In a lengthy excerpt posted on Wayne Madsen's site, Pierre-Henry Bunel, a former agent for French military intelligence, explains the origins of the word "al-Qaeda." As previously noted by British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, “al-Qaeda” has nothing to do with a terrorist organization, as the neocons and the corporate media tell us over and over, ad infinitum, but is in fact a database. "In the early 1980s the Islamic Bank for Development, which is located in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, like the Permanent Secretariat of the Islamic Conference Organization, bought a new computerized system to cope with its accounting and communication requirements," Bunel explains. "It was decided to use a part of the system’s memory to host the Islamic Conference's database. It was possible for the countries attending to access the database by telephone: an Intranet, in modern language. The governments of the member-countries as well as some of their embassies in the world were connected to that network." Files associated to the database were called "Q eidat il-Maaloomaat" and "Q eidat i-Taaleemaat" in Arabic. "Those two files were kept in one file called in Arabic 'Q eidat ilmu’ti'aat' which is the exact translation of the English word database. But the Arabs commonly used the short word Al Qaida which is the Arabic word for 'base.'"
Because of the presence of 'rogue states,' it became easy for terrorist groups to use the email of the database. Hence, the email of Al Qaida was used, with some interface system, providing secrecy, for the families of the mujaheddin to keep links with their children undergoing training in Afghanistan, or in Libya or in the Beqaa valley, Lebanon. Or in action anywhere in the battlefields where the extremists sponsored by all the 'rogue states' used to fight. And the 'rogue states' included Saudi Arabia. When Osama bin Laden was an American agent in Afghanistan, the Al Qaida Intranet was a good communication system through coded or covert messages.... Al Qaida was neither a terrorist group nor Osama bin Laden's personal property.
In short, "al-Qaeda" was in essence an email designation and had nothing to do with the "American agent in Afghanistan," Osama bin Laden. In fact, "al-Qaeda," the terrorist organization, is a creation of the United States government and the corporate media.
Saturday, November 19, 2005
50 Percent of American Cretins Think Torture Work
If we can believe the Pew Research Center in Washington, nearly fifty percent of all Americans not only believe torture is justified against "suspected terrorists" (i.e., Pakistani and Afghan cab drivers and dirt farmers kidnapped and then sold to the CIA), but also that it works.
Here's a clue for Bubba in Palookaville: torture does not work. People tortured invariably tell torturers whatever they want to hear to make the pain stop and thus torture is a very unreliable form of intelligence gathering.
Never mind torture is morally and spiritually repugnant.
But then the Americans who believe torture works are the same people who think Saddam teamed up with Osama and attacked the United States on nine eleven.
Moreover, as an indication of the inevitable (when dealing with ill-informed cretins) result of the relentless drumbeat of fake terror attacks and dire warnings of impending doom emanating from the White House are working, 48 percent of Americans believe "that current policies had not gone far enough" in dismantling our cherished liberties, once upon a time guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, "while 34% worried they had gone too far in restricting civil liberties."
It's a testament to the massive stupidity of the populace when a little more than a third of the citizenry understands that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are not open for negotiation.
I'm sorry to call fifty percent of Americans cretins. But in essence that is precisely what they are if they believe the phony baloney and mostly illusory al-Qaeda is a threat, that nineteen cave-dwelling Arab hijackers pulled off nine eleven with boxcutters, that the twin towers "pancaked" against the laws of physics, that an aviation fuel fire is capable of melting hardened steel, and a one-legged petty criminal of sub-normal intelligence is capable of running a complex underground resistance in Iraq. My fellow citizens are cretins if they surrender their birthright--constitutionally guaranteed liberty--to gain an illusory and vaporous security from fake terrorism obviously contrived by the government.
An Examination of Bush Fascism
The expansion of democracy in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries intensified the antidemocratic reaction of conservative authoritarianism. Starting first in Italy as an antidemocratic and antisocialist movement after WWI, fascism is in essence the twentieth century version of age old tendencies in politics. Like democracy, it is a universal phenomenon, and it appeared in different forms and varieties in accordance with national traditions and circumstances.
Fascism is a postdemocratic political system and cannot be understood except as a reaction to democracy. Fascism is not possible in countries with no democratic experience at all: in such countries dictatorship may be based on the army, bureaucracy, and church, but it will lack the element of mass enthusiasm and participation characteristic of fascism. Fascism learned from democracy the value of popular support for national policies, and it sought to manufacture popular support by propaganda and fear. Evidence of this manipulation of fear can be seen both in the color-coded terror alert system, the false statements made to the U.N. before the invasion of Iraq, and this video montage of the Republican National Convention (.mov file)
True democracy holds respect for all views, left and right, and all citizens are allowed a political voice free from persecution for their political views. The United States' slide towards fascism began with the elimination of the far left from the political dialogue. To date, the socialist and communist factions of our society have been all but silenced, and currently even the most timid of liberalism has been demonized. The only recognizable elements of our current political discourse are the centrists and the extreme far right. The philosophy of truly liberal democrats such as Dennis Kucinich and the deceased Paul Wellstone exists now on the fringe of American politics. This comes in sharp contrast to the time when the American communist party inflamed workers to form labor unions and worker protections and ideas such as the Social Security program were adopted from the Socialist party platform. The uber-"patriotic" right-wing support your troops crowd might be shocked to learn that the Pledge of Allegiance was written by a socialist.
There is no Little red book or manifesto of fascism; it cannot be gathered from one systematic treatise but must be culled from various sources that express thought and opinion as much as political philosophy. For this reason, the Project for the Old American Century has compiled a table comparing the research done by three critics of fascism. Each writer has detailed 14 defining characteristics of fascism pulled from the examination of the regimes of Mussolini, Pinochet, Franco, Hitler, Suharto, and others. The order has been slightly rearranged to better reflect the similarities and discrepancies:
Fascism is a postdemocratic political system and cannot be understood except as a reaction to democracy. Fascism is not possible in countries with no democratic experience at all: in such countries dictatorship may be based on the army, bureaucracy, and church, but it will lack the element of mass enthusiasm and participation characteristic of fascism. Fascism learned from democracy the value of popular support for national policies, and it sought to manufacture popular support by propaganda and fear. Evidence of this manipulation of fear can be seen both in the color-coded terror alert system, the false statements made to the U.N. before the invasion of Iraq, and this video montage of the Republican National Convention (.mov file)
True democracy holds respect for all views, left and right, and all citizens are allowed a political voice free from persecution for their political views. The United States' slide towards fascism began with the elimination of the far left from the political dialogue. To date, the socialist and communist factions of our society have been all but silenced, and currently even the most timid of liberalism has been demonized. The only recognizable elements of our current political discourse are the centrists and the extreme far right. The philosophy of truly liberal democrats such as Dennis Kucinich and the deceased Paul Wellstone exists now on the fringe of American politics. This comes in sharp contrast to the time when the American communist party inflamed workers to form labor unions and worker protections and ideas such as the Social Security program were adopted from the Socialist party platform. The uber-"patriotic" right-wing support your troops crowd might be shocked to learn that the Pledge of Allegiance was written by a socialist.
There is no Little red book or manifesto of fascism; it cannot be gathered from one systematic treatise but must be culled from various sources that express thought and opinion as much as political philosophy. For this reason, the Project for the Old American Century has compiled a table comparing the research done by three critics of fascism. Each writer has detailed 14 defining characteristics of fascism pulled from the examination of the regimes of Mussolini, Pinochet, Franco, Hitler, Suharto, and others. The order has been slightly rearranged to better reflect the similarities and discrepancies:
''Intelligence Brief: U.S. Military Bases in the Black Sea Region''
On November 17, Romania and the United States agreed on installing American military bases near the Black Sea. The same day, Washington started a new round of talks with Bulgaria in order to finalize a deal granting the United States use of Bulgarian military bases (the Bezmer airfield and the Novo Selo firing range).
As expected, the positive trend in political and strategic relations between the U.S. and the two southeastern European countries of Romania and Bulgaria is continuing. During the 2003 preparation of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and in the middle of a serious European diplomatic split in front of the U.S.-led intervention in Iraq, Bucharest and Sofia openly said that Washington could count on them for future strategic cooperation. [See: "Bulgaria, Romania and the Changing Structure of the Black Sea's Geopolitics"]
The 2005 advancement in establishing a U.S. military presence in the two countries signals the consolidation of the new American geostrategic initiative in the Black Sea region and will have important consequences for the European Union, U.S.-Russian relations, and the West's strategy toward the "Greater Middle East." Moreover, it also confirms that Washington now seeks small, flexible bases for the possible deployment of forces in Europe, instead of Cold War-style bigger, permanent facilities.
As expected, the positive trend in political and strategic relations between the U.S. and the two southeastern European countries of Romania and Bulgaria is continuing. During the 2003 preparation of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and in the middle of a serious European diplomatic split in front of the U.S.-led intervention in Iraq, Bucharest and Sofia openly said that Washington could count on them for future strategic cooperation. [See: "Bulgaria, Romania and the Changing Structure of the Black Sea's Geopolitics"]
The 2005 advancement in establishing a U.S. military presence in the two countries signals the consolidation of the new American geostrategic initiative in the Black Sea region and will have important consequences for the European Union, U.S.-Russian relations, and the West's strategy toward the "Greater Middle East." Moreover, it also confirms that Washington now seeks small, flexible bases for the possible deployment of forces in Europe, instead of Cold War-style bigger, permanent facilities.
Venezuela: US May Attack Our Country
Caracas, Nov 19 (Prensa Latina) Venezuela concludes on Saturday a week marked by firm actions regarding foreign policy, mainly a strong response to reiterated, open US attacks.
The latest US darts hit Venezuela as there is an underlying crisis with Mexico in the wake of criticism by President Vicente Fox of Venezuela"s rejection of the Washington-sponsored Free Trade Area of the Americas.
The diplomatic crisis with Mexico started during the Summit of the Americas recently held in Mar del Plata, Argentina, and it led to withdrawal of their respective ambassadors after Venezuela rejected a Mexican ultimatum.
This bilateral crisis remains stagnant. Mexico is demanding an apology Venezuela sees as unjustified, while thousands of people are marching of Saturday in Caracas in support of President Hugo Chavez" stand in the controversy.
To cap it all, as if part of a well-written script, the row with Fox was immediately followed by an attack on Venezuela by US Undersecretary of State for the Western Hemisphere Thomas Shannon.
Speaking before the House of Representatives, Shannon reiterated the same anti-Venezuela arguments of his predecessor Roger Noriega while admitting that the White House is working to support internal opposition in the South American country.
After he heard about Shannon's remarks, President Chavez warned on a new US offensive against his country.
He added that this new offensive stems from the US failure in the Summit of the Americas.
In Chavez" opinion, the northern power represents the most serious threat facing the planet. However, he said Venezuela is ready "to resist whatever may come" and will continue struggling for democratic, peaceful revolution.
The Venezuelan president's reaction was echoed by his Foreign Minister Ali Rodriguez, who stressed that Washington "will not find us unarmed if it does the crazy thing of attacking Venezuela."
The latest US darts hit Venezuela as there is an underlying crisis with Mexico in the wake of criticism by President Vicente Fox of Venezuela"s rejection of the Washington-sponsored Free Trade Area of the Americas.
The diplomatic crisis with Mexico started during the Summit of the Americas recently held in Mar del Plata, Argentina, and it led to withdrawal of their respective ambassadors after Venezuela rejected a Mexican ultimatum.
This bilateral crisis remains stagnant. Mexico is demanding an apology Venezuela sees as unjustified, while thousands of people are marching of Saturday in Caracas in support of President Hugo Chavez" stand in the controversy.
To cap it all, as if part of a well-written script, the row with Fox was immediately followed by an attack on Venezuela by US Undersecretary of State for the Western Hemisphere Thomas Shannon.
Speaking before the House of Representatives, Shannon reiterated the same anti-Venezuela arguments of his predecessor Roger Noriega while admitting that the White House is working to support internal opposition in the South American country.
After he heard about Shannon's remarks, President Chavez warned on a new US offensive against his country.
He added that this new offensive stems from the US failure in the Summit of the Americas.
In Chavez" opinion, the northern power represents the most serious threat facing the planet. However, he said Venezuela is ready "to resist whatever may come" and will continue struggling for democratic, peaceful revolution.
The Venezuelan president's reaction was echoed by his Foreign Minister Ali Rodriguez, who stressed that Washington "will not find us unarmed if it does the crazy thing of attacking Venezuela."
Friday, November 18, 2005
An Open Letter To Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald From Former White House Counsel John W. Dean
November 18, 2005
The Honorable Patrick J. Fitzgerald
Special Counsel
Bond Federal Building
1400 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Special Counsel Fitzgerald:
Excuse my being so presumptuous as to send you this open letter, but the latest revelation of the testimony, before the grand jury, by Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward has raised some fundamental questions for me.
In your post as Special Counsel, you now have nothing less than authority of the Attorney General of the United States, for purposes of the investigation and prosecution of "the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity." (The employee, of course, is Valerie Plame Wilson, a CIA employee with classified status, and the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.) On December 30, 2003, you received a letter from the Deputy Attorney General regarding your powers. On February 6, 2004 you received a letter of further clarification, stating without reservation, that in this matter your powers are "plenary." In effect, then, you act with the power of the Attorney General of the United States.
In light of your broad powers, the limits and narrow focus of your investigation are surprising. On October 28 of this year, your office released a press statement in which you stated that "A major focus of the grand jury investigation was to determine which government officials had disclosed to the media prior to July 14, 2003, information concerning Valerie Wilson's CIA affiliation, and the nature, timing, extent, and purpose of such disclosures, as well as whether any official made such a disclosure knowing that Valerie Wilson's employment by the CIA was classified information."
If, indeed, that is the major focus of your investigation, then your investigation is strikingly limited, given your plenary powers. To be a bit more blunt, in historical context, it is certainly less vigorous an investigation than those of your predecessors who have served as special counsel -- men appointed to undertake sensitive high-level investigations when the Attorney General of the United States had a conflict of interest. (Here, it was, of course, the conflict of Attorney General John Ashcroft that led to the chain of events that resulted in your appointment.)
The Teapot Dome Precedent
As I am sure you are aware, President Calvin Coolidge appointed Owen J. Roberts, a Philadelphia attorney at the time, and former U.S. Senator Atlee Pomerene, then practicing law in Ohio, as special counsels to investigate and prosecute on behalf of the government any wrongdoing related to the so-called Teapot Dome inquiry. That investigation related to the improper dissipation of government assets -- dubious oil leases to Edward L. Doheny and Harry F. Sinclair.
Several years ago, I had an opportunity to spend several weeks at the National Archives going through the files of Special Counsels Roberts and Pomerene. I urge you to send a member of your staff to do the same, for they are highly revealing as to the aggressive -- yet appropriate -- nature of their investigation and actions.
What you will find is that Roberts and Pomerene, before figuring out exactly who was to blame and going after them, first sought to protect the interest of the United States by ending the further dissipation of the nation's oil reserves to Doheny and Sinclair, and seek restitution.
In brief, they started by taking protective civil measures. Only with that accomplished did they move on to criminal prosecutions. Why have you not done the same?
Your investigation also relates to the dissipation -- if not the irreparable destruction -- of a government asset: Valerie Plame Wilson. As you no doubt know, the U.S. Government invested a great deal of money in her special education and training, as well as other aspects of her covert status. Then, either intentionally, or with gross negligence, senior Bush administration officials blew Valerie Wilson's cover. (Prior to the disclosure, her status was not, as some have claimed, an "open secret": Rather, as you yourself have said, the fact that she was a CIA asset was not previously well-known outside the intelligence community.)
Yet there is no evidence that you have made any effort whatsoever to undertake any civil remedies dealing with this either intentional or grossly careless destruction of a government asset. As acting Attorney General for this matter, you have even more authority than did Special Counsels Roberts and Pomerene.
Those who leaked the information about Valerie Wilson breached signed contracts they had made with the government. These contracts, moreover, were not to be taken lightly: They enforced profoundly important obligations to national security, on the part of the very people who were supposed to be serving that end.
Why are you not enforcing those contracts? Why have you not urged the president to sanction those who have released national security information? The president has said he would fire those who committed crimes -- but breach of such profoundly important contracts, even if it does not rise to the level of a crime, is surely cause for dismissal, as well.
You should so urge the President. And if he is not willing to take appropriate action with those who have dishonored their offices, and broken their contracts, you ought to go to court and get an injunction to remove their security clearances.
Again, their agreement with the government was the very understanding upon which they were (and continue to be) given classified information. Now that they have breached it, the vital predicate for those clearances is gone.
The Watergate Precedent
Even more troubling, from an historical point of view, is the fact that the narrowness of your investigation, which apparently is focusing on the Intelligence Identities Protection Act (making it a crime to uncover the covert status of a CIA agent), plays right into the hands of perpetrators in the Administration.
Indeed, this is exactly the plan that was employed during Watergate by those who sought to conceal the Nixon Administration's crimes, and keep criminals in office.
The plan was to keep the investigation focused on the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters -- and away from the atmosphere in which such an action was undertaken. Toward this end, I was directed by superiors to get the Department of Justice to keep its focus on the break-in, and nothing else.
That was done. And had Congress not undertaken its own investigation (since it was a Democratically-controlled Congress with a Republican President) it is very likely that Watergate would have ended with the conviction of those caught in the bungled burglary and wiretapping attempt at the Democratic headquarters.
Now, with a Republican-controlled Congress and a Republican President, you (a Republican appointee) are the last bulwark of protection for the American people. We must hope you will keep faith with them.
It was well understood at the Nixon White House, and it surely is at the Bush White House, that government attorneys do not look to prosecute those for whom they work. We knew that career government lawyers simply were not going to be looking for crimes at the White House -- not because they acted with corrupt intent, but simply because it is no one's instinct to bite the hand that feeds them.
When Archibald Cox was appointed special counsel -- under pressure from the U.S. Senate as a condition to confirm Attorney General Elliot Richardson -- he immediately recognized what had occurred. While no Department of Justice lawyer was found to have engaged in the cover up, their timidity had facilitated it. Cox was fired because he refused to be intimidated. His firing became a badge of honor for all those who do the right thing, regardless of the consequences.
While I have no reason to believe you are easily intimidated, all I can say is that your investigation, thus far, is falling precisely within the narrow confines -- the formula procedure -- that was relied upon in the first phase of the Watergate cover-up by the Nixon administration.
So narrow was your investigation that it appears that you failed to learn that Bob Woodward had been told of Valerie Wilson's CIA post until after you had indicted Scooter Libby. While I have no doubt you know your way around the Southern District of New York, and the Northern District of Illinois, Washington DC is a very different place.
With all due respect, Mr. Fitzgerald, I believe you are being had. I believe that you were selected with the expectation that you would conduct the narrowest of investigations, and it seems you have done just that.
The leak of Valerie Wilson's status did not occur in a vacuum. Republicans in Congress do not want to know what truly happened. You are the last, best hope of the American people in this regard.
I can tell you, as someone who travels about the country, that Americans -- regardless of their political disposition -- are deeply troubled by this case. And, increasingly so, by the limits you have apparently placed on your investigation.
To right-minded Americans, the idea that Administration officials have betrayed their national security obligations, yet remain in their jobs, is nothing short of appalling. Beyond politics is patriotism: Patriotic Americans want to see you not only prosecute those who compromised and endangered Valerie Plame Wilson, but also force the Administration to clean house with respect to those who did this, which you can accomplish through appropriate civil action.
As one who does know something about the way Washington works, I hope you will actually use the plenary powers you have been granted to implement what I understood to be the announced policy of the Department of Justice for which you work -- a zero tolerance policy for leaks.
The Honorable Patrick J. Fitzgerald
Special Counsel
Bond Federal Building
1400 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Special Counsel Fitzgerald:
Excuse my being so presumptuous as to send you this open letter, but the latest revelation of the testimony, before the grand jury, by Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward has raised some fundamental questions for me.
In your post as Special Counsel, you now have nothing less than authority of the Attorney General of the United States, for purposes of the investigation and prosecution of "the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity." (The employee, of course, is Valerie Plame Wilson, a CIA employee with classified status, and the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.) On December 30, 2003, you received a letter from the Deputy Attorney General regarding your powers. On February 6, 2004 you received a letter of further clarification, stating without reservation, that in this matter your powers are "plenary." In effect, then, you act with the power of the Attorney General of the United States.
In light of your broad powers, the limits and narrow focus of your investigation are surprising. On October 28 of this year, your office released a press statement in which you stated that "A major focus of the grand jury investigation was to determine which government officials had disclosed to the media prior to July 14, 2003, information concerning Valerie Wilson's CIA affiliation, and the nature, timing, extent, and purpose of such disclosures, as well as whether any official made such a disclosure knowing that Valerie Wilson's employment by the CIA was classified information."
If, indeed, that is the major focus of your investigation, then your investigation is strikingly limited, given your plenary powers. To be a bit more blunt, in historical context, it is certainly less vigorous an investigation than those of your predecessors who have served as special counsel -- men appointed to undertake sensitive high-level investigations when the Attorney General of the United States had a conflict of interest. (Here, it was, of course, the conflict of Attorney General John Ashcroft that led to the chain of events that resulted in your appointment.)
The Teapot Dome Precedent
As I am sure you are aware, President Calvin Coolidge appointed Owen J. Roberts, a Philadelphia attorney at the time, and former U.S. Senator Atlee Pomerene, then practicing law in Ohio, as special counsels to investigate and prosecute on behalf of the government any wrongdoing related to the so-called Teapot Dome inquiry. That investigation related to the improper dissipation of government assets -- dubious oil leases to Edward L. Doheny and Harry F. Sinclair.
Several years ago, I had an opportunity to spend several weeks at the National Archives going through the files of Special Counsels Roberts and Pomerene. I urge you to send a member of your staff to do the same, for they are highly revealing as to the aggressive -- yet appropriate -- nature of their investigation and actions.
What you will find is that Roberts and Pomerene, before figuring out exactly who was to blame and going after them, first sought to protect the interest of the United States by ending the further dissipation of the nation's oil reserves to Doheny and Sinclair, and seek restitution.
In brief, they started by taking protective civil measures. Only with that accomplished did they move on to criminal prosecutions. Why have you not done the same?
Your investigation also relates to the dissipation -- if not the irreparable destruction -- of a government asset: Valerie Plame Wilson. As you no doubt know, the U.S. Government invested a great deal of money in her special education and training, as well as other aspects of her covert status. Then, either intentionally, or with gross negligence, senior Bush administration officials blew Valerie Wilson's cover. (Prior to the disclosure, her status was not, as some have claimed, an "open secret": Rather, as you yourself have said, the fact that she was a CIA asset was not previously well-known outside the intelligence community.)
Yet there is no evidence that you have made any effort whatsoever to undertake any civil remedies dealing with this either intentional or grossly careless destruction of a government asset. As acting Attorney General for this matter, you have even more authority than did Special Counsels Roberts and Pomerene.
Those who leaked the information about Valerie Wilson breached signed contracts they had made with the government. These contracts, moreover, were not to be taken lightly: They enforced profoundly important obligations to national security, on the part of the very people who were supposed to be serving that end.
Why are you not enforcing those contracts? Why have you not urged the president to sanction those who have released national security information? The president has said he would fire those who committed crimes -- but breach of such profoundly important contracts, even if it does not rise to the level of a crime, is surely cause for dismissal, as well.
You should so urge the President. And if he is not willing to take appropriate action with those who have dishonored their offices, and broken their contracts, you ought to go to court and get an injunction to remove their security clearances.
Again, their agreement with the government was the very understanding upon which they were (and continue to be) given classified information. Now that they have breached it, the vital predicate for those clearances is gone.
The Watergate Precedent
Even more troubling, from an historical point of view, is the fact that the narrowness of your investigation, which apparently is focusing on the Intelligence Identities Protection Act (making it a crime to uncover the covert status of a CIA agent), plays right into the hands of perpetrators in the Administration.
Indeed, this is exactly the plan that was employed during Watergate by those who sought to conceal the Nixon Administration's crimes, and keep criminals in office.
The plan was to keep the investigation focused on the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters -- and away from the atmosphere in which such an action was undertaken. Toward this end, I was directed by superiors to get the Department of Justice to keep its focus on the break-in, and nothing else.
That was done. And had Congress not undertaken its own investigation (since it was a Democratically-controlled Congress with a Republican President) it is very likely that Watergate would have ended with the conviction of those caught in the bungled burglary and wiretapping attempt at the Democratic headquarters.
Now, with a Republican-controlled Congress and a Republican President, you (a Republican appointee) are the last bulwark of protection for the American people. We must hope you will keep faith with them.
It was well understood at the Nixon White House, and it surely is at the Bush White House, that government attorneys do not look to prosecute those for whom they work. We knew that career government lawyers simply were not going to be looking for crimes at the White House -- not because they acted with corrupt intent, but simply because it is no one's instinct to bite the hand that feeds them.
When Archibald Cox was appointed special counsel -- under pressure from the U.S. Senate as a condition to confirm Attorney General Elliot Richardson -- he immediately recognized what had occurred. While no Department of Justice lawyer was found to have engaged in the cover up, their timidity had facilitated it. Cox was fired because he refused to be intimidated. His firing became a badge of honor for all those who do the right thing, regardless of the consequences.
While I have no reason to believe you are easily intimidated, all I can say is that your investigation, thus far, is falling precisely within the narrow confines -- the formula procedure -- that was relied upon in the first phase of the Watergate cover-up by the Nixon administration.
So narrow was your investigation that it appears that you failed to learn that Bob Woodward had been told of Valerie Wilson's CIA post until after you had indicted Scooter Libby. While I have no doubt you know your way around the Southern District of New York, and the Northern District of Illinois, Washington DC is a very different place.
With all due respect, Mr. Fitzgerald, I believe you are being had. I believe that you were selected with the expectation that you would conduct the narrowest of investigations, and it seems you have done just that.
The leak of Valerie Wilson's status did not occur in a vacuum. Republicans in Congress do not want to know what truly happened. You are the last, best hope of the American people in this regard.
I can tell you, as someone who travels about the country, that Americans -- regardless of their political disposition -- are deeply troubled by this case. And, increasingly so, by the limits you have apparently placed on your investigation.
To right-minded Americans, the idea that Administration officials have betrayed their national security obligations, yet remain in their jobs, is nothing short of appalling. Beyond politics is patriotism: Patriotic Americans want to see you not only prosecute those who compromised and endangered Valerie Plame Wilson, but also force the Administration to clean house with respect to those who did this, which you can accomplish through appropriate civil action.
As one who does know something about the way Washington works, I hope you will actually use the plenary powers you have been granted to implement what I understood to be the announced policy of the Department of Justice for which you work -- a zero tolerance policy for leaks.
Of Urine and Oil (With Translation)
The following is something I received in my inbox, which I believe is a humorous analogy to the situation in Iraq.
English translation first, followed by Arabic original:
Umm Da'boul was stunned when she discovered her little ten year old was urinating oil. Her shock grew when she discovered he could urinate large quantities that not only covered her daily requirements, but exceeded them. At first, she kept it a secret- especially since it was winter and we were in the midst of an oil shortage. It was unprecedented- every time she needed to light the stove (tanoor) or fill the kerosene heater, she called out, "Yumma, save us Da'boul..."
[Yumma - or mother - is a term Arabs use to call their children. It is a term of endearment]
Da'boul would stand in front of the oven, or the heater, and begin the systematic dripping process until the fire was going strong.
Nuwaira once discovered the strange situation, when she saw the boy urinating on a small compost heap on their street. Da'boul was playing around and having fun as he stoked the fire. Nuwaira began watching this strange phenomenon especially since she was a person concerned with observing and recording strange phenomenas. Nuwaira was finally able to acquire a sample of Da'boul's urine to test in one of her sophisticated laboratories, and she came out with the result: OIL.
The news spread quickly and the women crowded in front of Umm Da'boul's home, carrying containers of various sizes to carry his urine - oil.
English translation first, followed by Arabic original:
Umm Da'boul was stunned when she discovered her little ten year old was urinating oil. Her shock grew when she discovered he could urinate large quantities that not only covered her daily requirements, but exceeded them. At first, she kept it a secret- especially since it was winter and we were in the midst of an oil shortage. It was unprecedented- every time she needed to light the stove (tanoor) or fill the kerosene heater, she called out, "Yumma, save us Da'boul..."
[Yumma - or mother - is a term Arabs use to call their children. It is a term of endearment]
Da'boul would stand in front of the oven, or the heater, and begin the systematic dripping process until the fire was going strong.
Nuwaira once discovered the strange situation, when she saw the boy urinating on a small compost heap on their street. Da'boul was playing around and having fun as he stoked the fire. Nuwaira began watching this strange phenomenon especially since she was a person concerned with observing and recording strange phenomenas. Nuwaira was finally able to acquire a sample of Da'boul's urine to test in one of her sophisticated laboratories, and she came out with the result: OIL.
The news spread quickly and the women crowded in front of Umm Da'boul's home, carrying containers of various sizes to carry his urine - oil.
New Zapatista "Caracol" Created in Mexico
A Conversation with Veteran Social Fighter Don José Félix Serdán Nájera
SAN ESTEBAN XOCHIMILCO, MEXICO CITY, OCTOBER 2005: The struggle of the Mexican social left is producing relevant and unprecedented results in southeast Mexico City. The form of autonomous organization that the Zapatista Army of National Liberation’s (EZLN's) "caracoles" -- base communities -- have followed since 2003 is being taken up by residents of the San Esteban neighborhood of Xochimilco (an old town now part of a sprawling Mexico City). Here, the land floats on what Mexico's pre-Hispanic history has patiently prepared as a source of ancient crops. The fertile land of a 100-square-meter chinampa (one of the small islands where traditional agriculture developed on Xochimilco's canal system) hosts the Zapatista Caracol "Tecpanpa," its name a Nahuatl word meaning "place of the palaces." It is here where public space and concern for one’s community transcend the private sphere to become another pillar of resistance against social injustice in Latin America.
The caracol's inauguration was held on the morning of October 22. One of the main events was the christening of a trajinera, one of the colorful boats that serve as the traditional means of transport on the canals that connect Xochimilco's chinampas. From that day on, the caracol's first official rebel trajinera has born the name "Digna Ochoa," after the Mexican social fighter and human rights defender who died in 2001. Her death was, to many, obviously the result of a murder, and not a suicide as was the official explanation. Those responsible for the crime remain shrouded by the veil of impunity.
Drugs and the Guatemalan Military
Washington, D.C., November 18, 2005 - Investigative journalist Frank Smyth breaks new ground in documenting links between retired Guatemalan military officers and drug trafficking into the United States in "The Untouchable Narco-State: Guatemala's Military Defies the DEA." Smyth's story, featured in the independent weekly Texas Observer appearing on news stands today, uses declassified U.S. documents from the National Security Archive among other critical evidence.
Smyth's article tells the devastating tale of ongoing, endemic corruption in Guatemala, made possible by the clandestine ties between smugglers and former senior military officers. Unlike other Latin American countries like Colombia and Mexico, Guatemala has not prosecuted or extradited any of its drug kingpins for a over decade. Today the country is a hub for drug smuggling into the United States - according to statistics cited in the article, up to 75% of all cocaine that reaches the United States passes through this Central American nation.
Records provided by the National Security Archive for the story describe a powerful and brutal military institution with intimate ties to the United States and a history of corruption. They include information on:
The Man Who Sold the War
The Man Who Sold the War: Meet John Rendon, Bush's general in the propaganda war
The road to war in Iraq led through many unlikely places. One of them was a chic hotel nestled among the strip bars and brothels that cater to foreigners in the town of Pattaya, on the Gulf of Thailand.
On December 17th, 2001, in a small room within the sound of the crashing tide, a CIA officer attached metal electrodes to the ring and index fingers of a man sitting pensively in a padded chair. The officer then stretched a black rubber tube, pleated like an accordion, around the man's chest and another across his abdomen. Finally, he slipped a thick cuff over the man's brachial artery, on the inside of his upper arm.
Strapped to the polygraph machine was Adnan Ihsan Saeed al-Haideri, a forty-three-year-old Iraqi who had fled his homeland in Kurdistan and was now determined to bring down Saddam Hussein. For hours, as thin mechanical styluses traced black lines on rolling graph paper, al-Haideri laid out an explosive tale. Answering yes and no to a series of questions, he insisted repeatedly that he was a civil engineer who had helped Saddam's men to secretly bury tons of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. The illegal arms, according to al-Haideri, were buried in subterranean wells, hidden in private villas, even stashed beneath the Saddam Hussein Hospital, the largest medical facility in Baghdad.
It was damning stuff -- just the kind of evidence the Bush administration was looking for. If the charges were true, they would offer the White House a compelling reason to invade Iraq and depose Saddam. That's why the Pentagon had flown a CIA polygraph expert to Pattaya: to question al-Haideri and confirm, once and for all, that Saddam was secretly stockpiling weapons of mass destruction.
There was only one problem: It was all a lie. After a review of the sharp peaks and deep valleys on the polygraph chart, the intelligence officer concluded that al-Haideri had made up the entire story, apparently in the hopes of securing a visa.
Venezuela's Chavez calls Bush a 'killer' and a 'madman'
CARACAS (AFX) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez lashed out at his US counterpart, George Bush, late yesterday, calling him a 'killer' and a 'madman' after a top US diplomat criticized Caracas.
The Venezuelan president criticized testimony to the US Congress by Washington's top diplomat for Latin America, Thomas Shannon, who said Venezuela was a 'threat to regional stability'.
Shannon said the administration is 'working multilaterally, engaging the OAS (Organization of American States), the EU and the Council of Europe, among others, to support Venezuelan civil society, speak out against abuses of democracy and hold the Venezuelan government accountable to its commitments under the Inter-American Democratic Charter.
The Bush administration is 'reaching out, at a bilateral level, to our partners in the hemisphere and in Europe to do the same, and sensitizing them to the threat to regional stability posed by the Venezuelan government's arms shopping spree and its support for radical political movements,' Shannon said.
'Within Venezuela, we are working to preserve political and civic space for increasingly at-risk groups,' the diplomat told the House of Representatives' subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere.
Chavez accused the Bush administration of 'assuming the right to grossly intervene in any country'. Shannon's remarks, he told the executives, were part of a 'new offensive' by the White House, after its 'failure' at the Summit of the Americas in Argentina.
'The planet's most serious danger is the government of the United States. ... The people of the United States are being governed by a killer, a genocidal murderer and a madman,'Chavez said at a meeting of Venezuelan and Brazilian business executives in Caracas.
The Venezuelan president criticized testimony to the US Congress by Washington's top diplomat for Latin America, Thomas Shannon, who said Venezuela was a 'threat to regional stability'.
Shannon said the administration is 'working multilaterally, engaging the OAS (Organization of American States), the EU and the Council of Europe, among others, to support Venezuelan civil society, speak out against abuses of democracy and hold the Venezuelan government accountable to its commitments under the Inter-American Democratic Charter.
The Bush administration is 'reaching out, at a bilateral level, to our partners in the hemisphere and in Europe to do the same, and sensitizing them to the threat to regional stability posed by the Venezuelan government's arms shopping spree and its support for radical political movements,' Shannon said.
'Within Venezuela, we are working to preserve political and civic space for increasingly at-risk groups,' the diplomat told the House of Representatives' subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere.
Chavez accused the Bush administration of 'assuming the right to grossly intervene in any country'. Shannon's remarks, he told the executives, were part of a 'new offensive' by the White House, after its 'failure' at the Summit of the Americas in Argentina.
American Christian Fundamentalist Leader Calls For Global War
If Christian fundamentalists are to be believed, America's invasion of Iraq and the consequent brutal slaughter of thousands of innocent civilians in that country are all part of a grand divine plan that will finally culminate in the 'second coming' of Jesus Christ. Establishing an empire that will extend all over the globe, Christ will rule like a powerful monarch, saving those who believe in him and dispatching non-believers, all non-Christians and non-conformist Christians, to everlasting perdition in hell. This is no childish nonsense for millions of Christian fundamentalists, who sincerely believe this to be predicted in the Bible. Not surprisingly, American Christian fundamentalists are today among the most fanatic supporters of Bush's global imperialist wars, in Iraq and elsewhere, which they see as in keeping with the divine mandate. They are no eccentric or lunatic fringe elements, for today Christian fundamentalists exercise a powerful influence in American politics. Among them is George Bush himself, who insists that the American invasion of Iraq has been sanctioned by God, with whom he claims to be in personal communication.
While the Western press is awash with stories, real and exaggerated, about 'Islamic fundamentalists', rarely is mention made about Christian fundamentalists, who, with their vast resources and close links with the current American administration, are a potentially more menacing threat than their Muslim counterparts. According to newspaper reports more than a third of Americans are associated with one or the other Christian fundamentalist outfit, most of which are fiercely anti-communist, anti-Muslim and are passionate advocates of free-market capitalism, global American hegemony and the myth of the civilizing mission of white America. In recent years, these fundamentalist groups have been engaged in aggressive missionary work in other countries as well, including in the so-called 'Third World'. Fired by a passionate hatred for other religions, which they dismiss as 'false' and even 'Satanic', they are today among the most well-funded missionary groups in large parts of Asia and Africa. Crusading for Christ, these fundamentalist groups are not simply out fishing for souls. Rather, for them Christianity is only part of the agenda, which also includes aggressively promoting American and Zionist interests. Today, these groups preach not only Christ but also Pax Americana and even American-led imperialist wars, which they bless as holy causes to usher in the final arrival of Jesus.
Texas-based author and preacher Michael Evans is one of the most notorious American Christian fundamentalist preachers today, a passionate advocate of war in the name of Christ. In a recently published book, titled 'Beyond Iraq: The Next Move-Ancient Prophecy and Modern-Day Conspiracy Collide' (Whitestone Books, Florida, 2003), he spells out a grand design for American global hegemony, blessed in the guise of a holy global war. Key players in this 'divine' plot include the CIA, the American government and army, and Israel, besides various Christian fundamentalist outfits. The book is dedicated, among others, to what Evans describes as 'two old friends', Ehud Olmert, former Israeli Vice President, and the former Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Equally revealingly, the book begins with a quotation which graces the lobby of the original headquarters of the CIA.
While the Western press is awash with stories, real and exaggerated, about 'Islamic fundamentalists', rarely is mention made about Christian fundamentalists, who, with their vast resources and close links with the current American administration, are a potentially more menacing threat than their Muslim counterparts. According to newspaper reports more than a third of Americans are associated with one or the other Christian fundamentalist outfit, most of which are fiercely anti-communist, anti-Muslim and are passionate advocates of free-market capitalism, global American hegemony and the myth of the civilizing mission of white America. In recent years, these fundamentalist groups have been engaged in aggressive missionary work in other countries as well, including in the so-called 'Third World'. Fired by a passionate hatred for other religions, which they dismiss as 'false' and even 'Satanic', they are today among the most well-funded missionary groups in large parts of Asia and Africa. Crusading for Christ, these fundamentalist groups are not simply out fishing for souls. Rather, for them Christianity is only part of the agenda, which also includes aggressively promoting American and Zionist interests. Today, these groups preach not only Christ but also Pax Americana and even American-led imperialist wars, which they bless as holy causes to usher in the final arrival of Jesus.
Texas-based author and preacher Michael Evans is one of the most notorious American Christian fundamentalist preachers today, a passionate advocate of war in the name of Christ. In a recently published book, titled 'Beyond Iraq: The Next Move-Ancient Prophecy and Modern-Day Conspiracy Collide' (Whitestone Books, Florida, 2003), he spells out a grand design for American global hegemony, blessed in the guise of a holy global war. Key players in this 'divine' plot include the CIA, the American government and army, and Israel, besides various Christian fundamentalist outfits. The book is dedicated, among others, to what Evans describes as 'two old friends', Ehud Olmert, former Israeli Vice President, and the former Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Equally revealingly, the book begins with a quotation which graces the lobby of the original headquarters of the CIA.
Vatican Official Refutes Intelligent Design
VATICAN CITY - The Vatican's chief astronomer said Friday that "intelligent design" isn't science and doesn't belong in science classrooms, the latest high-ranking Roman Catholic official to enter the evolution debate in the United States.
The Rev. George Coyne, the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory, said placing intelligent design theory alongside that of evolution in school programs was "wrong" and was akin to mixing apples with oranges.
The Rev. George Coyne, the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory, said placing intelligent design theory alongside that of evolution in school programs was "wrong" and was akin to mixing apples with oranges.
"Intelligent design isn't science even though it pretends to be," the ANSA news agency quoted Coyne as saying on the sidelines of a conference in Florence. "If you want to teach it in schools, intelligent design should be taught when religion or cultural history is taught, not science."
Congressional Hispanic Caucus and U.S. House and Senate Roll Call Vote on Iraq Resolution
Below is the roll call vote of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and of the entire House and Senate on the resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to attack Iraq. The Hispanic Congressional Caucus was unanimous in rejecting the resolution by a vote of 15 - 0. The House approved the resolution by a vote of 296 to 133 and the Senate approved the resolution by a vote of 77 to 23.
Civilization, genocide style
"I think it would be a good idea"- Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought about Western civilization
Ann Clwyd is the Prime Minister Blair’s Human Rights Envoy in Iraq. On November 15th, 2005, interviewed by Jeremy Paxman at BBC 2 Newsnight, she said:
"We have been trying to train the Iraqis in human rights. We’ve set up conferences for the Iraqis on human rights with all the NGOs. We've been trying our very best to get human rights into the Iraqi psyche. We want to help them I think" (1)
When I first heard Ann Clwyd's words, I thought I had missed something. So, I went on line and watched the programme again. No, I had not missed anything. The words were still there, as clear as they could be.
"And what of human rights?" asked novelist Haifa Zangana last April on the Guardian:
An estimated 60% of Iraqi families still depend completely on the monthly food ration. A recent UN human rights commission report says that malnutrition among Iraqi children under the age of five nearly doubled last year to 7.7%, and blamed the war for this deterioration. More than a quarter of Iraqi children do not get enough food to eat.
Four million Iraqis are still in exile, and more are joining their ranks. Many academics, scientists and consultants are leaving for the fear of assassination or kidnapping. According to the interior ministry, 5,000 Iraqis were kidnapped in the last 15 months. Roadside bombs, mortar assaults, shootings by US troops and suicide attacks are all part of daily life.
There are 17,000 prisoners, mostly under US control. Two new prisons have been built by US contractors to accommodate 4,000 new prisoners in the south. A recently published Human Rights Watch report documents the torture and ill-treatment of members of political and armed groups, the arbitrary arrest and torture of criminal suspects, and the torture of children held in adult facilities.
Dick Cheney: War Profiteer
Questions persist about Vice-President Cheney’s role in the ongoing investigation and scandal swirling about the White House. His chief of staff and confidante Lewis "Scooter" Libby has been indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice. Let's take a look at some personal incentives for Cheney’s selling war to our country.
Cheney has pursued a political and corporate career to make himself very rich and powerful. He is the personification of a war profiteer who slid through the revolving door connecting the public and private sectors of the defense establishment on two occasions in a career that has served his relentless quest for power and profits.
As Defense Secretary, Mr. Cheney commissioned a study for the U.S. Department of Defense by Brown and Root Services (now Kellogg, Brown and Root), a wholly owned subsidiary of Halliburton. The study recommended that private firms like Halliburton should take over logistical support programs for U.S. military operations around the world. Just two years after he was Secretary of Defense, Cheney stepped through the revolving door linking the Department of Defense with defense contractors and became CEO of Halliburton. Halliburton was the principal beneficiary of Cheney's privatization efforts for our military's logistical support and Cheney was paid $44 million for five year's work with them before he slipped back through the revolving door of war profiteering to become Vice-President of the United States. When asked about the money he received from Halliburton, Cheney said. "I tell you that the government had absolutely nothing to do with it."
Cheney has pursued a political and corporate career to make himself very rich and powerful. He is the personification of a war profiteer who slid through the revolving door connecting the public and private sectors of the defense establishment on two occasions in a career that has served his relentless quest for power and profits.
As Defense Secretary, Mr. Cheney commissioned a study for the U.S. Department of Defense by Brown and Root Services (now Kellogg, Brown and Root), a wholly owned subsidiary of Halliburton. The study recommended that private firms like Halliburton should take over logistical support programs for U.S. military operations around the world. Just two years after he was Secretary of Defense, Cheney stepped through the revolving door linking the Department of Defense with defense contractors and became CEO of Halliburton. Halliburton was the principal beneficiary of Cheney's privatization efforts for our military's logistical support and Cheney was paid $44 million for five year's work with them before he slipped back through the revolving door of war profiteering to become Vice-President of the United States. When asked about the money he received from Halliburton, Cheney said. "I tell you that the government had absolutely nothing to do with it."
MUERE LENTAMENTE
MUERE LENTAMENTE
Muere lentamente
quien se transforma en esclavo del habito,
repitiendo todos los dias los mismos trayectos,
quien no cambia de marca.
No arriesga vestir un color nuevo y no le habla a
quien no conoce.
Muere lentamente
quien hace de la television su guru.
Muere lentamente
quien evita una pasion,
quien prefiere el negro sobre blanco
y los puntos sobre las "ies" a un remolino de
emociones,
justamente las que rescatan el brillo de los ojos,
sonrisas de los bostezos,
corazones a los tropiezos y sentimientos.
Muere lentamente
quien no voltea la mesa cuando esta infeliz en el
trabajo,
quien no arriesga lo cierto por lo incierto para ir
detras de un sueño
quien no se permite por lo menos una vez en la vida,
huir de los consejos sensatos.
Muere lentamente
quien no viaja,
quien no lee,
quien no oye musica,
quien no encuentra gracia en si mismo.
Muere lentamente
quien destruye su amor propio,
quien no se deja ayudar.
Muere lentamente,
quien pasa los dias quejandose de su mala suerte
o de la lluvia incesante.
Muere lentamente,
quien abandona un proyecto antes de iniciarlo,
no preguntando de un asunto que desconoce o
no respondiendo cuando le indagan sobre algo que sabe.
Evitemos la muerte en suaves cuotas,
recordando siempre que estar vivo exige un esfuerzo
mucho mayor
que el simple hecho de respirar.
Solamente la ardiente paciencia hará que conquistemos
una espléndida felicidad.
Pablo Neruda
Muere lentamente
quien se transforma en esclavo del habito,
repitiendo todos los dias los mismos trayectos,
quien no cambia de marca.
No arriesga vestir un color nuevo y no le habla a
quien no conoce.
Muere lentamente
quien hace de la television su guru.
Muere lentamente
quien evita una pasion,
quien prefiere el negro sobre blanco
y los puntos sobre las "ies" a un remolino de
emociones,
justamente las que rescatan el brillo de los ojos,
sonrisas de los bostezos,
corazones a los tropiezos y sentimientos.
Muere lentamente
quien no voltea la mesa cuando esta infeliz en el
trabajo,
quien no arriesga lo cierto por lo incierto para ir
detras de un sueño
quien no se permite por lo menos una vez en la vida,
huir de los consejos sensatos.
Muere lentamente
quien no viaja,
quien no lee,
quien no oye musica,
quien no encuentra gracia en si mismo.
Muere lentamente
quien destruye su amor propio,
quien no se deja ayudar.
Muere lentamente,
quien pasa los dias quejandose de su mala suerte
o de la lluvia incesante.
Muere lentamente,
quien abandona un proyecto antes de iniciarlo,
no preguntando de un asunto que desconoce o
no respondiendo cuando le indagan sobre algo que sabe.
Evitemos la muerte en suaves cuotas,
recordando siempre que estar vivo exige un esfuerzo
mucho mayor
que el simple hecho de respirar.
Solamente la ardiente paciencia hará que conquistemos
una espléndida felicidad.
Pablo Neruda
Eyes on US Troops in Paraguay as Bolivian Election Nears
The recent shift to the left among Latin American governments has been a cause for concern in the Bush administration. The White House has tried in vain to put this shift in check. Presidential elections in Bolivia on December 18th are likely to further challenge U.S. hegemony. Evo Morales, an indigenous, socialist congressman, is expected to win the election. How far will the U.S. go to prevent a leftist victory in Bolivia? Some Bolivians fear the worst.
In the past year, U.S. military operations in neighboring Paraguay have complicated the already tumultuous political climate in the region. White House officials claim the operations are based on humanitarian aid efforts. However, political analysts in Bolivia and Paraguay say the activity is aimed at securing the region’s gas and water reserves and intervening in Bolivia if Morales wins.
Five hundred U.S. troops arrived in Paraguay on July 1st with planes, weapons and ammunition. Reports from a journalist with the Argentine newspaper, Clarin, prove that an airbase exists in Mariscal Estigarribia, Paraguay, which is 200 kilometers from the border with Bolivia and may be utilized by the U.S. military. (1)
Earlier this year, Paraguayan lawmakers granted U.S. troops total immunity and have given the Pentagon access to the Estigarribia base, which was built by U.S. technicians in the 1980s and is larger than Paraguay's international airport in Asunción, the country’s capital. (2)
In the past year, U.S. military operations in neighboring Paraguay have complicated the already tumultuous political climate in the region. White House officials claim the operations are based on humanitarian aid efforts. However, political analysts in Bolivia and Paraguay say the activity is aimed at securing the region’s gas and water reserves and intervening in Bolivia if Morales wins.
Five hundred U.S. troops arrived in Paraguay on July 1st with planes, weapons and ammunition. Reports from a journalist with the Argentine newspaper, Clarin, prove that an airbase exists in Mariscal Estigarribia, Paraguay, which is 200 kilometers from the border with Bolivia and may be utilized by the U.S. military. (1)
Earlier this year, Paraguayan lawmakers granted U.S. troops total immunity and have given the Pentagon access to the Estigarribia base, which was built by U.S. technicians in the 1980s and is larger than Paraguay's international airport in Asunción, the country’s capital. (2)
CITGO to Begin Discounted Heating Oil Distribution to Poor U.S. Communities
Caracas, Venezuela, November 18, 2005—The Venezuelan-owned and U.S.-based fuel refiner and distributor Citgo will begin distributing discounted heating oil to poor U.S. communities next week. Rafael Ramirez, Venezuela's Minister of Energy and Petroleum, made the announcement yesterday, saying that the measure is meant to show Venezuela's commitment to disadvantaged sectors in the United States.
Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez had originally announced the measure last August, while the U.S. civil rights activist Jesse Jackson was visiting Venezuela.
The launch of the discounted heating oil program is meant to coincide with the Thanksgiving holiday and will benefit communities in poor communities of Boston, Massachusetts and of the Bronx, New York.
The first phase of the program will begin in Boston and will provide 4.5 million liters (1.2 million gallons) of heating oil at discounted rates, which will mean a savings of approximately $10 million. According to the Venezuelan government, the discounts will be achieved by eliminating middle-men and having Citgo deliver the heating oil directly to the communities. Accordingly, the plan does not involve any losses to Citgo itself.
The logistics of the plan will involve non-profit community organizations, which will help with the selection of beneficiaries, distribution, and billing. Heating oil costs are expected to reach historical heights this year, which means that many poor households might have to go without heat, despite limited state programs to subsidize heating oil for low-income families.
Citgo is a wholly owned subsidiary of Venezuela's state-owned oil company PDVSA and operates five refineries and licenses 14,000 gas stations throughout the U.S.
Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez had originally announced the measure last August, while the U.S. civil rights activist Jesse Jackson was visiting Venezuela.
The launch of the discounted heating oil program is meant to coincide with the Thanksgiving holiday and will benefit communities in poor communities of Boston, Massachusetts and of the Bronx, New York.
The first phase of the program will begin in Boston and will provide 4.5 million liters (1.2 million gallons) of heating oil at discounted rates, which will mean a savings of approximately $10 million. According to the Venezuelan government, the discounts will be achieved by eliminating middle-men and having Citgo deliver the heating oil directly to the communities. Accordingly, the plan does not involve any losses to Citgo itself.
The logistics of the plan will involve non-profit community organizations, which will help with the selection of beneficiaries, distribution, and billing. Heating oil costs are expected to reach historical heights this year, which means that many poor households might have to go without heat, despite limited state programs to subsidize heating oil for low-income families.
Citgo is a wholly owned subsidiary of Venezuela's state-owned oil company PDVSA and operates five refineries and licenses 14,000 gas stations throughout the U.S.
The "Some Other Dude Did It" Defense of I. Lewis Libby
Two presiding deities -- and lively ghosts they are -- continue to hover over the present administration: Vietnam and Watergate. Though the competition between them is fierce, this week Watergate suddenly surged to the fore as the Washington Post's Bob Woodward, famed investigative reporter turned imperial "stenographer" for the Bush administration, crashed and burst into distinctly Judy-Miller-esque flames. Even Woodward's blurry account of his testimony for Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald had a taste of Millerdom to it. It's interesting, by the way, that he thought to offer an "apology" to his Washington Post colleagues and boss, but not to the Post's readers who might wonder why the supposed greatest reporter of our times swallowed the first Plame leak the way a cat might a canary and later went out on the hustings claiming there was little significance to the case. On Larry King Live ("When the story comes out, I'm quite confident we're going to find out that it started kind of as gossip, as chatter...") and National Public Radio ("When I think all of the facts come out in this case, it's going to be laughable because the consequences are not that great…"), he dissed the case, while referring to Fitzgerald as "a junkyard-dog prosecutor." It's quite a sordid little tale. So prepare yourself for another perfect storm of newspaper and blogging criticism over the sad fate of the mainstream media and our -- until recently -- less than investigative press.
Libby's defense team should be careful what it hopes for, because the real facts don't help Libby at all. Woodward's recent disclosure merely adds another senior administration official to the already large group who were obviously working with Libby to distract the public from a truth the administration had already fessed up to -- that the President had made an entirely unsubstantiated claim about an Iraqi search for uranium from Niger in his State of the Union Address. It's not that "some other dude did it" or that "some other dude did it first." The more the real facts about smearing and deception by senior administration officials come out, the more obvious it is that lots of them did it -- and Patrick Fitzgerald shows no signs of folding up his tent and departing. In the meantime, the SODDI defense is likely to prove not only unhelpful to Libby but a potential disaster for the Bush administration, sweeping yet more people into the case.
Libby's defense team should be careful what it hopes for, because the real facts don't help Libby at all. Woodward's recent disclosure merely adds another senior administration official to the already large group who were obviously working with Libby to distract the public from a truth the administration had already fessed up to -- that the President had made an entirely unsubstantiated claim about an Iraqi search for uranium from Niger in his State of the Union Address. It's not that "some other dude did it" or that "some other dude did it first." The more the real facts about smearing and deception by senior administration officials come out, the more obvious it is that lots of them did it -- and Patrick Fitzgerald shows no signs of folding up his tent and departing. In the meantime, the SODDI defense is likely to prove not only unhelpful to Libby but a potential disaster for the Bush administration, sweeping yet more people into the case.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)