Or so the government wants you to accept.

The L.A. Times and many other newspapers last week came out with very disturbing quotes from initial court proceeding concerning the fate of detainees in Guantanamo.  More than any other Bush policy, this one makes me the most angry.  Here is the article:
U.S. Says Terrorism Net Must Be Wide  Try bugmenot.com if you don't want to register with the Times.

The arguments the lawyers for the government are making are the real views of the U.S. government, and until the courts overturn those policies, the government is free to enact them.  Among them:

 arresting foreigners in their own country

 arresting them on suspicion that their charitable contributions went to terrorist organizations

 arresting them even if they had no intention or knowledge of aiding terrorists

 jailing them in Guantanamo with almost no access to lawyers, their accusers, or the evidence against them

 giving them almost no recourse to contest their arrest.  

More below the fold:

The Washinton Montly as a fascinating article on the Bush WH policy/political balance.  Basically, Rove and Bush are 100% political and regard policy wonks as lepers.

It recalls a few choice quotes from former Bush officials:

Paul O'Neill on the difference between his experience with Nixon and Bush:  

John DiIulio, who ran Bush's faith-based initiative:

Finally, it concludes

I hope Kerry's dBunker web page gets on this issue.  Presidential press secretary Scott McClellan stated that John Kerry should release the list of names of foreign leaders that support his run against Bush; if he will not, McClellan went on, one can only conclude he was making it up.

Again, the other party is trying to paint Kerry as a two-faced liar (I still love Lincoln's quote upon being called two-faced --"If I was two-faced,
why would I have chosen this one?").

Kerry's response has been inadequate so far.

The recent US decision to ban the use of dumb landmines is laudable.  So is the proposal to spend 50% more ($70 million) to aid in the removal in landmines.  And the decision to go further than the international landmine treaty by banning dumb anti-vehicle landmines is a step forward.

BUT, the administration is proposing to use a new class of "smart landmines" instead.  These will disable themselves after a time or the US will be able to disable them remotely.  As this NYT opinion piece states, "The problem is that few countries have the new technology, and Washington is now stamping an American imprimatur on the ongoing use of land mines."

My questions are:

will the US give this technology to other countries?  Is that a good thing?

will the Administration push Congress for the increase in landmine removal aid?

Does the US need landmines at all?  In Korea?

USA Today:  Attacks down 22% since Saddam's capture

Only deep in the article does it mention that the rate of US combat injuries is unchanged and the number of combat deaths is up.  They could have spun it the other way and said the US deaths are up by 40%.

Also, only two reasons are given for the decrease in attacks:  US offensive operations and Saddam's capture.  What about these possibilities:

troops staying more inside the Green Zone or out of harm's way

the Resistance concentrating more of their efforts on Iraqis

the Resistance becoming more organized and lethal, eschewing weak attacks

I don't believe we are winning this war, and Saddam's capture certainly didn't make us safer.  The article gives the opposite impression and amounts to news distortion.

What should be the Democrats response to Bush's immigrant proposal?

Here are my thoughts, what are yours?

Assuming Bush's plan won't pass because of Republican opposition, the Democrat's goal should be to maximize political damage to Bush and minimize his gains in the Hispanic community by telling the truth about what's going on.

the Democrats should declare that this is mostly an attempt to look good in an Hispanic flight suit; either he doesn't have the cojones to fight for it in the Congress, or he will undermine it by slanting it toward employers and away from worker's rights, working conditions, and citizenship.

Democrats should propose a stronger alternative, with a name something like "The Labor and Citizenship Fairness Act," that includes provisions for worker's rights and wages and a fast-track to citizenship, not just green card status, for those most deserving.  They should push hard to bring it to a vote, and when the Republicans won't allow a vote, Democrat's can truthfully say that Bush doesn't support reasonable immigration reform and progressive immigrant labor laws.

 Conservative Democrats should join hard-right Republicans in jointly declaring their opposition to Bush's proposals to undermine the earning strength of American families who will lose their jobs to the influx of immigrants.

Any comments?

   

Here is the latest coalition dead count (battle and non-battle related) in Iraq.  Total coalition dead:  578.  Saddam's capture has not decreased death rates--if anything, they are up.

Here is a graph of the total weekly deaths.  

The raw data for this graph is at the Iraq Casualty List site.

And from the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Regarding the Plame Affair

George Bush sounds like a school bully who is interrogated over a misdeed:

January 1, 2004:  
"I'm not involved with the investigation in any way, shape or form," Bush told reporters here after wrapping up a hunting trip with his father and a family friend.

You'll have to stay after class if you won't answer my questions, George!  

Recently he said this regarding Ashcroft's recusal:  "You're going to have to ask him."  Now, George, don't blame others.  I'm asking what YOU did.

A poster at Calpundit notes how "concerned" Bush is:  "I don't know if we're going to find out the senior administration official. I don't have any idea."
--President George W. Bush, 10/7/03

Oh, George!  You're going to have to answer my questions in detention today.

Bad schoolboys who want to avoid blame also try to shift the attention elsewhere:

Now I'm not saying whether George is guilty are not.  He is guilty of a lot of things, but being complicit in this particular federal crime is probably something he is in not guilty of.  But George is guilty of not caring whether someone in his gang committed this felony.

Here is the latest coalition dead count (battle and non-battle related) in Iraq. Total coalition dead: 555. Obviously there was a pickup during Ramadan, but Saddam's capture has not had a noticeable effect.

Here is a graph of the total weekly deaths.

The raw data for this graph is at the Iraq Casualty List site.

Sorry about the earlier mis-post. I hope this graph comes through.

Here is the latest coalition dead count (battle and non-battle related) in Iraq. Total coalition dead: 541. Obviously there was a pickup during Ramadan, but there is no noticeable decrease as a result of Operation Iron Hammer. We'll see if there is a change now that Saddam has been picked up. Let's hope it's a change for the better.

Here is a graph of the total weekly deaths.

The raw data for this graph is at the Iraq Casualty List site.

Here is the latest coalition dead count (battle and non-battle related) in Iraq. Total coalition dead: 541. Obviously there was a pickup during Ramadan, but there is no noticeable decrease as a result of Operation Iron Hammer. We'll see if there is a change now that Saddam has been picked up. Let's hope it's a change for the better. Here is a graph of the total weekly deaths. The raw data for this graph is at the Iraq Casualty List site

Let's see, how does this work?