Domestic Spying

Several positive developments have occurred recently, including the passing of (at least cosmetic) anti-torture laws, the halting of Patriot Act extensions that would have endangered civil liberties, and the removal of Arctic drilling from the defense bill. These are significant defeats for the White House, but we must remain vigilant because the forces in control still vow to restrict our rights ostensibly in order to protect them. It's astounding that we're having to debate whether to allow the torture we deny using, or whether spying on Americans without a warrant is legal since the Constitution of the United States clearly states otherwise. Being at war doesn't suspend these safeguards; in fact, we should be particularly careful to respect the rule of law if our goal is be an example to the rest of the world. A president also shouldn't be able to use a conflict he himself started in order to establish "at war" status. Foreign and domestic relations demand a sensible diplomacy and a regard for universal values sorely lacking in recent dialogue.

Meanwhile, President Bush has admitted to authorizing extensive surveillance without the necessary court orders, emphatically insisting that he is within the Constitution. However, it's obvious that many of these cases exceeded customary boundaries, since apparently all formality had to be suspended. An expansion of power even beyond the Patriot Act (which still requires warrants) was sought, using 9/11 as the excuse, but when rebuffed, the White House decided to bypass both Congress and the courts. These revelations come on the heels of news that the Pentagon has been monitoring anti-war groups for some time now, a practice that has more to do with keeping an eye on perceived enemies of the Bush administration than national security. Linking those exercising their constitutional right of dissent with terrorism is a paranoid fantasy worthy of former President Nixon, and is indeed reminiscent of the late 1960s. Ironically, the laws now in place were set up to eliminate just this kind of excess. In taking us backwards, George W. Bush has effectively imperiled the liberty he so vociferously claims to champion.

Presidential powers set forth in Article Two of the Constitution are being stretched to undermine the Fourth Amendment guarantee of freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. This is a convoluted attempt to strengthen the executive at the expense of the legislative and judiciary branches. A tribunal set up by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) is already in place to handle top-secret inquiries and provide special warrants when needed. Even this essentially rubber stamp court was forced to modify increasingly broad administration requests in order to comply with the law. It didn't take long for the president to grow impatient with these limitations and decide to dispense with the requirements altogether. That he personally signed off on more than three dozen cases reveals an extra bureaucratic step that should have been left to the court in the first place.

The charge that the leaking of this program somehow endangers national security is patently false since most self-respecting terrorists must suspect that wiretaps are occurring around the clock anyway. Urgency isn't an issue since authorization can be obtained retroactively within 72 hours, or up to 15 days during wartime. The only difference now is that the president has taken it upon himself to make the decision giving the National Security Agency (NSA) wider leeway instead of allowing judges or Congress their say; this is beyond the scope of his office. Our representational government requires the input of all three branches, along with guidance from the Constitution. A separation of powers must be recognized, or else a totalitarian state may ensue. The executive's reach should always be equal to, but never superior to the others; this is the foundation of our republic.

A circumstance that needs to be taken into account is the emergence of technology that wasn't available back in 1978 when FISA was set up. Computers can now search through massive amounts of data in a short time, and consequently e-mails and hard-drives can be monitored in an unprecedented fashion. Phone calls, both land and cell, can be traced much more easily than before. This raises privacy issues that have never been fully addressed, but we shouldn't have to amend the Constitution to do it. New laws need to be forged regarding the changes in the way information is handled, but the administration must not be allowed to abuse the situation in the meantime. Limits need to be set on how much data can be stored indefinitely, simply as a matter of shielding the innocent. It has now emerged that for several years internet providers and telecommunications corporations have supplied the NSA with virtually everything they have requested without restriction. Unbeknownst to us, the government has been accessing virtually all international communications, either originating in or destined for the U.S., placing our country in a legal limbo of potentially catastrophic proportions.

Congressional hearings have been called for in a bi-partisan manner, unusual for our current political climate, but it remains to be seen whether there is any substance involved, or if this is just empty posturing. No Senator or Representative wants to face re-election without seeming to stand up for such a basic right as safety from undue government scrutiny. Unbelievably, we seem obliged to petition for the rights secured by the Revolutionary War all over again. The executive branch has assumed powers normally reserved for kings or dictators, not the elected officials of a democracy. Checks and balances established by the founders have been pushed aside in favor of the president.

Even though Mr. Bush can't prove that he was ever legitimately elected, he is still required to abide by the Constitution. That the domestic spying story was withheld from the public for over a year at the behest of the White House (they didn't want it released now, either), is indicative of an abdication of responsibility by both the mainstream media and the Bush administration. The public was not only deliberately uninformed about matters critical to their expectations of privacy, but denied crucial information before the 2004 election. This amounts to blatant intimidation of the fourth estate, directly jeopardizing freedom of the press guarantees vouchsafed in the First Amendment.

Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) has offered a resolution of censure for President Bush and Vice President Cheney, as an adjunct to discovering if impeachment can address the avalanche of offenses committed by the administration. Certainly there are grounds for investigations into the manipulation of evidence in the run-up to the Iraq war, the torture of captives, the broad surveillance of citizens, and the issues behind indictments already pending against top government officials. Together this constitutes a devastating case of malfeasance surely exceeding anything Richard Nixon ever contemplated. Republicans ignore these crimes at their own peril; the only way to save their party and the country itself from imploding is to agree to full Congressional hearings, complete with subpoena power.

Unfortunately, the public has become inured to scandal, and a compliant Congress and media will probably once again give the president the benefit of the doubt after a spirited debate. Given a choice between introducing the Articles of Impeachment or an Amendment to the Constitution reflecting the new paradigm, the latter is a much more likely prospect. However, the issue isn't just about whether the president should have the powers he claims, but whether he overstepped the rules by superseding Congress and the courts in exercising them. Members of Congress have a responsibility to remove a president that has broken the laws of the nation, by impeachment if necessary. This directive is instilled in the very Constitution they are sworn to uphold, and that solemn duty is abrogated if such a trial fails to materialize.

As we head into the new year, and a congressional election to boot, we need to be mindful of the ability of the American people to bring about change. However, our election system is damaged in many ways and it's unclear whether it can be fixed in time to prevent another coup. It has been proven that the secret proprietary software owned by private companies friendly to the Bush administration can easily be hacked by insiders. Touch-screen computers are the most vulnerable and if they are to be used for such an important task as voting, open-source code verifiable by independent experts should be mandatory. Perhaps we would be better off scrapping polling places altogether and switching to a national mail-in format similar to Oregon's successful program, thus eliminating long lines, provisional ballots, picture I.D. cards, and the threat of electronic tampering in one fell swoop.

Election reform remains our greatest challenge, even ahead of holding the current administration accountable, because without the right to vote for the candidates of our choice, we can never make the changes necessary to get the country back on course. The mid-terms will help determine whether we head towards stability or increasing turmoil, depending on your viewpoint. A Democratic Congress could spell trouble for President Bush, but it would signal the beginning of healing for the nation and the world. Iraq, national security, international peace, and the economy, for starters, all hang in the balance. Let's work together to achieve real victory, which in this case has nothing to do with the battlefield, but rather the re-assertion of the ideals we all cherish, regardless of politics.

Sources:

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/5769

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1230-39.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1228-28.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1227-33.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1226-20.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1226-21.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1226-22.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1226-23.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1226-05.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1224-02.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1224-23.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1223-24.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1223-20.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1222-21.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1223-30.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1222-24.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1218-28.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1218-29.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1219-27.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1219-35.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1219-33.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1221-26.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1221-20.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1219-21.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1221-24.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1220-30.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1220-29.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1219-34.htm

http://johnconyers.com/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10592932/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10564288/site/newsweek/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10485860/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10530417/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10536559/site/newsweek

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/18/opinion/18sun1.html?ex=1292562000&en=5174791e648f571d&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/20/politics/20fbi.html?ex=1292734800&en=d2129bfa7b4b8554&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/terroristattack/joint-resolution_9-14.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/12/25/MNGCEGD95C1.DTL

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/12/18/Opinion/Warrantless_surveilla.shtml

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/121805A.shtml

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/121805B.shtml

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.txt

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/22/AR2005122201101.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/22/AR2005122202119.html

Iraq Pullout

It's time to look for an end to the occupation of Iraq. Rep. John Muthra has offered a reasonable suggestion for a pullout to begin within six months. This would give the Iraqis time to settle into their new government after the December 15th election. Lingering much longer than that would give the "insurgency" more incentive to continue fighting, rather than less. Muthra is correct in that we are the real targets now, even though it was probably so from the beginning. It needs to finally be acknowledged that the United States' presence in Iraq is part of the problem rather than the solution. Unless we make it clear that we will eventually leave completely, the violence is bound to continue unabated. The idea that we should stay because the resistance wants us to leave is the most ironic and tragic absurdity given so far. The real reasons have more to do with the goals of those in charge of the U.S. government than any altruism toward Iraq. Even though the unadorned truth about why we are there might hurt morale, asking troops to sacrifice their lives without being honest with them is many times worse.

The attacks on the messenger came immediately and were characterized by much handwringing and gratuitous posturing. White House press secretary Scott McCllellan exclaimed that John Muthra was "endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party." One relatively new member of the House of Representatives resorted to terming those who advocate a timetable to exit Iraq as "cowards" who wanted to "cut and run." These kind of histrionics show the war advocates in a bad light and distances them from the mainstream they claim to represent. The charges were answered beautifully by Muthra himself, pointing out that he drives by Arlington Cemetery everyday on the way to work, and the tombstones don't say Democrat or Republican, but American. It should also be noted that hurling insults is detrimental to rational discourse, and fails to address the issues at hand. Muthra's credentials are unassailable compared with those making such wild comparisons.

The Iraqi people overwhelmingly want us out of their country and they should be the ultimate arbiters in the matter. This war never had anything to do with the security of the U.S., but rather the interests of the radicals currently controlling our government. The corporate press continues to bolster the Bush administration's case that we are somehow fighting the "war on terror" in Iraq, by printing White House propaganda on a daily basis. They keep announcing that we are capturing or killing this or that "terrorist," only to later admit it wasn't necessarily true. It's hard to get the facts to the American people when there is so much noise from the media echo chamber. Major news articles keep saying Democrats "voted for the war," when what they did was give President Bush the power to invade Iraq, if necessary. It was the President that made the decision, though the authority to declare war should never have been surrendered by Congress. Clearly the resolution was all a formality anyway, since Bush was intent on invasion from the start of his first term.

Investigations into the way we were misled into Iraq are crucial to the future of the U.S. and the rest of the world. The pre-emptive strike mentality must be repudiated and a new era of truth and openness needs to follow. Congressional hearings are a first step towards this goal, along with the various criminal indictments going forward. Wrong-doing by our government needs to be thoroughly exposed before a broad reversal can ensue. Our basic philosophy must again include justice and freedom for all without being just an empty slogan. This means an end to the use of torture, as defined by the Geneva Conventions. Any defense of these tactics is the ultimate proof of hypocrisy, since that was one of the stated reasons for overthrowing Saddam Hussein's regime in the first place. Meanwhile, we deny that we torture captives or employ chemical weapons, while claiming the right to continue doing just that. For instance, it recently emerged that our troops had indeed used white phosphorus against targets, though our military vociferously insisted otherwise.

Unfortunately, President Bush and his administration are loath to admit any mistakes or change course for fear of losing their dwindling base of support. They seem to really believe their deceptions, or need to continue them to protect themelves. The administration is still determined to control the Middle East and retain long-term contracts for its oil; that's why they don't want to leave. However, their energy policies are outdated, and actually threaten our security rather than strengthening it. It's too bad that they have put us in a position where removing them from office may be the only way to restore confidence in our government. But before Democrats can take any major steps they need to articulate an alternative vision, and this needs to include Republicans and Independents in the discussion as well. We must go beyond liberal and conservative labels and find common ground, without diluting what the country truly stands for. Once that occurs, we can join together in healing our nation, as well as Iraq.

Sources:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1117-08.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1118-12.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1119-04.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1120-01.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1121-03.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1130-04.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1130-09.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1119-28.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1119-20.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1119-23.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1119-27.htm

http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/declassdocs/dia/19950901/950901_22431050_91r.html

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CONGRESS_IRAQ_MURTHA?SITE=VTBAR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10088231/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10271158/from/RS.4/

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Egypt-Iraq-Conference.html

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/11/21/phosphorus-chemical/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/24/AR2005112400477_pf.html

Indictments Finally

Finally we are beginning to see some of the indictments that the extremists controlling our government so richly deserve. It will take a real effort by the mainstream media to set the record straight after years of playing along with this charade. First of all, the news media itself, with rare exceptions just to appear balanced, has sold itself to corporate interests backing a neo-conservative agenda. The real mainstream in this country is generally what used to be called liberal and is now represented only by progressive websites and blogs. It's time to take our country back from the right-wing zealots that have taken the reigns of power by force; even hijacking the Republican party. Their goal was never to work with Democrats and others for the common good, but to eradicate all debate by destroying the opposition. They gained the presidency twice and both Houses of Congress over the years with the plot, but it's beginning to disintegrate.

It started with the indictment of Tom Delay on corruption charges that are just an example of the dirty tricks played on America by the current regime. Illegal campaign contributions led to the first Republican majority in the Texas House in 130 years. Once they achieved that, they were able to redistrict so that Republicans could add five more seats in the United States House of Representives. This added to their already swelled ranks possibly gained by the manipulation of electronic voting machines. It will be difficult to undue the damage to our republic and they know it. Part of the problem is that many of them think what they are doing is right for the country. They really believe that the liberalism that has sustained the U.S. since its founding is wrong, and are determined to reverse it. The time has come to show them as clearly as possible the error of their ways. It won't be easy, though Hurricane Katrina ripped away the curtain, and showed there was no real compassion or integrity in their plans.

One way to expose the truth is through the recent indictment of "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff. His violation of security clearances by talking to reporters about a covert CIA agent and subsequent lying about it might be the key to unraveling the web of deceit surrounding the White House. The reasons for talking about Valerie Plame were at the very least intended to discredit her husband, Joseph Wilson, because he had pointed out major discrepancies in the Bush administration's case for the war in Iraq. The Niger documents insinuating Saddam Hussein's purchase of uranium for nuclear weapons were obvious forgeries and the administration had to know it. It's important to find out who forged those documents and how and why they were obtained by our government. That is a possible course of inquiry by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald who is heading the Plame investigation. It is now known that he has the authority to pursue any illegality involved in the case, no matter where it leads.

Of course, the so-called mainstream press has already begun its attempts to provide cover for President George W. Bush at all costs. Most of the current articles in the news are about how his second-term slide can be fixed, as though this were a typical slowdown of support that happens to all presidents. Actually, the actions of this White House constitute perhaps the most impeachable offenses in U.S. history. The only thing stopping the charges are a compliant Congress that was not counted on by the writers of our Constitution. The immediate selection of Samuel Alito, a hard-line conservative, to replace the retiring Sandra Day O'Connor (after Harriet Miers was forced to withdraw), the very next working day after Libby's indictment was announced, is calculated to distract from the criminal trials pending. Next we can expect a concerted effort to blame Democrats for obstruction of the president's agenda. The public is waking up to the distortion, however, and the administration might not get away with it this time.

President Bush has so far escaped close scrutiny in the CIA leak case, but it should eventually catch up with him. Everyone, even those in denial, must know that Bush and Cheney are involved in this, and any supposed lack of engagement by them as an excuse is then direct proof of incompetence. Unfortunately, it's not illegal to be incompetent, so complicity in the leak or its cover-up needs to be indisputably shown. Since the investigation was stalled for over a year by the various lies and red-herrings, it may take a long time to complete. I hope the country has the stomach for it, because if we don't, the consequences could be even more severe. With America's reputation in tatters, only a true reckoning can begin the healing process necessary to reestablish the trust of the nation and the rest of the world. This could be the beginning of a new era of accountability, though we have been disappointed so many times before. If a bright future is possible, it depends on thoroughly understanding the past, and we are starting to see some illumination.


Sources:

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1002-20.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1002-21.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1003-29.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1026-26.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1027-29.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1031-21.htm

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/28/60minutes/main994753.shtml

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20051031/HERSH31/TPEntertainment/?query=Hersh

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10816.htm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9558564/site/newsweek/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9557669/site/newsweek/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9583433/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9865902/site/newsweek/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9874588/

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/documents/libby_indictment_28102005.pdf

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/index.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/28/AR2005092800270.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/29/AR2005102901478.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/31/AR2005103101386.html

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=19693

Resignations Now

The time has come for President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney to resign in disgrace. After Hurricane Katrina, America can no longer afford a fake effort to protect us, or further decimation of our infrastructure. Since a Republican Congress is unlikely to impeach, we must ask for their resignations now. 300,000 (not just "100,000 or more" as generally reported) marched in Washington, D.C. on Sept. 24 to call for an end to the war that is at the root of this crisis; a position now shared by a clear majority of Americans. Since this administration is committed to retaining power at any cost, pressure must be applied at least as a matter of conscience. We can't wait for the 2006 elections for a Democratic Congress to introduce impeachment proceedings. And would they have the spine to do so, even if they had the power? Besides, it's clear that unless a major overhaul is done to our election systems, the Republicans will steal yet another "election."

It needs to be understood that we no longer have a real democracy in the United States. Exit polls have always been accurate in every previous election within 1%, and were correct this time only in precincts without computerized voting. The polls clearly showed a John Kerry victory nationwide by 5 million votes, along with victories in Ohio and Florida securing the Electoral College; disenfranchisement of minorities notwithstanding. A hand recount of Ohio has still not been attempted because of malfeasance by precinct heads who have now been belatedly indicted for not allowing the full state recount required by Ohio law. Not to mention the duplicity of Ohio's Secretary of State also acting as Bush's reelection chairman--eerily similar to the Florida fiasco in 2000. This is all without even considering Florida's continued problems in 2004.

The vulnerabilities in electronic voting machines were known years before last November, yet were inexplicably never addressed. Only Congressional hearings with full subpoena power can force the private companies that count our votes to release their source code for public scrutiny. These companies are run by some of Bush's biggest campaign contributors, and are run under a veil of secrecy without accountability to the American people. Unless they are stopped, Republicans will continue building a super-majority to cut off all debate, even in mid-term elections when the party in power usually loses some clout. It will take a monumental scandal to expose the depth of corruption gripping our nation, and some Republicans with integrity willing to investigate themselves.

A new report from the Carter/Baker Commission makes two half-way reasonable suggestions: A verifiable paper trail for computerized voting (the problem with this is that true recounts are rarely done), and elections run by nonpartisan officials (better than nothing, but a little late, since two major elections have already been tainted). The other recommendation is the draconian national I.D. card idea, which is part of a Republican scheme to blame Democrats for "voter fraud," while disenfranchising millions of voters nationwide. Though there is little actual evidence of such fraud, they would like to deflect criticism from their own manipulation of the voting process. Most of these problems would be easily solved by adopting Oregon's successful mail-in elections on a national scale, thus eliminating the need for absentee ballots, provisional ballots, or electronic voting machines altogether.

We should be very concerned about the major decisions being made now that will affect generations to come. This is a time when our main focus should be on delivering relief for the victims of Katrina and Rita, yet Supreme Court appointments are being rammed through Congress by a president that can't even prove he was ever legitimately elected. A candidate few had heard of three months ago is being catapulted to Chief Justice with nary a whimper from the so-called mainstream press. Whittling away at Roe v. Wade is just the beginning of an onslaught geared to destroy federal oversight of many hard-won benchmark decisions. States' rights are important, but we need a strong federal government to withstand a breach in the common fabric that unifies us. We need protection from the tyranny of the majority as provided in the Bill of Rights, especially when the majority is proven illegitimate.

This country is in serious trouble because of the Bush administration, and another attack inside the United States might just finish us off. Unfortunately, that is the position we now find ourselves in. The war in Iraq has left us vulnerable, and Homeland Security is obviously not up to the task of protecting America or helping us withstand any cataclysm. Bush himself asked whether we are prepared for the next emergency. That's reassuring to hear from the supposed leader of our government; maybe something should have been done sooner to improve this scenario. One step might have been to have the National Guard here at home where they belong, instead of in Iraq. This left Louisiana 30,000 troops short, forcing the Guard to fly in reinforcements from other states.

Immediately after Katrina, Dick Cheney's office ordered electricity switched from hospitals and relief efforts in order to get some oil pipelines back in service. With priorities like this, there is little hope that things will really get better. Also, the company doing the body count in Louisiana has ties to the Bush administration, and is known in the past to be involved in cover-ups reaching all the way back to Bush's tenure as Governor of Texas. The heads of FEMA (Federal Emergency Response Administration) and Homeland Security were both political appointees with little experience except with President Bush's election campaigns. Cheney's former company, Halliburton, received no-bid contracts for the oil cleanup, just like in Iraq. We can do much better than this kind of blatant cronyism, and it's time to expose the truth before they literally get away with murder.

Mainstream news sources need to look for practical solutions to this mess, and that must include talking about impeachment. Even though some columnists are willing to criticize the administration strongly, they are strangely silent about the obvious remedy provided by our fore-fathers. Could it be that the media are owned by the same special interests that support the president unequivocally? Of course they are. Big Energy is behind much of this, and Bush has admitted that we can't leave Iraq without "protecting" the oil. I'm waiting for someone to accuse liberals of not understanding the importance of this, even though we have known it was the main reason for the war from the beginning. It must be remembered that it is not our oil to take, and if we had not been such bullies in the first place, we wouldn't have such difficulty obtaining a fair share.

It is now becoming clear what has long been suspected, that the continued chaos in Iraq is not merely a result of incompetence by our civilian leaders, but a purposeful prolongation of the conflict. As soon as the "insurgency" is quelled, there will be no logical reason to maintain our military presence. The Bush administration wants permanent bases, and even the threat of a civil war gives us an excuse to stay. Also, leaving without controlling the region and the oil would appear to be a defeat for Bush, something he could never admit. Actually, an immediate pullout of all of our forces is the only way to prevent more "terrorism." The Iraqis should be allowed to conduct their own elections without U.S. interference, and international forces could help clean up whatever mess remains.

Our resources would be much better spent here in America, developing alternative energy sources such as solar and wind, and spending money on a more sustainable economy. A strong response to the global warming that is the cause of increasingly powerful hurricanes and other natural disasters would improve the image of the U.S. worldwide, and be profitable for business at the same time. We need to be looking at long-term solutions, instead of complying with the special interests of the oil and nuclear industry. Renewable energy sources could be spread out over the country so it wouldn't be such a problem every time another storm hits.

Much of New Orleans will probably be mostly uninhabitable for at least five years, maybe longer, according to a top expert with the Environmental Protection Agency. Yet the corporate press is mostly reporting how the cleanup is proceeding better than expected, and the situation is not as bad as previously thought. It's just like after 9/11 when the Bush administration covered up the true extent of the toxicity of the twin towers debris, to the extent of actually changing the EPA report; they apparently wanted Wall Street up and running as soon as possible. Many recovery workers have irreversible damage because of this, and we have to be concerned that it's happening again. People should not be allowed back into most of the city or any of the other affected areas until it is proven completely safe, especially with further hurricanes possible.

A truly independent inquiry into both the response to Katrina and the underlying lack of funding for levee reparation is absolutely necessary, though the administration is fighting it just like they resisted having a 911 Commission (weak as it was). However, since more than 80% of Americans want such an investigation at the very least, some semblance of a real inquiry can be blocked for only a short time. This is the beginning of a far-reaching reckoning that should never end. Even though Bush claims to accept responsibility, he still blames everyone but himself or his friends. In the face of all these scandals and more, it's time to call for the impeachment or resignations of all the top officials in our government. This would create a constitutional crisis, but our country is strong enough to handle it. The general welfare must take precedence over protecting the executive branch from prosecution. Our national security itself depends on it.


Sources:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0914-04.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0911-03.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0914-29.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0914-33.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0908-20.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0914-23.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0915-26.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0819-21.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0919-25.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0929-28.htm

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/09/24/global_warming_you_better_believe_it?mode=PF

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001838.htm

http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/25552/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/05/09/24_enemy.html

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001138507

http://www.harpers.org/ExcerptNoneDare.html

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2005_09_19.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9287434/site/newsweek/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9173582/

http://katrinablog.msnbc.com/2005/09/toxic_ghost_tow.html#below-fold

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/FEMA_outsources_Katrina_body_count_to_firm_implicated_in_bodydumping_scan_0913.html

http://rawstory.com/admin/dbscripts/printstory.php?story=1219

http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2005-09-14T174247Z_01_N14659343_RTRIDST_0_KATRINA-KENYON-RECOVERY.XML

http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2005-09-27T171814Z_01_N27198532_RTRIDST_0_HURRICANES-COMMISSION.XML

http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=60243

http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050911/NEWS05/509110304

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091405B.shtml

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091705Y.shtml

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091905D.shtml

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/093005F.shtml

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/12/AR2005091201433.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/20/AR2005092001894_pf.html

Cindy Sheehan

The peace movement needed a miracle and they got one in the form of Cindy Sheehan, the now famous mother of a fallen soldier. She wants answers to important questions about the reasons behind the war in Iraq, and an end to the senseless slaughter. Her message may seem radical to some, but compared to the atrocities she is trying to stop, she is right in the mainstream. A grass-roots movement is building, and as we head more and more into a Vietnam type situation, vast majorities may come to protest this war. President Bush says we can't have a timetable, but already high-ranking military officers have been quoted as saying we will begin withdrawing troops within the year. (Just enough to convince the public that all is well before the mid-term elections.)

Part of the problem is that the Bush administration has never planned on leaving Iraq completely. We have fourteen permanent bases set up for our military. This more than sends the wrong message; it creates conditions for endless conflict. A shift in direction is needed that this administration is incapable of, both philosophically and literally. Since Bush has announced that we will not leave Iraq under his watch, our only recourse is to introduce the Articles of Impeachment as set forth in the United States Constitution. A president has never been impeached in time of war, but it nearly happened during Vietnam, and an illegal invasion that threatens to destroy everything America has ever stood for is an unprecedented circumstance.

Until recently I went along with the gradual withdrawal many have proposed. But we're hearing now that the military is planning on being there at least four more years at a 100,000 troop level as a worst-case scenario. Even this seems wishful thinking. It's a simple fact that the longer we occupy Iraq, the more blood will be shed. This eliminates any humanitarian rationale that might be claimed. Since we are the (so-called) insurgents main target, we must evacuate before we can even know what we have in the way of an insurgency. Any "terrorism" is only increased by our continued presence. Has it occurred to anyone that supports the war that we are actually the invaders here? The Iraqis might be so happy to see us leave that they could settle their differences relatively amicably. Maybe that's too optimistic on my part, but it is their country, remember?

Cindy Sheehan is seeking the truth about this unfortunate war, and a way to end it as soon as possible. Those that accuse her of having a left-wing agenda have a right-wing agenda themselves. It's also very hard to admit or accept that our soldiers are dying for worse than a mistake, but a deliberate deception. This has been proven over and over again. The Downing Street memos, Joseph Wilson, Richard Clarke, Paul O'Neill, et al. It's clear that Iraq was on George Bush's agenda from the start, even before he ran for president. It's time to end the ruse. Vietnam required a complete pullout and it's just as necessary now. We might have to leave without "democracy" or "victory," but neither was ever a realistic goal in Iraq, nor ours to impose.

Some say the message should be toned down in order to reach people on the fence; Cindy responds that no one should still be sitting on the fence. That sounds a little too much like "You're either with us or against us," though I generally agree that people should be informed enough to take a stand on an issue of such importance. Unfortunately, since the mainstream press is playing along with Bush in failing to report the truth about what's going on, there really are people on the fence, through no fault of their own. She could try to be a little more diplomatic for their sake. It's refreshing, though, to finally hear someone saying what needs to be said.

Now she is taking her vigil to Washington, D.C., as Bush returns from his month-long vacation. It's going to be an eventful Fall, with a big demonstration in Washington that she will be part of. There are many other important issues besides the war before Congress and the Supreme Court that also need addressing, but we need to keep the focus on bringing the troops home. Excitement is in the air that a people's movement, combined with emerging scandals involving the Bush administration, could finally expose to the nation the full extent of the damage perpetuated in our name. Considering how long we've waited, I don't think anyone is holding their collective breaths until a true reckoning occurs.

Sources:

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0820-30.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0821-20.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0821-02.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0818-23.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0813-26.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0829-22.htm

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/9f81fef2-14de-11da-9df1-00000e2511c8.html

http://homepage.mac.com/godofkarma/swimmerfilms/iMovieTheater75.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cindy-sheehan/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9022420/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9032036/

Rovegate

It doesn't matter if he is indicted or not, Karl Rove has admitted to discussing Valerie Plame (as Joseph Wilson's wife) with journalists. Statements made two years ago to the FBI don't jibe with the current story told through his lawyer. If he really did mean to just innocently protect the President from libel, then that should have been claimed in the first place. Instead it was insisted repeatedly that Rove never talked to reporters about Wilson's wife. We know now that he at least confirmed her identity, and that's a crime even of mere negligence.

This is a reheating of the story involving the exposure of a CIA agent in apparent retaliation for her husband's publication of an op-ed disputing the Bush administration's claim that Iraq was obtaining uranium ore from Niger in order to restart their nuclear programs. This plan was based on a proven forgery about which the administration deigns complete innocence. More information about the forged document would be instructive; why a full investigation hasn't been held is curious.

The reason all this is coming back to the fore is that two journalists faced jail for refusing to name their sources for the leak. Matt Cooper got a last second reprieve from his source (Rove), the other is (far from) rotting in a minimum security prison. Judith Miller isn't protecting the First Amendment; she's protecting someone in the White House, and possibly herself, from criminal prosecution. Since Miller was one of the main disseminators of Iraq war propaganda in the mainstream media, her intentions here should be looked at credulously.

This scandal goes to the heart of the whole rationale for going to war with Iraq. It will be interesting to see if the mainstream press gathers the threads together, since we receive new revelations almost daily. Another memo has surfaced implicating someone aboard Air Force One, proving that key White House officials knew of Plame's occupation and that it was Top Secret. Either Rove lied to Bush about his involvement, or Bush lied when he told the nation that he would find and dismiss the leaker.

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald probably won't announce any indictments before October, and even that deadline could be extended another six months if necessary. This story will likely fade until then, but it never should have been forgotten in the first place. It relates to the struggle of protecting our national security from political opportunists. Let's keep this on the forefront, while continuing to juggle the previous scandals, and it's inevitable that some kind of justice will prevail.

Sources:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8635385/

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0715-01.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0717-20.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0719-32.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0719-20.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0724-20.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0729-25.htm

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001000732

http://mediachannel.org/blog/node/232

http://www.perrspectives.com/resources/documents.htm#plame

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10016

http://www.theillustrateddailyscribble.com/daily.scribble.pages.05/07.19.05.html

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/ericmink/story/9B4E75AD9D6F9A7D86257044003231CB?OpenDocument

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/26/AR2005072602069.html

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=19375

http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/article_23080.shtml

Cabinet Briefings

Seven more memos have been released to the Sunday Times of London, bolstering the case for investigating the already famous Downing Street minutes. The first of the new batch was a briefing paper passed around at the Downing Street meeting, written two days earlier. The inevitability of the Iraq invasion and the need to get around it's illegality was discussed, and also the Bush administration's lack of a real plan for the aftermath. When the story broke, American mainstream news sources only reported the latter allegation.

The other memos are various letters and memorandums to and from Tony Blair's top cabinet members. Much doubt is expressed about the legality or necessity of invading Iraq; a stark contrast to the public face our leaders were presenting. Also hinted at are the early bombings of Iraq, before Congressional or Parliamentary approval was obtained. These reports should be the ones that certainly finish both administrations. Unfortunately, it's also possible these documents could get lost in the maze of circumstances. The more scandals pile up, the easier it seems for at least the Bush administration to escape any particular scrutiny.

Maybe we'll finally see how powerful they really are, or how dangerous. It's scary to contemplate what events they could use to distract us from the truth. Some of these disasters are standard policy, like the almost obligatory take-over of Iran. Others include another possible attack on the United States. If either occurred, they know it would be hard to impeach a 'war' president. Darker days surely lie ahead rather than brighter ones. No matter what happens, it will be painful for all of us, regardless of ideology.

Even if obtaining oil by any means necessary is somehow in America's interest, it's still against international law. Perhaps these countries would be more likely to sell us oil in the first place if we weren't such bullies. It's rather late for diplomacy, though, and it's our fault. Without a change in course, we are heading straight for another world war. Our country doesn't seem to be trying to stop it, but rather the opposite. A commission to study the use of intelligence in the lead-up to the Iraq war would be instructive as a beginning to understanding the true intentions of our government.

The distractions that help the Bush administration escape accountability also help them achieve their goals. They have now created the conditions to control Iran's oil, too. (Not to mention natural gas reserves, second largest in the world.) We need to move quickly, before they institute their plans anyway as par for the course. Full investigations and hearings need to happen before a viable excuse can be manufactured again for another invasion. Impeachment hearings could weaken Bush enough to lessen his clout. It may be the only way to stop the next world war.

Sources:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1663752,00.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1669292,00.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1669640,00.html

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0623-25.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines05/0612-02.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0612-01.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0615-33.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0602-25.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0618-04.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views05/0618-28.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views05/0619-30.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views05/0629-27.htm

http://alternet.org/waroniraq/22200/

http://alternet.org/waroniraq/22220/

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8207731

http://www.democraticunderground.com/crisis/05/015_bw.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2005/06/14/worldviews.DTL

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2005/06/14/DI2005061401261_pf.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/27/AR2005062701584.html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050618/ap_on_re_eu/downing_street_memos

Secret Memo

A memo has been leaked to the British press that corroborates the position of anti-war protesters world-wide. The release several days before the election in Great Britain nearly brought down Tony Blair's government, but is barely making a stir in the United States. It is now clear we invaded a sovereign country under false pretences. Much of the world and half the U.S. has known it from the beginning.

It's a report from Britain's top advisors, back in July 2002, stating that President Bush was determined to go to war with Iraq and that the facts were being "fixed" around the policy. It was deemed necessary to bait Saddam Hussein with threats of inspections, with the hopes of using his refusal as reason for war. But Saddam did allow the inspectors in, leaving Bush to make his case with virtually nothing except bogus evidence.

Oil has always been the main reason and Iraq is not the end. Iran is around the corner; both its oil and almost never mentioned natural gas constitute the second largest un-tapped reserves in the world. If you believe that current oil and gas consumption should continue unabated by any means necessary, then the Bush administration represents your interests. However, this diverges from the ultimate good of the American people, since oil is a finite resource, and alternative energy sources are abundant.

It's time to look for ways to get out of this mess. Unfortunately, impeachment of the president may be the only way to achieve a restoration of America's reputation. The fact that the Republican majority in Congress is unlikely to vote for it is further proof of its necessity. Even if a person agrees with the reasons (both given or actual) for the war in Iraq, eventually it must be acknowledged that Congress and the American people were deceived. In the absence of a lot of other options, some are calling for a national recall election, with paper ballots only.

It's hard to imagine what it would take for the rest of the public to wake up and realize they have been conned. The secret British memo is all the information we need to open an investigation. Full Congressional hearings should follow as soon as possible. Members of the House Judiciary committee are opening an inquiry over in Great Britain in order to get the ball rolling. For the American mainstream press to pick it up, it needs to be sensational enough to risk lucrative ties to corporate sponsors with connections to the White House.

Time is running out on stopping this administration from destroying the infrastructure of the United States. Their targets are many, so they must be confronted directly. The American people deserve to know the truth. This is apparently one of the things they are disputing. And just because it's old news that Bush misled us, doesn't mean it should be ignored. The toll increases daily because of these ill-fated decisions. It needs to be remembered that the Iraq war was foisted upon us, and its legality under national and international law has always been tenuous at best.

Our next move must be to alert the American people. If there is any semblance of integrity left in the mainstream media, it needs to come forward now. The future of the country and the world depend on it. Without demonstrating that we repudiate these policies, we are merely subjecting ourselves to more hatred that feeds the cycle of violence. Peace isn't possible until the arrogance of our own government has been examined and completely dissolved. Only then can the real America emerge into its role as a benevolent leader in the world.


Sources:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1592904,00.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1622378,00.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1632566,00.html

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/cgi-bin/roberts.cgi/American%20Empire/2005/05/18/A_Reputation_in_Tat

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0531-23.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0531-20.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0528-26.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0511-24.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0521-24.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0411-21.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0602-25.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0602-22.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0603-33.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0604-24.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0608-23.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0607-26.htm

http://www.johnconyers.com/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/21/AR2005052100474.html

Media Silence

The media has taken a role in our democracy, both good and ill. Unfortunately, a turn for the worse has occurred that both political persuasions dispute. The mainstream media is considered to be too conservative and too liberal by opposite sides at the same time. As long as the truth is being pursued, it shouldn't matter that much whether it's being presented with a liberal or conservative slant. However, when the press censors stories to protect the government or corporations, instead of the public interest, dangerous territory is entered.

The liberal media label itself is a concoction of the corporations that control the media. For example, though Fox is owned by a right-wing magnate, it was the leader in raising the bar for what they call liberal television. There really is a liberal media, but it consists of something else entirely, and the general public doesn't know it exists. The truth isn't getting out, often because it isn't being reported by the conglomerates. The real liberal media challenges the official story and doesn't accept things at face value; the way journalism is supposed to work.

Right now, the news is more of a tabloid show than anything else. It has become shallow and murky; the opposite of in-depth. There is the case of the fake reporter in the White House press corps. How he got his pass was never investigated, though national security may have been at risk. Questions about government interference with the media should also have been raised. The fact that this didn't become a serious news item, rather than just fodder for pundits, shows the control the right wing has over journalism today. If there truly was a mainstream liberal news media, they would be all over this one.

The consolidation of media is contributing to the decline of real journalism in the major outlets. An independent press is vital to a true democracy, yet both are vanishing before our very eyes. After the fact, we find out journalists were paid to write positive reviews for administration policies, and videos with actors instead of reporters were distributed and broadcast as real news. The General Accounting Office went so far as to call it propaganda; a bill has been introduced in the Senate to force the government to be more accountable in the future.

Entertaining us while protecting us from the facts seems to be a higher priority than telling a substantial news story. The American mainstream press failed to fully investigate the election of 2000, the mysteries of 911, the voting machine anomalies in the 2002 mid-term races, the run up to the Iraq war, the war itself, or the 2004 election debacle. These are just the most obvious abdications. We have to wonder just how deeply the media is complicit in the destruction of our national trust. For now, we must search for the truth in our own way, beyond the media silence.

Sources:

http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/blogrightscnetoped32405.pdf

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/05/04/con05129.html

http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/05/04/int05017.html

http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/05/05/ana05013.html

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/not_guilty_by_reason_of_the_pr.html

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/invasion_coverage.html

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_facts.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7520345/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/05/05/06_media.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/05/04/16_death.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/05/04/20_tyranny.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/crisis/05/008_ep.html

http://www.resist.com.au/comments/c68.asp

http://pilger.carlton.com/

http://www.mpp.org/releases/nr20050414.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4947016,00.html

http://www.commonwonders.com/archives/col290.htm

http://commonwonders.com/archives/col293.htm

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=18963

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh042005.shtml

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/050605Y.shtml

http://www.rawstory.com/aexternal/conyers_iraq_letter_502

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/11574296.htm

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000912159

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0520-10.htm

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=711509

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/26/AR2005052601538.html

911 Investigation

I'd like to do an investigation of the investigation into 911. There are many unanswered questions that go to the heart of the matter. It is obvious there is a cover-up, and our own government's complicity cannot be ruled out. Either the Bush administration was catastrophically inept (possible), shrewdly culpable (possible), or a little of both (probable). At the very least, they exploited 911 for political gain; how much is what we need to know. Our nation's well-being may ultimately depend on finding the truth.

F.B.I. headquarters stopped an investigation of the hijackers just as it was making progress. Large stock sell-offs prior to the event were reported. Computers, security cameras, and locks were powered down in the south tower the weekend before, ostensibly for a cable upgrade. Many CEOs from the World Trade Center happened to be at a conference in Nebraska at the very Air Base Bush flew to after leaving the school in Florida. A false claim was even made from Air Force One of danger to the aircraft, that was later shown to be bogus; their story doesn't match the facts.

Former F.B.I. translator Sibel Edmonds has revealed that she saw documents involving attacks by airplanes on major American cities, that were labeled "not pertinent." Her supervisor told her not to pursue it. She was eventually fired for reporting similar abuses in the translation department, and was placed under a gag order for "national security" purposes. She testified at the 911 Commission hearings, but her testimony has remained top secret. Recently, she has been attempting to get the gag order relinquished and her testimony released.

The Federal Aviation Administration had 52 prior warnings about Al Qaida attacking the U.S. with airplanes as weapons. This information from the 911 Commission was withheld all the way through the election and inauguration, and was released soon after the swearing in of Condoleeza Rice as Secretary of State. Since Rice testified under oath that the Aug. 6th memo describing a possible attack was "historical in nature," she is clearly guilty of perjury. President Bush has made similar statements that are now proven to be patently false.

We know the Bush administration planned to invade Iraq long before 911, and were looking for a "new Pearl Harbor," to help achieve their goals. The warnings about Al Qaida may have been ignored specifically for this purpose. It is clear they stood to gain unprecedented power by an attack on the United States. President Bush was informed in the car on the way to the grade school about the first plane hitting the north tower, but went ahead anyway. He stayed in a classroom and read a story for ten crucial minutes after being told of the second attack, and then worked on his speech until being whisked away.

There is the matter of Afghanistan, which the Bush administration had been planning to invade prior to 911. They wanted in on an oil pipeline that the Taliban were controlling. It is now up and running, though we don't hear much about it. The mainstream media have dared not investigate this, since it would hurt America in the eyes of the world. However, they have caused much greater harm by their silence. As far as the rehabilitation of our reputation, only the end of Bush's term is likely to achieve that goal. The damage being done now might be irreversible. Certainly, 100,000 dead Iraqis cannot be brought back to life; they have been permanently "liberated." 1,500 American soldiers are also experiencing endless "freedom."

The 911 Commission report skimmed over some of the most important questions. For instance, why were no planes scrambled from the nearest Air Force base to protect the towers? Apparently it was decided to shoot down the hijacked planes, after it was too late. It is understandable that national security should be considered in deciding what to reveal, but maybe this is a case where transparency is required, before national security can be assured. As long as the reasons behind 911 failures are dismissed, the chances of avoiding a recurrence are low. The Palestinian/Israeli conflict has shown that the cycle of violence is hard to stop.

The Bush administration has gotten everything it wanted because of 911. The plot is so obvious, they even spell it out for us in their writings. Their plan is to destroy the liberal foundation of this country and replace it with a neo-conservative one. Only a coalition of liberals and conservatives who believe in the America our founders envisioned can stop the onslaught. It is necessary to look forward, but we must not forget the 3,000+ that died on September 11, 2001. There needs to be an independent investigation by irreproachable (i.e. truly non-partisan) observers. Until then, it's dangerous to give the benefit of the doubt to an administration that hasn't earned our trust.

Sources:

http://www.911timeline.net/

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Exec.htm

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

http://www.aviationtoday.com/reports/letter_tk.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0413-11.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0910-06.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0402-01.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0226-03.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0705-02.htm

http://independent.com/news/news906.htm

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/weiner6.html

http://911research.wtc7.net/

http://69.28.73.17/thornarticles/powerdown.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1480093,00.html

http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2005502210360

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050321052700567

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646

http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2004/07/07_400.html

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essayaninterestingday.html

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&day_of_911=bush

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&theme=oil

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/cbs091901.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/19/BU184559.DTL

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/12/16/wbush16.xml

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/topic/911investigation/

http://www.alternet.org/story/14873/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A32319-2001Sep26

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1984459.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1550366.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/4354269.stm

Climate Change

One of the major issues facing the world is the possible weakening of the Gulf Stream. Just off Greenland, a whirlpool of salty water is being flushed away by arctic melting. This whirlpool is the beginning of the Great Conveyor Belt, an undersea river that helps propel the Gulf Stream as it swings around North America. High salt content in the Greenland Sea causes cold water to sink, providing the thrust that starts the Conveyor.

The current is so deep and dense that when it turns northward, it draws warm Pacific Ocean water over the surface of the Atlantic. This warm stream evaporates when it reaches the North Atlantic, helping keep Europe and the Eastern United States mild. If the Conveyor Belt falters or shuts down, the Gulf Stream would slow and many temperate regions would experience extreme cold.

The Gulf Stream itself can never completely shut down, because it is also pulled by wind and gravitational forces, but even a small decline would be catastrophic. During the height of our most recent Ice Age, 20,000 years ago, the Gulf Stream was operating at two-thirds its current strength. The Conveyor Belt accounts for half of the Streams pull, and there has been a 20% decrease in its outflow since 1950. This corresponds with reduced inflow at the beginning of the loop, further exacerbating the situation.

It was previously thought a transition between Glacial and Interglacial Ages would be gradual, but evidence discovered in the Greenland ice pack shows that it's more like flipping a switch. We're either in an Ice Age or we're not. Once that switch is flipped, there's no turning back; it can begin within 2 or 3 years. In our case it would be more of a "mini" Ice Age, if you will. Conditions could start resembling the Little Ice Age that occurred 1300-1850, during our current Temperate period.

Imagine longer, more severe winters; spring, summer, and fall ever shorter. Eventually winter would prevail over the Northern Hemisphere most of the year, while the rest of the world continues warming. Rain would cease in many areas of the Southern Hemisphere. Under this scenario, massive displacement of people, due to drought and famine, would cause unrest leading to wars. That's why the Pentagon is studying this. It was their report that got the attention of the media.

Most projections indicate these changes could happen in the next couple of decades to half century. The actual turning point is unknown. The world has warmed 0.7 Celsius (1.26 Farenheit) since just before the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Once 2.0C (3.6 Farenheit) is reached, the damage is considered irreversible. We are heading there fast, with the highest average temperatures occuring since 1990. Scientists world-wide are working together to solve this problem, but unless something is done now to address the underlying causes, it really might be too late.

Sources:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5052363/

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0130-11.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0130-02.htm

http://www.ems.org/climate/pentagon_climate_change.html

http://www.ems.org/climate/pentagon_climatechange.pdf

http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1083419,00.html

http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/currenttopics/abruptclimate_joyce_keigwin.html

http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/currenttopics/climatechange_wef.html

http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/currenttopics/abruptclimate_15misconceptions.html

http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/currenttopics/abruptclimate_rcurry_pr.html

http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/currenttopics/abruptclimate_currents10no2_riverruns.html

Election Reform

Now that the inauguration is over, we can focus on election reform. The place to start is the computerized voting machines. A paper trail should be a minimum requirement, though it would be merely cosmetic since full hand-recounts are rarely accomplished, thanks to arbitrary deadlines or monetary concerns. Unfortunately, this is probably the only legislation with a chance of passing.

Perhaps more machines could be allocated in minority districts. The lines were unreasonably long and constitute in itself a clear case of disenfranchisement. However, if the machines can't be trusted, it wouldn't be reassuring to have more of them.

Voting machines need to be publicly owned, both touch-screens and tabulators. Allowing private companies to control source-code is a recipe for disaster; there's no accountability. This should be a non-partisan issue, and conflicts of interest should be avoided at all costs.

Provisional ballots should be minimized; 150, 000 in Ohio is unacceptable. This allowed too many votes to be taken off the table on election day. The 10-day wait before they could be counted was a true killer to John Kerry's chances to contest. They needed to be validated, but why so many in the first place? A provisional ballot should be a last resort, not standard. This is indicative of a problem with the whole process.

The best solution would be national mail-in voting, thus eliminating most of these concerns in one fell swoop. Also gone would be precinct location mix-ups and absentee ballot confusion. It has worked in Oregon for several years, as I can vouch. Getting nationwide support would be hard, though, unless a major scandal hits. I'm not holding my breath, but it wouldn't be surprising, since the scandals already exist.

First Post

This is my very first post in my very first blog! I'd like to cover so-called "conspiracy theories" from a moderate liberal point of view. The recent election is a good starting point. I'm just getting started, so bear with me.