I really have to laugh and this whole issue should get more publicity. We should be discussing it more and I have not seen it at all on the MSM. Diplomats don't want to serve but our troops must? Let's get this discussed.
last week we discussed the fact that despite the chief idiot swearing off a draft for our military as he could lie to them and misuse and abuse their Patriotism. He was reduced to being forced to Draft Diplomats who know better, to work in the war zone fortress he has created as a monument to his middle east breakdown and so called successful middle east democratization, until he can get his new world order world war three going full swing which will happen when he attacks Iran. Draft for Diplomats to man failed Baghdad Fort
We discussed numerous times that we don't know what it will be yet but Bush will find an excuse to attack them so he can appear to be forced to fight his Forever war. as Bush and Iran have been going tit for tat looking for an excuse to get this war going it seems forever now they feign concern? Many U.S. officials believe small conflicts on the ground or at sea are potentially riskier than a nuclear program. While the White House dwells on Iran's nuclear program, senior U.S. diplomats and military officers fear that an incident on the ground in Iraq is a more likely trigger for a possible confrontation with the Islamic Republic.
In one sign of their concern, U.S. military policymakers are weighing whether to release some of the Iranian personnel they have taken into custody in Iraq. Doing so could reduce the risk that radical Iranian elements might seize U.S. military or diplomatic personnel to retaliate, thus raising the danger of an escalation, a senior Defense official said. Read the changing excuses for war with Iran
We discussed that once the excuse is found the fact that the world is rallying to take us on in the middle east when Bush attacks Iran to start his new world order world war three. Read our story on the world rallying against Bush
We are also watching as Israel steps up threats to invade the Gaza strip. Israel escalated its threats on Tuesday to invade the Hamas-run Gaza Strip in response to Palestinian rocket fire after a plan to withhold key utilities drew objections from legal experts and foreign powers.
Since quitting Gaza in 2005, Israel has mounted regular commando raids and air strikes on rocket crews but the salvoes have not ceased. Two such operations on Tuesday killed at least four Hamas policemen and wounded six Palestinian civilians.
Islamist Hamas's takeover of the territory in June stoked calls in the Jewish state for a big military sweep. "Every passing day brings us closer to a broad operation in Gaza," Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak told reporters. "We are not looking forward to it (and) we would be happy if circumstances prevented it." Read about Israel's efforts for new middle east order
Turkey is threatening to erupt into civil war over the issue of going into Iraq in a full scale military attack on the PPK in Kurdish Iraq thereby making the area even more volatile. Kurds in southeast Turkey voted this summer in record numbers for Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his promise to bring peace to their region. Now, with Turkish troops massed for a possible invasion of Iraq, the talk is of curtailed political rights and ethnic strife.
Erdogan is threatening a full-scale military operation in northern Iraq to root out guerrillas from the Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK, after almost 50 soldiers and civilians were killed last month. Such a move would exacerbate tensions between Turks and the estimated 15 million ethnic Kurds in Turkey, who represent 20 percent of the country's population.
``The rising tide of nationalism feels directed at Kurds, and people here fear a civil war,'' said Fahri Timur, 33, head of the Human Rights Association in the Kurdish town of Hakkari. ``This government has improved the situation for Kurds, but we can't expect respect for human rights in the Please read about Turkey joining the middle east breakdown
Amidst this still just beginning middle east breakdown soon to be world war can you blame American Diplomats for speaking the truth about being forced to serve in the middle of this mess? Calling it "a potential death sentence," several hundred diplomats expressed their resentment Wednesday over a new State Department policy that could force them to serve in Iraq or risk losing their jobs. Others pointed out the risks of such a rule, considering the dangers of a war zone, lack of security and regular rocket attacks on U.S. personnel.
One State Department worker complained she was not provided medical treatment for her post-traumatic stress disorder after she voluntarily served in Iraq. The session was marked by angry exchanges, according to an audio recording of the meeting held at the State Department. The sharpest comments came from Jack Croddy, a 36-year veteran of the Foreign Service. To loud applause from his fellow workers, he asked how the State Department could protect people in Baghdad or the Iraq countryside when "incoming is coming in every day. Rockets are hitting the Green Zone.
"It is one thing if someone believes in what is going on over there and volunteers," he said, "but it is another thing to send someone over there on a forced assignment. And I'm sorry, but basically that is a potential death sentence and you know it. Who will raise our children if we are dead or wounded?" please read the whole story
The thing that angers me is that Iraq is a death trap that is spreading throughout the entire middle east as it was expected to and I for one can not blame our Diplomats for not wanting to get in the middle of Bush's success and risk death but I do not like the idea that my sons and all our troops are expected to. What about them? What about their kids? What about our Grandchildren?
With those questions asked I do not like what I am hearing once again but I have to hope that the diplomats will not cave in to threats and will set an example that will reverberate throughout the military and our America. Many of us are against everything Bush not just what he is doing in the middle east but around the world. Hopefully this is the beginning of a growing dissention that will hopefully work against Bush's new world order control and warmongering. What do you think?
James Joiner
Gardner Ma
www.anaveragepatriot.com
13 comments:
If Congress can't stand up to Bush et al., maybe the civil servants in the State Department can!
I agree that we shouldn't be sending anyone into war in Iraq, but the diplomats are not trained to be in the middle of a war zone, which is where the US Embassy is. In wartime, the Emabssy should be closed, but BushCo is trying to pretend that things aren't so bad there....
pookyshoehorn
Nice dog! I really hope this is going to snowball because the rest of us appear to be powerless to stop this just unfolding world nightmare. Glad to hear from you by the way!
Now these yuppie Republicans know how the troops feel being shoved off into that deathtrap.
larry
I know! At least they can just quit. I just hope it sends a message that will stop at least Bush's momentum. What stinks is the rest of the world has now been set in motion and that will proceed regardless of who is President.
Check this out Jim:
Hard Rain Journal: Asking the Right Questions -- It is Tyranny, Treason & Torture, Not Terrorism, that Will Destroy Us; Unless We Resist.
By Richard Power
The question isn't whether or not the Bush-Cheney regime should attack Iran without first receiving explicit congressional authorization, the question isn't even whether or not the Bush-Cheney regime should get the funding to continue the occupation of Iraq.
The question is "How can the _resident be allowed to spend one more weekend mountain biking at Camp David while the men and women of the US military die in the Mega-Mogadishu of Iraq?"
The question isn't whether or not the VICE _resident should be investigated for his role in violations of the Foreign Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Freedom of Information Act or improprieties in regard to the awarding of no-bid DoD contracts to Halliburton, or for tampering with the operations of the CIA or the DoJ.
The question is, "Why should the US taxpayer foot the bill for this person to fall asleep at another cabinet meeting, shoot another friend in the face or spend any more time 'working in the shadows' from his secure, undisclosed location?"
The question is, "How can we remove these people from office peacefully and constitutionally; and if there is no way to remove them from office peacefully and constitutionally, how do we best use the political process to mitigate their destructive impact until their term is up?" The question is, "How do we insure that they leave at the end of it?"
The question is, "How do we make certain that they are not followed up by others like Giuliani or Romney, who although just as disturbed, might prove more competent?"
It is not terrorism that will destroy us, it is tyranny, treason and torture.
In recent days, despite the worst intentions of the US mainstream news media, the stark truth has bled through the fabric of self-deception, from within that mainstream itself.
However, without the aggregation, analysis and amplification that is only available in the blogosphere, the truth would be all too easily drowned out with nonsense.
So here are four nuggets of gold truth concerning Tyranny, Treason and Torture extracted from the mainstream media's mine of false memes:
Tyranny --
CNN commentator Jack Cafferty speculated on Wednesday about how George W. Bush's unilateral grab for presidential power might be reversed.
"The president of the United States didn't have the power to spy on Americans ... operate secret prisons ... suspend due process ... torture ... hide the conduct of the government from the public," Cafferty stated. "It's not like anybody gave President Bush any of these powers -- he took them, as a brain-dead Congress just stood there and watched."
In the follow-up segment, Cafferty read a selection of emails from clearly outraged -- and outspoken -- viewers ... "George Bush is the next president. He and Darth Cheney will be surrendering none of their bounty. Forty years of planning to hand it all to Hillary Clinton? Not a chance. If you think there'll be a November 8 election, give my regards to the Easter Bunny." Raw Story, 10-26-07
Treason --
Disclosure of her covert identity for political purposes was nothing short of "treason," outed former CIA agent Valerie Plame told Hardball host Chris Matthews Thursday on MSNBC. ...
"When your husband filed that story," Matthews said, "he must have known, didn't he, that he was gonna light a match that was going to lead all the way to you?"
Plame responded that her outing was not only unexpected, it was also treasonous.
"You cannot possibly be suggesting that with Joe's credentials, my airtight cover, that we actually anticipated that senior government officials would commit treason by blowing my covert identity," she said. Raw Story, 10-26-07
We know, with a 70 percent level of certainty — which is huge in the world of intelligence — that in August of 2007, bin Laden was in a convoy headed south from Tora Bora. We had his butt, on camera, on satellite. We were listening to his conversations. We had the world’s best hunters/killers — Seal Team 6 — nearby. We had the world class Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) coordinating with the CIA and other agencies. We had unmanned drones overhead with missiles on their wings; we had the best Air Force on the planet, begging to drop one on the terrorist. We had him in our sights; we had done it. Nice job again guys — now, pull the damn trigger.
Unbelievably, and in my opinion, criminally, we did not kill Usama bin Laden. ... The United States of America’s political and military leadership has, on at least three separate occasions, chosen not capture or kill bin Laden or Ayman al-Zawahri. We have allowed Pakistan to become a safe haven for Al Qaeda. We have allowed Al Qaeda to reconstitute, partially because of money they (Al Qaeda in Iraq) have been sending to Al Qaeda in Pakistan. Col. David Hunt, Fox News, 10-26-07
Torture --
Former US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's jaunt to France was interrupted today by an unscheduled itinerary item -- he was slapped with a criminal complaint charging him with torture. ...
The head of one of the groups responsible for bringing the charges, the US-based Center for Constitutional Rights, told RAW STORY today by phone that the suit was a long time coming.
"We've been working on cornering Rumsfeld and getting him indicted somewhere going on three years now," said the Center's president, Michael Ratner. "Four days ago, we got confidential information he was going to be in France."
Joined by activists, attorneys for the human rights groups caught up with Rumsfeld on his way to a breakfast meeting. "He was walking down the street with just one person," said Ratner.
"Around 20 campaigners gave Rumsfeld a rowdy welcome...yelling 'murderer,' waving a banner and trying to push into the building," reports AFP. ...
According to Ratner, France has a legal responsibility under international law to prosecute Rumsfeld for torture abuses.
Cashing In on Terror
Not to stoke any of the inane conspiracy theories running wild on the Internet, but if Osama bin Laden wasn't on the payroll of Lockheed Martin or some other large defense contractor, he deserves to have been. What a boondoggle 9/11 has been for the merchants of war, who this week announced yet another quarter of whopping profits made possible by George Bush's pretending to fight terrorism by throwing money at outdated cold war-style weapons systems.
Lockheed Martin, the nation's top weapons manufacturer, reaped a 22 percent increase in profits, while rivals for the defense buck, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics, increased profits by 62 percent and 22 percent, respectively. Boeing's profits jumped 61 percent, spiked this quarter by its commercial division, but Boeing's military division, like the others, has been doing very well indeed since the terrorist attacks. As Newsweek International put in August: "Since 9/11 and the U.S.-led wars that followed, shares in American defense companies have outperformed both the Nasdaq and Standard & Poor's stock indices by some 40 percent. Prior to the recent cascade of stock prices worldwide, Boeing's share prices had tripled over the past five years while Raytheon's had doubled."
Not bad for an industry in serious difficulty with the sudden collapse of the cold war at the beginning of the 1990s, when the first President Bush and his defense secretary, Dick Cheney, were severely cutting the military budget for high-ticket planes and ships designed to fight the no-longer-existent Soviet military. Sure, they had Iraq to kick around, but the elder Bush never thought to turn the then very real aggression of Saddam Hussein into an enormously expensive quagmire. He both defeated Hussein and cut the military budget.
Not so Bush the younger, who exploited the trauma of 9/11 as an occasion to depose the defanged dictator of Iraq and thus provide a "shock and awe" showcase for the arms industry, which continues to benefit obscenely from the failed occupation. The second Iraq war, irrationally conflated with the 9/11 attack that had nothing to do with Hussein, provided the perfect threat package to justify the most outrageous military boondoggle in the nation's history. The bin Laden boys only had an arsenal of $3 knives, but Bush claimed Hussein had WMD. Sadly for the military-industrial complex, Hussein's army collapsed all too suddenly. But the insurgency, much of it fueled by the Shiites, who were ostensibly on our side, provided the occasion for pretending that we are in a war against a conventionally armed and imposing military enemy.
Of course, we are in nothing of the sort with this so-called war on terror, a propaganda farce that draws resources away from serious efforts to counter terrorism to reward the corporations that profit from high-tech weaponry that has little if anything to do with the problem at hand. As Columbia professor Richard K. Betts points out in Foreign Affairs magazine: "With rare exceptions, the war against terrorists cannot be fought with army tank battalions, air force wings, or naval fleets--the large conventional forces that drive the defense budget. The main challenge is not killing the terrorists but finding them, and the capabilities most applicable to this task are intelligence and special operations forces.... It does not require half a trillion dollars worth of conventional and nuclear forces."
That half a trillion only covers the Pentagon budget for expenses beyond the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars or the Department of Homeland Security. Those last three items total more than $240 billion in Bush's 2008 budget requests. Add to that the $50 billion spent on intelligence agencies and an equal amount of State Department-directed efforts and you can understand how we manage to spend more fighting a gang of mujahedeen terrorists, once our "freedom fighters" in that earlier Afghan war against the Soviets, than we did at the height of the cold war.
"The Pentagon currently absorbs more than half of the federal government's discretionary budget," writes Lawrence J. Korb, "surpassing the heights reached when I was President Reagan's assistant secretary of defense. ... And, much like the 1980s, we are spending billions of dollars on weapons systems designed to fight the Soviet superpower."
Thanks to bin Laden and Bush's exploitation of "war on terror" hysteria, the taxpayers have been hoodwinked into paying for a sophisticated military arsenal to fight a Soviet enemy that no longer exists. The Institute for Policy Studies calculated last year that the top 34 CEOs of the defense industry have earned a combined billion dollars since 9/11; they should give bin Laden his cut.
Hey Patriot I saw on another blog that bush was going to have israel attack iran so he could help israel and then russia will join in and if that happens it will get really bad everywhere
Holly
I have said it so many times and for years now that Israel would attack Iran and coming to there rescue would be Bush's excuse to attack iran that is is sickening then coming to Iran's rescue would be China and Russia's reason to get in.
Whatever the trigger is there are so many avenues being explored that one will be found. This so called war on terror which is in reality world war three will not be avoided regardless.
larry
You know tyranny torture annd treason are routine with this misadministration. It is debilitating to watch it all every day and to just be knowingly lied to, have it denied, and then continued.
It is horrible but I always told my sons I can tell you are lying. You read like a book, it is all over your face. Look at Bush's and especially Cheney's, very scary.
It is horrible to look at. You can see hate and death all over them. Thing is this was obvious before the idiots even got in and it has been debilitating to have to watch all this and be powwrless to stop it.
you listen to me. I keep saying the only way to stop this period is to take to the streets enmasse other wise Congress will not intervene. They are complicit and looking for a role in Bush's nightmare scenario.
I was just lying in bed thinking of something I think about often and that is Putin, Chavez, Bush, the whole lot of them that don't already have it are scheming to get into power for life so they caan prosecute this war. What the hell can we of the world do? We have to do something!
Larry
I told you! That is why I get peeved when people say it is all about the oil. That is only a small part of it.
It is all about profit. I have written on it before you may know. We are a war economy and Bush needs this Forever war to grease the stock market and the economy as he bankrupts the country.
It isn't just the defense industry reaping the benifits of this nightmare but they seem to be the prime benefactor. We have to get someone of consequence to listen, see this, and take action.
larry
I am looking at one of your comments again and you know as well as I do that we let Bin Laden out of Tora Bora and worse. I have written about that too numerous times and can get it if you want.
They probably know where he is but need him free to prosecute this so called war on terror. Aghhhh!! It is very frustrating being observent but voiceless.
"With those questions asked I do not like what I am hearing once again but I have to hope that the diplomats will not cave in to threats and will set an example that will reverberate throughout the military and our America."
This is what I hope too. I hope the administration is not able to recruit enough Loyal Bushie Foreign Service Officers to go to Iraq.
I hope they hold their own and protest by not going. I am actually surprised that there is this much resistence.
I was under the impression Bush had stacked Loyal Bushies in every nook and cranny he could find.
I'm guessing they are trying to send the Liberal/Democrat/Progressive FSO's to Iraq as much as possible.
Let the conservatives go. Recruit some of the fucking rah-rah right wing blogging war cheerleaders.
If the diplomats won't go, why should our troops?
I am glad this was covered by Olbermann. Man, the guy in charge taking the questions is such a tool and loyal Bushie. He was pathetic.
This could gain some traction if more resist and the news keeps covering it.
But I'm guessing the Bush Administration is moving quickly to quash any dissent and punish those for speaking out.
Olberman had on a former FSO who said the price was high for not obeying BushCo and epected swift retribution was on its way.
Buddy
A am hoping it gains traction. I am so fed up with the arm twisting and lying.
I lost the entire day and all my information so except for my site I lost everything and must start from scratch so I do not have anyones E's or anything.
Please bear with me and spread the word if you want. Take care, man I'm telling you 10 hours of this shit and I'm frazzled!
Post a Comment