Dealing Democrats

Another article about the Democrat betrayal of the peace movement. The Democrats are truly a pitiful party. The best solution for activists would be to work outside the political system or try to form a third party. Boring from within will have only the result that activists will be bored to death or exhausted without achieving much of anything.

Dealing Democrats
By JEAN DANIELS

President Bush can meet with family friend, Prince Bandar while Vice President Cheney meets with King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, but neither leader are able to meet with Cindy Sheehan and the mothers who ask to know why their children have died in Iraq and Afghanistan. Congress, the Democrats in particular dealt Cindy and the families of these soldiers another blow. Instead of voting-all the democrats voting against this 120 billion dollar spending bill lacking any deadline for troop withdrawal, the Democrats, as Cindy writes in her open letter to the Congress and the American public, May 28, 2007, handed the Bush administration more money for political expediency. "It is a moral abomination and every second the occupation of Iraq endures, you all have more blood on your hands."

The country was lied to by this administration.

The country has witnessed the unraveling of the Halliburton and Blackwater scheme for war profits.

We have had Katrina and a despicable response from the administration before and after the hurricane.

Eight million dollars sent to Iraq, handed over to the Iraqi "government" under Paul Brenner's control, is missing. It is a good possibility that this money was distributed as treats to hands held out, including the hands of El-Qaeda and other insurgent groups who, in turn, are maiming and killing U.S. soldiers.

What deal have the Democrats made with the Bush administration?

Over 3000 soldiers have died without the media in this country covering their return home. The President has not attended one funeral. Over 50, 000 wounded soldiers are returning to no homes and are ending up on the streets. Many are coming back to wives who are stressed out from trying to care for children while they face the possibility of foreclosures on their homes and or farms. More soldiers are suffering from devastating injuries, particularly brain trauma, requiring life-long care. Others are suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Did I mention the criminal conditions suffered by returning Vets at Walter reed Hospital right there in Washington D.C.?

Teaching people to kill-to shape an "enemy" in their minds rather than incubate or foster ideas for living with others has resulted in soldiers returning home and seeing wives and other family members as the enemy. When those responsible for leading this country, betrays its military for oil profits for the few and an idea of world control for mega-corporations, should the American public speak up in outrage? Shouldn't all of America have joined Cindy in demanding accountability to the countless deaths of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi citizens alike? Shouldn't the Democrats have done more than capitulate to Bush's spending of billions for war?

Families have lost mothers and children have lost parents. These young soldiers serve as fodder for the war machine, and like the victims of Katrina, know something suffering governmental indifference.

Even if a soldier does not lose his or her life, they lose in the long run while Bush, Cheney, Rice, Halliburton, Blackwater trip over the money bags on the way to Swiss banks. They and their friends are the ones who are thought of when contracts worth billions pass from one hand to the other, when control of the "globalization" of the world is the only idea worth considering.

The atmosphere in this country for the right to dissent is as cruel and as brutal as the activities at detention campus operated by the U.S. in its "war on terror."

This "war on terror" has successfully produced terror! Read and try to feel the terror as Cindy writes of the "thousands of broken hearts." "How do you put behind you the screaming mothers on both sides of the conflict? How does the agony you have created escape you? It will never escape me I can't run far enough to get away from it."

The Democrats did not do it! They did not listen to Cindy or those mothers or the American people who gave them their vote last November. They did not do it!

Cindy wrote that the Camp Casey Peace Institution will meet in Philadelphia on July 4th "to try and figure out this 'two' party system that is brought and paid for by the war machine which has a stranglehold on every aspect of our lives." Cindy is leaving the Democratic Party because to stay with the Democrats is to "stay the course" of disaster lead by the Republican administration.

She is leaving the Democratic Party, for they "have failed" those who put them in power "to change the direction our country is heading."

"We did not elect you to help sink our ship of state but to guide it to safe harborWe gave you a chance, you betrayed us."

Dr. Jean Daniels lives in Madison, Wisconson and writes a column for the City Capital Hues and the Black Commentator. Email: Darlkofi2002@yahoo.com

A Conservative Voice: Democratic Jellyfish, Republican Lemmings

Obviously opposition to the Iraq war is not a monopoly of left wingers. This fellow is about as anti=left as you can be. He is also not opposed to "fighting terrorism" as he thinks that it would be appropriate to bomb Iran back into the stone age if they support terrorism. His opinion of middle easterners is not exactly liberal!
A link to Turtel's own site can be found at the Conservative Voice.
by Joel Turtel
Democrat Jellyfish, Republican Lemmings
May 27, 2007 01:00 PM EST



I never in my life thought I would be rooting for Democrats to get some spine. I despise the liberals’ and Democrats’ fascist-socialist steal-your-money and regulate us to death philosophy. But they are now the only power we have who can stop this sick, meaningless war in Iraq. Yet the Democrats are jellyfish.

What dopes we were to start this war. We played right into the hands of the terrorists. We are fighting on their ground, in their territory, in their kind of guerrilla war, in a tribal, religiously fanatic region of the world. We have now spent over $500 billion on this war, draining the life-blood and hard-earned taxes of average Americans, with no end in sight.

Thousands of young Americans have already died to give “democracy” to fanatic Islamic millions whose mullahs and religion preach hatred against the very concept of democracy. They practice a religion that detests democracy and individual liberty, a religion that demands absolute obedience to their god and Islamic law.

The only way this war will end is if Democrats get the spine to cut off the war funds, now. I have given up hope on the Republicans. Like lemmings, they just follow the President over the cliff, taking the American people with them.

President Bush is playing a huge bluff game with the Democrats. He dares them to cut off the funds, and thereby “endanger our troops,” and the Democrats have once again caved in to the bluff. They have just passed the President’s newest request for another $95 billion for the war.

Democrats in Congress, here’s what would happen if you cut off the spigot. Without money for the war, the President would have to withdraw the troops. He would never endanger our soldiers in the field. He would withdraw the troops, then rant at Congress for making him do this. But Democrats, if you don’t call his bluff, he will never end this war. He is on a messianic mission to “spread democracy” to a democracy-hating Middle-East, and is in complete denial about the futility of such a mission.

Democrats, our Founding Fathers gave you the ultimate weapon to stop a President who endangers our country with useless wars. That weapon was the power of the purse. If you don’t use it, you and the Congress you control are just utterly useless to the American people and to our security.

The Democrats will say, “we have tried to stop the war, but we don’t have the two-thirds majority to overturn the President’s veto. That’s why we had to pass the new bill giving President Bush another $95 billion for the war.”

No, Democrats, you did not have to capitulate. You did not up the ante in this power poker game. Your strategy should be to refuse to pass ANY spending bill until the President stops this war. If necessary, bring the government to a halt. Cut off all funding to every department, every bureaucrat, every recipient of a government check. Hell, even stop the President’s salary and the salary of his cabinet members.

Oh, how government-union employees will howl when they don’t get their weekly paychecks. Oh, how Social Security recipients will howl when they don’t get their Social Security checks. Post office employees might even go on strike. Take away the billions of dollars that millions of Americans get from government paychecks and you will see how fast this war stops. Millions of Americans will demand President Bush’s resignation or impeachment if he doesn’t stop the war immediately (Social Security recipients—don’t worry. With your help, the war should end in about a week, and you’ll then get your checks).

But do you Democrats have the spine to do this? Do you have the nerve to take away government paychecks from millions of government-union employees that voted you into office? What do you value most, your own power in office, or stopping this war? Care to up the ante?

We constantly hear from the President and his fellow Republicans that there would be horrendous consequences if we withdrew from Iraq. OK. What consequences? If we left Iraq tomorrow, here’s my guess on what would happen. There would be a blood-bath civil war between the Shiites, Sunnis, former Saddam’s Bathe party militia, Al Qaida terrorists, Iranian infiltrators, and a dozen other fanatical groups, all at each others’ throats. It would be like another Palestine, where Fatah and Hamas terrorist groups are now at each other’s throat for power.

Does it really matter who wins this civil war? Most of the groups there are either secular or religious fanatics, and the group that wins will probably create a dictatorship as bad as Saddam Hussein’s. When we hung Saddam, we just ousted one sick dictator, only to make room for another. In the Middle East, from past experience, what more can you expect?

Then what happens when this new secular or Islamic dictator is in power? He will not disrupt our oil supply (which is all we really care about), because oil is the only thing that keeps these Middle-East countries from descending back into the Middle Ages. It is their only resource. Did Saddam cut off our oil? Does Iran stop selling us oil, even though they hate our guts? Do they want to lose their billions of dollars in revenue? I don’t think so.

Moreover, it might be the best thing that happened to us if Middle-East countries cut off our oil. What we need is a massive, alternative-energy “Manhattan project” like the Manhattan Project in World War II that created the atomic bomb in record time. We already have the technology to become oil-independent.

We also have huge, untapped supplies of our own oil, gas, and coal if we stop strangling our energy companies with “save-the-earth” environmental regulations that stop us from drilling all over the Arctic, Alaska, and offshore. If we combine an alternative-energy “Manhattan project” and take the strangling shackles off our oil and gas companies, we soon won’t need Middle-East oil anymore. When that happens, these countries will go bankrupt, their economies will shrivel up, and they’ll have no more money to fund the terrorists.

What about the poor people of Iraq? I feel truly sorry for them. But if they can’t get their act together to defend their own liberty, should we waste the lives of thousands of Americans and bankrupt ourselves in a never-ending war to “spread democracy?” Should we strangle Americans’ freedom, turn America into a police state with “Patriot” acts and massive surveillance of Americans by our own FBI, to protect the “freedom” of Iraqi muslims?

If we left Iraq now, we could use part of the hundreds of billions of dollars we save to hunt down Al Qaeda terrorists all over the world. They were the original and still worst threat to our security. We could also build a high wall between us and Mexico to keep out Middle-East terrorists, and pay for surveillance equipment at airports and all our harbors to check every package and container coming in.

We could also threaten Iranian leaders that we will decimate their power like we did to the Taliban in Afghanistan if they continue to support terrorists who try to attack America. We don’t need nuclear weapons. We can level their power centers and infrastructure with massive bombings like we did against Nazi Germany. To win, we can’t get sucked into a guerrilla war on their territory, far from our supply lines. Instead, we could bomb them into the Stone age so they could no longer support terrorists. I just hope the good Iranian people overthrow their current rulers before we have to destroy their country one day.

But none of this will happen with our Democrat jellyfish. This war will go on and on, sucking the lifeblood from America like the barbarians sucked the lifeblood from ancient Rome. Instead of hoarding our strength to fight the real enemy, the Al Qaeda terrorists, we now squander our strength in a useless civil war in Iraq. God forbid, will we have to elect a Democrat President to end this war?

Democrats PR shop run by Orwellian writers

This is from the Huffington Post. I wonder if this will cause any type of movement toward third (Or more) parties in the US. It should be painfully clear that there is no real choice between Democrats and Republicans. George Orwell of course would not write this sort of PR except to expose it so he really would not work for the Democrats..


David Sirota| BIO
Democrats Hire George Orwell to Run Their PR Shop
26 Comments | Posted May 27, 2007 | 01:26 PM (EST)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read More: George W. Bush, George Orwell, Harry Reid
Apparently, House and Senate Democrats have resurrected George Orwell from the dead and put him on staff as the head of their PR department. Why do I say that? Because House and Senate Democrats are now insisting that this week's votes to give President Bush a blank check to continue the war were, in fact, heroic efforts to stand up against George Bush and stop the war. I kid you not.


Here's a line from the Democratic Party's official radio address this weekend, delivered by Elliot Anderson, a veteran of the Afghanistan War:

"The best way to honor the troops is to responsibly end our involvement in Iraq's civil war. As long as President Bush stays committed to the same policies that aren't working, it won't be easy. But I am proud to see Democrats and now some brave Republicans standing up to him." (emphasis added)
Now look, I have all the respect in the world for those like Anderson who have served or are serving our country in the military. And I think Anderson is absolutely right that "the best way to honor the troops is to responsibly end our involvement in Iraq's civil war." But the claim that "Democrats and now some brave Republicans standing up to" President Bush just a few days after 90 percent of congressional Democrats voted to give Bush a blank check is right out of a George Orwell novel (by the way, I don't blame Anderson for any of this - I'm guessing Harry Reid's people wrote him the speech or at least shaped it accordingly as a condition of him getting to deliver it).

Same thing, I might add, from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Hours after the blank check vote, the organization sent out a fundraising letter saying:

"The House just passed legislation that will go to the White House that includes critical issues Democrats have been fighting for including canceling the President's blank check in Iraq."
And, big shocker, there was Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) telling reporters that giving Bush a blank check somehow represents "the beginning of the end of the president's policy in Iraq."

Again, it's an utterly Orwellian attempt to make the public believe something happened when clearly the opposite happened. We are expected to believe Democrats did everything they possibly could to end the war, just like George Bush would have us believe the war is going swimmingly - because politicians in Washington, to paraphrase Orwell, believe that while all Americans are created equal, some - in particular, the creatures of the Beltway who think they are smarter than everyone and can trick the public - believe they are more equal than others.

The only difference between the Democratic Party's behavior right now and an Orwell novel is that the state-run propaganda in the latter is just a wee bit more convincing. Memo to Democratic politicians and their new political consultant, George Orwell: YOU AREN'T FOOLING ANYONE. WE ALL KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. THE MORE YOU PRETEND THAT YOU HEROICALLY DID EVERYTHING YOU COULD TO STOP THE WAR, THE MORE PATHETIC YOU LOOK.

Collusion between Bush and Democrats on Iraq

This is very controversial in places. Chin just blithely and without qualification states that 9/11 was planned and executed by the US govt.! Certainly I don't find the official story very believable but I doubt that the US government planned and executed the attacks. At the most the government let them happen and knew something about them but did not act.

Iraq war funding bill fiasco masks collusion between Bush and Democrats
Expansion of Middle East oil war is a bipartisan imperative


by Larry Chin

Global Research, May 26, 2007





On May 22, 2007, Washington’s Democrats obediently capitulated to the Bush administration, handing Bush a war spending bill completely stripped of conditions that would, in any way, slow the administration’s relentless Middle East conflagration. In fact, the new bill is an even more egregious blank check for a massive “surge” of Bush administration violence throughout the region, opening the door for a war with Iran. New Iraq “benchmarks” pushed by the Democrats themselves will result in new atrocities and more bloodshed, funded by the Democrats themselves.


In refusing to definitively corner a scandalized Bush administration, the Democratic Party leadership has earned itself a tidal wave of rage, vitriol and disgust from Americans who harbor any illusions that the Democrats have any intention of ending the war, or “bringing the troops home”.(see Entire US government failed us on Iraq by Keith Olbermann, and Funding Iraq occupation without deadlines or time lines is a travesty)

The Democrats’ open betrayal of their own constituents, their resounding slap in the face to the vast majority of the American people (70% of whom oppose the war) lays bare the true nature of the Democratic Party, and the US government itself. Dick Cheney stated with smug confidence weeks ago that the Democrats would surrender. Now, the Democrats have not only tossed away their own credibility, and their dreams of future political gain. They have fully revitalized Bush-Cheney and the Republicans.

Bipartisan criminal consensus confirmed

The US political and economic system, ruled by consensus, is deeply criminalized. It thrives on war and oppression. It is an elite racket, sustained by resource conquest, collusion, fraud, lies, cover-up, and the indoctrination and manipulation of minds. “The people”, whose votes never count, are viewed with contempt.


The Republicans and Democrats are factions of the same criminal New World Order, funded by the same criminal interests, beholden to the same think tanks, foundations, corporations and military-intelligence-industrial interests, following the same geopolitical script, written by bipartisan consensus.

Given this reality, it is no surprise that the Democratic leadership has kept its promise to keep the impeachment of Bush and Cheney “off the table” and reach “across the aisle”. Consensus interests are at stake.

The vast majority of the Democrats, particularly the corrupt Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), want the war and bloodshed to continue.

The vast majority of Democrats are, and have always been, enthusiastic and willing partners in the “war on terrorism” and are co-architects of an ever-expanding "homeland security" apparatus.

The vast majority of Democrats do not oppose the war in the Middle East. They support its expansion and the deepening of the occupation, as long as it is “managed” properly, and under the control of a US-led international consensus.

As Michel Chossudovsky wrote in America's "War on Terrorism":


“The Democrats are not opposed to the illegal occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Nor are they opposed to the militarization of civilian institutions, as evidenced by their 1996 initiative to repeal the Posse Comitatus Act [which has now been completely obliterated by the Bush administration, the Patriot Act, and other post-9/11 acts]. Moreover, their perspective and understanding of 9/11 and the “war on terrorism” is broadly similar to that of the Republicans.

“This ongoing militarization of America is not a Republican project. The ‘war on terrorism’ is part of a bipartisan agenda. Furthermore, successive US administrations since Jimmy Carter have supported the Islamic brigades and have used them in covert intelligence operations.”

The vast majority of Democrats do not want the troops to come home. They support the permanent presence of the US in the Middle East, as much as the Bush administration does. The largest embassy/military base in the world is being built in Iraq as you read this.

The Democrats want Iraq’s oil, as much as their neocon partners do.

The Democrats and Iraq oil

Perhaps most telling of all, the vast majority of Democrats want to steal Iraq’s oil as much as the Bush administration does. They, too, understand Peak Oil and Gas and energy depletion, and the imperial need to seize and control what little is left.

In a glaring development unreported by the mainstream media, the Democrats’ spending bill specifically forces the privatization of Iraqi oil to multinational corporations, and other strongarm measures that further strip Iraq of its sovereignty.

Congressman Dennis Kucinich, one of the very few Democrats (along with Mike Gravel, another presidential candidate) who have been willing to denounce their own party’s venality, courageously exposed this aspect of the bill, on the floor of the House. (See Kucinich claims war masks real objective: Iraqi oil; Has Anyone in Congress or Mainstream Media Actually Read Bill?; Kucinich reveals Dem funding bill includes privatization of Iraq oil)

The Democrats worked very hard with the Bush administration and the Republicans to make sure these key provisions were written into the bill. So much for the liberal/progressive rhetoric.

The next phase of the “war on terrorism”
The new blank war check, this massive rejuvenation for Bush’s neocons, at the same time that Bush has quietly written a presidential directive giving himself dictatorial powers , in the event of a “catastrophic 9/11-style event”. Both the Bush administration and the Democrats are actively planning this event, and preparing for ways to consolidate their powers in its aftermath.

Bush-Cheney has also written a new directive for the destabilization of Iran, which will be fully supported by the Democrats.

An attack on Iran, delayed from the original spring date, is simply being pushed to the summer or fall of this year, when the destabilization program “bears fruit”.

The small minority of Democrats who actually oppose the war, and have truly opposed the Bush administration have been politically neutered, and rendered insignificant. Others have been blackmailed and intimidated, forced to cooperate.

The congressional Democrats have, in the course of numerous “probes”, exposed a variety of the Bush administration’s crimes since being given the majority of the Congress. But these investigations are limited hangouts that pose no real threat to the Bush “crime family”, that have come nowhere near exposing Bush, Cheney, Rove, etc. The mass murder of 9/11, and the “war on terrorism” remain the focus of purposeful and tight-as-a-drum consensus cover-up. Individuals who should have long ago been jailed and subjected to capital punishment for treason and murder are, instead, continue to rule the planet, and commit crimes at will.

The eternal blank war check
Any illusions that the Democrats will ever “end the war” or “bring the troops home” were erased months ago, when the (then-confident) Democrats floated a deceptive policy “limiting US forces in Iraq to fighting ‘Al-Qaeda’”. This itself was the recipe for endless, eternal war.

The “Al-Qaeda” and 9/11 fictions are bipartisan products. Neoliberals, progressives, and neocons alike have uniformly embraced and promoted the propaganda that all opposition to the US war and occupations, all insurgencies and resistance, is “sectarian violence’ linked to “Al-Qaeda”. Any “enemy” of US interests are connected to “Al-Qaeda”, or eventually transformed into “Al-Qaeda”.

Beyond the rhetoric and posturing, the true bipartisan agenda, captured in the language of all of the war legislation, is crystal clear. No limits to the war. No limit to troop strength. No limit in scope. No change in US policy. No opposition, but absolute knowing cooperation, with the Bush administration.

So brazen is the Bush administration, that George W. Bush continues to retell debunked criminal lies over and over, on camera, into microphones, years later. Just yesterday, Bush devoted an entire speech at the US Coast Guard Academy to the lie that 9/11 and Iraq were connected.

Following Bush’s goose-stepping lead, Republicans immediately fell in lockstep behind their dictator, issuing flatulent repeats of the original 9/11 falsehoods and reiterations of Bush’s own 9/11-Iraq connection. Republican Congressman John Boehner stupidly weeped, “3,000 of our fellow citizens died at the hands of these extremists, when are we going to get them?”


In another reach into the old playbook, Bush “declassified” intelligence fabrications about Osama bin Laden, "Al-Qaeda", and Zarqawi. In the new fiction, Bush-Cheney places this Al-Qaeda “super terror cell” is placed in the middle of Iraq.

With this propaganda, Iraq conveniently is magically transformed into the “hotbed” of Al-Qaeda, and the staging ground for operations within the United States.

Bush boasted:

“In the minds of Al-Qaeda leaders, 9/11 was just a down payment on violence yet to come. It is tempting to believe that the calm here at home after 9/11 means that the danger to our country has passed.”

Given the fact that Al-Qaeda (including Osama bin Laden, and Zarqawi) is a creation and a military-intelligence asset of Anglo-American interests, and given the fact that the US government planned and executed 9/11 (using these assets as its front), Bush is simply promising that his administration intends to ratchet up its attacks against the American populace, and the world. He is confident that the masses, particularly the dumbed-down and acquiescent American populace, will never figure it out.

The danger posed by the Washington consensus has never been greater


Larry Chin is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Larry Chin