Monday, June 07, 2004

Who was Elie Hobeika? Ask Karl Rove.

Who was Elie Hobeika?
Ask Karl Rove.




On September 15, 2001, just four days after the 9-11 attacks, CIA Director George Tenet provided President Bush with a Top Secret "Worldwide Attack Matrix"—a virtual license to kill targets deemed to be a threat to the United States in some 80 countries around the world. The Tenet plan, which was subsequently approved by Bush, essentially reversed the executive orders of four previous U.S. administrations that expressly prohibited political assassinations.

According to high level European intelligence officials, Bush's counselor, Karl Rove, used the new presidential authority to silence a popular Lebanese Christian politician [Elie Hobeika], who was planning to offer irrefutable evidence that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon authorized the massacre of hundreds of Palestinian men, women, and children in the Beirut refugee camps of Sabra and Shatilla in 1982. In addition, Sharon provided the Lebanese forces who carried out the grisly task.

After announcing he was willing to testify against Sharon, Hobeika became fearful for his safety and began moves to leave Lebanon. Hobeika was not aware that his threats to testify against Sharon had triggered a series of fateful events that reached well into the White House and Sharon's office.

On January 24, 2002, Hobeika's car was blown up by a remote controlled bomb placed in a parked Mercedes along a street in the Hazmieh section of Beirut.....

It is noteworthy that the State Department's list of global terrorist incidents for 2002 worldwide failed to list the car bombing attack on Hobeika and his party. The White House wanted to ensure the attack was censored from the report. The reason was simple: the attack ultimately had Washington's fingerprints on it.

High level European intelligence sources now report that Karl Rove personally coordinated Hobeika's assassination. The hit on Hobeika employed Syrian intelligence agents. Syrian President Bashar Assad was trying to curry favor with the Bush administration in the aftermath of 9-11 and was more than willing to help the White House. In addition, Assad's father, Hafez Assad, had been an ally of Bush's father during Desert Storm, a period that saw Washington give a "wink and a nod" to Syria's occupation of Lebanon. Rove wanted to help Sharon avoid any political embarrassment from an in absentia trial in Brussels where Hobeika would be a star witness. Rove and Sharon agreed on the plan to use Syrian Military Intelligence agents to assassinate Hobeika. Rove saw Sharon as an indispensable ally of Bush in ensuring the loyalty of the Christian evangelical and Jewish voting blocs in the United States....



[LINK-Online Journal]


Prior thought about Hobieika:

--The Assassination of Elie Hobeika

--Elie Hobeika's Assassination: Covering Up the Secrets of Sabra and Shatilla

--BBC Profile

--Robert Fisk- The Man Who Would Testify Against Sharon Is Blown Up

--Dawn.com

--Michael Young commentary

--Stark Portrait of Sabra & Shatila & Sharon depicted in World Premier Film "2000 TERRORISTS"..

--Jafi.org Info on Kahan Commission

Iraq hostage Matt Maupin family statement

Iraq hostage Matt Maupin family statement


Where is Pfc. Keith Matthew Maupin?


I would hope none of us have forgotten that Pfc. Keith Matthew (Matt) Maupin, a 20-year-old Army reservist, has been held hostage by insurgents since April 9 somewhere in Iraq.

I don't see very much about Matt in the mainstream news.

The silence is absolutely deafening.



For those who haven't forgotten, a recent statement from Keith & Carolyn Maupin (parents of Matt):


The Maupin family would like to thank everyone for supporting all soldiers as well as our son, Spc. Matt Maupin. The Yellow Ribbon campaign for our soldiers has been truly amazing and our spirits are lifted each time we see a new yellow ribbon displayed. Please continue to keep the yellow ribbons flying and candles lit to light their way home. A special thanks to the many people who have brought meals, provided religious support, established websites and for the many campaigns and vigils throughout the community and country. The outpouring of support and sentiment towards our family has been incredible, from both the military and civilian community. The emails, letters, cards, and prayers continue to arrive daily with well wishes for the safety of our son. Each one has touched our heart deeply during this difficult time. Although Matt has been captured for some time, we continue to pray daily for his safe return and the safe return of all soldiers to their loved ones. Our faith will never diminish and we ask that you keep all soldiers in your prayers and wish them a safe and speedy return.

Keith and Carolyn Maupin


[LINK-ChannelCincinatti.com]


Sunday, June 06, 2004

Iraq Weekend Updates

Iraq Weekend Updates

Thursday:

Tom Clancy: "Is Wolfowitz working for our side?"
[LINK-Informed Comment]

*Note- see my own recent comments [LINK] about the seemingly anti-American activities by some of the NeoCons.*


Friday:

The situation in Iraq acutely threatens Israeli security
[LINK-Informed Comment];

Iran Leader Slams Caretaker Government in Iraq [LINK];
Iraq as Failed State [LINK]


Saturday:

5 US Troops Killed in Iraq, 5 wounded,New Accord in Najaf
[LINK-Informed Comment]

Sunday:

Sistani Meets Muqtada; Ceasefire Taking Hold
[LINK-Informed Comment]

Who Is Francis Brooke?

Who Is Francis Brooke?

--Ahmed Chalabi's right-hand man in Baghdad
--An American consultant
--An Iraqi National Congress lobbyist
--Worked with the shady Rendon group on the Iraq project, a London-based C.I.A.-funded program to influence global opinion on Saddam Hussein.
--An evangelical Christian
--Ex-CIA consultant
--A recent consultant for BKSH and Associates, a company run by Charlie Black, a Republican Party veteran.
--A man who has boasted of engineering the war on Iraq by providing the United States the "evidence" it was seeking on (apparently non-existent)weapons of mass destruction along with Saddam's supposed ties to terrorists.


Where is Francis Brooke now?

--It's thought he scrambled back to Washington D.C.

Who wants to know?

An Iraqi judge...Judge Zuhair Al-Maliky of the central criminal court in Baghdad, to be precise.

Why?

Francis Brooke allegedly obstructed the Iraqi police from conducting a legitimate raid on Ahmed Chalabi's place. They say Brooke stopped the Chalabi raid by telling the police they didn't have the legal power to do it because "he was an American and they were Iraqis."

Reports from Iran suggest Francis Brooke acted as an intermediary between Washington and Tehran, passing letters between the two governments, which do not have diplomatic relations.

Brooke is trying to pass the buck and blame it all on a fellow by the name of Arras Habib, who is Chalabi's security chief.

[LINK]


More on Francis Brooke:

--Telegraph: Iraqi judge orders arrest of American aide to Chalabi
--Disinfopedia
--New Yorker- The Manipulator
--MSNBC- Chalabi-A questionable use of U.S. Funding
--Washington Post- Chalabi Aides Suspected of Spying for Iran; Raid at Leader's Home Targeted His Associates

Who Is John Israel?

Who Is John Israel?

[LINK]

Abu Ghraib Intelligence Soldier Describes Iraq Abuse in Detail

Abu Ghraib Intelligence Soldier Describes Iraq Abuse in Detail

[LINK]

Elvis chicken at Google Blog

Elvis chicken at Google Blog

I borrowed this recipe for fried chicken from Charlie Ayers at the Google Blog. It was a recipe he summoned up the nerve to extract from a southern cook named Robert Brown who had allegedly fried the stuff up for Elvis Presley at one point in time.
[LINK]

Buttermilk Fried Chicken Elvis Loved
*Google-sized portions; read all the way through to get the total amounts needed*

1/2 c thyme
1/4 c oregano
1/4 c basil
1/2 c onion powder
1/2 c garlic powder
1/2 c dry mustard
1/2 c paprika
1/4 c chili powder
1/2 c celery seed
2 Tbsp salt
1/2 c coriander
1/2 c cumin
1/3 c kosher salt
1/4 c cayenne pepper
1/2 c ground black pepper
1/4 c ground white pepper

3 gals. buttermilk
3 cases organic free range chicken (roughly 30 chickens, divided into 1.5- to 2-lb. sections)

Mix these amounts of the dry ingredients together in a large bowl, then whisk in the buttermilk until it's thoroughly mixed.

Pour the batter over the chickens and marinate for up to five days - keep refrigerated, of course.

For frying
Now mix another 4x the above dry ingredients, and add:
2 lbs. cornstarch
8 qts. all-purpose organic whole wheat flour

Dredge the marinated chicken pieces in the dry herbs/flour/cornstarch mixture mix.
Fry the dredged chicken in a large skillet with hot peanut oil @ 375 degrees. Once chicken has reached a golden brown color, finish cooking it in the oven.



Thanks for sharing, Charlie!

Tie-runn-eee

Tie-run-eee

Bush said today, in tribute to former President Reagan, that he had saved the world from an "era of fear and tyranny".

Ronald Reagan never would have pronounced the word 'TYRANNY' as TIE-RUNN-EEE.

Good heavens.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"My father crapped bigger ones than George Bush."

--Ronald P. Reagan


Saturday, June 05, 2004

President Match

President Match


Go here to take the test.

My results were:

1. Kucinich Score: 90%


2. Kerry Score: 74%


3. Bush Score: 5%



Abu gah rabe abu gaaa rabe ahb ahb abuuuu gaaaaaah

Abu gah rabe abu gaaa rabe ahb ahb abuuuu gaaaaaah


Oh, please, please listen to this!
*..the first two minutes are all I'm asking!*

Friday, June 04, 2004

Col. Dana Pittard: A Gentleman Among Occupiers

Col. Dana Pittard: A Gentleman Among Occupiers

Army Col. Dana Pittard's name crossed my path again today. I've come to the conclusion that he is a gentleman.

Being a gentleman, even when faced with the hardest decisions, is a reflection of what I believe we're missing today in our American leaders. It's reassuring to know there are men like Dana Pittard on America's side.

With corresponding gentlemanly leadership in Washington D.C., I think this mission may have been a winning success by now. I realize now that this is the component we've been missing. There are few in the Bush administration that have acted with discernible grace as gentleman. The greater world knows it and has reacted accordingly by leaving us, for the better part, to our own (ugly) political devices in Iraq. They see we've made our own disgraceful bed, and it's in that bed we sleep while men like Dana Pittard put a decent face on some downright indecent policies.

I am convinced Col. Pittard is doing his personal best for this country. I pray for equally decent leadership to help him succeed...leadership that will be seen by Iraqis as having genuine motives with prompt follow-through on important promises.

Let's face it..thanks to President Bush, we unnecessarily broke Iraq and now we've bought it. We are at their service now, if we look at this as ethical business (and we must). The overall personal customer service in Iraq stinks so far. An ethical businessman is always a gentleman (or lady).

I wish Bush was a gentleman. He's a chickenhawk, a shifty-eyed liar, an inexperienced and irresponsible Texas-tough talker (double-daring killers to attack our troops), a bumbling buffoon.

Because human beings are prone to illusion, the sounds and sights of battle—the groans of the wounded, the maimed bodies of one’s comrades—may remain in the mind for many years, like a cloud that confuses judgment. Hence, a man who has fought on the battlefield and has later risen to high office may be fearful of leading his people to war. Such weakness does not afflict the armchair warrior, who at all times is firm in his resolve.
--Evan Eisenberg



We need more Dana Pittards. If anyone can win this war, it will be the men and women who come forth with a force of genuine compassion and respect.

In the following story, an Iraqi Shi'ite cleric claims that a decent gesture by Col. Pittard did not change his views on the occupation. You simply cannot recognize a friend when you and your brothers and sisters are being assaulted.

I put myself in that Muslim cleric's place. My own current views on our occupation of Iraq aren't much different than his.

I believe, however, that Col. Pittard's described gesture and kindness is something that will not soon be forgotten by the cleric.

It's small gestures like these (along with larger gestures such as securing world cooperation) that will eventually, (with better leadership in Washington), change the hearts of freedom-seeking Iraqis.

The story:


[A senior Shiite Muslim cleric, Ali Abdul Kareem Madani] has his own reasons for disliking the U.S. occupation. He returned to Baqubah on May 25 after nearly 10 months in seven different Army detention centers, where he was taken after being accused of promoting anti-U.S. violence early in the occupation.

The charges against him have not been dropped, U.S. officials said. But Army Col. Dana J.H. Pittard, who recently took command here and realized Madani's position of influence, helicoptered to Umm Qasr -- about 325 miles to the southeast, at the head of the Persian Gulf -- to secure his release from prison and escort him home, according to Iraqi and U.S. sources.

Pittard has shown himself to be a gentleman, Madani said, but the gesture did not change his views on the U.S. occupation.
[LINK]




*For insight into the security mess in Ba'qubah, read Eric Jewett's ("Baghdad Eric's") entry about his frustrating experience there. Mr. Jewett has been working for the Coalition Provisional Authority as an advance representative and special assistant to Paul Bremer.

Tenet Should Not Be Bush Sacrificial Lamb

Tenet Should Not Be Bush Sacrificial Lamb

Knowing Porter Goss is the likely replacement for George Tenet and knowing Porter Goss is the Republican chair of the Intelligence Committee who is skewering George Tenet seems a definite conflict of interest.

It seems the Bush administration would love to make Tenet the fall guy for "misleading them about WMD".

If Bush's motive for war on Iraq was actually WMD, I'd understand.

From their standpoint, WMD was not the Bush administration's reason for the Iraq war.

WMD was just the way the President Bush (and his cabinet) conned the public..using George Tenet's bad advice knowing fully-well they shouldn't have. (per Bob Woodward's "slam-dunk" account).

Tenet was the most convenient of all people to leave his post.

One resignation does not come close to resolving the problem in Iraq or relieving Bush of his complicity in leading us to a totally unnecessary war in Iraq.

The smelliest skunks remain firmly in place and perhaps they will only be removed when we eject them from their undeserved positions in November.

If Bush doesn't have the guts to do it, we Americans will do it (provided Diebold hasn't already arranged the electoral swindle).

Thursday, June 03, 2004

Like Sunnis, Shiites Now Love the Extra (extra) Crispy

Like the Sunnis, Shiites Now Love the Extra (extra) Crispy

...and Americans are less safe than ever..

I had to quote this gem from Juan Cole. From 'Making Americans Safer':


The riots in Karachi on Tuesday, protesting a bombing at a Shiite mosque in Pakistan's major port, involved setting fire to American fast food outlets. This sort of attack had previously been common among radical Sunnis, but it is ominous that now the Shiite mobs are asking for very extra crispy KFC. Now I find that in my old stomping grounds of Lucknow, India, where the Shiite community had been so kind to me in the early 1980s, Americans are now unwelcome. Why, if the Bush administration has any more successes in the War on Terror, I just don't know how we'll be able to survive them.

[LINK]


*Actually, this won't be the first time Extra Crispy was ordered..just a batch of new customers.*

Also, be sure to see the cheery Sistani Fatwa on the New Government of Iraq!

Porter Goss raised as one possibility for Tenet job

Porter Goss raised as one possibility for Tenet job

Ex-CIA Goss poo-pooed the fury over Valerie Plame outing as "partisan politics"; Claimed CIA leak was not worthy of committee action

I heard a pundit on a cable news network name Porter Goss (R-Fla), an ex-CIA-man, as a fitting replacement for George Tenet. It's out in the press, too.

I certainly am not impressed with the look of his past voting record in Congress, from a purely ideological standpoint. Look at what he said indicating his feelings about the non-importance of the treasonous outing of Joseph Wilson's wife, agent Valerie Plame. Does that matter, you ask? Nonchalance about this outing of an agent coming from an ex-CIA, I should say so! Given the fact we need to regain out trust in someone to be totally independent from partisanship and totally independent in their CIA position, I'd have to say YES--it matters a lot.

Interestingly, Juan Cole believes Tenet's resignation may have much to do with the Valerie Plame case.

I'm sure he's not the best person to put into the job at this precarious and divisive time in our nation. I have a feeling we'll wind up getting him, anyhow.

FYI, here is a question posed to Goss just after 9-11 in an interview with PBS/Frontline:


FRONTLINE: Do we need a James Bond agency that goes out and basically whacks people?

Porter Goss: No, we don't. We don't need that. ... We have been trying to redefine our defense capabilities to respond to the kinds of threats we have today, and we're trying to do the same exact thing with intelligence, change the capabilities we have. Do we need more arrows in the quiver of small "c," covert action? The answer is yes. There is no doubt about that. Is it a James Bond assassination squad? Certainly not. It's a great movie, but movies, unfortunately, are not reality.

Back in the day when James Bond was popular, that was sort of the image of intelligence. Those were, in many ways, the heydays. ... Now we're in the position where we have had to overcome this sort of bad period where intelligence is not only unfashionable, it's un-American, and we don't want to do that any more. We've had to resist that, rebuild the financing for it, rebuild the recruiting, rebuild the morale. It has been a very hard problem, and we are caught a little short, and that's one of the reasons.

So when you say, *"Was this a cultural problem that we had?" The answer is partly yes, because we decided that the world didn't need quite as much intelligence, and we weren't sure what it exactly it should be. So we backed off from some stuff. I can't say we would have prevented the tragedies of last Tuesday if we'd had more intelligence. I'd just say the odds were higher that we could have.


[LINK]


From an informative Washington Post article about Goss:

Before President Bush's election, Goss's name surfaced as a candidate for the top CIA job amid speculation that Bush would replace Director George Tenet, a Clinton appointee.

Goss supported Tenet as a holdover and has not wavered in his support amid calls by others for Tenet's resignation after 9/11. After blasting Tenet last fall, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), the Senate Intelligence Committee vice chairman, also described Goss as "close to a lot of people" at the CIA, telling Roll Call, "I don't think we should be too close to anybody we have oversight of, because you can't do your job."

But other prominent Republicans -- namely Bush and Vice President Cheney -- maintain great faith in Goss. Though Goss had said he would not run again, Cheney was dispatched earlier this year and helped persuade him not to retire. Goss also recalls seeing the president on two occasions and quotes him thusly:

" 'Porter, listen, I really want you to stay.' He said, 'This intelligence stuff is important. I want you here.' " And, Bush told him, "You've got it exactly right."

[LINK]

George Tenet Has Resigned

George Tenet Has Resigned

The CIA deputy director will serve as acting director until a replacement is found.

The singing birds in the Rose Garden were far more animated and interesting than Bush when he made shell-shocked comment on the resignation today.
[LINK TO BUSH REMARKS ON TENET- VIDEO]

[LINK]


Tenet's biggest mistake was behaving more as part of the Bush administration and less as a properly independent Director. That was not his job. He especially crossed the line on WMDs in Iraq, where he, Colin Powell, and the Pentagon all provided tainted information that was not nearly accurate and contributed to the (patently false) rationale to make pre-emptive attack.



I'll never understand why Tenet and Powell sat together at the UN and gave that faulty dog and pony show about WMDs in February, 2003.

I somehow trust, from sheer intuition, that Tenet and Powell were somehow ill-used and are truly, truly decent men at heart.

Tenet is going to spend quality time with his family. I wish him happiness.

It's odd timing....while Ashcroft stands at a podium and tells us terrorists are ready to strike domestically, Tenet walks away.

These are strange days, indeed.

Now Colin Powell (and the good Mr. Armitage) should turn in resignations and leave the worst of the liars behind to rot away.

Books should be written.

'60 Minutes' appearance schedule slots should be filled.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Robert G. Kaiser, Associate Editor at the Washington Post, thinks (perhaps) Tenet must have been livid to discover (if it's actually the case) that someone in or affiliated with the Pentagon had caused the disaster of Ahmad Chalabi telling the Iranians that their code had been broken. He says he can imagine him thinking this was the straw that broke the camel's back. [LINK]

Meanwhile, the used-up-spook Ahmad Chalabi is bad-mouthing George Tenet. I really don't think that's going to go over big with the American public now that Chalabi's been soundly trashed, sliced, and diced in the American media, deservedly or undeservedly. His credibility has been "flushed from the bathroom of our hearts", as the late singer Johnny Cash would have said.

See Miss-information for a look at reactions around the world about the Tenet resignation.

Bush seeks credibility for Iraq failure through WWII analogy

Bush seeks credibility for Iraq failure through WWII analogy


"........mustn't say Viet Nam.........say Hitler...
.....mustn't say Viet Nam...say Pearl Harbor..."


What can we do about a President whose brain-washing "vision-speeches" have no connection to facts on the ground?
*(We could start by not re-electing the buffoon)*


Sidney Blumenthal (who is NeoCon Michael Ledeen's favorite "liar") rips away the political brainwash-curtain to reveal the simple fact that Iraq is far closer to a VietNam than it will ever be to WWII.

But don't ask Sidney. Ask the fine folks at the Army War College in Carlisle, Pennslyvania:



....on the eve of Bush's appearance at the Army War College, its strategic studies institute released a report, Vietnam and Iraq: Differences, Similarities and Insights, observing the similarities as failures of strategy, maintaining public support and nation building.

It also noted:

"Prospects for creating a stable, prosperous, and democratic Iraq are problematic, and observers and decision makers should not be misled by false analogies to American state-building success in Germany and Japan after World War II."

"They haven't known what they've been doing since the statue of Saddam came down," a military strategist at the Army War College told me. "Bush's speech was a vision speech with no connection to facts on the ground. That seems to be the limit of his understanding and ability. Even Vietnam doesn't look so bad in retrospect." But Bush will not make reference to "Vietnam and Iraq" in Europe.

[LINK-Guardian-Can You say VietNam? Bush won't.]

Pre-War Iraq: Journalists forgot what journalism is for

Pre-War Iraq: Journalists forgot what journalism is for


I found a particular quote from this Boston Phoenix article too important to be allowed to pass without special mention:



If Judith Miller, the New York Times, and the mainstream media in general had done a better job of covering the run-up to the war in Iraq — if they had given greater voice to the skeptics, if they had made it clear that the case for WMD was not a "slam-dunk," to borrow one of CIA director George Tenet’s favorite expressions — perhaps a few more moderates in Congress would have voted against authorizing President Bush to go war. Perhaps public-opinion polls would have been more mixed. Perhaps a few fence-straddling commentators would have gotten off the fence.

But the case for Iraq’s weapons capabilities and terrorist ties couldn’t have been absolutely disproven any more than it could have been proven. The media didn’t fail because they were unsuccessful in stopping the war. Rather, they failed because, in all too many instances, they parroted the White House’s rationale for war rather than subjecting it to rigorous, skeptical analysis. That is to say, they failed because they forgot what journalism is for.

[LINK]



Wednesday, June 02, 2004

A Vet Compares Pres. Candidates' Veterans' Websites

A Vet Compares Pres. Candidates' Veterans' Websites

From the Voice of a Veteran blog:


I wondered how each of the candidates was communicating with these and other veterans apart from the rhetoric and the ads. Both George Bush and John Kerry have veterans' links on their websites.

John Kerry's veterans' website talks about veterans and their needs, and includes his Compact With Veterans:

· Providing Mandatory funding of Veterans' Healthcare
· Grant Full Concurrent Receipt to Disabled Military Retirees
· Make the Veterans Administration Responsive
· Properly Compensate Soldiers and their Families for their Service
· Full Accounting for Missing POW/MIAs
· Combating Homelessness
· Supporting Members of the National Guard and Reservists
· Protecting Family members who lose a loved-one
· Don't Overstretch the Military

George Bush's veterans' website talks about himself and what he says he has done for veterans - almost nothing about what he will do for them in the future.

There's a clear difference. John Kerry talks about veterans. George Bush talks mostly about himself. Check it out for yourself. And then make the choice vets - who do really believe is thinking about you?
[LINK-Entry of June 2, 2004]


SEE:

VETERANS-THE BUSH RECORD
Years of Broken Commitments with More to Come (pdf)

Bush Compares Unnecessary War in Iraq to WWII

Bush Compares Unnecessary War in Iraq to WWII



Franklin D. Roosevelt must be spinning in his grave like chicken rotisserie.

The only D-Day many Americans may recall is DUPED-DAY in October, 2002 when we were misled toward unnecessary war upon Iraq, the White House press laid back like good little children, and our Congress pliantly acquiesed by passing the Iraq Resolution (despite the protesting cries of millions around the globe).

Saddam Hussein did not sneak-attack us on 9-11. There was no connection.

There were no WMDs to threaten us (save one shell containing Sarin--pitiful proof for bringing on Shock and Awe).

We were told to expect roses and candies. Instead, we got over 800 filled coffins (toll rising daily).

All we did was take a weakened nation and beat her down and drag her to her knees; then invite the violent scourge of civil society (with a "Bring 'em on") to cross her borders in order to make her the "central front for the war on terror". SHAMEFUL!

Bush--you are no FDR!


[LINK]

Zogby: The Story Behind Chalabi, Feith and Company

The Story Behind Chalabi, Feith and Company
by Dr. James J. Zogby


...Both men [Chalabi and Feith] were willing and eager accomplices of each other’s missions. Both wanted a US war to topple the hated dictator and would, apparently, go to any length to make that happen.

...One of [Chalabi's] nephews, Salem Chalabi, chose not to hold a government position. Instead, he established the Iraq International Law Group (IILG), which describes itself as “your professional gateway to the new Iraq.” Assisting Salem in setting up the IILG was a partner Marc Zell (the IILG’s website has been registered in Zell’s name). Here the plot thickens...

...Zell [now 'Chairman of Republicans Abroad'] had for many years been Feith’s partner in their Washington-Tel Aviv law firm, Feith and Zell (FANDZ). FANDZ had been set up when Feith left government to pursue the work of a “foreign agent” representing Turkey and some Israeli interests.Following the Baghdad opening of the IILG, Zell soon opened, in the US, an office for Zell, Goldberg & Co., which promises to assist “American companies in their relations with the US government in connection with Iraq’s reconstruction projects.” It is interesting to note that Zell, Goldberg & Co still uses the website FANDZ, the site of the old Feith and Zell firm. So when Zell boasts his connections to government, businesses know exactly what is meant. In the relatively short period of time since the fall of the Baath Party regime, IILG and Zell, Goldberg, & Co have facilitated contracts in the tens, possibly hundreds of millions of dollars.

...What is intriguing is that in all the recent US media coverage of the changing fortunes of both Feith and Chalabi, there is very little mention made of the questionable business dealings by those closely connected to them. Only a handful of reporters have actually dug deeply into this story.

[LINK]



Related article:

Ye of Little Feith

Why one of Doug Feith's underlings thinks he might go to jail.
By Laura Rozen

Excerpt:


For months, news organizations have reported that the information from defectors provided by Chalabi to Feith and the U.S. government had turned out to be bogus. Then, earlier this month, a Newsweek article said U.S. intelligence had intercepted Chalabi passing sensitive U.S. information to Iran.

An article in Salon on May 3 then quoted Feith's own former law partner, L. Marc Zell, calling Chalabi a "treacherous, spineless turncoat." (In a follow-up letter to Salon on May 5, Zell denied consenting to the interview.) After the conference, Feith's deputy, Middle East expert Harold Rhode, furtively discussed Zell's reputed comments in a huddle in the corner. "What's up with Zell?" someone asked Rhode. "I have no idea," Rhode replied, shaking his head.

For his part, Feith said he hadn't seen the Salon article. Nevertheless, he may have taken a look after being told that the article, citing Iraqi Defense Minister (and Chalabi nephew) Ali Allawi, reported that he would be forced to resign his job at the Pentagon later this month.

When asked about this by a reporter after the conference, Feith let out a pained chuckle. "They are always saying that," he said, before being rescued by Pletka and ushered from the room.

Others, however, are less sanguine.

"He was very arrogant," Karen Kwiatkowski, Feith’s former deputy, says, describing what it was like to work with him. "He doesn't utilize a wide variety of inputs. He seeks information that confirms what he already thinks. And he may go to jail for leaking classified information to The Weekly Standard." (As she explains, an article appeared in The Weekly Standard that included a leaked memo written by Feith alleging ties between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.)


[LINK]



A final note:

New Iraqi President Allawi is a cousin of Salem Chalabi, Ahmed's son, who drafted much of the Transitional Administrative Law in Iraq, is involved in highly questionable deals with Doug Feith and Mark Zell, and will likely be running the prosecution of Saddam Hussein.

P.J. O'Rourke's New Melodrama

P.J. O'Rourke's New Melodrama

P.J. O'Rourke has his shorts in an uproar over fear about Israel's being "militarily attacked" should the U.S. change course in Iraq. Funny, last time I checked, Israel had something like 400 nuclear warheads to its list of defensive assets. The rest of his stubbornly ideological liberal-hating, U.N.-shunning worst-case scenarios are a melodramatic hoot.

Get real, O'Rourke. You sound like such a melodrama queen.

If you call that satire, I have to tell you: It reeks of flailing Bush-defense.

I can recognize a desperate display when I see one.

I see one.


[LINK]

The Road to Losing Hearts and Minds: "Iraq-On the Brink"

The Road to Losing Hearts and Minds:
"Iraq-On The Brink"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I'll begin with a news article from Yahoo News titled "Three US soldiers killed in Iraq", dated November 23, 2003, which included the following (limited) information:

"We want to present a new image of Iraq, different from that of the old regime. In years to come, Iraq will need the support of the United States."

--Hoshyar Zebari, Foreign Minister of interim gov't in Iraq

"I want to erase the image of the detestable past..."

--Mrs Rand Rahim Franki, who previously worked for the Iraq Foundation in Washington.

A US soldier was killed and two wounded when their vehicle struck an improvised explosive device in Baqubah, north the capital, 4th Infantry Division spokesman Colonel Bill MacDonald said. Sunday's deadly Baqubah attack came a day after US troops seized a former lieutenant general in Saddam's army, Taha Hassan Abbas, in a raid in the town........"

Question:

Would we have understood the situation better if we'd been made fully aware of what had actually occurred the night before? Would we have had a different opinion on the entire Iraq situation if our media had been independent and far more objective?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



In a Boston Phoenix feature titled "On-the-ground-reality TV", there's an interview by Jason Vest with seasoned independent journalist Ross Coulthart. Coulthart is the featured journalist in a yet-to-be-released documentary titled "Iraq-On The Brink" (produced by Nick Farrow) which explains how the "disconnect" of the Iraqi heart and mind occurred during and after the intended American "liberation" of Iraq. Coulthart shows how, because of improper media coverage and/or distribution, the American people don’t seem to realize the incalculable damage that has been done in Iraq. He refers to footage taken of the arrest of a suspected Ba'athist leader, Taha Hassan Abbas, taken from his home in the middle of the night.

Coulthart says: "You can see on the face of the young woman [a family member of the arrested leader] that her heart and mind are gone forever to the Americans. When we first saw this footage, the first reaction of our Iraqi fixers was absolute anger — I can only begin to guess what the reaction is to the scenes from Abu Ghraib."

Coulthart says he’s not sure what’s more troubling: that the arrest of a former Iraqi lieutenant general apparently merited no coverage; that footage showing an arrest almost completely at odds with the official account was not distributed in its entirety by Associated Press Television News; or that what was distributed wasn’t of interest to any APTN clients.

Coulthart also claims that, while a handful of journalists has provided a steady stream of exemplary reporting, there are some who feel that whatever good reporting has been done since the end of "major combat operations" has involved an even greater uphill battle for attention than usual. Why? Because the Bush administration’s practice of embedding journalists with the troops set the tenor of Iraq-war reporting. (The lack of independent reporting naturally lead to propagandizing rather than objectivity).

The New York Times recently presented its own mea culpa about their own angst about errant pre-war and 'combat-phase' reporting.

I think the whole of the American media needs to reflect and repent for the misleading reports from Iraq during that period of time.

Like Abu Ghraib, it was a collective sin..not just the actions of a few scapegoats. Judith Miller, although terribly negligent, wasn't the only reporter who failed to be dependent upon limited sources and/or properly objective.

As long as the media continues down this path, we will continue to have leaders like G.W. Bush who are allowed to lie and get away with waging unnecesary wars.

If we choose to stand back and let this happen in silence, we will deserve the consequences of the re-election of such a leader.

Excerpt from video by Ross Coulthart:



The soldiers don’t exactly approach with stealth. They kick open a gate to the house’s yard. What happens next..illustrates a perilous gap in American and Iraqi cultural understanding.

Coulthart voice-over on video:
"First, you have to understand that guns are ubiquitous in Iraq — most people have them, and it’s very common for them to shoot them in the air all the time for any number of reasons — from celebrations to anger to whatever. Burglary has become very common in the past year, and oftentimes, if people hear something outside their homes at night, they’ll fire a shot or two into the air to scare burglars away. Now, you could just go up to a house, like other soldiers do, and just knock on the door. But some treat these missions like full-fledged combat operations and start kicking things in with guns drawn, and then you get what happens next. The officer’s son — thinking the soldiers are thieves — goes to the roof of the house and fires into the air to scare them away." The response from US soldiers: "We’ve got a shooter on the roof!" followed by a hail of bullets loosed at the house.

The next shot — of film, that is — shows Abbas, a clearly unarmed, middle-aged, balding man in pajamas, hands above his head, trembling as he stands across from at least a half-dozen US soldiers whose M-16s are trained on him.

Voiceover:

"Inside the house, the officer surrenders, but he doesn’t understand what the Americans are saying — and they don’t have a translator. Abbas repeats the only English he appears to know — "Welcome! Welcome!" — over and over again, keeping his hands far above his head as the Fourth Infantry Division soldiers handle the situation in a way almost exactly the opposite of how the Third Cav troops acted in similar circumstances. The Fourth Infantry soldiers’ manner foreshadows the images at Abu Ghraib that the world would see months later.."


(Photo credit: Journeyman Pictures


"Want me to shoot him in the leg?" one soldier yells. "I might shoot you!" another growls at Abbas. As Abbas stands motionless in the doorway between his kitchen and the next room, one soldier shouts, "He’s trying to draw us in there!" Another solider half mutters, half yells, "I don’t give a sh*t, I’m gonna shoot, I’m gonna shoot, I’m gonna shoot!" while another hollers, "I can shoot him in the leg!"

"Get the f*ck over here, get the f*ck over here," shouts another, while the previous soldier repeats his desire to shoot Abbas in the leg, adding that someone should also "shoot him in the foot."

Abbas steps away from the doorway and moves his back to the wall.

Voiceover:

"The Iraqi officer, thinking he’s about to die, can now be heard praying. The American response is far from ecumenical, with one soldier yelling, "Who the f*ck are you talking to? Who the f*ck are you talking to? Shut the f*ck up! Shut the f*ck up!" The soldier then grabs the man’s pajama top and hurls him across the room into the hands of another soldier, who in turn hurls him into a chair that goes flying as the Iraqi sprawls onto the floor. One soldier begins to kick Abbas, who, though on his back, has his hands in the air again, repeating "Welcome! Welcome!" Three soldiers put their gun barrels in his face, with one solider yelling repeatedly, "Shoot him!" Another asks, "Who’s shooting?" when he hears gunfire from the roof, and then yells, "Bullsh*t" at the prone Abbas, who continues to repeat, "Welcome!"

The next sequence shows the capture of Abbas’s adult son, who had shot the gun off on the roof; as he’s being restrained, a soldier’s voice barks menacingly, "Take the camera off him." The film then resumes with a shot of two women — apparently Abbas’s wife and daughter — kneeling on the ground at gunpoint, their hands on their heads, their faces pictures of anger and humiliation.

The final shot shows the former general. Though fleeting, it is, perhaps, the most disturbing sequence of the film, given that in his previous appearance Abbas was terrified but physically unharmed. Now, his arms are restrained behind his back. His face is battered and bruised. His left eye is beginning to swell shut. The front of his shirt is stained with blood, and a stream of snot and blood dangles from his left nostril.."

Final voiceover:

"No one here was killed, But it’s raids like this that can only fuel the resentment against Coalition forces."
[LINK]


[LINK TO VIDEO TRAILER OF "Iraq-On the Brink"]


A quote from the documentary:

"What’s fuelling at least part of the antagonism towards Americans here in Iraq from ordinary Iraqis is the growing suspicion that the Americans aren’t being entirely honest about their long-term strategic intentions with this country. There’s talk of permanent American military bases here in Iraq and once you’ve seen this sprawling Al Asad airbase three hours west of Baghdad – another of Saddam Hussein’s follies – it’s not hard to see why if you were an American policymaker, you wouldn’t be leaving in a hurry. Israel’s just minutes flying time by jet in that direction. Syria, same thing in that direction. An unstable Saudi Arabia, about ten minutes by fighter in that direction. And Iran about the same time over there. Indeed, why would America be leaving in a hurry?"




What Force Is Your Soul?

What Force Is Your Soul?

Earth

You are guided by the earth itself. People like you are very rare. You are in tune with everything around you. While you try to bring peace to the world, you can sometimes create pain to those around you. You generally don't take risks.


What force is your soul?

"Fahrenheit 9/11" Gets U.S. Distributor

"Fahrenheit 9/11" Gets
U.S. Distributor



At Last!



"Fahrenheit 9/11" will hit American theaters this June 25th, thanks to Lions Gate Films, IFC Films and the Fellowship Adventure Group, which was formed by Harvey and Bob Weinstein.

[LINK]


CBS: Enron Was Devoid of Ethics

CBS: Enron Was Devoid of Ethics

CBS News has revealed their exclusive story on the totally unethical company known as Enron. You can hear audio-proof that they were no better than modern-day pirates who loved the fact that Bush was their Privateer-in-Chief.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has released two Enron memos describing company plans to inflate energy prices during California's energy crisis of 2000.
The practices were considered so outrageous, that an attorney with the California Public Utilities Commission dubbed them a "smoking gun memo."

Enron memo, Dec. 6, 2000 .pdf file

Enron memo, Dec. 8, 2000 .pdf file

Go here for video of Enron filthy-mouthed scammer-scums.

SEE ANONYMOSES'COMMENTS ON ENRON.

[LINK]

President Bush: Flip-Flopper-In-Chief

President Bush:
Flip-Flopper-In-Chief

From the Center for American Progress-
A documentation of President Bush's serial flip-flopping, which raises serious questions about whether Congress and foreign leaders can rely on what he says.

[LINK]

Tuesday, June 01, 2004

Allawi was responsible for 45-minute WMD claim

Allawi was responsible for 45-minute WMD claim

[LINK-Independent UK]

The Lying Game-Iraq A to Z

The lying game

An A-Z of the Iraq war and its aftermath, focusing on misrepresentation, manipulation, and mistakes

From Atta all the way to Zarqawi. (with Mobile biological labs and NucularNuclear programmes smack dab in the middle)

[LINK-Independent UK]

The Education of Alexandra Polier

The Education of Alexandra Polier
Falsely accused of having an affair with John Kerry, the “intern” sifts through the mud and the people who threw it.


Alexandra Polier (Photo credit: Robert Maxwell)

[LINK-New York Metro]


David Brock asks Rumsfeld to boot Rush Limbaugh

David Brock asks Rumsfeld to boot Rush Limbaugh

David Brock of Media Matters for America has sent a letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld requesting that he consider removing Rush Limbaugh from American Forces Radio.

The liberal media watchdog group complains that Limbaugh, whose program is broadcast at taxpayer expense for an hour a day to U.S. troops overseas, has “spent the past four weeks condoning and trivializing the abuse, torture, rape and possible murder of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. guards at the Abu Ghraib prison.”

[LINK]


Howard Dean turns to the written word

Howard Dean turns to the written word

[LINK]



(Photo Credit: SitNews.com)

See Howard's first Cagle column:

Electronic Voting - Not Ready For Prime Time
By Howard Dean


Excerpt:

Some politicians believe a solution to this problem can be found in electronic voting. Recently, the federal government passed legislation encouraging the use of "touch screen" voting machines even though they fail to provide a verifiable record that can be used in a recount. Furthermore, this equipment cannot even verify as to whether a voter did indeed cast a ballot for their intended candidate. Unfortunately, this November, as many as 28% of Americans - 50 million people - will cast ballots using machines that could produce such unreliable and unverifiable results.
[LINK-SitNews.com]


Understanding the Howard Dean Internet Effect

Understanding the Howard Dean Internet Effect
And Why It Matters to Marketers
From: AdAge.com
[[LINK]]


Hitchens sinks to ad hominem attack on Moore

Hitchens sinks to ad hominem attack on Moore

I thought I'd tune in to CSPAN this morning to watch Christopher Hitchens. I watched to the point where he said (about Michael Moore):

"Europeans think Americans are fat, vulgar, greedy, stupid, ambitious and ignorant and so on. And they've taken as their own, as their representative American... someone who actually embodies all of those qualities."

He lacked grace. For the first time, he totally lost me. I turned him off at that point.

Early on, he was asked if he knew anything about the new Iraqi interim President. He admitted knew nothing about him. I wonder, if in a few months, he'll claim to be an expert on the man he claimed to know nothing about today.

Bush vs. Kerry- Respective advantages in presidential race

Bush vs. Kerry- Respective advantages in presidential race

ABC News' Political Note lays out what they see as respective political advantages in the Bush/Kerry race:


Bush:

1. The war on terror serving as a potential trump issue, a la the communist threat during the Cold War.

2. Incumbency in a time of national crisis will seem safe(r) to a lot of voters.

3. The sustaining value of the "Bush brand" (highlighted again this month with 41@80).

4. The likeability and accessibility stops haven't even been pulled out yet.

5. Laura Bush.

6. An improving economy and seemingly successful POTUS projection of "if even one American is looking for work, that's too many" caring.

7. The rise of the Republican 527s.

8. Candidate confidence and rapid response confidence.

9. The political press' general belief the Kerry probably won't win, and inclination to scrutinize the Kerry "record" more than the Bush "record."

10. Most imaginable October Surprises favor the President.

11. The skew of the Electoral College.



Kerry:

1. An energized base which (we are now ready to say) viscerally dislikes President Bush as much as the right disliked Clinton. (Although no accusations of domestic murders yet..)

2. Stew of wrong track, events in Iraq, gas prices, and other only semi-controllable factors.

3. Famous capacity to close strong.

4. Potential week or more of positive coverage if he picks a good running mate.

5. Don't forget health care.

6. The regularity of the circularity of history (one-term Bush presidencies featuring a war victory in Iraq, stratospheric poll ratings, and, then, decline...).

7. The head start of the Democrat 527s.

8. Unchallenged in key Blue States such as California, Illinois, and New York.

9. Daughters, stepsons, vets unveiled big time in Boston.

10. In what would be a Bush irony (and The Note tries exceedingly hard not to misuse the term), the President's team's apparent* belief that Kerry is a phony, liberal, hypocritical Francophile might just blind them so much to his appeal to voters that they (mis)underestimate him all the way through November, and never take him seriously enough to stop him.

11. The political press' general preference for (a) underdogs; (b) challengers; (c) change; (d) Democrats; (e) good stories.


[LINK]

Today's Developments with Iraqi Interim Government

Today's Developments with Iraqi Interim Government

This from Yahoo News / AP:

The U.S. and Saudi-educated head of Iraq's Governing Council was named president of the interim Iraqi government Tuesday, after the Americans' preferred candidate turned down the post. Ghazi Mashal Ajil al-Yawer will have the largely ceremonial position. The Governing Council then decided to dissolve immediately rather than remain in office until the transfer of sovereignty to the new government.


...new Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi said that Iraq needs help from U.S. and other multinational forces to help defeat "the enemies of Iraq." The statement was seen as a prelude to the new government negotiating an agreement that would allow troops of the U.S.-led coalition to continue operating in the country.

...the council dissolved to allow the new government to begin taking over responsibilities immediately. Still, the U.S.-led occupation authority will continue to run Iraq until June 30.

...Allawi, whose appointment was announced Friday, was chosen because he was considered the best candidate to cope with the deteriorating security situation.

...Council members had angrily accused the American governor of Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, of trying to install Adnan Pachachi, a former foreign minister, over their opposition.

...Al-Yawer, who routinely wears traditional Arab robes and head gear, was sharply critical of the American occupation in a recent television interview, blaming U.S. ineptness for the deterioration in law and order. Al-Yawer also has denounced violence against American and other coalition forces.

...Most of the 22-member Governing Council backed al-Yawer, the current Governing Council president. A graduate of the Petroleum and Minerals University in Saudi Arabia and of Georgetown University, he is a prominent member of the Shammar tribe, one of the largest in the Gulf region that includes Shiite clans. He enjoys the support of Shiite and Kurdish council members.
[LINK]

Ineffective Management of Iraq Failures-TPM

Ineffective Management of Iraq Failures- TPM

At TPM, Josh Marshall compares Bush's recent ideas about Iraq to correcting miserably botched medical surgery (in light of collapse and near-total abandonment of policy).

Excerpt:

It has now become close to a commonplace that John Kerry's policies differ little from President Bush's. Where is the difference, we hear, since both candidates are for an openness to greater troop deployment, a fuller role for the United Nations and the country's traditional allies, and dropping support for the exilic hucksters who helped scam the country in the first place.

This is a weak argument on several grounds. But the most glaring is that what we see now isn't the president's policy. It's the president's triage -- his team's ad hoc reaction to the collapse of his policy, the rapid, near-total, but still incomplete and uncoordinated abandonment of his policy.

The president's actions, if not his words, concede that Iraq has become the geopolitical equivalent of a botched surgery -- botched through some mix of the misdiagnosis of the original malady and the incompetence of the surgeon. Achieving the original goal of the surgery is now close to an afterthought. The effort is confined to closing up as quickly as possible and preventing the patient from dying on the table. And now the 'doctor', pressed for time and desperate for insight, stands over the patient with a scalpel in one hand and the other hurriedly leafing through a first year anatomy text book.
[LINK]

Foreign fighters gain Fallujah foothold

Foreign fighters gain Fallujah foothold

A well-armed group infiltrated the city before fighting erupted in March and is continuing to mount operations against the coalition and Westerners in the area - in defiance of leaders of Fallujah's mosques, the army and the police force.

The group, led by Abu Abdullah, a young Saudi, is linked to kidnappings of Westerners, particularly journalists. Its members include Wahhabi Muslims, the ultra-fundamentalist sect that spawned Osama bin Laden.

Fallujah's leaders, who follow different Islamic fundamentalist teachings, fear that the Saudis belong to an al-Qaeda cell seeking a final showdown between Islam and America in the Middle East.

A senior sheikh in Fallujah said the group was "out of control".

....The Saudis were at first welcomed among the hundreds of foreign combatants who came to help Iraqis fighting the coalition. They fought in the southern section of Fallujah, where US marines met the stiffest resistance.

In all, about a quarter of those fighting the Americans were foreigners: Syrian, Saudi, Palestinian and Tunisian. They helped the Iraqi mujahideen - the collection of armed Islamic groups fighting the coalition - become better-organised and equipped,
aided by funds brought by the Saudi fighters. The Syrians were trained in tactics used against the Israelis in Lebanon.
[LINK-The Age]
[LINK-Telegraph]

Chalabi Duped Pentagon; Played U.S. vs. Iran for himself

Chalabi Duped Pentagon; Played U.S. vs. Iran for himself

I highly recommend you read a Stratfor.com analysis before it's removed from the site. In the analysis titled "Overdoing Chalabi", we are shown how the U.S. and Iran each used Ahmed Chalabi for its own purposes. At this point, it is honestly impossible to tell who got the better of whom.

The analysis doesn't discuss Chalabi's direct motive. They simply call him a "used-up-spook". The Iranians used him to screen information from the Americans more than to give false information. The Americans used him to try to convince the Iranians that they had a sufficient degree of control over the situation and that it was in their interests to maintain stability in the Shiite regions.

No one can say Chalabi didn't play one off the other for his own furtherance and his own hope for Iraq. Did he wind up the big loser? Time will tell.

I blame our leadership for being sucked into this quagmire. There is no one else to blame. No matter how the Bush administration tries to slice and dice Chalabi, it was always THEIR responsibility for going in without a realistic outloook or 'post-war' plans. Our Congress also failed in their serious duty to raise questions before giving the Bush administration free reign when they voted for the Iraq resolution in October, 2002.

Excerpts:


The implication was that the United States would have chosen a different course, except for Chalabi's disinformation campaign. We doubt that very much.

Iran wanted the United States to invade Iraq...The destruction of the Iraqi regime and army was at the heart of Iranian national interest...If the western frontier could be secured, Iran would achieve a level of national security it had not known in centuries...Iran knew it could not invade Iraq and win by itself. Another power had to do it.

Chalabi's job was to give the Americans a reason to invade, which he did with stories of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). But he had another job, which was to shield two critical pieces of information from the Americans: First, he was to shield the extent to which the Iranians had organized the Shiite south of Iraq. Second, he was to shield any information about Hussein's plans for a guerrilla campaign after the fall of Baghdad. These were the critical things -- taken together, they would create the dependency the Iranians badly wanted.

The United States did not want to invade Saudi Arabia....It wanted to change the Saudi strategy...The United States was interested not only in frightening Saudi Arabia, but also in increasing its dependence on the United States...The United States would take an indirect route...The solution: an invasion of Iraq.

Chalabi's claims about Iraqi WMD did not instigate the invasion, because the United States did not invade Iraq to get rid of WMD.

Al Qaeda was a Sunni movement. Following U.S. grand strategy, logic held that the solution to the problem was entering into an alliance of sorts with the Shia. The key to the Shia was the major Shiite power--Iran.

What is important to see here is how the Iranians were using the Americans, and how the Americans were using the Iranians.

Nothing he [Chalabi] said triggered the invasion [of Iraq]. It was what he did not say that is significant. Chalabi had to know that the Iranians controlled the Iraqi Shia. It is possible that he even told the Pentagon that...there is one thing that Chalabi should have known that he certainly didn't tell the Americans: that Hussein was going to wage a guerrilla war. On that point, there is no question but that the Pentagon was surprised, and it mattered a lot.

Chalabi did not share intelligence that the Iranians almost certainly had because the Iranians wanted the Americans to get bogged down in a guerrilla war. That would increase U.S. dependence on the Shia and Iran, and would hasten the American departure.

We suspect that the Pentagon intelligence offices and the CIA both knew all about Chalabi's relation to Iranian intelligence...Chalabi was a minor player in a dance between Iran and the United States that began on Sept. 11 and is still under way.
[LINK]

Sunday, May 30, 2004

This Was Spanky

Memorial Day-
This Was Spanky

Remember Who We Are Losing



It's guys like Spanky that we'll be remembering this Memorial Day weekend.

Army Spc. Philip Ian Spakosky, known as Spanky to family and friends, was killed on May 14th while defending the Mukhaiyam Mosque in downtown Karbala, Iraq.

Those who knew him have said there was nothing he wouldn't do for his leaders. He was an outstanding Soldier, very humorous and to-the-point, and full of life.

At his funeral, his Grandmother Good said, "When he joined the Army and was first sent over to Iraq, he was all for the war. He believed in the mission. But lately, when he would call or write, his tone was different. You could hear the doubt about the situation in his voice. He seemed to change his mind about being over there. He knew it wasn't safe, and he was worried."

Spanky's brother-in-arms Sgt. Michael Cannon said, "He didn't understand why we were here. But there was nothing he could do to change it, so he tried to make it positive for everyone."

His bereaved mother Lisa Good has stated, "The politicians have to resolve this conflict and bring everyone home alive. No more caskets for any family to bear."

His best Army-friend lamented that they'd 'been over there for a year', then they were 'sent to a place like' downtown Karbala.

The day before he died, Spanky spoke by satellite phone with his wife, Keisha, who was in Germany. They'd just observed their second wedding anniversary four days earlier, but he was afraid she was calling to say she was leaving him, Sergeant Cannon said. Instead, she told him she had gotten a tattoo over her heart with his name on it.

Spanky's younger brother, Jeff, is serving in Iraq with the Marine Corps, and family members have asked that he be reassigned to non-combat duty. It's not known when or if a decision will be made on the request.

I'll be performing with a choral group this Memorial Day singing songs of America. When I sing the words "Here rests in honored glory; an American soldier known but to God" and "Greater love hath no man than this; that a man lay down his life for his friends", I'll be especially thinking of Spc Spakosky and all the Americans who laid down their lives while courageously doing their duty, even when they had private doubts.

I'm here to publically express those doubts and relay their human fears. I do it not for myself, but for men and women just like Army Spc. Philip I. Spakosky.

[LINK]

The Top 25 Censored Media Stories of 2002-2003

The Top 25 Censored Media Stories of 2002-2003

#1: The Neoconservative Plan for Global Dominance
#2: Homeland Security Threatens Civil Liberty
#3: US Illegally Removes Pages from Iraq U.N. Report
#4: Rumsfeld's Plan to Provoke Terrorists
#5: The Effort to Make Unions Disappear
#6: Closing Access to Information Technology
#7: Treaty Busting by the United States
#8: US/British Forces Continue Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons Despite Massive Evidence of Negative Health Effects
#9: In Afghanistan: Poverty, Women's Rights, and Civil Disruption Worse than Ever
#10: Africa Faces Threat of New Colonialism
#11: U.S. Implicated in Taliban Massacre
#12: Bush Administration Behind Failed Military Coup in Venezuela
#13: Corporate Personhood Challenged
#14: Unwanted Refugees a Global Problem
#15: U.S. Military's War on the Earth
#16: Plan Puebla-Panama and the FTAA
#17: Clear Channel Monopoly Draws Criticism
#18: Charter Forest Proposal Threatens Access to Public Lands
#19: U.S. Dollar vs. the Euro: Another Reason for the Invasion of Iraq
#20: Pentagon Increases Private Military Contracts
#21: Third World Austerity Policies: Coming Soon to a City Near You
#22: Welfare Reform Up For Reauthorization, but Still No Safety Net
#23: Argentina Crisis Sparks Cooperative Growth
#24: Aid to Israel Fuels Repressive Occupation in Palestine
#25: Convicted Corporations Receive Perks Instead of Punishment

Bush Keeps Saddam's Tin-Pot As Trophy

Bush Keeps Saddam's Tin-Pot As Trophy

NOT.




Bush Keeps Saddam's Stuffed Fuzzy Head As Trophy

NOT.


Bush Keeps Saddam's Country As Trophy

Well, no, but some Iraqis believe it.


Bush Keeps Saddam's Pistol As Trophy

CORRECT

[LINK]

Play "Which Dictator Are YOU?"

Saturday, May 29, 2004

Billmon is back

Billmon is back

Billmon's back...and you really need to read his entry of re-entry.
[LINK]

NeoCons still love Chalabi-Inconvenient White House Friend

NeoCons Still Love Chalabi-
The Inconvenient White House Friend

Would their vociferous defense of con-man Chalabi make the NeoCons anti-American? Have NeoCons become inconvenient friends of the White House?
Wait! Some of the NeoCons are members of the White House administration!


From the New Yorker-
The Manipulator by Jane Mayer

At a moment when President Bush was struggling with multiple political burdens, Chalabi had become an inconvenient friend..


....A former admirer of Chalabi’s was alarmed by his turn toward Shiite nationalism, and said that his actions risked unleashing sectarian political strife that could pitch the country into civil war. He said, “There’s an irresponsibility in how he’s approaching this. It’s reckless. Iraq needs a stable government. But Ahmad’s pushing his private agenda at the cost of the country’s needs.”

....Chalabi claimed that his relationship with Tehran was purely expedient. “There are geopolitical reasons to be friendly with Iran,” he said. “Iran has the longest border with Iraq. Also, Iran is a much stronger state than Iraq, with three times the population. So strategically it’s not a good idea to be on bad terms. My good relations were not a secret from the U.S.”

.....Chalabi himself accused the C.P.A. of corruption, telling me, “There are so many bribes and kickbacks!"

.....One of his I.N.C. confidants told me that Chalabi might spend the summer repositioning himself as a fierce critic of Brahimi’s interim government, with an eye toward the coming election. Chalabi himself was less specific when I asked him about his plans. He said simply, “I think I have more of a future than the C.P.A.”

[LINK]


From the New York Times-
Conservative Allies Take Chalabi Case to the White House by Elisabeth Bumiller


On May 22, according to several of these Chalabi supporters, a small delegation of them marched into the West Wing office of national security adviser Condoleezza Rice to complain about the administration's abrupt change of heart about Chalabi and to register their concerns about the course of the war in Iraq.

"There is a smear campaign underway, and it is being perpetrated by the CIA and the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) and a gaggle of former intelligence officers who have succeeded in planting these stories, which are accepted with hardly any scrutiny," [Richard] Perle, a leading neoconservative, said in an interview. Perle added that the campaign against Chalabi was "an outrageous abuse of power" by U.S. government officials in Washington and Baghdad.

Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, who favored going to war in Iraq and was a patron of Chalabi, did not respond to numerous requests this week for an interview.

Wolfowitz's spokesman, Charley Cooper, said in an e-mail that Wolfowitz believed that Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress "have provided valuable operational intelligence to our military forces in Iraq which has helped save American lives." Cooper added that "Wolfowitz hopes that the events of the last few weeks haven't undermined that."

The current views of Vice President Dick Cheney and Lewis Libby, Cheney's chief of staff, are not known. Both strongly supported Chalabi before and during the war in Iraq.

[LINK]


In a National Review article, NeoCon Michael Ledeen seems disapointed that the Chalabi accusations are serving to slow down his hoped-for war upon the nation of Iran. He's stooping so low as to calling Sidney Blumenthal a liar (point-blank). Ledeen blames the disinformation about Chalabi on Blumenthal, our State Department (meaning Colin Powell), and the Iranians. This is getting so twisted, my dear readers...I don't even know where to begin telling you just how twisted. We need to get this administration and their corrupt NeoCons out of power before our nation's credibility is completely destroyed.

While I do not share as much (weird) admiration for Chalabi as Christopher Hitchens, I wish to point out that even Hitchens has said:

[Former criticism] has now been replaced with a whole new indictment: that Chalabi tricked the United States into war, possibly on Iran's behalf, and that he has given national security secrets to Iran. The first half of this is grotesque on its face. Even if you assume the worst to be true—that the INC's "defectors" were either mistaken or were conscious, coached fabricators—the fact remains that the crucial presentation of the administration's case on WMD and terrorism was made at the United Nations by Secretary of State Colin Powell, with CIA Director George Tenet sitting right behind him, after those two men most hostile to Chalabi had been closeted together. Nor does the accusation about an alternative "stove pipe" of disinformation, bypassing the usual channels, hold much water (or air, or smoke). Woodward's book Plan of Attack makes it plain that the president was not very impressed with Tenet's ostensible evidence. The plain and overlooked truth is that the administration acted upon the worst assumption about Saddam Hussein..


Chalabi did all he did in his OWN nation's best interests, which is what anyone who LOVES his country might do. But that doesn't mean it was EVER our job to get into his slimy bed and do his bidding. The American public was totally misled, and even the President didn't trust George Tenet's WMD slam-dunk, but he tried to convince America, anyhow.

I disagree with Christopher Hitchens TOTALLY when he absolves Chalabi and Judith Miller of pre-war wrong-doing. Chalabi's misleadings were criminal. Miller, whether negligent or not, was gullible.

Bush will never have an excuse for taking us to unnecessary war, no matter HOW he slices and dices Chalabi.

The NeoCons want to kill off the U.N. by making the public believe they are a totally corrupt institution because of the Oil-for-Food-Program scandal. This is only one reason why NeoCons love Chalabi.

From A World Net Daily (un)Intelligence report:

[He [Chalabi] has also threatened to release damaging details on the corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program, which included high U.N. officials, possibly including the son of Secretary-general Kofi Annan.

"I have opened up the investigation of the oil-for-food program, which has cast doubt about the integrity of the U.N. here," Chalabi said. "They don't like this."

But Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell were not to be dissuaded. They are convinced that unless the administration converts Iraq into an international problem, the U.S. will never succeed in leaving Iraq.

The sight of U.S. boys dying daily in Iraq without a clear exit strategy is not seen as a reelection strategy.
[LINK]


What kind of line is that last line from World Net Daily? I'll tell you--it's a stupid unAmerican line! How about changing that last line to:
"The sight of U.S. men and women dying is f***ing sickening when we all know the war was unnecessary and pimped by Dick Cheney, the NeoCons and Chalabi and taken in by the all-too-war-willing Bush who, in turn, pimped his unnecessary war to the American public with lie after lie"?
None of these people...Bush, Cheney and his NeoCons, Tenet, Rumsfeld, Rice, Chalabi, Judith Miller, hoodwinked pundits.. not one of them was right. Wake up! It's time we truly started supporting our troops. We need the U.N. and we could certainly use new leadership in Washington.


The U.S. (including John Negroponte) was complicit in the oil-for-food corruption and the NeoCons and the Bush administration know it. We all know it. Negroponte's been given a new position of American power in Iraq. The Bush administration needs to cover any news that would make him look worse than he already does after his death-squad days. Perhaps Chalabi had "the goods" on Negroponte.

The NeoCons want suppport for Chalabi and they do not CARE that our troops' lives are endangered every day we fail to get world cooperation on Iraq. They are pushing stories to the public to slow down the possibility of U.N. involvement in Iraq...all for their own agenda.

They are fighting American diplomacy tooth and nail.

I submit to you that these NeoCons are acting as anti-Americans.

Rush Limbaugh is not acting in America's best interests, either, in pumping all the oil-for-food he can get partisan mileage out of.

The U.N. is our hope for world cooperation to get Iraq on its feet (rather than further destroy their weakened institutions). Chalabi has been instrumental in helping the NeoCons push this Oil-For-Food story. While the matter deserves investigation, it does not deserve front-page headlines at a time when we need a U.N. resolution and cooperation on Iraq.

The NeoCon war against the U.N. does not serve our country's best interests. It does NOT support our American soldiers.


Article worth reading:

Last Man Standing by Tom Engelhardt

Friday, May 28, 2004

Why is John Kerry calling for more troops?

Why is John Kerry calling for more troops?

I'm not saying he shouldn't, but I believe he needs to explain a lot to the American people first. Without a new U.N. resolution with U.N. peacekeeping commitments and/or commitment from NATO to contribute troops on a multilateral basis, I don't believe we should be discussing sending more loyal troops into this hell of a mess.

In Wisconsin today, John Kerry called for more troops to relieve the over-extended National Guard and reservists in Iraq...20,0000 MPs, 20,000 combat troops. Without giving specifics, he said he'd pay for the added troops by making cuts elsewhere in the Pentagon budget.

None of it sits right with me. While we are lost in the woods of civil chaos in Iraq, I don't want to hear about sending more of our loyal troops into a mess that has gone out of our control. I would feel much better hearing someone (like Kerry) who wanted to lead my country tell me they planned to move our limited number of troops out of the Iraqi cities (where they do not belong) and off to the western and northern borderlands to stop the flow of outside antagonists..with Special Forces to guard the Iraqi "Ho Chi Minh trail"...to search for those in legion with Osama Bin Laden. Conventional combat should have been over after Saddam's regime was taken out.

I want to hear someone say we must work to bring Iraq back into the community of nations, not through destruction, but through constructive action worldwide.

I want to hear a Presidential candidate say he (or she) is willing to commit to a plan to bring our troops home.

No one is saying that. Why not?

You don't simply add more fuel to a fire.

I'm not comfortable with the idea of sending more troops into harm's way.

I'd be more comforted with the idea of getting the troops already IN Iraq OUT of harm's way and put into a place where they can make an effective strategic difference.

[LINK]

Philosophers and the Iraq war

Philosophers and the Iraq war

From TPM Online- Joseph Chandler asks:
Where were the philosophers when the US and UK went into Iraq?

- Most of the evidence points towards a strong trend of opposition to the conflict among professional academic philosophers. The clearest sign of this came when the American Philosophical Association eastern division passed a motion opposing war.

- Anecdotal evidence certainly does suggest that British philosophers were generally against the war, although perhaps not as interested in it as one might expect.

- There have not been many philosophers who have made their voices heard in public on the war, whether by choice or simply because the media takes no interest.

- It has been left to Roger Scruton to provide a lonely public voice of a philosopher generally supportive of the war.

- If there is an overall picture, then it is one of philosophers being much more opposed to the war than in favour of it, but not on the whole feeling as strongly on the issue as might be expected.

- If--and it remains a big "if" – this war turns out to have made the world a safer and better place, philosophers will be forced to reconsider the centuries-old principles of just war theory. And if it doesn’t, then the philosophical community can feel vindicated about the stand it took, albeit rather quietly.

[LINK]

Ref - See: Immanuel Kant and the Iraq war by Roger Scruton [LINK]

Press Stories on Iraq Hardly Reliable

Press Stories on Iraq Hardly Reliable

Yesterday the big headline was the al-Sadr-U.S. truce. It got "top-billing" on the ABC News Headlines last night and it was cautiously presented as one of the first (few) positive days in Iraq.

And today..it's like yesterday never happened.

I'm beginning to find it absolutely impossible to believe the stories coming from the White House Press these days. I don't really blame the writers..they're only reporting what they're fed. So many stories have gone down the sink soon after their reporting, though. In today's fast-paced competetve technological atmosphere, I hope journalists learn important lessons from making hasty reports. While it isn't their job to opine, it is their job to ask the right questions and to remain skeptical.

The lesson I've learned is that you can't believe what you read when a desperate and arrogant administration is putting out any story that makes them look like they have no problems. They have a busload of problems.

Jim Hoagland wrote a column I think we all should read...especially the Bush administration. It's time for Bush to get real. See Five Points of Reality That Bush Overlooked.

Excerpt:


Your talented speechwriters built this address around a five-step "plan." May I offer five realities I think you slighted but must still address if you are to dispel rising skepticism, including mine?

• The decision to concentrate power in the hands of the Coalition Provisional Authority rather than establish a provisional Iraqi government a year ago has had disastrous results. As Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani and others have said, that step "turned an army of liberation into an army of occupation" resented across Iraq. Liberation was successful, and ousting Hussein was a justifiable action. Denying power to Iraqis once he was gone was not. You must face that.

• Continuing to insist that a real transfer of sovereignty will occur on June 30 to what is at this point an unknown and untested Iraqi leadership is damaging your credibility. That entity would have power over U.S. troops and actions in Iraq if your assertion were true. Tell the American people and the world what you really intend to happen.

• Abandon the pretense that all goes well in the mission of U.N. negotiator Lakhdar Brahimi, who has spent most of his recent mission in Baghdad hunkered down inside the U.S.-protected "Green Zone." Your aides let you tell the nation Monday night that Brahimi would announce an interim government "this week," even though Baghdad sources say his choice of a Shiite to be prime minister has run into serious opposition. Brahimi's spokesman, Ahmed Fawzi, said on Monday that his boss is as much as a week behind his May 31 deadline. You should have known that before you spoke.

• NATO allies will not take up new burdens in Iraq while you are in the middle of a reelection campaign. Why would countries such as France and Germany risk that? Preemptive war may well be justified. But there are costs for firing the first shot. Accept the fact that you will now pay a price and proceed accordingly.

• Most important, move away from the obsession with secrecy that is a cancer at the center of your administration. Sept. 11, 2001, did change the world, and the Geneva Conventions do look outdated in places. Engage the nation and then the world in the debate about the changes -- and sacrifices -- that need to be made in fighting a war against terrorists. Don't confine that discussion to secret memos and directives.

Those directives and your own great confidence in the paramilitary warriors of the intelligence world helped bring you the Abu Ghraib scandal. You need the nation's engaged, informed support to rescue Iraq -- and yourself, Mr. President.


Saudi Arabia and Egypt WIll Stiff G8 Summit

Saudi Arabia and Egypt WIll Stiff G8 Summit

Saudi Arabia and Egypt are thumbing their noses at Washington's "Greater Middle East Initiative". Tunisia, Qatar, and Morocco will probably not attend, either. Egypt's particular concern is the dissolving of the Arab identity under the American plan. Other Arab states (as well as some European states) have been at odds about how the Initiative fits in with the Arab-Israeli peace efforts and the conflict in Iraq. King Abdullah of Jordan will attend and stress that he believes the Palestinian issue is an essential part of achieving reform in the region.

The Bush administration, in my opinion, is unrealistic in thinking they will get very far with this Initiative while failing to address obvious issues, especially the Arab-Israeli conflict. There are so many misgivings right now and so much Arab fury over the Iraq conflict that NATO is strategically avoiding issuing invitations to Middle East nations, including Israel, to its summit in Istanbul next month. The region is burning. [LINK]