The Reason Why by GEORGE MCGOVERN

Theirs not to reason why, Theirs but to do and die. --Alfred, Lord Tennyson "The Charge of the Light Brigade" (in the Crimean War) hanks to the most crudely partisan decision in the history of the Supreme Court, the nation has been given a President of painfully limited wisdom and compassion and lacking any sense of the nation's true greatness. Appearing to enjoy his role as Commander in Chief of the armed forces above all other functions of his office, and unchecked by a seemingly timid Congress, a compliant Supreme Court, a largely subservient press and a corrupt corporate plutocracy, George W. Bush has set the nation on a course for one-man rule. ...

The invasion of Iraq and other costly wars now being planned in secret are fattening the ever-growing military-industrial complex of which President Eisenhower warned in his great farewell address. War profits are booming, as is the case in all wars. While young Americans die, profits go up. But our economy is not booming, and our stock market is not booming. Our wages and incomes are not booming. While waging a war against Iraq, the Bush Administration is waging another war against the well-being of America. Following the 9/11 tragedy at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the entire world was united in sympathy and support for America. But thanks to the arrogant unilateralism, the bullying and the clumsy, unimaginative diplomacy of Washington, Bush converted a world of support into a world united against us, with the exception of Tony Blair and one or two others. READ

The Last Refuge By PAUL KRUGMAN

In 1944, millions of Americans were engaged in desperate battles across the world. Nonetheless, a normal presidential election was held, and the opposition didn't pull its punches: Thomas Dewey, the Republican candidate, campaigned on the theme that Franklin Roosevelt was a "tired old man." As far as I've been able to ascertain, the Roosevelt administration didn't accuse Dewey of hurting morale by questioning the president's competence. After all, democracy — including the right to criticize — was what we were fighting for.
Last week John Kerry told an audience that "what we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States." Republicans immediately sought to portray this remark as little short of treason. "Senator Kerry crossed a grave line when he dared to suggest the replacement of America's commander in chief at a time when America is at war," declared Marc Racicot, chairman of the Republican National Committee.READ

After Resigning to Protest War, A Diplomat Turns Peace Envoy

... "Now I am convinced the president lied to the U.S. Congress," Mr. Kiesling said at Harvard. "He never had any intention of stopping short of war. And now he's cashing the blank check Congress wrote for him."
... The last straw came when a prominent Greek professor wrote a blistering commentary in an Athens newspaper under the headline, "Blood for Oil." Mr. Kiesling was tasked with telephoning the professor to straighten him out. He had no problem attacking the "blood for oil" argument, as Mr. Kiesling doesn't believe oil has driven U.S. policy toward Iraq.
"But I didn't have an answer to his next question, 'So why are you going to war?' " Mr. Kiesling says. READ

The toll of a war that has taken Allies to the gates of Baghdad

130,000 British and American troops are in action in Iraq from a total force of 250,000 in the Gulf. The Allies have launched 725 Tomahawk cruise missiles, flown 18,000 sorties, dropped 50 cluster bombs and discharged 12,000 precision-guided munitions. There have been an estimated 1,252 Iraqi civilian deaths, 57 Kurdish deaths and 5,103 civilian injuries. 88 Allied troops have been killed in the conflict, 27 of whom are British. ...So far, 0 weapons of mass destruction have been found. 1,500,000 people in southern Iraq have no access to clean water. 200,000 children in southern Iraq are at risk of death from diarrhoea. READ

Iraqi Army toll a mystery because no count is kept

The world knows with some precision how many American and British soldiers have been killed so far in the war in Iraq: 77 as of Tuesday. The names of the dead and the cause of their deaths are scrupulously reported by Washington and London, with some delay to notify their families.
But how many Iraqi soldiers have died? It could be scores, hundreds, even thousands. No one outside of Iraq — and probably no one there, either — knows. And, as in the first Gulf War and in Afghanistan, the American military is not counting. ...They count captured weapons. They do not count people, civilian or military. ‘‘You know, we don’t do body counts,’’ General Tommy Franks said a year ago in response to reports that American bombing killed 1,000 Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters during the Afghan campaign of 2001-2002. READ

The IRAQ BODY COUNT Project

This is a Human Security project to establish an independent and comprehensive public database of media-reported civilian deaths in Iraq resulting directly from military actions by the USA and its allies in 2003. READ

A List of Bush LIES on Iraq

1. Powell relies on FORGED documents to link Saddam to terror.
MSNBC: "They have been the closest of allies. But under the intense pressure of a diplomatic crisis at the United Nations and an imminent war in Iraq, the friendship between the United States and Britain is beginning to fray. The most recent strain emerged when U.N. nuclear inspectors concluded last week that U.S. and British claims about Iraq's secret nuclear program were based on forged documents. The fake letters supposedly laid out how Iraqi agents had tried to purchase uranium from officials in Niger, central Africa."... READ

Lesson in Chronology: Bush wanted to invade Iraq in March 2002 but in August 2002 he said he hadn't yet made up his mind. Compare and contrast the following 3 stories.

First Stop, Iraq (Bush quote from 03/02)

"F___ Saddam. We're taking him out." Those were the words of President George W. Bush, who had poked his head into the office of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. It was March 2002, and Rice was meeting with three U.S. Senators, discussing how to deal with Iraq through the United Nations, or perhaps in a coalition with America's Middle East allies. Bush wasn't interested. He waved his hand dismissively, recalls a participant, and neatly summed up his Iraq policy in that short phrase. The Senators laughed uncomfortably; Rice flashed a knowing smile. The President left the room.
A year later, Bush's outburst has been translated into action, as cruise missiles and smart bombs slam into Baghdad. But the apparent simplicity of his message belies the gravity at hand. ...The war has turned much of the world against America. Even in countries that have joined the "coalition of the willing," big majorities view it as the impetuous action of a superpower led by a bully. READ

Archives U.S. Decision On Iraq Has Puzzling Past: Opponents of War Wonder When, How Policy Was Set (Bush quote from 04/02)

On Sept. 17, 2001, six days after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush signed a 2√-page document marked "TOP SECRET" that outlined the plan for going to war in Afghanistan as part of a global campaign against terrorism. Almost as a footnote, the document also directed the Pentagon to begin planning military options for an invasion of Iraq, senior administration officials said.
The previously undisclosed Iraq directive is characteristic of an internal decision-making process that has been obscured from public view. Over the next nine months, the administration would make Iraq the central focus of its war on terrorism without producing a rich paper trail or record of key meetings and events leading to a formal decision to act against President Saddam Hussein, ...Often, the process circumvented traditional policymaking channels as longtime advocates of ousting Hussein pushed Iraq to the top of the agenda by connecting their cause to the war on terrorism....
Then, in April, Bush approached Rice. It was time to figure out "what we are doing about Iraq," he told her, setting in motion a series of meetings by the principals and their deputies. "I made up my mind that Saddam needs to go," Bush hinted to a British reporter at the time. "That's about all I'm willing to share with you."...
Only later did it become clear that the president already had made up his mind. In July, the State Department's director of policy planning, Richard N. Haass, held a regular meeting with Rice and asked whether they should talk about the pros and cons of confronting Iraq. Don't bother, Rice replied: The president has made a decision. READ

Archives Bush Urges Patience On Iraq (Bush quote from 8/02)

President Bush poured cold water Wednesday on speculation that the U.S. will soon make a military move on Iraq, at the same time that a prominent Republican lawmaker denounced critics of the war option as "appeasers."
Following a meeting of his top defense advisers in Texas, Mr. Bush went out of his way to ridicule media reports that the day's agenda would include planning for a move against Iraq, reports CBS News Correspondent Bill Plante.
"I know there's this intense speculation, a churning, a frenzy ... but the subject didn't come up," Mr. Bush said.
The White House said Wednesday's meeting at Mr. Bush's ranch in Crawford was focused on long-term budget and strategy issues in defense. The president chose to emphasize that there were many methods other than war for replacing Saddam Hussein.
"Regime change (in Iraq) is in the interest of the world," Mr. Bush said. "How we achieve that is a matter of consultation and deliberation." The president said "I am a patient man and ... we will look at all options and we will consider all technologies available to us and diplomacy and intelligence." READ

US arms group heads for Lisbon

Directors of one of the world’s largest armament companies are planning on meeting in Lisbon in three weeks time. The American based Carlyle Group is heavily involved in supplying arms to the Coalition forces fighting in the Iraqi war. ...Top of the meeting’s agenda is expected to be the company’s involvement in the rebuilding of Baghdad’s infrastructure after the cessation of current hostilities. Along with several other US companies, the Carlyle Group is expected to be awarded a billion dollar contract by the US Government to help in the redevelopment of airfields and urban areas destroyed by Coalition aerial bombardments.

The Group is managed by a team of former US Government personnel including its president Frank Carlucci, former deputy director of the CIA before becoming Defence Secretary. His deputy is James Baker II, who was Secretary of State under George Bush senior. Several high profile former politicians are employed to represent the company overseas, among them John Major, former British Prime Minister, along with George Bush senior, one time CIA director before becoming US President. The financial assets of the Saudi Binladen Corporation (SBC) are also managed by the Carlyle Group. The SBC is headed up by members of Osama bin Laden’s family, who played a principle role in helping George W. Bush win petroleum concessions from Bahrain when he was head of the Texan oil company, Harken Energy Corporation - a deal that was to make the Bush family millions of dollars. Salem, Osama bin Laden’s brother, was represented on Harken’s board of directors by his American agent, James R. Bath. READ

Iraq rebuilding contracts awarded: Halliburton, Services of America get government contracts for early relief work.

The first contracts for rebuilding post-war Iraq have been awarded, and Vice President Dick Cheney's old employer, Halliburton Co., is one of the early winners. The Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR) unit of Halliburton (HAL: up $0.54 to $20.66,
Research, Estimates), of which Cheney was CEO from 1995 to 2000, said late Monday that it was awarded a contract by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to put out oil fires and make emergency repairs to Iraq's oil infrastructure.
President Bush Tuesday asked Congress for $489.3 million to cover the cost of repairing damage to Iraq's oil facilities, much or all of which could go to Halliburton or its subcontractors under the terms of its contract with the Army. READ

Cronies set to make a killing

Andrew Natsios, head of the US Agency for International Development, set out last week to counter accusations that $600 million worth of contracts for reconstruction in Iraq that he is to award to US companies, some with strong Republican links, were examples of cronyism.
'If you need a surgeon, a lawn service, a real estate agent or a college, you seek out the names with the reputation for quality and the ability to get the job done,' he said. Strange, then, that a front-runner is construction giant Bechtel, whose record in managing America's biggest public works project has been, by most accounts, disastrous. READ

This story made headlines. The retraction was harder to find. Read the following two stories

The STORY: Army Says Drums Could Contain Chemical Agents

The U.S. Army said today it had tentatively identified nerve and other chemical agents in drums discovered at a military compound on the Euphrates River.
If confirmed, the discovery would provide the first tangible evidence to substantiate Bush administration allegations that Iraq has secretly hidden caches of chemical weapons proscribed under terms imposed after the Persian Gulf War of 1991. But commanders at the 101st headquarters, south of Karbala, cautioned against a rush to judgment.
Several purported discoveries in the last several weeks have proved to be false alarms. On Sunday, several soldiers close to today's site grew nauseous from a substance initially reported as nerve agents; further analysis determined that the suspicious drum contained a weak form of tear gas. READ

THE RETRACTION: "Smoking Gun" WMD Site in Iraq Turns Out to Contain Pesticide

NEAR NAJAF, Iraq - A facility near Baghdad that a US officer had said might finally be "smoking gun" evidence of Iraqi chemical weapons production turned out to contain pesticide, not sarin gas as feared.
A military intelligence officer for the US 101st Airborne Division's aviation brigade, Captain Adam Mastrianni, told AFP that comprehensive tests determined the presence of the pesticide compounds.
Initial tests had reportedly detected traces of sarin -- a powerful toxin that quickly affects the nervous system -- after US soldiers guarding the facility near Hindiyah, 100 kilometres (60 miles) south of Baghdad, fell ill. READ

Corporate Media Control

In 1983, 50 corporations controlled the vast majority of all news media in the U.S. At the time, Ben Bagdikian was called "alarmist" for pointing this out in his book, The Media Monopoly. In his 4th edition, published in 1992, he wrote "in the U.S., fewer than two dozen of these extraordinary creatures own and operate 90% of the mass media" -- controlling almost all of America's newspapers, magazines, TV and radio stations, books, records, movies, videos, wire services and photo agencies. He predicted then that eventually this number would fall to about half a dozen companies. This was greeted with skepticism at the time. When the 6th edition of The Media Monopoly was published in 2000, the number had fallen to six. READ

Hotel hit 'deliberate': French TV

FOOTAGE filmed by France 3 television of a strike on a hotel which killed two journalists in Baghdad today shows a US tank targeting the journalists' hotel and waiting at least two minutes before firing.
The journalist and film editor who filmed the attack, Herve de Ploeg, who filmed the attack, said: "I did not hear any shots in the direction of the tank, which was stationed at the west entrance of the Al-Jumhuriya (Republic) bridge, 600 metres north-west of the hotel. READ

11 Journalists Die in 21 Days of War

During the 43 days that comprised the Persian Gulf war in 1991, no journalists lost their lives in the conflict. In the current war in Iraq, now just 21 days old, 11 journalists have died, including three who were killed today in United States military strikes in Baghdad.
Tariq Ayoub, a Jordanian journalist working for the Arab news service Al-Jazeera, died after two American missiles struck his company's headquarters in downtown Baghdad just after dawn today. Later in the day, about a mile across town, an American tank shelled Baghdad's Palestine Hotel, where most foreign journalists are based, killing two television cameramen — Taras Protsyuk, 35, a Ukranian national working for Reuters, and Jose Couso, 37, of the Telecinco Spanish television station, who was fatally injured in the attack.
American forces also reportedly fired on an office owned by Abu Dhabi Television, an Arab broadcasting network, this morning. READ

List of Journalists Killed in Iraq

News organization employees killed in combat situations during the war in Iraq, which began March 20: READ

Iraqi TV interview costs reporter Arnett his job NBC severs ties with veteran New Zealand war reporter

NBC fired journalist Peter Arnett today, saying it was wrong for him to give an interview with state-run Iraqi TV in which he said the U.S.-led coalition's initial plan for the war had failed because of Iraq's resistance. Arnett himself called the interview a "misjudgment" and apologized. Arnett, on NBC's Today show today, said he was sorry for his statement but added "I said over the weekend what we all know about the war." READ

Army chaplain offers baptisms, baths

CAMP BUSHMASTER, Iraq - In this dry desert world near Najaf, where the Army V Corps combat support system sprawls across miles of scabrous dust, there's an oasis of sorts: a 500-gallon pool of pristine, cool water. It belongs to Army chaplain Josh Llano of Houston, who sees the water shortage, which has kept thousands of filthy soldiers from bathing for weeks, as an opportunity. ''It's simple. They want water. I have it, as long as they agree to get baptized,'' he said. And agree they do. Every day, soldiers take the plunge for the Lord and come up clean for the first time in weeks. READ

THE NEW POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

...Last Tuesday, demonstrating that she is no Dixie Chick, the former Madonna Louise Ciccone announced that she was withdrawing an anti-war video to promote her song "American Life." "It was filmed before the war started, and I do not believe it is appropriate to air it at this time," she said. "Due to the volatile state of the world and out of sensitivity and respect for our armed forces, who I support and pray for, I do not want to risk offending anyone who might misinterpret the meaning of this video."

Political correctness has turned sharply right, hasn't it? I'm sure Madonna was not at all influenced by the ongoing radio boycott of the Dixie Chicks (news - web sites), whose lead singer, Natalie Maines, had said she was ashamed to be from the same state as President Bush.. That would be Texas. The chick quickly apologized, but it may have been too late. The new PC warriors are taking names. READ

For Some, Syria Looms as Next Goal

On Sunday, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz said, "There's got to be a change in Syria," which has been accused by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld of allowing war materials and Islamic fighters to cross its border to help the government of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. "The Syrians need to know . . . they'll be held accountable," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Wolfowitz and other officials have not spelled out how they expect a peaceful change of government in Syria would occur. But many are beginning to speak about a successful conclusion of the war in Iraq providing a possible springboard for change.
"I think a lot of countries, including Syria, will eventually get the message from this [Iraq war] that it's much better to come to terms peacefully with the international community, to not acquire these weapons of mass destruction, to not use terrorism as an instrument of national policy," Wolfowitz said. READ

Get Ready for PATRIOT II

The "fog of war" obscures more than just news from the battlefield. It also provides cover for radical domestic legislation, especially ill-considered liberty-for-security swaps, which have been historically popular at the onset of major conflicts.The last time allied bombs fell over a foreign capital, the Bush Administration rammed through the USA PATRIOT Act, a clever acronym for maximum with-us-or-against-us leverage ... As a result, the government gained new power to wiretap phones, confiscate property of suspected terrorists, spy on its own citizens without judicial review, conduct secret searches, snoop on the reading habits of library users, and so General John Ashcroft wants to finish the job.
On Jan. 10, 2003, he sent around a draft of PATRIOT II; this time, called "The Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003." The more than 100 new provisions, Justice Department spokesperson Mark Corallo told the Village Voice recently, "will be filling in the holes" of PATRIOT I, "refining things that will enable us to do our job." READ

Archive (10/01) Branding New and Improved Wars

Marketing a war is serious business. And no product requires better brand names than one that squanders vast quantities of resources while intentionally killing large numbers of people.
The American trend of euphemistic fog for such enterprises began several decades ago. It's very old news that the federal government no longer has a department or a budget named "war." Now, it's all called "defense," a word with a strong aura of inherent justification. The sly effectiveness of the labeling switch can be gauged by the fact that many opponents of reckless military spending nevertheless constantly refer to it as "defense" spending.
During the past dozen years, the intersection between two avenues, Pennsylvania and Madison, has given rise to media cross-promotion that increasingly sanitizes the organized mass destruction known as warfare. READ

Archive (10/01) New Slogan in Washington: Watch What You Say

A few Sundays ago, shortly after returning from a weekend of national security briefings at Camp David, President Bush walked into the White House with a small group of advisers and delivered a stern warning. "Anybody who discloses classified information could literally endanger somebody's life," he told the group, according to Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, who was there.
... It is a sign of the times that Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld stood at a Pentagon podium last month and cited Winston Churchill's famous words that "in wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies." Mr. Rumsfeld, who has repeatedly said from the same podium that disclosing classified information is not only dangerous but against federal law, added that he did not "intend to" lie to the press about present and future military operations. READ

Archive Pakistan's ISI and 9-11

Two days after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, a delegation led by the head of Pakistan's military intelligence agency (ISI) Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed, was in Washington for high level talks at the State Department.
Most U.S. media conveyed the impression that Islamabad had put together a delegation at Washington's behest, and that the invitation to the meeting had been transmitted to the Pakistan government "after" the tragic events of September 11. But this is not what happened.
1. Pakistan's chief spy Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad "was in the U.S. when the attacks occurred."
2. According to The New York Times, "he happened to be here on a regular visit of consultations."
3. Not a word was mentioned regarding the nature of his "business" in the U.S. in the week prior to the terrorist attacks. According to Newsweek, he was "on a visit to Washington at the time of the attack, and, like most other visitors, is still stuck there," unable to return home because of the freeze on international airline travel
4. General Ahmad had in fact arrived in the U.S. on the 4th of September, a full week before the attacks.
5. Bear in mind that the purpose of his meeting at the State Department on the 13th was only made public "after" the September 11 terrorist attacks, when the Bush Administration took the decision to formally seek the "cooperation" of Pakistan in its "campaign against international terrorism." READ

WEEK of 03/10/03, 03/17/03 and 03/24/03 (news delayed due to war)

Another Death in Palestine

Rachel Corrie was a beautiful, kind, young woman. She was an artist and peace activist. She was going to graduate from college this year. She was 23 years old, and she was murdered on March 16th, 2003 in Palestine by an Israeli bulldozer. Rachel was my friend. READ

Amnesty International USA (AIUSA) today condemned the killing of Rachel Corrie and called for an independent investigation of her death.

The organization also renewed a call for a suspension of US transfers to Israel of military equipment, including bulldozers, that have been used to commit human rights abuses.” Amnesty International has consistently condemned violations by all parties to the conflict and called on these parties to take all possible measures to bring to an end the killing and wounding of civilians. ...Ms. Corrie was a member of a group called International Solidarity Movement. Reports indicate that she was trying to stop the demolition of a Palestinian building in the Rafah refugee camp located in the Gaza Strip, when an Israel army bulldozer ran her over, crushing her to death. READ

Confronting our fears so we can confront the empire: Bush administration cultivates fear -- and silence

I am finally ready to admit what for months I have kept hidden: I am terrified. I am more scared than I have ever been in my adult life. For weeks now I have felt a new kind of free-floating terror at what has been unfolding, as the Bush administration has made it clear that nothing would derail its mad rush to war. Until now, I have not spoken of it. In organizing meetings or talks to community groups or rally speeches, I held back. The task was to build the antiwar movement, and I worried that talking too much about my fear might undermine that. ...But I no longer think we can build such a movement by suppressing or keeping quiet about this fear we feel. In the past few weeks I have seen this fear so clearly in the eyes of my friends, heard it in the nervous comments of strangers, and been surprised by it in the unease with which even many supporters of the war talked. READ

When it comes to Helen Thomas, Miguel Estrada and acts of war, George W. Bush isn't big on convention.

When most people don't like the rules of a particular game, they either complain that the rules are unfair or they quit the game altogether. Not President Bush. He just changes the rules. Consider a few recent examples. Bush and White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer didn't like some of the recent questions and comments coming from veteran White House reporter Helen Thomas. (She's called Bush "the worst president in all of American history.") As the dean of the White House press corps, Thomas, by tradition, gets to ask the first question at each press conference. But at his recent press conference on Iraq, Bush ignored Thomas completely, thus violating an unwritten rule that had been followed by every recent president, including his father. Then there's the tussle over judicial nominee Miguel Estrada. Bush doesn't like the fact that Democratic senators are filibustering Estrada's nomination. So he suggested changing the rules to "ensure timely up-or-down votes on judicial nominations ...There have been plenty of presidents who haven't liked congressional rules, but that doesn't mean they've suggested changing them just to accomplish one goal. READ

FAIR STUDY: In Iraq Crisis, Networks Are Megaphones for Official Views

Network newscasts, dominated by current and former U.S. officials, largely exclude Americans who are skeptical of or opposed to an invasion of Iraq, a new study by FAIR has found. of all Among the major findings in a two-week study (1/30/03=2/12/03) of on-camera network news sources quoted on Iraq: Seventy-six percent of all sources were current or former officials, leaving little room for independent and grassroots views. Similarly, 75 percent of U.S. sources (199/267) were current or former officials. At a time when 61 percent of U.S. respondents were telling pollsters that more time was needed for diplomacy and inspections (2/6/03), only 6 percent of U.S. sources on the four networks were skeptics regarding the need for war. Sources affiliated with anti-war activism were nearly non-existent. On the four networks combined, just three of 393 sources were identified as being affiliated with anti-war activism-- less than 1 percent. Just one of 267 U.S. sources was affiliated with anti-war activism-- less than half a percent. READ

Cutting through Iraq's 'fog of war'

The millions of people around the world avidly following the latest news from the war in Iraq could be forgiven for becoming slightly confused in recent days. On several occasions, reports of apparently significant developments have later had to be withdrawn or downgraded - causing great embarrassment to journalists and military officials alike. But are these classic examples of the confusion due to the "fog of war". Or of news management, not to say propaganda?
First, British and United States military officials said that Umm Qasr had been "taken" while BBC reporters on the ground said that pockets of resistance remained - which continued for several days. Then, military officials reported a "civilian uprising against Saddam Hussein" in Iraq's second city of Basra, hard evidence of which has yet to materialise. On Wednesday, "a column of up to 120 tanks was leaving Basra". The convoy later proved to be just three-strong. And the death of 15 Iraqi civilians in a Baghdad shopping centre has been shrouded in mystery. The Iraqis blame United States-led forces. READ

How Bush sold war to Americans

...Now there's one marketing team that appears to have no qualms about lying, no hesitation about making false claims, no ethics at all when it comes to moving product: George W. Bush's White House. So where are the media watchdogs now? ...Which brings us back to the marketing campaign. The R&D on the war began years ago, in 1992 when deputy secretary of defence Paul Wolfowitz, a Pentagon strategy guy in both Bush administrations, drafted the Defence Planning Guidance on the U.S.' military stance toward the world. It advocated pre-emptive strikes against unfriendly states. It can't be a coincidence how much that document resembles Bush's National Security Strategy of September, 2002 — or the principles outlined by the Project For The New American Strategy (newamericanstrategy.org), a might-is-right organization headed by William Kristol, editor of the right-wing magazine Weekly Standard. READ

Guess who will be calling the shots at CNN

Already, the American press is expressing its approval of the coverage of forces that the U.S. military intends to allow its reporters in the next Gulf war. The boys from CNN, CBS, ABC and the New York Times will be "embedded" among the U.S. Marines and infantry. The degree of censorship hasn't quite been worked out. But it doesn't matter how much the Pentagon cuts from the reporters' dispatches. A new CNN system of "script approval" — the iniquitous instruction to reporters that they have to send all their copy to anonymous officials in Atlanta to ensure it is suitably sanitized — suggests that the Pentagon and State Department have nothing to worry about. READ

Media Watchdogs Caught Napping

In the run up to a conflict in Iraq, foreign news websites are seeing large volumes of traffic from America, as U.S. citizens increasingly seek news coverage about the coming war. "Given how timid most U.S. news organizations have been in challenging the White House position on Iraq, I'm not surprised if Americans are turning to foreign news services for a perspective on the conflict that goes beyond freedom fries," said Deborah Branscom, a Newsweek contributing editor, who keeps a weblog devoted to media issues. In January, for example, half the visitors to the Guardian Unlimited news site, an umbrella site for Britain's left-leaning Guardian and Observer newspapers, were from the Americas...."What we're seeing is a lot of searching for news information, particularly from America," said Richard Goosey, NetRating's international chief of measurement science. READ

News media abdicate role in Iraq war

Editor & Publisher, the professional weekly, devotes its latest issue to the subject of the press and the Iraq war. "Now that the Super Bowl and Golden Globes are over," it begins, "Americans are finally ready to debate an attack on Iraq." The press' role in the Bush administration's march to war has not been glorious....
...E&P blames the public's confusion in part on "officials planning the war, who have not fully explained the reasons for it," but adds that U.S. newspapers deserve "no small measure" of blame for the confusion. I think the media deserve most of the blame. Bush officials have explained in detail their reasons for war, and the media have not sufficiently challenged those reasons. They are endorsing Bush's war by default. The public is confused because its gut feeling is that the government/media reasoning doesn't add up. READ

Lies, Damned Lies, and Ultimatums

I’ve decided to go through Bush’s Monday address and count all the lies in it. I lost count, you see, during the broadcast. This is from the text the White House put out. It is said that the best lies are mostly truth, so I’m just going to go through every paragraph and say true or false. If false, I’ll explain. READ

Memo to the President: Forgery, Hyperbole, Half-Truth: A Problem by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

...We last wrote you immediately after Secretary of State Powell's UN speech on February 5, in an attempt to convey our concerns that insufficient attention was being given to wider intelligence-related issues at stake in the conflict with Iraq. Your speech yesterday evening did nothing to allay those concerns. And the acerbic exchanges of the past few weeks have left the United States more isolated than at any time in the history of the republic and the American people more polarized.
... We cannot escape the conclusion that you have been badly misinformed. It was reported yesterday that your generals in the Persian Gulf area have become increasingly concerned over sandstorms. To us this is a metaphor for the shifting sand-type "intelligence" upon which your policy has been built. Worse still, it has become increasingly clear that the sharp drop in US credibility abroad is largely a function of the rather transparent abuse of intelligence reporting and the dubious conclusions drawn from that reporting- the ones that underpin your decisions on Iraq. READ

Bush Clings To Dubious Allegations About Iraq

As the Bush administration prepares to attack Iraq this week, it is doing so on the basis of a number of allegations against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein that have been challenged -- and in some cases disproved -- by the United Nations, European governments and even U.S. intelligence reports. For months, President Bush and his top lieutenants have produced a long list of Iraqi offenses, culminating Sunday with Vice President Cheney's assertion that Iraq has "reconstituted nuclear weapons." Previously, administration officials have tied Hussein to al Qaeda, to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and to an aggressive production of biological and chemical weapons. Bush reiterated many of these charges in his address to the nation last night. But these assertions are hotly disputed. Some of the administration's evidence -- such as Bush's assertion that Iraq sought to purchase uranium -- has been refuted by subsequent discoveries. READ

Credibility Bomb

The "powerful odor of mendacity" (to borrow Tennessee Williams’ phrase) hung over George Bush’s primetime virtual declaration of war Monday night. When Bush proclaimed that "The Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised," that was a lie. ..."Bush’s war on Iraq is a gift to the Bin Ladens of this world and to the extremist theocrats." Bush asserted that Iraq "has aided, trained, and harbored terrorists, including operatives of Al Qaeda." The last part of that was a lie. Pieces of the crucial document of U.S. "proof" that Saddam Hussein has aided his ideological enemy Al Qaeda -- a cut-and-paste British report assembled by Tony Blair’s public relations strategist, and recommended heartily as the fundament for this assertion by Colin Powell in his prosecutor’s brief at the United Nations -- turned out to have been plagiarized from a paper by a graduate student, based on data a decade old, and augmented by more plagiarizing from press cuttings. READ

Questionable Evidence Is Weapons Case Against Iraq Disintegrating?

As the Bush administration tries to make the case to America and the world that Iraq is trying to rebuild its nuclear weapons program, some top United Nations officials contend that key evidence against Iraq is crumbling.
Before Congress, and in public, President Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell have repeatedly pointed to aluminum tubes imported by Iraq which they say are for use in making nuclear weapons. But on Friday, head United Nations nuclear inspector Mohammad ElBaradei told the Security Council that it wasn't likely that the tubes were for that use. ElBaradei also said that documents Bush had cited and relied upon to make the case that Iraq tried to buy uranium from a country in central Africa were fake. "These documents — which formed the basis for the reports of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger — are in fact not authentic," ElBaradei told the United Nations on Friday. On Sunday, Secretary Powell defended some of the evidence against Iraq. ... "With respect to the uranium, it was the information that we had," Powell said. "We provided it. If that information is inaccurate, fine." READ

Just when did Mr Bush decide to go to war?

Did Tommy Franks, the chief of Central Command, let the cat out of the bag? There was some anxiety at the White House that, during his first press conference of the Iraq military campaign, Gen Franks may have been a little too, well, frank. The controversial question the general unwittingly addressed was this: When did George W. Bush decide to go to war? The more evidence there is that Mr Bush decided to go to war early, the more ammunition for those who say his decision to go to the UN was little more than a charade.
The awkward suggestion that the decision was made early has already surfaced in some US magazines. Time magazine reports that the president poked his head into the office of Condoleezza Rice, his national security adviser, in March 2002 and told three senators sitting there: "[Expletive deleted] Saddam. We're taking him out." READ

The Thirty-Year Itch

...For the past 30 years, the Gulf has been in the crosshairs of an influential group of Washington foreign-policy strategists, who believe that in order to ensure its global dominance, the United States must seize control of the region and its oil. Born during the energy crisis of the 1970s and refined since then by a generation of policymakers, this approach is finding its boldest expression yet in the Bush administration -- which, with its plan to invade Iraq and install a regime beholden to Washington, has moved closer than any of its predecessors to transforming the Gulf into an American protectorate. READ

All in the Neocon Family

What do William Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Elliot Abrams, and Robert Kagan have in common? Yes, they are all die-hard hawks who have gained control of U.S. foreign policy since the 9/11 attacks. But they are also part of one big neoconservative family – an extended clan of spouses, children, and friends who have known each other for generations. READ

THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION Corporate Connections: President Bush's Cabinet

Of course, everyone knows that the U.S. oil industry has a secure foothold in the White House. But when he handed out cabinet posts and picked his top advisors, Bush left no industry out in the cold. From old school automobile manufacturers to fledgling biotech companies, just about every sector was covered. Below is a list of the corporations represented in the Bush White House. You won’t find every cabinet member or senior adviser listed here. READ

A naked bid to redraw world map

Sadly, Bush has made the U.S. the 21st century's first colonizer The island bit over the weekend was a revealing farce. The three wannabe liberators, determined to export popular rule to Iraq, had to flee the protests of their own peoples to an inaccessible retreat in the Azores. How fitting to choose an island chain originally settled by a Portuguese Crusader whose goal was to encircle the Muslim world with Christian armies.
Unlike the other leaders of his tiny "coalition of the willing," George W. Bush can at least claim a slim majority at home in support of his war after selling frightened Americans the big lie that Iraq is connected to 9/11. But how do British and Spanish leaders claim to be acting in the spirit of democracy when almost no one in their countries supports going to war without the backing of the United Nations, which has now been gutted? ...The United States lied to the world when Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he had "bulletproof evidence" that Iraq was behind the Sept. 11 attacks and then failed to produce a shred of credible evidence. Bush repeatedly has made a lie of omission by telling us Saddam Hussein "gassed his own people" but neglecting to mention that in the immediate aftermath of that attack 15 years ago, his father gave Hussein's government $1.2 billion in financial credits. READ

US names 'coalition of the willing'

The US has named 30 countries which are prepared to be publicly associated with the US action against Iraq. The state department says more countries have now announced concrete support for a possible US invasion of Iraq than during the first Gulf War. And it says that there are an additional 15 countries which are providing assistance, such as over-flight rights, but which do not want to declare support. Full list of coalition countries: Afghanistan, Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom and Uzbekistan. READ

Bush's Strong Arm Can Club Allies Too: Lawmakers, Activists Say Tactics for Enforcing Loyalty Are Tough and Sometimes Vindictive

After a Newsweek cover story in 1987 titled "Bush Battles the Wimp Factor," the label stuck to George H.W. Bush for years. Now, his son is creating the opposite perception: the Bully Factor. As the United States wages war this week following a pair of ultimatums to the United Nations and Iraq, the airwaves and editorial pages of the world have been full of accusations that President Bush and his administration are guilty of coercive and harrying behavior.
Even in typically friendly countries, Bush and the United States have been given such labels this week as "arrogant bully" (Britain), "bully boys" (Australia), "big bully" (Russia), "bully Bush" (Kenya), "arrogant" (Turkey) and "capricious" (Canada). Diplomats have accused the administration of "hardball" tactics, "jungle justice" and acting "like thugs."
... Just as the administration used unbending tactics before the U.N. Security Council with normally allied countries such as Mexico, Germany and France, the Bush White House has calculated that it can overcome domestic adversaries if it tolerates no dissent from its friends. READ

Thank God for the death of the UN Its abject failure gave us only anarchy. The world needs order by Richard Perle

Saddam Hussein's reign of terror is about to end. He will go quickly, but not alone: in a parting irony, he will take the UN down with him. Well, not the whole UN. The "good works" part will survive, the low-risk peacekeeping bureaucracies will remain, the chatterbox on the Hudson will continue to bleat. What will die is the fantasy of the UN as the foundation of a new world order. As we sift the debris, it will be important to preserve, the better to understand, the intellectual wreckage of the liberal conceit of safety through international law administered by international institutions. READ

The U.N. Is Irrelevant

It's typical of the Bush team's polemical tactics to try to dismiss the United Nations as irrelevant if it doesn't buckle to President Bush's demands for an instant war against Iraq. It's also nonsense. As for the hoopla about vetoes, the United States is second only to the Soviet Union in exercising the U.N. veto. The score card, compiled by the BBC News, is: the Soviet Union/Russia, 120 vetoes (only two of those since the Soviet Union collapsed); the United States, 76 vetoes — 35 used to block criticism of Israel (that old double standard has the United States in its grip); the United Kingdom, 32 vetoes, of which 23 were votes cast with the United States; France, 18 vetoes, 13 of which were in support of the United States' position; and China, 5 vetoes. READ

Corporate America Divvies Up The Post-Saddam Spoils

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner in Iraq. Yes, I know that the first smart bomb has yet to be dropped on Baghdad. But that's just a formality. The war has already been won. The conquering heroes are not generals in fatigues but CEOs in suits, and the shock troops are not an advance guard of commandos but legions of lobbyists.
The Bush administration is currently in the process of doling out over $1.5 billion in government contracts to American companies lining up to cash in on the rebuilding of postwar Iraq. So bombs away! The more destruction the better -- at least for the lucky few in the rebuilding business.
... To further expedite matters, the war-powers-that-be invoked "urgent circumstances" clauses that allowed them to subvert the requisite competitive bidding process ... the common denominator among the chosen few is a proven willingness to make large campaign donations to the Grand Old Party. Between them, the bidders -- a quartet of well-connected corporate consortiums that includes Bechtel Group, Fluor Corp., and, of course, Vice President Cheney's old cronies at Halliburton -- have donated a combined $2.8 million over the past two election cycles, 68 percent of which went to Republicans. READ

U.S. business to reap most of the profit in rebuilding

Bush administration plans for the rebuilding of Iraq call for private American corporations to undertake much of the work, with the United Nations development agencies and other multilateral organizations sidelined, according to administration officials who have seen confidential documents outlining the plans. With the administration offering $1.5 billion in work to private companies and just $50 million to American aid groups like Save the Children, the plan will leave out many large international organizations. The companies that have been asked to bid on the contracts include Kellogg Brown Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton Company, which Vice President Dick Cheney once headed. Since Sept. 11, 2001, the Pentagon has relied increasingly on Kellogg Brown Root, which has built cells for detainees at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and fed American troops in Uzbekistan. READ

The Bottom Line on Iraq

... The dots leading from Wall Street to the West Wing situation room are the ones that need connecting. There's money to be made in post-war Iraq, and the sooner we get the pesky war over with, the sooner we (by which I mean George Bush's corporate cronies) can start making it. The nugget of truth that former Bush economic guru Lawrence Lindsey let slip last fall shortly before he was shoved out the oval office door says it all. Momentarily forgetting that he was talking to the press and not his buddies in the White House, he admitted: "The successful prosecution of the war would be good for the economy."
... Clearly, our national interest runs a distant second when pitted against the rapacious desires of special interests and the politicians they buy with massive campaign contributions. Oil and gas companies donated $26.7 million to Bush and his fellow Republicans during the 2000 election and another $18 million in 2002. So does it really come as any surprise that Cheney's staff held secret meetings in October with executives from Exxon Mobil, ChevronTexaco, ConocoPhillips – and yes, Halliburton – to discuss who would get what in a post-Saddam Iraq? As they say, to the victors – and the big buck donors – go the sp-oil-s. READ

USA: Halliburton -- To the Victors Go the Markets

The influence of big energy corporations in the Bush Administration is no secret. But the story of Dick Cheney and his former company, Halliburton Co., has received little attention -- and it may be the most important. Prospects for democracy in post-Taliban Afghanistan appear dimmed by the bare-knuckled oil services deal-cutting overseen by the victor, the United States. Last December, the US Department of Defense made a no-cap, cost-plus-award contract to Halliburton KBR's Government Operations division. The Dallas-based company is contracted to build forward operating bases to support troop deployments for the next nine years wherever the President chooses to take the anti-terrorism war. READ

Top White House anti-terror boss resigns

The top National Security Council official in the war on terror resigned this week for what a NSC spokesman said were personal reasons, but intelligence sources say the move reflects concern that the looming war with Iraq is hurting the fight against terrorism. ...
This is a very intriguing decision (by Beers)," said author and intelligence expert James Bamford. "There is a predominant belief in the intelligence community that an invasion of Iraq will cause more terrorism than it will prevent. There is also a tremendous amount of embarrassment by intelligence professionals that there have been so many lies out of the administration -- by the president, (Vice President Dick) Cheney and (Secretary of State Colin) Powell -- over Iraq." Bamford cited a recent address by President Bush that cited documents, which allegedly proved Iraq was continuing to pursue a nuclear program, that were later shown to be forgeries. "It is absurd that the president of the United States mentioned in a speech before the world information from phony documents and no one got fired," Bamford said. "That alone has offended intelligence professionals throughout the services." READ

Veteran US diplomat resigns in protest over US policy toward Iraq, becoming the second career foreign service officer to do so in the past month.

John Brown, who joined the State Department in 1981, said he resigned because he could not support Washington's Iraq policy, which he said was fomenting a massive rise in anti-US sentiment around the world. In a resignation letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell, Brown said he agreed with J Brady Kiesling, a diplomat at the US embassy in Athens who quit in February over President George W Bush's apparent intent on fighting Iraq. READ

U.S. diplomat resigns to protest Iraq policy

A career diplomat who has served in U.S. embassies from Tel Aviv to Casablanca to Yerevan resigned this week in protest against the country's policies on Iraq. The diplomat, John Brady Kiesling, the political counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Athens, said in his resignation letter, "Our fervent pursuit of war with Iraq is driving us to squander the international legitimacy that has been America's most potent weapon of both offense and defense since the days of Woodrow Wilson." Kiesling, 45, who has been a diplomat for about 20 years, said Wednesday that he faxed the letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell on Monday after informing Thomas Miller, the ambassador in Athens, of his decision. He said that he had acted alone, but had received support afterward from colleagues. "No one has any illusions that the policy will be changed," he added. "Too much has been invested in the war." READ

U.S. Diplomat's Letter of Resignation by John Brady Kiesling

Dear Mr. Secretary: I am writing you to submit my resignation from the Foreign Service of the United States and from my position as Political Counselor in U.S. Embassy Athens, effective March 7. I do so with a heavy heart. The baggage of my upbringing included a felt obligation to give something back to my country. Service as a U.S. diplomat was a dream job. I was paid to understand foreign languages and cultures, to seek out diplomats, politicians, scholars and journalists, and to persuade them that U.S. interests and theirs fundamentally coincided. My faith in my country and its values was the most powerful weapon in my diplomatic arsenal. READ

Sixth aide resigns over Iraq

A sixth ministerial aide today confirmed he had quit the government over the Iraq crisis, saying he did not think there was sufficient international backing for a war. David Kidney, MP for Stafford and a parliamentary private secretary (PPS) at the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), said he had resigned last night after he voted for the rebel amendment. ...His resignation makes him the ninth member of the government to leave over Iraq. READ

Blair loses third minister over Iraq

A third minister has quit the government over the Iraq crisis as Clare Short announced she would stay in her cabinet job despite earlier threats to resign. Home Office Minister John Denham has now followed Health Minister Lord Hunt of Kings Heath in resigning on Tuesday morning. Their resignations come in the wake of Robin Cook's departure from the cabinet after he objected to war without a fresh United Nations mandate. ...There were two more departures from the lower ranks of government: Bob Blizzard, the parliamentary private secretary to Work and Pensions Minister Nick Brown, and Anne Campbell, who did a similar for Trade Secretary Patricia Hewitt. Robin Cook's resignation speech late on Monday evening was greeted with an unprecedented round of applause and a standing ovation by some MPs. READ

List of Labour resignations

Some members of the Labour Government are reconsidering their role in Parliament over the issue of a possible war with Iraq. Here is a list of the ones who feel they cannot support the prime minister's position. READ

Justice Bans Media From Free Speech Event

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (news - web sites) banned broadcast media from an appearance Wednesday where he will receive an award for supporting free speech.AP Photo
The City Club usually tapes speakers for later broadcast on public television, but Scalia insisted on banning television and radio coverage, the club said. Scalia is being given the organization's Citadel of Free Speech Award. "I might wish it were otherwise, but that was one of the criteria that he had for acceptance," said James Foster, the club's executive director.The ban on broadcast media, "begs disbelief and seems to be in conflict with the award itself," READ

French fries get new name in House restaurants

House cafeterias will be serving fries with a side order of patriotism Tuesday with a decision by GOP lawmakers to replace the ''French'' cuisine with ''freedom fries.'' READ

2 Christian organizations are ready to convert Iraqis Missionaries set to tend to physical, spiritual need.

Two leading evangelical Christian missionary organizations say they have teams of workers poised to enter Iraq to address the physical and spiritual needs of a large Muslim population. The Southern Baptist Convention, the country's largest Protestant denomination, and the Rev. Franklin Graham's Samaritan's Purse say workers are near the Iraq border in Jordan and are ready to go in as soon as it is safe.
The relief and missionary work is certain to be closely watched because both Graham and the Southern Baptist Convention have been at the heart of controversial evangelical denunciations of Islam, the world's second largest religion. Both organizations say their priority will be to provide food, shelter and other needs to Iraqis ravaged by recent war and years of neglect. But if the situation presents itself, they will also share their Christian faith in a country that's estimated to be 98 percent Muslim and about 1 percent Christian. READ

War to cost millions in Oscar revenues

The spectre of war in Iraq is threatening to cost hundreds of millions of dollars in Oscars-generated revenue from services ranging from coveted advertising time to Botox shots for ageing movie stars. Just days ahead of the scheduled ceremony that is usually the glamorous - and financially lucrative - high point of Hollywood's year, Oscars organisers are insisting that Sunday's show will still go on. But they have refused to rule out postponing or even cancelling the show if war is raging in the Middle East amid fears that images of jewel-encrusted stars waltzing into the show would seem unseemly at a time of national crisis. READ

WEEK of 03/03/03

Bush's Wake-Up Call Was a Snooze Alarm

George W. Bush kept seeming to lose interest in his own remarks last night (03/06/03) as the president did that rarest of rare things -- for him -- and held a prime-time news conference. Televised live on all the major networks from the East Room of the White House, the occasion found Bush declaring this to be "an important moment" for America and the world, yet he spoke with little urgency and no perceptible passion. Have ever a people been led more listlessly into war? It's tempting to speculate how history would have changed if Winston Churchill or FDR had been as lethargic as Bush about rallying their nations in an hour of crisis. There were times when it appeared his train of thought had jumped the tracks. Occasionally he would stare blankly into space during lengthy pauses between statements -- pauses that once or twice threatened to be endless. There were times when it seemed every sentence Bush spoke was of the same duration and delivered in the same dour monotone, giving his comments a numbing, soporific aura. Watching him was like counting sheep. READ

Revealed: US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war: Secret document details American plan to bug phones and emails of key Security Council members.

The United States is conducting a secret 'dirty tricks' campaign against UN Security Council delegations in New York as part of its battle to win votes in favour of war against Iraq. Details of the aggressive surveillance operation, which involves interception of the home and office telephones and the emails of UN delegates in New York, are revealed in a document leaked to The Observer. The disclosures were made in a memorandum written by a top official at the National Security Agency - the US body which intercepts communications around the world - and circulated to both senior agents in his organisation and to a friendly foreign intelligence agency asking for its input.
The memo describes orders to staff at the agency, whose work is clouded in secrecy, to step up its surveillance operations 'particularly directed at... UN Security Council Members (minus US and GBR, of course)' to provide up-to-the-minute intelligence for Bush officials on the voting intentions of UN members regarding the issue of Iraq. ...The existence of the surveillance operation, understood to have been requested by President Bush's National Security Adviser, Condoleezza Rice, is deeply embarrassing to the Americans in the middle of their efforts to win over the undecided delegations. READ

Rumsfeld Filled His Pockets with Pyongyang's Nuclear Loot

It's a well-known fact--oft detailed in this column--that the boys in the Bush Regime swing both ways. We speak, of course, of their proclivity--their apparently uncontrollable craving--for stuffing their trousers with loot from both sides of whatever war or military crisis is going at the moment. That's why it came as no surprise to read last week that just before he joined the Regime's crusade against evildoers everywhere (especially rogue states that pursue the development of terrorist-ready weapons of mass destruction), Pentagon warlord Donald Rumsfeld was trousering the proceeds from a $200 million deal to send the latest nuclear technology--including plenty of terrorist-ready "dirty bomb" material--to the rogue state of North Korea, Neue Zurcher Zeitung reports. READ

New Poll Shows Bush Would Lose to Democrat in Election

President Bush would lose narrowly to a Democratic Party candidate if the U.S. presidential election were held now because of concerns about possible war and the economy, according to an opinion poll published on Thursday. The Feb. 26-March 3 nationwide survey of U.S. voters by Hamden, Connecticut-based Quinnipiac University found that by a 48 percent to 44 percent margin, voters would pick the as yet unknown candidate out of nine Democrats running over the Republican incumbent. The survey of 1,232 voters had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percent. READ

The rewards of friendship: Many countries are getting hush-money for siding with the US over Iraq. Britain's gains are not so obvious, but they are considerable

There is little debate that America's war is also Britain's. Equally, little is said about the rewards of such a position. With some nations, the cost of building alliances and the price of friendship is highly visible. Take the billions offered to Turkey, or the loan guarantees Israel has asked for to cover the black hole at the heart of the nation's finances. Or the request by Poland, a staunch US ally, that its companies get a slice of the oil action after Saddam is toppled. No opposition seems principled enough to resist the lure of lucre. America has dangled enough cash in front of Russia to cover the $8bn (£5.3bn) it is owed by Iraq since the last Gulf war. The US public should worry about this trend. A billion here, a billion there, and sooner or later you are talking real money. READ

Murky message hurts U.S. case for war in Iraq

Is the United States trying to disarm Iraq's Saddam Hussein, or trying to remove him from power? The simple answer: both. Washington believes that the only way to make sure he disarms is to oust him. That is why it is preparing to fight. But somewhere on the road to Baghdad, that message has become clouded, confusing U.S. allies and undermining the case for war. Consider what happened just last Friday. In Washington, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the U.S. aim in Iraq was "disarmament and regime change."
When asked about the remark in Mexico the same day, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien seemed surprised, even outraged. "If you start changing regimes, where do you stop?" Mr. Chrétien said. "This is the problem: Who is next? Give me the list, the priority list." READ

Him and us

The spinners have spun, the plagiarists plagiarised: we are still opposed to Blair's war. As a historian, I worry about the crude use of history, particularly our old friend the 1930s. Time and again we hear that this crisis is the 1930s come again - what nonsense. Saddam is not another Hitler. Where is his Mein Kampf? Where is his dream of universal conquest? George Bush is certainly no Churchill; it would be a calumny on the reputation of that great man to suggest it. It is a facile argument, and it disturbs me that Downing Street produces it, all the more because I taught one or two of them. My efforts were clearly in vain. READ

The Sin of Pride Vision Thing: A scholar wonders if Bush has the humility to see the nuance of this conflict

“God bless America.” For decades, chief executives have acted like priests of the national religion. Sometimes they soothe—think of shuttle disasters or terrorist attacks—and sometimes they inflame, as in times of war. NEVER HAVE WE historians been busier making sense of presidential God talk than now. We all knew that after a reckless youth and a fall into alcohol addiction, George W. Bush experienced a Christian conversion of the now standard “born again” sort and settled down.
On the path to the presidency he saw that his newfound faith appealed to a core constituency of religious conservatives and they appealed to him. His religious rhetoric became more public and more political. After September 11 and the president’s decision to attack Iraq, the talk that other nations found mildly amusing or merely arrogant has taken on international and historical significance. It rouses many Americans to an uncertain cause and raises antagonism among millions elsewhere.
Few doubt that Bush is sincere in his faith, a worthy virtue when he alone must decide whether to lead 270 million people into war, possibly killing thousands of others. The problem isn’t with Bush’s sincerity, but with his evident conviction that he’s doing God’s will. READ

Americans ill-served by own media

Here are a few under-reported yet telling statistics from a Princeton Survey Research Associates poll conducted two months ago: At the time, 65 per cent of Americans were convinced that Al Qaeda and Iraq were "allied" even though the U.S. administration had yet to present its "evidence'' — which turned out to be cribbed, typos and all, from a student paper.
Despite the fact that 15 of the 19 Sept. 11 hijackers were Saudi, with the rest Egyptian, Lebanese and from the United Arab Emirates, 49 per cent of those surveyed were convinced that at least one of them, if not most of them, was a card-carrying Iraqi citizen. Only 17 per cent knew that not one was a boy from Baghdad.
Now, as much as we Canadians like to rag on our nearest and dearest neighbours, telling ourselves that they're so stupid, we have to cut them some slack. That's because they are so ill-served by their news media. Not all of it, mind you, but certainly most of it, and definitely by the most pervasive of it, whether local or national. READ

Boycott the War! It can be stopped

Our current administration has been dismissing our vocal opposition on War. No Longer! Now, it is time to take our protests to the next level. We will hit them where it hurts the most – in their wallets. We are beginning a global boycott of companies that make significant financial contributions to this administration.
Kraft – Parent Company Phillip Morris (new name: Altria Group, Inc) made a contribution of US$3,094,237 which represents 82% of their total contributions.
Exxon Mobil – Made a contribution of US$1,226,331 which represents 89% of their total contributions.
Pepsico Inc – Made a contribution of US$749,494 which represents 84% of their total contributions.
United Parcel Service – Made a contribution of US$2,072,468 which represents 71% of their total contributions.
Wal-Mart Stores – Made a contribution of US$610,748 which represents 88% of their total contributions. READ

We were Soldiers Once? The Bush War Record

George W. Bush on sacrifice: "I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go to war." Houston Chronicle, January 2002 Bush on commitment: "I, George W. Bush, upon the successful completion of pilot training, plan to return to my unit and fulfill my obligation." Air National Guard pledge, 1968 The Guard on Bush: "George Walker Bush is one member of the younger generation who doesn't get his kicks from pot or hashish or speed.... As far as kicks are concerned, Lt. Bush gets his from the roaring afterburner of the F-102." Texas Air National Guard press release, March 1970 Bush on lessons learned: "I learned some good lessons from Vietnam. First, there must be a clear mission. Secondly, the politics ought to stay out of fighting a war. There was too much politics during the Vietnam War." Associated Press, March 2002 READ

Did you witness GW Bush performing any National Guard Service between May 1972 and October 1973, in either Alabama or Texas?

If so, you could be eligible for thousands of dollars in unclaimed reward money!! Here are the details of the Texas and Alabama rewards. READ

Who served in the military? Part of the Chickenhawks Data Base (Elected Officials and Influence Mongers who want to rush to war but avoided service themselves)

READ

The Compassionate Conservative's Bait-and-Switch Budget

Reagan pioneered the Bush tactic: Cut taxes, generate deficits, express shock, compel off-setting cuts in social spending Most of the debate about President George W. Bush's proposed budget has focused on fiscal and tax issues: Are the tax breaks excessive? Would they go to the right people? Will they really promote long-term growth? Is the resulting deficit sustainable? Does the economy really need this kind of stimulus? These are important questions. And the skepticism expressed by Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, as well as the recent critique by 10 Nobel laureates in economics, should give Congress plenty of pause. However, a whole other issue has been obscured by the tax-and-deficit debate: the devastating effect of the Administration's budget priorities on domestic social spending. READ

The CEOs' Dim View of Deficits

From the heart of the business establishment comes a statement criticizing and rejecting the Bush tax cuts -- a stunning repudiation of the president's fundamental economic strategy delivered by the very corporate leaders who make the investment decisions on which recovery and growth turn.
Along with the criticism of the administration plan leveled last month by Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan, the report being issued today by the Committee for Economic Development, a blue-ribbon organization of corporate CEOs and civic leaders, is a warning that President Bush's policies risk long-term damage to Americans' prosperity and the government's fiscal stability. While administration officials defend the deficits in store for this year and next as small by historical standards and temporary, the committee says that more realistic calculations show that over the next decade we can expect "annual deficits of $300-$400 billion, increasing as far as the eye can see."
Those estimates do not take into account the new tax cuts proposed by Bush in January and now beginning to make their way through the House of Representatives. "All told, the new budget proposals, if enacted, would raise the 10-year deficit by about $2.7 trillion and annual deficits 10 years from now by about $500 billion," the report says. And none of this, by the way, factors in the costs of a possible war with Iraq and its aftermath. READ

Now Your Vote Is The Property Of A Private Corporation

... in the November 2002 election, when some Florida voters pressed the touch-screen "button" for Bush's Democratic opponent, votes were instead recorded for Bush. "Misaligned" touch-screen voting machines were blamed for the computer-driven vote-theft, and when a losing candidate in Palm Beach sued to inspect the software of Florida's computerized voting machines, a local judge denied the petition, citing the privacy rights of the corporation that wrote the programs....
And in February of 2003, Bev Harris of www.blackboxvoting.com noticed a wide-open FTP site. Harris had just done a Google search on the company that tabulated most of the vote in Georgia in the 2002 election. (That was the upset election that saw popular war-hero Max Cleland, who lost three limbs in Vietnam, defeated by a poll-trailing draft dodger who campaigned by questioning Cleland's patriotism.) Walking into the unsecured FTP website, she says she found a software patch that was apparently applied statewide to Georgia's voting machines just days before the election, and a folder titled "rob-georgia." READ