William K. Wolfrum Chronicles

The fight against facts has been an endless battle for the Bush Administration. It seems on virtually every issue, reality and facts totally disagree with everything they want.

But people like George W. Bush and Gem David Petraeus are by no means quitters. When the facts are lined against them, they do what needs to be done - they get those facts changed. Like the recent NIE report, for instance:

Administration officials said yesterday that the Petraeus-Crocker testimony will closely follow the National Intelligence Estimate judgments released last week, which predicted continued political deterioration in Iraq but cited “measurable but uneven improvements” in the security situation.

The NIE, requested by the White House Iraq coordinator, Lt. Gen. Douglas E. Lute, in preparation for the testimony, met with resistance from U.S. military officials in Baghdad, according to a senior U.S. military intelligence officer there. Presented with a draft of the conclusions, Petraeus succeeded in having the security judgments softened to reflect improvements in recent months, the official said.

Kevin Drum puts it well:

Now I’m not so sure. Petraeus has been very shrewd about providing dog-and-pony shows to as many analysts, pundits, reporters, and members of Congress as he could cram into the military jets criss-crossing the Atlantic to Baghdad on a seemingly daily basis this summer. And those dog-and-pony shows don’t seem to have been subtle: rather, they’ve been hard-sell propositions complete with “classified” PowerPoint presentations (always a winner for people with more ego than common sense); visits to a handpicked selection of the most successful reconstruction teams in the country; a plainly deceptive implication that the surge played a role in the Anbar Awakening; feel-good stories about how local power generation is a good thing; the recent insistence that civilian casualties are down, which increasingly looks like a book-cooking scam that wouldn’t stand the light of day if Petraeus allowed independent agencies access to his data; and, of course, the ongoing campaign to scare everyone by kinda sorta claiming that Iran and al-Qaeda are ramping up their activities and then getting suddenly slippery whenever anyone asks if they have any real evidence for this.

Petraeus is still a smart guy. He won’t go too far overboard. But he’s obviously been treating the September report like a military operation, trying to generate as much good press and congressional change of heart as he possibly can in the weeks leading up to 9/11.

Remember, come Sept. 11 - a date they have the balls to say was picked at random - Petraeus and Bush will say anything - literally anything - in order to keep their Occupation of Iraq going and to keep the ball rolling so that they can push it all into Iran, as well. If anything Petraeus and Bush say in two weeks happens to be true, it will just be happy coincidence for them.

–WKW

With the sixth anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, two weeks away, the Bush Administration has once again shown they will do all they can to squeeze every last drop of blood from 9/11 victims for political gain. Under the guise of a front group known as Freedom’s Watch, the White House has yet again prominently used the attacks on the Twin Towers to advance their sick, cash-driven agenda.

The Iraq Occupation has nothing to do with 9/11, and it has nothing to do with any “War on Terror.” For that matter, the Iraq Occupation and its current Escalation are nothing like Vietnam, either. A more apt comparison is the Brinks Job.

Read Matt Taibbi’s latest in the Rolling Stone, “The Great Iraq Swindle” and then watch that video again. And wonder anew how the U.S. has allowed such a morally bankrupt, depraved group lead our nation so far astray while using the Federal Budget as their own personal piggy bank. And while using 9/11 as their most important political tool.

–WKW

Ayad Allawi, with a Presidential lobbying firm behind him, is heading back to Iraq to save the nation, George Bush’s Presidency, and stop international terrorism. Because if there’s one thing we know now as fact, it’s that CIA-backed foreign leaders never fail in making life better for everyone.

A good look at Allawi comes here, from Salon in 2004:

There could be no more perfect evidence of the desperation among U.S. officials dealing with Iraq than the choice of veteran Baathist and CIA hireling Iyad Allawi as prime minister of the “sovereign” government due to take office after June 30. As one embittered Iraqi told me from Baghdad on Friday: “The appointment must have been orchestrated by Ahmed Chalabi in order to discredit the entire process.” He was not entirely joking, given the fact that Chalabi joined the rest of the Governing Council in voting for Allawi despite their long and vicious rivalry.

Of course, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki isn’t taking any of this laying down, and he will fight for his job. And Bush recently endorsed him:

“Prime Minister al-Maliki’s a good guy — good man with a difficult job and I support him. And it’s not up to the politicians in Washington, D.C., to say whether he will remain in his position,” said Bush, who always seems to forget that he is, in fact, a politician.

The endorsement was the type you’d expect from a man who once owned a Major League Baseball team - there are few endorsement’s less sincere than that of an owner of a last-place club, which would be about the perfect analogy for Bush’s current ownership of Iraq and the Iraq Occupation.

Basically, look for al-Maliki to be deposed or dead by the time the White House Surge Report - as Read by Gen. David Petraeus - comes out on Sept. 11.

–WKW

Dear Penthouse,

I never thought I’d be writing to you, but here I am. I’m still amazed it happened to me. I am but a simple Atheist. Well, I thought I was an Atheist but now I know I am not. And what a sexy conversion it has been.

His name was William D. And he taught me all about Virtue, both figuratively and literally.

Let me start at the beginning: I was in the library surfing the Internet. Sometimes I can get so overwhelmed with my deep, burning passion for knowledge that I can shriek out without even knowing. “There is so much to learn!” I shouted passionately.

“Oh, you’d learn a lot. You’d learn about virtue,” said William D., emerging from the shadows.

I was transfixed. His virtue was enormous. I had always mocked the virtuous, but I was unable to in William D.’s case. He had virtue that seemed God-given. “But I don’t believe in God,” thought I, my chest heaving, my mind racing.

His hand slid down my firm yet supple spine.

“Hollywood likes anal sex. They like to see the public square without nativity scenes. I like families. I like children,” said William D.

I was confused. Firm and supple, yet confused. All this talk about Hollywood and anal sex and families from this man of virtue had me strangely aroused.

“What is that smell,” I asked, breathing in deeply, my stiff nostrils sucking in the air, the scent tantalizing. “It’s almost freakish.”

“Freakish still is the idea that humans have rights by virtue of nature and nature’s God,” said William D.

I swooned. The words and smells had a hold on my trim, yet curvy mind. His hand moved to my leg.

“This is just so uncivil,” I said, turgid with anticipation.

“But civility and community are both predicated on the individual being subordinate to the interest of society. If you make a fetish of individual rights, you are going to emasculate that community,” said William D., virtue booming from his voice.

I was his. He guided me from the library into a cab. Before long we were at my place. I was to be converted. I could no longer deny it. Still I foolishly thought I could fight him.

“Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular … Hollywood likes anal sex,” he said, virtue literally dripping from the corner of his mouth. He sexily dabbed at it with a handkerchief.

Virtue. Why was it having such an affect on me? Why were my defenses slowly falling to the wayside for this mature, sweaty man? Why, why?

“In this country, we are civilized. We don’t appreciate it when somebody sticks it to you in the name of freedom of speech, sir,” said William D.

My taut body erupted in ecstasy.

“Stick it to me, Sir,” said I.

I woke up the next morning alone. I felt used up. My world had been rocked. I would never be the same. More than anything, I wanted to tithe. I had an epiphany - I was now Catholic. Dear God in heaven, I was Catholic, virtues and all.

I was on my feet again, sprinting back to the library as fast as my sinewy, muscular legs could carry me. My heart was ripping through my taut chest. I had to know. Virtue. What did it mean? How did William D. use Virtue to turn me into this - a man with Catholicism and virtue nearly bursting from his every orifice. I had to know.

When I got back to the computer and checked the Internet again, I saw the answer - Virtue Perfume.

I navigated to the Virtue Perfume Web site and was rocked to my very core. I read the descriptions, sweat cascading down my smooth stomach:

“Mist on your wrist and indulge your senses. You immediately note, with delight, that this is no ordinary perfume. You want to involve yourself with it’s uplifting character and take it’s subtle journey, ever deeper, into it’s enduring and memorable essence.”

Memorable essence. An image of William D. exploded in my mind and my now-Catholic loins. I read on:

“Practically all religions and Spiritual practices, persons of high Spiritual attainment are known to give off a fragrance, attributed to their Virtue. Christ, many of the Saints, and numerous others with highly developed spirituality, are, historically, known to have given off such a fragrance.”

And there it was. It all came flooding back to me. Virtue. Hollywood. Anal sex. Virtue. Jews. Anal sex. Catholicism. Emasculate. Virtue.

“In other words, we were creating a fragrance to lead people to their own Virtue.”

I shuddered. I had been led to my virtue. I would never be the same, thanks to William D. And Virtue.

–WKW

Let’s face it, Rush Limbaugh has never really hidden the fact that he speaks for the upper-class white racists of the U.S. And the upper-class white racists love him for it. His latest: telling his predominantly white audience know that the Democratic Party wants to take U.S. troops out of Iraq and move them into Darfur so they can clinch the African-American vote.

CALLER: Hey, Rush. It’s great to talk to you. I talked to you once before. I’ve been listening to you for a couple of years now, and I think I’m getting brighter, but there’s a lot to be learned. I know I’m no expert in foreign affairs, but what really confuses me about the liberals is the hypocrisy when they talk about how we have no reason to be in Iraq and helping those people, but yet everybody wants us to go to Darfur. I mean, aren’t we going to end up in a quagmire there? I mean, isn’t it — I don’t understand. Can you enlighten me on this?

LIMBAUGH: Yeah. This is — you’re not going to believe this, but it’s very simple. And the sooner you believe it, and the sooner you let this truth permeate the boundaries you have that tell you this is just simply not possible, the better you will understand Democrats in everything. You are right. They want to get us out of Iraq, but they can’t wait to get us into Darfur.

CALLER: Right.

LIMBAUGH: There are two reasons. What color is the skin of the people in Darfur?

CALLER: Uh, yeah.

LIMBAUGH: It’s black. And who do the Democrats really need to keep voting for them? If they lose a significant percentage of this voting bloc, they’re in trouble.

CALLER: Yes. Yes. The black population.

LIMBAUGH: Right. So you go into Darfur and you go into South Africa, you get rid of the white government there. You put sanctions on them. You stand behind Nelson Mandela — who was bankrolled by communists for a time, had the support of certain communist leaders. You go to Ethiopia. You do the same thing.

Rush Limbaugh, once again tackling the nonexistent racial issues to help make Republicans feel better about the fact that they are terrified of, and inherently hate black people. Read more from Digby and Media Matters. It’s going to be a fun, hate-filled 15 months leading to next November.

Other Sunday Reading

–WKW

If George Orwell’s character Winston Smith were around today, his job at the Ministry of Truth would consist of a lot of time editing Wikipedia pages. The latest scrubbing truth from the records is the State of Florida:

“Newspaper: State Computers Used To Edit Wikipedia Pages”

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — People have used state-owned computers hundreds of times to make edits to the Web encyclopedia Wikipedia, ranging from the serious to the ridiculous, a newspaper reported Friday.

The edits were detailed by a new Web site that tracks changes to the publicly edited online encyclopedia, according to the St. Petersburg Times.

WikiScanner has been a media delight since it burst onto the scene this month, used to expose corporate mischief and political games in Washington, such as PCs in congressional offices being involved in Wikipedia entries trashing political rivals.

The Times found Internet Protocol, or IP, addresses attached to computers at state agencies and the Legislature that made Wikipedia edits.

“It doesn’t seem to me like the best use of a public servant’s time,” said Kevin Cate, spokesman for the Florida Department of Health, where computers have been used to edit at least 124 Wikipedia entries since 2004.

…

A user at the Florida Supreme Court made an edit to note that Yuengling is not only America’s oldest beermaker, but that it produces the “finest lager brewed in this country.”

…

In April, someone using a computer owned by the Legislature removed an entry on the page for Sen. Lee Constantine, R-Altamonte Springs. Anyone who drops by the page now will not learn that Constantine was arrested on a drunken driving charge in 2004.

History, it appears, is not just written by the victors. In the Internet age, it’s also rewritten by the losers. See who else is doing it at Wikiscanner.

–WKW

This morning, John Edwards woke up to the knowledge that his poll numbers were starting to get a John McCain like stench, as he was nearing single digits - polling’s version of baseball’s Mendoza Line - in the battle for the Democratic nomination. Tonight, Edwards goes to sleep knowing he’s not out of this yet. Thanks to Hillary Clinton making what has to be the largest gaffe thus far in the race for the Presidency.

“Clinton: Terrorist attack would help GOP”

WASHINGTON (CNN) — She says she is the Democrat best equipped to fight terrorists, but White House hopeful Sen. Hillary Clinton told New Hampshire voters Thursday that another attack on the United States would likely help Republican candidates at the polls.

Sen. Hillary Clinton said the Republicans would benefit politically if a terrorist attack occurred before the ‘08 vote.

“It’s a horrible prospect to ask yourself, ‘What if? What if?’ ” Clinton, a New York Democrat, told a house party in Concord, according to the New York Post and The Associated Press and confirmed by her campaign.

“But, if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world.”

Clinton added that if such a scenario occurred, she is the best Democratic presidential candidate “to deal with that.”

Clinton was in the crucial early voting state Thursday to unveil her health care plan.

A Clinton spokesman, Isaac Baker, told CNN “Sen. Clinton was making clear that she has the strength and experience to keep the country safe.”

Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Connecticut, who is also competing for the Democratic nomination, issued a statement Friday afternoon calling Clinton’s remark “tasteless.”

“Frankly, I find it tasteless to discuss political implications when talking about a potential terrorist attack on the United States,” he said.

“It is extremely important for the Democrats to nominate someone who doesn’t think like a loser. And assuming that any failure of the president’s anti-terrorism policies will automatically be a political boon for the Republican party means thinking like a loser,” wrote Josh Marshall. “It also signals a lack of confidence either in your own policies or the American people’s reasoning powers. And quite possibly both.”

“This is, I think, a disaster,” wrote Matthew Yglesias.

And it is a disaster for Clinton. And a big open door for Barack Obama. And a sign that the door is by no means closed on John Edwards.

–WKW

Recently, this blog suffered a huge blow, as WordPress (the blog software this blog and millions of others is hosted on) was banned in Turkey, due to the work of alleged criminal nutjob Harun Yahya (Who also goes by the name Adnan Oktar). This is terrible for multiple reasons, especially due to my own maniacal following amongst the Turks. I’m friggin’ huge over there.

Want to know more about this angry, stupid man who apparently takes time off from his pseudoscience work to engage in pedophilia? From the WordPress blog, “Who is Harun Yahya”:

Adnan Oktar (pen name: Harun Yahya) is claimed on his web page to be a ‘world renown and respected scholar’ who has devoted himself to writing about scientific and faith-related subjects such as the theory of evolution and miracles of God.

He is further described by supporters as a respected ’scientist’ who has publications in incredibly diverse areas of interest (actually he is not a university graduate). He speaks only Turkish. The fact is that, his publications and his foundation (Science Research Foundation) have recently been banned in Turkey, and most members of his “sect” have been sent to court. This was not due to their Islamic and scientific activities, but due to crimes such as blackmail, extortion, possession of unlicensed weapons and sexual intercourse with minors. About three years ago, upon complaints of victims and many years of suspicion, Turkish police raided residences of this group. The discoveries at the houses and testimony of the group members were shocking. Under the mask of promoting Islam and scientific facts, the group members had been found to engage in extensive criminal activity.

Click here to find out from WordPress itself about the ban. Let them know not to give in to the demands of the demented Yahya.

And perhaps let the European Union know that Turkey has no place in the EU if it treats freedom of speech so casually.

–WKW

Of the many issues to come out of the Michael Vick dog-fighting case, one of the most interesting has to be the sudden enlightenment many in the media have experienced when it comes to professional athletes. Suddenly it has struck sportswriters that perhaps there’s something wrong with a society where the public wants to hang an athlete who is a dog abuser, but will pay little or no attention to the athlete who commits domestic or sexual abuse.

There have already been several columns on this theme, all more or less covering the same ground:

– “Vick’s story sick, but it’s far from only one” (Chicago Daily-Herald)

– “The greater outrage” (Chicago Tribune)

– “Ignoring domestic abuse is the shame of the sports world” (Orlando Sentinel)

–“Don’t direct all your ire at Falcons’ Vick” (HeraldNet)

– “It’s a dog and pony show” (N.Y. Daily News)

The conclusion: Yes, what Vick did was hideous and deserving of scorn and punishment, but shouldn’t we all look at the bigger picture? Isn’t it time to start using some of that anger, and punishing the multitude of male athletes involved in domestic abuse, sexual assault and other crimes against women?

Almost all go to the same cases, mostly highlighting the offense of such athletes as Pacman Jones, Bobby Chouinard, Michael Pittman and Kobe Bryant. And every last columnist is correct in their basic premise - Male athletes have nearly gotten a completely free ride when it comes to domestic and sexual abuse, despite the fact that it’s a serious and continuous problem.

“A three-year study published in 1995 by researchers at Northwestern University found that while male student-athletes are 3 percent of the population, they represent 19 percent of sexual assault perpetrators and 35 percent of domestic violence perpetrators,” wrote Sandra Kobrin of Women’s eNews.

So the light being shined onto this problem by these columnists is a positive thing, overall. Nonetheless, one important part of the story is completely avoided by the above sportswriters - all of whom are male.

The sports world is male dominated. Obviously, there are a great deal of women who both compete, and enjoy games as fans. But it is not going out on a huge limb to say that female fans are greatly outnumbered by their male counterparts when it comes to the major sports in the U.S. (baseball, football, basketball). And as far as sportswriters and sports columnists go, it is virtually a boys club at newspapers throughout the nation.

Yet none of the above sportswriters seem to notice this. The onus is on you. Why aren’t you paying more attention to the domestic abuse and sexual assault problems so prevalent in America’s sports world? Why are you so upset about Michael Vick’s treatment of dogs, when you seem to care less about Michael Pittman trying to run down his wife?

Basically, sportswriters are ignoring and overlooking their own culpability. And just because they’ve suddenly gotten the meme that there should be more outrage over how male athletes treat women doesn’t mean they are suddenly free of the responsibility of how they’ve helped to keep the outrage quelled.

An example: Note how easily Craig Swalboski, sports editor of the Post-Bulletin in Minnesota, glosses over the domestic abuse charges of the late Twins’ star Kirby Puckett while discussing how lucky Minnesota sports fans have been through the years:

“Puckett’s image was not tarnished until after his retirement, when allegations of domestic abuse and molestation came out.

In that regard, (Kevin) Garnett was like Puckett, but without the chain saws or groping charges,” wrote Swalboski.

Make no mistake, the lack of outrage at athletes who abuse women comes partly from how it’s been reported. The world of sports writing is dominated by males, and overall, these male sportswriters have failed to shine a bright enough light on how male athletes abuse women.

Of course, by no means are sportswriters totally to blame. But what the Michael Vick case has done is opened eyes to a rather demented part of American society. It is forcing us to look at ourselves and question why we give misogynist athletes a pass.

And now it’s time for sportswriters to ask themselves these questions, and to open their own eyes to the part they’ve played in it all.

–WKW

Has there ever been a time when so many with so much pull in the U.S. government have literally despised the freedoms that the United States is supposedly based upon?

Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell is the latest, arguing that any debate on the government’s spying programs will lead to dead Americans:

“McConnell: FISA Debate Will Kill Americans”

By Spencer Ackerman - August 22, 2007, 5:30 PM

With a heavy heart, Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell told a Texas newspaper last week that due to the public debate over revising the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, Americans will die.

McConnell, who before the late July-early August FISA legislation enjoyed broad bipartisan respect, placed the predicted deaths of Americans at the doorstep of an open society. Thanks to widespread efforts to understand what the NSA’s highly classified warrantless surveillance program is — from journalists, from legal scholars, from national security experts, from elected officials — the Bush administration was forced last month to reveal too much about how the program operates, in order to correct misunderstandings. And that means, McConnell said, “Americans are going to die.”

As simply put as possible: The U.S. government continues to use terror tactics on its people to stifle debate. How is this not an outright form of terrorism by McConnell?

–WKW