| |
 |
|
(JavaScript Error)
|
| Archives |
|
|
|
|
Subscribe
|
| Now you
can subscribe to this blog and receive new blogs direct to
your email! |
|
RSS/XML Syndication
| |
|
|
|
|
Video: Alternative
Views
|
|
Censured Casualties
features rare footage
of war crimes against the Iraqi people suffered during
and after the Gulf War. The footage is from former Attorney
General Ramsey
Clark in his attempt to document the injustice
of United States military actions in the region.
|
|
|
Video: Alternative
Views
|
|
Another Unknown
War
features a film on the
struggle of the indigenous people of West Papua to remain
sovereign in the face of an Indonesian invasion backed
by world capital. Footage of Noam
Chomsky on Western involvments in the region and
the relation to East Timor.
|
|
|
Doug's New Books & Related
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TV/Radio
|
|
|
| |
 |
| |
|
|
|
Thursday, July 31, 2003
|
Group releases report on abuses in Afghanistan
With liberators like this, who needs enemies?
Taipei Times
A human rights report has documented widespread extortion, armed robbery and kidnapping by police and intelligence officials and militias in Afghanistan. The report accuses the US of supporting some of the worst offenders, and blames all countries for not doing enough to intervene and halt the abuses. The 101-page report, titled Killing You Is a Very Easy Thing for Us, by the New York-based Human Rights Watch, is a list of violent crimes committed against Afghan civilians in recent months in 12 provinces in eastern and southeastern Afghanistan. It also details threats against journalists, feminists and political activists.
|
|
|
Salon.com | Joe Conason's Journal
Bush's press conference yesterday was highly revealing. Ray sent me an email this morning that was on target: "At his most recent press conf, Bush admitted that the tax reduction legislation was probably responsible for 25% of the debt. Even that figure is probably low. Regardless, 25 % of $450 billion (I am
estimating) is still a pretty large chunk. Will anyone call him on this?"
Salon.com | Joe Conason's Journal
And from the London Independent: "The usual mangled speech but Bush is let off the hook in rare press conference
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=429148
US media lets Bush off the hook but Bush is Bush so some interesting moments emerged: "The main lesson to emerge from the 50-minute session, the first since the invasion of Iraq four months ago, was how easily the chief executive evaded any serious damage - and how the reporters made it easy for him to do so.
The Bush on display was familiar: a bit macho, a bit matey and condescending. On occasion he flashed that unappealing smirk, or a spark of temper when a trusted aide was challenged. For a man who does not like being asked to explain himself, he looked relaxed and in command not only of his audience, but also (by his own unexacting standards) of the English language"
There were the usual odd breakdowns in brain-mouth co-ordination. "I will never assume the restraint and goodwill of dangerous enemies when lives of our citizens are at work," he proclaimed during a chest-beating passage about pursuing the war against terrorism. On occasion he moved his hands silently groping for words. But the ones he finally came up with more or less did the job.
As usual, reporters did not follow up each other's questions. At one point Mr Bush was pressed on the dodgy pre-war intelligence (and the even dodgier use made of it) about Saddam's supposed weapons' programmes. Predictably, he launched into an answer about how much better the world off was without Saddam Hussein.
The reporter pressed him but Mr Bush cut him off, calling the next question - which was about gay marriage. The President, as only to be expected, didn't think it was a good idea. The chance to pin him down was gone.
From then on it was downhill all the way. We saw the truculent Bush ("Since I'm in charge of the war on terror, we won't reveal source and methods," he said of his refusal to declassify 28 pages of the congressional report on the 11 September attacks). Then there was the carelessly dismissive Bush ("I didn't expect Thomas Jefferson to emerge in Iraq in a 90-day period," he said of the shambles there). "
|
|
|
"Conflict 'may have driven Muslims into arms of al-Qa'ida'"
More evidence that Bush-Blair policies aid al Qaeda recruitment
News:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bit by bit, the real Dr Kelly emerges from the shadows
It is just over a week since Dr David Kelly's body was found in the Oxfordshire countryside, yet the shock waves from his apparent suicide are still spreading.
The BBC quickly revealed that the scientist was the source for Andrew Gilligan's Today programme report which said Downing Street had intervened, against the wishes of the intelligence services, in the preparation of the September 2002 dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction to make it "sexier". Soon afterwards Tony Blair, on tour in the Far East, announced a judicial inquiry into Dr Kelly's death.
At that point it appeared that the BBC was guilty as charged by Alastair Campbell, the Prime Minister's director of communications: it had quoted a "middle-level technician", in the description of the Ministry of Defence (MoD), with no connection to the intelligence services and in no position to know what had happened as the dossier neared publication. A week later, however, things look very different.
It has become clear that Dr Kelly was not quite the narrowly focused specialist, with little connection to the world of spying, that he seemed when he gave evidence to the parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC) during its investigation of the decision to go to war in Iraq. He himself sought to create that impression before the committee, and his reasons for doing so may be significant.
It was public knowledge that Dr Kelly had a distinguished career as a leading UN weapons inspector in Iraq and had been nominated to lead the British contingent in the Iraq Survey Group, formed to take the UN inspectors' place. But we now know that not only was he probably the Government's most knowledgeable adviser on the history of Iraq's weapons programmes, but he also had a high security clearance, sat in on MI6 interrogations of Iraqi defectors and was a member of a high-level committee reviewing all the intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. His value was such that he had been appointed a "special deputy chief scientific officer", a rarely used civil service grade that allowed him to move in senior circles without having administrative responsibilities.
When it came to the contents of the dossier, in short, David Kelly was certainly in a position to know what he was talking about. And it emerged that he had talked, not only to Mr Gilligan, not only to two other BBC journalists whose names were put to him by the FAC (one of whom, it turned out, had recorded the interview), but to several more reporters. The picture is of a man who had suppressed his doubts last September, only to feel growing disquiet in the aftermath of war as it became clear how wrong the Government's claims on Iraqi WMD had been.
Some have suggested Dr Kelly was an unworldly scientist led on by the reporters, but he was used to dealing with the media. He was not simply one expert among many on Iraq's weapons programmes: in his field - biological weapons - he was the expert. Although he did not seek them out, journalists came to him over the years whenever they wanted to make sure they had the details right on the efforts of the United Nations weapons inspectors to root out Iraqi WMD.
Among them was Judith Miller of the New York Times, the paper's WMD expert and the recipient of an e-mail on the day Dr Kelly died, in which he spoke of "dark actors playing games". In Germ, the 1998 book she co-wrote, she is fulsome in her praise for him as part of the "Gang of Four", the senior inspectors who forced so many admissions about WMD out of the Iraqis in the mid-1990s. More than anyone else, Dr Kelly was instrumental in getting the regime to admit the existence of its biological weapons programme.
This was an achievement for which Dr Kelly and his team deserved a Nobel prize, according to the then chief inspector, Rolf Ekeus - only for that achievement to be slighted earlier this year in The Independent on Sunday by the Prime Minister.
"The UN inspectors found no trace at all of Saddam's offensive biological weapons programme - which he claimed didn't exist - until his lies were revealed by his son-in-law," Mr Blair wrote in answer to an IoS reader's question in March. In fact, Dr Kelly's work had wrung this admission from the regime more than a month before the son-in-law defected to Jordan - according to at least one expert, it was probably what caused him to flee.
Whether or not Mr Blair's comment fed the scientist's disaffection, his conversations with journalists after the Iraq war went well beyond the usual technical subject matter. The tape of his interview with the Newsnight journalist Susan Watts is now under lock and key, pending its submission to Lord Hutton's judicial inquiry, but the words read by an actor on the programme are a virtual transcript.
"It is beginning to look as if the Government's committed a monumental blunder," Dr Kelly says of the most controversial claims in the September dossier - that Iraq had links to al-Qa'ida, and that it could deploy WMD within 45 minutes of the order being given. Of the latter, he says: "It was a statement that was made, and it just got out of all proportion. They were desperate for information ... that could be released. That was one that popped up and was seized on, and it's unfortunate that it was.
"That's why there is the argument between the intelligence services and the Cabinet Office/No 10 - because they picked up on it, and once they've picked up on it, you can't pull it back from them."
He goes on to say that in the week before the dossier was put out, many people were expressing unease about questions of accuracy and emphasis. At no point, however, was Mr Campbell named by Newsnight, as he was by Mr Gilligan in The Mail on Sunday, precipitating the row which resulted in Dr Kelly's death.
A former colleague suggested he might not have realised the full ramifications of his disclosures, saying: "He knew his microbiology through and through, he was a real expert from that point of view. Whether he had the political antennae, I'm not sure." Nor might he have realised the implications of telling his superiors at the MoD that he had spoken to Mr Gilligan, although the journalist Tom Mangold, a family friend, wrote: "David never liked the MoD, he used to complain bitterly about them."
Much of the speculation of the past week has focused on how the MoD dealt with him, and how his name was leaked to the press. On Friday the ministry denied that it had threatened Dr Kelly's pension, or told him action could be taken under the Official Secrets Act. The Independent on Sunday asked whether his security clearance had been discussed, but the MoD refused to comment.
When the scientist appeared before the FAC, however, MPs had been led to expect that he would confess to being Mr Gilligan's source. Almost inaudibly, he reinforced the impression that he was a man out of his depth, who had had no right to speculate on the interaction between the Government and the intelligence services. The atmosphere was hostile.
But then Dr Kelly said he did not think he could have been the source, and the MPs swung on to his side. Had he reneged on a deal? It is impossible to say, but it is becoming increasingly clear that he was less than truthful with the committee - denying, for example, that he had met Gavin Hewitt, the third BBC journalist, which he had done.
Whatever went on at the MoD, it must have been clear to Dr Kelly after the hearing that his security clearance might be in jeopardy, perhaps also his chances of taking up his post in Iraq, a country to which he was deeply attached. His friend and fellow weapons expert Alistair Hay, whose wife committed suicide, believes the scientist felt deeply isolated.
"It wasn't as if the MoD were saying, 'You're our man, we're supporting you to the hilt'," said Professor Hay. "He was being fed to everyone as being the person probably responsible for the Government's difficulty ... If he felt he had been less than truthful before the committee ... [and] had been caught dissembling and not being absolutely truthful, I would have thought this would create huge conflicts for him."
But did this lead David Kelly to kill himself? That is a question for Lord Hutton and the coroner, but it goes to the heart of the Government's case for going to war. How far the law lord will want to travel down that path remains to be seen.
|
|
Wednesday, July 30, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
Another gas deal to help Bush corporate contributers
News: "Bush, the rainforest and a gas pipeline to enrich his friends. Plan would enrich Bush corporate campaign contributors"
|
|
|
Airlines warned of terror threat from weapons hidden in cameras
Probably not a good time to travel; security in Sydney airport yesterday was very tight with long lines and checks; I noticed the day before they were not letting cabs go up to the Sydney opera house as usual so obviously there are some security warnings; I have never encountered such antiAmericanism as I have travelling this summer, people really hate Bush and are angry so many people seem to support him; Bush is a disaster for the US as well as the rest of the world
News
|
|
|
washingtonpost.com: Oct. Report Said Defeated Hussein Would Be Threat
Here's insider documentation of a claim I've been making for some time: that Saddam is more dangerous out of the cage than in it and that Iraq invasion intensified US insecurity and vulnerability to terror attacks
washingtonpost.com: Oct. Report Said Defeated Hussein Would Be Threat
|
|
|
Bush Acknowledges 'Real Threat' of Terrorism
Gee whiz, Bush recognizes "real threat" of terrorism; does he recognize how much more dangerous the situation is with world in rage over US Iraq invasion, Saddam Hussein and bin laden both on the loose and growing global hatred of the US thanks to Bush's insane policies?
Bush Acknowledges 'Real Threat' of Terrorism
|
|
|
Bush Looking for Means to Prevent Gay Marriage in U.S.
Bush and his rightwing are going after gay rights; the Bush right was furious at the Supreme Court for affirming gay rights and will now do whatever possible to limit them, this will be a big battle....
Bush Looking for Means to Prevent Gay Marriage in U.S.
|
|
|
Cheney's Believe It or Not! - A BuzzFlash Reader Commentary
A good summary of Cheney's lies on iraq and other topics; no one pushed harder for the Iraq war than Cheney who had billions of dollars of Halliburton contracts dancing before his eyes and aggressive military doctrines he wanted to try out twisting around in his dark and warped soul....
Cheney's Believe It or Not! - A BuzzFlash Reader Commentary
|
|
|
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Pentagon to issue terrorism futures
The Pentagon has outdone itself in stupidity and obscenity on proposing futures investment in terrorism and terror war, evidently they are going to scrap it, who will take the blame on this?
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Pentagon to issue terrorism futures
Here's a good commentary on the obscenity by Jeff Coopersmith:
Wolfowitz's Future: Egg-Faced
Derivative, Admiral Poindexter? The Department of Defense opens -- and
closes -- a "casino" betting on your children's lives
By Jeff Koopersmith
July 30, 2003 (apj.us) -- Early yesterday morning I heard a story on
news radio regarding plans by the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA) to open what is nothing more than an Internet gaming
casino at which you might place a bet on where are soldiers might be
killed next..
DARPA is the central research and development organization for the
Department of Defense (DoD). I could hardly believe my ears: DARPA was
launching a kind of worldwide terrorism gambling palace where at least
one thousand traders could bet on what was going to happen in the
volatile Middle East.
Granted, DARPA is charged with hiring some of the most creative American
minds to "blue sky" regarding the creation of unheard of technolgies and
techniques. Yet this one seemed destined for the record books.
Remember, the DARPA budget request for 2000 was nearly $2 billion.
Paul Wolfowitz, naturally, found himself in the unfortunate position of
testifying before a Senate Committee yesterday morning on reconstruction
of Iraq. It was not good timing for him as he was raked over the coals
by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and others from both sides of the aisle for
this lamebrained scheme.
Mr. Wolfowitz at least pretended he knew nothing "much" of the Middle
East Roulette scheme, and also claimed he did not know who cooked it up.
However, one senator mentioned the name "Admiral Poindexter" -- and more
than one senator called for heads to roll.
Will it be John Poindexter -- already infamous and prosecuted as a felon
during the Iran-Contra scandal -- or was someone else truly responsible?
For the record, John Poindextera, then a retired Navy Admiral, lost his
job as National Security Adviser under Ronald Reagan and was convicted
of conspiracy, lying to Congress, defrauding the government, and
destroying evidence in the Iran Contra scandal.
A few idiots at the White House, including Donald Rumsfeld, somehow
convinced George W. Bush to recruit Poindexter in a new role -- as head
of the "1984"-like "Information Awareness Office" at DARPA. This is the
group that convinced the White House and Congress that they should be
able to patch into your home PC without a warrant and spy on you and
your family -- for reasons of national security, of course.
Poindexter's "vision" (http://www.darpa.mil/iao/) includes:
· "Event prediction and capability development model building engines"
-- The Casino?
· "Structured argumentation and evidential reasoning" -- The Dealer?
· "Story telling, change detection, and truth maintenance " -- Your
Email?
By the way, in case you forgot the details of just how insane Poindexter
and his criminal confederate Oliver North are, see this email from 1986
from North to Poindexter, now semi-declassified, to refresh your memory
-- and remember this: FOX News has given North his own television show!:
MSG FROM: NSOLN --CPUA TO: NSJMP --CPUA
09/06/86 15:31:36 To: NSJMP --CPUA
*** Reply to note of 09/02/86 16:03
-- SECRET --
NOTE FROM: OLIVER NORTH Subject: Iran
Last night at 2330 our Project Democracy rep. in Costa Rica called to
advise that the Arias Govt [One line deleted, (b)(1)(s) exemption] "was
going to hold a press conference today (Saturday) announcing that an
illegal support operation for the Contras had been taking place from an
airfield in Costa Rica for over a year. The names of two Americans
Secord and [Deleted, (b)(1)(s) exemption] were going to be predominantly
mentioned. I called [Deleted, (b)(1)(s) exemption] to confirm the info
and he returned call at 0030 verifying the info. I then had a conference
call w/ Tambs, Abrams and Fiers and we agreed on the following sequence:
-- North to call Pres. Arias and tell him that if the press conference
were held, Arias [One line deleted, (b)(1)(s) exemption] wd never see a
nickel of the $80M that McPhearson had promised him earlier on Friday.
--Tambs then called Arias from his leave location in W. Va. and
confirmed what I had said and suggested that Arias talk to Elliott for
further confirmation. --Arias then got the same word from Elliott.
--[One line deleted, (b)(1)(s) exemption] At 0300 Arias called back to
advise that there wd be no press conference and no team of reporters
sent to the airfield. As a precaution, the Project a/c were flown to
Ilopango last night and no project personnel remain in site at the field
other than local guards (8). Fiers advises today that this operation vas
timed to coincide w/ the Conference on our $100M and was directed by the
Cubans. [Two lines deleted, (b)(1)(s) exemption] - but that I wd
reconsider if things looked better next wk. I recognize that I was well
beyond my charter in dealing w/ a head of state this way and in making
threats/offers that may be impossible to deliver, but under the
circumstances and w/ Elliott's concurrence - it seemed like the only
thing we could do. Best of all, it seems to have worked. I believe that
it is important that you or Al or both make a trip down there again as
soon as the $100M is approved so that someone w/ more horsepower than I
can look Arias - [One line deleted, (b)(1)(s) exemption] very aware of
our resolve in making this project work. If Al were to go it wd be a
good opportunity for him to become familiar w/ some of the faces which
will be critical to this effort if it is to succeed. V/R North
What smacks of Poindexter in this Casino deal is the "example", shown at
http://www.apj.us/20030730gamble.gif, which would allow people to trade
in contracts on whether the Kind of Jordan would be overthrown, and
when.
If that didn't get your money flowing -- how about betting on whether
the Iraqi regime might persist for more than one month of hostilities?
In short, you'd be betting on the deaths of American boys and girls.
The White House might also focus its wrath on Dr. Anthony J. Tether,
Director of DARPA, for merely being asleep at the wheel if Poindexter is
not responsible.
Whichever the case, and whoever's head is placed on the chopping block
you can rest assured that this program is OVER.
Wolfowitz, uncharcteristically nearly red faced told Senator Boxer that
the program would be shut down today.
You can find some detailed examples of that program for your scrap book
at http://www.apj.us/20030730Koop2.html.
Watch for Wolfowitz to report back on the persons responsible -- and
what it cost you.
Are we really going to tolerate this tomfoolery?
-------------
JEFF KOOPERSMITH is a political consultant, opinion research authority,
policy analyst, and self-described "renegade lobbyist."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Saddam tape promises revenge for 'martyr' sons
Saddam threatens revenge for death of sons. the guy is more dangerous than ever....
The Electronic Herald
|
|
|
Bush Refuses to Declassify Saudi Section of Report
Obviously, the Saudis were a major force in 9/11 and the Bush family has long had secret and overt connections with Saudi groups so there is still a coverup on extent of Saudi connection to 9/11, as there is a coverup of what Bush administration knew and when they knew it concerning coming and timing of 9/11 attacks
Bush Refuses to Declassify Saudi Section of Report
Judicial Watch is going for the classified Saudi material=
For Inmediate Release
July 30, 2003
Contact: Press Office
202-646-5172
JUDICIAL WATCH TO SEEK SAUDI DOCUMENTS FROM JOINT CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRY
REPORT
Documents Detail Saudi Government Involvement in 9/11
Lawsuit on Behalf of WTC Family in U.S. District Circuit
for DC Provides Venue to Uncover Terror Links
(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption and abuse, said todaythat it will seek court authorization to subpoena the redacted pages of the Joint Congressional Committee’s 9/11 Report dealing with Saudi Arabia.
The documents reportedly detail the involvement of the Saudi Arabian government and members of the extended Saudi royal family in financing and
supporting terrorism, including involvement in the 9/11 attacks against the United States. The information contained in the redacted pages of the report bears directly on the lawsuit Judicial Watch has filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on behalf of the surviving family members of a woman killed in the World Trade Center on 9/11.
Judicial Watch will seek documents through its ongoing lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, John Doe v. Al Baraka
Investment and Development Corporation (CA No. 02-1980 (JR)), which was brought against various Saudi entities and individuals, including members of the ruling Saudi family.
The Report of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the U. S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence entitled, “Joint Inquiry Into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001,” is nearly 900 pages long and features at least 28 pages of redacted material detailing Saudi support of and involvement in terrorism. The full, classified report, dated December 2002, was released to the public on Thursday, July 24, 2003 in a declassified and highly redacted form.
“We believe the Bush administration is more interested in protecting the terrorist-supporting regime of Saudi Arabia than the intelligence sources and methods drawn upon to produce those portions of the report detailing Saudi terror links. We hope the court allows us to get to the truth,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
|
|
|
Blair Boasts of Long Tenure, Then Gets Queries on Ending It
Blair is under serious attack in his own party and via the British public for his role in Iraq lies and deception and subsequent death of British Iraqi arms expert David Kelly who told the press how intelligence reports were doctored by Blair's spin machine
Blair Boasts of Long Tenure, Then Gets Queries on Ending It
|
|
|
THE STRATFOR WEEKLY: Iraq and the Broader War
I am back from 16 days in Australia during which I posted sporadically and want to thank Richard and Ray for keeping blogleft going; here is intelligence analysis from respected Stratfor Weekly collected by the excellent INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE on the Iraq mess; I just read NEWSWEEK on Iraq that was quite critical and the reader's letters to the International edition savaged the Bush administration Iraq policy so it is getting clear to experts and to the public that the Bush administration Iraq adventure is becoming a fiasco on multiple fronts, arguments we've been making in blogleft for months....
THE STRATFOR WEEKLY: Iraq and the Broader War
|
|
Tuesday, July 29, 2003
|
Careful: The FB-Eye May be Watching
Reading the wrong thing in public can get you in trouble
BY MARC SCHULTZ
"The FBI is here,"Mom tells me over the phone. Immediately I can see my mom with her back to a couple of Matrix-like figures in black suits and opaque sunglasses, her hand covering the mouthpiece like Grace Kelly in Dial M for Murder. This must be a joke, I think. But it's not, because Mom isn't that funny.
"The who?" I say.
"Two FBI agents. They say you're not in trouble, they just want to talk. They want to come to the store."
I work in a small, independent bookstore, and since it's a slow Tuesday afternoon, I figure, "Sure." Someone I know must have gotten some government work, I think; hadn't my consultant friend spoken recently of getting rolled onto some government job? Background check, I think, interviewing acquaintances ... No big deal, right? Then, of course, I make a big deal about it in front of my co-workers.
"That was my mom," I tell them. "The FBI's coming for me." They laugh; it's a good joke, especially when the FBI actually shows up. They are not the bogeymen I had been expecting. They're dressed casually, they speak familiarly, but they are big. The one in front stands close to 7 feet, and you can tell his partner is built like a bulldog under his baggy shirt and shorts.
"You Marc Schultz?" asks the tall one. He shows me his badge, introduces himself as Special Agent Clay Trippi. After assuring me that I'm not in trouble, he asks if there is someplace we can sit down and talk. We head back to Reference, where a table and chairs are set up. We sit down, and I'm again informed that I am not in trouble.
Then, Agent Trippi asks, "Do you drive a black Nissan Altima?" And I realize this meeting is not about a friend. Despite their reassurances, and despite the fact that I haven't committed any federal offenses (that I know of), I'm starting to feel a bit like I'm in trouble.
They ask me if I was driving my car on Saturday, and I say, reasonably sure, that I was. They ask me where I went, and I struggle for a moment to remember Saturday. I make a lame joke about how the days run together when you're underemployed. They smile politely. Was I at work on Saturday? I think so.
"Were you at the Caribou Coffee on Powers Ferry?" asks Agent Trippi. That's where I get my coffee before work, and so I tell him yes, probably, just before remembering Saturday: Harry Potter day, opening early, in at 8:30.
So I would have been at Caribou Coffee that Saturday, getting my small coffee, room for cream. This information seems to please the agents.
"Did you notice anything unusual, anyone worth commenting on?" OK, I think. It's the unusual guy they want, not me. I think hard, wondering if it was Saturday I saw the guy in the really cool reclining wheelchair, the guy who struck me as a potential James Bondian supervillain, but no: That was Monday.
Then they ask if I carried anything into the shop -- and we're back to me.
My mind races. I think: a bomb? A knife? A balloon filled with narcotics? But no. I don't own any of those things. "Sunglasses," I say. "Maybe my cell phone?"
Not the right answer. I'm nervous now, wondering how I must look: average, mid-20s, unassuming retail employee. What could I have possibly been carrying?
Trippi's partner speaks up: "Any reading material? Papers?" I don't think so. Then Trippi decides to level with me: "I'll tell you what, Marc. Someone in the shop that day saw you reading something, and thought it looked suspicious enough to call us about. So that's why we're here, just checking it out. Like I said, there's no problem. We'd just like to get to the bottom of this. Now if we can't, then you may have a problem. And you don't want that."
You don't want that? Have I just been threatened by the FBI? Confusion and a light dusting of panic conspire to keep me speechless. Was I reading something that morning? Something that would constitute a problem?
The partner speaks up again: "Maybe a printout of some kind?"
Then it occurs to me: I was reading. It was an article my dad had printed off the Web. I remember carrying it into Caribou with me, reading it in line, and then while stirring cream into my coffee. I remember bringing it with me to the store, finishing it before we opened. I can't remember what the article was about, but I'm sure it was some kind of left-wing editorial, the kind that never fails to incite me to anger and despair over the state of the country.
I tell them all this, but they want specifics: the title of the article, the author, some kind of synopsis, but I can't help them -- I read so much of this stuff.
"Do you still have the article?" Probably not, but I suggest we check behind the counter. When that doesn't pan out, I have the bright idea to call my dad at work, see if he can remember. Of course, he can't put together a coherent sentence after I tell him the FBI are at the store, questioning me.
"The FBI?" he keeps asking. Eventually I get him off the phone, and suggest it may be in my car. They follow me out to the parking lot, where Trippi asks me if there's anything in the car he should know about.
"Weapons, drugs? It's not a problem if you do, but if you don't tell me and then I find something, that's going to be a problem." I assure him there's nothing in my car, coming very close to quoting Rudy Ray Moore in Dolemite: "There's nothin' in my trunk, man."
The excitement of the questioning -- the interrogation -- has made me just a little bit giddy. I almost laugh out loud when they ask me to pop my trunk.
There's nothing in my car, of course. I keep looking anyway, while telling them it was probably some kind of what-did-they-know-and-when-did-they-know-it article about the buildup to Gulf War II. Trippi nods, unsatisfied. I turn up some papers from the University of Georgia, where I'm about to begin as a grad student. He asks me what I'm going to study.
"Journalism," I say. As I duck back into the car, I hear Agent Trippi informing his partner, "He's going to UGA for journalism" in a way that makes me wonder whether that counts against me.
Back in the store, Trippi gives me his card and tells me to call him if I remember anything. After he's gone, I call my dad back to see if he has calmed down, maybe come up with a name. We retrace some steps together, figure out the article was Hal Crowther's "Weapons of Mass Stupidity" from the Weekly Planet, a free independent out of Tampa. It comes back to me then, this scathing screed focusing on the way corporate interests have poisoned the country's media, focusing mostly on Fox News and Rupert Murdoch -- really infuriating, deadly accurate stuff about American journalism post-9-11. So I call the number on the card, leave a message with the name, author and origin of the column, and ask him to call me if he has any more questions.
To tell the truth, I'm kind of anxious to hear back from the FBI, if only for the chance to ask why anyone would find media criticism suspicious, or if maybe the sight of a dark, bearded man reading in public is itself enough to strike fear in the heart of a patriotic citizen.
My co-worker, Craig, says that we should probably be thankful the FBI takes these things seriously; I say it seems like a dark day when an American citizen regards reading as a threat, and downright pitch-black when the federal government agrees.
Special Agent Trippi didn't return calls from CL. But Special Agent Joe Parris, Atlanta field office spokesman, stressed that specific FBI investigations are confidential. He wouldn't confirm or deny the Schultz interview.
"In this post-911 era, it is the absolute responsibility of the FBI to follow through on any tips of potential terrorist activity," Parris says. "Are people going to take exception and be inconvenienced by this at times? Oh, yeah. ... A certain amount of convenience is going to be offset by an increase in security."
Marc Schultz is a freelance writer in Atlanta. The Weekly Planet happens to be Creative Loafing's sister paper in Tampa. For a copy of the column that got Schultz in hot water, go to here.
|
|
Monday, July 28, 2003
|
Loud Explosion Rocks Basra's City Centre
Via: Agence France-Presse
Three or four loud explosions were heard on Sunday, from the Centre of southern city of Basra just before 10:00 pm (local time), followed by rounds of gunfire, an AFP correspondent said. Witnesses said there were several casualties. The city, under British control, has generally been free of the violence and lawlessness that has struck Baghdad since it fell to US forces in April.
|
|
|
Thousands Being Recruited for 'Jihad'
And for another story from the 2+2=4 department...
Via: Gulf-news.com
Despite official pledges of action to stop militancy, the 'jihad' movement in the country seems to be growing. This appears to be especially true in the Punjab and also the NWFP, where it is said "more people have linked up to jihadi forces in the post-Iraq war scenario than at any other time in years."
"Jihad is spreading like wildfire in Pakistan," claims an official in the country's Interior Ministry. He says that according to several jihadi publications between January and June 2003, Islamic groups recruited over 7,000 young boys aged between 18 and 25. "Some of the largest separatist outfits – Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) andJaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) – claim to have recruited more than 3,350 and 2,235 boys respectively during this period," says the official. Jihadi groups are finding the Pakistani environment particularly receptive after the U.S.-led attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq. They use publications, web sites, local prayer leaders, cassettes, CDs, and souvenirs like file covers, badges,T-shirts and so on to lure recruits.
|
|
|
Official Story on Deaths of Saddam's Sons "Wags the Dog"
Via: Michel Chossudovsky
The deaths of the sons of Saddam Hussein in a high profile "shoot-out" in the northern city of Mosul arrive at a most opportune moment for President Bush and his entourage. Political assassination is tied into the logic of war propaganda. The killings were designed by the Pentagon to uphold the shaky legitimacy of the Anglo-American military axis in the face of Iraqi armed resistance to occupation forces. In the words of President Bush: "their deaths show that the former Iraqi regime will not be coming back."
By mobilizing media attention Worldwide on Saddam's two sons, the Mosul event has served to distract Western public opinion from the broader issue of war crimes committed by the Bush administration and its indefectible British ally, not to mention the mysterious death of David Kelly, the senior MI6 official who "pulled the plug" on Tony Blair. Meanwhile, the fake Niger uranium dossier, used in Bush's State of the Union address has been quietly sent to the news archives. The Mosul shoot-out serves to "reduce the heat" and conceal the lies: "The death of the two sons was greeted with jubilation in Washington, where President George Bush has been under growing political pressure..." (Washington Post, 24 July 2003)
|
|
Saturday, July 26, 2003
|
Democratic Panel's National Security Report
I think the following set of Democratic policy recommendations should be praised for addressing the real issue of WMD at work in the world -- the growing proliferation of nuclear arsenals in both state and non-state hands. It is correct in challenging the present administration's emphasis on re-starting exploration of new nuclear devices, testing, and possible future implementation into a revived weapons program. Also helpful is the attempt to disarm the Bush doctrine of unilateral military action as the preferred method of getting business started in world regions unfriendly to Western capital interests. Defense spending needs to come way down in this report and the money be shifted into more multilateral, non-military preventative measures.
Those looking for critique, however, have some ammo as well:
1) The Defense budget here would be mostly used to fund a dramatic expansion of the Nunn-Lugar program (designed to disarm Russia after USSR collapse and keep nukes off the black market)...without saying that it has accomplished nothing, the Russian situation remains extremely volatile and is the major source for the black market in radiological weapons worldwide. It's not clear then that increasing the bureaucratic funding of Nunn-Lugar achieves much -- especially as it has been linked to allowing Russia the military expenditures to finance the war on Chechnya.
2) Premptive strikes: the "doctrine" is renounced (happily), but the right is retained (unhappily).
3) Unilateralism: is renounced generally (happily), but not entirely -- there are some cases when unilateral action is correct thinks this report.
Still, the overall attempt to de-escalate growing nuclear aggressions is admirable and necessary, while many will find the move towards a more multilateral framework of international alliance a welcome repreive from Bush Terror War policy.A panel established under the auspices of Senate Democrats yesterday released a report entitled "An American Security Policy: Challenge, Opportunity, Commitment."
The advisory group is chaired by former Defense Secretary William Perry and includes Madeleine Albright, Sandy Berger, Louis Caldera, Ashton Carter, Wesley Clark, Michele Flournoy, Alfonso Lenhardt, John Podesta, John Shalikashvili, and Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall.
The panel was formed: "partly in response to the perception that Democrats have been indifferent to national security problems and weak on defense."
Among the recommendations of the panel:
•Pursue direct U.S. talks with North Korea, rather than "An incoherent U.S. approach" to the crisis there
•Undertake a dramatic expansion in the scale, scope and pace of the Nunn-Lugar and other threat reduction programs.
•Preemption: Retain the option but renounce the "doctrine."
•Reaffirm the value of international non-proliferation agreements like the NPT, BWC and CWC.
•The United States has no compelling requirement for new types of nuclear weapons, and new programs of these types should not be pursued.
•Reject new departures for nuclear weapons design and testing.
•The administration lacks an ordered set of homeland security goals and the strategy for achieving them.
•The United States should seek a UN Security Council resolution endorsing the [Iraq] post-conflict reconstruction effort.
•Most security problems cannot be addressed unilaterally.
•Ad Hoc "Coalitions Of The Willing" are a poor substitute for alliances.
•Still higher levels of defense spending are not only not needed but not sustainable.
|
|
|
GOP's Power Play
From Wash Post
Goal of Reforms in House Gives Way To Tough Tactics Party Once Criticized
... Republicans won control of the House, in part, by promising to allow elected representatives a chance to voice their proposals and have them voted up or down. On the November 1994 night that voters delivered the House into GOP hands, the incoming speaker, Gingrich, declared: "We're going to be dramatically more fair than the Democrats have been in my lifetime."
Nonetheless, Republicans routinely write complicated legislation and provide Democrats little time to review it. They frequently prevent the minority party from offering an alternative.
Norman Ornstein, a nonpartisan congressional scholar, this week wrote in the newspaper Roll Call that the Democratic "high-handedness" Gingrich lamented was "nothing compared to what House Republicans are doing now."
|
|
|
Libertarian view on drug reimportation bill
The Drug Re-Importation Controversy, as given by Lew Rockwell. While ordinarily I don't agree with Libertarian views, Rockwell's position on lowering drug costs makes sense. Check it out.
... Everyone knows that pharmaceuticals are far cheaper around the world than they are in the US, due mainly to stringent patent laws that prohibit free-market competition and guarantee producers huge profits. However, these same companies also compete in real market conditions, by exporting their drugs to foreign countries at a profit.
These same drugs have been coming back into the US market and selling for much lower prices, which has given rise to demands that re-importation be blocked—at the very time when the Bush administration is imposing more medical socialism to lower the retail price of drugs!
The issue is very simple from the point of view of free trade. Should Americans be able to buy American-made prescription drugs from other countries at cheaper prices than they would have to pay in the US? Of course, the answer is yes. All that free traders are asking is that US firms be willing to let Americans buy US drugs at market prices when they are imported from other countries. The only possible reason to pay more would be if you want to dump vast sums of money on the US drug industry for no good reason. Consumers might want to—they can send Eli Lilly a fat check--but they shouldn't be forced to.
And yet some free traders have gotten on board with the desire to use protectionist means to boost prices and thereby add fuel to the fire of socialized medicine. It's expected that politicians sell their souls. But what about think tanks? The American Enterprise Institute, Cato, Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the National Center for Policy Analysis, National Review, and many other organizations and "free market" publications have come out for banning re-importation. Why? They say that re-imported drugs are unsafe, would undercut US drug makers, dry up research funds, and make drugs more difficult to regulate.
Doug Bandow [link to National Review broken] of Cato, for example, argues that because foreign countries do not have free markets for drugs, they shouldn't be permitted to export to the US which does. Of course that is precisely the same rationale used by the catfish and textile industry to ban competitive products. If anything, the claim is even more absurd since we are not talking about competitors but the very same firms that already sell in the US. So hysterical has been the campaign that re-imported drugs are said (by Michael Krauss) to be "an invitation to terrorists."
As with other protectionist schemes, it is really about taxing Americans and imposing price floors to benefit a politically influential industry. Krauss actually admits this when he says: "Do we want pharmaceutical progress? Then we must pay for these goods, even if other nations don't do their part." But protectionist profits are not the reason for pharmaceutical progress. The reason is innovation, which depends in no way on patents and protectionism in drugs any more than with any other form of innovation. The proof is precisely that American firms are willing to sell at such low prices to foreign nations; they must be making a profit.
In short, the arguments used in favor of cracking down on drug re-importation are identical to all the arguments used for all forms of protectionism. They always amount to the same thing: special pleading for a protected US industry at the expense of consumers. Fortunately, the drug protectionists have been beaten back by the House, which voted yes on a bill to permit wholesale re-importation of pharmaceuticals—a bill that was opposed by the whole of the drug industry as well as the FDA and the Beltway thinktanks.
The role of free traders in promoting protectionism is particularly notable, for it proves that libertarians have a useful role to play on Capitol Hill after all. Their studies, arguments, articles will be read, cited, and praised so long as they willing to call for expanded government. If however, they stick to what they should be doing, which is calling for freedom, they must suffer under unrelenting marginalization, as they do most of the time in Washington. ...
|
|
Friday, July 25, 2003
|
Interesting stats emerge from last night's vote on House drug reimportation bill
Money Talks
Contributions from Pharmaceutical lobby correlate with outcome of bill, but read on to find out how and why. Funny how sometimes the "good guys" win, inspite of the odds.
|
|
|
What a Tangled Web We Weave . . .
Via: Whiskey Bar
Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of
mass destruction.
Dick Cheney
August 26, 2002
Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used
for the production of biological weapons.
George W. Bush
September 12, 2002
If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is
once again misleading the world.
Ari Fleischer
December 2, 2002
We know for a fact that there are weapons there.
Ari Fleischer
January 9, 2003
Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the
materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve
agent.
George W. Bush
January 28, 2003
We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass
destruction, is determined to make more.
Colin Powell
February 5, 2003
We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized
Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the
dictator tells us he does not have.
George Bush
February 8, 2003
So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons
of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? I think our judgment
has to be clearly not.
Colin Powell
March 8, 2003
Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt
that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most
lethal weapons ever devised.
George Bush
March 17, 2003
Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that
Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical
particularly . .! . all this will be made clear in the course of the
operation, for whatever duration it takes.
Ari Fleisher
March 21, 2003
There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons
of mass destruction. As this operation continues, those weapons will be
identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who
guard them.
Gen. Tommy Franks
March 22, 2003
I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass
destruction.
Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman
March 23, 2003
One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a
number of sites.
Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark
March 22, 2003
We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad.
Donald Rumsfeld
March 30, 2003
Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of
mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be ! plenty.
Neocon scholar Robert Kagan
April 9, 2003
I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials,
a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass
destruction will be found.
Ari Fleischer
April 10, 2003
We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi
scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he
destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.
George Bush
April 24, 2003
There are people who in large measure have information that we need . .
. so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that
country.
Donald Rumsfeld
April 25, 2003
We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.
George Bush
May 3, 2003
I am confident that we will find evidence that makes it clear he had
weapons of mass destruction.
Colin Powell
May 4, 2003
I never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction
in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld
May 4, 2003
I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam
Hussein -- because he had a weapons program.
George W. Bush
May 6, 2003
U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and
find" weapons of mass destruction.
Condoleeza Rice
May 12, 2003
I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean,
there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago --
whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they're
still hidden.
Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne
May 13, 2003
Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had
weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them
to be found. I still expect them to be found.
Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps
May 21, 2003
Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating,
I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction.
Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
May 26, 2003
They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.
Donald Rumsfeld
May 27, 2003
For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass
destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one
reason everyone could agree on.
Paul Wolfowitz
May 28, 2003
|
|
Thursday, July 24, 2003
|
Opening the Doors: Intellectual Life and Academic Conditions in Post-War Baghdad
Report from H-Net on the the extent of the damage to institutions of higher learning and cultural production:
Word began to trickle out of Baghdad in mid-April 2003 that the Iraqi National Library and Archives and the library of the Ministry of Holy Endowments and Religious Affairs (al-Awqaf) had been burned and looted during the paroxysm of aggravated mayhem that followed the collapse of the Baathist regime. Soon, it became clear that in addition to the damage to those libraries, universities, research centers and private institutions had also been harmed or destroyed, and that additional elements of Iraq's rich cultural heritage in the form of historic buildings, musical archives and contemporary art were at risk. These were moments of deep and profound sadness that ultimately gave way to conversations about ways to work to rebuild and restore what had been lost. The several H-Net Middle East Networks like H-Levant, H-Turk, H-Islamart, as well as H-Museum provided the primary venue for these conversations. Information, critical writing, and planning all took place in the context of the H-Net community....
|
|
Wednesday, July 23, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
Hunt for ever elusive leader will be dogged and slow
Bush administration hype and mainstream US media commentary makes it appear that killing of Saddam's son is major turning point in Iraq war but until they get Saddam the possibilities of bigtime revenge are ever present
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1004713,00.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, July 22, 2003
|
No Child Left Behind (Small print: This does not include the couple thousand per year in each American city across the nation that are left behind)
Bush Lied About His Schools, Too
NY TIMES - As a presidential candidate and Texas governor, George Bush boasted that his state's school accountability system would be a model for the nation. A focus on basic skills and frequent testing had turned around an under-performing set of school systems in a state with a large poor, nonwhite population. In particular, he said, Houston was leading the way. When he was elected president, Mr. Bush selected Rod Paige, the Houston superintendent, as his education secretary.
It turns out the Houston schools have not lived up to their billing. Their amazingly low high school dropout rate was literally unbelievable — the educational equivalent of Enron's accounting results. The school district has found that more than half of the 5,500 students who left in the 2000-1 school year should have been declared dropouts but were not.
|
|
|
Officials See Threat in Bush Newspaper Cartoon
For those who think that the government's paranoia over attack is over...the information machines roll on.
Via: Indymedia
L.A. Times Cartoonist Michael Ramirez is no Lalo Alcaraz, he's a deeply conservative fellow that fully supports Bush and the war on Iraq. Ramirez created a cartoon that supports Bush and portrays him as a victim being politically murdered for his attacking Iraq. Now Ramirez is being investigated by the Secret Service for his drawing!
Michael Ramirez made more than one mistake with his cartoon supporting the President, his toon actually turns history upside down. Ramirez based his drawing on famous news footage from 1968 that showed a South Vietnamese Police Commander putting a gun to a Viet Cong suspect's temple and pulling the trigger. The shocking and extremely bloody assassination was broadcast around the world, turning even more people against America's war on Vietnam.
Ramirez re-writes history with his cartoon... he portrays Bush as the suspect about to have his brains blown out. Ramirez is telling us that Bush is being unjustly attacked by people who wish to "politically assassinate" him over his policies in Iraq. His cartoon equates critics of Bush with ASSASSINS. Despite the fact the Michael Ramirez's cartoon is an attack against the critics of Bush... the Secret Service is considering the pro-Bush cartoon in the Los Angeles Times as a possible threat to the President! LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The Secret Service is studying a pro-Bush cartoon in the Los Angeles Times, showing the president with a gun to his head, as a possible threat, U.S. officials said on Monday.
The cartoon, based on a Pulitzer Prize-winning photograph from the Vietnam War, depicts Bush with his hands behind his back as a man labeled "Politics" prepares to shoot him in the head. The background of the drawing is a cityscape labeled "Iraq."
"We're aware of the image and we're in the process of determining what action if any can be taken," John Gill, Secret Service spokesman, said.
An official who asked not to be named said: "The Secret Service does take threats against all of their protectees very seriously and they have an obligation to look into any threat that's made against any of their protectees." The official did not elaborate.
|
|
|
Super-secret Spy Agency Now Trying Child's Play
Another bizarre government propaganda internet site aimed at children. Done in Flash, listen to great songs like "American Pride" while you scroll over the menu and hear the weird voice announce the categories. Then go to the stirring pedagogy of "Stories" and read/listen to "Proud to be an American." It's not exactly clear what is educational at this site. The objective falls out of the half-century old US plan to combine US military interests and technology with the growth of the private sector in science and technology to create a dominant world power -- the so-called Endless, and then, New, Frontier.
Via: Pulitzer pubs
Corey Corona and Dana Drop, agents for the nation's spy satellite agency, have a mission that once would have been impossible.
That's because the two characters promote an agency whose programs and very existence were secret just a decade ago.
Welcome to the new world order, where the National Reconnaissance Office not only admits it exists but also owns up to satellite launches, honors its pioneers publicly and even has a Web site geared toward children. NROjr.gov targets kids between the ages of 3 and 10 with songs, stories, games and art.
The Web site for NRO, which is jointly operated by the CIA and Defense Department, was born out of a family day for the Virginia-based agency, according to NRO spokesman Art Haubold. The agency announced the Web site's presence late last year.
"We thought it was something that could be fun, and there's some educational elements to it," said Haubold.
"The realities of today are different than when NRO was shrouded in a complete cloak of secrecy," said Haubold. "One of the reasons we are doing this is we want today's youth to become interested in science and technology. This is one way we do some outreach to them.
"Whether or not they end up working for NRO, its importance to get today's youth interested in the science and technology we need to continue United States pre-eminence in space," he added.
So Corey Corona -- named for NRO's first space-based spying effort four decades ago -- offers games.
Dana Drop pushes coloring projects.
Whirly Lizard carries stories.
And Earth Watch touts tunes.
Haubold couldn't give a cost estimate for the kids' page, noting that the site was designed by a contractor who handles the agency's main Web site at www.nro.gov.
Scott Hollister, operations manager for Space Endeavour Camp at Vandenberg Air Force Base, said he supports anything that educates people.
"My hat's off to them," said Hollister. "I applaud them ... Anywhere you educate people is great."
NROjr.gov creates mixed feelings among the many who lobbied for an end to the spy satellite agency's secrecy.
"I think they sort of have a split personality," said Steven Aftergood from the Federation of American Scientists in Washington D.C. "On the one hand they're not releasing what you would expect. On the other hand, they're publishing all kinds of things you'd never look for, like this kid site."
NASA has long had Web sites geared toward children. The Clinton administration pushed for kid-friendly Web sites, Aftergood said. The CIA has a site offering youth a chance to don disguises or decode messages in cyberspace.
NRO admitted to existence in 1992, and began pre-announcing its launches a few years later.
"It still comes as a surprise and a bit of a shock," said Aftergood. "I think NRO may have some uncertainty about its own identity as an intelligence organization. It looks like NRO can't decide whether they are a clandestine intelligence organization or just another government bureaucracy."
He's not intending to be critical of the site, Aftergood said, but it seems a little bit odd to have a Web site for kids.
"I don't think it does any harm," said Aftergood, who has waged a long war to get information about the government's "black program" budgets, but "I don't think it's a substitute for public accountability. That is something that is still deficient at NRO, beginning with the amount of money they spend."
He continues to fight for a statement of what NRO costs.
"The kid site is fun and games, but the public information is not a joke," he said. "It's a responsibility they have that they are not discharging. I'm getting more worked up as we talk."
|
|
Monday, July 21, 2003
|
Iraq Intel Wars
Here's a good Newsweek overview of the Iraq intel wars and the problems of Bush and Blair in cooking intelligence
Iraq Intell Wars
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Krugman on Patriotism
Krugman notes that intelligence and Pentagon officials were justified and patriotic in expressing reservations about Bush administration Iraq adventure and points to some of the costs on the policy: who will want to join the military now and which of our allies want to get involved in Bush's follies?
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/22/opinion/22KRUG.html?hp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condi vs Bush
Bush Overheard, in Merry Old Ireland
Below is actual text from Wash Post. Hyperlink should lead to Wash Post story. Rather interesting disclosure, I think. Evidently even Condi isn't immune to scolding.
Monday, July 21, 2003; Page A19
It's a most rare moment whenever anyone outside the government is actually able to sit in on meetings amongst the major players and then report on them right afterward. Usually we have to wait years for memoirs, and those have an annoying tendency to be biased.
But British Prime Minister Tony Blair afforded that extraordinary real-time access to Peter Stothard, former editor of the Times of London, for four weeks in March and April. The result is Stothard's new book, "Thirty Days," which turned out to coincide with the start of the war with Iraq. (The are many additional hits on Thirty Days available.)
Stothard was the constant fly on the wall, sometimes in critical meetings, sometimes just outside the door. The book naturally focuses on Blair, and some say Stothard was a bit too kind to him.
But President Bush and top U.S. officials were often on the stage. For example, Stothard is there April 7 when Blair greets Bush for a summit in Belfast, Northern Ireland. British troops had secured Basra that day.
Blair asked Bush if he'd had a good trip. " 'Yes,' Bush replied, 'I go to sleep, wake up and here I am in Merry Old Ireland.' " Stothard mildly notes that "Northern Ireland is not normally known as 'merry,' " and that, in any event, they were not in the Irish republic, but in Great Britain.
The two leaders wanted to work out what role the United Nations would play in postwar Iraq. Blair wanted to describe it not as merely "important," which had been the understanding, but "of vital importance," according to Stothard. The Brits were happy that Bush agreed to promise in the next day's news conference that the United Nations would play "a vital role."
Indeed he did. The press near national security adviser Condoleezza Rice counted how many times Bush said "vital role." The figure was eight.
"You were brilliant," British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw told Bush after the news conference. Rice was less ebullient.
"Rice begins gently to suggest to her boss that some of their colleagues back in Washington might not be best pleased. When she becomes more vigorous," Stothard wrote, Bush "leads her away from the crowd. "He looks at first concerned, then a bit frosty."
Later, at a photo session, "Rice continues her commentary on the excess vitality of the press conference," Stothard writes. "'Ease it, Condi, ease it,' says the president. The dispute ceases."
Shortly thereafter, Rice is "sitting on a bench under a large tapestry of Don Quixote tilting at windmills and talking on her mobile phone to Washington.
"'Yes,' she says firmly, 'a vital role for the U.N. I just want to make sure that the DOD doesn't say anything wrong about this. Yes, it's important that we all use the same language.' "
|
|
|
The Founders and the Fedayeen
Cornell historian, MARY BETH NORTON, takes Rummy to task for "bad" history. In this NYT op ed piece, she says:
When questioned about the difficulties American forces are having in rebuilding Iraq, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has taken to giving a history lesson. Several times he has spoken of another country in "chaos and confusion" during a period characterized by "looting, crime, mobs storming buildings, breakdown of government structures and institutions that maintained civil order, rampant inflation caused by the lack of a stable currency, supporters of the former regime roaming the streets . . ."
But she also notes that Rummy is not guilty of "revisionist", history, so reviled by his boss Instead, she notes,
At least Mr. Rumsfeld is not one of those "revisionist historians" .... In fact, the basic interpretation of American history he advances is so ancient it creaks.
It's a good read
|
|
Sunday, July 20, 2003
|
Framing the Debate on WMDs
Interesting op ed from Bob Murphy, a regular on Lew Rockwell's Libertarian blog. An extended account, complete with numerous hyperelinks.
... What happens in American politics if you rely on a crude forgery to justify starting a war? Not too much, it turns out. Even if you get caught red-handed, you can always count on a mass of sycophant apologists to defend you. ...
And don't be offput by the libertarian label of lewrockwell.com. Ever since Bill Moyers featured Lew Rockwell on NOW, late last year, I believe, I (definitely a lefty) have subscribed the the lewrockwell daily letter, the results of which -- much to my surprise -- are that I share these opinions more often than not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Saturday, July 19, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finger Pointing for Kelly Death, Blair Takes Some Fingers
Who will take the blame?
David Kelly bled to death from slashed wrist * His life was made intolerable, say family * Glenda Jackson calls for Blair's resignation. Once again the London
Independent is all over this story
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=425934
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Train Loaded with Radioactive Waste Leaves New York
Despite assurances of "safety" and "sure hands," a wide range of activists, NGO policy analysts, and politicians think otherwise about the secret shipping of high-level radioactive waste by rail through the US. The fact of the matter is that our rail system is woefully underfunded and unkempt and the chances for rail accidents involving the waste startlingly high. Since 9/11, the public's right to know about the plans for such waste, whether or not it is coming through their community, and when, has been severely curtailed. This is fundamentally undemocratic and also politically noxious -- as the communities who live closest to the tracks (those who would be affected by an accident the most) are often poor and/or minority. For more on the issue, and an attempt to see (if you're in America) whether or not waste shipments affect you, see the Nuclear Waste Route Atlas.
Via: AP
A train loaded with high-level radioactive waste left western New York in a classified disposal operation that had been put on hold after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
The shipment marks a milestone in the decades-long, federal-state cleanup of the former West Valley Demonstration Project, the only factory designed to recharge fuel cells worn out at nuclear power plants.
Spokesmen for West Valley and the U.S. Department of Energy would not say Wednesday when the train left or where it was headed, citing security concerns.
''It is in safe and secure hands and under the government's control,'' Energy Department spokesman Joe Davis said from Washington.
West Valley officials have previously said the shipment of 125 spent fuel assemblies bundles of rods that contain fuel pellets used to produce electricity in nuclear power plants would travel through 11 states to the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory.
Davis said as a general practice, local law-enforcement agencies are notified when such shipments pass through their locations.
Among people not notified was U.S. Rep. Amo Houghton, whose district includes West Valley, 35 miles south of Buffalo. The train's departure prompted Houghton to write a letter of dismay to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham on Tuesday.
''We've been in touch several times about the site, including my repeated requests for information about the movement of high level nuclear waste which had been stored on rail cars waiting to be shipped out West,'' Houghton wrote.
''You might imagine my surprise when I heard today that the rail cars moved off site in the middle of last night headed for ... God knows where,'' the letter said.
Houghton's office agreed to release the letter to The Associated Press after segments were published Wednesday. Spokesman Bob Van Wicklin said Houghton would not elaborate until receiving a response from Abraham.
''Spencer - really. This is irresponsible stuff, don't you think?'' the New York Republican wrote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Friday, July 18, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bush ratings down in Zogby poll
Bush Job Performance Slips to 53% Positive, 46% Negative; More Voters (47%) Say It's Time for Someone New Than Say He Deserves Re-election; Two-in-Three Say it Makes No Difference if WMDs Are Never Found, According to Newest Zogby America Poll
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=721
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
White House E-Mail System Becomes Less User-Friendly
Looks like the administration has "enhanced" web communication in the same way that they have improved the economy, civil rights, environmental protections, global peace, etc. etc. etc.
Via: NY Times
Do you want to send an e-mail message to the White House?
Good luck.
In the past, to tell President Bush — or at least those assigned to read his mail — what was on your mind it was necessary only to sit down at a personal computer connected to the Internet and dash off a note to president@whitehouse.gov.
But this week, Tom Matzzie, an online organizer with the A.F.L.-C.I.O., discovered that communicating with the White House had become a bit more daunting. When Mr. Matzzie sent an e-mail protest against a Bush administration policy, the message was bounced back with an automated reply, saying he had to send it again in a new way.
Under a system deployed on the White House Web site for the first time last week, those who want to send a message to President Bush must now navigate as many as nine Web pages and fill out a detailed form that starts by asking whether the message sender supports White House policy or differs with it.
The White House says the new e-mail system, at www.whitehouse .gov/webmail, is an effort to be more responsive to the public and offer the administration "real time" access to citizen comments.
Completing a message to the president also requires choosing a subject from the provided list, then entering a full name, organization, address and e-mail address. Once the message is sent, the writer must wait for an automated response to the e-mail address listed, asking whether the addressee intended to send the message. The message is delivered to the White House only after the person using that e-mail address confirms it.
Jimmy Orr, a White House spokesman, described the system as an "enhancement" intended to improve communications. He called it a "work in progress," and advised members of the public who had sensitive or personal matters to bring up with President Bush to use traditional methods of communications, like a letter on paper, a fax or a phone call. [..]
|
|
Thursday, July 17, 2003
|
Upload a File, Go to Prison
I saw the best peer-to-peer networks of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked, dragging themselves through the cyberpunk networks at dawn looking for an angry file, angleheaded uploaders burning discs for the ancient heavenly connection to the starry dynamo in the machinery of all-consuming transnational corporate night...
This is an outrage -- the attempt to turn the most potentially democratic aspect of the Net into a heavily regulated commercial wasteland is a travesty. Will the youth who rolled over on Napster realize their error and release a torrent of rage? It's the only hope -- the older generations (those in the positions of power) just don't seem to understand the importance of what has been happening to P2P.
Via: Wired
A new bill proposed in Congress on Wednesday would land a person in prison for five years and impose a fine of $250,000 for uploading a single file to a peer-to-peer network. The bill was introduced by Reps. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) and Howard Berman (D-Calif.). They said the bill is designed to increase domestic and international enforcement of copyright laws. More specifically, the bill targets peer-to-peer file trading, an aide working for the congressmen said. The law is meant to keep up with changing technology.
|
|
|
Next G8 summit set for island off U.S. coast
The need for increased security resulting from Bush's Terror War has become the status-quo legitimation for moving the regular business deals of global imperialism to ever-more remote regions. However, one suspects that the only security they are looking for is from the waves of increasing mass-protest "from below." There is no question that the development over the last few years of the anti-globalization movement -- culminating in Feb 15th's unprecendented global protest against the war on Iraq -- have brought heightened attention to the attempt by planetary power brokers to assign neo-colonialist rights to capitalist development for the next century. Increasingly, the media has shown itself to be at least a partial ally to this movement's struggle by giving it coverage and an air of legitimacy (which it certainly deserves). Thus, Bush and co. seek to create as much distance as possible for their backroom deals from the on the ground protest...not b/c of terrorism, but because of political image. Now, the media (and public) need to realize that the movement has thereby outed the imperialists for what they are -- anti-democratic forces of global power. Their development strategies are not up for challenge or even debate...the media needs to begin to make a spectacle of their absence.
Via: Globe and Mail
U.S. President Bush has chosen a posh island resort community on the Georgia coast to host next year's meeting of leaders from the world's major industrial countries. The White House announced Tuesday that Sea Island will be the site of the G8 summit next June, a location Governor Sonny Perdue described as "a great venue for security." The island 100 kilometres south of Savannah is close to several major military bases and a federal law enforcement training center. Protesters have had a growing presence at the annual summits, where leaders from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States meet to discuss economic and political issues.
|
|
|
Cheney under pressure to quit over false war evidence
Cheney should undoubtedly be sent packing. However, getting rid of this creep as a sort of scapegoat for the administration as a whole should be avoided...DC would undoubtedly go back to Halliburton and continue to assert all manner of political pressure from his "non-governmental" seat of power.
Via: UK Independent
Dick Cheney, the US Vice-President and the administration's most outspoken hawk over Iraq, faced demands for his resignation last night as he was accused of using false evidence to build the case for war. He was accused of using his office to insist that a false claim about Iraq's efforts to buy uranium from Africa to restart its nuclear programme be included in George Bush's State of the Union address - overriding the concerns of the CIA director, George Tenet. Mr Cheney was also accused of knowingly misleading Congress when the administration sought its authorisation for the use of force to oust Saddam Hussein.
The allegations against Mr Cheney have come most vocally from a group of senior former intelligence officials who believe that information from the intelligence community was selectively used to support a war fought for political reasons. In an open letter to President George Bush, the group have asked that he demand Mr Cheney's resignation.
|
|
|
Hearing delayed as CIA revolts over claims on Syrian threat
Via: SMH.com.au
The CIA objected to a Bush Administration assessment of the threat posed by Syria's alleged weapons of mass destruction that was to be presented to Congress. After the objections, Tuesday's planned testimony by an undersecretary of state, John Bolton, a leading Administration hawk, was delayed until September. US officials said Mr Bolton had planned to tell a House of Representatives international relations subcommittee that Syria's development of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons had progressed to a point where they posed a threat to stability in the region. The CIA and other intelligence agencies said the assessment was exaggerated.
|
|
Tuesday, July 15, 2003
|
Bill Gates: Killing Africans For Profit And P.R.
Via: Greg Palast
Bring back Jayson Blair! The New York Times has eliminated the scourge of plagiarized journalism by eliminating journalism altogether from its front page. Check this Sunday’s edition: “Bill Gates is no ordinary philanthropist,” gushes a Times reporter named Stephanie Strom, re-writing one of the digital diva’s self-loving press releases. Gates has saved 100,000 lives by providing vaccines to Africans, gushes Stephanie, according to someone on the payroll of … Bill Gates. And he’s making access to drugs for Africans, especially for AIDS victims, “cheaper and easier.” Stephanie knows because she asked Bill Gates himself!
Then we get to the real point of this journalistic Lewinsky: “Those who think of Mr. Gates as a ruthless billionaire monopolist … may find it hard to reconcile that image with one of a humorously self-deprecating philanthropist.” Actually, that’s not hard at all.
Stephanie, let me let you in on a little secret about Bill and Melinda Gates so-called “Foundation.” Gate’s demi-trillionaire status is based on a nasty little monopoly-protecting trade treaty called “TRIPS” – the Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights rules of the World Trade Organization. TRIPS gives Gates a hammerlock on computer operating systems worldwide, legally granting him the kind of monopoly the Robber Barons of yore could only dream of. But TRIPS, the rule which helps Gates rule, also bars African governments from buying AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis medicine at cheap market prices.
|
|
Monday, July 14, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
In Rebuff to U.S., India Says It Won't Send Troops to Iraq
Most countries like India want nothing to do with the Iraq occupation and Bush policies which are extremely unpopular everywhere, the US and Britain are pretty much stuck in Iraq alone footing the bill and the troops
In Rebuff to U.S., India Says It Won't Send Troops to Iraq
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Los Angeles Times: Back Home, Challenges Abroad
Bush is under fire on multiple fronts, its clear he doesn't have a clue what to do anywhere: Afghanistan, Iraq, Korea, Middle East, Liberia, and so on; all he really understands is that giving corporate favors and tax breaks to the rich helps him raise money so he can push through a rightwing agenda
Los Angeles Times: Back Home, Challenges Abroad
|
|
|
washingtonpost.com: No More Mr. Nice Guy
Demos intensify attacks on Bush and each other [and media commentary continues to fiercely attack democratic candidates although finally are becoming more critical of Bush, it will get ugly before it gets pretty)
washingtonpost.com: No More Mr. Nice Guy
|
|
Sunday, July 13, 2003
|
Blair is defiant to the end. But is the end in sight?
Another good London Independent critique of the Iraq debacle: "Tony Blair insists the weapons will be found. Never mind that the Foreign Secretary seems ready to admit they never existed. Never mind that bereaved parents say their sons were betrayed. Never mind that President Bush made false claims. Andy McSmith opens a seven-page report on how the absence of WMD is destroying the case for war"
Independent News
|
|
|
20 Lies About the War
Here's a good summary of the whole mess of lies and deceptions used to justify the unjustifiable Bush-Blair Iraq invasion: "Falsehoods ranging from exaggeration to plain untruth were used to make the case for war. More lies are being used in the aftermath."
News
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
washingtonpost.com: CIA Got Uranium Reference Cut in Oct.
Washington Post investigative reporting is also going after Bush, obviously a lot of people are starting to spill some beans and the corporate media are letting it flow, let's keep in coming and circulating....
washingtonpost.com: CIA Got Uranium Reference Cut in Oct.
|
|
Saturday, July 12, 2003
|
National House of Waffles
Maureen Dowd goes after the Bush administration, finally real anger is coming out in the media against an administration of lies and infamy; I've noticed that CBC and ABC news have significantly intensified their critiques of Bush, it's about time...
National House of Waffles
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
washingtonpost.com: Support for Bush Declines As Casualties Mount in Iraq
Here's some good news, Bush's popularity is starting to rapidly fall, imagine if the media covered ALL of Bush's lies, mishaps, and disastrous policies! they won't, so we need to keep spreading the word, REGIME CHANGE IN THE US!
washingtonpost.com: Support for Bush Declines As Casualties Mount in Iraq
|
|
|
C.I.A. Chief Takes Blame in Assertion on Iraqi Uranium
Tenet falls on the sword, still the whole incident points to a national security team in disarray that presented reams of false information and Bush et al told countless lies on Iraq
C.I.A. Chief Takes Blame in Assertion on Iraqi Uranium
|
|
|
Blair to challenge Bush over Britons held at Camp Delta
Now its Blair vs Bush: "Tony Blair will challenge President George Bush next week over the fate of the Britons being held in Guantanamo Bay as disquiet over their legal status grows among opposition parties and Labour backbenchers"
News
And fallout continues and expands in UK over "dodgy dossiers," in fact the whole iraq debacle was based on lies and disinformation
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=423840
|
|
|
Bush Versus the American Environment
 From Zyg Plater:
Here are roughly 50 pages of materials on the Bush Administration's environmental record to date, enclosed as an Attachment in RichTextFormat.
The materials are reprinted from the 2002 and 2003 Updates to our coursebook Environmental Law & Policy: Nature, Law & Society.
This year, even more than last year, a theme that must be acknowledged in any environmental policy course is the Bush II Administration's extraordinarily broad-front effort to alter environmental law as it previously existed. The presidential staffers who make national policy in the current Bush Administration have made clear that they are fundamentally antagonistic to many of the environmental policies and regulatory provisions instituted over the past twenty years. This means that any environmental course that purports to deal with reality must integrate some consideration of the ongoing political initiatives in Washington as an active backdrop to the doctrines and issues covered in the class. Most teachers in this field, though certainly not all, are likely to regard the majority of Bush initiatives as a deeply distressing backing-away from environmental protection. In any case it is clear that a major shift away from the environmental protection canon is occurring, in a siege far broader and more effective than in the Reagan '80s or the 1994 Contract with America Congress (and quite antithetically to the environmental law positions held by the Bush, Senior, Administration). Our students should ultimately be able to recognize the differences between what had been and what is now happening. In the second half of the materials there is a brief rough history of environmental protection in the U.S. that may offer a jumping-off point for your efforts to put current events in context. The evolving new political agenda offers our students an opportunity to reassess afresh the role and dimensions of national environmental policy, moreover providing a lens through which perhaps we can observe the evolving path of democracy in America.
|
|
Friday, July 11, 2003
|
MadKane on Shoot Out at the G-Dub Corral
From MadKane: Hi again. I'm still hoping this SOTU lie story will become the Bush impeachment turning point. Just posted this here: http://www.madkane.com/notable05_03a.html#07_11_03
July 11, 2003 (More on the AFRICAN URANIUM LIES)
Will there be a shoot-out at the G-Dub corral? It sure looks that way -- a fight for survival between George Tenet and Condoleezza Rice. The stakes? Who takes the fall for the SOTU uranium lies.
Condy's now asserting that the specific wording was approved by the CIA. Of course, she adds that the "White House 'absolutely' had confidence in CIA Director George Tenet, saying he had served 'very well.'" Yeah, right -- no doubt Dubya backs him one-thousand percent.
Rice, dutifully covering for her "Buck Doesn't Stop Here" boss, also "said no one had expressed any doubts to Bush about the information underlying the National Intelligence Estimate, a report that has input from the 13 U.S. spy agencies and includes consensus and dissenting opinions."
I sure hope Tenet kept good records! Cause I'd love to see Condy go down and take her boss down with her. (Via Buzzflash, which also discuss CBS's headline change from "Bush Knew Iraq Info Was False" to "Bush Knew Iraq Info Was Dubious."
Here's hoping we all can help keep this story alive!
Take care.
Mad
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MadKane dreams Impeachment [a dream widely shared]
From MadKane: I just posted a quickie link to this story. And I wanted to make sure you knew about it. This could be the beginning of the end!
CBS News | Bush Knew Iraq Info Was False | July 10, 2003 20:44:36
If anything can lead to impeachment this is it!
CBSnewsReports
(CBS) Senior administration officials tell CBS News the President’s mistaken claim that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa was included in his State of the Union address -- despite objections from the CIA.
Before the speech was delivered, the portions dealing with Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction were checked with the CIA for accuracy, reports CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin.
CIA officials warned members of the President’s National Security Council staff the intelligence was not good enough to make the flat statement Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa.
The White House officials responded that a paper issued by the British government contained the unequivocal assertion: “Iraq has ... sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” As long as the statement was attributed to British Intelligence, the White House officials argued, it would be factually accurate. The CIA officials dropped their objections and that’s how it was delivered.
“The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa,” Mr. Bush said.
The statement was technically correct, since it accurately reflected the British paper. But the bottom line is the White House knowingly included in a presidential address information its own CIA had explicitly warned might not be true.
Today at a press conference during the President’s trip to Africa, Secretary of State Colin Powell portrayed it as an honest mistake.
“There was no effort or attempt on the part of the president or anyone else in the administration to mislead or to deceive the American people,” said Powell.
But eight days after the State of the Union, when Powell addressed the U.N., he deliberately left out any reference to Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa.
“I didn’t use the uranium at that point because I didn’t think that was sufficiently strong as evidence to present before the world,” Powell said.
That is exactly what CIA officials told the White House before the State of the Union. The top CIA official, Director George Tenet, was not involved in those discussions and apparently never warned the President he was on thin ice.
Secretary Powell said today he read the State of the Union speech before it was delivered and understood it had been seen and cleared by the intelligence community. But intelligence officials say the director of the CIA never saw the final draft.
©MMIII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.
|
|
Wednesday, July 09, 2003
|
More Evidence Bush Misled Nation
Interestingly, the CIA is backtracking on WMD claims and allegedly that Bush administration distorted data; BUT don't forget that CIA Director Tenet sat behind Colin Powell when he made his extremely dicey and problematic UN presentation of Iraqi WMD evidence
More Evidence Bush Misled Nation
and it's curious that one of the 30 or so Big Lies Busha and Blair told about Iraqi WMD is coming back to haunt them...
The Niger Connection
A Brit paper claims that Bush's Iraq lies arebecoming a political liability for him
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rumsfeld Estimates U.S. Monthly Costs in Iraq at $3.9 Billion
Bush's Iraq adventure is extremely expensive, from the beginning it wasn't clear how the US could afford this whim of the neocons, how long will the US have to keeping paying this amount?
Rumsfeld Estimates U.S. Monthly Costs in Iraq at $3.9 Billion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
American Administration Acknowledges Lies
Via: Pravda RU
Iraqi officials rejected an offer to buy uranium because of UN sanctions. To all appearance, the Iraqi campaign will echo many times to the American president and his advisors, despite George W. Bush's optimism. It is not about the daily news about attacks on coalition forces in Iraq. The presidential election is coming and political opponents of the American president do not want to miss the chance to accuse Bush of lies, as it happened during the story with the Iraqi uranium, for example.
As it is known, the main reason for the USA to launch the war in Iraq was Saddam Hussein's possession of the weapons of mass destruction. In addition to it, George W. Bush said in January of the current year, the British intelligence had the information about the fact of selling a considerable amount of uranium from African countries to Iraq. However, before the war started, UN inspectors doubted, whether the Iraqis were trying to develop the nuclear weapon. After the war was over, there was a letter found in the building, where Saddam's secret police had been housed. The letter was allegedly written by an intelligence officer of one of African countries, it was dated May 20th, 2001. As it was written in the letter, a spokesman for an African country was ready to sell uranium and other radioactive materials to Iraq. However, Iraq rejected the offer because of UN sanctions. To all appearance, the sanctions were rather efficient, if Iraqi officials explained their refusal with them.
However, an African person was rather persistent: in his next letter he set out his readiness to return to the issue later. It is not known, how Iraqi officials reacted to that, though: either a part of the correspondence was destroyed during the bombardment and massive looting, or American special services did not want to expose it.
Under the pressure of the society and the Congress regarding the circumstances that preceded the incursion in Iraq, the White House had to acknowledge certain manipulations that had been performed with facts. In other words, the US administration acknowledged its lies, trying to explain the need of the military force to overthrow Saddam's regime.
|
|
|
South Africans March in Protest of Bush
Via: Guardian UK
About 1,000 demonstrators marched peacefully to the U.S. Embassy Wednesday, protesting President Bush's war in Iraq and trip to Africa. ``We stand together with millions of people throughout the world and say that the biggest weapon of mass destruction is George W. Bush,'' Salim Vally of the Anti-War Coalition said in a speech. About two dozen police officers and a handful of embassy employees looked on as demonstrators burned several small American flags emblazoned with slogans against Bush, who was visiting South Africa Wednesday as part of his five-day, five-nation Africa tour. The demonstration brought together a wide variety of groups including the Anti-War Coalition, members of the governing African National Congress, the South African Communist Party, trade unions, civil society groups and members of a militant black organization.
|
|
|
Court Allows Suit on Cheney Energy Panel
Via: Washington Post
A federal appeals court Tuesday rejected the Bush administration's bid to stop a lawsuit that seeks to delve into the energy industry's ties to Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force. In a 2-1 ruling, the court said administration officials must turn over some information about the task force or list specific documents that they intend to withhold from the proceedings.
The administration argues that the lawsuit by the Sierra Club and a conservative group, Judicial Watch, is an unwarranted intrusion into the internal deliberations of the executive branch of government. But Cheney and administration officials "have not satisfied the heavy burden" required for the appeals court to get involved in the case, wrote Appeals Court Judge David Tatel. Bush administration officials have not even produced a log of documents they want to keep confidential, the appeals court said.
Appeals judges David Tatel and Harry Edwards rejected the administration's effort to stop the case. Judge A. Raymond Randolph dissented, declaring that "for the judiciary to permit this sort of discovery" into the actions of the executive branch "strikes me as a violation of the separation of powers." Tatel said that if the administration is so concerned about unwarranted intrusion, it can "invoke executive or any other privilege" in an attempt to keep the material out of the public domain. Federal agencies have disclosed 39,000 pages of internal documents related to the work of Cheney's energy task force, material which so far has yielded nothing.
The energy plan adopted four months after President Bush took office favored opening more public lands to oil and gas drilling and proposed a wide range of other steps supported by industry.
|
|
|
Iraq Elections Would Be "Destructive"
Via: Jay Hamilton
Posted on The Weekly Spin.
So much for "Operation Iraqi Freedom." William Booth and Rajiv Chandrasekaran report that "U.S. military commanders have ordered a halt to local elections and self-rule in provincial cities and towns across Iraq, choosing instead to install their own handpicke mayors and administrators, many of whom are former Iraqi military leaders." The decision is "creating anger and resentment," but L. Paul Bremer, the PR crisis manager turned overlord of Iraq, says "Elections that are held too early can be destructive." The Guardian quotes Bremer's strategy for running the country: "We are going to fight them and impose our will on them and we will capture or... kill them until we have imposed law and order on this country. We dominate the scene and we will continue to impose our will on this country."
SOURCE: Washington Post, June 27, 2003
|
|
Sunday, July 06, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TIME Magazine -- Grounding Planes the Wrong Way
Here's an interesting story I hadn't seen previously indicating that US troops looted the Baghdad airport. Here are some shocking excerpts: "Much has been written about how Iraqis complicated the task of rebuilding their country by looting it after Saddam Hussein's regime fell. In the case of the international airport outside Baghdad, however, the theft and vandalism were conducted largely by victorious American troops, according to U.S. officials, Iraqi Airways staff members and other airport workers. The troops, they say, stole duty-free items, needlessly shot up the airport and trashed five serviceable Boeing airplanes. "I don't want to detract from all the great work that's going into getting the airport running again," says Lieut. John Welsh, the Army civil-affairs officer charged with bringing the airport back into operation. "But you've got to ask, If this could have been avoided, did we shoot ourselves in the foot here?"
The airplanes suffered the greatest damage. Of the 10 Iraqi Airways jets on the tarmac when the airport fell, a U.S. inspection in early May found that five were serviceable: three 727s, a 747 and a 737. Over the next few weeks, U.S. soldiers looking for comfortable seats and souvenirs ripped out many of the planes' fittings, slashed seats, damaged cockpit equipment and popped out every windshield. "It's unlikely any of the planes will fly again," says Welsh, a reservist who works for the aviation firm Pratt & Whitney as a quality-control liaison officer to Boeing.
U.S. estimates of the cost of the damage and theft begin at a few million dollars and go as high as $100 million. Airport workers say even now air conditioners and other equipment are regularly stolen. "Soldiers do this stuff all the time, everywhere. It's warfare," says a U.S. military official. "But the conflict was over when this was done. These are just bored soldiers." Says Welsh: "If we're here to rebuild the country, then anything we break we have to fix. We need to train these guys to go from shoot-it-up to securing infrastructure. Otherwise we're just making more work for ourselves. And we have to pay for it."
Who's going to investigate this and bring the looters to justice?
TIME.com: TIME Magazine -- Grounding Planes the Wrong Way
|
|
|
TIME.com: -- Life Under Fire
TIME Magazine raises the question as to whether Paul Bremer and the Bushites are up to administering Iraq; Bremer looked terrible on TV yesterday, as if the chaos was really getting to him but since he's been assigned Mission Impossible its unlikely he'll be smiling soon [though Cheney no doubt continues to chuckle about all the Halliburton contracts]
TIME.com: TIME Magazine -- Life Under Fire
|
|
|
TIME Magazine -- Quizzing Them on 9/11
There has been much contentious debate about what Clinton did or did not do to stop bin Laden and terrorism and likewise what Bush did or didn't know about the coming attacks and why he didn't do more to prevent them. Sidney Blumental claims in his recent book THE CLINTON WARS that Clinton wanted to more aggressively fight bin Laden and terrorism, waging “a mostly secret war that was largely screened from the public.” According to Blumenthal, FBI director Louis Freeh’s “hostility to the White House dictated his lack of cooperation with the war against bin Laden.” Blumenthal claims that Clinton planned to follow up the cruise missiles on Al Qaeda and wanted to drop Special Ops troops into the mountains of Afghanistan in a surprise attack, but the Pentagon blocked the plan, saying such an attack would be too risky. And there are all kinds of rumors that Bush receive more briefings on the threat of terror attacks than the Aug 6 briefing leaked to the press so it would be very interesting if Bush and Clinton and Cheney were grilled on their respective understandings of al Qaeda terror threats to US and what they did or did not do to block them....
TIME.com: TIME Magazine -- Quizzing Them on 9/11
|
|
|
O'Connor Dismisses Rumors That She Plans to Retire From Court
O'Connor denial that she is planning to quit soon may forestall Supreme Court wars; she also denies that she claimed on election night that a Gore victory would be a disaster for her because she could not then retire, can this be believed? she didn't look convincing in her denial and if the original story was a lie why didn't she speak out sooner?
O'Connor Dismisses Rumors That She Plans to Retire From Court
|
|
|
|
|
|
Saturday, July 05, 2003
|
Intelligence chief accuses Blair of 'credibility gap' over WMD
Former British intelligence advisor criticizes Blair for misinforming public about WMD
News
And new arguments that Iraq destroyed its WMD in the 1990s
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US Reported in Secret Peace Talks with Taliban
The mess in Afghanistan is so out of control that the US is reportedly engaging in secret peace talks with the Taliban
Albion Monitor (frames)
|
|
|
7 U.S.-Trained Police Cadets Are Killed in Iraq Explosion
More evidence of Mission Impossible, that there are too many obstacles to "pacifying Iraq," that its worse than Vietnam as there is not even coherent forces that the US could work with, that everything the US has tried has backfired, showing that it was a failed project from the start
7 U.S.-Trained Police Cadets Are Killed in Iraq Explosion
|
|
|
|
|
|
Friday, July 04, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thursday, July 03, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bring 'em on!
Good satire of 'bring 'em on" Bush from American Jabber
American Jabber
And here's an excellent commentary from Bushwarsblog:
"Bring 'em on"
As one well known blogger would say, Jeebus help us. The syntax is frightening enough (more so if you've read Mark Crispin Miller on the psycholinguistic drama that unfolds everytime Bush speaks), but the strutting, chest-thumping bellicosity of our President's eruption was jaw-dropping theater.
"Bring 'em on."
It wasn't enough that he stuck his chin out and dared the Iraqi resistance to hit it, the dyslexic bastard had to pluralize his threat to boot. "Bring 'em on." Maybe this is some clever ruse to bring the rats out of their hidey holes so we can track them down to their lairs, but that would suggest a level of cleverness we haven't seen yet from Bush & Co.
Karl's the clever one. He got Wolfie and Rummy permission to go play, but the kids have made a mess of things, and now their leader, Cool Top Hand W, is blustering and making a bigger mess of things.
Isn't it about time the grown-ups stepped in and started cleaning up the mess?
— guest posted by Mark Gisleson
http://babelogue.citypages.com:8080/sperry/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"US suspends £30m aid in row over war crimes court"
Here's a rich one: the Bush Bully Boys are suspending aid to countries active in the International Criminal Court who will not promise not to prosecute American citizens! It is if for the Bushites that Americans are above the law! This arrogant attitude continues to isolate the US.
News Excerpt: "The Bush administration has underlined its refusal to co- operate with the International Criminal Court (ICC) by suspending military aid worth almost $50m(£30m) to 35 countries that have refused to promise not to prosecute American citizens. Its behaviour was condemned as that of 'schoolyard bullies'."
News:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jobless Rate Rises to 6.4 Percent; Highest in More Than 9 Years
Bushonomics takes its toll, "new claims for jobless benefits rose last week to 430,000, an increase of a seasonally adjusted 21,000 from the previous week's revised 409,000 claims." The comparison between all the jobs created under Clinton and the almost 3 million lost under Bush is damning
Jobless Rate Rises to 6.4 Percent; Highest in More Than 9 Years:
Excerpt: "The nation's unemployment rate shot up to 6.4 percent in June, the highest level in more than nine years, in an economic slump that has added nearly a million people to jobless rolls in the past three months.
Businesses slashed 30,000 jobs in June for the fifth straight month, with cuts heavily concentrated in the nation's factories, the Labor Department reported Thursday.
The 0.3 percentage point increase from May's 6.1 percent rate was the largest month-to-month rise since the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks. That surprised analysts who predicted a smaller rise, to 6.2 percent. The last time the overall rate was higher was in March 1994."
|
|
Wednesday, July 02, 2003
|
Bush Issues Taunt on Iraqi Attacks: 'Bring 'Em On' (washingtonpost.com)
Bush repeats his we'll get Osama "dead or alive" Bubba-blustering, in effect taunting Iraqis to kill US troops: "President Bush yesterday delivered a colloquial taunt to militants who have been attacking U.S. troops in Iraq, saying "bring 'em on" and asserting that the forces in Iraq are "plenty tough" to deal with the threat."
"Though Congress is in recess, some Democrats criticized Bush's "bring 'em on" statement. "I am shaking my head in disbelief," said Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.). "When I served in the Army in Europe during World War II, I never heard any military commander -- let alone the commander in chief -- invite enemies to attack U.S. troops." Lautenberg's statement said Bush's words were "tantamount to inciting and inviting more attacks against U.S. forces."
In addition, Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.), a presidential candidate, said he had heard "enough of the phony, macho rhetoric" from Bush. Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor also mounting a bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, said Bush "showed tremendous insensitivity to the dangers" troops face."
I ask: Has there ever been a worse President in the US?
Bush Issues Taunt on Iraqi Attacks: 'Bring 'Em On' (washingtonpost.com)
Taking on Bush's taunts, "Iraqis Defy Bush, Wound Seven US Soldiers in Attacks
And Joe Conason reflects on Bush's "Bring 'em on!" and tells a story of how Bush was a worthless Board member of an airline catering company, obviously his intended destiny in life was to serve on board's connected to Daddy Bush, too bad that he tried to go above his natural level!
|
|
|
Reaping the whirlwind
Global warming may be worse than anticipated as Extreme weather prompts unprecedented global warming alert
News: "
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bush Says Attacks on U.S. Forces Won't Deter Him From the Rebuilding of Iraq
Bush and Rumsfeld et al fail to see that part of growing resistance in Iraq is from growing number of people angry with US occupation and seeking revenge for US actions against Iraq; this creates a spiral of violence that creates a Mission Impossible
Bush Says Attacks on U.S. Forces Won't Deter Him From the Rebuilding of Iraq
The American people are wakening up to the debacle although are still largely in denial as the following excerpt from a WP article indicates: "Amid reports of lawlessness and anti-U.S. violence in Iraq, Americans have begun to show ambivalence about the mission. In a Gallup poll for USA Today and CNN, only slim majorities of 56 percent thought that the postwar situation was going well and that the war was worthwhile, while Americans were split on whether the United States would be able to kill or capture Hussein, find weapons of mass destruction, establish democracy and stop attacks on U.S. soldiers." 56% think operation is going well? What world are they in! Well, it took years before a majority opposed the Vietnam policy....
Another poll was also interesting: "According to a poll released yesterday by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes, 71 percent said they believed that the Bush administration implied that Hussein was involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, while 25 percent believed, incorrectly, that Iraq was directly involved in the attacks. " Somehow, Bush's constant harping on bin Laden and Saddam created impressions that they were together on the 9/11 attacks, evidence that the Big Lie works, at least up to a point [one hopes there will be a price to pay for an entire term of lies....]
See US Faces Long Stay in Iraq Bush Says
|
|
|
Subject of Anthrax Inquiry Tied to Anti-Germ Training
Hatfield under suspicion/attack again for anthrax attacks and who can miss the irony that the US apparently had mobile germ labs, still not found and confirmed in Iraq....
Subject of Anthrax Inquiry Tied to Anti-Germ Training
|
|
Tuesday, July 01, 2003
|
A Nation of Victims
Here's brilliant analysis of Bushspeak dissecting his use of empty language, personalizing discourse, and negative/crisis discourse that promotes dependency on the government and Bush himself as protector-in-chief. Its conclusion is also important, that an alternative discourse must provide a positive alternative vision to Bush's demagogery and negative discourse
A Nation of Victims
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clamor Magazine - Heir to the Holocaust
The Maureen Farrell Buzzflash commentary that I just sent has a link to a really explosive critique of Bush family connection to National Socialism; I have previously posted articles on how Prescott Bush and Herbert Walker (the W. in George W. Bush, the H.W. in George Herbert Walker Bush, aka Uncle Herbie) ran National Socialist businesses in the US. Now new Dutch intelligence documents show a close connection between Prescott Bush and Fritz Thyssen who was heavily involved in German industry, including the concentration camps, read on for a compelling story
Clamor Magazine - Heir to the Holocaust
|
|
|
The Attack Has Been Spectacular - Maureen Farrell at BuzzFlash.com
Here's a hardhitting critique of Bush's Iraq policy and the scandal that 9/11 has never been investigated with Bush administration blocking investigations. Clinton was impeached over a sexual indiscretion and little white lie about it, Bush has lied about the most serious matters of national security and threatens us daily with more lies and wars
The Attack Has Been Spectacular - Maureen Farrell at BuzzFlash.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
