Monday, August 23, 2004
Swift Boat 'Controversy' Kerry’s Waterloo?
How to Get Rid of This? Can’t; Stuck in a country that has a debased political discourse, featuring a dumbed-down public, a ‘non-journalistic’ press, and an official “opposition”- the Democrats- who aren’t as good at gutter politics as Republicans. It’s so nuts that the most powerful country in the world determines its elections by focusing on this nonsense. By these rules, the know-nothings tend to win. They will this time, unless Kerry makes Bush’s inveterate cowardice the issue, not Kerry’s military record. Tuesday will tell much, as he’s reported to be approaching such a position.
And, McCain: Please no more lionizing of him; he was a brave, honorable POW; he impressed me by his forging a close, respectful relationship with anti-Viet vet Kerry. But he loathes Bush, who not only said he betrayed the other POWs and had a black illegitimate child, but also targeted spouse Cindy McCain as a drug addict. Yet, he’s endorsing Bush, either so as to ‘help clean up the GOP or to consider running for Prez as a 70 year old in 2008. So, self-interest trumps principle. A politician.
The content? All the military records back up Kerry. That record has always been presumed to be accurate, yet the media plays it as ‘he said, she said,’ that there are two sides. So those who have been shown to be either inconsistent or liars and Kerry are assumed to be equally credible. This perfectly captures the right-wing talk show tact. Sean Hannity- for those who don’t listen, he’s popular. He has a refrain- “I don’t know what to believe”. Bob Dole, a true partisan, joins the fray and no one questions as to where he got his talking points, i.e. why should we be hearing from him?
If Kerry survives this and wins on November 2- it’s still early- he will face the ongoing noise machine of the Right. They’ve been at this since Nixon’s time. Chuck Colson and Murray Chotiner were there long before Lee Atwater and Karl Rove.
Now, we have hard core folk like Floyd Brown David Bossie and Citizens United.
Somerville’s own Chip Berlet has written about these guys.
The web banner for Citizens United explains that the group is dedicated to "Reasserting Traditional American Values: limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, national sovereignty and security."85 The group claims 150,000 members, but that is most likely a count of anyone who has sent money for projects touted in frequent direct mail appeals. The group has a member newsletter, Citizens Agenda, and a specialty periodical, ClintonWatch, sent to selected reporters and political activists.86
Citizens United is the project of Floyd G. Brown who published "Slick Willie:" Why America Cannot Trust Bill Clinton, a slim paperback book distributed as part of a direct mail fundraising effort. The book is a right-wing tirade designed to document Clinton's lack of character. What it also showed was that Brown unabashedly mixes sexism and homophobia in his conservative analysis http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/clinton/Clintonculwar8-12.html#P247_69030
Media: And as Bush makes the appallingly misleading comment, “I hope my opponent joins me in condemning all such activities”, at least some of the media fall for this line and make him sound righteous and resolute.
MSNBC: "Bush: Vets Should Halt anti-Kerry Ads”
CNN: “Bush urges Kerry to condemn attack ads."
Uh, Kerry did that about 12 days ago. No shame, no shame.
Time’s Joe Klein on the straight-jacketed Kerry: He’s controlled by his consultants/handlers, says Joe.
And yet, when Kerry spoke to the VFW two days later, he attacked Bush's position, using an argument with some merit but of microscopic import in the midst of a presidential campaign: he said it was a "hasty" and "political" plan and certainly not a good negotiating tactic to withdraw troops from Korea while we are trying to get the North Koreans to drop their nuclear program.
But oops. Some two weeks earlier, in an interview with George Stephanopoulos, Kerry had taken a different position: "I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just [in Iraq] but ... in the Korean peninsula, perhaps, in Europe, perhaps." As you might imagine, the Bush campaign quickly pointed out the inconsistency.
The stumble raises two basic questions about Kerry's campaign. First, is he a latter-day Ron Burgundy—the idiot 1970s anchorman of Will Ferrell's recent film who would read anything that appeared on his TelePrompTer? Did Kerry not remember what he had said to Stephanopoulos? No, it was, apparently, yet another Kerry nanonuance: he is in favor of redeployments, just not now. The second question is far more dire: Why is Kerry wasting breath on such periphera? Why isn't he hammering Bush on his conduct of the Iraq war and the larger war against Islamist radicalism, which is the most important issue in this election? The answer is politics. His political consultants don't want him to do it. Their focus groups tell them that the public wants an "optimistic" candidate who offers a "positive plan" rather than a "negative" candidate who criticizes the President. http://www.maxlogan.com/klein.0822.htm
Election Irregularities: The Florida – New York Connection
Is this true? If so, is it bad news?
Some 46,000 New Yorkers are registered to vote in both the city and Florida, a shocking finding that exposes both states to potential abuses that could alter the outcome of elections," a New York Daily News investigation shows."Registering in two places is illegal in both states, but the massive snowbird scandal goes undetected because election officials don't check rolls across state lines." http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/224449p-192807c.html
Kerry tried to focus on this today; it got a bit of coverage.
With the Bush campaign reportedly releasing another misleading ad tomorrow attacking John Kerry's plan to cut taxes for the middle class, the Kerry-Edwards campaign will pressure Bush to come clean about why he is shifting more of the tax burden on to working families, cutting overtime pay for six million people and covering up key details about his health care claims.
The campaign will also release a new report on what the impact of the new overtime rules will be on working families
Colombia: Oil, Violence, etc. It isn’t a pretty picture
Why has Arauca been singled out for "enhanced" security? One answer is oil. It is home to the Caño Limón oilfield, which accounts for 30% of Colombia's oil production. The oil is pumped to the Caribbean through a pipeline that has been a major target for guerrilla forces. Now a complex mosaic of armed groups - rightwing paramilitaries and the army, often working closely together, and leftwing guerrillas - struggle for control of the lucrative pipeline and cocaine routes.
The civil war is decades old but has grown more complex in recent years.
It’s too late for three citizens of the oil-rich north-east region of Arauca, on the border with Venezuela. They were murdered by the army on August 5. The men were all trade unionists, and their killings bring to 30 the number of unionists killed in Arauca so far this year. Last year, the US gave Colombia $99m to protect the pipeline, to be split between the 18th Brigade and a new mobile unit. President Bush also sent 60 US special forces personnel to Arauca to train the brigade http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=9&ItemID=6082
Israel - France: 2 notes
* New homes on the West Bank are being built. The U.S. does not oppose.
* The worst incident of recent anti-Semitism in France, as a cultural center was defaced and wrecked “in response to racist acts by Jews in France against Islam and the Muslims…and as a simple response to the racist and savage acts by Jews in Muslim countries like Palestine.”
North Korea:
Can’t forget them. They remind us of their presence by releasing striking statements
North Korea described US President George W. Bush as an "imbecile" and a "tyrant" who was worse than Adolph Hitler, and ruled out holding new talks on nuclear weapons with the United States. In an unusually strong attack, a North Korean foreign ministry spokesman said comments by Bush calling North Korea a tyrant during campaigning last week in Wisconsin were "malignant slanders and calumnies".
Oil:
Pepe Escobar of Asia Times. Always worth the time:
Welcome to peak oil According to HSBC, oil is now 136% - and counting - more expensive than before September 11, 2001. The United States - with 5% of the world's population - gobbles up no less than 26% of the world's oil production. Whatever the spin from the White House and the Pentagon, the fact is one of the key objectives in the whole Iraqi adventure - completely in line with Dick Cheney's 2001 energy report - was to take over the world's second-largest oil reserves, extirpate Iraq from the much-hated OPEC and maybe kill the cartel for good. Last May in Houston, Asia Times Online confirmed that even the oil business didn't think this was a good idea. The crumbling Iraq oil infrastructure - on the most optimistic of days - currently cannot produce more than 1.8 million barrels, and much less export it. The Iraqi resistance knows how formidable a weapon is the regular bombing of either the northern pipeline from Kirkuk to Ceyhan, Turkey, or the southern pipeline from Basra. Whenever there is a bombing - or an interruption in pumping because of workers condemning the offensive against Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in Najaf - production in Basra falls to less than 1 million barrels a day. It's always important to remember that even under United Nations sanctions, Iraq exported at least 2.5 million barrels a day.
The strength of the dollar is guaranteed above all by a secret agreement signed between the US and Saudi Arabia in the 1970s that all OPEC oil sales be denominated in dollars. Saddam Hussein started selling Iraqi oil in euros (and making a handsome profit) in November 2000 - and that's another crucial reason for the Iraqi invasion. Many OPEC countries, not to mention Russia (President Vladimir Putin already referred to it on the record), flirt with the idea of trading their oil in euros. (OPEC is made up of Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela.) A recent analysis published by Goldmoney states that OPEC has already switched, in fact, to trading oil in euros - as oil-exporting countries fight to offset the weak dollar, "It seems clear that OPEC and the other oil exporters are already pricing crude oil in terms of euros, at least tacitly. Whether they start invoicing their crude oil sales in terms of euros remains to be seen." So what is Cheney doing in the middle of this crisis? He's blaming the Democrats. The failure of Cheney's Russia strategy will be examined in a separate article. But as far as Iraq is concerned, the blowback is obvious. The neo-cons dreamed of exporting "democracy". Instead, they imported geopolitical instability - reflected in the rising price of oil. The Bush administration has not been rewarded with cheap oil: it is now facing a new, slow, mutating oil shock.
Oil at $50 a barrel, and on its way to $60, is an absolute disaster for oil-importing countries (and this means most of the world). Business costs are automatically higher - leading in many cases to job cuts, which means higher unemployment. The days of cheap oil may be over - as most analysts agree. But beyond the current hysteria over oil at $50 and the failure of Cheney's US energy policy, the world seems to be failing to address at least four extremely important questions on which the common future depends: how much oil - proven reserves - is left in the Middle East? How much oil does Russia have? What is the real amount of proven reserves in the Caspian Sea? How long will all this oil last? http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/FH24Dj01.html
Plame Outing: Indictments in the CIA agent case?
Rumors, if not scuttlebutt in D.C. as to Cheney’s chief-of-staff Scooter Libby being one of three to be charged. If so, will those indictments be put off till after the election? And, if Bush wins, would they disappear? And if Kerry won, would he pardon those charged, based on ‘let’s move on’?
But, just rumors.
What’s Happening, Iraq: More deaths, still no resolution of Sadr ‘issue’.
The New Iraqi Army
Iraq's security forces, ordered to prepare for an offensive against the Mahdi Army in Najaf, have been plagued by a desertion rate that exceeded 80 percent.
A U.S. report warned that Iraqi Interior Ministry troops remain unprepared to fight Shi'ite or Sunni insurgents and could not be deemed reliable. The report, published before the current showdown in Najaf, said the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps, renamed the Iraqi National Guard, has not been trained to fight insurgents armed with rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons. http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2004/august/08_22_2.html
William Pfaff: Let’s Get Out: The International Tribune resource:
Why then is Ambassador John Negroponte in Iraq? He is now building up what is to become a 3,000-person U.S. mission to a nominally sovereign Iraq, whose new interim government is supposed to be taking political control of the country.It is reported that when the shooting started between the Marines and the Mahdi army, and Negroponte was informed that Sadr was summoning help, he "decided to pursue the case" - apparently meaning that he backed what the Marines had started, leading to the present stand-off in Najaf.The Falluja fiasco took place when Bremer was proconsul. It was Bremer who touched off the original clash with Sadr four months ago when he decided to shut down Sadr's radical newspaper - which "nobody read," as Bremer was warned at the time - and sent forces to arrest "or kill" Sadr. This provoked the earliest uprisings by Sadr's armed sympathizers in Najaf, Baghdad and elsewhere. The United States had subsequently to back down, at least temporarily.As a result, Sadr, who was originally a figure of minor and local consequence, was turned into a national leader of the Shiite community and a threat to that community's existing moderate leadership.This lack of political supervision of the Marines, and the responsibility of both Bremer and Negroponte in these confrontations, adds to an American record in Iraq that has displayed a persistent lack of common sense. The pursuit of Sadr has so far proved a political and military disaster. A policy of attacking large cities with armor, artillery and airpower in order to seize individuals defies reason.The fundamental question in Iraq is whether the United States should simply get out, cutting its losses now. There are many Americans who believe that, including this writer. But neither the Bush government nor the Kerry campaign wants to contemplate so enormous and desperate an act of common sense.The only chance of minimizing current costs is to do everything possible to lend legitimacy to the interim government and its chaotically formed new National Assembly. This means, above all, allowing it, and not the U.S. Marines, to run the country and to make the important security decisions. http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?file=534962.html
U.S. Forces heading for Azerbaijan?
News that the United States plans a massive redeployment of its armed forces has Azerbaijanis wondering whether their country will soon host US troops. Azerbaijani officials are coy on the base question, prompting some local political analysts to say Baku is trying to leverage the issue to achieve a breakthrough on the stalled talks on a Nagorno-Karabakh peace settlement.
Speculation over whether the United States would establish a military base in Azerbaijan began almost immediately after US leaders announced August 16 that up 70,000 US troops in Europe and East Asia would be redeployed. Most US soldiers appear headed back to the United States, but some will staff new facilities, in keeping with the Pentagon’s desire to create a more mobile armed forces. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. http://www.eurasianet.net/departments/insight/articles/eav082304_pr.shtml
Air America Radio: New outlets in Ann Arbor and San Diego
Conservative Disquiet (cont.)
(1) more Buchanan: Review essay by Justin Raimondo at antiwar.com
Buchanan shows how the small clique of neocons in this administration moved within hours of the 9/11 terrorist strike to divert the President's anger, and the nation's, toward Iraq, rather than Osama bin Laden. He strongly implies that the neocons exercised a thinly-veiled threat to abandon the President if he didn't take immediate action against Saddam Hussein:
"Nine days after an attack on the United States, this tiny clique of intellectuals was telling the President of the United States and commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces that if he did not follow their war plans, he would be publicly charged with a 'decisive surrender' to terrorism."
Buchanan tells the story of a President who was deceived into war, lied to by his own top advisors, and then led down the garden path by a bunch of war-maddened ideologues. I would tend to agree, but would add that this view would be strengthened by an analysis of why this course has been politically advantageous to the President and his party, particularly as it relates to the role of the Christian fundamentalist foot-soldiers who play such a vital role in the GOP electoral machine. http://antiwar.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Buchanan+Against+the+Empire-+by+Justin+Raimondo&expire=&urlID=11406120&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.antiwar.com%2Fjustin%2F%3Farticleid%3D3429&partnerID=16
(2)Weekly Standard’s Andrew Ferguson: They’re a conservative periodical…which makes this notable.
Yet, in 2004, Republicans find themselves supporting a candidate, George W. Bush, with a slender and ambiguous military record against a man whose combat heroism has never (until now) been disputed. Further--and here we'll let slip a thinly disguised secret--Republicans are supporting a candidate that relatively few of them find personally or politically appealing. This is not the choice Republicans are supposed to be faced with. The 1990s were far better. In those days the Democrats did the proper thing, nominating a draft-dodger to run against George H.W. Bush, who was the youngest combat pilot in the Pacific theater in World War II, and then later, in 1996, against Bob Dole, who left a portion of his body on the beach at Anzio.
Republicans have no such luck this time, and so they scramble to reassure themselves that they nevertheless are doing the right thing, voting against a war hero. The simplest way to do this is to convince themselves that the war hero isn't really a war hero. If sufficient doubt about Kerry's record can be raised, we can vote for Bush without remorse. But the calculations are transparently desperate. Reading some of the anti-Kerry attacks over the last several weeks, you might conclude that this is the new conservative position: A veteran who volunteered for combat duty, spent four months under fire in Vietnam, and then exaggerated a bit so he could go home early is the inferior, morally and otherwise, of a man who had his father pull strings so he wouldn't have to go to Vietnam in the first place. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/493kldgc.asp?pg=2
Florida Ballot: Newest problem: AP report:
Palm Beach County has introduced an absentee ballot that requires voters to indicate their choices by connecting broken arrows, sparking criticism that it is even more confusing than the infamous "butterfly ballot" used in the 2000 election.
Zogby Poll: Battleground States
Taken before the Swift Boat episode fully developed, it has Kerry’s lead in Minnesota and Michigan narrowing, now similar to the very slight leads in Missouri.
Note: New Hampshire is the only battleground state that looks to be safely in Kerry’s column.
All told, Mr. Kerry's lead is outside the margin of error in just three states -- Pennsylvania, Oregon and Washington -- and the president in just Ohio. If one considers only those results that are outside the margins of error, Mr. Kerry would cling to a lead of just 211-209 -- with 118 votes still up for grabs
In two crucial states -- Florida and Missouri -- Mr. Kerry's lead is tiny -- less than a percentage point. If both of those states, which have moved back and forth between the candidates over the course of Zogby's polling were to go Mr. Bush's way in the end, Mr. Kerry's lead would shrink to 286-252.
Finally, in five states, the Massachusetts senator leads by fewer than three percentage points. If all of those states went to Mr. Bush on Election Day, the president would win the election 274-264. http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-battleground04-an0823.html
But between the Vietnam issue and the GOP convention, you can bet this is changing. The question is by how much?
-R
How to Get Rid of This? Can’t; Stuck in a country that has a debased political discourse, featuring a dumbed-down public, a ‘non-journalistic’ press, and an official “opposition”- the Democrats- who aren’t as good at gutter politics as Republicans. It’s so nuts that the most powerful country in the world determines its elections by focusing on this nonsense. By these rules, the know-nothings tend to win. They will this time, unless Kerry makes Bush’s inveterate cowardice the issue, not Kerry’s military record. Tuesday will tell much, as he’s reported to be approaching such a position.
And, McCain: Please no more lionizing of him; he was a brave, honorable POW; he impressed me by his forging a close, respectful relationship with anti-Viet vet Kerry. But he loathes Bush, who not only said he betrayed the other POWs and had a black illegitimate child, but also targeted spouse Cindy McCain as a drug addict. Yet, he’s endorsing Bush, either so as to ‘help clean up the GOP or to consider running for Prez as a 70 year old in 2008. So, self-interest trumps principle. A politician.
The content? All the military records back up Kerry. That record has always been presumed to be accurate, yet the media plays it as ‘he said, she said,’ that there are two sides. So those who have been shown to be either inconsistent or liars and Kerry are assumed to be equally credible. This perfectly captures the right-wing talk show tact. Sean Hannity- for those who don’t listen, he’s popular. He has a refrain- “I don’t know what to believe”. Bob Dole, a true partisan, joins the fray and no one questions as to where he got his talking points, i.e. why should we be hearing from him?
If Kerry survives this and wins on November 2- it’s still early- he will face the ongoing noise machine of the Right. They’ve been at this since Nixon’s time. Chuck Colson and Murray Chotiner were there long before Lee Atwater and Karl Rove.
Now, we have hard core folk like Floyd Brown David Bossie and Citizens United.
Somerville’s own Chip Berlet has written about these guys.
The web banner for Citizens United explains that the group is dedicated to "Reasserting Traditional American Values: limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, national sovereignty and security."85 The group claims 150,000 members, but that is most likely a count of anyone who has sent money for projects touted in frequent direct mail appeals. The group has a member newsletter, Citizens Agenda, and a specialty periodical, ClintonWatch, sent to selected reporters and political activists.86
Citizens United is the project of Floyd G. Brown who published "Slick Willie:" Why America Cannot Trust Bill Clinton, a slim paperback book distributed as part of a direct mail fundraising effort. The book is a right-wing tirade designed to document Clinton's lack of character. What it also showed was that Brown unabashedly mixes sexism and homophobia in his conservative analysis http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/clinton/Clintonculwar8-12.html#P247_69030
Media: And as Bush makes the appallingly misleading comment, “I hope my opponent joins me in condemning all such activities”, at least some of the media fall for this line and make him sound righteous and resolute.
MSNBC: "Bush: Vets Should Halt anti-Kerry Ads”
CNN: “Bush urges Kerry to condemn attack ads."
Uh, Kerry did that about 12 days ago. No shame, no shame.
Time’s Joe Klein on the straight-jacketed Kerry: He’s controlled by his consultants/handlers, says Joe.
And yet, when Kerry spoke to the VFW two days later, he attacked Bush's position, using an argument with some merit but of microscopic import in the midst of a presidential campaign: he said it was a "hasty" and "political" plan and certainly not a good negotiating tactic to withdraw troops from Korea while we are trying to get the North Koreans to drop their nuclear program.
But oops. Some two weeks earlier, in an interview with George Stephanopoulos, Kerry had taken a different position: "I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just [in Iraq] but ... in the Korean peninsula, perhaps, in Europe, perhaps." As you might imagine, the Bush campaign quickly pointed out the inconsistency.
The stumble raises two basic questions about Kerry's campaign. First, is he a latter-day Ron Burgundy—the idiot 1970s anchorman of Will Ferrell's recent film who would read anything that appeared on his TelePrompTer? Did Kerry not remember what he had said to Stephanopoulos? No, it was, apparently, yet another Kerry nanonuance: he is in favor of redeployments, just not now. The second question is far more dire: Why is Kerry wasting breath on such periphera? Why isn't he hammering Bush on his conduct of the Iraq war and the larger war against Islamist radicalism, which is the most important issue in this election? The answer is politics. His political consultants don't want him to do it. Their focus groups tell them that the public wants an "optimistic" candidate who offers a "positive plan" rather than a "negative" candidate who criticizes the President. http://www.maxlogan.com/klein.0822.htm
Election Irregularities: The Florida – New York Connection
Is this true? If so, is it bad news?
Some 46,000 New Yorkers are registered to vote in both the city and Florida, a shocking finding that exposes both states to potential abuses that could alter the outcome of elections," a New York Daily News investigation shows."Registering in two places is illegal in both states, but the massive snowbird scandal goes undetected because election officials don't check rolls across state lines." http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/224449p-192807c.html
Kerry tried to focus on this today; it got a bit of coverage.
With the Bush campaign reportedly releasing another misleading ad tomorrow attacking John Kerry's plan to cut taxes for the middle class, the Kerry-Edwards campaign will pressure Bush to come clean about why he is shifting more of the tax burden on to working families, cutting overtime pay for six million people and covering up key details about his health care claims.
The campaign will also release a new report on what the impact of the new overtime rules will be on working families
Colombia: Oil, Violence, etc. It isn’t a pretty picture
Why has Arauca been singled out for "enhanced" security? One answer is oil. It is home to the Caño Limón oilfield, which accounts for 30% of Colombia's oil production. The oil is pumped to the Caribbean through a pipeline that has been a major target for guerrilla forces. Now a complex mosaic of armed groups - rightwing paramilitaries and the army, often working closely together, and leftwing guerrillas - struggle for control of the lucrative pipeline and cocaine routes.
The civil war is decades old but has grown more complex in recent years.
It’s too late for three citizens of the oil-rich north-east region of Arauca, on the border with Venezuela. They were murdered by the army on August 5. The men were all trade unionists, and their killings bring to 30 the number of unionists killed in Arauca so far this year. Last year, the US gave Colombia $99m to protect the pipeline, to be split between the 18th Brigade and a new mobile unit. President Bush also sent 60 US special forces personnel to Arauca to train the brigade http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=9&ItemID=6082
Israel - France: 2 notes
* New homes on the West Bank are being built. The U.S. does not oppose.
* The worst incident of recent anti-Semitism in France, as a cultural center was defaced and wrecked “in response to racist acts by Jews in France against Islam and the Muslims…and as a simple response to the racist and savage acts by Jews in Muslim countries like Palestine.”
North Korea:
Can’t forget them. They remind us of their presence by releasing striking statements
North Korea described US President George W. Bush as an "imbecile" and a "tyrant" who was worse than Adolph Hitler, and ruled out holding new talks on nuclear weapons with the United States. In an unusually strong attack, a North Korean foreign ministry spokesman said comments by Bush calling North Korea a tyrant during campaigning last week in Wisconsin were "malignant slanders and calumnies".
Oil:
Pepe Escobar of Asia Times. Always worth the time:
Welcome to peak oil According to HSBC, oil is now 136% - and counting - more expensive than before September 11, 2001. The United States - with 5% of the world's population - gobbles up no less than 26% of the world's oil production. Whatever the spin from the White House and the Pentagon, the fact is one of the key objectives in the whole Iraqi adventure - completely in line with Dick Cheney's 2001 energy report - was to take over the world's second-largest oil reserves, extirpate Iraq from the much-hated OPEC and maybe kill the cartel for good. Last May in Houston, Asia Times Online confirmed that even the oil business didn't think this was a good idea. The crumbling Iraq oil infrastructure - on the most optimistic of days - currently cannot produce more than 1.8 million barrels, and much less export it. The Iraqi resistance knows how formidable a weapon is the regular bombing of either the northern pipeline from Kirkuk to Ceyhan, Turkey, or the southern pipeline from Basra. Whenever there is a bombing - or an interruption in pumping because of workers condemning the offensive against Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in Najaf - production in Basra falls to less than 1 million barrels a day. It's always important to remember that even under United Nations sanctions, Iraq exported at least 2.5 million barrels a day.
The strength of the dollar is guaranteed above all by a secret agreement signed between the US and Saudi Arabia in the 1970s that all OPEC oil sales be denominated in dollars. Saddam Hussein started selling Iraqi oil in euros (and making a handsome profit) in November 2000 - and that's another crucial reason for the Iraqi invasion. Many OPEC countries, not to mention Russia (President Vladimir Putin already referred to it on the record), flirt with the idea of trading their oil in euros. (OPEC is made up of Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela.) A recent analysis published by Goldmoney states that OPEC has already switched, in fact, to trading oil in euros - as oil-exporting countries fight to offset the weak dollar, "It seems clear that OPEC and the other oil exporters are already pricing crude oil in terms of euros, at least tacitly. Whether they start invoicing their crude oil sales in terms of euros remains to be seen." So what is Cheney doing in the middle of this crisis? He's blaming the Democrats. The failure of Cheney's Russia strategy will be examined in a separate article. But as far as Iraq is concerned, the blowback is obvious. The neo-cons dreamed of exporting "democracy". Instead, they imported geopolitical instability - reflected in the rising price of oil. The Bush administration has not been rewarded with cheap oil: it is now facing a new, slow, mutating oil shock.
Oil at $50 a barrel, and on its way to $60, is an absolute disaster for oil-importing countries (and this means most of the world). Business costs are automatically higher - leading in many cases to job cuts, which means higher unemployment. The days of cheap oil may be over - as most analysts agree. But beyond the current hysteria over oil at $50 and the failure of Cheney's US energy policy, the world seems to be failing to address at least four extremely important questions on which the common future depends: how much oil - proven reserves - is left in the Middle East? How much oil does Russia have? What is the real amount of proven reserves in the Caspian Sea? How long will all this oil last? http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/FH24Dj01.html
Plame Outing: Indictments in the CIA agent case?
Rumors, if not scuttlebutt in D.C. as to Cheney’s chief-of-staff Scooter Libby being one of three to be charged. If so, will those indictments be put off till after the election? And, if Bush wins, would they disappear? And if Kerry won, would he pardon those charged, based on ‘let’s move on’?
But, just rumors.
What’s Happening, Iraq: More deaths, still no resolution of Sadr ‘issue’.
The New Iraqi Army
Iraq's security forces, ordered to prepare for an offensive against the Mahdi Army in Najaf, have been plagued by a desertion rate that exceeded 80 percent.
A U.S. report warned that Iraqi Interior Ministry troops remain unprepared to fight Shi'ite or Sunni insurgents and could not be deemed reliable. The report, published before the current showdown in Najaf, said the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps, renamed the Iraqi National Guard, has not been trained to fight insurgents armed with rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons. http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2004/august/08_22_2.html
William Pfaff: Let’s Get Out: The International Tribune resource:
Why then is Ambassador John Negroponte in Iraq? He is now building up what is to become a 3,000-person U.S. mission to a nominally sovereign Iraq, whose new interim government is supposed to be taking political control of the country.It is reported that when the shooting started between the Marines and the Mahdi army, and Negroponte was informed that Sadr was summoning help, he "decided to pursue the case" - apparently meaning that he backed what the Marines had started, leading to the present stand-off in Najaf.The Falluja fiasco took place when Bremer was proconsul. It was Bremer who touched off the original clash with Sadr four months ago when he decided to shut down Sadr's radical newspaper - which "nobody read," as Bremer was warned at the time - and sent forces to arrest "or kill" Sadr. This provoked the earliest uprisings by Sadr's armed sympathizers in Najaf, Baghdad and elsewhere. The United States had subsequently to back down, at least temporarily.As a result, Sadr, who was originally a figure of minor and local consequence, was turned into a national leader of the Shiite community and a threat to that community's existing moderate leadership.This lack of political supervision of the Marines, and the responsibility of both Bremer and Negroponte in these confrontations, adds to an American record in Iraq that has displayed a persistent lack of common sense. The pursuit of Sadr has so far proved a political and military disaster. A policy of attacking large cities with armor, artillery and airpower in order to seize individuals defies reason.The fundamental question in Iraq is whether the United States should simply get out, cutting its losses now. There are many Americans who believe that, including this writer. But neither the Bush government nor the Kerry campaign wants to contemplate so enormous and desperate an act of common sense.The only chance of minimizing current costs is to do everything possible to lend legitimacy to the interim government and its chaotically formed new National Assembly. This means, above all, allowing it, and not the U.S. Marines, to run the country and to make the important security decisions. http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?file=534962.html
U.S. Forces heading for Azerbaijan?
News that the United States plans a massive redeployment of its armed forces has Azerbaijanis wondering whether their country will soon host US troops. Azerbaijani officials are coy on the base question, prompting some local political analysts to say Baku is trying to leverage the issue to achieve a breakthrough on the stalled talks on a Nagorno-Karabakh peace settlement.
Speculation over whether the United States would establish a military base in Azerbaijan began almost immediately after US leaders announced August 16 that up 70,000 US troops in Europe and East Asia would be redeployed. Most US soldiers appear headed back to the United States, but some will staff new facilities, in keeping with the Pentagon’s desire to create a more mobile armed forces. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. http://www.eurasianet.net/departments/insight/articles/eav082304_pr.shtml
Air America Radio: New outlets in Ann Arbor and San Diego
Conservative Disquiet (cont.)
(1) more Buchanan: Review essay by Justin Raimondo at antiwar.com
Buchanan shows how the small clique of neocons in this administration moved within hours of the 9/11 terrorist strike to divert the President's anger, and the nation's, toward Iraq, rather than Osama bin Laden. He strongly implies that the neocons exercised a thinly-veiled threat to abandon the President if he didn't take immediate action against Saddam Hussein:
"Nine days after an attack on the United States, this tiny clique of intellectuals was telling the President of the United States and commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces that if he did not follow their war plans, he would be publicly charged with a 'decisive surrender' to terrorism."
Buchanan tells the story of a President who was deceived into war, lied to by his own top advisors, and then led down the garden path by a bunch of war-maddened ideologues. I would tend to agree, but would add that this view would be strengthened by an analysis of why this course has been politically advantageous to the President and his party, particularly as it relates to the role of the Christian fundamentalist foot-soldiers who play such a vital role in the GOP electoral machine. http://antiwar.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Buchanan+Against+the+Empire-+by+Justin+Raimondo&expire=&urlID=11406120&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.antiwar.com%2Fjustin%2F%3Farticleid%3D3429&partnerID=16
(2)Weekly Standard’s Andrew Ferguson: They’re a conservative periodical…which makes this notable.
Yet, in 2004, Republicans find themselves supporting a candidate, George W. Bush, with a slender and ambiguous military record against a man whose combat heroism has never (until now) been disputed. Further--and here we'll let slip a thinly disguised secret--Republicans are supporting a candidate that relatively few of them find personally or politically appealing. This is not the choice Republicans are supposed to be faced with. The 1990s were far better. In those days the Democrats did the proper thing, nominating a draft-dodger to run against George H.W. Bush, who was the youngest combat pilot in the Pacific theater in World War II, and then later, in 1996, against Bob Dole, who left a portion of his body on the beach at Anzio.
Republicans have no such luck this time, and so they scramble to reassure themselves that they nevertheless are doing the right thing, voting against a war hero. The simplest way to do this is to convince themselves that the war hero isn't really a war hero. If sufficient doubt about Kerry's record can be raised, we can vote for Bush without remorse. But the calculations are transparently desperate. Reading some of the anti-Kerry attacks over the last several weeks, you might conclude that this is the new conservative position: A veteran who volunteered for combat duty, spent four months under fire in Vietnam, and then exaggerated a bit so he could go home early is the inferior, morally and otherwise, of a man who had his father pull strings so he wouldn't have to go to Vietnam in the first place. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/493kldgc.asp?pg=2
Florida Ballot: Newest problem: AP report:
Palm Beach County has introduced an absentee ballot that requires voters to indicate their choices by connecting broken arrows, sparking criticism that it is even more confusing than the infamous "butterfly ballot" used in the 2000 election.
Zogby Poll: Battleground States
Taken before the Swift Boat episode fully developed, it has Kerry’s lead in Minnesota and Michigan narrowing, now similar to the very slight leads in Missouri.
Note: New Hampshire is the only battleground state that looks to be safely in Kerry’s column.
All told, Mr. Kerry's lead is outside the margin of error in just three states -- Pennsylvania, Oregon and Washington -- and the president in just Ohio. If one considers only those results that are outside the margins of error, Mr. Kerry would cling to a lead of just 211-209 -- with 118 votes still up for grabs
In two crucial states -- Florida and Missouri -- Mr. Kerry's lead is tiny -- less than a percentage point. If both of those states, which have moved back and forth between the candidates over the course of Zogby's polling were to go Mr. Bush's way in the end, Mr. Kerry's lead would shrink to 286-252.
Finally, in five states, the Massachusetts senator leads by fewer than three percentage points. If all of those states went to Mr. Bush on Election Day, the president would win the election 274-264. http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-battleground04-an0823.html
But between the Vietnam issue and the GOP convention, you can bet this is changing. The question is by how much?
-R
