Cedric's Big Mix: Amy wanna a cracker?

Monday, December 01, 2008

Amy wanna a cracker?

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE

TODAY ON DEMOCRACY SOMETIMES!, IMPERIAL AGENT AMY GOODMAN (AKA AMY GOODWHORE -- TALK ABOUT A WRONG NAME!) LIED AND DECLARED THE TREATY BETWEEN THE WHITE HOUSE AND IRAQ WAS "LANDMARK." WHERE DID SHE GET THAT TALKING POINT?

FROM THE WHITE HOUSE.

AMY'S BEEN WORKING FOR THE MAN FOR SOME TIME NOW AND IT IS WHY WAS SHE WAS PIMPING THE ASPEN INSTITUTE BACK IN JULY.

WHEN ASKED, SMELLS GAMEY GOODMAN TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "I CAN'T PULL IN AN AUDIENCE. OF COURSE I DEPEND ON FOUNDATION MONEY. I DO WHAT I AM TOLD. I AM AN AGENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND I WILL REPEAT ANY LIE NECESSARY TO PROLONG ILLEGAL OCCUPATIONS."

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Meanwhile, mark the calendars, Jodie Evans and I-Need-Attention Benjamin may not be the biggest idiots of the week. Red Diaper Baby Amy Goodman, so busy pleasuring herself over Barack Obama's win she helped so much with, demonstrated just what a loon, idiot and non-journalist she's always been -- independent or otherwise -- today on the trashy, daily hour of propaganda Pacifica Radio broadcasts where she declared of the treaty voted on by Iraq's Parliament Thursday that it was "landmark" and it "paves the way for U.S. forces to withdraw by the end of 2011." Blah, blah, blah. The most useless tool of US imperialism is what Liar Goody's become (which does explain her week at the Aspen Institute last summer and her need to parade their speakers on her program without informing her listeners of that fact) decided the way to 'round out' her propaganda was to quote the puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki -- surely a trusted voice! Democracy Sometimes! cries Goody, just never, ever today. So nice of the non-reporter and non-journalist to toss out about 30 bad seconds to the Iraq War -- remember, the war she tried to ride to fame, the one she got her tired, droopy ass booked on the cable shows via, "Only I, Amy Goodman, tell the truth about the Iraq War, only I, Amy Goodman, cover the Iraq War, only I, Amy Goodman . . . " Today, not only can she not get the facts right, she expects her increasingly dwindling audience to be grateful she managed to toss out a 'shout-out' to an ongoing, illegal war that will hit the six-year mark this March.

In the real world, the treaty passed the Parliament on Thursday. It was covered in the Thursday and Friday snapshots last week. Amy Goodman called it a "landmark" -- Xenophobic Whore says what? While The Liar Goody chants "USA! USA!", the reality is that the treaty went before the 275 member Parliament and was voted with 149 members voting for it. No, that's not a landmark, nor is it the two-thirds required by Iraqi's own Constitution. As for "landmark," AFP explained Friday who was calling it that, the United States government. If we can get past Liar Goody's "USA! USA!" chants, lets remember what Iran's Press TV reported:

"Washington echelons repeatedly threatened to overthrow the Iraqi government if they continued their opposition to the security deal," said Tehran's interim Friday prayers leader Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati.

Iraq's al-Morsad reported on Oct. 10 that US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte had warned that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki would be 'ousted' unless he signed the US-proposed security pact.

Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi has also claimed that the Bush administration had threatened to cut off vital services to Baghdad if it further delayed the accord, saying the threats were akin to 'political blackmail'.

"It was really shocking for us…Many people are looking to this attitude as a matter of blackmailing," al-Hashimi said on Oct. 26.

As we noted during the holiday, The Scotsman explains the treaty better than any domestic outlet: "On Thursday, Iraqi lawmakers approved a pact allowing US forces to stay in Iraq for three more years." It does not guarantee the US leaves at the end of 2011. It takes a real liar, a real whore to repeat that lie (hello, Amy Goodman, tired and old but someone's tossing dimes on her night stand). For those who missed reality, we'll drop back to Thursday's snapshot.

Yeah, it's a one-year agreement. Only 2009 cannot be changed or cancelled. Everything else that the White House says is set-in-stone is actually a conditional option that can be wiped away by either side. Today the White House finally released the agreement in English. We'll jump in at Article 30 The Period for which the Agreement is Effective:

1) This Agreement shall be effective for a period of three years, unless terminated sooner by either Party pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article.

Get it? Paragraph three: "This Agreement shall terminate one year after a Party provides written notification to the other Party to that effect." Meaning only 2009 is set in stone. It is too late for either party (US or Iraq) to give one year's notice and cancel it in 2009. They can give notice to cancel in 2010 or 2011. The second clause is also worth noting because it weakens the strength of any agreement as well: "This Agreement shall be amended only with the official agrement of the Parties in writing and in accordance with the constitutional proceudures in effect in both countries." That's the aspect that allows for a change and all the 'flowery' respect for Constitutional procedures is hog wash. The Iraqi Parliament needed to have two-thirds of all members (not just members present) to pass the treaty today. They did not have that. According to their Constitution and their laws, that's what was needed. In the US, Congressional approval is needed over all treaties and we know that has not take place. We further know that Barack Obama -- alleged Constitutional scholar -- doesn't give a damn about the Constitution. He show boated and did his little pretty words number while campaigning but despite all his insisting that the treaty would have to come before the Congress -- including becoming one of thirteen co-sponsors on Hillary Clinton's Senate bill insisting upon that -- he shut his corporate mouth and put his tiny tail between his legs to slink off like the disgusting, cowering trash he is. He's not going to stand up for the Constitution 'later.' He couldn't stand up for it right now.

An agreement built upon a systematic disrespect for the rule of law does not suddenly develop one. An agreement built upon lies does not suddenly embrace honesty. The treaty is built on lies and they include the lies to the American people. Why is the US pursuing this treaty? The White House keeps talking about these 'recent' gains in Iraq. Today is November 27th of 2008. Recent would, for most of us, go back no further than the end of spring. But Article 25 explains Nouri al-Maliki and Condi Rice notified the United Nations that the Security Council's mandate would be cancelled at the end of this year . . . last year. al-Maliki's letter was dated December 7th, Rice's December 10th. 'Recent' events?

The agreement the White House has released may not be the official agreement or the final one. It is the one that US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker and Iraq's Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari signed November 17, 2008. The note above their signatures states: "Signed in duplicate in Baghdad on this 17th day of November, 2008, in the English and Arabic languages, each text being equally authentic."

That version is published online by the White House in PDF format (click here). The Bully Boy of the United States released the following statement today: "Earlier today, in another sign of progress, Iraq's Council of Representatives approved two agreements with the United States, a Strategic Framework Agreement and a Security Agreement, often called a Status of Forces Agreement or SOFA. The Strategic Framework Agreement sets the foundation for a long-term bilateral relationship between our two countries, and the Security Agreement addresses our presence, activities, and withdrawal from Iraq. Today's vote affirms the growth of Iraq's democracy and increasing ability to secure itself. We look forward to a swift approval by Iraq's Presidency Council. Two years ago, this day seemed unlikely -- but the success of the surge and the courage of the Iraqi people set the conditions for these two agreements to be negotiated and approved by the Iraqi parliament. The improved conditions on the ground and the parliamentary approval of these two agreements serve as a testament to the Iraqi, Coalition, and American men and women, both military and civilian, who paved the way for this day."

That was all in Thursday's snapshot. No reason for the alleged 'independent' media today to still not know what the hell they are talking about. But have they ever needed a reason to demonstrate why they couldn't get real jobs in the real media? No. On Friday, we addressed how little bits of reality surfaced in the reporting from the MSM, buried deep, but they surfaced. The Washington Post managed to include the following on the treaty:

". . . the pact also allows the Iraqi government to negotiate with the United States to extend the presence of U.S. troops if conditions on the ground are not stable. The Los Angeles Times manages to note: "The pact allows for amendments if both sides agree to them. U.S. officials have indicated that they interpret that as permitting an extension, if security conditions in Iraq are deemed too shaky to leave Iraqi forces in charge. 'There is a provision for extension, by agreement of both sides,' one U.S. official said."

2009 is the only thing binding by the treaty. It is not difficult to grasp at this late date. The only reason not to grasp it is because you don't want to. Liars, fools and whores need to be held accountable. Which is a good time to bring in the Bully Boy of the United States who thinks he can rewrite reality as well. Lauren Sher (ABC News) reports he will appear on ABC's World News Tonight this evening to declare, "I think I was unprepared for war." Which one? Vietnam or Iraq? He continues, "In other words, I didn't campaign and say, 'Please vote for me, I'll be able to handle an attack'." Iraq didn't attack the United States and if Gibson doesn't correct Bully Boy on that the whole world will grasp why he spent the bulk of his TV time on a morning entertainment show (Good Morning America) and not in the news department. Repeating, Iraq did not attack the United States. Bully Boy thinks he can lie and get away with it and -- watch and see -- many people will allow him to get away with it. Gibson is a tool, a fool and a tired, tired whore. (He and Goody should go on vacation together.) Gibson asks him what if he'd known there were no WMDs? What if he'd known that? The public record indicates the White House always knew that. The public record demonstrates that. Apparently we're all supposed to forget Paul Wolfowitz' May 2003 statements and everything else reported including Colin Powell's original snarl that he wasn't going to say "this s--t" to the United Nations (he, of course, did). All forgotten because Bully Boy wants to allow that maybe he made a few mistakes. I guess it's easier to confess to mistakes than to war crimes. He truly is the spawn of Tricky Dick. And if you doubt that, UPI reports that while pretending to have some sort of sorrow, he also wanted to insist that Iraq was "his greatest accomplishment" and quotes him stating, "I keep recognizing we're in a war against ideological thugs and keeping America safe." Iraq DID NOT attack the United States.