Slashdot Mirror

In the US are in the CIA.

I'll probably get more Troll mods for this one. It's not.

http://www.orlingrabbe.com/binladin_timosman.htm

http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytood/archives/ 002721.html

http://invisionfree.com/forums/4th_Space_Cafe/inde x.php?showtopic=285&view=getnewpost

thing is a red herring.

it has nothing to do with software.

she's the person who helped wipe bush's national guard records.

it's called cronyism. just about everyone in the current administration is there because of donating to the GOP or is a close friend of the bushs.

http://www.counterpunch.org/frank10042005.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/miers-l ed-law-firm-repeat_b_8277.html

http://www.globalnewsmatrix.com/modules.php?name=N ews&file=article&sid=2835

http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytood/archives/ 002383.html

just some interesting links.

"Especially since the bucks responsible for upgrading the levee system were PERSONALLY slashed from the budget and diverted to Iraq - which in itself was a fucking moronic operation."

$250 million was cut from the levee maintenance program, which ended up costing the country $50 billion.

More on this ridiculous state of affairs here

Over the next 10 years, the Army Corps of Engineers, tasked with carrying out SELA, spent $430 million on shoring up levees and building pumping stations, with $50 million in local aid. But at least $250 million in crucial projects remained, even as hurricane activity in the Atlantic Basin increased dramatically and the levees surrounding New Orleans continued to subside.

Yet after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars.

-- Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; New Orleans Times-Picayune, June 8, 2004

Let the Bush bashing begin, at least, according to some.

Funding for work on New Orleans' flood prevention system slowed to a trickle in 2003, and many people (long before Monday) claimed that was due to the Iraq war. Did GW bet that he wouldn't need the money for New Orleans levees, and decided to shift it to the war instead?

Looks like a bad bet.......

Wonder if Congress will look into this?

Information on Bush's contribution to the problem in southeastern Louisiana (Bush cut the funding to New Orleans' and surrounding areas' levy program to help fund the war in Iraq):

When the levee breaks: http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytood/archives/ 002331.html

The TSA will, of course, lie whenever possible. Because they have no accountability. And lying gives them power. Not just "to take over the world", but to do a lousy job. To be lazy, incompetent, and still get paid.

Really, it's completely obvious that, except for the Qaeda and the Taliban, that slogan about "the post-9/11 world" everyone on TV chants, "everything changed", is total BS. Nothing changed, except the ability to scare people into submission went off the charts. People who wanted war in Iraq, no matter what, got their war. People who wanted giant defense budgets got them. People who wanted to discard habeas corpus protections got rid of them. People who wanted Republicans to control all the branches of government got them. People who wanted an excuse for a broken economy, to cover up offshoring, inadequate education, failed confidence from Enron, WorldCom, ArthurAndersen, and a generation of Wall Street snake oil salesmen, got their excuse. People who wanted tax shirking got it. People who wanted racial profiling and massive privacy invasion got it. People who wanted government handouts to their welfare states, at the cost of $trillions in debt, got all that. And all the oil profiteers got $60:barrel oil, which costs little more to extract and sell than when it was $25. And of course they got federal tax credits for buying SUVs that get <15MPG, rather than 50MPG alternative energy vehicles.

But only if you embraced terror: became a terrorist. People who didn't, like the Democrats, didn't get what they wanted. They didn't get their candidate in the White House, because they didn't get a big noise in the media about how the Qaeda specifically planned to avoid attacking the US. Freedom lovers haven't gotten the rest of the 1990s "peace dividend", like forcing China to stop its tyranny with the "market power of the US" - because the businesses which own the new Chinese industries, and their American markets, are profiting from the fear that distracts from the perpetual terrorism that keeps their Chinese slaves in line. And we didn't get Osama bin Laden. WHERE'S OSAMA? Where's that "democratic Iraq", the "quelled Iraqi threat to American security"? It's with those who failed to embrace terror: on the ash heap of history.

The lists of who got what, and who didn't, line up perfectly on who "embraces and extends" terrorism, and who doesn't. And it's not just "who's for and who's against". Because Democrats, the losers in the political duopoly, have been just as "against" terrorism in their laws and policies, as Republicans. Republicans, however, have cast Democrats as preferring "therapy" to "killing" for terrorists, though that's a vicious lie. But that way to scare Americans about Democrats is successful terrorism, using planebombs as fuel for political power. Really, there's little difference between the Qaeda and the Bush uses of terrorism. The planebombs and tube-bombs are attacks, they're sabotage of our essential infrastructure. But they're really just the necessary spark for the actual terrorism, the terror perpetuated in the media and among people. Just like the Taliban who conquered Afghanistan on the spark of repeling the Soviets with "Islam", the neocons are conquering America on the spark of repeling the "liberals" with Christian evangelism: the Christaliban who back Bush with faith. Regardless of what you believe about conspiracies among people in Washington to allow or encourage a "Pearl Harbor event" to justify their neocon agenda, it's undeniable that some have rode the wave of fear with skill and aplomb. So we're going to get nothing but more terrorism, with the minimum of actual bombs that destroy corporate property. We're going to get more fear, more lies, more abuse. Until we wake up and reject the terror, dispelled by knowledge, and eradicate the terrorists. Starting with those in Washington and the corporate media who are closest, and doing most of the damage. Cleansing the TSA of thse lying tyrants would be a good start.

The only thing that is clueless about this issue is in this story's comment. Rick Santorum is profoundly corrupted, and not clueless at all when it comes to supporting his contributors, no matter at whose expense. One short summary here.

Would you accept a Cheney bashing comment? How about Cheney bashing Cheney? I found the following on andrewsullivan.

"And the question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam worth? And the answer is not very damned many. So I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we'd achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq... All of a sudden you've got a battle you're fighting in a major built-up city, a lot of civilians are around, significant limitations on our ability to use our most effective technologies and techniques. Once we had rounded him up and gotten rid of his government, then the question is what do you put in its place? You know, you then have accepted the responsibility for governing Iraq." - vice president Dick Cheney, 1992

You can find the full context of the quote here and some newspaper spin here. Now personally, I don't have a problem with a person changing his mind. To me it's often a sign of common sense. But over in GOP-land it seems to be some kind of mortal sin! Or maybe only when a democrat does it...