I never thought I'd see the day, but this item from Saturday's Mercury News suggests even conservatives are finding the Bush's greed and fascist tendancies excessive.....   Posted on Sat, Jul. 19, 2003, San Jose Mercury News
World news in brief WASHINGTON, D.C. Cheney task force eyed Iraq oil industry Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force appeared to have some interest in early 2001 in Iraq's oil industry, including which foreign companies were pursuing business there, according to documents released Friday by a private watchdog group. Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group, obtained a batch of task-force-related Commerce Department papers that included a detailed map of Iraq's oil fields, terminals and pipelines as well as a list titled ``Foreign suitors of Iraqi oil field contracts.'' The papers included similar data on Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, and a list of oil- and gas-development projects in those two countries.

5:26:58 PM    

Re: 16 Little Words

Dear Friends:

It's more than Bush's 16 words that are the problem--it's a whole pattern
of corruption that we are dealing with. Paul Krugman queries how we got
into this mess. The case of the bogus uranium purchases wasn't an isolated
instance. It was part of a broad pattern of politicized, corrupted
intelligence. So far, George Tenet, director of the CIA,has been ordered to
fall upon his sword in protection of his boss. Bush can throw officials to
the lions all he wants, but that's not going to make the problem go away.
If you truly desire regime change at home, and an outing of the truth, keep
asking questions and keep the pressure on.
________________________

The New York Times
July 15, 2003

Pattern of Corruption
by Paul Krugman

More than half of the U.S. Army's combat strength is now bogged down in
Iraq, which didn't have significant weapons of mass destruction and wasn't
supporting Al Qaeda. We have lost all credibility with allies who might
have provided meaningful support; Tony Blair is still with us, but has lost
the trust of his public. All this puts us in a very weak position for
dealing with real threats. Did I mention that North Korea has been
extracting fissionable material from its fuel rods?

How did we get into this mess? The case of the bogus uranium purchases
wasn't an isolated instance. It was part of a broad pattern of politicized,
corrupted intelligence.

Literally before the dust had settled, Bush administration officials began
trying to use 9/11 to justify an attack on Iraq. Gen. Wesley Clark says
that he received calls on Sept. 11 from "people around the White House"
urging him to link that assault to Saddam Hussein. His account seems to
back up a CBS.com report last September, headlined "Plans for Iraq Attack
Began on 9/11," which quoted notes taken by aides to Donald Rumsfeld on the
day of the attack: "Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not."

But an honest intelligence assessment would have raised questions about why
we were going after a country that hadn't attacked us. It would also have
suggested the strong possibility that an invasion of Iraq would hurt, not
help, U.S. security.

So the Iraq hawks set out to corrupt the process of intelligence
assessment. On one side, nobody was held accountable for the failure to
predict or prevent 9/11; on the other side, top intelligence officials were
expected to support the case for an Iraq war.

The story of how the threat from Iraq's alleged W.M.D.'s was hyped is now,
finally, coming out. But let's not forget the persistent claim that Saddam
was allied with Al Qaeda, which allowed the hawks to pretend that the Iraq
war had something to do with fighting terrorism.

As Greg Thielmann, a former State Department intelligence official, said
last week, U.S. intelligence analysts have consistently agreed that Saddam
did not have a "meaningful connection" to Al Qaeda. Yet administration
officials continually asserted such a connection, even as they suppressed
evidence showing real links between Al Qaeda and Saudi Arabia.

And during the run-up to war, George Tenet, the C.I.A. director, was
willing to provide cover for his bosses--just as he did last weekend. In an
October 2002 letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee, he made what
looked like an assertion that there really were meaningful connections
between Saddam and Osama. Read closely, the letter is evasive, but it
served the administration's purpose.

What about the risk that an invasion of Iraq would weaken America's
security? Warnings from military experts that an extended postwar
occupation might severely strain U.S. forces have proved precisely on the
mark. But the hawks prevented any consideration of this possibility. Before
the war, one official told Newsweek that the occupation might last no more
than 30 to 60 days.

It gets worse. Knight Ridder newspapers report that a "small circle of
senior civilians in the Defense Department" were sure that their favorite,
Ahmad Chalabi, could easily be installed in power. They were able to
prevent skeptics from getting a hearing  and they had no backup plan when
efforts to anoint Mr. Chalabi, a millionaire businessman, degenerated into
farce.

So who will be held accountable? Mr. Tenet betrayed his office by tailoring
statements to reflect the interests of his political masters, rather than
the assessments of his staff--but that's not why he may soon be fired.
Yesterday USA Today reported that "some in the Bush administration are
arguing privately for a C.I.A. director who will be unquestioningly loyal
to the White House as committees demand documents and call witnesses."

Not that the committees are likely to press very hard: Senator Pat Roberts,
the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, seems more concerned
about protecting his party's leader than protecting the country. "What
concerns me most," he says, is "what appears to be a campaign of press
leaks by the C.I.A. in an effort to discredit the president."

In short, those who politicized intelligence in order to lead us into war,
at the expense of national security, hope to cover their tracks by
corrupting the system even further. 

Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company
________________________________

In peace,

Otoño
________________________________

Read all about it and get the news that matters by receiving the War and
Peace Watch.
To subscribe, send an e-mail to:  Reikiworks@compuserve.com
Thank you for your support, The War and Peace Watch publisher.
contact:  Otoño Johnston
============================================================
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit or payment  for research and educational
purposes only.)
============================================================
5:16:34 PM    

Re: Gag Rule for Soldiers?

Dear Friends:

Not all the US soldiers that are stationed in Iraq are happy about it. Many
feel abandoned and let down. And no, it's not because of our protests
against this hellish war, it's because they have been repeatedly told one
thing, only to have it change in the blink of an eye. Remember those
distasteful "Iraqi playing cards?" The circle has now come full circle,
with some disgruntled soldiers creating their own "most wanted lists." The
prime suspects are the gang of 4 responsible for US policy in
Iraq--Rumsfeld, Bremer, Bush, and Wolfowitz.
______________________

ABC News
July 16, 2003

General Unrest
New U.S. Commander Upset by Comments From Troops in Iraq

The new U.S. war commander today took exception with American soldiers who,
angry over extended tours of duty in Iraq, criticized Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld in televised interviews on ABCNEWS. 
 
"None of us that wear this uniform are free to say anything disparaging
about the secretary of defense, or the president of the United States,"
said Gen. John Abizaid, the head of U.S. Central Command.

But several of the wives of soldiers from the 3rd Infantry Division who
talked to ABCNEWS said today that their husbands spoke the truth and they
wanted those views heard.

"They feel that their mission is completed. They feel that they came, did
what they went over there to do. And, I mean, they're done," said Rhonda
Vega, whose husband is Sgt. Felipe Vega.

Sgt. Vega, in the interview with ABCNEWS' Jeffrey Kofman, said it was not
easy to maintain morale in his platoon when the Army keeps changing the
orders. "They turn around and slap you in the face," he said. When asked if
that's the way it feels, he said, "Yeah, kicked in the guts, slapped in the
face."

Another soldier who was interviewed, Spc. Clinton Deitz, said he had a
message for the defense secretary. "If Donald Rumsfeld was here," he said,
"I'd ask him for his resignation."

Asked about the comments made to him by the soldiers, Kofman said he did
not pre-interview any of them to find soldiers who were critical of the
situation in Iraq before they spoke on camera.

"They just spoke. I simply asked questions. I was utterly astonished by
their candor. They let their guard down and they said what was on their
mind," said Kofman, who is reporting from Baghdad.

Unfortunate Comments

Today, Abizaid said he had seen the interviews and was not happy.

"It's very unfortunate that soldiers, professional soldiers, made comments
like that," he said in his inaugural briefing at the Pentagon after taking
control of Central Command from Gen. Tommy Franks, who retired. "Whatever
action may be taken, whether it's a verbal reprimand or something more
stringent, is up to the commanders on the scene."

Officially, a soldier could be court-martialed for making such comments,
although it is rare and is at the discretion of a commanding officer.

Abizaid said the United States was still, in effect, at war in Iraq as
anti-American fighters are waging a "classical guerrilla-type campaign
against us." The general also said U.S. troops may have to stay for
yearlong tours to meet the threat.

"It's war, however you describe it," Abizaid said.

Abizaid did say definitively that the 3rd Infantry Division would be out of
Iraq by September. But he also made clear that the current troop strength
of 160,000 will be needed for the foreseeable future.

"If the situation gets worse, I won't hesitate to ask for more," he said.

Anxious for Spouses to Return

The delays in getting their spouses home clearly has upset some Army family
members at home.

"This saying one thing and backing out of it, all it does is breed
distrust," said Michelle Brock, wife of a 3rd Infantry soldier based at
Fort Stewart in Georgia. "It's going to be really hard to trust anything
that the military tells us again."

Brock and others had been led to believe that Fort Stewart's soldiers, some
of the first into Baghdad and the ones who saw some of the fiercest
fighting, would be relieved quickly. "In the beginning, they told us they'd
be the first ones back," said Army wife Stacey Gilmore.

But Gilmore's husband, Sgt. Terry Gilmore, remains in Iraq almost a year
after he was deployed. Sgt. Gilmore was one of the soldiers who spoke to
ABCNEWS.

Sgt. Gilmore had to call his wife this week to her that he wouldn't be home
in a few weeks to see her and their two little children after all. He said
he was upset by the repeated delays and the constantly changing orders.

"We couldn't figure out why they do it. Why they can keep us over here
right after they told us we were coming home," he said.

Stacey Gilmore is upset over Abizaid's harsh criticism of her husband and
his colleagues. She said her husband's comments spoke volumes because he is
not one to complain.

"It takes a lot for Terry to get upset and he's been through a lot. He has
the right to complain. I think anybody would," she said.

But there are wives who are willing to be patient, given the uncertainties
in Iraq. "They're doing their jobs and if our government says they have to
stay and do the job longer, that's what they have to do," said Army wife
Mychelle Ostrow.

Abizaid said he understood some of the frustrations.

"It's very, very important to all of us to make sure that our soldiers,
sailors, airmen and Marines know when they're coming home," he said. "Every
now and then we've got to look at our young people and understand why they
said what they said, and then do something about it."  

ABCNEWS' Martha Raddatz and Erin Hayes contributed to this report.
 
Copyright ABCNEWS
________________________________

In peace,

Otoño
________________________________

Read all about it and get the news that matters by receiving the War and
Peace Watch.
To subscribe, send an e-mail to:  Reikiworks@compuserve.com
Thank you for your support, The War and Peace Watch publisher.
contact:  Otoño Johnston
============================================================
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit or payment  for research and educational
purposes only.)
=============================
5:01:01 PM