Here we go again!
Oh, this isn't good. See, we get all wrapped up all over the place with the war on terror and next thing you know...
( see "Bounding the Global War on Terrorism" http://www.carlisle.army.mil/ssi/pubs/2003/bounding/bounding.htm )

March 18, 2004
Kosovo Torn by Widest Violence Since U.N. Took Control in '99
By NICHOLAS WOOD

RISTINA, Kosovo, March 17 -- At least eight people were killed and more than 200 wounded in clashes between Albanians and Serbs across Kosovo on Wednesday, in what United Nations officials described as the worst violence in the province since they took over its administration almost five years ago.
The fighting erupted in midmorning in the divided city of Mitrovica after a protest over the drownings of at least two Albanian children. The protesters blamed Serbs for the deaths.
The province, in southern Serbia, is inhabited mostly by Albanians.
By nightfall the United Nations had lost control of several city centers, and mobs of Albanian men were attacking Serbian areas at will. In the provincial capital, Pristina, machine gunfire and explosions could be heard late into the night.
A United Nations police spokesman said the exact number of casualties was difficult to calculate because the police and peacekeeping troops had not re-established control.
"This is the severest case of unrest since the end of the war," said Derek Chappell, the chief United Nations police spokesman in Kosovo.
Although the province has experienced waves of violence since NATO peacekeepers arrived in June 1999, he said none had been as widespread as the clashes on Wednesday. "This is happening all over Kosovo," he said.

Full Story: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/18/international/europe/18KOSO.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=

Is this guy on drugs?
Rumsfeld with Nick Childs of the BBC: 3/16/04

http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040316-secdef0545.html

Q: Does this, though, present any practical problems for you? The election in Spain has resulted in a government that is now talking about the possibility of withdrawing its contribution to the coalition in Iraq possibly in June. Isn't that a crack in the coalition?

Rumsfeld: Well, obviously, one would prefer that more countries would come in, rather than a country leave.

Q: Isn't that - will it make it more difficult to do that?

Rumsfeld: (inaudible) involved in the global war on terror. There's some 34 nations. Now they're probably 33, with forces in Iraq. The task will get done. It'll get done and it'll get done well and progress is being made. And my guess is you'll find other countries reacting just the opposite.

You'll find countries stepping forward and saying, well, if that's what that country is going to do, we'll do just the opposite.

(What? Who would be crazy enough after this?)

Hitler's Coalition of the Willing
All this arm-twisting, threatening, and spying by Bush and his bullyboys against Chile, Mexico, and all the "coalition" member countries during the build up to war against Iraq got me thinking about this famous exchange between Hitler and Roosevelt.

By the time Roosevelt had sent his telegram, Hitler had already signed the orders for the invasion of Poland. You can be sure all the nations mentioned in the telegram knew which way the wind was blowing and eventhough everybody knew damn well they were lying, they were sure to say they didn't fear Germany.

You might notice some familiar names on the list.
Some things never change.

President Roosevelt to the Chancellor of Germany (Hitler) [40], [Telegram], 14 April 1939
THE WHITE HOUSE, April 14, 1939.

You realize I am sure that throughout the world hundreds of millions of human beings are living today in constant fear of a new war or even a series of wars...

I am convinced that the cause of world peace would be greatly advanced if the nations of the world were to obtain a frank statement relating to the present and future policy of governments...Because the United States, as one of the nations of the Western Hemisphere, is not involved in the immediate controversies which have arisen in Europe, I trust that you may be willing to make such a statement of policy to me as the head of a nation far removed from Europe in order that I, acting only with the responsibility and obligation of a friendly intermediary, may communicate such declaration to other nations now apprehensive as to the course which the policy of your Government may take.

Are you willing to give assurance that your armed forces will not attack or invade the territory or possessions of the following independent nations: Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, The Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain and Ireland, France, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Luxemburg, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, Russia, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey, Iraq, the Arabias, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Iran.

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/WorldWar2/fdr3.htm

Hitler's answer:
April 28, 1939 before the Reichstag

Members of the German Reichstag:

The President of the United States of America has addressed a telegram to me, with the curious contents of which you are already familiar. Before I, the addressee, actually received this document, the rest of the world had already been informed of it by radio and newspaper reports, and numerous commentaries in the organs of the democratic world press had already profusely enlightened us as to the fact that this telegram was a very skillful tactical document, designed to impose upon the states, in which the people govern, the responsibility for the warlike measures adopted by the plutocratic countries.

Mr. Roosevelt asks that assurances be given him that the German armed forces will not attack, and above all, not invade, the territory or possessions of the following independent nations. He then names as those to which he refers: Finland, Lithuania, Latvia,' Estonia, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain , Ireland, France, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, Russia, Bulgaria, Turkey, Iraq, the Arabias, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Iran.

Answers I have first taken the trouble to ascertain from the states mentioned, firstly, whether they feel themselves threatened, and, what is most important, secondly, whether this inquiry by the American President was addressed to us at their suggestion or at least with their consent.

The reply was in all cases negative, in some instances strongly so. It is true that there were certain ones among the states and nations mentioned, whom I could not question because they themselves - as for example, Syria - are at present not in possession of their freedom, but are under occupation by the military agents of democratic states and consequently deprived of their rights.
Apart from this fact, however, all states bordering on Germany have received much more binding assurances and -particularly, more binding proposals than Mr. Roosevelt asked from me in his curious telegram.

But should there be any doubt as to the value of these general and specific statements which I have so often made, then any further statement of this kind, even if addressed to the American President, would be equally worthless. For in the final analysis it is not the value which Mr. Roosevelt attaches to such statements which is decisive, but the value attached to these statements by the countries in question.

But I must also draw Mr. Roosevelt's attention to one or two mistakes in history. He mentions Ireland, for instance, and asks for a statement to the effect that Germany will not attack Ireland. Now, I have just read a speech delivered by Mr. de Valera, the Irish Taoiseach (Prime Minister), in which strangely enough, and contrary to Mr. Roosevelt's opinion, he does not charge Germany with oppressing Ireland, but reproaches England with subjecting Ireland to continuous aggression.

With all due respect to Mr. Roosevelt's insight into the needs and cares of other countries, it may nevertheless be assumed that the Irish Taoiseach would be more familiar with the dangers which threaten his country than would the President of the United States.

Similarly the fact has obviously escaped Mr. Roosevelt's notice that Palestine is at present occupied not by German troops but by the English; and that the country is undergoing restriction of its liberty by the most brutal resort to force, is being robbed of its independence and is suffering the cruelest maltreatment for the benefit of Jewish interlopers.

The Arabs living in that country would therefore certainly not have complained to Mr. Roosevelt of German aggression, but they are voicing a constant appeal to the world, deploring the barbarous methods with which England is attempting to suppress a people which loves its freedom and is merely defending it.

This, too, is perhaps a problem which in the American President's view should be solved at the conference table, that is, before a just judge, and not by physical force or military methods, by mass executions, burning down villages, blowing up houses and so on.

For one fact is surely certain. In this case England is not defending herself against a threatened Arab attack, but as an uninvited interloper, is endeavoring to establish her power in a foreign territory which does not belong to her.

...Lastly I have the following statement to make:

The German Government is in spite of everything prepared to give each of the states named an assurance of the kind desired by Mr. Roosevelt, on condition of absolute reciprocity, provided that such state wishes it and itself addresses to Germany a request for such an assurance, together with correspondingly acceptable proposals. [and you can take that to the bank!]

http://www.adolfhitler.ws/

Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us ?
Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war? Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years ? Threat to the world is greater than terrorism.

Mark Townsend and Paul Harris
Sunday February 22, 2004

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters.. A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world. The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html

The warming warning
By Danny Rabinowitz
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/398873.html

Damage from Warming Becoming 'Irreversible,' Says New Report
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=655&e=9&u=/oneworld/4536815561079359338

Dolphins go ape with newest acquisition
Yes, unfortunatly, I am a big-time Miami Dolphins fan. There might be a few detours along the way on the roadmap to defeat Bush.

Here's an article I picked up in the fictional Miami newspaper's sports section of my friend George's twisted imaginings:
( No! We're not desperate!)

In a move that has shocked the sports world, the Miami Dolphins have announced the signing of "Timmy," a 748 lb. silverback gorilla from the Bronx Zoo.

It is expected that Timmy will immediately upgrade an offensive line in sore need of impact players.

Reached by phone, the burly simian was ecstatic upon hearing the news. "This is truly the opportunity of a lifetime. The Dolphins are giving me a chance to leave this sh*t-filled cage and I don't plan on letting them down."

Timmy is also eager to dispel any fears among his new teammates. "I'm sure there will be an adjustment period, but that's normal in human/ape relationships. Once I pick the lice out of a few of their scalps, I'm confident they'll accept me as part of the team." He warns, however, that opponents can't expect the same civility. "Hey, if I need to disembowel some guy and leave his intestines on the field, I'm going to do it. Whatever it takes, man. And you can tell those referees to forget about throwing the damn flag...not if they value their lives."

Team officials were reluctant to say if reports of a mysterious scout named "T-Man" were instrumental in the signing, but General Manager Rick Spielman was blunt in his assessment of the gorilla. "Look, it's not like this is the first time we've ventured into the animal kingdom for a player. We've had a turkey at quarterback for the past four years. I'm confident Timmy is the missing link in the championship puzzle."

Didn't "W" go AWOL?
An AWOL guardsman who refuses to return to Iraq duty plans to turn himself in and become the first soldier to publicly challenge the conflict


By Michael Martinez
Chicago Tribune

March 15, 2004, 1:55 PM EST

NEW YORK -- In Iraq last April, freshly promoted Staff Sgt. Camilo Mejia led squads of Florida National Guard soldiers in the fight against insurgents in the deadly Sunni triangle.

But Mejia, a native of Miami, became increasingly pained by his war experiences, and when he went on leave in the autumn, he decided not to come back. The staff sergeant--one of about 600 soldiers counted as AWOL by the Army during home leaves from Iraq--eventually was labeled a deserter.

Now, after five months in hiding, Mejia plans to surrender Monday in Boston on the eve of the war's first anniversary, and he aims to become the first Iraq war veteran to publicly challenge the morality and conduct of the conflict. At a time when polls indicate that Americans' support for the war is slipping, Mejia intends to seek conscientious-objector status to avoid a court-martial.

Full story:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-312moralityofwar,0,6369096,print.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines

There he goes again...
Rumsfeld on Face The Nation today:
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/face_031404.pdf

SCHIEFFER: The--the president ordered this invasion, as the world knows, because he said
there were weapons of mass destruction, and he said they posed a threat to this country.
Knowing what we now know, Mr. Secretary, do you think it was still wise to take this
invasion? Did Iraq pose an immediate threat to this country?

Sec. RUMSFELD: Bob, the answer is I do believe it was the--it was the--the right thing to do.
And I'm--I'm glad it's done. The 25 million Iraqi people have been liberated. A regime, a
vicious regime, is gone after decades of repression and death squads and--and mass graves
and mass killings, a country that used chemical weapons on its neighbors and on its own
people, that fired ballistic missiles into several of its neighboring countries. It's a good thing
they're gone. And--and...

SCHIEFFER: Well, let me just ask you this. If they did not have these weapons of mass
destruction, though, granted all of that is true, why then did they pose an immediate threat
to us, to this country?

Sec. RUMSFELD: Well, you're the--you and a few other critics are the only people I've heard
use the phrase `immediate threat.' I didn't. The president didn't. And it's become kind of
folklore that that's--that's what's happened. The president went...

SCHIEFFER: You're saying that nobody in the administration said that.

Sec. RUMSFELD: I--I can't speak for nobody--everybody in the administration and say
nobody said that.

SCHIEFFER: Vice president didn't say that? The...

Sec. RUMSFELD: Not--if--if you have any citations, I'd like to see 'em.

Mr. FRIEDMAN: We have one here. It says `some have argued that the nu'--this is you
speaking--`that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent, that Saddam is at least five to
seven years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain.'

Sec. RUMSFELD: And--and...

Mr. FRIEDMAN: It was close to imminent.

Sec. RUMSFELD: Well, I've--I've tried to be precise, and I've tried to be accurate. I'm s--
suppose I've...

Mr. FRIEDMAN: `No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security
of our people and the stability of the world and the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.'
[http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/arms/02091831.htm]

Sec. RUMSFELD: Mm-hmm. It--my view of--of the situation was that he--he had--we--we
believe, the best intelligence that we had and other countries had and that--that we believed
and we still do not know--we will know. David Kay said we're about 85 percent there. I
don't know if that's the right percentage. But the Iraqi Survey Group--we've got 1,200 people
out there looking. It's a country the size of California. He could have hidden his--enough
chemical or biol--enough biological weapons in the hole that--that we found Saddam Hussein
in to kill tens of thousands of people. So--so it's not as though we have certainty today.
But what--think what happened. There were 17 UN resolutions. There was unanimous
agreement that he had filed a fraudulent declaration. The final opportunity was given with
the last resolution, and he didn't take it. He chose war. He didn't do what Kazakhstan did.
He didn't do what South Africa did. He didn't do what Ukraine did. He--he didn't say,
`Come in and look and see what we have.' He was engaged in active deception. We'll
ultimately know a great deal about what took place.


...In other words, "where's the guy who asked about the subway running under the building?"

See also: Rumsfeld 'pocketed 9/11 souvenir'
From John Solomon in Washington
13Mar04
http://www.news.com.au/common/printpage/0,6093,8953686,00.html

I have a few thoughts on this Madrid bombing situation.
Amazingly, the Spanish government is still insisting ETA is a suspect in these terrible attacks. The media is playing right along discussing whether it's possible they might have teamed up with Al-Quaeda. All the evidence points to Al-Quaeda or an offshoot, not ETA. However, it's most convenient and self-serving for the Spanish to keep the heat on ETA to try and convince the Bush administration to start focusing the "War on Terror" on the Basque insurgency, which they haven't had any luck defeating on their own for 40 years.

I think they've seen charlatans like Ahmad Chalabi dupe the Pentagon and Cheney into invading Iraq; they've noted Israel conflating their problems with Hizbollah and the Palestinian Intifada into the "Global War On Terrorism."
Every tin-pot dictator in the world is trying to get us to believe their homegrown insurgencies are Al-Quaeda. (We're even doing it in Iraq; it can't be the Iraqis fighting us, it has to be groups from outside!)

Let's read this quote again from "Bounding the War on Terrorism" by Jeffery Record (cited below):

"Should the United States, in addition to fighting Al-Qaeda, gratuitously pick fights with the Basque Eukzkadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA), the Sri Lankan Tamil Tigars...Hamas and Hizbollah? Do we want to provoke national-and regional-level terrorist organizations that have stayed out of America's way into targeting the U.S. interests and even the American homeland?"

I should think not. We don't have the manpower or the resources.

One more quote that is sobering:

"A cardinal rule of strategy is to keep your enemies to a manageable number. A strategy whose ambitions provoke the formation of an array of enemies whose defeat exceeds the resources available to that strategy is doomed to failure. The Germans were defeated in two war wars notwithstanding their superb performance at the operational and tactical levels of combat because their strategic ends outran their available means..."

Let's hope the quid pro quo for Spanish support of our invasion in Iraq wasn't adding the ETA to our list of enemies.

It's good to be Neil Bush
This is trully unbelieveable.
Here's a few little tid-bits from an article from the Washington Post on the president's brother.

The Relatively Charmed Life Of Neil Bush
Despite Silverado and Voodoo, Fortune Still Smiles on the President's Brother
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35297-2003Dec27?language=printer

"During his travels, he met with several Arab princes and enjoyed a private dinner with Jiang Zemin, then China's president, who serenaded Bush with a military song.

For the last several years, Bush's main business interest has been Ignite!, the educational software company he co-founded in 1999. To fund Ignite!, Bush has raised
$23 million from U.S. investors (including his parents), as well as businessmen from Taiwan, Japan, Kuwait, the British Virgin Islands and the United Arab Emirates,
according to documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The program's first course -- eighth-grade American history -- was tested over the last two years in schools in a dozen states. Available commercially for the first
time this year, it is being used by about 40,000 students in 120 school districts, mostly in Texas, at a cost of about $30 per pupil.

However, Ignite! has been attacked by other educators for dumbing down history. Among its controversial aspects is a lesson that depicts the Seminole Wars in a
cartoon football game -- "the Jacksons vs. the Seminoles" -- the animated Indians smashing helmets with animated white settlers. The Constitutional Convention is
taught in a rap song:

It was 55 delegates from 12 states

Took one hot Philadelphia summer to create

A perfect document for their imperfect times

Franklin, Madison, Washington -- a lot of the cats

Who used to be in the Continental Congress way back.

Ignite! is working well, Bush wrote in an e-mail: "Teachers and students have given anecdotal feedback that confirms the powerful impact our program is having on
student achievement, student focus and attitudes, and teacher success in reaching all of their students."

But at Whitney reviews were less laudatory. "The kids felt pretty strongly that what this was about was lowering the bar," says Humes.

Humes wasn't impressed, either. "There was a lot of rhyming and games," he says. "It reminded me of what my son uses -- but he's in kindergarten."

When Bush spoke at Whitney, several students began arguing with him.

"He was very surprised," Humes recalls. "You had to see the look on his face when one young woman got up and said she liked calculus. He said it was useless.
This is the branch of mathematics that makes space travel possible, and he said it was useless.""

There's also a lot of stuff about him having sex with strange women who just happen to walk into his hotel room and a very nasty divorce with charges of voodoo being used against him by his former wife.
Man! Billy Carter and Roger Clinton have nothing on this perp.

See also: No Bush Left Behind: When You're Barred From Banking, Why Not Bank on Education
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/03/12/1534244

Where's the man who asked about the subway coming in under the building?
A day after the devastating bombings in Madrid, security has been increased on the Metro here in DC and around the country. I thought this might be a good time to recap the whole `guy who asked Donald Rumsfeld about the subway that runs under the pentagon' thing.

On August 6th 2002 at a Pentagon Town Hall Meeting Dennis Stephens, an employee at the Pentagon, was the first person to get up and ask Rumsfeld a question. The timing was perfect because Rummy had just spent about 20 minutes blathering on about all the "truly remarkable accomplishments" since 9/11 that had made everyone so much safer.

Rummy: And I would be happy to respond to questions. Make the first one easy.(Laughter.) And why don't we try something totally new? When I get questions from the press, all they ask about is Iraq. (Laughter.) So why doesn't somebody ask something else, anything else?! (Laughter.) There's a hand way in the back.Yes, sir?

Q: My name is Dennis Stephens (sp). I work for the Air Force in the Finance Department. I'm curious and concerned about what's going on here for us, the people that work in the Pentagon, as far as the security is going, and especially because the Metro runs right under our building.

Rumsfeld: Well, you are doing exactly what the president suggested, and that is that all of us go about our normal lives but have a heightened sense of awareness. And clearly you do.
I thought the Metro did not currently run under the building. Am I wrong? Is it currently under --

Not distinguishable: (Off mike.)

Rumsfeld: The answer's yes. Is that right? Not distinguishable: Yes.

Rumsfeld: Yes. And I will talk to some folks who are involved in that, the chief and others who have set up, as you can see, around the department a whole host of new security activities. But I just was not aware that that's still happening, and I'll ask why.

Q: It goes right underneath the East Wing. In fact, I ride it every day.

Rumsfeld: I see. Fair -- are you looking around you when you're riding?(Laughter.)

Q: To be sure, sir.

Rumsfeld: (Laughs.) Thank you. I'll check. Well, wasn't it stopped for a while? It was.

Not distinguishable: Just the different rings -- (off mike) -- get off -- (off mike) --Pentagon -- (off mike).

Rumsfeld: I see. Good.

What else? That was very good. It wasn't about Iraq. (Laughter.) That's impressive.

[It wasn't over then. The issue just wouldn't go away...]

Tuesday, November 12, 2002

Q: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. My name is Dennis Stevens. I work for the United States Air Force in the finance department as a computer specialist.
In light of the ongoing threat and the ongoing military operations, I know that there have been a lot of changes in our building as far as security for the people who come to work here every day. I asked this question last time we were here, and there was some -- maybe some confusion. But I wanted to see if you could tell us all how things are changing around this building to protect the men and women that come here and work every day.

Rumsfeld: Are you the one who asked about whether the subway came in? It turns out I think I was right and you were wrong! (Laughter, applause.) I hope I was right!

Q: The metro doesn't go right under the building, it goes --

Rumsfeld: It stops short now.

Q: -- it goes right next to the East Wing of the building, which is where --

Rumsfeld: Right. I thought I'd been told that by someone smart like Wolfowitz. But -- (laughter).

Q: Yes. It doesn't go right under the building, it goes very close to the building. But in general, the improvements in security for the people who come to work here every day.

Rumsfeld: Well, there have been a great many things that have been done. As you -- visually, you can see there are a good many more people that are in the area around the building, police as well as military people. The subway was one of the things that was taken care of.

Thursday, March 6, 2003

Rummy: Where's the man who asked about the subway coming in under the building? (Laughter.) Not here. Okay

Q: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I was actually out in the hall, you asked for me. Is there an update on subway security, sir? (Laughter.)
Rumsfeld: I had a feeling you'd be here. (Laughter.) I think we're doing just fine down there where the subway comes in. They're making some improvements and they're keeping it out from under the building. And most people who look at the security thing feel pretty good about it. How do you feel about it now?

Q: Thank you. It has improved. I do know that there have been some problems. There was an issue yesterday. But since I take the subway every day, it's something I see every day. And it's not -- it doesn't have the security of, say, the airport, for instance, which is unfortunate, but it would be very difficult to implement that.

[The thing is, as far as I know, it still runs under the Pentagon. The evidence of absence isn't the absence of evidence. (Or something like that.)]
http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/archive.html