Another British Labour Party Myth SMASHED
The British Labour Party had been touting the myth that a vote for the Liberal Democrats headed by Charles Kennedy would allow the Conservatives to gain power through the back door.
The article in The Independent, "Vote for Lib Dems will not let in Tories" by Andrew Grice, the political editor, puts paid to that lie which was being spread as the main issue of their election platform by Tony Blair and his gang.
"John Curtice, the respected psephologist and professor of politics at Strathclyde University, who carried out the analysis, said: "Labour's claim that switching from Labour to the Liberal Democrats could enable Mr Howard to win the election is highly misleading.""
Mr Blair led the co-ordinated campaign and it became a recurrent theme on many of the Labour campaign spots.
The entire Labour party campaign has been based on mistatements of facts and total lies. This includes the Iraq Invasion and Occupation, student top-up fees, the NHS revamping, no tax hikes,....
I do hope the Daily Mirror will have the front page similar to their November 4th 2004 issue ready to put out on 6th May 2005!!
Question Time participants hammer Blair
Those who had the good fortune to watch BBC's "Question Time" like me, on the internet, saw that Tony Blair is unfit to be PRIME MINISTER, he is unfit to lead the Labour Party, and the only place he belongs is behind bars for being responsible for the death of a British Weapons Expert, David Kelly, for being responsible for the deaths of British soldiers based on his lies, and for being responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis.
In short, Blair is worse than Saddam Hussain, and most of the people in the audience at "Question Time" knew this. Given below are links if you want to watch the performance:
Real Player link to Question Time:
Windows Media Player link to Question Time:
Charles Kennedy, the leader of the Liberal Democrats came out on top in Question Time, except that he seemed not quite to push hard enough to get to POWER!!
Michael Howard, the Leader of the Conservatives was hammered by the audience on immigration as being a raacist, which it was obvious he was, and then shot himself in his foot by answering the question about whether, knowing what he knows now, he would have invaded Iraq - to which he answered "Yes". He was, therefore, stumped when he was caught implying he would have ignored the Attorney General's advice that it was not possible to invade a country to carry out "regime change".
It was fascinating to watch that Blair has no concept about leadership or how the UK is run except for his myopic view and was unable to defend lies, except with more shallow lies. The real situation in the National Health Service and his flip-flop on Top Up Fees for Students showed him up. But the position on Iraq hit him between the eyes.
Any thinking Britain who watched that debate should have no hesitation to vote Liberal Democrat after watching this performance. A breath of fresh air will be introduced into British political leadership when all those sycophants will be erased from the political spectrum.
BBC Weblog is a sham
I have posted anti-Blair comments on the BBC Weblog but they edit stuff and only publish stuff that they want to show up.
It is clear that the BBC blog is a sham and it is an attempt by Mainstream trying to elbow in to the Blogosphere.
The Guardian blog appears to be a little more free in what it publishes - but it is very badly organised.
Has anyone done a study on the relevance of Mainstream Media blogs?
Labour MP defects to Liberal Democrats
The decision by the leader of the British Liberal Democrat Party, Charles Kennedy, to take a firm stand on the Iraq Invasion and to bring it to the centre stage of the coming elections, as it reveals the true character of Tony Blair, has brought its first reward in the defection of Labour MP Brian Sedgemore. This has just been reported in an exclusive article, "Exclusive: Labour MP defects to Lib Dems over Iraq" by Colin Brown, Deputy Political Editor in today's edition of the British newspaper The Independent.
Could this be the start of the open defection of over 150 Labour MPs who loathe the "Liar" and could this be followed by another 50 who have grave doubts about him? These figures were given by Mr. Sedgemore in his statement of his defection.
My most recent advice to Mr. Kennedy was to withdraw the Liberal Democrat candidate from the Sedgefield constituency of Tony Blair and to extend full support to the independent candidate Reg Keys, the father of the miltary man who was brutally and unnecessarily killed in Iraq.
"Tony Blair has always said that history will be his judge. On May 5th it will be up to the people of Sedgefield to make history happen. I ask them for their vote and I ask you for your support." Reg Keys
This is in keeping with my long-standing advice to Mr. Kennedy to withdraw Liberal Democrat candidates from constituencies where Labour MPs who were against the war were standing in these elections.
What is important is that in these elections that morality is once again introduced into British politics, something that was the first loss in the Blair era.
Blair's lies are fast catching up on himself
Tony Blair has run out of places to hide as his lies are catching up on him.
Just last week it was revealed in a Television interview where Blair revealed he was the one who had outed Dr. David Kelley. The details are contained in articles in almost EVERY British newspaper, eg., The Daily Mail, "Tories attack Blair admission over Dr Kelly naming" which shows that it was Blair that had organised the outing of Dr. David Kelley which led to the death of this scientist.
No wonder Blair was pale and shaken when he a reporter shouted this question to him "Have you got blood on your hands, Prime Minister?" at Tokio just after the death of Dr. Kelley.
Now it has been revealed that Blair lied to the British people, the British Parliament and even his own Cabinet with regard to the advice on the legality of the war with Iraq. The British Attorney General, Lord Godsmith, submitted a detailed report to Blair on March 7 2003 stating with six caveats that the war with Iraq would be illegal. Blair did not reveal this and only tabled a summary from Lord Goldsmith dated March 17th 2003 which omitted reference to the caveats.
This was revealed by "The Mail on Sunday" in an article entitled "Proof Blair was told war could be ruled illegal by SIMON WALTERS"
Only a nation of fools would elect this man and his party back to power.
Will the Daily Mirror headline of November 4 2004 asking about the state of mind of the American electorate "How can 59.017,382 people be so DUMB?" soon have to be mirrored appropriately in the UK!!
Charles Kennedy heeding advice
It appears that UK Liberal Democrats leader, Charles Kennedy, is heeding the advice I have been sending him.
In The Guardian today, the headline reads "Lib Dems ready to play the anti-war card" Tania Branigan, political correspondent Friday April 22, 2005.
However, it is not sufficient to only follow half the advice. I had told him that he should not run Liberal Democrat candidates in constituencies where there is a clear Anti War candidate, immaterial of whether it is Labour or Conservative,
Liberal Democrats efforts should be on every constituency where there is a candidate who has been Pro War, then and now.
In essence this would ensure that the Muslims and the Islamic World will understand that the people of UK were never behind the war and the British forces will be pulled out immediately the new Government is installed.
Britain does not need to remain as the "poodle" of George Bush, even if Blair, the B-----Liar, wants to maintain his status as such.
Al Franken learns about India and Finland
I was listening to The Franken Factor on Air America Radio.
This is a show I hardly ever listen to as Thom Hartmann is usually on at the same time. Also Al Franken is a comedian rather than a good Talk Show host of the quality of Thom, Mike Malloy, Guy James or Peter Werbe.
Al Franken is obsessed with his own brand of humour and political take which compromises many serious issues as he is "friends" wiith so many "nice" Republicans - many of whom I consider a piece of "****".
The reason I listened to the show was there was an interview with Richard Florida who has written the book "Flight of the Creative Class".
It was no surprise to hear what Richard had to say.
The first was the drop of the top Indian engineering graduates from IIT who have stopped migrating to the US or even going to US for higher studies, as they no longer want to go to a repressive gulag. From as many as 90% it has dropped to 30%. That is a huge loss to the American "creative" community.
Secondly, Richard mentioned his stint in Finland where he talked to people at our leading newspaper, "Helsingin Sanomat", where Finns who went as exchange students to US said that they are no longer sending their children to the US but to other countries as Canada.
Reasons are obvious to anyone who knows the malAdministration of the Bush regime of criminals
The US is now regarded by many of us as a country which is repressive and the not safe for us who have broad creative views. And there are lots of alternatives!
Iran to be bombed in June
Everything that former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter has said has always been found by me to be factual.
I heard him on the Randi Rhodes on Air America Radio on Wednesday night and he said that from his reasoning, Bush and his team of killers was set to bomb Iran in June 2005.
He qualified his statement with a few caveats, but to read his reasoning, he has written a comprehensive article for AlJazeera.Net Sleepwalking to disaster in Iran
God Oh God! A bigger idiot than Bush
Peter Principle being played out in full.
I have been watching and listening to the Confirmation hearings on the Appointment of John Bolton to the Ambassadorship to the United States.
This man is worse than Bush.
He does not even know how to lie.
Bush is at least a past master at lying.
Bolton Pledges to Help Strengthen U.N. is the present update on yahoo.com, but it has a misleading title.
Bolton was slammed by Senator Barbara Boxer and Bolton was squirming and wriggling when lied and lied.
Senator Boxer used the same technique as in the Case of Condoleeza Rice where she played a video of his own words and, boy, was Bolton shifting in his chair.
He was crucified by Senator Joe Biden, Senator Chris Dodd, Senator Russ Feingold and also by Senator Barrack Obama. And then he was being smashed by Senator Bill Nelson.
What is the US coming to?
You can see the continuation of this on CSpan later today.
End of an era for me
Today Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao were involved with the signing of over 12 agreements that has removed most of the problems that has existed between the two countries for 43 years.
I was in Delhi University in 1962, at the time of the Indo-China War, which saw Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru a shattered man. His trust in the Chinese was broken when the idea of the five principles of coexistence underlined in the Panchsheel (mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit and peaceful co-existence) were thrown to the wind on one side, while on the other, his closest friend, Indian Defence Minister Mr. V. K. Krishna Menon, was exposed for his absolute naiveté as he had converted the war production machinery into producing expresso coffee machines.
The Indian defeat was indeed humiliating as, despite the resistance by a brave Indian Army, they were simply overwhelmed by superior high terrain equipment in the Himalayas and the sheer man power of the Chinese army - to neither of which the Indian Army had any answer but to retreat.
As inexplicable as their forward thrust into India, the Chinese army withdrew. This was to make a strong and simple point - do not question the Chinese with lines of control drawn by the Imperialistic British with no regard to the reality on the ground.
A shattered and drawn Nehru visited our college one evening for a post dinner discussion, and the now Planning Commission Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Alhuwalia, then the host for our distinguished guest in our small staff room, crowded by students who even thronged the doors and windows, we all knew that the end was nigh for our country's leader. He looked pale, drawn and tired. He felt betrayed.
May 27th 1964, Nehru passed on deeply saddened by the fact that he had not achieved what he had wanted to do in the years as Prime Minister. He was a man betrayed on several fronts.
Now it falls on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to bring all Indians, most of them unaware of the deep feelings that were in all of us as we lost that 1962 war, to work closely to bring a unified feeling of oneness in the region and jointly become the world's only superpower base.
The US is a spent horse. It has been defeated in every battle. All it can do now is threaten weak unarmed nations as any bully would. The cowardly nation is led by a coward and a religious fundamentalist and surrounded by bigots. They are doomed to fail and fall, just as the Soviet Union fell on its knees when the financial base crumbled.
The US with its enormous budget deficit is now unable to meet any of its commitments. As Bush pulled out the bonds bearing his signature and said that they were worthless IOUs, has meant that no nation need recognise any debt of the US and they can plunder that country at their will as the dollar has fallen to its lowest level ever and there is no production base to even take advantage of the lower dollar rate.
No doubt the US will try to destabilise the Indo-China region, such as by selling the F-16s to pakistan, but the new feeling of detente that has crossed even that border with the new cricket series in progress and the bus routes in Kashmir opened up, the Americans have become more and more isolated as they nominate imbeciles to head key international posts - the same imbeciles who thought they would be welcomed into Baghdad on a carpet of FLOWERS!
Good riddance and let us hope that the present worthless American culture will also die in the process!
Only ONE Bank Record needed
There is a story in the New York Times of today of how the US Administration is seeking access to International Bank Records to trace terrorists. This was my letter to the Editor:
I read with great interest the article
U.S. Seeks Access to Bank Records to Deter Terror
by your Justice Department Editor Eric Lichtblau.
In my opinion only one Bank Record needs to be investigated to find the links to terror on this planet.
That is the one of the pResident George W. Bush and his past endeavours and especially the money he has received from the bin Laden family.
That should answer all the questions being sought!!
Testimony before the House Armed Servces Committee
I just listened to the full three and a half hours testimony by neo-con Richard Perle and Retired General Wes Clark to the House Armed Services Committee.
General Clark was right before the war when he said that going in was foolhardy as America was unprepared to handle the situation and it was the wrong war.
However, in this testimony he says that America has to be prepared for a long stay.
I strongly disagree with him and have sent this email to Catherine Grunden, WesPAC Executive Director as follows:
I just listened to the full 3 plus hours on the appearance of General Clark with Richard Perle before the House Armed Services Committee.
General Clark is making several fundamental mistakes.
He said he believed that things are moving in the right direction.
That is wrong. Maybe you should draw his attention to the protest that took place in Baghdad today where the only chant was for the US forces to go home and statues of Bush and Blair were toppled..
1. The Iraqi elections were a total failure, however much the spin is put on it being a success.
2. The Bush Administration has no intention of leaving Iraq - why would anyone build 13 to 15 major bases in Iraq?
3. General Clark should stop trying to be diplomatic when it is clear that the neo-cons have no intention of doing anything diplomatically!!
However distasteful it may sound:
1. US has lost this war.
2. US should put its tail between its legs and run.
3. US should let the Iraqi people put their own house in order but be made to pay for the chaos it had caused.
4. All war criminals belonging to occupation forces, from the pResident to the lowliest soldiers, should be put on trial before an impartial international court.
Then people will start to begin to believe in American democracy.
Otherwise, everyone knows the American Democratic model is a great sham.
Another first for Bush!!
"When Bush's face appeared on giant screen TVs showing the ceremony, many in the crowds outside St. Peter's Square booed and whistled."
Bush, Clinton Disagree on Pope's Legacy
By TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer
(Sarcasm ON) To be booed in full view of the entire world at a funeral of a renowned religious leader must be a historic first.
Not even Presídent Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe was given this unique honour!!
I have a gut feeling that even Saddam Hussain would not have received such a wonderful honour. (Sarcasm OFF)
Just shows what is the state of the American pResidency.
Legacy of Britain's New Labour
Blair's New Labour was nothing more than Thatcher-lite.
As all stupid platforms this one has found its true level in this statement:
"Longbridge and the whole of the West Midlands are becoming ghost towns."
Blair and Brown have rushed to limit the damage to their election hopes, "Blair and Brown in MG Rover talks", but the sad fact is that for the last five years Blair has been so obsessed with his illegal and destructive war in Iraq and his creation of lie after lie, he has let important subjects concerning the work of productive Britains go crashing down hill like Jack who broke his head. Now this duop are trying to repair the damage with "vinegar and brown paper", just to hide it from the electorate.
Blair, like Bush, is concerned with spending money on destruction, rather than building hope and prosperity for the people of Britain.
May he and his LOT rot in hell.
Charles Kennedy - Clutching at straws
It is indeed sad for people all over the world that the leader of the Liberal Democrats in the UK is not one with broad vision. His recent statement that the bulk of the students would vote Liberal Democrat (The Independent "Backlash over top-up fees may deliver 24 seats, says Kennedy") shows that he is clutching at straws to get a few seats here and there.
There is nothing clearer than the fact that
1. Blair is a liar - there are innumerable instances that the British know, right from duping Brown about his chance to be Prime Minister, to the Iraq War, to various home grown issues.
2. Blair is the poodle of the Bush neo-cons group.
Also, Michael Howard has too many negatives, especially his lack of a clear stand on anything, including the Iraq war.
If the Liberal Democrats want to enter the Government, there is no time like the present. But Kennedy is blowing away the chances with each passing day.
The single most powerful factor driving the UK electorate will be the Iraq War.
This can be witnessed by the Blair spin machine releasing the news about the reduction of the British troops by 5500 by the end of this year. This is nothing but another lie by the Blairites to get this factor of the Election Agenda - and Kennedy has fallen for it hook line and sinker.
Why wait till the end of the year?
That gives Blair a chance, when he is re-elected, to spin another web of lies to keep the troops there and stay on as Bush's favourite poodle till such time as he can join the Carlyle Group, just as John Major!!
I hope Charles Kennedy will wake up and implement a strategy for Liberal Democrats to oppose all Pro-War candidates and support all Anti-War candidates as the first step of their election platform. This would then make it the party to lead any coalition that would form when the electorate makes its views known.
Otherwise the general inertia of voters will only ensure the re-election of another Blair Government.
If US Treasury Bonds are worthless,
then what about a piece of paper which reads
"In God We Trust"?
Should it read
"My God, We Are Bust"?
NEW YORK TIMES EDITORIAL
Published: April 7, 2005
Imagine this: On his next trip to Japan, President Bush visits the vault at the Bank of Japan, where that country's $712 billion in United States government bonds is stored. There, as the cameras roll, he announces that the bonds, backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, are, in fact, worthless i.o.u.'s. He does the same thing when he visits China and so on around the world, until he has personally repudiated the entire $2 trillion of United States debt held by foreigners. .....
....Mr. Bush wants Americans to believe that the trust fund is a joke. But if the trust fund is a joke, so is the full faith and credit of the United States.
Fortunately, the governments, institutions and individuals who hold United States debt can tell a publicity stunt from a policy statement. Still, casting aspersions on a basic obligation of the United States government is insulting and irresponsible."
The ALL MIGHTY American Dollar is worthless according to George Bush, who stood in fromt of a filing cabinet and said that the Social Security Trust Fund, which is invested its surplus in Treasury Bonds, is just a worrthless bunch of IOUs.
Americans really have an idiot as its White House resident!Recall that Daily Mirror Front Page Splash of 5th November 2004? How TRUE.
Email from Wes Clark Committee
I think this email from Catherine Grunden, Executive Director of WesPAC – Securing America's Future Group is enlightening (emphasis mine):
Today, Wes Clark testified before the House Armed Services Committee about the situation in Iraq. The hearing certainly provided the opportunity for a serious debate about the conflict in Iraq and our nation's foreign policy.
At the bottom of this email, I've included a copy of General Clark's opening statement at today's hearing, which you can also find at SecuringAmerica.com. We hope you'll find it informative. Please feel free to forward this email along to people who may be interested in reading General Clark's comments.
We really appreciate the feedback we received from more than 20,000 people who completed Wes Clark's Iraq survey on SecuringAmerica.com before his testimony today. General Clark certainly has his own very strong views about what went wrong, what went right, and what we need to do going forward in Iraq -- but he also wanted to hear the views of the American people, to know what's on their mind before walking into the hearing room.
The survey wasn't designed as a scientific instrument -- but it was designed to encourage people to think through these difficult issues and respond as best they could. These are not easy questions, but they're just a few of many issues our country will be grappling with in the years ahead.
Some of the results:
* Nearly 9 out of 10 respondents believe that things in Iraq are on the wrong track
* More than 4 out of 5 respondents believe that the U.S. should not continue to stay in Iraq, especially if it leads to another 1500 American deaths
* More than 4 out of 5 respondents believe that we should not take military action against Syria
* About 3 out of 5 respondents believe that the U.S. should not demand military access to Pakistan
* An overwhelming majority -- more than 95% of respondents -- believe Congress should demand an investigation into how policymakers used intelligence in the run-up to Iraq
* More than 60% of respondents know someone who is currently serving, or who recently served, in Iraq or Afghanistan -- an amazing number that shows how personal the war in Iraq is to the American people
Thanks again for your involvement in the important issues facing our country and for your support of WesPAC.
WesPAC – Securing America's Future
Opening Statement of General Wesley Clark
House Armed Services Committee Hearing
April 6, 2005
Mr. Chairman, Congressman Skelton, distinguished members of this Committee,
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. From moment one, this Committee has been strongly supportive of the men and women in uniform, and I want to commend you for that -- and thank you for the support that so many of you gave to me during my time in the military. As a former soldier, I can't stress enough how important these deliberations are to our armed forces and military families stationed around the world -- and to the thousands of veterans I've met with over the past two years. I have also heard from thousands of people over the internet who wish to express their gratitude for your efforts and concerns about the situation in Iraq. On their behalf and on behalf of my own family, I thank you.
It is a privilege to appear today to present my thoughts on Iraq and our armed forces, to offer a brief retrospective on the mission there, to sketch out a successful way ahead, and to discuss the implications for the U.S. armed forces.
In September 2002, you invited me to testify about the looming crisis in Iraq. At the time, based on the information provided by the U.S. intelligence community, we all believed that Iraq possessed some chemical and biological weapons, and had an ongoing effort to gain nuclear weapons. It made sense at the time to go to the United Nations and get strong diplomatic reinforcement to end Saddam's weapons programs.
But the critical issue then was how to end Saddam's weapons program without detracting from our focus on Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda network, and our efforts to deal with other immediate, mid- and long-term security problems. As you may recall, I counseled at the time that we needed a Congressional Resolution -- not at that point authorizing the use of force -- but rather expressing the intent to use force if all other measures were to fail. I testified that we should then use this Congressional Resolution to press for UN action, that we should work patiently to forge world-wide legitimacy, and that force should be used only as a last resort, after all diplomatic means had been exhausted -- and then only after we had fully prepared to handle the post-conflict process in Iraq.
After a Congressional Resolution and an aborted U.N. inspection effort, the U.S. invaded Iraq. We did not use the U.N. process effectively to enhance our legitimacy or build our coalition. The Administration did not heed the warnings of General Shinseki and others who warned of the force strength necessary to win the war and win the peace. In short, the Administration did not give our military adequate planning or sufficient resources to handle the post-conflict situation in Iraq. These errors were compounded by weak strategic decisions, including dissolving the Iraqi army and outlawing Baathist participation in new governmental structures. The prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib has provided our enemies with a propaganda bonanza resulting in a recruiting windfall in Iraq and throughout the Arab world.
More fundamentally, with its armed occupation of Iraq, the Administration lost focus, and was substantially distracted from worldwide efforts against Al Qaeda. Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda network are still at large, terrorist incidents have continued to take innocent life, and U.S. military actions in Iraq have provided a magnet for recruiting and training large numbers of extremist youth in continuing warfare. If Iraq is today the center of the war against terrorism, as some in the Administration have contended, it is not because the terrorists were there originally, but because they have been recruited there to the fight against us. Our military action in Iraq is more a catalyst for terrorists than a cure. Whatever results may ultimately come from removing Saddam Hussein from power, ending the terrorist threat against the United States of America is not likely to be one of them.
Of great concern today and, frankly, in the years ahead is that the focus on Iraq has deprived the Administration of the time, diplomatic support, and military resources to act effectively against other, more dangerous sources of WMD proliferation. The "red line" established by the Clinton Administration against North Korea's reprocessing of spent uranium fuel to make plutonium has now been breached. North Korea has announced that they have reprocessed and presumably now have the fissile materials to make at least a half dozen additional nuclear weapons. Furthermore, this Administration has refused to participate in the discussions aimed at persuading Iran to permanently renounce its uranium enrichment capabilities.
From the outset, the military mission in Iraq has been complicated by factors other than making the best decisions for success. Operations to destabilize Iraq were apparently viewed as the start of a broader campaign to destabilize or overthrow a number of governments in the Middle East, including Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Libya, and Sudan. The start of the campaign was rushed, for reasons that have never been made clear by the Administration. And once U.S. forces were inside Iraq, U.S. diplomacy failed to take measures to undercut regional resistance from countries such as Syria and Iran.
If we are to succeed in Iraq, we must move along three tracks; first, improve security and at the same time reduce the exposure and commitment of the U.S. forces; second, strengthen our ability to facilitate Iraqi political development; third, we must reduce regional resistance to the emergence of a democratic Iraq.
On the first track, the U.S. military must shift away from the battlefields and move into more of a reserve role, relying on a cadre of U.S. advisors to strengthen the newly-minted Iraqi forces. This will entail risks, as U.S. forces turn over combat responsibilities, so it must be paced to improved Iraqi capabilities and the development of an advisory structure.
On the second track, our Embassy obviously has to play a behind-the-scenes role. Without usurping Iraqi responsibilities, we should be able to do more to gain local political information, shape alternatives and facilitate the emergence of democratic governance inside Iraq
On the third track, we should to be talking to all of Iraq's neighbors, including Syria and Iran in a regional framework. Delaying this until we can change the governments in Damascus and Tehran, which seems to be the current policy, puts increasing pressure on our troops and raises the risks inside Iraq.
The U.S. armed forces are caught up in an over-extended ground campaign that is rapidly using up our ground combat strength. In equipment terms, each year in Iraq puts about five years of normal wear-and-tear on the equipment. The wheeled and tracked fleets from the first combat rotation into Iraq have not yet been fully repaired and restored. Reserve component units are leaving much of their equipment behind in Iraq for follow-on units, thereby crippling their recovery and retraining at home
Even more importantly, the human costs to the all-volunteer Army, especially, have been staggering. The Army currently has 17 brigades deployed in Iraq, from an active force of 33 brigades, which should grow to 44 brigades as the result of internal Army restructuring. Most reserve component brigades have already been called up and deployed. The result is that active duty soldiers can expect to be deployed every other year to Iraq for a year long combat tour, unless either the size of the American commitment to Iraq is reduced or the size of the active force is significantly increased.
And even maintaining the force at its current size is likely to be challenging. While the active force is meeting its retention objectives, recruiting for the Army and Marine Corps is lagging behind both for the active and the reserve component. Ultimately, if the current combat levels in Iraq continue, this recruiting gap is unlikely to be closed by more financial incentives. Most married soldiers just can't contemplate indefinitely deploying for a year, every other year, away from their families.
Even worse is the treatment that the United States is meting out to its returning reservists, Guardsmen, and other veterans. Over the past three years there has been a substantial erosion of veterans benefits -- hospitals have closed or reduced treatments, usage fees have risen, returning reservists and Guardsmen have lost jobs, had their homes foreclosed on, credit scores ruined, suffered family tragedies, and significant stresses. The adjustment mechanisms to receive home our soldiers and then to sustain them and care for them as a grateful nation should are simply inadequately developed and funded. We owe our veterans -- and we owe their families as a pragmatic matter, if we don't do more, we'll never be able to raise the forces we need to sustain our commitments.
If we are to sustain the all-volunteer force, and restore our defenses, we will need to augment the size of the active force substantially, fully fund our materiel requirements, enhance the benefits and support for our reserve force, and as both a pragmatic and moral imperative, fully fund the VA and improve our support structure for our veterans.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you again for your support of our troops. I will be pleased to take your questions.
My reply to Catherine was as follows:
I have read General Clark's opening statement and the results of the survey. I think what General Clark failed to state was:
1. America has lost this war. It would be best to put the tail between the legs and scoot - and that is what the survey told him.
2. Any presence of Americans by virtue of an Embassy or troops in Iraq will not help the security one iota. The Americans ARE THE PROBLEM.
3. Within four weeks of the Americans scooting there will be law and order established in Iraq. The Iraqi's are not imbeciles. they know how to bring about THEIR solution without help from a bunch of idiots!!
4. Americans who want to stay would only do so because of a false ego.
I hope that General Wes Clark will understand this and modify his opinion accordingly. The Vietnam syndrome is looming closer everyday!!
I have posted your email and the General's Opening Statement on my blog. I would also direct the General to read this page of my correspondence with an "educated" American
Repblicans stoop to the lowest of low
The New York Times is starting to grow some hair on its almost bald head.
The Editorial in The New York Times today
The Judges Made Them Do It
Published: April 6, 2005
"It was appalling when the House majority leader threatened political retribution against judges who did not toe his extremist political line. But when a second important Republican stands up and excuses murderous violence against judges as an understandable reaction to their decisions, then it is time to get really scared."
What is American "Democracy" coming to?
Violence against anyone that disagrees with you.
I think it is called being an "arrogant bully" and a "bad loser".
British Voting System = Banana Republic
The British legal system has lambasted Blair and his party for running a banana republic voting system. The lead story in The Guardian today is a scathing attack on the British voting system and the Labour Party represented by six Labour councillors who scammed the postal voting system.
The Labour party has suspended the six men - but like the Abu Ghraib scandal the people at the helm of the scandal are off scott free!!
Judge slates 'banana republic' postal voting system
Tuesday April 5, 2005
"A senior judge made a scathing attack on the postal voting system yesterday, condemning the government for complacency in the face of fraud which would disgrace a "banana republic".
Richard Mawrey QC, presiding over a special election court in Birmingham, warned that there were no realistic systems in place to detect or prevent postal voting fraud at the general election. "Until there are, fraud will continue unabated," he said.
He found six Labour councillors in Birmingham guilty of carrying out "massive, systematic and organised" postal voting fraud to win two wards during last June's elections for the city council. Declaring the results void, he barred the men from standing again in a byelection expected on May 12."
And , of course, as Tony Blair knows, it had to be focused on the Mulsim vote which was alienated by his action:
"It was focused on areas with a large Muslim population who could no longer be trusted to vote for the party because of unhappiness over the Iraq war."
And the Brits are complaining about Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe!!
Talk of taking the mote out your brother's eye!!
Bush believes he is communicating with the Almighty! Again!
Bush to Show Gratitude at Pope's Funeral
"He's a courageous person. He's a moral person. He was a godly person," Bush said. It is "my great honor, on behalf of our country, to express our gratitude to the Almighty for such a man. And of course we look forward to the majesty of celebrating such a significant human life."
Bush uses "is" for a dead person!! The pResident of the US does not know the difference between "is" and "was"!!
He was certainly a child who was left behind.
Then he believes he is talking to God!
In my book of rules, anyone who talks this way needs to be kept in a locked facility in a mental asylum!
This is Bush's hope that he can get away unnoticed in Europe mixed up with the millions who come to honour the former Pope. I hope that protestors will ensure that Bush does not desecrate this occasion to make political capital out of this sombre funeral!
Don't you believe it!! Another Blair LIE
The latest news headline
Britain to pull 5,500 troops out of Iraq
By Sean Rayment, Defence Correspondent
is another one of Tony Blair's lies.
The Poodle is, like his boss who holds his leash, an inveterate LIAR.
Blair does not know the difference between the truth and lies as far as his power politics is concerned.
The same way that he supposedly did not announce the general election today in his supposed respect for the Pope. The Pope threw him out when he went to see him to "get his blessings" to go to war on Iraq.
Tony Blair may be plotting how he can become the Pope if he loses the General Election, just as he got rid of the challenge of Brown for the Prime Ministership!!
Weapon's Inspector Ritter says not to elect LIAR BLAIR!!
Tony Blair, like George Bush is a liar, a war criminal and has blood on his hands. Scott Ritter, UN Weapons Inspector has made a desparate plea to the people of Britain not to elect this scumbag back into office.
Published on Sunday, April 3, 2005 by the Independent (UK)
Don't Let the Warmonger Off the Hook
The voters should seize their opportunity to punish Blair for his breach of international law
by Scott Ritter
The American people have already shown themselves to be culpable in legitimizing this tragedy by re-electing George Bush, the chief architect of this disaster, as president of the United States. In the weeks to come, the citizens of Great Britain will have a chance to carve their names in the annals of history, either slavishly repeating the same mistake of their American cousins by re-electing a man who is responsible for a massive violation of international law, or establishing the viability of British democracy as a lasting bastion of the rule of law by voting out Tony Blair. This will send a clear and lasting signal to those on the Presidential Commission and the Butler Commission that illegal wars of aggression are the responsibility of the politicians who order them, not the intelligence officials who justify them.
I hoped Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy would have a bit more foresight. He should have ensured that no liberal candidates would stand in places where anti-war Labour or Tories are standing and that he would concentrate on seats where pro-war Labour and Tory candidates are standing.
This would ensure that he would bring the Liberals to power either as a single party or as a coalition with like-minded people.
Sadly, politicians are drunk with their "knowledge" of their success that they refuse to heed the words of people who want to help them.
Tony Blair knows that the self-serving attitude of Charles Kennedy will help him come back to power!!
Conspiracy of silence continues
Listening to KGO, San Franscisco, on the internet this morning (Finnish time), I was shocked to hear that "18 Americans had been killed" in the attack by resistance fighters on the Abu Ghraib prison,
Scouring through the news channels I found that the conspiracy of silence has been imposed on the media where the only talk is of a serious attack where 44 US Soldiers were wounded, some seriously, and that 12 prisoners were also wounded.
Did KGO get the news specifically about the US dead and then they were asked to shut out this news?
Karel, who was standing in for Bernie Ward, specifically referred to the 18 US soldiers dead. He asked the audience very pointedly whether the coverage by the US media about the Pope was more important than covering the largest single day loss of life of US forces in Iraq.
However, there is no mention of even 1 dead in any mainstream media.
Even BBC is playing it cool. Are they also scared that Blair will lose his ratings further with the election drawing close in May.
Bush, the country bumpkin, has not stepped forward to tell his stooges that the war is going exactly to plan!!
Mainstream media can be thrown out of the window.