Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
The irises and Patrick Fitzgerald
Victorian born novelist and St Kilda supporter, and long-time Webdiary columnist Kerryn Higgs spends a lot of time in New York, and lives the rest of the year in northern NSW. She's been obsessed with the looming environmental crisis since 1972 and is working on the relationship between globalisation, economic growth and the future (if any) of the planet.
Her regular visits to New York began the day before the 2000 election, so she watched the shutdown of counting in Florida by the US Supreme Court at close range. Living amongst New Yorkers, a breed unto themselves, has enriched her view of America and complicated her longstanding interest in its politics, history and impact on the rest of the world. Her 2004 articles The failure to prevent 9/11: Clarke's story and Bush on the ropes: his awful deeds post S11 reported on Clarke, the US counter-terror co-ordinator under every administration since Reagan, as he fronted the 9/11 Commission.
Her last piece for Webdiary was on Blowin' in the wind, the film by David Bradbury on the nature and effects of ‘depleted’ uranium (DU) munitions.
Again writing from New York, Kerryn reports on the early outing of iris and the alleged criminal outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame, wife of Joseph C Wilson, the CIA envoy investigating the fake Niger yellowcake deal.
The irises and Patrick Fitzgerald
by Kerryn Higgs
I left my garden bulbs in Australia last week before the first buds appeared, sorry to miss their splendour. But arriving in Kingston - 70 miles north of New York City and several degrees cooler - I find the iris here in rampant flower, buds bursting every day. They imagine, apparently, that spring is in the air. Locals assure me no one here has seen anything like it before. Simultaneously, the most intense Atlantic hurricane ever measured appeared in the Caribbean.
As Webdiarist David Roffey has detailed here in Climate change update 3: Greenhouse 2005, the climate stories come thick and fast these days. Quite a few caught my attention in the past few months. The Siberian tundra, with its immense load of sequestered methane, is beginning to thaw, an instance of what is called positive feedback - where the immediate consequences of a process magnify that same trend. UK scientists have also measured increasing CO2 loss from temperate peat bogs. The Arctic sea ice is vanishing at extraordinary speed, another positive feedback, where seawater absorbs even more heat from the sun, instead of reflecting it back into space the way the floating ice did. And last week it was revealed that the vast Antarctic ice-sheets may be far less stable than previously supposed.
Rather than exaggerating the extent of warming, the signs are that we might have seriously underestimated the speed and degree of climate change. Indeed, one team of geologists has foreshadowed feedback events cascading towards a global inferno such as that of the Permian extinction some 250 million years ago when most of the world's species disappeared.
***
Meanwhile, the cliffhanger story here is the culmination of Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation into the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame, wife of Joseph C. Wilson. Wilson was the envoy the CIA sent to Africa in February 2002 after Vice-President Cheney asked for more information on the story that Niger had sold yellowcake to Iraq. Documents purporting to prove this happened were later passed via a journalist from an Italian "security consultant" to the US Embassy in Rome.
Iraq's supposed nuclear ambitions were a key element in the Bush administration's case for the "grave and gathering danger" from Saddam's alleged WMD, which served as the primary pretext for the invasion of Iraq as well as the central fear motivating US public support for war.
Wilson's story
The Niger documents proved later to be inept forgeries and Wilson found no evidence for the uranium deal. He made his report in March 2002, a year before the invasion. His findings were disseminated to the CIA, the State Department and presumably reached the Vice-President's office - which had asked the question.
However, Wilson's report had no impact on the administration's trajectory and did not prevent the President from repeating the African uranium claim in his January 2003 State of the Union address, eight months later.
When Wilson realised Bush's State of the Union speech was referring to the same allegation he had debunked ten months earlier, it looked to him like the intelligence was being cooked - or "fixed" as the Downing Street memo put it. See this Newsweek article for a summary of the memo story. His distress about the apparent manipulation of intelligence culminated in his own piece, "What I Didn't Find in Africa", published in The New York Times on 6 July, 2003 (archived here on Common Dreams.org).
Valerie Plame's cover blown
Senior administration officials contacted various reporters to tell them that Wilson had been sent to Niger by his CIA agent wife, Valerie Plame. A week later, on 14 July, syndicated conservative columnist Robert Novak published the story. The supposed nepotism was apparently intended to undermine Wilson's credibility and the grim consequences for his wife (cover blown) demonstrated what whistleblowers might expect.
In the USA, it's illegal to reveal the identity of a covert agent - though it is not Novak who has committed a crime but the person(s) who disclosed the classified information in the first place.
In fact Plame was working under the deepest form of cover - "non-official". She worked out of a front organisation and enjoyed no diplomatic protection if something went wrong. Since Novak's article, she is obviously unable to pursue her career and her entire network has been rendered useless, its personnel endangered. Ironically, she was working on preventing WMDs from falling into terrorist hands.
Under pressure from the CIA, Attorney-General John Ashcroft's Justice Department and the FBI began inquiries into the possible felony in September 2003. Dozens of high-ranking White House officials were interviewed.
It is inconsistencies between these early testimonies to the FBI and later statements which could form the basis for indictments over perjury or obstruction. Martha Stewart, for example, went to jail for just such an offence - lying to the FBI - rather than for the insider trading she was found guilty of lying about.
Fitzgerald takes over
On 30 December 2003, the case was taken out of Ashcroft's hands. Apart from being a member of the same administration which harboured the leaker(s), Ashcroft had specific connections with Karl Rove ("Bush's Brain") who had handled political campaigns for him. It was rumoured at the time that Rove, White House advisor and fixer, might have been fingered by someone lower down. Chicago prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was named to take over the investigation.
Fitzgerald is widely regarded as independent and unlikely to allow political loyalties to cloud his judgement. For nearly two years, Fitzgerald has worked in camera with sparse indications of his hunches, his findings or his intentions. Occasional leaks have emanated from lawyers associated with targets of the inquiry, and some witnesses have published their stories. Most of those who have testified have been identified. But nearly two years have gone by without substantial information about the likely outcome of the investigation.
In the past weeks, however, there's been an avalanche of speculation as Fitzgerald nears his October 28 deadline.
We do not yet know who actually released Plame's name to reporters. We think Novak had one source whose name has not been made public. Two prominent members of the Bush administration have admitted talking to reporters about Plame - Cheney's Chief of Staff 'Scooter' Libby and Karl Rove, but both have maintained that it was reporters who told them Plame's name and job.
According to several sources, Fitzgerald is examining the possibility that blowing Plame's cover was a desperate tactic in a far-reaching conspiracy, first to falsify WMD intelligence and, later, to destroy Wilson's credibility and warn off other potential whistleblowers.
UPI news service cited NATO sources yesterday in reporting that Fitzgerald is investigating the Niger forgery, which was executed on letterhead stolen from Niger's embassy in Rome. The pursuit of this line of inquiry may suggest that Fitzgerald suspects connections between these fakes and administration officials.
The Judith Miller story
New York Times journalist Judith Miller (notorious for her links with Chalabi's defectors and her prewar front page stories based on their "intelligence" about Iraqi WMD) spent 85 days in jail rather than disclose her confidential source. Her reputation varies from First Amendment goddess (protecting journalists' constitutional right not to divulge their sources) to government stooge. Ultimately her source, who turned out to be Libby, waived her pledge of confidentiality. She was released on September 29.
Since then, she has appeared twice before the prosecutor and publishing an extensive account of her story in last weekend's New York Times (archived here at TruthOut.org). One curious admission made here was that she agreed to Libby's request to misrepresent him as a staffer in Congress rather than a senior member of the administration. Though reporters keep the identities of their sources confidential, it's unusual to agree to fudge their status.
After Miller's first testimony to Fitzgerald, the Times "found" an additional Miller notebook in their Washington office, covering an earlier conversation with Libby back in June. It included references to Plame. Miller claims she has no recollection of writing them down. Such lapses of memory on the crucial details seem incomprehensible in a top journalist. Avalanche of speculation - is Fitzgerald pursuing conspirators?
Fitzgerald established a website late last week, which some commentators believe could be used to post indictments. Suggested outcomes range from the President suddenly sacking Fitzgerald or issuing pre-emptive pardons, to Fitzgerald extending the inquiry or closing the case with neither charges nor report, to indictments of senior officials (possibly Libby and/or Rove) or conspiracy charges reaching to the very top - to Cheney perhaps, or even Bush. Some commentators also caution that proving the actual felony involved in leaking Plame's name may not be possible and any charges will more likely be confined to perjury or obstruction.
The more radical speculations are anchored in rumours that Fitzgerald's pursuit of the felon(s) who outed Plame has led him to examine the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) - the team set up inside the White House to market the war - and to investigate the overall process whereby bogus intelligence was deployed to launch the US - and its "coalition of the willing" - into Iraq. WHIG's records were subpoenaed in early 2004.
WHIG was set up as the marketing arm of the war effort and both Libby and Rove were members, along with Whitehouse Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Condoleezza Rice, Stephen Hadley and several other communications specialists. See Card's interview with Elisabeth Bumiller of the New York Times (archived here krigskronikan.com). The initial Commission that looked into what went wrong with US WMD intelligence before the war put the blame entirely on the CIA, though it was not authorised to look at the role of policymakers in interpreting intelligence. That issue was supposed to be taken up in Phase II, promised before the 2004 election and shelved by the new administration. There has still been no public inquiry into the use and/or abuse of intelligence by the administration.
Implications
Even if Fitzgerald decides against indictments, the problem for the administration will not go away. Valerie Plame and Joseph Wilson are preparing a civil suit against administration officials which they say they will launch if they have to.
Whatever he does decide, the most salutary result of Fitzgerald's work has been in bringing back into public focus the ruthless tactics employed to sell a war decided upon well in advance, with an objective of regime-change presented in the fictional - but far more saleable - guise of disarmament. See my Webdiary piece here for some of the evidence of the plans to attack Iraq dating back to September 11 and before. As US threats to Iran and Syria continue, it is to be hoped that Fitzgerald's inquiry contributes to ongoing public scepticism this time around.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week that an attack on Syria was not an "option" the President would be taking "off the table". When Senator Lincoln Chafee pressed her as to whether she agreed that an attack on Iran or Syria would require new authorisation by Congress, Rice declined to "circumscribe presidential war powers [which] the President retains... in the war on terrorism and in the war on Iraq." New York Times columnist Frank Rich argues that Rove pushed for the war in 2002 as a poll-reviver and election-winner. Given Bush's current abysmal ratings, US citizens should all be extremely cautious about the War President's next campaign.
 |
|
 |
 |
| © 2005-2011, Webdiary Pty Ltd |
| Disclaimer: | This site is home to many debates, and the views expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the site editors. Contributors submit comments on their own responsibility: if you believe that a comment is incorrect or offensive in any way, please submit a comment to that effect and we will make corrections or deletions as necessary. |
Of murderers and conmen.
First today, a story that I am sure will please Richard (G'day) - concerns an SEC investigation into deals involving Halliburton and Nigeria ... at a time when Limp Dick was at the helm of H.
Now to the state of the mind of Commander Codpiece and Robert Scheer is not impressed.
Nor is Sy Hersh.
A personal tragedy - it was all too much.
Meanwhile, is it all falling apart?
William Odom on facing reality.
How does it play for the public? A NYTimes poll.
No wonder the Republicans are getting down and dirty and trying to divert attention.
I look forward to more than just Limp Dick in stripes. The crimes are many and varied and the corrective long overdue. How many more must die? How much more damage must be done? How long will the real dangers be ignored? Phil Kendall (G'day) knows what I mean and has a word for it - "greedastrophe".
Down in the gutter.
Six days to go to the midterms and what are the Republicans doing to hold onto their majorities? Well, first, a view of what they want to hold onto.
Is it the torture election?
Now the methods being used.
And this.
Not forgetting Doug Thompson.
Not only blood in the gutter.
By way of contrast, Tom Engelhardt introduces a story by Elizabeth de la Vega on a soldier who had the courage to take a stand.
On the matter of the war, this from Ray McGovern.
Near the end there is an interesting article from three years ago -a "can't say they weren't warned" reminder.
Now to the matter of climate change and Tony "Snowjob's" response to a question .... Video and transcript. The comments are very interesting and include a list of Bush's actions.
Remember: "We create our own reality".
Others have to suffer the consequences.
Death for what reason?
G'day Phil Kendall, belated thanks for your comments, it seems that WD was tripped up. How I do it is the result of several years of seeking material first for academic pursuits and thence for my own interest. Always seem to be new places to visit. I hope you, and other readers enjoy the material which follows.
On why people are dying in Iraq we turn to Frank Rich of the NYTimes.
The LATimes has this on the similarities in the situation re Iran with the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.
For those who want an interesting 83 minutes of audio there is this discussion with Sy Hersh and Scott Ritter on the plan for Iran and related issues based on Ritter's book Target Iran. Recommended.
While WD was absent Part II of Tom Engelhardt's Truths of a Lost War appeared.
As did Parts II and III of Robert Parry's The Original October Surprise.
Now here is an interesting story - a claim by an adviser to Saddam Hussein that SH had accepted Bush's ultimatum before the invasion. I will post further on this issue if and when material is at hand. To those who would dismiss such a claim without examining the evidence I remind them of all the lies that were told and crimes committed.
Freedom! (I won't.)
Subtitle (From 'Bringing up Baby'): "Do what you want!" (I know you will anyway.)
Keywords: Truth(beauty), lies, belief and ideologues[1].
-=*=-
I was talking yesterday about a certain shameless pro-Howard hussy, and the hapless organization she 'works' for (imagine being the 'official voice of the people' and being forced(?!) to tell us, we the people, lies). I tried listening to 'her' program this morning, but soon had to give up - too many (detested) American voices. I also said yesterday that the choice of material on RN/Breakfast was extremely unlikely to be accidental; a distinct pro-American slant has been evident at least since the time of the predecessor Thompson, another (detested) 'Americaphile'[2]. But before I stopped listening - actually, why I stopped, was hearing a bit from a 'sound-bite,' presumably from here: October 25, 2006 Press Conference by the President.
A note on spelling: yesterday, I wrote 'ass' when I meant 'arse;' this problem arising because the full phrase 'kiss your ass goodbye' came to us from America 'back-then,' in the 'run-up' to the nukular®-holocaust 'promised' by the cold war. We didn't know it then, that America was the real enemy: but now we do, and we avoid as much of the detested Ameri-Speak as possible. Sorry.
-=*=-
Long story short (more detested Ameri-Speak, spit spit!): it's murder for oil. No matter how anyone dresses it up (i.e. geopolitics/un- or non-lawful killing (on 'legal' orders(?!) - tell it to a judge)), Iraqis are being murdered, in the full and true sense of the word[3]. Bob Wall (g'day) gave us a link yesterday ('How to tell they lied'): Jacob G. Hornberger's "They Lied About the Reasons for Going to War." (Bob is a great source of good links; I dunno how he does it but he certainly does it well.) Q: Does this lying matter? A: Yes. Another of Bob's famous links is to Bogart; that stuff added to the content of Phil Moffat's (g'day) Engdahl article all adds up to something truly dreadful (and I mean this really seriously, daaarlings): the 'cold war' is not in any way dead let alone gone; rev-up all those good old nukular fears everyone!
For those unwilling to follow the links and read 'em, Bogart describes how (disgustingly thoroughly) the military/industrial complex has permeated itself into the US, and Engdahl outlines the (utterly ghastly) US strategy. Both together can lead to a severe case of the collywobbles, you bet!
Until the AusBC (and SBS, and the AL-bloody-P) accuses the Libs/Howard both loudly and exactly: "Murder for oil!" they'll be guilty of hiding the truth, simply another way of saying "Liars!" - Oh! Always 'only' IMHO, of course!
And until B, B & H are charged (Yale/Nuremberg: "To initiate a war of aggression ... contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole"), we'll be living in a state of (at the very least) reduced (and for the Iraqis: absolutely no) justice.
-=*pause*=-
Now, what's all this about 'Truth(beauty), lies, belief and ideologues?' Well, 'in here' there are a few pro-status quo stooges, otherwise referred-to by me as proxy-murderer apologist/agitators. By 'pro-status quo' I include pro-'free-market,' pro-Liberal (and specifically pro-Howard), pro-US (and specifically pro-GWBush), and last but hardly least (in the crime stakes), pro-Israel. Note that a) the mention of countries here refers to 'regime' rather than 'good burghers of,' and b) this is not a pro-status quo exhaustive list; just the bits I wanna be here concerned with. Pro-'free-market' is in itself a topic largely for another day, but it's included here as it relates to Iraq's oil. (No market at the point of a gun can be considered in any way 'free,' hmmm?) These stooges are my keyword ideologues; their 'viewpoint' obviously differs radically from mine: why? As Julius Sumner Miller used to say, "Why is it so?" - to which I could add: "How can it be?"
That brings us to the 'Truth(beauty), lies' bit. One of the beauties of truth is that it's unique; one only needs to keep track of the one true reality. Lies, of course, come in many sorts; worse, there's generally more lies than liars and that makes keeping up with liars and their myriad and in this case murderous lies difficult. (Apart from identifying lies, there's nothing much more that you can do with 'em except lament.) Sooo, if there's only one truth (which I doggedly pursue), how can the proxy-murderer apologist/agitators disagree with me? How indeed!
Now, belief; from 'Bringing up Baby': "But everyone thinks they're correct!" Well, of course. But only adherents to truth can be correct; the rest must believe in lies. Basta! QED.
I want to make myself perfectly clear: there is simply no 'wiggle-room' (spit, spit!) here: people have been and continue to be murdered for spoil; in Israel - possibly 'ex-Palestinian territories' for those who won't acknowledge a 'pre-47 Palestinian State' - in Israel it's murder for land (and wardah®), and in Iraq it's murder for the oil (among other 'geostrategic' objectives to be sure, like bases to threaten from and including, as a total 'last resort' for the pro-wars, 'regime change' and 'liberation' - but these two only, as noted, as 'Johnny-come-lately throw-aways.' But whatever, it's mass-murder-most-foul, being a) premeditated and b) in the pursuit of a crime, namely armed theft including actual deadly violence to people: aka murder for spoil. Basta! - and once again QED. The fact that the US (with UK and Aus) and Israel pretend to democracy can't change basic facts: murder is murder. Sooo again; supporters (i.e. voters who gave their effective preference to B, B or H) have not 'excused' these 'leaders,' but rather those voters have assumed some of the the guilt of those 'leaders,' and this is exactly why the apologist/agitators are in actual fact proxy-murderers.
I've said it before (and willing to endlessly repeat); this is an opinion forum (as opposed to a Darlinghurst courtroom, say). Now I can use my keyword 'belief' on my own behalf: I sincerely believe that B, B & H went - actually, sent us - to war, on not 'just' an 'accidental' lie (i.e. not just 'bad' intel), but on deliberately fabricated lies (see Web Results 1 - 100 of about 62,800 English pages for Wolfowitz, Vanity Fair bureaucratic. (0.61 secs) - or Bob's Hornberger link above), and with control of Iraqi oil as 'a' if not 'the' prime objective. Of course, the US could disprove this at any time by totally freeing the Iraqi oil market to open competition, but in exactly the same way, pigs are free to fly.
There have been two (that I recall) more- rather than less-rational 'objections' to my general thesis; one on 'quasi-legal' grounds along the lines that murder is not a defined international crime, the other on some sort'a compassionate basis, the main 'prop' there being that Saddam was a tyrant. Well sorry fellas (but not too sorry); what we see is what we (actually not we but they; i.e. Iraqis, Palestinians etc) get: and that is horribly and unmistakeably mass-murdered for spoil.
It has been asserted 'in here' that the UN is a) a source of legality (i.e. for Israel), b) a source of illegality (i.e. for the aggressive invasion of Iraq) and c) only as good as its 'best' sponsors. With the strongest (US with UK, Aus as pimple on the Anglo's arse, Israel) being also among the greatest of miscreants, well, daaarlings, the whole UN 'thing' is made moot, no? So sorry again (but not too sorry); we resort to 'natural' justice: except in the narrowest of defined exceptions, killing any human being is just wrong.
The word 'propaganda'[4] has also been thrown 'in here.' My claim is that I'm a seeker of truth, and that to the best of my knowledge and ability, my assertions are based on fact - and although I suppose that I could be wrong in some minor detail, surely not in the main? After all, one only needs to open one's eyes (and mind) to see.
One last bit of detested Ameri-Speak (spit spit!): 'closure,' and other-such (IMHO) idiotic nonsense. You won't hear me talking such rubbish, but justice, yes. Without it, we (yes us, all of us; US, UK, Aus and Israel) live in outlaw countries. And that's not all, the worst is yet to come (and we truly are wasting possibly priceless time); the greedastrophe® is coming...
-=*end*=-
PS What's about the "Freedom! (I won't.)" bit? Well (again), GWBush rants and raves about "They hate us for our freedoms!" and "Terrists® will be brought to justice!" etc. His slogans trivialise the complexities; there's little scope for any 'nuancing' for example. But there are implications; a) that we might actually be somehow free and b) that crooks can actually be brought to justice, etc. My objective is to promote justice by speaking freely - but my opponents (apart from the aforesaid proxy-murderers) are B, B & H and their fellow-travellers in deadly crime. So seeking justice may not actually be too 'healthy;' whereas ASIO are unlikely to be interested, the CIA and especially Mossad have form. Brrr. But no, I won't (be intimidated).
Refs:
[1] ideologue n. often derog. adherent of an ideology. [French: related to *idea] (Near to idée fixe n. (pl. idées fixes pronunc. same) dominating idea; obsession. [French, = fixed idea]) [POD]
[2] Americaphile: You can google it with this.
[3] murder —n. 1 intentional unlawful killing of a human being by another [POD]
[4] propaganda n. 1 organized propagation of a doctrine by use of publicity, selected information, etc. 2 usu. derog. ideas etc. so propagated. [ibid.]
History and fantasies and culprits unpunished.
G'day to Jacob A. Stam who has made excellent use of some Tom Engelhardt material elsewhere. Yes, there does seem to be a pattern, perhaps indicating that there are limitations on how much Bush's brain can retain - "Best just teach him one number lest we confuse him."
Or perhaps he just likes saying "30,000". Perhaps he also likes saying "we're winning". Arianna has a view on that.
What is Commander Codpiece's message to the American people?
A Greg Palast reminder of how elections can be "done".
On military matters, they want to go boldly where noone has yet gone.
Let's play Space Empires.
Down to earth, and Enron perp gets 24 years but Robert Scheer asks "what about the enablers?" Yes, them.
On the subject of the soothing balm, Venezuela is in their sights.
There is the oft used term "October surprise" and here is material from Robert Parry on the original October surprise - the deal done to free the US hostages in Iran. And other matters that relate to US involvement in Iran and Iraq.
A lot of material in this and lots of links. You can even find this.
A murky business. And a reminder that despite those who say you cannot deal with certain states, they have done so in the past when it suited them.
Terrorists on the loose in US.
And according to Keith Olbermann, it is the GOP. 10+ minutes of video. Apologies to those who lack the facilities to watch this - it is great stuff. And there are others on the page.
On Iraq, "no good options".
And some bad ones, especially for those not fit to fight.
That's just part of it. And don't forget the comment:
"We can lose in Iraq, or we can lose in Iraq and lose the army." Follow the link "former army commander-in-chief".
How to tell they lied.
Oh, and the keep doing it, determined to stay that course.
Some are cutting and running.
Corrupt! All is corrupt.
A poll.
Having started with one of my favourites, I will end with another, Tom Engelhardt with Part I of Losing the Home Front.
On another thread F Kendall (G'day) mentioned the Bush family purchase of land in Paraguay, well known retread for those wishing to avoid scrutiny. Yes, get yourself a nice place with protection from prosecution and keep a lot of lawyers on the payroll. Personally, I can't see how anyone could defend these people if they weren't being paid to do so.
End of Empire.
G'day Chris and Phil, thanks for the interesting posts.
Worrying report you linked Chris, more of the control the flow of information tactic. Which of your options is it? Either or all? Or just do not like differing views being available?
There might need to be some fancy verbal gymnastics given the possibilities in the air over Iraq. Bush is trying it on and causing headaches for "Snowjob".
Hilarious stuff. As funny as Limp Dick's "everything is going well" approach.
Meanwhile, there are reports of interest:
This.
And this.
I await developments and, if events take a turn completely different to the rhetoric, what the new rhetoric will be.
Planned without reference to facts.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good war. Good war? Only if you get your hands on the soothing balm.
Nice closing para:
So they should but a segue to this.
Proving the above point.
Something rotting and an historical analogy.
As all this happens, there are far more important issues, as this latest from Tom Engelhardt shows. It is Bill McKibben reviewing a number of books on climate change and starts with dire predictions about far worse than the end of an empire and moves on to ways to deal with the problem.
Makes one wonder why some spend so much of their time playing their little games with each other. Blinded to the looming danger.
birds of a feather
This morning, as I stumbled groggily out'a my deliciously comfy-warm bed, and 'transitioned' from the bed-side clock-radio to the ancient steam-driven ('only' 2-ch!) stereo in our up-stairs split-level kitchen/dining/living-room space, only to hear - horrors! - a snatch'a RN Breakfast: "Like heck, we can't tell the Iraqis what to do," the senator said. "It's our blood and treasure. ... We should tell them now, 'Get a political settlement, or you're on your own, Jack.' " [My reaction: Haw! - then: Urk!]
I decided to google a bit: "[news] Results 1 - 2 of 2 for it's-our-blood-and-treasure. (0.42 secs)"
Hit#1: "White House Wants Iraqi Leaders to Take More Responsibility for ...
FOX News - 8 hours ago" - from which my above introductory quote was 'cut.'
And this is interesting because?
-=*=-
Well, most'a you ort'a know me by now, but for those who don't (or 'just' haven't been paying enough attention), one'a my main theses is 'murder for oil,' and a secondary (but nevertheless most important) one is that the AusBC is biased alright - but it 'leans' (BS! 'Is pushed' or even 'shoved' is more like it, and that mostly from 'inside(!)') towards the right, rather than as portrayed endlessly by the (mindless!) right-whingers as 'left-wing.'
Anyhow.
The introductory quote (just as I found it; check it for yourself), 'presented' by Fran Kelly came from Sen. Joseph Biden, senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee via FOX News. Here is the lot (from Biden):
Y'just got'a laugh (since the alternative is 'cry'); at how many 'inaccuracies' (aka lies) in the above lot?
As Bob Wall (g'day!) has reported, 'just rub a little soothing oil on any injuries:'
-=*=-
What all'a this shows (always 'only' IMHO!) is:
a) that the US (and UK, with Aus as the pimple on the Anglo's arse), usually written by me as B, B & H 'went in' for the oil - and if you insist regime change, and 'for' Israel perhaps (never against WMD: just filthy lies!) - but always primarily as 'murder for oil,'
b) that the so-called 'opposition' parties - Dems over there; just as Lab over here: Latham (as perhaps the only Lab who ever could'a) did not offer us a clear anti-war choice - the 'opposition' parties do not actually oppose, and certainly not the concept of 'murder for oil' and
c) that the AusBC stays forever silent on 'murder for oil.' (They/she didn't 'select' this item for 'balance...' - bets?)
-=*=-
There must be something terribly wrong with people like me, who can quite clearly see 'murder for oil.' Why are we upset by this?
PS Although 'blind Freddy' can see 'murder for oil' actually happening, and the strife it's causing amongst the (poor, ignorant and often murdered) Iraqi natives, the same disgustingly criminal rip-offs are happening here too. See any of my 100s of contributions lamenting resource-rent. Why do we 'accept' being ripped off?
SBS under attack?
From The Age.
- - -
There are several ways of looking at this. It could simply be a rearguard action to protect Howard and Co against the fallout from Iraq. It could be a pre-emptive strike to smother news of the noose which is being tightened around Iran.
It could also be a device which, if left to run it's logical course, might inflame the ire of our Muslim communities. If so, Ronaldson will be a witting or unwitting dupe of the "sly-boys".
Having crossed swords with him before (by correspondence) on Iraq, I can attest to the fact that he trots out the usual bog-standard cardboard cutout version of the government narrative. Whether that makes him an ambitious operator, or just too ideological for everyone's good, I couldn't say.
I have contacted Getup, with a view to a campaign - and also sent off some (frankly) inflammatory letters to the Reps and Senators.
To arms!..... my kingdom for a horse!
Who will ride with me?
God moves in mysterious ways his disasters to achieve,
Given the amount discussion about the religious fervour of various leaders, in particular in the ME, the following story I find both interesting and worrying:
Top US general says Rummy is inspired by God.
An illegal invasion based on lies and poorly planned resulting in a disaster which necessitates even more lies from Donald "I never said that" Rumsfeld. Mmmmmm. Best erase a few things from the bible, beginning with some of the Commandments and the teachings of JC will have to undergo some severe editing.
Apart from that there is the matter of what the response would be if say the Chimp passed on the OK to attack some other state and Rummy gave the order to the Joint Chiefs. One has to worry about the amount and nature of the consideration they might give such an order.
Meanwhile, Tom Engelhardt and Robert Dreyfuss on Iraq and time for a coup?
Leon Hagar - Humbling the Hegemon.
Gordon Prather on Neocrazies and nukes.
Games people play - and some have the tools to do a lot of damage.
How to lose a war.
Some very interesting material today about Iraq and the situation there.
First is Gareth Porter.
Simon Tisdall.
A surge in US casualties.
On reading the above it seems that things are not going well. An understatement perhaps. The next article is a fulsome analysis of wars; and doctrines and egos and delusions. A little about the author, in case some start reading and try to dismiss him too readily:
So very "hands on", unlike some he mentions.
He begins:
There is much, much more. And well worth reading and thinking about. Some, such as the Commander, do not seem to want to think about it. But the weight of evidence is that the Bush wars have been failures, Iraq, in particular, a disaster that has discredited and weakened the US. Perhaps James Baker's group will provide an "out" or perhaps obstinacy will rule or even more desperate actions will be taken. We can hope reality imposes itself before any more damage is done.
A few items to ponder.
Interesting piece by Andrew Bacevich on the mess that has been made and a bad case of denial.
James A. Baker, whose opinion has relevance, went and saw and was not impressed.
Despite this, Limp Dick is being positive.
Some great comments with the above article.
The public has a different view.
CNN poll.
This.
Zogby.
This is brief as I have a meal to prepare. Just a little more evidence to add to the mountain.
The soothing balm.
There is much death and injury in Iraq but some have a cure, just rub a little soothing oil on any injuries.
It will certainly make some feel a whole lot happier. Pity about the victims.
With the midterms approaching, there is concern about the integrity of the electoral system. It is not just those electronic voting machines but also all the other ways of depriving people of their vote.
There are reports that the GOP is becoming increasingly worried. That there aren't tricks enough to fix the problem. Now it seems solid Republican states are disenchanted with Commander Codpiece. Enough to vote Democrat? Wait and see and watch look out for surprises and shenanigans.
Here is a Dan Froomkin roundup.
And the Commander signs the torture bill today and sets the US on a backward path.
Do not neglect the fiddle.
How not to conduct foreign policy, or, "Do I smell burning?". Gordon Prather on an appropriate historical analogy for Commander Codpiece.
Charley Reese on the neglect.
It should be obvious to all, except those who are blind to reality.
William Rivers Pitt - The Wretched Years.
All the damage being done causes a rising level of criticism. Perhaps there are ways of dealing with that.
One of the justifications for the illegal invasion of Iraq (OK, the justifications change every time truth raises its head) is to spread democracy. Well, the Iraqis seem to have been given a T-model range of choices. For those who do not know it was "any colour you want, as long as it is black." In Iraq it was any government you want as long as ...
Many are voting with their feet.
Noting some of the responses on the mortality thread, I remind readers who don't get it of the warning Colin Powell gave Bush before the war:
That is the simple, straight forward way of putting it. One could always take recourse to various laws and Conventions for the legal view.
For the spin merchants here, this is an article on the professionals.
Need to be good to turn disasters into successes. Or have some really big surprises up your sleeve.
The lies of the land.
From Tom Engelhardt Part II of Elizabeth De la Vega's Debunking the Armitage Story.
Will the presidential pardon be used to remove a vexatious issue?
More Rovian fixing?
More evidence of GOP priorities (although not always limited to them). Never mind the paedophilia, look at the House numbers.
Now to those latest Iraq casualty figures.
DemocracyNow! interviews the co-author.
The other stories in today's edition deal with US casualties and treatment of prisoners in US prisons.
Dahr Jamail.
Paul Craig Roberts.
Norman Solomon
The accuracy of the latest figures is being challenged, the above articles should help readers form a view. Throw in previous wars and the sanctions and even the lowest estimates give a nasty tally. Take the higher range and people should be careful about a limited attribution of the description "monster".
And for what? We have seen the stories of the effect of the Iraq war on the "war on terror". Here is a report on the progress of the Baker Panel's considerations on the future of Iraq.
Recall yesterday's item about US troop numbers being maintained until 2010.
What could happen after the midterms? Here is a view.
Some have done OK in Iraq. But where is the justice?
For those who missed the facts, Robert Parry revisits the Bush lies that led to Iraq and since.
Lies, damned lies and Bushworld.
It's in the Constitution.
Another Keith Olbermann special today - Why does habeus corpus hate America? Great item. Video and transcript.
Karen Kwiatkowski - The Bush Legacy, or the Modern American Standard?
Some very interesting internal links.
Reference has been made to the latest estimate of the Iraq death toll. Here is the report. (.pdf)
Johns Hopkins article about the report.
Dave Lindorff on the tally.
People will dispute the figures but Lindorff has this item:
"Collateral damage" at 30-1?
And no respite soon, unless soldiers get sick of it. See an internal link in the Kiatkowski article if you have not done so . OK this one.
Their are elections coming up, Doug Thompson Rants about the matter.
Enough to concern people without articles about paedophiles and the cover up.
Like falling rain.
A report on US war crimes in Iraq has been released as a 36 page .pdf document.
As an accompanying piece, here is Kathy Kelly - When Evil Doing Comes Like Falling Rain.
For those who wish to shift the blame, recall Colin Powell's prewar warning to Bush - "You break it, you own it."
Now to the North Korean test and some background on the Bush policy to NK.
Robert Parry.
Joshua Marshall.
And Bush saying a while back how his policy would work.
The Boston Globe editorial on the matter.
A military solution?
If you ask a "silly question" you get a Snowjob.
Apologists might reject the part the Bush administration played in North Korea's decision to pursue nuclear weapons, the logic apparently being that the world's most powerful state with an aggressive, macho chest thumping foreign policy with little awareness of what is really required could not affect the actions of state's it has targeted. You know, the "axis of evil" rhetoric and such. Actually, there seems little in the way of logic, more in the nature of spin and denial.
How do you defend lying, delusional, criminal, corrupt incompetents?
The words that are used ...
Tom Engelhardt - George Bush's War of the Words, looks at the language that is used.
Note the use in the article of "Mushroom cloud" in re Condi Rice, saw another article yesterday which used "Mushrooms", someone else has been using such terms for a while now.
Words again, in particular, their use as propaganda.
Now an article about "Mushroom Cloud" and her latest, in a long list, trip to the ME. This is Gideon Levy on the trip and US policy.
Here's one on "Mushroom's" lost credibility.
Perhaps she'd be better off tending the president's banana.
Now to a couple of polls and the numbers are looking bad for the Grotesque Old Paedophiles.
This.
And this.
Which leaves some people speculating on how big the "October surprise" will be.
Of course it would not make sense to launch another war. But we are dealing with an administration not noted for common sense. More one that is delusional, criminal and corrupt.
Base political motives - a peek into the cesspool.
It is the story in DC at the moment and its ramifications could be great. I write of the Foley scandal and the attempts of the GOP to cover it up and to shift blame. I featured a Jon Stewart segment on blame-shifting last week, more shortly.
The first article in this post is from Time magazine and it declares the end of the Republican revolution. Interesting poll figures at the end of the 7 pages.
A Republican Congressman says he knew in 2000. So it goes a lot further back than the leadership claim.
There is an attempt to blame the Democrats:
Upside down indeed.
And another attempt, but lacking an answer when asked for evidence. Video and transcript.
I'm sure readers will recognise the tactics - the apologists have learned it well from their heroes. They are always willing to lend a hand, but I hope they keep the tissues handy.
Now for something completely different, a story on what fuels the furnace of Keith Olbermann's brilliant special comments and a reflection on why they stand out so much.
And, as North Korea is in the news, here is a story about happenings in South Korea - farmers versus the USA.
Some would much prefer to talk about the North.
"Anyone who shelters a terrorist is a terrorist"
This post will be a weekend magazine-like collection of articles ranging across a variety of issues. The responses might range from amusement through to fear.
First, another example of Bush hypocrisy by way of a reminder of unequal treatment.
Cooking the books.
Gordon Prather on National Intelligence Estimates being made to order.
What to do about Iraq? All sorts of ideas are being tossed around.
Helen Thomas on Henry Kissinger advising on Iraq.
The latest Newsweek poll.
Fire up those Diebold machines, boys.
"Sorry, it was an accident."
What if the US used missiles designed for nuclear payloads with conventional ones? Who would be able to tell the difference and how long would they have to decide what to do?
OK, a worrying possible scenario, so I'll finish on a lighter note:
Jeb Bush cuts and runs and then goes into the closet but comes out later.
Enjoy your Sunday reading.
No sooner said ...
Having posted material about Commander Codpiece's use of signing statements yesterday, why am I not surprised that today I can link two more examples? Almost a Pavlovian response by the Commander, as in dog's, although reference to a dessert - a meringue cake with cream and fruits - might be an analogy for presidential and party attributes.
Here is one example, on FEMA.
And on privacy reports.
He's the decider who can do what he wants regardless of the Constitution and any other legal impediment.
Which us more ammunition to support articles such as this.
The latest Time poll is not good news for the Commander.
Perhaps he'll dismiss the nay-sayers, ie., the majority, as traitors.
So the public do not think the Commander is doing a very good job. But what is his job? Jon Stewart investigates. Video. Nice little sting in the tail.
On the revelations of a meeting that was conveniently forgotten, some widows are not happy and have issued a statement. Here is an extract:.
People debating the merits of investigations held might take note of not only this article but also material previously posted.
Touching on the page boy scandal (no pun intended) here is Doug Thompson revealing yet more Republican hypocrisy.
"Liars and scumbags"? Seems justified by the evidence.
Olbermann takes aim.
Keith Olbermann in a special comment has let fly at Bush. Video here.
Transcript here.
Just a taste of what to expect. OK., another taste:
IMO, every word delivered right on target and so deserved.
The assumption and exercise of power.
The Congressional Research Service has issued a report on Bush's use of signing statements.
One can almost hear Bush saying "The trouble with the French is that they have no expression for 'l'etat c'est moi'.
One must be careful about infringing on the domain of the powers that be, as this chap found out.
The effrontery, talking to the Lord of Darkness that way. That chap who told Cheney to "go f*ck yourself" must be counting his blessings. But then that was what Cheney told someone to do on the Senate.
What about American "values" in all this?
Garrison Keillor.
Bill Moyers.
Paul Craig Roberts.
James Abourezk.
So what to do? For a start, Tom Engelhardt presents David Swanson who looks at the remedy available and the reasons to use it. It does seem that the people agree. But what have they got to do with it?
G'day Angela, nice post on the Aussie Islam thread.
Spin out.
Another piece of Bushspin is under fire -the claim that Iran has been supplying weapons to Shiite groups in Iraq. The British have found no evidence to support this claim.
Condi Rice is off to try to the ME again, although Time is not very optimistic in an article titled Condi Rice Tries to Look Busy.
With such faint hopes of any success it probably doesn't matter if she remembers what was said in meetings, or even if there were meetings.
US policy towards the ME has echoes of the Cold War.
Ira Chernus on what Iran means to the neocons.
Hot or Cold, a war is a useful tool.
Speaking of tools, OK, one item on the scandal that is preoccupying DC. The Speaker is on his way out according to insiders. And the midterms loom. Will require all the Republicans "expertise" to avoid losing control of at least one chamber.
Interesting times ahead.
Just found this - there have been a number of retired former high ranking US military men critical of the Iraq war. Now we have a serving senior officer speaking out. Marine Gen James L Jones, US commander for Europe has confirmed criticisms attributed to him in Bob Woodward's State of Denial.
The old DC shuffle.
G'day Trevor Kerr, I note you have taken the Foley scandal to another thread. Spread the muck evenly. And no need for anyone to say "Give the Republicans a hand." Been far too much of that. I will focus on another scandal, the one about meetings and attacks and wars.
First, DemocracyNow! interviews Rand Beers, formerly Bush's senior director for combating terrorism on the NSC.
Next, Robert Scheer on Condi Rice.
William Rivers Pitt - The Tipping Point.
Now that will make people sit up and take notice. And Jack ...off (how appropriate that is) gets a mention:
He then gets onto the Foley matter and the way it has garnered attention as opposed to other matters.
On the matter of wars, whither Afghanistan?
And is al Qaeda as powerful in Iraq as claimed?
Well, does that take care of that particular bit of spin?
OK, a bit on the Foley issue and Republican hypocrisy, this is a Doug Thompson Rant, a welcome home present for a particular Thompson fan.
To close, a piece on Hizb Allah, which might be useful to those battling elsewhere. Not the sort of material that suits some.
Trick or treat.
While DC is wallowing in the latest scandal, there is conjecture that an old scandal – and the starting point of this thread – could become a new scandal. Tom Engelhardt features Elizabeth de la Vega on conjecture of a December pardon for Scooter Libby.
Meanwhile, back at Fox, they somehow got confused as to which party Foley belongs to. An accident surely? They wouldn't do it on purpose, would they?
With the bad polls and the latest scandal people expect Democrat victories in the midterms. But do the Republicans have a card (or voting machines etc) up their sleeve?
On really important tissues, a group of scientists predict one third of the Earth will be desert by 2100.
There is also a link to a story on polar ice caps melting.
Really serious problems might lie ahead.
Muck and Mire.
It's a woman's prerogative ... Condi "Must leave those mushrooms alone" Rice has "amended her previous statement about that meeting. And others were also warned.
My underlining.
Now to the page boy scandal. This is now causing the Republicans a great deal of trouble .. and with the midterms just a month away.
The Huffington Post has a good collection of pieces on the issue.
Here are some views:
This.
This.
The Washington Times calls for the Speaker's resignation.
Who knew and who covered it up?
Jon Stewart and his take on the scandal. 10 minute video.
Now to other problems.
William Pfaff - A Disaster by Any Measure.
This is one reason (or should it be 263) why the word disaster is appropriate.
This senior Republican isn't singing from the same hymn book as the Administration - Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, says Taliban should be taken into the Afghan government.
On the Detainee Bill and the junking of habeus corpus.
Appropriate to finish this edition with Doug Thompson.
Read on.
Has the city in the hill sunk into a cesspit?
Condi caught with her pants ... on fire?
Dear readers, pleasing when apparent confirmation of a claim comes as quickly as it does in the following case.
In this morning's post I linked an further article on the claim in Bob Woodward's book, State of Denial, that then CIA director George Tenet warned then NSA Condi "Mushrooms" Rice of a looming threat by al Qaeda. This is part of Ms Rice's response, as posted earlier:
Now we have this:
Ignored or not, it seems Ms Rice eventually forgot all about the meeting. None seem to come out of this smelling of roses it seems. But the claim of not remembering the meeting sits alongside the "noone imagined" statement among Ms Rice's gems. And from the woman who said at her Senate confirmation hearing, after listening to a list (though not a complete one) of her "inconsistencies" read to her:
When I suggest to people that governments do lie, the above is further evidence. Unless her memory really is that bad. Could it be? I very much doubt it.
Jack's Back.
Jack ...off, that is and in the sense of DemocracyNow! devoting its program to Bill Moyers and his examination of the extent of the scandal surrounding ...off. And it is very extensive. Video and transcript.
In the wake of the Detainee Bill, here is an article of what some US POWs confessed to in Korea under non-physical torture.
The commotion continues over Bob Woodward's new book, which is selling like hotcakes and is already in its third printing. The Administration is ducking and covering and trying to defuse the issues the book has raised. Condi "Mushrooms" Rice is denying that she had secret meeting with George Tenet where he warned her of an impending attack.
Well, she would say that.
Here's another view.
And it is not all exactly new news. So why now?
Arianna Huffington's view.
Some more on Pakistan and the war on terror.
Someone on a thread some months ago tried to discredit a critic of the Iraq war by referring to allegations involving an underage girl. This was shown to be a false allegation. I suggest that person might try to ignore the current scandal in DC concerning the activities of a former Republican Congressman and boys, a matter the party's leadership knew well before the public revelations about his behaviour. The old DC politics above all else game. I will not go into details, they can be readily found on the 'net, but it is worth recalling the fuss over adult consensual sex in re Bill Clinton that the Republicans made.
There have been many comparisons made between the Iraq war and the Vietnam war. Lawdy, Commander Codpiece even has Henry "lots of countries I can't visit" Kissinger advising him. Here is another comparison, between the US and ancient Rome. Empires rise and fall.
A nod in the direction of Craig Rowley who is doing a great job in a number of ways. G'day and many thanks, Craig.
He's not in a state of denial, he's in the state of Texas.
Today more on the fuss and bother over pre-Sept 11 preparedness, the Iraq foul up and why the raking over the ashes, a surprise encounter on Fox, and he fired the wrong man.
Yes, just another day in Old DC.
To start, a Bush adviser takes the usual approach to critics, yes, question their integrity.
The meeting that never was.
Lots of Comments as well and could be a useful resource on the 9/11 thread.
Richard Clarke on the fuss.
Frank Rich.
Obvious to all, except those in denial.
They sold the world a pup and then sacked the chief salesman. The fall of Colin Powell.
This is a lengthy piece bout the development of the "Powell moment", the UN speech, and then the unraveling. A strange item at the end is that when Powell went to bid farewell to Bush, Bush did not seem to know why Powell was there:
On the ball, or what?
Something unexpected on Fox, interviewer gets uppity with William Kristol talking about political manoeuvring while US personnel are dying in Iraq. Video.
Here is a teaser, is Musharraf on the US payroll?
The denial is expected, one of those "well, they would say that" moments. However, surely the claim could not be true that an administration that claims to be spreading democracy and freedom would simultaneously be supporting dictators. Otherwise it would be gross hypocrisy. Given the Bush administration's record this is surely ... oh, hold on a moment.
Enough, I think for now, to keep readers occupied or perhaps, for some, a risk of apoplexy.
Give the man a banana.
Seemed like a day to rest but seeing as someone has decided to don the moderator's cap and there are such interesting articles (not to some perhaps) I thought I'd prepare a reading list.
First, Marjorie Cohn, "a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, is president-elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and the U.S. representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists." on the detainee Bill.
There they go, spreading freedom and democracy again. Or is it just fertiliser they spread?
On the lead up to the new bill.
More on Bob Woodward's new book State of Denial.
From Woodward.
After the above appetizer, an 11 page extract from the book.
This.
From the Grauniad, ooops, Guardian.
On Iraq.
Bush on the offensive. From the safety of the US, of course.
Someone finds Bush offensive.
Now, for a change of subject, an article from Paul Craig Roberts on the US economy, in particular, the outsourcing of US jobs.
I note a response from Timothy Wong (G'day) on another thread to the behaviour of some there. And some weighty material for consideration. Not sure, Timothy, if there will be much intelligent response allowed. Seems to be the aim. Great try though. There is another post addressed to me but short of having a lobotomy and abandoning all regard for the principles and practices of civil debate, I'm not sure I can provide an answer, or to sink to that level.
So, dear readers, you have some more weekend reading. Enjoy.
Heil to the Chief
The US Senate has passed the detainee bill designed to get around the finding of the Supreme Court in the Hamdan case. The Bill now heads to the desk of Commander Codpiece. Following are some reports and views on the matter.
This.
This.
This.
This.
For some flavour - David Corn This is What Waterboarding Looks Like.
And, just in case they get ideas, the A-G issues a caution to judges.
From DemocracyNow! an interview with Sen. Patrick Leahy. Video and transcript.
The second story on today's program is Rajiv Chandrasekaran on Emerald City, the Green Zone in Baghdad.
On the matter of Iraq, here are some tidbits from Bob Woodward's new book.
Iraq not healthy for journalists.
For those who have read the material presented above or similar material elsewhere might be a wee bit concerned not only at the powers being granted to a US president, but especially to the current president. Jon Stewart on TDS gives his take on Bush's response to the leaking of the NIE report, the one that gives a bad picture of the impact of the Iraq war on the "war on terror". Yes indeed, especially this president. Video.
So read the material and draw your conclusions. I've omitted posting extracts as it could have resulted in a very large post and, apart from bandwidth concerns, our moderators have had quite enough to do in a time which seems unusually difficult.. Thanks Richard, and to Craig, who has been fighting a very necessary battle against the Vandals at the gates of Webdiary, quite superbly, imo.
G'day to Chris Shaw and thanks for your kind words yesterday. And g'day to all Irises readers.
A progress report.
The first item today is Keith Olbermann giving an account of the Bush administration's efforts (or lack of them) to deal with the threat of al Qaeda before September 11 2001. Video and transcript.
Some interesting extracts:
And
And
There are also clips of several people who "could not imagine ...". One, perhaps, could imagine small boats falling from the stratosphere ....
A NYTimes editorial on legislating tyranny.
Read on.
Browbeating the military.
Now to Iraq. First, Tom Engelhardt.
This is a fulsome piece with at least 50 internal links.
The Democrats held an unofficial hearing in the Senate on Iraq . Here is Maj Gen John Batiste's (ret) testimony.
Bob Woodward gets stuck in.
And a Doug Thompson Rant on the subject.
It begins:
Some get upset when members of the Bush administration are branded as liars. The evidence that they are is overwhelming.
Here is an article on the first poll mentioned in the article. The second has been linked in an earlier post.
Something rotten in the States.
Nuts and Boltons.
Here is an article about John Bolton, whose confirmation for the UN job has been delayed. There are internal links which lead to some very interesting articles.
Here is a poll of Iraqis and what they want. The big majority want the US out, and when do they want it? Now. But what about that embassy and those "enduring bases"?
Tom Engelhardt presents Michael T. Klare on falling oil prices, Iran and peak oil. Sections of this could be used as material for discussion elsewhere, if the lords of Onan were to allow a constructive discussion to occur. Unlikely.
Two articles on why it makes sense to some to nuke Iran.
Jorge Hirsch.
Paul Craig Roberts.
One hopes that these will be read and analysed in a sober manner.
Doug Thompson took a break from writing his Rants but has returned to the fray. Here is his latest - Stupid is as stupid does. This a welcome on the way home present for a diarist who has a particular fondness for Thompson's work. This is understandable given this extract:
Yes, the old common sense we hear so much about. But the worry is, Allen's behaviour would make sense to some. As would that of those mentioned in the earlier articles. Sad but true.
"Attack the virtuous and reward the useless"
G'day Phil Kendall, thank you for your post which has much to commend it.
In my previous post I linked to an extract of the interview in which an attempt was made to ambush Bill Clinton. And the perpetrators wished they hadn't. There has been the usual kerfuffle from the usual suspects in its wake but Keith Olbermann has retaliated with a Special Comment. This is an example of why KO is the nearest the US media has today to Edward R Murrow and this is a prime example of why I make that assessment. Video and transcript. Here is a juicy extract:
Condi "Mushrooms must have clouded my brain" Rice denied some of the former president's claim but this article has evidence that Condi was fibbing. Not Condi "Noone imagined" Rice?
William Blum - If It's Election Season, It Must be Time for a Terror Alert
Tom Engelhardt presents David Morse on US machinations over Darfur.
For those who can view videos readily - and in this case I particularly direct this to Richard (G'day) as it deals with issues he is interested in - a film by Robert Greenwald - Iraq For Sale: The War Profiteers.
Is a 75 min video. When I tried it yesterday the Real Player version did not work but the WMP did.
The Bush administration is trying to get an amnesty law passed, Robert Parry reports. Could be a case of saving one's own ass.
On Phil's greedastrophe the US National Academy of Sciences reports that Earth is at its hottest for thousands of years.
So all we need is more war for oil and all the time, resources and attention wasted, eh?
The Empire of Fear. Out sourced, of course.
Here is the latest Tom Engelhardt which deals with prisons, an oversized embassy, "enduring bases" and the outsourcing, even in the CIA. Recommended.
Meanwhile, the NYTimes splashed this story over its front page.
Not a surprising conclusion, but now made very prominent.
Another instance of corruption - this of the Education Dept's reading program.
I include this as an example of how widespread corruption appears to have become in old DC. No child left behind? Or no dollar left behind?
On the media - Fox tried to ambush Bill Clinton by questioning him on Bin Laden but they forgot who they were dealing with. Video.
Coincidence? Nooo, I don't think so...
A certain right-wing ratbag (and yes, 'in here') has boasted that s/he was deploying "Islamo-Fascist" before the term became so fashionable, that even Costello has now used it.
That may be so, (and who would deny even such a s**t his or her 'day in the Sun'?) - but 'mainstream' Islamo-Fascism now is. You know it's arrived when the AusBC announcers Oh, so casually drop it into their 'news' bulletins.
The same thing happened to "Jihad;" we even had GWBush's "Crusade" slip Oh, so long ago (before 9/11? We know they wanted to slam Iraq looong before then.)
Now even the Pope's into Islamo-bashing, again with Costello climbing aboard in support. Think of the hypocrisy, of Costello on the one hand addressing "Hillsong" then telling the Muslims to get religion out'a government. Get in the far queue!
Coincidence? Nooo, I don't think so...
-=*=-
A while ago, the idea of 'tipping-points' came to me; it was in connection to a certain 'high-nach' (need to achieve) but nevertheless midget-politician, in response to a) a so-called never-ever GST, b) those kiddies (not!) in the wardah®, c) the shameful Tampa imbroglio (I knew the election was 'lost' as soon as I saw the TV pictures of that rust-coloured near-wreck of a 'rescue' ship) and d) SIEV-X: 353 miserably drowned-dead in nearly the very same wardah, with or without our brave Navy as witness. (Only they really know. And so much for SOLAS.) Then came the non-WMD illegal invasion of Iraq; it was all 'easy-peasy' by then - a boundary had already been crossed.
My idea of a 'tipping-point' is that once a certain limit has been breached, there are no further meaningful limits.
I also talked about service personnel and murder; I think there really is a human utter revulsion towards killing people; service personnel are 'coached' to approach then transcend this natural revulsion, but once this 'limit' is crossed, the 'dogs of war' are truly and horribly unleashed. Panic perfect. One might comprehend the notion of 'defence' perhaps - but that (defence) we just ain't got.
As in Iraq; from the "Get-go" (hideous Ami-speak; spit, spit!) the "Grunts" spoke of going to "Play in Iraq" and "pink-mist" the towel-headed (Muslim) multitudes.
I suspect it's only possible to kill by first de-humanising; the same boastful "Islamo-Fascist" deployed, as well as his three or four stooge-agitators 'in here,' the whole Conga-Line starting with our own mangy politicians and (corrupt!) MSM, all the way 'up' to GWBush himself - and now, how astoundingly, the Pope are all into 'dehumanising' our Muslim mates. (We are all human; only true idiots or outright monsters can delude themselves otherwise.)
And Q: Why dehumanise and then murder? A: To steal the world's resources, that's why. All too-simple, all too bloody-criminal. It really does seem that the fat-to-the-point-of-obscene-cats just can't ever get enough. Now they kill, or kill by proxy, as they steal to gorge and enrich themselves ever grossly more and more. (Now over 400 billionaires in the US alone.)
You could say that the modern age of murder-for-spoil started with the A-bombings; to stay 'credible' they (those fat-cats and their proxies) actually have to kill every now and then, and that on a wide scale. And so we stand (with Iraq nowhere close to being disgustingly digested) before the next murder-feast; another 'pre-emptive aerial-raid' this time against Iran - possibly including nukes - just to keep their stealing going.
And all the while, the greedastrophe® draws nearer...
The rich get ever filthy-richer, but one day the sheople must awake - and, one might presume, with a wrathful vengeance well-justified by the fat-cats' hideous crimes up to and including mass-murder for spoils.
[Can I hear tumbrels being prepared?]
More than meets the eye?
Robert Parry reports that Richard Armitage and Karl "Turd Blossom" Rove are closer than many think and that there is more to Armitage's outing of Valerie Plame than previously realised.
For Richard, an extract from my Hons thesis (2003) about Bush and religion:
I have placed this item here as it seems a more appropriate place and there is so much silliness happening elsewhere.
"We will not walk in fear ..."
Rummy went to Sat Lake City and made some comments about critics.
The mayor of Salt Lake City has responded - here is a video of an interview about a speech he gave a rally. There is a link to the full transcript of his speech.
A patriot is a person who loves his or her country.
Who among you loves your country so much that you have come here today to raise your voice out of deep concern for our nation - and for our world?
And who among you loves your country so much that you insist that our nation's leaders tell us the truth?
Let's hear it: "Give us the truth! Give us the truth! Give us the truth!"
Let no one deny we are patriots. We love our country, we hold dear the values upon which our nation was founded, and we are distressed at what our President, his administration, and our Congress are doing to, and in the name of, our great nation.
Blind faith in bad leaders is not patriotism.
A patriot does not tell people who are intensely concerned about their country to just sit down and be quiet; to refrain from speaking out in the name of politeness or for the sake of being a good host; to show slavish, blind obedience and deference to a dishonest, war-mongering, human-rights-violating president.
Then there is this gem from Keith Olbermann who ends his comments by invoking Edward R Murrow. Video and transcript. Great stuff.
"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty," he said, in 1954.
"We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear - one, of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of un-reason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men; Not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were - for the moment - unpopular."
Bush served - no not in that sense.
In this sense.
There is a link to a .pdf copy of the subpoena. See these lovely words:
Add to the various other legal matters that are in motion and possibly more to come and recall these comments from the introduction to my They hate us for our values thread:
Accurately read Hamish, and it looks better by the day.
As to comments elsewhere about Bush having been stupid, do not forget the criminal, corrupt and extremely dangerous both to the system in the US and to the world.
Here is Paul Craig Roberts on Bush covering his backside.
His own party is suffering.
Stupid is as stupid does. Have to have this Rummy story.
How clever they are? Perhaps he has seen reports that they can tie their own shoelaces. Or it is a comparative analysis.
Manipulating the media. Lie with impunity. Oh for a sense of irony!
Back to proceedings, there is this on Plamegate.
Caution, Jason Leopold has had some misses.
What about the war? Oh, the war on the American people, according to Dave Lindorff.
And to finish off, how about another serving of hypocrisy?
More like a city in a cesspit under Dubya.
Anniversary of the day the scales fell away.
The desolation wrought by Hurricane Katrina, or, more correctly the government response to events is considered the tipping point to public perceptions of George W. Bush. From that time it has been a downhill slide. Now a year later ....
From DemocracyNow!
First Greg Palast and then an interview with Malik Rahim.
Frank Rich - Return to the scene of the crime.
An interview with Michael "Heckuva job" Brown.
Bush admits errors.
Read the above with the DemocracyNow! reports in mind. And things must reall be bad if Bush admits any error.
"President" Cheney.
More electoral shenanigans.
Al Gore on democracy under threat from media control.
Dahr Jamail interviews Ray McGovern.
"Fool me once ..."? Impeachment is too good for him and his puppet master.
"There ought to be limits to freedom"
The above words were spoken by George W Bush whilst Governor of Texas and Jim Hightower reports on Bush's efforts to limit freedom amongst other deeds.
Chatham House report finds that the war on terror has strengthened Iran.
Not, for the US, a desired outcome. Let us hope they do not seek a drastic remedy.
Two reports about Christian groups. The first is on a group the Taliban might feel a kinship with.
Elsewhere, things aren't going well for the Christian coalition.
Will the lessening power of the latter also diminish the prospects for the former or create a space to be filled?
To save a post I will place the link to Jon Stewart's take on the Bush press conference here instead of on Craig's thread. Hilarious piece, as we have come to expect.
Wicked, wicked ways
Good morning Angela, and yes you were right - sounds like peril, but whether it was is a subjective matter. Lots of people seemed to enjoy ... Errol Leslie Flynn 1909-59, live fast die young and leave the corpse of a 75 yr old. The quote in my previous was from The Adventures of Robin Hood, a true cinema classic and a joyous romp. The scene of the quote was Robin gatecrashing a feast in honour of Prince John. It was Maid Marian (Olivia de Havilland) who said "Why, you speak treason."
Down to work.
Yes, Joe wants Rummy's job.
Someone wanting to hold onto his job or has the bloom gone off the romance?
The alliance between George Bush and Tony Blair is in danger after it was revealed that the Prime Minister believes the President has 'let him down badly' over the Middle East crisis.
A senior Downing Street source said that, privately, Mr Blair broadly agrees with John Prescott, who said Mr Bush's record on the issue was 'crap'.
The source said: "We all feel badly let down by Bush. We thought we had persuaded him to take the Israel-Palestine situation seriously, but we were wrong. How can anyone have faith in a man of such low intellect?"
The disclosure comes ahead of a mini recall of Parliament to allow MPs to vent their fury over Mr Blair's handling of Israel's war with Hezbollah and whether the recent terror plot in Britain was affected by his role in the Iraq war.
Will the cunning runt rejoice thinking that now he will be Dubya's first best friend?
Here is the Frank Rich article reported yesterday.
The hyperbole that has greeted the Lamont victory in some quarters is far more revealing than the victory itself. In 2006, the tired Rove strategy of equating any Democratic politician's opposition to the Iraq war with cut-and-run defeatism in the war on terror looks desperate. The Republicans are protesting too much, methinks. A former Greenwich selectman like Mr Lamont isn't easily slimed as a reincarnation of Abbie Hoffman or an ally of Osama bin Laden. What Republicans really see in Mr Lieberman's loss is not a defeat in the war on terror but the specter of their own defeat. Mr Lamont is but a passing embodiment of a fixed truth: most Americans think the war in Iraq was a mistake and want some plan for a measured withdrawal. That truth would prevail even had Mr. Lamont lost.
Just what will they do to try to prevent their defeat?
Here is another perspective on threats.
For the last five years, we’ve been kept in a panic state over terrorism, told constantly that it not only presents an immediate threat to ourselves and the ones we love, but is a danger to our very civilisation. The result has been both that extremists have been more successful in spreading fear and authoritarian politicians have used this opportunity to reduce government transparency while eroding protections for human rights and the democratic process.
But is terrorism really the biggest threat facing the United States? And is more military spending really likely to make us safer?
Includes some interesting internal links.
Thanks for linking that "accident" article, I had seen it but it went on the backburner. An "accident watch" - good idea! "Suicide you say?" "Yes, he repeatedly ran over himself with a steam roller."
The worry is that some would believe it.
"Fluently"
G'day Angela, oh treason, yes, there is that suggestion about the neocons on the basis that in at least some cases their loyalties are dual at best and placing the interests of Israel (as they perceive them) above those of the US. Then there is the matter of the WH outing Valerie Plame - that has drawn the accusation as well.
So, when knee (or other) jerk reactions are accusations that investigation of these matters is anti-American, the response is just who is anti-American, if not the abovementioned folk?
The "unconstitutional" finding adds weight to that, oh that "goddamned piece of paper".
Proper investigations? What a novel idea - you will recall material here about the Congressional investigation into 9/11 - not exactly full and thorough and with a bit of convenient for reelection timing involved.
Lots of things smell but are difficult to prove. I tend more often to go for incompetence over conspiracy but there is one that is obvious - the conspiracy of lies to launch a war of aggression.
Must give a nod to Craig Rowley for his quote:
"I just want you to know that when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace."
Oh what a follow up to my previous comment on that thread:
The problem we have in trying to analyse the situation and arise at logical answers is that logic doesn't appear to play a big part in the plans of the Bush administration. Too many delusions and a trifle too messianic.
A perfect fit. And not forgetting other resonances.
Lieberman, oh what must the Republican candidate be thinking? Maybe Joe really does want to replace Rummy.
OK, what does my header "Fluently" represent? Uttered by an Australian actor in a famous movie in response to the accusation "You speak treason." I'm sure you know it - but a hint in case: Noone ever buckled a swash on the silver screen quite like this chap.
Pre-requisite poetry
Ah Bob, that cute lutle pencil moustchio, is that whom you mean,sounds like "peril"? And was that really his name? Which movie?
I can understand the delight editors have in getting just that header for the page,it is fun.
But more seriously than peril, did you catch this about the rendition flight investigations and surrounding suicide?(they just happen eh?)
http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/99443
It is about the SISMI and CIA . There is more about the greek bugging,blamed upon the US at the time and yet another suicide.Hmm.I still think we need a suicide/accident watch column,it is getting rather full of anti neoconners.
And Joe would luuuv to replace Rummy. But can he do poetry and impromptu Bohemian Grove impersonations?
Cheers
Richard: Angela I like the idea of an "accident" watch. It might also act as a deterrant. Any other opinions?
Some are born to endless night.
G'day Angela, thank you for your very kind words and for your contributions. Big thank you for that document - seeing it all in one place is very useful - and condemning.
Amidst the fear mongering Frank Rich sees signs that the US public is waking up. Subscription needed for entire article but this report gives you an idea.
On the matter of the NYTimes, here is an editorial about the Federal Court decision.
William Blum on perpetual fear. Begins with this quote from Douglas MacArthur:
And Blum:
Sleepers awake!
Here is an amusing, perhaps revealing (or rather, not revealing) item about articles of clothing that are not inspected.
On why no impeachment? Well, no visible stains on little blue dresses. The Constitution, international law etc are different matters. Basically it is due to a reordering of priorities within US politics, particularly in the contemporary Republican party. Partisanship unscrupulously promoted has taken precedence over the health of the system. There is the delusion that what they do is right. Reasons might be explored further on Craig's (G'day) thread.
But yes, beware of what might be attempted to hold onto office - the summary you provided is evidence of the lengths these people will go to.
treason
Hi Bob, isn't it amazing that after 5 years of hoohaaaar about plane terrorism we still have drug rings managing to smuggle 10kgs of cocaine in our airports via baggage handlers! "Mr Staley said before Chalmers' alleged involvement, baggage handlers had helped the group successfully smuggle 10 kilograms of cocaine into Australia via Sydney Airport. "
Now, we know how easy a bomb on board a plane would upset that flight and how easy a baggage handler can put it on....so all this fuss about face cream that could never make a bomb anyway and the bleeding obvious techiniques totally elude out moronic protectors.We have even HAD an investiagtion into it already by a Pom who said, yes,your airport security is farcical and the baggage handlers are full of organised crime mates. And look at how the Israelis killed the Lebanese leader they were after...a car door specially made to be added to his car and then boom one day.
So, simply replace an item with another specially made for the plane trip. it could be in the plane,like a fire extinguisher,seat, TV, or put it on board ,like a baby carriage,or surf board.etc. The bovinely obvious point that I am trying to make is all this defence against an attack is totally useless. With unlimited funds and the organised crime links any target is feasible with minimum inagination. it is the will and intention ot do it that must be targeted. But everyone has said that,academic studies have shown it, wise words have been spoken by silver haired gentlemen of previous statesman lives...so why this farsica war on terror method employed??
Why not a proper investigation into 911 and 7/7 and Bali bombing and Jakarta bombing and Bogota? Why all this rubbish about gum and glues. Why use infiltratorrs to stir these people up in underpriveliged areas,already angry with the world like McDAID did in the 7/7 group? Mcdaid, an ex SBS bomb expert. Ring any bells? Staakknife?? And as to the Congress ? the "Party " is a farce. the real game is the "Interest Group" And this article clearly shows who in the Republicans are in that interest group willing to support Neocon warmongeror Lieberman as his henchmen:
And when we look at the Clean Break paper that is the evil sister to the PNAC we see the big picture of treason against America for Israeli Neocon interests. Cheers
Courting favour and disfavour.
More views on the Federal Court decision. From Jennifer Van Bergen, a stronger ruling needed.
From Capitol Hill Blue - grounds for impeachment.
Dare one suggest that Bush's breaches are far more serious?
The response to the ruling has been predictable, such as:
Ray McGovern.
For further discussion, DemocracyNow! interviews Glenn Greenwald. Also features an interview with former UK ambassador Craig Murray on the latest terrorist plot - and suspicions it was revealed early to suit the Bush administration and related matters.
Same old, same old, Limp Dick is getting "intel" on Iran from the Office of Special Plans. You remember them, set up to provide that "intel" on Iraq which turned out to be a heap of ....
Reliable? Read on.
G'day Richard, I, for one, do read your material and take note, I am sure others do as well. I have had similar experiences here - post away and wonder how many are reading - but some drop by to let me know they are. Something I greatly appreciate. Take heart and keep on providing the evidence.
In my case the way things are going I might well see a result.
Cheers.
And likewise to all those who do drop by here.
will we remember?
Pending appeal, no "alleged" on this.
G'day Phil, thanks for the material ... and the reminder to people about the need for "alleged" to be inserted where appropriate, perhaps in place of "can you make the announcement now because an antiwar, Osama loving candidate just won a ballot".
For more on the ruling on the Federal Court ruling, see here. There are internal links to further material including to Salon. In the header piece there is the explanation of the importance of the decision:
The appeal process is the worry so we have to wait for that process to play out. In the meantime the decision in the F C is not a good look for some and we have this sort of situation already.
Irises readers will be familiar with the name Blackwell and the alleged shenanigans that have allegedly occurred on his watch. The concluding paragraphs:
Lots of shenanigans will be required. John Conyers will be rubbing his hands together in anticipation.
Interesting times ahead. Anything could happen. Anything.