified plainclothes cop to show me her ID when she started threatening me at a city council meeting. Instead, I was sprayed in the face with pepper spray.
Now I see where three Boston area kids were arrested ostensibly for the crime of building a snow fort in the parking lot of a high school closed for a “snow day”. Officer Pig told the three to go away. The one that did got a pass. The two that asked for Officer Pig’s badge number were arrested. The two were convicted after a three-hour jury trial and face fines and up to 30 days in jail.
On the brighter side, they at least didn’t get tasered for “non-compliance” or sprayed with mace or pepper spray. This is what passes for liberty in America now.
Posted by Ali Massoud at 09:18 AM | Comments (0)
May 07, 2005
True Courage At Last!
This story really showed what one person can do in the right place at the right time. Though the protest was political in nature, and merely resulted in one side of the ol' coin of State turning up rather than the other, it still took guts not many would have shown. The fact that Natalia Dmytruk thought that she was doing the right thing for freedom makes it an act to be proud of.
Thanks to Catallarchy for the link.
Posted by Patrick Yancey at 06:09 PM | Comments (1)
Even in the UK
Even in the UK the legitimacy of rule by electoral democracy is starting to be questioned, and this I believe is progress. Not much progress mind you, but a start anyway.
How is it that one political party (New Labour) can utterly dominate English political life with 35.9% of the vote?
“How legitimate is a system that gives total power to a party with barely 36% of the popular vote? Trust in politicians was a big theme of the last term. Maybe trust in the system will be a big theme in the next.” So states Jonathan Freedland in a piece in the Guardian UK on their May 5th general election.
How legitimate is a system that grants anyone from anywhere on the island over age 18 a say in going to war, how much money to take from you in taxes, or whatever the hell else half plus one of them vote on?
Hope springs eternal even for a natural pessimist such as me.
Posted by Ali Massoud at 05:59 PM | Comments (0)
May 05, 2005
Whither the Liberal Media?
The British press is all over this. It made the headlines in Canada. A top secret memo passed to the Sunday Times reveals the minutes of a briefing by MI-6 Chief Richard Dearlove reporting on his meeting with U.S. officials in July, 2002.
Here are what should amount to a couple of the biggest bombshells:
C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.
***
The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran.
One would think this would merit at least a sidebar mention in at least one of the big three American papers. New York Times? No. Washington Post? No. Los Angeles Times? No. It seems the liberal American media should be on this like stink on poo, given their legendary anti-Bush biases, doesn't it? Nary a peep. Perhaps it's just that John Clueless Public already knows the Busheviks "fixed" the intelligence and facts and doesn't really care, therefore it's not really "news"?
WTF?
Originally posted here.
Posted by Matthew Bryan at 02:18 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Pentagon Acrobatics Can't Disguise Horrors of War
Talk about rebel technology: the Pentagon this week was not overwhelmed by a dirty bomb or a jet converted into a missile, but by a simple cut and paste job. Like anyone else, the Pentagon uses Adobe Acrobat. At first, the 42 pages of the report which would supposedly shed some light on the March 4 killing of Italian secret agent Nicola Calipari and the wounding of kidnapped journalist Giuliana Sgrena in Baghdad showed up on the Centcom website as a PDF file heavily censored with large sections blacked out - including the significant omission, among others, of the names of all the soldiers involved in the shooting, as well as entire pages.
But because the Pentagon failed to save the file properly, all it took was for someone to cut and paste the document into a word-processing application to give Italy and the rest of the world access to the full, uncensored version.
That part is just laughable, typical of the stupid bureaucracy. The conclusions to be drawn from the uncensored report are not.
The uncensored Pentagon report at least allows the international public to know that there were no less than 15,527 attacks on the occupation forces from July 2004 to March 2005. In Baghdad alone, from November to March 12, there were 2,404 attacks. These numbers confirm that when US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his minions spin that the situation in Iraq is under control they are essentially lying. In the three months since the Iraqi elections there may have been fewer American casualties, but there were countless more assassination attempts against the so-called Iraqi security forces, all of them based on precise intelligence. Every day, there are at least 20 bomb attacks in Baghdad alone, and at least 60 throughout Iraq. . . .
Regardless, the Italian report is devastating. Among the most important issues: 1) American soldiers did not signal or warn the Toyota Corolla carrying Calipari and Sgrena - a fact confirmed even by a US official, who sheepishly ventured that the Italian driver did not understand the road signs "because they are written in English and Arabic". Sgrena, as well as the driver, a major with the Italian carabinieri, have always been adamant: there were no warning shots. 2) The soldiers at the checkpoint fired away due to "stress and inexperience". Specialist Mario Lozano was the man who shot and killed Calipari. 3) The Toyota was traveling at no more than 50 km/h (the Pentagon says it was close to 100 km/h). The road was wet, the major was driving with only one hand because he was talking on a mobile phone, and to top it all he was approaching a 90-degree turn. 4) The crime scene was not isolated and secured. Evidence simply "disappeared". 5) The Americans knew about Calipari, and that he was on a mission in Baghdad, even if they didn't know the details. US command was informed by the Italians of a delicate mission hours before the shooting, and they knew that Sgrena had been released 25 minutes before Calipari was killed.
(Thanks to LewRockwell.com for the link.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:16 AM | Comments (0)
Old Crooks Never Die; They Just Go Into Government
You'll recall that good ol' Ahmad Chalabi was appointed acting oil minister of Iraq last week, but he was only to remain in the post until such time as a permanent oil minister could be named.
It was thought on Tuesday that the government had agreed upon a permanent minister, but, lo and behold:
“There was a last minute hitch. Ahmad Chalabi remains acting oil minister,” said Jawad al-Maliki, a senior official in Jaafari’s Dawa Party.
Hmm . . . I wonder what that "last minute hitch" could have been? Well, we know it wasn't pressure from Uncle Sam, who gave the Iraqis sovereignty last June. On the other hand,
Ahmad Chalabi, the one-time Pentagon favorite who fell from grace in Washington amid accusations that he gave U.S. intelligence to Iran, has received a congratulatory call from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice about his new Iraqi Cabinet posts.
U.S. officials said Rice called the secular Shi'ite politician on Tuesday to congratulate him on becoming deputy prime minister and acting oil minister in Iraq's first elected government since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.
Did you know Chalabi was deputy prime minister, too? Yes, this guy--the very one who provided all the bogus intelligence about Saddam Hussein's WMD programs and who likely gave U.S. secrets to Iran--has not one but two posts in the new, "independent" Iraqi government.
Ain't freedom grand?
(Links courtesy Antiwar.com.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 10:56 AM | Comments (0)