Thursday, April 01, 2004
Peter Ustinov, who died on Monday, was known to us as a stage and screen actor, or as a fine narrator of Babar and Peter and the Wolf (!) Less known is his quote re terrorism: "Terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich."
Air America premiered yesterday. While it has but 5 outlets at present, it is on the net here http://www.airamericaradio.com/. First impression is that the liberal talk network is a bit tamer than one would want, but it’s early to judge.
9/11 Commission Compromise: Kid Glove Treatment for the Bushies:
Galling compromise that allows Condi to testify on the conditions that no other White House folk can be called. So, no follow-up and she can blame anyone she chooses. Equally absurd was allowing W and Cheney to appear together. I’m hardly the only one to wonder as to the request itself: Is this the most obvious ‘we don’t trust George’, to ensure that they don’t contradict one another? I can’t be the only one to think of how other venues would not allow such. Sopranos fans think of Tony and Christopher (or Silvio) being brought in by the Feds and being questioned together. Likely!
Meanwhile, another piece that recalls that prior to 9/11 the Bush Administration was only focused on strategic defense, not terrorism. In fact, strategic defense was seen as THE response to any and all threats, including terrorism! As Robin Wright notes in the Washington Post Condi Rice was to give a speech on September 11, 2001 that barely referred to terrorism, only criticizing Clinton for OVER-emphasizing transnational terrorism at the expense of missile defense! Case closed…again.
Top Focus Before 9/11 Wasn't on Terrorism
On Sept. 11, 2001, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was scheduled to outline a Bush administration policy that would address "the threats and problems of today and the day after, not the world of yesterday" -- but the focus was largely on missile defense, not terrorism from Islamic radicals. http://65.54.186.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=342f2a5d09d36e6c9b2f0c23f5a39ab7&lat=1080827790&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fletters%2ewashingtonpost%2ecom%2fW3RH0597201C74672B7593E146203
Dana Milbank and Dan Eggen raised questions re the White House counsel calling a 9/11 panelist prior to Clarke’s appearance, who then made the most vigorous questioning of Clarke.
President Bush's top lawyer placed a telephone call to at least one of the Republican members of the Sept. 11 commission when the panel was gathered in Washington on March 24 to hear the testimony of former White House counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clarke, according to people with direct knowledge of the call.
White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales called commissioner Fred F. Fielding, one of five GOP members of the body, and, according to one observer, also called Republican commission member James R. Thompson. Rep. Henry A. Waxman, the ranking Democrat on the House Government Reform Committee, wrote to Gonzales yesterday asking him to confirm and describe the conversations.
Waxman said "it would be unusual if such ex parte contacts occurred" during the hearing. Waxman did not allege that there would be anything illegal in such phone calls. But he suggested that such contacts would be improper because "the conduct of the White House is one of the key issues being investigated by the commission."
White House spokesmen were unable to get a response from Gonzales.
Fielding did not return phone calls seeking comment.
Thompson declined yesterday to say whether he spoke with Gonzales. "I never talk about conversations with the White House," he said. Asked about the source of his information for his questioning of Clarke, Thompson said: "I ask my own questions."
During the commission's 21/2 hours of questioning Clarke, Fielding and Thompson presented evidence questioning the former official's credibility. http://65.54.186.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=c4ad2da40d2eb9067bab53714c125eed&lat=1080827790&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fletters%2ewashingtonpost%2ecom%2fW3RH0597203C64672B7593E146203
Maureen Dowd has a fine summary…in her style:
The Vice President will not address any queries about why no one reacted to George Tenet's daily "hair on fire" alarms to the President about a coming Al Qaeda attack; or why the President was so consumed with chopping and burning cedar on his Crawford ranch that he ignored the warning in an Aug. 6, 2001, briefing that Al Qaeda might try to hijack aircraft; or why the President asked for a plan to combat Al Qaeda in May and then never followed up while Richard Clarke's aggressive plan was suffocated by second-raters; or why the President was never briefed by his counterterrorism chief on anything but cybersecurity until Sept. 11; or why the Administration-in-amber made so many cold war assumptions, such as thinking that terrorists had to be sponsored by a state even as terrorists had taken over a state; or why the President went along with the Vice President and the neocons to fool the American public into believing that Saddam had a hand in the 9/11 attacks; or why the Administration chose to undercut the war on terrorism and inflame the Arab world by attacking Iraq, without a plan to protect our perilously overextended forces or to exit with a realistic hope that a democracy will be left behind.
The Commission must not, under any circumstances, ask the Vice President why American soldiers and civilians in Iraq are being greeted with barbarous infernos rather than flowery bouquets.
Finally, we request that when the President finishes with this painful teeth-pulling visit, the Commission shall offer him a lollipop. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/01/opinion/01DOWD.html
Whoops: Talking Points found at Starbucks
Al Kamen of the Washington Post reported on White House notes, apparently meant to prep Rumsfeld, being left at a Dupont Circle store. They were then dispatched to the Center for American Progress:
"Took threat v seriously and then segue to wh we have been doing. Rise above [ Richard A.] Clarke.
"Emphasize importance of 9/11 commission and come back to what we have been doing.
"[Commission member Jamie] Gorelick pitting Condi [ Condoleezza Rice] v. [Deputy Secretary of State Richard] Armitage
"Our plan had military plans to attack Al Q -- called on def to draw up targets in Afg -- develop mil options."
There's an underlined notation "DR" in the margin and a quotation, apparently from DR, perhaps Rumsfeld, to "Stay inside the line -- we dont need 2 ruff [or puff] this at all. we need 2b careful as hell about it. This thing will go away soon and what will keep it alive will be one of us going over the line."
A third sheet is dated Saturday, 4:30 p.m., and headed "Possible Q's for Sunday Talk Shows," but there are no answers.
A fourth sheet describes actions taken to change a policy of treating terrorism as a law enforcement matter to treating it as war.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37321-2004Mar30.html
Sidney Blumenthal on Bush humor re wmd
The former WCAS newsman (Cambridge AM radio, 1975-80) and Clinton staffer registered his thoughts in the Guardian as to the appropriateness of Bush making fun of the wmd being no where to be found.
With each gag the press corps roared. Bush was acting as the college fraternity house president he once was and the journalists as pledges eager for acceptance by the Big Man on Campus. "I'm the commander - see, I don't need to explain - I do not need to explain why I say things," Bush told Bob Woodward in Bush at War. "That's the interesting thing about being president."
Through its laughter the press corps didn't grasp that the joke was on them…
The Clarke episode is symptomatic of a systematic abuse of power. Reality is raw and dangerous to report - better to laugh along. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1183425,00.html
What’s Happening, Iraq: The killing of 4 security contractors and 5 GIs led to a more downbeat assessment by Paul Bremer, who is now noting that it will be “at least a year” before Iraq’s police could be in control. Jeffrey Gettleman reported on NPR and the NY Times as to the evaporation of recent optimism.
Most of the Sunni Triangle, north and west of Baghdad, has become so unsafe that American forces stick to their bases, their movement usually limited to heavily guarded convoys. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/01/international/middleeast/01IRAQ.html
John Burns notes the perspective of the generals:
But along with the publicly expressed confidence, there are hints that American generals are not as sure as they were only weeks ago that they have turned a corner in the conflict. Nor do the scenes from Falluja on Wednesday — Iraqis mutilating American bodies, and crowds cheering at the sight — appear to fit the theory put forward by the American military that Islamic militants, including foreigners, rather than Iraqi supporters of Saddam Hussein, are increasingly behind terrorist attacks. Falluja, 30 miles west of Baghdad, has been the volatile center of support for the toppled dictator, and a bellwether of the wider war. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/01/international/middleeast/01ASSE.html?hp
Political Strategy: Jonathan Steele notes in the Guardian that the U.S. strategy may be to appoint a Shia technocrat, altering the plan to expand the governing council:
The United States will transfer power in Iraq to a hand-picked prime minister, abandoning plans for an expansion of the current 25-member governing council, according to coalition officials in Baghdad.
With fewer than 100 days before the US occupation authorities are due to transfer sovereignty, fear of wrangling among Iraqi politicians has forced Washington to make its third switch of strategy in six months.
The search is now on for an Iraqi to serve as chief executive. He will almost certainly be from the Shia Muslim majority, and probably a secular technocrat. http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1179077,00.html
Kerry Surgery:
His generally lower profile and the ongoing negative ads have eliminated his recent lead in polls and driven up his negatives. The Franklin and Marshall Keystone Poll also has him now trailing Bush in Pennsylvania. But, it’s only April…
Republican Ethical Lapse
Still another: The Wall Street Journal reported on the Treasury calculating the cost of Kerry’s ostensible tax plan and posting its analysis on the Treasury web site. Then, the RNC issued a press release that cited the Treasury’s ‘finding.’ Yet, a federal law bars government officials from working on political campaigns. The White House quickly seized the offense through its accusations that the Dems are illegally raising funds through sympathetic web campaigns.." http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB108069824631269856,00.html?mod=home_whats_news_us
Uzbekistan Violence:
Important to note, especially in view of its geography…
As many as 23 people were reported dead on Tuesday in bombings and gun battles in Uzbekistan during a third day of violence in a strategic ally of the United States that borders Afghanistan.
The government immediately blamed local Muslim militants with ties to international terrorism. Human rights groups and independent analysts said they feared a new crackdown in a nation that already holds an estimated 7,000 political prisoners.
Human rights groups and other analysts say the Muslim organization blamed by the government, Hizb ut-Tahrir, does not have a record of violence and has been the target of repression for years. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/31/international/asia/31UZBE.html
Woodward Contrition?
Rumors that Bob Woodward will make up for his overly laudatory account of Bush at War by being much more critical of the Administration in his Plan of Attack, an account of the “war on terrorism”. The book will be released later this month and he will be interviewed by 60 Minutes on April 18.
-R
Air America premiered yesterday. While it has but 5 outlets at present, it is on the net here http://www.airamericaradio.com/. First impression is that the liberal talk network is a bit tamer than one would want, but it’s early to judge.
9/11 Commission Compromise: Kid Glove Treatment for the Bushies:
Galling compromise that allows Condi to testify on the conditions that no other White House folk can be called. So, no follow-up and she can blame anyone she chooses. Equally absurd was allowing W and Cheney to appear together. I’m hardly the only one to wonder as to the request itself: Is this the most obvious ‘we don’t trust George’, to ensure that they don’t contradict one another? I can’t be the only one to think of how other venues would not allow such. Sopranos fans think of Tony and Christopher (or Silvio) being brought in by the Feds and being questioned together. Likely!
Meanwhile, another piece that recalls that prior to 9/11 the Bush Administration was only focused on strategic defense, not terrorism. In fact, strategic defense was seen as THE response to any and all threats, including terrorism! As Robin Wright notes in the Washington Post Condi Rice was to give a speech on September 11, 2001 that barely referred to terrorism, only criticizing Clinton for OVER-emphasizing transnational terrorism at the expense of missile defense! Case closed…again.
Top Focus Before 9/11 Wasn't on Terrorism
On Sept. 11, 2001, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was scheduled to outline a Bush administration policy that would address "the threats and problems of today and the day after, not the world of yesterday" -- but the focus was largely on missile defense, not terrorism from Islamic radicals. http://65.54.186.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=342f2a5d09d36e6c9b2f0c23f5a39ab7&lat=1080827790&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fletters%2ewashingtonpost%2ecom%2fW3RH0597201C74672B7593E146203
Dana Milbank and Dan Eggen raised questions re the White House counsel calling a 9/11 panelist prior to Clarke’s appearance, who then made the most vigorous questioning of Clarke.
President Bush's top lawyer placed a telephone call to at least one of the Republican members of the Sept. 11 commission when the panel was gathered in Washington on March 24 to hear the testimony of former White House counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clarke, according to people with direct knowledge of the call.
White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales called commissioner Fred F. Fielding, one of five GOP members of the body, and, according to one observer, also called Republican commission member James R. Thompson. Rep. Henry A. Waxman, the ranking Democrat on the House Government Reform Committee, wrote to Gonzales yesterday asking him to confirm and describe the conversations.
Waxman said "it would be unusual if such ex parte contacts occurred" during the hearing. Waxman did not allege that there would be anything illegal in such phone calls. But he suggested that such contacts would be improper because "the conduct of the White House is one of the key issues being investigated by the commission."
White House spokesmen were unable to get a response from Gonzales.
Fielding did not return phone calls seeking comment.
Thompson declined yesterday to say whether he spoke with Gonzales. "I never talk about conversations with the White House," he said. Asked about the source of his information for his questioning of Clarke, Thompson said: "I ask my own questions."
During the commission's 21/2 hours of questioning Clarke, Fielding and Thompson presented evidence questioning the former official's credibility. http://65.54.186.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=c4ad2da40d2eb9067bab53714c125eed&lat=1080827790&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fletters%2ewashingtonpost%2ecom%2fW3RH0597203C64672B7593E146203
Maureen Dowd has a fine summary…in her style:
The Vice President will not address any queries about why no one reacted to George Tenet's daily "hair on fire" alarms to the President about a coming Al Qaeda attack; or why the President was so consumed with chopping and burning cedar on his Crawford ranch that he ignored the warning in an Aug. 6, 2001, briefing that Al Qaeda might try to hijack aircraft; or why the President asked for a plan to combat Al Qaeda in May and then never followed up while Richard Clarke's aggressive plan was suffocated by second-raters; or why the President was never briefed by his counterterrorism chief on anything but cybersecurity until Sept. 11; or why the Administration-in-amber made so many cold war assumptions, such as thinking that terrorists had to be sponsored by a state even as terrorists had taken over a state; or why the President went along with the Vice President and the neocons to fool the American public into believing that Saddam had a hand in the 9/11 attacks; or why the Administration chose to undercut the war on terrorism and inflame the Arab world by attacking Iraq, without a plan to protect our perilously overextended forces or to exit with a realistic hope that a democracy will be left behind.
The Commission must not, under any circumstances, ask the Vice President why American soldiers and civilians in Iraq are being greeted with barbarous infernos rather than flowery bouquets.
Finally, we request that when the President finishes with this painful teeth-pulling visit, the Commission shall offer him a lollipop. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/01/opinion/01DOWD.html
Whoops: Talking Points found at Starbucks
Al Kamen of the Washington Post reported on White House notes, apparently meant to prep Rumsfeld, being left at a Dupont Circle store. They were then dispatched to the Center for American Progress:
"Took threat v seriously and then segue to wh we have been doing. Rise above [ Richard A.] Clarke.
"Emphasize importance of 9/11 commission and come back to what we have been doing.
"[Commission member Jamie] Gorelick pitting Condi [ Condoleezza Rice] v. [Deputy Secretary of State Richard] Armitage
"Our plan had military plans to attack Al Q -- called on def to draw up targets in Afg -- develop mil options."
There's an underlined notation "DR" in the margin and a quotation, apparently from DR, perhaps Rumsfeld, to "Stay inside the line -- we dont need 2 ruff [or puff] this at all. we need 2b careful as hell about it. This thing will go away soon and what will keep it alive will be one of us going over the line."
A third sheet is dated Saturday, 4:30 p.m., and headed "Possible Q's for Sunday Talk Shows," but there are no answers.
A fourth sheet describes actions taken to change a policy of treating terrorism as a law enforcement matter to treating it as war.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37321-2004Mar30.html
Sidney Blumenthal on Bush humor re wmd
The former WCAS newsman (Cambridge AM radio, 1975-80) and Clinton staffer registered his thoughts in the Guardian as to the appropriateness of Bush making fun of the wmd being no where to be found.
With each gag the press corps roared. Bush was acting as the college fraternity house president he once was and the journalists as pledges eager for acceptance by the Big Man on Campus. "I'm the commander - see, I don't need to explain - I do not need to explain why I say things," Bush told Bob Woodward in Bush at War. "That's the interesting thing about being president."
Through its laughter the press corps didn't grasp that the joke was on them…
The Clarke episode is symptomatic of a systematic abuse of power. Reality is raw and dangerous to report - better to laugh along. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1183425,00.html
What’s Happening, Iraq: The killing of 4 security contractors and 5 GIs led to a more downbeat assessment by Paul Bremer, who is now noting that it will be “at least a year” before Iraq’s police could be in control. Jeffrey Gettleman reported on NPR and the NY Times as to the evaporation of recent optimism.
Most of the Sunni Triangle, north and west of Baghdad, has become so unsafe that American forces stick to their bases, their movement usually limited to heavily guarded convoys. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/01/international/middleeast/01IRAQ.html
John Burns notes the perspective of the generals:
But along with the publicly expressed confidence, there are hints that American generals are not as sure as they were only weeks ago that they have turned a corner in the conflict. Nor do the scenes from Falluja on Wednesday — Iraqis mutilating American bodies, and crowds cheering at the sight — appear to fit the theory put forward by the American military that Islamic militants, including foreigners, rather than Iraqi supporters of Saddam Hussein, are increasingly behind terrorist attacks. Falluja, 30 miles west of Baghdad, has been the volatile center of support for the toppled dictator, and a bellwether of the wider war. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/01/international/middleeast/01ASSE.html?hp
Political Strategy: Jonathan Steele notes in the Guardian that the U.S. strategy may be to appoint a Shia technocrat, altering the plan to expand the governing council:
The United States will transfer power in Iraq to a hand-picked prime minister, abandoning plans for an expansion of the current 25-member governing council, according to coalition officials in Baghdad.
With fewer than 100 days before the US occupation authorities are due to transfer sovereignty, fear of wrangling among Iraqi politicians has forced Washington to make its third switch of strategy in six months.
The search is now on for an Iraqi to serve as chief executive. He will almost certainly be from the Shia Muslim majority, and probably a secular technocrat. http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1179077,00.html
Kerry Surgery:
His generally lower profile and the ongoing negative ads have eliminated his recent lead in polls and driven up his negatives. The Franklin and Marshall Keystone Poll also has him now trailing Bush in Pennsylvania. But, it’s only April…
Republican Ethical Lapse
Still another: The Wall Street Journal reported on the Treasury calculating the cost of Kerry’s ostensible tax plan and posting its analysis on the Treasury web site. Then, the RNC issued a press release that cited the Treasury’s ‘finding.’ Yet, a federal law bars government officials from working on political campaigns. The White House quickly seized the offense through its accusations that the Dems are illegally raising funds through sympathetic web campaigns.." http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB108069824631269856,00.html?mod=home_whats_news_us
Uzbekistan Violence:
Important to note, especially in view of its geography…
As many as 23 people were reported dead on Tuesday in bombings and gun battles in Uzbekistan during a third day of violence in a strategic ally of the United States that borders Afghanistan.
The government immediately blamed local Muslim militants with ties to international terrorism. Human rights groups and independent analysts said they feared a new crackdown in a nation that already holds an estimated 7,000 political prisoners.
Human rights groups and other analysts say the Muslim organization blamed by the government, Hizb ut-Tahrir, does not have a record of violence and has been the target of repression for years. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/31/international/asia/31UZBE.html
Woodward Contrition?
Rumors that Bob Woodward will make up for his overly laudatory account of Bush at War by being much more critical of the Administration in his Plan of Attack, an account of the “war on terrorism”. The book will be released later this month and he will be interviewed by 60 Minutes on April 18.
-R
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
Blog Return: I was away, in Australia and Viet Nam. I’ll limit myself to apt political points.
- Australia’s P.M. John Howard, who has studiously followed a pro-Cheney line, is in possible trouble, a candidate to join Spain’s Aznar as a casualty of their joining the deceitful Bush Administration in Iraq. The opposition’s mis-steps, however, may yet save him.
- Viet Nam’s population is predominantly young and doesn’t tend to focus on the American war on Vietnam, ancient history to many. Yet, their nationalism and knowledge and understanding of the past is keen. Huge throngs visit Ho Chi Minh’s embalmed body and the nearby War Museum each and every day.
- Agent Orange remains a focus. Though with an almost dispassionate tone, periodicals note the ongoing damage to Agent Orange victims. There’s also modest, consistent noting of the lawsuit in US Federal Courts against the companies that produced the 76 million litres that were sprayed on victims during Operation Ranch Hand. (Quaint!) One activity has been a petition calling on Bush, other governmental officials and the chemical companies to compensate Victnamese victims.
- Dien Bien Phu is the focus of the year, as this is the 50 year anniversary of the final battle that kicked out the French. Veterans, in full uniform, were most evident in Hanoi.
- Viet Nam is poor, but striving and competent, witness their masterful bridge building (U.S. planes bombed out all of northern Vietnam’s bridges during the American War). Development is everywhere, at the usual cost of pollution and dislocation. Motorbikes have taken over Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi.
- Like many other countries, Australia is forging partnerships with Viet Nam. I talked with the Dean of U. of South Australia’s Ed School who was heading to Hanoi to set up a campus in Hanoi; another school, the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology had similarly decided to open a second campus in Viet Nam.
- The focus of the international community was on the disputed Korean election and the implications of the assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. One other issue- the notable attempt to trap important al-Qaeda “assets” in Pakistan- was a charade that is well-summed up by Aziz-ud-DinAhmad:
In the meanwhile prodding from Washington continues unabated. There are a number of US officials, some acting as good cops, others as bad cops trying to push Gen. Musharraf in their peculiar ways to do more to help them. On Sunday Zalmay Khalilzad told Associated Press that two Taliban commanders located in Pakistan were orchestrating attacks inside southern Afghanistan while some of the al-Qaeda leaders were also there. While a Foreign Office spokesman has strongly reacted to the statement, there is likely to be more action in the tribal areas to please the Americans. Unless the government combines puts more emphasis on persuasion, the ongoing operation tied up with the agenda of the American elections could lead to disastrous results http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/Mar-2004/25/EDITOR/op3.asp
Passing through L.A., I noted the LA Times had produced still another account of the pre-war intelligence distortions, that Colin Powell’s infamous UN presentation was heavily reliant on details from a discredited source. Bob Drogin’s and Greg Miller’s account of defector “Curveball” notes that
Curveball's story has since crumbled under doubts raised by the Germans and the scrutiny of U.S. weapons hunters, who have come to see his code name as particularly apt, given the problems that beset much of the prewar intelligence collection and analysis. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/complete/la-fg-curveball28mar28,1,6627511,print.story?coll=la-home-headlines
I return to an improved political situation. Over the last months, an accumulation of incidents and the Dean campaign has helped the Democrats and the media to begin to find their voice. It’s good to see that the culture no longer focuses on Dick Clark, the eternally youthful host of American Bandstand and New Year’s Eve. Now Dick Clarke is The Man.
Working backwards, the Administration activities have become more transparent. Last night’s NBC report wrapped with the following:
U.S. officials told NBC News that the full record of Clarke’s testimony two years ago would not be declassified. They said that at the request of the White House, however, the CIA was going through the transcript to see what could be declassified, with an eye toward pointing out contradictions. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4623066/
Wow; to admit to your dirty tricks when chatting with the press on ‘background’…
Clarke has won the initial rounds; the lies and contradictions in defending them have been all too obvious. The claims that they were always focused on terrorism- we all remember that tax cuts and strategic defense were the entire agenda pre 9/11.
Let’s recall: On 4/30/01 the Bush Administration’s released the annual report on terrorism. It broke with previous Administrations when it decided to specifically de-emphasize bin Laden. http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0104/30/ip.00.html
Then, keep in mind Bush’s comment that "Prior to September the 11th, we thought oceans could protect us." Yet, Warren Rudman and Gary Hart’s Commission on National Security had warned in January of 2001 of massive attacks on the U.S. Yet that report was essentially rejected. Instead, Cheney announced that he would head a task force to analyze the threat himself. The Administration then slowly assembled this group over a five month period and never did hold a meeting prior to 9/11.
Clarke was oh so clear on Tim Russert’s show http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4608698/ where he demolished the charges against him.
MR. CLARKE: Well, I think that this is part of a general pattern of the White House and the Republican National Committee and the president's re-election committee distributing talking points like that to senators and to press and to media trying to make me the issue and trying to engage in character assassination. I'm not the issue. Now, we can talk about the specifics of their allegations.
MR. RUSSERT: Is there any inconsistency between your sworn testimony before the September 11 Commission last week and two years ago before the congressional committee?
MR. CLARKE: No, there isn't. And I would welcome it being declassified, but not just a little line here or there. Let's declassify all six hours of my testimony.
MR. RUSSERT: You would request this morning that it all be declassified?
MR. CLARKE: And I want more declassified. I want Dr. Rice's testimony before the 9-11 Commission declassified, and I want the thing that the 9-11 Commission talked about in its staff report this week declassified, because there's been an issue about whether or not a strategy or a plan or something useful was given to Dr. Rice in early January. And she says it wasn't. So we now have the staff report of the 9-11 Commission, and it says, "On January 25th, Clarke forwarded his December strategy paper to the new national security adviser, and it proposed covert action to the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, significantly increasing CIA funding, retaliating for the USS Cole, arming the Predator aircraft, going after terrorist fund raising."
Now, Dr. Rice has characterized this as not a plan, not a strategy, not a series of decisions which could be made right away, but warmed-over Clinton material. Let's declassify that memo I sent on January 25th and let's declassify the national security directive that Dr. Rice's committee approved nine months later on September 4th, and let's see if there's any difference between those two, because there isn't. And what we'll see when we declassify what they were given on January 25th and what they finally agreed to on September 4th, is that they're basically the same thing and they wasted months when we could have had some action.
The Administration ignored Sandy Berger’s warning that they will (need to) focus on bin Laden. Instead, the Administration persisted in their emphasis on states as the cause of terrorism, not groups that are not reliant on state sponsors but are merely housed in host states. Newsweek’s Fareed Zakaria tackled this and noted the incessant obsession of doing the opposite of Clinton.
The Bush team, distrustful of anything Clinton's people said, did not see Al Qaeda as an urgent threat. They held few meetings on it and in other ways were inattentive to it. One example from the panel's report: the senior Pentagon official responsible for counterterrorism is the assistant secretary for special operations and low-intensity conflict. Even by September 11, 2001, no one had been appointed to that post.
The Bush administration came to office with different concerns. During the 1990s conservative intellectuals and policy wonks sounded the alarm about China, North Korea, Cuba, Iran and Iraq, but not about terror. Real men dealt with states. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4615876/
And, yet, after 9/11, that orientation continued, as Iraq and the rest of the axis of evil became the focus, not the difficult-to-find bin Laden.
Then, there’s the perverse Bill Frist accusing Clarke of perjury, and Crossfire’s Robert Novak- the ‘outer’ of Valerie Plame- pathetically claiming reduced the issue to Clarke being a racist:
ROBERT NOVAK: Congressman, do you believe, you're a sophisticated guy, do you believe watching these hearings that Dick Clarke has a problem with this African-American woman Condoleezza Rice?
Walter Pincus, Dana Milbank had a fine summary in the Washington Post:
This week's testimony and media blitz by former White House counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clarke has returned unwanted attention to his former boss, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.
The refusal by President Bush's top security aide to testify publicly before the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks elicited rebukes by commission members as they held public hearings without her this week. Thomas H. Kean (R), the former New Jersey governor Bush named to be chairman of the commission, observed: "I think this administration shot itself in the foot by not letting her testify in public."
At the same time, some of Rice's rebuttals of Clarke's broadside against Bush, which she delivered in a flurry of media interviews and statements rather than in testimony, contradicted other administration officials and her own previous statements.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage contradicted Rice's claim that the White House had a strategy before 9/11 for military operations against al Qaeda and the Taliban; the CIA contradicted Rice's earlier assertion that Bush had requested a CIA briefing in the summer of 2001 because of elevated terrorist threats; and Rice's assertion this week that Bush told her on Sept. 16, 2001, that "Iraq is to the side" appeared to be contradicted by an order signed by Bush on Sept. 17 directing the Pentagon to begin planning military options for an invasion of Iraq.
Rice, in turn, has contradicted Vice President Cheney's assertion that Clarke was "out of the loop" and his intimation that Clarke had been demoted. Rice has also given various conflicting accounts. She criticized Clarke for being the architect of failed Clinton administration policies, but also said she retained Clarke so the Bush administration could continue to pursue Clinton's terrorism policies.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A25177-2004Mar25?language=printer:
Bush Comedy: A royal turn-off was Bush’s attempt to transform the scandal of wmd b.s. into comedy. David Corn of The Nation summed it up.
Disapproval must have registered upon my face, for one of my tablemates said, "Come on, David, this is funny." I wanted to reply, Over 500 Americans and literally countless Iraqis are dead because of a war that was supposedly fought to find weapons of mass destruction, and Bush is joking about it. Instead, I took a long drink of the lovely white wine that had come with our dinner. It's not as if I was in the middle of a talk-show debate and had to respond. This was certainly one of those occasions in which you either get it or don't. And I wasn't getting it. Or maybe my neighbor wasn't. http://www.thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=1336
Other News:
Air America Radio begins tomorrow- only 4 outlets, but presumably on the web as well.
Air America Radio, a progressive talk radio network, announced today it will hit the airwaves on March 31st.
"Air America Radio is launching in the top U.S. markets with leading talent that will provide compelling and entertaining programming on the radio, on satellite feeds, and on the web," said Mark Walsh, Chief Executive Officer of Air America Radio. “We aim to build an important new media franchise that delivers results.”
The network’s on-air personalities represent today’s top political and popular satirists, commentators and activists. Comedian, and best selling author Al Franken, who was recently taken to court when Bill O’Reilly and Fox News were seeking an injunction to halt distribution of "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right," and is known for fact-based, drug-free satire, will host a weekday show on the network called “The O’Franken Factor.” http://www.centralairmedia.com/
French socialists win big
French socialists won about half the votes in regional elections. Agence France-Presse termed this a “stunning defeat” for President Jacques Chirac's conservative government. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1504&u=/afp/20040329/ts_afp/france_vote_040329103149&printer=1
Saddam’s Defense:
Jacques Verges, a French lawyer who defended Klaus Barbie and Carlos the Jackal, will be Saddam’s lawyer. He suggested in an interview with Reuters that his strategy would be to focus on the role played by the U.S. and other countries in supporting Saddam in the 80s. Verges specifically cited his intention to make Defense Secretary Rumsfeld an issue, that Rumsfeld would "take a seat next to the leader.". http://www.reuters.com/printerFriendlyPopup.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=4677009
-R
- Australia’s P.M. John Howard, who has studiously followed a pro-Cheney line, is in possible trouble, a candidate to join Spain’s Aznar as a casualty of their joining the deceitful Bush Administration in Iraq. The opposition’s mis-steps, however, may yet save him.
- Viet Nam’s population is predominantly young and doesn’t tend to focus on the American war on Vietnam, ancient history to many. Yet, their nationalism and knowledge and understanding of the past is keen. Huge throngs visit Ho Chi Minh’s embalmed body and the nearby War Museum each and every day.
- Agent Orange remains a focus. Though with an almost dispassionate tone, periodicals note the ongoing damage to Agent Orange victims. There’s also modest, consistent noting of the lawsuit in US Federal Courts against the companies that produced the 76 million litres that were sprayed on victims during Operation Ranch Hand. (Quaint!) One activity has been a petition calling on Bush, other governmental officials and the chemical companies to compensate Victnamese victims.
- Dien Bien Phu is the focus of the year, as this is the 50 year anniversary of the final battle that kicked out the French. Veterans, in full uniform, were most evident in Hanoi.
- Viet Nam is poor, but striving and competent, witness their masterful bridge building (U.S. planes bombed out all of northern Vietnam’s bridges during the American War). Development is everywhere, at the usual cost of pollution and dislocation. Motorbikes have taken over Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi.
- Like many other countries, Australia is forging partnerships with Viet Nam. I talked with the Dean of U. of South Australia’s Ed School who was heading to Hanoi to set up a campus in Hanoi; another school, the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology had similarly decided to open a second campus in Viet Nam.
- The focus of the international community was on the disputed Korean election and the implications of the assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. One other issue- the notable attempt to trap important al-Qaeda “assets” in Pakistan- was a charade that is well-summed up by Aziz-ud-DinAhmad:
In the meanwhile prodding from Washington continues unabated. There are a number of US officials, some acting as good cops, others as bad cops trying to push Gen. Musharraf in their peculiar ways to do more to help them. On Sunday Zalmay Khalilzad told Associated Press that two Taliban commanders located in Pakistan were orchestrating attacks inside southern Afghanistan while some of the al-Qaeda leaders were also there. While a Foreign Office spokesman has strongly reacted to the statement, there is likely to be more action in the tribal areas to please the Americans. Unless the government combines puts more emphasis on persuasion, the ongoing operation tied up with the agenda of the American elections could lead to disastrous results http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/Mar-2004/25/EDITOR/op3.asp
Passing through L.A., I noted the LA Times had produced still another account of the pre-war intelligence distortions, that Colin Powell’s infamous UN presentation was heavily reliant on details from a discredited source. Bob Drogin’s and Greg Miller’s account of defector “Curveball” notes that
Curveball's story has since crumbled under doubts raised by the Germans and the scrutiny of U.S. weapons hunters, who have come to see his code name as particularly apt, given the problems that beset much of the prewar intelligence collection and analysis. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/complete/la-fg-curveball28mar28,1,6627511,print.story?coll=la-home-headlines
I return to an improved political situation. Over the last months, an accumulation of incidents and the Dean campaign has helped the Democrats and the media to begin to find their voice. It’s good to see that the culture no longer focuses on Dick Clark, the eternally youthful host of American Bandstand and New Year’s Eve. Now Dick Clarke is The Man.
Working backwards, the Administration activities have become more transparent. Last night’s NBC report wrapped with the following:
U.S. officials told NBC News that the full record of Clarke’s testimony two years ago would not be declassified. They said that at the request of the White House, however, the CIA was going through the transcript to see what could be declassified, with an eye toward pointing out contradictions. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4623066/
Wow; to admit to your dirty tricks when chatting with the press on ‘background’…
Clarke has won the initial rounds; the lies and contradictions in defending them have been all too obvious. The claims that they were always focused on terrorism- we all remember that tax cuts and strategic defense were the entire agenda pre 9/11.
Let’s recall: On 4/30/01 the Bush Administration’s released the annual report on terrorism. It broke with previous Administrations when it decided to specifically de-emphasize bin Laden. http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0104/30/ip.00.html
Then, keep in mind Bush’s comment that "Prior to September the 11th, we thought oceans could protect us." Yet, Warren Rudman and Gary Hart’s Commission on National Security had warned in January of 2001 of massive attacks on the U.S. Yet that report was essentially rejected. Instead, Cheney announced that he would head a task force to analyze the threat himself. The Administration then slowly assembled this group over a five month period and never did hold a meeting prior to 9/11.
Clarke was oh so clear on Tim Russert’s show http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4608698/ where he demolished the charges against him.
MR. CLARKE: Well, I think that this is part of a general pattern of the White House and the Republican National Committee and the president's re-election committee distributing talking points like that to senators and to press and to media trying to make me the issue and trying to engage in character assassination. I'm not the issue. Now, we can talk about the specifics of their allegations.
MR. RUSSERT: Is there any inconsistency between your sworn testimony before the September 11 Commission last week and two years ago before the congressional committee?
MR. CLARKE: No, there isn't. And I would welcome it being declassified, but not just a little line here or there. Let's declassify all six hours of my testimony.
MR. RUSSERT: You would request this morning that it all be declassified?
MR. CLARKE: And I want more declassified. I want Dr. Rice's testimony before the 9-11 Commission declassified, and I want the thing that the 9-11 Commission talked about in its staff report this week declassified, because there's been an issue about whether or not a strategy or a plan or something useful was given to Dr. Rice in early January. And she says it wasn't. So we now have the staff report of the 9-11 Commission, and it says, "On January 25th, Clarke forwarded his December strategy paper to the new national security adviser, and it proposed covert action to the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, significantly increasing CIA funding, retaliating for the USS Cole, arming the Predator aircraft, going after terrorist fund raising."
Now, Dr. Rice has characterized this as not a plan, not a strategy, not a series of decisions which could be made right away, but warmed-over Clinton material. Let's declassify that memo I sent on January 25th and let's declassify the national security directive that Dr. Rice's committee approved nine months later on September 4th, and let's see if there's any difference between those two, because there isn't. And what we'll see when we declassify what they were given on January 25th and what they finally agreed to on September 4th, is that they're basically the same thing and they wasted months when we could have had some action.
The Administration ignored Sandy Berger’s warning that they will (need to) focus on bin Laden. Instead, the Administration persisted in their emphasis on states as the cause of terrorism, not groups that are not reliant on state sponsors but are merely housed in host states. Newsweek’s Fareed Zakaria tackled this and noted the incessant obsession of doing the opposite of Clinton.
The Bush team, distrustful of anything Clinton's people said, did not see Al Qaeda as an urgent threat. They held few meetings on it and in other ways were inattentive to it. One example from the panel's report: the senior Pentagon official responsible for counterterrorism is the assistant secretary for special operations and low-intensity conflict. Even by September 11, 2001, no one had been appointed to that post.
The Bush administration came to office with different concerns. During the 1990s conservative intellectuals and policy wonks sounded the alarm about China, North Korea, Cuba, Iran and Iraq, but not about terror. Real men dealt with states. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4615876/
And, yet, after 9/11, that orientation continued, as Iraq and the rest of the axis of evil became the focus, not the difficult-to-find bin Laden.
Then, there’s the perverse Bill Frist accusing Clarke of perjury, and Crossfire’s Robert Novak- the ‘outer’ of Valerie Plame- pathetically claiming reduced the issue to Clarke being a racist:
ROBERT NOVAK: Congressman, do you believe, you're a sophisticated guy, do you believe watching these hearings that Dick Clarke has a problem with this African-American woman Condoleezza Rice?
Walter Pincus, Dana Milbank had a fine summary in the Washington Post:
This week's testimony and media blitz by former White House counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clarke has returned unwanted attention to his former boss, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.
The refusal by President Bush's top security aide to testify publicly before the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks elicited rebukes by commission members as they held public hearings without her this week. Thomas H. Kean (R), the former New Jersey governor Bush named to be chairman of the commission, observed: "I think this administration shot itself in the foot by not letting her testify in public."
At the same time, some of Rice's rebuttals of Clarke's broadside against Bush, which she delivered in a flurry of media interviews and statements rather than in testimony, contradicted other administration officials and her own previous statements.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage contradicted Rice's claim that the White House had a strategy before 9/11 for military operations against al Qaeda and the Taliban; the CIA contradicted Rice's earlier assertion that Bush had requested a CIA briefing in the summer of 2001 because of elevated terrorist threats; and Rice's assertion this week that Bush told her on Sept. 16, 2001, that "Iraq is to the side" appeared to be contradicted by an order signed by Bush on Sept. 17 directing the Pentagon to begin planning military options for an invasion of Iraq.
Rice, in turn, has contradicted Vice President Cheney's assertion that Clarke was "out of the loop" and his intimation that Clarke had been demoted. Rice has also given various conflicting accounts. She criticized Clarke for being the architect of failed Clinton administration policies, but also said she retained Clarke so the Bush administration could continue to pursue Clinton's terrorism policies.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A25177-2004Mar25?language=printer:
Bush Comedy: A royal turn-off was Bush’s attempt to transform the scandal of wmd b.s. into comedy. David Corn of The Nation summed it up.
Disapproval must have registered upon my face, for one of my tablemates said, "Come on, David, this is funny." I wanted to reply, Over 500 Americans and literally countless Iraqis are dead because of a war that was supposedly fought to find weapons of mass destruction, and Bush is joking about it. Instead, I took a long drink of the lovely white wine that had come with our dinner. It's not as if I was in the middle of a talk-show debate and had to respond. This was certainly one of those occasions in which you either get it or don't. And I wasn't getting it. Or maybe my neighbor wasn't. http://www.thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=1336
Other News:
Air America Radio begins tomorrow- only 4 outlets, but presumably on the web as well.
Air America Radio, a progressive talk radio network, announced today it will hit the airwaves on March 31st.
"Air America Radio is launching in the top U.S. markets with leading talent that will provide compelling and entertaining programming on the radio, on satellite feeds, and on the web," said Mark Walsh, Chief Executive Officer of Air America Radio. “We aim to build an important new media franchise that delivers results.”
The network’s on-air personalities represent today’s top political and popular satirists, commentators and activists. Comedian, and best selling author Al Franken, who was recently taken to court when Bill O’Reilly and Fox News were seeking an injunction to halt distribution of "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right," and is known for fact-based, drug-free satire, will host a weekday show on the network called “The O’Franken Factor.” http://www.centralairmedia.com/
French socialists win big
French socialists won about half the votes in regional elections. Agence France-Presse termed this a “stunning defeat” for President Jacques Chirac's conservative government. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1504&u=/afp/20040329/ts_afp/france_vote_040329103149&printer=1
Saddam’s Defense:
Jacques Verges, a French lawyer who defended Klaus Barbie and Carlos the Jackal, will be Saddam’s lawyer. He suggested in an interview with Reuters that his strategy would be to focus on the role played by the U.S. and other countries in supporting Saddam in the 80s. Verges specifically cited his intention to make Defense Secretary Rumsfeld an issue, that Rumsfeld would "take a seat next to the leader.". http://www.reuters.com/printerFriendlyPopup.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=4677009
-R
