 |
||||||
|
March 23, 2004 |
||||||
Important Note: Because we can't always determine your intentions, we need to ask a favor of you when you send us email. If you DO NOT WANT YOUR EMAIL PUBLISHED in the Mailbag or in the Contributors section, please write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the Subject line or at the top of your email. That way we'll know it's just a comment to BuzzFlash. Additionally, if you submit a mailbag item and DO NOT WANT YOUR NAME associated with your submission, sign your email "A BuzzFlash Reader." If you send email unsigned, we will post your name with your submission, or, if that's not available, your email name (not the full address, just what's on the left side of the email address). Please try and keep your word count under 400. If your letter includes hypertext links, please include the entire URL. We can only post a small percentage of what is sent to us. The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. Thanks again for your email and your patience.
Subj: John Kerry-Senate Foreign Relations Committee 1971 I was spellbound watching John Kerry's testimony in 1971 before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee tonight on CSPAN. It propelled me right back to that time. In my mind and body, I felt the frustration and outrage that many of us were feeling then, knowing that our government was lying to us; knowing that brave men, and women, were dying for reasons that were at best idealistic, and at worst, sinful.Those were the times that changed America's feeling about politics. A political system that had been seen before as somewhat benevolent had become, through the lens of VietNam and the final outrage of Watergate, a corruption on the spirit of America. We had learned in so many terrible and tragic ways that we could not trust our leaders with simple things like our welfare, our best interests, and the truth. Too many years have passed since these sad but empowering lessons, and by and large the American electorate has become complacent again, believing in the myth of a kind Uncle Sam that will take care of us when we need help, and kick ass when we are threatened. Now we are slowly seeing that our uncle is actually a figure with flaws like all of us. He can be kind or corrupt. He can be helpful or harmful. And lately he seems to have become like the early '70s version: engaged in adventures and enterprises that are of no benefit to the common good, but are rather cynical and duplicitous. It is clear that Iraq was no threat, yet Saddam was vilified. It is clear that alQaeda is a real threat, yet Pakistan and Afghanistan are again falling into the hands of the fundamentalists and Saudi Arabia is given a pass. And it is clear that our government, our faithful uncle, is once again lying to us, counting on the complacence that has arisen in the last 30 years. It is time to remember the early '70s, and the anger and resolve that we who protested felt. For the same issues are present again: a valueless military exercise and a mislead electorate. "...we are probably angriest about all that we were told about Iraq and about the mystical war against terrorism", to paraphrase John Kerry in 1971. I remember how I felt then, and it's the same as I feel now. It's time to make our government accountable for the deceit, and the lives lost. It's time to demand the truth. Stephen Anderson Subj: Video of Eric Alterman giving Dennis Miller the smack-down Dennis Miller has No Facts and Zero Class If you have a hi-speed connection the video linked below is well worth taking a look. Eric Alterman went on the Miller show the other night and it was a perfect display of how pathetic Dennis Miller has become. In front of dozens of people watching his show on television Miller berated Alterman, interrupted, made snide remarks, and at one point even laid back in his chair slumping with his hand on his face. While Alterman made many detailed points of how Bush and his cabinet members have lied to the American public. Miller had nothing, zero, zilch, nadda! All Miller could do was laugh or berate or interrupt with a cheap-shot. Finally, as Alterman continued to make detailed point after point about how going into Iraq had nothing to do with the 911 attacks and Bush had lied .. Miller just sat there, with his elbow on the desk and hand on his face, saying nothing. It's one thing to get smoked in a political debate, which Alterman clearly did to Miller, but for the loser to act out like a little spoiled brat the way Miller did is not just pathetic it's pitiful. Unlike many celebrities who's careers have gone into the dumpster, Miller is living proof that they all don't fall gracefully. Dennis Miller has sunk as low as you can go. Best Kelley ================================================ Direct link to comments http://kelleykramer.blogspot.com/2004_03_14... Source link to video http://homepage.mac.com/duffyb/iMovieTheater127.html Subj: How much duplicity are they going to be allowed to get by with? The president's aid Bartlett said that after 9/11, Bush said the attack on Iraq was not in response to 9/11. Well just a minor search will reveal that they said numerous times that it was and that Saddam was in on 9/11. You guys at the press are going to have to do at least a small part of the computer work. This bunch has over and over denied they even thought they were connected when every one of them said it was connected. Condi Rice needs to go and if I hear George Tenet one more time. They are using him because at least for the present he doesn't mind being blamed for this whole thing. I wouldn't be surprised if the poor man did himself in. Aren't you guys getting tired of listening to them change everything over and over again? And what's with Joe Biden? Is he changing parties are what? Be prepared because you guys are about to get a deluge of quotes from these jerks that they will respond to by saying, "Oh well it didn't matter that we were dead wrong about everything, except Saddam said he would kill GWB's father", it was worth it because the life of GHWB is worth all those soldier's and all those Iraq lives. Condi and the rest need to testify under oath and we want to see it on TV just like with Clinton. Clinton lied about sex and Bush lied about our safety and then is responsible for killing a lot of people. We want to see all the lies. Karen Webb, Moore, Ok. Subj: A blast from the past: 2nd Presidential debate, Oct. 11, 2000 Dear BuzzFlash, I would like to bring your attention to this "catch" regarding Bush's plans to invade Iraq... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/... A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Clarke Allegations In light of the revelations on 60 Minutes last night, I think the song "Call Me Irresponsible" could be used in the campaign to paint President Bush as the unreliable, irresponsible leader that he is. Steady and Strong leadership? I think not. You'd have to get permission from the composer and lyricist, and maybe pay royalties, but it would be worth it to nail this guy. The electorate doesn't seem to remember anything when it comes to this President incompetence. Maybe they would remember the tune. Use it in MoveOn.org tv and radio commercials. Al Franken could use it on his new radio show. Demonstrators at rallies could use it to taunt the President and Vice President on the campaign trail. I was shocked that I didn't know that Bush had downgraded the Terrorist Czar post from his cabinet upon starting his term. And I always thought I was well informed. The news media has really shielded the public from the Truth in regards to this President. The 9/11 families deserve better. S. Harrington Subj: My letter to the 9/11 families.. The following is a letter I sent out this morning to all of the 9/11 survivors and families groups, to wit: We are at an important juncture in our history. Proof of the failure of the Bush administration to act regarding terrorist threats prior to 9/11, and/or, of their complicity in the 9/11 attacks (including subsequent attempts to cover-up their failures), has finally made it to the general public. At the very least, they are guilty of criminal neglect, and a gross failure to carry out their responsibilities as outlined in our Constitution. It is imperative therefore, especially after Richard Clarke's recent bombshells, and those of Paul O'Neill, that the 9-11 families immediately, and forcefully, hit the media with calls for the Bush administration's impeachment. Their urgings could be the "one-two" punch needed, to finally get the Republican controlled Congress to deliver some justice on the matter. It must be stated, that Congress's refusal to act in the face of the evidence that has now accumulated, amounts to complicity, and that their continued refusal to act will be viewed as a hostile act, not just against the surviving families, but against every citizen of this nation. It is time for Congress to the take responsibility vested in them by our Constitution. Those members of Congress that fail to act in supporting impeachment, should be threatened with protests and voter backlash, and should be targeted for defeat at the polls, .... right along with G.W. Bush. All of us must act now, while this issue is red-hot, and fresh in the public mind, and before the propaganda machinery of the Bush administration succeeds in diverting the public's attention to some other matter (as they have done with so many other issues). It is time, for this nation to cleanse itself, and remove those who have harmed her. And most importantly, it is time for the 9-11 families to have the truth and justice they so deserve in the face of the tragedies that have visited their lives. Sincerely, T. Bass Subj: WILL THE RICHARD CLARKE ACCUSATIONS BE MET WITH THE USUAL APATHY? Dear Buzz, Yesterday's 60 minutes interview with Richard Clarke was, in my opinion, quite explosive. This is about the third administrative officer from the Bush white house who has come out (boldly), and said almost the same thing. If the Bush supporters don't see any pattern here, they are, I am sorry to say, dumb, and need to sharpen their minds. How many more prominent staff members have to come out with these stories before anything sinks in? I am tired of the apathy that people in our nation are now famous for, and that our government is not held accountable for the blunders that are costing the lives of the american people. It is sickening to see Condi Rice appear on numerous tv shows and lie through the gap in her teeth. She tries to take the focus away from their mistakes with pretty words and flamboyant language, but I just don't buy it. As for Richard Clarke (a Reagan appointee) I think he must be very brave to come out and confront the Bush administration like this, especially when he know what the consequences will be. He is dealing with a very vindictive bunch who has even outed a CIA agent to "get even" with her husband. We need more patriotic folk like Clarke, who should, for the love of this country, tell the nation exactly what the Bush cartel is up to, and I think it is time that our spineless congress follow through and impeach this administration for all the lying, misleading, and for the unnecessary deaths of our troops and people in Iraq. WE CERTAINLY DO NOT NEED FOUR MORE YEARS OF DECEPTION AND HAVOC, AND IT IS TIME FOR CHANGE. THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAS TAKEN US DOWN A VERY DANGEROUS PATH, PEOPLE HAVE TO LOOK BACK AT THE LAST FEW YEARS AND REALIZE THAT THE COUNTRY CANNOT KEEP GOING IN THIS DIRECTION. WE HAVE SERIAL LIARS IN THE WHITE HOUSE WHO SEEM TO BE SPENDING THEIR TIME ETERNALLY COVERING THEIR BEHINDS, AND NOT DEVOTING THEIR TIME TO CORRECTING THEIR FAILILNG POLICIES. I AM SO ANGRY I COULD SCREAM!!!!!!! A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Spain/Argyros link Here's a very good article in OC Weekly about our "unfavorite son," Nixon's old pal and our now ambassador to Spain, George Argyros: http://www.ocweekly.com/ink/04/28/cover-arellano.php Regards, Joe Weber Subj: The Ides of March I agree with BuzzFlash that Kerry should never permit the Bushittes define him. It appears that Rove's thrashing machine is beginning to make a swath. Just as Julius Caesar was given the "Beware of the Ides of March" warning, BuzzFlash gave Kerry a warning not to let Rove and his marauders define him to the American public. And what did Kerry do? He went skiing and permitted Rove to make ridiculous and unfounded accusations, painting a Kerry portrait that BuzzFlash warned about. To date, we haven't seen much rebuttal from Kerry, but we have seen videos of him skiing down hills. I hope [down hills] doesn't turn out to be an omen. Mr. Kerry repeated over and over to "Bring it on." Well, here it is - the first test of "Bring it on" and Kerry goes skiing!!! Kerry deserves time away, but we all know that's when Rove puts high octane in his thrashing machine. Another Ides of March warning to Kerry... take a few days off after you are inaugurated. ~ Cathy Subj: Kerry, use the power of appointments Just in case the Kerry for president group of advisors have not yet had these thoughts. If its possible to dislike and have any less confidence in Bush, that would have to be for his choices for his cabinet. In the five months before the Democratic convention, leaked announcements from the Kerry camp from unidentified sources for different positions will generate headlines and free publicity right up to the convention. The choices that I believe would make the most of this multi million dollar publicity. An unidentified advisor close to Kerry has told us off the record that John may appoint, Sen. Edwards to replace attorney general Ashcroft, April let it come out that it has been mentioned that Bill Clinton is being talked about for Secretary of State to replace Colin Powell. May could be another block buster, that John has been talking to John McCain to see if he will accept Secretary of Defense. June could be that Gephardt is most often mentioned in the inner circle as the best VP candidate. July might be that Ruben is being courted to see if he might come back as Secretary of the treasury. In these very troubling days with such a void in leadership, voters will be most anxious over the cabinet appointments and will want to hear who these would likely be before voting. JR It makes me so angry when I hear the Bushtapo blame Clinton for not doing anything about terrorism. We must remember that President Clinton spent his entire Presidency trying to defend himself against Ken Star's Pit Bulls, and during the last years of his administration, every time he wanted to do ANYTHING when it came to terrorism, the rallying cry was: NO WAR FOR MONICA!!!!!!!!! How quickly we forget! Jan Swing Subj: "Liberal" A Dirty Word? The Republicans have succeeded in making "Liberal" a Dirty Word. Mr. Kerry MUST embrace this word, and make the claim to it by saying: "If Liberal means helping Americans to have a better life, then please, please, accuse me of being a "Liberal"!!! J. Pipkin, San Jose, Ca Subj: CNN Deletes Pro-Kerry Comments I am sick of CNN deleting Wes Clark's words where Clark is defending Kerry. This news network refused to talk about the good things Clark was doing when he was running and now they delete Clark's words that support Kerry. Does CNN just think it can invent and twist facts in their transcripts because that is ok with Michael Powell (nepotism Bush appointee) or is CNN just anti-veteran? just asking Clarkie04Kerry Subj: Rove vs. News Just a question for discussion: Is it truly possible that Karl Rove is really smarter/ far more manipulative than all of America's top news editors and reporters; are are they simply lazy, naive, weak and/or intimidated? Maybe it's time to make the newspeople news, through inquiry along these lines. JBH Subj: Hmmm Does it strike anyone odd that right after Clarke made his accusations on 60 Minutes, Israel took out Hamas' leader? That's all the media can talk about today and it is overshadowing what Clarke had to say! How convenient! Another Rove strategy? ~ Cathy Hmmmmm.......... Richard Clarke and Paul O'Neill have no problem with testifying under oath. Bush and his people refuse to be under oath. Like I said.....hmmmmmm KM what the hell is wrong with that joe lieberman creep? when is he up for reelection and isn't there a real democrat who can run against him? i keep waiting for him to endorse bush! a BuzzFlash reader Buzz, You’ve been reporting this since Day 1 –Finally it’s in the news, in a subscription only Wall Street Journal article, and in today’s “WHITE HOUSE BRIEFING”Column of the Washington Post found here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/politics/administration/whbriefing/ Excerpt from the article
There was no such video until late that night, and the TV wasn't even plugged in, Paltrow writes. Maybe the truth will yet emerge. Steve Bodenheimer Subj: Most coherent 9/11 information to date At the end of the day, go to www.c-span.org to listen to 9/11 Citizens' Watch presentation at today's Washington Press Club. Very comprehensive, detailed, coherent, no-holds barred, questions posed by families and investigators, excellent. Tomorrow and Wednesday open hearings of 9/11 hearings. You're only going to get it untainted by media slant by watching it on C-span. Add this to Clarke's 60 Minutes appearance last night and we would have anybody but Bush for President. Check out www.911citizenswatch.org Jackie Subj: WHOA! Cheney caught in Taliban lie. Busted! RE: Cheney on Limbaugh's show talking about "going after the Taliban." Excuse me, was that before or after the Cheney/Bush Administration gave the Taliban $43 million and, then, worked (unsuccessfully, as it turned out) on a pipeline rights deal with the Taliban? Cheney parses his words ("going after the Taliban to end its support for Al Qaeda" -- note the BIG hedge, here) so as to look like the Admin was cracking down on the Taliban and Al Qaeda, when, in fact, it was "playing footsie" with the Taliban, which it knew was harboring Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. Isn't there one "mainstream" journalist who can point this out??! Frustrated in Alabama . . . Subj: On the assassination of Hamas leader Israel has had the leader of Hamas -- a paraplegic in a wheelchair who leads and attends regular religious events -- in their sights for a long time. All they needed was the greenlight from Washington. And the Bushies gave them the green light when the Clarke story would've been the biggest news of the day. It's now on the back burner and fading fast. Who cares if the assassination of the Hamas leader will lead to untold years of bloodshed? That's what I think of the Bush administration and its duplicity and sleaze. Mike Kilroy The Bush ad suggests Kerry’s no vote on the supplemental appropriations bill somehow led to troops not be adequately equipped with protective gear or with armored vehicles. The problem is the logic with the argument. The bill passed stupid! So now if the troops are not adequately equipped, it falls directly on the Bush administration and the Pentagon to answer why the troops have been and are still being deployed without such equipment. Two recent stories show that despite the bill’s passage, these shortages still exist. So how is Kerry responsible for this? To what audience does this play? One more deception to add to the rather lengthy list.
Chris Matthews called the new Bush ads “brilliant.”Yeah, brilliantly deceptive! I swear that Matthews has a Cialis moment every time he talks about GWB. All pretense of objectivity is lost on Matthews, but so it goes on NBC/GOP. A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Now is the Time to Hit Hard now is not the time to let the story die about bush and iraq. france knew it. germany knew it-people in the white house knew it. Congress and the press (I think they were worried about the white house not giving them anymore interviews) so soft on this administration/remember all the investigations on clinton-everything that they did the press focused on. bush will try everything to distract from his scandals and lies. remember when they accused bush of bombing iraq to distract from his monica lewinsky problems? what goes around.... anyway-someone needs to compile a list of all the alleged misleading statements and actions he took...take a good look at it-let the public know...and you will see reality. this administration is so crooked. just look at the facts. karin dicker Subj: Alternate Preamble Since the administration wants to protect us by changing the Constitution, let's change the Preamble as long as we're at it. The president has announced he's running the country like a business, so here's a suggested draft:
Jerold Drucker Subj: Proof Bush didn't/doesn't give a damn about Al-Qaeda Dear BuzzFlash, We don't need a Senate Investigation, a Grand Jury Investigation, Richard A. Clarke's book or statements on 60 Minutes, nor Bob Graham's statements regarding Bush's neglect of immanent Al-Qaeda threats. All any reasonably thinking person needs to see is the Booker Elementary video tape of GW Bush listening to second graders read him a book about goats for 20 minutes after he was informed of the second plane attacking our Nation! Observe the empty, callous and uncaring look on his face. See how he sits a little nervously as if he is doing as he was instructed despite his knowledge of what was happening! What more proof does one need to evidence the fact that ON 9-11 BUSH KNEW AND DID NOTHING! Actions speak louder than words. Post the Booker Elementary video again BuzzFlash and maybe this time someone in our Government will take notice! Nancy Lynn Nagy (TN) Subj: HUGE STORY!!!!!! Scalia recusal case info Hi there, I found this article on the New Yorker that indicates that the case that " Justice" Scalia should be recused from (the energy task force case) might be about a lot, lot more than domestic energy policy. The article says that a memo dated February 3, 2001 (6 months before 9/11) indicates that the task force might have been into a lot more than domestic policy - like "the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields." Here is an excerpt: "Additional evidence that Cheney played an early planning role is contained in a previously undisclosed National Security Council document, dated February 3, 2001. The top-secret document, written by a high-level N.S.C. official, concerned Cheney's newly formed Energy Task Force. It directed the N.S.C. staff to cooperate fully with the Energy Task Force as it considered the "melding" of two seemingly unrelated areas of policy: "the review of operational policies towards rogue states," such as Iraq, and "actions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields." Here is the article: http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040216fa_fact A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Capture Osama IrmaS asked if there was anyone else out there that heard anything about the fact that we had already captured Osama. I have a friend that speaks Farci (sp.) and volunteers for the FBI and she said that Osama had been captured months ago. Also everyone out there, make sure that you tell everyone you know and post to everything you can find, even email the main news stations about the reporting outside the US of WMD weapons secretly entering Iraq. Ask the same questions about Osama. Try to stop and October surprises as much as possible. We need to stay one step ahead of these guys as much as possible. Anyone else out there feel like you need to take a shower whenever you deal with this stuff. BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Were we the only ones who heard it... Or are we going nuts in my house? Dear BuzzFlash, We were watching Condi Rice on Meet The Press on the 14th, when Russert asked her why we didn't invade or why we're not invading North Korea? She responded, "because they have nuclear weapons..." My mom and I just looked at each other and blinked - "Did you hear that?...I can't believe what she just said." I think Russert responded with "Precisely." Did anyone else catch this exchange? Thanks, dcitti [BuzzFlash Note: If she said it, it wasn't put in the transcript. She did, however, say a lot of other ridiculous things, like the President has a "busy schedule," so the 9/11 commission shouldn't expect him to speak for as long as they'd like, despite the fact that Bush uses 9/11 as his reason for existing and he's got PLENTY of time to fly around on Air Force raising money from the rich and corporate elite. The ease and dexterity with which the Bush Administration lies and misleads is jaw-droppingly beyond belief.] Subj: CNN on Richard Clarke's Motivation On CNN, Miles O'Brian wonders, with the objectivity that typifies CNN these days, whether Richard Clarke is just "trying to sell his book" when he says the President did not take the steps he could have to possibly prevent 9/11. While ignorance of the relevant facts is de rigueur for TV 'journalists' now days, it still astonishes me that CNN prizes it so highly. After being told Al Qaeda was planning to use commercial aircraft in terrorist attacks, a perfectly reasonable interpretation of the President's deciding to take the longest vacation in Presidential history is that he did not find that possibility particularly distressing. Even without a book to flog that seems clear enough to me. But I am not a Communications major and probably can't see the subtle clues that let Mr. O'Brian and Co. make those telling conjectures about other people's motivations that pass for objective reporting at CNN. Albert Clark, NY Subj: Jane Stillwater The article by Jane Stillwater was so funny i don't know if i was laughing or crying,because it sure is the truth,but no one wants to listen. I have tried telling someone about his lies ,i thought i was going to be hanged,but will keep trying. Helen Chester, NC Subj: McClellan Scott McClellan kept harping today about the timing of Clarke's criticism of the bush cartel's handling of the warnings about Al Qaeda, and his book coming out. He kept asking why would he wait until now if he were so displeased with what the bushies were (not) doing about terrorists. I think he is missing two things. Clarke did speak out while working for the administration....The bushes would not listen because they were so obsessed with invading Iraq. And... Who among us thinks he would have had a chance to write the book if he had spoken publicly first? Paula Subj: Did I hear Condi right on the Today show Monday Morning 3/22 Not sure if I heard Condi Rice correctly this morning. She was on the Today show as the stooge the White House had sent out to counter Clarke's recent claims about Bush's myopic view on Iraq after 9/11. She staunchly defended the fact that Bush was looking at all possibilities and wasn't focused on Iraq. She went further to say that shortly after 9/11, when she and the president returned from Camp David , he took her a side and told her and I quote " that he had just heard from George Tenet that there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11"!.. Now I am almost 40 so my hearing might be going but is this yet another example of our administration admitting that shortly after 9/11/2001 they new there was no connection? I'm sure I must be wrong because I can recount at least 40 times since 9/11/2001 where this administration told me there was in fact I believe it was one of their reasons for the war. Hmmm better get my hearing checked Sean Erwin re: sucker-punched Jane Stillwater Ms. Stillwater does raise a valid point, even as the majority of Americans are getting seriously screwed by the Presidency of GW; he continues to enjoy over 50% or more approval ratings. It is inconceivable that a leader whose every policy will have a negative effect on those who earn less then 40000 a year (over 70% or more of the workforce) would have a chance in hell of winning reelection. How? The brilliant Journalist Bill Moyers answered it best in an interview on BuzzFlash on 28 Oct 2003: http://www.BuzzFlash.com/interviews/03/10/int03281.html
What more is there to say? But Moyers does offer some hope as well:
Thank-you BuzzFlash, Bartcop, the Daily Howler and all the rest. As the late Dr Sagen said, you are a candle in the darkness. SSG (Ret) Paul
A Schonberger Cheney says Dick Clarke "wasn't really in the loop?" Let me get this straight. The Terrorism Czar hired by Reagan, rehired by Bush I, rehired by Clinton and rehired by Bush II wasn't kept in the loop? Sounds like a confession that very few if any experts were actually in the loop. Definitely not King George and Squire Dick. Who WAS in the loop and why were they more qualified? Arthur Ruger oh my god! what is causing all these well respected, highly regarded, clearly intelligent, already wealthy, life long republicans to go crazy and start telling all these lies about gw bush? da It takes real gal to paint Richard Clarke as a partisan because he associates with Rand Beers. Beers was Bush’s Senior Director for Combating Terrorism who became so horrified by the administration’s handling of terror that he quit to work for Kerry’s campaign. Like Clarke, he worked for four administrations, most of them Republican, but it wasn’t until Bush came along that they found it necessary to jump ship. When insiders publicly support their former boss’s opposition, voters should not just be concerned, they should be terrified. Here’s a copy of Beers’s biography: http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/degreeprog/courses...
Dylan Otto Krider Subj: Or.... . . .or it's America's "new best friend" the Pakistanis going through the motions to appease a US President desperate for a pre-election extravaganza. LOL. Rosamond Subj: Sunday, March 21st New York Times Several of us here in New Haven are puzzling over the New York Times so-called reportage on the Peace March. Front page carried a small box insert referring readers to page 27 for Peace March coverage. Look on page 27, there is nothing. On page 2, there is another little teaser with a small pic of protest banner and reference to page 14 for full story on the peace demonstrations.....nothing on page 14? Are we hallucinating? Called a friend in California to see if we just got the depraved Connecticut Sunday edition, nope, California papers carried the same mysterious non-reference. Anybody else out there in Buzzland notice this??? Margaret Subj: What happened to North Korea Cover-up? Hey BuzzFlash, With all the hype about The Bush regimes medicare cover up. Why hasn't anybody mentioned anything about the Bush Administrations cover up of their knowledge of North Koreas nuclear capabilities. Didn't the White house have knowledge of North Koreas Nuclear capabilities just before the congress voted on the Iraq war resolution. But withheld the information until after the vote so as not to influence the congress from voting yes on the resolution. Doesn't this all tie in together? Shouldn't the public be reminded of this? Seems the Bush administration has a habit of doing this kind of thing. Victor Saldivar Subj: Video of Cheney 'We're Better Off' Speech with Split-Screen of Bombs Going Off This is one for the 'you thought you had seen it all' category. This video is from the Daily Show but it's real footage of Fox News covering a Cheney speech where he is (as usual) telling his tall stories about how safe we are and how much better things are in Iraq. Well, well .. FOX had a 'breaking news' story in the middle of the speech and decided to run with a split screen of both the Cheney speech and the breaking news video .. of a huge bombing in Iraq. It's almost surreal to listen to Cheney blather on about how well things are going while watching the carnage going on from the pictures on the other side of the monitor. Of course John Stewart gives maximum mileage in poking fun at the irony, but the real video is still an incredible display of how Dick Cheney will say whatever he thinks will work for political gain (and personal wealth) in spite of what the real facts are. Dick Cheney has become so blatant he's almost like Baghdad Bob.. 'we are winning, there are no bombs, things are going fantastically' .. meanwhile the live video is showing the complete opposite. You have to see this one to believe it, one can only wonder how the FOX News staff and crew felt when seeing such a literal display that they are supporting a liar. Best! Kelley Kramer ===================================================== Link to comments http://kelleykramer.blogspot.com/2004... Link to page with video (as of this writing it's the top video on the page) http://www.comedycentral.com/tv_shows/thedailyshowwithjonstewart/ If that doesn't work, try this direct link http://www.comedycentral.com/mp/play.php?... Subj: How does Cheney dare call Kerry weak on defense? Buzz, Cheney spent the worst years, 66 - 70 in Viet Nam. How does Chickenhawk Cheney have the audacity to call Kerry weak on defense? Why is littlechickenhawk Bush afraid to debate Kerry? Clarkie04Kerry Subj: "Aren't we better off..." ... now that Saddam is out of power?" If I hear ONCE more that imbecilic "gotcha" question from one more goddam talking pinhead on TV I am going to throw a screaming fit. I hope the next dumb-ass who asks that silly question gets an infected toe and goes for antibiotics to a doctor. I want the doctor to look at the swollen toe and say, "Well, antibiotics take a long time to work and once in a while the patient develops gangrene which is much more serious, even life-threatening. You'll be much 'better off' if I just amputate your leg right now instead of bothering with pills." Jim Karageanes Buzzers: Let's pause a minute and take stock of where we are and where we want to get. Our government has been hijacked by the pod people called neo-cons. Forget liberal, conservative, right, left. World domination is the name of their game, and they are playing hardball, taking no prisoners. They do not play by anybody's rules except their own, which is simple. WIN. They have perfected the art of mass mind manipulation and are ruthlessly applying it to us. Far too many Americans have succumbed to this brainwash. Thank god the rest of our fellow humans aren't buying. Our hope lies in awakening the manipulated souls, beginning with those who only have a mild case, and are known as the "undecided voters". Let's drop the paradigm that if we only can defeat Bush/Cheney in November, things will turn around. Although another 4 years of Bush/Cheney would be an almost unimaginable disaster, a democratic win in November is only a minor milestone. We need to stop them in their tracks, NOW, before they can create even more mischief! These neo-cons need to be constantly and relentlessly defeated by every means at our disposal. Every day they perpetrate some new outrage upon humankind. Every day they need to be resisted. Forgive me if I ramble. I'm goddam mad and writing this as fast as I can. If we only confine our energies to being outraged and expressing our outrage in terms we understand, we become a giant echo chamber with no net effect on public affairs. We need OUTREACH in our personal dealings with neighbors, friends, relatives, co-workers. Ask:"what do you think of the situation in (Iraq, Washington, Haiti,etc.)". let them respond, then show them -in their own terms - the contradictions in the neo-con line. Take a risk. Do you fear losing a few "friends", or losing your way of life? Write or e-mail your congressman, your newspaper, the war-profiteering corporations, the columnist-prostitutes that craft these disgusting lies for their corrupt media bosses. And if there are any mass-media types out there, put together a series of TV ads by getting under the skin of the average(not rabid) Bush voter and having them - or convincing actors express their sense of betrayal. They could represent blue-collar workers who got laid off, people who lost their life savings in the stock market or an employee savings plan, veterans short-changed on benefits, elders who don't have enough medical coverage, etc,etc. The common mantra should be "I TRUSTED YOU, YOU BETRAYED ME. I hope this has encouraged you to reach out to swell our numbers. A BuzzFlash Reader Sent to morning@npr.or; ombudsman@npr.org: Subj: Covering for Condoleeza? To Pam Fessler and NPR, Your Morning Edition statement today that, "...Rice already appeared before the 911 commission" is incredibly misleading! She refused to appear in public and continues to refused to appear! This was front page news in a number of newspapers! The truth is is that Ms. Rice REFUSED to testify in public! Please correct or at least qualify your misleading statements!!!! Sincerely, Brian Pesetsky Subj: These facts support Clarke and refute Bush (links provided) Dear Editors, The factual information cited in the May 2002 article linked below (information that was reported by other sources as well) pretty much proves Richard Clarke's allegations of neglect and refutes the Bush administration's counter-assertions. On September 10, 2001, John Ashcroft denied a months-pending request by the FBI for a $58-million appropriation for their counter-terrorism division to buy new computers, appropriate additional agents and hire more linguists. The day before that, Rumsfeld warned Congress of a presidential veto if it re-allocated $600-million from ballistic missile defense (the "Star Wars" boondoggle) towards counter-terrorism. There is also information on the urgent warnings Bush was receiving since June 2001 that, in Clarke's words of July 5, 2001, "something spectacular is going to happen here, and it's going to happen soon." http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0519-08.htm Below is another account from The Guardian (also from May 2002) that covers some of this same ground. http://www.guardian.co.uk/september11/story/0,11209,719231,00.html Best regards, Wayne "Sugar Cane" Grabert Subj: Republicans!! My head is spinning...I have heard so much the last few days, negative and almost criminal about the administration. The Paul O'Neill book was scathing, but the Clarke book is worse! All day, Scott McClellan and every other rightwingnut has been trying to make it all out to be a conspiracy...sound familiar?? There are times, I think all the republicans that I know, will not discuss politics at all because, they remember what I went through when the best president we have had since Kennedy, was impeached for "Sex"??? Now, we have a president and his entire administration, who obviously stole this office for one thing....revenge for Daddy....and fun time for people like Rumsfeld and Cheney. I still think a lot of this is a surprise for Colin Powell, but it got his son, who is likely as bad as the bushits, a high up in the administration, job!!! Cheney is so evil, it is obvious...Rumsfeld may be as nutty as my poor dear mother who has alzheimers...and is 92!!! Whomever in this mailbag provided us with the Face the Nation link....it was priceless!!!!!!!! To the Buzzer with the great comeback to her republican acquaintances, when they bash Kerry "If Kerry were president, Saddam would still be in power"...great comeback, funny, in my experience, they just go silent! Tom Weinert....I too, saw the thing with Dennis Miller...boy, is he able to hold on to that show or what?? I am wondering why an idiot like that would even have Eric Alterman on his show...Eric has his mind made up and no one will stop him...then the departure was precious, too! (Eric is a joy to watch...he is always right, and the reps hate it) And, with all these people coming forward, McClellan today, inferred that it was because it was so near election! Pshawww!!! It takes some time to write a book, and I would bet that both Clarke and O'Neill kept it a secret....or, you know, they could always end up like J.H. Hatfield! You cannot write a book in a day...and these men were both fired because THEY WOULD NOT GO ALONG! (wrong answer, my ass) Why, in the good name of the Lord, would Bush actually say to Clarke that .....was not the right answer! Because, it did not implicate Iraq!!!!!!!! This may be the most crooked administration ever....they make the Nixon adm. look like boy scouts!!!! And, are on a level with all the people running the Afghanis and Iraqis. How in hell could anyone think they were worse? Karen in S.C., those people in the Bush audience, were told exactly what to do and most of them are likely really rich donors...they have to believe!! Poor idiots!!! And, I too, Travis was a faithful follower of Howard Dean....but, I also am an ABB person...I would have voted for any of them except Lieberman and Sharpton and I have given the reasons many times on this site. Today, Mcclellan, was trying to make Bush out to be Legit....and he named two democratic senators who were making excuses for Bush and bad mouthing Clarke. Guess who.....yeah, Lieberman and Biden...the two men who kicked Clinton as hard as hell when he was down! Have any of you democrats and Clinton admirers ever, ever in your life heard him being quoted as a credible source as much as now??? Three years ago...and especially in 1999 and 2000, if anyone said his name, they all laughed, snickered, and just had to mention Monica. Now, it is quite different, since the dem. candidates are preaching what all they are going to do like Bill Clinton did it! And, oh, how I hope they get the chance before Bush gets four more years! No doubt about it....Bill Clinton is the TOP DOG...now!! It made me sick when Lieberman would say nice things about him....he and Biden were busy in the senate bashing him, while the other members of the houses went up to the white house and stood behind him. Yes, I hope many of these wonderful Democratic candidates will have cabinet posts..they were so good! Kerry has already said that he will send Bill Clinton to Israel to try to straighten that out....it just may be so unsafe after what has happened. With this country thinking they can kill anyone they want....Israel is following suit...and Palestine will be next. I am so scared to even see another day sometimes....the news gets worse every day. God Bless Buzz...just for letting us vent. If I didn't have this mailbag...and all the other news....I do not know what I would do! Shirley..........St.Louis Subj: President's 9/11 Ad I have heard all the debate over the President's campaign ad wherein the flag-draped coffin from ground zero is shown. It might be more fair if the President would allow the world to see the flag-draped coffins of the recently killed soldiers coming off the planes from Iraq. How can he exploit one death then embargo the others? McCracken Poston Subj: Give Me A Break why in the world won't any of the bush people testify under oath? 3000 people are dead, what are they hiding? if you plan on telling the truth there is no reason you would not agree to go under oath. the only reason you would not is if you know you might lie! karen m. Subj: Well this explains everything.. Richard Clarke, a Republican, was hired by Reagan, stayed on through the Bush senior administration and was the top counter-terrorism adviser for Clinton and Bush #2 before retiring last year. On Sunday he stated on 60 Minutes: "I find it outrageous that the President is running for re-election on the grounds that he's done such great things about terrorism. He ignored it." ... "I think he's done a terrible job on the war against terrorism." Monday morning, National security adviser Condoleezza Rice said on ABC's Good Morning America: "Dick Clarke just does not know what he is talking about. He wasn't involved in most of the meetings of the administration" ... "Clarke was not in the loop on top discussions at the White House"
Not having your top counter-terrorism expert and advisor in "the loop" would explain the 9/11 attacks and the misfire against Iraq. The White House is also suggesting that Clarke is bitter because the Bush administration downgraded the of role counter terrorism advisor from a cabinet level position to a staff position. Uh.... hmm? Doesn’t that actually confirm Clarke’s assertions that the Bush administration didn’t take terrorist threats as seriously as the Clinton administration? Attorney General John Ashcroft also lowered the priority of counter terrorism funding before 9/11. After the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, Ashcroft cut by nearly two-thirds an emergency request for counter terrorism funds by the FBI. Wow! I can’t see how the 9/11 panel is going to take very long on this. Todd Smyth Subj: Clark I think now that Clark has told the truth about the Bush administrations handling of the aftermath of 911 , we the democrats should make sure that they do not get by with making him into a liar . They have already been proven to be liars , because there were no weapons of mass destruction . We have to do every thing possible to get this story to everyone . Robert Subj: A New Slogan To all: No matter how angry one gets at the Bush administration (and believe me, there is no limit to that anger) and no matter how much one wants to see his tenure limited, there is only one way to remove him. John Kerry has a good slogan ("Like father, like son; one term and he's done) but we are proposing a new one. FIGHT TYRANNY - VOTE! The problem is that not everyone voted last time. The vote count this time must be so huge, the turnout so great that no amount of fudging or cheating will deny the obvious outcome. Once again, the slogan for the coming months should be: FIGHT TYRANNY - VOTE! In peace, Tony Mitchell,
Ph. D. and Ann-Marie Walker |
||||||
 |
||||
| DAILY BUZZ | ||||
| INTERVIEWS | ||||
| ANALYSIS | ||||
| MEDIA LINKS | ||||
|
Unless
otherwise noted, all original |
 |
|||
