Hegira

This is utterly ridiculous.

Just so we're clear on this: it's okay to serve and be Wiccan. It's okay to die in Iraq and be Wiccan. But it is somehow NOT okay to be Wiccan when it comes to engraving a symbol on your monument?

... frankly, folks, if we sent you overseas, you fought for us, and you died doing it? I don't care if your widow asks for a Star of David, a swastika, or an engraved Satan complete with pitchfork, flames, and tortured souls on your memorial, as long as she's not demanding it be neon, larger than the others, or some different material -- that is, no more noticeable than any of the many others until you really look at the symbol -- let her have it. Memorials are for the survivors. If all we can give back to her that brings her any comfort is a symbol, what symbol it is makes no difference in the long run. Somebody smack the DVA around until they Get this, please.

You'd make sure the family's breadwinner(s) got paid a living wage. Couples run into problems because of financial strain more than anything else.

You'd tackle the problem of domestic violence so that people felt safe with their partners, or prospective partners.

You'd make sure healthcare was available, because the stress of caring for a sick loved one -- and their medical bills -- can wreck a family.

You'd make sure quality childcare was available and affordable as the norm instead of the exception, so that people felt comfortable going out to work to earn that aforementioned living wage.

You'd make sure employers offered enough time off to accomodate their workers who have families to care for, so the issue of absentee parents and latchkey children wouldn't be so common. Latchkey children tend to become problem children, and differences on how to deal with them can tear their parents' relationship apart. The stress of wondering if (or, y'know, knowing that) you're going to lose your job because your kid's been too sick for daycare all week long and you didn't have any sick days doesn't make for family harmony, either.

You'd make sure health insurance would cover at least some family counseling as a rule.

There'd be a waiting period between when someone could get a marriage license and when they were allowed to use it. No getting married on a drunken night or "just for fun".

There'd be a full battery of drug- and STD- tests with the results revealed to both partners as a part of the process of getting the marriage license.

There'd probably be some lessons on handling basic household finances in there too.

Teenage girls who got pregnant would be advised to seek counseling and there'd be support available for them as a rule, instead of the push to marry the child's father that there often is now. Just because you had sex and proved fertile together doesn't mean you ought to be in a relationship for life.

Divorce would be harder to get.


... but hey, those things are hard, so instead of doing any of that, I suppose pushing a Constitutional amendment to make sure those horrible gays get excluded will suffice.

I have nothing more to say on this topic.

Y'know, for a nation that gets bored with repeats of our television shows, we sure are tolerant of repeated idiocy from our government.

We're not done in Afghanistan but we jump to Iraq. Iraq's not going well, so we ... what? Turn to take on Iran. What is this? Government for the Attention Deficit Disordered? Perhaps Diplomacy for the Sandbox Bully? And whatever it is, can we be finished with it, yet?

One former defense official said the military planning was premised on a belief that "a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government," The New Yorker pointed out.

Say that again? Is that not the self-same line of thinking that leads to terrorist cells bombing American targets because they want our government's policies to change? And we all know how well it's worked on us. Why, the very DAY after 9/11, boy, you remember, the whole country rose up and tossed that Bush administration out on its ...

Right.

Well, maybe we should've. Had we known then what we know now, we might have. I hope. Just like I hope that this newest foolishness gets nowhere. I hope. But I really don't believe, anymore.

Via aris_tgd:

Although few studies have been made of this phenomenon, a study done in 1981[1] found that 24% of women who had abortions considered the procedure morally wrong, and 7% of women who'd had abortions disagreed with the statement, "Any woman who wants an abortion should be permitted to obtain it legally." A 1994/95 survey[2,3] of nearly 10,000 abortion patients showed 18% of women having abortions are born-again or Evangelical Christians. Many of these women are likely anti-choice. The survey also showed that Catholic women have an abortion rate 29% higher than Protestant women. A Planned Parenthood handbook on abortion notes that nearly half of all abortions are for women who describe themselves as born-again Christian, Evangelical Christian, or Catholic.[4]

Tape: Bush, Chertoff Warned Before Katrina

By MARGARET EBRAHIM and JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writers

WASHINGTON - In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, put lives at risk in New Orleans' Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage.

Bush didn't ask a single question during the final briefing before Katrina struck on Aug. 29, but he assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: "We are fully prepared."

The footage — along with seven days of transcripts of briefings obtained by The Associated Press — show in excruciating detail that while federal officials anticipated the tragedy that unfolded in New Orleans and elsewhere along the Gulf Coast, they were fatally slow to realize they had not mustered enough resources to deal with the unprecedented disaster.

Linked by secure video, Bush expressed a confidence on Aug. 28 that starkly contrasted with the dire warnings his disaster chief and numerous federal, state and local officials provided during the four days before the storm.

A top hurricane expert voiced "grave concerns" about the levees and then-Federal Emergency Management Agency chief Michael Brown told the president and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that he feared there weren't enough disaster teams to help evacuees at the Superdome.

"I'm concerned about ... their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe," Brown told his bosses the afternoon before Katrina made landfall.

The White House and Homeland Security Department urged the public Wednesday not to read too much into the video footage.

"I hope people don't draw conclusions from the president getting a single briefing," presidential spokesman Trent Duffy said, citing a variety of orders and disaster declarations Bush signed before the storm made landfall. "He received multiple briefings from multiple officials, and he was completely engaged at all times."

Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke said his department would not release the full set of videotaped briefings, saying most transcripts — though not the videotapes — from the sessions were provided to congressional investigators months ago.

"There's nothing new or insightful on these tapes," Knocke said. "We actively participated in the lessons-learned review and we continue to participate in the Senate's review and are working with them on their recommendation."

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, a critic of the administration's Katrina response, had a different take after watching the footage Wednesday afternoon from an AP reporter's camera.

"I have kind a sinking feeling in my gut right now," Nagin said. "I was listening to what people were saying — they didn't know, so therefore it was an issue of a learning curve. You know, from this tape it looks like everybody was fully aware."

Some of the footage and transcripts from briefings Aug. 25-31 conflicts with the defenses that federal, state and local officials have made in trying to deflect blame and minimize the political fallout from the failed Katrina response:

• Homeland Security officials have said the "fog of war" blinded them early on to the magnitude of the disaster. But the video and transcripts show federal and local officials discussed threats clearly, reviewed long-made plans and understood Katrina would wreak devastation of historic proportions. "I'm sure it will be the top 10 or 15 when all is said and done," National Hurricane Center's Max Mayfield warned the day Katrina lashed the Gulf Coast.

"I don't buy the `fog of war' defense," Brown told the AP in an interview Wednesday. "It was a fog of bureaucracy."

• Bush declared four days after the storm, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees" that gushed deadly flood waters into New Orleans. He later clarified, saying officials believed, wrongly, after the storm passed that the levees had survived. But the transcripts and video show there was plenty of talk about that possibility even before the storm — and Bush was worried too.

White House deputy chief of staff Joe Hagin, Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco and Brown discussed fears of a levee breach the day the storm hit.

"I talked to the president twice today, once in Crawford and then again on Air Force One," Brown said. "He's obviously watching the television a lot, and he had some questions about the Dome, he's asking questions about reports of breaches."

• Louisiana officials angrily blamed the federal government for not being prepared but the transcripts shows they were still praising FEMA as the storm roared toward the Gulf Coast and even two days afterward. "I think a lot of the planning FEMA has done with us the past year has really paid off," Col. Jeff Smith, Louisiana's emergency preparedness deputy director, said during the Aug. 28 briefing.

It wasn't long before Smith and other state officials sounded overwhelmed.

"We appreciate everything that you all are doing for us, and all I would ask is that you realize that what's going on and the sense of urgency needs to be ratcheted up," Smith said Aug. 30.

Mississippi begged for more attention in that same briefing.

"We know that there are tens or hundreds of thousands of people in Louisiana that need to be rescued, but we would just ask you, we desperately need to get our share of assets because we'll have people dying — not because of water coming up, but because we can't get them medical treatment in our affected counties," said a Mississippi state official whose name was not mentioned on the tape.

Video footage of the Aug. 28 briefing, the final one before Katrina struck, showed an intense Brown voicing concerns from the government's disaster operation center and imploring colleagues to do whatever was necessary to help victims.

"We're going to need everything that we can possibly muster, not only in this state and in the region, but the nation, to respond to this event," Brown warned. He called the storm "a bad one, a big one" and implored federal agencies to cut through red tape to help people, bending rules if necessary.

"Go ahead and do it," Brown said. "I'll figure out some way to justify it. ... Just let them yell at me."

Bush appeared from a narrow, windowless room at his vacation ranch in Texas, with his elbows on a table. Hagin was sitting alongside him. Neither asked questions in the Aug. 28 briefing.

"I want to assure the folks at the state level that we are fully prepared to not only help you during the storm, but we will move in whatever resources and assets we have at our disposal after the storm," the president said.

A relaxed Chertoff, sporting a polo shirt, weighed in from Washington at Homeland Security's operations center. He would later fly to Atlanta, outside of Katrina's reach, for a bird flu event.

One snippet captures a missed opportunity on Aug. 28 for the government to have dispatched active-duty military troops to the region to augment the National Guard.

Chertoff: "Are there any DOD assets that might be available? Have we reached out to them?"

Brown: "We have DOD assets over here at EOC (emergency operations center). They are fully engaged. And we are having those discussions with them now."

Chertoff: "Good job."

In fact, active duty troops weren't dispatched until days after the storm. And many states' National Guards had yet to be deployed to the region despite offers of assistance, and it took days before the Pentagon deployed active-duty personnel to help overwhelmed Guardsmen.

The National Hurricane Center's Mayfield told the final briefing before Katrina struck that storm models predicted minimal flooding inside New Orleans during the hurricane but he expressed concerns that counterclockwise winds and storm surges afterward could cause the levees at Lake Pontchartrain to be overrun.

"I don't think any model can tell you with any confidence right now whether the levees will be topped or not but that is obviously a very, very grave concern," Mayfield told the briefing. Other officials expressed concerns about the large number of New Orleans residents who had not evacuated.

"They're not taking patients out of hospitals, taking prisoners out of prisons and they're leaving hotels open in downtown New Orleans. So I'm very concerned about that," Brown said.

Despite the concerns, it ultimately took days for search and rescue teams to reach some hospitals and nursing homes.

Brown also told colleagues one of his top concerns was whether evacuees who went to the New Orleans Superdome — which became a symbol of the failed Katrina response — would be safe and have adequate medical care.

"The Superdome is about 12 feet below sea level.... I don't know whether the roof is designed to stand, withstand a Category Five hurricane," he said.

Brown also wanted to know whether there were enough federal medical teams in place to treat evacuees and the dead in the Superdome.

"Not to be (missing) kind of gross here," Brown interjected, "but I'm concerned" about the medical and mortuary resources "and their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe."

___

That's really all I want to say or ask: are you angry, yet? Is it enough, already? Can we finally all agree that, yes, he's the biggest mistake to happen to this country in living memory, and can we fix it? Before his next disastrous failure -- though it's hard to comprehend what could be larger than this -- can we stop now? Please?

... I'm told that the video was, a few hours ago, available and viewable on CNN's front page. It is no longer accessible there. I feel so much better now. Don't you?

Snippets still are available through CBS here ... though who knows for how long?

The Washington Post is carrying the story and the video here.

"I don't see how you can be a partner in peace if you advocate the destruction of a country as part of your platform," declares our President.

... Truer words he never spoke. But have another rock, Mr President? I think there's a wall over there still standing...

in other news, Democratic Senator Tim Johnson of South Dakota joins Ben Nelson of Nebraska to support Alito's appointment to the Supreme Court. Ben Nelson, if he's running, is up for re-election this year, having come in in 2000. I hope y'all out there in his state don't let this go unremembered. Johnson, sadly enough, isn't up this year, but his time, too, will come.

"It is necessary to investigate before legislating, but the line between investigating and persecuting is a very fine one and the junior Senator from Wisconsin has stepped over it repeatedly. His primary achievement has been in confusing the public mind, as between internal and the external threats of Communism.

We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men -- not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular.

This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy's methods to keep silent, or for those who approve. We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of a republic to abdicate his responsibilities. As a nation we have come into our full inheritance at a tender age. We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom, wherever it continues to exist in the world, but we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.

The actions of the junior Senator from Wisconsin have caused alarm and dismay amongst our allies abroad, and given considerable comfort to our enemies. And whose fault is that? Not really his. He didn't create this situation of fear; he merely exploited it -- and rather successfully. Cassius was right. 'The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.' "

-- Edward R Murrow.

I wish I could make this one movie required viewing for every single American. Judging from the comments of the rather vacuous pair of girls behind us, at least one teacher has offered extra credit for it, and that, if not their reactions, gives me hope -- but the unspoken parallels between the climate of fear then and the "post 9/11" America of today are hard to miss, and even harder to answer. (Incidentally, let me thank my friends at the Nuke Free Zone -- usually the first place I turn when I'm trying to find links quickly on matters like this.) If you can, please see this movie. Alternately, read the text of the original broadcast upon which the movie's based. I've seen several attacks, unsurprisingly, on the movie, but Murrow's original words still stand, strong and unsullied.

NEW YORK (CNN) -- A Republican congressman from North Carolina told CNN on Wednesday that the "evidence is clear" that Iraq was involved in the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001.

Let's recap this slowly for you, Robin -- it's obvious that you've been sitting in the back of the classroom staring out the window all this time.

• The attacks were plotted and carried out by al Qaeda. Remember them? Remember, the guy we're looking for is Osama bin Laden? I know they may all seem alike to you, Robin, but really and truly, Osama isn't Saddam. Two different people entirely. I promise you.



• We had the 9/11 commission look into this. They reported back in August of last year, saying that there was no evidence that Saddam was connected to 9/11. He did not help al Qaeda carry out or plan the attacks.



• Even President Bush has acknowledged that there is no evidence Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks. Let me point out the dates on those for you: they came way back in 2003.

Now, I can see where you might think you have better insight and information than the 9/11 committee, but better insight and intelligence than the President himself, Robin? They didn't go to him with proof, but they came to lay it on your desk? How nice for you. I hope they brought you a nice dose of Risperdal along with it, and some tea and cakes, too.

Even worse,  Robin, you're Vice Chairman of the House Subcommittee on terrorism. You should know better. You have to know better. And if you don't, then you haven't been paying any attention whatsoever. So, either A) you're somehow privy to information the President doesn't have, in which case, you ought to hand it over;  B) you're so incompetent that you haven't yet caught up with conclusions reached more than a year ago; or C) you're misusing your position and deliberately lying. Do tell me if there's a fourth option I've missed in there, won't you? And in the meantime? Sit down and stay away from the media, 'cause you're making us all look bad.

Edit: fixed link.