What Petraeus and Crocker didn’t say.
What Petraeus and Crocker didn’t say.
McClatchy notes that while Gen. David Petraeus and Amb. Ryan Crocker yesterday repeatedly referenced declines in Baghdad’s sectarian violence, they completely ignored the city’s ethnic cleansing:
A chart displayed by Army Gen. David Petraeus that purported to show the decline in sectarian violence in Baghdad between December and August made no effort to show that the ethnic character of many of the neighborhoods had changed in that same period from majority Sunni Muslim or mixed to majority Shiite Muslim.
Neither Petraeus nor U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker talked about the fact that since the troop surge began the pace by which Iraqis were abandoning their homes in search of safety had increased. They didn’t mention that 86 percent of Iraqis who’ve fled their homes said they’d been targeted because of their sect, according to the International Organization for Migration.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
About time someone talks about with the decreased population in cities as it relates to the death tolls
September 11th, 2007 at 10:52 amSame thing Petraeus depended on in Tel Afar. Remember that? That was supposed to be the big success that made Petraeus a great success in counter-insurgency.
But the only thing that pacified Tel Afar was ethnic cleansing.
Same bullshit, different day.
September 11th, 2007 at 10:53 am.
Listening yesterday to the hearings, it became clear to me that Petreaus is a talker.
September 11th, 2007 at 10:56 amHe interrupted committee members, and would drone on and on, talking over questions, continuous verbage.
I understand now his role as a talking head, with an agenda in place, as he continues to parrot the corporate militarist line of bullsh!t.
Better than Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
September 11th, 2007 at 10:56 amPlease digg this article it is very important to have these questions asked.
http://digg.com/political_opinion/Iraq_death_toll_down_due_to_population_decreases_and_ethinic_cleansing
September 11th, 2007 at 10:57 amRepublicans are such optimists:
September 11th, 2007 at 10:59 amfocus on the positive and ignore the negative
The generals report must have been even better then I had thought judging by the lack of anything interesting or concrete. It is obvious now that you folks have no care about what our generals feel is the best way forward. You want out regardless of the cost to America and the Iraqi’s. Pretty sad if you ask me.
September 11th, 2007 at 10:59 amAgreed, Roger_Roger.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:00 amSince when have the core of the Right wing, the neocons, the Administration or it’s puppets in the military given a damn about ethnic cleansing? It just kind of makes their jobs easier doesn’t it?
Why does the President hate Iraqi civilians?
September 11th, 2007 at 11:01 amAs I pointed out, Bush cares more about ethnic cleansing that Harry Truman (or even Bill Clinton) did.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:02 am#7 – “It is obvious now that you folks have no care about what our generals feel is the best way forward.” Comment by Roger_Roger — September 11, 2007 @ 10:59 am
Don’t forget, these are the only Generals that survived the purge when Pres. Bush didn’t like their original assessments like “We need to plan for the occupation after the war!” and “It’ll take at least 200,00 troops to secure Iraq!” and “Why are we guarding the oil but not the borders?”
Leave it to the right-whiners to ignore the fact they only support Generals that survived the culling!
September 11th, 2007 at 11:03 amThe White House/Petraeus report only needs to use Al Qaeda as to put fear in Americans. Look everyone knows this is a civil war in Iraq but the media and White House just push Al Qaeda in it to keep it going. If Americans would wake up and realize we’re in the middle of this countries conflict we’re get out. Notice how when the US had it’s civil war no one came in to dictate or direct the United States. But in the Iraq Civil War the United States wants control of the oil and could care less about the people. We will see thousands more soldiers die for the greed and lies of the White House. If only our leaders put the American people first or even listen to what Americans want. Both parties are guilty of murder as each day more soldiers are killed for nothing.
God can’t bless America because Satan is in charge.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:04 am#10 – “As I pointed out, Bush cares more about ethnic cleansing. . .” Comment by Jake D. — September 11, 2007 @ 11:02 am
Unless, of course, the ethnic cleansing occurs in Dufar, at which point he just doesn’t care at all.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:05 amBetter than Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Comment by Jake D. — September 11, 2007 @ 10:56 am
Utterly irrational comment. Complete nonsense.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:05 amBoth of them were NOT sworn in under oath, so their testimony before House members was hearsay and lies.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:06 amYou want out regardless of the cost to America and the Iraqi’s. Pretty sad if you ask me.
There’s the crux of the problem with you whacked-out dittoheads, roger_roger.
You fail to recognize that there is a greater cost to be paid by the U.S. and Iraqis if we allow GDumbya to continue his incompetent prosecution of his unnecessary and avoidable little war in Iraq.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:07 amAs I pointed out, Bush cares more about ethnic cleansing that Harry Truman (or even Bill Clinton) did.
Comment by Jake D. — September 11, 2007 @ 11:02 am
Yet another unprovable and therefore meaningless statement.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:07 amRoger_Roger,
This administration forces out anyone of the top brass that does not give them the answers they want. Before I am accused of only looking at the information that agrees with me, let’s review:
1. Major General John Batiste
– Said Rumsfeld threatened to fire anyone who discussed conflicting views
– Retired to speak out against the occupation
– WSJ would not post insight from a TWO STAR general on the occupation
2. General Eric Shinseki – (4 star general for the military illiterate)
– suggested several hundred thousand troops necessary if we invaded Iraq
– ignored pre-invasion
3. LT. General Gregory Newbold – (3 stars)
– Retired in 2002 openly criticizing Donal Rumsfeld’s plans fro invation
– Retired in protest
– suggested 500,000 troops necesary
– Wrote a very insightful TIME article “Why Iraq was a mistakeâ€
4. Lt General Anthony Zinni
– Says it was a mistake to support Bush in 2000
– Supported Jim Webb in last election
– Presented plan about what was necessary to invade Iraq – was ignored
– Outlined 10 majore criticisms of the Iraq Invasion in May of 2004
5. Many retired Generals (8 I believe) wrote an open letter to the President about their concern about torture policy.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:07 amThere are more, I am sure, but I don’t have them all here. This is UNPRECIDENTED. Never before in the history of our country have so many of the TOP military spoken out against an administration. Although I will listen to the Patraeus report and weigh it on its merits, I have low expectations, because anyone being honest or saying what the administration does not want to hear is forced out or marginalized.
Let’s not forget that these Generals were traditionally Republican – not to mention they have great combined combat experience. You can not accuse these men of “hating America†or “wanting the US to failâ€. When will people wake up?
Truism:
“Bush cares about ethnic cleansing.”
a: how to set it up
September 11th, 2007 at 11:08 amb: how to fund it
c: how to ignore it
d: how to deny it
Sadly, it doesn’t really matter …….. BushCo just bought another 1 or 2 F U’s with the blood of 500 brave US troops and thousands of Iraqis.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:08 am“Better than Hiroshima and Nagasaki”- commnet by Jake D(umb)
Again you show your ignorance. You a one sick f*ck.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:14 am1- Waging “pre-emptive” war
2. Government- sanctioned torture with no habeas corpus rights for ‘detainees’
3. Aiding and abetting ethnic cleansing
4. Disrupting and harming regional balance-of power with disastrous results (..handing Iraq, to Iran, on a silver platter, and acting sur-prahsed when it happens, thereby rationalizing war with Iran)
5. Warrantless wiretapping and shredding the Constitution
IMPEACH, IMPRISON, and stop this NeoCON Nightmare.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:17 amRoger_Roger,
The only argument for continuing this occupation has been apocalyptic and catastrophic hypothetical scenarios. They are not based on any good facts, hard evidence or historical perspective. I say that the cost is too great for both the US and the Iraqis to stay. My proof is that most of the violence in Iraq is against the United States of America – move us out of the equation, and the Iraqis can start working out their differences.
Really what it comes down to is that everything above – whether the “surge” is working or not is irrelevant. The fact is the Iraqis want us out of their country. We have no right or authority to stay in a country when the whole country (including the government we set up!) wants us out.
In addition to lying us into this occupation, mishandling EVERY step along the way, making tons of money on the blood of the American Military and Iraqi civilians, this administration has refused, from DAY ONE, to commit the necessary resources and ask the American public to sacrifice – No draft to give our troops a break and sustain necessary troop levels. No taxes to pay for this occupation. No conservation or civilian contributions to the “war” effort. Even worse, they neglect our troops when they get home.
There is a reason they don’t ask the American people to sacrifice – because many of the cowards that are cheer leading on the sidelines will change their tune when they have the lives of those they care about at stake. It will no longer be worth it. If it is not worth the American people to sacrifice (whether they have to or not) then it is not worth the military to fight.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:17 amAgreed, Roger_Roger.
Oh, no! They’re doing it troll-style!
September 11th, 2007 at 11:21 am.
Both of them were NOT sworn in under oath, so their testimony before House members was hearsay and lies.
Comment by Jay Randal — September 11, 2007 @ 11:06 am
I wouldn’t expect you to understand the honor and integrity that a military general brings to the table. The lack of a sworn oath does not change a truthful statement into a lie.
Sheesh.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:22 amUnless, of course, the ethnic cleansing occurs in Dufar, at which point he just doesn’t care at all.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — September 11, 2007 @ 11:05 am
ethnic cleansing is only important if oil is involved (or if you need an excuse to distract people from the fact you totally fu(ked up another country and have no way to fix it)
September 11th, 2007 at 11:25 am#25 – ” wouldn’t expect you to understand the honor and integrity that a military general brings to the table.”
Gen. Westmoreland, anyone?
“The lack of a sworn oath does not change a truthful statement into a lie.” Comment by r — September 11, 2007 @ 11:22 am
The lack of a swrn oath does mean that lies cannot be refuted with charges of perjury. Ask right-whiner Mighty Aphrodite about perjury! SHe’ll be able to tell you that no-oath means you can lie with impunity!
September 11th, 2007 at 11:32 amand… What Petraeus DID NOT Do….
Not many know that Petraeus WAS NOT sworn in yesterday … and when a CIA agent
yelled out “Swear Him In!†– he was expelled from yesterday’s hearing..
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/091007a.html
and what the media did not report….
The United States has not had a Legitimate Justice Department since 2000.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:38 amThe United States has not had a Legitimate Government since 2000.
Both of them were NOT sworn in under oath, so…
“their testimony before House members was hearsay and lies.â€
Comment by Jay Randal — September 11, 2007 @ 11:06 am
no-oath means you “can†lie with impunity!
Comment by Democrat Soldier — September 11, 2007 @ 11:32 am
But it doesn’t mean that they would.
Clearly more Democrat than Soldier if you’re going to support Jay Randals slurs against a US General.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:43 amWe have been manipulated into sacrificing the constitution and our guarantee of rights under it.
We have been manipulated into sacrificing 3800 of our young men and women.
And the Bush gang really really do cook the books in an effort to further manipulate us into sacrificing more of our young men and women.
In out system of justice, the jury (we) decides guilt or innocence, or assigns blame… not the defendant.
The Bush administration is the defendant (and Patraeus is his witness)
September 11th, 2007 at 12:05 pmA REQUEST
i was talking to a middle-road brother (with a dem wife) about how close this country is to becoming a dictatorship and i could tell he was mostly being polite and humoring me…
i would like to send a link to the proof of what i’m talking about…
i have seen some youtubes and other copy, all great, but i want something that can capture and hold a busy executive mind…
something succinct and gripping…
any ideas? please, and thank you!
September 11th, 2007 at 12:43 pm…
i find that, in order to understand their rhetoric better, you just have to add “for us” to the end of all their sentences.
September 11th, 2007 at 1:35 pmjust add “for us” to the end of all crockers and petraeus’s statements. it makes sense
September 11th, 2007 at 1:36 pmHey Katy,
You wanted stuff that indicates that President Bush may be making an unprecedented power grab to become the dictator of the United states of America.
The first link is a link which describes the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive which was issued quietly by the president on May 9, 2007.
The second link describes how a July 17th, 2007 Executive Order can be used against peace activists or anyone who dissents from the President’s policy.
I never would have thought that this country could become a dictatorship a couple years ago; however, current events, the President’s insistence to do what he wants regardless of the consequences, and these two scary orders issued by our President has me a little worried.
I hope this helps.
September 11th, 2007 at 3:03 pmWhy is there NO discussion in these repetitive hearings about the fact that nearly half of Iraq’s parliament has resigned/walked out?
“Iraq’s parliament has reconvened after a month-long summer break under pressure from Washington to take up key benchmark legislation.
The session opened on Tuesday with 158 members of 275 present – enough to form quorum, but the agenda was not immediately announced.”
I keep hearing Crocker and Petraeus (and our own Congress) refer to the Iraqi government as if it were a solid, functioning body. Last I looked, the government has essentially crumbled and disbanded. Who is there to take any action toward “political reconciliation?”
September 11th, 2007 at 5:01 pmto Katy’s REQUEST: This is a sad commentary, but there probably is not any one link or a series of links that can change one’s mind if they have bought the mis-perception promoted by this administration. The closest thing that I could suggest would be a personal review of the teachings of Dr. Leo Strauss, a former political science instructor at the University of Chicago. He was the father of neo-conservative thought. His ideas are essentially a political theory, but my studies have shown that it is a very flawed set of notions. Several of the Bush administrators have been students of Strauss, Wolfowitz in particular wrote his dissertation under Strauss. He is a clear proponent of the war in Iraq and was certain that there were WMDs in Iraq. Strauss’ theory in a nut shell is Aristotelean in the notion that the average man is not capable of moral virtue and the aristocracy should be allowed to do as they please, with the average people being “controlled” by whatever means possible. This includes taking away our rights. Strauss was a German Jew and one of the Hitler Youth whose family fled Germany to avoid the holocaust. However, his indoctrinations as a youth stayed with him throughout his life, including atheism. His view was that the average person could only achieve moral virtue through a combination of religion (Christianity, in America) and military service. The aristocracy, in association with the government, would then send them into battle to validate virtue, elevating them to “hero” status. The Bush Administration has bought this theory hook, line, and sinker and implemented it. The problem with this theory is just that, it’s a theory. And it should not be used unless in conjunction with other balancing theories as all other theories are applied. I ran across this theory working on my Masters in Public Administration and when I presented the study in class the conservative students were outraged. Many were conservative because of indoctrination and its social acceptability. They were also very wealthy, all of them. The problem with the theory is that it was developed by a man who lucky to be alive, raised in a Fascist society, did not believe in equality (except for right to life), did not believe in God or Jesus, thought man was generally a corrupt entity, but had no problem implementing religion as a tool to conjure a perception to the “average” person that, if he connected it to military and fought for his country in its name, that they could achieve a virtue which man desires, but cannot attain on his own. And, of course, in a capitalist country, anything is acceptable if it makes money in a perceived legality. Coercion is clearly acceptable. Strauss may have been a genius, but so was Constantine. So was Caesar. So was Augustus. In many ways, so was Hitler. They were also greedy and egotistic. But the theory should be consistent with the belief. It is also the great inconsistency of the Bush Doctrine. Your “brother’ has probably bought the perception and his mind is made up. The facts are merely confusing. He is probably also comfortable in his economic social setting, which makes him part of the pseudo-aristocracy. Good luck. I hope this gives you a starting point in your search. Google “Leo Strauss” and follow the links. Then connect the dots.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:51 pmHey , DanCaveman. Great Links. Good work. Thanks. I would wonder if the order will be used against the activists that were ejected from the Congressional report from Petraeus. The chairman did say the “full” extent of the law.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:59 pmWhat would one expect from these two side performers in Bush’s circus of bozos. They are just saying what the CIC dictates.
September 11th, 2007 at 7:41 pm>no-oath means you “can†lie with impunity!
>
>Comment by Democrat Soldier — September 11, 2007 @ 11:32 am
>
>But it doesn’t mean that they would.
Brilliant non-argument. If theres nothing to hide, why not take an oath to give the testimony more weight?
We already know Betrayus lied, look at the glowing report card he gave the Iraq situation 6 weeks before the 2004 election…sounds exactly like what hes saying now.. what a shock.. the dude is a total stooge, kudos to DantheCaveman for posting that list of generals fired for not towing the administration line, I’d love to see a troll adress that..they never will..
dude.. the dems could have really made him look like a fool by starting to swear him in, then watch him stammer and stutter on live tv by saying..
“b-b-u-t you said I didnt have to take an oath”?
also, they could have nailed him by asking him to name ONE thing that he disagreed with the bush administration about, regarding the current iraq situation…
another lost chance for the dems to make a bush crony look like a fool.. go figure..
September 12th, 2007 at 12:53 amJamming with Geppetto
By David Glenn Cox
Recently a Bush supporter asked me “So which is it? Is the President an idiot or a genius.†The idea being to paint the Presidents critic’s into a corner either he’s a genius and we were all wrong before or he’s an idiot and we are all wrong now.
But the short answer is the President is neither he’s a psychopath.
A psychopath is mentally ill but believes he is smarter than everyone else, they live in their own alternate reality. Like Geppetto they live alone in the woods and dream of having a friend but instead of going out and making friends they go into the workshop and build one. Then they hope and hope with all their might that it might be so and then presto changeo the boy’s alive!
But no, he’s not, he’s still just a piece of wood carved and painted to look like a boy. To Geppetto’s mind however he is quite alive and Geppetto thinks, “I must be the greatest wood carver in the whole world I can carve wood into a real little boy.†The clues are obvious if you look for them, why would a lonely man living alone in the woods want to carve a little boy? Why is it that when that little boy, that carved block of wood tells a lie it is the boy’s appendages that grow? You see Geppetto was neither fool nor genius Geppetto was a sick puppy.
Our own Geppetto is knee deep in wood chips happily carving away all the livelong day. He sends his puppets to testify on Capital hill, “General Pinnocio you say the situation in Iraq is improving and that the surge is working?†But as the puppet lays limp on the table a voice that sounds strangely just like George W. Bush in falsetto answers. “That’s right Senator it’s going sooo good that the surge that was supposed to be only temporary is going to be extended till at least next year.â€
“General your testimony hasn’t been influenced by the White House has it?â€
“Oh no! Senator,†the falsetto voice replies, “these strings are the latest style.â€
Serious people, sane people mainly ask themselves, “They can’t be serious.â€
Yet they are and in case you don’t believe one puppet they send two. To corroborate the testimony of a pentagon puppet they send a White House puppet but they all speak with the same falsetto Texas twang. Geppeto watches from his wood shop and slaps his knee’s saying that’s working great!
To this great deliberative body Geppetto sends hand carved puppets to give their honest assessment and they pass Senate muster. However in reality they are two wooden puppets laying limp on the desk and didn’t make a sound that didn’t come from Gepetto’s lips.
The wood carver had promised us explanations and sends instead two chunks of carved wood and the Senators thanked them for their candor. Were it not so serious I’d think they were just humoring the old wood carver but this august body includes Larry Craig of who it can be said, “of all the Charlie Brown’s on Capital hill you’re the Charlie Browniest.†As if his decision-making abilities hadn’t already been called into question Craig has now decided to fight his guilty conviction.
Craig mistakes sympathy for support, Charlie Brown gives up 10 runs and drops a fly ball but when Linus says, “That’s alright Charlie Brown†Craig thinks maybe I am a good ball player after all? Craig can’t tell the difference between a wooden puppet and a sap. Maybe because the puppet show has been going on for so long now we accept the foolish as sensible and knotty pine as oak and woodenheaded puppets as leaders.
But Geppetto has help he can’t pull all the strings by himself, not one media outlet had the courage to say, “Those are nothing more than wooden puppets and that’s George Bush’s voice!†Maybe the media just doesn’t recognize one of their own? Most all major media outlets as well are run by the same wooden headed puppets and as their ratings slide and their readership declines they ponder how can we fix this? Real investigative reporting? Tell more of the truth? No, more cleavage and change her hair.
I know, we’ll let six million people submit their own questions then we will select the questions we were going to ask anyway and we’ll call it the You Boob Debates and then we’ll let someone fair and non partisan moderate it like Wolf Blitzer!
But they know, they know the difference between brainpower and balsa as illustrated by Michael Moore’s solid drubbing of Wolfie and Sanjay Gupta.
Moore exposed the strings and Sanjay’s been staying at Robert Novak’s house ever since. Because once the strings are exposed or flaws in the puppet appear the puppet it is trashed and Geppetto starts again. Six months ago when Donald Rumsfeld resigned all America wanted to know why and now we know, he was a bad puppet. Rumsfeld had given a list to Geppetto of everything that could go wrong in Iraq.
Did the President respond to the list? “No†Do you miss working with the President? “No†When was the last time you spoke with the President? “I don’t remember.†A psychopath will invent the most fantastic story about train wrecks and space aliens to keep from admitting even a minor mistake. Geppetto may love his puppets but not more than he loves Geppetto. After all wood is inexpensive and it’s easier for Geppetto to just make a new one than listen to them.
That’s the scary part of this, a psychopath sees real flesh and blood humans as just things. Things to do his bidding and when he’s finished with them or they don’t perform as ordered he throws them away like scrap wood. Tens hundreds and thousands if need be Geppetto is indeed a sick puppy and needs to be removed to the old wood carver’s home. This is far from a fairy tale this is a nightmare where instead of a harmless old man dreaming of making wooden boys become real a real monster makes real boys dead and doesn’t care any more about it than a block of wood.
September 12th, 2007 at 1:53 pm