Saturday, July 23, 2005

my latest letter to the editor

Calls for Bush impeachment
I continually hear our leaders and media pundits say we are fighting the terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them here.
Before we started this war Iraq had no terrorist groups. It's true they had a brutal dictator who we armed and supported in the 1980s. Who can forget the picture of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam in 1983?
In President Bush's latest speech he made several references to 9/11 as if that was the justification for our attack, invasion and occupation of Iraq. Bush himself has said "we have no evidence Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11."
Iraq never threatened us, our allies, or any of their neighbors. No WMDs have been found.
Now the Downing Street memos show the intelligence was fixed to fit the policy. They wanted to invade Iraq and lied to Congress and the American people to justify it.
There should be an immediate inquiry and move to impeach. What has been done in our name is criminal. All responsible should be held accountable.
We should begin immediate withdrawal and reparations. How arrogant and inhumane suggesting the people of Iraq should host a war so we don't have to "fight them here." jpeg

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

What we're up against

- The Rabid Rights Media Menagerie -

From 'The Nation'

article |posted July 8, 2005 (web only)
M is for Moronic
Max Blumenthal

... The conservative media game was neatly summarized by Matt Labash, a former senior writer for The Weekly Standard who now writes for National Review, in a 2003 interview on the website Labash explained: "The conservative media likes to rap the liberal media on the knuckles for not being objective. We've created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un-objective.... It's a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It's a great little racket." ...

- And as examples of that "great little racket" -

From 'Media Matters'

CNN, ABC offered unchallenged legal analysis on Plame leak from Novak's partisan friends
Reporting on White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove's alleged involvement in the leaking of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity, CNN and ABC News presented unchallenged legal analysis from Victoria Toensing and Joseph E. DiGenova, respectively, both of whom defended Rove and were identified only as a "legal analyst" and a "former US attorney." Toensing and DiGenova, however, are partisan Republicans and personal friends of CNN host and columnist Robert D. Novak, who originally outed Plame in July 2003.

CNN's Malveaux plays White House correspondent, mind-reader, judge, and jury

CNN's Kyra Phillips: "definitely a major smear campaign going on" against Rove

Fox's Cameron parsed Bush's past statements on the fate of the CIA leaker: Bush "never actually said the word 'fired'"

ABC News, Wash. Post, Newsweek: Rove did not actually disclose Valerie Plame's name

...but a five-minute Google search would have produced it