A veteran writes

BUSH TRIES TO KEEP HALF MILLION VETS IN THE DARK

President Bush celebrated the July 4th holiday by praising veterans, saying "we're proud of your service, we're grateful for the example you have set for America." But a new report shows that more than half a million veterans are going without health care benefits owed to them - and the Bush administration has tried to keep those veterans in the dark.

According to Knight-Ridder newspapers, 572,000 veterans nationwide "are missing out on disability payments from the Veterans Administration" even though they are owed those payments from their service. A large portion of these veterans are not receiving their payments because they do not know about them - a situation the White House has tried to perpetuate. In 2002, VA officials were ordered by the Bush administration "to cease efforts to enroll new patients into its health care system." The directive said it was "inappropriate" for local VA workers to attend health fairs, open houses and community meetings to educate veterans about what their eligibility and to enroll them in health care programs.

The President's efforts to prevent veterans from getting the benefits they are owed came at the same time the White House was squeezing veterans programs overall. Specifically, the President has drastically underfunded
veterans health care programs, leading to major veterans groups calling his policies a "disgrace" and noting his most recent budget falls $2.6 billion short of what is needed this year alone. The President also raised premiums that veterans pay for their prescription drugs.


BUSH COORDINATING WAR ON TERROR WITH ELECTION

In the months after the tragic attacks of 9/11, President Bush told the American people that he had "no ambition whatsoever to use [the War on Terror] as a political issue." But according to a new report, the Bush Administration is now demanding that international allies coordinate the arrest of al Qaeda terrorists to coincide with key U.S. political events, so as to maximize political benefits for the President.

According to the New Republic, top Pakistani intelligence officials have confirmed that the Bush Administration is demanding the Pakistani government find as many "high value" terrorist targets specifically before Americans go to the polls in November. By contrast, no similar urgent push or "timetable" was discussed in 2002 or 2003. Even more troubling, Pakistani sources admit White House aides told the Pakistani Director of Intelligence that "it would be best if the arrest or killing of [any high value terrorist target] were announced on twenty-six, twenty-seven, or twenty-eight July" - the first three days of the Democratic National Convention in Boston.

The report calls into question whether key military decisions were affected by similar political motivations during the last three years. For instance, during 2002 and 2003 when al Qaeda was regrouping along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, the Bush administration refused calls to seriously increase operations there. Only in March of 2004 - once the Presidential election campaign had begun -- did the President finally announce "stepped up efforts" in Afghanistan to find bin Laden.


BUSH APPOINTED PARTISANS AND CRONIES IN IRAQ

The Bush Administration publicly claims that it is pursuing "independent and objective oversight" of taxpayer money in Iraq. Yet even as Halliburton overcharges for services in Iraq, its top auditor last week refused to
admonish the company, instead offering a justification for further taxpayer rip offs. But according to a new report, this should be no surprise: the President specifically appointed auditors, investigators and budget officials based on their partisan and corporate ties -- instead of their political independence and experience.

As documented in a new American Prospect article, the President appointed a Pentagon Inspector General and a Coalition Provisional Authority Inspector General with deep Republican Party ties -- despite those offices requiring nonpartisan leadership to oversee taxpayer dollars. Similarly, the Bush Administration appointed a Bush campaign donor whose law firm represented construction contractors to run the budget office that oversees Iraqi reconstruction.


ADMINISTRATION IGNORED IRAQ/AL-QAEDA INTELLIGENCE

The Senate Intelligence Committee released a report on Friday that does its best to whitewash the Administration's role in hyping intelligence by pinning the blame on the CIA. The report distorts the truth by failing to meaningfully investigate "the ways intelligence was used, misused, misinterpreted or ignored by Administration policymakers... in making the case to the American people that war with Iraq was necessary." Those issues, conveniently, will be addressed in a separate report scheduled to be released sometime after the November elections.

Despite its inadequacies, the Intelligence Committee's report illustrates how - in the few cases the intelligence community did get it right - top Administration officials ignored them anyway.

For example, the CIA reported to the Administration that Iraq and al-Qaeda did not have "an established formal relationship." In fact, the Iraqi government actively sought "to prevent Iraq youth from joining Al Qaeda."
Yet, Vice President Dick Cheney continues to tell the American people that Saddam Hussein had "an established relationship with al Qaeda."

Also, according to the Intelligence Committee report, George Tenet directly contacted National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice and her deputy Stephen Hadley in October 2002 to tell them the President should not say that Iraq had sought uranium from Africa because "the evidence was weak." In a fax sent to the White House, the CIA explained that "this is one of the two issues where we differed with the British." Nevertheless, just two months later, the President publicly declared "[t]he British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

http://www.vetsforjustice.com/

To quote a moderator on another thread.
"Summarise in one sentence please,that's all it's worth."

So ..you believe that veterans being screwed by the government is only worth one sentence? I'm sure they'll be delighted to hear that one .

Found the article at http://www.misleader.org/daily_mislead/Read.asp?fn=df07132004.html so a site like misleader.org is the source for this.

:disappoin

Next.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

So ..you believe that veterans being screwed by the government is only worth one sentence? I'm sure they'll be delighted to hear that one .

I know I'm a pretty important person(to me anyway) but I don't think they will be either delighted or dismayed by anything I have to say on the subject. Just trying to make a statement more than an opinion point.

My Best friend got out of the Marines before I did because he broke his ankle. He got some VA benifits for a while, then suddenly, they just stopped. He was told that his case was being reviewed for validity.

I saw him bust his ankle, and it hurts me to think about it. He walks with a limp, and isnt as active as he was before that. He cant get certain jobs because he walks funny, and employers see that as a liability.

I dont agree with the VA or the Bush Admin for screwing these guys. They deserve for the government to provide something to help them along. It doesnt nessessarily be money, but a job or something that will do them some good. They served thier time, and deserve to be taken care of.

the title should be changed, since a veteran didnt write. should be like

Veterans Rights.

Just a suggestion

Found the article at http://www.misleader.org/daily_mislead/Read.asp?fn=df07132004.html so a site like misleader.org is the source for this.

:disappoin

Next.

Yes, because nobody ever reposts.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/6266430.htm

http://www.vetsforjustice.com/HOSbody.htm

the vetsforjustice site actually quotes misleader.org as a source,no great detective work required there.

I'm quite happy to accept that the vets wouldn't have used the article if they didn't know from first hand experience that it was true

Bush, on the other hand,has less credibility than OJ Simpson. And like Simpson,is getting away with murder.

Its the one thing from you that I can agree that is 100% true. Though, u will have to take Bush to court for his murders, as u call them. If he gets the Dream Team, you might be in trouble