Enemy Entity

Israel has designated Gaza– not Hamas, the entire Gaza – an “enemy entity” (or “hostile entity” in the BBC’s translation), and will cut off its fuel and electricity and prevent people and goods (but not, they say, food) entering Gaza. Israel claims the declaration absolves it of its obligations under international law as an occupying power. Condi, who is in Israel, helpfully added that the US considers Hamas a hostile entity too, but that it won’t “abandon the innocent Palestinians in Gaza,” but did not say how many of the Palestinians in Gaza she considers innocent.


An aide to Maliki says they may not kick Blackwater out of the country after all: “Maybe they will make a commitment that they study their moves” or just... change its name. Possibly to Hostile Entity, Incorporated.

Demanding that Congress make the legalization of warrantless surveillance permanent, Bush informed it of its rather limited job description: “It is the job of Congress to give the professionals the tools they need to do their work as effectively as possible.” Makes it sound like a plumber’s assistant. Which, come to think of it...

The many sullen faces of the Bush administration:

Hiding in the Easter basket

The WaPo’s Walter Pincus writes an article based on a round-table conference-call interview (transcript) of the guy who runs American detention facilities in Iraq, Maj. Gen. Douglas Stone by several “defense bloggers,” whatever they might be (one asked whether we could use robots as guards), about the US military’s attempt to de-program Muslim extremists among the 25,000 prisoners we are holding (and more each month), some of them as young as 11. “Religious enlightenment,” they call it. And honestly, a bunch of (presumably) non-Muslim occupiers trying to alter the religious outlook of captured Iraqis, what could possibly be wrong with that? (Note as well that 83% of the prisoners are Sunni, which is a tad disproportionate.)

Stone says he reads the Koran every day, but let’s see if we can detect a hint as to his actual religion in this quote about Muslim extremists: “They’re like rotten eggs, you know, hiding in the Easter basket”. Nevertheless, Stone feels able to talk about “fraudulent imams” and prisoners’ “misunderstanding” of the Koran. He likes to talk about this as the “battlefield of the brain” and says his goal is to “turn these guys and spin them around”. “We’re out here because war is an act of force and we’re going to compel this enemy to do our will. And our will is that the moderates are going to win out. And so everybody that’s in my detention is either going to go out doing that, because that’s what will -- our will is, or they’re not going out.”

And how does he know that prisoners who claim to have changed their religious views in response to these programs actually have? Polygraphs, of course.

Stone says Iraqi VP Tariq al-Hashimi told him that the US could win the war if only it could do the same thing to the whole of Iraq. Er, Stoney, I’m not sure he really wanted actual Iraqis to find out that he said something like that.

Stone spoke approvingly of an incident two weeks ago, when moderate Muslim prisoners attacked radical Muslim prisoners: “Found them, identified them, threw them up against the fence, and shaved their frickin’ beards off of them. That, I mean, that is historic.” Yes, if by historic you mean that much of world history does indeed consist of people attacking each other over religious differences. And clearly Iraq needs more of that sort of thing.

Every day is Mother’s Day as far as you’re concerned

This morning Bush met with members of military support organizations. “Laura and I are honored to welcome you here to the South Lawn. Welcome to the people’s house.” Okay, technically, shouldn’t that be “welcome to the people’s lawn”?


“Gold Star Mothers, got you, okay, thank you -- Blue Star Mothers, Gold Star Mothers, all the mothers, yes. (Applause.) Every day is Mother’s Day as far as you’re concerned, isn’t it? (Laughter.)” If you mean that on Mother’s Day, it is traditional to receive flowers, candy, and the fear that you will outlive your child because they will be killed by a roadside bomb in a pointless war far from home, then yes, every day is Mother’s Day as far as they’re concerned.

With your help, perhaps a cure can be found

Romney attacked Hillary’s health care plan (before she’d even released the details – he’s just that good) in front of St. Vincent’s in Manhattan, unaware that the hospital has a “Rudolph W. Giuliani Trauma Center.”

Finally, a center for the treatment of the dreaded Rudy Giuliani trauma.

If it weren’t for recreational hysteria, I’d get no exercise at all

Bush nominates Michael “Not As Much of a Dick As Ted Olson” Mukasey to be attorney general.



While Mukasey does indeed seem to be not as much of a dick as Ted Olson (or, to set the bar even lower, as incompetent as Gonzales), this 2004 op-ed article in which he defended the Patriot Act against “a good deal of hysteria, some of it reflexive, much of it recreational,” and calling for the government to be given “the benefit of the doubt,” does give one some pause, if not the recreational hysteria we all enjoy so much. At least not yet.

This morning Bush met Prime Minister José Sócrates of Portugal for a bit of a – dear god I can’t help myself – Socratic dialogue, which Bush described thusly:

So we discussed our bilateral relations. I asked the Prime Minister, I said, how would you frame our bilateral relations, he said: good. Well, you know, I feel the same way. ... we discussed and confirmed that transatlantic relations are very important for the United States and the EU.

The prime minister then called for a round of hemlock.

Fiat lux

No posting here for a bit, what with the slow news weekend and a 10½ hour power outage here at Casa de WIIIAI, thanks to the good folks at Pacific Gas & Not So Much With The Electric. Missed “Tokyo Story,” which was on Turner Classics last night, too.

The LAT lists some of the bills passed by California Legislature in the past session. A mixed bag, to be sure (and if the governor signs
SB 880, that bag can now be made from the imported skin of a kangaroo). Other bills would legalize condom distribution in prisons and allow celebrities to control the use of their names and images even after their deaths. One which has been signed into law allows restraining orders in domestic abuse cases to protect family pets.

O.J. Simpson: you’re supposed to start with stuff like robbery and work your way up to double homicides, not the other way round.

Now, slogan contests. Two of them:

1) Donald Rumsfeld is starting the Rumsfeld Foundation. He just gives and he gives, doesn’t he? The foundation needs a motto, and I think you people are the ones to supply it. I mean, it could just go with the motto it has rather than the motto it might want or wish to have at a later time, oh my goodness yes, but there are known known mottos and known unknown mottos and possibly unknown unknown mottos, but we don’t know them, and what was I talking about?

2) Andrei Lugovoi, the “former” KGB guy who allegedly poisoned Alexander Litvinenko with polonium, isn’t starting a foundation, but is running for the Duma, possibly in order to acquire parliamentary immunity, as a candidate of the Liberal Democrats (who are neither). What would a Lugovoi bumper sticker say? (Er, that is, a Lugovoi election bumper sticker, not the bumper sticker on Lugovoi’s actual car, which I believe says “If you’re close enough to read this, you might want to consult a physician.”)

You may offer slogans for either or both (or indeed neither, I know it’s a Monday) (and the time is evidently 12:00, blinking, and have I said “Fuck PG&E” yet?)

Honor

This week the Indian government put forward an official position that the Hindu god Rama isn’t real. Specifically, it told a court that development should be allowed to go ahead in Adam’s Bridge, a chain of shoals linking India and Sri Lanka, because it is a natural formation and was not built by Lord Rama with an army of monkeys.

Pro-war politicians like to talk about “honor.” Actually, not Bush so much, but Cheney and, especially, McCain. At the Petraeus hearing on Tuesday, McCain said, “All of us want our troops to come home, but we should want them to return to us with honor, the honor of victory that is due all of those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice.”

While “honor” seems to be important to war supporters, I’m not really sure what they mean when they use the word. Perhaps in McCain’s case the word means nothing: he seems increasingly to be using words in ways that are intended to convey an impression of meaning, rather than to convey actual meaning. For example, in the sentence I just quoted (which presumably he prepared in advance), the reference to the “ultimate sacrifice” seems to say that he wants American troops to return only when they are 1) victorious, and 2) dead. If that is not what he meant, and I’m guessing it isn’t, then we must assume that he just strung some grand-sounding phrases – “honor of victory,” “the ultimate sacrifice” – together willy nilly, in much the same way that I’ll use any excuse to use the phrase “willy nilly” (or “army of monkeys”).

But to return to honor (as opposed to returning with honor), is McCain saying that whether or not honor accrues to individual troops is dependent on whether the war is fought to “victory” or not? Doesn’t seem quite fair. Someone really should ask him to define his terms more clearly.

I know what you’re all asking at this point: did Rama’s monkey army return with monkey honor?

Yes it did.

We’ve got what’s called return on success

Abdul Sattar Abu Risha, the thuggish Sunni sheikh in Anbar assassinated yesterday, has been replaced by his brother, Ahmed Abu Risha, who promises, “All the tribes agreed to fight al-Qaeda until the last child in Anbar.” Oh good.

Today Bush visited a Marine Corps training facility, amusingly named The Basic School, where he had a basic lunch with the troops. (What’s that round white thing? Rice? Mashed potatoes?)




Then he spoke to reporters about his basic visit. “First of all, my first impression is, it’s amazing country where people volunteer in the face of danger.” Yup, that never happens in any other country in the world.

He recounted how he explained to the Marines the speech he gave last night. It was like a game of Telephone, but with only one player: “the plan I announced was that we’re making enough -- based upon the fact we’re making enough success in Iraq that we can begin bringing some troops home; that I told the American people last night we’ve got what’s called return on success.”

“Making” success, “return on” success. Well, to be fair, there isn’t normally much call for Bush to use the word success in a sentence. For some reason it just doesn’t come up that often.

I assume everyone’s following The Case of the Contraband Underwear at Guantanamo.

Speaking of contraband underwear, today was Alberto Gonzales’s last day as attorney general. Try not to cry, Little Fredo, try not to cry.



Oh, now you’ve got me going.

Bush addresses the nation: Return on success

Transcript.

Bush has a vision, a vision of a united America, if everyone just shuts up: “those of us who believe success in Iraq is essential to our security, and those who believe we should begin bringing our troops home, have been at odds. Now, because of the measure of success we are seeing in Iraq, we can begin seeing troops come home. The way forward I have described tonight makes it possible, for the first time in years, for people who have been on opposite sides of this difficult debate to come together.” If by come together you mean everybody supporting Bush doing whatever he feels like doing. Let the healing begin.


Is this supposed to reassure us?: “Young Sunnis who once joined the insurgency are now joining the army and police.”

Troops will “return on success”. Bush keeps returning to make these speeches. Doesn’t seem quite fair.

“During my visit to Anbar on Labor Day, local Sunni leaders thanked me for America’s support.” So it’s all been worth it.

Iraqi leaders (he was a little unclear on who these Iraqi leaders might be) have asked for an “enduring relationship” with the US. They asked us! They asked us!


(Update: see also Fred Kaplan in Slate and Matthew Rothschild on the Progressive website.)

Yes we have no surrender today

John McCain, in an email today, attacked Hillary Clinton for saying that the Petraeus report required “a willing suspension of disbelief.” He then somehow linked this to the MoveOn.org ad,


saying, “I think it willingly suspends disbelief to not repudiate an advertisement...” Er, how? That sort of rhetorical jiu-jitsu really only works if the phrase you’re trying to turn back on your opponent has some sort of relevance to what you’re saying.

He also thinks it has something to do with toughness: “If you’re not tough enough to repudiate a scurrilous, outrageous attack such as that, then I don’t know how you’re tough enough to be President of the United States. I am prepared to be Commander-in-Chief and tough enough to face the challenges presented by a dangerous world.” Assuming those challenges come in advertisement form.

“In fact, I’m the only candidate in this race prepared to be Commander-in-Chief from day one.” This brings up the scary possibility that if anyone else won, they’d have to let Dubya continue as commander-in-chief while they took some night classes in order to get their commander-in-chief license.

“Right now I’m traveling through Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina talking about the success of the surge...” Because it’s a hell of a lot safer than traveling through Baghdad and Ramadi and Fallujah taking about the success of the surge.

This is his new banner, which nicely conflates his refusal to surrender his dying campaign with his refusal to surrender his pointless war.


Right now he is on a “No Surrender Tour,” in which presumably he travels from town to town, not surrendering.

Say, you don’t like terror either?

Gov. Terminator has vetoed a ballot initiative on the Iraq war, saying it was “divisive.” The initiative, not the war.

Petraeus told the National Press Club that “The central front of al Qaeda’s global war on terror is in Iraq.” Wait, if Al Qaida is also fighting a global war on terror, maybe this whole thing has been a crazy misunderstanding?

Bucket. That’s all I’m saying.

Wait, is Bush “kicking ass” in Iraq or kicking the can down the road? I’m confused by all the kicking metaphors.

John Negroponte, who these days is deputy secretary of State, is visiting Pakistan to shore up General Musharaf with, among other things, another $750 million in US aid, and to talk up the forthcoming “democratic elections.” Negroponte’s plane practically crossed paths with that of the one carrying Nawaz Sharif, the man Gen. Musharaf forcibly overthrew, back into involuntary exile, but he said that he hadn’t brought the matter up because “This is a legal matter for the government and the people of Pakistan to decide”. Actually, it is an illegal matter, since Musharaf acted in defiance of a Supreme Court order to allow Sharif back into the country.

Israel dropped bombs on Syria last week, and invaded Gaza today. Just saying.

Condi Rice did a few interviews today. In one, she repeated the talking point used by Crocker two days ago, but which we’ve heard before, that any Nelson Mandela type in Iraq had been killed by Saddam. So basically what they’re saying is that if any of the current crop of Iraqi politicians had been any damned good, they wouldn’t be alive.

The interviewer asked about the latest Republican talking point, that Al Qaida members have cut the fingers off people they found smoking. She deflected. Are there any authenticated reports that this ever actually happened to anyone?

A day that really helped

Indonesia bans giving money to beggars in Jakarta.

Every time I see an excerpt from one of the detainee hearings at Guantanamo, someone on the panel says something remarkably naive and/or ignorant – no, I’m gonna go with “clueless.” The AP has got hold of some transcripts, and here’s a panel member, simply amazed after being told that some of the prisoners actually tell untruths to their interrogators: “Why do you feel you have the right to lie to the interrogators?” The right? Like he is under some obvious moral obligation to truthfully answer the questions of people who seized him in Pakistan and have illegally kept him prisoner for several years now.

Actually, it turned out there was an answer. The prisoner explained that he had to lie, had to tell the interrogators what they wanted to hear, because they would stop his medicine until he did so.

This morning Bush, as he put it, “commemorated the -- a day that really helped -- or it did define our nation, which is 9/11/2001.” No, no freudian slip there.

Earlier, he went outside for a moment of looking down, all squinty and solemn-like, then looking around furtively to see what everyone was doing silence.

Petraeus & Crocker testify, Day 2: Some type of success is possible

Today Corp. Combover told the Senate that “some type of success in Iraq is possible.” Yay! Success! Well, some type of success! Is a possibility! Not a complete impossibility! Yay!


Lieberman once again helpfully suggested that his fellow congresscritters should now shut up and go into hibernation, or as he phrased it, he hoped they’d “take yes for an answer and we’d go on and look forward to [Petraeus’s] next report in the spring.”

Holy Joe also suggested that it was time to authorize military strikes inside Iran, “in pursuit of your mission in Iraq, to pursue those Iranian Quds Force operations in Iranian territory, in order to protect Americas troops in Iraq”. Petraeus said that since he commands multi-national Coalition of the Willing (COW) forces, he can’t really do that, but maybe CentCom could.


A heckler asked, “Hundreds of thousands dead, isn’t that enough for your blood thirst.” One assumes that was a rhetorical question.

John Warner asked if succeeding in the Iraq war would make the US safer. Petraeus said fuck if he knew. In fact, he made it sound like it was not an interesting enough question for him to have ever spent any time thinking about it. He’s just in it for the ass-kicking.


Speaking of which, Barbara Boxer pointed out that 28 American soldiers have died since Bush said we are kicking ass in Iraq.

Actually, a bit later, after a bathroom break, Petraeus claimed that he had now had a bit of a think and yes, the war in Iraq is deeply, deeply important to the safety of Americans after all.


Biden asked if a Sunni could safely travel to a Shiite neighborhood in Baghdad? Petraeus said it depends on the neighborhood, but failed to name any Sunni-friendly Shiite neighborhoods. Funny, he had a chart for everything else.

What’s your hurry?

Forgot to mention: Petraeus warned repeatedly yesterday against “rushing to failure.” Also bad: running with scissors to failure. And swimming to failure less than an hour after eating.

Petraeus & Crocker testify: There are no easy answers

I watched bits of the testimony and the McNeil-Lehrer summary, read Petraeus’s and Crocker’s prepared statements, and half-watched their appearance on Fox.

Petraeus informed us that “There are no easy answers or quick solutions.” No quick solutions? Really? What was your first clue? Was it that we’re in the fifth year of this war?


Crocker: “In my judgment, the cumulative trajectory of political, economic, and diplomatic developments in Iraq is upwards, although the slope of that line is not steep.” Yay! Er, boo?

Crocker: “There will be no single moment at which we can claim victory; any turning point will likely only be recognized in retrospect.” Hell it may have happened 6 or 7 times already.

Crocker says the whole problem is that there was no Iraqi Nelson Mandela, because if there had been such a person, Saddam would have killed him. Or maybe he smothered to death at the bottom of a naked human pyramid in Abu Ghraib.

I’ve been told by one of my operatives that Crocker brought up the Sabra/Shatila massacres in Lebanon (he was stationed there at the time). He thinks the massacres occurred because Reagan pulled out prematurely, and the same sort of thing could happen in Iraq if we pulled out prematurely (and if Israel invaded and occupied part of Iraq and allowed its Christian militia allies access to refugee camps) (which very well could be Richard Perle’s exit strategy).


Crocker: “No longer is an all-powerful Baghdad seen as the panacea to Iraq’s problems.” Way to put a positive spin on the fragmentation of Iraq and the impotence and incompetence of the Maliki regime!

I forget who said this one: “[W]e are putting quick response funds, QRF, in the hands of our provincial reconstruction team leaders to help build communities and institutions in post-kinetic environments.” I believe post-kinetic environment means “after the rubble has stopped bouncing.”

On Fox, Petraeus says outright that there would have been no sectarian violence without Al Qaida.

Listen carefully

Renowned Iraq experts Lieberman


and McCain


have an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal, suggesting that just as Bush had the “courage to change course in Iraq,” so opponents of the war should change course and support the war. They admonish “opponents of the war in the Congress” to “listen carefully to the evidence that the U.S. military is at last making real and significant progress in its offensive against al Qaeda in Iraq.” Those opponents of the war in the Congress are no doubt immensely grateful for this not-at-all-condescending reminder, without which they might have listened carelessly, leading to merry mix-ups galore: “Did he say the surge is seceding?” “I don’t know, I wasn’t listening carefully, I thought he said it was re-seeding.” “Are you sure he didn’t say inbreeding?”

But what about the notion that “the U.S. military is at last making real and significant progress” (emphasis added). When have the two of them have ever claimed it was doing anything else?

The article talks as if the only causes of violence in Iraq are Al Qaida and Iran.

They say that the Sunni Arab community “was largely synonymous with the insurgency a year ago,” which is just a tad reductive if not racist, but that it “has been turning against al Qaeda from the bottom-up”. Which sounds quite kinky.

Well, it does.

Waiting for Colonel Combover

No blog posting today. Obeying Bush’s order not to “jump to any conclusions” before listening to Petraeus and Crocker.

While waiting, can you suggest any captions appropriate for these pictures of Bush in Hawaii on his way back from Australia?

Seeing with his own eyes

The US released 16 Saudis from Guantanamo this week. Here’s a detail the AP left out: one of these oh so incredibly dangerous men had no legs. Blown off by an American bomb in Afghanistan. I’m sure this prisoner was given the best of medical care and physical therapy, and is returning to Saudi Arabia with shiny new prosthetics, or at least a motorized wheelchair, or maybe a couple of skateboards duct-taped together.

Bush cited the Osama bin Laden video (or whoever that was), in support of his Iraq policy: “If al Qaeda bothers to mention Iraq it’s because they want to achieve their objectives in Iraq”. He added that he thinks Osama is a really smart guy and totally believes everything he says, including the thing about the Kennedy assassination, and is it really true that Muslims don’t have to pay taxes?, and...

And in today’s radio address, Bush began, “Earlier this week, I traveled to Iraq’s Anbar Province to visit our troops and see with my own eyes the remarkable changes they are making possible.” Just a reminder: the only thing he saw with his own eyes was an American airbase. Possibly there have been some remarkable changes in that airbase – a really nice swimming pool, for example – but that’s about all he could have seen with his own eyes without, you know, leaving the airbase.

It is traditional on the last day of the APEC summit for all the world leaders to dress in native garb. Chile 2004.


Vietnam 2006.


I’m sure Bush was looking forward to donning this Australian outfit,


but, sadly...

Security ∙ Unity ∙ Prosperity

In an interview with the Boston Globe, Petraeus excuses the lack of political progress in Iraq: “It takes time to resolve these issues, however, just as it took the U.S. time to resolve fundamental issues like civil rights (which is similar to de-Ba’athification)”. So who’s Maliki supposed to be in this scenario? Bobby Kennedy? George Wallace? Rosa Parks? Suggestions in comments, please.

He also deploys the supremely obnoxious phrase the Bushies have been using: the Anbar Awakening.

Bizarre and unsettling story of the day: a 31-year-old Chinese woman has been discovered to have 26 sewing needles in her body, including some which have penetrated her lungs, liver, kidney and, oh yes, brain. They were probably stuck in her by her grandparents, upset that she was a girl, when she was a new-born.

Fred Thompson has unveiled his campaign slogan:


Not exactly liberty, equality, fraternity, is it? Do they think the inclusion of “prosperity” make it seem less fascistic? And since those three words all end with a long e sound, shouldn’t he have used what we all learned this week is his legal first name, Freddie, so it’s all rhymey? Or perhaps they should just have gone with “Fred08. Law ∙ Order”. Or “Fred08. Dun ∙ Dun.”

Speaking of security, unity and prosperity, Guatemala, which has a presidential election Sunday, has been spiraling downwards for several years without the outside world (or, let’s face it, me) paying that much attention. According to the AP, just 1% of its 5,000 homicides annually lead to a conviction. The campaign, which has not been without violence itself, may be won by a general who promises to get tough on crime, using the military, and to bring back the death penalty.

Must-read: David Corn on corruption in Iraq, and what Maliki is doing to thwart investigations of that corruption.