Daily Kos :: U.S, Killing More Civilians Than Insurgents Are

From Daily Kos

Coalition fatalities in Iraq: 1183

U.S. military fatalities in Iraq: 1048

Iraqi military fatalities: Several thousand

Iraqi civilian fatalities: At least 12,927

Number of Weapons of Mass Destruction discovered: Zero

Iyad Allawi, the Bush Administration’s dancing bear, scarcely strained on his leash during his visit to America to shore up support for the war that Dubyanocchio told us was all but over when he did his own little dance on the USS Abraham Lincoln nearly 17 months ago. While Allawi had harsh words for the insurgents and the thugs who kidnap and behead foreigners in Iraq, not a word was spoken about this:

Iraqi civilian casualties mounting

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Operations by U.S. and multinational forces and Iraqi police are killing twice as many Iraqis - most of them civilians - as attacks by insurgents, according to statistics compiled by the Iraqi Health Ministry and obtained exclusively by Knight Ridder.

According to the ministry, the interim Iraqi government recorded 3,487 Iraqi deaths in 15 of the country's 18 provinces from April 5 - when the ministry began compiling the data - until Sept. 19. Of those, 328 were women and children. Another 13,720 Iraqis were injured, the ministry said.

While most of the dead are believed to be civilians, the data include an unknown number of police and Iraqi national guardsmen. Many Iraqi deaths, especially of insurgents, are never reported, so the actual number of Iraqis killed in fighting could be significantly higher.

Tying Kerry to Terror Tests Rhetorical Limits (washingtonpost.com)

President Bush and leading Republicans are increasingly charging that Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry and others in his party are giving comfort to terrorists and undermining the war in Iraq -- a line of attack that tests the conventional bounds of political rhetoric.

Appearing in the Rose Garden yesterday with Iraq's interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi, Bush said Kerry's statements about Iraq "can embolden an enemy." After Kerry criticized Allawi's speech to Congress, Vice President Cheney tore into the Democratic nominee, calling him "destructive" to the effort in Iraq and the struggle against terrorism.

CBS News, R.I.P. : Network delays bombshell Iraq story until after election

CBS News is officially dead. The network is postponing its bombshell expose on Chimp's Iraq lies --- until after the election. Yes, this is the report that was bumped so the TANG story could run. And why won't it run now:

'We now believe it would be inappropriate to air the report so close to the presidential election,' the spokeswoman, Kelli Edwards, said in a statement.

Got that? It's now inapropriate to report the facts about how the President lied the country into war.

'60 Minutes' Delays Report Questioning Reasons for Iraq War

By KATE ZERNIKE

Published: September 25, 2004

CBS News said yesterday that it had postponed a '60 Minutes' segment that questioned Bush administration rationales for going to war in Iraq.

The announcement, in a statement by a spokeswoman, was issued four days after the network acknowledged that it could not prove the authenticity of documents it used to raise new questions about President Bush's Vietnam-era military service.

The Iraq segment had been ready for broadcast on Sept. 8, CBS said, but was bumped at the last minute for the segment on Mr. Bush's National Guard service. The Guard segment was considered a highly competitive report, one that other journalists were pursuing.

CBS said last night that the report on the war would not run before Nov. 2.

'We now believe it would be inappropriate to air the report so close to the presidential election,' the spokeswoman, Kelli Edwards, said in a statement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/25/politics/campaign/25cbs.html

Pakistan President: Iraq war made the world more dangerous

Pakistan President: Iraq war made the world more dangerous

He says what I and other libbies have been saying for ages. And he is an ally of Bush !

-------------------------
Just read the transcripts below (as seen on TV just today)

Paula Zahn Now - September 24, 2004

ZAHN: Is the world a safer place because of the war in Iraq?

MUSHARRAF: No. It's more dangerous. It's not safer, certainly not.

ZAHN: How so?

MUSHARRAF: Well, because it has aroused actions of the Muslims more. It's aroused certain sentiments of the Muslim world, and then the responses, the latest phenomena of explosives, more frequent for bombs and suicide bombings. This phenomenon is extremely dangerous.

ZAHN: Was it a mistake to have gone to war with Iraq?

MUSHARRAF: Well, I would say that it has ended up bringing more trouble to the world.

ZAHN: Even members of President Bush's party are saying that the United States is in trouble in Iraq and it's possible the United States won't win the war in Iraq. Is that the way you see it?

MUSHARRAF: Well, when you enter operations, you can go wrong in your calculations. That always is a possibility in any operation.

ZAHN: Has that happened in Iraq?

MUSHARRAF: Well, there are difficulties. One can't predict. Maybe the difficulties are surmounted and then it ends up with a victory, with a success. But, at the moment, we are bogged down, yes, yes indeed.

ZAHN: Are you fearful the United States will pull out before it should militarily?

MUSHARRAF: That will be a folly. They must leave a stable, territorially integrated Iraq. We have people of Iraq hard administering themselves, governing themselves, and governing their own natural resources. That must be left intact. They must not leave a disturbed area there. The disturbance can spread to other areas.

ZAHN: Do you think that the war in Iraq has undermined the overall war on terror?

MUSHARRAF: It has complicated it, certainly. I wouldn't say undermined. It has further complicated it. It has made the job more difficult..

And below, on NBC Nightly News, Musharaff says the same thing, but with a more "cautious" air to his words.

-----------------------------
NBC Nightly News, September 24, 2004

Brokaw: Do you think the American war against Iraq was a mistake?

Musharraf: Well, I wouldn't comment on that. But I will certainly say that it has complicated the issue.

Brokaw: In your part of the world.

Musharraf: In the Islamic world. In the Iraqi region. In the Middle East.

Brokaw: Made it worse for America?

Musharraf: Yes.

So far, only the liberal blogs and CNN have the scoop. See video in the link below

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/09/25/musharraf/index.html

Musharraf was less enthusiastic in his support for the U.S. war in Iraq, saying the world is less safe in the wake of the invasion.

But the Pakistani president stopped short of calling the invasion a mistake, saying, "I would say that it has ended up bringing more trouble to the world."

Musharraf also said that because of the situation in Iraq, he does not foresee Pakistan sending troops to help with the effort.

Aljazeera.Net - Musharraf: Iraq war a mistake

Saturday 25 September 2004, 7:24 Makka Time, 4:24 GMT

The Pakistani president said the US-led invasion was a mistake

Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf has said the US-led invasion of Iraq made the world a more dangerous place.

Though an ally of the United States, Musharraf on Friday described the invasion as a mistake and said it had complicated the 'war on terror'.

'It has ended up bringing more trouble to the world,' Musharraf said in a television interview.

'The world is more dangerous because the Iraq war has aroused the passions of the Muslims more,' he added.

'The war in Iraq has complicated the war on terror ... it has made the job more difficult.'"

Operation 'Shame on You'

Operation 'Shame on You'

From Daily Kos
Newspapers all over the country are gearing up to make their endorsements for President. Many of them are predictable, of course. The Chicago Tribune, where I live, historically endorses the Republican candidate, regardless of who it is. If the GOP nominated an avocado, the avocado would be trumpeted as the 'right way to go for our country.' So what can you do?

Here's the plan:

Last week, I went on the web and looked up all of the Bush endorsements that I could find from the 2000 election. A lot of links to these publications can be found on this website:

http://www.gwu.edu/~action/natendorse5.html

(Warning: many of these threads, being four years old, are now dead. If you find more, e-mail me at Cyberactor@aol.com.)

For example, I found this from the Detroit News, who said of Bush:

'Mr. Bush will be a far better friend to Michigan workers. Preserving and growing jobs through smarter economic and conservation approaches is far better for the state's unionized work force than the empty and tired slogans of Mr. Gore.'

Well, even an avocado knows what happened, right? So here is my idea: We go and find these endorsements. We spread these ridiculous predictions far and wide. And we respond to them. In force. Letters to the editor of each of these dailies, especially those in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania...you get the idea.

Point out to the editors (as I did earlier to the Detroit News, the Cincinnati Post, the Cincinnati Enquirer and the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel), that their predictions of what kind of president George Bush would be proved to be disastrously wrong. Some of our letters might get published. Maybe not. Some of these editors might be shamed into endorsing Kerry this time around. Maybe not.

But it's worth a shot.

A 5 line hack can break into e-vote machines!!!!

From Daily Kos

Activists Find More E-Vote Flaws
http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65031,00.html?tw=rss.TOP

In the demonstration, a five-line script whipped up by a hacker in Notepad altered the election tallies in Global Election Management System, or GEMS, the (Windows-based) software that runs on a county's server and tallies votes after they come in from Diebold touch-screen and optical-scan machines in polling places. Diebold's reponse?

Diebold spokesman David Bear said by phone that no one would risk manipulating votes in an election because it's against the law and carries a heavy penalty.

Feel better now?"

We're Losing 'Cause We're Winning

From DailyKos:

Interim Iraqi prime minister Ayad Allawi parroted Karl Rove's script today. And the New York Times ate it up. Allawi's words:

They are becoming more deadly because we think they are getting more desperate.

That's speaking of the insurgents, of course. And it would almost make sense -- if the Bush administration hadn't been saying the same thing since the war began. Surely, if increases in violence meant we were close to winning a year ago, we'd have won by now?

This isn't brain surgery, folks. It's PR. And I'd just like once for a reporter to point out how long this spin point has been floating around. Much more below the fold.

Diaries :: whopundit's diary ::

A Brief History of the Bush "Failure Is Victory" Doctrine

This is the behavior of desperate men. Iraqi authorities know their days are numbered. And while the Iraqi regime is on the way out, it's important to know that it can still be brutal, particularly in the moments before it finally succumbs. This campaign could well grow more dangerous in the coming days and weeks as coalition forces close on Baghdad and the regime is faced with its certain death.
(Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 25, 2003)

I think these people are the last remnants of a dying cause.
(Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, on "dead-enders," June 18, 2003)

Every sign of progress in Iraq adds to the desperation of the terrorists and the remnants of Saddam's brutal regime.
(George W. Bush, Aug. 19, 2003)

This progress makes the remaining terrorists even more desperate and willing to lash out.
(George W. Bush, Aug. 23, 2003)

The more progress we make in Iraq, the more desperate the terrorists will become.
(George W. Bush, Aug. 26, 2003)

You have some remnants -- you have remnants of a regime that we removed, that was an oppressive regime, that is desperate -- more and more desperate every single day, because of the progress we are making on many fronts in Afghanistan.
(Press Secretary Scott McClellan, Sept. 17, 2003)

The more progress we make, the more desperate the holdouts of Saddam Hussein's regime and foreign terrorists become.
(Press Secretary Scott McClellan, Oct. 14, 2003)

The more progress we make on the ground, the more free the Iraqis become, the more electricity that's available, the more jobs are available, the more kids that are going to school, the more desperate these killers become.
(George W. Bush, Oct. 27, 2003)

The more progress we make, the more desperate they tend to become.
(Press Secretary Scott McClellan, Nov. 10, 2003)

As democracy takes hold in Iraq, the enemies of freedom will do all in their power to spread violence and fear.
(George W. Bush, State of the Union Address, Jan. 20, 2004)

The closer we come to passing sovereignty, the more likely it is that foreign fighters, disgruntled Baathists or friends of the Shia cleric will try to stop progress.
(George W. Bush, April 28, 2004)

[Our enemies] know that time is against them, and their only chance is to shake the resolve of Iraqis, Americans, anybody else who loves freedom. And that's why their actions have grown more cruel and sadistic. (George W. Bush, July 4, 2004)

The bad guys, the army of the darkness, are getting more helpless and hopeless. That's why they are stepping up these things. (Iraqi president Ghazi al-Yawer, July 3-, 2004

I'm sure there are other examples, as well. When will get a strategy for winning that doesn't involve losing? How desperate will these killers have to become before the administration finds a new line?

Better yet, when will our nation's highest-paid reporters start paying attention?

- Marc
http://whopundit.blogspot.com

Commentary: Iraq's bridge too far - (United Press International)

Commentary: Iraq's bridge too far


By Arnaud de Borchgrave
UPI Editor at Large

Madrid, Spain, Sep. 15 (UPI) -- Before the Iraqi war, Europe's principal intelligence services shared the Bush administration's view that Saddam Hussein was hiding his stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction. Today, these same services disagree with the White House on several critical assessments.

Off the record conversations with intelligence chiefs in five major European countries -- each with multiple assets in Iraq -- showed remarkable agreement on these points:

-- The neo-con objectives for restructuring Iraq into a functioning model democracy were a bridge too far. They were never realistic.

-- The plan to train Iraqi military and security forces in time to cope with a budding insurgency before it spun out of control was stillborn.

-- The insurgency has mushroomed from 5,000 in the months following the collapse of the Saddam Hussein regime to an estimated 20,000 today, which is still growing. Insurgents are targeting green Iraqi units and volunteers for training and some have already defected to the rebels.

-- Iraqi soldiers trained by the United States are complaining that the equipment ordered by the U.S. from the Ukraine that is being assigned to them gives them "2nd class status."

-- To cope with the insurgency, the United States requires 10 times the rebel strength -- or some 200,000 as a bare minimum. Short of that number, the insurgency will continue to gain momentum. The multiple is based on the British experience in Northern Ireland for a quarter of a century as well as France's civil war in Algeria (1954-62), when nationalist guerrillas were defeated militarily, but won the war diplomatically. France deployed half a million men to defeat the fellaghas in Algeria.

-- The U.S. occupation has lost control of large swathes of Iraq where the insurgency operates with virtual impunity.

-- Iraq was a diversion from the war on a global movement that was never anchored in Baghdad.

-- Iraq does not facilitate a solution to the Mideast crisis. And without such a solution, the global terrorist movement will continue to spread.

-- Iraq has become a magnet for would-be Muslim jihadis the world over; it has greatly facilitated transnational terrorism.

-- Charting a course out of the present chaos requires an open-ended commitment to maintain U.S. forces at the present level and higher through 2010 or longer.

-- The once magnificent obsession about building a model Arab democracy in Iraq now has the potential of a Vietnam-type quagmire.

-- Everything now undertaken in Iraq is palliative to tide the administration over the elections.

-- What is urgently needed, whether a Bush II administration or a Kerry White House, is for the world's great democracies to meet at the summit to map a common strategy to confront a global challenge. The war on terrorism -- on the terrorists who have hijacked Islam -- is only one part of a common approach for (1) the defense of Western democracies and (2) the gradual transformation of an Arab world that must be assisted out of poverty, despair and defeat.

-- A war on terrorism without a global strategy, which must include the funding of major educational reforms in poor countries like Pakistan, where wannabe jihadis are still being churned out by the hundreds of thousands, could only lead to the gradual erosion of Western democratic structures.

-- The "war on terror" is a misnomer that is tantamount to rhetorical disinformation. One can no more fight terrorism than one could declare war on Hitler's Panzers in World War II or Dreadnoughts in World War I. Terrorism is a weapons system that has been used time and again for the last 5,000 years. The root causes are the problem, not the weapon.

-- To ignore the causes is to guarantee escalation -- to weapons of mass destruction

GODvsBUSH.

Quick exit from Iraq is likely

By Robert Novak (!!)

Inside the Bush administration policymaking apparatus, there is strong feeling that U.S. troops must leave Iraq next year. This determination is not predicated on success in implanting Iraqi democracy and internal stability. Rather, the officials are saying: Ready or not, here we go.

This prospective policy is based on Iraq's national elections in late January, but not predicated on ending the insurgency or reaching a national political settlement. Getting out of Iraq would end the neoconservative dream of building democracy in the Arab world. The United States would be content having saved the world from Saddam Hussein's quest for weapons of mass destruction."

9/11 Commission Report Confirms Key Fahrenheit 911 Facts

http://www.9-11commission.gov/

9/11 Commission Report Confirms Key Fahrenheit 911 Facts

The September 11 Commission's 567-page final report has confirmed key
facts presented in Fahrenheit 9/11. These include:

* Attorney General John Ashcroft told acting FBI director Thomas
Pickard that he did not want to hear anything more about terrorist
threats. Confirmed, Commission Report at p. 265

* After Bush was informed of the first plane hitting the World
Trade Center, he went ahead with his classroom event. After Bush was
informed that the nation was under attack after the second plane hit,
Bush stayed in the classroom for nearly seven more minutes, continuing
to read with the children. Confirmed, Commission Report at pp. 35, 38-39.

* Bush failed to have even one meeting to discuss the threat of
terrorism with his head of counterterrorism Richard Clarke.
Confirmed, Commission Report at p. 201.

* Bush failed to react to the August 6, 2001 security briefing,
"Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." Confirmed, Commission Report
at pp. 260-262.

* 142 Saudis, including 24 members of the bin Laden family, were
allowed to leave the country after September 13. Confirmed, Commission
Report at p. 556, n. 25 [Note that Fahrenheit 9/11 understates the
number of Saudis who left.]

* Individuals were interviewed by the FBI before being allowed to
leave (although the report confirms that most individuals on these
flights were not interviewed.) Confirmed, Commission Report at p.
557, n. 28.

* White House former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke
approved these flights. Confirmed, Commission Report at p. 329.

It should also be noted that the 9/11 Commission does not address or
deem important a number of other issues either addressed in Fahrenheit
9/11 or revealed since completion of the film, including:

* What exactly was the rush in getting these individuals out of
the country so soon after the worst attack in U.S. history, why did
Saudi Royals and bin Laden family members receive such special
treatment at a time when most Americans still could not get flights
(even though airspace may have been open), and how exactly were the
flights arranged by the U.S. government?

* Several unanswered questions posed by Senator Byron Dorgan
(D-ND) in a July 20, 2004, Grand Forks Herald column: "At a time when
14 of the 19 terrorists from Sept. 11 were Saudi citizens, how and why
were six secret flights allowed to sneak 142 Saudi citizens out of the
United States in the days after Sept. 11 before they were properly
interrogated? How do we know they weren't properly questioned? Because
Dale Watson, the No. 2 man and former head of counterterrorism at the
FBI has said none of them were subjected to `serious' interrogation or
questions before being allowed to leave. In fact, we now know that at
least two and perhaps more of the Saudis who were allowed to leave
after Sept. 11 were under investigation by the FBI for alleged
terrorist connections."

* Information that came to light in Dana Milbank's July 22, 2004
Washington Post article, including the fact that at least one bin
Laden family member who was allowed to leave lived with a nephew of
Osama bin Laden, who "was involved in forming the U.S. branch of the
World Assembly of Muslim Youth" (WAMY), which the FBI has described as
"a suspected terrorist organization," and that the bin Ladens flew out
of the country on the same airplane that "has been chartered
frequently by the White House for the press corps traveling with
President Bush."

George W. Bush Meets "Baghdad Bob"

It started with a joke, but once the laughter stopped I had to admit that the President's sunny statements about Iraq last week did sound disturbingly similar to some of the classics uttered by Saddam's former Minister of Information. "Be assured: Baghdad is safe."

By Greg Mitchell

(September 19, 2004) -- On his Friday night chat show on HBO, comedian Bill Maher cracked a joke about President Bush remaining relentlessly upbeat about our war effort in Iraq despite a week of seemingly serious setbacks. Bush, according to Maher, sounds more like "Baghdad Bob" every day.

Baghdad Bob, of course, was Saddam Hussein's minister of information, now immortalized on t-shirts, Web sites and even a DVD for his optimistic, if fanciful, statements about Iraq's triumph over the American infidels, right up to the point we toppled his boss's statue. Baghdad Bob, real name Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf, somehow survived and at last report was happily working as an Arab TV commentator, sans trademark beret.

Maher's joke was funny because it got at an essential truth, even as he stretched it. But the next day, I got to thinking, what if that's not such an exaggeration after all?

Consider that in the past week violence flared at unprecedented levels all over Iraq; U.S. deaths there soared past the 1,000 mark with more killed than at any time in recent weeks; a declassified National Intelligence Estimate painted a dire picture of prospects in Iraq; and reports circulated that our military plans to mobilize more troops and launch bloody attacks (post-election) on insurgent strongholds. A leading GOP senator, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, said, "the worst thing we can do is hold ourselves hostage to some grand illusion that we're winning. Right now, we are not winning. Things are getting worse."

And yet President Bush suggested all week that Iraq was firmly on the path to stability and democracy. On Friday he told a newspaper, "The Iraqis are defying the dire predictions of a lot of people by moving toward democracy....I'm pleased with the progress."

So was John Kerry right last week when he said Bush was living in "a fantasy world of spin"? Is the president really not so different from Baghdad Bob? Should he now be known as "D.C. Dubya"? Or "Baghdad Bush"?

Here are a few Baghdad Bob classics from the spring of 2003 (courtesy of one of his many Web shrines), verbatim. See if you can imagine them coming out of the mouth of our president speaking to the press today.

*****

"I will only answer reasonable questions."

"No, I am not scared, and neither should you be."

"Be assured: Baghdad is safe, protected."

"We are in control, they are not in control of anything, they don't even control themselves!"

"The battle is very fierce and God made us victorious."

"They mock me for how I speak. I speak better English than they do."

"I have detailed information about the situation...which completely proves that what they allege are illusions . . . They lie every day."

"I blame Al-Jazeera."

"I can assure you that those villains will recognize in the future how they are pretending things which have never taken place."

"I would like to clarify a simple fact here: How can you lay siege to a whole country? Who is really under siege now?"

"We're giving them a real lesson today. Heavy doesn't accurately describe the level of casualties we have inflicted."

"Those are not Iraqis at all. Where did they bring them from?"

"The American press is all about lies! All they tell is lies, lies and more lies!"

"They are becoming hysterical. This is the result of frustration."

"Just look carefully, I only want you to look carefully. Do not repeat the lies of liars. Do not become like them."

"Search for the truth. I tell you things and I always ask you to verify what I say."

"The United Nations...it is all their fault."

"Even those who live on another planet, if there are such people, would condemn them."

"This is unbiased: They are retreating on all fronts. Their effort is a subject of laughter throughout the world."

"The force that was near the airport, this force was destroyed."

"They are achieving nothing; they are suffering from casualties. Those casualties are increasing, not decreasing."

"They think that by killing civilians and trying to distort the feelings of the people they will win."

"Our estimates are that none of them will come out alive unless they surrender to us quickly."

"They hold no place in Iraq. This is an illusion."

"Once again, I blame al-Jazeera. Please, make sure of what you say and do not play such a role."

"These cowards have no morals. They have no shame about lying."

"You can go and visit those places. Everything is okay. They are not in Najaf. They are nowhere. They are on the moon."

"Rumsfeld, he needs to be hit on the head."

Kerry on Iraq War

Why did Kerry vote yes on the resolution to authorize the use of force in Iraq?

The resolution of October 11, 2002 authorized the President to use force if necessary; it did not direct the President to go to war. Kerry voted for the resolution in order to strengthen the President's hand in dealing with Saddam Hussein and the U.N. It was not a vote on the question 'Should we attack Iraq?' Nothing in the resolution required or recommended that the President take the nation into war when alternatives were available. That decision was made by President Bush."

FOX NEWS DECLARES BUSH WINNER OF 2004 ELECTION

Funny and scary

Missouri Secretary of State's GOP Partisan Activity Violates Election Laws

Missouri Republican Secretary of State, Matt Blunt has inititated a number of actions which aim to weight the November election to favor the GOP in Missouri. At least one of these actions is in clear violation of election laws. In light of the number of complaints I've heard around the country of similar actions by GOP party members, some folks are beginning to wonder if the strategy is for the GOP to make a bold faced stab and stealing the election again. Over the past few months Blunt's actions make a mockery of the idea of fair elections, for example:

*** Last month, Mr. Blunt asked country clerks to turn over the names of citizens requesting absentee ballots to GOP operatives. Clerks or election officials in four counties contacted say Blunt's written request has been followed up with visits or phone calls from people claiming to be acting on behalf of the Bush-Cheney presidential campaign and asking for daily updates of the county's absentee-request list.

The absentee-ballot statute cites as illegal behavior "any person who . . . in any manner coerces or initiates a request or a suggestion" to a voter with an absentee ballot. Republican strategist John Hancock, who is working for Blunt, acknowledged that Republican aides were calling people on the list to promote the party's candidates. If as John Hancock says, the GOP is promoting candidates then the GOP is initiating a request or suggestion to the voter and that violates state election law....Case Closed, Mr. Blunt.

Oh... did I tell you Mr. Blunt is a candidate for Governor for in Novemeber which futher sullies this GOP operation to strong arm absentee ballot voters to vote the GOP ticket. Blunt's request for county clerks to hand over absentee ballot lists to the GOP clearly is a conflict of interest, as he is a GOP candidate for Governor.

The state of Missouri has a strict anti-telephone solicitation law forbids organizations (except charities) to contact those on a statewide no call list. Mr. Blunt's utter disregard for the privacy of absentee voters violates the spirit, if not the letter of the No-Call list legislation.

***Most recently, Blunt sparked national debate with his decision to allow Missouri military personnel stationed in war zones to cast ballots by e-mail through the Pentagon. Questions have been raised about the security of such ballots and the fact that the votes would been seen by Pentagon officials. Pentagon officials would be free to alter the ballot in any way or ways they saw fit, before forwarding the email to the Missouri Secretary of State to be counted.

Mr. Blunt is extending rights and privileges to soldiers and denying those rights to other absentee voters overseas. This action is denial of equal protection under the law to other absentee voters. Mr. Blunt makes it easier for servicemen to vote because he feels they are overwhelmingly GOP voters. There's an arguable case that email voting should be extended to everyone as an option and not just GIs.

I'm an election judge in Missouri which requires me to cast an absentee ballot because I work the entire election day. I have to drive an hour and a half roundtrip to the Board of Election Commissioners office in Maplewood, where I request my ballot and vote on the spot. I don't trust the post office to get my absentee ballot to me or back to the Board on time. If Blunt makes the argument that emailed ballots are secure, then he should extend email voting to all absentee voters, not just soldiers, whom he feels have Republican leanings.

*** Last month Mr. Blunt, who claims the system should "be encouraging voter participation" went to court to prevent an early voting plan from being implemented in the city of St. Louis, an overwhelmingly Democratic area. Early voting broadens voter particiaption by allowing the a voter who files a request to cast an onsite ballot anywhere from a month to a week prior to the election date. Many states have adopted early voting regulations, but not Missouri because early voting helps Democrats in Mr. Blunt's view.

*** Before the August primary Mr. Blunt spent $ 48,000 of taxpayer money mandated to promote voter turnout in Missouri. Instead Mr. Blunt spent the funds to take out newspaper ads with pictures of Matt Blunt, your GOP candidate for governor.

***Mr. Blunt attempted to schedule a vote on the Gay Marriage Amendment for the November election, hoping it would encourage a big turnout of anti-gay bigots who would vote Republican. The Missouri State Supreme Court ordered Mr. Blunt to put the issue on the sparsely attended primary ballot in August, because the petition was complete and the law of the Missouri madates that an approved ballot initative should appear on the next election after signatures are approved.

Hijacking Catastrophe

Hijacking Catastrophe: "Hijacking Catastrophe

- by Karen Kwiatkowski (Lt. Col. USAF retired)

Better than anyone to date, the Media Education Foundation has quietly and accurately documented the most important history of 21st century thus far in their recent video and DVD release, Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear, and the Selling of American Empire.

Hijacking Catastrophe is powerful, understated, straightforward and educational. In a single meticulously organized hour of evidence and analysis, viewers are treated to a thoughtful explanation of modern American empire, neo-conservatism as a driving force for the current Bush administration, and something I have not seen before, a real economic analysis of what is driving some of our current 'global war on terror.'

The film examines the Bush Administration"

9/11 Commission report confirms Moore's truths

* Attorney General John Ashcroft told acting FBI director Thomas
Pickard that he did not want to hear anything more about terrorist
threats. Confirmed, Commission Report at p. 265

* After Bush was informed of the first plane hitting the World
Trade Center, he went ahead with his classroom event. After Bush was
informed that the nation was under attack after the second plane hit,
Bush stayed in the classroom for nearly seven more minutes, continuing
to read with the children. Confirmed, Commission Report at pp. 35, 38-39.

* Bush failed to have even one meeting to discuss the threat of
terrorism with his head of counterterrorism Richard Clarke.
Confirmed, Commission Report at p. 201.

* Bush failed to react to the August 6, 2001 security briefing,
"Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." Confirmed, Commission Report
at pp. 260-262.

* 142 Saudis, including 24 members of the bin Laden family, were
allowed to leave the country after September 13. Confirmed, Commission
Report at p. 556, n. 25 [Note that Fahrenheit 9/11 understates the
number of Saudis who left.]

* Individuals were interviewed by the FBI before being allowed to
leave (although the report confirms that most individuals on these
flights were not interviewed.) Confirmed, Commission Report at p.
557, n. 28.

* White House former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke
approved these flights. Confirmed, Commission Report at p. 329.

It should also be noted that the 9/11 Commission does not address or
deem important a number of other issues either addressed in Fahrenheit
9/11 or revealed since completion of the film, including:

* What exactly was the rush in getting these individuals out of
the country so soon after the worst attack in U.S. history, why did
Saudi Royals and bin Laden family members receive such special
treatment at a time when most Americans still could not get flights
(even though airspace may have been open), and how exactly were the
flights arranged by the U.S. government?

* Several unanswered questions posed by Senator Byron Dorgan
(D-ND) in a July 20, 2004, Grand Forks Herald column: "At a time when
14 of the 19 terrorists from Sept. 11 were Saudi citizens, how and why
were six secret flights allowed to sneak 142 Saudi citizens out of the
United States in the days after Sept. 11 before they were properly
interrogated? How do we know they weren't properly questioned? Because
Dale Watson, the No. 2 man and former head of counterterrorism at the
FBI has said none of them were subjected to `serious' interrogation or
questions before being allowed to leave. In fact, we now know that at
least two and perhaps more of the Saudis who were allowed to leave
after Sept. 11 were under investigation by the FBI for alleged
terrorist connections."

* Information that came to light in Dana Milbank's July 22, 2004
Washington Post article, including the fact that at least one bin
Laden family member who was allowed to leave lived with a nephew of
Osama bin Laden, who "was involved in forming the U.S. branch of the
World Assembly of Muslim Youth" (WAMY), which the FBI has described as
"a suspected terrorist organization," and that the bin Ladens flew out
of the country on the same airplane that "has been chartered
frequently by the White House for the press corps traveling with
President Bush."

http://www.9-11commission.gov/

CNN poll: Bush maintains 7-point lead over Gore - October 29, 2000

WASHINGTON (CNN) - GOP presidential candidate Texas Gov. George W. Bush continued to maintain an advantage over Democratic Vice President Al Gore in Sunday's CNN/USA Today/Gallup tracking poll.

Forty-nine percent of respondents said they supported Bush while 42 percent said they would vote for Gore, no change at all from Saturday's poll.

Support for Green Party candidate Ralph Nader and Reform Party candidate Patrick Buchanan also remained unchanged at 3 percent and 1 percent respectively.

The poll results are not predictions, but instead are merely snapshots of who likely voters currently favor.

In the past, the poll has shown Bush with at least 48 percent of support for five consecutive days, and Gore with no more than 43 percent during that same length of time.

We're back at war in Iraq, says general

Gen Sir Mike Jackson, the head of the Army, has admitted that British troops in Iraq are 'back at war'. He is the first authoritative figure to concede that war is still being waged in Iraq, 16 months after President George W Bush declared that combat operations were over.

In an interview with The Telegraph, the Chief of the General Staff said that August had been a difficult month for soldiers serving in southern Iraq.

Gen Sir Mike Jackson: 'August was a very busy month'

'Soldiers are now fighting a counter-insurgency war,' said Sir Mike. 'August was a very busy month and British soldiers were involved in war fighting.'"

Britain to cut troop levels in Iraq

The British Army is to start pulling troops out of Iraq next month despite the deteriorating security situation in much of the country, The Observer has learnt.

The main British combat force in Iraq, about 5,000-strong, will be reduced by around a third by the end of October during a routine rotation of units.

The news came amid another day of mayhem in Iraq, which saw a suicide bomber kill at least 23 people and injure 53 in the northern city of Kirkuk. The victims were queueing to join Iraq's National Guard.

More than 200 people were killed last week in one of the bloodiest weeks since last year's invasion, strengthening impressions that the country is spinning out of control.

Yesterday grim footage apparently showing a British engineer kidnapped from a house in Baghdad last week along with two American colleagues surfaced in a video released in the Iraqi capital. The group holding the three threatened to execute them unless Iraqi women prisoners are released from jail.

And last night it was reported that 10 more staff working for an American-Turkish company had been seized as hostages.

There are now fears that scheduled Iraqi elections in January will have to be delayed because of the growing instability.

Last week Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, said that more troops could be sent to safeguard the polls if necessary, although Whitehall sources said there was no guarantee that they would be British.

The forthcoming 'drawdown' of British troops in Basra has not been made public and is likely to provoke consternation in both Washington and Baghdad. Many in Iraq argue that more, not fewer, troops are needed. Last week British troops in Basra fought fierce battles with Shia militia groups."

STOP BUSH POSTCARDS