I hope Jane will take a moment to tell us how she feels about illegal immigrants being granted amnesty, while we deport Iraqi refugee mother's to the nightmare known as Iraq. Particularly now that the illegals are starting forest fires on the border so they can distract the border patrol long enough to slither over the border undetected.

I would also like to know how long she and her compatriots intend to hold themselves above the law, refusing to impeach a president and a vice president, (lack of capitals on purpose), who have so blatantly ignored thier oaths of office and acted against the best interests of this nation.

And in closing, I would like to ask her how long she thinks the American people are going to continue to tolerate the complete absence of a respresentative government before they rise up in unrest? Or is she and the other elitist opportunists relying on an apothetic and ignorant populace that will remain pliable and unengaged?

Say hello to AIPAC for us, will you Jane?

Oops, almost forgot. I am also curious if they are allowing Rice to ignore a Congressional subpoena because they may need to do the same some day, or are the laws written just for us peons?

What an incompetent post. "Numerous small aircraft have targeted the White House." That's is a genuinely stupid remark. Look, kitchen knives are potential terrorist weapons. Putting recreational boats under regulation because of the USS Cole incident? This is hilarious.

By the way. If an arab snuck across our border, and torched a forest, what would it be called?

So, we are now granting amnesty to terrorists?

"What an incompetent post. "Numerous small aircraft have targeted the White House." That's is a genuinely stupid remark. Look, kitchen knives are potential terrorist weapons. Putting recreational boats under regulation because of the USS Cole incident? This is hilarious.":

Yeah, I wasn't even going to comment on it, it didn't seem to deserve a comment. The God damned borders are wide open, we have hundreds of thousands of un-inspected containers coming in monthly, and these incompetent criminal buffoons are going to clamp down on some sailor running downwind on a J-24? Or hey, lets go after the middle class guy out plying the sky in his Cessna. But don't screw with those corporate bigboys feeding Home Depot an endless supply of cheap Chinese shit masquerading as "building supplies".

keep the focus on terrorism jane.. it keeps the focus off so much else.. i agree home depot imports and the like are a much bigger concern, but lord help the politician who wants to take a run at controlling that zone - chinese imports to major multinationals.. hands off walmart and home depot but go after operators of small pleasure craft.. makes good headlines too, lol.. lord it is hard not to be cynical when one reads what is on the mind of an ordinary politician in the usa these days.

i think ron paul asked a good question 'why do they hate us?' here we have the usual avoidance tactics.

Well, Jane's got it right about "bipartisanship". They're ALL screwin' us over.

Jane Harman and her ilk are the problem. Why are we spending spending time on this?

Jane Harman and her ilk are the problem. Why are we spending time on her?

“...If ever there was an issue that should not fall victim to the vicious partisanship now plaguing Congress, it is national security.”

-- Jane Harman

Ah, Representative Harman, I agree -- national security must, indeed, be our top concern.

Hence, you may agree that we should be looking at the “big picture” as a first priority. Borders and boats are one thing, of course, and must be protected, yes.

What I would like to know, however, looms as a much, much larger threat to this country -- Bush and Cheney’s plans to use nuclear weapons on Iran. That, IMHO, will do much more long-lasting damage to this country, the Middle East, and the world....than anything you have spoken of here as concerns.

“A plan to attack Iran with nuclear weapons might also explain the otherwise inexplicable "National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive" (NSPD-51 AND HSPD-20) that Bush issued on May 9. Bush's directive allows him to declare a 'national emergency' on his authority alone without ratification by Congress. Once Bush declares a national emergency, he can take over all functions of government at every level, as well as private organizations and businesses, and remain in total control until he declares the emergency to be over.”

http://tinyurl.com/2mr3d7

So, it’s possible then, that there won’t even BE a 2008 election?

and: http://tinyurl.com/3aprpg

Some other questions wrt the connections between neo-conservatives in the U.S. and the Likud Party in Israel....

What about the 1996, The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and what it called for, “a new Pearl Harbor”? And, “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (Israel, that is)”?

And, finally, what is the true role and influence of the Israel Lobby (AIPAC) insofar as it drives U.S. foreign policy under Bush/Cheney? For example, isn’t it true that when Nancy Pelosi was booed during her speech at the last AIPAC luncheon, she got back in the lobby’s good graces by stripping a provision from the military appropriations bill that would have required Bush to go to Congress for permission to attack Iran?

Now, in keeping with his imperial presidency, Bush and Cheney believe, as they have for years, that they are free to do just as they wish?

When will the attack on Iran happen? This month? Next?

(Reminds me, I need to go get some plastic and duct tape....)

What ABOUT New Orleans having to ask for foreign aid?

Is this a joke? I find this hard to take seriously.

Is this suppose to remind us all of Isrmerica's World Wide Terrier Wur?

I will comment later, when I have finished wiping the insult off my intelligence.

Yes, America's port security was so full of holes in 2003 to make a Swiss cheese jealous...When I came back from Bernuda in June of that year, in a thick fog, a Navy vessel patrolling the entrance to Ambrose channel ignored my sailboat and when I called the Coast Guard on VHF radio to ask where I should report for a check-in, I was told to continue to my destination and from there, call a Customs phone number. For all they knew, I might have had bin Laden on board but they didn't bother to check

I see that people are getting up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. I think Representative Harman's post makes sense and is a way of reaching out to Chertoff to work with the Democratically controlled Congress on some things that matter. Yes, I know that there are still many "big picture" issues that frustrate Americans -- but sometimes you have to find common ground. And as anyone who reads this blog knows, I believe in giving the administration credit for positive steps as well.

It waa very cool of Jane Harman to write this short bit for TWN -- and I'm hopeful she will share her views again. Clearly, not everyone will agree with her, but let's at least maintain civility and discuss the merits of the policy argument.

More later,

Steve Clemons

"It waa very cool of Jane Harman to write this short bit for TWN -- and I'm hopeful she will share her views again. Clearly, not everyone will agree with her, but let's at least maintain civility and discuss the merits of the policy argument."

Steve, Harman is being ridiculous here.

She waves the Cole attack as if a marina in San Diego is the Yemeni coast. She presents the alarmist threat of a "radiological weapon" as if the first choice of a terrorist with radioactive materials that could be used as a dirty bomb would be on the water.

Harman praises this silly proposal solely in order to burnish her "centrist" credentials, and "build bridges" to the Bush administration. That is a bridge to nowhere, however -- and if Harman cared more about National Security than she did about her reputation as "centrist" she'd be trashing the corrupt and venal Michael Chertoff who has turned DHS into a haven for patronage hacks, rather than desperately searching for something to praise him about.

Heckuvajob, Janie!

We all agree that national security, terrorism, etc. are concerns, but in the real world they do not represent the encompassing threat that politicians seem to feel necessary to genuflect to. (except maybe in palces like Iraq and Lebanonn, with regard to which politicians appear clueless and therefore reflexively throw more money and weapons).

We absolutely know that the Bush administration has stirred the cauldron of fear to keep Americans from focusing on the incompetent and criminal enterprise they are.

But when they can pry themselves away from their sitcoms and other diversions, Americans appear to be genuinely very angry. As chair of an intelligence subcommitte, of course, it is perfectly appropriate for Rep Harman to write on intelligence-related matters; she must unfortunately receive the message that we are angry, and not amused by a dog and pony show just because it happens to be a dog and pony show related to her committee assignment.

So while it is understandable to note positive moves, even by this administration, it is perhpas more important to place it in context lest we become [even more] complicit in the vast charade that too often passes for governance.

I'm sorry if politeness gets lost in the shuffle.

(you know, I wish Senate and House websites would allow non-constituents to send comments; its not like their actions affect only certain zip codes).

I'm sorry Steve, but I got up on the right side of the bed this morning, and have had quite a few hours, last night, and this morning, to ponder Harman's condescending and laughable bit of political horsecrap. If these people want respect, they are going to have to give a little to get a little.

There are some specific concerns raised here in response to Harman's comment. I raised a few myself. You might not like the tone or the delivery of those concerns, but you must remember we have had years of watching Washington shred everything we once stood for.

Now, if Harman is really concerned about what America wants from its REPRESENTATIVES, than she will follow through on her comment by taking EACH AND EVERY ONE of our comments and responding to them. If not, then her post here is just more political posturing and doublespeak. These people have more than enough time to listen to the concerns of AIPAC,and respond to them, so maybe its about time they responded to the concerns of thier constituents.

I'm not impressed, Steve. Not by Chertoff, not by Harman, and not by thier handling of national security, where the people bear the brunt of the infringments, while global corporate entities have free rein, whose shipping methods, and need for cheap labor, pose the real threat.

And Steve, perhaps you are too close to power, and have tunneled inside just a bit too far. People out here in the real world are angry. The angriest I have ever seen them in my fifty five years. The kind of bubbly "gee isn't this wonderful" horseshit Harman handed us isn't diminishing the anger, it is adding to it.

"Gee golly folks, we are gonna act in your best interests, and further impinge on your rights and recreation, and isn't Mr. Chertoff a darling for joining us in this endeavor? Sleep tight now, although the boogie man is under your bed tonight, working to behead you, Cherty and I are working diligently to keep you safe. Nighty night now."

Harman...Chertoff...AIPAC spy scandal...TOWNHOUSE...gatekeepers...MEGAPHONE...

Madam Harman,

You write "If ever there was an issue that should not fall victum to the vicious partisanship now plaguing Congress, it is national security."

That is completely wrong. For 6 years the Bush administration, enabled by the republican Congress has "viciously" used national security to:

--Condone torture
--Imprision people without trial or charge
--Waste the flower of this generation in the sands of Iraq
--Award no bid contracts to Halliburton
--Win elections in 2002, 2004

A "bipartisan" relationship with the Bush Administration and your Republican colleagues in Congress is impossible.

Please do your job and expose the criminality of this Administration and your colleagues. Do not stop until those that conducted and enabled torture, unlawful dentention and warcrimes are where they belong--jail

I can't tell you how angry this post makes me. Really unbelievably completely angry.

I can't imagine a better distillation of everything that's wrong with our country and our representatives than this claptrap of further eroding our liberties in the name of terrorism.

Not to mention the absolutely insane idea of "reaching across the aisle" at a time when the "other side of the aisle" has done nothing but screw up this country. "Radical centrist?" How about "collaborator?"

I am so disgusted.

I'm sorry steve. I don't wish to be rude, but we need to start talking straight about the issues to our representatives if we're ever going to get any of this mess fixed. And seeing a leading democrat try to take us even further down the path of the nonsense we've endured ove rthe last 6 years is very disturbing.

Oh yes - and as others have said above, impeach these criminals.
And then jail them. Or execute them, as the convictions warrant.

that is about the most paranoid thing I have read in a long time.

Jane, when will we begin removing the criminals from the white house?

Slightly OT; I think that progressive . . . and centrist . . . politicians would have a cakewalk (!) getting elected if they simply adhered to the business of trying to get things straightened out in D.C.. Which by the way was the conensus reading of the '06 elections - repudiation of Bush et al, big time. So instead, what do we get. More posturing and politiking; more accommodation and prattling about "bipartisan". More comity, certainly, than the republicans who have perpetrated the most stepford-like congresses than I can recall in decades had any right at all to expect.

I know, the mantra is "were elected to legislate". Well, some congresses are more for legislating, and others are needed to thoroughly address the institutional attack on our system of rights, liberties and common sense (such as we have left)undo harmful laws. Some congresses are elected - as this democratic one -- in reaction to abuse; thorough disgust at the transparent failure of honesty and decency, much less leadership.

Example of being out of touch: recent email form DCCC (that would be democratic congressional campaign committee). Soliciting more contributions. Sent out with the picture and over the signature of James Carville. Do they live in an alternate universe, or think we are that stupid?

Posted by DonS at June 22, 2007 09:06 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I echo DonS.

And I agree there is no need to be personally rude but there is no longer any tolerance in the pulic for this sort of fear mongering fluff, spin and nonsense from politicans. Chertoff can't even put an American city like New Orleans back together again or defend the Mexican border or enforce our laws and they are going to secure our coastline?

We all know know the past and current history of why we have a terrier problem. And instead of an intelligence post discussing changes that need to be made in our foreign policy (like we usually see here) we get this little ditty from Ms. Harman, who like others of her kind helped create our ME problem and are continuing to create problems for the US with their ideology driven positions and Israeli fetish. And she wants us to know that she is protecting us from the "Green Peril"?

As a life long coastal resident of a port town and off shore boater since childhood and owner of a small plane for many years I won't even attempt to explain why her plans to monitor private boats and aircraft won't be worth the money it would take to even try to enforce it.

Perhaps Ms. Harman and Ms. Collin can put their heads together and figure out how US policies in the ME that they support might have spawned our so called terrier problem.

And if Ms. Harman wants to keep her job or protect Americans she might start be realizing she is suppose to be working for the interest of the American "people" and not a buffet of domestic and international special interest and adjust her position accordingly.

"terrier problem" -- I like that.

Arf! Arf!

Bad doggy! Back in the cage!

Representative Harmon:

While you so fully support AIPAC, to the point of invitng scores of them to wine and dine as guests at your palatial estate, as long as you're talking waterfront security, don't forget the true story of the USS Liberty.

"The Israeli government, the AntiDefamation League, and certain notorious apologists for Israel insist that the attack was a tragic accident and that the US government accepts that assertion. Not so. Virtually every knowledgeable American official with the lone exception of Robert McNamara is on public record calling the attack deliberate and the Israeli story untrue."

http://www.ussliberty.org/

I mean look at it folks...look at it. Here is the kind of thinking that got the Dems to go along with the Iraq War, the Patriot Act, et al. Ok, you think it was nice of Ms Harmon to offer us this stuff. Fine Steve. And if this is what she believes then this is what she believes. But it is crap Steve. Like the same kind we have been getting for years from many Dems. Spreading the fear....expanding incompetent bureaucracies in search of a mission. That there real bad guys, and gals, out there is not reason to suspend risk analysis 101. I do it for a living. If I brought this stuff in to a client they would laugh me out of the room. There is no cost/benefit analysis here. Or none that I see, anyway. There is a cover your butt mentality. Sorta a "DO SOMETHING". Why would we want to work with the Sec of DHS? He is incompent and power grabbing. What are you going to do with him? The only thing positive from guys like Chertoff is to see the back of him as he walks out the door. But who will be walking in the door if Dems win? The Jane Harmon's of the party? Whew....

Ms. Harman: You lecture us on the “the vicious partisanship now plaguing Congress” and say we should join you and get past all that....rise above....and support Secretary Chertoff in ports safety.

Hmmm. You mean THIS Michael Chertoff?

http://tinyurl.com/yrlyox

http://tinyurl.com/5km3n

And, gee, Chertoff’s DHS oversees the Coast Guard, but in January this year, DHS underwent an audit....and, surprise (to name just one finding):

“The United States Coast Guard (Coast Guard) was unable to provide sufficient evidential matter or make knowledgeable representations of facts and circumstances, that support transactions and account balances of the Coast Guard....”

As Firedoglake reported in January:

“Particularly with respect to fund balances with Treasury, accounts receivable, actuarially-derived liabilities, environmental and legal liabilities, operating materials and supplies, certain categories of property, plant and equipment, undelivered orders and changes in net position, and adjustments both manual and automated, made as part of the Coast Guards financial reporting process.

Translation: Not only did they not keep the receipts or write shit down, when we asked them what they spent the money on or where the stuff they spent the money on was to be found, they told the auditors, “Duh, I don’t know”. Consequently, they don’t even know what their account balance is at Treasury.

So, if there is an attack on the U.S. requiring defense of our shores and they need to buy some extra bullets or fuel for the cutters, they don’t know what, if any, money they have available. So how can they know if they need an emergency appropriation?

I feel so much safer knowing that, don’t you?”
------------------------------------------------------
http://tinyurl.com/ye8dd3

BTW, Chertoff is the guy who directed some people needing help after Katrina to -- Dick Cheney’s son-in-law!

As others have said here, we are angry about the egregious mismanagement, cronyism, war profiteering, and corruption of the Bush/Cheney Regime. Your post asks us to ignore all that....and play nice. For our own safety, you say. To protect us from the terriers out there.

Suddenly, Pogo comes to mind. “We’ve seen the enemy and it is us.”

Or, that is, maybe those you would have us turn a blind, bi-partisan eye to are themselves terriers of this country, wouldn’t you say?

We aren’t stupid, you know.

We’re mad as Hell....and, we’re very much on to you and your “friends” in D.C. and beyond.

I’m a whole lot more worried about what your Neo-con friends will have Bush do next. And, the long-term impact on the national defense of this country due to the Larry Franklin/Steve Rosen/Keith Weissman spy ring for Israel.

It should be a big September -- what with the latters’ trial....and the Baghdad-Bob-reporting of the “Victory” of the “Surge strategy” that Fred Kagan (Bob’s, PNAC brother) crafted, right? (The surge of our kids dying....for W’s ego and buying him time, that is.)

Or, maybe by then we’ll be diverted by Iran and the devastation there.

maybe jane got up on the wrong side of the bed when she wrote it.. that seems more the case.. but, i doubt it.. this is typical political 'the terrorists will get us if we don't' bullshit. i am sure many of the posters here were spitting it out 5 years ago with the move to war in iraq over the same bullshit.. when will these politicians stop sucking up to military establishments intent of selling fear and an assortment of other things? it seems endless.

To belabor my point a bit more. Some straight talk about terrorism theory.

What does Ms. Harmon think she or congress accomplished toward abating terrorism or bringing our relations in the ME back to center with their absurd resolution to refer Ahmadinejad to the UN for inciting genocide against Jews and Israel? Besides making fools of themselves and of the US and confirming once again that the majority of our politicians represent not America, but whatever "cult" or lobby butters their political bread, in this case Israel and their followers in this country.

I use this resolution as an example to point out what pissy, childish, tribal, cultist, useless behavior congress indulges itself in...none of which is in the "interest" of America.

First,what Ahmadinejad said has been correctly translated by the NYT, which you would not allow to be inserted into the official record. But never mind quibbling over words or meanings. Ahmadinejad is just another thug among many Israeli, Arab and US thugs. So what if he called for the destruction of the zionist "regime"?

A big fat...So what.

I can give you mountains of quotes by Israeli officials and US politicians demanding the preemptive destruction of Iran, demanding the destruction of any Palestine elements which might be close to forming any kind of state, assassinating and calling for assassinations of all over the ME.
All of which statements entail mass deaths. I can give the exact origin of the Israeli Sampson Option in which they threaten to bring down the entire world with them if they don't get their way. Is that the mark of a sane government..threateneing the entire world with destruction? Is the US endorsing genocide in adopting a premptive nuclear strike policy toward other countries? I can give you dozens of articles about Netenyahu, not a citizen of this country, but a foreign official, touring MY country to whip the 2% population of Jews and our goverment into a frenzy of demanding that our country preemptively attack Iran for Israel's security.

The utter stupidly of congress in assuming that Americans don't see the disgusting "HYPOCRISY" in their cheering the Israeli bombing of civilian Lebanon, the use of cluster bombs that are still killing children in Lebanon or supporting the slow motion genocide of Palestine by Israel or our invasin of Iraq or where all this is coming from ..well it just boggles the mind of sane Americans.

Only in the incest tank of congress could one get away with cherrypicking the 1948 conventions. Well, the rest of us can also read and we understand that you have put our country, the US, in the position of needing to be referred to the ICC right along with Israel under Articles II and III.

So there can be no arguement on this, here it is for anyone on this site to review:

Excerpt from the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Genocide

"Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article III: The following acts shall be punishable:

(a) Genocide;

(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;

(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide. "

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a crime to plan or incite genocide, even before killing starts, and to aid or abet genocide: Criminal acts include conspiracy, direct and public incitement, attempts to commit genocide, and complicity in genocide.
Punishable Acts The following are genocidal acts when committed as part of a policy to destroy a group’s existence:

Killing members of the group includes direct killing and actions causing death.

Causing serious bodily or mental harm includes inflicting trauma on members of the group through widespread torture, rape, sexual violence, forced or coerced use of drugs, and mutilation.

Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group includes the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group’s physical survival, such as clean water, food, clothing, shelter or medical services. Deprivation of the means to sustain life can be imposed through confiscation of harvests, blockade of foodstuffs, detention in camps, forcible relocation or expulsion into deserts.

Prevention of births includes involuntary sterilization, forced abortion, prohibition of marriage, and long-term separation of men and women intended to prevent procreation.

Forcible transfer of children may be imposed by direct force or by fear of violence, duress, detention, psychological oppression or other methods of coercion. The Convention on the Rights of the Child defines children as persons under the age of 18 years.

Genocidal acts need not kill or cause the death of members of a group. Causing serious bodily or mental harm, prevention of births and transfer of children are acts of genocide when committed as part of a policy to destroy a group’s existence.

The law protects four groups - national, ethnical, racial or religious groups.

A national group means a set of individuals whose identity is defined by a common country of nationality or national origin.

An ethnical group is a set of individuals whose identity is defined by common cultural traditions, language or heritage.

A racial group means a set of individuals whose identity is defined by physical characteristics.

A religious group is a set of individuals whose identity is defined by common religious creeds, beliefs, doctrines, practices, or rituals.

Key Terms

The crime of genocide has two elements: intent and action. “Intentional” means purposeful. Intent can be proven directly from statements or orders. But more often, it must be inferred from a systematic pattern of coordinated acts.

Intent is different from motive. Whatever may be the motive for the crime (land expropriation, national security, territorrial integrity, etc.), if the perpetrators commit acts intended to destroy a group, even part of a group, it is genocide.

The phrase "in whole or in part" is important. Perpetrators need not intend to destroy the entire group. Destruction of only part of a group (such as its educated members, or members living in one region) is also genocide. Most authorities require intent to destroy a substantial number of group members – mass murder. But an individual criminal may be guilty of genocide even if he kills only one person, so long as he knew he was participating in a larger plan to destroy the group."

I could use a hundred other examples and go on and on but this is the most recent...and 99% of the people who read TWN already know the who(s), what(s) and why(s) of everything concerning our empire and terrier war so I won't take up any more space.

Ms. Harman: You lecture us on the “the vicious partisanship now plaguing Congress” and say we should join you and get past all that....rise above....and support Secretary Chertoff in ports safety.

Gee, Chertoff’s DHS oversees the Coast Guard, but in January this year, DHS underwent an audit....and, surprise (to name just one finding):

“The United States Coast Guard (Coast Guard) was unable to provide sufficient evidential matter or make knowledgeable representations of facts and circumstances, that support transactions and account balances of the Coast Guard....”

As Firedoglake reported in January:

“Particularly with respect to fund balances with Treasury, accounts receivable, actuarially-derived liabilities, environmental and legal liabilities, operating materials and supplies, certain categories of property, plant and equipment, undelivered orders and changes in net position, and adjustments both manual and automated, made as part of the Coast Guards financial reporting process.

Translation: Not only did they not keep the receipts or write shit down, when we asked them what they spent the money on or where the stuff they spent the money on was to be found, they told the auditors, “Duh, I don’t know”. Consequently, they don’t even know what their account balance is at Treasury.

So, if there is an attack on the U.S. requiring defense of our shores and they need to buy some extra bullets or fuel for the cutters, they don’t know what, if any, money they have available. So how can they know if they need an emergency appropriation?

I feel so much safer knowing that, don’t you?”
------------------------------------------------------

BTW, Chertoff is the guy who directed some people needing help after Katrina to -- Dick Cheney’s son-in-law!

As others have said here, we are angry about the egregious mismanagement, cronyism, war profiteering, and corruption of the Bush/Cheney Regime. Your post asks us to ignore all that....and play nice. For our own safety, you say. To protect us from the terriers out there.

Suddenly, Pogo comes to mind. “We’ve seen the enemy and it is us.”

Or, that is, maybe those you would have us turn a blind, bi-partisan eye to are themselves terriers of this country, wouldn’t you say?

We aren’t stupid, you know.

We’re mad as Hell....and, we’re very much on to you and your “friends” in D.C. and beyond.

I’m a whole lot more worried about what your Neo-con friends will have Bush do next. And, the long-term impact on the national defense of this country due to the Larry Franklin/Steve Rosen/Keith Weissman spy ring for Israel.

It should be a big September -- what with the latters’ trial....and the Baghdad-Bob-reporting of the “Victory” of the “Surge strategy” that Fred Kagan (Bob’s, PNAC brother) crafted, right? (The surge of our kids dying....for W’s ego and buying him time, that is.)

Or, maybe by then we’ll be diverted by Iran and the devastation there.

BTW, I had had some tinyurl's -- to give proper attribution to the quotes I used....and also a couple of other pieces I thought it would be informative to read....(in the above)

but the URL's bounced the whole response...so I had to eliminate them. Sorry.

I've just read your post, Carroll. Well done! Important points.

As POA said, it would be refreshing if Rep. Harman -- besides simply reading our responses (unless she's stopped) -- would comment to us on what we have said here.

I won't hold my breath.

Since Harmon is a Lobby puppet, how much credibility does she have on anything?

Posted by Sandy at June 22, 2007 05:42 PM
>>>>>>>>>

They will never answer our accusations or complaints. They are rogue "employees" who have taken over our factory from it's righful owners and are using our own guards to prevent us from getting it back.

Until we make them....and by that time we will be ready to make them "answer for it" instead of just answer the complaint.

I await the day.

Of course all US elected Representives WILL answer to who they truely represent:

Keep it congress and AIPAC...your day is coming.

GOP writes AIPAC to explain 'no' vote
E-mail News Brief

The Republican leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives is sending a letter to AIPAC explaining why the party voted against a foreign aid funding bill that includes $2.4 billion for Israel.

The overall funding bill of $34.2 billion for foreign operations passed late Thursday night 241-178, mostly along party lines in the Democratic majority House.

Republicans opposed the overall bill because it restores some funding for contraception aid to overseas groups that provide abortions. Rejecting such funding has been a Republican red line for over two decades.

The Senate has yet to consider its own version of the bill. If the amendment restoring the funding survives the Senate-House conference, President Bush is sworn to vetoing it.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee lobbied hard for the inclusion in the bill of $2.4 billion in defense assistance for Israel and another $40 million in refugee assistance.

In a P.S. attached to a memo to all Republicans instructing them to vote "no," minority leader Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio.) adds: "Members are advised that the Leadership has drafted a letter to AIPAC affirming Republican support for Israel funding, not withstanding final passage of this bill. This letter will be available for Members to sign at the Leadership Desk on the floor tonight. A copy of that letter is attached."

Republicans attached mostly symbolic pro-Israel amendments to the bill. One by Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), reaffirming existing policy banning assistance to groups that reject israel's existence, passed 390-30.

Another, moved by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), also passed. It cuts funding to the U.N. Human Rights Council and to Saudi Arabia. The United States does not participate in the council, and aid to Saudi Arabia has never surpassed $100,000.
>>>>>>>>>>>>

I see Harman, in typical fashion, dropped a bit of fluff on us, then scurried away when we weren't appropriately adoring. Any vestige of respect I had for her is gone. These people are despicable cowards.

I swear to God, I will never vote a Democrat ticket again. Screw these people.

Yawn. Just some more fluff from another lightweight in the Congress. A rich girl to boot, who cares little about the U.S., but very much about maintaining access to power. Good malls where she comes from; most of her ilk spend their days in those malls supporting the president's exhortations to spend, spend, spend and assisting in the ongoing decline in the nation she purports to serve.

And then there is AIPAC. Is Ms Harman a registered lobbyist for the Israeli government? We do have laws about that.

I don't know, Jane. Centrist just doesn't get it any more. You're either with us—the Americans—or you're with them—those who care nothing about the ordinary American, but who care ever so much about money, power and acceptance from their other rich friends. It's clear where you stand.

I see Hillary was booed at the Take Back America conference when she tried to blame the Iraqi government for this mess in Iraq. The Harman's and the Hillary's should probably get thier heads of their posteriors, and get a clue. Many of us are no longer buying this crap.

http://tinyurl.com/yrra45

"The American military has succeeded. It is the Iraqi government, which has failed to make the tough decisions that are important for their own people," the New York senator said from the podium, earning jeers from some members of the audience."

Way to go Hillary, help Buahg and Cheney make a war torn wasteland out of Iraq, then blame the Iraqis for it.

Slap Doesn't Stick: Corrupted Congress Will Help Bush Escape Court Ruling

Written by Chris Floyd
Thursday, 21 June 2007

Sidney Blumenthal adds a worthy comment to the recent ruling by the arch-conservative federal court that struck down George W. Bush's outrageous claims to tyrannical power. The court recognized what we have been saying here (and elsewhere) for years: that Bush's claims, if accepted, mean the end of even the pretense of a constitutional republic in the United States.

However, Blumenthal also notes that the ruling has changed nothing "on the ground." Bush has not altered his policies in the light of this stinging rebuke from his own side of the ideological divide. In fact, just last week, one of his mouthpieces strenuously defended Bush's abuse of "signing statements" -- his regular declarations that he is not bound by the laws passed by the people's representatives in Congress. The Boston Globe's Charles Savage, who almost alone in the corporate media has doggedly pursued this sinister practice, reports numerous specific instances of Bush's deliberate subversion of legislation. Questioned about the story, a Bush spokesman answered, in essence: "Yeah? So what? The Boss does what he wants to do, and that's the way it is. You savvy?"

The disgusting thugs who seized control of our government have been repeatedly unmasked. Their authoritarian pretensions and rampant lawbreaking have been repeatedly exposed in the media and by government insiders, and roundly condemned by numerous courts, including, as in this case, conservative courts packed with appointees of the Bush dynasty itself. Yet still, this gang squats in the White House, still they wield their earth-shaking powers, still they break laws and commit atrocities every day.

And Congress, the only institution in the country with the legal power to bring this monumental crime spree to an end, will not even attempt to use the tools provided to it by the Constitution to remove the perpetrators of high crimes from office. Richard Nixon was successfully impeached -- in wartime -- for offenses which, though serious, pale immeasurably in contrast to the Bush gang's crimes, which have put the very existence of the Republic in peril. [We speak here of the official charges against Nixon, not such monstrous transgressions as the bombing of Cambodia, etc., which went unpunished.] Yet the leadership of this Congress will not even try to launch impeachment proceedings against the Bush Administration, which openly admits, even champions, its lawbreaking; they will not even make the effort to defend the Constitution and restore the nation's honor. Instead, they prefer to "run out the clock," and let Bush continue his unfettered depredations, let his moral rot spread even further through the government and through our society.

What an extraordinary situation. On the one hand, we have a tin-pot tyrant, discredited, deeply unpopular, increasingly delusional, his illegitimacy exposed, his political base shrinking -- yet he remains firmly in power, waging a criminal war of aggression and actively moving toward another one, openly flouting the law of the land, and maniacally filling his cronies' pockets with loot. On the other hand, we have an opposition party that could draw upon the support of the vast majority of the public who oppose the tyrant's policies -- yet it refuses to take up the one legal weapon it has to accomplish the people's will and turn the criminal out of office.

Here we see the rotten fruit of the complete corruption of the American political system by big money. The system has always been corrupt, of course -- as are all systems of human government, to one degree or another; as Shakespeare noted 400 years ago, "tis often seen, the wicked prize buys out the law." But in the past few decades, big money has come to devour the entire system; there is no longer any alternative base of support for office-seekers other than the coffers of massive business interests and the wealthy elite. (Except of course when the wealthy elite deign to enter politics themselves, using their own money.) Such a system is bound to produce an army of mediocre time-servers, money-grubbing cowards, third-rate intellects -- twisted characters bloated with self-importance and obsessed with self-aggrandizement. And aside from the handful of honorable exceptions that can be found in any political system, that's what we have now: a Congress of ignorant, money-grubbing timeservers grovelling after the elite -- along with a large and growing number of the monied elite in office. To expect political courage from such a gaggle of overstuffed geese is like hoping a public toilet will belch forth gold bullion. It just ain't gonna happen.

continues at.....

http://tinyurl.com/yu6nsz

I'm sorry, Rep. Harman, but I find your description of yourself as a radical centrist self serving in a flattering way to cover for abdicating your oversight responsibilities to reign in an out of control President. While I applaud any steps forward that will actually protect our borders from penetration by terrorists, your so called centrist position has been dragged far right of center by this radical President. He has so inflamed the world with his reckless aggression, that we now find ourselves isolated against growing threats around the globe. All with the help of well meaning centrists like yourself. I hope you open your eyes a little wider and exercise more aggressively than you have in the past, your oversight responsibilities. Obviously, as exhibited by the latest outrage coming out of the office of the Vice President, the occupants of the Executive Branch feel that they are above the law and that this Congress will not impeach them. That was a very big mistake.

"Obviously, as exhibited by the latest outrage coming out of the office of the Vice President, the occupants of the Executive Branch feel that they are above the law and that this Congress will not impeach them. That was a very big mistake."

No, it's not a big mistake. They know exactly what they're doing. They know they can get away with it. They can get away with it because of get-along, go-along members of Congress. People like Jane Harman have made them bullet-proof. People who have no sense of decency or of the Constitution. People who have forgotten—or actually have never known—that their loyalties are supposed to be to the nation and to the people of the nation.

I wonder why Ms Harman hasn't responded here. Probably too busy at a fund raiser.

PissOffAmerica,

Just for the record, did you see the tape of Hillary being 'booed'? I did and I could barely hear the boos, if, indeed, there were any boos. I just saw this trumped up episode as another example of Hillary's triangulation strategy. It served her purposes to appear to be disliked by the so called 'hard left' or 'anti-war' wing of the party. And it served the purposes of the less sophisticated Right to imagine Hillary booed (disliked) by 'her own party'. It goes to the unlikeable meme the MSM is pushing about her. This is one more attempt by the MSM to 'demonisze' the dem nominee, whoever it is. For the record, Hillary is not my choice but I will vote, and work, for whomever the Dem candidate is. Unless it is a Lieberman type.

"Just for the record, did you see the tape of Hillary being 'booed'? I did and I could barely hear the boos, if, indeed, there were any boos."

No, I didn't see the vid. But honestly, I am dissappointed the boos were not more widespread. Hillary should be placing the blame for this mess in Iraq squarely where it belongs, in the laps of Congress and this Executive Administration. Her assertion that she voted for the war because the Bush Administration hoodwinked her, and "everyone" thought Iraq had WMDs is despicable. And now, this attempt to blame the Iraqi government for the current turmoil is equally as despicable.

And I do not understand your intent to support a Democrat. Which one? I see none that are any better than what the right is offering. Speaking of which, did you see Romney doesn't support closing Gitmo? I guess, after lying to us about the IAEA's pre Iraq invasion status, he figures he might as well see to it that our downward spiral in world opinion continues. Welcome to modern America, where Presidential candidates kick off their campaigns with obvious lies, and damaging policy proposals. Well, at least with Romney, we'd know what we were getting.

The fact that Harman has not endeavored to defend her original comment here, and the policy it outlines, says volumes about her.

Jean Harman, you are a posturing coward, like so many of your compatriots.

The mid-term election saw the very last vote I will ever cast for a Democrat ticket.

Oh, please Jane.

I used to live in her district, and her title should be Jane Harman (D-Israel) -- she was being investigated by the Feds for her ties to AIPAC.

There was an article in Newsweek (Oct. 25, 2006) on the investigation, as well as her private dinner with Chertoff and Negroponte last year at her mansion in Los Angeles.

Here's the URL:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15419753/site/newsweek/

And here's an excerpt from the Newsweek article on Harman:

"The Sept. 13 dinner took place at the home of Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Select Committee on Intelligence, and was attended by over 120 top financial backers of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The highlight of the evening was a panel discussion in which Harman played the host, questioning Negroponte and Chertoff about Mideast developments, international terrorism and homeland-security issues, according to an AIPAC official. "

But my question to Jane would be, and I did call her office at the time to ask it:

"My tax dollars are being used to kill Palestinians, Lebanese, Iraqis and Afghans in this so called "War on Terror". They are being strafed by F-16s, destroyed by cluster bomblets, and their infrastructures are being destroyed, so Jane are you and I a "terrorist"?

Because we are killing possibly millions of innocents -- how Jane, do you define a "terrorist" as it appears to me that the AIPAC controlled Congress definition of a "terrorist" to be an enemy of Israel, and now, because of Israel, the U.S."

The destruction of the Bill of Rights continues, and it can be entirely be put on the doorstep the Israel Lobby.

www.antiwar.com is a must read today and every day.

According to the Israeli papers, Israel is preparing to bomb Iran, this as Bush claims that he is above the law.

Harman is a criminal, she swore an oath to the U.S. and she has destroyed us, like the rest of the Uni-Party, who should all just put (R-Israel) or (D-Israel) after their names.

Jane Harman writes:

"So, I believe Secretary Chertoff is onto something important, and am happy to say so. If ever there was an issue that should not fall victim to the vicious partisanship now plaguing Congress, it is national security."

How about the issue of the war in Iraq? How about Gitmo and Abu Ghraib and extraordinary renditions? How about the destruction of America's reputation abroad because of torture, lying and its militarism? And don't forget Bush's acceptance of everything in violation of human rights Ehud Olmert wants to do, vis-a-vis the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

People like Jane Harman who pretend to be centrists are really enablers of George Bush and Dick Cheney, and are as responsible for the mess in Iraq as they are.

Reading all the comments made to Harman's post sort of focuses my thoughts on the public's options ..and how few options we actualy have with our governement.

Not too long ago most Americans had a sort of benign neglect policy toward their government. Most looked at legistation and political elections as how it would effect their business or personal interest or home region. If we railed and ranted it was mostly in seperate classes or regional groups about what we didn't get favorable toward our lives.
Then our focus was mainly on corruption in domestic policy favoring rich corps and multinationals or one economic group over another.

But now our politicans have gone global in their corruption and disloyalty to America and Americans. They have upped their corruption to include spilling real blood and lives and US law and international law. They have brought in other countries and all kinds of foreign groups and interest and given them a seat at their corruption table. They call this corruption table "American Interest" becuase they don't dare call it the Special Interest Congressional Shopping Bazzare, but none of them ever say exactly what those interest are except to refer to them in vague ways about 'allies" and "democracy", sometmes "energy interest"
and always getting them "Enemies of Amurkins."

The number crunchers say the 2006 election reflected 70% of America wanted a 180 change in American empire and foreign adventures and elite rule.
Now the polls say only 23% of the country approves of our entire congress and goverment.

And still we see no change. We see the same game continuing. We see congress still using the legistative "system" they created; the use of "poison pills" inserted into bills to kill them for one side or another, or to sneak in pork, or to insert legistation for their favorite lobby or own personal ideology, that has nothing to do with the "supposed" title or purpose of the bill. The biggest parts of all our legistation and laws are now dictated by special interest lobbies.

Assuming that congress is aware of it's 77% disapproval rate the only thing you can conclude is...They Do Not Care. period.

They think they have us by the short hairs, that we have no choices but the least dangerous of the two Mafia families.

The only ways I see all this ending are we continue this system all the way to the bottom of the pit for America. Reaching the bottom of the pit will take some time because it will be like that death of a thousand cuts, a little bit at a time. We can keep on trying to vote out the corruption one politican at a time. Another long process with the certainity that a major % of the new ones will also be converted to the club of the corrupt by the system. So basically the trip to the bottom of the pit and our efforts will be traveling at the same speed.

If a true revolution, violent or otherwise is out of the question until people reach that famous "nothing left to lose" point, what do we do in the meantime?

It seems we wait for the bottom or some of us voters could hasten the bottom by letting the worse win to speed up the bottoming out and re-birth of democracy. I guess it's a matter of who wants to get it over with sooner vrs those who want to postpone the pain as long as possible. I am personally leaning toward speeding up the blow up and cleaning this up on our watch, not leaving it for our children to have to do. It's our fault, not our childrens.

For those who still think that we are a democratic nation of laws and can right ourselves with the right party in control I ask you to take a real hard look at congress...both parties are different only in their choice of the corruptions on the menu.
But for those who want to work on this the only thing I can think of is working for a law in each state that would allow the voters of that state to boot their politican out of office at any time with a recall petition.

Right now, I don't have the stomach to vote for any Democrat next year either. IF the Bush/Cheney mafia allows an election to be held, that is. The Democrats are for the most part clueless. Any hope I had after the last election has been shattered by their actions....non-actions....since. Everyone bows to the AIPAC/Israel/Neo-cons first....the Constitution and Rule of Law....later...if at all.

I just read that worldwide, other countries say that the three largest terrorist nations they fear are Iran, Israel and the United States.

So much for our torture and kidnapping policies...and the genocide going on in Gaza.

I believe the Democrats are in for a very rude awakening.

 http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062207H.shtml
 
 "...It was surrealistic what these guys were doing," the ex-officer told Hersh. "They were running around the world without clearing their operations with the ambassador or the [CIA] chief of station." [New Yorker, June 25, 2007, edition]

    In other words, President Bush not only had arrogated to himself the right to snatch people off the street and lock them up indefinitely without trial but he had dispatched assassins around the world to eliminate alleged "bad guys."

    The bigger picture - the stark and grim image of what had transpired over the past half dozen years in the name of the American people - was that the United States could no longer claim to be a nation of laws and liberties. It had become a country governed by a criminal mob deploying an unsavory collection of capos, consiglieres and hit men.

    In this view, George W. Bush was no longer President of a Republic but Godfather of the world's most intimidating crime syndicate. But that was a reality that the U.S. news media could not afford to acknowledge in real time, though it might become the unavoidable conclusion of future historians."

And nobody's stopping them.

Some of you may have been actually verifying my claims that the AIPAC website has been exagerating, and at times actually lying, about Iran's nuclear efforts. I hope that in the past, when I have posted such assertions, accompanied by a link to thier site, that one or two of you have made the effort to check my claims, and verify for yourselves their veracity. The last time I made such an assertion was when the AIPAC website ran an article claiming that Iran was refusing to allow an IAEA inspection of its Nanatz facility, when the IAEA was running public announcements that these claims were untruer, and that an IAEA inspection team was in fact inspecting the Nanatz facility.

Considering the close ties that Pelosi, Reid, Harman, Clinton, Obama, and Edwards, etc, maintain with AIPAC, it should be no suprise that they have not raised the issue of AIPAC's efforts at propagandizing the Iranian nuclear program, and exagerating the threat that Iran poses to the United States and Israel. But the fact that they have not raised the issue, (beyond being not suprising), is alarming in the fact that they are actually complicit, through thier silence, and acceptance of a foreign agency spreading such propaganda, in decieving the American public. The are actually co-conspirators, in the strictest sense of the term. Should we find ourselves in military conflict with Iran, our Democratic leadership must bear as large a share of responsibility as our President should. Carroll points out that there is virtually no difference in the level of corruption of both parties. The warmongering and fear tactics being waged by both parties in regards to Iran perfectly underscore her point.

On the heels of this disastrous and deadly debacle in Iraq, we now see the same deceptions and exagerations used to bring us closer to conflict with Iran. And the Democrats are up to thier necks in it, in no small part because of their illicit partnership with AIPAC.

A Congress Voters Can't Buy

by Gordon Prather

On January 13, 2007, just days after the new Democrat-controlled Congress convened, President Bush took the opportunity provided by a joint press conference with the new German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, to condemn both Iran and President Ahmadinejad.

"Countries such as ours have a great responsibility to work together and send a common message to Iran that it's behavior... trying to clandestinely develop a nuclear weapon or using the guise of a civilian program to get the know-how ... is unacceptable,"

Bush then repeated the often made – but completely bogus – charge that Ahmadinejad had called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."

"And that's unacceptable. And the development of a nuclear weapon seems to me would make them a step closer to achieving that objective,"

Of course, Bush increasingly finds the real world "unacceptable." But as the Washington Post's Jeffrey Smith notes –

"Having a president call something "unacceptable" is not the same as having him order U.S. troops into action. But foreign policy experts say the word is one of the strongest any leader can deploy, since it both broadcasts a National position and conveys an implicit threat to take action if his warnings are disregarded."

National position?

According to a CBS News poll taken a few weeks after Bush's "implicit threat," a large majority of Americans – 71% – did not consider Iran to be a threat requiring military action.

Nevertheless, a large majority – 59% – reckoned Bush's war in Iraq would soon lead to a larger war in the region.

When asked in that public opinion poll how much "public opinion" should affect Bush's decision-making about the situation in Iraq, 30% said "some" and 62% said "a lot."

When asked how much Congressional actions should affect Bush's decision-making about the situation in Iraq, 42% said "some" and 51% said "a lot."

So, what "mandate" had voters given the 110th Congress?

To somehow prevent Bush from launching another war of aggression, attacking yet another state, Iran, posing no threat to us.

Accordingly, Walter Jones (R,NC) introduced House Joint Resolution 14 and Robert Byrd (D,WV) introduced Senate Resolution 39, both reaffirming the Constitutional requirement of Congressional approval before offensive military action can be undertaken by the President.

The next step ought to have been for Congress to determine – as best it could – whether Iran did indeed have such a clandestine nuclear weapons program, and if so, to what extent that program posed an imminent threat to you and yours.

Now, the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons requires signatories not already having nuclear weapons to conclude a Safeguards Agreement – with the International Atomic Energy Agency – applicable to certain proscribed "source and special nuclear materials" and activities "with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons."

On 22 February, 2007, IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei made his quarterly report [.pdf] to the IAEA Board of Governors, wherein he concluded –

"Pursuant to its NPT Safeguards Agreement, Iran has been providing the Agency with access to declared nuclear material and facilities, and has provided the required nuclear material accountancy reports in connection with such material and facilities.

"The Agency is able to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran.

Hence, Iran was in compliance with its NPT obligations.

The same, of course, could not be said for all IAEA Board Members, most especially the United States.

Consider that –

"Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also cooperate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.

So, Congressional oversight committees, if necessary, should have subpoenaed Secretary of State Rice and/or her munchkins – the Ambassador to the United Nations and the Special Envoy to the IAEA – and demanded from them an explanation as to why we have been falsely charging Iran with being in noncompliance with the NPT and with their IAEA Safeguards Agreement.

In particular, after ElBaradei reported in February that there was no indication that Iran had ever diverted any NPT-proscribed materials to a military purpose, why did Rice's munchkins proceed to strong-arm the UN Security Council into passing Resolution 1747?

In it, the Council begins by "reaffirming"

(a) its commitment to the NPT and the need for all signatories "to comply fully with all their obligations," and

(b) the "right" of all signatories to conduct research and development, to produce and to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes "without discrimination"

Now, bear in mind that the whole world knows that Iran is fully complying with all its NPT obligations and knows that the United States is not only not complying with all our NPT obligations, but, in blatant disregard of the NPT, has been discriminating against Iran – denying Iran its "inalienable rights" under the NPT – and strong-arming other NPT signatories into similarly discriminating.

Notwithstanding that, under UNSCR 1747 [.pdf], the Council – acting under Article 41 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter – "reaffirms" that Iran "shall, without further delay, take the steps required by the IAEA Board of Governors in its resolution GOV/2006/14."

What that language means is that the Security Council has decided – under Article 39 of Chapter VII – that Iran's Safeguarded nuclear programs constitute a "threat to the peace, breach of peace, or act of aggression" and therefore calls upon all UN member states to apply "complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations"!

Of course, the 110th Congress hasn't pursued the mandate given it, hasn't demanded to know why we're willfully violating the IAEA Statute, the NPT and the UN Charter, why we're trying to provoke Iran into withdrawing from the NPT. Or worse.

Bush probably finds that "acceptable" Congressional behavior.

http://www.antiwar.com/prather/?articleid=11180

US: New polls reveal mass opposition to Democrats and Republicans

By Joe Kay

15 June 2007

New opinion polls released this week show mounting discontent within the American population over the war in Iraq and the policies of both political parties. They reflect deep and bitter opposition to the Bush administration, but also reveal that just six months after the Democrats took control of Congress, masses of Americans who voted Democratic to express their opposition to the Iraq war are disillusioned and angry over the Democrats’ cowardice and complicity with Bush.

According to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released on Wednesday, Bush’s overall approval rating stands at an all-time low of 29 percent. Over 66 percent disapprove of his job performance. From April of this year Bush’s approval rating dropped 6 percentage points, an extraordinary fall in such a short period of time, particularly given the president’s already low numbers.

However, the continued collapse of support for the Bush administration has not translated into a corresponding rise in support for the Democrats. In fact, approval for the Democratic-controlled Congress stands at only 23 percent, below even that for Bush and down sharply from only a few months ago.

In early 2007, following the midterm elections, approval for Congress jumped to 31 percent from its pre-election low of 16 percent. Over the past two months, however, support for Congress has fallen a full 8 percentage points.

The fall in support for the Democrats reflects more than anything else anger over the passage of the $100 billion war-funding bill in May.

Another recent poll, conducted by the Los Angeles Times and Bloomberg earlier this week, registered similar results. It found that 63 percent of the population believes that the new Democratic-controlled Congress is governing in a “business as usual” manner—that is, doing nothing to change the course of US government policy.

The Democratic speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, has an approval rating of only 36 percent, while 58 percent of self-described “liberal Democrats”—those most likely to oppose the war in Iraq—disapprove of Congress, up 15 percentage points from January.

On Iraq, the poll found that 68 percent of the population now favors the complete withdrawal of US troops within one year or less, with 25 percent favoring “immediate withdrawal,” up from 19 percent in January. These views, held by the overwhelming majority of the population, are nowhere expressed in the political establishment.

At the same time, 54 percent of those surveyed in the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll said the situation in Iraq has gotten worse in recent months, during the period of the “surge,” while only 10 percent said it has gotten better. A New York Times/CBS News poll last month found opposition to the Iraq war at record highs, with six in ten saying that the US should never have gone into Iraq.

The NBC/Wall Street Journal poll also found that only 19 percent of those surveyed—less than one in five—said that the country is “headed in the right direction,” while 68 percent said it was “off on the wrong track.”

Besides mass opposition to the Iraq war, these polls reflect mounting anger over the growing concentration of wealth at the top, and the increasingly difficult economic situation facing working people. Rising gas and food prices, the collapse of the housing market, job cuts, attacks on health benefits and pensions, wage stagnation have all contributed to widespread anxiety and disillusionment within the American population.

The percentage of people who believe the country is headed in the right direction has declined steadily over the past several months, from 29 percent last October, to 28 percent in January, 25 percent in March, and 22 percent in April.

These figures provide a snapshot of a political system in deep crisis. Beneath the ossified and unrepresentative political and media establishment in the US is a population seething with anger and discontent.

Commenting on the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll findings Wednesday evening, NBC News anchor Brian Williams said they indicate a “volatile period in modern American history,” in which the mood of the population has turned “decidedly grim and downright angry.” NBC Washington Bureau Chief Tim Russert remarked that the polls showed “it’s churning out there.”

These comments reflect nervousness within the ruling elite that growing opposition could produce a social explosion, with the public finding new channels for expressing its views and interests beyond the confines of the two-party system.

There is a profound disconnect between the majority of the population, increasingly politicized by the war in Iraq and the social crisis, and the political establishment. Underlying the chasm between official politics and the sentiments of masses of people are longer-term trends, in particular, the extraordinary growth of social inequality. The political establishment is dominated by the interests of a tiny oligarchy.

The Hoekstra-Harman Hoax

How the War Party plans to lie us into war – again

by Justin Raimondo

For the War Party, deception isn't just a tactic, or even a strategy – it's a lifestyle. That's why they're indifferent to getting caught. Like a hardened criminal arrested for his umpteenth felony, the neocons see brazen lying as just a routine procedure. Caught red-handed, they just move on to their next subterfuge, one invariably designed to drag us into war.

That is the only way to explain what Reps. Peter Hoekstra and Jane Harman thought they were doing when they released their "report" [.pdf] on Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program, which – as the International Atomic Energy Agency puts it – is chock full of "erroneous, misleading, and unsubstantiated information." In a letter [.pdf] to House Intelligence Committee chairman Hoekstra, IAEA official Vilmos Cserveny takes "strong exception" to "incorrect and misleading" claims in the report that the IAEA fired an inspector, one Christopher Charlier, for giving the Iranians a hard time. He was let go, says the Hoekstra-Harman report, because he went up against an alleged policy "barring IAEA officials from telling the whole truth about the Iranian nuclear program," as Hoekstra-Harman put it. This conspiracy theory is put to rest by Cserveny, who curtly informs the American Congress that Iran is fully within its rights, under the Nonproliferation Treaty, to ask for the replacement of one inspector out of over 200 which it has accepted.

Cserveny points out, as did some in the blogosphere when the report first came out, that the "weapons grade" enrichment described by Hoekstra-Harman as occurring at Natanz is a complete fabrication. Why, it was only last April, Cserveny reminds the esteemed members of the House, that the inspectors verified a 3.6 percent enrichment rate – not the 90 percent or more required to qualify as "weapons grade."

The lies pile up, one placed upon another until an edifice of massive deception is constructed, a narrative that can convince the American people to go along with the effort to start World War III (or IV, as some would have it). Iran, the latest target of the regime-changers, is in America's sights, and we aren't going to let such a paltry consideration as the facts get in our way. Hoekstra-Harman have no interest in reality: their "report" is war propaganda, pure and simple. That's why they shrieked that Iran is "covertly" producing polonium-210, a substance with "two known uses," one of which is to produce nukes (the other is to make satellite batteries). Who cares if Iran is not required, under the terms of the NPT, to provide information about P-210 production? It sounds scary, and the average reader – and reporter – is not going to know what is entailed – or that the UN has made an investigation [.pdf] in good faith to determine the nature and extent of Iran's P-210 production. Instead, they are expected to swallow the conspiracy narrative woven by Hoekstra-Harman that depicts the IAEA as the Iranians' willing instrument. After all, isn't the head of the IAEA named ElBaradei? Don'tcha know those ragheads are all in on it together?

The War Party has learned nothing and has no regrets, and this willful blindness is underscored by the latter half of the Hoekstra-Harman duo. Even as the Democrats rail against the "quagmire" in Iraq, and decry the conduct of that war, their leaders are intent on dragging us into yet another conflict, this time much bigger, and with far more mire.

continues at.....

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9702

Posted by PissedOffAmerican at June 23, 2007 06:30 PM
Posted by Sandy at June 23, 2007 05:13 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

It would be interesting to do a real in depth individual study of the dems vrs. the repubs on the Israel fetish and the ME in general.

Everything I have read in individual statements and on Thomas in bills re Israel tells me the dems like Harman, Ackerman, Nadler, Lantos etc are far more dangerous (and active)in their Israeli idealogy and therefore the ME in general than the repubs.

On the repub side you have some real christian zionist and a few really sick whores like Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, but mostly you have run of the mill "defense" politicans who go along with AIPAC just because they don't want to targeted as enemies of AIPAC in elections or because Israel is just in the overall package of their US defense or empire model or they have politically active christian zionst in their election districts.

However on the dem side you have a gaggle of Jewish congressmen for whom Israel really is their first loyalty, it's their obession, plus they are truely "right wing" Lukidnics. They fight any and all chances of any settlement in Isr-Pal. If you go to thomas or Govtrac you can see all the bills and resolutions of this group....none of it is ever aimed at doing anything positive, it's all dennouncing and punishing the Palestines and all other ME countries except Israel. There isn't any forward peace movement in Isr-Pal because the right wing repub cz's, but mostly the 'Greater Israel" Jews in the US congress won't allow it. Palestine will never get their statehoood or be anything but a ghetto as long as they are still in congress and the US will continue to be blamed and despised for it.

When you look at the list and descriptions of their resolutions and bills "for" Israel and "against" everyone else it is so bazzaro it is comical. Or would be comical if it wern't so tragic.

When they passed a resolution condemning Hezbollah for using civilian shields by launching rockets from civilian areas...the Israeli papers themselves were at the same time reporting on the IDF using Palestines children and teenagers as human shields in their house searches in the occupied territories.

Wes Clark said if we really wanted a war with one billion Arabs we could probably have one and this group is certainly pushing to kick that off with an attack on Iran.

I think we need an unhyphened American Political Action Committee to fight these people..as undesirable as a war with Iran would be, that might be the catalyst for enough 98% of Americans to finally unite behind an plain American agenda.

Steve:

I address this to you because -- unlike with Harman -- there is a faint chance you will read this.

What the Harman post truly reveals is that no one -- no one -- in Congress, in the Bush regime, in the think tanks, in the academy, in the stooge corporate media. No one is now nor has ever made step one toward real steps to making our country more secure.

Because empty guestures are easier. posturing is easier. Building fences and making people take off their shoes and harrassing mothers with two-year-old toddlers is easier.

And every politician from the beginning of time to the end will go for the easy answers, no matter what the party label, no matter what the idealogical label.

Even when there is a significant segment of the voting population that recognizes that easy answers and campaign slogans are a lousy way to govern, politicians will go for the easy answers, because the real answers take time. By the time any real progress is made on any real answers, the next campain is over, and maybe they'll win, maybe they'll lose. But the campaign consultants and the moneybags contributors are telling them that the only way to guarantee re-election (remember, they're saying this to Congressmen who enjoy a 98% re-election rate) is to go for the slogans and the easy answers.

That tirade out of the way, Harman has had the misfortune of presenting her easy answers where the audience is intelligent enough to see them for the empty rhetoric and posturing they are. What she really needs to do is listen instead of posture, but without money, we have no power to compell her to listen, and that's the end of that.

Because we know that the answers to both the immigration problem and the terrorism problem are the same: economics and ideas. If we were to get back to believing in the ideas that made this country great, the ideas of the Constitution and the Great Society (yes, that's what I said), and if we were to ever get around to actually promoting those ideas honestly throughout the world, then the two things that drive people to become suicide bombers -- grinding poverty and fascist ideology -- would have far less power and reach.

That's the short way of putting it, because this string of comments has gone so long that it's likely no one will ever get far enough to read a post that's also too long. But complex ideas don't fit in a thirty-second campaign ad, which is another reason we'll never see them in this or any other campaign again.

Here's the program:

1. Public campaign financing to get corporate power out of the government.
2. Universal health care. I don't care how.
3. Return to the rule of law, rather than of the vice president.
4. Start advocating free enterprise with rational regulations where needed, and respect for human rights and the rule of law, and show that they work to develop decent lives everywhere.
5. Counter fascist religious ideology, whether in the Middle East or Washington.

Bar the above, the rest is useless.

I wouldn't miss this website for anything. But it isn't because of the Jane Harmans....it is exactly because of the honesty and informed intelligence and passion and caring of the people that I have read here in every single post since I left to go fix dinner at 5:15! Quite amazing!

And, yes, I, for one, have read...and followed...what you've posted POA, including the websites you've mentioned. And, Carroll often reads where I do, too. I just hadn't read this newest J. Raimondo...nor the latest from Wes Clark...though I donated to his effort to stop the next war....on Iran. It's my biggest worry. They are just insane enough, power-mad enough to do it. And, from what I've read here, they are being helped along by the Democrats who have been mentioned....and others of them as well.

This was quite amazing, you DO agree, don't you, Steve:

"...Cserveny points out, as did some in the blogosphere when the report first came out, that the "weapons grade" enrichment described by Hoekstra-Harman as occurring at Natanz is a complete fabrication...."

....A COMPLETE FABRICATION !!!

You are right, Carroll and POA...and David N. We need a revolution. No need to look to Congress. Nobody home.
The inmates are in charge of the asylum.

They are laughing at us now.

http://tinyurl.com/2c922f

They know Nancy, Jane, Harry, et al have promised...

IMPEACHMENT IS OFF THE TABLE.

What are we securing? Cheney's "fourth branch of government"?

As a previous thread said, we need a million man march on Washington to burn it down. Sorry, Rep. Harman, but you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Why would we want a centrist?

The sad fact is that Democrats are frightened of the shadows of their shadows. On an overcast day. Which leads to the even sadder fact that American voters effectively have two bold selections from which to choose when they step into a voting booth. There is the truly disastrous party and then there is the merely embarrassing party. There is the party that is destroying when it isn’t pathetically bumbling, and then there is the party that facilitates whatever the other guys want (hey, you don’t even have to say ‘please’, either!). Tweedledee and Tweedledum, my handbag! In any given election, American voters can choose between really evil monsters, on the one hand, and a third-cup-out-of-the-same -depleted-tea-bag anemic approximation of evil monsters, on the other. Who says there’s no real choice in American politics?!

David Michael Green
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/06/22/2038/

I will be calling, and emailing, Jane to request that she respond to the comments here. I hope a number of you will do the same.

Contact
Office Addresses
Washington, DC
2400 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225 8220
Fax: (202) 226 7290

El Segundo
2321 E. Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 3270
El Segundo, CA 90245
Phone: (310) 643 3636
Fax: (310) 643 6445

Wilmington
544 N. Avalon Boulevard, Suite 307
Wilmington, CA 90744
Phone: (310) 549 8282
Fax: (310) 549 8250

http://www.house.gov/harman/contact/email.shtml

My question, where does Harman and the rest of the DINO Bush enablers stand on the IMPORTANT STUFF == the outright lies and incremental creep of Bush's unitary executive dictatorship?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

How can we believe her when she trotts out yet another band-aid solution that smells like yet another corporate heist of our taxpayer dollars? Which lobby is behind this plan?

I'm appalled and disgusted at the Democrats refusal to stick together and push for checks and balances on this administration. Refusing to look after the publics interest, but going overboard when it comes to Israel's financial aid and bombs.

I truly hope you are challenged in the primaries again.

Oops, I guess we can't email to her inbox, unless we are in her district. Funny, she considers us "non-constituents". Whats that make Israel?

Congresswoman Harman: The existing 100 foot restriction is a large margin and the restriction on approaching US Navy ships is even greater. Please reconsider your stance on this proposal. In the matter of port security there are much more important priorities. We cannot protect against all possible risks. Some more vital things to consider are a radiation bomb or suitcase nuke, or worse, a full-scale nuclear bomb obtained from one of the former soviet republics in a shipping container on one of those commercial ships you are trying to protect.

Shhhh, Jim, Harman doesn't want to hear about true threats. Its far easier to hassle some guy out for a bay cruise in his SeaRay.

Posted by PissedOffAmerican at June 24, 2007 12:29 PM
>>>>>>>>>>

Here's a thought...at the end of this post.

Glenn Greenwald made the corrrect observations on Harman and her fellow travelers:

http://tinyurl.com/ygp3bg

"As a result, Pelosi and her opposition to Harman have to be belittled and removed from the substantive arena. Harman supported the most disastrous strategic decision in our nation's history and repeatedly defended the administration's worst excesses. That ought to be disqualifying on its face. But the Beltway media are guilty of the same crimes, so they want to pretend that Harman -- just like Steny Hoyer -- did nothing wrong and the only reason not to anoint her to her Rightful Place is because of petty, womanly personality disputes that have no place in the public arena.

For the same reason, they decree that Pelosi must prove that she's a "responsible" and serious leader. How does she do that? By embracing the Beltway establishment types, including those -- especially those -- who have been so wrong about so many things.

That's why the media has taken such an intense interest in the otherwise mundane matter of who will be House Majority Leader and House Intelligence Chair. Jane Harman, like Steny Hoyer, is the symbol of official Washington, the broken, rotted, corrupt Washington that propped up this war and enabled this administration in so many ways. Pelosi has to prove that she's one of them, or else suffer the consequences of being mauled and scorned.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Using this for a point about carrots and sticks.
It's been my "general impression" that Pelosi has been trying to marginalize the lib-neo's, can't swear to it, but that is how it seems to me. So along with spreading the message to eliminate the Harman's and Hoyer's and AIPAC enforcers we also need to be giving Pelosi and others some encouragement and reinforcement on doing the right thing so they don't feel it's useless and give up. If this observation is correct and there is a Pelosi wing they need enough pressure/encouragement to throw the Harman-Hoyer wing overboard by not putting the party weight behind their re-elections and supporting other dem challanges to these people for the "good of the party". Divide and conquer, divide and conquer.

Pelosi's office now has a "comment line" to leave your comments on...I a