::::::::
General David Petraeus spoke to the Senate Armed Services Committee April 8 on Capitol Hill. General David Petraeus, the commander of the semi-fictional "coalition" forces in Iraq, and Ryan Crocker, U.S. ambassador to Iraq, testified before a duo of Senate committees Tuesday concerning the state of the war in IRAQ. For a welcome and lively change of pace, I respond with the non-fiction version of said war and it's weird adorees. For instance, General Petraeus says, "Though Iraq obviously remains a violent country, we do see progress in the security arena." My question,? If as the Bushites say we are not there for the oil, and Petraeus says, "... we do see progress in the security arena," what other "arena" are we there for? "Ambassador" Crocker says, "One conclusion I draw from these signs of progress is that the strategy that began with the surge is working." Crocker's analysis is a Crock. Progress? Working? WORKING? For whom is it working? For our gallant troops who are there being shot up and blown up? For the Iraqi citizens who are there being shot up and blown up and raped? For the Bushites and the oil companies, I can verify why they are there, for their wet-dream of empire.
However, for the Almighty God, each death, each suffering, each rape, each tiny child with a cancer from the DU-238, or missing an arm or an eye, for the students afraid to go to school, for those afraid to go out for groceries, for them I do not think it is working. And further, what and where is this Progress of which Crocker speaks? Well, he did tell-off Condi rice, so he can't be all bad. Indeed the violence is down, but only to mid-2005 levels. Civilian deaths are down, also, but only to February 2006 levels. There still rages a civil war in Iraq, exactly as many people, including this writer, predicted before the war began and one did not have to be a prophet to see what is as plain as the largest feature on one's own face. All one had to do to deny permission to invade Iraq, was to pass a law which forbid any congressperson owning oil, arms, or defense stocks, something few people in congress or the MSM can say about their own stock portfolios, and I guarantee therewould have been no war. What branch of Hell will profits from this war put them all in? We already know that members of congress in both parties have profited $196 millions from such investments and now we know why the Democrats voted in favor of the war. It was not merely a matter of the tiny bee-bee size stones; it was a profit or loss matter as well. I would guess the Dems thought, Oh, hell now that we are as impotent as the Neo-cons, we may as well have the money. We do know one thing, as evil as they are, the fascists and Neo-cons are also just that much smarter than the tripe the Democrats have been using as their own consultants and political advisors. I wonder what part of Hell the ballet dancing fundraiser who convinced Ms. Pelosi not to impeach, will be frying in sooner than he thinks?
You see, the Neo-cons, now have the Democrats arguing over reducing troop levels when sometime ago the Democrats were arguing that the job would have been done properly had the attack begun with more troops-250,000-350,000 troops and more artillery. Never mind that there never should have been such a decision to unleash an administratively, cowardly, preemptive attack on a nation 1/12 the size of the USA, a nation with neither Air Force nor Navy, putting our brave troops into harm's way in a war unworthy of the leading nation of the free world, now they have gotten the Alzheimerized Democrats to forget their past stand, reverse it and argue for less troops, exactly the opposite of what the Dems were arguing a few years ago. However, it is time to examine why violence seems to be down a smidge? Petraeus and Crocker did not strongly emphasize imperially the increased number of U.S. troops in Iraq. Rather, they spoke more about deal making. Just before the "Surge" in 2006 a large number of Sunni communities agreed to a cease-fire with our troops and instead joined us in fighting al-Queda in Iraq-which group (al-Queda) being a strong presence in Iraq before the war, was a relatively inaccurate, if not wholly fictional event. Whatever is the number above a handful of al-Queda now in Iraq, that number minus no more than one, arrived after the Bushites Oil Machine, started the fish-in-a-barrel slaughter. Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr's made a decision last August to declare a cease-fire appears to be the main reason why there is a bit of reduced violence in Iraq. Moreover, it would appear that the Iranians had more than a little to do with truces in Iraq, a thing that Bush ignores completely because they have outsmarted him, which is not very difficult. Oh, you might say, Prof, you just said the Neo-cons/fascists were much smarter than the Dems, now you are saying they are not so smart? No, I am saying that they were outsmarted by Iran, as they outsmarted the Dems, that neither makes the Iranians geniuses or the Neo-con/fascist coalition, geniuses, it merely shows you that they hired smarter analysts than did the Dems. You don't see any Donna Brazil's, or ballet dancing fundraisers, among either the Neo-cons or the Iranians do you? Case closed. Maybe the Dems should be hiring Neo-cons and Iranians as political advisors? Sometime ago several people, this writer included, wrote about walls going up in Baghdad along sectarian lines. The stone walls deserve some credit for the itty-bitty downturn in violence, but as soon as people figure out how to surmount them, that may change. The substitute Generals and Admirals, (who replaced the original Generals and Admirals who refused to go to war and the others who refused sell their souls cheap and attack Iran), as well as the politicians are claiming that the surge may ultimately succeed. They say, we've kept the civil war to a simmer in Iraq, and there is real national political reconciliation happening. "In the last several months ... Iraq's Parliament has formulated, debated vigorously, and in many cases passed legislation dealing with vital issues of reconciliation and nation building," Crocker said. This may be true on the surface, but is there a release by the American administration for the Iraqi's is to go it alone? Of course not, not until the oil is secured-stolen by American and Brit Oil companies. Here is one example: The Administration and everyone else including the Democrats are saying the Iraqi's have to handle things on their own. They keep blaming the Iraqi's for the wake of a war and mess the Bush administration dumped on them. The Iraqi's are held in an ulcer position. Blamed for the mess Bush's idiotic administration foisted upon them and told that they have to take responsibility, but when they do, such as in the case of passing legislation throwing Blackwater out of Iraq, for their alleged mass-murders, the Bush administration refuses to fire Blackwater and in fact, the State Department signs them up for further service. Why the military cannot guard contractors and make safe, the missions of politicians is beyond anyone outside of the administration to comprehend. It is simple, the more bloated contracts the Bushites pile on their corporate sponsors, the more money those corporate sponsors will pile onto Republican Campaign Funds. The Bushites like to point to an example of this progress such as the passage by the Iraqi Parliament of some new laws. One, which allows members of Saddam Hussein's Baath party back into government, another yet a third, approving local and regional elections for this October, and also one granting amnesty in the cases of tens of thousands of prisoners in Iraqi and in U.S. custody. However, it is rather doubtful that any of these are more than window dressing and it is doubtful that they will ever be implemented. Petraeus says that, "The progress made [on security] since last spring is fragile and reversible." Crocker says primarily the same thing, re: "These gains are fragile, and they are reversible." Well, mostly, what has happened is that some of the off half-cocked shooters have agreed, for the time being, at least, to shoot each other less often for a while.
One new law proposed is that no one can shoot another until after they have been formally introduced and shared at least some tea and crumpets with together, bonding, so to speak before blowing each other to itty-bitty pieces. What's more, Great Britain has agreed to spring for the tea and the Crumpets! However, at the very first tea party they held, one rough word led to another and soon there was a tea and crumpet food fight. It ended with the Sunni's saying that from that moment forward, they would only drink Indian Tea because the Brits are stealing more oil than the Americans. The Shiites however, refuse to drink any but Chinese or Australian tea and want Italy to make the crumpets out of pizza dough, or their special Easter Pizza dough, They asked that because the Italians left Iraq in a huff because a good Pizza and Ravioli Risteraunte' was hard to find in Down town Baghdad and not a pint of Chianti was available anywhere.
The Mafia volunteered to go over and open Italian restaurants, but the Bushites were afraid they would bump-off all the generals and bury the contractors in the concrete walls they were building and then take-over the oil fields, and then offer Blackwater protection in a deal they could not refuse. It had something to do with the head of a dead horse and a Blackwater Commander's bed. Upon hearing that horsey proposal, The Blackwater "Guards" began to weep and snivel, and say, "I want my teddy bear!" When they saw the size of the Mafia Enforcers the Blackwater people ran to hide under their cots, and began to whine audibly, and pee thjeir panties, so the Bushites had to send their Nannies to comfort them.
After that, Bush said no to Italy and so the Italian Army and al their chefs, left and went home where they said the food is better anyway, and the women are much better looking, with little facial hair, at least less than the American co-ed troops and the natives. However, the Iraqi sectarian warriors did agree recently to a truce while they held a Blind tea tasting and crumpet tasting party, labeling one Brand X and the other Brand Y. If the various factions, including Muqtada al-Sadr and his powerful Mahdi Army decide that they like the Brit tea better, the question is, what sort of crumpets will he choose? One mistaken choice and 160,000 American troops will be caught in the another food-fight, crossfire. Crocker thinks that It is still possible to turn Iraq into a shining light of democracy in the Middle East, and that Iraq will develop into a stable, secure, multiethnic, multisectarian democracy under the rule of law and decide for themselves what brand of crumpets and tea they will use. That is all fine and dandy conjecture, but will their democracy, their Constitution and Bill of rights, allow Freedom Of Choice among the many tea and crumpet Brands??? Of this, many critics are doubtful, and further, they wonder if the SI Swim Suit Issue will find a suitable market among Iraqi men. One source says that the number of credible national security experts out there who think that Iraq is going to become Jeffersonian democracy before the Moon Molts Green Cheese, can probably be counted on one finger, the middle finger stuck straight up in the air. Some believe that a positive development is the number of Iraqis (mostly Sunnis) who have volunteered to scrub the backs and rub on sun screen on the fronts of US female troops is a step in the right direction, but are fearful that the male American troops would go on strike if that happens. None of the female officers could be reached for comment, they were too busy showering and getting sunscreen applied. There is a new phenomenon; U.S.-funded local security units called the "Sons of Iraq. That simply put, means Americans are bribing Iraqis not to shoot at each other or the US military so often. Tentatively, the rule of thumb is, the Sunni's may shoot at the US army only on alternate Tuesdays and Thursdays, and the Shiites on alternate Mondays and Wednesdays, and at each other only on week-ends in even numbered months and allowing Americans to shoot back on the week-ends in the odd numbered months. That, however, left a gaping hole, in the coverage, for instance when is Al Queda paid not to shoot at anyone? In addition, what is worse do they ever get paid TO shoot at everyone, or indeed, anyone at all? The Militia decided that the solution to that problem was to ask the al-Queda what they would like to do and who they would like to shoot and how often, and how much would they like to be paid not to shoot at anyone. Problem was, they could not find any al Queda to ask. Seems that the only al Queda available are those found in the imagination of the Bushites, right next to the WMD's. Now, there are almost 100,000 Sons of Iraq (SOI) funded by U.S. taxpayers. Most are Sunnis, including reformed insurgents who fought against U.S. troops. However, some of them don't care who they shoot as long as they get to play with their guns and rockets on a weekly basis and especially if they can make lots of noise shooting. If, however, they had a choice they prefer shooting at Shiites and not shooting at the Italians, whose Pizza they love. As one Mufda put it, "If we shoot the Italians, where do we get good Pizza? Have you tasted the dreck Halliburton is making? Yuckl!. The administration says that Iran's influence in Iraq is revolutionary. They say the Iranians are arming rogue militias to shoot at the Iraqi central government. Problem is they do not really know who those people are, because whenever any member of the government opposes the Bushite will, they disappear and a new person takes their place. The game of musical Generals and admirals is not the musical officer game in town, the Iraqi's get to play also. However, seldom, any more do the Bushites kill American officers who do not obey, they simply convince them that they will have a longer life-expectancy in civilian life. The Iraqi's who are contrary are not quite so lucky; they simply disappear, one night. In addition, the Iranians are harder to find in Iraq than are Al Queda. Petraeus and Crocker, want to blame it all of the Iranians, because it is hard to find any Al Queda to blame, so they may go head-hunting to hire some al Queda and some Iranians who will agree to be blamed, but few, except for those inhabiting the American South and Bible belt, are dumb enough to buy that Crock by Crocker. One source says that the Bushites are asking the Iranians if the US could provide them, free of charge, special very colorful uniforms. If the Iranians say yes, the US will have Brit and American Mercenaries dress up in these colorful outfits and attack US positions and blame that on the Iranians so they could start a war or provoke a violent response. So far, the two sides are arguing about choices of colors and fabric content. The Iranians are holding out for Sheepskin, the US for British Silk. Further, the Iranians want their uniforms to be red, white and Chartreuse and the US is insisting on Luminous Red and Yellow against electric Green, with large TARGET logos on front and back, with hoods so no one can see the nationality of those attacking, the better for Mercenaries to pretend to be Iranians carrying out "terrorist" activities. Iranian meddling in Iraq is one of the murkiest and most difficult parts of the picture to assess, mostly since the Iranians brokered a peace in Iraq which the Bushites could not arrange and secondly because many see the Iranian "meddling," with as much credibility as the WMD's and Al Queda presence. The United States has made various claims about direct Iranian involvement in military activity in Iraq, although evidence of such involvement has been unclear to sane people with normal vision. However, there is no doubt that there is an Iranian influence in Iraq: For example, the Iranians, not the Americans, reportedly brokered the recent cease-fire in Basra. Moreover, the Iranians have strong ties to the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, led by Shiite cleric Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, a powerful member of the coalition keeping Maliki in power. Even Crocker had to admit that, saying, "Iran has a dialogue with everyone in the Shiite community." Some are saying "Al-Queda in Iraq" is also very strong. However, we are kicking their butts in Iraq, and thus, Osama bin Laden's. "The threat posed by AQI [al-Queda in Iraq] -- while still lethal and substantial has been reduced significantly ... Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri have consistently advocated exploiting the situation in Iraq, and we have also seen AQI involved in destabilizing activities in the wider Mideast region." Is what General Petraeus says. Has he visited Turkey lately, because they also have fine hashish I hear? Some folks, who say whatever they are told to say by the Bushites about, al-Queda in Iraq -- or what the Bushites claim is some organization linked with Osama bin Laden's -- is reeling in Iraq and is getting harder to find. That is hard to verify since Al Queda has always been hard to find in Iraq, thanks to Saddam, his bitter enemy. This, the Bushites say is mostly because the group or groups or groups of groups, of larger groups or groups of groups, of militants got too rough with Iraqis, and Sunnis, in western Iraq, and so those guys don't like them anymore, so there, hahahaha! However, any connection between "AQI" and Osama bin Laden's terrorist organization is considered highly questionable by experts the Bushites have not yet bribed or threatened, who warn not to think of AQI and al-Queda as anything like the same group or group of groups, or... well you know. The recent war of Basra, in which government forces led by Maliki, a Shiite, attacked militias associated with Muqtada al-Sadr, another Shiite, was a good thing. They said that Maliki was cracking down on criminals, including Shiites. Crocker says, "When viewed with a broader lens, the Iraqi decision to combat these groups in Basra has major significance. First, a Shiite majority government, led by Prime Minister Maliki, has demonstrated its commitment to taking on criminals and extremists regardless of sectarian identity. Second, Iraqi security forces led these operations in Basra and in towns and cities throughout the south." Some observers think that comment is self-serving bullshit for the uninformed of the American south and Bible belt to swallow. Most independent analysts believe Maliki dispatched Iraqi troops to Basra not to enforce law and order, but to cripple his political adversary, Sadr, before elections in October, which is a typical Neo-con move. Maliki did not let the Americans know about the operation until moments before the fighting broke out. Good planning was another matter. The Iraqi units arrived in Basra in armored vehicles too wide to fit down many of Basra's narrow alleys. Over 1,000 Iraqi policemen and soldiers in Maliki's employ, refused to fight, including two senior field Commanders. The Bushites had, at first, labeled the attack a "defining moment" that would show the Iraqi military is guts and skill. In addition, Maliki had, vowed to see it through to victory. It turned out to be a non-victory at best, however. Crocker Claims that The Iraqis have redesigned their flag -- which is a big deal because it suggests that Iraq is uniting as a nation and that, bodes well for the future as a nation. He went on, "In January, a vote by the Council of Representatives to change the design of the Iraqi flag means the flag now flies in all parts of the country for the first time in years." So, if the nation has united, what are our troops still doing there? Well m maybe with more than $everal Billion American dollars still unaccounted for, including $282,000,000 cash from an Iraqi bank, there is more than enough, together with the graft from No-Bid contracts, the incredible 200% profit-mark-ups by the oil companies selling oil that costs them 2 cents a gallon, to produce and deliver, for $4.00 a gallon, there is plenty of graft to hire mercenaries to make life miserable in Iraq for the new American president and once we pull out a rogue force will capture the oil and sell it to American an Brit companies at still higher markups. General Petraeus says, "I recommended to my chain of command that we continue the drawdown of the surge combat forces and that, upon the withdrawal of the last surge brigade combat team in July, we undertake a 45-day period of consolidation and evaluation. At the end of that period, we will commence a process of assessment to examine the conditions on the ground and, over time, determine when we can make recommendations for further reductions." So here is my take: With the occupation holding steady at about 140,000 U.S. troops throughout the summer, the Iraq war will now become the worst nightmare of the next American President, which they believe will be a Democrat. The men and women of our armed forces may well be fighting a war against guerrillas paid by oil companies, corporate mercenaries and other rogue Mass-murdering pirates.
Treason? Of course, but hasn't this entire war been treasonous as well as everything this administration supported by a rogue profit hungry, soulless congress and Supreme Court?
