9-11: THE STONEWALLS and the U-TURNS

HE NEVER WANTED ANY OF IT.
BUSH NEVER WANTED US TO THINK ABOUT 9-11 ONCE IT HAPPENED.
*UNLESS HE USED IT IN A CAMPAIGN AD.*

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


January 2002- Before the Commission

Bush and Cheney ask Sen. Tom Daschle to limit 9-11 Congressional probe

President Bush personally asked Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle to limit the congressional investigation into the events of September 11, congressional and White House sources told CNN.

“The vice president expressed the concern that a review of what happened on September 11 would take resources and personnel away from the effort in the war on terrorism," Daschle told reporters.


Senate Leader Tom Daschle said "I can tell you on January 24th, first, and on January 28th second, and on other dates following, that request [by Cheney and Bush not to conduct any Sept. 11 inquiry whatsoever] was made.

__________________________

May 2002-

Stonewall- NO Special Commission!

President Bush took a few minutes during a trip to Europe to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11

___________________________




October 2002-

Bush and Cheney Block 9-11 Investigation

The press asks why? Democrats keep pressing for a full hearing into the massive failures which left the U.S. open to terrorist attacks. Why were Bush and Cheney still blocking a public 9-11 investigation?

VP Dick Cheney actually threatened Democrats to keep quiet. "Press the issue," Cheney implied, "and you risk being accused of interfering with the war on terrorism."

____________________________



November 2002-

Democrats criticize Bush Administration for thwarting Commission creation

Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle criticized the Bush administration .. for thwarting creation of a commission to investigate last year’s terrorist attacks, saying an independent probe would help the country deal with future threats.

____________________________


December 2002-

A well thought-out and self-protective U-Turn for Bush

By December, "George W. Bush has tapped Thomas Kean to chair the independent investigation into the attacks of September 11th. This nomination comes in the wake of the choice of Henry Kissinger for that post, and his sudden departure. Kissinger, considered a master of secrets and a war criminal to boot."

Kean's Chairmanship is questioned within the scope of "his association with Hess Oil that has drawn concern from 9/11 victims groups, because Hess has business agreements with Saudi Arabia and oil exploration facilities in Indonesia and Malaysia."

In many ways, it is thought "this was a non-nomination. Kean has much to lose and little to gain from chairing this investigation. In the final analysis, it appears that Bush has nominated someone who will be easily controlled by the administration."

It is vital, at this point, to "remember that the Bush administration thwarted this independent investigation for the past 18 months, until they got the two things they wanted. What they wanted was a requirement that any subpoenas would be issued only after six of the ten people on the commission voted for it. The commission is comprised of five Democrats and five Republicans. If a particular subpoena seems to cut too close to the political bone, the Republicans on the committee need only stand shoulder to shoulder to stop it."

*words in quotations attributed to William Rivers Pitt.

________________________


March 2003-

The Shortchange Form of Stonewalling--Underfunding the Investigation

Many ask: Is the Bush White House trying to put the brakes on the congressional panel created last fall to investigate 9-11 attacks? Sources told TIME that "the White House brushed off a request quietly made in March, 2003, "by the 9-11 Commission Chairman Tom Kean, the Republican former governor of New Jersey, to boost his budget by $11 million. Kean had sought the funding as part of the $75 billion supplemental spending bill that the president just requested to pay for war with Iraq. Bush's recent move has miffed some members of the 9-11 panel. The money was to pay for a staff of about sixty and their resources. The White House sidestepped the issue of why the request wasn't granted in the Iraq spending bill. "We've just recently received the letter and we're reviewing it and we look forward to talking about it with Gov. Kean," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said."

___________________________________

April, 2003-

The stonewalling continues

As White House political aides planned their 2004 campaign plan designed to capitalize on the emotions and issues raised by the September 11 terror attacks, administration officials were waging a behind-the-scenes battle to restrict public disclosure of key events relating to the attacks. Sen. Bob Graham was “increasingly frustrated” by the administration’s “unwillingness to release what he regarded as important information the public should have about 9-11. In Graham’s view, the Bush administration wasn’t protecting legitimate issues of national security but information that could be a political “embarrassment”.

______________________________

May, 2003-

Rense.com creates an analysis of White House Stonewalling

"The Bush administration, the CIA, and the FBI are all refusing to cooperate with Congress as the latter tries to release for publication its 900-page report on the 9/11 terror attack on the WTC. The report contains numerous critical comments about administration and intelligence agency mishandling of forewarnings received by agents in the field-including a warning from an FBI agent that al-Qaeda supporters might be training in US flight schools."

_________________________________



July, 2003-

Some are disturbed to think that President Bush might be actively suppressing evidence of the Saudi kingdom's guilt.

Bush Under Pressure to Reveal Saudi Role' in 11 September- The Independent (UK) Jul 26, 2003

The Bush administration is under pressure to allow publication of a secret part of a congressional report on the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, which is said to point to large-scale financial backing for the hijackers from Saudi Arabia. The 28-page section, dealing with the role foreign governments may have played in the attacks, was kept out of the 900-page document issued last week by a joint House and Senate intelligence committee. But it is said to dwell almost exclusively on Saudi Arabia, 15 of whose citizens were among the 19 men who carried out the suicide strikes. According to The New York Times, it suggests that senior officials from the kingdom channelled hundreds of millions of dollars to Islamic charities and other front organisations.

____________________________________________________________



October, 2003-

The White House refuses to willingly hand over top-level papers that may be subpoenaed

References: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/13/terror/main583425.shtml

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30B1EFE3B550C758EDDA90994DB404482

9-11 Commission Chairman Thomas Kean told the New York Times that he was prepared to subpoena the documents from the White House if they were not turned over within weeks.

Kean also told the Times that he believed the panel would soon be forced to issue subpoenas to other executive branch agencies because of continuing delays by the Bush administration in handing over documents and other evidence.

Members of both parties are accusing the White House of stonewalling the federal commission investigating the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, by blocking its demands for documents despite threats of a subpoena.

Sounds Of Silence - Surely the White House realizes that the perception of a cover-up is more politically damaging than turning over a few intelligence reports. (??!!?)

_________________________


January, 2004-

After months of stonewalling the panel's requests for information about the terror attacks, the White House is signaling that it opposes extra time to complete the probe.

For months, the Bush administration and the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 terror attacks have been locked in low-intensity warfare. The White House opposed creation of the commission, and after it reluctantly yielded, it sought to bar the commission from seeing reams of documents pertaining to the attacks. The stonewalling went on so long that some commissioners say they're months behind in their work -- and yet, the White House is insisting that the May 27 deadline for the commission's final report shouldn't be extended.

___________________________________


February, 2004-

Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert Is Still Dead-Set Against Giving the 9/11 Commission Panel More (Needed) Time

From WP: House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) has hardened his opposition to extending the deadline for the independent commission studying the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, even as the panel's leaders pleaded yesterday for more time to complete their work. Hastert told Republican lawmakers in a meeting yesterday that he will not bring up any legislation to grant the commission extra time.

*BUSH HAD U-TURNED ALREADY BY THIS TIME:

After opposing the idea, President Bush reversed himself earlier this month and agreed to support an extension.


__________________________


March, 2004-

Three thousand died, yet President Bush and National Security Advisor Rice have little or no time for the commission investigating the national tragedy.


In her rush to defend the White House, Rice trips over her own words


March 14, 2004-- Meet The Press

MR. RUSSERT: Will you testify under oath in public about September 11?

DR. RICE: Tim, this is not a matter of preference; this is a matter of principle.

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

In March, 2004, the chairman of Bush's reelection campaign actually said the White House had been "entirely cooperative" with the independent commission conducting the probe.

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


White House U-turn on 9/11 inquiry

The White House bowed to pressure to allow National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice to testify in public and under oath to the 9/11 commission.

___________________________


April, 2004-

U-Turns and limitations reveal weaknesses in leadership

By his insistence that Cheney appear with him before the 9-11 Commission, Bush has stripped away any doubt from those who wondered about who is running the White House.

WOW


308,000 jobs last month.
Whew....At least there's a sign of life.
President Bush was quick to take credit for the fastest rate of job creation since April 2000.
I guess that means he's as readily accountable for the past 3+ years of job losses and creation-stagnancy.

Oh, by the way, the average during Clinton's second term was a consistent 240, 000 new jobs per month.
Oh--that's every month....

Not one month out of 39.

Whoopsie--Unemployment's up..oh, but it's just a tad.

Are we using mercenaries in Iraq?


Today's Eric Alterman blog says:

The horrific murders in Falluja raises the issue of whether mercenaries are being hired to fight our wars. There’s a provocative series of posts on that question here.

There's a letter in the Syracuse Post Standard today by citizen Ed Kinane concerning the topic. It reads as follows:

'Civilians' in Iraq more like 'mercenaries'

To the Editor:

Four unnamed men guarding a U.S. convoy in a war zone were killed Wednesday in Fallujah, Iraq. This is a tragedy for those individuals, for their families, for all involved.

As the folly and brutality of the invasion and occupation become daily more obvious, more doubletalk must be used to spin such deaths to the voters back home. Thursday's front-page coverage of the killings referred to the victims as "civilians" and "contractors." It kind of sounds like they may have been electricians or engineers. In the Iraq context, however, "contractor" is often simply sanitized language for "mercenary" - a growing personnel category in U.S. "defense" in Iraq and around the world.

In this case, the four men worked for Blackwater Security Consulting out of North Carolina. According to its Web site, Blackwater provides, among other lethal arts, sniping and advanced sniper training. It "employ[s] only the most highly motivated and professional operators, all drawn from various U.S. and international Special Operations Forces, Intelligence and Law Enforcement organizations." Such operators may technically be "civilians," but hardly civilians in the usual sense.

The use of mercenaries allows the jiggling of U.S. casualty stats: Dead and maimed mercenaries need not be counted. Such use evades accountability for military operations and functions. As U.S. soldiers increasingly come to doubt the wisdom and morality of their mission, more mercenaries are deployed. Mercenaries take on jobs and take risks honorable soldiers refuse.

Quotes From the Headlines

"...Maxwell No. 1; Harvard No. 2 - Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs edged out Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government as having the nation's top graduate program for public affairs in the latest U.S. News & World Report rankings...."

_____________

"...Those awful pictures from Falluja are a necessary part of Americans’ education and must be shown to them just as frequently as the deliberate deceptions the media so gullibly passed along when the president was misleading us into war. As horrific and inhuman as these actions may be, Bush asked for this....."

_____________

"...Former Sen. Gary Hart says he, too, warned Condi Rice about an imminent terror attack on two occasions before 9/11..."
_____________

"........the Pentagon had no coherent postwar plan and not enough troops. Mistakes followed mistakes, and today the administration is still in denial about the extent to which resistance to the Americans is becoming a popular uprising rather than the work of leftover Saddamists and foreign terrorists."

_____________

"...Before the Vietnam schism, Democrats and liberals were credibly tough about protecting America precisely because they were the realists, while the Republican right were the utopians.....Now, courtesy of Bush's astonishing bungling, Democrats are on the verge of reclaiming that legacy -- not by being more extreme saber-rattlers, but by being better realists about how best to keep America safe..."

_____________

"...if unnamed "administration officials" spread rumors about administration critics, reporters have an obligation to check the facts before giving those rumors national exposure. And there's no excuse for disseminating unchecked rumors because they come from "the White House," then denying the White House connection when the rumors prove false. That's simply giving the administration a license to smear with impunity...."

_____________

"...Fallujah should teach even the administration's most die-hard optimists that the mission is deeper and muddier than they'd imagined...Many are wondering how President Bush will retaliate for the brutal slayings of the four American contractors who were shot, beaten, dismembered, dragged down the street, and strung up on bridge poles. The universal feeling is that some response is necessary to let the insurgents know they can't get away with this. The question is what kind of response?"

_____________

"..The US is creating its own Iraqi Gaza...Military convoys trundle through or near Falluja every day. The usual tactic is to ambush them with homemade bombs, followed by grenades and small arms fire when the survivors jump out of their vehicles. Then the resistance runs off into the suburban side-streets. The American response is heavy-handed and indiscriminate. "The US is indirectly supporting the resistance by targeting innocent people. It makes us more sympathetic to the resistance," Shaban Rajab, 45, a taxi-driver, told me."

_____________

Polls: Free or Safe?



Rather than asking the scaredy-cat poll question:

"Do you feel safer since 9-11?"



......why don't they ask the all-American question:

"Do you feel more free since 9-11?"

How can we be 'the home of the brave' if we're always being asked whether or not we're chickenshit?

Meet Sibel Edmonds

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



"This whole situation is outrageous and I am going public."

--Sibel Edmonds

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

Mrs. Sibel Edmonds is 33 years old. She's been a citizen of the United States for ten years. She is a Turkish-American who speaks Azerbaijani, Farsi, Turkish and English. (How many languages do you fluently speak?)

Sibel was hired as a translator for the FBI's Washington field office on September 13, 2001-- just two days after the al-Qaeda attacks. Her task was to translate documents and recordings from FBI wire-taps. When you work side-by-side with 200 translators, you get to see and hear a lot of things. Her job was to determine if anything was missed in the translations that related to the 9-11 plot. In her review, Sibel said the documents clearly showed that the 9-11 hijackers were in the country and plotting to use airplanes as missiles. The documents also included information relating to their financial activities. Sibel has not been able to publically comment in detail because she has been under a Justice Department gag order since October 2002. However, Sibel has testified before the 9-11 commission, the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Select Intelligence Committee.

Tom Flocco has reported that Sibel was offered a substantial raise and a full time job to encourage her not to go public that she had been asked by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to retranslate and adjust the translations of [terrorist] subject intercepts that had been received before September 11, 2001 by the FBI and CIA.

Sibel has called Condi Rice an outrageous liar. Ouch. That's a politically potent accusation. I wonder how long before Sibel's character will be assassinated by the White House? She's not that big a fish....perhaps they'll just call her crazy or create a story about how she's got a grudge.

________________________________

See DEMOCRACY NOW for interview with Sibel Edmonds on Wednesday, March 31st.

AMY GOODMAN: "She [Sibel Edmonds] says the FBI had information that an attack using airplanes was being planned before Sept. 11 and calls Condoleezza Rice's claim the White House had no specific information on a domestic threat or one involving planes "an outrageous lie."

________________________________

Tom Flocco questions Commission Chairman Thomas Kean's potential conflict of interest:

....9/11 Commission Chairman and Amerada-Hess Oil director Kean's company maintained Caspian joint venture Delta Oil business ties to bin Laden's brother-in-law for 15 months after attacks despite reported terrorism finance links--and just 21 days prior to Kean's appointment by Bush to commission. This, as FBI translator Sibel Edmonds' letter and follow-up calls to Kean charging FBI internal security and espionage breaches went unanswered for a year......

9-11: Bush Aides Are Blocking Clinton Papers From Commission

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

"The legislature's job is to write law. It's the executive
branch's job to interpret law."

—GW Bush, 11/22/00, Austin, Texas

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

Why has the Bush administration blocked thousands of pages of classified foreign policy and counterterrorism documents from President Clinton's White House files from being turned over to the panel's investigators? The Commission members are sratching their heads and wondering why. The Bush-hugging trolls will tell me it's because of an honorable defense of Executive privilege or it's "too sensitive" to release. These are merely code words. If there's one thing I understand about the Bush administration by now, it's this: they won't do ANYTHING that makes them look bad. Knowing how they operate (as Watergate-era John Dean has said, they're "creepier than Nixon's administration"), I can only assume the Bush administration is withholding Clinton's papers because it would flow perfectly with Richard Clarke's statements and would cause the current Administration to take heavy, heavy political damage. Condi's head would implode under the pressure of such scrutiny and demand for truth. The Bush Administration's extreme legalistic approach to the documents once again shows how hypocritical they are when accusing trial attorneys of gaming the legal system.

To 41

"It hurts an awful lot more when it's your son that is being criticized."
--GHW Bush

Of course it's bound to hurt. You were President, but first you were young George's father. He deserves the criticism, though. You have to bear that in mind.

Your opinion as a former President is valued. It is no more valuable than former President Carter or Clinton, however. Your opinion is entwined with your attachment to your son. It's an inevitable and natural consequence of feeling.

He deserves the criticism. though. You have to bear that in mind.

He deserves it.


An April Fools' scenario

O'Franken Factor makes waves



Howard Kurtz:
FLASH: Liberals Heard on Radio!


Here's some of the best from Howie's article:

.....perhaps the most entertaining moment came when conservative talker and onetime Watergate felon G. Gordon Liddy called in from his radio show.

"I know if someone comes after me, you'll kill them," Franken said.

"And not quickly," Liddy noted. "Slowly and painfully."

*G Gordon's a real card (and a good sport)!


________________________

[Mark] Walsh has assembled a lineup that leans heavily on entertainers, from comedian Janeane Garofalo to rapper Chuck D to Lizz Winstead, co-creator of Comedy Central's "The Daily Show."

Conservative pundits have been dismissive. O'Reilly said on his Fox News show that "this whole liberal network scheme is just plain stupid. . . . These pinheads backing the venture will lose millions of dollars because the propaganda network is simply tedious and tedious doesn't sell." *To which Iddybud replies: bwahahahahahahahahahaha!*

________________________

*I agree with Howie here.....they could have done a better (and more gracious) job while they had Al Gore on the line.*

- A surprise call from Al Gore was frittered away as Moore offered an apology (for supporting Ralph Nader in 2000) so convoluted that the former Democratic nominee asked: "What are you saying?" -

*I made a personal note that on yesterday's debut, Michael Moore was still associating Gore with the DNC. Al Franken failed to correct him on that erroneous political point. It's been very clear that Gore has become far more detached from the DNC in the recent past. His endorsement of Howard Dean was a major clue.*

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

RUPERT MURDOCH TO PURCHASE AIR AMERICA RADIO

The parade may come to an abrupt halt, however, as Rupert Murdoch, evil head of the News Corporation which owns Fox News, has announced his intention to acquire the liberal radio network, by force if necessary. He said that if efforts to take over the network itself are unsuccessful, he plans to simply buy out all the stations carrying it. Left-wing shows will be replaced by Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage, and Ann Coulter. Advertisers including Purdue Pharmaceuticals are already lined up.

April Fools!

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

Real articles

Talk Network Makes Debut, With Rage a No-Show
New York Times

New, liberal radio network launched in US
ABC Online

A voice for unabashed liberals
San Francisco Chronicle, CA

New network out to give liberal listeners a rush
Chicago Sun Times

Talking back
BBC News, UK

On Franken's new network, left is right
Newsday, NY

Liberals take to airwaves
Miami Herald, FL

There is a lot left to learn
Boston Globe, MA

Franken's shtick shaky in liberal radio debut
Atlanta Journal Constitution

Liberal Radio Network Hits Air With Left Jab
Washington Post

Regime change radio launches in the US
BBC News, UK

Liberal talk-radio station hits airwaves
MSNBC

Stronghold Fallujah-
Why are they so anti-American?




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

“The U.S. commanders said they didn’t want demonstrations. We told them that democracy allows people to demonstrate. If they bring in international peacekeepers it would be better. What happened at the school was done in a cruel way, even if it was in self-defense.”

---- Tahab Bedawi Hamidi, Fallujah’s mayor, April, 2003

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


Gary Leupp wrote about one particular incident last April which may give some insight into why tempers flare to savage pitch in Fallujah to this day:

"....April 29, just checking out the news online. MSNBC. Very mainstream, trustworthy reportage.
...."US fires on Iraqi crowd, killing at least 13".. In the town of Fallujah, MSNBC reports, U.S. soldiers opened fire on a crowd of demonstrators (boys 5-20 in age) this morning, 10:30 Baghdad time, protesting the troops' occupation of the school where (according to MSNBC) the boys used to normally study, but now is used as those troops' headquarters. The story cites al-Jazeera as reporting that the soldiers fired after "someone threw a rock at the school."
..Dr. Ahmed Ghanim al-Ali, director of Fallujah General Hospital, said there were 13 dead, including three boys under 11 years old. He said his medical crews were shot at when they went to retrieve the injured, which he said numbered 75 people........CNN said the school (termed "an elementary school") was taken over because it was thought to house weapons, but says none were found.....
.....Shooting schoolboys is sometimes necessary, especially when you've taken their school, and they want to take it back, and they don't want you there, and they're armed with rocks, or whatever's on hand. And occupation is liberation, and good is bad, and up is down, and Iraq is free.......

In anticipation of some troll telling me I'm supporting yesterday's heinous behavior in Fallujah, allow me to remind you of journalist Ashley Banfield's words (also from last April):

Again, I'm not saying support for that side. There are a lot of things that I hate about that side but there's got to be the coverage, there's got to be the journalism, and sometimes that is really missing in our effort to make good TV and good cable news.

That goes for blog news, too.
Read the follow-up MSNBC article from last May titled "They Call it the Alamo"

What on earth have we done?

The world should have been together on Iraq all along. Our unilateral folly still reeks of Bush's blatantly ignorant anti-U.N. stance. He abandoned the world on a crooked path to fight an invisible enemy in gray areas. I'm sorry, but I must say, as a nation, you just don't do that sort of thing on your own and expect it to work out well for you. In the Atlantic monthly, James Fallows' Blind Into Baghdad, the definitive history of the Bush administration's willfull ignorance in its lead-up to the pre-emptive attack upon Iraq includes the line:

"What David Halberstam said of Robert McNamara in The Best and the Brightest is true of those at OSD as well: they were brilliant, and they were fools."

Bush's ideology really hasn't changed since
(pre 9-11) Campaign 2000

I'm sure you recall Bush's Campaign-2000 “we don’t nation-build” ideology. An international effort with peacekeepers would have won hearts and minds. Donald Rumsfeld 's paring down U.S. forces and systematic disbanding of the Army War College’s Peacekeeping Institute ( where officers were trained in post conflict-issues) have worked against the U.S.' better interests in Iraq.

The Bush administration’s stubborn and determined resistance to multilateral aid (with seemingly little thought about what would come after the initial battle was won) has thwarted any good-faith effort to "liberate" the Iraqis. In the Bush administration's political rush to hand over self-government to Iraq, they ignore the deterioration of progress and trust of the Iraqi people.Again, from the James Fallows article:

Administration officials must have believed not only that the war was necessary but also that a successful occupation would not require any more forethought than they gave it....It will be years before we fully understand how intelligent people convinced themselves of this..

The people of Iraq are turning to anarchy in their mistrust and confusion. My heart breaks for them..and especially for our troops who are determined in their mission to do what is right while their government handles it oh-so-wrong. If we support our troops, speak out about this charade of a "liberation". Let's get it right for once. Most of all, let's admit it never had a damned thing to do with a 9-11 connection.

We suffered an overwhelming defeat by 19 foreigners on 9-11...15 of them were Saudi nationals. Lashing out at Iraq for the actions of those 19 who brought such overwhelming defeat to our doorstep seems more like a disjointed act of vengeance than a 'next logical step' on a reasoned path.

There were myriad warning signs (pre-Iraq) that the Bush Administration chose to ignore. Choice involves free will. Our leader was perfectly willing to do as he pleased knowing all the risks. To be asked to think about how a generally non-curious President may have entered Iraq for some "big idea" that would bring glory to his name and unnecessary death to so many people..troops and Iraqi citizens... is a nauseating proposition. James Fallows ends his article by saying:

Leadership is always a balance between making large choices and being aware of details. George W. Bush has an obvious preference for large choices. This gave him his chance for greatness after the September 11 attacks. But his lack of curiosity about significant details may be his fatal weakness. When the decisions of the past eighteen months are assessed and judged, the Administration will be found wanting for its carelessness. Because of warnings it chose to ignore, it squandered American prestige, fortune, and lives.

___________________________

See: May 1, 2003, Killings in Al Fallujah, City of Mosques- Has America Taken on a New Military Culture with New Rules that Allow Us to Kill Civilians at Will? By Sam Hamod

___________________________

Informed Comment
Wolfowitz of Bagdhad? (No April Fools joke..I swear)

I couldn't believe it when I read it. Were my eyes betraying me? I firmly believe President George W. Bush has made some foolhardy decisions, but this one would take the cake. Could it really be possible that Bush would consider appointing Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz as amabassador to Iraq? That is apparently the "buzz". Juan Cole reports that Wolfowitz "is currently deputy Secretary of Defense, but probably could not have continued into a second Bush term." He also wonders "whether Wolfowitz could be a successful ambassador, given the way he has sidelined and badmouthed the State Department. Wouldn't the foreign service officers find ways to sabotage him?"

In the most gut-realistic and politically incorrect way, we know Wolfowitz' chances of being seen as a successful abassador of good faith in Iraq are slim-to-none. Juan Cole says it well:

"...having a Likudnik* run the US embassy in Baghdad would be a complete disaster for US policy in Iraq and in the whole region. It would be proof positive to the insurgents in Iraq that the US intends to reshape the country in accordance with a Zionist agenda and make Iraqis the bitches of Ariel Sharon [Mind you, I think this conspiratorial way of thinking illegitimate, but it is already a theme in Iraqi popular political discourse]. It seems unlikely to me that Wolfowitz could get the cooperation of the Shiite clerics."

At Informed Comment, we are also sadly reminded that 8% of Iraqi academics have fled the country, and more than 1000 leading Iraqi professionals and intellectuals have been assassinated since last April; and several thousand angry Shiites demonstrated in downtown Baghdad yesterday, protesting the closure of the al-Hawzah newspaper.

Headlines

9-11 Commission / War on Terror


Washington Post- Top Focus Before 9/11 Wasn't on Terrorism ; Rice Speech Cited Missile Defense
On Sept. 11, 2001, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was scheduled to outline a Bush administration policy that would address "the threats and problems of today and the day after, not the world of yesterday" -- but the focus was largely on missile defense, not terrorism from Islamic radicals.

Josh Marshall comments on the Rice speech that never was:

"...in a front page piece in Thursday's Washington Post we learn that on September 11th, 2001 Condi Rice was scheduled to deliver a major foreign policy address on missile defense as the centerpiece of a new strategy to combat "the threats and problems of today and the day after, not the world of yesterday."
-Then reality intruded.
-As the Post explains, the speech contained little real discussion of terrorism. The only mentions were swipes at the Clinton administration's supposed over-emphasis on transnational terrorism at the expense of more important priorities like missile defense.
-Perhaps it goes without saying, but let's say it: It was as obvious four years ago as it is today that the most potent threats to America are asymmetric threats, particularly forms of attack that cannot easily be tied back to particular states which we can punish with our conventional military superiority.
-In plainer speech, the biggest threats we face today are ones that don't come with a return address."

Washington Post- Bush's Flip-Flop Problem; Credibility Questions Could Boomerang on Bush
•The president initially argued that a federal Department of Homeland Security wasn't needed, but then devised a plan to create one.
•He resisted a commission to investigate Iraq intelligence failures, but then relented.
•He opposed, and then supported, a two-month extension of the 9/11 commission's work, after the panel said protracted disputes over access to White House documents left too little time.
•He initially said any access to the president by the commission would be limited to just one hour but relaxed the limit earlier this month

Visa Process Undermines American Opportunity, Education and Progress

Robert M. Gates, ex-CIA director under President George H. W. Bush and President of Texas A & M, claims that our current visa process will undermine our hopes for future peace and foreign alliance. In a NYT op-ed, he writes:

To defeat terrorism, our global military, law enforcement and intelligence capacities must be complemented with positive initiatives and programs aimed at the young people in developing nations who will guide their countries in the future. No policy has proved more successful in making friends for the United States, during the cold war and since, than educating students from abroad at our colleges and universities.

I take a back seat to no one in concern about our security at home in an age of terrorism.....I learned..that protecting our security requires more than defensive measures; we have to win the war of ideas, too. For this reason, we simply cannot tolerate a visa process that fails to differentiate quickly and accurately between legitimate scholars and students — and individuals who may pose genuine security risks.

Look at which New York Times Op-Ed Columnist
I "am" according to Quizilla



You are Paul Krugman! You're a brilliant economist
with a knack for both making sense of the
current economic situation and exposing the
Bush administration's lies about it. You
somehow came out as the best anti-war writer on
the Op-Ed staff. Other economists hate your
guts for selling out to the liberals. To hell
with 'em.


Which New York Times Op-Ed Columnist Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

TODAY AT NOON- BE THERE OR BE SQUARE!


March 31st: The O'Franken Factor

Website: http://airamericaradio.com/
Time: 12-3pm.
Current stations: WLIB (NYC, AM 1190am), WNTD (Chicago, AM 950), KBLA (LA, AM 1580). Will also be streamed online at http://airamericaradio.com/.

The O’ Franken Factor: 12:00-3:00pm

After debunking right-wing propaganda in his bestselling books Lies, and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them and Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot, Al Franken is taking the fight to America's airwaves--and he's doing it drug-free. With his co-host, veteran radio personality Katherine Lanpher, Franken will deliver three hours a day of fearlessly irreverent commentary, comedy, and interviews. Franken and Lanpher have a mean streak a smile wide. The O'Franken Factor will energize fans, infuriate liars, and deliver the truth--in what Al Franken likes to call the Zero Spin Zone.

Host: Al Franken

Co-host: Katherine Lanpher

Producer: Billy Kimball

Portland station KPOJ-- Listen live


NYT: LIBERAL VOICES GET NEW HOME ON RADIO DIAL

Headlines

Iraqi Rage in Sunni Triangle Turns to Savage Violence

--------------------------------------

AP: Bomb Kills Five U.S. Troops in Iraq By Sameer N. Yacoub

Scotsman-Two civilian vehicles hit in Fallujah--4 may be dead, mangled bodies dragged in broad daylight, mutilated, hung from bridge


click photo for FALLUJAH VIDEO - Warning: graphic content

----------------------------

FOX: Violent, Bloody Day Hits Iraq

BBC: Bodies Mutilated in Iraq Attack

Reuters: Seven civilians hurt in Baghdad bomb blast

WP: Army Says Troops Killed Two Iraqi Journalists-U.S. Military Accepts Responsibility but Insists Shooting That Sparked Protests Was Accidental

Salon: John Dean says Bush is far creepier than Nixon was

NY Times - This Isn't America by Paul Krugman

BBC News - Terror suspects held in raids

MSNBC - 150 'dead zones' counted in oceans


Campaign News
-----------------------------------------------

CST: Kerry meeting set, Nader says

Kerry FBI files stolen

NY Times - Cheney and Kerry Trade Barbs Over Taxes and Economy

San Diego Union-Tribune - Kerry raps Cheney, will hold a rally at UCSD this morning by John Marelius

The News-Review - Kucinich feels comfortable campaigning in Oregon by John Sowell



Iraq, 'The War on Terror' & the 9/11 Commission
-----------------------------------------------

NYT editorial: Shutting down newspapers no way to win hearts/minds or end Iraqi hostility

CAP: Fact Check: Condi Rice's 60 Minutes Interview Lies

CAP: Condoleeza Rice's Growing Credibility Gap

Insider vs. outsider: Senior aide to Condi Rice calls Clarke "melodramatic"--(are we surprised?)

NYT-Book Review-"Against all Enemies" and "Ghost Wars"- Conecting the dots

NYT: Coming soon: First Iraq WMD status report since October from the American government, no indication of newfound evidence of any illicit Iraqi arsenal

NYT: White House Caught In Lie About Sitting National Security Advisers Who Have Testified, click "multimedia" chart

Christian Science Monitor - US fights shifting Iraqi foes

Bloomberg - Uzbek Forces Kill 20 in Fight Near President's Home, AFP Says

The Age - White House concedes Bush asked about Iraq

New Zealand News - Al Qaeda spy chief killed in Pakistani raid

Washington Times - UPI: Police foil terror attacks in Manila

The Missoula Independent - Hornet's nest by George Ochenski

Guardian Commentary: Guantanamo-Maybe none of them are terrorists



Other News & Comment-----------------------------------------------


Yahoo! News - Seven New Allies Shift NATO to Russia's Borders

Pravda - Scandal in Ukraine: hundreds of missiles disappeared

International Herald Tribune - The debate on humanitarian intervention by William Pfaff

ENN News - U.N. environment summit opens, targets ocean dead zones by Hans Greimel

Sydney Morning Herald - Employers face ban on email spying by Stephanie Peatling and Bonnie Malkin

London Independent - Prozac Nation, UK by Maxine Frith

ENN News - As natural gas prices rise, utilities plan new coal-fired plants by Dan D'Ambrosio

Guardian - Odds on that God exists, says scientist by Stewart Maclean, Catherine Bolsover and Polly Curtis

Pravda - Time Can be Turned Back by Olga Zharina

MSNBC - The World on a String: Brian Braiker interviews Brian Greene

Why would Matt Drudge do this?!

I noticed this in the Drudge Report last week... and I just have to point out how idiotic and pointless I thought it was.



DEM HEADQUARTERS USES BUSH FACE AS DOORMAT



FLASHBACK: SADDAM'S VERSION OF BUSH-MAT...

Christopher Hitchens review: Occidentalism

Those who are eager to die are expressing a hatred for the everyday, banal achievements of human society... The ideas of liberal pluralism are newer in "the West" than we suppose, and could in fact use some ruthless warriors of their own.

--Christopher Hitchens

??????????

In Buruma's view, the Islamist militant war against the West has less to do with imperialism or global injustice/ inequality than it does with hatred for pluralism and global modernization. We are to assume Islamic radicals are following in the footsteps of 20th-century European fascists and Japanese militants who simply hated Americanism and universalism. I think we have to keep an open mind as to where this somewhat overly-idealistic version of Anglo-American society is coming from. We should never forget the consequence of actual history. A careful and realistic study of both English and American history might cast an entirely different light on this view. Let me preface this next line by saying I am not a Marxist (because I can just hear the trolls singing now). The U.S. and England have backed any efforts in the Islamic world to smash their Marxist parties. There is no doubt a strong hatred of imperialist exploitation in Arabic and Islamic lands today.

The New York Review of Books January 17, 2002 Occidentalism
By Avishai Margalit, Ian Buruma

Chronicle Review-The Origins of Occidentalism

The book at Amazon.com

OK, so he didn't have them. But did he want them?


What's next? Maybe: OK, so he didn't want them, but did the thought ever cross his mind......at all....even once?

David Brooks is doing damage-control for someone....


David Brooks (who I'm sure is being paid very well by his employer) is posing as a non-partisan who is wounded by the damage the Richard Clarke-circus has done to precious American politics. (I'll cry tomorrow.) Brooks clearly begrudges Clarke for the attention (and money) he's amassed by telling his own truths about his 9-11 experience. David Brooks accuses Clarke of being like a "Power Ranger"...in Brooks own words:

See Dick Clarke courageously take control of the government in the middle of the terror attacks! See him heroically lead a teleconference! Behold his White House conversations! Everything he says is farsighted and brave! Everything the Bushies say is incorrect. And he remembers it all perfectly!

Why do you suppose David Brooks is riled to the point of reducing Clarke to a Power Ranger? These tasks Clarke performed on 9-11 may sound mundane in stark contrast with the heroic terms Brooks uses to describe them. Yet, I ask you to think about it for a moment. Do you remember when you first heard about those planes hitting the towers? Are there experiences from that day that are forever etched in YOUR memory? IF you wrote about them in a journal, would that make you a Power Ranger? A partisan? A liar? Of course not. Now, imagine you were working for the White House on 9-11. How soon would you forget all you'd done and how you felt?

Brooks can't seem to accept the fact that Clarke is assigning responsibility and accountability to this White House. He calls him a "shrill partisan". He says Clarke wrote "shrill passages" about Bush's stupidity. Brooks imagines American politics are damaged by these types of activity. He may be right. But what exactly do POLITICS have to do with TRUTH, anyhow? Who gives a damn how "politics" are damaged? The object, after what this nation experienced on 9-11, is the TRUTH. Clarke, as far as I can see, is telling HIS side of the truth. It's politically incorrect and David Brooks can't seem to handle that. I submit that he's every bit as partisan as Clarke might be. Politics has little to do with what is TRUE..I cannot stress that enough! Let politics take the biggest beating of its life over this. It's time we got to the core of what truly matters. Too many innocent Americans died on 9-11 to worry about the fragile state of politicians' overbloated egoes. David Brooks is doing damage control for someone....I wonder who?