Siccing the Bulldog: Patrick Fitzgerald Gets the Rove Treatment

http://www.lowculture.com/
archives/images/31prob184.jpg


Pre-Emptive War Against Patrick Fitzgerald
Rep. John Conyers

Huffington Post
October 25, 2005

As if spin and character attacks were a viable justification for a massive breach of national security, Republicans have already decided to smear Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald rather than take responsibility for their own misdeeds. Prevailing wisdom expects grand jury indictments to be issued this week. Any criminal charges will likely reach deep into the White House.

Over the weekend, the GOP spin machine gave us a preview of what we can expect from the Republican Party when we finally learn who outed CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson.

The New York Times reports that “allies of the White House suggested Sunday that they intended to pursue a strategy of attacking any criminal charges as a disagreement over legal technicalities or the product of an overzealous prosecutor” and that, in what appears to be a coordinated Congressional and White House attack, “allies of the White House have quietly been circulating talking points in recent days among Republicans sympathetic to the administration, seeking to help them make the case that bringing charges like perjury mean the prosecutor does not have a strong case."

Before the Congress and the American people can consider the possibility of a White House cover up, it will have to penetrate the smokescreen of character assassination and RNC talking points. This sort of misdirection is nothing new to this White House. The weapons they will use will be the same used to defame Ambassador Joe Wilson; in the words of a Republican Congressional aide months ago, “it’s slime and defend.”

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson was tapped to test drive the strategy on this weekend’s edition of “Meet the Press.” As if insider trading were at all comparable to alleged treason, Senator Hutchinson attempted to draw parallels between the Fitzgerald investigation and the Martha Stewart trial: mere perjury under oath shouldn’t really bring criminal sanctions, she argued, "where they couldn't find a crime and they indict on something that she said about something that wasn't a crime." Senator Hutchinson further expressed her hope that the grand jury would not “go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars."

Much like the war in Iraq and the clumsy smear of Joe Wilson, the campaign against Patrick Fitzgerald appears doomed from the outset. First and foremost, if the grand jury does choose to bring indictments, neither Senator Hutchinson and her band of White House apologists nor the general public yet know what the scope of those indictments will be. It is quite possible that Patrick Fitzgerald could indict under the Espionage Act, which makes it a crime to disclose classified information to someone not authorized to received it. The smear artists are already arguing about technicalities-as if perjury under oath were somehow not criminal behavior. Is espionage enough of a crime for Senator Hutchinson? Is conspiracy? Is outright treason?

If senior White House advisors are, in fact, charged with perjuring themselves, why isn’t that enough for Republicans? It was enough for Senator Hutchinson to vote to remove President Clinton from office, when she said “Lying is a moral wrong. Perjury is a lie told under oath that is legally wrong....[t]o say otherwise would be to severely lower the moral and legal standards of accountability that are imposed on ordinary citizens every day. The same standard should be imposed on our leaders....I will not compromise this simple but high moral principle...” The American people are simply smarter than Senator Hutchinson gives them credit-we remember the high moral principles brought to bare against the Clinton Administration. We will not be fooled by terms like “perjury technicality.”

What about President Bush, whose Administration is being so disingenuously defended? When the story first broke, the President told the nation: “If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of." The President did not make a distinction between some crimes and other crimes.

And how do those who claim Patrick Fitzgerald is an overzealous prosecutor reconcile that view with the statements made by the President they so ruthlessly seek to protect? Not one week ago, President Bush again addressed the country: “The special prosecutor is conducting a very serious investigation. He's doing it in a very dignified way, by the way, and we'll see what he says."

The American public should be outraged-not surprised, but truly indignant-if the grand jury has uncovered evidence that the advisors closest to the President placed politics and petty revenge over national security. Time will tell. The only certainty, it seems, is that Republican leaders are less willing to confront the facts on the ground then they are to smear the character of a decent and dedicated public servant.

Representative John Conyers, Jr. was re-elected in November 2002 to his nineteenth term in the U.S. House of Representatives. He is the second most senior member of the House and was re-elected by his Congressional Colleagues to remain the first African-American Democratic Leader of the pivotal House Committee on the Judiciary. Congressman Conyers is also a founding member and Dean of the Congressional Black Caucus. Most recently, he led efforts to investigate irregularities in the Ohio presidential election.

© 2005 The Huffington Post

Red Cross, Black History

http://www.ellisparkerbutler.info/
epb/pic/v08/red_cross_1919_03_a.jpg

A Bait-and-Switch Charity

The Scandalous History of the Red Cross
By JOE ALLEN
October 20, 2005

In recent years, the image of the Red Cross has been tarnished. The worst scandal came after the September 11 attacks, when it was revealed that a large portion of the hundreds of millions of dollars donated to the organization went not to survivors or family members of those killed, but to other Red Cross operations, in what was described by chapters across the country as a "bait-and-switch" operation.

Recently, long-simmering concerns about the Red Cross' disaster relief operations were expressed by Richard Walden, of the humanitarian group Operation USA, in the Los Angeles Times--prompting a vitriolic response by the Red Cross.

But these recent scandals are nothing new for the Red Cross. In fact, the whole history of the organization is one gigantic scandal--stretching from its racist policies toward African Americans to its corporate mentality toward human beings.

It is a tribute to the feebleness of the U.S. media--and the Red Cross' powerful Republican allies--that an institution with such a dubious history continues as the symbol of "humanitarian leadership," when it should have been replaced by a far more effective agency decades ago.


* * *

The Red Cross was founded in 1881 by Clara Barton, who became famous during the Civil War for organizing the distribution of food and medical supplies to Union Army soldiers.

The Red Cross is specifically mandated, according to its Congressional charter adopted in 1905, to "carry out a system of national and international relief in time of peace, and apply that system in mitigating the suffering caused by pestilence, famine, fire, floods and other great national calamities, and to devise and carry out measures preventing those calamities." The organization was also to carry out its work in accordance with the Geneva Conventions concerning the treatment of prisoners of war. Later, the Red Cross would also be entrusted with control of a large part of the nation's blood supply.

But who got relief after disasters has always been affected by the racism that has been part of the Red Cross' long history.

For example, during the Great 1927 Flood that destroyed large parts of the Mississippi Delta and Louisiana, Black farm laborers and sharecroppers without a doubt suffered the most. As John Barry documents in his epic history of the flood, Rising Tide, delta plantation owners refused to evacuate them out of the region for fear--rightly--that most wouldn't return to their miserable, slave-like conditions.

The Red Cross came in to provide temporary housing and food aid. What African Americans of the Delta got was prison-like camps where they were routinely beaten by white, racist National Guardsmen. Food distributed by the Red Cross was given to whites first, and if anything was left, it went to Black survivors.

On the eve of the Second World War, the Red Cross stockpiled large amounts of blood because of techniques developed by the brilliant African American scientist Dr. Charles Drew. Drew himself became director of the Red Cross's Blood Bank in 1941, but resigned his position after the War Department ordered that the blood of Black and white donors be segregated.

Drew called the order "a stupid blunder," but the Red Cross complied and imposed Jim Crow in the blood supply. The Red Cross even initially refused to accept the donation of blood by African Americans at the beginning of the war effort--though it was willing to accept cash donations from them. Throughout the war, the NAACP investigated complaints by Black servicemen of racist treatment by Red Cross.

The Red Cross desegregated the blood supply after the Second World War nationally, but it allowed its Southern chapters to continue segregating blood through the 1960s.

People who think of the Red Cross as a "private charity" would be shocked to discover its actual legal status.

Congress incorporated the Red Cross to act under "government supervision." Eight of the 50 members of its board of governors are appointed by the president of the United States, who also serves as honorary chairperson. Currently, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security are members of the board of governors.

This unique, quasi-governmental status allows the Red Cross to purchase supplies from the military and use government facilities--military personnel can actually be assigned to duty with the Red Cross. Last year, the organization received $60 million in grants from federal and state governments. However, as one federal court noted, "A perception that the organization is independent and neutral is equally vital."

The leading administrators and officials of the Red Cross are almost always drawn from the corporate boardroom or the military high command. Among the past chairs and presidents of the Red Cross are seven former generals or admirals and one ex-president.

The current president Marty Evans is a retired rear admiral and a director of the investment firm Lehman Brothers Holdings. Bonnie McElveen-Hunter, the chair of the Red Cross, is also CEO of Pace Communications, whose clients include United Airlines, Delta Air Lines and AT&T--a group of companies known for their vicious treatment of workers.

The Red Cross has become particularly tied up with the Republican Party in recent decades. Both McElveen-Hunter and Evans are Bush appointees--for her part, McElveen-Hunter has donated over $130,000 to the Republican Party since 2000.


* * *

THOUGH IT is technically a nonprofit, the Red Cross is run more like profit-hungry corporation than what most people think a "charity" would act like. The most deadly example of this was the Red Cross' criminally negligent response to the early stages of the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s.

The Red Cross has been for many decades, and remains today, the largest blood bank in the country. In 1982 and especially 1983, when it would have possible to contain the outbreak--or at least stop the spread of the disease through infusions of infected blood--major blood banks, led by the Red Cross, opposed national testing of blood for HIV.

The Red Cross' opposition was based on the financial cost. As investigative journalist Judith Reitman wrote in her book Bad Blood: "It appeared it would be cheaper to pay off infected blood recipients, should they pursue legal action, than to up the Red Cross blood supply."

Earlier this year, the Canadian Red Cross pleaded guilty to distributing contaminated blood supplies that infected thousands of Canadians with HIV and hepatitis C in the 1980s. This scandal is a large part of why the Canadian Red Cross was removed from running the country's blood supply in the late 1990s--but not the American Red Cross.

Enron-style bookkeeping, deceptive advertising and outright theft of funds have also been a big part of the Red Cross' recent history.

For years, the organization has been criticized for raising money for one disaster, and then withholding a large chunk of it for other operations and "fundraising." For example, the Red Cross raised around $50 million for the victims of the 1989 San Francisco earthquake in San Francisco, but it's estimated that only $10 million was ever turned over to the victims.

Similar charges were made against the Red Cross following fundraising operations after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 and a San Diego fire in 2001. There was also a huge scandal involving the embezzlement of millions of dollars in donations in the New Jersey chapter in the late 1990s.

These scandals and the potentially embarrassing political fallout from them were muffled by the media and the Red Cross' political allies. But the truth couldn't be contained after September 11.

Soon after the attacks, Dr. Bernadine Healy, who was appointed president of the Red Cross in 1999, appealed for donations to help survivors and the families of those killed. In record-breaking time, the organization raised nearly $543 million.

Then the controversy began. A congressional investigation revealed that--though it had promised that all 9/11 donations would all go to victims' families--the Red Cross held back more than half of the $543 million. During congressional hearings, Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-La.)--soon to become a lobbyist for Big Pharma--declared: "What's at issue here is that a special fund was established for these families. It was specially funded for this event, September 11. And it is being closed now because we're told enough money's been raised in it, but we're also told, by the way, we're going to give two-thirds of it away to other Red Cross needs."

Healy was forced to resign, and her successors promised to allocate all of the money to September 11 survivors and their families.


* * *

THE HURRICANE Katrina catastrophe on the Gulf Coast has revealed the same old problems with the Red Cross. In late September, the organization was ordered out of a suburban Atlanta relief center because, according to the New York Times, its "application process had resulted in long lines and the group had made false promises of financial payments."

In an even more bizarre incident in Chicago, students were turned away from volunteering for a multi-agency relief center because they refused to sign a loyalty oath to the U.S. government!

Some more scrutiny of the Red Cross is beginning to take place. As Richard Walden, of Operation USA, wrote in the Los Angeles Times, "Its fundraising vastly outruns its programs because it does very little or nothing to rescue survivors, provide direct medical care or rebuild houses."

Walden noted (and the Red Cross now confirms) that the organization has raised $1 billion in pledges and gifts for hurricane relief. He also revealed that "FEMA and the affected states are reimbursing the Red Cross under pre-existing contracts for emergency shelter and other disaster services. The existence of these contracts is no secret to anyone but the American public."

How many people would donate to the Red Cross if they knew all this?

In the richest country in the history of the world, it is a travesty that such an organization is responsible for lifesaving. We deserve so much better.

Joe Allen writes for the Socialist Worker.

Berlusconi Behind Fake Yellowcake Dossier

http://www.gruene-partei.de/cms/files/dokbin/
33/33348.download_ecard_berlusconi.jpg

Double-Dealers and Dilettantes--
the Men Behind Nigergate Were All Italians
Carlo Bonini and Giuseppe d'Avanzo

October 26, 2005 - 1:24pm.
Source: La Republica via Nur al-Cubicle

The military intervention in Iraq was justified by two revelations: Saddam Hussein attempted to acquire unprocessed uranium (yellowcake) in Niger (1) for enrichment with centrifuges built with aluminum tubes imported from Europe(2). The fabricators of the twin hoaxes (there was never any trace in Iraq of unprocessed uranium or centrifuges) were the Italian government and Italian military intelligence. La Repubblica has attempted to reconstruct the who, where and why of the manufacture and transfer to British and American intelligence of the dodgy dossier for war.

They are the same two hoaxes that Judith Miller, the reporter who betrayed her newspaper, published (together with Michael Gordon) on September 8, 2002. In a lengthy investigative piece for the New York Times, Miller reported that Saddam could have built an atomic weapon with those aluminum tubes. These were the goods that the hawks in the Bush administration were expecting.

The "war dance" which followed Judith Miller’s scoop seemed like "carefully-prepared theater” to an attentive media-watcher, Roberto Reale of Ultime Notizie (The Latest News).

Condoleezza Rice, who was then White House Security Advisor, said on CNN: We don’t want the smoking gun to look like a mushroom cloud. A menacing Dick Cheney told Meet the Press that We know with absolute certainty that Saddam is using his technical and commercial capacities to acquire the material necessary to enrich uranium to build a nuclear weapon. This was the beginning of an escalation of fear.

26 September 2002: Colin Powell warns the Senate: The Iraqi attempt to acquire uranium is proof of its nuclear ambitions.

19 December 2002: The information on Niger and the uranium is included in the three-page President’s Daily Briefing prepared each day by the CIA and the Department of State for George W. Bush. The ambassador to the United Nations, John Negroponte, added his stamp of approval: Why is Iraq dissimulating its purchase of Niger uranium?

28 January 2003: George W. Bush pronounced the 16 words, which amountd to a declaration of war. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

The beans in that bag are Roman

In the general haze of events which precede the invasion of Iraq, Italian involvement is prefigured by a single, grotesque protagonist: Rocco Martino, son of Raffaele and America Ventrici, born in Tropea (Province of Catanzaro) on September 20, 1938.

Unmasked by the British press (The Financial Times, The Sunday Times) in the summer of 2004, Rocco Martino spills the beans: It’s true, I had a hand in the dissemination of those (Niger uranium) documents, but I was duped. Both Americans and Italians were involved behind the scenes. It was a disinformation operation.

An incomplete confession but close to the truth

Martino conceals the identify of the architects behind the “operation” and appears to be merely a pawn, like his partners in crime. So who is the puppeteer pulling the strings behind their sordid adventure? To find out, we’ll start with that funny-looking fellow who came to Rome from Tropea...

Rocco Martino is a dishonest cop and a crooked spy. He’s got the aura of a rogue about him even if you don’t know his background. A captain of politico-military intelligence between 1976 and 1997, he was let go for “conduct unbecoming”. In 1985, he was arrested for extortion in Italy. In 1993, he was arrested in Germany in possession of stolen checks. Nevertheless, according to a Defense Ministry official, Martino worked for SISMI until 1999 as a double agent.

Martino rents a place at No. 3 rue Hoehl in Sandweiler, Luxemburg. He gets a fixed salary from French intelligence and uses a consulting firm as cover: Security Development Organization. In other words, he also works for French intelligence. Serving two masters, Rocco tries his best. He sells information on the Italians to the French and information on the French to the Italians. That’s my job. I sell information.

In 1999, the pleasure-seeking Rocco is running out of cash. When he’s down to his last dime, he hatches a plot of his own. He's convinced that he’s got a brilliant and risk-free idea. What illuminates the light bulb is the problem the French are encountering in Niger.

In brief, between 1999 and 2000 the French realize that someone is working abandoned mines to generate a brisk clandestine trade in uranium. Who is purchasing the smuggled uranium? The French are looking for an answer and Rocco Martino senses an opportunity.

So he asks for help form an old colleague at SISMI: Antonio Nucera. A Carabinieri (cop) like Rocco, Antonio is the Deputy Chief of the SISMI center in viale Pasteur in Rome. He’s chief of the 1st and the 8th divisions (weapons and technology transfers and WMD proliferation counterespionage, respectively, for Africa and the Middle East.

This section is very busy section at the end of the 1980s tailing the many agents whom Saddam has deployed around the world prior to the invasion of Kuwait. “With some success”, according to an Italian intelligence official who at the time worked for the division. The official recalls: We succeeded in getting our hands on Niger code books and a telex from Ambassador Adamou Chékou to the Niger Foreign Ministry informing Niamey that Wissam al-Zahawie, the Iraqi Ambassador to the Vatican, would be coming to Niger as a representative of Saddam Hussein.

But that wasn’t all. We confiscated maraging steel (ultra-high strength steel) in the port of Trieste. We thought it was destined for a series of centrifuges used to separate uranium. We exchanged information on Iraqi nuclear proliferation at the end of the eighties with the British of MI6—the cream of the crop. A sincere friend of Italy worked there: Hamilton MacMillan. MacMillan mentored Francesco Cossiga [Interior Minister, in charge during the kidnapping and murdering of Aldo Moro by the Red Brigades] in Cossiga's introduction to the mysterious ways of espionage when he was "resident" in Rome.

Nucera decided to give a hand to his old friend, Rocco. Rocco quickly briefs him on the job. Isn’t there anything you can give me—Info? A good Niger contact? I’ll take anything you have! The French are as dry as people lost in the desert. They want to know who is buying their uranium under the table. I’m prepared to pay well to find out.

In the archives of Nucera’s SISMI division, there are documents that could be useful in pawning off a half-baked frittata and making a few bucks. There’s the telex from the Niger ambassador. Further needs might be met at the Niger Embassy at No. 10 via Baiamonte in Rome. SISMI director Nicolò Pollari confirms to La Repubblica: Nucera wanted to help out his friend. He offered him the use of an intelligence asset—no big deal, you understand--one who was still on the books but inactive--to give a hand to Martino. The asset worked at the Niger Embassy in Rome. She was in bad shape. She barely eked out a living in the back of the espionage shop. She didn't get a monthy sum from Italian intelligence. In other words, she was a contractor.

Information and cash were exchanged. It was only chickenfeed—a few hundred thousand lira notes. But that was a lot of money in 2000, when Martino was really desperate. He was on a slow slide to destitution—nothing to spy on and nothing to sell.

La Signora

You should have seen her, "La Signora". Sixty years old if she was a day! A face that once was pretty—now it looked a crinkled leaf. You could call her a gofer for the Niger Embassy. She looked like my old auntie. A French accent. A complicit wink. Always spoke in a whisper. Even when she said “hello”, her voice was like a tiny, mysterious flute, ready to reveal a thousands secrets. But even "La Signora" was in need of cash.

Nucera arranged the meeting. Rocco and La Signora don’t take long. He going to get what he came for. But wasn’t Nucera her official contact at SISMI? Then why wasn’t she supposed to know that it was SISMI who wanted the favor? And why was the item useful to the Agency?

With the blessing of Nucera, Rocco and La Signora, a pair of clever snake oil vendors, conclude a bargain. There would be a few sheets of paper available for sale. But the help of a Niger national was needed. La Signora points him to the right man. He’s First Embassy Counselor Zakaria Yaou Maiga. As Pollari told us, that Maiga spent six times more than he earned.

The gang of spendthrift bunglers, short on cash, is ready to go into action. Rocco Martino, La Signora, Zakaria Yaou Maiga. Nucear retreats into the shadows. They wait for the embassy to close its doors for New Years 2001. They simulate a break-in and burglary. When on January 2, 2001, bright and early, the Second Secretary for Administrative Affairs Arfou Mounkaila reports the burglary to the Carabinieri of the Trionfale station, he has to admit with a grin that the burglars were half asleep. A lot of trouble and effort for nothing. Mounkaila is unable to report missing what he doesn’t know is gone: Letterhead, and official stamps. In the hands of the snake oil vendors, useful stuff with which to assemble a dodgy dossier.

Old documents are extracted from the SISMI division’s archives where Nucera is deputy chief of section: code books, letters, contracts and a memorandum of understanding between the government of Niger and Iraq “concerning the supply of uranium on 5 and 6 July 2000 in Niamey”. The memorandum has a 2-page attachment entitled “Agreement”. Rocco hands over the “package” to agents from the French Direction Générale de la Sécurité Extérieure. They hand him some banknotes which he spends in Nice. Rocco loves the Cote d’Azur.

Up to this point, a caper worthy of Stan Laurel, Goofy and Cruella deVille. But it's an innocuous swindle. The French take the documents and toss them in the dumpster. One of the agents remarks, Niger is a French-speaking place and we know how things are there. But nobody would have confused one minister with another they way they did in that useless piece of garbage.

Case closed, then? No! The burlesque imbroglio is transformed into a very grave matter—along comes September 11th and Bush immediately starts to think about Iraq and requests proof of Saddam’s involvement in the attacks.

SISMI recalls the via Baiamonti squad to into action. A new director, Nicolò Pollari, arrives at Forte Brasco. And Col. Alberto Manenti, the new man on the job, is placed in charge of WMD. A well-prepared officer but completely incapable of saying "No" to a superior, says a SISMI official with whom he worked. Col. Manenti had Nucera on his staff for a time and knew him well. Manenti, who knows that Nucera is about to retire, asks him to stay on as a consultant.

SISMI is straining at the bit. It's got room for maneuver like it’s never had before in the history of Italy. Berlusconi asks Pollari for a feat on the international stage which will catapult Italy to the first among US allies. A request along the same line comes in from the CIA station chief in Rome, Jeff Castelli. News, information, useful scraps of intelligence are needed. Now! On the double! Washington is looking for proof to use against Saddam.

The White House (in particular, Cheney) puts pressure on the CIA to hop to it. The absence of proof isn’t proof of absence, philosophizes Rumsfeld at the Pentagon. In that kind of climate, with their phony dossier, the snake oil salesmen of via Baiamonti, (Rocco Martino and Antonio Nucera) would be useful. So what do they do in the fall of 2001? Rocco Martino describes it this way: At the end of 2001, SISMI handed the yellowcake dossier to the British of MI6.

They hand over a dossier devoid of scrutiny. They claim only that they got it from “a reliable source.” Then they make a small tweak: SISMI wanted to disseminate the Niger documents to allied intelligence but at the same time, did not want its collaboration in the operation known. These are allegations which Palazzao Chigi vehemently denies. The government tells a bald-faced lie. After the war reveals the WMD chicanery, the Italian Government swears that no uranium dossier was handed over or made to be handed over to anyone, either directly or through intermediaries.

The next move was predictable. The Italian Government and SISMI build a dike between Forte Braschi and the footprints of the via Biaimonte squad. But its denial does not hold up. It is a known fact that in fall of 2001, SISMI monitored Rocco Martino’s every move in London. This is confirmed to La Repubblica by SISMI chief Nicolò Pollari. We monitored Martino and photographed his meetings in London. Would you like to see the pictures? So why didn’t Rome put the lie to its ex-agent and snake oil salesman? Especially since the information in the dossier was vouched for by Pollari to Jeff Castelli, CIA station chief. It is a known fact that a report on the bogus, made-in-Rome dossier ended up at the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence—in the Office of Strategic, Military and WMD Proliferation Affairs.

Strategic Affairs is not a big place. At the time, 16 analysts worked there under the direction of Greg Thielmann. Thielmann tells La Repubblica: I received the report in fall of 2001. We thought that Langley acquired it from their field officer in Italy. The agent in the field reports that Italian intelligence permitted him see some papers documenting the attempt by Iraq to acquire 500 tons of uranium ore from Niger. So, SISMI purported the truth of documents it knew to be false to the CIA. There’s a second confirmation. At Langley, Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson was assigned the mission to verify the Italian “story” of the 500 tons of uranium.

Says Wilson: The report was not very detailed. It’s not clear if the agent who signed the report materially saw the peddled documents or whether he heard it from another source.

We'll have to modify the sequence of events:

Fall 2001: General Pollari’s SISMI is in possession of a phony dossier assembled by Rocco Martino and Antonio Nucera. They show it to the CIA while Rocco Martino delivers it to Sir Richard Dearlove’s MI6. This is only the beginning of the Great Italian Yellowcake Scam.

Galloway Gauntlet Down - Again!

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - Not content perhaps with the mauling he received courtesy of British Respect Party MP George Galloway during testimony to his senate committee investigating U.N. Oil for Food Programme improprieties, U.S. Senator Norm Coleman is again sending accusatory salvos across the Atlantic charging Galloway did indeed personally profit the United Nation's much maligned Iraq aid scheme. And, true to form, George Galloway is answering with a challenge of his own.

www.respectcoalition.org/

www.pej.org

Galloway Gauntlet Down - Again!
C. L. Cook

PEJ News
October 26, 2005

The feud between the two trans-Atlantic legislators began last May when, Senator Coleman publicly charged (and extra-judicially convicted) newly minted independent Respect party MP George Galloway with profiting, through his charity organization, Mariam's Appeal, by siphoning off funds and oil contracts for himself. Coleman made the charge as part of the Senate proceedings he chairs, the "Oil For Influence: How Saddam Used Oil to Reward Politicians and Terrorist Entities Under the United Nations Oil-for-Food Programme."

Coleman had used the committee hearings to slander others, assured of the impunity afforded by Senate committee rules: Much like the House of Commons, slurs, lies, and slander are not considered in the "public domain" so legal action cannot be taken in defense of charges made there. So, when Galloway offered himself to testify under oath to the committee Coleman may have had sugar plum headlines dancing in his fancy; but, like so much undertaken by the Bush administration and its proudly mediocre apparatchiks, Coleman too was unprepared for what was to come.

Galloway arrived to a media-circus, replete with the neo-con's favoured performing poodle, fellow-Brit Christopher Hitchens, strategically placed to throw off the "bruising" parliamentarian, but he had arrived a man on a mission, inured to the too familiar intimidation meted to domestic opponents of the Bush administration. Galloway had come to fight.

What followed for Coleman and his committee was a 47 minute humiliation, an absolute dressing down of not only the gruel-thin "evidence" supporting his slanderous claims, but too a blistering critique of the blatant illegality of the Bush war in Iraq and its outrageous mendacity. As Galloway pointedly suggested, the committee's mandate to uncover "sanctions-busting" oil deals might be better served investigating American corporations operating throughout the U.N. sponsored embargo of Iraq with a wink and a nod from both the Clinton and Bush Administrations.

Clearly, Coleman now believes he has the goods on Galloway, claiming in another defamatory attack, he now has the "evidence" he claimed and failed to prove the first go-around. To which Galloway has responded with a "bring it on" challenge to Coleman to debate the "merits" of the charges in his home state of Minnesota.

Galloway says Coleman's latest charges, that he lied under oath to the Senate committee are politically motivated, and expressed doubt Coleman would have the courage to repeat those allegations outside the legal bubble of the Senate.

"If they say they are going to charge me I'll head for the airport and I'm calling for them to do so, begging them to do so. The charge against me in this sneak attack is that I lied under oath in front of the Senate when I went there in May and trounced this group of lickspittle pro-war Bushites. I am unequivocally stating here and now I'll head for Heathrow now, pausing only to pick up my toothbrush, if they will promise to charge me with perjury. It is very clear what they said, I lied under oath. It is a criminal offence which is what they told me when I swore the oath. It is put up or shut up time. See you in court Senator Coleman."

At issue here are specific assertions made by Coleman that Galloway personally benefited through eight oil allocations, totalling 23 million barrels of oil between the years 1999 and 2003.

Galloway says: "We want to take the fight to the enemy," but he believes Coleman is unlikely to agree to an open debate, saying: "I have no confidence that Coleman will charge me. That would require [Tariq] Aziz (the former Iraqi deputy prime minister being held in jail in Iraq and one of the senate committee's alleged sources) and others appearing in court," adding, Coleman would be "terrified of that."

The impetus of Coleman's recent attack seem to be timed to coincide with this week's expected report from former chairman of the US Federal Reserve, Paul Volcker on his UN investigation into abuses of the Oil for Food Programme by companies and individuals. That report is expected to repeat allegations against Mr. Galloway, though deeming those inadequate due to a lack of evidence he received any money, a claim Galloway has consistently repeated.

Galloway successfully sued British newspaper, the Daily Telegraph for libel for their printing of similar accusations in 2004. A ruling on the Telegraph's appeal of that ruling is also imminent. Figuring prominently in that case were the finding of an indepedent Charity Commission inquiry into the Mariam Appeal's finances that found no improprieties.




Chris Cook is a contributing editor for PEJ News. He also hosts Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. You can check out the GR Blog here.




George Galloway and the US senate
(Guardian UK)

25.10.2005: Galloway accused of lying to US Senate
25.10.2005: Senate presents new claims against Galloway
25.10.2005: 'In everything I said, I turned out to be right'
18.05.2005: Galloway and the mother of all invective
18.05.2005: Ewen MacAskill: Mr Galloway goes to Washington
17.05.2005: Galloway defends himself at US Senate
13.05.2005: Galloway to face US hearing
12.05.2005: Galloway faces renewed claims over Saddam oil
12.05.2005: Galloway offers to answer Iraq oil

Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

Liars, Jihadists, and Spooks! Oh My!

http://www.pronetisp.net/~diana/122.jpg


Voting in Afghanistan;
warlords, jihadis, and Iranian-agents

By Mike Whitney

10/24/05 "ICH " -- -- The western media rarely explores the failures of the Afghanistan war. That's unfortunate, because the conflict tells us a great deal about the suicidal direction of American foreign policy.

95% of the American public supported the war in Afghanistan, feeling that something had to be done in response to the attacks of September 11. Something was done; we invaded a sovereign nation, toppled the fanatical Taliban, and cobbled together an American-friendly regime that has never had any real authority and never provided even minimal security for its people.

The toxic effects of the conflict are now tragically evident in the unexpected results of the parliamentary elections. The Sept. 18 elections for the Wolesi Jirga (Lower House) show that warlords and ex-Taliban commanders won over half of the seats in the new parliament. Many of those elected are among the most extreme human rights abusers in the country; certainly not what President Bush imagined when he began his "global democratic revolution". Now, former jihadis, Islamic fundamentalists, and warlords will control a majority of the seats in Parliament ensuring that the security of the Afghani people will continue to be at risk.

For all practical purposes, the country has returned to its brutal pre-Taliban days where the nation was divided into fiefdoms controlled by regional warlords. Many of the candidates participated in the civil war during the 1990's that devastated much of the country. They are now in a position to challenge the power of the central government and obstruct efforts to further integrate the country.

Some of the Taliban leaders who won spots in the new government are Wakil Mutawakil, former Foreign Minister for the Taliban, and Maulavi Qalamuddin, the head of the Dept. for the Prevention of Vice and the Promotion of Virtue; the fanatical agency that enforced Sharia Law through severe forms of punishment and physical abuse. It is widely believed that Tehran is directly supporting the more extreme members in the fledgling parliament. This tells us that Iran is developing a base of political support in Afghanistan as it has in Iraq. Ironically, the US is currently defending Iran-friendly regimes in both countries it has chosen to invade.

After 4 years of occupation, we can see that the administration's promises for Afghanistan were all lies. The military has never tried to liberate the countryside from the tyranny of the warlords, nor has Bush's promise of a Marshall Plan ever materialized. The Karzai government is a feeble puppet-regime with no popular base and with no real power beyond the confines of Kabul. Judging by its inability to address any of Afghanistan's urgent problems; security, drug-trafficking, sanitation, human rights abuses, we can conclude that Karzai and his American overlords are a serious obstacle to Afghanistan's rehabilitation. There's really no chance of meaningful recovery or development in Afghanistan until Karzai is replaced by someone with a broader popular mandate.

The increasing attacks on American forces are a sign of the widespread frustration with the American occupation. The public no longer believes that the US will honor its original commitments to rebuild or stabilize the country and that is causing growing discontent and violence. Life in Afghanistan is an endless cycle of sporadic attacks, bureaucratic ineffectiveness, and grinding poverty. The specter of occupation only adds to the sense of hopelessness.

The window of opportunity for the US to demonstrate its good intentions has long since passed. The reported incidents of prisoner abuse and even death are fueling the rising restlessness and anger. The recent broadcast of the US troops burning the bodies of Taliban fighters is just the latest, and most obscene, affront to the cultural sensitivities and religious beliefs of the Afghanistan people. The shock-waves from this incident will undoubtedly be felt for years to come.

Things will only get worse in Afghanistan until the United States leaves. We are no longer trusted by the people, nor can we claim the moral authority to know what is in their best interest. The sad fact is that American troops are no longer guarantors of the peace but, rather, are the main instigators of the continuing hostilities. According to Stars and Stripes magazine, "the recent surge in fighting (in Afghanistan) could be attributed more to American aggressiveness than anything Al Qaida is doing." Just like in Iraq, the American tendency to "shoot now, and ask questions later" is the primary source of the burgeoning violence.

The western media has scrupulously kept Afghanistan off the front page of America's newspapers. That spot has been reserved for the spurious charges against Syria so that Washington can drum-up support for its next war. But, thoughtful American's should take a second look at Afghanistan and judge for themselves whether any of the administration's goals have been realized or if the conflict has been a dismal failure. The recent parliamentary elections demonstrate beyond a doubt that America's involvement has only strengthened the most reactionary and brutal elements in Afghani society. This is a clear sign that it is high-time for us to withdraw our troops and to reconsider the use of military force as the primary means for achieving foreign policy objectives.

Let Justice Be Done, Though the Heavens Fall

http://www.artofthemix.org/ UploadImages/57068949prometheus_ rising_FINITO.JPG Justin Raimondo

Fiat justitia, ruat coelum. "Let justice be done, though the heavens fall." The above Latin quotation – usually attributed to Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus, a Roman statesman and Julius Caesar's father-in-law – succinctly summarizes both prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald's view of the law and the possible consequences of its application in the case of the CIA leak investigation. In Washington, D.C., the heavens will surely fall on the heads of several prominent players, including not only the vice president's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, but also the president's top national security adviser, Stephen J. Hadley; John Hannah, the vice president's chief national security adviser; and David Wurmser, the VP's chief of Middle Eastern affairs. The fate of the more high-profile Karl Rove is in some doubt: he's probably looking at obstruction of justice and/or perjury charges, but the others – including, perhaps, a number of unindicted co-conspirators – are looking at some real jail time.

Gorilla Radio for Monday, October 23, 2005

This week on GR: Film maker and journalist Kevin Pina and 'Haiti: The Untold Story.

And; Janine Bandcroft bringing us up to speed on all that's good to do in and around Victoria this week.


Chris Cook hosts Gorilla Radio, airing live every Monday, 5-6pm Pacific Time. In Victoria at 101.9FM, 104.3 cable, and on the internet at: http://cfuv.uvic.ca He also serves as a contributing editor at the progressive web news site: http://www.pej.org.

Gorilla Radio for Monday,
October 23, 2005
C.L. Cook

In April of 2004, the duly elected President of Haiti, Jean Bertrand Aristide was ousted from office and sent into exile. Since, the poorest nation in the Americas has suffered an occupation similar in style if not scope to that experienced by the unfortunate citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Today, Haitians live in fear of brutal “government” repression aided by a ruthless “coalition” of willing foreign soldiers and mercenaries. What differentiates the Haitian occupation from those in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine is the participants.

Of course, the United States is playing the leading role and is, in reality, the de facto ruler of Haiti; but the “boots on the ground” are filled with the Blue Helmeted soldiers and police of the United Nations; a contingent which includes Canadians.

Kevin Pina is an American film maker and journalist living in Haiti. He was in Victoria last week to screen his film, ‘Haiti: The Untold Story,’ a grim and gripping look at the reality of international intervention in Haiti’s democracy, and the complicit role the United Nations and Canada have played in atrocities occurring there.

On today’s show, Kevin Pina and a special one hour examination of Haiti: The Untold Story.

And, Janine Bandcroft will join us at the bottom of the hour to bring us up to speed with all that’s good to do in and around Victoria this week.

But first, Kevin Pina, telling Haiti’s story.

You can check out the GR blog at: http://GorillaRadioBlog.blogspot.com

G-Radio is dedicated to social justice, the environment, community, and providing a forum for people and issues not covered in the mainstream media.

Some past guests include: M. Junaid Alam, Joel Bakan, Maude Barlow, David Barsamian, William Blum, Luciana Bohne, Vincent Bugliosi, Helen Caldicott, Noam Chomsky, Michel Chossudovsky, Diane Christian, Juan Cole, David Cromwell, Jon Elmer, Reese Erlich, Anthony Fenton, Jim Fetzer, Laura Flanders, Chris Floyd, Susan George, Stan Goff, Robert Greenwald, Denis Halliday, Chris Hedges, Sander Hicks, Julia Butterfly Hill, Robert Jensen, Dahr Jamail, Diana Johnstone, Kathy Kelly, Naomi Klein, Anthony Lappe, Frances Moore Lappe, Dave Lindorff, Jim Lobe, Jennifer Loewenstein, Wayne Madsen, Stephen Marshall, Linda McQuaig, George Monbiot, Loretta Napoleoni, John Nichols, Kurt Nimmo, Greg Palast, Michael Parenti, William Rivers Pitt, Sheldon Rampton, Paul Craig Roberts, Paul de Rooij, John Ross, Danny Schechter, Vandana Shiva, Norman Solomon, Starhawk, Grant Wakefield, Paul Watson, Bernard Weiner, Mickey Z., Dave Zirin, and many others.

Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

Lambs of God: A Child's Crusade

http://www.arsmar.com/emporium/IMG/
books/TheChildrensCrusade-escape3.jpg


Lambs of God:
A Child's Crusade
C. L. Cook

PEJ News
October 22, 2005

It's perhaps fitting that the leader of the new crusades should be seen as a simpleton. Almost childlike, George W. Bush has, over the tragic course of his reign, displayed a Fontleroian personality perfectly suited to one who would muster the young on a grand adventure. His foot-stamping insistence the game continue until he takes the ball home bodes ill for the young siblings of the soldiers now serving. Georgie likes this game and won't quit while he's winning. Losses? Aren't there are always more tin soldiers? Hasn't there always been more for George?

Across the world, in a place America's children are bound to, other children wait their arrival. Already, thousands have perished; scorched and rent by fire and steel, whithered by hunger and disease. Killed before knowing first love; torn apart from life; extinguished children, slain by children. Murdered to remain forever; not "lost," or even "stolen," not "preserved," or "delivered," but dead, gone forever promises never to be fulfilled. Finished.

Omar al-Ibadi, writing for Reuters today told of another child, finished on the side of a Baghdad highway with two bullets in his back.

"Adel Abed Hammed was a skinny 31-year-old so withdrawn he sometimes went days without talking to anybody and would let only his mother touch him. Mentally ill since childhood, he used to wander the streets of Baghdad alone. One day he chanced on some American soldiers who shot him dead after he took fright at a bullet fired over his head."

"I stayed up all night crying, waiting for him outside the house. I pictured him dead, with blood coming from his face."

Adel Abed's mother was waiting at home anxiously, as all who live there wait when minutes of missed appointments hang heavy with dread. Her wandering, curious "child" was overdue, she couldn't know his body had been scooped up by the boys who killed him, a little "claims card" left by the place he fell notifying kith and kin of his body's whereabouts.

“I wouldn’t feel such misery if he wasn’t so sick but that makes it double for me,” said his mother. “He was like a child.”

Almost childlike, Adel Abed's life held little promise for his aging parents. He would likely never know a love affair. He would never know achievement, or ponder the mysteries of the universe beyond his neighbourhood. Yet, the misery his grieving mother describes doubles because he was innocent. Innocent as the thousands finished before him yes, but innocent too to the knowledge of the greed and ambition, cunning and ruthlessness that ultimately killed him.

Adel Abed's mother sits with her family, wondering at the fate for her two living sons.

"He always used to go walking for hours." she says. "When he came home he used to tell me about what he saw on the road. I used to take him to the bathroom and wash him."

It was Adel Abed's neighbours, who witnessed his death, that brought the dire confirmation of Adel's fate to the Hammed household. They told her it happened this way:

"I saw Adel coming walking slowly towards the Americans from the other side. They fired a warning shot over his head. Adel panicked and ran to the other side of the highway. He’d just started running when they shot him with a couple of bullets. Then he fell to the ground. Four soldiers approached his body and checked him, then they carried his body to a Humvee and put him inside and took him away."

Shot from behind as he fled, Adel Abed Hammed finished.

The neighbours begin paying their condolence visits to the Hammed's for the mourning rituals; rituals that ring daily across benighted Iraq with unnatural frequency. And, across the world, another child whines for more toy soldiers to keep the game going.


Chris Cook is a contributing editor to PEJ.org. He also hosts Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. You can check out the GR Blog here.

Dovetailing Wars: Drugs and Conquest

http://www.canoe.ca/ RemembranceDayImages/poppies.jpg Gainspotting:Terror War Meets Drug War

Chris Floyd Empire Burlesque Thursday, 20 October 2005

Here is some eminent good sense from Norm Stamper, former police chief of Seattle on how to vastly reduce crime – and America's scandalously high prison population – and, not incidentally, stanch the relentless spread of corruption throughout government and the business world, while helping to heal some of the nation's most greivous racial and class divides. What's the secret? It's simple: legalize drugs. The Los Angeles Times is to be applauded for publishing such a provocative piece, which flies in the face of deeply entrenched (and deeply profitable) conventional wisdom – and to be condemned for trying to undercut it at the same time with a headline designed to set middle-class teeth on edge: "Let Those Dopers Be." As Stamper makes clear, you don't have to be a "doper" to see the incalcuable damage being done to American society and politics by the horrendously stupid and counterproductive "war on drugs." Then feel free to take a hit of the piece below. This is the first installment of several excerpts from the book, "Empire Burlesque: High Crimes and Low Comedy in the Bush Imperium, 2001-2005," that we will be running in the week ahead, while your correspondent trots the globe. This is from November 2001, and shows the connection between the 30-year-old "war on drugs" and the "war on terror," then in the first bloody bloom of youth. Gainspotting: Terror War Meets Drug War November 30, 2001 Among the isolated, out-of-step losers who dare open their mouths to mutter "doubts" about America's military campaign in Afghanistan, you will sometimes hear the traitorous comment: "This war is just about oil." We take stern exception to such cynical tommyrot. No one who has made a clear and dispassionate assessment of the situation in the region could possibly say the new Afghan war is "just about oil." It's also about drugs. For, although we must now hail the warlords of the Northern Alliance as noble defenders of civilization, the fact is that for some time they have also functioned as one of the world's biggest drug-dealing operations. Indeed, one of the main sticking points between the holy warriors of the alliance and their ideological brethren in the Taliban has been control of the profitable poppy, which by God's grace grows so plentifully in a land otherwise bereft of natural resources. (Always excepting the production of corpses.) .... In the good old days, when the brethren were united against the Soviet devil, all shared equally in the drug-running trade, under the benevolent eye of that great lubricator of illicit commerce, the CIA. When the Northern Alliance was driven from Kabul – having killed 50,000 of the city's inhabitants during their civilized rule – the Taliban seized the lion's share of Afghanistan's opium production. The noble warlords managed to hold on to several prize fields in the north, however, and together with avaricious Talibs, they helped fuel a worldwide rise in heroin traffic. Earlier this year, the Bush administration bribed the Taliban to stop growing opium – a most effective use of baksheesh, according to the UN, which found that Afghan opium production dropped from 3,300 tons annually to less than 200. But the Northern Alliance leapt manfully into the breach, engineering a threefold rise in opium output on their territory this year. Now the bountiful southern fields are also theirs for the plucking. For war-ravaged Afghan farmers, the "market realities" are clear: they can plant wheat, and get 50 bucks an acre, or plant opium and pull down $8,000 in hard cash for the same plot of land. Needless to say, the poppy replanting has already begun. Come harvest time, the drug lords – sorry, the noble warlords – will take their cut and ship the dope off to pollute the minds of decadent infidels in the West. Ah, the spoils of victory! Hey, maybe their CIA buddies will help coordinate the shipments. Those guys are killer when it comes to covert logistics. After all, as Attorney General "Jailin' John" Ashcroft tells us, the "war on terrorism" is just like "the war on drugs" – that is to say, a never-ending fount of profitable corruption for the ruthless, the murderous and the well-connected. Certainly, the "war on drugs" makes little sense otherwise. We all know that if the ingestion of various arbitrarily chosen substances were no longer prosecuted, the level of violence, crime and repression in society would be reduced immeasurably. "Substance abuse" would then become what it is now for drugs like alcohol and nicotine: a matter of personal character and private consequence. Crack addicts, for example, could have their nightly pipe in the safety of their own home, for the same price as a six-pack of beer, a carton of cigarettes or the latest Disney video. They wouldn't need to resort to crime to feed an expensive criminalized habit. And their resulting stupefaction would be no more harmful to the public good than that of millions of their fellow citizens sitting slack-jawed in front of the tube. But decriminalization will never happen. Illegal drugs are simply too profitable for the various powerful criminal elements known as "mafias," "warlords" – and "intelligence agencies." For drug-running is the perfect way to fund your black ops – no budget restraints, no legal niceties, no pesky legislators looking over your shoulder. That's how they did it back in those high old Iran-Contra days, as investigator Robert Parry reports on Consortiumnews.com. Buried in the papers of that thwarted investigation are outright admissions of CIA connivance with the drug dealers who helped finance the murderous Reagan-Bush terrorist network in Latin America. This is – in part – what G.W. Bush is covering up with his recent autocratic edict sealing past presidential papers. That, and the fact that his Daddy lied about his own involvement in the criminal enterprise – lies which he drowned certain fathoms deep by pardoning his co-conspirators. Some of these criminal connivers with drug-running now hold high office in the new Bush administration. You know, the one that "restored honor and integrity" to the White House. Bottom Line Let's connect the dots. Drugs help stoke war. Defense firms sell the weapons of war – to governments, warlords, terrorists, whoever will pay. The investors and owners of defense firms – like, say, the Bush family and the bin Ladens – are directly enriched by war. And so the wars go on. For every American soldier killed, for every Afghan child murdered, George W. Bush adds a few more dollars to his inheritance. His former business associates, the bin Ladens – whom he protected by stifling FBI investigations into their activities, while also crippling probes into Saudi funding of al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups – will do quite nicely as well. Nu, what can you say? Such is the eternal way of the world, where "oft 'tis seen, the wicked prize itself buys out the law." So it was in Babylon, so it was in Rome; so it was in Moscow, Mecca, Peking and Thebes. The ruthless, the murderous and the well-connected carry it away.

She Says She Said: Judith Miller's Masters

No one risks their own career and their paper’s credibility for short-term gratification or fleeting notoriety. The breadth and detail of Miller’s lies implies that other factors were involved. Miller clearly had an agenda that far exceeded her own ambitions. What was it? Who does Judy Miller serve?

http://gulfnews.com/images/
2005/07/25_opinion_reporter.jpg

Escorting Judy to the Gallows
Mike Whitney

www.dissidentvoice.org

October 22, 2005

For the last 85 days the New York Times has been heaping praise on Judy Miller for going to jail rather than divulging the name of her source in the Valerie Plame case. The paper composed 15 editorials lauding her courage and comparing her to everyone from Rosa Parks to Joan of Arc.

So, why did Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger suddenly fire her after she was out of prison for less than a week?

Did heroism suddenly go out-of-style at the paper of record? Or were Miller’s shenanigans too hot to handle for the right-leaning Times?

A week earlier the Times had Saint Judy up on a pedestal, elevating her to near-mythic status and celebrating her eagerness to accept jail time rather than flinch on a matter of principle. They tried to turn her case into a national referendum on free speech and make it look like she was the victim of a justice system run amok. Miller was presented as the femme fatale enduring the “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” rather than compromise her steadfast convictions.

What rubbish.

Miller broke the law by obstructing an investigation into the outing of a CIA agent. She deserved to be penalized. This isn’t Watergate, where reporters’ Woodward and Bernstein withheld the names of sources that knew the details of the government break-in at Democratic headquarters. Miller committed a felony when she took Plame’s name from Libby and passed it on to others, putting other CIA agents in the field directly at risk. The First Amendment does not protect reporters actively participate in the commission of a crime.

Sorry, Judy.

Fortunately, the case has attracted widespread attention and the public seems to know that Miller is just protecting the creeps in the White House. The whole mess is nothing more than a personal vendetta carried out by the dirty tricks branch of the Bush administration. And, no one is buying the Times’ pompous rhetoric about journalistic integrity and the freedom of the press. Everyone knows that Miller was simply hiding the facts to shield her powerful friends.

Since Miller’s testimony, the focus of the investigation has shifted to Libby, Rove, and VP Dick Cheney. But what about Miller? Is she off the hook or can she be prosecuted for her involvement in a crime?

And, what about her role in building the case for war with fraudulent information from fly-by-night sources? Isn’t there a statute that covers that?

Miller’s earlier articles laid the foundation for going to war. Week after week she conjured up the lurid details of mobile weapons labs, aluminum tubes designed for nukes, and biological weapons plants hidden in the basement of Saddam’s castles, all completely bogus. Most of the fake claims that appeared on America’s front pages came from Miller’s pen.

Is it really possible that someone who contributed so greatly to the violent deaths of over 100,000 people will get off Scot-free?

Miller now says that she may have “got it wrong” about Saddam’s WMD, but that hardly seems likely. She wrote at least five blockbuster articles that convincingly challenged the findings of the UN Weapons inspectors and whipped the country into war hysteria. The Times never once disputed her uncorroborated allegations or her skewed perspective. Instead, they took a laissez faire approach; giving her headline space for every specious claim made by dubious defectors or Pentagon spokesmen. As she later admitted, “I can do whatever I want.”

Yes, she could.

But, WHY did she? No one risks their own career and their paper’s credibility for short-term gratification or fleeting notoriety. The breadth and detail of Miller’s lies implies that other factors were involved. Miller clearly had an agenda that far exceeded her own ambitions. What was it? Who does Judy Miller serve?

What exactly is her relationship to the White House? Did she really have a direct line of communication to Donald Rumsfeld? Was she the main channel for disseminating the lies that mobilized public support for administration policies? If so, we need to find out whether she received any compensation for her work or if she was acting as an agent for a foreign country. If Miller accepted as much as one thin dime for her efforts, then she is not protected under the 1st amendment and can be charged with a crime.

Let’s investigate the lead up to the war and see if Miller and Sulzberger colluded with the White House to create the deceptive news that duped the Congress into supporting the war. Let’s see if the “facts were fixed to fit the policy” in the newsroom as well as in the Oval Office. Perhaps, there’s a connection between Miller and her Washington benefactors that goes beyond mere ideological compatibility.

The First Amendment does not prohibit rigorous, independent investigations nor does it preclude assigning blame where it belongs. If Miller and Sulzberger were part of a larger conspiracy to initiate hostilities against a defenseless nation, we need to know. The Iraq war is the greatest crime of the new century. We need to find out who is responsible and hold them accountable.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state, and can be reached at: fergiewhitney@msn.com.

The New Told Lie: Syria in the Sights

Neocons and U.N. Draw a Bead on Syria
Kurt Nimmo

Another Day in the Empire

Friday October 21st 2005

Once again, we must assume the Syrians are dunderheads so murderous and impulsive as to be unable to control themselves, going right ahead and killing Rafiq Hariri, irrespective of the consequences. In fact, if we are to believe the United Nations—a disgusting lickspittle for neocon interests on several different occasions—the pernicious conspiracy to murder Hariri runs right up the Syrian totem pole of power to none other than the family of Bashar Assad, the Syrian president. According to the Independent, the politically motivated UN “report says senior Syrian and Lebanese security officials were directly involved in the killing of Hariri in February and planned it over many weeks. The missing names are of Asef Shawkat, President Bashar Assad’s brother-in-law who is Syria’s intelligence chief, and his brother, Maher Assad.”

Naturally, Bush wants a special UN session so he can rattle the bones of war. It’s of course no secret the neocons want to take out Assad and render Syria into a smaller version of Iraq—a smoldering ruin of misery and chaos—or short of that (the UN gets squeamish about such things and prefers inflicting misery from a distance) impose a medieval siege on the country as the UN and the United States teamed up to do more than a decade ago against the people of Iraq. Imposing sanctions and a “no-fly zone” over Syria will also provide U.S. pilots with the same opportunity they enjoyed in Iraq—to blithely fly around and shoot up Iraqis like fish in a barrel. All told, the Bush-Clinton-Bush sanctions were a smashing success, killing around a million hapless Iraqis. It was worth it, as the Iron Maiden, Madeline Albright, attested.

Few people doubt there is a treacherous dictatorship in Syria and the Assad family is capable of wholesale butchery (consider the elder Assad killing around 40,000 members of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Syrian city of Hama in 1982—and the well-documented fact the Brotherhood is a CIA penetrated organization). Even so, it is a stretch to believe the Syrians, especially the Assad family—having clung to power all these past decades—would be stupid enough to kill a high-profile Lebanese politician and expect to get away with it, especially when it should be obvious to a ten year old killing Hariri plays right into the hands of the United States and especially Israel.

It is common knowledge in Bushzarro world on the Potomac that Syria is “low-hanging fruit,” an easy target for neocon bullies determined to reduce Muslim society and culture to smoldering wreckage, a front and center plan for hoodlum Likudites for some time now. As Bill Van Auken writes, Hariri’s assassination is fishy:

The timing of the assassination, barely a week after Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas announced their truce in Egypt, is noteworthy. It is quite possible that any limited concessions the Israeli regime may agree to make as part of the “peace process” with the Palestinians will be repaid by Washington giving the green light for Israeli provocations and military actions against Syria.

Moreover, the assassination and the impending sanctions (or direct military action) are manna from heaven for the likes of neocons such as David Wurmser, Cheney’s adviser on the Middle East. “Wurmser has long called for the United States and Israel to work together to roll back the Ba’ath-led government in Syria,” notes SourceWatch. “For the latter part of the 1990s, he wrote frequently to support a joint U.S.-Israeli effort to undermine then-President Hafez el-Assad in hopes of destroying Ba’athist rule and hastening the creation of a new order in the Levant to be dominated by ‘tribal, familial and clan unions under limited governments,” a long-held Israeli dream. It should also be noted that Wurmser, a rabid Zionist, would do all of us well if he were wasting away in federal prison (making sure not to drop the soap) for his role in passing classified information to Ahmad Chalabi and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee—an act of treason once punished by firing squad, now apparently no big shakes, especially for Zionists who more or less are allowed to roam around, organizing “art student” spies and micromanaging nine eleven terrorists.

In fact, Wurmser co-authored (along with the weasel Douglas Feith and the Prince of Darkness Richard Perle) a report drafted for incoming Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (the infamous A Clean Break: a New Strategy for Securing the Realm document). “It called for a repudiation of the ‘land for peace’ formula that had served as the basis for Middle East peace negotiations, in favor of a plan to ‘roll back’ regional adversaries. It advocated the overthrow of the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein and recommended Israeli strikes against ‘Syrian targets in Lebanon’ and within Syria itself,” explains Van Auken. A couple years later, Wurmser “helped draft a document entitled ‘Ending Syria’s Occupation of Lebanon: the US Role?’ It called for a confrontation with the regime in Damascus, which it accused of developing ‘weapons of mass destruction.’ Among those signing the document were Feith and Perle, as well as Elliott Abrams, Bush’s chief advisor on the Middle East, who was recently appointed deputy national security advisor.”

Considering all of this—well documented and not hidden under a rock—and also Israel’s long and sordid history of using assassination (especially car bombings) as an instrument of state policy, you’d think the United Nations would have arrived at a different conclusion. Instead, we are expected to believe the Assad family is not only stupid but also unable to cover its own tracks and self-destructively begging to be bombed or stand by while their people starve to death under brutal sanctions, a favorite tactic of milquetoast bureaucrats at the United Nations. In fact, according to the Independent, Shawkat and Maher Assad were so stupid they “talked about killing Hariri in talks begun in September last year in Damascus,” conversations apparently so casual the United Nations had no problem tracking down alleged documentation.

Once again, we are expected to believe whatever our rulers tell us—even if it makes absolutely no sense and it is obvious only the neocons and Israelis stand to benefit from such carnage. Syria only stands to lose—and lose big time as the U.S. will eventually use military action against the Syrian people, as they did—predicated on similar lies—against the people of Iraq.

It’s about time more of us wake up and call the Bushites on these transparent crimes. But of course this will not happen because Americans generally do not care what their government does—apparently not even to their own Constitution and Bill of Rights—and most Americans are hard-pressed to even find Syria on a map, let alone understand the magnitude of the neocon war against Islam and the horror that portends: millions of people ultimately slaughtered, entire countries reduced to uninhabitable rubble, and poisonous depleted uranium and who knows what other deadly and noxious chemicals spread over large areas, killing and making people sick for generations to come.

Indeed, we are verging on Nazi-like crimes here. Only the magnitude is missing—but given enough time, the neocons will give Hitler and Stalin and run for the money.

Shutting Down Chavez, Shutting Down CITGO

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez has again charged the United States with a conspiracy to remove him from power. Chavez said, in an address to the solidarity group, 'Friends of a Democratic Venezuela' in Paris, and broadcast live in Venezuela Wednesday, "intelligence reports" had revealed evidence of a planned attempt against the nation.

www.pej.org

Shutting Down Chavez,
Shutting Down CITGO

C. L. Cook

PEJ News
October 21, 2005

Discounting the possibility of the success of a supposed "planned invasion" of Venezuela, Chavez said he felt compelled to issue a warning as to the consequences, saying:

"If it occurs to them [United States] to invade Venezuela to try to halt the process in Venezuela, that would start a 100-year war. We would defend against it with our teeth, with our nails."

But, Chavez has more than hands and teeth in his arsenal.

Venezuela currently supplies more than 1.5 million barrels of crude to the U.S. per day, or roughly fifteen percent of America's imports. Only Canada and Saudi Arabia supply more. But the president, who warned the Bush administration last March, following another intelligence bulletin, vital oil supplies would be cut-off entirely should he be killed, added a new wrinkle to the scope of his country's retaliatory power should something untoward befall either he, or Venezuela.

In addition to the significance of Venezuelan oil, Chavez reminded, CITGO, Venezuela's nationalized oil company, operates eight refineries and more than 14,000 gas stations within the U.S.

"We are sure that it will be very difficult for the United States to attack Venezuela, he said. "If the United States tried to attack Venezuela by a direct invasion, forget the oil."

In an allusion to televangelist, and one-time Republican presidential hopeful, Pat Robertson's now infamous call for his head, Chavez said:

"The barrel price of crude oil could hit $150 following a U.S. attack. That's why Pat Robertson, the spiritual adviser of Mr. Bush, is calling for my assassination - that would be much cheaper than an invasion."

Excoriating U.S. media propagandizing against he and the "people's revolution" he represents, President Chavez concluded, saying he wouldn't be surprised if the USA says Osama bin Laden is living in the Presidential Palace in Caracas.

The Bush administration denies there are now, or have been in the past, any plots against either Chavez, or Venezuela.



Chris Cook serves as a contribution editor to PEJ News. He also hosts Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. You can check out the GR Blog here.

Disaster: A Silver Lining for Kashmir

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - Cautious optimism is being whispered in the wake of what's been deemed the worst natural disaster for the Near East region smashed nearly two weeks ago by a massive earthquake.

www.pej.org

http://www.ladakh-kashmir.com/
gifs/flowers-kashmir.jpg

Disaster: A Silver Lining for Kashmir
C. L. Cook

PEJ News
October 19, 2005

The Kashmir, a hotly contested confluence of India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan has seen nuclear powers India and Pakistan nose to nose for years, neither swearing off the possibility of a "nuclear option" to end the hostilities. Already, the two young nations have fought three wars over control of the area, and terrorist activities conducted by both sides and Kashmiri independence factions is a constant in the decades-old conflict. Now, overwhelmed by the scope of relief efforts in the rugged, mountainous reaches where thousands have been left homeless and hungry, the two main protagonists are talking.

While champaign corks are not exactly popping over the prospect of an amicable resolution to India and Pakistan's long-standing emnity over Kashmir, the two parties are working out details to allow travel between their respective "lines of control" by relatives of the afflicted. The division of the territorities was largely manufactured by the British in the waning days of the Raj, creating the new nations of Pakistan and India and effectively seperating families and friends by the new border. In the early days of independence that followed the end of the Second World War, horrific ethnic cleansing bloodied the ground on both sides, setting the scene for the decades of war and mistrust leading to the current stand-off.

Pakistan's "President" Pervez Musharraf made the first move. Following a visit to the quake stricken capital city of Pakistani-controlled Muzaffarabad, Musharraf addressed India's leadership, saying:

"We will allow every Kashmiri to come across the Line of Control and assist in the reconstruction effort."

India responded immediately, if not definitively, saying:

"We welcome the offer. This is in line with India's advocacy of greater movement across the LOC (Line of Control) for relief work and closer people-to-people contacts."

India has sent relief flights into Pakistan and suspended it's "no-fly zone" rule for Pakistani helicopters. So far, fatalities from the October 8th quake are estimated to have been over 42,000, with a further 60,000 believed at risk of dying of exposure and hunger in its aftermath.

Powerful aftershocks have continued throughout the region, further complicating relief efforts.



Chris Cook is a contributing editor to PEJ News. He also hosts the weekly public affairs program, Gorilla Radio, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. You can check out the GR Blog here.

Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

No Further Delay: Bush Lieutenant Booked Today

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - One of the most influential members of George W. Bush's political apparatus submitted himself for fingerprints and pictures today at Houston's Harris County Sheriff's Department. Republican Leader of the House of Representatives, Tom DeLay stands accused of conspiracy and money-laundering.

www.pej.org

(Photo/Harris County Sheriff Department)


No Further Delay:
Bush Lieutenant Booked Today
C. L. Cook

PEJ News
October 20, 2005

Delay's troubles began with allegations he funnelled corporate donations into Texas state elections, something prohibited under Texas law. The Texas Republicans carried that election, held prior to the presidential election campaign, and subsequently redrew voting districts to favour George W. Bush's presidential bid.

DeLay's lawyer, Dick DeGuerin told reporters the charges are politically motivated, accusing the Travis County District Attorney's office of bias against his client and charging District Attorney Ronnie Earle of headline seeking. Referring to Earle, DeGuerin told reporters:

"Now Ronnie Earle has the mugshot he wanted."

But, the defense didn't limit accusations of bias to the Travis County District Attorney's office; DeGuerin also demanded presiding Judge Bob Perkins be removed from the case. In a motion for a change of venue citing Perkin's past contributions to "DeLay opponents," DeGuerin presented records of 34 instances of the judge's past political donations, including to Bush '04 opponent, John Kerry, and MoveOn.org, a "liberal" advocacy organization.

District Attorney Earle denounced the defence's assertions, saying:

"The logic behind the defendant's motion to recuse Judge Perkins would mean that no criminal defendant could be tried in a court presided over by a judge who did not belong to the defendant's political party."

DeLay, nicknamed "The Hammer" for his reputation of ruthless political tactics employed against both Democrat opponents and dissident Republicans, is a long-time Bush associate and confidant.

DeLay's first court appearance is set for tomorrow in Austin, Texas.



Chris Cook is a contributing editor to PEJ News. He also hosts Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. You can check out the GR Blog here.

Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

Anglo-American Axis Powers Charge Iran in Iraq Bombing Campaign

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - Rolling the contentious issue of Iranian nuclear development into the mix, British P.M., Tony Blair has accused Tehran of involvement in the recently escalated rate of bombings throughout the south of Iraq. The Iranians deny their participation, instead claiming Blair and his American partner are simply practicing "psychological warfare" against them.

www.pej.org

http://jupiter.walagata.com/
w/boudica/president-george-bush.jpg

Anglo-American Axis Powers
Charge Iran in Iraq Bombing Campaign
C.L. Cook

PEJ News
October 16, 2005

At the crux of Blair's charge is, what he claims, a heightened level of sophistication in the bombings and, he says, evidence that the materiel used could only be coming from the Iranian military. Charges again denied in Tehran. One thing is certain though; attacks have been on the increase, and have been increasingly deadly.

But the bombings are not limited to Iraq.

Just yesterday, two bomb attacks in the Iranian city Ahvez killed four and injured more than 80 bystanders. The bombs, described as "homemade" and placed in garbage cans, were detonated a few minutes apart, and while Britain condemned the attack, they provided no clue as to why the Iranians would be blowing up their own people.

Iranian state media has openly blamed yesterday's blasts on Britain.

There is a strong suspicion in Iran, and throughout the Middle-East, British and American "black-ops," covert agents provocateurs have been, and continue to be, responsible for many of the puzzling terrorist attacks against primarily civilian and religious targets.

In a statement, Britain acknowledged and rejected Iranian suspicions, saying:

"There has been speculation in the past about alleged British involvement in Khuzestan... We reject these allegations. Any linkage between the British Government and these terrorist outrages is certainly without foundation."

Last month, two British SAS agents were captured in Iraq by "police." When their car was stopped, the two men opened fire, killing one officer. Their vehicle was later found to be full of weapons and bomb-making materiel. British forces later mounted a raid on the jail where the men where being held, freeing them and killing at least five Iraqis in the process.

For their part, the Iranian government, when asked about possible British involvement in the string of bombings in Iran's Khuzestan province said, through spokesperson, Hamid Reza:

"Unlike the British we are not going to express our views without the necessary investigations," adding: "The (U.N. Security) Council cannot be used as a Sword of Damocles against Iran, we cannot be threatened by referral."

Khuzestan province is the heart of Iran's oil industry.

Chris Cook is a contributing editor to PEJ News. He also hosts the weekly public affairs program, Gorilla Radio. You can check out the GR Blog here.

Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.