The Purple Pinup Guru Platform

When purple things are pulsating on your mind, I'm the one whose clock you want to clean. Aiding is Sparky, the Astral Plane Zen Pup Dog from his mountain stronghold on the Northernmost Island of the Happy Ninja Island chain, this blog will also act as a journal to my wacky antics at an entertainment company and the progress of my self published comic book, The Deposit Man which only appears when I damn well feel like it. Real Soon Now.

Tuesday, August 09, 2005



• • •


March 5, 2003 - General Tommy Franks, commander of the U.S. Central Command, answers a question at the daily Pentagon briefing. General Franks was at the Pentagon to have meetings with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld (not pictured) about possible future operations inside Iraq.

Washington Post: Dan Froomkin: Is Bush Vulnerable on Iraq?
Will Lester writes for the Associated Press: "Americans' approval of President Bush's handling of Iraq is at its lowest level yet, according to an AP-Ipsos poll that also found fewer than half now believe he's honest." ... "Approval of Bush's handling of Iraq, which had been hovering in the low- to mid-40s most of the year, dipped to 38 percent. . . . "A solid majority still see Bush as a strong and likable leader, though the president's confidence is seen as arrogance by a growing number. . . . "Bush's overall job approval was at 42 percent, with 55 percent disapproving. That's about where Bush's approval has been all summer but slightly lower than at the beginning of the year." ... Here are the complete results , and some graphs.
Tom Raum of the Associated Press looks at the headlines, looks at the poll results, and concludes: "The deadly recent attacks on American troops in Iraq are increasing the pressure on President Bush to develop an exit strategy. The U.S. death toll from the war is now over 1,800, and a new AP-Ipsos poll shows the lowest approval yet for Bush's handling of Iraq, just 38 percent. ... "The president's fellow Republicans are growing nervous as they head into an election year."

Rumsfeld always overruled Franks, New Yorker magazine says —

BBC:Rumsfeld 'wanted cheap war'
“US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld forced his military chiefs to accept his idea that a relatively small, lightly armed force should go to war with Iraq, it is being alleged.

The New Yorker magazine quotes unnamed Pentagon sources as saying that Mr Rumsfeld insisted at least six times before the conflict on the proposed number of troops being reduced.
In an article to be published on Monday, the magazine says Mr Rumsfeld overruled advice from the war commander, General Tommy Franks, to delay the invasion of Iraq.
The defence secretary has flatly denied overriding military commanders.
"You will find, if you ask anyone who has been involved in the process in the central command, that every single thing that they have requested has, in fact, happened," he said on the US television network, Fox News. ...” (Complete in link & New Yorker article linked below)

The New Yorker: OFFENSE AND DEFENSE: The battle between Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon:
“... As the ground campaign against Saddam Hussein faltered last week, with attenuated supply lines and a lack of immediate reinforcements, there was anger in the Pentagon. Several senior war planners complained to me in interviews that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his inner circle of civilian advisers, who had been chiefly responsible for persuading President Bush to lead the country into war, had insisted on micromanaging the war’s operational details. Rumsfeld’s team took over crucial aspects of the day-to-day logistical planning—traditionally, an area in which the uniformed military excels—and Rumsfeld repeatedly overruled the senior Pentagon planners on the Joint Staff, the operating arm of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “He thought he knew better,” one senior planner said. “He was the decision-maker at every turn. ... ” (Complete in link)
Ponder this — Orson Scott Card: War Watch :
“ ... A report from the Army War College, written by Jeffrey Record, warns that the U.S. Army is "near the breaking point."

"The global war on terrorism as currently defined and waged is dangerously indiscriminate and ambitious, and accordingly ... its parameters should be readjusted." (Quoted from a Washington Post article by Thomas E. Ricks.)

It would be easy to dismiss Record as being an former aide to Sam Nunn, a Democrat, and say that this report is pure partisanship. And, in fact, there are aspects of the report that clearly show bias in the treatment of the evidence -- especially in Record's recommendations about what ought to be done.

Going after just Al-Qaeda instead of all of the interlocking network of fanatical Muslim terrorists, as Record recommends, is precisely the kind of selective targeting that made the Vietnam War impossible to win.

But ignore his conclusions, for the moment, and look at what he actually has evidence for.

The American military is seriously overextended. After years of neglect under Clinton, so that when Bush took office there was barely enough ammunition in stock to mount a panty raid, it took major ratcheting up of defense spending to get our army to the strength it supposedly had on paper, let alone increase its capability.

The problem with military power is that the moment you commit a significant part of the force to combat, then from that moment on, you have far less in reserve to deal with other threats that might come up.

Plus, combat requires an eruption of money, whether you win or lose. All those smart weapons that kept us from killing as many civilians as previous wars would have killed cost far more than the much cheaper dumb weapons.

Add to that the fact that with our forces committed to Iraq and a significant number also still involved in Afghanistan, we only have a reserve large enough to deal with one other major combat and that would mean a total commitment of all our resources. A third major combat would break us.

Record seems to be making the case that we couldn't even deal well with the one. I can't dispute his figures; they are not implausible. ...” (complete in link)
New York Times: Bob Herbert: War on the Cheap :
“ ... We don't have enough troops because we are fighting the war on the cheap. The Bush administration has refused to substantially expand the volunteer military and there is no public support for a draft. So the same troops head in and out of Iraq, and then back in again, as if through a revolving door. That naturally heightens their chances of being killed or wounded.

A reckoning is coming. The Army National Guard revealed last Thursday that it had missed its recruiting goals for the past two months by 30 percent. Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum, who heads the National Guard Bureau, said: "We're in a more difficult recruiting environment, period. There's no question that when you have a sustained ground combat operation going that the Guard's participating in, that makes recruiting more difficult."

Just a few days earlier, the chief of the Army Reserve, Lt. Gen. James Helmly, told The Dallas Morning News that recruiting was in a "precipitous decline" that, if not reversed, could lead to renewed discussions about reinstatement of the draft.

The Bush administration, which has asked so much of the armed forces, has established a pattern of dealing in bad faith with its men and women in uniform. The callousness of its treatment of the troops was, of course, never more clear than in Donald Rumsfeld's high-handed response to a soldier's question about the shortages of battle armor in Iraq. ...” (complete in link)

Federal Suit Filed Against Rumsfeld For Prisoner Abuse

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld still faces human rights abuse allegations

March 2, 2005

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld faces a federal lawsuit brought today by the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights First, filed in his home state of Illinois. The suit charges that he bears direct responsibility for the torture and abuse of detainees in U.S. military custody.

The lawsuit was filed in federal court on behalf of eight men who were subject to torture and abuse at the hands of U.S. forces under Secretary Rumsfeld's command. The parties seek a court order declaring that Secretary Rumsfeld's actions are in violation of the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes and international law.



U.S. war protest mom met Bush in 2004
August 9, 2005

Cindy Sheehan rallied supporters in front of the tour bus
emblazoned with "Veterans for Impeachment Tour".

Bush Junta II's Puppet Boy
King's administration
lackluster and shoddy
handling of pre-war intelligence
The image “” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.
Standard GOP Chickenhawk
salute to Our Brave Loyal
American War Dead as
demonstrated by
the Traitor Karl Rove
Related stories
External links

On a CNN Wolf Blitzer Late Edition broadcast Sunday, U.S. Senators George Allen (R-VA) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) both told Blitzer that in the furore created by the protest that they believe President Bush should personally meet with Cindy Sheehan. She is the mother of a soldier son killed in Iraq in April 2004, and leader of a protest march now camped near the presidential ranch in Crawford, Texas.

After returning from commercial break, Blitzer told his guests that CNN had just received a news bulletin from the White House. The bulletin said that Bush had met previously with Sheehan in the summer of 2004. Both Senators and Blitzer withheld further comment on the matter during the remaining segment of the show.

Later that day, Cindy Sheehan herself appeared on CNN Sunday with Blitzer and said she did meet with Bush at the White House with fifteen or sixteen other families.

She defended her current protest by saying, "The whole meeting was simply bizarre and disgusting."

Sheehan said that Bush entered the meeting chamber with an insensitive comment to those present, "Who we'all honorin' today?" She added, "His mouth kept moving, but there was nothing in his eyes or anything else about him that showed me he really cared or had any real compassion at all. This is a human being totally disconnected from humanity and reality. His eyes were empty, hollow shells."

The angry mother of the fallen U.S. soldier on Saturday led a protest march of nearly 50 on the Bush ranch. Cindy Sheehan of Vacaville, California demanded, but was denied, the chance to speak with Bush and personally ask him, "'Why did you kill my son? What did my son die for?"

Sheehan was met outside the ranch, after progress of the march was stopped by Texas troopers and the Secret Service, by national security adviser Steve Hadley and deputy White House chief of staff Joe Hagin. They spoke with her approximately 45 minutes.

Sheehan, unsatisfied with the meeting, vowed to remain camped outside the ranch until she is granted a personal interview with Bush. Meanwhile, Bush arrived in Albuqerque, New Mexico Monday where he signed into law the new energy bill. He will travel back to his Texas ranch this week to meet with his defense and economic advisers, then later, he will travel to Illinois to sign a highway bill.

Cindy Sheehan said Sunday that she plans to hold the roadside peace protest near Bush's ranch until he talks to her again. "I'll follow him to D.C.," she said.


External link

It's about the War - and it all matters ...
Read up on the Downing Street Memo again! Link Above ... It is time to take these traitors to prison! I bet the chickenhawks are so excited about doubling their profits (selling armor twice) that they're pooping themselves with glee (maybe there's a different trail to follow if someone has the nose for it?) - Sparky


  • At 7:02 PM , Blogger Coat said...

    Formatting is wonky - I'll try and fix later

  • At 10:36 AM , Blogger Coat said...

    Can't resolve the formatting wonkiness ... looks good in Composition mode - publishing makes it wonky.

    Mea Culpa - Sparky


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home