Browsed by
Tag: Bush administration

Open Letter to Saxby Chambliss (R, GA)

Open Letter to Saxby Chambliss (R, GA)

Comments 1 comment

I received an email today from Senator Saxby Chambliss, and I’m posting both his communication and my own.

Dear Ms. N: Thank you for contacting me regarding the National Security Agency’s (NSA) monitoring of conversations connected to terrorist activity and the treatment of military detainees. It is good to hear from you.

I certainly understand your concerns regarding personal freedoms. We are blessed to live in a free and effective democracy, and, just like you, I hold dear the personal freedoms that are provided to each and every law-abiding American.

As you know, the world changed on September 11, 2001. In the weeks following the catastrophic and murderous attacks on our nation, President Bush authorized the NSA to intercept certain international communications into and out of the United States from persons known to have links to terrorist organizations. As it has been publicly discussed, the purpose of the monitoring program is to prevent another attack on our country. This program is effective and the terrorist plots that have been foiled demonstrate that it is vitally important for the President of the United States to have the power and authority to act on information to protect the American people.

With respect to military detainees captured by the United States, they should be treated humanely and in a manner that honors our agreement under the Geneva Conventions. On October 17, 2006, President Bush signed into law (P.L. 109-366) a bill that outlines the treatment of our military detainees and our interrogation program. This law will further underscore to other countries that the United States will treat its detainees properly and justly.

As always, I appreciate hearing from you.

(Yada yada yada, I’m so sure he appreciates hearing from me.)

So here is my response. I am almost completely certain that such correspondence has no impact on Senator Chambliss whatsoever, but perhaps his staff draws some kind of statistical trend reports for purposes of future elections.

I’m not the only Georgian who wonders why Mr. Chambliss continues to puppet the lies of this administration.

Dear Senator Chambliss:

The NSA monitoring of conversations and email has gone beyond the bounds of what you describe in this correspondence. I am quite sure that you are aware of that.

How can you try to say that you hold dear our freedoms and the values of our democracy when you continue to support the unethical and anti-American actions of this President and Vice-President?

Stop using 9/11 as the “second Pearl Harbor.” With policies such as surveillance of American citizens, retroactive immunity laws, the expansion of executive power, and the torture and mistreatment of prisoners of all kinds – both here and abroad – you have undermined the values of the United States of America.

In this respect, the 9/11 attack couldn’t have been more successful as an act of terrorism; this administration, with your full support, has used it to betray what we should have been standing up for – our freedoms, our democracy, our rights as Americans. You, sir, are allowing that act to succeed in changing the very fabric of our nation.

You say we are “blessed to live in a free and effective democracy.” What remains of this “blessing” – a state of affairs hard-earned in blood and vigilance – is systematically being dismantled, and you contribute to this! Your oblique reference to God does not move me; I cannot imagine how you think God would approve of rampant greed and corruption, deceit, theft, torture, war profiteering, or throwing away the very aspects of American democracy that used to give hope to so many people here and abroad.

Senator Chambliss, after 9/11, we had the sympathy and support of most of the world – think for a moment about how we have thrown that away. Think for a moment about how a truly effective counter-terrorism policy might have reduced terrorism, rather than exponentially increasing it as this administration has done with its harmful policies and actions.

America currently disregards international and domestic laws and agreements on a level that I would never have thought possible. We have even aggressively invaded another country that had not attacked us – a deep violation of our own principles, and of the U.N. agreements for member countries.

You claim that the NSA program has foiled terrorist plots. Would you care to name a few? Can you show me someone that has been lawfully convicted on the basis of this (unconstitutional) activity?

The statement that we treat prisoners (whether at Gitmo, or in Iraq or Afghanistan – or in the countries we ship them out to for torture) in a manner that is in accordance with international law and treaty is so laughable that I am quite frankly amazed that you would still continue to make this claim.

Mr. Chambliss, I have contacted you about many issues, and although I know that your email responses are simply cut and pasted from form letters written by others, I still ask you to hold yourself accountable for the misleading statements being made in them.

Sir, your role in the Senate is to represent the interests – and the laws – of the people of Georgia and of this nation. When will you begin to take your job more seriously?

Senator, I plead with you. Revisit some of these important issues. The future of America is at stake.

These are real problems, and the way they have been handled so far will have lasting repercussions.

Won’t you begin to be part of solving these problems rather than making them even worse with your denials and your continued support of every whim of this secretive and dangerous administration?

Most sincerely-

(it’s “Dr. N.” to you, Senator)

Chuck Hagel Lets it Rip

Chuck Hagel Lets it Rip

Comments 2 comments

Chuck Hagel, Republican turning Democrat. Maybe he can give the Dems some… ahhh…. backbone.

“This is one of the most arrogant, incompetent administrations I’ve ever seen personally or ever read about,” the always blunt and frequently quotable Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., said yesterday during an appearance at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

“This administration in my opinion has been as unprepared as any administration I’m aware of,” Hagel added, “not only the ones that I have been somehow connected to and that’s been every administration — either I’ve been in Washington or worked within an administration or Congress or some way dealing with them since the first Nixon administration. I would rate this one the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in consensus — almost every area, I would give it the lowest grade. …

“And you know, I think of this administration, what they could have done after 9/11, what was within their grasp. Every poll in the world showed 90% of the world for us. Iran had some of the first spontaneous demonstrations on the streets of Tehran supporting America. They squandered a tremendous amount of opportunity.”

Read Hagel’s (not Hegel’s – lol) complete remarks.

Way to Support the Troops

Way to Support the Troops

Comments 0 Comment

Nice. You get wounded, and then you are asked to REPAY part of your incentive to enlist in the first place? Insult upon injury. Literally.

“Service members seriously wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan after they received a $10,000 bonus for enlisting are being asked by the Pentagon to repay portions of the incentive money, says a U.S. senator who calls the practice an example of military policy gone wrong.”

“A bill in the mail is not the kind of present our soldiers deserve in this holiday season,” Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. said. “Our veterans are not being treated with the dignity, respect and thanks that they deserve. It’s just a disgrace.”

At a news conference Sunday, he said the policy remained in effect despite a report last July by a presidential commission that wounded veterans were being unfairly penalized by a requirement that enlistees must fulfill their entire term of service or lose a pro-rated portion of their bonus.

Nancy Nord – oh please

Nancy Nord – oh please

Comments 0 Comment

Nancy A. Nord was nominated by President George W. Bush to be a commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) for a term that expires in October of 2012. The CPSC is supposed to protect the public against unreasonable risks of injury and death associated with consumer products. You know, lead. Things like that.

Nord is also the president of Executive Women in Government, a nonprofit professional women’s organization. Sorry, women.

In two different letters, Nancy Nord has asked lawmakers not to approve legislation that would increase the agency’s authority, double its budget and increase its ever more pathetic staff. She opposes increasing the maximum penalties for safety violations. She opposes making it easier for the government to make public reports of faulty products. She opposed protecting industry whistle-blowers. And of course she opposes prosecuting executives of companies that willfully violate laws.

Hello? Anyone home in America?

The agency has suffered from a steady decline in its budget and staffing in recent years. Its staff numbers about 420, about half its size in the 1980s. It has only one full-time employee to test toys. And 15 inspectors are assigned to police all imports of consumer products under the agency’s supervision, a marketplace that last year was valued at $614 billion.

I am ashamed to share a syllable of my name with Nancy Nord. My mother’s name is Nancy, too. I haven’t felt this bad since people started asking me if I was related to OJ Simpson because of a character he played. Sorry, children.

The very direction of North – what Nord means – is blasting its winds in her general direction.

Anyone who doesn’t think the agency needs more resources “does not understand the gravity of the situation and does not understand the concerns that America’s parents have for the safety of their children,” Pelosi said.

Government Bad. Corporations Good. Yar yar.

Family values? Children’s safety?

Lead, good. Whistleblowers bad.

Good government? Promote the general welfare?

Bah. We don’t need your stinkin’ children.

Iraq Numbers

Iraq Numbers

Comments 0 Comment

Iraq causalities may be more than a million.

…a survey of 1,461 adults suggested that the total number slain during more than four years of war was more than 1.2 million. … nearly one in two households in Baghdad had lost at least one member to war- related violence, and 22% of households nationwide had suffered at least one death. It said 48% of the victims were shot to death and 20% died as a result of car bombs, with other explosions and military bombardments blamed for most of the other fatalities.

Here are some more startling stats – via Tom Engelhardt’s excellent article Here Are the Real Numbers That Tally Iraq’s ‘Progress’:

Number of U.S. criminal investigations underway for contract fraud in Iraq, Kuwait, and Afghanistan: 73.

Cost to Pentagon of shipping two 19-cent metal washers to a key military installation abroad, probably in Iraq or Afghanistan: $998,798.00.

Amount paid by the U.S. military to two British private security firms, Aegis Defence Services and Erinys Iraq, to protect U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reconstruction teams in Iraq: $548 million ($18 million a month, with a private army of 2000 – about three military battalions).

Percentage of Iraqi national police force which is Shiite: 85%.

Number of Iraqis in American prisons in Iraq: 24,500.

Number of juveniles (11-17), held in those prisons: Approximately 800 (85% Sunni).

Number of foreign suspected jihadis held in those prisons: 280.

Estimated number of full-time al-Qaeda-in-Iraq fighters: 850 (2-5% of the Sunni insurgency).

Number of times President Bush mentioned al-Qaeda in a speech on the Iraqi situation on July 24, 2007: 95.

Number of Iraqi civilian deaths in August: 1,809 (the highest figure of the surge year so far).

Number of Iraqi “bus people” now in exile in neighboring lands: 2.5 million.

Amount spent by the average household in Baghdad for a few hours of electricity a day: $171 a month ($400 is a reasonable monthly wage).

Number of U.S. Army suicides: 17.3 per thousand, the highest rate in 26 years – not including unconfirmed reports or those who served and then committed suicide at home. In 2006, 99. Since 2003, 118 U.S. military personnel have committed suicide in Iraq itself.

Percentage of people across the globe who “think U.S. forces should leave Iraq within a year”: 67%, according to a just-released BBC World Service poll of 23,000 people in 22 countries. Only 23% think foreign troops should remain “until security improves.”

Percentage of citizens of U.S.-led “coalition” members in Iraq who want forces out within a year: 65% of Britons, 63% of South Koreans, and 63% of Australians. Even a majority of Israelis want either an immediate American withdrawal (24%), or withdrawal within a year (28%); only 40% opt for “remain until security improves.

Percentage of Americans who think U.S. forces should get out of Iraq within a year: 61% (24% favor immediate withdrawal, 37% prefer a one-year timetable).

Percentage of people across the globe who think the United States plans to keep permanent military bases in Iraq: 49%.

Percentage of Americans who believe, that the U.S. mission in Iraq will be seen as a failure in the long run: 57%, (only 29% disagree).

These from “The General Lies” by Robert Scheer:

Percent of Iraqis who believe security has deteriorated since the surge began: 70%.

Percent of Iraqis who believe attacks on U.S. forces are justified: 60%.

Percent of Sunnis (whom the general and ambassador claim are joining our side) that want to see us dead: 93%.

Recommended reading:

America’s Deadly Shock Doctrine in Iraq by Naomi Klein explains how the U.S. set about to destroy the Iraqi national psyche and then push through a disastrous privatization of its economy. The link will lead to an excerpt from the new book.

U.S. Secret Air War Pulverizes Afghanistan and Iraq by Conn Hallinan reports on the U.S. military’s increasingly reliance on deadly air strikes in Iraq and Afghanistan as the ground occupations fall apart, killing untold numbers of civilians.

Faced with defeat or bloody stalemate on the ground, the allies have turned to air power, much as the U.S. did in Vietnam. But, as in Vietnam, the terrible toll bombing inflicts on civilians all but guarantees long-term failure.

“Far from bringing about the intended softening up of the opposition,” Phillip Gordon, a Brookings Institute Fellow, told the Asia Times, “bombing tends to rally people behind their leaders and cause them to dig in against outsiders who, whatever the justification, are destroying their homeland.””


Six Years After 9/11, Why We’re Losing the War on Terror by David Cole and Jules Lobel argue that the Bush administration and its extralegal policies have taken the U.S. from being the object of the world’s sympathy to the object of their scorn.

The proposition that judicial processes and international accountability — the very essence of the rule of law — are to be dismissed as a strategy of the weak, aligned with terrorism itself, makes clear that the Administration has come to view the rule of law as an obstacle, not an asset, in its effort to protect us from terrorist attack.

Our long-term security turns not on “going on offense” by locking up thousands of “suspected terrorists” who turn out to have no connection to terrorism; nor on forcing suspects to bark like dogs, urinate and defecate on themselves, and endure sexual humiliation; nor on attacking countries that have not threatened to attack us. Security rests not on exceptionalism and double standards but on a commitment to fairness, justice and the rule of law. … The preventive paradigm has compromised our spirit, strengthened our enemies and left us less free and less safe.

Actions of the Day for Progressive Armchair Activists

Actions of the Day for Progressive Armchair Activists

Comments 4 comments

We come in peace (shoot to kill): Just Foreign Policy Iraqi Death Estimator

Some actions for my fellow armchair activists. Click on the links for more information and to take action.