Thanks! :-)

Sure, Dawnie!

Five minute recess because the microphones aren't working...

...and they're back. General Petraeus speaking now.

General Petraeus just said that violence in Iraq, including sectarian violence and civilian deaths, has decreased.

Fact-check:

The U.S. military's claim that violence has decreased sharply in Iraq in recent months has come under scrutiny from many experts within and outside the government, who contend that some of the underlying statistics are questionable and selectively ignore negative trends.

...Intelligence analysts computing aggregate levels of violence against civilians for the NIE puzzled over how the military designated attacks as combat, sectarian or criminal, according to one senior intelligence official in Washington. "If a bullet went through the back of the head, it's sectarian," the official said. "If it went through the front, it's criminal."

Just said again that civilian deaths have declined.

Fact-check:

1,809 civilian deaths in August, the highest monthly total this year--Associated Press, 9/1/07

I am coming in late, but they are kicking out a group of people for yelling! I don't blame them, if he is Lying like you are saying he is!

Just finished this article. Seems like the people LIVING the surge don't agree with Petreaus, bush butt kisser.

Iraqis Say Surge Is Not Working
By Gary Langer
ABC News

Monday 10 September 2007

Barely a quarter of Iraqis say their security has improved in the past six months, a negative assessment of the surge in U.S. forces that reflects worsening public attitudes across a range of measures, even as authorities report some progress curtailing violence.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091007J.shtml

Keep those tap shoes tapping............

"Many Iraqi forces now operate with minimum coalition assistance."

Fact-check:

The Pentagon has lost track of about 190,000 AK-47 assault rifles and pistols given to Iraqi security forces in 2004 and 2005, according to a new government report, raising fears that some of those weapons have fallen into the hands of insurgents fighting U.S. forces in Iraq.

So is that what he means by "minimum coalition assistance"--i.e., we can't find them?

Another reason for 'minimum coalition assistance', is that every other country saw the folly of this occupation (except for Australia with their big 500 troops, whoopdedoo), and took their troops out.

Fact-check:

Attacks by U.S.-allied Sunni tribesmen--recruited to battle Iraqis allied with al-Qaeda--are also excluded from the U.S. military's calculation of violence levels.

Is he under oath?

WOW, either Ryan Crocker used a Super good sun block, or ELSE, he was hiding in a little dark bunker. What a WHITE, white man! He must have learned a whole lot about what was going on, in 130 degree weather, and still not get any tan!

I think it's Code Pink women being removed, because of the Pink stuff they're wearing and it's just been reported that Cindy Sheehan was one of them

U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker speaking now. Several Code Pink protesters arrested and removed from the hearing room.

I don't blame them! How do you sit and listen to these men read off reports written for them by this administration, full of lies, and not be outraged???

(I meant to say nice to see you back here, Kay-WI. Hope you stick around now as we head for the Big Event, November 08)

General Petraeus already spoke about it, but there will be more on Anbar province, which is being pointed to as a "model" of escalation success. Over at the Senate blog, they've done a good job debunking this. Most important point: gains in Anbar province were made before Bush's escalation.

here is another new one dated today, on ANBAR,

IRAQ: Anbar province plagued by violence

Outside Baghdad, Anbar province has witnessed more fighting and killing than any of Iraq's 18 provinces since the US-led occupation of Iraq began in late 2003. While US forces flushed out a number of Sunni insurgent groups there in military operations in 2004 and 2005, the insurgents have returned and escalating violence has prevented NGOs and aid agencies from reaching people who desperately need food and medical supplies.

http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=64374

Crocker: Iran plays a "harmful role" in Iraq.

Uh-oh.

Crocker calls for "more time and patience on the part of the United States." Adds that he "cannot guarantee success" in Iraq.

Crocker: "Iranian president has already announced that Iran will fill any vacuum in Iraq." More uh-oh.

Thanks, Pam
You said it when you said "How do you sit and listen to these men read off reports written for them by this administration, full of lies, and not be outraged"
I can barely stand this on TV. I keep catching myself clenching my teeth. In person I know I would have been dragged out by now.
Spin, spin, spin.....and all those anticipated deaths as if they're not even talking about human beings.

How do you know when Petreus is lying?

When his mouth moves!!! He is spinning so much, I am getting dizzy. Who was it that said he was such an honorable man, surely he would tell the truth!

That Lanten (I coudn't make out his nameplate clearly, but the older gentleman who was just speaking) was kicking ass big time. I Have to go find out who he is.

He is a Dem from CA, Kay.

And the question asked by the Chairman, was a blunt, good one too.

Ah well, at the end of the day, will they call these guys Bush Rubber Stampers and say they lied?

CNN just cut to commercial, so here's some more fact-checking, courtesy Americans Against the Escalation in Iraq:

Petraeus: "We endeavor to ensure our analysis of that data is conducted with rigor and consistency, as our ability to achieve a nuanced understanding of the security environment is dependent on collecting and analyzing data in a consistent way over time."

Fact-check:

There were significant revisions to the way the Pentagon's reports measure sectarian violence between its March 2007 report and its June 2007 report. The original data for the five months before the surge began (September 2006 through January 2007) indicated approximately 5,500 sectarian killings. In the revised data in the June 2007 report, those numbers had been adjusted to roughly 7,400 killings – a 35% increase. These discrepancies have the impact of making the sectarian violence appear significantly worse during the fall and winter of 2006 before the President's "surge" began. [DOD, 11/2006. 3/2007. 6/2007]

haha, I KNEW that Ros-Lethinen was A Republican the minute she condemned the MoveOn ad calling him General Betray Us !!!

Look how the Repubs are soft balling their questions, and trying to make Iran look like a terrible dangerous threat!!

Kay-WI, the opening statement by Rep. Lantos is on YouTube, courtesy The Gavel:

Chairman Lantos: "We can not take ANY of this Administration's assertions on Iraq at face value anymore, and no amount of charts or statistics will improve its credibility. This is not a knock on you, General Petraeus, or on you, Ambassador Crocker. But the fact remains, gentlemen, that the Administration has sent you here today to convince the members of these two Committees and the Congress that victory is at hand. With all due respect to you, I must say...I don't buy it. And neither does the independent Government Accountability Office or the Commission headed by General Jones. Both recently issued deeply pessimistic reports...In the last few days, General Petraeus, media have reported that you are prepared to support a slow drawdown of our forces in Iraq - beginning with a brigade or two, perhaps at the end of this year. This clearly is nowhere near enough...It is time to go--and to go now."

Representative Lantos, a True Patriot.

You are doing a great job on fact checking, Stephanie. thank you.

bbl when break is over.

CNN is calling it "major news" that General Petraeus said he might support a possible return to pre-escalation levels in Iraq--but he is not calling for withdrawal.

Thanks, Pam! I'll be back after the break, too.

General Petraeus claims that six months ago, "No one would have forecast" success in Anbar.

Fact-check (via ThinkProgress):

Today in his testimony to the House, Gen. David Petraeus cited the reduced violence in the Anbar province as evidence that President Bush's "surge" is working. He added that it would be "premature" to withdraw U.S. troops now, because in January, "no one would have dared to forecast that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has in the past 6 months."

...Yet in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Commitee six months ago--just two weeks after Bush first announced his escalation plans--Petraeus admitted that in Anbar, there already appeared "to be a trend in the positive direction where sheikhs are stepping up."

...Bush's "surge" is not responsible for progress in Anbar. The Sunni sheik who forged the alliance with the Americans "traced the decision to fight al-Qaeda to Sept. 14, 2006, long before the new Bush strategy." Nevertheless, the Bush administration "dispatched another 4,000 U.S. troops to Anbar to exploit the situation."

Spratt
War cost $958BILLION?
Did I see that correctly?

The National Priorities Project puts the current cost at $450 billion--and rising by the minute.

good article to read later: Brand Petreus

The core marketing decision was, of course, finding the right spokesman for the product. As Robert Draper, author of the new book Dead Certain, reported recently, the President was "fully aware of his standing in opinion polls" and so, earlier this year, decided that "his top commander in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus, would perhaps do a better job selling progress to the American people than he could." As Bush put it, ""I've been here too long. Every time I start painting a rosy picture, it gets criticized and then it doesn't make it on the news." Indeed.

So launching "Brand Petraeus" and providing him with some upbeat Iraqi news (Sunnis in al-Anbar Province ally with U.S.) and numbers (violence down in August) were the two necessities of the summer. In July, the celebrity surge general, who had already shown a decided knack on earlier tours of Iraq for wowing the media, was loosed. Petraeus, in turn, loosed all his top commanders to enter vociferously into what previously would have been a civilian debate over U.S. policy and the issue of "withdrawal." This campaign, by the way, represents a significant chiseling away at traditional prohibitions on U.S. military figures entering the American political arena while in uniform.

Why anyone in the media or Congress takes this situation seriously as "news," or even something to argue about, is hard to tell. Think of it this way: The most political general in recent memory has been asked to assess his own work (as has our ambassador in Iraq), and then present "recommendations" to the White House in a "report" that is actually being written in the White House. You couldn't call it a political version of "the honor system"; but perhaps the dishonor system would do.

Numbers in Iraq are a slippery matter at best, though again, why anyone pays serious attention to U.S. military numbers from that country is a mystery. On countless occasions in the past, these have been ridiculous undercounts of disaster.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091007D.shtml

Representative Lantos, a True Patriot.

Posted by PamB on September 10, 2007 at 03:10 PM

I caught that part! It was really well thought out. Petraeus seems a bit caught off guard.

Perhaps he's just used to being questioned by lemming brown noser chicken hawks!

Fact-check:

General Petraeus spent 17 days in August flacking for Bush's escalation plan.

The Washington Post reported this weekend that the White House political office and Gen. David Petraeus' unit have been "hard-wired" together, working jointly to "map out ways of selling the surge."

The White House has used Petraeus as a PR flack over and over again to sustain its failing Iraq strategy. Last month, Petraeus kicked his political activities into overdrive. He hosted over 38 congressional members inside the Green Zone, and he gave numerous radio, print and TV interviews.

Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL) just did a great job asking Petraeus "How much longer?"

Drat I missed it. And I voted for her.

Back to the tube.

Did I just hear right? After the break announced, you could hear someone say "keep it up, you are doing a hecka of a job'????

HAHAHAHA. this seems to be the Republican Mantra and code for "keep those lies and distortions flowing'!!!

Short break right now. Worth remembering that this report was supposed to be submitted in writing, without interference from the White House--although now it's obvious that the White House is heavily involved.

Wow, I missed that. Good Lord.

Crocker: "After weeks of Preparatory work and many days of intensive meetings, Iraq's five most prominent national leaders from the three major communities issued a communiqué on August 26 that noted agreement on draft legislation dealing with de-baathification."

Fact-check:

The NIE found that Sunnis are incapable of delivering on national reconciliation. "The Sunni Arab community remains politically fragmented, and we see no prospective leaders that might engage in meaningful dialogue and deliver on national agreements." [National Intelligence Estimate, 8/23/07]

The Iraqi cabinet approved an amended draft oil law, back in July to try to demonstrate progress before the interim benchmarks report but the agreement turned out to be hollow. The law was pushed through without the support of Sunnis or the Kurdistan Regional Government and faces major opposition in parliament. The oil law is important because it could help bring about national reconciliation by guaranteeing a fair division of oil revenues for Shi'a, Sunnis, and Kurds. Unfortunately, the law was approved by the cabinet while the Sunnis were boycotting the meetings. Muqtada Al Sadr's party, which represents the largest group of Shi'a, has also objected to the law and the leaders of the Kurdistan Regional Government have not yet seen the final draft. [LA Times, 7/5/07. AP, 7/4/07]

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) just asked General Petraeus what he would do in the event of a "constitutional crisis." Petraeus said he would consult his lawyer.

Rep. Sherman (D-CA) also asked for "the Petraeus Report"--not the White House report. Petraeus says that he saw a draft the other day (of the White House report) and there is nothing "substantive" that is different.

To the DEMOCRATIC PARTY....... the only reason your poll numbers are low is because the AMERICAN PEOPLE wants a withdrawal of our TROOPS from IRAQ. The AMERICAN PEOPLE disdain for congress stems from the fact that congress has not upheld the 06 PLAN of putting a WITHDRAWAL DATE FROM IRAQ in the war bill.

So stop let the Rove/rightwing water carrying radio minions skew the poll numbers as a no confident vote on congress performance rather than a no confident vote on congress lack of FORTITUDE pertaining to the WITHDRAWAL clause.

Watching CNN at dinner, Michael Ware in Iraq, is watching this testimony.

He made a very interesting observation !

In addition to criticizing a lot of the rhetoric , he said "We are not hearing anything about alQaeda at all, but we ARE hearing a lot about Iran'! That is true. We did not hear any spin about the group we are supposed to be fighting over there, but the push to let Bush bomb Iran is on all sides of the Right Aisle!

well, SL, there was just a clown on CNN, tearing apart the MoveOn ad in the NY Times today, who quoted 50% of the american people do not want any withdrawal date ! He is part of CNN and I assume it is their own poll he is quoting.

Posted by PamB on September 10, 2007 at 05:41 PM

It's true. Earlier, Crocker said that Iran plays a "harmful role" in Iraq and that the "Iranian president has already announced that Iran will fill any vacuum in Iraq." Very scary stuff.

Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL): "The surge has failed...selectively massaging information will not change the basic truth...Four years ago very credible people in uniform and not in uniform came before this Congress and sold us a bill of goods that turned out to be false. This testimony today is eerily similar."

Kevin Drum makes an important point at the Washington Monthly about the graph showing a draw down of forces in Iraq. The dated withdrawals are on the map not because of success but rather because the Bush Administration has stretched US troops. The other withdrawals have no dates attached to them.

Bush and the Republicans would LOVE to bomb Iran, and re-create the fear, the whetting of the blood letting, that so stimulates their base!

Did you hear all the Republicans put down the MoveOn ad???

Republicans focus on attacking MoveOn.org 'Gen. Betray Us' ad during 'surge' hearing

Hunter accused Democrats of spending the last week "prepping the battlefield" by questioning Petraeus's credibility, and he called it an "outrage" that there were suggestions the general couldn't be trusted.

"He's going to give us the one thing we ask, and that's a candid independent assessment," Hunter said.

http://rawstory.com//news/2007/Republicans_focus_on_attacking_MoveOn.org_Gen._0910.html

(Oh sure Dunkie! He is reading a script written for him by the White House, he has been recruited by Bush to go there and to bring back nothing but good news, and we are hearing an Independent assessment of it all!) LOL

PamB:

General Betrayus is betraying the LEFT, the 70% COMMON POPULATION, he is definitely protecting the REPUBLICANS.

No one ever thought General "Betrayus" would betray the REPUBLICANS -- it was "us" he would betray. The ONLY WAY Petraeus would not betray "us", the 70% COMMON POPULATION, would be for him to resign his commission, which would have been the honorable thing for him to do, but apparently too costly -- he wants to stay in the military and not lose his pension, therefore he betrays "us" and solely represents the White House saying ONLY what the White House wants him to say. General Petraeus is truly General "Betrayus".

Follow the money!!!!

Most republicans have no personal investment in this mess or so they think but they are their children, grandchildren will be paying as the bushnit regime bankrupts the USA!

i watched some of the general and the other guy today. they are quite impressive until you realize they are selling bush's program and that is the main objective of the presentation rather than describing reality. the general like various coaches i have had in my life is trying to gather support, get what he needs from the audience and hoping his agenda will work. i don't fault him for this but some of the congress folks were pretty effective in getting past the rhetoric and on to realities. one guy read an op-ed from the nytimes the general wrote three years ago that said about the same stuff he said today...another guy ( from ny of course and probably one of the most wealthy districts in the nation ) ackerman was much more confrontational and analytic. all in all i respect the general and his hard work but am afraid the basic premise under which we invaded iraq was flawed and everything that has followed is tainted with that flaw. in particular ackerman confronted the general about what he thinks we should do with the vast al quada in iraq that DID NOT EXIST BEFORE OUR INVASION and now is using iraq to breed more and more terrorists. the general choose not to take on this point...

'Swear Him In' Provokes Expulsion

By Ray McGovern
September 10, 2007

“Swear him in.” That’s all I said in the unusual silence this afternoon as first aid was being administered to Gen. David Petraeus’s microphone at the hearing before the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committees.

It had dawned on me that when House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton, D-Missouri, invited Gen. Petraeus to make his presentation, Skelton forgot to ask him to take the customary oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I had no idea that would be enough to get me thrown out of the hearing.

I had a flashback to a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in early 2006, when Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, reminded chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, that Specter had forgotten to swear in the witness, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales; and how Specter insisted that that would not be necessary.

www.consortiumnews.com/2007/091007a.html

Be sworn in before testifying and tell the truth or STFU.

Thanks to TomN for the information that neither Petraeus nor Crocker were sworn-in before their testimony. This is very significant for those who did not know this, and will be trusting what they hear. Does this mean that Petraeus and Crocker cannot be held legally accountable for what they say is fact?

Remember Deflect; Deceive; Distract?
I hope Congress will remember the pattern of misinformation in the run-up to Iraq, and be particulary wary of a similar pattern against Iran and Syria. I hope the senators will ask Petraeus and Crocker to put their evidence on the table when they make sweeping accusations against these two countries. Petraeus and Crocker have made some serious accusations against Iran and Syria. The Bush Administration might use these accusations to unilaterally and precipitiously take military action, without consulting Congress, without providing verification, and without engaging in dialog. That's their pattern -- the speed and deception of a short-change artist. It's a done deal before one can think.

All may not be what it seems or what has been said. The talking-point blitz has begun, and unverified claims are flying fast and furious. Petraeus and Crocker are fueling the fire with very public, very serious accusations. Israel is making noises about invading Gaza on a large scale and has already taken some action against Syria.

Was the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent surge a staging point to get to bigger fish? That's another question I'd like to hear asked.

EVEN if what they say is true, there are alternatives that can achieve results without military action. Will Congress anticipate the White House's agenda, and act asap?