Monday, April 19, 2004
Radical Right, Sharon, Middle East, American Jews
I’m aware that I’ve largely stayed away from the Palestinian-Israeli tragedy, but now the Administration’s embrace of the Sharon plan is just too unsettling to ignore; we have to address the emerging overt alliance of the Right in Israel and the U.S. and the courting of more, ongoing “terror.”
Despite some (Tom Friedman) welcoming the break from the status quo, we have to recognize how Others view this. The Arab world and Europe condemn it; even Tony Blair demurs from the shift.
American Jews are now tested as to whether they can rally to the side of justice- and Israel’s future- by not reflexively defending Bush (and Kerry) as being “pro-Israel.” We also have to accept the fact that this Administration is “pro-terror”, as this move invites permanent war with a growing number of increasingly aligned enemies. We’ve heard plenty from Bush (sample, below) as to his welcoming of a mission/crusade against all evil.
Again, it’s terribly unsettling.
Juan Cole, Middle East/Iraq expert, terms the administration’s action as “Turning into Israel?”
Outraged by President Bush's embrace of Ariel Sharon and the bloody U.S. assault on Fallujah, the Arab world is linking America's occupation with Israel's. That's ominous. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/04/16/israel/index_np.html
Dana Milbank of the Washington Post spells out a portion:
Some evidence shows that the recent Israeli assassination of Sheik Ahmed Yassin has caused Hamas to fight among themselves and other such internal problems, but this recent assassination may finally cause Hamas and their sympathizers to strike the United States directly. For years, we've heard the anti-American rhetoric from the Palestinians after an Israeli strike, but mostly it's b/c of the Israeli use of U.S. helicopters and other weapons. This time, the timing of the assassination makes the anti-American threats a bit more realistic.
Israeli PM Ariel Sharon and President Bush just had a meeting, where Bush basically conceded to Sharon everything that was asked of him. Now, with this assassination merely a few days later, it gives the appearance that Bush may have ok'd it. I think Sharon acts for himself and what he thinks is good for Israel first, but this attack does nothing but make America look ba.d
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11483-2004Apr14.html
The blogger “billmon”’s has the feeling he’s in a slow car crash. He has advice for bin Laden: I mean, why bother with suicide bombers when you've got both major political parties on your side? http://billmon.org/archives/001402.html
Bush’s “thinking” (mixed with Cheney’s militancy…)
"Our war with terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end...until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated." And what if America ends up alienating the entire world in the process? "At some point, we may be the only ones left," Bush told his closest advisers, according to an administration member who leaked the story to Bob Woodward. "That's OK with me. We are America." http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=45897
What’s Happening, Iraq:
The Pentagon belatedly admits to 10 American troops being killed on Saturday, a few others since. The Spanish are packing up. [And, Honduras and Nicaragua are quitting, and Bulgaria, El Salvador, Thailand, Portugal and the Philippines are considering withdrawal. Australia will decide its future in this November’s elections.]
Let’s remember that the Spanish are not leaving because of the train attack; they’re leaving because the previous [Aznar] Administration was rejected because of its lies. The Bushies have not been subtle in their insinuations that unlike Spain, U.S. voters can’t let the terrorists win by voting for Kerry- i.e. ‘we must stand firm’ and not let them interpret…
Yet, as we’ve heard over the past 5 days, the Administration is frantically trying to get cover from the U.N.
Warren Hoge in the NY Times:
The United Nations, once snubbed and excluded from the task of shaping Iraq's future, suddenly finds itself pressed to play the major role in that effort, but it is taking up the task with some foreboding.
"There is a mixture of vindication on the one hand and great apprehension on the other," said Edward Mortimer, a senior aide to Secretary General Kofi Annan.
Mr. Mortimer contrasted the recent calls for assistance from President Bush with the disparagement he said the United Nations had become used to from the administration. "It's quite nice when you've been generally dissed about your irrelevancy and then suddenly have people coming on bended knee and saying, `We need you to come back,' " he said. "On the other hand, it's quite unnerving to feel you're being projected into a very violent and volatile situation where you might be regarded as an agent or faithful servant of a power that has incurred great hostility."
With time running out on the June 30 deadline for transfer of power, the United Nations is being looked to as the only institution that can confer immediate global legitimacy on the American goal of bringing representative government to Iraq. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/18/international/middleeast/18NATI.html
Rajiv Chandrasekaran and Karl Vick in the Washington Post provide a capsule:
In the space of two weeks, a fierce insurgency in Iraq has isolated the U.S.-appointed civilian government and stopped the American-financed reconstruction effort, as contractors hunker down against waves of ambushes and kidnappings, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials.
The events have also pressured U.S. forces to vastly expand their area of operations within Iraq, while triggering a partial collapse of the new Iraqi security services designed to gradually replace them.
The crisis, which has stirred support for the insurgents across both Sunni and Shiite communities, has also inflamed tensions between Arabs and Kurds.http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A20690-2004Apr17?language=printer
It worked with Noreiga, so…
American troops are back to their ‘culture wars’, seeking to irritate /alienate the locals with music.
In Fallujah's darkened, empty streets, U.S. troops blast AC/DC's Hell's Bells and other rock music full volume from a huge speaker, hoping to grate on the nerves of this Sunni Muslim city's gunmen and give a laugh to marines along the front line. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040416.wpsyop0416/BNStory/International/
But, it’s no game. A comment:
The conflict in Iraq is "much more serious" than the war in Vietnam and any comparison between the two is misplaced, the European Union's external relations commissioner said on Saturday.
"The comparison... that Iraq could become as difficult an issue as Vietnam is misplaced, because I think it is arguably much more serious," Chris Patten told a news conference after an informal meeting of EU foreign ministers in Ireland.
"If things go wrong in Iraq we will be living with the consequences for a very, very long time," he added. http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=852591
Brits in Basra face facts: ‘It’s conceivable that we’d leave; it’s up to them’
…the commander of British troops in southern Iraq, Brig Nick Carter, admitted that he would be powerless to prevent the overthrow of Coalition forces if the Shia majority in Basra rose up in rebellion. Brig Carter, of the 20 Armoured Brigade, who has been in Iraq for four months, said British forces would stay in Basra with the consent of local Shia leaders, or not at all…
"A crowd of 150,000 people at the gates of this barracks would be the end of this, as far as I'm concerned," Brig Carter said. "There would be absolutely nothing I could do about that." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/04/18/wirq18.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/04/18/ixportaltop.html
Sidney Blumenthal writes of the disquiet within the military:
The president may see his mission to Iraq as a holy war, but frustrated Pentagon strategists say they're being ignored and ill-treated by the administration. http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2004/04/15/bush/index_np.html
Woodward on 60 Minutes: Most important to publicize is the relationship of the Bushes and Prince Bandar et al. Some Americans might blanche at the notion that the Saudis are ‘interfering’ with a presidential election.
Prince Bandar enjoys easy access to the Oval Office. His family and the Bush family are close. And Woodward told 60 Minutes that Bandar has promised the president that Saudi Arabia will lower oil prices in the months before the election -- to ensure the U.S. economy is strong on election day.
Woodward says that Bandar understood that economic conditions were key before a presidential election: "They're [oil prices] high. And they could go down very quickly. That's the Saudi pledge. Certainly over the summer, or as we get closer to the election, they could increase production several million barrels a day and the price would drop significantly."
Shorter than the video or transcript was this summary by William Hamilton:
Beginning in late December 2001, President Bush met repeatedly with Army Gen. Tommy R. Franks and his war cabinet to plan the U.S. attack on Iraq even as he and administration spokesmen insisted they were pursuing a diplomatic solution, according to a new book on the origins of the war.
Powell felt Cheney and his allies -- his chief aide, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby; Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz; and Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith and what Powell called Feith's "Gestapo" office -- had established what amounted to a separate government. The vice president, for his part, believed Powell was mainly concerned with his own popularity and told friends at a dinner he hosted a year ago celebrating the outcome of the war that Powell was a problem and "always had major reservations about what we were trying to do."
Wolfowitz proposed sending in the military to seize Iraq's southern oil fields and establish the area as a foothold from which opposition groups could overthrow Hussein.
Powell dismissed the plan as "lunacy," according to Woodward, and told Bush what he thought. "You don't have to be bullied into this," Powell said.
Asked by Woodward how history would judge the war, Bush replied: "History. We don't know. We'll all be dead." http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A17347-2004Apr16?language=printer
Today’s NY Times has more. (Steven Weisman)
For more than a year, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and his aides have tacitly acknowledged that he was concerned before the war about what could go wrong once American forces captured Iraq.
But Mr. Powell's apparent decision to lay out his misgivings even more explicitly to the journalist Bob Woodward for a book has jolted the White House and aggravated long-festering tensions in the Bush cabinet. Moreover, some officials said, the book has created problems for the secretary inside the administration just as the situation in Iraq is deteriorating and President Bush is plunging into his re-election drive. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/19/politics/19POWE.html
So if they’re not all chummy inside the Administration, what can it mean? Juan Cole has some thoughts:
Likewise, in the Bush administration, the Pentagon has its own foreign policy, which competes with and often trumps the foreign policy of the State Department and the National Security Council. Thus, Gen. Myers is pointing fingers at Iran and Syria and making all sorts of wild accusations at them, darkly hinting they will be overthrown if they don't shape up. And Colin Powell is writing them polite letters about bilateral relations and could they please use their good offices to help the Americans in Iraq. It is bizarre, and the urbane, canny leaders in Damascus and Tehran (who have long experience of residence in the UK and Germany respectively), must be scratching their heads in wonder at this Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde American hyperpower that rages about an axis of evil and goes about preemptively invading countries on the one hand and then comes politely, hat in hand, to request selfless assistance on the other.
www.juancole.com
Condi Warns, Predicts?, Welcomes?
The smile that slipped in as she uttered this was not reassuring.
The United States is bracing for possible terrorist attacks before the November presidential election, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said Sunday.
The opportunity for terrorists to try to influence the election, as was the case last month in Spain, appears to be an opportunity that would "be too good to pass up for them," Rice said.. http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20040418/D821A60G0.html
9/11 Commission: Summary Statement
…now, after three weeks of extraordinary public hearings and a dozen detailed reports, the lengthy documentary record makes clear that predictions of an attack by Al Qaeda had been communicated directly to the highest levels of the government.
The threat reports were more clear, urgent and persistent than was previously known. Some focused on Al Qaeda's plans to use commercial aircraft as weapons. Others stated that Osama bin Laden was intent on striking on United States soil. Many were passed to the Federal Aviation Administration.
While some of the intelligence went back years, other warnings — including one that Al Qaeda seemed interested in hijacking a plane inside this country — had been delivered to the president on Aug. 6, 2001, just a month before the attacks.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/18/politics/18SEPT.html?hp
There were others who were preparing for planes as missiles. From USA Today (Steven Komarow, Tom Squitieri)
NORAD had drills of jets as weapons
In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties.
In a third scenario, the target was the Pentagon — but that drill was not run after Defense officials said it was unrealistic, NORAD and Defense officials say.
NORAD, in a written statement, confirmed that such hijacking exercises occurred. It said the scenarios outlined were regional drills, not regularly scheduled continent-wide exercises.
http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+NORAD+had+drills+of+jets+as+weapons&expire=&urlID=9961878&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fwashington%2F2004-04-18-norad_x.htm&partnerID=1660
Our Politicized Government: You work for them, or you’re out. I’ve previously noted the politicization of the Treasury, as employees had to assess Kerry's economic proposal.
The following 2 non-consecutive paragraphs are part of a posting on the Treasury’s site:
While nobody likes paying taxes, the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service have been working to make the burden of paying taxes a little easier. E-filing and electronic services offered on IRS.gov are seeing big increases this year. Taxpayers can use these services and follow other simple steps to help make tax time easier.
And,
America has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's policies are doing; or it can raise taxes on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery and future job creation. http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/js1313.htm
Compare that with a Republican National Committee fact sheet that reads:
America has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's polices are doing; or it can raise taxes on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery and future job creation. http://www.rnc.org/News/Read.aspx?ID=4069
At the NRA Convention:
Bush "has shown you respect, earned your vote and appreciates your support," Cheney said. [...]
Earlier in the day, Tom Mauser, whose son, Daniel, was killed with an assault weapon in the Columbine High School killings five years ago, tried to enter the convention hall where the NRA was meeting, seeking to urge Cheney to support extending the assault weapons ban.
Mauser was turned away by a security guard as several conventioneers applauded. A couple of conventioneers yelled "Get a life" and "Vote for Bush." http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&e=4&u=/ap/20040418/ap_on_re_us/nra_convention_cheney
Good News: Senate Races, Conservative Split
(1) Many races are looking more promising than only 2 months ago. The Bush drop in polls has undoubtedly raised the prospects of several senatorial candidates, raising the possibility of the Democrats having a short of taking back the Senate.
(2) Many conservatives have their qualms with the Administration. Those of us who favored a more muscular approach to American foreign policy and a more Wilsonian view of our efforts in Iraq find ourselves pitted against more traditional conservatives, who have more isolationist instincts to begin with, and they are more willing to say, `Bring the boys home,' " Mr. Weinstein said.
Richard A. Viguerie, a conservative stalwart and the dean of conservative direct mail, said the Iraq war had created an unusual schism. "I can't think of any other issue that has divided conservatives as much as this issue in my political lifetime," Mr. Viguerie said. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/19/politics/19CONS.html
Kerry as Blunt Centrist
He’s making clear that he’ll be outspoken, but that he’s no liberal. While most will overlook much (“anyone but Bush”!), we should keep his centrism in mind.
Also, a friend sent me the following.
Just came across a bit of information regarding Kerry and his claim of the Bush administration sending jobs abroad. Well, it seems that the Heinz Corporation, owned by Kerry's wife, has 79 plants where it manufactures products and 57 of the 79 are located in countries outside of the U.S. How many U.S. jobs are lost here???
Factories located at: Taipei, Taiwan (makes Heinz baby foods) Dublin, Ireland; Paris, France; Dovarmenez, France; Lisbon, Portugal; Madrid, Spain; Milan, Italy; Monguzzo, Italy; Athens, Greece; Warsaw,Poland; Pudliszki, Poland; Wodzislaw, Poland; Miedzychod, Poland; Moscow, Russia; Georgievisk, Russia; Cairo, Egypt; Tel Aviv, Israel, etc.
-R
I’m aware that I’ve largely stayed away from the Palestinian-Israeli tragedy, but now the Administration’s embrace of the Sharon plan is just too unsettling to ignore; we have to address the emerging overt alliance of the Right in Israel and the U.S. and the courting of more, ongoing “terror.”
Despite some (Tom Friedman) welcoming the break from the status quo, we have to recognize how Others view this. The Arab world and Europe condemn it; even Tony Blair demurs from the shift.
American Jews are now tested as to whether they can rally to the side of justice- and Israel’s future- by not reflexively defending Bush (and Kerry) as being “pro-Israel.” We also have to accept the fact that this Administration is “pro-terror”, as this move invites permanent war with a growing number of increasingly aligned enemies. We’ve heard plenty from Bush (sample, below) as to his welcoming of a mission/crusade against all evil.
Again, it’s terribly unsettling.
Juan Cole, Middle East/Iraq expert, terms the administration’s action as “Turning into Israel?”
Outraged by President Bush's embrace of Ariel Sharon and the bloody U.S. assault on Fallujah, the Arab world is linking America's occupation with Israel's. That's ominous. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/04/16/israel/index_np.html
Dana Milbank of the Washington Post spells out a portion:
Some evidence shows that the recent Israeli assassination of Sheik Ahmed Yassin has caused Hamas to fight among themselves and other such internal problems, but this recent assassination may finally cause Hamas and their sympathizers to strike the United States directly. For years, we've heard the anti-American rhetoric from the Palestinians after an Israeli strike, but mostly it's b/c of the Israeli use of U.S. helicopters and other weapons. This time, the timing of the assassination makes the anti-American threats a bit more realistic.
Israeli PM Ariel Sharon and President Bush just had a meeting, where Bush basically conceded to Sharon everything that was asked of him. Now, with this assassination merely a few days later, it gives the appearance that Bush may have ok'd it. I think Sharon acts for himself and what he thinks is good for Israel first, but this attack does nothing but make America look ba.d
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11483-2004Apr14.html
The blogger “billmon”’s has the feeling he’s in a slow car crash. He has advice for bin Laden: I mean, why bother with suicide bombers when you've got both major political parties on your side? http://billmon.org/archives/001402.html
Bush’s “thinking” (mixed with Cheney’s militancy…)
"Our war with terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end...until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated." And what if America ends up alienating the entire world in the process? "At some point, we may be the only ones left," Bush told his closest advisers, according to an administration member who leaked the story to Bob Woodward. "That's OK with me. We are America." http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=45897
What’s Happening, Iraq:
The Pentagon belatedly admits to 10 American troops being killed on Saturday, a few others since. The Spanish are packing up. [And, Honduras and Nicaragua are quitting, and Bulgaria, El Salvador, Thailand, Portugal and the Philippines are considering withdrawal. Australia will decide its future in this November’s elections.]
Let’s remember that the Spanish are not leaving because of the train attack; they’re leaving because the previous [Aznar] Administration was rejected because of its lies. The Bushies have not been subtle in their insinuations that unlike Spain, U.S. voters can’t let the terrorists win by voting for Kerry- i.e. ‘we must stand firm’ and not let them interpret…
Yet, as we’ve heard over the past 5 days, the Administration is frantically trying to get cover from the U.N.
Warren Hoge in the NY Times:
The United Nations, once snubbed and excluded from the task of shaping Iraq's future, suddenly finds itself pressed to play the major role in that effort, but it is taking up the task with some foreboding.
"There is a mixture of vindication on the one hand and great apprehension on the other," said Edward Mortimer, a senior aide to Secretary General Kofi Annan.
Mr. Mortimer contrasted the recent calls for assistance from President Bush with the disparagement he said the United Nations had become used to from the administration. "It's quite nice when you've been generally dissed about your irrelevancy and then suddenly have people coming on bended knee and saying, `We need you to come back,' " he said. "On the other hand, it's quite unnerving to feel you're being projected into a very violent and volatile situation where you might be regarded as an agent or faithful servant of a power that has incurred great hostility."
With time running out on the June 30 deadline for transfer of power, the United Nations is being looked to as the only institution that can confer immediate global legitimacy on the American goal of bringing representative government to Iraq. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/18/international/middleeast/18NATI.html
Rajiv Chandrasekaran and Karl Vick in the Washington Post provide a capsule:
In the space of two weeks, a fierce insurgency in Iraq has isolated the U.S.-appointed civilian government and stopped the American-financed reconstruction effort, as contractors hunker down against waves of ambushes and kidnappings, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials.
The events have also pressured U.S. forces to vastly expand their area of operations within Iraq, while triggering a partial collapse of the new Iraqi security services designed to gradually replace them.
The crisis, which has stirred support for the insurgents across both Sunni and Shiite communities, has also inflamed tensions between Arabs and Kurds.http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A20690-2004Apr17?language=printer
It worked with Noreiga, so…
American troops are back to their ‘culture wars’, seeking to irritate /alienate the locals with music.
In Fallujah's darkened, empty streets, U.S. troops blast AC/DC's Hell's Bells and other rock music full volume from a huge speaker, hoping to grate on the nerves of this Sunni Muslim city's gunmen and give a laugh to marines along the front line. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040416.wpsyop0416/BNStory/International/
But, it’s no game. A comment:
The conflict in Iraq is "much more serious" than the war in Vietnam and any comparison between the two is misplaced, the European Union's external relations commissioner said on Saturday.
"The comparison... that Iraq could become as difficult an issue as Vietnam is misplaced, because I think it is arguably much more serious," Chris Patten told a news conference after an informal meeting of EU foreign ministers in Ireland.
"If things go wrong in Iraq we will be living with the consequences for a very, very long time," he added. http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=852591
Brits in Basra face facts: ‘It’s conceivable that we’d leave; it’s up to them’
…the commander of British troops in southern Iraq, Brig Nick Carter, admitted that he would be powerless to prevent the overthrow of Coalition forces if the Shia majority in Basra rose up in rebellion. Brig Carter, of the 20 Armoured Brigade, who has been in Iraq for four months, said British forces would stay in Basra with the consent of local Shia leaders, or not at all…
"A crowd of 150,000 people at the gates of this barracks would be the end of this, as far as I'm concerned," Brig Carter said. "There would be absolutely nothing I could do about that." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/04/18/wirq18.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/04/18/ixportaltop.html
Sidney Blumenthal writes of the disquiet within the military:
The president may see his mission to Iraq as a holy war, but frustrated Pentagon strategists say they're being ignored and ill-treated by the administration. http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2004/04/15/bush/index_np.html
Woodward on 60 Minutes: Most important to publicize is the relationship of the Bushes and Prince Bandar et al. Some Americans might blanche at the notion that the Saudis are ‘interfering’ with a presidential election.
Prince Bandar enjoys easy access to the Oval Office. His family and the Bush family are close. And Woodward told 60 Minutes that Bandar has promised the president that Saudi Arabia will lower oil prices in the months before the election -- to ensure the U.S. economy is strong on election day.
Woodward says that Bandar understood that economic conditions were key before a presidential election: "They're [oil prices] high. And they could go down very quickly. That's the Saudi pledge. Certainly over the summer, or as we get closer to the election, they could increase production several million barrels a day and the price would drop significantly."
Shorter than the video or transcript was this summary by William Hamilton:
Beginning in late December 2001, President Bush met repeatedly with Army Gen. Tommy R. Franks and his war cabinet to plan the U.S. attack on Iraq even as he and administration spokesmen insisted they were pursuing a diplomatic solution, according to a new book on the origins of the war.
Powell felt Cheney and his allies -- his chief aide, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby; Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz; and Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith and what Powell called Feith's "Gestapo" office -- had established what amounted to a separate government. The vice president, for his part, believed Powell was mainly concerned with his own popularity and told friends at a dinner he hosted a year ago celebrating the outcome of the war that Powell was a problem and "always had major reservations about what we were trying to do."
Wolfowitz proposed sending in the military to seize Iraq's southern oil fields and establish the area as a foothold from which opposition groups could overthrow Hussein.
Powell dismissed the plan as "lunacy," according to Woodward, and told Bush what he thought. "You don't have to be bullied into this," Powell said.
Asked by Woodward how history would judge the war, Bush replied: "History. We don't know. We'll all be dead." http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A17347-2004Apr16?language=printer
Today’s NY Times has more. (Steven Weisman)
For more than a year, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and his aides have tacitly acknowledged that he was concerned before the war about what could go wrong once American forces captured Iraq.
But Mr. Powell's apparent decision to lay out his misgivings even more explicitly to the journalist Bob Woodward for a book has jolted the White House and aggravated long-festering tensions in the Bush cabinet. Moreover, some officials said, the book has created problems for the secretary inside the administration just as the situation in Iraq is deteriorating and President Bush is plunging into his re-election drive. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/19/politics/19POWE.html
So if they’re not all chummy inside the Administration, what can it mean? Juan Cole has some thoughts:
Likewise, in the Bush administration, the Pentagon has its own foreign policy, which competes with and often trumps the foreign policy of the State Department and the National Security Council. Thus, Gen. Myers is pointing fingers at Iran and Syria and making all sorts of wild accusations at them, darkly hinting they will be overthrown if they don't shape up. And Colin Powell is writing them polite letters about bilateral relations and could they please use their good offices to help the Americans in Iraq. It is bizarre, and the urbane, canny leaders in Damascus and Tehran (who have long experience of residence in the UK and Germany respectively), must be scratching their heads in wonder at this Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde American hyperpower that rages about an axis of evil and goes about preemptively invading countries on the one hand and then comes politely, hat in hand, to request selfless assistance on the other.
www.juancole.com
Condi Warns, Predicts?, Welcomes?
The smile that slipped in as she uttered this was not reassuring.
The United States is bracing for possible terrorist attacks before the November presidential election, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said Sunday.
The opportunity for terrorists to try to influence the election, as was the case last month in Spain, appears to be an opportunity that would "be too good to pass up for them," Rice said.. http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20040418/D821A60G0.html
9/11 Commission: Summary Statement
…now, after three weeks of extraordinary public hearings and a dozen detailed reports, the lengthy documentary record makes clear that predictions of an attack by Al Qaeda had been communicated directly to the highest levels of the government.
The threat reports were more clear, urgent and persistent than was previously known. Some focused on Al Qaeda's plans to use commercial aircraft as weapons. Others stated that Osama bin Laden was intent on striking on United States soil. Many were passed to the Federal Aviation Administration.
While some of the intelligence went back years, other warnings — including one that Al Qaeda seemed interested in hijacking a plane inside this country — had been delivered to the president on Aug. 6, 2001, just a month before the attacks.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/18/politics/18SEPT.html?hp
There were others who were preparing for planes as missiles. From USA Today (Steven Komarow, Tom Squitieri)
NORAD had drills of jets as weapons
In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties.
In a third scenario, the target was the Pentagon — but that drill was not run after Defense officials said it was unrealistic, NORAD and Defense officials say.
NORAD, in a written statement, confirmed that such hijacking exercises occurred. It said the scenarios outlined were regional drills, not regularly scheduled continent-wide exercises.
http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+NORAD+had+drills+of+jets+as+weapons&expire=&urlID=9961878&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fwashington%2F2004-04-18-norad_x.htm&partnerID=1660
Our Politicized Government: You work for them, or you’re out. I’ve previously noted the politicization of the Treasury, as employees had to assess Kerry's economic proposal.
The following 2 non-consecutive paragraphs are part of a posting on the Treasury’s site:
While nobody likes paying taxes, the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service have been working to make the burden of paying taxes a little easier. E-filing and electronic services offered on IRS.gov are seeing big increases this year. Taxpayers can use these services and follow other simple steps to help make tax time easier.
And,
America has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's policies are doing; or it can raise taxes on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery and future job creation. http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/js1313.htm
Compare that with a Republican National Committee fact sheet that reads:
America has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's polices are doing; or it can raise taxes on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery and future job creation. http://www.rnc.org/News/Read.aspx?ID=4069
At the NRA Convention:
Bush "has shown you respect, earned your vote and appreciates your support," Cheney said. [...]
Earlier in the day, Tom Mauser, whose son, Daniel, was killed with an assault weapon in the Columbine High School killings five years ago, tried to enter the convention hall where the NRA was meeting, seeking to urge Cheney to support extending the assault weapons ban.
Mauser was turned away by a security guard as several conventioneers applauded. A couple of conventioneers yelled "Get a life" and "Vote for Bush." http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&e=4&u=/ap/20040418/ap_on_re_us/nra_convention_cheney
Good News: Senate Races, Conservative Split
(1) Many races are looking more promising than only 2 months ago. The Bush drop in polls has undoubtedly raised the prospects of several senatorial candidates, raising the possibility of the Democrats having a short of taking back the Senate.
(2) Many conservatives have their qualms with the Administration. Those of us who favored a more muscular approach to American foreign policy and a more Wilsonian view of our efforts in Iraq find ourselves pitted against more traditional conservatives, who have more isolationist instincts to begin with, and they are more willing to say, `Bring the boys home,' " Mr. Weinstein said.
Richard A. Viguerie, a conservative stalwart and the dean of conservative direct mail, said the Iraq war had created an unusual schism. "I can't think of any other issue that has divided conservatives as much as this issue in my political lifetime," Mr. Viguerie said. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/19/politics/19CONS.html
Kerry as Blunt Centrist
He’s making clear that he’ll be outspoken, but that he’s no liberal. While most will overlook much (“anyone but Bush”!), we should keep his centrism in mind.
Also, a friend sent me the following.
Just came across a bit of information regarding Kerry and his claim of the Bush administration sending jobs abroad. Well, it seems that the Heinz Corporation, owned by Kerry's wife, has 79 plants where it manufactures products and 57 of the 79 are located in countries outside of the U.S. How many U.S. jobs are lost here???
Factories located at: Taipei, Taiwan (makes Heinz baby foods) Dublin, Ireland; Paris, France; Dovarmenez, France; Lisbon, Portugal; Madrid, Spain; Milan, Italy; Monguzzo, Italy; Athens, Greece; Warsaw,Poland; Pudliszki, Poland; Wodzislaw, Poland; Miedzychod, Poland; Moscow, Russia; Georgievisk, Russia; Cairo, Egypt; Tel Aviv, Israel, etc.
-R
