Full disclosure -- so far, this is just a theory. So please have your tinfoil hat in place and secure.

But I have the strong suspicion that Barack Obama was originally slated to visit Iraq first, followed by Afghanistan.  The plans were changed when John McCain foolishly disclosed Obama's itinerary on Friday.

Here is the circumstantial evidence.

First, from Marc Ambinder, we learn that the press was told that Obama would be traveling to Iraq first:

So reporters were to led to think that Obama would first travel to Iraq and then to Afghanistan.... not the other way 'round.

Second, doesn't it seem strange that Obama would fly to Kuwait, which is right next door to Iraq, only to skip Iraq and fly straight to Afghanistan?

Mr. Obama touched down in Kabul just before noon on Saturday, his aides said, after stopping to visit — and play basketball with — American troops in Kuwait on his trip from Washington.

                 obama with president hamid karzai at presidential palace in kabul, afghanistan

Netroots Nation 2008 has done something invaluable for me. It brought the senselessness and the travesty of the Iraq War back to the forefront. It was a potent reminder of why we're even here--the single most significant factor behind the rise of the netroots.

From the IGNT/Mojo Friday care packages for the troops, Pastor Dan's moving service this morning, and the remarks of every key note speaker, Iraq is bubbling up again to become the first issue we will expect our new President to address. Donna Edwards was particularly strong in her keynote Saturday night, running through the litany of challenges we face in our failing economy, and the salient fact that not a single one of them can be solved until we are our to Iraq.

The withdrawal from Iraq also featured largely in the panel that I participated in Saturday, "War Pundits," along with Mark Danner, Samantha Power, Greg Mitchell, and moderated by Ari Melber.
Spencer Ackerman attended the panel, and has a great live blog of the panel. I've got a lot of thoughts still emanating from the discussion that I'll be drawing upon in the coming months as the discussion about how we approach the withdrawal. But for now, my remarks from yesterday are below the fold.

Given the release by CENTCOM, a clarification on Maliki's statement to Der Spiegel, and the appearence of Admiral Mullin on Fox News today I wonder?

Noted by:

Along those lines, Dr. Ali al-Dabbagh, who the Times calls a spokesman for the Iraqi government, has released a statement saying that Prime Minister Maliki's statement was "misunderstood and mistranslated" and "not conveyed accurately regarding the vision of Senator Barack Obama, U.S. presidential candidate, on the timeframe for U.S. forces withdrawal from Iraq." But as the Times notes al Dabbagh did not specify what had been mistranslated.

Another interesting detail, noted by the Times. al-Dabbagh's statement was released by CentCom. I do not know how often Iraqi government statements are released by CentCom.

VirginiaDem

(crossposted at Barefoot and Progressive and Ditch Mitch)

As we all know by now, Obama's plan for withdrawal has just been endorsed by Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki. Soooo, let's see if Bush/McSame/McConnell keep talking about Iraq's "sovereignty"...

Al Gore sits down to take some question and speak to Tom Brokaw today.
Brokaw Asks a wide range of questions, from Joe Lieberman to Climate Change.
He also talks about The New Yorker's Satire of Obama.
Gore gets a small dig in on President Bush, joking he had already won a run for the high office he just didn't serve.
Brokaw asked allot of questions but did not ask many scientific ones, which i was hoping he would in regards to burying carbon.
Just wondering what the scientific research is in burying all this carbon in this carbon capture plan. Would this not taint alot of citizens well water?
Not a bad interview all in all.

The bush administration is trying to muddy the waters about Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki's quotes in Der Spiegel that he supports Barak Obama's 16-month timetable for a withdrawal of US troops from his country.  Despite claims of "translation errors," even Fox News made Iraq's position clear:

July 8, 2008 AP Report
Iraq Insists on Withdrawal Timetable for U.S. Troops
Iraq's national security adviser said Tuesday his country will not accept any security deal with the United States unless it contains specific dates for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces.
The comments.. were the strongest yet by an Iraqi official about the deal now under negotiation with U.S. officials. They came a day after Iraq's prime minister first said publicly that he expects the pending troop deal with the United States to have some type of timetable for withdrawal.  President Bush has said he opposes a timetable. The White House said Monday it did not believe Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was proposing a rigid timeline for U.S. troop withdrawals.

1872 - Mahlon Loomis patents wireless radio

1969 - Neil Armstrong walks on the Moon

COINCIDENCE? I think NOT!

Quote:
"It is natural that people should differ most, and most violently, about the unknowable. . . . There is all the room in the world for divergence of opinion about something that, so far as we can realistically perceive, does not exist."
-- E. Haldeman-Julius, speaking on christianity

From the Church of Ineffable Stupidity:

The 2008 Democratic Presidential ticket, burnished with a former U.S. Naval Admiral -- Admiral Fallon is more conciliating than I would like him to be, but...

I have just received an important clarification from CentCom regarding remarks that I made in my diary yesterday about John McCain.  It seems as though there was a misinterpretation and misunderstanding, so this necessary update and clarification was issued a few moments ago.

Please note the following changes in bold and/or strikethrough from the original comments that were "purportedly made" by me:

Since Der Spiegel has released the transcript of their interview with Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki, I thought I would go through it and see what al-Maliki thought about various things.  Some of his comments were quite interesting.

Boy was I Surprised to find my re-posted, slightly updated, diary, from yesterday, on the rescue list, I'll get to that in a minute.

There is reportedly some 43 million voters who are Veterans of our Military, active duty Members of our Military, as well as direct Family Members of both of those groups. Anyone who wants to keep cruntching numbers could keep a fairly close number of all three groups, births, deaths, enlistments etc., a huge task but a rough estimate could be had. The PLUS comes from the fact of not only the Extended Families of but also includes the Friends, Neighbors, Communities and how much they take into consideration Military Service especially when in occupation of two countries, or any dedicated service, to Country. The figures for that can't be put into a raw number, a close figure, or a percentage, they are Unknown.

Yesterday's Iraq PM's essential endorsement of Obama's 16 months withdrawal plan, reported by German magazine Spiegel, caused much uproar.

http://www.spiegel.de/...

With pundits calling Maliki's endorsement of Obama's plan a "major development" in the campaign, the White House, in coordination with McBush, was in a total damage control. A few hours later, some murky sources in Maliki's office began apparently walking backwards on reported qoutes from his interview in Spiegel. "Lost in translation defense" was apparently channeled via CentCom.  

VirginiaDem has excellent diary on this:
http://www.dailykos.com/...

Today, Speigel fires back.  

Barack Obama advocates engaging the Iranians diplomatically as a more useful strategy than saber-rattling and refusing to talk to them.  Obama is called an appeaser and (much) worse with great disdain by both the administration and the McCain camp for daring to even suggest it. This week, the US sent a diplomatic envoy to the Iran-Europe talks as "an observer" for the very first time.  Hmmm.  You say coincidence?

For many Americans Colin Powell's trip to the UN solidified their support for the Iraq war.  I needed no such reassurance.  John McCain supported the war and so I felt comfortable and confident.  In 2002, it seemed unimaginable that John McCain would follow President Bush blindly.  Those of us who campaigned for McCain in 2000 fought on the front lines of the first battle to stop the Bush regime.  

I don't want to get into the details of the decision to support the war: the influence of September 11th and politics, the capitulation of Democratic critics, or the silencing of dissent by the media.  I was a victim of and accomplice to all of that.  

What I do want to talk about is the tragedy of post-2000 John McCain.  This is not to say that the reality of pre-2000 McCain is as impressive or positive as I felt it was when I supported him, but instead to show how cold heartedly and cynically he betrayed those who eight years ago looked to him for leadership.  

Not long ago Charlie Black caused a stir in Fortune magazine when he predicted that another terrorist attack would do a great deal to give a boost to McCain's presidential aspirations.  There was much a-do about this little 'mistake' and Charlie immediately apologized to 'the world at large' for saying such a horrible thing...out loud that is.

When nothing else works, its time to pull out the old 9/11 fear card and even though McCain made if clear that he did not agree with Charlie Black, guess who's got their crystal ball out and is predicting that there will more than likely be a huge horrible attack in Iraq very near election day this year.

How convenient.  How specific.  How amazing that among all of his other talents, John McCain can see into the future.  

It only gets worse below the fold.  Bring your helmets and wear garlic around you neck just in case.

Blackwater, as part of the State Department's Worldwide Personal Protective Service, is protecting Barack Obama on his current trip to Afghanistan according to Jeremy Scahill, speaking today at the Gitmo panel at Netroots Nation.  Jeremy was vehement in a way I haven't heard him before in exhorting us to let Obama know what we think about his attitude towards these contractors. He's pressing on us to make our voices heard now, when Obama most needs us--before the election, not after.  

Update:AllisonInSeattle said it just as I stopped myself from climbing into bed to come back and say it myself.  It is NOT a good thing to have OUR candidate being protected by right wing Bush-supported forces!  Think about it.

Update 2:  I can see that many of us don't know about Blackwater and who they really are.  Maybe some Blackwater 101 diaries are in order.

THE DKOS FAQ PLAINLY states...

Diaries should be substantive. A good guideline is that if you don't have at least three solid paragraphs to write about your subject, you should probably post a comment in an open thread, or in a recent diary or front-page post that covers a topic relevant to what you wish to write about.

I would add that tight writing, careful research, insightful analysis -- these are the ingredients of the best diaries. And of course the carefully chosen word.  

But sometimes, only pictures -- and the look in a soldier's eyes -- will do...