The Heretik

A WHOLE LOT OF NOTHING

A WHOLE LOT OF NOTHING
Shorthand Live Blog of President of the United State’s Speech on Iraq. I’m not sure he convinced anyone on this one tonight, not even himself.  Has there ever been a  Presidential Address in the usual Oval Office setting political PR Event in front of hand picked troops that so invigorated the nation fell so flat?

Here is the play by play:
Stand in front of troops.  I have a dream plan.  Commander in Chief. Rah, rah. A plan, a progress. Elections.  September Eleventh. The Mission. September Eleventh.  Hate. Innocent. Coalition. September Eleventh. Hail to the Troops. We were attacked.  September Eleventh. Fight them there. Ideology of Hate. Not here.   Rah, rah, Hail to the troops. God bless America. September Eleventh.

Maybe now  people will give Bush the Downing Street Memos the deserved respect.

PREVIOUS HERETIK POSTS:
[THE BULLHORN]
[NEW WHITE HOUSE STRATEGY]

TEXT OF PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS
[WHITE HOUSE]

BAND ON THE RUN: EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION

BAND ON THE RUN:
Search for CIA Kidnappers of Abu Omar Spreads Across Europe. Former CIA station chief in Milan is most sought after and may have witnessed Omar’s torture in Egypt. With extraordinary rendition, what annoys our Italian allies most is a me first attitude of American agents. Agents regularly break laws of other countries, but some do it with more of an approving nod from local government than others.  The question that must be asked while this sad music plays is what does this say about international law if we regularly break  the law to catch people we consider criminals.

WANTED: WOMEN AND MEN
MILAN - From today, thirteen CIA agents are wanted all over Europe. The operatives are accused of abducting Imam Abu Omar in Milan and taking him to Egypt, where he was tortured. The formal transmission of the arrest warrant to the Eurojust judicial coordination office means that it will automatically become effective in all EU member countries. At this stage, any European police officer could arrest, as well as identify, the thirteen CIA agents, who are now “on the run”.
  [IL CORRIERE]

CIA STATION CHIEF MOST WANTED
The alleged former CIA station chief in Milan, a 51-year-old Honduran-born American who is among those named in the arrest warrants, is believed to have accompanied or followed Abu Omar to Egypt and to have been present for some of the interrogations, a senior Italian judicial official said yesterday.
That raises the possibility that the American agent was aware of the alleged torture, the Italian official said. The man's movements were tracked by his use of a cellular telephone to make calls from Egypt in the two weeks after the disappearance of Abu Omar, the official said.
Abu Omar, during a brief period of freedom in 2004, told associates that he was tortured with electrical shocks to his genitals and beatings during the interrogations in Egypt.
[LA TIMES NEWS SERVICE]

 

 

In some ways this new controversy comes down to a difference in philosophy and style.  In its aggressive assault in the "War on Terror," the United States does not have the patience to deal with critics at home and allies abroad who insist on doing things by the book, the law book.  The same administration that derides it critics at home for treating terror as a law enforcement issue take the same impatient approach with allies like Italy.  The Italians had their own plans for prosecuting Omar Abu.  He won't be prosecuted in Italy any time soon.  Nor does it look like the American CIA agents will be, if they are ever found.

European counterterrorism officials have pursued a policy of building criminal cases against terrorism suspects through surveillance, wire-taps, detective work and the criminal justice system. The United States, however, has frequently used other means since Sept. 11, 2001, including renditions - abducting terror suspects from foreign countries and transporting them for questioning to third countries, some of which are known to use torture.

Those two approaches seem to have collided in the case of an Egyptian cleric, Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr, or Abu Omar, who led a militant mosque in Milan.

By early 2003, the Italian secret police were aggressively pursuing a criminal terrorism case against Mr. Nasr, with the help of American intelligence officials. Italian investigators said they had told the Americans they had strong evidence that he was trying to build a terror recruitment network, possibly aimed for Iraq if the United States went forward with plans to topple Saddam Hussein.

On Feb. 17, 2003, Mr. Nasr disappeared.

When the Italians began investigating, they said, they were startled to find evidence that some of the C.I.A. officers who had been helping them investigate Mr. Nasr were involved in his abduction.

"We do feel quite betrayed that this operation was carried out in our city," a senior Italian investigator said. "We supplied them information about Abu Omar, and then they used that information against us, undermining an entire operation against his terrorist network."
[NY TIMES]

The go it alone approach to taking prisoners in other countries has its mirror in the United States approach to giving up its own agents when they are accused of crimes in Italy.  It's not going to happen.

‘There is close to no probability that the United States is going to extradite any of these people to Italy, notwithstanding the letter of any treaty," said Peter J. Spiro, who teaches international law at the University of Georgia. "It's very unlikely that there is going to be any sort of cooperation on this end."

It is not unusual for intelligence operations to violate local laws, but operations like the one at issue here are typically undertaken with at least the tacit blessing of the local government. The government of Silvio Berlusconi has made no official comment on the case.

"If the apprehension and removal, to use those relatively neutral terms, of this individual, were done without the knowledge and authorization of at least some part of the Italian government," said Douglass W. Cassel Jr., who teaches international law at Northwestern University, "then it's a clear violation of international law."
  [NY TIMES]

So what does the leader of the free world have to say about extraordinary rendition?  George Bush has very well chosen, deceptive words when he was asked a question on rendition at his March 17, 2005 Press Conference.

THE QUESTION THAT IS ASKED AND WHAT LIES IN THE ANSWER

Q Mr. President, can you explain why you've approved of and expanded the practice of what's called rendition, of transferring individuals out of U.S. custody to countries where human rights groups and your own State Department say torture is common for people under custody?
THE PRESIDENT: The post-9/11 world, the United States must make sure we protect our people and our friends from attack. That was the charge we have been given. And one way to do so is to arrest people and send them back to their country of origin with the promise that they won't be tortured. That's the promise we receive. This country does not believe in torture. We do believe in protecting ourselves. We don't believe in torture. And --
Q As Commander-in-Chief --
THE PRESIDENT: Sorry, what -- make Roberts feel terrible.
Q That's all right.
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, you shouldn't make --
Q It doesn't bother me at all. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Elisabeth.
Q As Commander-in-Chief, what is it that Uzbekistan can do in interrogating an individual that the United States can't?
THE PRESIDENT: We seek assurances that nobody will be tortured when we render a person back to their home country.
[WHITE HOUSE]

Bush parses his answer quite plainly about assurances and countrymen being sent back home, but what of reports of people rendered to Egypt and to Syria that were not of those countries?  A greater question remains.  We take great pride in our intelligence service for its abilities.  When we render people to other countries, are we saying those countries can do something we cannot? Or something we will not, but will allow them to do in our name?  So long as they don't explicitly tell us.  Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink.

PREVIOUS HERETIK POST ON RENDITION:
[EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION RULED ORDINARY CRIME IN ITALY]

MORE ON THIS AT: [TALK LEFT] [BEAUTIFUL HORIZONS]

NUMBERS DON'T LIE

NUMBERS DON’T LIE
And the People Who Have Sworn to Uphold and Protect the Constitution of United States of America Shouldn’t Either. In the matter of the Downing Street Memo, that simple a basic premise of truth applies to General T. Michael Moseley and to the George Bush, the servant of the sovereign people of the United States of America.  Tomorrow General Moseley must be asked the questions and he must answer truthfully about the spikes in bombing activity in late 2002 and late 2003.  The President must answer as well.

CHART CREDIT: [RAW STORY]

When the President does answer to the sovereign ruling people of the United States about these aggressive acts of war, he should remember what his title of Commander in Chief means.  He commands not us, but our military.  The numbers above show just how many bombs were dropped in the past, but perhaps not how many will drop when Mosely testifies before  the Senate Armed Services Committee.

RELATED HERETIK POST:
[MORE DOWNING STREET MEMO BOMBS DROP]

WHAT THE BLOGS ARE SAYING:

SHAKESPEARE'S SISTER: HUH?
Following up on yesterday’s post about the general who confirmed in a 2003 briefing the secret air war, known as the “spikes of activity” which preceded Congressional authorization for the Iraq War, we come to find out, care of Spoof News editor JJ, that the same general, Gen. T. Michael Moseley, was nominated by Bush on May 16 as chief of staff of the Air Force to succeed Gen. John P. Jumper who has served in the position since September 2001.

Call me crazy (I know you will), but I think Wednesday's confirmation hearing would be the perfect place to question Gen, Moseley, who served as the Combined Forces Air Component Commander for operations Southern Watch, Enduring Freedom, and Iraqi Freedom, about the “spikes of activity” that were alleged in the Downing Street Memos to have been designed to provoke Saddam.
[SHAKESPEARE'S SISTER]

FROM [EXPOSTULATION]
Gen. T. Michael Moseley, the one who confirmed the secret air war on Iraq (mentioned in yesterday’s BBA PSA), was nominated by Bush to be the Air Force Chief of Staff in May. Tomorrow is his confirmation hearing. Moseley, who served as the Combined Forces Air Component Commander for operations Southern Watch, Enduring Freedom, and Iraqi Freedom; needs to answer questions about his role in the “spikes of activity” that were allegedly designed to provoke Saddam. Here is the listing of the Senate Armed Forces Committee members. If you click on their name, you get their contact information. Contact them and request that they bring up this issue.

CHECK BACK FOR UPDATES LATER TODAY.

RELATED LINKS:
[MOSELEY AIR FORCE BIO]
November 2001 - August 2003, Commander, 9th Air Force and U.S. Central Command Air Forces, Shaw AFB, S.C.
August 2003 - present, Vice Chief of Staff, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C.

MUKHTARAN: WHAT LURKS IN THE SHADOWS

MUKHTARAN: WHAT LURKS IN THE SHADOWS
What Lurks in the Shadows for Mukhtaran Mai Is What Waits for Any Woman who Has Been Raped and Then Some.  Whether raped by a gang or a date, women historically have faced a he said/she said conundrum where he is always given more because his future could be at stake because of a false accusation, while her whole life would be merely ruined by the incident. 

Pakistan is different from other countries.  Many courts would claim jurisdiction in this case.  The Pakistani government would like to see it go away. What people forget in the west is that Pakistan is an Islamic republic with religious as well as state courts.  Who decides may be more important than what is decided.  A woman’s word alone has only recently been given the credibility so critical in rape cases there. And for some reason terror law applies in the case of Mukhtaran.

THE LATEST: JUNE 28, 2005
Pakistan's Supreme Court has suspended the acquittals of five men in a notorious gang rape case that has sparked worldwide outrage.

The Lahore High Court had in March acquitted five men accused of raping Mukhtar Mai in 2002, allegedly on a village council's order.
--snip—

Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry said in the ruling: "The inspector general of Punjab police is directed to arrest them and hand them over to judicial custody, pending final disposal of the appeals."
[BBC]

As proceedings came to a close on Monday, Ms Mai had no idea that Tuesday would bring a speedy decision. "I just want justice to be done," she said.

On Tuesday, as Attorney General Makhdoom Ali Khan continued his arguments, Ms Mai took a nap.

Mr Khan blasted the Lahore High Court's acquittals, saying they was based on pure conjecture.

"A sole statement of the accused in gang rape cases is sufficient to ensure a conviction," he told the court.

Then it was the turn of Ms Mai's lawyer, Aitzaz Ahsan, to take the podium.

"This is a battle of a poor and illiterate lady who has decided to fight a legal battle against her rapists to the farthest level and she has not succumbed to the pressures she has faced in her course," he said.

He urged the court to review the village council system - Ms Mai was raped allegedly on the direction of such a council, or panchayat.

"In this case the role of the rapists and the panchayat are the same. It is all about dastardly rule," he said.
[MUBASHIR ZAIDI/BBC]

Outside the courtroom, dozens of women hugged and congratulated a relaxed and smiling Mai, who was wearing the traditional Shalwar kameez -- trousers and a shirt -- with a blue-and-green shawl covering her head.

''I am happy and I hope those who humiliated me will be punished,'' Mai said. ''I was expecting justice from the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court has done justice.''
[NY TIMES]

RECENTLY:
ISLAMABAD, June 27: The government told the Supreme Court on Monday that the acquittal of five accused in the Mukhtaran Mai gang-rape case was based on wrong assumptions. “The Lahore High Court’s Multan bench judgment was purely based on conjectures as all the corroborative evidences were ignored,” Attorney-General Makhdoom Ali Khan said
--snip—
The Supreme Court had asked the attorney-general to assist the court on the question if the Federal Shariat Court (FSC) could take up the matter by suspending the high court’s order of acquitting convicts involved in the Meerwala gang-rape case.

On March 14, the Supreme Court through a suo motu notice stepped in to end an inter-court controversy by staying separate orders of the Lahore High Court, Multan bench, and Federal Shariat Court, which had suspended Multan bench’s order of acquitting the convicts by declaring high court’s judgment as without jurisdiction.

The attorney-general said the question of jurisdiction was also raised at the time when the Anti-Terrorist Court (ATC) initiated the Mukhtaran Mai trial.

Section 6, 7 and 32 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 overrides Enforcement of Zina and Hudood Ordinance 1979, therefore, any appeal against trial court’s verdict could only be challenged before the high court and not the FSC, he said.

Citing a previous apex court judgment, he said the Supreme Court had held in the Mohammad Abbas case that convictions could be awarded even on the sole statement of a gang-rape victim.
[DAWN]

 

So many aspects of Pakistani justice come out in the Mukhtaran case that President Pervez Musharraf would prefer stay in the dark. But in the midst of shadow also lingers hope. For those who doubt, the power of one conscience can challenge a government and the world.  The challenge is to turn from darkness and see us all in the light.

LOOK FOR UPDATES HERE LATER TODAY.

RECENT HERETIK POSTS ON MUKHTARAN MAI:
[LIGHT CHALLENGES SHADOW]
[DARK REFLECTION]
[OTHERS SPEAK UP]
[LIGHT DEFINED BY SHADOW]
[THE POWER OF CONSCIENCE]
[IDENTITY THEFT]
[FRIEND OF THE DEVIL]
  
ALSO RECOMMENDED:
[BBC TIMELINE]
[MUKHTARAN'S STORY]
[INTERVIEW: MP 3]
[TOM WATSON/HUFFINGTON POST]

THE BULLHORN

THE BULLHORN
When Things Look Tough for the Future, You Go Back to What Has Worked in the Past   George Bush’s poll numbers on Iraq continue to sink into the dark ooze of a deep ocian and the message of the Downing Street memo is seeping into the national conscience.

For those who will not have a chance to see the President speak tonight, Scott McClellan gave the short story  for what the president will say.  Déjà vu all over again may hit some on the head as some recall they have seen this scene before.  Tonight George Bush, the prophet of the new apocalypse, will come down again from the mountain we have so publicly seen him climb and he will give us his word of God. The new words we will hear will be mixed with some old ones.  What a sorry stew it is suggested we eat: Commander in Chief, threat, strategy, Iraq, mission, nature of the enemy, ruthless, victory, mission. September Eleventh.  Also: strategy for  success, clear path to victory. September Eleventh.

WHITE HOUSE PRESS BRIEFING JUNE 27, 2005
Q    The question is, is there a new direction, though, or not?

MR. McCLELLAN: You're going to hear from the President tomorrow night.  I think we have a clear strategy for success.  He's going to be talking in a very specific way about what that strategy is. It's an opportunity for the American people to hear about the strategy.  We've all seen on the TV screens the images of bloodshed and violence.  They are disturbing.  The President is disturbed by those images.  The terrorists have inflicted great suffering.  There have been tremendous sacrifices.  But the cause for which we are in Iraq is an important one, and there is great progress being made on the ground.

The terrorists' only alternative is to spread violence and chaos and destruction because they know that when a free Iraq takes hold, a democratic Iraq, that it will be a major defeat for their ambitions. You've heard terrorists talk publicly about the importance of trying to stop the progress that is being made in Iraq.

Q    Isn't the message really more patience?  Isn't that really what the President is going to be requesting, something he's --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think if you go back to September 11th -- remember, on September 11th the threats of the 21st century were brought to our shores.  We saw in a very clear way the threats that we face on that day.

And the President said shortly after the attacks of September 11th that this is a long struggle that we're going to be in, that this is a different kind of war, one which we have never seen before.  And we do face a determined and ruthless enemy, an enemy that has no regard for innocent human life.  That's the nature of the enemy that we're up against.  That's the nature of the enemy that the President will be talking about in his remarks tomorrow night.
[WHITE HOUSE]

We have come so far to find ourselves in the same place. We are back in the dark times.  Bush climbs up the rubble of the Trade Center, sacred holy ground and profanes it. Yet again Bush the false prophet climbs over the bodies of the dead to make his diabolical connection.  We were attacked by Osama Bin Laden . . . so we must go after Saddam Hussein. And now we must stay in Iraq . . . because we are there.

OTHER PRESS BRIEFING NOTES: Someone named John has replaced Jeff Gannon for giving Scott McClellan a break and a chance to reiterate the day's message.

Go ahead, John.

Q Scott, could you talk a little bit more about the nature of the enemy?
[WHITE HOUSE] 

This press briefing lasted all of twentysix minutes with not one question asked about the Downing Street Memos.  Still Iraq and its postwar condition deteriorate further.  When the future of the war requires a return to its dubious, dark beginnings, you know the what is coming out of that bullhorn.

WHAT OTHER BLOGS ARE SAYING:

MAHABLOG: GUILTY PLEASURES

I try not to go around saying that those who were in New York City or Washington on 9/11 understand the attacks differently from those who weren't. I try not to say it because it sounds snotty, and it's not something you can prove. But I know I've said it a few times, because I think it's true.

The first time I went back to the Midwest and saw people wearing commemorative 9/11 T-shirts--burning towers in background, weeping American eagle in foreground--I was stunned. Just the idea of a commemorative 9/11 T-shirt seems obscene to me. And if you don't understand that, then you don't understand 9/11 the same way I do.                                       

I can only speculate, but I do think many Americans got a big vicarious thrill out of the attacks. It must've been great television. But even better, it was a five-star excuse to wallow in self-righteousness and indignation. And the villians of the drama were swarthy Islamic aliens, which was great for xenophobes. When the towers collapsed, suddenly it was socially acceptable to haul xenophobia out of the darkness and place it on a pedestal. Party time!
  [MAHABLOG] [KEITH OLBERMAN]

THE HERETIK HAS A QUESTION: How long will we waste our time against an enemy who never attacked us the way the president says?  How much more time has the real enemy been given because of that?  How long will we indulge our misplaced vengeance?

 

WHEN WORDS FAIL

WHEN WORDS FAIL

In a statement to mark United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, Bush said: ``Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right, and we are committed to building a world where human rights are respected and protected by the rule of law.''
--snip—
``America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies,'' Bush said in the statement.

``All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: The United States will not ignore your oppression or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you,'' he said.
[NY TIMES]

when words fail
i must remember shadow is
but the absence of light

when words fail i must
remember the heart beats
on the blood in me

is the blood in them
i must remember shadow is
but the absence of light

when words fail i must
remember the cry that is
the color of night will

one day have its dawn
when words fail still
in darkness i must not

“When Words Fail”
Joe Ivory Mattingly

For Jeanne, for whom words never fail

NEW WHITE HOUSE STRATEGY

A NEW STRATEGY
After the Downing Street Memo Reveals All That Bush Deceived the Nation on in Regard to the Planning of the War in Iraq and the Subsequent Post Major Combat Disaster, This What We Can Look for as a New Direction:

Q The question is, is there a new direction, though, or not?

MR. McCLELLAN: You're going to hear from the President tomorrow night. I think we have a clear strategy for success. He's going to be talking in a very specific way about what that strategy is. It's an opportunity for the American people to hear about the strategy. We've all seen on the TV screens the images of bloodshed and violence. They are disturbing. The President is disturbed by those images. The terrorists have inflicted great suffering. There have been tremendous sacrifices. But the cause for which we are in Iraq is an important one, and there is great progress being made on the ground.

The terrorists' only alternative is to spread violence and chaos and destruction because they know that when a free Iraq takes hold, a democratic Iraq, that it will be a major defeat for their ambitions. You've heard terrorists talk publicly about the importance of trying to stop the progress that is being made in Iraq.

Q Isn't the message really more patience? Isn't that really what the President is going to be requesting, something he's --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think if you go back to September 11th -- remember, on September 11th the threats of the 21st century were brought to our shores. We saw in a very clear way the threats that we face on that day.

[WHITE HOUSE]

The president has been doing a lot of thinking on Iraq lately  He must still be thinking: We must all be fools. MORE ON THIS LATER TONIGHT.

MY CHIEF CONCERN

MY CHIEF CONCERN TODAY IS . . .
Today Is the Last Day of the Supreme Court's Session for the Year.  Rehnquist is probably going to retire and we may someday wonder how we had it so good now.  These could be the good old days. Before I get going, I want to thank the Democrats for at least saving the Senate while the rest of us go down the tubes with the likes of Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owen.

Before Rehnquist retired, we got liberal judges siding for condemning land and tossing grandma from the house in which you rembember eating all those nice cookies. I want to toss my cookies right now.  Before Rehnquist retired, we got news the Ten Commandments can't be kept in court houses, but the signs of the dominant religion may be kept on government land, no problem.  Thank god we no longer worship Jim Carey's farting ass.  Or something some people find really offensive.  These may be the good old daze.  Or not.

Some day soon we could remember the present times of Clarence Thomas as a libertine lovefest.  Or not.  Today the Supreme Court ruled that software service companies like Grokster and Kazaa  may be liable for the illegal downloads that people use their software for.  Before I say iPod, there iCry, I will say I look forward to the same logic being applied to . . . guns.

These really are the good old days. The Snake Woman says Clarence Thomas is guaranteed in any case to vote against the woman.  It could get worse. We may next be living  in a world where he votes against the women. And against men too.  Property may again be king. Like it was back with Dred Scott.  Welcome to the ownership society.  If you do not already have an owner . . .  That ownership line?  I think I borrowed it from Jesus' General I hope he doesn't find out, because than he might own me.

LIGHT CHALLENGES SHADOW

LIGHT CHALLENGES SHADOW
Mukhtaran Mai Today Started the Appeal of Her Case in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.  Guilty verdicts  against her gang rape attackers were overturned by a regional high court in March.  The court heard initial arguments on whether Pakistan’s highest Islamic court should have jurisdicition in the case and then adjourned until Tuesday. The intolerant Islamic sect of Wahabism, the power of tribal councils, the power politics internal and external to the Pakistani government are all confronted by one brave woman seeking justice.

Ms Mai, 33, said outside court on Monday: "I have high hopes. I hope the original verdict will be upheld and that my attackers will be punished."
—snip--
The BBC's Paul Anderson in Islamabad says the case has become a test of President Musharraf's commitment to protect the rights of women.

Women's and civil rights activists, he says, argue neither the president nor the government have been able or had the will to resist the tribal and feudal leaders who mete out justice by what they see as a time-honoured cultural code.
[BBC]

LOOK FOR UPDATES HERE LATER TODAY.

RECENT HERETIK POSTS ON MUKHTARAN MAI:
[DARK REFLECTION]
[OTHERS SPEAK UP]
[LIGHT DEFINED BY SHADOW]
[THE POWER OF CONSCIENCE]
[IDENTITY THEFT]
[FRIEND OF THE DEVIL]
  
ALSO RECOMMENDED:
[BBC TIMELINE]
[MUKHTARAN'S STORY]
[INTERVIEW: MP 3]
[TOM WATSON/HUFFINGTON POST]

MONSTER POLICY PART TWO

MONSTER POLICY PART TWO
How Worse Things Happen When the Same Bad Decisions Happen Again and Again Because of Politics The Downing Street Memos predict what happens when people who believe themselves so right go so wrong.  The Bush foreign policy is built upon seeming divine sense of what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is evil.  To be so completely right from the start means there can be no wrong turns ahead and no turning back.  Nowhere is this seen more than in the continuing presence of Donald Rumsfeld and in in his influence in the Bush Administration.  Rumsfeld gave us a war with too few soldiers at its start and a war with too many soldiers dying after the end of major combat operations now. 
Rumsfeld is the cursed creature of a desert policy, the mummy once given life, now dead, that yet haunts the living. His bungle through Iraq, his evil acts undead and still alive in abominations like Guantanamo, go not unnoticed in the Middle East and other places where human hearts still beat.  That the monstrous mummy of Bush policy still stalk the world tells the people of the desert country and beyond that something is seriously wrong with the country that claims always to be right, that those who claim to see the good are blind to at least one man’s evil.  Wrong policy only makes a wrong turn when it continues on straight ahead for politics and can’t turn back.

Monstrous policy commits itself to failure when its makers cannot admit a mistake. To admit a mistake would admit a critic could be right, if only once.  Monstrous policy is built upon being always right.  Because you said so.

MR. RUSSERT: Chuck Hagel, a Republican, said this: "Things aren't getting better, they're getting worse. The White House is completely disconnected from reality. ...It's like they're just making it up as the go along. The reality is we are losing in Iraq."
SEC'Y RUMSFELD: That's just flat wrong. We are not losing in Iraq. . . --snip--
MR. RUSSERT: The Times of London reports this morning that there have been two meetings between Iraqi and U.S. officials and some members of the insurgency. Is that accurate?
SEC'Y RUMSFELD: Oh, I would doubt it. I think there have probably been many more than that. . . . .
--snip--
MR. RUSSERT: Is that negotiating with terrorists?
SEC'Y RUMSFELD: No, no.
--snip--
MR. RUSSERT:  . . . .Does any of that represent, in your mind, misjudgments made by you or the administration about Iraq?
SEC'Y RUMSFELD: Well, you know, you have to remember that in every war, a battle plan doesn't survive first contact with the enemy. This is in history. Why? Because the enemy has a brain and they're constantly adapting, so we're constantly adapting. Every time there's an adaptation, someone says, "Oh, there's a mistake." It isn't a mistake. It's just reality.
[MEET THE PRESS/NBC]

The message from Rumsfeld? We are not losing in Iraq. . . . It isn't a mistake. It's just reality.  Losing is the reality.
Rumsfeld has some gems to offer about what others say about Iraq.  At home you should not listen to what polls say:

Q: With polls showing that people are very worried about Iraq, is the administration trying to change its message now?  What are they saying?
SEC. RUMSFELD:  Well, you know, I don’t think there’s ever been a war that was popular.  I think that if you think about it, in the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World War I and II, the Korean War, Vietnam War – they’re tough, they’re hard, and people die.  And the reporting on them tends to report the dramatic and the negative. 
[DOD]

But in Iraq itself listen to the polls Rumsfeld cites:

Q: Should we have better estimated the strength of the insurgency --
SEC. RUMSFELD:Oh my goodness – the strength of the insurgency is a function of the success of the Iraqi government people to persuade the Iraqi people that, in fact, they have a legitimate government and that’s coming; you can see it in the polls.  You can see people in Iraq have greater respect for the government.  They have greater respect for the Iraqi security forces.  Now how do you estimate that?  How does anyone do it?  You don’t have crystal balls in life.
[DOD]

There it is. The failure of our monstrous testosterone policy in overdrive in Iraq can be explained away by a lack of balls.

RELATED AND RECOMMENDED:
[MONSTER POLICY]
[THE MONSTER SADDAM]
[WAKE ME WHEN THE LIBERATION IS OVER]
TINY URL FOR THIS POST
[ http://tinyurl.com/bokbz]

WHAT OTHER BLOGS ARE SAYING:

[AGITPROP]: Donald Rumsfeld, the ubiquitous Cold War dinosaur and crack-pipe philosopher, who said that the Iraq War would be easily won in several months has now admitted that the insurgency may last until 2017.

[SHAKESPEARE'S SISTER] links to Fort Wayne's Ron Steinback who asks:
[DO YOU WANT TO KNOW?]

That's the only popular division that matters in the United States today: Those who want to determine once and for all if President Bush knowingly ``fixed the facts'' regarding Iraq, thereby misleading Congress and the American people into supporting an unnecessary war, and those who will cover their ears and hum loudly in order to maintain their belief that Bush and his advisors remain above reproach.

You're in one camp or the other. Either you want to know if you've been lied to, or you don't.

The American public is inching tentatively toward a reckoning unlike any this nation has ever experienced. The oh-so-clever Bush administration strategists and their quasi-media acolytes, who have kept the reckoning at bay with a deft combination of we're-at-war patriotic fervor and fear-the-evil-liberals rhetoric, are running out of parlor tricks.