Tag Archives: Rumsfeld


The United States of America can be proud to have such fighters for freedom and truth as Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs, Ann Coulter or Glenn Beck. However, much as these fearless fighters for honesty have brought to the attention of the American people the horrifying truth that the current man sitting in the Oval Office was never qualified to hold that position, this reporter must finally tell the real truth. First of all, there is no such person as “Barack Obama.” It is now clear that over forty years ago, a group of terrorists under the leadership of a young Osama bin Laden decided to hatch a diabolical plot under which al-Qaeda would gain control of America without firing a shot. Osama bin Laden’s father had a child by a western woman who was in his harem and the baby and the woman were sent to Hawaii. She was paid over one million dollars to pretend she had a child by someone from Kenya. Yes, she did place an ad in a Hawaii newspaper about the birth of a son, but there is no evidence any doctor or nurse was able to verify the birth of such son. If her child was born in Hawaii, why can’t we ever find a picture of the birth? American mothers and fathers always take pictures of newborn babies, but for some strange reason no such photos exist of the “Barack Obama” birth. How about defenders of Barack Obama producing a picture, all we ask, is a single photo! If anything I have just written is incorrect, I challenge liberals to produce a single piece of evidence to the contrary.

The boy was named after the sacred rock which is in Mecca and this “Barack Obama” is none other than one of Osama bin Laden’s brothers. Anyone familiar with al-Qaeda knows their secret password is “Amabo” which for some strange reason is the name Obama spelled backwards. Is this a coincidence? I have it on the highest authority that during the summer of 2008, Barack Obama was not seen by anyone for a period of 24 hours. During that time he met with his brother in a brothel in Tel Aviv to discuss policies he would put in place once in power. A third man was at that meeting, and this intrepid reporter can now reveal the name of the Third Man. It was none other than Don Rumsfeld! Employ some logic. The invasion of Iraq in search of WMD was among the most inept, bungled, confused operations in military history. Even the Pentagon could not be that incompetent. Don Rumsfeld planned the entire fiasco from day one to ensure there would be chaos in Iraq and that would serve as a means of rallying Muslims around the world to the banner of Osama bin Laden.

Have you ever wondered why Barack Obama refuses to allow investigations into the Iraq war or to torture? The reason is simple– he knows any investigation would reveal there was an alliance between Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, George Bush and Osama bin Laden. They succeeded brilliantly in creating complete chaos in Iraq, an economic meltdown and loss of public support for the Iraq debacle. How else could Osama bin Laden’s brother win the election?

Of course as a final touch to their plan, they sent a hyperactive Big Momma from one of the harems to the state of Alaska where she was given financial support to be elected governor of the state. Let’s be realistic, if John McCain has an intelligent vice presidential candidate the election might well have gone the other way. But, with the boob head doll by his side, McCain guaranteed the election of Osama bin Laden’s brother.

It is now necessary for Rush, Ann, and the other voices of reason to demand a complete investigation into the origin of the war in Iraq. Let’s get at the truth.

American Torture Report Shows Bush As He Really Is!

In the history of the United States there have been few episodes which have matched in disregard for human rights as the story of what has transpired in Guantanamo during the interrogation of prisoners. Aside from flippant remarks from Don Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney about what is the big deal in listening to loud music or standing, no Republican leader who served under George Bush has indicated the slightest understanding of what was done to those imprisoned. And, we cannot forget that few of these men were ever convicted of anything other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Of course, some were part of the Taliban or served with al-Qaeda, but in America we believe people are entitled to a fair trial.

Mark Danner, a journalism professor has released on the web site of the New York Review of Books, the story of interrogation. It doesn’t take much more than reading the Table of Contents to make an American sick to his stomach. Among the headings are; “Suffocation by water, prolonged stress standing, beating by use of a collar, beating and kicking; confinement in a box; prolonged nudity; sleep deprivation; use of loud music; exposure to cold temperatures/cold water; prolonged use of handcuffs and shackles; threats; forced shaving; deprivation/restricted provision of food.”

This is the story of the Bush administration, not the story of America. This nation must place on trial every member of the Bush administration–including the president– who allowed such behavior on the part of Americans. We strongly suggest formation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission after the model used in South Africa.

Intelligence, Bush Style!

Lawrence Wilkerson, a Republican who served as chief of staff for then Secretary of State Colin Powell, admitted that many men presently in Guantanamo are innocent and the only crime they ever committed was to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. In his discussions with military officials, they admitted they knew some of the men were innocent, but they had a plan. “It did not matter if the detainee was innocent. Indeed, because he lived in Afghanistan and was captured on or near the battle area, he must know something of importance”was the assumption of men raised in the United States of America which has a Constitution based on innocence until proven guilty!! Wilkerson, says “US leadership became aware of this lack of proper vetting very early on and thus, of the reality that many of the detainees were innocent of any substantial wrongdoing, had little intelligence value, and should be immediately released.

Wilkerson claims Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld know of this but refused to do anything because it would damage the Republican presidency. Wilkerson says at present we can not try those who are guilty because they were tortured and the evidence will not stand up in a court of law.

Was Rumsfeld Guilty Of War Crimes?

There is one topic that Barack Obama would prefer go away without any further discussion and that is the possibility of instituting legal action against former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld for war crimes. Manfred Nowak, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture told “Frontal 21″ a German television program there is currently sufficient evidence to place Rumsfeld on trial for war crimes. There is more than enough evidence that Rumsfeld, Rice, Cheney and Bush ignored the Geneva Convention and are responsible for mistreatment of prisoners who were held in Abu Ghraib. The abuse was not that of a few rogue soldiers but was ordered by those who headed the American government and American military forces. Rumsfeld authorized new interrogation policies for Guantanamo include placing prisoners in “stress positions,” hooding detainees for 20 hour interrogations, exploiting phobia to induce stress, sensory deprivation and isolation.

According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ALU) in 2003, senior officers of the Judge Advocate General’s office objected to interrogation techniques but “Pentagon officials didn’t think this was a bid deal so they just ignored the JAGs.”

One can go on and on about reports and complaints by officials in the American military or those from international organizations. Donald Rumsfeld was guilty of war crimes and the American people must cleanse their souls by placing this man on trial.

Cheney Defends Bush Administration Policies

Dick Cheney, in probably his last interview as vice president, mounted a vigorous defense of the Bush administration and compared dangers America was facing in 2001 with those confronted by Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt. He insisted President Bush had not exerted any more executive power than previous presidents. Cheney defended the use of tough interrogation programs and wire tapping. He insisted Bush “was fully authorized in taking” and it was due to such actions that al-Qaeda was put on the run. The vice president was uncertain if Osama bin Laden was still alive, and he expressed disagreement with the Bush decision to fire Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense, given the brilliant job he was doing.

Bush, and Republicans, often cite wartime actions by Lincoln and FDR to support their claims the president had to take strong steps against terrorism. Of course, Lincoln had a large Confederate army within sight of Washington D.C. and FDR was confronting the best army in the world in Nazi Germany, not a few thousand men who had no ability to inflict any serious damage to the United States. If Bush and Cheney policies defeated al-Qaeda, perhaps he could explain how today al-Qaeda has more members than ever before and is operating throughout the world?

Afghan President Discusses Taliban With UK’s PM

President Hamid Karzai is in London in order to review with Prime Minister Gordon Brown the progress being made in secret talks with members of the Taliban. Saudi Arabia King Abdullah has sponsored the discussions in an effort to end chaos which now reigns in Afghanistan. There are also reports Pakistan Prime Minister Zardari has played a role in trying to bring together the Taliban and more secular groups in Afghanistan. Karzai has held talks with Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a former mujahedin leader who once was supported by American intelligence when he was fighting against the Russians. After his fall out with Americans, Hekmatyar went to Iran where he has been directing attacks on US and coalition forces in Afghanistan.

Another effort to achieve peace is being made by Pakistani tribal elders who recently held a two day assembly in order to organize a group to meet with Taliban leaders. There is almost something comic about these meetings and changes. Seven years ago, Donald Rumsfeld announced to the world, the US had defeated the Taliban and they never would return. Today, the same people who were defeated are back in the saddle.

The unanswered question remains– will a compromise with the Taliban restore their fundamentalist anti-Western ideas to Afghanistan?

US Conducted Secret Operations Inside Other Nations

The American nightmare is drawing to its conclusion with the exodus from Washington D.C. of George Bush. During the past eight years the ignorant trio of Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush have considered the United States Constitution a piece of paper they could ignore anytime they considered it didn’t accord with their plans. A story in The New York Times indicates American military forces conducted secret operations against al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups by entering nations like Syria and Pakistan without permission of their governments. Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld authorized the military in the spring of 2004 to conduct operations anywhere in the world. Units like the SEALS or special forces simply operated in Syria and Pakistan on the basis of their own intelligence that al-Qaeda leaders were in the area.

The United States once stood as a symbol of a nation that represented law and order. Under the Bush administration we have come to represent a bunch of thugs who enter nations without permission because the president says we can do it. We all hope an Obama administration will end this rogue behavior.

Cheney Against Invasions Of Other Nations

Vice President Dick Cheney, on a visit to Georgia, spoke out against nations which use military force to intervene in the affairs of other nations. He described Russia’s invasion of Georgia as “an illegitimate, unilateral attempt” to change the country’s borders and expressed concern about Russia’s reliability as an international partner. The vice president assured President Saakashvili the United States would stand beside Georgia as a friend and ally “as you work to overcome an invasion of your sovereign territory and an illegitimate unilateral attempt to change your country’s borders by force that has been universally condemned by the free world.” However, there was no mention made as to whether the United States would re-equip the Georgian army.

Even as Cheney was expressing reassuring words to Georgia, Dimitry Gogozin, Russia”s fiery representative to NATO was warning the EU and the United States his nation would not stand by idly if Georgia was allowed to enter that organization. He insisted Russia had warned the UK it would take action if Georgia invaded South Ossetia, but British leaders denied ever receiving such information.

Dick Cheney’s comments may reverberate well to right wing Republicans who believe the Bush invasion of Iraq demonstrated that powerful nations had a right to invade other nations in order to reorganize the world, but most people in the Middle East see little difference between the vice president’s support for the American invasion of Iraq and Georgia’s invasion of South Ossetia. In both cases force, rather than diplomacy, was employed.

Mission Unaccomplished In Iraq Is What I Meant-Bush

As the glory days of the spring of 2003 recede further into recesses of the past, President Bush wants America to know he was quite clear the war in Iraq at that point was merely the opening stages of a six year struggle to defeat terrorism. Yesterday, the White House wallowed in self pity by claiming George Bush paid an unfair price because some unknown individuals had placed a banner on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln saying: “Mission Accomplished.” His actual words that fateful day were: ‘Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September 11, 2001 and still goes on.”

As I recall, right wing pundits boasted that liberals who had denigrated the president were now eating crow because the brilliant military ideas of Secetary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had proven more correct than timid demands of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for more troops in order to ensure victory. Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter were on a tear viciously ripping into liberals and the incompetent military who lacked the expertise of the Rumsfeld theory of fighting wars.

The White House is correct that media sources will mock Bush claims of that day and the poor president will have to suffer the outrageous stings of unfair criticism. As I recall, Bush and his pack of vicious dogs even mocked the patriotism of an American senator who had lost both arms and legs fighting in Vietnam. There is no question George Bush has always been honest, spoken clearly, and never questioned the integrity of those who opposed him. On that point, we can definitely say, “Mission Accomplished.”

Republican 2003 Views On Paying For Iraq

Following are comments made by Republican leaders as the Iraq war began in which they discussed how to pay for it.

Don Rumsfeld, March 27, 2003
“When it comes to reconstruction, before we turn to the American taxpayer, we will turn first to the resources of the Iraqi government and the international community.

Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defence, March 27, 2003
“There is a lot of money to pay for this that doesn’t have to be U.S. taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi peole. We are talking aobut a country that can really finance its own reconstruction and relatively soon.”

Mitchell Daniels, White House Office Of Managment and Budget, April 21, 2003
“The United States is very committd to helping Iraq recover from the conflict, but Iraq will not require sustained aid.”

Glenn Hubbard, White House Economic adviser, October 4, 2002
“The cost of any intervention would be very small.”

Lawrence Lindsey, White House economic adviser, Septembr 16, 2002
“The likely cnomic effectss of a war in Iraq would be small… Under every plausible scenario, the negative effect will be quite small relative to the economic benefits.”