Reagan Navy Secretary
By on Jan 18th, 2006 at 10:26 am
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Good for him.
January 18th, 2006 at 10:29 amOkay lets play Smear. Karen Hughes has gone unnoticed for her lies, let us SWIFT BOAT Bushco
As we know, even the US Army War College admits there is no evidence Saddam gassed the Kurds. Stephen C. Pelletiere, Douglas V. Johnson II and Leif R. Rosenberger, of the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. War College at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, wrote in 1990: “Having looked at all of the evidence that was available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the State Department’s claim that gas was used in this instance. To begin with there were never any victims produced. International relief organizations who examined the Kurds—in Turkey where they had gone for asylum—failed to discover any. Nor were there ever any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.â€
On January 31, 2003, Pelletiere wrote for the propaganda-friendly New York Times it “was no surprise that President Bush, lacking smoking-gun evidence of Iraq’s weapons programs, used his State of the Union address to re-emphasize the moral case for an invasion,†a case we now know is devoid of any substance. “The dictator who is assembling the world’s most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured,†Bush claimed. “But the truth is, all we know for certain is that Kurds were bombarded with poison gas that day at Halabja,†writes Pelletiere. “We cannot say with any certainty that Iraqi chemical weapons killed the Kurds. This is not the only distortion in the Halabja story.â€
Now Run for Cover because here comes the Cover spin words;
JEFF GANNON FBI CHILD PORNO BUSHCO VICTOR ASHE LAROUCHE RIGGS BANK MISSING 28 PAGES 911 COMMISSION ABLE DANGER 3 of 5 Al Qaeda (Saudi wahhabi) CELLS INDENTIFIED BEFORE 911
OPERATION SUNSET DELAY ABRAMOFF COMMIE MONEY FOR FAVOR YUKOS OIL RIGGS BANK BUSH SR KRONGARD AB BROWN SAUDI AMBASSADOR. OIL PIPELINE ISRAELI BANKERS,
this outta be interesting to watch…
January 18th, 2006 at 10:43 amMaybe there can be a re-start of the points Murtha was talking about. He’s entirely correct and note that while the talking Scotty was downplaying Abramoff contacts yesterday,he reiterated the point that a withdrawal from Iraq would be a disaster. But then staying is a disaster,too.
January 18th, 2006 at 10:43 amOF course the STATE DEPT is AEIco aka Despot Inc. Laden with kooks of Cheney Fame
A family affair: Wolfowitz girlfriend Shaha Ali Riza, on the job as a World Bank flack (above), now gets to go to lunch at the State Department with Liz Cheney, Dick’s daughter.
Shaha Ali Riza, lately in the news as World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz’s Saudi-born girlfriend, has been assigned to the U.S. State Department. The move, which has not been announced by either huge agency controlled by the Bush regime, means that she’ll be working with Dick Cheney’s daughter Liz Cheney, a top official in the key Near East Affairs bureau.
How Quaint! Why does that name Riza ring a Bell?
Dr. Wolfowitz should clarify whether he used his position to coerce sex from women under his authority at SAIS. Dr. Wolfowitz should come clean and tell how many of his staffers, aides and employees he has had sex with and if he is still married.
Reports indicate that Dr. Clare Selgin Wolfowitz separated from Paul because he had an affair with a woman at Johns Hopkins University. Paul Wolfowitz was Dean and Professor of International Relations at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) of The Johns Hopkins University. During that time he used his position to prey on woman under his authority When the scandal broke he and his wife Clare separated but appear not to have divorced. At this point it is unclear if the relationship with Shaha Ali Riza predates the scandalous affair at SAIS.
One may wonder if Wolfowitz has trouble keeping track of his women but I have it on good authority that he uses his protective detail of Federal Officers to manage his affairs and shuttle him from assignation to assignation. Indications are that the White House has been aware of this situation and has even had a letter from Dr. Clare Selgin Wolfowitz concerning the Security Implications of her husband’s womanizing. The only White House response to date was to nominate Wolfowitz for the World Bank because they know he could not make it through a Senate Conformation Hearing for any other job for which they could nominate him.
Dr. Clare Wolfowitz
The Ex-wife: Dr. Clare Wolfowitz
Picture from http://www.iris.umd.edu
The Ex-wife or the wife, Clare is not saying. If she divorced Wolfie the records cannot be found and she is refusing to answer. It appears that Paul Wolfowitz is a married man carrying on with multiple woman.
Shaha Ali Riza
The Girlfriend: Shaha Ali Riza
Public Domain Photo – http://www.worldbank.org
A primarily Saudi Arabian terrorist attack takes out the Twin Towers and hits the Pentagon. So what does Paul Wolfowitz recommend? Attack Iraq! There was no evidence to support war with Iraq so Dr. Wolfowitz and his Likud linked cabal in the Pentagon dummied up evidence. Why did Dr. Paul Wolfowitz sell out America and how was he influenced by his Arab girlfriend who spent much of her life living in Saudi Arabia.
Well BoY Howdy..Aint that lovely..
Yeah yeah Murtha spoke Well and correctly this I agree, However I like watchng Buschco contort its putrid mass..
January 18th, 2006 at 10:53 amPetition congress for a progressive agenda.
Browse boycott – republicans . com
January 18th, 2006 at 11:05 amhttp:// http://www.usalone.com /cgi-bin/petition.cgi?pnum=142
January 18th, 2006 at 11:06 amBush should thank Murtha for delaying the impending mutiny.
January 18th, 2006 at 11:31 am#2–Nobody would pay any attention; least of all “our” media. They’re only interested in reading the news releases that come out of the Whitehouse & Pentagon.
January 18th, 2006 at 11:46 amhttp:// http://www.usalone.com/cgi-bin/transparency.cgi?qnum=pnum147
January 18th, 2006 at 11:59 am#2–Nobody would pay any attention; least of all “our†media. They’re only interested in reading the news releases that come out of the Whitehouse & Pentagon.
Comment by Preznit_Douchebag — January 18, 2006 @ 11:46 am
Then the point of Blogging is?
January 18th, 2006 at 12:35 pmSo we can hear ourselves TYPE!
January 18th, 2006 at 12:37 pmYaY oh YaY
USA!
Ignore thy citizens
for they are denizens
whom steal and lie
just like AEI
Buscho and Chainme
Freedom of Speech
Not on my beach
Said Pinky and the Brain
If the Iraq war were the diaster the left makes it out to be, then why soldier reenlistments exceeding their goals?
I saw a newsconference where a soldier who recently returned from Iraq totally shot down Murtha recently for his comments. Of course it was covered by Fox, no other MSM news channel would have shown it.
http://www.collegerecruiter.com/weblog/archives/2005/12/army_exceeds_re.php
January 18th, 2006 at 12:45 pmRandy,
If this teleconference exists, the soldier hasn’t been in combat enough to know the price we pay for a war that was
started by an administration , most of them had chickened out of Vietnam while still in the military.
John Murtha was in Vietnam, not Bush, not Cheney, not Rumsfeld, not anyone who used special privileges to get them out while still in the military.
And what’s with this idea of higher re-enlistment? In the past two years or more, enlistments have gone way down. Would you support an administration who won’t let our soldiers wear body armor? Body armor that would protect them from bullets? If you think our soldiers don’t deserve protection, then you want them to die.
January 18th, 2006 at 1:31 pm#12 that is easy to answer after many many months of missing their goals they do occasionally hit a monthly goal now and then. However they are moving the goal posts too. I’ll even give you a real world example.
A friend’s son who is 19 has been tryign to join the service for two years. He has learning disabilities which make it more difficult for him to read. He really can’t read very well actually. He is also on medications for his disability and has been for years. All four services initially turned him down based on his disability. Then he applied again this time the airforce and navy turned him down outright. The army said come back after you have been off the medication for one year and the marines signed him up. This is not a dig at the Army or Marines in any way, but one of my buddies who is an army recruiter says the pressure is on to get as many signed up as possible.
Since 1975 standards were slowly raised higher and higher and for the last three years or so they have ben lowering and lowering them to meet goals. Eventually the goals had to be lowered so they could be met. Perhaps if more war supporters of the appropriate ages would follow their convictions the goals could be met at the higher standards. Sadly though they choose to stay home and hack away at their keyboards claiming to support the war but doing little else other than sticking that yellow magnet on their trunk.
Heck in Hew Hampshire (I think) a young dem political organizer went to Iraq with his marine unit. The local college republicans criticised him for fighting in a war he did not agree with. Apparently these young republicans have no clue abou honor and service and they apparently believe that you should only follow the president you ideologically believe in. I say they are all lost causes.
January 18th, 2006 at 1:44 pmRandy, see GAO report 06-141. Retention rates in the army have exceeded targets. For example,in the over 19 year career enlisted,the army hit 128% of target. But for FY05,the army budgeted about $50 million in retention bonuses to hit the targets but spent $400 million over budget.
January 18th, 2006 at 1:52 pmRecruitment is more problematic. Each fiscal year, the army targets having 35% of its recruitment target (80,000) in delayed entry recruits or (28,000). For FY06,the army entered the year at 8% 6,400). To achieve the 80,000 recruits,the army has to get more than 70,000 fresh bodies which is why they’re lowering standards.
If the Iraq war were the diaster the left makes it out to be, then why soldier reenlistments exceeding their goals?
Comment by Randy — January 18, 2006 @ 12:45 pm
Here are some answers:
In the wake the worst recruiting slump in decades, the Army announced earlier this week that they are loosening recruitment standards to accept more high school dropouts
Military Seeks To Remedy Recruitment Dropoff with Dropouts
Further evidence that the war in Iraq is wrecking the U.S. Army: Recruiters, having failed to meet their enlistment targets, are now being authorized to pursue high-school dropouts and (not to mince words) stupid people.
The Dumbing-Down of the U.S. Army
First, the number of Category IV recruits is starting to skyrocket. Second, a new study compellingly demonstrates that, in all realms of military activity, intelligence does matter. Smarter soldiers and units perform their tasks better; dumber ones do theirs worse.
GI Schmo – How low can Army recruiters go?
Although I don’t agree that the recruits mentioned in the Slate article are necessarily “dumb” or “stupid”, high school dropouts have diminished opportunities in the job market. It is hard enough to find a good job even with a College degree.
January 18th, 2006 at 2:16 pmThey are being forced to reenlist, you moron. It is called “stop loss.”
USAToday
January 18th, 2006 at 2:56 pmArmy expanding ’stop loss’ order to keep soldiers from leaving
#10–you and I read the blogs, but Joe Sixpack & Jane Soccermom don’t. They watch the teevee news (maybe) and occasionally hear the top-of-the-hour two minute soundbites that pass for news on the commercial radio stations.
“CNN–the most trusted name in news”.
January 18th, 2006 at 4:16 pmGot a report that said either the army or marines are offering up to $90,000 in signing bonuses now and have upped the age limit to 45years old…
hmmmm…
Desperation?
January 19th, 2006 at 9:09 amI think the ball is in your court now Randy. Any clever retorts or will this just be Clinton’s fault? Pssst, do you ever wonder WHY Fox covers all these “stories” that no other journalist worth a salt covers? Don’t you find it odd that Fox is so out of the norm?
Look, Fox makes a hell of a lot of money selling you what you want to hear. It is profit, a business and nothing more. You are being used for your wallet and they don’t see you as a person, only a viewer. Too bad really that folks like you perpetuate this brand of phony journalism and hack reporting and don’t demand better, more honest work from them.
Oh well, it takes all kinds, right?
January 19th, 2006 at 10:44 am