Tweet
By a vote 76-22, the Senate passed the Lieberman-Kyl amendment, which threatens to “combat, contain and [stop]” Iran via “military instruments.” Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) called the amendment “Cheney’s fondest pipe dream” and said it could “read as a backdoor method of gaining Congressional validation for military action.”
Total roll call is here. Clinton and Reid both voted for it. Obama (D-Ostrich) was predictably not present for the vote.
I suppose I should be comforted that 22 Democrats voted against this bill, as opposed to the 97-0 vote for Lieberman’s last bellicose “let’s bomb Iran” chest thumper.
Somehow I’m not.
(Note — final language of the amendment here.)
185 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Jane!!!
dreadful! ughh!
To say this is an outrage, is a dramatic understatement. I feel unrepresented in the foreign policy arena.
Can anyone say Prez HRC won’t attack Iran?
Proud of Senator Sherrod Brown..glad many of us worked our asses off for him.
The language has completely changed. #3 and #4 were scrapped. Here is the revised Amendment that passed:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c…..age=8&
Senator Byrd to the protestors “one more time, out you go, don’t do it”
I wonder which Middle Eastern country Maliki was referring to?
UNITED NATIONS – Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki warned the U.N. General Assembly Wednesday that the continued flow of weapons, suicide bombers and terrorism funding into his country would result in “disastrous consequences” for the region and the world.
Need another clue that Bayh wants to be Clinton’s Veep?
He votes for the stupid ass amendment, and Lugar (one of the savviest foreign policy Senators) doesn’t?
Oklahoma kiddo @ 7
Good Catch!!! Sau…
I can’t shake the feeling that I have NO representation in our government. It seems like a pure fix. Supposedly we have two competing political parties, but in the end their votes are already in-line with a pre-determined stance.
My own Senator, Dick Durbin, voted for this crap. I’ve been calling his office all morning regarding Von Spakovsky, but have been unable to get through. And then to find out that he voted for this piece of shit.
Oh Gawd I feel better.
AP – Unhappy with the Pentagon’s oversight of its private contractors in Iraq, Defense Secretary Robert Gates has dispatched a fact-finding team to probe further into the problem, officials said Wednesday.
Lately I feel like I don’t even belong in this country anymore.
No way in hell will Hillary get my primary vote.
The general election, we’re stuck, but she is not my nominee.
Jesus fucking Christ, what is wrong with these people?
I see from the roll call that my Senators were split. The usually reliable Boxer voted nay, while the increasingly cartoonish DiFi voted yea.
Dammit!
I am having trouble understanding the Biden amendment vote..
So all but one Dem just supported partitioning of Iraq?
SteveAudio @ 14
Don’t bother trying her Washington office, you’ll have better luck calling her San Fran office, fat lot of good it will do, however.
Well, since the threat of vapors from silly schoolhouse rhymes in advertisements has been forcefully dealt with, it is time for our government to turn to starting a new vanity war.
It’s not like they should be dealing with the illegal and unconstitutional acts of the sitting government or trying to disentangle our country from two existing, failing wars. Or dealing with the growing domestic problems.
Remember, MoveOn bought an advertisement.
The language in the Amendment was changed. The bill linked to in the post, is not the one that was passed. Please read it as amended.:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c…..age=8&
Oklahoma kiddo @ 11
Gawd, what a load of donkey kong crap.
Hillary votes Aye, and Obama is absent? Edwards should have a field day with that.
LS @ 5
Seems like section 5 would give them plenty of room to pre-emptively attack Iran.
” that the US should so designate Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps as a foreign terroist organization”
I wish 22 Democrats voted “nay.” It was 19. Hagel and Lugar voted “nay,” as did the Independent, Sanders.
Damn. It’s the only commentary I can muster. And the modified language doesn’t do much to placate me.
I think Boxer and Feinstein get together on who votes nay and who yea because they often cancel out each others vote. That way the Dems can’t win and war goes on. Obama and McCain are look-alikes. Talk about cut and run. These two are poster boys.
It’s extremely interesting that NOWHERE in the language of the amendment (which I found here but I’m not 100% it was the latest version that passed) is there a mention of the Iranian nuclear program.
So (a) it’s so flimsy that even Kyl/Lieberman don’t want to bring it up, but (b) it’s still out there floating in people’s minds without being really debunked.
I guess they learned their lesson the first time: you need only whisper about WMD’s, don’t put them up front and center.
Will someone please confirm that the K/L ammendment was just a “sense of the Senate resolution.” Please.
I am not saying that these sense of the Senate resolutions are trivial, but, it is an important distinction.
It’s like being in an alternate universe.
How can Sen. Webb have said all that he said yesterday on the floor of the Senate, and still Clinton(?!) and Reid(?!), among many other Democrats, voted for it?
I would ask if there’s something we’re not seeing, except for a few days, weeks, months, or years after a vote like this, they’ll all say if they’d understood the bill better they wouldn’t have voted for it.
Of course, those mea culpas don’t usually appear until something else dreadful happens.
UGH!!
OK everyone, let’s have a sing-along … and a one, and a two and a three …
Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran ….
The odds of us being in a nuclear war with Iran before the onset of more rain in the region just went up by a huge factor. Short of massive protests, there is nothing we can do to stop it now. Massive protests, beyond any scale ever seen in this country may not even be enough to stop this totally derailed system from destroying our legacy in the eyes and hearts of nations for the rest of mine, my kids’, and their kids’ lives.
Totally confirming my view of Obama: playing to the crowd. Not quite sure what the savvy move is, so plays it safe for now, leaving plenty of wiggle room.
Presidential? I think not.
And Hillary? Lining up with the warmongers? SCREW THAT.
in fact there’s a lot of names on that list that make my blood boil.
Kathleen @ 21
Not really. The AUMF specifically cited those responsible for the attacks on 9/11. Designating them a terrorist organization is just that…just words. It’s not to say that something resembling an authorization to use force against the nation of Iran isn’t in the works, but this is not it.
f*ck L/K.
here’s LKJ.
Gates yes sir we have a group in Iraq undermining the Iraqi governments efforts to “step up to the plate” by asking Blackwater to get the hell out of our country.
Well, I’ve just gone from Hillary-nutral to a Hillary-fighter
and to make matters worse, the insanity is not limited to the senate. yesterday the house voted to approve lantos’ anti-iranian bill H.R.1400, “Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007,” by 397 – 16.
by vote totals, even worse than in the senate.
albert fall @ 13
May be a pipe dream but the Draft Gore online movement is picking up a lotta steam lately – in the six days I was in SF and offline.
ReElect President Al Gore in 2008!
Accept No Substitute! Keep Hillary in da Senate!
Big Mitch @ 24
Good point. I’d forgotten it was a (non)Sense of the Senate resolution. I’m sure that’s what many Dems will use as cover. Meanwhile, Bush/Cheney will see it as all the authorization they need.
HumboldtBlue @ 27
Old Beach Boy fans like me do not like McCains’
version at all.
Excuse the vent but I was trying to eat lunch while I pulled up the Lake and read this vote…What the !@#$(*)@#$&) is wrong with these people??? How do we get our message across to those who are supposedly representing us or to the democratic party? Because calls/protests/letters/emails just aren’t doing the trick!
Thanks – back to..well, no, I don’t want lunch any more….
LS @ 18
will do. but it will have to wait until after the senate appropriations committee hearing. i can’t think about what i’m reading while i’m trying to think about what i’m listening to.
Ed*ard Teller @ 28
Time to put our own asses on the line for the Iranian people. So many dead in Iraq, so many refugees. Way overdue for massive civil disobedience…how many people have to die for the American people to wake the fuck up?
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/
Oct 27
National Mobilization
to End the War in Iraq
11 Massive Demonstrations for Peace
Boston, Chicago, Jonesborough, Tenn., Los Angeles, New Orleans, New York City, Orlando, Philadelphia, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, and Seattle
A March in your neighborhood. Make your plans now!
bluejeansntshirt @ 37
I’m pretty sure the Iranians panned his version as well.
is that ted stevens yelling at negroponte?
From Jane’s post above:
“which threatens to “combat, contain and [stop]” Iran via “military instruments.”
This language was scrapped. The amendment in the link is not what was passed. Don’t worry, I won’t repeat this again, but if you haven’t read what was actually passed, you should, just so you know. :]
Geez!! Guess who the only one who voted the right way on all these bills was? Feingold, of course. I am happy he voted against HoJo’s bill this time since he voted for it last time. Is Harry Reid that stupid that he doesn’t think Darth Vader will use this(if he in fact does) to double down? Ugh!!
LS @ 30
I agree that the most offensive paragraphs were removed and diplomatic language was added. It still represents an unnecessary escalation in our relations with Iran.
EPU’d from last thread:
Biodun @ 199
LS @ 43
please continue to repeat until we get it right… sometimes it takes a few reminders *g*
still does sound (from what webb said on senate floor) that this a very problematic bill (although perhaps not as bad as it was before the changes),
newspaperbrat @ 35
I’ve been reading that Gore doesn’t get along with the Clinton’s these days at all. If she is still polling at 40% come Halloween, will that make him jump in? The funny thing with that is, from the few polls with him in it that I saw, he actually takes a fair amount of support from Hillary(though I am sure a fair amount of Edwards supporters will jump ship if Al runs).
LS @ 43
Yes, but the key provision was Congress endorsement of designating the Revolutionary Guard as terrorist organization — this is the go ahead the Admin needed to take further actions. Whatever we do against a terrorist organization is okay — it is a political (and partly legal) blank check, because if bush takes action against them, no one will complain, because after all Congress said they were bad guys.
When you look at the crossed out document at TPM, and then think about how
carelesslycarefully the US Congress considers matters of war and peace, all you can do is shake your head, or your fist. Truly irresponsible.We are going to attack Iran soon. I am beginning to believe this is a no thinker.
Now is the time to hear from all Hillary supporters. What say you?
LS @ 30
I don’t know LS. USually I follow your lead, but in this case I read it the way Kathleen has it.
Bush has thumped repeatedly that we’ll go after terrorists and any country who harbors them…laws get swirled into warmongering sound bites and vice versa and Bob’s yer uncle. And since when has the law stopped Bush anyway?
This sends the message that the Senate agrees with Bush that we should bomb the crap out of anyone we don’t like. It’s disgusting statesmanship, if one can even use that word for this Senate.
IOW I am not assured by any edits of anything coming from Kyl and Hojo.
:(
pukers.
alla them.
Thank you, Ms. Jane, for being the voice of reason.
(gotta go throw up now.)
Oklahoma kiddo @ 50
If we do, it would truly be a no-thinker. The decision is now left to the WH and whatever is left of rational people in the Pentagon. Congress is AWOL.
Gates…So now we have Al Queda in Afghanistan and Iraq, so we need to stay
Oklahoma kiddo @ 50
All the Bush death cult needs now is money, and that’s what the $200 billion “emergency” request for Iraq is all about, coming up today I think.
(How can anyone take seriously an “emergency” request for funding five years into the Iraq Occupation?)
The mystery remains: do they really believe in and favor a war with Iran, or have they been subjected to some mysterious “pressure” by somebody.
So, what are the possibilities? :
* On Sunday Glenn Greenwald http://www.salon.com/opinion/g…..index.html offered the opinion that DiFi is socially, politically, and economically secure and hence beyond pressure and certainly not “spineless” in the sense of personal fear. He believes that it’s a matter of class identification.
* Some conspiracy theorists believe that the NSA has been gathering shit on everyone and the right wing is using it for blackmail.
* There is always A*P*C to blame, and it’s generally acknowledged that they were the force behind the Lieberman bill. (I’d go with that one in the particular case of Kyl-Lieberman, since all Iran has been a bee in their bonnet for a long time. But can they be blamed for betrayals on FISA and Habeas Corpus and everything else in sight? I don’t think so.)
* They truly believe that war with Iran, like domestic surveillance and torture and indefinite detention, is a good thing.
do-si-do @ 52
I am a peasant you folks may be lawyers. That section jumped out at me in the original amendment.
scarecrow @ 54
On this issue they have been AWOL since May when in the Iraq supplemental they removed the amendment that required Bush to seek Congressional approval before an attack on Iran.
General Pace no proof that Iran is sending in IED’s
http://www.americablog.com/200…..ts-as.html
I guess George & Dick now have their Congressional Declaration of War. I wonder when the bombs start flying?
I believe reelecting Gore is the only way we can begin to turn some of this insanity around.
Ben Nelson, in action.
This morning’s result: faced with the defection of a Democrat on the committee, later revealed to be Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) chose to agree to send all four nominees, two Democrats and two Republicans, to the floor without recommendation. In other words, the committee did not vote to approve von Spakovsky, but he got through nonetheless.
A Democrat voting to put von Spakovsky on the FEC makes even less sense than a Wookiee living on Endor. What is Nelson’s problem?
selise @ 47
I would rather it not come to the floor in the first place. It sets a stage. This must be condemnation week. Bad Iran and its military (only US can supply arms to other armies) and bad, bad MoveOn.org.
Hi, y’all. Thank god for the Lake. Keeping me from getting seriously depressed about the state of our country.
I have npr’s Talk of the Nation on. It’s “Political Junkie” day. Announced topics; Larry Craig (not even the title of senator included), this week’s debates, and I-forget-the-third. I was so appalled, sitting here reading about Kyl-Lieberman, watching a substantive conversation on issues, I sent an email objecting to the topics, and telling them what I wanted to hear. I pointed out that the announced topics were trivial.
Then, when they announced Armstrong Williams to comment on the Repugs ducking the Morgan State debate, AND Williams objected to his introduction, claiming he was not a “Republican columnist,”, “just a columnist,” the guest host APOLOGIZED! Yup, I sent another email, pointing out also that the actual introduction was as a “conservative columnist.”
Our media just get sadder and sadder. W/o the Lake and TPM and Nest Hurrah and all the others that I’ve discovered through FDL, not to mentio Blue America, I would simply be in despair.
I wonder if anyone will ask General Pace do you have verifiable evidence (that could be recognized by the International community) that proves that Iran is sending in IED’s to Iraq.
Remember when Seymour Hersh told us in the “Iran Plan” that US special forces and the Israeli mossad were all ready on the ground in Iran.
selise @ 47
I just repeated it, because people were flipping out, as was I, until I read the changes. Many people read the post, the links, and then comment. It is an unnecessary bill, but not really consequential, in my ignorant opinion. What is worse, is if everybody abandons candidate support based on a different impression than what actually happened.
Eureka Springs @ 15
No. Biden completely rejected “partition” as descriptive, on one of the talking head fests recently. The plan is for a weak central government with the Kurds, Shia and Sunni each able to police themselves and make their own laws about domestic concerns. You can read it here.
I think it is also significant that he did not vote for the Iran amendment. When he was here in Iowa a few weeks ago, I asked him about Iran, and he made it very clear that he thinks war with Iran would be colossally stupid. He said it would provoke a constitutional crisis.
Biodun @ 46
:-0!
I’m going with Dodd from now on.
darn straight– how about it, Pelosi and Reid and everbody else????? And don’t give me the quivering poop that you (?dems?) have been spewing about a veto-proof majority! PUT it out there yesterday!
Dodd, Kucinich, Gore……. JANE!
ifthethunderdontgetya @ 63
He has the IQ of an acephalic gibbon. This has been another edition of “Snarky Answers to Simple Questions.”
QuakerGirl @ 64
I could not agree more.
Spector just said Irans nuclear “weapons” program.
Do these folks ever listen to Iaea’s El Baradei who says there is no proof to back up these claims about Iran.
Iran came to the Bush administratin in 2003
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..00727.html
http://www.cfr.org/publication/10326/
Kathleen @ 74
It makes you want to pull your hair out. And, no they don’t listen to IAEA. They listen to Bush and Cheney.
May 25, 2006 by Inter Press Service
Iran Proposal to U.S. Offered Peace with Israel
by Gareth Porter
2003 Iran approached the Bush administration
http://www.commondreams.org/he…..525-05.htm
LS @ 67
What bothers me about the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment even in its modified incarnation is that it still keeps us going in the wrong direction. Yes, it is not as bad as it could be but is that the bar we are using to judge Congressional Democrats now?
Kathleen @ 74
Snarlin’ Arlen usually makes a big show of looking like he understands something before crapping out and throwing BushCo another bone. Today he was in a hurry.
Kathleen @ 76
But, of course, offering peace to BushCo is a little like offering a carrot to a rabid wolf.
Biden is right. War with Iran will provoke a constitutional crisis and the constitution will lose. The NeoCons have been trying to diminish and change the constitution for years. They would draw up there own and replace our constitution. We will have a strong military government with elite rule. Voting will be mostly ceremonial. Capitalism will replace democracy and the military will be used to ensure democracy doesn’t rear its ugly head again among the people. War, war and more war.
“Yes, it is not as bad as it could be but is that the bar we are using to judge Congressional Democrats now?”
There is no bar, there is no difference between the two parties inside the beltway. They are all bought and paid for by the same big money. They vote together against the wishes of their constituents. Let’s all make sure we donate more money though, because things are surely getting better! What utter garbage.
Hugh @ 77
I agree completely. I just wanted to point out that it is not a blank check to attack the country of Iran. In it’s earlier, broader incarnation, it was much worse. The whole drum up to war with Iran is insanity.
Ugh — folks, if the Criminal-in-Chief and his cronies succeed in unleashing one or more mushroom clouds on Iran you can kiss our economy good-bye.
IIRC, Iran supplies oil to China, and guess who’s holding a lot of our T-bills?
Wonder what the rich-bitch Republicans will do when their lake of money vanishes?
EvilDrPuma @ 72
spew alert!
(damn – all over the charts, too. glad weak green tea doesn’t stain…much)
Senator Leahy can Blackwater be prosecuted? Does Iraq have authority to prosecute?
What the hell all of these characters have been demanding that the Iraqi government “step up to the plate” ” accept responsibility for the direction of their country” but do not have anyway to prosecute Blackwater.
Was this Bremer’s doing
EvilDrPuma @ 72
Thanks. The clown won in 2006, it’s not like he has to bow and scrape before the Kitty Harris crowd (in fact, I wonder if he could have won against anybody besides pontoons).
EvilDrPuma @ 72
Let’s not insult the gibbon :-D
Brisingamen @ 83
They will not nuke Iran. They want the oil, if they nuke Iran, they won’t be able to operate. I think most likely they will threaten, and threaten until they get Iran to say uncle by giving them some big incentive; or they will attack them with airstrikes following a false flag incident or provoked incident. They will not nuke them. They are way, way too greedy.
I just can’t help repeat Leahy looks and acts like the god I was taught to believe in by the Catholic church…just, stern, compassionate and after the truth. Helen Thomas the female equivalent
Kathleen @ 89
And remember Kathleen, Blackwater was founded and is run by a band of militant Catholics. Crusaders to say the least.
Kathleen @ 89
I think Leahy looks like a giant leprechaun! McConnell looks like Jiminy Cricket.
Susan in Iowa @ 68
biden and the rest of our senate has no business telling the iraqis how to organize their country. that is my objection.
I sill can’t shake the smell of the fucking incense from my nostrils and I haven’t gone to mass since I was 17.
LS @ 91
Nah..as I recall, Jiminy Cricket was Pinnocchio’s conscience and McConnell doesn’t have one.
Further evidence our Congress does not represent the population. Our republic isn’t.
Hugh @ 77
It’s encouraging in a hollow kind of way that the final text seems to indicate Webb was able to exert influence and that a lot of calls to Senators seemed to have some kind of effect on their votes.
It’s moot, though. It’s out of the Senate’s hands, because we simply don’t have a government as described by the Constitution.
What the 76 Senators are doing at this point is propping up the facade of constitutional democracy by lending Congressional support, solely for the history books, to what the dictatorship have decreed.
We’re obviously going to attack Iran. A month ago I thought it wouldn’t happen, but I was wrong. Notions of the national interest are utterly alien to the cabal in power. Good night Irene.
HumboldtBlue @ 90
In my church the bad altar boys were always dealt with harshly, if not tossed out of service.
brendan @ 96
I think Iran will be attacked, but not with nukes; unless they use Cheney’s bunker buster nukes, but not the big bombs. If Iran gets attacked, I’m afraid Israel will be toast, and I think Cheney would be happy with that.
Brisingamen:
Cheney shorted the dollar over a year ago:
http://articles.moneycentral.m…..dNews.aspx
OT, but relevant to the Blue Square crowd:
(h/t raw story)
Scene: Harry and Nancy meet for lunch tomorrow, at the Old Ebbitt Grill. They’re into their third hour. Their tranquil countenance reflects deep appreciation for the best days of their lives.
Nancy
You know, Harry — I was thinking.
Harry
Well…? What were you thinking?
Nancy
How many more months before — you know.
Harry
No — I don’t know. Tell me.
Nancy
Well, it’s a little — embarrassing.
Harry
We’re friends, Nancy — you can tell me.
Nancy
(looking down at her soup, stirring)
How many months before — we have to start — you know — listening, reading, thinking hard — well……working.
Harry
Heh, heh. Why, Nancy — that’s nothing to be embarrassed about. You know that compared to what we could be making in the private sector the pay here is shit — that’s why we’ve got 2007 — an off-year. Next year we’ll have plenty of work to do — the elections, you know. This year is — for us.
Nancy
(looks, up, smiles)
I really appreciate you, Harry. We all do.
Harry
(lifts glass)
To us — to all of us.
They click.
Nancy
To us.
LS:
How exactly would Israel be “toast”? I trust they know their exposure better than we do — after all, they’re orchestrating this, too, to put it mildly.
Lieberman’s grandchildren should be compelled by law to be in the initial wave of any invasion. Makes me wonder how Chickenhawk Joe would feel about it then?
But the progeny of the current group, by and large, with a few notable exceptions never seem to find time to enlist, or even do much besides look for ways to gorge at the public trough like their fathers (and mothers) before them.
These are the names that will get any of my money.
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Dodd (D-CT)
Feingold (D-WI)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Leahy (D-VT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Sanders (I-VT)
Tester (D-MT)
Webb (D-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)
Via Froomkin,
HumboldtBlue @ 90
I might be wrong, but as I recall Blackwater is connected with the Assemblies of God. Erik Prince, the president, is also the brother of Betsey DeVos, who is married to Dick DeVos(who ran for Gov. of MI and lost), who is not only connected with Amway, but also with the Assemblies of God. There is more out there that I read the other night – I’m not sure where the link is, but it was very creepy. John Ashcroft is also very active in that church and supposedly George W. Bush has worked with them in the past.
So, no, I don’t think Blackwater is run by a bunch of fundamentalist Catholics.
Toby Wollin @ 106
Well, research Mr. Prince a little bit more. He’s loonier than Mel Gibson’s dad.
brendan @ 102
Because Hezbollah is supported by Iran and Syria, and Lebanon borders Israel. Everyone would converge on Israel one way or another. Israel has nukes. Bryezygnski (sp)was interviewed last week and stated that Israel has a couple hundred nukes. It would be a mess. Remember, the neocons want the oil, they don’t want nuclear war. That is a no win solution.
LS:
I’m pretty sure this “bunker buster” stuff is bullshit. Those things will irradiate a large portion of the country. It’s a genocidal project.
cspan3 now. code pink yelling at pace for his anti gay stance
LS @ 88
My 4th sense tells me the NeoCons actually think they learned a lesson on how they handled Iraq. Somethings they like such as crippling the country and bringing the people to their knees. Chaos will follow for many years to come. They could cripple Iran, bring them to their knees, destroy their infrastructure, starve the people and come in for the kill. Chaos will reign for many years.
Remember when Paul (Lewis, Jerry, whatever) Bremer changed the Iraq flag to look almost identical to Israel’s flag. (Maybe their was a fire sale on that particular color blue for flags.) The blue flag turned Iraq into a satellite of Israel until the Iraqis ripped that flag out of Bremer’s ugly prissy hands.
HumboldtBlue @ 107
Since you’re making the assertion, it would be appropriate for you to provide your sources.
bluejeansntshirt @ 97
Now they are handed over to the p*dophile priests.
Fireworks at the Senate hearing with Gates and Pace. Just totally disrupted by demonstrators. Pace yelled at them, Byrd woke up even.
HumboldtBlue @ 107
Bingo – found it on Dailykos
http://dogemperor.dailykos.com/
EvilDrPuma @ 112
Another source..and perhaps something considered perhaps a little more “credible” would be this from Cornell University:
http://www.theocracywatch.org/new_links.htm
brendan @ 109
They can’t irradiate land that holds the “prize”. The prize is the oil.
agrQuakerGirl @ 111
Agree.
Brendan @99:
Terrific… I think we’re screwed.
Pessimistic rant:
You know, I used to support Israel. Now, if someone is stupid enough to drop nukes on Iran, I hope one of Israel’s enemies is able to return the favor…
I’m wondering if the only way to stop the 3-way fight over Jerusalem is to nuke it ’til it glows.
Sorry — deep breath…I’m really depressed this afternoon.
[Mod Note; we really don’t wish that on any of our fellow human beings now, do we?]
LS @ 88
SeamusD @ 113
I am not Catholic although I was raised Catholic. The only thing that hung with me out of that upbringing (12 years of Catholic schools) is that “we are all born in the image and likeness of god”
Also appreciate that the nuns of the early 60’s era taught many of us about civil rights, hell they took me to see Martin Luther King in the early 60’s.
Blackwater is a dangerous and criminal group of individuals
Michael @ 104
Wow Lugar voted against it.
When will you kids figure it out?
CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS WANT WAR, TOO.
…and yes, I will be voting for Dennis Kucinich.
Susan in Iowa @ 120
Did you get a chance to read the final amendment as passed that had all of the broad language removed? I do think that it is entirely possible that Iran will be attacked one way or another. I do not, however, think that “nukes” will be used…unless, things get out of control..which could happen.
Hugh @ 77: “What bothers me about the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment even in its modified incarnation is that it still keeps us going in the wrong direction. Yes, it is not as bad as it could be but is that the bar we are using to judge Congressional Democrats now?”
Amen. Have Senate Dems not WATCHED these guys for almost 7 years? The way I see it, there’s just enough Senate-endorsed wiggle room in the modified language for this admin to take it as support for whatever they might want to do against a “terrorist organization.”
Also, the “sense of the Senate” I get is that if they want them to pass an AUMF against Iran, the message to the admin from this symbolic vote is that they’d probably get it.
That it passed with the overwhelming support of both parties really scares me.
Jo Fish @ 103
Yes Yes Yes.. will not happen. They like sending other folks to fight “cakewalk” crazies wars.
Enoch Root @ 123
We need a lot more of this.
Curse you aquascum!
The language has to be similar to what I found at Thomas, to wit:
[Mod Note; FWIW, there is some question whether this is the final language of the resolution that passed.]
You amuse me, Jane, with your peculiar belief that what the Senate passes is important.
Dick and George do not care — they have signing statements all ready to go.
Kathleen @ 121
What worries me more than anything else about Blackwater is that there is not a huge uproar about the fact that a corporate mercenary army is allowed to exist in this country.
Kathleen:
Everything comes down to whether you support the war. My tin foil tells me that the Catholic Church is a target for its doctrinal opposition to unjust wars.
selise @ 92
I don’t think he is. We keep pushing this strong central government idea, (strong=Maliki?), while the Iraqis are voting with their feet. Their constitution, which they voted for, permits this structure, so it is not imposing anything on them from outside. Rather, it is getting out of their way and lessening our interference. Anyway, the measure as passed made clear that it is up to the Iraqis.
Blackwater’s web site is unique. Almost all corporations list their executives and have a bio on them. Try to find it on Blackwater’s site. It’s a secret.
But here is something of interest – their Purpose (vision) and Mission Statement.
VISION
To support security, peace, freedom, and democracy everywhere.
MISSION
Blackwater is committed to supporting national and international security policies that protect those who are defenseless and provide a free voice for all. We dedicate ourselves to providing ethical, efficient, and effective turnkey solutions that positively impact the lives of those still caught in desperate times.
We further are committed to the foot soldiers; the men and women who daily stand on the frontlines of the global war on terror and say, “not today” and who believe in a peaceful future for their communities and nations. Whether they serve in uniform or out, we will provide them the very best in training and tactical support to ensure they are fully prepared to meet current and future global security challenges.
LS @ 125
I don’t know which is more paranoid: my sinking feeling that BushCo might be “out of control” enough to nuke Iran, or my sinking feeling that they might use the implied threat of nukes to try to make a non-nuclear attack somehow seem more acceptable.
LS @ 117
Not necessarily — what happens to the oil market if that oil is rendered unavailable?
The value of other stocks of oil increases.
Now, I think it’s crazy strategy, but who said the people we’re talking about here are sane?
brendan @ 132
The Pope did not make time for Condi when she was in the neighborhood.
QuakerGirl @ 133
That is sick. Democracy meets Have Gun Will Travel
Kathleen @ 137
Only because she once snagged a pair of expensive shoes right out from under his nose.
Slothrop @ 130
They don’t even need those. They just have to claim “national security,” which to them trumps everything anyway.
Slothrop @ 130
so via signing statements they can pre-emptively attack Iran?
Alank 129, your language is not what was passed. Here is some of what was amended. Read the entire amended amendment:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c…..age=8&
SeamusD @ 138
…and gets blown away in the crossfire.
Kathleen @ 137
This was before the war, but I began to view the Catholic Church as a useful punching bag when Tim Russert devoted an entire show to the priest scandal at the very moment Jenin was happening.
General Pace what do you think about the Senate voting down the Webb Amendment? Did that demonstrate to the troops that the Senate support them?
“Ghoulish wounds of war”
SeamusD @ 137
For it to make sense, replace democracy with capitalism. Strike that nasty “d” word out.
Hah! Jane I’ve already used the Barrack enumerator ‘D-Ostrich’ at dKos….
Going to check back later to measure the height and breadth of teh ‘Pile-On’ from the ‘good’, ‘hopeful’ supporters of ‘Senator D-Ostrich‘.
Luv it!
LS @ 98
Iran would be burnt toast everyone knows this
If Cheney/Bush want to attack Iran and Syria, they will – so long as the military obeys orders. The question is whether the Military obeys them and does not follow the Constitution. It is up to the Military to stop more war. The neocons in the WH don’t give a damn about whether they have been given authority to do so. Congress does not matter to them at all…not one iota. I doubt they are planning on leaving office either. If they do, I’ll be really surprised. I hope I’m wrong.
Regarding UN Res 1747:
“The resolution bans arms exports from Iran and imposes restrictions on individuals, because Iran has failed to comply with IAEA requests for information and because Iran has failed to suspend enrichment activities in compliance with UN Security Council Resolution 1737. It also holds our to Iran the promise of extensive concessions and advantages if it would consent to a temporary ban in enrichment and cooperate with the IAEA. Inasmuch as the UN has no way to enforce the ban on export of arms, which are sent primarily to Syria for the use of the Hezbollah, and perhaps to Iraqi insurgent groups, it has little practical effect. Financial sanctions against individuals and firms can be easily circumvented through proxies.”
Regarding UN Res 1737:
“The resolution does not impact the civilian economy of Iran in any way. The resolution prohibits the import or export of some of the items listed in two documents: S/2006/814 and S/2006/815. These documents respectively cover lists of materials required for nuclear weapons and missile and other armaments. Upon the insistence of the Russians and others, many items were excluded, such as the light water reactor that the Russians are building for Iran. The Iranians are also allowed to trade in missiles of under 300 KM range of the type supplied to Hezbollah, and in unmanned aerial vehicles.
“The resolution imposes so many exceptions that its provisions are virtually meaningless. For example, a freeze on accounts of organizations and persons listed in the annex is referred to in paragraph 12, but in paragraph 13 virtually every transaction, regular and exceptional, is made an exception to the freeze, allowing member countries to do as they please.”
LS and Evil DrP, I haven’t read the final passed version. I assume the words are less important than the fact that the Bushies will use it as cover to attack Iran.
I do think the attack will come. I don’t know whether they will use nuclear weapons. There are probably people inside the DoD who are not happy with the prospect. Will some resign? Rice was apparently not in favor, and she has been sidelined. Cheney is still ascendant. And Bush has the controls until January 2009.
I have been asking about this as much as I could. I liked Biden’s answer, and it is one big reason I decided to support him. Yesterday Obama called me and I raised it with him, too. (You gotta love Iowa in an election year.)
brendan @ 144
Actually happened more recently
http://www.democraticundergrou…..15;2997336
Thank you, Jane. Sometimes I get so wound up I forget to express my appreciation which actually precedes my rant. McCain I Xed-out a long time ago but Barak came in as a hopeful. Let them talk and be silent; either way the person self-reveals. Now we know who Barak really is. Silence is truly golden.
Susan in Iowa @ 153
They cannot use the amendment as amended as authority to attack the Nation of Iran, they can use it to attack Iranian interference inside Iraq. The other language was removed.
Here are the changes:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c…..age=8&
LS and Evil DrP, I haven’t read the final passed version. I assume the words are less important than the fact that the Bushies will use it as cover to attack Iran.
I do think the attack will come. I don’t know whether they will use nuclear weapons. There are probably people inside the DoD who are not happy with the prospect. Will some resign? Rice was apparently not in favor, and she has been sidelined. Cheney is still ascendant. And Bush has the controls until January 2009.
I have been asking about this as much as I could. I liked Biden’s answer, and it is one big reason I decided to support him. Yesterday Obama called me and I raised it with him, too. (You gotta love Iowa in an election year.)LS @ 155
Better, but still the Revolutionary Guard is a terrorist organization and doesn’t the AUMF allow all sorts of bad stuff if we can call the targets “terrorists”? I just think it is one more dance step toward war, and I think that Biden and Dodd knew it. I don’t think Clinton is stupid, so I assume she is OK with that.
Kathleen:
You misunderstood the phrasing of my first sentence.
I had read about the Ratzinger-Rice thing.
I believe the Catholic Church was a bit of an obstacle to Hitler, if ultimately an ineffectual one, and, like everyone else, a collaborator in the end. It’s telling that recently they’re virtually painted up as virtual co-architects of the Holocaust.
I don’t even have to look at the Roll Call to know my Senator Ken Salazar voted for this. He is useless and so is his brother. Marginally better than Allard. I cannot wait until next eyar when we have Udall as a Senator. I expect great things from him.
LS @ 154
It is an escalation. In the future it can be used to substantiate a position on attacking Iran. It can also “sanction” sneak attacks on the country like we did in Laos. The words are muted but the intent is still formidable.
QuakerGirl @ 158
Yes, I agree with you. It is, however, not an AUMF against the “country” of Iran, it is against activities inside Iraq, and yes, it is an escalation.
Kathleen @ 141
You haven’t been paying attention. Dick Cheney can do whatever he wants at anytime.
This is what I don’t get – why does Harry Reid let these craptastic amendments make it to the floor?
Susan in Iowa @ 155
Only if the “terrorists” are the same terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. Otherwise, they would have attacked every country with Hezbollah and Hamas for the past 5 years. It is not an authority to use military force against the nation of Iran, just activities inside Iraq.
brendan @ 156
Many were too frightened. Not uncommon to human reaction to fear. It happens among all peoples of the world and in every time in history.
“First they came…” is a poem attributed to Lutheran Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group.
Diane @ 161
Because Harry Reid is part of the problem.
LS @ 159
Did I ever say, Thank you, LS? I don’t think so. You make fine contributions to this site. I pay attention.
I doubt that the distinction will matter much to the people who are intent on attacking Iran.
Slothrop @ 161
I have been paying attention too much attention. Explain to me how a “signing statement” would trump having to go back through congress.
I know there was thinking that the Bush crazies could attack Iran under the 2002 war resolution, but signing statements?
Senator Feinstein doing her part to keep the “war clouds” over Iran.
Nothing personal, but you people don’t get it. If the sense of the senate was the opposite and instructed Bush not to bomb Iran, he would try to bomb it anyhow. That the generals, pilots, grunts eagerly follow him off the cliff-actually they jump off and he stays behind, boggles the mind. If the senate had gone the other way, underlings might have been encouraged to disobey the attack order. As it is, no way.
No one knows where those errant nuclear cruise missles are. We know they went south by mistake, but we don’t know if the mistake was corrected and they were returned home. There’s lots on the web to indicate it could not possibly have been a mistake. Whoever leaked it to the press must be sweating. It’s hard to be the sane one in the asylum. As for Gore or anyone in 2008, let’s hope so.
Kathleen @ 168
Investigate Senator Feinsteins war profiteering!
both Durbin and Obama got emails announcing that they no longer have my support. I am angry beyond words.
Big Mitch @ 25
Yes, in the beginning of the amendment and at the end those words are used.
I’m wondering if this amendment will be attached to an appropriations bill. Bush could veto it if it’s a bill he doesn’t like (you know, the ones where children have healthcare!).
Once we had an ethical understanding called “conflict of interest” that was taken very seriously. If you or any member of your family won the sweepstakes they were disqualified based on “conflict of interest”. It was also applied to politicians and board members. It was deemed necessary because 1)There is the problem of perception and 2) Questionable influencing for personal interests.
I have no idea what ever happened to “conflict of interest” but it no longer seems to be applicable. I remember when Republicans were the standard bearers on holding others to “no conflict of interest” operations. Gone. Just gone. Not even mentioned.
I’d like that reinstated. No member of congress nor any member of their families can hold investments or have jobs in companies with which the US does business. That means Cheney’s old company could not get government contracts. Hum! Strange how some things just evaporate into the vapor-sphere. The MIC would greatly diminish if politicians applied “conflict of interest” ethics.
Ed Kunin @ 169
I think you are correct.
Kathleen, the Executive Branch no longer considers the Constitution operative. Senate votes, signing statements, contempt of Congress notices — none of this matters anymore.
They’re not stopping for anything.
So lets see now…
1…Which nation since 1945 has done lots of regime change,front and back door entry or simple break and entry warmaking,sends official government agents into the world to muck up things for other nations and since the turn of the century(2000)decided to invade and occupy(we cant leave now–must stay–who will OverWatch if we leave?) Iraq?
A)China
b)Brazil
c)India
d)Iran
e)USA
2…Which current Democratic Party Primary Candidate for President of United States voted to invade Iraq and evidently may well desire to have lots of Americans stay on in Iraq for OverWatch(also known as colonialism) if elected President of USA?
a) Gravel
b) Obama
c) Richardson
d) Clinton
3…Which current U.S.Senator has stated that many of these Sense of the Senate votes are pandering/grandstanding in nature and so does not view them as up/down critical votes in/of substance? You may agree or disagree.
a) Dodd
b) Obama
c) Biden
d) Clinton
4…Which current Democratic Party Candidate for President of United States seems ever so inclined to keep Americans in Iraq for OverWatch and also just voted to further set up Iran and provide political cover for a Bush/Cheney regime whack job?
a) Obama
b) Dodd
c) Clinton
b) Biden
Correct Answers
1….e
2….d
3….b
4….c
LS @ 174
I’m not convinced that the generals, et al, are all that willing to jump off of the Iran cliff. There are a lot of realists in the military who realize that attacking Iran is not the smartest move that the US could make. There are real consequences that could cost them dearly. Iran could easily close the Strait of Hormuz by sinking a few tankers in the shipping channel, and that would just be the easiest retaliation. They have the potential to sink any aircraft carrier that gets too close, and their Shiite allies in Iraq could really wreak havoc. And that’s without reckoning on Russia, China, and the rest of the world who would dearly love to take America down a few pegs.
Both my senators voted against the Lieberputz-Kyl amendment, and Ed Markey, my representative, voted against the House Move-On resolution. I called all three to thank them.
Booyah and woohoo! Move to Boston, y’all!
SeamusD @ 177
I hope you are right but I fear you are wrong. Logic and common sense has nothing to do with it. Perhaps if the UN were to pass a resolution “ordering” the US not to bomb Iran, it might help, but I doubt it. As for the generals, are they the same guys who picked out 1400 or so sites in Iran to bomb?
albert fall @ 13
The big problem we face in the primary is that the more conservative Dems have 2, maybe 3, candidates, but the more Progressive-Liberal voters have 5 or 6 candidates splitting the vote.
How can a Progressive or Liberal ever win if the vote is split this way and there’s no run-off?
Either you have to bring down the Conservative candidates or you have to join together behind one candidate.
I’m not asking anyone to forego supporting the candidate they like. But, it should be obvious we are climbing a steep hill, trying to defeat Clinton.
Even if Obama were to leave the race it’s not clear where his supporters would go.
If Hillary has 40% of the Dem voters (nationally), then there’s 60% that can beat her if we can get them together.
I suppose we have to hope Obama stays in the race to keep the conservative vote split and somehow join together to defeat Clinton (the more dangerous of those two).
Can you peel off some of Clinton’s supporters? It depends upon what drives them. If they’re in it for the celebrity factor, then it is hopeless. If they really see her as the “next in line”, then maybe they can be awakened to their choices.
A lot is riding on this. We have to get it right.
Ugh, both my Senators voted for this!! It’s a sad day for the people of NJ and the country as a whole.
What happened to the Dems fighting for us? I feel abandoned.
LS @ 18
Most of us here are not NAIVE…
We and definitely the neocons and neolibs who voted for this amendment know that Condi and Bush already see themselves as having expansive war powers — and this resolution is an basically acknowledging and giving the ok *again* for the President go ahead without Congressional authority to EXPAND THE BOGUS *WAR ON TERROR* remembering that:
I can’t find my notes… but all this comes back to the 2002 AUFM and how much power it gives Bush (or how much power Bush thinks he has) under the War Powers Act. How he can expand the *War On Terror* into other soveriegn states. How he will respond with Nukes. What would be defined as a pre-emptive strike vs. an act of defense.
etc. etc… This vote was significant.
After all this is not *old* news:
Et tu, Unnamed Democrat?
by wildekid
Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 03:07:19 PM PDT
Further into the Hersh piece (well, a hot one paragraph later), he says:
The House member said that no one in the meetings “is really objecting” to the talk of war. “The people they’re briefing are the same ones who led the charge on Iraq. At most, questions are raised: How are you going to hit all the sites at once? How are you going to get deep enough?” (Iran is building facilities underground.) “There’s no pressure from Congress” not to take military action, the House member added. “The only political pressure is from the guys who want to do it.”
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…..8719/83003
I am so sickened by this vote. I hope everyone emails and phones Reid’s office. This is unacceptable. Why are the Republicans stillmoving the agenda in Congress? And why is the Democratically controlled Congress still voting lockstep with these ghouls?
Reid needs to hear from all of us that this is outrageous. This lays the foundation for war with Iran.
And where was Obama? Conveniently absent.
I got a call from his campaign this afternoon and let them know that an absence on a vote of this importance is simply unacceptable.
They all suck.
Congress specifically recognized this authority in 2001 following the 9-11 attacks when it passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force. The resolution provides as a matter of fact that “the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States.”
Iran now harbours a terrorist group, so says the Congress, and if the President determines they have been or may attack Americans in the future in Iraq. Bombs away.