PROOF THAT BUSH IS A LUNATIC-DICTATOR
save-our-democracy
WERE BASED ON PHONEY, FRAUDULENT AND MANUFACTURED SO-CALLED "EVIDENCE"
THAT BUSH & CO. SAID:
*************
(1)PROVED THAT IRAQ HAD WMD "NOW";
(2)THAT THE U.S. WAS IN "IMMINENT DANGER;
(3)THAT THE U.S. "MUST DISARM IRAQ"
BY:
(A)BOMBING THE HELL OF THAT COUNTRY (SHOCK & AWE),
(B)KILLING TENS OF THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS;
(C)KILLING MAIMING THOUSANDS OUR OWN YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN, AND
(D)ROBBING OUR NATIONAL TREASURY OF A TRILLON DOLLARS;
AND BUSH "WOULD NOT WAIT FOR, NOR ABIDE BY THE U.N. CHARTER OR
INTERNATIONAL LAWS, AND BULL-HEADEDLY AND ARROGANTLY GAVE THEM
THE FINGER.
THIS MANIAC (BUSH)IS NOW SAYING....HE WOULD DO THIS "ALL OVER AGAIN".
******************************************************************
CLEARLY ANY "REASONABLE PERSON", MUCH LESS THE LEADER OF THE MOST
POWERFUL NATION IN WORLD WOULD BE "DEMANDING THE HEADS OF THOSE
PEOPLE WHO WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE:
(1)INTENTIONALLY DIDN'T GIVE HIM ACCURATE PRE-WAR INFORMATION;
AND, IN FACT,
(2)MANUFACTURED "EVIDENCE" AND WROTE REPORTS THAT WERE PURE LIES.
BUT BUSH "IS NOT DOING ANY OF THAT", IN FACT HE IS "COMPLIMENTING"
THESE SAME SO-CALLED LIARS.
THERE CAN ONLY BE "ONE REASON FOR THAT APPALLING CONDUCT":
BUSH NOT ONLY "KNEW THIS SO-CALLED EVIDENCE OF WMD WAS ALL LIES",
HE WAS HELL-BENT ON "ORDERING HIS FASCISTS AND PROSTITUTES" TO
GET THESE LIES "ON PAPER" SO HE COULD FLASH THEM AROUND SAYING:
"I'VE GOT ALL THE PROOF "ANYBODY NEEDS" TO PROVE THAT SADDAM
HUSSEIN HAS BEEN LYING TO ALL OF US AND IS "READY TO ATTACK
THE U.S.".
HERE IS BUSH'S OWN WORDS OF WHICH I WILL TRY TO FIND A FULL
TRANSCRIPT. ALSO: THE SENATE'S SO-CALLED INTELLIGENCE COMMITTE WEBPAGE
NOW HAS THE FULL REPORT AVAILABLE FOR US TO READ. IT CAN BE
FOUND AT: (HOPE I AM TYPING THIS CORRECTLY):
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/911.html
NOTE: ON TODAY'S RADIO PROGRAMS I WAS HEARING CONGRESSMEN STATE THAT
THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS (SENATE REPORT CONFIRMING THERE NEVER WAS ANY WMD,
AND THAT THEY (CONGRESS) VOTED ON THE RESOLUTION ALLOWING BUSH TO
ATTACK IRAQ BECAUSE "THEY BELIEVED BUSH HAD "THE EVIDENCE". IF EVER
THERE WAS A TIME TO E-MAIL YOUR CONGRESS PERSONS...NOW IS THE TIME
WHILE THEY "ARE OUTRAGED" AND DEMAND IMMEDIATE IMPEACHMENT OF BUSH,
ESPECIALLY BECAUSE BUSH "SAYS HE WOULD "STILL" DO THE VERY SAME
THING "KNOWING THAT THE EVIDENCE WAS FALSE".
THIS LUNATIC IS CLEARLY "DANGEROUS" TO THIS ENTIRE NATION AND THE
WORLD AND SHOULD BE IN AN ASYLUM FOR THE "CRIMINALLY INSANE".
SYLVIA &:O
PS I AM MOVING ALL OF THESE ARTICLES TO THE ONE THREAD-
"WAR CRIMES-ILLEGAL INVASION" SO THIS INFO WILL BE IN ONE PLACE.
=======================================================================
10 Jul 2004 20:40 UTC
Bush Defends Iraq Invasion
************************
Scott Stearns
Pennsylvania
09 Jul 2004, 22:27 UTC
**********************
Listen to Scott Stearns' report (RealAudio)
Stearns report - Download 325k (RealAudio)
President Bush has welcomed a Senate investigation into
"intelligence lapses" in the run-up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
Democratic challenger John Kerry says Mr. Bush went to war without a
plan to win the peace.
President Bush says he appreciates the Senate's work because
one of the key ingredients in winning the fight against terrorism is
*******************************************************************
improving the quality of U.S. intelligence.
******************************************
AP
George Bush
**********
"The idea that the Senate has taken a hard look to find out where the
intelligence gathering services went short is good and positive," he
said.
"And I commend the chairman of the committee for doing that.
We need to know. I want to know."
*******************************
While this report does "not examine how President Bush used
intelligence"
to make his case for toppling Saddam Hussein, the report does conclude
that most key judgments related to Iraq's alleged weapons of mass
destruction programs were either overstated or not supported by raw
intelligence.
*******************************************************************
The report accused the U.S. intelligence community of what it called
"group think," saying it interpreted ambiguous evidence as conclusive
and never challenged the assumption that Iraq had illegal weapons.
The "immediacy of that threat" was the president's biggest
justification for
****************************************************************************
invading Iraq.
*************
"There have been "some" failures,"
===============================
he acknowledged.
"Listen, we thought there were going to be stockpiles of weapons.
**************************************************************
I thought so.
************
The Congress thought so.
**********************
The U.N. thought so.
********************
"I will tell you what "we do know". Saddam Hussein had "the capacity"
to make
===========================================================================
weapons. See, he had the "ability to make them."
==============================================
Despite those intelligence failures,
President Bush says he would do the same thing again if confronted
with the
============================================================================
same threat because he says
==========================
the world is better off and America is safer without Saddam Hussein in
power.
===========================================================================
President Bush was asked about the report throughout his day of
campaigning in Pennsylvania and
at each stop offered support for the men and women who work in the
U.S.
**********************************************************************
intelligence community, saying "they are doing the very best job they
can."
***********************************************************************
Campaigning in the neighboring state of West Virginia, Senator Kerry
did not mention the intelligence report directly, but said he and his
Democratic running mate, North Carolina Senator John Edwards, would
not lead the country into war without a clear threat.
"This president rushed to war without a plan to win the peace," he
stated.
"John Edwards and I will put back in place America's time honored
tradition. The United States of America never goes to war because we
want to. We go to war because we have to. That's the standard for this
country."
Mr. Bush says:
"he wants to know" how to improve U.S. intelligence collection
==============================================================
and analysis and
============
will work with Congress to follow through on what he called "a useful
report".
===========================================================================
President Bush says he has already made some of the changes
recommended by the intelligence committee including better information
sharing through the "Terrorist Threat Integration Center."
White House officials also cite the "U.S. Patriotic Act", which
authorizes broader police powers and efforts to refocus the FBI to
make counter-terrorism its top priority.
==============================
Email this article to a friend.
Printer Friendly Version
Related Stories
US Senate Report Sharply Criticizes Pre-War Intelligence on Iraq
US Senate to Release Report on Pre-War Intelligence, Friday
English - Worldwide Home| About Us| Contact VOANEWS| Disclaimer &
Privacy Notice| Top of Page
Flip Flopper@aol.com Edwards Says Bush was Right !
Kerry Said Saddam Had Already Used WMD And Had Intent "To Do So" Again.
"[T]here are set of principles here that are very large, larger in some
measure than I think has been adequately conveyed, both internationally and
certainly to the American people. Saddam Hussein has already used these
weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by
virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat
to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the
potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to
regions near but not exactly in the Middle East." (Sen. John Kerry, Press
Conference, 2/23/98)
Kerry Said That If Saddam's Weapon Capability Was Not Eliminated "We Will Be
Called On To Send Our Ships And Our Troops At One Point In The Future Back
To The Middle East." "Saddam Hussein has violated . that standard [against
using weapons of mass destruction] on several occasions previously and by
most people's expectation, no matter what agreement we come up with, may
well do so again. The greater likelihood is that we will be called on to
send our ships and our troops at one point in the future back to the Middle
East to stand up to the next crisis." (Sen. John Kerry, Press Conference,
2/23/98)
December 1997
Kerry Urged U.N. To Eliminate Iraq's "Suspected Infrastructure For
Developing And Manufacturing Weapons Of Mass Destruction." "Democratic
Senator John Kerry has said: 'The Security Council should authorize a strong
UN military response that will materially damage, if not totally destroy, as
much as possible of the suspected infrastructure for developing and
manufacturing weapons of mass destruction.' He added that 'Saddam Hussein
has intentionally or inadvertently set up a test which the entire world will
be watching, and if he gets away with this arrogant ploy, he will have
terminated the most important multilateral effort to defuse a legitimate
threat to global security.'" ("US Lawmakers Threaten Military Action
Against Iraq," Agence France Presse, 12/12/97)
November 1997
Kerry Warned U.S. Senate Of Saddam's WMD Capabilities. "It is not possible
to overstate the ominous implications for the Middle East if Saddam were to
develop and successfully militarize and deploy potent biological weapons. We
can all imagine the consequences. Extremely small quantities of several
known biological weapons have the capability to exterminate the entire
population of cities the size of Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. These could be
delivered by ballistic missile, but they also could be delivered by much
more pedestrian means; aerosol applicators on commercial trucks easily could
suffice. If Saddam were to develop and then deploy usable atomic weapons,
the same holds true." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 11/9/97, pp.
S12254 -S12255)
Joann Burris
that Irag had WMD and he was merely trying to stop what happened on 9/ll
from hapening again.
Bush is an extremely honest man and it saddens him when he hears of our
men getting hurt because he sent these troops to Iraq, but he had to get
that madman out of Iraq, because Saddam had no feelings for anyone but
himself and would have attacked any country (including ours) if it
served his purpose.
Hooray for President Bush.
Shooty Canseco
"Joann Burris" <forlovin...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:15265-40...@storefull-3232.bay.webtv.net...
> I don't think President Bush lied, I think Bush was lied to.
If Bush was lied to:
(1) Why hasn't he said so?
(2) Why hasn't he held anyone accountable?
The American people will hold Bush accountable in November.
Shooty
save-our-democracy
> "Joann Burris" <forlovin...@webtv.net> wrote in message
> news:15265-40...@storefull-3232.bay.webtv.net...
>
> > I don't think President Bush lied, I think Bush was lied to.
SHOOTY'S BEST EVER POST (BELOW)...WHICH:
"ASKS THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT QUESTIONS THAT
"ALL AMERICANS" SHOULD NOT ONLY "BE ASKING", BUT "DEMANDING ANSWERS".
SYLVIA &;D
========================
> If Bush was lied to:
>
> (1) Why hasn't he said so?
======================
> (2) Why hasn't he held anyone accountable?
> =====================================
save-our-democracy
<15265-40...@storefull-3232.bay.webtv.net>...
>
(1)I don't think President Bush lied, I think Bush was lied to.
-----
MY RESPONSE:
NO DEAR, YOU "DO NOT THINK"...IF YOU DID YOU WOULD KNOW BETTER.
BUSH HAS BEEN LYING THROUGH HIS TEETH, AND SO SAYS A FORMER CIA
ANALYST,
OF 27 YEARS, WHO WROTE THE BELOW ARTICLE "TODAY"...HOW TIMELY FOR YOU.
BUSH "WAS NOT LIED TO...HE "ORDERED" THE LIES..AGAIN "READ" BELOW.
(2)He "thought" that Irag had WMD and
he was merely trying to stop what happened on 9/ll from hapening
again.
------
MY RESPONSE:
HOW DO "YOU" KNOW WHAT BUSH "THOUGHT" AND
"WHAT HE WAS "MERELY" TRYING TO DO???
UNLESS YOU HAVE THE "SAME GOD-LIKE POWERS" THAT BUSH "SAYS HE HAS,
(I.E.BUSH SAYS "HE TALKS TO GOD AND GOD TALKS BACK TO HIM)
YOU, LIKE MILLIONS OF OTHER SO-CALLED AMERICANS, HAVE JUST BEEN
SUCCESSFULLY CONNED AND YOU "NEED" TO DO SOME "REAL HOMEWORK".
FORTUNATELY FOR YOU, YOU CAN START RIGHT HERE, IN THIS GROUP AND
START READING THOSE POSTS THAT HAVE "ALL CAPS AND SIGNED BY
SAVE-OUR-DEMOCRACY".
(3)Bush is an extremely honest man
------
MY RESPONSE:
YOU JUST MADE ME PUKE!
WHERE DO YOU COME OFF TELL US THAT "YOU KNOW BUSH IS HONEST"..BOY,
YOU ARE WORSE OFF THAN I THOUGHT...I HAVE THIS BRIDGE FOR SALE, AND I
HAVE NO DOUBTS THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO BUY IT.
(4) and it saddens him when he hears of our men getting hurt
----
MY RESPONSE:
MY GOD WOMAN, NOW YOU "KNOW WHAT MAKES HIM SAD"...
ARE YOU WRITING THIS IN A MENTAL INSTITUTION????
(5)because he sent these troops to Iraq, but he had to get that
"madman out of Iraq",
----------
MY RESPONSE"
THE "REAL MADMAN "IS" BUSH, AND SADDAH HUSSEIN, IN CASE THAT IS WHO
YOU REFERRING TO....IS "STILL IN IRAQ", IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED.
(5) because Saddam had no feelings for anyone but himself
---
MY RESPONSE:
OH, I SEE, NOT ONLY CAN YOU READ GEORGE BUSH'S MIND AND HEART, YOU
ALSO HAVE THE SELF-RIGHTOUS GODLY GIFT, OF ALSO READING HUSSEIN'S
MIND AND HEART...WELL DEAR, I CAN TELL YOU THAT UNTIL I PUT A BIG
SIGN ON MY DOOR SAYING "BIBLE THUMPERS DON'T TOUCH THIS DOOR", I
WAS BEING CONSTANTLY HARASSED BY RELIGIOUS KOOKS, LIKE WHAT YOU
APPEAR TO BE.I.E. JUST SO WRAPPED UP IN YOUR SELF-CENTERED AND
SELF-PERCEIVED GODLINESS, THAT YOU WENT NUTS.
(6)and would have attacked any country (including ours) if it
> served his purpose.
-----
MY RESPONSE:
DEARY, EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE SAID ABOUT SADDAM HUSSEIN "APPLIES TO
GEORGE W. BUSH" BUT YOU ARE TOO LAZY AND STUPID TO KNOW IT. NOW READ
THE ARTICLE I AM POSTING HERE "JUST FOR YOU". AND IF THAT ONE DOESN'T
OPEN UP YOUR EYES AND BRAIN, START READING ALL OF THE REST IN THIS
GROUP.
YOU NEED HELP BUT I HAVE A FEELING IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH
"INFORMATION".
>
(7)Hooray for President Bush.
-----
MY RESPONSE:
YEP...YOU ARE A TYPICAL EXAMPLE OF AN "AMERICAN MORON"..BUSH WOULD
KILL
YOU ON THE SPOT, IF YOU GOT IN HIS WAY DEARY, BUT YOU ARE SO DUMB YOU
WOULD OBVIOUSLY JUST LAY DOWN AND LET HIM RUN YOU OVER WITH HIS TANK
IN
ORDER TO PLEASE HIM. GET SOME PSYCHIATRIC HELP GIRL..YOU NEED IT.
SYLVIA
=================
RE-POSTED HERE FROM:
------------------
From: mcs...@yahoo.com (save-our-democracy)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.alaska
Subject:
Re: YEA! SENATE "WILL" INVESTIGATE WHITE HOUSE-RE WMD
7-14-04-CIA ANALYST OF 27 YEARS, RAY MCGOVERN, HAS SAID IN THE BELOW
===============================================
ARTICLE ALMOST EVERYTHING I HAVE
SAID...CONFIRMING MY "ACCURATE
SUSPICIONS".
THE TRUTHOUT ARTICLES ARE NOT SENT OUT UNTIL
ABOUT 5:00 P.M. (PST) OR
LATER,
WHILE "MY ARTICLES "WITH MY OPINIONS" WERE POSTED
HERE STARTING EARLY
THIS MORNING, YET I HAD MADE MANY OF THE "SAME
STATEMENTS" WEEKS AGO,
SO THERE IS
NO WAY THAT I COULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THIS
ARTICLE.
WHAT'S MY POINT? IT'S JUST TO TELL YOU ALL...I
TOLD YOU SO. &:D
===========================================================
BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY...MCGOVERN MAKES IT "CLEAR"
WITHOUT COMING RIGHT
OUT
ANY SAYING SO.....
"BUSH AND HIS HENCHMEN "KNOWINGLY AND
INTENTIONALLY (TWO NECESSARY
ELEMENTS TO A "CRIMINAL INDICTMENT"....ORDERED
TENET, DIRECTOR OF THE
C.I.A. AND OTHERS, TO "KNOWINGLY AND
INTENTIONALLY..PRODUCE "FALSE
REPORTS RE IRAQ'S WMD" FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF:
PROPAGANDA TO CON THE ENTIRE WORLD, ESPECIALLY
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, TO
"BELIEVE
THAT WE WERE ALL IN "IMMINENT DANGER OF A
NUCLEAR, BIOLOGICAL, AND/OR
CHEMICAL
ATTACK FROM SADDAM HUSSEIN".
WELL....MOST OF YOU BOUGHT IT, "HOOK LINE AND
SINKER",
====================================================
AND NOW,
"WHAT CAN YOU TELL THE FAMILIES OF ALL THE DEAD"
AND ALL THOSE
AMERICANS WHO DESPERATELY NEEDED SERVICES, SUCH
AS HEALTH CARE, WHICH
ARE
BEING CUT OFF, DUE TO THE INTENTIONAL ROBBERY OF
OUR TREASURY"???
ARE YOU "NOW MAD AS HELL"??
=========================
ARE YOU "NOW READY TO FIGHT BACK"?
=================================
WHAT SAY YOU AMERICANS? YOU HAVE NOW BEEN SHOWN
THAT YOU, "IN FACT"
HAVE A CORRUPT FASCIST GOVERNMENT, WHO
INTENTIONALLY SAW TO IT THAT
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF HUMAN BEINGS HAVE BEEN
"MURDERED", ALL FOR
THE SAKE OF
"POWER, GREED, AND THE "WISHES OF CERTIFIABLE
RELIGIOUS
LUNATICS"...YOUR
SO-CALLED "PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES" AND
HIS DOZEN OR SO
FASCISTS,
WHICH INCLUDE THE "NATION'S TOP LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICER, U.S. ATTORNEY
GENERAL, JOHN ASHCROFT WHO WILL DIE BEFORE
PROSECUTING HIS HERO,
GEORGE BUSH.
======================
SYLVIA
=====================================
Print This Story E-mail This Story
Go to Original http://www.truthout.org
Iraq: An Intelligence Debacle...and Worse
****************************************
By Ray McGovern
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Tuesday 13 July 2004
*********************
In our various oral and written presentations on
Iraq, my veteran
intelligence officer colleagues and I took no
delight in sharply
criticizing what we perceived to be the
corruption of intelligence
analysis at CIA.
Nothing would have pleased us more than to have
been proven wrong.
It turns out we did not know the half of it.
==========================================
Several of us have just spent a painful weekend
digesting the report
of the Senate Intelligence Committee on prewar
intelligence
assessments on Iraq.
The corruption is far deeper than we suspected.
===============================================
The only silver lining is that the
corrupter-in-chief, George Tenet,
is now
===========================================================================
gone.
=====
When the former CIA Director departed Sunday,
he left behind an agency on life support -
an institution staffed by sycophant managers and
thoroughly demoralized analysts.
The analysts are embarrassed at their own naiveté
in believing that
the passage carved into the marble at the
entrance to CIA Headquarters
-
"You will know the truth, and the truth will set
you free" -
==========================================================
held real meaning for their work.
The Senate Committee report is meticulous.
Its findings are a sharp blow to those of us who
took pride in working
in an agency where:
"we could speak truth to power" -
==============================
with career protection from retribution from the
powerful, and
with leaders who would face down those
policymakers,
who tried to exert undue influence over our
analysis.
===================================================
Enter "Joe Centrifuge"
=====================
Although it was clear to us that:
"much of the intelligence on Iraq had been cooked
to the recipe of
"policy",
=========================================================================
not until the Senate report did we know that:
the skewing "included outright lies."
==================================
We had heard of "Joe,"
=======================
the nuclear weapons analyst in
CIA's Center for Weapons Intelligence and Arms
Control, and
it was abundantly clear that his agenda was to
"prove" that
===========================================================
the infamous aluminum tubes sought by Iraq
were to be used for developing a nuclear weapon.
================================================
We "did not know" that he and his CIA associates
falsified the data -
===================================================================
including rotor testing ironically called "spin
tests."
The Senate committee determined that "Joe"
deliberately skewed data to
fit "preconceptions regarding an Iraqi nuclear
threat."
======================================================
"Who could have believed that about our
intelligence community,
that the system could be so dishonest?"
wondered the normally soft-spoken David Albright,
a widely respected veteran expert on Iraq's work
toward developing a
nuclear weapon.
I share his wonderment.
I too am appalled - and angry.
==============================
You give 27 years of your professional life to an
institution whose
main mission -
to get at the truth -
is essential for orderly policy making, and
then you find it has been prostituted.
======================================
You realize that your "former colleagues have
lacked the moral
courage"
needed to stave off the effort to
"enlist them as accomplices in deceiving"
========================================
our elected representatives into giving their
blessing to an
ill-conceived, "unnecessary war."
===============
Even "Republican stalwart Sen. Pat Roberts",
chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee,
has conceded that,
"had Congress known "before the vote" for war
===========================================
what his committee has now discovered,
======================================
"I doubt if the votes would have been there."
===========================================
Pandering to the "Powers That Be"
=================================
It turns out that "only one US analyst"
=======================================
had met with the now-infamous Iraqi defector
appropriately
=========================================================
codenamed "Curveball,"
=====================
the source of the scary tale about "mobile
biological weapons
factories."
========================================================================
This analyst, in an e-mail,
to the deputy director of CIA's task force on
weapons of mass
destruction, raised strong doubt regarding
Curveball's reliability
======================================================
"before" Colin Powell highlighted his claims at
the UN on Feb. 5,
2003.
========================================================================
I almost became physically ill reading the
cynical response from the
deputy director of the task force:
"As I said last night, let's keep in mind the
fact that this war's
going to
===========================================================================
happen regardless of what Curveball said or
didn't say,
=======================================================
and "the powers that be" probably aren't terribly
interested in
whether
========================================================================
Curveball knows what he's talking about."
========================================
(Reading this brought to consciousness a painful
flashback to early
August 1964.
(We CIA analysts knew that reports of a second
attack on US destroyers
in the (Tonkin Gulf were spurious but we were
prevented from reporting
that to (policymakers and to Congress.
(The then-Director of Current Intelligence
explained to us
condescendingly
(that President Johnson had decided to "use the
non-incident" as a
"pretext" to
==========================================================================
(escalate the war" and
===============
(that "we do not want to wear out our welcome at
the White House."
==================================================================
(So this kind of politicization, though rare in
the past,
(is not without precedent - and not without
similarly woeful
consequences.)
=========================================================================
With respect to Iraq, George Tenet's rhetoric
about "truth" and
"honesty" in his valedictory last week has a
distinctly Orwellian
ring.
Worse still, apparently "Joe Centrifuge," the
above mentioned deputy
director,
=============================================================================
and other co-conspirators will get off scot-free.
=================================================
=================================================
Sen. Roberts says he thinks:
"It is very important that we quit looking in the
rear-view mirror and
******************************************************************
affixing blame and, you know, pointing fingers."
*************************************************
And "Acting Director (CIA) John McLaughlin,
******************************************
has told the press that he sees
********************************
"no need to dismiss anyone as a result of:
******************************************
what he portrayed as honest, limited mistakes.
**********************************************
Tell It To The Families
========================
I would like to hear Roberts and McLaughlin
explain all this to the
families of the almost 900 US servicemen and
women already killed and
the many thousand seriously wounded in Iraq.
Roberts seemed at pains to lay the blame on a
"flawed system," but
a close reading of the committee report yields
the "unavoidable
conclusion" that CIA analysis can no longer be
assumed to be honest -
to be aimed at getting as close to the truth as
one can humanly get.
For those of you cynics about to smirk, I can
only tell you -
believe it or not -
that truth was in fact the currency of analysis
in the CIA
in which I was proud to serve.
Aberrations like the Tonkin Gulf cave-in by CIA
management
notwithstanding,
the analysis directorate was widely known as the
unique place in
Washington where one could normally go and expect
a straight answer
unencumbered by any political agenda.
And we were hard into some very controversial -
often critical -
national security issues.
It boggles my mind how any president, and
====================================
particularly one whose father headed the CIA,
=============================================
could expect to be able, without that capability,
==================================================
to make intelligent judgments based on unbiased
fact.
===================================================
It is said that truth is the first casualty of
war.
=================================================
Sadly, in the case of Iraq,
"even before the war"
====================
truth took a back seat to a felt need to "snuggle
up to power" -
============================================================
to stay in good odor with a president and his
advisers,
=====================================================
all well known to be hell-bent on war on Iraq.
=============================================
*********************************************
Caution: Don't Be Fooled
=========================
The Washington Times lead story on July 10 began:
"Flawed intelligence that led the United States
to invade Iraq
was the fault of the US intelligence community...
a report by the Senate Select Committee on
Intelligence concluded
yesterday."
From the other end of the political spectrum,
David Corn of The Nation led his own report with,
"The United States went to war on the basis of
false claims."
Not so.
This is "precisely the spin that the Bush
administration wants to
give" to the
====================================================================
Senate report;
============
i. e.,
that the "president was misled";
=============================
that "his decision for war" was based on spurious
intelligence
==============================================================
about non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
==============================================
But the "president's decision for war"
======================================
had little to do with intelligence on Iraqi
weapons of mass
destruction.
=======================================================================
It had everything to do with the administration's
determination to
gain
=======================================================================
control of strategic, oil-rich Iraq,
====================================
implant an enduring military presence there, and
-
============================================
not incidentally - eliminate any possible threat
from Iraq to Israel's
======================================================================
security.
========
These, of course, were "not the reasons given" to
===============================================
justify placing US troops in harms way, but
even the most circumspect senior officials have
had unguarded moments
of candor.
For example, when asked in May 2003 why North
Korea was being treated
differently from Iraq,
Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz
responded:
=================================================
"Let's look at it simply...The country (Iraq)
swims on a sea of oil."
====================================================================
And basking in the glory of "Mission
Accomplished" shortly after
Baghdad had fallen,
Wolfowitz admitted that the focus on weapons of
mass destruction
================================================================
to justify the attack on Iraq was "for
bureaucratic reasons."
============================================================
It was, he added,
"the one reason everyone could agree on" -
meaning, of course,
=============================================================
the one that "could successfully sell the war"
to:
=================================================
Congress and the American people.
================================
The Israel factor?
===================
In another moment of unusual candor - this one
"before the war" -
Philip Zelikow,
==============
a member of the President's Foreign Intelligence
Advisory Board
from 2001 to 2003
(and now executive director of the 9/11
commission),
pointed to the danger that Iraq posed to Israel
as "the unstated
threat -
=======================================================================
a threat that dare not speak its name...because
it is not a popular
sell."
=========================================================================
Last, but hardly least.
It was "not until several months after" the Bush
White House
======================================
"decided to make war on Iraq" that the
weapons-of-mass-destruction-laden
========================================================================
National Intelligence Estimate was commissioned,
and
===============================================
then "only" because
Congress needed to be persuaded that the threat
was so immediate that
war was
=============================================================================
necessary.
=======
Vice President Dick Cheney
===========================
"set the main parameters" in a major speech on
August 26, 2002,
===============================================================
in which he declared:
"We know" that Saddam has resumed his efforts to
acquire nuclear
weapons."
***********************************************************************
The "estimate" (NIE) Tenet signed,
==================================
dutifully endorsed that "spurious judgment" -
=========================================
with "high confidence," no less.
===============================
Is There Hope?
*************
If hope is what is found at the bottom of
Pandora's box,
it can be found here too.
That there are still honest, perceptive analysts
at CIA is clear from
the analysis that Anonymous sets forth in his
excellent book:
"Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War
on Terror.
==========================================================
(Note to Condoleezza Rice: Anonymous' name is
Michael Scheuer;
he is an overt employee;
you can get his extension from the CIA operator -
just call 703 482
1100.)
As long as analysts of Scheuer's caliber hang in
there,
there can be hope that, once the CIA is given the
=================================================
"adult supervision it has lacked" for "the last
two dozen years",
====================================
it can get back on track in performing its
critical job for our
country.
=======================================================================
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ray McGovern, a CIA analyst for 27 years, is
co-founder of Veteran
Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.
This article first appeared on TomPaine.com
-------
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,
this material is
distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information
for research and
educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no
affiliation whatsoever
with the originator of this article nor is t r u
t h o u t endorsed or
sponsored by the originator.)
Print This Story E-mail This Story
© : t r u t h o u t 2004
| t r u t h o u t | forum | issues | editorial |
letters | donate |
contact |
| voting rights | environment | budget | children
| politics |
indigenous survival | energy |
| defense | health | economy | human rights |
labor | trade | women |
reform | global |
save-our-democracy
INSANE RHETORIC, "BROUGHT ON"
========================================================================
AND UNITED..THOUSANDS OF ARABS IN AND OUT OF
IRAQ, TO KILL U.S.
SOLDIERS.
========================================================================
AT THIS WRITING, JULY 13, 2004, THOUSANDS OF
"MORE AMERICAN MEN" ARE
BEING FORCED TO GO INTO IRAQ, WHILE TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF REMAINING
U.S. TROOPS, ARE "TOLD" THEY HAVE TO "STAY
LONGER".
ALSO NOTE (BELOW):
=================
THE "ONLY REFERENCE BUSH USES REGARDING IRAQ
"HAVING WMD" DEALS WITH THE 1980'S", WHEN HUSSEIN "USED THE BIOLOGICAL
AND CHEMICAL WEAPONS,
"OUR POLITICIANS" NAMELY, RUMSFELD, GAVE TO HIM
TO USE AGAINST THE IRANIANS, WHICH HE DID, AND ALSO AGAINST THE
"KURDS", WHO LIVE IN NORTHERN IRAQ AND ARE, AT THIS WRITING, BEING
TRAINED AND SUPPLIED WITH WEAPONS, BY "THE ISRAELIS, RIGHT NOW...TO FIGHT
AGAINST THE U.S.TROOPS.
SEE THOSE ARTICLES UNDER MY THREAD: "ISRAEL IN IRAQ"..FRIEND OR FOE."
===================================================================
THE U.S. HAS BEEN "SUPPORTING ISRAEL FOR DECADES,
WHILE THE U.N. HAS DECLARED ISRAEL IN VIOLATION OF "WAR CRIMES", AS
WELL AS YOU AND ME "PAYING ISRAEL $4-9 "B"ILLION DOLLARS A YEAR TO
"PROTECT THE OIL FIELDS IN THE MIDDLE EAST"..AND NOW...ISRAEL IS CLEARLY
"SUPPORTING THOSE ARABS WHO ARE KILLING AMERICANS IN IRAQ".
IS THIS NUTS, CRAZY, INSANE? YES...BUT THAT IS "WHAT BUSH & CO WANTS,
I.E.
THE CONTROL OF OIL AND THE MIDDLE EAST..AT "ALL
COSTS" AND THAT INCLUDES, "THE LIVES OF ALL AMERICAN TROOPS"..IT'S CALLED
"FRIENDLY FIRE", I BELIEVE.
===========
IT HAS BEEN KNOWN FOR DECADES THAT U.S. TROOPS
"USUALLY SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT WHO "DEMANDS THE TROOPS BE CALLED UP
FOR A WAR"...THAT IS "UNTIL VIETNAM"...WAKE UP TROOPS...THIS IS
"ANOTHER VIETNAM" AND "IF YOU AND YOUR FAMILY RE-ELECTS GEORGE BUSH, BUSH
IS ALREADY ON RECORD, STATING THAT THERE ARE "60 OTHER COUNTRIES" WHICH
HAVE "TERRORISTS" AND HE IS GOING AFTER THEM ALSO.
IT'S "YOUR LIFE" AND THAT OF YOUR SONS,AND
YOUR SON'S SON, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT NOW...
TELL US AGAIN....EXACTLY "HOW WAS IRAQ A THREAT TO THE U.S."? SYLVIA
========================================================================
Bush Says Iraqi Resistance Will Be Treated 'Harshly'
*************************************************
By Scott Laidlaw
Associated Press Writer
Wednesday, July 2, 2003; 12:06 PM
======================================
President Bush pledged Wednesday that the United
States will deal
harshly with those who attack American troops in
Iraq, and said:
such violence will "not undercut his resolve to
keep Americans there"
until
========================================================================
stability is restored.
======================
"Anybody who wants to harm American troops will
be found and brought
to justice," Bush said at an impromptu news
conference at the White
House.
"There are some who feel like if they attack us,
we may decide to
leave prematurely. They don't understand what
they're talking about if
that's the case."
Increasing attacks have killed 26 U.S. soldiers
since Bush declared
major combat over on May 1.
On Tuesday, assailants traveling in a vehicle in
central Baghdad fired
a rocket-propelled grenade at a U.S. military
vehicle, wounding three
soldiers. Another grenade slammed into a U.S.
truck on a road south of
Baghdad, injuring three soldiers, one of whom
died at a field hospital
overnight.
"There are some who feel like that, you know,
the conditions are such that they can attack us
there.
My answer is bring them on," Bush said.
**************************
"We got the force necessary to deal with the
security situation."
================================================================
Bush said he would welcome assistance from other
countries willing to
send troops to help restore peace.
"Anybody who wants to help, we'll welcome," Bush
said.
"But we got plenty tough force there right now to
make sure the
situation is
===========================================================================
secure."
=======
He also promised harsh justice for people who
sabotage Iraqi
infrastructure such as power lines.
"Those who blow up the electricity lines really
aren't hurting
America, they're hurting the Iraq citizens," Bush
said.
"Their own fellow citizens are being hurt. But we
will deal with them
harshly as well."
The president also gave a forceful defense of the
Iraqi war.
============================================================
He "rejected a question" about:
whether there was a gap between what intelligence
and
================================================
administration officials reported as the threat
from Saddam Hussein,
and
==================================================================
the scant evidence found so far of an Iraqi
weapons program.
===========================================================
"Saddam Hussein "had" a weapons program," Bush
said.
=====================================
"Remember" he used them -- he used chemical
weapons on his own
people."
=====================================================================
Bush "made no mention of the failure" of U.S.
teams
to find evidence of weapons" of mass destruction,
but said,
"We're bringing some order to the country and
we're beginning to learn the truth."
=================================
Bush did "not" explicitly promise, as "he has in
the past",
========================================================
that weapons or evidence of a weapons program
will be found.
=========================================================
But, he said,
"It's just a matter of time, a matter of time."
=============================================
He also expressed:
"impatience with the criticism leveled at his
administration" in
recent weeks.
============================================================
"See, we've been there for, what -- I mean, how
many days", Bush said.
"Eighty, 90?
Frankly, it wasn't all that long ago that we
started military
operations.
And we got rid of him; much faster than a lot of
people thought."
And Bush "compared the Iraqi operation to the
humanitarian effort"
he is undertaking to combat AIDS in Africa and
the Caribbean.
"It's been a "great honor" to "lead our nation"
in:
*******************************************
not only the cause of humanitarian relief through
an AIDS initiative,
but
also to lead our nation to free people from
the clutches of what history will show was an
incredibly barbaric
regime," Bush said.
© 2003 The Associated Press
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related Links
Full Mideast Coverage
save-our-democracy
==============================================
News Updates Sunday, July 13, 2003
Tamuz 13, 5763 Israel Time: 07:31 (GMT+3)
`Road map is a life saver for us,' PM Abbas tells Hamas
*******************************************************
By Arnon Regular
Selected minutes acquired by Haaretz from one of last week's
cease-fire
=======================================================================
negotiations between:
====================
Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas and
*******************************************
faction leaders from:
the Hamas,
Islamic Jihad and
the Popular and Democratic Fronts,
reveal some of the factors at play behind the scenes in the
effort to achieve a hudna.
-------------
Abbas opened the session after hearing scathing criticism from
faction leaders for his Aqaba speech in which he defined
their activities as "terrorism."
He began with a broad review of his two meetings with Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon and the Aqaba summit.
"After seven days we did not reach agreement in Cairo on either the
hudna or the united leadership. These points were later discussed in
contacts in Gaza and in my view, the two points are the ones that
should be on the
table."
Abbas said:
"The descriptions of what happened at Sharm el Sheikh and in Aqaba are
vague in parts and in some parts are inventions, so this is an
opportunity to
talk about what happened since the PA accepted the road map on
December 20," he said.
"Despite our reservations we decided not to make them an obstacle,
believing that the road map was a life saver for a tiger whose head
was caught
in the neck of the bottle."
Abbas said:
"we were told that [President George] Bush is committed to the
establishment of a viable Palestinian state beside the state of
Israel, so based on our saying that we are ready to try that
experiment, that is what was determined."
He explained to the faction leaders that with regard to the first
phase of the road map, there was an agreement with the Americans that
"the Palestinians would speak publicly about their commitments
according to the map and then
the Israelis would do the same thing."
From there, he moved on to describe what happened at the summits. He
said that Bush told the Arab leaders that he is fully committed to a
solution based on his "vision speech" from June 24, 2002 and is ready
to move forward "if there
is help on your part."
"The Arabs supported him and I said we are ready to fulfill our
commitments as they appear in the map," said Abbas. He said the
discussion of the start of the implementation of the map dealt with
Gaza, where he said that Palestinian
Authority institutions "are 75 percent destroyed, while in the West
Bank they are 100 percent destroyed."
He emphasized that at that stage he made clear to the participants at
the Sharm summit that "we need time and capabilities to stand on our
feet. And I explained that I had already spoken with Ariel Sharon
about reaching a hudna between all the Palestinian factions."
According to Abbas, "Bush exploded with anger and said `there can be
no deals with terror groups.' We told him that they are part of our
people and we cannot deal with them in any other way. We cannot begin
with repression, under no circumstances, and I made clear to Bush that
Sharon already agreed with that."
He said that he presented Bush with the deliberations about the hudna
that he had with Sharon in Jerusalem after he was appointed prime
minister.
He explained to Bush that the dialogue between the Palestinian
factions that
****************************************************************************
began in Cairo and continued in Gaza were on the verge of completion.
*******************************************************************
He said that Bush said
"a case-fire is not the whole story" -
Bush meant that a hudna is only the start of the process of disarming
the groups.
Abbas outlined the political contacts during the Aqaba summit and said
he added the prisoner issue at the three-way session with Bush and
Sharon.
"I told them the prisons are the election district for a campaign of
calm in the Palestinian territories."
He said Bush then turned to Sharon "with the following words,
`look what you can profit from this,
that holding onto the prisoners only creates tension.'"
Abbas said:
"We were asked what we need if Israel withdraws and we said `that
there not be raids, chases, assassinations or house demolitions,
because that kind of activity will destroy everything.'"
Abbas tried to placate the faction leaders by telling them that
Palestinian Security Minister Mohammed Dahlan had raised the exact
same issues with John Wolf, the American monitor of the road map.
He tried to explain that in the wake of the failed attempt on Abdel
Aziz Rantisi's life, the PA was now insisting on an end to the
assassinations.
He went on to explain his speech in Aqaba.
"We did not speak of our rights but only of our commitments.
Bush was impressed by that and mentioned the prisoners and settlements
in his speech."
On the matter of the right of return, Abbas said "that right
appears in all the previous initiatives, and is not under discussion
now.
Bush asked, if that's the case, why mention the settlements now, and I
told him the settlements are happening now. The Israelis use the
excuse of
natural growth and I told them that according to U.S. statistics, 33
percent of settlements are empty. We said the growth should happen
westward, and not on our territory."
Abbas said that at Aqaba, Bush promised to speak with Sharon about the
siege on Arafat.
He said nobody can speak to or pressure Sharon except the Americans.
*******************************************************************
According to Abbas, immediately thereafter Bush said:
****************************************************
"God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them,
****************************************************
and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did,
***********************************************************
and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East.
**************************************************************
"If you help me I will act, and if not,
*************************************
the elections will come and I will have to
*******************************************
focus on them."
**************
© Copyright 2004 Haaretz. All rights reserved
Post a follow-up to this message
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Google Home - Advertising Programs - Business Solutions - About Google
©2004 Google
Jim Booth
*EVERY* investigation has proved that President Bush did not receive factual
information....that included information from the French, Russians, English,
and our own agencies.
The Director of the CIA has resigned.
What more proof do you need? Even the leading Democrats have stated that
Bush received misleading information along with Congress.
What more do you want?
JIM
Shooty Canseco
"Jim Booth" <bo...@alaska.net> wrote in message
news:40f8...@news.acsalaska.net...
> *EVERY* investigation has proved that President Bush did not receive
factual
> information
Oh cool, you've come over to my side on this. Yes, Bush went to war for
false purposes unsupported by facts.
Shooty
Doug Chadduck
> What more proof do you need? Even the leading Democrats have stated that
> Bush received misleading information along with Congress.
>
> What more do you want?
>
How about taking some responsibility for the mess we're in in Iraq?
How about something like "I screwed up. I'm sorry."
But that will never happen.
Back to just hanging out and reading here.
Doug
John P. Mullen
Its called "deniability."
Bush has a long history of isolating himself from information he does
not want to know. He did it as governor of Texas and I have no reason
to suspect he has changed.
John Mullen
save-our-democracy
> news:10f748q...@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > "Joann Burris" <forlovin...@webtv.net> wrote in message
> > news:15265-40...@storefull-3232.bay.webtv.net...
> >
> > > I don't think President Bush lied, I think Bush was lied to.
SHOOTY SAID:
> > If Bush was lied to:
> >
> > (1) Why hasn't he said so?
> > (2) Why hasn't he held anyone accountable?
> >
> > The American people will hold Bush accountable in November.
> >
> > Shooty
---------
JIM BOOTH SAYS:
============
> Shooty:
>
(1) *EVERY* investigation has proved that President Bush did not
receive factual
> information....
that included information from the French, Russians, English,
> and our own agencies.
MY RESPONSE:
==========
NOT TRUE...THE CONGRESSIONAL SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, "JUST
ANNOUNCED
THAT THEY WOULD BE INVESTIGATING "WHAT BUSH KNEW AND WHEN HE KNEW IT
AND FROM WHOM....(SEE MY THREAD: "YEA THE SENATE WILL INVESTIGATE THE
WHITE HOUSE".
(2)The Director of the CIA has resigned. What more proof do you need?
====
MY RESPONSE:
==========
YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVEN'T HEARD OF "TAKING THE FALL FOR YOUR BOSS'S
CORRUPTION".
IT'S DONE ALL THE TIME "IN THE MAFIA" AND "THE U.S. WHITE HOUSE
(TURNED CANCER GREEN BY THE CURRENT OCCUPANTS".
TENET "TOOK THE FALL EARLIER" WHEN THE "16 WORDS RE NIGER URANIUM" WAS
EXPOSED, EVEN THOUGH TENET "PUBLICLY STATED "HE TOLD BUSH NOT TO USE
THAT INFO"...AND THEN "TOLD BUSH'S BOY TO THE U.N. NEGROPONTE"..NOT
USE THE INFO....ARE YOU "HEARING ME"....TENET WAS "DOING HIS DUTY TO
TRY AND STOP THESE LYING S.O.B.S BUT "TENET WAS IN "THEIR WAY"...SO
HE GAVE UP AND "PLAYED THE ROLE OF A GOOD LITTLE PROSTITUTE" AND SAID
AND DID, "WHATEVER BUSH * CO. WANTED HIM TO SAY AND DO". OH HELL,
READ MY THREADS BOOTH...IT'S ALL SPELLED OUT THERE.
(3)Even the leading Democrats have stated that
> Bush received misleading information along with Congress.
-------
MY RESPONSE:
NO...THERE WAS A "BIG DIFFERENCE"...BUSH WAS PLAYING "DUMB", A ROLE
THIS IS MORE THAN CONVINCING BECAUSE IT IS TRUE,,,NONE THE LESS "BUSH
KNEW WHAT HIS FASCIST-MAFIA BOYS WERE UP TO SINCE THEY "SET UP THEIR
OWN SO-CALLED INTELLIGENCE AGENCY", THE OSP, (SEE ARTICLE BELOW)IN
WHICH BOTH THE "CIA AND DIA" WERE "NOT A PART OF" AND AS YOU CAN SEE,
THE INTEL THAT "WAS COOKED WAS DONE THERE AND WAS "TOLD TO BUSH" BY
HIS OWN HENCHMENT, RUMSFELD, WOLFOWITZ AND OF COURSE CHENEY WHO WAS
ORDERING THE CIA & DIA "TO PRODUCE A REPORT LIKE HE WANTED IT".
>
(4) What more do you want?
>
> JIM
----
MY RESPONSE:
-----
EVEN THOUGH YOUR POST WAS DIRECTED TO SHOOTY, WHICH HE DID ANSWER IN
TWO GREAT SUCCINCT QUESTIONS, I WILL "PROVIDE, FOR YOUR "PERSONAL
INFORMATION/EDUCATION, THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE THAT "SPECIFICALLY
ANSWERS YOUR QUESTIONS. AND IF THAT DOESN'T DO IT..."READ MY OTHER
POSTINGS"...MORE WILL FOLLOW ON THE "OPS AN PNC" WHICH CLEARLY
LAYS OUT "THE PLAN OF FRAUD" BY BUSH & CO. RE "INTELLIGENCE AND
THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRODUCED" AND WHY.
NOTE: THE SENATE INTEL COMMITTEE HAS CLEARLY STATED, "THEY WILL BE
INVESTIGATING THIS "VERY AGENCY/S I.E. OSP AND PNAC"..READ MY THREAD
UNDER "YEA SENATE WILL INVESTIGATE WHITE HOUSE"....JUST READ, THEN
ASK YOUR QUESTIONS....I PUT A LOT OF WORK IN THESE THREADS FOR THIS
VERY REASON, I.E. "TO INFORM PEOPLE SO THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO WONDER
WHAT
THE ANSWERS ARE...BUT OF COURSE, NEITHER I NOR ANYONE IN THIS GROUP
WAS
PRIVY TO "FIRST HAND INFO, SO WE HAVE TO GO BY "ALL OF THE INFO
AVAILABLE
TO US, AND I CAN TELL YOU FROM MY OWN DECADES OF EXPERIENCE, "DON'T
TRUST MOST OF THE AMERICAN MEDIA...GO OUTSIDE (FOREIGN PAPERS) AND
"THE ACTUAL GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS", NOT SOMEONES "OPINION" OF WHAT
THESE
DOCUMENTS SAY. SYLVIA
=====================
US rivals turn on each other as weapons search draws a blank
==================================================================
One key argument for war was the peril from weapons of mass
destruction.
Now top officials are worried by repeated failures to find the proof -
and US intelligence agencies "engaged in a struggle to avoid the
blame"
=========================================================================
Paul Harris and Martin Bright in London, Taji and Ed Helmore in New
York
Sunday May 11, 2003
*******************
The Observer
The Iraqi military base at Taji does not look like a place of global
importance. It is a desolate expanse of bunkers and hangars surrounded
by barbed wire and battered look-out posts. It is deserted apart from
American sentries at the gate.
Yet Taji, north of Baghdad, is the key to a furious debate.
============================================================
Where are Saddam's weapons of mass destruction?
Was the war fought on a platform of lies?
Taji was the "only specific location singled out by Secretary of State
Colin
=============================================================================
Powell in his address to the UN
================================
when he argued that evidence compiled by "US intelligence proved"
the existence of an illegal weapons programme.
'This is one of 65 such facilities in Iraq,' Powell said.
'We "know" this one "has" housed chemical weapons.'
================================================
But The Observer has learnt that Taji has drawn a blank.
US sources say no such weapons were found when a search party scoured
the base in late April.
=============
By then "it had already been looted" by local villagers.
If Taji ever had any secrets, they are long gone.
That is bad news for Britain and the United States.
The pressure is building to find Saddam's hidden arsenal and time is
running out.
Last week the US flew 2,000 more experts into Iraq.
==================================================
The Iraq Survey Team will join 600 experts already there.
========================================================
Organisations in Iraq hunting for weapons now include teams from:
================================================================
(1)the US and
(2)British armies,
(3)the CIA,
(4)the FBI and
(5)the Defence Threat Reduction Agency.
Yet at more than 110 sites checked so far they have found nothing
conclusive.
===========================================================================
It has been an exercise in false alarms.
======================================
(A)Suspect white powder at Latifiyah was only explosives.
(B)Barrels of what was thought to be sarin and tabun nerve agents
pesticides.
(C)When a dozen US soldiers checked a suspect site and fell ill, it
was because they had inhaled fertiliser fumes.
Each setback ratchets up the political pressure.
"Infighting between government departments" and
==========================================
"intelligence agencies"
======================
is becoming vicious on both sides of the Atlantic.
=================================================
Having fought a war to "disarm Iraq of its terrible weapons",
neither the US nor Britain "can admit" that
Iraq never had them in the first place.
=======================================
The search for weapons of mass destruction cannot be allowed to fail.
The search is especially vital for "The Cabal."
=============================================
In the brave new world of post-11 September America,
this "tight group of analysts" deep in the "heart of the Pentagon"
has been the driving force behind the war in Iraq.
=================================================
"Numbering no more than a dozen,"
=================================
"The Cabal is part of the "Office of Special Plans (OSP),
=========================================================
"a new intelligence agency" which has taken on the CIA and won.
==============================================================
Where the CIA dithered over Iraq, the OSP pressed on.
Where the CIA doubted, the OSP was firm.
=======================================
It fought a battle royal over Iraq and
"George Bush came down on its side."
====================================
The OSP is the brainchild of Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld,
==============================================================
who set it up after the 2001 terrorist attacks.
It was tasked with going over old ground on Iraq and showing that
=================================================================
"the CIA had "overlooked the threat posed.
==========================================
But its rise has caused massive ructions in the
"normally secretive world of intelligence gathering."
===================================================
The OSP reports directly to Paul Wolfowitz, a leading hawk in the
================================================================
administration.
=============
They bypassed the CIA and the Pentagon's own Defence Intelligence
Agency
======================================================================
when it came to "whispering in the President's ear."
=================================================
They argued a forceful case for war against Saddam before his weapons
programmes came to fruition. More moderate voices in the CIA and DIA
were drowned out. The result has been a flurry of leaks to the US
press. One CIA official described The Cabal's members as 'crazed', on
a 'mission from God'.
But for the moment The Cabal and Rumsfeld's Pentagon have won and
Powell's doveish State Department has lost. Tensions between the two
are now in the open.
'Rumsfeld set up his own intelligence agency because he didn't like
the intelligence he was getting,' said Larry Korb, director of
national security studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. 'He
doesn't like Powell's approach, a typical diplomat, too cautious.'
Former CIA officials are caustic about the OSP. Unreliable and
politically motivated, they say it has undermined decades of work by
the CIA's trained spies and ignored the truth when it has contradicted
its world view.
'Their methods are vicious,' said Vince Cannistraro, former CIA chief
of counter-terrorism. 'The politicisation of intelligence is pandemic,
and deliberate disinformation is being promoted. They choose the
worst-case scenario on everything and so much of the information is
fallacious.' But Cannistraro is retired. His attacks will not bother
The Cabal, firmly 'in the loop' of Washington's movers and shakers.
Yet, even among them, continued failure to find any weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq is a growing fear. The fallout from the war could
bring them down.
The warning was there in black and white. Citing 'intelligence'
sources, Tony Blair produced an official dossier that concluded Iraq
could fire its chemical or biological weapons within 45 minutes of an
order to do so.
It was a terrifying prospect and ramped up the pro-war argument when
the dossier was produced last September. But cold analysis after the
war tells a different story.
Iraq was abandoned by the UN weapons inspectors, then bombed, invaded
and finally brought under US and British military control. During that
entire time the 'button' was never pressed on its weapons of mass
destruction. Now both the pro-war party and the anti-war lobby want to
know why. Can this mysterious lapse be explained or did the weapons
never exist?
They could have been hidden. Iraq is the size of California with
mountains and deserts in abundance. Ibrahim al-Marashi, an Iraqi
expert whose work was heavily plagiarised in a now infamous Downing
Street dossier published on the eve of war, has detailed a
sophisticated concealment network set up in the 1990s and headed by
Saddam's son Qusay. At the heart of the operation was Saddam's
son-in-law and cousin, Hussein Kamil, who defected in 1995 to Jordan,
where he revealed the concealment techniques to Western intelligence
agencies.
But, according to al-Marashit, the main cache of weapons of mass
destruction should have been found in Saddam's home city of Tikrit.
But Tikrit has fallen and as yet nothing has been found, leaving US
officials clutching at straws. Some have gone so far as to suggest
that the weapons were hidden so well that the Iraqis themselves were
unable to use them.
A more worrying possibility is that they were looted. Across Iraq -
not just in Baghdad and Basra - practically every government and
military facility was looted long before US or British troops were
able to control them. It might be that the weapons are now on the
black market. 'It means the weapons would now be proliferating, which
is exactly what the war was meant to stop,' said Garth Whitty, a
former weapons inspector in Iraq in the 1990s.
But there are problems with that argument. Barrels of nerve agent are
not easy to sell. The war's critics point to a more obvious conclusion
- in the run-up to the war the Iraqis were simply telling the truth.
They had no weapons of mass destruction.
A massive picture of intelligence misuse has emerged. Aside from
Downing Street's plagiarised dossier, there are allegations that Iraq
tried to buy uranium from Niger. The documents that the accusation
were based on were shown to be false by the International Atomic
Energy Agency, but that had not stopped Britain and America warning of
Saddam's nuclear threat. In fact, the forgeries were obvious. One
Niger Minister, whose signature was on a document, had been out of
office for a decade when the forgeries were produced. A US envoy sent
to investigate the claims reported to the CIA in February 2002 that
they were fakes. But the OSP and the White House ignored him.
Other selective use of intelligence occurred. Much was made of the
OSP's body of Iraqi defectors, but they chose which defectors they
wanted to listen to. Kamil's terrifying description of Iraq's
capabilities in the early 1990s and its efforts to conceal its arsenal
was touted as killer proof. The fact that Kamil also told his
interrogators the weapons had later been ordered destroyed was
suppressed.
Other defectors may have had their own agendas. Kamil described one,
Dr Khidhir Hamza, as a 'professional liar' - but told US intelligence
what it wanted to hear and said Iraq was close to building a nuclear
bomb. No one now believes that. But Hamza has now returned to Iraq as
part of a Pentagon team to rebuild the country, in charge of atomic
energy. Kamil also returned to Iraq - but when Saddam was in power. He
was executed.
Perhaps the most damning evidence is the lack of intelligence emerging
from captured Iraqi officials. The list is impressive: Huda Ammash,
known as 'Mrs Anthrax'; General Hossam Amin, responsi ble for talks
with weapons inspectors; General Amir Saadi, Saddam's science adviser;
General. Rashid al-Ubaidi, an arms adviser; and Abdul Hwaish, believed
responsible for all Iraq's military capabilities. If anyone knows
about the weapons, it is these people. They have powerful motivation
to 'cut a deal' and tell what they know.'Why is no one coughing?' said
Whitty.
In a quiet corner of Baghdad International Airport sits a truck and
trailer painted military green. Its canvas sides have been rolled up
to reveal the pipes and vats of some form of biological fermentation
machine. It was stolen in Mosul two weeks ago then handed over to
Kurdish militia when the thieves realised it was no ordinary truck.
The Kurds passed it on to the Americans.
It is the only concrete sign that any weapons of mass destruction may
have existed. The firm which made it has said six others were
similarly kitted out. It has a strong resemblance to the 'mobile
bio-weapons labs' described by Powell to the UN, but is it the smoking
gun? Not even the most desperate Pentagon official goes that far. No
trace of biological weapons residue has been found inside. The truck
was apparently thoroughly cleaned out with bleach before it was
stolen.
Yet many experts believe something will be found. Before the 1991 Gulf
war, Iraq did have a massive chemical and biological weapons
programme. Some is probably still lying around. If sufficient
quantities can be uncovered, perhaps it will be enough for a public
eager to feel the war was worth it. Finding nothing is unthinkable.
Email us at deb...@observer.co.uk
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004
save-our-democracy
=========================================
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/graphics/bush_approval_052504.html
save-our-democracy
===============================================================
IF YOU "NEED PROOF" THAT MILLIONS OF AMERICANS ARE MORONS, THEN
TAKE A LOOK AT THE LATEST POLLS, AS TO "HOW MANY "STILL" THINK
THAT GOING INTO IRAQ WAS "A GOOD IDEA". JUST INCREDIBLE...THEY
ALL CAN'T BE "PRIVATE CONTRACTORS", GRANTED AN EARLY REPORT
SHOWS THAT THE BRITS PROVIDED 9,500 TROOPS, WHILE THE
AMOUNT OF "PRIVATE CONTRACTORS NUMBER 10,000"...AND THAT
WAS "LAST YEAR"...
GIVEN THE BLATANT ARROGANCE OF BUSH & CO TO DEFY THE U.N. AND
INTENTIONALLY VIOLATE ALL OF THE INTERNATIONAL LAWS, THEN
DECIDED TO "GO IT ALONE"..."BUSH HAS TO HIRE MERCENARIES" AS
SO-CALLED "SECURITY TROOPS" SO THAT THE "DATA DOESN'T REFLECT
"THEIR DEATHS" IN AMONST THE "U.S. TROOP DEATHS", THUS THE
"MORONS" SO-CALLED "THINKS" THAT THINGS ARE JUST GOING FINE,
AS SEEN IN THIS POLL, EVEN THOUGH BUSH'S RATINGS ARE GOING
WAY DOWN. SYLVIA
======================
U.S. National - AFP
Majority of Americans say US should have stayed out of Iraq: poll
==============================================================
WASHINGTON (AFP) -
A majority of Americans surveyed for a
===============================
New York Times/CBS News poll said:
the United States should "not" have launched the war in Iraq.
===========================================================
51% of respondents said:
the United States should have stayed out of Iraq,
===============================================
up from 46 percent in April, May and June.
45 % said military intervention was a "good idea",
===============================================
down from 48 percent in June.
62% said the Iraq war was not worth the "cost in lost lives"
and other repercussions.
37% of those surveyed said:
==========================
"they approved" of the way President George W. Bush
==================================================
conducted the war;
================
58 percent disapproved.
56%--the situation in Iraq was bad or very bad,
43% said they thought-
====================
efforts to stabilize the country were "going well or very well."
=============================================================
The July 11-15 poll of 955 adults
---------------------------------
had a three-percentage-point margin of error.
save-our-democracy
=============
Subject: Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty - BUSH WITHDREW FROM TREATY-6-13-02
save-our-democracy
============================================================
"PREEMPTIVELY".
==============
IN FACT, IT WILL SHARE IT'S NUKES "WITH IRAN (SEE NEXT
POST). OH YEAH, BUSH SURE "DOES" MAKE THE WORLD SAFER EVERY DAY HE
IS IN OFFICE. SYLVIA
==========
Article Published: Thursday, October 09, 2003
================================================
NATO to seek explanation of new Russian nuclear policy
=====================================================
Officials also to discuss peacekeeping missions
NATO via AP
NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson, left, shares a word with
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov during a meeting at the
Broadmoor Hotel in Colorado Springs today.
By Paul Ames
The Associated Press
COLORADO SPRINGS - Provoked NATO officials want an explanation from
Russia's defense minister of:
Russia's threat to rethink its nuclear strategy because of the Western
====================================================================
alliance's "offensive military doctrine."
=======================================
Today's final day of talks by NATO defense ministers at the Broadmoor
Hotel here also reviewed plans to expand the alliance's peacekeeping
mission in Afghanistan as the alliance prepares to expand its
peacekeeping operation there.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov joined his NATO counterparts
today, a week after the document released by his ministry cast a
shadow over much-improved relations between Russia and its Cold War
rival.
Released before a Moscow meeting among Ivanov, President Vladimir
Putin and senior military officers, the document noted that NATO had
failed to remove "anti-Russian components" from its military plans and
political statements.
"If NATO is preserved as a military alliance with its existing
offensive military doctrine, this will demand a radical reconstruction
of Russian military planning ... including changes in Russian nuclear
strategy," the ministry said.
Separately, Putin said:
Russia has dozens of stored strategic missiles that would allow it to
maintain
==============================================================================
its strategic potential for years, and
=================================
Ivanov reiterated that:
Russia would not rule out a pre-emptive attack anywhere if national
interests
============================================================================
demand it.
=========
"I've no doubt that minister Sergei Ivanov will want to expand on the
fairly sketchy details that came out of that meeting," NATO Secretary
General Lord Robertson, told a news conference Wednesday on the
opening day of the ministers' meeting.
After speaking to Ivanov last week, Robertson said the Russian
minister has been "at pains to say that some of the reports bore no
relation to what the reality was."
Russia's relations with the NATO alliance have warmed since the
signing last year of a partnership agreement that increased military
and political contacts and set up a NATO-Russia Council that sets up
regular meetings between Russian ministers and their NATO fellows.
Russia's military remains uneasy, however, about NATO's plans to bring
in seven new members next year from the old communist bloc, including
the former Soviet Baltic states of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania.
"It's been a challenge for Russia to see all the new members, but they
have to live with that," said Norway's Defense Minister Kristin Krohn
Devold.
The deputy chief of Russia's General Staff, Col.-Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky,
told reporters last week in Moscow that the Kremlin was bothered by
NATO's "anti-Russian orientation" and what he described as NATO plans
to "lower the threshold of using nuclear weapons."
On Afghanistan, diplomats said the existing alliance operation with
5,500 in the Afghan capital is still short of full strength, over two
months since NATO took command of the force.
The alliance is also looking for extra troops to extend its mission
into up to eight provincial cities, a mission NATO officials said
could involve several thousand more troops.
Robertson wants allies to provide 10 more helicopters for the existing
International Security Assistance Force in Kabul, and is seeking 30
extra intelligence officers.
Plans under consideration would see alliance troops fan out into up to
eight provincial cities, beyond Kabul, to protect civilian
reconstruction teams.
The plans could more than double the current NATO force of 5,000,
which operates separately form the U.S.-led force hunting fighters of
the al-Qaeda network and the former Taliban ruling militia in the
countryside.
In another area, diplomats said the United States was expected to ask
for more time to consider the European Union's offer to takeover
NATO's 9-year-old peacekeeping mission in Bosnia in next year.
A transfer of responsibility to the EU would free up the 1,500 U.S.
troops that comprise about 10 percent of the Bosnia force.
U.S. officials are unsure, however, of the ability of the EU's
fledgling military arm to handle the mission.
Washington also is wary of plans by some members of the European bloc
to develop military planning facilities independent of NATO.
Click here for online information about the NATO meeting.
RETURN TO TOP
RELATED
Russia shares 1st-strike doctrine
=================================
NATO exercise points to new risks
Airwave glitch hits Springs area
Think you're hearing spin? You're wrong
Rumsfeld denies Iraq rift
100 demonstrate against NATO, Iraq war
======================================
NATO leaders face mock crisis to spur 'creative thinking'
Rumsfeld blasts critics, defends Iraq rebuilding
U.S. ready to lobby NATO in Springs
Rumsfeld has no easy answers for Ft. Carson families
Allies to offer help to U.S. at NATO meet
NATO meeting highlights tough transition
Security tight around Broadmoor
save-our-democracy
============================================
Article Published: Friday, October 10, 2003
Russia shares 1st-strike doctrine
==================================
NATO to review aping of U.S. policy
====================================
AP / Virginia Mayo
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov answers questions from
journalists during a media conference at The Broadmoor hotel in
Colorado Springs on Thursday.
NATO's Secretary General Lord Robertson said Russia's defense minister
assured him Moscow was not adopting a more aggressive nuclear stance
and remained committed to cooperation with the Western alliance.
By Bruce Finley
Denver Post International Affairs Writer
COLORADO SPRINGS - The NATO bloc that helped thwart the Soviet Union
throughout the Cold War turned back to familiar territory Thursday -
focusing on:
a "new Russian military doctrine" that
======================================
calls for first-strike war if necessary to defend Russian "interests".
=====================================================================
But instead of the old icy silence between enemies, 19 NATO defense
chiefs
heard directly from Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov, who
attended their informal meeting here as an observer.
Ivanov handed out translated "copies of Russia's doctrine" and assured
the ministers that his nation wants better relations with NATO.
Only the United States recently has made first-strike military action,
or
=========================================================================
"pre-emption," against emerging threats abroad an explicit part of its
foreign
==============================================================================
policy.
=====
The prospect of "multiple powers" contemplating "first-strike war" is
widely
============================================================================
seen as dangerous given the firepower available.
===============================================
The U.S. policy even allows first-strike use of nuclear weapons.
================================================================
After meeting with NATO leaders for an hour, Ivanov tried to clarify
Russia's posture in a news conference. Contrary to recent reports in
Russia, his nation's "new nuclear posture", which includes:
==============================================
efforts to modernize nuclear weaponry,
======================================
aims only at "political deterrence," Ivanov said.
==================================
Yet "non-nuclear action" to "protect the interests of Russia" and
============================================================
"its allies"
===========
"is possible" "if other means are exhausted," he said.
===========================================
"We do not rule out something like that."
=======================================
Ivanov also publicly reminded "U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld"
that
the U.S. bases Russia allowed in Central Asia for the war on
Afghanistan
are meant to be temporary.
=========================
U.S. officials declined to comment on the doctrine or
=================================================
Russia's reminder about the bases.
=================================
"We are all now reading the document,"
said Ambassador Nicholas Burns,
the top U.S. representative to NATO.
"We are comfortable with what we've seen of it,"
said Melissa Maynard,
spokeswoman for Britain's Ministry of Defense.
"But we will go away and read it."
NATO Secretary-General Lord Robertson downplayed the implications of
the new doctrine.
The "notion" of first-strike military action "is nothing new,"
=============================================================
Robertson said.
"NATO itself waged a first-strike war in 1999",
bombing Kosovo to stop ethnic cleansing,
"and nobody thought of that as earth-shattering."
NATO in the future:
=================
would wage first-strike war
==========================
"only" if every member country agreed, he said.
"I don't think there's a problem here if
=======================================
"individual nations have that policy."
=====================================
During the meeting, NATO defense chiefs initially focused on
modernizing NATO forces so that they could respond rapidly to
terrorism and "other threats beyond Europe".
They committed themselves to radical change,
conceding that NATO forces are outdated.
=======================================
But on Thursday, relations with Russia threw NATO leaders back to the
Cold War era, when their purpose was to contain the Soviet Union.
Russian President Vladimir Putin unveiled the new doctrine last week
====================================================================
amid efforts to downsize Russia's massive army.
==============================================
Part of the plan is to:
redeploy mothballed heavy strategic nuclear missiles.
=====================================================
Ivanov was quoted in Russian newspapers as saying:
nuclear weapons remains crucial and that
Russia would not exclude the possibility of pre-emptive strikes
if necessary to defend Russia's or its allies' "interests".
=========================================================
Russia is basically "imitating what the United States is doing,"
===============================================================
said Alexei Bogaturov,
head fellow at the
Institute of the World Economy and International Relations
in the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Ivanov "just wants to say that:
if "Americans" want to "threaten countries" such as North Korea or
Iran,
===================================================================
which are close to Russia,
==========================
that "could somehow threaten Russian national security".
=======================================================
And the Russians are saying:
===========================
'If you change your doctrine, we will change our doctrine,"'
===========================================================
Bogaturov said.
That Ivanov attended the NATO talks is an indication that
Russia is on good terms with NATO, Bogaturov said.
"Let's talk about this, rather than go back to unilateralism.
=============================================================
Russia feels:
NATO, too,
=========
"is uncomfortable with what the Bush administration" is doing."
=============================================================
Rumsfeld met privately with Ivanov on Thursday morning. Senior defense
officials said he and Ivanov agreed to continue sharing information
and
that "Russians would be informed about U.S. plans for missile
defense."
=====================================================================
They'll be invited to:
observe missile-defense simulation exercises
=============================================
scheduled for 2005 at Schriever Air Force Base,
==============================================
east of Colorado Springs.
=========================
Some military analysts say:
==========================
"first-strike policy" is the "only one that makes sense"
======================================================
to "confront new global threats."
===============================
"No rational country would ever have any other policy," said
=====================================================
Michael Ledeen,
================
a foreign policy analyst at
the American Enterprise Institute and
================================
a national security adviser under President Reagan.
==================================================
"The alternative to a policy of us hitting them
before they hit us is;
them hitting us before we hit them - whoever it may be."
But the world "is a much more insecure place" now that Russia,
==============================================================
the other major nuclear power,
==============================
has decided to follow America's lead and
========================================
"reserve the same rights as the United States," said
=============================================
Fiona Hill,
=============
a leading Russia scholar and
a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C.
"Yes, the cat is out of the bag," Hill said.
===============================
"You can't expect to reserve that right exclusively for yourself.
=================================================================
The Russians are following suit, and
==============================
presumably "other countries" will follow suit.
============================================
You are setting a very negative example.
It's an escalation - of pre-emption -
=====================================
like the arms race we saw in the Cold War."
=========================================
RETURN TO TOP
save-our-democracy
==========================================================
Russia Won't End Accord with Iran to Build Reactor
==================================================
By David E. Sanger
New York Times
Sunday 28 September 2003
WASHINGTON, Sept. 27 - President Vladimir V.
Putin of Russia said
today that he would send "a clear but respectful
signal to Iran" that
it must comply with international inspections of
its suspected nuclear
weapons program,
but he told President Bush that Russia would go
forward with its plans
to help
=============================================================================
Iran to build a nuclear reactor.
===============================
Mr. Putin's statement this morning that he:
would not terminate Russia's $800 million
commercial nuclear contract
=====================================================================
with Iran came as a brief, and almost cryptic,
aside in response to a
question
========
at a news conference with Mr. Bush at the
presidential retreat at Camp
David.
Eager to portray themselves as close partners in
a fight against
terrorism
and proliferation,
neither leader dwelled on their differences over
support to Iran's
nuclear program, and the two men said they had
warm and detailed
discussions of:
Iraq,
the Middle East, and
the "twin nuclear threats of Iran and North
Korea".
==================================================
But Russia's help to Iran in "its main nuclear
reactor project"
=============================================================
has been a continuing source of tension between
the two countries,
even as Russia has joined in setting an Oct. 31
deadline for
Iran to open itself completely to international
inspectors,
who have found worrisome traces of highly
enriched uranium at
============================================================
two sites in the country.
=======================
Mr. Putin's statement indicated that President
Bush, after two years
of discussions,
had been unable to persuade his Russian
counterpart that Russia's
support of an ostensibly "civilian nuclear energy
program"
could speed the country's ability to gain the raw
material for
weapons,
and suggested broader differences in how they
will approach the
problem of proliferation.
============
Asked about the issue today, Mr. Putin said
simply,
"As to the joint work, we are ready to pursue
it."
He gave no details, and immediately moved into a
discussion of Iraq.
Mr. Bush played down any differences, telling
reporters, referring to
the "International Atomic Energy Agency:
"You heard the president say that the I.A.E.A.
process must go
forward.
We firmly agree. I found this part of our
discussions to be very
satisfactory."
The meeting was intended to reinforce a
relationship that began well
after Mr. Bush's election,
but has run into a series of sharp differences -
===============================================
first over Mr. Bush's decision to withdraw from
===============================================
the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, then
============================================
over Iraq and Iran.
==================
"This visit comes at the confluence of two
streams,"
one of Mr. Bush's senior advisers said on Friday.
"Iraq and other current issues, and
our effort to take a relationship that is pretty
good and pretty broad
and to deepen it."
The two men insisted today that they had done so.
But at the same time, Mr. Putin kept his distance
from Mr. Bush
on several issues. He said he would not decide
what kind of help
Russia
would provide in "the occupation of Iraq"
until "a new resolution passes the United
Nations",
==================================================
where there is an effort to "pressure Mr. Bush"
to
turn over more authority to the "Iraqi Governing
Council" and
"to the United Nations" than he has been willing
to do.
"We have differences over Iraq, in terms of
practical ways
how to resolve this problem, but we had
understanding on
the essence of the problem," Mr. Putin said.
But he said that relations were good and problems
would be solved
"without excessive emotions or ambitions,"
an apparent reference to the highly charged
meetings between American
presidents and their Soviet counterparts during
the cold war.
In another example of their different approaches,
Mr. Putin pressed Mr. Bush to offer North Korea a
=================================================
"guarantee of its security"
==========================
in exchange for:
===============
"its agreement to re-enter the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty and
==============================================================
to "dismantle its nuclear weapons program",
=========================================
which is racing forward at a pace matched only by
Iran's.
=========================================================
"Russia believes:
ensuring the nuclear nonproliferation regime
should be accompanied
by North Korea receiving guarantees in the sphere
of security,"
Mr. Putin said.
He was referring to North Korean demands for what
it calls a:
============================================================
"nonaggression pact" with the United States.
===========================================
Mr. Bush has rejected such a pact,
=================================
though he has repeatedly stated publicly that:
the United States has no intention of invading
North Korea.
==========================================================
While they sounded friendly -
Mr. Bush referred to Mr. Putin as Vladimir and
gave his highest
compliment, "Good job," to the Russian president
for how he handled himself at the news conference
-
the two men did not share the easy laughs they
had in Crawford, Tex.,
last year when Mr. Bush took Mr. Putin to meet
local high school
students.
Yet at every turn,
Mr. Bush and Mr. Putin said today they shared the
same goals:
(1)assuring that unconventional weapons do not
fall into the hands of
terrorists,
=============================================================================
(2)that neither Iran nor North Korea develop
nuclear weapons,
============================================================
(3) and that democracy flourishes in Iraq.
==========================================
They cast their differences as tactical, and
Mr. Bush said they shared what he termed "a
trustworthy relationship."
"Plus, I like him, he's a good fellow to spend
quality time with,"
Mr. Bush said.
But growing American concern about Russia's
brutal military action in
Chechnya led Mr. Bush to raise the issue,
delicately, in his prepared
statement today, saying that:
while "terrorists must be opposed wherever they
spread chaos and
destruction, including Chechnya,"
a "lasting solution" would require "respect for
human rights and a
political settlement that leads to free and fair
elections."
Mr. Putin did not discuss Chechnya in public
today, and was not asked
about it.
Mr. Bush appeared eager to portray Mr. Putin as a
general supporter of
America's approach to Iraq, especially after the
Russian president
sided with France and Germany in "opposing the
invasion of the
country".
Mr. Putin muted any criticism today, as he stood
next to Mr. Bush,
with Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, Vice
President Dick Cheney,
and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld just out
of the camera shot.
Instead, Mr. Putin said that:
progress was being made on carrying out the
biggest single success in
the relationship so far:
the "Treaty of Moscow", which calls for sharp
reductions in both
nations'
======================================================================
nuclear arsenals.
=================
A Russian reporter seemed
less worried about America's nuclear power than
about "its visa
power",
saying that Russian reporters were interviewed at
the American Embassy
before being allowed to accompany Mr. Putin.
"Can I be assured that my question will not lead
to a denial of visa
for me, personally?" the reporter asked.
"No!" the president said, laughing.
"Nyet!" he added, laughing harder.
-------
Jump to TO Features for Sunday 28 September 2003
Today's TO Features -------------- CIA:
Investigate White House Dean,
Kerry call on Rumsfeld to Quit Russia Won't End
Accord With Iran to
Build Reactor Paul Krugman: 'I Do Get Rattled'
'You Lied, They Died,'
U.S. Parents Tell Bush Another 15, 000 U.S.
Troops Told to Prepare for
Iraq GOP Seeks to Open Spill-Cleanup Funds to
Polluters With Each
Attack, U.S. Image in Iraq Erodes Nicholas D.
Kristof | God on Their
Side Labour MPs Put Blair on Notice
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,
this material is
distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information
for research and
educational purposes.)
Print This Story E-mail This Story
© : t r u t h o u t 2003
save-our-democracy
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 14:32:55 -0700
THE P.N.A.C. (PROJECT FOR THE "NEW AMERICAN CENTURY"..YOUR "SECRET
GOVERNMENT"
=============================================================================
AND....HALF OF BUSH'S CABINET IS "A MEMBER", AS
WELL AS "THE MEDIA".
HERE "ARE THE PEOPLE WHO "PUT" THE ARROGANT IDIOT
(BUSH JR)IN OFFICE.
BUSH HAS
"ALREADY PUBLICLY ADMITTED..."I GET ALL MY
INFORMATION FROM "MY LOYAL
STAFF",
I.E. BUSH IS "BEING TOLD ONLY WHAT THIS GROUP
"WANTS HIM TO KNOW" AND
THEN
"TELLS HIM WHAT TO DO"..BUSH IS TOO LAZY AND
STUPID TO "THINK FOR
HIMSELF",
AND EVERBODY WHO TWO GRAY CELLS WHO LISTENS TO
BUSH SPEAK, WITHOUT CUE
CARDS KNOWS IT..EVEN THE REPUBS "ADMIT THAT BUSH
HAS PROBLEMS "WITH
THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE". BUSH JR. IS A "WILLING
STOOGE FOR THIS FASCIST
BROTHERHOOD" AND YOU
CAN TAKE THAT TO THE BANK; ONLY THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE DON'T KNOW
THIS..THE
AGAIN...THE REST OF THE WORLD DOES. DO A GOOGLE
SEARCH ON THIS GROUP
AND SEE
HOW OFTEN IT IS SPOKE OF, I.E. "PNAC AND GEORGE W
BUSH".
READ ABOUT IT AND COMPARE IT TO "THE EVENTS THAT
HAVE TAKEN PLACE
SINCE
BUSH TOOK OFFICE"..."THEY" HAVE "SUCCEEDED SO
FAR"...AND THE AMERICAN
MORONS WHO VOTE FOR BUSH, WILL INSURE THE "TOTAL
SCHEME WILL TAKE
PLACE".
THIS IS "NOT SOME KIND OF A RUMOR"...THIS "IS THE
FACTUAL TRUTH" AND
NONE
OF THESE PEOPLE DENY IT. BUTTT....IT IS A "TRUE
CONSPIRACY" TO TAKE
OVER THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE AND YOUR GOVERNMENT, DO YOU EVEN
"GIVE A DAMN".
SYLVIA
======
Subject: Project for the New American Century -
TEXT-WITH LINKS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century
save-our-democracy
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 09:14:07 -0700
SEPTEMBER 2000-REPORT BY THE PNAC FASCISTS-ENTITLED "REBUILDING AMERICAN
========================================================================
DEFENSES", I.E. "THE NEW WORLD ORDER".
===================================
THIS REPORT, NOT SURPRISINGLY, IS FILLED WITH
ARROGANT, POMPOUS, SELF-
SERVING "PLANS" TO "CONTROL THE WORLD VIA A HUGE
U.S.MILITARY FORCE"
WHICH FORCES WILL BE STATIONED ALL OVER THE WORLD
FOR EASY ATTACKS ON
ANY COUNTRY THE FASCISTS WANT TO DESTROY.
LANGUAGE SUCH AS THE FOLLOWING, MAKES IT CLEAR TO
EVERYONE THAT "THEY"
WANT THE U.S. TO CONTROL ALL NATIONS:
(1) PURPOSE: "PROMOTE AMERICAN "GLOBAL"
LEADERSHIP;
(2)"PROMOTE "AMERICAN" PRINCIPLES AND
"INTERESTS"(OIL/GAS);
(3)"AMERICA NEEDS NATIONAL LEADERSHIP THAT
"ACCEPTS THE U.S. "GLOBAL"
RESPONSIBILITIES;(STUPID STOOGES, LIKE GEORGY
BUSH).
(4)"AMERICA SHOULD "SEEK" TO PRESERVE AND
"EXTEND" IT'S POSITION OF
"GLOBAL" LEADERSHIP BY MAINTAINING THE
"PREEMINENCE OF "U.S. MILITARY
FORCES". (PREEMINENT ATTACKS ON ANY COUNTRY, JUST
BECAUSE THEY CAN)
---------------
QUESTION: JUST WHO THE HELL DO THESE GUYS THINK
THEY ARE...GODS?
=====================================================
ANSWER: THE ANSWER HAS TO BE "YES"..
==================================
THIS DOCUMENT REAKS WITH THE SAME MANICAL
BLATHERINGS THAT MIRRORS
HITLER'S BOOK, MEIN KAMPF.
===================================================================
IF AMERICANS "WANT TO CONTINUE TO LIVE IN FEAR
AND HATED BY THE
REST OF THE WORLD, THEN "RE-ELECT GEORGE W. BUSH"
BECAUSE HE WILL
"KEEP" THESE SAME LUNATICS AT HIS SIDE "TELLING
HIM WHAT TO DO" AND
AS YOU KNOW, BUSH IS HELL-BENT ON CREATING "MORE
ATTACKS ON 60 NATIONS
UNDER THE GUISE OF "WAR ON TERRORISM" AND HE HAS
ALREADY SET "IRAN" UP
AS HIS NEXT TARGET.
SO, IF YOU JUST LOVE WAR, A BANKRUPT TREASURY, NO
EMPLOYMENT OTHER
THAN
BUILDING MORE WAR MACHINERY, THEN BUSH IS YOUR
MAN..JUST MAKE SURE YOU
DON'T WANT TO LIVE VERY LONG BECAUSE "YOUR
FUTURE" IS "NOT HIS
CONCERN"..
"PERSONAL POWER, CONTROL AND WEALTH" IS. SYLVIA
==============
THIS DEAR AMERICANS "IS" THE "PLAN OF THE NEW
WORLD ORDER" AND YOU
SHOULD READ IT RATHER THAN TAKE MY WORD FOR
IT...THIS "PLAN" WAS
FOLLOWED TO THE "T" BY CHENEY, WHO IS A MAIN
"PLANNER" IN THIS SCHEME,
AND RUMSFELD, WHO HAS BEEN CARRYING OUT THE
"MILITARY FORCE AND
OPERATIONS"
FOR "THE WORLD". THEIR SICKENING SMIRKS AND
ARROGANCE TELL YOU...THEY
HAVE
"JUST BEGUN THEIR PLAN TO CONTROL THE WORLD".
THIS DOCUMENT IS IN PDF AND CONTAINS 90 PAGES OF
THE MOST HORRIFIC
"PLANS"
THAT WILL INSURE WWIII..READ IT AND WEEP, OR GET
MAD AS HELL AND "TAKE
CONTROL
OF YOUR GOVERNMENT FOR "ONCE IN YOUR LIFE", WHILE
YOU HAVE ONE.
----
Subject:
SEPT.-2000-RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf--90 pages
http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
save-our-democracy
WANT BUSH AS PRESIDENT, I WOULD ASSUME THAT YOU "WANT" A PRESIDENT WHO
IS
"SANE AND HAS A "GRASP OF REALITY"...IF THAT IS TRUE, THEN WHY DO YOU
THINK BUSH "IS STILL CLAIMING THAT SADDAM HUSSEIN WAS A "THREAT TO HIS
NEIGHBORS" WHEN ANYONE WHO HAS FOLLOWED "THE EVIDENCE" OF BUSH'S
CLAIMS AND
HIS SO-CALLED DOCUMENTATION, AS WELL AS THE U.S.CONGRESSIONAL SENATE
INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE WHO "STUDIED HIS EVIDENCE"...STATE:
SADDAM HUSSEIN "HAD NO WMD", WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HUSSEIN "TOLD THE
WORLD"?
BUT HERE BUSH IS, ON JULY 6, 2004, STATING EXACTLY THAT, I.E. SADDAM
"WAS A THREAT TO HIS NEIGHBORS"..YOU WILL ALSO NOTICE THAT BUSH CANNOT
AND DID NOT "TELL THE TRUTH" AND STATE, "THERE WERE NO WMD", WHICH WAS
HIS ENTIRE JUSTIFICATION TO MURDER TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE.
BUSH "NOW" SAYS "HUSSEIN HAD THE "INTENT" TO USE WMD...BUT MR.
PRESIDENT...HE DIDN'T HAVE ANY WMD AND EVERYBODY KNEW IT WHO WAS
INVOLVED IN YOUR FRAUD..AND NOW IT HAS BEEN "PROVEN BEYOND A DOUBT",
SO WHY ARE YOU STILL "ACTING LIKE HE HAS THEM"? THE "FACT AND TRUTH
IS, MR. PRESIDENT...YOU "CANNOT READ HUSSEIN'S MIND TO "KNOW WHAT HE
INTENDED".
BUSH ALSO STATES THAT HUSSEIN "HAD THE CAPABILITY"...THE CAPABILITY OF
DOING WHAT? BRUSHING HIS TEETH, COMBING HIS HAIR...WHAT!
BUT PERHAPS IN YOUR INSANITY OF "DELUSIONAL THINKING" THAT
YOU HAVE A "DIRECT LINK TO GOD, AS YOU ARE QUOTED AS SAYING,
"GOD TOLD YOU TO TAKE OUT SADDAM, SO YOU DID"; YOU ARE STILL SO INSANE
THAT YOU HAVE CONVINCED "YOURSELF" THAT "WHAT "YOU" SAY HAS TO BE
TRUE".
WELL IT ISN'T MR. PRESIDENT.
THE MAJORITY OF THE AMERICANS NOW SEE YOU FOR WHAT YOU ARE...
"A RAVING LUNATIC WHO SHOULDN'T BE IN CHARGE OF OPENING
DOORS AT A GROCERY STORE"..
BOTTOM-LINE:
==========
THE ONLY THING THE "BIG MOUTH-STRUTTING TEXAN" TOLD US THAT "WAS TRUE"
WAS
HIS CONSTANT BOAST OF "I AM A WAR PRESIDENT". THIS WAS AND STILL
IS.."TRUE".
NEVER HAS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HAD SUCH A CERTIFIABLE MANIAC
FOR
A PRESIDENT WHO "LOVES PLAYING WAR GAMES....FOR REAL" AND OBVIOUSLY
IS SUCH A SOCIO-PATH THAT HIS MURDERS OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
INNOCENT
PEOPLE IN AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ "MEAN NOTHING", NOR DO THE U.S. TROOPS
WHO
HE HAS ORDERED TO THESE "KILLING FIELDS".
BUSH IS TOTALLY INSANE...A TOTAL LUNATIC..A PERSON WHO SHOULD BE IN AN
ASYLUM FOR THE "CRIMINALLY INSANE" WHERE HE CANNOT HURT ANYONE ELSE.
GOD HELP US ALL IF YOU MORONS RE-ELECT HIM. SYLVIA
============
July 6, 2004
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON July 6, 2004 — President Bush said Tuesday he has not
decided whether he will nominate a new CIA director before the
November election.
The agency's current head, George Tenet, leaves his post on Sunday,
the seven-year anniversary of his swearing in. Poised to take over as
acting director is his deputy, John McLaughlin, 61.
Asked whether he planned to wait until after the election to name
Tenet's replacement, Bush said: "I haven't made up my mind on the
nomination process."
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Porter Goss, R-Fla., is said to
be the front-runner. Washington insiders have speculated for a month
about who else may be in the running: Deputy Secretary of State
Richard L. Armitage; former Sen. Sam Nunn, D-Ga.; Rep. Christopher
Cox, R-Calif.; former National Security Agency director, retired Adm.
William O. Studeman; and perhaps McLaughlin.
Among factors the White House must weigh when deciding whom to name
and when is whether a confirmation process before the election would
draw attention to intelligence failures and how it would be perceived
should an attack occur this summer with only an acting director in
place.
Bush, who spoke during an Oval Office meeting with Prime Minister
David Oddsson of Iceland, declined to comment about an upcoming report
by the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is expected to be highly
critical of the intelligence community's assessments of Iraqi dictator
Saddam Hussein's weapons capability in the months preceding the war.
"I will wait for the report," Bush said.
"I will look at the whole report."
================================
Bush, however, added that:
*************************
Saddam Hussein harbored terrorists and
=================================
was a threat to his people and the region.
=========================================
"Saddam Hussein had the "intent," to use weapons of mass destruction,
==================================================================
Bush said.
"He had the "capability."
=======================
photo credit and caption:
President Bush meeting with Prime Minister of Iceland David Oddsson
(unseen) in the Oval Office of the White House, tells reporters that
he welcomed Sen. John Edwards as Democratic presidential candidate
John Kerry's running mate on the Democratic presidential campaign
ticket, Tuesday, July 6, 2004. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
Copyright © 2004 ABCNEWS Internet Ventures.
save-our-democracy
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 12:54:31 -0700
THE GENEVA CONVENTION OF 1977-PROTOCOL 1-PART
IV-CIVILIAN PROTECTION
=====================================================================
AMERICANS HAVE TO ASK THEMSELVES...HOW MANY IRAQI
PEOPLE HAVE BEEN
MURDERED UNDER THE ILLEGAL BUSH ATTACKS AND
OCCUPATIONS IN IRAQ..
THE ESTIMATED NUMBERS ARE STAGGERING, I.E. 40,000
AND BUSH HAS NOT
ORDERED HIS "TOP KILLER", DONALD RUMSFELD,
SECRETARY OF SO-CALLED
"DEFENSE" OF THE U.S. TO "FIND OUT".
THESE MURDERS HAVE BEEN TAKING PLACE "DAILY" IN
IRAQ BECAUSE THESE
ATTACKS "ARE IN THE CITIES, TOWNS AND VILLAGES"
WHERE THE IRAQI
PEOPLE LIVE.
CAN YOU LIVE WITH THESE "MURDERS FOR BUSH'S FRAUD
CALLED:
"IRAQI FREEDOM"...AMERICANS, I.E. IT IS ALL BEING
DONE.."IN YOUR NAME".
SYLVIA
====================
Subject: Protocol I Additional to the Geneva
Convention, 1977
save-our-democracy
================================================
HERE IS ONE COUNTRY "IRAQ" IN WHICH BOTH BUSH'S "THROUGH LIES AND
MANIPULATION" CREATED TWO WARS ON THE SAME COUNTRY. I WILL POST AN
ARTICLE/S ABOUT THE "GRANDPA BUSH", WHO WORKED WITH "HITLER" TO
FILL HIS POCKETS. IT'S TIME FOR "THE AMERICAN PEOPLE" TO WAKE UP
FROM YOUR APATHY AND REALIZE..YOU HAVE A FASCIST GOVERNMENT AND
HAVE HAD FOR DECADES...THE WORLD WILL NOT TOLERATE THIS ANY LONGER.
SYLVIA
=======
HERE IS A REPORT (ONE OF SEVERAL)WRITTEN BY ATTORNEY, MICHAEL RATNER,
WHO FILED A LAW SUIT, QUESTIONING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE "WAR
CRIMES" COMMITTED BY BUSH I WHICH "WAR" WAS "CONCOCTED" JUST AS BUSH
II, DID.
THIS IS A "MUST READ"..FOR TWO REASONS:
(1)THERE IS A U.N. REPORT WHICH STATES "IRAQ WAS BOMBED BACK TO THE
PRE-INDUSTRIAL AGE"...A FACT THAT BUSH II & CO. "KNEW" AND BUSH'S TOP
NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR, CONDI RICE, "AND" SECRETARY OF STATE, COLIN
POWELL "PUBLICLY STATED BEFORE BUSH II ORDERED
"HIS" BOMBINGS OF IRAQ.
(2)RATNER, IN WRITING HIS REPORT (BELOW)SAID "THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
CAN'T DO ANYTHING TO HOLD BUSH I ACCOUNTABLE FOR THESE
WAR CRIMES." (IN 1991)
WELL, THAT IS NO LONGER THE CASE..AS STATED AND DOCUMENTED...WE,
AMERICANS CAN "NOW FILE A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST BUSH II FOR
WAR CRIMES, "UNDER THE NEW INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT".
THIS REPORT IS MUCH EASIER READING THEN THE ACTUAL LAWS..BUT MORE
IMPORTANTLY YOU WILL "SEE THE ABSOLUTE FASCISM THAT HAS BEEN PASSED
DOWN FROM FATHER TO SON (BUSH'S) AS WELL AS, "GETTING THE SAME FASCIST
STAFF" FOR BOTH REGIMES.
YOU WILL ALSO SEE, "HOW THE COLLUSION BETWEEN THE U.N. AND BUSH I" WAS
CARRIED OFF, JUST AS IT IS STILL DOING TODAY.
WE, AMERICAN PEOPLE, "DO NOT STAND FOR THIS MURDEROUS TYRANNY" SO WHY
ARE WE TOLERATING IT...YOU MUST START ACTING LIKE "ADULTS WITH
RESPONSIBILITYOVER YOUR GOVERNMENT AND TAKE CONTROL OF IT",
OTHERWISE THIS NATION WILL BE DESTROYED AND I FOR ONE SAY...."WE WOULD
DESERVE IT". SYLVIA
===============================================================
Subject: Appendix A -International Laws --WAR CRIMES
INTENTIONALLY COMMITTED BY BUSH I & II
===============================================================
http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-appa.htm
save-our-democracy
FAMILY.
=======================================================================
THIS ARTICLE IS ABOUT PRESCOTT BUSH
===================================
--WAR CRIMES--WORKING WITH HITLER "FOR PROFIT"
==========================================================
AND THE INSANITY AND GREED OF THE BUSH FAMILY-
WHY HASN'T THE MEDIA COVERED THIS?
WHY HASN'T DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT CANDIDATE, JOHN KERRY MENTIONED THIS?
AS YOU WILL SEE, (NEXT POST) GEORGE BUSH JR. AND JOHN KERRY "BOTH
BELONG TO THE
SECRET SOCIETY, "SKULL AND BONES"..
THIS IS NOT JUST SOME RUMOR...THE MEDIA "HAS" ASKED BOTH OF THESE
MEN ABOUT THIS SOCIETY...AND "BOTH HAVE REFUSED TO TALK"..SO THAT IS
THE
"ANSWER" AS FAR AS KERRY GOES..."HE IS ALSO PART OF THIS "NEW WORLD
ORDER",
AND AMERICANS "DON'T HAVE A CLUE"...NOT BECAUSE THE INFORMATION WASN'T
THERE
FOR THEM TO KNOW..IT'S BECAUSE THEY "PREFER 30 SECOND NEWS BITES
INSTEAD"
WHICH THEY CAN DO WHILE GOING TO THE REFRIG AND POPPING A CAN OF BEER.
SYLVIA
=================================================
Standing On The Dead
++++++++++++++++++++
Friday, 24 January 2003, 11:46 am
Opinion: Marc Ash
From: http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/012303A.ma.dead.htm
t r u t h o u t | Essay
Wednesday 22 January 2003
"What luck for the rulers that men do not think."
--Adolf Hitler
In October of 1942, under the Trading With the Enemy Act,
========================================================
the U.S. government halted operations at New York's Union Banking
Corporation.
A bank official was charged with "Running Nazi front groups in the
United
========================================================================
States."
======
His name: Prescott Bush.
=======================
Prescott Bush, father of future U.S President George Herbert Walker
Bush
and grandfather of George W. Bush,
had been hard at work on behalf of his Nazi partners.
====================================================
In flagrant violation of U.S. law, Prescott Bush had worked tirelessly
to:
(1)launder money,
(2)procure raw materials,
(3)arrange transportation and
(4)provide guidance
for the Nazi war effort and the German army he had helped to build.
=================================================================
In April of 2002,
===============
George W. Bush -- standing literally on the bones of the men who fell
at Normandy beachhead in mortal combat with that very same Nazi army
--
delivered his Memorial Day address.
He said, in part:
"This is a day our country has set apart to remember what was gained
in our wars, and all that was lost."
Let us remember.
As the German army came crashing into Poland, spreading death and
destruction in its path,
Prescott Bush continued aiding the Nazis.
=======================================
As German tanks rolled through the Ardennes Forest and into Paris,
Prescott Bush continued aiding the Nazis.
========================================
As Allied forces fighting to defend France were forced literally into
the sea at Dunkirk by the German Army,
Prescott Bush continued aiding the Nazis.
=======================================
As German war planes rained bombs down on London, killing 50 thousand
English men, women and children,
Prescott Bush continued aiding the Nazis.
=======================================
As millions died at the hands of the most ruthless and violent
organization the world has ever known,
Prescott Bush continued aiding them.
===================================
And of course, as Hitler and the Nazis planned and carried out the
extermination of Europe's Jews,
Prescott Bush was an eager and active partner.
=============================================
When did Bush stop? When we made him stop.
==========================================
In this case, George W. Bush won't have to worry about the US
Government shutting him down. That's been taken care of -- he is the
US Government.
As debate rages back and forth across the Atlantic over the morality
and acceptability of this assault against Iraq, it is interesting to
note the German position.
It was Germany who bought most completely into the war lie during the
past century.
It was the German people who, with their faith in country and
leadership, and even their loyalty to the Fatherland, made possible
the greatest nightmare the world has ever known.
It is those same German people who stand today before Europe and the
world
in unflinching opposition to this latest world conquering force.
===============================================================
How well do the German people know George W. Bush? Better than they
want to.
===========================================================================
***********
Sources:
Heir to the Holocaust :
=====================
http://www.clamormagazine.org/features/issue14.3_feature.3.html
The Bush Nazi Connection :
=======================
http://www.lpdallas.org/features/draheim/dr991216.htm
Gold Fillings, Auschwitz & George Bush :
======================================
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/bushies.htm
Or just do a search at http://www.google.co.nz/search?
=======================================================
q=Prescott+Bush+Nazi+UBC+1942&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search
and
=========================================================================
take your pick of the documents that come up. (Highly recommended.)
[Scoop Additional Source: A great flash movie…
===============================================
http://www.takebackthemedia.com/bushnonazi.html.]
===================================================
- You can send comments to t r u t h o u t Editor Marc Ash at:
m...@truthout.com
Home Page | Headlines | Previous Story | Next Story
save-our-democracy
================================================================
QUESTION THAT RUMMY & HIS LUNATICS NEED TO BE LOCKED UP?
RUMSFELD REFUSED TO GET RID OF THIS GENERAL AFTER THE BELOW INCIDENT
TOOK PLACE.
NOTE: THIS ARTICLE & INCIDENT TOOK PLACE "IN THE SAME MONTH THAT THE
TORTURES BEGAN IN THE IRAQ PRISONS AND "THIS LUNATIC GENERAL WAS
CLEARLY "IN CHARGE" OF THOSE TROOPS AND OFFICERS AT THE TIME. SYLVIA
--------------------------------------------
Print This Story E-mail This Story
Go to Original http://www.truthout.org
The Pentagon Unleashes a Holy Warrior
=====================================
By William M. Arkin
The Los Angeles Times
Thursday 16 October 2003
------------------------
Click Here for Video Report
William M. Arkin is a military affairs analyst who writes regularly
for The Times.
A Christian extremist in a high Defense post can only set back the
U.S. approach to the Muslim world.
In June of 2002, Jerry Boykin stepped to the pulpit at the First
Baptist Church of Broken Arrow, Okla., and described a set of
photographs he had taken of Mogadishu, Somalia, from an Army
helicopter in 1993.
The photographs were taken shortly after the disastrous "Blackhawk
Down" mission had resulted in the death of 18 Americans. When Boykin
came home and had them developed, he said, he noticed a strange dark
mark over the city. He had an imagery interpreter trained by the
military look at the mark. "This is not a blemish on your photograph,"
the interpreter told him, "This is real."
"Ladies and gentleman, this is your enemy," Boykin said to the
congregation as he flashed his pictures on a screen. "It is the
principalities of darkness It is a demonic presence in that city that
God revealed to me as the enemy."
That's an unusual message for a high-ranking U.S. military official
to deliver. But Boykin does it frequently.
This June, for instance, at the pulpit of the Good Shepherd
Community Church in Sandy, Ore., he displayed slides of Osama bin
Laden, Saddam Hussein and North Korea's Kim Jung Il. "Why do they hate
us?" Boykin asked. "The answer to that is because we're a Christian
nation We are hated because we are a nation of believers."
Our "spiritual enemy," Boykin continued, "will only be defeated if
we come against them in the name of Jesus."
Who is Jerry Boykin?
===================
He is Army Lt. General William G. "Jerry" Boykin.
=================================================
The day before Boykin appeared at the pulpit in Oregon, the
Pentagon announced that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had
nominated the general for a third star and named him to a new position
as deputy undersecretary of Defense for
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
intelligence.
-------------
In this newly created position, Boykin is not just another Pentagon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
apparatchik or bureaucratic warrior.
--------------------------------------
He has been charged with reinvigorating Rumsfeld's "High Value Target
Plan" to
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
track down Bin Laden, Hussein, Mullah Omar and other leaders in the
terrorism world.
But Gen. Boykin's appointment to a high position in the
administration is a frightening blunder at a time when there is
widespread acknowledgment that the position of the United States in
the Islamic world has never been worse.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A month long journalistic investigation of Boykin reveals a 30-year
veteran whose "classified resumé" reads like a history of special
operations and counter-terrorism.
From the failed Iranian hostage rescue attempt in 1980 to
invasions in Grenada and Panama, to the hunt
for drug lord Pablo Escobar in Colombia, to Somalia and various
locales in the Middle East, Boykin has been there.
He also was an advisor to Atty. Gen. Janet Reno during Waco.
He has risen in the ranks, starting out as one of the first Delta
Force commandos and going on to head the top-secret Joint Special
Operations
Command.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He has served in the Central Intelligence Agency and, most recently,
================================================
he commanded Army Special Forces before being brought into the
Rumsfeld
leadership team.
------
But Boykin is also an intolerant extremist who has spoken openly
about how
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
his belief in Christianity has trumped Muslims and other
non-Christians in
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
battle.
-------
He has described himself as a warrior in the kingdom of God and
invited others to join with him in fighting for the United States
through repentance, prayer and the exercise of faith in God.
He has praised the leadership of President Bush, whom he extolled as
"a man who prays in the Oval Office." "George Bush was not elected by
a majority of the voters in the United States," Boykin told an Oregon
congregation.
"He was appointed by God."
--------------------------
All Americans, including those in uniform, are entitled to their
views. But when Boykin publicly spews this intolerant message while
wearing the uniform of the U.S. Army, he strongly suggests that this
is an official and sanctioned view and that the U.S. Army is
indeed a Christian army.
But that's only part of the problem. Boykin is also in a senior
Pentagon policymaking position, and it's a serious mistake to allow a
man who believes in a Christian "jihad" to hold such a job.
For one thing, Boykin has made it clear that he takes his orders not
from his Army superiors but from God which is a worrisome line
of command. For another, it is both imprudent and dangerous to have a
senior officer guiding the war on terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan
who believes that Islam is an idolatrous, sacrilegious religion
against which we are waging a holy war.
And judging by his words, that is what he believes.
In a speech at a church in Daytona, Fla., in January, Boykin told
the following story:
"There was a man in Mogadishu named Osman Atto," whom Boykin
described as a top lieutenant of Mohammed Farah Aidid.
When Boykin's Delta Force commandos went after Atto, they missed him
by seconds, he said. "He went on CNN and he laughed at us, and he
said, 'They'll never get me because Allah will protect me. Allah will
protect me.'
"Well, you know what?" Boykin continued. "I knew that my God was
bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an
idol." Atto later was captured.
Other countries, Boykin said last year, "have lost their morals,
lost their values. But America is still a Christian nation."
The general has said:
he has no doubt that our side is the side of the true God.
=========================================================
He says he attends prayer services five times a week.
=====================================================
In Iraq, he told the Oregon congregation,
==========================================
special operations forces were victorious
precisely because of their faith in God.
=======================================
"Ladies and gentlemen I want to impress upon you that
the battle that we're in is a spiritual battle," he said .
=============================================
"Satan wants to destroy this nation,
===================================
he wants to destroy us as a nation, and he
================================
wants to destroy us as a Christian army."
=======================================
Since 9/11, the war against terrorism has become almost exclusively
a "special operations war",
=========================
melding military and CIA paramilitary and
covert activities
with finer and finer grained integrated intelligence information.
Hence, the creation of Boykin's new job as deputy
================================================
undersecretary of Defense for intelligence.
=========================================
The task facing Boykin, Rumsfeld insiders say, is to break down the
wall between different intelligence collectors and agencies and
quickly get the best information and analysis for American forces in
the field.
But even as he begins his new duties, Boykin is still publicly
preaching.
As late as Sept. 27, he was in Vero Beach, Fla., speaking on behalf
of Visitation House Ministries.
In describing the war against terrorism, President Bush frequently
says it "is not a war against Islam." In his National Security
Strategy, Bush declared that "the war on terrorism is not a clash of
civilizations." Yet many in the Islamic world see the U.S. as waging a
cultural and religious war against them.
In fact, the White House's own Advisory Group on Public Diplomacy
for the Arab and Muslim World
reported this month that since 9/11,
"hostility toward America has reached shocking levels."
"Arabs and Muslims respond in anger to what they perceive as U.S.
denigration of their societies and cultures," the report stated.
The task for the U.S., the report said, is to wage "a major struggle
to expand the zone of tolerance and marginalize extremists."
Appointing Jerry Boykin, with his visions of holy war in the Islamic
world, to a top position in the United States military is no way to
marginalize extremism.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Go to Original http://www.truthout.org
Go to search engine
General Casts War in Religious Terms
====================================
By Richard T. Cooper
The Los Angeles Times
Thursday 16 October 2003
----------------------------
The top soldier assigned to track down Bin Laden and Hussein is an
evangelical Christian who speaks publicly of 'the army of God.'
-------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON; The Pentagon has assigned the task of tracking
down and eliminating Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and other
high-profile targets to:
an Army general who sees the war on terrorism
as a clash between Judeo-Christian values and Satan.
==================================================
Lt. Gen. William G. "Jerry" Boykin,
=================================
the new deputy undersecretary of
================================
Defense for intelligence,
========================
is a much-decorated and twice-wounded
veteran of covert military operations. From the bloody 1993 clash with
Muslim warlords in Somalia chronicled in "Black Hawk Down" and the
hunt for Colombian drug czar Pablo Escobar to the ill-fated attempt to
rescue American hostages in Iran in 1980, Boykin was in the thick of
things.
Yet the former commander and
======================
13-year veteran of the Army's top-secret Delta Force
====================================================
is also an outspoken evangelical Christian who
appeared in dress uniform and polished jump boots before a religious
group in Oregon in June to declare that:
"radical Islamists hated the United States
========================================
"because we're a Christian nation,
================================
because our foundation and our roots are Judeo-Christian ...
and the enemy is a guy named Satan."
Discussing the battle against a Muslim warlord in Somalia, Boykin
told another audience,
"I knew my God was bigger than his.
===================================
"I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol."
=====================================================
"We
in the army of God,
===================
in the house of God,
===================
kingdom of God
=============
have been raised for such a time as this," Boykin said last year.
================================================================
On at least one occasion, in Sandy, Ore., in June, Boykin said of
President Bush:
"He's in the White House because God put him there."
===================================================
Boykin's penchant for casting the war on terrorism in religious
terms appears to be at odds with Bush and an administration that have
labored to insist that the war on terrorism is not a religious
conflict.
Although the Army has seldom if ever taken official action against
officers for outspoken expressions of religious opinion, outside
experts see remarks such as Boykin's as sending exactly the wrong
message to the Arab and Islamic world.
In his public remarks, Boykin has also said that radical Muslims who
resort to terrorism are not representative of the Islamic faith.
He has compared Islamic extremists to "hooded Christians" who
terrorized blacks, Catholics, Jews and others from beneath the robes
of the Ku Klux Klan.
Boykin was not available for comment and did not respond to written
questions from the Los Angeles Times submitted to him Wednesday.
"The first lesson is to recognize that whatever we say here is heard
there, particularly anything perceived to be hostile to their basic
religion, and they don't forget it," said Stephen P. Cohen, a member
of the special panel named to study policy in the Arab and Muslim
world for the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy.
"The phrase 'Judeo-Christian' is a big mistake. It's basically the
language of Bin Laden and his supporters," said Cohen, president of
the Institute for Middle East Peace and Development in New York.
"They are constantly trying to create the impression that the Jews
and Christians are getting together to beat up on Islam.... We have to
be very careful that this doesn't become a clash between religions, a
clash of civilizations."
Boykin's religious activities were first documented in detail by
William N. Arkin, a former military intelligence analyst who writes on
defense issues for The Times Opinion section.
Audio and videotapes of Boykin's appearances before religious groups
over the last two years were obtained exclusively by NBC News, which
reported on them Wednesday night on the "Nightly News with Tom
Brokaw."
Arkin writes in an article on the op-ed page of today's Times that
Boykin's appointment "is a frightening blunder at a time that there is
widespread acknowledgment that America's position in the Islamic world
has never been worse."
Boykin's promotion to lieutenant general and his appointment as
deputy undersecretary of Defense for intelligence were confirmed by
the Senate by voice vote in June.
An aide to the Senate Armed Services Committee said the appointment
was not examined in detail.
Yet Boykin's explicitly Christian-evangelical language in public
forums may become an issue now that he holds a high-level policy
position in the Pentagon.
Officials at his level are often called upon to testify before
Congress and appear in public forums.
Boykin's new job makes his role especially sensitive: He is charged
with speeding up the flow of intelligence on terrorist leaders to
combat teams in the field so that they can attack top-ranking
terrorist leaders.
Since virtually all these leaders are Muslim, Boykin's words and
actions are likely to draw special scrutiny in the Arab and Islamic
world.
Bush, a born-again Christian, often uses religious language in his
speeches, but he keeps references to God nonsectarian.
At one point, immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist
attacks, the president said he wanted to lead a "crusade" against
terrorism.
But he quickly retracted the word when told that, to Muslim ears, it
recalled the medieval Christian crusaders' brutal invasions of Islamic
nations.
In that context, Boykin's reference to the God of Islam as "an idol"
may be perceived as particularly inflammatory.
The president has made a point of praising Islam as "a religion of
peace." He has invited Muslim clerics to the White House for Ramadan
dinners and has criticized evangelicals who called Islam a dangerous
faith.
The issue is still a sore spot in the Muslim world.
Pollster John Zogby says that public opinion surveys throughout the
Arab and Islamic world show strong negative reactions to any statement
by a U.S. official that suggests a conflict between religions or
cultures.
"To frame things in terms of good and evil, with the United States
as good, is a nonstarter," Zogby said.
"It is exactly the wrong thing to do."
For the Army, the issue of officers expressing religious opinions
publicly has been a sensitive problem for many years, according to a
former head of the Army Judge Advocate General's office who is now
retired but continues to serve in government as a civilian.
"The Army has struggled with this issue over the years. It gets
really, really touchy because what you're talking about is freedom of
expression," he said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
"What usually happens is that somebody has a quiet chat with the
person," the retired general said.
Times staff writer Doyle McManus contributed to this report.
-------
Jump to TO Features for Friday 17 October 2003
Today's TO Features -------------- Clinton Warned Bush of bin Laden
Threat William M. Arkin | The Pentagon Unleashes a Holy Warrior
Schwarzenegger Asked To Explain Ken Lay Meeting Many Troops
Dissatisfied, Iraq Poll Finds US Soldiers to America: Bring Us Home
Now Iraqi Shiite Split Widens Sept. 11 Panel Votes to Subpoena FAA
Union Asks Colombian President to Find Two Missing Labor Workers EPA
Scuttles Comparison Of Ways To Control Mercury Maureen Dowd |
Bewitched, Bothered, Billy-Goated
Print This Story E-mail This Story
© : t r u t h o u t 2003
| t r u t h o u t | forum | issues | editorial | letters | donate |
contact |
| voting rights | environment | budget | children | politics |
indigenous survival | energy |
| defense | health | economy | human rights | labor | trade | women |
reform | global |
save-our-democracy
ACROSS THIS POST...ONE OF THE BEST POSTS I HAVE EVER READ. IT IS VERY
RELEVANT
TODAY AND I THANK POSTER FOR ALL THE WORK HE/SHE PUT INTO IT. SYLVIA
==============
From: Da_Bomb (Da_Bomb)
Subject: Stop The War! Support Our Troops, Bring Them Home
View: Complete Thread (4 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: alt.culture.alaska, misc.rural, rec.equestrian,
talk.politics.misc, rec.org.mensa
Date: 2003-03-18 07:34:31 PST
=================
"It still confuses many Americans that, in a world full of vicious
slimeballs,
we're about to bomb one that didn't attack us on 9/11 (like Osama);
that
isn't intercepting our planes (like North Korea); that isn't financing
Al Qaeda
(like Saudi Arabia); that isn't home to Osama and his lieutenants
(like Pakistan);
that isn't a host body for terrorists (like Iran, Lebanon and Syria)."
--Maurene Dowd, "Bush: The Xanax Cowboy"
http://nytimes.com/2003/03/09/opinion/09DOWD.html
Tom Stovall <sto...@wt.net> wrote:
>anonymous, posting as "da bomb", wrote:
>>Why would you imagine Bush doesn't want war?...
>
>Why would you imagine Dubya does?
One needn't imagine that which is well known, and that
category includes 'wagging the dog' and weapons sales.
>>He profits, immensely, from war...
>
>You know this because?
I read up on things. It'd behoove you to do the same.
Then you'd be able to know about the Carlyle Group.
http://www.freedomdomain.com/Templemount/10_10f.html
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0141/gray.php
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/LAZ112A.html
Could you answer the question of whether Bush profited
from the crimes of 9/11 or not, and how would you do so?
Did you know about the Bush family history of support for
enemies of the USA, and its traditions of arming them?
>>Perhaps the expression "conflict of interest" is too complex
>>for you to understand...
>
>Like many folks, you confuse unsubstantiated opinion with knowledge.
On what would you base that claim?
There's nothing about the Carlyle Group being a source for
war-based income to the Bush family that'd be mere opinion
or unsubstantiated, just because you were ignorant of it.
That's merely one aspect of the same situation. See also:
http://www.lightscion.com/white_house_business_profits.htm
http://www.counterpunch.org/floyd02152003.html
http://www.dack.com/war/portfolio/
[re the regrettable "...I haven't talked personally to anyone who
opposes military action against Iraq..."]
>>You haven't been perceived as open to such perspective,
>>or else you've been away from much human company.
>
>Opposition from one faction does not change another faction's
>perception of necessity.
No one had so much as implied that it would.
The fact remains that many people do realize that Bush is an
out-of-control crook pillaging the US treasure of resources and
lives to enrich himself and his band of corrupt malicious cronies,
and they are not deceived by his many lies.
They're paying attention. More people should do so.
>>Do you believe that Jesus wants you to get Iraqi people killed?
>
>Why would I care?
Why would you imagine you'd been asked?
> Conjecture relative to the opinions of mythical
>figures is meaningless.
I was just wondering why some religious people condemn
the Bush invasion/terrorism of Iraq to steal its oil, while yet
others try to claim to be religious, and lust for Iraqi blood.
Now, if Bush tells you that he'd be religious, yet he does
things that go against his professed religion, wouldn't that
tell you that he's not honest or at least not consistent about
it, whether you'd share his perspective on belief or not?
[re Saddam isn't a nice guy being acknowledged]
>Your most profound statement so far.
You hadn't noticed that there are too many who would
confuse a refusal to support Bush's invasion/terrorism
of Iraq with support of Saddam Hussein?
So, how do you feel about dissent being falsely labeled
as unpatriotic? Dislike it enough to be a real American?
>>Given that, should we ignore how he got that way and hope the
>>people who gave him his start won't make the same mistake again?...
>
>How Saddam came to power is irrelevant.
That'd only be true if the same people weren't gearing up
to make the same, and worse, mistakes.
Why would you support them in doing so?
Do you tell yourself that Bush's invasion/terrorism would
somehow be good for the people of the Middle East? Why?
"...Washington -- A classified State Department report expresses deep
skepticism that installing a new regime in Iraq will foster the spread
of democracy in the Middle East..."
http://www.ctnow.com/hc-democracy0314.artmar14,0,7818214.story?coll=hc-headlines-home
> The fact he is in power and has
>demonstrated a willingness to utilize that power in ways detrimental
to
>the interests of the USA is indisputable.
You really believe he'd be a threat to the USA? Why?
Did you fall for the forged documents on the nuclear program,
or some other lie from the batch of lies you've been spoonfed
as you cried for the pablum of propaganda in your piss-wetted
pampers as you cowered helpless from Bush's 9/11 terrorism?
Here you go:
>>->http://walden3.org/
>>->2003 Gulf War Facts:
>>->Iraq Uranium Purchase A Lie
>>->" 'The IAEA has concluded ... that these documents, which formed
the
>>->basis for the reports of recent uranium transactions between Iraq
and
>>->Niger, are in fact not authentic,' El Baradei told the U.N.
Security
>>->Council. Britain and the United States have alleged that Iraq had
>>->tried to revive an ambitious atomic weapons program that was
>>->neutralized by the United Nations before inspectors left in
December 1998."
>>->Please go to this webpage to see the story:
>>->http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=2346364
>>->
>>->No "Poison Factory"
>>->Powell testified to the UN that there was a "Poison Factory" in
>>->northern Iraq. Foreign Journalists were invited in two days later
and
>>->found nothing, not even aspirin.
>>->Please go to this web page to see the story:
>>->http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,892112,00.html
>>->
>>->Iraqi Reactor Parts Evidence Faked
>>->"A key piece of evidence linking Iraq to a nuclear weapons program
>>->appears to have been fabricated, the United Nations' chief nuclear
>>->inspector said yesterday in a report that called into question
U.S.
>>->and British claims about Iraq's secret nuclear ambitions."
>>->http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59403-2003Mar7.html
>>->
>>->War Will Increase Terrorism - CIA
>>->George Tenet of the CIA testified to Congress that attacking Iraq
>>->would greatly increase the chance of terrorism and Saddam
unleashing
>>->any weapons of mass destruction he might have.
>>->Please go to this webpage to see the story:
>>->http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2315967.stm
>>->
>>->Wall Street: Casualty of War
>>->Alan Greenspan and practically all economists have stated that
>>->the imminent war is causing the current crash on Wall Street.
>>->http://story.news.yahoo
>>->http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/030310/economy_bluechip_1.html
>>->
>>->Vatican: War Immoral, Not Legal
>>->The Pope, through Cardinal Pio Laghi, has told President Bush that
a
>>->preemptive strike
>>->against Iraq is immoral and illegal and not supported by God.
>>->Please go to this webpage to see the story:
>>->http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-03-05-bush-catholic_x.htm
>>->http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_1904.shtml
>>->
>>->Jesus said to him, "Put your sword back into its place ;
>>->for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword.
>>->Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and
>>->He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of
>>->angels?"
>>->"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent
of
>>->throwing it at someone else; you are the one getting burned."
-Buddha
>>->
>>->On March 5, the Santa Barbara News-Press reported that a spokesman
for
>>->the US State department claimed they were unaware of our full-page
>>->"Powell Lied?" ad in the NY Times on page A-15 on February 27,
2003.
>>->There is a commentary in this: the US State department knows that
>>->there are poison factories and weapons of mass destruction in Iraq
but
>>->they do not know what is on a full-page ad in the NY Times.
>>->
>>->Shall we infer incompetence, or a lie?
>>->
>>->Or an incompetent lie?
>>->
>>->The 44 claims made by Secretary Powell to the UN on Iraq, 5th
>>->February, 2003
>>->and their evaluation
>>->http://middleeastreference.org.uk/powell030205.html
>>->
>>->Sixteen discrepancies between Powell's claims and the evidence of
Blix
>>->and
>>->ElBaradei
>>->http://middleeastreference.org.uk/un030214.html
Given this, do you really want to portray yourself, in public,
as so remarkably gullible as to believe what Bush tells you?
Do you always swallow, hook, line, and sinker, anything any
drug abuser military deserter animal torturer offers you?
>>Do you believe that anyone with hidden WMD should be bombed?
>
>When one feels an imminent threat, being first has its advantages.
Why do you feel 'an imminent threat' from Iraq?
Have you merely been terrified into unthinking cowardice by Bush?
Why don't the countries around Iraq share your level of concern?
>>Do you believe you should support those who put Saddam in power?
>
>The interests of the USA are dynamic, not static. Times change.
Do you believe you should support those who put Saddam in power?
Aren't you just supporting the next set of Saddams when you do so?
>>Do you believe you should support those who sold him his weapons?
>
>Their source is irrelevant: the salient point is that he has them
and
>has expressed a willingness to use them.
Why do you believe that?
Do you always believe any lies you're told, once you're scared
senseless?
Or do you just want to feel less impotent by kicking helpless innocent
ass?
>>Why do you believe he'd be hiding weapons that would be a threat
>>to you?
>
>Ask the Kurds, Kuwaitis, Iranians, or Israelis. Unfortunately,
getting
>an answer might be problematic - as Francisco Villa said, "Los
muertos
>no hablan."
There aren't any of them eager to depose him enough to go do it.
Why should you be sending others to their deaths?
If you want Saddam out, why aren't you over there removing him
yourself
instead of insisting that other people should have to go there in your
stead?
>In realpolitik, if bombing a state is in the perceived best interest
of
>another state, it's going to happen.
When the perception is merely false, that becomes a war crime.
Do you believe that it should have been possible to hold trials in
Nuremberg over Nazi crimes and suchlike, or not?
>>Are you really that greedy for the corrupt to profit on scams over
the oil?
>
>Are you really foolish enough to think your conjecture can be a
>substitute for knowledge?
You don't know it's for the oil?
Do you know about the contracts Halliburton's getting?
Do you believe that Kennyboy Lay should determine the
energy policies of your nation, and do so in secret, so that
you have no way of knowing what was done thusly?
>>Do you believe that the USA and other countries should do as the UN
>>says they should...
>
>The UN is an impotent joke, incapable of imposing its will on any
state
>without the backing of the USA.
Then why are you hoping to get Iraqis killed over a UN resolution,
when you don't observe that policy anywhere without all the oil?
>... illogical arguments ...
Such as ?
Do you believe that 'you're either with us or against us' would be
logical?
Do you believe that it'd be logical to bomb bunches of people in
Afghanistan
and Iraq who had nothing whatsoever to do with the crimes of 9/11
except
to feel sorrow for the victims, if they even knew of the event at all,
and try
to tell oneself it'd somehow be 'justice' for the victims/survivors of
9/11?
>>Do you have any idea who installed and armed Saddam?
>>Had you any clue just why Rumsfeld is in that photo shaking Saddam's
hand?...
>
>Have you any clue just why Churchill and FDR shook Stalin's hand at
>Yalta?
I know why it's not the same as Rumsfeld's relationship with Saddam.
You should know, too. Why don't you?
>>You can't imagine even one alternative to killing?
>
>There is no *effective* alternative.
On what do you base that claim? What happened to the Soviet Union,
in your opinion? Do you believe that they'd been bombed into
submission?
>...Individual, family,
>tribe, city, state - each operates in self-interest and to hell with
the
>neighbors.
Actually, when you support Bush you don't even act in your
own self interest, or that of your "family, tribe, city, state", etc.
You want to remove police, firefighter, and medical personnel
from service to the public here and send them overseas to get
contaminated without sufficient protection in an invasion to steal
Iraq's oil for Cheney, increasing the threat of blowback back home.
You want the sons and daughters of homesteaders, farmers, and
ranchers to kill helpless innocent people so others can rob them,
to get sick and see the land lose their best efforts at stewardship.
You'd have to know enough to do better than that.
http://truthout.com/docs_02/09.17A.wrp.murder.htm
http://democrats.com/elandslide/petition.cfm?campaign=iraq
http://progressiveliving.org/editorial_iraq_oil_war.htm
Maybe they'll start up some extra incentive programs for the
bloodthirsty:
pay a donation and you can get your name branded onto the skin of a
dead or dying Iraqi just before they get bulldozed into mass graves.
Pay extra for that tender little baby and the flag added. Heat your
branding irons with the Iraqi's own oil, as stealing it won't bring
enough money to begin to rebuild their destroyed country.
Attacking a defenseless nation to steal its resources isn't support of
democracy, nor of life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness, nor of
any
concept a patriotic American should hold as precious. To do so to
enrich a few horrifically corrupt, convicted criminals, is worse yet,
and to deny Americans their rights and resources worst of all.
America is shamed, disgraced, by the Bush crime organization,
in front of the entire planet, for all of history.
You must reject the current electronic voting systems if you believe
in
a democratic republic. Bush/Cheney/Ashcroft/Rumsfeld/etc must be
legally removed from power if you believe that corruption shouldn't
rule.
Become civilized for the new millenium, and replace mass murder with
the rule of law.
Post a follow-up to this message
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Google Home - Advertise with Us - Search Solutions - Services & Tools
- Jobs, Press, & Help
©2003 Google
save-our-democracy
6-05-03-IS LYING ABOUT THE "REASON FOR WAR" AND
"IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE"?
SEE THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE CIA IN IT, PER NIXON'S
ATTY. JOHN DEAN-
====================================================================
RE-POST:
> WITH THE RECENT & AND NOT SURPRISING SO-CALLED
RESIGNATION OF THE
> C.I.A. DIRECTOR, GEORGE TENET I DECIDED TO
RESEARCH THE HISTORY OF
> THIS AGENCY AND THE U.S.'S SO-CALLED
"INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY", BECAUSE
> IT IS CLEAR, THAT THE C.I.A. WILL BE THE MAIN
FOCUS OF THE UP-COMING
> COMPLETED REPORT FROM THE 9-11 COMMISSION WHICH
HAS BEEN INVESTIGATING
> "WHY" THE C.I.A. & OTHER U.S. INTEL AGENCIES
DID NOTHING TO STOP THE
> ATTACKS ON THE U.S. IN 2001.
>
> CIA DIRECTOR, GEORGE TENET'S PUBLIC ADMISSION
THAT IRAQ "WAS NOT AN
> IMMINENT THREAT" TO THE U.S. AND WAS "NOT"
INCLUDED IN ANY C.I.A.
> REPORTS WAS MADE ON FEBRUARY 5, 2004, AT THE
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY,
> ALMOST A YEAR "AFTER" THESE ILLEGAL ATTACKS
TOOK PLACE, AND NOW...4
> MONTHS AFTER HIS SO-CALLED "RESIGNATION FOR
PERSONAL REASONS".
> TENET:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2004/tenet_georgetownspeech_02052004.html
HERE IS A TERRIFIC ARTICLE BY A WELL-KNOWN
ATTORNEY, JOHN DEAN, OF THE
WATERGATE ERA, WHO COMPARED THE "HIGH CRIMES" OF
NIXON WITH GEORGE
BUSH AND THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS, I.E.
"IMPEACHMENT" FOR LYING TO
CONGRESS, THE MEDIA AND THE PUBLIC.
NOTE THE DATE OF THIS ARTICLE:
JUNE 6, 2003, I.E. ONE YEAR AGO TODAY. DEAN'S
SCENARIO RE LIES ABOUT
WMD HAS
****************************************************************************
BEEN CONFIRMED.
***************
CLEARLY BUSH COULD AND SHOULD BE IMPEACHED BASED
ON "THE RULE OF LAW"
AND THE CLEAR EVIDENCE WE NOW HAVE AGAINST
HIM...THE QUESTION IS...WHY
IS CONGRESS REFUSING TO DO SO, UNLESS, THEY "KNOW
THAT THEY TO CAN BE
IMPEACHED AS CO-DEFENDANTS FOR VOTING ON A
RESOLUTION PERMITTING BUSH
TO ATTACK IRAQ, WHEN IT WAS CLEAR "BUSH'S
EVIDENCE WAS CLEARLY
FRAUDULENT". SYLVIA
--------
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030606.html