http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1671984,00.html --------------------------------------------------The American nightmare
The Bush administration's defence of unauthorised phone taps shows a chilling disregard for the rule of law, writes Philip James
Wednesday December 21, 2005
Is America becoming what it most fears: a big brother state ruled by diktat, where no one is protected from eavesdropping by the secret police, and everything is permitted in defence of the homeland, including torture?
Perhaps I'm naive, but I grew up believing that America was somehow different, that alongside the corporate greed, brash materialism and barely functioning social safety net, a unique society prospered. This America was a land of limitless opportunity, a magnet to those escaping oppression, offering prince and pauper alike the possibility to dream big.
This America still exists, but it is being eroded by an administration that believes it can rule outside the rule of law. They are fast replacing the American dream with an American nightmare, an Orwellian world where memos defending torture are penned in the department of justice and judges are made redundant in the public interest.
The irony of President Bush's proud statement this week on the Iraqi elections was inescapable. "The Iraqi people now enjoy constitutionally protected freedoms and their leaders now derive their powers from the consent of the governed," he said at the start of a press conference in which he defended eroding those freedoms at home while asserting his power to act without judicial check.
Waiting to authorise wiretaps on suspected enemies of the state takes too long, long enough for them to act, went the argument. This is bogus. The laws in place make attaining a warrant for a wiretap extremely easy. What's more, once a warrant is obtained, it is effective without review for up to 120 days.
The warrant law is not some tiresome piece of procedural bureaucracy, but the only safeguard against the executive branch of government targeting anyone they don't particularly like for any reason of their choosing. It was put in place after the Watergate scandal demonstrated how easily the White House could persecute its perceived political opponents by drawing up secret enemies lists.
In an astonishing display of candour, Dick Cheney now looks back on the Nixon presidency with chilling nostalgia, ruing the loss of unfettered executive power. "Watergate and Vietnam served ... to erode the authority I think the president needs to be effective, especially in the national security area," opined the vice-president to a gaggle of reporters in the cabin of Air Force Two, as they flew over the Middle East.
Dick Cheney isn't the only one prone to bouts of nostalgia, nowadays. I have begun to look back on my first close encounter with American power. I was a young journalist covering the Reagan-Gorbachev summit in Moscow. The sight of the presidential motorcade growling through Red Square, literally pulling up to the front door of the "evil empire" was nothing less than awesome. But something that seemed insignificant at the time stayed with me.
I was struck by how fascinated Gorbachev's security detail was with its American counterpart. As the two delegations negotiated the end of the Soviet Union inside the Kremlin, outside KGB agents marvelled at the air conditioning of the secret service agents' Chevy Suburbans, the superior fabric of their suits.
The Russians' eyes revealed more than material envy, however. They betrayed the acknowledgment that the Americans represented to them the pinnacle of individual freedom, while they remained locked in the dark ages of a repressive state. I wonder if today's Russians still marvel at America in the same way, an America that cannot clearly renounce torture as an acceptable method of interrogation and sanctions secret spying on anyone the president considers threatening.
While the rest of the world may have lost faith in America long ago, President Bush is counting on the continued support of Americans. He has calculated that, after 9/11, the American people are prepared to trade some constitutional liberties for personal safety. It is a cynical calculation that has worked so far. So far fear has triumphed over hope.
The first rumblings of a backlash are finally evident in a Congress that has up to now been loth to challenge a wartime president. Sensing that the president may have overplayed his hand, Republican senator Arlen Specter has announced he'll hold hearings into Mr Bush's decision to allow domestic wiretaps without court approval.
Public opinion still lags behind the outrage of senators. In a country that still feels it could be one day away from the next terrorist attack, public opinion may never catch up. Fear may still triumph over hope.
ยท Philip James is a former senior Democratic party strategist
Rice and Ed Bradley:
Condi Rice, Bush's National Security Adviser, appeared on 60 Minutes Sunday evening, but, unlike Bush anti-terrorism adviser Dick Clarke at the 9/11 Probe, she did not swear on the Bible that what she would say would be the truth. While Clarke on 60 Minutes last Sunday allowed himself to be probed and turned inside and out for nearly the entire program, the edited tape of the Rice interview with Ed Bradley lasted around 10 minutes, and she said nothing new. The short episode came across as political spin to control the bleeding, and nothing more.
Rice's Lie #1 (transcript)
DICK CLARKE (video):
I said 'Mr. President, we've done this before. We - we've been looking at this. We looked at it with an open mind, there's no connection.' He came back at me and said, 'Iraq, Saddam - find out if there's a connection.' And in a very intimidating way. I mean, that we should come back with that answer....
CONDOLEEZZA RICE:
I - I have never seen the president say an - anything to an - people in an intimidating way, to try to get a particular answer out of them. I know this president very well. And the president doesn't talk to his staff in an intimidating way to ask them to produce information - that is false.
OUR RESPONSE:
Clarke and two others were in the room with Bush. The others have gone on record as agreeing with Clarke's description of the meeting. Condi was not present.
Rice's Lie #2 (transcript)
VOICE OVER:
All week long, the White House said it had no recollection that the September 12 meeting ever took place, and that it had no record that President Bush was even in the situation room that day. But two days ago, they changed their story, saying the meeting did happen.
CONDOLEEZZA RICE:
"None of us recall the specific - conversation....
OUR RESPONSE:
Actually, two lies here. First, the White House said the meeting didn't happen, then they changed their story. Second, Condi misleads Bradley by saying "us" did not recall the specific conversation. Of course "us" didn't since it has already been established that "us" was not in the room at the time of the conversation.
Rice's Lie #3 (transcript)
ED BRADLEY:
Clarke has alleged that the Bush administration underestimated the threat from - from al Qaeda, didn't act as if terrorism was an imminent and urgent problem. Was it?
CONDOLEEZZA RICE:
Of course it was an urgent - problem....
ED BRADLEY: :
But even the former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Hugh Shelton, has said that the Bush administration pushed terrorism, and I'm quoting here, farther to the back burner.
CONDOLEEZZA RICE:
I just don't agree....
ED BRADLEY:
After 9/11, Bob Woodward wrote a book in which he had incredible access and interviewed the president of the United States. He quotes President Bush as saying that he didn't feel a sense of urgency about Osama bin Laden. Woodward wrote that bin Laden was not the president's focus or that of his nationally security team. You're saying that the administration says fighting terrorism and al-Qaeda has been a top priority since the beginning.
CONDOLEEZZA RICE:
I'm saying that the administration took seriously the threat - let's talk about what we did....
ED BRADLEY: :
You'd listed the things that you'd done. But here is the perception. The chairman of the joint chiefs of staff at that time says you pushed it to the back burner. The former Secretary of the Treasury says it was not a priority. Mr. Clarke says it was not a priority. And at least, according to Bob Woodward, who talked with the president, he is saying that for the president, it wasn't urgent. He didn't have a sense of urgency about al Qaeda. That's the perception here.
CONDOLEEZZA RICE:
Ed, I don't know what a sense of urgency - any greater than the one that we had, would have caused us to do differently.
OUR RESPONSE:
It's clear that Bradley wants to discuss the Clarke charge that the Bush administration changed terrorism from the top priority to one of secondary concern, and Rice attepts to twist the question of giving terrorism "top priority" to taking terrorism "seriously," which are two different things. Then Bush is quoted as saying terrorism was not "urgent." Rice ignores this documented quote and goes on to disagree with Bush. As such, she is attempting to mislead by changing the terms from "top priority" to "seriously," and to simply ignore the evidence presented that Bush disagrees with her. As such, she is on auto-pilot as she lies, spinning the implicit scenario she wants Bradley to accept.
Finally, Bradley repeatedly gave Rice the program's forum to apologize for 9/11 to the millions of viewers watching the show, like Clarke did on the show last week and previously to that under oath in front of the 9/11 Panel, but she refused each time. (transcript)
Bush said, "The Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." A U.S. intelligence analyst said the inspectors could not locate weapons caches "because there may not be much of a stockpile." No stockpiles were found and the U.S. inspectors are going home.
Bill Clinton said:
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
Madeline Albright said:
"Iraq is a long way from the USA, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical,or biological weapons against our allies is the greatest threat that we face."
Senator Carl Levin( Democrat) said:
"Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stablity of the region, He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton said:
In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid. comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members.
Senator Jay Rockerfeller said:
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years...We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.
Al Gore said:
"We know that Saddam has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
John Kerry said:
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force--if necessary--to disarm Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Ted Kennedy said:
" We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction"
Senatgor Robert Byrd said:
"The last UN inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his cheicmal and biological warfare capablities."
A New York Times Editorial stated( 1999)
"without further outside intervention, Iraq should be able to rebuild weapons and missle plants within a year and future military attacks may be required to diminish the attacks again."
Nice round up there Mortkat.
There are more, MCGentrix. I only used the important ones.
In his book, Tyranny's Ally: America's Failure to Defeat Saddam Hussein, David Wurmser of the American Enterprise Institute urges the US to support an insurgency aimed at toppling the Bath'ist government of Saddam Hussein as part of a broader policy to defeat pan-Arabism in Iraq. In its place, the US should encourage the creation of a "loosely unified Iraqi confederal government, shaped around strong sectarian and provincial entities," Wurmser argues. [Wurmser, 1999, pp 136-137] What happens in Iraq is vitally important, Wurmser notes, because the country is of extreme strategic importance. "It is a key transportation route, and it is rich in both geographic endowments and human talent," he explains. "Its location on pathways between Asia and Europe, Africa and Asia, and Europe and Africa makes it an ideal route for armies, pipelines, and trade from both the eastern Mediterranean and Asia Minor to the Persian Gulf. Iraq also has large, proven oil reserves, water, and other important resources. Its geographic centrality and abundance of natural advantages alone make the country a regionally important center." [Wurmser, 1999, pp 116-117]
People and organizations involved: David Wurmser
February 1999
Wissam al-Zahawie, Iraq's ambassador to the Vatican, sets off on a trip to several African countries as part of an effort to convince African heads of state to visit Iraq. Saddam Hussein hopes that these visits will help break the embargo on flights to Iraq, and undermine the UN sanctions regime. Zahawie's first stop is Niger, where he meets with the country's president, President Ibrahim Bare Mainassara, for one hour. Mainassara promises that he will visit Baghdad the following April (He's assasinated before he has an opportunity to do this). [Sunday Herald, 7/13/2003; Time, 10/2/2003; New Yorker, 10/20/03; Independent, 8/10/03a Sources: Wissam al-Zahawie, Charles O. Cecil] Zahawie's visit is reported in the local newspaper as well as by a French news agency. The US and British governments are also aware of the trip but show no concern. No one suggests that the trip's motives have anything to do with acquiring uranium. At this time, Niger is actively seeking economic assistance from the United States. [New Yorker, 10/20/03 Sources: Charles O. Cecil, Wissam al-Zahawie] In early 2002, the Italian military intelligence service, SISMI, will allege in a report (see February 5, 2002) sent to the US that the motive behind the visit was to discuss the future purchase of uranium oxide, also known as "yellowcake" (see October 15, 2001). [New Yorker, 10/20/03 Sources: Wissam al-Zahawie, Unnamed US intelligence sources]
People and organizations involved: Ibrahim Bare Mainassara, Wissam al-Zahawie
February 4, 1999
President Clinton signs Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 99-13 designating seven Iraqi opposition groups as being eligible to receive US federal funds under the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act (see October 31, 1998). The act stated that the policy of the US should be to support regime change in Iraq. The seven groups include the Iraqi National Accord, the Iraqi National Congress, the Islamic Movement of Iraqi Kurdistan, the Kurdistan Democratic Party, the Movement for Constitutional Monarchy, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, and the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq. [White House, 2/4/1999]
People and organizations involved: Islamic Movement of Iraqi Kurdistan, Iraqi National Congress, Iraqi National Accord, Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, Kurdistan Democratic Party, Movement for Constitutional Monarchy, William Jefferson ("Bill") Clinton
March 1999
A special panel of the UN Security Council reports that "the declared facilities of Iraq's biological weapons program have been destroyed and rendered harmless." [Guardian, 5/15/02; Daily Mirror, 4/5/02]
(After June or July 1999)
Rocco Martino, an Italian information peddler and former SISMI agent, provides French officials with documents suggesting that Iraq intends to expand its "trade" with Niger. It is not known from where he obtains these documents. The French assume the trade being discussed concerns uranium, Niger's main export. At French intelligence's request, Martino continues supplying them with documents. [Financial Times, 8/2/04; Sunday Times, 8/1/04]
People and organizations involved: France, Rocco Martino
June 1999
A businessman reportedly approaches Nigerien Prime Minister Ibrahim Mayaki and insists that Mayaki meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss "expanding commercial relations" between Niger and Iraq. Mayaki reportedly interprets "expanding commercial relations" to mean that Iraq is interested in discussing uranium sales. According to Mayaki, he does meet the delegation but avoids discussion of trade issues because of UN sanctions on the country. They reportedly never discuss what the businessman had meant when he said Iraq was interested in "expanding commercial relations." [Sources: Report On The US Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq]
People and organizations involved: Ibrahim Mayaki
November 19, 1999
Congress allocates $10 million "to support efforts to bring about political transition in Iraq, of which not less than $8 million shall be made available only to Iraqi opposition groups designated under the ILA [Iraq Liberation Act of 1998] for political, economic humanitarian, and other activities of such groups, and not more than $2 million may be made available for groups and activities seeking the prosecution of Saddam Hussein and other Iraqi Government officials for war crimes." President Clinton signs the appropriation bill into law on November 29. [The Library of Congress Thomas Database, n.d. Sources: Public Law 106-113] This $10 million dollars is the first allocation of funds to Iraqi opposition groups out of the total $97 million that was authorized by the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act (see October 31, 1998).
People and organizations involved: Iraqi National Congress, William Jefferson ("Bill") Clinton
December 2, 1999
Speaking in Manchester, New Hampshire, presidential candidate George Bush says as president he would not lift the sanctions on Iraq nor attempt to negotiate with Saddam Hussein. "I'd make darn sure that he lived up to the agreements that he signed back in the early '90s. I'd be helping the opposition groups. And if I found, in any way shape or form, that he was developing weapons of mass destruction, I'd take them out. I'm surprised he's still there. I think a lot of other people are as well." [Boston Globe, 12/3/1999; Federal Document Clearing House, 12/2/1999]
People and organizations involved: George W. Bush
December 17, 1999
With the passing of UN Resolution 1284, the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) is created to assist in the disarming of Iraq. The new body replaces the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM). UNMOVIC is deliberately designed to prevent infiltration by spies of the UN Security Council member states, specifically the US and Britain. This had been a problem with its predecessor, UNSCOM. The UN diminishes the role of Americans in the new commission by abolishing the powerful office of deputy chairman, which had always been held by an American, and by appointing non-Americans to important positions. In the new inspections body, "The highest-ranking American in the agency now has a relatively lowly job, in charge of the training division." A Chinese official holds the senior "activity evaluation" position and a Russian official is in charge of "liaising with foreign governments and companies." Another reform is that the inspectors will use commercial satellite companies, instead of US spy satellites, to monitor Iraq's activities. [The Times, 9/18/02]
2000
US intelligence learns from the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) that Iraq has made arrangements to purchase tubes, made of 7075-T6 aluminum, from China through Garry Cordukes, the director of the Australian company International Aluminum Supply. The company is associated with Kam Kiu Propriety Limited, a subsidiary of the Chinese company that will manufacture the aluminum tubes. Concerned that the tubes may be related to Iraqi efforts to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program, an Australian intelligence agent contacts Cordukes to obtain a sample of the tubes for examination. A CIA agent, Joe T., is said to have played a significant part in this discovery. [Australian Broadcasting Corporation; Washington Post, 8/10/03 Sources: Unnamed US intelligence, US administration, and/or UN inspectors]
People and organizations involved: Joe T.
2000-2002
The State Department begins funding the Iraqi National Congress' "information collection" program to the tune of $150,000 per month. The program is part of the US government's larger goal of effecting a regime change in Iraq (see October 31, 1998). According to the agreement between the State Department and the INC, the group is permitted to use the money to "implement a public information campaign to communicate with Iraqis inside and outside of Iraq and also to promulgate its message to the international community at large." The INC is prohibited from engaging in activities "associated with, or that could appear to be associated with, attempting to influence the policies of the United States Government or Congress or propagandizing the American people." But according to Francis Brooke, an INC spokesman, some of the State Department's funds are used to finance the expenses of Iraqi defectors who serve as the sources for several US news stories. Brookes claims that there are "no restrictions" on the use of US federal funds to make defectors available to the media. Another Chalabi spokesman will say: "The INC paid some living and travel expenses of defectors with USG funds. None of these expenses was related to meeting journalists." He adds that the INC "did not violate any US laws." [Newsweek, 4/5/2004]
People and organizations involved: Francis Brooke, Iraqi National Congress, US Department of State
2000
Former CIA director James Woolsey serves as a corporate officer for the Iraqi National Congress Support Foundation which manages the Iraqi National Congress' US funding. Also during this time, Woolsey and his former law firm, Shea and Gardner, provide the INC and Iraqi exiles with pro bono work. [Knight Ridder, 7/16/04]
People and organizations involved: Iraqi National Congress, Shea and Gardner, James Woolsey
2000
During the 2000 presidential campaign, the Republican Party calls for "a comprehensive plan for the removal of Saddam Hussein." Similarly, the Democratic Party's platform supports using "America's military might against Iraq when and where it is necessary." [Project for the New American Century, 7/6/00; Strategic Affairs. 11/1/00; NewsMax, 2/3/01; Democratic National Committee, 2000 Platform, pg 46; Republican National Committee, 2000 Platform Sources: Republican National Committee, Democratic National Committee]
People and organizations involved: Republican National Committee, Democratic National Committee
2000
In his book, Machiavelli on Modern Leadership, neoconservative Michael Ledeen measures modern leaders against Machiavelli's rules for leadership and concludes that "[e]ven after a half a millennium, Machiavelli's advice to leaders is as contemporary as tomorrow." [Ledeen, 2000, pp 185] He laments that contemporary Western leaders, "like their counterparts in the rest of the world, have fallen short of Machiavelli's standards." [Ledeen, 2000, pp 187] According to Ledeen, "f new and more virtuous leaders do not emerge, it is only a matter of time before we are either dominated by our enemies or sink into a more profound crisis." [Ledeen, 2000, pp 187] Such a situation, he explains, would put the US in the "same desperate crisis that drove Machiavelli to call for a new dictator to set things aright." He adds, "In either case, we need Machiavellian wisdom and leadership." [Ledeen, 2000, pp 188] Throughout the book Ledeen highlights certain qualities that he believes make strong leaders. A leader "must be prepared to fight at all times," he writes, and must be of "manly vigor." Women, he says, are rarely strong leaders because women generally cannot achieve virtue for they lack the "physical wherewithal and the passionate desire to achieve" military glory. To Ledeen, the ends may justify the means. In some situations, "
Mc Gentrix- I think Cicerone Imposter won the battle of the posts. Of course that means that President Bush will be impeached for lying and that the Democrats will become the majorities in the House and Senate in November 2006.
If that doesn't happen, I'll let Cicerone Imposter know.
From today's British papers:
Tony Blair's visited Iraq yesterday to convey good news to the British troops there: they are ready to begin leaving Iraq within six months. "WE'RE OUTTA HERE!" cheers the Mirror alongside a picture of smiling soldiers.
Tim Collins is dubious. "What he is saying is in effect the same as General Dutton on the BBC's Newsnight last week when he talked of handing over some areas to the Iraqi security forces," he writes in the Mirror. "That is not the same as saying the UK is withdrawing troops any time soon - because that day is still a long way off ... If Tony Blair really does want to cheer some troops up, just be honest. And he doesn't have to go to Iraq to see them either. There are rows of them in the military hospital in Portsmouth where neither Tony nor any of his cabinet have visited. They are a little nearer to home and need cheering up."
The Guardian says it was the "clearest signal yet" of Britain's intentions. The Times goes further, saying that more than 1,000 soldiers have "already been pulled back from frontline duties". Steady on, says the paper's editorial: the provincial elections next spring will need support if "Iranian-backed elements" are to be controlled.
Blair signals Iraq exit plan
Mirror: EXCLUSIVE: WE'RE OUTTA THERE!
Times: Leading articles: Comment: Troop movements
