Friday, July 22, 2005

I'm finally back from Europe. I had a great trip. I would tell you more about it if this site was about me but it's not.

While I was gone there was a major terrorist attack on a city I was in. I few into London the night of the first bombing and I was in London the day the second bombing happened. It really got me thinking about the "war on terror." One thing that we all knew and no one said for a week was the this happened because of the Iraq war. It's just obvious. They went after Spain to get them out of Iraq and now they are going after Great Britain. Anyway I really thought about how we should be fighting this war because obviously this isn't working it is only making the world a much less safe place. Don't be trying to tell me otherwise, you know this wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for the Iraq war. I thought to myself "This will never work. We will just have more war then more terror then more war etc. a vicious cycle." I finally realized the only way to truly defeat terror is to fight a war with books and not guns and bombs. Do you think the 9/11 bombers were geniuses? NO! They were stupid idiots! They were very misguided people. So the only way we could have ever stopped them is if we had educated them so that they understood that terrorism doesn't get you anywhere. I kept thinking we just need to drop the whole "war on terror" and go on a major campaign to let the world know that terror gets mankind nowhere. Then guess what, Tony Blair said it. I don't like Blair much since he held Bush's hand as they went to war together but he sure did hit the nail on the head this time. This is how you really fight the war on terror:

"What we are confronting here is an evil ideology.

It is not a clash of civilisations - all civilised people, Muslim or other, feel revulsion at it. But it is a global struggle and it is a battle of ideas, hearts and minds, both within Islam and outside it.

This is the battle that must be won, a battle not just about the terrorist methods but their views. Not just their barbaric acts, but their barbaric ideas. Not only what they do but what they think and the thinking they would impose on others."

-- Tony Blair 16 July, 2005

We must crush the "evil ideology" as Tony Blair puts it. Don't get me wrong Blair is still not 100% with it but I think he is getting on the right track. Now he is just one step away from getting it right. I don't think he is realizing it though. I just don't see him changing coarse and ending this war none since and immediately start trying to educate radical Islam to end this crap rather than fighting fire with fire.

So I guess thats my big story for you from Europe.


Thursday, July 14, 2005

Caleb is traveling in Europe - this post was done by Lisa Hayes

As I am watching the news over the last few days, I am entertained by the prospect that Karl Rove may be several steps out on the plank of his political demise. Unless you are listening to O’Riely on Fox, even the media coverage regarding Rove’s alleged criminal mis-step seems to be pretty cut and dry. Karl Rove is that guy. He has a reputation for obliterating his enemies. He has a reputation for having an uncompromising hard ass attitude and being that guy that takes no prisoners and takes no names. In this case, the evidence clearly supports that reputation. Simply put, Karl Rove committed a felony and in that commission of a crime he endangered a CIA agent and compromised national security. One could even make a case that his actions were treasonous.

As I ponder this interesting turn of events I think that an over-riding issue looms above all of this. That issue is the media’s role in determining the attitude of the American people. In the face of so many glaring steps of misconduct by the Bush administration that have been more or less completely ignored by the American public, why now, have we collectively decided to sit up and take notice. Valerie Blame, the CIA agent is more or less an inanimate object to most of us. She’s a idea or a character that we’ve read about over the last few months. This in opposition to the actually, real, tangible, touchable people who have been effected by the war in Iraq in unspeakable ways. We know those people. The soldiers, their wives, children, mothers and father – we live next to them; many of us are those people. The pain of those people, who are fighting a war based on lies, barely registers with the American populous. However, Valerie Blame, she’s on the map and we are collectively ready to string up Karl Rove on her behalf.

Is it because Valerie Blame, with her flowing blond hair, sun glasses and scarf, is just more beautiful and glamorous then the grieving wives and mothers of the victims of the war? Maybe – but I’m inclined to think it’s something else. I can’t explain how it happened. I don’t know what astrological alignment or celestial event may have created this serendipitous turn. However, I believe what caused the sudden willingness of the American people to look critically at a high ranking member of the Bush administration is the remarkable event that the White House Press Corps was suddenly replaced by real reporters. That’s right folks, real reporters, willing to ask real questions of the White House Spokesman, in a real dogged pursuit of answers to glaring abuses by the Bush administration.

Watching the press corp the other day I was astounded. Where did they come from? The didn’t just accept no answer as the status quo when they questioned Scott McClellan regarding Rove. For some reason that is absolutely unknown they continued doing what real reporters do. They continued to question him.

As the White House Press Corp took an unprecedented stand against the lies and omissions of the Bush Administration, the American people were finally willing to do the same. An underlying current of unexpressed dissatisfaction, if not outright rage against the administration and it’s policies is currently being blasted at Karl Rove. What a bizarre turn of events. Today- “that guy”, that take no prisoners guy, is just a patsy, fall guy for an administration that will ultimately leave him hanging out to dry with not only a grand jury but most importantly with the American people.

So, here’s to the new improved version of the White House Press Corps. I hope that with their new found claim to fame, a press corp with a backbone, they will be willing to take the responsibility that comes with their job, the unrelenting pursuit of truth that is journalism. May they understand that fundamentally whether they like it or not, they set the tone for the rest of media, and for the American people when it comes to being willing honestly examine the truth and the lies when it comes to this administration or any other.

For your reading pleasure…
QUESTION: Scott, can I ask you this: Did Karl Rove commit a crime?
MCCLELLAN: Again, David, this is a question relating to a ongoing investigation, and you have my response related to the investigation. And I don't think you should read anything into it other than: We're going to continue not to comment on it while it's ongoing.
QUESTION: Do you stand by your statement from the fall of 2003, when you were asked specifically about Karl and Elliot Abrams and Scooter Libby, and you said, "I've gone to each of those gentlemen, and they have told me they are not involved in this"?
QUESTION: Do you stand by that statement?
MCCLELLAN: And if you will recall, I said that, as part of helping the investigators move forward on the investigation, we're not going to get into commenting on it. That was something I stated back near that time as well.
QUESTION: Scott, this is ridiculous. The notion that you're going to stand before us, after having commented with that level of detail, and tell people watching this that somehow you've decided not to talk.
You've got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium or not?
MCCLELLAN: I'm well aware, like you, of what was previously said. And I will be glad to talk about it at the appropriate time. The appropriate time is when the investigation...
QUESTION: (inaudible) when it's appropriate and when it's inappropriate?
MCCLELLAN: If you'll let me finish.
QUESTION: No, you're not finishing. You're not saying anything.
You stood at that podium and said that Karl Rove was not involved. And now we find out that he spoke about Joseph Wilson's wife. So don't you owe the American public a fuller explanation. Was he involved or was he not? Because contrary to what you told the American people, he did indeed talk about his wife, didn't he?
MCCLELLAN: There will be a time to talk about this, but now is not the time to talk about it.
QUESTION: Do you think people will accept that, what you're saying today?
MCCLELLAN: Again, I've responded to the question.
QUESTION: You're in a bad spot here, Scott...
... because after the investigation began -- after the criminal investigation was under way -- you said, October 10th, 2003, "I spoke with those individuals, Rove, Abrams and Libby. As I pointed out, those individuals assured me they were not involved in this," from that podium. That's after the criminal investigation began.
Now that Rove has essentially been caught red-handed peddling this information, all of a sudden you have respect for the sanctity of the criminal investigation.
MCCLELLAN: No, that's not a correct characterization. And I think you are well aware of that.
We know each other very well. And it was after that period that the investigators had requested that we not get into commenting on an ongoing criminal investigation.
And we want to be helpful so that they can get to the bottom of this. Because no one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the president of the United States.
I am well aware of what was said previously. I remember well what was said previously. And at some point I look forward to talking about it. But until the investigation is complete, I'm just not going to do that.
QUESTION: So you're now saying that after you cleared Rove and the others from that podium, then the prosecutors asked you not to speak anymore and since then you haven't.
MCCLELLAN: Again, you're continuing to ask questions relating to an ongoing criminal investigation and I'm just not going to respond to them. QUESTION: When did they ask you to stop commenting on it, Scott? Can you pin down a date?
MCCLELLAN: Back in that time period.
QUESTION: Well, then the president commented on it nine months later. So was he not following the White House plan?
MCCLELLAN: I appreciate your questions. You can keep asking them, but you have my response.
QUESTION: Well, we are going to keep asking them.
When did the president learn that Karl Rove had had a conversation with a news reporter about the involvement of Joseph Wilson's wife in the decision to send him to Africa?
MCCLELLAN: I've responded to the questions.
QUESTION: When did the president learn that Karl Rove had been...
MCCLELLAN: I've responded to your questions.
QUESTION: After the investigation is completed, will you then be consistent with your word and the president's word that anybody who was involved will be let go?
MCCLELLAN: Again, after the investigation is complete, I will be glad to talk about it at that point.
QUESTION: Can you walk us through why, given the fact that Rove's lawyer has spoken publicly about this, it is inconsistent with the investigation, that it compromises the investigation to talk about the involvement of Karl Rove, the deputy chief of staff, here?
MCCLELLAN: Well, those overseeing the investigation expressed a preference to us that we not get into commenting on the investigation while it's ongoing. And that was what they requested of the White House. And so I think in order to be helpful to that investigation, we are following their direction.
QUESTION: Scott, there's a difference between commenting on an investigation and taking an action...
MCCLELLAN: (inaudible)
QUESTION: Can I finish, please?
MCCLELLAN: I'll come back to you in a minute.
QUESTION: Scott, (inaudible) president spoke about war on terrorism and, also, according to India Globe report there is bombings in London and also bombings in India. And at both places, Al Qaida was involved.
According to the India Globe and press reports, Pakistani television said that Osama bin Laden is now alive and they had spoken with him. And his group is (inaudible) terrorism around the globe is concerned.
Well, now, the major bombings after 9/11 took place in London and (inaudible) fighting against terrorism is concerned.
Where do we stand now? Really, where do we go from London as far as terrorism is concerned? How far can we go after Osama bin Laden now to catch him, because he's still in Pakistan?
MCCLELLAN: What occurred in London is a grim reminder that we are at war on terrorism. We are waging a comprehensive war on terrorism.
You heard the president talk earlier today to the FBI personnel and others who were at Quantico. And the president talked about our global war on terrorism. He talked about our strategy for taking the fight to the enemy, staying on the offensive, and working to spread freedom and democracy to defeat the ideology of hatred that terrorists espouse.
And the president pointed back to the 20th century. He pointed out that in World War II, freedom prevailed over fascism and Nazism. And in the Cold War, freedom prevailed over communism.
MCCLELLAN: Freedom is a powerful force for defeating an ideology such as the one that the terrorists espouse. And that's why it's so important to continue working to advance freedom and democracy in the broader Middle East. And that's what we will continue to do.
And the president also talked about the great progress we've made at home to protect the home front.
The families and friends of those who lost their lives in London continue to be in our thoughts and prayers. We know what it's like to be attacked on our own soil.
And that's why the president made a decision that we were going to take the fight to the enemy to try to disrupt plots and prevent attacks from happening in the first place. And that's exactly what we are doing.
But we're also going to work with the free world to support the advance of freedom and democracy in a dangerous region of the world. For too long we ignored what was going on in the Middle East. We accepted and tolerated dictatorships in exchange for peace and stability, and we got neither.
As the president said, free nations are peaceful societies. And that's why it's so important that we continue to support the advance of freedom, because that's how you ultimately defeat the ideology of hatred and oppression that terrorists espouse.
QUESTION: Does the president continue to have confidence in Mr. Rove?
MCCLELLAN: Again, these are all questions coming up in the context of an ongoing criminal investigation. And you've heard my response on this.
QUESTION: So you're not going to respond as to whether or not the president has confidence in his deputy chief of staff?
MCCLELLAN: You're asking this question in the context of an ongoing investigation, and I would not read anything into it other then I'm simply going to comment on an ongoing investigation.
QUESTION: Has there been any change, or is there a plan for Mr. Rove's portfolio to be altered in any way?
MCCLELLAN: Again, you have my response to these questions.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?