nwsltr73
NEWSLETTER #73 October 23, 2005Katrina, Eugenics and 'Peak Oil'
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr73.html
So ... I thought that I'd try the old "fake my death and boost sales" charade, 'cause I heard that it worked great for the Beatles back in the '60s, but it hasn't worked out all that well for me, to tell you the truth, which is why, for better or worse, I'm back. Did anyone miss me?
I have a lot of catching up to do, so much so that I don't really know where to begin, but I guess I'll start with the following brief news story, which I happened to stumble upon while digging deep within a recent edition of the Los Angeles Times:
KATRINA'S AFTERMATHCuban Hurricane Preparation Offers Lessons in OrganizationLos Angeles TimesSeptember 10, 2005; Page A30HAVANA — Cubans have no Astrodome or cruise ships to house evacuees, and meals-ready-to-eat usually consist of rice and beans.But they have weathered some of the most violent storms the tropics can churn up, with surprisingly low death tolls and almost perfect compliance with evacuation orders.Last year, United Nations emergency relief coordinator Jan Egeland singled out Cuba for praise among Caribbean nations for hurricane evacuation planning. When Hurricane Ivan swiped the island last September, for example, Cuba didn't record a single death, but 115 people died regionally. The same month, Hurricane Jeanne killed more than 1,500 in Haiti, many drowning in floodwaters.Now, as analysts and politicians examine how the U.S. government responded to Hurricane Katrina — and how to avoid a similar catastrophe — some say this communist island may offer a few lessons.Cuban evacuations are mostly carried out by community groups that take cues from the government. The military assists, unarmed."Cuba views hurricanes as a top national security priority, and they know the drill," said Daniel P. Erikson, Caribbean specialist at the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington think tank. The storms not only imperil lives, he said, but threaten Cuba's economic underpinnings: agriculture and tourism."The drill" Erikson refers to includes yearly military exercises across the island, with two-day training sessions for emergency workers, simulated evacuations and reviews of emergency plans.During hurricanes, Cuba's four state-run television stations run nonstop evacuation orders and weather reports. The coverage is anchored by President Fidel Castro, who coordinates response during live broadcasts as if waging battle against an invading army."It's an organized system, in a pyramid structure," said Dr. Gabriel Diaz Ramirez, a Cuban pediatrician dispatched to Indonesia this year to treat tsunami survivors. "We have our government's support."Perhaps the most striking element of Cuba's disaster preparedness is that most residents obey evacuation orders without question. The government says it evacuated 1.5 million people in July ahead of Hurricane Dennis. Most went to safe zones, and 245,000 flocked to state-run shelters.This contrasts starkly with New Orleans, where thousands decided to ride out the storm and were later plucked from flooded attics or perished. Others are still refusing to leave, even with toxic muck on the streets and armed forces moving in to carry out mandatory evacuations.Erikson suggested that the smooth displacements were a product of the government's tight control over residents."It's still a police state," he said. "You could say one advantage they may have is the ability to move large numbers of people in a short amount of time."But of course the political environment in Cuba makes it difficult to resist those kinds of orders."(http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-cuba10sep10,1,3142651,print.story?coll=la-home-headlines&ctrack=1&cset=true)
Stupid fucking Commies! Can you imagine a government actually demonstrating concern for the health and safety of the people? What are they thinking over there? And what is this business of sending in the military unarmed, as if they were being sent in to do some sort of humanitarian work? How in the hell are you going to issue shoot-to-kill orders if your relief workers aren't even packing heat? Those pinkoes are just so damn backwards in their thinking. I mean, who the hell relies on "community groups" when you can just get on the phone and call in some professional mercenaries? (Blackwater Mercenaries Deploy in New Orleans) Come to think of it, I bet they don't even have any 'private' paramilitary outfits in Cuba. They do though have an awful lot of medical doctors. So many that they offered to send over a veritable army of 1,100 of them to tend to the victims of Katrina. The Bush administration, however, realizing that the presence of swarms of qualified medical personnel could negatively impact their denegrofication project, declined the offer.
The writer and editor of the L.A. Times piece, after consulting their trusty copy of "Orwell for Dummies," concluded that Cuba is better at responding to disasters because "it's still a police state." But that much is rather obvious, since, as any fool knows, a “police state” is one that responds to natural disasters by sending in actual relief workers, while a “democracy” generally responds to natural disasters by militarily occupying the zone of destruction and criminalizing the survivors. Most of you probably remember learning all that stuff back in your Civics classes.
There is, of course, an alternative explanation for why the Cuban people willingly follow evacuation orders while the residents of New Orleans were reluctant to do so. Granted, the alternative explanation lacks the disconnection from reality so clearly on display in the Times article, but we should probably give it some consideration nonetheless, so here it is: the Cuban people know that after the danger has passed, they will actually be allowed to return to their homes!
The people of New Orleans, on the other hand, had good reason to fear that they would not.
It is painfully obvious that many of the former residents of New Orleans will never be going home. Many did not survive, though we will never know the true number since it was apparent from early on that the death toll would be covered up. Of those who did survive, many have seen the last of their family homes. Residents of New Orleans probably didn’t realize it at the time, but the stage was set two months before Katrina came ashore, on June 23, 2005, when the U.S. Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom, decreed that it was well within the ‘rule of law’ for the government to seize what is ostensibly privately held land so that that land can then be passed into the grubby, bloody hands of developers.
The stage was actually set earlier than that, in April 2005, when the United States Congress, in its infinite wisdom, opted to pass some bankruptcy ‘reform’ legislation. I’ll defer to the L.A. Times once again for an explanation of exactly how that ‘reform’ will come into play:
After virtually every major hurricane of the last 25 years, bankruptcy filings have grown significantly faster than usual as victims sought to shake off old debts in order to rebuild their economically ruined lives.
But unless changes are made to an overhaul of the nation’s bankruptcy law due to kick in next month, many of those affected by Hurricane Katrina and the resulting floods will have a substantially harder time winning court relief from loans they incurred for homes and businesses that are now gone, according to a variety of judges, lawyers and policy experts.
“Just because your house or car is somewhere in the Gulf of Mexico doesn’t mean that your auto loan or mortgage went with it,” said Brady C. Williamson, who was appointed by President Clinton to head a national bankruptcy commission in the mid-1990s. (Peter Gosselin “New Bankruptcy Law Could Exact a Toll on Storm Victims,” Los Angeles Times, September 7, 2005)
Imagine, if you will, this purely – ahem – ‘hypothetical’ scenario (which, as we all know, could never happen in the land of the free and home of the brave): under the pretense that conditions are far too dangerous for you to stay, you and your family are forced from your family home by heavily armed troops. You are then shipped off, against your will, to some distant, unspecified location, where your actions are monitored lest you decide to do something crazy, such as attempting to return to what you, quite foolishly, still think of as your home. That home, meanwhile, is condemned and quickly bulldozed, though the actual damage to the property was quite minimal. The ground that your house used to stand on is seized by the government and will soon serve as the home of the “Pirates of the Caribbean” ride at the new Disneyland New Orleans®. Having been stripped of everything that you once called your own – including your home and all its furnishings, the land it stood on, your vehicle(s), and your job – and having been separated from your friends and neighbors, you are now faced with the daunting prospect of completely rebuilding your life with little to work with other than a mountain of debt, which, you are quickly assured, you will be required to pay back. And guess what? This month’s payments are already past due.
If you were ever to find yourself in this ‘hypothetical’ predicament, which of the following would best describe your situation? (a) I live in some sort of hellish, Kafkaesque police state; (b) I live in the world’s greatest democracy; or (c) I’m Caucasian, so this doesn’t really apply to me – yet.
I have to admit that I am quite impressed at the amazing foresight displayed by the Washington gang in getting these new and vastly improved interpretations of “bankruptcy” and “eminent domain” on the books just in time to serve the needs of the victims of Hurricane Katrina. And I am also quite impressed with Washington’s propaganda unit, otherwise known as “Hollywood,” which continues to demonstrate an uncanny ability to serve up “product” that offers commentary on ongoing events, despite the fact that that product was filmed long before the events even took place.
Consider, for example, the new television series “Invasion,” which debuted on September 21, just a few short weeks after the flooding of New Orleans, and just three days before Rita came ashore. Two curious facts about this new show stood out even before the first episode aired: (1) ABC chose to premier it along with the rest of its slate of new Fall shows even though it was obviously in very poor taste to do so; and (2) there was not a whimper of protest from any avenue of the media over that decision.
For those who have not seen “Invasion” (and you are all excused for that oversight, since the series, shockingly enough, sucks), it concerns the rather strange goings-on in the aftermath of – are you ready for this? – a Gulf Coast hurricane. Prominently featured on the program are frequent allusions to governmental cover-ups. The hurricane that kicked off the series, you see, was apparently not your run-of-the-mill hurricane. According to one character on the show – a character who, as custom dictates, is portrayed as a paranoid ‘conspiracy theorist’ with a fondness for aliens – the hurricane was actually an elaborate “cover for a military operation.” Elsewhere in the premier episode, a young girl spoke cryptically about how “the truth will never come out” because the media wouldn’t hang around for long before they moved on to other things. (These may or may not be exact quotes; I wasn’t taking notes.)
Despite being a mediocre show at best, “Invasion” has received rave reviews from many supposed critics. The fact that the show is on the air at all, despite the obvious insensitivity shown to the tens of thousands of victims of Katrina and Rita, coupled with the fact that it is actually being praised, rather than questioned, would seem to indicate that some powerful folks in the Washington/Hollywood axis feel that it is important that “Invasion” be seen by the viewing public.
And that, of course, raises the obvious question: why is it important that this show be seen? My guess is that it is probably because at the very time when people of conscience should be asking questions not too dissimilar from those raised in “Invasion,” Hollywood has already, in its inimitable style, proactively relegated such concerns to the world of television fantasies. And, of course, thrown a bunch of aliens into the mix. Can anal probes be far behind?
Perhaps we should throw caution to the wind and have a quick look at some of the ‘conspiracy theories’ surrounding Hurricane Katrina. There certainly is no shortage of them out there. Probably the most elaborate theories are the ones claiming that the government actually created Katrina, using advanced, ‘black’ technology. Personally, I find that scenario to be highly unlikely. And yes, by the way, I am well aware that control of the weather has been, for some time now, an explicitly stated goal of the U.S. military. And yes, I am also well aware of the HAARP project in Alaska. However, there is a big difference between having the desire and willingness to do something, and having the technological ability to actually do it. And I seriously doubt that the technology to create and control manmade weather systems currently exists. I seriously doubt that mankind even has an accurate understanding of how naturally-occurring weather systems operate, which would seem to be a prerequisite for creating artificial systems.
A related theory is the one that holds that while Katrina was not necessarily artificially created, it was deliberately steered into New Orleans. Again, this seems very unlikely – more plausible than the creation theories, I suppose, but still very unlikely. And the truth of the matter is that what these almost entirely speculative theories primarily do is draw attention away from the real question that needs to be asked here, which is: was Hurricane Katrina even the primary cause of the devastation in New Orleans, or did it just provide a convenient “cover for a military operation”?
Already long forgotten, by both the media and the always well-informed American public, is that there was a bizarrely long gap between when Katrina came ashore and when the levees were breached. Also long forgotten is that the earliest reports out of New Orleans held that the city had been spared from a direct hit, and the storm had therefore done considerably less damage than anticipated.
Captain Nora Tyson – commander of the USS Bataan, a Navy ship that first rode out the storm in the Gulf of Mexico before following it to shore – perfectly summed up the initial feeling about the storm’s impact on New Orleans: “On Monday it was like, ‘Wow, it missed us, it took a turn east,’ and everything eased up. It was ‘Let’s open up Bourbon Street, have a beer, let’s go party,’ and understandably so. And then all of a sudden, literally and figuratively, the dam broke, and here we are.” (Stephen J. Hedges “Navy Ship Nearby Underused,” Chicago Tribune, September 4, 2005)
According to the Los Angeles Times, Wall Street was feeling in a celebratory mood as well: “Hurricanes are never good news for insurance companies. But by veering east of New Orleans on Monday, Hurricane Katrina may have saved insurers a bundle. Major casualty insurers saw only modest losses on Wall Street …” (Kathy M. Kristof “Insurers Reevaluate Hurricane’s Losses,” Los Angeles Times, August 30, 2005, Page C2) On the front page of the same newspaper, Katrina was said to have “delivered a hard but glancing blow to New Orleans, then spent its full fury on the Mississippi Gulf Coast, swamping beach resorts and inland towns.” (Scott Gold and Ellen Barry “Katrina Hits the Gulf Coast,” Los Angeles Times, August 30, 2005, Page A1)
That “glancing blow” would have serious repercussions – but not until the next day. Hurricane Katrina arrived on the shores of New Orleans on Monday morning, August 29. By the time night fell on the partially evacuated city, it appeared as though the danger had passed and New Orleans had successfully dodged a bullet. The Category 4 winds never really materialized, the rain was no match for New Orleans’ formidable pumping system, and all 350 miles of the city’s system of levees and canals held fast against the feared storm surges. Until, that is, the wee hours of the morning of Tuesday, August 30, when three canals (the 17th Street Canal, the London Street Canal and the Industrial Canal, aka the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal) suffered major breaches in no less than five separate locations.
The official story, for the first several weeks, was that storm surges from the mighty Katrina were simply too much for the overburdened levee walls to handle. The rising water first surged over the tops of the levee walls, we were to believe, sending the first floodwaters into New Orleans, and then the levee walls themselves ultimately succumbed to the surging waters. And the rest, as they say, is history.
Now, that’s a nice little story. It really is. It’s at least as good, I’d have to say, as any of the other stories cooked up in recent years to explain away unusual events. True, if you really give it some thought – like, say, for thirty seconds or so – then it doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense, but that has never stopped a wild yarn from becoming a part of the new reality before, so it shouldn’t be a problem now.
Once upon a time, in a more innocent era, people might have questioned how it was that storm surges could have caused the breaches in the levees nearly a full day after the storm had hit town. “How can that be?” they might have asked. “The storm came through here on Monday and the levees weren’t breached until Tuesday. The wind and rain were pretty well gone by then, so it seems to me like it would have been kind of an odd time for a massive storm surge. And it seems pretty darn peculiar that all five of those breaches – all five of them! – occurred under cover of night some 18-21 hours after Katrina came ashore.”
Today, in these much more enlightened times, we would never raise such foolish questions. Instead, we instinctively do what is expected of all refined, cultured men and women of the twenty-first century: we warmly embrace whatever nonsensical lies are thrown our way, and then we go and share those lies with others, only to find that everyone else already knows the same lies, which is okay, as it turns out, because that makes it easier for us to all sit around and discuss current events as though we actually know what we’re talking about.
In this particular situation, however, we do not have to blindly accept the first official lie. There are slightly different rules at play here, because this is one of those cases where the official story has been officially repudiated. That official repudiation, however, was a rather coy one, which means that this is a situation where it is okay to believe either the first official lie or the second official lie. Either one will do just fine, just so long as you firmly believe in one of the two. The closest parallel I can think of here concerns the attack on the Pentagon on September 11. Readers will recall that at first it was claimed that the plane and everything in it was vaporized by the intense heat from the resulting fire. Later, however, it was claimed that the passengers were actually recovered and identified through DNA analysis, and that the plane had been largely reconstructed and was sitting in an unidentified aircraft hangar.
Obviously, both stories could not possibly be true, and, in fact, neither one of them was actually true. But that’s not the point here. The point here is that it is perfectly okay to be a true believer in either official version of reality. What is not okay is trying to insert your own reality, or, worse yet, a relatively objective reality into the mix. That would be considered a major faux pas. The important thing to remember here is that, while you are not limited to a specific official reality, you must choose from one of the available official realities. And as I started to say, there is a new official story concerning the breached levees. It goes something like this:
The levee breaches along two major canals that flooded New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina resulted from massive soil failures under concrete storm walls, not from hurricane surges that sent water over the tops of the walls as Army officials initially said, according to teams of investigators who have examined evidence in the last week. The findings appear to chip away at the simple story that the storm surge was much larger and higher than the walls were designed to handle … Investigators have found no evidence of such overflow and foundational scouring at the breaches in the London Avenue and 17th Street Canals, two main failures behind the central New Orleans flooding. In fact, in one case, water marks are a full 2½ feet below the tops of the walls. (Ralph Vartabedian “Soil Failure, Not Overflow, Cited in Levee Breaches,” Los Angeles Times, October 8, 2005, Page A26)
So it appears that it has now been officially acknowledged that there was no massive storm surge that sent water pouring over the levee walls, on either Monday or Tuesday mornings. Even at the height of the storm, the hurricane’s surges didn’t come close to overflowing the levee walls at either the 17th Street or London Avenue Canals, where water remained "more than two feet below the tops of the walls." (Ralph Vartabedian and Stephen Braun “System Failures Seen in Levees,” Los Angeles Times, October 22, 2005) But then, hours later, when the winds and rain had died down, and relative calm had returned to the waters of Lake Pontchartrain, the soil underneath the levee walls, in multiple locations, spontaneously failed. Along the London Avenue Canal, for example, “a 100-foot-long block of soil, about 15 feet deep, was pushed back 35 feet. As the earth berm shifted, the concrete storm wall on top collapsed into the hole left by the moving soil and disappeared into the water.”
I wonder what could cause that to happen? Why would there be such a tremendous lateral force exerted on the soil underlying the levee walls at that particular time? Is that the norm in the aftermath of a hurricane? I’m no expert in the dynamics of various types of natural disasters, but it seems to me that a phenomenon like that would more likely be the result of an earthquake than a hurricane. Another possibility, I suppose, is that some type of depth charges were responsible for undermining the levees. I’ll bet that the Pentagon has something in its catalogue that would do the trick. But I don’t recall reading any news reports of the levees being deliberately blown, so I guess we have to rule out that possibility.
Luckily, we have an alternative explanation. According to the most recent reports, the soil failures were caused by oak tress and burrowing rodents: "The triggering event in the catastrophic failure of the 17th Street Canal may have been the fall of a large oak tree planted at the base of the levee ... The tree's falling started a chain reaction that took out several hundred feet of flood wall. A similar scenario may have played out on the London Avenue Canal." In addition, "burrowing animals created large tunnels that undermined already weak foundations." Levee board officials, however, openly scoffed at such foolishness, noting that "there were no trees on the levees anywhere," and neither were there large concentrations of burrowing rodents. (Ralph Vartabedian and Stephen Braun “System Failures Seen in Levees,” Los Angeles Times, October 22, 2005)
Since it is pretty obvious that only a crazed 'conspiracy theorist' would buy into the notion that oak trees and rodents caused the massive flooding of New Orleans, let's turn our attention back to the more credible theory that the levees were deliberately breached. And, as it turns out, there were indeed some reports of deliberate flooding, albeit much later in the day Tuesday, many hours after the initial breaches: “authorities took the decision to flood [Crowder Road] district in an apparent attempt to sluice out some of the water that had submerged a neighbouring district … The authorities had given people in the district until 5pm on Tuesday to get out – after that they would open the floodgates.” (Jamie Doward “They’re Not Giving Us What We Need To Survive,” The Observer, September 4, 2005)
Do levees have floodgates? Gates that, if opened, allow neighborhoods to be flooded? That’s a pretty odd feature. I hope they keep them locked, to keep the neighborhood kids from trying to open them. What really happened, I suppose, is that a levee was deliberately breached. But I wonder how they did that? I wonder if they undermined it by blasting away the soil underneath? I’m just curious because that seems to be a pretty effective technique. And it probably makes relatively little noise. But I guess in this case noise wasn’t really a factor, since breaching the levee was an officially acknowledged act. No one was trying to hide anything. If you were trying to hide authorship of the breaches though, it might be a good idea to undermine the levee walls rather then just blasting them directly.
Does anyone find it curious, by the way, that the Crowder Road District was deliberately flooded? What was the thought process behind that decision? ... “Well, it looks like we have one neighborhood over here that is pretty well trashed. There’s just water everywhere. So I think what we should do – and I’ve given this a great deal of thought – is try to drain some or all of the water into that neighborhood right over there. That way, we will have two flooded neighborhoods! Actually, truth be told, we’re hoping that if we act quickly enough, the first neighborhood can be saved – at the expense, of course, of the second neighborhood. And I’m sure the people in the second neighborhood won’t mind because, as a general rule, the black folks around here are always willing to lend a hand to help out the white folks.”
The main point of this semi-digression, I suppose, is that as of Tuesday (August 30) evening, actions were being taken to deliberately cause flooding in certain neighborhoods, and no credible explanation was being given for these actions. Perhaps then it is not so unreasonable to ponder whether the initial breaches, all occurring under cover of night, all occurring many hours after the storm had passed through town, and all causing flooding primarily in the poorest sections of the city, were deliberate as well. And perhaps the additional flooding – occurring too long after Katrina’s landfall to be credibly attributed to the storm, and so therefore officially, though quietly, acknowledged as a deliberate act – was undertaken to correct a ‘problem’ with the initial flooding, that problem being that a few of the targeted neighborhoods were spared while a few of the non-targeted neighborhoods were not.
Before moving on from this discussion of the levees, I should probably mention one rather curious incident that occurred in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. I realize, of course, that America is home to the largest, mightiest, ‘freest’ media machine the world has ever seen, and because of that, there is virtually no scrap of news that escapes the attention of the press corps and the American people. Nevertheless, in the unlikely event that some of you may have missed this story the first time around, I present it to you here in its entirety:
Police shot eight people carrying guns on a New Orleans bridge Sunday, killing five or six, a deputy chief said. A spokesman for the Army Corps of Engineers said the victims were contractors on their way to repair a canal. The contractors were walking across a bridge on their way to launch barges into Lake Pontchartrain to fix the 17th Street Canal, said John Hall, a spokesman for the Corps. Earlier Sunday, New Orleans Deputy Police Chief W.J. Riley said police shot eight people, killing five or six. The shootings took place on the Danziger Bridge, which spans a canal connecting Lake Pontchartrain and the Mississippi River. No other details were immediately available. (“Police Kill Five Contractors on LA Bridge,” Associated Press, September 4, 2005)
This was, of course, a huge story when it first broke. I mean, how often do groups of armed military personnel and groups of armed police personnel reenact the “gunfight at the OK Corral” on an American street using live ammunition? This unprecedented event – the gunning down of half-a-dozen military personnel on American soil for merely going about doing their jobs – naturally generated a considerable amount of media attention. Bill O’Reilly alone spent the better part of a week hashing over the ‘talking points’ of the story. To the surprise of everyone, Greta Van Susteren and Nancy Grace even took a break from their relentless search for Natalie Holloway to focus attention on the big story. Oprah had on the wives of the fallen contractors to discuss how they were dealing with their loss. Investigations were quickly launched into the incident by the Army Corps of Engineers, the New Orleans Police Department, the Louisiana Governor's Office, the New Orleans Mayor's Office, the United States Congress, and various other concerned parties.
You all remember all of that … right? If not, it’s probably because none of it actually happened. Except for the part about the shootout between the Army Corps of Engineers and the New Orleans Police Department. That part really happened. At least, I’m assuming that there was quite a shootout, since one would expect that when armed military personnel are being fired upon, they will generally fire back. But all the rest, I just made up. Kind of like the real media just makes stuff up.
It is difficult to determine, given the scarcity of details available, what really happened. When the two organizations involved are the New Orleans Police Department and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, it’s near impossible to determine who might have been the good guys in this story. Was this a case of corrupt elements of the NOPD thwarting efforts to arrest the flooding of New Orleans? Or was this a case of honest police officers thwarting efforts to further sabotage the levee system? Or was it neither? Was it merely a tragic case of mistaken identity? Possibly so, but the fact that this story was quickly buried suggests otherwise.
Moving on then …
Much less discussed than the breakdown in the levee system was the unprecedented breakdown in the city’s second line of defense, its imposing system of pumping stations. Given that New Orleans sits below sea level, an effective pumping system is absolutely essential to the city’s survival. Without it, New Orleans would flood every time a decent rain came through town. Luckily then, the city has a pumping system like no other in the world. (“How the Levees Failed,” Discovery Channel, October 9, 2005)
Built in the early 1900s, New Orleans’ pumping system is composed of 23 pumping stations that house a combined 140 pumps. Though nearly a century old, these pumps remain, to this day, the largest and most powerful of their kind in the world. And, since they were built before America became a society that reveres disposability, the pumps are remarkably reliable. Right up until the day that Katrina came ashore, every one of those 140 pumps were fully operational. But that all changed very quickly in the aftermath of the storm, when, for reasons that have never been adequately explained – and never will be, because no one in government or the media will ever bother to ask – the decision was made to shut the system down.
The explanation that was given was that, since the major levee breaches lay between the pumping stations and Lake Pontchartrain, the pumps were serving no purpose other than to circulate the water right back through the breaches. It was not the case, however, that all 23 of the stations were situated in that manner, and yet all of them were apparently shut down. And all of the stations, while they were running, were serving at least one crucial function: keeping the pumping stations themselves from being flooded.
Once the pumps were shut down, the stations were promptly, and quite predictably, submerged, thus doing major damage to all of the pumps’ electrical components. With one incredibly stupid, or one incredibly malicious act, a system that had performed nearly flawlessly for almost a century was rendered completely inoperable. Before repairs could even be attempted, workers were faced with the uniquely challenging task of pumping out the pumping stations. The damage was so extensive that two weeks after Katrina hit New Orleans, over half of the stations still had no running pumps.
It is difficult to think of a reasonable explanation for why the pumping stations were shut down, just as it is difficult to think of a logical explanation for why at least some neighborhoods were deliberately flooded. It is difficult as well to explain the curious timing of the five major levee breaches, though I suppose that in a world where three steel-framed skyscrapers can spontaneously collapse on a single day, the nearly simultaneous appearance of five major levee breaches, many hours after the supposedly precipitating event, doesn’t really require any explanation at all.
PART II
Monday, October 24, 2005
TOPDOG08.COM: Snell worked for Zelikow, not Gorelick
TOPDOG08.COM: Snell worked for Zelikow, not Gorelick
As much as you've got to love Curt Weldon for having the guts to say he will resign if the Able Danger cover up continues, you've also got to admit that at times Congressman Weldon can get his facts wrong.
A great furor has arisen in the blogosphere over this Weldon comment:
"The person who debriefed Scott Philpot was, in fact, the lead staffer for Jamie Gorelick," Weldon told the Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes." "His name was Dieter Snell."Weldon contended: "It was Dieter Snell who did not brief the 9/11 Commission. The 9/11 Commissioners were never briefed on Able Danger."
He also said pretty much the same thing to Lou Dobbs on CNN:
That 9/11 Commission staffer made a decision not to brief the commissioners. That 9/11 Commission staffer was working for Jamie Gorelick, who was a member of the Commission, who wrote the famous memo that said they could not tranfer information between the military and the FBI.
First of all, the Gorelick memo - which you can read - dealt with FBI counterterrorism efforts and the need to separate countterterrorism from criminal prosecution, to avoid getting a mistrial. It did not have anything to do with the separation of FBI counterterrorism from CIA countterterrorism, DIA countterterrorism, or anything else. William Dugan established this at the Judiciary Committee hearing.
Now, on to the real substance of the argument.
Did Snell debrief Phillpott? Yes. Was he working for Jamie Gorelick? No. Not any more than he was working for Slade Gordon or any other member of the Commission, as opposed to the Commission staff. He was working for Philip Zelikow, the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission staff who hired him as Senior Counsel.
Who is Philip Zelikow? Zelikow is now the lead Counsel for Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice. Zelikow also wrote a document called the National Security Strategy for Rice back in 2002. Not exactly a Clinton administration hold over:
Zelikow, who's mostly stayed out of the spotlight, is a strange fit for the role of administration scourge. Intellectually, he's squarely in the neoconservative camp. He was part of the Bush foreign policy transition team, and the president later named him to his presidential advisory board on intelligence. Zelikow is reportedly close to national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, with whom he co-wrote a book about German reunification in 1995. In 2002, according to James Mann's Rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush's War Cabinet, Rice tapped Zelikow to rewrite the National Security Strategy of the United States, which emphasized preemption. He also fought for the administration's corner in his academic writing. After working on the National Security Strategy, Zelikow wrote a 6,000-word article in the neoconservative journal The National Interest praising his own document for its "explicit adaptation to the new conditions of international life."
Not only did Zelikow hire Snell, he put him in charge of writing the section of the 9/11 Commission report that dealt with the 9/11 plot. As Ernest R. May told The New Republic:
With agreement from the commissioners and his colleagues in the front office, Zelikow divided the staff into teams, more or less coinciding with topics in the outline. MacEachin headed one studying Al Qaeda. In time, this team split in two, with Dietrich Snell captaining a group that worked specifically on the 9/11 plot and the movements of the hijackers. Though a lawyer through and through, Snell had prosecuted terrorists in New York, was fascinated by the terrible story, and proved to be both a natural-born historian and a gifted writer. Hurley led the team that focused on U.S. counterterrorism activity prior to September 11.MacEachin's, Snell's, and Hurley's teams found offices in the premises that Hamilton had obtained from the CIA. So did a team that concentrated on the intelligence community, as well as parts of a team that dealt with terrorist finance. This Special Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF, pronounced "skiff"), essentially one large safe, housed also the front office and the commission's sensitive files. It had the commission's principal conference room. Other staff in Washington and New York worked on topics such as emergency response on September 11, which required less access to highly classified material, but the SCIF was where the commission met and where all drafts for the final report ended up.
Zelikow asked all the teams to start preparing timelines and monographs for their subjects. For some, this was the first hint that they might not be writing a conventional government report--that they would be writing history. MacEachin set the example, turning out a rolling chronology into which he fitted every new scrap of information. Nearly all members of the staff accommodated to this way of sorting evidence--and this way of thinking about it. In the late spring of 2003, when the outline was finally unveiled before all the commissioners, it appeared to have won acceptance among the staff. The commission endorsed it almost without debate.
It is also worth noting that while Zelikow had been told about Able Danger in October 2003, he subsequently ignored Tony Shaffer, when Shaffer attempted to contact him to discuss it in more detail.
Snell on the other hand, did not meet with Phillpott until days before the 9/11 Report was supposed to go to press. As the Commission describes in their press release from August 12, 2005:
On July 12, 2004, as the drafting and editing process for the Report was coming to an end (the Report was released on July 22, and editing continued to occur through July 17), a senior staff member, Dieter Snell, accompanied by another staff member, met with the officer at one of the Commission’s Washington, D.C. offices. A representative of the DOD also attended the interview.According to the memorandum for the record on this meeting, prepared the next day by Mr. Snell, the officer said that ABLE DANGER included work on “link analysis,” mapping links among various people involved in terrorist networks. According to this record, the officer recalled seeing the name and photo of Mohamed Atta on an “analyst notebook chart” assembled by another officer (who he said had retired and was now working as a DOD contractor).
The officer being interviewed said he saw this material only briefly, that the relevant material dated from February through April 2000, and that it showed Mohamed Atta to be a member of an al Qaeda cell located in Brooklyn. The officer complained that this information and information about other alleged members of a Brooklyn cell had been soon afterward deleted from the document (“redacted”) because DOD lawyers were concerned about the propriety of DOD intelligence efforts that might be focused inside the United States. The officer referred to these as “posse comitatus” restrictions. Believing the law was being wrongly interpreted, he said he had complained about these restrictions up his chain of command in the U.S. Special Operations Command, to no avail....
The interviewee had no documentary evidence and said he had only seen the document briefly some years earlier. He could not describe what information had led to this supposed Atta identification. Nor could the interviewee recall, when questioned, any details about how he thought a link to Atta could have been made by this DOD program in 2000 or any time before 9/11. The Department of Defense documents had mentioned nothing about Atta, nor had anyone come forward between September 2001 and July 2004 with any similar information. Weighing this with the information about Atta’s actual activities, the negligible information available about Atta to other U.S. government agencies and the German government before 9/11, and the interviewer’s assessment of the interviewee’s knowledge and credibility, the Commission staff concluded that the officer’s account was not sufficiently reliable to warrant revision of the report or further investigation.
Notice that it does not say Snell made the decision, it only says that "the Commission staff" did. That leads me to believe that Snell showed Zelikow his momorandum which specifically named Atta, and it was Zelikow, not Snell, who deemed it "not sufficiently reliable to warrant revision of the report or further investigation".
Now compare the records Snell kept, explicitly mentioning Atta, with the records that Zelikow kept when he met Shaffer in Afghanistan:
Was Snell on this trip? If not, who else was? The plot thickens.
On October 21, 2003, Philip Zelikow, the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, two senior Commission staff members, and a representative of the executive branch, met at Bagram Base, Afghanistan, with three individuals doing intelligence work for the Department of Defense. One of the men, in recounting information about al Qaeda’s activities in Afghanistan before 9/11, referred to a DOD program known as ABLE DANGER. He said this program was now closed, but urged Commission staff to get the files on this program and review them, as he thought the Commission would find information about al Qaeda and Bin Ladin that had been developed before the 9/11 attack. He also complained that Congress, particularly the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), had effectively ended a human intelligence network he considered valuable.As with their other meetings, Commission staff promptly prepared a memorandum for the record. That memorandum, prepared at the time, does not record any mention of Mohamed Atta or any of the other future hijackers, or any suggestion that their identities were known to anyone at DOD before 9/11. Nor do any of the three Commission staffers who participated in the interview, or the executive branch lawyer, recall hearing any such allegation.
Sunday, October 23, 2005
Suburban Guerrilla � God�s Fixer
Suburban Guerrilla � God�s Fixer
Time has a good piece placing professional Christian fixer Ralph Reed at the center of the Abramoff scandal.
Time has a good piece placing professional Christian fixer Ralph Reed at the center of the Abramoff scandal.
Postman Patel: Bashad bashed - International choir finds the same page on the hym sheet
Postman Patel: Bashad bashed - International choir finds the same page on the hym sheet
UN investigator Detlev Mehlis has just released his pallid, incomplete and mystifying report on Rafik Hariri’s death (earlier UN report also released here). Mehlis asked for more time to work with Lebanese investigators, and in a letter accompanying the report, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has extended Mehlis' investigation until December 15. BBC report outline of the main players involved is helpful. (pic Asma Assad)THIS IS NOT THE FINAL REPORT ... although the MSM might encourage you to believe that.Such is the state of forensic science, even with one tonne of explosives he cannot be certain what type was used .. or it’s source. He has found that there were / are a lot of bad guys about who were watching Hariri – which being the Saudi backed capo di capo of the region who amassed massive amounts of money from rebuilding Lebanon on the back of crooked politicians, drug dealers, counterfeiters, shysters is not an astonishing revelation.Chirac turned up for the funeral, the French, who had struggled for the mandate in Paris in 1918 and have always seen it as their sea to swim in, approved Resolution 1559, which led to Syria's complete withdrawal from Lebanon a few months later.China and Russia, were publicly silent and allowed Resolution 1559 and the resolution that authorized Mehlis’s investigation. Russia went ahead with selling Assad some SA - 18 anti aircraft missiles he has bought on a recent shopping spree with Vladimir Putin eaarlier... this did not impress (nor was it meant to) Ariel Sharon,
"We are not pleased with the sales of weapons to Syria, particularly sophisticated weapons that Russia intends to sell to Syria, weapons that may end up in the hands of terror organisations,"Within days of Hariris killing the US withdrew their Ambassador and blamed Syria.The Israeli’s whilst gently stirring the pot from within the arras, have remained modestly silent.. until now that Mehlis has produced his interim report.The ageing Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres couldn’t wait to get on Israeli Radio on Friday and call for regime change in Syria 'I think Syria needs a change, it is neither natural nor acceptable that a family representing a small minority should govern Syria in a brutal fashion.' (The Assads are of the small but perfectly formed Allawite Islamist sect)'If it is true that the Syrian government is implicated in the assassination of Rafiq Hairi, that will undermine the regime of the Assads,' Peres said.Of course Israel wants to topple Bashar and his beautiful bride, Peres led the way, another ageing voice, ex Mossad boss, London born Ephraim Halevy chimed in calling for “regime change”. "The head of the Syrian pyramid is Bashar Assad," Halevy told Israel Army Radio. "I don't think ... there is any doubt that this was an extensive and coordinated operation that was planned for many months. Lots of people from the Syrian elite were involved."Yuval Steinitz, chairman of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee ally of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was reported in Haaretz calling for regime change in Damascus."As far as I am concerned ... and here I have a dispute with some of the people in the security establishment, it is not just an American interest but a clear Israeli interest to end the Assad dynasty and replace Bashar Assad."The pro-Israel lobby in the US sponsored legislation—the Syria Accountability Act to isolate Syria before - expect a re-visit to such policies.Dubya chimed in calling upon the United Nations to “convene a session as quickly as possible to deal with this very serious matter”. Obediently Bush’s bathroom monitor… responded ….” "A report of that kind has got to be both discussed and debated in the U.N. Security Council, and there will have to be some way to ensure accountability for what has already been found here,"…”it cannot be left lying on the table”.Jack Straw , squiring the Veep elect Condi through Alabama also joined the choir,” "You simply cannot tolerate a situation where one state decides to deal with problems of another state by assassinating the other state's leaders." Blair had probably reminded Jack as he swept off to tailgate in Tuscaloosa what he told the Guradian in early March…
” A ripple of change is running through the Middle East “ warning the Syrian government to grab a last chance to comply with international demands.Mr Straw said to the BBC he "could not discuss the details of any UN resolution against Syria".This is of course the unfolding of a historic plan – which requires a revisit to the 1996 policy paper prepared with shortly to be ex Veep “Limp” Dick Cheney, and his neo-con gangster friends, Richard Perle, Doug Feith, David and Meyrav Wurmser, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., and Robert Loewenberg,Entitled "Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," this proposed shredding the Oslo accords between Israel and the Palestinian Authority , and, first Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Hezbollah, and Iran, would be targeted for military assault and political destabilization.The document boldly and uncompromisingly states that Israel should engage
"Hizbollah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon, including by ... establishing the precedent that Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces [and] striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper." Furthermore, it said, Israel should divert "Syria's attention by using Lebanese opposition elements to destabilize Syrian control of Lebanon." First on the agenda of establishing the regional strategy called for "removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq...."The outcome of this regional seismic shifting which was the heart of the "Clean Break" doctrine, was a new Middle East, with Israel hegemonic in the region, presiding over newly balkanized states, run by puppet regimes. Noticeably they form parts of the Bush Administration’s "outposts of tyranny" identified by Condi early this year. The menu is the same, the dishes have been shuffled in the kitchen, and Iran has moved down and Syria has moved into first place.Note too…Bush calls for Condi to shift the debate to the UN, where Bolton will try (probably without success, such is his popularity) to ram through a motion for an assault on pariah state Syria. Then , whatever the result, re-run Shock and Awe. Mission Unending support for the Mil – Industrial complex who have stockpiled enough stuff since “Desert Storm” for another noisy Son et Lumiére show in the sand.Remember in 1967, Israel gobbled up, as fruits of war territory that doubled it’s size. Much was not annexed … the West Bank .. but is "territory militarily administered by Israel" and the now discarded prison for the Palestinians, which used to be called the Gaza Strip.The Golan Heights are quite legally Syrian territory but strategically vital to Israel;1. As a military outpost a small plateau region that ends in cliffs overlooking the Sea of Galilee (which is inside Israel proper) providing unrivalled opportunity to shell Israel.2. Water, of which the main source is the Jordan River is essential to Israel (and everyone else in the region) .Reflecting what Gerry Adams said in another place .... the neo-Cons have not gone away… and the Bible Bashers of the Beltway are happily following the script.Meanwhile in a further mystifying step in the labyrinth of intrigue which surrounds this violent and messy bombing (which killed not only Hariri but 21 others) ….this is reported in the International Herald Tribune on October 17th …” French police arrested former Syrian intelligence officer accused of lying to UN staff investigating the assassination of Rafik Hariri in Beirut, police and judicial officials said Monday.Zuhair Mohammed Al-Siddiq was taken into custody Sunday in the Paris suburb of Chatou by France's DST counterespionage service, He was the subject of an international arrest warrant and is expected to be extradited, the police said.The arrest warrant, issued by Magistrate Elias Eid of Lebanon, accused Siddiq of giving false testimony and misleading the UN investigation, judicial officials in Lebanon said.Recent blogs on same topic here
posted by Postman 10/23/2005 01:45:00 PM
UN investigator Detlev Mehlis has just released his pallid, incomplete and mystifying report on Rafik Hariri’s death (earlier UN report also released here). Mehlis asked for more time to work with Lebanese investigators, and in a letter accompanying the report, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has extended Mehlis' investigation until December 15. BBC report outline of the main players involved is helpful. (pic Asma Assad)THIS IS NOT THE FINAL REPORT ... although the MSM might encourage you to believe that.Such is the state of forensic science, even with one tonne of explosives he cannot be certain what type was used .. or it’s source. He has found that there were / are a lot of bad guys about who were watching Hariri – which being the Saudi backed capo di capo of the region who amassed massive amounts of money from rebuilding Lebanon on the back of crooked politicians, drug dealers, counterfeiters, shysters is not an astonishing revelation.Chirac turned up for the funeral, the French, who had struggled for the mandate in Paris in 1918 and have always seen it as their sea to swim in, approved Resolution 1559, which led to Syria's complete withdrawal from Lebanon a few months later.China and Russia, were publicly silent and allowed Resolution 1559 and the resolution that authorized Mehlis’s investigation. Russia went ahead with selling Assad some SA - 18 anti aircraft missiles he has bought on a recent shopping spree with Vladimir Putin eaarlier... this did not impress (nor was it meant to) Ariel Sharon,
"We are not pleased with the sales of weapons to Syria, particularly sophisticated weapons that Russia intends to sell to Syria, weapons that may end up in the hands of terror organisations,"Within days of Hariris killing the US withdrew their Ambassador and blamed Syria.The Israeli’s whilst gently stirring the pot from within the arras, have remained modestly silent.. until now that Mehlis has produced his interim report.The ageing Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres couldn’t wait to get on Israeli Radio on Friday and call for regime change in Syria 'I think Syria needs a change, it is neither natural nor acceptable that a family representing a small minority should govern Syria in a brutal fashion.' (The Assads are of the small but perfectly formed Allawite Islamist sect)'If it is true that the Syrian government is implicated in the assassination of Rafiq Hairi, that will undermine the regime of the Assads,' Peres said.Of course Israel wants to topple Bashar and his beautiful bride, Peres led the way, another ageing voice, ex Mossad boss, London born Ephraim Halevy chimed in calling for “regime change”. "The head of the Syrian pyramid is Bashar Assad," Halevy told Israel Army Radio. "I don't think ... there is any doubt that this was an extensive and coordinated operation that was planned for many months. Lots of people from the Syrian elite were involved."Yuval Steinitz, chairman of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee ally of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was reported in Haaretz calling for regime change in Damascus."As far as I am concerned ... and here I have a dispute with some of the people in the security establishment, it is not just an American interest but a clear Israeli interest to end the Assad dynasty and replace Bashar Assad."The pro-Israel lobby in the US sponsored legislation—the Syria Accountability Act to isolate Syria before - expect a re-visit to such policies.Dubya chimed in calling upon the United Nations to “convene a session as quickly as possible to deal with this very serious matter”. Obediently Bush’s bathroom monitor… responded ….” "A report of that kind has got to be both discussed and debated in the U.N. Security Council, and there will have to be some way to ensure accountability for what has already been found here,"…”it cannot be left lying on the table”.Jack Straw , squiring the Veep elect Condi through Alabama also joined the choir,” "You simply cannot tolerate a situation where one state decides to deal with problems of another state by assassinating the other state's leaders." Blair had probably reminded Jack as he swept off to tailgate in Tuscaloosa what he told the Guradian in early March…
” A ripple of change is running through the Middle East “ warning the Syrian government to grab a last chance to comply with international demands.Mr Straw said to the BBC he "could not discuss the details of any UN resolution against Syria".This is of course the unfolding of a historic plan – which requires a revisit to the 1996 policy paper prepared with shortly to be ex Veep “Limp” Dick Cheney, and his neo-con gangster friends, Richard Perle, Doug Feith, David and Meyrav Wurmser, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., and Robert Loewenberg,Entitled "Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," this proposed shredding the Oslo accords between Israel and the Palestinian Authority , and, first Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Hezbollah, and Iran, would be targeted for military assault and political destabilization.The document boldly and uncompromisingly states that Israel should engage
"Hizbollah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon, including by ... establishing the precedent that Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces [and] striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper." Furthermore, it said, Israel should divert "Syria's attention by using Lebanese opposition elements to destabilize Syrian control of Lebanon." First on the agenda of establishing the regional strategy called for "removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq...."The outcome of this regional seismic shifting which was the heart of the "Clean Break" doctrine, was a new Middle East, with Israel hegemonic in the region, presiding over newly balkanized states, run by puppet regimes. Noticeably they form parts of the Bush Administration’s "outposts of tyranny" identified by Condi early this year. The menu is the same, the dishes have been shuffled in the kitchen, and Iran has moved down and Syria has moved into first place.Note too…Bush calls for Condi to shift the debate to the UN, where Bolton will try (probably without success, such is his popularity) to ram through a motion for an assault on pariah state Syria. Then , whatever the result, re-run Shock and Awe. Mission Unending support for the Mil – Industrial complex who have stockpiled enough stuff since “Desert Storm” for another noisy Son et Lumiére show in the sand.Remember in 1967, Israel gobbled up, as fruits of war territory that doubled it’s size. Much was not annexed … the West Bank .. but is "territory militarily administered by Israel" and the now discarded prison for the Palestinians, which used to be called the Gaza Strip.The Golan Heights are quite legally Syrian territory but strategically vital to Israel;1. As a military outpost a small plateau region that ends in cliffs overlooking the Sea of Galilee (which is inside Israel proper) providing unrivalled opportunity to shell Israel.2. Water, of which the main source is the Jordan River is essential to Israel (and everyone else in the region) .Reflecting what Gerry Adams said in another place .... the neo-Cons have not gone away… and the Bible Bashers of the Beltway are happily following the script.Meanwhile in a further mystifying step in the labyrinth of intrigue which surrounds this violent and messy bombing (which killed not only Hariri but 21 others) ….this is reported in the International Herald Tribune on October 17th …” French police arrested former Syrian intelligence officer accused of lying to UN staff investigating the assassination of Rafik Hariri in Beirut, police and judicial officials said Monday.Zuhair Mohammed Al-Siddiq was taken into custody Sunday in the Paris suburb of Chatou by France's DST counterespionage service, He was the subject of an international arrest warrant and is expected to be extradited, the police said.The arrest warrant, issued by Magistrate Elias Eid of Lebanon, accused Siddiq of giving false testimony and misleading the UN investigation, judicial officials in Lebanon said.Recent blogs on same topic here
posted by Postman 10/23/2005 01:45:00 PM
The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies Jerusalem, Washington
The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies Jerusalem, Washington
Blogger Thoughts: This document was identified by the Syrian Ambassador on C-Span this morning.
---------------------------------------------------------
A Clean Break:A New Strategy for Securing the Realm
Following is a report prepared by The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000." The main substantive ideas in this paper emerge from a discussion in which prominent opinion makers, including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser participated. The report, entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," is the framework for a series of follow-up reports on strategy.
Israel has a large problem. Labor Zionism, which for 70 years has dominated the Zionist movement, has generated a stalled and shackled economy. Efforts to salvage Israel’s socialist institutions—which include pursuing supranational over national sovereignty and pursuing a peace process that embraces the slogan, "New Middle East"—undermine the legitimacy of the nation and lead Israel into strategic paralysis and the previous government’s "peace process." That peace process obscured the evidence of eroding national critical mass— including a palpable sense of national exhaustion—and forfeited strategic initiative. The loss of national critical mass was illustrated best by Israel’s efforts to draw in the United States to sell unpopular policies domestically, to agree to negotiate sovereignty over its capital, and to respond with resignation to a spate of terror so intense and tragic that it deterred Israelis from engaging in normal daily functions, such as commuting to work in buses.
Benjamin Netanyahu’s government comes in with a new set of ideas. While there are those who will counsel continuity, Israel has the opportunity to make a clean break; it can forge a peace process and strategy based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism, the starting point of which must be economic reform. To secure the nation’s streets and borders in the immediate future, Israel can:
Work closely with Turkey and Jordan to contain, destabilize, and roll-back some of its most dangerous threats. This implies clean break from the slogan, "comprehensive peace" to a traditional concept of strategy based on balance of power.
Change the nature of its relations with the Palestinians, including upholding the right of hot pursuit for self defense into all Palestinian areas and nurturing alternatives to Arafat’s exclusive grip on Palestinian society.
Forge a new basis for relations with the United States—stressing self-reliance, maturity, strategic cooperation on areas of mutual concern, and furthering values inherent to the West. This can only be done if Israel takes serious steps to terminate aid, which prevents economic reform.
This report is written with key passages of a possible speech marked TEXT, that highlight the clean break which the new government has an opportunity to make. The body of the report is the commentary explaining the purpose and laying out the strategic context of the passages.
A New Approach to Peace
Early adoption of a bold, new perspective on peace and security is imperative for the new prime minister. While the previous government, and many abroad, may emphasize "land for peace"— which placed Israel in the position of cultural, economic, political, diplomatic, and military retreat — the new government can promote Western values and traditions. Such an approach, which will be well received in the United States, includes "peace for peace," "peace through strength" and self reliance: the balance of power.
A new strategy to seize the initiative can be introduced:
TEXT:
We have for four years pursued peace based on a New Middle East. We in Israel cannot play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent. Peace depends on the character and behavior of our foes. We live in a dangerous neighborhood, with fragile states and bitter rivalries. Displaying moral ambivalence between the effort to build a Jewish state and the desire to annihilate it by trading "land for peace" will not secure "peace now." Our claim to the land —to which we have clung for hope for 2000 years--is legitimate and noble. It is not within our own power, no matter how much we concede, to make peace unilaterally. Only the unconditional acceptance by Arabs of our rights, especially in their territorial dimension, "peace for peace," is a solid basis for the future.
Israel’s quest for peace emerges from, and does not replace, the pursuit of its ideals. The Jewish people’s hunger for human rights — burned into their identity by a 2000-year old dream to live free in their own land — informs the concept of peace and reflects continuity of values with Western and Jewish tradition. Israel can now embrace negotiations, but as means, not ends, to pursue those ideals and demonstrate national steadfastness. It can challenge police states; enforce compliance of agreements; and insist on minimal standards of accountability.
Securing the Northern Border
Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon, including by:
striking Syria’s drug-money and counterfeiting infrastructure in Lebanon, all of which focuses on Razi Qanan.
paralleling Syria’s behavior by establishing the precedent that Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces.
striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper.
Israel also can take this opportunity to remind the world of the nature of the Syrian regime. Syria repeatedly breaks its word. It violated numerous agreements with the Turks, and has betrayed the United States by continuing to occupy Lebanon in violation of the Taef agreement in 1989. Instead, Syria staged a sham election, installed a quisling regime, and forced Lebanon to sign a "Brotherhood Agreement" in 1991, that terminated Lebanese sovereignty. And Syria has begun colonizing Lebanon with hundreds of thousands of Syrians, while killing tens of thousands of its own citizens at a time, as it did in only three days in 1983 in Hama.
Under Syrian tutelage, the Lebanese drug trade, for which local Syrian military officers receive protection payments, flourishes. Syria’s regime supports the terrorist groups operationally and financially in Lebanon and on its soil. Indeed, the Syrian-controlled Bekaa Valley in Lebanon has become for terror what the Silicon Valley has become for computers. The Bekaa Valley has become one of the main distribution sources, if not production points, of the "supernote" — counterfeit US currency so well done that it is impossible to detect.
Text:
Negotiations with repressive regimes like Syria’s require cautious realism. One cannot sensibly assume the other side’s good faith. It is dangerous for Israel to deal naively with a regime murderous of its own people, openly aggressive toward its neighbors, criminally involved with international drug traffickers and counterfeiters, and supportive of the most deadly terrorist organizations.
Given the nature of the regime in Damascus, it is both natural and moral that Israel abandon the slogan "comprehensive peace" and move to contain Syria, drawing attention to its weapons of mass destruction program, and rejecting "land for peace" deals on the Golan Heights.
Moving to a Traditional Balance of Power Strategy
TEXT:
We must distinguish soberly and clearly friend from foe. We must make sure that our friends across the Middle East never doubt the solidity or value of our friendship.
Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq. This has triggered a Jordanian-Syrian rivalry to which Asad has responded by stepping up efforts to destabilize the Hashemite Kingdom, including using infiltrations. Syria recently signaled that it and Iran might prefer a weak, but barely surviving Saddam, if only to undermine and humiliate Jordan in its efforts to remove Saddam.
But Syria enters this conflict with potential weaknesses: Damascus is too preoccupied with dealing with the threatened new regional equation to permit distractions of the Lebanese flank. And Damascus fears that the 'natural axis' with Israel on one side, central Iraq and Turkey on the other, and Jordan, in the center would squeeze and detach Syria from the Saudi Peninsula. For Syria, this could be the prelude to a redrawing of the map of the Middle East which would threaten Syria's territorial integrity.
Since Iraq's future could affect the strategic balance in the Middle East profoundly, it would be understandable that Israel has an interest in supporting the Hashemites in their efforts to redefine Iraq, including such measures as: visiting Jordan as the first official state visit, even before a visit to the United States, of the new Netanyahu government; supporting King Hussein by providing him with some tangible security measures to protect his regime against Syrian subversion; encouraging — through influence in the U.S. business community — investment in Jordan to structurally shift Jordan’s economy away from dependence on Iraq; and diverting Syria’s attention by using Lebanese opposition elements to destabilize Syrian control of Lebanon.
Most important, it is understandable that Israel has an interest supporting diplomatically, militarily and operationally Turkey’s and Jordan’s actions against Syria, such as securing tribal alliances with Arab tribes that cross into Syrian territory and are hostile to the Syrian ruling elite.
King Hussein may have ideas for Israel in bringing its Lebanon problem under control. The predominantly Shia population of southern Lebanon has been tied for centuries to the Shia leadership in Najf, Iraq rather than Iran. Were the Hashemites to control Iraq, they could use their influence over Najf to help Israel wean the south Lebanese Shia away from Hizballah, Iran, and Syria. Shia retain strong ties to the Hashemites: the Shia venerate foremost the Prophet’s family, the direct descendants of which — and in whose veins the blood of the Prophet flows — is King Hussein.
Changing the Nature of Relations with the Palestinians
Israel has a chance to forge a new relationship between itself and the Palestinians. First and foremost, Israel’s efforts to secure its streets may require hot pursuit into Palestinian-controlled areas, a justifiable practice with which Americans can sympathize.
A key element of peace is compliance with agreements already signed. Therefore, Israel has the right to insist on compliance, including closing Orient House and disbanding Jibril Rujoub’s operatives in Jerusalem. Moreover, Israel and the United States can establish a Joint Compliance Monitoring Committee to study periodically whether the PLO meets minimum standards of compliance, authority and responsibility, human rights, and judicial and fiduciary accountability.
TEXT:
We believe that the Palestinian Authority must be held to the same minimal standards of accountability as other recipients of U.S. foreign aid. A firm peace cannot tolerate repression and injustice. A regime that cannot fulfill the most rudimentary obligations to its own people cannot be counted upon to fulfill its obligations to its neighbors.
Israel has no obligations under the Oslo agreements if the PLO does not fulfill its obligations. If the PLO cannot comply with these minimal standards, then it can be neither a hope for the future nor a proper interlocutor for present. To prepare for this, Israel may want to cultivate alternatives to Arafat’s base of power. Jordan has ideas on this.
To emphasize the point that Israel regards the actions of the PLO problematic, but not the Arab people, Israel might want to consider making a special effort to reward friends and advance human rights among Arabs. Many Arabs are willing to work with Israel; identifying and helping them are important. Israel may also find that many of her neighbors, such as Jordan, have problems with Arafat and may want to cooperate. Israel may also want to better integrate its own Arabs.
Forging A New U.S.-Israeli Relationship
In recent years, Israel invited active U.S. intervention in Israel’s domestic and foreign policy for two reasons: to overcome domestic opposition to "land for peace" concessions the Israeli public could not digest, and to lure Arabs — through money, forgiveness of past sins, and access to U.S. weapons — to negotiate. This strategy, which required funneling American money to repressive and aggressive regimes, was risky, expensive, and very costly for both the U.S. and Israel, and placed the United States in roles is should neither have nor want.
Israel can make a clean break from the past and establish a new vision for the U.S.-Israeli partnership based on self-reliance, maturity and mutuality — not one focused narrowly on territorial disputes. Israel’s new strategy — based on a shared philosophy of peace through strength — reflects continuity with Western values by stressing that Israel is self-reliant, does not need U.S. troops in any capacity to defend it, including on the Golan Heights, and can manage its own affairs. Such self-reliance will grant Israel greater freedom of action and remove a significant lever of pressure used against it in the past.
To reinforce this point, the Prime Minister can use his forthcoming visit to announce that Israel is now mature enough to cut itself free immediately from at least U.S. economic aid and loan guarantees at least, which prevent economic reform. [Military aid is separated for the moment until adequate arrangements can be made to ensure that Israel will not encounter supply problems in the means to defend itself]. As outlined in another Institute report, Israel can become self-reliant only by, in a bold stroke rather than in increments, liberalizing its economy, cutting taxes, relegislating a free-processing zone, and selling-off public lands and enterprises — moves which will electrify and find support from a broad bipartisan spectrum of key pro-Israeli Congressional leaders, including Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.
Israel can under these conditions better cooperate with the U.S. to counter real threats to the region and the West’s security. Mr. Netanyahu can highlight his desire to cooperate more closely with the United States on anti-missile defense in order to remove the threat of blackmail which even a weak and distant army can pose to either state. Not only would such cooperation on missile defense counter a tangible physical threat to Israel’s survival, but it would broaden Israel’s base of support among many in the United States Congress who may know little about Israel, but care very much about missile defense. Such broad support could be helpful in the effort to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.
To anticipate U.S. reactions and plan ways to manage and constrain those reactions, Prime Minister Netanyahu can formulate the policies and stress themes he favors in language familiar to the Americans by tapping into themes of American administrations during the Cold War which apply well to Israel. If Israel wants to test certain propositions that require a benign American reaction, then the best time to do so is before November, 1996.
Conclusions: Transcending the Arab-Israeli Conflict
TEXT: Israel will not only contain its foes; it will transcend them.
Notable Arab intellectuals have written extensively on their perception of Israel’s floundering and loss of national identity. This perception has invited attack, blocked Israel from achieving true peace, and offered hope for those who would destroy Israel. The previous strategy, therefore, was leading the Middle East toward another Arab-Israeli war. Israel’s new agenda can signal a clean break by abandoning a policy which assumed exhaustion and allowed strategic retreat by reestablishing the principle of preemption, rather than retaliation alone and by ceasing to absorb blows to the nation without response.
Israel’s new strategic agenda can shape the regional environment in ways that grant Israel the room to refocus its energies back to where they are most needed: to rejuvenate its national idea, which can only come through replacing Israel’s socialist foundations with a more sound footing; and to overcome its "exhaustion," which threatens the survival of the nation.
Ultimately, Israel can do more than simply manage the Arab-Israeli conflict though war. No amount of weapons or victories will grant Israel the peace its seeks. When Israel is on a sound economic footing, and is free, powerful, and healthy internally, it will no longer simply manage the Arab-Israeli conflict; it will transcend it. As a senior Iraqi opposition leader said recently: "Israel must rejuvenate and revitalize its moral and intellectual leadership. It is an important — if not the most important--element in the history of the Middle East." Israel — proud, wealthy, solid, and strong — would be the basis of a truly new and peaceful Middle East.
Participants in the Study Group on "A New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000:"
Richard Perle, American Enterprise Institute, Study Group Leader
James Colbert, Jewish Institute for National Security AffairsCharles Fairbanks, Jr., Johns Hopkins University/SAISDouglas Feith, Feith and Zell AssociatesRobert Loewenberg, President, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political StudiesJonathan Torop, The Washington Institute for Near East PolicyDavid Wurmser, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political StudiesMeyrav Wurmser, Johns Hopkins University
Back to Publications
Blogger Thoughts: This document was identified by the Syrian Ambassador on C-Span this morning.
---------------------------------------------------------
A Clean Break:A New Strategy for Securing the Realm
Following is a report prepared by The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000." The main substantive ideas in this paper emerge from a discussion in which prominent opinion makers, including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser participated. The report, entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," is the framework for a series of follow-up reports on strategy.
Israel has a large problem. Labor Zionism, which for 70 years has dominated the Zionist movement, has generated a stalled and shackled economy. Efforts to salvage Israel’s socialist institutions—which include pursuing supranational over national sovereignty and pursuing a peace process that embraces the slogan, "New Middle East"—undermine the legitimacy of the nation and lead Israel into strategic paralysis and the previous government’s "peace process." That peace process obscured the evidence of eroding national critical mass— including a palpable sense of national exhaustion—and forfeited strategic initiative. The loss of national critical mass was illustrated best by Israel’s efforts to draw in the United States to sell unpopular policies domestically, to agree to negotiate sovereignty over its capital, and to respond with resignation to a spate of terror so intense and tragic that it deterred Israelis from engaging in normal daily functions, such as commuting to work in buses.
Benjamin Netanyahu’s government comes in with a new set of ideas. While there are those who will counsel continuity, Israel has the opportunity to make a clean break; it can forge a peace process and strategy based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism, the starting point of which must be economic reform. To secure the nation’s streets and borders in the immediate future, Israel can:
Work closely with Turkey and Jordan to contain, destabilize, and roll-back some of its most dangerous threats. This implies clean break from the slogan, "comprehensive peace" to a traditional concept of strategy based on balance of power.
Change the nature of its relations with the Palestinians, including upholding the right of hot pursuit for self defense into all Palestinian areas and nurturing alternatives to Arafat’s exclusive grip on Palestinian society.
Forge a new basis for relations with the United States—stressing self-reliance, maturity, strategic cooperation on areas of mutual concern, and furthering values inherent to the West. This can only be done if Israel takes serious steps to terminate aid, which prevents economic reform.
This report is written with key passages of a possible speech marked TEXT, that highlight the clean break which the new government has an opportunity to make. The body of the report is the commentary explaining the purpose and laying out the strategic context of the passages.
A New Approach to Peace
Early adoption of a bold, new perspective on peace and security is imperative for the new prime minister. While the previous government, and many abroad, may emphasize "land for peace"— which placed Israel in the position of cultural, economic, political, diplomatic, and military retreat — the new government can promote Western values and traditions. Such an approach, which will be well received in the United States, includes "peace for peace," "peace through strength" and self reliance: the balance of power.
A new strategy to seize the initiative can be introduced:
TEXT:
We have for four years pursued peace based on a New Middle East. We in Israel cannot play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent. Peace depends on the character and behavior of our foes. We live in a dangerous neighborhood, with fragile states and bitter rivalries. Displaying moral ambivalence between the effort to build a Jewish state and the desire to annihilate it by trading "land for peace" will not secure "peace now." Our claim to the land —to which we have clung for hope for 2000 years--is legitimate and noble. It is not within our own power, no matter how much we concede, to make peace unilaterally. Only the unconditional acceptance by Arabs of our rights, especially in their territorial dimension, "peace for peace," is a solid basis for the future.
Israel’s quest for peace emerges from, and does not replace, the pursuit of its ideals. The Jewish people’s hunger for human rights — burned into their identity by a 2000-year old dream to live free in their own land — informs the concept of peace and reflects continuity of values with Western and Jewish tradition. Israel can now embrace negotiations, but as means, not ends, to pursue those ideals and demonstrate national steadfastness. It can challenge police states; enforce compliance of agreements; and insist on minimal standards of accountability.
Securing the Northern Border
Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon, including by:
striking Syria’s drug-money and counterfeiting infrastructure in Lebanon, all of which focuses on Razi Qanan.
paralleling Syria’s behavior by establishing the precedent that Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces.
striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper.
Israel also can take this opportunity to remind the world of the nature of the Syrian regime. Syria repeatedly breaks its word. It violated numerous agreements with the Turks, and has betrayed the United States by continuing to occupy Lebanon in violation of the Taef agreement in 1989. Instead, Syria staged a sham election, installed a quisling regime, and forced Lebanon to sign a "Brotherhood Agreement" in 1991, that terminated Lebanese sovereignty. And Syria has begun colonizing Lebanon with hundreds of thousands of Syrians, while killing tens of thousands of its own citizens at a time, as it did in only three days in 1983 in Hama.
Under Syrian tutelage, the Lebanese drug trade, for which local Syrian military officers receive protection payments, flourishes. Syria’s regime supports the terrorist groups operationally and financially in Lebanon and on its soil. Indeed, the Syrian-controlled Bekaa Valley in Lebanon has become for terror what the Silicon Valley has become for computers. The Bekaa Valley has become one of the main distribution sources, if not production points, of the "supernote" — counterfeit US currency so well done that it is impossible to detect.
Text:
Negotiations with repressive regimes like Syria’s require cautious realism. One cannot sensibly assume the other side’s good faith. It is dangerous for Israel to deal naively with a regime murderous of its own people, openly aggressive toward its neighbors, criminally involved with international drug traffickers and counterfeiters, and supportive of the most deadly terrorist organizations.
Given the nature of the regime in Damascus, it is both natural and moral that Israel abandon the slogan "comprehensive peace" and move to contain Syria, drawing attention to its weapons of mass destruction program, and rejecting "land for peace" deals on the Golan Heights.
Moving to a Traditional Balance of Power Strategy
TEXT:
We must distinguish soberly and clearly friend from foe. We must make sure that our friends across the Middle East never doubt the solidity or value of our friendship.
Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq. This has triggered a Jordanian-Syrian rivalry to which Asad has responded by stepping up efforts to destabilize the Hashemite Kingdom, including using infiltrations. Syria recently signaled that it and Iran might prefer a weak, but barely surviving Saddam, if only to undermine and humiliate Jordan in its efforts to remove Saddam.
But Syria enters this conflict with potential weaknesses: Damascus is too preoccupied with dealing with the threatened new regional equation to permit distractions of the Lebanese flank. And Damascus fears that the 'natural axis' with Israel on one side, central Iraq and Turkey on the other, and Jordan, in the center would squeeze and detach Syria from the Saudi Peninsula. For Syria, this could be the prelude to a redrawing of the map of the Middle East which would threaten Syria's territorial integrity.
Since Iraq's future could affect the strategic balance in the Middle East profoundly, it would be understandable that Israel has an interest in supporting the Hashemites in their efforts to redefine Iraq, including such measures as: visiting Jordan as the first official state visit, even before a visit to the United States, of the new Netanyahu government; supporting King Hussein by providing him with some tangible security measures to protect his regime against Syrian subversion; encouraging — through influence in the U.S. business community — investment in Jordan to structurally shift Jordan’s economy away from dependence on Iraq; and diverting Syria’s attention by using Lebanese opposition elements to destabilize Syrian control of Lebanon.
Most important, it is understandable that Israel has an interest supporting diplomatically, militarily and operationally Turkey’s and Jordan’s actions against Syria, such as securing tribal alliances with Arab tribes that cross into Syrian territory and are hostile to the Syrian ruling elite.
King Hussein may have ideas for Israel in bringing its Lebanon problem under control. The predominantly Shia population of southern Lebanon has been tied for centuries to the Shia leadership in Najf, Iraq rather than Iran. Were the Hashemites to control Iraq, they could use their influence over Najf to help Israel wean the south Lebanese Shia away from Hizballah, Iran, and Syria. Shia retain strong ties to the Hashemites: the Shia venerate foremost the Prophet’s family, the direct descendants of which — and in whose veins the blood of the Prophet flows — is King Hussein.
Changing the Nature of Relations with the Palestinians
Israel has a chance to forge a new relationship between itself and the Palestinians. First and foremost, Israel’s efforts to secure its streets may require hot pursuit into Palestinian-controlled areas, a justifiable practice with which Americans can sympathize.
A key element of peace is compliance with agreements already signed. Therefore, Israel has the right to insist on compliance, including closing Orient House and disbanding Jibril Rujoub’s operatives in Jerusalem. Moreover, Israel and the United States can establish a Joint Compliance Monitoring Committee to study periodically whether the PLO meets minimum standards of compliance, authority and responsibility, human rights, and judicial and fiduciary accountability.
TEXT:
We believe that the Palestinian Authority must be held to the same minimal standards of accountability as other recipients of U.S. foreign aid. A firm peace cannot tolerate repression and injustice. A regime that cannot fulfill the most rudimentary obligations to its own people cannot be counted upon to fulfill its obligations to its neighbors.
Israel has no obligations under the Oslo agreements if the PLO does not fulfill its obligations. If the PLO cannot comply with these minimal standards, then it can be neither a hope for the future nor a proper interlocutor for present. To prepare for this, Israel may want to cultivate alternatives to Arafat’s base of power. Jordan has ideas on this.
To emphasize the point that Israel regards the actions of the PLO problematic, but not the Arab people, Israel might want to consider making a special effort to reward friends and advance human rights among Arabs. Many Arabs are willing to work with Israel; identifying and helping them are important. Israel may also find that many of her neighbors, such as Jordan, have problems with Arafat and may want to cooperate. Israel may also want to better integrate its own Arabs.
Forging A New U.S.-Israeli Relationship
In recent years, Israel invited active U.S. intervention in Israel’s domestic and foreign policy for two reasons: to overcome domestic opposition to "land for peace" concessions the Israeli public could not digest, and to lure Arabs — through money, forgiveness of past sins, and access to U.S. weapons — to negotiate. This strategy, which required funneling American money to repressive and aggressive regimes, was risky, expensive, and very costly for both the U.S. and Israel, and placed the United States in roles is should neither have nor want.
Israel can make a clean break from the past and establish a new vision for the U.S.-Israeli partnership based on self-reliance, maturity and mutuality — not one focused narrowly on territorial disputes. Israel’s new strategy — based on a shared philosophy of peace through strength — reflects continuity with Western values by stressing that Israel is self-reliant, does not need U.S. troops in any capacity to defend it, including on the Golan Heights, and can manage its own affairs. Such self-reliance will grant Israel greater freedom of action and remove a significant lever of pressure used against it in the past.
To reinforce this point, the Prime Minister can use his forthcoming visit to announce that Israel is now mature enough to cut itself free immediately from at least U.S. economic aid and loan guarantees at least, which prevent economic reform. [Military aid is separated for the moment until adequate arrangements can be made to ensure that Israel will not encounter supply problems in the means to defend itself]. As outlined in another Institute report, Israel can become self-reliant only by, in a bold stroke rather than in increments, liberalizing its economy, cutting taxes, relegislating a free-processing zone, and selling-off public lands and enterprises — moves which will electrify and find support from a broad bipartisan spectrum of key pro-Israeli Congressional leaders, including Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.
Israel can under these conditions better cooperate with the U.S. to counter real threats to the region and the West’s security. Mr. Netanyahu can highlight his desire to cooperate more closely with the United States on anti-missile defense in order to remove the threat of blackmail which even a weak and distant army can pose to either state. Not only would such cooperation on missile defense counter a tangible physical threat to Israel’s survival, but it would broaden Israel’s base of support among many in the United States Congress who may know little about Israel, but care very much about missile defense. Such broad support could be helpful in the effort to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.
To anticipate U.S. reactions and plan ways to manage and constrain those reactions, Prime Minister Netanyahu can formulate the policies and stress themes he favors in language familiar to the Americans by tapping into themes of American administrations during the Cold War which apply well to Israel. If Israel wants to test certain propositions that require a benign American reaction, then the best time to do so is before November, 1996.
Conclusions: Transcending the Arab-Israeli Conflict
TEXT: Israel will not only contain its foes; it will transcend them.
Notable Arab intellectuals have written extensively on their perception of Israel’s floundering and loss of national identity. This perception has invited attack, blocked Israel from achieving true peace, and offered hope for those who would destroy Israel. The previous strategy, therefore, was leading the Middle East toward another Arab-Israeli war. Israel’s new agenda can signal a clean break by abandoning a policy which assumed exhaustion and allowed strategic retreat by reestablishing the principle of preemption, rather than retaliation alone and by ceasing to absorb blows to the nation without response.
Israel’s new strategic agenda can shape the regional environment in ways that grant Israel the room to refocus its energies back to where they are most needed: to rejuvenate its national idea, which can only come through replacing Israel’s socialist foundations with a more sound footing; and to overcome its "exhaustion," which threatens the survival of the nation.
Ultimately, Israel can do more than simply manage the Arab-Israeli conflict though war. No amount of weapons or victories will grant Israel the peace its seeks. When Israel is on a sound economic footing, and is free, powerful, and healthy internally, it will no longer simply manage the Arab-Israeli conflict; it will transcend it. As a senior Iraqi opposition leader said recently: "Israel must rejuvenate and revitalize its moral and intellectual leadership. It is an important — if not the most important--element in the history of the Middle East." Israel — proud, wealthy, solid, and strong — would be the basis of a truly new and peaceful Middle East.
Participants in the Study Group on "A New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000:"
Richard Perle, American Enterprise Institute, Study Group Leader
James Colbert, Jewish Institute for National Security AffairsCharles Fairbanks, Jr., Johns Hopkins University/SAISDouglas Feith, Feith and Zell AssociatesRobert Loewenberg, President, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political StudiesJonathan Torop, The Washington Institute for Near East PolicyDavid Wurmser, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political StudiesMeyrav Wurmser, Johns Hopkins University
Back to Publications
Althouse: Not contributing.
Althouse: Not contributing.
Blogger Thoughts: Ok, perhaps, I was wrong (about Althouse). Althouse has nothing except partisan hackery here. Do Repubs get brownie points for launching these ludicrious attacks?
Blogger Thoughts: Ok, perhaps, I was wrong (about Althouse). Althouse has nothing except partisan hackery here. Do Repubs get brownie points for launching these ludicrious attacks?
Leak Case Renews Questions on War's Rationale - New York Times
Leak Case Renews Questions on War's Rationale - New York Times
Blogger Thought: Washington Post seems to be prepping people for the hammer to fall.
Blogger Thought: Washington Post seems to be prepping people for the hammer to fall.
mparent7777: Questions remain about George Bush's brother's maid's suspicious death
mparent7777: Questions remain about George Bush's brother's maid's suspicious death
October 22, 2005 -- Questions remain about Marvin Bush maid's death. Seasoned intelligence and law enforcement specialists have had an opportunity to review the police report on the suspicious death of Marvin Bush employee Bertha Champagne on September 29, 2003. Chief among the questions are: How could a vehicle traveling at mere 5 miles per hour have struck and crushed a person without prior warning? How could a late model vehicle go into gear without the key being in the ignition? Why would the key be in the ignition if the employee was walking the dogs? Why didn't the dogs start barking and alert Mrs. Champagne to danger? What was actually on the videotape in question? What was the circumstance of the videotape encounter between Mrs. Champagne and President Bush? Why were dirt samples not being analyzed by the State of Virginia lab? Could dirt samples have pointed to the presence of other witnesses/suspects? Why did the vehicle continue to cross Ft. Hunt Dr. after hitting the woman and the outer building without someone being on the accelerator peddle (the driveway is a flat surface, no incline)? Why were there no witnesses to the car crossing Ft. Hunt Rd. on its own during a Monday night rush hour -- 9:06 pm? -- (Ft. Hunt Rd. is an extremely busy road connecting two main arteries -- Route 1 and George Washington Parkway).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
October 21, 2005 -- EXCLUSIVE TO WMR: Marvin Bush's maid wanted to show him a video of her and President Bush. Moments later she was crushed to death by her own vehicle in Marvin Bush's driveway.
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/
October 22, 2005 -- Questions remain about Marvin Bush maid's death. Seasoned intelligence and law enforcement specialists have had an opportunity to review the police report on the suspicious death of Marvin Bush employee Bertha Champagne on September 29, 2003. Chief among the questions are: How could a vehicle traveling at mere 5 miles per hour have struck and crushed a person without prior warning? How could a late model vehicle go into gear without the key being in the ignition? Why would the key be in the ignition if the employee was walking the dogs? Why didn't the dogs start barking and alert Mrs. Champagne to danger? What was actually on the videotape in question? What was the circumstance of the videotape encounter between Mrs. Champagne and President Bush? Why were dirt samples not being analyzed by the State of Virginia lab? Could dirt samples have pointed to the presence of other witnesses/suspects? Why did the vehicle continue to cross Ft. Hunt Dr. after hitting the woman and the outer building without someone being on the accelerator peddle (the driveway is a flat surface, no incline)? Why were there no witnesses to the car crossing Ft. Hunt Rd. on its own during a Monday night rush hour -- 9:06 pm? -- (Ft. Hunt Rd. is an extremely busy road connecting two main arteries -- Route 1 and George Washington Parkway).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
October 21, 2005 -- EXCLUSIVE TO WMR: Marvin Bush's maid wanted to show him a video of her and President Bush. Moments later she was crushed to death by her own vehicle in Marvin Bush's driveway.
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/
Official faced pressure on jobs (KY STATE GOVT.)
Official faced pressure on jobs
Saturday, October 22, 2005
faced pressure on jobs Hamm: Adviser told him to comply
By Tom Loftustloftus@courier-journal.comThe Courier-Journal
FRANKFORT, Ky. -- A state personnel official said he told Gov. Ernie Fletcher's advisers last year that he did not want to fill merit jobs on the basis of politics.
But that official, J.P. Hamm, said one of the advisers, Darrell Brock, warned him to do as he was told, according to documents the attorney general's office filed in court yesterday.
"When I give you a name I speak for the governor," Hamm said Brock told him, according to the documents.
At the time, Brock was head of the Governor's Office of Local Development, and he is now chairman of the Kentucky Republican Party.
Brock was indicted on allegations of breaking the merit system law but later pardoned by Fletcher, who then asked him to step down as GOP chairman.
Hamm, executive director of the Office of Personnel Management for the Cabinet for Health and Family Services, told investigators he did not believe Brock spoke for Fletcher.
The governor has denied any wrongdoing, saying he never knowingly broke the law, but some in his administration "made mistakes." Most qualified candidates
At a later meeting, Hamm said he pleaded that they had to hire the most qualified applicants in his cabinet because "we're dealing with health and family, we're not dealing with filling pot holes."
But Hamm said an unpaid adviser, Dave Disponett, treasurer of the state Republican Party, told him: "If you only hired the most qualified people, how will our people ever get hired?"
Disponett was indicted Thursday on allegations of breaking the merit law.
He has previously denied wrongdoing.
Hamm declined to comment yesterday through the cabinet spokeswoman.
Disponett and Brock could not be reached.
The transcript of Hamm's interview Aug. 9 with investigators was among more than 200 pages of investigation records that the attorney general's office filed in Franklin Circuit Court late yesterday.
The records were filed in response to an attempt by Fletcher's former chief of staff, Daniel Groves, to have his own indictment dismissed.
A judge has yet to rule on the matter.
Groves was indicted Sept. 30 by a special grand jury on three counts of criminal conspiracy to violate the state merit law that requires hiring of civil service workers to be based on qualifications and forbids political considerations. Battle over pardon's scope
Fletcher issued a pardon order that Groves believes covers him. That order specifies that the only person it does not cover is Fletcher.
Yesterday Fletcher's office released a statement asserting that the order covers anyone caught up in the investigation of allegations that the Fletcher administration broke the merit system law.
"The Governor and his counsel are confident in the constitutional power of amnesty. The Attorney General's unconstitutional actions are in direct violation of a settled legal precedent," the statement said.
Groves and his lawyer did not respond to phone messages.
The filing by the attorney general's office's contends that Fletcher's pardon cannot apply to Groves because he was indicted after the order was issued. Putting Republicans in jobs
Much of the attorney general's filing repeats what prosecutors have already alleged: That as a result of great pressure from GOP supporters to put Republicans in state jobs, the governor's office created the Governor's Personnel Initiative.
Under the initiative, trusted supporters were placed in the cabinets of state government to help see that supporters would get merit jobs, prosecutors allege.
And prosecutors say part of the scheme was to use the governor's network of eight regional outreach offices, known as LINK -- for Local Initiatives for a New Kentucky -- to forward recommendations of political supporters and vet the names of pending hires.
The response filed yesterday cites e-mails and other records previously released showing Groves' involvement in setting up the initiative.
It notes that former Transportation Cabinet official Dan Druen told investigators in August that the initiative was Groves' brainchild. New details from Hamm
Prosecutors also disclosed for the first time a transcript of an interview with Hamm, who had been designated as the Health and Family Services Cabinet's member of the initiative.
Hamm was hired as that cabinet's top personnel official in May 2004.
According to the response filed yesterday, he said that by late summer that year it became almost a full-time job for his assistant to track the status of merit job applicants referred to him by the governor's office.
Hamm said that while in the Capitol on other business last fall he met with Disponett and Brock in Disponett's office, where the two questioned why he hadn't hired a woman they recommended for a secretarial job.
"Hamm stated that the meeting became heated when he told Disponett and Brock that she had not been the most qualified candidate," the response states.
Hamm said it was at this meeting that Brock told him he spoke for the governor.
At a second meeting later last year Hamm said he intended to describe to Brock, Disponett and another unpaid Fletcher adviser, J. Marshall Hughes, how recommendations from political supporters should be handled based on opinions of the Executive Branch Ethics Commission.
Hamm said this meeting became "extremely heated" and Brock told him regarding hiring decisions, "If I give you a name, that's good enough for you."
But Hamm said that earlier this year, the pressure to hire recommended candidates subsided in his cabinet. He said that in a February meeting, John Roach, then Fletcher's general counsel, told a LINK lawyer "to make sure the LINK representatives knew that they were not in the business of passing resumes."
After that, Hamm said his cabinet "never got any pushback." Fletcher e-mail
The filing also says that a series of personnel moves by the governor last fall were intended to help implement the personnel initiative, including the move of Basil Turbyfill from a job in the Finance Cabinet to Fletcher's office to become an adviser on personnel.
The filing states that on Nov. 28, 2004, Fletcher e-mailed his new chief of staff, Stan Cave, and said of Turbyfill, "He said he's willing to do what I ask of him."
The filing also alleges that advisers including Disponett, Turbyfill and Hughes were getting pressure to put political supporters in jobs.
Another e-mail included in the filing was to Hughes from Allen Sturgeon, the Breckinridge County GOP chairman.
In it, Sturgeon said: "I realize that Ernie campaigned on a 'No Politics as usual' policy, but if we don't have input in helping loyal Republicans get a chance at state jobs it will come back to haunt us in upcoming elections."
The filing said Sturgeon was interested in a foreman's job at the state's local highway garage. "I don't know if it is a Merit Position or not, but it is a position that I feel the local party should have some input when it is filled."
Sturgeon said last night he may have written the e-mail, but he did not recall it.
He said all he ever wanted to recommend was that Republican applicants get fair consideration for jobs.
Print this article Go back
Saturday, October 22, 2005
faced pressure on jobs Hamm: Adviser told him to comply
By Tom Loftustloftus@courier-journal.comThe Courier-Journal
FRANKFORT, Ky. -- A state personnel official said he told Gov. Ernie Fletcher's advisers last year that he did not want to fill merit jobs on the basis of politics.
But that official, J.P. Hamm, said one of the advisers, Darrell Brock, warned him to do as he was told, according to documents the attorney general's office filed in court yesterday.
"When I give you a name I speak for the governor," Hamm said Brock told him, according to the documents.
At the time, Brock was head of the Governor's Office of Local Development, and he is now chairman of the Kentucky Republican Party.
Brock was indicted on allegations of breaking the merit system law but later pardoned by Fletcher, who then asked him to step down as GOP chairman.
Hamm, executive director of the Office of Personnel Management for the Cabinet for Health and Family Services, told investigators he did not believe Brock spoke for Fletcher.
The governor has denied any wrongdoing, saying he never knowingly broke the law, but some in his administration "made mistakes." Most qualified candidates
At a later meeting, Hamm said he pleaded that they had to hire the most qualified applicants in his cabinet because "we're dealing with health and family, we're not dealing with filling pot holes."
But Hamm said an unpaid adviser, Dave Disponett, treasurer of the state Republican Party, told him: "If you only hired the most qualified people, how will our people ever get hired?"
Disponett was indicted Thursday on allegations of breaking the merit law.
He has previously denied wrongdoing.
Hamm declined to comment yesterday through the cabinet spokeswoman.
Disponett and Brock could not be reached.
The transcript of Hamm's interview Aug. 9 with investigators was among more than 200 pages of investigation records that the attorney general's office filed in Franklin Circuit Court late yesterday.
The records were filed in response to an attempt by Fletcher's former chief of staff, Daniel Groves, to have his own indictment dismissed.
A judge has yet to rule on the matter.
Groves was indicted Sept. 30 by a special grand jury on three counts of criminal conspiracy to violate the state merit law that requires hiring of civil service workers to be based on qualifications and forbids political considerations. Battle over pardon's scope
Fletcher issued a pardon order that Groves believes covers him. That order specifies that the only person it does not cover is Fletcher.
Yesterday Fletcher's office released a statement asserting that the order covers anyone caught up in the investigation of allegations that the Fletcher administration broke the merit system law.
"The Governor and his counsel are confident in the constitutional power of amnesty. The Attorney General's unconstitutional actions are in direct violation of a settled legal precedent," the statement said.
Groves and his lawyer did not respond to phone messages.
The filing by the attorney general's office's contends that Fletcher's pardon cannot apply to Groves because he was indicted after the order was issued. Putting Republicans in jobs
Much of the attorney general's filing repeats what prosecutors have already alleged: That as a result of great pressure from GOP supporters to put Republicans in state jobs, the governor's office created the Governor's Personnel Initiative.
Under the initiative, trusted supporters were placed in the cabinets of state government to help see that supporters would get merit jobs, prosecutors allege.
And prosecutors say part of the scheme was to use the governor's network of eight regional outreach offices, known as LINK -- for Local Initiatives for a New Kentucky -- to forward recommendations of political supporters and vet the names of pending hires.
The response filed yesterday cites e-mails and other records previously released showing Groves' involvement in setting up the initiative.
It notes that former Transportation Cabinet official Dan Druen told investigators in August that the initiative was Groves' brainchild. New details from Hamm
Prosecutors also disclosed for the first time a transcript of an interview with Hamm, who had been designated as the Health and Family Services Cabinet's member of the initiative.
Hamm was hired as that cabinet's top personnel official in May 2004.
According to the response filed yesterday, he said that by late summer that year it became almost a full-time job for his assistant to track the status of merit job applicants referred to him by the governor's office.
Hamm said that while in the Capitol on other business last fall he met with Disponett and Brock in Disponett's office, where the two questioned why he hadn't hired a woman they recommended for a secretarial job.
"Hamm stated that the meeting became heated when he told Disponett and Brock that she had not been the most qualified candidate," the response states.
Hamm said it was at this meeting that Brock told him he spoke for the governor.
At a second meeting later last year Hamm said he intended to describe to Brock, Disponett and another unpaid Fletcher adviser, J. Marshall Hughes, how recommendations from political supporters should be handled based on opinions of the Executive Branch Ethics Commission.
Hamm said this meeting became "extremely heated" and Brock told him regarding hiring decisions, "If I give you a name, that's good enough for you."
But Hamm said that earlier this year, the pressure to hire recommended candidates subsided in his cabinet. He said that in a February meeting, John Roach, then Fletcher's general counsel, told a LINK lawyer "to make sure the LINK representatives knew that they were not in the business of passing resumes."
After that, Hamm said his cabinet "never got any pushback." Fletcher e-mail
The filing also says that a series of personnel moves by the governor last fall were intended to help implement the personnel initiative, including the move of Basil Turbyfill from a job in the Finance Cabinet to Fletcher's office to become an adviser on personnel.
The filing states that on Nov. 28, 2004, Fletcher e-mailed his new chief of staff, Stan Cave, and said of Turbyfill, "He said he's willing to do what I ask of him."
The filing also alleges that advisers including Disponett, Turbyfill and Hughes were getting pressure to put political supporters in jobs.
Another e-mail included in the filing was to Hughes from Allen Sturgeon, the Breckinridge County GOP chairman.
In it, Sturgeon said: "I realize that Ernie campaigned on a 'No Politics as usual' policy, but if we don't have input in helping loyal Republicans get a chance at state jobs it will come back to haunt us in upcoming elections."
The filing said Sturgeon was interested in a foreman's job at the state's local highway garage. "I don't know if it is a Merit Position or not, but it is a position that I feel the local party should have some input when it is filled."
Sturgeon said last night he may have written the e-mail, but he did not recall it.
He said all he ever wanted to recommend was that Republican applicants get fair consideration for jobs.
Print this article Go back
TIME.com Print Page: World -- Stench Prompted U.S. Troops to Burn Corpses
TIME.com Print Page: World -- Stench Prompted U.S. Troops to Burn Corpses: "'We decided to burn the bodies,' one soldier recounts, 'because they were bloated and they stank.'"
Louisville Courier-Journal
10/22/2005
Online Poll
How do you feel about the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court?
13.2%
She's qualified for the bench on her merits
10.4%
She's not qualified, having never been a judge
9.7%
If Bush feels she's the right choice, that's good enough
14.4%
Waiting for confirmation hearings to form an opinion
52.3%
She's just another Bush crony
Total Votes: 2848
Keld Bach�s Press Cuttings � Blog Archive � Griffin: Controlled Demolition of World Trade Center is Now a Fact
Keld Bach�s Press Cuttings � Blog Archive � Griffin: Controlled Demolition of World Trade Center is Now a Fact
Tags: 09/11/2001 Controlled Demo WTC 09/11 NY Towers Explosion Bombs WTC7
Tags: 09/11/2001 Controlled Demo WTC 09/11 NY Towers Explosion Bombs WTC7
Humint Events Online: Still Amazes Me That I Can Find Weird New Stuff About 9/11
Humint Events Online: Still Amazes Me That I Can Find Weird New Stuff About 9/11
Tags: 09/11/2001 WTC "unmanned survelillance vehicle"
Tags: 09/11/2001 WTC "unmanned survelillance vehicle"
Drudge Retort: Few in Congress Fight Patriot Act
Drudge Retort: Few in Congress Fight Patriot Act: "USA Patriot Act's renewal is now almost a fait accompli"
Rumsfeld says Afghan body burning charges damage US - Yahoo! News
Rumsfeld says Afghan body burning charges damage US - Yahoo! News
Blogger Thoughts: Rumsfeld, on the Job... hardly. He does not know whether the charges are true.
Blogger Thoughts: Rumsfeld, on the Job... hardly. He does not know whether the charges are true.
The "Rule of Law" crowd has changed their tune.
Crooks and Liars: "Delay cries about MoveOn-Flies on Big Tobacco's Jet"
USATODAY.com - Pryor calls for government improvements
USATODAY.com - Pryor calls for government improvements
Blogger Thoughts: No offense toward Pryor intended: DO YOU THINK YOU WORTHLESS DEMOCRATS COULD DO ANY MORE TO DESERVE YOUR MINORITY STATUS!?
Where's you indignation about FEMA? Where's your indignation about Corruption? Where's your indignation about mindless killing in Iraq?
Blogger Thoughts: No offense toward Pryor intended: DO YOU THINK YOU WORTHLESS DEMOCRATS COULD DO ANY MORE TO DESERVE YOUR MINORITY STATUS!?
Where's you indignation about FEMA? Where's your indignation about Corruption? Where's your indignation about mindless killing in Iraq?
The Loft > Moonbat Watch: The Illusion of Normality
The Loft > Moonbat Watch: The Illusion of Normality
Blogger Thought: GOPUSA unwittingly publishes the truth again....
Blogger Thought: GOPUSA unwittingly publishes the truth again....
NewsMax.com: John L. Perry (Liberation of Bush)
NewsMax.com: John L. Perry
Blogger /Thoughts: On the Miers Backlash. What a incredibly sick piece of work here.
Blogger /Thoughts: On the Miers Backlash. What a incredibly sick piece of work here.
Legal Problems Dog Bush's Inner Circle - Yahoo! News
"sui generis" (unique)
Blogger Thoughts: The AP, and Yahoo, looking out for us "Red State" Americans not used to those 50 cent phrases.
Blogger Thoughts: The AP, and Yahoo, looking out for us "Red State" Americans not used to those 50 cent phrases.
Miers' Answer Raises Questions - Los Angeles Times
Miers' Answer Raises Questions - Los Angeles Times: " in her Senate questionnaire 'terrible' and 'shocking.'"
The Blog | Hooman Majd: See Karen Run | The Huffington Post
The Blog | Hooman Majd: See Karen Run | The Huffington Post: "exhibiting such jejuneness "
Blogger Thoughts: Some of us just can't help it.
Blogger Thoughts: Some of us just can't help it.
Bush Abandonment Watch, Part 2 - A former State Department bigwig unloads. By Timothy Noah
Bush Abandonment Watch, Part 2 - A former State Department bigwig unloads. By Timothy Noah
A former State Department bigwig unloads.
By Timothy Noah
Posted Friday, Oct. 21, 2005, at 3:59 PM PT
A former State Department bigwig unloads.
By Timothy Noah
Posted Friday, Oct. 21, 2005, at 3:59 PM PT
Lawrence Wilkerson was chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell from 2002 to 2005. Inside the Bush administration, he has never been a team player. Last year he told GQ, "I don't care whether utopians are Vladimir Lenin on a sealed train to Moscow or Paul Wolfowitz. Utopians I don't like." He also complained that the Defense Department was mucking around in Taiwan, "delivering messages to Taiwan that 'Taiwan needn't worry.' " When he said these things, Wilkerson was still on the State Department payroll.
Now he is off the State Department payroll. In a speech this week to the New America Foundation, he laid out what I think may be the most blisteringly contemptuous critique yet of the Bush administration by a.former high-ranking official there. (Second prize: Richard Clarke, or possibly Paul O'Neill.)
Here is how Wilkerson described his time in the Bush administration:
[T]he case that I saw for four-plus years was a case that I have never seen in my study of aberrations, bastardizations, perturbations, changes to the national security decision-making process. What I saw was a cabal between the vice-president of the United States, Richard Cheney, and the secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, on critical issues that made decisions that the bureaucracy didn't know were being made. And then when the bureaucracy was presented with the decision to carry them out, it was presented in such a disjointed, incredible way that the bureaucracy often didn't know what it was doing as it moved to carry them out.
Of Douglas Feith, the undersecretary of defense, Wilkerson said: "Seldom in my life have I met a dumber man." Yet, with regard to Iraq policy, he was "given carte blanche to tell the State Department to go screw itself in a closet somewhere."
Of President Bush, Wilkerson said he is "not versed in international relations and not too interested in them either."
Of former national security adviser Condolezza Rice, Wilkerson said, "She made a decision she would side with the president to build her intimacy with the president."
Quoting George Packer's new book, The Assassin's Gate, quoting Richard Haas, former director of policy planning at the State Department, Wilkerson said, "To this day I still don't know why we went to war in Iraq." Haas declined to comment to me about the speech.
And so on. You can read the whole thing here.
Timothy Noah writes "Chatterbox" for Slate.Politics of Dissent
Politics of Dissent
"Not since I taught high school have I seen such insipid accolades put to paper."
Blogger Thought: I email all my insipid accolades these days...no paper.
"Not since I taught high school have I seen such insipid accolades put to paper."
Blogger Thought: I email all my insipid accolades these days...no paper.
The Axis of Perverts
The Axis of Perverts: "A woman at a Pacifica radio station brought me on the radio show for an interview, but when she tried to get me or Dave vonKliest on a second time she was told that she would lose her job."
Blogger Thoughts: Not sure I take all of this as the perfect characterization, but it is as close as I can find.
Blogger Thoughts: Not sure I take all of this as the perfect characterization, but it is as close as I can find.
Saturday, October 22, 2005
Tucker Carlson - Low Life
Cannonfire
Right wingers lie all the time. So why does each new barrage of bunk carry the shock of the new?
Tucker Carlson, far from the worst of his bad lot, spewed an impressive amount fertilizer on Bill Maher's program tonight:
1. He said that viagra saved the rhino, which was supposedly being hunted to extinction by Asians who consider rhino horns an aphrodisiac. But Asians don't really hold to that belief. Some Chinese traditionalists consider rhino horn a cure for fever.
2. Carlson emphatically said that there is no evidence that the levees were deliberately blown in New Orleans. In fact (as Spike Lee, also on the panel, should have pointed out) we have several named witnesses who claim that explosions did occur. Others counter that these witnesses were mistaken. We should recognize the difference between disputed evidence and no evidence.
3. He averred that Congress bears much of the blame for the Iraq war, since they voted for it. In fact, Congress authorized war only if Saddam Hussein refused inspections. But weapons inspectors did enter the country, and they did their work unhindered. From the start, this war was unauthorized, unconstitutional, and illegal.
Right wingers lie all the time. So why does each new barrage of bunk carry the shock of the new?
Tucker Carlson, far from the worst of his bad lot, spewed an impressive amount fertilizer on Bill Maher's program tonight:
1. He said that viagra saved the rhino, which was supposedly being hunted to extinction by Asians who consider rhino horns an aphrodisiac. But Asians don't really hold to that belief. Some Chinese traditionalists consider rhino horn a cure for fever.
2. Carlson emphatically said that there is no evidence that the levees were deliberately blown in New Orleans. In fact (as Spike Lee, also on the panel, should have pointed out) we have several named witnesses who claim that explosions did occur. Others counter that these witnesses were mistaken. We should recognize the difference between disputed evidence and no evidence.
3. He averred that Congress bears much of the blame for the Iraq war, since they voted for it. In fact, Congress authorized war only if Saddam Hussein refused inspections. But weapons inspectors did enter the country, and they did their work unhindered. From the start, this war was unauthorized, unconstitutional, and illegal.
Making Everything out to be "They are out to hurt our beloved Pres. Bush"
Blogger Thoughts: Wow. This blog post from Anchoress is worthy of Newsmax. I thoroughly agree that there is a fair amount of intrigue going on.
Rather than address the fairly detailed player list of Plamegate, some of which are singled out in the post copied below and labeled black hats, let's go back to discuss the ruse that is at play day in and day out:
The press, the pudits, and most patisans all discuss the Presidency as being "Imperial", the man Bush as having strong leadership ideas and capabilities. Showing the Pres. "in charge" is a very important tool of the various and sundry propagandists.
As an alternative I think we could all agree that the role of this Pres. and the role of any President in world and national affairs could be characterized is various ways: from cheerleader in residence, to lying frontman, to useful idiot, to decisive, principled leader and Commander in Chief. In Bush's case, I think we can let go of the last option. And I think we have to fit any kind of thoughts of intrigue into our understanding of Bush "the soft-headed crusader."
------------------------------------------------------------------
October 21, 2005
Varifrank makes Plame connections
Filed under: Why can't weeee be friends, The Fourth Estate, America
Because I’ve been a tad under the weather, I missed this excellent exposition by Varifrank, concerning the Plame affair and what exactly might be the real situation behind all the spin. You’ll want to read this whole post, but just to whet your appetite, Frank reads Judith Miller’s book Germs, Biological Weapons and America’s Secret War and comes away thoughtful:
Author Judy Miller: She was one of the people who received one of the “anthrax letters”. If I knew it, I forgot it.
Lewis “Scooter” Libby: Worked in the White House and worked in biological warfare issues with various officials in the preparation for the Kuwait war.
Richard Clarke: Yeah, that Richard Clarke. A major referenced source for this book. This makes my antenna twitch…A Reporter with an Ex-CIA guy who was a source on another book and a reporter who just happens to be looking into a guy who just happens to have a CIA agent as a wife. Mighty cozy those quaint little georgetown neighborhoods are, arent they? Maybe this is what Libby was talking about in the famous “aspens” letter. An illusion to the idea that everyone knows everyone else? maybe…
Saddam Hussein: Oh yeah, tons of stuff. You get a much clearer impression of all of the major players of the last 5 years in how and why they were reacting to Saddam the way they did after 9/11.
General Anthony “I Hate Bush” Zinni: In 1998, sees an eminent biological threat from Iraq that could not wait to be dealt with any longer, and had all his troops take the anthrax shots( remember that controversy? I do!). Well, how times have changed, haven’t they, General Zinni?
Project BACUS: A project to determine if using off the shelf and commonly found materials it was possible to create a biological weapons lab on short notice that could also produce weaponized biological materials that would be effective if they were deployed. Guess what? It worked. That should keep you up at night.
…how is it possible that with all the people she knew in Washington, in the White House, in the CIA in the military, that she didn’t know that Ambassador Wilson’s wife was in the CIA as well? It would not take very long to play a game of “six degrees of separation” with the people she has outlined in the book to come up with a direct link to Valerie Plame and Joseph Wilson.
Could Richard Clarke be the source she is really protecting and the whole Libby/Rove connection simply a smokescreen to cover another trail that would lead to a far more damaging connection? That is, a rogue CIA organization that wishes to protect its power and cover up its large scale mistakes in regards to Iraq and the middle east?
Read the whole thing, the end is pretty juicy. And then go read the transcripts of this interview between Jed Babbin and Victoria Tensing and ask yourself if you believe anything you’re being handed about the Plame case, or if this isn’t the most obscene mountain of contrivance and connivance you have ever witnessed.
Dr. Sanity has a song for the occasion.
Tom McQuire wonders, Just how COVERT was Valerie Plame?
By: TheAnchoress @ 7:25 pm
Permalink
Posted on:
2 Comments ?
1.
The story has legs- I’d wager on it.
Comment by Sigmund, Carl and Alfred ? October 21, 2005 @ 9:37 pm
2.
Remember how this whole thing started—the CIA contacted the Justice Department with a “concern” about articles in the press that included the “disclosure” of “the identity of an employee operating under cover.” The CIA informed the Justice Department that the disclosure was “a possible violation of criminal law.” They followed that up with a four-page memo to Rep. John Conyers, ranking Democratic Member of the House Judiciary Committee. Now if anybody was in position to know the operating status(covert or overt) of Valerie Wilson(as she chose to be known after being outed by Aldrich Ames and a second time by the Swiss when they accidentally handed over the formal credentials they had asked for to the Cubans), you would think it would be the CIA. So why the ambiguity? She either was or wasn’t a covert agent. Since she was listed in the employee directory at Langley, one would assume she was overt. A cover for an covert operative as an overt operative working at Langley is absurd–and unheard of. The CIA instructs its overt employees working mundane jobs in the US to keep their employer to themselves especially when overseas. You are told to say “US government” when asked. Bagging any CIA employee provides instant street creds in a big part of the world. Now this issue(and the resulting investigation) should have been put to rest when the CIA said later she was not a covert agent for at least the last five years. Why wasn’t it? Remember that a covert agent’s name would never appear on documents such as those given to the 9/11 Commission, additional confirmation that she was not a covert agent.You do know the same sort of divisions occur in government that occur in regular life. Left versus Right. That’s why it is so important not to give the Left an opportunity to hold power to staff government to their heart’s content. I think we have an attempt by a certain group of employees in the CIA to try to bring down a government–ours. Just like we had State Dept. people working against the Administration before the final UN vote. This is a problem we are going to have to address sooner or later. Thew last survey I saw was that some 80% of career US Government employees classify themselves as Democrats. We can’t have people working crosspurposes with an elected Administration. As for this whole investigation, the law in question has three elements–First, the agent has to have official covert status within the last five years. Second, the person’s name must be disclosed with the information provided that they are a covert CIA operative. And third, the person disclosing that information had to learn it by having access to classifeied information. In the case of Rove and Libby, none of those elements is met. Rove said “wife” according to the Newsweek chap(who said he contacted Rove, by the way, not the other way around). Libby said that she worked in an overt department in Langley. The wrong one, as it turned out. That was when Wilson was saying that “he was Cheney’s man”–sent by Cheney to Niger. It’s no wonder a reporter would contact someone at Cheney’s office to confirm that.
If Fitzgerald indicts Rove or Libby, I will be absolutely amazed. The world, once again, will be turned on its head.
Comment by Darrell ? October 22, 2005 @ 1:00 am
ANKARA - Turkish Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc has said, ``we have always felt contArinc: We Have Always Felt US Contribution To Turkey's EU Process
Arinc: We Have Always Felt US Contribution To Turkey's EU Process
ANKARA - Turkish Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc has said, ``we have always felt contributions of the United States to Turkey`s EU process.``
Arinc hosted dinner in honor of Brent Scowcroft, chairman of the Board of the American-Turkish Council (ATC), and accompanying delegation in Ankara on Thursday.
Arinc said, ``Turkey has always believed the importance of Turkey-United States relations which have roots deep in history. We want these relations to continue similarly.``
``We have acted jointly with the United Stated regarding important issues which concern world peace. We never forget U.S. contribution to Turkey`s development and economic improvement. We have always felt the contribution of the United States to Turkey`s EU process as well. We believe this support will continue during negotiation process,`` he added.
ANKARA - Turkish Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc has said, ``we have always felt contributions of the United States to Turkey`s EU process.``
Arinc hosted dinner in honor of Brent Scowcroft, chairman of the Board of the American-Turkish Council (ATC), and accompanying delegation in Ankara on Thursday.
Arinc said, ``Turkey has always believed the importance of Turkey-United States relations which have roots deep in history. We want these relations to continue similarly.``
``We have acted jointly with the United Stated regarding important issues which concern world peace. We never forget U.S. contribution to Turkey`s development and economic improvement. We have always felt the contribution of the United States to Turkey`s EU process as well. We believe this support will continue during negotiation process,`` he added.
The Daily News, Jacksonville NC
The Daily News, Jacksonville NC
Blogger Thoghts: Never been to Jacksonville, NC. From the looks of this, don't think I want to.
Blogger Thoghts: Never been to Jacksonville, NC. From the looks of this, don't think I want to.
Skye Puppy: Undecided No More On Harriet Miers
Skye Puppy: Undecided No More On Harriet Miers: "Constitutional law is not rocket science..."
Blogger thoughts: Oh now I see, Miers wil do just fine. And let's see, FEMA isn't rocket science either.... and really if you think about, nothing in Washington is rocket science..... anyone on the planet with a conservative heart (and a tolerance for corruption) should be able to fill any of these positions.
Blogger thoughts: Oh now I see, Miers wil do just fine. And let's see, FEMA isn't rocket science either.... and really if you think about, nothing in Washington is rocket science..... anyone on the planet with a conservative heart (and a tolerance for corruption) should be able to fill any of these positions.
The Anchoress � Sick White Chick Sittin� Around, Thinkin�
The Anchoress � Sick White Chick Sittin� Around, Thinkin�
Blogger Thought: Wow, McCain deserves the slap he gets here.... Who would have thought?
Blogger Thought: Wow, McCain deserves the slap he gets here.... Who would have thought?
(Miers) lots of personal assurances, with not much behind them
The Anchoress � Blogger/RNC call w/ Judge Enoch: "lots of personal assurances, with not much behind them"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)