THE PRICE OF TEA IN CHINA, THE PRICE OF GAS IN IOWA

.
WHAT'S THAT GOT TO DO WITH MCBUSH POLICY ON ISRAEL, IRAN, IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN, PAKISTAN?

DUBYA DETERMINED TO HIT $200/BBL, $6/GAL BEFORE HE GOES

It's A Family Thing: He Promised His Daddy & His Friends

What rational reason could the United States have for attacking Iran, at this point?

Or Iraq, in the first place?

Let's look at the results: Much higher oil prices. Much less security in America, the Middle East, and around the world. A rising police State. A cowering, compliant, corporatist Congress. Much higher military budgets. Much larger deficits. A large permanent American military presence in the oil fields. Strategic positioning between Israel and her enemies. A more and more belligerent Israel. Greater tensions in the Middle East. A general shift toward anti-Islamic and anti-Arab sentiments and policies in the U.S. A loss of respect for and belief in American world leadership. A shift away from the U.S. Dollar in international business and in financial markets. More and more public debt required to support the war effort and the sinking dollar. A still further sinking dollar. Multiple crises in business and finance in the U.S. and abroad. Consumer confidence shattered. Unemployment and inflation rising dramatically. Much higher gasoline prices. The rich are up and the rest are down. Public outcry. Weak-kneed politicians. More oil drilling. More corporate control.

Mission accomplished.

And it only cost a few thousand American lives, and an unknown number of "Other" lives, but they don't patronize our gas stations, so, no great loss.

So, if we have to threaten, provoke or start another war in the oil fields to reach Bushco's price point, it's just business as usual. Nothing personal. And if the Iranians cooperate by rattling their own sabers, or scimitars, they get more money for their oil too. The question is, between the bloodthirsty ayatollahs and the money-hungry oil sheiks, or whatever they call them in Iran, are there any sane people in charge over there? Because it doesn't seem like there are any back in Texas, home of Big Oil and really Bad Presidents.

[Cross-posted on blog me no blogs.]
.

MORE WAR TODAY? HIGHER OIL TOMORROW!

.
BUSHCO, ISRAELI'S, AYATOLLAH'S BUMP-UP PRICE OF OIL ON A BLUFF(?)

LET'S HOPE THEY'RE BLUFFING!

United States Allows Israeli Warplanes Onto U.S. Iraq Airbases "Five Minutes From Iran"

Everybody keeps saying they're all bluffing. Reports say the Iranians are years from producing nuclear weapons. Their recent missile-tests were a failure. Israel is in no danger. The U.S. has guaranteed her security, repeatedly and belligerently. Iran says they don't want trouble, but they will stop all Gulf oil from flowing if they are attacked. Oil prices jumped on this news, after falling earlier.

Americans are suffering at the gas pump, and in the grocery stores as the price of everything skyrockets due to energy costs. The U.S. economy is tanking and taking the world economy with it. U.S. unemployment and inflation are up, exports and the dollar are down. It's all about oil, but there is no actual shortage of supply. Prices are being pumped up by fear and speculation that supplies might be cut off. But that is all coming out of the White House, which is engineering this crisis. Why?

It doesn't make sense for a sitting President to be whacking his own economy in the middle of a tough election campaign. It does make sense for an international oil exec, though. Conclusion: We have an international oil exec as Commander-In-Chief. Bush & Co are Oilco moles who have taken over the U.S. government for the benefit of Big Oil. Bush is a traitor, an agent for foreign economic interests. Does the Iraq War, and the possible Iran War begin to make any sense, now? Still think it's not about oil? No blood for oil? What's that stuff coming out of our troops wounds, then?

HERE'S HOW IT PLAYS OUT:


INTERNATIONAL MIDDLE-EAST MEDIA CENTER
"Massive Israeli military exercise seen as provocation to Iran"

' US officials dismissed the exercise as “sabre-rattling”, and said Israel is not likely to bomb Iran without US permission. "If the Israelis were serious about it, no one would know about it until after it has happened," said the official, adding that the Pentagon knew that Israeli forces "have been conducting some large-scale exercises - they live in a tough neighborhood".
'

AFP
"US plays down fears of war with Iran"

' But Under Secretary of State Williams played down any imminent dangers from Iran's uranium enrichment despite fears among world powers fear the sensitive nuclear program could be used to make a nuclear weapon.
"While Iran seeks to create the perception of advancement of its nuclear program, real progress has been more modest," he told Congressional hearings on the "strategic challenge posed by Iran." '

CNN
"Reports: Iran test-fires more missiles"

' The Shahab-3 has a range of about 2,000 km, putting all of Israel, Turkey, Pakistan and the Arabian peninsula within striking distance. From Iran the missile's reach extends from southern Russia to the Horn of Africa, from south-eastern Europe to Nepal. '

THE GUARDIAN
"US will not hesitate to defend Israel, Rice warns Tehran"

' Oil prices resumed climbing yesterday as Opec said it would not be able to replace any shortfalls if Iran were attacked and took its crude supplies off the market. '

CHINA VIEW
"News Analysis: Tensions mount in Mideast as Iran test-fires missiles"

' Iran's missile tests also lend U.S. an excuse of persuading other countries such as Russia the necessity of expanding its missile defense system in Europe. '

AGI NEWS
"IRAN'S BLUFF: PHOTOS OF MISSILE TESTS RE-TOUCHED"

' The trick was spotted by Mark Fitzpatrick, analyst at London's Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS), according to whom Teheran wanted to "disguise the malfunction of one of the missiles" Bearing in mind that the objective of Teheran's missile test "is to send a signal of strength (to the international community) Iran exaggerated its capacities by fiddling the photo", Fitzpatrick explained. '

THE INDEPENDENT
"Israel hints at pre-emptive attack on Iran"

' Most analysts believe that for all bellicose talk, a pre-emptive attack, by the US at least, is most unlikely. "Everyone recognises what the consequences of a conflict would be," the Defence Secretary Robert Gates warned, among them possible closure of the oil lifeline through the Strait of Hormuz, the risk of generalised war in the Middle East and immense new strains on the fragile global economy. '

THE TIMES OF LONDON
"Iran and Israel build up their bluffing game"

' In short this would be in effect a joint US-Israeli mission. The catch is that Washington has no intention of joining in any attack any time soon. '

ISRAEL TODAY
"Israeli warplanes taking up position in Iraq?"

' If Israel ultimately decides to launch a aerial strike against Iran's main uranium enrichment facility, taking off from Hadita would cut the flight time to the target down to about five minutes. '

BLOOMBERG
"Crude Oil Rises to Record on Speculation Israel May Attack Iran"

' ``We are now in uncharted territory here with the Iranian situation,'' Tom James, head of commodities trading at Liquid Capital Markets Ltd., said in a phone interview ``People are just too scared to sell.'' '

GLOBAL RESEARCH
"Is There an Oil Shortage?"

' Contrary to the claims of the champions of war and militarism, of the Wall Street speculators in energy markets, and of the proponents of Peak Oil, the current oil price shocks are caused largely by the destabilizing wars and political turbulences in the Middle East. These include not only the raging wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also the danger of a looming war against Iran that would threaten the flow of oil out of Persian Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz. '

.


[Cross-posted on blog me no blogs.]

.

There's more: "THE PRICE OF TEA IN CHINA, THE PRICE OF GAS IN IOWA" >>

How Bush Started the Iraq War

Most of us believe that weapons of mass destruction (WMD) served as Bush's lynch pin for starting the war with Iraq more than five years ago. But Bush used a different criterion to trigger the war.

The context to Bush's ultimate trigger was that the WMD inspections were going well, unless like Bush you wanted to use WMDs as the excuse for starting a war. 731 inspections between November 2002 and March 2003 had found nothing, despite using intelligence from the US. As an aside, this puts the lie to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's claim that....

We know where they are (Iraq's WMD). They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat.

On March 7, 2003, Hans Blix, the UN's chief weapons inspector in Iraq, told the UN Security Council that his inspectors faced "relatively few difficulties," and

at this juncture are able to perform professional, no-notice inspections all over Iraq and to increase aerial surveillance.

Asked how long it would take to address the remaining issues, Blix said it:

will not take years, nor weeks, but months.

Bush's excuse for starting the Iraq war, disarming Saddam Hussein, was seriously threatened. He had to come up with a guarantee to ensure he could have his war. At the 11th hour Bush changed his criterion for triggering a war. On March 17, 2003 Bush gave an ultimatum that he knew Hussein would not accept:

Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict.

There you have it. Bush's final excuse for starting a war of agression was that Hussein and his sons would not leave Iraq upon his demand.

Sources:

1. Interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC News This Week, March 30, 2003.

2. Vincent Buliosi, The Prosecution of George Bush for Murder. See pages 130-135 for more on this.

There's more: "How Bush Started the Iraq War" >>

National Assembly offers antiwar action blueprint

This report on the National Assembly to End the Iraq War and Occupation held June 28-29 in Cleveland is overdue, but was delayed to await an official summary of the actions taken there. Unless you were in the room almost all of the time for the debate and votes, it was impossible to know exactly what decisions the 400-plus participants made. And I confess to spending a good chunk of time "networking" and kibitzing in the halls.

Now the organizers have produced their summary and evaluation, which you can read it its entirety here.

The Assembly urged united and massive mobilizations on both coasts in the spring to end the war, while also endorsing demonstrations at the Republican (Sept. 1-4) and Democratic (Aug. 25-28) conventions, local actions on October 11 -- the date Congress passed the resolution authorizing the Iraq war -- and proposing Dec. 9-14 as dates for local actions across the country demanding the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The group also voted almost unanmously to endorse local Iraq Moratorium actions on the Third Friday of every month, although that is not specifically mentioned in the organizers' report. That's disappointing to me, as part of the group who worked to make that part of the action agenda passed by the participants. But in the grand scheme of things, as one of my compatriots said, "This is just one document, produced by some exhausted folks in the aftermath of a complex event." The proof, as usual, will be in the pudding.
Organizers believe the Dec. 9-14 actions provide the best potential for uniting the entire movement in the months ahead:

ANSWER and the Troops Out Now Coalition have endorsed them and the hope is that United for Peace and Justice will do the same. The need now is to take these proposed dates to local antiwar coalitions; labor groups, especially U.S. Labor Against the War; veterans and military families organizations: the faith community; Black, Hispanic, Asian, Arab, Muslim and other nationalities, racial and ethnic groups; students; women’s peace organizations; the Iraq Moratorium; and other social forces that can be drawn into antiwar activities. All actions are viewed as springboards for building massive, united, independent and bi-coastal Spring 2009 demonstrations against the war.

In other action, the Assembly:

-- Expressed its strong opposition to attacks against Iran, as well as sanctions and other forms of intervention into that country’s internal affairs; registered determination to join other antiwar forces in massive united, protest actions in the event that the U.S. or its proxy, Israel, bombs Iran; and urged that if this occurs an emergency meeting of all the major antiwar forces be called to plan such actions.

-- Added Afghanistan to the name of the Assembly because the U.S. is fighting two unjust, illegal and brutal wars simultaneously and both must be opposed. We are now the National Assembly to End the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and Occupations.

-- Voted to integrate the issue of Palestine into the broader antiwar struggle and to challenge U.S. support for the Israeli occupation.

It's hard to judge the Assembly's real impact, but just getting activists from a wide variety of groups and causes to spend the weekend in the same room, operating in a civil fashion and emphasizing their unifying beliefs rather than their differences, is an accomplishment in itself.

As one of my Wisconsin friends put it, "The hollering was at a minimum, the crowd lively, (if a bit unfocused), the tone was upbeat."

The Assembly adopted the Big Tent philosophy, and was happy to keep enlarging the tent to make room for everyone. Oppose the war in Afghanistan, too? Come on in. Palestine's your main focus? No problem, there's plenty of room.

While that may have built a broader coalition, it seems like that message may be a harder sell when it comes to trying to mobilize massive numbers of regular folks to act against the war -- and that must be the ultimate objective. With a single focus on Iraq, which two-thirds of Americans think was a mistake, it has still been hard to get people to translate their feelings into action. Adding more issues to the pot will not make it easier, but more difficult.

The group's five points of unity are: (1) “Out Now!” as the movement’s unifying demand, (2) mass action as the central strategy, (3) unity of the movement, (4) democratic decision making, and (5) independence from all political parties. Steps were taken to make the Assembly an ongoing organization, "a network with its mission intact and continuing: to be a catalyst and unifier, striving always to unite the movement in the streets."

There are certain to be some bumps in the road. The one-person, one-vote rule worked in Cleveland, but that meant that Ohio participants had 140 votes while Texas had one. Twenty-five states had no representatives at all. While geography may not be important -- this is an antiwar coalition, not the Electoral College -- it also means that some of the bigger organizations were under-represented. At some point that may become an issue.

But, big picture, was it worth doing? Was it energizing? Am I glad I went?

Yes, yes, and yes.

There's more: "National Assembly offers antiwar action blueprint" >>

Pop Obama's Trial Balloon

LibHom recently writes:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Saturday his plan to end the Iraq war was unchanged and he was puzzled by the sharp reaction to his statement this week that he might "refine" his timetable for withdrawing U.S. combat troops.

With the insight of many who have been deflated by the empty words of Democrat candidates, LibHom continues:

Of course, if you have followed past Democratic betrayals, you know that "refine" almost always means "capitulate" when it is uttered by most centrist and conservative Democrats.

Where does that leave us? With advice from LibHom:

Maybe Obama's prior comments were a trial balloon. If so, we need to fight like heck to pop it.

Contact Obama: Let him know there is a large constituency holding his feet to the fire Obama Comment Form Click Here.

There's more: "Pop Obama's Trial Balloon" >>

Tom Hayden exposes the real Obama on Iraq

Hayden has crystal-clear analysis of the real Barack Obama position on Iraq, viewpoints that many liberal Democratic Party bloggers, may not like to discuss.

More ambiguous than audacious.

Check.

“(That) pledge also has been laced with loopholes all along, caveats that the mainstream media and his opponents (excepting Bill Richardson) have ignored or avoided until now.

Indeed.

Then he adopted the safe, nonpartisan formula of the Baker-Hamilton Study Group, which advocated the withdrawal of combat troops while leaving thousands of American counter-terrorism units, advisers and trainers behind.

And, as for Obama’s “refining,” Hayden calls him out on that right away.

“I intend to end this war.”

Beyond that, Hayden notes that the whole thrust of Obama’s speech is to buck final responsibility to the military. If Petraeus says, “too dangerous to bring them home,” well, who is Civilian Obama to overrule that?

Read the whole column; Hayden is spot on. Hayden concludes with four talking point “demands” for Obama to show his progressive peace talker bona fides.

There's more: "Tom Hayden exposes the real Obama on Iraq" >>

The So-Called 'President' is a Mass Murderer

'Terrorism' is simply the response to US terrorism --perpetrated primarily by the CIA and US surrogates. The 'blowback' is the root cause of terrorism, the motivation for it, the fuel that keeps it alive. Fighting a 'war on terrorism' is just plain stupid. Such a war 'causes' terrorism and I've got the stats prove it.

'Terrorism' is a political term applied to anyone who has a different point of view.

Anyone who opposes the criminal interventions of the US is --by Bush's decree --a 'terrorist'! If you merely dissent, you may be defined as a terrorist. The Bush regime is now claiming that he has the authority under the pretext of a phony war to define citizens of other nations as terrorists. He demands of other nations, for example, that they provide his administration with the records of their citizens whenever Bush may 'deem' them guilty of terrorism.

Be warned! If you are but 'deemed' a terrorist, you are deprived of the right to be represented by a lawyer, you don't get to make a phone call, you may not demand a hearing, you are robbed of habeas corpus --a right England demanded of King John and got! [See: How America is snooping on YOU ... and may soon be snooping a whole lot more]

William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, stood up in Parliament during the American 'revolution', and uttered these brave words knowing that they would appear in the record, knowing that they would be seen and read by King George III:

"If I were an American, as I am an Englishman, while a foreign troop was landed in my country, I never would lay down my arms -- never! never! never!"

The US military are wimps --hiding behind hi-tech gadgetry and robots. Even so --the US 'leadership' is outraged when our criminal methods, oppressions, and various tyrannical methods are met with armed opposition! How bloody stupid are our leaders! How bloody incompetent! How incredibly venal! How traitorous and criminal!

Bush has committed capital crimes --primarily in and against Iraq --for which he MUST be arrested, charged, and tried if there is to be any justice whatsoever in this world.

I do not merely allege that Bush's polices are counter-productive, I can prove it with the FBI own stats! Terrorism is always worse under GOP regimes.
The illegitimate regime of George W. Bush assumed power upon a violation of US Codes having to do with 'seditious treason'.

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

--TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2383, Rebellion or insurrection

Bush's coup was assisted by a Republican gang of 'brownshirts', in this case 'white shirts' who physically attack voter recounters in Florida. The effect of this felonious use of violence stopped the court ordered recount of votes in Florida until a packed Republican court could return Bush v Gore.

These are some of the thugs who staged a riot at the Miami canvassing board and shut down the recount. Most of these thugs are present or past employees of Congressional Republicans. The riot was led by Rep. John Sweeney of upstate NY. All of these thugs - and their Congressional bosses, led by Tom DeLay - should be prosecuted for criminally interfering with a federal election.

2005 Update: (Al Kamen, Washington Post 1/24/05)

No. 1. Tom Pyle, who had worked for Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), went private sector a few months later, getting a job as director of federal affairs for Koch Industries.

No. 2. Garry Malphrus, a former staff director of the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on criminal justice, is now deputy director of the White House Domestic Policy Council.

No. 3. Rory Cooper, who was at the National Republican Congressional Committee, later worked at the White House Homeland Security Council and was seen last week working for the Presidential Inaugural Committee.

No. 6. Matt Schlapp, a former House aide and then a Bush campaign aide, has risen to be White House political director.

No. 7. Roger Morse, another House aide, moved on to the law and lobbying firm Preston Gates Ellis & Rouvelas Meeds. "I was also privileged to lead a team of Republicans to Florida to help in the recount fight," he told a legal trade magazine in a 2003 interview.

No. 8. Duane Gibson, an aide on the House Resources Committee, was a solo lobbyist and formerly with the Greenberg Traurig lobby operation. He is now with the Livingston Group as a consultant.

No. 9. Chuck Royal was and still is a legislative assistant to Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), a former House member.

No. 10. Layna McConkey Peltier, who had been a Senate and House aide and was at Steelman Health Strategies during the effort, is now at Capital Health Group.

--Gore Won Florida!

Having stolen two elections, having flouted the Constitution, Bush assumed powers that place him above the law. He has done so upon a series of well-planned, malicious frauds, all of which are cited in justification for his tyrannical usurpation of every right guaranteed individuals in the Bill of Rights. It is circular, delusional logic, symptomatic of psychos!

This unprecedented seizure of absolute power upon lies and frauds amounts to high treason. It is tyranny! Some of the crimes Bush has committed subsequent to these various usurpations are punishable by death!

Bush, an illegitimate 'ruler', has left the sovereign people of the US no other choice but revolution.

'The tree of Liberty needs to be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.'

--Thomas Jefferson

I vote for spilling the blood of tyrants! The blood of true patriots is in short enough supply already! A Federal Grand Jury, perhaps one already convened, should indict George W. Bush for his MANY violations of US Codes, Title 18, Section 2441. That's a CAPITAL CRIME and it's an open shut case against Bush. A fair court upon proven evidence and the rule of law will sentence George W. Bush to death!

(a) Offense.— Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.

--US Codes, TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 118 > § 2441, War crimes

Bush will, of course, have no defense but the lies he's told already.

Read more at The Existentialist Cowboy

There's more: "The So-Called 'President' is a Mass Murderer" >>