Saturday, October 18, 2003
What’s happening, Iraq:
It’s becoming more difficult for the Administration to blame remnants of Saddam’s government for all the difficulties in Iraq. First Sunni Muslims and an unknown number of Islamic fundamentalists who may have crossed into Iraq were seen as the additional enemies at hand. But now the Shiite Muslim community is becoming the focal point of resistance. Yesterday’s gun battle with followers of the cleric Moktada al-Sadr left 3 Americans dead.
These developments provide an increasingly bizarre contrast with the reassuring, confident statements coming from the Administration.
UN Postscript
The Bush Administration put on its happy face, celebrating the UN’s acceding to a US-authored resolution on Iraq.
The resolution allows the United Nations to form a multinational force under a single US command to assist American troops, and calls for financial pledges from UN member states to help rebuild Iraq -- a key request before a donor conference scheduled for next week. The measure also calls for the US-appointed Iraqi Governing Council to provide a timetable by Dec. 15 for drafting a constitution and holding elections.
Yet, it is evident that this was largely for show: With the exception of Japan, no other country is even considering sending money or troops. Some countries quickly noted that they did not like the agreed-to text, and one UN diplomat called it a "prime UN Security Council product: a text on which everyone agrees, but no one agrees what it means."
What’s happening, Iran: The French speak
Not everyone is quietly tolerating the Administration’s threatening talk about the lesser “threats”. The Guardian (Simon Tisdall, Ewen MacAskill) report on the French foreign minister’s denouncing the US pre-emptive regime change notions. Dominique de Villepin noted that military action against Iran over its alleged nuclear weapons would be “absolutely ridiculous.” The official then threw some cold water on the apparent thaw over Iraq by noting that "the conditions for real progress on the reconstruction of Iraq are not complied with today. Reconstruction has to have a partner, you have to have real sovereignty in Iraq if you want to have the Iraqi people working with you.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4777463-110633,00.html
Disturbing Report on Care for wounded
One wants to not believe the UPI report (Mark Benjamin) that describe sick and wounded U.S. troops ...including many who served in the Iraq war are languishing in hot cement barracks here while they wait -- sometimes for months -- to see doctors.
The National Guard and Army Reserve soldiers' living conditions are so substandard, and the medical care so poor, that many of them believe the Army is trying push them out with reduced benefits for their ailments. One document shown to UPI states that no more doctor appointments are available from Oct. 14 through Nov. 11 -- Veterans Day.
One month after President Bush greeted soldiers at Fort Stewart -- home of the famed Third Infantry Division -- as heroes on their return from Iraq, approximately 600 sick or injured members of the Army Reserves and National Guard are warehoused in rows of spare, steamy and dark cement barracks in a sandy field, waiting for doctors to treat their wounds or illnesses.
The Reserve and National Guard soldiers are on what the Army calls "medical hold," while the Army decides how sick or disabled they are and what benefits -- if any -- they should get as a result.
Some of the soldiers said they have waited six hours a day for an appointment without seeing a doctor. Others described waiting weeks or months without getting a diagnosis or proper treatment.
The soldiers said professional active duty personnel are getting better treatment while troops who serve in the National Guard or Army Reserve are left to wallow in medical hold.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4997.htm
Bolivia: Protests, Resignation
Good to know what’s going on in this hemisphere, other than the latest targeting of Cuba. Yesterday Bolivia’s president, Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada, resigned following a month of bloody street protests which have claimed approximately 80 lives. The notable popular uprising was fuelled by a triad of complaints- “widespread fury over austerity plans sponsored by the International Monetary Fund [IMF], a US-backed crackdown on coca production and government plans to sell off natural gas”. More from the Guardian at http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4777411-103681,00.html
-R
It’s becoming more difficult for the Administration to blame remnants of Saddam’s government for all the difficulties in Iraq. First Sunni Muslims and an unknown number of Islamic fundamentalists who may have crossed into Iraq were seen as the additional enemies at hand. But now the Shiite Muslim community is becoming the focal point of resistance. Yesterday’s gun battle with followers of the cleric Moktada al-Sadr left 3 Americans dead.
These developments provide an increasingly bizarre contrast with the reassuring, confident statements coming from the Administration.
UN Postscript
The Bush Administration put on its happy face, celebrating the UN’s acceding to a US-authored resolution on Iraq.
The resolution allows the United Nations to form a multinational force under a single US command to assist American troops, and calls for financial pledges from UN member states to help rebuild Iraq -- a key request before a donor conference scheduled for next week. The measure also calls for the US-appointed Iraqi Governing Council to provide a timetable by Dec. 15 for drafting a constitution and holding elections.
Yet, it is evident that this was largely for show: With the exception of Japan, no other country is even considering sending money or troops. Some countries quickly noted that they did not like the agreed-to text, and one UN diplomat called it a "prime UN Security Council product: a text on which everyone agrees, but no one agrees what it means."
What’s happening, Iran: The French speak
Not everyone is quietly tolerating the Administration’s threatening talk about the lesser “threats”. The Guardian (Simon Tisdall, Ewen MacAskill) report on the French foreign minister’s denouncing the US pre-emptive regime change notions. Dominique de Villepin noted that military action against Iran over its alleged nuclear weapons would be “absolutely ridiculous.” The official then threw some cold water on the apparent thaw over Iraq by noting that "the conditions for real progress on the reconstruction of Iraq are not complied with today. Reconstruction has to have a partner, you have to have real sovereignty in Iraq if you want to have the Iraqi people working with you.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4777463-110633,00.html
Disturbing Report on Care for wounded
One wants to not believe the UPI report (Mark Benjamin) that describe sick and wounded U.S. troops ...including many who served in the Iraq war are languishing in hot cement barracks here while they wait -- sometimes for months -- to see doctors.
The National Guard and Army Reserve soldiers' living conditions are so substandard, and the medical care so poor, that many of them believe the Army is trying push them out with reduced benefits for their ailments. One document shown to UPI states that no more doctor appointments are available from Oct. 14 through Nov. 11 -- Veterans Day.
One month after President Bush greeted soldiers at Fort Stewart -- home of the famed Third Infantry Division -- as heroes on their return from Iraq, approximately 600 sick or injured members of the Army Reserves and National Guard are warehoused in rows of spare, steamy and dark cement barracks in a sandy field, waiting for doctors to treat their wounds or illnesses.
The Reserve and National Guard soldiers are on what the Army calls "medical hold," while the Army decides how sick or disabled they are and what benefits -- if any -- they should get as a result.
Some of the soldiers said they have waited six hours a day for an appointment without seeing a doctor. Others described waiting weeks or months without getting a diagnosis or proper treatment.
The soldiers said professional active duty personnel are getting better treatment while troops who serve in the National Guard or Army Reserve are left to wallow in medical hold.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4997.htm
Bolivia: Protests, Resignation
Good to know what’s going on in this hemisphere, other than the latest targeting of Cuba. Yesterday Bolivia’s president, Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada, resigned following a month of bloody street protests which have claimed approximately 80 lives. The notable popular uprising was fuelled by a triad of complaints- “widespread fury over austerity plans sponsored by the International Monetary Fund [IMF], a US-backed crackdown on coca production and government plans to sell off natural gas”. More from the Guardian at http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4777411-103681,00.html
-R
Thursday, October 16, 2003
Stopping those Leaks:
That ethical, effective Administration is very much ‘on top.’ Witness the following, courtesy of the Philadelphia Inquirer (Joseph L. Galloway, James Huhnhenn):
Concerned about the appearance of disarray and feuding within his administration as well as growing resistance to his policies in Iraq, President Bush - living up to his recent declaration that he is in charge - told his top officials to "stop the leaks" to the media, or else.
News of Bush's order leaked almost immediately.
Bush told his senior aides Tuesday that he "didn't want to see any stories" quoting unnamed administration officials in the media anymore, and that if he did, there would be consequences, said a senior administration official who asked that his name not be used.
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/nation/7023679.htm
For the unconvinced: Imminent Threat?
The Administration is spinning that they never said the Iraqi threat was “imminent.” Well, it is true that they didn’t toss the word around. But, if you have any doubters who assert that they didn’t mislead or worse, use some of the following from a Bush speech of 53 weeks ago, October 8, 2002:
We also must never forget the most vivid events of recent history. On September 11, 2001, America felt its vulnerability -- even to threats that gather on the other side of the earth. We resolved then, and we are resolved today, to confront every threat, from any source, that could bring sudden terror and suffering to America.
Some ask how urgent this danger is to America and the world. The danger is already significant, and it only grows worse with time. If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today -- and we do -- does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?
We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, and VX nerve gas. Saddam Hussein also has experience in using chemical weapons. He has ordered chemical attacks on Iran, and on more than forty villages in his own country. These actions killed or injured at least 20,000 people, more than six times the number of people who died in the attacks of September 11.
We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical and biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using UAVs for missions targeting the United States.
And, of course, sophisticated delivery systems are not required for a chemical or biological attack -- all that might be required are a small container and one terrorist or Iraqi intelligence operative to deliver it.
And that is the source of our urgent concern about Saddam Hussein's links to international terrorist groups.
Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.
Sounds like a noteworthy, growing if not imminent threat to me…
Another Poll- of the troops
This survey, conducted by Stars and Stripes backs the notion that the troops and the Administration have distinctly contrasting views. The Pentagon-sponsored newspaper reported that half of the soldiers survey believed that their morale was low, that their training was insufficient and that they do not plan to re-enlist. The Washington Post (Bradley Graham, Dana Milbank) report, a front-pager in today’s edition, added that one-third complained that their mission lacks clear definition.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A32521-2003Oct15?language=printer
Syria Bill passes House:
The aforementioned 'Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Act' passed the House by a vote of 398-4 yesterday. The bill calls for sanctions on Syria for alleged links to terrorist organizations and its suspected efforts to procure nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. The legislation provides U.S. President George W. Bush with an array of tools to use against Syria, including restrictions on exports and investments, a reduction of U.S. diplomatic representation in Syria and the imposition of travel limitations on Syrian diplomats in the United States, prohibition of the exportation of "dual-use" technology and restrictions on permission for Syrian aircraft to use U.S. airspace. It also would freeze Syrian assets.
“Allies” Approve the UN Resolution
Noontime today the triad of Germany, France and Russia agreed to favor the latest U.N. resolution that had been pushed by the U.S. which authorizes the Occupation. Rumors of this joining had been circulating for the past weeks. But unsurprisingly, the countries still ruled out military commitments to the Occupation. Thus, the Security Council was able to give its unanimous approval to the resolution.
Another confirmation: Invasion Yielded more al-Qaeda followers:
The International Institute for Strategic Studies issued its annual report. The British think-tank noted that the ranks of al-Qaeda were swollen and galvanized by the invasion. They also termed the Administration’s assertions about progress in the war on terror to be “over-confident.”
http://www.iiss.org/news.php?cat=4
What’s Happening: Afghanistan- are we leaving?
After a series of reports about the U.S. talking with the Taliban, a thorough account by Syed Saleem Shahzad of Asia Times noted that…
With Afghanistan daily slipping into more anarchy and chaos, United States authorities, aware that they are unlikely to ever bring stability to the country by military means, continue to explore political avenues that ultimately could pave the way for them to withdraw from the country.
First there were the talks at the Pakistan Air Force base in Quetta with "moderate" elements of the Taliban (which immediately failed due to the US insistence on the sidelining of Taliban leader Mullah Omar). Then came the formation of Jaishul Muslim, a formal grouping of lesser Taliban lights (which failed even to enter into Afghanistan), and moves to pry some of the more powerful mujahideen commanders from the anti-US resistance movement.
But now, with the US's first choice proving so poor, US authorities are keen on soliciting Pakistan's assistance in sorting out the mess in Afghanistan, which includes the "moderate" Taliban concept, which initially the US found repugnant...
At the same time, options are being explored to recruit other powerful former Taliban ministers into the central cabinet in key positions, including that of defense.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/EJ15Ag01.html
-R
That ethical, effective Administration is very much ‘on top.’ Witness the following, courtesy of the Philadelphia Inquirer (Joseph L. Galloway, James Huhnhenn):
Concerned about the appearance of disarray and feuding within his administration as well as growing resistance to his policies in Iraq, President Bush - living up to his recent declaration that he is in charge - told his top officials to "stop the leaks" to the media, or else.
News of Bush's order leaked almost immediately.
Bush told his senior aides Tuesday that he "didn't want to see any stories" quoting unnamed administration officials in the media anymore, and that if he did, there would be consequences, said a senior administration official who asked that his name not be used.
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/nation/7023679.htm
For the unconvinced: Imminent Threat?
The Administration is spinning that they never said the Iraqi threat was “imminent.” Well, it is true that they didn’t toss the word around. But, if you have any doubters who assert that they didn’t mislead or worse, use some of the following from a Bush speech of 53 weeks ago, October 8, 2002:
We also must never forget the most vivid events of recent history. On September 11, 2001, America felt its vulnerability -- even to threats that gather on the other side of the earth. We resolved then, and we are resolved today, to confront every threat, from any source, that could bring sudden terror and suffering to America.
Some ask how urgent this danger is to America and the world. The danger is already significant, and it only grows worse with time. If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today -- and we do -- does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?
We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, and VX nerve gas. Saddam Hussein also has experience in using chemical weapons. He has ordered chemical attacks on Iran, and on more than forty villages in his own country. These actions killed or injured at least 20,000 people, more than six times the number of people who died in the attacks of September 11.
We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical and biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using UAVs for missions targeting the United States.
And, of course, sophisticated delivery systems are not required for a chemical or biological attack -- all that might be required are a small container and one terrorist or Iraqi intelligence operative to deliver it.
And that is the source of our urgent concern about Saddam Hussein's links to international terrorist groups.
Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.
Sounds like a noteworthy, growing if not imminent threat to me…
Another Poll- of the troops
This survey, conducted by Stars and Stripes backs the notion that the troops and the Administration have distinctly contrasting views. The Pentagon-sponsored newspaper reported that half of the soldiers survey believed that their morale was low, that their training was insufficient and that they do not plan to re-enlist. The Washington Post (Bradley Graham, Dana Milbank) report, a front-pager in today’s edition, added that one-third complained that their mission lacks clear definition.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A32521-2003Oct15?language=printer
Syria Bill passes House:
The aforementioned 'Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Act' passed the House by a vote of 398-4 yesterday. The bill calls for sanctions on Syria for alleged links to terrorist organizations and its suspected efforts to procure nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. The legislation provides U.S. President George W. Bush with an array of tools to use against Syria, including restrictions on exports and investments, a reduction of U.S. diplomatic representation in Syria and the imposition of travel limitations on Syrian diplomats in the United States, prohibition of the exportation of "dual-use" technology and restrictions on permission for Syrian aircraft to use U.S. airspace. It also would freeze Syrian assets.
“Allies” Approve the UN Resolution
Noontime today the triad of Germany, France and Russia agreed to favor the latest U.N. resolution that had been pushed by the U.S. which authorizes the Occupation. Rumors of this joining had been circulating for the past weeks. But unsurprisingly, the countries still ruled out military commitments to the Occupation. Thus, the Security Council was able to give its unanimous approval to the resolution.
Another confirmation: Invasion Yielded more al-Qaeda followers:
The International Institute for Strategic Studies issued its annual report. The British think-tank noted that the ranks of al-Qaeda were swollen and galvanized by the invasion. They also termed the Administration’s assertions about progress in the war on terror to be “over-confident.”
http://www.iiss.org/news.php?cat=4
What’s Happening: Afghanistan- are we leaving?
After a series of reports about the U.S. talking with the Taliban, a thorough account by Syed Saleem Shahzad of Asia Times noted that…
With Afghanistan daily slipping into more anarchy and chaos, United States authorities, aware that they are unlikely to ever bring stability to the country by military means, continue to explore political avenues that ultimately could pave the way for them to withdraw from the country.
First there were the talks at the Pakistan Air Force base in Quetta with "moderate" elements of the Taliban (which immediately failed due to the US insistence on the sidelining of Taliban leader Mullah Omar). Then came the formation of Jaishul Muslim, a formal grouping of lesser Taliban lights (which failed even to enter into Afghanistan), and moves to pry some of the more powerful mujahideen commanders from the anti-US resistance movement.
But now, with the US's first choice proving so poor, US authorities are keen on soliciting Pakistan's assistance in sorting out the mess in Afghanistan, which includes the "moderate" Taliban concept, which initially the US found repugnant...
At the same time, options are being explored to recruit other powerful former Taliban ministers into the central cabinet in key positions, including that of defense.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/EJ15Ag01.html
-R
Tuesday, October 14, 2003
Bulldozing in Iraq:
I sat on this. The Independent (and Common Dreams, t. you, M) had a report (Patrick Cockburn) about the American military using the Israeli tactic of bulldozing plots of civilians who have not been fully allied with the American effort. This is not good.
US soldiers driving bulldozers, with jazz blaring from loudspeakers, have uprooted ancient groves of date palms as well as orange and lemon trees in central Iraq as part of a new policy of collective punishment of farmers who do not give information about guerrillas attacking US troops.
The stumps of palm trees, some 70 years old, protrude from the brown earth scoured by the bulldozers beside the road at Dhuluaya, a small town 50 miles north of Baghdad. Local women were yesterday busily bundling together the branches of the uprooted orange and lemon trees and carrying then back to their homes for firewood.
http://news.independent.co.uk/low_res/story.jsp?story=452375&host=3&dir=75
Lieberman wages class warfare!
Trailing badly, Lieberman looks for additional issues to distinguish him from the pack. Well, mazel! Urging us to "restore integrity and fairness" to the tax code by shifting more of the burden to wealthy individuals and companies is meritorious, and hopefully will push other candidates in this direction. The specifics:
The plan calls for lower income tax rates for individuals earning less than about $70,000 a year and families earning less than about $115,000 a year. In addition, Mr. Lieberman's plan would restore the tax on dividends and re-establish certain estate taxes, negating two changes central to the Bush administration's economic plan.
The plan announced on Monday by Mr. Lieberman went further. He would raise the top tax bracket to 39.6 percent from 33 percent for individuals with adjusted gross incomes of more than $143,500. A family with adjusted gross income of more than $150,000 could see its rate rise to 39.6 percent from 28 percent.
But many others would see their taxes fall, Mr. Lieberman said. The tax rate for a married couple earning $50,000 would fall to 12.5 percent from 15 percent currently, saving the family up to $1,000. Couples earning $75,000 could see their taxes decline by $1,500, he said, and couples earning $100,000 could expect to save up to $2,000.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/14/politics/campaigns/14LIEB.html
What’s Happening, Iraq:
Non-combat casualties
The New York Times and USA TODAY carried articles on the military looking into the number of suicides (14) by the army’s soldiers in Iraq. Monday’s USA Today:
Alarmed by the number of suicides among soldiers in Iraq, the Army has asked a team of doctors to determine whether the stress of combat and long deployments is contributing to the deaths. "The number of suicides has caused the Army to be concerned," said Lt. Col. Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, a psychiatrist at the Army's Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md. Ritchie is helping to investigate the suicides in Iraq. "Is there something different going on in Iraq that we really need to pay attention to..?
Tuesday’s NY Times: Pentagon officials are trying to determine whether the reported suicides can be attributed to combat stress or the growing length of tours of Iraq, or whether the numbers of deaths attributed to self-inflicted wounds are in keeping with suicide rates in the military when not deployed.
Troubling news re Wilson/Plame: According to Wilson, analyst Sam Gardiner has an account (he does) that contends that the White House / Pentagon made up over 50 ‘tall tales’ about the war, ranging from Jessica Lynch to purported surrenders of Iraqi troops.
"It was not bad intelligence. It was much more. It was an orchestrated effort. It began before the war, was a major effort during the war and continues as post-conflict distortions."
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/031020/whispers/20whisplead.htm
Those Second Tier Enemies:
We’ve been hearing about "them" for the past week or more- Syria, Cuba, Iran, even Libya. The hardened stance- most pathetic in targeting Cuba, despite many Miami Cubans’ oppostion- seeks to expand our enemies list, to provide other opportunities for ‘being tough’. The Christian Science Monitor’s account (Howard LaFranchi) notes that although termed "the ladies’ auxiliary of the axis of evil" by one "former US official", all of these countries are alleged to be seeking WMD.
So, we have, for example, the Syria Accountability Act, imposing new sanctions against them, which stands a good chance of passage. Perhaps that will appease some influential "Israel lobby" folk who might be less than enthused with the Bush Middle East policy. Similarly, the old game of buying Cuban-American votes in Greater Miami is undoubtedly a factor in this push on Syria.
But we’ve long heard other stories of Syrian cooperation in the "war on terror", and none of these countries obviously present any threat that’s comparable to Pakistan and its wmd / missile trading, long documented by Seymour Hersh…and noted in this space! http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1014/p02s01-usfp.htm
Meanwhile, Ariel Sharon has chimed in that Libya is deserving of this status, as he contends that Libya is trying to develop nuclear weapons with help from countries such as North Korea and Pakistan. A Sharon aide quoted Sharon as saying, "One would not be surprised if Libya would be the first Arab country (to) have nuclear weapons," Sharon purportedly said to a group of foreign ambassadors.
Those Form Letters from Iraq:
Ongoing problem! Identical letters showing up in multiple newspapers. Perhaps you’ve heard of or noticed this before, as similar letters lionizing the accomplished Bush Administration appear in papers across the country with suspiciously similar, or identical wording. Now, such letters have come from Iraq, allegedly authored by our boys in the military. There may be a small chance this is an innocently orchestrated campaign of sorts coming from isolated army public affairs officials, or "command staff", as NPR now notes. Maybe this time…maybe not.
Organized PR drive:
Dana Milbank of the Washington Post had a leading article on the Administration policy of seeking to bypass the usual media coverage. No longer pleased with the formerly compliant media, "exclusive interviews" is the new method for reaching voters. The Bush effort seeks to target five regional broadcasting companies which they hope have an audience of 10 million. Bush aides make no apologies for targeting local media -- which, they say, tend to be less cynical. "We believe local media and regional broadcasters are more interested in letting viewers or readers see or hear what the president has to say," said Dan Bartlett, White House communications director. "It's less analytical and more reporting." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21714-2003Oct13.html
Disorganized PR Drive:
Cheney and Bush are putting out competing versions of reality. As noted in past blogs, Cheney continues to pair Saddam and bin Laden (who?) while the Bush and the rest of his handlers have now stated that there is no connection. Why does this continue? A nice take comes from Peter Canellos in the Boston Globe-
Cheney's assertions can be explained by two possible scenarios. Some Democrats have said the administration deliberately intends to mislead people. While Bush's comments about Iraq include various hedges to maintain deniability, Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld make much broader assertions that, if ever called upon to justify, the administration could write off as Cheney's or Rumsfeld's personal interpretations, not shared by the president or the CIA.
But the sheer disorganization of the administration's response to postwar crises argues against this interpretation. What seems clear is that this administration, once admired for its discipline, is split into warring factions over Iraq. And the seasoned veteran put on the ticket to help Bush resolve these kinds of disputes is not a helper but a participant.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/10/14/cheney_on_iraq_puts_white_house_to_work_on_unmuddling_message?mode=PF
-R
I sat on this. The Independent (and Common Dreams, t. you, M) had a report (Patrick Cockburn) about the American military using the Israeli tactic of bulldozing plots of civilians who have not been fully allied with the American effort. This is not good.
US soldiers driving bulldozers, with jazz blaring from loudspeakers, have uprooted ancient groves of date palms as well as orange and lemon trees in central Iraq as part of a new policy of collective punishment of farmers who do not give information about guerrillas attacking US troops.
The stumps of palm trees, some 70 years old, protrude from the brown earth scoured by the bulldozers beside the road at Dhuluaya, a small town 50 miles north of Baghdad. Local women were yesterday busily bundling together the branches of the uprooted orange and lemon trees and carrying then back to their homes for firewood.
http://news.independent.co.uk/low_res/story.jsp?story=452375&host=3&dir=75
Lieberman wages class warfare!
Trailing badly, Lieberman looks for additional issues to distinguish him from the pack. Well, mazel! Urging us to "restore integrity and fairness" to the tax code by shifting more of the burden to wealthy individuals and companies is meritorious, and hopefully will push other candidates in this direction. The specifics:
The plan calls for lower income tax rates for individuals earning less than about $70,000 a year and families earning less than about $115,000 a year. In addition, Mr. Lieberman's plan would restore the tax on dividends and re-establish certain estate taxes, negating two changes central to the Bush administration's economic plan.
The plan announced on Monday by Mr. Lieberman went further. He would raise the top tax bracket to 39.6 percent from 33 percent for individuals with adjusted gross incomes of more than $143,500. A family with adjusted gross income of more than $150,000 could see its rate rise to 39.6 percent from 28 percent.
But many others would see their taxes fall, Mr. Lieberman said. The tax rate for a married couple earning $50,000 would fall to 12.5 percent from 15 percent currently, saving the family up to $1,000. Couples earning $75,000 could see their taxes decline by $1,500, he said, and couples earning $100,000 could expect to save up to $2,000.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/14/politics/campaigns/14LIEB.html
What’s Happening, Iraq:
Non-combat casualties
The New York Times and USA TODAY carried articles on the military looking into the number of suicides (14) by the army’s soldiers in Iraq. Monday’s USA Today:
Alarmed by the number of suicides among soldiers in Iraq, the Army has asked a team of doctors to determine whether the stress of combat and long deployments is contributing to the deaths. "The number of suicides has caused the Army to be concerned," said Lt. Col. Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, a psychiatrist at the Army's Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md. Ritchie is helping to investigate the suicides in Iraq. "Is there something different going on in Iraq that we really need to pay attention to..?
Tuesday’s NY Times: Pentagon officials are trying to determine whether the reported suicides can be attributed to combat stress or the growing length of tours of Iraq, or whether the numbers of deaths attributed to self-inflicted wounds are in keeping with suicide rates in the military when not deployed.
Troubling news re Wilson/Plame: According to Wilson, analyst Sam Gardiner has an account (he does) that contends that the White House / Pentagon made up over 50 ‘tall tales’ about the war, ranging from Jessica Lynch to purported surrenders of Iraqi troops.
"It was not bad intelligence. It was much more. It was an orchestrated effort. It began before the war, was a major effort during the war and continues as post-conflict distortions."
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/031020/whispers/20whisplead.htm
Those Second Tier Enemies:
We’ve been hearing about "them" for the past week or more- Syria, Cuba, Iran, even Libya. The hardened stance- most pathetic in targeting Cuba, despite many Miami Cubans’ oppostion- seeks to expand our enemies list, to provide other opportunities for ‘being tough’. The Christian Science Monitor’s account (Howard LaFranchi) notes that although termed "the ladies’ auxiliary of the axis of evil" by one "former US official", all of these countries are alleged to be seeking WMD.
So, we have, for example, the Syria Accountability Act, imposing new sanctions against them, which stands a good chance of passage. Perhaps that will appease some influential "Israel lobby" folk who might be less than enthused with the Bush Middle East policy. Similarly, the old game of buying Cuban-American votes in Greater Miami is undoubtedly a factor in this push on Syria.
But we’ve long heard other stories of Syrian cooperation in the "war on terror", and none of these countries obviously present any threat that’s comparable to Pakistan and its wmd / missile trading, long documented by Seymour Hersh…and noted in this space! http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1014/p02s01-usfp.htm
Meanwhile, Ariel Sharon has chimed in that Libya is deserving of this status, as he contends that Libya is trying to develop nuclear weapons with help from countries such as North Korea and Pakistan. A Sharon aide quoted Sharon as saying, "One would not be surprised if Libya would be the first Arab country (to) have nuclear weapons," Sharon purportedly said to a group of foreign ambassadors.
Those Form Letters from Iraq:
Ongoing problem! Identical letters showing up in multiple newspapers. Perhaps you’ve heard of or noticed this before, as similar letters lionizing the accomplished Bush Administration appear in papers across the country with suspiciously similar, or identical wording. Now, such letters have come from Iraq, allegedly authored by our boys in the military. There may be a small chance this is an innocently orchestrated campaign of sorts coming from isolated army public affairs officials, or "command staff", as NPR now notes. Maybe this time…maybe not.
Organized PR drive:
Dana Milbank of the Washington Post had a leading article on the Administration policy of seeking to bypass the usual media coverage. No longer pleased with the formerly compliant media, "exclusive interviews" is the new method for reaching voters. The Bush effort seeks to target five regional broadcasting companies which they hope have an audience of 10 million. Bush aides make no apologies for targeting local media -- which, they say, tend to be less cynical. "We believe local media and regional broadcasters are more interested in letting viewers or readers see or hear what the president has to say," said Dan Bartlett, White House communications director. "It's less analytical and more reporting." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21714-2003Oct13.html
Disorganized PR Drive:
Cheney and Bush are putting out competing versions of reality. As noted in past blogs, Cheney continues to pair Saddam and bin Laden (who?) while the Bush and the rest of his handlers have now stated that there is no connection. Why does this continue? A nice take comes from Peter Canellos in the Boston Globe-
Cheney's assertions can be explained by two possible scenarios. Some Democrats have said the administration deliberately intends to mislead people. While Bush's comments about Iraq include various hedges to maintain deniability, Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld make much broader assertions that, if ever called upon to justify, the administration could write off as Cheney's or Rumsfeld's personal interpretations, not shared by the president or the CIA.
But the sheer disorganization of the administration's response to postwar crises argues against this interpretation. What seems clear is that this administration, once admired for its discipline, is split into warring factions over Iraq. And the seasoned veteran put on the ticket to help Bush resolve these kinds of disputes is not a helper but a participant.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/10/14/cheney_on_iraq_puts_white_house_to_work_on_unmuddling_message?mode=PF
-R
Sunday, October 12, 2003
I’ve ignored the pathetic developments in California, but provide a snippet from Frank Rich in today’s NY Times that captures some of the craziness.
Last weekend, the candidate toyed with appearing on "60 Minutes," in emulation of the Clintons' Hail Mary pass after the Gennifer Flowers revelations, then thought better of the idea and went on his wife's network instead. "I never grabbed anyone," he told Tom Brokaw on "Dateline NBC," to which the newsman countered, "So you deny all those stories about grabbing?" Mr. Schwarzenegger's answer: "No, not all. I'm just saying this is not — this is not me." What was that again? The candidate was saying simultaneously that a) he never grabbed women; b) he grabbed some women; c) whoever grabbed those women was a mysterious interloper in his body. It's hard to imagine how any journalist, indeed any sentient listener, could parse the candidate's jabberwocky, an amalgam of denial, nondenial and nondenial denial all in the same thick mouthful.
.http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/arts/12RICH.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Of course this confusion of reality and the movies was at the heart of the Reagan candidacy. Then, the media blushed, but were silent when Reagan talked of his liberating the concentration camps, contrary to the reality of his never having left the states, including his working on a film for the army.
Rummy, Cheney and the D.C. Chaos
Another theme I’ve side-stepped is the in-fighting in the Administration. As Bush has returned to pre-9/11 poll numbers, Rumsfeld has returned to his pre-9/11 status of being the most criticized / isolated Cabinet member. The Occupation’s failures have cost Rummy his untouchable status and have led to Condi Rice being named the coordinator of the policy… as if the White House shouldn’t be coordinating! Meanwhile, despite everyone else admitting to the Saddam-al-Qaeda disconnect, Cheney persists. His script has remained stuck for two years and has raised concern that his presidency may be in trouble, i.e. Bush is being revealed as being not in charge.
Two entries: From Maureen Doud in Sunday’s Times on Cheney’s transformation since 1991:
When Bush the Elder put Bush the Younger in the care of Dick Cheney, he assumed that Mr. Cheney, who had been his defense secretary in Desert Storm, would play the wise, selfless counselor. Poppy thought his old friend Dick would make a great vice president, tutoring a young president green on foreign policy and safeguarding the first Bush administration's legacy of internationalism, coalition-building and realpolitik.
Instead, Good Daddy has had to watch in alarm as Bad Daddy usurped his son's presidency, heightened its conservatism and rushed America into war on the mistaken assumption that if we just acted like king of the world, everyone would bow down or run away.
Bush I officials are nonplused by the apocalyptic and rash Cheney of Bush II, a man who pushed pre-emption and peered over the shoulders of C.I.A. analysts, as compared with the skeptical and cautious Cheney of Bush I (who did not even press to march to Baghdad in the first gulf war, when Saddam Hussein actually possessed chemical weapons).
Some veterans of Bush I are so puzzled that they even look for a biological explanation, wondering if his two-year-old defibrillator might have made him more Hobbesian. Mr. Cheney spent so much time in his bunker reading gloomy books about smallpox, plague, fear and war as the natural state of mankind. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/opinion/12DOWD.html?pagewanted=print&positin
And, the growing concern from Republicans as well as Democrats that Bush is not in charge. From the San Francisco Chronicle, amongst others:
President Bush has lost control of Iraq policy because of infighting among administration officials, the leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said Sunday.
The administration also came under criticism from Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry for being unwilling to create a real international coalition and alienating governments everywhere. "This is haphazard, shotgun, shoot-from-the-hip diplomacy," the Massachusetts senator said.
The committee leaders urged Bush to take charge of U.S. postwar policy in Iraq.
"The president has to be the president, over the vice president and over these secretaries," the chairman, Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind., said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Added the committee's top Democrat, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware: "There's no clear articulation within this administration of what the goals, what the message is, what the plan is. You have this significant division within the administration between the Powells and the Rumsfelds."
sfgate.com/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/10/12/national1339EDT0490.DTL
WMD: The Defense
No new developments in the last two days; just pathetic attempts to explain it away. What’s left of the Administration’s credibility is being shredded by attempts, such as the following:
Administration sources said they believe that the officials who discussed Plame were not trying to expose her, but were using the information as a tool to try to persuade reporters to ignore Wilson. The officials wanted to convince the reporters that he had benefited from nepotism in being chosen for the mission.
Laughable.
Meanwhile supporters such as columnist Andrew Sullivan (www.andrewsullivan.com) seek to work on the language front. There’s apparently few quotes of Bush saying Iraq was an “imminent threat”, but more so “grave and gathering danger”. So, now the media is being attacked for being its liberal self, picking on the poor White House.
Conyers Calls For Rove's Resignation:
Dear Mr. Rove:
I write to ask you to resign from the White House staff. Recent press reports have indicated that, while you may or may not have been the source of the Robert Novak column which revealed the status and name of a covert operative, the wife of Ambassador Joseph Wilson, you were involved in a subsequent effort to push this classified information to other reporters and give it even wider currency. This itself may be a federal crime, but regardless of that fact, your actions are morally indefensible. In my view, it is shameful and unethical that an
Administration that promised to govern with "honor and integrity" and "change the tone" in Washington has now engaged in an orchestrated campaign to smear and intimidate truth-telling critics, placing them in possible physical harm and impairing the efforts and operations of the CIA.
Recent reports indicate that you told the journalist, Chris Matthews, and perhaps others, that Mr. Wilson's wife and her undercover status were "fair game." Evan Thomas and Michael Isikoff, Newsweek, Oct. 13, 2003. Since these initial allegations have arisen, neither the White House nor your office have denied your involvement in furthering the leak. Repeated press inquiries into this matter have been rebuffed with technical jargon and narrow legalisms, instead of broader ethical issues. Indeed, in the same article it appears a White House source acknowledged that you contacted Matthews and other journalists, indicating that "it was reasonable to discuss who sent Wilson to Niger."
It should be noted that these actions may well have violated 18 U.S.C. ¤ 793, which prohibits the willful or grossly negligent distribution of national defense information that could possibly be used against the United States. The law states that even if you lawfully knew of Mr. Wilson's wife's status, you were obliged to come forward and report the press leak to the proper authorities - not inflame the situation by encouraging further dissemination. Larger than whether any one statute can be read to find criminal responsibility is the issue of whether officials of your stature will be allowed to use their influence to intimidate whistle-blowers.
Over three decades ago, our nation was scarred by an Administration that would stop at nothing to smear and intimidate its critics. I do not believe the Nation will countenance a repeat of such activities. For your role in this campaign, I would ask that you resign immediately.
Sincerely,
John Conyers, Jr.
Ranking Minority Member
John Dean comments:
The Watergate figure contributes:
What counts as "fraud" under the statute? Simply put, "any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing, or defeating the lawful function of any department of government." (Emphasis added.) If telephoning reporters to further destroy a CIA asset whose identity has been revealed, and whose safety is now in jeopardy, does not fit this description, I would be quite surprised.
If Newsweek is correct that Karl Rove declared Valerie Plame Wilson "fair game," then he should make sure he's got a good criminal lawyer, for he made need one. I've only suggested the most obvious criminal statute that might come into play for those who exploit the leak of a CIA asset's identity. There are others.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=/dean/20031010.html
Cheney under Investigation
The Guardian (Jon Henley) reports that la merde is hitting the fan. The French public prosecutors office has opened a “formal judicial inquiry” into possible corruption by a French engineering firm and Halliburton, the American oil services giant that Cheney headed until elected as VP. The charge: that $200 million in bribes were given to Nigerian leaders, that there was a web of offshore bank accounts / front companies that evaded cross-border corruption laws that had been signed in 1997. http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1060773,00.html
Israel and Iran:
Syria is a potential hot spot. But, we can’t forget Iran…
The LA Times (Douglas Frantz) keeps us informed about Israel’s nuclear options.
Israel has modified American-supplied cruise missiles to carry nuclear warheads on submarines, giving the Middle East's only nuclear power the ability to launch atomic weapons from land, air and beneath the sea, according to senior Bush administration and Israeli officials.
The previously undisclosed submarine capability bolsters Israel's deterrence in the event that Iran — an avowed enemy — develops nuclear weapons. It also complicates efforts by the United States and the United Nations to persuade Iran to abandon its suspected nuclear weapons program.
Two Bush administration officials described the missile modification and an Israeli official confirmed it. All three spoke on condition their names not be used.
The Americans said they were disclosing the information to caution Israel's enemies at a time of heightened tensions in the region and concern over Iran's alleged ambitions.
http://www.latimes.com/la-fg-iznukes12oct12,1,1483949.story
What’s Happening, Iraq:
Rival Government being established?
Moqtada Al Sadr, a radical Shiite cleric announced that he was setting up a government. The announcement comes on the heels of sizable, angry demonstrations by Iraq’s Shiites and front-page U.S. media coverage of this new threat to the U.S. The Governing Council, appointed by the U.S., announced that they were the legitimate government of Iraq.
Microcosm: The Fate of Baghdad’s Jews
MSNBC (Christopher Dickey / Sarah Sennoti) profiled how the invasion was a powerful missed bag for Iraq’s Jewish population. Saddam was suspicious of the Jews and thus the invasion has provided a greater sense of freedom. Yet, the Jews also feel more threatened- their lives and the culture itself. The one remaining synagogue remains closed and they lie low, fearing being targeted as “Zionists.”
http://www.msnbc.com/news/978403.asp
States in Trouble:
Now that this is a chronic state of affairs, it’s getting less ink. Last week there was a brief mini-headline about Mass. having a $2 billion deficit; otherwise usually there’s little concern.
Not so in the past days. Two entries here. Below is a front-page NY Times article illustrating the chronic borrowing and risks the states are taking.
…state and local governments, facing ballooning pension promises to police officers, firefighters, teachers and other public employees, are rushing to sell bonds to cover the shortfall. That strategy has sometimes backfired in recent years, leaving taxpayers on the hook for even more debt.
States and municipalities are drawn to bond sales because they bring instant cash, easing budget pressures without further tax increases or reductions in retirement benefits.
But critics say the bonds could prove costly for some officials using them — and for the local taxpayers. The cities and states have to pay a fixed rate of interest on the bonds, and are essentially betting they can earn a higher rate of return by investing the proceeds in their pension funds.
But recent investment losses have already left some cities and states on the hook for a mounting debt, covering not just the retirement money for their workers but also the interest on the bonds. New Orleans, Pittsburgh and New Jersey have all placed losing bets in recent years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/business/12PENS.html?pagewanted=print&position
And, the Washington Post had a powerful report on the declining tax revenues, hitting a 44 year low. When one thinks about a range of factors- the wealthy and their off-shore accounts, lower rates, etc. and the conversion of many decently-paying, benefited jobs in the manufacturing and service sectors to Walmart ($8/hour, no benefits) employ, it’s hardly surprising.
Federal tax receipts relative to the overall economy have reached their lowest level since Dwight D. Eisenhower was president, while government spending has climbed to the highest point since Bill Clinton declared the era of big government over, according to new figures released by the Congressional Budget Office.
The CBO closed its books on the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30 with a report that presents a mixed picture of the federal government's financial position. Although it documented a large fiscal imbalance that's expected to grow, the report from Congress' nonpartisan budget scorekeeper also showed how the economy's building strength helped reduce the near-term growth rate of the federal budget deficit…
"There's no good news there," said Kent Conrad (N.D.), the senior Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee.
With Congress considering spending $87 billion on Iraq and Afghanistan, the figures are expected to rise. Bolten said he still expected the deficit to top $500 billion this year, even with a brightening economic picture. Strong economic growth expected next year will not produce a surge in tax receipts until 2005, he said.
Still, Bolten said, the president's expectation that the deficit will be half that size in five years now seems easily attainable.
Critics of the president's fiscal stewardship are not backing off. Bush's $1.7 trillion in tax cuts will really begin taking a toll on government finances toward the end of the decade, when forecasters expect the economy to be rolling, said William G. Gale, an economist at the Brookings Institution. By 2010, the tax cuts will account for nearly half the swing from government surpluses once predicted to the deficits now expected.
And by then, the vanguard of Baby Boom retirees will have begun driving up Social Security and Medicare expenses by nearly 7 percent a year.
The 2003 numbers are "a distraction compared to the big story of where this is all heading," Conrad said. "A fiscal crisis unlike any we've ever seen."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A10618-2003Oct10?language=printer
-R
Last weekend, the candidate toyed with appearing on "60 Minutes," in emulation of the Clintons' Hail Mary pass after the Gennifer Flowers revelations, then thought better of the idea and went on his wife's network instead. "I never grabbed anyone," he told Tom Brokaw on "Dateline NBC," to which the newsman countered, "So you deny all those stories about grabbing?" Mr. Schwarzenegger's answer: "No, not all. I'm just saying this is not — this is not me." What was that again? The candidate was saying simultaneously that a) he never grabbed women; b) he grabbed some women; c) whoever grabbed those women was a mysterious interloper in his body. It's hard to imagine how any journalist, indeed any sentient listener, could parse the candidate's jabberwocky, an amalgam of denial, nondenial and nondenial denial all in the same thick mouthful.
.http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/arts/12RICH.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Of course this confusion of reality and the movies was at the heart of the Reagan candidacy. Then, the media blushed, but were silent when Reagan talked of his liberating the concentration camps, contrary to the reality of his never having left the states, including his working on a film for the army.
Rummy, Cheney and the D.C. Chaos
Another theme I’ve side-stepped is the in-fighting in the Administration. As Bush has returned to pre-9/11 poll numbers, Rumsfeld has returned to his pre-9/11 status of being the most criticized / isolated Cabinet member. The Occupation’s failures have cost Rummy his untouchable status and have led to Condi Rice being named the coordinator of the policy… as if the White House shouldn’t be coordinating! Meanwhile, despite everyone else admitting to the Saddam-al-Qaeda disconnect, Cheney persists. His script has remained stuck for two years and has raised concern that his presidency may be in trouble, i.e. Bush is being revealed as being not in charge.
Two entries: From Maureen Doud in Sunday’s Times on Cheney’s transformation since 1991:
When Bush the Elder put Bush the Younger in the care of Dick Cheney, he assumed that Mr. Cheney, who had been his defense secretary in Desert Storm, would play the wise, selfless counselor. Poppy thought his old friend Dick would make a great vice president, tutoring a young president green on foreign policy and safeguarding the first Bush administration's legacy of internationalism, coalition-building and realpolitik.
Instead, Good Daddy has had to watch in alarm as Bad Daddy usurped his son's presidency, heightened its conservatism and rushed America into war on the mistaken assumption that if we just acted like king of the world, everyone would bow down or run away.
Bush I officials are nonplused by the apocalyptic and rash Cheney of Bush II, a man who pushed pre-emption and peered over the shoulders of C.I.A. analysts, as compared with the skeptical and cautious Cheney of Bush I (who did not even press to march to Baghdad in the first gulf war, when Saddam Hussein actually possessed chemical weapons).
Some veterans of Bush I are so puzzled that they even look for a biological explanation, wondering if his two-year-old defibrillator might have made him more Hobbesian. Mr. Cheney spent so much time in his bunker reading gloomy books about smallpox, plague, fear and war as the natural state of mankind. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/opinion/12DOWD.html?pagewanted=print&positin
And, the growing concern from Republicans as well as Democrats that Bush is not in charge. From the San Francisco Chronicle, amongst others:
President Bush has lost control of Iraq policy because of infighting among administration officials, the leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said Sunday.
The administration also came under criticism from Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry for being unwilling to create a real international coalition and alienating governments everywhere. "This is haphazard, shotgun, shoot-from-the-hip diplomacy," the Massachusetts senator said.
The committee leaders urged Bush to take charge of U.S. postwar policy in Iraq.
"The president has to be the president, over the vice president and over these secretaries," the chairman, Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind., said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Added the committee's top Democrat, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware: "There's no clear articulation within this administration of what the goals, what the message is, what the plan is. You have this significant division within the administration between the Powells and the Rumsfelds."
sfgate.com/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/10/12/national1339EDT0490.DTL
WMD: The Defense
No new developments in the last two days; just pathetic attempts to explain it away. What’s left of the Administration’s credibility is being shredded by attempts, such as the following:
Administration sources said they believe that the officials who discussed Plame were not trying to expose her, but were using the information as a tool to try to persuade reporters to ignore Wilson. The officials wanted to convince the reporters that he had benefited from nepotism in being chosen for the mission.
Laughable.
Meanwhile supporters such as columnist Andrew Sullivan (www.andrewsullivan.com) seek to work on the language front. There’s apparently few quotes of Bush saying Iraq was an “imminent threat”, but more so “grave and gathering danger”. So, now the media is being attacked for being its liberal self, picking on the poor White House.
Conyers Calls For Rove's Resignation:
Dear Mr. Rove:
I write to ask you to resign from the White House staff. Recent press reports have indicated that, while you may or may not have been the source of the Robert Novak column which revealed the status and name of a covert operative, the wife of Ambassador Joseph Wilson, you were involved in a subsequent effort to push this classified information to other reporters and give it even wider currency. This itself may be a federal crime, but regardless of that fact, your actions are morally indefensible. In my view, it is shameful and unethical that an
Administration that promised to govern with "honor and integrity" and "change the tone" in Washington has now engaged in an orchestrated campaign to smear and intimidate truth-telling critics, placing them in possible physical harm and impairing the efforts and operations of the CIA.
Recent reports indicate that you told the journalist, Chris Matthews, and perhaps others, that Mr. Wilson's wife and her undercover status were "fair game." Evan Thomas and Michael Isikoff, Newsweek, Oct. 13, 2003. Since these initial allegations have arisen, neither the White House nor your office have denied your involvement in furthering the leak. Repeated press inquiries into this matter have been rebuffed with technical jargon and narrow legalisms, instead of broader ethical issues. Indeed, in the same article it appears a White House source acknowledged that you contacted Matthews and other journalists, indicating that "it was reasonable to discuss who sent Wilson to Niger."
It should be noted that these actions may well have violated 18 U.S.C. ¤ 793, which prohibits the willful or grossly negligent distribution of national defense information that could possibly be used against the United States. The law states that even if you lawfully knew of Mr. Wilson's wife's status, you were obliged to come forward and report the press leak to the proper authorities - not inflame the situation by encouraging further dissemination. Larger than whether any one statute can be read to find criminal responsibility is the issue of whether officials of your stature will be allowed to use their influence to intimidate whistle-blowers.
Over three decades ago, our nation was scarred by an Administration that would stop at nothing to smear and intimidate its critics. I do not believe the Nation will countenance a repeat of such activities. For your role in this campaign, I would ask that you resign immediately.
Sincerely,
John Conyers, Jr.
Ranking Minority Member
John Dean comments:
The Watergate figure contributes:
What counts as "fraud" under the statute? Simply put, "any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing, or defeating the lawful function of any department of government." (Emphasis added.) If telephoning reporters to further destroy a CIA asset whose identity has been revealed, and whose safety is now in jeopardy, does not fit this description, I would be quite surprised.
If Newsweek is correct that Karl Rove declared Valerie Plame Wilson "fair game," then he should make sure he's got a good criminal lawyer, for he made need one. I've only suggested the most obvious criminal statute that might come into play for those who exploit the leak of a CIA asset's identity. There are others.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=/dean/20031010.html
Cheney under Investigation
The Guardian (Jon Henley) reports that la merde is hitting the fan. The French public prosecutors office has opened a “formal judicial inquiry” into possible corruption by a French engineering firm and Halliburton, the American oil services giant that Cheney headed until elected as VP. The charge: that $200 million in bribes were given to Nigerian leaders, that there was a web of offshore bank accounts / front companies that evaded cross-border corruption laws that had been signed in 1997. http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1060773,00.html
Israel and Iran:
Syria is a potential hot spot. But, we can’t forget Iran…
The LA Times (Douglas Frantz) keeps us informed about Israel’s nuclear options.
Israel has modified American-supplied cruise missiles to carry nuclear warheads on submarines, giving the Middle East's only nuclear power the ability to launch atomic weapons from land, air and beneath the sea, according to senior Bush administration and Israeli officials.
The previously undisclosed submarine capability bolsters Israel's deterrence in the event that Iran — an avowed enemy — develops nuclear weapons. It also complicates efforts by the United States and the United Nations to persuade Iran to abandon its suspected nuclear weapons program.
Two Bush administration officials described the missile modification and an Israeli official confirmed it. All three spoke on condition their names not be used.
The Americans said they were disclosing the information to caution Israel's enemies at a time of heightened tensions in the region and concern over Iran's alleged ambitions.
http://www.latimes.com/la-fg-iznukes12oct12,1,1483949.story
What’s Happening, Iraq:
Rival Government being established?
Moqtada Al Sadr, a radical Shiite cleric announced that he was setting up a government. The announcement comes on the heels of sizable, angry demonstrations by Iraq’s Shiites and front-page U.S. media coverage of this new threat to the U.S. The Governing Council, appointed by the U.S., announced that they were the legitimate government of Iraq.
Microcosm: The Fate of Baghdad’s Jews
MSNBC (Christopher Dickey / Sarah Sennoti) profiled how the invasion was a powerful missed bag for Iraq’s Jewish population. Saddam was suspicious of the Jews and thus the invasion has provided a greater sense of freedom. Yet, the Jews also feel more threatened- their lives and the culture itself. The one remaining synagogue remains closed and they lie low, fearing being targeted as “Zionists.”
http://www.msnbc.com/news/978403.asp
States in Trouble:
Now that this is a chronic state of affairs, it’s getting less ink. Last week there was a brief mini-headline about Mass. having a $2 billion deficit; otherwise usually there’s little concern.
Not so in the past days. Two entries here. Below is a front-page NY Times article illustrating the chronic borrowing and risks the states are taking.
…state and local governments, facing ballooning pension promises to police officers, firefighters, teachers and other public employees, are rushing to sell bonds to cover the shortfall. That strategy has sometimes backfired in recent years, leaving taxpayers on the hook for even more debt.
States and municipalities are drawn to bond sales because they bring instant cash, easing budget pressures without further tax increases or reductions in retirement benefits.
But critics say the bonds could prove costly for some officials using them — and for the local taxpayers. The cities and states have to pay a fixed rate of interest on the bonds, and are essentially betting they can earn a higher rate of return by investing the proceeds in their pension funds.
But recent investment losses have already left some cities and states on the hook for a mounting debt, covering not just the retirement money for their workers but also the interest on the bonds. New Orleans, Pittsburgh and New Jersey have all placed losing bets in recent years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/business/12PENS.html?pagewanted=print&position
And, the Washington Post had a powerful report on the declining tax revenues, hitting a 44 year low. When one thinks about a range of factors- the wealthy and their off-shore accounts, lower rates, etc. and the conversion of many decently-paying, benefited jobs in the manufacturing and service sectors to Walmart ($8/hour, no benefits) employ, it’s hardly surprising.
Federal tax receipts relative to the overall economy have reached their lowest level since Dwight D. Eisenhower was president, while government spending has climbed to the highest point since Bill Clinton declared the era of big government over, according to new figures released by the Congressional Budget Office.
The CBO closed its books on the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30 with a report that presents a mixed picture of the federal government's financial position. Although it documented a large fiscal imbalance that's expected to grow, the report from Congress' nonpartisan budget scorekeeper also showed how the economy's building strength helped reduce the near-term growth rate of the federal budget deficit…
"There's no good news there," said Kent Conrad (N.D.), the senior Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee.
With Congress considering spending $87 billion on Iraq and Afghanistan, the figures are expected to rise. Bolten said he still expected the deficit to top $500 billion this year, even with a brightening economic picture. Strong economic growth expected next year will not produce a surge in tax receipts until 2005, he said.
Still, Bolten said, the president's expectation that the deficit will be half that size in five years now seems easily attainable.
Critics of the president's fiscal stewardship are not backing off. Bush's $1.7 trillion in tax cuts will really begin taking a toll on government finances toward the end of the decade, when forecasters expect the economy to be rolling, said William G. Gale, an economist at the Brookings Institution. By 2010, the tax cuts will account for nearly half the swing from government surpluses once predicted to the deficits now expected.
And by then, the vanguard of Baby Boom retirees will have begun driving up Social Security and Medicare expenses by nearly 7 percent a year.
The 2003 numbers are "a distraction compared to the big story of where this is all heading," Conrad said. "A fiscal crisis unlike any we've ever seen."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A10618-2003Oct10?language=printer
-R
