Only good news will do

The War Within: A Secret White House History, 2006-2008, by Bob Woodward

Christopher Meyer | Spectator | Wednesday, 22nd October 2008

There is a startling passage in this book. It recounts an intimate moment (among many, it should be said) between the President of the United States, George W. Bush, and his Secretary of State and long-time adviser, Condoleezza Rice. They are sitting on the porch of Bush’s Texas ranch. It is December 2006 and, after more than three years of war, the situation in Iraq is dire. Bush and Rice are debating the pros and cons of a ‘surge’ — the despatch of five extra brigades to pacify Baghdad. Condi has her doubts, Bush has none. She tells him that if he goes ahead, he has to get it right ‘because you are one of the four or five most consequential Presidents … maybe in our history’. She asks what will happen if the surge does not work. Bush dodges the question.

Astonishing stuff: a supremely confidential and private exchange about a decision that would affect the lives of millions, the fate of nations and Bush’s place in history — willingly revealed to a journalist-author for his next book. Compare and contrast with our own dear government. It is still fighting a rearguard action with the Information Commissioner to stop the release of papers that would tell the voter why the Cabinet backed Blair’s decision to join Bush in Iraq.

Bob Woodward specialises in revelations of this kind. They are scattered like truffles in the somewhat arid soil of this latest of four books about the life and times of the Bush administration after 9/11. They are no masterpieces of literature. The best that can be said for Woodward is that he has the functional competence of the experienced journalist. I cannot imagine The War Within, any more than its three predecessors, having broad appeal in Britain. But, if, like your reviewer, you have the aficionado’s delight in the minutely detailed cut-and-thrust of Washington decision-taking — and what this reveals of Bush the President and man — The War Within is a treasure trove.

BUSHED!

Bush corruption scandals exposed

AntiConformist911 | YouTube | Added: August 16, 2008

BUSHED! (Part 1 of 12)

Keith Olbermann comments on the many Bush Administration corruption scandals that have been ignored by the mainstream media. Included in each video are issues such as:

* the false justification for the Iraq war
* war profiteering involving contractors such as blackwater, Halliburton, and KBR
* the Justice Dept, Atty. firings, Attorney Generals Alberto Gonzales and Michael Mukasey
* torture, water boarding, Abu ghraib, Geneva convention, Guantanamo Bay
* the economy, recession, corruption
* FISA, illegal wiretapping

For prosecution of Bush war crimes, planning begins

Stephen C. Webster | Raw Story | Tuesday, Sept 16, 2008

On Saturday morning in Andover, Massachusetts, as about 120 activists, adademics, constitutional scholars, public officials and legal experts gathered in the Wyndham hotel, the building suddenly went dark.

Electricity had been cut off just prior to the start of a landmark war crimes conference, the goal of which was to plan the prosecution of Bush Administration officials. The first of its kind conference, already featuring a laundry-list of notable speakers, was suddenly in flux … If only for a few moments.

“We were already so effective, the government tried to shut us down,” said conference organizer Lawrence Velvel, dean of the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover, in an interview with RAW STORY.

My Journey to 9/11 Truth and the Real Reasons for the Invasion of Iraq

My own journey from swallowing the official story of 9/11, when we were all traumatised by the events of that terrible day and psychologically suggestible to whatever the authorities told us, to my current position, which is that elements of the Bush administration were almost definitely somehow involved, and that aircraft fuel cannot explain the Twin Towers’ collapse, I mean, disintegration, is very similar to betmo’s.

My reaction was one of great hatred directed towards the man who was said to have masterminded the attacks, Osama bin Laden, and a desire to see him caught, tried, and punished.

Despite the fact that most of the Muslim adults I know (and I know many), are fine, upstanding, God-fearing, law-abiding folk, it also coloured my attitude towards this people and their religion in a very negative way. Whenever I saw a Muslim woman wearing the chador or a Muslim man in Muslim dress, I felt a strong urge to say out loud, “Bang! bang!” As if all Muslims secretly support suicide bombers and the perpetrators of 9/11, which I now realise is certainly not the case.

When we went into Iraq, I also initially accepted the official reasons. But as the months wore on, and there was no sign of the famed Weapons of Mass Destruction, I became more and more puzzled by the invasion. Was it all just a hugely embarrassing mistake on the part of the Bush and Blair administrations?

It wasn’t until the September of 2006, when I read an article in a British newspaper about 9/11 scholars for truth, that I began to investigate what really happened. My initial reaction, when I realised that 9/11 was an inside job, was burning anger and a desire to see those involved brought to justice, an anger that burnt all the more fiercely for having been misled by the real perpetrators as to who really did it.

And as for the Bush and Blair administrations being misled about WMDs, I no longer buy it. They knew all along that there were none, and the invasion of Iraq, far from being one huge mistake, was, in reality, nothing more than a blatant and nakedly obvious oil grab, as the awarding of non-tender oil contracts to big western oil companies shows. Likewise, the invasion of Afghanistan, which has less to do with the war on terror, than with safeguarding a pipeline from the Central Asian oilfields to US-friendly Pakistan.

By rights, both Blair and Bush should be brought before the International Court of Justice to be tried for war crimes. But will it ever happen? Will it, heck? Though an evil man, former Serb leader Haralan Karadzic was right when he stated that the Court, which is to try him for war crimes committed against the Bosnians, was nothing more than a NATO court.

There’s no justice! At least, not in this world. I can take consolation only in the fact that, one day, both Bush and Blair will have to meet their maker, in whom they claim so ardently to believe but whom, by their actions, they so tragically betray.

Bush Extends 9/11 National Emergency Yet Again

Peter Dale Scott | Global Research | Friday, Sept 5, 2008

Though few Americans realize it, Cheney and Rumsfeld worked through the 1980s and 1990s on emergency nuclear-response plans which allegedly suspended the American constitution and also Congress.[1] (Through these decades Rumsfeld was CEO of a major pharmaceutical firm, and in the later 1990s Cheney was CEO of Halliburton; but their private status did not deter them from continuing to exercise a supra-constitutional planning power conferred on them by Ronald Reagan.)

Even fewer Americans know that these rules, originally dealing with a nuclear attack on America, were extended by Reagan Executive Order 12656 to cover “any occurrence, including natural disaster, military attack, technological emergency, or other emergency, that seriously degrades or seriously threatens the national security of the United States.”[2] And few Americans realize that at least some of these rules, known technically as Continuity of Government or COG rules, were invoked before 10:00 AM on September 11, 2001.[3]

As he did in 2007, President Bush has again, on August 28, 2008, continued for another year the national emergency first officially proclaimed on September 14, 2001, along with “the powers and authorities adopted to deal with that emergency:”

Obama might pursue criminal charges against Bush

Elana Schor in Washington | guardian.co.uk, Wednesday September 03 2008

Democratic vice-presidential nominee Joe Biden said earlier this week that he and running mate Barack Obama could pursue criminal charges against the Bush administration if they are elected in November.

Biden’s comments, first reported by ABC news, attracted little notice on a day dominated by the drama surrounding his Republican counterpart, Alaska governor Sarah Palin.

But his statements represent the Democrats’ strongest vow so far this year to investigate alleged misdeeds committed during the Bush years.

When asked during a campaign event in Deerfield Beach, Florida, whether he would “pursue the violations that have been made against our Constitution by the present administration”, Biden answered in the affirmative.

“We will not be stopped from pursuing any criminal offence that’s occurred,” he continued, going on to praise congressional committees for the deliberate pace of their inquiries into alleged Bush administration misdeeds.

Members of Congress are “doing the right thing, they’re not making false accusations about anything … they’re collecting data, subpoenaing records, they’re building a file”, Biden said.

“If there has been a basis upon which you can pursue someone for a criminal violation, they will be pursued – not out of vengeance, not out of retribution, out of the need to preserve the notion that no one, no attorney general, no president — no one is above the law.”

Bush quietly seeks to make war powers permanent, by declaring indefinite state of war

John Byrne | Raw Story | Sunday, Aug 31, 2008

As the nation focuses on Sen. John McCain’s choice of running mate, President Bush has quietly moved to expand the reach of presidential power by ensuring that America remains in a state of permanent war.

Buried in a recent proposal by the Administration is a sentence that has received scant attention — and was buried itself in the very newspaper that exposed it Saturday. It is an affirmation that the United States remains at war with al Qaeda, the Taliban and “associated organizations.”

Part of a proposal for Guantanamo Bay legal detainees, the provision before Congress seeks to “acknowledge again and explicitly that this nation remains engaged in an armed conflict with Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated organizations, who have already proclaimed themselves at war with us and who are dedicated to the slaughter of Americans.”

The New York Times’ page 8 placement of the article in its Saturday edition seems to downplay its importance. Such a re-affirmation of war carries broad legal implications that could imperil Americans’ civil liberties and the rights of foreign nationals for decades to come.

Conyers Questions Iraq ‘Forgery’

Jason Leopold | The Public Record | August 22, 2008

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has asked current and former White House aides and ex-CIA officials to respond to questions about an alleged scheme to create a bogus letter in late 2003 linking Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda.

In sending the interview requests Wednesday, Conyers is following up on a disputed story in journalist Ron Suskind’s new book, The Way of the World: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism, which includes an account of how the mysterious letter originated.

The book cites statements from former CIA associate deputy director of operations Rob Richer and John Maguire, the former chief of the CIA’s Iraq Operations Group/Near East Division, as indicating that the White House ordered the CIA to produce the bogus letter to retroactively justify the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

Richer and Maguire gave Suskind on-the-record interviews, which the author recorded, discussing the reasons the letter was created and saying that it likely emanated from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office. Both men have since recanted their statements.

Conyers, who has held periodic hearings on abuses of power by George W. Bush’s administration, sent letters to former CIA Director George Tenet; the CIA’s former executive director A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard; Cheney’s former chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby; and John Hannah, another Cheney assistant – as well as to Richer and Maguire.

“I am writing to follow up on recent serious allegations regarding the creation of a false letter from Tahir Jalil Habbush, Saddam Hussein’s former Chief of Intelligence, to Saddam Hussein,” Conyers said.

“The letter, which was allegedly backdated to July 1, 2001, attempted to establish an operational link between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein in the period before the 9/11 attacks by specifically stating that 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta had received training in Iraq.

“At the time of the alleged decision in 2003 to concoct the false letter, the Vice President’s Office had been reportedly pressuring the CIA to prove this connection as a justification to invade Iraq. The letter also falsely noted that Iraq had received a ‘shipment’ (presumably uranium) from Niger with the assistance of al-Qaeda.

“Upon careful review of the allegations concerning this matter, I have become very concerned with the possibility that this administration may have violated federal law by using the resources of our intelligence agencies to influence domestic policy processes or opinion.

“The law specifically provides that ‘no covert action may be conducted which is intended to influence United States political processes, public opinion, policies, or media.’”

Suskind wrote in his book that such a violation might constitute an “impeachable offense.”

Who Started Cold War II?

Patrick J. Buchanan | Taki’s Magazine | August 18, 2008

The American people should be eternally grateful to Old Europe for having spiked the Bush-McCain plan to bring Georgia into NATO.

Had Georgia been in NATO when Mikheil Saakashvili invaded South Ossetia, we would be eyeball to eyeball with Russia, facing war in the Caucasus, where Moscow’s superiority is as great as U.S. superiority in the Caribbean during the Cuban missile crisis.

If the Russia-Georgia war proves nothing else, it is the insanity of giving erratic hotheads in volatile nations the power to drag the United States into war.

Was 9/11 an Inside Job?

By Mark H. Gaffney

The following is an excerpt from Mark H. Gaffney’s forthcoming book, THE 911 MYSTERY PLANE AND THE VANISHING OF AMERICA, to be released in September 2008.

15/08/08 “ICH” — – - Regrettably, there is considerable evidence that elements of the Bush administration were complicit in the 9/11 attack, and may even have helped stage it. Let us now examine some of what I regard as the most compelling evidence. However, the following discussion makes no claim to be comprehensive.

We know that within minutes of the “worst terrorist attack” in US history, even before the collapse of WTC-2 at 9:59 am, US officials knew the names of several of the alleged hijackers. CBS reported that a flight attendant on AA Flight 11, Amy Sweeney, had the presence of mind to call her office and reveal the seat numbers of the hijackers who had seized the plane.[1] FBI Director Robert Mueller later said, “This was the first piece of hard evidence.”[2] In his memoirs CIA Director George Tenet emphasizes the importance of the passenger manifests, as does counter-terrorism czar Richard A. Clarke.[3] All of which is very strange because the manifests later released by the airlines do not include the names of any of the alleged hijackers. Nor has this discrepancy ever been explained.

According to MSNBC, the plan to invade Afghanistan and “remove Al Qaeda from the face of he earth” was already sitting on G.W. Bush’s desk on the morning of 9/11 awaiting his signature.[4] The plan, in the form of a presidential directive, had been developed by the CIA and according to Richard Clarke called for “arming the Northern Alliance…to go on the offensive against the Taliban [and] pressing the CIA to…go after bin Laden and the Al Qaeda leadership.”[5]