The Philadelphia Inquirer Endorses John Kerry for President:

Editorial: Kerry for President

The choice is vivid. The stakes are vast.

Our nation is threatened by jihad warriors who scoff at boundaries. It stumbles toward a fiscal ruin that will punish our children. The rules that protect our air, water and health are weaker than we know. When 45 million of our neighbors fall ill, they have no insurance card to hand to the doctor.

We boast of exporting liberty and rule of law, yet watch them erode at home. A hooded prisoner on a box has replaced a soaring lady with a lamp as the global icon of America's intentions. Our national discourse has grown peevish, choking on distortion and bile.

On Nov. 2, we can return to office the man who, since 2001, has spawned some of those ills and shown a shaky touch at healing the others.

Or we can go a new way, one alert to fresh global challenges yet rooted in the approaches that made the 1990s so productive. We can elect Democratic nominee John F. Kerry.

Dear fellow citizen, this is as important an election as any in which you've had a chance to vote.

The Inquirer's urgent, deeply felt recommendation: Cast that ballot on Nov. 2 for JOHN F. KERRY.

The case for Kerry has two parts. The first is the record of George W. Bush. The evidence is compelling, though tallied in sorrow: His was a presidency of high promise that lapsed into multiple disasters.

On his watch, useful surpluses have become a sea of red ink. The economic rebound he bought with tax cuts is mild, barely more than would have occurred in the natural cycle. Those slanted tax changes have left society more unequal, its safety net frayed. His team's habits of ignoring science and punishing dissent hamper the search for solutions.

His plan for a second term is not to repair those mistakes, but to expand and entrench them.

Most worrisome, his response to the stunning blows of 9/11 has gone fatefully awry. He has left Americans less safe than they could be and America less admired than it should be.

Those are strong words. You deserve to see them documented thoroughly.

That is why, beginning today, we present a 21-day editorial series. It will review the facts of the Bush record on an array of issues, from homeland security to Head Start, contrasting it with Kerry's ideas. The first appears below. Most days, on the facing page, a prominent supporter of President Bush will provide a contrasting view.

You deserve a fair and frank debate.

You also deserve a fair picture of the second half of the case for change: the record and views of John Kerry.

This, very few of you have gotten during a petty, dispiriting campaign. Some blame rests with the Democrat. He has not framed the debate with the force and clarity he must master to be an outstanding president.

More blame, though, rests with Bush. Awash in millions from the corporate donors to whom his White House caters so avidly, the President has spent more time ridiculing Kerry through distortions than presenting his own plans.

Bush backers cling to a tired, tiresome slogan of elections past: Kerry is a clueless liberal, out of touch with the American mainstream.

Here is what Kerry thinks, and what his record as a U.S. senator, lieutenant governor and prosecutor underscores:

John Kerry thinks government should pursue solutions to problems that haunt American lives, but must pay for each initiative as it goes - not stick the nation's children with the tab. Robert Rubin, the superb Treasury secretary under Bill Clinton, praises Kerry as a senator who stood tall on the tough votes that tamed deficits.

He thinks work is better than welfare; he voted for welfare reform.

He thinks it's unacceptable that 45 million Americans lack health coverage; he has a smart plan to shrink that number dramatically.

He wants science to do all it can to speed cures for illnesses.

He knows that protection of America's air, land and water can't be left to the whims of corporations.

He doesn't just shrug when he sees American children slipping into poverty, or more paychecks losing buying power.

If those aren't mainstream American values, then God help America. But of course these are American values.

If you're an undecided voter, consider this: As president, Kerry will have to work with a Congress where at least one chamber is Republican. Checks and balances, a prescription for moderation. A vote for Bush risks one-party rule, with Congress under the control of aggressive conservatives and reelection concerns no longer checking Bush's impulses.

You've heard - eight gazillion times - that John Kerry is a flip-flopper. No doubt, he's a man who relishes nuance. His penchant for thinking out loud is ill-suited to a sound-bite culture. He'll have to curb that, seeking a more disciplined clarity. But the flip-flop label rests mainly on one sound bite. All together now: "I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it."

Muddy words, but a defensible vote. The Bush campaign's incessant mockery of it relies on voters' unfamiliarity with the workings of the Senate, where two or more versions of a bill often come up for votes. Kerry voted for a Democratic version of this Iraq appropriation, which would have rescinded tax cuts for the affluent to pay for body armor, etc., for the troops. The GOP version, which passed easily, added to the ever-growing load of debt we are leaving to our kids.

Let's deal with another pack of poisonous distortions: Vietnam.

Kerry served, showed courage, won medals, then raised an honorable, if hyperbolic, alarm about a misguided war. Case closed. Perhaps the Boston convention overdid the allusions to those facts, but that doesn't justify the baseless Swift-boat assaults of August.

Kerry doesn't talk much about his Senate record, a curious omission. That record isn't spectacular, but it is solid and qualifying. Names on bills are just one road to effectiveness. Kerry took the less glamorous path of investigation. He had major successes.

He was one of the first to spot and expose the scandal that came to be known as Iran-contra. He took the lead in unraveling the criminal deeds of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, which financed drug cartels and terrorists. Finally, he worked well with John McCain and others to resolve the emotional issue of Vietnam MIAs.

Not flashy, not easy. Just important.

The BCCI probe showed Kerry spotting early on a key thread in the global web of terror.

Thwarting terrorism is a president's core job in these haunted times. Kerry's approach is more thorough than that of Bush, whose two main tools seem to be bombs and bombast. Bush's reckless missteps in Iraq have cost a painful toll in lives, credibility, alliances, Islamic anger and lost opportunities.

Kerry is right to press hard on: tracking down loose nuclear material in Russia and elsewhere; repairing alliances that can help spot terror cells and roll up financing networks; better securing our chemical and nuclear plants and ports.

It is absurd to claim that, had Kerry been president on that awful day in 2001, he would merely have shrugged and sent a strongly worded memo to the World Court. Any president would have done much of what Bush did in late 2001 - with less soaring eloquence perhaps. But few would have raced as he did into the deadly detour of Iraq.

John Kerry isn't perfect. He has things to learn. One thing Americans should have learned by now, though, is that the incumbent lacks the realism, judgment and ability to adjust to events that the United States needs in its commander in chief. In this perilous moment, the safer choice, the wiser choice, is John F. Kerry.

10 Oct 2004 Philadelphia Inquirer http://www.philly.com

In an unprecedented display of support from the military establishment, twelve retired generals and admirals endorsed John Kerry for president of the United States.

The flag officers endorsing John Kerry are:

Lieutenant General Edward D. Baca (United States Army, Retired)

Baca served as Chief of the National Guard Bureau in Washington, D.C.

"I am proud to have served our country in the military for over 41 years. I am even prouder that 4 of my children have worn the uniform of our armed forces. Three are still serving. As a combat veteran and proven leader, I know that John Kerry will never send them in harm's way, without exhausting all means of diplomacy. Even then, it will be a last resort. God forbid if he ever has to, he will make sure that they are part of an armed force as best equipped, best training, and most respected in the world."

Lieutenant General Daniel W. Christman (United States Army, Retired)

Christman served as the Superintendent of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. He also served for two years as Assistant to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, during which time he represented the U.S. as a member of NATO's Military Committee in Brussels, Belgium.

"Success in the global war on terror requires enlightened U.S. leadership - leadership that knows the importance of listening to and working with other countries. Senator Kerry is such a leader, and as Commander-in-Chief, he will adapt our military to the unprecedented security demands faced by our country and its armed forces."

General Wesley K. Clark (United States Army, Retired)

Wesley Clark graduated first in his class from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1966 and served as the Commander-in-Chief of US Southern Command from 1996 to 1997 and NATO Supreme Allied Commander from 1997 to 2000.

"I ask you to join me in standing up for an American who has given truly outstanding service to his country in peace and in war. John Kerry has the right message and right character to bring the nation forward. Both John and I served in Vietnam -- and know what it is to be tested on the battlefield, fighting for your country. John Kerry never quit fighting for his country."

Admiral William J. Crowe (United States Navy, Retired)

Crowe served as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest ranking officer in the U.S. military.

"The current administration has an overly simplistic view of how and when to use our military. By not bringing in our friends and allies, they have created a mess in Iraq and are crippling our forces around the world. John Kerry has a realistic understanding of the requirements of our military and the threats that we face."

Vice Admiral Lee F. Gunn (United States Navy, Retired)

Gunn served as the Inspector General of the Department of the Navy until his retirement in August 2000.

"My son is a Navy sailor, my son-in-law is a Navy sailor, and my nephew is a Navy sailor. I want them, and all of America's sons and daughters in uniform to have a new, wiser, better, and courageous commander-in-chief in John Kerry."

General Joseph Hoar (United States Marine Corps, Retired)

Hoar served as Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Central Command. After the first Gulf War, Hoar led the effort to enforce the naval embargo in the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf, enforce the no-fly zone in the south of Iraq. Hoar was the Deputy for Operations for the Marine Crops during the Gulf War and served as General Norman Schwartzkopf's Chief of Staff at Central Command.

"Sen. Kerry has demonstrated his courage in combat and his broad knowledge of international relations while in the Senate. He's a leader who is not afraid to lead."

Lieutenant General Claudia J. Kennedy (United States Army, Retired)

Kennedy is the first and only woman to achieve the rank of three-star general in the United States Army. Kennedy also served as Deputy Chief of Staff for Army Intelligence.

"John Kerry understands the future as it is framed by the international community and by the people at home. He will make the right decisions about education, defense, intelligence, economic development both foreign and domestic, and sustaining international relationships. He is a leader I trust."

Lieutenant General Donald Kerrick (United States Army, Retired)

Kerrick served as Deputy National Security Advisor to the President of the United States where he was responsible for developing, implementing, and managing United States foreign and national security policies.

"The miscalculations of the last three years have severely stressed our armed forces both around the world and here at home. John Kerry understands the military and war. He is the right leader at the right time to restore America's credibility around the world."

General Merrill "Tony" A. McPeak (United States Air Force, Retired)

McPeak served as the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force.

"I'm a registered independent, but I like and admire John Kerry. He simply has a great record of brave and skillful service to the country. He is sure to be a fine Commander-in-Chief, one we can all be proud of, and proud to follow."

General John M. Shalikashvili (United States Army, Retired)

Shalikashvili served as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest ranking officer in the U.S. military. Prior to serving as Chairman, he served as the Supreme Allied Commander Europe and also as the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. European Command. He served as Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Army in Europe and during the first Gulf War in 1991.

"I believe in John Kerry. As a young man, he heeded his country's call to service when it needed him. He commanded in combat and did so with bravery and distinction. He knows from experience a commander's responsibility to his troops. He stands with our troops and with their families."

Admiral Stansfield Turner (United States Navy, Retired)

Turner served as the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 1977-1981. Previously, he served in the U.S. Navy as Commander of the U.S. Second Fleet and NATO Striking Fleet Atlantic. Turner also served as the Commander-in-Chief of NATO's Southern Flank, and as President of the Naval War College.

"George Bush as the Commander-in-Chief has got us into a morass in both Iraq and Afghanistan. John Kerry is a true veteran, and would be a much better commander-in-chief."

General Johnnie E. Wilson (United States Army, Retired)

Wilson served as the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Material Command, and was responsible for the Army's wholesale logistics, acquisition and technology generation operations.

"Senator Kerry is a principled, patriotic leader with the requisite skills to lead America in the 21st century."

- Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc.

"In the closing days of this campaign, John Kerry is going on being John Kerry -- talking about his hopes for America; his plans for America; his commitment to our security and our prosperity. Now, one of Clinton's laws of politics is this, if one candidate's trying to scare you, and the other one is trying to get you to think, if one candidate is appealing to your fears and the other one is appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope. That's the best. My fellow Americans, we can do better."

Smart Debate Depends on Intellectual Integrity

By Steven Conn

"... Many Americans, I among them, feel a shocked disbelief when we read that many in the Islamic world continue to believe that the Sept. 11 attacks were staged by the Israelis or the Bush administration or both.

"But are those who believe that really any different from the majority of Americans who, according to a recent poll, continue to believe that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction and that he was involved in the 9/11 attacks? In both cases, people cling to an idea despite overwhelming evidence that it is wrong because it satisfies some emotional, irrational yearning. ...

"American politics has worked best when it has worked pragmatically rather than ideologically. But to work pragmatically means measuring one's convictions about issues against the empirical tests of experience and experiment. Further, to work pragmatically means changing one's mind when the data of experience contradict the faith of ideology. ...

"The politics we have now works almost entirely in the reverse: Data, information, the disinterested consensus of experts are dismissed if they do not conform to the prefabricated mold of our particular ideological beliefs. ...

"As products of the 18th-century Enlightenment, the founders of this nation took as their article of faith that rational thinking was the only thing that would keep the American experiment viable. At a moment when we are as riven and entrenched as we are, that is worth thinking about."

Philadelphia Inquirer, 12 Sep 2004

"As people do better, they start voting like Republicans - unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing."
-- Karl Rove, Bush political advisor

"For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearances, as though they were realities, and are often more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are."
-- Niccolo Machiavelli

Where's the Money?
By Will Connell, March 2004

Five years ago the federal budget surplus was $236 billion. That surplus has been turned into a federal budget deficit of more than $500 billion. ...

Interest rates have fallen to levels not experienced during our lifetimes. ...

During this same time, unemployment has risen from 4% in 2000 to about 6% now. It approaches 9% if one includes those who no longer actively seek work. ...

All this has occurred despite the supposed stimulation of low interest rates, repeated tax cuts, and government spending programs.

Unless some 2 million new jobs are created before the November elections, George W. Bush will become the first president since Hoover to oversee a net loss in employment during his administration.

Personal debt and bankruptcies of Americans have exploded. ...

In the last three years our trade balances with foreign countries have collapsed while the trade deficits have soared. ...

Two years ago our dollar was strong and sought-after around the world. Since 2001 it has lost 30% of its value.

The price of oil has reached record highs, and this has erased any economic benefits that the Bush tax cuts may have brought you. ...

You may not think that the conditions mentioned above and illustrated in the following chapters mean much right now. But they show the true economic forces that govern your life, and soon they will dominate the lives of your children and grandchildren. The nation's economic future is deeply compromised and getting worse every day.

You have a personal stake in what is happening to our nation. You may not be affected right now. You may not really care if gasoline prices are at record highs, or that your neighbor down the street has lost his job. What does Saudi Arabia have to do with anything in our daily lives, anyway? And who cares whether or not the value of the dollar is falling, or that the federal deficit has soared? What does that have to do with you? As far as you know your retirement plan is working, and you put food on the table and gasoline in your car. And work seems stable as far as you can see. "What," you may ask, "does all this have to do with me and the well-being of my family?"

The purpose of this report is to show in how much danger you are, and how your future will be taken out of your hands if the current policies in Washington continue. Every effort is being made by those in Washington to prevent you from reaching conclusions based on the facts of the situation. And we are about to be inundated with political rhetoric designed to divert your attention still further from what is really going on. ...

The changes have just begun, so many of us remain unaware of what the future will bring. We cannot feel the impact as yet. Henry Kissinger long ago wrote that a society that has been accustomed to stability can't bring itself to believe what is happening when such a major shift is taking place. There is a saying in finance that people who reside within a bubble cannot see it. ...

At almost every turn you are being harmed, whether or not you realize it. Your economic security is being eroded. Let's look at the disappearing money act. Just consider the money flows and ignore all the political rhetoric.

The purpose of this report is to follow the money and try to answer where it has all gone. ...

• Empty the Social Security trust fund by $507 billion to help offset fiscal irresponsibility and at the same time slash Social Security benefits.
• Cut Medicare by 17 percent and reduce veterans' benefits and military pay.
• Eliminate overtime pay for millions of Americans and raise oil prices by 50 percent.
• Give tax cuts to businesses that sent American jobs overseas, and, in fact, by policy encourage their departure.
• Give away billions of tax dollars in government contracts without competitive bids.
• Involve this country in a deadly and highly questionable war, and
• Take a budget surplus and turn it into the worst deficit in the history of the United States, creating a debt in just four years that will take generations to repay.

These were elements of a hidden agenda that surfaced only after he took office.

The publishers of The Iconoclast endorsed Bush four years ago, based on the things he promised, not on this smoke-screened agenda.

Today, we are endorsing his opponent, John Kerry, based not only on the things that Bush has delivered, but also on the vision of a return to normality that Kerry says our country needs. ...

http://news.iconoclast-texas.com/

Republicans say "liberals" will ban the Bible
by Jim Wallis

... Does the president not know that millions of Christians, including many evangelical Christians, disagree with him on the war in Iraq, on his budget priorities and tax cuts for the wealthy, on his dismal performance in poverty reduction, or on his policies that so negatively impact the environment? What is he saying about their faith with mailings like this one? ...

When I read about the new RNC mailing, my first response was to ask how conservative Republicans can accuse the "liberals" of wanting to ban the Bible when they ignore it altogether on the weighty scriptural matters of social and economic justice or on Jesus' command that Christians be "peacemakers." There should at least be a serious debate in this election about what those biblical teachings mean in relation to Christian voting. But the Republicans apparently don't want any debate about religion and the election. They have just declared themselves the winners. ...

The Charleston Gazette in West Virginia responded to the mailings in an editorial headlined, "Holy Moley! Who concocts this gibberish?" The paper went on to suggest that such behavior on the part of the Republicans could actually alienate swing religious voters and others: "Most Americans see morality more complexly," the paper said. "Many think a higher morality is found in Christ's command to help the needy, prevent war and pursue other humanitarian goals. Churchgoers of this sort aren't likely to believe childish allegations that Democrats want to ban the Bible." ...

- Sojourners
www.sojo.net

National security is a central issue in this campaign. We owe it to the American people to have a real debate about the choices President Bush has made and the choices I would make to fight and win the war on terror.

That means we must have a great honest national debate on Iraq. The president claims it is the centerpiece of his war on terror. In fact, Iraq was a profound diversion from that war and the battle against our greatest enemy, Osama bin Laden and the terrorists. Invading Iraq has created a crisis of historic proportions and, if we do not change course, there is the prospect of a war with no end in sight.

In June, the president declared, "The Iraqi people have their country back." Just last week, he told us: "This country is headed toward democracy. Freedom is on the march."

But the administration's own official intelligence estimate, given to the president last July, tells a very different story.

According to press reports, the intelligence estimate totally contradicts what the president is saying to the American people.

So do the facts on the ground.

Security is deteriorating, for us and for the Iraqis.

42 Americans died in Iraq in June -- the month before the handover. But 54 died in July -- 66 in August and already 54 halfway through September.

And more than 1,100 Americans were wounded in August -- more than in any other month since the invasion.

Falluja, Ramadi, Samarra, even parts of Baghdad -- are now "no go zones" -- breeding grounds for terrorists who are free to plot and launch attacks against our soldiers. The radical Shiite cleric, Muqtada al-Sadr, who is accused of complicity in the murder of Americans, holds more sway in the suburbs of Baghdad.

The president now admits to "miscalculations" in Iraq.

That is one of the greatest understatements in recent American history. His were not the equivalent of accounting errors. They were colossal failures of judgment -- and judgment is what we look for in a president.

This is all the more stunning because we're not talking about 20/20 hindsight. Before the war, before he chose to go to war, bi-partisan Congressional hearings... major outside studies... and even some in the administration itself... predicted virtually every problem we now face in Iraq.

The administration told us we'd be greeted as liberators. They were wrong.

They told us not to worry about looting or the sorry state of Iraq's infrastructure. They were wrong.

They told us we had enough troops to provide security and stability, defeat the insurgents, guard the borders and secure the arms depots. They were wrong.

They told us we could rely on exiles like Ahmed Chalabi to build political legitimacy. They were wrong.

They told us we would quickly restore an Iraqi civil service to run the country and a police force and army to secure it. They were wrong.

In fact, the only officials who lost their jobs over Iraq were the ones who told the truth.

General Shinseki said it would take several hundred thousand troops to secure Iraq. He was retired. Economic adviser Larry Lindsey said that Iraq would cost as much as $200 billion. He was fired. After the successful entry into Baghdad, George Bush was offered help from the UN -- and he rejected it. He even prohibited any nation from participating in reconstruction efforts that wasn't part of the original coalition -- pushing reluctant countries even farther away. As we continue to fight this war almost alone, it is hard to estimate how costly that arrogant decision was. Can anyone seriously say this president has handled Iraq in a way that makes us stronger in the war on terrorism?

By any measure, the answer is no. Nuclear dangers have mounted across the globe. The international terrorist club has expanded. Radicalism in the Middle East is on the rise. We have divided our friends and united our enemies. And our standing in the world is at an all time low.

Think about it for a minute. Consider where we were... and where we are. After the events of September 11, we had an opportunity to bring our country and the world together in the struggle against the terrorists. On September 12, headlines in newspapers abroad declared "we are all Americans now." But through his policy in Iraq, the president squandered that moment and rather than isolating the terrorists, left America isolated from the world.

Let me put it plainly: The president's policy in Iraq has not strengthened our national security. It has weakened it.

Two years ago, Congress was right to give the president the authority to use force to hold Saddam Hussein accountable. This president, any president would have needed the threat of force to act effectively. This president misused that authority.

The power entrusted to the president gave him a strong hand to play in the international community. The idea was simple. We would get the weapons inspectors back in to verify whether or not Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. And we would convince the world to speak with one voice to Saddam: disarm or be disarmed.

Instead, the president rushed to war without letting the weapons inspectors finish their work. He went without a broad and deep coalition of allies. He acted without making sure our troops had enough body armor. And he plunged ahead without understanding or preparing for the consequences of the post-war.

Yet today, President Bush tells us that he would do everything all over again, the same way. How can he possibly be serious? Is he really saying that if we knew there were no imminent threat, no weapons of mass destruction, no ties to Al Qaeda, the United States should have invaded Iraq? My answer is no -- because a commander in chief's first responsibility is to make a wise and responsible decision to keep America safe.

Now the president, in looking for a new reason, tries to hang his hat on the "capability" to acquire weapons. But that was not the reason given to the nation; it was not the reason Congress voted on; it's not a reason, it's an excuse. Thirty-five to forty countries have greater capability to build a nuclear bomb than Iraq did in 2003. Is President Bush saying we should invade them?

In Iraq, we have a mess on our hands. But we cannot throw up our hands. We cannot afford to see Iraq become a permanent source of terror that will endanger America's security for years to come.

complete text

Far Graver Than Vietnam
by Sidney Blumenthal, Washington Bureau Chief of Salon.com

Retired general William Odom, former head of the National Security Agency, told me: "Bush hasn't found the WMD. Al-Qaida, it's worse, he's lost on that front. That he's going to achieve a democracy there? That goal is lost, too. It's lost." He adds: "Right now, the course we're on, we're achieving Bin Laden's ends."

Retired general Joseph Hoare, the former marine commandant and head of US Central Command, told me: "The idea that this is going to go the way these guys planned is ludicrous. There are no good options. We're conducting a campaign as though it were being conducted in Iowa, no sense of the realities on the ground. It's so unrealistic for anyone who knows that part of the world. The priorities are just all wrong."

W. Andrew Terrill, professor at the Army War College's strategic studies institute - and the top expert on Iraq there - said: "I don't think that you can kill the insurgency". According to Terrill, the anti-US insurgency, centred in the Sunni triangle, and holding several cities and towns - including Fallujah - is expanding and becoming more capable as a consequence of US policy.

"We have a growing, maturing insurgency group," he told me. "We see larger and more coordinated military attacks. They are getting better and they can self-regenerate. The idea there are x number of insurgents, and that when they're all dead we can get out is wrong. The insurgency has shown an ability to regenerate itself because there are people willing to fill the ranks of those who are killed. The political culture is more hostile to the US presence. The longer we stay, the more they are confirmed in that view."

After the killing of four US contractors in Fallujah, the marines besieged the city for three weeks in April - the watershed event for the insurgency. "I think the president ordered the attack on Fallujah," said General Hoare. "I asked a three-star marine general who gave the order to go to Fallujah and he wouldn't tell me. I came to the conclusion that the order came directly from the White House." Then, just as suddenly, the order was rescinded, and Islamist radicals gained control, using the city as a base.

"I see no exit," said Record. "We've been down that road before. It's called Vietnamisation. The idea that we're going to have an Iraqi force trained to defeat an enemy we can't defeat stretches the imagination. They will be tainted by their very association with the foreign occupier. In fact, we had more time and money in state building in Vietnam than in Iraq."

General Odom said: "This is far graver than Vietnam. There wasn't as much at stake strategically, though in both cases we mindlessly went ahead with the war that was not constructive for US aims. But now we're in a region far more volatile, and we're in much worse shape with our allies."

He compares any such planned attack to the late Syrian dictator Hafez al-Asad's razing of the rebel city of Hama. "You could flatten it," said Hoare. "US military forces would prevail, casualties would be high, there would be inconclusive results with respect to the bad guys, their leadership would escape, and civilians would be caught in the middle. I hate that phrase collateral damage. And they talked about dancing in the street, a beacon for democracy."

General Odom remarked that the tension between the Bush administration and the senior military officers over Iraqi was worse than any he has ever seen with any previous government, including Vietnam. "I've never seen it so bad between the office of the secretary of defence and the military. There's a significant majority believing this is a disaster. The two parties whose interests have been advanced have been the Iranians and al-Qaida. Bin Laden could argue with some cogency that our going into Iraq was the equivalent of the Germans in Stalingrad. They defeated themselves by pouring more in there. Tragic."

The Guardian (UK), 16 Sep 2004

"Democracy Itself is in Grave Danger" by Al Gore, 24 June 2004

"I am convinced that our founders would counsel us today that the greatest challenge facing our republic is not terrorism but how we react to terrorism, and not war, but how we manage our fears and achieve security without losing our freedom. I am also convinced that they would warn us that democracy itself is in grave danger if we allow any president to use his role as commander in chief to rupture the careful balance between the executive, the legislative and the judicial branches of government. Our current president has gone to war and has ... declared that our nation is now in a permanent state of war, which he says justifies his reinterpretation of the Constitution in ways that increase his personal power at the expense of Congress, the courts, and every individual citizen.

"We must surrender some of our traditional American freedoms, he tells us, so that he may have sufficient power to protect us against those who would do us harm. Public fear remains at an unusually high level almost three years after we were attacked on September 11th, 2001. In response to those devastating attacks, the president properly assumed his role as commander in chief and directed a military invasion of the land in which our attackers built their training camps, were harbored and planned their assault. But just as the tide of battle was shifting decisively in our favor, the commander in chief made a controversial decision to divert a major portion of our army to invade another country that, according to the best evidence compiled in a new, exhaustive, bi-partisan study, posed no imminent threat to us and had nothing to do with the attack against us.

"As the main body of our troops were redeployed for the new invasion, those who organized the attacks against us escaped and many of them are still at large. Indeed, their overall numbers seem to have grown considerably because our invasion of the country that did not pose any imminent threat to us was perceived in their part of the world as a gross injustice, and the way in which we have conducted that war further fueled a sense of rage against the United States in those lands and, according to several studies, has stimulated a wave of new recruits for the terrorist group that attacked us and still wishes us harm."

"I don't know where he [Osama Bin Laden] is. I have no idea, and I don't really care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
-George Bush,
13 March 2002

Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change

"Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change are an unprecedented bipartisan coalition of 27 career chiefs of mission and retired four-star military leaders who have launched a nationwide campaign to press the need for change in U.S. foreign and defense policy because they are deeply concerned by the damage the Bush Administration has caused to our national and international interests.

"DMCC is dedicated to ensuring an informed public during a critical election year. On the basis of foreign and defense policy experience spanning half a century, members desire, through their participation in public forums, to share their expertise and express their deep concern over the current state of this country's diplomatic and security challenges. Never in recent years, in the view of the group, have those challenges been as serious as they are today."

http://www.diplomatsforchange.com/

Veterans Against the Iraq War

"Veterans Against Iraq War is a coalition of American veterans who support our troops but oppose war with Iraq or any other nation that does not pose a clear and present danger to our people and nation.

"Until and unless the current U.S. Administration provides evidence which clearly demonstrates that Iraq or any other nation poses a clear, direct and immediate danger to our country, we oppose all of this Administration's pre-emptive and unilateral military activities in Iraq. Furthermore, we cannot support any war that is initiated without a formal Declaration of War by Congress, as our Constitution requires.

"Although we detested the dictatorial policies of Saddam Hussein and sympathized with the tragic plight of the Iraqi people, we opposed unilateral and pre-emptive U.S. military intervention on the grounds that it established a dangerous precedent in the conduct of international affairs, that it could easily lead to an increase of violent regional instability and the spread of much wider conflicts, that it places needless and unacceptable financial burdens on the American people, that it diverts us from addressing critical domestic priorities, and that it distracts us from our goals of tracking down and destroying international terrorists and their lairs."

http://www.vaiw.org/vet/index.php

"Mission Accomplished" in Iraq?

• Over 1,000 US deaths, and rising
• Over 28,000 US injuries, and rising
• $200 billion cost, and rising
• Anti-American extremists presently in control of major Iraqi cities

Philadelphia Inquirer, 5 Sep 2004
The McLaughlin Group, PBS, 3 Oct 2004

New York Times, 8 Sep 2004

"The Case Against Bush" by Ron Reagan
Esquire, September 2004

"It felt something like a demonstration of that highest of American prerogatives and the most deeply cherished American freedom: dissent."

"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism"
- Thomas Jefferson

Republicans For Kerry '04
http://www.republicansforkerry04.com/

Who Are We?
We are ordinary Republicans from across the political spectrum -- moderate, conservative, and progressive -- who believe in the sanctity of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. This unites us in our desire to return our country and our party to the traditional values that have been abandoned by the present extremist administration and their exclusionary allies in Congress. We have taken the unusual step of supporting a Democrat, John Kerry, because we believe he more honestly represents these values so vital to the health and well-being of our democracy. On the important issues of foreign policy, fiscal responsibility, tax policy, energy, the environment, media consolidation, civil liberties and trust, history has shown us all too clearly that John Kerry will be a far better steward than the present administration. We believe that all Americans should heed George Washington's wisdom and put country before party.

Come Back to the Mainstream
by William Frey

Dear friends at Republicans for Kerry '04,

Mainstream2004 (Come Back to the Mainstream) at http://www.backtothemainstream.org/ (unrelated to the similarly named Republican Main Street Partnership) is the largest group of former Republican office-holders (including 5 ex-governors and 2 ex-Senators) to strongly issue a formal demand to the Republican Party to return to the center. While it has made no formal presidential endorsement as of yet, it's web site prominently displays statements in support of voting Democratic in the presidential election ...

GOP Suppression of the Black Vote

"Four years ago, Florida election officials removed over 52,000 voters from the rolls under the guise of "cleansing" the list of felons. Over 90% of those purged were not guilty of any crime and 54% were African-American, a group which, in Florida, are likely to vote Democratic over 90% of the time. The company that provided the purge list warned Florida officials that thousands of eligible voters would likely be disenfranchised in the process, but Katherine Harris, the Florida Secretary of State who also served as state campaign manager for George W. Bush, went forward with the purge anyway. The result was thousands of voters not allowed to vote in an election that was decided by just over 500 votes.

"And the practice continues: a recent report from the NAACP and the People for the American Way Foundation documents suppression tactics in use right now."

Seattle Times Editorial
27 August 2004

"Four years ago, this page endorsed George W. Bush for president. We cannot do so again - because of an ill-conceived war and its aftermath, undisciplined spending, a shrinkage of constitutional rights and an intrusive social agenda.

"The Bush presidency is not what we had in mind. Our endorsement of John Kerry is not without reservations, but he is head and shoulders above the incumbent."

Suppression of Student Vote

"The Arizona County Recorder official could not be more wrong. The Twenty-Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution lowered the voting age to 18. Voting is a federal right, and the rights of students to register to vote where they attend college is guaranteed by federal law in federal elections. The U.S. Supreme Court has expressly ruled that college communities must allow students to register to vote there (US v. Symm) and the Federal Voting Rights Act prohibits states from imposing 'durational residency requirements.'"

"2004 Election is in Danger: Top Five Risks to Eligible Voters"
League of Women Voters press release, 27 May 2004

"The 2004 election is in danger. We are here today to sound the alarm," stated Kay J. Maxwell, LWVUS president. "Effective steps must be taken immediately to protect the right to vote. Our nation cannot afford to have a replay of 2000, when voting systems failed to properly record voters' intent, when purging and other election practices undermined voter participation, and when millions of Americans questioned the outcome and legitimacy of the presidential election," Maxwell noted.

Link: League of Women Voters

Your Vote Matters
Register to vote. Volunteer to protect voting rights and make sure every vote counts on election day.

Rock The Vote

Will The Gang That Fixed Florida Fix the Vote in Caracas this Sunday?
10 August 2004
by Greg Palast

"Some months ago, a little birdie faxed to me what appeared to be confidential pages from a contract between John Ashcroft's Justice Department and a company called ChoicePoint, Inc., of Atlanta. The deal is part of the War on Terror. Justice offered up to $67 million of our taxpayer money to ChoicePoint in a no-bid deal for computer profiles with private information on every citizen of half a dozen nations. The choice of which nation's citizens to spy on caught my eye. While the September 11th highjackers came from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon and the Arab Emirates, ChoicePoint's menu offered records on Venezuelans, Brazilians, Nicaraguans, Mexicans and Argentines. How odd."

Enron Chief Indictment Bad News for Bush

"It won't be easy for the president to ignore his ties to Lay, who has been a friend and supporter of the Bush family for years. Lay was co-chairman of President George H.W. Bush's 1992 re-election campaign and was a leading fund-raiser for the current president's 2000 campaign. Enron and its executives contributed more than $3 million to GOP causes between 1998 and 2002. Lay also reportedly had a hand in putting together the administration's energy policy, which worked out to Enron's benefit."

The San Francisco Chronicle, 8 July 2004

Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-FL) Addresses the Concerns of Young Adults

"Young people must get involved, or elected officials will not address their issues. The next generation will be affected by the policies of today, and that's why it's crucial that young people get involved. Their futures depend on it."

No firm has benefited more in Iraq than Texas-based Halliburton, Dick Cheney's former company.

• Halliburton was awarded a no-bid contract worth more than $7 billion for the rebuilding of Iraq. This contract was "coordinated" by the vice president's own office. That same year, 2003, Dick Cheney received $178,437 in "deferred compensation" from Halliburton.
• Reports show that Halliburton drastically overcharged America for gas being imported into Iraq, and skimped on basic services to troops like providing clean working conditions and safe food.
• In all, Halliburton has overcharged the U.S. government $186 million.
• A recently filed 2003 financial disclosure form reveals that Halliburton invoked an insurance policy last year to indemnify Cheney for what could be steep legal bills "arising from his service" at the company

Criticism of Record Medicare Increase Tempered by Holiday Weekend Announcement

Sept. 7, 2004 - The increase in Medicare charges for 2005 that were announced Friday - just as a long holiday weekend began - drew new criticism aimed at the Medicare Modernization Act but most of the negative reaction came from parties who normally oppose administration policy. The timing may have blunted criticism from many off for the weekend. "This record high 17.3 percent Medicare premium jump is a body blow to millions of older Americans living on fixed incomes," said Robert M. Hayes, president, Medicare Rights Center of New York.

Stewart Grabel, ombudsman for the the Pima (AZ) Council on Aging, told the Tucson Citizen that the news just proves what advocates for seniors have been saying since the Medicare bill was up for a vote - "the devil is in the details."

"What we said when the Medicare Modernization Act came out is that everybody is talking about the new drug coverage benefit, which isn't that great to begin with because it doesn't control the costs of drugs," Grabel said. "Then if you take a step back, what (the act) is doing is again shifting the costs in the form of increased co-payments and deductibles back to the seniors. That got no press at all back then."

There are subsidies to pay the Medicare premium for the poorest Medicare beneficiaries, Grabel said, "but if you're at about $1,000 a month, that's going to be $78 of your income that's going to go to Medicare even before you get to the co-pays and deductible."

SeniorJournal.com

Bush's Tax Cuts

"Bush's tax cuts threaten our ability to fund critical national priorities; they unfairly shift the responsibility of paying taxes from the wealthy and corporations toward lower- and middle-income workers; they will burden future generations with enormous debt; and they have failed to effectively create jobs or wage growth for working Americans."

"Twelve million children of low-income families were callously excluded from May's tax package. Now, Republican leaders in the House are holding up legislation to fix this $3.5 billion problem by tying the expanded child tax credit to nearly $80 billion in additional, unpaid-for tax cuts for wealthier Americans."

Fair Taxes For All
http://www.fairtaxes4all.org/

BUSH SPENDS SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS
The New York Times reported that "the president's new budget uses Social Security surpluses to pay for other programs every year through 2013, ultimately diverting more than $1.4 trillion in Social Security funds to other purposes."
New York Times, 6 Feb 2002

"10 out of 10 Terrorists Agree: Anybody but Bush"
- bumpersticker
(How did we miss that poll?)

"It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States,"
- Dick Cheney, 7 Sep 2004, in Des Moines, (making a terrorist threat against American voters?)

We agree with him. Although we doubt that his choice is the same as ours.

Sen. Chuck Hagel [R] of Nebraska called the remarks "silly."

"I think most Americans understand that, regardless of who's president, the terrorists are still going to be terrorists, and they're going to still target Americans," said Hagel, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Intelligence committees.

"And I don't think terrorists of the world sit around the campfire gauging who's the easier president to deal with."

- CNN, 20 Sep 2004

"Open and accountable government is one of the bedrock principles of our democracy. Yet virtually since inauguration day, questions have been raised about the Bush Administration's commitment to this principle. News articles and reports by independent groups over the last four years have identified a growing series of instances where the Administration has sought to operate without public or congressional scrutiny.

"At the request of Rep. Henry A. Waxman, this report is a comprehensive examination of secrecy in the Bush Administration. It analyzes how the Administration has implemented each of our nation's major open government laws. The report finds that there has been a consistent pattern in the Administration's actions: laws that are designed to promote public access to information have been undermined, while laws that authorize the government to withhold information or to operate in secret have repeatedly been expanded. The cumulative result is an unprecedented assault on the principle of open government.

"The Administration has supported amendments to open government laws to create new categories of protected information that can be withheld from the public. President Bush has issued an executive order sharply restricting the public release of the papers of past presidents. The Administration has expanded the authority to classify documents and dramatically increased the number of documents classified. It has used the USA Patriot Act and novel legal theories to justify secret investigations, detentions, and trials. And the Administration has engaged in litigation to contest Congress' right to information.

"The records at issue have covered a vast array of topics, ranging from simple census data and routine agency correspondence to presidential and vice presidential records. Among the documents that the Administration has refused to release to the public and members of Congress are (1) the contacts between energy companies and the Vice President's energy task force, (2) the communications between the Defense Department and the Vice President's office regarding contracts awarded to Halliburton, (3) documents describing the prison abuses at Abu Ghraib, (4) memoranda revealing what the White House knew about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, and (5) the cost estimates of the Medicare prescription drug legislation withheld from Congress. ..."

An Open Letter to President Bush and Congress from America's Clergy
16 May 2001

"It is out of our commitment to the success of such faith-based enterprises that we are writing today to express our serious reservations about the provisions commonly referred to as 'Charitable Choice' in the Administration's Faith-Based Initiative. The 'Charitable Choice' proposals would inject government dollars and bureaucratic oversight directly into houses of worship and other pervasively religious organizations. We believe this portion of the Faith-Based Initiative poses numerous dangers to both religion and government.

"These provisions would entangle religion and government in an unprecedented and perilous way. The flow of government dollars and the accountability for how those funds are used will inevitably undermine the independence and integrity of houses of worship."

"The Southern Baptist Convention, a conservative denomination closely aligned with President Bush, said it was offended by the Bush-Cheney campaign's effort to use church rosters for campaign purposes.

"'I'm appalled that the Bush-Cheney campaign would intrude on a local congregation in this way,' said Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission."

The Guardian (United Kingdom) 3 July 2004

The Patriot Act in Action: The Confiscation of The Baptist Peace Fellowship's Banner
17 July 2004

"On behalf of the Baptist Peace Fellowship of North America, I wish to register my concern about this incident. We would like to have an explanation as to why Franklyn's bag with our peace banner was held, and what can be done in the future so that this type of incident does not recur. As someone who frequently travels both domestically and internationally, I find it disturbing that personal property can be searched, seized, and held indefinitely, and without explanation. This incident has certainly done nothing to make any of us in the Baptist Peace Fellowship of North America feel 'more secure.' In fact, it has had an opposite, chilling effect."

www.bpfna.org

Cheney's Former Company Under Fire for Fraud/Waste in Iraq

"The Pentagon has already awarded Halliburton Co., the controversial military contractor, deals worth up to $18 billion for its work in Iraq. But now former Halliburton insiders have come forward with new allegations of massive waste of taxpayer money."

MSNBC, 1 July 2004

Military Records of First Lieutenant George W. Bush
National Guard Service Between 1972 and 1973:

Jan. 6, 1973 USAF Dental Exam Record
Released by White House on Feb. 11, 2004
Memorandum of Lt. Col. Albert C. Lloyd, Jr. (Ret.) (Analysis of Military Payroll Records 1972 to 1973)
Released by White House on Feb. 10, 2004
USAF Reserve Personnel Record Card (27 May 1972 to 26 May 1973)
Released by White House on Feb. 10, 2004
ARF 1st Statement of Points Earned (1972-1973)
Released by White House on Feb. 10, 2004
ARF 2nd Statement of Points Earned (1973)
Released by White House on Feb. 10, 2004
Military Payroll Records (1972-1973)
Released by White House on Feb. 10, 2004

Source: http://news.findlaw.com

According to the Boston Globe, which researched the available facts extensively, there's no evidence Bush reported for duty during the summer and fall of 1972, a time when he was supposed to be serving in the National Guard. But despite a promise on "Meet the Press" to open up his "entire record," Bush has yet to offer any documents that show he was there.

Meet the Press Transcript for 8 Feb. 2004

"Military records that could help establish President Bush's whereabouts during his disputed service in the Texas Air National Guard more than 30 years ago have been inadvertently destroyed, according to the Pentagon."

The New York Times, 9 July 2004

Military Records of Lieutenant (Junior Grade) John F. Kerry
U.S. Navy Military Service During The Vietnam War, 1968 - 1969 (Kerry was promoted to Full Lieutenant on Jan. 1, 1970 prior to requesting a discharge)

Purple Heart Awards (3) For wounds received in action on Dec. 2, 1968, Feb. 20, 1969, and Mar. 17, 1969.

Silver Star For displaying "courage under fire, outstanding leadership, and exemplary professionalism" while acting as the Officer in Charge of a Tactical Command on Feb. 28, 1969.

Bronze Star For "professionalism, great personal courage under fire, and complete dedication to duty" in rescuing, while wounded, a man overboard following a mine explosion, directing his gunners to provide supporting fire for the rescue, and towing a damaged boat to safety under enemy fire on March 13, 1969.

Honorable Discharge from Reserve Feb. 16, 1978
National Defense Service Medal
Nuclear Weapons Training Certificate For training from May 8 - 11, 1967
Personnel Casualty Report
Presidential Unit Citation "For Extraordinary Heroism" from Dec. 6, 1968 to Mar. 31, 1969
Release From Active Duty Jan. 2, 1970
Request for Swiftboat Duty Feb. 10, 1968
Security Clearances Dec. 16, 1966
Thrice Wounded Reassignment March 17, 1969
Top Secret Clearance April 28, 1969
Transfer to Standby Reserve March 1, 1972
Vietnam Service Medal April 8, 1968

Source: http://news.findlaw.com

A group of Bush allies released an ugly and outrageous ad which claims that John Kerry faked his injuries, betrayed his troops, and "dishonored his country" in Vietnam. The ad features people who say "I served with John Kerry" (although they didn't) and who make numerous, provably false accusations about Kerry's war record.

The "Swift Boat" ad is so far beyond the pale that even Senator John McCain, a Bush supporter, spoke out about it, calling it "dishonest and dishonorable." In a recent interview, Senator McCain noted that the ad "was the same kind of deal that was pulled on me" in 2000. McCain was referring to a vicious smear campaign -- which included race-baiting allegations that he had a black child out of wedlock -- run by close Bush allies in 2000. In fact, the same firm that ran some of the anti-McCain ads in 2000 produced the "Swift Boat" ad.

Republicans' Dishonorable Charge, 8/6/04

And although the group claims to be independent of the Republican party, the Dallas Morning News reported that the organization has also received two $100,000 checks from Houston home builder Bob Perry, who backed George W. Bush's campaigns for Texas governor and for president.

www.FactCheck.org

Discussing the "Swift Boat" ad, Senator John McCain said, "I deplore this kind of politics." Nebraska Governor Mike Johanns (R) called the ad "trash" and even Pat Buchanan said "not a single charge is substantiated . . . I think the ad is wrong."

AP, 8/5/04 (McCain); Nebraska State Paper, 8/7/04 (Johanns); MSNBC, Scarborough Country, 8/6/04 (Buchanan)

Ten Senior Military Officials Respond to Cheney's Attacks
“We are deeply disappointed by the tone and tenor of President Bush and Vice President Cheney’s personal attacks on John Kerry, a decorated combat veteran who served his country with courage and honor. John Kerry is talking about his plan to address the most pressing issues facing our nation – jobs, the economy, health care, the war on terror, the war in Iraq. George Bush and Dick Cheney have chosen to take their campaign to the gutter. We call on President Bush and Vice President Cheney to stop the irresponsible personal attacks and tell us where they want to take the country. Tell us how they plan to win the peace in Iraq. Tell us how they plan to get us back on track with the war on terror. Tell us where they plan to lead the country. The American people and our troops deserve better.”

Signed by:
Admiral William J. Crowe (United States Navy, Retired)
Admiral Stansfield Turner (United States Navy, Retired)
General Wesley K. Clark (United States Army, Retired)
General Merrill “Tony” A. McPeak (United States Air Force, Retired)
General Joseph Hoar (United States Marine Corps, Retired)
General Johnnie E. Wilson (United States Army, Retired)
Vice Admiral Lee F. Gunn (United States Navy, Retired)
Lieutenant General Claudia J. Kennedy (United States Army, Retired)
Lieutenant General Donald Kerrick (United States Army, Retired)
Lieutenant General Edward D. Baca (United States Army, Retired)

Larry Thurlow, the Swift Boat Vet who claims that Kerry was not under enemy fire when he earned his Bronze Star, himself earned a Bronze Star for actions under enemy fire in the same incident. Louis Letson, who claims to have treated the wound that earned Kerry his first Purple Heart, is not the medic listed in medical records as having treated Kerry. John O'Neill, the leader of the group, has said that Kerry would have been "court-martialed" had he crossed the border into Cambodia-- but O'Neill is on tape telling President Richard Nixon that he himself had been in Cambodia. Several members of the group are on the record praising Kerry's leadership.

FAIR Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
August 30, 2004
http://www.fair.org/press-releases/swift-boat.html

Jim Rassman, a Republican veteran who served under Kerry, recently wrote an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal. He told the story of how Kerry saved his life. And he concluded with these words on the "Swift Boat" veterans: "[W]hen the noise and fog of their distortions and lies have cleared, a man who volunteered to serve his country, a man who showed up for duty when his country called, a man to whom the United States Navy awarded a Silver Star, a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts, will stand tall and proud. Ultimately, the American people will judge these Swift Boat Veterans for Bush and their accusations. Americans are tired of smear campaigns against those who volunteered to wear the uniform. Swift Boat Veterans for Bush should hang their heads in shame."

Shame on the Swift Boat Veterans for Bush, 8/10/04

George W. Bush

Total Receipts
$218,503

Candidate Loans
--

Individual Contributions
$211,778

PAC Contributions
$2,744

Ending Cash Balance
$110,261

John F. Kerry

Total Receipts
$146,133

Candidate Loans
$6,388

Individual Contributions
$136,101

PAC Contributions
$141

Ending Cash Balance
$28,507

New York University
26 May 2004
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0527-01.htm

The abuse of the prisoners at Abu Ghraib flowed directly from the abuse of the truth that characterized the Administration's march to war and the abuse of the trust that had been placed in President Bush by the American people in the aftermath of September 11th.

There was then, there is now and there would have been regardless of what Bush did, a threat of terrorism that we would have to deal with. But instead of making it better, he has made it infinitely worse. We are less safe because of his policies. He has created more anger and righteous indignation against us as Americans than any leader of our country in the 228 years of our existence as a nation -- because of his attitude of contempt for any person, institution or nation who disagrees with him.

He has exposed Americans abroad and Americans in every U.S. town and city to a greater danger of attack by terrorists because of his arrogance, willfulness, and bungling at stirring up hornet's nests that pose no threat whatsoever to us. And by then insulting the religion and culture and tradition of people in other countries. And by pursuing policies that have resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent men, women and children, all of it done in our name.

President Bush said in his speech Monday night that the war in Iraq is "the central front in the war on terror." It's not the central front in the war on terror, but it has unfortunately become the central recruiting office for terrorists. The unpleasant truth is that President Bush's utter incompetence has made the world a far more dangerous place and dramatically increased the threat of terrorism against the United States. Just yesterday, the International Institute of Strategic Studies reported that the Iraq conflict " has arguable focused the energies and resources of Al Qaeda and its followers while diluting those of the global counterterrorism coalition." The ISS said that in the wake of the war in Iraq Al Qaeda now has more than 18,000 potential terrorists scattered around the world and the war in Iraq is swelling its ranks.

The war plan was incompetent in its rejection of the advice from military professionals and the analysis of the intelligence was incompetent in its conclusion that our soldiers would be welcomed with garlands of flowers and cheering crowds. Thus we would not need to respect the so-called Powell doctrine of overwhelming force. …

And the worst still lies ahead. General Joseph Hoar, the former head of the Marine Corps, said "I believe we are absolutely on the brink of failure. We are looking into the abyss."

When a senior, respected military leader like Joe Hoar uses the word "abyss", then the rest of us damn well better listen. Here is what he means: more American soldiers dying, Iraq slipping into worse chaos and violence, no end in sight, with our influence and moral authority seriously damaged.

Retired Marine Corps General Anthony Zinni, who headed Central Command before becoming President Bush's personal emissary to the Middle East, said recently that our nation's current course is "headed over Niagara Falls."

The Commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, Army Major General Charles H. Swannack, Jr., asked by the Washington Post whether he believes the United States is losing the war in Iraq, replied, "I think strategically, we are." Army Colonel Paul Hughes, who directed strategic planning for the US occupation authority in Baghdad, compared what he sees in Iraq to the Vietnam War, in which he lost his brother: "I promised myself when I came on active duty that I would do everything in my power to prevent that ... from happening again. " Noting that Vietnam featured a pattern of winning battles while losing the war, Hughes added "unless we ensure that we have coherence in our policy, we will lose strategically."

***

In his upcoming book, Zinni blames the current catastrophe on the Bush team's incompetence early on. "In the lead-up to the Iraq war, and its later conduct," he writes, "I saw at a minimum, true dereliction, negligence and irresponsibility, at worst, lying, incompetence and corruption."

Zinni's book will join a growing library of volumes by former advisors to Bush -- including his principal advisor on terrorism, Richard Clarke; his principal economic policy advisor, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, former Ambassador Joe Wilson, who was honored by Bush's father for his service in Iraq, and his former Domestic Adviser on faith-based organizations, John Dilulio, who said, "There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus. What you've got is everything, and I mean everything, run by the political arm. It's the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis."

Army Chief of Staff General Eric Shinseki told Congress in February that the occupation could require "several hundred thousand troops." But because Rumsfeld and Bush did not want to hear disagreement with their view that Iraq could be invaded at a much lower cost, Shinseki was hushed and then forced out.

Washington Monthly, Sep. 2004
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0409.sirota.html

Two decades ago, the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) was a highly respected financial titan. In 1987, when its subsidiary helped finance a deal involving Texas oilman George W. Bush, the bank appeared to be a reputable institution, with attractive branch offices, a traveler's check business, and a solid reputation for financing international trade. It had high-powered allies in Washington and boasted relationships with respected figures around the world.

All that changed in early 1988, when John Kerry, then a young senator from Massachusetts, decided to probe the finances of Latin American drug cartels. Over the next three years, Kerry fought against intense opposition from vested interests at home and abroad, from senior members of his own party; and from the Reagan and Bush administrations, none of whom were eager to see him succeed.

By the end, Kerry had helped dismantle a massive criminal enterprise and exposed the infrastructure of BCCI and its affiliated institutions, a web that law enforcement officials today acknowledge would become a model for international terrorist financing. As Kerry's investigation revealed in the late 1980s and early 1990s, BCCI was interested in more than just enriching its clients--it had a fundamentally anti-Western mission. Among the stated goals of its Pakistani founder were to "fight the evil influence of the West," and finance Muslim terrorist organizations.

Mistakes Admitted in Terror-Cell Case

"Reversing its stand in a case once hailed by the Bush administration as a major victory in the war on terror, the Justice Department said its original prosecution of a suspected terror cell in Detroit was filled with a 'pattern of mistakes and oversights' that warrant the dismissal of the convictions. Among the mistakes was the failure to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense."

Philadelphia Inquirer, 5 Sep 2004

Current Federal Deficit:
about $500 billion a year, and growing.

Overseas investors and foreign banks are currently lending the U.S. more than $1 billion a day.

Philadelphia Inquirer, 5 Sep 2004

Democratic National Convention, July 2004

"In America, the true patriots are those who dare speak truth to power. The truth we must speak now is that America has responsibilities that it is time for us to accept again."

transcripts of selected speeches

A View, By Garrison Keillor

"Here in 2004, George W. Bush is running for re-election on a platform of tragedy - the single greatest failure of national defense in our history, the attacks of 9/11 in which 19 men with box cutters put this nation into a tailspin, a failure the details of which the White House fought to keep secret even as it ran the country into hock up to the hubcaps, thanks to generous tax cuts for the well-fixed, hoping to lead us into a box canyon of debt that will render government impotent, even as we engage in a war against a small country that was undertaken for the President's personal satisfaction but sold to the American public on the basis of brazen misinformation, a war whose purpose is to distract us from an enormous transfer of wealth taking place in this country, flowing upward, and the deception is working beautifully.

"The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few is the death knell of democracy. No republic in the history of humanity has survived this. The election of 2004 will say something about what happens to ours. The omens are not good.

"Our beloved land has been fogged with fear - fear, the greatest political strategy ever. An ominous silence, distant sirens, a drumbeat of whispered warnings and alarms to keep the public uneasy and silence the opposition. And in a time of vague fear, you can appoint bullet-brained judges, strip the bark off the Constitution, eviscerate federal regulatory agencies, bring public education to a standstill, stupefy the press, lavish gorgeous tax breaks on the rich.

"There is a stink drifting through this election year. It isn't the Florida recount or the Supreme Court decision. No, it's 9/11 that we come back to. It wasn't the 'end of innocence,' or a turning point in history, or a cosmic ocurrence, it was an event, a lapse of security. And patriotism shouldn't prevent people from asking hard questions of the man who was purportedly in charge of national security at the time."