bt’s Weblog

Did you notice that the stories about the 36% decrease Iraqis killed in June were on the wires and in the papers on July 1st? Apparently someone stayed up late and at the stroke of midnight in Baghdad they collated all the data on dead persons and got it out in time for the papers to publish. Amazing!

And did you notice that there wasn’t just one AP release but three over the next half day and that they were either published directly, as in our local paper, or worked over by a reporter in papers like the NY Times.

So I did a search for “Iraq” + “June 1″ and guess what? There was nothing on the previous month’s casualty figures. On June 2nd there was a NY Times article by Richard A. Oppel Jr. et al titled, “Number of Unidentified Bodies Found in Baghdad Rose Sharply in May.” The number of ‘unidentifed bodies’ shot up from 411 to 726. The number of identifiable victims fell from 495 to 344. Pretty much the same as the July 5th article Body Count Up In June
Oppel reported that “The Bush administration and military have cited a decline in sectarian killings as proof that the troop escalation is working. And despite May’s increase in corpses, the numbers remain far below the peak of sectarian executions last year.” But (says I) last year has nothing to do with the surge which Bush announced in January and according to the “generals in the field” was completed in either May or June.

The next day Oppel and Khalid W. Hassan had a piece headed “7 More U.S. Soldiers Are Killed in Iraq.” They write, “At least 22 American soldiers were killed in Diyala during May, more than any other province except Baghdad, where 60 died…” and “Altogether, 75 American troops have been killed so far this year in Diyala, compared to 20 during all of last year.” Not good news which according to the pseudo-conservatives is proof of the NY Times’ liberal bias.

The appearance of stories on the “36% decrease” sounds like a public relations operation typical of the backroom style of Karl Rove. Maybe he got help from Karen Hughes who is earning a large U.S. government salary as Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs. The State Department blurb says of her, “(Hughes) has been tasked by President Bush with leading efforts to promote America’s values and confront ideological support for terrorism around the world. She oversees three bureaus at the Department of State: Educational and Cultural Affairs, Public Affairs, and International Information Programs, and participates in foreign policy development at the State Department.” Can you say “Minister of Propaganda?”

This is one of a series of ‘blips’ in the news that are meant to create the impression that things is lookin’ up in Iraq. You know, the ordinary Joe who can name all the teams in the NFL, NHL, NBA, NL and AL will vaguely remember that he heard somewhere that deaths in Iraq are going down and the surge is working. God Bless America. Gimmie a beer.

So goes a line from the Monty Python movie, The Holy Grail.

After writing the previous comment (below) I recalled seeing the number of Iraqi soldiers and police who were killed in the past two months (May and June 2007). So I searched the NY Times and Washington Post and found (in the Post) the article I was looking for. The July 1st article was headed, “Iraq: Civilian Deaths Down 36 Percent” and among other numbers it reported that 190 policemen and 31 soldiers were killed in June as compared to 127 policemen and 47 soldiers the month before.

The number of U.S. military killed was 101 in June and 126 in May. A chart will help you see the implication of those numbers; Civilian numbers include both “official” sets of numbers.

Note that it didn’t go well for the police (50% increase in fatalities). The other groups decreased by percents in the low thirties. BUT compare U.S. and Iraqi army deaths and then answer the question, “How well are we doing with training Iraqis to take over from us?” Not very well, you say? I agree. When the occupying army suffers three times the casualties of the home army there is something really, really rotten going on.

Aside from that the numbers are horrible no matter how you look at them.

In June, at best, 1,500 people were snuffed out in Iraq. The high official figure is 2,400 people. And what for? Shrub says we’re fighting ‘terrarists over there’ so we don’t have to do it here. What a crock of shit that is. He created the insurgent, terrorist, al-Qaeda murder-fest and instead of crawling away in shame he tells a friendly group in West Virginia that this horrible situation, “will require more patience, more courage and more sacrifice.” Who the fuck is doing the patiently courageous sacrificing Junior? Most certainly it is not you or any of your war-monger support group. You, Mister President, are dragging out this needless slaughter until you can skip out of the White House and go back to your Texas ranch and get stone drunk or clear brush or both. Then you will blame the next president, who you assume will be a Democrat, for losing your war. Talk about lowlife.

Might as well join the millions of bloggers and such who are getting their two cents worth in on this auspicious (or not) date.

Over the past week I’ve noticed a couple of articles with headlines that say tensions are easing and killing is down in Baghdad. Reading the articles shows that the headlines aren’t completely accurate. It depends on who is talking and what constraints they put on their statistics.

On July 1 the headline was, “Officials Say Civilian Casualties in Iraq Declined” and the statistic given by the government was a 36% decline from May to June. “Only” 1,200 civilians were (estimated) killed in Iraq in June. Or according to the Iraqi Health Ministry the number was actually 2,097 down from 3,190 in May. Less than 100% difference in the two “official” estimates (he said sarcastically).

A rather downbeat article appeared on July 5 in the NY Times with the headline “Body Count In Baghdad Up in June.” Those bodies were the ones found dumped in the street or where ever and that number was up 41% since January.

Today the banner was “Tensions easing in some Baghdad neighborhoods.” The article gave a number of (anecdotal) comments from Iraqis about the improving situation. The statistics given were that from June 30 until July 5th, 472 civilians had died in attacks in Baghdad,” a dip of 2% from the previous 16 day period. Deaths from bombings fell 17% to 96 and bodies found dumped in the streets decreased 11% to 279 over the same period.”

Few read the statistics and fewer calculate what the percentages indicate. For example if 96 deaths from bombings is 17% less over a two week period that is a drop of 20 people dead. Wow! An 11% decline in dumped bodies to 279 comes out to 34 fewer dead. That’s absolutely better than the bombing deaths although the fact is in one city that has half as many people as New York City 279 bodies of tortured and sometimes beheaded bodies were dumped in the streets over a two week period.

In other words, you can find “good” news that O’Reilly of Faux News tells us is being covered up by the fucking liberal press. But how good is it when on average you are going to find 19 dead bodies a day somewhere in the streets of Baghdad. That’s the ones that are found. Now WTF is so good about that?

Just for the record:

It took me under two minutes to download and install the latest Firefox version (2.0.0.4).

It took twenty-one minutes to do the same for Internet Explorer version 7. Had to verify my Windows installation first even though it has been done, it seems, weekly for quite some time.

So tell me which of the two is bloated?

Today we celebrate the signing of the Declaration of Independence, a document we treasure whether or not we’ve ever read it. President Shrub celebrated by commuting the 2 year prison sentence of I. Libby, a former advisor to V.P. Cheney, who was convicted of lying to a grand jury on more than one occasion.

Shrub said the sentence was “too harsh” and that Libby would still have to pay the fine, etc. A few hours later the White House said that a full pardon is still a possiblilty.

Those, like me, who oppose this latest twisting of justice are in the majority and pretty much see it’s something Cheney pushed to keep Libby out of jail and thus to “reward” him for doing his dirty work and possibly to keep him from deciding to blow bush-cheney’s cover on how they lied and faked data so they could start the Iraq War.

Some on the other side said that commutation isn’t good enough, pardon is called for. Some others used various reasons and comparisons to justify the action. One was that President Clinton was not sent to jail for perjury (for which he was aquitted). Yet others are like a woman who said in a letter to the editor (of the New Haven Register) “I just like it when Bush sticks it to the liberals.” I think that’s honest at least.

And we slog on with the feeling that a watched, botched Administration never ends. But it will and that is reason for hope.

Hard for me to believe that someone actually believes the following opinions I read in the New Haven Register’s letters to the editor (Tuesday, June 19, 2007, Serge G. Mihaly Jr., Hamden) Each of the four paragraphs heads a section of my commentary.

“With the anti-President Bush letters and articles filling newspapers, I want to express my support of Bush. I consider the man honorable and determined in his steadfast defense of our nation.”

Bush has never demonstrated that he is honorable. The record of his administration shows just the opposite. He puts cronies and “friends” in positions that allow them to make decisions that affect all of us. Through them he has raped the land, destroyed our good name in the world, wasted a trillion dollar surplus and put us in debt for decades to come, suppressed government experts on global warming, turned our Justice Department into a Republican Party operation, allowed the city of New Orleans to wallow for years in misery, tortured prisoners in secret prisons in foreign countries, denied hundreds of men the benefit of all human rights for years, lied to Congress and us about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and started a war whose aims changed with the times and politics of the moment. How honorable.

“He appears to not use public opinion to make decisions, but rather relies on the information before him and his own judgement. Whether you agree with him, you must respect the president for sticking by his decisions.”

Bush’s every move is scripted to influence public opinion (think klieg lights in New Orleans) and if you look at what he has said over the past six years you will find contradictions which accommodate the prevailing political climate. There is no reason in the world to respect someone who sticks to his decisions if those are based on lies and propaganda or produce conduct which is against the law (Abu Graib, anyone?). There is much evidence that supports the conclusion that Bush’s decisions change with the public mood. The only ‘decision’ he has consistently supported is to reduce taxes for very wealthy individuals and corporations even in the face of putting the Federal Government in serious debt. What judgement he has.

“How easy would it be for him to prematurely declare victory and pull out of Iraq? But, he knows and so do others that this war on terror has only just started, an unpleasant reality made more real by the recent discovery of a plot to kill soldiers here.”

Bush declared victory in Iraq about as prematurely as you can get “on May 1, 2003 George W. Bush landed on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, in Navy One, a Lockheed S-3 Viking, wearing a flight suit. A few hours later he gave a speech announcing the end of major combat operations in the Iraq War. Clearly visible in the background was a banner stating “Mission Accomplished.” In Bush’s own words,

“Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. (Applause.) And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.

“In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty, and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment — yet, it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage, your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other, made this day possible. Because of you, our nation is more secure. Because of you, the tyrant has fallen, and Iraq is free. (Applause.)”

And then there were the outright lies. Again, in Bush’s own words,

“The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We’ve removed an ally of al Qaeda, and cut off a source of terrorist funding. And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more. (Applause.)”

Iraq was never an ally of al Qaeda (as in NEVER). It never financed terrorists and never had weapons of mass destruction to supply to anyone.

“We needed a leader on Sept. 11 who would stand up strongly against a deadly enemy, and we got one. Now we want to pretend we never needed one. How convenient”

The “leader who stood up strongly against a deadly enemy” spent most of the day on Sept. 11, 2001 running and hiding. Yes he did. I remember watching the news broadcasts and waiting for some word from our ‘leaders’ but all I heard were comments by Clinton Administration officials who were brought in because NO ONE from the Bush Administration was talking. The only person in the Administration who was visible was Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld who to his credit went outside to help those who were dealing with the disaster at the Pentagon.

Our “leader” high-tailed it out of Florida under a complete blackout that lasted until he turned up at a nuclear bomb shelter in Colorado in the afternoon. There he went underground. The White House propaganda machine released a rumor that Air Force One was threatened by enemies of undisclosed type. It was allowed to die since its job had been done - to insert this fake item into the peripheral memory of a gullible public. A day or so later the White House released a picture of Bush in Air Force One “on the phone with V.P. Cheney” and began the myth that Bush was in charge from the get-go. The same ‘looking out the window of Air Force One’ stunt was used after Hurricane Katrina. It didn’t work.

We have never been told what V.P. Cheney was doing on 9/11. Yes, he was in another bunker in Washington, DC but what was he doing besides allegedly talking to Bush (eight hours after the attack, at least). After all, he was the one Bush appointed (that January) to take charge of anti-terrorism planning. He was head of the Security Committee that never met, by the bye.

We needed and still need leadership not only against terrorism but to rally our nation to make the world a better place. Bush is not and never has been that person.