... "The Truth Is, ..." Almost Never The Truth!

Perhaps I have been spending way too many hours listening to interviews lately, or perhaps there is a new school of oratory out there that is teaching a more modern style of speech-writing. However, I am encountering a phrase ubiquitous to political speech, and even the comments of experts on radio or TV interviews, ... a peppering of the speech with ... "The truth is ... " , inserted before some point the speaker desires the listener to believe. It is meant, I suppose, to lend validity to the argument being made. It is also, at times, meant to close the mind of listeners to the opposing point of view.

To me, it comes off as proof of the widespread belief among many "leaders" in our nation that they have special access to the Truth, writ large, that the rest of us do not enjoy. Their relationship with the Truth is a gift they bestow upon us lesser types, ... too foolish to recognize it when it comes our way. "For those of you too unschooled to know, ... the truth is, ... that is an elephant in the main ring there before you!" Some condescending circus master! One ring, ... one act, ... show over! Now go home, bestowed with the "truth".

So when you hear the phrase "The truth is, ... ", and I assure you that you will, you can almost be certain that truth is the furthest thing from what you are about to hear. Truth is, more lies begin with "The truth is, ... " than any other phrase I know. No lie!

Thank You, Valerie Plame Wilson, For Your Service!

I must admit I do not know much about Nuclear Proliferation. A baccalaureate level understanding of physics and chemistry does not make one adequate to the task. I follow some of the technological discussion of isotope enhancement through centrifugation, ... and even some of the writing about Uranium versus Plutonium based weapons. Even at my deficient level of understanding, I was suspect of the "aluminum tubes" that conveniently appeared to justify our attack upon Iraq. It seemed ridiculous to me that tons of yellow cake ore had been purchased by, let alone transferred to, Iraq with the many intercessions in place to enforce our sanctions on that nation over the previous decade. That our representatives in Congress could have believed the misrepresentations is preposterous to me to this day, and I am suspicious of their individual motivations to vote for the war. They must be asked such questions before we ever again allow them to lead us in any capacity.

I know President Carter understands these matters, for it was his specialization as an officer in the Navy after graduation from the USNA with my father. What all of that inspiring but insufficient understanding meant to me today, was that when you, Valerie Plame Wilson, appeared before a House Committee, you brought credibility, and honor to a place generally known for its stench of partisanship and stupidity of purpose about a subject that few comprehend, and I assure you none in the room could fully grasp.

And so, as an American, I offer my thanks to you as a former officer of the Central Intelligence Agency for your service. You are a hero to me for having carried off your assignment with grace and style, with intelligence and purpose. I also extend my thanks to those you worked with in the Agency and abroad, and hope they are safe and out of harm's way, clearly caused by the despicable acts of our current Executive Administration.

What I am loathe to admit, and grieved to comprehend, is that America is probably more blind now to nuclear proliferation threats than we have been in many years as a result of this political abomination. Cheney and Bush will rot in the basement of American political history in any event, ... but even moreso if there is someday a nuclear attack upon America that you, and your networks, could have prevented on our behalves. In that event, there should be criminal hearings to call them to account for the attack, and the network these men have destroyed for personal political cover and gain.

I am afraid to admit that the America you took an oath to serve has been betrayed by others above us all, but who take no stock in their oaths whatsoever. That truth, ... the irrefutable treachery at the highest level of our Nation, is a threat against which neither you, the CIA, nor our Nation are truly prepared. To the extent that your testimony of today might reverse that course for our Nation, I thank you a second time.

Be well.

High Time To Impeach the President of the United States

Kahlid Sheikh Muhammad's guilt, ... the purported and, apparently, confessed "Mastermind of 9/11, ... WTC 1993, and even Richard Reid's bizarre, 'I can't light the damn thing' shoe bombing attempt aboard a Trans-atlantic flight" has apparently been resolved, according to a late release from DOD today. In a secret hearing at Gitmo sometime in the past or future, ... although I will be damned to hell forever if I reveal when the hearing was or will be heard, ... the Sheikh (I'm confused if that is a title or a nickname) willingly, ... well, at least personally, admitted that he had done everything that he was accused of ever, since the time he was a 12 year-old kid back in the old country. I forget what that country is, ... but will leave it to the MSM to assure us we knew if he had ever lived in White Sands, Wichita Falls, or elsewhere he might have become trouble to the local leaders, Christian or otherwise.

Do I like this man? Nope, ... He's ugly to the eye and to the mind, and I suspect that if photos we love the best were taken with "smellivision", we would have recommended a different sort of "rendition", ... maybe a rendering, ... as in "take the old horse and render him!". I can't be certain, unfortunately, what he actually did. Should we release him in Central Park, I suspect we'd find him mumbling to himself at the base of a tree after the first 24 hours.

We seem to have a special skill at Gitmo, ... according to reports, to addle the brains of our captives, ... as if they were unwanted goose eggs along the shore of a public reservoir. I guess if we had proven beyond doubt, that they should be addled, I'd agree wholeheartedly, ... but it might be me someday whose brain they feel the need to addle. For my part, I've not yet finished using it, thanks very much, Alberto Gonzales!

(BTW Didn't we invade that little Nation yet?) and don't let him out if you can prove to the judicial system of the US that he had a part in any Federal Crimes of any sort. If not, ... keep him a little longer, if you feel that is certain.

As for the rest of our illegal captives in Gitmo, ... The US Government must make a case in the courts! If you can not, or will not, then at the very least acknowledge that the Commissions decisions are, and will be, subject to Federal Court review. You know they will be, ... don't you, George II?

If not, ... then why not go ahead, ... and draw and quarter them. What does it matter, and who the hell will care, Mr. President? Just do whatever the F**K you want to, fool.

In the end we are either a Nation of Laws, or we are not. It is up to each of us ultimately, and our representatives, to decide what we believe the Constitution assures to us as our assured protections. But I worry as much about the woman sitting next to me in the train station as I do about myself. Oh, ... I'm sorry, I did not know she is considered by you to be "an enemy cambatant". Who says so, ... Alberto? I'm sorry, ... is he still the Attorney General? Barely? Really? Sorry, ...

In the end I trust she is a fellow American more than I trust the President, His VP, or his AG. Sorry, ... the Constitution allows me to decide, ... and I like the looks of my neighbor far more than the looks of you shiny-suited scumbags.

And that, in the end, is the only hope I have that we can save America.

Let's agree to disagree, Mister President! (And let's just say for the moment that I agree just to let me identify you to be an "enemy combatant" of the United States of America, based upon your conradictious actions to the Constitution of the United States of America. ) That in itself is gracious of you, Sir.

The things you say and do amaze me, Sir. Were you a comic, or a guest on SNL, I could excuse your inept and stupid actions and comments. I can not excuse them as President of the United States. Your actions have cost too many American lives, both military and domestic.

You must, Mister Bush, be excused from office by Impeachment.

Hazelton Fights Back, ... A Workplace Tsunami

First let me say that I am blessed to have visited Hazelton, Pennsylvania, and to have done business there for years, calling upon the State Hospital there, serving the patients there, and even camping with my daughters not far from there in the Pocono Mountains. Suffice it to say that I love Hazelton, and Pottsville, and Centralia, and Scranton and Wilkes Barre.

Each of these beautiful communities depended not long ago upon coal mining and/or clothing textiles. The people that still live in these communities are the bulwarks of American manufacturing families of a while ago. They are the parents and grandparents of America's newest generation, ... who have nowhere to work in Hazelton, nor almost any of the other towns of which I write here.

It is not a matter of where our kids work, ... but who will work in our own hometowns? Who wants to move to Hazelton, or Pottsville, or Centralia, or Scranton to work? Our parents need caretakers, and janitors, and restaurant workers, ... and every other form of service worker. If we outlaw them, are we willing to pay more? Is there anyone else we truly trust to do that work for us?

I have no answer to these questions, and can not answer whether Hazelton, ... this beautiful bright spot at the top of a mountain, can fend off the need for helpers and service workers who can take the place of grandchildren who know their services will draw better pay elsewhere.

One municipality's argument with immigration policy will not solve the dilemma of an older nation disconnected from the services they will require, ... and I include myself among that population.

Tonight I made potato and onion pierogies, pork chops and sauerkraut, ... and wish I could share them with my older friends in Hazelton. I am a believer that the comfort of familiar foods is a part of what life is meant to be as we become older and depend upon others to care for us.

I don't believe they have to look like us, or speak like us, ... but they can learn to do pork, sauerkraut, and pierogies, ... and I promise you they would love to do that. I promise!

I want your home to be "home" but I also know that there are not enough loving children left to care for those Hazeltonians who still live atop the mountain there in Pennsylvania. Your neighbors will not be pale-faced Polish Americans. They will be darker faced Hispanic Americans, that you will come to cherish this land and you fellow citizens just as your neighbors came to love your families long ago.

It is not my place nor my position to worry about the elderly in Hazelton. I hear the Mayor complaining about the influx of immigrants, but he can do nothing about the loss of kids from that wonderful community.

How about you Hazelton Kids? Any ideas about who should care for your folks back home? I just want your folks to stay close to home, ... even in their own homes. Maybe a lady with three kids at home is willing to take care of your parents since you moved away. Maybe she speaks Spanish as her first language. And if you think about it, ... maybe this is just about the best place you would want her to be in America, especially if she loves to be here. She might be just the sort of person you'ld want in your stead, to make a warm dinner dinner for your folks. I think I would!

Check with your Mother and Father, ... Does the mayor speak for them? Or do your mother and father know better after all? I'll hold cooking lessons if you would like!

The Worth of an Oath

I have struggled recently with the meaning of "supporting our troops" versus questioning the escalation of the war, and I have come to an understanding I am ashamed to say has eluded me for almost forty years.

Among my friends who have served, and lost their limbs, and minds, and more in wars since 1968 to this very day, I have been adverse to not give them every thing, ... everything! I have been angered that they did not receive proper medical care, proper housing, proper VA health benefits, ... and respect to allow themselves self-respect.

And when the ballyhoo about Walter Reed Army Medical Center came to our attention this past week, my ears perked up once again. You see, I used to go to Walter Reed and Bethesda Naval as part of my many jobs, ... and as long ago as 35 years, there were long lines of our enlisted, waiting in the outpatient areas to be seen, to be treated, perhaps to be cured. That on top of the lengthy wait they should return to sub-standard housing, ... then to return day after day, or wait month after month for an opportunity to be treated at all, is more than I can imagine.

I received a deferment for college in the 60's and 70's, ... no different than many. No special consideration, ... just a college kid, ... then a high number in the draft lottery. I worked in hospital work every weekend, beside Army docs in a civilian setting, ... with GI's working at my side as security guards, in a community hospital near an Army base hospital.

And all of that, so many years later, has come home to help me understand why the privatization of the military, and the care of our soldiers, and the preservation of balance between civilian values and the requirement for a civilian military are at the very heart of our Republic.

A corporation is a most self-interested beast. It exists and persists out of a devouring appetite for its competitors and its own young. Efficiency and profit are all it is about. It does not care for continuity, for tomorrow it might sell out to the highest bidder, ... indeed it will! It is its birthright, its edict. It is its only law of survival, even when it is a monopoly. It is the most blind of beasts for it has no past, and aspires to no future. The closing bell is its call to dinner, and the quarterly returns are its only aspiration.

In the age of Halliburton's monopolization of military services, I am wont to distinguish my admiration for the military, the grunt private still wearing out the initial starch of his uniform issued Stateside just last week, and the Lance Corporal in Anbar Province who has not seen a fresh shower in three weeks. Oh, ... did I leave out the shiny silk-suited KBR Corporati in Suburban DC? Yeah, ... I think we all do.

Therein lies the difference! I love the kids in khakis, and I would carry soup to the front line for them, and will when the need arises. But those kids, and their elder commanders all took an oath on my behalf, and my kids, ... and my grandkids. The muscular and devoted Marine Lance Corporal that I have seen grow from a kid to a beloved killing Marine machine still had to promise to take care of America, ... from the get go. Before we handed him a pair of socks and boots, he swore to take care of you and me, ... and America.

Ah, lets ask ourselves what Halliburton, the Corporation has sworn to do on our behalves, ... no We will go there another day. For now, ... let me only say that there is nothing that Halliburton or KBR will do for America before it takes care of its shareholders, ... and my guess is that there is nothing it will do for its shareholders before it takes care of its officers.

Therein lies the difference, my fellow Americans. I'd choose a kid who swears allegiance to the Constitution any day over a corporate type who promises a profit to shareholders foreign or domestic. And is that not, after the last contract signed, the sole difference? Isn't it Mr. Cheney?

A soldier who pledges his solemn honor to defend the United States is a sure as hell better bet than a corporation that promises its shareholders a bigger cut of the pie. Sorry Dick, ... I'll bet on the Lance Corporal I know than the Veep I distrust as a corporate shill anytime.

And in the end, it might just be that I trust an honest kid with a rifle more than I trust a shaky old fart with a shotgun! Sorry, Dick

The Must Do List To Save Our Republic

With a sigh of relief, I feel at least a few Americans, and perhaps the first publication in America that is widely read enough to matter, have now stated what must be done to bring us away from the brink of social ruination. It depends upon what you do next, and what the New York Times does in follow up to the editorial they published today, ... and what I do as well. I need to get off my sorry old ass and make my voice heard to achieve what the NYT has demanded, ... and they need to make it a purpose for more than an editorial headline. Generations before us have rioted and picketed and died for far less that what the NYT demands on our behalves in today's editorial.

What the NYT proscribes today is no matter of social nuance, nor some socieconomic stratogem. What they mandate in this editorial is the essential restoration of basic rights within our nation, and by our nation within the world at large. At its heart, its strongest advocates should, but will not, be the NRA, and CPAC, and latter day Goldwater Conservatives, ... for there will be no reason to own a gun if you can not speak your peace. The true conservatives in our nation and in our history were those who understood that privacy, and a right to life and liberty, in all their full richness and meaning, are what we have always fought and died for in America.

When we have fought as a nation beyond our shores it has always been to preserve these rights within our shores. We support our troops in order that they can defend our way of life, and then return from the battlefield to enjoy its full benefits when their wars are finished.

Walter Reed and the scandal developing around its mismanagment and desecration by the Executive Branch is simply another reminder that it is time for Americans to reclaim full ownership of our Nation by every means available to us under our Constitution. Privatization in the name of capitism has proved to be a bastardization of our national purpose. Halliburton and KBR don't get it, and never will, ... for there is no commitment and no oath behind any corporate interests. Give me a young private with a crew cut and a new uniform anyday over a slick suit, bald headed old fuck. I trust a young woman just out of boot camp to take care of our lifestyle, and I love a hard muscled Marine Corporal who will know that when his "Unitary Executive" commands him to arrest and imprison his fellow Americans that the Executive will have gone way too far! These men and women will be our best hope in the end, if we can not reverse these illegal and unconstitutional insults to the American Republic. The notion that citzen soldiers are our best defense to a military coup in America was something Thomas Jefferson understood that we might have forgotten.

Perhaps it is time to tighten the belly, and harden the spirit to protect what we have been granted by our mothers and fathers.

==================================================================

In the event you do not receive or can not view this editorial from the New York Times from today, ... I copy its contents for your consideration and appreciation, with full and complete attribution to the Editor in Chief of that fine paper, who, in this instance, has spoken clearly and forthrightly on our behalf.

The Must-Do List
The New York Times Editorial
Published: March 4, 2007

The Bush administration’s assault on some of the founding principles of American democracy marches onward despite the Democratic victory in the 2006 elections. The new Democratic majorities in Congress can block the sort of noxious measures that the Republican majority rubber-stamped. But preventing new assaults on civil liberties is not nearly enough.
Five years of presidential overreaching and Congressional collaboration continue to exact a high toll in human lives, America’s global reputation and the architecture of democracy. Brutality toward prisoners, and the denial of their human rights, have been institutionalized; unlawful spying on Americans continues; and the courts are being closed to legal challenges of these practices.
It will require forceful steps by this Congress to undo the damage. A few lawmakers are offering bills intended to do just that, but they are only a start. Taking on this task is a moral imperative that will show the world the United States can be tough on terrorism without sacrificing its humanity and the rule of law.
Today we’re offering a list — which, sadly, is hardly exhaustive — of things that need to be done to reverse the unwise and lawless policies of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Many will require a rewrite of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, an atrocious measure pushed through Congress with the help of three Republican senators, Arlen Specter, Lindsey Graham and John McCain; Senator McCain lent his moral authority to improving one part of the bill and thus obscured its many other problems.
•
Our list starts with three fundamental tasks:

Restore Habeas Corpus

One of the new act’s most indecent provisions denies anyone Mr. Bush labels an "illegal enemy combatant" the ancient right to challenge his imprisonment in court. The arguments for doing this were specious. Habeas corpus is nothing remotely like a get-out-of-jail-free card for terrorists, as supporters would have you believe. It is a way to sort out those justly detained from those unjustly detained. It will not "clog the courts," as Senator Graham claims. Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the Democratic chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has a worthy bill that would restore habeas corpus. It is essential to bringing integrity to the detention system and reviving the United States’ credibility.

Stop Illegal Spying

Mr. Bush’s program of intercepting Americans’ international calls and e-mail messages without a warrant has not ceased. The agreement announced recently — under which a secret court supposedly gave its blessing to the program — did nothing to restore judicial process or ensure that Americans’ rights are preserved. Congress needs to pass a measure, like one proposed by Senator Dianne Feinstein, to force Mr. Bush to obey the law that requires warrants for electronic surveillance.

Ban Torture, Really

The provisions in the Military Commissions Act that Senator McCain trumpeted as a ban on torture are hardly that. It is still largely up to the president to decide what constitutes torture and abuse for the purpose of prosecuting anyone who breaks the rules. This amounts to rewriting the Geneva Conventions and puts every American soldier at far greater risk if captured. It allows the president to decide in secret what kinds of treatment he will permit at the Central Intelligence Agency’s prisons. The law absolves American intelligence agents and their bosses of any acts of torture and abuse they have already committed.
•
Many of the tasks facing Congress involve the way the United States takes prisoners, and how it treats them. There are two sets of prisons in the war on terror. The military runs one set in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay. The other is even more shadowy, run by the C.I.A. at secret places.

Close the C.I.A. Prisons

When the Military Commissions Act passed, Mr. Bush triumphantly announced that he now had the power to keep the secret prisons open. He cast this as a great victory for national security. It was a defeat for America’s image around the world. The prisons should be closed.

Account for ‘Ghost Prisoners’

The United States has to come clean on all of the "ghost prisoners" it has in the secret camps. Holding prisoners without any accounting violates human rights norms. Human Rights Watch says it has identified nearly 40 men and women who have disappeared into secret American-run prisons.

Ban Extraordinary Rendition

This is the odious practice of abducting foreign citizens and secretly flying them to countries where everyone knows they will be tortured. It is already illegal to send a prisoner to a country if there is reason to believe he will be tortured. The administration’s claim that it got "diplomatic assurances" that prisoners would not be abused is laughable.
A bill by Representative Edward Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, would require the executive branch to list countries known to abuse and torture prisoners. No prisoner could be sent to any of them unless the secretary of state certified that the country’s government no longer abused its prisoners or offered a way to verify that a prisoner will not be mistreated. It says "diplomatic assurances" are not sufficient.
•
Congress needs to completely overhaul the military prisons for terrorist suspects, starting with the way prisoners are classified. Shortly after 9/11, Mr. Bush declared all members of Al Qaeda and the Taliban to be "illegal enemy combatants" not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions or American justice. Over time, the designation was applied to anyone the administration chose, including some United States citizens and the entire detainee population of Gitmo.
To address this mess, the government must:

Tighten the Definition of Combatant

"Illegal enemy combatant" is assigned a dangerously broad definition in the Military Commissions Act. It allows Mr. Bush — or for that matter anyone he chooses to designate to do the job — to apply this label to virtually any foreigner anywhere, including those living legally in the United States.

Screen Prisoners Fairly and Effectively

When the administration began taking prisoners in Afghanistan, it did not much bother to screen them. Hundreds of innocent men were sent to Gitmo, where far too many remain to this day. The vast majority will never even be brought before tribunals and still face indefinite detention without charges.
Under legal pressure, Mr. Bush created "combatant status review tribunals," but they are a mockery of any civilized legal proceeding. They take place thousands of miles from the point of capture, and often years later. Evidence obtained by coercion and torture is permitted. The inmates do not get to challenge this evidence. They usually do not see it.
The Bush administration uses the hoary "fog of war" dodge to justify the failure to screen prisoners, saying it is not practical to do that on the battlefield. That’s nonsense. It did not happen in Afghanistan, and often in Iraq, because Mr. Bush decided just to ship the prisoners off to Gitmo.
Prisoners designated as illegal combatants are subject to trial rules out of the Red Queen’s playbook. The administration refuses to allow lawyers access to 14 terrorism suspects transferred in September from C.I.A. prisons to Guantánamo. It says that if they had a lawyer, they might say that they were tortured or abused at the C.I.A. prisons, and anything that happened at those prisons is secret.
At first, Mr. Bush provided no system of trial at the Guantánamo camp. Then he invented his own military tribunals, which were rightly overturned by the Supreme Court. Congress then passed the Military Commissions Act, which did not fix the problem. Some tasks now for Congress:

Ban Tainted Evidence

The Military Commissions Act and the regulations drawn up by the Pentagon to put it into action, are far too permissive on evidence obtained through physical abuse or coercion. This evidence is unreliable. The method of obtaining it is an affront.

Ban Secret Evidence

Under the Pentagon’s new rules for military tribunals, judges are allowed to keep evidence secret from a prisoner’s lawyer if the government persuades the judge it is classified. The information that may be withheld can include interrogation methods, which would make it hard, if not impossible, to prove torture or abuse.

Better Define ‘Classified’ Evidence

The military commission rules define this sort of secret evidence as "any information or material that has been determined by the United States government pursuant to statute, executive order or regulation to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national security." This is too broad, even if a president can be trusted to exercise the power fairly and carefully. Mr. Bush has shown he cannot be trusted to do that.

Respect the Right to Counsel

Soon after 9/11, the Bush administration allowed the government to listen to conversations and intercept mail between some prisoners and their lawyers. This had the effect of suspending their right to effective legal representation. Since then, the administration has been unceasingly hostile to any lawyers who defend detainees. The right to legal counsel does not exist to coddle serial terrorists or snarl legal proceedings. It exists to protect innocent people from illegal imprisonment.
•
Beyond all these huge tasks, Congress should halt the federal government’s race to classify documents to avoid public scrutiny — 15.6 million in 2005, nearly double the 2001 number. It should also reverse the grievous harm this administration has done to the Freedom of Information Act by encouraging agencies to reject requests for documents whenever possible. Congress should curtail F.B.I. spying on nonviolent antiwar groups and revisit parts of the Patriot Act that allow this practice.
The United States should apologize to a Canadian citizen and a German citizen, both innocent, who were kidnapped and tortured by American agents.
Oh yes, and it is time to close the Guantánamo camp. It is a despicable symbol of the abuses committed by this administration (with Congress’s complicity) in the name of fighting terrorism.