to some democrats, most republicans, and esp. the former president of vice and UU.



by English singer Lily Allen, on her second album It's Not Me, It's You, track 8, "Fuck You"

Look inside,
Look inside your tiny mind
Now look a bit harder
Cause we're so uninspired,
so sick and tired of all the
hatred you harbor

So you say
It's not okay to be gay
Well I think you're just evil
You're just some racist who
can't tie my laces
Your point of view is medieval

Fuck you (Fuck you)
Fuck you very, very much
Cause we hate what you do
And we hate your whole crew
So please don't stay in touch

Fuck you (Fuck You)
Fuck you very, very much
Cause your words don't translate
And it's getting quite late
So please don't stay in touch

Do you get,
Do you get a little kick out of
being slow minded?
You want to be like your father
It's approval your after
Well that's not how you find it

Do you,
Do you really enjoy living a
life that's so hateful?
Cause there's a hole where
your soul should be
Your losing control of it and
it's really distasteful

Fuck you (Fuck You)
Fuck you very, very much
Cause we hate what you do
And we hate your whole crew
So please don't stay in touch

Fuck you (Fuck You)
Fuck you very, very much
Cause your words don't
translate and it's getting
quite late
So please don't stay in touch

Fuck you, Fuck you, Fuck you,
Fuck you, Fuck you, Fuck you,
Fuck yooooou

You say
You think we need to go to war
well you're already in one
Cause it's people like you
that need to get slew
No one wants your opinion

Fuck you (Fuck You)
Fuck you very, very much
Cause we hate what you do
And we hate your whole crew
So please don't stay in touch

Fuck you (Fuck You)
Fuck you very, very much
Cause your words don't
translate and it's getting
quite late
So please don't stay in touch

Fuck you, Fuck you
Fuck you, Fuck you
Fuck you, Fuck you

looking back

Flashback, 1999
Mar 26th, 2009 at 8:57 pm by Susie



http://susiemadrak.com/2009/03/26/20/57/flashback-1999/

oh w'hell

http://www.atlargely.com/2009/03/rfk-jr-free-paul-minor.html

http://blog.locustfork.net/2009/03/02/white-house-counsel-greg-craig-asked-to-step-down/

on an unrelated note, have any (or all) of the united states attorneys appointed by UU. been replaced yet ??

just wondering

also, you have to have it to jeopardize it

http://mediamatters.org/items/200903200026?f=h_top

looking back

March 19, 2003

"My fellow citizens, at this hour American and coalition forces are in the early stages of an illegal invasion and occupation to disarm an unarmed Iraq, to kill a million or more of its people, and to create a hostile envirnment to make it easier to rob the United States treasury, direct those funds to politically connected firms and individuals, and trash not only the Constitution, but also the Geneva Conventions and the good name of our great country..."

slightly edited text of the finally former president

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/19/sprj.irq.int.bush.transcript/

three things

a: an example of why you can learn more from bloggers, and their commenters, than the meadea:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/03/report-treasury-knew-about-aig-bonuses-earlier-than-geithner-claims.php#comment-3411707

and

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/03/17/dodd/index.html

b: put the blame where it is due, 8 years deregulation by bush/cheney, paulson who put the bailout together, and the democratically controlled congress who passed it

c: in an attempt to fix the problems now before us, obama compounds it by picking for treasury secretary a person who helped create the mess in the first place, the democratically controlled senate confirms him any way, and, as the first links says, we are shocked, shocked by the relevations of the day

looking back

there were others

Iraq — Declaration of War — 18 Mar 2003 at 22:00
Summary All voters One view All eligible voters Similar Divisions Policies

The motion voted through by a majority of MPs agreed that the Government "should use all means necessary to ensure the disarmament of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction"

This resulted in the United Kingdom joining the United States...

http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2003-03-18&number=118

looking back [updated]

Monday, March 17, 2003 Posted: 9:34 PM EST (0234 GMT)
Transcript of President George W. Bush's Monday night televised address to the nation

My fellow citizens, events in Iraq have now reached the final days of decision...

remember, yesterday they were in the final stages of diplomacy, obviously

For more than a decade, the United States and other nations have pursued patient and honorable efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime without war...

as little as two days ago, and for the past decade, we were conducting airstrikes

We have passed more than a dozen resolutions in the United Nations Security Council. We have sent hundreds of weapons inspectors to oversee the disarmament of Iraq...

but not that pesky second U.N. resolution, and you pulled the inspectors out

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised...

including sexed up intel and "facts" made to fit the policy

Yet the only way to reduce the harm and duration of war is to apply the full force and might of our military, and we are prepared to do so...

with 1/3 of the troops he was told that was needed, the harm was not reduced and the duration has lasted six years now

In desperation, he and terrorist groups might try to conduct terrorist operations against the American people and our friends. These attacks are not inevitable. They are, however, possible.

And this very fact underscores the reason we cannot live under the threat of blackmail...

saddam won't be able to threaten or blackmail you, but i will to get my agenda passed

Free nations have a duty to defend our people by uniting against the violent, and tonight, as we have done before, America and our allies accept that responsibility...

free congresses have a duty to prosecute war crimes committed by it's violent leaders, and today, as they have ignored the rule of law before, they continue to ignore the crimes committed, and for that, american must accept responsibility, for this we must atone

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/17/sprj.irq.bush.transcript/

update

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/03/justice_secreta.html

it's a start, how 'bout doing the same on this side of the pond

they why's and wherefore's

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2009/03/why-there-must-be-criminal.html

looking back

Copyright 2003, National Broadcasting Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
PLEASE CREDIT ANY QUOTES OR EXCERPTS FROM THIS NBC TELEVISION PROGRAM TO “NBC NEWS’ MEET THE PRESS.”
NBC News
MEET THE PRESS
Sunday, March 16, 2003
GUEST: Vice President DICK CHENEY
MODERATOR/PANELIST: Tim Russert - NBC News

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

MR. TIM RUSSERT: Our issues this Sunday: the president leaves this morning for a final summit meeting on Iraq. What does he hope to achieve? How close are we to war? We know things are very serious when we hear from this man. In a rare Sunday morning interview—with us for the full hour, the vice president of the United States, Dick Cheney.

Mr. Vice President, welcome to MEET THE PRESS.

VICE PRES. DICK CHENEY: Good morning, Tim.

MR. RUSSERT: How close are we to war?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, I think we are still in the final stages of diplomacy, obviously...

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/bush/cheneymeetthepress.htm

looking back

On March 15, 2003 America's inevitable march to war continued. Consumer confidence, Bush's poll numbers and Tony Blair's standing abroad were down. The President's optimism and intransigence remained the same.

...In a notable escalation of the small-scale U.S. air war in Iraq, two Air Force B-1 bombers participated in an airstrike against two military sites in the western Iraqi desert yesterday. It marked the first time in more than four years that a heavy bomber has been used against Iraq.

The bombers hit two radar sites: One was a truck-mounted mobile anti-aircraft radar system, code-named "Flat Face," near the military air base in western Iraw; the other, operating near the Jordanian border, was a "Pluto" surveillance radar system...

http://www.progressohio.org/page/community/post/daveharding/BxV

for those keeping track, we hadn't invaded yet

the new site is great and all that, but it's not obama's site, it's ours (updated)

why can't i see this link anymore
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

if'n someone can point to an archive site to where all the content has gone

or is it down some memory hole somewhere ??

(update)

to look for an old white house (UU. era) page, change the site from www.whitehouse.gov to georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov, then the rest of the link

the above link http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html
is now here: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

problems with the teevee machine

airing what they shouldn't
http://www.atlargely.com/2009/03/we-are-being-spoonfed-stupid-again.html

not airing what they should
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/13/msnbc-dont-talk-cramer/

looking back

March 14, 2003

Key documents presented as evidence that the US should invade Iraq are revealed as forgeries. The documents stated that Niger was selling 500 tons of uranium to Iraq. One, dated 2000, was on stationery from the military government of the 1980s and referred to a foreign minister who had not been in power for 14 years; another bore a signature of the president of Niger that was an obvious fake. Iraq's supposed acquisition of African uranium was a feature in Colin Powell's speech to the UN Security Council in February and in George W. Bush's State of the Union Address. Senator John Rockefeller asked the FBI to investigate the origin of the documents. Rockefeller expressed concern that the forgeries "may be part of a larger deception campaign aimed at manipulating public opinion and foreign policy regarding Iraq."

(from the wiki)

looking back

posted March 13, 2003 2:30 pm

Preoccupying Iraq

...For a clearer view of the occupation, there's a recent piece in the Guardian, Cheney is still paid by Pentagon contractor, in which Julian Borger and Robert Bryce report that our VP is still receiving annual payments of "deferred compensation" of up to $ 1 million a year from Haliburton, the Texas company he ran, whose subsidiary, Kellog, Brown & Root just received a contract from the Pentagon to control oil fires, should Saddam Hussein order the Iraqi oil fields to be burned. They go on to say,

"Halliburton is one of five large US corporations - the others are the Bechtel Group, Fluor Corp, Parsons Corp, and the Louis Berger Group - invited to bid for contracts in what may turn out to be the biggest reconstruction project since the Second World War. It is estimated to be worth up to $900m for the preliminary work alone, such as rebuilding Iraq's hospitals, ports, airports and schools.

"The contract winners will be able to establish a presence in post-Saddam Iraq that should give them an invaluable edge in winning future contracts. The defence department contract awarded to the Halliburton subsidiary, Kellog, Brown & Root (KBR), to control oil fires… will put the company in an excellent position to bid for huge contracts when Iraq's oil industry is rehabilitated."

The Los Angeles Times similarly reported yesterday (see below) on oil industry expectations that in the wake of a successful Iraqi war, the Iraqi "playing field" will be "leveled" for US and British oil firms (though the Brits have taken note of the fact that only large US firms have been invited to bid on the "reconstruction" of Iraq)...

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/482/preoccupying_iraq

looking back

Pentagon: Iraq invasion will take a week

Wednesday, March 12, 2003
2:50:52 PM

An invasion of Iraq could be completed in just seven days, a senior Pentagon official claimed.

The attack would be the most spectacular military operation in history and involve minimal allied or enemy casualties, the unnamed defence official told the New York Daily News.

The Pentagon has repeatedly said the massive bombing campaign they expect to unleash against Iraq will cause “shock and awe“.

The US Air Force yesterday attempted to further intimidate Saddam Hussein by testing a massive 21,500lb bomb, the world’s most powerful non-nuclear weapon.

Pentagon officials also predicted that the US presence in post-war Iraq would be far shorter than some opponents of the expected invasion have forecast.

“I’ll probably come back to hate this answer, but I’m talking months,” a senior official responsible for organising the reconstruction effort said.

The Iraqi regular army would used for much of the work while being paid by the US, he said.

“They can help rebuild their own country.”

http://archives.tcm.ie/breakingnews/2003/03/12/story91424.asp

looking back

House cafeterias change names for 'french' fries and 'french' toast
Move reflects anger over France's stance on Iraq
By Sean Loughlin
CNN Washington Bureau
Wednesday, March 12, 2003 Posted: 10:52 AM EST (1552 GMT)

Reps. Walter Jones, left, and Bob Ney announce the name changes on House menus at a Tuesday news conference.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The cafeteria menus in the three House office buildings changed the name of "french fries" to "freedom fries," in a culinary rebuke of France stemming from anger over the country's refusal to support the U.S. position on Iraq.

Ditto for "french toast," which will be known as "freedom toast."

The name changes were spearheaded by two Republican lawmakers who held a news conference Tuesday to make the name changes official on the menus...

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/11/sprj.irq.fries/

looking back

On March 10, 2003, the Dixie Chicks' Natalie Maines stepped onto a London stage and announced, "We're ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas."

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,1154125,00.html

and U.S. diplomat John Brown, who joined the State Department in 1981, resigned. He said that the Bush administration's Iraq policy was fomenting a massive rise in anti-US sentiment around the world and he could not support it.

(from the wiki)

looking back

cnn, march 9, 2003

LATE EDITION WITH WOLF BLITZER

Showdown: Iraq

BLITZER:Let me read a quote from the New Yorker article, the March 17th issue, just out now. "There is no question that Perle believes that removing Saddam from power is the right thing to do. At the same time, he has set up a company that may gain from a war."

PERLE: I don't believe that a company would gain from a war. On the contrary, I believe that the successful removal of Saddam Hussein, and I've said this over and over again, will diminish the threat of terrorism. And what he's talking about is investments in homeland defense, which I think are vital and are necessary.

Look, Sy Hersh is the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist, frankly.

BLITZER: Well, on the basis of -- why do you say that? A terrorist?

PERLE: Because he's widely irresponsible...

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1994.htm

this, from a person who later had to give up the chairmanship on the defense policy board advisory committee because of accusations of bribery regarding a defense contractor's sale of assets to a chinese company

those that don't know their history are doomed to learn it

http://www.villagevoice.com/2009-01-28/news/what-cooked-the-world-s-economy/1

from the sideshow
http://sideshow.me.uk/smar09.htm#03071252

and on a completely unrelated note

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123638394500958141.html

more and other stuff

http://www.propublica.org/special/missing-memos#

looking back

cnn, march 8, 2003

ANNOUNCER: THE CAPITAL GANG.
MARK SHIELDS, HOST: Welcome to CAPITAL GANG.

I'm Mark Shields with the full GANG, Al Hunt, Robert Novak, Kate O'Beirne, and Margaret Carlson.

President Bush, in his first prime time news conference in 17 months, challenged the United Nations.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: This issue has been before the Security Council, the issue of disarmament of Iraq, for 12 long years. The fundamental question facing the Security Council is, do its words mean anything?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHIELDS: On the next day, U.N. weapons inspectors reported to the Security Council.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)

HANS BLIX, CHIEF U.N. WEAPONS INSPECTOR: We have faced relatively few difficulties, and certainly much less than those that were faced by UNSCOM in the period 1991 to 1998. We are able to perform professional, no-notice inspections all over Iraq and to increase aerial surveillance.

MOHAMED ELBARADEI, DIRECTOR GENERAL, INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY: There is no indication of resumed nuclear activities in those buildings that were identified through the use of satellite imagery as being reconstructed or newly erected since 1998, nor any indication of nuclear-related prohibited activities at any inspected sites.

...

CARLSON: You know, his best qualities didn't come through because he was so subdued to show that if he's a cowboy, he's a very reluctant one, and he wanted to prove how serious he was. Wrong format for what he had to do. Just too -- almost comatose, it's like Al Gore in the second debate, after being shown the jumping-up-and- down tape in the first debate. He was just overly subdued.

NOVAK: Beyond the dramatic criticism of the president, isn't the problem that this preemptive doctrine, that we are going to preempt people that we think are dangerous, is not a very good doctrine for a democratic country?

HUNT: I'm very worried about a doctrine of preemption. As I say, I think there is a case to take out Saddam Hussein that does not rest on a doctrine of preemption. I think a doctrine of preemption is terribly dangerous because who are we, then, to turn to the Indians and say, it applies for us but not for you, if they don't like what the Pakistanis are doing?

CARLSON: And disarmament is a better road to go down than regime change.

HUNT: It doesn't mean you don't engage in preemptive strikes on occasion. But as doctrine...

O'BEIRNE: Look. Look...

HUNT: ... as a policy...

O'BEIRNE: ... that's not why France and these other countries are objecting. They object because they don't feel as though lethal threat is aimed at them, is why they're objecting to us taking any action.

NOVAK: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

O'BEIRNE: And as the president said, we don't need world approval to defend ourselves.

And if they're wrong, if they're wrong about whether or not he could be contained through inspections, the United States will be the one to pay the price. We'll have to...

NOVAK: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0303/08/cg.00.html

remember, the administration was told there were no wmds and none were ever found

looking back

cnn, march 7, 2003

...Stepping into the CROSSFIRE is actress and anti-war activist Janeane Garofalo.

(APPLAUSE)

JANEANE GAROFALO, ACTRESS: Hello. Thank you.

CARLSON: Nice to see you. Janeane, thanks for joining us.

GAROFALO: Thanks for having me.

CARLSON: I absolutely respect the opinion of many people who disagree with the idea of a war in Iraq. I guess what I don't respect, and I'm a little bit offended by, are the constant descriptions of motives that President Bush must have. This is all for the oil companies. It's to avenge his father. This sort of stupid kind of psycho babble, psychoanalysis. The president says in the end he's doing this because he thinks Saddam Hussein is a threat to the United States. Do you believe that?

GAROFALO: I actually don't. I agree with you, I don't like those facial things like, "It's oil, no blood for oil." I think oil is a part of it. I think oil is a part of it.

I actually do not believe him when he says that Saddam is an immediate threat or a threat to America. I felt his press conference last night was an absolute non-event. I feel like the American people are being lied to and manipulated. He's trying to force 9/11 and Saddam together.

He's banking on the ignorance or the disinformation of the American people. And I think it's unfair. Can I read a quote of why I actually am going to be marching?

CARLSON: Well hold on. Before we get to your march, I'm fascinated of this idea of why Bush would do this. Why he would risk his presidency, why he would send Americans to their deaths and kill American soldiers to perpetuate this lie that you just accused him of perpetuating.

Why would he do that? What's the motive?

GAROFALO: Actually, I think that there are two things. One is called "The Project for a New American Century," which is a paper from 1997, I believe, that was worked on by Wolfowitz, Perle, Libby, Abrams (ph), I think maybe Cheney, which talks about going into dominate the Gulf region for the resources and also for the geopolitical dominance in a post Cold World War world. The Gulf region is very valuable.

Then there's a paper that James Baker worked on called "Strategic Energy Policy Challenges for the 21st Century" that he gave to Dick Cheney five months before 9/11 saying that we should go into Iraq.

CARLSON: Well, wouldn't it just be cheaper to negotiate better oil contracts, which we could?

(CROSSTALK)

GAROFALO: Well, I don't know. I actually don't know. It seems like it's an idea that Wolfowitz and Perle and some of the other gentlemen in the administration have had for a long time. I don't know why we can't negotiate or something, but can I read a quote by George Bush Sr. about why I -- because it concurs why I'm going to be marching tomorrow. Is that OK?

CARLSON: Sure. Hit us with it.

GAROFALO: OK. This is by George Bush Sr. from his book "A World Transformed." "We should not march into Baghdad. To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day Arab hero. Assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an unwinable urban guerilla war, it could only plunge that part of the world into ever greater instability."

(APPLAUSE)

CARLSON: You do realize that was in reference to another war under totally different circumstances?

GAROFALO: That's written in 1998. It was written in 1998, and I don't know whether he was just specifically referencing that war, but what he's saying, that's exactly right. And, also, the letter that Colleen Rowley wrote to the FBI yesterday, saying that she doesn't understand why we're going into Iraq when the al Qaeda -- the hunt for al Qaeda is not nearly finished.

It's a distraction to go into Iraq. And that she feels, as an FBI 22-year bureau agent, that Iraq is not an immediate threat.

CARLSON: But we just captured the [ first of many] number three member of al Qaeda who planned 9/11...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0303/07/cf.00.html

shoulda listened to the bowler

http://www.eschatonblog.com/2003/03/bowler_08.html

google maps_ amazon

they supply the camera, you take the shot