ACCUSED Australian terrorist David Hicks should be given a prompt trial or returned home, Catholic Bishops said today.

The bishops are concerned for the health of Hicks, who has been detained at the US military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, since 2001.

They called on the Australian and US governments to resolve the issue urgently.

"There is now heightened concern for his physical and mental health, in conditions which reputable human rights agencies have said are tantamount to torture," the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference said in a statement.

"If Mr Hicks has a case to answer, he should be tried without further delay by a competent and independent tribunal with protections of the rule of law that all Australians would expect.

"A continuation of the current situation is not acceptable."

Adelaide-born Hicks has been detained in the US detention centre in Cuba since he was captured with the Taliban in Afghanistan five years ago, but he has yet to be tried.

"Australia has a duty, as a member of the world community, to uphold standards of justice and decency," the statement said.

"Historically, Australia and its allies have a proud record in supporting these principles, both within and outside their borders."

Steve it seems lots of people are out cleaning up behind BushCo. There are many doctors in the country fighting to restore health rights to lyme disease patients too. The NC Board of Medicine has been allowed to disenfranchise American citizens with the diagnosis of Lyme Disease in America. This is really no different than what is going on in Iraq. People are trying to fix what Bush broke with his crass UnAmerican leadership style. He has broken our international relations just like he broke health care and treatment at home for thousands if not hundreds of thousands of Americans with lyme disease and the scientific data America was always proud of.Bush stifled the world for 6 years in all ways. Will anyone at all care about our internal problems here at home that Bush caused too???

Lovely that HTML comments are disabled... please excuse the lack of links and formatting... not to mention the difficulty in trying to post, apparently after previewing... wow... Guess I must have missed something.

Sibel Edmonds is back with another hard-hitting piece this week. She describes Turkey's Deep State behind-the-scenes power structure, involving organized crime, drug trafficking, arms trafficking and a bunch of state-condoned nastiness. She also highlights some familiar American names with implied peripheral involvement. Horrifying, yet fascinating.
Read here: www.nswbc.org/Op%20Ed/Part2-FNL-Nov29-06.htm

Blogger lukery at WotIsItGoodFor highlights a separate article about the Turkish "Susurluk Incident", described thusly:

The Susurluk Incident became Turkey's Watergate, exposing the deep links between the Turkish state, terrorists and drug traffickers. It revealed what Turks call the Gizli Devlet, or Deep State – the politicians, military officers and intelligence officials who worked with drug bosses to move drugs from Afghanistan into Europe.

"It was like a flash of lightning," says Hugh Pope, a British writer on Turkish affairs who has lived in Istanbul since the 1980s. "For a brief moment, it lit up everything that was really happening behind the stage."

Read it here: wotisitgood4.blogspot.com/2006/12/sibel-edmonds-americas-watergate.html

"But then again, it's remarkable that the basic findings of the study group are considered achievements."
Take a close look to see who is touting these leaked conclusions as paramount to finding the tomb of Toutankhamon.
I think you will find it is the same group of avid bounty hunters that were so eager to invade, and now clutching at straws, will find the dimmest glow a beacon in the night.
Also take a very close look at the members of this so called "commision."

While I have been advocating abandonment of the mad adventure that was the invasion and occupation of Iraq since before it was launched -- and I make no claim to unique prescience, since I'm by no means the only one -- the leaked ISG report is get another example of how monumentally bad the idea was.

We have to await the report, of course, but what has been missing from the leaks and discussion is any hint that anyone is thinking about the consequences and reactions to the proposed action. Just as no one ever properly thought through the consequences and reaction to our invasion in the first place.

What I mean is this: During the course of this "drawdown" or "redeployment" or whatever you want to call it that the ISG recommends, what will the Iraqi insurgents and militias be doing?

One suspects with a bit of a sigh that the assumption of these so-called wise men is that the various Iraqi factions will see the backs of the U.S. soldiers and say, "Ah, they are leaving. That's what we wanted. We don't have to attack them any more." That assumes, of course, that they have thought about the Iraqi reaction at all.

Would it were so. Unfortunately, Iraqi/mujahhideen irrationality makes them as predictable as they would be were they rational. One can easily anticipate that the more likely reaction will be, "Ah, they are leaving. That means those left will be more vulnerable, and our window of opportunity for killing Americans is closing. Let's attack them even more actively, to kill as many as we can while we can."

Thus my comment at an NAF symposium that redeploying to the permanent bases will replace thousands of low-value targets -- U.S. army patrols and stations -- with a few high-value targets -- the permanent U.S. military bases we have been building throughout Iraq.

We must be clear: While the Iraqi factions have as one of their goals getting U.S. troops out of their country, there are many factions for whom the main goal is simply killing Americans. One can thus predict that attacks against U.S. forces will be of greater frequency and severity during a pullback than they are even now.

Will the ISG contain any references to this? Will it or the disfunctional, political, national security aparatus this White House has built even allow the Army -- where there no doubt are plenty of people who are fully aware of the danger of the ISG recommendation -- to plan for this contingency?

Finally, one can only look at the time line, and think, what else will be happening in the Summer/Fall of 2008 that will make the prospect of a reduction in troop casualties (which may not happen under the scenario above) attractive?

To go way out on a paranoid limb, one can look at the events of the past five years, and posit that BushCo has never intended to actually reduce the threat of Islamoterrorism against the U.S. This threat allows them to use the fear card in election campaigns, and get votes that their otherwise abysmal record on every other issue would render unavailable. BushCo have treated national security -- like they have every other action -- as a political campaign sound bite.

The only argument I can think of against this bit of paranoic conspiracy theory is that it gives BushCo far too much credit for Machiavellian scheming.

But either way, we should be afraid, be very afraid. Of our own government.

"You came here under the pretext of confronting Saddam and weapons of mass destruction, but in truth you had come here to take over the oil of the region"--Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Nov. 29. Does anyone doubt he's right?

"The real reason for the muddle is that the Bush administration has not defined a realistic and achievable set of military goals in Iraq. Its original political goal of establishing a unified Iraq with a pro-US government that would let oil contracts on a favorable basis for Houston, would ally with Israel, and would form a springboard for further US pressure on Iran and Syria, is completely unrealistic. Cheney's inability to let go of those objectives is the biggest problem we have in Iraq. Move on." --Juan Cole, Nov. 28

"Vice Premier Barham Salih says that Iraq's new draft petroleum law, which will govern foreign investment in the industry, should be completed before the end of this year. THIS IS WHAT IT HAS BEEN ALL ABOUT."--Juan Cole, Nov. 7

Since it's all about energy, is anyone proposing to tackle it directly? All I see is policy elites burying their heads in the sand, flailing about, refusing to acknowledge the obvious.

Peace in Iraq will come only when all parties have firm guarantees that they will receive a fair share of their country's wealth. Peace in the Persian Gulf will come only when all countries feel that they can develop and use their wealth in accordance with their own needs, not dictated according to Houston's agenda.

Where is the intellectual energy and honesty to come up with real solutions?

"But then again, it's remarkable that the basic findings of the study group are considered achievements."

But the formation of the ISG does reflect a growing feeling that leaving the conduct of the Iraq war to aWol is a bad idea.

We're about to witness the political equivalent of the film "Weekend at Bernie's" --- the ISG report is dead, but the main characters are going to be running around propping up the corpse in order to stay in Bernie's mansion/Iraq.

You know its dead when the key recommendation is essentially a policy of rapproachment with Iran and Syria. Anyone who thinks that is going to happen with BushCorp running things is more braindead than Bernie himself.

Blah,blah,blah...the ISG is another dud.

Marica is right, just look at the members of the commission. This whole thing is another "bi-partisan" piece of crap. With anything concrete truths "redacted" to protect the gulity, the idiots, the politicans and the incompetent. Why in the hell have people on a study that were so WRONG to begin with.

I had hoped Baker would exert his will on this group, but no, we are still playing cover little George's ass, cover the gop ass, cover the dems ass...oh we just have to be soooooo inclusive.

More DO NOTHING political craploa bullshit.
The latest "reason" for why the Iraq forces aren't ready to take over is lack of equipment and training...well whose FAULT is that?
The latest "excuse" for not giving the Iraq forces what they need is that we are afraid they will use them on American troops.
Well, give them the damn equipment and weapons they need and move the troops out...then they will fight or die or desert....which is what will happen whether we leave now or later.
According to the numbers Steve published here prior 150,000 American troops aren't able to control 40,000 insugents. They don't even know who the hell is who or whether they are killing Sunnis or Shiites or what the hell the Kurds are doing.

Burn Washington to the Ground and Start Over.

I was watching CNN this morning and I couldn't believe how breathless they were about the Baker report, full of optimism that troops could come home in a few months and the Iraqis could take over security.
They have schizophrenic war reporting, with Michael Ware a war-weary cynical voice on the ground contrasting the bright-eyed, thick-brained anchors at home, who can't believe that things just aren't hunky dory.

Marky: The medium has become the message. Since we have info-tainment news anyway, aren't we on the the point of the story arc where the cavalry rides over the hill? Then roll credits...

But the spin cycle only works if everyone--including people in the ME--buy in.

Carroll,

Baker's PURPOSE in the ISG is to pull Junior's nuts out of the fire and provide cover for Poppy's little boy.

That's what he did in 2000, when he stole the election for Junior using an utterly bogus argument that a ten-year-old -- but evidently not a Democratic lawyer -- could have refuted.

That's what he and every other one of Poppy's buds have been doing ever since Junior threatened to flunk out of Andover, or Yale, or wherever he was ignoring his teachers. That's what they did every time Junior failed at business. Why should this be any different?

The only difference now is, rescuing Junior does not include the pesky little detail of saving all the hundreds of thousands of lives lost or ruined by Junior's incompetance, inattention, and delusions.

To hell with impeaching Junior. First, we impeach Cheney. Then we take Baker and Poppy out to the nearest wall and shoot them, for inflicting Junior on an innocent world. Then we make Junior appoint Gore Vice President. THEN impeach -- and send to Baghdad -- Junior.

That's justice.

Posted by David N at December 1, 2006 05:22 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>

Ditto.

Except there is no rescue for junior in this. I guess Baker figured that out, and decided the best he could do was past it on to the next administration.

Everywhere I went today I made a point of mentioning... Burn Washington to the Ground and Start Over....and I got rave reviews every single time.

Leon Panetta....Clinton advisor, Lieberman supporter
Vernon Jordan...Clinton confidante
Lee Hamilton (Indiana), Chuck Robb (Virginia) as conservative as one gets in the Democratic Party.

No Bob Graham... a conservative, but a war opponent.

Quite a bipartisan group here. First they come up with like minded members from the Republican and Democratic Parties; then they interview experts from neocons like "expert" neocon Clifford May all the way to like minded hawks in the Democratic Party. Certainly this group will come up with a varianton the sick thinking that brought us this disaster. But why does Clemons play the fool calling this a star-studded political cast. Do we ever break out of the mold of the so called sensible idiots who brought us disaster after disaster?

The ISG is just another sop towards the public opinion. The advance leaks sound remarkably like current policy, which is that the troops are coming home when the Iraqi troops stand up. This will be soon, but we can't say exactly when, because that would aid the terrorists.
We also might have to send more troops if things get worse.

I don't suppose the ISG says anything about the permanent bases. Want to make a wager with me that their are concrete proposals about those bases in the document? I'll give odds.

Gads, it just gets weirder and weirder. The Pope asked Kissinger to be his "Political Advisor", and Kissinger accepted. I guess the Pope just figures its OK to be a war criminal, as long as you are HIS war criminal.

In the course of history, have we ever had such a convergence of evil in both our religious leaders, from all sides, and our political leaders, from all sides?? It wouldn't be so damned scary if we were still slicing each other up with swords and cutlasses, but geez, these maniacs have nukes and doomsday bugs in their toy-boxes.

I wonder if the Pope's ill-timed and ill-conceived comments about Islam were a factor in bringing Dr. Strangelove on board?

From what I have read the Pope himself doesn't have a shiny record of action during WWII. I'm just saying you really can judge folk by the company they keep.

"Gads, it just gets weirder and weirder. The Pope asked Kissinger to be his "Political Advisor", and Kissinger accepted. I guess the Pope just figures its OK to be a war criminal, as long as you are HIS war crimina"

this is completely bizarre. can you post a link? i missed this story.

Here's a link.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20061130&articleId=4022

Posted by Pissed Off American at December 1, 2006 10:43 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>

Actually it's not all that weird that the Pope has called in Kissinger...it's just weird the Vatican let it be known. "The Church" has a long history of it's own little wars and political intrigue. My Jesuit uncle traveled far and wide for 30 years on political "errands" for the church. Like all organized religions their "bizness" comes first.
Too bad the Pope doesn't just shut the hell up and mind his holy business.

There is a reason the mafia was so compatible with The Church...

"the ends justifies the means"...
Ignatius Loyola....founder of the Secret Society of Jesus (Jesuits)

And yet another criminal conspirator steps down.....Cambone.

If this nation was what it was supposed to be, these fuckin' criminals would be getting frog-marched out of Washington in leg irons. Instead, they jump ship, join a think tank somewhere, write a book or two for millions of bucks, and just keep churning out the kind of perverse policy suggestions that landed us in this mess in the first place.

"We are watching a poorly staged rendition of Wag the Dog, interpreted for the morbidly stupid and performed by the criminally insane".......Jules Carlysle

http://www.buzzflash.com/store/items/371

No shit, Sherlock. I don't understand why they didn't accept the newly elected Iraqi gov't's peace plan, which included an agreement with Sunnis to lay down their arms, if the US withdrew its troops in two years. What the hell was wrong with that? What better way to demonstrate the benefits of a democratic gov't than to declare peace and end the killing? You tell me? What was that election for, anyway? I guess in Busholini's book, the damned Iraqis elected the wrong man. They wanted Chalabi, so I guess this gov't just has to fail, no matter how many people are killed and maimed, as long as it isn't one of the Bush brats. I wish Jim Webb had puncherd that sissy ass punk in the nose, I wish Webb had asked Dopey how his girls were doing on the Jet Set Nightclub Circuit. Pass the barf bags, please.

Mark 12:38-40 "Be suspicious of biblical scholars who make a big show of their religion, wearing distinctive garments and bearing lofty titles. They love praise from men and they occupy the most conspicuous seats of honor. They pray long prayers to impress people, and by their doctrines they steal the money of the poor. The hottest flames of damnation are reserved for them." Jesus

From Laura Rosen

The Guardian: Iraq corruption 'the second insurgency,' costing $4 billion a year. "The Iraqi government is in danger of being brought down by the wholesale smuggling of the nation's oil and other forms of corruption... Stuart Bowen, who has been in charge of auditing Iraq's faltering reconstruction since 2004, said corruption had reached such levels that it threatened the survival of the state. A US government report has concluded that oil smuggling abetted by corrupt Iraqi officials is netting insurgents $100m a year, helping to make them financially self-sustaining." Blown up oil pipelines mean oil transported by trucks is sold on the black market."

It's hard to miss an oil tanker truck going down the road. If the US was so hot to guard the oil fields you would think they would be at least as hot to guard oil transport trucks.

Rosen also report that Victor Bout, international criminal and arms dealer, among other things, is working for KBR, (Halliburton) transporting private armies and equipment (arms) into Iraq.

That evidently the US is paying no attention to these things means MafiaUSA isn't finished plucking all the feathers off Iraq yet.

http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/sf/Omaha1.htm

Sen. Hagel continues to make sense.

Well, would you just get a load of that nasty UN, the nerve of them to expect our number one welfare baby to actually pay for their destruction! Stay tuned for the hissy fits by the US. Who is paying btw for the power station they blew up in Palestine? I can't wait for the dem congress to offer Israel more of our taxpayer money. More political blood to spill in 2008...gop down, dems to go.

Israel should compensate damage in Lebanon - U.N. team

By Reuters
Friday December 1, 11:05 PM
By Stephanie Nebehay

GENEVA (Reuters) - A United Nations human rights inquiry said on Friday that Israel should be made to pay compensation for damage caused by its month-long war in Lebanon, especially losses incurred by civilians.

It suggested setting up an international compensation programme similar to the one which has paid out billions of dollars to cover losses due to Iraq's 1990-91 invasion and occupation of Kuwait.

But the three-member commission of inquiry -- which also rejected Israeli and U.S. charges that its recent report accusing Israel of "flagrant violations" in the war was one-sided -- left any decision to the U.N. Human Rights Council.

"It should consider creation of a commission competent to examine individual claims for reparations and compensation...," commission member Joao Clemente Baena Soares told a briefing. ........continued at

http://in.news.yahoo.com/061201/137/69x5j.html

This Iraq Study Group is classic DC BS. Brilliant minds convening for weeks to come up with what??
The list of things we need to do in Iraq?
1. Pack our bags
2. Leave
That's what it amounts to ultimately. The Iraqis want us to go. WE NEED TO GO. We lost this one. Perhaps this time we'll learn the lesson and REMEMBER IT. Now about Osama...

I fully expect the US to withdraw from UN membership any day now...no doubt we will set up our own New World Disorder UN with three of four other coconut republics in Jerusalem.

Last update - 18:09 02/12/2006

New UN resolutions back Palestinian right to a state

By The Associated Press

UNITED NATIONS - The General Assembly approved Friday night six pro-Palestinian resolutions over U.S. and Israeli objections, culminating in the world body's declaration of backing the Palestinians' right to an independent state.

In the key resolution on the "Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine," the General Assembly welcomed the November 26 cease-fire in Gaza and urged both sides to maintain the truce which it said could pave the way for negotiations towards a solution to the conflict.

At the end of three days of speeches, the 192-member world body on Friday reaffirmed the UN's responsibility regarding the Palestinian question and stressed the Palestinian peoples' right to self-determination and an independent state.

The Palestinian UN observer, Riyad Mansour, said the vote - 157 to 7 with 10 abstentions - showed massive support in the international community for moving forward on the peace process.

In a separate resolution topping 150 "yes" votes declared any attempt to impose Israel's laws, jurisdiction and administration on Jerusalem illegal, and therefore null and void. It was approved by a vote of 157-6 with 10 abstentions.

Two other resolutions called on Israel to withdraw from the Palestinian territories in the West Bank and from the Golan Heights.

The resolutions are not legally binding - as Security Council resolutions are - but they are a reflection of world opinion. Each of the six resolutions received more than 100 "yes" votes. The United States, Israel, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau voted against all six resolutions.

I hope, Steve, you will comment on your discussions with IAEA officials. I read the Directors report from Sept 2006 on inspections in Iran. While they have issues with the Iranians, none that warrant an invasion or bombings. All of the requested sites were eventually inspected after some initial protests that too many inspections were taking place.

My senator, Olympia Snowe, wrote to me in reply to some comments on Iran in Sept:

"As you know, Iran's nuclear program is a primary concern for the United States and the international community. In January of this year, Iran publically admitted to resuming uranium enrichment... The IAEA- which was barred from nuclear sites in Iran the very next month- confirmed that Iran has already succeeded in enriching uranium to low levels using existing facilities, and is constructing additional facilities capable of producing highly enriched uranium of the type suitable for nuclear weapons."

She later in the letter stated that she cosponsored the Iran Freedom and Support Act (S.333) "which would toughen exisiting sanctions..." and that "the sanctions would remain in effect until the President certifies that Iran has permanently and verifiably dismantled its weapons of mass destruction programs..."

I didn't like the tone of this, especially the bit about the IAEA being barred from nuclear sites. And the legislation appears to pre-suppose weapons of mass destruction programs. I replied to her letter with a lengthy quote from the Sept report of the director of the IAEA saying they had inspected all of the sites they had requested to inspect. Not without some resistance, but in the end with Iranian cooperation. I didn't receive a reply to this second letter. She is known as a moderate, but she sounded unusually hawkish in her reply.

At any rate, I hope you can talk about what your contacts with IAEA officials reveal.

Also, Steve might wanna question the IAEA folks about Tuwaitha, and the other twelve nuclear waste storage dumps in Iraq that were looted. I'd be interested in knowing if any of them were ever opened to IAEA inspection, to assess what materials went missing because of our criminal negligence in failing to protect those sites.It might be an eye opener too, to find oiut how many Iraqis died of radiation poisoning around Tuwaitha. My gut tells me that this rarely told tale is horrendous in its scale. You simply cannot have folks drinking, washing , and laundering, with water stored in radioactive drums, without hellacious health costs, genetic damages, and increased cancers.

Then of course, there's alaways the 'ol DU issue. If we can't wipe them out with shock and awe, then lets try civil war. And if that doesn't do the trick, lets just contaminate their environment with a couple eons worth of radioactive dust. 'Course, that dust is carried in the winds, so these satanistic fuckers like Cheney will get the extra satisfaction of knowing they are contaminating EVERYONE'S environment with radioactive dust. I mean, geez, if you're gonna fry in hell, you might as well score as many deaths as you can. Like, life's short, right?

The MF and OF monthly card are sold with low price!!The FFXI CDKey is in wholesale by low price!!game

See many man with heart of a brute,do you want to see monster noodles public?game