Idealink

Okay… I said I was busy, but this is absurd. What little respect I had after for Condoleezza Rice after the 9/11 Commission is now gone. (Note: at the Commission, she demonstrated extreme evasiveness and implied was not given information by the Clinton administration, a claim refuted by others at the Commission).
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/2001_memo_to_Rice_contradicts_statements_0926.html

The above story talks about how Condi lied, in no uncertain terms, to the New York Post in her defense of the Bush administration after Clinton’s uproar on Fox News. Her defense was based on two things: 1) No Pakistan strategy from Clinton administration, and 2) No special emphasis on al-Qaeda. If you don’t believe Raw Story, believe a memo from Richard Clarke, called “Strategy for Eliminating the Threat from the Jihadist Networks of al-Qida: Status and Prospects“.

Let’s see if the echo chamber takes this on or stays glued to defending Condi. My guess is the latter.

Shockingly, Vice President Cheney continues to link Iraq with terrorism (read near the bottom of the linked page).

I don’t know how many different ways to say “nuh-uh”, but it’s clear that he is either a man willing to say anything to accomplish his agenda, or really really ignorant. I’m leaning to the former for four important reasons.

1) Halliburton stands to make a lot more in a drawn-out, protracted war in Iraq with no foreseeable end in sight. In fact, it already has.

2) Oil companies make a lot more if the Middle East is in turmoil. In fact, they already have.

3) A little more intellectual and PNAC-y… Instability in the Middle East means the need for a strong military is greater, and the U.S. must over-invest to maintain military supremacy as the world’s superpower. This dovetails nicely with their goals.

4) As the most involved vice president in recent memory, he has access to all the intelligence and resources available to the president. As vice president, Mr. Cheney also is responsible for conveying the president’s policies and ideas. Given that he has repeatedly made this link, that the president has said the exact opposite, and that he still makes his link means he has tacit approval to make this claim from his boss. Not to mention that his boss uses 9/11 as a reason to be in Iraq even though there’s no link. Therefore, ignorance of presidential positions, or of intelligence, is a dubious claim, at best.

The idea here: it’s not enough not to tell a lie. It is also important to tell the transparent truth. The doublespeak which is rampant in government today reflects the fact that they think we’ll buy it and the fact that we do.

EDIT (12 Sept, 9:05 ET): Spelling/formatting, second PNAC link.

Okay… In response to my previous “real” post, I was asked why I focused energy and effort into the horsemeat bill. The answer really comes in the very first sentence: “Finally, a useful law, in this time of terrorism and war and 50 million people without healthcare and higher poverty rate than ever and failing schools.”

Clearly, horses are important to people, and maybe the Humane Society is right about the fact that horses cannot be killed. But the rationales stated in the articles? Absurd. Congress focusing on this now, when it is increasingly clear that the government has systemically mismanaged security? Scary.

In the interest of avoiding the flames a comment about systemic mismanagement would incite, here follows a quick summary of things I’m thinking of when I write that. First, I do not mean that it was all intentional. I do think that some of it might be, though.

1) 9/11 Report tells us that not only were politics driving policy (instead of facts), but security is still not being adequately implemented. My favorite example is the ports and containers. While resources are funding the Alaskan bridge and more missile defense (please google, it’s late for me), they are not funding security of properly checking containers.

2) The makers of the 9/11 Report indicate that the administration officials were busy trying to avoid being questioned and the President and Vice President did not testify under oath.

3) The Iraq War is not based on good intelligence. Bad intelligence = less safe.

4) Billions of dollars are being wasted on a bad war. Several reports from CIA officials who have subsequently left (including Republicans) have noted that the administration wanted a link between 9/11 and Iraq, and even mandated publishing of a glossy “report” (meaning for public consumption) prepared using old/faulty information. Clinton was wrong about Hussein and WMD, but Bush actually attacked. There is a difference with being wrong, and acting on being wrong. All this makes Iraq less secure, which makes the Middle East more tumultuous, which makes the world a more dangerous place.

5) 50 million are uninsured. Which means, when they do get care, it is only when they really need it (emergency room visits) and when it is costliest to care for them. Because of that, everyone else pays higher premiums. Premiums are already high with managed care actually proving extremely expensive. Which means we have less money to contribute to the government via tax revenue. So, hospitals’ physical resources are taxed because of lack of insurance, which reduces emergency preparedness. And, tax revenue is reduced, meaning the government cannot afford to pay as much for security.

6) Civil liberties are being curbed. Which means we are becoming the enemy we purport to hate.

But at least I don’t have to worry about horsemeat anymore. And at least the rationale (as stated) is excellent. Thanks, Congress, I feel safer now.

…

Seriously, thanks to Conspicous Consumption for being the first commenter on my blog. She raises the (true) point that people define animals in basically three categories. First is pets, second is food, and third is “other” (the “let’s not think about it” category which includes things like lemurs). While I can accept that for the sake of argument, I still believe the rationale for “pet-ifying” horses is unconvincing. I’m also left wondering where the Humane Society stands on horse- and greyhound-racing. The horsemeat-is-okay-for-dogs-but-not-for-humans thing doen’t make much sense either.