Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal (2004)

Liberals lack vision. We have no imagination. We can't imagine any group more gullible, arrogant, hypocritical or incompetent than the Bush administratiomn. I was going to sneer at you for you feeble imagination, but I realise that I can't imagine how bad the Bush administration is either.

Looks like a case for fafblog to me.

We have spent over $200 billion making Iraq safe for Chalabi. But this administration is attracted to sleaze like oil to water. He fed their egos, their need for power and information, however erroneous. This administration confirms all our deepest fears about the nature of human nature.

I can image worse. bush wins in November.

It's even worse than that:

"A former translator for the FBI with top-secret security clearance says she has provided information to the panel investigating the 11 September attacks which proves senior officials knew of al-Qa'ida's plans to attack the US with aircraft months before the strikes happened."
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=507514

I wonder if this piece of news will make its way to US mainstream media. Not that it's has much to do with the United States and its security...

We ARE punishing Chalabi! Really, we are! We're only sending him $340,000 per month (out of your pocket, thank God, not much out of ours since our tax cuts). It would be much more if the idiot had done a better job. He's just destroyed over it.

DELENDA EST CHALABI-O

Yup.

Sincerely,
Dick and George or vice-versa, what's the difference?

The United States has been played like a fiddle, by the Iraqi exiles and their American Allies. Neo con ideology has made America vulnerable to manipulation.

Back in 1995 when pundits were crowing about the "victory" of America over the USSR, the thought occurred to me that all wars have a cost and all victories exact a toll on the victors. Britan was never the same after WWII. Could America have won but been changed? Do we simply not recognize what has happenned?

I don't have a full answer yet but my working hypothesis is that the Cold War struggle created the Far Right in America and the burden of this politcal movement is the "cost" of victory.
Made hard and hardheaded to win the cold war their mindset has led America down a dangerous path in the post cold war era under George W Bush.

Anybody watched the movie The Tailor of Panama?
http://imdb.com/title/tt0236784/
This and the pilot episode to The Lone Gunman make me feel as if Baudrillard was right.

Brad Delong: "Ahmed Chalabi deserves to be strung up by his thumbs and left for the vultures to feast on."

Yes, he is a deeply wicked man for having tricked others into helping remove Saddam's boot heel from the throats of fellow Iragis.

Should Americans resent being tricked? Sure. Do Chalabis actions merit thumb-hanging and vulture-feasting? That's not so clear.

Jean-Philippe Stijns: "'A former translator for the FBI with top-secret security clearance says...' I wonder if this piece of news will make its way to US mainstream media."

It made its way into the Washiington Times:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040402-064359-3845r.htm

Surely these large items, the fleet of trucks and railroad cars, could have been verified (even from satelites). Likely, Chalibi didn't have to work too hard to establish these facts. As O'Neill pointed out ( and Clarke confirms), Bush was headed that way from day one. The havoc created by this one man's testimony is magnified by BushCo's adamant disposition to remove Hussein.
Chalibi plays us(?) for fools? That would be Mr. Bush and Co. Yes, we pay.
Thanks for the link to the uk article jps.

Michael,
Some might consider WaTimes mainstream but a lot of people would consider it Moombeam.
God I hope this story is true, for if it is, there is time enough for it to seep into the minds of the voters.

Chalabi is the neocon's fig leaf. Tear it away, then you will REALLY see what you couldn't imagine.

Now that President Bush has created 308,000 new jobs, we no longer care about this topic - let's move along. Nothing to see here...

It is wrong for us to be mad at Chalabi. He had no moral or legal duty to the US, and so basically anything he was able to convince us to do is our own faults.

"played us for fools..Chalabi bears the blame"--How gullible: what set-up shall we swallow next? Chalabi fit in perfectly to the Administration's preconceived foreign policy, probably with the implicit understanding on both sides that he might have to be discredited publicly, in order to give the Administration the excuse of being "misled", should it come to that. Both sides get something--the Administration, a Quisling pawn; Chalabi, perhaps, the office of Prime Minister (until the Iraqis themselves oust him, since even the moderates there believe he's a crook, surrounded by security thugs). You do not think the CIA had a full dossier on an ex-pat Iraqi convicted of Jordanian bank fraud; and that evidence of his incredibility was sent up-channel for new rendition? We might have even fed him the WMD lies to begin with, to make sure they sounded damning enough. How does he get on 60 Minutes now, without talking points well-vetted? He says and does: what we want, when we want.

Your present administration will always prefer to deal with financial crooks. A good con man will always sell you what you want to buy.

This administration will never admit Chalabi's duplicity. To do so would be to admit their own gullibility and connivance. Chalabi knows where too many of the bodies are buried. He'll continue to get his $300k monthly stipend to keep his mouth shut.

Chalabi didn't play us for fools; the administration did. The administration wanted lies and propaganda, paid Chalabi for them, and received pretty good value for the money.

Quisling Chalabi had better watch out. He's gonna need that $300k monthly just to pay his bodyguards.

How 9-11 Happened

We don't need a "commission" to find out how 9-11 happened. The truth is in the timeline:

PRESIDENT CARTER, DEMOCRAT

In 1979, President Jimmy Carter allowed the Shah of Iran to be deposed by a mob of Islamic fanatics. A few months later, Muslims stormed the U.S. Embassy in Iran and took American Embassy staff hostage.

Carter retaliated by canceling Iranian visas. He eventually ordered a disastrous and humiliating rescue attempt, crashing helicopters in the desert.

Books
Treason: Hardcover | Audio
Slander: Paperback | Hardcover | Audio | Large Print
High Crimes: Paperback

Sponsors
USA FLAGS
Don't take your Freedom for granted.
Annoy a Liberal!
Peace Through Superior Firepower shirts
HEY HEY HO HO
WANT MORE FUN? GOTTA GO to Arkatents!
Spyware Removal
Free Software to remove spyware from PC

Start Advertising Now
.


E-Mail List

PRESIDENT REAGAN, REPUBLICAN

The day of Reagan's inauguration, the hostages were released.

In 1982, the U.S. Embassy in Beirut was bombed by Muslim extremists.

President Reagan sent U.S. Marines to Beirut.

In 1983, the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut were blown up by Muslim extremists.

Reagan said the U.S. would not surrender, but Democrats threw a hissy fit, introducing a resolution demanding that our troops be withdrawn. Reagan caved in to Democrat caterwauling in an election year and withdrew our troops – bombing Syrian-controlled areas on the way out. Democrats complained about that, too.

In 1985, an Italian cruise ship, the Achille Lauro, was seized and a 69-year-old American was shot and thrown overboard by Muslim extremists.

Reagan ordered a heart-stopping mission to capture the hijackers after "the allies" promised them safe passage. In a daring operation, American fighter pilots captured the hijackers and turned them over to the Italians – who then released them to safe harbor in Iraq.

On April 5, 1986, a West Berlin discotheque frequented by U.S. servicemen was bombed by Muslim extremists from the Libyan Embassy in East Berlin, killing an American.

Ten days later, Reagan bombed Libya, despite our dear ally France refusing the use of their airspace. Americans bombed Gadhafi's residence, killing his daughter, and dropped a bomb on the French Embassy "by mistake."

Reagan also stoked a long, bloody war between heinous regimes in Iran and Iraq. All this was while winning a final victory over Soviet totalitarianism.

PRESIDENT BUSH I, MODERATE REPUBLICAN

In December 1988, a passenger jet, Pan Am Flight 103, was bombed over Lockerbie, Scotland, by Muslim extremists.

President-elect George Bush claimed he would continue Reagan's policy of retaliating against terrorism, but did not. Without Reagan to gin her up, even Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher went wobbly, saying there would be no revenge for the bombing.

In 1990, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait.

In early 1991, Bush went to war with Iraq. A majority of Democrats opposed the war, and later complained that Bush didn't "finish off the job" with Saddam.

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON, DEMOCRAT

In February 1993, the World Trade Center was bombed by Muslim fanatics, killing five people and injuring hundreds.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

In October 1993, 18 American troops were killed in a savage firefight in Somalia. The body of one American was dragged through the streets of Mogadishu as the Somalian hordes cheered.

Clinton responded by calling off the hunt for Mohammed Farrah Aidid and ordering our troops home. Osama bin Laden later told ABC News: "The youth ... realized more than before that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat."

In November 1995, five Americans were killed and 30 wounded by a car bomb in Saudi Arabia set by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

In June 1996, a U.S. Air Force housing complex in Saudi Arabia was bombed by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

Months later, Saddam attacked the Kurdish-controlled city of Erbil.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, lobbed some bombs into Iraq hundreds of miles from Saddam's forces.

In November 1997, Iraq refused to allow U.N. weapons inspections to do their jobs and threatened to shoot down a U.S. U-2 spy plane.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

In February 1998, Clinton threatened to bomb Iraq, but called it off when the United Nations said no.

On Aug. 7, 1998, U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

On Aug. 20, Monica Lewinsky appeared for the second time to testify before the grand jury.

Clinton responded by bombing Afghanistan and Sudan, severely damaging a camel and an aspirin factory.

On Dec. 16, the House of Representatives prepared to impeach Clinton the next day.

Clinton retaliated by ordering major air strikes against Iraq, described by the New York Times as "by far the largest military action in Iraq since the end of the Gulf War in 1991."

The only time Clinton decided to go to war with anyone in the vicinity of Muslim fanatics was in 1999 – when Clinton attacked Serbians who were fighting Islamic fanatics.

In October 2000, our warship, the USS Cole, was attacked by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH, REPUBLICAN

Bush came into office telling his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, he was "tired of swatting flies" – he wanted to eliminate al-Qaida.

On Sept. 11, 2001, when Bush had been in office for barely seven months, 3,000 Americans were murdered in a savage terrorist attack on U.S. soil by Muslim extremists.

Since then, Bush has won two wars against countries that harbored Muslim fanatics, captured Saddam Hussein, immobilized Osama bin Laden, destroyed al-Qaida's base, and begun to create the only functioning democracy in the Middle East other than Israel. Democrats opposed it all – except their phony support for war with Afghanistan, which they immediately complained about and said would be a Vietnam quagmire. And now they claim to be outraged that in the months before 9-11, Bush did not do everything Democrats opposed doing after 9-11.

What a surprise.

Adrian

"'A former translator for the FBI with top-secret security clearance says she has provided information to the panel investigating the 11 September attacks which proves senior officials knew of al-Qa'ida's plans to attack the US with aircraft months before the strikes happened.'
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=507514

"I wonder if this piece of news will make its way to US mainstream media. Not that it's has much to do with the United States and its security..."

Posted by Jean-Philippe Stijns at April 2, 2004 06:20 AM

Funny she didn't mention it to the WaPo reporter back in 2002:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A7829-2002Jun18

Adrian Spittle:

Umm, could you explain again which two wars you feel comfortable describing as "won?" While you're at it, would you please let us know what your definition of "won" is? This adled liberal brain of mine can't conceive of how a war can be won when most of the stated initial objectives have not been met. Is this a case of 'let's just declare victory and leave?' I mean, like, what if country A went to war with country B in order to rid B of oranges. Yet, after A's invasion, it becomes obvious to all that B never had oranges, or ate them all before the invasion or something. Can A really claim victory??

"Umm, could you explain again which two wars you feel comfortable describing as "won? While you're at it, would you please let us know what your definition of "won" is?
Posted by m.c. "

REGIME CHANGE.

Can you please spell my name properly. It's pretty cowardly of you to use initials and nastily mispell the names of those decent enough to post under their real name.

Adrian SPIDLE.

And the translator didn't tell her latest story to Gail Sheehy either:

http://www.nyobserver.com/pages/story.asp?ID=8516

"Edmonds was seen as a jewel when the F.B.I. found her only a week after September 11, 2001. With reports of stacks of untranslated "chatter" from Middle Eastern suspects and their supporters, the embarrassed Bureau couldn’t wait to hire this Turkish-American graduate student who speaks four languages, not only Turkish, Farsi (the Iranian language) and Azerbaijani, but perfect American-English. "

So, she didn't work for the FBI until AFTER 9-11, and she doesn't speak Arabic. Perfect.

Adrian forgot to mention that Bush got rid of Saddam's WMD's, protecting us from all of those potential 'mushroom clouds'.

I apologize. Adrian pointed out that it wasn't about WMD's but 'REGIME CHANGE'.

Consider me enlightened.

Adrian: Why did Bush send $43 million to the Taliban, who were in league with Al Qaeda, in May 2001? How did they fool the boy genius?

"Adrian forgot to mention that Bush got rid of Saddam's WMD's, protecting us from all of those potential 'mushroom clouds'.

Posted by cc"

Yes, but you forgot to mention Clinton Sec Def Cohen's answer to the 911 commisions' question about "Why Clinton bombed the aspirin factory in the Sudan?"

Cohen said that the factory was really producing chemical warfare agents. The Clinton administration "knew this" because they'd traced the purchase of that Chem Warfare technology from Iraq by the owner of that factory.

Hmmm.

Adrian

The first significant step a better Iraq would be escorting Chalabi to the Jordanian border and pushing him across.

Scott McArthur wonders about the cost of winning the Cold War to the US. The best description I ever heard of what happened is economic: at the end the USSR went into Chapter 7 and the US went into Chapter 11. Of course having reorganized and emerged in the 90s, the US is now having another go,the stupidity of which drives our host mad.

The INC was a U.S. sponsored organization to begin with. And how exactly is it that Chalabi ended up as its head? At any rate, Chalabi spent more than enough time in Neo-con circles, before and since, to have thoroughly studied his marks.

Exiles like Chalabi have every right to try to free their country by hook or by crook.

If our leaders were gullible enough to believe him, that's their fault.

Yo...Adrian,

You left some points out of your spin.

Bush failed to reign in Reagan's monster, Saddam, from invading Kuwait.

In response to Saddam's failed assassination of President Bush, Clinton bombed Saddam's intelligence outfit and warned against further aggressions. Saddam conducted no more terrorist attacks after that.

The Clinton administration has reliable evidence that Al Qaeda is responsible for the USS Cole attack around December. Judiciously Clinton realizes the next administration, about a month away from assuming power, should retaliate. The Bush administration does nothing.

Bush said he was "tired of swatting flies" well into 2001, not when he came into office.

...

I want my President to make definite pronouncements of what he wants done, not issuing metaphors.

You think that provoking a bloody war between Iran and Iraq, supporting both sides to prolong bloodshed is good policy?

You think that managing to arrange the release of hostages on the FIRST day of one's presidency, evidently meeting with Iranian government people to arrange the release of the hostages while still private citizens (later supported by secret arms sales to Iran) shows bold antiterrorism?

How can this be? I really don't understand how you can believe that helping to send over 300,000 people to their deaths in a stalemated war is a GOOD thing, or how secretly appeasing hostage-taking religious fundamentalists is good.

No, you don't believe that, really, Adrian Spidle. So, what do you believe? That the Iran-Iraq war would have been just as bloody without U.S. support for both sides, but that it would have weakened the regimes involved less, since they would have fought a cheaper, lower-tech war? That Reagan's "toughness" was the reason the Iranians released the hostages, fear that he would attack them (even though it wasn't exactly Carter who sold the Iranian arms)?

"You think that provoking a bloody war between Iran and Iraq, supporting both sides to prolong bloodshed is good policy?"

This is historically illiterate. Iraq attacked Iran in the summer of 1980. That would be during the Carter presidency, for one thing. For another the U.S. didn't provoke it, unless you're counting the stupidity of Jimmy Carter in not taking his Nat'l Security Advisor's advice to support the Shah while he restored order in his country.

You think that managing to arrange the release of hostages on the FIRST day of one's presidency..."

Again, this is counter to the facts. Carter arranged for the release of the hostages. On the LAST DAY of HIS presidency.

"...evidently meeting with Iranian government people to arrange the release of the hostages while still private citizens (later supported by secret arms sales to Iran) shows bold antiterrorism?"

The Trifecta! Read Jimmy Carter's "Keeping Faith", and you'll see that Iran was negotiating with Carter to release the hostages right up to the week before the election.

Adrian spins this:
In 1979, President Jimmy Carter allowed the Shah of Iran to be deposed by a mob of Islamic fanatics. A few months later, Muslims stormed the U.S. Embassy in Iran and took American Embassy staff hostage.

Adrian, what was the US role in putting the Shah in power? Was he a popular leader? Did having a US puppet in there have anything to do with the origin of Islamic fundamentalism there? Do you think when a foreign power installs a puppet regime, that it foments a popular insurgency? Is this the origin you conveniently overlooked? Knowing this, does it make sense to push a US puppet in charge of Iraq? What might be the result if the prime minister is viewed as a US puppet?

Maybe in a few years you'll be posting this:
In 2005, President John Kerry allowed Ahmed Chalabi's pro-US govt to be displaced by an Iraqi insurgency with Islamic fundamentalist ties.

If you do, I'm sure you'll conveniently overlook all the history and bad choices leading up to it.

Numbskull.

"For another the U.S. didn't provoke it, unless you're counting the stupidity of Jimmy Carter in not taking his Nat'l Security Advisor's advice to support the Shah while he restored order in his country."

Er, Patrick. The Shah was stupefyingly unpopular among his own people, which is precisely how he was overthrown despite still having nominal support by his military. I see that you're one of those people who believes in keeping the safety valve strapped shut on the boiler to keep from being scalded by the steam jet from it.

If you find yourself saying something absurd like Adrian Spidle did:

"begun to create the only functioning democracy in the Middle East other than Israel"

then it's time to give yourself a good bitch-slap with the FAIR article linked in the URL slot below.

"Er, Patrick. The Shah was stupefyingly unpopular among his own people, which is precisely how he was overthrown despite still having nominal support by his military. I see that you're one of those people..."

I'm one of those people who keeps facts straight, and reasons logically from them. Whether or not the Shah was popular is irrelevant. Zbig himself has said Carter ignored his advice. Btw, do you think the present Iranian regime is popular?

"Whether the Shah was unpopular or not is irrelevant..."

As I say, Patrick is one of those people who believes that you keep the safety valve strapped down on the boiler so you won't get scalded by the steam. (In this case, Brzezinski apparently was too.)

"Btw, do you think the current Iranian regime is popular?"

Certainly not now -- the fact that the Iranian people have actually had the chance to find out for themselves how a Moslem theocratic regime works, and discovered that they detest it, is the one hopeful sign in the entire goddamn region. Except for the Iraqi Kurds, they are the only Moslems in the Mideast who now actually have some sympathy for the idea of secular democracy. But all the rest of the Mideast Moslems haven't yet discovered the worthlessness of theocracy the hard way -- and they won't learn it any other way.

Our job is to keep the coming theocratic regimes from getting their hands on the Bomb BEFORE their own people get fed up with them and overthrow them -- a process that will take decades, and to which there is no short cut. Meanwhile, our job is to limit our exercise of military strength to doing just that -- NOT on trying to forcibly cram Foul Western Ideas, which they will never accept from Infidels, down their throats.

Ahmed Chalabi ,is a convicted Fellon in Iraq and in jordan ,King Hussain gave him refuge against Saddams well ,and made him The CEO off oetra bank In Jordan ,The Snake took the money and ran almost a Billion Dollars .
And now we have ,we have attela the hunn in the white House and his homeboys ,running the world to profit and Kill arabs and muslims ,so they can protect our freedom????? . Gorege BUTCH can't even protect his own Kids ,men marrying men ,you can not say the name of GOD or display it ,as long as you are rich you can get away with murder ,Drugs every where ,Homeless every where, Media brain washing us , taxing us to death ,Porno every where ,no more Honnor ,Faith , and we should thank Sharon (which is wanted for Genoside in Europe) ,and here is Gorege Butch telling me Iraq and Afganstan ,lebya ,Syria , hate us because they are jelouse Off us ,and they hate our freedome ,Some body shoot me please .
The Mossad is the biggest terrorest in the world ,Think and think and think who would benifit out of bombing of the WTC ,why would the Iraqes blow each other up (the sunni & shiite) .why would any arab or musslim bring the wrath of the USA upon himself , the only one one who gained out of all of this.....Is Hello ISRAEL . Check " THE LAVON AFFAIR ,LEBANON 1982" 1-Saddam H is out of the way .2-every body hates the Arabs and Islam 3- Israel is doing any thing it wants .4- they will get that Oil Pipeline from Iraq .5-they allready Diverted their Army Budgt to handle the Palistinians ,because Gorege Butch is their protect them from any out side Threat .And we the nation of sheep are Buying line hook and sinker .every time any body says any thing about Israel or the Jews BOOM BOOM "hey man you are a jew hater ,you are antisemtic ,leave them alone they are victems of the Nazis ," .You know what tough that was 60 yers ago I had nothing to do with my Dad had nothing to do with and ,Tony blair , Gandi ,Butch ,Saddam , Captin Kirk Had nothing to do with it ,Actually the Bush Familly had some thing to do with it,they sold hard wear and GASES to the Nazi's ,Also they are not the only ones who got Screwed ,Check the History of Algeria ,the French Killed over a million ,I do not see them being called Victems ,or The French doing any thing to fix it.Look at the history of Israel ,Their is more than 20 documented massacres ,they commited against the Arabs ,I do not See any body saying any thing about it.
Why is it when r=the arabs in israel Defend them selfs in palistine we call them Terroist ,But the one who's Rapeing them and killing them and destoying their home for over 50 years , Mr Kill them all Goreg The W Butch Called him a Hero .
It's simple the arabs hate us because of our blind support to the Biggest crimnal State in the world ISRAEL, and they are sick and tired of the USA Protecting Israel "Wonder Why".Oh by the way John Ashcroft was convicted of election fraud ,a while ago ,But look at him now ..I'm so Proud of him ....This is a waste of time Sorry about the Crappy spelling

Playing at the right online casinos is possible only through

Online Casino Directory

Nullus est liber tam malus ut non aliqua parte prosit - There is no book so bad that it is not profitable on some part. (Pliny the Younger)

Ne feceris ut rideam - Don't make me laugh

Bene legere saecla vincere - To read well is to master the ages. (Professor Isaac Flagg)

best online casinos

play casino online

no download casinos

Crescit amor nummi, quantum ipsa pecunia crevit - The love of wealth grows as the wealth itself grew. (Juvenalis)