Thursday, September 28

Watch. Learn. Vote.

by justmy2 @ 9/28/2006 01:18:00 AM

Keith Olbermann produced an absolute masterpiece this evening.

This is real Must See TV.


But while it has become conventional wisdom, although debunked by the 9/11 Report, that Mr. Clinton dropped an offer from Sudan to hand over bin Laden… it is rare to hear anyone discuss whether similar… but real feelers were extended to Mr. Bush.

And it is, we suspect, even more rare, to see this tape, of the Bush White House addressing reports of such feelers in February, 2001, after we knew al Qaeda had attacked the Cole:

Q: The Taliban in Afghanistan, they have offered that they are ready to hand over Osama bin Laden to Saudi Arabia if the United States would drop its sanctions, and they have a kind of deal that they want to make with the United States. Do you have any comments?

MR. FLEISCHER: Let me take that and get back to you on that.


There is no record of any subsequent discussion on the matter.


Every American should watch this the next time they consider whether this Administration has made, is making, and will make America safer.

Wednesday, September 27

Can we Agree to Disagree?

by Coltrane @ 9/27/2006 11:52:00 PM

I was recently asked by a friend for my thoughts regarding comments made by former Sports Reporters Co-host and Kansas City Sports writer Jason Whitlock. Just to paraphrase his comments in the interview in the interest of time: Scoop Jackson and Flavor Fav are Bojangles and there is a war of coonification going on amongst Black Americans and yes we have to pick sides....... The 5 percenters vs. the 10 percenters.....

I read 'The Souls of black folks', and Dubois never mentioned the ignorant ass m*&^** 5 percenters in his book.

I disagree with Jason Whitlock's premise in the interview of a new war between Black Folks and a somehow parallel of this war to a new 21st Century Civil Rights Movement. Basically, he's played the Michael Eric Dyson card, when he went at Cosby, in this case ESPN Columnist Scoop Jackson. My issue with this is in both cases is this plays into the ultimate goal of Willie Lynchism. 'Divide and the they will never rise as a people'. When these public tiffs amongst black folks arise, I always think why not show a united front in public then work together and fix ourselves and our problems in private? Being a sports writer, you would think Mr. Whitlock would understand that concept. Most Championship Teams keep their dirty laundry in the house. Why air another brother out? What do we gain as a people?

Wouldn't another approach be:

"While I know Mr. Cosby and I are trying to get to the same place r

Can we Agree to Disagree?

by Coltrane @ 9/27/2006 10:25:00 AM

I was recently asked by a friend for my thoughts regarding comments made by former Sports Reporters Co-host and Kansas City Sports writer Jason Whitlock. Just to paraphrase his comments in the interview in the interest of time: Scoop Jackson and Flavor Fav are Bojangles and there is a war of coonification going on amongst Black Americans and yes we have to pick sides....... The 5 percenters vs. the 10 percenters.....

I read 'The Souls of black folks', and Dubois never mentioned the ignorant ass m*&^** 5 percenters in his book.

I disagree with Jason Whitlock's premise in the interview of a new war between Black Folks and a somehow parallel of this war to a new 21st Century Civil Rights Movement. Basically, he's played the Michael Eric Dyson card, when he went at Cosby, in this case ESPN Columnist Scoop Jackson. My issue with this is in both cases is this plays into the ultimate goal of Willie Lynchism. 'Divide and the they will never rise as a people'. When these public tiffs amongst black folks arise, I always think why not show a united front in public then work together and fix ourselves and our problems in private? Being a sports writer, you would think Mr. Whitlock would understand that concept. Most Championship Teams keep their dirty laundry in the house. Why air another brother out? What do we gain as a people?

Wouldn't another approach be:

"While I know Mr. Cosby and I are trying to get to the same place regarding the urban black youth of America, I think we should take the following steps to do so. I believe the steps he's articulating as a means of eradicating the problem are slightly different, but in the end we're both worried about the same thing .......black children"

"While I think Scoop has made some valid points and some points with which I don't agree, the great thing about America is there is a channel, website, periodical, blog for each of us to speak freely and honestly from our own perspectives. I'm not a 5'3 black man from the south side of chicago, so I can't really speak to his truths, but the great thing is we can all have medium to not only speak our views but feed our families in the process....That's the great thing about America."

"While I don't particularly enjoy the Flavor Flav show myself and some of the actions of the women are somewhat embarrassing, I do think it's great that hip-hop has grown to the point of there being a vehicle for militant conscience rapper like the former hype man from Public Enemy to still express himself. Yet another great thing about America'

Why can't black men agree to disagree without cutting each other's throat?

Our focus should be on getting the habitually racist Senator Allen out of Virginia!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Our focus should be on getting Congressman Harold Ford elected to the Senate in the state of Tennessee!!!!!

Our focus should be on taking legal action in the state of Maryland over voter irregularities, and getting a run-off so the true Democratic candidate Kweisi Mfume can run for the senate seat against Steele!!!!!!!

WE have a lot of work to do and having two irrelevant ass sports writer dish dirt on each other is a distraction we don't need..

Saturday, September 16

I'm not a buisness man I'm a buisness, MAN

by justmy2 @ 9/16/2006 11:29:00 PM




Well the names have all changed since you hung around,
But those dreams have remained and they're turned around.

....

Welcome back

Are you sure?

by justmy2 @ 9/16/2006 09:02:00 PM

Coltrane hits the nail on the head below...same product launch, new year. The least these guys could do is bring out a different fall line. But all this Administration knows is fear, as if they read the cliff notes to 1984 every monrning before breakfast and think "Hey, that could work."

But I digress...

What caught my eye today was these words out of the mouth of Jeffery Toobin in an interview he did on CNN yesterday...

So even if the president gets his proposal through, it is not at all clear that the court will approve it, especially given one provision we didn't discuss much ... secret evidence. And this is something that Sen. Lindsey Graham has focused on a lot. And he said, "Look, there's no court in America, especially the Supreme Court, that is going to uphold executing somebody ... based on evidence he never saw."

And I think Sen. Graham raises a very profound point there. So that's something that we've got to keep in mind. The politicians can agree or disagree, but they don't have the last word.

Those nine folks across First Street in Washington, they have the last word.


I never thought I would say this in my country, but I feel like we are one SCOTUS vacany away from not being able to be so sure that Sen. Graham is correct. Go back and read the dissenting opinions of the Hamdan ruling, and you quickly realize that certain justices are much more interested in protecting this President, than upholding the Constitution of the United States. The Congress has already decided they are no more than a rubber stamp, an with the recent Supreme Court appoints, SCOTUS isn't far behind.

As they say, absolute power corrupts, absolutely.

This is for all the marbles. Either we stand up to this end run around the Constitution and everything that makes us Americans in good standing in the civilized world, or we give in to our inner demons by acting like the bad guys and...let me quote The Decider here..."We let the terrorists win".

It's my POW and I'll torture if I want to!!!

by Coltrane @ 9/16/2006 08:35:00 AM

It's football season, so forgive me for using a Skins analogy. But, watching this administration is liking watching the Redskins in their first year of Joe Gibbs encore where he showed a penchant for running the exact same plays that won him three superbowls in the eighties and nineties over and over again, but with a 21st Century result that was not as favorable. If you walked out your door, you could hear countless beltway pigskin fanatics scream "run another play", "mix it up a little bit", "try something else". That's no disrespect to Joe Gibbs, because in an example of true leadership, Coach Gibbs realized that not only had the world drastically changed, but defenses had changed. Joe in seasons to follow gave up the reigns of playing calling and gave the task to someone who was more in tune with landscape of today's defenses. If only his neighbor from Pennsylvania Avenue, could make a similar call. See if I hear the President run the Give Fear a chance play one more time, then I will surely go crazy. There has to be another play in the playbook.

War in Iraq? Give Fear a Chance on silent count! Break. [Hands clap as they leave the huddle]

Wire tapping? Give Fear a Chance on two! Break. [Cheney and Rumsfield's knod as hands clap in agreement]

Abu Ghraib? Give Fear a Chance on one! Break. [Rice and Rumsfield pound fist as hand clap leaving the huddle]

Guantanmo Bay? Give Fear a Chance....... I think you get the point.

Now we see the fearless Mr. President on the lawn of the White House in crossroads of history stating that the Geneva Convention's Common Article 3 is "vague" and "open to interpretation."

Can you guess what play will be run when questioned as to WHY these long standing rules of morality all of a sudden need to be changed?

I'll take give fear a chance for $200! Great guess.

"Were it not for this program, our intelligence community believes that al Qaeda and its allies would have succeeded in launching another attack against the American homeland," Bush said

"My job and the job of the people here in Washington, D.C., is to protect this country," Bush said. "This enemy has struck us and they want to strike us again, and we'll give our folks the tools to protect this country. That's our job."

Just to paraphrase the use of fear on this particular play. If you don't give me my law then the terrorist will strike again, so out of fear the American people should side with me and get Congress to change excuse me clarify article 3 of the Geneva Convention again out of fear.

That's it! That's his entire explanation. This has worked twice now and if you don't use we will be attacked.

" Excuse me Mr. President, countless experts and senior leaders of the GOP have gone on record stating that torture does not work!!"

To side with them is to side with the Terrorist are president said. I heard pundits on talk shows state that these people must want the terrorist to win. Huh?!?

At what point will we as Americans force this administration and it's mouthpieces formely known as the media to at least choose another play. Although, I must admit it is difficult to stop, since if another attack does occur the President will quickly blame anyone that opposed his actions. Think 200 lb. chubby kid up the middle in the predominately 85lb and under pee wee league. And just like in Pee Wee league, its going to take the entire team to bring this kid from Texas down.

See Colin Powell and John McCain and other leaders have to fight the fear of FEAR and face this debate head on.

Play callers beware.

Friday, September 15

What He Said

by justmy2 @ 9/15/2006 11:54:00 PM

Billmon speaks...you listen...

What will be on the table then is the question of whether a nation as powerful and potentially dangerous to others as America (the proverbial bull in the china shop) can survive on brute force alone -- without moral legitimacy or political prestige, without true allies (save for the world's other leper regimes) and without "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind"

We're not there yet, but that is the direction we're heading, and a unilateral decision to redefine the Geneva Conventions (without actually admitting that we're doing it) would take us another few hundred miles down the road.


Click the link and read the entire thought provoking post.

Are we ready to surrender everything that has made us American, that easily?

Are we still the land of the free, and the home of the brave?

Wednesday, September 13

Bush Fears War Crimes Prosecution, Impeachment

by Coltrane @ 9/13/2006 05:15:00 PM

Here is an article I heard about that addresses what I was referring to yesterday. It’s the War Crimes Act of 1996 and the Detainee Treatment Act.... Check it out (I bolded the parts I found interesting)...


Bush Fears War Crimes Prosecution, Impeachment
by Marjorie Cohn; September 07, 2006
With great fanfare, George W. Bush announced to a group of carefully selected 9/11 families yesterday that he had finally decided to send Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and 13 other alleged terrorists to Guantánamo Bay, where they will be tried in military commissions. After nearly 5 years of interrogating these men, why did Bush choose this moment to bring them to "justice"?

Bush said his administration had "largely completed our questioning of the men" and complained that "the Supreme Court's recent decision has impaired our ability to prosecute terrorists through military commissions and has put in question the future of the CIA program."

He was referring to Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, in which the high court recently held that Bush's military commissions did not comply with the law. Bush sought to try prisoners in commissions they could not attend with evidence they never see, including hearsay and evidence obtained by coercion.
The Court also determined that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions applies to al Qaeda detainees. That provision of Geneva prohibits "outrages upon personal dignity" and "humiliating and degrading treatment."

Bush called on Congress to define these "vague and undefined" terms in Common Article 3 because "our military and intelligence personnel" involved in capture and interrogation "could now be at risk of prosecution under the War Crimes Act."
Congress enacted the War Crimes Act in 1996. That act defines violations of Geneva's Common Article 3 as war crimes. Those convicted face life imprisonment or even the death penalty if the victim dies.

The President is undoubtedly familiar with the doctrine of command responsibility, where commanders, all the way up the chain of command to the commander in chief, can be held liable for war crimes their inferiors commit if the commander knew or should have known they might be committed and did nothing to stop or prevent them.
Bush defensively denied that the United States engages in torture and foreswore authorizing it. But it has been well-documented that policies set at the highest levels of our government have resulted in the torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of U.S. prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo.
Indeed, Congress passed the Detainee Treatment Act in December, which codifies the prohibition in United States law against cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of prisoners in U.S. custody. In his speech yesterday, Bush took credit for working with Senator John McCain to pass the DTA.

In fact, Bush fought the McCain "anti-torture" amendment tooth-and-nail, at times threatening to veto the entire appropriations bill to which it was appended. At one point, Bush sent Dick Cheney to convince McCain to exempt the CIA from the prohibition on cruel treatment, but McCain refused.

Bush signed the bill, but attached a "signing statement" where he reserved the right to violate the DTA if, as commander-in-chief, he thought it necessary.
Throughout his speech, Bush carefully denied his administration had violated any laws during its "tough" interrogations of prisoners. Yet, the very same day, the Pentagon released a new interrogation manual that prohibits techniques including "waterboarding," which amounts to torture.

Before the Supreme Court decided the Hamdan case, the Pentagon intended to remove any mention of Common Article 3 from its manual. The manual had been the subject of revision since the Abu Ghraib torture photographs came to light.
But in light of Hamdan, the Pentagon was forced to back down and acknowledge the dictates of Common Article 3.

Bush also seeks Congressional approval for his revised military commissions, which reportedly contain nearly all of the objectionable features of his original ones.
The President's speech was timed to coincide with the beginning of the traditional post-Labor Day period when Congress focuses on the November elections. The Democrats reportedly stand a good chance of taking back one or both houses of Congress. Bush fears impeachment if the Democrats achieve a majority in the House of Representatives.

By challenging Congress to focus on legislation about treatment of terrorists - which he called "urgent" - Bush seeks to divert the election discourse away from his disastrous war on Iraq.

Marjorie Cohn, a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, is president-elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and the U.S. representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists.


All I can say is the President is a bad dude…how you gonna change the law so you can’t get caught!!!! Ahhh it must be nice to be that powerful.

Monday, September 11

Reflections from 9/11

by Coltrane @ 9/11/2006 10:03:00 AM

Today is the fifth anniversay of the most horrific attack to happen in my lifetime on US soil. Our prayers and thoughts go out to all the family and friends of those who were lost in this tragedy. In my humble opinion, in remembrance of our fallen citizens the greatest gift we can give to those individuals effected would be to take the neccessary steps to reduce the chances of this happening again. Our government has made several changes in the last five years. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the requirement that cockpits in planes be secured, the reorginization and increased training of TSA, and countless other measures that I applaud. We have come a long way and still have a great deal further to travel in the measures to secure our country. But if there were one wish that I could have on this day of reflection and remembrance, it would be that our leaders discontinue lying about a connection between this tragedy and the war and occupation of Iraq. The two have very little to do with one another and to continue to link the two is not only dishonest but disrespectful to the citizens of this country.

As President Bush told Kate Couric this past week:

"My toughest job is making people see the connection between the Iraq War and 9/11..."

With all due respect Mr. President, that isn't your toughtest job. It's not even your job at all. If there was any job born from this crisis for you Mr. President, then it would've been to capture Osama Bin Laden and bring him to trial for this all the otrocities he has masterminded across the world.

Mission Not Accomplished!

Osama Bin Laden still roams the world spreading his message of anti-america via video clips over the internet. Al Qaeda is still very much operating.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/11/zawahiri.911/index.html

Why don't we as a country take this day to not only remember those we lost, but to also remember the true enemy who attacked us and focus on really winning the war on terror.