Glenn Greenwald just gets it.

"The White House has authorized an expansion of the C.I.A.'s drone program in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas, officials said this week, to parallel the president’s decision, announced Tuesday, to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan" -- New York Times, December 4, 2009.

"In the midst of two unfinished major wars, the United States has quietly opened a third, largely covert front against Al Qaeda in Yemen" -- New York Times, yesterday.

_______

Actually, if you count our occupation of Iraq, our twice-escalated war in Afghanistan, our rapidly escalating bombing campaigns in Pakistan and Yemen, and various forms of covert war involvement in Somalia, one could reasonably say that we're fighting five different wars in Muslim countries -- or, to use the NYT's jargon, "five fronts" in the "Terror War" (Obama yesterday specifically mentioned Somalia and Yemen as places where, euphemistically, "we will continue to use every element of our national power"). Add to those five fronts the "crippling" sanctions on Iran many Democratic Party luminaries are now advocating, combined with the chest-besting threats from our Middle East client state that the next wars they fight against Muslims will be even "harsher" than the prior ones, and it's almost easier to count the Muslim countries we're not attacking or threatening than to count the ones we are. Yet this still isn't enough for America's right-wing super-warriors, who accuse the five-front-war-President of "an allergy to the concept of war."

In the wake of the latest failed terrorist attack on Northwest Airlines, one can smell the excitement in the air -- that all-too-familiar, giddy, bipartisan climate that emerges in American media discourse whenever there's a new country we get to learn about so that we can explain why we're morally and strategically justified in bombing it some more. "Yemen" is suddenly on every Serious Person's lips. We spent the last month centrally involved to some secret degree in waging air attacks on that country -- including some that resulted in numerous civilian deaths -- but everyone now knows that this isn't enough and it's time to Get Really Serious and Do More.

For all the endless, exciting talk about the latest Terrorist attack, one issue is, as usual, conspicuously absent: motive. Why would a young Nigerian from a wealthy, well-connected family want to blow himself up on one of our airplanes along with 300 innocent people, and why would Saudi and Yemeni extremists want to enable him to do so? When it comes to Terrorism, discussions of motive have been declared more or less taboo from the start because of the dishonest equation of motive discussions with justification -- as though understanding the reasons why X happens is to posit that X is legitimate and justifiable. Causation simply is; it has nothing to do with issues of morality, blame, or justification. Yet all that is generally permitted to be said in such situations is that Terrorists try to harm us because they're Evil, and we (of course) are not, and that's generally the end of the discussion.

Despite that taboo, evidence always ends up emerging on this question. As numerous reports have indicated, the Al Qaeda group in the Arabian Peninsula has said that this attempted attack is in "retaliation" for the multiple, recent missile attacks on Yemen in which numerous innocent Muslim civilians were killed, as well as for the U.S.'s multi-faceted support for the not-exactly-democratic Yemeni government. That is similar to reports that Nidal Hasan was motivated to attack Fort Hood because "he was upset at the killing of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan." And one finds this quote from an anonymous Yemeni official tacked on to the end of this week's NYT article announcing the "widening terror war" in Yemen -- as though it's just an afterthought:

"The problem is that the involvement of the United States creates sympathy for Al Qaeda. The cooperation is necessary -- but there is no doubt that it has an effect for the common man. He sympathizes with Al Qaeda."

As always, the most confounding aspect of the reaction to the latest attempted terrorist episode is the professed confusion and self-righteous innocence that is universally expressed. Whether justified or not, we are constantly delivering death to the Muslim world. We do not see it very much, but they certainly do. Again, independent of justification, what do we think is going to happen if we continuously invade, occupy and bomb Muslim countries and arm and enable others to do so? Isn't it obvious that our five-front actions are going to cause at least some Muslims -- subjected to constant images of American troops in their world and dead Muslim civilians at our hands, even if unintended -- to want to return the violence? Just look at the bloodthirsty sentiments unleashed among Americans even from a failed Terrorist attempt. What sentiments do we think we're unleashing from a decade-long (and continuing and increasing) multi-front "war" in the Muslim war?

There very well may be some small number of individuals who are so blinded by religious extremism that they will be devoted to random violence against civilians no matter what we do, but we are constantly maximizing the pool of recruits and sympathy among the population on which they depend. In other words, what we do constantly bolsters their efforts, and when we do, we always seem to move more in the direction of helping them even further. Ultimately, we should ask ourselves: if we drop more bombs on more Muslim countries, will there be fewer or more Muslims who want to blow up our airplanes and are willing to end their lives to do so? That question really answers itself.

Map of the pan-asian pipeline. One of 2 reasons we are in Afghanistan.

Source: US department of state.

Cheney's map

This is the map that cheney had on his desk when he had the "energy" conference during the first months of the Bush administration. long before 9/11 ever happened. this is how they were splitting up the loot earned by the blood of Americans.

The blue country you see there is Iran. It is one of the richest oil deposits in the world and our oil industry WANTS IT. It is the only reason you even know the word "Iran", but they'd have you believe Iranians are all terrorists so you will go kill them and they can have their oil

This is what imperialism looks like. We have a military presence in nearly every country in the world. Wonder what we'd say if some foreign country was installed on our continent? Would we welcome them or would we try to get rid of them. If we tried to rid our land of their presence, would we be called terrorists like those who try to get us out of their countries are?

Hello,

First of all, I would like to say that I make no claim of any formal
education beyond high school in the poorest district in the state of
Texas. There was not much motivation to keep me in the classroom.
However, having said this, I feel that knowledge can be obtained in
many other ways, sometimes within our own thoughts and inner wisdoms. I
also feel that education -- in this country -- in many cases, is wanted
purely for monetary purposes and gains and thus, breeds arrogance;
instead of a higher purpose, that can enriching our lives and those of
others. So, I wrote this with good intentions, that it may shed light
on the darkest corners of the people who truly love this nation and
truth, as oppose to corruption and corporate greed. Thank you. --

Subject: The Core Cause Of A Lost Democracy

Corporate Lobbying And “Campaign Contributions”

The real election scandal and what has become of “democracy” by way of
lobbying. Lobbying in America has become the apparent cause of a false
democracy and an ownership of the vast majority of
lawmakers/politicians and our government. This in fact, is the very
core that has destroyed our nation and the beliefs put forth by the
founding fathers of this great nation.

The corporate criminals repeatedly found guilty of felony fraud, and
various other charges, continue to earn hundreds of billions of
tax-payer dollars through th
e years. Although, they pay out billions in
fines for crimes, this is merely the cost of doing business as usual in
America today and for many years past. This is in no way an accident.
This is a systemic fraud that has become part of the American business
model. The war industry, pharmaceutical companies, health insurance
industry and others are in control of our country through these
sellouts who in the best interest of the government embedded
corporations, mislead the American people daily.

The funneling of contract money back into the campaign war chest of the
typical politician -- republicans and democrats alike -- in return for
the guarantee of war and extreme protectionism of criminal defense
contractors; behind-closed-door lawbreaking agreements, extreme
protectionism and subsidies for the felon pharmaceutical companies,
corrupt health insurance industry, Monsanto and others who are also
found guilty of countless crimes and criminal acts against the American
people, (in our courts of law) has become business as usual in the
U.S.A. Corporate "campaign contributions" come at a very steep price to
the average American. Everything we once knew to have been, is no more.
All that is left is the propaganda of a fake democracy; the illusion of
freedoms and other liberties; the dept we are left with and must pay,
only for them to continue on their current path of greed and
destruction, all in our name and with our tax dol
lars.

The media is an intricate -- and likely the most vital -- part of a
Democracy. Without freedom of the press and accountability within
journalism itself, of which the corporate media currently has a strong
choke-hold on, the truth is hidden from the common American in an array
of daily distractions, misleading headlines and outright lies. For
years the corporate media has become a storyteller, a liar, to create
fear, to distract us from who and what truly controls our so called
democracy and thus, our lives. The widespread systemic fraud along with
the lies of the media go virtually unnoticed, while our Democracy, and
we, become the sacrificial lamb.

What will it take for us to organize, come together as one, to defend
our nation and constitution against the greatest invasion -- foreign or
domestic -- our America has ever seen?

Sincerely,

Felix L. Cruz

Gallup: Obama’s Mideast Policies Have Not Disproportionately Hurt Him With Jews | The Plum Line

The Plum LineGreg Sargent's blog

Gallup: Obama’s Mideast Policies Have Not Disproportionately Hurt Him With Jews

A fascinating new poll from Gallup finds that Obama’s standing among American Jews is higher than among any other religious group, suggesting he still has domestic political breathing room as he deals with Iran and enters into grueling Arab-Israeli negotiations.

It finds that his approval rating among Jews is at a healthy 64%, besting his numbers among catholics (54%), protestants (47%) and adults overall (54%).

At first glance, the poll also seems to suggest warning signs, finding that his approval rating has slipped among Jews, from 83% in January. But Gallup says that this is actually proportional with his overall slippage, and concludes:

Importantly, the decline in approval of Obama among Jews since January is no greater than that seen among the general public. This suggests that since Obama became president, his actions on Middle East policy issues — particularly relating to Iran and the Israeli-Palestinian dispute — have not had a disproportionately negative (or positive) impact on his image.

A great deal of this is driven by disproportional Jewish loyalty towards Dems, obviously, but it seems worth keeping in mind, given the escalating attacks on Obama as soft on Israel and Iran.

Gallup: Obama’s Mideast Policies Have Not Disproportionately Hurt Him With Jews | The Plum Line

Sites leased and available for lease

Rachel Takes on ACORN hysteria

Guess what? Right wing media are liars. What a shock!

Rachel Takes on ACOR

Should Acorn Lose it's Government Contract?

sorry, i didn't know that thsi was someone else's work. thought my friend wrote it up.. linked above.


#1 - Can the illegal and/or unethical actions of a few individuals operating on their own and not under the sanction of their organizational entity automatically indict an entire organization?

#2 - If the answer to #1 is "YES", should that entity be barred from having any government contracts?

                     Federal      Instances        
Government                      Contract    Misconduct Misconduct $
Contractor                        $(FY2007)    (Since 1995) (Since 1995)

1. Lockheed Martin            $34234.9m      50             $ 577.2m
2. Boeing Company            $24304.9m      31             $1561.4m
3. Northrop Grumman       $18506.5m      27             $ 790.4m
4. General Dynamics          $14687.7m        9             $ 63.2m
5. Raytheon Company       $12233.2m      17             $ 475.8m
6. BAE Systems                  $10119.2m        3             $ 1.3m
7. L-3 Communications      $6802.2m         5             $ 41.3m
8. United Technologies       $5874.1m        13            $ 383.0m
9. SAIC                              $5230.9m        10            $ 14.5m
10. KBR                             $4872.5m        18            $ 103.0m

Bush Dow vs Obama Dow

What Stupid Looks Like