General Petraeus Did Betray Us

MoveOn.org has been getting a bit attention for their Petraeus ad. Republicans who refuse to listen to the content of the ad have been calling for Democrats to denounce it. Why should they? Why should the denounce an ad for telling the truth?

Gen. Petraeus did betray us. He lied to Congress. He lied to the American people. He lied to save the liar-in-chief George W. Bush.

MoveOn.org told the truth. And I still believe that telling the truth is a good thing, especially when you speak truth to lying power:

General Petraeus or General Betray Us?

Iraq Confronts Evil Blackwater

It is one of many sins in the long list of crimes against humanity that Bush has committed in his illegal war. The use of private mercenary forces that have no accountablity for the people they kill or harm is one of the more horrendous aspects of Bush's criminality.

Finally, it looks like Iraq is doing something about groups like Blackwater. It is a sad state of affairs that a country that barely has it together has to do this for us:

What happens to private contractors who kill Iraqis? Maybe nothing

Blackwater USA employees are accused of killing several civilians, but there might not be anyone with the authority to prosecute them.

By Alex Koppelman and Mark Benjamin

An incident this past weekend in which employees of Blackwater USA, a private security firm that has become controversial for its extensive role in the war in Iraq, allegedly opened fire on and killed several Iraqis seems to be the last straw for Iraqi tolerance of the company. Iraqi government officials have promised action, including but not limited to the suspension or outright revocation of the company's license to operate in Iraq.

But pulling Blackwater's license may be all the Iraqis can do. Should any Iraqis ever seek redress for the deaths of the civilians in a criminal court, they will be out of luck. Because of an order promulgated by the Coalition Provisional Authority, the now-defunct American occupation government, there appears to be almost no chance that the contractors involved would be, or could be, successfully prosecuted in any court in Iraq. CPA Order 17 says private contractors working for the U.S. or coalition governments in Iraq are not subject to Iraqi law. Should any attempt be made to prosecute Blackwater in the United States, meanwhile, it's not clear what law, if any, applies.

Of course, not paying for crimes and escaping justice is all part of the Bush plan for himself, Scooter Libby, his administration, and Blackwater. If this world has any sense of justice, all of them will see the inside a jail cell for 20 years or more.

Boehner (R-OH) Thinks Losing Troops' In Iraq Is A 'Small Price'

Many blogs have already run this story, but it is still being ignored by the traditional media. So maybe if the blogs keep the story alive, the TM will pick up on it:

"Small price"

by kos
Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 08:24:03 AM PDT

Remember how 4,000 dead, tens of thousands of wounded, and half a trillion spent was "a small price to pay" for the mess we've made in Iraq? No?

Well, for House Republican Leader John Boehner, that's a wee nothing:

"The investment that we're making today will be a small price if we're able to stop al Qaeda here, if we're able to stabilize the Middle East, it's not only going to be a small price for the near future, but think about the future for our kids and their kids."

Boehner still has yet to apologize.

Democrats Need To Make A Stand

I just want to echo what Kos wrote:

Sort out post

[...]Who cares if Bush vetoes? Let him. Don't worry about 66. Don't even worry about 60. If Republicans want to filibuster, let them. Turn it into a real one -- where Republicans have to hold the podium and read from the phone book for days. Let people see who is filibustering funding for the troops and legislation mandating a withdrawal.

If Bush vetoes? Send it back to him. Again and again. Congress is a co-equal branch of government, at least theoretically. There's no reason to capitulate to Mr. 25% on a war that even fewer want. Show the public that the Democrats have fight in them. Give David Broder the middle finger. Hang up on Joe Klein. And start paying attention to what the masses are demanding outside of D.C.

I couldn't agree more.

The reason why Congress' approval ratings are lower than the historic lows of Bush's approval ratings are because of the Democrats' refusal to stand strong, hold the line, and do what we elected them to do: get us out of Iraq.

If they listened to what the people are saying, we would have a better opinion of them. Our government is supposed to be of the people, by the people, and for the people, but if our government refuses the even listen to the people, then it has failed to live up to the ideals of a democracy.

Bush Lies, Petraeus Lies, Traditional Media Doesn't Care

I talked a little about this last week in a post called "Did Bush Escalate So That He Could De-escalate?", and it seems like my theory might prove to be correct (or at least close).

Gen. Petraeus talked about bringing troops home next year when he gave his white-wash of a report to Congress this week. Today, news reports are claiming that Bush will soon announce that he will bring troops home next year per Petraeus's suggestions.

This appears to be all a charade because our military will be stretched to its limits by next year, and Bush will be forced to reduce troop numbers in Iraq regardless.

The clueless traditional media seems so eager to report the future troop reductions that they are overlooking the fact that such reductions will occur not by Bush's choice but because Bush has no other options. In overlooking that fact and not reporting on it, the TM is making it seem like Bush IS choosing to bring troops home because he and Petraeus are claiming that the surge escalation has worked and conditions are improving in Iraq.

Of course they're not improving, the surge escalation hasn't worked, and Bush and Petraeus are lying, but the TM is too lazy or too foolish to report that either. Thank goodness we have Media Matters for America to correct the TM:

Myths and falsehoods about progress in Iraq

Summary: Supporters of the Iraq war -- rather than waiting for testimony by Gen. David Petraeus and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker on the effect of President Bush's troop increase in Iraq -- have engaged in a campaign to convince the media and public that progress is being made in Iraq and that the "surge" is "working." Media Matters has compiled some of the most pervasive myths and falsehoods advanced by opponents of withdrawal in service of the "surge is working" message, which many in the media have been complicit in perpetuating.

[...]On the August 20 edition of Fox News' Special Report, host Brit Hume said that "evidence mounts that the troop surge is working as planned." An August 16 editorial in Investor's Business Daily was headlined, "A Surge of Success." And on the August 21 edition of MSNBC's Tucker, U.S. News & World Report editor-in-chief Mortimer B. Zuckerman asserted: "[T]he fact is that, by far, the consensus is that the surge is working." However, by the administration's own standards, the national political reconciliation that the Bush administration identified as essential for the success of its escalation strategy has not occurred.

[...]an August 25 Associated Press article reported that while violence is down in Baghdad "from peak levels ... the death toll from sectarian attacks around the country is running nearly double the pace from a year ago." Moreover, McClatchy Newspapers reported on August 15 that while U.S. officials have said civilian casualties have decreased in Baghdad, they have "declined to provide specific numbers, and statistics gathered by McClatchy Newspapers don't support the claim."

[...]Statistics compiled by the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count on its website iCasualties.org, which publishes death count totals provided by the Department of Defense, show that more U.S. troops have died in Iraq during June, July, and August this year than the same three-month period in 2003, 2004, 2005, or 2006. The website currently lists the total U.S. death count for this period at 264.

Read the whole article for MMfA's list of myths and their debunking of those myths.

The ONLY way to support the troops, at this point, is to bring them home. Period. Not one more should die for Bush's lies.

Not One More!

Not one more American should die in Iraq. Not one more soldier or marine should die for Bush's lies. Not one more parent, spouse, or child should lose a loved one in an occupation that never should have been started.

I am sick of all the stupid slogans from the Right that debase the argument and deny the truth. I am sick of "cut and run" and "defeatist." I'm sick of all their lies and propaganda. They want to fight with simple slogans and demogoguery? Fine. Here's my stupid slogan: "Not one more!"

I am tired of Democrats not willing to stand up for what the American people elected them to do. I am tired of Democrats being frightened by a presidential administration with 25%-30% approval ratings with insipid claims that they "support the troops" or "we're winning in Iraq." Democrats act like they don't have the support of 70% of the country and they have nothing to fight back with. Well, Democrats, fight back with this: "Not one more!"

I don't want to have to see any more news like this:

U.S. military reports seven troops killed in Anbar, northern Iraq

BAGHDAD (AP) — Four U.S. marines were killed in fighting in Anbar province, and three were killed by a roadside bomb in northern Iraq, the military said Friday.

Not one more!

I don't want any more capitulation from the Democrats:

Democratically Controlled Congress Stands on the Brink of Irrelevance on Iraq

By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted September 6, 2007.

[...]The Democrats are reacting to this charade by conceding the battle before it begins, with Michigan's Carl Levin offering to remove a deadline from the amendment he and Jack Reed, D-R.I., co-sponsored (the deadline was already riddled with loopholes) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid offering to "compromise" with Senate Republicans by dropping his already watered-down demand for a spring "withdrawal."

As Dick Durbin, the senate majority whip, told the Chicago Tribune, "When it comes to the budget, I face a dilemma that some of my colleagues do." He opposes the war, but "felt that I should always provide the resources for the troops in the field."

Not one more!

Not one more American should have to die for Democratic cowardice. Not one more should have to die for Republican deceit. Not one more should have to die for Bush's lies and war crimes:

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction

Salon exclusive: Two former CIA officers say the president squelched top-secret intelligence, and a briefing by George Tenet, months before invading Iraq.

By Sidney Blumenthal

On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Not one more!

I am really far beyond fed up with this. I impatiently waited for Magic September, and the thought of the Democratic-controlled Congress giving more money to allow troops to continue to die in Iraq for lies and more lies has put me over the edge.

Not one more!

Tell your Representatives and Senators: Not one more!

And if they don't support "Not one more!", tell them you will support someone else who does (or run against them yourself).

Tell the presidential candidates: Not one more!

Tell the traditional media: Not one more!

Tell everyone: Not one more!

Repeat it over and over again until it becomes entrenched in the mind of every American like all those stupid slogans from the Right that we have to endure daily.

Repeat it until every American troop is safe at home with their families.

NOT ONE MORE!

Bush Knew Iraq Had No WMDs And Lied To Go To War

This news is huge, but I won't hold my breath while I wait for the traditional media to report on it.

Of course, it isn't really news to those of us on the left who have been saying this all along, but this reinforces our stance that Bush lied us into the war in Iraq. If he had any decency, Bush would resign for this, but since he doesn't, we should impeach him and prosecute him for the war criminal he is.

A diary by Chomskyface called "Bush Knew There Were No WMDs BEFORE Iraq War - New Salon Piece" on DailyKos.com first made me aware of this article on Salon.com:

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction

Salon exclusive: Two former CIA officers say the president squelched top-secret intelligence, and a briefing by George Tenet, months before invading Iraq.

By Sidney Blumenthal

Sept. 6, 2007 | On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.

Read the whole article, and tell your friends and family about it. If they aren't outraged, then they aren't paying attention.

Did Bush Escalate So That He Could De-escalate?

I was reading this post "Magical April" by BarbinMD on DailyKos.com when I had a thought.

Did Bush only escalate our involvement in Iraq so that, when he is forced reduce troop levels in April 2008, he could fool people into thinking that he is working to bring our troops home?

In April 2008, our military will be stretched to its limit, and Bush will be forced to reduce the number of troops in Iraq, and he may try to use that to deceive people into believing that he is making a proactive choice to bring some troops home from Iraq so that they will continue to support his failed policies. His defenders will say, "Look, he's not such a bad guy because he's bringing troops home, and that means we're succeeding in Iraq, and this isn't the worst mistake in the history of American foreign policy after all!"

I am not predicting that this is what will happen for certain, but I am putting this out there in case it does.

An Admission That We Are In Iraq For Oil

Finally, a conservative in government admits the real reason we are still in Iraq: oil.

Of course this conservative isn't from our government:

Australia 'has Iraq oil interest'

Australian Defence Minister Brendan Nelson has admitted that securing oil supplies is a key factor behind the presence of Australian troops in Iraq.

He said maintaining "resource security" in the Middle East was a priority.

[...]In comments to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Mr Nelson admitted that the supply of oil had influenced Australia's strategic planning in the region.

"Obviously the Middle East itself, not only Iraq but the entire region, is an important supplier of energy, oil in particular, to the rest of the world," he said.

"Australians and all of us need to think what would happen if there were a premature withdrawal from Iraq.

"It's in our interests, our security interests, to make sure that we leave the Middle East, and leave Iraq in particular, in a position of sustainable security."

There you have it, folks: A conservative admits the truth about why we are in Iraq.

It is not because we want to spread freedom or democracy. It is because the greedy men in power want oil, and they have sacrificed the blood of the innocent for that oil.

Naturally, this admission wasn't from an American conservative (I'm not going to hold my breath for that to happen), and naturally, this is something we liberals have been saying throughout this tragic debacle.

We have the capability to ween ourselves off of oil and convert to a eco-friendly energy infrastructure, but evil men in power like Bush and Cheney would rather sacrifice the lives of Americans to keep us slaves to the oil industry. They are traitors to this country, and even if they spend the rest of their lives in prison (and they should), it wouldn't be enough of a punishment for all the evil they have wrought.

Miliatary Mental Health

Add this to the list of ways we are failing to support our troops:

Report finds mental care for GIs lacking

By Renee Nadeau
Sunday, June 17, 2007

The Pentagon on Friday released its latest report on mental health care of soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, bringing to light disturbing statistics and shortfalls.

“Our troops give our country their brave service,” Sen. John Kerry said in a statement. “And we owe them the very best care when they come home, including healing the wounds of war, even those that might not be visible.”

The Mental Health Task Force Report found that 38 percent of returning troops show signs of combat stress. Adding to the problem is the stigma attached to mental health care among military members, which discourages many from seeking help. Other findings include the lack of accessible care and resources in the military system.

Magnetic yellow ribbons are not real support, and this is a sign of the hypocrisy by those who, like Bush, claim to support the troops, but do little to actually support them.

Lieberman Has Lost His Mind

Joe Lieberman, and anyone else who says that things are improving in Iraq and that we should consider attacking Iran, needs to have a psychiatric evaluation.

Lieberman says strike on Iran is an option

By Associated Press | June 11, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Senator Joseph I. Lieberman said yesterday that the United States should consider a military strike against Iran because of Tehran's alleged involvement in Iraq.

"I think we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq," Lieberman said. "And to me, that would include a strike over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers."

Lieberman has no proof for these accusations (which the article fails to mention). He is just wildly throwing out accusations and threats like some war-mongering madman (e.g. George W. Bush). Well, Bush isn't fit to be U.S. president, and Lieberman isn't fit to be a U.S. senator.

Mitt Romney: Liar Or Idiot?

My Mormon mother recently asked me if I would consider voting for the Mormon Mitt Romney for President in 2008.

Let me again reiterate that after eight long and destructive years of George W. Bush there is NO chance that I would even think of considering voting for a Republican in 2008. In fact, after George W. Bush, I may never vote for a Republican for president. Republicans like Nixon, Reagan, and especially George W. Bush have proven to me that Republicans care little for humanity, equality, Christian values, the rule of law, our Constitution, and our country.

But I do not want to get into all that right now. Now, I want to talk about Romney, and why he, in two recent debates, has proven a man like him should never be president. In two short statements, he has cemented my resolve to never vote for him in a million years.

Here is the first one:

Romney: ‘We Ought To Double Guantanamo’

As Crooks and Liars noted , former governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) said tonight that instead of shutting the prison at Guantanamo Bay, “we ought to double Guantanamo,” in part so that detainees “don’t get access to lawyers they get when they’re on our soil.”

ROMNEY: I am glad [detainees] are at Guantanamo. I don’t want them on our soil. I want them on Guantanamo, where they don’t get the access to lawyers they get when they’re on our soil. I don’t want them in our prisons, I want them there. Some people have said we ought to close Guantanamo. My view is we ought to double Guantanamo.

Wow, that's crazy!

I mean it is one thing to support Bush when he is down to a 32% approval rating in the polls, but to come out and be MORE evil than Bush while running for president indicates Romney is either incredibly brave or incredibly stupid.

Romney wants to double that crime against humanity, Guantanamo Bay?! He wants to double that place of evil that is both a symbolic and actual representation of torture, our abuse of human rights, and the degradation of our American values?!

Where are your supposed Christian morals, Romney?!

In my book, wanting to "double Guantanamo" is enough of a dealbreaker, but Romney manages to "double" my disdain for him with this:

Memo to the Media: Mitt Romney doesn’t know “Jack” about Iraq

By: John Amato on Thursday, June 7th, 2007 at 12:15 PM - PDT

CNN: Romney: Well, it’s a setting that’s almost a null set. Which is, if we knew that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, and if he had complied with the United Nations resolutions to allow IAEA inspectors into his country, we wouldn’t be having this conversation…

This statement by Romney is why I titled this post the way I did, because this statement is blatantly false. Hussein did allow the IAEA inspectors into his country, the IAEA inspectors were in Iraq before the war, and they told us that THERE WERE NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION IN IRAQ! So Romney is either a liar or an idiot, and it enrages me that the MSM is letting this slip by.

The CrooksandLiars.com post above goes on to link to Matthew Yglesias for the information that proves that Romney's statement is false, and I will link to it also:

Null Set Blogging, Part Three

Almost a null set, eh? Brian also notes that this is "evidence that he didn't just screw up his Iraq history at the debates on Tuesday, but rather that he's in a constant state of either denial, ignorance, or deception."

On March 7, 2003 Muhammed ElBarradei of the International Atomic Energy Agency told the world, "After three months of intrusive inspections, we have to date found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons programme in Iraq."

The person who actually ordered the IAEA inspectors to leave Iraq was... (drumroll, please)... George W. Bush! And why did he do that? So that he could begin bombing Iraq.

Does Romney believe Americans have such a bad memory that we would forget all that and believe his inaccurate version of recent history? Well, he may be partially right because the MSM isn't doing its job by rushing to correct him and remove this flagrant deception from the public conversation.

In short, no, I will not be voting for Romney.

I usually take pride in being a Mormon, but deceitful, pro-torture, anti-human rights Mormons like Romney, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), and professional bigot Glenn Beck make me ashamed of my religion. (Thank goodness for our Mormon Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) who restores some of my lost pride.)

Romney wants to double Guantanamo and lies about Iraq? Hmm. I think we got more than enough of that line of thinking from Bush. We definitely do not need another four years of that from a Bush clone like Romney.

Capitulation

I don't really have anything to say that hasn't already been said, and I am so weighed down by my disappointment with the Democrats in Congress that I don't have the will to say much anyway.

I will, at least, reinforce some points with which I agree:

We voted the Democrats into power in Congress to end the war in Iraq, and their capitulation to Bush and his desire to continue the occupation in Iraq yesterday goes beyond betrayal. What kind of democracy do we have when 70% of the public wants to end our occupation in Iraq and our President and our Congress act in opposition to the will of that 70%?

For all our politicians' claims of supporting "democracy," they sure have a hypocritical way of showing it.

Middle East Update

How are things going in the Middle East?

U.S. April death toll in Iraq passes 100

By Kim Gamel, Associated Press Writer | April 30, 2007

BAGHDAD --Five U.S. military personnel were killed over the weekend in Iraq, including three by a roadside bomb in Baghdad, the military said Monday, pushing the American death toll past 100 in the deadliest month so far this year.

Iraq reconstruction 'not working

Six out of eight Iraqi reconstruction projects hailed as successes by the US government are in fact failures, a US federal investigation has found.

The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (Sigir) examined works including a hospital, a barracks and Baghdad international airport.

Blaming ongoing unrest and spiralling corruption they said most were falling apart within as little as six months.

Faulty plumbing and wiring and looting have reportedly worsened the situation.

Corruption amongst Iraqi officials is cited as one of the main causes for the chaos.

According to the report $5bn is lost annually to the fraud and abuse which "afflicts virtually every Iraqi ministry", particularly the oil, interior and defence ministries.

Anti-US rallies follow deadly raid in Afghanistan

Civilians killed in attack on militants

By Rahim Faiez, Associated Press | April 30, 2007

KABUL, Afghanistan -- A US-led raid yesterday on a suspected militant cell killed as many as six Afghans, including a woman and a teenage girl, and spawned protests by hundreds of angry Afghans chanting "Death to Bush!"

The United States said four militants were among the dead, but it was the civilian deaths that infuriated the protesters, who carried five bodies to a main highway and blocked traffic with felled trees during the demonstration. The bodies of the women were entirely covered by sheets, while the men's faces were revealed.

"Their operation was based on incorrect reports, and they carried out a cruel attack on these houses," resident Akhtar Mohammad said at the protest. "We are not the enemy, we are not Al Qaeda. Why are they attacking us?"

The Occupation Of Iraq Getting Worse, Not Better

Every day we get more and more bad news about the situation in Iraq, and everyday we get someone from the White House (or McCain or Lieberman) to say how great things are in Iraq. So who are we going to believe, them or our own eyes?

Well, let's see, in my almost thirty years of life my eyes have never lied to me. Politicians, on the other hand, do not have such a trustworthy reputation.

I think I am going to go with what my own eyes are telling me, and from what the polls are showing, around 70% (give or take) of Americans also are believing their eyes rather than the White House's lies.

As for the other 30%, well, they might be a lost cause, but that does not mean we should give up hope. We must continue to speak out against politicians like Senator John McCain everytime he lies about Iraq like this:

McCain firm on Iraq war

WASHINGTON -- Attempting to restart his flagging presidential campaign, Sen. John McCain delivered a dark and detailed portrait of the situation in Iraq as he assailed Democratic opponents of the war in an address at the Virginia Military Institute on Wednesday.

He maintained that the military has made "measurable progress" in securing Baghdad and fighting insurgents in Anbar province, an assertion that has drawn ridicule from war opponents. At the same time, the Arizona Republican said, "to deny the difficulties and uncertainties ahead is an egregious disservice to the public."

[...]"Will this nation's elected leaders make the politically hard but strategically vital decision to give Gen. Petraeus our full support and do what is necessary to succeed in Iraq?" McCain said. "Or will we decide to take advantage of the public's frustration, accept defeat and hope that, whatever the cost to our security, the politics of defeat will work out better for us than our opponents? For my part, I would rather lose a campaign than a war."

Politics of defeat? How about the politics of delusion, McCain?

Everything McCain and Bush and their ilk are saying about Iraq is based on lies. Every argument for invading Iraq was a lie, and the lies continue. Bush did not begin a "surge" in Iraq; he started an escalation. The situation in Iraq is not getting better; it is getting worse. This is not a "war"; this is an occupation. The war was over when four years ago when Baghdad fell. This is an occupation that Bush has escalated because things were getting worse, and that has not changed despite the escalation:

Red Cross: Iraqi Situation Getting Worse

GENEVA (AP) - Millions of Iraqis are in a ``disastrous'' situation that is getting worse, with mothers appealing for someone to pick up the bodies on the street so their children will be spared the horror of looking at them on their way to school, the international Red Cross said Wednesday.

[...]Medical professionals also have been fleeing the country after cases where their colleagues were killed or abducted, the group said in a 13-page report. ``Hospitals and other key services are desperately short of staff,'' Kraehenbuehl said. ``According to the Iraqi Ministry of Health, more than half the doctors are said to have already left the country.''

The report, ``Civilians without Protection: The Ever-Worsening Humanitarian Crisis in Iraq,'' was produced over the past two to three weeks, a spokesman said - well after the stepped-up American-led military operations in the capital began Feb. 14.

[...]``Once I was called to an explosion site,'' it quoted a young Baghdad humanitarian worker named Saad as saying. ``There I saw a 4-year-old boy sitting beside his mother's body, which had been decapitated by the explosion. He was talking to her, asking her what had happened.''

That news is horrible enough, but today, insurgents were able to attack members of the Iraqi parliament within the Green Zone, the most heavily protected area in all of Iraq. This is solid proof that things are getting worse:

Explosion hits Iraqi parliament; 2 dead

BAGHDAD (AP) — A bomb exploded in the Iraqi parliament's cafeteria in a stunning assault in the heart of the heavily fortified, U.S.-protected Green Zone Thursday, killing at least two lawmakers and wounding 10 other people.

The blast in the parliament building came hours after a suicide truck bomb blew up a major bridge in Baghdad, collapsing the steel structure and sending cars tumbling into the Tigris River, police and witnesses said. At least 10 people were killed.

The bomb in parliament went off in a cafeteria while several lawmakers were eating lunch, media reports said. In addition to the two dead, state television said at least 10 people were wounded.

If that does not convince the other 30% of the populace that still believes the Bush administration that they are being lied to, then I do not know what will. Maybe this:

Army Extends Iraq Tours to 15 Months

WASHINGTON (AP) - Stretched thin by four years of war, the Army is adding three months to the standard yearlong tour for all active-duty soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, an extraordinary step aimed at maintaining the troop buildup in Baghdad.

The change, announced Wednesday by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, is the latest blow to an all-volunteer Army that has been given ever-shorter periods of rest and retraining at home between overseas deployments.

Or this:

Report: Claims Reveal Toll of U.S. Wars

NEW YORK (AP) - Iraqi and Afghan civilians have received more than $32 million in compensation from the Army for noncombat-related killings, injuries and property damage, The New York Times reported Thursday.

The details of hundreds of the claims, obtained from the Army by the American Civil Liberties Union through a Freedom of Information Act request, offer a glimpse into the daily violence that has marred the lives of civilians in both war zones.

And these are just the stories from today.

The ratio of these reports on the worsening situation in Iraq per day are horrifying. I am amazed that anyone still supports this war, but 30%?! That is beyond absurd.

Our military occupation of Iraq must end now.

The White House likes to call us defeatists, but they have already been defeated in the public's perception here and abroad. The majorities of both Americans and Iraqis want our troops out of Iraq.

The White House likes to question our patriotism. Well, I question theirs with their insulting and immoral penchant to lie daily to the American people, sacrifice our soldiers for Bush's "glory", waste our hard-earned money, risk our economic stability, exploit Iraq for greed, and destroy the Iraqi people.

This is an escalation of conflict, not a surge. The situation in Iraq is getting worse, not better. This is an occupation, not a war. Occupations cannot be won or lost, but they do end. Occupations end when the occupiers decide to leave or when the occupiers eliminate everyone who wants them to leave.

I would prefer it if we just leave.

Everyone Wants Us Out Of Iraq Except Bush And The Bushies

Americans want to get out of Iraq. Iraqis want us out of Iraq. The rest of the world wants us out of Iraq. Only Bush and his like-minded band of reality-deniers want us to stay.

The sky is blue, but Bush says it is orange, and his followers must agree that the sky is orange or else every argument they have ever made crumbles like the sand upon which they are built. It does not matter how wrong the argument is. The Bush chain is only as strong as its weakest link, so every delusional statement Bush makes must be held as absolute truth or else the chain breaks.

The situation Iraq is getting worse, but Bush says things are getting better in Iraq, so Bushies must believe that. Otherwise, they would have to accept that:

Iraqis want us out of Iraq, but Bush says Iraqis want us to stay, so Bushies have to accept that Iraqis want us to stay. Otherwise, they would have to accept that:

Our presence in Iraq is an occupation, not a war, but Bush says our presence in Iraq is part of the Global War on Terror, so Bushies have to believe that. Otherwise, they would have to accept that:

Iraq is in a civil war, but Bush says it is not in a civil war, so Bushies must believe that Iraq is not in a civil war. Otherwise, they would have to accept that:

Bush has ruined Iraq for oil and greed, but Bush says we are there for freedom and protection, so Bushies must believe that. Otherwise, they would have to accept that:

Our troops are dying for Bush's lies and so that he can save face, but Bush illogically says we are fighting terrorists who would "follow us home" if we left Iraq, so Bushies must believe that. Otherwise, they would have to accept that:

The best thing for us to do is leave Iraq, but Bush says we must stay, so Bushies must believe that we must stay. Otherwise, they would have to accept that:

We should not have invaded in Iraq in the first place, but Bush says we were right to invade Iraq, so Bushies must believe that. Otherwise, they would have to accept that:

Hussein was not an immediate threat to us, didn't have WMDs, wasn't building nuclear weapons, and wasn't connected to 9/11, but Bushies have a hard time accepting all of that because then they would have to accept that:

Bush had no reason for failing to get Osama bin Laden, but Bushies cannot believe that because then they would have to accept that:

Bush is doing a poor job at fighting terrorism, but Bushies cannot believe that because then they would have to accept that:

Bush is violating human rights and torturing detainess, but Bushies cannot believe that because then they would have to accept that:

Bush is breaking the law and lying about it, but Bushies cannot believe that because then they would have to accept that:

Bush is lying about Global Warming, outing a CIA agent, warrantless wiretapping, firing US attorneys, Jack Abramoff, abstinence-only education, voter fraud, Iran, engergy independence, Halliburton, propaganda leaks, manipulation of pre-Iraq War intelligence, tax cuts for the rich, the national debt, the economy, privatization, healthcare, Medicare Part-D, immigration, free trade agreements, trading deficits, the cost of the war, no-bid contracts, the federal response to Hurricane Katrina, corporate welfare, tax cuts for rich oil companies with record-breaking profits, Walter Reed, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, and pretty much everything the Bush administration has ever been involved in, but Bushies cannot believe that because then they would have to accept that:

Bush should not be president and should be impeached and removed from office.

That is why Bush and the Bushies refuse to back down on Iraq. Their house of cards would come crashing down.

Well, it is long past time for the cards to fall because the sky is blue, not orange, and the situation in Iraq is getting worse:

Baghdad a ‘deadlier battleground.’

For American troops, Baghdad has become a “deadlier battleground” since President Bush implemented his escalation plan. “The rate of American deaths in the city over the first seven weeks of the security plan has nearly doubled from the previous period.” According to the Iraq Coaltion Casualty Monitor, U.S. casualties since the beginning of the escalation have been “running at 3.14/day, which is the highest of any period since the end of major combat.”

And Iraqis want us out of Iraq:

Iraqis protest to mark Baghdad's fall

BAGHDAD --Tens of thousands draped themselves in Iraqi flags and marched peacefully through the streets of two Shiite holy cities Monday to mark the fourth anniversary of Baghdad's fall. Demonstrators were flanked by two cordons of police as they called for U.S. forces to leave, shouting "Get out, get out occupier!"

Security was tight across Iraq, with a 24-hour ban on all vehicles in Baghdad starting from 5 a.m. Monday. The government quickly reinstated the day as a holiday, rescinding its weekend order that had decreed that April 9 no longer would be a day off.

The Najaf rally was ordered by Muqtada al-Sadr, the powerful Shiite cleric who a day earlier issued a statement ordering his militiamen to redouble their battle to oust American forces, and argued that Iraq's army and police should join him in defeating "your archenemy."

There go the first two of Bush's arguments that I listed. The rest are being disproven on a daily basis in old media (newspapers, networks) and new media (political websites, blogs). The Bushies are losing the foundation for their ignorance and stubborness. Soon, they will have to accept that the sky is blue.

The Civil War In Iraq

The civil war in Iraq continues despite Bush's surge escalation:

At least 45 dead after police officers go on killing spree in northern Iraqi town

BAGHDAD---- Off-duty Shiite policemen enraged by massive bombings in the northern town of Tal Afar went on a revenge spree against Sunni residents there on Wednesday, killing at least 45 men execution-style, police and hospital officials said.
The policemen began roaming the town's Sunni neighborhoods on foot early in the morning, shooting at Sunni residents and homes.

A senior hospital official in Tal Afar said at least 45 men between the ages of 15 and 60 were killed with a shot to the back of the head and four others were wounded. He spoke on condition of anonymity due to security concerns.

But Joe Lieberman still claims Iraq it is not in a civil war. My question is: Is Joe Lieberman a liar or unintelligent or both?

Money Wasted In Iraq

I hate being right all the time:

Iraq Reconstruction Audit to Be Released

WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. government must learn from its multi-million-dollar mistakes of poor contract oversight and bad planning in its Iraq reconstruction effort or risk repeating them there and elsewhere, investigators say.

The audit released Thursday by Stuart Bowen Jr., the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, is the first to list in one place the series of mistakes, delays and missed opportunities in a four-year-old Iraq war and reconstruction effort that has cost taxpayers nearly $400 billion.

Characterizing the U.S. effort as chaotic and poorly managed, Bowen found the Bush administration's rebuilding effort riddled with problems - from a lack of strategy and unclear lines of authority to confusion and disarray between the Defense and State Departments.

I am not only angry because of this story. I am also angry because this is just another example of the countless ways we liberals were right but ignored regarding the war in Iraq.

Bush was WRONG about EVERYTHING. We were RIGHT about EVERYTHING. When are people going to, instead, start listening to us and stop listening Bush?